Johnson 43,1-25

J.43,1-25

Twenty-five paintings from a ‘ragamala’ series, arranged according to the Painter’s system with variations.

Provincial Mughal (Delhi area), c.1630 [Despite the arguments below, a Popular Mughal provenance in Rajasthan seems more probable].

Richard Johnson Collection. Purchased 1807.

Inscribed in Persian characters on the middle borders with the identification of each subject, and a number in Persian numerals; on reverse, the title in nagari characters, and a description of the subject written in Hindi in nagari and Persian characters.

Gouache; borders with inner black rules, a middle uncoloured margin and the outer surround coloured orange-red.

175 by 125 mm; with borders 205 by 150 mm.

Discussed: Ebeling (1973), 168-69, no.17; Waldschmidt (1975), 545, no.50.

Note: The series was apparently acquired for Johnson by Ibrahim ‘Ali Khan, the town magistrate of Benares. An incomplete inscription at the top of the contents page of the album (now mounted with J.43,24) reads ... ‘at Benares by Ibrahim Ali Khan for Mr. R.’ ‘Johnson.’ On another fly-leaf of the previous binding (now mounted with J.43,25) is a seal of Ibrahim ‘Ali Khan with the date AH1174/AD1760-61. A second seal on the same page naming Qasim Ali is dated AH1170/AD1756-57.

The style of the pictures is that often referred to as ‘Popular Mughal’ (Chandra (1960)), and they compare quite closely with two pictures in the Khajanchi Collection (Khandalavala (1960), figs 26 and 28). While these pictures may possibly have been painted by Mughal-trained artists who had moved to Rajasthan, there is no particular evidence that they were done there. Pictures of the Popular Mughal type from Rajasthan show some local influence by this date, and this is not apparent in this series. It therefore seems more plausible that they originate from the vicinity of Delhi or Agra where they could have been produced at bazaar level for Hindu clients.

The contents page lists thirty pictures, suggesting that at the time of acquisition by Johnson this was the number present, but the order of this listing does not correspond either to the present order or to the old numbers which are written on the top left corners of the borders. These old numbers run above thirty, suggesting that the original total of the series was thirty-six.

Short descriptions of the subjects are written on the reverse of each picture in nagari and Persian characters. These descriptions take the form of couplets, and they include in the case of the ‘ragas’ a list of the ‘raginis’ belonging to that ‘raga’. From this information it is possible to draw up a table of classification of the series (Ebeling (1973), 169), but allowing for some variation in the naming of the subjects this classification does not vary significantly from the ‘Painter’s’ tradition apart from the replacement of ‘Megha Raga’ by’ Pancham Raga.’