.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This very finely worked nim qalam portrait is signed by the artist Hajji Muhammad Husayn and is one of only four known signed works by the artist. Of the other three, one is a portrait of a princess of the same date in the Victoria and Albert Museum (IM110-1922), the second is a portrait of two nobles in a private collection, New York, and the third is an oval bust portrait formerly in the Cowasji Jehangir Collection, Mumbai. John Seyller has attributed a further four paintings have been attributed to the artist on stylistic grounds (Mughal and Deccani Painting, Zurich, 2010, p. 66).
Following the accession of the Emperor 'Alamgir (Aurangzeb) in 1658 there was a sharp decline in artistic patronage and production in the imperial Mughal atelier. However, this accomplished portrait demonstrates that there was not a decline in technical excellence on behalf of the artists who were required to seek patronage elsewhere. Some Mughal artists moved to regional courts of Rajput rulers whilst others sought patronage from other members of the royal family. Of the paintings attributed to Hajji Muhammad Husayn, one in the Los Angeles Museum of Art depicts Aurangzeb's son Prince Muhammad Mu'azzam (M.74.123.5) and therefore Seyller has suggested that the artist was at least for a time under the prince's patronage (op.cit.).
The present portrait relates very closely to a painting of the Emperor Aurangzeb from the St. Petersburg Album in the Smithsonian Museum (F1996.1). The Smithsonian painting is attributed to Hunhar and dated circa 1660. It depicts Aurangzeb bathed in a shaft of heavenly light kneeling on a terrace in front of two younger men, probably his sons. In that painting Aurangzeb is in a near identical pose, kneeling with right hand slightly extended and a large bolster behind. There are the same cushions to the sitter's right. Our unidentified noble is slighter of frame than Hunhar's Aurangzeb but with his greying hair and slightly whitening beard it is tempting to think that Hajji Muhammad Husayn is referencing the earlier painting and depicting the same man but in a later stage of life. In comparison to the Hunhar painting our sitter wears a light cloak which along with his patka and turban receive subtle painted decoration. He is dressed simply but evidently a man of status and if not Aurangzeb himself then his stern expression and modest appearance are befitting for a courtier to the emperor.
Following the accession of the Emperor 'Alamgir (Aurangzeb) in 1658 there was a sharp decline in artistic patronage and production in the imperial Mughal atelier. However, this accomplished portrait demonstrates that there was not a decline in technical excellence on behalf of the artists who were required to seek patronage elsewhere. Some Mughal artists moved to regional courts of Rajput rulers whilst others sought patronage from other members of the royal family. Of the paintings attributed to Hajji Muhammad Husayn, one in the Los Angeles Museum of Art depicts Aurangzeb's son Prince Muhammad Mu'azzam (M.74.123.5) and therefore Seyller has suggested that the artist was at least for a time under the prince's patronage (op.cit.).
The present portrait relates very closely to a painting of the Emperor Aurangzeb from the St. Petersburg Album in the Smithsonian Museum (F1996.1). The Smithsonian painting is attributed to Hunhar and dated circa 1660. It depicts Aurangzeb bathed in a shaft of heavenly light kneeling on a terrace in front of two younger men, probably his sons. In that painting Aurangzeb is in a near identical pose, kneeling with right hand slightly extended and a large bolster behind. There are the same cushions to the sitter's right. Our unidentified noble is slighter of frame than Hunhar's Aurangzeb but with his greying hair and slightly whitening beard it is tempting to think that Hajji Muhammad Husayn is referencing the earlier painting and depicting the same man but in a later stage of life. In comparison to the Hunhar painting our sitter wears a light cloak which along with his patka and turban receive subtle painted decoration. He is dressed simply but evidently a man of status and if not Aurangzeb himself then his stern expression and modest appearance are befitting for a courtier to the emperor.