JOIN USWe need an Act worthy of Kempegowda
The Karnataka government recently announced its plan to develop 46 sites associated with Kempegowda. These sites are listed in The Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Heritage Area Development Authority Act, enacted for “the development and maintenance of the heritage sites, tourist places and monuments of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda.”
The Act lists 46 sites in Bengaluru, Tumakuru, Chikkaballapura and Ramanagara districts as being heritage sites and monuments. It is unclear what processes or criteria were used to select these particular places. Forts, temples, mandapas and other structures around Magadi, Savandurga, Shivagange, Devanahalli, Avatihalli and elsewhere are included in the list, as is the recently discovered samadhi in Kempapura.
Inexplicably, so are the Kempegowda Museum and Kempegowda Study Centre, both of which are proposed but have not yet been set up. The list includes the Kote Venkataramanaswamy temple in Bengaluru, which was consecrated by Chikkadevaraja Wodeyar, and the Bengaluru Fort, which is usually ascribed to Chikkadevaraja Wodeyar and owes its present form to Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan. In Bengaluru Urban district, we also have the catch-all ‘Lakes and Kalyanis’, which erroneously suggests that all such waterbodies in Bengaluru were established by Kempegowda.
Surprisingly, some sites that are incontrovertibly linked to the visionary founder are excluded, such as the Ranganathaswamy temple in Bengaluru, where an inscription dated 1628 CE refers to Yelahanka Nadaprabhu Kempegowda’s grandson, Immadi Kempegowda.
A few monuments in the schedule are already protected by the Archaeological Survey of India, such as Bengaluru Fort and Devanahalli Fort. A few are under the aegis of Karnataka’s Department of Archaeology, Museums and Heritage. The Act specifies that the government can acquire any sites that are not already under its control. However, there is no mention and hence no clarity on whether these sites will then be declared as ‘heritage’.
Buildings and sites declared heritage would come under the purview of the Karnataka Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, which regulates construction and development activities around such heritage monuments. If they are not specifically notified as heritage, construction and modifications in and near monuments and sites listed in the Kempegowda Act will not be legally proscribed.
Indeed, the focus of the Act seems to be more on tourism and construction, less so on highlighting the architectural and other contributions of Kempegowda. The two need not be mutually exclusive, but the priority will determine the trajectory of any development.
The Act calls for development plans to be prepared for the heritage sites and monuments specified. It is heartening to see that first and foremost on the list of things that can form part of these development plans is ‘conservation and restoration of the heritage site’. Archaeological excavations and explorations can also be undertaken. However, the rest of the activities that can form part of development plans are mostly tourism-related, such as constructing choultries, lodges, hotels, restaurants; providing facilities for communication and transport; construction and reconstruction of buildings, and so on. Some of the items mentioned cause grave disquiet, like shopping complexes, artificial waterfalls, lakes with boating and water games and ‘other such tourist attractions.’
The Kempegowda Development Authority is supposed to oversee the development and maintenance of these sites and monuments. The Authority comprises MPs and MLAs from constituencies in and around Bengaluru, bureaucrats from various government departments and six non-official nominated experts in the history and heritage of the Kempegowda period. Though the Act is ostensibly about heritage, there are no archaeologists, planners, conservation architects or environmental experts included in the Authority.
These flaws and lacunae in the Kempegowda Heritage Area Development Authority Act can be overcome fairly easily. A larger question is whether there is a need for such an Act. Certainly, we should celebrate and highlight the founder of the city. But is a compartmentalisation of history, heritage and geography the best way to approach this? It behoves us to look at heritage in the context of the cultural and natural landscape that it is embedded and enmeshed in. Further, the region around Bengaluru has several historical layers, from over two millennia ago to more recent times. It would not be practical or advisable to have multiple Authorities and Acts for every period or dynasty that has left its stamp on the city and its environs.
For these reasons, an alternative strategy might be to dovetail some parts of the Kempegowda Heritage Area Development Authority Act with the Zonal Regulations (Amendment) of 2020, which apply to all heritage sites, buildings, precincts and natural features declared under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961.
As per the Zonal Regulations, Heritage Conservation Committees in each district – or in Bengaluru, an Urban Art Commission – will draw up a list of heritage monuments and sites for protection. These monuments will be graded into different categories depending on their heritage value. All the monuments mentioned in the Kempegowda Heritage Area Development Authority Act (except the Museum and the Study Centre) could have been identified in these lists. If required, additional and separate guidelines could have been made for them within the framework of the same regulations.
It is unfortunately true that most districts do not yet have Heritage Conservation Committees, nor has Bengaluru’s Urban Art Commission been revived. But had the government set these bodies up, as is required by the Zonal Regulations, we could have made much progress towards protecting and highlighting Kempegowda’s legacy as well as the region’s other tangible pasts.
The proposed Kempegowda Study Centre is a welcome initiative. While we have an airport, road, hospital and other institutions named after him, we need further deep and scholarly research into Kempegowda’s life, times and legacy.
A Kempegowda Museum is similarly much-needed. The small museum that was earlier housed at Mayo Hall was a good step but we hope to see something far more substantial that will help people appreciate Kempegowda’s foresightedness and his enduring stamp on the region around Bengaluru.
(Meera Iyer is the author of Discovering Bengaluru and the Convener of INTACH Bengaluru Chapter)