DOCSLIB.ORG

Archaeology at the Heart of a Political Confrontation the Case of Ayodhya Author(S): Shereen Ratnagar Source: Current Anthropology, Vol

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Archaeology at the Heart of a Political Confrontation the Case of Ayodhya Author(S): Shereen Ratnagar Source: Current Anthropology, Vol Archaeology at the Heart of a Political Confrontation The Case of Ayodhya Author(s): Shereen Ratnagar Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 45, No. 2 (April 2004), pp. 239-259 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/381044 Accessed: 13-04-2017 18:45 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, The University of Chicago Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology This content downloaded from 143.107.46.104 on Thu, 13 Apr 2017 18:45:37 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Current Anthropology Volume 45, Number 2, April 2004 ᭧ 2004 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. All rights reserved 0011-3204/2004/4502-0005$3.00 a mosque. While political parties that claim to speak for CA✩ FORUM ON Hindus are demanding the “return” of this site, others deny the existence of historical or archaeological evi- ANTHROPOLOGY IN PUBLIC dence of the destruction of an earlier temple at the site. Since 1950 there have been civil suits filed by Hindus and Muslims claiming entitlement to the site. In 1987 the Supreme Court of India decided that these suits would be grouped together and heard by a special bench Archaeology at the of the High Court of Allahabad, sitting in Lucknow. On orders from that court, the Archaeological Survey of In- Heart of a Political dia (ASI) has been excavating at the site since the begin- ning of 2003. I shall outline the political background and show how Confrontation archaeologists were drawn into this adversarial situation. Then, taking the position that this is no innocent debate about the details of this or that artefact or stratigraphic The Case of Ayodhya1 sequence, I shall attempt to initiate a discussion of why this happened—touching briefly on some of the concep- tual baggage of the discipline, on the use of archaeology 2 in a somewhat similar situation 50 years ago, and on by Shereen Ratnagar what we can expect it to deliver. The Background Despite its recourse to scientific (laboratory) investiga- It was in the nineteenth century that the dispute over tions, archaeology is a social science, researching the the site began. If we are to believe the records of the cultures of past societies through their material culture colonial administration, there was a tradition that the residues. No social science proceeds in an ideological mosque at Ayodhya stood on the site of a temple com- vacuum, and historians or geographers who claim not to memorating the birth of Rama, the hero of the Rama- be theoretical may simply be unaware of the conceptual yana who came to be deified as an incarnation of the or ideological underpinnings of the paradigms they use. god Vishnu. The British records were based on oral in- Being “apolitical,” in turn, often amounts to an accep- formation, and there is no documentation in medieval tance of the status quo. Thus archaeological methods and sources for any such destruction (although sources from paradigms are bound to be ideologically inscribed in that period do speak of the destruction of dozens of other some way. Moreover, the past is too important for so- temples by Islamic invaders and rulers [Eaton cieties to leave the matter to their academics. The ear- 2000–2001]). The British had annexed the wealthy state liest known “history,” the Sumerian King List (ca. 2000 of Awadh (of which Ayodhya was the capital until 1740) b.c.), for instance, was in all likelihood composed at the in 1856. Long before that, however, they had (in 1819) behest of a ruling dynasty that had usurped power and taken control of the civic and revenue affairs of the town lacked a Sumerian pedigree. In the postcolonial context, of Ayodhya even while Awadh was recognized as a sov- it is often in the process of delineating the past that ereign state. Several matters, including this annexation societies construct their identities. Therefore it is not and the disaffection of Indian soldiers, precipitated an surprising that archaeological interpretation is prone not uprising which spread across northern and central India only to controversy but also to politicization. in 1857 and 1858. During this rebellion, the British were Archaeology has become central to the current conflict besieged for five traumatic months in Lucknow, then the over sacred space in the North Indian town of Ayodhya, capital of Awadh. This siege united Muslims and Hindus, located on a northern tributary of the Ganga River. as did the uprising in general, with all rebels recognizing There, it has been claimed, a general of Babur (the foun- Bahadur Shah as their ruler—with the result that a Brit- der of Mughal rule in India in the sixteenth century) ish official noted that this was one occasion when “we destroyed a temple of the deity Rama in order to build could not play off the Mohammedans against the Hin- dus” (Bipan Chandra, Tripathi, and De 1972:45). Sur- prised by the uprising and thoroughly shaken by the mas- 1. Ajay Dandekar, Rusheed Wadia, Salima Tyabji, and Kannan Sri- nivasan took part in a lively discussion of the first draft. Anirudh sacres, especially because in Awadh “1857” was much Deshpande helped with archival enquiries. My dear friend Gouri more than just a soldiers’ mutiny, British officials turned Lad discussed matters at long distance. I thank H. Dastur and Ro- against the Muslims. After regaining control over shan Dadabhoy for permitting me a peek into the Munshi papers Awadh, they ransacked the palaces of its nawab, spoke at the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Mumbai. This article is dedicated to the memory of M. Muraleedharan. of Muslims as ferocious fanatics, and curtailed their re- 2. Empress Court, Churchgate Reclamation, Mumbai 400 020, India cruitment into the administrative services (Metcalf ([email protected]). 1965:298–301). 239 This content downloaded from 143.107.46.104 on Thu, 13 Apr 2017 18:45:37 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 240 F current anthropology Volume 45, Number 2, April 2004 Early British histories of India insisted on an inbuilt British officialdom, could have fed the belief that the and universal antagonism between Hindus and Muslims, mosque was built after the destruction of a temple, and a position contested by many historians today. True, re- by 1860 official British reports were recording that Ba- ligion had not been totally separate from politics in pre- bur’s general had destroyed an ancient temple and had colonial times, when the prestige of ruling dynasties used its stone pillars for the mosque. (Having once given could, on occasion, be closely tied to the temples that credence to this and the oral traditions [Van der Veer they endowed or patronized. Yet royal cults were not 1997 (1988):36], Van der Veer later remarked [1994:161] mere contests or confrontations between sects and re- that he and Bakker [1986], the author of the authoritative ligions. There were overlapping interests. For instance, work on the textual material about Ayodhya, had been Van der Veer (1997 [1988]) shows that in Ayodhya (Hindu) naı¨ve to accept the local traditions in British records at Shaivite militant ascetics fought in the armies of the face value.) It is also significant that by 1900 the Nirbani Shiite (Muslim) nawabs and were ousted in the eigh- sect had become the wealthiest of all the Vaishnava sects teenth century by other militant Hindu ascetics, devo- in Ayodhya, having received lands from the British as a tees of Rama, who in their turn came to receive the reward for their loyalty in 1857;by1900 they were doing patronage of the nawabs. well in trade and moneylending (Srivastava 1991b:44). Bipan Chandra (1984:240–49) documents about half a To see how tradition can be more construction than dozen official statements, recorded between 1858 and something preexistent, let us look at another instance. Independence (1947) by secretaries of state in India and Having read in an excavation report about an old and politicians in Britain, concerning the threat that would persistent cult of the goddess of seafarers at and around be presented to British rule if Indians were to unite. To- the Harappan site of Lothal near the Gulf of Khambat, wards the end of the nineteenth century, the secretary in Gujarat in western India (see Rao 1979:134–35), and of state was informing the viceroy, for instance, that if having seen a recently built cement structure on the site the religious communities of India were united in (with the name of the deity inscribed on it) in the 1970s, thought and action it would be “very dangerous politi- I asked local people if I could question some elders about cally” and that civic strife, though “administratively the goddess. Many informants confirmed the existence tiresome,” was “the least risky.” Agreeing with Tagore of the cult but said that the elders would not have any that “Satan cannot enter until he finds a flaw,” Bipan more extensive information to give me. When I persisted Chandra does not generalize that British policy was a in asking how, then, they knew about this deity, all re- cause of religious antagonisms; he notes nevertheless plied that they had learned about it from the officers of that the policy of divide et impera pronounced by El- the ASI (during the years when the excavations were phinstone in 1858 was a subtle one, involving turning a going on).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Book Reviews 275 Methodologies of Field Enquiries' As Lying Locked In
    Book Reviews 275 methodologies of field enquiries’ as lying locked in our pre-colonial texts. Rather, to my mind, it is the hegemony of history over archaeology in most academic institutions in India that has stifled the growth of the latter. If at all there is any hope in translating this vision into a reality, then this is a task that perhaps can only be entrusted to new archaeology centres located within universities in India sometime in the future. Supriya Varma Centre for Historical Studies, School of Social Sciences Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India Shereen Ratnagar, Harappan Archaeology: Early State Perspectives, Primus Books, Delhi, 2016, 326 pp., `2195. DOI: 10.1177/0257643017707693 The long archaeological scholarship of the Bronze Age Harappan (or Indus) Civilization (c. 2600 BCE–1800 BCE) provides a view of shifting disciplinary trends within South Asian archaeology. One can trace the moves away from overarching diffusionary approaches and ‘rise and fall’ of archaeological cultures to experi- ment with the application of new theoretical turns within archaeology, which have largely been fashioned by archaeological research in Western Europe and North America. One can also trace the adoption of sophisticated methods of archaeo- logical sciences, which reveal many details and minutiae that were once deemed irretrievable by earlier generations of archaeologists. Yet, the above advances have failed to eradicate the positivist archaeology of South Asia, which breeds fundamentalisms of many kinds, especially of scientificism and nationalism. Thus, the scientific scholarship of the Harappan Civilization is also being increas- ingly used for establishing truisms of national heritage and partisan and identity politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Truth Down There?: Cultural Heritage Conflict and the Politics of Archaeological Authority
    IS THE TRUTH DOWN THERE?: CULTURAL HERITAGE CONFLICT AND THE POLITICS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL AUTHORITY IAN BARBER PUBLIC HISTORY REVIEW, VOL 13, 2006, PP143-154 enerally it is acknowledged that conflict is axiomatic in any contemporary system of heritage (or cultural) resource management.1 Tunbridge and G Ashworth2 argue that dissonance (‘a discordance or a lack of agreement and consistency’) is ‘intrinsic’ to heritage, since ‘selection is inevitable’ and ‘any creation of heritage from the past disinherits someone [else] completely or partially, actively or potentially’. In this process there may be conflict between stakeholders who feel alienated from the physical reference points of their own past, and those decision-makers who would modify or appropriate that past. In overview, the selection pressures that are at the core of cultural heritage conflicts are complex and wide-ranging. Disagreement spans differences over the treatment and care of sites through to the targeted destruction of cultural property and associated customary communities.3 Affected communities may contest decisions that seem to dismiss their own heritage sites and associated narratives and practices. At the extreme end of the scale, these differences may lead to sectarian violence and the destruction of cultural property. Conflict can also occur between cultural heritage practitioners themselves over how, and even whether, to research the contested past.4 The appeal of the material archaeological record is often enhanced where the past is referenced in postcolonial or nationalist conflicts. In these disputes, archaeologists may be found as expert witnesses in legal proceedings (for example, Sutton’s article in this volume) or as public advocates for or against communities with customary or other cultural heritage associations.5 Newly discovered archaeological features and artifacts may be given considerable if tendentious weight or be subject to critical scrutiny and dismissal.
    [Show full text]
  • Semester IV (Electives Only) the Following Papers Are Added to The
    Semester IV (Electives Only) The following papers are added to the 4th Semester as electives. The detailed syllabus will be provided in time. 1. History of Peasants and Artisans in India: From Formations to the Colonial Take Over. 2. Aspects of Workers and Peasants Movements in Modern India 3. Landmarks in Environmental History of India 54 4. History of Human Rights Movements in India 5. Social History of Art and Architecture: Select Areas and Themes Paper XVI - Ancient Society OR Ancient Civilizations of West Asia OR History of Peasants and Artisans in India: From Formations to the Colonial Take Over Landmarks in Environmental History of India OR Aspects of Workers and Peasants Movements in Paper XVII - Modern India OR India: The Making of Colony OR Economic History of Modern India OR History of Democratic Institutions and Movements in England Rise of Modern China OR Rise of Modern Japan History of Human Rights Movements in India OR History of the Capitalist World Trade OR Diplomatic History of USA Paper XVIII - Contemporary India , Society and Economy OR Social History of Art and Architecture: Select Areas and Themes Paper XIX - Dissertation Viva Voce Paper XX - Paper XXI - Paper XXII - 55 Paper XV. Ancient Society (The Paper is intended to enable the students to gain in-depth knowledge about very ancient societies in terms of their formations. It seeks to have a special focus on the institutional and organizational features of ancient Societies. The readings have to be augmented with additions.) 1. Origins of Food Production: The West Asian Neolithic Societies - Expansion of the Neolithic- Chalcolithic Societies.
    [Show full text]
  • Judgment RJB-BM
    1 4251 123 3rd Cent. BC 185 124 Pre-Mauryan 184 125 3rd Cent. BC 185 126 3rd Cent. B.C. 176 That there are a large number discrepancies also in the description of these Terracotta finds, which also create doubts upon the bonafides of the A.S.I. Team giving such incorrect descriptions. It is true that when archaeological deposits are disturbed, it is not surprising to find earlier material in later levels. This happens when construction or leveling activities require the bringing in of soil from peripheral areas or the clearing and mixing of older deposits. On the other hand, the reverse is impossible, that is we cannot, in an earlier stratified context, find material of later periods. However, the latter appears to be the case at Ayodhya in the context of terracotta figurines as seen in the tabulation provided on pp. 174-203. We find in numerous cases figurines of later periods in far earlier levels, as is evident from the following Table:- Table of Discrepancies in stratigraphy in relation to terracotta figurines Artefact details Discrepancies S. No. 50 R. No. 1027. Layer 2 below Floor 2 belongs to Part of human figurine. Medieval period. It is impossible Mughal level. G5, for a Medieval period layer to layer 2, below Floor 2 have material from Mughal period which is later S. No. 52 R. No. 393. Layer 5 in E8 is Post Gupta (7th - Animal figurine. Late 10th centuries AD). It is Medieval period. E8, impossible for late medieval layer 5 (Mughal) period material to be found in an earlier period.
    [Show full text]
  • Occasional Paper No. 159 ARCHAEOLOGY AS EVIDENCE: LOOKING BACK from the AYODHYA DEBATE TAPATI GUHA-THAKURTA CENTRE for STUDIES I
    Occasional Paper No. 159 ARCHAEOLOGY AS EVIDENCE: LOOKING BACK FROM THE AYODHYA DEBATE TAPATI GUHA-THAKURTA CENTRE FOR STUDIES IN SOCIAL SCIENCES, CALCUTTA EH £>2&3 Occasional Paper No. 159 ARCHAEOLOGY AS EVIDENCE: LOOKING BACK FROM THE AYODHYA DEBATE j ; vmm 12 AOS 1097 TAPATI GUHA-THAKURTA APRIL 1997 CENTRE FOR STUDIES IN SOCIAL SCIENCES, CALCUTTA 10 Lake Terrace, Calcutta 700 029 1 ARCHAEOLOGY AS EVIDENCE: LOOKING BACK FROM THE AYODHYA DEBATE Tapati Guha-Thakurta Archaeology in India hit the headlines with the Ayodhya controversy: no other discipline stands as centrally implicated in the crisis that has racked this temple town, and with it, the whole nation. The Ramjanmabhoomi movement, as we know, gained its entire logic and momentum from the claims to the prior existence of a Hindu temple at the precise site of the 16th century mosque that was erected by Babar. Myth and legend, faith and belief acquired the armour of historicity in ways that could present a series of conjectures as undisputed facts. So, the 'certainty' of present-day Ayodhya as the historical birthplace of Lord Rama passes into the 'certainty' of the presence of an lOth/llth century Vaishnava temple commemorating the birthplace site, both these in turn building up to the 'hard fact' of the demolition of this temple in the 16th century to make way for the Babri Masjid. Such invocation of'facts' made it imperative for a camp of left/liberal/secular historians to attack these certainties, to riddle them with doubts and counter-facts. What this has involved is a righteous recuperation of the fields of history and archaeology from their political misuse.
    [Show full text]
  • Trails, Footprints, Hoofprints
    J Biosci (2019)44:56 Ó Indian Academy of Sciences DOI: 10.1007/s12038-019-9878-2 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) Trails, footprints, hoofprints SHEREEN RATNAGAR Formerly Professor of Archaeology, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India (Email, [email protected]) This paper takes issue with the notion behind some genetic sampling of populations that there are autochthonous groups (designated tribal) in India, and that to give a group, its ‘anthropological name’ [sic] is valid. The archaeological and textual evidence of the earliest known Indo-Europeans and Indo-Iranians is given in bare outline. Possible trails of the Indo-Aryans of Iron-age South Asia are detected in archaeological records, immigration through mountains in the northwest with horses and two-humped camels, and also incursions of small groups of horse-riders, from Vidarbha all the way south to the Tamil country. Keywords. Archaeology; human groups as samples; horses and riders The task assigned to me was to give an archaeological ‘colonization’ (Sankalia et al. 1971) because the chalcolithic perspective on the origin, diversity and migration of popu- settlers had brought with them a knowledge of some crops lations. Archaeology’s subject matter is material remains in and animals, the ways of house building, fabricating stone their contexts (the natural habitat, the dwellings or deserted tools, pottery firing and so on. In their work on the Neolithic houses, or graves or foundations of sacred buildings). and chalcolithic peopling of Malwa and Maharashtra, Material culture is understood as artefacts with their diverse scholars of the Deccan College repeatedly referred to the individual traits, their discovery as assemblages, and their ‘colonization’ of various sites and regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Negotiating Evidence: History, Archaeology and the Indus Civilisation
    Modern Asian Studies 39, 2 (2005) pp. 399–426. C 2005 Cambridge University Press doi:10.1017/S0026749X04001611 Printed in the United Kingdom Negotiating Evidence: History, Archaeology and the Indus Civilisation SUDESHNA GUHA University of Cambridge I Following the destruction of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in December 1992, the discipline of archaeology has been increasingly exploited for meeting the demands of religious nationalism in India, for offering material proof for the primordiality of Hindu dharma, and for substan- tiating claims that the ‘Vedic Hindu’ had an indigenous origin within the subcontinent. Over the last decade, statements such as ‘new astro- logical and archaeological evidence has come to light which suggests that the people who composed the Vedas called themselves Aryans and were indigenous to India’ (Prinja 1996: 10), have not only propped up the doctrinaire of Hindutva, but have also acquired an official sanc- tioning from many within the professional community of Indian ar- chaeologists (e.g. Lal 1998), who are actively involved in a programme of promoting the premise that it is possible to unearth true histories objectively through archaeological means (Gupta 1996: 142). The decision taken by the Allahabad High Court in March 2003,to examine the Vishwa Hindu Parishad’s claim for the existence of an ancient Rama temple at Ayodhya through an excavation, has added to the claims of these archaeologists, as this is the first instance in the history of Indian archaeology where the discipline’s principal method (i.e. excavations) has been legally endowed with the potentials for unearthing the ‘truth’. The verdict of the State judiciary of Uttar Pradesh, which requested the Archaeological Survey of India1 to I thank Simon Schaffer, Eivind Kahrs and Michael Dodson for their comments on an earlier draft.
    [Show full text]
  • Indus and Mesopotamian Trade Networks: New Insights from Shell and Carnelian Artifacts
    INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS BETWEEN SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST ASIA. STUDIES IN COMMEMORATION OF E.C.L. DURING CASPERS (1934-1996) E. Olijdam & R.H. Spoor (eds) BAR International Series 1826 (2008): 19-28 Indus and Mesopotamian Trade Networks: New Insights from Shell and Carnelian Artifacts Jonathan Mark Kenoyer Ever since the discovery of the Indus Valley Civilization, the question of trade contacts with outside regions has been a topic of con- siderable discussion. Among various controversial issues is the question of whether Mesopotamian merchants or other individuals were ever present in the Indus Valley itself. One of the leading scholars to contribute to this discussion was Elisabeth During Caspers. Although there is still no convincing evidence for the presence of Mesopotamians in the Indus cities (Chakrabarti 1990), the interpre- tations proposed by During Caspers (1982; 1984; 1994) and others have led to the critical analysis of the types of evidence for trade contacts in both major regions (Ratnagar 2001; Possehl 1997). In this article I review some of the evidence for Indus internal and ex- ternal trade and present some new information based on my comparative analysis of shell artifacts and beads from the Indus Valley and the Royal Cemetery at Ur. Although my study of the carnelian beads has remained unfinished due to the current political situa- tion in Iraq, it is possible to make some suggestions for future research and the possible outcome of such studies. Indus Trade and Exchange can assume that these adjacent regions were in fact a part of the internal trade networks, supplying the Indus cities Since all of the major urban centers of the Indus valley with rocks, minerals and processed metals such as cop- are located in the vast alluvial plains of the Indus river per, bronze, lead and tin.
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Palace Life at Mohenjo-Daro
    South Asian Studies ISSN: 0266-6030 (Print) 2153-2699 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsas20 Aspects of Palace Life at Mohenjo-Daro Massimo Vidale To cite this article: Massimo Vidale (2010) Aspects of Palace Life at Mohenjo-Daro, South Asian Studies, 26:1, 59-76, DOI: 10.1080/02666031003737232 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02666031003737232 Published online: 04 May 2010. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 593 Citing articles: 2 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsas20 South Asian Studies Vol. 26, No. 1, March 2010, 59–76 Aspects of Palace Life at Mohenjo-Daro Massimo Vidale* Department of Archaeology University of Padua, Italy In Indus urban sites, monumental buildings (with famous exceptions such as the ‘Great Bath’ at Mohenjo-Daro or the ‘Granary’ at Harappa) are often difficult to distinguish from surrounding constructions, and their functions remain quite uncertain. Ninety years ago archaeologists failed to appreciate the complex interlocking among ancient floors and trampling surfaces, wall foundations and earthen fillings created by continuous rebuilding. However, when we reconsider architecture in light of new excavations in Pakistan and India, the hypothesis that large palace-like complexes actually existed at Mohenjo-Daro gains substantial support. A large architectural complex in the HR area had been previously identified by Sir John Marshall as a palace, and now we can recognize the remains of its monumental entrances with massive ring-stone columns. Another building to the rear, cursorily described in John Marshall’s report, might be identified as a ‘Little Bath’,a tank surrounded by four fired brick pillars, with a well, a large drain, and a porch surrounded by carefully planned rooms.
    [Show full text]
  • A REPORT* the 68Th Session of Indian History Congress (IHC) Was Organized During on 28-30 December, 2007 at the University of Delhi, Delhi
    Indian Journal of History of Science, 43.1 (2008) 135-136 NEWS INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS PANEL ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY IN INDIA’S PAST – A REPORT* The 68th session of Indian History Congress (IHC) was organized during on 28-30 December, 2007 at the University of Delhi, Delhi. The Congress was attended by over 1500 scholars from all over the country and a few from abroad and a large number of papers were presented on various sessions alongwith a few special lectures by renowned scholars on different themes like i) DD Koshambi’s birth Centenary Celebrations on Reason in History, ii) 60 years of Indian Independence, and iii) Forms of Anti Colonial Resistance to British Rule. The remarkable feature of this congress was a special panel devoted to Science and Technology in India’s past. This two day session (29-30 December 2007) was organized by the Aligarh Historian Society (AHS) and was personally supervised by Professor Emeritus Irfan Habib, , AMU, who is also the Chairman of the AHS. Professor Habib’s effort was greatly appreciated by the scholars for designing this special panel under the auspices of IHC to inculcate wide interest in India’s rich scientific and cultural heritage. The panel was divided into four sessions and were chaired by renowned historians like Professors Suraj Bhan, Sabyasachi Bhattacharya and J V Nayak. The following seventeen papers were presented and discussed in different sessions in which seven INSA Project Investigators also contributed research papers: 1. Prehistoric Technology in India by Professor K Padayya, Pune. 2. The Drainage Systems at Mohenjo-Daro and Nausharo : A Technological Breakthrough or a Stinking Disaster by Professor Shereen Ratnagar , Mumbai.
    [Show full text]
  • ANSWERED ON:28.11.2016 Reconstitution of Central Advisory Board on Culture Gopalakrishnan Shri R.;Sathyabama Smt
    GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CULTURE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO:2040 ANSWERED ON:28.11.2016 Reconstitution of Central Advisory Board on Culture Gopalakrishnan Shri R.;Sathyabama Smt. V. Will the Minister of CULTURE be pleased to state: a) whether the Government has recently reconstituted and revamped the Central Advisory Board on Culture (CABC) and Central Advisory Board on Archaeology (CABA); b) if so, the details thereof along with its constitution and terms of reference; c) whether the Committee has been assigned with any special tasks to identify new plans and to guide the works of various schemes/ missions under the Ministry; and d) if so, the details thereof and the targets set for achieving the mission? Answer MINISTER OF STATE (IC) CULTURE AND TOURISM (DR. MAHESH SHARMA) a) Yes, Madam. CABC has been reconstituted on 25.10.2016. CABA was last reconstituted on 17th February,2014. (b) (i) The details and terms for constitution of CABC are at Annexure- I. (ii) The details and terms for constitution of CABA are at Annexure- II. (c & d)- Yes, Madam. Central Advisory Board on Culture (CABC) has been constituted to advise the Ministry of Culture at the policy level to evolve programmes which would focus attention on the creativity at different levels of Indian society, and in different regions, which hitherto has been either neglected or not sustained through the existing institutional mechanisms. Central Advisory Board on Archaeology (CABA) is constituted with a view to promote closer contacts of the Archaeological Survey of India with Indian Universities conducted Archaeological Researches and other Institutions carrying out studies related to application of archaeological principles, training future archaeologists and providing for closer association of learned societies in India and of the State Government with the activities of the Archaeological Survey of India.
    [Show full text]
  • South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, 24/25 | 2020 Creating Suitable Evidence of the Past? Archaeology, Politics, and Hindu Nati
    South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal 24/25 | 2020 The Hindutva Turn: Authoritarianism and Resistance in India Creating Suitable Evidence of the Past? Archaeology, Politics, and Hindu Nationalism in India from the End of the Twentieth Century to the Present Anne-Julie Etter Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/samaj/6926 DOI: 10.4000/samaj.6926 ISSN: 1960-6060 Publisher Association pour la recherche sur l'Asie du Sud (ARAS) Electronic reference Anne-Julie Etter, « Creating Suitable Evidence of the Past? Archaeology, Politics, and Hindu Nationalism in India from the End of the Twentieth Century to the Present », South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal [Online], 24/25 | 2020, Online since 03 December 2020, connection on 15 December 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/samaj/6926 ; DOI : https://doi.org/ 10.4000/samaj.6926 This text was automatically generated on 15 December 2020. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Creating Suitable Evidence of the Past? Archaeology, Politics, and Hindu Nati... 1 Creating Suitable Evidence of the Past? Archaeology, Politics, and Hindu Nationalism in India from the End of the Twentieth Century to the Present Anne-Julie Etter 1 Stating that archaeology and politics are closely linked is quite trivial. Archaeology has a double function, whose respective borders tend to overlap: a scientific one, which is to produce and disseminate knowledge about the past, and an ideological one (Demoule 2020:7). Such interference has been in place since the nineteenth century. Chronology is important here: archaeology developed as a discipline at the time of nation-building in Europe.
    [Show full text]