For the ASI archaeologists, the philosophy of conservation is still bound between the covers of John Marshall's handbook on the conservation of historical monuments, written in 1903. Marshall believed that the preservation of a structure was more important than its restoration. The catchword here was authenticity.

In 1873, the British government assigned the task of protecting monuments to local governments, but repair work became the duty of the Centre. Although a "Committee of Taste" was assigned to oversee, the actual work of restoration was left to the insensitive engineers of the public works department. Largescale preservation of monuments began in 1937, when the decaying sculptures of the Elephanta caves were chemically treated, with spectacular results. However, it was only in 1944 that the ASI took up conservation with an archaeologist directing the effort. Today, the ASI looks after 3530 historic monuments and manages about 30 museums.

The ASI's conservation efforts in restoring the Angkor Vat temple in Cambodia have received acclaim internationally. It has, nevertheless, been flayed at home for using Victorian restoration methods and for not,employing specialised architects for Indian monuments. Critics add that several monuments suffer neglect. Says,Ratish Nanda, secretary, Delhi Conservation Society, ,"We have too many monuments and it is not in the Indian ethos to visit them. To survive, a monument must be used. The National Trust in England looks after 40,000 sites, and is a success story because it has fine-tuned tourism to sell its monuments."

But "selling monuments" is a contentious issue. When the Taj upped its entry rates, many insiders in the ASI opposed the measure. Says B M Pande, director,publications, ASI, "The Taj belongs to every Indian in the country."