Sultans of Deccan India 1500 1700

Sultans of Deccan India
1500–1700 opulence and fantasy

FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F F
F Sultans of Deccan India, 1500 – 1700 F
F F
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
wwwwwww
wwwwww
Sultans of Deccan India
1500 – 1700
wwwwwww opu lence a nd fa n ta sy
wwwwww Navina Najat Haidar and Marika Sardar
wwwwwww with contributions by
wwwwww
John Robert Alderman, Jake Benson, William Dalrymple, Richard M. Eaton,
Maryam Ekhtiar, Abdullah Ghouchani, Salam Kaoukji, Terence McInerney,
Jack Ogden, Keelan Overton, Anamika Pathak, Howard Ricketts,
wwwwwww
Courtney A. Stewart, Sanjay Subrahmanyam, and Laura Weinstein
wwwwww
wwwwwww the metropolitan museum of art, new york
wwwwww
distributed by yale university press
new haven and london
wwwwwww
This catalogue is published in conjunction with the exhibition, “Sultans of Deccan Copyright © 2015 by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
India, 1500 – 1700: Opulence and Fantasy,” on view at The Metropolitan Museum of
Art, New York, from April 20 through July 26, 2015. First printing
The exhibition is made possible by the Gail and Parker Gilbert Fund, the Placido All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted
Arango Fund, the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the National in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
Endowment for the Arts, and Cynthia Hazen Polsky and Leon B. Polsky. It is recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in
supported by an indemnity from the Federal Council on the Arts and the writing from the publishers.
Humanities.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
The catalogue is made possible by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the 1000 Fifth Avenue
E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the Doris Duke Fund for New York, New York 10028
Publications, and Shubha and Prahlad Bubbar. metmuseum.org
Published by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Distributed by

Mark Polizzotti, Publisher and Editor in Chief Yale University Press, New Haven and London
Gwen Roginsky, Associate Publisher and General Manager of Publications yalebooks.com/art
Peter Antony, Chief Production Manager yalebooks.co.uk
Michael Sittenfeld, Managing Editor
Robert Weisberg, Senior Project Manager Cataloguing-in-Publication Data is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN 978-1-58839-566-5 (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Edited by Kamilah Foreman with Anne Blood and Elizabeth Franzen ISBN 978-0-300-21110-8 (Yale University Press)
Designed by Christopher Kuntze
Production by Jennifer Van Dalsen
n ote to th e r e a d e r
Bibliography edited by Jayne Kuchna with Leslie Geddes
Image acquisitions and permissions by Crystal Dombrow Foreign words are italicized throughout the book, and for the benefit of the general
Maps by Anandaroop Roy reader, terms are defined throughout the text. Every effort has been made to treat
the transliteration of Arabic, Dakhni, Farsi, Hindi, Persian, Telugu, Turkish, and
Site and architectural photographs are by Antonio Martinelli. Photographs of Urdu words consistently while respecting authorial choices. The ‘ayn and the
works in the Metropolitan Museum’s collection are by The Photograph Studio, hamza are marked, but diacritics are not used.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, unless otherwise noted. Dates are given in the Gregorian calendar unless an object carries a precise
Complete photograph credits are on page 368. Hegira and Vikram Samvat date. In those cases, dates are provided in both systems,
with the Hegira date appearing first. Except where context demands, all dates for
Typeset in Warnock Pro and Delphin buildings and architectural sites reflect the year of completion.
Printed on 150 gsm Furioso Dimensions are noted in the following sequence: height precedes width precedes
Separations by Professional Graphics, Inc., Rockford, Illinois depth. When necessary, the abbreviations H. (height), L. (length), W. (width),
Printing and binding coordinated by Ediciones El Viso, S.A., Madrid, Spain D. (depth), Diam. (diameter), and Wt. (weight) are used for clarity.
The authors of the catalogue entries are noted by their initials at the end of each
Jacket illustration: Princely Deer Hunters (cat. 68) text. Citations are abbreviated throughout the book; full references are provided in
the bibliography, beginning on page 351.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art endeavors to respect copyright in a manner
consistent with its nonprofit educational mission. If you believe any material has
been included in this publication improperly, please contact the Editorial
Department.
m Contents /
vii Director’s Foreword
Thomas P. Campbell
viii Preface and Acknowledgments

Navina Najat Haidar
xi Lenders to the Exhibition

xii Maps
1 the deccan
a golden age
3 A History of the Deccan, 1500 – 1700
Richard M. Eaton
15 The Art of the Deccan Courts

Navina Najat Haidar
29 The Bahmanis and Their Artistic Legacy

Marika Sardar
34 Catalogue 1 – 6
43 AHMADNAGAR AND BERAR

77 BIJAPUR
157 The Art of Abri : Marbled Album Leaves, Drawings, and Paintings of the Deccan
Jake Benson
171 BIDAR
179 Bidri Ware
John Robert Alderman
195 GOLCONDA
259 Inscribed Sacred Vessels
Abdullah Ghouchani, Marika Sardar, and Navina Najat Haidar
261 Catalogue 152 – 159

269 The Courtly Tradition of Kalamkaris
Marika Sardar
271 Catalogue 160 – 165
279 DRAWN TO THE DECCAN

mughals and europeans in the deccan
281 The Mughals in the Deccan
Terence McInerney
285 Burhanpur and Aurangabad

Marika Sardar
288 Catalogue 166 – 183
309 Europeans in the Deccan
Sanjay Subrahmanyam
313 Catalogue 184 – 196

325 Diamonds of the Deccan
Navina Najat Haidar
327 Catalogue 197 – 207
335 epilogue
Hyderabad under the Asaf Jahi Nizams
William Dalrymple
3 44 appendix
Excerpts from the Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah
Maryam Ekhtiar
346 Rulers of the Deccan Sultanates
347 Literature for Objects in the Exhibition
Compiled by Courtney A. Stewart
351 Bibliography
362 Index
368 Photograph Credits
m Director’s Foreword /
The foundations of today’s global culture were laid long ago, and an array of scholarly experts, to whom we owe profound
from the late fifteenth to the late seventeenth century, when thanks. With them we share the achievement of pioneering
Europeans set out to discover the world, their sights set above the first exhibition of its kind on this important subject.
all on India. Drawn to its heartland, the Deccan plateau, Many years of planning have gone into the making of this
they encountered a world where other cultures, those of the exhibition and catalogue, organized by Navina Najat Haidar,
Middle East and Africa, had already met and been absorbed Curator, Islamic Art, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, and
into India’s powerful embrace. This was the age of the Deccan Marika Sardar, Associate Curator, Southern Asian and Islamic
sultans, mysterious kings whose courts flourished for two Art, San Diego Museum of Art. Their efforts to present these
centuries before vanishing into the annals of history. The works to our public have been supported by the Exhibitions,
fragile but superb traces of their art are the subject of this Design, Objects Conservation, Paper Conservation, and
publication, Sultans of Deccan India, 1500 – 1700: Opulence Editorial Departments in a sustained collaboration across the
and Fantasy. Metropolitan Museum.
The late medieval period was one of discovery and change This exhibition would not have come to fruition without
for India, too. Receptive to outside influences yet securely the considerable support of a number of donors: the Gail and
rooted in its ancient traditions, the Deccan became home to Parker Gilbert Fund, the Placido Arango Fund, the E. Rhodes
foreign immigrants, Sufi mystics, Shi‘a Muslims, and global and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the National Endowment
traders. The courts of the Deccan kings also attracted art- for the Arts, and Cynthia Hazen Polsky and Leon B. Polsky.
ists from all over India and from farther afield. Works of art The exhibition has also been supported by an indemnity from
in this exhibition reveal the sophisticated taste of the royal the Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities. We
patrons and the masterful skill of the painters and craftsmen offer our gratitude to The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation,
in their employ. the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the
The diamond-rich Deccan fostered an opulent court cul- Doris Duke Fund for Publications, Shubha and Prahlad
ture, one represented in the precious textiles, rare treasures, Bubbar, and Marshall and Marilyn R. Wolf for their contri-
and refined objects on view, but the magic and majesty of butions toward the show’s catalogue. For underwriting the
Deccan art goes beyond the material realm and into that of accompanying scholarly symposium, I thank H.H. Sheikh
the imagination. Paintings express this quality most power- Hamad bin Abdullah Al-Thani. The E. Rhodes and Leona
fully in their fantastic styles, challenging the idioms of the B. Carpenter Foundation, the Doris Duke Foundation for
Indo-Persian canon but never straying from its discipline and Islamic Art, Princess Shamina Talyarkhan and the Deccan
technical finesse. The meeting of multiple cultural influences Heritage Foundation, and Benjamin and Barbara Zucker are
on India’s fertile ground must have contributed to this cre- also gratefully acknowledged for their support of the exhibi-
ative spirit of the age. tion’s educational programs. The opening is made possible by
Deccani art is one of the rarest categories for both muse- Amira Nature Foods Ltd.
ums and private collectors, yet this exhibition and its accom-
panying publication gather together nearly 200 works of Thomas P. Campbell
art. This endeavor has required the participation of approx- Director
imately sixty public and private lenders, numerous donors, The Metropolitan Museum of Art
vii
m Preface and Acknowledgments /
The surviving art and architecture from the five sultan- century to the development of a mature Deccani idiom
ates of the Deccan —Ahmadnagar, Berar, Bijapur, Bidar, through the course of the seventeenth century. Other works
and Golconda — are the enduring legacy of talented artists include metalwork vessels and sculptures, superb painted
working for courtly patrons. The region served as a meeting and dyed textiles (kalamkaris), and a variety of luxury objects
ground for cultural strands from Iran, Turkey, Arabia, East such as weapons, embellished boxes, and diamonds fash-
Africa, and Europe. Artistic, political, and spiritual interplay ioned for the courts as well as for trade abroad.
between these traditions on Indian soil resulted in the flow- The catalogue begins with a historical overview by
ering of the Deccan’s distinctive artistic expression. Deccani Richard M. Eaton, an art-historical introduction by the pres-
art continues to be recognized for its quality and depth, ent author, and an essay on the Bahmani period by Marika
with a growing number of publications, symposia, and dis- Sardar. Subsequent chapters are devoted to the courts that
plays in recent years. This volume brings together works of succeeded the Bahmanis, each beginning with a more detailed
art from four sultanates (Ahmadnagar, Bijapur, Bidar, and history and a discussion of architecture. Through short texts
Golconda) and Aurangabad (an important Mughal center in on the catalogue objects, organized in roughly chronological
the northern Deccan), along with a few objects related to order, a host of scholars bring the rich art of the period to life.
the European presence in the region. No portable works sur- In some instances special groups of material, such as bidri
vive from Berar, which was absorbed into Ahmadnagar at an metalwork or marbled paintings and drawings, are featured
early date, but its major architectural sites are discussed in together and discussed in short essays by specialists. A pen-
the catalogue. ultimate chapter in two parts is devoted to the Mughals and
The architectural remains of the Deccan constitute Europeans in the Deccan, with introductions to these topics
hundreds of monuments in varying states of preservation, by Terence McInerney and Sanjay Subrahmanyam, respec-
many displaying high-quality decoration. Some indepen- tively. An epilogue by William Dalrymple traces the region’s
dent fragments, such as relief-carved calligraphic panels later history through the period of its final rulers, the Asaf
or tile fragments, now reside in museum and private col Jahis (1724 – 1948) until shortly after Indian independence in
lections. Portable paintings, manuscripts, and objects 1947. The appendix provides excerpts from a translation of a
traveled widely, some during the sixteenth- and seventeenth- Qutb Shahi history of the seventeenth century. Last but not
century European diamond and textile trade, and are found least, photographs by Antonio Martinelli record the everlast-
in European treasuries and churches. Other works entered ing allure of the geographical landscape and the monuments
the realms of the imperial Mughal rulers and their Rajput within that attracted numerous peoples from three conti-
allies after their conquest of the Deccan in the 1680s and were nents for centuries. Many of these arresting images are pub-
further dispersed to Iran, Turkey, and Russia. More recently, lished for the first time.
during the period of British rule and its aftermath, other
objects made their way to public and private collections in
acknowledgments
India and abroad.
Owing to the widely scattered nature of the material, This exhibition and its accompanying catalogue have been
assembling a comprehensive display of the most import- nearly a decade in the making. Countless scholars, collectors,
ant works has involved approximately sixty institutional dealers, museum colleagues, and others have given their ideas
and private lenders. The resulting collection of works in the and support to this project in abundance. For their support
exhibition offers a partial but powerful view of one of the within the museum I thank Director Thomas P. Campbell,
world’s greatest artistic cultures. Paintings form the major- President Emily Kernan Rafferty, Associate Director for
ity of objects in this volume, which traces the evolution of Exhibitions Jennifer Russell, Deputy Director for Collections
style from the spare, bold compositions of the late sixteenth and Administration Carrie Rebora Barratt, and Patti Cadby
viii
Birch Curator in Charge of the Department of Islamic Art In India, permission to borrow objects and photograph
Sheila Canby. various sites and collections was granted by the Ministry
An exhibition of this scale and complexity requires the of Culture and Shri Ravindra Singh, Secretary; the National
generosity of many funders. We offer our thanks to the Museum, New Delhi, and Shri Venu Vasudevan, Director
Gail and Parker Gilbert Fund, the Placido Arango Fund, the General, as well as Shri Vijay Mathur, Shrimati Anamika
E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the National Pathak, Shri Varma, Shri S. V. Tripathi, and Mr. Rahman; and
Endowment for the Arts, Cynthia Hazen Polsky and Leon B. the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and Shri Rakesh
Polsky, and the Federal Council on the Arts and the Tewari, Director General, as well as Dr. M. Nambirajan,
Humanities for their commitment to the exhibition; The Dr. Urmila Sant, R. Krishnaiah, A. M. V. Subramanyam, A.
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Mounesh, Dr. Anand Thirth, Dr. H. R. Desai, T. J. Alone,
Carpenter Foundation, the Doris Duke Fund for Publications, and Shri N. Taher. I also thank Dr. Sabyasachi Mukherjee,
Shubha and Prahlad Bubbar, and Marshall and Marilyn R. Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya (CSMVS),
Wolf for supporting the rich scholarship of this publica- Mumbai; Dr. Shrikrishna Bhave and Professor B. D. Kulkarni,
tion; the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the Bharat Itihas Sanshodhak Mandal, Pune; and Professor S. M.
Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic Art, Princess Shamina Azizuddin Husain, Rampur Raza Library. Additional pho-
Talyarkhan and the Deccan Heritage Foundation, and tography permission was granted by Dr. C. G. Betasurmath,
Benjamin and Barbara Zucker for engaging a broad audience Dr. Khusru Hussaini, Dr. D. K. Mathur, and Shri Umesh Udal
through the educational programming; H.H. Sheikh Hamad Verma (Melghat Tiger Reserve).
bin Abdullah Al-Thani for graciously sponsoring the sympo- In the Deccan special thanks go to the Jagdish and Kamla
sium; and Amira Nature Foods Ltd. for their partnership in Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad; the Deccan
the opening celebration. Heritage Foundation, and Uzra Bilgrami. I am also indebted to
Several individuals played a critical role in helping to Shri Nagender Reddy, Director, Salar Jung Museum; Shrimati
advance knowledge of the subject. Terence McInerney has Chandana Khan; Dr. Ramakrishna Rao, Director, and Dr.
been an erudite and creative partner throughout the process. Suguna Sharma, Assistant Director, Andhra Pradesh State
The insights of Robert Skelton, Jagdish Mittal, John Robert Archaeology Museum, Hyderabad; ASI Circles of Hyderabad,
Alderman, and Andrew Topsfield helped to illuminate the Dharwad, Aurangabad, Bhopal; ASI Bijapur Archaeological
path while Bashir Mohamed has been a great guide and Museum; Department of Archaeology, Museums, and
teacher. Similarly, I thank Steven Kossak, Gursharan Sidhu, Heritage, Mysore; Mir Nawazish Ali Moosvi and his sons
George Michell, Helen Philon, Klaus Rötzer, Robert Elgood, Abbas and Murtuza of the Mujawar Badshahi Ashurkhana,
Richard M. Eaton, Phillip Wagoner, Sanjay Subrahmanyam, Hyderabad; Ratish Nanda and K. K. Muhammad, Aga Khan
and Howard Ricketts. The generous lenders, listed on page Trust for Culture; and Sarath Chandra, Deccan Heritage
xi, in providing their works of art have also shared their taste Foundation.
and discernment. Philippe de Montebello has been a sup- Several individuals assisted Antonio Martinelli: Apoorva
porter of this project since the beginning. Srivastava, Embassy of India, Paris; Helen Philon and George
The authors of this catalogue—John Robert Alderman, Michell, Deccan Heritage Foundation; Klaus Rötzer; Aman
Jake Benson, William Dalrymple, Richard M. Eaton, Maryam Nath; Francis Wacziarg; Ilaria Narici; Peter Martinelli-
Ekhtiar, Abdullah Ghouchani, Salam Kaoukji, Terence Bunzl; Princess Esra Jah; Shri G. Kishan Rao, Chowmahalla
McInerney, Jack Ogden, Keelan Overton, Anamika Pathak, Palace Nizam Trust, Hyderabad; P. Srinivas Rao; Mangesh
Howard Ricketts, Marika Sardar, Courtney A. Stewart, Chouksey; Sandeep Daddla; Hameed Patel; Ameen Hullur;
Sanjay Subrahmanyam, and Laura Weinstein—provided Kumar Kamble; Ramesh V. Raghavan; Joseph John; Mahendra
invaluable contributions to this volume. The site and archi- Tak; Syed Owasis Ahmed Qadri; Dr. Major M. K. Gupta; and
tectural photographs of Antonio Martinelli are a key feature M. Yakub Boringwala.
of this publication, while the images of Anna-Marie Kellen, In India I am also grateful to Rahul Jain, Momin Latif,
Ram Rahman, and Alan Tabor round out the extensive pho- Suhel Seth, Karan Chanana, Nandini Mehta, Kavita Singh,
tography campaign for the book. Saryu Doshi, Shailender Hemchand, Pramod Kumar KG,
ix
Javed Abdullah, and Martand Singh, all great supporters of colleagues in the Department of Islamic Art, particularly
this project. Annick Des Roches, Douglas C. Gieger, Charles Dixon,
Museum and academic colleagues who provided scholarly Helen D. Goldenberg, Jean F. Tibbets, Julia A. Rooney, Ria
counsel and other generous aid include Daniel Walker (who Breed, Julia Cohen, and Fatima Quraishi.
first conceptualized the idea of a Deccan exhibition), Amin I am grateful to Michael Langley, who created the design
Jaffer, Debra Noel Adams, Rosemary Crill, Susan Stronge, for the exhibition, along with Clint Ross Coller, Richard
John Seyller, Steven Cohen, Ali Akbar Husain, Yumiko Lichte, Constance Norkin, and Susan Sellers, Design;
Kamada, Priscilla Soucek, Ellen Smart, Finbarr Barry Flood, Nina McN. Diefenbach and Sarah Higby, Development;
Catherine Glynn Benkaim, Layla Diba, Sonya Quintanilla, Jennifer Mock, Education; Christopher A. Noey and Sree
Cynthia Amneus, Dale Mason, Mitchell A. Codding, Margaret Sreenivasan, Digital Media; Linda Sylling, Martha Deese,
E. Connors McQuade, Constancio del Alamo, Monica Katz, Maria E. Fillas, Exhibitions; Aileen Chuk, Registrar; Crayton
Daniel Silva, Leslee Michelsen, John D. Alexander, Kjeld von Sohan and Taylor Miller, Buildings Management; Frederick J.
Folsach, Joachim Meyer, Ebeltje Hartkamp-Jonxis, Pauline Sager, Objects Conservation, and the installers; Raouf
Lunsingh Scheurleer, Gijs Kruijtzer, Salam Kaoukji, Mirjam Ameerally and the Rigging Shop; Amy Desmond Lamberti
Shatanawi, Laura Parodi, Malini Roy, Emma Denness, John and Sharon H. Cott, Office of the Senior Vice President,
Henry Rice, Christopher Brown, Ladan Akbarnia, Saqib Secretary, and General Counsel; and Elyse Topalian, Egle
Baburi, Heather Ecker, Steven Markel, Deborah Hutton, Žygas, and Cynthia Round, Communications.
Deepali Dewan, Robert Mason, Nahla Nasser, Filiz Çakir Particular thanks go to the catalogue’s editorial team led
Phillip, Elaine Wright, Denis Bruna, Amina Okada, Stefan by Kamilah Foreman, along with Anne Blood, Elizabeth
Weber, Julia Gonella, Raffael Dedo Gadebusch, Thierry- Franzen, Jayne Kuchna, Leslie Geddes, Elizabeth Zechella,
Nicolas Tchakaloff, Usha R. Balakrishnan, and Sara Amelia Kutschbach, and Briana Parker as well as Pamela Barr
Mashayekh. For research assistance I warmly thank Vivek for the exhibition labels; and Jennifer Van Dalsen, Crystal
Gupta and Subhashini Kaligotla. Dombrow, Steve Chanin, mapmaker Anandaroop Roy, and
In London, great appreciation is expressed to Francesca designer Christopher Kuntze for the book’s production
Galloway, Simon Ray, Brendan Lynch, Sam Fogg, Samina and design. Gratitude is also expressed to Mark Polizzotti,
Khanyari, Indar Pasricha, Michael Spink, and Hamid Publisher and Editor in Chief, and his colleagues, Peter
Atigetchi. I also thank Alexis Renard, Edward Wilkinson, Antony, Gwen Roginsky, and Michael Sittenfeld.
Claudia Bombardier, and Fionnuala Croke. The greatest thanks are due to Marika Sardar and
Metropolitan Museum colleagues have provided ongo- Courtney A. Stewart, whose intellectual engagement, indus-
ing support. Abdullah Ghouchani read many of the inscrip- triousness, and camaraderie form the heart of this project.
tions and found their sources. I also thank Stuart W. Pyhrr,
James C. Y. Watt, Denise Patry Leidy, Michael Batista, Navina Najat Haidar
Christopher A. Noey, Jean-François de Lapérouse, Yana Curator, Department of Islamic Art
van Dyke, Florica Zaharia, and Janina Poskrobko as well as The Metropolitan Museum of Art
x
m Lenders to the Exhibition /
Aga Khan Museum, Toronto Musée de la Mode et du Textile, Les Arts Décoratifs, Paris
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris
University of Oxford
Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin
Bharat Itihas Sanshodhak Mandal, Pune
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston
Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris
Museum of Islamic Art, Doha
Bijapur Archaeological Museum, Gol Gumbaz
Náprstkovo Muzeum Asijských, Afrických a Amerických
Bodleian Library, University of Oxford Kultur, Prague
British Library, London National Museum, New Delhi
Trustees of British Museum, London Philadelphia Museum of Art
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin Private collection
Cincinnati Art Museum Private collection, Haddam, Connecticut
Collection of Patricia Phelps de Cisneros, New York Private collection, Seattle
Cleveland Museum of Art Private collection, Ticino, Switzerland
David Collection, Copenhagen Private collections, London
Free Library of Philadelphia Private collections, New York
Furusiyya Art Foundation Rampur Raza Library
Hispanic Society of America, New York Ranros Universal, S.A., British Virgin Islands
Collection of Howard Hodgkin, Oxford Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Collection of Rina and Norman Indictor, New York San Diego Museum of Art
Collection of H. E. Karim Khan, Zurich Collection of Elvira and Gursharan Sidhu, Seattle
Kronos Collections, New York Al-Thani Collection
Los Angeles County Museum of Art Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam
Collection of Terence McInerney, New York Collection of Dr. Daniel Vasella, Risch, Switzerland
Collection of Ismael Merchant, Claverack, New York Victoria and Albert Museum, London
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond
Collection of Bashir Mohamed, London Collection of Mrs. Stuart Cary Welch, New Hampshire
Morgan Library and Museum, New York Collection of Marshall and Marilyn R. Wolf, Toronto
xi
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F F
F Sultans of Deccan India, 1500 – 1700 F
F F
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
The Deccan
a golden age
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F A History of the Deccan, 1500 –1700 F
F F
F F
Richard M. E aton
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
T
he deccan pl ateau, which occupies the Indian peninsula’s broad midsection,
witnessed the production of some of India’s finest works of art and architecture between
the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. Renowned for their unusual and rich palette,
Deccani miniatures constitute only one dimension of the region’s extraordinary artistic legacy.
The courts of the Deccan — principally Ahmadnagar, Berar, Bidar, Bijapur, and Golconda, together
with their great neighbor to the south, Vijayanagara — also patronized stupendous works of
monumental architecture as well as those in other mediums, such as bronze, silver, stone, lac-
quer, and cotton fabric. Although one can see affinities between the Deccan’s visual arts and the
better-known art of northern India — especially that of the Mughal Empire (1526 – 1858) — the
artistic production of the Deccan is not merely derivative of northern traditions. Rather, Deccani
art and architecture stand very much in a class of their own. The reasons why that was so, and
why there was such a burst of artistic creativity in the early modern period, lie in the region’s
cultural, social, and political history.
The culture of the Deccani courts can be traced to the migration to India of waves of Central
Asian Turks who had been uprooted from their homelands by Mongol invasions in the thir-
teenth and fourteenth centuries. Having grown up in Central Asia or Iran amid the flowering of
the Persian Renaissance (10th – 13th century) — a vibrant literary and cultural movement then in
progress in those regions — these refugees brought with them the entire spectrum of cosmopol-
itan Persian culture, which soon took root in North India. This tradition eventually diffused
southward when armies of the Delhi sultanate (1206 – 1526), a large state that at the time spanned
northern India’s Indo-Gangetic Plains, conquered the Deccan plateau in the early fourteenth
century. Migrants transplanted from Delhi then settled the Daulatabad region, in the northwest-
ern part of the plateau. Accompanying these migrants were Sufis, Muslim holy men and mystics,
who were believed to possess spiritual authority that transcended the political authority of kings
or governors. Sayyid Muhammad Husaini Gesu Daraz (1321 – 1422), whose tomb attracts many
thousands annually, remains today the most popular Sufi in the Deccan. He was the son of one
of these early migrants from Delhi. Residing at a calculated distance from royal palaces, figures
Fig. 1. Tile Work, Southern Facade, Madrasa of Mahmud Gawan, Bidar, 1472 3
Pages xvi–1: Sharza and Gumbad Gates, Bidar Fort, 15th – 16th century
like Gesu Daraz often had complex relations with rulers, who simultaneously sought their polit-
ical support but distrusted their popularity with the masses. On the other hand, some Sufis offi-
ciated at royal coronations, legitimizing a ruler as properly Islamic and his sovereign territory as
incorporated into the Muslim world. Other Sufis, pursuing their spiritual quest for direct access
to divine reality, readily fraternized with yogis or other non-Muslim religious specialists, which
led to fascinating interactions between Muslim and Hindu spiritualists — a theme frequently
captured in Deccani miniatures.
In 1347, settlers to the Deccan from northern India, who had become disaffected with Delhi’s
imperious rule, successfully rebelled, establishing the Bahmani sultanate (1347 – 1538) — the first
independent Indo-Persian state in the Deccan and the political predecessor to the five major
sultanates discussed in this volume. Soon thereafter, the entire eastern Muslim world would fall
under the spell of the brilliant Turkish warlord Timur, or Tamerlane (died 1405), whose territory
spanned Central Asia, Iran, Iraq, and eastern Anatolia. In 1398, Timur turned to India, defeating
the armies of the Delhi sultanate and sacking the capital itself. Although Bahmani rulers in the
Deccan were spared Timur’s sword, they nonetheless emulated his courtly culture, his style of
patronage, and, especially, the Timurid aesthetic vision. Within months of Timur’s invasion of
northern India, Sultan Firuz Shah Bahmani (reigned 1397 – 1422) was planning his own p alace-city,
Firuzabad, just south of the Bahmani capital of Gulbarga. Here, in the Deccan’s earliest such city,
Firuz incorporated elements of Timur’s distinctive style — enlarged portals, an overall layout
emphasizing axial alignments of different elements, and the tiger or lion motif in the spandrels
of the gateway leading to the palace area.1 In fact, the tiger or lion motif at Firuzabad is the earli-
est known use of an animal motif in any Indo-Muslim architecture.
Firuz and his successors also sought administrators, soldiers, artists, and literati steeped in
the prestigious Persian culture that the Central Asian conqueror had so lavishly patronized. In
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, a steady stream of so-called Westerners (gharbian), settlers
from the Arab and Persian worlds, flowed to the Deccan, having been attracted by offers of
favored status.2 As the Russian horse merchant Anafasy Nikitin wrote, referring to the Bahmani
kingdom, which he had visited in the 1470s, “the rulers and the nobles in the land of India are all
Khorasanians” — that is, people from northeastern Iran and Central Asia.3 Perhaps the most
prominent of these immigrants was Mahmud Gawan (died 1481), an Iranian aristocrat whose
career epitomized Bahmani efforts to transplant Timurid Central Asian culture into the heart
of the Deccan plateau. In the Bahmanis’ final capital of Bidar, Mahmud Gawan patronized the
construction of one of the most dazzling madrasas, or schools, in all of India. With brilliant
glazed tiles covering its facades and minarets (fig. 1), this stunning monument follows Timurid
aesthetic principles so faithfully that, standing before it, one can easily imagine oneself in the
Central Asian metropolises Herat, Bukhara, or Samarqand.
However, the influx of foreign-born, Western recruits like Mahmud Gawan, and the official
favors granted them, caused considerable resentment among the descendants of the original
Muslim settlers who had migrated from northern India in the previous century and launched the
Bahmani state. These “Deccanis,” people who had been born in the Deccan, were as proud of
their local origins as the Westerners were of their foreign ones. This deep and intractable
4 The Deccan: A Golden Age

Deccani-Westerner rift — and the poisonous intrigues and destructive civil wars it spawned —
ultimately undermined the state’s stability. As a blue-blooded Westerner, Mahmud Gawan him-
self was a victim of the conflict; he was executed in 1481 after his Deccani enemies had tricked
the sultan into charging him with treason.
Out of the Ashes of the Bahmani Sultanate

Within just thirty years of Mahmud Gawan’s execution, the Bahmani state — a polity structured
around the person of the sultan, who was assisted at his capital by a council of ministers and in
the provinces by appointed governors — had effectively disintegrated. By the time provincial gov-
ernors scrambled to pick up the pieces of the collapsing sultanate, five successor states — Bidar,
Ahmadnagar, Berar, Bijapur, and Golconda — had emerged amid the rubble. In Bidar itself, the
last Bahmani prime minister, Qasim Barid I (died 1504), established the Barid Shahi dynasty
(ca. 1487 – 1619) more or less by default, as he found himself and the Bahmani capital abandoned
by rebellious provincial governors who had withdrawn their support for the central government.
Although the sultanate of Bidar had inherited the formidable outworks and fortifications of
the Bahmani capital (see pp. xvi – 1), Bidar was the smallest and weakest of the five successor
states. It was here where one of the Deccan’s most famous craft traditions was produced — the
so-called bidri (“from Bidar”) metalware, which is a blackened alloy inlaid with designs in silver,
brass, and gold.
The first independent sultanate to emerge was the Nizam Shahi dynasty of Ahmadnagar,
established by Malik Ahmad, the son of one of the last Bahmani prime ministers.4 In the 1480s,
his father, a staunchly partisan Deccani, had aggrandized all power and reduced the Bahmani
sultan to a puppet, which greatly exacerbated the perennial Westerner-Deccani conflict. Finally,
in 1486 the minister was assassinated, touching off a chain reaction of political disintegration.
Four years later Malik Ahmad, embittered by the politics of the court and the murder of his
father, declared his independence at Junnar, where he had been governor. However, he refrained
from minting coins in his own name until 1496, when he began styling himself as Ahmad Nizam
Shah Bahri. He also established a new capital named after himself, Ahmadnagar, which soon
became one of the Deccan’s most important centers of artistic patronage. Ahmad Nizam Shah
was succeeded by his son, Burhan Nizam Shah I, during whose long reign (1510 – 53) growing
numbers of Iranians migrated to Ahmadnagar owing to that state’s wealth, which resulted from
its control of key ports along the Arabian Sea.
Variations on this pattern of state formation were swiftly repeated throughout the plateau.
To the north of Ahmadnagar, in the Bahmani province of Berar, the governor Fathallah ‘Imad
al-Mulk (reigned 1490 – 1510) also grew disgusted with the deteriorating state of affairs in Bidar,
the Bahmani capital. In 1490 he, too, declared independence and founded the ‘Imad Shahi sul-
tanate (1490 – 1574), with the Fort of Elichpur (now Achalpur) as his capital.
About the same time, Yusuf ‘Adil Khan (ruled 1490 – 1510), the provincial governor of Bijapur,
asserted his de facto independence from the Bahmani house, establishing the ‘Adil Shahi
dynasty (1490 – 1686). An immigrant from the Middle East, Yusuf declared Shiism the state
A History of the Deccan, 1500–1700 5

religion of Bijapur shortly after Iran’s new Safavid
regime (1501 – 1722) had done so in 1503. Yet he never
imposed his faith on Bijapur’s subjects. His son and suc-
cessor, Isma‘il ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1510 – 34), by contrast,
was far more zealous. Raised by an aunt who had come
straight from Iran, Isma‘il seldom spoke Dakhni Urdu,
the language of the Deccani class, and employed only
Westerners, banishing all native-born Deccanis from
his court. In 1519 he had the Friday prayers offered for
Iran’s Safavid ruling family and ordered his entire army
to wear scarlet caps with twelve points, imitating the
style of the Safavid court. Isma‘il’s son Ibrahim ‘Adil
Shah I (reigned 1535 – 58), on the other hand, identified
himself and his regime with indigenous Deccani cul-
ture. First, he embraced Sunni Islam, the sect of most
Deccani Muslims. More interestingly, he invoked the
memory of one of the Deccan’s most illustrious imperial
dynasties by prominently placing Kalyana Chalukya
(973 – 1183) inscriptions and an ensemble of twenty-four
Chalukya columns in the courtyard of Bijapur’s citadel
gateway (fig. 41).5
Ibrahim’s son and successor, ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I (reigned
1558 – 80), reoriented the dynasty’s sectarian affiliation
back to Shiism. But he was no zealot. Indeed, being some
what of a freethinker, he took cartloads of books with
him on tours and military campaigns, and even invited
Portuguese clerics to Bijapur so that he could learn about
Fig. 2. “Mars and Aries,” folio 27v from the Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of the
Sciences, cat. 22) Christianity.6 ‘Ali’s crowning intellectual achievement
was to author the enigmatic Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of
the Sciences, cat. 22, figs. 2, 45), which, written in Persian
but replete with Dakhni Urdu, drew on Indic, Islamic, Hellenic, and Turkic traditions to provide
a comprehensive vision of medieval Deccani courtly knowledge.7 Blending astronomy, mysti-
cism, and politics, the text shows that, despite the bitter class struggles between Deccanis and
Westerners or the sectarian strife between Sunnis and Shi‘as, courtly knowledge in the Deccan
could achieve a remarkably eclectic synthesis of Indic and Persianate cultural traditions.
In the eastern Deccan another migrant from Iran, Sultan Quli (reigned 1496 – 1543), had
been appointed governor of Telangana in 1496 with the title Qutb al-Mulk. But owing to the
chaos accompanying the twilight years of the Bahmani sultanate, it took several decades of inter-
mittent conflict before he finally emerged as the former province’s sole, independent ruler with
his capital at Telangana’s famous hill fort of Golconda, starting the Qutb Shahi line (1496 – 1687).
Upon his death in 1543, his son Jamshid (reigned 1543 – 50) seized the throne by blinding his

older brother. Anticipating the same fate for himself, Jamshid’s younger brother, Ibrahim, pru-
dently fled to the court of Vijayanagara (1336 – 1646), the great kingdom occupying the southern
Deccan plateau. He spent seven years as a guest of Ramaraya, that state’s autocrat from 1542 to
1565, and became thoroughly steeped in courtly culture informed by Telugu language and litera-
ture. When Jamshid died in 1550, powerful Telugu chieftains in Golconda’s nobility invited
Ibrahim to return and accept the Qutb Shahi throne, which he did, inaugurating a reign (1550 – 80)
that saw an extraordinary degree of courtly patronage of Telugu and Indo-Islamic culture.8
Conflicts to the South and North

For the first half of the sixteenth century, the fracturing of the former Bahmani sultanate into five
smaller successor states played into the hands of Vijayanagara, a neighboring kingdom with
which the Bahmanis had so often been at war. Earlier scholarship on the Deccan typically repre-
sented the conflict between Vijayanagara and its northern neighbors as a titanic struggle waged
over religion, with the former cast as a bastion of Hinduism, defending peninsular India from the
advancing tide of Islam.9 More recent study has shown that a good deal of culture — modes of
governance, courtly etiquette, architectural traditions, sartorial habits — freely trafficked between
the northern and southern Deccan, as did thousands of opportunistic mercenaries and even
high-ranking nobles.10
However, relations between the northern and southern Deccan reached a dramatic climax
in the mid-sixteenth century. In the early 1540s, the ambitious and arrogant Ramaraya seized the
reins of Vijayanagara’s government and shrewdly exploited rivalries among the largest of the
northern sultanates — Ahmadnagar, Bidar, Bijapur, and Golconda — such that he alone held the
balance of power over the entire plateau. Ultimately the northern sultanates (except Berar), exas-
perated with Ramaraya’s excesses, formed a league and together confronted their powerful
southern neighbor. In the ensuing Battle of Talikota (1565), one of the most important battles in
Indian history, Vijayanagara’s army was annihilated, Ramaraya executed, the great metropolitan
capital of Vijayanagara sacked, and the state severely crippled. Politically, this outcome led to the
southward expansion of the Bijapur and Golconda sultanates, which annexed the western and
eastern portions, respectively, of Vijayanagara’s former territory. The sultanate of Bijapur, espe-
cially, benefited at the expense of its defeated foe, as Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I used his recently
acquired wealth to create a new circuit of walls around the capital, where he also constructed the
largest congregational mosque ever built in the Deccan.
From a cultural standpoint, the period following the Battle of Talikota — from 1565 to the
Mughal conquest in 1687 — was something of a golden age, as the principal Deccani sultanates
enjoyed unprecedented peace, prosperity, and artistic florescence. The great wealth of the five sul-
tanates, based especially on the production and export of textile fabrics, astonished foreign visitors.
In the Western imagination, Golconda, in particular, became synonymous with fabulous fortune,
as European merchants traveled to that city’s bazaars to purchase diamonds taken from nearby
mines.11 Perhaps the clearest evidence of this affluence is the urbanization that occurred during this
period. Older cities such as Daulatabad were greatly enlarged to accommodate growing

populations, while entirely new cities appeared —
most prominently Hyderabad, which Sultan
Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612)
had founded in 1591 just a few miles from Golconda
Fort. Centered on the Charminar (Four Towers,
fig. 3), the gateway and mosque that is doubtless the
Deccan’s most iconic monument, Hyderabad is con-
ventionally considered an Islamic city. Significantly,
though, its layout and conceptual design show it to
have been modeled not on stereotypically Islamic
cities like Isfahan or Samarqand, but on earlier
Deccani cities, in particular Warangal, the former
capital of the Kakatiya dynasty (ca. 1163 – 1323).12
Further contributing to the Deccan’s prosperity
and patronage was the shrinking number of sultan-
ates in the decades after the Battle of Talikota. As
smaller states were absorbed by the larger remaining
ones, the latter acquired more territory, more wealth,
Fig. 3. Charminar (Four Towers), Hyderabad, 1591
and, hence, greater wherewithal to endow the arts.
The first of the five sultanates to disappear was the
‘Imad Shahi kingdom of Berar, which Ahmadnagar
annexed in 1574. Next was the Barid Shahi sultanate of Bidar, which Bijapur assumed in 1619. By
this time, the Mughals, having consolidated their rule over all of northern India, had begun push-
ing southward in earnest. In 1601, Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605) took over Khandesh, an
independent state that the Faruqi dynasty of sultans (1382 – 1601) had ruled since 1382.13 Its capi-
tal of Burhanpur, known to the Mughals as the “gateway to the Deccan,” absorbed a great deal of
Mughal influence after 1609 when it became the capital of the Mughal Deccan for several decades,
governed by Emperor Jahangir’s second son, Parviz (1589 – 1626). From Burhanpur, which was
also a major commercial center and textile producer, the Mughals exerted increasing pressure
on the Deccan sultanates. Their first victim was the geographically contiguous Nizam Shahi
sultanate of Ahmadnagar, a state that under the brilliant leadership of its Ethiopian-born prime
minister, Malik ‘Ambar (1548 – 1626), had held back the Mughal tide for twenty-six years. But in
1636 this sultanate, caught between the expansive kingdom of Bijapur to the south and the much
larger Mughal Empire to the north, vanished as its former territory was divided by treaty between
those two states.
To stave off the encroaching Mughal power to the north, the two surviving Bahmani succes-
sor states, Bijapur and Golconda, which governed the western and eastern sides of the Deccan
respectively, were obliged to acknowledge the Mughals as their supreme overlords. Nonetheless,
Prince Aurangzeb, two-term governor of the Mughal territories (1636 – 44 and 1653 – 58) border-
ing Golconda and Bijapur, had urged his father, Emperor Shah Jahan (reigned 1628 – 58), to autho-
rize a full-scale war against the two states. But this onslaught had to wait until after Aurangzeb,

once he became Emperor ‘Alamgir (reigned 1658 – 1707), launched a protracted, twenty-six-year
Deccan campaign that commenced in 1681. The emperor’s immediate goal was to capture his
rebel son, Prince Akbar, who had taken refuge in the Maratha kingdom, a new state that had been
carved out of the mountainous western parts of Bijapuri territory in 1674. Although ‘Alamgir
sought to extinguish the fledgling Maratha power — a goal he doggedly pursued until his death
in 1707 — he first turned his attention to Bijapur and Golconda, states he had long wished to con-
quer. Faced now with the full brunt of ‘Alamgir’s army, both states capitulated and were finally
annexed by the Mughals — Bijapur in 1686 and Golconda the following year.
A new era dawned, one suffused with the Mughal culture that had accompanied the north-
ern empire’s drive southward. The transition from pre-Mughal to Mughal can be seen in Khirki,
a city Malik ‘Ambar founded in 1610 and whose town quarters had been named after prominent
Maratha chieftains.14 The Mughals captured the city in 1633, and when Prince Aurangzeb was
appointed viceroy of the Mughal Deccan for the second time in 1653, he made it his headquar-
ters, renaming it Aurangabad. The Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb), a magnificent tomb com-
pleted in 1661 in memory of Aurangzeb’s wife, Dilras Banu Begam (died 1651), is the city’s most
impressive monument (fig. 4). Resembling the much larger Taj Mahal in Agra, on which it was
modeled, the structure symbolizes the transplanting of Mughal architecture from northern India
to the Deccan. In 1681, Aurangzeb — by then emperor — ordered a wall built around Aurangabad,
and the city soon filled up with northern soldiers, administrators, scholars, merchants, and Sufis,
Fig. 4. Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb), Tomb of Dilras Banu Begam, Aurangabad, 1661

whose hospices and grave sites served to imbue the land with sanctity.15 However, at the end
of this period, in 1724, one of ‘Alamgir’s former generals, Nizam al-Mulk, Asaf Jah I (reigned
1724 – 48), carved out a de facto dynasty in the Mughal Deccan. His descendants would be known
as the Nizams of Hyderabad (1724 – 1948), after the capital had been transferred from Aurangabad
to Hyderabad in 1763.
In addition to spreading northern aesthetics and traditions, the Mughal conquest of the
Deccan ended a distinctive practice of courtly patronage in the region. When assessing what had
fostered the burst of artistry in the principal Deccani courts between the Battle of Talikota (1565)
and the Mughal conquest (1687), one must look beyond their sheer riches. After all, many courts
in the early modern world were wealthier than those of the Deccan yet were not as active patrons
of the arts. Perhaps most important was the cosmopolitan character of the Deccani courts, a
function of the region’s cultural and ethnic diversity. This diversity is especially apparent when
juxtaposed with the more homogeneous culture of the imperial Mughals, a contrast encapsu-
lated by an encounter that took place in 1596 at the dawn of Mughal military pressure on the
Deccan. Having been invited to intervene in Ahmadnagar’s internal politics, the Mughals hap-
pily obliged and then took the opportunity to besiege the Fort of Ahmadnagar. While the siege
was still in progress, officers from both sides sat down for cease-fire talks, during which one of
Ahmadnagar’s diplomats challenged the Mughals’ right to make demands on Deccani territory.
With Prince Murad, the son of Emperor Akbar at his side, a Mughal officer exploded in rage.
“What nonsense is this?” he exclaimed. Then, citing the prince’s and Akbar’s noble descent from
Timur, he angrily contrasted the Mughal dynasty with the motley collection of peoples defend-
ing Ahmadnagar’s fort, people he dismissed contemptuously as “crows and kites of the Dakan,
who squat, like ants or locusts, over a few spiders.” 16 The anecdote reveals the Mughals’ self-
perception as a homogeneous, Turko-Iranian class, in contrast to the welter of ethnic communi-
ties they encountered in the Deccan.
Diversity in the Deccan

Which different cultures were represented in the mosaic of people then confronting the mighty
Mughals? First, there was the Persianate tradition that émigrés from northern India or Central
Asia had brought with them in the early fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and which was then
absorbed by all the Deccani courts. As recent immigrants from the Middle East, Westerners
continued to cultivate Persian literary and aesthetic traditions in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries.17 By contrast, Deccan-born Muslims were rooted in the plateau’s indigenous tradi-
tions, and over time they became more confident and assertive of their own cultural identity. By
the fifteenth century, Deccanis had created their own vernacular, an early form of Urdu known
as “Dakhni.” By the sixteenth century, and more so in the seventeenth, Deccani poets were con-
fidently composing literature in that language.18 Literary Dakhni had attained such respectability
that even rulers — notably Bijapur’s Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) and
Golconda’s Sultan Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah — composed poetry in that language. These
courts also patronized the vernacular traditions of their respective regions. In the east the Qutb

Shahi rulers of Golconda enthusiastically supported the production of Telugu literature. As early
as 1535, Bijapur had switched the language of its revenue and judicial accounts from Persian to
Marathi; by the early 1600s Golconda would do the same with Telugu.19
The Deccan’s voracious demand for military labor, a product of continual interstate con-
flict, brought still other communities to the forefront of the region’s political and cultural life.
Among them were East Africans, or Habshis, who were recruited as military slaves initially by
Bahmani rulers, and then by the independent sultanates, especially Bijapur and Ahmadnagar, the
two westernmost states. Driving this process was the chronically unstable political environment
caused by the mutual antagonism between Deccanis and Westerners, and the belief that cultur-
ally alien military slaves, having no kin of their own and being wholly dependent on their legal
owners, would direct their loyalty to the state only, and to neither the Westerner nor Deccani
class. Since access to Central Asian slave markets was blocked by hostile northern Indian dynas-
ties — first the Delhi sultans, then the Mughals — recruits were sought in East Africa, across the
Arabian Sea, especially from the highlands of Ethiopia. By the early seventeenth century Habshi
slaves were entering the Deccan in substantial numbers. In 1610 Malik ‘Ambar, the prime min-
ister of Ahmadnagar and probably the most famous African in Indian history, fielded an army
of ten thousand Habshis, constituting a fifth of the sultanate’s forces. Inevitably, former military
slaves who rose to a high rank, as Malik ‘Ambar had, brought African sensibilities to the works of
art or architecture they patronized.20
Another prominent group attracted to military service in the sultanates was that of the
Marathas, the indigenous warrior clans of the western plateau. Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah I of
Bijapur hired thirty thousand Maratha cavalry, and by 1624 Ahmadnagar had enlisted forty thou-
sand Marathas into its service — figures that reveal the extent to which the sultanate form of
governance, initially alien to India, had meshed with local Deccan societies.21 In a pattern stretch-
ing back to the Bahmani era, Maratha deshmukhs, the hereditary territorial chiefs in the western
countryside, not only collected revenue and adjudicated disputes, but they also raised troops
and made them available to sultans, who in return formalized the chiefs’ rights to specified
lands.22 Indeed, many leading Maratha clans rose to prominence in tandem with the sultanates.23
In the eastern Deccan, meanwhile, Telugu warriors known as nayakwaris, whose martial tradi-
tions reached back to the Kakatiya dynasty, played an analogous role in Golconda’s army and
political system.24 Although nayakwari families tended to maintain strong ties to particular
ancestral locales, the more successful among them moved with relative ease from one place to
the next in search of military service under rulers who would grant them estates for maintaining
their troops. Inevitably, the cultures of these two military service groups, the Marathas and the
Telugu nayakwaris, seeped upward into the Deccan courts in which they served.
Finally, in sharp contrast to northern India under the Mughals, Brahmins figured promi-
nently in the administration of the Deccan sultanates. In Golconda the Niyogis were the worldly
Telugu Brahmins who had given up their caste’s traditional priestly role to serve in the state’s
administration. At lower levels, they were typically accountants; at higher levels, they were gov-
ernors of towns, diplomats at the courts of neighboring states, or even ministers to the sultan.
In Bijapur, beginning in 1535, Brahmins effectively ran the revenue administration at all tiers. By

the early seventeenth century, that state’s judicial system was, at the local level, in the hands of
Brahmin councils. These groups heard disputes in Marathi, the vernacular language of the west-
ern plateau, and litigated them using indigenous law codes dating back to the eleventh century.25
Added to this cultural amalgam were the many overseas influences that penetrated the early
modern Deccan. Peninsular India, after all, occupies the middle of the Indian Ocean, with ports
on both coasts that made the region a commercial hub. On the western side, Chaul, Dabhol,
and Goa connected the Deccan to the Middle East via maritime routes, while on its eastern side
Masulipatnam connected it to Southeast Asia. Deccani rulers needed overseas trading partners
to buy locally produced textiles. In turn, they needed to purchase warhorses from far beyond
India, since horses do not breed well in tropical South Asia. In fact, it was Bidar’s insatiable
demand for horses that attracted foreign merchants such as the aforementioned fifteenth-century
Russian horse merchant Nikitin, who described one market near Bidar where twenty thousand
horses were sold.26 European merchants — and conquerors — followed suit. Acting on behalf of
the Portuguese crown, in 1498 Vasco da Gama inaugurated the age of significant European pres-
ence in South Asia with his successful all-sea voyage from L isbon to India, landing in Calicut on
the Malabar Coast. This journey was followed by Afonso de Albuquerque’s seizure of the impor
tant port of Goa from Bijapur in 1510. Eschewing territorial conquest, however, the Portuguese
sought control of key Indian ports, which were nodes in a larger maritime network that extended
from eastern Africa to southern China, with Goa as its hub and headquarters. Though based on
the coasts, the Portuguese, nonetheless, sent commercial agents, spies, clerics, and mercenaries
into the Deccan interior to obtain commercial monopolies, proselytize for Christianity, and pro-
mote their political objectives.27
Northern Europeans did not enter the scene until 1597, when a Dutch ship returned from
India with a valuable cargo that stimulated the capitalist appetite of the Netherlands’ growing
bourgeoisie. Five years later, a group of trading companies consolidated their capital to form a
single joint-stock firm, the Dutch Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (United East India
Company), which the government licensed to make war, build forts, conclude treaties, and open
commercial relations anywhere in the East Indies. Although the Dutch company established
commercial stations all along the coasts of India, its principal window into the Deccan was the
east-coast port of Masulipatnam, where it established a station in 1605. At about the same time,
a group of English merchants formed a joint-stock company similar to its larger Dutch counter-
part, obtaining from Queen Elizabeth (reigned 1558 – 1603) a charter giving them a monopoly of
English trade with the East Indies. Having established a base in 1612 at the Mughal port of Surat,
on the Arabian Sea to the west, the English were initially focused on northern India, not the
Deccan. It was not until 1668 that King Charles II (reigned 1660 – 85) transferred the island of
Bombay to the company, having received it from the Portuguese as part of a wedding dowry
from his queen. This gave the English limited commercial access to the northwestern Deccan just
as the Mughals were consolidating their authority in the former Nizam Shahi and ‘Adil Shahi
territories of Ahmadnagar and Bijapur, respectively. In 1616 the Danish Ostindsk Kompagni
(East India Company) was given a royal charter allowing it to monopolize trade between

Denmark and India, where several maritime trading posts were established, principally at
Tranquebar on the peninsula’s southeastern coast.
All of these influences —
Chalukya, Timurid, Westerner, Deccani, Maratha, Habshi,
nayakwari, Brahmin, and European — conferred on Deccani courts an aura of dynamism, diver-
sity, and cosmopolitanism that was perhaps unique in the early modern world. This sophisticated
atmosphere, together with the region’s great wealth generated by the export of its renowned tex-
tiles, diamonds, and precious metals, shaped a moment of remarkable artistic creativity.
A version of this essay was published as Eaton 2011. 1. Michell and Eaton 1992, pp. 80 – 83. 2. In fact, Sultan Firuz Shah Bahmani sent
ships annually to the Persian Gulf to recruit men of talent for service in the Deccan. Firishta 1864 – 65, vol. 1, p. 308; English translation in
Briggs 1966, vol. 2, p. 227. 3. Nikitin 1970, p. 12. 4. The dynastic name Nizam Shahi derives from the title of its founder, Malik Ahmad
Nizam al-Mulk Bahri. Similarly, the dynastic names of the other Deccan sultanates were derived from the titles of their respective
founders. Barid al-Mulk became Barid Shah, and so on. 5. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 126 – 33. 6. Correia-Afonso 1964, p. 87. 7. Flatt
2011, pp. 226, 235. 8. Wagoner 2011. 9. The historian Robert Sewell, writing in 1900 during the height of Orientalist scholarship,
captured this sentiment by characterizing Vijayanagara as a “Hindu bulwark against Muhammadan conquests.” See Sewell 1962,
p. 1. 10. See Wagoner 1996. 11. The founding fathers of Golconda, Illinois (named in 1817), probably hoping to strike it rich, certainly
made this association. As the town’s website proudly declares, “Golconda sparkles like a diamond on the banks of the mighty Ohio
River.” 12. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 220 – 30. 13. The rulers of Khandesh descended from a former Bahmani minister who had
rebelled against the sultan in the late fourteenth century and carved out a small independent kingdom in the extreme northern
Deccan. 14. Gadre 1986, p. 182. 15. Green 2012, pp. 170 – 85. 16. Tabataba 1936, p. 629; English translation in Haig 1923, pp. 343 – 45.
17. This particular strand of Deccani culture, with its roots in Timurid Iran and Central Asia, was the same one boastfully claimed by the
above-mentioned Mughal officer who, continuing his rant, shouted to Ahmadnagar’s diplomats, themselves Westerners from Iran: “You,
who are men of the same race as ourselves [mardum ki ibna-yi jins-i ma’id], [should not] throw your selves away to no purpose.”
Tabataba 1936, p. 629; English translation in Haig 1923, p. 344. 18. S. R. Faruqi 2001, pp. 95 – 104. 19. Firishta 1864 – 65, vol. 2, p. 27;
English translation in Briggs 1966, vol. 3, pp. 47 – 48; see also Alam 2003, p. 157. Firishta called the new language “Hindvi,” the term
Westerners like Firishta used when referring to any Indian vernacular. 20. See Robbins and McLeod 2006. 21. See the account by
William Finch covering the years 1608 – 11 in Foster 1968, p. 138; see also Duff 1971, vol. 1, p. 36. 22. Gordon 1993, p. 34. 23. Eaton 2005,
p. 188. 24. Richards 1975, pp. 5, 11 – 12. 25. See Smith and Derrett 1975. 26. Nikitin 1970, p. 12. 27. Boxer 1978; Subrahmanyam 1993.

FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F The Art of the Deccan Courts F
F F
F F
Navina najat H aidar
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
T
he imaginative st yle of Deccani court art has been admired for its poetic charac-
ter and sense of fantasy. In painting these qualities are conveyed in part by a lyrical move-
ment of line; a dark, mysterious palette or one with distinctive combinations of glowing
color; enigmatic shifts of scale; and an emphasis on mood rather than reality, as the more widely
known Mughal school is often thought to educe. Several factors influenced Deccani artists,
including Hindu iconography, Persian painting, and European sources. But none entirely explain,
for example, transformations in the style of Bijapur’s most famous painter, the master Farrukh
Husain. His earlier, more conventional Persianized idiom, which he employed while in service
at Kabul and later at the Mughal court, gave way to a far more individual and inspired one when
Farrukh Husain reached the Deccan. His most famous Deccan painting depicts Sultan Ibrahim
‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) riding through a luminous landscape of emerald forest, fluidly
curving violet rocks, and golden sky, the whole work infused with a sense of jewel-like illusion
(cat. 31). The émigré artist had arrived home.
Metaphor and symbol also play a significant role in Deccani painting and the wider arts, as
demonstrated in illustrated sufi romances such as the Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Flower Garden of Love,
cats. 173 – 74), composed in 1657 – 58 by the Bijapur poet laureate Mullah Nusrati. His text links
allegorical gardens with actual horticulture through vivid descriptions of Deccani trees and flowers
and their symbolic meanings.1 In the romance the Pem Nem (The Laws of Love, cat. 29), the hero
in the illustrations bears the image of his beloved on his chest, and silver spray comes from his lips
when he mentions her name, among other visual metaphors.2 Objects, too, show similar imagin
ative flair such as the base of a bidri huqqa (water pipe) decorated with inlaid water patterns
with floating lotuses on the exterior (cat. 86), or the underside view of the fierce gandaberunda
double-headed mythical bird clutching elephants in a qanat (tent hanging) textile panel (cat. 165).
Established iconography takes on fresh combinations that relate to dynastic imagery. This can be
seen in a dagger with a zoomorphic hilt, in which a dragon, lion, deer, bird, and snake, royal sym-
bols drawn from Indian and Persian sources, appear in interlocked combat (cat. 63).
The view of Deccan art as otherworldly, as it is frequently described, certainly captures its
most seductive qualities. Yet this perception has also partially eclipsed a full appreciation of the
Detail of cat. 59 15

rigor and mastery of Deccani artists over the formal
idioms of Islamic art. The so-called Muraqqa‘-yi ‘Adil
Shahi (‘Adil Shahi Album) contains splendid specimens
of calligraphy by several leading scribes of the Ibrahim
‘Adil Shahi II period at Bijapur, such as Abdul Latif,
Abdul Hamid, and Mustafa, in a variety of writing
styles, primarily naskhi and thuluth scripts (fig. 6).3 A
Golconda album of about 1591 also displays extremely
fine Persian, Turkish, and Arabic calligraphy executed
in colored inks, decou page, and fingernail-pressed
relief by court calligraphers (cat. 104). Calligraphy as a
form of architectural ornament is perhaps most opu-
lently seen in the carved stone surfaces of Ibrahim ‘Adil
Shah II’s tomb, the Ibrahim Rauza (fig. 8), executed by
Naqi al-Din Husaini, whose son ‘Ali was also a calligra-
pher. Superb stone calligraphy is further found at the
Qutb Shahi tombs in Golconda and in that of the saint
Shah Khalilullah at Bidar, where crisply chiseled letters
are set against springing arabesque vines (fig. 7).
Certain major Islamic art forms that came to the
Deccan were transformed stylistically or technically,
resulting in effects that are almost unique among the
book arts and objects. One can cite marbled draw-
ings, numbering approximately forty and forming a
group found nowhere else (cats. 72 – 80); a style of gold
and ink illumination with abundant and naturalis-
tic foliage, birds, and animals (cat. 105); and fine-
relief calligraphy on the interior of metal vessels
Fig. 5. Farrukh Beg. Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Hawking, Bijapur, ca. 1590.
Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 11¼ × 6⅛ in. (28.7 × 15.6 cm). (cats. 152 – 59), a technical accomplishment particular
Institute of Oriental Manuscripts, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint
Petersburg (Ms. E. 14, fol. 2)
to the Deccan.
Architecture also contains elements that, while
remaining fundamentally faithful to the Indo-Islamic
tradition, are highly original in style. Some outstanding examples include the carved plaster
work and mother-of-pearl inlay into black basalt in the Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace) at Bidar
and the corresponding relief-carved arabesques executed in formal Timurid style in the wood
ceiling (pp. 170 – 71). Pierced calligraphic jali screens in the upper interior arches of the Ibrahim
Rauza exemplify the design expertise and technical skill of Deccani craftsmen. The extraordinary
trompe l’oeil gesso painted mihrab at Bijapur’s Jami Masjid and the Shi‘a-related designs of the
tile work in the Badshahi Ashurkhana at Hyderabad also demonstrate the Deccan imagination at
its most inventive (pp. 76 – 77, fig. 67).

Fig. 6. Muraqqa‘-yi ‘Adil Shahi (‘Adil Shahi Album), Bijapur, early 17th century. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, approx. 9 × 14 in.
(22.9 × 35.6 cm). Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad (M.91)
Fig. 7. Qur’anic Inscription, Tomb of Shah Khalilullah, Chaukhandi (Four Story), Bidar, 1450
Fig. 8. Chevron Decoration, Right Bay, Southern Facade, Ibrahim Fig. 9. Fragmentary Cenotaph Cover with Qur’anic Calligraphy,
Rauza, Tomb of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II, Bijapur, ca. 1627–35 Turkey, 17th–18th century. Silk and lampas, 38¼ × 26¾ in. (97.2 ×
67.9 cm). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, The Friedsam
Collection, Bequest of Michael Friedsam, 1931 (32.100.460)
Foreign contact in the Deccan influenced local artistic production and transported Deccani
works and styles to Iran and Turkey, Japan, Indonesia and other parts of Southeast Asia, and
northern Europe (where the Dutch master Johannes Vermeer [1632 – 1675] is thought to have
included a Deccani carpet in a painting).4 Deccan influence even came to North America, where
Elihu Yale’s legacy laid the foundations for Yale University, New Haven, based in part on the
wealth he had acquired in trading in Deccan diamonds. The recent identification of three
Hoysala-period shields of the late twelfth century and other items of furniture in a church in the
Ethiopian interior shows how far some Deccan objects had traveled into eastern Africa as part of
a medieval Indian Ocean exchange.5
Connections with Iran and Central Asia form a major theme in Deccan art, with numerous
writers, poets, theologians, calligraphers, and artists from these areas, particularly Iran, finding
patronage at the Deccan courts. Ottoman links are demonstrated by the immigrant Ottoman
gun-founder Ustad Muhammad Bin Husain Rumi, whose name appears on the monumental
Malik-i Maidan (Lord of the Plain) cannon, cast in 1549 at Ahmadnagar (fig. 47), and another
Nizam Shahi cannon at Ausa Fort in 1543.6 A walrus-ivory sword handle is of Ottoman shape
and style but attributable to Bijapur (cat. 62). Ottoman funerary textile patterns are reflected in

the chevron designs of the Ibrahim Rauza (fig. 8). However, the trade was not unidirectional:
an early eighteenth-century Burhanpur textile panel with medallion designs recalling Ottoman
wicker shields was reportedly found lining the inside of an Ottoman tent in Bulgaria.7
Chinese ceramic fragments are found all over the Deccan, but relatively scanty scholarly
attention has been paid to this material (although Chinese imports in northern India have
been better studied).8 Three distinguished Deccani institutions — the Andhra Pradesh State
Archaeology Museum, Hyderabad; Bijapur Archaeological Museum; and Salar Jung Museum,
Hyderabad — as well as the British Museum, London, all display quantities of Chinese ceramics
and shards, many dating to the seventeenth century or earlier (fig. 10). In addition, Asad Beg, the
Mughal ambassador to Bijapur in the early seventeenth century, mentioned large Chinese vases
in the palace of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II, and Chinese motifs taken from pots or textiles appear
in fifteenth-century Deccan wall painting and tile work.9 The mention of Chinese silk textiles
(murasa‘ alat va qumasha-ha-yi khata’i ) at the Golconda court in a contemporary history is
further evidence of a taste for such wares at court.10
Fig. 10. Ceramic Vases, China, 16th–17th century. Installation View, Bijapur Archaeological Museum, Gol Gumbaz
Arguably the greatest Deccani art tradition was that of painting. It is in this realm that the
hands of some individual artists can be discerned in the creation of distinctive, exciting stylistic
expressions of intellectual depth and profundity. This publication assembles paintings and book
arts from the schools of Ahmadnagar, Bijapur, and Golconda — where the main evidence sur-
vives — and also works from the northern Deccan, which reflect a mixed style incorporating
Mughal, Deccan, and Rajput influences. Like court painters in North India, Deccan artists inter-
wove Iranian Safavid, North Indian Mughal, and earlier Sultanate styles and subject matter.
However, in Deccani painting individual strands of these traditions retain their singular flavors
The Art of the Deccan Courts 19

Fig. 11. Coverlet (detail), China for the Export Market, 17th century. Silk satin
embroidered with silk and gilt paper – wrapped thread, 84 × 79 in. (213.4 × 200.7 cm).
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Rogers Fund, 1975 (1975.208d) Fig. 12. Yogini with a Mynah Bird, detail of cat. 30
to a greater degree. For example, the poses and bearing of figures are often in a medieval South
Indian style, and the palette includes the unusual pink hue typical of early Rajput painting.11
Similarly, Safavid-style figures within background architecture are not blended into the compo-
sition but appear as though directly planted there from distant shores (cat. 44).
Very little is known about Deccan artists, partly owing to the paucity of surviving records,
few translated primary sources, and less knowledge about the day-to-day life at court. Paintings,
when they bear inscriptions, generally include just one or two artists’ names, without specify-
ing their particular roles. Thus not much light can be shed on workshop practice. While indi-
vidual hands have been identified, scholars do not always agree on attributions, even for the
limited number of works under discussion. For example, the question of whether Bijapur’s most
famous artist, Farrukh Husain, was the same person as the Mughal painter Farrukh Beg has been
debated for almost sixty years, and only now most have come to agree that, indeed, he is the same
artist.12 Other masters in the Bijapur atelier are still largely known by their Berensonian nomen-
clature, with some exceptions.13 These artists include the Paris Painter (cats. 14 – 15), Bikaner
Painter (cats. 27 – 28), Dublin Painter (cat. 30, fig. 48), Bodleian Painter (cats. 38 – 42, 53), ‘Ali Riza
(cats. 46 – 47), and the Bombay Painter (cats. 66 – 67), as well as Kamal Muhammad and Chand
Muhammad (cat. 71).14
Ahmadnagar painting provides a crucial basis for understanding the evolution of style and
taste in the Deccan. Although extremely fragmentary, the evidence demonstrates two broad

styles. An early, simplified Indic idiom of around 1565, seen in the paintings of the Ta‘rif-i Husain
Shahi (Chronicle of Husain Shah, cat. 8) and in a group of ragamala paintings (cats. 10 – 13), is
marked by boldly drawn figures, buoyant color applied in strong blocks, and a spirited distilla-
tion of the essential elements of the subject. By contrast, a more Mughal-influenced style that
developed later in the sixteenth century, seen in the works of the so-called Paris Painter and a
group of drawings, has a more modeled approach to form, using superbly refined brushwork to
create fine lines and stippling and employing plenty of gold (cats. 14 – 15). These styles converged
at various points but also remained as separate strands in Deccani painting, giving rise to a range
of effects, from understated refinement to unbridled freedom of expression.
Bijapur painting, particularly during the reign of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II, is recognized as a
high point of Deccan art, meriting its description as a “window wide open upon an enchanted
world.” 15 Under his enlightened and sensitive patronage and that of his successors, the arts of
music and painting rose to expressive heights. Like other great Bijapur paintings, a penetrat-
ing portrait of an unidentified African or Indian noble (cat. 52), assigned to an unknown mas-
ter and dated to around 1630, captures the mood of its pensive sitter with haunting insight.
In general, Bijapur painting remained more independent of the Safavid and Mughal influences
seen in works painted for the Qutb Shahi rulers (1496 – 1687) of Golconda. Golconda artists in
some ways kept greater pace with developments in Iran and even preserved some styles past
their Persian arc, such as the fifteenth-century Turkmen idiom that flourished at Golconda
into the seventeenth century in the form of lively animal drawings and energetic figures. While
royal portraits and known artists can be associated with the courts of Golconda, Bijapur, and
Ahmadnagar, certain types of paintings, marbled works for example, cannot be assigned to any
one center, nor can some of the illuminated and decorated folios from books that share a com-
mon decorative language.
Shifts of scale in Deccan painting — the source of much of its ethereal strangeness — are
among its most fascinating qualities. Why do they occur? Some elements of scale can be under-
stood to be hierarchical, as in the portrait of a Golconda prince in a landscape with miniaturized
figures (cat. 132). He towers over his attendants running below him, a tendency that is also seen
in Mughal painting and various eighteenth-century Rajput schools, including Kishangarh and
Raghugarh.16 In other cases, shifts of scale were perhaps attempts to show distance or echo the
main theme, as in an image of a peregrine falcon, in which the overblown foliage in the back-
ground is filled with minuscule birds of the same gray-and-white coloring (cat. 48). The oversize
Chinese-inspired flowers on either side of the Dublin Painter’s Yogini with a Mynah Bird show
that this artist was quoting from sources that, though foreign to him, must have seduced him
into the creation of his enigmatic masterpiece (figs. 11 – 12).
European prints and engravings circulating in India also offer insights into the subject
matter and the question of scale. A print of two parakeets on branches by Adriaen Collaert
(1560 – 1618) has been identified as a source for two oversize birds appearing in Deccan paintings
(fig. 13).17 The Bodleian Painter introduced the bird on the right in the background of his famous
sufi visitation scene of around 1610 – 20 (fig. 15). The bird on the left pecking at a berry appears
(mirror-reversed) in a painting attributed to Golconda, around 1630 – 70 (fig. 14). Seated on the

Fig. 13. Adriaen Collaert (Netherlandish, 1560–1618). Avium Vivae Icones (Birds), from the Psitaci Duplex Genus
series, Antwerp, ca. 1600. Engraving, 5⅛ × 7⅜ in. (13 × 18.7 cm). Trustees of the British Museum, London (Z,1.59)
Fig. 14. A Parrot Perched on a Mango Tree, a Ram Tethered Below, detail of Fig. 15. Dervish Receiving a Visitor, detail of cat. 38
cat. 130
branches of a tree, the bird dwarfs a ram tethered below, perhaps as a result of the artist’s reading
of the distant sheep in the Collaert print as being on the same plane as the bird and therefore of
much smaller size.18 How did the two birds shown in Collaert’s engraving fly into such different
paintings, separated in time by as much as a half a century? The print source possibly remained
within an artist’s family or workshop for generations, valued for what might have been seen as
exotica. During a brief period of painterly exchange between Iran and Golconda at the end of
the seventeenth century, similar stylistic effects took place. Safavid Persian artists in the circle of
the master Shaikh ‘Abbasi were enamored of Mughal and Deccani painting and drawing, among
other foreign or exotic styles. Bahram Sofrakesh executed several works that display the same
shifts of scale as Deccani painting, including plants with oversize insects (figs. 16 – 17).19 Also
distinctive was a shaded and tinted drawing style that Safavid and Golconda artists jointly devel-
oped (cat. 143).
Fig. 16. Prince Holding a Rose, Golconda, end of 17th century. Ink, Fig. 17. Bahram Sofrakesh. Two Lovers, probably Isfahan, a.h. 1050
opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 12¼ × 7⅞ in. (31 × 20 cm). (a.d. 1640). Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, with artist’s
National Museum, New Delhi (58.30/5) signature, 6⅞ × 4⅛ in. (17.3 × 10.5 cm). Arthur M. Sackler Gallery,
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., Lent by the Art and
History Trust (LTS1995.2.116)

Fig. 18. Interior Wall Paintings, Kharbuza Mahal (Melon-Shaped Hall), Tomb of Bilqis Begum, Burhanpur, ca. 1632
Fig. 19. Tent Hanging, Deccan, ca. 1645. Mordant- and resist-dyed and hand-painted plain-weave cotton, 80¾ in. × 9 ft. 7 in.
(205.1 × 292.1 cm). Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, Providence, Gift of Miss Lucy T. Aldrich (37.010)
The wealth of the Deccan came partly from its fertile agricultural land, especially the cotton-
growing areas, and natural resources such as diamonds in the Golconda region. Early Deccan
diamonds in their original shapes are rare as many were recut into glittering forms. Several gems
are associated with later Mughal, Persian, or European royal ownership (cats. 197 – 200). A set of
pendants, however, displays flat-cut diamonds with limited facets set into à-jour (openwork)
gold frames (cats. 134 – 38). Such ornaments represent a local style of jewelry, as worn by a group
of women in a Golconda painted textile (cat. 163). The Shah Diamond (fig. 31), dated 1591 and
inscribed with the name of Burhan Nizam Shah II (reigned 1591 – 95) of Ahmadnagar, and the
Shah Jahan Diamond (cat. 133) are further examples of the local cut and shape during this period.20

Metalworking in the Deccan was highly developed in early times, to judge from the ample
surviving evidence in temple statues. However, unlike other parts of the Islamic world, smaller
domestic objects in metalwork are not known in significant numbers from the Deccan before the
fourteenth century.21 A hoard of ritual objects of that date excavated at Kollur near Bijapur is
a rare group of early metalwork vessels.22 From the s ixteenth century, however, a great many
metalwork techniques and styles were developed. Among them and particular to the Deccan are
bidri metalwork, chased and relief metal objects, ‘alams, arms and armor, and gilt copper (some-
times related to Ottoman tombak metalwork).23 Courtly vessels of devotion or medicine are
often richly embellished with verses from the Qur’an or Shi‘a invocations. Contemporary archi-
tectural forms and D eccan landscapes inspired shapes and designs. European forms were also
depicted in caskets (cats. 184 – 85) and works of art in Goa.
The great textile tradition of the Deccan was kalamkari (painted and dyed cotton textiles),
which flourished from the seventeenth century for at least two hundred years. An extraordinary
diversity of styles was made for a variety of markets, including those of Europe and Southeast
Asia.24 Possibly the most hybrid style was for the Deccan courts themselves, which incorporated
Persianate princely figures, Indian dancers, vignettes from European prints, and scenes of courtly
entertainment. The centers of production are not well known, but from the painting style it is
evident that contact with court art was an important factor for the designers of these cloths.
Designs produced at Burhanpur in the northern Deccan reflect a strong Mughal influence, fea-
turing flowering plants under cusped arches or formal arabesque medallions. Textiles from this
region and others in the Deccan found their way to the Rajput and other Indian courts. Among
them is a section of a tent panel painted with flowering palm trees (fig. 19) from the Amber
Palace toshakhana (storeroom) made in the period of the Rajput ruler Mirza Raja Jai Singh
(reigned 1622 – 67), who died in Burhanpur, where his memorial remains. Also at Burhanpur
from about the same period is the newly rediscovered tomb of the wife of Shah Shuja‘, known as
the Kharbuza Mahal for its melon-shaped profile.25 Its interior, which is miraculously pre-
served, is richly painted with qanat-style motifs that convey the lavish effect of Burhanpur’s
textile tradition (fig. 18).
However, a mystery persists about other types of textiles that did not survive but are assigned
to the Deccan. In the literature and painting of the period, many more types are mentioned and
portrayed — silks, brocades, shawls, and other varieties — some of which were likely imported
and others possibly produced locally. The use of pashmina wool from Kashmir as a backing in
furniture has been confirmed in a box at The Metropolitan Museum of Art that has fragments of
red-purple pashmina behind its metal inlay (cat. 176). Reflecting recent scholarship on carpets,
this volume includes two examples (cats. 151, 183), although most carpet production in the region
appears to be later than the period under consideration.26
The later period under the Nizams of Hyderabad (1763 – 1948) forms part of an ongoing artis-
tic continuum that lasted beyond the fall of the sultanates. Deccan styles also spread into Rajput
and Pahari painting following the Mughal conquest. Deccani court art continued to flourish at
Hyderabad and surrounding smaller centers throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centu-
ries, an efflorescence that constitutes another grand phase in the history of the Deccan.

1. Husain 2012, pp. 154 – 81. 2. See Hutton 2006, pp. 70 – 119, for an extended discussion; see also Hutton 2011, p. 49. 3. N. Ahmad 1956b,
p. 36, describes this muraqqa‘ (album) and gives an account of its contents. 4. Johannes Vermeer, Young Woman with a Water Pitcher,
ca. 1662, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (89.15.21). See Kamada 2011, pp. 171 – 77, especially p. 173. 5. Finbarr Barry Flood in
a lecture at Columbia University, New York, February 6, 2014. 6. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 248 – 58. The employment of an Ottoman
specialist may have been a natural development from earlier exchanges with West Asia during the fifteenth century, when the Mamluk
rulers of Egypt had likely been furnishing the Deccan with ordnance in exchange for other commodities. 7. Francesca Galloway, letter to
the author, April 2000 (curatorial files, Department of Islamic Art, Metropolitan Museum). The panel of a tent lining (1700 – 1740) is in
The Metropolitan Museum of Art (2005.251). 8. For a discussion of Chinese ceramics in northern India, see Carswell 2000, pp. 111 – 12;
see also Smart 1975 – 77. 9. Elliot 1964, p. 164; Philon 2012, p. 97. Muzaffar Alam and Sanjay Subrahmanyam quote and analyze another
part of Asad Beg’s text describing the Bijapur palace with martaban vases, which are generally attributed to Myanmar and China: “The
main gallery was at two yards height, and some sixty hands in width, but with no columns (sutūn). This gallery had three walls with ten
niches (taq) each, which were three yards in height and ten yards wide. Each had a royal chinaware jar (martabān), with a decorated
silk cover. These were as high as the niches themselves, and the walls behind them were well-decorated with trappings and mural
paintings. Asad Beg declares that he was quite astonished at seeing all this display.” See Alam and Subrahmanyam forthcoming. 10. See
Maryam Ekhtiar’s “Excerpts from the Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah,” in this volume, pp. 344 – 45. 11. D. Ali 2004, pp. 148 – 62,
provides information about court protocol and aesthetics, including bearing. 12. Beach 2011, pp. 208 – 9, explains the debates, ultimately
supporting Skelton 1957. The discussion is also summed up in Overton 2011b, pp 28 – 32. 13. Berensonian nomenclature refers to
unknown artists by the location of their famous works. 14. Overton 2011a, pp. 375 – 80, has suggested that ‘Ali Riza and the Bodleian
Painter are the same. 15.  Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 162. 16. Topsfield 2012, p. 222, no. 94. 17. Thanks are due to Robert Skelton,
who first identified this print source in a personal communication. 18. Thanks are due to Sheila Canby for pointing this out. 19. The
author is presently working on a research project on The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Davis Album, a collection of Indian and Persian
paintings, which sheds light on the exchanges between Iran and India in the late seventeenth century. 20. For more, see Navina Najat
Haidar, “Diamonds of the Deccan,” in this volume, pp. 325 – 26. 21.  Theories about why early metalwork has not survived in India include
(a) the melting down and reuse of metalwork in the domestic and courtly sphere and (b) notions of ritual pollution that would have
encouraged this practice and discouraged large numbers of ceramic imports or production. 22. M. Chandra 1962 – 64. 23. Robert
Elgood, in a forthcoming catalogue on the arms and armor collection at Bikaner Palace, will no doubt present more information about
this subject. 24. This broad aesthetic range was recently presented in the exhibition “Interwoven Globe: The Worldwide Textile Trade,
1500 – 1800,” held at The Metropolitan Museum of Art; see Peck 2013. 25.  See N. Mehta 2013. 26. S. Cohen 2011; Kamada 2011.

FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F The Bahmanis and Their Artistic Legacy F
F F
F F
M arika Sardar
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
I
t was during the reign of the powerful Bahmani dynasty (1347 – 1538) that that the cul-
tural foundations of the five Deccani sultanates were established. This dynasty had risen in
the wake of a major shift in the region after successive invasions led by the Khilji and Tughluq
sultans of northern India toppled the three dynasties ruling the Deccan — the Kakatiyas of Warangal
(ca. 1163 – 1323), Yadavas of Devagiri (mid-12th century – 1317), and Hoysalas of Dorasamudra
(ca. 1006 – 1346) — but failed to establish permanent control of the Deccan as a province of the
Delhi sultanate.1 In their stead, two new powerful empires emerged to take the reins. One was
located in the southern Deccan, where a series of four dynasties (1336 – 1646) ruled from the city of
Vijayanagara, and the other was in the northern and central Deccan, under the rule of the Bahmanis.
The Bahmani dynasty was based initially at Daulatabad Fort, former capital of the Yadavas,
before shifting to Gulbarga, a fort with a less distinguished heritage but a more strategic location
(fig. 21).2 The walls of the Gulbarga fort are well preserved; they enclose a sizable mosque, an
audience hall later transformed into a cannonade, a street of shops, and mounds of debris that
likely indicate the presence of ruined Bahmani palaces.3
To the north of the fort was the city’s congregational mosque, the Shah Bazaar Masjid
(ca. 1358 – 75), and to the northwest, the shrine of the sufi Shaikh Siraj al-Din Junaidi, built
around 1379/80, next to which the early Bahmani sultans were buried. Later on, the famed sufi
mystic Sayyid Muhammad Husaini Gesu Daraz (1321 – 1422) would surpass Junaidi in impor-
tance. Gesu Daraz had moved from Daulatabad to Gulbarga at the invitation of Firuz Shah
Bahmani (reigned 1397 – 1422), and despite losing this sultan’s favor, he remained widely popu-
lar, his shrine attracting royal patronage for the next several centuries.4 The Bahmani sultans
who died between 1378 and 1422 are interred near this shrine, and their domed tombs feature
plasterwork characteristic of this era, with vegetal, floral, and calligraphic designs once painted
in bright colors (fig. 22).5
On his accession to the throne, Firuz’s brother Ahmad Shah Bahmani I (reigned 1422 – 36)
named Bidar his capital and developed his own spiritual path by inviting the members of the
Iranian Ni‘matullahi sufi order to resettle near his new royal center. Bidar, too, had been a preex-
isting fortress, but Ahmad transformed the site and moved the court there from Gulbarga in 1432
Fig. 20. Outer Gallery, Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque), Gulbarga, late 14th – early 15th century 29
Fig. 21. Eastern Gate, Gulbarga Fort, 14th century
(pp. xvi – 1).6 Of Ahmad’s many palaces, the suite of buildings known as the Takht Mahal (Throne
Palace) is preserved closest to its fifteenth-century form. Its main hall, flanked by charming lobed
pools, is decorated with carved stone and glazed tiles depicting royal lions with suns rising over
their backs (fig. 23). All of these structures were on a grander scale than the earlier Bahmani
monuments at Gulbarga, reflecting the growth of the empire since its foundation a century ear-
lier; the construction of a royal necropolis at Ashtur, just east of the Bidar Fort, further estab-
lished the city as a dynastic center. Starting with Ahmad, all subsequent sultans and their families
would be buried there. Ahmad’s tomb possesses an extraordinary painted interior — geometric
strapwork and cartouches filled with arabesques cover the entire interior, along with extracts
from the writings of Shah Ni‘matullah, the sufi master whose teachings Ahmad had followed
(fig. 25).7
Meanwhile Vijayanagara was also rapidly growing in territory and influence, and its capital
city was truly impressive. Vijayanagara’s Hindu kings developed this major pilgrimage site
located on the banks of the Tungabhadra River, with massive temples forming a sacred center

Fig. 22. Interior, Tomb of Firuz Shah Bahmani, Gulbarga, ca. 1422
complemented by a vast royal zone with numerous palaces, audience halls, and other ceremonial
structures. Many Europeans, visiting Vijayanagara in the hope of establishing trade relations,
have left descriptions of the court rituals and festivals held in the city, which are an important
source for understanding the extensive architectural remains at the site.8
These two empires were political rivals and on the surface were culturally divergent.
Vijayanagara, with its Hindu, Kannada-speaking rajas, followed more closely in the path of the
dynasties that had preceded it, while the Bahmani sultans introduced Persian as the language of
literary discourse and Islam as the religion of the ruling class. However, at their height the
Bahmani and Vijayanagara empires also had much in common. In a change from the preceding
centuries, both depended on armies with a strong cavalry, and they were based on similar sys-
tems of tax-farming.9 Royal architecture shared a vocabulary of domed and arcaded spaces
(fig. 24) decorated with carved plaster, and styles of dress and titles were also harmonized across
the northern and southern halves of the Deccan.10 The surviving Vijayanagara objects, however,
are mostly religious in nature and do not reflect this cultural exchange.
The Bahmanis and Their Artistic Legacy 31

Fig. 23. Tile Work with Lion and Sun, Takht Mahal (Throne Palace), Bidar, 1420s Fig. 24. Elephant Stables, Vijayanagara, 15th–16th century
Manuscripts and decorative arts of the Bahmani period are rare. An anthology of 1436 and
a Shahnama (Book of Kings) of 1438 have been linked to the court,11 as well as an early Qur’anic
scroll included in this volume (cat. 4) and a late firman (edict) in the Metropolitan Museum’s
collection.12 The paintings hint tantalizingly at a strong Shirazi Persian taste, and the quality of
Bahmani calligraphy and illumination appears high. As it stands, however, it remains impossible
to identify a group of manuscripts that presage the great schools of bookmaking that developed
in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A small group of metal objects has also been attri
buted to this period (cats. 2 – 3, 5 – 6), but these meager remains stand in stark contrast to the
remarkable works mentioned in contemporary descriptions, including the turquoise throne of
Muhammad Shah Bahmani I (reigned 1358 – 75), made by Telugu craftsmen in 1361. According to
the historian Firishta (1560 – 1620), it was finished in ebony, with plates of gold studded with jew-
els and turquoise-colored enameling.13 Perhaps further study of regional collections will reveal
additional treasures of the Bahmani era.

Fig. 25. Painted Interior, Tomb of Ahmad Shah Bahmani I, Ashtur, ca. 1436
1. Venkataramanayya 1942, pp. 2 – 11; P. Jackson 1999, pp. 196 – 210. On the early establishment of the Bahmani dynasty, see Sherwani 1985,
pp. 21 – 30. 2. A few buildings have been associated with the Bahmani occupation of Daulatabad; see Philon 2010b. 3. Helen Philon
suggests that the mosque was originally built as a ceremonial hall; ibid., pp. 41 – 42. 4. For more on Firuz’s unusual character, see
Sherwani 1943 – 44. 5. For these and Bahmani buildings at other sites, see Merklinger 1981; Philon 2010b. 6. The foremost work on Bidar
remains Yazdani 1947. Helen Philon has more recently offered her own reinterpretations of the site. See Philon 2010a; Philon 2011. 7. For
Helen Philon’s new work on this tomb, see Philon 2000. 8. Fritz, Michell, and Nagaraja Rao 1984 is one of many publications on the
architecture of the site. For the foreign accounts, see Rubiés 2000. 9. Stein 1989, pp. 22 – 23, 39 – 42. 10. Asher 1985; Michell 1992;
Wagoner 1996. 11. As attributed by Barbara Brend in Brend 1986. The anthology is Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (Persian Ms. 124), and
the Shahnama, British Library, London (Or. 1403). 12. Eaton 2011, p. 6, fig. 3. The firman is in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York (1998.260). 13. Firishta, Tarikh-i Firishta; English translation in Briggs 1966, vol. 2, pp. 188 – 89.
o
The Bahmanis and Their Artistic Legacy 33
1 Coins of the Bahmani and Vijayanagara Empires The Bahmani and Vijayanagara empires were located on
either side of a long east-west border across South India. This
[a] Bahmani Tanka Coin from the Reign of ‘Ala al-Din Bahman Shah. territorial division, however, did not prevent cultural or eco-
Gulbarga, a.h. 756 (a.d. 1355). Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz. (10.3 g)
nomic exchange. Vijayanagara gold coins (hun) were widely
[b ] Tanka Coin from the Reign of ‘Ala al-Din Muhammad Shah Khalaji. used within the territories of the Bahmanis and their succes-
Ranthambor, late 13th – early 14th century. Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz. (10.9 g)
sors, outweighing Bahmani gold coins by a factor of more
[c] Bahmani Tanka Coin from the Reign of Muhammad Shah than two to one.1 These Vijayanagara coins are easily distin-
Bahmani I. Gulbarga, a.h. 762 (a.d. 1360 – 61). Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz.
(10.9 g)
guished from Bahmani specimens by their use of devanagari
script and Hindu iconography. The examples here show
[ d] Bahmani Tanka Coin from the Reign of Muhammad Shah
Bahmani II. Gulbarga, a.h. 797 (a.d. 1394 – 95). Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz. Shiva and Parvati seated and Vishnu as the young Krishna
(10.8 g) (Balakrishna) seated on the front and the names of the
[e] Bahmani Tanka Coin from the Reign of Taj al-Din Firuz Shah. kings Harihararaya II (reigned 1377 – 1404) and Krishnaraya
Gulbarga, a.h. 819 (a.d. 1416 – 17). Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz. (10.9 g) (reigned 1509 – 29) on the reverse (cats. 1 j–k).
[f] Bahmani Tanka Coin from the Reign of ‘Ala al-Din Ahmad Shah II. Bahmani coins were struck in copper (gani or falus), sil-
Bidar, a.h. 861 (a.d. 1456 – 57). Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz. (11 g) ver (tanka), and gold (tanka, dinar) and provide the titles,
[g ] Bahmani Gani Coin from the Reign of ‘Ala al-Din Ahmad Shah II. names, and parentage of the sultan in Arabic along with the
Deccan, a.h. 852 (a.d. 1448 – 49). Copper, Wt. 0.6 oz. (16.7 g) date and place of minting.2 Some Bahmani coins were appar-
[h] Bahmani Gani Coin from the Reign of ‘Ala al-Din Ahmad Shah II. ently unearthed in cylindrical boxes of the period.3 At least
Deccan, a.h. 838 or 839 (a.d. 1434 – 36). Copper, Wt. 0.5 oz. (15.1 g) two such boxes are in private collections; their bodies are said
[i] Bahmani Coin from the Reign of Shams al-Din Muhammad Shah III. to be high in zinc and decorated with relief designs on the
Bidar, a.h. 876 (a.d. 1471 – 72). Silver, Wt. 0.4 oz. (11 g) side and top, forming a simple radiating floral motif around
[j] Vijayanagara Half-Hun Coin from the Reign of Harihararaya II. the knob of the lid (fig. 26).4 nnh
Vijayanagara, ca. 1377–1404. Silver, Wt. 0.1 oz. (1.7 g)
1. Wagoner 2014. 2. Coin 1i is inscribed al-mu’tasim billah abu’l muzaffar
[k] Vijayanagara Hun Coin from the Reign of Krishnaraya. shams al-dunya wa’l-din muhammad shah bin humayunshah al-sultan
Vijayanagara, ca. 1509–29. Silver, Wt. 0.1 oz. (3.4 g) khallada mulkahu (He who relies on God, the Father of the Conqueror, Sun
of the world and of the faith, Muhammad Shah, son of Humayun Shah, the
Private collection, Haddam, Connecticut Sultan. May God preserve the kingdom). Goron and Goenka 2001 gives an
account of Bahmani coinage. See also M. H. Martin 1980; M. H. Martin
1992. 3. Abdul Wali Khan 1964, pl. xxxv. The author is grateful to Jagdish
Mittal for providing this reference. 4. Such boxes formerly in the collection
of Simon Digby, Jersey, are also known.
Fig. 26. Cylindrical Box, Deccan, 15th century. H. approx. 8 in.

(20.3 cm). Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art,
Hyderabad

[a] o bv er se [ a] r e v er se [ b] obv er se [ b ] r e ver se
[c] o bv er se [ c ] r e v er se [d] obv er se [ d ] r e ver se
[f ] obv er se [ f ] r e ver se
[e ] o bv er se [ e ] r e ver se
[ g ] o bv er se [ g ] r e v er se [ h] obv er se [ h ] r e ver se
[j ] obv er se [ j ] re v er se [k] obver se [ k ] r e ver se
[i ] o bv er se [ i ] r e v er se
2 Spherical Container with Spiraling Radials of its decoration, which resembles Kakatiya architectural
ornament.2 The spiral flutes on the box alternate between
Probably Warangal, 14th century
Bronze, Diam. 6 ⅛ in. (15.4 cm) plain and ribbed lines, presaging more simplified fluting
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad on later Deccan metal work vessels. Attachments on the
(76.1295) sides provide a hinge at one end and a latch at the other. It
Incribed in Telugu in interior: salpu di ranga phani yabhai: ka(?) was likely a container for coins or jewelry, as implied by its
(The value of the contents in this container is fifty: ka[?]) Telugu i nscription. nnh
1. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 165 – 202; Sardar 2014, p. 15. 2. Jagdish

Recent scholarship has uncovered the influence of the Mittal kindly pointed out the similarity with the ornamentation on
Kakatiyas (ca. 1163 – 1323) on the cultural codes of the later Kakatiya monuments such as the Thousand Pillar Temple at the Hana
makonda and the Warangal Fort.
sultans of the Deccan.1 This striking spherical box has been
attributed to their capital at Warangal partly on the basis
Cat. 2

Cat. 3
3 Footed Ewer with Elephant-Headed Spout foot in the manner of vessels that have been dated to the four-
and Bird-Shaped Terminals teenth century.1 This evidence comes largely from a hoard of
Deccan, probably 15th century metalwork objects, which display similar pedestals excavated
Copper alloy, H. 8⅛ in. (20.5 cm), W. 7⅞ in. (20 cm), D. 4⅛ in. (10.5 cm) at Kollur.2 The vessel’s zoomorphic elements, such as the ele-
Collection of Terence McInerney, New York phant spout and bird terminals, are associated with Deccan
metalwork styles in general. Therefore, the ewer may be a
The distinctive shape of a curving pilgrim flask with upturned rare survivor of the Bahmani period, when these features are
ends is well known through leather and metalwork examples likely to have first come together. nnh
from the Islamic courts of India from the sixteenth century
1. Zebrowski 1997, p. 138, pl. 167. 2. M. Chandra 1962 – 64.
onward. However, this ewer rests on a high diamond-shaped
Catalogue 37
4 Qur’an Manuscript Scroll
Calligraphy by ‘Abdullah Sururi
Probably Deccan, 15th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on glazed cotton, 9 ft. 10⅛ in. × 20⅞ in.
(300 × 52.9 cm)
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 1084 T)
Notwithstanding the fact that the text of the Qur’an was

transcribed on talismanic cotton shirts and that the early
Arab lexicographers al-Asma’i and Ibn al-Manzur mention
that the practice they labeled muhraq (an Arabized Persian
term) existed in early medieval times, it is highly unusual
to find the text transcribed on a cotton scroll. This rare,
three-meter-long manuscript, signed by the calligrapher
‘Abdullah Sururi, begins with an elaborate illumination,
covered with gold and inscribed with the first two verses of
the Surat al-Fatiha, the first chapter of the Qur’an, in red,
rounded thuluth script outlined in black and pale blue. The
contouring ground is filled with red, lobed medallions evoc-
ative of Chinese cloud bands, and small floral devices fill the
interstices of the letters. Below the header is a band inscribed
with the remaining three verses of the opening chapter in red
on a gold ground, followed by the basmala in pale blue out-
lined in red, and the entire text of the Qur’an in minuscule
ghubar script.
The thirty sections ( juz’ ) of the Qur’an are indicated by
large, circular medallions inscribed with the number of the
section in red on a gold ground, and are laid out in a zigzag
arrangement made possible because the ghubar script was
stretched and contracted to accommodate the pattern. Rect
angular panels that project from the medallions are inscribed
with the beginnings of the verse, which are almost illegible
today since they are on a silver ground that is now oxidized.
Smaller medallions that do not follow a particular pattern
indicate the quarter and half sections.
Bordering the outer edges of the scroll are bands featuring
roundels on a ground of lobed medallions (a few of which
are still legible), inscribed with some of the ninety-nine
names of God, as well as the apotropaic formula buduh. The
group of letters forming the word buduh generally invokes
good fortune and safe return, and the fact that the word was
frequently engraved on sword blades might suggest that the
scroll was carried during military campaigns to protect the
troops and secure their safe return.
Cat. 4
Detail of cat. 4
The scroll’s attribution to the Deccan is supported by its 1. Helen Philon, personal communication to Navina Najat Haidar. 2. An
unpublished Deccan scroll of 1683 transcribed with the names of the Shi‘a
decorative features and format. The shifts of scale seen in imams was formerly in the collection of Sam Fogg.
the arabesque patterns of the upper part are reminiscent of
the same sort of patterns in Bahmani carved plasterwork.1 In
addition, later scrolls indicate that such a tradition developed
in the region.2 sk/nnh
Catalogue 39
5 Bowl in the Shape of a Ten-Pointed Star A fifteenth-century cistern with fourteen trefoiled stellar
points, moved from the Takht Mahal (Throne Palace) and
Deccan, 15th century
Engraved bronze, H. 3⅜ in. (8.5 cm), Diam. 9 in. (23 cm) now located in the Lal Bagh (Ruby Garden) in front of the
Private collection, London Solah Khamba (Sixteen Columns) mosque at Bidar Fort, is
the centerpiece of a raised platform that dominates the gar-
An intriguing survivor from the early Bahmani period is this den (fig. 27).1 The combination of the tiered body and fret-
heavy bronze bowl with a rounded body and a raised, cusped work brackets also echoes Deccani architecture, particularly
rim in the form of a ten-pointed star. Seen from above, each that of Bijapur, where running cornices have openwork
point is a trefoil with an engraved, loosely drawn Timurid- brackets beneath their lower edges. A platform in the middle
style arabesque uniting the flat spaces that surround a round of a water tank in front of the city’s Asar Mahal, a shrine built
well in the middle. An Indian-style lotus is engraved at the to house hairs from the Prophet’s beard, has a similar tiered,
bottom. Seen from the side, a cusped, engraved, perforated bracketed outline.
cornice beneath the rim follows the outline of the star. This Round, cusped, black-basalt footed bowls used for burn-
cornice in turn creates a sort of awning that shades the ing incense are found at a number of Shi‘a shrines in the
rounded base and flanged foot. region. An impressive example is in the Asar Mahal itself,
The star shape can be compared to a number of fountains and another is found in the Badshahi Ashurkhana reliquary
and pools in Deccan and later Mughal palaces. Fifteenth- house in Hyderabad. It is possible that this metal bowl was
century stellar fountains adorn the Jahaz Mahal (Ship Palace) also used for burning incense in a Shi‘a shrine. jra
at Mandu, a pleasure dome in the extraordinary capital of
1. Philon 2010a, p. 54.
the sultans of Malwa (1401 – 1562) to the north of the Deccan.
Fig. 27. Star-Shaped Pool, Lal Bagh (Ruby Garden), Bidar, 1420s
Cat. 5

Cat. 6
6 Brazier in Timurid objects and architecture, which can also be seen

Deccan, probably 15th century in the tile panels and stuccowork of the buildings in Bidar.
Cast and chased bronze, H. 9⅝ in. (24.4 cm), W. 25 in. (63.5 cm) In addition, the dragon heads along the legs of this object
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Nathaniel are part of a shared decorative vocabulary and would be
Spear Jr. Gift, 1988 (1988.293)
seen on later Deccani metalwork, such as the beggars’ bowls
(kashkuls) and standards (‘alams) produced in the sixteenth
A hexagonal brazier with finials and short legs on each side and seventeenth centuries. The object’s provenance connects
is a type known from Iran, dating back at least to Timurid it to Hyderabad, lending weight to its Deccani attribution.1
(ca. 1370 – 1507) and perhaps Ilkhanid (1256 – 1353) times. The ms
interwoven and symmetrical organization of the scrolling
1. Thanks are due to Terence McInerney for this information.
stems and leaves on the side panels follows a design common
Catalogue 41
Ahmadnagar and Berar
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F F
F Ahmadnagar AND berar F
F F
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
I
t is to the Bahmani governor Malik Ahmad Nizam al-Mulk Bahri (reigned 1496 – 1510)
that the Deccani sultanates owe their existence.1 Already frustrated with the weakened
Bahmani sultan and the factionalized administration in Bidar, Ahmad was outraged by the
politically provoked murder of his father and declared independence in 1490, emboldening his
fellow governors in Bijapur, Golconda, and Berar to do the same.2
Ahmad’s gambit succeeded, and his province survived as an independent entity until
1636. Situated on the northwestern side of the Deccan plateau, it encompassed the key fort of
Daulatabad and the busy port of Chaul, among other assets. In 1494, Ahmad established his own
capital to cement the sultanate’s newfound status. Named Ahmadnagar, the city was located at a
strategic distance between the forts of Daulatabad and Junnar. Ahmad first built round earthen
walls, enclosing the elegant palaces and halls, and over time, a city grew up about a half mile to
the west, encircled by the residential garden estates of the Ahmadnagar elite. Few of the early struc-
tures survive, but Ahmad’s tomb at Bagh Rauza combines fine stucco- and stonework (fig. 28).
Ahmad’s grandson Husain Nizam Shah I (reigned 1553 – 65) would similarly rouse his fellow
Deccani sultans to action, in this case, to attack the kingdom of Vijayanagara in 1565. While each
of the Deccan sultans had found reason to ally with Vijayanagara at strategic moments in the past,
the rulers of Bijapur, Golconda, and Bidar joined forces with Husain, decisively routing their
southern rival. The momentous Battle of Talikota, which sealed the victory over Vijayanagara, is
the subject of the Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi (Chronicle of Husain Shah, cat. 8), made for the trium-
phant Husain.
The subsequent flow of treasures from Vijayanagara to the sultans’ territories resulted in
the increased patronage of paintings and buildings at their respective courts, and the city of
Ahmadnagar further blossomed under the Nizam Shahi rulers and their enriched nobles.3 The
Damri Masjid (1568), one of the structures erected at this time, is a fine example of the local
stone-carving tradition. Perhaps once a neighborhood mosque, the building is constructed
entirely of brownish-gray basalt. Austere from the exterior, it has a small interior replete with
carved details: geometric bands outline the structural elements, arabesques fill the spandrels of
arches, and trees flower and sprout alongside calligraphy in the mihrab (fig. 29).

Pages 42–43: Bagh Rauza, Tomb of Ahmad Nizam Shah, Ahmadnagar, 16th century
Fig. 29. Damri Masjid, Ahmadnagar, 1568
Husain’s son Murtaza Nizam Shah I (reigned 1565 – 88) was initially heavily involved in expand-
ing his realm of authority, particularly through the conquest of the neighboring sultanate of
Berar. But by 1575 he had almost entirely retreated from state affairs, taking up residence first in
the Hasht Bihisht Bagh (Eight Paradises Garden) and then in the Farah Bakhsh Bagh (Pleasure-
Bestowing Garden) estates. The historical chronicles portray him as mercurial, even deranged,
ordering massacres, burning libraries, and demolishing a newly built palace that displeased him.4
But this backdrop of mayhem and fear contrasts with the flourishing architectural scene that
included the construction of the refined pavilion in the Farah Bakhsh Bagh (fig. 30).5 The pavilion
is octagonal and set in the middle of a reflecting pool, from which water was pumped into the
building and up through its three levels of rooms. Inside the pavilion, strips of glass laid into the
floors connected the fountains, and delicately carved plaster decorated the ceilings.6
Though in power for only four years, Burhan Nizam Shah II (reigned 1591 – 95) is a pivotal fig-
ure under whom the arts at Ahmadnagar came fully into their own. His reign coincides with the
development of a new school of drawing (cats. 16 – 19) and with the careers of the poets Maulana
Malik, Malik Qumi, and Zuhuri, the last of whom dedicated his famous panegyric the Saqinama
(Book of the Cupbearer, ca. 1591 – 94) to the sultan.7 Burhan also commissioned several projects
in relation to the turning of the millennium in the Islamic calendar (a.d. 1591 – 92): he bid Sayyid
‘Ali Azizallah Tabataba’i to write the Burhan-i Ma’athir, a history of the Nizam Shahi dynasty,
Fig. 28. Dome, Bagh Rauza, Tomb of Ahmad Nizam Shah, Ahmadnagar, 1509 Ahmadnagar and Berar 47
Fig. 30. Pavilion, Farah Bakhsh Bagh (Pleasure-Bestowing Garden), Ahmadnagar, 1583
and had a diamond carved with his name and the year a.h. 1000 (fig. 31).8 Among the earliest
inscribed diamonds from India, this Deccani example predates even the known Mughal ones.
In the next several years of political upheaval, the Ethiopian-born general Malik ‘Ambar
(1548 – 1626) emerged as Ahmadnagar’s leader, using a succession of weak Nizam Shahi s cions
as puppets to effectively rule the sultanate. He was a brilliant strategist, credited with recon
figuring Ahmadnagar’s financial structure and with developing a new type of warfare that
48 Ahmadnagar and Berar

successfully stayed the conquest of the sultanate for nearly three
decades.9 Malik ‘Ambar also established the city of Khirki (now
Aurangabad) and built a tomb near the shrine of Burhan al-Din
Gharib (died 1334). This shrine had been patronized by the
Bahmani sultans and continued to grow through the Nizam
Shahi period, attracting pilgrims and spawning a series of
subsidiary shrines, around which hundreds of devotees are now
buried.10 Malik ‘Ambar’s tomb represents a final stage in the
Ahmadnagar architectural tradition with pierced screens set
into a simple square structure (fig. 32).
After Malik ‘Ambar’s death in 1626, his son Fath Khan con-
tinued to support the state in his role as prime minister to both
Husain Nizam Shah III (reigned 1631 – 33) and Murtaza Nizam
Shah III (reigned 1633 – 36) until surrendering to the Mughals in
1633. By ceding the fort of Daulatabad to the forces of Emperor
Shah Jahan (reigned 1628 – 58), the traitorous Fath Khan secured
leniency—and even a pension—from the Mughals, whereas Fig. 31. Shah Diamond, Deccan, dated a.h. 1000 (a.d. 1591 – 92)
with later inscriptions. Wt. 88.7 cts. State Diamond Fund,
other Nizam Shahi nobles continued the fight for the sultanate Armoury Chamber, Kremlin Museum, Moscow
for another three years, facing ultimate defeat in 1636.
Fig. 32. Interior, Tomb of Malik ‘Ambar, Khuldabad, 1626
Ahmadnagar and Berar 49

Fig. 33. Gavilgarh Fort, 15th–16th century
Fig. 34. Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque), Gavilgarh, late 15th century
zx
zx
zx
zx
Berar
b
Berar, located in the northeastern Deccan, was created as a separate p rovince in the late
fourteenth-century division of the Bahmani Empire into four administrative units, and in 1490,
its governor Fathallah ‘Imad al-Mulk (reigned 1490 – 1510) established his independence, found-
ing the ‘Imad Shahi dynasty (1490 – 1574).11 Although the sultanate should have prospered like its
neighbors, Fathallah and his successors ‘Ala’ al-Din ‘Imad Shah (reigned 1510 – 30), Darya ‘Imad
Shah (reigned 1530 – 61), and Burhan ‘Imad Shah (reigned 1562 – 74) faced constant pressure from
the sultans of nearby Ahmadnagar and Gujarat, who were determined to annex Berar for them-
selves. The Berar rulers kept up a valiant defense for several decades, but they could not repel the
determined efforts of Murtaza Nizam Shah I. When, in 1574, he launched simultaneous attacks
on several key forts, the young Burhan and his general Tufal Khan were forced to surrender. The
Ahmadnagar sultan thus captured Berar, and it remained a part of his sultanate until 1596, when
it fell in turn to the Mughals.12
Berar is usually overlooked in art-historical surveys because it was subsumed into
Ahmadnagar around the time the earliest works from any Deccani court are known, and no
surviving manuscripts or decorative objects can be linked to the region or its rulers. One can
assume its libraries were filled with Persian and Arabic manuscripts, and that its rulers were
immortalized in majestic portraits, but a sense of its courtly culture must be imagined from
other bits of evidence.
The forts at Gavilgarh, Narnala, and Elichpur (now Achalpur) served at different times as
the capital of Berar.13 The monuments built at these capitals demonstrate a distinctive north-
ern Deccani aesthetic—shared with Ahmadnagar and the nearby sultanate of Khandesh—that
features dressed stone, rather than stucco, and favors a decorative vocabulary of shallow niches,
rosette bosses, and eaves resting on brackets. The buildings were often constructed on high
plinths and have flanking minarets with a square profile topped with domed kiosks, or chhatris.14
Located high in the Satpura Range, the Gavilgarh and Narnala forts were established in the
fifteenth century under the Bahmanis.15 Both can be entered only on one side, via long wind-
ing paths defended by bastions and heavily fortified gates. In the ‘Imad Shahi period, Gavilgarh
(fig. 33) was built up as Fathallah and his son ‘Ala’ al-Din added monuments befitting a capital.16
Inside the main gate, a series of additional gates lead into a palace zone with water reservoirs and
courtly buildings, including baths with pyramidal roofs of a type found throughout the Deccan.
During the Nizam Shahi occupation of Gavilgarh, the Chhoti Masjid (Small Mosque, 1577 – 78)
was also constructed here.
Just beyond the palace zone is a large congregational mosque, the Jami Masjid (fig. 34), in
what may have been a more public part of the fort. The mosque, truly impressive in size and pro-
portions, is perched at the highest point of the compound and overlooks the plains below. The
building is preceded by a walled courtyard once enlivened with pierced screens, while the prayer
hall has a facade of seven arches flanked by minarets terminating in chhatris. There must have
Ahmadnagar and Berar 51

51
Fig. 35. Dedicatory Inscription, Mahakali Gate, Narnala Fort, 1487
Fig. 36. Gate, Elichpur Fort, 16th century
Fig. 37. Octagonal Pavilion, Hauz Katora Bagh, Elichpur, 16th century
once been a large dome over the bay in front of the mihrab, but it has fallen, as has most of the
qibla wall. No dedicatory inscription survives, but it is likely that the mosque was built around
the time of Fathallah’s declaration of independence. Several other Deccani sultans also erected
large mosques during this period as symbols of their break from the Bahmanis, but the determi-
nation to construct this building in such a remote location, and at a size that must have dwarfed
the fort’s population, is particularly poignant.
At Narnala, once again a long ascent is rewarded with the arrival into an area of level ground
where an audience hall, small mosque, baths, stables, and tombs are clustered next to water res-
ervoirs. The inscription on the fort’s Mahakali Gate (fig. 35) gives the date of its construction,
1487, and the name of its patron, Fathallah. Another building (of unknown function) may also
have been erected during the reign of Fathallah, as the form of its arches and the remaining
plasterwork suggest a late fifteenth-century date.
In Elichpur is a low-lying fort that was used for ceremonial rather than defensive purposes
(fig. 36). Little is left of the fort’s ‘Imad Shahi foundations, but about a mile and a half to the west
is a sixteenth-century garden, the Hauz Katora Bagh. It was designed along the same lines as the
Nizam Shahi Hasht Bihisht and Farah Bakhsh Baghs, and similarly features a large pool sur-
rounding a multistory octagonal tower (fig. 37).17 The first and second floors of the tower are
faced in stone and each has a single room, while the top floor, faced in brick but probably once
plastered, has a room in the center with a gallery surrounding it. The interiors are decorated with
carved stucco in addition to the rosette bosses, pierced screens, and shallow niches found on
other ‘Imad Shahi buildings.
Although the court was short-lived, the legacy of this strategically significant and agricul-
turally rich sultanate endured, and the name of Berar was later revived. In 1853, the Nizam of
Hyderabad, Asaf Jah IV, was forced to cede this territory to the British as payment of an alleged
debt, but his descendants were granted the title “His Exalted Highness the Nizam of Hyderabad
and Berar” and the heir apparent was known as the “Prince of Berar,” in acknowledgment of this
region’s importance. ms
1. Ahmad’s reign dates are typically given as 1496 – 1510 because he started minting coins in his own name in 1496; however, his move
toward independence started in 149o. 2. How independent Golconda was at this time is a matter of debate and is discussed further in
this volume, on p. 198. 3. For the development of Ahmadnagar under Burhan I, Husain I, and Murtaza I, see Nazim 1933 – 34, p. 2; Shyam
1966, pp. 373, 393 – 94; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, pp. 9 – 11; Sohoni 2010a. 4. Tabataba, Burhan-i Ma’athir; English translation in Haig
1921, pp. 326 – 27, p. 328; Haig 1922, p. 29. 5. Constructed between 1574 and 1583; see Nazim 1933 – 34, pp. 11 – 12; Shyam 1966, pp. 373, 395.
For Murtaza’s displeasure with the pavilion’s design, see Tabataba, Burhan-i Ma’athir; English translation in Haig 1921, p. 328. 6. Sohoni
2010b, pp. 48 – 51. 7. N. Ahmad 1974, pp. 91 – 92. 8. The diamond, now 88.7 carats, later passed into Mughal hands, at which time it
was inscribed with Emperor Shah Jahan’s name. It was then captured by Nadir Shah of Iran and inscribed by Fath ‘Ali Shah Qajar,
before being presented to the Russian Czar Nicholas I in recompense for the murder of a Russian diplomat in Tehran. Khalidi 1999,
pp. 53 – 54. 9. For a biography based on contemporary sources, see Seth 1957; see also Eaton 2005, pp. 105 – 28. 10. Ernst 1992,
pp. 201 – 6. 11. Fathallah was captured in a raid into Vijayanagara realms in 1423 and became a favorite of Ahmad Shah Bahmani, later being
appointed Berar’s governor around 1473. 12. Firishta, Tarikh-i Firishta; English translation in Briggs 1966, vol. 3, pp. 297 – 98; see also
Shyam 1973, pp. 278 – 87. 13. Various references in the Burhan-i Ma’athir (see, for example, English translation in Haig 1920, p. 165)
explain the movement of the court and capital among these three sites. 14. See the discussion in Z.-D. A. Desai 1974, pp. 256 – 58.
15. Hira Lal 1932, pp. 140 – 41, 147 – 48; see also Haig 1907, pp. 146 – 61; Haig 1907 – 8. 16. ‘Ala’ al-Din ‘Imad Shah is said by Firishta to
have “established his royal residence at Gavilgarh,” after “following the example of other chiefs of the house of Bahmani, and declaring
himself King, under the title of ‘Ala’ al-Din ‘Imad Shah”; Tarikh-i Firishta (English translation in Briggs 1966, vol. 3, p. 293; translation
slightly modified by the author). 17. Z.-D. A. Desai 1974, pp. 258 – 60; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 41.

o
Cat. 7
7 Sultan Husain Nizam Shah I on Horseback the Sanctuary. For he who is privy to the lane of the beloved has no
connection to the Sanctuary)
Ahmadnagar, ca. 1555
Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 7⅝ × 9⅞ in. In Persian on the parasol: buwad ab-i nabat az khak-i pa gar khizr rah
(19.5 × 25.1 cm) burdi /bi-khak-i
pa-yi tu hargiz najusti ab-i haywan-ra // khwash an
Cincinnati Art Museum, John J. Emery Endowment (1983.311) mahfil ka garbad rawshan az sham‘-i jamal-i u / khwash
an chatr[i] ka
bashad jilva-gah an shah-i khuban-ra ([Your] footprints are [sweeter]
Inscribed in Persian at top center: shabih-i sultan ibrahim-i kalan, than sugar water. Had Khizr found his way to your footprints, he would
padshah-i bijapur (Portrait of Sultan Ibrahim the Great, King never have sought the Fountain of Living Waters. Happy that assembly
of Bijapur) that is illuminated by the candle of his beauty; Happy that parasol that
is a place of manifestation for that prince of beauties)
In Arabic on the center of the sunshade: nasrun min allah wa-fathun
qarib wa-bashshiri l-mu’minin [Qur’an 61:13] (Assistance from In Arabic on the triangular banners: nasrun min allah wa-fathun qarib
God, and a speedy victory, and do thou bear good tidings to the [Qur’an 61:13] (Assistance from God, and a speedy victory).
true believers)
In Persian on the scarves: chih rahat-bakhsh u riza-awar (?) subhan
In Persian on the edge of the sunshade: zihi az gulshan-i ku-yi tu rawnaq-i allah in munzal shuda . . . / saya-i haq zill-i yazdan-ra // nizam-i silk-i
bagh-i rizwan-ra /safa-yi
digar az ru-yi tu khalwatkhana-i jan-ra // dawlat mazhar-i akhlaq-i yazdani / ka zat-ash bud az khalq-i jihan
muqim-i ka‘ba-i ku-yi tu bashad az haram farigh /ka nabwad ba haram maqsud yazdan-ra (What giver of ease and contentment[?]. Praise
nisbat-i harim-i ku-yi janan-ra (Your garden gives splendor to the God. This has been revealed . . . shadow of God. The order of the
garden of paradise. The hermitage of the soul is given another radiance arrangement of the state, manifestation of divine characteristics, whose
by your face. He who dwells in the Ka‘ba of your lane can dispense with essence was God’s purpose in creating the world) 1
Catalogue 55
This is a magisterial state portrait of Husain Nizam Shah I rounded head, but in the later manuscript his body has
(reigned 1553 – 65) and his attendants enjoying a hunt. It was already begun to acquire a middle-age thickness. In fact,
probably painted shortly after Husain I ascended the throne these works are so close in style that one is led to believe
at age thirty, making this the earliest known Deccani paint- they were painted by the same artist. tm
ing.2 Poetic and Qur’anic quotations inscribed on the regalia
1. Smart and Walker 1985, p. 43, with slight modifications to the translitera-
reinforce the royal theme. The later Persian inscription at the tion. 2. Daniel S. Walker in ibid., p. 44. 3. British Library, London (Or. 3299;
top center wrongly identifies the subject as Sultan Ibrahim Losty 1982, pp. 66 – 67, no. 40), National Museum, New Delhi (48.6/4;
S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 134 – 35, no. 79), and British Library (Persian Ms. 149;
‘Adil Shah II of Bijapur. Losty 1982, p. 67, no. 41), respectively. 4. K. Desai 2002, pp. 80, 81, 264 – 65,
Husain is hunting with a falcon, or kestrel, which is shortly nos. 77, 78; see also Khandalavala and M. Chandra 1969; P. Chandra 1976; P.
Chandra and Ehnbom 1976. 5. Aftabi 1987. 6. Men in present-day Yemen
to be released to attack the two cranes, outlined only in black wear similar basket-weave sandals. The author is indebted to Navina Najat
ink, fluttering in the uncolored sky in the upper-right corner. Haidar for this information. See also Leach 1995, vol. 2, p. 829.
The significance of these areas of plain paper is uncertain.

Perhaps this work was left unfinished, as also indicated by
8 Manuscript of the Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi
the flatness of the attendants’ robes. Yet there is also a long
(Chronicle of Husain Shah)
tradition in Indian painting of incorporating the natural color
of the paper as an important element of the composition. Ahmadnagar, ca. 1565 – 69
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6¼ × 5 in. (15.9 × 12.7 cm)
The painting’s style resembles examples from the royal Bharat Itihas Sanshodhak Mandal, Pune
workshops of the Khilji dynasty at Mandu, an Islamic sul-
tanate some 250 miles north of Ahmadnagar. Among the The Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi is the earliest and one of the
few extant illustrated Mandu manuscripts are the Miftah greatest Deccani illustrated manuscripts. Together with the
al-Fuzala, a glossary of rare words composed around 1500; equestrian portrait of Husain Nizam Shah I (cat. 7), it inau-
Sa’di’s Bustan (The Orchard), a classic of Persian poetry of gurates court painting at Ahmadnagar and in the Deccan at
around 1500 – 1503; and the Ni’matnama, a beautiful cook- large. Written in Persian, the court language of Ahmadnagar,
book of around 1495 – 1505.3 by the royal poet Aftabi, the text is a long epic poem (masnavi)
Few illustrated Mandu manuscripts have survived, but in praise of the sultan. It chronicles his principal activities,
several extant works belong to what has been called the particularly his great victory over Vijayanagara at the Battle
Chandayana style of pre-Mughal painting.4 Derived from of Talikota in 1565 and his marriage to Khanzah Humayun,
fifteenth-century Turkmen painting from Iran, this style
his primary queen, whom Husain idolized.
flourished in Ahmadnagar until about 1600. The present Only about 85 percent of Aftabi’s original text survives. At
work displays various elements of the Chandayana style, present it is organized in twelve cantos totaling 341 lines. The
including flattened figures with prominent contours and text is written in black ink, with eight lines to a page, in a very
faces depicted in strict profile, with very large, often bulging handsome nasta‘liq script. The margins are sprinkled with
eyes. But the palette does not correspond to the cool, pas- gold. There are fifty-three remaining folios; the last three are
tel colors associated with the style. Indeed, the warm colors empty, although they have been margined.
of Husain’s robe and those of his attendants recall similar Aftabi’s poem clearly postdates the Battle of Talikota, and
elements in the Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi (Chronicle of Husain the curious state of the last three pages is just one indication
Shah, cat. 8).5 This is not the only similarity between the that the text was left incomplete after Husain’s unexpected
two works. In this portrait, Husain sits atop a small-headed, death in 1565. Since there is no colophon, it has been sug-
spindly legged horse similar to one that he rides in the gested that the manuscript and its illustrations were made
Ta‘rif. The sultan’s eight male attendants wear basket-weave in the six-month period between Husain’s victory and his
sandals also worn by various minor characters in four illus- untimely death.1 Another opinion is that they were produced
trations (folios 34b, 44a, 46b, and 47a) from the Ta‘rif. 6 In during the regency of Khanzah Humayun, who ruled from
eight illustrations from the Ta‘rif, Husain wears a similar 1565 to 1569.2
tight-fitting turban and loose robe, and he is accompanied The chief glory of the Ta‘rif is its twelve (originally four-
in three illustrations (folios 34b, 46b, and 47a) by the same teen) miniatures, which can be divided broadly into battle
royal insignia: a fringed parasol and a fan-shaped aftabgir (folios 34b, 43b, 44a, 45b, 46b, and 47a) and palace scenes.
(sunshade). In both paintings, Husain has a blunt nose and Folio 29a cannot be placed in either category. It depicts the

Cat. 8
ancient Indian dohada theme in which a chaste and beautiful The influence of earlier Malwa painting from India, as well as
woman’s embrace makes a tree blossom. court painting from Vijayanagara, is also evident in the bold
The composition of the illustrations, as well as the vege- outlining of the male figures and the sinuous curves of the
tation and landscape, reflects the conventions of provincial female figures.
Persian painting. However, the often startling combinations The six battle scenes all have three rows of soldiers riding
of color, including ultramarine blue and the very Indian cin- on horses or elephants. Only the flat background color var-
nabar red and mustard yellow, are certainly Indic in origin. ies from illustration to illustration. Husain, identified by his
Catalogue 57
royal parasol and aftabgir (sunshade), appears in three battle a canopy-like cloth ceiling with a hanging frill or ceiling fan.
scenes. In folio 46b, he orders the decapitation of Ramaraya The garden pavilion is surrounded by a variety of trees and
(reigned 1542 – 65), the defeated ruler of Vijayanagara (fig. 38). fronted by a small pool of water.
More interesting than the battle scenes, the five palace Originally, Queen Khanzah Humayun was depicted be
scenes usually feature architecture and gardens, as well as side him. Her figure was later covered with thick layers of
people of diverse costume and ornament. The architecture paint and the sultan’s body was redrawn or repainted in
often consists of a large, rectangular frame and a decorated portions, perhaps to conceal the erotic nature of the scene.
arch with narrow, colored side compartments topped by Alternatively, it has been suggested that the changes to the
plain, pointed arches very much in vogue in Ahmadnagar.3 miniature are a visual record of the queen’s political rise and
Against this architectural background, the figures are placed fall.4 The figure of Khanzah Humayun was also obliterated
according to their specific narrative function. Often, Husain from folios 21b, 36a, and 40b. tm
is seated on a bedstead or divan at the center of the composi-
1. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 17 – 19. 2. Barrett 1958, p. 6. 3. Aftabi 1987, p. 29.
tion, with female attendants to either side. In one folio, he is 4. Barrett 1958, p. 6; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 147.
casually enthroned in a tall garden chamber, seated beneath
Fig. 38. Folios from cat. 8

Detail of cat. 9
Cat. 9 Fig. 39. Stone Steps, Daulatabad Fort, 1550–60
9 Helmet
violent combat that characterized warfare of the period. This
Probably Ahmadnagar, ca. 1570 – 1600 effect was achieved by placing thin panels of steel, embossed
Steel, silver, and fabric; skull: H. 7½ in. (19 cm), overall: H. 23⅝ in.
(60 cm), W. 8⅝ in. (21.8 cm) with scale work in the Italian fashion, within stouter verti-
Private collection, London cal ribs. Since ventilation was a major concern, movable steel
plates, which could be flipped or slid up when not needed,
This helmet is one of the most splendid examples of princely protected the face, ears, and neck.1
Deccani armor to have survived from the sixteenth century. To decorate the helmet, the armorer overlaid the metal
While thoroughly regal, it is light for comfort and robust with a thick plating of silver, a common feature of Deccani
enough to have offered complete protection in the often armor. This gave the piece status and, at the same time,
Catalogue 59
reflected heat away from the wearer and protected the metal Nikitin in the fifteenth century that describes “the Sultan of Beder [Bidar]
[wearing] a suit of gold armour inlaid with sapphires, and three swords
from rust. This technique could have evolved from the mounted in gold.” Quantities of Aq Qoyunlu silver-decorated armor would
Bahmani practice of gold-plating armor monochromatically have come into Ottoman hands after the defeat of the Safavids in 1514. It
was stored in the arsenal, formerly the Christian church of Saint Irene, in
in the previous century, or it could have been brought to Istanbul. 3. As discussed in Ricketts 2014. The trefoil is used as a blazon on
Ahmadnagar by Ustad Muhammad Bin Husain Rumi, the the forehead of an elephant; Ricketts 2014, p. 154, fig. 9. George Michell
points out that the lotus motif was commonly used in Ahmadnagar
Ottoman armaments expert employed by Burhan Nizam architecture; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 85. 4. Sohoni 2010a, p. 56,
illustrates the palace adjacent to the shrine. For the sword, see Goetz 1950,
Shah I (reigned 1510–53) to advise the sultan on military mat- p. 165, pl. 65; Ricketts 2014, p. 157, fig. 15. 5. Ricketts 2014, p. 156, fig. 13;
ters and to supervise the casting of the great cannon Malik-i Leach 1995, vol. 2, pp. 857, 860, no. 9.211, p. 856, colorpl. 117. 6. Ricketts
2014, p. 160, fig. 20, p. 161, fig. 22. 7. Rogers and Beveridge 1978, vol. 1, p. 42.
Maidan (Lord of the Plain, fig. 47) in 1549.2
Until now, little was known about where this helmet was
actually made. However, elements of decoration on the nasal 10 Peacock in a Rainstorm at Night
bar provide several clues. The designer-craftsmen chose lotus
Northern Deccan, late 16th century
and trefoil ornament, known to have been the favored motifs
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6⅛ × 7½ in. (15.5 × 19 cm)
of the ruling dynasty of Ahmadnagar.3 Both appear as roof Private collection, London
decoration on a shrine in Daulatabad and feature promi-
nently in the design of the hilt of a royal sword attributed
to Ahmadnagar.4 11 Gauri Ragini: A Maiden Picking Blossoms
The trees farther down the nasal bar are similar to a very from a Tree
stylized tree seen on steps in the Daulatabad Fort (1550 – 60, Northern Deccan, late 16th century
fig. 39) and in more mature form as a grove of palms in the Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9¾ × 7½ in. (24.8 × 19.1 cm)
Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Bequest of Edwin Binney, 3rd
Bijapuri folio “The Ruler on His Seven-Storied Throne” in the (M.90.141.2)
Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of the Sciences, cat. 22), which sug-
gests that these trees may be symbols of the longevity of the
ruling dynasty.5 On the lower part of the face guard, there is 12 Dhanasri Ragini: A Woman Drawing
a floral arabesque reminiscent of the blade-reinforcing plates a Portrait on a Tablet
seen in zoomorphic daggers, while the eyebrowlike form on Northern Deccan, late 16th century
the upper part is similar to the blazon shown on the tomb of Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 9⅞ × 7¼ in.
(25 × 18.5 cm)
Ahmad Nizam Shah (reigned 1490 – 1510) in the Bagh Rauza
Private collection, London
at Ahmadnagar.6
The nasal bar, originally probably removable, was firmly
attached to the helmet at a later date. This adaptation perhaps 13 Nat Malhar : A Woman Splashing Water on
pandered to the superstition that it was inauspicious for the Her Lover from the River
nasal bar to be accidentally dropped when the helmet was Northern Deccan, late 16th century
being put on before battle. Although there is no contempo- Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9⅝ × 7½ in. (24.5 × 19 cm)
rary account from the Deccan, Abu’l-Fazl, the chronicler of Private collection, London
the Mughal Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605), recounts
a similar occurrence during the campaign against Gujarat The genre of ragamala painting, which developed in
in the 1570s. However, when his courtiers remarked that it North India in relation to poetic texts, emerged at the end
could be taken as a bad omen, Akbar rebutted them and said of the sixteenth century in the music-suffused milieu of
quite the reverse, that without the face guard he would be the Deccan. Based on the idea of a “garland of ragas,” or
more recognizable to his troops in battle, which would only songs, ragamalas depict various Indian musical modes
inspire them with greater confidence.7 hr through illustrations of verses describing stories, moods,
seasons, and deities. Lyrical and spirited in their compo-
1. In several paintings in the Padshahnama, Mughal warriors are shown
with their earguards flipped up; Beach and Koch 1997, pls. 16, 18, 31. The sitions, these four folios are from a group of ten generally
design of the neck plate was probably derived from Mamluk riding helmets attributed to a provincial center in the northern Deccan,
of the period. One from the Kevorkian Foundation Collection was sold at
Sotheby’s, London (Sotheby’s 1968, p. 33, lot 114; see also Art at Auction or, alternatively, they are sometimes thought to be from
1968, pp. 286, 287). 2. Egerton 1896, p. 16, mentions a report by Anafasy the earliest phase of Bijapur painting.1 Several of these

Cat. 10
works were previously in the Bikaner royal collection and the fluid development of the Deccani ragamala tradition at
more unpublished folios are said to have belonged to the this formative time.5
Roerich Collection, Bangalore.2 Four different artistic hands The fragmentary but highly evocative Peacock in a
have been discerned, three of which are represented in this Rainstorm at Night (cat. 10) depicts a peacock in flight at the
selection. On some folios, the Sanskrit text is followed by break of the monsoon clouds, a subject symbolic of unre-
either a Persian summary or a blank area that may have been quited love. Within the branches of the trees, tiny birds nes-
intended for such an inscription. tle from the rain that is rendered in cold white lines against
The imagery of these early Deccani ragamalas corre- the dark hill. The missing portion of the page probably con-
sponds to descriptions of ragas and raginis found in the later tained a lovesick heroine.6 Gauri Ragini (cat. 11) describes
Sangita Darpana (Mirror on Music), a text composed around a wandering beauty who plucks blossoms off a mango tree.
1625 by Damodara Mishra, a musician at the Mughal court.3 Here, under a verdant canopy of entwined trees and lus-
The Javahir al-Musiqat-i Muhammadi (The Jewels of Music trous gold skies, a maiden and her attendants capture the
of Muhammad, ca. 1570) is another illustrated text contain- essence of the bhava (devotional feeling) of the verses. The
ing images of three ragas and twenty-two raginis.4 Its unusual figures have an attenuated grace typical of this anonymous
iconography, together with that of the present series, indicates painter’s hand. In Dhanasri Ragini (cat. 12), bold patterns
Catalogue 61
Cat. 11
and daring color intensify the slightly surreal vision of three stylized rocks and clusters of flowers, indicates an outdoor
beauties appearing above a colonnade of arches containing setting beyond. Such compositions, with figures above and
a peacock. The heroine dips her brush into a Persian-style patterned arches below, are also found in fifteenth-century
inkpot and portrays her lover on a Persian safina manuscript folios, such as the Chandayana romance.7
or a long palm leaf. Although the spatial relationships seem Nat Malhar (cat. 13) depicts a maiden playfully splash-
illogical, the mauve-blue background, filled with a pattern of ing water from a lotus-filled river onto her lover, who sits on

Cat. 12 Cat. 13
the shore. Now darkened, the drops of water once appeared and seventeenth centuries, including a copy of the present
as a silver spray sparkling across the page. Golden hues sur- series that is also dispersed and incomplete.9 However, it
round the princely figure, whose robe is tied on the right in is in these early Deccani pages that the aims of this major
the Muslim convention and whose patka (sash) is spread out Indian tradition—to express the ephemeral qualities of
to reveal its rich gold-pricked borders. The diagonal axis of music united with the moods of spiritual devotion—are most
the river and the delineation of the water in banded scales freshly realized. nnh
evoke established conventions of mid-sixteenth- century
1. Michell and Zebrowksi 1999, pp. 153 – 54, 157, lists nine known folios as
Rajput painting. The broad section in the lower part of the
8
Peacock in a Rainstorm at Night (cat. 10), Gauri Ragini (cat. 11), Hindola
image, filled with strong color and large, amorphous shapes, Raga, Sri Raga, Patanasika Ragini, Dhanasri Ragini (cat. 12), Kamghodi
Ragini, Prince and Ladies in a Garden House, and Malavi Ragini. 2. Ibid.,
may be inspired by a developing taste for marbling in the p. 153. 3. Skelton 2011b, p. 23. 4. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 63, ill. no. 45, points
Deccan or may be meant to suggest cloud forms, rocks, or out that it contains a later dedication to Muhammad ‘Adil Shah of Bijapur.
5. Ebeling 1973, p. 176, no. 24; Losty 1982, pp. 72 – 73, no. 51. 6. Michell and
other landscape elements somewhat like those in the Gauri Zebrowski 1999, p. 154. 7. K. Desai 2002, p. 80, no. 77; Adamjee 2011.
Ragini. Alternatively, it may simply represent the Deccani 8. A comparable page from the “Isarda” Bhagavata Purana, ca. 1560 – 65,
with Krishna and the gopis in the river is in The Metropolitan Museum of
flair for the strange and unexplained. Art, New York (1972.260; Kossak 1997, p. 30, no. 5). 9. Zebrowski 1983a,
pp. 55 – 59.
Following this early group, several other series of ragamala
paintings were produced in the Deccan during the sixteenth
Catalogue 63
Cat. 14
14 Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler also more Mughal.3 New to royal imagery, too, is the custom
of holding a white scarf, a Persian symbol of kingship; how-
By the Paris Painter
Ahmadnagar, ca. 1565 – 95 ever, the waving of a scarf above a royal figure was an estab-
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9¼ × 8⅛ in. (23.5 × 20.5 cm) lished Deccani feature.4
Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris (Supplément Persan 1572, fol. 26) The identity of this enthroned Nizam Shahi ruler has
Inscribed on reverse, probably in a Mughal hand: burhan nizam al-mulk; been a matter of debate. Most scholars accept the figure as
kar-i avval-i dakkan (Burhan Nizam al-Mulk; the earliest work of the Burhan Nizam Shah II (reigned 1591 – 95), who came to the
Deccan, or, alternatively, work of the first [best] quality of the Deccan);
owner’s dates: a.h. 1050 (a.d. 1643 – 44) and a.h. 1128 (a.d. 1715 – 16)
Ahmadnagar throne at age thirty-five after wresting power
from his son.5 When Burhan II was received at the Mughal
court in 1585, he may have seen imperial images that inspired
15 Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler Reclining his patronage at his own court.6 Another opinion suggests
beneath a Covered Takht (Seat) that it is an earlier portrait of his brother Murtaza Nizam
Attributed to the Paris Painter Shah I (reigned 1565 – 88), arguing that the image more
Ahmadnagar, 1565 – 95
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 10⅛ × 7⅝ in.
(25.5 × 19.3 cm)
Rampur Raza Library (Album 4, fol. 13a)
Inscribed: Burhan Shah (second inscription below seat is erased)
The Paris Painter, so named for his masterpiece in the

Bibliothèque Nationale, appeared as a new and brilliant
force in Ahmadnagar painting. He brought the refinement
of Mughal brushwork from his previous training and a feel
of opulence to darkly stippled gold backgrounds yet paid
heed to the human form that had already been established
at Ahmadnagar. Among the continuities from the style of
the earlier Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi (Chronicle of Husain Shah,
cat. 8) is the adapted maharajalilasana pose of the royal fig-
ure with one leg raised to the dais and the fashion of a red-
trimmed white robe with a gauzy neckline.1 However, the
overwhelming impact of the Paris painting lies in its power-
ful new idiom, in which shading, color, and figure style work
together to create a fresh vision of man. The monumental
sultan, spirited young betel-nut bearer (tambuladharin), and
dignified courtiers in attendance all exhibit a dark Deccani
complexion, projecting far eye, puckered lips, and stippled
faces rendered through masterful shading and layers of
applied pigment. These elements were new to the Deccan
and lay the foundation for the continued development of a
sophisticated portraiture tradition.
The presence of male courtiers around the king represents
a change of practice from the medieval South Indian tradi-
tion of female attendants, as seen in images of Husain Nizam
Shah I (reigned 1553 – 65) in the earlier Ta‘rif paintings.2 This
shift was likely based on Mughal parallels. The style of the
throne with a triangular back and sadeli mosaic patterns is Cat. 15
Catalogue 65
accurately represents Murtaza in his twenties during a cul- 16 Royal Elephant and Rider
tural high point at Ahmadnagar. Murtaza, known as Divana,
Ahmadnagar, 1590 – 1600
or “madman”—he had imprisoned his mother, Khanzah Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 12¾ × 9⅝ in.
Humayun, upon his accession—was also known for many (32.5 × 24.4 cm)
acts of self-aggrandizement. His reign, despite the political Ranros Universal, S.A., British Virgin Islands
turmoil, saw the arrival of the writers ‘Urfi and the young
Zuhuri from Iran. 7 The survival of a small group of fine compositions provides
The Paris Painter evoked the same Ahmadnagar ruler in evidence of the patronage of drawings at Ahmadnagar. While
another composition now in Rampur (cat. 15). The ruler is nim qalam (half-pen) and European grisaille techniques were
similarly posed, although more reclined, with his jama (robe) known in the Mughal sphere by about 1580, the pulsating
opened to reveal its inner tassels and his finely stippled and qualities of line in Ahmadnagar drawing indicate a different
rhythmically arranged chest hairs. A seventeenth-century taste, one reflecting the preservation of the fifteenth-century
Nayaka ivory plaque shows a Hindu ruler in a similar setting Turkmen style in the Deccan. Ahmadnagar artists demon-
and pose, indicating the later spread of this royal convention.8 strate a mastery of simple ink and line and various tech-
It has been suggested that the gold background and dark nical effects, such as stippling and shading. Although the
corona around the heads in both portraits reflect the influ- works form a group by virtue of their basic techniques, each
ence of Sienese painting imported into the region through example is quite different from the next: thus, the individual-
Portuguese contact, although no known examples of such ism of Ahmadnagar drawings in some ways defies their being
items survive.9 nnh classified together.
The undulating lines, areas of dense ink, and gradations
1. Aftabi 1987, pp. 98, 156. For the pose in Persian painting, see Hillenbrand
2002, p. 147, fig. 173; Sims 2002, p. 117. For the pose in India, see Michell of dots, dashes, and spots on this drawing of an elephant and
1995, p. 181, fig. 131. 2. D. Ali 2004, p. 114. 3. Sen 1984, p. 15, pl. 16, and p. 126, rider point to its remote aesthetic descent from the Turkmen
pl. 55, show variations of the same kind of throne. 4. Images of Persian
rulers with cloths can be seen in Lentz and Lowry 1989, p. 105, no. 30, style, particularly in the delineation of the heavy folds above
p. 243, no. 136; Canby 2011, p. 99, fol. 50v. Raman and Agarwal 2012, p. 87, elephant’s tail, around its ear, and in the rider’s turban.1 This
mentions that yak-tail chowris in gold handles and peacock morchals were
used specifically to indicate to the crowd the exact personage of the influence was mediated naturally through the intervening
monarch. 5. S. C. Welch 1985, p. 286, no. 190, argues that folio 74a of the refinements of sixteenth-century Iran, evident in the use
Darabnama depicts Burhan II, similarly stout, at the Mughal court, around
1585. 6. Shyam 1966, p. 179. 7. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, pp. 147 – 49. of red outline in the elephant’s backcloth. Most dominant,
8. Michell 1995, p. 214, fig. 156. 9. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, pp. 150 – 51. however, is the marked impact of Mughal composition, par-
ticularly in illustrated manuscripts of the 1580s, in which
animated elephants like this one are found. The human-
ized treatment of the animal’s eye stands in contrast to the
more stylized, staring gaze of the rider, who may represent
the same royal figure as the one at the center of Royal Picnic
(cat. 17). nnh
1. Çagman 2005.

Cat. 16
17 Royal Picnic
Ahmadnagar, ca. 1590 – 95
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 11⅞ × 8⅛ in. (30 × 20.5 cm)
British Library, London (Add. Or. 3004)
Inscribed at bottom: Muhammad Qutb ( ?) Shah
The artist who drew the lively running elephant (cat. 16) may
also have made this drawing of a royal picnic for Burhan
Nizam Shah II (reigned 1591 – 95) or one of his successors.
The enthroned figure and the elephant rider both wear short
mustaches and similarly tied turbans, as do other figures in
the picture. Entertainment scenes were common in Persian
painting, and the genre of razm-o-bazm (fighting and feast-
ing), two ideals of kingship, later spread into Indian and
Ottoman art. In these scenes, the ruler is typically shown
enthroned at an outdoor feast following a hunt or battle.
Double-page compositions with the ruler, attendants, musi-
cians, and guests on the right, and servants preparing a feast
on the left, were the customary formula.1 This drawing has
been slightly cut down at the edges and is incomplete in
parts, perhaps indicating that it was a preparatory study for
one half of a grand double-page spread in a royal manuscript.
The prominence of the falcon and the presence of the
hunters behind the throne imply that baz, or falcon hunting,
was the main activity of the day. The three figures seated on
the carpet may be diplomats. The servant in the foreground
with the lower part of his face covered by a cloth is a com-
mon figure type in such scenes.2 The facial covering was likely
worn to prevent pollution of the food. nnh
1. Sims 2002, pp. 114 – 20, shows several razm-o-bazm pictures. 2. Similar

Cat. 17
figures can be seen in Beach 2011, p. 193, fig. 3, and “Preparation for a
Feast,” a folio from a divan of Jami, in The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York (52.20.4).
68 Ahmadnagar and Berar Detail of cat. 17

18 Young Prince
Ahmadnagar, late 16th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper and marbled paper,
folio: 15⅛ × 10 in. (38.5 × 25.5 cm)
Free Library of Philadelphia, Rare Book Department, John Frederick
Lewis Collection (P99)
Inscribed: bi ruzigar-i tu surat-garan-i haft iqlim /q alam shikaste,

va dar surat-i tu hairanand (Upon seeing you the painters of the seven
climes / Will break their pens and will be awed by the beauty of your
countenance)
Cat. 18

19 Young Prince and Princess
Ahmadnagar, late 16th century
Opaque watercolor and gold on paper and marbled paper,
folio: 16½ × 11½ in. (42 × 29.3 cm)
San Diego Museum of Art, Edwin Binney 3rd Collection (1990.459)
Inscribed: sukhan-varan ke hadith-i saman-baran khanand /h adith-i

tu chu dar uftad varaq begardanand (The eloquent speakers who
tell your jasmine-scented tales /W
hen they speak about you, they will
turn the page)
The elegant princes on each of these folios may be the same

royal, possibly one of a number of child kings, who ascended
to the Ahmadnagar throne after the death of Burhan Nizam
Shah II (reigned 1591–95) in 1595.1 The diminutive female figure
holding the arm of the prince in the San Diego page is thought
to be his sister or bride. Such hierarchical scaling of figures in
Deccani art became more common in the seventeenth century.
These pages can be identified as facing folios from the same
album because of their rhyming couplets, by the poet Hasan-i
Dihlavi (1253 – 1327),2 and similarly marbled borders. They are
likely part of a larger dispersed album, of which more pages
are in the University of Edinburgh Library.3 All of them have
either a panel of calligraphy or a drawing at the center, sur-
rounded by smaller panels of text. Around each element is
a rectangular frame, which is made up of either marbled or
plain colored paper with colored rulings. The calligraphers
whose work appears in the album include Sultan Muhammad
Nur, ‘Ali al-Haravi, and Muhammad al-Husaini, among oth-
ers. While there is evidence of nineteenth-century European
interventions—such as the outermost borders—the preface
makes reference to the album’s fine marbling, which confirms
that the inner borders and sections of the pages are contem-
porary with each other. The album may well have been assem- Cat. 19
bled in Ahmadnagar in the sixteenth century, perhaps for or

by Muhammad Tahir, whose name is given in the text.4
nnh/ms
1. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 151. 2. Hasan-i Dihlavi 1963, p. 158, no. 333.

One line appears in a Mughal album in Tehran; see Ehsanullah 1962, p. 27.
3. Qit’at-i Khushkhatt, University of Edinburgh (Or. Ms 373). Jake Benson,
personal communication, August 20, 2013, identified these two pages as part
of the album in Edinburgh. Other folios may be in the Kronos Collections,
New York, and the San Diego Museum of Art (1990.474). 4.  The preface is
partially preserved in Edinburgh; read by Abdullah Ghouchani.
Catalogue 71
Cat. 20
20 Malik ‘Ambar
Ahmadnagar, early 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 12 × 8¼ in. (30.5 × 21.1 cm)
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Arthur Mason Knapp Fund (26.8)
Images of several Africans from the Deccan have survived,1

and as a whole, they fall safely within the body of royal
Deccani portraits: these men are not distinguished as being
different from any other courtiers. In the Deccan, manu
mitted African slaves held roles as commanders of troops
and could become nobles with the ability to marry and pass
on their titles and properties to their heirs.2 Among the
dozens of such figures mentioned in historical chronicles,
the most famous are Malik ‘Ambar (1548 – 1626) and Bijapur’s
Ikhlas Khan (died 1656, cats. 59–60), and they appear repeat-
edly in the painted record.
In this portrait the powerful Malik ‘Ambar is set against a
green background, wearing gauzy white robes and holding
a long Deccani sword. Born as Chapu in 1548, Malik ‘Ambar
was initially sold to an owner in Baghdad. He was later taken
to India, where the chief minister of Ahmadnagar, a for-
mer slave himself, purchased him in the early 1570s. After Fig. 40. Fath Khan, Son of Malik ‘Ambar. Ahmadnagar,
1610–20. Opaque watercolor and gold on paper, 14½ ×
being freed, Malik ‘Ambar built up his own corps of African 9⅜ in. (36.7 × 23.9 cm). Museum of Fine Arts, Boston,
slave-soldiers and became more and more powerful within Ross-Coomaraswamy Collection (17.3103)
the Ahmadnagar state. He married, and his son Fath Khan

(fig. 40) also later played a pivotal role in Ahmadnagar pol-
itics.3 Although best known for his strategies in politics and
warfare, Malik ‘Ambar was a generous patron of the arts
during the fragile moments of peace and stability in the early
seventeenth century.
The observational style of this image represents a new
phase in the development of the Ahmadnagar school, which
took a decidedly Mughal turn in the early seventeenth cen-
tury. Together with the portrait of Fath Khan and a handful of
other paintings, it shows a new, more documentary approach.4
This painting also set the iconography for images of Malik
‘Ambar that continued to be made through the seventeenth
century in both the Deccani and the Mughal courts.5 ms
1. Including examples in the Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (MS.48),

San Diego Museum of Art (1990.461), and a private collection (cat. 129).
2. A recent contribution to the study of Africans in India is Robbins and
McLeod 2006. 3. Eaton 2005, pp. 105 – 28. 4. This group includes
portraits in the Bharat Kala Bhavan, Varanasi, and the Museum of Fine
Arts, Boston (13.1397), as well as those listed in note 1. 5. For example,
paintings in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London (IM.21-1925), and
Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris (7172).
Catalogue 73
21 “Jahangir Shoots the Head of Malik ‘Ambar,” The antagonistic relationship between Malik ‘Ambar and
Folio from the Minto Album the imperial Mughals is exemplified in this famous allegor-
ical painting made for Jahangir. Offering a Mughal view of
By Abu’l Hasan (active 1600 – 1630)
Mughal, ca. 1616 the hated Deccani enemy, it shows the emperor shooting the
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 10⅛ × 6½ in. severed head of his rival, an event that occurred only in his
(25.8 × 16.5 cm) dreams.2 In an elaborate set of interrelated visual and tex-
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (In. 07A.15)
tual metaphors, Jahangir is associated with the forces of light
Inscribed near the head of Malik ‘Ambar: khani-yi bum shuda kalli-yi and legitimacy, while Malik ‘Ambar is aligned with darkness
shab-rang-i ghulam (The head of the night-colored servant has become
the house of the owl). Right of the javelin: huva. ‘anbar bum ki az nur
and evil.3
gurizan mibud, tir-i dushman fikanat kard zi ‘alam birun. (He [God]. This painting falls into a group of related works from
‘Anbar the owl, which fled the light, has been driven from the world by around 1616 – 18 by Abu’l Hasan and other leading Mughal
your enemy-smiting arrow). To the left of the javelin: huva. batin gah-i
painters, which depict the inner vision of their patron’s
‘aduvvat ra chu khuk-ast az khunish sar-i sinan-i tu sir. (He [God]. The
inside [nature] of your enemy is like a swine, from whose blood the psyche and dreams through the employment of a rich array
head of your javelin is sated). By the arrow: allahu akbar har gah ki of symbols and motifs drawn from Islamic, Hindu, and
dar kaman dar ‘a’i, rang az rukh-i dushmanan ruba’i. (God is highest. Christian sources.4 Here, these are interwoven into a unified
Whenever you [the arrow] appear in the bow, you will steal the color
set of references of considerable complexity. Jahangir stands
from the face of the enemies [they will be pale with fear] ). Under the
scales: allahu akbar zi ‘adl-i shah nur al-din jahangir makida shir az on a globe, upon which various beasts lie tamely together.
pistan-i buz shir. (God is highest. Because of the justice of King Nur The globe rests on the horns of a cow and a fish, symbols of
al-Din Jahangir, the lion has sucked milk from the teat of the goat). kingship in Islamic literature.5 Cherubs hand Jahangir divine
Near the gun: allahu akbar tufang-i shah nur al-din jahangir khata
na-buvad dar ‘u chun hukm-i taqdir kunand az sahm-i jan suz-ash
weapons, as he shoots at Malik ‘Ambar’s head with a golden
bi-har dam zamin-busi palang-u shir-u na[kh]jir. (God is highest. bow. A royal bird of paradise hovers above a crowned disc on
The musket of King Nur al-Din Jahangir, like the Judgment of Fate, a golden stand bearing a genealogical seal containing the
has no inaccuracy, because of its life-burning arrow, the leopard, the
dynastic titles. Scales and a chain of justice extend from
lion, and wild game kiss the earth every moment). Below the scales:
Zi-yumn maqdam-i zill-u-llahi zamin gushta sabuk bar gav-mahi. the globe to the pole on which Malik ‘Ambar’s decapitated
(Through the felicity of the Divine Shadow’s [Jahangir’s] coming; head is impaled. Shown without the dignity of its turban,
the earth rests lightly on the fish-bull). Between the bird of paradise his head is surmounted by an owl, symbol of darkness, whose
and the crown: huva. nuh pusht-i tu tajwar zi yazdan. (He [God].
dead mate hangs below. Jahangir’s musket rests against the
Thy nine ancestors were crowned by God). In the roundel below the
crown: nur al-din muhammad jahangir padshah-i ghazi; ibn akbar pole, below the severed head. The use of texts to label and
padshah; ibn humayun padshah; ibn babur padshah; ibn umar shaikh explain the various elements of the painting closely mirrors
mirza; ibn sultan abu sa’id; ibn sultan muhammad mirza; ibn miran the practice of explicatio in European Renaissance art.6
shah; ibn amir timur sahib qiran. (Nur al-Din Muhammad Jahangir
Padshah-i Ghazi; son of Padshah Akbar; son of Padshah Humayun;
Malik ‘Ambar also features in at least two Mughal por-
son of Padshah Babur; son of Umar Shaikh Mirza; son of Sultan traits made after Deccani originals, which are among a group
Abu Sa’id; son of Sultan Muhammad Mirza; son of Miran Shah; son of paintings of important Deccani men created by the art-
of Amir Timur Sahib Qiran). To the left of the crown and roundel:
ist Hashim. While Hashim’s portrait of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
allahu akbar ‘amal-i kamtarin murid zadaha-yi ba ikhlas abu’l-hasan.
(God is highest. Work of the humble follower of the faithful sons, (reigned 1580 – 1627) of Bijapur is quite dismissive, showing
Abu’l Hasan) 1 Ibrahim gray-bearded and shrunken,7 the images of Malik
‘Ambar convey a healthy respect for this foe. nnh
The Mughal Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605) commenced
1. These inscriptions have been read here by Abdullah Ghouchani. 2. Bailey
his campaign to conquer the sultanate of Ahmadnagar in 2001, p. 56. 3. Eaton 2005, p. 122. 4. Skelton 1988. 5. For example, Farid
1586. Fourteen years later, he finally succeeded in capturing al-Din ‘Attar, Mantiq’t-tair; English translation in ‘Attar 1998, p. 13, line 123:
“Since earth rests firmly on the back of the Cow, And the Cow on the Fish
its capital, only for Malik ‘Ambar to immediately free it from and the Fish on Air.” 6. Bailey 2001, p. 55. 7. This portrait is in The
his grasp. Akbar’s son Emperor Jahangir (reigned 1605 – 27) Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (55.121.10.33).
continued the quest for Ahmadnagar, relocating his court to

Mandu in order to oversee the campaign, but victory was not
to be his. Jahangir and Malik ‘Ambar died within months of
each other, bitter rivals to the end.

Cat. 21
Bijapur
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F F
F Bijapur F
F F
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
B
ijapur ( Vidyapuror City of Knowledge [vidya]) fostered an exceptional milieu of
artistic, musical, literary, and poetic life, whose spirit is captured in the jewel colors and
dreamy atmosphere of its evocative paintings. The state flourished under a succession of
nine ‘Adil Shahi rulers, from the foundations laid by Yusuf (reigned 1490 – 1510) to the downfall
of its last ruler, Sikandar (reigned 1672 – 86). Its western borders extended at times to the Arabian
Sea, bringing styles of Bijapur architecture into Goa and contact with the Portuguese, who had
established a base there in 1510. At the end of the sixteenth century, an influx of important court-
iers from Ahmadnagar, including the scholars Nur al-Din Muhammad Zuhuri (died 1616) and his
father-in-law, Malik Qumi, contributed to the court’s literary and cultural wealth.
Bijapur painting first appeared in the form of painted manuscripts from the reign of ‘Ali
‘Adil Shah I (1558 – 80), most abundantly in the enormous volume of 1570 known as the Nujum
al-‘Ulum (Stars of the Sciences, cat. 22), filled with illustrations related to an eclectic set of ideas
on cosmology, science, and magic. The esoteric qualities of the Nujum are reflected in other
works of the late sixteenth century. On a zoomorphic-hilted dagger (cat. 25), once possibly
belonging to ‘Ali, a lion and elephant are interwined with a dragon fighting a phoenix to create a
composite of allegorical allusions and hybrid symbols.
The golden age of the sultanate under the long rule of the visionary Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
(reigned 1580 – 1627) saw a mature Bijapur idiom in the arts come to full fruition. Ibrahim’s court
attracted some of the most talented artists of the age, who gave expression to the sultan’s inner
vision and whose works offer a glimpse into an opulent and sensuous world. An inspired patron
of the visual arts with mystical leanings and a profound love of music, Ibrahim is credited with
composing a book of songs, the Kitab-i Nauras (Book of Nine Essences, cat. 45), which is a key
to several artistic high points of the period and to the aesthetic concept of nauras as a symbol
within state affairs.1 Filled with romantic metaphors, the text sheds light on Ibrahim’s hybrid
religiosity and devotion to Saraswati, the Hindu goddess of music and learning; includes refer-
ences to Muslim divines; and provides information about the sultan’s inner circle. Surviving
pages from an imperial copy are among ten or so contemporary versions of the text written
during his reign.

Pages 76–77 : Interior, Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque), Bijapur, begun in 1576
Under Ibrahim’s successor, Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56), Bijapur reached its
maximum territorial extent, even as the state came into greater contact with the Mughals and
their Rajput officers in the north after a treaty had partitioned Ahmadnagar in 1636. Changing
styles in painting demonstrate this growing Mughal influence, with an increasing preference
for naturalism over fantasy in background details and for documentation over idealization
in portraiture. With an enhanced degree of recording events and people, paintings reveal other
figures at court, including the Habshi noble Ikhlas Khan (died 1656), an important power at
Bijapur (cats. 59 – 60). Royal costume styles from about 1630 also changed from the double-
tasseled, long Deccani jama (robe) to a shorter Mughal-style garment tied under one arm. Jewels
and weapons also show a greater presence of northern forms such as punch daggers (katars).
However, the tall, distinctively shaped Bijapuri turban with broad headband (patta) with roots
in South India’s medieval period seems to have endured.2 The element of fantasy of the Ibrahim
era continued as well, as in a brilliantly enigmatic portrait of Muhammad executed in a pointillist
style and rich colors, setting him against a purple sky, with mysterious symbols such as a
conch shell on the ground (cat. 53). By the middle of the seventeenth century, the book arts
had achieved many notable techniques, including decoupage, marbling, and cut-gold work,
along with new decorative motifs, particularly flowering vases, seen also in contemporary archi-
tectural decoration.
Bijapur was essentially a circular walled city with a citadel at its core (fig. 41). In addition to
fortifications, the city contained palaces, mosques, and tombs, as well as many hundreds of sufi
shrines, humble outdoor graves, and elaborate dargahs and khanqahs (spiritual centers). ‘Adil
Shahi architecture typically displayed domed, triple-bay structures featuring broad, double-
planed arches with finely worked plaster roundels in the spandrels, brackets with angled eaves,
turrets with miniature domes, and ‘alam-shaped relief ornaments, including pendants hanging
from stone chains. Important buildings include the Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque,
pp. 76 – 77), begun in 1576 by ‘Ali I, which contains a later intricately decorated mihrab of 1636
(fig. 44). Under Ibrahim II, finely carved stonework became popular. This stonework is also seen
in the Anda (Egg, for the shape of its dome) mosque of 1608 and the Mihtar-i Masjid of the same
period. Queen Taj Sultan’s exquisite tomb and mosque complex for her husband, the Ibrahim
Rauza (ca. 1627 – 35), is entirely covered in rich carvings and Arabic and Persian inscriptions
forming a sophisticated epigraphic and decorative program that combines Qur’anic verses, pious
phrases, magical and talismanic motifs, auspicious elements of Hindu temple architecture,
designs evoking funerary textiles, and unique jali screens of pierced calligraphy, of which barely
two survive (fig. 42). Faint traces of wall painting show that it was once further decorated
with images of tall, delicate trees, star-and-cross patterns, pendants on chains, and small, single,
waving flowers painted in minty green, white, and mauve-pink.3
Under Muhammad, his own mausoleum, Bijapur’s grandest building, the tomb known as the
Gol Gumbaz (Round Dome, 1656, fig. 43), was completed, its monumental dome, at forty-four
meters in diameter, the largest in the Islamic world at the time. He also built the Asar Mahal
(1647), which, like the palace Chihil Sutun (1646) in Isfahan, had a tall portico entrance, reflecting
pool, and wall paintings with figures and flowering vases.
80 Bijapur
Fig. 41. Southern Gate with 11th-century Chalukya-Dynasty Columns and Inscription, Citadel, Bijapur, 1538–44
While life at court flourished, the region at large saw a steady number of foreign visitors in
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Deccani works of art associated with European traders
and travelers are found both in the region and outside it. A set of Flemish tapestries created in
the second quarter of the sixteenth century to commemorate the Portuguese triumph in Goa
shows the variety of arms, regalia, and other types of objects that were likely to have been circu-
lating at that time.4 At Bijapur’s eastern limit, the Welsh merchant Elihu Yale reportedly played a
role in securing a fort from the governor of Jinji for the British.5 Dutch and French traders
were also on the ground, with Bijapur granting Pondicherry, which it briefly controlled, to
the French in 1674. European influences did not significantly penetrate the courtly arts, but
subtle connections are seen. Wall paintings showing this sort of inspiration are visible in
seventeenth-century buildings such as the Asar Mahal and the Kumatgi pavilion. The Dutch
artist Cornelis Claesz. Heda (active 16th – 17th century) also resided at the court of Ibrahim,
though none of his works survive.
The reigns of the last two sultans, ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (1656 – 72) and Sikandar, who ascended
the throne at age four and occupied it until the kingdom’s fall in 1686, saw the production of
many important works of art and architecture. ‘Ali II’s tomb, left unfinished at his death, is the
final major monument of the age, its large size indicative of Bijapur’s lasting architectural ambi-
tions. Many striking portraits of ‘Ali II exist, and his lush facial features are quite recognizable.
Several important scholars were at his court, including the poet Mullah Nusrati, who composed
the popularly illustrated sufi romance Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Flower Garden of Love, cats. 173 – 74) in
Bijapur 81
Fig. 42. Calligraphic Screen, Right Bay, Northern Facade, Ibrahim Rauza, Tomb of Fig. 43. Gol Gumbaz (Round Dome), Tomb of Muhammad ‘Adil Shah,
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II, Bijapur, ca. 1627–35 Bijapur, 1656
1657 – 58. But this was a fated age, filled with both the stirring of the future and the poignancy of
the past. Perhaps most evocative in Bijapur painting’s final phase are the masterful renderings of
landscapes and skies by the artists of the third quarter of the seventeenth century (cat. 68). The
last sultan of the house of Bijapur, Sikandar, ruled as a minor under powerful court nobles and
also the shadow of the oncoming Mughals. Even so, his youthful image appears at the end of a
dynastic painting of the ‘Adil Shahi royal family (cat. 71). nnh
1. N. Ahmad 1956b, p. 57, lists eighteen different uses of the term at court. 2. D. Ali 2004, pp. 118 – 19. 3. Thanks are due to John Robert
Alderman for photographs of these surviving traces. 4. Rotraud Bauer in Portugiesen in Indien 1992, pp. 53 – 151. 5. Nayeem 2008, p. 73.
o
82 Bijapur Fig. 44. Mihrab, Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque), Bijapur, 1636
22 Manuscript of the Nujum al-‘Ulum
(Stars of the Sciences)
Bijapur, a.h. 14 Rabi‘ al-Awwal 978 (August 17, 1570)
Opaque watercolor, ink, and gold on paper, 10⅛ × 6¼ in. (25.8 × 16 cm)
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (In. 2)
‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I has a bellicose reputation. Arms are among

the few objects attributed to his reign (1558 – 80), and portraits
made in later eras often depict him in full armor, sword at
the ready (cats. 24, 71). His interest in literature and the arts,
however, could be much better understood. Historical docu-
ments refer to his royal library, with an overseer and guard,
and to a workshop of sixty men, who created manuscripts for
his collection.1 Intriguing, too, is a set of works from his era,
including a copy of the quasi-scientific ‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat
(Wonders of Creation, ca. 1560); a treatise on Indian musical
systems, the Javahir al-Musiqat-i Muhammadi (The Jewels
of Music of Muhammad, ca. 1570); and a most interesting
guide to astrology and magic, the Nujum al-‘Ulum, which ‘Ali
himself is said to have written.2
A compilation of Sanskrit and Persian sources, this sub-
stantial volume filled with over four hundred illustrations has
been described as a treatise on astrology and astral magic.3
Since it provides the information a king requires to bring into
harmony the supernatural forces that affect his domains,4
the Nujum could equally be considered a mirror for princes.
Notes in different parts of the text and in a colophon on folio
171r indicate that copying of the book was completed in 1570,
and on the basis of the style of the paintings and the rich-
ness of the book’s production, it has long been tied to a court
workshop in the ‘Adil Shahi realms.5 The link to the Bijapur
court was recently confirmed by the discovery of notes in the
body of the text, in which the author claims to be ‘Ali.6 How
to read these claims can be debated, and they need not be
taken literally. After all, ‘Ali’s successor, Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
(reigned 1580 – 1627), is also credited with the creation of an
important text, the Kitab-i Nauras (Book of Nine Essences,
cat. 45). But both the association of ‘Ali with this manuscript Fig. 45. “The Ruhani Lhanas,” Folio 255r from Cat. 22
and its unusual blend of contents certainly fit within the larger
picture of his patronage of manuscripts and architecture.7
The catholic nature of the material is evidence of the
uniqueness of sixteenth-century Deccani culture and ‘Ali’s
diverse intellectual interests. The writings of Qazvini and
Apollonius of Tyana are among the sources of the Persianate
traditions, and these texts are presented in the Nujum along
with facts deriving from Indic conceptions of the universe,
84 Bijapur
Cat. 22. “The Ruler on His Seven-Storied Throne,” Folio 191r
although the exact source of the Sanskrit material is more
difficult to pinpoint.8 The paintings seem to indicate a sim-
ilar conclusion about the Bijapur court and its taste, in that
the variety of styles indicates a mingling of aesthetic cultures.
It has been plausibly suggested that the book was produced
by artists arriving from the recently defeated kingdom to the
south, Vijayanagara, who worked alongside those trained in
classical Persian bookmaking.9
The paintings vary in quality. Those in some sections, such
as the one on talismans, are hastier and simpler in execu-
tion, while those on the heavenly angels and on summoning
spirits are especially beautiful in their rendering. The style of
the figures resembles that of the near-contemporary Javahir
al-Musiqat, and together they represent an early phase of
painting at Bijapur marked by a preference for spare images
with angular and elongated figures whose clothing and
adornments are depicted in a rudimentary fashion.
The pages illustrated here come from two different
parts of the text. The first (folio 191r) depicts the ideal form
of the throne belonging to the chakravartin, the univer-
sal or ideal ruler. The text of this section describes other
such possessions, including the flywhisk and the palanquin,
which help the sovereign to rule in harmony.10 The throne
depicted here has seven stories, and the ruler sits atop it on Cat. 23
a blue lotus and is shaded by a parasol of gold leaves. Below
are the king’s consorts, subjects, courtiers, horses, and ele- 1. These references are found in the Bijapur historical chronicle written by
phants. The throne is adorned with the royal symbols of the Rafi’ al-Din Shirazi and in two edicts; all are discussed in Joshi 1956 – 57.
2. The ‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat is in the Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of
lion and the peacock and labeled sinhasan chakra, with refer- Indian Art, Hyderabad, and the Javahir al-Musiqat is in the British Library,
ence to the simhasana (lion seat), associated with the Buddha London (Or. 12857). 3. The book is incomplete, containing only seven of
the fifty-three sections listed in the fihrist at the beginning of the volume.
and Vishnu. Furthermore, it has been bound out of order, several pages have been cut
The second illustration (folio 255r, fig. 45), from the chap- and attached to papers of a larger size, and several pages are missing. One
of the removed pages has been located in the San Diego Museum of Art
ter on the earth forces and their spirits, depicts the ruhani (1990.435). 4. Leach 1995, vol. 2, pp. 819 – 89. Two additional copies of the
Lhanas. Ruhanis are goddesses with the power to determine text are known, one also in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, dated
around 1660 – 80 (Ms. 54; Leach 1995, vol. 2, pp. 891–903), which seems to
a ruler’s success in battle, and the author mentions that he have copied In. 2 as its model, and the other in the Wellcome Collection,
London, dated to the late seventeenth or early eighteenth century
learned about them from a Hindu source.11 In the manuscript (Per. Ms. 373). See Tourkin 2003. 5. As suggested by the rate of illustration,
they are shown with supernatural attributes and/or hideous number of artists involved, and extensive use of gold; Leach 1995, vol. 2,
p. 820. In addition, a note on folio 1r indicates that the book was purchased
features, but they wear the same clothing, large earrings, and for the library of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II. 6. This attribution is based on
heavy gold necklaces as the courtly women elsewhere in the comments on folios 43v, 53v, and 181r, as read by Flatt 2011. 7. Deborah
Hutton takes just this approach in Hutton 2006, pp. 26 – 69. 8. Leach 1995,
book. A cross between a monstrous bird and a lion, Lhanas vol. 2, p. 842. A large portion of the text, relating to arms, has been
carries dead soldiers in her hands. ms translated in Elgood 2004a, pp. 205 – 16. 9.  Leach 1995, vol. 2, p. 862.
10. Ibid., pp. 852 – 53. 11. Ibid., p. 862.
86 Bijapur
23 Battle-Ax with Openwork Decoration
and Hidden Blade
Bijapur or Ahmadnagar, ca. 1570
Silver, bronze, and iron, with some gilding, L. 23⅜ in. (59.5 cm),
W. 7½ in. (19 cm)
Inscribed in Persian: nasrun min allah wa fathun qarib (Assistance

from God and victory is near)
The handle of this ax conceals a sharp spike within, making it

a doubly powerful weapon. Its openwork blade, a technique
characteristic of the finest Deccan arms, contains in the cen-
ter a double-headed gandaberunda bird motif, flanked by
two leonine yalis, within vines and plants. As lively in out-
line as their narrow-waisted, painted counterparts in the
seven-stepped chakravartin throne of the Nujum al-‘Ulum
(Stars of the Sciences, cat. 22), these fantastical symbols on Detail of cat. 23
weapons further enhanced the ruler’s aura of power. The
use of such images is also related to relief-carved blazons on
Deccan forts, which appear in Bahmani structures as well as
later ones. nnh
Catalogue 87
24 Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I larger than the lion, whereas here the artist has properly
conveyed the theme of the lion, a symbol of royalty, in dom-
Bijapur, ca. 1570 – 80
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 13⅛ × 9½ in. (33.2 × 24.2 cm) ination.3 Owing to its formality and stiffness of pose, the
David Collection, Copenhagen (6/2013) present painting was once thought to be a Golconda copy of
Inscribed on right edge, possibly in the hand of the Mughal Emperor a lost Bijapur original.4
Jahangir or Emperor Shah Jahan: shabih-i ‘ali ‘adil khan dakani On the reverse, several lines of ta’liq calligraphy have
(Likeness of ‘Ali ‘Adil Khan of the Deccan) been cut out and laid down on another sheet with later gold-
On scroll: ya ‘ali madad/damid bar gul ruyat khatti zi-sabz-yi tar ground illumination. These seven lines referring to the Sufis
dilam/khushast bi-ru-yi tu . . . damidan khatt ‘ajab . . . (O ‘Ali help/On of Azerbaijan appear to be part of a firman (edict) in the name
your beautiful face there grows a light covering [of hair] for my heart/It
is good that it grows on your face . . . a wonderful line . . .)
of the Safavid Prince Sam Mirza, with a date of 1534 and his
seal.5 The remounting of this firman in later borders may be a
On the upper diagonal bands: fragmentary text
sign of the esteem that the order held and possibly relates in
On reverse in ta’liq script: seven lines and seal from a Safavid firman some way to one of the many sufi orders of the Deccan. nnh
(edict) of Prince Sam Mirza, brother of Shah Tahmasp, dated 1534
1. Verma 1974, p. 125. 2. Joshi 1973, p. 336, describes ‘Ali’s supplication to
the Mughals in 1576 and other exchanges. 3. Ricketts 2014. 4. Zebrowski
‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I (reigned 1558 – 80) was one of Bijapur’s great 1983a, p. 65. 5. Karimzadeh Tabrizi 2006, pp. 19 – 21, illustrates this firman
and a related one.
warriors, playing a significant role in the Battle of Talikota in
1565, when he led the confederacy of sultanates against the
Vijayanagara kingdom to the south. Perhaps his prominent
dagger, its sculptural hilt enriched with a lion dominating an
elephant, a well-known motif in South Indian art, came as
bounty from the victory that followed. Or it could have been
given to ‘Ali earlier when he reportedly visited the capital of
Vijayanagara during times of peace and was received with
honor by Ramaraya (ruled 1542 – 65).1
This portrait is one of two similar depictions of ‘Ali I,
the second in the Freer and Sackler Galleries, Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D.C. (fig. 46). A strong black scrawl
along the edges of the painting identifies the ruler but refers
to him as “khan,” a lesser title, rather than the more lordly
“shah,” as was the Mughal custom, indicating that the paint-
ing may have traveled from Bijapur into Mughal hands. Other
inscriptions contained on the diagonal bands in the upper
corners of the painting are now illegible. The verses on the
scroll that the ruler carries refer to his namesake, Imam ‘Ali,
the first Shi‘a imam.
The petitioner’s pose in which ‘Ali I is shown is a frequent
device of late sixteenth-century Mughal and Persian paint-
ing. ‘Ali I successfully established diplomatic relations with
the Mughals toward the end of his reign; perhaps this paint-
ing was created at that time.2 The Freer and Sackler version, Fig. 46. Sultan ‘Ali Adil Shah I, Bijapur, ca. 1590. Opaque
also similarly inscribed, is executed in a more convention- watercolor, ink, and gold on paper, 9¼ × 5⅞ in. (23.3 ×
15 cm). Freer and Sackler Galleries, Smithsonian
ally pale Mughal palette and may have been based on the Institution, Washington, D.C., Purchase – Smithsonian
Unrestricted Trust Funds, Smithsonian Collections
present work. In that image, the painter has misunderstood
Acquisition Program, and Dr. Arthur M. Sackler
the iconography on the dagger in that the elephant appears (S1986.446)
88 Bijapur
Cat. 24
Cat. 25
25 Dagger with Zoomorphic Hilt elephant, a larger but less fierce animal, often appears in a
Probably Bijapur, mid-16th century position of servitude, sometimes supporting great temples on
Hilt: gilt bronze inlaid with rubies, blade: watered steel, L. 16½ in. its back, as at the Kailashnatha temple in Ellora. Within the
(42 cm), W. 3⅜ in. (8.7 cm) Deccan, the symbolism of a lion over an elephant might have
David Collection, Copenhagen (36/1997)
had special significance, recalling Vijayanagara’s defeat of the
Gajapati dynasty of Orissa in the fourteenth century.2
This dagger is the most magnificent among a small group of Two portraits of ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I (reigned 1558 – 80) wear-
similar weapons, which are characterized by hilts that incor- ing a similar dagger with a zoomorphic hilt — including
porate entwined animals in hunting or fighting poses. The catalogue number 24 — have led to a Bijapur attribution
sinuous and fluid lines of this example form a horned lion for the group, although it is possible that such a weapon
(yali) grasping an elephant ( gaj ) on one side, while on the came to him from Vijayanagara, either before 1565 as a
reverse a long-tailed dragon (af ’i or naga) bites down on a royal gift or after the Battle of Talikota as booty.3 Another
struggling phoenix (simurgh). The guard is made up of two recent suggestion is that the dagger may have come from
other simurghs whose heads are turned toward the hilt; such Ahmadnagar, since a group of royal daggers from that state
mirrored bird finials are typical of South Indian ornament, employed comparable sculptural lion motifs.4 A slightly
often with parrots. larger and simpler zoomorphic-hilted dagger also in the
The iconography, which centers on the idea of the bal- David Collection, Copenhagen, and one in the Salar Jung
ance of power, both political and otherworldly, combines the Museum, Hyderabad, are the closest related weapons, while
long-standing South Indian Hindu motif of the elephant in a dagger in the Metropolitan Museum, although composed
subjugation to the royal lion with a Perso-Islamic theme of of different beasts, is a later, more linear expression of the
the dragon and phoenix. This latter combination occurs, for same general style (cat. 63).5 nnh
example, on a sixteenth-century Ottoman yatagan (short
1. David Alexander and Stuart W. Pyhrr in Metropolitan Museum of Art
saber) from the workshop of Ahmed Tekelü, in which the 2011, pp. 312 – 13, no. 221. 2. Elgood 2004a, p. 130, and personal communi-
same mythical beasts appear in gold relief decoration.1 In cation. Divyabhanusinh 2005, pp. 67 – 97, discusses the concept of Mrigraja,
Lord of the Beasts, in Indian kingship. 3. Elgood 2004a, p. 115. 4. Ricketts
India, the lion is generally a symbol of royalty, while the 2014. 5. Elgood 2004a, p. 113, no. 11.6; Pant 1989, p. 247, no. 20/LIII.
90 Bijapur
26 Hilt of a Gauntlet Sword (Pata) is reminiscent of the muzzle of the massive cannon known as
the Malik-i Maidan (Lord of the Plain, fig. 47); elephants are
Bijapur or Ahmadnagar, ca. 1550 – 80
Steel, iron, and silver, L. 19½ in. (49.5 cm), W. 4¾ in. (12 cm), shown between the lion’s teeth, symbolizing royal authority
D. 6⅛ in. (15.4 cm) over these immensely valuable animals. The preserve of the
Private collection, London ruler, elephants were equal in status to the tank in the twenti-
eth century: in a campaign they could win or lose not just the
This is an early hilt of a pata, or gauntlet sword (so called day but the entire kingdom.
because it resembles a glove), fashionable mostly in south- Sculptural depictions showing this configuration of ani-
central India from the late sixteenth to the late seventeenth mals have their origins in Mamluk architecture. The motif of
century. It evolved from the two-handed fighting sword used a lion in accompaniment used on a relief dated 1273 on the
for dueling in Ahmadnagar that had become popular around Baybars Bridge in what was Palestine is little different from
1500 during the reign of Ahmad Nizam Shah I (1490 – 1510), a that shown on the four reliefs at Raigad Fort in the Konkan
skillful swordsman who may have introduced the custom of region of western India, carved some three hundred years
dueling to the state.1 Later in the century, the need arose for later.2 In the Deccan this virtually identical Muslim emblem
a heavy sword, probably for fighting on horseback. Designed of royalty was sometimes further embellished with ornament
for use with one arm, the pata left the other hand free to hold taken from South Indian Hindu art. In this case the hilt is
the reins of a horse, a shield, or perhaps another weapon. modeled as a makara, or aquatic monster, set with the horns
This sword hilt originally incorporated a broad double- of a yali. Between the horns is a demon’s mask (kirtimukha),
edged blade, probably of European origin, now missing. also common in Hindu imagery, which can be seen on the
Requiring great forearm strength, it must have been a dif- walls at the Golconda Fort, where it appears as the conjoined
ficult sword to wield with ease; however, in close combat, head of two lion-tiger figures on the Banjara Gate.
it would have had the reach to counter a javelin. The blade On the hilt, rampant lions, also symbolic of majesty, flank
originally issued from the open mouth of a yali, a lion with the repoussé steel gauntlet, which is decorated with chevron-
horns and bulging eyes, that forms the hilt. Its iconography like ribs. This foreign technique of embossing was probably
Cat. 26
Catalogue 91
Detail of cat. 26 Fig. 47. Malik-i Maidan (Lord of the Plain) Cannon, Ahmadnagar, 1549. Installed at
Bijapur Fort
adopted from pieces of armor imported into the Deccan from 1. Shyam 1966, p. 46. 2. The relief on Baybars Bridge shows side views of
lions, lording over diminutive figures of horses, there to represent the
Italy in the mid-sixteenth century. The elephants’ heads act as cavalry, as important in battle to the Mamluks as elephants were to the
finials for the rear retaining strap. The hilt shows extensive princes of the Deccan. Baybars (reigned 1260 – 77), the first Mamluk sultan
to halt the advance of the Mongol armies, is mentioned in an inscription
traces of silvering, which would have not only proclaimed it a dated 1273.
princely piece, but also deflected the sun’s rays from the fore-
arm while protecting the surface of the metal from rusting on
humid days. hr
92 Bijapur
27 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II made throughout his reign and which also appears in
the epigraphic program of his tomb, the Ibrahim Rauza
Attributed to the Bikaner Painter
Bijapur, ca. 1590 (ca. 1627 – 35).3 Part of the poem, however, is missing in what
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; image: 10⅜ × 6½ in. is perhaps the artist’s attempt to suggest that the verses con-
(26.5 × 16.5 cm), folio: 15⅜ × 10¼ in. (39 × 26 cm) tinue on the back of the turban. The phrase huwa ’l khalil
(he is Khalil) in the end cartouche, which is not from the
Inscribed in a later ascription on album page above: mirza shahrukh
poem, relates Ibrahim to the prophet Abraham, hailed as the
pisar-i amir timur gurkan (Portrait of Mirza Shahrukh, son of Amir
Timur Gurkan) khalil (friend) of God, an association that was also exten-
On two bands in nasta‘liq script in the turban, except the bottom sively made at court.4
right cartouche: The Bikaner Painter, known from just two works, this
khadiv-i zamin badshah-i zaman/mah-i burj-i daulat shah-i kamran/ painting and another depicting Ibrahim in procession
furugh-i dil va dide-yi muqbilan/vali-i nimat jani-i sahibdilan
that was formerly in the Bikaner royal collection (cat. 28),
falakra guhar dar sadaf chun tu nist/faridun va jam ra khalaf chun
nist/bi-takht-i suleiman bimani salha (largely flaked off ) shows originality in concept and style. The unusual large
(Viceroy of the world, the king of his age/Enthroned under an three-quarter view of Ibrahim’s head is unprecedented and
auspicious sign, the fortunate king/Light of the heart and of the eyes presages similar developments in Mughal painting.5 It has
of the happy/The benefactor of the soul of the generous
The oyster shell of the heavens contains nothing like you/Faridun and
been conjectured that the artist may have had knowledge of
Jam have no son like you/On the throne of Solomon, may you stay European portraits circulating in the Deccan, although no
for years) comparable examples survive.6 nnh
In the cartouche on right end of second line: huwa ’l khalil
(He is Khalil) 1. D. Ali 2004, pp. 118 – 19. 2. Hafiz 2002, pp. 616 – 17. 3. Overton 2011b,
pp. 162 – 64. 4. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 73. 5. Skelton 1958, p. 124, mentions a
later head portrait of Ibrahim in the Bijapur Archaeological Museum, Gol
Gumbaz, which remains unpublished but might be based on this example.
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) inherited the 6. Jeremiah P. Losty in Royal Courts of India 2008, p. 52, suggests that Lucas
throne of his uncle ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I (reigned 1558 – 80) at the Cranach the Elder’s 1531 portrait of John Frederick I, Elector of Saxony, may
have been a source; Rosemary Crill in Crill and Jariwala 2010, p. 110, n. 2,
tender age of nine and a decade later shook off the controls proposes Cranach’s print of Sybilla of Cleves as another source.
of his regent, assuming real power as a mature youth. This
first-known portrait of the adolescent shah may have been
made at that key moment and demonstrates that the great 28 Procession of Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
artist known as the Bikaner Painter was in the royal atelier By the Bikaner Painter
at Ibrahim’s coming of age. Capturing the ruler’s sprouting Bijapur, ca. 1595
beard, rosy complexion, and adornments of a tall, decorated Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6¼ × 9⅞ in.
(16 × 25 cm)
turban and strings of emeralds, the portrait conveys the bud- Private collection, London
ding promise of Ibrahim’s glorious reign at Bijapur.
Inscribed on reverse in devanagari script: aviraham sah vajapur ro/
The broad decorated textile around Ibrahim’s turban was aduni ri kothi su an g(?) 5(?)/s[amvat] 1748 (Ibrahim Shah of Bijapur/
an important headpiece for royalty in southern India. In From the treasury of Adoni, part 5[?]/Year a.d. 1691)
earlier medieval courts, it was often conferred at moments Also contains a stamp from the Bikaner royal library
of transformation such as a coronation ( pattabandha
mahotsava).1 The texts in nasta‘liq script on the band con- This sumptuous portrait of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned
tain verses from the Saqinama (Book of the Cupbearer) 1580 – 1627) in procession with a group of attendants behind
of Hafiz (in seven of the cartouches) and were probably him captures the sultan at about age twenty-five. A devanagari
selected for their sentiment of praise for a king from a inscription on the reverse indicates that it was taken from the
poem that otherwise largely centers on the role of a cup- Deccan fort of Adoni at the siege laid by Raja Anup Singh of
bearer.2 A line in the original text has been changed from Bikaner and then added into the Bikaner royal library as part
bi-ja-yi sikandar biman salha (in the state of Alexander, of the booty in 1691. It is for this tour de force that the Bikaner
may you stay for years) to bi-takht-i suleiman bimani Painter is named.
salha (on the throne of Solomon, may you stay for years), Much of the opulence conveyed in this image comes from
an early instance of the Solomonic association with Ibrahim the figure’s flowing golden robes. Ibrahim also bears around
Catalogue 93
Cat. 27
Cat. 28
been a wall-painting tradition at Bijapur, as is hinted by the
very faded remains at the Kumatgi water pavilion, although
admittedly what little survives of those paintings tends to
depict single monumental figures and few groups.1 But there
may have been other variations. Certainly the sense of move-
ment, depth of space, and relationship between figures seen
here are far removed from the more formal conventions of
Mughal painting at this time, while some elements, such as
the individualized portraiture, are shared. Ibrahim’s counte-
nance is rendered with particular sweetness as he holds up
narcissus flowers and curls of hair escape the confines of his
tall Deccan turban.
The right side of this painting has been cut away, with var-
ious areas showing replacement and repainting in the white
ground. However, a surviving element is the edge of a red
skirt visible on the lower right.2 It appears to have belonged
to a female companion of Ibrahim’s, probably his concubine
the Maharashtrian dancing girl Rambha, who was either
deliberately or accidentally expunged from the painting.3
A contemporary painting (fig. 48), seemingly based on the
present image, provides some insight into how the original
may have appeared.4 Here Ibrahim appears in a similar pose
Fig. 48. Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II with a Consort in a Landscape.
Attributed to the Dublin Painter. Bijapur, ca. 1590–1605. Gouache with a staff and holding up a rose while Rambha faces him.
with gold on paper, folio: 12⅛ × 8⅞ in. (30.8 × 22.4 cm). Collection of
Bashir Mohamed, London
She is dressed in a sari draped in the Maharashtrian style,
its outward sweeping end resembling the textile edge in the
his neck four strings of rudraksha berries, a sign of his increas- present image. nnh
ing devotion to Hinduism. The composition displays a strong
1. See Cousens 1916, p. 125, for a description of the wall paintings. On
diagonal thrust, partly achieved by the descending cluster of entering Bijapur and Golconda, the Mughal Prince Aurangzeb ordered the
figures, each one a distinct individual. Such arrangements are wall murals removed. 2. Thanks are due to Robert Skelton for his
observations on this painting and its later versions. 3. N. Ahmad 1956b,
also seen in ancient wall paintings in the Deccan, and while p. 41, discusses Rambha and the confusion concerning whether she
no direct line can be drawn between the many intervening was Muhammad’s consort or Ibrahim’s. 4. Other versions of this painting
are M. Chandra 1951, p. 26, pl. 3 (from the Khandalavala Collection);
centuries, there could once have been elements of continuity Goswamy 1999, p. 94, fig. 72 (only Ibrahim but mirror-reversed).
that no longer survive. One means of transmission might have
96 Bijapur
29 Manuscript of the Pem Nem
(The Laws of Love)
Bijapur, text: a.h. 990 (a.d. 1590 – 91)
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9½ × 6¼ in. (24 × 16 cm)
British Library, London (Add. 16880)
In addition to supporting painters, Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II

(reigned 1580 – 1627) was a patron of calligraphers, musicians,
poets, and historians. Under his direction, Firishta and Rafi’
al-Din Shirazi wrote their chronicles, works that remain the
major historical sources for the Deccan, and during his reign
the Pem Nem, a romantic tale that serves as a metaphor for
the search for spiritual union with God, was composed.
The Pem Nem was dedicated to Ibrahim by Hasan Manju
Khalji, pen name Hans, who commences the work with a
lengthy introduction in praise of God, the Prophet, and the
sultan, mentioning Ibrahim’s elephant Atash Khan and his
musical instrument, the tambur nicknamed Moti Khan. Then
follows the main subject of the text, the story of Shah Ji, a
prince of Kuldip, and Mah Ji, a princess from the island of
Sangaldip. The two fall in love on seeing each other’s por-
traits, but when they finally meet in person, Shah Ji decides
that the woman he sees is merely a reflection of the ideal he
has borne in his heart during the months he has spent search-
ing for her. Shah Ji leaves Mah Ji: he to a year of contem-
plation, she to a year of mourning. The story ends happily,
however. On further consideration, Shah Ji realizes that his
love for Mah Ji is true; he returns to his beloved and the two
wed. Metaphorically, this is the tale of an adept so caught up
in his own conception of God that he does not recognize the
real God when he finally achieves union with him — a genre
with a long history in Persian, and then Indian, literature.
The illustrations in this manuscript have typically been
ascribed to three artists, differentiated on the basis of their
quality, but some traits carry throughout. The creative visual
metaphors such as the depiction of Mah Ji’s face on Shah Ji’s
chest not only are emotionally evocative, but also effica-
ciously demonstrate Shah Ji’s devotion to his beloved and the
fact that she is a very part of his being, whether or not he is
consciously meditating on her.1 This device is a visual expres- Cat. 29
sion of the sufi practice of dhikr, the constant remembrance
of God and repetition of his ninety-nine names.
Although the folios assigned to each painter range greatly full of sympathy for the lovers’ plight, with sensitively ren-
in style, in general, the best paintings, by Hand A (folios 46r, dered figures and background landscapes incorporating
49v, 69r, 75v, 80r, 82v, 119r, 181v, 183r, 197v, 210r, 213v, 215r, Persian-style rocks. In the second-best paintings, by Hand C
219r, and 232r), combine carefully conceived compositions, (folios 70v and 87r, and possibly 47r, 89v, and 138r), the figures
Catalogue 97
have rounder faces, trees are depicted as green masses cov- 30 Yogini with a Mynah Bird
ered with pointillist applications of colors, and the landscape
By the Dublin Painter
features are coarsely executed. The weakest, by Hand B (folios Bijapur, early 17th century
90v, 135r, 147r, 166r, 186r, 171r, 172r, 176r, 177v, 178v, 184r, 202r, Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, folio: 17⅜ × 12⅝ in.
206r, and 224v), have tall, thin figures outlined in red, with (44 × 32 cm)
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (In. 11A.31)
chinless faces and beaky noses, set against backgrounds with
little depth or detail.2 Inscribed on outer right and left margins: four couplets by Shaikh
Kamal Khujandi in praise of a beautiful woman, straight as an alif,
The manuscript as it stands now seems to reflect at least beautiful, tall, and with a mole at her lip 1
two moments of creation. All of the pages usually attributed
On outer top and bottom margins: four couplets by Khwaja Salman
to Hand A have been pasted into this copy and may have been al-Savuji in praise of a black-haired woman speaking and spreading
removed from an earlier work that was prepared at the same fragrance, impossible to forget from one’s heart and eyes 2
time as the composition of the text, around 1590 – 91. This art- On inner border on white ground, above and below: two couplets by
ist, among Bijapur’s finest early practitioners, might also have Katibi, which include his name and state that when Katibi speaks of her
been responsible for the great Yogini painting (cat. 30).3 eyes, a thousand fitna (stirrings of chaos) appear among people 3
Later, perhaps in the mid-seventeenth century, another On inner border: ten couplets from Maulana Sa’d, including his name,
copy was made that included the paintings from the Hand A about a heart burning with love 4
copy as well as additional paintings by Hands B and C, other On reverse: verses by Katibi
artists who may have been charged with filling out the orig-
inal. The Hand A folios do, in fact, tell the complete story, Yoginis, or female ascetics, as described in the Nujum ul-‘Ulum
while those by Hands B and C merely amplify it — prolong- (Stars of the Sciences, cat. 22) and Pem Nem (The Laws of
ing the exposition of Shah Ji’s initial meeting with the king of Love, cat. 29), were thought to be agents of occult powers in a
Sangaldip (even repeating a composition prepared by Hand belief system that was prevalent in the late sixteenth and early
A) and his decision to leave Mah Ji and the palace. They also seventeenth centuries in the Deccan.5 Such female mystics
expand the representation of the wedding and its prepara- more widely relate to Indian ideas of feminine auspicious-
tions. These additions perhaps represent the interests of the ness and power, and ideals of renunciation. For Sultanate-era
manuscript’s later owner, who requested that these subjects viewers, such images in painted albums might thus have been
be worked up. At yet another moment the manuscript was charged with great esoteric, layered meaning.
rebound, resulting in the loss of some pages and the misor- The dark yogini has the dusky complexion of an ash-
dering of others.4 ms covered mystic but bears the royal attributes of lavish jewelry
and fine costume. Her red chakdar jama (four-pointed tunic)
1. See the discussion in Hutton 2011. 2. This argument was laid out by
Barrett 1969 and is further discussed by Losty 1982, p. 73; Hutton 2006, is appropriately colored and masculine in style, a marker of
pp. 73 – 78. 3. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 103 – 4. 4. Catchwords and numbers female penitents in India. The Deccani palace on the distant
on the paintings indicate that additional paintings were once part of the
manuscript and that the current binding has disrupted the original sequence hill may be a gleaming symbol of the life she left behind as
of pages. For instance, the pages now numbered 138 to 142 should be she walks in an open landscape holding a mynah bird, teller
ordered as 139, 138, 141, 140, 142, and the author believes that the paintings
opposite folios 139v, 174v, and 179v are missing. Blumhardt 1899, p. 57, of stories and conveyer of joy. The flanking oversize lotus and
original cataloguer of the text, noted that painting numbers 21, 24, and 25 peony plants are likely to have been copied from Chinese por-
are missing, but since most of his analysis has been rejected by later
scholars, this observation has also been dismissed. celain, which was known in Bijapur and examples of which
still remain at the Bijapur Archaeological Museum, or from
imported Chinese textiles (figs. 10–11).6
This imaginatively realized vision shows the hand of an
unknown master. One suggestion is that the folios of the
Pem Nem attributed to Hand A, including one depicting a
prince conversing with a dark yogini, are by the same hand.7
But Hand A, while strong and gifted, lacks the refine-
ment and restraint shown here, and his Pem Nem pictures
vary considerably in style. Another view, worthy of serious
98 Bijapur
Cat. 30
appreciation, is that the artist of this page is Farrukh Beg, as suggested in Ibrahim’s song number nine, or was otherwise
whose style is recalled in the handling of trees, treatment rendered “useless,” much to his master’s grief.4 Atash Khan’s
of landscape, and the silhouette of the figure.8 Perhaps mate, Chanchal, appears as a demure and shadowy presence
Farrukh’s encounter with the yoginis of the Pem Nem inspired beside him; she was given to the Mughal Emperor Akbar
this response, which has all the hallmarks of a Persian- and (reigned 1556 – 1605) in 1604, embarking with the ambassador
Mughal-trained hand. Asad Beg on a long journey northward to the Mughal court,
The painting was part of an album that has a Golconda during which she reportedly exhibited a great fondness for
provenance (cat. 104), possibly having been sent as a gift from Portuguese wine.5 Therefore, this painting can be dated to
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) to Muhammad Quli before her departure in that year and the presumed decline
Qutb Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612). nnh of Atash Khan. The rider is the sultan himself, recognizable
by his stance and turban and by the fact that he is fanned
1. Kamal Khujandi 1954, p. 165. 2. Salman al-Savuji 1917, p. 160. 3. Katibi
Turshizi 1964, p. 78. 4. ‘Ali Shir Nava’i 1905, pp. 85, 259. 5. Diamond 2013a, by an attendant. A delicately Europeanized attendant on the
p. 149, fig. 11.1, illustrates this work as Yogini with a Mynah Bird, Bijapur, ground blends harmoniously into the composition.6 Another
ca. 1600. 6. Chinese-style lotuses also appear on Deccan tiles as early as
the Bahmani period; see Haidar, “The Art of the Deccan Courts,” in this splendid elephant picture attributable to Farrukh depicts a
volume, p. 19. 7. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 104 – 5. 8. Skelton 1957. heavily jeweled elephant, possibly Chanchal, just before her
departure for the Mughal court (fig. 50).7
31 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding the

Elephant Atash Khan
Attributed to Farrukh Husain
Bijapur, ca. 1600
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, folio: 6⅞ × 5⅜ in.
(17.2 × 13.7 cm)
Collection of Mrs. Stuart Cary Welch, New Hampshire
Farrukh Husain, Bijapur’s most celebrated painter, is undoubt

edly the author of this luminous work. An almost identical,
mirror-reversed version of the painting appears at the top
of another masterful composition depicting the Hindu god-
dess Saraswati and inscribed to Farrukh Husain, thus provid-
ing the evidence for the attribution (fig. 49).1 The Saraswati
painting was first published fairly recently and, together
with the present image, sheds light on Farrukh’s close in-
volvement with the Kitab-i Nauras (Book of Nine Essences,
cat. 45), for incorporated into that composition are key verses
from a song in the text: Ibrahim ko got pita dev guru ganapati
mata pavitra sarsuti (Ibrahim whose father is guru Ganesh
and mother, the pure Saraswati).2 Thus the subject of the
Saraswati painting derives from a highly personal textual ref-
erence to Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627), which,
combined with the sultan’s own presence along with his ele-
phants, shows Farrukh’s masterful representation of the ide-
alized vision of self, state, and culture that Ibrahim espoused.
Atash Khan, the elephant portrayed here, was Ibrahim’s
favorite, described by the sultan in the Kitab-i Nauras as
Fig. 49. Saraswati Plays on a Vina. By Farrukh Husain. Bijapur, ca. 1604.
“resplendent as the sun,” “speedy as eyesight,” and with “tusks
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9¼ × 6¼ in. (23.6 × 15.8 cm).
as sharp as spears.”3 By 1602 Atash Khan either had drowned, Brigadier Sawai Bhawani Singh of Jaipur, City Palace (JC-1/RJS.1326-RM 177)
100 Bijapur
Cat. 31
The Iran-born, Safavid- and Mughal-trained painter Farrukh 32 Royal Horse and Groom
Husain remains one of the most enigmatic artists of the
Attributed to Farrukh Husain
Deccan. The mystery lies less in his proposed trajectory, Bijapur, ca. 1600 – 1610
which is now largely accepted by most scholars, and more Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, folio: 17⅜ × 10⅝ in.
in his transformation from a competent but conventional (44 × 27 cm)
Victoria and Albert Museum, London (IS.88-1965)
painter into a master of great imagination and unique style
during his Bijapur years. Farrukh’s tenure at the court is
marked by expressive paintings employing saturated, glowing Farrukh Husain’s recognizable hand is most likely the one
color and distinctive figures, often leaning slightly forward to have created this spirited horse portrait. His mark includes
with dark coronas and shadows. Dramatic shifts of scale and a verdant green background with impressionistically ren-
evocative landscapes further convey the otherworldly mood dered conical trees shaded on the outer edges. The figure
for which his Deccan phase is known, and that to some extent of the groom, caught in active movement, and the capari-
defines the spirit of Bijapur painting. In some part Farrukh’s soned horse have been compared to figures in the ele-
style must have come about through his exchanges with other phant portrait also attributed to Farrukh (fig. 50).1 The
artists. Apart from those with his compatriots at Bijapur, his large, free-hanging, graduated flower pendants worn by
interactions with the Mughal artist Aqa Riza Jahangiri and the the horse seem to have been a local style of animal jewelry
Shirazi illuminator Muhammad ‘Ali have also been recently and also appear on the steed in Farrukh’s painting of Ibrahim
reconsidered by scholars.8 Of the approximately twenty-six ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) riding from the Saint
paintings associated with Farrukh along his route from Petersburg Album (fig. 5).2 nnh
Shiraz (Iran) to Kabul (Afghanistan), Agra (North India),
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 98. 2. The painting came from the collection of the
Bijapur (Deccan), and back to the Mughal north, about seven late Captain E. C. Spencer-Churchill.
are associated with his Bijapur period.9 nnh
1. The inscription appears on the stairs leading up to the throne:

harrarrahu(?) farrukh husain musavvir-i ibrahim ‘adil shahi (Work of
the humble Farrukh Husain, painter of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah), with the
words ibrahim shahi placed above. 2. Collection of Maharaja of Jaipur
2003, pl. I; Singh 2004, p. 99, no. 1326, pl. C (following p. 74). For a more
detailed discussion, see Haidar 2011b. The verses are from song number
fifty-six; see N. Ahmad 1956b, pp. 146 – 47. 3. N. Ahmad 1956b, song
number forty-five, pp. 119 – 20. 4. Ibid., song number nine, pp. 132 – 33:
“Having separated from Atash Khan I feel the anguish of burning fire. My
sad plight is such that the exemplary heat on the Day of Resurrection with
its acute intensity is nothing in comparison. . . . Taking water as fire’s enemy
it [the elephant] hastened and plunged into the water tank. . . . I fail to
understand how it would survive.” Muzaffar Alam and Sanjay Subrahmanyam
relate that Asad Beg’s request for the elephant Atish Para (Atash Khan) was
turned down as he had been rendered useless two years before; Alam and
Subrahmanyam forthcoming. 5. Alam and Subrahmanyam forthcoming.
6. Two grisaille drawings relating to this painting are known: one is in a
private collection in London (Sotheby’s 1989, lot 91); the second is in the
Freer and Sackler Galleries, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
(Lawton and Lentz 1998, pp. 182 – 83). The Polier Albums in the Museum für
Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, also contain a woodcut
loosely based on this composition. 7. N. C. Mehta 1926, pl. 47. This painting
is now thought to be lost. 8. Skelton 2011a has proposed interactions
between the Mughal artist Aqa Riza Jahangiri and Farrukh Husain. Seyller Fig. 50. Portrait of an Elephant, Either Atash Khan or Chanchal. Attributed to
2011c has proposed that Muhammad ‘Ali may have been in the Deccan Farrukh Husain. Bijapur, ca. 1600–1604. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold
around 1590. 9. Skelton 1957; Seyller 1995; Beach 2011, pp. 187 – 90. on paper, 4⅛ × 5½ in. (10.5 × 14.1 cm). Formerly in the Babu Sitaram Sahu
Collection, Varanasi, location unknown
102 Bijapur
Cat. 32
Cat. 33
33 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II the eye.2 From the direction in which he holds his tambur,
Playing the Tambur it can be inferred that he was left-handed. This conclusion
is also suggested by the hitherto unexplained feature of a
Ascribed to Farrukh Beg in an inscription written by Muhammad
Husain Zarin Qalam sharpened and extended thumbnail on his left hand, most
Bijapur, ca. 1595 – 1600 (painting); Agra, a.h. 1019 (a.d. 1610 – 11) likely the digit with which he plucked his string, in another
(album page and inscription) portrait of him by ‘Ali Riza (cat. 46).
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, folio: 16⅝ × 10⅜ in.
(42.3 × 26.5 cm)
This painting is an important key by which Farrukh
Náprstkovo Muzeum Asijských, Afrických a Amerických Kultur, Husain of the Deccan has been reasoned as being the same
Prague (A.12182) artist as Farrukh Beg of the Mughal court.3 In this largely
Inscribed: allah u akbar shabih-i ibrahim ‘adilkhan dakani tarafdar-i accepted view, Farrukh, having left the Mughals for Bijapur
bijapur ki dar ‘ilm-i/musiqi-yi dikan khud ra sar amad-i ahl-i an fann earlier in his career, returned during the reign of Emperor
mi danad/va ‘amal-i farrukh beg fi sana-yi 5 julus-i mubarak muvafiq-i
Jahangir (1605 – 27), with this powerful image among his
sana-yi 1019 banda-yi kamtarin muhammad husain zarin qalam
jahangir shahi tahrir numud offerings to his new patron. The painting comes from an
album of Jahangir, where it has been mounted together with
(God is highest. Likeness of Ibrahim ‘Adil Khan of the Deccan, ruler
of Bijapur, who, in the science of Deccani music, considers himself European prints, as was sometimes done with Deccan sub-
superior to the masters of that art. And the work of Farrukh Beg. In the jects in Mughal albums. The inscription written by the lead-
fifth auspicious regnal year [of Emperor Jahangir], corresponding to ing Mughal calligrapher Muhammad Husain Zarin Qalam
a.d. 1610 – 11, written by the humble servant Muhammad Husain Zarin
has been interpreted to suggest his diplomacy and helpful-
Qalam [in the service of ] Jahangir)
ness toward Farrukh Beg (probably an old friend) in present-
ing a painting to Jahangir that was likely originally made for
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) sits holding his Ibrahim, Farrukh’s former patron. Zarin Qalam composed
beloved instrument, the tambur that he named Moti Khan, the inscription in such a way that the date, which refers to
in the posture of an accomplished Indian musician, with one the inscription, appears close to Farrukh’s name, thus imply-
knee raised to support the guitar and toes splayed to balance ing that the painting may also have been made in 1610 – 11, in
the body. Accompanists clap taal, a system of beats, while a deliberate ambiguity.4 The inscription also takes a critical
nature blossoms beyond the bolstered divide. The painting tone, noting that Ibrahim considered himself superior to
is associated with verses in the Kitab-i Nauras (Book of Nine masters of Indian music.
Essences, cat. 45), in particular, a description in song num- Changes in Farrukh’s style over his long tenure at various
ber fifty-six (the same song from which verses appear in a Persian and Indian courts have generally been thought to
depiction of Saraswati by Farrukh Husain, fig. 49): “In one reflect shifts in patronage. However, this painting demon-
hand he has a musical instrument, in the other a book from strates that even within a particular period, his style was not
which he reads and sings songs related to [the] Nauras. He is uniform. Here, compared to his other Bijapur works, the fig-
robed in saffron-colored dress, his teeth are black, the nails ures are larger, the faces rounder, and the composition bolder.
are painted in red, and he loves all. Ibrahim whose father is Fine passages of stippling and shading coexist with simpler
guru Ganesh and mother, the pure Saraswati, has a rosary of elements such as the background elephants. nnh
crystal round his neck, a city like Vidyapur [Bijapur], and an
1. N. Ahmad 1956b, pp. 146 – 47. 2. Topsfield 2004c, p. 256, fig. 9, shows
elephant as his vehicle.” 1 musicians with red nails. For missi, see Platts 1993, p. 1036. Thanks are due
While this composition is not an exact illustration of the to Prashant Keshavamurti for this information. 3. Robert Skelton first
proposed this idea; see Skelton 1957; Skelton 2011a. See also Seyller 1995;
verses, certain key elements correspond, most obviously the Beach 2011, pp. 187 – 90. 4. Of course, if the date pertained to the painting,
description of Ibrahim holding a musical instrument. The it would be highly unlikely for the exact day of the regnal year of its original
creation to be mentioned. Also, the inscription on the lower line starts
sultan’s colored nails, also seen on his accompanists, prob- with the word va ‘amal . . . (and the work of . . .), which is a grammatically
ably reflect a custom by musicians, while the reference to incorrect way to begin a sentence. Therefore, the first half of the second line
may in fact be the continuation of the upper inscription, which would have
his blackened teeth likely indicates the use of missi, a beau- to be reordered slightly to understand its original sequence but would
have essentially the same meaning.
tification technique similar to the application of kohl around
Catalogue 105
Cat. 34 Cat. 35
34 “Suhrab Slain by Rustam,” Folio from a 35 “The Death of Farud,” Folio from a Shahnama
Shahnama (Book of Kings) (Book of Kings)
Bijapur, ca. 1610 Bijapur, ca. 1610
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; image: 2⅝ × 3⅛ in. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; image: 3¼ × 3⅝ in.
(6.7 × 8 cm), folio: 8 × 43⁄4 in. (20.3 × 12.2 cm) (8.4 × 9.1 cm), folio: 8 × 4⅞ in. (20.3 × 12.4 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of The Kronos The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of The Kronos
Collections, 1985 (1985.404.1) Collections, 1985 (1985.405.1)
106 Bijapur
Cat. 36 Cat. 37
36 “Piran Stays the Execution of Bizhan,” Folio 37 “Kai Khusrau Crosses the Sea,” Folio from
from a Shahnama (Book of Kings) a Shahnama (Book of Kings)
Bijapur, ca. 1610 Bijapur, ca. 1610
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; image: 5¼ × 2¾ in. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; image: 5⅜ × 2¾ in.
(13.2 × 7 cm), folio: 7⅞ × 4¾ in. (20 × 12.1 cm) (13.6 × 7 cm), folio: 8 × 4⅞ in. (20.3 × 12.4 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of Wendy Findlay, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of Wendy Findlay,
1983 (1983.354.1) 1982 (1982.476.3)
Catalogue 107
Given the great value placed on Persianate culture in the Suhaili produced in Golconda in 1582.4 A mural depicting
Deccan, it is unsurprising that the Shahnama (Book of the same episode — among the most piercing stories of the
Kings), an epic relating the feats of the kings of both legend- epic — appears inside a pavilion within the garden complex of
ary and historical Iran, should have been illustrated in the Kumatgi, ten miles east of Bijapur. The mural was probably
region. Compiled by Abu’l Qasim Firdausi (ca. 940 – 1020) produced during the reign of Ibrahim II, suggesting that this
from earlier histories of the kings of Persia, the text eventu- story may have resonated in both royal and courtly Bijapur
ally came to be represented more than any other narrative at this time.5
in illustrated manuscripts across the Persianate world. With Unlike most known illustrated pages from this copy of the
the exception of a few stray folios, no other early seventeenth- Shahnama, “The Death of Farud” (cat. 35) depicts events that
century Deccani copies of the Shahnama have been pub- do not appear until later in the text. It shows the demise of
lished.1 Produced in Bijapur in the early seventeenth century, the warrior Farud after a battle with the great Persian heroes
this small but delightful manuscript surely once contained far Rustam and Bizhan. Farud’s head is in the lap of his mother,
more than the two dozen or so folios that have survived.2 Jarira, who commits suicide soon after the death of her son.
Although all the known pages from this manuscript were In contrast to the episode of Rustam and Suhrab, this painting
at some point remargined with a brittle, brown paper that bears muted emotional content. As with many illustrations
has a glossy, oily look, their original main support is a very from this Shahnama, the composition extends into the right
thin, high-quality, cream-colored paper, sprinkled with gold. margin and over the gold rules around the text block. It seems
Four columns of nasta‘liq script have been inscribed on as though those in charge of the text and rules expected less
this lush surface, separated from one another by gold rules. expansive illustrations; however, such extensions were com-
Pages with paintings bear even more gold, since the text is mon in Persian and Indian manuscripts. The cluster of white
surrounded by gilt cloud bands. There is no evidence, as yet, palace buildings on the horizon is a visual trope that Mughal
that the manuscript was produced for Bijapur’s royal family, artists frequently used in the 1580s and 1590s and may have
but the abundance of expensive materials suggests its spon- been adopted in the Deccan upon the immigration of artists
sor was a high-ranking member of courtly society.3 such as Farrukh Husain.
The illustrations combine features familiar from Persian At least five illustrations of the story of Bizhan and
painting with unique traits found in Bijapuri works on paper. Manizhe survive from this manuscript.6 Among the most
For example, the landscapes in which the heroes confront romantic stories in the Shahnama, it was a favorite among
one another include the same red- and green-speckled trees illustrators, and many scenes are so popular that stock com-
that appear in portraits of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned positions evolved for their depiction. The protagonists are
1580 – 1627). Facial types and the clusters of white build- lovers from opposing kingdoms, and in “Piran Stays the
ings on horizon lines further link the illustrations to other Execution of Bizhan” (cat. 36), Bizhan is about to be killed,
images from Bijapur. The assimilation of the Shahnama into having been captured inside the palace of Manizhe’s father
the Bijapuri visual world is not total, however. Figures wear amid a dalliance with the princess. He narrowly avoids death
distinctly Persian, not Deccani, clothing, and when depicting through the intervention of the Turanian general Piran, who
popular episodes, the artists modeled their illustrations after appears in the bottom left of the painting on horseback. As
the standard compositions established in sixteenth-century in other folios from this manuscript, a certain coarseness is
Persian and Central Asian copies of the Shahnama. evident in the faces and clothing, but the vitality of the palette
In the tragic illustration of “Suhrab Slain by Rustam” and the ample use of gold give it remarkable charm.
(cat. 34), Rustam, his face pale and big eyes open wide, In “Kai Khusrau Crosses the Sea” (cat. 37), amid a Bijapuri
rips apart his tiger-skin garment in agony, having discov- landscape replete with speckled trees and white palaces
ered that he has slain his son. Suhrab lies bleeding on the under a golden sky, the legendary Persian king Kai Khusrau
ground next to him. Features that derive from Deccani and his men sail across the sea after a fierce battle in Makran.
painting include the color palette emphasizing pink, orange, The water was rough (“lions fought with oxen in the waves”)
and green and the candy-colored swirling clouds in the and full of miraculous creatures (“a fish that had a leopard’s
upper right and left corners. A Deccani precedent for such head . . . a lamb a hog’s”).7 This story is frequently illustrated,
polychromatic clouds is found in a manuscript of the Anvar-i perhaps because artists enjoyed depicting the amazing sea
108 Bijapur
creatures that Kai Khusrau and his companions encountered. 38 Dervish Receiving a Visitor
No obviously mythical animals swim around the sailboat in
By the Bodleian Painter
this painting, though fish, ducks, and alligators are paired as Bijapur, ca. 1610 – 20
if in a love story. lw Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 10⅜ × 7¾ in.
(26.5 × 19.7 cm)
1. The only other Deccani Shahnama published to date is an abridged Bodleian Library, University of Oxford (Ms. Douce Or. b. 2, fol. 1r)
manuscript from about 1660 – 80, which was produced in Sikakol (now
Srikakulam), a coastal city in present-day Andhra Pradesh (Chester Beatty Inscribed on the standards: (left) ima[m] hasan wa ima[m] Husain
Library, Dublin, Ms. 23). See Leach 1995, vol. 2, pp. 903 – 12. 2. In addition (Imam Hasan and Husain); (center) ya allah, ya muhammad, ya ‘ali
to the four pages without illustrations in The Metropolitan Museum of (O Allah, O Muhammad, O ‘Ali); (right) ya husain a‘inni (Help me,
Art, New York (1982.476.4; 1983.354.2; 1985.404.2; 1985.405.2), there are O Husain)
illustrated and unillustrated pages in the San Diego Museum of Art
(1990.437.1 – 4); Williams College Museum of Art, Williamstown, Mass.
(91.15.61-3); Los Angeles County Museum of Art (M.81.12a – b); Victoria and In Bijapur, sufi saints of all ranks formed spiritual lineages
Albert Museum, London (IS.75-1993); Asian Art Museum, San Francisco
(1990.219); Cleveland Museum of Art (2013.283.a – b); and private collec- and held allegiances as powerful as those of its kings. Here
tions in the United States and United Kingdom. 3. As yet, no colophon has a humble dervish, identifiable by his long nails and cross-
been located. The manuscript was first attributed to Bijapur on the basis of
the style of its illustrations and calligraphy, which is particularly close to legged pose, receives a visitor, who is also a Sufi, signaled by
that of the Pem Nem now in the British Library, London (Add. 16880);
McInerney 1982, p. 49. For an extended discussion of the Bijapuri manuscript the tattoos or burn marks on his forearms, and is accompa-
and an appendix of known pages, see Weinstein forthcoming. 4. See, for nied by an ash-covered devotee. The dervish has his begging
example, fol. 61v; Guy and Swallow 1990, pp. 109 – 10, ill. no. 90. The Anvar-i
Suhaili is in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London (IS.13:116-1962). bowl near him and the offering of a mango on the ground.
5. This mural is discussed in Overton 2011b, pp. 136 – 39. 6.  These include The simple outdoor holy shrine is marked by flags arranged
Los Angeles County Museum of Art (M.81.12a), San Diego Museum of Art
(1990.437.3), Victoria and Albert Museum, London (IS.75-1993), and Cleveland near the white grave, probably that of the old man’s pir (spir-
Museum of Art (2013.283.a). 7. Firdausi 1909, pp. 245 – 46. itual guide), while other mystics are seated all around. A
sacred tree flourishes in the middle of the mound, with a large
white bird perched beside tall standards bearing inscriptions.
The bird, the only oversize element in this otherwise per-
fectly scaled composition, is almost directly quoted from an
engraving of 1560 (fig. 13) by the Netherlandish artist Adriaen
Collaert (1560 – 1618).1
This gathering of mystics appears to show holy men from
several formal and informal traditions in various postures of
sleep, meditation, or observation. Each one bears traits sig-
nifying a particular order. The visitor, it has been suggested,
is Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627), appearing in
the guise of a Sufi but recognizable to some by the pointed
nose and beard. The subject of the meeting between a king
and a holy man had developed in Mughal painting by this
time, representing a well-known idea about the interaction
between the temporal and spiritual world. However, the fig-
ure’s closed eyes alternatively suggest that he may be a blind
dervish awaiting a miracle as other, more advanced Sufis
were known to have performed.
The painting reveals an exactitude of pen and brush that
distinguishes the Bodleian Painter’s other works. Contours
are precisely delineated, modeled, and shaded to great effect,
with dark coronas appearing around the edges that allow
for contrast and give the slight illusion of figures rising
up from the ground. In addition to the flawless polish,
the Bodleian Painter reveals great sensitivity to nature, as
Catalogue 109
110 Sultans of Deccan India, 1500–1700
Cat. 38
Detail of cat. 38
expressed through the tendrils of vines growing between 39 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Holding Castanets
stones and the carefully treated bamboo poles from which
Attributed to the Bodleian Painter
the flags fly. The use of gold and silver — in the gold-stippled Bijapur, ca. 1610 – 20
fleece of the sheep and the silver trough for the cows — brings Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6¾ × 4 in. (17 × 10.2 cm)
luster to this otherwise ascetic world rendered in tones of Trustees of British Museum, London, 1937 (1937,0410,0.2)
brown, olive, and gray.

The identity of the Bodleian Painter has remained mys- The musically and mystically inclined Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
terious. One recent suggestion is that he is ‘Ali Riza, creator (reigned 1580 – 1627) walks in a dark landscape where an
of several other works in this volume (cats. 46 – 47). Another invisible breeze is captured in the swaying movement of his
possibility is that the two are different painters, but each diaphanous robes and rich gold wrap. Flowers bloom at his
was influenced by Farrukh Husain, whose style of trees and feet, and a white palace with Safavid-style figures gleams in
compositional effects are seen here. The eighteenth-century the distance. The setting may be that of a scented night gar-
Lucknow painter Mihr Chand made a copy of this painting, den, a powerful metaphorical setting for spiritual and roman-
which reveals that a black-faced langur monkey once sat on tic union in the Deccani literary imagination.1
a stand at the upper left.2 His painting is inscribed “Hazrat In one hand Ibrahim holds castanets (kartals) of the kind
Shah Murad,” referring to an as-yet-unidentified saint, who used in devotional temple music (bhajans), indicative of his
may be the seated subject of the works. nnh dedication to Saraswati, the Hindu goddess of music and
learning. In his other hand is a small green cloth, a symbol
1. See Haidar, “The Art of the Deccan Courts,” in this volume, pp. 21–23.
2. Topsfield 1994, p. 30, fig. 5. of kingship adapted from Persian royal imagery, in which
the ruler is often depicted with a cup in the right hand and
a small cloth in the left. Ibrahim wears little jewelry; instead,
his opulence derives from his golden textiles, which might
have been imports from Gujarat.
The identification of this figure as Ibrahim has never been
doubted, even though there is no inscription and Ibrahim’s
features vary widely in his portraits. nnh
1. Husain 2012.
112 Bijapur
Cat. 39
40 Stout Courtier
Bijapur, ca. 1620
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6¾ × 4 in. (17 × 10 cm)
Trustees of British Museum, London (1937,0410,0.3)
41 A Mullah
Bijapur, ca. 1620
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; image: 6 × 3 in.
(15 × 7.5 cm), folio: 12 × 7¾ in. (30.3 × 19.6 cm)
British Library, London (J.25,14)
42 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Standing

Bijapur, ca. 1620
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 7 × 4½ in. (17.8 × 11.3 cm)
These three small portraits can be attributed to the Bijapuri

artist known as the Bodleian Painter or possibly ‘Ali Riza.1
Active during the reign of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (1580 – 1627),
the Bodleian Painter is renowned for his realism, draftsman-
ship, and technical precision, three qualities that often set him
apart within the broader history of Bijapuri painting. Each of
these portraits depicts a single figure on a plain background
accented by floral clusters and/or paired birds on the upper
and lower edges. All of the figures wear white or beige gar-
ments, and it is in these passages that the artist’s exemplary
use of underdrawing and fascination with white, the former
often showing through the latter, are most conspicuous.2
The depiction of a Bijapuri courtier (cat. 40) has been
cropped on its lower edge, but a comparison to the two other
Cat. 40
portraits presumably from the same album (cats. 41 – 42)
suggests that the pointed green forms at the bottom would
have been parts of flowers. Like Ibrahim in catalogue num- substantial information about the notables who populated
ber 42, this courtier wears luxurious gold cloths, including Ibrahim’s inner circle can be found in the contemporary text
a geometric patka (sash), turban sash, and large shawl. The entitled Khan-i Khalil (Table of the Friend of God), which
artist’s trademark underdrawing is visible, especially where includes descriptions of six of the ruler’s closest confidants,
the pigment has flaked off, and he has used different tones of all of whom hailed from Iran.3 One might speculate that this
white to imply volume, especially in the rotund upper body. stern figure is Shah Nawaz Khan, the prime minister from
The raised rosettes on the edges of the jama (robe) contribute Shiraz known for his lofty palace in Nauraspur (the new city
additional refinement. whose construction he supervised in 1599); his compe-
The identity of this figure is unknown, but his digni- tence in mathematics, astronomy, and physiognomy; and his
fied stature and exquisite dress leave little doubt that he gifting of books (via his son) to Ibrahim, including canonical
was a prominent courtier during Ibrahim’s reign. The most texts on mantiq (logic) and kalam (theology).4 While the
114 Bijapur
Cat. 41 Cat. 42
identity of this subject may never be known, the portrait to that of the seated Sufi in Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
itself enjoys a significant legacy, as attested by a later draw- Venerates a Sufi Saint (cat. 46), in his urbane demeanor he
ing in the Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian is the polar opposite of the wild ascetic in Dervish Receiving
Art, Hyderabad.5 a Visitor (cat. 38). Considered together, the three paint-
In A Mullah (cat. 41), the individual’s dress and accoutre- ings exemplify Ibrahim’s multifarious approach to religion,
ments — white and beige robes, bulbous white turban with ranging from the orthodox and canonical to the hetero-
red cap, natural-colored Kashmiri pashmina shawl, prayer dox and mystical. In addition to pledging devotion to the
beads, and book (possibly a Qur’an) with a fine gold bind- Prophet Muhammad, the Hindu goddess Saraswati, and the
ing — indicate that he is a religious dignitary.6 The Bodleian Deccani sufi saint Sayyid Muhammad Husaini Gesu Daraz
Painter created at least three depictions of Bijapuri religious (1321 – 1422), Ibrahim was nominally a Sunni who employed a
personalities. While this figure’s dress can be compared seal with the Shi‘a prayer Nadi ‘Aliyan (call to ‘Ali) and adopted
Catalogue 115
complexion. The last trait appears to be historically accurate,
based on the Flemish gem trader Jacques de Coutre’s account
that the ruler was “a little dark in the face like a gypsy.” 11
Ibrahim is similarly depicted in the Bodleian Painter’s mas-
terpiece Dervish Receiving a Visitor, and a comparison
between his paintings and those by Farrukh Husain (cat. 32,
fig. 50) underscores the former artist’s inclination toward
realism in contrast to the latter’s idealism.12 The Bodleian
Painter achieved his heightened naturalism through shading,
especially in the faces of his subjects, underdrawing, and pig-
ment layering. Meticulous lines of underdrawing are visible
throughout Ibrahim’s dress, and the artist applied white pig-
Detail of cat. 41
ment with restraint and delicacy in order to illuminate the
color beneath, whether the ruler’s brown skin or his orange
the Hindu title Jagadguru (world teacher) while repenting as pants. While at first glance this portrait may appear to be a
a true hanif (Hanafi Sunni Muslim).7 staid depiction of Ibrahim, sustained firsthand inspection
A number of sufi orders were active during Ibrahim’s reveals the artist’s subtle and methodical hand. ko
reign, including those composed of Arab émigrés who
1. For an overview of ‘Ali Riza, whom the author has argued elsewhere to
sought to reform Bijapur’s courtly culture from within its be the artist known as the Bodleian Painter, see Overton 2011a. For the
urban and elite environment (Qadiri, Shattari) and those Bodleian Painter, see Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 78 – 86. 2. For a fourth painting
of this type (of a European couple), and presumably belonging to the
made up of local saints who fostered ties with the general same album, see Overton 2011a, p. 384, fig. 10. 3. For the original Persian
populace and preferred to maintain a distance from the court and an English translation, see Seh Nasr (Three Essays) in Ghani 1930,
apps. A – C. 4.  For the description of Shah Nawaz Khan in the Khan-i
(Chishti). Several Sufis in the former category attempted Khalil, see ibid., pp. 453 – 58. For a history of Nauraspur, see Hutton 2006,
to steer Ibrahim toward the orthodox path, including the pp. 107 – 19. For volumes in Shah Nawaz Khan’s collection that eventually
passed to Ibrahim as gifts, see Overton 2011b, pp. 61 – 63. 5. The author is
Qadiri saint Shah ‘Abu’l Hasan (died 1635), whose family had grateful to Navina Najat Haidar for pointing out this work. 6. For
depictions of religious authorities wearing Kashmiri shawls, especially plain
migrated from Baghdad to Bidar to Bijapur.8 The library of ones, see S. Cohen 2008, pp. 180 – 81; Wright 2008, pp. 288 – 90, no. 36A,
Bijapur’s Qadiri order was apparently significant, and Shah pp. 326 – 27, no. 45A, pp. 397 – 98, no. 66A. The author thanks Stephen
Cohen and Rosemary Crill for these references. 7. See Ibrahim’s invoca-
‘Abu’l Hasan presented Ibrahim with books with illustrious tions in his Kitab-i Nauras; N. Ahmad 1956b, p. 128. Hanafi Sunni Islam was
provenances.9 Could this figure be ‘Abu’l Hasan or at least an restored in Bijapur early on in Ibrahim’s reign, in 1583. For the presentation
of Ibrahim as a “hanif pure believer, not a polytheist” in the epigraphy of his
equally influential Arab sufi intellectual? tomb, part of the Ibrahim Rauza complex, see Wannell 2011, pp. 255 – 56,
Of the approximately sixteen portraits of Ibrahim datable 266. 8. Eaton 1978, pp. 108 – 12, forms the basis of the recent assessment by
Wannell 2011, p. 266. 9. For the Qadiriyah Library, see Qureshi 1980, p. 4.
to his reign, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Standing (cat. 42) For more on the volumes that Shah ‘Abu’l Hasan presented to Ibrahim, see
may constitute his most accurate representation.10 Though Overton 2011b, pp. 63 – 65. 10. The painting’s muted brown background,
the elephant’s elongated trunk, and the foreground floral clusters appear to
the ruler can be readily identified through his codified ico- have been significantly restored, as shown by the reproduction in Sherwani
and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2, pl. VIb. Some of the restoration of the elephant’s
nography — including the elephant in the background, the trunk was removed in 2014, as shown here. Ibrahim himself appears
white handkerchief in his hand, and his royal garb (flat tur- untouched. 11. Jacques de Coutre, Vida de Iaques de Couttre, natural de la
ciudad de Brugas; see de Coutre 1991, p. 298. For more information on
ban with gold sash, white jama with pants underneath, and de Coutre’s memoirs, see Overton 2014. 12. For one of Farrukh’s especially
gold patka with geometric designs) — what is distinctive here idealized depictions of Ibrahim (beardless, with a slender, sloping nose), see
Overton 2014, p. 247, fig. 10.4, p. 251, fig. 10.7.
is his prominent hooked nose, thinning beard, and darker
Detail of cat. 41 Catalogue 117

Cat. 43
43 Siesta
the rich stylistic quotations. In Siesta (cat. 43), a handsome
Bijapur, early 17th century prince, most likely an idealized and youthful Ibrahim ‘Adil
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 8⅛ × 5⅝ in. (20.6 × 14.2 cm)
Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (T.4595, fol. 36)
Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627), dozes in a Deccan garden. He
is attended by three young pages, beardless like himself, and
is adorned with amulets and other golden jewels. One boy
44 Ascetic Visited by a Yogini presses the sultan’s feet and knees; another youth offers him
Bijapur, early 17th century a small cup, likely containing the opium that has sent him
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 11⅞ × 8⅞ in. (30.3 × 22.6 cm) to sleep, while a sword bearer fans him with a white scarf.
Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (T.4596, fol. 4a)
Opiate fantasies seem to extend into the setting, where irises
and other blossoms grow outward from lush green tufts
These two opulent paintings are by the same anonymous around small trees and rocks, giving the impression that they
artist, whose knowledge of varied idioms is evident through hang from above rather than grow from the ground. The
118 Bijapur
Cat. 44
second work (cat. 44), likely made sometime later based on has also been attributed to the same artist who created Yogini
its slight stiffness, depicts a yogini (female ascetic) visiting a with a Mynah Bird now in Dublin (cat. 30).3 While this attri-
sufi ascetic, each recognizable by various attributes.1 There is bution to the Dublin Painter has considerable merit, there is
much to linger over in this painting, which has a rich range also the possibility that two different artists were involved.
of foreign references. The pair of lions in the foreground are The Yogini painting has a softer, more modeled handling
posed in a fifteenth-century Persian Turkmen style. European of form and landscape along with a different palette. By con-
and Safavid figures can be seen within the architecture in the trast, the paintings under discussion make use of distinctive,
background, as can elephants, villagers, and a cowherd. In pale, flat colors to fill the background as well as more solid,
both works the artist mixes rich and cool color, strong and voluminous figures and generally crisper edged outlines.
subtle brushwork. nnh
These works are part of a set of five by the same hand, pos- 1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 111, ill. no. 86. 2. Ibid., p. 110. 3. Michell and
sibly once forming an album of delightful scenes.2 The group Zebrowksi 1999, p. 173.
Catalogue 119
45 Folios from a Manuscript of the Kitab-i
Nauras (Book of Nine Essences) of Sultan
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
Calligraphy by Khalilullah Butshikan
Bijapur, a.h. 1027 (a.d. 1618)
Ink, gold, and opaque watercolor on paper, each approx. 8⅛ × 4⅜ in.
(20.6 × 11 cm)
a, c – g: National Museum, New Delhi (69-22/1 – 6); b: Cleveland Museum
of Art, Gift in honor of Madeline Neves Clapp; Gift of Mrs. Henry
White Cannon by exchange; Bequest of Louise T. Cooper; Leonard C.
Hanna Jr. Fund; From the Catherine and Ralph Benkaim Collection
(2013.284.b)
Inscribed on cat. 45a: kamtarin shagird(?) amir(?) khalilullah ghafar

allah dhunubahu wa satara ‘uyubahu (Work of humble student[? ]
amir[?] Khalilullah. May God forgive his sins and conceal his failings)
These delicate, gold pages illuminated with scenes of bur-

geoning nature come from a dispersed manuscript of the
inspired verses of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627),
the Kitab-i Nauras. This text, containing fifty-nine devotional
songs and seventeen couplets, is attributed to Ibrahim by the
poet laureate Nur al-Din Muhammad Zuhuri (died 1616) in
his preface, Seh Nasr (Three Essays). Aside from being the
earliest musical work in Dakhni Urdu, the songs offer a fas-
cinating glimpse into Ibrahim’s mystical mind and personal
world. A variety of Hindu and Muslim divines are evoked.
The songs also mention Ibrahim’s wife, Chand Sultan, and
mother, Bari Sahib, his favorite elephant, Atash Khan, and
his attachment to his musical instrument Moti Khan.1 In Fig. 51. Frescoes of Flowering Vases, Asar Mahal, Bijapur, 1647
his preface Zuhuri provides information about the six lead-
ing courtiers in Ibrahim’s inner circle: Malik Qumi (Zuhuri’s
father-in-law and court poet), Khalilullah Butshikan (callig- brought together, providing a glimpse of the hand of the cel-
rapher and diplomat), Maulana Farrukh Husain (artist), Shah ebrated calligrapher Khalilullah Butshikan (Idol Destroyer),
Nawaz Khan (prime minister), Mullah Haidar Zehni (poet), whose writing Zuhuri described as possible to read “on the
and Zuhuri.2 A key to Bijapur’s golden age, the term nauras forehead of the sky.” 5 Khalilullah arrived in Bijapur in 1596
(nine juices or essences) refers to an Indian system of aesthet- after former association with the court of Shah ‘Abbas I
ics, which was widely adapted in state emblems, from coinage (reigned 1587 – 1629) in Isfahan.6 From Bijapur he returned at
to the naming of Nauraspur, a nearby city. least twice to Isfahan as an emissary, one time carrying an
About ten copies of the Kitab-i Nauras are known, rang- important letter asking for help against Mughal incursions.7
ing in date from 1562 to 1618 (the present folios).3 The earliest Recently an entire manuscript of the Khamsa (Quintet) of
version, copied by the calligrapher Abdul Rashid, is dated to Nizami copied by Khalilullah has come to public attention,
when Ibrahim would have been eleven years old and unlikely with an inscription describing the calligrapher as padshah-i
to have composed the full text.4 Therefore, some early ver- qalam (King of the Pen), a title Ibrahim had given him.8
sions of the songs may already have existed, and Ibrahim may The folios by an anonymous illuminator depict at least
have added to them. eight different species of birds, including ducks, cranes,
Here six pages from the National Museum, New Delhi, crested fowl, and hovering birds; more than twelve types of
and another from the Cleveland Museum of Art have been plants, including varieties of prunus, palm trees, reeds, irises,
120 Bijapur
b c
d e
Cat. 45a f g
and Turkmen-style blossoms; and foxes, fish, and a black- “health and prosperity,” and his attendant, holding a fanning
faced langur monkey climbing a palm tree. An ethereal flow- cloth and wearing two fine pendants (urbasi), stands behind
ering vase decorated with arabesque scrolls on the colophon the Sufi. These realistic vignettes are combined with several
page likely inspired the style of motif in wall paintings in the smaller objects — a mango or peach, pieces of rolled cloth, a
Asar Mahal, a palace built by Ibrahim’s son in 1647 (fig. 51). pince-nez, and a gold plaque — whose precise meanings and
nnh functions are ambiguous.5 Are they symbolic, exercises in
depth, or mere space filler? The overall premise of the picture
1. For a more extensive discussion of the Kitab-i Nauras, see Haidar 2011b.
2. Ghani 1930, pp. 461 – 62. 3. N. Ahmad 1956b, pp. 82 – 94. 4. In Pune in is enigmatic as well. Was it created at Ibrahim’s bequest as yet
2012, Dr. Mehendale examined the date in question in light of the Shuhur another visualization of his piety (cat. 38), or was the ruler a
San system of dating in the Deccan, as well as other local calendars. The
author is grateful to him for this information. 5. See Haidar 2011b, p. 31. mere pawn in the saint’s self-aggrandizement?
Another folio from this series remains in a private collection in New Delhi. While the meaning of the painting remains elusive, its
Jake Benson has also identified a related folio in an album in the Salar Jung
Museum, Hyderabad (Ms. 90). 6. N. Ahmad 1969, pp. 158 – 59; see also composition contains standard Bijapuri tropes and can be
N. Ahmad 1970, pp. 46 – 48. 7. N. Ahmad 1969, pp. 145 – 54. 8. Sotheby’s compared to several contemporary images. The penetrating
2014, pp. 47 – 49, lot 60.
gaze of the saint finds its closest parallel in Seated Devotee,
which has also been attributed to ‘Ali Riza and depicts a sim-
46 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Venerates ilarly dignified religious subject.6 In Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
a Sufi Saint Presenting a Necklace, a lady gazes directly at the viewer
while the ruler looks adoringly at her, and doorways and arches
By ‘Ali Riza
Bijapur, ca. 1620 – 30 contribute a similar sense of recession beneath tasseled
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, painting: 6⅜ × 5⅝ in. forms.7 Yet another romantic equivalent to the sufi painting
(16.2 × 14.4 cm), folio: 16⅝ × 11⅝ in. (42 × 29.5 cm) under discussion can be found in the Pem Nem (The Laws
of Love, cat. 29), where the lovers’ final encounters transpire
Inscribed in white on the lower border: mashaqahu khanazad ‘Ali Riza within canopied interiors.8 Since Ibrahim was a devotee of
(Drawn by the house-born [servant] ‘Ali Riza)
Sayyid Muhammad Husaini Gesu Daraz (1321 – 1422), it is pos-
In gold on the canteen held by Ibrahim: sihat va ‘afiyat (Health and sible that the saint in question is the Chishti pir and that ‘Ali
prosperity)
Riza cast the ruler’s veneration of his long-deceased spiritual
guide in the romantic visual language of Bijapur’s p resent.9
This painting is one of two images from the Ibrahim ‘Adil ko
Shah II era (1580 – 1627) inscribed with the name of the art-
1. For a third portrait signed by the ‘Ali Riza in question but likely dating to
ist ‘Ali Riza.1 Whereas Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding around 1640 – 50, see Overton 2011a, p. 389, fig. 14. 2. For the original
an Elephant under a Canopy (fig. 52) features his signature assessment of the inscription, see Robert Skelton in Indian Heritage 1982,
p. 42, no. 55. The painting was collected into an album owned by the late
in the picture plane, this inscription is rendered in white on eighteenth-century Maratha minister Nana Phadnavis. Calligraphy on the
the lower border and may be a copy of an original cropped back of the folio is dated a.h. 1142 (a.d. 1729 – 30); see Losty 2013, p. 4. The
author thanks Terence McInerney for this reference. 3. Overton 2011a.
during remounting.2 As is typical of his style, ‘Ali Riza has 4. For images of ostrich eggs dangling from canopied structures, or more
favored a muted palette dominated by white and beige, simply a pole or ceiling, see Green 2006, p. 55, fig. 12. 5. For the peach and
further discussion of the painting’s approach to depth, see Hutton and Tucker
employed underdrawing and shading throughout, and ren- 2014, pp. 223 – 25 and fig. 9.5. 6. Golestan Palace Library, Tehran (Ms. 1663,
fol. 126); Overton 2011a, p. 382, fig. 6. 7. Victoria and Albert Museum, London
dered the setting with painstaking precision.3 The saint sits (IS.48-1956, fol. 1b); Overton 2014, p. 238, fig. 10.1. 8. Deborah Hutton has
on a canopied, bedlike throne (takht) of the type ubiquitous argued that the Pem Nem’s thirty-nine paintings progress from expansive
natural settings to confined palatial ones (culminating in the canopied
in Deccani imagery (cats. 15, 119) and stares directly at the interior), thereby echoing the sufic path from the outer world toward inner
viewer. Two ostrich eggs encased in precious fittings dan- truth. See Hutton 2011, pp. 50 – 51 and p. 62, figs. 32, 33. 9. For the hypothesis
that the painting’s saint could be Gesu Daraz, see Hutton 2006, p. 105. It
gle above him and underscore his religious stature, presum- is well known that Ibrahim established Gesu Daraz as a major subject
ably as a notable sufi pir (spiritual guide).4 Clearly a visitor, of devotion in his Nauras (nine juices or essences) cult and praised him
throughout his collection of songs known as Kitab-i Nauras (cat. 45).
Ibrahim carries a bejeweled spittoon and canteen inscribed
122 Bijapur
Cat. 46
47 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in Procession versus a wealthy ruler — while simultaneously bearing the hall-
marks of his realistic draftsmanship (underdrawing, shading,
School of ‘Ali Riza(?)
Bijapur, early 17th century pigment layering, and translucency). They also complicate the
Opaque watercolor and gold on paper, 5⅜ × 4⅛ in. (13.5 × 10.5 cm) traditional divide between Deccani and Mughal painting, with
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford, the former presumed to be fantastical and dreamlike in con-
Lent by Howard Hodgkin (LI118.121)
trast to the latter’s naturalism and historicism. ko
1. For the attribution of this painting to a member of ‘Ali Riza’s school, see
The similarities between this diminutive painting of Ibrahim Overton 2011b, p. 281. Arguments in support of the master himself could be
‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) in a procession of elephants viable; at this stage, a definitive conclusion cannot be reached. 2. For what
was likely a preparatory sketch for the Victoria and Albert Museum,
and the far larger Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding an London, drawing, with Ibrahim’s head facing the opposite direction, see
Elephant under a Canopy (fig. 52), which is signed by ‘Ali Riza, Falk and M. Archer 1981, no. 467. See also further discussion in Overton
2011b, pp. 281 – 82. 3. For comparisons of the elephant and dervish
suggest that this example is a product of ‘Ali Riza’s school, paintings as well as the artist’s commitment to “contrived accuracy” and
perhaps by the master’s pupil.1 In terms of subject matter, the “illusionary realism,” see Overton 2011a, p. 385; Overton 2011b, pp. 279 – 80;
Overton 2012, pp. 49 – 53.
two works recall the portraits of Ibrahim riding elephants
by Farrukh Husain (cat. 31). However, whereas Farrukh
adopted jewel-like colors to create ethereal landscapes, ‘Ali
Riza and his followers used refined line to record the mate-
rial culture of Bijapur. Visible in this painting are many exam-
ples of Deccani portable arts, including a spiraling spittoon
(cat. 51); elephant goads (ankusha); a palanquin finial in the
shape of a lotus (similar to that in cat. 142); a lobed con-
tainer for preserving a precious item; incense burners topped
with peacocks; a red textile decorated with stripes and dots
recalling Ottoman chintamani designs (see the one on Atash
Khan in cat. 31); and bejeweled necklace pendants (urbasi).
Comparable snapshots of Bijapur’s decorative arts are visible
in figure 52, which includes a quintessentially Deccani can-
opy embellished with peacock-shaped finials and an ostrich
egg (cat. 46), water troughs similar to those in the Bijapur
Archaeological Museum, and two-pronged tridents identi-
cal to extant examples. Although incomplete — the artist did
not finish his alterations to Ibrahim, which entailed turning
his head — and often described as a “tinted drawing,” Sultan
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding an Elephant under a Canopy
includes fine passages of gold paint in keeping with the sig-
nature cartouche.2 In terms of composition and technique,
it closely parallels the Bodleian Painter’s Dervish Receiving
a Visitor (cat. 38), which depicts a sufi shrine in a similarly
naturalistic yet contrived mode, and therefore lends further
credence to the argument that ‘Ali Riza and the Bodleian
Painter may be one and the same.3 Considered together, the Fig. 52. Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding an Elephant under a Canopy.
By ‘Ali Riza. Bijapur, ca. 1610. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper,
dervish and elephant paintings epitomize the artist’s diver- 14 × 9⅜ in. (35.5 × 23.7 cm). Victoria and Albert Museum, London
gent approaches to representing Ibrahim — an ascetic devotee (D.398-1885)
124 Bijapur
Cat. 47
Cat. 48
48 Royal Hunting Falcon (Baz)
Attributed to a follower of the Bodleian Painter
Bijapur, ca. 1610 – 20
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9¼ × 6½ in. (23.5 × 16.5 cm)
Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris (MA2642)
This magnificent bird adorned with a ruby locket is a vari-

ety of peregrine falcon, identifiable by its coloring and wavy
pattern of breast feathers. Tiny birds nestled on the back-
ground plant, possibly of the same species as the main sub-
ject yet miniaturized, are completely out of scale with the
environment, adding to the strangeness of the picture. The
dark tones with glowing colors of plant life and spiky stalks of
grass resemble the mysterious backgrounds of the Bodleian
Painter, particularly the portrait of Ibrahim holding castanets
(cat. 39). However, the slightly stiff handling of the falcon sug-
gests that this might be the work of one of his followers.1
Studies of hunting falcons became popular in Mughal
painting by the 1620s, especially in the hands of the naturalist
master Mansur, the artist who had established the conven-
tion of placing the falcon on a stand. This bird might have
been an express favorite of the sultan. The outer borders of
the folio are composed of three types of marbling. nnh
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 86.
49 Incense Burner in the Shape of an Cat. 49

Octagonal Shrine
Brass, H. 9½ in. (24 cm)
The pierced wall of this incense burner would have released

fragrant smoke from a plate within. Its auspicious shape, that
of a shrine, would have been appropriate for both royal and
religious settings. Its tall dome and proportions also recall
the profile of a water pavilion from the pleasure gardens at
Kumatgi (fig. 53). nnh
Fig. 53. Water Pavilion, Kumatgi, first quarter of 17th century
Catalogue 127
50 Ewer with Dragon Heads (Butler Ewer) the bursar of Brasenose College, University of Oxford, A. J.
Butler, from whom it gets its name. The lid is a replacement
Deccan, first half of 17th century
Brass, with traces of gilding, H. 20⅛ in. (51 cm), W. 7⅞ in. (20 cm), and the original gilding is rather rubbed, giving the effect of a
D. 6¼ in. (16 cm) somewhat illusory silvery gold. nnh
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford,
presented by Miss Eleanor Butler, in memory of her father Dr. A. J. Butler, 1. Zebrowski 1995.
1976 (EA 1976.43)
The elegant proportions and graceful spiral fluting of this 51 Spittoon or Incense Burner
long-necked ewer make it the most famous example of a
Bijapur or Golconda, late 16th – early 17th century
type that was produced in the Deccan. When such ewers
Cast, joined, and engraved brass, H. 9 in. (22.9 cm)
first became known, they were attributed to Iran, Turkey, or The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Friends of
Mughal India, understandably as the ewer’s widely dispersed Islamic Art Gifts, 2007 (2007.287)
style appears in all of those schools of painting.1 However,
Deccani painting, too, depicts such objects. The painting Similar cup-shaped vessels can be seen in paintings from the
dubbed Siesta shows similar examples next to the sleeping Sultanate and Mughal periods, most often on the ground at a
prince (cat. 43). The ewer was formerly in the collection of royal gathering, as in Siesta (cat. 43), or in the hand of an atten-
dant near an esteemed dignitary, as in Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil
Shah II Venerates a Sufi Saint (cat. 46). The use for this type of
vessel is not certain. It may have been a spittoon, an accessory
for the practice of chewing betel nut ( pan ), a digestive aid that
also refreshed the mouth. In fact, in the Deccan these vessels
were sometimes called ugaldan, from the Urdu “to spit out.” 1
Vessels of this shape were also known to have served as incense
burners, perfuming the air during royal assemblies.
Cat. 51
Cat. 50
Cat. 52
The inclusion of these lavish objects in royal scenes indi- 52 Portrait of a Ruler or Musician
cates that their display no doubt had a ceremonial purpose, Bijapur or Golconda, ca. 1630
signifying the grandeur of a prince. Other paintings demon- Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 8 × 12 in. (20.3 × 30.5 cm)
strate how these cups were paraded in a procession, along Collection of Terence McInerney, New York
with other ceremonial objects including ‘alams (standards), Inscribed on back in devanagari script: uttam (the best)
chhatris (ceremonial umbrellas), and the mahi-maratib (fish On margin edge in Persian: 601 and 9
standard, cat. 180).2 In a Persian tradition well known through
On margin edge in Hindi: 34(?), 54(?)
text and iconography, the cupbearer was an esteemed posi-
tion crucial to the king’s safety. As a high-ranking officer, he
served drinks at the royal table and guarded against poison in This enigmatic portrait is probably one of the most impor
the king’s cup. Confidential relations with the king often gave tant Deccani paintings to have emerged in recent years.
him great influence, and depictions of cupbearers in Persian The seated figure is a dark-skinned nobleman, possibly of
art are well documented.3 cs Indian or East African descent, with a hooded gray-blue eye,
full lips stained red with betel nut (pan), subtly delineated
1. Zebrowski 1997, p. 179. 2. For the cups in procession scenes, see Sultan
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in Procession (cat. 47). For the other ceremonial wrinkles around chiseled features, and a prominent Adam’s
objects, see Sadiq Naqvi 1987, p. 11. 3. See, for example, a twelfth-century apple (a rare feature in Indian portraits). His expression is
brass figure in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (68.67).
thoughtful, perhaps troubled, and his visible hand is withered
and shrunken. He sits on a striped rug before a rudra vina
Catalogue 129
The identity of the seated noble may never be fully deter-
mined. Is he a member of the Bijapur or Golconda royal
family, an African nobleman, or a musician of great emi-
nence in a courtly culture where music was immensely val-
ued? The white jama (robe), with small tassels on both sides,
and his gold shawl are in the costume style of the 1630s,
before Mughal influence had set in more discernibly. If he
is a royal figure of that period, his chiseled nose and full lips
most recall Muhammad Qutb Shah (reigned 1612 – 26) of
Golconda, possibly in his true skin tones rather than the ide-
alized, fair visage that is elsewhere depicted (cat. 119).2 Like
other Deccan rulers, Muhammad was known for his love of
poetry; his divan (anthology) is filled with images of musi-
cians and dancers at court. Alternatively, another suggestion
is that he may be the later ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1656 – 72)
of Bijapur, who was often shown with such lush features by
his great portraitist, the Bombay Painter (cats. 66 – 67).3 The
horizontal format, striped carpet, and predominantly blue
palette have led to one opinion that this picture could be an
eighteenth-century Bikaner copy of a lost Deccan original.4
However, the striped carpet is a known seventeenth-century
type, and the format of the painting may in fact presage a
later convention, in which a group of figures tended to clus-
ter at one end of a horizontal composition with an expanse
of carpet beyond. The hierarchical arrangement of the three
attendants and the style of their turbans are typical of Bijapur,
and the shadowy coronas and shading are reminiscent of the
work of the Bodleian Painter. Perhaps this painting is by him
or one of his followers, either at Bijapur or at Golconda.
Beyond the style and attribution, the greatest interpre-
tive challenge lies in teasing out the work’s full meaning.
Detail of cat. 52 The psychological insights afforded by the figure’s expres-
sion and withered hand, together with the gathering clouds
that amplify the thought and introspection on his visage, are
instrument; his young son, wearing just a cloth over his bare almost hitherto unseen in Deccan painting. The setting hints
body, grasps his knee. Of the three servants who attend him, at ragamalas (illustrations of musical modes) associated with
one waves a scarf above, another holds a staff (reminiscent the monsoon season: raga Megh or Malhar are believed to
of that held by Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II [reigned 1580 – 1627] in bring on rain when performed or sung by a great mystic.
cat. 28), and the third holds a vessel and cup. A dark blue cur- nnh
tain on the left is tied back, seemingly deliberately, to reveal
1. Philon 2000, p. 7, points out a lifted blind to reveal blazing light beyond
a mottled ground beyond, probably a cloudy monsoon sky.1 as an allegorical feature of the murals in the tomb of Ahmad Shah Bahmani I
The painting was once mounted in a Jaipur album and is surat Ashtur. 2. Terence McInerney, personal communication, 2013. For a
portrait of Muhammad Qutb Shah, see Zebrowkski 1983a, p. 176, ill.
rounded by gold-speckled and chevron-decorated borders. no. 143. 3. John Robert Alderman, personal communication, 2013. 4. Stuart
The inscription uttam (the best) indicates that the folio was Cary Welch, personal communication, 2007.
recognized there for its merit.
130 Bijapur
53 Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah
Attributed to the Bodleian Painter and a Mughal-trained artist
Bijapur, ca. 1635
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 7½ × 4⅝ in. (19.1 × 11.7 cm)
Collection of Gursharan and Elvira Sidhu, Seattle
Glowing violet skies above gorgeously stippled trees and

intense blooms create an almost hallucinogenic setting for
Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56), the likely sub-
ject of this painting, portrayed as a young man in his early
twenties, in about 1635. He was the second son of Ibrahim
‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627), chosen by his father as
the heir to the throne, which Muhammad assumed at age
fourteen. This painting perhaps resulted from a collabora-
tion between a Mughal-trained artist at Bijapur, who based
the Mughal-style facial features on an image of Emperor
Shah Jahan (reigned 1628 – 58), and the Bodleian Painter,
who aided in the overall coloring and outdoor setting.1 The
Bodleian Painter is recognized by his remarkable use of color,
pointillist technique, and imaginative handling of the garden
setting. The symbols, yet to be fully decoded, are intriguing.
They include a conch shell on the ground, evoking attributes
of the Hindu god Vishnu; a shortened teal column with wine
and cup, recalling the promised river of wine in the Islamic
garden of paradise; and a parrot, teller of tales and secrets
in Indian tradition. Muhammad wears a jama (robe) with a
narrow-striped ikat design: this may be the first known rep-
resentation of a Gujarati mashru textile in an Indian painting
of this kind.2
A very thorough technical study of the picture has demon-
strated that its sublime palette is original and used conven-
tional ingredients, but to new effects — displaying a mastery of
alchemy as much as artistry.3 nnh
1. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 123 – 27. 2. Thanks are due to Dr. Gursharan Sidhu

for pointing out this feature. 3. Yana van Dyke, unpublished report,
Department of Paper Conservation, The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York.
Cat. 53
Catalogue 131
Cat. 54 Cat. 55
54 Album Page with Découpé Vase, Inscribed on cat. 55: ya qanbar kunta bi’l-ams-i li/wa sirta al-yuwma
mithli/wahabtuka li-man wahaba li/katabahu ‘ali ‘ali/qati’uha
Insects, and Birds muhammad hasan
Attributed to Muhammad Hasan
(O Qanbar, yesterday you were mine/And today you have become like
Bijapur or Golconda, 1630 – 40
me [free]/I donate you to He who had donated you to me / Written by
Gouache on black paper with colored and white decoupage,
‘Ali, ‘Ali/The cutter of the calligraphy is Muhammad Hasan)
8⅛ × 4⅛ in. (20.7 × 10.5 cm)
These two decorative pages, now in separate collections,
were likely mounted together, possibly in an album made
55 Album Page with Découpé Calligraphy
for Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56). However,
By Muhammad Hasan and calligraphy by ‘Ali decoupage was also practiced at Golconda, as demonstrated
Bijapur or Golconda, 1630 – 40
Gouache on black paper with colored and white decoupage, by the Shirazi Turkmen paper cutter Murad Dhu’l Qadr,
16¾ × 12⅝ in. (42.5 × 32 cm) whose name is found in a calligraphic page in the so-called
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford, Millennial Album made for Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah
132 Bijapur Detail of cat. 54

Catalogue 133
ducks. The finely cut legs and pale colors of the grasshopper
were arranged to convey a sense of its overlapping body. Its
liveliness is matched by the delicacy of the moth and poetic
irises below. The smoothness of the surface indicates the
thinness of the applied paper, which rises at a very low relief
and appears almost diaphanous in some areas.
The calligraphic folio provides the name of the talented
artist Muhammad Hasan and his collaborator, the calligra-
pher ‘Ali.2 The text quotes a phrase, attributed to ‘Ali ibn Abi
Talib (cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad) as
he freed his slave Qanbar, which became a well-known Shi‘a
phrase.3 The letters are interwoven with a simple but strong
S-shaped arabesque scroll bearing blossoms. The effect of the
light-colored letters and tightly curling vines against an almost
black ground recalls the mother-of-pearl inlay in black basalt
in the Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace, fig. 64) in Bidar and in
contemporary bidri metalwork. The work of the Ottoman
découpé artist Efsanci Mehmed (died 1534) and his followers,
who specialized in cutout flowers and gardens, may also have
been known to this artist. However, their works illustrate dif-
ferent types of flowers and vase shapes.4 Another decoupage
page, perhaps a practice sheet filled with images of flowers
and animals, provides the name of the artist ‘Yar Khan(?), who
was possibly part of the same workshop (fig. 54). nnh
1. James 1987, p. 246. 2. Originally the fourth line would have stated
katabahu ibn abi talib ‘ali. However, since the calligrapher is also named
‘Ali, he altered the original text by shortening it and repeating the name ‘Ali
twice (the first one referring to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib as the composer of the
Fig. 54. Album Page with Cut-Paper Decoration. By ‘Yar Khan(?). Probably text and the second to himself as its calligrapher). 3. Another folio with the
Deccan, ca. 1650. Cut paper, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 10½ × same phrase can be seen; Drouot-Richelieu 2014, p. 18, lot 33. Thanks are
7⅛ in. (26.7 × 18.1 cm). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Cynthia due to Nabil Saidi for pointing this out. 4. Atasoy 2002, pp. 73 – 86.
Hazen Polsky and Leon B. Polsky Fund, 2002 (2002.222)
56 A Floral Fantasy

(reigned 1580 – 1612).1 The two principal techniques of
Deccan, first half of 17th century
decoupage were both practiced in the Deccan: one in which Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 13⅞ × 9 in.
very fine shapes are cut away and applied to another surface, (35.2 × 22.9 cm)
as seen here, and another in which letters are cut away from Collection of Gursharan and Elvira Sidhu, Seattle
a sheet of paper, which is then laid down over another. The
Bijapur Archaeological Museum contains two unpublished This lively plant, a fantastical composite bearing several types
examples of this second technique. of stylized blossoms, grows out of rocks at the edge of a pool
These Deccan decoupage pages in their fineness and sensi- of water and is surrounded by swooping birds in the sky,
tivity surpass their stouter Ottoman and Persian cousins. In some alighting on its branches. The choice of colors, applied
the vase folio, the cut paper, which is now faded but was orig- with masterful stippling — purple in various shades of depth,
inally brighter, was colored to shape the springing flowers, blue graduated from azure to periwinkle, and glowing pinks
buds, thorns, and leaves, which are also pressed to enhance made mystical by the subtlety of the myriad points — matches
their veins. Gold leaf was applied to the collar of the fantas- the inventiveness of the drawing. A sinuous tendril in orange
tical vase, below which stands a charming family of marbled and shades of dark purple recalls the tail feathers of a simurgh
134 Bijapur
Fig. 55. A Floral Fantasy of Animals and Birds (Waqwaq).
Mughal India, early 1600s. Opaque watercolor and gold on
paper, 7⅞ × 5 in. (20 × 12.6 cm). Cleveland Museum of Art,
Gift in honor of Madeline Neves Clapp; Gift of Mrs. Henry
White Cannon by exchange; Bequest of Louise T. Cooper;
Leonard C. Hanna Jr. Fund; From the Catherine and Ralph
Benkaim Collection (2013.319)
is tied together by the use of arabesques, sinuous lines, inter-

locked saz leaves, and fantastical motifs such as dragons.1
From such examples as a wall-painting design of around 1425
Cat. 56 with a comparable flowering plant in a Persian album to a
pair of Waqwaq drawings attributed to s eventeenth-century
Mughal India (fig. 55), this tradition allowed the skill of art-
(mythical phoenix). Despite the fantasy, naturalism is also ists and illuminators to flower into ever more imaginative
apparent in the individual depictions of the ten pairs of birds exercises, with particular freedom at the Indian end of the
and four dragonflies (one caught in a bird’s beak) in the upper spectrum.2 The large scale and style of the plant and the pool,
part of the painting. Flanking the plant below, a pair of lynx which assumes a hillock-like profile, anticipate the Tree of
attacks a duck and a hare, whose respective mates flee; these Life compositions of kalamkari textiles, which were made in
vignettes are partly executed in silver, now oxidized. Another Golconda in the second half of the seventeenth century.
diving duck remains in the pool. The borders of the work nnh
appear to have been added later, perhaps at the Mughal court,
1. Denny and Krody 2012. Denny, personal communication, notes that the
where the folio seems to have made its way. flower on the left is an upside-down lotus blossom. 2. For the example in
This colored drawing falls into a connected world of such the Persian album, see Lentz 1993, pp. 257, 259, fig. 7.
creations that extends from Iran to Turkey to the Deccan and
Catalogue 135
57 Illumination in the Form of a Vase produced many of the same effects.1 The thickened line in
some strokes relates to the calligraphic technique of saz draw-
Probably Bijapur, early 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 10 × 6⅝ in. (25.5 × 16.8 cm) ings, as does the treatment of the leaves, which weave and
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford, interlock in stiff tension. Enriched with color and gold that has
Lent by Howard Hodgkin (LI118.99) been pricked and worked, the surface effect is that of opulence.
Inscribed above lower border: gul-i hazar gulha(?) (flower of a Small facial masks in the illuminated opening pages of
thousand flowers[?]) the manuscript Zakhira-yi Khwarazmshahi (The Treasury of
On lower left: 32, 30, an illegible date(?) Khwarazm Shah, cat. 96), made in Golconda in 1572, as well
as in other examples from sixteenth-century Shiraz, are in
This decorative fantasy of a flowering vase may have formed keeping with the frontally facing mask on the neck of the vase
the opening or end of a Bijapuri album of paintings and cal here. Turkmen-style blossoms and other more convention-
ligraphy. The shape of the vase is principally outlined by ally styled flowers, such as lotuses and peonies, are included.
serrated-edged saz leaves, which are a hallmark of sixteenth- At the base of the vase, a row of rocks with some plants grow-
and seventeenth-century Ottoman art. The Ottoman genre ing out of them pays a deferential nod to realism, from which
of saz ink drawings, executed with a reed pen and incorpo- this fanciful composition is otherwise far removed. nnh
rating the outlines of saz leaves in curving and broken forms,
1. Denny 1983.
must have been known to this illuminator, who successfully
Detail of cat. 57
136 Bijapur
Cat. 57
Cat. 58a Cat. 58b
58 Pair of Book Covers This exuberant pair of painted and lacquered book covers
Bijapur or Golconda, ca. 1700 is decorated with trees filled with plump birds and flanked
Lacquer, opaque watercolor, and gold on leather, a: 9¼ × 6⅝ in. by auspicious, flower-filled vases. Open urns burst with
(23.4 × 16.9 cm), b: 9 × 6⅜ in. (23 × 16.3 cm) cabbagelike leaves topped with sprouting grass and varieties
of ferns and flowers including tulips and lilies while over-
Lent by Howard Hodgkin (a: LI118.63, b: LI118.64)
size vases brim with long-stemmed leafy flowers. A sense
of oddness pervades the compositions: insects appear the
same size as birds, and flowers grow to great heights and in
unusual combinations.1 nnh
1. For a later tent hanging with a very similar design, see Veronica Murphy
in Indian Heritage 1982, p. 86, no. 217.
138 Bijapur
Cat. 59
59 Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah and Ikhlas Khan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56) inherited the splen-
Riding an Elephant did and diverse ruling traditions of his father, Ibrahim ‘Adil
By Haidar ‘Ali and Ibrahim Khan
Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627), and himself oversaw a strong
Bijapur, ca. 1645 and distinguished period of Bijapur history. However, in the
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 11¼ × 12⅝ in. (28.6 × 32 cm) background was the forceful and ambitious African prime
minister Ikhlas Khan (died 1656), shown here together with
the sultan on the royal elephant, in an emblematic display
Inscribed: ‘amal-i haidar ‘ali va ibrahim khan (Work of Haidar ‘Ali
of the actual power behind the throne.1 Many portraits of
and Ibrahim Khan)
both men exist from the period. Muhammad is often shown
Catalogue 139
in a more effete mode holding a flower or a mango, whereas paintings that later came to light made clear that the sub-
images of Ikhlas Khan invariably hint at his unyielding power. ject must be Ikhlas Khan.2 In each image he appears with the
Under Muhammad’s patronage Mughal influence was same snub nose, distinctive facial hair, and costume — a coat
manifested in painting through a great degree of natural- with rows of red flowers and a fur-lined collar over a trans-
ism and a growing interest in observation. Therefore, the lucent white or pink jama (robe).3 In this painting, he sits
elephant is as much the subject of the painting as its com- among bolsters on a carpet, armed with a sword and shield
manding riders. The large number of bells worn on its legs, yet holding a scroll, likely a reference to his former position
neck, and body would have ensured both a visual and an as secretary. On the cushion beneath his left arm is the signa-
aural impact. Opulent gold and areas of bold, flat color are ture “work of Muhammad Khan, son of Miyan Chand,” thus
confidently applied by the artists Haidar ‘Ali and Ibrahim identifying the work as that of the artist known from two
Khan.2 The blue background seen here became a preferred other paintings, both in Jaipur: one a portrait of Muhammad
one for the late eighteenth-century Hyderabad painter Rai ‘Adil Shah in a landscape, the other a scene in the sultan’s
Venkatchallam, whose royal elephant processions preserved quarters.4 In the latter, Muhammad sits on a cushioned plat-
much of the splendor and power seen here.3 nnh form, smoking a huqqa (water pipe), while the man standing
in front of him holds a decree dated 1651, stipulating that the
1. See Alderman 2006, pp. 116 – 21, for a discussion of portraits of Ikhlas
Khan and other Habshis at court. 2. Gahlin 1991, p. 43, no. 41, pl. 40. revenues of a village called Tib are hereby granted to the art-
3. See, for example, Venkatchallam’s Three Noblemen in Procession on an ist Muhammad Khan, son of Miyan Chand. Ikhlas Khan is
Elephant, 18th century, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
(2008.561). depicted on the sultan’s right, standing behind the platform.
The curving swoop of his figures’ facial features — espe-
cially eyes and eyebrows — is the most original feature of
60 Ikhlas Khan with a Petition Muhammad Khan’s work. He also repeatedly uses the device
By Muhammad Khan of the scroll, and from his contemporary court painters he
Bijapur, ca. 1650 borrows the unusual seated posture particular to portraits
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 4¾ × 4¼ in. (12 × 10.8 cm) of the Muhammad ‘Adil Shah era as well as the gesture of a
hand with palm turned up and one finger raised to the sky
Inscribed on cushion: ‘amal-i muhammad khan farzand-i miyan (cat. 59). ms
chand (Work of Muhammad Khan, son of Miyan Chand)
On border: Mas‘ud Khan 1. Sadiq Ali 1996, pp. 117, 123, 139, n. 12, the latter based on the Basatin
al-Salatin. Because this title was common, there is some confusion as to
whether he was the same person who had served under Ibrahim ‘Adil
Shah II, but that appears to be a different person altogether. 2. Edwin
Serving at the Bijapur court from a young age, the African Binney originally suggested that the sitter is Mas‘ud Khan, prime minister
slave Malik Raihan ‘Adil Shah was raised alongside Prince of Bijapur between 1678 and 1683; Binney 1973, p. 159. 3. The other known
portraits of Ikhlas Khan include that by Chand Muhammad (ca. 1640,
Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56). When Muhammad British Library, London, Johnson Album 23, no. 2); and one by an unknown
assumed the throne, so too did Malik Raihan (died 1656) artist (ca. 1650, British Library, Johnson Album 26, no. 19). He also appears
in multifigure compositions such as Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah and
embark on a new career. Rising up from his slave status, he ini- Ikhlas Khan Riding an Elephant (cat. 59); Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah
Selects a Jewel (ca. 1650, San Diego Museum of Art, 1990.443); and Darbar
tially presented petitions to the sultan in his private chamber. of Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (1651, City Palace Museum, Jaipur,
Later, he became a commander of troops, conquering territo- AG 771). He also appears in several late seventeenth-century compositions,
including two album pages (ca. 1670, Los Angeles County Museum of Art,
ries in Mysore. Eventually he was named governor of a prov- M.76.2.35, and San Diego Museum of Art, 1990.493), and at least three
ince on the border with Golconda, and in 1635 he received the portrait sets (ca. 1686, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, Witsen Album, no. 42;
and two albums in the British Museum, London, 1974,0617,0.4, fol. 26, and
title Ikhlas Khan, by which he is known to history. However, 1974,0617,0.2, fol. 54). 4. The portrait in a landscape (AG 765) and the scene
soon after the accession of ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1656 – in the sultan’s quarters (AG 771) are in the City Palace Museum, Jaipur.
Illustrated and discussed in Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 126 – 30. Zebrowski also
72), Ikhlas Khan was accused of betrayal and executed.1 attributes a portrait of Ikhlas Khan in the British Library to this painter but
As the inscription on the border states that the painting discounts Welch’s ascription of additional works to him. See Zebrowski
1983a, p. 134, n. 14; S. C. Welch 1961, p. 414.
depicts Mas‘ud Khan, this attribution was accepted until
140 Bijapur
Cat. 60
Cat. 61a. Folio 19a b. Folio 18b
61 Manuscript of the Qasida in Praise of Sultan In February 1633 the marriage of Muhammad ‘Adil Shah
‘Abdullah Qutb Shah of Golconda (reigned 1627 – 56) and Khadija Sultana, the sister of ‘Abdullah
Qutb Shah (reigned 1626 – 72), was celebrated in grand fash-
Calligraphy by ‘Ali ibn Naqi al-Husaini Damghani
Bijapur, mid-17th century ion as the ruling houses of Bijapur and Golconda united.
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 11¼ × 5⅞ in. (28.5 × 15 cm) Historical chronicles mention the presentation of a cash
British Library, London (Or. 13533) dowry, horses, and elephants as part of the monthlong
festivities.1 Yet, this lavishly illuminated poem in honor of
‘Abdullah may also have been among the gifts exchanged at
the time. Written by the Bijapuri court poet Mullah Nusrati,
the “poet laureate” of Muhammad’s son ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II
142 Bijapur
c. Folio 29a d. Folio 28b
(reigned 1656 – 72), this Qasida appears to be one of his ear- 1580 – 1627). Each opening of this special presentation manu-
liest works.2 Like his other poems, the text is in Dakhni and script is illuminated with a unique pattern that carries across
takes masnavi form (a system of rhyming couplets), follow- both pages, boldly filling the margins with large and confident
ing in the tradition of another Dakhni poetic encomium, the lozenges, cartouches, and floral-diaper patterns of color. ms
Ibrahimnama (The Story of Ibrahim), written in the early
1. Nizam ud-Din Ahmad 1961, pp. 133 – 42. 2. For more on Mullah Nusrati,
seventeenth century by ‘Abdul of Bijapur.3 see Husain Khan 1969, pp. 1 – 67. 3. Husain 2011.
Descending from a respected line of scribes, the calligra-
pher is the son of Naqi al-Din Husaini, whose name is signed
several times on the Ibrahim Rauza (ca. 1627, fig. 42), the
tomb of Muhammad’s father, Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned
Catalogue 143
Detail of cat. 62
Even though the date on the hilt postdates the death of

Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) by almost one
decade, the inscribed verse from the Surat al-Anbiya’
(Qur’an 21:69) in nasta‘liq script most likely refers to him,
since the sultan of Bijapur often availed himself of verses
associated with his namesake the prophet Ibrahim, and the
ruler’s wife, Taj Sultan, perpetuated the practice long after his
demise.1 As this specific verse is featured on Sultan Ibrahim’s
tomb complex, which was probably completed between 1633
and 1635, coinciding with the date on the hilt, it is quite likely
that the text was chosen, possibly by one of his descendants
or a member of his court, as a form of association with the
sultan.2 It could also have been a means of protection against
persecution, as alluded to in the verse in which the prophet
rebels against idolatry.
The hilt’s walrus-ivory slabs are decorated with an intri-
cate, gold-inlaid arabesque of finely detailed, split palmettes
as well as a lightly carved arabesque (never inlaid and exhib-
iting considerable wear) of spiraling scrolls issuing sprigs and
Cat. 62
small rosettes created from somewhat deeply drilled depres-
sions in the intervening areas. On the grip, two recessed
medallions are carved with floral wreaths; a later silver rivet
62 Hilt of a Sword obscures the palmette medallion, and the wreath in the lobed
medallion encircles a bird in flight. Framing the surface of
Probably Bijapur, a.h. 1044 (a.d. 1634 – 35)
Walrus ivory inlaid with engraved gold, iron covered with gold, and
each ivory slab and separating the grip from the pommel are
silver, H. 4¼ in. (10.9 cm), W. 1½ in. (3.9 cm), D. 1 in. (2.5 cm), excluding deeply carved, paired filets that retain no inlay and enclose a
silver rivets carved cable motif now showing great wear. sk
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 37 I)
Inscribed on upper edges of hilt in nasta‘liq script: qulna ya naru 1. Regarding the association with verses from the Qur’an referring to the
prophet Ibrahim, see references to inscriptions on the Ibrahim Rauza;
kuni barida wa salaman ‘ala ibrahim fi sana 1044 (We said, “O fire, be Michell 2011, pp. 245 – 46; Wannell 2011, pp. 252, 256. 2. For the reference
thou cool/and a means of safety for Ibrahim [Abraham]” in the year to Taj Sultan’s a.h. 1044 (a.d. 1634 – 35) abjad date on the tomb complex,
a.d. 1634 – 35) see Wannell 2011, pp. 252, 262.
144 Bijapur
63 Dagger with Zoomorphic Hilt
Probably Bijapur, ca. 1600 – 1650
Hilt: cast, chased, and gilt copper inlaid with rubies; blade: forged steel,
L. 15⅝ in. (39.6 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Lila Acheson
Wallace Gift, 2011 (2011.236)
Fig. 56. Casket of Matias de Albuquerque, Goa, late 16th century. Gold filigree
and enamel, H. 5½ in. (14 cm), W. 7⅝ in. (19.5 cm), D. 3¾ in. (9.6 cm). Museu
Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon (577 OUR)
More linear and attenuated than its cousins, this dagger falls
into a family of related weapons distinguished by hilts that
are composed of interlocked animals drawn from Persian,
Indian, and European sources. At the center, a tiger attacks
a deer, a long-standing Perso-Islamic hunting motif. Before
it a bird standing on a palmlike frond grasps a shrunken
snake in its beak. This motif, widely seen in South Indian art,
is associated with the enmity between Garuda, the mythi-
cal bird mount of Vishnu, and the nagas (serpent kings). A
dragon, whose tail wraps around the grip, attacks the tiger.
Lower down on the hilt is a kirtimukha (monster mask) with
floral scrolls issuing from its mouth. For whom could this
richly iconographic dagger have been made?
The motifs convey messages of power and dominance rele- Cat. 63
vant to specific dynasties of the region. The dagger could have
been meant for a Nayaka ruler (successors to the Vijayanagara The tiger, with tiny stripes, small head, and curly mane, is
Empire) or one of the Deccani Muslim states, Bijapur being quite naturalistically styled, even possibly Europeanized, in
the frontrunner as a similar style of dagger (cat. 25) was comparison to other sculptural forms of the time. The elon-
adopted by ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I (reigned 1558 – 80).1 The iconogra- gated dragon, too, has a distinctly foreign air with scales, a
phy is extremely Hindu in some respects, especially the pro- ruff, and a long snout. Perhaps this motif is the key to solving
tective lotus at the base of the hilt where it joins the blade. the mystery of the dagger’s origin.
Catalogue 145
A comparable lizardlike dragon, with a hatched pattern on 64 Fish-Shaped Waterspout from the Asar Mahal
its body, appears on the latch of the gold filigree and enamel
Bijapur, ca. 1647
casket of around 1597 (fig. 56) of the Portuguese viceroy Basalt, L. approx. 84 in. (213 cm)
Matias de Albuquerque (ruled 1591 – 97).2 This impressive Bijapur Archaeological Museum, Gol Gumbaz
object was commissioned in Goa by his widow and made
its way to the Convento da Graça monastery in Lisbon. The Asar Mahal on the east side of the Bijapur citadel was
Thus such Westernized creatures appear to be related to built in 1647 by Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56) as
Portuguese tastes and commissions of luxury objects, their a public audience hall, accessible from his palaces inside the
style comfortably aligning with the existing language of citadel walls as well as from the city proper. The building fea-
makaras (aquatic beasts), nagas, and other Indian mythical tures a deep porch supported by massive timber beams, and
dragons and snakes. Therefore, besides the existing sugges- it faces a large rectangular water tank. This waterspout and its
tions, a third possibility comes to the fore: perhaps the dagger mate are said to have come from that tank; each would have
was made for a Portuguese noble in Goa, reflecting both his tipped back and forth as water filled a recess in its back and
own culture and that of the Deccan. nnh then poured through the beast’s mouth. They complemented
a rich, unusual decorative program inside the building, which
1. Thanks are due to Robert Elgood for his insights on this object. 2. Dias
2004, p. 94. was painted with murals and inlaid with designs in ivory and
mother-of-pearl. Unique today as large sculptural works, the
Detail of cat. 64
146 Bijapur
65 Inscribed Panel
Deccan, mid-17th century
Carved basalt, H. 14½ in. (36.8 cm), W. 38 in. (96.5 cm), D. 4⅛ in. (10.5 cm)
Collection of Ismail Merchant, Claverack, New York
Inscribed in thuluth script: bismillah al-rahman al-rahim (In the name

of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful)
Stating “in the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful,”

this plaque might have started the dedicatory inscription of a
mosque. It has the orthographic features of mid-seventeenth-
century architectural inscriptions, finding close parallels to
the epigraphic panels in the second story of the Gol Gumbaz
(Round Dome, 1656), the tomb of Muhammad ‘Adil Shah
(reigned 1627 – 56). The building’s soaring dome is its most
notable feature, but its skillfully executed stucco and stone-
work are evidence that the fine architectural traditions of the
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II era (1580 – 1627) continued well into the
seventeenth century. Like the inscriptions in the tomb, this
example is contained within a cusped cartouche, with the
words appearing above and below a central line, here cre-
Cat. 64
ated by the horizontal extension of the letter he in al-rahim.
Technically, creating the inscription involved chipping away
spouts hint at a wider tradition of carved stone figural images the surface of the stone around each letter, the contrasting
that must have once graced the palaces of the Deccan. A surfaces resulting in different shades of gray for the fore-
male figure in court dress, also in the Bijapur Archaeological and backgrounds of the inscription. The effect is simple but
Museum, is another piece of evidence for this tradition. ms allows the words to be easily read. ms
Cat. 65
Catalogue 147
Cat. 66
66 Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II Slays a Tiger The Bombay Painter was a powerful force in Bijapur’s final
Attributed to the Bombay Painter (probably Abdul Hamid Naqqash)
phase of painting, in which he captured his patron ‘Ali ‘Adil
Bijapur, ca. 1660 Shah II (reigned 1656 – 72) in several opulent works. In this
Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and probably lapis-lazuli pigment on fragmentary painting, ‘Ali II is resplendent in gold as he draws
paper, 8½ × 12⅜ in. (21.5 × 31.5 cm) his bow to discharge a second arrow on a tiger crouching on
Lent by Howard Hodgkin (LI118.98) the rocks (cat. 66). The rising golden finial below is thought to
be either from the tail of a griffin or lion stand or an element
from a royal barge.1 Either case would indicate an unusual
67 Darbar of Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II iconography for such a subject. Several allusions have been
Attributed to the Bombay Painter (probably Abdul Hamid Naqqash) read into this image, including a reference to ancient Middle
Bijapur, ca. 1660 Eastern friezes and Gupta-era coinage of kings slaughtering
Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 7½ × 6⅝ in.
lions, symbols that must have held meaning for the ruler.2
(19.1 × 16.8 cm)
Private collection The small size of the tiger suggests hierarchical scaling rather
than distant perspective, while the hidden grotesques in the
rocks are a throwback to an earlier Persian convention.
148 Bijapur
Cat. 67
Another portrait of ‘Ali II by the Bombay Painter shows and court textiles, seen in the stripes of color on the robe,
him within a palace interior, with a blue curtain in the door- the robe’s split-sleeve style (the empty sleeve hanging behind
way drawn aside to reveal the landscape outside (cat. 67). ‘Ali ‘Ali’s back), the peacock-feather patterns on the bolster, and
holds a rigid tube extending from a huqqa (water pipe) held the lively arabesques of the kalamkari bedcover.
by a servant while a nobleman reads a scroll, in a compo- An inscription on a woman’s portrait from a dispersed
sition following a formula established in an earlier painting Bijapur album by the same artist — ‘abdul hamid naqqash
of Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56). The scene here or ‘amal-i (work of ) muhammad naqqash — provides the
might depict ‘Ali II with the Maratha ruler Shivaji (reigned Bombay Painter’s name.4 Blunt features, including well-
1674 – 80), holding the document and wearing a tilak (forehead articulated, reddened lips and a prominent eye with a sweep-
mark), at a reconciliation that took place in 1661.3 The Bombay ing brow, are marked qualities of his portraits. His influence
Painter proves himself to be a close recorder of sartorial styles made its way to the Rajput court of Kishangarh, where several
Catalogue 149
150 Bijapur
of the Bombay Painter’s works somehow arrived by the end approach a group of deer, below a movement-filled cloudy
of the seventeenth century, paving the way for the curvaceous monsoon sky, a portent of the storm and the hunt to follow.1
eye and elongated nose to become major hallmarks of the The externalization of emotion, from the direct subject into
eighteenth-century painting style of Nihal Chand.5 the surrounding environment, is one trait of the greatest
‘Ali II reigned as the penultimate ruler of Bijapur for six- Deccan paintings, seen also in the portrait of a mysterious
teen years. Plagued by pressure from the rising strength of dark-skinned nobleman against a cloudy, blue background
the Marathas under Shivaji in the west and the relentless (cat. 52).
pressure of the Mughals from the north, he nevertheless The deer are clustered on the right and attendants to the
managed to maintain active patronage of the arts. Some of hunters on the left, allowing for an open, green, hilly back-
the most evocative painted works of the Deccan come from ground, against which the vivid pink, gold, and white col-
his age. nnh ors of the princes — typical of the Bijapur palette in the late
seventeenth century — stand out. The identity of the princes
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 140; S. C. Welch 1985, p. 307. 2. S. C. Welch 1985,
p. 307. 3. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, pp. 186 – 87. 4. Zebrowksi 1983a, p. 143, is not known, yet they share the snub-nose, lush-lipped fea-
ill. no. 112; Okada 1991, pp. 112 – 13. 5. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 142, ill. no. 111. tures of the ‘Adil Shahi royal family. It has been speculated
that the young rider in front in a pink robe may be Sikandar
(reigned 1672 – 86), the last ruler of the royal house.2
68 Princely Deer Hunters The treatment of the sky in some ways recalls the tech-
Bijapur, ca. 1660 – 70 nique of marbling, a well-established Deccani process, but
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9½ × 18 in. (24.1 × 45.6 cm) here is the result of the expansive application and controlled
Collection of Mrs. Stuart Cary Welch, New Hampshire
movement of paint and gold. Later Rajput painters were espe-
cially influenced by the qualities of landscape shown here.
Infused with qualities of mood and allegory, this composi- nnh
tion contrasts the static and stiffly posed royal hunters on 1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 147. 2. S. C. Welch 1985, p. 309.
their pale horses, “beautiful machines of destruction,” as they
Cat. 68

69 Carpet Weights (Mir-i Farsh) with 70 Manuscript of the Futuh al-Haramayn
Domed Profiles (Description of the Holy Cities)
Deccan, mid-17th century Bijapur, probably Kharepatan, a.h. 1089 (a.d. 1678)
Stone; a: H. 10⅛ in. (25.5 cm), W. 5⅛ in. (13 cm), b: H. 11¼ in. (28.5 cm), Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, folio: 7⅜ × 4⅜ in.
W. 5 in. (12.5 cm) (18.8 × 11 cm)
Private collection, London The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, funds from
various donors, Elizabeth S. Ettinghausen Gift, in memory of Richard
Ettinghausen, and Louis E. and Theresa S. Seley Purchase Fund for
Islamic Art, 2008 (2008.251)
The Futuh al-Haramayn, a guidebook to the Holy Cities of

Mecca and Medina written by Muhi al-din Lari, instructs
pilgrims on the rituals of the hajj and lists the religious
sites they can visit. From a popularly illustrated tradition
in Turkey, Iran, and India, this manuscript remains within
a tight and somewhat dry formula of bird’s-eye views of
courtyards, buildings, and outdoor sites.1 The present copy
follows that well-established convention but adds consider-
able Deccani flourish in the curving, orange lines of the trees;
animated, purple mountains concealing hidden grotesques at
their rocky edges; and overall bright palette. Never has this
pious route looked quite as cheerful and lush as through the
hand of this anonymous painter.
The manuscript contains a colophon mentioning a date of
a.h. 1089 (a.d. 1678) and a place, Qil‘a Bandar, thought to be
the city of Kharepatan, which lay in the Bijapur territories
Cat. 69a, b just off the western coast of India. The small port town was a
center for trade and pilgrimage and likely a place from which
These carpet weights miniaturize seventeenth-century archi- a visitor to Mecca would embark. At least five other unpub-
tectural forms prevalent throughout the Deccan. They sport lished manuscripts of the same text remain in the National
bulbous domes, small in proportion to the structure below, Museum, New Delhi, demonstrating that this was a com-
that rest on narrow bases ringed by fringes of petals. The monly illustrated text in India. nnh
corner legs on which they stand are also found on Deccani
1. Witkam 2009.
cenotaphs as well as on the exterior corners of some Deccani
tombs.1 They are probably from such a tomb, where they
would have held down the cloth covering a grave. ms
1. Nayeem 2008, p. 336, fig. 36, illustrates stone lamp pedestals from various
Bijapur sites of similar shape but of uncertain date.
152 Bijapur
Cat. 70a. “Ma‘lla Cemetery” Cat. 70b. “The ‘Asi Mountains”
71 House of Bijapur This painting would have the viewer believe that the
key of legitimacy — being handed over by Isma’il (reigned
By Kamal Muhammad and Chand Muhammad
Bijapur, ca. 1680 1501 – 24), founder of the Safavid dynasty (1501 – 1722) of
Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, folio: 16¼ × 12¾ in. Iran (here erroneously identified as Shah ‘Abbas in a later
(41.3 × 32.5 cm) inscription), to Yusuf (reigned 1490 – 1510), founder of the
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Gifts in
Memory of Richard Ettinghausen; Schimmel Foundation Inc.,
Bijapur dynasty — symbolizes the unwavering allegiance of
Ehsan Yarshater, Karekin Beshir Ltd., Margaret Mushekian, Mr. and the ‘Adil Shahi family to the Shi‘a creed. However, Bijapur in
Mrs. Edward Ablat and Mr. and Mrs. Jerome A. Straka Gifts; The its golden period under the freethinking Ibrahim II (reigned
Friends of the Islamic Department Fund; Gifts of Mrs. A. Lincoln Scott
1580 – 1627, third from the right) witnessed the open embrace
and George Blumenthal, Bequests of Florence L. Goldmark, Charles R.
Gerth and Millie Bruhl Frederick, and funds from various donors, by of Hinduism and Sufism as well as the formalization of
exchange; Louis E. and Theresa S. Seley Purchase Fund for Islamic Sunnism as the state religion in 1583, which lasted until the
Art and Rogers Fund, 1982 (1982.213) end of his tenure.
Inscribed on left border: ‘amal-i kamal muhammad va chand Certain historicizing details in the composition acknowl-
muhammad (Work of Kamal Muhammad and Chand Muhammad) edge the two-hundred-year span of the family. The early rul-
In sky above: shah ‘abbas padshah-i iran (Shah ‘Abbas, King of Iran) ers on the left wear dagger hilts — straight, split-end West
Asian and curving double-leaf South Indian — of a style earlier
This image from Bijapur made for the last of its rulers, than the punch dagger (katars) in the belts of the later rulers
Sikandar (reigned 1672 – 86), shown here as a young boy on the right. Local tastes are seen in the swirling blue car-
soon before the kingdom’s fall to Mughal conquerors in pet and flat ceremonial umbrellas also found in early Andhra
1686, brings together all nine ‘Adil Shahi sultans in a dynas- sculpture. Like many other painters of the Deccan, Kamal
tic assembly likely inspired by Mughal paintings illustrating Muhammad and Chand Muhammad remain fairly unknown,
the same idea. The artists Kamal Muhammad and Chand with very few attested works.1 Several later versions of the
Muhammad here incorporated the characteristic features of present Bijapur dynastic work, which was formerly in the
the Bijapur school of the period: great shifts of view, varying Kevork Essayan Collection, Paris, are known, including one
use of perspective, and a palette rich in a distinctive pink hue. made for the Italian physician Niccolò Manucci.2 nnh
An otherworldly mood is conveyed partly by illogical juxta-
1. Baptiste, McLeod, and Robbins 2006, p. 34, fig. 26. Falk and M. Archer
positions, such as the stairs leading up to the carpet with no 1981, no. 404, illustrates a portrait of Ikhlas Khan signed by Chand
supporting architectural elements or the soaring mountains Muhammad. 2. Manucci Album, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris,
Estampes (Rés. Od 45 pet. fol.); Manucci 1907, vol. 3, pl. XXXIV. The author
of Safavid inspiration in the background. Distant views of is grateful to Marta Becherini for her assistance with the Manucci Album.
water hint at Bijapur’s former vastness, which at its greatest For other later versions of the painting, see Taylor and Fergusson 1866,
frontispiece; Strzygowski 1933, pp. 42 – 43, fig. 37 (abbreviated version of the
extent stretched to include Goa on the Arabian Sea. painting now in the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna); Duda
1983, p. 266, fol. 20, fig. 458; Sotheby’s 1985, lot 71 (copy of ca. 1750).
154 Bijapur
Cat. 71
The Art of Abri: Marbled Album Leaves,
zx
zx
zx
zx
b
b
Drawings, and Paintings of the Deccan
P
ersianate artists have produced a wide range of richly decorative papers for
making manuscripts since the fifteenth century.1 One particularly captivating type called
kaghaz-i abri — or simply abri, meaning “clouded” paper in Persian and known as “marbled
paper” in English — flourished in the Deccan in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The
technique is unique: organic colors such as lampblack, indigo, lac, and finely ground mineral
pigments are mixed with a chemical surfactant, floated on the surface of a liquid bath, and
manipulated with different tools to form abstract designs, after which a sheet of paper is carefully
laid on top to capture the final design. Marbling is essentially a form of fluid monotype printing,
since no two marbled patterns are ever exactly alike, no matter how precisely they are made. The
artists who made abri were also skilled in other techniques such as dyeing, spattering, and fleck-
ing gold on paper as well as bookbinding and illumination methods, including attaching cut-
paper borders, drawing marginal rules, and cutting paper for both stenciling and decoupage.
While water-based paper marbling first emerged in East Asia roughly one thousand years
ago, another form using plant mucilage may have independently appeared in Timurid Persia in
the late fifteenth century.2 The earliest example from the Islamic world is dated 1496 (cat. 72), and
one Safavid source attributes the invention of marbling to the Timurid scribe ‘Abdullah Murvarid
of Herat (died 1516 – 17).3 The master of nasta‘liq calligraphy Mir ‘Ali of Herat (died 1544 – 45)
wrote original compositions on pale, softly swirled abri, a practice imitated by his followers.4
Such works were collected by connoisseurs from India to Turkey, thereby popularizing marbled
paper throughout the eastern Islamic world.
While it is difficult to distinguish early styles from different regions owing to their overall
similarity, surviving evidence suggests that marbled-paper production commenced in India by
the last quarter of the sixteenth century. A Persian miscellany written over primitive spot pat-
terns, completed in Bijapur in 1580, is the earliest example of abri from the subcontinent; how-
ever, such rudimentary designs were not limited to the Deccan.5 A Divan-i Anvari, completed for
the Mughal Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605) in Lahore in 1588, is similarly marbled on every
leaf.6 Calligraphy specimens of one of his most celebrated scribes, Muhammad Husain Kashmiri
(died 1605), have also been identified.7 The earliest technical marbling account from the Islamic
world — describing the form as darhami, an “intermixed” form of color — is found in a chapter of
the Risala-yi Khushnavisan (Treatise of Calligraphers), which praises Akbar in the preface and is
hence dated before his death in 1605.8 The text describes two methods: abri-yi abi, produced on
a water bath, and abri-yi ahari, which is made on a mucilaginous sizing extracted from boiled
fenugreek seed, with an extract of ritha (soapberry) added to the colors to float them.
During the last decade of the sixteenth century in Iran and India, the repertoire of abri
patterns blossomed into a dizzying array of designs. Meticulously prepared floating colors were
Detail of cat. 72b 157

manipulated by a stylus or pin rake to form sharply defined swirls and spirals as well as chevron
and serpentine patterns. Drawing a broad, fine-tooth comb over a chevron pattern yielded opti-
cally captivating, microscopically fine arcs reminiscent of variegated feathers. Such combed pat-
terns were often further altered with a stylus or pin rake, spattered with additional droplets of
color that could be stylized into motifs, flecked with gold, or even outlined in gold ink. Various
additives mixed into the colors created visually riveting special effects, from droplets bursting
with bubbles to a finely veined craquelure. The patterning techniques likely derived from ancient
core-form glass production, in which finely colored rods or drops of molten glass were manipu-
lated with pins and combs to form strikingly similar designs. These innovations were likely
introduced to the Deccan by a Persian émigré named Mir Muhammad Tahir. One Deccan
album with multiple marbled borders on every folio contains a preface praising this master
exclusively and in lavish terms.9
Later Deccani marblers cleverly used stenciling and resist-masking techniques by blocking
off different areas of a sheet of paper prior to marbling to create a vividly colorful new mode of
painting. The exact method for producing these works was a matter of debate, with some schol-
ars arguing that the technique is a form of decoupage.10 Others observed that the works must
have been made with a masking technique of cut-paper stencils in conjunction with a gum solu-
tion applied as a masking fluid.11 The specific use of alum mordanting for marbling in conjunc-
tion with a gum resist recalls techniques for producing decorative kalamkari and other painted
cotton textiles (cats. 160 – 65), another major Deccani art form at the time. Since mordant and
resist methods do not appear within the Persianate manuscript tradition, it seems reasonable to
think that marbling artists probably adapted the textile method in their paintings and drawings.
While several abri drawings were made with just one pattern, others were repeatedly masked
and marbled in various contrasting colors and designs to furnish decorative elements and syn-
thesize complex imagery, drawn from Persianate, Indian, and European models, into new visual
modes. Some were made in multiples reusing the same stencils; however, the artist would change
the exact elements and rearrange their placement.12 Still others bear similar painted features,
probably by the same hand, an indication that workshops once specialized in the production of
these drawings.
Abri drawings are often ascribed to the ‘Adil Shahi sultanate of Bijapur because of the over-
painted features, especially in figural portraits.13 However, evidence of marbled paper elements
adhered to illustrated scenes in the Divan of Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (ca. 1590 – 95, fig. 72)
of Golconda, as well as a calligraphic panel written over a combed pattern and signed by Qutb
Shahi scribe ‘Arab Shirazi, proves that the art was practiced more widely throughout the Deccan.14
Other works bear overtly Mughal (cat. 80) or even European features, suggesting they date to the
second half of the seventeenth century or later, during the decline of the sultanates and rise of
Mughal hegemony in the region. The existence of a dispersed album with several marbled draw-
ings and a poem dated 1729 indicates that production continued at least until the early eigh-
teenth century, a longer period of time than had previously been known.15 Ample evidence from
elsewhere in India shows the popularity of marbling. Examples include several leaves penned by
Muhammad Ashraf Khan Razavi in Kashmir in December 1658, and two remarkable letters by
158 Bijapur
the nobleman Qa’im Khan, the son of the Mughal politician Roshan al-Daula, bearing a seal
dated 1704 – 5 and written within a masked, marbled central panel with surrounding floral motifs
such as a stylized tulip.16 The vivid marbled designs in these abri drawings and paintings reflect
the revolutionary innovations of Mir Muhammad Tahir and his followers. Even if some works
were produced outside the region, they still bear a discernible Deccani influence. jb
1. For an overview of decorative papers used in Islamic manuscripts, see Porter 1994, pp. 35 – 56; Blair 2000, pp. 25 – 32; Bloom 2001,
pp. 70 – 72; Roxburgh 2005, pp. 149 – 79; Blair 2006, pp. 50 – 56. Yana van Dyke discusses technical methods in relation to several
examples from The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; see van Dyke 2012, pp. 19 – 23. 2. For a concise overview of paper marbling
in East Asia, see Benson 2005. 3. Mahmud bin Muhammad, Khatimah dar Zikri Ustadan-i Khutut (Conclusion in Remembrance of the
Masters of Scripts) of the Qava’id al-Khutut (The Rules for Scripts), completed 1553; see Danish-Pazhuh 1977, p. 21. 4. One dated
example, Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., Lent by the Art and History Trust (LTS1995.2.93a), is a
riddle on the name Fasih written in Bukhara in a.h. 950 (a.d. 1543–44); Soudavar 1992, pp. 306, 307, no. 128a. 5. Bibliothèque Nationale
de France, Paris, Manuscrits Orientaux, Supplément Persan 796, fols. 152b, 154b – 155a, 157a, 173a, 196b; Richard 2000, p. 246, pl. 13
(fol. 196b); Déroche 2006, p. 141, ill. no. 50 (fol. 173). Note that the latter gives an incorrect date of 1560. 6. Arthur M. Sackler Museum,
Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, Mass. (1960.117); Schimmel 1983, p. 67. 7. Several panels are preserved in the Royal Collection,
Windsor Castle (Waley 1992, p. 18), and Golestan Palace Museum, Tehran (1049; Ghelichkhani 2013, p. 39). Another panel recently sold
at Christie’s (see Christie’s 2012b, p. 12, lot 12, verso). 8. See Porter 1989. The art form is described as darhami and is preceded by
discussions of mufrid (single) colors made from one pigment or dyestuff and murrakab (compound) colors made by mixing individual
colors together to produce different shades. 9. Qit’at-i Khushkhatt, University of Edinburgh (Or. Ms 373); see cats. 18 – 19, in this
volume. A detailed analysis of this album is planned as an essay by the present author for a forthcoming monograph on Deccan-Safavid
relations. 10. F. R. Martin 1912, p. 94, was the first to suggest that they were masked, but Binney 1979, p. 802, and, most recently, Michael
Barry in ‘Attar 2013, p. 360, advance the decoupage thesis. 11. See C. Weimann 1983; I. Weimann and Sönmez 1991, pp. 18 – 22. 12. In an
unpublished lecture given in 1988 at the University of California, Los Angeles, Christopher Weimann demonstrated how several
marbled works were all made with the same stencils. 13. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 137; Hutton 2006, pp. 146 – 55; Mittal 2013. 14. Jagdish
and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad (76.154); Jagdish Mittal in S. C. Welch 1985, p. 214; Mittal 2007, pp. 64, 132, no. 113;
Seyller and Mittal 2013, pp. 119 – 21, no. 40. 15. The leaves from a masked marbled album dispersed by Adrienne Minassian — Two Camels
Locked in Combat, Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, Mass. (1984.474); Marbled Paper Horse, formerly
Stuart Cary Welch Collection; Marbled Paper Drawing of a Lion or Qi-Li, formerly Stuart Cary Welch Collection; and Two Birds, Brown
University Library, Providence, R.I. — feature several masked marbled images executed within similar combed patterns. The folio bearing
the poem dated 1729 was exhibited at the Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, Mass., in 1986; see Ebru: The
Art of Marbling 1986. Its current whereabouts is unknown. 16. One of the leaves by Muhammad Ashraf Khan Razavi was sold by Sam
Fogg and is now in a private collection; for two additional examples, see Will Kwiatkowski in Fraser and Kwiatkowski 2006, pp. 124 – 25,
no. 37. The letters of Qa’im Khan are in the Africa and Middle Eastern Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (1-88-154.50 and
1-84-154.54); see Christiane J. Gruber in Arabic, Persian, and Ottoman Calligraphy 2007.
The Art of Abri 159

Cat. 72a, recto verso
72 Marbled Papers with an Accession Note Inscribed in divani script on cat. 72a (verso): alif(?); yad-dasht in
abriha-yi nadira; az tuhfa-jat-i iran ba khidmat-i hazrat khilafat-
at Mandu panah zill ilahi sultan ghiyath al-din khalji khallada ilahu mulkuhu;
Iran, 15th century (marbling); Mandu, a.h. 1 Dhu‘l Hijia 901 dar mandu amada bud dhi’l-hijja [written dha l-hijja] sana 901
(August 11, 1496) (note) hijri dakhil-i kutub khana-yi shahi shud (Beginning. Memorandum.
Opaque watercolor and gold on marbled papers, a: 8 × 4½ in. These incomparable pieces of marbled papers from the presents
(20.4 × 11.5 cm); b: 8 × 4⅝ in. (20.2 × 11.8 cm) [commodities] of Iran in the service of Hazrat Refuge of the Caliphate
Kronos Collections, New York Shadow of God Sultan Ghiyath al-Din Khalji [1469 – 1501], may God
make his rule endure; In Mandu had come [on] August 11, 1496, [they]
were entered into the royal library)
160 Bijapur
Cat. 72b, recto verso
The kingdom of Mandu, north of the Bahmani territories, of the bride), provides a rare documentation of a royal gift
discernibly influenced Deccan painting and book-art styles. within India or the broader Islamic world of the time. nnh
This important work relates to the development of later mar-
1. Simon Digby, handwritten notes in the possession of the lender.
bled drawings in the Deccan sultanates. These two marbled
papers are the earliest known works of Persian marbling,
dated approximately one century before other papers.1 The
inscription, written in a variant of divani script and with a
particular elegance, sometimes called shana-yi ‘arus (comb
Catalogue 161
Cat. 73
73 Ascetic Riding a Nag disparities suggest the hands of two different artists. Both
horses are rendered in an unnatural, highly exaggerated fash-
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper and marbled paper, ion, and the facial features and outstretched arms of both
4 × 6⅜ in. (10.2 × 16.2 cm) riders recall Mughal depictions of Majnun, who in the famed
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Rogers Fund, 1944 (44.154) tale starves himself out of grief over his separation from his
beloved Layla.1
74 Ascetic Riding a Nag Three other marbled drawings of emaciated horses also
exist, but curiously lack a rider; instead, two depict crows
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on marbled paper; image: attacking open, bloody wounds on the poor creature’s back.2
4½ × 6½ in. (11.5 × 16.5 cm), folio: 9½ × 14¾ in. (24 × 37.4 cm) Those riderless images are clearly derived from satirical
Morgan Library and Museum, New York, Purchased by J. Pierpont images from the fifteenth to seventeenth century of a horse-
Morgan (1837 – 1913) in 1911 (Ms. M.458.30v)
man whose aged mount appears pathetically frail and on
the verge of death.3 One such model in the Metropolitan
A wizened, bearded man wearing only a loincloth rides an Museum depicts the horseman forced to carry his saddle,
equally emaciated old nag, his feet locked beneath its belly. while crows relentlessly feast on the open, fistulous withers
These two images were likely made from positive and neg- on the back of his tired, old nag.4 Such imagery was undoubt-
ative stencils cleverly cut from the same sheet of paper, edly inspired by a darkly comic genre of Persianate poetry
creating the marbled body and background in both composi- that ridicules a pitiful, dying nag unfit for a soldier defending
tions. While the riders are drawn in black ink, their apparent the realm.5 A composition attributed to the Safavid painter
162 Bijapur
Mu’in served as a direct model for a marbled drawing of an his body as white and lifeless, trembling with age, and then
emaciated horse now in the Museum of Islamic Art, Doha, made the startling comparison to marbled paper: “My limbs
further proving that such satirical works inspired the mar- have become clouded [abri]; my colors have become mixed.” 8
bled compositions featuring a riderless emaciated horse Other scholars have attributed the scene to European
attacked by crows.6 Nevertheless, the horsemen observed in allegorical images of death riding an emaciated horse
those drawings are curiously omitted from the marbled ver- including two works by the German painter Albrecht Dürer
sions. Scholars have interpreted all of the marbled emaciated (1471 – 1528).9 The pose of the nag — head down, hind legs
horses as symbolic of nafs al-ammarah (base ego or lower crossed, and tail in between — is intriguingly similar to that
self ) in mystical sufi thought.7 While the present works may of a horse pulling a cart in the foreground of the Triumph of
allude to training the ego, a preliminary stage on the sufi path, Death (ca. 1562) by the Netherlandish painter Pieter Bruegel
their far more extreme depictions of a horse on the verge of the Elder (ca. 1525 – 1569) and subsequently copied by mem-
death suggest that they represent a highly advanced stage of bers of his family.10 The artist may have seen such allegori-
fana (annihilation), the level immediately preceding the final cal images but interpreted them differently, based on more
goal of baqa (subsistence) in the divine, which is also a cen- familiar imagery.
tral theme in the story of Layla and Majnun. Interestingly, in A final clue is offered by a very different marbled eques-
an elegy written toward the end of his life, the Iranian poet trian portrait, now in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, for
Ashraf Mazandarani (died 1704) bemoaned his pain and suf- it confirms how Deccani artists cleverly adapted European
fering, desiring release from his predicament. He described imagery. In this drawing, modeled on an engraving of Charles
Cat. 74
Catalogue 163
Howard, 2nd Baron Howard of Effingham and 1st Earl of
Nottingham, by the British artist Thomas Cockson (active
1591 – 1636), the artist faithfully imitated many features but
recast the earl’s hat, adorning it with an aigrette, a famil-
iar Indian expression of nobility.11 Such adaptations help to
explain the hybridized, multivalent imagery seen here that
simultaneously recalls Persian caricatures of stranded sol-
diers, Renaissance allegorical images of death, and the story
of Layla and Majnun. jb
1. See, for example, the depictions of Majnun in a Khamsa (Quintet) of

Nizami completed for Emperor Akbar in 1594 (British Library, London,
Or. 12208); Brend 1995, pp. 29 – 32, figs. 17 – 22. 2. The three drawings are
Aga Khan Museum, Toronto (1983.425); Museum of Fine Arts, Boston
(14.695); and Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (MS.653.2008). 3. S. C. Welch
1959, p. 141, no. 13, in his description of A Turkman Warrior Leading an
Emaciated Horse (now in the Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard Art
Museums, Cambridge, Mass., 1977.198), observed that such Persian images
were likely inspired by Mongol images, such as those by the thirteenth-
century Yuan dynasty painters Gong Kai and Ren Renfa, who drew emaciated
horses symbolizing the excesses and decline of the prevailing state. 4. An
Emaciated Horse Led by His Master (45.174.11); Swietochowski and Babaie
1989, pp. 36 – 37, no. 13. 5. Schimmel 1972 and Schimmel 1992b, pp. 114,
194 – 95, describe the genre. 6. Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg,
Polotsov Album (VR-735); Adamova 2012, p. 239, no. 55; Museum of Islamic
Art, Doha (MS.653.2008). 7. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 138, n. 11; Hutton 2006,
p. 193, n. 43. 8. Ashraf Mazandarani 1994, p. 274; Afshar 2011, p. 148.
9. F. R. Martin 1912, pp. 93 – 94; Seyller 2011a, p. 80, n. 9. 10. Museo del Prado,
Madrid, ca. 1562 (PO1393). 11. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (PDP
3447); Christopher Alan Bayly in Bayly 1990, p. 76, no. 72; Schmitz 1997,
p. 168. The author is grateful to Amy Marquis, Curator of Prints and
Drawings at the Fitzwilliam, for this identification of the engraving. Note
how the spiked plumes atop the aigrette closely resemble the contours of
the crowning feathers of the horse’s headdress.
75 Marbled Begum

Probably Bijapur, ca. 1625–30
Gold, silver, and opaque watercolor on paper and marbled paper,
9⅛ × 5⅜ in. (23.2 × 13.5 cm)
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad (76.408)
Inscribed: hur khanum mughalai (The Mughal lady Hur)

Cat. 75
Begum Hur was likely a Turkish Chaghatai lady of distinc-
tion, judging from her elaborate headdress embellished with
a feather plume and many strings of beads and ornaments. handling of color. When presented at The Metropolitan
Double-chinned and sharp-eyed, she is represented here Museum of Art in 1985, this painting was among the first
through both caricature and portraiture. In terms of tech- works to demonstrate that the Deccan was the source of a
nique, the marbling brilliantly follows the wobble and line group of marbled drawings likely made in the period of
of the folds of her body to articulate her monumental form, Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56).1 nnh
and this work may be by the same artist who created Man
1. Jagdish Mittal in S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 296, 298 – 99, no. 198; see also
with Captive Lion (cat. 76), which has a similarly rendered Mittal 2013, pp. 137, 140. Jake Benson has compiled a list of forty known
area of marbling in the foreground, metallic chains, and fine marbled drawings and paintings.
164 Bijapur
76 Man with Captive Lion
Ink and opaque watercolor on paper and marbled paper, 11⅝ × 6¾ in.
(29.5 × 17.2 cm)
Collection of Gursharan and Elvira Sidhu, Seattle
In this enigmatic depiction of a lion tamer, a bearded man

wearing a fur-trimmed hat stands by a lion chained to a tree.
He bears a stick in his right hand, while his left holds a cir-
cular object, possibly a small hand drum. A large bird, with
hairpin-shaped strokes for the plumage and large tail seem-
ingly inspired by the combed marbled pattern, flies over-
head. This drawing is likely influenced by a sixteenth-century
Safavid or Mughal manuscript illustration and may feature a
scene from the story of Shaikh Abu’l Ghays al-Yamani from
the Nafahat al-‘Uns (Breaths of Divine Intimacy) of ‘Abd
al-Rahman Jami (died 1492). According to the story, after the
lion killed the shaikh’s donkey, the man was forced to serve in
the animal’s place carrying firewood. While an exact model
for the composition has not been identified, the man’s attire,
with the exception of the headgear, resembles the shaikh’s as
depicted in a Mughal manuscript of 1603.1
To create the work, a paper stencil was cut to simultane-
ously render both the main bodies and the surrounding bor-
der of the scene, which was adhered to the paper before it was
marbled. The combed pattern is composed of dark red earth,
vermilion, yellow orpiment, indigo, and a bright green made
by combining indigo and orpiment. A sepia wash tones the
man’s belt and breeches as well as the tree leaves. The piece
was further illuminated in gold and silver inks — the latter now
tarnished black — to define the chain and collar of the lion.
In addition to painting the facial features, hands, and
legs, the artist adhered a small piece of blue comb-patterned
marbled paper to the man’s waist in order to furnish the man
with a pouch, probably to cover up a small void in the pat-
Cat. 76
tern. During the marbling process, specks of dust can land on
the floating colors, pushing them aside to form small voids
that, when printed, leave blank spots, disrupting the combed
design. In this case, the artist cleverly filled in these areas,
transforming one into a small pouch, dangling next to the
larger blue one, using a sepia wash. Other voids in the ground
and right margin were covered with rows of small hash marks
in alternating vermilion and indigo to blend in the blank
areas with the rest of the marbling. A similar treatment of
silver and sepia washes and fine-lined brushstrokes can be
observed in the Marbled Begum (cat. 75). jb
1. British Library, London (Or. 1362, fol. 534v).
Catalogue 165
77 Folio from an Album of Calligraphy with
Marbled (Abri) Borders
Deccan, ca. 1595 – 1630, with earlier and later additions
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on marbled paper, approx. 12 × 8 in.
(30.5 × 20.3 cm)
National Museum, New Delhi (54.45)
Inscribed on the panels: Various pious phrases
This album consists of approximately twenty folios contain-

ing Arabic and Persian calligraphic panels, including a ninth-
or tenth-century Kufic page on vellum and a number of other
cut and pasted sections. The album may have been assembled
in the seventeenth century when marbling was common.
However, the colors and bold style of marbling on some pages
suggest that they may belong to a later period, perhaps the
eighteenth century. nnh
Cat. 77
166 Bijapur
Cat. 78
78 Elephant Trampling a Horse ankusha (elephant goad) are all rendered in gold ink. While
Deccan, mid-17th century the mahout’s costume is decidedly Mughal, the delicate
Gold and opaque watercolor on marbled paper, 6¾ × 10 in. gilding of the harness recalls more elaborately jeweled metal-
(17 × 25.5 cm) work observed on paintings of Atash Khan, the favorite ele-
phant of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627).
Several other marbled works featuring elephants are
Inspired by Mughal manuscript illustrations of animals known, including one in the collection of the Princeton
in combat, this lively scene depicts a mahout desperately University Art Museum.1 In that work, an elephant ridden by
attempting to control his enraged elephant, which is intent two mythical div mahouts is led in a procession by another
on trampling a subdued and frightened horse. The bril- div blowing a trumpet. The composite body is filled with a
liant, comb-marbled background, composed of red earth, profusion of different animals, divs, and a bent, bearded male
black, and bluish-gray indigo, enhances the drama. A posi- figure wearing a jama (robe) and turban typical of the reign
tive cut-paper stencil was applied to the sheet before it was of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan (1628 – 58). The garments
marbled, after which the drawing was rendered within the of the man and divs are similar to the undulating jama worn
resulting void. Immediately in front of the mahout, a sin- by the mahout in the present composition, indicating that the
gle downward stroke was made with a stylus in the combed same hand likely drew them both. jb
design, conveying greater dynamism to the finished piece.
1. Seyller 2011a, p. 65, fig. 1. Other marbled drawings featuring elephants
A mature artist skillfully drew the delicately shaded, black are Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford
ink drawing in a variation of the nim qalam, or “half-pen,” (LI 118.49); Free Library of Philadelphia (M.55); Brooklyn Museum (2002.38);
and Walters Art Museum, Baltimore (Ms. W.715).
technique. The elephant’s jeweled harness and chain, the
horse’s bridle, and the mahout’s khawah (dagger) and hooked
Catalogue 167
79 Dervish Seated in Contemplation
Probably Bijapur, mid-17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper and marbled paper,
6½ × 4¾ in. (16.4 × 12 cm)
Inscribed in Persian at top left: hazrat-i hafiz-i shiraz (The Venerable

Hafiz of Shiraz)
A bearded ascetic with long hair parted to one side sits clasp-
ing his hands beneath the wide sleeves of his marbled cloak,
furrowing his brow as he gazes intently to his right. Seated on
an animal skin, he keeps at his side a kashkul (begging bowl),
with which he accepts offerings of food and alms. The animal
skin, begging bowl, and large sleeves are features tradition-
ally associated with Persianate sufi mendicants, and ideal-
ized single-page portraits of such ascetics, widely popular
throughout Iran and India at that time, undoubtedly inspired
this composition. A Persian inscription at the top left identi-
fies the dervish as the famed fourteenth-century Persian poet
Hafiz. While this identification is apocryphal, the vibrantly
colored marbled pattern evokes single-page portraits of Sufis
wearing billowing robes or patched clothing — such as the
Kneeling Dervish in the Gulshan Album — that were popular
in ‘Adil Shahi Bijapur.1
The robe of this dervish was made by applying a negative
cut-paper stencil to a sheet of paper and then marbling a
combed pattern formed of pink, grayish-black, and indigo-
blue colors. The marbler further manipulated the combed
pattern with a stylus, making a single, deliberate stroke, curv-
ing upward and terminating halfway up the left sleeve of the
dervish. The effect provides further definition to the man’s
lap and sleeves. Afterward, his head was rendered by hand
Cat. 79 in black and red, and the marbled design was outlined and
augmented in black and gold ink to form the sleeves, collar,
hemline, and bow-tie closing of his cloak, along with other
irregular lines intended to convey garment folds. This treat-
ment, along with several specific overpainted elements, such
as the outline of the eyes and fine, parallel brushstrokes of
the hair, beard, and animal skin, are observed in several other
marbled drawings including Man with Captive Lion (cat. 76)
and the Marbled Begum (cat. 75). jb
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 84, ill. no. 60.
168 Bijapur
80 Lady Carrying a Peacock
Probably Hyderabad, late 17th – early 18th century
Opaque watercolor on paper and marbled paper, 8 × 5¼ in.
(20.3 × 13.3 cm)
Free Library of Philadelphia, Rare Book Department, John Frederick
Lewis Collection (M56, box 20)
A noblewoman grasps a blossom in her right hand, while

in her left she clutches a peacock to her waist. Her hands
appear stained with henna, as though she is about to attend
a wedding and intends to present the peacock as a gift. Her
shaded facial features are reminiscent of paintings of Shaikh
‘Abbasi and his sons as well as Rahim Deccani, who flour-
ished in Hyderabad during the final quarter of the seven-
teenth century (cats. 143 – 44, 146).1 Her attire — specifically
her jeweled headgear with a distinctive twin-tailed sarpech
or aigrette — recalls Mughal-inspired portraits of noblemen
from Bijapur and Golconda as well as popular depictions of
the historical heroines Chand Bibi and Rupmati, dating from
the late seventeenth to the eighteenth century, during the
period of Mughal hegemony in the Deccan.2
Unlike the other marbled drawings featured in this pub-
lication, this piece was made with three separate stencils
applied in conjunction with two marbled patterns. Other
examples survive today that were similarly overmarbled
with as many as five different contrasting designs.3 First, all
of the stencils used to produce the portrait were likely cut
from the same sheet of paper. A positive stencil, fashioned
so as to allow for the body of the peacock, was applied to
the central area. Another stencil was added to designate the
surrounding border before the sheet was marbled with a gray
craquelure to provide the central background. To impart this
grained effect, the marbler mixed a chemical additive such as Cat. 80
alum into the color prior to marbling the first layer.4 After the
sheet had dried, the artist took great care to adhere the sec-
1. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 195 – 204. 2. See depictions of Muhammad,
ond stencil to ensure proper registration with the first pattern Sikandar, and ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II, as well as ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah wearing a
similar twin-tipped sarpech; ibid., ill. nos. 92, 94, 95, 118, 149 – 52, 163. For
as well as prevent the subsequent layer from overlapping. The Chand Bibi, see, for example, a painting of around 1700 in The Metropolitan
leaf was again marbled with a deep, rich burgundy-colored Museum of Art, New York (1999.403). 3. Christopher Weimann, in a lecture
at the University of California, Los Angeles, October 6, 1988, identified five
undulating chevron pattern to form the lady’s attire, which different layers in Rustam Catching Rakhsh, Cleveland Museum of Art
mimicks the turban folds of her headgear, and the border. (2013.286), and Tiger Devouring Its Prey, San Diego Museum of Art (1990.446).
4. This pattern is known as kumlu, meaning “sandy” in Turkish. In comment-
Finally, the remaining features of both the peacock and the ing on the use of this pattern for a background, C. Weimann 1983, p. 165,
lady were realized in colored pigments and black ink. jb noted that adding alum or alcohol to the color caused this effect.
Catalogue 169
Bidar
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F F
F bidar F
F F
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
Q asim barid i (died 1504), a Georgian-Turkish slave who entered service of the
Bahmani court in 1463, founded the fourth of the five Deccani sultanates. Having
risen steadily up the ranks by 1487 to become the most influential minister in the
court of Mahmud (reigned 1482 – 1518), Qasim outmaneuvered the dissolute young ruler to take
direct control of state after 1492. Qasim’s descendants continued to serve as all-powerful minis-
ters until the death of the Kalimullah Shah Bahmani in 1538. At this time they emerged as inde-
pendent sultans, establishing the Barid Shahi dynasty (ca. 1487 – 1619) with territories centered
around the former Bahmani stronghold of Bidar.1
Fig. 58. Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), Bidar, mid-16th century
Fig. 57. Mosaic Tile Inlay, Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), Bidar, mid-16th century 173
Pages 170–71: Woodwork, Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), Bidar, mid-16th century
174 Bidar
Fig. 60. Second Story, Tarkash Mahal, Bidar, mid-16th century
Qasim’s grandson ‘Ali Barid Shah (reigned 1543 – 80) must surely rank as the most impor
tant patron of this dynasty, yet little is known about him aside from two significant acts: the
adoption of the royal title “shah,” and his role in the 1565 defeat of Vijayanagara. This victory
resulted in a rise in wealth and status for ‘Ali, and he outfitted Bidar with beautiful palaces and
an impressive tomb.
The Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), located just inside the gates and preceding the Bahmani
palaces (fig. 58, pp. 170 – 71), is the first building that present-day visitors to the site encounter.
The two-story structure faces an open courtyard once dotted with pools of carved stone. Many
of its rooms still bear evidence of exquisitely carved stucco decoration, including a suite pre-
ceded by a porch with wood columns and a delicately carved ceiling. A doorway with mosaic tile
inlay of Timurid-style arabesques affords entrance into rooms with tile dados (fig. 57), accented
by panels of black stone inlaid with mother-of-pearl (fig. 64). The building also bears several
inscriptions, including verses in praise of the building and its patron.2
‘Ali’s tomb (fig. 59), west of Bidar Fort, is set in a royal necropolis established by Qasim at a
deliberate distance from the Bahmani tombs at Ashtur. The tomb is located within an enclosure
wall with an imposing gate on the south side. It is an open-sided pavilion with a tall dome over
Fig. 59. Interior Tile Work, Tomb of ‘Ali Barid Shah, Bidar, 1577 Bidar 175
Fig. 61. Stuccowork Arabesques, Tarkash Mahal, Bidar, mid-16th century
the sultan’s grave. On both the interior and exterior, bands of stone define spaces for colorful tile
decoration and extracts from the Qur’an selected by ‘Ali, who had the tomb constructed several
years before his death.
The Barid Shahi sultans also expanded and decorated the Tarkash Mahal and Gagan Mahal
at Bidar (figs. 60 – 61) and were patrons of the city’s congregational mosque. However, connect-
ing the strong and well-defined architectural aesthetic from Bidar to paintings or the decora-
tive arts has proved complicated. A single illustrated manuscript of the seventeenth century is
attributed to this era. The Bhogphal is a Dakhni text of erotic content written by the poet Qureshi
probably during the reign of Amir Barid Shah III (1609 – 19).3 It can be connected in style to
sixteenth-century manuscripts from Bijapur and Ahmadnagar, including the stiff figures, clothes
ending in hard pleats, found in the Javahir al-Musiqat-i Muhammadi (The Jewels of Music of
Muhammad, ca. 1570) or the Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi (Chronicle of Husain Shah, cat. 8).4 By con-
trast, bidri ware is plentiful, but the earliest known examples of this metalwork, so strongly
176 Bidar
Fig. 62. Cannon Inlaid with Arabesque Designs, Kalyana Fort, 16th century
connected to Bidar, date to the period after the tiny sultanate had been annexed to Bijapur in
1619. Nonetheless, the design of those objects (cats. 81 – 95) with their overall arabesque pattern-
ing can be convincingly argued to be an outgrowth of the arts of the Barid Shahi court, where sim-
ilar decorative arabesques can be found in the stucco, stone, and tile work of its sixteenth-century
palaces (fig. 61). Furthermore, the visual effect of a light inlay on a dark ground is seen in the
brass inlay of a Barid Shahi cannon at Kalyana, also of the sixteenth century (fig. 62).5 ms
1. Joshi 1973. 2. Translated in Yazdani 1947, p. 46. 3. Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad (466); see Mittal 1974, pp. 204 – 5. 4. The Javahir is
in the British Library, London (Or. 12857). 5. Mittal 2011, p. 13.
o
Bidar 177
zx
zx
zx
zx
Bidri Ware
b
O
f all the luxury goods produced in the Deccan, none are more distinctive than bidri
metalwork, named after Bidar, the Bahmani capital historically associated with the
craft, and where the work is still produced today. Cast from an alloy composed of
around 90 percent zinc with smaller amounts of lead, copper, and tin, along its surface the object
is incised with decorative floral or geometric motifs; the grooves are inlaid with silver and some-
times brass in sheet or wire to form a flush surface; the alloy background is then covered with a
paste containing sal ammoniac, among other ingredients. Next, this combination is polished to
give it a lustrous, black sheen. The metal alloy is fragile, soft, and warm to the touch, unlike steel
or bronze. The black ground is a perfect foil to the flashing silver and flecks of brass. Like all
Deccani art, the greatest examples of historical bidri, though influenced by Persian, Mughal, and
Turkish design, display a startling originality unique to their place of origin. Ewers, trays, basins,
pan (betel nut) boxes, incense burners, and, above all, huqqa (water pipe) bases are the main
categories of early pieces.
The apparent lack of a local zinc source raises the question of how this essential ingredient
reached Bidar. From the twelfth century, and long before China or Europe started producing
zinc, it was smelted in India at the Zawar mines, south of Udaipur and in present-day Rajasthan.
This mine was almost certainly used for bidri, but the distance of some six hundred miles from
Zawar to Bidar along with political rivalries in the area through which it would have passed have
caused recent scholars to question the dating and even the center of production for the earliest
bidri.1 Indeed the rarity of early bidri indicates that it was an expensive item and transportation
may have been a factor in the cost. Nonetheless, Zawar lies near the heavily traveled land trade
routes from North India to the Deccan, and zinc could easily have been part of the active trade
between the ports of Gujarat and those along the Konkan Coast controlled by Bijapur, where
goods from the Deccan hinterland flowed in and out. The volume of trade in luxury goods pro-
duced in the Deccan remains largely unstudied, but it was hugely profitable and little impeded by
political considerations. By at least the early seventeenth century, China was also producing zinc
that may have made its way to Deccani ports on the Coromandel Coast. In the late eighteenth
and early nineteenth centuries, artisans in other centers in India, such as Purnea, Lucknow, and
Murshidabad, used the bidri technique for large-scale production. Though often of great tech
nical quality, later bidri lacks the artistic grandeur of the early Deccani objects.
Despite its unusual technique and undoubtedly long tradition in Bidar, little documentary
evidence has been discovered for the origins of bidri and precise dating is nearly impossible.
Only one early huqqa base is inscribed with a date that has been interpreted as 1634, though
it is indistinct and subject to controversy as the first letter is illegible.2 Some accounts trace
a fifteenth-century trajectory from Persia via Ajmer in North India to the Deccan. Based on

stylistic grounds, several rare objects may predate the seventeenth century, but most cannot be
assigned a date earlier than the second quarter of the seventeenth century. As the Mughals grad-
ually conquered the Deccan during the seventeenth century, their influence on patronage and
taste became more pronounced. In trying to establish a chronology, the oral traditions of the
Bidar craftsmen, which relate the long lineage of their art, provide a source of information that
cannot be ignored. Equally useful are comparisons of the design similarities of bidri with the
decorative details of Deccani paintings and textiles where dating is more firmly established.
These details differ in both substantial and subtle ways from the North Indian design lexicon. In
Western terms one could make the case that, if Mughal decorative arts are serenely classical,
Deccani patrons preferred the Mannerist style in their arts, in which overblown fantastical flow-
ers are shaken by the wind, and dramatic rocky hillocks, elongated palm trees, and courting
cranes fill the moonlit landscapes. Architecture and architectural ornamentation provide vital
comparative material as many bidri objects are miniature shapes and forms of instantly recog-
nizable Deccani building types.
Seventeenth-century portraits of rulers and noblemen depicted smoking huqqas, a category
of bidri that far outnumbers other early types, indicate that the introduction of tobacco in the
Deccan by the Portuguese in the late sixteenth century gave a commercial impetus to the devel-
opment of the craft. Within several decades, smoking the huqqa became the aristocratic gentle-
man’s favorite pastime, long before the fashion spread to the courts of North India. The matching
trays, base rings, and chillams (fire cups containing the tobacco embers) required for a huqqa set
would have had a multiplying effect on production.
Perhaps the most distinctive Deccani quality of bidri is quite simply the black color. Almost
none of the courtly luxury items produced in Mughal India are black, a color reserved for funer-
ary purposes.3 Bejeweled gold and silver, enamel, glass, precious jades, stones, and marbles were
used to craft the possessions of the emperors and their highest-ranking courtiers. For the elite of
the Mughal court to prize objects made from a humble zinc alloy would have been unthinkable,
whereas their Deccani counterparts seem to have held them in high esteem. Dating far back in
history, the black basalt stone of the Deccan was used to create decorative objects, and the black-
ened base metal of bidri ware gives a similar effect. One of the greatest artistic achievements
in Deccani art is the polished black basalt panel inlaid with mother-of-pearl that adorns the
arch of a door in the Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace) in Bidar Fort (fig. 64). Dating from the mid-
sixteenth century, it is associated with Barid Shahi rulers of the city, and its effect on the viewer
is an uncanny precursor of that achieved by bidri.
Symbolic of mourning for the lost prophets Hasan and Husain, the black color accords with
the Shi‘a and sufi traditions of the Deccan. Many bidri objects have a metaphysical quality that
goes beyond their utilitarian function or a simple desire to be beautiful. They recall the shapes of
religious buildings, or their designs hint at cosmological meaning. jra
1. Parodi 2014a. 2. Mittal 2011, pp. 48 – 49, no. 1. 3. White was also a funerary color, particularly for Hindus. Black was associated with
o
Shi‘a mourning.
180 Bidar
81 Bidri Incense Burner (Dhupdan) a shrine with which to scent the house. This octagonal bidri
in the Shape of a Tomb incense burner (dhupdan) is inlaid with brass and silver and
has a broad, low dome accentuated with finials. Its wide niches
Bidar, 17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 5¼ in. (13.2 cm), Diam. 4½ in. contain prim, stylized flowers that suggest they are earlier
(11.5 cm) than the exuberant flora seen on other bidri objects in this
Private collection, London publication. Its shape relates closely to the fourteenth- and
fifteenth-century tombs of the Bahmani rulers in Gulbarga,
One delightful aspect of traveling through the Deccan which are based on Tughluq models.1 The flowers, archaic
landscape is the appearance of small tombs, mosques, and squat feet, and general solidity point to an early date, though
dargahs (sufi shrines of saints) that appear outlined in isola- such a supposition is based on visual comparisons and high-
tion against the bright horizon (fig. 63). lights the frustrating lack of early written accounts of the ori-
Metal craftsmen were inspired by the forms of these build- gins of bidri in the region. The name of a Maratha owner,
ings to make a variety of objects such as caskets, containers, dada ji bhau ka s . . . , inscribed on the base in devanagari
and particularly incense burners. These objects might have script, was probably added at least a century later. jra
been placed in the tombs and shrines, or used as incense
1. See Michell and Zebrowski 1999, pp. 67 – 73.
burners to give the owner a pious sensation of closely iden-
tifying with a favorite saint by possessing a small replica of
Fig. 63. Tombs from the Shrine of Sayyid Muhammad

Husaini Gesu Daraz, Gulbarga, 15th century
Cat. 81
Catalogue 181
82 Pear-Shaped Bidri Ewer (Aftaba) with 83 Bidri Ewer (Aftaba)
Flowering Trees Bidar, 17th century
Bidar, 17th century Cast and engraved zinc alloy inlaid with silver and brass, H. 11¼ in.
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 11 in. (28 cm) (28.5 cm), W. 7¼ in. (18.4 cm)
Collection of Bashir Mohamed, London Victoria and Albert Museum, London (1479-1904)
Cat. 82
182 Bidar
Even though ewers (aftabas) are among the most commonly exception is a silver and brass bidri ewer (cat. 83). It was exe-
found metal objects from India, few of high quality exist as cuted in the aftabi technique, where, instead of the black base
bidri. The base metal is relatively fragile and becomes increas- metal predominating with the silver or brass design incised
ingly so with age; while ewers are used daily, many have fallen into it, the process is reversed, and a silver sheet is laid over
victim to careless handling, or, over time, their inlay has cor- the surface and then incised to allow the design to appear in
roded from contact with water. Robust brass and bronze black. Strips of inlaid brass provide accents, and the incipient
ewers were more commonly used to hold liquids. A grand pear-shaped body is decorated with a scrollwork arabesque
Cat. 83
Catalogue 183
pattern. The ogival arches on the ewer’s neck relate to Deccani in the second piece, whose single floral motifs against a plain
architectural sources, including those found at Bidar, whereas background are typical of later seventeenth-century Deccani
the wider arch on the spout is Mughal in appearance. The decorative schemes when Mughal taste prevailed. jra
lid is missing, and on the upper rim where it would have
1. Stronge 1985, pp. 39 – 40. The apocryphal inscription on the hexagonal
rested, an inscription claiming that the object was made for rim of the neck—‘amiluhu usta/husayn isfahani. sultan/amir teymur kurka/
Timur (Tamerlane) in the early fifteenth century was added ni sanata hasht sad o no’—states that the ewer was made by Husain Isfahani
for the Amir Timur in a.h. 809 (a.d. 1406 – 7).
at a later date.1 With its fully developed pear-shaped belly
and crescent-shaped top, another bidri example inlaid with
brass and silver (cat. 82) resembles the classic proportions of 84 Bidri Box with Sloping Walls
a mid- to late seventeenth-century Mughal ewer. The grace-
Deccan, early – mid-17th century
ful chevron pattern of the spout and handle and the perfect Cast and engraved zinc alloy inlaid with silver and brass, H. 3⅞ in.
spatial disposition of the floral motifs across the body create (9.9 cm), W. 5⅜ in. (13.6 cm)
a sensuous object that is as much a pleasure to hold as it is The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Louis E. and Theresa S.
to observe. Though both objects are examples of the pear- Seley Purchase Fund for Islamic Art and Rogers Fund, 1996 (1996.3a, b)
shaped, seventeenth-century Indian ewer, the example from

the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, is probably a few The brass-yellow scrolling lattice that encloses the silver-
decades earlier. Its shape is less fully rounded, and its highly petaled flowers covering the surface of this pan (betel nut)
energized decoration gives way to a much calmer appearance box distinguishes the object from numerous later bidri vessels
Cat. 84
184 Bidar
decorated with individual flowering plants. The decoration
relates to illumination found in Deccani books from the same
time period, as well as to the patterning on objects such as a
seventeenth-century vambrace (cat. 123) and an unidentified
object (cat. 101), dating to the late sixteenth or early seven-
teenth century, and which is also decorated with arabesques.
The mid-sixteenth-century inlay work at the Rangin Mahal
(Colored Palace) displays a comparable use of a scrolling vine
with flowers and split-leaf motifs (fig. 64).
This type of decoration seems to indicate an earlier date
for the box than other objects within the bidri group,1 and
it helps to establish the genesis of the bidri tradition at the
beginning of the seventeenth century. ms
1. As originally suggested by Zebrowski 1983b.
85 Bidri Carpet Weight (Mir-i Farsh) with

Trellis Pattern
Bidar, 17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 7⅛ in. (18 cm),
Diam. at base 8¼ in. (21.1 cm)
Cat. 85
During the summer heat of India, royal and elite households
stored their wool carpets and replaced them with lighter
woven or embroidered cotton floor coverings. To hold them
in place, weights called mir-i farsh (slaves of the carpet) were
placed at the corners. A number of bidri examples exist,
though none as large and imposing as the one commonly
found in domestic settings and that appears in this volume
(cat. 85). In addition, the mir-i farsh secured textiles in tombs,
often woven or embroidered with Qur’anic inscriptions that
covered the stone or marble sarcophagus of a sufi saint or
noble personage. Owing to its unusual size and weight, which
would have been necessary to secure a heavy tomb covering,
the object most probably served this function. The weight
was made in the aftabi technique: instead of engraving the
design in the base metal and then applying the inlay, a sheet
of silver or brass was applied to cover the entire surface of the
object, and the design was then cut out to reveal the nega-
tive. This mir-i farsh, decorated with an overall trellis pattern,
has a majestic dome inspired by Deccani tombs and rests
on an octagonal base that repeats the shape of many tomb
chambers. jra
Fig. 64. Mother-of-Pearl Inlay, Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), Bidar,

mid-16th century
Catalogue 185
86 Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Lotuses
Emerging from a Pond
Bidar, mid-17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 8¼ in. (21 cm)
87 Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with a

Meandering Riverside Landscape
Bidar, mid-17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 8¼ in. (21 cm)
88 Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Tall

Flowers in Arches, and Associated Ring
Bidar, 17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver; ring: H. 1⅜ in. (3.5 cm),
Diam. 6⅛ in. (15.5 cm), base: H. 7⅜ in. (18.5 cm)
89 Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Poppies

against a Pointillist Ground
Bidar, 17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 7⅝ in. (19.5 cm) Cat. 86
90 Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Irises would rest on a bidri ring; with very rare exceptions (cat. 88),
the rings seem to have all been lost.
Deccan, last quarter of 17th century
Four of the five examples in this volume are inlaid with both
Cast and engraved zinc alloy inlaid with brass, H. 6⅞ in. (17.5 cm),
Diam. 6½ in. (16.5 cm) silver and brass, which is a characteristic of early bidri. They
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Louis E. and Theresa S. would have been highly prized possessions of the Deccani
Seley Purchase Fund for Islamic Art and Rogers Fund, 1984 (1984.221) rulers and their courtiers, or of the Mughal and Rajput aris-
tocracy who arrived with the Mughal armies that gradually
Of the small number of known bidri objects that predate the conquered the Deccan from 1636 to the end of the century.
eighteenth century, a majority are huqqa (water pipe) bases. Two of the huqqas (cats. 86–87) are perhaps from the
Tobacco arrived in India sometime in the late sixteenth cen- same workshop and are remarkable for their quality and
tury, brought by the Portuguese from the New World to the the poetic imagery of their decor. The first is decorated
port of Goa. The plant acclimatized well, and its popular- with lotuses emerging from a pond, which are shown in all
ity soon spread from the western Deccan northward into stages of flowering, from tightly budded to fully open. In
Mughal territories. By 1620 tobacco was used all over, and Buddhism, Hinduism, and sufi mystical tradition, the lotus is
while coconut shells were first employed as the hot-water a symbol of purity and enlightenment. Similar flowers adorn
chamber for the pipe, sometime around the mid-seventeenth a famous Bijapur painting depicting a holy woman, Yogini
century Bidar craftsmen were creating huqqa bases that rank with a Mynah Bird (cat. 30), which displays an overblown
among the most attractive decorative objects of the period. exuberance typical of the flora in Deccani art. Both huqqas
These early examples are nearly always spherical, though one are conceived as miniature universes of sky, earth, and water,
or two ovoid examples are known. To remain stable, the base a concept that was conducive to the restful meditation and
186 Bidar
Cat. 87 Cat. 88
Cat. 89 Cat. 90
harmony of their owners as they smoked. The landscape dec- 91 Bidri Tray with Lotuses and a River
oration can be interpreted as a setting under a dark night sky
Bidar, ca. 1675 – 1700
with the shiny silver and brass surfaces reflecting the shim- Cast and engraved zinc alloy inlaid with silver, Diam. 13 in. (33 cm)
mering light of the moon. Their nocturnal mood reminds one Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Gift of Anna Bing Arnold and
that the night is a time for the imagination to wander freely. the Indian Art Special Purpose Fund (M.89.19)
The second huqqa (cat. 87) depicts a riverbank lined with

palm trees and garden pavilions with niches revealing wine 92 Bidri Tray with Flowering Plants
cups and flasks. Loving pairs of cranes, a symbol of faithful-
Bidar, 17th century
ness and fidelity, stand amid the dramatic rocky hillocks that Zinc alloy inlaid with brass, Diam. 12¼ in. (31 cm)
give the Deccani landscape an almost lunar appearance. The Private collection, London
river, below, is fed by water cascading down from the rocks
and exemplifies the Qur’anic ideal of the pleasure garden.1
The increasing influence of Mughal preferences on Deccani
93 Bidri Tray with Flowering Plants in Arches
craftsmen becomes apparent in the three remaining huqqas,
Radiating from a Central Medallion
and as a result, it could be postulated that they are slightly Bidar, 17th century
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, Diam. 14⅛ in. (36 cm)
later in date. The first of this group (cat. 88) is unusual in that
it was acquired with a bidri ring from the same period, which
fits perfectly but does not seem to belong to it. The decorative
scheme of cusped arches containing large standing flowers 94 Bidri Tray with Petals
immediately recalls similar ones found in Mughal palaces Bidar, second half of 17th century
and tombs. Here, however, the flowers do not stay upright Cast and engraved zinc alloy inlaid with silver and brass,
and demure but twist and turn with an intense energy typical Diam. 12¼ in. (31 cm)
of the flora in Deccani art. Did a Rajput Maharaja or Mughal
grandee carry this home as a souvenir from his campaign in
the Deccan? Bidri was often furnished in a four-object set, composed of
The fourth huqqa (cat. 89) is adorned with graceful poppies the huqqa base, the ring, the chillam (fire cup), and a tray
against a pointillist background sky of silver stars. Again the on which the huqqa rested. A complete set from this time
flowers are similar to Mughal decoration, but their contorted period no longer exists, but a close approximation may be
movement, heavy blossoms, and drooping heads dramat- a large tray inlaid with brass and silver (cat. 93) with a nearly
ically juxtaposed to the sky reveal a uniquely Deccani aes- identical huqqa base and ring (cat. 88). In a masterful display
thetic. The poppies call to mind that opium was widely used of technical prowess, this particular workshop of artisans has
by the Mughal and Deccani elite, and that tobacco was not created a design that resembles a wheel whose spokes divide
the only substance that could be smoked in a huqqa. eight curved arches that radiate from a central medallion.
jra The arches are generously filled with flowering plants that
sway with a twisting, baroque movement. A high cusped rim,
The style of decoration, use of a single metal for inlay, and inlaid with recurring flowers, the scrolling arabesque of the
short neck with everted rim all point to a date later in the sev- outer border, and the frames of the arches create a rhythmic
enteenth century for the fifth huqqa base (cat. 90). The grace- quality, which from a distance gives the illusion that the tray
ful play of upright stem and leaves with drooping blossoms is spinning.
recalls the depiction of the iris plant on the kalamkari tent The concept of eight flowers fanning out from a central
panel (cat. 181), and the delicate sprinkling of flowers against medallion is also used on a second tray (cat. 92), but the effect
the background is a more restrained version of the decora- is very different. Created solely with brass inlay so thick and
tion found in the huqqa described just above. ms fine that it appears to be gold, the flowers reside again some-
where between Mughal and Deccani taste. A bold tulip, quite
1. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 241.
unlike the other flowers, centers the composition and is strik-
ingly similar to a painted tulip in the borders of a painting from
188 Bidar
Cat. 91
Cat. 92
the period of Emperor Shah Jahan (reigned 1627 – 58).1 Further Catalogue numbers 91 and 94 are decorated with con-
underscoring the artistic crosscurrents between the Deccan centric bands that distinguish them from catalogue num-
and Mughal courts, the painter of this tulip has been named bers 92 and 93, in which flowering plants are arranged as
the “Master of the Borders,” and it has been speculated that spokes emanating from a central hub. The pulsing rhythm
he may have migrated to the Mughal court from the Deccan of the striped petals surrounding a central stamen (cat. 94)
on the basis of his Deccani-style flowers.2 jra contrasts sharply with the blissful undulation of waves
190 Bidar
Cat. 93
Cat. 94
bearing lotus blossoms (cat. 91). The Copenhagen tray fur- the eighteenth century the repertoire broadened further to
ther makes use of a combination of wire and sheet inlay to include neoclassical motifs of European inspiration. ms
create pleasingly contrasting textures. Both trays are dated to
1. Zebrowski 1997, pp. 247, 248, pl. 421. 2. S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 245 – 47,
the second half of the seventeenth century, after bidri deco- no. 161.
rative schemes had evolved from repeating, allover patterns
to a preference for individual motifs. In the second half of
192 Bidar
Cat. 95
95 Bidri Basin ( Sailabchi ) mosaic tile work in the early seventeenth-century Badshahi
Bidar, mid-17th century Ashurkhana, Hyderabad. The wavy, stripelike decoration on
Zinc alloy inlaid with brass and silver, H. 6¾ in. (17 cm),
the underside of the rim is an element of the chintamani, or
Diam. 13⅝ in. (34.5 cm)
Private collection, London “auspicious jewels,” motif that was fashionable in contempo-
rary Ottoman silks.1 Here, the design has been altered, and
This imposing bidri basin (sailabchi) would have had an instead of two separate, parallel waves (thought to imitate
accompanying ewer. In more distinguished households one tiger stripes), there is a unified motif that more resembles
servant would pour water from the ewer over a guest’s hands clouds. The chevron pattern on the restricted neck of the
to wash them before the meal, while another servant would basin is similar to a sash that separates these stripes or clouds
collect the water in the basin from below. The inlay on the floating above the base from the rich floral decoration on
rim shows a degree of water corrosion that indicates it was the bowl. jra
well used.
1. An example of these silks making their way to the Deccani courts is in the
Few bidri pieces have a more sophisticated decorative portrait of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II riding an elephant (cat. 47), in which
scheme. The silver-and-brass floral and arabesque-scroll inlay the animal is covered with a sumptuous caparison, probably of Ottoman
origin, decorated with chintamani motifs.
on the rim relates to Mughal and Deccani carpet and textile
designs, as well as to architectural decoration such as the
Catalogue 193
Golconda
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F F
F Golconda F
F F
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
O
n the southeastern side of the Deccan, the sultanate of Golconda was blessed
with riches. Golconda had fertile lands, access to the sea, and diamond mines. It main-
tained diplomatic relations with the Safavids of Iran (1501 – 1722) and established trading
rights with European companies, ensuring that its goods found their markets around the world.
It was also the longest-lived of the Deccani sultanates, the last to fall to the Mughals in 1687.
Sultan Quli Qutb Shah (reigned 1496 – 1543), the founder of the sultanate, belonged to the
Qara Qoyunlu clan, which had once controlled large areas of western Iran but had been forced
from power by the opposing Aq Qoyunlus. Left to find his fortunes elsewhere, Sultan Quli
Fig. 65. Citadel and Outer Fort Walls, Golconda, 14th – 17th century

Pages 194–95: Ceiling, Tomb of Ibrahim Qutb Shah, Golconda, 1580
arrived at Bidar during the reign of Muhammad
Shah Bahmani III (1463 – 82) and rapidly moved
up the ranks to receive the governorship of
Telangana and the use of its fortress at Golconda
as his headquarters by 1496 (fig. 65).1
Although he did not sever ties with the
Bahmanis in the 1490s in the same fashion as the
other governors, Sultan Quli adopted other sym-
bols of independence by minting coins, building a
congregational mosque, and developing his capital
in much the same way as the rulers of Ahmadnagar,
Berar, and Bijapur. He also vastly expanded his ter-
ritories during the course of his nearly fifty-year
reign, extending the Qutb Shahi realms all the way
east to the Coromandel Coast and north to the
borders of Orissa.
While Sultan Quli’s origins meant cultural and
political ties to Iran remained strong under his
successors, other developments came to the fore
Fig. 66. Northern Arch Framing a View of the Charminar, Char Kaman (Four Bows throughout the history of the dynasty, especially
or Four Arches), Hyderabad, 1591
during the reign of Ibrahim Qutb Shah (1550 – 80),
who participated in the 1565 battle against Vijayanagara and presided over the subsequent flour-
ishing of the sultanate. The intellectual range of Ibrahim’s court was broad and surely reflects the
influence of the sultan’s seven-year exile at Vijayanagara during the reign of his brother Jamshid
Qutb Shah (1543 – 50). Ibrahim oversaw the creation of the earliest surviving Qutb Shahi manu-
scripts and Qur’ans (cats. 96 – 98), which were quite Persianate in nature, and he also sponsored
dams and waterworks in the manner of the Kakatiyas (ca. 1163 – 1323), the earlier rulers of the
Golconda region.2 He and his courtiers not only built mosques and made donations to the shrine
of Mashhad, 3 but also fostered a renaissance of Telugu literature.4
Ibrahim’s successor, Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612), moved the Qutb
Shahi capital from Golconda to Hyderabad.5 Like the other newly founded Deccani capitals of
this era, Hyderabad was located on a plain without natural defenses; rather than providing pro-
tection in times of war, its grandiose edifices instead symbolized the dynasty’s wealth and power,
and its foundation was timed to coincide with the turning of the millennium in the Islamic cal-
endar. At its center stands the Charminar monument (fig. 3), to the north of which is a broad
plaza that once provided access to the Qutb Shahi palaces, gardens, and public buildings (fig. 66),
including a hospital with a garden for medicinal plants,6 as well as the Badshahi Ashurkhana
(royal house of mourning), where Muharram was observed annually. Inside, this building is
revetted with spectacular tile mosaic (fig. 67) that forms the backdrop for the display of ‘alams
(standards); outside, its tall, columnar porch comes directly from the contemporary architecture
of Iran, and the Chihil Sutun pavilion of Isfahan. This feature was incorporated into many of the
198 Golconda
Fig. 67. Interior, Badshahi Ashurkhana (Royal Mourning House), Hyderabad, 1591. Tile Work, 1611
buildings of the era, including the tomb of Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah, located in the dynastic
necropolis at Golconda. These structures contain all of the elements that have come to define the
Qutb Shahi style of architecture: the mixed use of glazed tile, plaster and carved stone features,
hemispherical domes set on fringes of petal forms, and minarets with balconies and miniature
bulbous domes (fig. 68).
Muhammad Quli was also a poet, and his writing in Dakhni formed the content of two par-
ticularly beautiful productions: an illustrated divan (usually called the Kulliyat, ca. 1590 – 95,
figs. 69, 72) and an album of calligraphy (cat. 104). 7 The preoccupations of this genre of poetry
were different from the Telugu poems of the period; rather than returning to classical texts, as
Ibrahim’s poets had, Muhammad Quli’s verses focus on festivals and religious observances and
include a subgenre of love poetry in which the sultan assumes a female identity.8
The chief concern of Muhammad Quli’s nephew and successor Muhammad Qutb Shah
(reigned 1612 – 26) was the threat of Mughal invasion, now made quite real by the settlement of
the Mughal Prince Khurram in Burhanpur from where he closely supervised the campaign to
conquer the Deccan. Muhammad’s reaction was to maintain the close diplomatic relations with
the Safavid dynasty that had been established under his predecessor with an exchange of ambas-
sadors who spent years at a time at each other’s court.9 He also sponsored the writing of the
Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah (History of Muhammad Qutb Shah), a chronicle that provides
a key to the decorative arts from Golconda.10
Golconda 199
When ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (reigned 1626 – 72)
was proclaimed sultan, he was only fourteen years
old, and during the first several years of his reign, his
mother, the capable Hayat Bakshi Begum, acted as
regent. In 1630, when the armies of the Mughal
Emperor Shah Jahan (reigned 1628 – 58) inflicted a
major defeat on Ahmadnagar, which had provided
protection to the more southern Golconda, ‘Abdullah
was forced to sign a deed of submission.
Rather than diminishing the Qutb Shahi dynasty,
this action stabilized it and freed it from further
threat. With the subsequent discovery of diamonds,
the arrival of European trading companies, and the
conquest of new lands in the south, the Qutb Shahis,
in fact, found new footing. Golconda attained world-
wide renown for its printed and painted textiles,
which were a specialty of the kingdom’s eastern
coastal zone (cats. 160 – 65), and for its steel products,
especially swords that were manufactured near mines
such as Indalwai, northwest of the Golconda Fort.
Forests near the port of Masulipatnam, where the
Dutch Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (United
Fig. 68. Tomb of ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah, Golconda, ca. 1672
East India Company) was based, also supplied a
thriving shipbuilding business.
These outside contacts brought an altogether different style of painting to the region,
still to be better understood within the context of Deccani traditions — works with European
themes, such as the Holy Family, Madonna and Child, and a portrait with a marbled back-
ground of an English nobleman.11 Although these paintings and drawings are among a number
of European-style works loosely associated with the Deccan and there are direct quotations from
European sources in Deccani textiles (cat. 164), this influence remains an area for further study.
‘Abdullah had no direct heirs to his throne and eventually settled on Abu’l Hasan Qutb Shah
(reigned 1672 – 87), the husband of his youngest daughter, to succeed him. This was an unusual
choice given that Abu’l Hasan had little prior experience at the court and had chosen to reside
as a sufi ascetic at a khanqah just outside the city. He did, in fact, turn out to be a weak leader,
outmaneuvered by his ministers and unable to keep the Mughals at bay. In 1687, Emperor
‘Alamgir (reigned 1658 – 1707) captured Golconda, and Abu’l Hasan was taken prisoner to
Daulatabad, where he died and was buried in 1699. ms
200 Golconda
Fig. 69. Illuminated Frontispiece, Divan of Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah, Golconda, ca. 1590 – 95. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper,
folio: 10⅞ × 5¾ in. (27.7 × 14.5 cm). Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad (Urdu Ms. 153)
1. Minorsky 1955. For a detailed study of the dynasty, see Sherwani 1974, which synthesizes the author’s many earlier publications.
2. Yazdani 1925 – 26. For an extended discussion of these trends, see Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 165 – 202. 3. Gulchin Ma’ani 1969,
pp. 190 – 200. 4. Wagoner 2011, which includes a review of the Telugu literature of Golconda and previous scholarship on this
topic. 5. Legend relates that the city was called Bhagnagar, in honor of Muhammad Quli’s favorite courtesan, Bhagmati, but this
assertion has been proven to have little basis in fact. Bhagnagar may be a corruption of a seventeenth-century name for the city,
Baghnagar (City of Gardens). 6. Husain 2000. 7. The complete corpus of his poems has been published in Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah
1940. 8. Analyzed in Petievich 2007, in which the phenomenon is said to have grown out of North Indian Krishna bhakti poetry.
9. Sherwani 1973, p. 460; Sherwani 1974, p. 388. 10. For more information, see Maryam Ekhtiar, “Excerpts from the Tarikh-i Muhammad
Qutb Shah,” in this volume, pp. 344 – 45. 11. The portrait is in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (PDP 3447). See Jake Benson’s
discussion of the work in this volume on pp. 163 – 64.
o
Golconda 201
Cat. 96
96
Frontispiece from the Zakhira-yi Zakhira-yi Khwarazmshahi, also shows a creative Deccani
Khwarazmshahi (The Treasury of the contribution to the tradition. Here, the formality of its
Khwarazm Shah) Safavid-style decoration is enlivened by coral dragons, phoe-
Calligraphy by Baba Mirak Herati
nix birds, and angels, whose wings form borders between
Golconda, a.h. 22 Sha’ban 980 (December 28, 1572) areas of arabesque illumination in lapis and gold.
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 12⅝ × 8¾ in. The text is a medical guide written for a governor of the
(32.2 × 22.2 cm) Khwarazm province in Iran in 1110 – 11. In addition to the lav-
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (In. 30)
ish frontispiece, the beginning of each of the ten books within
the text is marked with sarlauhs (illuminated headpieces);
To judge from the Persianate style of the few surviv- and two subsections are also given this treatment. At the end
ing manuscripts from the period of Ibrahim Qutb Shah of the manuscript is a colophon, providing the name of the
(reigned 1550 – 80), one would imagine the early Golconda calligrapher, Baba Mirak Herati, also known as Muhammad
court to have been an outcrop of Iran.1 However, Golconda’s Sa’id, and the date and place of completion in Golconda. A
earliest known illuminated work, the frontispiece of the partially defaced seal on folio 445 indicates the continued
202 Golconda
presence of the manuscript in the Qutb Shahi library during
the reign of Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (1580 – 1612). 2
This is the first dated book to come out of Golconda, and
it rests with a small group of manuscripts from the 1570s
usually presented as evidence for the Golconda workshop’s
heavy debt to Persian and Khorasani models, and especially
the manuscripts of Shiraz and Bukhara.3
Certainly, its illuminations draw directly from Persian
models, but this would have made sense as the contents of
the book were also coming from that cultural milieu. None of
the known Telugu masterpieces associated with this era are
illustrated, and so the question of whether those manuscripts
would have received different treatment remains open. ms
1. Many of the texts produced in the Golconda workshops were the same
as those made at Persian courts, including copies of the Sindbadnama
(ca. 1575, cat. 97), Nizami’s Khamsa (Quintet, 1575, Andhra Pradesh State
Archaeology Museum, Hyderabad, Ms. P 1432), the Anvar-i Suhaili (1582,
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.13:116-1962), and the ‘Aja’ib
al-Makhluqat (ca. 1625, cat. 120). Hatifi’s Khusrau and Shirin (1568, Khuda
Bakhsh Library, Patna) is not included in this list, for which see the
argument in Weinstein 2011, pp. 57 – 61. In addition, there are paintings from
two different unidentified manuscripts, four around 1586 – 90, formerly
bound in an unrelated 1643 copy of the Divan of Hafiz (British Museum,
London, 1974,0617,0.6.1 – .4). Another manuscript, perhaps Sultan Husain
Mirza’s Majalis al-Ushshaq, dated around 1590 – 1600, survives only in
paintings pasted onto large cards, one in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin
(Persian Ms. 228), and another that was sold at the Hôtel Drouot, Paris,
March 5, 1971, lot 113 (Skelton 1973, pp. 190 – 93). 2. At least two other
copies of this text were made in the Deccan, and both are now in the Salar
Jung Museum, Hyderabad. In its present condition the Chester Beatty
manuscript is missing several pages and some pages are bound out of order.
The pages have also been cut from their original support and attached to
newer papers. Close observation of the opening illuminations reveals where
the outline of the drawing has not been followed precisely when the page
was cut, and where small details are now missing. 3. Likely based on the
important Persian manuscripts the Qutb Shahi rulers collected — Qutb
Shahi seals are found, for instance, in a 1431 Khamsa made for the Timurid
ruler Shah Rukh (Adamova 2001), and a copy of Jami’s Yusuf and Zulaikha
of about 1580 from Shiraz in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
(13.228.8.1).
97
Manuscript of the Sindbadnama (The Tales
of Sindbad)
Golconda, ca. 1575 Cat. 97
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9⅝ × 5⅞ in. (24.5 × 15 cm)
British Library, London (Persian Ms. 3214)
folios.2 Further evidence in support of this attribution is the
This manuscript is the only known copy of a literary work similarity of its paintings to illustrations in a manuscript of
(composed in Iran in 1374 – 77) comprising rhyming couplets Nizami’s Khamsa (Quintet) from 1575 that was represented in
relating the story of a wise vizier named Sindbad and the Golconda and bears the impression of a seal by Muhammad
coming-of-age of an Indian prince.1 In the absence of a colo- Quli Qutb Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612).3 The popularity of the
phon, this manuscript has long been attributed to Golconda Sindbad stories in the Deccani sultanate of Golconda is fur-
on the basis of an abraded impression, probably of a Qutb ther suggested by a manuscript containing a prose version
Shahi seal, on folio 1r and the presence of captions in the of the same tales, which was copied in 1622 for Muhammad
Kannada language within the margins of a number of early Qutb Shah (reigned 1612 – 26).4
Catalogue 203
Among the manuscript’s 166 folios, a few of which are indicate the desired subject of the image by describing, in
tinted blue,5 there are 72 illustrations in addition to introduc- few words, a particular moment in the adjacent text. Neither
tory pages bearing a shamsa (an illuminated rosette in the the Sindbadnama nor the other surviving manuscripts asso-
form of a stylized sun, folio 1r), a double-page illustration of ciated with sixteenth-century Golconda bear evidence of a
King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (folios 1v – 2r), and an master’s instructions to his artists, however, and it seems
‘unwan (an illuminated heading) at the start of the text (folio likely that they were made through a range of methods and
2v). These illuminations and images are related in style to under varying conditions, probably for various elite but not
those commonly found in Persianate manuscripts during the royal sponsors. lw
first half of the sixteenth century, and indeed, the Solomon
1. Clouston 1884. 2. Losty 1982, pp. 54, 70 – 71. In Losty 1982 and in
and Bilqis frontispiece closely follows those that appear at the subsequent publications on Deccani painting, these captions were
beginning of many manuscripts created in Iran, and partic- identified as Telugu. They were shown to be Kannada in Weinstein 2011,
pp. 134 – 40. 3. Andhra Pradesh State Archaeology Museum, Hyderabad
ularly in Shiraz between 1500 and 1565.6 Certain features of (Ms. P 1432); Weinstein 2011, pp. 143 – 64. 4. British Library, London
the paintings, however, are distinct from or appear as modi- (Or. 225); Rieu 1879 – 83, vol. 2, p. 748. 5. A feature also found in another
Golconda manuscript, an Anvar-i Suhaili (1582) in the Victoria and Albert
fied versions of Shirazi pictorial traditions, and most notable Museum, London (IS.13 :116- 1962). 6. Uluç 2006, p. 300. 7. Seyller 2000.
among these features are a color palette emphasizing bright
red and blue, as well as a range of paler tones, the prevalence 98
Manuscript of the Qur’an
of faces shown in three-quarter perspectives with sharply
Calligraphy by ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Husaini al-Shirazi
protruding noses, and the abundant and fantastic depictions
Probably Golconda, ca. 1560 – 1600
of greenery. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 21⅝ × 15 in. (55 × 38 cm)
There are ten notations in Kannada, which appear in the Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 277 MS)
margins of the early pages of the Sindbadnama, attesting to
the manuscript’s circulation among different linguistic com- A set of Qur’ans with the seals of the Bijapur or Golconda
munities of the Deccan in the sixteenth century. Most of rulers allows us to understand the types of Qur’ans once
these notes summarize concisely the contents of illustrations, found in Deccani collections.1 While one can identify many
sometimes explaining a Persianate concept or image through examples made in Iran and some in India, there are several
the use of an Indic term, as when a group of viziers are whose place of creation is unclear, so similar were the modes
described as “seven pandits” (folio 14v), or a king’s prayers are of production in the two places.
called tapas (a term meaning Hindu religious austerities, folio The calligrapher of this work, ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Husaini
11v). Most interesting for the study of this manuscript’s pro- al-Shirazi, has given rise to much speculation along these
duction is the notation on folio 1r (the page with the shamsa) lines. There are ten manuscripts associated with him, includ-
that reads surya. While this word in Kannada and in Sanskrit ing Qur’ans, copies of the Five Surahs, and the sayings of
can refer to the sun or to the Hindu sun god, here it appears ‘Ali.2 One group of these manuscripts has Qutb Shahi or
to be shorthand for this type of illumination that resembles a other Indian seals, including two that were donated to the
solar disk. These notes may have been added in Golconda by a shrine at Mashhad by Ibrahim Qutb Shah (reigned 1550 – 80)
Kannada-speaking member of the Qutb Shahi court. It is also and his descendant ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (reigned 1626 – 72).3
quite possible that the manuscript was gifted to a Bijapuri This may indicate that ‘Abd al-Qadir had actually moved to
noble and the notes were added later at the ‘Adil Shahi Golconda from his native Shiraz,4 and, in fact, several features
court where Kannada and Persian were both widely used. of the manuscripts suggest they were made in India: the tex-
Manuscripts produced in Golconda seem to have been ture of the paper, the letter ‘ayn that marks every tenth verse,5
created through a process much like that of the Mughal work- and the illumination lavished on the Surat al-Baqara.6 Other
shops. Once selected for production, the text of a particular features point more directly to Golconda: there are marbled
work was copied out by a scribe on blank folios with spaces borders on several pages of the Qur’an donated by Ibrahim
left for illustrations. In the Anvar-i Suhaili (1582) a supervisor to Mashhad,7 and the illumination is completed in the typi-
of the project then wrote out instructions for his artists to fill cal Golconda hues of bright orange and purple that are also
in these blank areas with paintings.7 Traces of these inscrip- found in the opening pages of the Zakhira-yi Khwarazmshahi
tions are seen on several pages of that manuscript, and they (The Treasury of the Khwarazm Shah, cat. 96) and other
204 Golconda
Cat. 98
works. On certain pages, the verses are written in differ- 1. The Golconda Qur’ans are discussed below; for the Bijapur Qur’ans, see
Overton 2011b, pp. 102 – 15. M.532 in the Morgan Library and Museum,
ent scripts and colored inks, or they are arranged in ruled New York, is a similar Shiraz manuscript; see Schmitz 1997, pp. 102 – 3,
compartments, features that are also seen in albums such no. 43, figs. 158 – 62. 2. For a discussion of his career, see Bayani, Contadini,
and Stanley 1999, p. 202. 3. Gulchin Ma’ani 1969, pp. 190 – 200, no. 88,
as catalogue number 104. Finally, this Qur’an, along with donated by Ibrahim on a.h. 1 Rabi ‘al-Awwal 970 (October 29, 1562), and
another very similar one, is known to have once been in a no. 89, donated by ‘Abdullah in a.h. 1051 (a.d. 1641 – 42). 4. This scribe is
described in the treatise of Qadi Ahmad as an expert calligrapher from
Hyderabad collection.8 It therefore seems likely that ‘Abd Shiraz; English translation in Minorsky 1955, p. 67. Qadi Ahmad does not
mention him leaving Iran (discussing him with a group of other calligra-
al-Qadir moved to the Golconda court and found patronage phers from Shiraz), but Gulchin Ma’ani 1969, p. 199, and James 1992, p. 196,
under Ibrahim and Muhammad Quli (reigned 1580 – 1612), suggest he did move to Golconda. 5. In at least two Qur’ans, one in the
Khalili collection (QUR248; James 1992, pp. 196 – 99, no. 47) and the present
where he would have enjoyed high merit for his elegant hand. manuscript; this feature may be true of the other Qur’ans, but they have not
This complete Qur’an is signed by the calligrapher on the been examined by the present author. 6. Noted in the present Qur’an, a
Qur’an in the Khalili collection (QUR248; James 1992, pp. 196 – 99, no. 47),
final page and after the prayers inscribed in a white thuluth. and the Mashhad Qur’ans (Gulchin Ma’ani 1969, nos. 89, 90). 7. Mentioned
The book includes thirty-four, fully illuminated, double-page but not illustrated in Gulchin Ma’ani 1969, p. 190. 8. Terence McInerney,
personal communication to Navina Najat Haidar.
spreads and preserves what is believed to be its original bind-
ing. Seal stamps on the flyleaves trace the Qur’an’s ownership
beginning in 1703. ms
Catalogue 205
Fig. 70. Animals in Combat, near the Patancheru Gate, Golconda, ca. 1559
Metal zoomorphic objects were a specialty of the Deccan,

revealing a more playful side of the decorative arts. An incense
burner could be shaped like a peacock with a flowing tail of
curlicued feathers or a door knocker might terminate in the
head of a lion, whose bared teeth reveal a ram trapped inside.
Echoes of these forms are seen in Iberian a quamaniles, ves-
sels whose commanding shapes and symbolic value were felt
across the Islamic world or closer to home, in the animal
carvings found on many Deccani forts and palaces (fig. 70).
When Ibrahim Qutb Shah (reigned 1550 – 80) extended the
Cat. 99 enclosed area of Golconda, adding new city walls with eight
new gates in 1559, they were decorated with pictorial panels
99
Yali with Elephants
of royal peacocks and lions as well as beasts in combat
Golconda, 16th or 17th century
(fig. 89). The small bronze yali (horned lion), possibly a
Bronze, H. 6⅜ in. (16.2 cm), W. 2 in. (5 cm), D. 6½ in. (15.8 cm)
Ranros Universal, S.A., British Virgin Islands weight used in commerce, may have been a portable version
of that same talismanic symbol (cat. 99).1 This mythical beast
100
Peacock-Shaped Incense Burner with powerful legs steps on four elephants, crushes another
one in its jaws, and traps a sixth with its tail. Heraldic and
Deccan, late 15th or early 16th century
Brass, H. 11⅞ in. (30 cm)
auspicious birds and animals graced Deccani palace interiors
Collection of Bashir Mohamed, London as well, where they might have been carved in stucco or
shaped in tile (fig. 71). A bird with a round belly and long tail
101
Steel Object, Possibly a Door Knocker that combines the features of a peacock with those of the
or Catch hamsa (goose) of the Indic tradition is a common element of
both wall decoration and three-dimensional objects. This
Probably Golconda, 16th – first half of 17th century
Cast and engraved steel overlaid with silver, H. 2 in. (5 cm), peacock incense burner (cat. 100) would likely have had a
W. 1¾ in. (4.4 cm), D. 5⅝ in. (14.2 cm) curved makara-headed (mythical aquatic monster) extension
Ranros Universal, S.A., British Virgin Islands in the back, serving as a handle and rest. The round shape of
Inscribed on the sides in nasta‘liq script: Pious inscriptions with the head, high beak, wide-set eyes, and double string of pearls
names of the twelve Shi‘a imams around the neck are attributes seen in a group of related works
assigned to the early sixteenth century, although this one
might be even earlier, from the late fifteenth century.2
206 Golconda
Cat. 100
Cat. 101
The “door knocker” remains an enigmatic object, variously

thought to be a door attachment for a religious building, part
of a gun carriage, or even a sampler of varied designs for a
craftsman to show his skills (cat. 101).3 Bearing rudimentary
horse heads on one end and a lion head with a ram in its
mouth on the other, the piece also contains calligraphy and
etched floral designs. Inscriptions in praise of the twelve
Shi‘a imams are inscribed in nasta‘liq on the sides, while the
underside contains an inlaid trellis of leaves and dots. The
lion’s head, with its elevated broad nose and wide-set ears,
and the simplified form recall the medieval Persian Seljuq
style, long dead in Iran but whose ghost appears in this odd
Deccani object. ms/nnh
1. Zebrowski 1997, p. 104, points out that zoomorphic weights were used in
Arabia and Africa. 2. Ibid., p. 94, pl. 87, p. 100, pl. 103. 3. Rosemary Crill
in Indian Heritage 1982, p. 148, no. 494.
Fig. 71. Stucco Birds, Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), Bidar, mid-16th century
Catalogue 207
Cat. 102
102
Tray with Animals and Birds amid Animated A herd of beasts fills the outermost band of this tray in an
Floral Arabesques endlessly inventive pattern with no repeating elements. This
Probably Golconda, ca. 1600
type of decoration relates strongly to Persian prototypes, but
Chased, engraved, and gilt copper, Diam. 23⅞ in. (60.5 cm) the hamsa (goose) at the center of the tray and the inclusion
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad (76.1442) of elephants are certainly Indian. The relationship of this
Inscribed in thuluth script: la ilaha illa allah, muhammad rasul-ullah, ornamental style with manuscript illumination suggests that
‘ali wali ullah, nasrun min allah wa fathun qarib (There is no god but a drawing master would likely have created a pounce or out-
God, and Muhammad is the messenger of God, Ali is the friend of
line for the decoration.1 The thuluth inscription around the
God; help is from God and victory is near)
central medallion interweaves the words with the letters of
the last word, qarib, appearing in two parts. ms
1. S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 310 – 13, nos. 209, 210.
208 Golconda
Detail of cat. 103
103 Lidded Box with Running Animals

Probably Golconda, ca. 1600
Chased and worked silver with niello-type inlay, H. 1⅝ in. (4.2 cm),
Diam. 3¼ in. (8.1 cm)
This delicate round box has an overhanging lid with a cen-

tral boss knob. Both parts are decorated with lively running
animals set against tightly wound flowering spirals. The ani-
mals are outlined with a black edging, possibly a type of niello
inlay, which makes their treatment distinctive from other
Deccani metal decoration, although niello is known through
a few, rare, unpublished objects.
The formula of leaping animals set against foliate forms,
particularly spiral vines, became characteristic of Deccan Cat. 103
metalwork, although related styles with animals in foliage
appear in northern India as well. On the carved metallic
surface in the present work, the animals have been given attributed to the Burhanpur region is another example of the
vibrant texture, with the fur and faces carefully rendered, Deccan taste for leaping animal figures set against laterally
the flowers sensitively rounded, and the ornament master- scrolling vines (cat. 175). nnh
fully layered, even within the very low relief. A lidded vessel
Catalogue 209
104 Folios from an Album of Calligraphy
Golconda and Hyderabad, late 16th – early 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 10⅞ × 15⅜ in.
(27.5 × 39 cm)
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (Persian Ms. 225)
There are no contemporary portraits of Ibrahim’s successor

Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612), but his
vivid personality comes to life in his coquettish poetry, his
grandiose vision for Hyderabad, and in the legends that sur-
round him — including those that link him with a dancing girl
named Bhagmati. Though the story is probably exaggerated,
the fact that it was attached to him rather than any of the
other Qutb Shahi sultans is revealing.1
Muhammad Quli’s artistic sensitivities are especially
apparent in the books that were made for him. The ear-
liest is a collection of his Dakhni poetry (ca. 1590 – 95), the
only illustrated copy of eight known anthologies. The lavish
manuscript contains inventive flourishes, such as the use
of tiny pieces of marbled paper to create different picto-
rial elements (fig. 72).2 While that divan seeks to apply the
conventions for illustrating Persian poetry anthologies to a
collection of Dakhni verses,3 other poetry compilations take
a very different tack. Now preserved as fifteen individual
folios are pages from at least one other Qutb Shahi album
containing more of Muhammad Quli’s verses as well as
selections from other Arabic and Persian sources. To the eye
accustomed to imperial Mughal albums, Deccani examples Cat. 104. Folio 13v
such as this and the Ahmadnagar album (cats. 18 – 19) are a
revelation: their vibrant marbling, découpé writing, multi-
hued inks, and arrangement of calligraphy in the qit’ah for- There is also a drawing (folio 4r), and it seems likely that a
mat4 are found nowhere in northern India. These pages have painting of a yogini (female ascetic) attributed to Bijapur pur-
the further distinction of being among the earliest evidence chased with this group, was once bound with it (cat. 30).5 As
for the Indian practice of album making, preceded only by they survive now, the folios bear evidence of interventions at
the book of about 1555 – 60 (the Fitzwilliam Album) made for many points in time . They have been assembled with varying
the Mughal Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605). degrees of skill and borders were added and then cut down.
The folios in the Chester Beatty Library include calligra- Folio 6v, signed by the calligrapher Zain al-Din ‘Ali,
phies signed by earlier scribes such as Malik Dailami (folio the scribe of Muhammad Quli’s divan, is dated a.h. 1000
1v, signed at Nachchivan in 1554) and Sultan ‘Ali al-Mashhadi (a.d. 1591–92), leading to the supposition that it came from
(folio 5v), Qutb Shahi calligraphers writing in Golconda and an album made in this momentous year.6 Additional Qutb
Hyderabad; Hajji ‘Abdullah (folios 2v and 3a); Murad Dhu Shahi folios in other collections also have this date,7 but the
al-Qadir (folio 3v); Zain al-Din ‘Ali qutb shahi (folios 6v, 7v, material is diverse and varied in quality, making it hard to
8v, 9r, 10r, 12r – v, 13r – v, 14v, and 15v); and Muhammad Riza imagine them as belonging to a single album.
(folios 7r, 8r, 9v, 10v, 11r – v, 12r, 13v, 14r – v, and 15r); as well Folio 13v features a Dakhni poem of Muhammad Quli
as some unsigned pieces (folios 4v and 5r); and one work by about Shab-i Barat, copied once by Zain al-Din ‘Ali and once
Muhammad al-Shirazi, whose dates are unknown (folio 6r). by Muhammad Riza at Hyderabad. Together with folios 7 – 15,
210 Golconda
Detail of cat. 104. Folio 6v
they seem to form a more cohesive group of the sultan’s

Dakhni poetry, all having been copied by the same two cal-
ligraphers. Two of these works are dated a.d. 1605 – 6, which
may help date the larger group.
Other single pages from Golconda albums, discussed in
the following entries, demonstrate the pictorial material also
included in Qutb Shahi albums. ms
1. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, p. 207, points to the validity of the story.
2. For a discussion and illustration of the full pages, see Zebrowski 1983a,
pp. 158 – 68; Khandalavala and Ali Khan 1986, pp. 40 – 47. 3. Weinstein
2014. 4. A horizontal composition of calligraphy combining lines in larger
and smaller scripts, some oriented diagonally. 5. James 1987. 6. Ibid.,
p. 245. In this article (p. 247), it was claimed that folio 7r also had this date,
but the reference in the text, as read by Abdullah Ghouchani, is to reading
the accompanying prayer 1,000 times at the start of the new year. 7. Two
more pages from this album may be in the Khalili collection (CAL58 and
CAL260); see Safwat 1996, pp. 140 – 41, nos. 72, 73, and for another
connection to this album, pp. 194 – 96. See also K. M. Ahmad 1974.
Fig. 72. Marbled Phoenix, folio 53v (detail) from Divan of Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah,
Golconda, ca. 1590 – 95. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, folio: 10⅞× 5¾ in. (27.7 ×
14.5 cm). Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad (Urdu Ms. 153)
Catalogue 211
105
Page of Illumination in Gold resist-application method of the delicate gold leaf. The effect
somewhat resembles the bookbinding practice of leather
Golconda or Bijapur, ca. 1600
Gold leaf on colored paper, 6¾ × 4 in. (17.1 × 10.2 cm) filigree (munnabatkari) seen at its most magnificent in the
Kronos Collections, New York interior binding of the 1483 Herat manuscript of the
Masnavi-yi Ma’nawi (Spiritual Masnavi) by Jalal ad-Din
The Deccan book arts featured techniques that were practi- Muhammad Rumi.1 In the present folio a similar idea of
cally unknown elsewhere. Here a fine sheet of gold has an imaginary world filled with lively creatures is realized,
been laid over a red folio with blue borders and worked into a although on a smaller scale and with different materials. This
forest of plants, trees, and arabesques containing leaping sheet is one of a pair, each probably at either end of a small
animals. The technique involved the use of a stencil and a and precious book.2 Several other works in this technique are
known but are not as refined as this example.3 nnh
1. Lentz and Lowry 1989, pp. 198, 199, 349, no. 99. Thanks are due to Steven
Kossak for pointing this out. 2. See Sotheby’s 2011a, pp. 128 – 29, lot 102, for
the other sheet forming the pair. 3. Losty 2013, pp. 114, 116 – 19, nos. 25, 26.
106
Tree on the Island of Waqwaq
Golconda, early 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 5¾ × 3¾ in. (14.6 × 9.5 cm)
(I.4594, fol. 26)
The talking tree from the Alexander legend in Persian lit-

erature told the hero of his impending fate and was illus-
trated many times in Islamic painting. While conventional
imagery depicts a tree with branches terminating in animal
heads, this Deccan version shows much greater detail: the
trunk is composed of snakes, the branches bear a large vari-
ety of heads, and the fruit takes the form of nude women.
The Waqwaq theme extends to the overall setting, with ani-
mate rocks sprouting fish and flowers made up of masks with
moth and butterfly leaves. This painting, along with several
other Deccan works, was once in the collection of the late
eighteenth-century Frenchman Colonel Antoine-Louis Henri
de Polier (1741 – 1795) in Lucknow, where it was mounted in
an album with Europeanized rococo borders. nnh
Cat. 105
212 Golconda Cat. 106

107 Stone ‘Alam
Relief-carved basalt, H. approx. 16 in. (40.6 cm)
Collection of Rina and Norman Indictor, New York
The ‘alam (standard) in this architectural fragment is of

a type dating to the late sixteenth century, in which a cen-
tral teardrop shape with a calligraphic invocation to God,
Muhammad, and ‘Ali is surrounded by a spiraling band ter-
minating in dragon heads with protruding tongues, furry
muzzles, and bushy eyebrows. At the top of the ‘alam are
swordlike projections ending in cusped medallions, and at
the base is a delicate lotus flower blossom just opening.
Assigning a place of production for this fragment is diffi-
cult. The reddish basalt is more common in the Bijapur realms
than elsewhere in the Deccan, yet the ‘alams seen in Bijapur
paintings are of a different form,1 and their use in architecture
or in processions is not nearly as well attested as in neighbor-
ing Golconda, where nearly identical ones are represented
in tile and wood. This basic form is repeated throughout the
Badshahi Ashurkhana, for instance, where the wood ‘alams
decorating the building’s arches also include the lotus-flower
detail found in the stone example (fig. 73). ms
1. As seen, for example, in the portrait of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in the Earl of
Harrowby Collection; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 91, ill. no. 67. See also Dervish
Receiving a Visitor (cat. 38).
Cat. 107
Fig. 73. Wood ‘Alam, Badshahi Ashurkhana (Royal

Mourning House), Hyderabad, 1591
214 Golconda
108 Brass ‘Alam
Probably Hyderabad, late 16th – early 18th century
Brass with relief decoration, H. 40 in. (101.6 cm), W. 24 in. (61 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of Terence
McInerney, 2012 (2012.207.2a, b)
Inscribed on the central panel: bi rahmatika ya arhamu al-rahimin (By

your mercy, the most merciful)
On roundels: Names of the Shi’a imams
On top panel: Later inscription with the basmalah
109 Brass ‘Alam

Probably Hyderabad, ca. 1700
Cast and joined copper alloy, H. 28½ in. (72.4 cm), W. 11¾ in. (29.9 cm),
D. 1¾ in. (4.5 cm)
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond, Arthur and Margaret
Glasgow Fund (1981.87)
Inscribed on central panel: Allah, Muhammad, ‘Ali
110 Brass ‘Alam

Probably Hyderabad, ca. 1700
Brass, H. 38 in. (96.5 cm), W. 12 in. (30.5 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Friends of
Islamic Art Gifts, 2013 (2013.37)
Inscribed on central panel and surrounding roundels: Allah,
Muhammad, ‘Ali
Among the most evocative descriptions of the Golconda

court are those concerning the religious observations of
Muharram, the month of mourning for the deaths of the
Prophet’s descendants Hasan and Husain at the Battle of
Karbala in 680. As soon as the moon that marked the start of
the month was sighted, a somber atmosphere prevailed: music
and dance came to a halt, meat was eschewed, and the people
dressed in black. ‘Alams representing the standards carried Cat. 108
in the seventh-century battle were installed in ashurkhanas

(meetinghouses used for the recitation of dirges and prayers), that on the final night a full ten thousand lamps blazed forth.
where they were raised on poles that were garlanded with rich The ‘alams were then taken out of the building in procession.2
cloths. Muharram is an event that the Hindus of Golconda The earliest ‘alam of this group (cat. 108) has lost its sur-
have historically observed, and it remains a major part of the rounding edge and crest of splayed finials, but the heart of
religious calendar of Hyderabad to the present day.1 the monumental standard still remains. Its thuluth relief
During the Qutb Shahi period, the Badshahi Ashurkhana inscriptions would have stood out against the surrounding
was the focus of a beautiful Qutb Shahi ritual enacted during delicately pierced designs, through which pinpricks of light
Ashura, the ten-day period at the start of Muharram. Each would have passed, decorating both the surface and the
night the sultan would light a row of one thousand lamps, so shadow of the ‘alam.
Catalogue 215
Cat. 109 Cat. 110
The other two examples are more similar: pierced inscrip- in Ardabil.4 All of these types of ‘alams are depicted in the tile
tions at their centers read “Allah, Muhammad, ‘Ali,” and in representations in the Badshahi Ashurkhana (fig. 74). ms/cs
the Metropolitan Museum example (cat. 110), these names
1. Sadiq Naqvi and Krishan Rao 2004. 2. The Hadiqat al-Salatin of Mirza
are repeated in roundels surrounding the main inscription. Nizamuddin gives a lengthy description of observances during the reign of
Dragons encircle the central section of each standard, which ‘Abdullah; see the English translation of pp. 45 – 53 in Rizvi 1986, vol. 2,
pp. 335 – 38. 3. The tips of the projections on the Virginia Museum of Fine
they grasp with their feet while their tails intertwine at the bot- Arts ‘alam are replacements, and the head of the proper-left dragon has
tom. The dragons’ bodies are pierced, and they have rounded been cast from the proper-right dragon, likely to replace a missing feature.
Dye 2001, pp. 418, 521 – 22, no. 193. 4. J. W. Allan 2012, p. 132.
scales on their backs.3 These unusual features are also found
on a sixteenth-century ‘alam that is now in the Shrine of Safi
216 Fig. 74. Tile ‘Alams, Badshahi Ashurkhana (Royal Mourning House), Hyderabad, 1611
Catalogue 217
Fig. 75. Wood Calligraphic Roundel, Badshahi Ashurkhana (Royal
Mourning House), Hyderabad, 1591
Cat. 111
111
Wood Roundel whereas the roundels in situ have recently been covered in
Probably Hyderabad, late 16th century
washes of gold and white paint, this piece retains some of its
Painted wood and gesso with gold and silver leaf, original polychromy, subtly varied between the central area
Diam. 19⅞ in. (50.5 cm) with writing and the surrounding sunburst pattern.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Richard S.
Mirror writing, a calligraphic specialty in the Deccan,
Perkins and Alastair B. Martin Gifts and Rogers Fund, 1991 (1991.233)
became popular for architectural inscriptions and the dec-
Inscribed: ya hayy (O, The Ever-Living) and ya quyyum (O, The
oration of objects in the seventeenth century, as found at
Self-Subsisting)
the mosque of the Sheikhpet Sarai, near Golconda. In the
eighteenth century, mirror writing was creatively deployed
In the buildings commissioned by Muhammad Quli Qutb to make images such as lions and faces in compositions
Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612) for his majestic capital city, there is on paper. On this roundel, the phrases, invoking two of the
a penchant for rich detail in materials of contrasting texture ninety-nine names of God, are repeated around the central
and scale — their lime-plastered walls are replete with orna- medallion in four units in which the inscription is written
ment in wood, stucco, and tile that lends depth and hue to the once forward and once mirror-reversed. The letters them-
structure. Wood roundels similar to this example can still be selves are arranged around the repeated word ya, in which
found in buildings like the Badshahi Ashurkhana (fig. 75), but the letter alif provides a tall vertical stroke. ms
218 Golconda
Cat. 112
112 Rider on an Epigraphic Horse grand choice for the sacred letters, the gold and lapis colors
Golconda or Bijapur, late 16th or early 17th century
reference a traditional Qur’anic-manuscript illumination
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6⅝ × 10⅜ in. style. A few words from the verse, however, are inexplica-
(16.7 × 26.5 cm) bly missing.1 From the slightly awkward positioning and the
Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (Ms. 816.2011)
insertion of reins and seat, it is evident that the rider atop the
Inscribed near the horse’s leg: 4 sahibuhu mir sahib (4 Owned by horse was probably added sometime after the animal’s com-
Mir Sahib)
pletion. This addition may have covered up some part of the
On the saddle cloth: mashq-i kamtarin mir m . . . rmi(?) (Work of the original design. It is not clear whether the artist named in the
poor Mir M . . .[?])
saddlecloth was responsible for the original drawing of the
horse or for the later addition of the figure. nnh/ag
One great talent of Golconda artists was to fashion calligra-
1. The missing words, which are nonconsecutive, are bayna aydi-him
phy into zoomorphic forms, as in this fantastic horse, whose (among their hands) and min ‘ilmihi (from his knowledge).
body is composed of the Arabic letters of the Throne Verse
(Ayat al-Kursi, 2:255) of the Qur’an. These auspicious words
speak of God’s power over the universe, a message to be con-
veyed by the speedy and powerful horse. An appropriately
Catalogue 219
Cat. 113
113
Calligraphic ‘Alam Finial in the Shape of However, the surviving examples of zoomorphic ‘alams with
a Dragon pierced inscriptions give proof of a wholly local development.
These most unusual standards depict animals made entirely
Golconda, ca. 1650 – 1750
Cast brass, H. 7⅛ in. (18 cm), W. 4¼ in. (10.7 cm), D. 1¼ in. (3.1 cm) of writing. The falcon (cat. 114) is assumed to have been a
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford, freestanding object, while the dragon (cat. 113) is probably
Purchased 1994 (EA1994.45) one of two such elements that would have been found on
Inscribed: Pious phrases and Qur’anic verses either side of a teardrop-shaped ‘alam, also presumed to have
been entirely composed of openwork calligraphy. The falcon’s
body proclaims a prayer to ‘Ali: “Call ‘Ali, the locus of man-
114
Calligraphic ‘Alam in the Shape of a Falcon
ifestations of miracles. You will find him a help in the vicis-
Golconda, 17th century situdes of life. All grief and sorrow will pass thanks to your
Perforated gilt copper, H. 13¾ in. (34.9 cm), W. 8 in. (20.3 cm)
Victoria and Albert Museum, London (IM.163-1913)
rule, O ‘Ali, O ‘Ali, O ‘Ali.” 2 The dragon’s teeth spell the word
“Allah,” and the crest on top of his head is composed of the
Most early Deccani ‘alams (standards) derive from a type word “Muhammad.” The rest of his face is made up of Qur’an
that had emerged in Iran in the sixteenth century: a central 61:13: “Help is from God and victory is near.” ms
teardrop-shaped unit with a pierced inscription is flanked by
1. J. W. Allan 2012, pp. 123, 130. 2. As translated by Annemarie Schimmel in
dragon-head finials and has projections ending in multifoil S. C. Welch 1985, p. 324.
finials at the top, as seen in catalogue numbers 109 and 110.1
220 Golconda
Cat. 114
Cat. 115 Cat. 116
115
Inscribed Hardstone Mortar and Pestle A vessel in the shrine complex of Sayyid Muhammad Husaini
Golconda, early 17th century
Gesu Daraz (1321 – 1422) at Gulbarga is an outstanding exam-
Green hardstone with gold leaf, mortar: 4⅝ × 2⅝ in. (11.7 × 6.7 cm) ple and probably datable to the Bahmani period (fig. 76).
National Museum, New Delhi (59.236a, b) Standing at more than two feet in height, the monumental
Inscribed in thuluth script on the sides: ya shafi (O Healer); banda-yi vessel has relief ornament on the exterior that includes con-
khaksar muhammad qutb shah (Lowly servant [of?] Muhammad fronting fish, rampant lions over elephants, and bird termi-
Qutb Shah) nals at the corners. These symbols no doubt had very specific
meanings for devotees and likely referenced both sufi ideas
116
Mortar with Six Sides as well as Indian tradition. The fish, in particular, is associ-
Golconda, 17th century ated with the prophet Khizr and numerous Hindu deities,
Black basalt, H. 6½ in. (16 cm), W. 15 in. (38 cm), D. 9 in. (23 cm) including Vishnu. The everted birds at the corners are typ-
ical of South Indian ornament, while the royal symbol of a
semirampant lion attacking elephants is also seen in reliefs
117
Mortar with Cusped Sides
on Deccan forts.2
Golconda, 17th century Another related type of stone vessel is simpler and smaller
Polished black basalt, H. 3⅞ in. (9.8 cm), W. 5⅞ in. (15 cm),
with plain sides. While in-situ examples are known, portable
D. 9½ in. (24 cm)
David Collection, Copenhagen (9/2004) ones also exist, such as the black stone mortar with thick walls
and strong lines (cat. 116) and a beautifully cusped basalt bowl
Elongated boat-shaped vessels form a distinct category in (cat. 117).3 Semiprecious hardstone was used for the smallest
Indo-Islamic art; they are most often carried by sufi der- vessels, which are sometimes known as havan dasta (hand
vishes and can be made from metal, stone, or natural materi- mortar) or imam dasta (hand of the imam). An inscribed
als such as coco-de-mer.1 Some large vessels of this shape are example in the National Museum, New Delhi, offers evidence
also known and remain in their original places at several sufi both of date and function (cat. 115). Boldly inscribed in thuluth,
shrines and dargahs in the Deccan, where they are used for ya shafi (O Healer) and banda-yi khaksar muhammad qutb
offerings of fruits and flowers by devotees, for the burning of shah (lowly servant [of ?] Muhammad Qutb Shah), the
incense, and as a receptacle for salt, which has associations of work can be attributed to the reign of that Golconda ruler
purity for pilgrims who touch it before entering the shrine. (1580 – 1612).4 The gold within the engraved letters might
222 Golconda
Cat. 117
have been reapplied at a later date. The invocation to God

as healer suggests that this vessel was used for the prepara-
tion of medicinal substances.5 Qutb Shahi rulers encouraged
their hakims, or Yunani doctors (of Greek or Arabic med-
icine), to write treatises.6 The hakims, who were recognized
as good cooks, used such sacred vessels for both medical and
dietary purposes. Further reflecting the court’s attention to
the health of its people, in 1595 Muhammad Quli established
the Dar al-Shifa Hospital in Hyderabad, where medicine and
food were provided free of cost. nnh/ap
1. Melikian-Chirvani 1990 – 91 offers an interpretation of the shape.

2. A less embellished but equally monumental vessel is found in the
courtyard of the Abul Fadl shrine at Bidar. This information was obtained
from Helen Philon and augmented with additional discoveries by Marika
Sardar. 3. At the shrine of Maula ‘Ali in Hyderabad, an embedded example
of the former type, about the same size and with relief inscriptions, dates
to the eighteenth century. An example in the Dar al-Shifa, Hyderabad, is Fig. 76. Monumental Stone Vessel, Shrine of Sayyid Muhammad Husaini Gesu Daraz,
shaped as a leather pouch, a form associated with Hazrat ‘Abbas, who was Gulbarga, 15th – 16th century
killed during the Battle of Karbala (680) while fetching water for the
Prophet’s family 4. Simon Digby, in a personal communication, first identi-
fied this vessel. 5. Another group of early eighteenth-century hardstone
vessels remains in the Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad. 6. M. Ali and
S. A. Hussain 1990.
Catalogue 223
Cat. 118
118
Miniature Garnet Cup with Dragon-Head concoction of wine and opium.2 In any case, this vessel was
Handles most likely produced to hold special beverages to be con-
Deccan, probably late 16th – early 17th century sumed in limited quantities.
Carved star garnet, with gilt-silver mounts, H. 1¼ in. (3.2 cm), Carved from a large star garnet and mounted with a silver
W. 2½ in. (6.4 cm), D. 1⅛ in. (3 cm) foliate rim and dragon-head handles, the cup nests in a sil-
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 119 J)
ver cradle atop a stemmed foot. Although significantly scaled
down, it evokes the form of wine boats – cum – sufi beggar
This cup is an extremely fine and rare example of a minia- bowls (kashkul).3 A tinned copper kashkul in the Jagdish and
ture vessel that was by no means uncommon. It most likely Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad, displays
served wine, a deduction supported by two prominent similar dragon-head handles with typical downward-curled
examples: the small jade wine cup of the Mughal Emperor snouts and is inscribed with the names of the twelve Shi‘a
Jahangir (reigned 1605 – 27) and a small wine cup depicted imams and that of Shaikh Muhyi ‘l-Din ‘Abd al-Qadir
in a painting of a couple savoring wine.1 Interestingly, a al-Gilani,4 founder of the Qadiri sufi order whose followers
small enameled cup in the Al-Sabah Collection, decorated reportedly landed in Bidar and Bijapur when they first settled
with grapevines on the interior and poppy blossoms on the in India and later formed an influential center in the fifteenth
exterior, probably suggests that the cup was made to hold a century.5 Since most rulers of the Deccan were adherents of
224 Golconda
the Twelver Shi‘a sect and sufi orders were quite widespread
in India, most particularly in the Deccan, it is more than
likely that this beautiful cup was produced for a prince or
nobleman of the Deccan courts.6 sk
1. For Emperor Jahangir’s wine cup, see Robert Skelton in Indian Heritage
1982, p. 117, no. 350. For the couple enjoying wine, see Skelton 2011a, p. 15,
fig. 3. 2. Numerous references are made to the consumption of wine and
opium in both the Baburnama (Autobiography of Babur) and the Tuzuk-i
Jahangiri (Memoirs of Jahangir). It is quite likely that since antiquity wine
has been mixed with opium or other narcotic substances, as in, for
example, mithridatum, a concoction of substances mixed with wine that
was believed to be an antidote to poison. Furthermore, during his
fourteenth regnal year (a.h. 1028 [a.d. 1619]), Emperor Jahangir spoke of
inhabitants of the northwestern province of Pakhli (in modern-day
Pakistan), who mixed the intoxicating beverage they called sar with bhang
to increase its potency. Rogers and Beveridge 1978, vol. 2, p. 126; Thackston
1999, p. 324. 3. Melikian-Chirvani 1990 – 91, pp. 3 – 42. 4. Rosemary Crill in
Indian Heritage 1982, p. 145, no. 492. 5. Schimmel 1980, p. 59. 6. It is
worth noting that after Sultan Quli Qutb Shah, founder of the Qutb Shahi
dynasty, conquered Golconda in the early sixteenth century, he immedi-
ately proclaimed his adherence to Twelver Shi‘ism.
119
Darbar of Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9⅞ × 6⅛ in. (25 × 15.5 cm)
This painting is among the first examples of the mature

Golconda style, free of the Persian influences evident in
paintings of the late sixteenth to early seventeenth cen-
tury. The Safavid-style turbans are gone, replaced by vari-
ous types of Deccani headgear; the women appear in Indian
garb; and the faces are more carefully realized portraits than
the generic features used in paintings in Muhammad Quli
Qutb Shah’s era (1580 – 1612). The ruler, probably Muhammad
Qutb Shah (reigned 1612 – 26), sits enthroned within a col-
umned hall and against a black wall hanging decorated with
gold. He receives elite visitors, including a kneeling noble-
man with a white beard and shawl. This figure, a key to the
dating of the painting, is thought to be Shaikh Muhammad
Cat. 119
ibn-i Khatun, who was made ambassador to Iran in 1616, one
of the court’s most important diplomatic posts. This painting
possibly depicts his send-off with the readied party of horse- brocading — accords with the clothing seen in images of
men in the foreground.1 Muhammad Quli or Muhammad,3 rather than the clothes
In an earlier interpretation, the scene was dated to around adorned with neat rows of floral motifs, in which ‘Abdullah
1630 when the shaikh was reported to have been given typically appears. 4
the privilege of sitting in the presence of the king, who at Golconda is considered the source of numerous portrait
that time would have been ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (reigned sets, produced in volume in the mid- to late seventeenth
1626 – 72).2 However, the sovereign’s style of dress — white century and preserved in places such as England, France,
jama (robe) with gold brocaded hems; a long straight, and the Netherlands, from where the foreign merchants
Deccani-style sword; and a caplike turban also with gold purchasing them had come. 5 But the courtly portraits of
Catalogue 225
226 Golconda
Golconda are less easy to find: no contemporary portraits 120 Manuscript of the ‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat
of the rulers Sultan Quli, Jamshid, Ibrahim, or Muhammad (Wonders of Creation) from the Library of
Quli are known. If the subject of this painting can be iden- Bari Sahib
tified as Muhammad, it would be the earliest portrait of a
Golconda ruler. ms Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 15¼ × 9¾ in. (38.7 × 24.8 cm)
National Museum, New Delhi (58.48)
1. Losty 1995, p. 312. Barrett 1958, p. 20, initially suggested the king was
Muhammad Quli. He then revised it to Muhammad; see Barrett 1960, p. 9. Seal on flyleaf with Persian inscription: parisahib bint sultan
2. Skelton 1973, pp. 184 – 86. 3. Known through later copies, such as a Mughal muhammad qutb shah (Pari Sahib, daughter of Sultan Muhammad
version of a portrait of Muhammad by the painter Hashim in the Victoria Qutb Shah)
and Albert Museum, London (IM.22 - 925). 4. This said, the round, rather
featureless face of the sultan in this painting does not match the square-
jawed and cleft-chinned features of Muhammad any more than it does the
swoop-nosed, mustachioed images of ‘Abdullah. 5. Portraits sets include Bari Sahib (sometimes known as Pari Sahib) was the daugh-
the Witsen Album in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (RP-T-00-3186), Manucci ter of Muhammad Qutb Shah (reigned 1612 – 26), and a major
Album in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris, Estampes (Rés Od 45
pet. fol.), and three albums in the British Museum, London (1974,0617,0.2; political force at Bijapur (into whose royal house she mar-
1974,0617,0.4; and 1974,0617,0.11), among others. ried). For the first years of ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II’s rule (1656 – 72),
she was effectively in charge of state affairs.1 Small traces
Cat. 120a
Catalogue 227
Detail of cat. 119
b c
of her library remain, including this large copy of the medi-

eval Persian author Qazvini’s classical Arabic text, filled
with more than four hundred lively images of the “Wonders
of Creation” described therein, along with parts of al-Sufi’s
“Book of the Fixed Stars.” A partially erased colophon pro-
vides a purchase date of 1565, which is likely inaccurate; how-
ever, the seal impressions on the flyleaf are certainly those of
the Golconda princess.2
The painting style is vigorous and cheerful, somewhat
removed from the refined courtly idiom as it is known and
combining elements from both the Bijapur and Golconda
styles. In some ways the paintings reflect the imagery of the
Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of the Sciences, cat. 22) manuscript
and also that of the Pem Nem (The Laws of Love, cat. 29).
Several folios toward the end remain incomplete.
Until the manuscript obtains the close study that the
Nujum has received to fully understand its construction,
text, and paintings, it can be enjoyed for its vivacity and
imaginativeness. Among the many real and mythological
creatures are demons, tigers, horned fish, dragons, flying
horses, crickets, and snakes. The plants include palm trees,
flowering vines, flowers such as poppies, and radishes and
other vegetables. Within this magical world are starry con-
stellations, demons, and djinns mixed in with episodes from
traditional Persian tales and human figures playing music or
d
performing rites. nnh
1. Weinstein 2011, p. 91. A small copper Deccan bowl is also inscribed with
Bari Sahib’s name; Sotheby’s 2011a, p. 185, lot 153. 2. Kruijtzer 2009, p. 50,
provides a seventeenth-century drawing of the seal.
228 Golconda
121
Shaffron of Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah
Golconda, a.h. 1026 (a.d. 1617 – 18)
Steel, H. 23⅞ in. (60.7 cm), W. 7¾ in. (19.6 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Arthur Ochs
Sulzberger Gift, 2008 (2008.197)
Inscribed: abu’l-muzzafar sultan muhammad qutb sana 1026.

(Abu’l-Muzzafar Muhammad Qutb year a.d. 1617 – 18)
Horse armor in India was usually made from a combination

of metal, textile, and leather, the centerpiece of which was
a steel shaffron such as this one, which protected the front
of a horse’s head from the muzzle to the ears. In addition
to the date, the Arabic inscription seen near the top edge of
this shaffron includes the name of Muhammad Qutb Shah
(reigned 1612 – 26). Very few pieces of Indian horse armor can
be dated so closely or associated with a specific ruler, making
this example extremely rare.1 nnh
1. Thanks are due to the Department of Arms and Armor at The

Metropolitan Museum of Art for this information.
Cat. 121
Catalogue 229
Cat. 122
122 Armored Shoes
Golconda, second quarter of 17th century
Gilt steel (koftgari), L. each 10 in. (25.5 cm)
These shoes are made of steel, elaborately styled with gold

koftgari decoration, a technique in which the craftsman files
the surface of the metal before hammering on gold leaf. The
uppers are pointed at the front and terminate in scrolled toe
caps. The sides and backs have closely arranged flower heads
in gold with chevron borders. The top and bottom rims are
pierced for the attachment of fabric linings of either silk or
cotton. The undersides of the toes have crenellated plates that
are decorated further with various flowers within scrolled
gold lines, and pierced borders originally held the leather — or
fabric soles, now missing — to the heel.1
Steel shoes are very rare survivors from the sixteenth and Detail of cat. 122
seventeenth centuries, although some pairs were known to
have been made in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth
century for the Mirs of Sind by armorers’ workshops in
230 Golconda
Bhuj in Kutch, located in western India, to complete their
suits of armor.2 Different styles of shoes that were worn in
the seventeenth- century Deccan can, however, be seen
in miniature paintings. Shoes with upturned backs are
worn by Murtaza Nizam Shah I (reigned 1565 – 88) in a
painting of around 1575,3 as well as by Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah I
(reigned 1535 – 58) in a Bijapur painting from around 1610 – 20
(cat. 39). The heelless slipper seems to have become fashion-
able by the mid-seventeenth century, as shown in a por-
trait of Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56) of
Bijapur4 and in a painting of an African courtier (cat. 129).
There is every likelihood that these shoes were a spe-
cial commission ordered from an armorer’s workshop by a
patron in need of either the extra height or to better engage
the stirrups when riding. Only one and a half pairs in steel
are known to have been decorated with brass borders around
the plain-steel uppers, and which are flat-heeled.5 The pres-
ent pair is thought to be the only high-heeled steel shoes to
survive from this period. hr
1. Such crenellated motifs appear in a carpet shown in a painting and in the

border decoration of a miniature, dated to 1650 – 60; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 48,
ill. no. 32, p. 141, ill. no. 108. 2. Robinson 1967, pl. XIIIA, B. 3. Zebrowski
1983a, p. 21, ill. no. 5. The author is uncertain of the identity of the sitter.
4. Ibid., p. 126, ill. no. 94. 5. One pair is illustrated in Mohamed 2008,
p. 313, no. 301.
123 Vambrace
Steel overlaid with gold, H. 13¼ in. (33.5 cm), W. 5⅜ in. (13.5 cm)
Collection of Rina and Norman Indictor, New York
The art of koftgari required gold to be overlaid on a steel

base, then carved away to reveal the darker surface below.
The resulting design on this vambrace is that of medallions
and cartouches on a floral ground enclosed within running
arabesque borders. Scrolling vines, palmettes, lotuses, and
leaves predominate in the field, while contrasting areas of
bold and fine gold allow the clarity of the design to come
through.1 The vertical medallion arrangement is also remi-
niscent of Ottoman carpets. nnh
1. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 233, fig. 171, liken the decoration to that
of a Golconda textile of 1645.
Cat. 123
Catalogue 231
124
Crutch Dagger in the Form of a Serpentine
Vine
Dagger: steel, hilt: gold; L. 14½ in. (36.8 cm)
Furusiyya Art Foundation
125 Dagger in the Form of a Bird Holding a Leaf

Deccan, early 17th century
Steel, L. 16 in. (40.5 cm)
Collection of Bashir Mohamed, London
Cat. 124 Cat. 125
Deccan artists brilliantly fused nature with fantasy through

merging motifs or abstracting shapes, all while maintaining
elegant and fluid lines. This phenomenon can be seen in these
two daggers: one in the form of a serpentine vine, and the
other a simplified bird head with an elongated crest and a
curving leaf in its beak.
The crutch dagger (cat. 124) is the weapon of choice of a
holy man, providing support during meditation or rest but
concealing a deadly blade within its narrow stalk, if needed.
The twisting vine terminates in a bud finial, while the iron
surface is decorated with a pattern of gold lozenges recalling
serpentine scales. The form evokes older South Indian Hindu
traditions, in which snakes held a special place in worship
and as a symbol.1 A similar crutch dagger in the Salar Jung
Museum, Hyderabad, helps secure a Deccan attribution for
the piece, whose style was quite widespread in northwestern
India.2 The abstracted bird-head dagger (cat. 125) appears to
have its original blade, demonstrating that the design con-
cept extended from the tip of the bird’s crest to the end of its
outward-pointed tail. nnh
1. Mohamed 2008, p. 204, no. 194. 2. Pant 1989, p. 254, no. 301/LIV-A.
232 Golconda
Cat. 126 Cat. 127
126 Basin the upper floors. These two pieces are among the few known
Deccan, first half of 17th century fountain fixtures to survive. The lotus-petal forms and
Cast and engraved bronze, H. 17¾ in. (45 cm), Diam. of top 35⅞ in. aquatic beasts located on the spouts of each piece refer to
(91 cm), Diam. of foot 25¾ in. (65.5 cm) their placement in water, while other decorative features (the
lappets, fluting, and zoomorphic forms) come from the larger
repertoire of Deccani metalwork.
127 Fountain Both pieces consist of several separately cast and joined
Deccan, first half of 17th century elements, and in each case, the spout on the bottom was the
Cast, joined, and engraved brass, H. 38½ in. (97.7 cm),
device through which water flowed in either to fill the basin
W. 26⅝ in. (67.6 cm), D. 36¾ in. (93.2 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Lila Acheson or to rise inside the fountain and then trickle down from the
Wallace Gift, 1997 (1997.150) top. It has been suggested that these two objects came from
the same Deccani garden and would have been aligned within
Water was an important part of Deccani palaces: buildings a water channel.1 ms
were set in or next to reservoirs, and fountains and orna-
1. Observation of Terence McInerney.
mental pools were placed throughout palaces, including on
Catalogue 233
128
Wedding Procession of Sultan Muhammad ple, who are seated together on a horse — a departure from
Quli Qutb Shah Indian convention, in which a bride is typically brought to
her new home in a doli, or separate litter, after the wedding.
Golconda, ca. 1650
Opaque watercolor and gold on paper, 9⅝ × 12¾ in. (24.3 × 32.3 cm) Perhaps the cart drawn by running cows in the background
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaelogy, University of Oxford, was meant to carry her; certainly her female attendants ride
Lent by Howard Hodgkin (LI118.15) within it while others follow on foot in the procession.
Four outstanding works have been assigned to this anony-
In one of Deccani painting’s most romantically charged mous master who worked during the reign of ‘Abdullah
visions, a sultan carries his diminutive Hindu bride in a night- Qutb Shah (1626 – 72) and ushered in a realistic mode in
time procession. The pair is thought to be Muhammad Quli Golconda painting imbued with a sense of movement and a
Qutb Shah (reigned 1580 – 1612) and Bhagmati, Golconda’s mastery of color. They are a grand procession scene of
legendary lovers. The clustered attendant figures glow against ‘Abdullah in the Dorn Album in Saint Petersburg, a painting
the dark ground as they carry royal umbrellas above the cou- of yogis in the Saint Petersburg Album (where a portion of
Cat. 128
234 Golconda Detail of cat. 128

Catalogue 235
236 Golconda
the painting is attributed to his hand), a portrait of an African
nobleman (cat. 129), and the present wedding scene. 1
Reportage and documentation were among the artist’s aims;
thus several historical characters appearing in the Dorn
Album procession scene can be identified.2 Yet, in this work,
we are perhaps seeing his imagination unleashed to evoke a
scene from the past.3 nnh
1. Zebrowksi 1983a, pp. 183, 185, discusses this artist’s oeuvre. 2. Ibid.,

p. 185. 3. Sotheby’s 1990, pp. 18 – 19, lot 32, shows this painting before the
restoration of its background. The author is grateful to Terence McInerney
for this reference.
129
African Courtier
Golconda, third quarter of 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 15½ × 10⅞ in.
(39.5 × 27.5 cm)
The African courtiers of Golconda are not as well known as

those of Bijapur or Ahmadnagar, and this particular figure
has not been identified, although he may also appear in other
court scenes.1 His impeccable all-white costume is common
to those of African servants at Golconda, but he has a confi-
dent gaze and pose that imply some social status. The artist
has taken delight in depicting the details of the man’s face and
costume: every fold including the seams on the sleeves and
the hems of the jama (robe) has been carefully rendered. On
the reverse of this picture was once mounted a portrait of
Muhammad Qutb Shah (reigned 1612 – 26), which is now in
the Sarikhani Collection, London.2 ms
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 185. 2. Ibid., p. 176, ill. no. 142. The border in which
the painting is now mounted bears the stamp of baha(?) khan, khanazad
(born to the royal household) of ‘Alamgir, but the painting and this border
may not be original to each other.
Cat. 129

130
A Parrot Perched on a Mango Tree, a Ram The oversize bird seen here was almost directly drawn, but
Tethered Below mirror reversed, from a print by the Netherlandish artist
Adriaen Collaert (1560 – 1618) (fig. 13).1 The bird dwarfs a ram
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 9⅜ × 5½ in. (23.9 × 14.1 cm) tethered below, perhaps as a result of the artist reading the
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad (76.438) distant sheep in the Collaert print as being on the same plane
as the bird and therefore of much smaller scale.2 Earlier, the
Bodleian Painter had introduced the second bird on the right
of the same print into the background of his famous sufi visi-
tation scene of about 1610 – 20 (cat. 38). nnh
1. Robert Skelton first identified the print source. 2. Thanks are due to
Sheila Canby for pointing this out.
131
Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah
Golconda, ca. 1660
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 6⅝ × 4¼ in.
(16.9 × 10.7 cm)
Musée National des Artes Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris (MA 5026)
132 A Golconda Prince

Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 8⅜ × 4¼ in.
(21.4 × 10.9 cm)
Musée National des Artes Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris (MG 9183)
Representing a different mode of production during the era

of ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (1626 – 72), the artist responsible for
these two portraits was familiar with Mughal painting, as
is evident in the finely delineated figures set against a green
ground. However, he takes an unconventional leap in reduc-
ing the surrounding landscape and figures into a delicately
miniaturized setting filled with trees, lake, deer, and hunt-
ers (cat. 132).1 ‘Abdullah appears young in this image, more
lithe than in later portraits in which he has aged into an
older, paunchier man with jowls. But he is mature enough to
have emerged from the shadow of his mother, Hayat Bakhshi
Begum, who had steered the state for the boy-sultan in the
early years of his reign. This fascinating woman negotiated
with the Mughal Prince Aurangzeb in 1656, sparing Golconda
from further siege;2 she also founded the town of Hayat Nagar
and was buried in a stately tomb that dwarfs those of the early
Qutb Shahi sultans.
The prince remains unidentified. ‘Abdullah had no sons,
and therefore this painting must represent another young
member of the royal family. Both sultan and prince wear attire
more northern Indian in style than that of their predecessors
and are decked in jewelry of a type unseen in earlier Golconda
Cat. 130
238 Golconda
Cat. 131 Cat. 132
Detail of cat. 132

Cat. 133
portraits. By this time, diamonds of enormous size were being Sophisticated methods of stone cutting and faceting were
found in Golconda mines and were being made into beautiful practiced without interruption in the Indian subcontinent
ornaments studded with rubies and pearls in a kind of open- from as early as the third millennium b.c. What is more, lapi-
work setting unique to the Deccan (cats. 134 – 38). ms daries typically strived to maintain the integrity of gemstones
and avoid wastage of precious material, which resulted in
1. Okada 1991, pp. 112 – 13. 2. Sherwani 1974, p. 443.
irregular shapes and forms that are often misinterpreted as a
lack of command on the part of the craftsmen. The practice
is exemplified in this diamond, which has lately been dubbed
133 Shah Jahan Diamond
the Shah Jahan Diamond, owing to its close formal resem-
Deccan, probably 17th century
blance to the diamond set in the turban ornament he holds
Fancy, light pink, facet-cut, and drilled diamond, H. 1⅛ in. (2.9 cm);
W. 1¾ in. (4.6 cm), D. 1⅛ in. (3 cm), Wt. 56.7 ct. in a portrait of him at age twenty-five.3 Since the diamond
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 2156 J ) unquestionably hailed from mines of the Deccan, it is tempt-
ing to assume that the prince acquired it while campaigning
This large hololithic diamond of ta‘widh (amulet) outline has in the region; however, there is sufficient evidence to suggest
a flangelike projection on the upper edge, which was drilled that the Mughal court had access to large quantities of the
from front to back with two suspension holes.1 Of a flattish finest Deccani diamonds.4 sk
and elongated octagonal plan, it is step-cut on the front with
1. Keene 2001, p. 128, demonstrates that the evolution of this form stems
a large rectangular table and two rows of elongated sloping from naturally occurring octahedrons in the original crystalline structures
facets, and on the back with seven irregular facets converging of particular gemstones. 2. The table is the largest flat surface of a gem.
3. Robert Skelton in Indian Heritage 1982, p. 37, no. 41, and front cover. 4. Silva
to a narrow culet.2 Its pale pink color is characteristic of many 2004a, p. 44, regarding the 259-, 180-, and 150-carat diamonds seen by the
Golconda diamonds. Flemish gem trader Jacques de Coutre on Emperor Jahangir’s turban.
240 Golconda
134 Quatrefoil Pendant of being transparent, thus set with such diamonds. While
the rubies and emeralds in these pendants were imported
Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably first quarter of 17th century
Gold worked in kundan technique and set with diamonds, rubies, and to India, the diamonds were all mined in Golconda, the only
emeralds, H. 1⅞ in. (4.7 cm), W. 1¾ in. (4.5 cm) place on earth where one could find diamonds until the eigh-
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 341 J) teenth century.
This pendant is set with flat, unpolished natural diamonds
This quatrefoil pendant, so elegant in its simplicity, is among a as petals and a cut and polished pyramid-shaped diamond in
group of exquisite floral pendants characterized by the à-jour the center.1 In contrast to the diamonds, and adding to the
or unbacked settings of their diamond petals (cats. 134 – 38). subtlety of this superb jewel, the rubies and emeralds sur-
When worn, they would have glowed beautifully, owing to rounding the central stone are set back-to-back: the main
the effects of light transmitted through the gemstones. In diamond is framed with rubies on one face and the small pet-
subtle contrast with the transparent diamond petals, all the als are set with emeralds, while on the other face the position
pendants feature subsidiary floral configurations of rubies of the rubies and emeralds is exchanged. The lower tip of the
and emeralds set back-to-back in their centers. Ever since pendant features a small loop that would have suspended a
this type of setting became known, it immediately shed light gemstone. sk
on the pendants and forehead ornaments worn by the ladies
1. Interestingly, the Mughal Emperor Jahangir appears to wear such a
represented on a Deccani kalamkari wall hanging of around pendant in the painting Jahangir Preferring a Sufi Shaikh to Kings (Freer
1640 – 50 (cat. 163), which unquestionably give the impression and Sackler Galleries, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., F1942.15a).
Cat. 134
Catalogue 241
135
Octagonal Rosette Pendant 136
Floral Pendant with Upswept Petals
Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably first half of 17th century Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably first half of 17th century
Gold worked in kundan technique and set with diamonds, rubies, and Gold worked in kundan technique and set with diamonds, rubies, and
emeralds, with pearl pendant and enameled cap, H. including pendant emeralds, with emerald bead pendant, H. including pendant 2⅝ in.
2 in. (5.2 cm), W. 1⅛ in. (3 cm) (6.7 cm), W. 1½ in. (3.9 cm)
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 955 J ) Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 1210 J )
Essentially in the form of an octagonal rosette, the outer pet- The eight lively, curled petals of this magnificent pendant
als of this pendant vary slightly, depending on the shape of are set à-jour with natural diamonds, and the overall gold-
the natural diamonds within, and are separated by bands of work of the settings is distinctly detailed. As in the catalogue
abutted rubies. On the front the gold settings of the petals number 135, the form of the natural diamonds dictated the
and the floral configuration of ruby and emerald petals are all outline of the petals, which are separated by small gold, chis-
lobed, and a gold band detailed with lotus petals borders the eled trefoils and ruby petals in trilobed settings. In the cen-
central rectangular diamond. On the back the outer petals ter a large ruby is set in an octagonal bezel surrounded by a
are detailed with lobes, and the center of the floral config- corolla of ruby petals gently curling on their tips, in between
uration is set with a ruby in a beveled rectangular setting. which are small emeralds in trilobed settings of a different
The pendant pearl is capped with four petals covered with ilk but recalling the small rubies set between the diamond
red enamel. sk petals. On the back of the pendant, an emerald in a beveled
rectangular setting is bordered by a multitude of ruby petals.
137
Floral Pendant with Drooping Petals The gold cuboctahedral loop is set on the front and back with
Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably first half of 17th century a small ruby. sk
Gold worked in kundan technique and set with diamonds and
rubies, with pearl pendant, H. including pendant 1⅞ in. (4.8 cm),
W. 1⅛ in. (2.7 cm) 138
Floral Pendant in the Form of an
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 1211 J ) Eight-Pointed Star
Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably first half of 17th century
Gold worked in kundan technique and set with diamonds, rubies, and
Virtually identical in overall form to catalogue number 136, emeralds, with emerald bead pendant, H. including pendant 2½ in.
this pendant has eight curling petals set à-jour with natu- (6.4 cm), W. 1½ in. (3.9 cm)
ral diamonds of varying outlines in detailed settings. In the Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 1212 J )
center, the large bud-shaped ruby is surrounded by rubies
in cusped settings that are pronouncedly curled in counter- This pendant presents several analogies with other à-jour
changing orientation in relation to the tips of the diamond pendants in this volume (cats. 134 – 37), but whereas they
petals. On the back, the decoration is identical to the front are of generally fluid appearance, this one takes the form of
of the pendant, except the center is set with a diamond. a rosette with an intricate eight-pointed star configuration.
The gold settings are as detailed, presumably allowing the On the front the gold settings are detailed with lobes along
owner to wear it, displaying either the ruby or the diamond the outer edges of the diamond star branches and around
to the front. sk the large emerald, and with chiseling on the small gold fan-
shaped petals between the inner corolla of ruby petals. On
the back, the emerald is nearly flat and displayed, as on the
front, in an irregular pentagonal setting enfolded by lively
upswept gold petals detailed with chiseling that also serve as
backing for the rubies on the front. More gold-chiseled petals
support the rubies on the outer edge of the pendant. sk
242 Golconda
Cat. 135 Cat. 136
Cat. 137 Cat. 138

139
Diamond Pendant of Amulet Case
(Ta‘widh) Form
Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably 17th century
Facet-cut and drilled diamond, H. ⅝ in. (1.5 cm), W. ⅝ in. (1.7 cm),
D. ⅜ in. (1.1 cm), Wt. 28.3 ct.
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 1804 J )
This diamond pendant, fashioned as an octagonal prism

with two integral lugs for suspension and terminals featur-
ing eight radiating facets, was cut in the shape of a ta‘widh,
or amulet case. The type ultimately took its form from the
faceted biconical beads produced in West and Central Asia
for millennia, which were most likely inspired by the shape of
natural crystals.1 Although a great number of prismatic beads
and pendants, while flat on their ends, can be seen adorning
sculptures of Bodhisattvas in Gandhara from the first to sec-
ond century a.d., it is uncertain at which point in history such
forms evolved into this type.2 A large number of examples
are extant from the early medieval Islamic period that were
carved from semiprecious stones or fabricated from bronze,
silver, or gold, the latter type most often had a removable end
Cat. 139
affording the insertion of a scroll with inscriptions to avert
evil from the wearer (hence the name ta‘widh or amulet).
sk
1. The author is grateful to her colleague Manuel Keene for drawing her
attention to the analogies between faceted biconical beads and double-
terminated crystals. 2. See, for example, Hallade 1968, pp. 91 – 93,
pls. 66 – 68.
140
Diamond Pendeloque
Deccan or Mughal dominions, probably 17th century
Fancy, light orange-pink, facet-cut diamond, H. ¾ in. (2 cm), W. ⅝ in.
(1.6 cm), D. ⅜ in. (1.1 cm), Wt. 24.8 ct.
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 2223 J)
The pendeloque, of timeless form, was cut from a very pure

Golconda diamond; it is of deep proportions and displays
a high degree of transparency. Given the prevalent extant
examples, it is clear that Indian lapidaries appreciated the
natural forms and qualities of gems, and any cutting of dia-
monds was done in flat facets to bring out the stone’s bril-
liant luster and a sparkling play of colors in its reflections.
This pendeloque is cut with a large irregular table, adjoined
by small trapezoidal facets on the front and two rows of fac-
ets on the back. The drop-shaped top consists of five facets
meeting in a point, joined by eighteen steep facets suggesting
gabled arches that radiate to the middle. sk
Cat. 140
244 Golconda
141
Sultan ‘Abu’l Hasan Qutb Shah Standing
Golconda, ca. 1675
Opaque watercolor and gold on paper, 8¾ × 5⅝ in. (22.1 × 14.2 cm)
A final set of Golconda paintings is associated with ‘Abu’l

Hasan Qutb Shah (reigned 1672 – 87). Large-scale paintings
on cloth such as portraits as well as scenes of assemblies and
processions, including many made for display in architectural
settings, became the norm during this period.
In his portraits, this, the last Golconda sultan, appears as
a confident and serene man, although he was a reluctant sov-
ereign, forced to take the throne. He stands in profile in a
magisterial pose with a halo and the sun shining all of their
glory on him. With his hand posed on his hip, his luxurious
clothing, and the number and size of the jewels he wears, he
assumes a stereotypical image of royalty with a long lineage
in northern Indian and Deccani portraiture.
The tendency to depict the body as a large mass, with the
full skirt of the robe billowing out, is a convention of late
Golconda painting, particularly the portrait sets produced
there by the dozen. The appearance of unshod feet, appar-
ently a court custom (cat. 119), is another feature of portraits
of this school. The painting does seem to be of a higher level
of production; the gold paint has been applied lavishly, and
the texture of the fur collar and the contrasting patterns of the
sultan’s garments are meticulously detailed. However, other
elements, especially the sultan’s pyjamas and the flowers of
the lower landscape, are more informally executed. ms
Cat. 141
Catalogue 245
Cat. 142a – h (left to right)
142 Palanquin Finials Golconda paintings depicting grand processions indicate

Golconda, ca. 1650 – 80 that such occasions were a frequent occurrence in the Qutb
Cast, pierced, chased, and gilt copper, and brass, dimensions variable Shahi capital at this time. In addition, written descriptions
a, b: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Friends also convey the spectacle of these events, as Abbé Carré, a
of Islamic Art Gifts, 1995 (1995.258a, b); c, d, f: Private collections,
seventeenth-century observer, noted: “It was a great pleasure
New York; e: Collection of Terence McInerney, New York; g, h:
Collection of Patricia Phelps de Cisneros, New York; i: Collection of and most interesting each morning to watch the pomp and
Bashir Mohamed, London magnificence of the princes and nobles of this place, who dis-
play their riches, jewels and precious stones, to excite the envy
of the others. Some adorn their elephants; some the harness
246 Golconda
of their horses and their arms; while others decorate their sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Mughal and Deccan art,
palanquins with rich ornaments, and above all wear splendid lotus imagery seems to have been used in a decorative rather
clothes, which lend great brilliance to their assemblies.” 1 than symbolic way. As a plant associated with water, however,
Finials, such as this group, were used as ornaments on perhaps the royal palanquin was conceived as a resplendent
the ends of poles that supported palanquins carrying their gondola, gliding on the bearers’ shoulders as if through a pool
elite riders.2 Paintings and surviving finials demonstrate that full of blossoms.
lotus flowers and pinecone shapes were popular decorative Two Deccani miniature paintings from the early eigh-
motifs on these gilt-copper objects.3 While historically the teenth century suggest an interesting gender divide during
lotus has special meaning in Buddhism and Hinduism,4 in this period, as evidenced among different styles of finials.
Catalogue 247
In a depiction of a woman’s palanquin, indicated by closed
curtains, the finials of the lotus type are seen (fig. 77). In the
man’s procession, however, the finials are ornamented with
a fierce group of animal figures (fig. 78).5 The finials in this
group with undulating lotuses were once part of the same
private collection assembled by a Hyderabad nobleman in
the 1920s. They may have been produced in the same work-
shop or perhaps even adorned the same palanquin used by
the Hyderabadi royalty. cs
1. M. E. F. Fawcett and C. Fawcett 1947, vol. 2, pp. 327 – 28. 2. The pinecone-

and lotus-shaped finials may also have been used to ornament the tops of
imperial umbrellas, canopies, or tents. See Wedding Procession of Sultan
Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (cat. 128) and Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in
Procession (cat. 47). Thanks to Keelan Overton for pointing this out.
3. They were used into later periods and spread beyond the Deccan. See
Chitarman II, Emperor Muhammad Shah with Falcon Viewing His Garden
at Sunset from a Palanquin, ca. 1750, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (26.283).
An example attributed to nineteenth-century Rajasthan is published in
S. C. Welch 1985, p. 436, no. 288. 4. Ward 1952. 5. For other zoomorphic
finials, see the elephant with a lotus growing from its trunk and the
lion-headed finials in Mughal Silver Magnificence 1987, pp. 70, 71, nos. 55,
57. See also the dragon finials in Emperor Farrukhsiyar Being Paraded in a
Palanquin in the collection of Gursharan and Elvira Sidhu, Seattle; Jorrit
Britschgi in Guy and Britschgi 2011, p. 139, no. 70.
Cat. 142 i
Fig. 77. Processional Scene (detail), Hyderabad, early 18th century. Ink, opaque watercolor, Fig. 78. Processional Scene (detail), Hyderabad, early 18th century. Ink, opaque
and gold on paper, approx. 10 × 7 in. (25.4 × 17.8 cm). Private collection, New York watercolor, and gold on paper, approx. 10 × 7 in. (25.4 × 17.8 cm). Private collection,
New York
248 Golconda
Cat. 143
143
Prince Seated in a Garden Conversely in the Deccan, a reimportation of motifs and
By Rahim Deccani styles took place. Mughal princes and Indian courtesans
Probably Golconda, late 17th century returned to their original shores but, under a Persian hand,
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 8½ × 12¾ in.
changed into more effete creatures, with a greater degree
(21.5 × 32.5 cm)
Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (66.1) of lyricism and a subtle foreign touch. In fact, the result of
these crosswinds was that such romantic imagery ended up
Inscribed at top center, upside down: raqam-i banda rahim deccani
(Work of the slave Rahim Deccani) with an exotically foreign feeling in both the Persian and
Indian worlds.
The late seventeenth century witnessed a renewed phase Rahim Deccani’s delicate painting is characteristi-
of artistic exchange in painting between Deccan India and cally poetic. An Indian prince receives an offering from a
Safavid Iran, through which a distinctive, tinted drawing Portuguese visitor, who wears his hat at a rakish angle over
style arose on paper or lacquer boxes, often depicting Indian long curls and is followed by a dog, a customary appendage
courtly couples, sometimes seated together on a lobed-back to European figures in Indian painting. The seated prince is
chair, or feminine figures with cascading locks.1 Six Persian attended by women in a garden filled with flowering trees,
artists were particularly enchanted by such Indianized birds, and deer. The unusual pale yellow ground against
motifs and styles: Shaikh ‘Abbasi, his sons ‘Ali Naqi and Mir which the figures are set loosely evokes the color of lacquer
Taqi, Bahram Sofrakesh, Muhammad Zaman, and ‘Ali Quli boxes, to which the painting is closely related.3 nnh
Jabaddar. Indian influences also extended into Safavid archi-
1. The author explored this subject in greater detail in Haidar 2004.
tectural decoration; for example, a wall painting in the Chihil 2. Babaie 1994. 3. Another painting, seemingly based on this one, recently
Sutun palace at Isfahan depicts a sati (immolation) scene passed through the art market; Losty 2014, pp. 17 – 19, no. 8.
from the Persian writer Nau’i’s Indian romance the Suz u
Gudaz (Burning and Melting).2
Catalogue 249
The lacquered casket attributed to Rahim Deccani was
probably intended for jewels, its cinched and curved shape
reflective of the gaiety of its decoration (cat. 144). Its evoca-
tive scenes depict a sleeping princess dreaming of her absent
lover whose image appears above, a European gallant fluting,
an enthroned prince with attendants, and a dancing courte-
san with singers.1 Also included is a woman in a diaphanous
robe in the Indian salabhanjika pose, grasping the branch
of a tree.
The casket came into the Victoria and Albert Museum,
London, in 1889 from the collection of Jules Richard, a
Frenchman who had acquired it in Iran.2 Its Iranian prove-
nance implies that Rahim may have been working outside
India, possibly in Iran.3 A pen box, signed by the little-known
artist Manohar (cat. 145), contains scenes almost identical to
those on Rahim’s box, which indicate that the jewel casket
must have been in India at some point. One side of Manohar’s
pen box shows men carrying an oversize bunch of grapes,
taken from the allegorical depiction of summer of about 1660
by French artist Nicolas Poussin (1594 – 1665).4 nnh
1. Other works attributed to Rahim Deccani include a pen box in the Freer
and Sacker Galleries, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. (F1959.5);
a Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, painting (cat. 143); two boxes sold at
auction (Zebrowski 1983a, p. 201); and a painting of a youth seated on rocks
Cat. 144 below a willow tree in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London
(Zebrowski 1983a, p. 204, ill. no. 175). 2. Victoria and Albert Museum
records. 3. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 201. 4. Haidar 2004, p. 183.
144
Casket with Painted Scenes 146
Lacquered Pen Box (Qalamdan)
Attributed to Rahim Deccani Attributed to Rahim Deccani or a close follower
Probably Golconda, late 17th century Probably Golconda, late 17th century
Painted and varnished papier-mâché with pierced ivory-base molding, Colors, ink, and gold on papier-mâché and wood, H. 2⅛ in. (5.5 cm),
H. 3¾ in. (9.6 cm), W. 5⅜ in. (13.6 cm), D. 3⅝ in. (9.2 cm) W. 13¼ in. (33.5 cm)
Victoria and Albert Museum, London (851-1889) Collection of Bashir Mohamed, London
This large pen box or qalamdan shows a parrot and a hoo-

145 Lacquered Pen Box (Qalamdan)
poe, each perched on flowering branches while insects buzz
By Manohar about. The subject matter is a variation on the popular gul-o-
Probably Golconda, late 17th century
bulbul (rose and nightingale) theme in Persian painting. The
Painted, gilt, and lacquered papier-mâché, H. 9⅛ in. (23.3 cm),
W. 1⅛ in. (3 cm), D. 1½ in. (3.8 cm) parrot, however, is very much within India’s artistic vocab-
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Cynthia Hazen Polsky ulary, while the hoopoe evokes the famous Persian poem
and Leon B. Polsky Fund, 2002 (2002.416a, b) Mantiq al-Tair (Conference of the Birds) by Farid al-Din
Inscribed: ‘amal-i manohar (Work of Manohar) ‘Attar, where it serves as a spiritual guide. nnh
250 Golconda
Detail of cat. 146
Cat. 145
Cat. 146
Cat. 147
147
Dancing Girl maid have fallen asleep in the heat of a Deccan afternoon.
Nature is alert, though: lively parrots flit between mangoes
Golconda, late 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, image: 4 × 2⅞ in. on a tree while kittens watch with close attention.
(10.3 × 7.3 cm) Nearly identical feminine figures occur in a large paint-
Collection of Dr. Daniel Vasella, Risch, Switzerland ing on cloth depicting the Mughal Prince Azam Shah
(1653 – 1707) on horseback approaching a fort, suggesting that
148 Sleeping Maiden and Maid the main patrons for such images may have been Mughal
Golconda, last quarter of 17th century nobles in the Deccan.2 While the feminine type might have
Ink on paper, 10¼ × 14¼ in. (26 × 36.2 cm) found favor with Mughal patrons, their tinted drawing style,
shadowy effects, and pronounced sweetness relate to the lan-
(Box J4589, F. 4589, fol. 1)
guid style developed by Rahim Deccani and his followers.
nnh
Although the image is fragmentary, the tribhanga (triple
1. Mark Zebrowski first pointed this out in S. C. Welch 1973, pp. 136 – 37,
bend) pose of the bejeweled dancing girl suggests that the no. 81. 2. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 201; K. Desai 2002, pp. 164, 165, no. 157.
painter had a feeling for classical Indian sculpture (cat. 147).1
In a second delicate drawing (cat. 148), both mistress and
Cat. 148
Catalogue 253
149 Sarinda The sarinda is a musical instrument most often associated
with North Indian folk tradition. This example has been
Probably Golconda, ca. 1700 or later
Ivory, hide, rubies, other precious stones, gold, and traces of pigment, attributed to the Deccan on the basis of its material (ivory)
H. 26½ in. (67.3 cm) and ornate decoration that incorporates fantastic creatures
Collection of Bashir Mohamed, London and other Deccan motifs, carved in low relief and inlaid with
rubies and other gems set in gold.1 A group of ivory panels
from a box attributed to Vishakhapatnam of around 1700
is carved with similar figures and motifs, and it includes an
image of a musician playing a sarinda (fig. 79). The Qutb
Shahis ruled Vishakhapatnam on the eastern Andhra coast in
the late seventeenth century.
The crowned and winged male figure (possibly a kinnara)
holding a shield and sword at the top of the sarinda flies above
a group of interlocked figures, in which a dragon-headed
being grasps elephants and bites down on a tiger, which in
turn pounces on a deer. The back of the instrument is carved
with the image of a bird of prey attacking an elephant with its
beak (comparable to the underside view of a double-headed
bird in a Golconda textile, cat. 165), while clutching two
kinnaras bearing Shaivite tilaks (forehead marks). The sides
contain images of two pairs of lovers, one where a man in
Mughal dress holds a falcon in a gloved hand, and the other
where the woman is depicted as a yogini (female ascetic) in
courtly costume. The concave front sections on each side are
carved with the image of a tigress and her cubs, one suckling
and the other playing with the mother’s tail.
A later and smaller copy of the instrument in the Tareq
Rajab Museum, Kuwait, substitutes a gaja-simurgh for the
male figure above and alters other features as well.2 The
present sarinda is said to have been acquired in India by
Lieutenant Colonel John M. MacGregor (1745 – 1822).3 nnh
1. Bor 2003, pp. 118 – 19, no. 60; Bor et al. 2003, p. 8. 2. Tareq Rajab Museum
1990, no. 21. 3. Bor 2003, p. 118. Cokayne 1906, p. 303, lists him as having
been the military auditor general of Bengal.
Cat. 149 Fig. 79. Panel from a Box, northeastern Deccan, ca. 1700. Carved ivory, overall:
11¾ × 5¼ in. (29.8 × 13.4 cm). Cleveland Museum of Art, Gift of George P. Bickford
(1969.229)
254 Golconda
150 Calligraphic Shield The phrase “There is no hero like ‘Ali, and there is no sword
like Dhu’l Faqar” refers to the legendary sword of ‘Ali, and
Probably Deccan, first half of 17th century
Hide, lacquer, gold, copper alloy, and enamel, Diam. 17¾ in. (45 cm) it is inscribed on the shield, twice in the correct orientation
Furusiyya Art Foundation and twice in mirror reflection. The intertwined lam and alef
of the words la and illa in this phrase form a diamond shape
inside of which the words are positioned. ms
Cat. 150
Catalogue 255
Cat. 151
151
Multiple-Niche Prayer Carpet (Saph) This saph has a wool pile and preserves six contigu-
Probably Warangal, 18th century
ous niches, each filled with a different repeating pattern.
Cotton foundation and wool pile, 48 in. × 16 ft. 2 in. (121.9 × 492.8 cm) Columns support the arches of the niches and rosettes dec-
Collection of Marshall and Marilyn R. Wolf, Toronto orate the spandrels, while vines and blossoms fill the rectan-
gular borders.
After conquering cities throughout the Deccan, the Mughal After nearly three decades of research, it is now accepted
Emperor ‘Alamgir (reigned 1658 – 1707) is said to have refur- that carpets were produced in the Deccan, although few early
bished their congregational mosques, adding towering min- examples are known. Carpets are mentioned in historical
arets and domes and repaving their floors with rows of inlaid records as palace furnishings. The appearance of carpets in
niches to indicate individual spaces for prayer. The type of paintings and the existence of a historical collection of car-
carpet, known as a saph, replicates those rows of niches and pets in Bijapur (shared between the Asar Mahal and the
was made in flat-weave and pile versions. Bijapur Archaeological Museum, Gol Gumbaz) imply that
carpets had been both made in and imported to the region.
256 Golconda
A set of criteria, including technical and visual markers, now carpets are smaller and have broadly executed, angular
exists for identifying Deccani carpets. Features that in com- designs; popular in the Netherlands, the Dutch also sold and
bination indicate a Deccani provenance are warps made up gifted them to the Japanese.3 Many more carpets survive
of as many as ten cotton threads; a high alternate warp dis- from the eighteenth century, when other types, including
placement; the use of mustard yellow, orange, tan, and deep saphs like this one and a variety with trellis patterns (cat. 183),
red with a preference for a ton-sur-ton color palette; and the became more common. ms
appearance of angular border elements and raceme motifs.1
1. Key publications include S. Cohen 1986; Walker 1997; Sindermann
The earliest Deccani carpets can be dated to the sev- 1999 – 2000; S. Cohen 2011; Kamada 2011. 2. Walker 1997, pp. 171 – 72,
enteenth century. This group, including grand carpets at no. 33, figs. 119, 120, pp. 173 – 74, no. 42, figs. 140, 141. 3. This type is depicted
in European, primarily Dutch, paintings beginning in the seventeenth
Boughton House, Kettering, England, and the Museum century, but the only surviving carpets of this type are from the eighteenth
of Islamic Art, Doha, is Persianate in design, like the car- century. See Ydema 1991.
pets depicted in contemporary Deccani paintings.2 Another,

more modest group was made for the foreign market. These
Catalogue 257
zx
zx
zx
zx
Inscribed Sacred Vessels
b
A
n accomplished metalworking technique of the Deccan is the decoration of
vessels with inscriptions that are found in relief on their exterior and, most impressively,
on their interior surfaces. The most common types of these vessels are curved kashkuls
(beggars’ bowls), round dishes or trays, stemmed cups, and small bowls with everted rims con-
taining Arabic thuluth inscriptions that generally evoke God, Muhammad, ‘Ali, and Fatima, indi-
cating that they were made in a Shi‘a milieu. They also frequently contain the Nadi ‘Aliyan (call
to ‘Ali) phrases from the Qur’an and Arabic poems such as the Qasida al-Burda (Poem of the
Scarf ).1 Some vessels have sacred inscriptions associated with curing the sick and, therefore, may
have been intended for medicinal use.
Certain epigraphic anomalies characterize this group of vessels.2 One concerns the treat-
ment of the shahada (declaration of faith) — la ilaha illa allah muhammad rasul-ullah (there is
no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger) — followed by the Shi‘a supplement of ‘ali
wali ullah (and ‘Ali is his regent). In some instances the inscriptions are composed in a manner
that if read in a straight line appear to state la illaha illa ‘Ali, rather than la ilaha illa-llah. This
would imply that ‘Ali has the status of God, an unlikely assertion even for pious Shi‘as. These
phrases either are composed as three stacked lines or appear in a straight-line arrangement.3
Calligraphers, it seems, interwove the inscriptions to be read in a flexible manner (up, down, or
across) by an educated audience schooled to understand any esoteric meaning contained therein.
Another peculiarity of inscribed vessels from the Deccan is the treatment of certain words
that are divided or broken up with some letters appearing far from one another, or with letters
intentionally reversed back to front, likely owing to compositional balance or artistic license.
One example is a tray from the Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad,
which arranges the word qarib (close) in two separate parts (cat. 102). Another example is a bowl
from the David Collection, Copenhagen, that includes the word murtaza (an epithet of ‘Ali)
written backward as taza-mur.4
Yet another observation has centered on the Arabic letter dal occasionally appearing after
the word qul (recite) in some dishes. It has been suggested that the letter dal stands for the word
da’iman (forever).5 Alternatively the letter can be read as part of the phrase ya ‘ali madad (O ‘Ali,
help) or just madad.6
The bowl in the David Collection reputedly dated a.h. 1000 (a.d. 1591 – 92) and a tray in the
Bijapur Archaelogical Museum, Gol Gumbaz, allegedly dated a.h. 1084 (a.d. 1673 – 74) were
thought to provide a time frame for the production of these vessels, but this conclusion cannot

be confirmed upon our reexamination. 7 Meanwhile, it appears that a kashkul from the Indictor
collection in New York may contain a date of a.h. 1055 (a.d. 1645) (cat. 157). Another vessel
recently seen at auction and reputedly inscribed to Bari Sahib, mother of ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (reigned
1656 – 72), is dated to that period.8 Therefore, most of the group may belong to the mid- to late
seventeenth century. ag/ms/nnh
Since the inscription content of these vessels is discussed in the body of each entry, it is not fully transcribed as in other objects in this
volume. 1. On an unpublished vessel in the collection of Jagdish Mittal, Hyderabad. 2. This set of features was identified in Zebrowski
1997, pp. 337 – 38. 3. The three-line composition is seen on a dish in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (cat. 155); another
unpublished dish in a private collection, London; a kashkul in the collection of Rina and Norman Indictor, New York (cat. 157); and a
kashkul in the Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad (Zebrowski 1997, p. 344, pl. 566). The straight-line composi-
tion is seen in the following objects: on the rims of two spouted vessels, one in The Metropolitan Museum of Art collection (cat. 159) and
the other formerly in the Welch collection (Sotheby’s 2011a, p. 176, lot 141); on the inner rim of a bowl in the Indictor collection (cat. 158);
and at the center of the large round thali in the Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad (cat. 102). 4. Zebrowski
1997, p. 339, pl. 554. 5. David Collection, Copenhagen (11/1992; ibid.), as read by Ralph Pinder-Wilson; see also Melikian-Chirvani 1982,
pp. 349 – 50, no. 164. 6. This phrase occurs on these objects: the Indictor collection kashkul and bowl (cats. 157 – 58), the David Collection
kashkul (cat. 156), and an unpublished dish in the collection of Jagdish Mittal. 7. Zebrowski 1997, p. 339, pls. 554, 555. 8. Formerly in the
Welch collection; Sotheby’s 2011a, p. 185, lot 153.
260 Golconda
Cat. 152
152 Incantation Cup and Tray individual to secure healing of a strictly spiritual nature; what-
Deccan, 17th century ever the case, the verses clearly rendered them more licit.
Cast and engraved bronze; cup: H. 3 in. (7.5 cm), Diam. 4⅜ in. (11.1 cm), In terms of ornament, the cup is decorated on the exterior
tray: H. ⅜ in. (1 cm), Diam. 6¾ in. (17.2 cm) with floral medallions and is bordered, just below the rim,
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
(LNS 823 M ab)
by a band of lotus petals. The interiors of the cup and tray
are inscribed in thuluth style against a hachured ground with
Incantation vessels inscribed with magic formulas spiraling two chapters from the Qur’an that proclaim belief in the one-
or in concentric bands around their inner walls have served ness of God and reject polytheism. They include the Surat
since pre-Islamic times as a means to heal various afflictions al-Kafirun (chapter 109), which was reportedly revealed when
and ward off evil. The practice of drinking concoctions pre- the Muslims were persecuted in Mecca, and Surat al-Ikhlas
pared in such bowls while reciting devotional prayers endured (chapter 112), revealed when the Prophet Muhammad was
in the Muslim world and most probably continues up to the taunted by polytheists.
present. Incantation bowls and trays from the Islamic period At first glance, other than being beautifully inscribed, the
inscribed with magic numbers and letters, astrological signs, cup and tray seem rather commonplace, but on closer exam-
and esoteric symbols together with pious phrases are extant, ination, one is struck by how skillfully the inscription layout
but in a few cases, such as the present example, inscriptions was planned. On both the cup and tray, the bands bordering
were restricted to verses from the Qur’an.1 This leads one to the outer edges start with the basmalah (invocation of faith)
assume that these two vessels were commissioned by a pious and the Surat al-Kafirun, which is interrupted in the middle of
Catalogue 261
verse five but continues to the end of verse six in the adjacent 153
Epigraphic Bowl
band. In the second band from the edge, the Surat al-Ikhlas
likewise starts with the basmalah, is interrupted at the very Cast, engraved, and tinned bronze, H. 2⅞ in. (7.2 cm), Diam. max.
beginning of verse three, and concludes in the last concentric 6⅛ in. (15.6 cm)
band that centers on the roundel with the invocation “O God.” David Collection, Copenhagen (8/1991)
Both roundels on the cup and tray that enclose the invocation
are identical in style and size, and the direction of the script Like the Al-Sabah Collection, Kuwait, cup (cat. 152), this bowl
that surrounds them is featured in counterchanging orienta- has verses on the interior only; at the center are the names
tion. Thus, when viewed from above, when the cup is on the Allah, Muhammad, and ‘Ali; the statement “There is no youth
tray, the effect of a spiraling inscription becomes even more but ‘Ali, no sword but Dhu’l Faqar”; and verse 2:255 from the
dynamic, encouraging a rhythmic, repeated recitation. sk Qur’an, associated by Hadith with the ability to heal. The
exterior has a band of lappets around the rim and the foot,
1. Savage-Smith 1997.
while the body is decorated with floral motifs and escutch-
eons bearing blossoms on filets. The small handles that curve
in opposite directions from the lip of the bowl are unusual
and give the object its unique profile. ms
Cat. 153
262 Golconda
Cat. 154 Cat. 155
154
Inscribed Dish phrase begins in the lower left of the outer band and contin-
ues into the second circle, ending with the names of Allah,
Cast and engraved copper alloy, Diam. 7½ in. (19 cm) Muhammad, and ‘Ali at the center.
Private collection, London The phrase at the center of the dish from The Metropolitan
Museum of Art (cat. 155) was intended to convey the message,
155
Inscribed Dish “There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of
Deccan, ca. 1600 God, ‘Ali is the regent of God.” Read line by line, however, the
Cast copper alloy, H. ¼ in. (0.6 cm), Diam. 5⅞ in. (14.9 cm) words state: “There is no god but ‘Ali/God, Muhammad is the
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Wendy F. regent of God/The messenger of God.” These central inscrip-
Findlay Gift, 1983 (1983.227)
tions interweave the two phrases in a manner seen in sev-
eral other vessels, likely to intensify their esoteric qualities.
On catalogue number 154, the composition of concentric Around the rim of the dish are the verses, “And we reveal of
bands of text surrounding a single name, ‘Ali, is similar to the Qur’an that which is a healing and a mercy to the believ-
the arrangement and function of the verses on the Al-Sabah ers, and it adds only to the perdition of the unjust” (Qur’an
Collection, Kuwait, tray (cat. 152), and it is likely this was also 17:82); “Peace, a word from the Lord of mercy” (Qur’an 36:58);
a tray for a small cup from which to drink healing water. The “Peace, it is until the break of dawn” (Qur’an 97:5); and “fin-
center of the dish is surrounded by two inscribed bands with ished” (tammat).1 Another unpublished dish in a private
verses from the Qur’an (2:196): “And do not shave your heads collection contains virtually the same design and was likely
until the sacrificial animal has reached its place of slaughter. issued from the same rubbing. ag/ms
And whoever among you is ill or has an ailment of the head
1. The inscriptions were read by Annemarie Schimmel, 1986.
must offer a ransom of fasting or charity or sacrifice.” The
Catalogue 263
Cat. 156
156
Beggar’s Bowl ( Kashkul) The kashkul in the Indictor collection (cat. 157) also
Deccan, ca. 1600
includes prayers and Qur’anic verses. It is further inscribed
Cast, engraved, and tinned bronze, H. 6⅝ in. (16.7 cm), W. 15⅛ in. with the date a.h. 1055 (a.d. 1645), which appears in two
(38.5 cm), D. 6¼ in. (16 cm) parts across the inner base; the name of a later owner,
David Collection, Copenhagen (61/1998) Saadullah Shah; and the dates a.h. 1161 (a.d. 1748) and
a.h. 1162 (a.d. 1749). ms/ag
These begging bowls, or kashkuls, may have been donated
1. The inscriptions were read by Manijeh Bayani in 1999 (files, David
to a sufi shrine, and therefore, may have had a slightly dif- Collection, Copenhagen).
ferent function from the previous objects in this group
(cats. 152 – 55). Nonetheless, their decorative elements place
157 Beggar’s Bowl ( Kashkul )
them in the same metalworking tradition. In the example
from the David Collection, Copenhagen (cat. 156), the bold Deccan, a.h. 1055 (a.d. 1645)
Copper alloy, H. 5 in. (12.7 cm), W. 14½ in. (36.8 cm), D. 4 in. (10.2 cm)
inscriptions proclaim invocations to ‘Ali, prayers to the Collection of Rina and Norman Indictor, New York
Prophet Muhammad and his daughter Fatima, and excerpts
from the Qur’an.1 Escutcheons filled with floral arabesques
and lappets complete the decoration.
264 Golconda
Inside of cat. 157
Cat. 157
Cat. 158
158 Epigraphic Bowl 159

Spouted Vessel with Qur’anic Verses and the
Deccan, ca. 1600 Names of the Shi‘a Imams
Cast and engraved copper alloy, H. 2½ in. (6.4 cm), Diam. 4½ in. Golconda or Bijapur, 17th century
(11.4 cm) Chased and worked copper alloy, H. 5⅛ in. (13 cm), Diam. 4½ in.
Collection of Rina and Norman Indictor, New York (11.5 cm)
The condition of this bowl reveals that it was made in two Islamic Art Gifts, 2014 (2014.689)
parts that were joined together; several elements of resto-
ration are also visible. It contains the phrases nasrun min-i Set into one of only two known spouted vessels of this balus-
allah wa fathun qarib (victory from Allah and an imminent ter shape, the inscriptions in the roundels provide the names
conquest) and wa bashshir al-mu’minin (give good tidings to of the Shi‘a imams.1 Other inscriptions quote the Qur’an
the believers) (Qur’an 61:13). It also quotes the Surat al-Ikhlas while the spout declares the Shi‘a credo of the Nadi ‘Aliyan
(Qur’an 112). nnh (call to ‘Ali). nnh
1. See Sotheby’s 2011a, p. 176, lot 141, for the other spouted vessel, which
was decorated with bands of calligraphic ornament.
266 Golconda
Cat. 159
zx
zx
zx
zx
The Courtly Tradition of Kalamkaris
b
b
T
he pictorial and written evidence suggests the Deccani courts were swathed in
fabric. Among the clothing shown in portraits are gold brocaded patkas and odhanis
(sashes and scarves), and sheer jamas and cholis (robes and blouses) of particularly fine
manufacture. While these were likely made domestically, fabrics from abroad were also readily
available, including Chinese silks, Kirman rugs, Kashmir shawls, and bolts of metal-threaded
brocades from the workshop of Khwaja Ghiyath, such as those sent by Shah ‘Abbas I (reigned
1587 – 1629) of Iran to Muhammad Qutb Shah (reigned 1612 – 26). On special occasions, architec-
tural spaces were decorated with textiles of all sorts — z arbafts (gold brocades with vegetal
designs), atlasi (silk satin), velvet, and milak-kar (textiles from Ramshir, Iran)—which together
evoked “paradise.” 1
Aside from a small group of seventeenth-century carpets preserved in the Asar Mahal,
Bijapur, and elsewhere, none of these fabrics are known. Instead, we have kalamkaris, a kind of
dyed textile created through a complicated process involving the separate application of mor-
dants, resists, and dyes for each color in the composition.2 The coastal zone of the eastern Deccan
has long been associated with the production of these textiles. This region was particularly suited
for kalamkari manufacturing because the water contained the mineral content necessary for
developing the dyes, and the required dyestuffs were locally grown, most notably the chay plant,
whose root produces the rich red that characterizes these cloths. The creation of kalamkaris is
presumed to have started long before the seventeenth century, but no surviving textiles are dated
earlier than this era, which is supported by records from European travelers and trading
companies listing cities and ports along the Coromandel Coast as the source for dyed textiles of
various designs.3
The kalamkaris in this exhibition, therefore, represent the beginning of the known tradi-
tion, reflecting the tastes of the Deccani courts before production was transformed in the
service of foreign markets in Europe and Asia.4 These textiles were made primarily in three
formats, including small rectangular cloths with figures arranged against floral backgrounds
(called rumals; cats. 160 – 62); large hangings, possibly tent panels, with figures and animals
arranged within arched niches (cats. 163 – 65); and floorspreads with a central field surrounded
by decorative borders.5
Animals and courtly figures are the primary subjects of these textiles. The animals appear in
the backgrounds of several rumals and the hangings, but as in the case of the tent panels from
the Victoria and Albert Museum, London (cat. 165), or the “Tapis Moghol,”6 they may also take
over the entire decorative field of the textile. Aside from straightforward depictions of leopards,
hares, birds, or sheep, there are fantastic composites that appear in Deccani paintings or that are
typically associated with southern India.

The depiction of people also points to the textiles’ rootedness in the particular artistic world
of the Deccan. The men’s dress is generally Persianate in style, but some wear costume more
typical of the seventeenth-century Safavid realms: turbans of a long cloth bound with the ends
protruding from the top, rather than the Indian caplike turban with a band across the front; and
coats fastened by buttons or frogging down the center of the garment, rather than the Indian
jama that crosses over the chest and secures under one arm. Heavy-hipped women wearing
South Indian-style saris and holding jewels in a type of openwork setting associated with the
Deccan (cats. 134–38) also populate the textiles, as well as European figures, some quoted directly
from known print sources. Other links, specifically to Deccani architecture and wall paintings,
are suggested by the depiction of buildings and the use of floral garlands in the backgrounds of
the large figural hangings.7
Kalamkaris of this type did find favor, however, well beyond the Deccan, with strong evi-
dence for their circulation throughout India, particularly to the north. An English agent noted in
1636 that no stock was available to him, because of its requisitioning by the Qutb Shahi ruler for
sale to the Persian and Mughal markets.8 In addition, several textiles have a Rajasthani prove-
nance from the treasury of the Kachhwaha kings at Amber, with stamps indicating their location
in this collection beginning in the 1650s (cats. 160 – 62, 181).9 ms
1. Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah, written by an anonymous author in a.h. Sha‘ban 1026 (July – August 1617). Translated by Maryam
Ekhtiar from a manuscript copy in the India Office Records, British Library, London (I.O. 179 [Ethé 456]). 2. For an illustrated descrip-
tion of the process, see Gittinger 1982, pp. 24 – 26. 3. Some of the European sources are surveyed in Baker 1921; see also the contempo-
rary account of William Methwold in Methwold 1931, p. 35. 4. The foundational text on this group is Irwin 1959. 5. John Irwin has
suggested that these different types were made in places along the Coromandel Coast, associating the rumals and floorspreads with the
cultural sphere of the Golconda court of the northern Deccan and the hangings, in which he states “Hindu elements” predominate, with
the southern Deccan, particularly the towns of Madras, Pulicat, and San Thome; Irwin and Brett 1970, pp. 13 – 15. Among the various
issues with this division, the notion of separating the rumals from the large hangings is particularly problematic in light of the many
details they share. Maintaining the larger group of figural textiles, whether or not they can be assigned to a specific place of production,
seems wiser. 6. Musée de l’Impression sur étoffes, Mulhouse (986.50.1); Crill 2004. 7. Varadarajan 1981. 8. India Office Records, British
Library, London, Official Correspondence, no. 1552, quoted in Irwin 1959, p. 15. 9. Several others, including the so-called Brooklyn
Curtain (Brooklyn Museum, 14.719.1 – .7) and the Cincinnati rumal (Cincinnati Art Museum, 1962.465), were purchased in North India
through the dealer Imre Schwaiger, who is known to have assisted the Jaipur royal family in selling works of art from their collection,
suggesting yet another point of connection to Rajasthan. Ellen Smart has taken this evidence to indicate that the textiles were made in
northern India, suggesting possible production centers such as Broach, Sironj, Sanganer, and Delhi; see Smart 1986; Ellen S. Smart in
Losty 2013, pp. 100 – 105, no. 11. While the authors stand by the Deccan attribution for the group of textiles published here, they do not
dismiss the likelihood of some kalamkaris with their own distinct characteristics having been produced in northern India — for instance,
a summer carpet that recently came on the market; Smart in Losty 2013, pp. 100 – 105, no. 11.
270 Golconda
160 – 162 Kalamkari Rumals Within the group of mid-seventeenth-century kalamkaris
with figural decoration are eight smaller pieces with a central
Golconda region of Coromandel Coast, ca. 1640 – 50
Mordant-painted and -dyed and resist-dyed plain-weave rectangular field surrounded by borders of varying widths.1
cotton; cat. 160: 24 × 36 in. (61 × 91.4 cm), cat. 161: 25¼ × 36 in. The central field is typically filled with scenes capturing inti-
(64.1 × 91.4 cm), cat 162: 32 × 35 in. (81.3 × 88.9 cm) mate interactions (a music performance, a look between
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Rogers Fund, 1928
(28.159.1 – .3)
lovers) or mundane activities (sewing, hunting). Though
unrelated, the individual vignettes are united by the applica-
Inscribed on cat. 160: Amber inventory mark on reverse with date of
a.h. 1084 ( a.d. 1673 – 74)
tion of pattern to all elements of the textile and a busy back-
ground of trees, plants, rocky outcrops, and animals in action.
a.h. 1101 ( a.d. 1689) and a.h. 1113 ( a.d. 1701)
Such textiles have been called rumals, a word liter-
ally meaning “face wiping” and used to designate cloths
a.h. 1061 (a.d. 1650) and a.h. 1062 (a.d. 1651)
employed not only as handkerchiefs and towels, but also as
Cat. 160
Catalogue 271
Cat. 161
coverings for trays.2 It is this last context that has been pro- Though produced by artisans outside the court work-
posed for the kalamkari rumals, and it has been speculated shop system, the imagery on the early seventeenth-century
that they were used specifically in the presentation of gifts.3 kalamkaris shows an awareness of the latest trends in paint-
Paintings of court scenes do not depict gifts being presented ings, and they may have been made from designs provided by
under such cloths, but that does not rule out such an identi- court artists.
fication; we might also propose their use as furnishings, cov- These three rumals are among a set of kalamkaris bearing
ering cushions, or laid on the floor as a small sofra (spread) inventory marks from the Amber storehouse, dated between
for an individual. 1650 and 1701; perhaps these were purchased by or presented
272 Golconda
Cat. 162
to Mirza Raja Jai Singh I (reigned 1622 – 67) of Amber, who Museum, London (IS.34-1969); two in the National Museum, New Delhi;
and the three in the present entry. 2. Yule and Burnell 1903, p. 769; Indian
served in the Deccan and died at Burhanpur.4 ms Heritage 1982, p. 171. 3. Ellen S. Smart in Smart and Walker 1985,
p. 90. 4. The amassing of fine textiles during his reign has been studied by
1. One in each of the following collections: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston Smart 1986.
(66.230), Cincinnati Art Museum (1962.465), and Victoria and Albert
Catalogue 273
163 – 164 Kalamkari Hangings vide interesting evidence for the circulation of European art
in the Deccan, in addition to what can be gleaned from works
Golconda region of Coromandel Coast, ca. 1640 – 50
Mordant-painted and -dyed and resist-dyed plain-weave cotton; on paper: the equestrian figure in The Metropolitan Museum
cat. 163: 8 ft. 4 in. × 78 in. (254 × 198.1 cm), The Metropolitan Museum of Art hanging (cat. 163) directly quotes an English portrait
of Art, New York, Gift of Mrs. Albert Blum, 1920 (20.79); cat. 164: 8 ft. type of the 1620s and 1630s; while the men in the Victoria
6 in. × 59⅞ in. (259 × 152 cm), Victoria and Albert Museum, London
(687-1898)
and Albert Museum’s hanging (cat. 164) appear from their
clothing to be Dutch of the same era and reproduced from an
as-yet-unidentified source.2
The figures on these two panels, once part of the same large These panels, now in New York and London, were cut
hanging, include men and women in an array of fashions apart and framed with blue- and white-ground chintzes
indicating their origins in Armenia, India, Iran, and west- sometime in the nineteenth century.3 Using a textile of sim-
ern Europe. 1 The somewhat naive depiction of figures and ilar scale and layout from the Calico Museum of Textiles,
architectural features is quite different from that displayed in Ahmedabad, as a guide, one can reconstruct the original
court painting of the time, but this can be explained by the textile to which these fragments belonged: a grand hanging
fact that, similar to carpets and arms, these dyed textiles were of approximately twenty-five feet in length with several pan-
not direct products of the court but rather created in places els like these flanking a central panel with figures on a larger
where the necessary materials were available. Yet, they pro- scale. It was likely used to create an outdoor enclosure of the
type used on special occasions in Hyderabad. A precursor to
this type of tent lining in the Brooklyn Museum, dated to the
1620s, consists of seven adjoining panels, each with figures of
a different ethnicity.4
The effect of the enclosed space created by the hangings,
in which viewers would have been surrounded by an array
of figures from Indian, Persian, and European worlds, must
have been overwhelming but seems to relate to an aesthetic
that was widespread in the Deccan for covering the walls
of palaces with paintings or textiles in a medley of sub-
jects — great rulers, literary figures, angels, musicians, and
dancers. Comparable works were also made for use in the
Vijayanagara realms,5 and they also found a market in north-
ern India. While neither of these panels has Amber inventory
marks, the Calico Museum example includes such a mark.
ms
1. See the more detailed discussion in Sardar 2011. 2. Both as identified by

Irwin 1959, pp. 36 – 37. 3. Further fragments of this hanging or a related
hanging may be identified in other museum collections, for example,
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond (39.8.1), and Victoria and Albert
Museum, London (IS.16-1956). 4. Nina Gwatkin in Gittinger 1982,
pp. 89 – 108. 5. One, formerly in a Japanese collection (Irwin 1959,
pp. 32 – 33, fig. 1), the other now held by the Association pour l’Étude et la
Documentation des Textiles d’Asie, Paris (2221).
Cat. 163
274 Golconda
Cat. 164
165
Panel from a Kalamkari Tent Hanging Unknown until its fairly recent acquisition by the Victoria
and Albert Museum, London, this section of a tent lining has
Golconda region of the Coromandel Coast, ca. 1640 – 50
Mordant-painted and -dyed and resist-dyed plain-weave cotton, expanded the repertoire of Deccani kalamkaris in fascinat-
91 × 76 in. (231 × 193 cm) ing ways. The bold imagery of a swooping, double-headed
Victoria and Albert Museum, London (IS.19-1989) eagle and snarling birds of prey is quite unlike that found
on the kalamkaris with courtly figures, although the range
of colors, subsidiary motifs, and style of drawing suggests
they all came from a similar place and era of production.
Another panel from the same tent is in the National Museum,
New Delhi (fig. 80).
This piece can be connected to a smaller subgroup of the
mid-seventeenth-century kalamkaris that feature fantastic
and composite animals. While the two other examples appear
to have been used on the floor, the format of this textile — a
repeating length with cusped arches separated by floral
borders — suggests it was used as a tent lining, and its imag-
ery accords well with a setting in an army encampment. A
group of daggers with zoomorphic hilts similarly depict pairs
of animals in combat (cats. 25, 63), as do carvings on several
gateways to forts in the Deccan (such as Golconda, Kaulas,
Koyilkonda, and Gavilgarh). In the latter context, in particu-
lar, one can also find the gandaberunda, the double-headed
eagle grasping elephants in its claws, which was a symbol of
royalty in southern India. The difference in this textile is that
the eagle is shown flying downward rather than in the more
conventional upright posture. ms
Cat. 165
Fig. 80. Qanat with Five Niche Panels, Deccan, mid-17th century. Painted cotton, 87¾ in. × 14 ft. 9½ in. (223 × 451 cm).
National Museum, New Delhi (48.7 / 29)
276 Golconda Detail of cat. 161

Catalogue 277
Drawn to the Deccan
mughals and europeans in the deccan
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F The Mughals in the Deccan
F
F F
F F
Terence McInerney
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
T
he mughals of Central Asia were the last of the Muslim invaders from the northwest
to create an empire in India. Established in 1526 by the emperor Babur (reigned 1526 – 30),
a descendant of Timur (Tamerlane) on his father’s side and Genghis Khan on his moth-
er’s, the Mughal Empire endured until it was replaced by the new British overlords of India in
1857. The empire was placed on firm footing by the great Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605),
who conquered most of the Hindu and Muslim regions of North India in the late sixteenth cen-
tury. It reached its greatest territorial extent during the reign of his great-grandson, Emperor
‘Alamgir (reigned 1658 – 1707, born Prince Aurangzeb, cat. 166), whose kingdom stretched from
Afghanistan in the west to Burma in the east, from the mountainous Himalayas in the north to
just short of Cape Comorin in the south. By the late seventeenth century, almost all of the sub-
continent had submitted to ‘Alamgir’s haughty will.
Akbar, in wishing to expand his empire beyond an eight-hundred-mile radius of Agra, Delhi,
and Lahore — the principal cities of Mughal India — faced an impenetrable barrier south of the
Narmada River: the three (originally five) Islamic kingdoms of the Deccan — Ahmadnagar,
Bijapur, and Golconda — the steadfast guardians of peninsular India against northern encroach-
ments. Thus, from the time of Akbar, it became a cardinal goal of Mughal foreign policy to
advance southward, destroy or weaken the Deccani kingdoms, and absorb their populations
and wealth into the Mughal realm. In the roughly one-hundred-year, epic struggle that ensued,
the two sides were unevenly matched, the Mughals having much greater resources and manpower
along with the strategic cleverness to exacerbate the mutual mistrust among the Deccani king-
doms. Akbar ordered an invasion of the Deccan in 1595 and withdrew in 1596 after having con-
quered the Islamic sultanate of Khandesh and much of Ahmadnagar, including the former
kingdom of Berar. These territories were conjoined to become a Mughal viceroyalty (the tradi-
tional perquisite of the monarch’s son) with its capital at Burhanpur. Despite the shrewd machi-
nations of the Ethiopian-born general Malik ‘Ambar (1548 – 1626), the remnants of Ahmadnagar
eventually fell to the Mughals, if only nominally, during the rule of Emperor Jahangir (reigned
1605 – 27), who was not otherwise particularly aggressive in his Deccani policy. Restive elements
in Ahmadnagar limped on, it seems, but only for nine more years.
Fig. 81. Door, Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb), Tomb of Dilras Banu Begam, Aurangabad, 1661 281
Pages 278–79: (left) Detail of cat. 169b; (right) Floral Motif, Exterior, Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb), Aurangabad, 1661
Jahangir sent his son, Prince Khurram, the future Emperor Shah Jahan (reigned 1628 – 58), to
Burhanpur, one of the empire’s largest and wealthiest cities, to serve as viceroy. (Its prosperity
lasted until about 1670.) Located in one of India’s great cotton-producing regions, it had become
famous for its painted, printed, and embroidered textiles. A locus of exchange and production,
this cosmopolitan city was replete with merchants from abroad and all over India, as well as
sophisticated craftsmen of every description. Prince Khurram arrived in 1616, remained for
about a year, and returned in 1621 to conclude another series of mostly ineffective treaties. This
time, however, he stayed in the Deccan until court machinations caused him to rebel against his
father in 1622. During the uprising, Prince Khurram fled Burhanpur and, along with his family
and a dwindling group of followers, was given sanctuary for several months in the neighboring
city and great fort of Golconda. At the end of his revolt in 1625, he agreed to stay in the Deccan,
where he served as viceroy once again, until Jahangir’s death in 1627.
By then, the boundaries of the Mughal Deccan had not changed much. Ahmadnagar was
more or less finished, but Bijapur and Golconda were still fully independent, and the Mughals
remained confined to the north and northwest in their viceroyalty centered on Burhanpur. During
this period of relative peace and political standoff, the art of the Deccani sultanates reached its
greatest florescence. At the same time, the Mughals continued their grand architectural patron-
age, embellishing Burhanpur with palaces, pavilions, walled gardens, tombs decorated with
wall paintings, and hamams (public baths), also replete with wall paintings dating from Prince
Khurram’s term as viceroy. Notably, as far as one knows, no branch of court painting was ever
produced there, only textiles, works of decorative art, and architecture.
This period of Mughal laissez-faire could not last forever. During the reign of Shah Jahan,
who, of course, knew the local population very well, the days of Deccani independence came
to an end. Shah Jahan was of two minds about conquering Bijapur and Golconda. The strict,
religious conservatives in his realm believed that one Muslim state should never wage war against
another. The imperialists and non-Muslims, whom Shah Jahan also wished to placate, believed
the declared faith of a desired territory was of no concern to an expansion-minded emperor. As
Shah Jahan vacillated, his foreign policy was inconsistent, but the gist of his actions from 1627
onward was to emasculate the two kingdoms but leave them intact.
Shah Jahan put this policy into full effect in 1636, when at the head of a vast army, he invaded
the Deccan, as emperor. Golconda, instead of being vanquished, agreed to become a Mughal
vassal state, guarding the southern boundary of his empire. Later that year, Shah Jahan com-
pelled the ruler of Bijapur, Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (reigned 1627 – 56), to sign a similar treaty. Also
in 1636 Shah Jahan appointed his third son, Prince Aurangzeb, as viceroy, in part to oversee com-
pliance with the treaties. During his eight-year term (1636 – 44), the future “hammer” of the
Deccan moved the capital in 1636 from the city of Burhanpur to the small town of Khirki, which
he renamed Aurangabad after himself, and continued the rebel Malik ‘Ambar’s previous archi-
tectural improvements on a much grander scale. Aurangzeb built palaces, gardens, and various
edifices in this new capital, which was strategically much closer to the great fort at Daulatabad as
well as to Bijapur and Golconda. From the late seventeenth to the mid-eighteenth century,
Aurangabad was the principal city and administrative center in the region, a distinction it held
282 Drawn to the Deccan

until 1763, when Hyderabad (near Golconda) became the capital of the revived Deccani state
ruled by the Asaf Jahis.
Aurangzeb’s rule as viceroy ended in 1644, but in 1653, he was reappointed to the position,
which he occupied until he became Emperor ‘Alamgir in 1658. Aurangzeb could have destroyed
the sultanate of Golconda in 1656 and that of Bijapur in 1657, but his archenemy, his older brother
and Shah Jahan’s favorite, Prince Dara Shikoh (1615 – 1659), convinced the emperor to redeploy
Aurangzeb’s vast armies; consequently Aurangzeb’s push to destroy the remaining Deccani king-
doms was put on hold. During his second term as viceroy, Aurangzeb, who was not known for
his artistic appreciation, quite unexpectedly became a patron of the arts, creating in his palace a
painting atelier composed of artists from both the Deccan and North India. Aurangabad was
emerging as a major center of patronage, in keeping with other places in the Mughal Deccan.
Like Akbar, Aurangzeb was a man of action. He spent the second half of his long reign,
indeed from 1683 on, in the Deccan, concentrating almost single-mindedly on local affairs. In
meticulously prepared military campaigns and with the full resources of the empire at his com-
mand, he invaded, besieged, and vanquished Bijapur in 1686 and Golconda in 1687, sending the
ruling families to prison or into permanent exile. The resolute emperor gave both territories to
Mughal governors, who answered to a dominant viceroy, and amalgamated them into the newly
enlarged Deccani viceroyalty. For the first time since the fourteenth century, the Deccan and
North India were reunited under a single ruler.
During the seventeenth century, the works of art that the Mughals sponsored in the Deccan
and the Deccani art that was influenced by their culture were not slavishly derivative or qualita-
tively inferior.1 After 1687, what remained of the Deccan was absorbed into the Mughal Empire
and the new, mixed Mughal-Deccani culture (particularly in painting and language) became the
high culture for the entire region. After 1687, and under Mughal and later Hyderabadi leadership,
art from the Deccan flourished once again.
Yet, as Aurangzeb was to soon learn, the components of his vast empire, post-1687, would
never walk in lockstep with one another: regional ambitions and tastes would always rise to the
surface, destroying the uniformity he desperately craved. In the end, did the Mughals conquer
the Deccanis or did the Deccanis — with their happy-go-lucky inclinations — conquer the
Mughals? The marvelous Mughal-Deccani paintings and lifestyle that resulted from all of the
bloodshed suggest that each side learned something from the other.
1. The masterpieces of this Mughal-Deccani style include a portrait of Aurangzeb (cat. 166); the double-page composition shared by the
Barlow Collection (John Seyller in Mason 2001, pp. 114 – 15, no. 42) and the Cincinnati Art Museum (Ellen S. Smart in Smart and Walker
1985, pp. 47 – 48, no. 25); Prince Azam Shah Galloping across a Rocky Meadow in a private collection (Zebrowski 1983a, p. 214, ill. no. 183,
p. 229, colorpl. XXI); and the early eighteenth-century ragamala series said to be from Bidar (Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 226 – 28, 231, 232,
o
ill. nos. 199 – 203).
The Mughals in the Deccan 283

Fig. 82. Arabic-Sanskrit Foundation Inscription and Qibla Wall, Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque), Burhanpur, 1588
Fig. 83. Mughal-Period Baths, Shahi Palace, Burhanpur, 1630s

zx
zx
zx
zx
Burhanpur and Aurangabad
b
T
he architecture of Burhanpur and Aurangabad, the two major Mughal settle-
ments in the Deccan, bears witness to their extended presence in the region. These cities
were not merely a camping ground for the Mughals, but a home-away-from-home, where
royal families were born and raised, where princes and princesses were buried, and where, even-
tually, victory over the Deccan was sealed.
Burhanpur was established around 1400 as the capital of Khandesh, ruled by the Faruqi
dynasty (1382 – 1601). There the Faruqi sultans erected many fine monuments, including the 1588
Jami Masjid (Congregational Mosque) with its bilingual Arabic-Sanskrit foundation inscription
(fig. 82) and stone-construction style typical of the northern Deccan. Emperor Akbar (reigned
1556–1605) added his own inscription to the mosque upon capturing Burhanpur in 1601, and in
1615, his brilliant general ‘Abd al-Rahim Khan-i Khanan sponsored construction of a still-
functioning qanat (underground channel) to supply water to the city and its surrounding farms.
Further additions to the city were classically Mughal in style, transplanting northern build-
ing methods, quite directly it seems, to the middle of the country. During his Deccan campaign
of the 1630s, Shah Jahan (reigned 1628–58) occupied the former Faruqi palace (later the Shahi
Palace) on the Tapti River (fig. 84). His most notable additions to these buildings are the
baths, which retain some of their seventeenth-century painted decoration (fig. 83). It is likely
that at these palaces Shah Jahan received the conciliatory envoys of Golconda’s ‘Abdullah
Qutb Shah (reigned 1626–72), who came bearing gifts of horses, elephants, and a payment of
30,000 hun in February 1631.1
Across the river and away from the city was the Ahukhana (Deer House), a palace set in the
middle of a deer preserve. Its bangla-style pavilion, with a curving roof, faces a picturesque pool
with a water channel leading onto an open-sided pavilion. Shah Jahan’s wife, Mumtaz Mahal,
resided there, and after she died in childbirth in 1631, she was initially interred on the grounds
until the Taj Mahal, her tomb at Agra, was complete. The following year, Shah Jahan’s son Shah
Shuja‘ would tragically lose his wife, Bilqis Begum, in the same circumstances. Her melon-shaped
tomb, the Kharbuza Mahal (ca. 1632), with its original wall paintings of flowering plants set in
lobed niches (fig. 18), still stands at Burhanpur.
On his first appointment as viceroy of the Deccan in 1636, Aurangzeb moved the Mughal
headquarters from Burhanpur to Khirki, the city founded by the Nizam Shahi general Malik
‘Ambar in 1610. Renaming it Aurangabad, Aurangzeb oversaw additions to Malik ‘Ambar’s con-
gregational mosque,2 as well as the construction of a walled citadel with palaces, audience halls,
and a mosque, all completed in 1659.3 Aurangabad’s most famous Mughal monument was the
Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb, 1661), built by one of Aurangzeb’s sons for his mother, Dilras
Banu Begam (died 1651). Modeled on the Taj Mahal, the Bibi ka Maqbara is a white building with
285
Fig. 84. Shahi Palace on the Tapti River, Burhanpur, 15th–17th century
painted and carved floral decoration, and is set in a Persianate garden (fig. 4). Unlike the Taj
Mahal, however, the Bibi ka Maqbara is constructed primarily from stucco, and marble only
appears in the tomb interior. Aurangzeb himself would also be buried in the Deccan, but in a
simple, uncovered grave in Khuldabad, near the tombs of the sufi pirs (spritual guides) and saints
that had been there since the fourteenth century.
It is said that fifty-four suburbs once surrounded central Aurangabad, established by mili-
tary commanders of the Mughal armies. Many of these men were stationed in the Deccan for
years and developed deep bonds with this captivating territory. Mirza Raja Jai Singh I (reigned
1622 – 67) collected all kinds of Deccani textiles, which were carefully stored and inventoried in
the storerooms of his palace at Amber (cats. 160 – 62). Sadly, he was not fated to return to this
northern idyll; he died at Burhanpur, where a memorial was erected for him near the Tapti River
(fig. 85). Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur (reigned 1629 – 78) spent seven years in the region,
where his philosophical discourses were written out in a decorated manuscript that blended
Mughal, Rajput, and Deccani styles (cat. 169). It is also likely that Muhammad Riza Nau‘i (died
1610 at Burhanpur) penned the influential Suz u Gudaz (Burning and Melting, ca. 1604) in the
Deccan.4 Among the other manuscripts attributed to the area are a handful of ragamala sets, a
Gita Govinda (Song of Govinda), and a Rasamanjari (Bouquet of Delights) made for a Mewar
king in 1650.5

Fig. 85. Raja ki Chhatri (King’s Memorial), Tomb of Mirza Raja Jai Singh I, Burhanpur, 1667
After the last of the Deccani sultanates finally fell to Aurangzeb in 1687, Deccani artists left
the region, and their works commenced their travels around India, to Lucknow, the Pahari hills,
and the Rajput courts of Mewar, Kishangarh, Jodhpur, and Bikaner. Aside from Jai Singh of
Amber, two Bikaner kings, Raja Rai Singh, governor of Burhanpur between 1604 and 1611, and
Maharaja Anup Singh, governor of Adoni between 1689 and 1698, were conduits northward
for many important works of art. The peregrinations of paintings, weapons, textiles, and other
decorative objects can be traced from the handwritten notes, inventory seals, and later mounts
of their subsequent owners (cat. 28).6 The impact these arts had on their new homes extended
the legacy of the Deccan’s greatest era of artistic production well beyond the seventeenth
century. ms
1. Nizam ud-Din Ahmad 1961, pp. 92 – 93. 2. Aurangzeb made additions to the Bijapur and Hyderabad congregational mosques after
defeating these cities. 3. S. H. Bilgrami and Willmott 1883 – 84, vol. 2, pp. 307 – 15, 329 – 30. Little survives of the Mughal-era architecture,
but eighteenth-century drawings and watercolors of those buildings are preserved in the British Library, London, and other collections.
4. N. A. Faruqi 1990. 5. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 48 – 59; Doshi 1972. 6. Elgood 2004a, p. 120.
o
Burhanpur and Aurangabad 287
166 Prince Aurangzeb In this extremely fine head-and-shoulder portrait,
Aurangzeb, who appears to be about age thirty-five, is depicted
Probably Aurangabad, ca. 1653 – 55
Opaque watercolor and gold on cloth, 14¾ × 10¾ in. (37.3 × 27.2 cm) in profile, wearing full court dress, heavy jewelry, and a lav-
Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford, ish turban surmounted by an aigrette, with a draped balcony
Lent by Howard Hodgkin (LI118.88) before him and a plain green background behind.3 This rich
Hindi inscription on reverse identifying subject yet restrained format is a common arrangement for depict-
ing the imperial family. The prince appears in his jharoka
Prince Aurangzeb (later Emperor ‘Alamgir, reigned 1658 – window (a perch for the ruler), dispensing judgment, alive
1707), third son of the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan (reigned and well as all the world can see. This otherwise conventional
1628 – 58), was the most hardheaded and savvy of the emper- Mughal-style painting has a number of unusual features: its
or’s four sons. He detested his elder brother and Shah Jahan’s cloth support, florid treatment of woven flowers and ara-
favorite, Prince Dara Shikoh (1615 – 1659), whom everyone besque, and sumptuous yet astringent color combinations,
assumed would inherit the Mughal throne. Aurangzeb, who all of which suggest the artist was a native of the Deccan. This
was twice appointed viceroy of the Mughal Deccan, in defi- artist adapted Mughal conventions but could not altogether
ance of his brother, established an alternate power base at mimic the style of his classicizing, northern cousins.
Aurangabad, living in the palace he built for himself — the The use of cloth is a very common Deccani feature. A cot-
‘Alamgiri Mahal — with his own officers and nobles housed ton support was also used in the large scroll depicting the
on allotted lands nearby. He held court at his palace. Indeed, Procession of Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (fig. 90), now in the
it can be asserted that to buttress his claim to the Mughal Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya, Mumbai,
throne, this “art-hating” prince quite unexpectedly became and the large painting of Prince Azam Shah (1653 – 1707),
a grand patron, establishing a painting atelier in his palace at son of Aurangzeb, and his retinue formerly in the collection
Aurangabad and creating departments for musicians, sing- of Sir Akbar Hydari, among other examples.4 At one time,
ers, and dancers, in the fashion of any self-respecting prince this painting had a narrow red and yellow border, typical
of the royal house who wanted to be emperor. of paintings once owned by the royal house of Bikaner in
Likely painted during Aurangzeb’s second term as vice- Rajasthan. Indeed, it might have been Aurangzeb’s gift to
roy (1653 – 58), this glorious portrait can be assigned to the Karan Singh, the Bikaner maharaja who had served with him
same patron and workshop as a tiny portrait of the prince in the Deccan. tm
and a copy of the Khamsa (Quintet) of Nizami, illustrated
1. Leach 1998, pp. 96 – 109, no. 30, p. 220, no. 64. 2. Artists from other
with four miniatures in which Aurangzeb himself appears, places in the Deccan include the Bijapur-trained ‘Ali Riza (ibid., p. 220,
both in the Khalili Collections.1 These works would have no. 64). ‘Ali Riza, an artist with a very common name who was active from
about 1625 to 1695, and the anonymous master called the Bodleian Painter,
been made in the Aurangabad palace workshop, an institu- an early seventeenth-century Bijapuri artist, were not in this author’s
tion probably composed of refugee artists from Ahmadnagar; opinion one and the same man, despite Keelan Overton’s suggestion to the
contrary. See Overton 2011a. 3. Probably more paintings from Aurangzeb’s
enterprising artists from Bijapur, Golconda, and other places Aurangabad palace workshop have survived, yet without a datable portrayal
in the Deccan; and senior artists from Delhi and other areas of the prince, it is very difficult to identify them. 4. For the procession scene,
see K. Desai 2002, pp. 162–63, no. 156. For the painting of Azam Shah,
in the Mughal Empire.2 Aurangzeb would likely have main- see Kramrisch 1937, pp. 176–80, pls. XXII, XXIII; K. Desai 2002, pp. 164,
165, no. 157.
tained this workshop until about 1657 or 1658, when he
moved north to defeat his royal brothers in the bloody civil
wars of those years.

Cat. 166
Fig. 86. “Birds in a Jungle,” folio 17 from Nal Daman. Dated
a.h. 1110 (a.d. 1698). Ink and opaque watercolor on paper,
9⅝ × 6⅛ in. (24.3 × 15.4 cm). Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj
Vastu Sangrahalaya, Mumbai, Sir Rata Tata Collection
Cat. 167
167 Birds in a Silver River The landscapes of the Deccan burgeon with bird-filled riv-
Probably Aurangabad, late 17th century
ers and green hills after the monsoon season. A silver stream
Ink, opaque watercolor, and silver on paper; image: 11 × 7⅛ in. (now partly oxidized) winds across the page, containing
(28 × 18.2 cm), folio: 12½ × 8¾ in. (31.5 × 22 cm) a group of white ducks flanked by four red-headed sarus
Aga Khan Museum, Toronto (AKM148) cranes — a coloristic marvel of restrained hues that conveys
an evocative mood. The sarus crane (Grus antigone), the only
resident breeding crane in India and Southeast Asia, is also
the world’s tallest flying bird. These birds are famous for their

lifelong coupling, and this image may depict two pairs of
cranes. The presence of the ducks in the water plays the use-
ful function of providing a sense of the cranes’ height, which
can reach more than six feet.
The composition was possibly inspired by a more com-
plex river view with birds found in a manuscript of the Nal
Daman attributed to the northern Deccan and dated to 1698
(fig. 86).1 One folio shows a jungle landscape with a large vari-
ety of avian life, incorporating several pairs of sarus cranes,
including one bird with flapping wings, possibly in a mating
pose. The crane is a favorite subject in Chinese art, and per-
haps a remote influence from imported Chinese porcelain
gave rise to the washy blue ground in the Aga Khan painting.
The grass, now mostly blue, may also have had some green at
one time, and some of this pigment is still visible at the edges
of the water.2 nnh
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 218, ill. no. 188; K. Desai 2002, p. 142, no. 13.

2. Terence McInerney, personal communication, points out that yellow
pigment is often fugitive in Indian painting. Of course, green is a mix-
ture of yellow and blue.
168 Manuscript of the Nihj al-Balagha (The Way

of Eloquence) and Other Texts
Northern Deccan, a.h. 1075 (a.d. 1664)
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; folio: 11½ × 6⅞ in.
(29.1 × 17.3 cm), binding: 11⅞ × 7¼ in. (30.1 × 18.5 cm)
National Museum, New Delhi (58.20/14)
Considered a masterpiece of Shi‘a literature, the Nihj al-

Balagha is a set of sermons, sayings, and commentaries
attri
buted to ‘Ali, cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet
Muhammad, compiled in the tenth century by the scholar
Sharif Razi. In the Shi’a Deccan, it was no doubt an honored
text. In this manuscript, a section of the Nihj al-Balagha is
joined with descriptions of stars and constellations, possi-
bly from the Kitab Suwar al-Kawakib al-Thabita (Book of
Cat. 168
the Images of the Fixed Stars) by the tenth-century scholar
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi. A smiling walrus or lion, a Deccani
crown, and a running div (demon) are among the lively
images found in the illustrations. The borders, filled with a
repeating pattern of bold flowers, are in the style of late
seventeenth-century manuscripts from the northern Deccan,
which became even more popular in eighteenth-century
Hyderabadi albums. nnh
Catalogue 291
Cat. 169a
169 Folios from a Manuscript of Jaswant Singh of Aurangabad, v.s. 1726 (a.d. 1669)
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; a: 12 × 14⅝ in. (30.5 × 37 cm),
Jodhpur’s Siddantha-sara, Siddantha-bodha, b: 12¼ × 7½ in. (31.1 × 18.9 cm), c: 19⅞ × 17¼ in. (50.4 × 43.8 cm)
and Aporaksha-siddantha Private collections, London, and Ticino, Switzerland
These pages come from one of the few dated manuscripts

from Aurangabad, and they exhibit the expected style —
a cosmopolitan blend of Deccani, Mughal, and Rajput

b c
elements.1 The text contains several philosophical works by profiles recall the decoration of the Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s
Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur (reigned 1629 – 78). During Tomb, fig. 81) in Aurangabad. Through the presence of Rajput
his seven-year period of service in the northern Deccan, his rulers, such as Jaswant Singh, Deccani objects made their way
treatise was copied in devanagari script by the scribe Vyasa into Rajasthan. Mehrangarh Fort, for example, has a number
Madhava and set within Ottoman-style chintamani (auspi- of inscribed Deccani cannons. nnh
cious jewels) borders. Mughal-style flowers on a gold back-
1. Indian Miniatures and Works of Art 2000, p. 60.
ground complete the embellishment of the folios. Their lively
Catalogue 293
170 Manuscript of the Nan va Halva (Bread While few dated or firmly ascribed painted works from
and Sweets) Aurangabad are known, a body of material attributed to that
center has nevertheless come together. One style exhibits
Probably Aurangabad, ca. 1690
Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, with leather binding, a strong Rajput sensibility as seen in a few large pichwais
9¼ × 5½ in. (23.5 × 14 cm) (painted backdrops) with rows of women in gold against a
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Friends of red ground;1 in a grand, forty-foot-long painted scroll from a
Islamic Art Gifts, 1999 (1999.157)
Jain bhandar (repository) in Nagpur;2 and in a couple of man-
uscripts, one a dispersed ragamala (garland of songs) series
with Hindu deities and lively patterned textiles.3 In another
strain of Aurangabad painting, a simplified Mughal style
predominates, which includes quizzical and amusing figures
often drawn with curved lines and filled with areas of flat
color rather than modeled with stippled contours.4 This style
was a favored idiom for courtly caricatures and also Islamic
texts, including the present example.
The Nan va Halva manuscript opens with a calligraphic
face composed of auspicious names, a characteristically
Deccani feature. This page is followed by four charming illus-
trations of the parables of Baha’ al-Din al-‘Amili (died 1621),
which are written out on cheerful text pages in bright ink.
Among the paintings depicted is the story of a hungry recluse
who accepts bread from an infidel, but is then reproached
by a dog for this lack of piety. The infidel is shown here as the
“merry monarch” Charles II of England (reigned 1660–85).
The three other paintings similarly illustrate the moral les-
sons of ‘Amili, who was also the author of Shir va Shikar
(Milk and Sugar) and Nan va Panir (Bread and Cheese).
Some pages of this manuscript are enclosed in silver
borders filled with a trellis of lotus flowers and stems. This
decoration recalls the openwork-lotus designs on the finials
of a palanquin from Golconda (cat. 142). Other borders are
filled with boldly rendered animals or birds, as on the pres-
ent folio, in which missing areas in the corners have been
repaired with marbled paper. Other copies of Nan va Halva
in collections in Mashhad, Taskhkent, and London (Victoria
and Albert Museum) await further investigation.5
nnh
1. S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 328–29, no. 223. 2. Doshi 1978. 3. Zebrowski

1983a, p. 49, ill. no. 33; Sotheby’s 2011b, pp. 34–35, lot 15. For another
manuscript, see Doshi 1972. 4. S. C. Welch 1994a, p. 92, fig. 12. 5. Musayev
and Karimov 2012, p. 50. Thanks are due to Vivek Gupta for his research
and this information.
Cat. 170

Cat. 171
171 Nobleman at Repast was a very ugly man, and never appeared at court for fear
Probably Aurangabad, ca. 1700 the people would joke at his odd physiognomy. This gentle-
Opaque watercolor, ink, and gold on paper, approx. 9½ × 11 in. man had a magician who . . . raised his head and voice, saying
(24.1 × 27.9 cm) that apples, pears, peaches, and several other fruits would
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad
fall. Accordingly, . . . they began at once to fall.” 2 Despite
his reported reticence, four other images of Farrukh Fal are
Tempting dishes of fresh fruit and pan (betel nut) are laid known, two of which are versions of this composition.3 The
out on a delicate white sheet to be inspected and enjoyed by subject evidently also became known at Aurangabad where
a languid nobleman, whose ample girth attests to his appre- officers were coming and going from many parts of India.
ciation of such delicacies. This figure can be identified as nnh
Farrukh Fal (Omen of Fortune), a Mughal officer in Agra in
1. This identification has been made by Robert Skelton in a personal
the second half of the seventeenth century.1 Although his communication. Farrukh Fal is mentioned in the Ma’athir al-Umarah;
name appears obliquely in various historical accounts of the Beveridge 1979, vol. 2, pt. 1, p. 215. He received a rank of 900 in 1656 – 57 and
1657 – 58; see Athar Ali 1985, p. 310, no. S6940, p. 335, no. S7745. 2. Manucci
period, the most interesting mention comes from the Italian 1907, vol. 3, p. 202. 3. Other versions are in the following collections: Museum
physician Niccolò Manucci: “In the days when I was at Agrah of Fine Arts, Boston (21.1674); Khosla collection, London, which has the
additional figure of a servant in the picture; Red Fort Museum, New Delhi
I went to pay my respects to the brother of Shaistah Khan, (99); and the collection of Bashir Mohamed, London, which is inscribed
who was called Faracfal . . . , which means ‘The Diviner.’ He pisar-i farrukh fal (son of Farrukh Fal) but may refer to Farrukh Fal.
Catalogue 295
Fig. 87. A Beauty at a Window with a Bird. Golconda,
ca. 1675. Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper,
10 × 6⅝ in. (25.5 × 16.7 cm). San Diego Museum of Art,
Cat. 172
Edwin Binney 3rd Collection (1990.489)
172 Bejeweled Maiden with a Parakeet are adorned with pink flowers on a gold ground, further rein-
forcing this symbolism. An inscription identifies her as Zib
Hyderabad, ca. 1670 – 1700
Opaque watercolor and gold on paper, 12½ × 8¾ in. (31.8 × 22.2 cm) al-Nisa, daughter of Emperor ‘Alamgir (reigned 1658 – 1707),
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of Cynthia Hazen but this is likely a later addition.
Polsky, 2011 (2011.585) In a comparable, mirror-reversed composition in the San
Inscribed: tasvir-i zib al-nisa dukhtar-i ‘alamgir (Portrait of Zib Diego Museum of Art (fig. 87), the woman does not wear gar-
al-Nisa, daughter of ‘Alamgir) ments ornamented with roses, but her transparent blouse is
rose-colored. These two works belong to a larger group of
Seen through a cusped arch, this young beauty holding a similar compositions, including an example in the Cincinnati
parakeet in her jeweled hand is perhaps an allegory for the Art Museum and one in a private collection.2 cs
gul-o-bulbul, or the rose and nightingale. In Persian mystical
1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 201. 2. See Seated Lady Holding a Flower, Cincinnati
poetry, the nightingale was the traditional lover of the rose, Art Museum (1991.139); for the work in a private collection, see Kramrisch
symbolized here by the beautiful girl.1 Pink roses cover the 1986, p. 37, no. 32.
golden cloth under the maiden’s left arm, and her trousers

173 “Fairies Descend to Manohar’s Palace,” 174 “Manohar Meets a Dervish in the Forest,”
Folio from a dispersed Gulshan-i ‘Ishq Folio from a Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Flower Garden
(Flower Garden of Love) of Love)
Probably Hyderabad, ca. 1710 Calligraphy by Ahmad ibn Abdullah Nadkar
Ink, opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper; image: 8¾ × 5⅝ in. Probably Hyderabad, calligraphy dated 1742, paintings dated 1743
(22.3 × 14.4 cm), folio: 15½ × 9¼ in. (39.5 × 23.5 cm) Ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, and leather binding with
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Friends of embossed gilding, folio: 14 × 10 in. (35.6 × 25.4 cm)
Islamic Art Gifts, 2011 (2011.183) Philadelphia Museum of Art, The Philip S. Collins Collection, Gift of
Mrs. Philip S. Collins in memory of her husband, 1945 (1945-65-22)
Cat. 173 Cat. 174
Catalogue 297
The Gulshan-i ‘Ishq, composed at Bijapur in 1657 – 58 by
Mullah Nusrati, remained popular through the ages, with a
grand illustrated copy produced around 1710 (cat. 173), fol-
lowed by a later close copy in 1742 (cat. 174). The folios of the
earlier manuscript are now dispersed, but the later volume
remains in the collection of the Philadelphia Museum of Art
and contains more than two hundred folios and ninety-seven
paintings.1 An early handwritten English notice within indi-
cates it was once in the zenana (female apartments) of Tipu
Sultan at Seringapatam.2
Belonging to the genre of sufi romances, the Gulshan-i
‘Ishq tells the tale of Prince Manohar’s quest to attain
Madhumalati, with whom he fell in love in a dream.3 The
paintings illustrate the main events of the story, as the hero
has many adventures and encounters fantastical creatures,
places, and mystical figures. The central poetic metaphor of
the garden as the setting for romantic and spiritual union
is important to the style of the paintings. They have a good
deal of floral imagery and color symbolism, while the figures
and landscapes retain a flavor of the late Golconda style,
moving toward the more simplified yet strong idiom favored
at Hyderabad.
The page from the earlier manuscript (cat. 173) shows
Manohar asleep in his chambers with his dai (attendant)
resting on the ground beside the bed, while a group of fairies Cat. 175
passing overhead descend to transport him to Madhumalati’s
palace. Later in the narrative, Manohar encounters a der-
vish in a dark forest who gives him a magic wheel. The folio 175 Covered Pot (Degcha) with Poetic Inscriptions
from the Philadelphia manuscript represents this import-
Probably Burhanpur, 17th century
ant spiritual moment (cat. 174). A subtle radiance emanates Copper, H. 20 in. (51 cm), Diam. of base 14½ in. (36.7 cm),
from the holy man’s body, and fierce animals are tamed in Diam. of cover 12⅝ in. (32 cm)
his presence. In the lower right corner, a feline appears with National Museum, New Delhi (83.356)
a raised front paw — this unusual sculptural element recalls Inscribed in nasta‘liq script in nine cartouches on the outer lid: nine
the metalwork-inspired leonine forms on the seven-stepped verses including one with sahibahu ghiyas ud-din (owned by Ghiyas
ud-Din), two in praise of the sarposh (lid), and six from the story of
chakravartin throne in an earlier Bijapur manuscript of the
Khusrau va Shirin from the Khamsa (Quintet) of Nizami
Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of the Sciences, cat. 22). Its presence
On the inner lid: Persian verses in three bands
here may be to reference the leonine symbol of worldly power.
nnh In eight cartouches on the inner rim of the base: verses from the
Sharafnama of the Khamsa (Quintet) of Nizami
1. Leach 1998, pp. 240 – 47, discusses the early manuscript; the present On upper band around the outside: Persian verses from the
author has explored the subject of both manuscripts in greater depth in
Sharafnama of the Khamsa (Quintet) of Nizami
Haidar 2014. 2. C. Stewart 1809, p. 179. It later became part of the
collection of Philip S. Collins, whose ex libris is found on its inner cover On lower band around the outside: phrases giving an account of
and whose widow donated the manuscript to the Philadelphia Museum of
Art. 3. Devare 1961, p. 121, gives a short account of Nusrati and his place in battles, lineages, and names of the Mughal ancestors, including the
Bijapur literary tradition. See also Eaton 1978, pp. 188 – 89. date a.h. 905 (a.d. 1484), referring to the capture of the city of Aadar
In thuluth script on the inner base of the pot: two bands of Persian
verses from the late fourteenth-century Kashmiri poet Pir Muhammad
Qari; at center, a roundel interweaving the words padshah (king), jahan
(world), ghazi (conqueror), and ‘adil (justice)

Festivals are an integral part of Indian culture, in which fast- 1. Tamarind-flavored dishes were formerly cooked in earthenware pots
only, and other cooking was done in copper or silver pots; Roger 1994,
ing and feasting are significant aspects of life. The special p. 221. 2. Watt 1903, p. 53. 3. Donor inscription at Kanheri and Junnar, in
preparation of food is common to both of these practices. Lüders 1912, nos. 998 and 1182, respectively; see also Dutt 1988, p. 152.
A refectory setting appears in architecture at Bhaja, Maharashtra; Dutt
The material and size of vessels reveal interesting informa- 1988, p. 151. 4. On the architrave, bhikku (Buddhist monks) are depicted
tion about the kind of cooking for which they were used, assembled for food, in the surroundings of a vedika (small railing), torana
(gateway), and bodhi trees, with one of them serving boiled rice from a
the people for whom this food was made, and the occasions large vessel with a ladle. The shape of both these vessels resembles the form
of the degcha from the National Museum, New Delhi. This architrave is
for which it was prepared. Many times, these vessels exhibit in the Mathura Museum, Uttar Pradesh (M.1). 5. Jeremiah P. Losty in Art
traces of a patron’s taste as well as his name and date. and Culture 1992, p. 137, no. 50; Titley 2005, colorpls. 21, 43, 47, and 51,
illustrates comparable vessels from the Ni’matnama. 6. The degcha is made
One such cooking vessel is a copper deg, or degcha, which from a sheet of copper, hammered on a stake, tinned, engraved, and inlaid
has been used to prepare food for feasts in India since the with a black composition. Watt 1903, p. 58. 7. Jagdish Mittal in S. C. Welch
1985, p. 313, no. 210, illustrates a line drawing in the Jagdish and Kamla
ancient period.1 The Hindu Shastras consider copper pots to Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Hyderabad; also reproduced in Zebrowski
be the purest.2 Such pots appear in a detailed description of a 1997, p. 153, pl. 199. For the colophon, see also Kitab-i Nauras, National
Museum, New Delhi; Haidar 2011b, p. 40, fig. 22. 8. Zebrowski 1997, p. 152,
Buddhist monastery and its monastic objects as recorded in pl. 198. 9. Inscriptions were read by Dr. Naseem Akhtar, former curator,
the Vinaya Pitaka treatise, in a donor inscription at Kanheri Manuscript Department of the National Museum, New Delhi, and also
Abdullah Ghouchani. For Pir Muhammad Qari, see Riyaz 1972.
and Junnar, and in early cave architecture.3 On an architrave
of a gateway from the Kushana period (1st – 3rd century) is
a depiction of a Buddhist refectory with twin degchas.4 A 176 Writing Box Clad in Gilt and Silver
number of similar literary, epigraphic, and visual references
Aurangabad or Burhanpur, mid-17th century
from the medieval period are also reported. A folio from the Pierced and chased silver and gilt-copper plaques on wood overlaid
famous cookbook Ni’matnama depicts a palace kitchen gar- with dyed wool, H. 5⅜ in. (13.6 cm), W. 16⅜ in. (41.5 cm), D. 12⅝ in.
den in which twin degchas are used for cooking.5 (32 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Gift of Dr.
This large copper degcha is a beautiful example of Deccani Mortimer D. Sackler, Theresa Sackler and Family, 1998 (1998.434)
metalwork. It has a dome-shaped lid surmounted by a knob in
the shape of a flower bud.6 The two scrolling, interlacing pat- This box is one among a group of similarly decorated objects
terns in the form of trilobed arches repeat on the outer body, formerly in the collection of the Rajas of Bobbili, a small state
neck, base, and lid. The illustration of split-leaf palmettos in the eastern Deccan, near the port of Vishakhapatnam.1
is similar to a Deccani line drawing on paper with black ink Included in the group is an elegant seat, probably part of a
and to the vase motif on the colophon page of the Kitab-i palanquin, which remains in a private collection (fig. 88).
Nauras (Book of Nine Essences, cat. 45).7 Divided into internal compartments beneath its hinged
The degcha’s body, neck, inner rim, and lid have elongated top, the box most likely was designed as a portable desk
horizontal panels with Persian calligraphy in nasta‘liq script. and would have held writing implements and other valuable
One panel contains the date a.h. 905 (a.d. 1484), which refers objects. Its interior is made from a hardwood, probably from
to a historical event mentioned in the verses, not the date of the shisham, which is indigenous to the Deccan. The silver
the vessel. The stylized-deer design, located in the cusped arch plaques were originally set against a plain-weave wool textile,
between the two calligraphic panels, is similar to a deer motif now largely lost, which was tinted red with madder lake, a dye
on a bronze ewer in a private collection that is signed Nayyim derived from the roots of the Rubiaceae plant family native
and was produced in either Iran or the Deccan around 1600.8 to the region.2
The base is decorated with an interlacing pattern with foli- The exterior of the box is ornamented in the classic Mughal
age and star motifs interspersed at regular intervals. The two lattice-and-flower style, with formal blossoms incorporated
circular plates with calligraphy fixed to the inner base and into lobed compartments. Its flat top and recessed sides recall
lid are possibly a later addition. The workmanship, date, and the profile and elevation of Mughal buildings, with their flat
calligraphy indicate that this vessel probably belonged to roofs, overhanging cornices, raised plinths, and symmetrical
Deccani royalty or the social elite.9 ap columns.3 Metal overlay is known in the architecture of the
Deccan, as seen in brass-clad doors embossed with floral and
stellar patterns on the Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb, 1661,
fig. 81).4 Furthermore, the rounded petals on the box’s floral
Catalogue 299
Cat. 176
motifs are akin to architectural ornamentation at Golconda,

found on the Hira Masjid (1668), on the facade of the mosque
atop the Charminar (Four Towers, 1591), and within the mosaic
designs in the Badshahi Ashurkhana (Royal Mourning House,
1611).5 Additionally, the flowering plant motif in the lobed
cartouche is reminiscent of colored stuccowork recovered
from the inner fort of Golconda.6 cs
1. Thanks are due to Terence McInerney for providing this information.

2. See de Lapérouse 2003. 3. For example, the Itimad al-Daula or Salim
Chishti’s tomb at Fatehpur Sikri. 4. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 134,
fig. 99. 5. Nayeem 2006, p. 166, fig. 2, p. 192, fig. 1(a); Safrani 1992b, p. 74,
ill. no. 3. 6. Nayeem 2006, p. 318, fig. 17.
Fig. 88. Palanquin. Deccan, 17th century. Gilt copper, silver, wood, and dyed wool, H. 5 in. (12.7 cm),
W. 34½ in. (87.6 cm). Private collection, Hong Kong

177 Dagger (Kard) with Jade Hilt
Probably Aurangabad, ca. 1650 – 60
Hilt: jade set with rubies and gold, blade: steel, L. 14⅝ in. (37 cm)
This remarkable dagger was probably a special commission.

The hilt is made of grayish-white jade, which at the time was
considered a talismanic stone thought to cure digestive com-
plaints; more important, among the Ottomans, it was believed
to ensure victory in battle.1 Consequently, jade is commonly
found in princely weapons.2 The hilt is strikingly decorated
with three horizontal bands of flame motifs, shown burst-
ing with an explosion of fiery heat, expressed in paved, flat-
cut rubies within gold settings. This repeated motif may be
symbolic, as fire was sometimes considered a means to avert
the evil eye, and it may have been understood to offer the
owner even greater protection.3 In the previous century, the
Mughal Emperor Akbar (reigned 1556 – 1605) venerated fire
and lamps “since they are to be accounted rays of the greater
light,” meaning God.4 Furthermore, anyone working with
elephants at this time would know that fire and sometimes
fireworks were the best ways to control these royal animals.5
The single-edged blade has two fullers and is inlaid in
gold at the forte with line and dot motifs. The steel ferrule,
which attaches the grip to the blade, is richly gold plated
and set with rubies.6 The grip’s backstrap is covered with
rubies held in diamond-shaped settings in a style reminis-
cent of gold mounts on rock-crystal objects from Goa, such
as the salt holder now at Burghley House in England.7 It is
hard to pinpoint the exact place of manufacture of jeweled
hardstone objects from this period in the Deccan owing to
an almost complete absence of inscriptions. One of the very
few documented pieces is a dagger, made around 1633, with
an inscription on the blade giving the ownership to Husain
Nizam Shah III (reigned 1631 – 33) of Ahmadnagar.8 Although
the sultanate of Ahmadnagar had fallen to the Mughals when
the present dagger was made, it may have been produced in
a workshop in the northern part of this state, perhaps around
Aurangabad, where the patrons for princely pieces like this
one would have been Mughal courtiers or members of afflu-
ent Rajput families. hr
1. Lentz and Lowry 1989, p. 353, no. 121. 2. Pinder-Wilson 1992, p. 35.

3. Gladwin 1885, p. 1075 (note). 4. Ibid., p. 127. 5. Egerton 1896, p. 24;
Gladwin 1885, p. 190. 6. The plating is similar to that of a small group of
unpublished talwars in a private collection probably from the northern
Deccan and dating to the 1650s or 1660s. 7. Countess’ Gems 1985, p. 24,
no. 26. 8. This dagger is in a private collection and unpublished.
Drawn to the Deccan 301
Cat. 177
Cat. 179
Cat. 178
178 Miniature Manuscript of the Qur’an upon completion of the Qur’an (du‘a’ khatm). On the last
Aurangabad, a.h. 1085 (a.d. 1674 – 75) folio of the manuscript, a seal impression dated a.h. 1212
Folios: ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper; binding: nephrite (a.d. 1797 – 98) indicates that it was once in the library of
jade inlaid with gold and set with rubies and emeralds in kundan Aristu Jah, a prime minister to Sikandar Jah, Nizam of
technique; spine: leather with gold paint, 3¾ × 2¼ in. (9.4 × 5.7 cm)
Hyderabad (reigned 1803 – 29).
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 373 HS)
The manuscript binding is composed of two jade slabs held
together by a leather spine. Both sides feature a ruby rosette
179 Enameled Pendant Case with an emerald center issuing gold vines bearing large ruby
Probably Aurangabad, ca. 1674 – 75 blossoms and buds with emerald calyces and leaves. The red
Champlevé enameled gold set with diamonds, rubies, and emeralds, leather spine is decorated in gold paint with a central flower
3⅛ × 4 in. (7.9 × 10 cm) issuing vegetal scrolls.
Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait (LNS 2201 J )
The pendant case has four large cuboctahedral suspen-
sion loops set with diamonds and rubies. It opens by sliding
This miniature manuscript and enameled pendant case fit one of the side panels, using the small green enameled knob
together perfectly and were in all likelihood made in con- atop the panel. A red enamel ground that enlivens a lattice
junction with each other. The Qur’an manuscript begins of gold vines enclosing stemmed diamond flowers with ruby
with a lavishly illuminated double frontispiece and contains centers covers the front of the pendant, which has a large
199 folios, with 19 lines to a page in black naskhi script and conical diamond in the center. Emerald leaves overlap the
chapter headings in gold thuluth script. It is dated a.h. 1085 vines, and emerald quatrefoils punctuate the lattice intersec-
(a.d. 1674 – 75) below chapter 114 (Surat al-Nas). tions. Gold vines, issuing diamond flowers with ruby centers
Following the Qur’an manuscript are three pages in Per and emerald leaves, scroll along the edges of the pendant.
sian inscribed in black nasta‘liq script with the Divination On the back, staggered rows of stemmed poppies, detailed
table ( fal ) of the sixth Shi‘a imam, Ja‘far al-Sadiq, and more with opaque white and green enamel, are set against a white
pages inscribed in Arabic in naskhi with a prayer to be read enamel ground. sk

Cat. 180
180 Mahi-maratib (Fish Standard)

crescents attached, fish banners made entirely of cloth (as
Northern Deccan, ca. 1700
Gilt copper alloy, iron, and rope, L. 26 in. (66 cm)
seen in the procession scene), and metal fish heads, like this
Furusiyya Art Foundation one, which would have had billowing cloth bodies.2 The latter
variety became especially prevalent at the Rajput courts, and
From a large cloth painting depicting ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah several eighteenth-century examples are known from royal
(reigned 1626 – 72) in procession (fig. 90), it is evident that collections in Rajasthan.3 The distinctive curling flames at the
mahi standards were used in the Deccan. It is not clear, how- temples, serrated-edge fin, etched ornament, and gilt-copper
ever, whether Deccani rulers adopted them for themselves, body suggest that this fierce fish head came from either the
or if they were obliged to use them as symbols of loyalty to Qutb Shahi world or the northern Deccan. A gateway in
the Mughals after a certain date. The mahi-maratib was one the Golconda Fort has plasterwork decoration with fierce
among the Mughal sovereign’s many royal ensigns, some of fish attacking animals (fig. 89). The style of the flower-head
which were also given out to vassal states.1 bosses on the sides is also similar to that of motifs seen on
Several mahi forms are known from surviving examples a Deccani shield, indicating that the same workshops must
and depictions in painting. They include whole metal fish in have produced such embellishments for objects used in the
a naturalistic style, rigid fish profiles with symbols such as many parades and military events of the period.4 nnh
Catalogue 303
1. Irvine 1903, pp. 31 – 33. Other important ensigns of royalty — the first four 181 Panel from a Tent Lining with a
for the sovereign alone — were the aurang (throne), chhatri (ceremonial
umbrella), sayaban or aftabgir (sunshade), kaukaba (a polished steel Fantastical Flower
ball suspended from a long pole), ‘alam (standard), catr-tok (yak tail),
tuman-tuk (another type of yak tail), and jhanda (Indian flag). 2. Jagdish Burhanpur, 1665 or earlier
Mittal in S. C. Welch 1985, p. 324, no. 219; Keene 2001, p. 106, no. 8.30. Mordant- and resist-dyed and painted plain-weave cotton,
3. Gods, Kings and Tigers 1997. 4. Mohamed 2008, p. 368, no. 350. 8 ft. 7 in. × 50 in. (261.6 × 127 cm)
(31.82.1)
Burhanpur figures in the mid-seventeenth-century reports

of many foreign merchants as a center for good-quality tex-
tiles. As French diamond dealer and traveler Jean-Baptiste
Tavernier wrote, “There is a large trade in this town, and both
at Burhánpur itself and in all the province an enormous quan-
tity of very transparent muslins are made, which are exported
to Persia, Turkey, Muscovie, Poland, Arabia, Grand Cairo,
and other places. Some of these are dyed various colours and
with flowers.” 1
Fig. 89. Stuccowork, Habshi Kamans (Ceremonial Gates), Golconda, mid- to This tent panel is typical of the products of Burhanpur, and
late 16th century its ornamentation derives from the Mughal floral style that
also spread to designs for bidri ware, carpets, and other deco-
rative objects. Linking this piece most strongly to Burhanpur is
the central flower, similar to the one in Tavernier’s description,
and the flowering plants painted in the niches of the tomb
of Bilqis Begum (fig. 18). But a strong element of Deccani
fantasy still prevails. The plant sprouts different blossoms on
each stem, including an iris and a Chinese lantern, a flower
mentioned in poetic descriptions of Deccani gardens.2
A defaced inscription on the back of the panel is illegi-
ble but has long been thought to be an inventory note from
Amber, the northern Indian palace of Mirza Raja Jai Singh I
(reigned 1622 – 67).3 This suggestion was confirmed by the
discovery of an inscription on another panel from the same
tent lining that states the textiles were inventoried at Amber
on a.h. 16 Jumada al-Thani 1076 (December 23, 1665).4 The
inscription not only links this panel to the collection at the
Amber palace but also places its production prior to 1665,
and therefore closer in date to the construction of Bilqis
Begum’s tomb around 1632. ms
Fig. 90. Procession of Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (detail). Golconda
mid-17th century. Colors and gold on cloth, 11 ft. × 2 ft. 11 in. (336 × 89 cm). 1. Tavernier 1889, vol. 1, p. 51. 2. Ali Akbar Husain, personal communica-
Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya, Mumbai, Sir Akbar tion to Navina Najat Haidar, 2011. 3. Smart 1986, p. 14. 4. This panel is
Haydari Collection (43.50) in the Doris Duke Foundation of Islamic Art (83.13). Inscription as found
and read by Rahul Jain; personal communication to Navina Najat Haidar,
February 21, 2014.

Cat. 181
182 Man’s Robe (Jama) with Poppies
Burhanpur, 18th century
Painted cotton with applied gold leaf, and silk tassels, 80 × 55 in.
(203.2 × 139.7 cm)
(29.135)
The production of cotton textiles at Burhanpur included not

only dyed cottons but also painted fabrics like the one used
to make this eighteenth-century robe. The pink poppies were
created using a method more akin to painting on paper than
the resist- and mordant-dyeing process employed to produce
kalamkaris. First, the decoration was painted onto the fabric
with pigments and gold leaf combined with adhesive, after
which the surface of the textile was covered with starch and
burnished. Silk bands now form the robe’s underarm ties and
define the hem, wrists, and collar. These seem to have been
added when the garment was retailored to fit a new owner,
and probably replaced elements that had become worn.1
While the robe is quite Mughal in design and tailoring,
its provenance connects it to the Deccan.2 It is also similar
to a robe in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, which
is said to have come from the collection of the Nizam of
Hyderabad.3 Furthermore, the pattern of the fabric and style
of the robe match those of garments depicted in northern
Deccani paintings of the late seventeenth to mid-eighteenth
century, the period of Mughal rule in the region.4 The extra-
long sleeves, worn bunched at the wrists, and the full skirt,
which reaches the ankles, are the most notable features of this
robe style. ms
1. Observations made by conservator Nobuko Kajitani; see Kajitani 1995.

2. The dealer who sold this jama to the Metropolitan Museum stated that
it came from Warangal; Imre Schwaiger, invoice, October 21, 1929, cura
torial files, Department of Islamic Art, The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York. 3. Victoria and Albert Museum (IM.312-1921). 4. For example,
see Abdul Ghaffar Khan Bahadur (Zebrowski 1983a, p. 210, ill. no. 181);
Muslim Nobleman Smoking on a Verandah (Zebrowski 1983a, p. 219, ill.
no. 190); or Allah-wirdi Khan Receiving a Petition (Zebrowski 1983a, p. 236,
ill. no. 209).
Cat. 182

183 Carpet with Lattice Pattern
Probably Warangal, ca. 1800
Cotton and silk foundation and silk pile, 83⅜ × 45¼ in. (211.7 × 114.9 cm)
Collection of H. E. Karim Khan, Zurich
The Mughal penchant for orderly rows of flowering motifs

also came to be reflected in Deccani carpet design. This silk-
pile carpet has a central field with a lattice connecting flow-
ers with blue, yellow, green, and salmon-pink petals. Guard
stripes with a reciprocal merlon pattern in yellow and red
are found on either side of the main border, which encloses a
meandering vine with red flowers on a blue ground. The car-
pet was once thought to date to the seventeenth century, but
it may have been produced closer to around 1800.1
Both this carpet and the multiple-niche prayer carpet
(cat. 151) have been associated with Warangal, a town
about ninety miles east of Hyderabad. Several other
nineteenth-century carpets shown in exhibitions in England
during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries also origi-
nated in Warangal.2 ms
1. Steven Cohen, personal communication, February 22, 2013. 2. Primary

among these are silk carpets in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London
(0744 [IS] and 0739 [IS]); S. Cohen 2011, pp. 114 – 15.
Cat. 183
Catalogue 307
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F Europeans in the Deccan
F
F F
F F
Sanjay Subrahmanyam
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
E
uropean engagement with the Deccan between 1500 and 1700 took a variety of
forms. The principal modalities that need to be accounted for are trade, warfare, medi-
cine, and artistic exchange. To these a fifth aspect, which is religion, can be added in the
sense above all that missionaries had a role to play in the interactions, even if it was a minor one.
Further, while some of these dealings can be properly classified as interstate relations, there were
also many forms of circulation and exchange that more or less entirely escaped the control of the
states in the region. This essay briefly explores all of these dimensions while acknowledging
that the Deccan courts were engaged in a vast web of inter-Asian exchanges, whether with the
Mughal Empire to the north, the Safavids and Ottomans to the west, the Vijayanagara Empire
and its offshoots to the south, or across the Bay of Bengal to Aceh, the Malay world, Thailand,
and Burma to the east.
The first Portuguese voyage to India of Vasco da Gama in 1498 already saw some sketchy
contacts with the Deccan, especially when the Portuguese made a brief halt at Angediva Island
(near Karwar). Before that some Europeans, such as the Italian Nicolò de’ Conti and the Russian
horse merchant Anafasy Nikitin, had had some experience of the Bahmani sultanate in the fif-
teenth century; Nikitin visited during the period when the great trading vizier Khwaja Mahmud
Gawan Gilani (died 1481) dominated political affairs. The Portuguese quickly became aware that
political affairs in the Deccan were in a phase of rapid evolution at the moment of their arrival.
As the Bahmani sultanate moved toward dissolution, several successor sultanates emerged in its
place. Since they were largely based on the west coast, the Portuguese tended first to deal with
the ‘Adil Shahis of Bijapur (whom they termed Idalcão or Idalxá) and the Nizam Shahis
(Nizamaluco) of Ahmadnagar. It was only in the middle decades of the sixteenth century that
they had more direct experience of the Golconda-based Qutb Shahis (Cotamaluco), the Berar-
based ‘Imad Shahis (Madremaluco), and the Bidar-based Barid Shahis (Veridio).
The tenor of official Portuguese dealings with Bijapur was frequently hostile, primarily as a
result of the conquest of Goa by Governor Afonso de Albuquerque in 1510. An initial attack in
the early part of that year was countered by Bijapur forces, but in November the Portuguese
managed to conquer the port definitively, despite the presence among its defenders of a number
Fig. 91. Interior, Church of Saint Francis of Assisi, Goa, 1661 309
of Italian renegades and other mercenaries from the Middle East. From Goa, the Portuguese
proceeded in 1521 to seize Chaul from the Nizam Shahis, and these two ports became their prin-
cipal points of access to the Deccan in the years that followed. Eventually, they also maintained
factories in other west-coast centers such as Dabhol, and by midcentury, they established semi
agrarian settlements in the area of Bombay (now Mumbai), notably Bassein (now Vasai), which
Sultan Bahadur of Gujarat had reluctantly ceded to them. In schematic terms, therefore, the
Portuguese Estado da Índia remained perched limpet-like on the coast, while the Deccani sultan-
ates periodically tried to dislodge this unwanted presence with little success through attacks on
Chaul, Goa, and other settlements in the 1540s, 1570s, 1590s, and so on. The sultans also stayed
in contact with Safavid Iran through the Persian Gulf, and with the ports of the Red Sea and
South Arabia. Iranian and other West Asian migrants continued to come into the Deccan through
the sixteenth century and played a major role in elite politics. Some like Shah Tahir Husaini or
Mustafa Khan Ardistani even maintained relations and a correspondence with the Portuguese.
In this process, the Portuguese came to know quite a lot about the Deccani sultanates, as one
can gather from their official correspondence as well as the chronicles of writers like Diogo do
Couto or António Pinto Pereira. They followed the twists and turns of Deccani politics by a vari-
ety of means, notably through unofficial go-betweens. Sometimes they even tried to intervene in
succession struggles, as in the episode of the exiled Prince ‘Ali bin Yusuf Khan (or Mealecão), son
of the founder of the Bijapur dynasty, in the 1550s. One can summarily list the categories of those
who mediated these dealings. First of all, from early on, there were Portuguese renegades and
mercenaries, who worked for the Deccani sultans, such as João Machado in the 1510s and Gonçalo
Vaz Coutinho and Sancho Pires later in the century. Some of these men converted to Islam,
whether as a matter of convenience or of conviction, but they continued to keep the lines of com-
munication to the Portuguese world open. Do Couto noted, for example, that he was well
informed regarding the famous Battle of Talikota in 1565, in which Vijayanagara opposed the
Deccani sultans, because of “some Portuguese who were present at this battle.” 1 Second, there
were the traders and the occasional envoys who shuttled between Goa and Chaul and the inte-
rior centers, mainly in order to buy Deccani textiles (roupas do Balagate) as well as precious
stones, in particular diamonds. The same traders sometimes imported exotic goods from Goa,
including Portuguese wine, for which there was apparently a market at the inland courts. The
important account (or Vida) of the Flemish jewel merchant from Bruges, Jacques de Coutre, is
a valuable source of information for these matters in the early seventeenth century. Third,
Portuguese and even Italian and French doctors could be found at the Deccani courts. An early
example was the New Christian physician Garcia da Orta, who worked for the Nizam Shahis for
a time in the mid-sixteenth century. In the 1590s, the Mughal poet laureate Faizi reported the
presence in Ahmadnagar of an important European physician named Borges. When the Mughals
expanded into the Deccan, many Mughal governors and princes also brought such firangi physi-
cians in their entourages, as one learns from the Italian doctor Niccolò Manucci, who wrote from
Daulatabad in the later seventeenth century.
Though European contacts with the Deccan initially concentrated on its western part, by the
later decades of the sixteenth century, one can also find more and more dealings with the east, in

particular with the Golconda region. Again, the lead was taken by mercenaries and renegades,
but during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (1580 – 1612), there were unofficial
Portuguese trading settlements in east-coast ports, such as Masulipatnam and Nizamapatnam.
Officially, Goa disapproved of this presence, and occasionally Portuguese fleets even conducted
raids on ships going from Masulipatnam to Aceh and Burma. But into the seventeenth century,
an uneasy entente emerged between Goa and the Qutb Shahis, though elements of tension
remained ever present. While major nobles like Mir Jumla had trade relations with the Estado,
the Golconda sultans played the Dutch and the English against the Portuguese, allowing the
northern Europeans substantial trading privileges. The Dutch, in particular, assumed a role of
some importance in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, all along the Coromandel Coast.
They arrived as early as 1605 in Masulipatnam from Aceh and soon consolidated a presence in
several other ports and commercial centers. Their main interest was South Indian textiles, which
they initially used in their spice trade in Southeast Asia and later brought back in some quantities
to Europe as well. These included excellent examples of kalamkari, produced by the textile paint-
ers of the coast, which sometimes portrayed traditional or mythological themes and at other
moments even depicted the Europeans themselves in all their exoticism. Dutch relations with
Golconda and other regional powers were frequently tense, and they used their sea power to
threaten local and regional commercial interests on a regular basis. Late in the seventeenth cen-
tury, they even sought to capture and fortify Masulipatnam itself but were forced to abandon this
project once the Mughals had consolidated their presence in the area after about 1690. The
Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC, United East India Company, more commonly
known as the Dutch East India Company) not only established factories on the coast, but even
regularly sent their agents inland to the great cotton-weaving centers of Telangana, such as
Khammam, Penuganchiprolu, and Nagulavancha. They also took in villages through revenue
farming, especially in the Godavari delta region.
The English, who were initially more modest in their activities, nevertheless obtained an
important grant (the so-called Golden Phirmaund of 1634) from Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah
(reigned 1626 – 72), which helped consolidate their trade on the east coast. They too participated
extensively in the textile trade and maintained a regular factory at Masulipatnam as well as sub-
sidiary operations both on the coast and in the interior. A more fragile presence was that of the
Danes, whose main base was at Tranquebar in the Thanjavur region. The Ostindisk Kompagni
(East India Company) in the 1630s and 1640s was often staffed by renegade Dutchmen and
acquired an unsavory reputation for piracy after attacks on Masulipatnam shipping. But the
Danes were never more than a distant third to the Dutch and English. With regard to the British
East India Company, their presence in the western Deccan remained limited until the 1660s,
when its eventual acquisition of Bombay from the Portuguese brought it into far closer contact
with that region, as well as with the emergent political power, the Marathas under Shivaji Bhonsle
(reigned 1674 – 80).
By the latter half of the seventeenth century, there was a complex official and unofficial
European presence in the Deccan, largely on the coast and even in a variety of interior centers
and garrison towns. This is what the French Compagnie des Indes Orientales (East India
Europeans in the Deccan 311

Company) found when it entered the region for the first time in the 1660s. The French could
count for support on physicians, such as Antoine Destremau, long stationed at Golconda;
well-informed jewel traders like Jean-Baptiste Tavernier; and a host of others (including the
resourceful physician Niccolò Manucci) to help them in their dealings. There were certainly
some French mercenaries and gunners in various armies in the Deccan by then, as even a quick
survey of Mughal salary papers from the period shows. But there are also clear signs of artistic
exchanges. Manucci himself collected a Mughal portrait album in Hyderabad, and the same was
done by the wandering Dutch artist Cornelis de Bruijn on behalf of various patrons in Europe.
Earlier still, it is possible that the famous Laud ragamala album was acquired by the British East
India Company’s agents through their contacts at Burhanpur in the early 1630s.2 Also in the
Deccan were a handful of European artists, of whom Cornelis Claesz. Heda (active 16th – 17th
century) at Bijapur has received the most recent attention. Heda worked for Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil
Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627), but he also continued to be a source of strategic information for his
Dutch compatriots in the 1610s and 1620s. In sum, even if the great centers of the Mughal north,
such as Delhi, Agra, and Lahore, may have attracted a greater number of such figures, there is
little sense in seeing the Deccan as a terra incognita for these wandering Europeans of the seven-
teenth century.
In all of this, religion and interreligious dealings had a relatively small role to play. While a
certain number of Europeans converted to Islam, very few converts to Christianity were seen
outside the European coastal settlements, and few Jesuit or Dominican missionaries ventured
into the interior. In the absence of a strong religious flavoring to the interactions, frontiers and
boundaries remained relatively porous, a fact that later nationalist historiography (focusing on
the role of the Marathas) has tended to distort. Shivaji’s own father, general Shahaji Bhonsle, was
referred to by the Bijapur Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1656 – 72) as a “pillar of [my] victorious
state” (rukn al-daulat al-qahirah) and as his son ( farzand ), when Shahaji Bhonsle was employed
in campaigns to the south.3 As it happens, the Deccan was also the region where the first major
European attempts at territorial conquest in India occurred in the eighteenth century. This rela-
tively brief and eventually unsuccessful adventure, masterminded by the French warlord Charles
de Bussy (1718 – 1785) between the late 1740s and the mid-1750s, has been overshadowed in his-
tory by the subsequent British conquests in Bengal and elsewhere. Nevertheless, it is instructive
to see how de Bussy could penetrate the political system of Hyderabad on the death of Nizam
al-Mulk, Asaf Jah I (reigned 1724 – 48), in May 1748 and then deftly play off Mughals and Marathas
as he tried to cleave off a new state under French protection in the east-central Deccan. Taking
on Mughal titles and honors such as the fish standard (mahi-maratib), de Bussy attempted to
profit from the long European familiarity with the Deccan. His failure thus closed a cycle that
had begun in 1510, with Albuquerque at Goa.
1. Cited in Subrahmanyam 2012, p. 63. 2. The album is in the Bodleian Library, University of Oxford. 3. Khan 1963.

o
Cat. 184 Cat. 185
184 Filigree Casket with Sliding Top new textiles and carved and inlaid wood furniture for every
Probably Goa, 17th century viceroy, and the old furnishings were sent off to Lisbon.1
Parcel-gilt silver filigree, H. 5⅛ in. (13 cm), W. 5⅛ in. (13 cm), Precious objects, such as embellished boxes and jewels,
D. 39⁄16 in. (9 cm) thus moved easily between courtly worlds and farther-flung
centers. Deccani craftsmen were exposed to objects through
Islamic Art Gifts, Elizabeth S. Ettinghausen Gift, in memory of Richard
Ettinghausen, and Ralph D. Minasian, and The Irene Diamond Fund trade, and documentary evidence indicates exchange among
Inc. Gifts, 2014 (2014.253) craftsmen in Portugal and India. Raul Xamtin, son of a
famous Goan jeweler, was recorded to have enjoyed a long
stay in Lisbon during the reign of Manuel I (1495 – 1521).2
185 Filigree Casket with Barrel Top
In Goa, advances in techniques were made in gold- and
Probably Goa, 17th century silverwork, notably in objects with gold filigree, in both
Silver filigree, H. 3⅜ in. (8.6 cm), W. 4⅞ in. (12.4 cm), D. 2¾ in. (6.9 cm)
Hispanic Society of America, New York (LR 2321/1)
open and closed styles. One spectacular filigree casket from
Goa was commissioned by Viceroy Matias de Albuquerque
From at least the late sixteenth century, the so-called Golden around 1597, while a group of silver-filigree objects in Saint
Goa was a major center for the introduction, production, and Petersburg show the same technique still in use in the
trade of precious objects and rarities, including new animals mid-seventeenth century.3
and plants, styles of music, European engravings, fine fur- The technique of filigree involves drawing wires through
niture, gemstones, and goldworking. Many imported goods a series of holes in a steel plate, which gradually diminish
were presented as diplomatic gifts to the Mughal and Deccani in diameter. The use of wire lengths of differing thickness
courts, while others stimulated the local production of new and the alternation of plain wires with twisted ones enable
designs to suit Portuguese taste. Fine objects were regularly craftsmen to vary the designs of scrolling palmettes and buti
made for the palaces, churches, and forts of the viceroys. For or buta (flame or feather) motifs.4 This art form was trans-
example, the Fortaleza Palace in Goa was refurbished with mitted to craftsmen across the Deccan, and filigree came to
Catalogue 313
be made in such centers as Karimnagar in Andhra Pradesh
and Cuttack in Orissa, as well as Goa, where these two caskets
were likely produced.5 Filigree objects produced in India were
held in the same esteem as examples produced in Europe.6
The filigree technique seen on these boxes also spread
throughout Europe and across the globe, with similar
high-quality pieces produced in Italy, Spain, China, Malta,
South America, Persia, and other centers.7 Filigree became
especially popular in England toward the end of the seven-
teenth century, following the marriage of Charles II (reigned
1660 – 85) to the Portuguese Catherine of Braganza in 1662. As
part of her dowry, Catherine brought many precious objects
from India to England, including caskets such as these, and
jewelry made of silver and gilt-silver filigree.8 These objects
undoubtedly influenced the English production of filigree.9
nnh/cs
1. Dias 2004, p. 68. 2. Mughal Silver Magnificence 1987, p. 153, no. 227.

3. Encompassing the Globe 2007, pp. 260, 264, 265, nos. I-28, I-32,
I-33. 4. Mughal Silver Magnificence 1987, p. 101, nos. 127, 128. 5. Zebrowski
1997, p. 49. 6. George Birdwood, quoted in Watt 1903, pp. 37 – 38: “The
silver filigrain work, in which the people of Cuttack in Orissa have attained
such surprising skill and delicacy, is identical in character with that of
Arabia, Malta, Genoa, Norway, Sweden and Denmark, and with the
filigrain work of ancient Greece, Byzantium and Etruria.” 7. A comparable
casket with elements similar to both the Metropolitan Museum and the
Hispanic Society caskets is attributed to Venice; see Art of Filigree 1990, n.p.
(collection of the Order of Lenin State History Museum [now the State
Historical Museum], Moscow). For a comparable casket made in China, see
Silver Wonders from the East 2006, pp. 44, 102, no. 1. A filigree casket with
very similar shape and feet to the example in the Hispanic Society (cat. 185)
is in the collection of the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon (384);
Mughal Silver Magnificence 1987, p. 153, no. 227. Another is in the collec
tion of Pádua Ramos, Matosinhos; Nuno Vassallo e Silva in Heritage of
Rauluchantim 1996, p. 214, no. 27. 8. Mughal Silver Magnificence 1987, p. 152,
no. 225. 9. For comparable seventeenth-century English filigree examples,
see The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1974.28.157, .158); Impey
1998, pp. 119, 120, nos. 34a, b, 35a, b.
186 Rock-Crystal Knife with a Jeweled Parrot

Probably Goa, ca. 1600
Hilt: gold set with rubies and emeralds and rock crystal, blade: steel
L. 8½ in. (21.5 cm)
The rock-crystal pommel of this knife is carved into the form

of a parrot, a motif also found in Hindu and Deccani metal-
work, painting, and architectural details from the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries. On this piece, the bird is looking
over its shoulder and once held a pearl, now lost, in its beak.
It is heavily jeweled with a band of rubies centered with emer-
alds edging its wings, a ruby-set beak, and emerald-set eyes.
It is perched on a plinth with three bands of rubies set in gold.
Cat. 186
The lower part of the hilt, which tapers toward a scrolled quil- 187 Shell-Shaped Pomander with a Makara Head
lon block, has strapwork in gold filigree and is chased with a and Birds
foliate trellis pattern within beaded borders. The shield motif
Probably Goa, 17th century
at the back of the hilt resembles a Portuguese coat of arms. Cast, embossed, and engraved gold inlaid with turquoise and rubies,
The single-edged blade is steel with a black patina. H. 1⅞ in. (4.8 cm), W. 1⅛ in. (2.9 cm), D. ⅝ in. (1.6 cm)
The form of this knife is related to the Indian kard (dagger), The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Louis E. and
Theresa S. Seley Purchase Fund for Islamic Art, A. Robert Towbin Gift,
commonly used in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. funds from various donors, and Josephine L. Berger-Nadler Gift, 2009
Only someone of high social standing would have owned such (2009.148a, b)
an excellent-quality, all-purpose knife, and it was probably
made for ceremonial rather than everyday use. It would have The cap of this pendant unscrews and the hinges on the bot-
been worn suspended on a cord strung from a belt and was tom allow it to be opened, revealing a small compartment
designed to fit almost completely into its sheath, with only with traces of red residue, thought to be the remains of an
the figure of the parrot protruding to make it easy to grip. aromatic substance. The pendant, probably made in the
This knife seems to be the only known Indo-Portuguese western Deccan, might have been a pomander, a European
example from Goa with a hilt carved out of rock crystal.
However, parallels for the knife’s ornamentation can be
found in the goldwork and gemstone settings employed on
other Goan objects. In the very early seventeenth century,
Goa was an important trading center for hardstone objects
and gemstones, and many Indo-Portuguese goldsmiths and
lapidaries occupied its streets, creating works in their own
distinctive style.1
Out of the small group of extant mounted rock-crystal
objects from Goa dating to around 1600, this knife is per-
haps closest in goldsmith technique to a ceremonial whistle
made for a captain-general of a Portuguese fleet that stopped
at Goa, now preserved in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.2 A
second jeweled captain-general’s whistle from Goa, now in the
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, displays similar gold fili-
gree and raised stone settings arranged in a diamond-shaped
pattern.3 This style of stone setting is also found in a rock-
crystal figure of the Good Shepherd, probably made in Goa
around 1600 and now in the Wallace Collection, London.4 hr
1. Silva 2004b, p. 120. 2. Silva 1995, p. 61, fig. 5. 3. Silva 2004b, p. 125.

4. Silva 1995, p. 61, fig. 4.
Cat. 187
Catalogue 315
accessory with a perforated case used to carry a mixture of
scented spices and perfumes that the wearer could sniff when
in the presence of offensive odors.
The cap is in the form of a fantastical aquatic beast, the
makara, with turquoise-set eyes and a ruby in the center of
its head. The two birds flanking the makara are similar to
those found on other kinds of Deccani jewelry, especially
rings. The pierced filigree work, with flowers and leaves on
a vine, is loosely related to motifs in local textiles and manu-
script illumination. The lines of the flowers, which turn and
curve in a lively, inspired manner, are particularly Deccani
in spirit. ms
188 Ring with Lobed Bezel and Birds

Deccan, 16th – 17th century
Gold, max. Diam. 1⅛ in. (2.9 cm), Diam. of bezel ¾ in. (1.9 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Louis E. and Theresa S.
Seley Purchase Fund for Islamic Art, 2008 (2008.565)
The bezel on this ring may once have held a jeweled bird
or been filled with a gemstone. The lotus-shaped cen-
ter and addorsed birds are familiar elements in the art
of South India and the Deccan. The back stud at the base, Cat. 189
however, is a feature of Ottoman rings from as early as the
fourteenth century.1 nnh
189 Goa Stone and Container
1. Wenzel 2003, pp. 125, 129, 131, nos. 389, 401, 409.
Goa, ca. 1700
Container and stand: pierced and repoussé gold, with cast legs and
finials, H. 2⅝ in. (6.7 cm), Diam. 5⅝ in. (14.4 cm); stone: compound of
organic and inorganic materials, Diam. 1⅛ in. (3 cm)
(2004.244a – d)
190 Goa Stone with Case and Stand

Goa, late 17th century
Container and stand: pierced, chased, and mercury-gilt silver,
H. 2 in. (5.2 cm), Diam. 1¾ in. (4.4 cm); stone: mercury-gilt compound
of organic and inorganic materials, Diam. 1¼ in. (3.2 cm)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Gift of Mr. and
Mrs. Gordon S. Haight, 1980 (1980.228.1; .2a, b; .3)
Goa stones are talismanic objects named for the location

where they are believed to have been manufactured by Jesuits
in the late seventeenth century. Like bezoar stones (natural
gallstones of ruminants), Goa stones were known for their
medicinal and prophylactic powers, though they were man-
made. The stone usually consists of a paste of bezoar, clay,
Cat. 188

the Simples and Drugs and Medical Things of India) devotes
several pages to the use and history of bezoar stones.
The ornate gilt containers for these stones were believed
to enrich the medicinal effects of the stone. In a letter of 1580,
Filippo Sassetti, a Florentine merchant, wrote that Goa stones
were customarily mounted in gold to enhance their powers.1
The Portuguese exported these objects to Europe, and the
elaborate containers reflect the sophisticated filigree styles
popular in Portugal (cats. 184 – 85).2 Goa stone holders are
recorded in European treasuries and Kunstkammers from
the early seventeenth century.3 The gold example contains
European animals within an ogival trellis resting on a bed
of floral arabesques. The smaller silver Goa case has a more
typical allover scrolling pattern. cs
1. See Nuno Vassallo e Silva in Exotica 2001, p. 152, no. 48. 2. See also

Impey 1998, p. 118, no. 33. 3. Silva in Exotica 2001, p. 151, no. 47.
191 Carved Panel from a Casket

Deccan, late 16th century
Teak, 15⅜ × 50¼ in. (29 × 127.5 cm)
Private collection, Seattle
Cat. 190
This rectangular panel is one of four remaining sides from
silt, crushed shell, amber, musk, resin, narwhal tusk (believed a large wood casket.1 It appears that a metal plate was once
to be unicorn horn), and crushed precious and semiprecious attached to the uncarved area in the center of the top of one
stones, all pressed into a ball and then gilt. Scrapings from the panel (fig. 92), which suggests the box once had a locking lid.
ball were ingested as an antidote to poison and melancholy, as Perhaps the casket was a piece of church furniture, such as a
well as to prevent illness. A pharmaceutical treaty published tabernacle or Bible box, which required this kind of security.
in Goa in 1563 by physician Garcia da Orta, Colóquio dos sim- The fantastical beasts, sea creatures, and spiraling vege-
ples, e drogas e coisas medicinais da Índia (Conversations on tal patterns depicted on all four panels recall motifs on other
Cat. 191
Catalogue 317
Fig. 92. Carved Panel. Deccan, late 16th century. Teak, 15⅜ in. × 50¾ in. (39 × 129 cm). Musée des Arts Décoratifs de l’Océan Indien, Saint-Louis, La Réunion
(MO 997-1053b)
types of Indian crafts made for the Portuguese market, such 192 Christ Child as the Bom Pastor
as the embroidered textiles from Bengal that blend elements (Good Shepherd)
of classical and Indian mythology with biblical narratives. Goa, ca. 1700
Like the textiles, the wood panels capture the convergence Carved ivory, H. 10½ in. (27 cm), W. 3⅛ in. (9 cm), D. 2¼ in. (5.5 cm)
of European and Indian imagery. The panel’s snarling double- Hispanic Society of America, New York (LD2109)
headed sea creatures are akin to the fierce dolphins rendered
in the woodwork of European Renaissance churches and to Beginning in the sixteenth century, ivory sculptures of
the fish found in carved plaster ornaments on Deccani pal- Christian subjects were commonly produced in India,
aces. The addorsed birds are similar to the mythical double- especially Catholic Goa, for export to Europe. Dense white
headed gandaberunda of South Indian iconography and the ivory, particular to African elephants, was exported from the
heraldic birds in northern European imagery. The bunches of coasts of Mozambique and Congo to the Gujarati ports of
grapes could be likened to those hanging from twisting trees Surat and Cambay.1 The Christ Child as the Good Shepherd
on Bijapur ceramic tiles as well as to the grapes that appear in was the most popular iconographic subject for ivory carv-
the carved wood altars of Goan churches. The resonance with ings produced in Goa. His role as a shepherd is identifiable by
the motifs on objects from the central and southern parts of the sheep surrounding him, as well as his ensemble, includ-
the Indian peninsula suggests that the wood box was manu ing sandals, a satchel across his shoulders, and a woolen or
factured in the Deccan. Carved wood furniture, often made sheepskin garment tied around his waist with a cord. This
from ebony, was also produced on the Coromandel Coast. ivory depicts the Christ Child seated, with his eyes closed in
ms sleep or meditation. His right palm gently supports his face,
and his left hand holds one of his flock, as another sheep rests
1. The four were still together when sold at Sotheby’s, New York, in 1993
(see Sotheby’s 1993b, lot 180) and when at Spink & Son, London, in 1994 on his shoulder. He is enthroned on a sacred mountain com-
(see Mark Zebrowski in Treasures of the Courts 1994, pp. 32 – 33, no. 22). posed of figures flanking the fountain of youth and pairs of
Aside from the two panels illustrated here, another is now in the Musée des
Arts Décoratifs de l’Océan Indien, Saint-Louis, La Réunion (Route des symmetrical sheep, both grazing and sleeping. The woman
Indes 1998, p. 108, no. 36), and the fourth is in the Art Institute of Chicago at the very bottom, reclining in a mountain cave and reading
(2001.107).
from her book of prayers, is Mary Magdalen, who represents
conversion and repentance.2 In comparable examples, a can-
opy of extended branches envelops the Christ Child and the
scene is ornamented with iconography of God the Father and
a dove representing the Holy Spirit.3 It is possible that this
object once had a similar extension attached on the back.4

193 Reception of a Dutch Ambassador
Coromandel Coast, ca. 1654
Mordant-painted and -dyed and resist-dyed plain-weave cotton,
76½ × 108 in. (194 × 274 cm)
Musée de la Mode et du Textile, Les Arts Décoratifs, Paris (12132)
Impelled to find direct trade routes to Asia after access to

the entrepôt of Lisbon was blocked owing to the Eighty Years’
War (1568 – 1648), Dutch trading companies launched explor-
atory voyages across the Indian Ocean in the 1590s. For the
century prior to the Dutch entry into the Asian market,
Portuguese traders had operated in this arena with little
competition; the Dutch, however, broke that monopoly by
employing superior ships and providing local rulers with
an attractive alternative to dealing with the Portuguese.
Following the success of the initial Dutch voyages, the
Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC, United East
India Company) was formed in 1602, and the Dutch govern-
ing body, the States-General, granted the company the right
not only to trade but also to wage war, build forts, and make
treaties with Asian potentates.1 The Dutch would eventually
establish their base of operations in Batavia in Indonesia, but
Indian textiles were the main commodity sold within their
intra-Asian network. Their factories in India, particularly
those along the Coromandel Coast, played a significant role
in the larger Dutch enterprise. These factories were located
at Masulipatnam (fig. 93) and Petaboli in the Deccan proper,
and at Pulicat and Negapatnam farther south.2 Dutch offi-
Cat. 192 cials also resided at Hyderabad from the 1660s to 1680s in
order to maintain good relations with the Qutb Shahi sultans.
It has been suggested that these depictions of the Christ Unlike the impressive Portuguese establishment at Goa, with
Child as the Good Shepherd can be read as hybrid cultural its florid Gothic churches, the humble and utilitarian Dutch
objects that were influenced by the stories of Krishna, an settlements reflect their uncertain tenure in the Deccan.
incarnation of the Hindu god Vishnu, who was a cowherd The Dutch presence led to a range of artistic interchanges.
as a child and is often depicted as such in pastoral scenes On a commercial level, they bought textiles as well as carved
surrounded by calves. In addition, the blissful and enlight- wood and ivory goods. On a personal level, they purchased
ened expression on Christ’s face has been likened to that of portrait sets of the great Deccani and Mughal rulers.3 This
the Buddha.5 cs was clearly part of a larger Dutch interest in Indian history
and culture, as demonstrated by the efforts of VOC employee
1. Carvalho 2008, p. 57. 2. Maria Helena Mendes Pinto in Vasco da Gama
et l’Inde 1998, pp. 144 – 45, no. 88. 3. See De Goa à Lisboa 1991, p. 76, no. 25, Daniel Havart, who in 1688 translated Sa’di’s Bustan (The
pp. 78 – 79, no. 26; Pinto in Vasco da Gama et l’Inde 1998, pp. 143 – 44, no. 87. Orchard, ca. 1500–1503) while stationed at Masulipatnam.4
4. For other examples without an arboreal canopy, see Arte do Marfim 1993,
pp. 64, 65. 5. Ibid., pp. 61 – 62, 79 – 80 (English translation). Conversely, there was a growing awareness of European
art in India, and Deccani artists began to experiment with
subject matter found in European prints and paintings. In
the realm of textiles, European influence can be seen in the
direct quotation of English and Dutch imagery (cat. 164). The
Catalogue 319
Cat. 193
present work, a large kalamkari, depicts ships arriving at a If interpreted this way, the Dutch ships are shown sailing to
bustling port, a procession with a dignitary in a palanquin, Tranquebar and dropping anchor next to Danish shipping
and a ceremonial meeting between European figures. These vessels; we see the Danes welcoming the Dutch, and the nego-
scenes are arranged facing the edge of each of the four sides, tiations being conducted. It has been further suggested that
in a manner much like that of the decoration on kalamkari the building on the right is the home in Pulicat of Laurens
summer carpets from Golconda. The present kalamkari was Pit, a patron of the textile industry and governor of the Dutch
possibly laid on a table in the Dutch company’s meeting hall, settlements on the Coromandel Coast.5
as Turkish and Persian carpets were commonly displayed in Although an unusual subject for a commission, the event,
European interiors at the time. whatever it may be, has been recorded using elements often
The identifiable Dutch and Danish flags suggest that a found on kalamkaris. The multigabled, open-fronted build-
specific event is depicted on the textile. Perhaps it portrays a ings in the center (see detail on p. 321) and at the right are also
meeting of 1654 when the Dutch, feeling insecure at their fac- present on a rumal in the National Museum, New Delhi.6 The
tory in Karikal (near Negapatnam), proposed to buy from the structure on the left, with several stories of domed pavil-
Danes their fort of Dansborg (close to the port of Tranquebar). ions, echoes the buildings that frame the figures in the large

hangings at the Metropolitan Museum and Victoria and
Albert Museum, London (cats. 163 – 64). Inside these struc-
tures, men and women appear against garlands or other kinds
of floral backgrounds. Small vignettes of animals set among
rocky outcrops and flowering bushes complete the scene.
This textile was made in a spirit of hope for the future of
Dutch ventures in India. ms
1. Kail 1981, pp. 11 – 14; Prakash 1998, pp. 72 – 73. 2. For information on

the physical remains of the latter settlements, see Rea 1897. 3. The Witsen
Album in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, is among the most important
of these sets; see Lunsingh Scheurleer 1996. Lunsingh Scheurleer 1996,
pp. 189 – 93, dates the album to the mid-1680s; Kruijtzer 2010, pp. 163,
180, n. 13, says it is from late 1677. 4. Den Persiaansen bogaard,
Amsterdam, 1688 (copy in the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague,
895J66). 5. Hartkamp-Jonxis 2005, pp. 46 – 47. 6. See Irwin 1959,
pp. 46–47, fig. 19. Fig. 93. Dutch Factory, Masulipatnam, established 1605
Detail of cat. 193
Catalogue 321
Cat. 194
194 Darbar of Cornelis van den Bogaerde

Indies, leaving behind all that was familiar to them, are lost to
Golconda, ca. 1687 us. These paintings of a self-important Dutchman put a face
Opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 8 × 10⅜ in.
to the dry administrative facts of the Dutch presence in India.
(20.2 × 26.2 cm)
David Collection, Copenhagen (43/2008) The man in both paintings has been identified as Cornelis
van den Bogaerde, a VOC chief agent stationed in Hyderabad
between late 1686 and the defeat of the Qutb Shahi sultanate
195 Procession of Cornelis van den Bogaerde in the autumn of 1687. The clues to this identification are the
Golconda, ca. 1687 Dutch flags borne by his attendants in the procession scene,
Opaque watercolor, gold, and silver on paper, 6⅝ × 9 in. which point to his nationality, and the branch of a fruit tree
(16.8 × 22.8 cm)
held by his servant in the darbar scene, which suggests his
surname, boegaerde or boogard, meaning “orchard.” 1
Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC, United East Van den Bogaerde chose to have himself represented
India Company) records document in detail the careers of its in the style used to portray a local ruler. Like any Deccani
youthful employees, but, despite our knowledge of their sal- royal, he is shown receiving guests, whose subservience
aries and dates of services, the individuals who set off for the is expressed in their posture and position. As is typical for

Cat. 195
this type of portrait, a sword, a spittoon, and a huqqa (water standard bearers, trumpeters, and other musicians as well
pipe) are displayed before Van den Bogaerde in the darbar as Dutch and Indian armed guards attended the chief agent
scene. He also appears to hold a mango,2 an emblem of mid- of Tegnapatam during his public appearances. Competition
to late seventeenth-century royal portraits.3 Deccani sultans among the Dutch reached such a state that the Council of the
typically appear on elephants rather than on horseback, but Indies was forced to issue the Order of Precedence, which
some equestrian portraits are known (cats. 7, 128, 132). The contained 131 articles regulating the types of clothing and
equestrian pose, the horizontal format of the paintings, and jewelry that were worn, the furniture and parasols that were
their pale palette all show the influence of Mughal portraiture used, and the number of attendants that could be owned by
at this point in time in the Deccan. each rank of official within the company.4 In this context, Van
The paintings might appear rather self-aggrandizing, but den Bogaerde’s commission makes sense, and he seems to
there is much evidence to suggest that the Dutch agents sta- have found himself a capable painter, one who captured the
tioned in South and Southeast Asia paraded around town in nuances of his patron’s unusual features and dress, even if he
a regal fashion. When Adriaan Moens, commander of the struggled with details such as the hands. ms
major port city Cochin, paid state visits, he was accompa-
1. Kruijtzer 2010. 2. Identified by Kruijtzer, however, as a koban, a kind
nied by armed Dutch troops and rode war elephants draped of coin; ibid., p. 173. 3. See Navina Najat Haidar’s discussion of Bijapur
with silver and gold trappings. More extravagantly, Indian paintings in this volume. 4. Kail 1981, pp. 152 – 56.
Catalogue 323
196 Embassy of Johannes Bacherus en route
to the Court of Aurangzeb
Golconda, late 17th century
Painted cotton, 96½ × 42⅝ in. (245 × 108.3 cm)
Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam (A-9584)
This impressively sized painting on cloth depicts the large

Indian encampment of a European figure, who appears in the
upper part of the central enclosure and again at the bottom
of the painting, carried in a palanquin. His red-tented enclo-
sure, which includes formal gardens and two small pavilions,
is surrounded by the bustle of numerous subsidiary tents
housing servants, animals, and Dutch agents. These men
are shown at work, receiving Indian supplicants and taking
breaks, with their hats doffed and clay pipes lit.
The main subject and patron of this painting is likely
Johannes Bacherus, a Dutch emissary from the Vereenigde
Oostindische Compagnie (VOC, United East India Company)
who traveled from northern India to the Deccan to meet
with the Mughal Emperor ‘Alamgir (born Prince Aurangzeb,
reigned 1658 – 1707) in the late 1680s. VOC records of
Bacherus’s expenditures, which include gardeners, seem to
corroborate this identification, as does the list of his posses-
sions, which mentions a large painting showing him “in the
camp of the Great Mughal.” 1 Bacherus made this journey in
order to secure the trading rights that the Dutch had enjoyed
under the Qutb Shahis, but which were threatened with their
defeat in 1687. His audience with the emperor was success-
ful; the privileges were confirmed, and Bacherus proceeded
to the Dutch port of Masulipatnam, where he lived until his
death in 1693.
The style of the painting recalls Rajput traditions, and it
might have been made by a Rajput painter stationed in the
Deccan. However, other works of this size, also on red-dyed
cotton, were made in Golconda, and this type of painting
seems to be a late seventeenth-century development.2 Might
they have been inspired by Dutch oil paintings? ms
1. Lunsingh Scheurleer and Kruijtzer 2005, p. 52. 2. These include the

Andhra Pradesh State Archaeology Museum, Hyderabad, portraits of
‘Abdullah Qutb Shah, ‘Abu’l Hasan Qutb Shah, and Mah Laqa Bai Chanda,
as well as another painting in the Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam (A-9585),
showing a hunting scene.
Cat. 196
zx
zx
zx
zx
Diamonds of the Deccan
b
U
ntil the discovery of Brazilian and African diamonds in the eighteenth and nine-
teenth centuries, nearly all diamonds, including those of the ancient world, were sourced
from alluvial mines in the Deccan and southern regions of India. During the late medi-
eval and Sultanate periods, the mines were under the control of various local powers in three
main areas: Berar and Ahmadnagar in the north, Vijayanagara in the south, and, most famously,
Golconda, primarily in the region between the Krishna and Kaveri Rivers. These areas produced
some of the world’s most famous gems, such as the Koh-i-noor, Agra, and “Idol’s Eye” diamonds,
which became the fascination of European royalty as much as that of India.
A good deal of our knowledge of diamond mining, cutting, and trading in the Deccani
Sultanate period comes from the accounts of European gemstone merchants in the region, who
traded at both the mines and the port of Goa. Possibly the best-known source is the account of
French trader Jean-Baptiste Tavernier.1 Also important are the writings of Jean Chardin, Elihu
Yale, and Nathaniel Cholmley, traders who interacted with the Golconda court and established a
variety of arrangements to allow them to develop this industry.2 Within the Islamic world, medi-
eval sources mention diamonds, but the gemstone never held the status it enjoyed in India and
Europe, until the seventeenth century. By that time, diamonds were often sent as diplomatic gifts
from the Deccani courts.
Diamonds are alluded to in a variety of Indian classical texts and had powerful royal and
symbolic associations, although very little documented evidence survives from before the fif-
teenth century about specific diamonds, their setting styles, or how they were used in ritual
contexts. However, the status and role of diamonds in India were doubtless important factors in
the European reception of this gemstone. An appreciation for diamonds had likely been fostered
in the medieval courts of South India preceding the establishment of the Deccani sultanates. The
early history of the Koh-i-noor diamond is one telling example. The stone may have first belonged
to the Kakatiya rulers of Warangal (ca. 1163 – 1323), from whom it was wrested by the sultans of
North India. The style of its original setting is not known, but its large, unfaceted, domed shape,
as recorded by Tavernier, must have inspired its moniker Koh-i-noor, or Mountain of Light.
While the Mughal rulers, most famously Shah Jahan (reigned 1628 – 58), were known for
their personal appreciation of precious gemstones, the Deccani sultans in their portraits appear
more restrained in their use of earrings, pearls, and necklaces. They are also rarely depicted
holding gemstones until after Mughal style began to influence Deccani painting in the later part
of the seventeenth century. At Ahmadnagar, a gold belt set with gemstones and a distinctive
hanging element was part of court costume, as were gold amulets worn across the upper body
and arms.3 At Bijapur, Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627) wore little precious jewelry,
except for a distinctive large pendant (urbasi). Diamonds and other gemstones appear more
325
often in the jeweled belts of ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (reigned 1626 – 72) and other members of the
ruling family of Golconda. Female figures, however, both royal and nonroyal, appear heavily
bejeweled in paintings, and women’s à-jour-style pendants contained translucent diamonds held
in place by a border of gold.
With the expansion of trade routes from the late medieval period, European treasuries came
to be filled with diamonds. Over the following centuries, diamond cutting developed in European
centers such as Bruges, Paris, London, and Antwerp, and also to some extent in India, and in
styles influenced by European taste. European gem cutters probably introduced the faceting of
diamonds in India, although Indian craftsmen and lapidaries are believed to have had the skills
and technology to cut hardstones since ancient times.4 Diamond cutting and polishing with any
degree of sophistication required a combination of diamond powder and an iron wheel, the latter
with even and continuous rotation, a European technological development dating from the late
fifteenth century.5 Many diamonds from Indian mines were thus transformed into glittering
shapes and passed down through European royal collections. Whereas the early history of such
gems is wrapped in legend, fairly detailed records of their later ownership remains. nnh
1. Tavernier 1676 – 77; English translation, Tavernier 1889. 2. Nayeem 2008, p. 73, describes Yale’s visit to the sultan; Ogden forthcoming
discusses a letter attributed to Cholmley. Forsyth 2013, pp. 163 – 69, also gives evidence. 3. Keene 2001, p. 48, no. 3.9, illustrates round
jeweled elements that may be surviving pieces from an Ahmadnagar belt. 4. Ibid., pp. 128 – 29. 5. Tavernier 1676 – 77, vol. 2, pp. 293 – 96;
English translation in Tavernier 1889, vol. 2, pp. 53 – 59.

Cat. 197
197 “Agra” Diamond
the duke’s collection published in 1860 is a note saying that it
Golconda, 16th century was taken by Babur at Agra in 1526.5 This is the first known
Cut-cornered, rectangular mixed-cut, fancy intense pink diamond,
mention of the Babur connection to the gemstone.
H. ¾ in. (1.8 cm), W. ¾ in. (1.7 cm), D. ⅜ in. (1.1 cm), Wt. 28.2 ct.
Al-Thani Collection After the Duke of Brunswick’s death in 1873, the Agra dia-
mond passed through various hands. It briefly returned to
The most detailed and ancient Indian text on gems, the India in 1877 and was displayed at the Imperial Assemblage
Ratnapariksa of Buddhabhatta, which may date to the sixth in Delhi to celebrate Queen Victoria’s being proclaimed
century, explains that pink diamonds were appropriate for Empress of India.6 In 1895, it was the subject of a court case
only the most important kings. This assertion fits with the at which its sale was voided when the stated history of the
legend, as recounted by the late Lord Balfour, that the first gem was judged fanciful.7 The diamond later acquired a cer-
Mughal Emperor Babur (reigned 1526 – 30) obtained this tain scientific celebrity when Sir William Crookes used it in
extraordinary pink diamond, now known as the Agra dia- his experiments to determine the transparency of diamonds
mond, after taking the city of Agra in 1526.1 It is said the fam- to X-rays.8 Following its auction at Christie’s in London in
ily of the defeated Raja of Gwalior presented the gemstone 1905, it belonged to various illustrious dealers and collectors,
to Babur in gratitude for sparing their lives, and thereafter including Louis Winans, a member of a Baltimore family that
Babur wore the diamond in his turban. As with many such had made its fortune in American and Russian railroads, and
legends, the truth of the events is impossible to corroborate.2 Abdul Hamid II, the ill-fated thirty-fourth Ottoman sultan
It has also been suggested that the Agra diamond might be (reigned 1876–1909).9 The early history of the Agra diamond
the same as the fabulous rose-colored diamond owned by may be hard to unravel, but the more recent history of what
French adventurer Major General Claude Martin, who in the has been called “the most lovely rose-pink diamond in the
late eighteenth century held positions of considerable influ- world” has been anything but uneventful.10 jo
ence within the courts of the Nawabs of Oudh.3 It may also be
1. See the description of the diamond in Gemological Institute of America,
an otherwise unidentified pink diamond that passed through Carlsbad, Calif., Colored Diamond Grading Report, no. 10381293, June 3,
a London auction house in 1807.4 The diamond is almost cer- 1998; see also Balfour 2009, p. 31. 2. For a detailed history of the Agra
diamond, see Jack Ogden in Beyond Extravagance forthcoming. 3. Obitu-
tainly from mines in Golconda, but the first definite refer- ary of Major General Claude Martin in European Magazine 31 (May 1801),
ence to the stone dates to its presence in Victorian London. pp. 329 – 33. 4. Reported in the Times (London), January 22, 1807, p. 4.
5. Catalogue de brillants 1860, p. 57. 6. Times of India (Bombay),
In 1844, the Agra diamond was sold by London-based dia- January 25, 1877, p. 3. 7. Trasker v. Streeter, 1895; extensively reported in
mond dealers Blogg and Martin to the flamboyant and eccen- the Times (London) (February 23, pp. 7, 9; February 26, p. 13; February 27,
p. 13; February 28, p. 7; March 1, p. 14) and other newspapers at the time.
tric Duke of Brunswick, the displaced eldest son of Frederick 8. Crookes 1899. 9. Christie’s 1905, p. 10, lot 127; the history of the Agra
diamond in the twentieth century is covered in detail by Balfour 2009,
William, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg. In the catalogue of p. 31. 10. “Smuggled Diamonds” 1905.
Catalogue 327
of the “Idol’s Eye” and its moniker date to an auction in
London in 1865, when the stone was sold as part of the col
lection of jewels and art belonging to Edward Strutt Hallum.4
Little is known of Hallum or how and where he acquired
the “Idol’s Eye.” A couple of years after the auction, a journal-
ist suggested that the gem might have been looted in
India during the Mutiny of 1857 against the British, an origin
that could account for the lack of records of the diamond’s
earlier provenance.
Soon after the 1865 auction, the stone was sent on approval
to the Ottoman court in Constantinople (now Istanbul), and
briefly returned to Europe when it was exhibited at the 1867
Exposition Universelle, Paris. The “Idol’s Eye” later passed
into the collection of Abdul Hamid, the thirty-fourth
Ottoman sultan (reigned 1876–1909).5 After Hamid was
deposed in 1909, the “Idol’s Eye,” along with eight other dia-
monds from his collection, including the Agra diamond
(cat. 197), were sold in Paris.6 Where the “Idol’s Eye” went
after this sale is unclear, but following World War II, it was
purchased by Harry Winston, and then passed through vari-
Cat. 198
ous owners, including jewelry aficionado May Bonfils Stanton,
198 “Idol’s Eye” Diamond Chicago jeweler Harry Levinson, international diamond
dealer Laurence Graff, and Imelda Marcos, wife of the former
Probably Golconda, early 17th century
Philippine p resident. jo
Antique triangular modified brilliant-cut light blue diamond,
H. 1 in. (2.6 cm), W. 1⅛ in. (2.8 cm), D. ½ in. (1.3 cm), Wt. 70.2 ct.
1. Gemological Institute of America, Carlsbad, Calif., Colored Diamond
Al-Thani Collection Grading Report, no. 5141553727, April 4, 2012. 2. Rogers and Beveridge 1978,
vol. 2, p. 38. 3. The Hope Diamond is in the collection of the National Museum
of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 4. Christie’s
The “Idol’s Eye” is a rare light blue diamond, and at 70.2 car- 1865, p. 7, lot 87. 5. For its presence in Turkey in 1866, see Sussex Advertiser,
ats, it is the largest cut blue diamond from India.1 The blue February 28, 1866, p. 2; for its display at the 1867 Paris exposition, see Sala
1868, p. 217. 6. For the full story of the “Idol’s Eye,” see Jack Ogden in Beyond
coloration is due to the presence of minute amounts of the Extravagance forthcoming; see also Balfour 2009, p. 144.
element boron. Unlike most historical diamonds, it is still in
the form in which it was first recorded in Britain a century
and a half ago. When the Mughal Emperor Jahangir (reigned
1605–27) encountered a blue diamond from an Indian mine, 199 Diamond Bodkin of Charles II for His
he commented in his memoirs that he had never seen one Mistress Nell Gwynne
like it and described it as looking like a sapphire.2 The dia- England, 17th century
mond mentioned by Jahangir must have been darker than the Diamonds and gold, H. 4 in. (10.2 cm), W. ⅝ in. (1.6 cm), D. ½ in.
(1.4 cm), Wt. 44 ct.
“Idol’s Eye,” and it may even have been the famous stone now Private collection, New York
known as the Hope Diamond.3 Although little is known of its
Inscribed on reverse: The gift of Charles 2nd to Nell Gwynne
origins, the history of the “Idol’s Eye” connects it to the dia-
mond mines of the Deccan, which have produced a handful
of blue diamonds. Its name is related to the romantic idea This circular, diamond-set element was once the bezel of a
that a diamond had formed the eye of a temple statue in ring, converted in the nineteenth century into a bodkin, or
India, a concept that appears in nineteenth-century litera- hairpin. The diamonds themselves came from Golconda
ture. Several other famous diamonds, including the Nassak and were traded from India to London probably in the sev-
and the Orloff, have similar legends attached. The first record enteenth century, most likely aboard a British East India

Detail of cat. 199
Cat. 199
Company ship. The engraved inscription on the reverse of the 200 “Arcot II” Diamond
diamonds reads, “The gift of Charles 2nd to Nell Gwynne.” 1 Golconda, late 18th century; modified 1959 and 2011
The English actress Eleanor “Nell” Gwynne (1650 – 1687) Pear-shaped, brilliant-cut diamond, H. 1 in. (2.6 cm), W. ⅝ in. (1.6 cm),
became the king’s mistress around 1668, and the diamonds D. ¼ in. (0.6 cm), Wt. 17.2 ct.
Al-Thani Collection
were handed down in the family of the Duke of Saint Albans
(1670 – 1726), an illegitimate son of King Charles II (reigned
1660 – 85) and Nell. The inscription helps to establish the Few high-quality diamonds in private hands have as well
chronology of the style of diamond cutting used on this piece. documented a history as the “Arcot II” diamond.1 The city
In 1669, a French diamond dealer and traveler sold to of Arcot was established by the Mughal Emperor ‘Alamgir
King Louis XIV of France (reigned 1643 – 1715) a selection of (reigned 1658 – 1707) as the capital of the Nawabs, who con-
fine diamonds he had purchased in India. One of these was trolled a large area of southern India that included import-
the famous French Blue diamond, now known as the Hope ant diamond mines. The strategic position of Arcot attracted
Diamond. Jean Pitau, the court jeweler, cut this stone in 1673 conquerors, such as the Marathas and the Europeans, and the
into a brilliant cut, and it is one of the earliest examples of this city was taken by the English in 1751. A small British force
style. The fashion for the brilliant cut spread quickly and soon under the leadership of Lord Robert Clive then held out hero-
reached London, where, according to later reports, it was ically against the combined Mughal and French forces in that
perfected. If the diamonds in the present bodkin maintain the same year. Muhammad ‘Ali Khan Wallajah (reigned 1752 – 95),
same form that they had when presented to Nell Gwynne, they the Nawab of Arcot, was keen to retain the support of King
must have been cut before the mid-1680s and are thus among George III (reigned 1760 – 1820). Wallajah sent many gifts
the earliest surviving examples of brilliant-cut diamonds in to the British monarch, including one to the king’s consort,
English jewelry. jo Queen Charlotte, consisting of “two diamond drops worth
twelve thousand pounds,” one of which was the “Arcot II.” 2
1. Scarisbrick 2007, p. 192, nos. 257, 258.
Catalogue 329
201 Bazuband (Upper Armband) or Guluband
(Choker Necklace)
Hyderabad, late 18th century
Diamonds, pearls, gold, and enamel, L. 10¼ in. (26 cm)
Private collection, New York
202 Square Diamond Pendant on Pearl Necklace

Diamonds, pearls, gold, and enamel; overall: L. 13½ in. (34.3 cm),
pendant: H. 1⅝ in. (4.1 cm), W. 1⅝ in. (4.1 cm), D. ⅜ in. (1 cm)
203 String of Pearls
Pearls, diamonds, gold, and enamel, L. of strands, min.: 18 in. (45.7 cm),
max: 24¼ in. (61.6 cm), W. 2¼ in. (5.7 cm), D. ⅜ in. (1 cm)
204 Diamond Earrings and Pearl Supports

Diamonds, pearls, gold, emeralds, and enamel; earrings: H. 3¾ in.
(9.5 cm), W. 1⅜ in. (3.5 cm), D. ¾ in. (1.9 cm), supports: H. 2 in. (5.1 cm),
W. 1 in. (2.5 cm), D. ⅜ in. (1.1 cm)
Cat. 200
These were couriered by none other than Lord Clive, “Clive

of India,” the defender of Arcot, on his final visit back to 205 Two Sarpeches (Turban Ornaments) for a
Britain in 1767. A copy of the queen’s thank-you letter to the Boy
nawab survives, and reads, “Lord Clive did not fail to acquit Hyderabad, late 18th century
himself of the commission you charged him with, by deliver- Diamonds, gold, and enamel; left: H. 2⅛ in. (5.4 cm), W. 1¼ in.
(3.2 cm), D. ½ in. (1.3 cm), right: H. 2 in. (5.1 cm), W. 1⅛ in. (3 cm),
ing into Our Hands the Present you Entrusted him with and D. ½ in. (1.3 cm)
for which We return you our best thanks.” 3 Private collection, New York
When Queen Charlotte died in 1818, the diamonds were
treated as personal rather than Crown possessions and sold.
In 1837, they were purchased by the Marquess of Westminster,
206 Diamond Stud Earrings
Robert Grosvenor, and remained in the Westminster family Hyderabad, late 18th century
Diamonds, pearls, gold, foil backing, and enamel, Diam. 1 in. (2.5 cm),
until the 1950s. They were then purchased by Harry Winston,
D. ½ in. (1.4 cm)
who had the pair repolished and then sold them separately. Private collection, New York
The “Arcot II” diamond was sold to an American-born mem-
ber of British society and then obtained for the present owner.
jo 207 Crescent-Shaped Pearl and Diamond
Earrings
1. See the description of this diamond in Gemological Institute of America,
Carlsbad, Calif., Diamond Grading Report, no. 1132471891, December 21, Hyderabad, late 18th century
2011; Gübelin Gemlab, Lucerne, Diamond Report, no. 12020074, February 28, Diamonds, pearls, gold, and enamel; left: H. 3 in. (7.6 cm), W. 2½ in.
2012. For a fuller account of the diamond’s history, see Jack Ogden in Beyond (6.4 cm), D. ½ in. (1.4 cm), right: H. 3⅛ in. (7.9 cm), W. 2½ in. (6.4 cm),
Extravagance 2013, pp. 380 – 81, no. 125. 2. Horace Walpole to Horace D. ⅝ in. (1.6 cm)
Mann, July 20, 1767, in Walpole 1843, pp. 353 – 54. 3. Queen Charlotte to
Muhammad ‘Ali Khan Wallajah, February 6, 1768, India Office Records,
British Library, London, Home Misc. Series, 99, p. 11.
Cats. 201 – 3 (clockwise from top)

This group of jewelry comes from the collection of the the big stones are surrounded by eighteen smaller, tradition-
Hyderabadi royal family, who inherited several gemstones ally kundan-set diamonds.
and jewels from earlier rulers in the Deccan, many of which Necklaces, too, were worn en masse, and while each piece
were remounted into new forms. At its peak, the Asaf Jahi may be magnificently opulent on its own, wearing several
dynasty (1724 – 1948) was one of the wealthiest and most together created a most extravagant effect. Square pendants,
extravagant in the world. The nizams had a vast estate with like the diamond example here (cat. 202), replicate the form
numerous family members, servants, and other dependents.1 of amulet boxes, which typically held verses from the Qur’an
In the decades following the merger of Hyderabad into the and were worn to deflect the evil eye.7 Other types of neck-
Indian state, however, power, titles, and assets were heav- laces (cat. 203), known as chavlada, panchlada, and satlada,
ily taxed and gradually stripped from the royal families. To are dominated by a mass of gradient pearls and take their
combat the loss of his family fortune, the last nizam, Osman names from the number of strands of pearls in each piece:
‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VII (reigned 1911 – 48), created a series of char, panch, and sat, meaning four, five, and seven, respec-
trusts to sustain the wealth of his household. These trusts tively.8 Though pearls feature prominently in Indian jewelry
stipulated that the nizam’s jewels could be sold only after from the Deccan, they are not native to India. Pearls were
the death of his son, Azam Jah, Prince of Berar (1907 – 1970), fished from the Persian Gulf by professional divers and then
and provided specific details to the order of the objects to be shipped to Bombay (now Mumbai) for redistribution to other
sold. Some works were dispersed from the collection, while parts of the subcontinent.9
another substantial group was ultimately sold to the Indian Other types of jewelry in this group may be less familiar
government, where it remains in a vault at the Reserve Bank to a Western eye, including the bazuband, or upper arm-
of India.2 band (cat. 201).10 Made up of nine identical square panels
In the Asaf Jahi period, as earlier, Indian jewelry served with foiled diamonds, the length of the bazuband could be
to ornament the whole body from head to toe, and many increased or decreased to fit the arm of the wearer. Turban
types were worn together. Ear ornaments designed to hang ornaments known as sarpeches (cat. 205) were awarded to
on the front side of the ear were worn in tandem with other and exchanged among princes as royal gifts. These two small
earrings (cat. 204).3 It was also popular for women to pierce examples, dominated by large Golconda diamonds, would
their ears in five places and to adorn each piercing with a have been worn on the headdress of a young boy, an opulence
different ornament.4 Crescent or fan-shaped (pankhiyan) befitting the Hyderabadi royal court. cs
ear jewels were traditionally attached to the scapha (the top
1. Bala Krishnan 2001, p. 25. 2. Ibid., pp. 28 – 37. 3. See the painting of Bani
outer edge of the ear), but a pair in this catalogue (cat. 207) Thani as Radha in Untracht 1997, p. 10. 4. Nigam 1999, p. 30. 5. A similar
have been adapted to a form that would suit an earlobe.5 pair is illustrated in Bala Krishnan 2001, p. 162 (NJ 95.127/1-2). The Yogini
from the Chester Beatty Library (cat. 30) also sports similar earrings. 6. For
The extravagant drop earrings with old Golconda diamonds a pair of lu lu ear pendants, see Bala Krishnan 2001, p. 163 (NJ 95.138/1-2).
(cat. 204) resemble an embellished version of a classic lu lu 7. Ibid., p. 132. 8. Nigam 1999, p. 30; Bala Krishnan 2001, p. 135. 9. Carter
2005, p. 143; see also Brickell 2012, p. 105. 10. This shape is sometimes
ear pendant known to have been worn at the court of the identified as a guluband (choker necklace) and differs only by the lack of a
Nizam of Hyderabad.6 The claw setting of the large Golconda suspended pearl fringe, which ornaments most gulubands from the Deccan.
For more information, see Brijbhusan 1979, p. 48 and pl. XXXIV; Latif 1982,
diamonds in these earrings betrays a European influence, but p. 151; Bala Krishnan 2001, pp. 176 (NJ 95.113/1-2), 178 (NJ 95.39/1-2); Nayeem
2006, p. 280, fig. 10.

Cats. 204 – 7 (clockwise from top left)
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
F Hyderabad under the Asaf Jahi Nizams F epi l o gue
F F
F F William Dalrymple
FGFGFGFGFGFGF
I
n 1984,a year before The Metropolitan Museum of Art opened its celebrated “India!” exhi-
bition, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis visited Hyderabad for the first time. She was working as
an editor with Doubleday & Company and was planning to publish a book by Naveen Patnaik
entitled A Second Paradise about India’s courtly culture to coincide with the show.1 She therefore
took the opportunity to visit the great art collections of India with the exhibition’s curator, her
friend Stuart Cary Welch, who then ran the Metropolitan’s Department of Islamic Art. She was
already familiar with Delhi and the tourist destinations of Rajasthan from other visits, but, she
wrote, “I never knew what the Deccan was, just large letters in the middle of the map of India.”
The trip proved a revelation, and on her return, she wrote a remarkable letter to the art his-
torian Mark Zebrowski, a pupil of Welch, thanking him for his book on Deccani painting, which,
she said, had opened up a whole cultural world for her. “We had an evening with the old noble-
men of the old nizam’s court,” she recalled,
men with long white hands transparent like alabaster. They recited Urdu poetry; one of them,
a former ambassador still sends me translations of his poems in English. The hereditary prime
minister of the nizam has his own lime grove, such inbred trees that their leaves are translucent
and the pan made with them is unlike any other. To see them making it from a beautiful case
and offering it to you. There were three ancient classical musicians playing in the moonlight
and they, the noblemen, were speaking of how all that was disappearing, that the youth didn’t
appreciate the ways of the old culture, the great chefs were being taken by the Emirates — etc.
This over-civilized, rarefied world — you could feel it — but you knew it was too rarefied to
survive — you felt so fortunate to be able to sense for those hours what it had been.
She described how this precious, fragile world was falling apart in front of her even as she reached
out to touch it:
That evening was profoundly sad, my son John told me the next day that the sons of the house
had taken him to their rooms, because they couldn’t stand the classical music. . . . They wore
tight Italian pants and open shirts, and all the while, their fathers, on the terrace in beautiful
sherwani, were speaking of how sad they made them. ‘Ali Pasha’s son had disappeared a year
before, on a motorcycle, because he didn’t like the marriage that had been arranged for him.2
Fig. 94. Khilwat (Audience Hall), Chowmahalla (Four Halls) Palace, Hyderabad, ca. 1780 335
The world Onassis saw in 1984 was the last remnants of a mixed Indo-Islamic Deccani culture
that first came into being in the thirteenth century with the southern conquests of the Delhi
sultans. Much that was best about it had been preserved into the twentieth century, thanks to
the survival in the middle of India of a large, detached fragment of the Mughal Empire. This
was the state of Hyderabad, the mightiest and richest of the semi-independent Indian princely
states that made up nearly a third of the Indian landmass under the hegemony of the British Raj.
Under the Asaf Jahis (1724 – 1948), Hyderabad had for more than two hundred years kept alive
a last flickering light of Indo-Islamic arts and culture that elsewhere had been eroded by first
the onslaught of British colonialism, and then encroaching modernism.
The founder of Hyderabad was an austere Mughal warlord, Mir Qamar al-Din Khan, who
was awarded the title Nizam al-Mulk when he first became the governor of the Deccan.
Nizam al-Mulk (reigned 1724 – 48) was a puritan in the mold of his hero, the Mughal Emperor
‘Alamgir (reigned 1658 – 1707), formerly Prince Aurangzeb: he never drank or smoke, and he dis-
approved of showy dress.3 Nor was Nizam al-Mulk a great enthusiast of the arts: although he
liked poetry and left two Persian language divans (albums) under his pen names Shakir and Asaf,
he had a deep suspicion of painting, music, and dancing.4 A close watch was kept on his nobles,
and spies reported on those who held illicit parties during Muharram. Permission for dance dis-
plays and nautches had to be sought from the darbar and was granted only on the occasion of
festivals and marriages.5
Partly for this reason, Nizam al-Mulk never saw eye to eye with his emperor, Muhammad
Shah (reigned 1719–48). Known as Rangila (the Colorful), the shah was a major patron of the arts
and an aesthete, given to wearing a lady’s peshwaz and shoes embroidered with pearls.6 Long
mocked as the effete degenerate who presided over the conquest of Delhi by the Persian adven-
turer Nadir Shah, he is now recognized as a major cultural catalyst, responsible for reviving the
miniature atelier in Delhi and for important innovations in Hindustani music. It was under his
patronage, for example, that the tabla, previously regarded as a rustic Punjabi folk drum, became
a court instrument, that the sitar reached its modern form, and that the khayal and tappa forms
of Hindustani music reached their artistic climax.7
Nizam al-Mulk, in contrast, saw this interest in the arts as contrary to all the principles he
had grown up with, and in his writings he describes himself as following “the discipline of
emperor ‘Alamgir,” which he was determined to emulate: he proudly claimed “I exercise all the
necessary restraint.” 8 It was therefore only under one of Nizam al-Mulk’s successors, Nizam ‘Ali
Khan (reigned 1761 – 1803), an illegitimate younger son who came to the throne in a coup d’etat
in 1761, that the puritanical strictures of Aurangzeb were thrown aside, and a great revival took
place in the arts.
On Nizam ‘Ali Khan’s accession, Aurangzeb’s old barrack town of Aurangabad was aban-
doned and Hyderabad was again made the capital of a domain that now embraced a far wider
slice of central and southern India than the old Qutb Shahi sultanate of Golconda had ever done.
Despite intermittent warfare, the city quickly began to recover its former wealth and splendor.
The ruins of the Qutb Shahi palaces and public buildings were restored, the mosques rebuilt, the
gardens replanted, and the city walls patched up. By the 1790s, Hyderabad, with a population of
336 Epilogue
Fig. 95. Hunting Party of Nizam ‘Ali Khan. By Rai Venkatchallam. Late 18th century. Opaque watercolor on canvas, approx. 48 × 72 in.
(122 × 183 cm). Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad
around a quarter of a million, was once again both a major center of commerce and the unrivaled
seat of the hybrid Indo-Islamic civilization of the Deccan.
If Nizam al-Mulk had a Department of the Scrutiny of Morals, his successor Nizam ‘Ali
Khan instead had one to oversee the business of dancing and music, known as the Daftar Arbab-
i-Nishaat, or the Office of the Lords of Pleasure.9 Two of the nizam’s leading nobles, Tajalli ‘Ali
Shah and Rai Venkatchallam, were both remarkable painters, and one noblewoman, Mah Laqa
Bai Chanda, was a courtesan, dancer, and celebrated poet, whose works were collected as far
away as Delhi and Lucknow. She commissioned the Mahanama, a major new history of the
Deccan, and later became an important patron of poets.10 She built a library filled with books
on the arts and sciences and commissioned the construction of the Naqqar Khana (Drum House),
the gateway for the principal Shi‘a shrine in Hyderabad, the hill of Maula ‘Ali. At its base, in
a magnificent garden tomb, she laid her mother, Raj Kanwar Bhai, to rest and she too left
instructions that she should be buried here. She remains there still, under a Persian inscription
that describes her as a “cypress of the garden of grace and rose-tree of the grove of coquetry.” 11
Such was Nizam ‘Ali Khan’s reliance on Mah Laqa’s wisdom that she was the only woman
given the rank of a senior omrah, so that she could attend the darbar and advise the nizam on
Hyderabad under the Asaf Jahi Nizams 337

state policy.12 She also accompanied him to war, dressed in male clothing, and gained a reputa-
tion for her riding skills and her accomplishments with the bow and even the javelin. A
Venkatchallam canvas depicting the nobility of Nizam ‘Ali Khan’s court hunting (fig. 95)
shows Mah Laqa at the top right, sitting in a stately palanquin, the only woman in a landscape
filled with men. No wonder that John Malcolm, the British assistant resident at the turn of the
nineteenth century, called her “an extraordinary woman” or that the Hyderabadi sage Qadrat
Ullah Qasim wrote that she was “a unique combination of body and soul.” 13
The atmosphere of languid sensual courtliness in Mah Laqa’s poetry is also found in minia-
tures of Rai Venkatchallam and Tajalli ‘Ali Shah. As with the work produced in Delhi under the
reign of Muhammad Shah a generation earlier, we are in the enchanted world of the pleasure
garden: water drips from fountains, flowers bend in the breeze, peacocks call from overladen
mango trees. Women smoke huqqas (water pipes) and swim in long garden pools, drink wine,
and play with pigeons, or while away the moonlit monsoon nights on swings, listening to music
and carousing in marble pavilions. There are some fine portraits in similar cultivated arcadian
settings, and the fountains and ranked cedar trees of the irrigated garden became the standard
background to portraits of the period.14
The famous Venkatchallam image of Aristu Jah’s son Ma’ali Mian shows him sitting in a gar-
den sniffing a flower and admiring a tame hawk as five small fountain jets play amid the roses and
dragonflies at his feet, and as clouds of rosy parakeets fly to roost in the banana trees and toddy
palms that frame the scene.15 The darbar and battle scenes of high Mughal art have disappeared.
As one rather surprised art historian has commented, “it is difficult to account for their absence
from the painters’ list of themes, but it shows that women and not hunting or war were import-
ant for their patrons.” 16 Nothing about these charmed garden scenes indicates that the Marathas,
the Hyderabadi’s mortal enemies, might ride into the outskirts at any minute, burning and pillag-
ing. As with the art under Muhammad Shah in Delhi, the painting feels like an almost willful
escape from the harsh politics of the time.
But the flourishing of the arts under Nizam ‘Ali Khan did not long survive him, and his late
nineteenth-century successors inhabited a world increasingly in awe of the West, all too ready
to drop their own cultural forms in favor of those of Europe. The encroachment of colonial-
ism, and the loss of confidence in indigenous artistic forms that so often accompanied it,
had already taken root during the reign of Nizam ‘Ali Khan. Ironically, the man who started
the rot was the British East India Company’s most thoroughly Mughalized diplomat, James
Achilles Kirkpatrick, who converted to Islam on marrying the Hyderabadi Princess Khair
un-Nissa. In 1798, Kirkpatrick persuaded the nizam to sign an alliance with the British that effec-
tively preserved the Hyderabad state until the end of the British Raj, but in the months that fol-
lowed, he imported craftsmen from Madras to begin work on a vast Palladian villa almost
identical to the White House in Washington, D.C. (fig. 96). Within a couple of years, the style had
become all the rage in Hyderabad. Several buildings were being constructed in imitation of his
architectural innovations, including the Chowmahalla (Four Halls) Palace, which became the
principal palace of the nizams from the early nineteenth century onward (fig. 94).17
338 Epilogue
This boom in Western architectural style accelerated when, in June 1805, as part of his
famine relief program, Nizam Sikandar Jah (reigned 1803 – 29) and his prime minister Mir ‘Alam
embarked, per Kirkpatrick’s recommendations, on a grand program of construction as a way of
providing employment and money to the refugees from the countryside who now flooded into
Hyderabad. As James Kirkpatrick explained:
By the much admired style of my improvements at the Residency, I have awakened a passion
for architectural improvement in the Meer [Alam] and Secunder Jah, both of whom I have
persuaded to lay out little of their enormous hoards in public and private works, both within
and without the City. . . . [These are] of considerable extent and some degree of Taste.
Among other works carrying on, and which are imitated on a humbler scale by rich
Mussulman and Hindoo individuals, Meer Allum has completed a neat square of upstairs
houses in front of his own mansion with a stone tank in the centre and a wide and long street
of shops with upper apartments leading to this square, the tout ensemble effect of which is
striking enough.
Secunder Jah has begun something on a similar plan, besides having a large Garden House
in hand, partly European and partly Asiatic.18
Until the end of the nineteenth century, there were members of the Hyderabadi aristocracy
who continued to patronize precolonial Deccani architectural styles, notably deoris (mansions)
with courtyards and three-sided wood pavilions. Increasingly, however, first Palladian, and later
Westernized Indo-Saracenic, styles began to dominate.19
After the British crushed the 1857 rebellion—the largest anticolonial revolt against a
European power during the nineteenth century—systematically destroying the Urdu-speaking
civilization of Delhi and Lucknow, the importance and uniqueness of Hyderabad only increased.
Though the Urdu poets of the north once looked down on what they saw as the provincial world
of Hyderabadi Urdu, they were quick enough to seek the shelter and patronage of the nizams
after their own nests were irreparably destroyed at the Ghadr (Catastrophe of 1857). One after
another, often on foot, in disguise, and using the most meandering routes, the surviving intellec-
tuals from the shattered courts of Delhi and Lucknow limped in the late 1850s and early 1860s
into Hyderabad, where the nizams gave them positions, honors, and crucially, safety.
The most important was probably Dagh Dihlavi (1831 – 1905), the greatest ghazal writer of his
generation. Dagh was the son of Nawab Shams al-Din Khan, who had been hanged in 1835 for the
murder of the Delhi resident, William Fraser. Nizam Mahbub ‘Ali Khan (reigned 1869 – 1911), who
recognized his genius and based his own often erotic compositions on those of Dagh, gave him
a huge monthly salary of 1,500 rupees. Other refugees who came from Delhi included the mem-
oirist Sarvar al-Mulk and the learned divine Maulvi Abdul Haq Khairabadi, and from Lucknow
came the great poet Munshi Amir Ahmad Minai.
By the beginning of the twentieth century, Hyderabad began to see itself as the leading cen-
ter of Urdu learning. In 1918, Osmania University made Urdu its official language and became the
first Western-style university in India to teach in a language other than English. There was also
patronage of traditional Deccani forms of music and storytelling, and it was common as late as

the early twentieth century for noblemen to fall asleep to the sound of singers or storytellers
declaiming the deeds of the Qutb Shahi kings from behind a screen.20
There was still some continuity in court manners and adab (etiquette). Although the nizams
and their elite began to sit on Western furniture and eat their meals in the Western manner,
forms of etiquette remained specifically Deccani. The nizams maintained the old Deccani tradi-
tion of recruiting courtiers from the Middle East, and as late as 1949, they were defended by a
Yemeni bodyguard. Moreover, like their forebears in the Deccani sultanates, they still patronized
scholars not just from North India but much farther afield: Bukhara, Samarqand, and Arabia.
Nevertheless, traditional architecture and the visual arts were not supported in the same
way. By the early twentieth century, all new palaces in Hyderabad, such as Iram Manzil (ca. 1900),
Falaknuma (1884), and Mahbub Mansion (ca. 1896), were being constructed in a European style,
and commissions for painting and portraits were given to artists working in a Western style
adapted to Hyderabadi tastes and needs.21 Although Nizam Mahbub ‘Ali Khan was a notable
patron of photography, he seems to have viewed painters of miniatures as passé.22
In this culturally mixed form, Hyderabad entered the twentieth century. By the 1940s, the
state had an income and expenditure equal to Belgium’s and exceeding those of twenty member
states of the United Nations. The nizam’s personal fortune was more remarkable still. According
to one contemporary estimate, it amounted to at least £100 million in gold and silver bullion, and
£400 million in jewels. Nizam Mahbub ‘Ali Khan also owned one of the Islamic world’s great
art collections, with libraries full of Mughal and Deccani miniatures, illuminated Qur’ans, and
esoteric Indo-Islamic manuscripts. In February 1937, Osman ‘Ali Khan (reigned 1911 – 48) was
featured on the cover of Time magazine as the “Richest Man in the World,” with his total wealth
estimated at $1.4 billion.23
Partly because of this extraordinary fortune, the nizam was feted by the British as the most
senior prince in India, and given clear precedence over all his rivals. After all, for more than three
centuries, his ancestors had ruled a state the size of Italy (82,700 square miles of the Deccan pla-
teau) as absolute monarchs, answerable — in internal matters at least — to no one but themselves.
Within this area, the nizam could claim the allegiance of some fifteen million subjects.
Nor was his reputation limited to India; during the years leading up to World War II, the
nizam was regarded by many as the leading Muslim ruler in the world. A few years earlier, in
1921, the nizam’s two sons, Azam Jah and Moazzam Jah, had been sent to Nice, where they
married, respectively, the daughter and the niece of the last Ottoman caliph, Abdul Majid II,
who had recently been expelled from the Topkapi Palace by Kemal Atatürk and sent into exile
in Provence. As part of the marriage arrangements, the caliph had nominated Azam as heir to
the caliphate, so uniting the supreme spiritual authority of the Muslim world with its greatest
concentration of riches. To many, the Asaf Jahi dynasty seemed unassailable.
Other observers were, however, all too aware of their fragility. A small Urdu-speaking
Muslim nobility ruled a population that was 85 percent Hindu and spoke mainly Telugu. By
the 1930s, the Indian Freedom Struggle was gaining momentum, and Hyderabad, firmly
aligned to British interests, was looking increasingly like an anachronism. “He [Osman ‘Ali Khan]
340 Epilogue
was as mad as a coot, and his [chief ] wife was raving,” I was told by the historian and biographer
Iris Portal, who had worked in Hyderabad before Independence.
It was like living in France on the eve of the Revolution. All the power was in the hands of the
Muslim nobility. They spent money like water and were terrible, irresponsible landlords, but
they could be very charming and sophisticated as well. . . . They would take us shooting . . .
talking all the while about their trips to England or to Cannes and Paris, although in many
ways Hyderabad was still living in the Moghul Middle Ages and the villages we would pass
through were often desperately poor. You couldn’t help feeling that the whole great baroque
structure could come crashing down at any minute.24
The end, when it came, was both sudden and extremely messy. A full four months after British
rule had come to an end in the rest of India, Osman ‘Ali Khan was still refusing to sign up to the
newly formed Indian union. He firmly believed that there was no reason why Hyderabad should
be forced to join either India or Pakistan and, rather than negotiating with the Indian govern-
ment, entered into correspondence with the Portuguese to see if he could buy Goa from them.
After months of stalled negotiations, India invaded Hyderabad in 1948, replacing the nizam’s
autocratic and despotic rule with parliamentary democracy. Indian casualties amounted to 7
killed and 9 wounded, as against 632 Hyderabadis killed and 14 wounded. What happened next
was much worse. According to the report commissioned by Indian Prime Minister Pandit Nehru
from Pandit Sunderlal on the communal rioting that followed, 200,000 died in the death throes
of the Hyderabad state.25
Twenty-six years later, Indira Gandhi abolished the nizam’s title — along with those of all the
other princes — removed their privy purses, and made them subject to crippling new wealth
taxes and land-ceiling acts, thus forcing them to sell most of their property. Mukarram Jah,
Osman ‘Ali Khan’s grandson who succeeded him in February 1967, quickly found himself
enmeshed in debts and financial chaos. He had inherited a ridiculously inflated army of retain-
ers: 14,718 staff members and dependents, including no fewer than 42 of his grandfather’s concu-
bines and their 100-plus offspring. The Chowmahalla Palace complex alone had 6,000 employees;
there were around 3,000 Arab bodyguards from Sudan and Yemen, and 28 people whose only job
was to bring drinking water; 38 more were employed to dust the chandeliers, while several others
were retained specifically to grind the nizam’s walnuts. Everything was in a state of severe dis
array: the nizam’s garages, for example, cost £45,000 for gasoline and spare parts for 60 cars, yet
only 4 vehicles were in working condition, and the limousine that was supposed to take Jah from
his coronation broke down on the way to the reception. Officially, 2,000 people a day were fed
from the royal kitchens, yet several local restaurants were also secretly being supplied with food
at the nizam’s expense.26
Most debilitating of all was the legal wrangling initiated by the several thousand descen-
dants of the different nizams, almost all of whom claimed part of Jah’s inheritance. By 1973, 476
legal heirs of the sixth nizam and 1,945 descendants of the fifth had filed suits or claims of various
sorts. Even getting the smallest sum to live on proved difficult for the new nizam. His vast inher-
itance had been distributed between 54 different trusts, the control of which was disputed. From

Fig. 96. Double-Curve Staircase, British Residency, Hyderabad, 1803–6
the beginning, despite nominally inheriting one of the world’s greatest fortunes, he was forced to
sell jewelry and other family heirlooms to stay solvent.
Eventually in 1973, frustrated and disgusted by the weight of litigation and the bitterness
of the family infighting, Jah relocated to a sheep farm in Perth. There His Exalted Highness,
the Rustam of the Age, the Aristotle of the Times, the Victor in Battles, and the Leader of
Armies donned blue overalls and spent his days tinkering under the hoods of his cars or driving
bulldozers, backhoes, and heavy earth-moving equipment around the Australian bush. As
his biographer, John Zubrzycki, memorably put it in The Last Nizam: “His grandfather com-
posed couplets in Persian about unrequited love. To Jah’s ears there was nothing more poetic
than the drone of a diesel engine.” Visitors frequently mistook him for a sheep shearer, but
Jah was not bothered: “Abu Bakar [his ancestor, the first caliph] was a shepherd,” he told one
interviewer, “so I see no reason why I shouldn’t be one too.” 27
In his absence, the nizam’s unsupervised Hyderabad properties were looted and his posses-
sions dispersed by a succession of incompetent or unscrupulous advisers. Many palaces were
342 Epilogue
sealed by orders of different courts. Others were quietly sold off or encroached upon: between
1967 and 2001, the Chowmahalla shrank from fifty-four acres to twelve, as courtyard after court-
yard, ballrooms, whole stable blocks, and even the famous mile-long banquet hall were acquired
by real-estate developers, who demolished the eighteenth-century buildings and erected con-
crete apartments in their place.
With the last nizam went much of the ruling class, taking with them their love of culture
and their artworks. Some went to the Persian Gulf and Pakistan, others to London and New York.
Few remained in the new Hyderabad, where the capable Reddy business caste from the coast
became the new elite. Even in academia, the Deccan was a subject that seemed to interest few
scholars. For every book on the Deccan sultanates, there were one hundred on the Mughals; for
every book on Hyderabad, there was a shelf on Lucknow. The old Hyderabad, as Onassis noted,
seemed doomed.
Yet in the last decade, the heritage of Hyderabad has made something of a comeback.
Mukarram Jah remains in exile in Turkey, where he now lives in a two-room apartment in
Antalya, but his first wife, the indomitable Turkish Princess Esra, has recently overseen a
major restoration of the principal city palace, the Chowmahalla complex, while the Falaknuma
has been turned into a luxury hotel. Meanwhile, a center of Deccani studies has opened at
Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad, and an excellent scholarly magazine,
Deccan Studies, acts as a forum for discussion of history and culture. There has recently been
a flood of new publications on its art and architecture, while Hyderabad itself has slowly real-
ized that development and prosperity need not come at the expense of conserving heritage
and wrecking the environment. Much has been lost, but the future of Hyderabad’s past seems
brighter than it has been for many decades.
1. Patnaik 1985. 2. Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, letter to Mark Zebrowski, February 10, 1986, private collection, London. 3. Lala
Mansaram, Masir-i Nizami ; English translation in Rao 1963, pp. 82, 97, 123. 4. Saksena 2002, p. 199. 5. Nayeem 1985, p. 87. For the
reporting of illicit parties, see Lala Mansaram, Masir-i Nizami ; English translation in Rao 1963, p. 112. 6. Dalrymple and Sharma 2012,
p. 4. 7. Bor et al. 2010, pp. 19, 24; Delvoye 2010, p. 48; Trivedi 2010, pp. 83 – 85. 8. Lala Mansaram, Masir-i Nizami; English translation in
Rao 1963, p. 102. 9. For the moral police, see Rao 1963, p. 209. The author learned about the Office of the Lords of Pleasure from a
conversation with Dr. Zebunissa Begum, who studied its records, which are now in the Andhra Pradesh State Archives, H yderabad. 10. See
her entry in Balkhi 1956. 11. See S. A. A. Bilgrami 1927, p. 13. 12. For Mah Laqa’s poetry in the Nawab of Avadh’s library, see Sprenger 1854;
for Mah Laqa’s status in the darbar, see Begum 1978, p. 114. See also Kugle 2010. 13. Handwritten inscription by John Malcolm in a book
of Mah Laqa’s poetry, Divan-i Chanda, presented to him by Mah Laqa in 1799 (British Library, London, I.O. Islamic 2768). For Qadrat
Ullah Qasim’s description of Mah Laqa, see Azmi 1998, pp. 34, 48 – 49. 14. Mittal 1963, p. 44. 15. This fine image, which James Achilles
Kirkpatrick’s assistant and successor, Thomas Sydenham, said he “procured with much Difficulty from the Archives of the [nizam’s] Family,”
is illustrated in Zebrowski 1983a, p. 265, ill. no. 242. 16. Mittal 1963, p. 44. 17. Dalrymple 2002, pp. 369, 378. 18. James Achilles
Kirkpatrick to William Kirkpatrick, June 4, 1805, India Office Records, British Library, London, Kirkpatrick Collection, F228/59,
p. 40. 19. Mackenzie Shah 2010, pp. 98 – 101. 20. Dalrymple 1998, p. 196. 21. Mackenzie Shah 2010, p. 99. 22. Jacob 2009. 23. “Hyderabad”
1937; B. B. Cohen 2007, p. 1. 24. Iris Portal, quoted in Dalrymple 1998, pp. 197 – 98. 25. Bawa 1992, p. 282; Khalidi 1988, p. x. Operation
Polo and its aftermath have recently been the subject of a controversial new book; see Noorani 2013. 26. Zubrzycki 2006, pp. 233,
286. 27. Ibid., p. 258.
o
appendix
m Excerpts from the Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah /

M aryam Ekhtiar
The Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah (History of Muhammad and twenty namad floor coverings (matted wool rugs) from
Qutb Shah) was completed in Hyderabad in a.h. Sha‘ban Kirman as well as two hundred large ghuri trays full of gold,
1026 (July – August 1617). Its unnamed author traces the his- emeralds, diamonds, rubies, and tigereye. Slaves were also
tory of the Qutb Shahi dynasty from the family’s origins in given as gifts. A variety of food, fruit, and drink was served.
Iran through the early part of the reign of Muhammad Qutb This feast was worth more than 50,000 hun and weighed an
Shah (1612 – 26). The chronicle has long been known to histo- equivalent of 150,000 man. The bazm included storytell-
rians, and John Briggs appended lengthy sections of the text ers, nadims (close companions), poets, singers, and angel-
to his translation of the Tarikh-i Firishta.1 This and other par- like beauties. The sultan’s own horses and elephants were
tial translations have focused on the historical facts that the adorned with jewels. The area was decorated with an array
manuscript contains. The text, however, also provides rich of decorative objects and Chinese silk textiles (murasa‘ alat
insights into the material culture of Hyderabad and Golconda va qumsha-ha-yi khata’i). The artisans were busy filling the
in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Drawn trays with jewels.
from the final chapter, the excerpts below focus on court rit-
uals and festivities, religious observances, and the patronage In return, Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah gave Mir Jumla his
of art and architecture during the reigns of Muhammad Quli own robe, five elephants, and five Arabian horses.
(1580 – 1612) and Muhammad and have been chosen for their
descriptions of objects, textiles, and gifts. These summa- Folio 250b: Bazm (Feast) Commemorating the
ries are based on a copy of the manuscript made by Shaikh Birth of the Prophet Muhammad
‘Abd al-Hakim “for the treasury of books of his Highness Ray Every year on a.h. 17 Rabi‘ al-Awwal (the third month of the
Dawarkadas” in 1676.2 Hegira calendar), there were twelve days of unimaginably
grand celebrations. The guards and workers laid down the
Folios 247 – 51: Account of Preparations for a Bazm cloths (mandil) of Chinese silk satin and unrolled the car-
(Feast) of the Khaqan (Emperor) of the Times, pets from Rum (Turkey). Many objects inset with rubies and
Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah pearls were displayed. Poets and angelic beauties attended
Muhammad Amin, Mir Jumla Shahi, had the interiors dec- the feast as musicians and singers performed in the hijaz
orated with zarbaft (gold brocades with vegetal designs), mode. Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah’s workers sprinkled the
atlasi (silk satin), velvet, and milak-kar (cotton textiles from grounds with musk, amber, and rosewater and served fruits,
Ramshir, Iran) that evoked paradise.3 Carpets were unrolled, sweets, and drinks to the guests.
and the guards and servants lined up in rows to greet the The celebration extended to the four sides of the square
shah on his arrival. Poets surrounded the court like jewels (maidan) of Hyderabad. The platforms and other areas of the
and recited both poetry and prose. Rosewater, amber, and ivan were decorated with a variety of decorative objects and
musk were sprinkled around the interior. Jeweled saddles Chinese silk textiles with designs of lions and elephants.4 At
and harnesses for twenty elephants and thirty Arabian horses each corner of the ivan were one thousand moon-faced sing-
with fourteen multi-jeweled medallions were given as gifts ers and dancers. The most luxurious textiles, such as gold and
to the sultan ( pishkish). Other presents included a porcelain silver brocades (zarbaft), velvets, and milak-kar, were used
double-sided mirror, jeweled trappings for the trunks of the as pay-andaz (runners) in preparation for the shah’s arrival.
elephants, fourteen beautifully penned Qur’ans with jeweled On the ninth day, the khaqan Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah
bindings, jewel-studded perfume sprinklers, two hundred entered with his entourage. One lakh hun was spent on the
Kashmir shawls, fourteen carpets from Jaushaqan in Iran, incense and essences used alone.
344 Appendix
Folios 253 – 54: Sultan Muhammad Quli Qutb In return, extravagant gifts such as jeweled objects and silk
Shah’s Buildings and Expenditures textiles were sent to the Safavid court through Burhanpur.
The sultan constructed buildings, gardens, portals, mosques, Fourteen thousand hun was spent on Husain Baig’s trip back
madrasas, khanqahs (spiritual centers), and hospitals. The to Iran.
treasurer Mir Abu Talib Nazim al-Mulk provided a detailed 1. The translation was published as “The History of Muhammad Quli Qutb
account of various buildings: Bagh-i Muhammadi Mahal, Shah” in Briggs 1966. 2. The copy is in the India Office Records, British
Library, London (I.O. 179 [Ethé 456]). 3. The royal bazm was prepared by
Imarat-i Elahi Mahal, Imarat-i Koh-i Tur, Nadi Mahal, and Muhammad Amin, who was appointed chief advisor (mir jumla) to Sultan
the Langar (soup kitchen) of the twelve Shi‘a imams. Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah in a.h. 1011 (a.d. 1602 – 3) and was responsible
for most state affairs until Muhammad Quli’s death in 1612. 4. An ivan is
Ashura ceremonies during the month of Muharram were a vaulted chamber that is walled on three sides with the remaining side
given great prominence. According to the court treasurer, opening onto a courtyard.
the shah spent over 70 lakh hun, equivalent to 600,000

toman, and each year spent 60,000 hun on staff and 12,000
hun for Muharram ceremonies. Black was worn during these
occasions. The sultan had the administrative buildings illu-
minated and invited the ulema, the learned, government
officials, and important men of the times to attend. He sent
substantial amounts of money and textiles to Mecca, Medina,
Karbala, Mashhad, and other holy places. Every year he also
spent 60,000 hun to pay the staff of the Langar of the twelve
imams. He also gave 12,000 hun yearly to charity during the
month of Muharram (zar-i ashuri).
Folios 257 – 67: Description of the Accession of

Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah
Muhammad Qutb Shah ascended the throne at age twenty-one.
Qasidas (odes) were composed, describing his accession, and

some verses liken Hindustan to Iran. Among the guests who
visited and brought gifts for the new king were officials from
the courts of Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (reigned 1580 – 1627)
and of the Nizam Shahis such as Mir Muhammad Taqi and
Mir Abu’l Fath.
Gifts from the emperor of Iran Shah ‘Abbas (reigned 1587 –

1629) were sent through the envoy Husain Baig Qubjaji-bashi,
who stayed for two years and four months and returned to
Iran in a.h. 1025 (a.d. 1616 – 17). Shah ‘Abbas sent a jeweled
crown, a saber, a dagger inset with rubies and pearls, a jew-
eled harness, and fifty horses as gifts. The emeralds and pearls
were unparalleled in size and opulence. Lavishly dressed
attendants offered [the sultan] patterned, gold-brocade gar-
ments and three hundred bolts of gold brocades by the work-
shop of Khwaja Ghiyath, milak-kar, and other gifts.
Excerpts from the Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah 345

m Rulers of the Deccan Sultanates /
This list is organized by dynasty and respective capital
the deccan: a golden age bijapur

Bahmanis of Gulbarga and Bidar ‘Adil Shahis of Bijapur
Hasan, 1347 – 58 Yusuf, 1490 – 1510
Muhammad I, 1358 – 75 Isma‘il, 1510 – 34
Mujahid, 1375 – 78 Mallu, 1534 – 35
Da‘ud I, 1378 Ibrahim I, 1535 – 58
Muhammad II, 1378 – 97 ‘Ali I, 1558 – 80
Shams al-Din, 1397 Ibrahim II, 1580 – 1627
Da‘ud II, 1397 Muhammad, 1627 – 56
Firuz, 1397 – 1422 ‘Ali II, 1656 – 72
Ahmad I, 1422 – 36 Sikandar, 1672 – 86
Ahmad II, 1436 – 58
Humayun, 1458 – 61 bidar
Ahmad III, 1461 – 63 Barid Shahis of Bidar
Muhammad III, 1463 – 82 Qasim I, 1487 – 1504
Mahmud, 1482 – 1518 Amir I, 1504 – 43
Ahmad IV, 1518 – 20 ‘Ali, 1543 – 80
‘Ala al-Din, 1520 – 23 Ibrahim, 1580 – 87
Waliullah, 1523 – 26 Qasim II, 1587 – 91
Kalimullah, 1526 – 38 Amir II, 1591 – 1601
Mirza ‘Ali, 1601 – 9
ahmadnagar and berar Amir III, 1609 – 19
Nizam Shahis of Ahmadnagar
Ahmad, 1496 – 1510 golconda
Burhan I, 1510 – 53 Qutb Shahis of Golconda and Hyderabad
Husain I, 1553 – 65 Sultan Quli, 1496 – 1543
Murtaza I, 1565 – 88 Jamshid, 1543 – 50
Husain II, 1588 – 89 Subhan, 1550
Isma‘il, 1589 – 91 Ibrahim, 1550 – 80
Burhan II, 1591 – 95 Muhammad Quli, 1580 – 1612
Ibrahim, 1595 Muhammad, 1612 – 26
Bahadur, 1595 – 1600 ‘Abdullah, 1626 – 72
Murtaza II, 1600 – 1610 ‘Abu’l Hasan, 1672 – 87
Burhan III, 1610 – 31
Husain III, 1631 – 33 epilogue
Murtaza III, 1633 – 36 Asaf Jahis of Aurangabad and Hyderabad
Mir Qamar al-Din Nizam al-Mulk, Asaf Jah I, 1724 – 48
‘Imad Shahis of Narnala Gavilgarh and Elichpur Mir Ahmad Khan, Nasir Jang, 1748 – 50
Fathullah, 1490 – 1510 Muzaffar Jang, 1750 – 51
‘Ala al-Din, 1510 – 30 Salabat Jang, 1751 – 61
Darya, 1530 – 62 Nizam ‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah II, 1761 – 1803
Burhan, 1562 – 74 Nizam Sikandar Jah, Asaf Jah III, 1803 – 29
‘Ali Khan Nasir al-Daula, Asaf Jah IV, 1829 – 57
The list of rulers is organized by ‘Ali Khan Afzal al-Daula, Asaf Jah V, 1857 – 69
dynasty and respective capitals. Nizam Mahbub ‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VI, 1869 – 1911
Osman ‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VII, 1911 – 48
346
m Literature for Objects in the Exhibition /
compiled by Courtney A. Stewart
The Deccan: A Golden Age Cat. 15, Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler Reclining beneath Cat. 26, Hilt of a Gauntlet Sword (Pata)
a Covered Takht (Seat) Unpublished
Cat. 1, Coins of the Bahmani and Vijayanagara Empires Zebrowski 1983a, p. 21, ill. no. 5
Cat. 27, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
Unpublished
Cat. 16, Royal Elephant and Rider Hôtel Drouot 1973, lot 5; Soustiel and David 1974, pp. 30 – 31,
Cat. 2, Spherical Container with Spiraling Radials S. C. Welch 1963b, p. 225, pl. 5, fig. 8; S. C. Welch 1963c, fig. 25; Zebrowski 1981b, fig. 412; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 54,
Mittal 2007, p. 207, no. 94; Jagdish Mittal 2014, p. 35, fig. 11 p. 11; S. C. Welch 1975, pp. 76 – 77, no. 36; Zebrowski 1983a, pl. VI, p. 74, ill. no. 49; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 290, 291 – 92,
p. 28, ill. no. 16; Beach 1985, p. 39, no. 26; Michell and no. 193; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 165, fig. 121;
Cat. 3, Footed Ewer with Elephant-Headed Spout and
Zebrowski 1999, p. 150, fig. 111; Indian and Islamic Works Jeremiah P. Losty in Royal Courts of India 2008, pp. 52 – 53,
Bird-Shaped Terminals
of Art 2011, pp. 130 – 33, no. 57, and frontispiece; Sotheby’s no. 20; Rosemary Crill in Crill and Jariwala 2010,
Unpublished
2011a, pp. 122 – 23, lot 98 pp. 110 – 11, pl. 31; Overton 2011b, p. 360, fig. 14, p. 473,
Cat. 4, Qur’an Manuscript Scroll fig. 177
Cat. 17, Royal Picnic
Unpublished
Falk and M. Archer 1981, pp. 221, 499, no. 401; Zebrowski Cat. 28, Procession of Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
Cat. 5, Bowl in the Shape of a Ten-Pointed Star 1983a, p. 29, ill. no. 17; V. N. Desai 1985, pp. 60, 63, no. 50; Goetz 1950, pl. VIII; W. G. Archer 1951, p. 12, fig. D, and
Christie’s 1985a, p. 163, lot 382; Zebrowski 1997, p. 176, Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 152, fig. 112 front cover; M. Chandra 1951, front cover; Gray 1951,
pl. 254a – c; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 237, fig. 175 pp. 12 – 13, pl. III; Skelton 1958, p. 101, fig. 2; Mārg 16, no. 2
Cat. 18, Young Prince
(March 1963), p. 29; Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2
Cat. 6, Brazier Unpublished
(1974), pl. VIa; Soustiel and David 1974, p. 78; Krishna
Zebrowski 1997, p. 122, pl. 142
Cat. 19, Young Prince and Princess Chaitanya 1979, p. 73, pl. 64; Zebrowski 1981b, fig. 418;
Sotheby’s 1961, p. 15, lot 77; Binney 1973, pp. 142 – 43, Zebrowski 1983a, p. 75, ill. no. 50; Michell and Zebrowski
Ahmadnagar and Berar no. 120; S. C. Welch 1975, p. 68, no. 29; Binney 1979, p. 785, 1999, p. 166, fig. 122
fig. 1; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 31, ill. no. 19; Michell and
Cat. 29, Manuscript of the Pem Nem (The Laws of Love)
Cat. 7, Sultan Husain Nizam Shah I on Horseback Zebrowski 1999, p. 153, fig. 113; Goswamy and Smith 2005,
Barrett 1969, pp. 142 – 59, figs. 91 – 102; Pinder-Wilson 1976,
Daniel S. Walker in Smart and Walker 1985, pp. 43 – 45, pp. 166 – 67, no. 66; Overton 2011b, p. 365, fig. 21
p. 90, no. 171; Losty 1982, p. 73, no. 52, colorpl. XVII;
no. 22, and ill. following p. 11; Elgood 2004a, p. 88,
Cat. 20, Malik ‘Ambar Zebrowski 1983a, p. 104, ill. no. 81; Knížková 1986, p. 121,
no. 8.28; Elgood 2004b, p. 79, fig. 4; Ricketts 2014, p. 150,
Coomaraswamy 1927, p. 8, fig. 5; Coomaraswamy 1930, fig. 7; Losty 1986, p. 55, no. 48; Seyller 1995, p. 332, fig. 16;
fig. 2
p. 48, pl. LXXVII; Khandalavala 1955 – 56, pl. III, fig. 3; Hutton 2006, pp. 73 – 78, pls. 8 – 15, pp. 81 – 83, figs. 3.2, 3.3;
Cat. 8, Manuscript of the Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi Krishna Chaitanya 1979, p. 72; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 37, Nayeem 2008, pp. 264 – 71, figs. 8 – 15; Hutton 2011,
(Chronicle of Husain Shah) ill. no. 21; Alderman 2006, p. 111, fig. 97 pp. 44 – 63
Kramrisch 1937, pp. 136 – 38, 140, pls. XII, XIII; Barrett
Cat. 21, “Jahangir Shoots the Head of Malik ‘Ambar,” Folio Cat. 30, Yogini with a Mynah Bird
1958, p. 6; Barrett and Gray 1963, p. 116; S. C. Welch 1963c,
from the Minto Album Arnold and Wilkinson 1936, vol. 1, pp. 49 – 50, vol. 3,
p. 9; Mittal 1974, pp. 218 – 19; Krishna Chaitanya 1979,
Arnold and Wilkinson 1936, vol. 1, pp. 31 – 32, vol. 3, no. 15, no. XXXI, pl. 93; Kramrisch 1937, p. 143; Gray 1949, p. 174,
pp. 72, 79, 81, 83, pl. 60; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 18, ill. no. 1,
pl. 62; Gray 1949, pp. 156 – 57, no. 705; Gascoigne 1971, no. 808; Skelton 1957, p. 399, pl. 8, fig. 16; Barrett 1958,
p. 33, colorpl. 1; Aftabi 1987; Michell and Zebrowski 1999,
p. 153; A. K. Das 1978, pl. 65; Skelton 1988, p. 189, fig. 2; pp. 18 – 19, pl. 7; “Ahmadnagar” 1963, p. 28; Krishna
p. 146, fig. 108
Leach 1995, vol. 1, pp. 398 – 400, 405, no. 3.25; Bailey 2001, Chaitanya 1979, pp. 76, 80, pl. 65; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 105,
Cat. 9, Helmet p. 56, fig. 6; Stronge 2002, p. 162, pl. 125; Eaton 2005, pl. 9; ill. no. 82, p. 108, pl. XII; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 292, 294 – 96,
Splendeur des armes orientales 1988, p. 84, no. 140 Alderman 2006, p. 106, fig. 93; Ramaswamy 2007, p. 763, no. 196; James 1987, p. 254, fig. 6; Leach 1995, vol. 2,
fig. 3; Susan Stronge in Wright 2008, pp. 344 – 46, no. 50 pp. 912 – 15, no. 9.641, colorpl. 126; Michell and Zebrowski
Cat. 10, Peacock in a Rainstorm at Night
1999, p. 175, fig. 129; Glynn 2000, p. 66, fig. 1; Hutton
Zebrowski 1983a, p. 41, ill. no. 24, p. 51, colorpl. III;
2006, pl. 16; Diamond 2013a, p. 149, fig. 11.1; Diamond
Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 154, fig. 114 Bijapur 2013b, pp. 126, 127, 294, no. 3f; Goswamy 2014, pp. 111,
Cat. 11, Gauri Ragini: A Maiden Picking Blossoms 514 – 17
Cat. 22, Manuscript of the Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of
from a Tree
the Sciences) Cat. 31, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding the Elephant
Binney 1973, p. 141, no. 118, colorpl. p. 150; Ebeling 1973,
Arnold and Wilkinson 1936, vol. 1, pp. 2 – 4, vol. 2, pls. 3 – 5; Atash Khan
p. 157, no. 14; Hughes 1973, p. 73; S. C. Welch 1973,
Kramrisch 1937, pp. 120 – 34, pls. X, XI; Gray 1949, p. 173, Gray 1938, pp. 74 – 76; Zebrowski 1981b, fig. 415; Zebrowski
pp. 126 – 27, no. 75; A. Welch 1975, fig. 1; Binney 1979,
no. 805; Barrett 1958, pp. 8 – 9, pl. 2; Barrett and Gray 1963, 1983a, p. 97, ill. nos. 71, 72; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 291, 292,
p. 803, fig. 19; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 42, ill. no. 25, p. 52,
p. 120; Krishna Chaitanya 1979, pp. 73, 83, 85; Marshall no. 194; Knížková 1986, p. 119, fig. 4; Zebrowski 1986, p. 98,
pl. IV; Pal 1993, pp. 352 – 54, no. 112; Michell and
1981, p. 138, fig. 148; Losty 1982, pp. 71 – 72, no. 50; Leach fig. 7; Seyller 1995, p. 323, fig. 4; Michell and Zebrowski
Zebrowski 1999, p. 155, fig. 115; Skelton 2011b, p. 23, fig. 7;
1995, vol. 2, pp. 819 – 89; Elgood 2004a, app. 1, pp. 205 – 16, 1999, p. 172, fig. 126; Beach 2011, p. 190, no. 24, p. 208,
Goswamy 2014, pp. 420 – 23
figs. AP.1 – 11; Hutton 2005 p. 74, fig. 15; Hutton 2006, fig. 18; Guy and Britschgi 2011, p. 65, no. 22; Haidar 2011b,
Cat. 12, Dhanasri Ragini: A Woman Drawing a Portrait on pls. 3 – 7; Flatt 2011, pp. 223 – 44; Diamond 2013a, p. 153, p. 36
a Tablet fig. 11.3; Diamond 2013b, pp. 125, 294, no. 3e
Cat. 32, Royal Horse and Groom
Gangoly 1948, pl. M; Goetz 1950, p. 55, pl. IV; Gray 1951,
Cat. 23, Battle-Ax with Openwork Decoration and Pinder-Wilson 1976, p. 90, no. 172; Zebrowski 1981b,
pp. 8 – 9, pl. I; W. G. Archer 1960, pl. 14; Ebeling 1973,
Hidden Blade fig. 417; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 99, ill. no. 74, p. 107, pl. XI;
p. 156, no. 12; Krishna Chaitanya 1979, p. 75; Zebrowski
Unpublished Topsfield 1984, p. 24, no. 15; Guy and Swallow 1990,
1983a, p. 46, ill. no. 29
p. 112, ill. no. 91; Seyller 1995, p. 322, fig. 5; Michell and
Cat. 24, Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I
Cat. 13, Nat Malhar : A Woman Splashing Water on Her Zebrowski 1999, p. 174, fig. 128; Komaroff 2011, p. 293,
Sotheby’s 1975, p. 36, lot 85; Persian and Islamic Art 1977,
Lover from the River no. 230
p. 22, no. 37; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 65, ill. no. 48; Lowry
Goetz 1950, p. 102; Ebeling 1973, pp. 155 – 58; Georgina
1988, p. 316, no. 367; Elgood 2004a, p. 115, fig. 11.9; Cat. 33, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Playing the Tambur
Fantoni in Indian Paintings and Manuscripts 1999,
Sotheby’s 2013, pp. 72 – 73, lot 80; Ricketts 2014, p. 148, Hájek 1960, no. 8, pls. 10 – 14; Barrett 1969, p. 158; A. K.
pp. 46 – 47, no. 28
fig. 1 Das 1978, pl. 24; Krishna Chaitanya 1979, p. 81; Zebrowski
Cat. 14, Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler 1981b, fig. 414; Robert Skelton in Indian Heritage 1982,
Cat. 25, Dagger with Zoomorphic Hilt
Blochet 1926, pp. 153 – 54, 159, pl. CIX; Goetz 1934, pl. 3, p. 38, no. 44; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 90, colorpl. X, p. 94,
Christie’s 1996, p. 71, lot 131; Michell and Zebrowski 1999,
no. 6; Barrett 1958, pp. 14 – 15, pl. 5; “Ahmadnagar” 1963, ill. no. 70; Khandalavala 1986, pl. 90; Knížková 1986, p. 116,
p. 231, fig. 169; von Folsach 2001, p. 342, no. 568; Elgood
p. 27; Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2 (1974), pl. Ia; fig. 1, p. 117, fig. 2; Seyller 1995, p. 322, fig. 3; A. K. Das
2004a, p. 114, no. 11.7; Blair and Bloom 2006, p. 81, no. 21;
Krishna Chaitanya 1979, pl. 74; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 20, 1998, p. 25, fig. 4; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 171,
Joachim Meyer in Calza 2012, pp. 166 – 67, 259, no. IV.19;
ill. no. 4, p. 22, ill. nos. 6 – 9, p. 34, colorpl. II; S. C. Welch fig. 125; Hutton 2006, pl. 21; Stronge 2010, p. 128, pl. 93;
Ricketts 2014, p. 158, fig. 17
1985, pp. 286 – 87, no. 190; Zebrowski 1986, p. 92, fig. 1; Beach 2011, p. 189, no. 12, p. 198, fig. 9; Overton 2011b,
Michell and Zebrowski 1999, colorpl. 2
347
p. 348, fig. 2, p. 493, fig. 199, p. 495, fig. 201, p. 508, fig. 217; Cat. 47, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in Procession Cat. 67, Darbar of Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II
Overton 2014, p. 248, fig. 10.5 Sotheby’s 1988, p. 14, lot 40, p. 64, pl. I; Overton 2011b, Zebrowski 1983a, p. 140, ill. no. 107; Michell and
p. 358, fig. 12; Christie’s 2012a, pp. 2, 118 – 19, lot 201 Zebrowski 1999, p. 187, fig. 137
Cat. 34, “Suhrab Slain by Rustam,” Folio from a Shahnama
(Book of Kings) Cat. 48, Royal Hunting Falcon (Baz) Cat. 68, Princely Deer Hunters
Overton 2011b, p. 443, fig. 138 Hôtel Drouot 1960, lot 38 and front cover; Zebrowski Blochet 1930, pl. L; Mark Zebrowski in S. C. Welch 1973,
1983a, p. 85, ill. no. 62; Okada 1991, p. 111, fig. 3 pp. 130 – 32, no. 78 and front cover; Zebrowski 1983a,
Cat. 35, “The Death of Farud,” Folio from a Shahnama
p. 147, ill. nos. 115, 116; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 308 – 9,
(Book of Kings) Cat. 49, Incense Burner in the Shape of an Octagonal Shrine
no. 207; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 188, fig. 139;
Unpublished Zebrowski 1997, p. 120, pl. 139; Michell and Zebrowski
Nayeem 2008, p. 281, fig. 29
1999, p. 239, fig. 178
Cat. 36, “Piran Stays the Execution of Bizhan,” Folio from a
Cat. 69, Carpet Weights (Mir-i Farsh) with Domed Profiles
Shahnama (Book of Kings) Cat. 50, Ewer with Dragon Heads (Butler Ewer)
Unpublished
Unpublished Harari 1939, p. 2513; Pope and Ackerman 1939, pl. 1378A;
J. W. Allan 1982, p. 48, pl. 48; Zebrowski 1995, p. 160, fig. 1; Cat. 70, Manuscript of the Futuh al-Haramayn
Cat. 37, “Kai Khusrau Crosses the Sea,” Folio from a
Zebrowski 1997, p. 147, pl. 189, p. 314, pl. 521 (Description of the Holy Cities)
Shahnama (Book of Kings)
Unpublished
Marie Lukens Swietochowski in Arte islámico 1994, Cat. 51, Spittoon or Incense Burner
pp. 92 – 93 Unpublished Cat. 71, House of Bijapur
Stuart Cary Welch in Metropolitan Museum of Art 1983,
Cat. 38, Dervish Receiving a Visitor Cat. 52, Portrait of a Ruler or Musician
pp. 12, 14, 15; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 151, ill. no. 118a, p. 145,
Zebrowski 1983a, p. 79, ill. no. 54, p. 70, colorpl. VII; Unpublished
pl. XVII; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 310, 311, no. 208;
Michell 1986, p. vi; Topsfield 1994, pp. 30 – 31, no. 12;
Cat. 53, Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah Metropolitan Museum of Art 1987, pp. 158, 159, pl. 121;
Nayeem 2008, p. 274, fig. 20; Overton 2011a, p. 376, no. 12,
Zebrowski 1983a, p. 124, ill. no. 92; Zebrowski 1986, p. 102, Kossak 1997, pp. 68, 69, no. 36; Haidar 2011a, p. 341;
p. 378, fig. 1; Overton 2011b, p. 352, fig. 6; Overton 2012,
fig. 11; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, pl. 7; Overton 2011a, Haidar and Sardar 2011, front cover, frontispiece; Navina
pp. 37 – 60, 255, ill. no. 3.5
p. 377, no. 13, p. 388, fig. 13; Overton 2011b, p. 521, fig. 230 Najat Haidar in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011,
Cat. 39, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Holding Castanets pp. 380 – 81, no. 269; Overton 2011b, p. 570, fig. 296;
Cat. 54, Album Page with Découpé Vase, Insects, and Birds
Gray 1937, pl. LIIIa; Gray 1938, pp. 74 – 76, p. 77, pl. B; Goswamy 2014, pp. 176 – 79
Bonhams 2011, lot 236
M. Chandra 1951, p. 23, pl. I; Skelton 1958, p. 117, fig. 5;
Cat. 72, Marbled Papers with an Accession Note at Mandu
Barrett and Gray 1963, p. 127; Skelton 1963, p. 37, ill. no. 5; Cat. 55, Album Page with Découpé Calligraphy
Unpublished
Pinder-Wilson 1976, p. 91, no. 176; Marshall 1981, p. 139, Bonhams 2011, lot 235; Topsfield 2012, pp. 106 – 7, no. 42
fig. 149; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 83, ill. no. 59, p. 72, colorpl. VIII; Cat. 73, Ascetic Riding a Nag
Cat. 56, A Floral Fantasy
S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 292, 293, no. 195; Zebrowski 1986, C. Weimann 1983, p. 165, no. 4; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 136,
Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 184, fig. 134
p. 100, fig. 9; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 15, fig. 2; ill. no. 105; Kossak 1997, p. 68, no. 35; Hutton 2006, pl. 33;
Hutton 2006, pl. 22; Nayeem 2008, p. 263, fig. 7; Overton Cat. 57, Illumination in the Form of a Vase Seyller 2011a, p. 68, fig. 5; Mittal 2013, p. 137, fig. 10.1
2011a, p. 376, no. 6, p. 381, fig. 5; Overton 2011b, p. 355, Milo Cleveland Beach in Topsfield and Beach 1991,
Cat. 74, Ascetic Riding a Nag
fig. 9; Goswamy 2014, pp. 310 – 13 pp. 34 – 35, no. 8; Filippi 1997, p. 119, no. 66; Michell and
F. R. Martin 1912, pl. 231; C. Weimann 1983, p. 165, no. 5;
Zebrowski 1999, p. 185, fig. 135; Topsfield 2012, pp. 108 – 9,
Cat. 40, Stout Courtier Zebrowski 1983a, p. 137, ill. no. 106; Beach 1985, p. 40,
no. 43
Gray 1938, pp. 74 – 76, p. 77, pl. C; Barrett and Gray 1963, no. 27; Schmitz 1997, pp. 167 – 69, pl. 39; Hutton 2006,
p. 126; Pinder-Wilson 1976, p. 91, no. 174; Zebrowski 1983a, Cat. 58, Pair of Book Covers pl. 34
p. 80, ill. nos. 55, 56; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 296, 297, Sotheby’s 1992, p. 248, lot 527; Filippi 1997, pp. 116 – 17,
Cat. 75, Marbled Begum
no. 197; Zebrowski 1986, p. 101, fig. 10; Michell and nos. 63, 64; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 209, fig. 155;
S. C. Welch 1975, p. 75, no. 35; C. Weimann 1983, pp. 135,
Zebrowski 1999, colorpl. 6; Overton 2011a, p. 376, no. 9, Topsfield 2012, pp. 110 – 13, nos. 44, 45
165, no. 7; Jagdish Mittal in S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 296,
p. 383, fig. 8; Overton 2011b, p. 519, fig. 228
Cat. 59, Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah and Ikhlas Khan 298 – 99, no. 198; Porter 1988, p. 25; Mittal 2013, p. 140,
Cat. 41, A Mullah Riding an Elephant fig. 10.5; Jagdish Mittal 2014, p. 37, fig. 13
Gray 1949, p. 175, no. 813, pl. 145; Pinder-Wilson 1976, Pinder-Wilson 1976, p. 92, no. 179; Zebrowski 1981b,
Cat. 76, Man with Captive Lion
p. 91, no. 175; Falk and M. Archer 1981, pp. 222, 500, fig. 429; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 132, ill. no. 100; Topsfield
C. Weimann 1983; Mittal 2013, p. 143, fig. 10.9
no. 402; Zebrowski 1981b, fig. 420; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 82, 1984, p. 25, no. 17; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 300 – 301, no. 200;
ill. nos. 57, 58; Losty 1986, p. 58, no. 52; Michell and Milo Cleveland Beach in Topsfield and Beach 1991, Cat. 77, Folio from an Album of Calligraphy with Marbled
Zebrowski 1999, p. 169, fig. 123; Overton 2011a, p. 376, pp. 38 – 41, no. 10; Filippi 1997, p. 103, no. 54, and front (Abri ) Borders
no. 10, p. 384, fig. 9; Overton 2011b, p. 401, fig. 78 cover; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 180, fig. 132; Unpublished
Alderman 2006, pp. 114 – 15, fig. 101; Rosemary Crill in
Cat. 42, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Standing Cat. 78, Elephant Trampling a Horse
Crill and Jariwala 2010, pp. 112 – 13, no. 32; Topsfield 2012,
Binney 1973, p. 143, no. 121; Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, Sotheby’s 1999, pp. 19 – 20, lot 28; C. Weimann 1983;
pp. 94 – 95, no. 36
vol. 2 (1974), pl. VIb; Pinder-Wilson 1976, p. 90, no. 173; Topsfield 2012, pp. 104 – 5, no. 41
Binney 1979, p. 788, fig. 4; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 86, Cat. 60, Ikhlas Khan with a Petition
Cat. 79, Dervish Seated in Contemplation
ill. no. 63; Overton 2011a, p. 376, no. 8, p. 383, fig. 7; Binney 1973, p. 159, no. 133; Binney 1979, p. 793, fig. 9;
Binney 1973, p. 153, no. 128; C. Weimann 1983, p. 165,
Overton 2011b, p. 353, fig. 7 Zebrowski 1981b, fig. 425; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 129,
no. 6; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 135, ill. no. 103; Goswamy and
ill. no. 96; Alderman 2006, p. 113, fig. 100
Cat. 43, Siesta Smith 2005, pp. 176 – 77, no. 71; Mittal 2013, p. 138,
Kühnel 1922, fig. 104; Barrett 1958, pp. 16 – 17, pl. 6; Cat. 61, Manuscript of the Qasida in Praise of Sultan fig. 10.2; Goswamy 2014, pp. 510 – 13
Krishna Chaitanya 1979, pp. 72, 87, pl. 63; Hickmann 1979, ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah of Golconda
Cat. 80, Lady Carrying a Peacock
no. 17; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 110, ill. no. 85, p. 117, colorpl. XIII; Sotheby’s 1974, p. 48, lot 308; Losty 1982, pp. 109, 132 – 33,
C. Weimann 1983, p. 166, no. 10; Kramrisch 1986, p. 34,
Zebrowski 1986, p. 99, fig. 8; Zebrowski 1995, p. 169, fig. 12; no. 103
no. 29
Zebrowski 1997, p. 147, pl. 190; Michell and Zebrowski
Cat. 62, Hilt of a Sword
1999, colorpl. 4; von Gladiss and Haase 2008, pp. 48 – 49;
Keene 1985, no. 39; Keene 2001, p. 31, no. 2.3
Overton 2011b, p. 572, fig. 298 Bidar
Cat. 63, Dagger with Zoomorphic Hilt
Cat. 44, Ascetic Visited by a Yogini
Haidar 2011c, p. 17; Sotheby’s 2011a, pp. 8 – 9, 130 – 33, lot Cat. 81, Bidri Incense Burner (Dhupdan) in the Shape
Hickmann 1979, no. 37; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 111, ill. no. 86,
103, and back cover; Canby 2012, p. 89, ill. no. 13 of a Tomb
p. 118, colorpl. XIV; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, colorpl. 5
Susan Stronge in Indian Heritage 1982, pp. 142 – 43,
Cat. 64, Fish-Shaped Waterspout from the Asar Mahal
Cat. 45, Folios from a Manuscript of the Kitab-i Nauras no. 484; Zebrowski 1997, p. 124, pl. 149
Nayeem 2008, p. 335, fig. 34
(Book of Nine Essences) of Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II
Cat. 82, Pear-Shaped Bidri Ewer (Aftaba) with
Krishna Chaitanya 1979, p. 74; Robert Skelton in Indian Cat. 65, Inscribed Panel
Flowering Trees
Heritage 1982, p. 37, no. 43; Schimmel 1984, pp. 70, 186, Sotheby’s 1993a, lot 216
Zebrowski 1997, p. 156, pl. 208
n. 262; Haidar 2011b, pp. 30 – 33, figs. 5 – 12, p. 40, fig. 22
Cat. 66, Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II Slays a Tiger
Cat. 83, Bidri Ewer (Aftaba)
Cat. 46, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Venerates a Sufi Saint Barrett 1960, p. 13 and frontispiece; Christie’s 1980, p. 27,
Crill 1982, p. 57, no. 23; Susan Stronge and Assadullah
Robert Skelton in Indian Heritage 1982, p. 42, no. 55; lot 55; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 142, ill. no. 110; S. C. Welch
Souren Melikian-Chirvani in Indian Heritage 1982, p. 140,
Khandalavala 1986, pl. 92; Zebrowski 1997, p. 116, pl. 135, 1985, pp. 306 – 7, no. 205; Michell and Zebrowski 1999,
no. 469, p. 159, no. 16d; Stronge 1985, p. 40, no. 2; La Niece
p. 180, pl. 256, p. 201, pl. 305; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 188, fig. 138; Sotheby’s 2011a, pp. 152 – 53, lot 113;
and Graham 1987, p. 97, fig. 1; Guy and Swallow 1990,
p. 176, fig. 130; Canby 2005, pp. 43, 48, 49; Hutton 2006, Topsfield 2012, pp. 96 – 97, no. 37
p. 118, ill. no. 97; Zebrowski 1997, p. 162, pl. 225, p. 253,
p. 104, fig. 3.8; Overton 2011a, p. 376, no. 2, p. 387, fig. 12;
pl. 432; Craddock et al. 1998, p. 72, pl. 22
Overton 2011b, p. 357, fig. 11, p. 550, figs. 268, 269, p. 553,
fig. 273; Hutton and Tucker 2014, p. 225, fig. 9.5
348 Literature
Cat. 84, Bidri Box with Sloping Walls Cat. 102, Tray with Animals and Birds amid Animated Floral Cat. 125, Dagger in the Form of a Bird Holding a Leaf
Zebrowski 1983b, p. 39, ill. no. 13; Zebrowski 1997, p. 265, Arabesques Unpublished
pl. 448a, b, p. 297, pl. 496; Parodi 2014a, p. 274, fig. 11.5 Jagdish Mittal in S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 310, 311 – 12, no. 209;
Cat. 126, Basin
Mittal 1986, p. 248, fig. 6; Zebrowski 1997, p. 334, pl. 546,
Cat. 85, Bidri Carpet Weight (Mir-i Farsh) with Trellis von Folsach 2001, p. 336, no. 549
p. 353, pl. 580; Z.-D. A. Desai 1999, p. 82, fig. 2; Michell
Pattern
and Zebrowski 1999, pp. 175 – 76, 238, fig. 176; Mittal 2007, Cat. 127, Fountain
V. N. Desai 1985, p. 137, no. 115; Zebrowski 1997, p. 133,
pp. 212 – 13, no. 97 Daniel S. Walker in “Recent Acquisitions” 1998, p. 13;
pl. 161
Marika Sardar in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011,
Cat. 103, Lidded Box with Running Animals
Cat. 86, Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Lotuses pp. 386 – 88, no. 275
Unpublished
Emerging from a Pond
Cat. 128, Wedding Procession of Sultan Muhammad Quli
Zebrowski 1997, p. 231, pl. 375, p. 304, pl. 507 Cat. 104, Folios from an Album of Calligraphy
Qutb Shah
James 1987, pp. 243 – 54, pls. XIV, XV; Weinstein 2014,
Cat. 87, Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with a Meandering Sotheby’s 1990, pp. 18 – 19, lot 32; Safrani 1992a, p. 10,
pp. 182, 200 – 201, nn. 12, 18
Riverside Landscape ill. no. 7; Filippi 1997, p. 59, no. 15; Michell and Zebrowski
Zebrowski 1997, p. 229, pl. 371, p. 306, pl. 509; Michell Cat. 105, Page of Illumination in Gold 1999, p. 201, fig. 148; Topsfield 2012, pp. 100 – 101, no. 39
and Zebrowski 1999, p. 240, fig. 179; Parodi 2014a, p. 273, Unpublished
Cat. 129, African Courtier
fig. 11.3
Cat. 106, Tree on the Island of Waqwaq Zebrowski 1983a, p. 187, ill. no. 155, p. 164, pl. XX; Michell
Cat. 88, Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Tall Flowers in Staatliche Museen zu Berlin 1937, no. 15; Skelton 1973, and Zebrowski 1999, p. 203, fig. 150; Alderman 2006,
Arches, and Associated Ring p. 194, fig. 160; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 172, ill. no. 137, p. 163, p. 118, fig. 104; Rosemary Crill in Crill and Jariwala 2010,
Zebrowski 1997, p. 224, pl. 360, p. 302, pl. 504 colorpl. XIX; Michell 1986, p. vii; Christine Gayraud in pp. 116 – 17, pl. 34
Étrange et le merveilleux en terres d’Islam 2001, pp. 168 – 69,
Cat. 89, Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Poppies against Cat. 130, A Parrot Perched on a Mango Tree, a Ram Tethered
no. 118; Museum für Islamische Kunst 2001, p. 146;
a Pointillist Ground Below
Goswamy 2014, pp. 112, 164 – 67
Sotheby’s 1983, p. 96, lot 228; Zebrowski 1997, p. 233, Mittal 2007, pp. 120 – 21, no. 30, and front cover
pl. 382, p. 309, pl. 513 Cat. 107, Stone ‘Alam
Cat. 131, Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah
Unpublished
Cat. 90, Bidri Huqqa (Water Pipe) Base with Irises Okada 1991, p. 113, fig. 7
Stuart Cary Welch and Carolyn Kane in Metropolitan Cat. 108, Brass ‘Alam
Cat. 132, A Golconda Prince
Museum of Art 1985, p. 9; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 322, 323, Unpublished
Okada 1991, p. 114, fig. 8
no. 218; Metropolitan Museum of Art 1987, p. 152, pl. 117;
Cat. 109, Brass ‘Alam
Walker 1997, p. 118, fig. 117; Zebrowski 1997, p. 234, pl. 389; Cat. 133, Shah Jahan Diamond
Dye 2001, p. 418, no. 193
Haidar 2011a, p. 341; Marika Sardar in Metropolitan Jobbins, Harding, and Scarratt 1984, pp. 1 – 7, figs. 1 – 11;
Museum of Art 2011, p. 386, no. 274 Cat. 110, Brass ‘Alam Christie’s 1985b, lot 423; Balfour 1987, pp. 244 – 46; Islamic
Unpublished and Hindu Jewellery 1988, no. 48; Khalidi 1999, pp. 71 – 73;
Cat. 91, Bidri Tray with Lotuses and a River
Keene 2001, p. 129, no. 11.3; Bharadwaj 2002, pp. 86 – 89;
Markel 1992, p. 47, fig. 2; Zebrowski 1997, p. 258, Cat. 111, Wood Roundel
Stronge 2010, p. 169, pl. 130
pl. 440a, b, p. 305, pl. 508; Parodi 2014a, p. 275, fig 11.6 Annemarie Schimmel in “Recent Acquisitions” 1992, p. 16;
Marika Sardar in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011, Cat. 134, Quatrefoil Pendant
Cat. 92, Bidri Tray with Flowering Plants
pp. 390 – 92, no. 278B; Soucek 2011, p. 8 Keene 2001, p. 26, no. 1.18; Keene 2004b, p. 194, fig. 3
Islamic Art from India 1980, p. 13, no. 7; Zebrowski 1997,
p. 248, pl. 422, pp. 290 – 91, pl. 487 Cat. 112, Rider on an Epigraphic Horse Cat. 135, Octagonal Rosette Pendant
S. C. Welch 1963a, p. 31; S. C. Welch 1975, p. 70, no. 31; Keene 2001, pp. 26 – 27, no. 1.20
Cat. 93, Bidri Tray with Flowering Plants in Arches Radiating
A. Welch 1979, pp. 180 – 81, no. 77; Sotheby’s 2011a,
from a Central Medallion Cat. 136, Floral Pendant with Upswept Petals
pp. 124 – 25, lot 99
Zebrowski 1997, p. 254, pls. 433, 434, pp. 302 – 3, pl. 505 Keene 2001, p. 27, no. 1.21; Schimmel 2004, p. 180,
Cat. 113, Calligraphic ‘Alam Finial in the Shape of a Dragon ill. no. 62
Cat. 94, Bidri Tray with Petals
Zebrowski 1997, p. 330, pl. 544
von Folsach 1990, p. 212, no. 357; Sultan, Shah, and Great Cat. 137, Floral Pendant with Drooping Petals
Mughal 1996, no. 348; Zebrowski 1997, pp. 308 – 9, pl. 512; Cat. 114, Calligraphic ‘Alam in the Shape of a Falcon Keene 2001, p. 28, no. 1.22
Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 241, fig. 180; von Folsach Wheeler 1956, p. 63; Mārg 26, no. 2 (March 1973), n.p.
Cat. 138, Floral Pendant in the Form of an Eight-Pointed Star
2001, p. 332, no. 538; Blair and Bloom 2006, p. 126, no. 56 (advertisement for Tata Enterprises); S. C. Welch 1985,
Keene 2001, p. 26, no. 1.19
pp. 324, 325, no. 220; Zebrowski 1997, p. 289, pl. 485
Cat. 95, Bidri Basin (Sailabchi)
Cat. 139, Diamond Pendant of Amulet Case (Ta‘widh) Form
Zebrowski 1997, p. 170, pls. 241, 242 Cat. 115, Inscribed Hardstone Mortar and Pestle
Keene 2001, p. 129, no. 11.2; Silva 2004a, p. 46, fig. 5
Pathak and Sharma 2013 – 14, p. 145, fig. 2
Cat. 140, Diamond Pendeloque
Golconda Cat. 116, Mortar with Six Sides
Christie’s 1999, pp. 156 – 57, lot 255; Keene 2001, p. 129,
Unpublished
no. 11.1; Stronge 2010, p. 169, pl. 129
Cat. 96, Frontispiece from the Zakhira-yi Khwarazmshahi
Cat. 117, Mortar with Cusped Sides
(The Treasury of the Khwarazm Shah) Cat. 141, Sultan ‘Abu’l Hasan Qutb Shah Standing
Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 243, fig. 183; Indian
Sotheby’s 1928, p. 31, lot 235; Skelton 1973, p. 188, fig. 152; Binney 1973, p. 162, no. 137, colorpl. p. 166; Mark Zebrowski
Miniatures and Works of Art 2003, p. 36, no. 17
Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2 (1974), pl. IXa; Losty in S. C. Welch 1973, pp. 132 – 33, no. 79; Binney 1979, p. 800,
1982, p. 70, no. 47; Leach 1995, vol. 2, pp. 886, 887, Cat. 118, Miniature Garnet Cup with Dragon-Head Handles fig. 16; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 190, ill. no. 156; Perriot 1987,
colorpls. 122, 123, pp. 889 – 91; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 157, Keene 2001, p. 133, no. 11.10 p. 382, fig. 7; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 204, fig. 151;
ill. no. 120; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 192, fig. 141 Goswamy and Smith 2005, pp. 170 – 71, no. 68
Cat. 119, Darbar of Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah
Cat. 97, Manuscript of the Sindbadnama (The Tales of Sotheby’s 1937, lot 589; Gray 1938, pp. 74 – 76, p. 77, pl. A; Cat. 142, Palanquin Finials
Sindbad) Barrett 1958, pp. 20 – 21, pl. 8; Skelton 1973, p. 185, fig. 149; Cat. 142a, b: Daniel S. Walker in “Recent Acquisitions”
Falconer 1841; Clouston 1884; Losty 1982, pp. 54, 70 – 71, Krishna Chaitanya 1979, p. 77; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 180, 1996, p. 18. Cat. 142c – h: Unpublished
no. 48; Weinstein 2011, pp. 134 – 40 ill. no. 145; Losty 1995, p. 296, fig. 6; Michell and Zebrowski
Cat. 143, Prince Seated in a Garden
1999, p. 198, fig. 146; Sardar 2010, p. 86, fig. 9
Cat. 98, Manuscript of the Qur’an Gray 1949, pp. 176 – 77, no. 819A, pl. 147; Barrett 1958,
Sotheby’s 1994, pp. 20 – 24, lot 18; Melikian-Chirvani 2007, Cat. 120, Manuscript of the ‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat (Wonders pp. 3, 24, pl. 10; Krishna Chaitanya 1979, pp. 82, 87, pl. 73;
pp. 448 – 49; Overton 2011b, pp. 102 – 15 of Creation) from the Library of Bari Sahib Zebrowski 1983a, p. 204, ill. no. 176; Christopher Alan
Unpublished Bayly in Bayly 1990, pp. 47 – 48, no. 19; Leach 1995, vol. 2,
Cat. 99, Yali with Elephants
pp. 948, 951, no. 9.681, p. 952, colorpl. 137; Haidar 2004,
Zebrowski 1997, p. 102, pl. 106; Christie’s 2011b, p. 86, Cat. 121, Shaffron of Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah
p. 181, fig. 8
lot 336 Unpublished
Cat. 144, Casket with Painted Scenes
Cat. 100, Peacock-Shaped Incense Burner Cat. 122, Armored Shoes
Kramrisch 1937, p. 223, n. 96, pl. XXI; Gray 1949, p. 176,
Zebrowski 1997, p. 94, pl. 87; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, Unpublished
no. 819, pl. 147; Victoria and Albert Museum 1969, pl. 52;
p. 234, fig. 172
Cat. 123, Vambrace Zebrowski 1981a, p. 181, fig. 197; Robert Skelton in Indian
Cat. 101, Steel Object, Possibly a Door Knocker or Catch Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 233, fig. 171; Elgood 2011, Heritage 1982, p. 159, no. 16b, p. 162, no. 548; Zebrowski
Rosemary Crill in Indian Heritage 1982, p. 148, no. 494; p. 219, fig. 1 1983a, pp. 202, 203, ill. nos. 169 – 74; Guy and Swallow
Zebrowski 1997, p. 105, pl. 116a, b; Christie’s 2011a, p. 227, 1990, p. 122, ill. no. 104; Michell and Zebrowski 1999,
Cat. 124, Crutch Dagger in the Form of a Serpentine Vine
lot 226; Indian and Islamic Works of Art 2011, pp. 56 – 57, p. 208, fig. 154; Jaffer 2002, p. 60; Haidar 2004, pp. 179,
Mohamed 2008, p. 204, no. 194
no. 25 180, figs. 5 – 7; A. Jackson and Jaffer 2004, p. 194
Literature 349
Cat. 145, Lacquered Pen Box (Qalamdan) fig. 166; Crill 2008, p. 20, fig. 14; Sardar 2011, p. 152, fig. 3, Cat. 187, Shell-Shaped Pomander with a Makara Head and
Navina Najat Haidar in “Recent Acquisitions” 2003, p. 10; p. 154, fig. 4 Birds
Haidar 2004, pp. 176 – 89, figs. 1 – 4, 10; Topsfield 2004b, Unpublished
Cat. 165, Panel from a Kalamkari Tent Hanging
pp. 234 – 35, no. 96
Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 227, fig. 166 Cat. 188, Ring with Lobed Bezel and Birds
Cat. 146, Lacquered Pen Box (Qalamdan) Unpublished
Christie’s 1990, p. 87, lot 113
Drawn to the Deccan: Mughals and Cat. 189, Goa Stone and Container
Cat. 147, Dancing Girl europeans in the deccan Bonhams 2003, pp. 144 – 47, lot 349; Encompassing the
Schroeder 1947, pl. XVIII, fig. 6; S. C. Welch 1963c, p. 13; Globe 2007, p. 261, fig. I-29; Haidar 2011a, p. 341; Navina
Mark Zebrowski in S. C. Welch 1973, pp. 136 – 37, no. 81; Cat. 166, Prince Aurangzeb Najat Haidar in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011,
Zebrowski 1983a, p. 205, ill. no. 177; Patnaik 1985, p. 57, Topsfield 2012, pp. 56 – 57, no. 17 pp. 389 – 90, no. 277
ill. no. 10; Sotheby’s 2011b, pp. 24 – 25, lot 9
Cat. 167, Birds in a Silver River Cat. 190, Goa Stone with Case and Stand
Cat. 148, Sleeping Maiden and Maid Aimée Froom in Spirit & Life 2007, p. 78, no. 49 Unpublished
Zebrowski 1983a, p. 200, ill. no. 168; Michell and
Cat. 168, Manuscript of the Nihj al-Balagha (The Way of Cat. 191, Carved Panel from a Casket
Zebrowski 1999, p. 207, fig. 153
Eloquence) and Other Texts Sotheby’s 1993b, lot 180a; Mark Zebrowski in Treasures of
Cat. 149, Sarinda Akhtar et al. 2002, p. 78 the Courts 1994, pp. 32 – 33, no. 22
Christie’s 1977, pp. 20 – 21, lot 90; Rosemary Crill in Indian
Cat. 169, Folios from a Manuscript of Jaswant Singh of Cat. 192, Christ Child as the Bom Pastor (Good Shepherd)
Heritage 1982, p. 164, no. 562; Bor 2003, pp. 118 – 19, no. 60;
Jodhpur’s Siddantha-sara, Siddantha-bodha, and Unpublished
Bor et al. 2003, p. 8
Aporaksha-siddantha
Cat. 193, Reception of a Dutch Ambassador
Cat. 150, Calligraphic Shield Cat. 169a, b: Unpublished. Cat. 169c: Indian Miniatures
Clouzot 1912, pp. 290, 291; Clouzot 1921, fig. 19; Irwin and
Mohamed 2008, p. 377, no. 357 and Works of Art 2000, pp. 60 – 61, no. 28
Brett 1970, p. 14, fig. 1; Hartkamp-Jonxis 2005, pp. 61 – 71,
Cat. 151, Multiple-Niche Prayer Carpet (Saph) Cat. 170, Manuscript of the Nan va Halva (Bread and Sweets) ill. nos. 1 – 7, 9 – 11; Labrusse 2007, p. 210, no. 223
Sotheby’s 1984, p. 78, lot 210; S. Cohen 1986, p. 122, fig. 6; Georgina Fantoni in Indian Paintings and Manuscripts
Cat. 194, Darbar of Cornelis van den Bogaerde
Walker 1997, p. 173, no. 38, pp. 136 – 37, figs. 132, 133 1999, pp. 56 – 57, no. 35; Navina Najat Haidar in “Recent
Olivier Coutau-Bégarie 2008, lot 245; Kruijtzer 2010,
Acquisitions” 2000, p. 16; Marika Sardar in Metropolitan
Cat. 152, Incantation Cup and Tray p. 160, fig. 1, p. 162, fig. 2
Museum of Art 2011, pp. 383 – 84, no. 271; Haidar 2012,
Unpublished
p. 115, ill. no. 15 Cat. 195, Procession of Cornelis van den Bogaerde
Cat. 153, Epigraphic Bowl Olivier Coutau-Bégarie 2008, lot 245; Kruijtzer 2010,
Cat. 171, Nobleman at Repast
Zebrowski 1997, p. 346, pl. 568a, b; von Folsach 2001, p. 164, fig. 3; Scarisbrick and Zucker 2014, p. 37, ill. no. 9
Unpublished
p. 337, no. 552
Cat. 196, Embassy of Johannes Bacherus en route to the
Cat. 172, Bejeweled Maiden with a Parakeet
Cat. 154, Inscribed Dish Court of Aurangzeb
Jeremiah P. Losty in Topsfield 2004b, pp. 322 – 23, no. 142
Unpublished Lunsingh Scheurleer 1996, p. 200, fig. 31; A. Jackson and
Cat. 173, “Fairies Descend to Manohar’s Palace,” Folio from a Jaffer 2004, pp. 80 – 81; Lunsingh Scheurleer and Kruijtzer
Cat. 155, Inscribed Dish
dispersed Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Flower Garden of Love) 2005, pp. 48 – 60, ill. nos. 1 – 3, 6 – 14; Kruijtzer 2010, p. 166,
Zebrowski 1997, p. 339, pl. 553; Overton 2011b, p. 372,
Christie’s 1979, pp. 54, 55, lot 187; Zebrowski 1983a, p. 224, fig. 4, p. 167, fig. 5
fig. 34
ill. no. 195
Cat. 197, “Agra” Diamond
Cat. 156, Beggar’s Bowl (Kashkul)
Cat. 174, “Manohar Meets a Dervish in the Forest,” Folio Catalogue de brillants 1860, p. 57; Christie’s 1905, p. 10,
Zebrowski 1997, p. 345, pl. 567a, b; Michell and Zebrowski
from a Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Flower Garden of Love) lot 127; Balfour 1987, pp. 28 – 33; Khalidi 1999, pp. 68 – 69;
1999, p. 239, fig. 177; von Folsach 2001, p. 337, no. 551; Blair
Philadelphia Museum of Art 1973, p. 30; Kramrisch 1986, Bharadwaj 2002, pp. 108 – 9; Jack Ogden in Beyond
and Bloom 2006, p. 101, no. 36
p. 39, no. 34; Gaeffke 1987a, pp. 224 – 45; Gaeffke 1987b, Extravagance forthcoming
Cat. 157, Beggar’s Bowl (Kashkul) pp. 309 – 11; Leach 1998, pp. 240 – 47; Manjhana 2000,
Cat. 198, “Idol’s Eye” Diamond
Unpublished front cover; Haidar 2014, p. 310, fig. 12.11
Christie’s 1865, p. 7, lot 87; Balfour 1987, pp. 138 – 39;
Cat. 158, Epigraphic Bowl Cat. 175, Covered Pot (Degcha) with Poetic Inscriptions Khalidi 1999, pp. 61 – 62; Bharadwaj 2002, pp. 70 – 72; Jack
Unpublished Unpublished Ogden in Beyond Extravagance forthcoming
Cat. 159, Spouted Vessel with Qur’anic Verses and the Names Cat. 176, Writing Box Clad in Gilt and Silver Cat. 199, Diamond Bodkin of Charles II for His Mistress
of the Shi‘a Imams Daniel S. Walker in “Recent Acquisitions” 1999, p. 11; Haidar Nell Gwynne
Unpublished 2011a, p. 341; Navina Najat Haidar and Jean-François de Scarisbrick 2007, p. 192, ill. nos. 257, 258; Scarisbrick and
Lapérouse in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011, pp. 388 – 89, Zucker 2014, p. 169, ill. no. 83
Cat. 160, Kalamkari Rumal
no. 276; Soucek 2011, p. 8
Breck 1928, p. 6, fig. 3, p. 7, fig. 4; Irwin 1959, pp. 44 – 45, Cat. 200, “Arcot II” Diamond
pl. XIII, fig. 17; Veronica Murphy in Indian Heritage 1982, Cat. 177, Dagger (Kard) with Jade Hilt Balfour 1987, pp. 42 – 45; Khalidi 1999, p. 67; Bharadwaj
p. 93, no. 241; Smart 1986, p. 21, no. 11 Sotheby’s 1967, p. 46, lot 161 2002, pp. 90 – 95; Jack Ogden in Beyond Extravagance
forthcoming
Cat. 161, Kalamkari Rumal Cat. 178, Miniature Manuscript of the Qur’an
Breck 1928, pp. 8 – 11, figs. 5 – 8; Dimand 1944, p. 278, fig. 185; Sotheby’s 1996, p. 20, lot 10; Keene 2001, p. 76, no. 6.33a; Cat. 201, Bazuband (Upper Armband) or Guluband
Wheeler 1956, p. 58; Irwin 1959, pp. 44 – 45, pl. XIV, fig. 18; Schimmel 2004, p. 182, ill. no. 65 (Choker Necklace)
Zebrowski 1981a, p. 188, fig. 213; Gittinger 1982, pp. 110 – 11, Unpublished
Cat. 179, Enameled Pendant Case
no. 101; Indian Heritage 1982, p. 70, no. 7, p. 92, no. 240;
Sotheby’s 1996, p. 20, lot 10; Keene 2001, p. 76, no. 6.33b; Cat. 202, Square Diamond Pendant on Pearl Necklace
Smart 1986, p. 12, fig. 14, p. 21, no. 12; Aimée Froom in
Schimmel 2004, p. 182, ill. no. 65 Unpublished
Arte islámico 1994, pp. 280 – 81
Cat. 180, Mahi-maratib (Fish Standard) Cat. 203, String of Pearls
Cat. 162, Kalamkari Rumal
Unpublished Unpublished
Breck 1928, p. 4, fig. 1, p. 5, fig. 2; Irwin 1959, pp. 43 – 44,
pl. XII, fig. 16; Carolyn Kane in Islamische Kunst 1981, Cat. 181, Panel from a Tent Lining with a Fantastical Flower Cat. 204, Diamond Earrings and Pearl Supports
pp. 326 – 27, no. 141; Smart 1986, p. 13, fig. 15, p. 21, no. 13; Wheeler 1956, p. 47; Smart 1986, p. 14, fig. 18, p. 21, no. 19 Unpublished
Guy 2011, p. 167, fig. 5
Cat. 182, Man’s Robe (Jama) with Poppies Cat. 205, Two Sarpeches (Turban Ornaments) for a Boy
Cat. 163, Kalamkari Hanging Ettinghausen 1975, p. 46; Metropolitan Museum of Art Unpublished
Irwin 1959, pp. 37 – 38, pl. V, fig. 5; Irwin and Brett 1970, 1987, pp. 146, 147, pl. 112
Cat. 206, Diamond Stud Earrings
p. 14, fig. 2; S. C. Welch 1985, pp. 315 – 17, no. 212;
Cat. 183, Carpet with Lattice Pattern Unpublished
Metropolitan Museum of Art 1987, pp. 154, 155, pl. 119;
Unpublished
Haidar 2011a, p. 341; Marika Sardar in Metropolitan Cat. 207, Crescent-Shaped Pearl and Diamond Earrings
Museum of Art 2011, pp. 392 – 94, no. 279; Sardar 2011, Cat. 184, Filigree Casket with Sliding Top Unpublished
pp. 150, 151, 153, figs. 1, 2, 4 Unpublished
Cat. 164, Kalamkari Hanging Cat. 185, Filigree Casket with Barrel Top
Irwin and Brett 1970, pp. 64 – 65, no. 2, pl. 2; Nina Gwatkin Unpublished
in Gittinger 1982, pp. 112 – 13, no. 103; Guy and Swallow
Cat. 186, Rock-Crystal Knife with a Jeweled Parrot
1990, p. 161, ill. no. 138; Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 227,
Splendeur des armes orientales 1988, p. 82, no. 135
350 Literature
m Bibliography /
Abdul Wali Khan, Mohd. Alderman, John Robert Arte do Marfim

1964 Bahmani Coins in the Andhra Pradesh Government 2006 “Paintings of Africans in the Deccan.” In Robbins and 1993 Arte do Marfim: Do sagrado e da história na Coleção
Museum, Hyderabad. Hyderabad: Government of Andhra McLeod 2006, pp. 106 – 23. Bombay: Mapin Publishing. Souza Lima do Museu Histórico Nacional. Exh. cat. Rio de
Pradesh. Janeiro: Centro Cultural Banco do Brasil.
Ali, Daud
Adamjee, Qamar 2004 Courtly Culture and Political Life in Early Arte islámico
2011 “Strategies for Visual Narration in the Illustrated Medieval India. Cambridge Studies in Indian History 1994 Arte islámico del Museo Metropolitano de Arte de
‘Chandayan’ Manuscripts.” PhD diss., New York and Society 10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nueva York. Exh. cat. Colegio de San Ildefonso; 1994 – 95.
University. Mexico: Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes.
Ali, Daud, and Emma J. Flatt
Adamova, Adel T. 2012 Eds. Garden and Landscape Practices in Pre-Colonial Art of Filigree
2001 “The Hermitage Manuscript of Nizāmī’s. Khamsa India: Histories from the Deccan. Visual and Media 1990 Iskusstvo skani / The Art of Filigree. With an essay by
Dated 835/1431.” Islamic Art 5, pp. 53 – 132. Histories 2. New Delhi: Routledge. [Papers presented at M. M. Postnikova-Loseva. Moscow: Gosudarstvennyi
2012 Persian Manuscripts, Paintings and Drawings, from the workshop “Fragrance, Symmetry and Light: The Istoricheskii Muzei, [1990].
the 15th to the Early 20th Century in the Hermitage History of Gardens and Garden Culture in the Deccan,”
Collection. Translated by J. M. Rogers. Edited by Simon Central University of Hyderabad, January 22 – 25, 2007.] Asher, Catherine B.
Hartley. London: Azimuth Editions. 1985 “Islamic Influence and the Architecture of
Ali, Momin, and S. A. Hussain Vijayanagara.” In Vijayanagara: City and Empire; New
Afshar, Iraj 1990 “Medical Manuscripts of the Qutub Shahi Period Currents of Research, edited by Anna Libera Dallapiccola,
2011 Kaghaz dar zindagi va farhang-i irani. Tehran: in the Libraries of Hyderabad.” Bulletin of the Indian with Stephanie Zingel-Avé Lallemant, vol. 1, pp. 188 – 95.
Markaz-i Pizhuhishi-i Miras-i Maktub. Institute on the History of Medicine 19, no. 2, pp. 129 – 35. Beiträge zur Südasienforschung 100. Stuttgart: Steiner
Verlag Wiesbaden.
Aftabi ‘Ali Shir Nava’i
1987 Tarif-i-Husain Shah Badshah Dakhan. Edited 1905 Majalis-i Nafa’is. Edited by ‘Ali Ashgar Hikmat. Ashraf Mazandarani
and translated by G. T. Kulkarni and Madhukar Shripad Tehran: Bank Melli Iran. 1994 Divan-i Ashraf Mazandarani. Edited by Muhammad
Mate. [In Persian and English.] Pune: Bharata Itihasa Hasan Sayyidan. Tehran: Bunyad-i Mawqufat-i Duktur
Samshodhaka Mandala. Allan, James W. Mahmud Afshar.
1982 “Metalwork: Copper, Brass and Steel.” In Tulips,
Ahmad, Khwaja Muhammad Arabesques & Turbans: Decorative Arts from the Ottoman Atasoy, Nurhan
1974 “Calligraphy.” In Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2, Empire, edited by Yanni Petsopoulos, pp. 33 – 48. New 2002 A Garden for the Sultan: Gardens and Flowers in the
pp. 409 – 22. York: Abbeville Press. Ottoman Culture. Istanbul: Aygaz.
2012 The Art and Architecture of Twelver Shi‘ism: Iraq,
Ahmad, Nazir Iran and the Indian Sub-Continent. London: Azimuth Athar Ali, M.
1954 “The Kitab-i-Nauras.” Islamic Culture 28, no. 2 (April), Editions. 1985 The Apparatus of Empire: Awards of Ranks, Offices,
pp. 333 – 71. and Titles to the Mu_ghal Nobility (1574 – 1658). [Aligarh]:
1956a “Farrukh Husain, the Royal Artist at the Court of Allan, James W., and Brian Gilmour Centre of Advanced Study in History, Aligarh Muslim
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II.” Islamic Culture 30, no. 1 (January), 2000 Eds. Persian Steel: The Tanavoli Collection. Oxford: University; Delhi: Oxford University Press.
pp. 31 – 35. Oxford University Press.
1956b Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II. Kitab-i-Nauras. Edited ‘Attar, Farid al-Din
and translated by Nazir Ahmad. New Delhi: Bharatiya Allan, Nigel 1998 The Speech of the Birds: Concerning Migration to the
Kala Kendra. 2003 Ed. Pearls of the Orient: Asian Treasures from the Real. The Manṭiqu’ṭ-Ṭair. Translated by P. W. Avery.
1961 “The Mughal Artist Farrukh Beg.” Islamic Culture 35, Wellcome Library. London: Serindia Publications. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society.
no. 2 (April), pp. 115 – 29. 2013 The Canticle of the Birds: Illustrated through Persian
1969 “‘Ādilshāhī Diplomatic Missions to the Court of Shāh Arabic, Persian, and Ottoman Calligraphy and Eastern Islamic Art. Translated by Afkham Darbandi
‘Abbās.” Islamic Culture 43, no. 2 (April), pp. 143 – 61. 2007 Selections of Arabic, Persian, and Ottoman Calligraphy. and Dick Davis. With commentaries on the works of art
1970 “Shāh Khalīlullāh Khushnawīs: The Royal Calligra- Edited and with commentaries by Christiane J. Gruber. by Michael Barry and a contribution by Leili Anvar. Paris:
phist of the ‘Adilshahi Court.” Islamic Culture 44, no. 2 Africa and Middle Eastern Division, Library of Congress, Diane de Selliers.
(April), pp. 35 – 55. Washington, D.C. http://international.loc.gov/intldl
1974 “Language and Literature: Persian.” In Sherwani and /apochtml/apochome.html. Azmi, Rahat
Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2, pp. 75 – 117. 1998 Mah-i Laqa. Hyderabad: Bazm-i Gulistan-i Urdu.
Archer, Mildred
“Ahmadnagar” 1970 “Company Painting in South India: The Early Babaie, Sussan
1963 “Ahmadnagar.” Mārg 16, no. 2 (March), pp. 25 – 28. Collections of Niccolao Manucci.” Apollo 92 (August), 1994 “Safavid Palaces at Isfahan: Continuity and Change
pp. 104 – 13. (1590 – 1666).” PhD diss., New York University.
Akhtar, Nasim, et al.
2002 Islamic Art in India. Exh. cat. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Archer, W. G. Bailey, Gauvin Alexander
Arts Museum Malaysia. 1951 “The Problem of Bikaner Paintings.” Mārg 5, no. 1 2001 “The End of the ‘Catholic Era’ in Mughal Painting:
(July), pp. 11 – 16. Jahangir’s Dream Pictures, English Painting, and the
Akimushkin, Oleg F. 1960 Indian Miniatures. Great Masters of the Past 9. Renaissance Frontispiece.” Mārg 53, no. 2 (December),
1994 The St. Petersburg Muraqqa’: Album of Indian and Greenwich, Conn.: New York Graphic Society. pp. 46 – 59.
Persian Miniatures of the 16th – 18th Centuries and
Specimens of Persian Calligraphy of ’Imād al-H.asanī. Exh. Armaria dos séculos XV a XVII Baker, George Percival
cat. Arch Foundation, Villa Favorita, Lugano. Lugano: 1983 Armaria dos séculos XV a XVIII. Exh. cat. Lisbon: 1921 Calico Painting and Printing in the East Indies in the
Arch Foundation. Presidéncia do Conselho de Ministros. XVIIth and XVIIIth Centuries. 2 vols. London: E. Arnold.
Alam, Muzaffar Arnold, T. W., and J. V. S. Wilkinson Bala Krishnan, Usha R.

2003 “The Culture and Politics of Persian in Precolonial 1936 The Library of A. Chester Beatty: A Catalogue of the 2001 Jewels of the Nizams. New Delhi: Department of
Hindustan.” In Literary Cultures in History: Reconstruc- Indian Miniatures, Oxford. 3 vols. Revised and edited by Culture, Government of India, in association with India
tions from South Asia, edited by Sheldon Pollock, J. V. S. Wilkinson. London: privately printed by J. Johnson Book House, Mumbai.
pp. 131 – 98. Berkeley: University of California Press. at Oxford University Press and published by E. Walker.
Balfour, Ian
Alam, Muzaffar, and Sanjay Subrahmanyam Art and Culture 1987 Famous Diamonds. London: Collins.
2007 Indo-Persian Travels in the Age of Discoveries, 1992 Art and Culture around 1492. Exh. cat. Cartuja de 2009 Famous Diamonds. 5th ed. Woodbridge, Suffolk:
1400 – 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Santa María de las Cuevas. Seville: Sociedad Estatal para Antique Collectors’ Club.
2012 Writing the Mughal World: Studies on Culture and la Exposición Universal Sevilla 92.
Politics. New York: Columbia University Press. Balkhi, Fasih al-Din
forthcoming “Self-Promoting Envoys.” In Muzaffar Alam Art at Auction 1956 Tazkirah-e Niswan-e Hind. Patna.
and Sanjay Subrahmanyam, Discovering the Familiar. 1968 Art at Auction: The Year at Sotheby’s & Parke-Bernet,
1967 – 68. Studio Book. New York: Viking Press.
351
Baptiste, Fitzroy André, John McLeod, and Kenneth X. forthcoming Beyond Extravagance: A Royal Collection of Bowen, Richard LeBaron, Jr.
Robbins Gems and Jewels. Edited by Amin Jaffer, Vivienne Becker, 1951 “The Pearl Fisheries of the Persian Gulf.” Middle East
2006 “Africans in the Medieval Deccan.” In Robbins and Jack Ogden, Katherine Prior, Judy Rudoe, Robert Skelton, Journal 5, no. 2 (Spring), pp. 161 – 80.
McLeod 2006, pp. 30 – 43. Michael Spink, and Stephen Vernoit. The Al Thani
Collection. 2nd ed. New York: Assouline. Forthcoming Boxer, C. R.
Barrett, Douglas E. [2015]. 1978 The Church Militant and Iberian Expansion,
1958 Painting of the Deccan, XVI – XVII Century. The Faber 1440 – 1770. Johns Hopkins Symposia in Comparative
Gallery of Oriental Art. London: Faber and Faber. Bharadwaj, Monisha History 10. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
1960 “Some Unpublished Deccan Miniatures.” Lalit Kalā, 2002 Great Diamonds of India. India Series. Mumbai: India
no. 7 (April), pp. 9 – 13. Book House. Brand, Mark
1969 “Painting at Bijapur.” In Paintings from Islamic Lands, 2010 “Bijapur under the Adil Shahis (1490 – 1686).” In Philon
edited by Ralph H. Pinder-Wilson, pp. 142 – 59. Oriental Bidri Ware 2010c, pp. 66 – 77.
Studies 4. Oxford: Bruno Cassirer. 1961 Bidri Ware. Catalogue by Anil Roy Choudhury.
Hyderabad: Salar Jung Museum. Breck, Joseph
Barrett, Douglas E., and Basil Gray 1928 “Four Seventeenth-Century Pintadoes.” Metropolitan
1963 Painting of India. Treasures of Asia. Geneva: Skira. Bilgrami, Syed Ali Asgar Museum Studies 1, no. 1 (November), pp. 3 – 15.
1927 Landmarks of the Deccan: A Comprehensive Guide to
Bawa, Vasant K. the Archaeological Remains of the City and Suburbs of Brend, Barbara
1992 The Last Nizam: The Life and Times of Mir Osman Ali Hyderabad. Hyderabad: Government Central Press. 1986 “The British Library’s Shahnama of 1438 as a
Khan. New Delhi: Viking. [Reprint, Delhi: Manas Publications, 1984.] Sultanate Manuscript.” In Skelton et al. 1986, pp. 87 – 93.
1995 The Emperor Akbar’s “Khamsa” of Niz∙āmī. London:
Bayani, Manijeh, Anna Contadini, and Tim Stanley Bilgrami, Syed Husain, and C. Willmott British Library.
1999 The Decorated Word: Qur’ans of the 17th to 19th 1883 – 84 Historical and Descriptive Sketch of His Highness
Centuries. The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic the Nizam’s Dominions. 2 vols. Bombay: Times of India Brickell, Francesca Cartier
Art 4, pt. 1. London: Nour Foundation, in association Steam Press. 2012 “Maharajas, Pearls and Oriental Influences: Jacques
with Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press. Cartier’s Voyages to the East in the Early Twentieth
Binney, Edwin Century.” Jewellery Studies 12, pp. 103 – 16.
Bayly, Christopher Alan 1973 Indian Miniature Painting from the Collection of
1990 Ed. The Raj: India and the British, 1600 – 1947. With Edwin Binney, 3rd. Vol. 1, The Mughal and Deccani Briggs, John
contributions by Brian Allen et al. Exh. cat. National Schools, with Some Related Sultanate Material. Exh. cat.; 1966 History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India,
Portrait Gallery; 1990 – 91. London: National Portrait 1973 – 74. Portland, Ore.: Portland Art Museum. till the Year a.d. 1612. Edited and translated by John
Gallery Publications. 1979 “Indian Paintings from the Deccan.” Journal of Briggs. 4 vols. Reprint. Calcutta: Editions Indian, 1966.
the Royal Society of Arts 127, no. 5280 (November), [Originally published London: Longman, Rees, Orme,
Beach, Milo Cleveland pp. 784 – 804. Brown and Green, 1829. English translation of
1978 The Grand Mogul: Imperial Painting in India, Muhammad Qasim Firishta, Tarikh-i Firishta.]
1600 – 1660. Exh. cat. Sterling and Francine Clark Art Blair, Sheila S.
Institute, Williamstown, Mass.; Walters Art Gallery, 2000 “Color and Gold: The Decorated Papers Used in Brijbhusan, Jamila
Baltimore; Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; and Asia House Manuscripts in Later Islamic Times.” Muqarnas 17, 1979 Masterpieces of Indian Jewellery. Bombay:
Gallery, New York; 1978 – 79. Williamstown, Mass.: pp. 24 – 36. Taraporevala.
Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute. 2006 Islamic Calligraphy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
1985 The Art of India & Pakistan. Exh. cat. Duke University University Press. Bukhari, Y. K.
Museum of Art, Durham, N.C.; Dixon Gallery and 1967 “An Unpublished Illuminated Manuscript Entitled
Gardens, Memphis, Tenn.; and J. B. Speed Art Museum, Blair, Sheila S., and Jonathan M. Bloom Fāwaīd-ī-Qutb
. Shāhī.” Lalit Kalā, no. 13, pp. 9 – 10.
Louisville, Ky. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Institute of 2006 Cosmophilia: Islamic Art from the David Collection.
the Arts. With essays by Kjeld von Folsach, Nancy Netzer, and Çağman, Filiz
2011 “Farrukh Beg.” In Masters of Indian Painting, edited Claude Cernuschi. Exh. cat. McMullen Museum of Art, 2005 “Glimpses into the Fourteenth-Century Turkic World
by Milo Cleveland Beach, Eberhard Fischer, and B. N. Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Mass., and Alfred and of Central Asia: The Paintings of Muhammad Siyah
Goswamy, vol. 1, 1100 – 1650, pp. 187 – 210. Artibus Asiae, David Smart Museum of Art, University of Chicago; Qalam.” In Turks: A Journey of a Thousand Years,
Supplementum 48. Zurich: Artibus Asiae Publishers. 2006 – 7. Chestnut Hill, Mass.: McMullen Museum of Art. 600 – 1600, edited by David J. Roxburgh, pp. 148 – 89. Exh.
cat. London: Royal Academy of Arts.
Beach, Milo Cleveland, and Ebba Koch Blochet, Edgar
1997 King of the World: The Padshahnama. An Imperial 1926 Les Enluminures des manuscrits orientaux—turcs, Calza, Gian Carlo
Mughal Manuscript from the Royal Library, Windsor arabes, persans—de la Bibliothèque Nationale. 2 vols. 2012 Ed. Akbar: The Great Emperor of India. Exh. cat.
Castle. Exh. cat. National Museum, New Delhi, and other Paris: Éditions de la Gazette des Beaux-Arts. Fondazione Roma Museo, Palazzo Sciarra, Rome;
institutions. London: Azimuth Editions; Washington, D.C.: 1930 Collection Jean Pozzi: Miniatures persanes et 2012 – 13. Milan: Skira.
Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution. indo-persanes. [Mâcon]: [Protat Frères].
Canby, Sheila R.
Begum, Zaibunnisa Bloom, Jonathan M. 1998 Princes, Poets & Paladins: Islamic and Indian
1978 “A Comprehensive Study of the Daftar-i-Dar ul Insha, 2001 Paper before Print: The History and Impact of Paper Paintings from the Collection of Prince and Princess
1762 – 1803.” PhD diss., Osmania University, Hyderabad. in the Islamic World. New Haven: Yale University Press. Sadruddin Aga Khan. Exh. cat. British Museum, London;
Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard University Art
Bennet, Ian, and Michael Franses Blumhardt, J. F. Museums, Cambridge, Mass.; Museum Rietberg, Zurich;
1992 “The Early European and Oriental Carpets at 1899 Catalogue of the Hindi, Panjabi and Hindustani and Musée d’Art et d’Histoire, Geneva; 1998 – 2000.
Boughton.” In Boughton House: The English Versailles, Manuscripts in the Library of the British Museum. London: Trustees of the British Museum by the British
edited by Tessa Murdoch, pp. 109 – 17. London: Faber and London: [British Museum]. Museum Press.
Faber and Christie’s. 2005 Islamic Art in Detail. London: British Museum.
Bonhams 2011 The Shahnama of Shah Tahmasp: The Persian Book of
Benson, Jake 2003 Islamic and Indian Art. Sale cat. Bonhams, London, Kings. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
2005 “Historical References to Marbling in East Asia.” October 16, 2003. 2012 “The Islamic Galleries at the Met: Art of the Arab
Society of Marbling Annual, pp. 20 – 27. 2011 Islamic and Indian Art. Sale cat. Bonhams, London, Lands. Turkey, Iran, Central Asia and Later South Asia.”
April 5, 2011. Arts of Asia 42, no. 5 (September – October), pp. 80 – 89.
Bes, Lennart
2007 Dutch Sources on South Asia, c. 1600 – 1825. Vol. 2, Bor, Joep Carswell, John
Archival Guide to the Repositories in the Netherlands 2003 “Bardes et baladins.” In Bor et al. 2003, pp. 110 – 51. 2000 Blue and White: Chinese Porcelain around the World.
Other Than the National Archives. New Delhi: Manohar. London: British Museum Press.
Bor, Joep, et al.
Beveridge, Henry 2003 Joep Bor, Amina Okada, Philippe Bruguière, et al. Carter, Robert
1979 The Maāthir-ul-Umarā; Being Biographies of the Gloire des princes, louange des dieux: Patrimoine musical 2005 “The History and Prehistory of Pearling in the Persian
Muhammadan
. and Hindu Officers of the Timurid de l’Hindoustan du XIVe au XXe siècle. Exh. cat. Paris: Gulf.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the
Sovereigns of India from 1500 to about 1780 a.d. Musée de la Musique and Réunion des Musées Orient 48, no. 2, pp. 139 – 209.
Translated by Henry Beveridge. Revised and edited by Nationaux.
Baini Prashad. Reprint, with index. 2 vols. Patna: Janaki 2010 Joep Bor, Françoise Nalini Delvoye, Jane Harvey, and Carvalho, Pedro de Moura
Prakashan. [Reprint of 2nd ed., Bibliotheca Indica 202. Emmie te Nijenhuis. “Introduction.” In Hindustani Music: 2008 Luxury for Export: Artistic Exchange between India
Calcutta: Asiatic Society, 1941 – 64.] Thirteenth to Twentieth Centuries, edited by Joep Bor, and Portugal around 1600. Exh. cat. Boston: Isabella
Françoise Nalini Delvoye, Jane Harvey, and Emmie te Stewart Gardner Museum, in association with Gutenberg
Beyond Extravagance Nijenhuis, pp. 11 – 29. New Delhi: Manohar. [Papers Periscope Publishing, Pittsburgh.
2013 Beyond Extravagance: A Royal Collection of Gems presented at the symposium “The History of North Indian
and Jewels. Edited by Amin Jaffer, Vivienne Becker, Jack Music: Fourteenth to Twentieth Centuries,” Rotterdam Catalogue de brillants
Ogden, Katherine Prior, Judy Rudoe, Robert Skelton, Conservatory, December 17 – 20, 1997.] 1860 Catalogue de brillants et autres pierres précieuses
Michael Spink, and Stephen Vernoit. The Al Thani de Son Altesse monseigneur le Duc souverain de
Collection. New York: Assouline. Brunswick-Lunebourg. Paris: Chauvet.
352 Bibliography
Chandra, Moti Cokayne, George Edward Yuthika Sharma, pp. 1 – 13. Exh. cat. New York: Asia
1938 A Handbook to the Indian Art Collection in the Prince 1906 Ed. Complete Baronetage. Vol. 5, 1707 – 1800. Exeter: Society Museum, in association with Yale University
of Wales Museum of Western India, Bombay. Bombay: William Pollard. Press, New Haven.
Published by Order of the Trustees.
1951 “Portraits of Ibrahim Adil Shah II.” Mārg 5, no. 1 (July), Collection of Maharaja of Jaipur Danish-Pazhuh, Muhammad Taqi
pp. 22 – 28. 2003 From the Collection of Maharaja of Jaipur: Six 1977 “Rang-sazi dar kaghaz va rang-zidayi az an.” Hunar va
1962 – 64 “Ceremonial Utensils from Kollur.” Prince of Multicoloured Prints. Surat Khana, Jaipur, 16th – 17th mardum 16, no. 181 (October – November), pp. 16 – 35.
Wales Museum Bulletin, no. 8 (1962 – 64; pub. 1965), Century, Mughal and Deccani. Jaipur: Jaipur Charitable
pp. 1 – 7. Trust. Das, Asok Kumar
1978 Mughal Painting during Jahangir’s Time. Calcutta:
Chandra, Pramod Coomaraswamy, Ananda K. Asiatic Society.
1976 T∙ūt∙ī-nāma / Tales of a Parrot / Das Papageienbuch. 1927 “Notes on Indian Paintings.” Artibus Asiae 2, no. 1, 1998 “Farrukh Beg: Studies of Adorable Youths and
Complete Colour Facsimile Edition in Original Size of the pp. 4 – 11. Venerable Saints.” Mārg 49, no. 4 (June), pp. 20 – 35.
Manuscript in Possession of the Cleveland Museum of Art / 1930 Catalogue of the Indian Collections in the Museum
Vollständige Faksimile-Ausgabe im Originalformat der of Fine Arts, Boston. Vol. 6, Mughal Painting. Boston: Das, Sukla
Handschrift aus dem Besitz des Cleveland Museum of Art. Museum of Fine Arts. 1992 Fabric Art: Heritage of India. New Delhi: Abhinav
2 vols. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt. Publications.
Correia-Afonso, John
Chandra, Pramod, and Daniel Ehnbom 1964 “Bijapur Four Centuries Ago as Described in a De Goa à Lisboa
1976 The Cleveland Tuti-Nama Manuscript and the Origins Contemporary Letter.” Indica 1, no. 1 (March), pp. 81 – 88. 1991 De Goa à Lisboa: L’Art indo-portugais, XVIe – XVIIIe
of Mughal Painting. Exh. cat. Cleveland Museum of siècles. Exh. cat. Brussels: Fondation Europalia International.
Art and David and Alfred Smart Gallery, University of Countess’ Gems
Chicago; 1976 – 77. Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of Art. 1985 The Countess’ Gems: An Exhibition of 16th- and 17th- Delvoye, Françoise Nalini
Century Jewels and Artifacts as Recorded in the Schedule of 2010 “Indo-Persian Literature on Music.” In Hindustani
Christie’s 1690 from the Collection of Burghley House. Introduction Music: Thirteenth to Twentieth Centuries, edited by Joep
1865 Catalogue of the Valuable Collection of Ancient & by Anna Somers Cocks. Stamford, Lincolnshire: Burghley Bor, Françoise Nalini Delvoye, Jane Harvey, and Emmie
Modern Pictures, Costly Jewels, including a Splendid House Preservation Trust, in association with A. H. Jolly te Nijenhuis, pp. 44 – 64. New Delhi: Manohar. [Papers
Diamond, Well Known as “The Idol’s Eye;” . . . and Objects (Editorial). presented at the symposium “The History of North Indian
of Art and Vertu. Sale cat. Christie, Manson & Woods, Music: Fourteenth to Twentieth Centuries,” Rotterdam
London, July 14 – 15, 1865. Cousens, Henry Conservatory, December 17 – 20, 1997.]
1905 Catalogue of Important Jewels: The Residue of the 1916 Bījāpūr and Its Architectural Remains, with an
Stock of Messrs. Streeter & Co., Ltd., of 18 New Bond Historical Outline of the ‘Ādil Shāhi Dynasty. Archaeo Denny, Walter B.
Street, W. Sale cat. Christie, Manson & Woods, London, logical Survey of India, Imperial Series 37. Bombay: 1983 “Dating Ottoman Turkish Works in the Saz Style.”
February 22, 1905. Government Central Press. Muqarnas 1, pp. 103 – 21.
1977 Fine Persian and Islamic Works of Art. Sale cat.
Christie’s, London, May 3, 1977. do Couto, Diogo Denny, Walter B., and Sumru Belger Krody
1979 Important Islamic and Indian Manuscripts and 1974 Da Ásia. Décadas 4 – 12. Reprint. Lisbon: Livraria Sam 2012 The Sultan’s Garden: The Blossoming of Ottoman Art.
Miniatures. Sale cat. Christie’s, London, October 11, 1979. Carlos. [Reprint of new ed., Lisbon: Na Régia Officina Exh. cat.; 2012 – 13. Washington, D.C.: Textile Museum.
1980 Important Islamic and Indian Manuscripts and Typographica, 1777 – 88.]
Miniatures. Sale cat. Christie’s, London, April 24, 1980. Déroche, François
1985a Islamic, Indian, and South-East Asian Manuscripts, de Coutre, Jacques 2006 Islamic Codicology: An Introduction to the Study of
Miniatures and Works of Art. Sale cat. Christie’s, London, 1991 Andanzas asiáticas. Edited by Eddy Stols, Benjamin Manuscripts in Arabic Script. With contributions by
November 25, 1985. Nicolaas Teensma, and Johan Verberckmoes. Crónicas de Annie Berthier et al. Edited by Muhammad Isa Waley.
1985b Magnificent Jewels / Superbes Bijoux. Sale cat. América 61. Madrid: Historia 16. Translated by Deke Dusinberre and David Radzinowicz.
Christie’s, Geneva, May 16, 1985. Al-Furqān Publications 102. London: Al-Furqān Islamic
1990 Islamic Art. Sale cat. Christie’s, London, October 9, Craddock, P. T., et al. Heritage Foundation.
1990. 1998 “Zinc in India.” In 2000 Years of Zinc and Brass, edited
1996 Islamic Art and Indian Miniatures and Rugs and by P. T. Craddock, pp. 27 – 72. Rev. ed. Occasional Paper Desai, Kalpana
Carpets. Sale cat. Christie’s, London, April 23 and 25, (British Museum) 50. London: British Museum. 2002 Jewels on the Crescent: Masterpieces of the
1996. Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya,
1999 Indian Jewellery. Sale cat. Christie’s, London, October 6, Crill, Rosemary Formerly Prince of Wales Museum of Western India.
1999. 1982 “The Indian Heritage: Court Life and Arts under [Bombay]: Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu
2011a Art of the Islamic & Indian Worlds, including Works Mughal Rule.” Mārg 35, no. 4 (September), pp. 43 – 58. Sangrahalaya, in association with Mapin Publishing,
from the Simon Digby Collection. Sale cat. Christie’s, 2004 “‘Le Tapis Moghol’: A Seventeenth-Century Deccani Ahmedabad.
London, April 7, 2011. Kalamkari.” In Crill, Stronge, and Topsfield 2004,
2011b Art & Textiles of the Islamic & Indian Worlds, pp. 203 – 12. Desai, Vishakha N.
including Works from the Collection of the Late Simon 2008 Chintz: Indian Textiles for the West. London: V&A 1985 Life at Court: Art for India’s Rulers, 16th – 19th
Digby. Sale cat. Christie’s South Kensington, London, Publishing. Centuries. With essays by B. N. Goswamy and Ainslie T.
October 7, 2011. Embree. Exh. cat. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, and
2012a Art of the Islamic and Indian Worlds. Sale cat. Crill, Rosemary, and Kapil Jariwala Dallas Museum of Fine Arts; 1985 – 86. Boston: Museum
Christie’s, London, October 4, 2012. 2010 Eds. The Indian Portrait, 1560 – 1860. Exh. cat. National of Fine Arts.
2012b A Private Collection Donated to Benefit the University Portrait Gallery. London: National Portrait Gallery
of Oxford: Islamic and Indian Works of Art on Paper. Sale Publications. Desai, Ziyaud-Din A.
cat. Christie’s, London, April 26, 2012. 1974 “Architecture: Bahmanī Succession States.” In
Crill, Rosemary, Susan Stronge, and Andrew Topsfield Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2, pp. 253 – 304.
Clouston, William Alexander 2004 Eds. Arts of Mughal India: Studies in Honour of 1999 “Studies in Indian Art and Culture: Some Avoidable
1884 The Book of Sindibad; or, The Story of the King, His Robert Skelton. London: Victoria & Albert Museum; Presumptions and Speculative Theories.” Mārg 51, no. 1
Son, the Damsel, and Seven Vazīrs. Edited by William Ahmedabad: Mapin Publishing. (September), pp. 75 – 87.
Alexander Clouston. Glasgow: privately printed by
J. Cameron. Crookes, William Desai, Ziyaud-Din A., and S. S. Hussain
1899 “Diamonds.” In Notices of the Proceedings at the 1973 “Two New Qutb Shahi Inscriptions from Golconda.”
Clouzot, Henri Meetings of the Members of the Royal Institution, vol. 15, Epigraphia Indica (Archaeological Survey of India),
1912 “Les Toiles peintes de l’Inde au Pavillon de Marsan.” 1896 – 1898, pp. 477 – 501. London: Royal Institution of Arabic and Persian Supplement, pp. 58 – 62.
Gazette des beaux-arts, 4th ser., 8 (October), pp. 282 – 94. Great Britain.
1921 “Les Toiles peintes de l’Inde.” In Baker 1921, vol. 1, Devare, T. N.
pp. 60 – 72. Currim, Mumtaz, and George Michell 1961 A Short History of Persian Literature at the Bahmani,
2004 Eds. Dargahs: Abodes of the Saints. Mumbai: Marg the Adilshahi and the Qutbshahi Courts—Deccan. [Poona]:
Clouzot, Henri, and Frances Morris Publications. [S. Devare].
1927 Painted and Printed Fabrics: The History of the
Manufactory at Jouy and Other Ateliers in France, Daljeet, Dr. Diamond, Debra
1760 – 1815. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 1999 Mughal and Deccani Paintings from the Collection of 2013a “Occult Science and Bijapur’s Yoginis.” In Themes,
the National Museum. New Delhi: Prakash. Histories, Interpretations: Indian Painting; Essays in
Cohen, Benjamin B. Honour of B. N. Goswamy, edited by Mahesh Sharma
2007 Kingship and Colonialism in India’s Deccan, Dalrymple, William and Padma A. Kaimal, pp. 148 – 59. Ahmedabad: Mapin
1850 – 1948. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 1998 “Under the Char Minar.” In The Age of Kali: Publishing, in association with Osianama.com.
Indian Travels & Encounters, pp. 192 – 214. London: 2013b Yoga: The Art of Transformation. With contributions
Cohen, Steven HarperCollins. by Molly Emma Aitken et al. Exh. cat. Arthur M. Sackler
1986 “Textiles.” In Michell 1986, pp. 118 – 28. 2002 White Mughals: Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth- Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.; Asian
2008 “Textiles, Dress, and Attire as Depicted in the Century India. London: HarperCollins. Art Museum of San Francisco; and Cleveland Museum
Albums.” In Wright 2008, pp. 178 – 87. of Art; 2013 – 14. Washington, D.C.: Arthur M. Sackler
2011 “Deccani Carpets: Creating a Corpus.” In Haidar and Dalrymple, William, and Yuthika Sharma Gallery, Smithsonian Institution.
Sardar 2011, pp. 112 – 31. 2012 “Introduction.” In Princes and Painters in Mughal
Delhi, 1707 – 1857, edited by William Dalrymple and
Bibliography 353
Dias, Pedro 2004b “Mughal Arms and the Indian Court Tradition.” von Folsach, Kjeld
2004 “The Palace of the Viceroys in Goa.” In Goa and the Jewellery Studies 10, pp. 76 – 98. [Issue titled Jewelled Arts 1990 Islamic Art: The David Collection. Copenhagen:
Great Mughal, edited by Jorge Flores and Nuno Vassallo e of Mughal India: Papers of the Conference Held Jointly by Davids Samling.
Silva, pp. 68 – 97, 204 – 6. Exh. cat. Museu Calouste the British Museum and the Society of Jewellery Historians 2001 Art from the World of Islam in the David Collection.
Gulbenkian, Lisbon. London: Scala. at the British Museum, London, in 2001.] Copenhagen: David Collection.
2011 “Swords in the Deccan in the Sixteenth and
Digby, Simon Seventeenth Centuries: Their Manufacture and the Forsyth, Hazel
2001 Sufis and Soldiers in Awrangzeb’s Deccan: Malfúzát-i Influence of European Imports.” In Haidar and Sardar 2013 The Cheapside Hoard: London’s Lost Jewels. Exh. cat.
Naqshbandiyya. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. 2011, pp. 218 – 33. Museum of London; 2013 – 14. London: Philip Wilson.
Dimand, M. S. Elliot, H. M. Foster, William

1944 A Handbook of Muhammadan Art. 2nd ed. New York: 1964 “Wika’ya’-i Asad Beg.” In The History of India, as Told 1968 Ed. Early Travels in India, 1583 – 1619. Reprint.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art. by Its Own Historians: The Muhammadan Period; the New Delhi: S. Chand. [Originally published London:
Posthumous Papers of the Late Sir H. M. Elliot, K.C.B., Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press, 1921.]
Divyabhanusinh edited by John Dowson, vol. 6, pp. 150 – 74. Allahabad:
2005 The Story of Asia’s Lions. Mumbai: Marg Publications Kitab Mahal. [1st ed., London: Trübner, 1875.] Fraser, Marcus, and Will Kwiatkowski
for the National Centre for the Performing Arts. 2006 Ink and Gold: Islamic Calligraphy. Exh. cat. Museum
Encompassing the Globe für Islamische Kunst, Berlin. London: Sam Fogg.
Doshi, Saryu 2007 Encompassing the Globe: Portugal and the World in
1972 “An Illustrated Manuscript from Aurangabad Dated the 16th and 17th Centuries. Exh. cat. edited by Jay A. Fritz, John M., and George Michell
1650 a.d.” Lalit Kalā, no. 15, pp. 19 – 28. Levenson. With contributions by Diogo R. Curto and Jack 2001 Eds. New Light on Hampi: Recent Research at
1978 “The Pancha-kalyanaka Pata, School of Aurangabad.” Turner. Washington, D.C.: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Vijayanagara. Mumbai: Marg Publications for the
Mārg 31, no. 4 (September), pp. 45 – 54. Smithsonian Institution. National Centre for the Performing Arts.
Drouot-Richelieu Ernst, Carl W. Fritz, John M., George Michell, and M. S. Nagaraja Rao
2014 Arts de l’Orient & de l’Inde. Sale cat. Drouot-Richelieu, 1992 Eternal Garden: Mysticism, History and Politics at a 1984 Where Kings and Gods Meet: The Royal Centre at
Paris, May 28, 2014. South Asian Sufi Center. State University of New York Vijayanagara, India. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Series in Muslim Spirituality in South Asia. Albany: State
Duda, Dorothea University of New York Press. Gadre, Pramod B.
1983 Islamische Handschriften. Vol. 1, Persische Hand 1986 Cultural Archaeology of Āh∙madnagar during Niz‥ām
schriften. 2 vols. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Étrange et le merveilleux en terres d’Islam Shāhī Period (1494 – 1632). Delhi: B. R. Publishing
Akademie der Wissenschaften. 2001 L’Étrange et le merveilleux en terres d’Islam. Exh. cat. Corporation.
Musée du Louvre, Paris. Paris: Réunion des Musées
Duff, James Grant Nationaux. Gaeffke, Peter
1971 History of the Mahrattas. Edited by J. P. Guha. 2 vols. 1987a “The Garden of Light and the Forest of Darkness in
New Delhi: Associated Publishing House. [Reprint of 4th Ettinghausen, Richard Dakkinī Sūfī Literature and Painting.” Artibus Asiae 48,
ed., Bombay: Times of India Office, 1878.] 1975 “Islamic Art.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art nos. 3 – 4, pp. 224 – 45.
Bulletin, n.s., 33, no. 1 (Spring). 1987b “Identification of Four Miniatures from the
Dutt, Sukumar Dekkhan.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 107,
1988 Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India: Their Exotica no. 2 (April – June), pp. 309 – 11.
History and Their Contribution to Indian Culture. 2001 Exotica: The Portuguese Discoveries and the
Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. [Originally published Renaissance Kunstkammer. Exh. cat. edited by Helmut Gahlin, Sven
London: George Allen and Unwin, 1962.] Trnek and Nuno Vassallo e Silva. Museu Calouste 1991 The Courts of India: Indian Miniatures from the
Gulbenkian, Lisbon; 2001 – 2. Lisbon: Calouste Collection of the Fondation Custodia, Paris. Exh. cat.
Dye, Joseph M., III Gulbenkian Foundation. Rijksprentenkabinet, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam. Paris:
2001 The Arts of India: Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Fondation Custodia; Zwolle: Waanders.
Richmond: Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, in association Falconer, Forbes
with Philip Wilson. 1841 “The Sindibād Nāmah: Analytical Account of the Gangoly, O. C.
Sindibād Nāmah, or Book of Sindibad, a Persian MS. 1948 Rāgas and Rāgīnis: A Pictorial & Iconographic Study
van Dyke, Yana Poem in the Library of the East-India Company.” Asiatic of Indian Musical Modes Based on Original Sources.
2012 “Casting Light on the Surface, Scientific Exactitude Journal and Monthly Register for British and Foreign Bombay: Nalanda Publications.
Meets Poetic Inspiration: A Close Look at Six Objects India, China, and Australia, n.s., 35 (May – August),
from the Islamic Collection of The Metropolitan Museum pp. 169 – 80. Gascoigne, Bamber
of Art.” Hand Papermaking 27, no. 2 (Winter), pp. 17 – 23. 1971 The Great Moghuls. New York: Harper & Row.
Falk, Toby, and Mildred Archer
Eaton, Richard M. 1981 Indian Miniatures in the India Office Library. London: Gayani, B. G.
1978 Sufis of Bijapur, 1300 – 1700: Social Roles of Sufis in Sotheby Parke Bernet; Delhi: Oxford University Press. 1945 “Kitāb-i-Nauras.” Islamic Culture 19, no. 2 (April),
Medieval India. Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 140 – 52.
2005 A Social History of the Deccan, 1300 – 1761: Eight Faruqi, Nisar Ahmed
Indian Lives. The New Cambridge History of India 1, 1990 “Burhanpur (Borhānpūr).” In Encyclopaedia Iranica, Ghani, Muhammad ‘Abdu’l
no. 8. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. vol. 4, pp. 555 – 57. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1930 A History of Persian Language, Literature at the
2006 “Malik Ambar and Elite Slavery in the Deccan, Mughal Court, with a Brief Survey of the Growth of
1400 – 1650.” In Robbins and McLeod 2006, pp. 44 – 67. Faruqi, Shamsur Rahman Urdu Language (Bābur to Akbar). Edited and translated
2011 “A Social and Historical Introduction to the Deccan, 2001 Early Urdu Literary Culture and History. New Delhi: by Muhammad ‘Abdu’l Ghani. Vol. 3. Allahabad:
1323 – 1687.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 2 – 9. Oxford University Press. Indian Press.
Eaton, Richard M., and Phillip B. Wagoner Fawcett, Marion Edith Fry, and Charles Fawcett Ghelichkhani, Hamidreza
2014 Power, Memory, Architecture: Contested Sites on 1947 The Travels of the Abbé Carré in India and the Near 2013 Muhammad Husayn Kashmiri. Tehran: Paykara.
India’s Deccan Plateau, 1300 – 1600. New Delhi: Oxford East, 1672 to 1674. Translated by Marion Edith Fry
University Press. Fawcett. Edited by Charles Fawcett, with Richard Burn. Ghouchani, Abdullah, and Bruce Wannell
Vols. 1 and 2. London: Hakluyt Society. 2011 “The Inscriptions of the Ibrahim Rauza Tomb.” In
Ebeling, Klaus Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 268 – 301.
1973 Ragamala Painting. Basel: Ravi Kumar. Filippi, Gian Giuseppe
1997 Ed. Indian Miniatures and Paintings from the 16th to Gittinger, Mattiebelle
Ebru: The Art of Marbling the 19th Century: The Collection of Howard Hodgkin. 1982 Master Dyers to the World: Technique and Trade in
1986 Ebru: The Art of Marbling in the Islamic World. Exh. cat. Museo di Castelvecchio, Verona. Milan: Electa. Early Indian Dyed Cotton Textiles. With contributions by
Exhibition brochure by Taylor Woodman. Cambridge, Nina Gwatkin. Exh. cat. Textile Museum, Washington,
Mass.: Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard University. Firdausi D.C.; Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago; and Asia
1909 The Shāhnāma of Firdausi. Translated by Arthur Society Gallery, New York. Washington, D.C.: Textile
Egerton, Wilbraham George Warner and Edmond Warner. Vol. 4. London: Museum.
1896 A Description of Indian and Oriental Armour . . . with Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.
an Introductory Sketch of the Military History of India. von Gladiss, Almut, and Claus-Peter Haase
New ed. London: W. H. Allen. Firishta, Muhammad Qasim 2008 The Radiance of Islamic Art: Masterpieces from the
1864 – 65 Tarikh-i Firishta. 2 vols. Lucknow: Nawal Kishore. Museum of Islamic Art in Berlin. Exh. cat. Sharjah
Ehsanullah, Shukrullahi Museum of Islamic Civilization. Berlin: Museum für
1962 “Muraqqa-i Humayan Shah.” Payam-i Baharistan, Flatt, Emma J. Islamische Kunst; Munich: Hirmer Verlag.
no. 29, pp. 26 – 27. 2011 “The Authorship and Significance of the Nujūm
al-‘Ulūm: A Sixteenth-Century Astrological Encyclopedia Gladwin, Francis
Elgood, Robert from Bijapur.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 1885 ‘Abu’l Fazl. Ayeen Akbery; or, Akber’s Regulations for
1979 Ed. Islamic Arms and Armour. London: Scolar Press. 131, no. 2 (April – June), pp. 223 – 44. the Government of Hindustan. Translated by Francis
2004a Hindu Arms and Ritual: Arms and Armour from Gladwin. Vol. 1. Calcutta: Shoshi Bhoosun Dass at the
India, 1400 – 1865. Delft: Eburon. Rajasthan Press.
354 Bibliography
Glynn, Catherine Later 15th, the 16th and 17th Centuries. Some Examples in Hay, Susan Anderson
2000 “Bijapur Themes in Bikaner Painting.” In Court American Collections. Venice: Edizioni Oriens. 1988 Ed. A World of Costume and Textiles: A Handbook of
Painting in Rajasthan, edited by Andrew Topsfield, the Collection. Providence: Museum of Art, Rhode Island
pp. 65 – 77. Bombay: Marg Publications. Gulchin Ma’ani, Ahmad School of Design.
1969 Rahnama-yi ganginah-i Qur’an. Mashhad: Idarah-i
Glynn, Catherine, Robert Skelton, and Anna Libera Kitabkhanah-i Astan-i Quds. Heritage of Rauluchantim
Dallapiccola 1996 A herança de Rauluchantim / The Heritage of
2011 Ragamala: Paintings from India, from the Claudio Guy, John Rauluchantim. Exh. cat. edited by Nuno Vassallo e Silva.
Moscatelli Collection. Exh. cat. London: Philip Wilson, 2011 “A Ruler and His Courtesans Celebrate Vasantotsava: Lisbon: Museu de São Roque.
in association with Dulwich Picture Gallery and Brighton Courtly and Divine Love in a Nayaka Kalamkari.” In
Museum & Art Gallery. Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 162 – 75. Hickmann, Regina
1979 With Volkmar Enderlein. Indische Albumblätter:
Gods, Kings and Tigers Guy, John, and Jorrit Britschgi Miniaturen und Kalligraphien aus der Zeit der
1997 Gods, Kings and Tigers: The Art of Kotah. Exh. cat. 2011 Wonder of the Age: Master Painters of India, 1100 – Moghul-Kaiser. Leipzig: Kiepenheuer.
Edited by Stuart Cary Welch. Asia Society Galleries, New 1900. Exh. cat.; 2011 – 12. New York: The Metropolitan
York; Harvard University Art Museums, Cambridge, Museum of Art. Hillenbrand, Robert
Mass.; and Museum Rietberg, Zurich; 1997 – 98. Munich: 2002 “The Arts of the Book in Ilkhanid Iran.” In The Legacy
Prestel. Guy, John, and Deborah Swallow of Genghis Khan: Courtly Art and Culture in Western
1990 Eds. Arts of India, 1550 – 1900. London: Victoria & Asia, 1256 – 1353, edited by Linda Komaroff and Stefano
Goetz, Hermann Albert Museum. Carboni, pp. 135 – 67. Exh. cat. The Metropolitan Museum
1934 Geschichte der indischen Miniaturmalerei. Berlin: of Art, New York, and Los Angeles County Museum of
Walter de Gruyter. Hafiz Art; 2002 – 3. New York: The Metropolitan Museum
1935 “La Peinture indienne: Les Écoles du Dekkan.” Gazette 2002 The Divan of Hafez. Translated by Reza Saberi. [In of Art.
des beaux-arts, 6th ser., 13, pp. 275 – 88. Persian and English.] Lanham, Md.: University Press of
1936 “Notes on a Collection of Historical Portraits from America. Hira Lal, Rai Bahadur
Golconda.” Indian Art and Letters, n.s., 10, no. 1, pp. 10 – 21. 1932 Inscriptions in the Central Provinces and Berar.
1945 “An Ivory Box of Chand Bibi, Queen Regent of Haidar, Navina Najat 2nd ed. Nagpur: Government Printing Press. [1st ed.,
Bijapur.” Bulletin of the Baroda State Museum and Picture 2004 “A Lacquer Pen-Box by Manohar: An Example of Late Descriptive Lists of Inscriptions in the Central Provinces
Gallery 2, no. 2 (February – July), pp. 29 – 32. Safavid-Style Painting in India.” In Crill, Stronge, and and Berar. Nagpur: Government Press, 1916.]
1950 The Art and Architecture of Bikaner State. Oxford: Topsfield 2004, pp. 177 – 89.
Published for the Government of Bikaner State and the 2011a “Art of South Asia (14th to 19th Centuries).” In Hôtel Drouot
Royal India and Pakistan Society by Bruno Cassirer. Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011, pp. 338 – 42. 1960 Collection Sevadjian. Peintures et dessins de la Perse
2011b “The Kitab-i Nauras: Key to Bijapur’s Golden Age.” et des Indes (écoles mogholes); scenes et portraits,
Golombek, Lisa In Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 26 – 43. miniatures à sujets européens, pages de manuscrits du
1992 “Discourses of an Imaginary Arts Council in Fifteenth- 2011c “The New Galleries for the Art of the Arab Lands, XIVe au XVIIe siècles, enluminures persanes. Sale cat.
Century Iran.” In Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Turkey, Iran, Central Asia, and Later South Asia.” In Hôtel Drouot, Paris, November 23, 1960.
Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century, edited by Lisa Metropolitan Museum of Art 2011, pp. 10 – 17, 18 – 19. 1973 Importante Collection de miniatures orientales. Sale
Golombek and Maria Subtelny, pp. 1 – 17. Leiden: E. J. Brill. 2012 “Visual Splendour: Embellished Pages from the cat. Hôtel Drouot, Paris, October 26, 1973.
Metropolitan Museum’s Collection of Islamic and Indian
Gordon, Stewart Manuscripts.” Arts of Asia 42, no. 5 (September – October), Hughes, Robert
1993 The Marathas, 1600 – 1818. The New Cambridge pp. 108 – 18. 1973 “Indian Miniatures: Delectable Medley.” Time 101,
History of India 2, no. 4. Cambridge: Cambridge 2014 “Gulshan-i ‘Ishq: Sufi Romance of the Deccan.” In no. 19 (May 7, 1973), pp. 73 – 74.
University Press. Parodi 2014b, pp. 295 – 318.
Husain, Ali Akbar
Goron, Stan, and J. P. Goenka Haidar, Navina Najat, and Marika Sardar 1996 “Qutb Shahi Garden Sites in Golconda and
2001 The Coins of the Indian Sultanates: Covering the Area 2011 Eds. Sultans of the South: Arts of India’s Deccan Hyderabad.” In The Mughal Garden: Interpretation,
of Present-Day India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. With the Courts, 1323 – 1687. New York: The Metropolitan Museum Conservation and Implications, edited by Mahmood
assistance of Michael Robinson. New Delhi: Munshiram of Art. [Papers presented at the symposium “The Art of Hussain, Abdul Rehman, and James L. Wescoat Jr.,
Manoharlal Publishers. India’s Deccan Sultans,” The Metropolitan Museum of pp. 93 – 104. Rawalpindi: Ferozsons.
Art, New York, October 24 – 26, 2008.] 2000 Scent in the Islamic Garden: A Study of Deccani Urdu
Goswamy, B. N. Literary Sources. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
1999 Painted Visions: The Goenka Collection of Indian Haig, Wolseley 2011 “The Courtly Gardens of ‘Abdul’s Ibrahim Nama.” In
Paintings. New Delhi: Lalit Kalā Akademi. 1907 Historic Landmarks of the Deccan. Allahabad: Pioneer Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 82 – 89.
2014 The Spirit of Indian Painting: Close Encounters Press. 2012 Scent in the Islamic Garden: A Study of Literary
with 101 Great Works, 1100 – 1900. Gurgaon: Penguin 1907 – 8 “Some Inscriptions in Berar.” Epigraphia Indo- Sources in Persian and Urdu. 2nd ed. Introduction by
Books India. Moslemica, pp. 10 – 21. William Dalrymple. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
1920 “The History of the Niz..âm Shâhî Kings of Ah∙madnagar.”
Goswamy, B. N., and Caron Smith Indian Antiquary 49 (September), pp. 157 – 67. Husain Khan, Masud
2005 Domains of Wonder: Selected Masterworks of Indian 1921 “The History of the Niz
..âm Shâhî Kings of Ah∙madnagar.” 1969 Ed. “Ibrahim Nama by Abdul Dehlavi (Court Poet
Painting. Exh. cat. San Diego Museum of Art; Museum of Indian Antiquary 50 (December), pp. 321 – 28. of Ibrahim Adil Shah II of Bijapur).” [In Urdu.] Qadim
Fine Arts, Boston; and Dallas Museum of Art; 2005 – 8. 1922 “The History of the Niz
..âm Shâhî Kings of Ah∙madnagar.” Urdu 3.
San Diego: San Diego Museum of Art. Indian Antiquary 51 (February), pp. 29 – 36.
1923 “The History of the Niz
..âm Shâhî Kings of Ah∙madnagar.” Hussain, S. A.
Gray, Basil Indian Antiquary 52 (November), pp. 331 – 46. 1993 “Zakhira-e-Nizam Shahi: A Medical Manuscript of
1937 “Portraits from Bījāpūr.” British Museum Quarterly 11, Nizam Shahi Period.” Bulletin of the Indian Institute of
no. 4 (September), pp. 183 – 84. Hájek, Lubor History of Medicine 23, no. 1, pp. 59 – 65.
1938 “Deccani Paintings: The School of Bijapur.” Burlington 1960 Indian Miniatures of the Moghul School. London:
Magazine 73 (August), pp. 74 – 77. Spring Books. Hutt, Anthony
1949 “Painting.” In The Art of India and Pakistan: A 1979 “The Safa Masjid: A Bijapuri Mosque in Goa.” Art and
Commemorative Catalogue of the Exhibition Held at the Hallade, Madeleine Archaeology Research Papers 15 (June), pp. 45 – 47.
Royal Academy of Arts, London, 1947 – 8, edited by Leigh 1968 Gandharan Art of North India and the Graeco-
Ashton, pp. 85 – 197. New York: Coward McCann. Buddhist Tradition in India, Persia, and Central Asia. Hutton, Deborah S.
1951 Treasures of Indian Miniatures in the Bikaner Palace Translated by Diana Imber. New York: Harry N. Abrams. 2005 “Carved in Stone: The Codification of a Visual Identity
Collection. Oxford: Bruno Cassirer. for the Indo-Islamic Sultanate of Bīdjāpūr.” Archives of
1981 Ed. The Arts of India. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Harari, Ralph Asian Art 5, pp. 65 – 78.
1939 “Metalwork after the Early Islamic Period.” In A 2006 Art of the Court of Bijapur. Bloomington: Indiana
Green, Nile Survey of Persian Art, from Prehistoric Times to the University Press.
2004 “Geography, Empire and Sainthood in the Present, edited by Arthur Upham Pope and Phyllis 2011 “The Pem Nem: A Sixteenth-Century Illustrated
Eighteenth-Century Muslim Deccan.” Bulletin of the Ackerman, vol. 3, pp. 2466 – 2529. London: Oxford Romance from Bijapur.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011,
School of Oriental and African Studies 67, no. 2, University Press. pp. 44 – 63.
pp. 207 – 55.
2006 “Ostrich Eggs and Peacock Feathers: Sacred Objects Hartkamp-Jonxis, Ebeltje Hutton, Deborah S., and Rebecca Tucker
as Cultural Exchange between Christianity and Islam.” 2005 “Going Ashore in Tranquebar: A South Indian 2014 “A Dutch Artist in Bijapur.” In Parodi 2014b,
Al-Masaq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean 18, Painting of a 1654 Meeting.” Arts of Asia 35, no. 3 pp. 205 – 32.
no. 1, pp. 27 – 66. (May – June), pp. 61 – 71.
2012 Making Space: Sufis and Settlers in Early Modern “Hyderabad”
India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Hasan-i Dihlavi 1937 “Hyderabad: Silver Jubilee Durbar.” Time 29, no. 8
1963 Divan-i Hasan-i Dihlavi. Edited by Sayyid Ahmad-i (February 22), pp. 19 – 23.
Grube, Ernst J. Bihishti Shirazi and Hamid Riza Qalichkhani. Tehran:
1968 The Classical Style in Islamic Painting: The Early Anjuman-i Asar wa Mafakhar Farhangi. Impey, Oliver R.
School of Herat and Its Impact on Islamic Painting of the 1998 The Cecil Family Collects Four Centuries of Decorative
Arts from Burghley House. Exh. cat. Cincinnati Art
Bibliography 355
Museum and other institutions; 1998 – 2000. Alexandria, Jobbins, E. A., R. R. Harding, and Kenneth Scarratt 1955– 56 “Identification of the Portraits of Malik Ambar.”
Va.: Art Services International. 1984 “A Brief Description of a Spectacular 56.71 Carat Lalit Kalā, nos. 1 – 2 (April 1955 – March 1956), pp. 23 – 31.
Tabular Diamond.” Journal of Gemmology and Proceedings 1963 “Reflections on Deccani Painting.” Mārg 16, no. 2
Indian and Islamic Works of Art of the Gemmological Association of Great Britain 19, no. 1, (March), pp. 23 – 24.
2011 Indian and Islamic Works of Art. Exh. cat. London: pp. 1 – 7. 1986 “Farrukh Beg the Artist and the Deccani Problem.” In
Simon Ray. Rupanjali: In Memory of O. C. Gangoly, edited by Kalyan
Jose, Regalado Trota Kumar Ganguli and S. S. Biswas, pp. 163 – 73. Calcutta:
Indian Heritage 1990 Images of Faith: Religious Ivory Carvings from the O. C. Gangoly Memorial Society.
1982 The Indian Heritage: Court Life & Arts under Mughal Philippines. Exh. cat. Pasadena: Pacific Asia Museum.
Rule. With contributions by Rosemary Crill et al. Exh. cat. Khandalavala, Karl, and Rahmat Ali Khan
London: Victoria & Albert Museum. Joshi, P. M. 1986 Eds. Gulshan-e-Mus∙awwari: Seven Illustrated
1956 – 57 ‘Ālī ‘Ādil Shāh I of Bījāpūr (1558 – 1580) and His Manuscripts from the Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad.
Indian Miniatures and Works of Art Royal Librarian: Two Ruq‘as.” Journal of the Asiatic Society Hyderabad: Salar Jung Museum.
2000 Asian Textiles, Indian Miniatures &Works of Art. of Bombay, n.s., 31 – 32 (1956 – 57; pub. 1959), pp. 97 – 107.
Dealer’s cat. London: Francesca Galloway. 1973 “The ‘Ādil Shāhīs and the Barīdīs.” In Sherwani and Khandalavala, Karl, and Moti Chandra
2003 Indian Miniatures and Works of Art. Dealer’s cat. Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 1, pp. 289 – 394. 1965 Eds. Miniatures and Sculptures from the Collection of
London: Francesca Galloway. the Late Sir Cowasji Jehangir, Bart. Bombay: Board of
Kahlenberg, M. H. Trustees of the Prince of Wales Museum.
Indian Paintings and Manuscripts 1972 “A Study of the Development and Use of the Mughal 1969 New Documents of Indian Painting: A Reappraisal.
1999 Indian Paintings and Manuscripts. Dealer’s cat. by Patkā (Sash) with Reference to the Los Angeles County Bombay: Board of Trustees of the Prince of Wales
Georgina Fantoni. London: Sam Fogg. Museum of Art Collection.” In Aspects of Indian Art: Museum of Western India.
Papers Presented in a Symposium at the Los Angeles
Irvine, William County Museum of Art, October 1970, pp. 153 – 66. Leiden: Knížková, Hana
1903 The Army of the Indian Moghuls: Its Organization and E. J. Brill. 1986 “Notes on the Portrait of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II of
Administration. London: Luzac. Bijapur in the Náprstek Museum, Prague.” In Skelton et al.
Kail, Owen C. 1986, pp. 116 – 23.
Irwin, John 1981 The Dutch in India. Delhi: Macmillan.
1959 “Golconda Cotton Paintings of the Early Seventeenth Komaroff, Linda
Century.” Lalit Kalā, no. 5 (April), pp. 11 – 48. Kajitani, Nobuko 2011 Gifts of the Sultan: The Arts of Giving at the Islamic
1995 “A Retrospective of 1973 Conservation Treatment on a Courts. With contributions by Sheila Blair et al. Exh. cat.
Irwin, John, and Katharine B. Brett Mughal Court Robe with the Pigment-Painted Poppy Los Angeles County Museum of Art and Museum of Fine
1970 Origins of Chintz, with a Catalogue of Indo-European Flower Pattern.” In The Conservation of 18th-Century Arts, Houston; 2011 – 12. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County
Cotton-Paintings in the Victoria and Albert Museum, Painted Silk Dress, edited by Chris Paulocik and Sean Museum of Art.
London, and the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. Flaherty, pp. 118 – 29. New York: The Costume Institute,
London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the Graduate Kossak, Steven
Program in Costume Studies, New York University. 1997 Indian Court Painting, 16th – 19th Century. Exh. cat.
Islamic and Hindu Jewellery New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
1988 Islamic and Hindu Jewellery. Exh. cat. London: Spink Kamada, Yumiko
& Son. 2011 “Flowers on Floats: The Production, Circulation, and Kramrisch, Stella
Reception of Early Modern Indian Carpets.” PhD diss., 1937 A Survey of Painting in the Deccan. London: India
Islamic Art from India New York University. Society, with the Department of Archaeology, Hyderabad.
1980 Islamic Art from India. Exh. cat. London: Spink 1986 Painted Delight: Indian Paintings in Philadelphia
& Son. Kamal Khujandi Collections. Exh. cat. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum
1954 Divan-i Sheikh Kamal Khujandi. Edited by Iraj of Art.
Islamische Kunst Gulsurkhi. Tehran: Suroush.
1981 Islamische Kunst: Meisterwerke aus dem Metropolitan Krishna Chaitanya
Museum of Art, New York / The Arts of Islam: Master- Karimzadeh Tabrizi, Muhammad Ali 1979 A History of Indian Painting. [Vol. 2], Manuscript,
pieces from The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 2006 Seals, Tugras and Firmans of Persian Kings, from Moghul and Deccani Traditions. New Delhi: Abhinav
Exh. cat. Berlin: Staatliche Museen Preussicher Safavids to Qajars. [In Persian.] London: M. A. Publications.
Kulturbesitz. Karimzadeh Tabrizi.
Krishnaiah, G. G.
Jackson, Anna, and Amin Jaffer Katibi Turshizi 1974 – 75 “A Note on the Cloth Paintings of Hyderabad
2004 Eds. Encounters: The Meeting of Asia and Europe, 1964 Divan-i Katibi Nishapuri Turshizi. Edited by Taqi School in the Sālār Jung Museum.” Salar Jung Museum
1500 – 1800. Exh. cat. Victoria & Albert Museum. London: Vahidian Kamyar et al. Mashhad: Astan Quds Rizavi. Research Journal 6 – 7, pp. 85 – 88.
V&A Publications.
2009 Eds. Maharaja: The Splendour of India’s Royal Courts. Keene, Manuel Kruijtzer, Gijs
Exh. cat. Victoria & Albert Museum; 2009 – 10. London: 1985 Selected Recent Acquisitions, 1404 a.h. – 1984 a.d. [In 2009 Xenophobia in Seventeenth-Century India. Leiden:
V&A Publishing. Arabic and English.] Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah. Kuwait: Leiden University Press.
Kuwait National Museum. 2010 “Pomp before Disgrace: A Dutchman Commissions
Jackson, Peter 2001 With Salam Kaoukji. Treasury of the World: Jewelled Two Golconda Miniatures on the Eve of the Mughal
1999 The Delhi Sultanate: A Political and Military History. Arts of India in the Age of the Mughals. Exh. cat. British Conquest.” Journal of the David Collection 3, pp. 160 – 82.
Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization. New York: Museum, London; The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
Cambridge University Press. New York; and other institutions; 2001 – 2. London: Kugle, Scott
Thames & Hudson, in association with al-Sabah 2010 “Mah Laqa Bai: The Origins of Hyderabad’s Most
Jacob, Anita M. Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait National Famous Courtesan and Her Family.” Deccan Studies 8,
2009 “The Camera’s Beloved: H. H. Nawab Mir Mahboob Museum. no. 1 (January – June), pp. 33 – 58.
Ali Khan, Patron of Photography.” Mārg 61, no. 1 2004a “The Enamel Road, from Siena, Paris, London and
(September), pp. 32 – 47. Lisbon, Leads to Lucknow.” Jewellery Studies 10, Kühnel, Ernst
pp. 99 – 126. [Issue titled Jewelled Arts of Mughal India: 1922 Miniaturmalerei im islamischen Orient. Kunst des
Jaffer, Amin Papers of the Conference Held Jointly by the British Ostens 7. Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.
2002 Luxury Goods from India: The Art of the Indian Museum and the Society of Jewellery Historians at the 1937 Indische Miniaturen aus dem Besitz der Staatlichen
Cabinet-Maker. London: V&A Publications. British Museum, London, in 2001.] Museen zu Berlin. Berlin: Gebr. Mann.
2004b “The Kundan Technique: The Indian Jeweller’s
Jagdish Mittal Unique Artistic Treasure.” In Crill, Stronge, and Topsfield Kulkarni, A. R.
2014 Jagdish Mittal: An Art Connoisseur. Hyderabad: 2004, pp. 190 – 202. 1981 “Shivaji: The Founder of the Maratha Kingdom.”
Shrishti Art Gallery. Mārg 34, no. 2 (March), pp. 9 – 14.
Khalidi, Omar
Jain, Rahul 1988 Ed. Hyderabad: After the Fall. HHS Monograph Labrusse, Rémi
2013 Indian Lampas-Weave Silks. Woven Textiles Technical Series 4. Wichita, Kans.: Hyderabad Historical Society. 2007 Ed. Purs Décors? Arts de l’Islam, regards du XIXe
Studies Monograph 3. Ahmedabad: Sarabhai Foundation. 1999 Romance of the Golconda Diamonds. Middletown, siècle. Collections des Arts Décoratifs. Exh. cat. Musée des
N.J.: Grantha Corporation; Ahmedabad: Mapin Arts Décoratifs; 2007 – 8. Paris: Les Arts Décoratifs and
James, David Publishing. Musée du Louvre Éditions.
1987 “The ‘Millennial’ Album of Muhammad-Quli Qutb
Shah.” Islamic Art 2, pp. 243 – 54. Khan, Yusuf Husain Lahori, Abd al-Sattar ibn-i Qasim
1992 After Timur: Qur’ans of the 15th and 16th Centuries. 1963 Ed. Farmans and Sanads of the Deccan Sultans. [In 2006 Majalis-i Jahangiri: Report of Night Assemblies at the
The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art 3. London: Persian, with English summaries.] Hyderabad: State Court of Nur al-Din Jahangir from 24 Rajab 1017 to 19
Nour Foundation, in association with Azimuth Editions Archives, Government of Andhra Pradesh. Ramadan 1020 a.h. / 24 October 1608 to 15 November 1611
and Oxford University Press. a.d. [In Persian.] Edited by Arif Nausahi and Mo’een
Khandalavala, Karl Nizami. Tehran: Miras-e Maktub.
Jawahiri, Ghulam Husayn 1951 “Five Miniatures in the Collection of Sir Cowasji
1997 Kulliyat-i ash’ar va asar-i Farsi Shaikh Baha’ al-Din Jehangir, Bart., Bombay.” Mārg 5, no. 2 (October),
al-‘Amili. Tehran: Intisharat-i Mahmudi. pp. 24 – 32.
356 Bibliography
La Niece, Susan, and Martin Graham Mārg Metropolitan Museum of Art
1987 “The Technical Examination of Bidri Ware.” Studies in 1958 Early Mughal Art. Mārg 11, no. 3 (June). 1983 Notable Acquisitions, 1982 – 1983. New York:
Conservation 22, no. 3 (August), pp. 97 – 101. 1963 Deccani Kalams. Mārg 16, no. 2 (March). The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
1965 Carpets of India. Mārg 18, no. 4 (September). 1985 Notable Acquisitions, 1984 – 1985. New York:
de Lapérouse, Jean-François 1978 Homage to Kalamkari. Mārg 31, no. 4 (September). The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
2003 With Maya Naunton. “Mixed Media: An Islamic 1979 Warp and Woof: Historical Textiles, Calico Museum, 1987 The Islamic World. Introduction by Stuart Cary
Writing Cabinet.” Met Objectives: Treatment and Research Ahmedabad. Mārg 33, no. 1 (December). Welch. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Notes (Sherman Fairchild Center for Objects Conserva- 1981 Heritage of Karnataka. Mārg 35, no. 1 (December). 2011 Masterpieces from the Department of Islamic Art in
tion, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) 4, 1992 The Qutb Shahs of Golconda. Mārg 44, no. 1 The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Edited by Maryam D.
no. 2 (Spring), pp. 1 – 3. (September). Ekhtiar, Priscilla P. Soucek, Sheila R. Canby, and Navina
Najat Haidar. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of
Latif, Momin Markel, Stephen Art.
1982 Bijoux moghols / Mogol juwelen / Mughal Jewels. Exh. 1992 “Bidri Ware: Lyric Patterns.” In Safrani 1992c,
cat. Brussels: La Société Générale de Banque. pp. 45 – 56. Michell, George
2004 “Non-Imperial Mughal Sources for Jades and Jade 1986 Ed. Islamic Heritage of the Deccan. Bombay: J. J.
Lawton, Thomas, and Thomas W. Lentz Simulants in South Asia.” Jewellery Studies 10, pp. 68 – 75. Bhabha for Marg Publications.
1998 Beyond the Legacy: Anniversary Acquisitions for the [Issue titled Jewelled Arts of Mughal India: Papers of the 1992 “Royal Architecture and Imperial Style at
Freer Gallery of Art and the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery. Conference Held Jointly by the British Museum and the Vijayanagara.” In The Powers of Art: Patronage in
Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Society of Jewellery Historians at the British Museum, Indian Culture, edited by Barbara Stoler Miller,
London, in 2001.] pp. 168 – 79. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Leach, Linda York 1995 Architecture and Art of Southern India: Vijayanagara
1995 Mughal and Other Indian Paintings from the Chester Marshall, Heather and the Successor States. The New Cambridge History of
Beatty Library. 2 vols. London: Scorpion Cavendish. 1981 “Painting in Islamic India until the Sixteenth Century.” India 1, no. 6. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1998 Paintings from India. The Nasser D. Khalili Collection In Gray 1981, pp. 125 – 40. 2011 “Indic Themes in the Design and Decoration of the
of Islamic Art 8. London: Nour Foundation, in association Ibrahim Rauza in Bijapur.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011,
with Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press. Martin, F. R. pp. 236 – 51.
1912 The Miniature Painting and Painters of Persia, India,
Lentz, Thomas W. and Turkey, from the 8th to the 18th Century. 2 vols. Michell, George, and Richard Eaton
1993 “Dynastic Imagery in Early Timurid Wall Painting.” London: Bernard Quaritch. 1992 Fīrūzābād: Palace City of the Deccan. Oxford Studies
Muqarnas 10, pp. 253 – 65. [Issue titled Essays in Honor of in Islamic Art 8. London: Oxford University Press for the
Oleg Grabar.] Martin, Marie H. Board of the Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of
1980 “Bahmani Coinage, and Deccani and North Indian Oxford.
Lentz, Thomas W., and Glenn D. Lowry Metrological and Monetary Considerations, 1200 – 1600.”
1989 Timur and the Princely Vision: Persian Art and PhD diss., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Michell, George, and Mark Zebrowski
Culture in the Fifteenth Century. Exh. cat. Arthur M. 1992 “Golconda Numismatics: Currencies in Circulation.” 1999 Architecture and Art of the Deccan Sultanates. The
Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, In Safrani 1992c, pp. 143 – 52. New Cambridge History of India 1, no. 7. Cambridge:
D.C., and Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Los Cambridge University Press.
Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Mason, Darielle
2001 Intimate Worlds: Indian Paintings from the Alvin O. Minorsky, Vladimir
Losty, Jeremiah P. Bellak Collection. With contributions by B. W. Goswamy 1955 “The Qara-Qoyunlu and the Qutb-Shāhs
. (Turkmenica,
1982 The Art of the Book in India. Exh. cat. London: British et al. Exh. cat. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art. 10).” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies
Library. 17, no. 1, pp. 50 – 73.
1986 Indian Book Painting. London: British Library. Mate, Madhukar Shripad
1995 “The Development of the Golconda Style.” In Indian 1967 Deccan Woodwork. Poona: Deccan College Post Mittal, Jagdish
Art and Connoisseurship: Essays in Honour of Douglas Graduate and Research Institute. 1963 “Paintings of the Hyderabad School.” Mārg 16, no. 2
Barrett, edited by John Guy, pp. 296 – 319. Middletown, (March), pp. 43 – 56.
N.J.: Grantha Corporation, in association with Mapin Mate, Madhukar Shripad, and T. V. Pathy 1974 “Painting.” In Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 2,
Publishing, Ahmedabad, and Indira Gandhi National 1992 Eds. Daulatabad: A Report on the Archaeological pp. 201 – 26.
Centre for the Arts, New Delhi. Investigations. Pune: Deccan College Post Graduate and 1986 “Indian Painters as Designers of Decorative Art
2013 A Prince’s Eye: Imperial Mughal Paintings from a Research Institute; Aurangabad: Marathawada University. Objects in the Mughal Period.” In Skelton et al. 1986,
Princely Collection. Art from the Indian Courts. Dealer’s pp. 243 – 52.
cat. London: Francesca Galloway. Matthews, David 2007 Sublime Delight through Works of Art from Jagdish
2014 Indian and Persian Painting, 1590 – 1840. Exh. cat. New 2002 “Pem Nem : A 16th Century Dakani Manuscript.” In and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art. Hyderabad:
York: Oliver Forge and Brendan Lynch. Cairo to Kabul: Afghan and Islamic Studies Presented to Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art.
Ralph Pinder-Wilson, edited by Warwick Ball and 2011 Bidri Ware and Damascene Work in Jagdish and
Lowry, Glenn D. Leonard Harrow, pp. 170 – 75. London: Melisende. Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art. Hyderabad: Jagdish
1988 With Susan Nemazee. A Jeweler’s Eye: Islamic Arts of and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art.
the Book from the Vever Collection. Washington, D.C.: McInerney, Terence 2013 “Deccani Marbled Paintings at Bijapur, c. 1625 – 1650.”
Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, in 1982 Indian Painting, 1525 – 1825: An Exhibition. Exh. cat. In Themes, Histories, Interpretations: Indian Painting;
association with University of Washington Press. David Carritt, London. London: Artemis Group. Essays in Honour of B. N. Goswamy, edited by Mahesh
Sharma and Padma A. Kaimal, pp. 136 – 47. Ahmedabad:
Lüders, Heinrich Mehta, Nanalal Chamanlal Mapin Publishing, in association with Osianama.com.
1912 A List of Brahmi Inscriptions from the Earliest Times 1926 Studies in Indian Painting: A Survey of Some New
to about a.d. 400, with the Exception of Those of Asoka. Material Ranging from the Commencement of the VIIth Mohamed, Bashir
Appendix to Epigraphia Indica and Record of the Century to circa 1870 a.d. Bombay: D. B. Taraporevala. 2008 Ed. The Arts of the Muslim Knight: The Furusiyya Art
Archaeological Survey of India 10 (1909 – 10). Calcutta: Foundation Collection. Milan: Skira.
Superintendent Government Printing. Mehta, Nandini
2013 “Middle Kingdom: Madhya Pradesh.” Outlook Mughal Silver Magnificence
Lunsingh Scheurleer, Pauline Traveller, January. 1987 Mughal Silver Magnificence (XVI – XIXth C.) / Magni-
1996 “Het Witsenalbum: Zeventiende-eeuwse Indiase ficence de l’argenterie moghole (XVIème – XIXème s.).
portretten op bestelling.” Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum Melikian-Chirvani, Assadullah Souren Exh. cat. Brussels: Antalga.
44, no. 3, pp. 167 – 254. 1982 Islamic Metalwork from the Iranian World, 8th – 18th
Centuries. Victoria & Albert Museum, London. London: Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah
Lunsingh Scheurleer, Pauline, and Gijs Kruijtzer Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 1940 Kulliyat-i Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah. Edited by
2005 “Camping with the Mughal Emperor: A Golkonda 1990 – 91 “From the Royal Boat to the Beggar’s Bowl.” Muhiuddin Qadri Zore. Hyderabad: Maktabah-yi
Artist Portrays a Dutch Ambassador in 1689.” Arts of Islamic Art 4 (1990 – 91; pub. 1992), pp. 3 – 111. Ibrahimiah Mashin Press.
Asia 35, no. 3 (May – June), pp. 48 – 60. 2007 Le Chant du monde: L’Art de l’Iran safavide,
1501 – 1736. Exh. cat.; 2007 – 8. Paris: Somogy and Musée Musayev, Sh., and G. Karimov
Mackenzie Shah, Alison du Louvre. 2012 “Literature.” In The Treasury of Oriental Manuscripts,
2010 “Hyderabad under the Asaf Jahis (1724 – 1950).” In pp. 44 – 57. Abu Rayhan al-Biruni Institute of Oriental
Philon 2010c, pp. 98 – 105. Merklinger, Elizabeth Schotten Studies, Academy of Sciences of the Republic of
1981 Indian Islamic Architecture: The Deccan, 1347 – 1686. Uzbekistan, Tashkent. Paris: United Nations Educational,
Manjhana Warminster: Aris and Phillips. Scientific and Cultural Organization.
2000 Madhumālatī: An Indian Sufi Romance. Edited and
translated by Aditya Behl, S. C. R. Weightman, and Shyam Methwold, William Museum für Islamische Kunst
Manohar Pandey. Oxford World’s Classics. Oxford: 1931 “Relations of the Kingdome of Golchonda, and Other 2001 Museum für Islamische Kunst: Staatliche Museen zu
Oxford University Press. Neighbouring Nations within the Gulfe of Bengala, Berlin Preussischer Kulturbesitz. With contributions by
Arreccan, Pegu, Tannassery, etc., and the English Trade Volkmar Enderlein et al. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
Manucci, Niccolò in Those Parts.” In Relations of Golconda in the Early
1907 Storia do Mogor; or, Mogul India, 1653 – 1708. Seventeenth Century, edited by W. H. Moreland, pp. 1 – 49. Nayeem, Muhammad Abdul
Translated and edited by William Irvine. 4 vols. Indian Works Issued by the Hakluyt Society, 2nd ser., 66. 1974 External Relations of the Bijapur Kingdom,
Texts Series. London: John Murray. London: Hakluyt Society. 1489 – 1686 a.d.: A Study in Diplomatic History. Foreword
Bibliography 357
by P. M. Joshi. Hyderabad: Published for Sayeedia conference “Art, Patronage and Society in the Muslim Prakash, Om
Research Institute by Bright Publishers. Deccan from the Fourteenth Century to the Present Day,” 1998 European Commercial Enterprise in Pre-Colonial
1985 Mughal Administration of the Deccan under Nizamul St. Anthony’s College, University of Oxford, July 4 – 6, India. The New Cambridge History of India 2, no. 5.
Mulk Asaf Jah, 1720 – 48 a.d. Bombay: Jaico Publishing 2008.] Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
House.
2002 The Splendour of Hyderabad: The Last Phase of an Pathak, Anamika, and Sushmit Sharma Qureshi, Saleemuddin
Oriental Culture, 1591 – 1948 a.d. Rev. ed. Hyderabad: 2013 – 14 “Jade: Emperor’s Pride, Artist’s Excellence.” 1980 “The Royal Library of Bijapur.” Pakistan Library
Hyderabad Publishers. [1st ed., Bombay: Jaico Publishing Jñāna-Pravāha Research Journal, no. 17, pp. 139 – 54. Bulletin 11, nos. 3 – 4 (September – December), pp. 1 – 17.
House, 1987.]
2006 The Heritage of the Qutb Shahis of Golconda and Patnaik, Naveen Raman, Sunil, and Rohit Agarwal
Hyderabad. Hyderabad: Hyderabad Publishers. 1985 A Second Paradise: Indian Courtly Life, 1590 – 1947. 2012 Delhi Durbar, 1911: The Complete Story. New Delhi:
2008 The Heritage of the Adil Shahis of Bijapur. Hyderabad: Introduction by Stuart Cary Welch. New York: The Lotus Collection.
Hyderabad Publishers. Metropolitan Museum of Art; Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday. Ramaswamy, Sumathi
Nazim, Muhammad 2007 “Conceit of the Globe in Mughal Visual Practice.”
1933 – 34 “Inscriptions from the Bombay Presidency.” Peck, Amelia Comparative Studies in Society and History 49, no. 4
Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica, supplement (pub. 1937), 2013 Ed. Interwoven Globe: The Worldwide Textile Trade, (October), pp. 751 – 82.
pp. 1 – 61. 1500 – 1800. Exh. cat.; 2013 – 14. New York: The Metropoli-
tan Museum of Art. Rao, P. Setu Madhava
Nigam, M. L. 1963 Eighteenth Century Deccan. Bombay: Popular
1999 Indian Jewellery. New Delhi: Lustre Press, Roli Books. Perriot, Madeleine Prakashan.
1987 “Une Série de portraits deccani: La Collection d’art
Nikitin, Anafasy indien du président de Robien au musée de Rennes.” La Rea, Alexander
1970 “The Travels of Athanasius Nikitin, of Twer.” Translated Revue du Louvre et des Musées de France 37, nos. 5 – 6, 1897 Monumental Remains of the Dutch East India
and edited by Count Wielhorsky. In India in the Fifteenth pp. 379 – 88. Company in the Presidency of Madras. Archaeological
Century; Being a Collection of Narratives of Voyages to Survey of India, New Imperial Series 25. Madras:
India . . . , edited by R. H. Major. Works issued by the Persian and Islamic Art Government Press.
Hakluyt Society, [1st ser., 22]. Reprint. New York: Burt 1977 Persian and Islamic Art. Exh. cat. London: Spink & Son.
Franklin, 1970. [Originally published London: Hakluyt “Recent Acquisitions”
Society, 1857.] Petievich, Carla 1992 “Recent Acquisitions: A Selection, 1991 – 1992.” The
2007 Ed. and trans. When Men Speak as Women: Vocal Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.s., 50, no. 2 (Fall).
Nizam ud-Din Ahmad Masquerade in Indo-Muslim Poetry. New Delhi: Oxford 1996 “Recent Acquisitions: A Selection, 1995 – 1996.” The
1961 Hadiqat us-Salatin. Edited by Syed Ali Asghar University Press. Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.s., 54, no. 2 (Fall).
Bilgrami. Hyderabad: Idara-e-Adabiyat-e-Urdu. 1998 “Recent Acquisitions: A Selection, 1997 – 1998.” The
Philadelphia Museum of Art Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.s., 56, no. 2 (Fall).
Noorani, Abdul Gafoor Abdul Majeed 1973 Treasures of the Philadelphia Museum of Art and the 1999 “Recent Acquisitions: A Selection, 1998 – 1999.” The
2013 The Destruction of Hyderabad. New Delhi: Tulika John G. Johnson Collection. Edited by George H. Marcus. Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.s., 57, no. 2 (Fall).
Books. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art. 2000 “Recent Acquisitions: A Selection, 1999 – 2000.” The
Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.s., 58, no. 2 (Fall).
Ogden, Jack Philon, Helen 2003 “Recent Acquisitions: A Selection, 2002 – 2003.” The
forthcoming The King of Gems: Diamonds from the Earliest 2000 “The Murals in the Tomb of Ahmad Shah in Bidar.” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.s., 61, no. 2 (Fall).
Times until 1725. Apollo 152 (November), pp. 3 – 10.
2005 “Religious and Royal Architecture of the Early Riazul Islam
Okada, Amina Bahmani Period, 748/1347 – 825/1423.” PhD diss., 1979 A Calendar of Documents on Indo-Persian Relations.
1991 “Miniatures of the Sultanates of Bijapur and Golconda University of London, School of Oriental and African Vol. 1. Tehran: Iranian Culture Foundation; Karachi:
in the Musée Guimet.” Orientations 22, no. 5 (May), Studies. Institute of Central & West Asian Studies.
pp. 110 – 16. 2010a “Bidar under the Later Bahmanis and Baridis
(1432 – 1619).” In Philon 2010c, pp. 44 – 55. Richard, Francis
Olivier Coutau-Bégarie 2010b “Daulatabad, Gulbarga, Firuzabad and Sagar under 2000 “Some Sixteenth-Century Deccani Persian Manu
2008 Château de Larnagol: Entier Contenu du château de the Early Bahmanis (1347 – 1422).” In Philon 2010c, scripts in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France.” In
Larnagol. Collections Raymond Subes. Sale cat. Olivier pp. 34 – 43. The Making of Indo-Persian Culture: Indian and French
Coutau-Bégarie, Paris, October 4, 2008. 2010c Ed. Silent Splendour: Palaces of the Deccan, Studies, edited by Muzaffar Alam, Françoise Nalini
14th – 19th Centuries. Mumbai: Marg Publications. Delvoye, and Marc Gaborieau, pp. 239 – 49. New Delhi:
Olson, Marsha Gail 2011 “The Solah Khamba Mosque at Bidar as a Ceremonial Manohar.
2007 “Jesus, Mary, and All of the Saints: Indo-Portuguese Hall of the Bahmanis.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011,
Ivory Statuettes and Their Role as Mission Art in pp. 188 – 203. Richards, J. F.
Seventeenth to Eighteenth Century Goa.” PhD diss., 2012 Gulbarga, Bidar, Bijapur. Mumbai: Pictor Publishing. 1975 Mughal Administration in Golconda. Oxford:
University of Minnesota. Clarendon Press.
Pinder-Wilson, Ralph H.
Overton, Keelan 1976 With Ellen S. Smart and Douglas Barrett. Paintings Ricketts, Howard
2011a “ ‘Ali Riza (The Bodleian Painter).” In Masters of from the Muslim Courts of India. Exh. cat. British 2014 “Ahmadnagar: Nizam Shahi Blazons, Animal
Indian Painting, edited by Milo Cleveland Beach, Museum, London. London: World of Islam Festival Sculptures, and Zoomorphic Arms in the 16th Century.”
Eberhard Fischer, and B. N. Goswamy, vol. 1, 1100 – 1650, Publishing Company. Journal of the David Collection 4, pp. 148 – 69.
pp. 375 – 90. Artibus Asiae, Supplementum 48. Zurich: 1992 “Jades from the Islamic World.” In The World of Jade,
Artibus Asiae Publishers. edited by Stephen Markel, pp. 35 – 48. Bombay: Marg Rieu, Charles
2011b “A Collector and His Portrait: Book Arts and Publications. 1879 – 83 Catalogue of the Persian Manuscripts in the
Painting for Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II of Bijapur (r. 1580 – British Museum. 3 vols. London: British Museum.
1627).” PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles. Platts, John T.
2012 “ ‘Maid Killing a Snake’ and ‘Dervish Receiving a 1993 A Dictionary of Urdū, Classical Hindī, and English. Riyaz, Mohammad
Visitor’: A Re-Examination of Bijapuri Masterpieces New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers. 1972 “Farsi sarayan kasmir dar duwra-yi pish az Taymuryan
through the Lens of the Lucknow Copy.” In Indo-Muslim [Originally published London: W. H. Allen, 1884.] shibh qarra.” Hilal Magazine, no. 124, pp. 51 – 55.
Cultures in Transition, edited by Alka Patel and Karen
Leonard, pp. 37 – 60. Leiden: Brill. Pope, Arthur Upham, and Phyllis Ackerman Rizvi, Saiyid Athar Abbas
2014 “Vida de Jacques de Coutre: A Flemish Account of 1939 Eds. A Survey of Persian Art, from Prehistoric Times to 1986 A Socio-Intellectual History of the Isnā ’Asharī Shī’īs
Bijapuri Visual Culture in the Shadow of Mughal Felicity.” the Present. Vol. 6. London: Oxford University Press. in India. 2 vols. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal
In Parodi 2014b, pp. 233 – 64. Publishers.
Porter, Yves
Pal, Pratapaditya 1988 “Marbled Paper.” India Magazine of Her People and Robbins, Kenneth X., and John McLeod
1993 Indian Painting: A Catalogue of the Los Angeles Culture, August, pp. 20 – 26. 2006 Eds. African Elites in India: Habshi Amarat.
County Museum of Art Collection. Vol. 1, 1000 – 1700. Los 1989 “Un Traité de calligraphie attribué à ‘Abd-Allāh Ahmedabad: Mapin Publishing; Ocean Township, N.J.:
Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art. S∙eyrafi.” Studia Iranica 18, no. 1, pp. 55 – 58. Grantha Corporation.
1994 Painters, Paintings, and Books: An Essay on
Pant, G. N. Indo-Persian Technical Literature, 12 – 19th Centuries. Robinson, H. Russell
1989 Catalogue of Edged Arms and Armour in the Translated by S. Butani. New Delhi: Manohar and Centre 1967 Oriental Armour. Arms and Armour Series. London:
Salarjung Museum, Hyderabad. Hyderabad: Salarjung for Human Sciences. Herbert Jenkins.
Museum.
Portugiesen in Indien Roger, Delphine
Parodi, Laura E. 1992 Die Portugiesen in Indien: Die Eroberungen Dom João 1994 “The Influence of the Indo-Persian Medical Tradition
2014a “Bidri Ware and the New Mughal Order.” In Parodi de Castros auf Tapisserien, 1538 – 1548. With contributions on Muslim Cookery in Hyderabad, India.” In Confluence
2014b, pp. 267 – 94. by Rotraud Bauer et al. Exh. cat.; 1992 – 93. Vienna: of Cultures: French Contributions to Indo-Persian Studies,
2014b Ed. The Visual World of Muslim India: The Art, Kunsthistorisches Museum. edited by Françoise Nalini Delvoye, pp. 217 – 36. New
Culture and Society of the Deccan in the Early Modern Delhi: Centre for Human Sciences; Tehran: Institut
Era. London: I. B. Tauris. [Papers presented at the Français de Recherche en Iran.
358 Bibliography
Rogers, Alexander, and Henry Beveridge Savage-Smith, Emilie B. N. Goswamy, vol. 1, 1100 – 1650, pp. 279 – 90. Artibus
1978 The Tūzuk-i-Jahāngīrī; or, Memoirs of Jahāngīr. 1997 “Magic-Medicinal Bowls.” In Francis Maddison and Asiae, Supplementum 48. Zurich: Artibus Asiae
Translated¯ by Alexander Rogers. Edited by Henry Emilie Savage-Smith, Science, Tools and Magic, pt. 1, Body Publishers.
Beveridge. 2 vols. 3rd ed. New Delhi: Munshiram and Spirit, Mapping the Universe, pp. 72 – 81. The Nasser
Manoharlal Publishers. [1st ed., London: Royal Asiatic D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art 12. London: Nour Seyller, John, and Jagdish Mittal
Society, 1909 – 14.] Foundation, in association with Azimuth Editions and 2013 Mughal Paintings, Drawings, and Islamic Calligraphy
Oxford University Press. in the Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art.
Rötzer, Klaus With contributions by Wheeler M. Thackston. Hyderabad:
1984 “Bījāpūr: Alimentation en eau d’une ville musulmane Scarisbrick, Diana Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art.
du Dekkan aux XVIe – XVIIe siècles.” Bulletin de l’École 2007 Rings: Jewelry of Power, Love, and Loyalty. London:
Française d’Extrême-Orient 73, pp. 125 – 96. Thames & Hudson. Sherwani, Haroon Khan
1943–44 “Tāju’d-Din Fīrōz and the Synthesis of Bahmanī
Route des Indes Scarisbrick, Diana, and Benjamin Zucker Culture (17-11-1397 – 22-9-1422).” New Indian Antiquary 6,
1998 La Route des Indes: Les Indes et l’Europe; échanges 2014 Elihu Yale: Merchant, Collector & Patron. New York: pp. 75 – 89.
artistiques et héritage commun, 1650 – 1850. Exh. cat. Thames & Hudson. 1953 The Bahmanis of the Deccan. Hyderabad-Deccan:
Musée des Arts Décoratifs and Musée d’Aquitaine, S. M. Himayatnagar.
Bordeaux; 1998 – 99. Paris: Somogy. Schimmel, Annemarie 1973 “The Qut‥b Shāhīs of Golkonda — Hydarabad.” In
1972 “Nur ein störrisches Pferd . . .” In Ex Orbe Religionum: Sherwani and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 1, pp. 411 – 90.
Roxburgh, David J. Studia Geo Widengren, vol. 2, pp. 98 – 107. Studies in the 1974 History of the Qutb Shāhī Dynasty. New Delhi:
2005 The Persian Album, 1400 – 1600: From Dispersal to History of Religions (Supplements to Numen) 22. Leiden: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.
Collection. New Haven: Yale University Press. E. J. Brill. 1985 The Bahmanis of the Deccan. 2nd ed. New Delhi:
1980 Islam in the Indian Subcontinent. Handbuch der Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.
Roy, Malini Orientalistik, 2nd ser., 4, pt. 3. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
2010 “Some Unexpected Sources for Paintings by the Artist 1983 “Anvari and His Poetry.” In Annemarie Schimmel and Sherwani, Haroon Khan, and P. M. Joshi
Mihr Chand (fl. c. 1759 – 86), Son of Ganga Ram.” South Stuart Cary Welch, Anvari’s Divan: A Pocket Book for 1973 – 74 Eds. History of Medieval Deccan (1295 – 1724).
Asian Studies 26, no. 1 (March), pp. 21 – 29. Akbar; a Dīvān of Auhaduddin Anvari, Copied for the 2 vols. Vol. 1, Mainly Political and Military Aspects.
Mughal Emperor Jalaluddin Akbar (r. 1556 – 1605) at Vol. 2, Mainly Cultural Aspects. Hyderabad: Government
Royal Courts of India Lahore in a.h. 996 /a.d. 1588, Now in the Fogg Art Museum of Andhra Pradesh.
2008 Paintings from the Royal Courts of India. Exh. cat. of Harvard University, pp. 57 – 70. New York: The
Peter Findlay Gallery, New York. London: Francesca Metropolitan Museum of Art. Shyam, Radhey
Galloway. 1984 Calligraphy and Islamic Culture. Hagop Kevorkian 1966 The Kingdom of Ahmadnagar. Delhi: Motilal
Series on Near Eastern Art and Civilization. New York: Banarsidass.
Rubiés, Joan Pau New York University Press. 1968 Life and Times of Malik Ambar. Delhi: Munshiram
2000 Travel and Ethnology in the Renaissance: South 1992a With Barbara Rivolta. “Islamic Calligraphy.” Manoharlal Publishers.
India through European Eyes, 1250 – 1625. Cambridge: The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 50, no. 1 1973 “The Niz..ām Shāhīs. The ‘Imād Shāhīs.” In Sherwani
Cambridge University Press. (Summer). and Joshi 1973 – 74, vol. 1, pp. 223 – 87.
1992b A Two-Colored Brocade: The Imagery of Persian
Sadiq Ali, Shanti Poetry. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Silva, Nuno Vassallo e
1996 The African Dispersal in the Deccan, from Medieval to 2004 The Empire of the Great Mughals: History, Art and 1995 “Jewels and Gems in Goa from the Sixteenth to
Modern Times. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Culture. Translated by Corinne Attwood. Edited by the Eighteenth Century.” Mārg 47, no. 1 (September),
Burzine K. Waghmar. Foreword by Francis Robinson. pp. 53 – 62.
Sadiq Naqvi London: Reaktion. 2004a “Jewels for the Great Mughal: Goa, a Centre of Gem
1987 Qutb Shahi ‘Āshūr Khānās of Hyderābād City. 2nd ed. Trade in the Orient.” Jewellery Studies 10, pp. 41 – 51. [Issue
Hyderabad: Bab-ul-Ilm Society. Schmitz, Barbara titled Jewelled Arts of Mughal India: Papers of the
1993 Muslim Religious Institutions and Their Role under the 1997 Islamic and Indian Manuscripts and Paintings in the Conference Held Jointly by the British Museum and the
Qutb Shahs. Hyderabad: Bab-ul-Ilm Society. Pierpont Morgan Library. With contributions by Society of Jewellery Historians at the British Museum,
Pratapaditya Pal, Wheeler M. Thackston, and William London, in 2001.]
Sadiq Naqvi and V. Krishan Rao Voelkle. New York: Pierpont Morgan Library. 2004b “Precious Stones, Jewels and Cameos: Jacques de
2004 Eds. The Muhrram Ceremonies among the Coutre’s Journey to Goa and Agra.” In Goa and the Great
Non-Muslims of Andhra Pradesh. Hyderabad: Bab-ul-Ilm Schroeder, Eric Mughal, edited by Jorge Flores and Nuno Vassallo e Silva,
Society. 1947 “The Troubled Image: An Essay upon Mughal pp. 116 – 33, 208 – 9. Exh. cat. Museu Calouste Gulbenkian,
Painting.” In Art and Thought: Issued in Honour of Dr. Lisbon. London: Scala.
Safrani, Shehbaz H. Ananda K. Coomaraswamy on the Occasion of His 70th
1992a “The Deccan: A Nucleus of Culture.” In Safrani 1992c, Birthday, edited by K. Bharatha Iyer, pp. 73 – 86. London: Silver Wonders from the East
pp. 1 – 18. Luzac & Company. 2006 Silver Wonders from the East: Filigree of the Tsars.
1992b “Golconda Alums: Shimmering Standards.” In Exh. cat. Zwolle: Waanders; Amsterdam: Hermitage
Safrani 1992c, pp. 69 – 80. Sen, Geeti Amsterdam.
1992c Golconda and Hyderabad. Bombay: Marg 1984 Paintings from the Akbar Nama: A Visual Chronicle of
Publications. Mughal India. Varanasi: Lustre Press. Sims, Eleanor
2002 With Boris I. Marshak and Ernst J. Grube. Peerless
Safwat, Nabil F. Seth, D. R. Images: Persian Painting and Its Sources. New Haven: Yale
1996 The Art of the Pen: Calligraphy of the 14th to 20th 1957 “The Life and Times of Malik Ambar.” Islamic University Press; Ahmedabad: Mapin Publishing.
Centuries. The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Culture 31, no. 2 (April), pp. 142 – 55.
Art 5. London: Nour Foundation, in association with Sindermann, Franz
Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press. Sethna, Nelly H. 1999 – 2000 “Bijapur: Tappeti dell’Asar Mahal e del Museo
1985 Kalamkari: Painted & Printed Fabrics from Andhra Archeologico.” Ghereh 22 (Winter), pp. 23 – 33.
Saksena, Ram Babu Pradesh. Living Traditions of India. New York: Mapin
2002 A History of Urdu Literature. Reprint. New Delhi: Publishing. Singh, Chandramani
Cosmo Publications. [Originally published Allahabad: 2004 Ed. Art Treasures of Rajasthan and Portfolio of
Ram Narain Lal, 1927.] Sewell, Robert Paintings from Jaipur. Jaipur: Jawahar Kala Kendra, in
1962 A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar): A Contribution to association with Publication Scheme.
Sala, George Augustus the History of India. Reprint. A National Trust Book.
1868 Notes and Sketches of the Paris Exhibition. London: Delhi: Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Skelton, Robert
Tinsley Brothers. Publications Division. [Originally published London: 1957 “The Mughal Artist Farrokh Beg.” Ars Orientalis 2,
Swan Sonnenschein, 1900.] pp. 393 – 411.
Salman al-Savuji 1958 “Documents for the Study of Painting at Bijapur in the
1917 Divan-i Salman Savuji. Edited by Mansour Mushfaq. Seyller, John Late 16th and Early 17th Centuries.” Arts asiatiques 5,
Tehran: Safi Ali Shah. 1991 “Hashim.” In Master Artists of the Imperial Mughal no. 2, pp. 97 – 125.
Court, edited by Pratapaditya Pal, pp. 105 – 18. Bombay: 1963 “Bijapur.” Mārg 16, no. 2 (March), pp. 34 – 39.
Sardar, Marika Marg Publications. 1973 “Early Golcon∙d∙a Painting.” In Indologen-Tagung 1971:
2010 “Golconda and Hyderabad under the Qutb Shahis 1995 “Farrukh Beg in the Deccan.” Artibus Asiae 55, Verhandlungen der Indologischen Arbeitstagung im
(1495 – 1687).” In Philon 2010c, pp. 78 – 87. nos. 3 – 4, pp. 319 – 41. Museum für Indische Kunst, Berlin, 7. – 9. Oktober 1971,
2011 “A Seventeenth-Century Kalamkari Hanging at The 2000 “Painter’s Directions in Early Indian Painting.” edited by Herbert Härtel and Volker Moeller, pp. 182 – 95.
Metropolitan Museum of Art.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011, Artibus Asiae 59, nos. 3 – 4, pp. 303 – 18. Glasenapp-Stiftung 8. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.
pp. 148 – 61. 2010 Mughal and Deccani Paintings: Eva and Konrad Seitz 1988 “Imperial Symbolism in Mughal Painting.” In Content
2014 “The Circular Cities of the Deccan.” In Parodi 2014b, Collection of Indian Miniatures. Zurich: Museum Rietberg. and Context of Visual Arts in the Islamic World: Papers
pp. 3 – 30. 2011a “Deccani Elements in Early Pahari Painting.” In from a Colloquium in Memory of Richard Ettinghausen,
Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 64 – 81. Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 2 – 4 April 1980,
Sarkar, Jadunath 2011b “A Mughal Manuscript of the Diwan of Nawa’i.” edited by Priscilla P. Soucek, pp. 177 – 92. University Park:
1912–24 History of Aurangzib: Mainly Based on Original Artibus Asiae 71, no. 2, pp. 325 – 34. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Sources. 5 vols. Calcutta: M. C. Sarkar & Sons. 2011c “Muhammad ‘Ali.” In Masters of Indian Painting, 2011a “Farrukh Beg in the Deccan: An Update.” In Haidar
edited by Milo Cleveland Beach, Eberhard Fischer, and and Sardar 2011, pp. 12 – 25.
Bibliography 359
2011b “Ragamalas in the Deccan and What Happens When 2013 Arts of the Islamic World, including Fine Carpets and Sultan, Shah, and Great Mughal
Ragas Migrate without Their Texts.” In Glynn, Skelton, Textiles. Art of the Middle East & Turkey. Sale cat. 1996 Sultan, Shah, and Great Mughal: The History and
and Dallapiccola 2011, pp. 23 – 28. Sotheby’s, New York, April 24, 2013. Culture of the Islamic World. Exh. cat. Copenhagen:
2014 Arts of the Islamic World. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, Nationalmuseet.
Skelton, Robert, et al. April 9, 2014.
1986 Robert Skelton, Andrew Topsfield, Susan Stronge, and Swietochowski, Marie Lukens, and Sussan Babaie
Rosemary Crill, eds. Facets of Indian Art: A Symposium Soucek, Priscilla P. 1989 Persian Drawings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Held at the Victoria and Albert Museum on 26, 27, 28 2011 “Building a Collection of Islamic Art at the Exh. cat. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
April and 1 May 1982. London: Victoria & Albert Metropolitan Museum, 1870 – 2011.” In Metropolitan
Museum. Museum of Art 2011, pp. 2 – 9, 18. Tabataba, ‘Ali
1936 Burhan-i Ma‘athir. Delhi: Jam‘i Press.
Smart, Ellen S. Soudavar, Abolala
1975 – 77 “Fourteenth Century Chinese Porcelain from a 1992 Art of the Persian Courts: Selections from the Art and Tareq Rajab Museum
Tughlaq Palace in Delhi.” Transactions of the Oriental History Trust Collection. New York: Rizzoli. 1990 Selections from Tareq Rajab Museum. Hawalli,
Ceramic Society 41, pp. 199 – 230. 1999 “Between the Safavids and the Mughals: Art and Kuwait: Tareq Rajab Museum.
1986 “A Preliminary Report on a Group of Important Artists in Transition.” Iran: Journal of the British Institute
Mughal Textiles.” Textile Museum Journal 25, pp. 5 – 23. of Persian Studies 37, pp. 49 – 66. Tavernier, Jean-Baptiste
1676 – 77 Les Six Voyages de Jean Baptiste Tavernier, Écuyer
Smart, Ellen S., and Daniel S. Walker Soustiel, Jean, and Marie-Christine David Baron d’Aubonne, qu’il a fait en Turquie, en Perse, et aux
1985 Pride of the Princes: Indian Art of the Mughal Era in 1974 Miniatures orientales de l’Inde: Présentation d’un Indes. 2 vols. Paris.
the Cincinnati Art Museum. Exh. cat. Cincinnati: ensemble de peintures musulmanes et rajpoutes 1889 Travels in India. Translated by V. Ball. 2 vols. London:
Cincinnati Art Museum. appartenant à Joseph Soustiel. [Vol. 2], Écoles mogholes, Macmillan.
du Deccan, et autres écoles indiennes. Paris: Jean Soustiel.
Smith, Graham, and J. Duncan M. Derrett Taylor, Meadows, and James Fergusson
1975 “Hindu Judicial Administration in Pre-British Times Spirit & Life 1866 Architecture at Beejapoor, an Ancient Mahometan
and Its Lesson for Today.” Journal of the American 2007 Spirit & Life: Masterpieces of Islamic Art from the Aga Capital in the Bombay Presidency. Published for the
Oriental Society 95, no. 3 (July – September), pp. 417 – 23. Khan Museum Collection. Exh. cat. by Aimée Froom. Committee of Architectural Antiquities of Western India
Palazzo della Pilotta, Parma, and the Ismaili Centre, under the Patronage of Kursondas Madhowdas. London:
“Smuggled Diamonds” London; 2007. Geneva: Aga Khan Trust for Culture. John Murray.
1905 Advertiser (Adelaide), January 24, 1905, p. 6. [Italian ed., Splendori a corte: Arti del mondo islamico
nelle collezioni del Museo Aga Khan. Milan: Olivares, Thackston, Wheeler M.
Sohoni, Pushkar 2007.] 1999 The Jahangirnama: Memoirs of Jahangir, Emperor
2010a “Ahmadnagar under the Nizam Shahis (1496 – 1636).” of India. Translated and edited by Wheeler M. Thackston.
In Philon 2010c, pp. 56 – 65. Splendeur des armes orientales Washington, D.C.: Freer Gallery of Art; New York:
2010b “Local Idioms and Global Designs: Architecture of 1988 Splendeur des armes orientales. Exh. cat. Paris: Oxford University Press.
the Nizam Shahs.” PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, Acte-Expo.
Philadelphia. Titley, Norah M.
Sprenger, Aloys 2005 The “Ni‘matnāma” Manuscript of the Sultans of
Sotheby’s 1854 Catalogue of the Arabic, Persian and Hindu’sta’ny Mandu: The Sultan’s Book of Delights. Translated and
1928 Catalogue of Valuable Printed Books, Autograph Manuscripts of the Libraries of the King of Oudh. Calcutta: edited by Norah M. Titley. RoutledgeCurzon Studies in
Letters and Historical Documents, Oriental Manuscripts printed by J. Thomas. South Asia. London: RoutledgeCurzon.
and Miniatures, &c. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London,
July 31 – August 1, 1928. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Topsfield, Andrew
1937 Catalogue of Valuable Printed Books, Autograph 1937 Indische Miniaturen aus dem Besitz der Staatlichen 1984 An Introduction to Indian Court Painting. London:
Letters and Historical Documents, Persian and Indian Museen zu Berlin. Introduction by Ernst Kühnel. Berlin: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, Gebr. Mann. 1994 Indian Paintings from Oxford Collections. Oxford:
March 16, 1937. Ashmolean Museum, in association with the Bodleian
1961 Catalogue of Important Western and Oriental Stein, Burton Library.
Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, 1989 Vijayanagara. The New Cambridge History of India 1, 2004a “A Dispersed Ragamala from the Deccan.” In The
December 11, 1961. no. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ananda-Vana of Indian Art: Dr. Anand Krishna
1967 Catalogue of Armour. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, Felicitation Volume, edited by Naval Krishna and Manu
July 10, 1967. Stewart, Charles Krishna, pp. 320 – 30. Varanasi: Indica Books.
1968 Catalogue of European and Oriental Armour. . . . 1809 A Descriptive Catalogue of the Oriental Library of the 2004b Ed. In the Realm of Gods and Kings: Arts of India.
Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, July 15, 1968. Late Tippoo Sultan of Mysore. Cambridge: printed at the Exh. cat. Asia Society Museum, New York; 2004 – 5.
1974 Catalogue of Fine Oriental Miniatures and University Press. London: Philip Wilson.
Manuscripts. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, July 9, 1974. 2004c “The Kalavants on Their Durrie: Portraits of
1975 Catalogue of Fine Oriental Miniatures, Manuscripts, Stewart, Devin J. Udaipur Court Musicians, 1680 – 1730.” In Crill, Stronge,
and Qajar Paintings. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, July 7, 2009 “Bahā’ al-Din Muh∙ammad al-‘Amilī.” In Essays in and Topsfield 2004, pp. 248 – 63.
1975. Arabic Literary Biography, vol. 2, 1350 – 1850, edited 2012 Visions of Mughal India: The Collection of Howard
1983 Islamic Works of Art, Carpets and Textiles. Sale cat. by Joseph E. Lowry and Devin J. Stewart, pp. 27 – 47. Hodgkin. Exh. cat. Oxford: Ashmolean Museum.
Sotheby’s, London, October 19, 1983. Mîzân 17. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
1984 Islamic Works of Art, Carpets and Textiles. Sale cat. Topsfield, Andrew, and Milo Cleveland Beach
Sotheby’s, London, April 18, 1984. Stronge, Susan 1991 Indian Paintings and Drawings from the Collection of
1985 Fine Oriental Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sale cat. 1985 Bidri Ware: Inlaid Metalwork from India. London: Howard Hodgkin. Exh. cat. Arthur M. Sackler Gallery,
Sotheby’s, London, November 21 – 22, 1985. Victoria & Albert Museum. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.; 1991 – 92.
1988 Oriental Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sotheby’s, 1995 Ed. The Jewels of India. Bombay: Marg Publications. New York: Thames & Hudson.
London, October 10, 1988. 2002 Painting for the Mughal Emperor: The Art of the Book,
1989 Indian, Himalayan and Southeast Asian Art. Sale cat. 1560 – 1660. London: V&A Publications. Tourkin, Sergei
Sotheby’s, New York, March 22, 1989. 2010 Made for Mughal Emperors: Royal Treasures from 2003 “Astrological Images in Two Persian Manuscripts.” In
1990 Oriental Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sotheby’s, Hindustan. London: I. B. Tauris. N. Allan 2003, pp. 73 – 85.
London, April 26, 1990.
1992 Islamic Works of Art . . . Oriental Manuscripts and Strzygowski, Josef Treasures of Indian Textiles
Miniatures. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, October 22 – 23, 1933 Ed. Asiatische Miniaturenmalerei im Anschluss an 1980 Treasures of Indian Textiles, Calico Museum,
1992. Wesen und Werden der Mogulmalerei. With contributions Ahmedabad. Bombay: Marg Publications.
1993a Indian and Southeast Asian Art. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, by Heinrich Glück, Stella Kramrisch, and Emmy Wellesz.
New York, June 17, 1993. Arbeiten des I. Kunsthistorischen Institutes der Treasures of the Courts
1993b Indian and Southeast Asian Art. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, Universität Wien (Lehrkanzel Strzygowski) 50. Klagenfurt: 1994 Treasures of the Courts. Exh. cat. London: Spink & Son.
New York, December 1, 1993. Kollitsch.
1994 Oriental Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sale cat. Trivedi, Madhu
Sotheby’s, London, April 27, 1994. Subrahmanyam, Sanjay 2010 “Music Patronage in the Indo-Persian Context: A
1996 Oriental Manuscripts and Miniatures. Sale cat. 1993 The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500 – 1700: A Political Historical Overview.” In Hindustani Music: Thirteenth to
Sotheby’s, London, April 24, 1996. and Economic History. London: Longman. Twentieth Centuries, edited by Joep Bor, Françoise Nalini
1999 Indian Miniatures: The Travel Sale. India and the Far 2001 “Palavras do Idalcâo: Um encontro curioso em Delvoye, Jane Harvey, and Emmie te Nijenhuis, pp. 65 – 93.
East, Modern and Contemporary South Asian Paintings. Bijapur no ano de 1561.” Cadernos do Noroeste 15, New Delhi: Manohar. [Papers presented at the sympos
Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, June 17, 1999. nos. 1 – 2, pp. 513 – 28. ium “The History of North Indian Music: Fourteenth
2011a The Stuart Cary Welch Collection. Part 1, Arts of the 2011 Three Ways to Be Alien: Travails and Encounters in to Twentieth Centuries,” Rotterdam Conservatory,
Islamic World. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, London, April 6, 2011. the Early Modern World. Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis December 17 – 20, 1997.]
2011b The Stuart Cary Welch Collection. Part 2, Arts of University Press.
India, including Art of the Himalayas. Sale cat. Sotheby’s, 2012 Courtly Encounters: Translating Courtliness and Uluç, Lâle
London, May 31, 2011. Violence in Early Modern Eurasia. Cambridge, Mass.: 2006 Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artisans and Ottoman
Harvard University Press. Collectors: Sixteenth Century Shiraz Manuscripts.
Istanbul: Türkiye İs. Bankası.
360 Bibliography
Untracht, Oppi Weimann, Ingrid, and Nedim Sönmez Stronge et al. Exh. cat. Arthur M. Sackler Gallery,
1997 Traditional Jewelry of India. New York: Harry N. 1991 Christopher Weimann (1946 – 1988): A Tribute. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., and other
Abrams. Tübingen: Jäckle-Sönmez. institutions. Alexandria, Va.: Art Services International.
Varadarajan, Lotika Weinstein, Laura Yazdani, Ghulam

1981 “Figurative Kalamkari and Its Locale.” In Chhavi-2: 2011 “Variations on a Persian Theme: Adaptation and 1925 – 26 “Inscription of Ibrāhīm Qutb Shāh from the
Rai Krishnadasa Felicitation Volume, edited by Anand Innovation in Early Manuscripts from Golconda.” ¨
Pangal Tank, Nalgonda District.” Epigraphia Indo-
Krishnan, pp. 67 – 70. Banaras: Bharat Kala Bhavan. PhD diss., Columbia University, New York. Moslemica, pp. 23 – 25.
2014 “Variations on a Persian Theme: The Dīwān of 1935 “Two Miniatures from Bījapûr.” Islamic Culture 9,
Vasco da Gama et l’Inde Muhammad-Quli Qutb Shah and the Birth of the pp. 211 – 17.
1998 Vasco da Gama et l’Inde. Exh. cat. Chapelle de la Illustrated Urdu Dīwān.” In Parodi 2014b, pp. 179 – 204. 1947 Bidar: Its History and Monuments. London: Oxford
Sorbonne, Paris. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, forthcoming “The Shahnama in the Deccan: A Dispersed University Press.
in association with the Chancellerie des Universités, Paris. Bijapur Shahnama of ca. 1610.” In Shahnama Studies III, 1960 Ed. The Early History of the Deccan. 2 vols. London:
edited by Charles Melville and G. R. van den Berg. Leiden: Oxford University Press.
Venkataramanayya, N. Brill.
1942 The Early Muslim Expansion in South India. Madras Ydema, Onno
University Historical Series 17. Madras: University of Welch, Anthony 1991 Carpets and Their Datings in Netherlandish Paintings,
Madras. 1975 “Islam in India.” Arts Victoria (Art Gallery of Greater 1540 – 1700. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collectors’
Victoria) 1, no. 2 (April). Club.
Verma, Dinesh Chandra 1979 Calligraphy in the Arts of the Muslim World. Exh. cat.
1974 History of Bijapur. Indian Institute of Islamic Studies. Asia House Gallery, New York. Austin: University of Yule, Henry, and Arthur Coke Burnell
New Delhi: Kumar Bros. Texas Press. 1903 Hobson-Jobson: A Glossary of Colloquial Anglo-Indian
Words and Phrases, and of Kindred Terms, Etymological,
Victoria and Albert Museum Welch, Anthony, and Stuart Cary Welch Historical, Geographical and Discursive. New ed. Edited
1969 Indian Art. Victoria and Albert Museum, London. 1982 Arts of the Islamic Book: The Collection of Prince by William Crooke. London: John Murray.
Large Picture Book 36. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Sadruddin Aga Khan. Exh. cat. Asia Society, New York;
Office. Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth; and Nelson-Atkins Zebrowski, Mark
Museum of Art, Kansas City, Mo.; 1982 – 83. Ithaca: 1981a “Decorative Arts of the Mughal Period.” In Gray 1981,
Vink, Markus Published for Asia Society by Cornell University Press. pp. 177 – 89.
2012 Dutch Sources on South Asia, c. 1600 – 1825. Vol. 4, 1981b “Transformations in Seventeenth Century Deccani
Mission to Madurai: Dutch Embassies to the Nayaka Welch, Stuart Cary Painting at Bijapur.” In Chhavi-2: Rai Krishnadasa
Court of Madurai in the Seventeenth Century. New Delhi: 1959 “Early Mughal Miniature Paintings from Two Private Felicitation Volume, edited by Anand Krishna, pp. 170 – 81.
Manohar. Collections Shown at the Fogg Art Museum.” Ars Banaras: Bharat Kala Bhavan.
Orientalis 3, pp. 133 – 46. 1983a Deccani Painting. London: Sotheby’s; Berkeley:
Wagoner, Phillip B. 1961 Review of Painting of the Deccan, XVI – XVII Century, University of California Press.
1996 “‘Sultan among Hindu Kings’: Dress, Titles, and the by Douglas Barrett. Ars Orientalis 4, pp. 411 – 15. 1983b “Ornamental Pandans of the Mughal Age.” Mārg 36,
Islamicization of Hindu Culture at Vijayanagara.” Journal 1963a “Bijapur.” Mārg 16, no. 2 (March), pp. 30 – 31. no. 2 (March), pp. 31 – 40.
of Asian Studies 55, no. 4 (November), pp. 851 – 80. 1963b “Mughal and Deccani Miniature Paintings from a 1986 “Painting.” In Michell 1986, pp. 92 – 109. Bombay:
1999 “Fortuitous Convergences and Essential Ambiguities: Private Collection.” Ars Orientalis 5, pp. 221 – 33. Marg Publications.
Transcultural Political Elites in the Medieval Deccan.” 1963c “Portfolio.” Mārg 16, no. 2 (March), pp. 7 – 16. 1995 “The Butler Brass Ewer.” In Islamic Art in the
International Journal of Hindu Studies 3, no. 3 1973 A Flower from Every Meadow: Indian Paintings from Ashmolean Museum, edited by James W. Allan, vol. 2,
(December), pp. 241 – 64. American Collections. With contributions by Mark pp. 159 – 72. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2011 “The Multiple Worlds of Amin Khan: Crossing Zebrowski. Exh. cat. Asia House Gallery, New York; 1997 Gold, Silver & Bronze from Mughal India. London:
Persianate and Indic Cultural Boundaries in the Qutb Center of Asian Art and Culture: The Avery Brundage Alexandria Press, in association with Laurence King.
Shahi Kingdom.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 90 – 101. Collection, San Francisco; and Albright-Knox Gallery,
2014 “Money Use in the Deccan, c. 1350 – 1687: The Role of Buffalo. New York: Asia Society. Zubrzycki, John
Vijayanagara Hons in the Bahmani Currency System.” 1975 Indian Drawings and Painted Sketches, 16th through 2006 The Last Nizam: An Indian Prince in the Australian
Indian Economic and Social History Review 51, no. 4, 19th Centuries. Exh. cat. New York: Asia Society. Outback. Sydney: Pan Macmillan.
pp. 457 – 80. 1985 India: Art and Culture, 1300 – 1900. Exh. cat. New
York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Waley, Muhammad Isa 1994a “A Matter of Empathy: Comical Indian Pictures.”
1992 “Islamic Manuscripts in the British Royal Collection: Asian Art & Culture 7, no. 3 (Fall), pp. 77 – 103.
A Concise Catalogue.” Manuscripts of the Middle East 6 1994b “Reflections on Muhammad ‘Ali.” In Gott ist schön
(1992; pub. 1994), pp. 5 – 40. und Er liebt die Schönheit: Festschrift für Annemarie
Schimmel zum 7. April 1992, dargebracht von Schülern,
Walker, Daniel S. Freunden und Kollegen /God Is Beautiful and He Loves
1997 Flowers Underfoot: Indian Carpets of the Mughal Era. Beauty: Festschrift in Honour of Annemarie Schimmel,
Exh. cat.; 1997 – 98. New York: The Metropolitan Museum Presented by Students, Friends and Colleagues on April 7,
of Art. 1992, edited by Alma Giese and J. Christoph Bürgel,
pp. 407 – 28. Bern: Peter Lang.
Walpole, Horace
1843 Letters of Horace Walpole, Earl of Orford, to Sir Welch, Stuart Cary, et al.
Horace Mann, His Britannic Majesty’s Resident at the 1987 Stuart Cary Welch, Annemarie Schimmel, Marie Lukens
Court of Florence, from 1760 to 1785. Vol. 1. London: Swietochowski, and Wheeler M. Thackston. The Emperors’
Richard Bentley. Album: Images of Mughal India. Exh. cat.; 1987 – 88. New
York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Wannell, Bruce
2011 “The Epigraphic Program of the Ibrahim Rauza in Wenzel, Marian
Bijapur.” In Haidar and Sardar 2011, pp. 252 – 67. 2003 Ornament and Amulet: Rings of the Islamic Lands.
The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art 16.
Ward, William E. London: Nour Foundation, in association with Azimuth
1952 “The Lotus Symbol: Its Meaning in Buddhist Art and Editions and Oxford University Press.
Philosophy.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 11,
no. 2 (December), pp. 135 – 46. Wheeler, Monroe
1956 Ed. Textiles and Ornaments of India: A Selection of
Watt, George Designs. Exh. cat. New York: Museum of Modern Art.
1903 Indian Art at Delhi, 1903: Being the Official Catalogue
of the Delhi Exhibition, 1902 – 1903. Exh. cat. Calcutta: Witkam, Jan Just
Superintendent of Government Printing. 2009 “Images of Makkah and Medina in an Islamic Prayer
Book.” Hadeeth ad-Dar (Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah),
Weimann, Christopher no. 30, pp. 27 – 32.
1983 “Techniques of Marbling in Early Indian Paintings.”
Fine Print 9, no. 4 (October), pp. 134 – 37, 164 – 66. Wright, Elaine
2008 Muraqqa‘: Imperial Mughal Albums from the Chester
Beatty Library, Dublin. With contributions by Susan
Bibliography 361
m Index /
Page references in italic refer to illustrations. Ahmad Shah Bahmani I, 29 – 30 tent hanging (fig. 19), 25, 26 Aurangabad, 9 – 10, 49, 282 – 83, 285 – 86, 288,
Arabic names, places, and terms beginning with tomb of, Ashtur (fig. 25), 30, 33 see also Jai Singh I 292 – 95, 301, 336
“al-” are alphabetized by their first major element; Ahmed Tekelü (Ottoman court jeweler), 90 Amir Ahmad Minai (poet), 339 Aurangzeb (Mughal prince; later ‘Alamgir), 8 – 9,
thus al-Sabah Collection will be found under S. ‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat (Wonders of Creation, by Amir Barid Shah III (ruler of Bidar), 176 238, 281, 282 – 83, 285 – 86, 287, 324, 336. See
Qazvini), manuscript of, from Library of Bari Anda mosque, Bijapur, 80 also ‘Alamgir
A Sahib (cat. 120), 84, 227 – 28, 227 – 28 Andhra Pradesh State Archaeology Museum, portrait of (cat. 166), 281, 288, 289
Akbar (Mughal emperor), 8, 10, 60, 74, 100, 157, Hyderabad, 19 Ausa Fort: cannon at, 18
‘Abbas I (shah of Iran), 120, 154, 269 210, 281, 283, 285, 301 Anup Singh (maharaja of Bikaner), 93, 287 Azam Jah (son of Osman ‘Ali Khan), 332, 340
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Husaini (calligrapher), 204 – 5 Akbar (Mughal prince; son of Aurangzeb), 9 Anvar-i Suhaili, Golconda manuscript of, 108, Azam Shah (son of Aurangzeb), 253, 288
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi: Kitab Suwar al-Kawakib ‘Ala’ al-Din ‘Imad Shah (ruler of Berar), 51 204
al-Thabita (Book of the Images of the Fixed ‘Alamgir (born Aurangzeb; Mughal emperor), Apollonius of Tyana (Greek philosopher), 84
Stars), 228, 291 8 – 10, 200, 256, 281, 283, 288, 296, 324, 329, Aqa Riza Jahangiri (painter), 102 B
‘Abdul of Bijapur (poet): Ibrahimnama, 143 336. See also Aurangzeb Arabic (language), 16, 34, 51, 55, 80, 166, 210, 219,
Abdul Hamid (calligrapher), 16 ‘Alamgiri Mahal, Aurangabad, 288 228, 229, 259, 285, 302 Baba Mirak Herati (Muhammad Sa’id;
Abdul Hamid II (Ottoman sultan), 327, 328 ‘alams (standards), 26, 41 ‘Arab Shirazi (scribe), 158 calligrapher), 202
Abdul Haq Khairabadi (scholar / divine), 339 brass (cats. 108 – 10), 215 – 16, 215 – 16 Arcot, 329 – 30 Babur (Mughal emperor), 281, 327
‘Abdullah Murvarid (scribe), 157 calligraphic, falcon-shaped (cat. 114), “Arcot II” diamond (cat. 200), 329 – 30, 330 Bacherus, Johannes: embassy of (cat. 196), 324,
‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda), 200, 220, 221 Aristu Jah (prime minister of Hyderabad), 338 324
204, 225, 234, 285, 311, 326 calligraphic finial for, dragon-shaped armor Badshahi Ashurkhana (Royal Mourning House),
portrait of (cat. 131), 238, 239 (cat. 113), 220, 220 armored shoes (cat. 122), 230, 230 – 31 Hyderabad, 40, 198
Procession of (fig. 90), 288, 303, 304 stone (cat. 107), 214, 214 helmet (cat. 9), 59, 59 – 60 tile mosaic work in, 193, 300; (fig. 67), 16,
Qasida in praise of (cat. 61), 142 – 43, tile (fig. 74), 216, 217 hilt of gauntlet sword (pata, cat. 26), 198, 199; (fig. 74), 216, 217
142 – 43 wood (fig. 73), 214, 214 91 – 92, 91 – 92 wood ‘alam from (fig. 73), 214, 214
tomb of (fig. 68), 199, 200 Albuquerque, Afonso de, 12, 309, 312 shaffron of Muhammad Qutb Shah wood calligraphic roundel from (fig. 75),
‘Abdullah Sururi (calligrapher), 38 Albuquerque, Matias de: casket of (fig. 56), 145, (cat. 121), 229, 229 218, 218
Abdul Latif (calligrapher), 16 146, 313 vambrace (cat. 123), 185, 231, 231 Bagh Rauza, Ahmadnagar: tomb of Ahmad
Abdul Majid II (Ottoman caliph), 340 ‘Ali (calligrapher), 134 Asaf Jah IV (nizam of Hyderabad), 54 Nizam Shah Bahri in, 42 – 43, 60; (fig. 28),
Abdul Rashid (calligrapher), 120 ‘Ali (Muhammad’s son-in-law). See ‘Ali ibn Abi Asaf Jahi dynasty, 10, 26, 282, 332, 335 – 43. See 45, 46
Abraham (biblical patriarch), 93, 144 Talib also Hyderabad; entry below Baha’ al-Din al-‘Amili (author)
abri (paper marbling), 16, 157 – 69 ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I (ruler of Bijapur), 6, 7, 79, 93, 145 Asaf Jahi dynasty, jewelry of, 330, 332 Nan va Halva (Bread and Sweets, cat. 170),
Ascetic Riding a Nag (cats. 73 – 74), 162 – 63, portraits of: (cat. 24), 88, 89, 90; (fig. 46), bazuband (upper armband) or guluband 294, 294
162 – 64 88, 88, 90 (choker necklace) (cat. 201), 330, 331, Nan va Panir (Bread and Cheese), 294
Dervish Seated in Contemplation (cat. 79), see also Nujum al-‘Ulum 332 Shir va Shikar (Milk and Sugar), 294
168, 168 ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (ruler of Bijapur), 81 – 82, 130, crescent-shaped pearl and diamond Bahadur (ruler of Gujurat), 310
Elephant Trampling a Horse (cat. 78), 140, 142 – 43, 227, 260, 312 earrings (cat. 207), 330, 332, 333 Bahmani sultanate, 4 – 7, 11, 29 – 30, 45, 49, 51, 54,
167, 167 portraits of (cats. 66 – 67), 148 – 49, 148 – 50, diamond earrings and pearl supports 173, 198, 309
folio from calligraphy album with marbled 151 (cat. 204), 330, 332, 333 arts of, 31, 32 – 41, 60, 87, 222
borders (cat. 77), 166, 166 ‘Ali al-Haravi (calligrapher), 71 diamond stud earrings (cat. 206), 330, 333 tombs of, 30, 33, 175, 181
Lady Carrying a Peacock (cat. 80), 158, ‘Ali Azizallah Tabataba’i (poet): Burhan-i square diamond pendant on pearl necklace Bahram Sofrakesh (painter), 249
169, 169 Ma’athir, 47 (cat. 202), 330, 331, 332 Two Lovers, 23, 23
Man with Captive Lion (cat. 76), 164, 165, ‘Ali Barid Shah (ruler of Bidar), 175 string of pearls (cat. 203), 330, 331, 332 Balfour, Ian, 2nd Baron Balfour of Inchrye, 327
165, 168 tomb of (fig. 59), 174, 175 – 76 two sarpeches (turban ornaments) for a Barid Shahi dynasty, 5, 8, 173, 175 – 77, 180, 309. See
Marbled Begum (cat. 75), 164, 164, 165, 168 ‘Ali bin Yusuf ‘Adil Khan (exiled prince of boy (cat. 205), 330, 332, 333 also Bidar
marbled papers with Mandu accession Bijapur), 310 Asar Mahal, Bijapur, 40, 80, 81 Bari Sahib (daughter of Muhammad Qutb Shah),
note (cat. 72), 156, 157, 160 – 61, 160 – 61 ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (Muhammad’s son-in-law), carpets in, 256, 269 120, 260
Abu Bakr (first Muslim caliph), 342 88, 134, 214, 216, 220, 255, 259, 262, 263, 264, fish-shaped waterspout from (cat. 64), manuscript from library of (cat. 120), 84,
Abu’l-Fazl (historian), 60 266, 291, 337 146 – 47, 146 – 47 227 – 28, 227 – 28
Abu’l Hasan (painter), 74 ‘Ali ibn Naqi al-Husaini Damghani (calligrapher), frescoes of flowering vases in (fig. 51), basins
Abu’l Hasan Qadiri, Shah (Sufi saint), 117 16 120, 122 bidri (cat. 95), 193, 193
Abu’l Hasan Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda), 200 Qasida manuscript (cat. 61), 142 – 43, ascetics, portraits of bronze (cat. 126), 233, 233
portrait of (cat. 141), 196, 245, 245 142 – 43 Ascetic Riding a Nag (cats. 73 – 74), 162 – 63, Bassein (now Vasai), 310
‘Adil Shahi dynasty, 5 – 6, 12, 16, 79 – 82, 84, 151, ‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah II (nizam of Hyderabad), 162 – 64 Batavia (now Jakarta), Indonesia, 319
154, 158, 168, 204, 309. See also Bijapur, 336 – 38 Ascetic Visited by a Yogini (cat. 44), 20, Baybars Bridge (Jisr Jindas), Palestine, 91
dynastic painting of (cat. 71), 20, 82, Hunting Party of (fig. 95), 337, 338 118 – 19, 119 A Beauty at a Window with a Bird (fig. 87),
154, 155 ‘Ali Naqi (painter), 249 Dervish Receiving a Visitor (cat. 38, fig. 15), 296, 296
Adoni (fortified city), 93, 287 ‘Ali Quli Jabaddar (painter), 249 21, 22, 109, 110 – 11, 112, 115, 122, 124, beggars’ bowls. See bowls, beggars’
African Courtier (cat. 129), 231, 236 – 37, 237 ‘Ali Riza (painter), 20, 112, 114 214, 238 Begum Hur: abri portrait of (cat. 75), 164, 164,
Africans, 11, 73. See also entry above; Fath Khan; Seated Devotee, 122 Dervish Seated in Contemplation (cat. 79), 165, 168
Ikhlas Khan; Malik ‘Ambar; Portrait of a Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in Procession 168, 168 Bejeweled Maiden with a Parakeet (cat. 172),
Ruler or Musician (cat. 47), 124, 125 in manuscripts, 168, 297, 298 296, 296
Aftabi (poet), 56. See also Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding an see also yoginis (female ascetics), Berar, 3, 5, 7, 8, 45, 47, 51 – 54, 198, 281, 309,
Agra, 9, 102, 281, 285, 295, 312, 327 Elephant under a Canopy (fig. 52), portraits of 325, 332
“Agra” diamond (cat. 197), 325, 327, 327, 328 124, 124 Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, betel nut (pan), 65, 128, 129, 179, 295, 295
Ahmadnagar, 3, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 45 – 49, 79, 80, 198, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Venerates a University of Oxford, 124, 128, 132, 136, 138, bidri box for (cat. 84), 184, 184 – 85
200, 237, 281 – 82, 301, 309, 310, 325 Sufi Saint (cat. 46), 105, 115, 122, 123, 139, 148, 167, 220, 234, 288 Bhagmati, 210, 234, 234 – 35
arts of, 18, 19, 20 – 21, 25, 55 – 75, 90, 91, 176, 124, 128 Ashraf Mazandarani (poet), 163 Bharat Itihas Sanshodhak Mandal, Pune, 56
210, 288, 301, 325 Amber Palace, textile collection at, 26, 286, 304 Ashtur: Bahmani tombs at, 30, 33, 175 Bhogphal, by Qureshi, 176
Ahmad Nizam Shah Bahri (ruler of panel from tent lining with flower al-Asma’i (lexicographer), 38 Bibi ka Maqbara (Queen’s Tomb), Aurangabad
Ahmadnagar), 5, 45, 91 (cat. 181), 188, 304, 305 Atash Khan (elephant), 97, 100, 101 – 2, 102, (fig. 4), 9, 9
tomb of, Bagh Rauza, Ahmadnagar, 42 – 43, rumals (cats. 160 – 62), 269, 270, 271 – 73, 120, 167 door of (fig. 81), 280, 285 – 86, 293, 299
60; (fig. 28), 45, 46 271 – 73, 277, 286 Atatürk, Kemal (first president of Turkey), 340 floral motif, exterior, 279
362 Index
Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris, 65 book covers, pair of (cat. 58), 138, 138 zoomorphic, 219 – 20, 219 – 21 Collaert, Adriaen: Avium Vivae Icones (Birds)
Bidar, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 29 – 30, 45, 117, 173 – 93, 198, Borges (physician), 310 see also entries for specific folios and (fig. 13), 21, 22
224, 309 Boughton House, Kettering, England, 257 manuscripts; entry below influence of (figs. 14 – 15), 21, 22, 23, 109,
arts of, 16, 40, 41, 134, 175 – 77 bowls calligraphy albums, folios from 238
see also bidri ware epigraphic: (cat. 153), 262, 262; (cat. 158), (cat. 104), 16, 100, 199, 210 – 11, 210 – 11 Conti, Nicolò de’, 309
Bidar Fort, 30, 175 266, 266 with marbled (abri) borders (cat. 77), Convento da Graça monastery, Lisbon, 146
Sharza and Gumbad Gates of, 1 – 2 in shape of ten-pointed star (cat. 5), 40, 40 166, 166 Coromandel Coast, 179, 198, 269, 311, 318,
Solah Khamba (Sixteen Columns) mosque see also mortars; vessels cannons 319 – 20
at, 40 bowls, beggars’ (kashkuls), 41, 224, 259 inlaid with arabesque designs, Kalyana Coutinho, Gonçalo Vaz, 310
see also Rangin Mahal (cat. 156), 264, 264 Fort (fig. 62), 177, 177 Couto, Diogo do, 310
bidri ware, 5, 26, 134, 176 – 77, 179 – 93, 304 (cat. 157), 259 – 60, 264, 265 inscribed, Mehrangarh Fort, 293 Coutre, Jacques de, 117, 310
basin (sailabchi) (cat. 95), 193, 193 as illustrated (cat. 38), 109, 110 – 11 Malik-i Maidan, Bijapur Fort (fig. 47), 18, Crookes, Sir William, 327
box with sloping walls (cat. 84), 184, boxes 60, 91, 92 cupbearer, position of, 129. See also Saqinama
184 – 85 cylindrical (fig. 26), 34, 34 carpets cups
carpet weight (mir-i farsh) with trellis ivory panel from (fig. 79), 254, 254 with lattice pattern (cat. 183), 26, 307, 307 incantation cup and tray (cat. 152), 261,
pattern (cat. 85), 185, 185 lidded, with running animals (cat. 103), multiple-niche prayer carpet (cat. 151), 26, 261 – 62, 263
ewer (aftaba) (cat. 83), 182, 183, 183 – 84 209, 209 256 – 57, 256 – 57, 307 miniature garnet cup with dragon-head
ewer, pear-shaped, with flowering trees writing, clad in gilt and silver (cat. 176), 26, carpet weights (mir-i farsh) handles (cat. 118), 224, 224 – 25
(cat. 82), 182, 182, 184 299 – 300, 300 bidri, with trellis pattern (cat. 85), 185, 185 cut-paper stencils, as used in abri, 157, 158,
huqqa base with irises (cat. 90), 186, boxes, lacquered, for pens (qalamdans) with domed profiles (cat. 69), 152, 152 162, 162, 165, 165, 167 – 69, 167 – 69. See also
187, 188 (cat. 145), 250, 251 Carré, Barthélemy (priest / emissary), 246 – 47 découpage
huqqa base with lotuses emerging from (cat. 146), 250, 251 caskets Cuttack (Orissa), 314
pond (cat. 86), 15, 186, 186, 188 Brahmins, 11 – 12 carved panels from (cat. 191, fig. 92),
huqqa base with meandering riverside brazier (cat. 6), 41, 41 317 – 18, 317 – 18 D
landscape (cat. 87), 186, 187, 188 British, 54, 81, 163 – 64, 281, 311, 312, 329 – 30, filigree, with barrel top (cat. 185), 26, 313,
huqqa base with poppies against pointillist 335 – 41 313 – 14 Dabhol, 12, 310
ground (cat. 89), 186, 187, 188 rebellion (1857) against, 281, 328, 339 filigree, with sliding top (cat. 184), 26, 313, daggers
huqqa base with tall flowers in arches, and British East India Company, 311, 312, 328 – 29, 338 313 – 14 crutch, in form of serpentine vine
associated ring (cat. 88), 186, 187, 188 British Library, London, 68, 97, 114, 142, 203 gold filigree (fig. 56), 145, 146, 313 (cat. 124), 232, 232
incense burner (dhupdan), tomb-shaped British Museum, London, 19 lacquered, with painted scenes (cat. 144), in form of bird holding leaf (cat. 125),
(cat. 81), 181, 181 Brooklyn Museum, New York, 274 250, 250 232, 232
tray with flowering plants (cat. 92), 172, Bruegel, Pieter, the Elder: The Triumph of Catherine of Braganza (consort of Charles II), kard, 315; with jade hilt (cat. 177), 301, 301
188, 190, 190 Death, 163 314 khawah, 167, 167
tray with flowering plants in arches Bruijn, Cornelis de, 312 cenotaph cover with Qur’anic calligraphy punch (katar), 80, 154, 154
radiating from central medallion Brunswick, Charles II, Duke of, 327 (fragment of ), Turkey (fig. 9), 18, 18 – 19 see also entry below; weaponry
(cat. 93), 188, 190, 191 Brunswick-Lüneburg, Frederick William, Duke Central Asia, immigrants from / influences of, daggers with zoomorphic hilts, 60
tray with lotuses and river (cat. 91), 188, of, 327 3 – 4, 10, 11, 18 – 19, 108, 244, 281. See also Iran, (cat. 25), 79, 90, 90, 276
189, 190, 192 Buddha, 86, 319 and entry following; Turkey; Turkmen people, (cat. 63), 15, 145, 145 – 46, 276
tray with petals (cat. 94), 188, 190, 192, 192 Buddhism, 186, 244, 247, 299 arts / artistic influence of as illustrated (cat. 24, fig. 46), 88, 88 – 89
Bijapur, 3, 5 – 6, 7, 8 – 9, 10 – 12, 19, 26, 45, 73, Bukhara, Uzbekistan, 4, 203, 340 Chalukya dynasty (Kalyana), 6, 13 Dagh Dihlavi (poet), 339
79 – 169, 179, 224, 227 – 28, 237, 281, 282 – 83, Burhan al-Din Gharib, 49 columns from era of, Citadel, Bijapur Dakhni Urdu (language), 6, 120, 143, 176, 340
309 – 10, 312, 325 Burhan ‘Imad Shah (ruler of Berar), 51 (fig. 41), 6, 80, 81 and poetry by Muhammad Quli Qutb
arts of, 15 – 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 40, 60, Burhan Nizam Shah I (ruler of Ahmadnagar), Chanchal (elephant), 100, 101 – 2 Shah, 10, 199, 210 – 11
84 – 154, 176 – 77, 186, 198, 204, 210, 214, 5, 60 Chandayana style of painting, 56 Damodara Mishra: Sangita Darpana (Mirror on
231, 269, 288, 298, 318 Burhan Nizam Shah II (ruler of Ahmadnagar), Chand Bibi (wife of ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah I), 169 Music), 61
Bijapur Archaeological Museum, Gol Gumbaz, 25, 47 – 48, 65, 68, 71 Chand Muhammad. See Kamal Muhammad and Damri Masjid, Ahmadnagar (fig. 29), 45, 47
19, 19, 124, 134, 256, 259 Shah Diamond of (fig. 31), 25, 48, 49 Chand Muhammad Dancing Girl (cat. 147), 252, 253
Bijapur Fort: Malik-i Maidan cannon (fig. 47), Burhanpur, 199, 209, 273, 281 – 82, 285, 286, Chand Sultan (wife of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II), 120 Danish East India Company, 12 – 13, 311
18, 60, 91, 92 287, 312 Chardin, Jean, 325 Dar al-Shifa Hospital, Hyderabad, 223
Bikaner (Rajput court), 61, 93, 130, 287, 288 textiles of, 8, 19, 26, 282, 286, 304, 305 – 6, Charles II (king of England), 12, 314 Dara Shikoh (Mughal prince; brother of
Bikaner Painter, 20 306 diamond bodkin of, as gift to Nell Gwynne Aurangzeb), 283, 288
Procession of Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Bussy, Charles de, 312 (cat. 199), 328 – 29, 329 Darbar of Cornelis van den Bogaerde (cat. 194),
(cat. 28), 93, 95, 96, 130, 287 Bustan (The Orchard, by Sa’di), 56, 319 as illustrated, 294, 294 322, 322 – 23
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (cat. 27), Butler, A. J., 128 Charlotte, Queen (consort of George III), 329 – 30 Darbar of Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (cat. 67), 130,
93, 94 Butler Ewer (cat. 50), 128, 128 Charminar (Four Towers), Hyderabad (fig. 3), 8, 149, 149
Bilqis Begum (wife of Shah Shuja‘): tomb of, 8; (fig. 66), 198, 198, 300 Darbar of Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah (cat. 119),
Burhanpur (fig. 18), 24, 26, 285, 304 Chaul, 12, 45, 310 130, 225, 225 – 26, 227, 245
Birds in a Silver River (cat. 167), 290, 290 – 91 Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, 210 Darya ‘Imad Shah (ruler of Berar), 51
C
Bodleian Library, University of Oxford, 109 Trustees of, 74, 84, 98, 202, 210, 249 Daulatabad, 3, 7, 29, 60, 200, 310
Bodleian Painter, 20, 21, 130 Calico Museum of Textiles, Ahmedabad, 274 Chhoti Masjid (Small Mosque), Gavilgarh, 51 Daulatabad Fort, 29, 45, 49, 282
Dervish Receiving a Visitor (cat. 38, fig. 15), calligraphers. See also individual calligraphers Chihil Sutun palace, Isfahan, 80, 198, 249 stone steps of (fig. 39), 59, 60
21, 22, 109, 110 – 11, 112, 115, 122, 124, and scribes by name China, art / artistic influence of, 19, 21 David Collection, Copenhagen, 90, 259, 264
214, 238 calligraphy, 16, 32, 294 ceramic vases (fig. 10), 19, 19, 98 Deccan Studies (journal), 343
A Mullah (cat. 41), 114, 115 – 16, 115 – 17 and abri, 157, 158, 166, 166 coverlet (fig. 11), 19, 98 découpage, 16, 80, 157
Stout Courtier (cat. 40), 114, 114 – 15 on architecture, 45, 52, 54, 147, 147, 214, Cholmley, Nathaniel, 325 album page with cut-paper decoration
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Holding 214, 218, 218 Chowmahalla (Four Halls) Palace, Hyderabad (fig. 54), 134, 134
Castanets (cat. 39), 112, 113, 127, 231 découpé (cat. 55), 132, 132, 134 (fig. 94), 334, 338, 341, 343 album page with découpé calligraphy
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Standing devanagari, 34, 93, 129, 181, 293 Christ Child as the Bom Pastor (Good Shepherd) (cat. 55), 132, 132, 134
(cat. 42), 114, 115, 117 divani, 160, 161 (cat. 192), 318 – 19, 319 album page with découpé vase, insects,
Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (cat. 53), on inscribed sacred vessels, 16, 259 – 66, Christianity, 6, 12, 74, 200, 310, 312, 318 – 19 and birds (cat. 54), 132, 132 – 33, 134
80, 131, 131 261 – 67 Church of Saint Francis of Assisi, Goa (fig. 91), 308 calligraphic (cat. 104), 16, 210 – 11, 210 – 11
Bogaerde, Cornelis van den naskhi, 16, 302 Cincinnati Art Museum, 296 Delhi (city), 4, 281, 288, 312, 327, 335, 336, 337,
Darbar of (cat. 194), 322, 322 – 23 nasta‘liq, 56, 93, 108, 144, 157, 206, 207, Cleveland Museum of Art, 120 338, 339
Procession of (cat. 195), 322 – 23, 323 298 – 99, 302 Clive, Robert, 1st Baron Clive, 329 – 30 Delhi (sultanate), 3 – 4, 11, 29, 335
Bombay (now Mumbai), 12, 310, 311, 332 in saz drawing (cat. 57), 136, 136 – 37 Cochin, 323 Dervish Receiving a Visitor (cat. 38, fig. 15), 21,
Bombay Painter, 20, 130, 149, 151 on shield (cat. 150), 255, 255 Cockson, Thomas, 164 22, 109, 110 – 11, 112, 115, 122, 124, 214, 238
Darbar of Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II (cat. 67), thuluth, 16, 38, 147, 205, 208, 215, 222, 259, coins, Bahmani and Vijayanagara empires Dervish Seated in Contemplation (cat. 79),
130, 149, 149 261, 298, 302 (cat. 1), 34, 35 168, 168
Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II Slays a Tiger at tombs, 16, 17 – 18, 19, 29, 30, 33, 80, 82, coins / coinage, 5, 36, 120, 148, 198 Destremau, Antoine, 312
(cat. 66), 130, 148, 148, 150 143, 144 Dhanasri Ragini: A Woman Drawing a Portrait
on a Tablet (cat. 12), 60, 61 – 62, 63
Index 363
diamond pendants Farah Bakhsh Bagh (Pleasure-Bestowing stone vessel (fig. 76), 222, 223 weaponry and, 90, 91, 145, 232, 314
in amulet case form (cat. 139), 244, 244 Garden), Ahmadnagar, 47, 54 tombs (fig. 63), 181 see also Saraswati; Vishnu
pendeloque (cat. 140), 244, 244 pavilion (fig. 30), 47, 48 Goa, 12, 79, 81, 146, 154, 186, 301, 309 – 11, 312, Hira Masjid, Golconda, 300
square, in amulet case form (cat. 202), Farid al-Din ‘Attar: Mantiq al-Tair (Conference 319, 325, 341 House of Bijapur (cat. 71), 20, 82, 154, 155
330, 331, 332 of the Birds), 250 arts associated with, 313 – 19, 313 – 19 Howard, Charles, 2nd Baron Howard of
diamond pendants, in à-jour frames, 25, 241 – 43, Farrukh Beg (painter), 20, 100, 105 Church of Saint Francis of Assisi (fig. 91), Effingham and 1st Earl of Nottingham, 163 – 64
268, 274, 326 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Hawking 308 Hoysala dynasty, Dorasamudra, 18, 29
floral, with drooping petals (cat. 137), 25, (fig. 5), 16, 102 filigree caskets from: (cats. 184 – 85), 26, Hunting Party of Nizam ‘Ali Khan (fig. 95), 337, 338
242, 243 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Playing the 313, 313 – 14; (fig. 56), 145, 146, 313 huqqas (water pipes), 180, 186, 188, 338
floral, in form of eight-pointed star Tambur (cat. 33), 104, 105 rock-crystal objects / knives from, 301; as illustrated, 140, 149, 149, 180, 322, 323
(cat. 138), 25, 242, 243 see also Farrukh Husain (cat. 186), 314, 314 – 15 huqqas, bases for (bidri, cats. 86 – 90), 15, 179,
floral, with upswept petals (cat. 136), 25, Farrukh Fal (Omen of Fortune; Mughal officer), Goa stones, 316 – 17 186, 186 – 87, 188
242, 243 295, 295 stone with case and stand (cat. 190), Husain Nizam Shah I (ruler of Ahmadnagar), 45, 47
octagonal rosette (cat. 135), 25, 242, 243 Farrukh Husain (later Farrukh Beg; painter), 15, 316 – 17, 317 equestrian portrait of (cat. 7), 55, 55 – 56
quatrefoil (cat. 134), 25, 241, 241 20, 102, 105, 108, 112, 120 stone and container (cat. 189), 316, 316 – 17 see also Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi
diamonds, 325 – 33 Portrait of an Elephant, Either Atash Khan Golconda, 3, 5, 6 – 9, 10 – 11, 19, 100, 130, 142, Husain Nizam Shah III (ruler of Ahmadnagar),
“Agra” (cat. 197), 325, 327, 327, 328 or Chanchal (fig. 50), 102, 102, 117 197 – 276, 281, 282 – 83, 285, 309, 310 – 11, 312, 49, 301
“Arcot II” (cat. 200), 329 – 30, 330 Royal Horse and Groom (cat. 32), 102, 336 Hydari, Sir Akbar, 288
Hope, 328, 329 103, 117 arts of, 16, 21 – 23, 88, 108, 132, 134, 136, Hyderabad, 8, 10, 19, 198, 205, 210 – 11, 215, 223,
“Idol’s Eye” (cat. 198), 325, 328, 328 Saraswati Plays on a Vina (fig. 49), 100, 158, 169, 202 – 57, 288, 294, 298, 300, 248, 274, 283, 307, 312, 319, 322
Koh-i-Noor, 325 100, 105 303, 324 arts of, 16, 26, 40, 41, 140, 169, 193, 291, 298
Shah Jahan (cat. 133), 25, 240, 240 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding the diamonds / diamond mines of, 7, 25, 197, see also Asaf Jahi dynasty and entry following
see also Asaf Jahi dynasty, jewelry of; jewelry Elephant Atash Khan (cat. 31), 15, 100, 200, 240, 325 – 32
Dilras Banu Begam (wife of Aurangzeb), 9, 285. 101, 124 inscribed sacred vessels of, 259 – 67
See also Bibi ka Maqbara Faruqi dynasty, 8, 285. See also Khandesh kalamkaris of, 135, 200, 269 – 76, 320 I
Divan-i-Anvari (abri manuscript), 157 Fathallah ‘Imad al-Mulk (ruler of Berar), 5, 51, 54 Golconda Fort, 6, 7, 91, 198, 200
Divan of Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah: (fig. 69), Fath Khan (son of Malik ‘Ambar), 49, 73 animals in combat, on gates of: (fig. 70), Ibn al-Manzur (lexicographer), 38
199, 201; (fig. 72), 158, 211 portrait of (fig. 40), 73, 73 206, 206; (fig. 89), 206, 303, 304 Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah I (ruler of Bijapur), 6, 11,
Dublin Painter, 20 Fatima (Muhammad’s daughter), 259, 264 citadel and outer walls of (fig. 65), 197 231, 325
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II with a Firdausi, Abu’l Qasim (poet), 108. See also A Golconda Prince (cat. 132), 21, 238, 239, 240 Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (ruler of Bijapur), 10, 15, 16,
Consort in a Landscape (fig. 48), 96, 96 Shahnama Gol Gumbaz, Bijapur: tomb of Muhammad ‘Adil 19, 21, 56, 79 – 80, 81, 114 – 15, 131, 139, 144, 147,
Yogini with a Mynah Bird (cat. 30, fig. 12), Firishta (historian), 32, 97 Shah (fig. 43), 80, 82, 147. See also Bijapur 154, 312, 325
20, 21, 98, 99, 100, 119 Firuzabad, 4 Archaeological Museum elephant of, 97, 100, 101 – 2, 102, 120, 167
Dürer, Albrecht, 163 Firuz Shah Bahmani, 4, 29 Good Shepherd motif, 315, 318 – 19, 319 and Sufis / Sufism, 109, 115, 117, 122, 154
Dutch, 12, 81, 257, 274, 311, 312 tomb of, Gulbarga (fig. 22), 29, 31 Graff, Laurence, 328 see also Ibrahim Rauza; Kitab-i Nauras;
Dutch East India Company, 12, 200, 311 fish-shaped waterspout, Asar Mahal, Bijapur Gujarat, 51, 60, 112, 131, 179, 310, 318 entry below
arts associated with, 319 – 24, 320 – 24 (cat. 64), 146 – 47, 146 – 47 Gulbarga, 4, 29 – 30, 181, 222 Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (ruler of Bijapur), portraits
factories of (fig. 93), 319, 320, 321 fish standard (mahi-maratib, cat. 180), 129, 303, Gulbarga Fort, 29 of, 74, 108, 109, 117, 122
303 – 4, 312 Eastern Gate (fig. 21), 30 with consort in landscape (fig. 48), 96, 96
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, 163 Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Flower Garden of Love, by first known (cat. 27), 93, 94
A Floral Fantasy (cat. 56), 134, 134 – 35 Mullah Nusrati), manuscript of (cats. 173 – 74), hawking (fig. 5), 16, 102
E
A Floral Fantasy of Birds and Animals (fig. 55), 15, 81 – 82, 297 – 98 holding castanets (cat. 39), 112, 113, 127, 231
Efsanci Mehmed (découpage artist), 134 135, 135 “Fairies Descend to Manohar’s Palace” playing tambur (cat. 33), 104, 105
elephants folio from calligraphy album with marbled (abri) (cat. 173), 297, 298 in procession (cat. 28), 93, 95, 96, 130, 287
in combat, 88, 90, 167, 167, 206, 206, 254 borders (cat. 77), 166, 166 “Manohar Meets a Dervish in the Forest” in procession (cat. 47), 124, 125
with riders, 14, 15, 66, 67, 68, 100, 101, 124, folios from calligraphy album (cat. 104), 16, 100, (cat. 174), 297, 298 riding elephant Atash Khan (cat. 31), 15,
124, 139, 139 – 40 199, 210 – 11, 210 – 11 Gwynne, Eleanor “Nell,” 328 – 29 100, 101, 124
in zoomorphic objects, 37, 37, 88, 90, 248 folios from a manuscript of Jaswant Singh of riding elephant under canopy (fig. 52),
see also Atash Khan; Chanchal Jodhpur’s Siddantha-sara, Siddantha-bodha, 124, 124
elephant stables, Vijayanagara (fig. 24), 31, 32 and Aporaksha-siddantha (cat. 169), 278, 286, standing (cat. 42), 114, 115, 117
H
Elephant Trampling a Horse (cat. 78), 167, 167 292 – 93, 292 – 93 taking siesta (cat. 43), 118, 118 – 19, 128
Elichpur (now Achalpur), 5 Fortaleza Palace, Goa, 313 Habshis, 11, 80 venerating Sufi saint (cat. 46), 105, 115, 122,
Elichpur Fort, 51 forts. See individual forts by name Hafiz (poet) 123, 124, 128
gate of (fig. 36), 52, 54 Fraser, William, 339 as illustrated (cat. 79), 168, 168 Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Presenting a Necklace, 122
Elizabeth I (queen of England), 12 Free Library of Philadelphia, Rare Book Saqinama (Book of the Cupbearer), 93 Ibrahim Khan (painter), 140
Embassy of Johannes Bacherus en route to the Department, John Frederick Lewis Collection, Haidar ‘Ali (painter), 140 Ibrahimnama (The Story of Ibrahim, by ‘Abdul
Court of Aurangzeb (cat. 196), 324, 324 70, 169 Haidar Zehni (poet), 120 of Bijapur), 143
Esra, Princess (former wife of Mukarram Jah), French East India Company, 311 – 12 Hajji ‘Abdullah (calligrapher), 210 Ibrahim Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda), 7, 198,
343 Futuh al-Haramayn (Description of the Holy Hallum, Edward Strutt, 328 202, 204, 205, 206, 227
Europeans, 12 – 13, 309 – 24 Cities, by Muhi al-din Lari), manuscript of Harihararaya II (ruler of Vijayanagara), 34 tomb of, Golconda: ceiling, 194 – 95
artistic influence of, 21 – 23, 26, 66, 81, (cat. 70), 152, 153 Hasan and Husain (Muhammad’s grandsons), Ibrahim Rauza (tomb of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II),
109, 158, 163 – 64, 200, 238, 274, 332, “The ‘Asi Mountains” (cat. 70b), 153 180 Bijapur, 80, 93, 144
338 – 39, 340 “Ma’lla Cemetery” (cat. 70a), 153 mourning period for (Muharram), 198, pierced calligraphy on jali screens (fig. 42),
see also British, and entry following; 215, 336 80, 82, 143
Danish East India Company; Dutch, Hasan-i Dihlavi (poet), 71 stone calligraphy (fig. 8), 16, 18, 19
and entry following; French East India Hasan Manju Khalji (author), 97 “Idol’s Eye” diamond (cat. 198), 325, 328, 328
G
Company; Portuguese Hashim (painter), 74 Ikhlas Khan (prime minister of Bijapur), 73,
ewers Gagan Mahal, Bidar, 176 Hasht Bihisht Bagh (Eight Paradises Garden), 80, 140
bidri (cats. 82 – 83), 182 – 83, 182 – 84, 193 Gajapati dynasty, Orissa, 90 Ahmadnagar, 47, 54 with Muhammad ‘Adil Shah, riding an
with dragon heads (Butler Ewer, cat. 50), Gama, Vasco da, 12, 309 Hauz Katora Bagh, Elichpur, 54 elephant (cat. 59), 139, 139 – 40
128, 128 Gandhara: Bodhisattva statues in, 244 octagonal pavilion of (fig. 37), 52, 54 Ikhlas Khan with a Petition (cat. 60), 73, 140, 141
footed, with elephant-headed spout and Gandhi, Indira, 341 Havart, Daniel, 319 illumination, 38, 38, 88, 204
bird-shaped terminals (cat. 3), 37, 37 Gauri Ragini: A Maiden Picking Blossoms from a Hayat Bakshi Begum (mother of ‘Abdullah Qutb Divan frontispiece (fig. 69), 199, 201
see also vessels Tree (cat. 11), 60, 61, 62, 63 Shah), 200, 238 in form of vase (cat. 57), 136, 136 – 37
Gavilgarh Fort (fig. 33), 50, 51 Heda, Cornelis Claesz. (painter), 81, 312 Kitab-i Nauras manuscript (cat. 45), 120,
Genghis Khan, 281 Herat, Afghanistan, 4, 157, 212 121, 122
F George III (king of England), 329 Hinduism, 4, 7, 30 – 31, 66, 80, 96, 117, 120, 154, page of illumination in gold (cat. 105), 16,
Gesu Daraz, Sayyid Muhammad Husaini, 3 – 4, 204, 215, 234, 247, 281, 294, 299, 340 212, 212
Faizi (Abu’l-Faiz ibn Mubarak; poet), 310 29, 115, 122 iconography / motifs of, 15, 34, 74, 86, 90, Qasida manuscript (cat. 61), 142 – 43,
Falaknuma Palace, Hyderabad, 340, 343 shrine of, Gulbarga, 3 91, 145, 186, 232, 245, 314 142 – 43
364 Index
Qur’ans: (cat. 98), 204 – 5, 205; (cat. 178), diamond pendants, 244, 244, 330, 331, 332 L Masnavi-yi Ma’nawi (Spiritual Masnavi, by
302, 302 diamond pendants in à-jour frames Rumi), 212
Lady Carrying a Peacock (cat. 80), 158, 169, 169
Zakhira-yi Khwarazmshahi frontispiece (cats. 134 – 38), 25, 241, 241 – 42, 243, “Master of the Borders,” 190
Lahore, 157, 281, 312
(cat. 96), 136, 202, 202 – 3, 204 268, 274, 326 Masulipatnam, 12, 200, 311, 319, 324
Lal Bagh (Ruby Garden), Bidar (fig. 27), 40, 40
‘Imad Shahi dynasty, 5, 8, 51, 54, 309. See also Berar ring with lobed bezel and birds (cat. 188), Maulana Azad National Urdu University,
Levinson, Harry, 328
incense burners 316, 316 Hyderabad, 343
lions / lion motif
as illustrated, 124, 125 see also diamonds Mehrangarh Fort: inscribed cannons at, 293
Ascetic Visited by a Yogini (cat. 44),
octagonal shrine-shaped (cat. 49), 127, 127 Jodhpur (Rajput court), 286, 287. See also The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 26, 32, 90,
119, 119
peacock-shaped (cat. 100), 206, 207 Jaswant Singh 162, 164, 216, 263, 274, 321, 335
hilt of gauntlet sword (pata, cat. 26),
tomb-shaped (cat. 81), 181, 181 Junnar, 5, 45, 299 Mewar (Rajput court), 286, 287
91 – 92, 91 – 92
vessels used as, 40, 222; (cat. 51), 128, 128 Miftah al-Fuzala (Mandu manuscript), 56
Man with Captive Lion (cat. 76), 165,
Indalwai mine, 200 Mihr Chand (painter), 120
165, 168
Indian independence movement, 340 – 41 K Mihtar-i Masjid, Bijapur, 80
palace gateway, Firuzabad, 4
Indian rebellion (1857), 281, 328, 339 mines, 325, 326
Kailashnatha temple, Ellora, 90 steel object, possibly door knocker or
Indictor collection: beggar’s bowl (cat. 157), in Golconda region, 7, 197, 200, 240, 325,
Kakatiya dynasty, 8, 11, 29, 36, 198, 325. See also catch (cat. 101), 206 – 7, 207
259 – 60, 264, 265 327, 328, 329
Warangal stone vessel, shrine of Gesu Daraz,
inscribed panel (cat. 65), 147, 147 in Zawar, 179
kalamkaris (painted / dyed textiles), 26, 135, 149, Gulbarga (fig. 76), 222, 223
inscribed sacred vessels, 16, 259 – 67 Mir ‘Alam (prime minister of Hyderabad),
158, 200, 269 – 76, 311, 320 Takht Mahal, Bidar (fig. 23), 30, 32
beggar’s bowl (cat. 156), 264, 264 338 – 39
hanging (cat. 163), 25, 241, 268, 269, 274, zoomorphic dagger (cat. 24), 88, 89
beggar’s bowl (cat. 157), 259 – 60, 264, 265 Mir ‘Ali (calligrapher), 157
274 – 75 see also yali (horned lion)
dish (cat. 154), 263, 263 Mir Jumla (statesman / general), 311
hanging (cat. 164), 200, 269, 274, 274 – 75, lotus motif, 40, 60, 62, 86, 145, 214, 233, 261, 294
dish (cat. 155), 258, 263, 263 Mir Taqi (painter), 249
319 on bidri ware, 186, 186, 188, 189, 190, 192
epigraphic bowl (cat. 153), 262, 266 Miyan Chand, 140
panel from tent hanging (cat. 165), 15, 254, on inscribed vessels, 40, 40, 261, 261
epigraphic bowl (cat. 158), 266, 266 Moazzam Jah (son of Osman ‘Ali Khan), 340
269, 276, 276 on jewelry, 242, 243, 316, 316
incantation cup and tray (cat. 152), 261, Moens, Adriaan, 323
panel from tent lining with flower on palanquin finials, 124, 246 – 48, 246 – 48,
261 – 62, 263 mortars
(cat. 181), 188, 304, 305 294
spouted vessel with Qur’anic verses with accompanying pestle, inscribed
qanat (tent hanging) with five niche panels in Yogini with a Mynah Bird, 98, 99, 186
and names of Shi‘a imams (cat. 159), hardstone (cat. 115), 222, 222 – 23
(fig. 80), 276, 276 Louis XIV (king of France), 329
266, 267 with cusped sides (cat. 117), 40, 222, 223
Reception of a Dutch Ambassador Lucknow, 112, 179, 212, 287, 337, 339, 343
Iram Manzil palace, Hyderabad, 340 with six sides (cat. 116), 222, 222
Iran, 4, 18, 21, 29, 108, 197 – 98, 225, 250 (cat. 193), 319 – 21, 320 – 21 Moti Khan (musical instrument), 97, 104, 105,
arts / artistic influence of, 41, 56, 66, 128, rumals (cats. 160 – 62), 269, 270, 271 – 73, 120
135, 152, 157, 168, 202, 203 – 4, 207, 220, 271 – 73, 277, 286 M Mughals, 3, 7, 8 – 10, 11, 12, 186, 253, 270, 281 – 307
269, 270, 299 Kalimullah Shah Bahmani (ruler of Bidar), 173 artistic influence of, 15, 19, 21, 23, 26, 40,
Ma’ali Mian (son of Aristu Jah), 338
see also Persian (language), and entries Kalyana Fort: cannon at (fig. 62), 177, 177 65, 73, 80, 100, 102, 105, 108, 109, 124,
MacGregor, John M., 254
following; Safavid dynasty of Iran Kamal Muhammad and Chand Muhammad 128, 130, 131, 135, 140, 154, 158 – 59, 162,
Machado, João, 310
Iranians, 3 – 4, 5, 6, 10, 18, 66, 102, 114, 163, 310 (painters), 20 165, 167, 169, 179 – 80, 184, 188, 190, 238,
Mahbub ‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VI (nizam of
Isfahan, Iran, 8, 120 House of Bijapur (cat. 71), 20, 82, 154, 155 254, 323
Hyderabad), 339, 340
Chihil Sutun palace, 80, 198, 249 Kannada (language), 31, 203 – 4 arts of, 9, 66, 88, 93, 96, 127, 193, 204, 210,
Mahbub Mansion, Hyderabad, 340
Islam. See Shi‘a Islam; Sufis / Sufism; Sunni Islam Karan Singh (maharaja of Bikaner), 288 224, 247
Mah Laqa Bai Chanda, 337 – 38
Isma’il I (founder of Safavid dynasty), 154 Karimnagar (city in Andhra Pradesh), 314 as conquerors, 7, 10, 26, 49, 51, 65, 82, 120,
Mahmud Gawan, 4 – 5, 309
Isma‘il ‘Adil Shah (ruler of Bijapur), 6 Kashmir, 26, 115, 115 – 16, 158 – 59, 269 151, 154, 180, 186, 197, 199 – 200, 256,
madrasa of, Bidar (fig. 1), 2, 4
Kevork Essayan Collection, Paris, 154 281 – 83, 287, 322, 324
Mahmud Shah Bahmani (ruler of Bidar), 173
Khadija Sultana (wife of Muhammad ‘Adil and diamonds / jewelry, 25, 48, 240 – 44,
Majnun and Layla, story of, 162, 163, 164
Shah), 142 325, 327 – 29
J Malcolm, John, 338
Khair un-Nissa (princess of Hyderabad), 338 and Europeans, 309 – 12, 313, 319, 323, 324
Malik, Maulana (poet), 47
Ja‘far al-Sadiq (Shi‘a imam), 302 Khalili Collection, 288 in Hyderabad, 336, 338, 340, 343
Malik Ahmad. See Ahmad Nizam Shah Bahri
Jagdish and Kamla Mittal Museum of Indian Art, Khalilullah, Shah (saint): tomb of, Bidar (fig. 7), see also individual Mughal emperors
Malik ‘Ambar (prime minister of Ahmadnagar),
Hyderabad, 115, 224, 259 16, 17 Muhammad (the Prophet), 40, 97, 115, 134, 259,
8, 9, 11, 48 – 49, 281, 282, 285
Jahangir (Mughal emperor), 8, 74, 75, 105, 224, Khalilullah Butshikan (calligrapher), 120. See 261, 262, 263, 264, 291
portrait of: (cat. 20), 72, 73; (cat. 21), 74, 75
281 – 82, 328 also Kitab-i Nauras Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (ruler of Bijapur), 80, 132,
tomb of, Khuldabad (fig. 32), 49, 49
“Jahangir Shoots the Head of Malik ‘Ambar,” Khamsa (Quintet, by Nizami), 120, 203, 288, 298 140, 142, 146, 149, 164, 231, 282
Malik ‘Ambar (cat. 20), 72, 73
folio from the Minto Album (cat. 21), 74, 75 Khandesh, 8, 51, 281, 285 portrait of (cat. 53), 80, 131, 131
Malik Dailami (calligrapher), 210
Jahaz Mahal (Ship Palace), Mandu, 40 Khan-i Khalil (Table of the Friend of God), 114 portrait of, riding an elephant with Ikhlas
Malik-i Maidan (Lord of the Plain) cannon,
Jai Singh I, Mirza Raja (ruler of Amber), 26, 273, Khanzah Humayun (wife of Husain Nizam Shah I), Khan (cat. 59), 14, 139, 139 – 40
Bijapur Fort (fig. 47), 18, 60, 91, 92
286, 287, 304 56, 58, 66 tomb of (Gol Gumbaz), Bijapur (fig. 43),
Malik Qumi (poet), 47, 79, 120
tomb of, Burhanpur (fig. 85), 26, 286, 287 Kharbuza Mahal (tomb of Bilqis Begum), 80, 82, 147
Malwa sultanate (Khilji dynasty), 29, 40, 56, 57
Jami, ‘Abd al-Rahman (Sufi poet / saint): Nafahat Burhanpur (fig. 18), 24, 26, 285, 304 Muhammad al-Husaini (calligrapher), 71
Mamluk dynasty, Egypt, 91
al-‘Uns, 165 Khirki, 9, 49, 282, 285. See also Aurangabad Muhammad ‘Ali (illuminator), 102
Man with Captive Lion (cat. 76), 164, 165, 165,
Jami Masjid (congregational mosque), Bijapur, Khizr (prophet), 222 Muhammad ‘Ali Khan Wallajah (nawab of
168
76 – 77, 80 Khurram (Mughal prince; later Shah Jahan), 199, Arcot), 329
Mandu, 40, 56, 74
mihrab of (fig. 44), 16, 80, 83 282. See also Shah Jahan Muhammad al-Shirazi (calligrapher), 210
marbled papers from (cat. 72), 156, 157,
Jami Masjid (congregational mosque), Kirkpatrick, James Achilles, 338 – 39 Muhammad Ashraf Khan Razavi, 158 – 59
160 – 61, 160 – 61
Burhanpur: Arabic-Sanskrit foundation residence of, Hyderabad (fig. 96), 338, 342 Muhammad Hasan (découpage artist), 134
Manohar (character in Gulshan-i Ishq), 297, 298
inscription of (fig. 82), 284, 285 Kishangarh (Rajput court), 21, 149, 151, 287 Muhammad Husain Kashmiri (calligrapher), 157
Manohar (painter): lacquered pen box by
Jami Masjid (congregational mosque), Gavilgarh Kitab-i Nauras (Book of Nine Essences, by Muhammad Husain Zarin Qalam (calligrapher),
(cat. 145), 250, 251
(fig. 34), 50, 51, 53 Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II, cat. 45), 79, 84, 100, 105
Mansur (painter), 127
Jami Masjid (congregational mosque), Gulbarga 105, 299 Muhammad ibn-i Khatun (diplomat), 225,
Mantiq al-Tair (Conference of the Birds, by
(fig. 20), 28 folios from manuscript of (cat. 45), 120, 225 – 26
Farid al-Din ‘Attar), 250
Jamshid Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda), 6 – 7, 121, 122 Muhammad Khan (painter), 140
Manucci, Niccolò, 154, 295, 310, 312
198, 227 Kitab Suwar al-Kawakib al-Thabita (Book of the Muhammad Nur (calligrapher), 71
Manuel I (king of Portugal), 313
Jaswant Singh (maharaja of Jodhpur), 286 Images of the Fixed Stars, by al-Sufi), 228, 291 Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda),
Maratha empire, 9, 11, 149, 151, 181, 311, 312,
illustrated manuscript of writings by Koh-i-Noor diamond, 325 7, 10, 100, 132, 134, 158, 198 – 99, 200, 203, 205,
329, 338
(cat. 169), 286, 292 – 93, 292 – 93 Krishnaraya (ruler of Vijayanagara), 34 210, 218, 225, 311
Marbled Begum (cat. 75), 164, 164, 165, 168
Javahir al-Musiqat-i Muhammadi (The Jewels of Kumatgi pleasure resort, near Bijapur, 108 Divan of: (fig. 69), 199, 201; (fig. 72),
marbled papers with accession note at Mandu
Music of Muhammad), 61, 84, 86, 176 Water Pavilion at (fig. 53), 81, 96, 127, 127 158, 211
(cat. 72), 156, 157, 160 – 61, 160 – 61
jewelry Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, 315 poetry of, in calligraphy album (cat. 104),
Marcos, Imelda, 328
of Asaf Jahi dynasty (cats. 201 – 7), 330, Kutch: armorers’ workshops in, 230 – 31 16, 100, 199, 210 – 11, 210 – 11
Martin, Claude, 327
331, 332, 333 wedding procession of (cat. 128), 234,
Mary Magdalen, 318, 319
diamond bodkin of Charles II, for Nell 234 – 35, 237
Mashhad, Iran: shrine in, 198, 204
Gwynne (cat. 199), 328 – 29, 329
Index 365
Muhammad Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda), 130, Nihj al-Balagha (The Way of Eloquence) and pomander, shell-shaped, with makara head and Rahim Deccani (painter), 169, 253
199, 203, 222, 227, 237, 269 other texts, manuscript of (cat. 168), 291, 291 birds (cat. 187), 315, 315 – 16 casket with painted scenes (cat. 144),
darbar of (cat. 119), 130, 225, 225 – 26, Nikitin, Anafasy, 4, 12, 309 Pondicherry, 81 250, 250
227, 245 Ni’matnama (Mandu cookbook manuscript), Portal, Iris, 340 – 41 lacquered pen box (cat. 146), 250, 251
shaffron of (cat. 121), 229, 229 56, 299 Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler (cat. 14), 21, Prince Seated in a Garden (cat. 143), 23,
Muhammad Riza (calligrapher), 210, 211 Ni‘matullah, Shah, and Sufi order of, 29, 30 44, 64, 65 – 66 249, 249
Muhammad Riza Nau‘i. See Nau‘i Khabushani Nizam al-Mulk, Asaf Jah I (nizam of Hyderabad), Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler Reclining Raigad Fort, Konkan, 91
Muhammad Shah (Mughal emperor), 336, 338 10, 312, 336 beneath a Covered Takht (Seat) (cat. 15), 21, Rai Singh (governor of Burhanpur), 287
Muhammad Shah Bahmani I, 32 Nizami (poet): Khamsa (Quintet), 120, 203, 65, 66 Raja ki Chhatri (King’s Memorial), Tomb of
Muhammad Shah Bahmani III, 198 288, 298 Portrait of an Elephant, Either Atash Khan or Mirza Raja Jai Singh I, Burhanpur (fig. 85),
Muhammad Tahir (abri artist), 71, 158, 159 Nizam Shahi dynasty, 5, 8, 12, 45, 47 – 49, 51, 301, Chanchal (fig. 50), 102, 102, 117 26, 286, 287
Muhammad Zaman (painter), 249 309 – 10. See also Ahmadnagar Portrait of a Ruler or Musician (cat. 52), 21, Rajasthan, 179, 270, 288, 293, 303, 335
Muharram, 198, 215, 336 Nobleman at Repast (cat. 171), 295, 295 129 – 30, 129 – 30, 151 Rajput dynasties / courts, 26, 80, 149, 186, 188,
Muhi al-din Lari. See Futuh al-Haramayn Nujum al-‘Ulum (Stars of the Sciences, by ‘Ali Portuguese, 6, 12, 79, 81, 180, 186, 249, 249, 293, 301, 303
Muhyi ‘I-Din ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Gilani (founder of ‘Adil Shah I), manuscript of (cat. 22), 6, 79, 309 – 11, 319, 341 arts of, 19, 20, 21, 63, 151, 286 – 87, 292 – 93,
Qadiri Sufi order), 224 84, 86, 98, 228 artistic influence of, 66, 146, 180, 186, 294, 324
Mu’in (painter), 162 – 63 “Mars and Aries,” folio 27v (fig. 2), 6 313 – 18, 313 – 19 Ramaraya (ruler of Vijayanagara), 7, 58, 88
Mukarram Jah, 341 – 43 “The Ruler on His Seven-Storied Throne,” see also Goa, and entry following Rambha (consort of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II), 96, 96
A Mullah (cat. 41), 114, 115 – 16, 115 – 17 folio 191r, 60, 85, 86, 87, 298 Poussin, Nicolas, 250 Rampur Raza Library, 65, 66
Mullah Nusrati (poet) “The Ruhani Lhanas,” folio 255r (fig. 45), Prince Aurangzeb (cat. 166), 281, 288, 289 Rangin Mahal (Colored Palace), Bidar Fort
Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (cats. 173 – 74), 15, 81 – 82, 84, 86 Prince Holding a Rose (fig. 16), 23, 23 (fig. 58), 16, 173, 175
297, 297 – 98 Princely Deer Hunters (cat. 68), 82, 151, 151 ceiling woodwork, 16, 170 – 71, 175
Qasida (cat. 61), 142 – 43, 142 – 43 Prince Seated in a Garden (cat. 143), 23, 249, 249 mosaic tile inlay (fig. 57), 172, 175
see also Gulshan-i ‘Ishq O Princeton University Art Museum, 167 mother-of-pearl inlay in black basalt
Mumtaz Mahal (wife of Shah Jahan), 285. See Processional Scene (figs. 77 – 78), 247 – 48, 248 (fig. 64), 16, 134, 175, 180, 185, 185
also Taj Mahal Onassis, Jacqueline Kennedy, 335 – 36, 343 Procession of Cornelis van den Bogaerde stucco birds (fig. 71), 206, 207
Murad (Mughal prince; son of Akbar), 10 Orissa, 90, 198, 314 (cat. 195), 322 – 23, 323 Reception of a Dutch Ambassador (cat. 193),
Murad Dhu’l Qadr (calligrapher), 132, 210 Orta, Garcia da, 310, 317 Procession of Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah 319 – 21, 320 – 21
Muraqqa‘-yi ‘Adil Shahi (‘Adil Shahi album, Osman ‘Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VII (nizam of (fig. 90), 288, 303, 304 Richard, Jules, 250
fig. 6), 16, 17 Hyderabad), 332, 340 – 41 Procession of Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Rider on an Epigraphic Horse (cat. 112), 219, 219
Murtaza Nizam Shah I (ruler of Ahmadnagar), Osmania University, Hyderabad, 339 (cat. 28), 93, 95, 96, 130, 287 Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, 315
47, 51, 65 – 66, 231 Ottoman Empire, artistic influence of, 18 – 19 Pulicat, 319, 320 Risala-yi Khushnavisan (Treatise of
Murtaza Nizam Shah III (ruler of Ahmadnagar), Calligraphers), 157
49 Roerich Collection, Bangalore, 61
Musée de la Mode et du Textile, Les Arts P Q Roshan al-Daula, 159
Decoratif, Paris, 319 roundels, wood (cat. 111), 218, 218
palanquin, 86; (fig. 88), 299, 300 Qadrat Ullah Qasim, 337
Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet, calligraphic (fig. 75), 218, 218
as illustrated, 247 – 48, 248, 320, 320, 324, Qa’im Khan, 159
Paris, 127, 238 Royal Elephant and Rider (cat. 16), 66, 67, 68
324, 337, 337 Qamar al-Din Khan. See Nizam al-Mulk, Asaf
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, 73 Royal Horse and Groom (cat. 32), 102, 103, 117
palanquin finials (cat. 142), 124, 246 – 48, 246 – 48, Jah I
Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Royal Hunting Falcon (cat. 48), 21, 126, 127
294 Qasida, manuscript of, in praise of Sultan
Museen zu Berlin, 212, 253 Royal Picnic (cat. 17), 66, 68, 68 – 69
as illustrated, 124, 124, 247 – 48, 248 ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah of Golconda (cat. 61),
Museum of Islamic Art, Doha, 163, 257 Rumi, Jalal ad-Din Muhammad (poet):
Paris Painter, 20, 21 142 – 43, 142 – 43
musical instruments Masnavi-yi Ma’nawi, 212
Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler (cat. 14), Qasida al-Burda (Poem of the Scarf ), 259
castanets (Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II holding), Rumi, Ustad Muhammad Bin Husain: Malik-i
21, 44, 64, 65 – 66 Qasim Barid I (ruler of Bidar), 5, 173, 175
112, 113 Maidan cannon cast by, 18, 60, 91, 92
Portrait of an Ahmadnagar Ruler Reclining Qazvini (physician / astronomer), 84, 228. See
Hindustani innovations in, 336 Rupmati (queen of Mandu), 169
beneath a Covered Takht (Seat) also ‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat
lute (‘Aja’ib al-Makhluqat, cat. 120d), 228
(cat. 15), 21, 65, 66 Qil’a Bandar, 152
sarinda, 254, 254
A Parrot Perched on a Mango Tree, a Ram Qumi, Malik, 47, 79, 120
tambur (of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II), 97, 104, S
Tethered Below (cat. 130, fig. 14), 21, 22, 23, Qur’an, 115, 188, 198, 340
105, 120
238, 238 manuscript of (cat. 98), 204 – 5, 205 Saadullah Shah, 264
vina, 100, 129, 129 – 30
Parviz (Mughal prince; son of Jahangir), 8 manuscript of, on cotton scroll (cat. 4), 32, Al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah,
Mustafa (calligrapher), 16
Patnaik, Naveen: A Second Paradise, 335 38 – 39, 38 – 39 Kuwait, 224, 262, 263
Mustafa Khan Ardistani (diplomat), 310
Peacock in a Rainstorm at Night (cat. 10), 60, miniature manuscript of (cat. 178), 302, 302 Sa’di: Bustan (The Orchard), 56, 319
61, 61 Qur’anic inscriptions, 26, 55, 56, 332 Safavid dynasty of Iran, 5, 88, 154, 157, 197, 199,
N Pem Nem (The Laws of Love, cat. 29), calligraphic, 17, 18, 18 – 19, 219 – 20, 219 – 20 309, 310
Nafahat al-‘Uns (Breaths of Divine Intimacy, by manuscript of, 15, 97, 97 – 98, 100, 122, 228 in sacred vessels (cats. 152 – 59), 261 – 66, artistic influence of, 19 – 20, 21, 112, 119,
Jami), 165 pendant case, enameled (cat. 179), 302, 302 261 – 67 154, 165, 202, 225, 249, 270
Nal Daman manuscript: “Birds in a Jungle,” pendants (urbasi), 122, 124, 325. See also on sword hilt (cat. 62), 18, 144, 144 artists of, 23, 102, 162 – 63
folio 17 (fig. 86), 290, 291 diamond pendants, and entry following at tombs, 16, 17, 80, 174, 176, 185 Safi, shrine of, Ardabil, Iran, 216
Nan va Halva (Bread and Sweets, by ‘Amili), Pereira, António Pinto, 310 Qureshi: Bhogphal, 176 Saint Albans, Charles Beauclerk, 1st Duke of, 329
manuscript of (cat. 170), 294, 294 Persia. See Iran; see also entries below Qutb Shahi dynasty, 6 – 7, 11, 16, 21, 158, 197 – 200, Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad, 19, 90, 232
Náprstkovo Muzeum Asijských, Afrických a Persian (language), 11, 31, 38, 80, 87, 337 202 – 3, 204, 210 – 11, 215, 223, 238, 254, 270, Samarqand, Uzbekistan, 4, 8, 340
Amerických Kultur, Prague, 105 in manuscripts, 6, 16, 31, 51, 55 – 58, 61, 80, 303, 309, 311, 319, 322, 324, 336, 339. See also Sam Mirza (Safavid ruler), 88
Naqi al-Din Husaini (calligrapher), 16, 143. See 84, 157, 168, 204, 210, 302, 336 Golconda San Diego Museum of Art, 296
also Ibrahim Rauza Persian literature / poetry, 66, 79, 120, 165, 168, Sanskrit (language), 61, 84, 86, 204, 284, 285
Naqqar Khana (Drum House), Hyderabad, 337 212, 319 Saqinama (Book of the Cupbearer): by Hafiz, 93;
Narnala Fort, 51 see also Nizami; Saqinama; Shahnama; by Zuhuri, 47, 93
R
dedicatory inscription, Mahakali Gate Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi Saraswati (Hindu goddess), 79, 100, 100, 105,
(fig. 35), 52, 54 Persian / Persianate cultural traditions, 3 – 4, 6, 10, Rafi’ al-Din Shirazi (historian), 97 112, 115
National Museum, New Delhi, 120, 152, 222, 21, 257, 270, 286 ragamala paintings, 21, 60 – 63, 130, 286, 294, 312 Saraswati Plays on a Vina (fig. 49), 100, 100, 105
276, 320 as absorbed into Deccani style, 15, 23, 26 Dhanasri Ragini: A Woman Drawing Sarikhani Collection, London, 237
Nat Malhar: A Woman Splashing Water on Her in manuscripts, 32, 55 – 58, 61 – 62, 65, 68, a Portrait on a Tablet (cat. 12), 60, sarinda (musical instrument, cat. 149), 254, 254
Lover from the River (cat. 13), 60, 62 – 63, 63 84 – 86, 198, 202 – 4 61 – 62, 63 sarpech, 169, 330, 332, 333
Nau‘i Khabushani: Suz u Gudaz, 249, 286 see also abri (paper marbling) Gauri Ragini: A Maiden Picking Blossoms as illustrated, 169
Nauraspur, 114, 120 Petaboli, 319 from a Tree (cat. 11), 60, 61, 62, 63 Sarvar al-Mulk (memoirist), 339
Nawaz Khan (prime minister of Bijapur), 114, 120 Philadelphia Museum of Art, 298 Nat Malhar: A Woman Splashing Water Sassetti, Filippo, 317
Nayaka kingdom, 66, 145 Pires, Sancho, 310 on Her Lover from the River (cat. 13), saz leaves, motif of, 135 – 36, 135 – 36
Negapatnam, 319, 320 Pit, Laurens, 320 60, 62 – 63, 63 scale, shifts of, in paintings / manuscripts, 15, 39,
Nehru, Jawaharlal, 341 Pitau, Jean, 329 Peacock in a Rainstorm at Night (cat. 10), 102, 126, 127, 138, 138
Nihal Chand (painter), 151 Polier, Antoine-Louis Henri de, 212 60, 61, 61
366 Index
as hierarchical, 21, 22, 71, 71, 129, 130, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Playing the Tambur Timur (Tamerlane; Turkish warlord / ruler), 3, weaponry
148, 148 (cat. 33), 104, 105 10, 184, 281 battle-ax with openwork decoration and
as influenced by Collaert’s birds, 21, 22, 23, Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II in Procession Timurid style / influence, 4, 13, 16, 40, 41, 157, 175 hidden blade (cat. 23), 87, 87
109, 110 – 11, 238, 238 (cat. 47), 124, 125 Tipu Sultan (ruler of Mysore), 298 hilt of gauntlet sword (pata, cat. 26),
Seringapatam: Tipu Sultan’s palace at, 298 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding the Elephant tombs. See specific tombs by name of tomb or 91 – 92, 91 – 92
Shahaji Bhonsle (Maratha ruler), 312 Atash Khan (cat. 31), 15, 100, 101, 124 person hilt of sword (cat. 62), 18, 144, 144
Shah Diamond (fig. 31), 25, 48, 49 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding an Elephant Topkapi Palace, Istanbul, 340 rock-crystal knife with jeweled parrot
Shahi Palace, Burhanpur (fig. 84), 285, 286 under a Canopy (fig. 52), 124, 124 Tranquebar, 13, 311, 320 (cat. 186), 314, 314 – 15
Mughal-period baths of (fig. 83), 284, 285 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Standing (cat. 42), trays yali motif on, 87, 87, 90 – 91, 90 – 92
Shah Jahan (Mughal emperor), 8, 49, 131, 167, 114, 115, 117 with animals and birds amid animated see also daggers, and entry following
190, 200, 282, 283, 285, 288, 325 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Venerates a Sufi floral arabesques (cat. 102), 208, 208, Wedding Procession of Sultan Muhammad Quli
Shah Jahan Diamond (cat. 133), 25, 240, 240 Saint (cat. 46), 105, 115, 122, 123, 124, 128 259 Qutb Shah (cat. 128), 234, 234 – 35, 237
Shahnama (Book of Kings, by Firdausi), 32, Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah (cat. 53), 80, 131, 131 bidri (cats. 91 – 94), 172, 188 – 92, 189 – 92 Welch, Stuart Cary, 335
108 – 9 Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Shah and Ikhlas Khan Tree on the Island of Waqwaq (cat. 106), 212, 212 Westminster, Robert Grosvenor, Marquess of,
“The Death of Farud” (cat. 35), 106, 108 Riding an Elephant (cat. 59), 14, 139, 139 – 40 Tufal Khan, 51 330
“Kai Khusrau Crosses the Sea” (cat. 37), Sultan Quli Qutb Shah (ruler of Golconda), 6, Turkey, 18, 128, 135, 152, 157, 304, 340, 343 White House (Washington, D.C.), 338
107, 108 – 9 197 – 98, 227 Turkmen people, arts / artistic influence of, 21, 56, Winans, Louis, 327
“Piran Stays the Execution of Bizhan” Sunni Islam, 6, 115, 117, 154 66, 119, 122, 132, 134, 136 Winston, Harry, 328, 330
(cat. 36), 107, 108 Suz u Gudaz (Burning and Melting, by Nau‘i), Two Lovers (fig. 17), 23, 23 writing box clad in gilt and silver (cat. 176), 26,
“Suhrab Slain by Rustam” (cat. 34), 106, 249, 286 299 – 300, 300
108 swords, hilts of: (cat. 62), 18, 144, 144; (cat. 26),
Shah Shuja‘ (son of Shah Jahan), 26, 285 91 – 92, 91 – 92 V
Shaikh ‘Abbasi (painter), 23, 169, 249 X
Shams al-Din Khan, 339 Venkatchallam, 140, 338
Shi‘a Islam, 5 – 6, 40, 88, 115, 134, 154, 180, Hunting Party of Nizam ‘Ali Khan (fig. 95), Xamtin, Raul, 313
T
224 – 25, 291, 337 337, 338
artworks associated with, 26, 180, 207, 215, Tahir Husaini, Shah (Ismaili imam), 310 Vermeer, Johannes, 18
224 – 25, 291, 302 Tajalli ‘Ali (poet), 337, 338 vessels Y
see also Badshahi Ashurkhana; inscribed Taj Mahal (tomb of Mumtaz Mahal), Agra, 9, covered pot with poetic inscriptions
285 – 86 (cat. 175), 209, 298, 298 – 99 Yadava dynasty of Devagiri, 29
sacred vessels
Taj Sultan (wife of Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II), 80, 144 huqqa bases (bidri, cats. 86 – 90), 15, 179, Yale, Elihu, 18, 81, 325
Shiraz, Iran, 32, 102, 114, 132, 136, 203, 204
Takht Mahal (Throne Palace), Bidar, 40 186, 186 – 87, 188 yali (horned lion)
Shivaji Bhonsle (Maratha ruler), 149, 151, 311, 312
tile work with lion and sun (fig. 23), 30, 32 miniature garnet cup with dragon-head with elephants (cat. 99), 206, 206
Siesta (cat. 43), 118, 118 – 19, 128
Talikota, Battle of, 7 – 8, 10, 45, 56 – 58, 86, 88, 90, handles (cat. 118), 224, 224 – 25 as weaponry motif, 87, 87, 90 – 91, 90 – 92
Sikandar ‘Adil Shah (ruler of Bijapur), 79, 81, 82,
175, 198, 310 mortars (cats. 115 – 17), 222 – 23, 222 – 23 ‘Yar Khan (découpage artist), 134
151, 154, 155
“Tapis Moghol,” 269 spherical container with spiraling radials yoginis (female ascetics), portraits of
Sikandar Jah, Asaf Jah III (nizam of Hyderabad),
Tareq Rajab Museum, Kuwait, 254 (cat. 2), 36, 36 Ascetic Visited by a Yogini (cat. 44), 20,
302, 338 – 39
Ta‘rif-i Husain Shahi (Chronicle of Husain Shah, spittoon or incense burner (cat. 51), 124, 118 – 19, 119
Sind, Mirs of (Talpur dynasty), 230 – 31
by Aftabi), manuscript of (cat. 8, fig. 38), 21, 128, 128 on sarinda (cat. 149), 254, 254
Sindbadnama (The Tales of Sindbad),
45, 56 – 58, 57 – 58, 65, 176 see also bowls, and entry following; ewers; Yogini with a Mynah Bird (cat. 30, fig. 12),
manuscript of (cat. 97), 203, 203 – 4
Tarikh-i Muhammad Qutb Shah (History of incense burners; inscribed sacred 20, 21, 98, 99, 100, 119
Siraj al-Din Junaidi, 29
Muhammad Qutb Shah), 199 vessels Young Prince (cat. 18), 70, 71
Sleeping Maiden and Maid (cat. 148), 253, 253
Tarkash Mahal, Bidar, 176 Victoria (queen of England), 327 Young Prince and Princess (cat. 19), 71, 71
spittoon or incense burner (cat. 51), 124, 128, 128
second story of (fig. 60), 175 Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 184, 250, Yusuf ‘Adil Khan (ruler of Bijapur), 5 – 6, 79, 154
Stanton, May Bonfils, 328
Star-Shaped Pool, Lal Bagh, Bidar (fig. 27), 40, 40 stuccowork arabesques of (fig. 61), 176 269, 274, 276, 294, 306, 321
steel object, possibly door knocker or catch Tavernier, Jean-Baptiste, 304, 312, 325 Vishakhapatnam, 254, 299
(cat. 101), 185, 206, 207, 207 Telugu people / culture, 7, 11, 32, 36, 198, 199, Vijayanagara, 3, 29, 30 – 31, 145, 274, 309, 325 Z
Stout Courtier (cat. 40), 114, 114 – 15 203, 340 coins of (cat. 1), 34, 35
Zain al-Din ‘Ali (calligrapher), 210
Sufis / Sufism, 3 – 4, 9 – 10, 29, 30, 88, 117, 200, textiles defeat of, 7 – 8, 10, 45, 56 – 58, 86, 88, 90,
Zakhira-yi Khwarazmshahi (The Treasury of the
224 – 25 cenotaph cover fragment, Turkish (fig. 9), 175, 198, 310
Khwarazm Shah), frontispiece from (cat. 96),
Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II and, 109, 115, 117, 18, 18 – 19 Vikramajit (raja of Gwalior), 327
136, 202, 202 – 3, 204
122, 154 cloth painting of ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah in Vinaya Pitaka (Buddhist treatise), 299
Zawar mine, 179
practices / thought of, 97, 163, 180, 186 procession (fig. 90), 288, 303, 304 Vishnu (Hindu god), 34, 86, 131, 145, 222, 319
Zebrowski, Mark, 335
shrines / tombs of, 3, 29, 80, 124, 181, 181, cloth painting of Johannes Bacherus Vyasa Madhava (scribe), 293
Zib al-Nisa (daughter of Aurangzeb), 296, 296
185, 222, 223, 264, 286 embassy (cat. 196), 324, 324
zoomorphic elements
see also ascetics, portraits of coverlet, Chinese (fig. 11), 19, 98
battle-ax blade, 87, 87
Sultan ‘Abdullah Qutb Shah (cat. 131), 238, 239 man’s robe with poppies (cat. 182), 306, W calligraphy, 219 – 20, 219 – 21
Sultan ‘Abu’l Hasan Qutb Shah Standing 306
Wallace Collection, London, 315 dagger hilts, 15, 60, 79, 88 – 90, 88 – 90, 145,
(cat. 141), 196, 245, 245 mashru, Gujurati, 131, 131
Warangal, 8, 29, 36, 325 145 – 46, 276
Sultan ‘Ali ‘Adil Shah II Slays a Tiger (cat. 66), panel from tent lining with flower
artistic influence of (cat. 2), 36, 36 everyday objects, 37, 37, 206 – 7, 206 – 7
130, 148, 148, 150 (cat. 181), 188, 304, 305
carpets from: (cat. 151), 26, 256 – 57, Malik-i Maidan cannon, 91, 92
Sultan ‘Ali al-Mashhadi (calligrapher), 210 pashmina wool box lining, 26, 299
256 – 57, 307; (cat. 183), 26, 257, 307, 307 palanquin finials, 248, 248
Sultan Husain Nizam Shah I on Horseback pashmina wool shawl, 115, 115 – 16
water fixtures pomander, 315, 315 – 16
(cat. 7), 55, 55 – 56 scarf, for fanning, 64, 65, 78, 95, 97, 118,
basin (cat. 126), 233, 233 sword hilt, 91 – 92, 91 – 92
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II (cat. 27), 93, 94 118, 129, 130, 139, 149, 225 – 26
fountain (cat. 127), 233, 233 waterspouts / water fixtures, 146 – 47,
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II with a Consort in a of sultan’s turban, 93, 94
Water Pavilion, Kumatgi pleasure resort (fig. 53), 146 – 47, 233, 233
Landscape (fig. 48), 96, 96 tent hanging (fig. 19), 25, 26
81, 96, 127, 127 Zubrzycki, John: The Last Nizam, 342
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Hawking (fig. 5), as worn at court, 112 – 17, 131, 131, 149, 149
waterspout, fish-shaped, Asar Mahal, Bijapur Zuhuri, Nur al-Din Muhammad (poet), 66,
16, 102 see also carpets; kalamkaris
(cat. 64), 146 – 47, 146 – 47 79, 120
Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Holding Castanets Saqinama (Book of the Cupbearer), 47, 93
(cat. 39), 112, 113, 127, 231
Index 367
m Photograph Credits /
Pp. 1, 42 – 43, 76 – 77, 170 – 71, 194 – 95, 279, figs. 1, 3 – 4, 6 – 7, 10, 18, 20 – 30, Kuwait; cats. 11, 91: © 2015 Museum Associates / LACMA. Licensed by Art
32 – 38, 41 – 44, 47, 51, 53, 57 – 76, 81 – 85, 89, 91, 94 – 96, and cats. 8, 64: Resource, NY; cat. 15: Schmitz, Barbara, and Ziyaud-Din A. Desai. Mughal
© The Metropolitan Museum of Art / Antonio Martinelli; p. 14 and cats. 50, 59, and Persian Paintings and Illustrated Manuscripts in the Raza Library,
113: © Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford; figs. 2, 12, 45, and cats. 21 – 22, Rampur. New Delhi: 2006, pl. 47; cats. 16, 99: Courtesy of Francesca Galloway
30, 96, 104, 143: © The Trustees of the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin; fig. 5: Ltd.; cats. 17, 29, 41, 61, 97: © The British Library Board; cats. 24 – 25, 27, 94,
Haidar and Sardar 2011, p. 21; fig. 8: Photograph by Amit Pasricha; fig. 13 and 117, 126, 153, 156, 194 – 95: The David Collection, Copenhagen (photographs by
cats. 39 – 40, 46, 119: © The Trustees of the British Museum; fig. 16: Daljeet Pernille Klemp); cats. 43 – 44, 106: BPK, Berlin / Museum für Islamische Kunst,
1999, p. 122; fig. 17: Soudavar 1992, p. 366; fig. 19: Courtesy of the Museum of Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Germany / Georg Niedermeiser / Art Resource, NY;
Art, Rhode Island School of Design, Providence (photograph by Erik Gould); cats. 48, 132: © RMN-Grand Palais / Art Resource, NY; cat. 54: Image courtesy
fig. 31: Prior and Admanson 2000, p. 26; fig. 39 and cats. 9, 23, 26, 103a, 122, of Oliver Forge and Brendan Lynch Ltd.; cat. 65: Ismail Merchant; cat. 74: The
169a – b, 177, 186: Photographs by Alan Tabor; fig. 40 and cat. 20: © 2015 Pierpont Morgan Library, New York; cats. 82, 100, 125, 142i: Saphrax London;
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; fig. 48 and cats. 112, 147: Courtesy of Sotheby’s; cat. 101: Courtesy of Simon Ray; cat. 109: © Virginia Museum of Fine Arts
fig. 49: Haidar and Sardar 2011, p. 35; fig. 50: Haidar and Sardar 2011, p. 37; (photograph by Travis Fullerton); cats. 124, 150, 180: Furusiyya Art Foundation
fig. 52 and cats. 32, 83, 114, 144, 164 – 65: © Victoria and Albert Museum, (photographs by Noël Adams); cat. 131: © RMN-Grand Palais / Art Resource,
London; figs. 55, 79, and cat. 45a: © The Cleveland Museum of Art; fig. 56: NY (photographs by Thierry Olivier); cat. 146: Photographs by Noël Adams;
Direção-Geral do Património Cultural / Arquivo de Documentação Fotográfica cat. 149: Bor, Okada, Burguière, et al. 2003, p. 118; cat. 167: Courtesy of the
(DGPC / ADF); fig. 80 and cats. 45b – g, 77, 115, 120a, 168: Photographs by Ram Aga Khan Museum (photograph by Weaver / Boyko); cat. 169c: Foto Gstaad
Rahman; fig. 87 and cats. 19, 42, 60, 79, 141: Courtesy of The San Diego (photograph by André Martin); cat. 193: Photo Les Arts Décoratifs, Paris
Museum of Art; fig. 88: Photograph by Nigel Sequeira; fig. 93: Photograph (photograph by Jean Tholance); cat. 197: © Servette Overseas Limited 2014.
courtesy of Ganesan; cat. 1: Photograph by Nara Giannella; cats. 4, 62, 98, 118, All rights reserved; cats. 198, 200: © Servette Overseas Limited 2014. All
133 – 40, 152, 178 – 79: © The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, rights reserved (photographs by Prudence Cuming Associates Ltd.)
368
ISBN 978-0-300-21110-8
pr inted in spain

Sultans of Deccan India 1500 1700

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sultans of Deccan India 1500 1700

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sultans of Deccan India 1500 1700

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sultans of Deccan India

1500–1700 opulence and fantasy

wwwwww Navina Najat Haidar and Marika Sardar

wwwwwww with contributions by

Published by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Distributed by

viii Preface and Acknowledgments

xi Lenders to the Exhibition

15 The Art of the Deccan Courts

29 The Bahmanis and Their Artistic Legacy

43 AHMADNAGAR AND BERAR

160 Catalogue 72 – 80

181 Catalogue 81 – 95

261 Catalogue 152 – 159

271 Catalogue 160 – 165

279 DRAWN TO THE DECCAN

285 Burhanpur and Aurangabad

313 Catalogue 184 – 196

327 Catalogue 197 – 207

British Library, London National Museum, New Delhi

Trustees of British Museum, London Philadelphia Museum of Art

Trustees of Chester Beatty Library, Dublin Private collection

Cincinnati Art Museum Private collection, Haddam, Connecticut

Collection of Patricia Phelps de Cisneros, New York Private collection, Seattle

Cleveland Museum of Art Private collection, Ticino, Switzerland

David Collection, Copenhagen Private collections, London

Free Library of Philadelphia Private collections, New York

Furusiyya Art Foundation Rampur Raza Library

Kronos Collections, New York Al-Thani Collection

Los Angeles County Museum of Art Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam

4 The Deccan: A Golden Age

Out of the Ashes of the Bahmani Sultanate

A History of the Deccan, 1500–1700 5

6 The Deccan: A Golden Age

Conflicts to the South and North

A History of the Deccan, 1500–1700 7

8 The Deccan: A Golden Age

A History of the Deccan, 1500–1700 9

Diversity in the Deccan

10 The Deccan: A Golden Age

A History of the Deccan, 1500–1700 11

12 The Deccan: A Golden Age

A History of the Deccan, 1500–1700 13

Detail of cat. 59 15

16 The Deccan: A Golden Age

18 The Deccan: A Golden Age

The Art of the Deccan Courts 19

20 The Deccan: A Golden Age

The Art of the Deccan Courts 21

The Art of the Deccan Courts 23

The Art of the Deccan Courts 25

26 The Deccan: A Golden Age

The Art of the Deccan Courts 27

30 The Deccan: A Golden Age

The Bahmanis and Their Artistic Legacy 31

32 The Deccan: A Golden Age

Fig. 26. Cylindrical Box, Deccan, 15th century. H. approx. 8 in.

34 The Deccan: A Golden Age

[c] o bv er se [ c ] r e v er se [d] obv er se [ d ] r e ver se

[j ] obv er se [ j ] re v er se [k] obver se [ k ] r e ver se

1. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 165 – 202; Sardar 2014, p. 15. 2. Jagdish

1. Eaton and Wagoner 2014, pp. 165 – 202; Sardar 2014, p. 15. 2. Jagdish

1. Sims 2002, pp. 114 – 20, shows several razm-o-bazm pictures. 2. Similar

1. Michell and Zebrowski 1999, p. 151. 2. Hasan-i Dihlavi 1963, p. 158, no. 333.

1. Including examples in the Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (MS.48),

31 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Riding the

Farrukh Husain, Bijapur’s most celebrated painter, is undoubt

1. The inscription appears on the stairs leading up to the throne:

42 Sultan Ibrahim ‘Adil Shah II Standing

1. Zebrowski 1983a, p. 86.

49 Incense Burner in the Shape of an Cat. 49

1. Zebrowski 1983a, pp. 123 – 27. 2. Thanks are due to Dr. Gursharan Sidhu

56 A Floral Fantasy

1. See, for example, the depictions of Majnun in a Khamsa (Quintet) of

75 Marbled Begum