Asian and African studies blog: South Asia

Some more unpublished Deccani paintings

In two recent posts I examined a largely unpublished album of 18^th century paintings associated with the Deccan and with the Maratha courts and prior to those posts a newly acquired portrait of Ikhlas Khan, the African minister of the Bijapur sultans. In this new post I want to look at some other Deccani items acquired since the publication of the Falk and Archer catalogue of Indian miniatures in 1981. The first is associated with the artist Muhammad Khan, who is well known for his portraits of Sultan Muhammad ‘Adil Khan of Bijapur (reg. 1627-57) and notables of his court. Two of these portraits are in the British Library (Johnson Album 1,9 and Add.Or.2770, see Falk and Archer 1981, nos. 405-406), while others are in the British Museum and in collections in India and the USA (Zebrowski 1983, pp.127-31). He signs himself as the son of Miyan Chand, presumably another artist, none of whose work is now known. Not at all known is the work of his son, Muhammad Husayn, one of whose works was acquired for the collection in 1985. This is a head and shoulders portrait of the Mughal Emperor Jahangir (reg. 1605-27), a version of one of the bust portraits of that emperor done in the Mughal court during his reign.

The Emperor Jahangir. By Muhammad Husayn, son of Muhammad Khan. Bijapur, 1660-70. Opaque water-colour with gold. Oval: 112 by 78 mm. Add.Or.4243.

It is inscribed in Persian on the gold rim of the oval: Mashq-i Muhammad Husayn ibn Muhammad Khan Musavvir (‘copy by Muhammad Husayn son of Muhammad Khan the painter’). This appears to be the first reference to Muhammad Khan’s son also being a painter. It is certainly not the equal of his father’s work, but then it may of course be the work of an apprentice as suggested by the unusual term mashq (i.e.copy).

Another copied painting acquired in that same year is also linked with Bijapur. This shows the founder of the Bijapur dynasty Sultan Yusuf ‘Adil Shah (reg. 1509-11) enthroned with the next four monarchs of Bijapur and being handed the key of royal authority by a Persian figure. To his right, and slightly smaller and below him, are kneeling his two immediate successors Isma’il (d.1534) and Ibrahim I (d.1557), and likewise to his left are ‘Ali I (d.1579) and Ibrahim II (d.1626). Attendants behind carry parasols above the sultans. The painting is by a Deccani artist, apparently about 1750, after a lost Bijapuri original of c.1610. It is inscribed on a cover sheet in Persian: Majlis-i ‘Adil Shah badshah ma’ah nazdikan (‘assembly of King Adil Shah with his relatives’).

The first five Sultans of Bijapur. By a Deccani artist, c.1750, after a lost Bijpur original of c.1610. Opaque water-colour with gold. 180 by 272 mm. Add.Or.4242

A larger version of this scene including all the Bijapuri Sultans up to the last one Sikandar (reg. 1672-86) is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (Zebrowski 1983, pl. XVII). The New York version would appear to be an accession portrait linking Sikandar with his ancestors back to the founder of the dynasty, who is receiving the keys of royal authority from his Shia co-sectarian Shah Isma’il of Iran. Our painting would appear to be after a painting that is not an accession portrait but a statement of Ibrahim II’s royal authority, since he is painted fully mature and with a beard; the original would have been the beginning of a tradition of such paintings which added each new ruler at the appropriate time.

A well-known painting showing a lady lying pining on her couch for her absent lover is one of the most important paintings from Hyderabad in the Richard Johnson Collection.

A lady pining for her absent lover. Hyderabad, c. 1740-50. Opaque pigments with gold and silver. 215 by 150 mm. Johnson Album 50, 4.

The duenna bends down to whisper to the recumbent lovelorn lady about her absent lover, perhaps suggesting his imminent arrival, while her two maids look at each other knowingly. There is real interaction between the two pairs of women. The scene is set at night with a full moon and a pair of white cranes starkly silhouetted against the dark background, while the lady’s agitation is suggested by the breeze ruffling the canopy. Even the cranes seem to have paused in their flight to comment to each other on the goings-on below them.

A lady pining for her absent lover. Hyderabad, c. 1740-50. Brush drawing with gold. 170 by 132 mm. Add.Or.5695.

A closely related drawing was acquired in 2010. The attention to detail in this lively drawing makes it look very finished and not at all a preliminary drawing for anything else. The artist, being unable to suggest night-time, has substituted clumps of plants, all waving in the breeze that agitates the folds of the canopy above. Delicate designs on the textiles of bedcovers and clothes substitute for the vibrant colours of the painted version.

An album of 75 portraits (Add.Or.4396-4470) depicting principally the courtiers and ministers of the Nizams of Hyderabad ‘Ali Khan (reg. 1762-1803) and Sikandar Jah (reg. 1803-29) was acquired in 1989. It was assembled originally in Hyderabad in the early 19th century, refurbished about 1900 and presented in 1915 by Nizam Mir Usman ‘Ali Khan to the Viceroy Lord Hardinge. Inscribed on the fly-leaf is: To His Excellency Lord Hardinge of Penshurst Viceroy of India (with all good wishes) from Mir Usman ‘Ali Khan Nizam of Hyderabad 15th June 1915.

The album is particularly valuable for the large number of portraits and notables of the court of Hyderabad about 1810 in the time of Nizam Sikandar Jah (reg. 1803-29), during whose reign most of the portraits as well as those of earlier rulers seem to have been painted. These greatly supplement in this respect the collection of Henry Russell, Resident at Hyderabad 1811-20 (Add.Or.1912-47, Falk and Archer 1981, no. 434). An exception is the portrait of Nizam ‘Ali with his chief minister Aristu Jah in a larger format, which together with three portraits of notables of Nizam ‘Ali’s court in the same format are about 15 to 20 years earlier.

Nizam ‘Ali Khan, Nizam of Hyderabad (reg. 1762-1803), seated on a terrace with his minister Aristu Jah. Hyderabad, c.1790. Inscribed below: Nawab Nizam ‘Ali Khan Bahadur. Opaque pigments with gold. 217 by 125 mm. Add.Or.4411.

The minister is almost certainly ‘Azim al-Umara Aristu Jah (d. 1804). His portrait is the same as that in the Victoria and Albert Museum identified as Aristu Jah (I.S. 163-1952, see Zebrowski, Deccani Painting, fig. 247, who misidentifies him as the chief minister of Nizam Sikandar Jah). Despite his reputation as a wily politician, he was responsible for the disaster at Khardla in 1794 that befell the Hyderabadi forces in their encounter with the Marathas and spent two years imprisoned in Pune.

Finally in this brief selection is this delightful equestrian portrait of Lieutenant John Gustavus Russell, acquired in 1992. Russell is accompanied by sowars of the Kurnool Irregular Horse, and is riding in a flowery landscape in front of a Muslim tomb typical of Kurnool architecture. Inscribed on the wooden back-plate of the frame is: Blacklock an Arab Horse I had ten years. Never lost a 1st Spear out Hog hunting when I rode him.- I spent £50 for him as a 3 year old and refused £300 when in his prime.- Dead. Rosie a terrier my Constant Companion halting or travelling for 14 years, she is Still Alive. John G Russell. 4 April [18]53. P.S. The drawing is made by a native. The horse & dog are right - but the rider not - I did not sit for it.

Lt. John Gustavus Russell with sowars of the Kurnool Irregular Horse. By a Kurnool artist, c.1850. Water-colour with gold. 24 by 34 cm. Add.Or 4661

Kurnool, some 120 miles south of Hyderabad, became in the 18th century semi-independent under its own Pathan Nawabs. It was captured by Haidar ‘Ali of Mysore, and in 1799 was given to the Nizam at the division of Tipu Sultan's territory. It was ceded by him to the East India Company in 1800, although the Nawabs were left in charge in return for a tribute to Madras. The last of them was judged guilty of treasonable activity in 1838 and the territory was annexed, although left in the charge of a British Commissioner and Agent until 1858 rather than under the normal Collector and Magistrate of British India. The arts flourished under the Nawabs and an offshoot of the Hyderabad style of painting can be located there (Zebrowski 1983, pp. 272-3). In the 19^th century Kurnool produced paintings on leather of both Hindu and decorative subjects, but this painting by Kurnool artist would seem to be a rare instance of a Deccani ‘Company’ painting. The artist has combined a delicate Deccani approach to landscape with the more naturalistic traditions associated with European portraiture.

John Gustavus Russell (b. 1817) first served in the 29th Madras Native Infantry in 1838 when based at Jalna near Aurangabad in the Nizam’s territory. By 1846 he was placed in charge of a portion of the Kurnool Irregular Horse, a cavalry regiment formed from the numerous Pathan retainers of the Nawabs of Kurnool after the last one was deposed in 1838. He remained in Kurnool until 1858, from 1849 as Assistant to the Governor of Madras's Agent at Kurnool, himself acting as Agent from 1856-58. He was promoted to Captain in 1856. The role of Agent was abolished in 1858, when Kurnool was treated like a regular Madras District for the first time, and Russell from 1859-61 acted as Paymaster to the Malabar and Kanara Force, and then the Nagpur Force; he retired early with the rank of Major on 1 October 1861.

Indian paintings in the Sir John Ritblat Gallery from July 2014

Visitors to the Sir John Ritblat Gallery: Treasures of the British Library may have encountered our display of Indian paintings next to the entrance to the Magna Carta. As part of the conservation programme, the paintings are rotated every few months. If you missed the display on the portraits of rulers of Rajasthan, you can still view a selection on the Asian and African Studies Blog.

Selecting paintings to display is no easy task: the library’s collection holds a diverse range of Indian paintings that date mainly from the 16-19^th centuries. Popular genres and themes for the display can be drawn from portrait studies, illustrations to literary themes, religious subjects and from the 19^th century onwards on architecture. In consultation with exhibitions and conservation, the selection is placed into the gallery.

The theme for the current selection is ‘Art of the Book’ and includes elegant visualisations of the ever so popular Hindu deity Krishna with his beloved Radha, Prince Rama and his brother Lakshman pinned by serpentine arrows, and illustrations to the Indian classical music known as ragamala (garland of musical modes). Some of the highlights are featured below:

Rama and Laksmana are pinned by serpentine arrows. By a Pahari artist from Bahu or Kulu, from the Shangri Ramayana, Style III, circa 1700-10. 186 by 290 mm; page 215 x 316 mm. Add.Or.5696, acquired 2010.

- See more at: http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/asian-and-african/2014/01/pahari-paintings-at-the-british-library.html#sthash.Kf5yXor6.dpuf

Radha makes love to Krishna by a grove. An illustration to a Rasakapriya of Keshav Das. Kangra, c.1820. Attributed to Purkhu and his school. Add.Or.26

Vasanta Ragini, Murshidabad (Bengal, India), c. 1760. Johnson Album 36,8.

The Sir John Ritblat Gallery: Treasures of the British Library hosts a permanent free display of the library's greatest treasures. It is usually open 7 days a week.

Additional material held in the Visual Arts department at the British Library can be viewed by appointment in the Print Room (Asian & African Studies Reading Room). Please email [email protected] for an appointment. The Print Room is generally open Monday-Friday, from 2-5pm.

Posted by Malini Roy at 10:00 AM in Art , Exhibitions , Hinduism , Ramayana , Religion , South Asia , Visual arts | Permalink | Comments( 0)

‘The Kuwait Cat’s Meat Crisis’ & British Imperial Control

On 11 January 1937, the British Political Agent in Kuwait, Gerald Simpson De Gaury (1897-1984) returned to Kuwait City from a tour of the interior. Upon his arrival at the Agency, De Gaury was informed by his Head Clerk that a British subject had been arrested and detained by the local authorities. The subject in question, a Pathan [Pashtun] restaurant owner named Abdul Muttalib bin Mahin, had been charged with “selling cat in his restaurant instead of mutton”.

As Muttalib was a British subject, his arrest was contrary to the provisions of the Kuwait Order-in-Council, the agreement between the British Government and Kuwait’s rulers that governed the relationship between the two states. De Gaury’s response to this breach of the agreement was decisive and illustrates well the extent of the British Empire’s control over Kuwait during this period.

According to a letter De Gaury sent to his superior, Trenchard Craven Fowle (1884-1940), the British Political Resident in the Persian Gulf, within half an hour of his return to the city, he had successfully secured Muttalib’s release from prison and temporarily detained him in the Agency instead.

The first page of De Gaury’s letter to Fowle reporting the details of Muttalib’s case, 18^th March 1937 (IOR/R/15/1/506 f. 207)

‘A Herd of Eight Fat Cats’

The next day, the ruler of Kuwait, Shaikh Ahmad Al Jabir Al Sabah apologised to De Gaury in person for the “error in procedure” and then sent a letter to the Agency that presented the ‘evidence’ against Muttalib. According to the letter, the Kuwait Town Watch had visited Muttalib’s house and “found a herd of eight fat cats there”. The letter ended with a request for De Gaury to approve Muttalib’s deportation from Kuwait. In the words of De Gaury, “His Excellency or his officers had thus in effect tried, and convicted the man and I was to be merely his executive official for the deportation”.

Subsequently, De Gaury called for Shaikh Ahmad’s Lieutenant (who was head of the Town Watch) to come to the Agency. Once the Lieutenant arrived, De Gaury informed him that he intended to try Muttalib the following day at 3pm and asked for the witnesses to be ready at that time. In his letter to Fowle, De Gaury states that as he had previously seen an unusual number of cats in the Lieutenant’s own home, he “sharply” asked him how many he himself kept, to which the Lieutenant fearfully responded that his household had “about fourteen, including those in the harem” (the area of a house reserved solely for women).

Evidence: A Dead Cat’s Hair

The next day, De Gaury was told that Shaikh Ahmad had gone away on a hunting trip and that it was not possible to call the witnesses to trial without the Shaikh’s permission. Undeterred, De Gaury held the trial regardless and swiftly dismissed the case against Muttalib due to a lack of evidence. In his letter to Fowle, De Gaury mentions that the American Mission[1] had become involved in the case “with their habitual elan” when Dr. Charles Stanley Mylrea from the Mission’s hospital had analysed a hair found by the Mayor on a table in Muttalib’s restaurant and certified it to be the same as that on a dead cat from a dustbin in the neighbourhood. However, much to the chagrin of the Mission, De Gaury decided that, in the absence of all other witnesses, Mylrea’s assessment carried no weight as evidence.

Dr. Mylrea’s Gravestone at the Old Jewish & Christian Cemetery in Kuwait City. Courtesy of Julia & Keld

Playing on the Shaikh’s Weakness

According to De Gaury, by this point, the town had split into pro- and anti-Muttalib factions as a result of the controversy and in order to show his support, De Gaury visited Muttalib’s restaurant and publicly rebuked the Mayor of Kuwait who had initially brought the case against the restaurateur. De Gaury’s actions, combined with pressure from Kuwait’s religious establishment (who also supported Muttalib, “owing to his past charity”), soon led the local authorities to lose interest in the case.

De Gaury believed that the Mayor had initiated the case against Muttaliib in order to try and gain control of his restaurant and had been assisted in this effort by the Town Lieutenant, said by De Gaury to be an “ambitious, jealous man who plays on the Shaikh’s weakness”. At this time, a large number of Indian merchants had recently been expelled from Iran and Iraq and in the words of a British official “were keen to try their luck in Kuwait”. This eventuality worried Shaikh Ahmad as he was concerned that an influx of these merchants into Kuwait would bankrupt their local competitors and cause instability. It is possible that he supported the Mayor’s call for Muttalib’s deportation due to this broader concern.

De Gaury explained to Fowle that the Mayor made the error of attacking a British subject thinking that foreigners would be “easier game” than Kuwaitis and since the Shaikh had “concealed the provisions of the Kuwait Order-in-Council from most of his subjects”, had not realised “that he would in the end encounter me”.

Diplomatic Humour

After receiving De Gaury’s letter, Fowle reported the details of the case onwards to the British Government in India in a letter of his own on 5 May 1937. In this letter, Fowle joked that by using the ‘capital’ of 14 cats, the Lieutenant and the Mayor “could doubtless have started a flourishing business in the restaurant line”.

Fowle’s light-hearted commentary on the final page of his letter to the Government of India regarding Muttalib’s case, 5 May 1937 (IOR/R/15/1/506 f. 214).

Although the charges against Muttalib were dropped, under the belief that his business would suffer as a result of the accusations nevertheless, he wound up his affairs and left Kuwait. Fowle sardonically remarked that it was not known whether he left “with or without his eight cats”. Thus ended what was known while it lasted as the ‘Kuwait Cat’s Meat Crisis’, and in De Gaury’s words “at one time threatened to be rather serious”.

Although De Gaury may have sympathised with Muttalib’s plight on a personal level, the underlying motivation for the decisive action he took in his support clearly had a wider context. As De Gaury observed, many Kuwaiti subjects were unaware of the depth of Britain’s imperial control over the country and the extent to which the Kuwait Order-in-Council infringed upon on the country’s sovereignty. The crisis therefore served to visibly underline the British Empire’s commanding presence in Kuwait. Muttalib’s almost immediate release from prison and the dismissal of the case against him the next day sent a strong message that all British subjects in Kuwait, even those accused of a crime, were under their government’s protection and could not be arrested or prosecuted by the local authorities.

Primary Sources
London, British Library, ‘File 53/32 V (D 128) Kuwait Miscellaneous', IOR/R/15/1/506

Further reading
al-Ḥātim, ‘Abd Allāh ibn Khālid, Min hunā bada’at al-Kūwayt, 2nd edn (al-Kūwayt: Maṭba‘ah Dār al-Qabas, 1980)

Louis Allday, Gulf History & Arabic Specialist
British Library/Qatar Foundation Partnership

[1] The Arabian Mission of the Reformed Church in America.

Posted by Ursula Sims-Williams at 9:24 PM in Gulf , Middle East , Qatar , South Asia , Trade | Permalink | Comments( 0)

Sir Thomas Reade: Knight, ‘Nincumpoop’ and Collector of Antiquities

How did a fourteenth century illustrated ‘Treatise on the Art of Riding and using the Instruments of War’ [نهاية السؤل والامنية في تعلم أعمال الفروسية] end up in the British Library’s Arabic manuscript collection? A ‘Nincumpoop’ of the Napoleonic era, who moonlighted as an antiquarian, holds the answer.

This strikingly illustrated manuscript, Add.18866 (currently undergoing digitisation by the BL/Qatar Foundation Partnership), probably originates from Egypt or Syria. It was authored by Muḥammad ibn ‘Īsá ibn Ismā‘īl al-Aqṣarā’ī (d. 1348), and this copy was completed on 10 Muḥarram 773 AH (25 July AD 1371). The manuscript’s title claimed that, in its comprehensiveness, it could nullify all desire for further instruction in the subject.

‘Illustration of four horsemen, each one with a sword and a hide shield, and each one carrying his shield on his horse's croupʼ [صورة أربع فوارس مع كل واحد منهم سيف ودرقة وكل منهم درقته على كفل فرسه] (BL Add.18866, f. 140)

Tracing Provenance

The British Library’s ‘Register of Additional Manuscripts’ states that this item was purchased from the estate of Sir Thomas Reade via a sale at Sotheby’s auction house. It is listed in the 1852 Sale Catalogue as Lot 94, a ‘Treatise on the Art of Riding and using the Instruments of War, with illustrations, beautifully written’.

The sale of Reade’s manuscript Add.18866 to the British Museum. Sotheby and Wilkinson’s Sale Catalogue, 28 January 1852, Lot 94 (BL S.C.Sotheby(1))

The manuscript was the third most expensive item of the two-hundred and sixty lots from his estate, and by far the most expensive of Reade’s Arabic manuscripts. It was purchased on behalf of the British Museum for four pounds, four shillings (equating to four guineas, or £4.20 – about £500 today) by the brothers Thomas and William Boone, specialist antiquarian booksellers with whom the British Museum dealt in the nineteenth century. Prior to this, provenance can be surmised through tracing the life of its former owner.

Thomas Reade in the Army

Sir Thomas Reade (1782–1849) was born in Congleton, England and in 1799 he ran away from home to enlist in the army. Following campaigns in Holland, Egypt and America, as well as postings across the Continent, Reade received many subsequent honours and promotions, culminating in his Knighthood in 1815, aged just thirty-three. This event coincided with the end of his military career and marked a turning point in his life, for, on 29 January 1816, Reade set sail with Sir Hudson Lowe for the remote island of St Helena in the South Atlantic.

Colonel Sir Thomas Reade, C.B. (1782-1849). Unknown artist

Napoleon’s Jailer

According to a biography written by his descendant Aleyn Reade, Sir Thomas was deployed as Deputy Adjutant-General of the troops. Not only was he jailer to the French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte – exiled there after the Battle of Waterloo – but he acted as the main intermediary between Napoleon and Lowe, whose relationship was famously strained.

Whilst Count Montholon (who accompanied Napoleon to St Helena and was later suspected by some to have poisoned him) spoke favourably of Reade, as did Lieutenant Clifford (a Naval officer who visited the island in 1817), he was not popular with everyone. Gorrequer, Lowe’s Aide-de-camp and acting military secretary, referred to him in his diary by various derogatory pseudonyms including ‘Nincumpoop’ and ‘Ninny’. However, in spite of the rumours and controversy regarding Lowe’s alleged ill treatment of Napoleon, Aleyn Reade argues that the exiled Emperor appeared to have liked or at least favoured Sir Thomas.

Life in Tunisia

Following Napoleon’s death in 1821, Reade returned to England. He was appointed Consul-General of Tunis on 5 June 1824 (London Gazette of that date), and married Agnes Clogg on 9 September that year. In Tunisia in addition to his main charge of defending against the French, his most notable achievement came in 1842 when he successfully influenced the Bey (monarch) of Tunis to abolish slavery throughout his dominions.

He remained in Tunis until his death from cancer in 1849 and was honoured with an impressive public funeral, which, as his obituary states, was ‘celebrated with solemnity and pomp’. It was Reade’s professional standing and foreign postings that enabled him to collect manuscripts, but the life he led outside of his official duties sheds more light on why he acquired them.

Reade the Collector

Like many high-ranking British officers of his day Reade was also a scholar and antiquarian. He studied and collected Carthaginian and Romano-African antiquities and zoological specimens, published papers and excavated among the ruins at Carthage at his own considerable expense. Many of the artefacts he unearthed were given to the British Museum, a practice that was common at the time, but would be a complicated diplomatic issue today. This was part of the less official, but equally destructive looting by colonial officials of the treasures of the greater empire. It is very probable that Reade acquired possession of al-Aqṣarā’ī’s manuscript at this stage of his career.

‘Illustration of a horseman with a sword in his right hand, its blade on his left shoulder and a sword in his left hand whose blade is under his right armpitʼ [صورة فارس ومعه سيف في يده اليمنى وذبابة على كتفه الأيسر وفي يده اليسرى سيف وذبابة تحت إبطه اليمنى] (BL Add.18866, f. 132v
)

Unfortunately, this is where the trail runs cold. Exactly where, when and from whom Reade obtained this striking volume is unlikely to come to light. However, the personal interest of a high profile official in ancient antiquities allows us a small insight into the manuscript’s path to the British Library, where it now forms one of the highlights of the Asian and African Studies collection. A detailed catalogue description is available here.

Sources

London, British Library, Department of Western Manuscripts departmental archive: Register of Additional Manuscripts, February 1851 – July 1861.

‘Catalogue of a Valuable Collection of Oriental Books and Manuscripts; including many, the Property of the Late Sir Thomas Reade’, Sotheby and Wilkinson Sale Catalogue, 28 January 1852, pp. 1–16, and accompanying annotations. In BL S. C. Sotheby(1): Auctioneersʼ archival set of Sotheby’s sale catalogues, 20 Jan 1852 to 16 Feb 1852.

Anon, ‘Sir Thomas Reade, C. B.’, The Gentleman’s Magazine, (September 1849), pp. 316–7.

Herbert John Clifford, ‘A Visit to Longwood: copied by his great-grand-daughter, M. C. Bernard, from the diary of Lieut. Herbert John Clifford, R. N., 1817 [written on board H. M. sloop Lyra on the homeward voyage from China, whither the Lyra had gone with Lord Amherst’s embassy.]’, The Cornhill Magazine, (November 1899), pp. 665–75.

James Kemble, St Helena During Napoleon’s Exile: Gorrequer’s Diary. (London: Heinemann, 1969).

Aleyn Lyell Reade, The Reades of Blackwood Hill in the Parish of Horton Staffordshire. A record of their descendants: with a full account of Dr Johnson’s Ancestry (London: Spottiswoode & Co, 1906), pp. 57–63.

Jo Wright, Content Development Curator, British Library Qatar Foundation Partnership

Posted by Ursula Sims-Williams at 12:15 AM in Art , Middle East , Provenance , Qatar , South Asia | Permalink | Comments( 1)

An Album of Maratha and Deccani Paintings - Add.21475, part 2

In a previous post (April 2014), I looked at the first three paintings in this album and explored the connections between the Maratha court in Poona and Jaipur artists. The remaining five paintings in the album are all from a large Hyderabad-type series of the Rasikapriya, the classic text by Keshavdas on Hindi poetics that the author wrote at Orccha in 1594 for Kunwar Indrajit Singh, the brother of the ruler Raja Ram Shah of Orccha (1592-1605). Although a literary work, it was written in the context of the Vaishnava revival in northern and western India in the 16^th century. Keshavdas took the love of Krishna and Radha out of the pastoral settings of the Gita Govinda and placed it in a courtly ambience. He used their relationship to explore all the different kinds of literary heroes and heroines and the erotic sentiment (sringara rasa) in all its variety.

A complete set of illustrations to this text involves several hundred paintings. Our album contains only five such paintings. If there were more, their whereabouts is not now known. Originally the Hindi verses were inscribed in nagari in a separate box above the paintings and text and paintings were contained within gilded and coloured ruled lines, but for some reason the original text panels were cut out and replaced with other panel pasted down from the reverse. The remains of the tops of the original aksaras are visible only on folio 7. The pictures are not particularly specific and their subjects could apply to many of the verses and situations in the text. On the reverse of each folio are inscribed brief Hindi labels for the subject of the painting taken from Keshavdas together with a number different from that associated with the relevant verse in its chapter in the printed editions, and a written out Persian numbering. As noted in the earlier post, all the paintings were at some time removed from their original album pages and let into European paper frames.

Two of the paintings (ff. 4 and 8) have an oversize Krishna as the hero or nayaka, wearing a tall golden crown, which serves to locate the provenance of the paintings as southern, as do the large white palatial buildings in the background which resemble those in the Johnson Hyderabad Ragamala in the British Library of c. 1760 (J. 37, Falk and Archer 1981, no. 426). The style of the paintings will be discussed later after dealing with the subject matter. The inscription on the reverse is here taken as the title of the painting. For the complete text and translation of the verses of the Rasikapriya, along with numerous examples of their illustrations, see Dehejia 2013.

Nayaka ko prakasa biyoga sringara, Krishna’s ‘open’ love in separation (Rasikapriya 1, 27-28). 301 x 217 mm. Deccan, perhaps Aurangabad, 1720-30. British Library, Add.21475, f.4

The verses on folio 4 come from the conclusion of the opening chapter, in which Keshavdas makes some general remarks about the emotion of romantic love and its two major varieties, love in union and love in separation. Keshavdas divides his descriptive verses into ‘open’ (prakasa) or clear and ‘hidden’ (prachanna) or more suggestive. Here the sakhi (confidante) has been to see Krishna and describes him to Radha: ‘He is totally unresponsive and has stopped eating and drinking. All of Braj is concerned about him and you are sitting here unconcerned. Get up and do something about it. This is the result of his longing for you.’ The artist shows Krishna sitting mournful and unresponsive in one pavilion while the sakhi tries to talk to him and then she goes off to find Radha, who is meant to be some way away in another pavilion.

Ajnata yauvana, a youthful maiden unaware of her own flowering. 336 x 257 mm. Deccan, perhaps Aurangabad, 1720-30. British Library, Add.21475, f.5

The term on the reverse of folio 5, ajnata yauvana, a youthful maiden unaware of her own flowering, comes not from the Rasikapriya but from Bhanudatta’s Rasamanjari, an earlier work in Sanskrit on the same topic. Similarly the verse above our painting is not found in Keshavdas’s work, where the relevant verses (3, 20-21) speak about a navayauvana mugdha nayika, a maiden newly grown to adolescence. Their purport is the same: her waist is slimmer, her hips have expanded, her gait is more steady but she does not know why this should be so. Chapter 3 of the Rasikapriya deals with the different types of heroine or nayika, which are classified in various ways. The artist shows the maiden sitting by a pool populated by ducks in an extensive meadow while her confidante tries to reassure her about what is happening to her body. A girl standing with flower wands perhaps signifies her impending marriage. In the distance is a white palace set beside a garden.

Nayaka ko prachanna sravana darsana, Radha’s hidden meeting [with her lover] through hearing [his name] (Rasikapriya 4, 15). 331 x 246 mm. Deccan, perhaps Aurangabad, 1720-30. British Library, Add.21475, f.6

The verse for this painting comes from the fourth chapter, on how lovers meet: in person, through a portrait, in a dream or through hearing the other’s name. Radha chides her sakhi for speaking of Krishna for she does not know what to do now that Krishna is so enshrined in her heart. The artist shows Radha sitting under a canopy with her friends in a meadow with what appear to be flamingos in a pond in the foreground.

Radha ko prachanna citra darsana, Radha’s hidden meeting [with her lover] through a painting (Rasikapriya 4, 8). 335 x 250 mm. Deccan, perhaps Aurangabad, 1720-30. British Library, Add.21475, f.7

From the same chapter 4, the nayika can ‘meet’ her lover through seeing his portrait. Radha’s mind was filled with love on seeing her beloved’s portrait, but her shyness caused her to tremble. She is shown holding a portrait and sitting on a carpeted terrace with her friends in front of a palace with flamingos again in the foreground.

Madhya adhira nayika, the plain speaking experienced heroine (Rasikapriya 3, 48). 340 x 250 mm. Deccan, perhaps Aurangabad, 1720-30. British Library, Add.21475, f.8

In chapter 3, heroines can be mugdha, madhya or praudha (adolescent, experienced or mature). The madhya heroine is subdivided various ways, of which one is according to the way she speaks to her lover, which can be dhira, adhira or adiradhira (firmly, harshly or scoldingly). Here the heroine is unable to restrain her indignation at her lover’s fickleness and speaks harshly to him with words capable of two meanings: “Your body is like that of your father [for just as he shakes on account of old age so do you tremble for fear that your secrets will be out]. In strength you resemble your brother Balaram [for just as he is intoxicated with wine you are intoxicated with love]. Your face is like your mother’s [she has a tilak on her forehead and you have a love mark] and just as her mind is full of motherly love you are infatuated with thoughts of love. Your temperament is stable like that of the earth [for you are able to sustain the frailties of others]. Your mind is restless like the wind and pure like water. Your mouth [on account of chewing betel] is red like fire. As is the sky full of space and sound, you who are dark as the cloud and your words that speak of your misdeeds prevail in every home. Like Rati [the consort of Kamdev] is your love [for separation torments you as it affected her]. Your form is pleasing like that of Rati’s lord. Tell me, Lord, how did you learn to speak such lies?” (adapted from Dehejia 2013, p. 60).

The artist sets the scene in the countryside with a pavilion in which Radha is upbraiding Krishna for his fickleness. Beside the stream with its birds and flowers in the foreground a cowherd is milking a cow, with a gopi standingready to churn the milk into butter, while on the hill in the background a prince, presumably meant to be Balarama as he is white, is sitting with a woman. The latter reference is easy to pick up, although there is no sign of wine, but the pastoral activity in the foreground is possibly a reference to Krishna’s being like the earth.

The style of the five paintings in our album relates to eighteenth century Hindu Hyderabadi painting, in which Krishna wears the tall crown typical of that style.

Krishna, a peacock, cows and a devotee. Hyderabad, c. 1770. British Library, J.45,39.

See Falk and Archer 1981, no. 472iv for another example of this style. Some of the most important paintings from 18^th century Hyderabad are found in a group of Ragamala sets, of which Richard Johnson’s album in the British Library J.37 is typical.

Vasant raga from the Hyderabad Ragamala, Hyderabad, c. 1760. British Library, J.37, 6.

Exquisite figures male and female disport themselves on palatial terraces or in idyllic visions of the country. This fine set of 36 paintings was collected by Johnson during his appointment as Resident at the court of Nizam ‘Ali Khan in Hyderabad from 1784-85. Nizam ‘Ali (1762-1802) was a patron of music, poetry and painting and Johnson apparently came to know him well, since he was constantly espousing the Nizam’s interests as against those of his superiors in Calcutta which resulted in his early recall. These sets are famous among other things for their perspective views of architecture with semi-naturalistic vanishing points, in contrast to our album paintings where all the buildings are viewed frontally. Nonetheless it is possible to see the resemblances in the architecture: the white chunam-covered buildings tend to have a tall ground storey with smaller pavilions on top. The beautiful canopied pavilion on folio 6 is also found several times in the Ragamala set. Yet the treatment of landscape, flowers and birds do differ, for here in the album the artist is very free. By the 1760s the Hyderabad landscape style was turning harder with conceptualised hills and meadows criss-crossing each other to suggest depth, while our artist takes a more naturalistic approach to recession, as in the exquisite meadow of folio 6 and in the various naturalistic clumps of flowers as opposed to the regimented rows in the Ragamala. More open landscapes were a feature of Deccani painting in the first quarter of the 18^th century (see Zebrowski 1983, ch. 11) and it is at the end of that period that our five album paintings seem best placed. Bold distortion of forms in our album as in the overlarge Krishna figure, the tiny steps and minuscule foreground trees are all features found in the earlier style. Only one other painting has so far been identified as related to the style of our five paintings, showing a prince seated on a carpet amidst flowers and miniscule trees in a meadow leading back as in f.5 of our set to white palatial buildings on the horizon. This was formerly in the William K. Ehrenfeld collection in San Francisco (Ehnbom 1985, no. 36, where it is called Golconda, 1660-70) and its whereabouts is not now known.

As to the set’s patron, the fall of Bijapur and Golconda to Aurangzeb in 1686-87 released many of their artists for patronage elsewhere, as is well known for various Rajput courts, but many others stayed locally to work for the local nobility of the former Golconda kingdom as well as for Mughal or Rajput patrons depending on their appointments to positions within the new Mughal subahs of the Deccan. Aurangabad (now in western Maharashtra) remained the principal Mughal capital in the Deccan and even Asaf Jah, the first Nizam of the newly independent Hyderabad state from 1724, was based there before his successors moved the capital to Hyderabad. This distinctness from Hyderabad proper is perhaps reflected in the Hindu costume of skirt, bodice and orhni worn by nearly all the women as distinct from the more Muslim costume (paijama and peshwaj) of the Hyderabad Ragamala sets done later under Nizam ‘Ali’s patronage. A provenance from Maharashtra would thus put the five paintings within the orbit of the Peshwas based at Poona and link them to the other three paintings in the album.

The Khamsah of Nizami: A Timurid Masterpiece

One of the best loved of the illustrated Persian manuscripts in the British Library is the Khamsah of Nizami Or. 6810. Made in Herat during the reign of Sultan Husayn Bayqara, and with one picture dated 900/1494-95, it contains some of the finest late 15th-century painting. The glorious colour and meticulous drawing of its illustrations strike the viewer immediately, while the depth and complexity of their meaning is endlessly fascinating. In addition the manuscript poses interesting problems of artistic attribution and patronage.

Harun al-Rashid and the barber. Ascribed in notes to Bihzad and to Mirak (BL Or.6810, f. 27v).

Illustrating a parable in Makhzan al-Asrar (‘Treasury of Secrets’), the first of the five books of the Khamsah, ‘Harun al-Rashid and the barber’ takes us inside a hammam (‘bathhouse’). We are well and truly inside since the plain doorway in the right marks the entry to an area of privacy, or relative privacy. In its main saloon, men, with their gaze politely directed away from each other, are dressing or undressing with proper decorum. To the left is a more private space, its status is expressed in a more stately architecture: this is for the moment reserved for caliphal use. In it Harun al-Rashid is the direct object of attention of two attendants, and appears to have engrossed the activity of two more. This space is the focus of the narrative: the viewer’s eye has been led towards it from right to left, according to the reading direction of the Persian script. The text tells us that when Harun visits the hammam the barber who shaves his head asks for the hand of his daughter in marriage. Harun is incensed by this impertinence, which is, moreover, repeated on his subsequent visits. Harun puts this problem to his vizier, remarking that it seems unwise to subject oneself to the double threat of an actual razor and a dagger-like word. The vizier speculates that the barber’s presumption might result from his standing over a treasure: the caliph should order him to move his position. Harun acts accordingly; standing on a different spot, the barber no longer feels himself the caliph’s equal; excavation reveals the treasure over which had been beneath his feet.

Over and above the requirements of the narrative, the depiction of the hammam is the gift that the artist makes to the viewer. There are minutely observed practical details such as the soot deposited on the walls by the lamps in the private room, or the precise position of hands that wring a wet towel in the public space; and there is the symbolic detail that the caliph’s robes and crown are temporarily laid aside, so that in a sense he becomes a vulnerable man on a level with the others. There is careful observation and judgement in the use of colour: the dark buff tiles of the floor are evidently not glazed, so that even when wet they will not be slippery; their colour is beautifully set off by the array of blue towels of varying stripe that blazon the function of the establishment, and that are secured into the main composition by the rod that lifts them to or from the drying line.

Is this picture the work of the great painter Bihzad? The names of both Mirak, the older master, and of Bihzad have been written underneath it at an unknown date, but the majority of scholars would attribute it to Bihzad. Writing in 1605, the Mughal emperor Jahangir, then in possession of the manuscript and priding himself on his connoisseurship, asserted that 16 of its pictures were by Bihzad, five by Mirak, and one by ʿAbd al-Razzaq, though he did not specify which (See earlier post: ‘A Jewel in the Crown’).

The Prophet mounted on the Buraq and escorted by angels passing over the Kaʻbah (BL Or.6810, f. 5v).

One of the pictures to which no notes of attribution have been added is the ‘Miʿraj’ (‘ascent’), the picture of the Prophet Muhammad carried up into the heavens on the back of the Buraq, a mount with a human face—the Buraq’s face suggests the work of Mirak, the other faces less so. The Prophet is seen in a swirl of golden clouds and surrounded by angels, against a night sky. He is above the black-draped Kaʿbah, with the town of Mecca around it treated in fascinating detail, albeit in a rather persianate architecture replete with blue and turquoise tiling. The picture follows the type of one produced some 80 years earlier in the Miscellany for Iskandar Sultan BL Add. 27261 of 1410-11 (see earlier post: ‘The Miscellany of Iskandar Sultan’). The later picture has, however, two brilliant innovations. The Prophet is here looking around him in wonder, and the precinct of the Kaʿbah contains two human figures that are so tiny that the viewer seems to look down on them from an immense height.

Iskandar, in the likeness of Husayn Bayqara, with the seven sages. An inscription in the arch of the window is dated AH 900 (1494/95). (BL Or.6810, f. 214r).

This magnificent manuscript clearly draws upon the talents of artists of the royal workshop, but it does not display the name of Sultan Husayn Bayqara, who ruled Herat from 1469 to 1506, as patron, instead a line on one of the arches of Shirin’s palace (f. 62v) says that it was made for the Amir ʿAli Farsi Barlas, and it seems that he is depicted in the frontispiece. Nevertheless, it is beyond doubt that it is Sultan Husayn Bayqara who appears, in proxy portraiture, in illustrations to the story of Iskandar (Alexander the Great), as an ideal king, surrounded by philosophers (above) or showing respect for a holy man (below).

Iskandar, in the likeness of Husayn Bayqara, visiting the wise man in a cave. Ascribed to Bihzad underneath, but to Qasim ʻAli in the text panel. (BL Or.6810, f. 273r).

Thanks to the generosity of the Barakat Trust this manuscript has been fully digitised and can be viewed in our digitised manuscripts viewer (click here Or.6810). Follow this link for a detailed catalogue description with links to all of the miniatures.

Further Reading

Ebadollah Bahari, Bihzad: Master of Persian Painting, London and New York, 1996.
Basil Gray, Persian Painting, Geneva, 1961.
Thomas W. Lentz and Glenn D. Lowry, Timur and the Princely Vision, Los Angeles, 1989.
John Seyller, ‘Inspection and valuation of manuscripts in the Imperial Mughal Library’, Artibus Asiae, LVII, 3/4 (1997), pp. 243-349.
Ivan Stchoukine, Les peintures des manuscrits Tîmûrides, Paris, 1954.

Barbara Brend, Independent scholar

Posted by Ursula Sims-Williams at 12:15 AM in Afghanistan , Art , Central Asia , Iran , Middle East , Mughal India , Provenance , Seals , South Asia | Permalink | Comments( 0)

‘White Mughal’ Richard Johnson and Mir Qamar al-Din Minnat

With Dan Snow’s series on the East India Company beginning on BBC2 on Wednesday 30 April, there may be renewed interest in ‘White Mughals’ like Major General Charles ʻHindooʼ Stuart. A less colourful figure but more important, from the British Library’s point of view, was Richard Johnson whose collection was purchased at a much reduced price by the East India Company in February 1807 for its newly formed Library. The Company paid 500 guineas for 64 albums of paintings (over 1,000 individual items) and 2,500 guineas for an estimated 1000 manuscripts in Persian, Arabic, Turkish, Urdu, Sanskrit, Bengali, Panjabi, Hindi and Assamese. These formed the backbone of the East India Company (later the India Office) Library. It is doubtful, however, whether at the time the Library appreciated the true value of the collection and as recently as 1921 the orientalist Thomas Arnold (Assistant Librarian at the India Office 1904-9) wrote somewhat disparagingly (see Rupam below):

As a collector he [Johnson] certainly did not show any remarkable power of discrimination…which would appear to indicate that he was not a man of very refined taste or endowed with a nice sense of judgement.

Today, however, the Johnson collection is accepted as one of the most significant in the British Library and in our recent exhibition, ‘Mughal India: Art, Culture and Empire’, it contributed a major proportion of the exhibits.

Laylā and Majnūn at school from the story of Laylā u Majnūn in Nizāmī’s Khamsah. Painting ascribed to Mīrak and Bihzād, and to Qāsim ʻAlī in the text panel, c.1494. This manuscript, classed as one of the most precious manuscripts in the imperial Mughal library (see my earlier blog ‘A Jewel in the Crown’), was acquired by Richard Johnson in December 1782. He must, however, have sold it separately from the rest of his collection since the British Museum purchased it from a dealer over 100 years later in 1908 (BL Or.6810, f.106v).

Richard Johnson (1753-1807)
Appointed a writer on the Bengal establishment of the East India Company's service Johnson arrived at Calcutta in 1770. Between 1780 and 1782 he was Assistant to the Resident, Nathaniel Middleton, in Lucknow, and from 1784 to 1785 he was Resident in Hyderabad. Recalled from both postings, his career was to some extent unsuccessful but he nevertheless established influential contacts with both European intellectuals such as William Jones, Elijah Impey and Antoine Polier and Indian poets and artists from whom he purchased and commissioned many works. It was Johnson who commissioned the first printed edition of the Dīvān of Ḥāfiż published by Upjohn’s Calcutta press in 1791 (see Encyclopaedia Iranica: Hafez VI).

Richard Johnson’s bookplate inscribed in English and Persian with his name and Mughal titles: Mumtāz al-Dawlah Mufakhkhar al-Mulk Richārd Jānsan Bahādur Ḥusām Jang, 1194 ʻRichard Johnson chosen of the dynasty, exalted of the kingdom, sharp blade in war, 1780ʼ. Johnson was very proud of his titles which were granted by Shāh ʻĀlam in 1780 together with the rank (mansab) of 6,000 and insignia of a fish and two balls, a kettle-drum and fringed palankeen (BL IO Islamic 1518).

Portrait of Richard Johnson from a copy of Minnat’s Dīvān, painted by an unknown artist c. 1782. Thomas Arnold – he seems to have strongly disapproved of Johnson! – commented unfavourably on this portrait: “The artist has certainly made no attempt to flatter Mr. Richard Johnson, and his appearance does not inspire either admiration or respect.” All the same it is the only portrait we have of him, showing Johnson seated on a terrace in a formal garden, perhaps in Lucknow (BL Or.6633, f. 68r).

Mir Qamar al-Din Minnat
It was while Johnson was in Lucknow that he came across the poet Mīr Qamar al-Dīn Minnat. Minnat was a pupil of the Persian poet Shams al-Dīn Faqīr and was brought up in Delhi by his aunt who was married to the Islamic scholar and reformer Shāh Waliullāh. The deteriorating political situation in Delhi led him to move to Lucknow in 1191 (1777/78) where he met Richard Johnson who introduced him to the Governor-General Warren Hastings. Minnat wrote poetry in Persian and Urdu which included a Dīvān (selected poems) and a Persian version in verse, Qiṣṣah-i Hīr u Ranjhā, of a Panjabi tale, which he composed in 1781 at Johnson's request. He died in Calcutta in 1792 or 1793.

Portrait, presumed to be of the poet Qamar al-Dīn Minnat, by an unknown artist. In Falk and Archer (details below) he has been mistakenly identified as Nizam ʻAlī Khān (BL Or.6633, f. 136r).

The fly leaf to Minnat's translation of Hīr u Ranjhā, inscribed by Johnson: “The tale of Hire Ranja versified by Meer Cummur uldeen at the desire of R.J.” (BL IO Islamic 1318, f. 27r).

The British Library has two copies of Minnat’s Dīvān, both dating from the author’s lifetime. One, IO Islamic 54, unillustrated but containing lavishly illuminated openings, belonged to Johnson himself.

The opening pages of Johnson's personal copy of the Dīvān of Minnat (BL IO Islamic 54, ff.1v-2r)

The other, Or. 6633, containing a slightly different collection of texts, includes odes (qaṣīdas) in praise of Johnson (ff. 67v-68v – click here to see Text of Ode to Johnson), Warren Hastings (ff. 66r-67v) and Sir William Jones (ff. 68v-69v) in addition to 13 portraits, among them Warren Hastings, the Nawab of Awadh Āṣaf al-Dawlah (r. 1775-97), his ministers Ḥasan Riẓā Khān and Amīr al-Dawlah Ḥaydar Beg Khān Bahādur, and the Nizam of Hyderabad Nizam ʻAlī Khān (r. 1762-1803). For full details of the illustrations in this manuscript see Titley, p. 120.

Portrait of Warren Hastings by an unknown artist (BL Or.6633, f. 67r).

This manuscript was left unfinished with pages missing at the end and many gaps intended for subsequent paintings. At one time it belonged to the court of Awadh and it contains the characteristic red seals of Nāṣir al-Dīn Ḥaydar (r. 1827-37) and Amjad ʻAlī Shāh (r. 1842-47). It was purchased by the British Museum in 1905 from the estate of the Indian Civil Service Judge James O’Kinealy.

For those interested in further details of some of the more notable acquisitions in the Johnson collection, see the exhibition catalogue Richard Johnson (below) and pp. 14-29 of Indian Miniatures. The latter also includes transcripts (pp. 26-9) of the correspondence relating to the acquisition of the collection.

Further reading
Toby Falk and Mildred Archer, Indian Miniatures in the India Office Library, London: Sotheby Parke Bernet, 1981.
T.W. Arnold, “The Johnson collection in the India Office Library. 1”, Rupam no 6 (April 1921), pp. 10-14, 2p. plates.
Norah M. Titley, Miniatures from Persian Manuscripts. London: British Museum Publications, 1977.
Richard Johnson, (1753-1807): nabob, collector and scholar: an exhibition of oriental miniatures and manuscripts from the collection of Richard Johnson, as well as rare books, documents, prints and drawings illustrating his career and interests, mounted for the sesquicentenary of the Royal Asiatic Society ... from 1 August 1973. London: India Office Library, India Office Records, 1973. [Asia, Pacific & Africa P/T 5477].
ʻAbd-al-Muqtadir, Catalogue of the Arabic and Persian Manuscripts in the Oriental Public Library at Bankipore, 3. Persian Poetry. Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Book Depôt, 1912, pp. 243, 244, 245.
Garcin de Tassy, Histoire de la Littérature Hindoui et Hindoustani, 1. Paris: Oriental Translation Committee of Great Britain and Ireland, 1839, pp. 339-40.

Ursula Sims-Williams, Asian and African Studies

Posted by Ursula Sims-Williams at 12:30 AM in Art , Exhibitions , Middle East , Mughal India , Provenance , South Asia | Permalink | Comments( 0)

An Album of Maratha and Deccani Paintings - part 1

An Indian album in Asian and African Collections of which hitherto little notice has been taken is a large but slim volume, numbered Add.21475 (Blumhardt 1899, no. 91). The album contains eight paintings mostly from the Deccan, including five large paintings illustrating verses from Keshav Das’s classic text on poetics, the Rasikapriya. It has to my knowledge been exhibited only once, in 1976, and only one of its paintings has ever been published, a portrait of Raja Sambhaji (Losty 1986, no. 56). An inscription records that it was presented to the British Museum in 1856 by F.S. Haden Esq. This is possibly Sir Francis Seymour Haden (1818-1910), an eminent surgeon and one of the great 19^th century authorities on etching, both on its practice and on the works of eminent etchers. The album was rebound in Europe and the paintings remounted on European paper so that any connection with its compiler in India has been lost.

The album begins with two important Maratha portraits.

Inscribed above: Maharaja Sambhajiraje. Maratha, late 17^th century. Opaque pigments and gold on paper, 146 by 220mm (including border). BL Add.21475, f. 1

Sambhaji (1657-89) was the eldest son of Sivaji, leader of the Hindu Deccani resistance to Aurangzeb’s assault on the kingdoms of the Deccan. After Sivaji’s death in 1680, Sambhaji led his forces against not only the Mughals but the Siddis of Janjira, the Portuguese in Goa and the Wodeyars of Mysore. He was captured in a minor skirmish with the Mughals at Sangameshwar in 1689 and executed at Aurangzeb’s command. This rare portrait cannot be much removed in time from Sambhaji’s life. The conventions of the portraiture, being seated on a terrace holding a flower, are standard throughout the 17^th and 18^th centuries, but the tangled clouds at the top point particularly to an early date. Its dark flat colours suggest a provenance far from the glitter of Hyderabad, the centre of Deccani painting at the time, and perhaps to a Maratha provenance, about whose artistic activities at this period little is known. Portraits of Sambhaji are very rare, but two formerly in the royal Satara collection are now in the History Museum of Marathwada University, Aurangabad (Deshmukh 1992, pls. I. IIIA). The former is a standard Golconda/Hyderabad sort of portrait, but the second showing him seated with his young son Sahu (pl. IIIA), painted probably in the early 18^th century by a Maratha artist, seems based on our portrait or one similarly early. Both show the same Vaisnava sect mark on his forehead and the four chains of pearls attached to the back of his turban.

The Maratha Peshwa, Madhavrao II. Maratha, perhaps by Shivram Chitari, c. 1790. Opaque pigments and gold on paper, 278 by 205 mm (including border). BL Add.21475, f. 2.

Next in the album comes an unattributed portrait which from the turban and clothing can only be one of the later Maratha Peshwas. The Peshwas, all Chitpavan Brahmins, were the hereditary chief ministers of the Maratha kings, and after the descendants of Sivaji and Sambhaji had established themselves at Satara and Kolhapur, they ruled the empire in their name from their base at Pune. The long shawl wound round the body is in the manner of the Bijapur and Golconda sultans of the 17^th century. The hairless face, long nose, protruding mouth, turban, clothing and Vaisnava sect mark all match those of the young Peshwa Madhavrao II Narayan (1774-1795), the posthumous son of the murdered Peshwa Madhavrao I, as seen for example in the portrait by James Wales dated 1792 in the collections of the Royal Asiatic Society (see the website http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings).

The Maratha empire was governed by the famous statesman Nana Phadnavis during the Peshwa’s long minority. Holly Shaffer who is currently researching Maratha paintings has kindly confirmed the identity of the sitter as the Peshwa Madhavrao II, based on an unpublished inscribed portrait of the same man in the Bharat Itihas Samshodak Mandal in Pune. A portrait of his father, Madhavrao I with various attendants, ascribed to the Maratha artist Shivram Chitari, now in Aurangabad, is in a very similar style (Deshmukh 1992, pl. IX). That portrait has a garden and palace background that suggests that the artist must have had some training in Hyderabad, which was the major artistic centre for the northern Deccan. For painting in Hyderabad and its provinces in the later 18^th century, see Zebrowski 1983, pp. 244-82.

These two portraits of Maratha interest are succeeded somewhat unexpectedly by a Jaipur painting of Radha and Krishna, portrayed as the hero and heroine of the month of Jyestha (May/June) from a Barahmasa set of paintings illustrating the twelve months of the Hindu calendar.

The month of Jyestha (May/June), from a Barahmasa set. Jaipur, c. 1780-90. Opaque pigments and gold, 244 by 189 mm (including border). BL Add.21475, f. 3.

Krishna dressed as a young raja is embracing Radha, while being serenaded by two female musicians with tambura and drum. Radha’s maid to the side holds the cord of a punkah hanging from the ceiling of the pavilion and Krishna with his hennaed hand held out seems to be encouraging her to work harder, to cool them down in the hottest month of the year. Our artist’s attention to detail is exquisite – note particularly his foreground flowers and those round the balustrade, as well as the pairs of brilliantly coloured birds in the trees. In a contemporary Barahmasa set of paintings from Jaipur in the History Museum, Aurangabad (fully published in Deshmukh n.d.), the month of Jyestha is a very similar composition to our painting (ibid., pl. 5), save that in place of the woodland surround there is a view of a distant landscape with tiny buildings and trees. Krishna’s costume and appearance both in our painting and in the Aurangabad set leave little doubt that he is based on the portraits of the young Maharaja of Jaipur, Pratap Singh, as seen in a drawing in the BL when he is slightly older.

Maharaja Pratap Singh of Jaipur (b. 1764, reg. 1778-1803). Attributed to Sahib Ram, 1785-90. Brush drawing with some colour on paper, 610 by 440 mm. BL Add.Or.5579

Another drawing formerly in the James Ivory collection shows Pratap Singh at a younger age without facial hair (Losty 2010, no. 46) and is even closer in appearance. The enhanced curve of the eyebrow and the curl of hair at the back of the neck are similar in all these examples. Shailka Misra, who is currently researching the Jaipur archives, advises that in a Ragamala set from Pratap Singh's reign, in the City Palace Museum, Pratap Singh also appears as the hero or nayaka of one of the Ragamala illustrations. Jaipur paintings of this date are normally surrounded by broad red borders, but instead here there is a Mughal type of border of alternate large and small blue cartouches filled with arabesques against a yellow ground, suggesting influence from a late Mughal source. Pratap Singh’s Ragamala in Jaipur also has the same kind of Mughal-influenced borders.

The angled hipped roof of the pavilion, normally seen in Avadhi paintings, and the attention paid to linear perspective suggest that our artist has been exposed to influence from Lucknow. The connections between Avadhi and later Jaipur paintings are obvious but their means of transmission remain to be explored. The Barahmasa set in Aurangabad also has similar angled hipped roofs as well as two other readily identifiable Avadhi characteristics: distant tiny landscapes in the manner of the Faizabad and Lucknow artist Mihr Chand and a concern to show foreshortened buildings in linear perspective.

Given that the other paintings in the album are all associated with the Deccan, it would seem that this Jaipur painting would also have been collected there. The many Jaipur religious and mythological paintings in the collection of Major Edward Moor, author of the Hindu Pantheon (London 1810), now in the British Museum, indicate that such paintings were readily available in Bombay and Poona where Moor served in the Bombay Army 1796-1805. Jaipur seems to have been a centre for the dissemination of Hindu religious and genre paintings during this period, quite apart from the ones which were sent as gifts to other courts. Our painting could easily have been part of a Barahmasa set sent as a gift to one of the Peshwas, perhaps Madhavrao II Narayan himself, and mounted up with other Maratha and Deccani material in this album. The Jaipur Barahmasa set now in Aurangabad came from the royal Satara collection and was possibly a gift from Pratap Singh to Maharaja Shahu II (reg. 1777-1810).

The remaining five paintings in the album are all from a large Hyderabad-influenced series of the Rasikapriya, the classic text by Keshav Das on Hindi poetics, and will be dealt with in a subsequent post.

J.P. Losty, Curator of Visual Arts (Emeritus)

Asian and African studies blog

193 posts categorized "South Asia"

Some more unpublished Deccani paintings

Indian paintings in the Sir John Ritblat Gallery from July 2014

‘The Kuwait Cat’s Meat Crisis’ & British Imperial Control

Sir Thomas Reade: Knight, ‘Nincumpoop’ and Collector of Antiquities

An Album of Maratha and Deccani Paintings - Add.21475, part 2

The Khamsah of Nizami: A Timurid Masterpiece

‘White Mughal’ Richard Johnson and Mir Qamar al-Din Minnat

An Album of Maratha and Deccani Paintings - part 1

Asian and African studies blog recent posts

Other British Library blogs

Archives

Tags

Asian & African links