Name: SWEEKRITI SINGH SIKARWAR

Roll.no: 22/HIS/59 (Semester-6th)

Date of submission: 17-03-2025

ASSIGNMENMT

HISTORY OF INDIA-VI: c.1600-1750s

QUESTION - How do recent historiographies of Jahangir Nama reshape Jahangir's image,

and how do Mughal paintings reflect imperial ideology?

Introduction

Historically, Jahangir has been portrayed in a largely negative light, as a weak, pleasure‐

seeking ruler allegedly overshadowed by his influential wife, Nur Jahan. Early European

travelogues and later Mughal chronicles helped cement this image. However, recent studies,

particularly those re-examining Jahangir’s own memoirs, challenge this view by revealing a

ruler who was much more multifaceted than previously thought. Scholars like Corinne

Lefèvre have shown that the Jahangir Nama is not merely a record of a passive monarch but

rather a carefully crafted self-portrait that presents Jahangir as a sovereign, a naturalist, and

an aesthete/collector. Similarly, A. Azfar Moin’s work on sacred kingship places Jahangir

within a broader tradition of Islamic rulers whose authority was as much about spiritual

symbolism as it was about statecraft.

The Traditional Narrative

For decades, the dominant historiography painted Jahangir as a ruler who had little interest in

governance, one whose reign was marked by personal indulgence and political instability.

Early monographs, such as Beni Prasad’s History of Jahangir (1922), set the stage for a

narrative that emphasized his supposed weakness, often attributing his shortcomings to
personal vices like intemperance and to the overpowering influence of Nur Jahan (this

perspective was further reinforced by later chroniclers and European observers).

When we explore the sources that helped form the negative image of Jahangir’s reign, two

main types emerge: one being the accounts by European visitors—such as the Portuguese,

English, Dutch, and Italians—who documented their experiences during the early seventeenth

century, and the other, the Mughal chronicles written during Shah Jahan’s rule (1628–1658).

The European records, which vary in form from letters and journals to treatises and

chronicles, do not form a single uniform tradition; rather, they capture different aspects of

Jahangir’s rule in three distinct phases. In the period from 1605 to 1611, works by Jesuit

Father Jerónimo Xavier and William Hawkins portray him as a decisive ruler who actively

enforced justice and maintained order. In the following years, between 1611 and 1622, the

writings of English ambassador Sir Thomas Roe and his chaplain Edward Terry suggest a

decline in his political strength, largely attributed to the dominant influence of his wife, Nur

Jahan. Later, from 1622 to 1627, Dutch traveller Francisco Pelsaert and, to a lesser extent,

Roman observer Pietro Della Valle, describe an era that bordered on internal conflict, were

Nur Jahan’s opposition to Prince Bahram further diminished Jahangir’s political presence.

These European narratives, notably those of Roe and Pelsaert, were later disseminated in

popular compilations like Samuel Purchas’s “Purchas His Pilgrimes” (1625) and Joannes De

Laet’s “De Imperio Magni Mogolis” (1631), thereby shaping Western perceptions of the

emperor. Simultaneously, Jahangir’s own memoir, the Jahangir Nama, marks a departure

from his father Akbar’s chronicle tradition and remains the sole contemporary official

account of his reign. Soon after his death, texts such as Mu‘tamad Bin’s Iqbal Nama-i

Jahangir and Khamgirusain’s Maʿāthir-i Jahangir were composed, not only to secure Shah

Jahan’s legitimacy after a protracted rebellion but also to recast earlier revolts by depicting

Salim as a dissolute figure and presenting Nur Jahan as the chief antagonist.
Re-Evaluating Through the Jahangir Nama

Recent historiographies, however, challenge these long-held assumptions. A close re-

examination of the Jahangir Nama reveals that the emperor consciously employed his memoir

as a means of self-fashioning. Instead of merely recording events, Jahangir used his memoir

to construct a political identity that underscored his role as a sovereign with a keen interest in

natural history, art, and administration. This self-representation is multi-layered: while his

prose adopts a modest tone (consistent with cultural norms of self-effacement), it

simultaneously provides evidence of a ruler who was deeply involved in the management and

aesthetic shaping of his empire.

The Sovereign and Administrator

One of the most striking revisions in recent studies is the recognition of Jahangir’s active role

in the affairs of state. His memoirs detail administrative reforms, judicial measures, and

military campaigns, even if some of these are wrapped in rhetorical flourishes. Rather than a

ruler who abdicated power after Nur Jahan’s influence, Jahangir emerges as a calculated and

thoughtful administrator who was determined to maintain the legacy of his father, Akbar. He

emphasizes continuity in policies, particularly in religious tolerance and the management of a

pluralistic empire.

Moreover, Jahangir’s self-positioning as a “doer” of state affairs, by commissioning volumes

for his royal library and documenting his daily routines, demonstrates his desire to be seen as

an inheritor of Akbar’s mantle, even if his achievements differed in scale. This careful

delineation of his administrative actions challenges the notion of his passivity and

underscores a ruler who was, in fact, deeply engaged with the practical realities of

governance.
The Naturalist and Observer

Another significant dimension revealed in the memoirs is Jahangir’s profound interest in the

natural world. Throughout the Jahangir Nama, the emperor documents detailed observations

of flora and fauna, reflecting not only his curiosity but also a sophisticated engagement with

the world around him. These naturalistic passages are far more than mere poetic digressions;

they serve to humanize the ruler and highlight his scientific mindset, a quality that was

admired in both contemporary Mughal and European courts.

In his writings, Jahangir recounts marvels of nature, such as the curious behaviour of animals

or the peculiar beauty of exotic flowers, which he interprets as both personal fascinations and

as omens bearing on the health of his reign. This self-portrayal as a naturalist adds an

unexpected layer to his personality, challenging the stereotype of the dissolute sovereign and

suggesting instead a ruler who was reflective, perceptive, and deeply connected to the world

of nature.

The Aesthete and Collector

Jahangir’s memoirs also reveal his sensitivity to the arts and his passion for collecting. Unlike

the grandiose artistic patronage of his father Akbar, Jahangir’s approach is characterized by a

personal and often subtle engagement with visual culture. He is depicted as a discerning

connoisseur who appreciated the finer details in paintings and manuscripts. His interest in art

was not merely for display but served as a means of asserting his identity as a cultured and

sophisticated ruler.
This dimension of his personality is further enriched by the existence of Jahangiri paintings

that, while not always directly mentioned in his memoirs, provide a complementary narrative

of his reign. These paintings often present him as a nearly mystical figure, imbued with

qualities that transcend the purely political and suggest a sacred kingship in line with the

millennial traditions discussed by Azfar Moin. In this sense, Jahangir’s image oscillates

between that of a pragmatic administrator and a transcendent sovereign whose presence in art

reinforces his legitimacy and mystique.

Jahangir’s Image as a Monarch

When we assess Jahangir as a monarch based on recent studies of his memoirs, it becomes

clear that his self-portrayal is intentionally complex. On one level, the memoir is a record of

administrative acts and personal reflections that reveal a ruler keenly aware of his

responsibilities. On another level, the text is a medium for self-fashioning, wherein Jahangir

carefully negotiates the boundaries between humility and authority. He downplays overt

claims to mysticism, unlike his father’s more explicit assertions, while still allowing his

naturalistic and aesthetic observations to speak to his broader cultural and political

sensibilities.

The Dual Nature of His Sovereignty

The memoir’s modest tone, especially in its personal introspections, may initially appear to

undercut the image of a mighty sovereign. Yet, when placed in the context of Mughal cultural

norms, which prized self-effacement as a mark of nobility, it becomes apparent that

Jahangir’s approach was both a reflection of his personality and a strategic political gesture.

His narrative refrains from overtly mystical declarations; instead, it employs subtle references

to the natural and artistic worlds to hint at a deeper, almost sacred authority. This duality,

between the modest record and the more exalted imagery found in court paintings, illustrates
the dynamic tension within his self-representation. On one hand, he is a ruler who practices a

careful form of self-restraint in his memoirs; on the other, he is celebrated in visual culture as

an almost saintly figure, capable of performing symbolic acts of renewal and justice (for

instance, the iconography of animal imagery symbolizing peace among natural foes).

Jahangir’s memoir and his paintings offer two different yet complementary perspectives on

his reign. His Jahangir Nama is a detailed and candid self-narrative, where he openly

discusses his personal life, administrative policies, and natural observations. However, it

largely follows the tradition of courtly writing, limiting direct references to his spiritual

authority and divine legitimacy. In contrast, his paintings serve as a more symbolic and visual

assertion of his kingship. Unlike his writings, which focus more on his daily experiences,

Mughal art under Jahangir incorporated celestial imagery, talismanic symbols, and allegorical

themes to present him as a divinely sanctioned ruler. His paintings, such as those depicting

him standing on a globe or engaging with saints, convey his millennial authority and cosmic

role, which his memoir only hints at. While the Jahangir Nama records his deep interest in

painting and his connoisseurship, it does not fully articulate how he used visual art to enhance

his image. Scholars like Ebba Koch and Azfar Moin highlight how Mughal paintings,

influenced by Persian, Timurid, and even Jesuit traditions, functioned as tools of political

propaganda, reinforcing Jahangir’s legitimacy beyond the written word. Thus, while his

memoir narrates his life, his paintings elevate his rule to a more sacred and universal

dimension.

Sacred Kingship and Political Legitimacy

Azfar Moin’s exploration of sacred kingship offers an invaluable framework for

understanding Jahangir’s reign. According to this perspective, Mughal sovereignty was not

simply a matter of military or administrative might; it was also a performance of divine order
and cosmic balance. Jahangir’s actions, both recorded in his memoirs and depicted in his

paintings, can be read as part of a broader tradition in which the monarch’s legitimacy is

intertwined with his ability to embody sacred authority. While Jahangir did not emulate the

overtly messianic claims of Akbar, his measured self-representation and the subtle use of

religious and natural symbols in his memoirs reflect a conscious effort to position himself as

a divinely sanctioned ruler in an era marked by millennial expectations.

This synthesis of political, natural, and artistic elements creates an image of Jahangir that is

far richer than the one-dimensional portrayal of a weak or pleasure-driven monarch. Instead,

he emerges as a ruler who was both deeply engaged with the practical challenges of

governance and invested in a broader cultural project of kingship, one that sought to merge

earthly rule with a higher, almost mystical order.

From my perspective as a student of history, the revised image of Jahangir is particularly

compelling. The re-evaluation of his memoirs not only challenges the long-standing narrative

of weakness and decadence but also underscores the importance of reading primary sources

critically. Jahangir’s self-portrayal, marked by a balance between humility and assertiveness,

invites us to reconsider how rulers use personal narratives to craft their legacies. It is

fascinating to see how his careful observations of nature and art serve as subtle yet powerful

expressions of his authority. This multidimensional approach enriches our understanding of

Mughal history by revealing that even a seemingly modest memoir can encapsulate a ruler’s

broader ambitions and values.

Moreover, the interplay between the written record and the visual representations of his reign

highlights a critical point: historical images and texts often work together to shape a ruler’s

public persona. The stark contrast between the understated tone of the Jahangir Nama and the
vivid, sometimes even mystical, portrayals in contemporary paintings creates a dialogue

between different cultural expressions of power. This layered representation suggests that

Jahangir’s authority was as much about how he was seen by his people and his court as it was

about the policies he implemented, a reminder that kingship is as much a performance as it is

an administrative reality.

Conclusion

In conclusion, recent historiographical studies have significantly altered our understanding of

Jahangir by revealing new dimensions in his personality through his memoirs. Rather than a

ruler overshadowed by personal weaknesses and the dominance of Nur Jahan, Jahangir

appears as a complex sovereign, one who actively engaged in governance, demonstrated a

refined appreciation for nature and art, and subtly asserted his authority through a blend of

modesty and cultural symbolism. His memoirs serve as a key text in this re-evaluation,

offering a self-portrait that is both personal and politically charged.

By situating Jahangir within the broader tradition of sacred kingship, as explored by A. Azfar

Moin, we come to see that his rule was not only about the practicalities of administration but

also about cultivating an image of divine legitimacy and cosmic balance. This

multidimensional portrayal, combining administrative acumen with naturalistic curiosity and

aesthetic sensitivity, ultimately provides a much more nuanced and robust image of Jahangir

as a Mughal monarch.

Sources

 Moin, Afzar. The Millennial Sovereign: Sacred Kingship and Sainthood in Islam. New

York: Columbia University Press, 2012.

Discourse of Jahangir (1605–27) in His Memoirs." Journal of Economic and Social

History of the Orient 50, no. 4 (2007): 452–489.