Why is the term 'Rajput Schools' considered obsolete in the study of Indian paintings?

1) Lack of historical significance
2) Emergence of specific categories like Rajasthani and Pahari
3) Disapproval by the Rajput rulers
4) Introduction of Mughal art in the region

2

Answer: Emergence of specific categories like Rajasthani and Pahari
The term 'Rajput Schools' is considered obsolete in the study of Indian paintings because specific categories, such as Rajasthani and Pahari, are now employed to describe the indigenous traditions of painting in different regions, rendering the broader term unnecessary.

The term ‘Rajasthani Schools of Painting’ pertains to the schools of painting that prevailed in the princely kingdoms and thikanas of what roughly constitutes Rajasthan and parts of Madhya Pradesh in the present time, such as Mewar, Bundi, Kota, Jaipur, Bikaner, Kishangarh, Jodhpur (Marwar), Malwa, Sirohi and other such principalities largely between the sixteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Scholar Anand Coomaraswamy in 1916 coined the term ‘Rajput Paintings’ to refer to these as most rulers and patrons of these kingdoms were Rajputs. He, specifically, coined it to categorise and differentiate this group from the much known Mughal School of Painting. Therefore, Malwa, comprising princedoms of Central India, and the Pahari Schools that comprises the pahari or mountainous Himalayan region of north-western India was also in the ambit of Rajput Schools. For Coomaraswamy, the nomenclature represented the indigenous tradition of painting prevalent in the mainland before the conquest by the Mughals. Studies in Indian paintings have come a long way since then and the term ‘Rajput Schools’ is obsolete. Instead, specific categories, such as Rajasthani and Pahari are employed.