Man who brought back Nataraja

Arguing for the return of a Nataraja idol from a private collector, India presented evidence to prove it was smuggled out of Tamil Nadu, but the turning point happened when archaeologist Ramachandran Nagaswami was called to give evidence in a special court in London. After presenting his case for four days and being cross-examined for the fifth, when Nagaswami stepped down from the stand, it was clear that the Chola bronze would return to its homeland. Nagaswami, who died at his Chennai home on Sunday at the age of 91, was a man of purpose.

A recipient of Padma Bhushan and Kalaimamanai awards, Nagaswamy was born on August 10, 1930. After completing his masters in Sanskrit, he pursued his doctoral studies in Poona University in arts and archaeology. After a stint as a curator of Madras Museum, he joined the department of archaeology, Tamil Nadu and became its first director in 1966, and retired in 1988. It is to his credit that the Irumporai inscriptions at Pugalur near Karur (Chera) of the first century were taken up for protection. He has done extensive work on Gangaikonda Cholapuram, Thirumalai Nayak Mahal at Madurai and the Danish fort at Tharangambadi.

Nagaswamy was noted for his exemplary scholarship, knowledge and strength of language, especially Tamil and Sanskrit – and his ability to identify bronzes for their time. The Nataraja idol story is a thriller. In 1976, Ramamurthy, a farmer of Pathur village in Nannilam Taluk of Thanjavur district, was digging a field belonging to the Sri Viswanatha Swamy temple when he struck upon some bronze idols. Unaware or unmindful of the Treasure Trove Act, 1878, the farmer decided to sell it.

Mujbul Hussain, a beedi merchant of Trichy, offered Ramamurthy ?200 for the Nataraja, one of the idols, with a promise of more later. Hussein sold the idol for ?1500 to a man called Paul Nadar who passed it on to an idol dealer in Mumbai for ?30,000. The subsequent passage of the bronze from India to London and its purchase by Robert Borden, chairman of the Canada-based Bumper Development Corporation, for ?57.5 lakh showed the network’s efficiency.

When the bronze needed cleaning, it was handed over to a specialist employee of the British Museum. The Scotland Yard chanced upon this idol, and promptly took possession of it before lodging a complaint with the London special court. In the meantime, Julian Sherrier, an art dealer, falsely claimed that the bronze was in his possession for some years to show that it did not come from India recently.

With assistance from the Tamil Nadu government, the Indian government argued that the idol was stolen from Viswanatha Swamy temple in Pathur in Thanjavur district. Investigation by Tamil Nadu CID under IGP Sri Rajasekharan Nair found that the idol was indeed unearthed from the temple field where it was buried along with others, to protect them from Muslim invaders. A petition was filed by Sivakami, the consort of Nataraja, claiming the statue, and Indian envoy P C Alexander represented Sivakami in the court where the Queen’s Counsel Adrian Hamilton was assisted by the London-based Indian barrister Baskar Ghorpade.

The farmer, Maqbool Hussein and Nadar were taken to London. The Government retained the forensic expert Pakkiriswamy Chandra Sekharan and archaeologist Nagaswamy who stood out as the most important person to prove the case. Over five days of proceedings, Nagaswamy proved that the styling of the bronze was distinctively of Chola vintage. Citing the Agamas, he described how when a temple was threatened by invaders, its deities should be buried in a particular manner. When he was asked how a temple in ruins and where no worship continued could lay claim to its deities, his agama citations led to the judge concluding that if even one stone of the temple exists on its site, the temple exists. Sivakami won the case. A court dismissed the petitioners’ appeal with cost and awarded the Pathur temple damages of some 1,000 British pounds.

The case, which started in August 1982, set a record for an Indian case in the UK having finished in just 44 working days. Hamilton and Ghorpade maintained: “Once a deity, always a deity. An idol remains a juristic person, however long buried or damaged, since the deity and its juristic entity survive the total destruction of its earthly form.” They argued that the temple’s rights were not affected by the mere fact of the idol’s clandestine removal and export.

If the arguments sounded offbeat, Justice Kennedy’s judgment was fascinating. He said he was entirely “persuaded” that the London Nataraja was indeed the Pathur Nataraja. The judge concluded: “A juristic entity, which has a title to the Nataraja, is superior to that of the defendant.” The judge congratulated Nagaswamy and specially mentioned the flawless deposition provided a solid base.

Nagaswamy’s passing is a loss to the knowledge base of archaeology in Tamil Nadu.