.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Visitors arriving at the courts of Indian rulers from the 17th century on were unanimously impressed by their material splendor. The lavishness of the interiors that greeted them, highlighted with small accents provided by enamelled and jewelled objects, has been recorded time and again. Sir Thomas Roe, who was sent as an embassy to Jahangir in 1615-18 described the Mughal court as 'the treasury of the world' (Susan Strong, Nima Smith and J.C.Harle, A Golden Treasury. Jewellery from the Indian Subcontinent, London, 1989, p.27). This tulwar is an example of the type of object that would have created this rich impression - a way of expressing wealth, and by implication status and military prowess.
In India metal objects, and particularly gold, were habitually melted down if damaged or if fashions changed. The invasion of Nadir Shah of India in 1739 saved for posterity a number of jewelled pieces which he either took back to India as booty or, in an overt display, sent with embassies to the rulers of Russia and Turkey. These however constitute the only substantial groups of royal Mughal decorative arts in gold to have survived - the St. Petersburg items comprise the largest group of Mughal jewelled objects which survive together. Zebrowski wrote that nothing survives in India itself (Mark Zebrowski, Gold, Silver and Bronze from Mughal India, London, 1997, p.52).
Abu'l Fazl's Ain-i Akbari, 'Institutes of Akbar', a late 16th century detailed document recording the administration of the emperor Akbar's empire gives a technical description of the practices used within the royal karkhana or workshop, and provides us with an insight into the techniques used to produce pieces such as these. It records that each skill was specific to a different professional, such as an enameller (minakar), engraver (zar nishan), or one practiced in the setting of gems. An individual object, such as this magnificent tulwar, would therefore have been worked on by a number of craftsmen.
A quintessentially Indian technique, recorded by Abu'l Fazl and used here is that of kundan or setting of stones. This technique is practiced from the Akbari period until the 19th century when claw settings were introduced via Western jewellery. Susan Strong et al give a comprehensive description of how this technique is carried out - 'the pieces are shaped by the relevant craftsmen and left in separate hollow halves. Holes are cut for the stones, and any engraving or chasing is carried out, and the pieces are enameled. When the stones are to be set, lac is inserted in the back and is then visible from the front through the holes for the stones. Highly refined gold, the kundan, is then used to cover the lac and the stone is pushed into the kundan. More kundan is then applied round the edges to strengthen the setting and give a neater appearance' (Strong, 1989, op.cit., p.30).
A defining feature of this tulwar and one for which it is all the more elegant, is the use of enamel, or mina. How and when enameling was introduced into the Mughal court is unclear. It is said to have reached Mughal India through Goa - 16th century pieces made in Goa confirm that local craftsmen had mastered European techniques (Pedro Moura Carvalho, Gems and Jewels of Mughal India. The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art, London, 2010, p.19). The first known pieces so decorated are an oratory-reliquary and a gold filigree casket, both now in Lisbon and produced in the late 16th century (Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon, inv. nos. 99 and 577). Akbar sent a cultural mission to Goa in 1575 so it is possible that the technique was learnt there. Manuel Keene has recently suggested that from Goa the enamelling may have spread first to the Deccan (Manuel Keene, Treasury of the World. Jewelled Arts of India in the Age of the Mughals, exhibition catalogue, London, 2001, p.62). Sir Thomas Roe, mentioned that if red enamel, as used on this tulwar, was 'very fine' it would sell at twice the price of gold - for of all the colours enameled on gold, translucent red is the hardest to achieve (Susan Strong, Made for Mughal Emperors. Royal Treasures from Hindustan, London, 2010, p.218). A similar tulwar decorated with jewels and red enamel is in the Al-Sabah collection, catalogued as 3rd/4th quarter 17th century (LNS 2157 Ja and b, Keene, op.cit., no.6.32, p.75).
Another jeweled tulwar, although without the elegant ground of enamel that ours has, is in the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (Joseph M. Dye III, The Arts of India, Virginia, 2001, no.199, p.423). A hilt and chape, again without the enamel, but with similar floral spray to the chape is in the Al-Sabah Collection, catalogued as 2nd-3rd quarter 17th century (Keene, op.cit, no.13.9, p.148). A group of similarly inset and enameled objects were recently sold in these Rooms as part of the collection of Dr. Mohammed Said Farsi, 5 October 2010, lots 43 to 50.
In India metal objects, and particularly gold, were habitually melted down if damaged or if fashions changed. The invasion of Nadir Shah of India in 1739 saved for posterity a number of jewelled pieces which he either took back to India as booty or, in an overt display, sent with embassies to the rulers of Russia and Turkey. These however constitute the only substantial groups of royal Mughal decorative arts in gold to have survived - the St. Petersburg items comprise the largest group of Mughal jewelled objects which survive together. Zebrowski wrote that nothing survives in India itself (Mark Zebrowski, Gold, Silver and Bronze from Mughal India, London, 1997, p.52).
Abu'l Fazl's Ain-i Akbari, 'Institutes of Akbar', a late 16th century detailed document recording the administration of the emperor Akbar's empire gives a technical description of the practices used within the royal karkhana or workshop, and provides us with an insight into the techniques used to produce pieces such as these. It records that each skill was specific to a different professional, such as an enameller (minakar), engraver (zar nishan), or one practiced in the setting of gems. An individual object, such as this magnificent tulwar, would therefore have been worked on by a number of craftsmen.
A quintessentially Indian technique, recorded by Abu'l Fazl and used here is that of kundan or setting of stones. This technique is practiced from the Akbari period until the 19th century when claw settings were introduced via Western jewellery. Susan Strong et al give a comprehensive description of how this technique is carried out - 'the pieces are shaped by the relevant craftsmen and left in separate hollow halves. Holes are cut for the stones, and any engraving or chasing is carried out, and the pieces are enameled. When the stones are to be set, lac is inserted in the back and is then visible from the front through the holes for the stones. Highly refined gold, the kundan, is then used to cover the lac and the stone is pushed into the kundan. More kundan is then applied round the edges to strengthen the setting and give a neater appearance' (Strong, 1989, op.cit., p.30).
A defining feature of this tulwar and one for which it is all the more elegant, is the use of enamel, or mina. How and when enameling was introduced into the Mughal court is unclear. It is said to have reached Mughal India through Goa - 16th century pieces made in Goa confirm that local craftsmen had mastered European techniques (Pedro Moura Carvalho, Gems and Jewels of Mughal India. The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art, London, 2010, p.19). The first known pieces so decorated are an oratory-reliquary and a gold filigree casket, both now in Lisbon and produced in the late 16th century (Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon, inv. nos. 99 and 577). Akbar sent a cultural mission to Goa in 1575 so it is possible that the technique was learnt there. Manuel Keene has recently suggested that from Goa the enamelling may have spread first to the Deccan (Manuel Keene, Treasury of the World. Jewelled Arts of India in the Age of the Mughals, exhibition catalogue, London, 2001, p.62). Sir Thomas Roe, mentioned that if red enamel, as used on this tulwar, was 'very fine' it would sell at twice the price of gold - for of all the colours enameled on gold, translucent red is the hardest to achieve (Susan Strong, Made for Mughal Emperors. Royal Treasures from Hindustan, London, 2010, p.218). A similar tulwar decorated with jewels and red enamel is in the Al-Sabah collection, catalogued as 3rd/4th quarter 17th century (LNS 2157 Ja and b, Keene, op.cit., no.6.32, p.75).
Another jeweled tulwar, although without the elegant ground of enamel that ours has, is in the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (Joseph M. Dye III, The Arts of India, Virginia, 2001, no.199, p.423). A hilt and chape, again without the enamel, but with similar floral spray to the chape is in the Al-Sabah Collection, catalogued as 2nd-3rd quarter 17th century (Keene, op.cit, no.13.9, p.148). A group of similarly inset and enameled objects were recently sold in these Rooms as part of the collection of Dr. Mohammed Said Farsi, 5 October 2010, lots 43 to 50.