Stringing Together The Past and The Present

The origins and antiquity of the Kathputli tradition are matters of some debate. Kathputli puppeteers and scholars alike make different and sometimes contradictory claims, with some sources claiming that it is an ancient tradition, others claiming it dates to the Mughal empire, and others still who date it to the much more recent 19th or 20th centuries (Jairazbhoy, 2007; Snodgrass, 2006; Chopra et al., 2023; Smith & Foley, 2018). While there are some indications that perhaps the tradition existed in the time of the Mughal Empire (Jairazbhoy, 2007), much of the Kathputli Bhat community began taking up puppetry in within the last one hundred years or so (Jairazbhoy, 2007; Snodgrass, 2006), something that even some puppeteers who claim that the tradition is ancient often concede upon further questioning (Snodgrass, 2006). 

The reasons why some Bhat puppeteers claim a longer ancestral tradition of puppetry than likely exists in reality are myriad. One key consideration is that Kathputli Bhats rely on their puppetry to make a living, and their audiences are increasingly made up of tourists (Snodgrass, 2006; Smith & Foley, 2018) seeking what they view to be an authentic Rajasthani experience, an idea that is intricately bound with a perception of tradition and history (Jackson, 2021; Snodgrass, 2006).

This understanding of tourist expectations and desires incentivizes Bhat puppeteers to exaggerate or, perhaps, invent ancient backstories for their line of work. This incentive in turn may play some role in the construction of the puppets and the stories told with them, such as their use in portraying historical figures (Chopra et al., 2023; Jairazbhoy, 2007). Some Bhat puppeteers take this even further, deliberately creating the puppets to look older than they are in order to maximize their value to tourists (Snodgrass, 2006). Bhat puppeteers’ claims regarding the antiquity of their work must also be considered in connection with the stigma attached to performances and arts targeted towards tourists, which are often perceived as inauthentic and lacking in merit or value (Smith & Foley, 2018; Plowright, 2005; Jackson, 2021). By emphasizing narratives of the tradition’s ancient roots, Bhat puppeteers distance themselves from this stigma and encourage more appreciation and support for their work. 

The significance of time goes further than this, however. As genealogists and oral historians, Bhats have historically occupied an important role in their communities, particularly their patrons, standing at the crossroads between the past, the present, and the future (Jairazbhoy, 2007; Snodgrass, 2006; Heydari, 2025). In this sense, the Bhat community communicates information about tradition, and thus has the power to shape it. There is thus a degree of continuity between the Kathputli Bhats’ more traditional/historic occupations as genealogists and oral historians and their relatively more recent occupations as puppeteers (Snodgrass, 2006; Heydari, 2025). 

This act of connecting the past and the present is evident in the materiality and manipulation of the puppets themselves. By having physical representations of historical figures in their stories, Bhat puppeteers are able to bring the past to life in the eyes of the audience, making vivid the days of past empires. In order to make the past not only vivid but also accessible and understandable to their audiences, Kathputli puppeteers are often willing to bend and manipulate time for their own purposes, an ability often available through puppetry (Smythe, 2014). For instance, a Kathputli show may involve interactions between characters whose historical counterparts were not even alive at the same time (Jairazbhoy, 2007). A common example of this lies in the frequently performed story of Amar Singh Rathor; despite being set during the reign of Shah Jahan, Kathputli puppeteers will regularly prioritize the inclusion of well-known historical figures to sit at the court over those that would have actually been alive during Shah Jahan’s reign (2007). What matters in the selection of characters is not total historical accuracy, but rather recognizability to audiences (2007), as this is what will best enable the audiences to feel connected to and understand the story. Similarly, the dance movements often executed by the Anarkali puppet are not those that an actual courtesan in a Mughal court would likely have done, but rather are common in modern Hindi films (Jairazbhoy et al., 1994), prioritizing movements that are familiar and entertaining than are accurate. To see an example of a Kathputli puppeteer who has taken this a step further for comedic effect, click on the point in the Neatline map below to view a performance at Jaipur's City Palace, featuring a puppet introduced as the “Indian Michael Jackson” (responsibleadventures, 2009).

Just as the Kathputli puppeteers are able to use the puppets to bring the past into the present, they are also able to bring the present to the past. A significant portion of many Kathputli performances are dedicated to various skits and trick acts, performances within a performance in which puppets are introduced to entertain an assembled court of royals and nobles, mimicking actual practices observed in historic Indian palaces (Jairazbhoy, 2007; Heydari, 2025). This creates a parallel in the experiences of the human audience and the royal puppet characters (Jairazbhoy, 2007), and enables the audience to occupy the same position as a Mughal-era noble or royal. This effect is heightened when more traditional staging is utilized, with the backdrop decorated to resemble a royal court and the performance held at night, mimicking the context in which performances would be held in actual Mughal courts (Jairazbhoy, 2007; Heydari, 2025). To experience it yourself, click on the point in the Neatline exhibit below, showing the Bharatiya Lok Kala Mandal museum in Udaipur, Rajasthan. The video embedded is of a Kathputli performance at the museum, set with a backdrop decorated with arches to create a palatial atmosphere. The performance includes an Anarkali puppet dancing for a royal puppet audience on stage, for a human audience offstage, and now for you, too. 

Thus, time fixes certain aspects of the performers, audiences, and performances, imposing certain constraints, influenced by perceptions of what it means for an art form to be valuable or meaningful or authentic. It is also, however, an axis along which puppeteer and audience alike can establish connections with one another, defining and re-defining new understandings of themselves and one another. But when discussing these acts of defining and redefining, it is important to consider who and what they understand themselves and each other as; this will be considered in the next section.