Unlike its small sibling,1 the so-called Large Clive Album has never attracted much scholarly attention. Except for several single miniatures that have been analysed and published in various contexts, the album as a complete entity has not yet been thoroughly studied.
This is astonishing in the light of the historical importance of the two principal figures traditionally associated with this muraqqaÊ¿âSir Robert Clive (1725â1774) and Nawab ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla (1732â1775), governor of Awadh (r. 1754â1775) and prime minister (wazÄ«r) of the Mughal empire.2 However, this lack of interest might be partly explained by the albumâs heterogeneous content and the uneven quality of its visual material.
The Large Clive Album was given to the British government in lieu of inheritance tax and allocated to the Victoria and Albert Museum in 1964;3 before then, it had been housed in the library of Powis Castle in Wales, which served as the family seat of Robert Clive and his descendants for nearly two centuries.4 In addition to the Large Album, Cliveâs collection included two other albumsâthat is, the Small Clive Album and a now dispersed third album. Furthermore, he owned twenty-three separately mounted miniatures as well as a hunting scene by Mir Kalan Khan, which was âundoubtedly commissionedâ by ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla, according to Robert Skelton.5
Due to a lack of written documentation, it is not clear how Clive acquired the three albums.6 It is generally believed, however, that the Large Clive Album originally belonged to ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla.7 Neither the exact circumstances of this change of ownership are documented, nor the fact that this album was indeed ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawlaâs property. In the following, I will advance the thesis that the album was indeed produced as an official present for Clive as a representative of the East India Company, and that the Nawab Vizier was the most likely patron, although at least one other person familiar with European tastes and reading habits seems to have been involved in its making. In accordance with its role as an official gift, the albumâs compilation follows clearly defined intentions; it tells a multifaceted history of the art and culture of Mughal India and conveys a political message to its recipient. As this message and the narratives are essentially communicated by visual means, I will focus my analysis mainly on the pictorial material; this is all the more justified since Cliveâs knowledge of Farsi seems to have been quite rudimentary.8 The calligraphic and textual specimens will therefore be treated only marginally, although they undoubtedly complement the narrative of the visual material and corroborate the intended meaning.
In order to accomplish this aim, I will first provide an overview of the heterogeneous material of the album. Then, a comparison of the structures of the Clive Album and an almost contemporary album, Smith-Lesouëf 247 (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris), which once belonged to Shir Jang Bahadur, ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawlaâs cousin, will help to determine the general outline of organisation as well as the underlying artistic conventions. Thirdly, I will scrutinise the beginning and the end of the album in order to establish who sent and who received the album.
In line with my assumption that the album was produced for a European recipient, the analysis of its pictorial content follows the Western direction of reading.9 This reading is confirmed by the first two pictorial double-pages (fols. 1vâ2r), to be analysed separately at the end (see figs. 3.7a and 3.7b).
1 Visual Narratives
The Large Clive Album consists of 104 folios, comprising 104 pages of paintings and 102 pages of calligraphy. Each painting and each calligraphic specimen is surrounded by borders made of small strips of coloured paper decorated with gilt floral patterns, which are framed inside by gold and white rules and outside by gold and dark-blue rules. The margin consists of white, gold-flecked paper; thin gold ruling marks the outer edge of each page. Usually, the painting or panel of calligraphy is placed slightly off-centre, closer to the spine. As is customary for Persianate albums, double-page spreads of paintings are alternated with double-page spreads of calligraphy. Measuring 49 by 34â¯cm, the pages are remarkably large. They are bound together by means of cloth hinges, probably made of red silk.10 The album is bound in a red leather cover. Small bands of golden tendrils frame the centre field, which is decorated with a scalloped medallion with pendants in the middle axis and four corner pieces. The tendrils on the cover are stylistically consistent with those of the small paper strips on the album folios and therefore must have been made at the same time.
Although the scope of the 104 pictorial pages is unexpectedly diverse, it is obvious even at first glance that the works were not randomly assembled but meaningfully arranged. The material was divided into several chapter-like groupings;11 these, however, were not conceived as self-contained units but split up into sections (in most cases two), interrupted by sections belonging to other thematic groups. The album starts with a grouping of nineteen pages presenting European engravings from the late sixteenth and first half of the seventeenth centuries (a twentieth engraving appears later). There follows a second grouping of eleven Persian single-page miniatures from 1600 to c. 1650, three Deccani paintings from the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, and one painting from late-seventeenth-century Bikaner. The Mughal material representing two-thirds of the albumâs pictorial content is divided into two sections. The smaller section consists of sixteen works that imitate Persian or European iconography and date mainly from the seventeenth century. The second and larger section comprises fifty-three pages. This section is broken up into several sub-divisions: the largest one with over twenty works is devoted to Mughal portraiture, the second one shows wise men and Sufi saints, the third focuses on hunting and court scenes, and the fourth consists of a haphazard group of a few genre scenes and some detached manuscript illustrations. The Mughal works span a period of more than two hundred years from about 1570 to the mid-eighteenth century.
Of the 102 pages devoted to calligraphy, a large portion (that is, forty-four pages) are chiefly from prose works, most probably copied in India in the eighteenth century. These include at least three classics such as the TÄrÄ«kh-i AlfÄ« (History of the Thousand Years).12 These pages are mainly written in shikasta. A superficial examination has already revealed that there are two pages with identical content and two consecutive pages from a single source. The next group of thirty-two pages13 principally comprises four- and six-line poems in nastaÊ¿lÄ«q, dating from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. Only a minority of them is signed, and their provenance is still pending further research. The third group holds a surprise as they originate from the Ottoman Empire. They take up twenty-five pages, a quarter of the calligraphy section.
1.1 European Material
As I will deal with the first two and last four pictorial double-page spreads separately, the following observations will concentrate on folios 5v to 94r.
The first group of six double-pages after the four introductory folios consists nearly exclusively of coloured French prints from the first half of the seventeenth century. Strikingly, the material is arranged according to the European hierarchy of painting genres. Hence, it begins with engravings after history paintings (fols. 5vâ6r), followed by religious subject-matter (fols. 7vâ8r) and eight allegorical figures (fols. 9vâ10r, 11vâ12r, 15vâ16r, 17vâ18r). While I have not yet been able to identify these prints,14 three of the four female figures with ostrich feathers in their hair must belong to a multi-part set of the Five Senses (fols. 16r, 17v, 18r). At least Taste (fol. 17b) is known from another, now dispersed and unidentified Indian muraqqaÊ¿,15 albeit with different colouring. Furthermore, this print might have served as model for two Indian portraits of a European woman, as Friederike Weis has suggested.16 One of them, probably the younger version, is mounted in one of the albums with Indian paintings owned by Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Gentil (1726â1799).17 The harp-playing allegory of Hearing (fol. 16r) is paired with an intentionally erotic tambourine player by Charles David (fol. 15v).
Another group of three allegorical figures (fols. 9v, 10r, and 12r) is more difficult to define, but quite probably once belonged to a series of the Four Times of the Day. They can be attributed to the Parisian publisher and printer François Mazot, who flourished around the middle of the seventeenth century. It is worth noting that two other prints in similar style were used for an Iranian book cover and as model for a wall painting that still adorns the house of the Armenian merchant Sukas in Isfahan, built in the latter half of the seventeenth century.18
Charles David (c. 1596/1600â1632), the son-in-law of the well-known engraver Pierre Firens (c. 1580â1638), was a lesser-known artist who mainly published with Pierre Mariette (1596â1657) and Jean I Le Blond (c. 1594â1666), two of the most prolific Parisian publishers in the first half of the seventeenth century. François Mazot belonged to a small number of Parisian publishers who specialised in the distribution of engravings abroad, beyond the confines of Europe. As in the present case, the female figures in these engravings soon became unfashionable and no longer found buyers in France.19
An ensemble devoted to Christian themes in general follows this group of French prints. It consists of Flemish engravings and Mughal paintings of the Holy Virgin and Jesus Christ, summarising the Mughal engagement with Christian iconography around 1600. Although this group is repeatedly interrupted by sub-groups of divergent content, it can be read as a unit.
The first four engravings (fols. 13vâ14r, 19vâ20r) are related to the works of the most famous Flemish engravers but are either copies after them or variations by unknown artisans. The series starts with the âTrue Image of Our Lady of Loretoâ on the left half of the double-spread and with Christ on Mount Nebo on the right half. This latter print was cut out from Jerónimo Nadalâs widespread and influential Adnotationes et Meditationes in Evangelia, first published in Antwerp in 1593 and mainly illustrated by the Wierix family workshop. The print shows angels sitting in a cave, serving a meal to Christ, but it has been stripped of its explanatory text in Latin. This opening is complimented by a Last Supper that quite probably goes back to a composition by Maarten de Vos from the second half of the sixteenth century.20 It is paired with a Nativity of the Virgin that replicates mirror-reversed a work by Adriaen Collaert, after a drawing by Jan van der Straet from about 1588â1590.21
The Mughal response consists of two portraits of the Virgin Mary (fols. 21vâ22r). These inconspicuous miniatures could well date from the eighteenth century, as suggested by the curators of the Victoria and Albert Museum.22 This seems even more likely when they are compared to another set of Mughal imitations of Christian and/or European imagery, which follows much later in the album but can be linked to this group (fols. 51vâ52r, 53vâ54r).
1.2 Persian Material
Another coherent group consists of eleven Safavid miniatures and one Mughal imitation, split up into two equal sets. They date from around 1600 to the mid-seventeenth centuryâthat is, from the reign of Shah Ê¿Abbas I (r. 1587â1629) to the middle years of Shah Ê¿Abbas IIâs rule (r. 1642â1666)âand are representative of the generic single portraits of standing or sitting young women and men. Their style and iconography are generally associated with Riza Ê¿Abbasi (d. 1635), the most influential artist of Shah Ê¿Abbasâ reign. He dominated artistic production in Persia until long after his death, and his compositions were widely imitated by his followers. Therefore, it is not surprising that the series starts with a lightly tinted drawing of a young woman with a wine flask by this master artist (fol. 25v).23 This single figure is flanked by a similar female cup-bearer by Muhammad Qasim (d. 1659), one of Rizaâs most successful students. The second part of this Safavid group starts with another drawing, this time a group scene, also by Muhammad Qasim (fol. 43v). It is paired with an amorous couple by Mir Afzal al-Husayni (fl. c. 1630â1660), yet another important student of Riza (fol. 44r).
As various instances in Jahangirâs Gulshan Album confirm,24 Persian single-page compositions were already known in India in the seventeenth century. Consequently, Mughal artists imitated their iconography from time to time. A case in point is the fully-coloured representation of a Persian cup-bearer in this album, which forms a double-page with the Safavid painting of a seated young woman (fols. 45vâ46r).25 It seems that Persian single-page compositions were not an uncommon feature in Indian albums from the middle of the eighteenth century onwards. At least three instances can be cited: one from an album of Colonel Gentil,26 another from the Swinton albums,27 and a third from the Polier albums.28 The Gentil example is especially interesting, as two of the three miniatures (fig. 3.1b) are very close to fols. 29vâ30r in the Clive Album (fig. 3.1a).
A characteristic feature of Persian album pages from the late sixteenth to the seventeenth century are borders that consist of regularly-arranged snippets of calligraphy, precisely as on four of the eleven Safavid miniatures in the Clive Album (fols. 28r, 30r, 46r, and 48r). This suggests that Persian single-page miniatures made their way to India, not as single works, but as collections, already mounted in albums. Even if these borders differ slightly, the colour scheme and floral vocabulary used for the small panels between the calligraphic snippets (fol. 30r is shown on fig. 3.1a, right hand page) is identical. It can therefore be concluded that these four pages once belonged to one and the same Persian album before they were detached and re-used in the Clive Album.
1.3 Mughal Material
In contrast to the European and Persian material, the works with Mughal iconography form the most extensive group, incorporating half of the painting pages. They assemble a heterogeneous selection of subject-matter that ranges from hunting, horse-riding, and polo matches to a religious gathering of dervishes, a prayer assembly in a mosque, as well as fighting elephants and portraits. This varied material is roughly organised into three sets. The first set consists of highly popular motifs and genre scenes, while the second set is mostly made up of manuscript illustrations. The third and most extensive set is mainly dedicated to portraiture and shows members of the Mughal court, wise or religious men, an athlete, a youth with his buck, and an antique European hero.
Some of the motifs of the first set are known from other albums of the second half of the eighteenth century. One of these popular iconographies shows an armoured warrior on horseback (fol. 35v; fig. 3.2a). Although a late version of the first half of the eighteenth century, it clearly goes back to the equestrian portrait of Aurangzeb as military leader from between 1670 and 1680, mounted in the third album of Richard Johnson (no. 4) who stood in the service of the East India Company from 1770 to 1790 (fig. 3.2b). There exists not only another version in the same Johnson Album (no. 5), but also at least a third version of the same period, which is now kept in the San Diego Museum of Art (1990.361). A fourth version is bound into one of the Polier albums (Museum für Islamische Kunst, I. 4596, fol. 10r, fig. 3.2c).29 A fifth variant can be attributed to Chitarman II; instead of Aurangzeb, it shows his great-grandson Muhammad Shah and is mounted in one of the albums of Sir Gore Ouseley.30
Figure 3.1a
Double-page opening with two single-page miniatures of Persian young men, Iran, 1620â1650, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:29/B-1964 and IS.133:30/A-1964
Figure 3.1b
Double-page opening with two single-page miniatures of Persian young men, Iran, 1620â1650, album of 44 folios with Indian and Persian paintings
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Estampes, Réserve Od 43, fol. 33r and 32r
Figure 3.2a
Equestrian portrait of Aurangzeb, Mughal India, first half of eighteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:35/B-1964
Figure 3.2b
Equestrian portrait of Aurangzeb, Mughal India, 1670â1680
British Library, London, Johnson Album 3, no. 4
Figure 3.2c
Equestrian portrait of Aurangzeb, Mughal India, eighteenth century
Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Museum für Islamische Kunst, I. 4596, fol. 10r
Although portraiture plays an important part in the Clive Album, most of the court members portrayed are neither identified by inscriptions, nor can they all be recognised by comparison with existing images. Only twelve persons are known, and only six of them bear a small one-line inscription in gold ink giving their name. These are written either on the gold-flecked margin, just above the mounted portrait, or on the framing border, or even directly on the image. Among these persons are the Daudzai Afghan general Dilir Khan (d. 1683), who served under Aurangzeb (fol. 40r);31 Ghazi al-Din Khan (d. 1710), another of Aurangzebâs amirs (fol. 37v);32 a certain KhwajaÊ¿ Bihbud who is represented twice (fols. 82r and 94r); the wrestler or palvÄn Shir Ê¿Ali Bijapuri who was active under Jahangir (fol. 78r);33 and the unfinished portrait of probably the Rajput ruler Hari Singh of Kishangarh (r. 1628â1643)34 (fol. 92r).
The ruling Mughal family is represented by Bahadur Shah (r. 1707â1712) (fol. 69r and probably 62v35), his second son and governor of Bengal, Prince Muhammad Ê¿Azim al-Shan (1664â1712)36 at a prayer assembly (fol. 38r), Prince Walajah (d. 1707) (fol. 76r), son of AÊ¿zam Shah (d. 1707) and nephew of Bahadur Shah, as well as Farrukh Siyar (r. 1712â1719) (fols. 68v and 104r). A court scene with female dancers performing in front of a young ruler, whom Terence McInerney has identified as Muhammad Shah (r. 1719â1748) (fol. 64v), complements this series of dynastic portraits.37 Although the choice of identified non-royal figures (let alone the bulk of unknown persons) appears rather random, the presence of portraits of successive Mughal emperors from Bahadur Shah to Muhammad Shah (with the exception of the three unfortunate rulers whose reigns did not last more than a couple of months) speaks of an intentional selection. It is revealing that they follow each other quite closely (fol. 64v, 68vâ69r).
This cluster of imperial portraits emphasises recent Mughal history. This is all the more obvious as Akbar (r. 1556â1605), Jahangir (r. 1605â1627), Shah Jahan (r. 1627â1658) and Aurangzeb (r. 1658â1707) are absent. Not absent, however, are the dynastic âforefatherâ Timur (1336â1405) and the two first Mughal emperors Babur (r. 1526â1530) and Humayun (r. 1530â1540). They are depicted in an ideal, shrine-like scene where all three rulers are sitting on golden thrones with their individual parasols (chattri) under a tripartite canopy (fol. 61r). Fashioned after a well-known composition of the early seventeenth century,38 a similar version exists in one of the Swinton albums.39
The courtly group scene with Muhammad Shah (fol. 64v) is exceptional, as it is not directly followed by the double-page spread with his predecessors but disrupted by two figures on horseback (see fig. 3.3c). The Muhammad Shah scene is faced by a nearly contemporary darbÄr scene from Murshidabad (fol. 65r), both concluding the above-mentioned second set of Mughal manuscript paintings. Three of them derive from illustrated manuscripts from Akbarâs period, from between c. 1570 and 1605 (fols. 57v, 58r, 59v), complemented by a copy from the eighteenth century (fol. 60r). This group of early imperial productions also comprises the already mentioned dynastic triple portrait (fol. 61r). Immediately afterwards follows the portrait of Bahadur Shah (fol. 62v), flanked by the portrayal of a musician (fol. 63r). The juxtaposition of Akbari and post-Aurangzeb paintings connects the earliest productions of the courtly workshop with its latest achievements since 1707. It thus reads like an art historical statement that highlights continuation without concealing the differences.
1.4 Ottoman Calligraphic Material
Although this article focuses solely on painting, a group of Ottoman calligraphic specimens deserves brief mention. Their inclusion in an album of mixed content is quite unique. The twenty-five leaves date to the seventeenth century. Four of them are in dÄ«vÄnÄ« script, which was commonly used for administrative letters within the sultanâs chancellery (fols. 32vâ33r, 76v, and 87r).40 Another twelve leaves are calligraphic specimens or qiá¹Ê¿a in the standard combination of thuluth and naskh (fols. 61vâ73r). The matching size of the leaves and similar layouts suggest that they derive from an album of earlier, Ottoman production. This group is complemented by another six qiá¹Ê¿a leaves (fols. 56vâ59r; 80vâ81r). Finally, there are three calligraphic panels in large thuluth script that quite probably also are of Ottoman origin (fols. 38vâ39r; 54v).
2 Elective Affinities? The Clive Album and Album Smith-Lesouëf 247
In order to deepen our understanding of the Clive Album and advance its contextualisation, I will compare it in greater detail with an unaltered, nearly contemporary Indian album at the Bibliothèque nationale de France, commonly known under its shelf-mark Smith-Lesouëf 247.41 Contrary to the Clive Album, Smith-Lesouëf 247 contains not more than fifty-eight foliosâthat is, only half the number of the those in the Clive Album. According to a note on fol. 35v, Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Gentil acquired this muraqqaÊ¿ in the province of Awadh in 1768. It had once belonged to Shir Jang Bahadurâa cousin of ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla and governor of Kashmir under Muhammad Shah42âfor whom it was also put together.43 As was customary, double-page spreads with paintings alternate with openings with calligraphy. Measuring 44.3â¯Ãâ¯31.2â¯cm, the album pages are slightly smaller than those of the Clive Album (49â¯Ãâ¯34â¯cm). In contrast to the homogeneous Clive margins, the colour of the paper varies, as does its design. The calligraphic works are mounted on plain, buff paper, whereas the paintings are laid out on differently coloured papers decorated either with various lozenge patterns or with gold-flecking.
As in the Clive Album, the assembled pictorial works are organised along some general but distinct lines. Following the Persian reading orientation, the album starts with five pages dedicated to wise men (fols. 1r, 3râ2v, 5râ4v; fig. 3.5b). These are followed by a double-page with nobles on a terrace, each of them entertained by a woman or a group of female musicians (fols. 7râ6v, fig. 3.4b), which introduces a series of ten double-pages mainly presenting portraits of women (fols. 9râ8v to 27râ26v). This series is succeeded by four openings with Bhils preparing food (fol. 28v) and enjoying wine (fol. 29r); two versions of a so-called camel fight modelled after the famous original by the Persian painter Bihzad (fols. 31râ30v; fig. 3.4f); two composite elephants (fols. 33râ32v); and two portraits of horses (fols. 35râ34v). The following opening with two female likenesses (fols. 37râ36v) quite unexpectedly segues into an encampment scene with a blank facing page (fol. 38v). Spectacularly mounted on two facing dÄ«bÄcha pages are the portraits of the Mughal princes Muhammad Ê¿Azim al-Shan and his brother RafiÊ¿ al-Shan (1671â1712)44 (fols. 40râ39v), which introduce a series of ten portraits of Mughal nobles, a Persian ambassador, an Abyssinian musician, as well as an Abyssinian grandee (fol. 45v, identified in French as Malik Ambar). Two equestrian portraits of Emperor Farrukh Siyar and his unfortunate successor RafiÊ¿ al-Darjat (1699â1719) close this self-contained section on fols. 50râ49v. Falconers on horseback (fols. 52râ51v; fig. 3.3d) and a double-page with drivers on elephants hunting lions (fols. 54râ53v; fig. 3.9b) form a kind of intermission before the last two double-pages resume portraiture with two historical figures from the times of Humayun and Jahangir, respectively (fols. 56râ55v). The album ends with the depictions of two Turkoman prisoners (fols. 58râ57v; fig. 3.3b).
Figure 3.3a
Double-page opening; left: A Central Asian chieftain, Mughal India, signed Riza Jahangir shahi, c. 1605; right: Turkoman prisoners, Iran, late sixteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:49/B-1964 and IS.133:50/A-1964
Figure 3.3b
Double-page opening with two Turkoman prisoners, Mughal India, eighteenth century (?), Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 58râ57v
Figure 3.3c
Double-page opening; left: Persian prince on horseback hawking, Mughal India, seventeenth century or later; right: Equestrian portrait, Mughal India, eighteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:66/B-1964 and IS.133:67/A-1964
Figure 3.3d
Double-page opening; left: Persian prince on horseback hawking, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century; right: Falconer on horseback, Mughal India, seventeenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 52râ51v
Figure 3.3e
Double-page opening; left: Amir on horseback, Mughal India, c. 1670â1680; right: Equestrian portrait of Muhammad Farrukh Siyar, Mughal India, c. 1715, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:103/B-1964 and IS.133:104/A-1964
Figure 3.3f
Double-page opening; left: Mirza Rafi al-Darajat (?) on horseback, Mughal India, early eighteenth century; right: Equestrian portrait of Muʿin al-Din Muhammad (?), Mughal India, early eighteenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 50râ49v
Several parallels can be drawn between the Mughal material of the Clive Album and that of Shir Jang Bahadur. Starting with the layout of double-page spreads, which form the smallest unit of a Persianate album, one can already find numerous analogies regarding the thematic pairing of similar or even identical subject-matter. The two Turkoman chieftains are a good case in point (fig. 3.3a). In the Clive Album, one is sitting on his heels, holding an arrow in his right hand (fol. 49v), the other in mirror-reversed posture with his arm fettered by a wooden pÄlÄhang, a kind of Y-shaped branch which functions like modern-day handcuffs (fol. 50r). As can be guessed from the equivalent double-page spread from Smith-Lesouëf 247, where both are captive, this subject-matter circulated widely in the Persianate world and was known in many variations.45
The same holds true for the mounted falconer. It appears twice in the Clive Album (fols. 31v and 66v), once facing an elephant and his mahout (fol. 32r), and the second time (fol. 66v) paired with an unidentified equestrian portrait (fol. 67r; fig. 3.3c).46 In Smith-Lesouëf 247 (fols. 52râ51v), it is coupled with another image of a falconer (fig. 3.3d). These juxtapositions prove the versatility of a given iconography and reveal which thematic aspect of it is highlighted. Thus, it is either the riding of a quadruped (horse or elephant), or the different postures of a horse (moving or rearing), or even falconry on horseback (once with the falcon sitting on the hunterâs fist, once flying away).
There are yet more potential associations when a double-page spread is seen in the wider context of the muraqqaÊ¿. Thus, the opening with falconer and horseman in the Clive Album (fig. 3.3c) is embedded between the Akbari and post-Aurangzeb examples of courtly painting traditions (fols. 57vâ65r) and examples of courtly portraiture that start with the two facing emperors Farrukh Siyar and Bahadur Shah (fols. 68vâ69r). In this regard, these imperial portraits mark the beginning of a new chapter. When reading the subsequent double-page spread with the falconer as a portrait, as in Smith-Lesouëf 247 (fol. 52r, identified as âAbdulmoumin Kan Seigneur Uzbek [sic!]â), instead of an iconographic type,47 and when considering the horseman as a known person, this arrangement becomes more easily discernible. In Smith-Lesouëf 247, the two falconers play a similar role. They function like a hinge, leading from the series of male portraits that terminates in the two equestrian portraits of Farrukh Siyar and his successor to a double-page spread with hunting elephants. It is worth noting that Farrukh Siyar and his respective counterpart share a similarly elevated role in both albums, since in both cases they form the culminating point of either a thematic group, or, as is the case in the Clive Album, the whole muraqqaÊ¿ (fig. 3.3e).
Formal congruence or contrast is another shared feature. An obvious example consists of the facing portraits of two nobles sitting on a terrace, leaning against large bolsters, and either looking straight ahead or watching the person opposite (fig. 3.4a and 3.4b).48 The similar or even identical colours of the bolsters and their angular positions work like a geometrical visual bracket. In other cases, this visual link may materialise through contrasting colours (Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 17râ16v). Geometrical forms such as circles, ovals, and triangles constitute another means for juxtaposing two paintingsâfor example, in the double-page spreads with a polo game and a gathering of dervishes in the Clive Album (fols. 33vâ34r; fig. 3.4c), as well as gopis dancing around Krishna and a group of equilibrists in Smith-Lesouëf 247 (fols. 11râ10v; fig. 3.4d). Here, one case displays the combination of a vertically and a horizontally oriented oval and the other the combination of a circle and a triangle.
There exist, of course, other examples in both albums, where the same artistic conventions are employed. It might suffice here to allude to two fighting scenes with elephants and camels, respectively (fols. 41vâ42r in Clive, fols. 31râ30v in Smith-Lesouëf 247; fig. 3.4e and 3.4f), or the two openings with the famous group portrait of six of the most venerated shaykhs (fols. 85vâ86r in Clive, fols. 2vâ3r in Smith-Lesouëf 247; fig. 3.5a and 3.5b).49 A last example are pairs of âportraitsâ of a European woman and the Virgin Mary (fols. 51vâ52r in Clive, fols. 23râ22v in Smith-Lesouëf 247; fig. 3.5c and 3.5d).
In terms of the internal organisation of self-contained groups, variety is a heavily employed characteristic. The series of portraits once again can serve as a case in point. As can be observed in the Clive Album as well as in Shir Jang Bahadurâs album, alternating types of portraiture forms a fixed rule. Thus, standing figures alternate with sitting individuals and jharokha portraits; likenesses of mounted nobles and single portraits alternate with group scenes; and openings with portraits of European women alternate with openings employing portraits of Indian women.
Figure 3.4a
Double-page opening; left: Seated noble, Mughal India, second quarter of eighteenth century; right: Rajput ruler, possibly Hari Singh of Kishengarh, Mughal India, c. 1640, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:91/B-1964 and IS.133:92/A-1964
Figure 3.4b
Double-page opening; left: Portrait of a noble (identified in French as âMahabat Kan Seigneur Patane dans Son Serail [sic!]â), Mughal India, eighteenth century; right: Portrait of a noble (identified in French as âLe Nabab Chacst Kan Frere de la celebre Nourijehan Begom, Favorite de LâEmpereur Djehanguir [sic!]â), Mughal India, c. 1640, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 7râ6v
Figure 3.4c
Double-page opening; left: A game of polo, Mughal India, seventeenth century; right: Assembly of yogis, Mughal India, mid-eighteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:33/B-1964 and IS.133:34/A-1964
Figure 3.4d
Double-page opening; left: Krishna and the gopis, Mughal India, eighteenth century; right: Acrobats, Mughal India, second half of eighteenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 11râ10v
Figure 3.4e
Double-page opening; left: Attendants rescuing a fallen man from an enraged elephant, Mughal India, mid-eighteenth century; right: An elephant out of its mahoutâs control, Mughal India, mid-eighteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:41/B-1964 and IS.133:42/A-1964
Figure 3.4f
Double-page opening; left: Camel fight, Mughal India, first half of eighteenth century; right: Entangled camels, Mughal India, late seventeenth/early eighteenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 31râ30v
Another often used device is contrast through interruption. In both albums, the long series of up to ten double-pages are broken up, more than once, by thematically contrasting double-page openingsâsuch as Krishna and the gopis on one page and equilibrists on the other in Smith-Lesouëf 247 (fig. 3.4d). This interruption not only prevents monotony, but it can also accentuate the content of the interspersed double-page spread itself, drawing attention to a singular painting or pair of paintings.50 Contrary to Shir Jang Bahadurâs muraqqaÊ¿, variety and contrast structure not only the chapter-like groupings in the Clive Album but also explain the complex interlacing of different groups, as mentioned above. In most cases, there is a sequence of three inter-related folios from one thematic group before they are interrupted either by a sub-division of another group or by a single folio of special interest.51
The comparison with Smith-Lesouëf 247 has shown that the Clive Album shares similar structural features regarding thematic content. The visual parallels between the openings of the two muraqqaÊ¿s are remarkably numerous and attest to shared artistic conventions and training as well as patronsâ viewing habits. While the non-Mughal works form coherent groups, the interplay between the Mughal works is naturally richer and more subtle. The most remarkable feature of the Clive Album, however, consists of the geographic range of its works. Half of the pictures and iconographies derive from foreign sources. Although the calligraphic section awaits further research, nearly one-third is of Ottoman origin, whereas the four- and six-line poems, which usually make up a substantial part of the calligraphy in a Persianate album, represent no more than another third. The last third is dedicated to prose text written in shikasta.
Overall, the Clive Album is conceived as a compendium-anthology providing a broad vision of Mughal India in the first half of the eighteenth century, presenting cultural networks, artistic and historical achievements, as well as religious diversity. However, this wealth (as visualised in the diagram in fig. 3.6) differs from the content of Shir Jang Bahadurâs muraqqaÊ¿, making it difficult to believe that this album was made for a Mughal patron.
3 Hidden Messages in the Opening and Closing Pages
For whom, then, was the album made? The answer to this question can be found in the opening and closing double-page spreads of the album. The first opening (fols. 1vâ2r, fig. 3.7a) shows a small Flemish engraving from around 1600 representing an eagle, a falcon, a finch, and a magpie with a tree. An Indian portrait of a verditer flycatcher (Eumyias thalassinus) sitting on a small tree occupies the opposite page. The direct juxtaposition of a European engraving and an Indian miniature appears only once more in the entire album,52 butâand this is crucialâit is the only instance where birds are shown. Here, at the very start, this pairing establishes a visual link between the two cultures without blurring the differences. Thus, one is bound to observe opposing attitudes: the eagle appears almost aggressive with its open beak and the prey in its claws, while the flycatcher remains silent, politely waiting for its turn to speak. Whether the artist intended for viewers to arrive at such a reading, we cannot know with any certainty. In any case, it is an apt preparation for the following pictorial double-page spread (fols. 3vâ4r, fig. 3.7b).
Figure 3.5a
Double-page opening; left: A group of Muslim holy men, Mughal India, late seventeenth/early eighteenth century; right: Shal ʿAbduʾl Qadir and Khwaja Muʿin al-din Chisthi, Mughal India, c. 1760/65, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, IS.133:85/B-1964 and IS.133:86/A-1964
Figure 3.5b
Double-page opening; left: Khwaja Muʿin al-din Chisthi, Mughal India, seventeenth century; right: A group of Muslim holy men, Mughal India, mid-eighteenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 3râ2v
Figure 3.5c
Double-page opening; left: European lady holding a dish of fruit, Mughal India, late seventeenth century; right: Virgin Mary holding Christ Child on crescent moon, engraving, Flemish, sixteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, IS.133:51/B-1964 and IS.133:52/A-1964
Figure 3.5d
Double-page opening; left: European lady holding a glass of wine, Mughal India, seventeenth century; right: Virgin Mary holding Christ Child, Mughal India, first half of seventeenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 23râ22v
Figure 3.6
Diagram showing the number and proportion of paintings and calligraphy specimens in the Large Clive Album according to their origin
Both pages show a European engraving. On the left, we discern the personification of Asia53 and on the right Alexander the Great. Today, the figure of the youthful general riding towards Asia involuntarily makes one think of his conquest of India. The question arises, however, to what extent such a reading was comprehensible to the English recipient and how far it reflects the patronâs intention. There is no doubt that Alexander the Great played a significant role in both the European and Persianate worlds. In Persian epics, Iskandar develops from a boisterous young general into a charismatic ruler. He left the Iranian princes in their positions and allowed the conquered Indian rulers to continue ruling, as long as they would acknowledge him. As was generally known, one of the Indian kings accepted this and remained on his throne, while another king refused and had to pay for it with his life. In the Persianate world, Iskandar was considered the epitome of an exemplary ruler who listened to the advice of sages and acted according to ethical principles. For some, he even attained the status of a prophet. Iskandarâs relationship with the mysterious al-Khidr, the âGreen Oneâ, is famous. The latter found the source of eternal life andâin contrast to Iskandarâbecame immortal.54 Incidentally, there exists another double-page in the Clive Album that can be interpreted as an allusion to al-Khidr and Iskandar. It shows a green-robed old man carrying a tray with regal insignia on the right, looking at a ruler in antique garb holding a goblet on the left (fols. 89vâ90r; fig. 3.8a). A comparison with the miniature from the Small Clive Album showing al-Khidr as a green-robed sage standing on a fish (fol. 12r; fig. 3.8) reveals great similarities, even if the attributes are different. On this basis, the prince with goblet can tentatively be read as Iskandar.
Figure 3.7a
Double-page opening; left: An eagle, a falcon, a finch, and a magpie, engraving, Flemish, c. 1600; right: Bird (verditer flycatcher) sitting on a small tree, Deccan (?), first half of eighteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:1/B-1964 and IS.133:2/A-1964
Figure 3.7b
Double-page opening; left: Asia, from a series of the four continents, mirror-inverted copy after Adriaen Collaert (engraver) and Maarten de Vos (inventor), Flanders or Netherlands, second half of sixteenth century; right: Alexander Magnus, copy after Adriaen Collaert (engraver) and Maarten de Vos (inventor), Flanders or Netherlands, second half of sixteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:3/B-1964 and IS.133:4/A-1964
Figure 3.8a
Double-page opening; left: Man in antique dress holding a goblet with lid (after a European engraving), Mughal India, eighteenth century (?); right: Muslim saint (al-Khidr) bearing regal insignia, Mughal India, mid-eighteenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:89/B-1964 and IS.133:90/A-1964
Figure 3.8b
Al-Khidr with rosary standing on a fish, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century, Small Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, IS.48:12/A-1956
The European understanding of Alexander is revealed by the print itself. This is a copy after an engraving by Adriaen Collaert, which goes back to a design by Maarten de Vos. It is the third sheet in a four-part series on ancient rulers.55 Nonchalantly sitting on his rearing stallion, he towers over his conquered enemies, Ninus of Babylonia and Cyrus of Persia, who are at his feet. The four-headed leopard with wings refers to Danielâs dream from the Old Testament.
Of course, this theologically tinted interpretation had lost its meaning by the eighteenth century. Nevertheless, Alexander occupied a prominent place within learned English society in the 1700s.56 This was also true for candidates who applied to the East India Company for so-called writerships. Besides book-keeping and writing, their curriculum also included classical education.57
After Robert Cliveâs legendary victory in the Battle of Plassey in 1757, William Pitt, then secretary for war and foreign affairs, celebrated him in the English Parliament as a âheaven-born generalâ and compared him to Alexander the Great.58 John Henry Grose, who published his travelogue Voyage to the East Indies in London in 1766, which coincided with Cliveâs stay in India, followed in his steps. Describing his experiences on the subcontinent from 1750 to 1764, he equated Robert Clive with the antique hero and exclaimed: âIf a Justin or a Curtius had been living in our times, what would they have said, to find the glory of Alexander the Great outrivalled by a British subject?â59
Thus, the comparison of Clive with Alexander the Great was commonplace both in England and among the British in India. Given the popularity and fame of Clive in India, the Mughal elite in general and ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla in particular cannot have been ignorant of this equation. Since both cultures shared ancient lore, it was only natural to place their shared heritage in the person of Alexander/Iskandar at the beginning of the album. Moreover, the allusion to Alexander was, on the one hand, an elegant way of flattering Robert Clive and dedicating the album to him. This praxis clearly reflects the panegyric traditions at Persianate courts where the equation of a living ruler with a legendary royal figure presented common practice.60 On the other hand, the allusion conveys the Mughal expectations towards the East India Companyâthat is, just rule over Bengal, similar to the rule Alexander/Iskandar exercised after his conquest of India.
Let us now turn to the last three double-page spreads at the end of the Clive Album, since they provide several further aspects in connection with these expectations. They show in sequence a lion attacking a buffalo on one side and the hunt for a lion on the other side (fol. 97vâ98r; fig. 3.9a). In one case, the lion is the attacker; in the other, it is the attacked. The buffalo or bull brought down by a beast of prey constitutes an ancient mythological symbol of Iran.61 This striking image of a fundamental struggle over life and death enjoyed a certain popularity in Mughal painting in the eighteenth century,62 probably as a reaction to the devastating capture of Delhi in 1739 and later disasters. It is revealing that this motif plays a prominent role in the large painting showing ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla hunting lions near Allahabad, the painting that the Nawab Vizier presented to Robert Clive.63 It is attributed to Mir Kalan Khan who painted it c. 1760â1765. This corresponds to the last years of the Bengal war between the British (lead by Clive) and the Mughals (with ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla as one of the belligerents) that began with the Battle of Plassey in 1757 and ended with the Treaty of Allahabad. Despite its deeper significance, it is the depiction of a lethal attack in particular that counts in the context of the album.
The following opening juxtaposes two famous scenes from the ShÄhnÄma (fig. 3.9c). The left scene depicts the White Div (in fact, Akvan Div) carrying away Rustam who is sleeping on a rock. According to Firdausi, the Div would then throw Rustam into the sea where he had to fight against sea monsters. In the scene on the right, Rustam slays the White Div, one of his seven heroic deeds. Here, too, we are faced with two sides of a medal; in parallel to the preceding double-page, but in reversed order, the defeated here becomes the victor. The third juxtaposition finally repeats this lesson (fig. 3.9d) by means of a hunting scene and a war scene.
Common to all three double-page spreads is the idea that tables can turn: the hunter can become the hunted; the supposedly defeated can turn into the victor. This applies to times of peace as well as times of war. These concluding pages can justifiably be interpreted as a series of parables that depict the inconsistency of fate. Regarding their position at the end and its content, they are very much reminiscent of the moral lessons taught in mirrors for princes. This interpretation can also be backed by one of the opening pages in Smith-Lesouëf 247, showing two lion hunts with contrasting outcome, obviously a visual trope (fols. 54râ53v; fig. 3.9b).64 In the context of the Clive Album, this triple series therefore can be understood as a sly message to both Clive and the East India Company. Finallyâand tellinglyâthe album self-confidently closes with two equestrian portraits of an unidentified Mughal noble on the left and Farrukh Siyar to the right (fols. 103vâ104r; fig. 3.3e).
Figure 3.9a
Double-page opening; left: A lion in combat with a water buffalo, Mughal India, first half of eighteenth century; right: Three men lion-hunting, Mughal India, seventeenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:97/B-1964 and IS.133:98/A-1964
Figure 3.9b
Double-page opening; left: Hunters strapping a dead lion onto an elephant, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century; right: Lion hunting, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century, Shir Jang Bahadur Album
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 54râ53v
Figure 3.9c
Double-page opening; left: The White Div carrying Rustam away, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century; right: Rustam slaying the White Div, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:99/B-1964 and IS.133:100/A-1964
Figure 3.9d
Double-page opening; left: Rajput princes hunting bears, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century; right: Battle between the forces of Iran and Turan, Mughal India, mid-seventeenth century, Large Clive Album
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, IS.133:101/B-1964 and IS.133:102/A-1964
The distinct visual messages at the beginning and end of the Clive Album, which is read according to the Western direction of reading from left to right, support the argument that this album was made specifically for Robert Clive. This conclusion is also supported by the sheer size of its leaves. Their dimensions surmount the folio sizes not only of Smith-Lesouëf 247 but also of other comparable albums of the early eighteenth century, by 2 to 5â¯cm in height.65 The page size as well as the scope of the album are impressive and appropriate for a diplomatic gift.
4 Patron and Recipient
Two questions remain to be addressed. When was this album presented to Clive? And, more importantly, was Shujaʿ al-Dawla really the patron?
There are several indications that support the assumption that Clive received this large muraqqaÊ¿ during his third sojourn in India. Prior to his departure back to Britain in 1767, he announced in a letter to his wife that he had sent home âa Chest full of Shawls, Pictures, Swords, & other Curiositiesâ.66 In another letter only one year later, in 1768, he asked his secretary Henry Strachey for a map of India and âa few Indian picturesâ to be sent âfor the amusement of Prince Ferdinand, the King of Prussiaâs brotherâ to Spa in Belgium.67
The most probable occasion for receiving this album was 12 August 1765, the date when the Treaty of Allahabad was concluded in the aftermath of the Battle of Buxar; as was customary, the handing-over of presents quite certainly had its share in the ensuing ceremonies. The treaty was signed by the Mughal emperor Shah Ê¿Alam II (r. 1760â1806) and Robert Clive in the presence of ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla. The Battle of Buxar had taken place on 23 October 1764, and European soldiers and Indian sepoys of the East India Company had defeated a large Indian army led by ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla, Mir Qasim, the nawab of Bengal (r. 1760â1763), and Shah Ê¿Alam II. The British victory marked a turning point in British-Indian relations and confirmed the British as a political power in South Asia. At the instigation of Robert Clive, the treaty granted the East India Company the office of imperial Diwani (provincial revenue administration system) of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. From this day on, the East India Company had the right to administer these three provinces and to collect its revenue. The nawab of Bengal and Shah Ê¿Alam were compensated with an annual payment in return.68 The province of Awadh was given back to ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla, under the condition that he paid a war indemnity to the East India Company.
Even though ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawlaâs role as patron of the arts in general and as collector in particular remains elusive, there exist many references corroborating his role. Apart from a detached folio in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art that on its back bears an inscription mentioning his name,69 several portraits of him dating from around 1755 to c. 1765 or 1767 attest to his activities.70 Some of the albums, which are stamped with the seal of his successor Asaf al-Dawla (r. 1775â1797) and found their way into other collections, might once have belonged to ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla. There are also several album leaves now kept in the Chester Beatty Library that Linda Leach has tentatively ascribed to him.71
Although there exists no proof for this conjecture, several details regarding the Clive Album are noteworthy. The Chester Beatty pages and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art folio both feature similar margins made of gold-flecked buff paper.72 The inner framing with strips of paper, especially their outer ruling in gold, blue and red and the inner ruling in gold only constitute a type of hallmark. Except for the absence of red, the Clive margins and the inner borders are comparable. However, their quality differs slightly, as the decoration of the inner borders of the Chester Beatty folios is more elaborate and the execution finer.73 Another common feature consists of works by a calligrapher named Ê¿Abdullah (al-Husayni),74 whom Leach has identified as a Persian immigrant living in Lucknow. This calligrapher, whose works are also present in the album of ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawlaâs cousin Shir Jang Bahadur,75 is represented by at least one work in the Clive Album (fol. 100v). This is certainly no coincidence, even less so since Lucknow was ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawlaâs main residence from 1757 to 1765.76 Another fact that speaks for ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla having commissioned the Clive Album consists of the large number of seventeenth-century Safavid single-page miniatures. Like the Akbari works, they might derive from the rich Mughal collections. It is more probable, however, that they were part of the wealth he inherited from his father Safdar Jang (1708â1754) who was of Persian origin and served as the leader of the Iranian party at the Mughal court.
A last point concerns the relatively substantial presence of written pages with literary content. Such a selection is unique; more than an Indian collectorâs taste, it rather reflects the peculiar historic and literary interests of European scholars such as Gentil, who had started collecting in 1757 and since 1763 had been in the service of ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla.77 Working as a military advisorâhe had helped craft the Treaty of Allahabad78âit cannot be ruled out that he was also involved in the preparation of this album. The fact that the French prints are ordered according to the European hierarchy of genres supports this thesis, as does the fact that he once owned the album made for Shir Jang Bahadur (Smith-Lesouëf 247). Familiar with both Mughal as well as Western culture, he would have been predestined to contribute to the making of the album.
5 Conclusion
From the outset, the so-called Large Clive Album seems to have been conceived as a political gift by Shujaʿ al-Dawla. Through a vast array of visual material from European, Persian, Ottoman, Indian and Mughal sources, the muraqqaʿ summarises the central achievements of Mughal art. It reflects the positive self-perception of a proud, albeit struggling empire, culturally as well as historically intertwined with Europe. This self-confidently depicted history of cultural cosmopolitanism is clearly meant to impress the recipient.
By addressing Robert Clive in the guise of Alexander at the beginning of the album, ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawlaâperhaps instigated by Gentilâflattered a powerful victor, while at the same time alluding to the Mughalsâ political expectations of a just rule. Finally, in the concluding double-page spreads, he hints at the imponderability of fate, a discreet warning to Clive, in particular, and the East-India Company, in general.
Overall, the Large Clive Album is an important official document that provides unexpected insights into the perceptions and considerations of a defeated party at a crucial moment in Anglo-Mughal history. In comparison to Shir Jang Bahadurâs album as well as the Small Clive Album, which both display a more private and individual character, the Large Clive Album is a more obvious example of such an official political statement.
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Friederike Weis for her continuous encouragement and support as well as her meticulous editing of the first version of my article and the many precious hints and valuable suggestions she made.
For the most recent study, see Isabelle Imbert, âPatronage and Productions of Paintings and Albums in 18th-Century Awadhâ, Journal of Islamic Manuscripts 12 (2021), pp. 174â201.
This assumption was first expressed by Robert Skelton, âA Decorative Motive in Mughal Artâ, in Aspects of Indian Art, ed. Pratapaditya Pal (Leiden: Brill, 1972), pp. 147â153. See also Imbert âPatronage and Productionsâ, pp. 188â190.
According to the credit line of this object. The work is easily accessible through the online collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum,
According to Lucian Guthrie Harris, the Large as well as the Small Album were in Cliveâs possession in 1766, as stated in âA list of things sent [â¦] to the right hon[our]able Lady Clive, all received in 1766;â see Lucian Guthrie Harris, âBritish Collecting of Indian Art and Artifacts in the 18th and Early 19th Centuries,â (PhD diss., Sussex University, 2002), p. 78 and note 222.
Mildred Archer, Christopher Rowell, Robert Skelton (eds.), Treasures from India: The Clive Collection at Powis Castle (London: The Herbert Press, 1987), p. 123. The Small Clive Album is now housed in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, (IS.48-1956); the other album has been dispersed (nine of its pages appeared at Christieâs, London, 18 December 1968, lots 66â74), and the same holds true for the twenty-three miniatures. Mir Kalan Khanâs hunting scene, however, is still preserved at Powis Castle (ibid., cat.no. 180).
Christopher Rowell has conjectured that Clive, who besides the three albums and the miniature paintings possessed a quite extensive collection of Indian artifacts, obtained the objects of his collection either âas booty, or as presents from the native princes;â see Christopher Rowell, âClive of India and His Family: The Formation of the Collection,â in Archer, Rowell, and Skelton (eds.), Treasures from India, pp. 17â30, here p. 17. Harris, however, has presumed that the Small Album was probably given to Clive after the Battle of Buxar, which took place on 22 and 23 October 1764, but is silent about the Large Album; see Harris, âBritish Collecting,â p. 78.
Terence McInerney, âThe Patronage of Shuja-ud-Daula of Awadh and the Work and Influence of His Principal Court Artistsâ, Artibus Asiae 79/1 (2019), pp. 51â99, esp. p. 68, caption to fig. 23.
Contrary to other Europeans, such as Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Gentil (1726â1799), who was fluent in Farsi, Clive spoke neither Farsi nor any other Indian language; see Harris, âBritish Collectingâ, p. 78.
The foliation of the album as done by the keepers of the Victoria and Albert Museum follows the Western direction of reading, whereas the folios of Smith-Lesouëf 247 are numbered according to Islamic custom.
On Indian binding, see, for instance, Jake Benson, âThe QitÊ¿at-i Khushkhatt Album: Authenticity and Provenanceâ, in Iran and the Deccan: Persianate Art, Culture, and Talent in Circulation, 1400â1700, ed. Keelan Overton (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2020), pp. 337â365, see esp. the illustration on p. 344.
This term is borrowed from Anastassiia Alexandra Botchkareva, âTopographies of Taste: Aesthetic Practice in 18th-Century Persianate Albumsâ, Journal 18/6 (30Â October 2018) (
I would like to thank Hamid Hosravi from the University of Zurich for his valuable help in identifying some of the material.
Unfortunately, there is no image of fol. 79r available, but based on the albumâs internal logic this page must show a poem written in nastaÊ¿lÄ«q, similar to its counterpart fol. 78v on the left side of the double-page spread.
The only exception is the female figure to the left of St Roch on fol. 6r. The engraving was after Hendrick Goltzius (1558â1617), as stated on the print: âHG [Hendrick Goltzius] Inventor.â
San Diego Museum of Art, Edwin Binney 3rd collection, 1990.364.
See Friederike Weis, âPersian and Mughal Portrait Miniatures: Types or True Likenesses?â, in In the Name of the Image: Figurative Representation in Islamic and Christian Culture, ed. Axel Langer (Berlin: Hatje Cantz, 2022), pp. 417â432, esp. pp. 430â431.
Bibliothèque de France, Paris, Estampes, Réserve Od 44, fol. 11r (for a digitised version of the album, see:
Layla S. Diba with Maryam Ekhtiar (eds.), Royal Persian Paintings: The Qajar Epoch 1785â1925 (New York: Brooklyn Museum of Art/I.B. Tauris, 1998), p. 110, fig. II. While Diba has dated the book covers to the seventeenth century, it is now believed that they were made in the nineteenth century; see the entry in the auction catalogue by Sothebyâs where it was on sale on 25 October 2017 (lot 105).
Marianne Grivel, Le commerce de lâestampe à Paris au XVIIe siècle (Geneva: Droz, 1986), p. 261.
See a similar version by an anonymous engraver after Maerten de Vos, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, RP-P-OB-68.129 (
For the original version by Adriaen Collaert, see Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, Brunswick, ACollaert ABÂ 3.25 (access to the collection via:
See the information on the website:
See also Sheila R. Canby, The Rebellious Reformer: The Drawings and Paintings of Riza-yi Abbasi of Isfahan (London: Azimuth Editions, 1996), p. 197, no. 109.
See Mohammad Ê¿Ali Rajabi (ed.), Iranian Masterpieces of Persian Painting / ShÄhkÄrhÄ-yi nigÄrgarÄ«-yi ĪrÄn (Tehran: Museum of Contemporary Art, 2005), pp. 448, 449, 451, 461.
Later in the album, there is another Persianate work; see fol. 88r. The best-known imitations are attributed to Muhammad Khan and date from 1043 (1633/34). One of them shows a young man pouring wine, the other a prince with turban ornament and attendant. They can be found in the so-called Dara Shikoh Album (British Library, London, Add Or 3129, fol. 21vâ22r). It is noteworthy that, according to Jeremiah P. Losty, Muhammad Khan was possibly a Deccani artist who was later employed by Dara Shikoh (for a study on the Dara Shikoh Album, see Jeremiah P. Losty and Malini Roy, Mughal India: Art, Culture and Empire. Manuscripts and Paintings in the British Library [London: the British Library, 2012], pp. 124â137, esp. 135 on Muhammad Khan, and Jeremiah P. Losty, âDating the Dara Shukuh Albumâ, The Mughal Empire from Jahangir to Shah Jahan: Art, Architecture, Politics, Law and Literature, ed. Ebba Koch and Ali Anooshahr, Marg Publications, vol. 70/2â3 [Mumbai: The Marg Foundation, 2019], pp. 246â287, esp. 273, 280 and 284 on Muhammad Khan). Due to strong political and cultural ties to Safavid Persia, the imitation of Persian paintings in the first half of the seventeenth century is well-documented. Other examples of Mughal as well as Deccani origin can be found in the Swinton and Polier albums of the Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin; see, for instance, I. 4589, fol. 40v; I. 4593, fol. 2v; I. 4601, fols. 33v, 39v, and 41v. This interest was not one-sided, however. After the middle of the seventeenth century, Indian art played an increasingly important role for Safavid artists such as Shaykh Ê¿Abbasi, Ê¿Aliquli Jabadar and Muhammad Zaman. The intense engagement with Mughal and Deccani models led to a new style and changed Persian painting permanently (see Axel Langer, âAuf dem Weg zu einem transkulturellen Stil: Die Rezeption europäischer und indischer Bildquellen in der spätsafavidischen Buchmalerei in Persien von 1600 bis 1700â [PhD diss., University of Zurich, 2020]).
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Estampes, Réserve Od 43, fols. 31r (
Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin, I. 4589, fol. 11v and I. 4590, fol. 6v (four single drawings mounted together). For an analysis of this specific folio, see Ernst Kühnel, âArbeiten des RizÄ Ê¿AbbÄsi und seiner Schuleâ, Forschungen und Berichte, 1 (1957), pp. 122â131, esp. pp. 127â129, figs. 7, 8, 10, and 11.
Museum für Islamische Kunst, I. 4593, fols. 9r and 50v (see Kühnel, âRizÄ Ê¿AbbÄsiâ, p. 127, fig. 6 and p. 126, fig. 4); I. 4598, fol. 25v (see Kühnel, âRizÄ Ê¿AbbÄsiâ, p. 130, fig. 12; Kühnel has also mentioned fol. 4 in the same album, p. 124, fig. 2; unfortunately, I was unable to rectify this information); and I. 4601, fol. 49v (see Kühnel, âRizÄ Ê¿AbbÄsiâ, pp. 126â127, fig. 5). One should also mention I. 4593, fol. 35v, since this originally must have been a Persian work that was later reworked in India.
It should be mentioned here that this folio bears an inscription identifying the warrior as pÄdshÄh AfrÄsiyÄb. Paintings of armoured warriors on a rearing stallion were very popular not only with European collectors but also with Rajasthani princes. The Museum Rietberg, for instance, owns a portrait of Maharao Bhim, Singh of Kota (r. 1707â1720) as Vishnu, which clearly derives from Aurangzebâs equestrian portrait (RVIÂ 2047a) (
Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS. Ouseley Add. 173, fol. 27v (
The Clive version is an eighteenth-century copy of Dilir Khanâs portrait from the late seventeenth century, now in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington (DC), F1907.260 (
See also An Oriental Biographical Dictionary, Founded on Materials Collected by the Late Thomas William Beale, ed. Henry Keene (London: Allen & Co., 1894, 2nd edition), p. 143 (
For this famous wrestler, see Henry Beveridge (ed.), The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri; or, Memoirs of Jahangir, trans. Alexander Rogers, (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 3rd edition, 1978), vol. 1, p. 335.
For the sitterâs probable identity, see the corresponding entry in the online collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum,
The court member portrayed has not yet been identified, but his facial features and his posture show great similarities with the portrait of Bahadur Shah I enthroned by Hunhar II in an album presented to King George III (1738â1820) of Britain by Lord Teignmouth, Governor-General of India, in c. 1798; London, Royal Collection, RCIN 1005068.ae, fol. 29r.
An Oriental Biographical Dictionary, p. 89 (
McInerney, âThe Patronage of Shuja-ud-Daulaâ, p. 89.
Victoria and Albert Museum, IM.8-1925 (
Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin, I. 4589, fol. 35v.
These examples are not part of official letters but obviously calligraphic exercises. I would like to thank Tobias Heinzelmann from the University of Zurich for this information.
The album is accessible online:
Francis Richard, âJean-Baptiste Gentil, collectionneur de manuscrits persansâ, Dix-huitième siècle 28 (1996), pp. 91â110, here p. 97. Richard has identified him as MuÊ¿iz al-Din based on Gentilâs Mémoires published in 1822.
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Smith-Lesouëf 247, fol. 35v: âCes 60 peintures ont été ramassées et mises en livre par Chirdjangue, gouverneur du Cachemir sous le règne de lâEmpereur Mametcha, maintenant 1768, retiré dans le souba dâAvad à Faizabad près de Patna.â
Oriental Biographical Dictionary, p. 324. (
A mirror-reversed drawing of Clive fol. 49v can be found in one of the Ouseley albums, Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS. Ouseley Add. 171, fol. 25v (
A noble Mughal officer on his rearing horse (fol. 67r) constitutes yet another widespread motif that has many equivalents in the albums of Gentil (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Estampes, Réserve Od 43, fols. 28r and 40r;
Although this page bears no equivalent inscription in Farsi explaining the French caption, it is quite likely that one once existed, before the folios were trimmed while the album was rebound in Paris. Other pages still show traces of the small Persian inscriptions in the middle of the top margin.
This pairing is quite common since likenesses of sitting persons in profile was a fixture in Mughal portraiture. A counterpart of the noble looking to the right in fol. 91b of the Clive Album can be found in one of Swintonâs albums (Museum für Islamische Kunst, I. 4589, fol. 45v).
For other contemporary versions, see one of Polierâs albums, Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin, I. 4595, fol. 30r, or British Library, Add Or 4473 (
This is the case of the Large Clive Albumâs double-page spread with the Mughal version of a crucifixion and the martyrdom of the prophet Zakariya, who was sawn in half by two men after he had taken refuge in a tree (fols. 79vâ80r).
I am quite aware of the fact that the analysis of the similarities between the Clive Album and Smith-Lesouëf 247 is but a beginning. Concentrating mainly on structural features in general, I cannot go into great detail. There are many double-page spreads whose juxtapositions deserve closer examination. A good example is the Persian on horseback accompanied by a small dog and his Mughal counterpart, either a noble on a rearing stallion (Clive Album) or a Mughal falconer (Smith-Lesouëf 247) at full speed, as presented in fig. 3.3d. Apart from different ways of riding a horse (in relaxed or collected posture), there are also stylistic differences in the composition and the rendition of the figures, which can be interpreted as âPersianâ or âMughalâ characteristics. This visual âcomparative discourseâ or âcomparative juxtapositionâ is analysed in depth by Anastassiia Botchkareva, âRepresentational Realism in Cross-cultural Perspective: Changing Visual Cultures in Mughal India and Safavid Iran 1580â1750â (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2014); for a similar pairing of riders see pp. 465 and 466, figs. 71 and 72.
Fols. 51vâ52r show a Europeanising Mughal drawing of a standing woman in antique garb holding a dish of fruits and an engraving of a Madonna with child on a moon crescent triumphing over sin represented as devilish monster.
This is a mirror-inverted copy after an engraving showing the personification of Asia (as part of a series of the four continents), engraved and published by Adriaen Collaert after a drawing by Maarten de Vos; for the original print, see Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum, Grah. A1:467c access to the collection via:
See Claus-Peter Haase, âIskandar, Sohn des Darabâ, Antike Welt 40/5 (2009), pp. 22â28.
For Adriaen Collaertâs engraving, see Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel, 39.3 Geom. 2° (9â3) (access to the collection via:
Christopher A. Hagerman, âIn the Footsteps of the âMacedonian Conquerorâ: Alexander the Great and British Indiaâ, International Journal of the Classical Tradition 16/ 3â4 (Sep.âDec., 2009), pp. 344â392, esp. p. 374.
Hagerman, âIn the Footsteps of the âMacedonian Conquerorââ¯â, p. 378.
Robert Harvey, CliveâThe Life and Death of a British Emperor (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1998), p. 252.
John Henry Grose, Voyage to the East Indies (London: printed for the author, 2nd edition, 1766), vol. II, p. 263.
A good example can be found in the portraits of the Timurid governor of Herat, Baysunghur (1397â1433), in various literary roles; see Friederike Weis, âDas Bildnis im Bild: Porträts und ihre Betrachter auf persischen und moghulischen Miniaturenâ, in Taswir: Islamische Bildwelten und Moderne, ed. Hendrik Budde and Almut Sh. Bruckstein Ãoruh (Berlin: Nicolai, 2009), pp. 175â178, esp. p. 177, notes 16â19.
Willy Hartner and Richard Ettinghausen, âThe Conquering Lion, the Life Cycle of a Symbolâ, Oriens 17 (31 Dec. 1964), pp. 161â171.
See, for instance, one of Gentilâs albums, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Estampes, Réserve Od 43, fol. 9r (
The Clive Collection, Powis Castle, see also note 5. The painting measures 72â¯Ãâ¯84.5â¯cm. For an image, see McInerney, âThe Patronage of Shuja-ud-Daulaâ, p. [65], fig. 17. The motif dominates the foreground. In the centre of the painting, on the same axis as the lion-bull attack, but twice as large, we see ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla killing a lion. This painting can be interpreted as wishful thinking. It was only after his defeat that ShujaÊ¿ al-Dawla gave it to Clive.
It is noteworthy that the motif of the hunters on the elephant squeezing a lion with his trunk appears in nearly identical fashion on fol. 98r of the Clive Album and Smith-Lesouëf 247, fol. 53v.
See, for instance, Royal Collection, London, RCIN 1005068 (42.1â¯Ãâ¯28.1â¯cm); Freer and Sackler Galleries of Art, Washington (DC), F1907.276.1â17 (46â¯Ãâ¯32.2â¯cm) (
Rowell, âClive of India and His Familyâ, esp. pp. 21â22, note 20a. Clive left on 1 February 1767 but, according to Rowell, the letter dates from 31 January 1766! However, 1767 seems more likely.
Ibid., p. 17.
Rowell, âClive of India and His Familyâ, p. 21. See also C. Brad Faught, Clive: Founder of British India (Washington, DC: Potomac Books, 2013), p. 83; Harvey, Clive, pp. 294â297, and 306.
Los Angeles County Museum of Art, M.72.88.5 (
McInerney, âThe Patronage of Shuja-ud-Daulaâ, p. 57, fig. 1; p. 58, fig. 2; p. 59, figs. 4 and 5; p. 60, figs. 6 and 7; p. 61, fig. 8; p. 65, fig. 17; and p. 68, fig. 22.
Leach, Mughal and Other Indian Paintings, vol. 2, pp. 654â664; for a discussion of one of these album pages, see also John Seyllerâs article in this volume (fig. 13.8).
Contrary to the margin of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art folio, the Chester Beatty folios are all decorated at the top with a gold cartouche inscribed in blue or black. Today, similar folios are related to the collector Elijah Impey (1732â1809) who was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Bengal from 1774 to 1790. The cartouches, which can often be found, are not contemporaneous with the gold-flecked margins but a later addition, presumably on Impeyâs behalf.
These differences in quality might be explained by the relatively short time in which the album was probably produced; between the Battle of Buxar and the signing of the Treaty of Allahabad, less than ten months had passed.
See Leach, Mughal and Other Indian Paintings, vol. 2, p. 655.
Smith-Lesouëf 247, fols. 7v, 11v, and 19v.
McInerney, âThe Patronage of Shuja-ud-Daulaâ, p. 52.
Richard, âJean-Baptiste Gentilâ, pp. 91â110, and Jean-Marie Lafont, Indika: Essays in Indo-French Relations 1630â1976 (New Delhi: Manohar, 2000), chapter 3, âThe Quest for Indian Manuscripts by the French in the 18th Centuryâ, pp. 99â103.
McInerney, âThe Patronage of Shuja-ud-Daulaâ, p. 94.