Read more and download this stunningly beautiful catalogue : http://www.francescagalloway.com/i/home/ce.pdf

Architectural Drawings by Agra Draughtsmen J.P. Losty The Mughal monuments of Agra and its vicinity were already greatly admired when the British established themselves in Agra in the years after the capture of the city from the Marathas in 1803. Drawings by Agra draughts- men of the great Mughal buildings and of details of their marble and inlay decoration form a regular part of the many albums and sets of drawings made in the period 1803–40. These drawings were necessitated partly as a conse- quence of the need to conserve the Mughal monuments such as the Taj Mahal and Akbar’s tomb at Sikandra. There is much correspondence for instance be- tween London and Calcutta about the necessity to keep these particular tombs in good repair and a Committee was set up in 1808 precisely to do this. In 1813 the Court of Directors of the East India Company requested plans of these buildings to be sent to London. There is no trace now of any plan being sent, but the album of drawings of the Taj Mahal and Akbar’s tomb, commis- sioned by George Steell, the Executive Engineer in Agra 1807–13, would seem to have been sent instead (Archer 1972, no. 131). Other albums of drawings of these and other monuments quickly followed Steell’s album. At first commissioned by the Company’s men, such as General Lionel Smith or John Bax of the Bombay civil service (ibid. nos. 135, 142) and many others whose patronage is now lost, they subsequently became collectors’ items in their own right. High ranking tourists such as Lady Nugent (1812), wife of the Commander-in-Chief Sir George Nugent, Lady Hastings (1815), wife of the Governor-General Lord Moira afterwards Marquess of Hastings, and the artist Robert Home (1820s) collected them into albums. Lady Nugent’s album, which was given by her to her kinsman the Duke of Buckingham at Stowe, is now in the British Library (partially published in Koch 2006). Lady Hastings’ album remained with her descendants the Marquess of Bute’s family until sold at Christie’s (London 25 May 1995, lots 4-19) and is now dispersed. Home’s album remained in India to be acquired by Thomas Holbein Hendley in Jaipur. Hendley was one of the earliest men to take an interest in Indian art and architecture (see Bautze 1998, p. 219). It was sold in the 1980s and is now dispersed – its contents are listed by Bautze (p. 219). Our album of monuments of Agra was originally bound in a folio volume with the word Agra embossed on the cover in a gilt decorated panel in Regency style that was probably done in London. The range of watermarked dates on the paper (between 1801 and 1815) suggests that it was a collection of drawings by different hands put together at different times before being bound into the album. The supplementary covering papers are also watermarked 1815, indicating that the whole album was put together by 1820 at the latest. These drawings are based on European architectural drawings and make consistent use of single- and double-point perspective for the first time in Indian painting. They imitate architectural draughtsmen’s drawings, in that there is not at first any background in which the buildings are set, except for a perfunctory indication of the River Jumna in front of the Agra fort or Taj Mahal. Around 1820, these artists began to place the buildings in their sur- roundings and to add figures, turning them into picturesque drawings. Here however in the first fifteen years of this artistic movement, the artists were to- tally concerned with the accuracy of their elevations and of the inlaid decora- tions which embellish the buildings. They combined a secure command of European perspective with an Indian painterly passion for precise and metic- ulous detail, no matter how small or indistinguishable to the unaided eye. Agra draughtsmen like any other Indian artists also preferred to work from already existing drawings and sketches, the earliest datable of which appear so far to be those done for George Steell referred to above, the British engineer in charge of the conservation of the Taj Mahal and Akbar’s tomb. It was Steell’s artists who must have drawn the buildings from life for the first time, probably in multiple copies, while subsequent artists worked from charbas based on them. As a rough rule of thumb, the earlier the date of the drawing, as determined often by the watermarked date in the paper, the closer it is to the original concept in its execution of the perspective and the fineness of the detail. The names of only two of these artists names are known: Shaikh Ghulam Ahmad who drew a plan and elevation of the walls of the Agra fort 1812–15 (Losty 1989, fig. 1) and Latif, whose work is known only from two major sets of the 1820s (that of John Bax, Archer 1972, no. 142, and Robert Home, Bautze, no.55). Latif was also an architect and inlayer of semi-precious stones into marble. We know from Fanny Parks that he designed the tomb in Agra of the mercenary John Hessing (d. 1803) while she also mentio

Those of us who are ready to run down on the British must acknowledge that it is the British who saved our precious monuments from assured destruction. Recall how Akbar's tomb at Sikandra (pictured above) was plundered by our own people and his bones and treasures like books, robes, and arms were burnt. How the massive silver gates of the Taj Mahal were melted and taken away by our own people. It was the British who restored the area around the Qutub Minar, Taj Mahal, Sikandra, and hundreds of other noble monuments important to our heritage. They also established the Archaeological Survey of India (under Sir Alexander Cunningham) who preserved these great mounments, but I feel the ASI could do a better job now. They are falling short in that. I must admit that some marble work was taken out of these monuments (like Taj Mahal) initially by some British officers and they tried to sell them in London. It did not fetch a good price so this practice was quickly abandoned. That was lucky for everyone.

Asad ~ ... Now let's not get carried away ! ... The British were always convinced of their own inherent ' cultural ' supieriority ( if not, indeed, ' racial ' supierority ) above and beyond anything else of ' value ' that they discovered in the ' mysterious East'. In the early days the British tried to adapt themselves to Indian ways ~ but ~ when they realised that this would not work, they changed the rules to suit their own advantage... Having said that ~ the British have always venerated tradition and have made strong efforts to preserve that which they value as worthy of preserving... it was this instinct that was exported whence we wandered abroad ~ when viewed with such hindsight, I feel the British 'contribution' to international heritage protection has been a very worthy one ...

Very true, Julian. You have nicely summed up the core aspects of the British tradition and personality. There are a few things that we can still learn from them.

All ancient races were 'convinced of their own cultural superiority'. It was only when they were challenged by the might, power, advanced military technology and domination of the white races from early 15th century onwards...did the white race start believing themselves to be superior (lets ignore the Greeks and Romans for a moment, or else we have to bring in the ancient Hindus, Egyptians and the IVC etc as well) … and made the others feel inferior to them. A cursory glance of world history makes one immediately understand that the Chinese, Japanese, Hindus, Arabs, American Indians, Zulus etc were all convinced of their inherent cultural superiority and sense of beauty. In fact many Brahmins to this day feel convinced about it ! Strange as it may sound...the Brahmins even called the white man as 'Mleccha' ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mlechha ) ! Role reversal…only in a different time-frame. In fact, most of the proud African cultures were absolutely convinced that 'black was indeed beautiful' and that the white skin was not...until they were colonized by the white man and made to feel ugly. Needless to say the largest selling cosmetic in the whole of Africa (maybe in India too !) today are the 'skin-whitening and fairness creams'. One of the most important tools in the method of 'colonizing' has been the use religion through missionaries. Bereft and deprived of their religion...the colonized people lost their roots, history and sense-of-self....and finally their land too. They soon became a lost people. As Bishop Desmond Tutu so cleverly articulated, "When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said "Let us pray." We closed our eyes. When we opened them, we had the Bible and they had the land. " I guess the issue here is not of 'superiority' but of 'insularity' ! But without a doubt, the "British 'contribution' to international heritage protection has been a worthy"…if not a stellar contribution !

When one looks at the state of scientific, cultural, social and economic development, one cannot deny that the western people are 'superior' but I don't think this superiority is written in their genes. It is just that in Asian and African countries, there has been slavery, domination, corruption, addiction, exploitation, and religion entrenched for centuries. All of these factors have prevented those people from reaching their full potential for advancement. Different races do have different characteristics (like musical, athletic, or intellectual ability) and there may be a genetic basis for it, but the superiority of the western races - at present - seems largely (but not exclusively) due to the environment in which they are raised. This is why I say that there is still much to learn from the West; the Chinese are among the first to realize that.

Cultural superiority ???...I am sure you didnt mean that ! Of course no country can match the scale of economic development of China today. As I said earlier, its all a matter of time-frame. Wonder what we would be speaking in 2025.

I mean "overall cultural development" of the West without denigrating our Eastern cultures which are different.

"Hatred is something peculiar. You will always find it strongest and most violent where there is the lowest degree of culture." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

The Germans are a culturally advanced people. I don't understand how could they become so full of hatred for the Jews and Gypsies during the Nazi period. Brainwashing?

Re: " One of the most important tools in the method of 'colonizing' has been the use religion through missionaries. " I must disagree with you on this point RBSI ~ I feel that the role of the ' missionary' has been greatly over emphasized in the colonial narrative. In the British context ' religion ' was hardly of any significance whatsoever... it was certainly not a motivating factor behind the will to 'colonise '~ beyond a very vaguely defined desire to export certain 'cultural' values, of the 'take it on the chin, fair play at all times and church on a sunday morning' variety ! Missionaries were expressly forbidden by the EIC from travelling to India until the 1820s ~ and when they were eventually permitted their activities were not officially sanctioned and despite the good works that they carried out (school building and so on) they were viewed as meddlesome trouble-makers in government circles.

Will post a few references later to validate my argument...

Julian Craig : It might not have been an overt strategy as you have mentioned...but the missionaries could not have progressed without covert support by the British Government : British rule and British Christianity in India By Joseph Kingsmill http://www.archive.org/stream/britishruleandb01kinggoog#page/n4/mode/2up British India in its relation to the decline of Hindooism, and the progress of Christianity By William Campbell http://www.archive.org/stream/britishindiaini02campgoog#page/n15/mode/2up Advantages of Christianity in promoting the establishment and prosperity of the British government in India : containing remarks occasioned by reading a memoir on the Vellore mutiny By Joshua Marshman http://www.archive.org/stream/advantagesofchri00marsiala#page/n5/mode/2up The life and writings of Bishop Heber: the great missionary to Calcutta http://www.archive.org/stream/lifewritingsofbi00hebeuoft#page/n3/mode/2up

Indian mutiny was 'war of religion' By William Dalrymple http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5312092.stm

The Indian mutiny was strongly influenced by religious preachings by Christian missionaries. A few years ago, I went to see a church near the Company Garden in Meerut where the mutiny started. The church, now abandoned but in good condition, had all kinds of messages written in excellent urdu on its walls to encourage conversion to Christianity. The wooden benches had special racks in front of each row - not to store the holy book - but rifles. The low level missionary activity glued the Hindus and Muslims together against the British. So, it seems unlikely that the 'Honorable' East Indian Company disapproved of missionary activity in India. This low level proselytizing activity ignited the fire of rebellion when the rumor was spread that the cartridges were made of pig or cow fat. The sepoys then were convinced that the Company was out to destroy their religion. The mutiny slogan (I don`t remember the exact words) named religion (deen), the King (mulk), and their local Raja. Now all actions by the missionaries were not so bad. They started schools and hospitals. I went to a Christian school in Mainpuri myself and have fond memories of the kindness of my teachers (Mr Liddle, Mr Chester - who always used to hide a hockey stick specially for me behind a wooden cabinet if I was late in coming to play in the afternoon).

Hello RBSI ~ Thank you for forwarding the interesting links (above). If anythhing they serve to confirm my contention that the 'role of religion has been greatly over emphasised in the colonial narrative.' Books written by clerics or missionaries in the 19th century (as one or two of these are) are bound to have titles that to modern eyes might seem strident or provocative. You should keep in mind, however, that many of the missionaries in India c.1820 -1840 were representatives of the Evangelical school of Christianity ( popular in Britain at this time) that was very much of the tub-thumping, fire and brimstone, bring the 'heathen' from the 'dark to the light' variety and, I have no doubt, might seem either ridiculous and/or offensive to contemporary sensibilities .... but such views were always only ever held by a very small minority of proselytising zealots amongst the British community in India and were certainly not the views of the establishment. I do not agree with pompous, self-publicists like Mr Dalrymple who shout that the Indian mutiny was a 'war of religion' ... Religion ( or rather percieved threats to indigenous Indian religions posed by the 'rise' of Christianity ~ which were largely unfounded by the way) was certainly ONE of the factors, amongst many others, that triggered its outbreak, but there were other equally powerful and deep-rooted cultural motivations behind the conflict ~ the rapid pace of change in many spheres of life, pushed along by the British at a reckless pace in that era (post industrialisation) where secular progress and science were becoming THEIR new Gods, high amongst them. The mutiny, to my mind, has always seemed like something of a small 'c' conservative back-lash by disgruntled elements within Indian society, rather than some sort of radical, populist ' revolution ' as it is so often portrayed in a certain circles today. ... Whilst Christianity was a part of everyday life in the 19th century for most ' Britishers' in India ( as the large number of churches scattered across the country ~ with their companions, the graveyards ~ will atest) for the overwhelming majority who worked within the civil service or the military or in 'trade' it was not their primary focus or reason for being in India ~ furthermore, whilst many would have been happy to mouth Christian platitudes about bringing 'civilisation' to ' heathen' India (and other such patronising Victorian phrases), most would have been firmly convinced that the path to ' civilised 'development lay through the introduction of education and technology and law, rather than through the medium of the Bible or via the pulpit.

Asad ~ Re: " The wooden benches [in the Church ] had special racks in front of each row - not to store the holy book - but rifles." ... I'm afraid that I find this hard to believe ~ are you sure that the 'special racks' were not for some other purpose ? ... Re: " So, it seems unlikely that the 'Honorable' East Indian Company disapproved of missionary activity in India. " ... I can assure you that, until 1813, it was the official policy of the EIC not to interfere with indigenous Indian religious practise in the territories that it controlled ~ and that missionaries were forbidden within these territories ~ profit was always more important to the EIC than proselytizing ! It was only as a result of domestic pressure in Britain that (after 1813) missionaries were allowed out to India in any significant numbers ~ and even then the EIC did not support their activities officially ~ although, of course, it did nothing to proscribe these activities.

Julian: Believe me that I too was astonished to see those wooden holders in front of each bench and could not figure that out since I have never seen anything like that inside any church in North America. My host explained that those slots were made to hold rifles of the soldiers. The church was in reasonable condition but there was just one caretaker and the grass was overgrown. My impression is that there are no services there anymore. This Anglican church is located next to the main military cantonement. My host's ancestors purchased the burnt out 'Kothis' (mansions) of the British officers after the mutiny and acquired great wealth developing the real estate. The area is called 'Jali Kothi' or Burnt Mansions. The Mutiny Memorial - a rather crude piece of sculpture mounted on a tall pillar is located right there. They could have at least built a better memorial to all those - both Indian and British - who lost their lives there. It all began there!

... Asad ~ Re: 'Rifles'... I am not doubting that is what you might have been told ~ I am doubting whether that what you were told is really the truth !! I am glad to hear, however, that at least this particular church remains intact and seems to be looked after to a certain extent ~ so many other colonial-era buildings have been left to go to rack and ruin ...

It is possible that I was misinformed. Those holders were like the holders for coffee mugs in new cars. The Church building was in tact, the grass was overgrown, and there was a caretaker, but no one else. It was quite deserted although located right next to the military cantonement. It may be that there is a service on Sundays but I am not sure of even that. In China, maintenance of churches, mosques, and temples is a government responsibility - it has its advantages and also disadvantages.