Context

In his Independence Day speeches, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has consistently urged the public to honour the sacrifices of those who resisted colonial rule. However, these appeals are often more symbolic than practical, typically limited to referencing a few well-known freedom fighters or quoting their words. What is missing is a meaningful call to action—ways for citizens to actively engage with India’s rich and complex historical past.

This tendency toward symbolism reflects the broader approach of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which focuses largely on isolating, repairing, and occasionally beautifying monuments. While these efforts do preserve physical structures, they fall short of grappling with the layered, lived, and evolving realities of India’s historical landscape.

Colonial Legacies and Present Shortcomings

India’s contemporary conservation model is deeply rooted in colonial-era frameworks. British officials, motivated more by administrative convenience than cultural reverence, undertook the cataloguing of monuments and the codification of preservation laws. A defining influence was John Marshall’s Conservation Manual (1923), which emphasized structural restoration and aesthetic landscaping. Nearly a century later, these principles still guide ASI’s operations.

However, surveys, court rulings, and government audits increasingly reveal that many protected monuments are deteriorating, with policy execution inconsistent and often inadequate. Newer approaches, such as allowing corporate entities to adopt monuments, indicate a shift toward privatisation. But this strategy risks transforming heritage into a commodity, thereby alienating it from the collective cultural imagination and diluting its communal significance.

Learning from Gandhi and the Arts of Translation

A more holistic and inclusive path to conservation might begin by revisiting Gandhian ideals—particularly Sarvodaya, Gandhi’s adaptation of John Ruskin’s vision of collective uplift. Gandhi advocated for the dignity of labour, the celebration of craft, and a commitment to community welfare. If these principles are applied to heritage conservation, the focus would extend far beyond structural maintenance to include the wellbeing of local communities and the meaningful engagement of visitors. Monuments could thus evolve into active spaces of learning, creativity, and shared history, rather than remaining static relics behind protective barriers.

Translation offers another powerful metaphor for rethinking conservation. Modern translators understand that fidelity to the past does not mean erasing difference; rather, it involves recognising temporal and linguistic distances. Similarly, conservation work should be transparent, making clear where restoration has occurred. This allows the viewer to discern the historical from the newly added. Just as translators periodically revisit texts to ensure their relevance, conservationists should regularly reassess restoration materials and methods to avoid damaging the integrity of the original structures.

Lessons from Science, Ecology, and the Role of Citizens

Conservation, as the essay suggests, can benefit greatly from interdisciplinary insights, particularly from science and ecology. Wildlife biologists, for instance, emphasise ecosystems over individual species. This approach can inspire conservationists to view monuments not in isolation but as part of broader landscapes that include rivers, forests, and human settlements. In practice, this could mean dismantling boundary walls that currently sever monuments from their natural and social surroundings.

Mycologists, who study fungi—agents of both decay and renewal—offer another valuable analogy. Decaying monuments such as old wells, cisterns, and city walls can be reimagined not as lost causes, but as vital resources: for water storage, wildlife habitat, or even community gathering places.

Economic perspectives further enrich conservation discourse. Economists remind us that value is often tied to function rather than appearance. For instance, the natural ventilation of an old haveli might be more valuable than a newly applied coat of paint. Concepts like scarcity and creative destruction can help justify expanded budgets for conservation and support the reimagining of submerged temples as sites for underwater archaeological research. Across disciplines, the message is consistent: heritage must be dynamic, adaptive, and capable of generating new meanings and uses.

The Role of Citizens

Ultimately, conservation cannot be the sole responsibility of the ASI. In a country as culturally diverse as India, the meaning and method of heritage preservation must be constantly negotiated and contextualised. Citizens have a crucial role to play in this process. They must learn to interpret the language of stone, understanding the biases of builders, giving voice to those silenced by history, and challenging entrenched prejudices.

Monuments, when read critically and empathetically, are not merely historical structures—they become reflections of society, revealing both triumphs and injustices. Through such engagement, ordinary citizens can help shape a vision of India where heritage is not confined to walled-off spaces but is woven into the fabric of daily life. The ultimate aim is to create a nation that is itself a monument without walls—an ongoing, participatory project of cultural preservation and renewal.

Conclusion

India now stands at a crossroads in its approach to heritage conservation. To move forward, it must shed the constraints of colonial-era frameworks and embrace a more inclusive, dynamic, and community-rooted vision. Monuments should no longer be treated as polished remnants of a bygone era but as living, breathing spaces that link people, environments, and histories.

Drawing inspiration from Gandhi’s vision, the nuanced understanding of translators, ecological and scientific insights, and economic pragmatism, both the ASI and the public have the opportunity to collaboratively draft a new conservation manual. This manual would not only preserve stone structures but also honour the multiplicity of voices, memories, and lives that give those structures meaning.