WILLEM SCHELLINKS
Four Sons of Shah Jahan 1770s
V&A
Willem Schellinks (1623-78) and Francois Bernier (1620-88)
Two paintings of similar composition by Willem Schellinks are among the most curious depictions from the hands of a seventeenth-century Dutch artist. One version of the picture is in the Musee Guimet, Paris and the other is in the V&A (fig.18). They differ in size and proportions, and are not regarded as a pair.
Depicting the same subject, these medium-sized oil paintings on wood panel and canvas respectively, have been variously titled ‘A royal tamasha at the court of Delhi’, ‘An imaginary view of an Entertainment at the Mughal Court’ and ‘Shah Jahan and His Four Sons’. The first impression is of an elaborate Baroque setting comprising a theatrical stage-set framed with curtains.
The manner and style in which the people and the four mounts are portrayed derive from Indian paintings. Portrayals especially of Shah Jahan, his sons and the mounts are to be found in Mughal miniatures, and similar poses of people shown in profile, wearing the same style of dress and jewellery occur frequently. Composite animal painting in which both human and animal forms make up their entire beings was also popular with the Mughals.
Willem Schellinks was born in Amsterdam on 2 February 1623, the oldest surviving son of Laurens Schellinks who was a tailor and freeman of the city. Willem specialized in topography and was relatively successful as a draughtsman and painter. He also produced etchings and wrote poetry. Although he certainly never went to India, he travelled widely in Europe, visiting France in 1646 with Lambert Doomer who was one of Rembrandt’s pupils. Both Schellinks and Doomer were typical traveller-artists who toured the Continent in search of topographical subjects of general interest. The wealthy Amsterdam barrister, Laurens van der Hem (1621-c.1678), spent many decades of his life compiling an atlas of topographical drawings and maps. Rather than travel himself, he commissioned different artists including Doomer and Schellinks to record distant places for his atlas. Eleven volumes of Van de Hem's Atlas Major were printed in 1662 and the work continued to expand throughout the rest of his life. It also included views of the East Indies relating to the territories of the Dutch Company, drawn by personnel serving in these regions. Between July 1661 and April 1663 Schellinks visited England, perhaps at the specific request of Van der Hem, although he may also have been working for the intelligence service of the Dutch States General. While in England he made topographical drawings highlighting the salient features of English coastlines, besides the disposition of naval vessels at key locations. His diary reveals his preference for good living, interest in the theatre and civic ceremonies such as the Lord Mayor's show in London. Before Schellinks married Maria Neus, (widow of Dancker Danckerts, the engraver and bookseller) in 1667, he made another extensive tour of the Continent. Thereafter, until they both died in 1678, Schellinks and his wife lived with their young children in Amsterdam.
The paintings, 'Shah Jahan and His Four Sons' do not fit into the usual theme of Schellinks' subjects. Only one other painting signed by him depicting a Mughal subject is known. Titled 'Shah Jahan and His Four Sons Hawking', it shows them riding horses through a landscape, and captures the moment when Shah Jahan alerts his sons to a fight between an elephant and a rhinoceros. This scene, probably painted in Amsterdam for one of the burghers interested in the Mughal family, is easily comprehensible, while the other two pictures are complex and mysterious.
Obviously Schellinks had considerable knowledge of the Mughal dynasty and an interest in contemporary events of the imperial household. By the end of the 1650s, momentous episodes were taking place among family members of Shah Jahan. In 1657 when the Emperor fell ill, there began a desperate war of succession between his four sons. The eldest, Dara Shikoh, was the designated heir and his father's favourite. Next in line came Sultan Shuja, Governor of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. His third son, Aurangzeb, had become Governor of four Deccan provinces and was determined to succeed his father as emperor. Murad Bakhsh, Governor of Gujarat and Malwa, was the youngest. In June 1658, Aurangzeb imprisoned his ailing father in the Fort at Agra. After relentlessly pursuing Dara Shikoh with his army and having already claimed the throne, Aurangzeb had him killed on 30 August 1659. Sultan Shuja met his death the following year, while Murad Bakhsh remained captive in the state prison in Gwalior Fort, only to be executed on 4 December 1661. Shah Jahan died on 22 January 1666 having been cared for by Shah Begum for over thirty years.
The first of many Dutch editions of Francois Bernier's book was published in Amsterdam in 1672. Although it included some copperplate illustrations, most of which were 'mere fancy sketches' and maps, one engraving portrayed the 'Great Mogul riding in state'. Additional images enlivened the Amsterdam edition of 1699, published under the title Voyages de Francois Bernier. Among the most elaborate illustrations were the 'Great Mogul being weighed against coinage', and the 'Court of the Great Mogul'. All were based on descriptive passages in Bernier's narrative. His letters also describe the campaigns and related events between 1655 and 1661 during which Aurangzeb came to power and his early conquests as Emperor. Bernier had personally witnessed numerous events, ceremonies, and festivals, which he vividly recounted.
There is no evidence, however, that these two pictures by Schellinks had any direct connection with Bernier's text, since no specific passage relates to the scenes. Nevertheless, it is highly probably that Schellinks would have known the French edition and certainly the Dutch. If so, his concept of the Mughals was inspired by the general theme of Bernier's text rather than a particular narration. There is no reference in either picture to the wars of succession and no sign of weaponry. Instead, the spectacle on stage, watched by Shah Jahan and Shah Begum seated together, is festive. Moreover in fig.18, Aurangzeb facing Dara Shikoh holds a bird - probably a hawk. The individual mounts may also be significant. In western art, the elephant (bearing Aurangzeb) symbolizes military victory, triumph and longevity. The horse (ridden by Dara Shikoh) was also a mount of warriors, kings, or leaders in battle. The camel (carrying Murad Bakhsh) was the attribute of Asia, while in India the palanquin (bearing Shah Shuja) was the most common type of transport. Although the entire theatrical setting of both pictures was probably Schellinks' own concept, it may have been suggested by Bernier's reference, in his dedication to the French King, to 'one of the largest Theatres in the World', which would have appealed to his interest in drama and poetry.
In 1675, four years after Bernier's first English edition was published, John Dryden's last play Aureng-Zebe, A tragedy (derived from Bernier's text) was performed at the Royal Theatre in London. Much admired by many including Charles II, this stage production provides further evidence of the widespread interest in the Mughal Empire. Although Schellinks may have been unaware of the production, this theatrical event broadens the social context in which his unusual pictures were produced. Immediately following Aurangzeb's death in 1707, Dryden's play was revived on the London stage.
It is not known for whom these pictures by Willem Schellinks were painted. It is possible that retired officials of the Dutch East Company, like Pieter Stethenhuis, commissioned them for their home. They may have been destined to hang as centrepieces in curiosity cabinets. It also seems likely that the pictures were painted after the death of Shah Jahan in 1666, perhaps in the 1670s towards the end of Schellinks' life. The concept of these images seems to transcend reality, while the entire spectacle is presented as an historical tableau glorifying the Mughals. As highly sophisticated works of art, they are full of symbolic references. Rather than representing a tragedy, the pictures present the majestic spirit of the Mughal dynasty, from the Emperor Akbar to the youngest of Shah Jahan's sons, Murad Bakhsh. They convey a regal sense of power, wealth, and nobility. Above all, the festive atmosphere and flamboyant Baroque setting chosen by Schellinks confirm his personal interest and admiration for the Mughal Empire that had been the focus of attention among Europeans for over a century.
- EXTRACT FROM THE BOOK “INDIAN LIFE AND LANDSCAPES BY WESTERN ARTISTS”.
Hard to beleive that d curtains, clothes, shamiyana all these things were so rich n colorful! And also the animal figures were formed by humans.
Fascinating, thanks Subbiah for sharing this account with us :)
fascinating insight into another time.
The opulence is spectacular!
This pic has been cropped and includes Shah Jahan and his daughter Jahanara seated in the foreground on the right side of the painting.
Ideal for a Clementoni 1500-piece jigsaw puzzle!!
Could someone please help identify the imaginary characters in this painting? The four feuding sons of Shah Jahan are easy to recognize. Are the two men on the top Akbar and Jahangir? And the old man sitting with a lady is Shah Jahan with the Queen? What are the two girls doing at the lower left corner? Jahan Ara had been badly burnt in a palace fire. I wish her picture had not been omitted. Would it not be wonderful if Dara had become the Emperor instead of Aurangzeb?
dara was a liberal shia with sufi leanings. aurangzeb misread sunni tenets
Bigoted Aurangzeb was the father of the demise of Mugals. Dara was a Hindusthani, not a shia/sunni/sufi. He translated Sanskrit scriptures into Persian.................. .
Afshan :The V&A site has a slightly larger uncropped picture but it does not show anyone else on the right side of the painting : http://www.vandaprints.com/image.php?id=12712
sublime...
Afshan : I wish you could you also clarify Asad Ahmed's doubt. It would be quite interesting for all of us to know more about this fascinating picture and I guess there are few who are better qualified than you to do that ! : )
William Schellinks painted a few of this Mughal miniature 'inspired' paintings from his imagination and from actual paintings. The one I reference is very similar to this one but includes Shah Jahan and Jahan Ara seated on the lower right hand corner admiring the spectacle of their dynastic legacy. Please see this link: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/191775/1/Painting-Inspired-By-Moghul-Miniatures.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/Willem-Schellinks/Painting-Inspired-By-Moghul-Miniatures.html&usg=__UGJ1FV1g7Xe9keawFTO5Ddj-FuE=&h=470&w=600&sz=69&hl=en&start=1&sig2=s3kIQDSjE2qoUUqvRv5Etg&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=atJY_oONFd-lfM:&tbnh=106&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3DWilliam%2BSchellinks%2Bmughal%2Bpaintings%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1R1GGGL_en___US314%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=INfyS5XPOYL6lwef4rSKDQ
Ahmed's speculations are correct on all points except that SJ is not shown seated with a Queen in this painting but in the one I have included in the link and it is Jahanara and not Mumtaz Mahal. Also, Jahanara was in a burning incident but she recovered by 1648 and these works are inspired by later paintings which would include her person. Also, poor Mumtaz Mahal enjoyed her role as a Queen for only 4 years while SJ's was on the throne after which she passed away.
Very nice indeed.
Afshan : Thanks for elaborating further on the work of William Schellinks. And the other picture is equally fascinating.
If the elderly man and woman seated on stage (in the middle) not Shah Jahan and Mumtaz Mahal (or more likely, Jahan Ara), who could they be? Any ideas? Prince Dara Shikoh was an intellectual and a liberal, like his great grandfather Jalaluddin Akbar. He was above religion - as an Emperor should be - and that is why Aurangzeb used religious fanaticism and hypocrisy against him. He did like the sufi movement and I have read one of his books on the subject. It hurts me to see that Aurangzeb did not allow him to be buried inside Humayun's tomb, but only outside it in the courtyard. He is alone there. As Walt Whitman wrote: "Be good, and you will soon be lonesome". That was a tragic turning point in Indian history.
Love that quote : "Be good, and you will soon be lonesome". : )
Ah! The great Mughal Empire at its zenith! Unfortunately, it was downhill all the way after this. I wonder if contemporary writings (esp fiction) are acceptable in this forum (I trust they are not a 'no no'), but a quick read of Liddle's The Englishman's Cameo would serve to tell us why! Great painting.
Sudhir Arora : Your suggestion is most welcome. This is rare book forum and is naturally filled with history buffs... with a respectable number of brilliant academics and experts with almost intimidating educational backgrounds.
@rbsi,but surely history buffs can come from ordinary middle class housewives, school kids, general readers (who read for the fun of it)all history buffs need not be expert academicians. iam sure all these common people can have their say in the comment section of the fb.i request your comment onthis. is rbsi restricted only to the brilliant people only?
what a spectacular painting.the power play, grandeur,ostentatious display is simply fantastic.