An important and interesting document on the preservation of monuments in India. This sets the record straight for those who are unaware or in doubt of the British efforts in preserving the monuments in India. This is a Government publication and has a few frank and candid entries that can only surprise the readers of today. For e.g. the much bandied 'sale of Taj Mahal' by Lord William Bentinck which is all part of the Indian folklore has been mentioned in simple terms in Vol.1 - Page 5 Entry 22: http://bit.ly/1gOZXly But more importantly, this is an accurate historical record that establishes the efforts taken by the British and the methods and systems laid by so many of their dedicated Officers which have been the foundation for archaeological and monument preservation policies in India to this day.

' @ ' The R.B.S.I : Fascinating documents - thank you for digging these up ... If one turns to page nine of the ' First Report for the year 1881-82 ' you will find a citation that begins : " In 1874 preservation of historical monuments in India was advocated in a memorial signed by ..." Followed by a list of the signatories . This list includes a number of very notable names, including - Lord Salisbury (then Secretary of State for India) - George Gilbert Scott (the famous architect) - Charles Trevelyan ( the Grandfather of both the British and Indian Civil Service) - and several other figures - all of whom had some sort of connection, official or otherwise, with the A.S.I. or had promoted its cause, lobbied on its behalf etc. The presence on the list of such powerful and influential representatives of the British establishment came as something of a surprise ! One tends to think of the A.S.I. as , prior to the reforms of the early 1900s, being run by a brains trust of enthusiastic amateurs and academics, in a slightly ramshackle way, with very little sanction or support from the highest circles of government. This document would seem to suggest that this was not entirely the case - and that the need for heritage protection and architectural conservation on the Indian sub-continent was taken really quite seriously. This is also interesting in a wider context : in Britain, during the same period of the late 19th century, there was NO government involvement of any kind in the preservation of significant historical monuments or buildings - and their upkeep was a responsibility that fell entirely upon the shoulders of their respective owners. These documents are an example of very progressive, ' cutting edge ' legislation being introduced by the Indian colonial authorities that led , in time, to the enactment of parallel legislation by parliament, in Britain itself . ( i.e. the Heritage Act of 1913). We have a tendency to assume, today, that this process always worked the other way around - i.e. from London to Calcutta, not from Calcutta to London - not always so !