Imperial Masculinities in late eighteenth- and early Nineteenth-century India

Paintings executed during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century India under the aegis of Mughal and other Indian and non-Indian patrons have in the past been referred to as ‘Company Paintings’ to distinguish them from the Mughal school.  However recent scholarship has challenged this distinction both in terms of the style and content of the paintings and in relation to art patronage. This paper tries to study the continuities and changes in notions of masculinity as depicted in paintings by artists like Ghulam Murtaza Khan, Ghulam Ali Khan and Mazhar Ali Khan. In this paper I compare the theoretical formulation of Mughal imperial masculinity as described by Rosalind O’ Hanlon with the visual culture of the late eighteenth century. O’Hanlon describes the objectification of the human body through the various robes, sashes and jewel pieces  that nobles were supposed to wear in the Mughal court. Being dressed according to courtly etiquette not only signified that the wearer was prepared always for imperial orders; it also helped constitute masculinity. During the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, when British power was gradually rising and Mughal power was ebbing, this had a conspicuous impact on Mughal courtly cultures. One striking change came when the East India Company prohibited the bestowal of robes of honor, khil’at, by the Mughal Emperor to anybody except its own servants. This presentation asks whether this prohibition affected notions of masculinity and whether or not the visual cultures of this period register and reflect this change.