4 Tracing the history of Indian Archaeology and its pioneers
V. N. Prabhakar
1. Introduction
The history of archaeology in the global context was briefly dealt in the module on Exploration Techniques in Archaeology. In the global context, the concept of understanding the past and preserving masterpieces of art along with conservation and safeguarding measures of ancient structures and buildings can be traced back to the Renaissance times in Europe. During the 18th and 19th centuries CE, more and more developments took place along with the discovery of major sites like Pompeii, Herculaneum, expeditions to Egypt by the French and the discovery of Rosetta stone, the decipherment of Hieroglyphs and Cuneiform writings are a few of the major discoveries.
The discipline of archaeology passed through several phases, starting from the interest in antiquarian remains and collection of art objects and display in private collections, which grew into museums later; speculative phase to deeper understanding of the past through application of other disciples, initially with the help of geology by adopting stratigraphy and uniformitarianism principles; followed by descriptive archaeology and then the era of New Archaeology and many of its offspring leading to application of modernist and post-modernist approaches. If we trace the history of global archaeology, the various discoveries from time to time, development in concepts both in classification of time periods by C.J. Thomson, to development of field techniques by Pitt Rivers and Flinders Petrie to the Evolution of Mankind, all shaped its developments. The understanding of association of animal fossils of different geological ages and stone tools from sites in Europe lead to an understanding of evolution of cultures and their association with geological ages. Similarly, the major discoveries like Indus Valley Civilization, their contacts with the Mesopotamian Civilization, all led to better understanding of the archaeology of different regions, their cultural interaction in remote past.
In the Indian context also, the journey of archaeology passed through several phases, which ultimately shaped the present course. In this paper, we will be tracing the history of Indian archaeology starting from the earliest and try to place some of the major pioneers, who shaped this discipline with their invaluable contributions.
2. Indian Historiography: Earliest Attempts
It is often said that we lack proper representation of our history in detailed documentation of the past. However, this may not be true as it can be observed in several of the ancient literature like the Rigveda and other Vedas, the Epics and Puranas, wherein history of the contemporary society along with geography is described, albeit not in a pure historical sense. These early literatures are an invaluable source of society, polity and geography to a large extent. Attempts in repairing and making functional of ancient water structures like the Sudarshana lake, which was created during the period of Chandragupta Maurya, repairs during Asoka, and later repaired during the time of Kshatrapa Rudradaman and Gupta king Samudragupa are examples of valuing the resources created by the former dynasties. Scholars often pay tribute to the work of Kashmir Historian, Kalhana, who, in his Rajatangini makes an attempt to study the ancient relics like the coins, inscriptions, monuments and tries to posit them in a historical narrative and context. This could be attributed as an earliest historiography in the Indian context. The examples of Muslim historians like Al Biruni, Abul Fazl are some stark exceptions in making attempts to delve into the historical aspects.
The relocation of Asokan pillars with inscriptions by Firuz Shah Tughluq from Topra and Meerut to Delhi, even though without the understanding of the complete significance of its history, purpose, is another example of valuing the past. Historical and geographical accounts of Indian region could be gleaned more from the writings of Classical and Chinese travellers. The unknown author of the Periplus of the Erythrean Sea is an excellent example of documentation of the coast port cities and towns along with the interior kingdoms, their commercial products that were traded. Similarly, the travelogue of Xuanchang is another good example to understand the contemporary monastic Buddhist establishment, cities and towns connected to Buddhist, the ruling dynasties and the customs and traditions of the contemporary society.
The trade connections between the Indian subcontinent with other parts of the contemporary world provided unique opportunities for traders and travellers to visit and document several aspects of the contemporary society and practices. It also attracted travellers and explorers like Marco Polo and Vasco de gama to the Indian shores. The advent of trade with Europeans from the 17th century CE onwards enabled a host of new travellers who have left vivid accounts on several aspects. The important among them are Tom Coryat (1612-1617) who travelled from Aleppo to Ajmer; William Finch (1608-1611), who left a good account of Asokan pillars at Delhi and Allahabad, and on the architecture of Delhi, Agra, Lahore, Gwalior, Mandu; Nicolo Conti (1419-1444), Athanasius Nikitin (1468), Ludovico di Varthema (1503-1508) and Duarte Barbosa on Vijayanagara; Ralph Fitch and Tavernier on Bijapur. Further, Coryat, Withington, Tavernier and Bernier made descriptions about the architectural wealth of Delhi and Agra. The splendors of cave architecture can also be understood from the early writings of Thevenot at Ellora, Garcia da Orta and Gemelli Careri on Kanheri, Niebuhr, Fryer and Hamilton on Elephanta.
Simultaneously, attention was also being drawn to other intellectual wealth of the Indian subcontinent through the compilation of Sanskrit grammar in Latin by Hanxlden (1699-1732); translation of Sanskrit literature; exposing the richness of Rigveda and Aitareya Brahmana by Calmette in 1731, among a few. The vast plethora of Sanskrit literature and its richness was being continuously transmitted to Europe through several translations, which enabled historians like Joseph Duguigne, who brought to light the importance of Buddhist literature and religion to Europe. The most important contributions towards the opening up of studies on Indian literature and their antiquarian remain goes to Sir William Jones and Samuel Johnson. The latter made an appeal to the then Governor General of India, Warren Hastings in 1774 requesting to explore the histories and traditions, ancient ruins and buildings, arts and practices of the people. William Jones, who was appointed as a Judge in Calcutta Supreme Court, was an accomplished scholar and linguist, and enabled the congregation of other enthusiastic antiquarians to form the Asiatick Society on 15th January, 1784 with an objective (Roy: 1961) to “…enquiring, among other things, into the History…the Antiquities, Arts, Sciences, and Literatures of Asia.”
3. Indian Archaeology: Surveys and Descriptions
The founding of Asiatick Society provided a major impetus for the investigations of a wide range of subjects and aspects and also included related to antiquarian remains. The objectives of the Society as summed by Roy (1961) consist of “…geology and pure mathematics, ethnography and mechanics, geography and religion, mineralogy and politics, grammar and rhetoric, music and agriculture, architecture and medicine.” Some of the earliest activities of the society consisted of study, translation of ancient literature, inscriptions and their interpretation. The discovery of Roman coins datable to 2nd century CE below the ruins of a Brahmanical temple near Nellore in 1786 was an important find, even though it did not attract the attention of scholars much. Meanwhile, William Jones was already making important contributions in identifying Chandragupta Maurya with Sandrakottos of Classical writers, and association with Alexander, which helped in fixing a firm chronological base. Jones also identified the location of ancient Patalipura (Palibothra of classical writings) at the confluence of Ganga and Son. The most remarkable contribution is attributed to the affinities between the Greek, Latin, Celtic and German language group with Sanskrit and Persian language group.
Charles Wilkins deciphered the Gupta as well as kutila script during this period. The study of a large number of inscriptions through the efforts of H.T. Colebrooke and H.H. Wilson enabled a strong base for Indian Epigraphy and also led to the publications like The Asiatick Researches and Ariana Antiqua, the latter mainly on the work of Colebrooke on the antiquities of Afghanistan.
The Asokan Pillar inside the Firuz Shah Kotla was a topic of immense interest and an account on which was published by Lt. Colonel Antoine Polier in the Asiatick Researches Vol. I, 1788, while an eye-copy of the same along with that on Allahabad pillar was done by Captain James Hoare. Captain Hoare was also responsible for carrying out detailed drawings of some of the monuments inside Firuz Shah Kotla and Allahabad Fort, which formed a main part of the publication by J.H. Harrington in The Asiatick Researches, Vol. VII in 1801. Harrington also associated with the discovery of the Nagarjuni caves.
The other important discoveries during this period include two urns from a stupa at Sarnath, a report on which was published by Jonathan Duncan; Manikyala by Mountstuart Elphinstone; Sanchi by Captain E. Fell. The study of Islamic monuments also drew attention by the scholars, the most important one being the detailed measurements of Qutb Minar by James T. Blunt; the inscriptions of Qutb Minar in 1822 by Walter Ewer; monuments at Bijapur by Major Moor in 1794.
The vast number of cave shrines and monasteries of different faiths in western Maharashtra attracted the attention of many accounts and publications, which include discovery of inscriptions at Ellora Caves by Charles Warre Malet in 1794, who was also instrumental in publishing a detailed account of the case with measurements and drawings; detailed account of Kanheri Caves along with architectural drawings and sculptures in 1806; a much more detailed account of Ellora Caves by Colonel Skyes in 1819; Elephanta Caves by J. Goldingham in 1794; Ajanta by Erskine. James Tod was instrumental in surveying the antiquarian remains of Rajasthan, which was published as Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan.
The archaeological remains of South India also received the attention of several scholars like William Chambers, who documented Mahabalipuram in 1772 and 1776 and published in The Asiatick Researches in 1788; later on the same monument by J. Goldingham. In the annals of South Indian survey of antiquarian remains, Col. Colin Mackenzie stands apart due to his innumerable contributions, who also served as Surveyor General of India since 1815. The collections of Mackenzie is vast and consist of 2630 measured drawings, 78 plans, 6218 coins, 106 images and copying of nearly 8076 inscriptions, which formed a firm ground for researches in South Indian History and Epigraphy. Mackenzie also documented the remains of Buddhist stupa at Amaravati extensively through detailed plans and drawings. Further, he drew the attention of other explorers towards the enormous number of megalithic monuments in South India and their importance.
The documentation of the architectural and archaeological wealth of the country was carried out in different media and the work of Thomas Daniell stands apart through the careful rendering of architectural illustrations in water colour medium on large canvas. The documentation of Daniell formed a basis for the publication of 6 folio volumes with 120 coloured representations, which were engraved from 1790 to 1809. The efforts of the individuals who were carrying out the enormous task of documentation and recording of architectural and archaeological remains were not equaled by the then governments, be it provincial or local or princely states, albeit with some stray exceptions.
The appointment of Francis Buchanan by Marquis of Wellesley for the survey of entire Mysore territory in 1800 can be cited as an attempt to fill this gap. The survey of Buchanan also included several aspects on the antiquarian remains, which was published later. Later, the assignment of Buchanan was further extended to the whole of Presidency of Fort William, and he surveyed for eight years covering the regions of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Purnea, Bhagalpur, Bihar, Shahabad and Gorakhpur, which formed copious volumes in thirty-eight parts along with four volumes covering 500 architectural and sculptural drawings and 62 inscription details. The efforts of Buchanan were commended by later surveyors including Alexander Cunningham, the first Archaeological Surveyor, for the meticulous details of documentation and accuracy.
In the meantime, examples of official efforts towards the preservation of monuments may be quoted from the appointment of a committee by Lord Minto for maintenance of Taj Mahal; conservation of Sikandara, Fatehpur Sikri and Ram Bagh in Agra by Moira; Qutb Minar by Captain Robert Smith under Lord Amherst. However, no concrete efforts were undertaken for the preservation and conservation of monuments, and for the prevention of vandalism on the monuments. Glaring examples of misuse of monuments by those even in the administration could be seen during this period. Examples of demolition of monuments and buildings inside forts like Agra Fort and Red Fort, Delhi, and converting them into military barracks could be observed. The dismantlement of Marble Bath of Shah Jahan located inside Agra Fort by Moira and presenting it as a gift to King George IV is a glaring example in this regard. The bath was later auctioned by the orders of Lord Bentinck. The other examples are attempt of Lord Bentinck for public auction the marble of Taj Mahal; efforts to lease the garden of Akbar’s Tomb, Sikandara for cultivation purposes by Executive Engineer at Agra; plundering the Buddhist stupa at Amaravati and sending the masterpiece sculptures to England. The only attempt towards safeguarding public buildings is the passing of Bengal Regulation XIX of 1810 and Madras Regulation VII of 1817, which enabled the government to intervene in case of misuse of buildings by private individuals. However, these two regulations were restricted only to public buildings and not those under private ownership.
4. The Beginnings of Archaeology
The beginnings of antiquarian query and documentation led to publications in the Asiatick Researches, which of course invoked much interest among the scholars and enthusiasts. The most important phase between the founding of Asiatic Society and Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) witnessed several landmark events, which ultimately paved the way for further understanding Indian history and archaeology. The contribution of James Prinsep as a Assay Master, Calcutta Mint between 1832 and 1840 was also Secretary of Asiatic Society, is enormous. Prinsep contributed in various fields and subjects like documentation of the streets and buildings of Banaras through accurate plans and drawings during 1825; systematic field operations and survey; the importance of coins and inscriptions in understanding the rulers of Kushana dynasty and other works to follow.
However, the most significant contribution by Prinsep was the decipherment of Brahmi and Kharoshthi scripts between 1834 and 1837, which was a real breakthrough in unrevealing the ancient history of India through inscriptions. The initial understanding of the Indo-Greek coins, which have the rulers names, both in Kharoshthi as well as Greek script, as suggested by Masson enabled Prinsep to work further, and further, on meticulous examination of the various symbols helped in the final decipherment. The decipherment of Brahmi script was based on the votive inscriptions found on the railing stones of Stupa 1 at Sanchi, which are short label inscriptions, invariably ended with danam meaning gift. Prinsep also tested these two letters with the inscription from Delhi Asokan pillar. The identification of the word ‘piyadasi’ from the Asokan inscription on the pillar, and its identification with Mauryan Asoka was a landmark of discoveries. Prinsep, in 1838, further identified the three Hellenistic kings, namely Antiochus II, Ptolemy Philadelphos and Magas of Cyrene mentioned in the Asokan edict from Girnar, Gujarat, which helped in establishing a firm chronological framework. The decipherment of Kharoshthi and Brahmi scripts, along with the identification of Indo-Greek rules from their coins, identifying the contemporary rulers of Asoka from West Asia, all were exemplary contributions of James Prinsep, which shaped the further course of research.
However, it is also noted that the early days of discoveries, decipherments and other fieldwork was mostly concentrated on finding the antiquities, sculptures, documentation of architectural heritage, contributing to a museum, and not in the real sense of making an enquiry of bygone civilizations. The contribution of Prinsep in the reading of most of the early inscriptions cannot be denied, but as it was the concept of archaeology in the rest of the world, more and more effort was being made to discover and retrieve antiquities.
The death of Prinsep in 1840 left a deep void on the historical and archaeological pursuits initiated by him and at that time, the important personalities in picture were Alexander Cunningham, Markham Kittoe, Edward Thomas, Walter Elliott, J Stevenson and Bhau Daji. Cunningham largely continued the activities in North India and was instrumental in investigating the Indo-Greek and Indo-Scythic rulers; identifying Sankissa with ancient Sankasya and the stupas at Bhilsa. Markham Kittoe was associated with Cunningham in the excavation at Sarnath during 1835-36, which led to the identification of Buddhist monastery remains near the Dhamekh stupa. The field of numismatics received impetus due to the efforts of Edward Thomas in identifying and publishing coins ranging from 3rd century BCE to 16th century CE. The field of epigraphy was better served by the contributions of Elliot, who worked on the inscriptions from Dharwar, Sonda and North Mysore, establishing the chronology and history of Chalukyas with the help of their coins; Stevenson, who translated the inscriptions from the cave shrines of western India and Bhau Daji translated the inscriptions from Ajanta Caves, and those of Rudradaman and Skandagupta on Girnar rock.
Roy (1961), however emphasize the contributions of two scholars, namely James Fergusson and Colonel Meadows Taylor who were instrumental in unraveling several unknown facets of Indian archaeology. James Fergusson was particularly instrumental in carrying out the architectural survey between 1829 and 1847, which were published in Illustrations of Rock-cut Temples of India, Picturesque Illustrations of Ancient Architecture in Hindustan and Handbook of Architecture. The monumental work on the rock-cut temples by James Fergusson is a landmark in this regard, and dedicates descriptive, historical and inscriptional evidences from many of the cave shrine locations in India.
Meadows Taylor concentrated exclusively on the megalithic tombs of South India in general and Shorapur Doab between Krishna and Bhima rivers in particular. The early excavations carried out by Meadows Taylor of some of the megaliths are indeed of scientific in nature, by recording the various strata and description of sections by illustrating them. The discoveries and the publications of documentations and surveys might have prompted the administrators of the time, and based on the suggestion by the Royal Asiatic Society in 1844, the Government of India was suggested among others, to the employment of talented officers, documentation of Ajanta caves and other similar ones, and their repairs for enabling their preservation. Further, this also led to allotment of funds for the repairs of Ajanta and Ellora caves. A 32-year project for documenting the principal objects of western India was also formulated by the Government of Bombay, and the constitution of a Commission was mooted “…for collecting accurate, minute and well-classified information as to the nature, the extent and the state of the existing monuments” (Roy: 1961). Even though the recommendations were not accepted completely for the formulation of a Commission, Lord Hardinge decided to assign the task of documentation of important monuments and sites to a few specific groups of scholars. Accordingly, Kittoe was entrusted with the task of survey in Bihar and Banaras; Major F. Maisey for Kalinjar and sculptures of Sanchi; Captain Gill for documenting the Ajanta paintings. A ‘Bombay Cave Temple Commission’ was set up and it recommended Lt. Brett in 1851 for taking impressions of the cave inscriptions.
More or less at the same time, the Archaeological Society of Delhi was formed in 1847, whose objectives have been summarized by Roy (1961) as, “…investigation by means of plans, drawings, and elevations by inscriptional and…historical researches…of the ancient remains both Hindu and Mahomedan, in and around Delhi; and the institution of similar researches, in other parts of North Western Provinces.”
5. Indian Archaeology: The Era of Alexander Cunningham
The background of nearly 60 odd years since the founding of Asiatic Society provided a firm background for the consequent researches by several scholars. The foremost among them was Alexander Cunningham, who realized very early the need for a nation-wide survey of archaeological remains. This could be seen from this article published in 1848 under the title, ‘Proposed Archaeological Investigations’ (Roy: 1961). However, this did not invite much attention and a long wait of 13 years ensued, until ultimately Lord Canning accepted the proposal of Cunningham. Cunningham stressed the importance of the archaeological heritage and their preservation and conservation, the very less steps taken by the government, need for survey of this heritage among others. Canning understood the importance of the heritage and also observed the investigations carried out by private individuals only and very less intervention from the side of government. Canning approved a ‘scheme of survey in northern India’, with the aims of “accurate description illustrated by plans, measurements and drawings or photographs and by copies of inscriptions of such remains as deserve notice, with the history of them so far as it may be traceable, and a record of the traditions that are retained regarding them” (Roy: 1961). Thus, Cunningham was entrusted with the task of this survey with effect from 1st December 1861, and designated as Archaeological Surveyor. The task assigned to Cunningham was to survey and document, while the preservation and conservation activities were left out under his purview. Cunningham was much impressed on the publication on the accounts of Fahien and Xuanchang and thus concentrated his efforts on the survey of locating the ancient sites and routes travelled by the Chinese travellers. Cunningham surveyed the regions of Bihar, Banaras during the first year, described on the caves of Barabar hills; later he extended his surveys to other regions like Fatehgarh, Kannauj, Rourkee, Kalsi, Mathura and Delhi. Cunningham described on the inscriptions of Asoka at Kalsi and identified the name of Alexander of Epirus mentioned in that inscription. His surveys slowly extended towards the west and identified the locations and regions mentioned by the historians of Alexander, thus describing the ruins of Jamalgarhi and Yusufzai, and also Taxila, Manikyala, Sirhind and Thanesar. Within four years of his appointment, Cunningham could survey a vast area covering Gaya in the east to River Indus in northwest, from Kalsi in north to Dhamnar caves in the south.
While the monuments, heritage edifices were receiving much of the attention, apart from the investigations of Meadows Taylor on the megalithic remains, much of the prehistoric period of India received less attention. The first attempts in finding prehistoric remains came in the form of a discovery of large number of neoliths in the Tosney river valley in 1860 and a palaeolith at Pallavaram near Madras by Robert Bruce Foote in 1863. Later, Foote along with another geologist, W. King discovered palaeoliths in the gravel beds of at Attirampakkam on Kortalayar and Naranavaram rivers near Madras. Foote, later made discovery of many palaeolithic sites on the River Palar and other parts of peninsular India. Foote also noticed the presence of pottery from several of the Neolithic and Megalithic sites, which he could not place in the proper cultural context. More prehistoric tools were being recovered from different areas following the discovery made by Foote. This includes discoveries in Cuddappah and North Arcot districts in 1864 by C.F. Oldham and in Godavari valley by A.B. Wynne in 1865. Later in 1873, Hacket discovered a quartzite handaxe in association with fossil mammalia in a cliff near Bhutra on the River Narmada.
An act (XX) passed in 1863, in the midst of archaeological surveys and discovery of sites, vested the government with the powers ‘to prevent injury to and preserve buildings remarkable for their antiquity or for their historical or architectural value’.
The abolition of Archaeological Survey in 1866 by Lord Lawrence was a great setback on the archaeological activities happening in the country. However, Charles Wood in 1866 defined the policy of the government, “…the preservation of the historical monuments and their accurate descriptions were objects well deserving the attention of the Government” (Roy: 1861). Further, in 1867, the government issued a circular to Local Governments for preparing a list of historical buildings and their photographs. Later, Sir Stafford directed to prepare casts of monuments in different architectural styles. This task was later entrusted to the Local Governments who were encouraged to engage Principals of art colleges for training the local workers for preparation of casts and moulds. This enabled preparation of photographs and moulds of several important monuments and heritage buildings. The important ones in this regard are that from Kashmir, Mathura by Lt. H.H. Cole, the local Archaeological Surveyor in Upper Provinces; preparation of large-sized casts of Sanchi gateways by Cole for display in the Kensington Museum; survey by Rajendra Lala Mitra in Orissa between 1868 and 1869, published later as Antiquities of Orissa.
Meanwhile a directive of the government in 1867, due to the efforts of E.V. Bayley, secretary to the Home Department, not only recognized the conservation of monuments that were already located, but also encouraged exploration activities for discovery of more such monuments. In 1870, the Duke of Argyll, the then Secretary of State urged the Government to establish a Central Department of Archaeology. Lord Mayo, the then Governor General, realizing the importance of archaeological investigations, preservation and conservation of heritage buildings, agreed “the duty of investigating, describing and protecting the ancient monuments of a country”, “..India has done less in this direction…vast materials for the illustration of history which lie unexplored in every part of Hindoostan…for the creation under the Government of India of a machinery for discharging a duty, at once…” (Roy 1961).
This led to the revival of Archaeological Survey of India as a distinct department of Government of India, with a separate Director General and Alexander Cunningham was appointed for the post, who assumed the charges in February 1871. The objectives of the department was defined by a Government resolution as “a complete over the whole Country, and a systematic record and description of all architectural and other remains that are either remarkable for their antiquity, or their beauty, or their historical interest” (Roy 1961).
Cunningham was provided with the assistance of J.D. Beglar, A.C. Carlleyle and H.B.W. Garrick for carrying out the survey. The government, however, also emphasized the training of locals for photography, measuring and surveying buildings, directing excavations and deciphering inscriptions.
Cunningham continued with his previous tasks and renewed them from where they were left in 1866. He also initiated the survey of Delhi and Agra, the capitals of Mughal Empire. The investigations and survey of Cunningham during his second tenure are as follows:
| 1872 | Rajputana, Bundelkhand, Mathura, Bodh Gaya and Gaur |
| 1873 | Selected sites in Punjab, large discovery of Indo-Greek sculptures |
| 1873 and
1877 |
Whole of Central Provinces, Bundelkhand and Malwa; surveyed Bharhut
stupa, discovered monolithic pillars, capitals of Asoka; architectural fragments of Gupta and post-Gupta periods |
| 1878-79 | Further surveys in Punjab, discovery of a hoar of pre-Alexander Indian origin
coins at Taxila |
| 1879-80 | Survey of Bengal and Bihar, from a dated inscription, he could fix the
accession of Dharmapala of Pala dynasty |
| 1880-81 | Clearance of the ruins at Bodh Gaya, identification of several places
mentioned by Xuanchang and other travellers |
| 1881-82 | Survey in the Central Provinces |
| 1882 to 1885 | Completion of survey programme, completed the reporting of sites in
Western Rajputana, Bundelkhand and Rewa |
Cunningham is also credited to have visited the site of Harappa on three occasions, viz., 1853, 1856 and 1875, and in his report of 1875, he notes, “the ruins of Harappa are the most extensive of all the old sites along the banks of the Ravi” (Cunningham: 1875). The size of Harappa was given as 2.5 miles (4 km) in circuit and the height varying from 12 to 18 m. Cunningham also noted with regret that extensive damage had been caused to the site due to the removal of brick from this site for use as brick ballast by the railway contractors, most probably for the Lahore – Multan railway line. Cunningham also carried out a minor excavation at the site, but could not assign any satisfactory chronology to the ruins. He has the credit of making the first site plan and designated the principal mounds at Harappa as A-B, C, D and E, which are still in use today. Cunningham describes the find of a single seal as a most curious one, which was made of smooth black stone without polish. He also describes stone implements, pottery and a ringstone. However, Cunningham could not identify the cultural significance of the site and could not predate before the Buddhist period, and even speculated that a seal find, which he examined as that of foreign origin.
Cunningham’s main interest was based on the surveys of antiquarian remains, which was followed by his attention in promoting epigraphical research. The search for antiquarian remains ever since the founding of Asiatic Society led to the discovery of a large number of inscriptions, which were deciphered and published mainly on an individual basis. However, the real thrust on the studies of epigraphy was given when a new journal, Indian Antiquary was started by James Burgess in 1872. The scholarly works, decipherments and interpretations of Buhler, Fleet, Eggeling, Rice, Bhandarkar, Indraji were published in this journal along with lithographic fascimiles. Cunningham, with an objective of bringing out collections of epigraphs and inscriptions of a single dynasty at a single place, started an epic collection known as Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum in 1877. The first volume of this collection was dedicated to the inscriptions of Mauryan ruler Asoka and his grandson.
At this juncture, the necessity of an independent branch for epigraphical research was felt as the enormous task of deciphering a large number of inscriptions from all over India, their publication in two journals proved to be a stupendous task. Cunningham made a proposal for the creation of independent epigraphical survey, and accordingly with the support of James Burgess and Berlin International Congress of Orientalists, J.F. Fleet was appointed on 17th January, 1883 as Government Epigraphist, for a period of three years. The immediate task of Fleet was to edit and publish the collection of Gupta inscriptions, some already known and a host of new inscriptions, which enabled to fix the Gupta epoch. The publication on this research resulted in the third volume of Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum. The research and interpretations of Arabic and Persian inscriptions was assigned to Henry Blochmann by Cunningham. Blochmann was known for his publications on inscriptions from Bonhara mosque, inscriptions of Muslim rulers of Bengal and inscriptions from Hugli district. Blochmann is credited with the decipherment and publication of a wide range of inscriptions from the regions of Delhi, Mahoba, Ajmer, Agra, Sikandara, Jaunpur, Rohtas, Sasaram, to name a few, which were published between 1872 and 1878.
While the research on archaeological remains and epigraphs was receiving good attention, the fate of numerous heritage buildings depended upon the interest of the representatives of the government. The occasional attention of the government towards conservation of buildings could be noted in the form of directives issued to the Local Governments or regulations passed therein. One such directive issued to the Local Governments on 13th February 1873, assigned the task of preservation of all buildings and monuments of historical and architectural interest to the local governments. The contribution of Lord Lytton in this regard is important. Lytton was instrumental in promulgation of The Treasure Trove Act, 1878 with in intention “to prevent the despoiling of the archaeological remains by treasure-hunters.” Lytton in 1878 also noted that the task of preservation of national level antiquities and works of art should not be exclusively left to the Local Governments, as they may not be better managed by them only. Lytton therefore mooted a proposal for the appointment of Curator of Ancient Monuments for carrying out conservation works under the Central Government. The tasks of the Curator were defined (Roy 1961) as follows:
i) Prepare classified lists of the monuments of each province;
ii) Grouping lists of them according as they required to be kept in permanent good repair or were decayed beyond that point but still not in complete ruin or were unimportant or irretrievably ruined.
All the Provincial Governments were supposed to submit their proposals of conservation to the Central Government through the Curator. Initially, the proposal was not considered positively, and instead it was suggested that the task of the proposed Curator can very well be managed by the Director General of Archaeology itself. Finally, the proposal was approved during the tenure of Lord Ripon and a Curator of Ancient Monuments was appointed on 11th November 1880 for a period of three years. Major Cole was the first Curator and he joined in January 1881. The task assigned to Cole was, “to give the Government of India and the Local Governments the advantage of professional advice concerning the restoration and conservation of ancient monuments throughout India.” Cole visited and inspected numerous monuments in Delhi, Agra and Lahore, and drew up notes and preservation condition, which was published in three volumes in 1882, 1883 and 1885. Cole also prepared reports on the group of monuments in Bombay, Madras, Rajputana, Hyderabad, Punjab and North-Western Provinces in twenty-three parts. Cole was also instrumental in remarkable conservation works, the most important ones being Gateway at Sanchi, Agra Fort, Akbar’s Tomb at Sikandara, Fatehpur Sikri, Mathura and Brindavan. The post of Curator was abolished when Cole retired in 1883 and the conservation work was again entrusted to the Local Governments.
However, based on a report of Cole, the Government categorized the monuments (Roy 1961) as per the following:
1) The monuments which from their ‘present condition’ and historical or archaeological value ought to be kept in permanent good repairs;
2) Those which it was only possible or desirable to save from further decay by such minor measures as the eradication of vegetation, the exclusion of water from the walls or the like; and
3) Those which for their advanced stage of decay or comparative unimportance it was impossible or unnecessary to preserve.
Based on the above category of state of preservation of monuments, the quantum of funds was decided. As the conservation was kept outside the purview of Archaeological Survey of India, Cunningham expressed his anguish that as the archaeologists alone are the best authority for understanding the different styles of ancient monuments and they can decide the nature of repairs in a better manner.
Cunningham decided to retire in 1885 and on his relinquishment of service he recommended for the abolition of ASI as a central agency and instead recommended smaller independent circles, viz., (i) Punjab with Sindh and Rajputana, (ii) the North-Western Provinces (present Uttar Pradesh) with the Central India Agency and the Central Provinces, and (iii) Bengal including Bihar, Orissa, Assam and Chota Nagpur, each under a Surveyor and a small team. The regions of Madras along with Bombay and Hyderabad were placed under James Burgess, who was the Archaeological Surveyor and Epigraphy was placed under J.F. Fleet. Accordingly, Beglar was placed in charge of Bengal; North-Western Provinces under Major J.B. Keith, with A. Fuhrer as his assistant and Punjab under C.J. Rodgers.
6. Indian Archaeology: The Period of James Burgess
James Burgess started as an Archaeological Surveyor for the regions of West India in 1873, who had already conducted extensive surveys and prepared inventories of monuments in Bomby, Sindh, Berar, the Central Provinces and Hyderabad. He initially covered Belgaum and Kaladgi districts in 1874, followed by Kathiawad and Kachchha, western dominions of Nizam of Hyderabad. Burgess got an extension of four years, when his term expired in 1879. In 1881, Burgess became the Archaeological Surveyor of South India. In the meanwhile, investigations of Amaravati stupa by Robert Sewell; surveys of Vijayawada area and the stupas at Amaravati and Jaggayyapeta; Chalukyan temples of Dharwar district; survey of Madurai district, monuments of Belgaum region and Mahabalipuram monuments by Alexander Rea are some of the main achievements.
James Burgess succeeded Cunningham on 25th March, 1886 and observed the necessity of some drastic changes. Based on the recommendations of Burgess on the need of a regular Epigraphist along with staff with knowledge in Sanskrit, Pali and Dravidian languages, the Government appointed E. Hultzch as Government Epigraphist in 1886. Further, in a landmark decision, based again on the recommendations of Burgess, the Government amalgamated all the then activities of the survey of north, west and south, and also the disciplines of exploration, conservation and epigraphy under a single executive head. However, still the regional Surveyors submitted their conservation plans to the Local Governments for approvals, and the Director General did not have any control.
The important contributions during the tenure of Burgess are surveys by Fuhrer and Smith during 1886 and 1887 of the Sharqi architecture of Jaunpur, and the monuments located in Zafarabad, Saheth, Maheth and Ayodhya; survey in the region of Badaun, Lalitpur, Orchcha, Bundelkhand by Fuhrer; survey of north Gujarat and Bijapur, Mahabalipuram, Nellore and Godavari districts by Henry Cousins. Burgess himself investigated the Kankali Tila in Mathura during 1887 and 1888. Burgess was also instrumental in issuing a Government directive barring illegal disposal of antiquities by the public officers and illegal excavations without the consent of Archaeological Survey. Another important publication, named Epigrahia Indica was started under Burgess in 1888, which had articles by reputed epigraphists like Buhler, Kielhorn, Eggling. The publications like Archaeological Survey of India-New Imperial Series, Epigraphia Indica, were important landmarks and the former contained detailed monographs of the works of Burgess.
Burgess, however decided to retire in June 1889, and he recommended again the abolishment of Director General’s office and creation of only two independent Circles, one each under Cousens and Rea, and the complete abolishment of Punjab and Bengal surveys. The Government also conceded and abolished the Archaeological Survey of India, with only two Surveyors in the west and south, now known as Superintendents; Fuhrer as general antiquarian and epigraphist; continuation of Hultzch as Government Epigraphist. The conservation of monuments was again placed under the Provincial Governments.
7. Indian Archaeology: The Dark Phase
A dark phase set into the Indian Archaeology with virtually no government support after James Burgess left with the exception of good work by Hultzch, who continued with the publication of Epigraphia Indica and also revived Indian Antiquary. The conservation work was left at the mercy of local governments. The excavation programs also suffered due to the lack of any concrete policy. Rudolf Hoernle and George Buhler urged the importance of excavation in understanding the past. Buhler also suggested that sites like Patna, Kausambi, Ujjain, Ahichchhatra, Charsadda, Taxila, Mathura are potential sites that need to be excavated. The government did not appreciate the concern for excavations.
Later, when the government reviewed the status of survey in 1895, the enormity of the task loomed large, and they urged the Asiatic Society to take over the survey, which they refused. The government weighed several options including placing the survey under private enterprise, which however was immediately rejected. Later, after due considerations and exhaustive consultations with scholars like Tawney, Buhler, Fleet and Royal Asiatic Society, a complete reorganization of the archaeological work was recommended.
Five new circles of jurisdictions were created, (i) Bombay with Sindh and Berar, (ii) Madras and Coorg, (iii) Punjab, Balochistan and Ajmer, (iv) North-Western Provinces and Central Provinces and (v) Bengal and Assam, however under the control of Local Governments. The main objective of these new circles was entirely of conservation and preservation, instead of survey of antiquarian remains and very less attention was given to excavation. The Epigraphy matters received some due consideration and the government continued the services of Hultzsch and even considered to appoint reputed epigraphists as honorary posts to reduce the burden of Hultzsch.
7. Indian Archaeology: The Curzon and Marshall Era
The near disappearance of archaeological survey, lack of any concrete policy during the post-Burgess era, all ended with the appointment of Lord Curzon as the Governor General of India in 1899. Curzon placed before the government a detailed proposal taking into consideration the lack of activities like conservation, preservation and archaeological research in the country. The Government decided to revive the post of Director General. On the recommendation of British Museum, John Marshall was appointed as Director General by a Resolution dated 21st February 1902, defining his responsibilities (Roy 1961) as, “…the most important function of the Director General was to secure that the ancient monuments of the country were properly cared for, that they were not utlised for purposes which were inappropriate or unseemly, that the repairs were executed when required and that any restoration which might be attempted were conducted on artistic lines…assist the Regional Surveyors in ascertaining and formulating the special requirements of each province and to advise the Government of India…visit all the circles in succession, succinctly reporting the general results of his tour to the Government of each province…exercise a professional control over all his colleagues…”
Curzon also visualized several aspects of archaeology, which he defined (Roy 1961) as, “it is in the exploration and study of purely Indian remains, in the probing of the archaic mounds, in the excavation of old Indian cities and in the copying and reading of ancient inscriptions that a good deal of the…work of the archaeologists will in future live…it is in my judgement equally our duty to dig and discover, to classify, reproduce and describe, to copy
and decipher and to cherish and conserve.” Curzon was also instrumental in reorganization of the Survey by placing Kashmir, Rajputana, Punjab Stages, Dir, Swat, Chitral under the Punjab Circle; Baroda, Central India, Hyderabad (Deccan) under the Bombay Circle; Madras and Bengal under the respective Circles.
John Marshall assumed the charges of Director General of Archaeological Survey of India in 1902 and with the vision set forth by Curzon, his responsibilities started to materialize. Marshall started the scheme of exploration programmes, the important among them being that of Nalanda, Vaisali, Patalipura, Bhita, Taxila, Harappa and later the discovery of Mohenjo-daro. The chief contributors in the scheme of exploration and archaeological investigations under Marshall were Henry Cousens in Western Circle, Alexander Rea in Southern Circle, T. Bloch in Bengal, Vogel in Punjab, Taw Sein Ko in Burma, D.R. Bhandarkar in Bombay, Aurel Stein as an Archaeological Superintendent in North West Frontier and Baluchistan and assisted by several Indian scholars like D.R. Sahni, K.N. Dikshit, M.S. Vats. In addition, the presence of other scholars like Sten Konow, A.H. Longhurst, D.B. Spooner, further strengthened the survey works.
An important legislative measure for the protection, preservation, conservation of monuments and excavation activities in the country was promulgated in the form of The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904. A major setback to abolish the Director General post in 1912 was averted due to protests both in India and abroad. In 1917, a post of Archaeological Chemist was created, and in 1918 Assistant Director General post was added which was changed to Deputy Director General in 1919. The Devolution Rules of 1921 classified archaeology as a central subject. Through this, all the protected monuments under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904 came under the purview of Central Government and the remaining unprotected ones with the Local Governments. Further, all the regional surveyors came under the control of central government. Many new posts were created in the year 1921 by adding two Superintendents, one each for Epigraphy and Archaeology Section of Indian Museum, two Assistant Superintendents in Epigraphy and two as reserve. Another important decision taken during this period was to fill the posts with Indians only. Several scholars like K.V.S. Aiyar, Hirananda Sastri and R.P. Chanda joined the survey.
In 1926, a separate fund was created to support the activities of exploration activities and in 1926-27, the posts of a Deputy Director General and three Assistant Superintendents were created exclusively for exploration. A separate Exploration Branch was also set up for undertaking the enormous task of archaeological survey on a permanent basis. The excavation at crucial sites like Sarnath brought to light the famous Asokan lion capital (emblem of Indian Government now), a large Bodhisattva sculpture of the period of Kanishka, and rich collection of Buddhist sculptures of Gupta era. The Buddhist monuments at Sanchi received special attention by John Marshall, who extensively surveyed, explored and excavated and conserved the remains their and brought out publications on the work carried out. Similarly, at Taxila, the investigations under John Marshall continued for twenty long years, wherein he excavated a considerable portion of the city revealing three consecutive cities datable to pre-Alexandrian, Indo-Parthians and the Kushanas respectively. Further, revealing the Dharmarajika stupa and its associated remains, the Buddhist establishment and the associated cultural vestiges is another important contribution. Marshall’s investigation at sites like Bhita, Kumrahar and Bulandibagh near Patna, are equally important.
The most stupendous among all the excavations is the discovery of Indus Valley Civilization based on the excavation at Harappa since 1921 and Mohenjo-daro since 1922. John Marshall examined the finds in his Shimla office in 1924 and immediately understood the significance of similar finds from the two sites that were separated by 480 km. Marshall announced the discovery in The Illustrated London News on 20th September 1924 and immediately in the next issue itself on 27th September, 1924, Prof. A.H. Sayce published the presence of Harappan artefacts from a datable context of third millennium BCE from Susa. Thus, the antiquity of Indus Valley Civilization was immediately pushed back to third millennium BCE. Based on the discovery of this bronze age civilization, Marshall renewed exploration to find out the presence of similar sites. Sites like Nal in Baluchistan by Hargreaves; Lohumjo-daro in Larkana and Limujunejo in Sindh by K.N. Dikshit; Jhukar in Sindh by N.G. Majumdar were investigated. Further, discovery of new sites like Rana Ghundai, Periano Ghundai, Kulli, Mehi, Nundara, Suktagen-dor, Shahi Tump was also made.
Equally important are the extensive surveys undertaken by Aurel Stein at places like Niya in Taklamakan region, discovering a large number of Kharoshthi inscription; surveyed the Tun-huang region and collected a rich harvest of antiquities, documents in Brahmi script in Khotanese and Tokharian and also in Sanskrit; Miran and Turfan areas, wherein in the latter, he could discover a burial ground with evidence of silk and other decorated fabrics wrapped on the entombed bodies. The investigations of Aurel Stein are published as Ancient Khotan (1907), Serindia (1921), Innermost Asia (1928).
In the fields of conservation also, John Marshall showed enormous acumen and vision and due to his efforts bring out a manual on conservation practices, to define the scope and methodology of conservation works in the country. Marshall, who suggested the museums to work in close association with the Survey, further mooted the combination of archaeology as well as museums and thus, in many cases, the Superintendents served as responsible for the museums. Until the Indian Museum became a separate entity through an Act in 1932, the Superintendents of the Survey headed the archaeology section.
The concept of Archaeological Museum was also initiated by Marshall and during his tenure, museums at Agra, New Delhi, Delhi Fort, Lahore Fort, Mandalay, Taxila, Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, Sarnath, Nalanda and Pagan were started. Further, new museums were created at Bijapur, Baripada, Chamba, Ajmer, Gwalior, Khajuraho, Sanchi and Dacca. The New Delhi museum chiefly housed the collections of Aurel Stein from his Central Asian expedition during 1906-08 and 1913-16.
The system of Government Epigraphist continued and a new publication namely, Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica was started in 1903. The John Marshall expanding the reference collection with the survey started the Central Archaeological Library. Publications like The New Imperial Series, which was started by James Burgess in 1874 continued, with the addition of new ones like Annual Reports of the Director General of Archaeology containing the various activities of the Survey including conservation, exploration, epigraphy and museum activities; Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India with each volume dedicated to a particular theme or topic in any field. The Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, two volumes of which were already published, was enlarged with inputs from Hultzsch on Asokan Inscriptions in 1925 and Kharoshthi Inscriptions by Sten Konow published in 1929.
Marshall also supported the archaeological activities in the states, which resulted in renewed explorations and publications. The Mysore state came with their version of Ancient Monuments Preservation Regulation in 1924, which was followed by other states also. The states of Travancore (1908), Gwalior (1913), Kashmir (1912), Hyderabad (1914) created their own departments of archaeology
John Marshall relinquished his charge on 6th September 1928, but he was retained up to 15th March 1934, as he was asked to supervise and direct the excavations at Taxila and to publish the report on the results of investigations in the Indus valley sites. Marshall published Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civilization, Monuments of Sanchi in two volumes, Taxila in three volumes, before he left for England.
8. Indian Archaeology: Post Marshall Era
When Marshall left India, his successors consisted of Daya Ram Sahni, K.N. Dikshit, N.G. Majumdar and M.S. Vats. Hargreaves succeeded John Marshall from 8th October 1928 to 29th July 1931. Daya Ram Sahni took over as first Indian Director General from Hargreaves and was succeeded by J.F. Balkiston on 1st June, 1935. Then, K.N. Dikshit assumed charges on 21st March, 1937 and retired in 1944. The post-Marshall era saw again ups and downs, and the Government in 1931 decided to reduce the strength of survey from twenty-nine to twenty, abolishing the Exploration Branch, and by other reduction of funds. The onset of World War II further tightened the funding position. In 1937, Ancient and Historical Monuments including Archaeological Sites and Remains were declared a federal subject, and thus the Central Government could wrest all powers from the Provincial Governments. An amendment in 1932 in the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904 enabled foreign institutions for excavation at protected sites, including other institutions and organizations. The excavations at Chanhudaro in 1935 by American School of Indic and Iranian Studies and Boston Museum of Fine Arts were possible due to this amendment.
K.N. Dikshit enabled the participation of Indian Universities and Institutions to participate in the exploration activities and also encouraged institutions other than the government to extend their activities in archaeological pursuits. The University of Calcutta excavated Bangarh by obtaining an independent license. In the meanwhile, since the period Marshall relinquished his service, the exploration activities revealed further protohistoric sites, including that of Harappan ones, including Rupar in Punjab, Rangpur in Gujarat both discovered by M.S. Vats and many sites in Sindh including Chanhudaro, Ali Murad, Amri, Lohri, Pandi Wahi by N.G. Majumdar. The continuing excavations at Harappa also brought to light the presence of urn burial site at Cemetery H, which post-dated the Indus Valley Civilization.
The prehistoric investigations were receiving much attention during this period marked by the analysis of palaeoliths by M.C. Burkitt in Krishna valley, which were discovered by L.A. Cammaide and identified a long continuous sequence, which could be comparable with African sequence at that time. The expedition of Yale-Cambridge University consisting of Helmut De Terra, Teilhard de Chardin and T.T. Paterson in 1939 was remarkable during the period, which identified two different palaeolthic industries in South Asia, viz., pebble choppers, flakes and cores, christened as Sohanian and handaxe tradition of south. However, the identification is not accepted now.
In 1939, scathing report by Leonard Woolley, highly condemned the functioning of Archaeological Survey of India. Woolley focused on the poor policy in dispensing the funds, lack of planning to investigate different sites all over the country, not excavating sites to the natural soil for understanding the stratigraphy, criticizing the conservation approaches at Taxila and Mohenjo-daro and methodology of excavation. Woolley also recommended the appointment of an Advisor on Archaeology, two specialists in stone age antiquities, allowing Indian and foreign non-official institutions to participate in excavations, extensive excavation of a select number of archaeological sites of historical period, including that of Ahichchhatra.
The excavation at Ahichchhatra almost started immediately and was carried out for four years up to 1944, which brought to light among other important occupational deposits spanning over 1500 years, two distinct ceramic types, later to be known as Northern Black Polished Ware and Painted Grey Ware. K.N. Dikshit retired in 1944.
9. Indian Archaeology: The Era of Mortimer Wheeler
In 1944, after K.N. Dikshit retired, R.E. Mortimer Wheeler was appointed as Director General, who reorganized the Survey on many aspects. Wheeler introduced scientific methods in excavation, set up an Excavation Branch under an Assistant Superintendent (later as Superintendent), creation of posts of Prehistorian, Assistant Archaeological Chemist, Assistant Superintendent of Muslim Epigraphy in 1945 and Superintendent of Publications in 1946. On the conservation front, he brought the conservation programme under the overall control of Survey. For this purpose, a post of Executive Engineer was created at the centre. A new Circle namely, South Eastern Circle was created in 1947 with jurisdiction over whole of Andhra districts of Madras, Orissa and few parts of Central Provinces. A Museum Branch was created in 1945 under an Assistant Superintendent, an Assistant Archaeological Chemist in 1947 for Museum. A committee was set up for the creation of National Museum of India under Maurice Gwyer, which gave positive inputs.
Wheeler also initiated several training programmes in conservation, techniques of excavation, reparation of field records, surveying, photography, and administration for the members of survey as well as outsiders. A bulletin of the ASI, namely Ancient India was started in 1944. Further, a Central Advisory Board of Archaeology with an objective (Roy 1961) “to review the needs of archaeology in India-current and future…to act as an intermediary between the Archaeological services, the world of learning administration and in some, small degree, the wide public.”
Wheeler’s excavation consisted of Harappa, wherein studying the relation between the Cemetery H and Cemetery R 37, the latter discovered in 1937 and his hypothesis of identifying the Cemetery H burials with the invading Aryans and who were responsible for destroying the Indus Valley Civilization. Wheeler also identified three sites, viz., Taxila, Brahmagiri and Arikamedu for understanding the chronological framework of Indian sub-continent. Arikamedu was excavated in order to understand the finds associated with Roman world.
Wheeler continued till 30th April, 1948 and was succeeded by N.P. Chakravarti as Director General during independent India.
10. Indian Archaeology: Post Independence Era
During the post-Independence era, several changes in the administration of survey took place along with the overall reorganization. At present, there are 27 Circle, 3 Mini Circles, 6 Excavation Branches, 2 Temple Survey Branches, 1 Prehistory Branch for archaeology, survey and heritage management related issues, 1 each Epigraphy, Chemistry, Horticulture Branches. The promulgation of Constitution of India in 1950 allocated the following responsibilities:
Union List (Entry 67) – Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains, which might be declared by Parliament to be of national importance
State List (Entry 12) – Responsibilities of all monuments outside the category
Concurrent List (Entry 40) – Archaeological Sites and Remains other than monuments, the Centre and States were vested with concurrent jurisdiction
The post-Independence era saw the emergence of Department of Archaeology in the Universities and State Departments of Archaeology in the respective states that shared the task of survey and archaeological research, while the conservation activities largely rests with the ASI. The efforts of leading universities like University of Pune (later Archaeology Department elevated to Deemed University status and known as Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute), M.S. University, Vadodara, Universities of Allahabad, Chennai, Calcutta, have contributed enormously in the archaeological investigations. With the advent of radiocarbon dating technology, chronological framework of the cultural periods of the sub-continent is much clear now. The application of sciences in archaeological research became a norm since the advent of New Archaeology in 1960s and archaeology is visualized much better departing widely from its descriptive nature and more towards the analytical and multi-disciplinary approaches.
The promulgation of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, its amendment in 2010, The Antiquities and Art Treasures Act 1972 is the important legislative step for preservation and conservation of heritage, managing excavation and exploration activities, controlling the trade on antiquities. In the international arena, the World Heritage Convention of UNESCO in 1972 enabled the definition of Universal Heritage and as India became a signatory to this convention, sites of outstanding universal values were inscribed on the World Heritage List. As of date, there are 36 World Heritage Properties from India in the World Heritage List including 29 cultural properties, 7 natural and 1 mixed property.
Web links
- http://www.asi.nic.in
- http://unesco.org
- http://whc.unesco.org