For those curious how much of the foregoing tale is "true," perhaps it
may be helpful to unmask the original inspiration for several of the
characters. The Great Moghul Akman, his son Arangbar, and Arangbar's
primary consort, Queen Janahara, had real-life counterparts in the
Great Moghul Akbar, his successor Jahangir, and Jahangir's resourceful
Persian queen, Nur Jahan. Nadir Sharif, for all his duplicity, had
nothing on Jahangir's devious prime minister, Asaf Khan, the brother of
Queen Nur Jahan. Similarly, Prince Jadar was no more ingenious, and no
less wronged, than Asaf Khan's son-in-law, the subsequent Moghul and
builder of the Taj Mahal, Shah Jahan. Prince Jadar's strategies and
intrigues, first with and then against Queen Janahara, resemble in many
ways those of Shah Jahan as he struggled to thwart the ambitions of Nur
Jahan. The Shahbandar and the opium-sotted governor of Surat also had
counterparts in real individuals, as did Jadar's beloved Mumtaz, his
younger brother Prince Allaudin, Princess Layla, Malik Ambar, and
Inayat Latif. The Sufi mystic Samad was re-created from the real-life
poet Sarmad, who was admired by Shah Jahan and who was executed by a
later Moghul for precisely the reasons given in the story. Of the
Portuguese, Father Alvarez Sarmento was drawn in some part from the
learned Father Jerome Xavier. It should be noted that the unofficial
actions of the early Jesuits in India are remembered today primarily
through the perceptions of English travelers, all of whom were all
staunchly anti-Catholic. The role of Portuguese Jesuits in the
preceding story was faithful in spirit to the English reports, although
today these may seem mildly paranoid in their fear and suspicion.
Of the English characters, only Huyghen and Roger Symmes are beholden
to single, recognizable individuals: being Jan van Linschoten and Ralph
Fitch, respectively. Brian Hawksworth is largely a fictional composite,
whose experiences recall in part those of William Hawkins (in India
from 1608 to 1613) and in part those of other seventeenth-century
European adventurers. His defeat of the four Portuguese galleons was
only a slight dramatization of historic victories by severely
outnumbered English frigates off Surat in 1612 and 1614 commanded by
English captains Thomas Best and Nicholas Downton, both sailing for the
early East India Company. Hawksworth's mercurial relationship with the
Moghul and his experiences at the Moghul's court were re-created in
part from the letters and diaries of William Hawkins and those of his
successor, Sir Thomas Roe. As did Brian Hawksworth, William Hawkins
adopted the Indian style of life in dress and diet, much to the
astonishment of his European contemporaries. Brian Hawksworth's love
affair with Shirin was suggested by William Hawkins' marriage to an
Indian women of noble descent, possibly a member of the Moghul's court,
on the encouragement of Jahangir, who suspected the Jesuits of
attempting to poison him and wanted his food monitored. Hawkins' wife
later journeyed to London, where she caused the East India Company
considerable disruption over their responsibilities toward her, and
eventually she returned to India.
Although most of the early Englishmen in India resembled our George
Elkington far more than they did Brian Hawksworth, there was one early
traveler, Thomas Coryat, whose cultural and human sensibilities would
not have clashed greatly with those of Brian Hawksworth at the end of
his story.
The sudden appearance of the bubonic plague in India was taken from the
court history of the Moghul Jahangir. Similarly, the capture of the
Moghul's trading vessel by the Portuguese, intended to intimidate him
and forestall an English trade agreement, and his retaliatory closure
of Jesuit missions happened essentially as described. The Jesuits were
allowed to reopen their missions a few years later, but the damage was
done. There seems evidence that the Portuguese did conspire to assist
the forces opposing the succession of Shah Jahan, whom they justifiably
feared. The rebellion of Shah Jahan extended over several years, and
did include at one point a stay on the Udaipur island of Jagmandir,
where some historians now believe he first saw inlay work of the type
that later became a distinguishing feature of his crowning creation,
the Taj Mahal.
For those who may wish to gain more familiarity with Moghul India,
various sources can be recommended. Lively historical works on the
Moghul period include Waldemar Hansen's classic panorama The Peacock
Throne and the even more recent Cities of Mughul India by Gavin Hambly,
to mention two of my favorites. For those still more curious, and
adventurous, there are the original writings from the seventeenth
century, which will require more digging but are decidedly worth the
effort. Readers with access to a major library may be able to find
reprinted editions of the diaries of several seventeenth-century
English and European travelers in India. These are the works, with
their trenchant firsthand accounts, that all students of the era find
indispensable. Perhaps the most easily obtainable is a collection
entitled Early Travels in India, William Foster, ed., which contains
edited versions of the diaries of William Hawkins and several others.
Following this, the most thorough account of England's early diplomacy
in India is contained in the diary entitled The Embassy of Sir Thomas
Roe (1615-1619), written by England's first real ambassador to India.
Many subsequent diaries and letters of seventeenth-century European
travelers have been reprinted by the Hakluyt Society, whose
publications comprise a virtual bibliography of the era.
The most relevant Indian writings, also obtainable in English
translation from a fine library, are the memoirs of the Great Moghul
Jahangir, entitled the Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri, and an encyclopedic
description of court life in late sixteenth-century India entitled the
Ain-i-Akbari, set down by Akbar's chief adviser and close friend, Abul
Fazl.
In fashioning a story such as this, a writer must necessarily be
indebted far beyond his ability to acknowledge adequately. The scholar
who provided the greatest assistance was Professor John Richards of the
Duke University Department of History, a widely respected authority on
Moghul (he might prefer it be spelled Mughal) India, who graciously
consented to review the manuscript in draft and offered many
corrections of fact and interpretation. He is, of course, in no way
accountable for any liberties that may have remained. Thanks are
similarly due Professor Gerald Berreman of the University of California
at Berkeley, a knowledgeable authority on Indian caste practices, who
agreed to review the relevant portions of the manuscript. I am also
indebted to Waldemar Hansen, who generously provided me with the
voluminous notes accumulated for his own history, The Peacock Throne.
Historians in India who gave warmly of their time and advice include
Dr. Romila Thapar, Professor P. M. Joshi, and Father John Correia-
Alfonso, the preeminent Jesuit authority on the early Moghul era and a
scholar whose characteristic integrity and generosity roundly revise
the period depiction of his order in the story.
Thanks also are due Mrs. Devila Mitra, Director-General of the
Archaeological Survey of India, for special permission to study the
now-restricted _zenana _quarters beneath the Red Fort in Agra; to Nawab
Mir Sultan Alam Khan of Surat, for assistance in locating obscure
historical sites in that city; to Indrani Rehman, the grande dame of
Indian classical dance, for information on the now-abolished _devadasi
_caste; to Ustad Vilayat Khan, one of Indian's great sitar masters, for
discussions concerning his art; and to my many Indian friends in New
York, New Delhi, and Bombay.
I am also obliged to Miss Betty Tyres of the Indian Department of the
Victoria and Albert Museum in London, who kindly provided access to the
museum's extensive archives of Indian miniature paintings, and to the
National Maritime Museum in Greenwich for information on early English
sailing vessels.
Finally, I am most indebted to a number of tireless readers who
reviewed the manuscript in its various drafts and supplied many
insightful suggestions: including my editor, Lisa Drew, my agent,
Virginia Barber, and my patient friends Joyce Hawley, Susan Fainstein,
Norman Fainstein, Ronald Miller, and Gary Prideaux. Most of all I thank
Julie Hoover, for many years of assistance, encouragement, and
enthusiasm.