5134939245

32-33. National Museum, New Delhi.

32. Saint Afargaret in Attitndc of Prayer (Flan-ders), polychromcd stonc, c. 1480. 84 x 20 cm.

32.    Sainte Margnerite en pricre (Flandre), pierre polychrome, vers 1480. 84 X 20 cm.

33.    Setne of Execntion in Prestnee of a Bi shop and Cburcb Dignitarics (France), polychromcd oak, ijth ccntury. 45.5 x 47 cm.

33.    Setne d'e.\óei/tion en presence d'tm iriąue et d’antres dignitaires eccUsiastiąues (France), chenc polychrome, xv^e sićclc. 45,5 X 47 cm.

34.    Saint holding a book [St. John?] (Southern Germany), polychromcd oak, 15th ccntury. 81 X 28 cm.

34. Saint tenant tm linę [saint Jean?) (AUemagne meridionale), chćnc polychrome, xv« siecle. 81 X 28 cm.

3j. Yirgin and Cbild (Lorraine, France), polychromcd sandstonc, c. 1330-1350.70 x 31.5 cm.

33. La Vierge et l'Enfant (Lorraine, France), gres polychrome, vcrs 1330-1350. 70 X 31,5 cm.

and cducational cnlightcnment of students and the generał public. The idea of exchangc quickly found a sympathetic response within India itself, where exchangc of art objects between museums had not bcen freguent carlier but had occasion-ally occurred. In India, likewise, success in ar-ranging exchanges proved slow but could be somewhat morę rapid than the morę complex international exchanges.

The National Museum has, from its founding, had coflcctions representing all parts of India, all types of its art materials and all periods. Other museums of the country, with very few excep-tions (outstanding cxamplcs: Indian Museum, Calcutta: Princc of Wal es Museum,' Bombay; Goyernmcnt Museum,^- Madrasj, have been devotcd exclusivcly to the archaeology and arts of their immcdiate area, often in overflowing abundance, to the point where exhibition space is crowded and storagc space is clogged with what are multiple examples of equally good pieces, of the same or closcly related subjccts, of the same style and the same period—“dupli-cates” in some cases, in the precise meaning of the term archaeologically speaking, or “equiva-lents”, which is morę usual. As soon as the National Museum opened in its new building from carly 1961, cfforts began to be madę, by consultation, discussion of museum techniques and examination of approved international practices, to cncouragc exchanges among Indian museums for the improvement in nadon-widc representation and divcrsihcation of their cxhi-bitions. The National Museum and the State and other museums, as weU as the Archacological Survcy of India began to plan cxchanges under a diyersity of plans. The aim was to make morę complctc the all-Indian representation of the National Museums’ collcctions, and to havc in New Delhi art pieces of fine quality from differ-ent parts of the country which might be consid-cred their cultural “ambassadors” at the Capital. As a rcsult the National Muscurrfs collections havc incrcascd sclectively and significantly. For other museums in the country also exchangc was advantagcous. Many of the major State museums havc broadened their own collections to include finc and instructivc cxamplcs of pieces from other parts of India, to scrvc as comparison with the locał production and often meaningful in terms of style and period in relation to the placc’s own arts. The rcsultshave bccnagrcatimprovc-ment in museums throughout the country, especially from the point of view of education in history, culturc and art of India’s long past. Along with this striving for morę rcprcscntatiyc collcctions has gonc the development of a kccncr requiremcnt for quality in cxhibitcd materiał, but also marked progrcssive improve-ment in the manner of its cxhibition. Uncsco’s project for international exchanges must be rccognizcd as a stimulus to museum growth in India and is surę to providc a continuing incen-tive to museum progress.

241