Monumental neglect
WHEN WILL INDIA GET ITS ACT TOGETHER TO PRESERVE ITS HERITAGE BUILDINGS?
If the status quo on heritage conservation continues, not much will be left of India’s historical treasures, say the country’s conservation enthusiasts. While the Ministry of Culture, along with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), is responsible for the preservation, conservation and promotion of Indian heritage, experts rue the fact that not much is being preserved.
But let’s backtrack a bit. Does the ASI, which has been in existence for 155 years and which has been entrusted with the preservation and conservation work, have the manpower and resources to undertake this gigantic workload?
An ASI official, on conditions of anonymity, told Gulf News, “As far as the structural conservation of monuments is concerned, the ASI is capable of taking up such works. However, there are some challenges we face due to rapid urbanisation, pollution and other such issues.”
The official said he could not provide an example in particular, as work was on at numerous monuments simultaneously and all held equal significance for ASI.
Conservation policy
“The restoration of an archaeological monument is carried out as per the conservation policy. The basic concept of conservation is to maintain the monument in the same condition as it was when taken over by the ASI. No addition or alteration is allowed until and unless warranted. While taking up conservation work, efforts are made to use materials that were applied in the original construction,” he said.
However, Sohail Hashmi, a heritage enthusiast, debunked the official’s theory, pointing to the ad hoc manner in which restoration efforts are often carried out across the country.
“At the time of the 2010 Commonwealth Games in New Delhi, 27 monuments, which would be visible to sportspersons and visitors, were identified for being given a facelift by the ASI. All kinds of shortcuts were applied to carry out urgent repairs, including the use of cement plaster instead of limestone. The damage caused to monuments where such measures are applied will only be revealed after a few decades. By then, it will be too late,” said Hashmi.
Conservation experts in India believe that for several years, the functions of ASI have been in the hands of bureaucrats, most of whom have little interest and no idea about restoration, preservation and conservation.
“ASI needs dedicated archaeologists to understand the requirements of conservation. Just as a bureaucrat is not sent to head the space research programme, ASI should not be headed by an administrator,” said a conservation expert. Until this level of commitment is achieved, no amount of funding, he said, will help. Furthermore, both preservation and lands acts need to be simplified.
“Not much has changed,” said Hashmi, “If at all, the situation has only worsened.”
ASI castigated
Castigating the ASI for its performance, the 2013 Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India on Performance Audit of Preservation and Conservation of Monuments and Antiquities, noted that the ASI did not have a reliable database of the exact number of protected monuments under its jurisdiction.
According to the CAG report, the ASI’s jurisdiction includes 3,678 centrally protected monuments and archaeological sites as varied as megalithic sites, burials, rock cut caves, stupas, temples, mosques, churches, forts, water systems, pillars, inscriptions, relics, monolithic statues and sculptures.
Of these, what is preserved and what remains, only time will tell.
Restoration efforts are often carried out in an ad hoc manner. The damage caused to monuments by such measures will be revealed only in a few decades.”
Sohail Hashmi |
Heritage enthusiast We should utilise our energies on the betterment of our heritage. What is urgent is to have a larger debate on the list of monuments that need to be protected and how.”
Himanshu Prabha Ray |
Ex-chief of NMA