Executive Summary:
This document is the Ministry of Culture's response to Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 96, answered on July 21, 2025, regarding the Keezhadi excavation report. It addresses concerns about the report's review process, alleged deficiencies, archaeologist transfers, and the government's commitment to the excavation's autonomy and report release. The response clarifies the standard procedures followed by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and reaffirms commitment to scientific accuracy and legal compliance.
Key Points / Main Content:
* **Report Review and Acceptance:**
* ASI follows a standard procedure where excavation reports submitted by the lead archaeologist are vetted by experts.
* Expert comments are shared with the lead archaeologist for finalization.
* There is no practice of rejecting reports; instead, conclusions are verified and incorporated.
* The Keezhadi excavation report is currently under review, with expert comments yet to be finalized.
* **Lead Archaeologist Transfer:**
* The allocation of works to archaeological officers is a routine administrative matter.
* **Excavation Autonomy and Report Release:**
* Excavations are conducted according to the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and Rules of 1959.
* ASI is committed to following the law and due scientific process for releasing accurate findings.
* Views of eminent experts will be incorporated for a scientifically authentic record.
* **Expert Suggestions (Annexure):**
* Nomenclatures of the three periods require change.
* The time bracket of 8th century BC to 5th century BCE for Period 1 is not justified.
* The other two periods should be determined based on scientific AMS dates and recovered material, considering stratigraphical details.
* The earliest period, based on current knowledge, may originate in pre-300 BCE.
* For scientific dates, the depth of the sample and the layers should be marked for comparative consistency analysis.
* Details missing include: Redrawn village map, content map, plate drawing plan, contour cuttings, plan map giving location of trenches, reoriented cultural period, stratigraphy drawing image, and graffiti.
Impact Analysis:
* **ASI Archaeologists:**
* Impact: Must incorporate expert comments and finalize the Keezhadi excavation report according to established procedures. Must adhere to the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and Rules of 1959.
* Action Required: Review and address expert suggestions, revise the report accordingly, and ensure scientific accuracy.
* **Ministry of Culture:**
* Impact: Responsible for overseeing the excavation process and ensuring compliance with relevant laws and scientific standards.
* Action Required: Continue to follow due process in reviewing and releasing the Keezhadi report.
* **Tamil Nadu Archaeology Department:**
* Impact: Currently conducting the Keezhadi excavation.
* Action Required: Continue excavations as per established guidelines.
* **Experts:**
* Impact: Providing expertise in the vetting process of the excavation report.
* Action Required: Provide thorough feedback and suggestions to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the report.
Key Entities Referenced
Keezhadi: An archaeological site in Tamil Nadu, India, where excavations are being conducted.
Archaeological Survey of India (ASI): An Indian government agency responsible for archaeological research and the conservation and preservation of cultural monuments in the country.
Tamil Nadu Archaeology Department: The archaeology department of the Government of Tamil Nadu, involved in the Keezhadi excavation.
Amarnath Ramakrishna: The lead archaeologist who prepared the initial Keezhadi excavation report.
Gajendra Singh Shekhawat: The Minister of Culture and Tourism who provided the answer to the Lok Sabha question.
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958: An act of the Indian Parliament providing for the preservation of ancient and historical monuments and archaeological sites and remains of national importance.
Lok Sabha: The lower house of the Parliament of India, where the unstarred question about Keezhadi excavation was raised.
Dr. T Sumathy Alias Thamizhachi Thangapandian: Member of Parliament who raised the question about the Keezhadi excavation in Lok Sabha.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF CULTURE
LOK SABHA
UNSTARRED QUESTION NO.96
ANSWERED ON. 21.07.2025
KEEZHADI EXCAVATION REPORT BY TAMIL NADU ARCHAEOLOGY
DEPARTMENT/ASI
96. Dr. T Sumathy Alias Thamizhachi Thangapandian:
Will the Minister of CULTURE be pleased to state:
(a) whether the Keezhadi excavation report prepared by the Archaeological Survey of
India (ASI)/ Tamil Nadu Archaeology Department under Amarnath Ramakrishna was
officially reviewed by the Government after submission in June 2025;
(b) if so, the details of the specific deficiencies cited by the Government or ASI leading to
rejection, with dates and expert opinions;
(c) the rationale behind repeated transfer of the lead archaeologist within nine months
and its impact on excavation continuity; and
(d) whether the Government is likely to commit to restoring excavation autonomy, release
the full Keezhadi report and set up a joint expert panel including Tamil Nadu Government
appointees in line with protecting Tamil heritage and Dravidian pride?
ANSWER
THE MINISTER OF CULTURE AND TOURISM
(SHRI GAJENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT)
(a) & (b) Excavations conducted by Archaeologists of ASI are done over a period of
time during which more than one Archaeologist may have led the excavations. The
lead Archaeologist submits a report of the excavation, which is vetted by the
experts at ASI. After duly verifying and incorporating the conclusions of experts in
concurrence with the lead excavation Archaeologist, ASI releases an official report.
Keezhadi excavation has been conducted under the aegis of ASI and a report of
lead Archaeologist is under review. The comments of experts have been shared
with the lead Archaeologist, which are still to be finalized.Excerpts of observations of experts are given at Annexure. There is no practice of
rejecting a report as explained in the aforementioned paragraph. Excavations at
important sites are done by ASI as well as State Archaeology Departments and
academic institutions. Currently, the Keezhadi excavation is being conducted by
the State Archaeology Department of Tamil Nadu.
(c) Allocation of works to archaeological officers is a routine administrative matter.
(d) The excavations in the country are conducted as per the provisions of the Ancient
Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, and the Rules of
1959. ASI is fully committed to follow the law and due scientific process for
releasing the accurate findings based on the excavation at Keezhadi. Views of
eminent experts will be taken and incorporated for scientifically authentic record.ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PART (A) AND (B) OF LOK SABHA
UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 96 FOR 21.07.2025
As per experts suggestion:
(a) the nomenclatures of the three periods require change.
(b) the time bracket of 8th century BC to 5th century BCE given for Period 1 is not justified at all.
(c) The Other two periods should also be determined on the basis of scientific AMS dates and the
material recovered in view of stratigraphical details. For the earliest period in the present state of
our knowledge we can, at the maximum, suggest than it originates somewhere in pre-300 BCE.
(d) for the available scientific dates only depth from where the sample has been collected may not
be enough but the layers should also be marked for comparative consistency analysis.
Details missing
● The village map must be redrawn
● Content/map
● Plate
● Drawing
● Plan
● Contour
● Cuttings (A plan/map giving location of the trenches)
● Cultural Period to be reoriented as specified
● Stratigraphy
● Drawing
● Image-Graffiti
****