instance, nowadays all children the world over are taught in school that the earth is round, and they are all given the same proofs for it. These proofs are scientific proofs which do not include artistic, aesthetic, ethical or utilitarian considerations. Now I do not suggest that for anyone to reject this is to return to teaching that the earth is flat. What I am concerned is with asking whether the more important questions might be, 'Is the earth a living creature or not?' Is it a living creature like 'Mother Earth' or is the latter expression to be taken as purely metaphorical? If we decide that the earth is a living creature then we have to discuss it in the context of a theory of what life is, what living creatures are, and what implications this view has for our active attitude to the environment. I want to argue that, apart from or along with its content, the particular manner of forming a question, and the form of the answer expected, really define and constitute the cultural universe in which a particular age, a nation and class thinks and lives. To concretise such questions therefore is to define a particular view-point toward history. If we can come to grips with these questions in India today, we shall have to make up our own mind independently as to what has happened in modem in the world of knowledge and to decide whether there did exist alternate non-dominant traditions and underground tendencies, which could redefine the official history as handed down to us. One possible framework for our search would be to divide the history of modern European culture into three periods or phases: the period of creativity or the Gopernican Age (1500-1650); then the period of institutionalization (1650-1800) when scientific organisations and scientific journals really got established in Britain, France and Germany; and thirdly the period when this pattern of organisation and system of thinking were diffused through the world under colonial rule (1800-1950). One may then look for certain events or certain individuals from each period through whom one could discover and demonstrate tendencies that have been ignored by established histories. For instance, around 1500; instead of re-studying Copernicus I looked for someone who would be as modern but perhaps in some other sense, i.e. linked to what has been called the radical Reformation as well as the Renaissance and perhaps the peasant war in Germany. A good candidate was Paracelsus (1493-1541) who is already known to be important in the history of chemistry and medicine and also involved in the history of magic, but whose importance in the history of religion and politics is yet to be discovered. I now believe that it is possible to show that there existed a Paracelsian revolution just as much as there was a Copemican Journal of Arts and Ideas ' 39