The West knows best?
Dilip K. Chakrabarti
March 09, 2008
www.hindustantimes.com/Redir.aspx?ID=db9f511c-6688-4ade-87ad-29df374cd541
One gathers that the Ministry of Culture is going to table a proposal
that, if passed by the Lok Sabha, will enable educational research
institutes and academic bodies outside India to get loans of Indian
antiquities from museums or excavated sites. I wonder if the concerned
people in the ministry have carefully considered the implications
of this proposal. I am an Indian citizen who earns his living
by teaching and researching the ancient Indian past in exactly
such an academic body that will be entitled under the new law
to bring over anything on loan from an Indian museum or excavated
site. I suppose this gives me an insider's point of view on this
matter, and it may be worthwhile to lay bare this point of view
both for our ministry and the concerned Indian public.
What
necessitates the proposal in the first place? The existing set-up
does not prevent foreign scholars from coming to India and study
whatever ancient object or specimen they want to study. Why should
they be permitted to take the objects out of India? All the scientific
techniques currently employed to study the different vestiges
of the past are available in the Indian laboratories. Any non-Indian
keen on applying any of these techniques to an Indian museum object
or excavated specimen can do so through a collaborative research
project with the relevant Indian science group.
If
the foreign-based scholar wants to have the specimen in his own
space, there is reason to suspect his motive. The most charitable
explanation I can offer is that the foreign scholar concerned
is not interested in having an Indian collaborator in this regard
and wants the result of his study to be entirely 'West-inspired'.
What is also likely in this case is that the result of this research
will be in a foreign journal that will not be commonly available
to Indians, even in their metropolitan libraries. This means that
the result of this study of a segment of the Indian past will
be closed to Indians unless they are willing to pay for that article
in the online version of the concerned journal.
The
reluctance of the Western specialists in ancient India to publish
the fruits of their researches in India is well-known. To give
an example, the Euro-American archaeologists interested in South
Asia have been holding biannual conferences in Europe since 1981.
With only one exception, the proceedings of these conferences
have been invariably published in Europe and America. In most
Indian university libraries, they are not available. So, however
positive the perception of our Culture Ministry is regarding foreign
scholarship in the field of ancient India and its material remains,
that scholarship is not meant to be accessible to Indians.
Those
concerned, for academic and not-so-academic reasons, that there
should be an easier movement of India's antiquities to non-Indian
institutions and academic art collections for making foreigners
better aware of the richness and variety of India's past, may
be told that enough of these specimens is already available in
many centres of learning including the private art galleries in
the West, where they are on sale.
Occasionally,
I have been forced to wonder if some of the finest specimens of
ancient Indian art have not already found their way to the rich
academic institutions of the West and the collections of their
super-rich private patrons. Some years back, a Bangladeshi scholar
wrote a detailed monograph on the richly decorated terracottas
of a site near Kolkata, basing himself, by his own admission,
on what was already available in the US. All that one has to do
to get an idea of what related to the Indian past is available
in the West is to go through the catalogues put up by the major
Western auction houses or published by different museums.
Some governments are known to monitor the appearance of their
national antiquities in the international market. A Cambridge
archaeological research institute has a specific cell to monitor
the illegal looting of antiquity: 'antiquity without context'.
Scholars write learned articles on the legal and various other
implications of these antiquities. If the present proposal of
our Culture Ministry goes through, India will send a clear message
to the international antiquity collectors (institutional or otherwise)
that its antiquities will now be up for grabs legally as
a 'loan', as long as one can put up an academic and his research
as a front. The situation will be a bit like the medical establishments
with charitable status that we have in India. All of them have
the word 'research' somewhere in their names but it is not really
necessary to get any research done.
The
proposal has some serious long-term implications for the study
of the Indian past through archaeology. All kinds of excavation
results fall within the purview of antiquities, and these range
from the excavated clods of earth to different kinds of biological
materials. If these samples are offered 'on loan' to foreign archaeologists
in their own countries, a few things will happen. First, the Indian
role in their studies will simply disappear and the results of
these studies will also not be easily available to Indians.
Second,
the point that has to be driven home is that the study of the
past even its science-based study is not a universal
discipline in the sense of physics, chemistry, mathematics or
even economics. It deals essentially with regional data, and the
scholarship that has evolved around it does not permit universal
postulates, methods or answers. Even when the study of archaeological
samples is based on various forensic techniques, themselves offshoots
of various sciences, the answer is never one-to-one. For interpretation,
there is always a wide arc in which the scholar will position
himself, depending on his attitude to the country whose past he
is studying.
This
is where the element of politics enters archaeology. Socio-politics
of the past is a recognised theme of modern archaeological research.
What will happen is that this proposal will both aggravate and
consolidate a trend which is already here a trend where
the Western archaeologists consider themselves as a group vis-à-vis
the Indians. I have been in this game long enough to know that
no foreign group can be given unhindered freedom to exert control
over a nation's past, even though it is ostensibly for academic
reasons. As far as practicable, no nation does so.
Dilip
K. Chakrabarti is Professor of South Asian Archaeology, Department
of Archaeology, Cambridge University.