Mystery in Bangladesh: Whose Home Is Being Called Satyajit Ray’s Ancestral House? | World News
Dhaka/New Delhi: A crumbling structure at Mymensingh in Bangladesh has stirred a storm across social media. It was claimed that the property was the ancestral home of renowned filmmaker Satyajit Ray, now slated for demolition. The debate quickly escalated into a transnational matter.
The Indian government responded with concern. Officials expressed hope that the demolition decision would be reconsidered. It also offered assistance in restoring and preserving the structure, emphasising its historical and cultural value. A statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs referred to the house as one built by Ray’s grandfather and described it as part of Bengal’s literary and cultural legacy.
Echoing the sentiment, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee urged the Bangladesh government to preserve the building. She called the demolition a heartbreaking development, underlining that the Ray family’s importance in Bengali heritage. She asked that the house be seen not just as a building but as part of a larger cultural fabric.
The mounting criticism led Bangladeshi authorities to pause the proposed demolition. The structure in question stands at Harikishore Roy Road in Mymensingh. The land was officially allocated in 2008 to the Bangladesh Shishu Academy, under the Ministry of Women and Children Affairs. The academy had deemed the structure hazardous and proposed constructing a new building in its place.
Did the building truly belong to Ray’s ancestors?
A local official from the Department of Archaeology in Mymensingh confirmed that there is belief within the department that the house may have historical ties to the Ray family. However, it is not yet included in the list of protected heritage structures. He said survey work in the division is ongoing, and until it is complete, no official heritage status can be assigned. The country’s archaeology department has requested that demolition remain on hold and has formally asked the academy for all related documents.
Meanwhile, district officials have contested the claims. Mufidul Alam, deputy commissioner of the district, said in a meeting with stakeholders that the structure had no known connection to Ray’s lineage. His stance was supported by a local researcher (Swapna Dhar) affiliated with Qazi Nazrul Islam University. He cited a 2010 joint study by the Bangladeshi government and a German agency, which identified the building as a temporary residence of philanthropist Ranada Prasad Saha, not of the Ray family.
According to him, another house on the same road, believed to be the one actually connected to Ray’s ancestors, was torn down nearly a decade ago. He added that confusion may have arisen because the road itself was named after a zamindar (landlord) linked to Ray’s family.
Historical sources present a mixed picture. The national encyclopedia of Bangladesh, Banglapedia, records that Ray’s grandfather, Upendrakishore Ray Chowdhury, was born in a nearby village called Masua. He was later adopted by a local zamindar in Mymensingh and took the name Ray Chowdhury. That story places the family in the region, but makes no direct mention of the house now under scrutiny.
An official from the archaeology department explained that the structure does have significant value. Built with lime and mortar, the walls are nearly half a meter thick, pointing to construction methods from over a century ago. Parts of the building had already been demolished before the work was halted.
She also said that in heritage studies, oral histories, books, online material and even folklore are considered relevant. One local historian’s book had mentioned the structure, but not definitively. Her reasoning for a possible Ray family link included the name of the street and circumstantial references in various sources.
But she acknowledged the building remains outside the official heritage registry. The inclusion process, she empasised, requires thorough surveying. That process only began recently in the Mymensingh division and is still incomplete in many sub-districts, including the one where the house is located.
Other historians provided broader context. According to them, the region once had many similar homes owned by Bengali families who migrated long before the partition. Some buildings have been preserved, but many have deteriorated due to neglect. A few were even demolished decades ago.
One historian explained that maintaining hundreds of such structures is not practical. He suggested that only those still structurally sound should be preserved. He gave examples of other iconic homes that have disappeared over time, including those belonging to other prominent people from the region.
The issue also brought to light a 2010 urban preservation study conducted by a French conservationist. That research had identified over 300 historically significant homes in Mymensingh, though only 280 were found intact. The study categorised these based on architectural features and historical significance. The house now under discussion had been listed among the second tier, meaning valuable but not necessarily protected.
According to the researcher involved in that study, the structure was built by Ranada Prasad Saha using bricks that had distinct markings from the same period. He said records and local testimonies all indicate that this was not a Ray family residence.
Still, confusion persists because of the symbolic associations. Advocates for preservation argue that even if direct lineage to the Ray family cannot be proven, the building holds cultural importance and should be spared.
Bangladeshi officials maintain that the house was abandoned and in disrepair for over a decade. The academy had been operating from a rented location. Economic constraints played a role in the decision to raze the building and construct a new one.
A meeting held at the district level brought together administrators, researchers and community members. After reviewing available documents, the district commissioner announced that government records show no trace of ownership linked to Ray’s family. The land and structure have been listed as government property since 2008. He stated that legal and administrative procedures were followed before initiating the demolition.
He said that interviews with elderly residents and researchers confirmed that the building had no historical connection to the Ray lineage. The viral narrative, in his words, appeared to be based on a misinterpretation.
For now, the house remains standing. Whether it will be protected or replaced is still uncertain. The debate, however, has reignited conversations about memory, history and the value of preserving cultural landmarks in South Asia.
