Misunderstanding a story for history is pathetic: Indologist R. Balakrishnan

Published on May 24, 2025. On May 23, 2025, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) asked lead archaeologist K. Amarnath Ramakrishna to revise and resubmit his monumental 982-page report on the first two phases of the Keezhadi excavations. The ASI stated that two external experts had vetted the report and recommended changes to enhance its scientific rigour and authenticity. In this episode of Frontline Conversations, indologist and acclaimed author R. Balakrishnan, known for his seminal work "Journey of A Civilization: From Indus to Vagai", shares his insights into this unprecedented development with host R.K. Radhakrishnan. He speaks about the implications of returning a report of such scale and importance, the politics of archaeological narrative-making in India, and the wider significance of the Keezhadi findings for understanding Tamil civilisation and its links to the Indus Valley. Balakrishnan places the Keezhadi episode in historical context—from the early announcements of the Indus Valley Civilisation by the ASI in 1924 to the neglected reports of Adichanallur and the Dravidian paradigm in historical linguistics. He draws on decades of research, field visits, and institutional memory to offer a compelling defence of evidence-based history and public stakeholding in archaeological heritage. Watch the full video to know more Highlights: 1) Why was the Keezhadi report returned? 2) What makes Keezhadi’s findings significant? 3) The role of Tamil Nadu’s archaeological efforts 4) On delay, politics, and narrative control 5) Dravidian topocentrism and the significance of “Keeladi” 6) Can archaeology be misused to rewrite history? Credits: Interview by R.K. Radhakrishnan Camera by Kavya Pradeep M and Mridula V Editing by Sumiesh S