24-05-2025
ASI seeks revised report on TN excavations
The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has challenged the dating and classification of key discoveries from Tamil Nadu's Keeladi excavations, asking its officer to carry out extensive revisions to a report that underpins the state government's, and of rival Dravidian parties', claims about ancient Tamil civilisation.
In a May 21 letter, ASI asked K Amarnath Ramakrishna—who led the first two phases of excavations at the politically sensitive site—to rework his 982-page findings submitted in January 2023. The central agency said two experts had vetted the report and suggested five corrections to make it 'more authentic.'
ASI questioned his classification of three historical periods and suggested the earliest dating was 'very early,' placing it 'at maximum, somewhere in pre-300 BCE'—significantly more recent than claims supporting Tamil Nadu's narrative.
The intervention strikes at what has become a core issue of an escalating political conflict over Keeladi, a site near Madurai that has become central to the ruling DMK government's campaign to establish an ancient history of Tamil civilisation.
Ramkrishna did not respond to HT's request for a comment on the matter.
Ramakrishna led ASI's initial excavations at Keeladi from 2015-2017, finding artifacts that appeared are now key to chief minister MK Stalin's contention that Tamil civilisation is thousands of years older than traditionally believed and contemporaneous with major ancient civilisations like the Indus Valley.
But ASI transferred him in 2017 and declared 'no significant findings' after a third round of excavations that were led by a different expert PS Sriraman.
The Tamil Nadu's government took control and made bold assertions about a 5,000-year-old Tamil civilisation, tying to findings Ramakrishna made in a 982-page scientific report submitted in 2023 — it is this report the ASI now wants amended.
The report by Ramakrishna, now ASI's director of antiquities, stems from excavations at Keeladi in that began in March 2015. The site was earmarked alongside several others in Madurai district as part of ongoing research into a possible civilisation that existed on the banks of the Vaigai river. His team discovered brick construction, terracotta and beads that appeared to match descriptions from Tamil Sangam literature, fuelling hopes of validating ancient Tamil texts through archaeological evidence.
ASI's latest intervention questions Ramakrishna's classification of Keeladi into three periods: pre-early historic (8th-5th century BCE), mature early historic (5th century BCE-1st century BCE), and post-early historic (1st century BCE-3rd century CE). The letter from Hemasagar A Naik, ASI's director (exploration and excavation), demanded 'proper nomenclatures or re-orientation' and stated that 'the pre-early historic period requires concrete justification.' The agency insisted that 'the other two periods also be determined on scientific AMS dates and the material recovered with stratigraphical details.'
The agency also cited extensive technical deficiencies, demanding that 'only mentioning depth for the available scientific dates is not enough but the layer number should also be marked for comparative consistency analysis.' The letter detailed missing elements including unclear village maps, absent plates, plan and contour maps, stratigraphy drawings, and plans showing trench locations. 'Therefore, you are hereby requested to resubmit the report after making the necessary corrections for taking further action in this matter,' ASI stated.
In 2017, when ASI declared 'no significant findings' at the site, regional parties protested and approached courts. The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court eventually handed excavation rights to the Tamil Nadu state department of Archaeology in 2018.
The current DMK administration has escalated further, with Stalin declaring in January this year: 'I am telling the world today, the technology of smelting iron began in Tamil Nadu around 5,300 years ago. I am saying it with scientific evidence from recent chronometric results.'
The chief minister has framed these archaeological pursuits as part of a broader ideological battle, arguing that 'many used to argue that it was a figment of imagination that Aryan and Sanskrit were the origin of India,' while asserting that discoveries support claims that 'the language spoken in the Indus Valley could be Dravidian.'
