Circle of Sajnu · Mandi School · circa 1810–25

A Virahini Nayika Shows the Dūj Moon to Her Sakhi

USD 17,500

Dimensions: 23 by 19 cms (approx)

Probably from a nāyikā-bheda or related poetic series. Opaque pigments heightened with gold on paper Verso inscribed with a Braj couplet in Devanagari

This finely worked Pahari miniature depicts two elegantly dressed women upon a palace terrace. One, the nayika, raises her hand toward the slender crescent visible in the evening sky, drawing the attention of her companion, or sakhi. Beyond them, a stream winds through gently modelled hills, while elaborate white palace architecture, richly patterned awnings and an unusually sophisticated sequence of floral borders frame the intimate scene.

The painting is best understood within the poetic world of viraha—love experienced through separation. The Braj inscription on the reverse appears to make explicit what the painting conveys visually: it refers to dūj, the second lunar day, the distance of the beloved, and apparently to the moon emerging into view.

A provisional normalized reading is:

॥ दोहा ॥ आज दूज पिय दूर है, ससि […] निकस्यो चहुँ ओर । [और] मेरे पिया की लाग रही इक ठौर ॥ १ ॥

Transliteration: Āj dūj piy dūr hai, sasi […] nikasyo cahũ or; [aur] mere piyā kī lāg rahī ik ṭhaur.

Translation: “Today is dūj, and my beloved is far away; the young moon has appeared. Yet my attachment to my beloved remains fixed upon him alone.”

Several letters remain difficult to resolve with certainty, so the transcription should be regarded as provisional. The essential poetic construction, however, is compelling: dūj is the second lunar day, when the first slender crescent becomes visible. For the separated heroine, the sight of this delicate moon does not bring pleasure; it becomes an uddīpana, an external stimulus that intensifies longing for the absent beloved. The sakhi, traditional confidante and intermediary of Indian love poetry, witnesses the heroine's emotional state.

Attribution

An older label associated with the painting describes it as Kangra or Chamba, circa the 1830s. The broader Pahari identification is convincing, but comparison with documented early nineteenth-century material suggests a closer relationship to Mandi painting during the period transformed by Sajnu and his followers.

Sajnu is understood to have brought the sophisticated Guler-Kangra idiom to the court of Raja Ishvari Sen of Mandi in the early nineteenth century. The Metropolitan Museum describes the resulting Mandi manner as softer in tonality and quieter in palette than the earlier, more robust local style, associating that transformation directly with Sajnu's presence and legacy at the Mandi atelier.

The present painting displays several features characteristic of this Mandi “Phase Two” vocabulary: pale and intricately articulated architecture; refined but highly decorative textiles; softly receding hills; courtly female physiognomies; carefully staged architectural space opening onto landscape; and an exceptional concern with ornamental framing.

The more specific association with the circle of Sajnu rests especially upon the border design and the combination of pale architecture with brilliant textiles. Christie's notes precisely these features—delicate figures, soft faces, bright textiles, pale architecture with niches and turrets, and particularly imaginative treatment of borders—in its discussion of paintings attributed to Sajnu and his workshop. It also identifies a dispersed Rasikapriya series associated with Sajnu's circle, circa 1810–20, including related works in the Victoria and Albert Museum.

Further comparison is provided by Sotheby's 2025 Rasikapriya folio, lot 541, attributed to Sajnu, Mandi, circa 1810. That work combines pale architectural settings, intensely patterned textiles, landscape recession and a black foliate border. Sotheby's relates it specifically to the Kangra-Guler-influenced transformation of the Mandi atelier associated with Sajnu.

The present painting does not possess quite the effortless figure drawing of the strongest works attributed directly to Sajnu. For that reason, “circle of Sajnu” is preferable to “attributed to Sajnu.” It acknowledges a close relationship to his artistic environment without claiming autograph authorship.

The most defensible present attribution is therefore:

Mandi, circle of Sajnu, circa 1810–25.

Condition

Fine.

Status

Available