Emerging from the fertile Ganges plains, where the river Megna¹ flowed, was a textile celebrated for its ethereal qualities. As light as the wind, and clear as the dew, the Indian Muslins, or ‘malmal’, were a delicate, sheer handwoven cotton cloth that captured the imagination of all who encountered them as they were manufactured, traded, and worn within India and beyond its shores. Acclaimed for their beauty, muslins became a symbol of excellence in the Indian weaver’s artistic oeuvre, traversing from humble workshops to grace nobility and kings.

Numerous early modern travel accounts mention muslin; however, its earliest documentation appears in a first-century maritime trade text titled, The Periplus of the Erythrean Sea (Ashmore, 2012). The muslins are evocatively described in this text as ‘nebula-mist’ and ‘venti textiles’, translated as the ‘woven winds’ or the renowned ‘baft hawa’ textiles. This and subsequent accounts place the Bengal-Gangetic muslins as a valuable textile trade commodity within a global transnational trade network. From Indian shores, they were exported westward to Europe via Africa, to the Arabian Peninsula, and extending eastward as far as China (Ghuznavi, 2006).

Yet as a centuries-old textile, its significance is also rooted in the broader socio-cultural meanings that it acquired. Its crafting was an embodied practice— a sacred bond between maker and material, almost like an act of devotion to mother nature. It became symbolic of power and prestige, shaped sartorial practices, and its global success and eventual decline mirrored India’s woes in the face of colonial modernity. This essay explores these complex intertwinings.

Crafting Muslin: The Sentient Practitioner

The crafting of muslin was a process inextricably linked to nature and temporality. The diaphanous translucency of the finest muslins was chiefly attributed to the quality of thread drawn from a superior quality of cotton that was only grown in the delta region of Bengal, called ‘photee’ or ‘bairati kapas’ (Ghuznavi, 2006; Hossain, 2018). The growing and harvesting of the kapas and the labor-intensive production of muslin were bound by the seasons. The most comprehensive historical account on muslin manufacturing titled A Descriptive and Historical Account of the Cotton Manufacture of Dacca penned by James Taylor in 1851, elaborates on the complexity of the process, but more importantly, reveals the Indian artisans’ astute understanding of the material and ecological context in which muslin was created. The making of muslin, from its spinning, and weaving to finishing, had to be completed in the monsoon months from May to September between the spring and fall cotton harvesting cycles. Interestingly, both men and women had distinct roles in the crafting process. Notably, younger women (aged below thirty) had perfected the art of spinning the finest thread from cotton ‘photee’ due to their nimble fingers and better eyesight. For a finer yarn to be drawn, the air had to be damp or moisture-laden, allowing the filaments to elongate. Hence, spinning was either done in the early hours of the morning or late afternoon when it would be humid. Often spinning would also be done over a shallow vessel of water to maintain additional moisture. In his study, Taylor (1851) observes that a month of daily spinning would likely yield just under 6 grams of thread, with finer qualities valued for their weight in silver.

After the spinning process, the thread was prepared for weaving. This involved an iterative process of soaking the thread skeins in water for several days and coating them with rice-water starch. Once prepared, the thread was set up on the pit loom for weaving. Pure Hindu caste weavers, known as ‘tantee,‘ specialized in weaving extremely fine muslin, while lower-caste weavers produced lower-quality muslin (Ashmore, 2012).

It could take anything between thirty days to six months, for two craftsmen to weave a standard length of muslin that measured 20 yards by 1 yard breadth, depending upon the fineness of the cloth being produced (Taylor, 1851). With the weaving being done only during the rainy season, specifically in the Bengali months of Ashar, Shrabon (Sawan), and Bhadran (Bhadun), it provided optimal moisture and temperate conditions, preventing the warp threads from breaking due to drying out (Hossain, 2018). One of the many myths linked to muslin was that it was “woven underwater” (Islam, 2016). In reality, perhaps this was just a reference to the damp or watering that was required throughout its crafting.

While the process of crafting muslin was a testament to the Indian craftsman’s devotion to his practice, what is even more fascinating are the descriptive and evocative names of the muslins, which connect them to water and the weaver’s landscape. It can be said that muslin was created in a “milieu of wetness” (Hossain, 2018). For example, Ganga-jal, Gangazil, and Gangetiki (Habib, 2003), all refer to the Ganges waterscape; meaning these varieties were ‘from the Ganges’ or perhaps suggested that the cloth possessed sacred qualities after being washed in the Ganges (Houghteling, 2017). Similarly, Abrawan, meaning ‘running water’, Shabnam or ‘evening dew’, and Samandar Leher translating to ‘wave of the sea’, were all fine, translucent varieties of muslin that aimed to convey the ephemerality of a dew-drop or the sight and feel of water into woven cloth. Crafting muslin was thus an embodied practice, in which the artisan was deeply connected to and inspired by nature’s rhythm and topography. From analogies of water to wind; the desire to capture the elements in a length of cloth, alludes to a sentient and imaginative artisan – one who had the skills to produce something beautiful while intending to craft a meaningful ‘synesthetic experience’.

Kings’ Muslin and the Intertwinings of Colonial Trade

Early 16th-century accounts from the court of Emperor Akbar, highlight that cotton cloth became part of the imperial wardrobe “through tribute, purchases, and gifts” (Houghteling, 2017, p. 96). The Ain-e Akbari (official chronicles of Emperor Akbar) mentions thirty different varieties of cotton textiles, of which malmal and doorea were noted to be the most expensive. Records also show that the finest muslin called the ‘khaasa/malmal khaas’ or ‘Kings muslin’ manufactured in the town of Surnagaon in Bengal, was a specially commissioned textile that was presented annually to the king (Houghteling, 2017; Ashmore, 2012). Even though muslin was in circulation in the early stages of the Mughal Empire, silk was still the preferred material for imperial garments, and cotton usage was limited (Houghteling, 2017). It was only later under the reigns of Emperors Akbar (r. 1556 -1605) and Jahangir (r.1605 to 1627) that muslin was promoted as an industry and the finest qualities became a regular part of the royal wardrobes in the form of jamas², patkas³, kurtas⁴ and veils/dupattas.⁵

However, the early 17th century also marked another significant milestone in history. Under Emperor Jahangir’s reign, the British East India Company (EIC) laid the foundations of a trade relationship that unfolded between Britain and India and ultimately impacted the power dynamics of the subcontinent over the next 250 years. Trading along the spice route, the East India Company (EIC) realized that Indian textiles were in high demand due to their variety, color fastness, and superior craftsmanship (Johnson, 2006). Among the various Indian textiles exported to Europe and Britain, muslins were particularly sought after. Recognizing the significant potential of this market, the British quickly established a physical footprint in India and set up muslin factories in Hooghly, Calcutta, and Dacca by the end of the 17th century (Ashmore, 2012).

This background context is a valuable entry point to explore a later representative collection of Muslin specimens in the archival Catalogue series titled, The Textile Manufactures and The Costumes of the People of India compiled by J Forbes Watson in 1866. Comprising 700 indigenous hand-crafted textile samples, these Catalogues were meant to educate British industrial manufacturers so that they could imitate these textiles in British industries, and export their machine-made textiles back to India. In his official position as a ‘Reporter for the Products of India’ at the India Museum, Watson perceived India, as an underexplored market and a “magnificent customer” (Watson, 1866, p.2). But one may ask what fuelled this perception? For the past 150 years, the EIC had been involved in a profitable trade of textile goods from India but had very little to offer to Indian markets in return. Watson was fully aware of this trade imbalance and sought to reverse it in favor of Britain’s industrial manufacturers (Watson, 1866).

The compilation of the Catalogues in 1866 thus came at a critical political-economic juncture; for one, India was now formally a colony of the British Empire. Secondly, the Industrial Revolution had modernized Britain’s textile industry and to compete on the global stage it saw the consumptive demands of the Indian population as key to its success. Notwithstanding their original colonial premise, the Catalogues when viewed today are significant as they provide tangible evidence of the creative repertoire of the Indian craftsman at a time when the machine was set to engulf and disrupt a centuries-old system of crafting by hand.

A Survey of the Muslins in the Catalogues

In compiling The Collections of the Textile Manufactures of India, J. Forbes Watson had access to the surplus stock of textiles that lay in the India Museum.⁶

The 700 specimens can be read as a ‘cultural portrait’ revealing what was being manufactured, circulated (within and beyond India), and popularly worn by the people of India. For our discussion, the Muslin specimens there-in shall be used as a point of departure to understand the broader formal and stylistic trends. The Catalogues feature a stunning collection of 80 muslin specimens that can be broadly divided into two groups. The first includes the translucent, sheer plain variety, along with striped, checked, and exquisite loom-figured jamdanis that are woven and patterned on the loom. From this follows a second group of muslins that have undergone some kind of artistic intervention, after having been taken off from the loom. These include the tie-dyed, chikan kari, and embellished muslins (see image below).

Amongst the plain, sheer translucent muslin specimens from Dacca, the following qualities (in order of fineness), namely, Aab – rawan آب رواں (running water) thought to be only second to the malmal khaas, Shabnam شبنَم (Evening Dew), Tanzeb تن زیب (Ornament of the body), Circar Ali سَرْکارعَلی, Jungle Khaassa جن٘گل خاصا, and Naynsook نین سک feature in the compilation. Watson takes special care to mount these fine specimens against a blue paper background so that the fineness of the weave can be appreciated.

As mentioned earlier, wearing these fine white muslins was a trend propagated at the Mughal courts, which then gained traction at the regional Deccan, Sikh, and Rajput courts, to be ultimately adopted into mainstream fashion. The most popular article of attire was the Jama – a full-sleeved, knee-length garment with a high waist seam and flared skirt that would be tied under the left or right armpit with tie cords. Evidence of the diffusion of sartorial styles can be seen in this painting of the Nizam of Hyderabad, where he and his ministers are wearing translucent muslin jamas in the customary Delhi style.

By the mid-19th century, nearly 100 varieties of muslin were being produced (Ashmore, 2012). These included the striped ‘doorea’ and the ‘charkhana’ checkered muslins. While muslins were mainly woven with white thread, the Catalogue features examples of colored warp and weft used alongside white yarn in the checkered muslins. The quality and price of a length of muslin were determined by the weight of a 20-yard piece. The lighter the piece, the more expensive and finer it would be (Watson, 1866). The fine, soft, breathable, and malleable qualities of these plainer and simpler varieties of muslins made them a practical choice for clothing. They were used for a range of clothing that eventually cut across rank and status. From the finest qualities used for turbans and jamas for royalty and nobility to the fashioning of kurtas, angarakhas⁷, dupattas, saris⁸, and dhotees⁹ from weighted qualities; muslin became an integral part of the Indian wardrobe. (For Glossary of fashion terms see endnotes)

Moving to the famous Jamdanee or loom-figured muslin; it has been described by Watson (1866) as the ‘chef-d-oeuvre’ or ‘masterpiece’ of the Indian Craftsman’s art (p. 79). The word jamdanee comes from the Persian word ‘jam-dar’ meaning flowered or embossed (Ashmore, 2012). Made in a complex brocading technique, the muslin was figured or patterned with motifs in the same fine cotton yarn, in a monochromatic color scheme, white on white. The resultant beautiful flowered Dacca muslin would be a visual combination of an opaque pattern set against a translucent muslin ground (Ghuznavi, 2006, p. 305). The designs for jamdanees ranged from all-over floral trellis patterns called ‘jaal’, scattered floral motifs called ‘butis’, and striped arrangements.

As a labor-intensive technique, jamdanees were very expensive and found patronage only among the ruling Mughals and Nawabs. Also as a specialized practice, the weaving of jamdanee was strictly the domain of Muslim weavers in Bengal. Jamdanees became a premium export textile and records show that in 1797, India exported jamdanee worth five million rupees to Britain at the time (Ashmore, 2012, p. 20).

Muslin’s intrinsic diaphanous materiality lent it great functional versatility. It could be tied, ruched, crimped, folded, pleated, dyed, printed, embroidered, and embellished. These qualities direct us to the second group of muslins, which were decorated after they were taken off the loom and then fashioned into articles of attire. Much like perfecting the art of weaving muslin, the Indian craftsman was also adept at dyeing and printing cloth with dyes derived from plant and vegetative sources. Indian-dyed textiles were valued globally for their color fastness. Muslin was particularly suitable for crafting exquisite tied and dyed cloths. This was a resist-dye technique in which linear and dotted patterns would be created by selectively wrapping sections of the cloth with string or thread and then immersing it in dye. Only sections tied or covered with string remained white, resisting the dye, while the uncovered areas absorbed color. This would be done repeatedly, dyeing from lighter to darker tonalities.

Dating back to the era of Emperor Jahangir, this process was poetically called ‘gul bandhi’ (rose-tying) but is more popularly known as ‘bandhani’, meaning ‘to tie’ (Houghteling, 2017). The Catalogues contain several beautiful multicolored tied and dyed turban cloth specimens with the popular zig-zag or lehriya design and a collection of medium-quality resist dyed dotted dupatta cloths. Bandhani was a specialized craft in the Rajasthan region that received royal patronage and one finds the most intricately patterned dupattas/veils dating to the 19th century in museum collections.¹⁰

Muslins were also used as a base cloth for crafting the most exquisite embroidered and embellished textiles. In the former, the famous chikankaari embroideries became a specialized industry that catered to both local and global consumption. These delicate, white-on-white flowered muslins were created by embroidering white cotton thread on the finest plain white muslin from Bengal. The distinctive feature of chikankaari was its unique combination of embossed satin stitch and a pulled-work technique in which the base muslin cloth would be broken down into a mesh-like jaali texture with the help of a needle (Watson, 1866, p. 116).

Chikankaari embroidery is believed to have been initially introduced by Empress Nur Jehan. Over time, Calcutta, Dacca, and Lucknow emerged as the leading centers for this exquisite art form. In Dacca, lengths of muslin were embroidered for export purposes and were traded as far as Europe and America, while in Lucknow, under the patronage of the Nawabs, chikankaari came to symbolize refined taste and opulence (Ashmore, 2012). It became popular with both men and women for jamas, angarkahas, peshwaz¹¹, kurtas, dupattas and the famous dopalli topi or embroidered caps that were popularly worn in Lucknow. The specimens in the Catalogue are of fine quality, and represent a typical indigenous design vocabulary, with small-scale floral sprigs or butis, and diagonal bel/vine creepers. However, a hybridized aesthetic also developed as the artisans came in contact with foreign tastes, which saw a scaling up of the motifs, and scalloped border embroideries being created for floor-length gowns.

As with all other trade textiles, the difference in design vocabulary between home and export chikankaari muslin indicates that Indian artisans were adaptable and could cater to the tastes of specific markets.

This brings us to the embellished muslins, which were extremely decorative and ornamental. These were made in the zardozi technique (derived from the Urdu & Farsi words, zar meaning ‘gold’, dozi meaning ‘work’) a process of embroidering or couching silver and gold threads and wires of varying thickness. Materials used for embellishment included metal-wrapped silk thread called ‘kalabattun’, (this was also used to make ribbons called ‘gota’), flat metal tinsel strips (called badla), and beetle-wings (Crill, 2015). Delhi and Dacca became renowned as the main centers of production for such textiles.

The beautifully embellished zardozi specimens in the Catalogue represent the popular patterns of the time, including the ‘keri buti’ (a paisley-shaped motif), three-flowered buti, and floral roundels or small geometric motifs. These decorative muslins were mostly used for women’s attire to fashion ethereal lavish bridal dupattas, kurtis, and angia¹² blouses (Parlby, 2003). Simultaneously, the iridescent green beetle-wing embellished muslins found circulation in Europe in the form of flounces for gowns, dress panels, and stoles (Ehrman, 2018). As a luxurious material, the beetle-wings were first patronized by the Mughals, but then also became a sought-after trade item in the West¹³.

As this survey shows, muslin with its breadth of variety, carried forms of technical and experiential artisanal knowledge. From its heightened demand and patronage within India to its export to far-off markets such as Britain, Europe, and America, this luxurious textile linked people horizontally across different regions through trade, materiality, and a shared design vocabulary. However, it also connected them vertically, establishing sartorial hierarchies among its wearers, that were reflective of the wider cultural meanings muslin had acquired.

Muslins: Sartorial Practices and Cultural meanings.

To grasp the broader cultural significance of muslins and their essential role in India’s clothing practices, Mughal-era paintings serve as an excellent point of reference. The creative allure of muslins and their associated prestige have been immortalized and visually documented in illustrated manuscripts and album paintings commissioned by successive Mughal emperors.

In one such early 17th-century painting, from the St. Petersburg Muraqaa/Album, one sees Emperor Jahangir seated on his throne in an outdoor tent encampment holding an audience with a group of Shaykhs ( See Image7).

While the painting itself is replete with textiles in the form of carpets, tent panels, and the throne canopy; a striking feature is the rendering of the King and his courtiers, all dressed in translucent muslin jamas. Jahangir is seen seated on his throne, wearing a sheer muslin jama, a spotted tie/n dyed muslin turban, and pale silk paijamas. One can safely assume that his jama may likely have been made from the ‘malmal khaas’ variety, which took six months to weave and was the exclusive reserve of the King. This painting attributed to the famous Lal Chand, is interesting on many counts. Not only does this stunning rendition provide a complete sartorial portrait of the king and his attendees, but more importantly it captures a material hierarchy with astonishing detail.

Schneider & Weiner (1986) emphasize that when textiles are “shaped, tied or cut” they have the potential to define the social identity of the wearer and communicate an array of cultural meanings (p. 178). In this painting, the artist attempts to delineate social identities through attire. The groups of Shaykhs are intentionally rendered in coarser fabrics, the jama muslin-clad persons of rank (on the right) are depicted in varying degrees of opacity/translucency suggesting the different weights of the muslin, and the Emperor is portrayed radiantly in the sheer luminosity of his malmal khaas. Interestingly, Jahangir’s attire was a hybrid response to his immediate Indic and Islamic context. Indic tradition dictated that the kings be bare-chested because the body was thought to “reflect the inner state and qualities of the individual” whereas in the Islamic tradition; it was thought to be immodest to be naked and uncovered (Houghteling, 2017, p. 98). In this case, the translucent muslin jama, served both purposes, covering yet allowing for the king’s innate wisdom and power to shine through. Cotton muslin was also thought to be symbolically in line with Islamic conjunctions, reflective of humility even though ironically it was a cloth that could fetch its weight in gold.

It can be inferred from the above, that sartorial matters were thus very carefully curated. Dressing up was like a performance and it had an experiential dimension. Turner (1983) points out that textiles when fashioned into clothing, impact both the wearer and the viewer. Touching the wearer’s skin on the one hand and being viewed on the outer side by other people, he calls dress or clothing the “social skin” (as cited in Hansen, 2004). And since social identities were tied to the choice of textiles worn, the “social skin” was subject to constant interpretation by those viewing it. It was not surprising then that textiles that received state patronage and articles of attire worn by the Mughal royalty would be viewed as markers of prestige and rank.

Within stitched clothing, both men and women wore muslin in some form or another, contributing to a layered silhouette. By the early 19th century, the collective ensemble for men came to be known as the ‘Delhi Tarz’ and was configured through combinations of the following garments: kurta, angarakha, jama, and paijama (Goswami, 1993). Men wearing long flowing lengths of muslin, whether plain or embroidered was the norm. It was not until colonial contact that Indian men were forced to reconfigure ‘what to wear’ because both their choice of textiles and attire were considered decorative and effeminate. The ‘social skin’ was thus in a large part dictated by the wearer’s spatial and social context.

This was particularly the case when it came to women’s attire. Although women lived in the segregated women’s quarters or the zanaanah, they took great pains in fashioning themselves. Muslin dupattas, floor-length sheer peshwaz, kurtis, and the sensuous breast-covering garment called an angia were often fashioned from sheer and embellished varieties of muslin. It appears that Indian women used the confining premise of the zanaanah to their advantage and were comfortable wearing clothes that expressed their beauty, power, and sexuality within this all-women space. These sensuous qualities were captured in representations of imperial women, albeit from a male perspective (perhaps imaginary). This Deccan portrait of Princess Zebunnisa captures the translucency of the muslin she is wearing while revealing the contours of her body. Muslins were thus a textile that had an experiential dimension attached to them, with the wearer and viewer both contributing to that sensorial experience.

Muslins as a Material Object.

Muslin however also gained importance as a ‘material object’, influencing socio-economic and political interactions. Textiles have always played a significant role as gifts in the circuits of exchange signifying religious affinities, political allegiances and bestowing honour. Historical sources dating to the 17th-century record that on the important occasion of Nawruz¹⁴festivities it used to be obligatory for court nobles and political affiliates from other provinces to offer gifts to the king. These ceremonial gifts called ‘pishkash’ were a means for the Emperor to assess the degree of allegiance of his servant and determine if he was worthy of any favor. Among the rich array of gifts, which included rare jewels, elephants, and horses; lengths of fine Bengal muslin would also be part of the offerings (Rice, 2023, p.143).

It was also the responsibility of the Imperial court to lend patronage to regional craft industries as a tool to strengthen political and economic ties. Purchasing muslin from Bengal was a strategy to integrate these regions from the eastern territories into the Empire. The imperial machine had a sophisticated taxation system in place and Bengal would pay a large proportion of its tribute in the form of muslin instead of cash. Transactions in cloth were thus a tool of “political discourse upholding the legitimacy of the ruler and pledging the attachment of subjects” (Houghteling, 2017). Additionally, failure to patronize textile production in any part of the empire was seen as a “crisis of legitimacy” (Houghteling, 2017) –  and this in part also led to the decline of muslin production in Bengal.

These political-economy intertwinings linked to cloth were so significant that visual records show Emperor Akbar and Jahangir wearing muslin Bandhini patkas reaffirming their familial and political connections to Rajasthan through marriage. This nuanced messaging through attire was done consciously and was a means of giving value to these political and regional ties.

Conclusion

Despite the broader cultural significance and semiotics of muslin, by the middle of the 19th century, its production had declined due to decreased demand both within India and abroad. This was caused by several factors; the Mughal Empire had weakened and so primarily muslin lost its royal patronage. Moreover, the effects of the Industrial Revolution in Britain were felt directly in India. With the influx of machine-spun fine cotton yarn known as ‘English twist,’ the quality of muslin became heavier. Additionally, Muslin also began to be mass-produced in Britain and was sent back to India, pitching it in direct competition with the hand-woven Bengal muslins (Ashmore, 2012). While these interventions made the muslin more affordable, it lost its perceived and actual monetary value.

In India, sartorial preferences also shifted under British colonial rule, prompting the Indian elite to favor English cloth, which had begun flooding Indian markets in the later quarter of the 19th century. India’s weavers were struck by poverty and thousands of skilled artisans linked to the muslin industry were displaced. Collectively, thus an irreversible socio-econmic shift had occurred that altered material sensibilities.

The legacy of these Gangetic muslins transcends its material form, embodying the rich history, cultural narratives, and skilled artistry of its creators. Today, while the tangible presence of this exquisite cloth may have diminished, one is reminded and inspired by the ethos of the craftsman and his profound connection to the rhythm of nature. While it may not be possible to recreate the muslin of the past, as artists and designers in the 21st century, the journey of these ethereal muslins urges us to pause and reflect on the authenticity of creative practice, rekindling our connection to the intellectual and synesthetic pursuit of creating meaningful textiles for the future.

Title image: Processes in the Manufacture of Dacca Muslins. From John Forbes Watson’s The Textile Manufactures and the Costumes of the People of India (1866). Open Access from Archive.org.

Bibliography

Ashmore, S. (2012). Muslin. V & A Publishing.
Crill, R. (Ed.). (2015). The Fabric of India. V & A Publishing.
Ehrman, E (2018) Fashioned from Nature [Exhibition]. Victoria and Albert Museum, London, UK
https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O1387342/dress/
Ghuznavi, R. (2006). Muslins of Bengal. Textiles from India: the Global Trade, 303-315.
Goswamy, B. N., Krishna, K., & Dundh, T. P. (1993). Indian Costumes in the collection of the Calico Museum of Textiles. (No Title).
Habib, I. (2003, January). Textile Terms in Medieval Indian Persian Texts: A glossary. In Proceedings of the Indian History Congress (Vol. 64, pp. 525-547). Indian History Congress.
Hansen, K. T. (2004). The world in dress: Anthropological perspectives on clothing, fashion, and culture. Annu. Rev. Anthropol., 33(1), 369-392.
Hossain, L. (2018). The Ground of Wetness Through the Practice of Muslin Making. Tradition/Trans/Formation: Craft, Practice and Discourse Conference.
Houghteling, S. W. (2017). The Emperor’s Humbler Clothes: Textures of Courtly Dress in Seventeenth-century South Asia. Ars Orientalis, 47, 91.
Islam S., Muslin: Our Story, Dhaka: Drik Picture Library Ltd., 2016.
Johnson, D. C. (2006). Seventeenth-century Perceptions of Textile Trade as Evidenced in the Writings of the Emperor Jahangir and Sir Thomas Roe. Textiles From India: The Global Trade, 233-44.
Parlby, F. P. (2003). Begums, Thugs and Englishmen: the journals of Fanny Parkes. Penguin Books India.
Pathak A. (2006) Indian Costumes. Roli Books. India.
Rice, Y. (2023). The brush of insight: artists and agency at the Mughal court. University of Washington Press.
Taylor, J. (1851). Descriptive and historical account of the cotton manufacture of Dacca. Bengal.‘John Mortimer publications, London, 48.Watson, J. F. (1866). The textile manufactures and the costumes of the people of India. India office.