The reign of Shah Jahan (r. 1627-58) still counts to the rather understudied periods of Mughal history. It offers, though, promising material to approach the negotiation and mediation of Macht and Herrschaft at the Mughal Court, as well as its representation to the periphery. Starting from a broad understanding of communication, this paper aims at approaching the relation of performative or interactive communication (as in court ceremonial) and textual forms of communication. In contrast to performative communication, which is bound to the very moment the respective participants interact, both visual and textual communication are means of representation, and may be directed towards intended target groups beyond the participants in courtly communication. It is thus vital asking for intentions and agendas behind the (textual or visual) representation of communication. While miniature painting and architectural communication at the Mughal Court have been studied formerly, this paper concentrates on textual representations of court communication. The paper starts from the assumption that Mughal Herrschaft based on a constant interaction of the emperor as the ‘center’ of his realm on the one hand, and the mansabdar-élite on the other. The emperor’s supremacy being reliant on a cooperating élite, communication between emperor and mansabdars became the central means of negotiating Macht and Herrschaft. Textual representation of court communication thus served to depict or even discuss social relations and rank, especially between the emperor and the mansabdar-élite holding functions both at court as well as in the military and administration. It served to show idealized social relations and to mirror ways of negotiating Macht as well as constellations of Macht and Herrschaft between the emperor and the élite. The semantics of khidma (‘service’) and ni'ma/inayat (‘benefice’) are explored as a vital part of the discourse. The paper explores communication strategies represented in two historiographies from the early Shah Jahani period, namely Qazvini’s and Tabataba’i’s Padshahnamas/Shahjahannamas. How do the historiographers describe communications situations, and to what purpose do they use the topic in their narrative?