AHIS 1219 001 Sample Visual Analysis Langara Student

1
Why is Captain John Foote in Mughal Regalia?
The portrait in discussion is Captain John Foote (Fig. 1), it was painted by the renowned
portraitist, Sir Joshua Reynolds, who was also on amicable terms with the patron.1 Sir Joshua
Reynolds’ earlier work focuses primarily on history painting, but the increase and demand for
portraiture reformed Reynolds’ practice. In 1768 Joshua Reynolds was knighted and became
the first president of the Royal Academy. Reynolds’ status and popularity as an artist increased;
he was known to be one of the greatest portraitist of his era painting in the “Grand Style”. 2 The
“Grand Style” or “Grand Manner” was a genre of classical painting immersed with moral themes
and the idealization of imperfections.3 Now although this portrait is consistent with Reynolds’
other work, the subject matter or clothing rather, differs from the others entirely. The subjects of
his other portraits were mostly the upper class European citizens and royals at the time and so
his paintings reflected the wears and attitudes of British upper classism. So this poses the
question, why did Captain John Foote propose that his portrait show him in Mughal Regalia
rather than his traditional European clothing? What is the significance or purpose for displaying
these foreign garments? It may be a combination of reasons unknown to us, but ultimately I
believe it was an attempt to assert his authority and to defend the reputation of the East India
Trading company as well as situate good standing among the Mughals.
Examining the formal elements of the painting indicates that this was a portrait made to
be seen and displayed. There is an illustrious gold frame that echoes the rococo style
accompanied by delicate and feathered brushwork of the painting itself. This portrait is 128 x 98
cm, quite large in scale, reflecting Sir Joshua Reynolds’ strength and background in historical
painting. The scale of the painting also confirms that this was intended for exhibition. The high
contrast and grandeur of this painting semblances baroque influence. There are hints of rich
1
“Captain John Foote,” ArtUK, 2018, https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/captain-john-foote-7860.
2
“Joshua Reynolds”, ArtUK, 2018, https://artuk.org/discover/artists/reynolds-joshua-17231792.
3
Ian Chilvers, Oxford Dictionary of Art & Artists (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 49.
2
fabric behind Foote which drape over a window or opening with a view of a pleasant sky, an
indication that he is inside and perhaps somewhere of importance. The soft light from the ideal
blue sky pours in and seems to illuminate the Captain, adding to his overall appearance of
sovereignty. Captain John Foote is depicted in Mughal regalia in a powerful stance, showing
three quarters of his body.
The robe that Foote is wearing may be a qaba, a “sleeved, tailored, midcalf-length coat,
open down the front and closed by one side being fastened across the other.”4 This was a
common garb worn by Muslims at the time.5 Yet the robe may also be a khil’a, which was a
specific type of robe that was valued not for “the intrinsic worth of its constituent materials nor to
the artisanal skill that it displays” but for the “relationship with the body of the donor.” 6 Mughal
rulers would often hold a ceremony called a khilaat where this exchange of gifts, such as the
khil’a, would occur to establish partnerships or alliances between the donor and its recipient.7
Around the robe, there appears to be a rich sash or a belt which holds the robe in place. There
is a turban atop Captain John Foote’s head, common headgear for the Mughals at the time. It is
worth noting that Foote’s turban has slight ornamentation which could indicate a higher social
standing. As stated above, the materiality of the robe was not as important as to whom the robe
had actually been a gift from.
Interestingly enough, where this painting now resides in the York Museum, sometimes it
is accompanied by the actual surviving garments that John Foote wore for this very portrait.
Comparing the materiality of the robes in the real life photographs to that of the oil painting (see
image 2) reveals a stark contrast in the fabric. The robes in the oil painting take on a illuminated
4
Finbarr B. Flood, Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval “Hindu-Muslim” Encounter
(United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 2009), 66.
5
6
7
Randip Bakshi &
Finbarr B. Flood, Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval “Hindu-Muslim” Encounter (United
Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 2009), 77.
3
and soft appearance, leading the viewer to believe it was woven out of very fine or silky
material. Yet the photographs seem to indicate that this is not an iridescent or rich fabric at all,
the robe appears to be made from a more coarse material, such as cotton or linen. This illusion
can be accredited to the great skill of the artist, Joshua Reynolds, and his tendency to idealize
imperfections in the Grand Style.
As previously stated, the gifting of the khil’a was of great importance, however, not
mentioned is the significance of the refusal of such a gift. Finbarr Barry states that “the refusal”
or “public desecration of such a gift” were a means to express “rejection of the donor’s
authority.”8 For this very reason, I believe that this is why Captain John Foote chose to be
depicted in this formal Mughal regalia. Captain John Foote intended to make his allegiance to
the Mughals known. Captain John Foote seemed to be using his acceptance of the “donor’s
authority” for two purposes, to appease the Mughal emperor he had pledged to and to combat
the growing discontent for the East India Trading Company in the British commons.
The “Nabob Game” was a common term used by Europeans around the 18th century to
chronicle the early method of imperial expansion in India.9 The word nabob is derived from the
Persian word nawab, meaning governor.10 By the 1770’s the Nabobs were under huge criticism
and mistrusted by the commonwealth. Not everyone was in favour of the East India Trading
Company’s methods involving bribery and extortion. Many of the company’s generals or other
people in positions of power often chose to abuse this power for their own personal gain. These
individuals desired the advantages of commercial monopoly, military supremacy, and influence
8
9
Andrew J. Greig, “Nabob Game,” in Encyclopedia of India (Detroit: Charles Scribner's Sons, 2006),
accessed June 7, 2018,
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3446500420/GVRL?u=vanc85972&sid=GVRL&xid=fa4460bf.
10
4
and power over the Indian rulers to gain access to their territories.11 Since the wealth of the
Nabobs was usually acquired through dishonorable circumstance, these individuals were not
accepted by the titled elites when they returned home, even though they were able to lead the
same comfortable, wealthy lifestyles.12 This criticism was fueled by the fear that these company
servants would attempt to buy a place of power in Parliament.13
It is important to keep in mind the timeframe in which this painting took place, 1761-
1765, because it also correlates with some of Colonel Robert Clive’s time in the East India
Trading Company. The author of the “Encyclopedia of India”, Greig, tells us that Clive was the
“stereotypical Nabob”.14 Clive was able to make substantial gains through his small, but well
trained force of European soldiers in India. The success of Clive’s endeavors in Bengal were
partially due to his connection with a Hindu banker who provided large sums of money used for
bribery. Clive then placed a friendly ruler on the throne in Bengal for his own benefit and
acquired a huge personal fortune as an outcome. The growing discontent for the Nabobs
reached a peak when a famine hit Bengal in the 1770’s where ⅓ of the peasantry starved to
death.15 The English became outraged and Parliament was forced to act. Although doing very
little to change the overall outcome in India, Parliament reforms the East India Trading
11
12
13
Ainslie T. Embree, “British East India Trading Company Raj,” in Encyclopedia of India (Detroit: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 2006), accessed June 7, 2018,
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3446500117/GVRL?u=vanc85972&sid=GVRL&xid=acc12c14.
14
15
5
Company so that the profits will reach company coffers as well as company agents.16 British
political advisers continued to control the actions of Indian rulers so that the British interest
remained top priority rather than that of the common subject in India. The actions of Clive
contribute to the evident extortion of Indian subjects and is even illustrated in the work of art
titled The Mughal emperor Shah Alam hands a scroll to Robert Clive, the governor of Bengal,
which transferred tax collecting rights in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa to the East India Company,
August 1765 by Benjamin West, completed in 1818 (see image 3).17
The Mughals maintained a fairly open and accepting empire, they embraced other
cultures and their success can be accredited to their willingness to adapt. When the British first
arrive in India, they are never viewed as a threat for this reason. To the Mughals misfortune, as
time went on India was seen as more of a material object to profit off of and be conquered by
the British rather than a two way alliance. This brings the question up again, so why did Captain
John Foote choose to depict himself in Mughal regalia. The time frame indicates that there were
major concerns with the East India Trading Company, perhaps the Captain intended to change
people's views on himself and his role in the company with this painting. I don’t believe that
Captain John Foote, or anyone for that matter in this era, would want to be associated with the
negative connotation of a “nabob”. By depicting himself in the Mughal regalia, Foote is showing
acceptance of his position to the Mughal ruler he has been appointed under, a sort of
appeasement. I cannot validate Foote’s genuineness or actual intentions, yet I can speculate
that he, like most Europeans at this point in time, were using the sincerity of the Mughals for his
own societal gain and image. This portrait is an indication of his achievement and success
16
17
6
during his time as a Captain for the East India Trading company, which ultimately had a part in
the undoing of the Mughal Empire.
Word Count: 1554

7
IMAGES
Fig. 1: Sir Joshua Reynolds, Portrait of Captain John Foote, 1761-1765, York Museum
123 x 98 cm, oil on canvas, 7205371504_436f9e2a1c_b.jpg

8
Fig. 2: Mughal Regalia, 18th century, York Museum,
https://www.yorkmuseumstrust.org.uk/collections/search/item/?id=10004042&search_query=bGltaXQ9MTYmQ0wlN
UIwJTVEPUNvc3R1bWUrYW5kK1RleHRpbGVzJk9CJTVCMCU1RD1kcmVzcyZPQiU1QjElNUQ9ZXZlbmluZytkcmV
zcyZPQiU1QjIlNUQ9Z293biZGTj0lMkEmcGFnZT0y
Fig. 3: Benjamin West, The Mughal emperor Shah Alam hands a scroll to Robert Clive, the governor of Bengal, which
transferred tax collecting rights in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa to the East India Company, August 1765, 1818, india-
18th-century-2-990x556.jpg
9
BIBLIOGRAPHY
“Captain John Foot.” ArtUK. 2018. https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/captain-john-foote-7860
Chilvers, Ian. “Joshua Reynolds.” In Oxford Dictionary of Art & Artists, 44, 214. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2009.
Embree, Ainslie T. "British East India Company Raj." In Encyclopedia of India, Vol. 1. Detroit:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 2006. Gale Virtual Reference Library (accessed June 7, 2018).
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3446500117/GVRL?u=vanc85972&sid=GVRL&xid=acc12
c14.
Flood, Barry B. Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval “Hindu-Muslim”

Encounter. United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 2009.
Glick, Thomas F. "Colonialism." In Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern
World, Vol. 2. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 2004. Gale Virtual Reference Library
(accessed June 7, 2018).
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3404900248/GVRL?u=vanc85972&sid=GVRL&xid=17bf2
2d6.
Greig, J. Andrew. "Nabob Game." In Encyclopedia of India, Vol. 3. Detroit: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 2006. Gale Virtual Reference Library (accessed June 7, 2018).
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3446500420/GVRL?u=vanc85972&sid=GVRL&xid=fa446
0bf.
“Joshua Reynolds.” ArtUK. 2018. https://artuk.org/discover/artists/reynolds-joshua-17231792

AHIS 1219 001 Sample Visual Analysis Langara Student

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AHIS 1219 001 Sample Visual Analysis Langara Student

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Why is Captain John Foote in Mughal Regalia?

Trading company as well as situate good standing among the Mughals.

three quarters of his body.

had actually been a gift from.

imperfections in the Grand Style.

servants would attempt to buy a place of power in Parliament.13

August 1765 by Benjamin West, completed in 1818 (see image 3).17

the undoing of the Mughal Empire.

Word Count: 1554

123 x 98 cm, oil on canvas, 7205371504_436f9e2a1c_b.jpg

Fig. 2: Mughal Regalia, 18th century, York Museum,

“Captain John Foot.” ArtUK. 2018. https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/captain-john-foote-7860

Flood, Barry B. Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval “Hindu-Muslim”

“Joshua Reynolds.” ArtUK. 2018. https://artuk.org/discover/artists/reynolds-joshua-17231792

You might also like