SPAB in India : Contemporary interventions

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANCIENT BUILDING’S APPROACH TO CONTEMPORARY INTERVENTIONS : ITS APPLICATION IN BRITAIN AND INDIA

A Dissertation submitted for MSc in Architectural Conservation University of Edinburgh

by A. Masters student no: s1265419 Student Name : Sangeetha Kanekal Tilak First reader: Cristina Gonzalez-Longo

SCOTTISH CENTRE FOR CONSERVATION STUDIES EDINBURGH SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE EDINBURGH COLLEGE OF ART UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH 2013-2014

CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 3 List of illustrations ..................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 6 a. Critical Questions b. Aim and objective c. Research Methodology 1. New interventions in historic buildings. .......................................................................... 12 1.1. Theoretical background 1.2. SPAB’s approach to new intervention in historic buildings and emblematic cases.

2. SPAB’s and its influence in Britain and in India ............................................................ 17 2.1. Influence of SPAB in Britain since its creation 2.1.1. History 2.1.2. Projects and activities 2.2. SPAB’s influence on conservation in India from its creation 2.2.1. History 2.2.2. Projects and activities 2.3. Differences between SPAB’s approaches in Britain and in India.

3. Contemporary interventions in Britain: Some examples of SPAB’s approach ............... 36 3.1. Is SPAB’s approach still relevant today?

3.2. Key projects and practitioners 4. Contemporary intervention in India and SPAB’s influence ............................................49 4.1. Is SPAB’s approach still relevant in India 4.2. Who are the key practitioners and projects ?

4.3. Is it appropriate to apply t approach in India ?

What are the main recommendations?

5. Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 61 Bibliography............................................................................................................................ 63

2

ABSTRACT

The study analyses The Society for the Protection of Ancient Building’s (SPAB) material centric approach to contemporary interventions in Britain and discusses whether SPAB’s principles are still relevant and may guide future contemporary interventions in India.

It analyses a series of SPAB’s methods in Britain through its emblematic cases where SPAB’s pragmatic approach had been applied and compares it to SPAB’s approach in India. This bring to notice the changes in the Conservation Manual that John Marshall makes from SPAB’s approach in Britain. His key justification being that in India the monument were not ruins but were in fact Living Monuments and that the restoration would not destroy the authenticity.

The dissertation studies in detail how these key changes from the Manual would inform future contemporary interventions in India.

3

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1. The Front cover of the Repair of Ancient Buildings Fig. 2. The only allowance for restoration that SPAB allowed.

Fig. 3. The Front cover of the Conservation Manual.

Fig.4. The Coventry cathedral after the Second world war.

Fig.5. The elevation of the Coventry cathedral as drawn by Sir Basil Spence.

Fig.6. The floor plan of the old and new cathedral Fig. 7. The ruins of the Astley castle before the intervention Fig. 8. The ruins of the Astley castle after the intervention Fig.9. The new and the old in the Astley castle.

Fig.10. The crafted Oak staircase.

Fig.11. The main hall of the Neues Museum Fig.12. An illustration of the‘repair by building’ that Powys advocates Fig.13. An illustration of the central wall of the Astley castle Fig. 14. An archival image of the Chowmahalla palace Fig. 15. The restoration of a column at the Chowmahalla Palace Fig. 16. The restoration of a part of the Chowmahalla palace Fig. 17. Craftsmen restoring the lime plaster carvings at the Chowmahalla palace

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This dissertation was a great learning experience that exposed me to the exchange of conservation philosophies across borders from Britain into India. I would like to begin by thanking Cristina Gonzalez-Longo under whose constant supervision my work has progressed. I would also like to thank Dr Miles Glendinning for his support in the initial choice of the topic and guidance.

Last but not the least, I would like to thank my family and friends for their constant encouragement during tough times.

5

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION As our needs constantly evolve, the ways in which we inhabit our spaces change as well. These changes however inevitable need to be accommodated in historic buildings in order to make them progressively habitable. The need for interventions could arise either from a change in the function of a building which requires new facilities or due to the loss of fabric from destruction. Similarly a building can be incapacitated or it could also be that the building needs to be more economically sustainable.1

Intervening in historic buildings was a common practice over centuries, although it is only in recent times that we began to understand the importance of historic buildings and their inherent historic, cultural and economic values. There are however threats such as rising land values and commercial interests which result in historic buildings being abandoned which in most cases results in its dereliction. It is in such situations that interventions play an important role in avoiding this and facilitating them to the future. Intervening in a historic building has also been found to be more sustainable in terms of carbon emissions than to rebuild a new building.2

As the current National Conservation Policy 2013 of India3 and the Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings of 2013 4 bring to notice that theoretically in India there are a lot of discourses on the topic of contemporary intervention but in practice as Rahul Mehrotra an Indian architect states the application is very limited and this results in an inconsistency in the approaches taken.5 1. Dimitris Theodossopoulos, Structural design in building conservation(Oxon: Routledge, 2012), x.

2. Retrofit for purpose: Old buildings get a green facelift, last modified August 13, 2014, http://www.bbc. co.uk/news/business-25298461 3. National Conservation Policy for Monuments, Archaeological Sites and Remains Protected by Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeological Survey of India, draft (2013). url ?

4. Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings, Central public works department,(2013).

5 Rahul Mehrotra, Conservation and Change: Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India, Built Environment (1978-), Vol. 33, No. 3, Built Heritage Conservation Education (2007)

6

The dissertation focuses on The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings’ (SPAB)6 approach to contemporary interventions in historic buildings. SPAB has had a substantial influence on the conservation in India since its creation in Britain. The approach advocated by William Morris in the SPAB’s Manifesto in 1877 speaks of retaining the material honesty of the historic building and disregards imitations of any kind in contemporary interventions and directs that the interventions should be eloquent of the period they are built in.7 This aspect of material honesty is also advocated by the Charter of Venice which notions that all periods of the building material should be respected.8 SPAB’s approach, even though it initially started as an opposition to the imitation in historic buildings in England, had a pragmatic stance towards new additions in historic buildings. It advocates pragmatic resolution of the issues by retaining the historic material and giving allowance for new additions fashioned in their own time.9 The dissertation studies in detail this approach of SPAB and analyses whether it is still relevant to guide future contemporary interventions in Britain and in India.

Integral to SPAB’s approach is the notion that the physical material of the historic building should be repaired and not restored. Julian Harrap, Sir Basil Spence and the architects Witherford Watson Mann are designers who have addressed historic buildings with an approach that aligns with SPAB. It has been applied selectively in historic buildings in Britain like the Coventry Cathedral, the Astley Castle and in the Neues Museum in Berlin, Germany where the historic buildings have been meticulously integrated with modern architectural interventions and yet the material honesty of the historic buildings has been maintained, an approach that SPAB promotes and one that has influenced international charters like the Charter of Athens and the Charter of Venice. Even though this approach has been successful in these buildings there are many cases in Britain where restoration and reconstruction is still being done.

6.Henceforth known as the SPAB. 7.The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration (London 1977), 10.

8. ICOMOS,The Charter of Venice, last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/charters/ venice_e.pdf.

9. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration (London 1977), 10.

7

The dissertation tries to understand in detail SPAB’s approach to contemporary interventions and especially its influence on conservation works in India. It focuses on the colonial document, the Conservation Manual,10 which was published by John Marshall in 1923 as a manual for conservation works in India. SPAB’s influence in India is quite strong and it starts from the late 1800’s and continues to the 1900’S. The Conservation Manual was influenced by SPAB’s philosophies as John Marshall the then Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)11 was in regular correspondence with the SPAB in Britain on issues of conservation as the institution had become one the most influential heritage body in Britain. The dissertation identifies key changes that Marshall had to make which were different from SPAB’s philosophy in Britain and why these changes were made in India. The Conservation manual is still followed today in conservation works in India. Although in India the influence of the conservation theories and charters is quite limited.

In Britain the existing guidelines like the New Design in Historic Settings12 by Historic Scotland 13 discusses how new intervention could be contemporary in design to the historic setting but it shies away from addressing the issue of contemporary interventions more directly within the context of material honesty. There are still many instances in Britain where reconstruction is still done which is not always in alignment with international principles. The reconstructed Scandic Crown Hotel now known as the Radisson Blu in Edinburgh on the Royal Mile, built in 1989 as an imitation of a medieval facade is one such instance.14 This is would in the words of John Ruskin be a “Falsification 10. John Marshall, Conservation Manual (Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1923), 1.

11. Henceforth known as the ASI 12. Historic Scotland, New Design in Historic Settings, last accessed 10 March, 2014, http://www. historic-scotland.gov.uk/new-design-in-historic-settings.pdf 13. Historic Scotland is the conservation body in Scotland.

14. John Punter, Urban design an British urban renaissance, last accessed 10 March, http://books.google. co.in/books?id=0lOOAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA246&lpg=PA246&dq=Scandic+Crown+Hotel+royal+mile&sou rce=bl&ots=1FplcSW2JF&sig=b40pyDBuqUGzMWHYczwF0tqNw94&hl=en&sa=X&ei=X1zpU_X7M 6Gv7Aa_3YCQDg&ved=0CHUQ6AEwCA#v=snippet&q=Scandic%20Crown%20&f=false, 246.

8

of history”. 15

It is only in recent times that SPAB’s methods have been adopted and accepted in the practice of contemporary interventions. SPAB’s influence can be seen on the contemporary intervention in the ruinous Astley castle which has been awarded the Stirling Prize 2013. However there have been few who have used this method of interventions as a form of contemporary additions in historic buildings in Britain and in India.

a. Critical Questions The critical questions attempts to answer are; What is SPAB’s approach to new interventions in historic buildings and what are the most emblematic cases? What was the influence of SPAB in UK since its creation ? Is SPAB’s approach still relevant today in UK? Who are the Key practitioners ?

Did SPAB influence conservation in India from its creation till now ? What were the main projects ? How different was SPAB’s activities in UK and in India ? Is SPAB’s approach still relevant today in India? Who are the key practitioners? Is it appropriate to apply today SPAB’s approach in India ? What are the main recommendations ?

b. Aim and objective The study analyses The Society for the Protection of Ancient building’s material centric approach to contemporary interventions in Britain and discusses whether the SPAB’s principles are still relevant and may guide future contemporary interventions in India.

c. Research Methodology The dissertation used an over arching qualitative research approach to understand literature and current practices in contemporary interventions. It not only analysed the data collected on SPAB’s casework in Britain and in India but cross-examined them to arrive at interpretations as to what 15. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration (London 1977), 10.

9

were the changes made and why and how they were made.

It began with a qualitative research of SPAB’s approach to contemporary interventions. This was initiated by a study of SPAB’s Manifesto. Which was then followed by an in-depth study of the SPAB’s principles which are pragmatic guidelines derived from the Manifesto,16 and William Morris’s stance on conservation issues through the cases that SPAB dealt with in the Annual Reviews of the committee and in particular the cases from India.

This was then followed by a study of the practice of these principles in the Coventry Cathedral where the approach to the contemporary intervention was aligned with SPAB’s views of a building expressive of its own time. The material for this research was sourced from various journal articles and the book “The Phoenix at Coventry” written by the architect himself Sir Basil Spence which was primary source for the information.17 The current practice with contemporary interventions was reviewed in the study of the Astley Castle where SPAB’s principles of material honesty have been practiced.

A study of the Neues Museum followed, which is in Germany but has been conserved by the British architect Julian Harrap who is a practitioner of SPAB’s conservation methods.18 This study was sourced from books, journals and articles.

The approaches to contemporary interventions in each of the above three cases was analysed through a study of the space, form, order and proportion of the intervention itself. Detailed architectural data was collected on the case studies. The theoretical framework that was used was identified.

A comparison was then done by a study of the architectural types to identify the patterns used to establish continuity in the historic fabric. The interventions were also critically analysed with 16. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration (London 1977), 10.

17. Basil Spence, The Phoenix at Coventry (London: Geoffrey Bles Ltd.,1962) 18. Julian Harrap, Does British architecture have a future as well as a past ?, RSA Journal, Vol. 136, No. 5388 (November 1988), pp. 862-872.

10

respect SPAB’s philosophy of material honesty and no imitation of art.

A study of the influence of SPAB in India since its creation followed. The current situation of contemporary interventions in India was then studied by understanding the National Conservation Policy 2013 and the Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings of 2013. This was used to identify the current attitude to contemporary interventions in India.

SPAB’s influence in India was also studied through journal articles and books and particularly from the Archaeological survey of India’s colonial document the Conservation Manual which was studied in detail to identify the key changes that John Marshall made in the application of SPAB’s conservation theories in India. A critical analysis was done of the guidelines of the Conservation Manual parallel to SPAB’s philosophies in Britain at that time to identify the key differences in the approaches and an interrogation into why these changes were made.

This was then compared to Rahul Mehrotra’s approach to contemporary interventions in India. An analysis of how SPAB’s methods could be adopted in India and what changes would have to be made if it were adopted were identified. The approach to contemporary interventions in India has been evaluated by studying the theoretical debates of the practitioners like Rahul Mehrotra through various journal articles written by him. Mehrotra’s views were especially considered as they bring to focus the implications of the context of India in his practice of contemporary interventions.

This has been then compared with SPAB’s philosophies in India and the conservation manual of John Marshall within the context of international charters. This was done to arrive at the implications of India’s craft traditions on the SPAB principles to further evaluate how SPAB’s guidelines would need to be applied selectively to contemporary interventions in India.

11

CHAPTER 1: New interventions in historic buildings 1.1 Theoretical background Theoretically contemporary architectural interventions in historic buildings and the integration of the old and the new is a much debated issue in conservation. D. Theodossopoulos’s Structural Design in Building Conservation is specific to the topic of contemporary interventions and provided an initial understanding of the debates in Europe. The author advocates that there have been many theorists who have engaged with this discourse and describes interventions as a decision making process where the practitioner responds to the cultural values of the historic building.19 The rhetoric of the old and the new was especially taken for granted after the Second world war because of the many instances where large amounts of the historic building was lost in the destruction. 20

Previously in Britain in the early 20th century there was a movement away from the falsification of history which was seen in the restoration of churches to a more repair centric approach to historic buildings that Morris and the SPAB upheld. A. R. Powys’s book Repair of Ancient Buildings first published in 1929 was one of the leading manuals for pragmatic conservation in its time, based on SPAB’s principles it focused on the importance of a skilled repair and advocated that new interventions should be evocative of their own time, yet they should be informed by the historic building.21 Powys’s influence can be traced in the Charter of Athens as he was a delegate from Britain to the conference in Athens in 1931.22

19. Dimitris Theodossopoulos, Structural Design in Building Conservation(Oxon: Routledge, 2012), 6.

20. Miles Glenndinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 265.

21. A. R. Powys, Repair of Ancient Buildings (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929).

22. Peter Burman, Michael Stratton, Conserving the Railway Heritage (Oxon: Routledge, 1997), 22.

12

Fig. 1. The Front cover of the Repair of Ancient Buildings

With respect to design interventions The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments 1931 is one of the first international charters to deal with the topic of modern materials and techniques, the use of materials like concrete in historic buildings was accepted, although the Charter conservatively advocated that these alterations should be well concealed.23

The ‘Charter of Venice’ was especially influenced by Brandi’s Theory of Restoration which was based on the Charter of Athens.24 The common thread was the importance of retaining the physical historic material and its authenticity in the context of contemporary additions. The Charter of Venice reacted to the inconsistent post war interventions in historic buildings by upholding Ruskin’s views of the Anti Scrape and the material authenticity in a new version influenced by the modernist movement and its likeness for the contrast of the old and the new. 25 23. ICOMOS, The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments 1931, last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-andstandards/167-the-athens-charter-for-the-restoration-of-historic-monuments.

24. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 398 25. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 398

13

This contrast of the old and the new can be traced to the Venice Charter 1964 where it was jointly discussed that all periods of the buildings historic fabric must be respected and any contemporary additions to the historic building must be differentiated from the historic layer.26 This point had progressed from the Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments 1931 where the new additions were required to be concealed.

27

This change in the Charter of Venice was done

with the intention that the contemporary additions would not alter the authenticity of the historic building. This was a notion very similar to Morris’s theory that altering the physical material of a building would be a falsification of history.

1.2. SPAB’s approach to new intervention in historic buildings and emblematic cases.

SPAB’s approach which focused on the minimum loss of fabric through a skilled repair and advocated that new additions had to be fashioned in their own time is a notion that the International charters like the Charter of Venice and the Charter of Athens still uphold as the methods of intervening in historic building. Reviewing William Morris’s philosophical statement on conservation, The Manifesto28 gave the initial understanding of the theoretical framework that SPAB believes in, it does not however offer pragmatic guidance. The book Repair of Ancient Buildings by A. R. Powys was particularly useful in pointing out that SPAB’s influence was not only theoretical but SPAB’s then practitioners like A. R. Powys provided clear pragmatic guidance rooted in the philosophy on how to work with new additions in historic buildings and retain the historic evidence in the building. It also provided insight into the practical application of SPAB’s philosophy in specific 26. ICOMOS,The Charter of Venice, last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/charters/ venice_e.pdf, Article 11.

27. ICOMOS, The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments 1931, last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-andstandards/167-the-athens-charter-for-the-restoration-of-historic-monuments. Article IV. 28. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration (London 1977), 10.

14

cases. Donovan’s William Morris and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings provided a detailed account of SPAB’s philosophies and their work in Britain.29

The practice of contemporary interventions was analysed with three specific case studies.

Glendinning’s The Conservation Movement gave a better understanding of post war Britain and the conservation issues of that time and specifically SPAB’s Anti Scrape influence on buildings in post war Britain like the ruins of the St. Michael’s Cathedral now called the Coventry Cathedral.

The philosophy and design of the Coventry Cathedral was studied. This was particularly useful in understanding the approach that was used at Coventry to integrate the ruin and the new building.

G. Darley’s article Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle specifically notions that the approach that was adopted by the architects Witherford Watson Mann at the Astley castle echoes of SPAB’s principles of material honesty, skilful repair and no imitation of art. 30

The book The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage soaked in the post war debates in conservation in Germany talks about how David Chipperfield and Julian Harrap and the conservation society of Berlin pieced together the war torn Neues Museum.31 In the article An Approach Philosophy, Julian Harrap notions that SPAB’s philosophy was used in the Neues Museum to retain the material honesty of the building.32

A History of Architectural Conservation provided insight into SPAB’s philosophies that had spread in 29. A. E. Donovan, William Morris and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings ( New York: Routledge, 2008) 30. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

31. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010) 32.Julian Harrap, “An Approach Philosophy”, The best in heritage, last accessed 15 April, 2014, http:// www.thebestinheritage.com/presentations/search/neues-museum,204.html

15

India through Britain’s colonial hold during the 19th century.33 The dissertation critically analyses key pieces of work like the Conservation Manual from 1923 which gives an insight into Marshall’s guidelines for conservation in India. This provided the evidence to compare Marshall’s guidelines to SPAB’s then guidelines in Britain to arrive at that key changes that Marshall had to make to conserve historic buildings in India because of its long standing crafts tradition. The Manual clearly pointed out that because of India’s long standing crafts tradition an absolute approach of ‘No conservation’ would not be applicable as it would put an end to crafts and traditions which were still in use.

Luther’s paper on Indian Heritage the process to INTACH’s Charter provided further understanding of SPAB’s theoretical influence in India. In her paper talks about the new charter by INTACH which embraces intervening in buildings.34 India’s National Conservation Policy 2013 and the Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings 2013 state that contemporary additions should be accepted in conservation works but they are still quite conservative in the approach as they provide no pragmatic guidance on an approach that can be practiced. Rahul Mehrotra mentions in his article Conservation and Change: Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India points out that ruins are still romanticised and that reuse is often not considered which results in further ruination of the monument.35

33. Jukka Jokilehto, A History of Architectural Conservation (Oxford: Reed educational and professional publishing Ltd., 1999) 34. A. C. Luther, “Indian Heritage the process to INTACH’s Charter”, last accessed 15 may 2014, file:/// Users/sangeetha/Downloads/Indian_Heritage-the_Process_to_INTACHs_Charter-Aline_de_Carvalho_ Luther-libre%20(1).pdf 35. Rahul mehrotra, Conservation and Change: Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India, Built Environment (1978-), Vol. 33, No. 3, Built Heritage Conservation Education (2007)

16

CHAPTER 2: SPAB’s and its influence in Britain and India 2.1. Influence of SPAB in Britain since its creation 2.1.1. History It was in the 18th and 19th century that medieval buildings began to be differentiated and studied as historical monuments, this was the beginnings of the conservation movement. In England however in the 19th century there was an aversion to the church restorations that were going on at this time and this was the founding of the Anti Scrape movement of which Ruskin was the guiding force. Glendinning states that “… the Anti Scrape faction branded any restoration (or ‘scrape’) of that ‘living’ fabric as intrinsically immoral, and the restorers as wicked men.”36

Ruskin’s forceful views against any reproduction contributed a great deal to the Anti Scrape movement. His views were directed by his almost obsessive stand on the sanctity of the physical material of the historic building. To Ruskin the material of the building was evidence of its maturity and its beauty and any alteration to this would destroy its historic value. What we would today call the patina was to Ruskin an evidence of the building’s historicity which had been subject to nature’s process of evolution through time. He looked at the ruined monument as art itself with traces of time on it.

His opinion of the word restoration was that it meant a total negation of the historical quality of the building as it interfered with the most important aspect according to Ruskin which was the building’s fabric. His aversion to all forms of restoration fuelled the Anti Scrape movement.

However his view that historic buildings should not be altered was quite idealistic in its approach as 36. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 116

17

it did not prevent the decay in a building. The church restoration in England was hugely dominating the Gothic revival, but because of Ruskin’s heavy stance against it, It was beginning to be highly criticised.37

Around the same time the book ‘A plea for the faithful restoration of our ancient churches’ was written

by G.Scott as a response to the restoration of the churches in England.38 He however talks about churches as a part of a larger Christian art and believed that future alterations or changes in churches especially should be directed by a particular style which was influenced by Christianity.

He speaks of reviving dormant styles and adopting one of them to guide future alterations. In his book he states that “I admit that the adoption, in the main at least, of one style, would seem to be the most consistent.”39 With respect to lost details he advocates that they be reproduced in form and proportion from nearby churches.40

On Ruskin he says that “[…] only differ from him in not viewing the different shades of variety in pointed architecture as so many distinct styles, though I view one of them as the leading type, which it would be well to adopt as our nucleus and rallying point.”41 From this it is evident that Scott’s view was that, there should be one identifiable style in a historic buildings which should guide all future alterations. He particularly favoured the Gothic style for alterations and supported the Gothic revival in England.

Sir G. Scott published his book after John Ruskin published his book The Seven lamps of 37. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 118 38. G. G. Scott, A plea for the faithful restoration of our ancient churches (London: John Henry Parker) 39. G. G. Scott, A plea for the faithful restoration of our ancient churches (London: John Henry Parker),76 40. G. G. Scott, A plea for the faithful restoration of our ancient churches (London: John Henry Parker),31 41. G. G. Scott, A plea for the faithful restoration of our ancient churches (London: John Henry Parker), 75

18

architecture in 1850.42 Glendinning notions that Scott was trying to differentiate the destruction of indiscriminate restoration from the positive possibility of recreating features where they can be indisputably traced.43 From this it is evident that Scott was trying to advocate a certain amount of restoration.

Scott’s approach was not approved in England and the views remained to Ruskins very idealistic and material centric view of conservation. Ruskins theory however was most influential on many heritage bodies. The Society of Antiquaries also supported Ruskin and financed a ‘conservation fund’ against the conduct of restoration.44

Scott’s approach was lost amongst this and he was forced to change his way of thinking. He was coerced into changing his opinions because of these pressures and Ruskin’s growing popularity.

In the 1870’s the balance of the educated opinion in England shifted even more decisively against the restorers. This no longer relied on Ruskin’s initiative it was the efforts of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) which was founded in 1877.45

William Morris founded SPAB during the opposition of the ‘restoration’ that was being done during this time on churches which was to reinstate them to a particular period of history which was thought to be the most significant and this was at this time favoured to be in the Gothic style by practitioners like G. Scott.

Theoretically SPAB was deeply rooted in John Ruskins ideologies from his book The Seven Lamps of Architecture which treasured the historic physical material of the medieval buildings as its most 42. John Ruskin. The Seven Lamps of Architecture. 1880. Reprint, New York: Dover Publications, 1989.

43. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 112 44. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 112 45. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 112

19

important value. The difference however between Ruskin and SPAB was that the former was idealistic and disregarded any alteration in historic buildings and the latter was pragmatic and used a more skilful approach by formulating practical guidelines for conservation work in the historic buildings. Their opposition against the restoration was more commonly known as the ‘Anti Scrape’.

The Manifesto a philosophical document on conservation written by William Morris in 1877, is the defining philosophy of SPAB. It begins with saying that architecture was decaying in the nineteenth century because of the inclination towards imitation of architecture as opposed to creating something original and this happened when people began to study and understand the importance of medieval architecture. Morris advocates that the idea of ‘restoration’ was born out of this. Morris urged people of the nineteenth century to create something of their own period instead of imitating the styles of the earlier periods as imitation would cover up certain periods of the buildings history and this would ruin the building for future generation.46

He then proceeded to say that even though prior to the centuries before the 19th there were many changes, these changes were physical expressions of that time period and did not mimic a different period. He considered the different layers of the historic building as evidences of different periods of its history and upheld that an alteration of these layers would alter the buildings history for future generations. He mainly focuses on the honesty of the building fabric to its time period with respect to the architecture at that time.

Retaining the layers in the material of the historic building was important to Morris as it would help in reading and understanding the buildings history. Evidence of this notion can be seen in the Charter of Venice where it states that “The valid contributions of all periods to the building of a monument must be respected, since unity of style is not the aim of a restoration [...]”.47 46. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration (London 1977), 10.

47. ICOMOS,The Charter of Venice, last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/charters/

20

This ‘Unity of Style’ is what Morris advocated as inauthentic. The aversion is based on the idea that all periods of time are essential in a buildings history and erasing of one period would damage the buildings historicity.

The Charter of Venice however goes to say that exceptionally an alteration can be accepted if it justified by experts that establish that the alteration to the fabric would be by removing a part that is of little or no respect to reveal a part that is of great architectural value and wherein this removal would be aiding the preservation of the monument. In today’s world this could mean that an individual should call for experts to establish the cultural significance of the building and its fabric before any interventions. The aspect of cultural values or cultural significance as described by The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter) “[...] means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations.”48

Morris then further proceeds to say that if the historic buildings are inconvenient then it is better to build a new one as opposed to alter them as they are buildings from a bygone era and created by bygone manners. This however can be argued to be too idealistic in today’s age and times where the carbon footprint altering the building is much lesser than building a new one.

It upholds skillful repair with minimum loss of the building fabric and disregards restoration of historic buildings and at no point allows for reproduction of parts except in repairs of a very small scale if justified. With respect to new interventions it says that the new intervention should at no point attempt to out-do the original. It advocates that the building must first be understood with respect to its architectural qualities, method of construction and social development before any venice_e.pdf, Article 11.

48. ICOMOS, The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter), last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.heritage.tas.gov.au/media/pdf/The%20Burra%20Charter%20 1999adopted.pdf, 2.

21

work begins. The new elements should be fitted to the old with workmanship that does not conceal a repair but it instead exposes it as a record of what has been done using materials that are different but compatible to the historic building.

Fig. 2. The only allowance for restoration that SPAB allowed.

SPAB’s main strength was in its pragmatic approach to conservation and also its extensive network of influential members. Owing to the fact that the establishment of SPAB was because of Morris’s strong outcry against the restoration of the medieval “churches” a main part of its philosophy was its clear outlook on “repair” which ostracised all imitation of buildings as it destroys the honesty of the building’s fabric for future generations.

SPAB’s initial stance against restoration transformed into one that suggested minimal skilled repairs instead, and in time this lead to more criticism of restoration and an acceptance of repair. SPAB’s alternative to restoration was to protect the historic fabric of the building by minimal and skillful repair and allow for new additions to be designed in their own time. The Repair of Ancient Buildings

22

written by A. R. Powys was one of the first manuals to convert the SPAB’s Manifesto into pragmatic guidelines for practitioners. A. R. Powys states that his advice for historic buildings was threefold the first that it should be structurally sound, the second that it should be altered appropriately and the third was that these alterations were to be done with skilled workmanship, form, colour and texture so as to not alter the historicity of the building.49

When repair is done to a part of the wall that is missing either by grouting or by building he directs that the lines that give a building its character like the quoins and angles of walls, windows, gables, parapets should remain undisturbed. 50 He says the works should be done by using firm bricks that attempt to rebound the masonry from one side to the other, this approach he calls as “repair by building”. In the case of ruined buildings where the walls are incapable of standing by themselves he advises it sometimes becomes necessary to provide additional building supports.51 With respect to material he advocates that stone should only be replaced if it was structurally unstable.52

As described SPAB’s pragmatic approach was to conserve the building using traditional methods and practices. One of their main ideologies is that the skill of the craftsmen allows them to intervene in historic buildings with the utmost importance to safeguarding the historic fabric. SPAB’s early philosophy influenced the National Trust in its approach towards conservation. This approach however is not so popular today.

2.2.2. Projects and activities One of the early examples of SPAB’s cases was the restoration of the Salisbury Cathedral South West of London in 1880.53 SPAB had disapproved of the new stained glass window that had been 49. A. R. Powys, Repair of Ancient Buildings (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929),1.

50. A. R. Powys, Repair of Ancient Buildings (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929),52 51. A. R. Powys, Repair of Ancient Buildings (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929),59 52.A. R. Powys, Repair of Ancient Buildings (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929),79 53. A. E. Donovan, William Morris and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings ( New York:

23

placed between the two transcripts. They were however unable to stop the work as it had already progressed. The Cathedral at this time was also suffering from its poor foundation and was found

by Sir Christopher Wren to have settled unevenly. When it was decided that the foundation was to be strengthened SPAB had shown interest in the work that being done by the architect Sir Arthur W. Blomfield. The work being done by Blomfield was found to be repairs and no restoration and was being done by fixing some loose stones, and the belfry, some repair to damage done by Scott’s use of iron clamps, the strengthening of the upper parts of the turrets and relating pinnacles, and strengthening in the base of the spire. SPAB was supportive of these repairs. SPAB supported Blomfield’s work until full completion. It is clear from this, that even in its early Ruskin influenced stages, SPAB approved of minimal repair in the Cathedral. Their main opposition however was against the new stained glass window. This was however different from Ruskin’s approach that the historic buildings should not be touched.

In another instance concerning the Westminster Abbey in London which is a prominent Gothic style building, SPAB’s attention was focused on its prominent painted glass rose window which was erected in 1722.54 SPAB considered the window as an important example of English glass painting that shouldn’t be lost. The architect of the Abbey John Pearson however wanted to put in a completely new window at this time to match the North transept front. In 1890 it was found that even though it was promised otherwise the window was altered by cutting up the glass except a little piece in the middle by cutting out the figures and by replacing it with new tracery light. From this it is evident that SPAB was against the destruction of art pieces like the stained glass window by its fragmentation as in accordance with them it would destroy the integrity of the rose window from the 1700’s.

Routledge, 2008), 69.

54.A. E. Donovan, William Morris and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings ( New York: Routledge, 2008), 74.

24

With respect to St.Margaret’s Cathedral at the Edinburgh Castle the architect Hippolyte Blanc’s method of repair was much appreciated as he destroyed nothing old and made nothing new instead he reopened brick closed thorough ways, staircases and doors and he exposed an old ceiling as well.55

The contemporary interventions that are influenced by Morris’s view have used material authenticity as the main value to which they relate the contemporary intervention through a choice of materials.

The contemporary intervention structurally supports the historic building and creates a place.

SPAB’s philosophy towards conservation mainly a material centric one which upheld the honesty and the authenticity of the material with respect to the time and age it was created in. The theory advocates for new buildings in historic areas to be a representation of their own time. This emphasis on the physical material of the historic building is quite similar to Cesare Brandi’s “Teoria Del Restauro” published in the year 1963. Brandi whose view is one that arises from Art gives importance to the physical nature of the work since it represent the real context in which the image was materialised in a particular place in time and it was this material that was the medium of its transition in the future.56 His work was largely influenced in his studies as an art critic. He defines restoration as a critical process and states that “Defining restoration as the methodological moment of recognition of the work of art as such, that recognition comes in that moment of the critical process on which, and only which, can the legitimacy of restorative action be based.” He defined restoration as a critical act which could be done after understanding the work of art or architecture. The aim he says of restoration is what defines the restoration itself.57 He also stresses on the potential oneness of the 55. A. E. Donovan, William Morris and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings ( New York: Routledge, 2008), 82 56. Cesare Brandi. Theory of Restoration. 1977. Translated by CynthiaRockwell. Reprint, Florence: Nardini Editore, 49.

57. Cesare Brandi, Theory of Restoration. 1977. Translated by CynthiaRockwell. Reprint, Florence: Nardini Editore, 47

25

work of art and says that this should be done without committing an artistic imitation and without erasing the traces of time on the physical material.58

SPAB’s philosophy and Brandi’s theory both upheld the historical material of the building as the most sacred and advocated that it should be preserved in the same state that it was found in. Brandi’s theory however referred to art as something more purer and not an imitation of nature unlike Ruskin’s view that architecture was an imitation of nature. Brandi put art before the historical meaning and derived the monuments authenticity from a cycle of its creation and receptance.59

2.2. SPAB’s influence on conservation in India from its creation till today

2.2.1. History In India the reign of the Mughal Empire was from the 1526 to 1761 which was followed by the British rule. Owing to the colonial rule, SPAB, was quite influential in India through its Foreign committee. There were many British painters who travelled around India and documented the historical buildings. It was only in the late 18th century that the idea of surveying the East was introduced in Britain, this resulted in various surveys that were carried out in India. It was after this that the Asiatic Society was founded, through which they published the journals called Asiatic researches. 60 The Asiatic Society then dedicated its collections to the Museum of Calcutta.

The present national body for the protection of monuments in India which is the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) was first established in 1861 by Alexander Cunningham, who then became 58. Cesare Brandi, Theory of Restoration, 1977, Translated by Cynthia Rockwell. Reprint, Florence: Nardini Editore, 49 59. Brandi 60. Jukka Jokilehto, A History of Architectural Conservation (Oxford: Reed educational and professional publishing Ltd., 1999)276

26

the first Director General of the ASI. This then lead to a substantial progress of conservation works in India. He started a series of reports, 23 of them in total, through this he documented the state of monuments in India. In 1884 the care of monuments was assigned to provincial governments.

Major H. H. Cole, Who had already worked in the Northern part of India was appointed the inspector of ancient monuments for three years and produced a series of preliminary reports on all important monuments.61

Lord Curzon who was the Viceroy to India in 1898 took up the duties of the Director General of Archaeology. An annual record of the society was maintained and in 1904 the first act for Indian heritage was passed. The ASI which was initiated with the purpose of surveying India, under the governance of Lord Curzon shifted its focus in 1899 from explorations to the conservation of monuments. The most prominent work during this time was the work on the Taj Mahal for which Curzon was criticised for by SPAB. The casework for which is elaborated in the next section.

John Marshall was appointed the Director general in 1902 and was in correspondence with SPAB in Britain on conservation issues in India. The Conservation Manual published in 1923 was written by him to guide future conservation works in India. The manual consisted of the main government orders with regard to the conservation and maintenance of buildings and detailed instructions and technical specifications to carry out the works. The guidelines of the conservation manual are still in practice in India by the ASI and are adhered to by conservation professionals in India and have been the context to the current National Conservation Policy of 2013.

61. Jukka Jokilehto, A History of Architectural Conservation (Oxford: Reed educational and professional publishing Ltd., 1999)278.

27

Fig. 3. The Front cover of the Conservation Manual.

The Conservation Manual was largely influenced by SPAB’s Anti restoration stance. The over arching principles of the manual however were that, restorations were shunned except in cases where there was a need for structural stability, or the building was in a state of disrepair, or if the quality of stone carving could be achieved as close to the original as possible although carvings of figures were however forbidden. SPAB’s principles had to deal with the context of local Indian traditions which were very different from Britain’s.

2.2.2. Projects and activities The SPAB’s Chairman in the earlier annual report of the committee in the year 1879 had stated that the society should prevent restoration of any kind and respect the historic fabric as it is.62 Only two years after its establishment in Britain the society wrote about its intention to prevent the 62. SPAB, The second annual meeting of the society, Report of the committee (N.P:n.p, 1879),7.

28

falsification of monuments by spreading its principles abroad through public prints.63

As the SPAB was one of the earliest heritage organisation in Britain it was also one of the earliest conservation bodies to have an influence on the conservation approaches in India. The Society tried to propagate its ideas of Anti Scrape through this with the intent to protect the centuries old heritage of India which they considered as the intellectual heritage of not only the Indians but of mankind. They regularly reviewed heritage precincts from India as a part of the SPAB Foreign Committee.

In as early as 1879 the SPAB wrote in the report of the committee that the Mughal art was falsified and debased in India they comment that the conservation work in India was wrong and misleading and the society believed that conveying SPAB’s principles to them would prevent this from happening.64

Lord Curzon in India was especially involved in the work at the Taj Mahal, where restoration works were carried out at a large scale. Jokilehto wrote that “ A number of artisans were trained to cut marble and to repair the damages that had been caused by visitors who had taken fragments from the monuments as souvenirs.” 65 This however lead to his work being largely criticised by the SPAB in Britain who were staunchly against the restoration work as they considered it to be misleading. The Anti Scrape movement which had already almost banished restoration in England was starting to influence conservation work in India.

From the Society’s writing above it is quite clear that they opposed any ‘restoration’ in India as 63. SPAB, The second annual meeting of the society, Report of the committee (N.P:n.p, 1879),11.

64. SPAB, The second annual meeting of the society, Report of the committee (N.P:n.p, 1879),23.

65. Jukka Jokilehto, A History of Architectural Conservation (Oxford: Reed educational and professional publishing Ltd., 1999) 275.

29

well, which had been conducted on Mughal monuments even before Lord Curzon’s time. The first major works in India were started by Lord Curzon, he was very interested in the safe keeping of the monuments. Curzon’s correspondence about issues in India continued even after he had returned to England and he was in correspondence with SPAB’s secretary Thackeray Turner to discuss the conservation principles that could be applied in India. The SPAB had then stated that “Indian buildings were on a different footing from European medieval buildings, because whereas in Europe all medieval traditions have died out in India the building traditions are, to some extent still alive.” 66 Here the SPAB’s writing refers to the recognition of crafts traditions of India which were very much alive and had developed from a long line of unbroken craftsmen.

In the next instance with reference to the Manikiala Stupa which was a part of undivided India and is now in North East Pakistan. In the Annual Progress report of the ASI for the year 1915, the ASI had stated that the proposals for the Stupa had been submitted and approved and that the conservation work was not extensive and that certain parts were being replaced for the preservation of the structure and no attempt would be made to restore the details as in 1891. 67 This reference to ‘no restoration’ was clearly the result of SPAB’s influence on the ASI where they had responded to the criticism by adhering to the principles of SPAB which condemned restorations of any kind.

However later in the report of the year 1921 The Annual report of the ASI uses restoration for the colonnades of the Taj Mahal, where it states that the Dalans (colonnades) had been replaced in a way that they were never missing.68 66. SPAB, The second annual meeting of the eleventh annual meeting of the committee, Report of the committee (N.P:n.p, 1888),57.

67. ASI, Annual progress report of the superintendent archaeological survey hindu and buddhist monuments, northern circle (Lahore: C. M. Gazette press, 1915), 2.

68. ASI, Annual progress report of the Archaeological Survey of India (Simla: Government of India Press, 1921), 2. (plate Ia)”2

30

The difference in the excerpts from the Reports from the year 1915 and the year 1921-22 is clearly evident to be its approach towards conservation. In the year 1915 it is clear that restoration in India had clearly been affected by the Anti Scrape movement in Britain and thus was being intentionally avoided very similar to the movement in Britain to avoid restoration of the churches that was lead by SPAB. This intention was to protect the historicity of the historic buildings and avoid a falsification of the building’s history. However in the year 1921 it is evident that the approach had changed to one in which restoration had been accepted and was being used on important Mughal architecture in India like the Taj Mahal. Where previous restoration works were condemned by SPAB.

This change in the attitude of conservation is what John Marshall tries to address in his conservation Manual. John Marshall became the Director General of the ASI in 1902 and during his time the ASI was divided into the Frontier Circle and the Northern Circle it was then later controlled centrally.

He formulated the Conservation Manual in India which was influenced by SPAB’s manifesto. The Conservation Manual published in 1923, is one of the earliest documents relating to conservation works in India which is still used. The book has two main sections, the first is a set of state orders with respect to the maintenance of the monuments and the ‘conduct of the conservation works’ and the second part is about the technical specifications of the conservation work.69

I. Sengupta states that “The manual was the product of the tension that was implicit in the operation of colonial state power in India which resulted from the need to reconcile ideas from metropolitan Britain with local pressures on the ground in India.”70 As Sengupta states and as evident from the casework studied in the previous section, there was an inconsistency in the conservation approaches in Colonial India and the conservation officers in India had to often deal with the current debates of 69. John Marshall, Conservation Manual (Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1923), 10.

70. Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/

sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 1.

31

the conservation society in Britain within the context of the local conditions in India which were very different to that in Britain.

The Manual was written to formulate clear pragmatic guidelines for the conservation works for future officers and practitioners by trying to resolve the differences between the practice in Britain and in India. The officers had to often justify their methods of conservation to the society in Britain, who thought that the officers in India were behind in their thoughts.71

In December 1906 John Marshall wrote to the then Vicerory Lord Minto defending his work by saying that his work was influenced by the local conditions of India and that his judgements were informed by being physically present at the site which the SPAB might not understand.72 Marshall here answers to SPAB’s criticism of the restoration work in India by reasoning that the local conditions in India were much different from those in Britain. He was trying to justify the restoration work in India.

The SPAB then criticises the work done by the ASI and says “In a final rebuke the society pointed out the need for a code of “ clear and definite instructions regarding works of repair and conservation “ and for “clearest and most rigid instructions on this point.” 73

Marshall however includes many of the principles of the SPAB in the Conservation Manual. The Manual was a way of justifying his practices. He wanted to establish clear principles with respect 71. Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 22.

72. John Marshall to Duncan Smith, December 28, 1906. Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeology File no. 202, quoted in Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 25.

73. Letter from Thackeray Turner, Secretary to the SPAB, 12 October 1906. ASI, Archaeology File no.

202, 1906, quoted in Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 29.

32

to restoration and conservation as a response to SPAB. There was a need to create a regulatory framework for the practice of conservation which is how the Manual was born. In 1906 he wrote a precursor to the conservation manual called the Conservation of Ancient Monuments: General principles for the guidance of those entrusted with the custody of and Execution of Repairs to Ancient Monuments.74 Here Marshall said that the historical value of a building is destroyed when they are renewed as it destroys their authenticity. The Manual with respect to the restoration states that the historical value of a building was gone when renewed and so the first step was to preserve the authenticity of the material. 75 These principles largely echo of SPAB’s own principles in Britain of material honesty which were so voraciously put forth by William Morris.

Marshall justifies the restoration in his work by saying that Mughal monuments were not relics or ruins from the past but were in fact their national heritage and that they should be maintained in its original splendour. He also states that these monuments were being used for imperial settings for the important state functions.76 He was trying to make SPAB understand that in India the monuments were not ruins or relics but in fact monuments that were still being used.

With respect to the Mughal structures Marshall had explained to Christiana Herringham, a member of SPAB who visited India that “it was not only possible to successfully undertake restoration without compromising authenticity and or historicity, it was in fact desirable and possible since the building tradition of the artisans go Mughal buildings continued to survive unbroken under British rule.� 77 This 74. Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 25.

75. John Marshall, Conservation Manual (Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1923), 10.

76. John Marshall to Duncan Smith, December 28, 1906. Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeology File no. 202, quoted in Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 30.

77. Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 32.

33

brings to notice that he upheld restoration in India as the craftsmen came from an unbroken, long standing tradition of craftsmen in India and that by this there was no compromise on the historicity or authenticity.

As a reply to this Herringham later stated in her report that Marshall was advocating for restoration specifically in the Mughal monuments because there was no break in the traditions and the craft workshops were still continuing which enabled repair work in the same manner as the creators had created it. 78

SPAB had however advocated that a code of practice should be established for the conservation in India which Marshall was finding difficult because of the myriad of religions, culture, materials and architecture in India. Marshall here was stressing on the need for immense study of the case before the starting of any conservation work.79 Even though the Mughal structures belonged to a time previous to the British rule they were still current because the crafts and traditions that had made them were unbroken. Marshall was trying to apply SPAB’s principles within the context of India.

Sengupta points out that Marshall here might be trying to bring out the difference between the living, still used buildings of India and the ruined buildings of Europe which SPAB was supportive of. In India these buildings were still in the present.80 p32

78. Christiana Herringham to SPAB, Annual report of the SPAB, 1907, quoted in Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1. pdf, 32.

79. Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 34 80. Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 32.

34

Marshall in the Manual describes these Mughal monuments as living monuments which he describes as, those monuments which are still used for the purpose for which they were designed, and in the case of these monuments Marshall advocates that restoration could be justified more than desirable on purely archaeological grounds.81 Marshall argues for a differential treatment for these living monuments by clearly pointing out that they were not ruins that were inhabited but were in fact a part of India’s present.

Sengupta again points out that Marshall resolved this ambiguity between the differences in the India and Britain in the Conservation Manual by a clear distinction between the “living” and the “dead” monuments.

2.3. Differences between SPAB’s approach in India and Britain SPAB’s influence in India was largely from the impact that it had on the Conservation Manual through correspondence with Marshall. Even though Marshall was well aware that restoration was disregarded in the debates in Britain on all accounts, he approved it for the context of India with respect to Mughal monuments. The Manual allows for restoration and the reproduction of geometric designs especially in the living monuments of the Mughal period. He specifically advocates that with respect to monolithic pillars or walls that have fallen, if the new masonry is introduced the new stone should replace the earlier as accurately as possible even with chiseling of the details.

In cases of reconstructions he advocates that the new stone should be the same texture as the old and advises that the material also should be stained if required to integrate it with the rest of the building. Even though the SPAB had influenced the Conservation Manual on aspects of material honesty, its staunch anti restoration stance was not adopted in India by Marshall on grounds that the Indian Historic buildings were not ruins but in fact living monuments which were a part of 81. John Marshall, Conservation Manual (Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1923), 10.

35

the present culture which allowed the repair of the buildings in a way in which it would have been originally done. He had recognized that the long standing unbroken line of crafts and traditions of India as integral to the conservation works in India and by this had justified the restoration. Explain specific text in detail technical stuff.

CHAPTER 3 : Contemporary Interventions in Britain : Examples of SPAB’s approach 3.1. Is SPAB’s approach still relevant today?

The most successful aspect about SPAB was that their approach provided principles that were a result of a resolution of the theories of William Morris into practical guidelines for a historic buildings repair, an example of which was the book Repair of Ancient Buildings. Prior to this there have been inconsistent approaches to contemporary interventions that included restorations and reconstructions. SPAB’s influence can be seen on the contemporary intervention in the ruinous Astley castle which has been awarded the Stirling Prize 2013. However there have been few who have used this method of interventions in contemporary additions in historic buildings in Britain .

3.2. Key projects and practitioners The Coventry Cathedral which was bombed in 1940 is one such example where the influence of SPAB can be traced. The Coventry Cathedral previously known as the St. Michael’s Cathedral which was one of England’s largest parish churches was bombed in 1940 during the Second World War which left only the outer walls, the Cathedral’s spire and tower standing. It was then decided that the cathedral would be rebuilt, which lead to a lot of discussions on how this would be done and a competition was announce for a new Cathedral in 1951.

36

Fig.4. The Coventry cathedral after the Second world war.

L. Campbell in his article Towards a new cathedral: the competition for Coventry Cathedral 1950-51 states that the only brief of the competition was that the new cathedral had to be built harmoniously with the tower and the spire, it had disregarded recommendations that it should be built in the Gothic tradition. This brings to notice that there was a shift away from the gothic and signs of acceptance of a more contemporary architecture.82 With this it was clear that the collective opinion had moved towards a more contemporary building which was to be integrated with the cathedral ruins. The architect chosen was Sir Basil Spence whose approach was to keep the entire ruined part of the cathedral and that the new building would be integrated with, he did this by placing the altar on the north of the plan and used the porch to connect the old and the new Cathedral.83

82. Louise Campbell, “Towards a new cathedral: the competition for Coventry Cathedral 1950-51�, Architectural History, Vol. 35, (1992): 208, last accessed May 15, 2014, doi: 10.2307/1568577.

83. Basil Spence, The Phoenix at Coventry (London: Geoffrey Bles Ltd.,1962), 11.

37

Fig.5. The elevation of the Coventry cathedral as drawn by Sir Basil Spence.

The rebuilding of the Cathedral was testing the ‘balance between modernity and heritage’, SPAB’s representatives had argued that the destruction should be ‘remedied by a harmonious ’ contemporary building, built within the ruins and not only by a contemporary building that was attached to the tower and spire.84

The new Cathedral however was not built within the old cathedral, but it was harmoniously linked to the old by the Architect Sir Basil Spence using a similar coloured sandstone and similar form as the old cathedral as illustrated in Fig.5. He used the geometry of the architecture of the ruined cathedral to be his guiding lines for the proposition. The two main patterns that he uses from the historic building is the rhythm created by the spacing of the nave pillars and the other was the spacing of the mullions in the tracery. He used these two main patterns in his own design to integrate the old and the new.85 84. Miles Glendinning, The Conservation Movement (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 254.

85. Basil Spence, The Phoenix at Coventry (London: Geoffrey Bles Ltd.,1962), 14

38

Fig.6. The floor plan of the old and new cathedral

The notion of ‘guiding lines’ that Sir Basil Spence uses is an approach that Powys of the SPAB advocates as well where he says that the quoins and angles of walls, windows, gables, parapets should remain undisturbed as they gave the building character through their linearity.86

With respect to the material he decided to use the sandstone which was used for the Cathedral itself.

His approach was one that integrated the historic building with its modern counterpart with his choice of materials and his approach to use the historic proportions for the contemporary building.

His main connection between the two parts was the porch. He described the old cathedral as having ‘lace like walls’ and found that it would contrast greatly with the contemporary building and he attempted to use the porch to ‘soften’ this contrast. He used his own judgement as an architect and felt that the porosity of the porch would be the key to the continuity between the old and the 86. A. R. Powys, Repair of Ancient Buildings (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929),59

39

new building.87

The design by Spence was heavy and solid on the outside but he treated the ruins ‘gingerly’.88 Spence’s method of a contemporary addition to historic building was quite aligned with SPAB’s approach as he respected the historic building and yet integrated it with a contemporary building using practical approaches like form, texture and material as shown in the image.

Fig. 7. The ruins of the Astley castle before the intervention

Fig. 8. The ruins of the Astley castle after the intervention

The contemporary intervention at Astley Castle, in Warwickshire, England was recently completed in 2012. It was a country house and it has evidences of building fabric from as early as the 13th 87. Basil Spence, The Phoenix at Coventry (London: Geoffrey Bles Ltd.,1962), 92 88. Louise Campbell, “Towards a new cathedral: the competition for Coventry Cathedral 1950-51”,Architectural History, Vol. 35, (1992): 217, last accessed May 15, 2014, doi: 10.2307/1568577.

40

century, with Tudor features which were found in the window and the arched doorway and has been in constant occupation since almost a 1000 years.89 The castle was converted into a hotel after world war II and in 1978 it was largely destroyed by a fire after which it was mostly uninhabited.

The reason for the contemporary intervention was because the castle was in a very dilapidated state after the fire with only its shell remaining and in danger of total collapse even though it was a Grade II listed building. After the fire the Landmark Trust leased it and tried to rehabilitate it only to return it again to the Arbury estate because they were running a loss, They then leased it again in 2005.

A competition was then held and the brief of the competition was that the contemporary house would have to parasitically sit in the old and that it would be let as a holiday home, like the Trust’s other properties.90 The ruin was only a shell when the work started and in a highly derelict state and was on the Heritage At Risk register.

The architects chosen for building were Witherford Watson Mann Architects (WWM), as their approach was found to be the most sympathetic to the historic building as they believed that the many layers of the history should be visible.

91

They designed the contemporary intervention

within the ruin itself consciously using the spaces that were inhabited since the 13th century for living spaces as it had been in continuos occupancy since years, the authenticity of the building with respect to its use was thus maintained as shown in Fig.7 and Fig.8. The contemporary intervention later went on to win the RIBA Stirling Prize for the year 2013.

90. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

91 Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

41

The trust was unable to do the restoration because of its immense costs involved. The process as described by the architects involved a historic ruin into which they put in a carefully structured yet discrete concrete structure of the new building which would stabilise the old building. The concrete lintels of the new design support the ruin creating a space that is habitable.

Following this a series of details were developed for the doors and windows. The new addition has carefully recessed large window frames that cast deep shadows, like the gaping holes that are present in the ruin.

Fig.9. The new and the old in the Astley castle.

Fig.10. The crafted Oak staircase.

The material used is mainly concrete for the lintels and narrow gauge bricks for the walls that are built integrated with the ruined masonry walls and in some places structural carpentry for the windows. The joinery of the old ruin with the new has been done meticulously. As G. Darvey

42

a former chair of the SPAB in the article Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle states the building involved “sewing together masonry”.

92

The architects used 40 mm

gauge bricks from Denmark, these bricks give the new addition the depth and material continuity with the old by using the very lines of the centuries old masonry but not in the same style and scale as the centuries of before but instead they have designed thinner, sleeker walls of the twenty first century. The design leaves the unfinished layers of the rubble masonry only stabilising it or doing the basic repair but never considering to rebuild the whole wall.93 This detail to material specificity integrated the old walls with the new.

G.Darley advocates that this integration however does not mislead the perceiver as the old masonry walls have not been altered, they have instead been carefully repaired using a material that is coherent with the old masonry walls in terms of the colour using the lines of the existing masonry.

The brick walls have only been built in places where it was required for the structural stability of the ruin and for enclosing a space. Reclaimed bricks were used for paving the floor. Alterations to the wall were only done on the lines of repair and preservation places where the walls were vulnerable or new edging was required or if there was capping to be inserted. 94

Witherford Watson Mann comment that the new construction could be compared to a graft or a splint that followed the old.95 The house consists of two main courtyards and the entrance is 92. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

93. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

94. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

95. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

43

through one of them. The courtyards although earlier largely fragmented have been bound together by the cleverly placed narrow gauge brick walls.

The East front was stabilised and serves as the main access into the building. The entrance is dramatic due to large double height space with a wall at the far end with all traces of time.

The roof has been designed with new timber frames but has a large clean cut opening which allows the light to filter in much. It aligns with the ruinous quality of the space as the ruinous building had large openings where the masonry had fallen out and this act had retained that quality. Most of the historic building was completely retained except for a Jettied Victorian part that was removed as it was deemed unstable.96

G. Darley states that the “The skilful combination of principle and pragmatism underpins the exemplary renovation of an historic house,”97 The principle that the architects have applied here is to retain the honesty of the material and to not imitate or ‘restore’ the building to a style of a different period.

The house has been continuously intertwined with the historical ruins.

Skilled carpentry has been used by the architects through out the contemporary building especially in the oak stair that connects the two levels. The architect states that ‘[...] through the craft of masonry and joinery’ they used different materials and techniques as used in the past to create the new additions. 98

96. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

97. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

98. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

44

G. Darley states that “William Morris’ view – as articulated in the 1877 manifesto of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, a visionary document which anyone applying for membership of SPAB still must read and sign – is entirely consistent and as I see it has close affinity with WWM’s thinking at Astley Castle.” 99 She describes the work of WWM as architecture that was honest to its time and made no attempt to mislead by reproduction.

The Neues Museum was designed by Friedrich August Stuler and his Karl Friedrich Schinkel as a neoclassical building. It was heavily bombed by incendiary bombs during the second world war, Which destroyed the north west wing of the Neues museum including the main stairwell and its connection to the adjacent Altes Museum. In 2009 it was rebuilt by the architect David Chipperfield and the conservation architect Julian Harrap a prominent member of the SPAB.100

The conservation of the Neues Museum was heavily debated, on this the architect chipperfield states that “Nowhere has this debate been so well and so fiercely articulated as in post war Germany.”

101

Germany after the second world war was faced with many situations where there was a need

for conservation works and there were large debates on conservation, restoration and preservation.

On the approach used at the Neues Museum Harrap states that he tried to “bridge the gap between the great traditions of the Beaux Arts reconstruction” and the practical approach that was advocated

by SPAB’s William Morris in 1877 which “was based on the proposition that the ruin of a building 99. Gillian Darley, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”, Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

100.Julian Harrap, Does British architecture have a future as well as a past ?, RSA Journal, Vol. 136, No. 5388 (November 1988), 1.

101. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010), 57.

45

Fig.11. The main hall of the Neues Museum

had greater meaning in recording its journey through time than its completion or reproduction in a theoretically correct manner.” 102 Here Harrap refers to the material honesty that Ruskin and Morris both considered integral to the historic value of the building. The Neues Museum has been meticulously conserved by Harrap by retaining the buildings most significant physical fabric. The main stairwell that was completely destroyed was replaced by a more contemporary intervention

by David Chipperfield.

102. Julian Harrap, “An Approach Philosophy”, The best in heritage, last accessed 15 April, 2014, http:// www.thebestinheritage.com/presentations/search/neues-museum,204.html

46

Harrap uses reclaimed and recycled bricks to respond to the masonry walls of the building, a notion which was advocated by A. R. Powys in his Repair of Ancient Buildings and an attitude which has been used in the Astley castle intervention as well. as shown in .

Fig.12. An illustration of the ‘repair by building’ that Powys advocates

Fig.13. An illustration of the central wall of the Astley castle

47

On designing the intervention Chipperfield states that the intervention at no point tried to immitate or reproduce earlier architecrural elements but instead used repair to protect the historic fabric and to make it an architectural whole.103 The continuity and completeness in the fabric was established by a theoretical and pragmmatic approach where the original material was the most important.104

This was done “by the construction of new volumes and surfaces in brickwork and precast concrete.These new volumes, while supportive to the concept of completion and avoiding the imitation of historical detail, have a sufficient scake that demands that they must establish their own presence.105 He also states that in the case of the Neues Museum the missing parts were large and thus required larger repairs which had an identity of their own owing to its large size. 106

The work at Astley Castle by the architects has been materially honest as they have not tampered with the historic building instead they have stabilised the historic walls and supported them with new contemporary interventions by using a material that is very similar to the historic building in terms of colour texture form and form. This point is also advocated by A. R. Powys in his book The Repair of Ancient buildings that any new building works during repair should be sympathetic to the historic buildings and the material should be similar in terms of form colour and texture.

The architect even uses the lines of the masonry to guide the new building work a point that A. R. Powys clearly states in his book as well. This of course has also been done in the Coventry Cathedral where Spence used the lines of the historic cathedral to design the new cathedral. In all the three 103. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010), 57 104. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010), 58 105. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010), 58 106. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010), 58

48

cases the principles that have been used is material honesty. Collaboratively however they have maintained the honesty and integrity of the historic fabric and succeeded in contemporizing the building.

CHAPTER 4: Contemporary intervention in India and SPAB’s influence 4.1. Is SPAB’s approach still relevant in India The influence of SPAB’s approach can be seen in the The National Conservation Policy 2013 and the Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings both of which are state guidelines for conservation in India.

4.1.1. The National policy and Local guidelines The National Conservation Policy 2013 focuses on is the importance of craftsmanship in India and also the modern needs of tourism and development around the monument. It attempts to include the debates of the international charters and tries to revise the Conservation Manual. It addresses the issues of conservation and restoration and touches upon the topic of contemporary interventions.

The Policy condemns reproduction of work at all costs, Its only allowance for ‘restoration’ is when the monument has high architectural value and when there is certain parts of the geometric patterns missing that can be remade by an unbroken line of craftsmen. 107

With respect to contemporary interventions it allows for ancillary spaces of the monument to be used but it does not refer to how this can be done in a pragmatic way.108 4 It strictly disregards 107. National Conservation Policy for Monuments, Archaeological Sites and Remains Protected by Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeological Survey of India, draft (2013), last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://asi.nic.in/pdf_data/draft_national_conservation_policy_monuments.pdf.

108. Ibid.

49

restoration but gives no alternative of what can be done when a building’s interior needs to be modernised by of a change of use.109

On contemporary intervention in historic buildings it says that at no point should the intervention take away from the original monuments cultural values it should be coherent in terms of design, material, colour and scale and the materials used should be vernacular to that existing.110 This however exists in the guidelines but in practice in India it is hardly executed because of its theoretical nature. The policy directs that the new design should blend with the historic ‘character’ of the monument, however it does not talk about the approach that it should take and also does define what the ‘character’ of the monument is.111 The importance of these new additions to be selfsufficient in terms of energy has also been mentioned.

112

In India today SPAB’s philosophy of

protecting the historic fabric has been adopted but what has not been addressed is how to continue the use of these buildings to secure their future. There focus is more on the repair of historic buildings as opposed to designing in them or securing them for future use.

It is only in the recent policy of 2013, that it was declared that the National Authority would consider new construction within the earlier prohibited area of 300 metres around the monument for purposes of intervention. 113 This had previously greatly limited the possibility of any modernisation within 300 metres of the monument.

The policy focuses on India’s long standing unbroken crafts tradition as an integral part of its conservation process. It recognises the role of the craftsmen integral to safeguarding the heritage for posterity and approaches conservation as a multi disciplinary field that requires the skills of the 109. Ibid. Article 5.16.

110. Ibid., Article 14.02 111. Ibid. Article 14.03 112. Ibid., Article 14.04 113. Ibid.,

50

craftsmen. 114 It states that traditional methods an techniques of conservation should be respected an applied for the conservation of the historic buildings. 115

The policy advocates for the continuity in these traditions and upholds the knowledge of the craftsmen as integral to the conservation process and stresses on the importance of continuing these practices.116

With respect to material the policy directs that vernacular materials and techniques should be adopted for a new construction in the case of interpretation centres.117 This point brings to notice

that the policy directs that interpretation centres in the surrounding areas of the monument should use vernacular materials and techniques. The policy focuses on interpretation centres as new constructions and not all interventions.

With respect to the different layers of history it aligns itself in principle again to the Charter of Venice by directing that the all the layers of the historic building should be retained but continues to say that any new modern additions if justified can be removed sparingly.118 It focuses on the material authenticity of the historic building which is similar to SPAB’s method.

It advocates that the new material should be compatible with the old but should be differentiated from it which resonates with the Charter of Venice, although it proceeds to say that if in case there is an idea that it should merge together then the material should be matched carefully in terms of specifications, form and colour and the process of this should be recorded for future reference.119 114. Ibid., Article 6.02 115. Ibid., Article 6.03 116. Ibid.,Article 6.04 117. Ibid., Article 9.06 118. Ibid., Article 5.12 119. Ibid., Article 4.08

51

The Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings the Central Public Works Department is book of guidelines for architects and engineers who work with historic buildings and deal with issues concerning their development. It is more accepting of new additions than the Conservation Manual and particularly addresses changes in historic buildings. It lays emphasis on the reuse of buildings, their economic sustainability and its environmental benefits.120 Its definition of the word restoration is “”Restoration” means and includes returning the existing fabric of a place to a known earlier state by removing accretions or by reassembling existing components without introducing new materials.121 It uses examples to illustrate the acceptable methods for contemporary interventions. One such example is the Tijara Fort Palace in Rajasthan in India where the abandoned palace has been converted into a heritage hotel. On the approach tit says “The newer structures are built using modern materials and technologies and a lot of care is taken in the design and detailing to weave it together with the existing structure. RCC construction with glass is used but practically underground in a way that it does not stand out from the old building.”122

This however maybe a good description at the work at the Tijara Fort Palace but does not provide practical guidelines for future practitioners and is ambiguous with respect to the statements “weave it together with the existing structure” and “RCC construction with glass is used but practically underground “.

SPAB’s influence on the National and Local Policies are quiet evident to be the protection of the material honesty and the acknowledgement of skilled craftsmen as integral to the process of 120. Central public works department, Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings, (2013), last accessed 15 April, 2014. http://cpwd.gov.in/Publication/ConservationHertBuildings.pdf, 11.

121. Ibid.,15 122. Ibid.,92.

52

conservation. However unlike SPAB they allow for restoration in buildings of high architectural value and in places where the excellence of the original can be acquired. Continuity of these craftsmen.

4.2. Who are the key practitioners and projects ?

Rahul Mehrotra is an architect and urbanist is the founder of Rahul Mehrotra Architects which was founded in 1990.1 He has done many notable projects of which two in particular the extension to the Prince of Wales Museum in Mumbai and the Chowmahalla Palace in Hyderabad can be referred to as contemporary interventions. He has published many essays on the conservation approaches in India.

4.2.1 Mehrotra’s Approach to Interventions Rahul Mehrotra one of India’s leading practitioners in contemporary interventions in historic buildings points out that Indian cities are growing exponentially and historic buildings needs to address contemporary needs. The Indian approach to conservation was previously highly influenced by the British debates at that time, which was to preserve the monuments as much as possible in the original state and to refrain from any interference with the historic material except of repairing it.

Although this approach is still followed today in India there is need to improvise historic buildings.

Mehrotra says that Indian cities are ‘kinetic’ and are defined by the movements of their residents and their festivals and rituals and that any practitioners designing in India must understand the significance of this while attempting interventions.123 A notion very similar to Marshall’s view that monuments in India were living monuments. Mehrotra points out that conservation education in India does not provide guidance for intervening with the heritage amidst the urban cities in India 123. Rahul Mehrotra, Conservation and Change: Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India, Built Environment (1978-), Vol. 33, No. 3, Built Heritage Conservation Education (2007), 342.

53

and regards monuments as buildings that cannot be interfered with.124 He instead advocates that the practitioners should not only look at the heritage material but instead look at the community and their requirements and urges that the material focused view of conservation in India should change.125

Historic buildings are an important part of the architectural and intellectual heritage of mankind, but they will no longer belong to the community if continuity in terms of usage is not established.

Mehrotra brings to notice that the field of conservation in India would have to facilitate historic buildings to have places for communities and that this would help to bridge the gap of the past and the present.126

In his restoration of the Chowmahalla palace he uses skilled longstanding arts and crafts traditions to restore the stucco lime plaster and the terracotta balusters. Mehrotra points out that India is too influenced by principles from the UK which do not fit in an Indian context because the crafts are still very much alive in India. Unlike in the UK where most of the crafts have died out.127 A point which Marshall also brings to our notice as explained earlier. On the current conservation in India he says “…in India the conservation movement is at a very early stage - focusing largely on establishing fundamental rules (often driven solely by the international charters) and thus allowing little room for conjecture and strategy which might employ subjective interpretations”

He argues that the notion of differentiating the old and the new advocated by the Charter of Venice is more applicable in Europe where the renaissance, the industrial revolution and the two world wars have destroyed these traditions of crafts, but in India “such catastrophes have not devastated craft 124. Ibid., 348.

125. Ibid., 348.

126. Ibid., 349.

127. Ibid., 350.

54

beyond recovety, Therefore as craft is alive and continuously evolving, it is capable of endless adaptation.”128 Here he bring to notice the difference in the context of India and Europe.

In conservation in India allowances for new buildings are limited and buildings are seen as ruinous, a view which is probably influenced by the colonial view. The ASI focuses the attention on the survival of the historical building as opposed to them being reinterpreted or reinvented.129

He advocated that craftsmen should be considered as important practitioners of crafts and traditions that were evolving. In his opinion the conservation debate in India needs to shift to one that facilitates change not opposes it where the conservation is integrated in to the urban fabric of the city and responds to the community and that practitioners should focus on ‘constructing significance.”130

The allowance for interventions in historic buildings in India is very limited by state guidelines which are more prone to preserving the building as opposed to intervening in them with contemporary interventions. For this reason there are fewer practices who attempt to contemporarise historic buildings. Even though SPAB’s approach to contemporary interventions has been practiced in Britain in India the state guidelines previously largely limited this possibility.

4.4.2 Approach at the Chowmahalla Palace The Chowmahalla Palace is one of India’s examples of Neoclassical architecture and was built by the Nizam of Hyderabad in the 1750’s. The complex has two main parts each with its owns courtyard. The first courtyard is surrounded by rooms and the second courtyard consists of four 128. Ibid., 350.

129. Ibid., 350.

130. Ibid., 352

55

palaces Aftab Mahal, Mehtab Mahal, Afzal Mahal and the Tahniyat Mahal, between these two courtyard was the most important part of the complex called the Khilwat which housed the Darbar hall otherwise known as the throne room.

Fig. 14. An archival image of the Chowmahalla palace

The Chowmhalla Palace was threatened by encroachment and property disputes and was in a bad condition where it had already lost large parts of the complex from encroachment. It was abandoned for a long period of time and its condition had deteriorated. It was then restored by Rahul Mehrotra in the year 2000.131 The Khilwat was turned into a museum for the Nizams collection and the courtyard with the rooms was turned into a crafts centre. Mehrotra’s approach at the Chowmhalla palace is an intervention that restores parts of the palace using skilled craftsmen.

The interiors have been modernised with glass partitions for the Nizam’s Museum but Mehrotra largely uses restoration for the palace.

131. Swati Sucharita, “Patched up, piece by piece”, last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://epaper.timesofindia. com/Default/Layout/Includes/CREST/ArtWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=CREST&Base Href=TCRM%2F2010%2F10%2F02&ViewMode=HTML&PageLabel=10&EntityId=Ar01000&AppNa me=1.

56

The work was carried out in three main phases the first was a detailed mapping of the site and a study of the buildings through conservation reports the second phase was a structural stabilisation the building and the final phase was where restoration work was carried out and facilities were introduced.132 The restoration was done by using traditional conservation methods like lime plastering and special attention was given to restoring the architectural features such as the granite arches, stucco work and terracotta balusters.133 Restoration of these features were possible because the original methods of making them were still in practice by skilled craftsmen.

Fig. 15. The restoration of a column at the Chowmahalla Palace

Mehrotra’s attention to detail and specificity of material can be observed as the signages in the building were painted by hand and the stones for the curbs are all carved by hand. 134 The exterior walls were finished with hand mixed lime plaster that was as close as possible to the original especially to the shade of the lime plaster.135 The plaster was also made in a kiln by slaking lime on the iste itself. The restorers sought authenticity to repair the terracotta balustrades on some of the palace 132. Rahul Mehrotra Architects, “Restoration of the chowmahalla palace complex”, last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://rmaarchitects.com/architecture/restoration-of-the-chowmahalla-palace-complex/ 133. Elizabeth Gudrais, “Designs for a new India”, Harvard Magazine, last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://harvardmagazine.com/2012/05/designs-for-a-new-india#article-images.

134. Ibid.

135. Ibid.

57

buildings, they tracked down the great-great grandson of the original craftsman.136

Fig. 16. The restoration of a part of the Chowmahalla palace

Mehrotra’s approach is one that is adherent to Marshall’s philosophies from the Conservation Manual which allows ‘restoration’ in some cases. He uses traditional crafts and skills that come from an unbroken line of craftsmen to reproduce parts of the building that add value to the historic building. By doing this he enables the traditions of craftsmen to continue uninterrupted. However 136. Ibid.

58

Marshall’s view on restoration is limited to the Mughal era, as in accordance with him the crafts and tradition of the Mughal era were still ‘living’ although in India there are crafts still surviving from different periods in history and this would make them in a sense ‘living’ crafts as well.

Fig. 17. Craftsmen restoring the lime plaster carvings at the Chowmahalla palace

Mehrotra’s approach is still very different from SPAB’s philosophies in Britain which allowed no ‘restoration’ of any kind. Mehrotra instead influenced by Marshall’s conservation manual has used crafts even in designing the Khilwat Mahal which was converted into a museum. However Mehrotra’s approach to the restoration and the repairs applies great emphasis on the importance of the skill of the craftsmen to do these repair a philosophy very similar to that of SPAB. Through this he advocates that interventions in India must make use of the crafts traditions wherever possible.

The point that Mehrotra is focusing towards is that India is constantly evolving and the needs are changing so it is important for the needs to be answered effectively by conservation that also looks towards the future. A pragmatic approach to things are required and a more open one.

4.3. Is it appropriate to apply SPAB’s approach in India ? What are the main recommendations?

As aforementioned SPAB’s philosophy that repairs should be done with a minimum loss of fabric

59

and through skilled workmanship is one that is already in practice in India through the Conservation Manual and practitioners of the manual like Mehrotra, although SPAB’s stance of no restoration was not followed on the grounds of the justification that was provided by John Marshall that India’s craft and traditions were still alive. Conservation work in India today uses the unbroken line of crafts and traditions for restoring historic buildings in India as SPAB’s approach to no-restoration is still invalid in the present context in India as the crafts and traditions are still alive.

Although SPAB’s pragmatic approach to contemporary interventions which dictates that the new interventions should be fashioned in their own time would be appropriate in India for developing historic buildings with a minimum loss of fabric, but it should be applied with caution as the living craft traditions in India allow for certain parts of the building to be rebuilt maintaining its historicity and authenticity as Marshall advocates earlier. As the National Policy advocates these crafts and traditions should take precedence even in the new interventions.

Alternative methods of contemporary interventions like those done in Britain guided by Powy’s pragmatic approaches could be applied in cases of new additions where the craft traditions are irretrievable.

So it is important that SPAB philosophies if applied in India need to address this context of continuing their crafts. Although mere copying in India is not allowed it still allows reproduction when it comes to monuments of huge historic value or places where the geometric pattern needs to be done. So contemporary interventions in India should acknowledge the crafts tradition and use it skillfully to repair in monuments. It says that sculptures cannot be copied but geometric patterns are allowable if evidences are provided for it.

60

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION Apart from SPAB’s strong stance against restoration of any kind SPAB’s approach to new interventions focused on the minimum loss of fabric through a skilled repair, and advocated that new additions had to be fashioned in their own time. This approach of SPAB was transformed into practical guidelines for new intervention by A. R. Powys and evidences of this approach can be seen in the examples of the Astley Castle, the Neues Museum and the Coventry Cathedral. In these instances new additions have been made by retaining the historic building’s material honesty and intervening with an intervention which was contemporary.

SPAB’s approach however in Britain has been very influential in its approaches on heritage bodies and international charters because of its clear pragmatic principles for new additions that lay emphasis on material honesty yet support contemporary architecture. What makes their approaches very relevant to today is that they provide practical technical guidelines to maintain honesty in buildings. Some of the key practitioners that use this method are Julian Harrap, Witherford Watson Mann and the late Sir Basil Spence.

Owing to the British colonial rule in India SPAB’s philosophy had a large impact on the conservation philosophies that were adopted in India, evidence of which can be seen in the Conservation Policy of 2013 and the Conservation Manual. SPAB’s no restoration approach was however not adopted as Marshall had justified restoration in India based on it living tradition of arts and crafts.

SPAB’s approach is still relevant in India because of its pragmatic approach to contemporary interventions while maintaining the historic fabric. Yet it would have to be applied in caution as SPAB’s approach to contemporary interventions in India would have to embrace India’s ‘living

61

heritage’ of crafts and traditions and the contemporary interventions could make use of them not as reproductions of an earlier lost art, but as evidences of the continuity of the crafts and traditions in alignment with Marshall’s view in 1923. This could however apply to all living crafts and traditions and not only the Mughal era as Marshall had previously done.

The topic of contemporary interventions in India is still in its nascent stage where state policies have only recently allowed for selective development in historic buildings. However there are practitioners like Mehrotra that advocate for contemporary interventions in historic buildings using traditional crafts and methods in a contemporary manner, a notion that aligns with SPAB’s methods of using traditional crafts in a contemporary manner.

In conclusion the main recommendations for the application of SPAB’s approach to contemporary interventions in India would be that India’s long standing arts and crafts tradition would have to take precedence while intervening in a building and in cases where these traditions were irretrievable new contemporary design which is environmentally sustainable can be advocated using SPAB’s pragmatic material centric approach that protects the material honesty of the historic building.

These interventions could be guided by experts who first the cultural significance of a building and its fabric before any interventions.

62

BIBLIOGRAPHY ASI, Annual progress report of the superintendent archaeological survey hindu and buddhist monuments, Northern circle, Lahore: C. M. Gazette press, 1915 ASI, Annual progress report of the Archaeological Survey of India. Simla: Government of India Press, 1921.

Brandi, Cesare. “Theory of Restoration”.Translated by Cynthia Rockwell. Florence: Nardini Editore, 1977.

Burman, Peter and Michael Stratton. Conserving the Railway Heritage: Oxon: Routledge, 1997.

Campbell, Louise. “Towards a new cathedral: the competition for Coventry Cathedral 1950-51”.

Architectural History. Vol. 35., SAHGB Publications Limited, 1992

Central public works department, Handbook of Conservation of Heritage Buildings 2013. last accessed 15 April, 2014. http://cpwd.gov.in/Publication/ConservationHertBuildings.pdf.

Darley, Gillian, “Inhabiting the ruin: Witherford Watson Mann at Astley Castle”. Architecture Today, last accessed 15 May, 2014, http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767.

Glendinning Miles, The Conservation Movement Oxon: Routledge, 2013.

Harrap, Julian. “An Approach Philosophy”. The best in heritage, last accessed 15 April, 2014, http://www.thebestinheritage.com/presentations/search/neues-museum,204.html Herringham, Christiana to SPAB, Annual report of the SPAB, 1907, quoted in Indra Sengupta,

63

A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/sangeetha/ Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf.

ICOMOS. “The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter)”, last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.heritage.tas.gov.au/media/pdf/The%20Burra%20 Charter%201999adopted.pdf, 2.

ICOMOS. “The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments 1931”. last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/ charters-and-standards/167-the-athens-charter-for-the-restoration-of-historic-monuments.

ICOMOS. “The Charter of Venice”. last accessed March 12, 2014, http://www.icomos.org/ charters/venice_e.pdf, Article 11.

Jokilehto, Jukka, A History of Architectural Conservation. Oxford: Reed educational and professional publishing Ltd., 1999 Marshall John, Conservation Manual. Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1923 Marshall, John to Duncan Smith. December 28, 1906. Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeology File no. 202, quoted in Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 25.

Mehrotra, R. Conservation and Change: Questions for Conservation Education in Urban India, Built Environment (1978-), Vol. 33, No. 3, Built Heritage Conservation Education, Published by: Alexandrine Press, 2007 National Conservation Policy for Monuments, Archaeological Sites and Remains Protected by

64

Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeological Survey of India, draft: 2013, last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://asi.nic.in/pdf_data/draft_national_conservation_policy_monuments.pdf.

Powys, A. R.. Repair of Ancient Buildings London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929

Rahul Mehrotra Architects. “Restoration of the chowmahalla palace complex”, last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://rmaarchitects.com/architecture/restoration-of-the-chowmahalla-palace-complex/ Ruskin, John. “The Seven Lamps of Architecture”. 1880. Reprint, New York: Dover Publications, 1989.

Scott, G. G.. “A plea for the faithful restoration of our ancient churches”. London: John Henry Parker Sengupta, Indra. A Conservation code for the colony. last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf Spence, Basil The Phoenix at Coventry. London: Geoffrey Bles Ltd.,1962 Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010 Sucharita, Swati. “Patched up, piece by piece”, last accessed on May 15, 2014, http://epaper. timesofindia.com/Default/Layout/Includes/CREST/ArtWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&S kin=CREST&BaseHref=TCRM%2F2010%2F10%2F02&ViewMode=HTML&PageLabel=10& EntityId=Ar01000&AppName=1.

The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), Repair not Restoration: London, 1977.

Donovan, A. E. William Morris and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings: New York:

65

Routledge, 2008 Turner, Thackeray to the SPAB, 12 October 1906. ASI, Archaeology File no. 202, 1906, quoted in Indra Sengupta, A Conservation code for the colony, last accessed March 12, 2014, file:///Users/ sangeetha/Downloads/9783642358692-c1.pdf, 29.

The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB). The second annual meeting of the society, Report of the committee: N.P:n.p, 1879 The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), The eleventh annual meeting of the committee, Report of the committee:N.P:n.p, 1888

IMAGE CITATION 1. Sangeetha K.T, “The Front cover of the Repair of Ancient Buildings”.2014 2. SPAB, “Drawing of a 19th century repair.” Accessed 2014. http://www.spab.org.uk/what-isspab-/spab-s-purpose/ 3. K.T, Sangeetha. “The Front cover of the Conservation Manual.”2014 4. “The Coventry cathedral after the Second world war.” Accessed 2014. http://www.eif.co.uk/ sites/default/files/styles/event_header_image/public/media/brochure_and_website_only_lebrecht_68535_ruins_of_coventry_cathedral_copy_2.jpg?itok=5VMwLEXK 5. Basil Spence, “The elevation of the Coventry cathedral as drawn by Sir Basil Spence,” The Phoenix at Coventry, 1962.

6. Basil Spence, “The floor plan of the old and new cathedral,” The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland, http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/284699/ photographs/warwickshire+coventry+priory+street+cathedral+of+st+michael/?show=all.

7. Helen Binet, “The ruins of the Astley castle before the intervention,” http://www.wwmarchi-

66

tects.co.uk/subpage/public_buildings/astley_castle.php?view=pb 8. Architecture Today, “The ruins of the Astley castle after the intervention,”http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767 9. Design boom, “The new and the old in the Astley castle.,” http://www.designboom.com/ architecture/2013-riba-stirling-prize-winner-astley-castle-warwickshire-09-26-2013/ 10. Architecture Today, “The crafted Oak staircase,”http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=23767 11. Staatliche Muzeen Zu Berlin, “The main hall of the Neues Museum,”The Neues Museum Berlin: Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage. Leipzig: E. A. Seemann Verlag of Seemann Henschel GmbH & Co, 2010 12. Powys, A. R..”An illustration of the‘repair by building’ that Powys advocate”, Repair of Ancient Buildings London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1929 13. The Architectural review, “An illustration of the central wall of the Astley castle,” http://www. architectural-review.com/buildings/stirling-prize-winner-astley-castle-renovation-by-witherford-watson-mann/8630748.article 14. Lala Deen Dayal, “An archival image of the Chowmahalla palace” 1880, An archival image of the Chowmahalla palace 15. RMA Architect, “The restoration of a column at the Chowmahalla Palace,” Harvard magazine, 2012, http://harvardmagazine.com/2012/05/designs-for-a-new-india#article-images 16. RMA Architect, “The restoration of a part of the Chowmahalla palace,” Harvard magazine, 2012, http://harvardmagazine.com/2012/05/designs-for-a-new-india#article-images 17. G. Ramakrishna, “Craftsmen restoring the lime plaster carvings at the Chowmahalla palace”, The Hindu, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/chowmahalla-palace-being-spruced-up-for-cop11/article3884383.ece

67

68

69

70