Archaeology as Source and tool of historical reconstruction of Ancient India

 

Short History                                                08/08/2022

Archaeology as Source and tool of historical reconstruction of Ancient India

By the latter half of the 19th, the reconstruction of early Indian history was based on a new set of premises. Theories of historical origin and explanation precluded the need for historical writing in the indigenous tradition. Thus a familiarity with the intellectual history of Europe in the 19th century becomes a precondition to understanding those interpretations of the Indian past.

Indian history is centuries old and has passed through several periods and seen many ups and downs. For re constructing such an old history tremendous efforts are needed because it needed. Much which was even recorded on copper plates is laying buried deep in the earth and in a language which cannot be deciphered. Much has been destroyed by the invaders. In fact there are many difficulties in reconstructing Indian History. Efforts are made to reconstruct it with the help of our religious books, coins, pottery, musical instruments, recorded events, cave and pillar inscriptions and the writings and accounts left by foreigners who visited India from time to time during those old good days. But each source has its own problems and it is difficult to authoritatively say what is true and should be accepted and what should be left out. There are even now many gaps in the narrations of ancient Indian history which are gradually narrowing down as new discoveries are made but nothing can be said with certainly how long will the historians take to fill these gaps. 

Dr. R. C. Mazumdar is of the view that, ‘The literary genius of India, so fertile and active in almost all conceivable branches of study, was not applied to chronling the records of the kings and fall of the states and nations’. Similarly Alberuni also said, “The Hindus do not pay much attention to the historical order of things, they are very careless in relating the chronological succession of their kings, and when they are pressed for information and are at a loss, not knowing what to say, they invariably take to tale-telling”. Though it may be extreme view and one may not agree with what he has said yet it is a fact that in the past not much attention was paid to the recording of events less to chronological recording. Some of the difficulties about the reconstruction of India history are –

(1)  It appears that our ancestors in the ancient past had no love for recording historical events. They attached least importance to it and in fact completely ignored it. Since, Indian history dates back to the remote past this apathy towards history is now posing a serious problem to the students of ancient Indian history and an unbridgeable gape still exists. 

(2) The material which was produced after a lot of difficulties of those days is not available to us as it has been destroyed with the passage of time. This has created a serious gape in the study of ancient Indian history.

(3) Lack of definite chronology was another difficulty to reconstruction of ancient Indian history. One reason perhaps was that each important ruler started a separate era which suited to his taste and by which he wanted to immoralities himself. This is now creating a problem and it is becoming difficult to establish which even happened when.    

(4) In the study of ancient Indian history one more serious problem is that of deciphering of what is available to us. Much of that is available has been written either on copper plates or curved on stones and pillars in the languages which are not decipherable by our present day scholars.

(5) In ancient India there was no system of recording the events but in cases where these were recorded, these were not recorded by court recorders with an eye on history. They exaggerated their qualities, their bravery, their position and what not.

(6) Difficult recording process, that is in ancient India there were no printing process and as such the events were recorded on the copper plates or engraved on stones and rock. The whole task was very difficult, time consuming needed hard labour. Because of difficult recording system most of the rulers did not pay much attention to the recording of the events and thus got only such events recorded which were of great significance of them.

 (7) In our religious books same even is recorded in different version. If the ruler was favourably inclined towards particular religion , the religious books of that religion favourably versioned the even and vice-versa. His has made the authenticity of events doubtful and a source of history which would have been of great value has reduced, if not lost its historical value.

 (8) Ancient Indian source material is lying so much scattered and at so many places that it has become difficult to bring that at one place and link that in a coherent manner.

 (9) Ancient India was divided into small states and each sovereign state had no link with the other. The existence of these many small states is today posing serious problems for the scholars of ancient Indian history.  

(10) One more cause of confusion and difficulty in the study of ancient Indian history is that the name of the rulers of the same name are found at different places, in different dynastical tables and at several other places making the identification of the other real ruler difficult on the one hand and creating confusion on the other.

(11) Continuing excavation also creates difficult for scholars to reconstruct ancient Indian history.

Indigenous literary sources whether Brahmanical, Buddhist or Jain through a lot of light on ancient Indian history. Brahmanic literature include Vedas which are four in number namely, Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sam Veda and Atharv Veda. Archaeological sources include inscriptions, coins, monuments, paintings and sculptures. The sources of Ancient Indian history are divided into two main groups. They are Archaeological and Literary. The Archaeological source can again be divided in to three groups – Archaeological remains, Monuments Inscriptions and Coins. The literary source can also be divided into three groups namely Religious Literature Secular Literature and Accounts of Foreigners

Archaeological Remains and Monuments: Ancient ruins remains and monuments recovered as a result of excavations and exploration are archaeological sources of history. The archaeological remains are subjected to scientific examination of radiocarbon method for its dates. A sources give us some knowledge of the life of the ancient people. It has long been accepted as a scientific discipline providing tangible evidence for building up the superstructure of history. In fact its claim is accepted as supreme especially in such periods where written records are absent or have remained undeciphered. When, however, writer records exist, the materials turned up by the spade convey in a telling manner the impact of the written word.

Archaeological material, however, has to be interpret with a view to determining its real character and significance. Such an interpretation often tends to be subjective vitiating the very purpose of scientific enquiry. The precondition, therefore, is of complete objectivity aided only by such reason and control speculation as warranted by facts. To the extent objectivity is sacrificed, the results are found to be erroneous. This will also largely depend on the field of experience or versatility of the interpreter for a person with limited knowledge and experience is likely to overlook or misinterpret the facts.

Among the varied range of archaeological materials that will be useful for reconstruction of the history of science of India, the fall may be mentioned.

1. Excavated materials and other antiquities;

2. Standing monuments

3. Sculpture, reliefs and paintings on monuments and other objects.

4. Inscribed records

Of these, the last mentioned items viz. inscribed records, is, in fact, a sort of a literary record and could, therefore, be classified as archaeo-literary source material. Perhaps this source has one specialty in as much as it reveals its date or probable period and generally belongs to the region where it is found unlike a manuscript which is copied from time to time liable to be transferred from one place to another and is susceptible to interpretation, diminution or alteration. Hence, inscribed records those found on stone, rock or copperplates are more reliable through in the last named variety spurious records are also sometimes met with.

Archaeological sources material for building up the history of sciences is proposed to be dealt with in a chronological order, highlighting the archaeological evidence that is available during prehistoric, proto historic and early historical period. The consideration of the historical period is generally left out, for, it is during this period written records are available and archaeological sources assumed supplementary and secondary character. It is quite evident that, during the pre-historic period, man was rather a helpless creature struggling, to adapt to the natural environment his technological skill being limited to fashioning of stone tools. It is really in the prehistoric age that he commences his supreme effort to master the environment when the foundation of science and technology was laid.