BY G. VENKATACHALAM

III.AESTHETICAL AND TECHNICAL

The term ‘Rajput Painting’ was first coined by Dr. Ananda Coomaraswamy, the well-known Indian scholar and critic, for this class of Hindu pictorial art of Medieval India and to distinguish it from its later development under the influence and patronage of the Timrud Kings, which is known by the name of ‘Moghal Painting’. There was a constant confusion of criticism with regard to both these schools of painting, and often some of the best examples of Rajput art were mistaken for Moghal pictures and under that name they were collected and catalogued by the early European connoisseurs. It was left to Dr. Ananda Coomaraswamy not only to draw the attention of the world to the great aesthetical and pictorial values of this vernacular folk-art of the Hindu India of the Middle Ages but also to point out the main differences between the various schools of Rajput painting and the court art of the Grand Moghals. Moghal art, so called, was not an exotic plant transported into India from elsewhere, but an indigenous art developed and enriched by the Persian culture of the Moghal Court. Rarely in the history of the world have two great cultures, rich and significant in their own ways, fused and blended so harmoniously and so wonderfully as in the case of Moghal India.

The Hellenistic influence and the so-called cultural conquest of India by Greece was a failure; its net result being the hybrid art of Gandharan sculptures and architecture. The commercial and political conquest of India by the European nations that followed the decline of the Moghal Empire, resulted in the national degeneracy of her people and the decay of her arts. Moghal India, culturally speaking, was a glorious period in Indian history; and especially from the standpoint of Indian art, it was a period of considerable enrichment of national heritage. Indian architecture, Indian music, Indian painting, Indian textiles and crafts, Indian dress and food, all these were greatly influenced and enriched by the Moghal conquest of India and yet they remained distinctly Indian. It was, therefore, no wonder that early collectors and connoisseurs of old paintings were not able easily to distinguish the early indigenous Hindu art from its later development, the Moghal art.

It is now nearly over two decades since Dr. Coomaraswamy called the attention of the world to the significance of these miniature paintings, both as works of art and from the point of view of the history of Indian culture. In his Indian Drawings, Volume II, and later, in his most valuable and exhaustive work, Rajput Painting, he attempted a thorough analysis of the subject and discussed at length, with profuse illustrations, the aesthetical values of these paintings. He has since been followed by other students and critics, notable among whom are Dr. Goetz of Germany, Percy Brown of the Indian Educational Service, Laurence Binyon of London and O. C. Gangoly of Calcutta. Mr. Gangoly's latest portfolio, Some Masterpieces of Rajput Painting, with explanatory notes, is, perhaps, the most up-to-date and informative work on the subject.

Nothing saddens a lover of Indian art so much as the fact that some of the finest examples of this art are outside India, in the private collections of connoisseurs in Europe and in the museums of the West. The collections of Johnston, French, Rothenstien, Binyon and others in England are at least exhibited now and then for public view, and are reproduced and written about in journals, so that one does not get the feeling of their having been lost, but what about those other rare paintings that are in the private possession of unknown individuals and rich millionaires, which do not see the light of day? Some of the choicest and rarest pictures are in the Boston Museum under the care of Dr. Coomaraswamy, and in the museums of London and Berlin. In India the best private collections are those of Parsanis of Satara, Manuk of Patna, Gazdar of Bombay, the Tagore Collection in Calcutta and the collections of the Rampur State and Jaipur Palace. The Calcutta School of Arts, the Tata collection in the Prince of Wales Museum in Bombay, the galleries at the Baroda and Lahore Museums, the Bharat Kala Parishad of Benares and the Bharata Ithihasa Mandali of Poona also have some rare collections of Rajput and Moghal paintings for public view. It is by a close and careful study of some of these paintings that one can get a fair idea of the aesthetical and technical qualities of this art.

"The Rajput School" writes Mr. O. C. Gangoly in his introduction to his Some Masterpieces of Rajput Painting, "forms one of the most characteristic and fascinating chapters of Indian Painting and is of great aesthetic and spiritual significance." There are critics who object to the word ‘Rajput’ and would prefer to call it ‘Hindu’ School of Painting, on the ground that the appellation ‘Rajput’ or ‘Rajasthani’ connotes restricted geographical area and therefore misleading, as this art was spread all over Northern India from the deserts of Rajputana to the lower valleys of the Himalayas. However misleading the name may be topographically, culturally speaking it is a significant term, and a happy term at that, to be associated with this style of painting. The name has come to stay and it is best known all over the world by that name. There is another class of critics that refuses to see anything ‘aesthetical’ in this art, and considers it merely as a primitive folk-art, and what to them is pictorially intelligible in it, they trace to the influence of Persian art introduced into India by the Moghals. Fortunately, further researches made by scholars like Goetz, Ananda Coomaraswamy, Binyon, Havell, Gangoly and others, based on the styles and mannerisms of the pictures, technical treatment, dress and other significant motifs, have once for all established its indigenous character and its pictorial excellence.

Though there is much dearth of materials for a proper study of the art of painting in India between the closing years of the seventh century A. D., which saw the completion of the last of the Ajanta Viharas and its immortal frescoes and the opening years of the sixteenth century, when blossomed this exquisite Rajput art of India, yet from the few fragments of illuminated manuscripts of Jains of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and from the Gujerati illustrated manuscript, Vasanta-Vilasa, of the fifteenth century, one can easily estimate their pictorial values and discover the conventions and traditions of Rajput art. In fact, there is little difference either in the technical features of both these arts or in their style or mannerisms. The general tone about these early folk-paintings is weak, there is a lack of sincerity and depth of conviction and also a poverty of strength which is emphasized by the muddy colour schemes, in contrast with the joyous note of the blaze of colour in Rajput Miniatures. Otherwise, the general features are the same. On these early Indian paintings of the fifteenth century, my friend, Nanalal Mehta, of the Indian Civil Service, a good critic of Indian Art, has a very interesting note, which throws additional light on the origin of Rajput Painting and reveals identical methods of treatment and technique. "The pictures," writes Mr. Mehta, referring to the illustration of the manuscript Vasanta-Vilasa, "are not by way of illustrations of the verses, but may be regarded as a sort of pictorial interpretation of the perennial themes of Love and Spring . . . . They are painted with all the directness, vigour and concentrated intensity of primitive art . . . . The figures are bound by bold and definite lines; the colour scheme is extremely simple, and there is a preponderance of yellow, red and blue . . . . Shading, foreshortening, perspective, are conspicuous only by their absence." The Rajput painting, of course, is not one of pure draughtsmanship; the pictures are mere compositions in colours, harmonious and balanced. As contrasted with the primitive folk-art of the fifteenth century, the sixteenth-century Rajasthani Painting is a more developed, cultured and refined art.

"The whole composition," writes Mr. O. C. Gangoly, "is architecturally built up by the bold juxtaposition of masses of severely defined colours. There is not much drawing and the whole design is expressed in colours. They are characterized by unconventionality and originality of design . . . Trees, flowers and clouds in the background are introduced not for their own sake, but as significant motifs; nothing is introduced which is irrelevant to the expression of the theme. In Indian Art there is a remarkable fusion of form and substance. And if we forget for a moment the subject-matter of these pictures, their plastic and chromatic qualities cast the spell of their magic, and we are embarrassed to choose between the variegated claims of their appeal, their sensitive drawing and luminous colouring, the graceful curves of the figure, the magic rhythm, the sinuous grace of the flowing lines of their drapefy, and above all the charming ensemble of their decorative composition. In the types they create, in the manner of presentation and in the peculiar vision in which the spiritual and humanistic outlook are skilfully fused, the Rajput Schools introduced new value into the history of pictorial art. Indeed, they do add something new to the world of art, and this something is indescribably precious."

This style of painting became widespread in India, with local variations and peculiarities, and extended from the Himalayan valleys of Kangra, Basholi, Jummu, Chamba in the North to the fertile plains of the Vijianagar, Tanjore and Mysore kingdoms in the South, and from the deserts of Rajputana to the Gangetic valley of Bengal. In the hill schools of Kangra and Garhwal, myths and legends of Shiva became popular subjects for painting, and in the plains of Rajputana, Krishna and his Leelas were the favourite themes,

The representation of Ragas and Raginis (melody-moulds), lyrical love scenes, erotics and Nature's moods were, other characteristic features of this school of painting.

IV. HISTORICAL

It is but natural that, for the purposes of a correct estimate and proper study of so vast a subject as Indian Art, covering over a period of two thousand years and more, and comprising as many styles, schools, types and expressions of art as it is possible to conceive, students and critics divide it into definite eras or periods; but in this, there is always a fear of being too rigid and dogmatic. These divisions, as all students will admit, are only arbitrary, and are based on scholars’ speculations and researches and archaeologists’ finds. Pre-Buddhistic period, Buddhistic period, Kushan period, Mauriyan and Post-Mauriyan periods, Gupta period, Mathura School, Gandharan School, Sanchi-Barhut styles, all these indicate to the student of Indian Art a rough outline of the development of the Fine Arts in this country. In most cases, the names were given arbitrarily by the first researcher or the pioneer in the field, and the name sticks to them in spite of its wrong application or connotation, as further investigations disclose. There is really nothing final in the statements that critics make, and the last word can never be said with regard to the past history of the arts of any country, much less with regard to those of India. Though the superstition that ‘India is country without a history’ is knocked on the head by the researches of epigraphists, archaeologists and students of Indian Art, yet our knowledge of India's past will always remain fragmentary, one-sided, meagre and confusing, considering its vast antiquity and the mass of materials available, which are too overwhelming to be easily disposed of. Indian Art has suffered much for want or this understanding on the part or its early students, who ever emphasized the ‘formal’ side of India's artistic expression and often missed its inner or vital life-expression. The one great message that India has ever given right down the ages, through her religions, philosophies, arts and sciences, has been that stupendous truth, the Unity of Life, and therefore, the unity of her arts; and it is strange that almost all the early European scholars, who did such magnificent work to interpret India to the West, managed to miss that fundamental fabric of India's thought and life. It is only the latter-day students like Goetz, Havell, Cousins and others who were able to sense and intuit this great secret of India.

The above preliminary remarks are necessary for a correct and proper estimation of the subject under study. The Rajput School of Painting is one of the most significant and outstanding artistic achievements of Medieval India, but it is not an isolated achievement of a particular period in Indian history. Whatever may be the originality and the peculiarity of a work of art, it is rarely an isolated work: it is explained by anterior works, and is justified by the contemporary ones. The Hindu art of Rajput Painting is a direct descendant of the Buddhistic art of Ajanta, and in spite of the seeming differences in mannerisms, style, size and expression, the underlying unity of both these arts is the same. It is true that the art of Ajanta is more highly developed, more naturalistic and richer in composition than the sixteenth-century art of Rajputana and of the Punjab and foot-hills of the Himalayas, which is primitive in style. But, nevertheless, both styles are nearly the same; the difference in expression need not belie their common genus. Even the art of Ajanta was not an isolated factor. It had its antecedent, and is the direct outcome of the creative genius of the Guptas. The Gupta Empire was most powerful then, reigning over the greater part of India, whose cultural rule expanded over the whole of the known world, to China and Japan, to Turkestan and Rome, to Cambodia and Java. It was the Golden Age of India. Its greatest poets were Kalidas, Dandi, Amaru and Bhartrihari. Its special achievements were in sculpture and painting. Ajanta was the epitome of that culture. Its last great king was Harshavardhana; and with his death, India soon fell into, decay and degeneracy, and her greatness vanished for many, many centuries. The whole of Northern and Middle India fell into the hands of less cultured but more warlike dynasties, and new kingdoms were founded in the Punjab, in Gujerat, in Rajasthan, in Bengal and along the lower valleys of the Himalayas. These were the ancestors of the Rajput clans. The history of Medieval India, from the twelfth century to the eighteenth, is a history of the struggles, wars, achievements and cultural conquests of these races. The ideals, thoughts, aspirations and feelings of a people are best reflected in their arts, and we find in the arts of this time, a new development, a new tendency, a new expression, but fundamentally Indian in character and genius. The painting of this period imitates the marvellous frescoes of Ajanta, but while the latter were large wall paintings of rich composition, here, during this period, they were done in miniatures and for book-illustrations. The art was not so much religious as courtly. When the Thakurs and the Ranas became more and more independent, and firmly established themselves as powerful rulers, the art was filled with a new vitality and feeling. Though the primitive style remained, the colourings became more fine and harmonious, and the human figures were more delicate, refined and sensitive. These were the days of romance, chivalry and heroism, of Padmini, Rupmati, Mira and others. Rajasthan was a world of castles and hill-forts, a world of knighthood and chivalry. And just as the Knights of Europe worshipped their Ladies, so the Rajputs plighted their word of honour to protect, help, shield, fight and die for the women who had given them the Rakhi (bracelet). Woman became one of the motifs of their art and soon ‘worship of woman’ became almost an artistic cult. Women inspired the art of Ajanta as well, but they were women of a sensuous type and mundane feeling. In the languorous poses of their bodies, in the coquettish looks in their eyes, in the fascinating gestures of their hands, in the well-developed busts and slender waists, in the confusion of curls and flowers round the faces, in the jewellery, modeled out of many little filigree-links, in the extremely fine texture of the dresses that revealed their beauty and grace, and in their enchanting smiles, you recognize the grand amouresses of the women of Ajanta. Nothing vile, seductive and immoral; but frivolous, sentimental and Charming. Those were the morals of the Gupta times. But in the art of the sixteenth century, woman was depicted as a tender, delicate, innocent but proud heroine. She is painted as an ideal type "with round moon-face seen in a bewitching profile, with large sensitive eyes, graced by eye-brows which rival the bow of Cupid, whose dark raven hair ends in the fairest curls and whose fully-developed bosoms throbbed with love longing in their hearts". Their dresses were long gowns down to the knees or even the ankles, in simple, great lines, and sometimes also trousers.

"The Schools of Rajput Art," writes Mr. 0. C. Gangoly, "embody a whole cycle of Hindu culture, chiefly covered by medieval Vaishnavism, with its doctrine of Love and Faith. Though rooted in the old Sanskrit classic culture, it takes the form of a vernacular folk-art, the pictorial analogue to the great body of Hindu literature, inspired by the renaissance of the Puranic Hindu religion. The most absorbing themes for painting are furnished by the cult of Krishna, idealized in a series of religious mysteries, the Gopis being the symbols of the souls yearning for the Divine."