.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This very large and captivating painting likely depicts Thakur Rupshahji Dev Bahadur. Set within an ornate European-style interior, he sits on a chair with courtiers sat either side and attendants stand ready behind. As if in a photograph, each member of the group, some of whom stare directly out at the viewer, is captured suspended in a singular moment in time.
By the mid-19th century the first commercial photography studios began to appear in India, quickly followed by a profusion of photography societies and amateur clubs. Initially just in the British presidency towns of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras, the popularity of the emerging medium quickly spread (Nayar 2024). Against an existing backdrop of decline, Indian court painting soon found the emergence of photography as an almost existential challenge. In Rajasthan the challenge was particularly acute in Jaipur during the reign of Maharaja Sawai Ram Singh (1835-80). The Maharaja was a great moderniser but also a very serious photographer and referred to as the first "photographer prince" after buying his first camera in 1864 (Bautze 1998, no.34, p.174). However, traditional painting in Jaipur still had one "final flourish" (Topsfield 2021, p. 294).
Mohan Lal, who likely painted the present scene, was one of many Jaipur court-trained artists that were likely dismissed by Sawai Ram Singh and quickly found patronage hard to come by. Some artists found employment applying colour to hand-tinted photographs but Mohan Lal was perhaps the most successful at adapting to the photographic challenge and produced paintings in the style of Western Studio photography which both rivalled and subverted the practice (Topsfield 2000, p.10). Painting to commission, Mohan Lal would have faced stiff competition from the growing number of professional photographers in Jaipur trained at the newly established Maharaja's School of Arts - which did not encourage traditional Indian painting. However, the known paintings by the artist, some of which are inscribed, clearly shows that Mohan Lal found popularity and patronage in Jaipur and the surrounding area for his quasi-photographic style.
Thakur Rupshahji Dev Bahadur is identified by an inscription in another closely comparable painting by Mohan Lal dated circa 1890 in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (EA1995.34). Although the Thakur in the Ashmolean painting has a slightly different beard, both men have the same nose and similarly direct stare. It is quite possible that our work, which is a little more refined in its portraiture, was created some years after the Ashmolean painting. That painting, which shows the Thakur sat opposite Maharaja Madho Singh II of Jaipur, is of a near exact size to ours and is also painted on cloth. Like the Ashmolean painting, Mohan Lal frames the scene with a theatrical proscenium arch which gives way to a lavish two-storey interior replete with European style-mouldings, chandeliers and carpet. Nonetheless, we are reminded that this is still an Indian setting by the presence of the ornate jali-style stonework balcony. The close similarity of interior arrangement may also indicate the same patron for both paintings.
Another similar work by Mohan Lal, this time on paper but inscribed, like the Ashmolean painting, depicts the Thakur Balwant Singh at a dance performance (Philadelphia Museum of Art, acc.no. 2004.149.79). Again, the arrangement closely follows the conventions of European studio photography with figures stiffly arranged in rows and their expressions, frozen in a single moment in time. However, the impressive scale and vitality of colour overcome the rigidity of the composition and inject a warmth that cannot be achieved in a photograph. According to Terence McInerney, these were the key competitive advantages that Mohan Lal held over photography that would have kept him in employment until the fashion for photographic style paintings altogether collapsed in the early twentieth century (Mason 2001, p.208).
By the mid-19th century the first commercial photography studios began to appear in India, quickly followed by a profusion of photography societies and amateur clubs. Initially just in the British presidency towns of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras, the popularity of the emerging medium quickly spread (Nayar 2024). Against an existing backdrop of decline, Indian court painting soon found the emergence of photography as an almost existential challenge. In Rajasthan the challenge was particularly acute in Jaipur during the reign of Maharaja Sawai Ram Singh (1835-80). The Maharaja was a great moderniser but also a very serious photographer and referred to as the first "photographer prince" after buying his first camera in 1864 (Bautze 1998, no.34, p.174). However, traditional painting in Jaipur still had one "final flourish" (Topsfield 2021, p. 294).
Mohan Lal, who likely painted the present scene, was one of many Jaipur court-trained artists that were likely dismissed by Sawai Ram Singh and quickly found patronage hard to come by. Some artists found employment applying colour to hand-tinted photographs but Mohan Lal was perhaps the most successful at adapting to the photographic challenge and produced paintings in the style of Western Studio photography which both rivalled and subverted the practice (Topsfield 2000, p.10). Painting to commission, Mohan Lal would have faced stiff competition from the growing number of professional photographers in Jaipur trained at the newly established Maharaja's School of Arts - which did not encourage traditional Indian painting. However, the known paintings by the artist, some of which are inscribed, clearly shows that Mohan Lal found popularity and patronage in Jaipur and the surrounding area for his quasi-photographic style.
Thakur Rupshahji Dev Bahadur is identified by an inscription in another closely comparable painting by Mohan Lal dated circa 1890 in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (EA1995.34). Although the Thakur in the Ashmolean painting has a slightly different beard, both men have the same nose and similarly direct stare. It is quite possible that our work, which is a little more refined in its portraiture, was created some years after the Ashmolean painting. That painting, which shows the Thakur sat opposite Maharaja Madho Singh II of Jaipur, is of a near exact size to ours and is also painted on cloth. Like the Ashmolean painting, Mohan Lal frames the scene with a theatrical proscenium arch which gives way to a lavish two-storey interior replete with European style-mouldings, chandeliers and carpet. Nonetheless, we are reminded that this is still an Indian setting by the presence of the ornate jali-style stonework balcony. The close similarity of interior arrangement may also indicate the same patron for both paintings.
Another similar work by Mohan Lal, this time on paper but inscribed, like the Ashmolean painting, depicts the Thakur Balwant Singh at a dance performance (Philadelphia Museum of Art, acc.no. 2004.149.79). Again, the arrangement closely follows the conventions of European studio photography with figures stiffly arranged in rows and their expressions, frozen in a single moment in time. However, the impressive scale and vitality of colour overcome the rigidity of the composition and inject a warmth that cannot be achieved in a photograph. According to Terence McInerney, these were the key competitive advantages that Mohan Lal held over photography that would have kept him in employment until the fashion for photographic style paintings altogether collapsed in the early twentieth century (Mason 2001, p.208).