xxviii
INTRODUCTION
history, doesnoteven mention
the Aryan village
community.
Indo-Aryan history has dropped
offthe official
files. The
same authority declares that there is
little Indian sculpture
tobecalled artafterthe fourth century a.d.
Similarly inits
history of Indian architecture,
all of Fergusson's
archaeo-
logical categories of
"
styles
"
arecited as he arranged
them,
but the one vital truthwhich he
told in his history—which
shouldbewrittenupineveryPublic
WorksOfficeandinscribed
in letters of goldover the doorsof
Indian universities—that
theAryan traditionofbuildingisstillaliving
artin India—is
suppressed.
Anglo-Indianbureaucracyis indeedagreat
and splendid
machine, but the familiar proverb, Humanism est
errare, is
not yet written in its code. Sir George Birdwood, who
for
thirtyyears kept the conscienceof the IndiaOffice in artistic
matters, revealed the true spirit of bureaucracy when he
declared that Fergusson had fixed
"
pastallgainsaying"^the
classification of Indian styles of architecture. Any official,
unlesshebe ofthehighestrank,whoimpugns theaccuracyof
Indian history,as itis written officially, is viewed with sus-
picion and risks his prospects in Government service.
My
first venture on that desperate enterprise was to question
thetheory, asserted in official handbooks and propagated by
Governmentmuseumsand schoolsofart,thatIndianever
had
a
"
fineart." Thissuggestionwasreceivedwith mildsurprise
andscepticism,forthehighestmedicalauthoritieshadsaid
that
Indian
artistswere
totallyignorantofanatomyandperspective.
But as art teaching is never takenveryseriously
by British
statesmen, itwas not considered a
very dangerous doctrine.
Soaftermanyyears Indian finearthasatlast
been put
onthe
officialfile, and Mr.Abanindro
NathTagore's recentdiscovery
that India has averyperfect and practical
systemof
artistic
^
"Journal
oftheEastIndia
Association,"January
1913,
p.22.