Opinion Shored against ruin

When the Archaeological Survey of India was established — 150 years ago — it pre-dated any similar agency in the UK. Archaeologists,engineers and architects assumed responsibility for preservation. The British did not realise,however,that building craft traditions lost in Europe were still actively practised by craftsmen in India until colonisation dismantled traditional systems of preservation and patronage. Craftsmen were traditionally employed to preserve the monumental buildings of the Mughals — tombs,mosques,madrasas,bridges,aqueducts — with revenue generated from estates attached to the buildings by those who built them. The significance of historic buildings often lies in the original builder’s intention; ruins may be romantic,but our great medieval buildings were not meant to be reduced to ruins.

Many of our Mughal craft traditions,such as making ceramic tiles,lime punning or araish,where marble-like plaster was used on important buildings,inlay work with semi-precious stones on marble,stone carving for lattice screens,vaults and domes still survive — though only barely — with largely illiterate craftsmen who still do not understand the vocabulary of modern construction.

Historic buildings in India today suffer on several counts. For one,conservation is seen as an elitist pursuit that no longer creates jobs. A single consultant preparing a “management plan” for a World Heritage Site today costs over 25,000 man-days of craftsmen’s wages. Restoration is not only about aesthetic effects — original building elements such as lime plaster,ceramic tiles,stone facing,water spouts,chajjas (eaves),etc also had a significant protective function. Restoring original material to the monument — as our craftsmen did until only a hundred years ago — often significantly enhances the life of the building. However,unlike a hundred years ago,formally established conservation norms suggest restoration only where the original builder’s intention can be documented and is not a matter of conjecture.

There is a renewed appreciation for the old in new India,but unlike the handicrafts sector,building crafts have not been patronised by the government. Though the Delhi Urban Art Commission has recently stated that the use of traditional building crafts will count towards the mandatory 2 per cent spend on artwork in public projects,how can a revival of building crafts and employment of craftsmen be expected when these works are no longer seen on the monuments that are the principal product of these crafts?

In 1922,the director-general of the ASI,John Marshall wrote its conservation manual that is still followed. His directions included,“As funds will be limited … preservation should be aimed at and repair (restoration) attempted only in cases where special funds can be provided.” Yet,when funds have been made available,certain conservation attempts have left the “intelligentsia” confused. It then becomes the responsibility of those in charge of the preservation and upkeep to ensure that works being undertaken draw upon the skills of our master craftsmen and are based on sound archival research coupled with an in-depth study of the monument. Employment opportunities for craftsmen and revival of craft traditions,better understanding of our heritage by tourists,neighbourhood improvement,restoring pride in local communities are only some of the by-products of conservation.

The Red Fort has no doubt become more “red” than Emperor Shahjahan ever desired it to be. The original lime punning layer — a 1 mm thick coat of lime and marble dust plaster on Diwan-i-Aam to give the sandstone building a marble-like appearance was scraped off in the 20th century to reveal the then more fashionable red sandstone underneath. Plastered buildings in the Red Fort were simply painted red at the Naubat Khana and white at the Moti Masjid.

Mughal lime plaster was usually 15-20 cm thick and applied in several layers with the base layer containing brick aggregate in addition to lime and sand; the next layer lime,sand and brick dust; and the final lime punning layer simply lime,marble dust and occasionally,for polished wall surfaces,egg-white. The ASI’s efforts to remove cement layers and replace these with traditional lime plaster layers used by the Mughal builders,including the significant final layer will no doubt look give buildings a “new” look until a few good monsoons restore the “dignified” patina. It will also ensure better preservation by protecting the underlying layers and allowing the porous sandstone to breathe — which the impervious cement layers did not,and which resulted in accelerated deterioration.

Sadly,not all buildings can be recovered from the well-meaning,yet inappropriate repairs of the past. Zafar Hasan,ASI Superintendent Archaeologist described the inner chamber of Humayun’s Tomb on October 19,1914: “the domed ceiling … adorned originally with gilding and tile work,is now covered with whitewash … traces can still be seen,in several places,of the original tile decoration”. A century later,expectant visitors are greeted with bare whitewashed walls and no evidence remains to restore the original builder’s intention. If only the craftsmen had remained empowered,this past glory would not have been lost forever.

The writer is a conservation architect and project director of the Aga Khan Trust for Culture