An Archaeological Past: Negotiations between Local Communities, Archaeologist and State

About the Speaker

Jaya Menon has been teaching and practising Archaeology for over two decades. Her interests lie in aspects of social archaeology and ancient technology. She currently teaches at Shiv Nadar University.

Abstract

In South Asia, archaeological places often frame and structure the lives of local communities who in turn, impact on these sites. This symbiosis results from the high population density in the Indian subcontinent, particularly in the Gangetic plain of North India. This story gets further complicated by legislative practices of preservation related to ancient monuments and archaeological sites, as well as the custodianship of antiquities and art treasures.

I will, in my presentation, try to bring out the complexities of these issues by focusing on the site of Indor Khera in the Upper Ganga Plains of North India, which was surveyed and excavated between 2004 and 2010. While Indor Khera merited archaeological attention in its own stead, what is usually neglected, particularly in South Asia, are issues related to the current social contexts of archaeological sites. It, thus, becomes imperative to address questions such as (1) local perceptions and the daily negotiations of local residents with the mound; (2) the challenges faced by archaeologists at mounds still inhabited by local communities and; (3) difficulties and hindrances in enforcing the protection of archaeological places, such as Indor Khera. There may be many reasons for the preservation of archaeological places. The most obvious is where archaeological remnants can be commercialized through tourism. In other cases, there may be an emotional connect between local communities and archaeological sites that may be seen as ancestral places. However, in the absence of these factors, local communities are often not vested in preserving archaeological sites, and for the state, protection becomes a challenge. I argue that this is particularly relevant in the case of Indor Khera. The challenge, thus, lies in formulating ways of involving local communities in the preservation of archaeological sites in South Asia.

Report

In South Asian contexts, archeological sites are not isolated from the presence of local communities around them and often structure the lives of these communities whilst also being impacted by their practices. The exercise of archaeology gets further complicated by the legislative action on the preservation of monuments and artefacts and the custodianship of the same. This makes one realise how we tend to overlook the interactions of a site with the communities thriving in and around it, as we saw even in our visit to Barnawa with the proximity of the Sanskrit pathshala to the mound.

Professor Menon illustrated these issues with the example of the site of Indor Kherain in the upper Ganga Plains, which was surveyed and excavated between 2004 and 2010. She brought out in her discussion the question of local perceptions and the kind of daily negotiations local residents have with the mound and the challenges that archaeologists face in enforcing protection in mounds that are still inhabited by local communities.

Archeological sites remain preserved for a variety of reasons, the most prevalent of which is their commercialisation for tourism. However, in a lot of cases, sites survive because of the sentimental value they can hold for local communities as they may be seen as ancestral places.

This gives one insight into the role played by locals in the preservation of sites and artefacts.

But why and how are sites preserved when these conditions are absent? How can one create meaning out of a site for locals?

To answer these questions, prof. Menon brought to attention the fact that excavations call for manual unskilled labour. They present seasonal employment opportunities, feeding the economy and local interests.

However, this need for personal incentive for the preservation of invaluable pieces of history leaves one with the sad realisation that, it is easy to sell the cause of healthcare or education, not easy to sell the cause of heritage.

By Samridhi Agarwal, Undergraduate Class of 2020