Archaeologist and Director at the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) K Amarnath Ramakrishna has strongly pushed back against an internal evaluation of his Keeladi excavation report, insisting that his findings are based on firm archaeological evidence and should be released without further delay, Deccan Herald reported.
Amarnath, who led the excavations that brought national attention to the Sangam-era site near Madurai, has rejected the 114-page assessment prepared by a five-member ASI committee, describing it as “formulaic and lacking substantive engagement with the material unearthed at the site,” the report added.
The committee, comprising ASI officers Priyank Gupta, Garima Kaushik, P Aravazhi, Hemsagar A Naik and Nandini Bhattacharya Sahu, raised concerns about the structure and presentation of Amarnath’s 982-page report, suggesting that its narrative style affected clarity and analytical focus. In a detailed response sent earlier this month to the ASI Director General, Amarnath reportedly disputed both the intent and competence of the review.
According to Deccan Herald, Amarnath argued that the evaluation went beyond the ASI’s standard internal review process and amounted to an attempt to override conclusions drawn from years of fieldwork. He maintained that his report was prepared in accordance with established ASI excavation protocols and grounded in primary archaeological data, including stratigraphy, cultural layers and material remains recovered on site.
The dispute traces back to May 2025, when the ASI asked Amarnath to resubmit his Keeladi report nearly two years after it was first submitted. When he declined, the agency constituted an internal committee to examine the document. Amarnath questioned why such a process was initiated only in the case of Keeladi, noting that excavation reports are typically subjected to editorial scrutiny rather than reassessment of findings.
In his response, Amarnath also raised concerns about how the evaluation was prepared. He suggested that the uniform language and repetitive structure of the document indicated a mechanical approach to review and claimed that the committee had not engaged directly with the site or its material evidence.
He further objected to the committee’s failure to visit Keeladi or independently examine the cultural deposits and artefacts forming the basis of his conclusions. He reiterated that his proposed chronology, placing the site between the 8th century BCE and the 3rd century CE, was derived from systematic excavation and scientific analysis, and should not be altered through a desk-based review.
Keeladi has been at the centre of intense political and academic debate over the past decade. Amarnath was transferred out of Tamil Nadu in 2017, a move that triggered controversy after subsequent excavation phases were publicly described as yielding no major findings. The episode led to allegations of political interference, particularly from Tamil parties.
From the fourth phase onward, excavations at Keeladi were taken over by the Tamil Nadu State Department of Archaeology. Since 2014, nearly 20,000 artefacts have been recovered from the site, contributing to a growing body of evidence about early urbanisation and cultural continuity in the region.