Language-based AI systems could aid in organising reports in archaeology
Independent India was challenged in every sphere of life. Archeology was no exception. Historian Himanshu Prabha Roy and co-author Ajay Yadav map its journey in a new book, “Indian Archeology After Independence: Amalananda Ghosh and His Legacy.” They also calculate how AI can help archaeology.1. Archeology in pre-independent India was primarily a colonial subject. What were the main challenges in its colonization?Answer: From its inception in 1861, the ASI was headed by classical (Greek and Latin) trained British officers till 1948 – Daya Ram Sahni (1931-1935) and KN Dixit (1937-1944). With their expertise in Greek and Latin and Greco-Roman archaeology, ASI’s research agenda was set by DGs who saw India’s past as a search for Alexander’s legacy (Alexander Cunningham 1861–1885) or as a validation of Roman imperial greatness through trade with India (Wheeler-Morti 1948). ASI’s primary function from its inception was to preserve monuments. These included those that exemplified Britain’s imperial glory, as well as those built during colonial rule.In contrast, British dignitaries’ Indian subjects had mastery of Sanskrit, Tamil and other Indian languages and scripts, and were keen to discover India’s past for its citizens, not for European audiences. Thus, the challenges of decolonizing the ASI were twofold: one, to shift the focus from understanding Indian archeology through a Greco-Roman lens to the core of the Indian cultural landscape that had developed and evolved in various ecological niches across the country since the prehistoric period; And secondly, the inclusion of a large number of monuments protected by Princely States before 1947 within the ambit of ASI’s conservation budget.2. Before ASI was born in 1861 was Bhagwanlal Indraji (1839-88). Would you say something about his life and work?Answer: Born and brought up in Junagadh, Gujarat, Bhagwanlal Indraji should without doubt be considered as one of the earliest dedicated archaeologists of India. He not only deciphered some Ashokan inscriptions but also discovered inscriptions at Bairat near Jaipur and Sopara near Mumbai. In 1882 Indraji excavated a Buddhist stupa known as the Buruda (or basket-maker) king’s fort west of modern Sopara, which contained many Buddhist relics.3. Amalanand Ghosh served as Director General of ASI from 1958-1973. You write about his “strategy, skill and vision”. What makes his tenure important enough to be part of the book’s title?Answer: Ghosh’s leadership style was to promote teamwork rather than seeking individual glory. This is what distinguishes him from his predecessors and his followers. The survey of Bikaner by his team and him was to understand the cultural context of the settlement along the Ghaggar river system rather than the exploration of the Harappan sites that India lost to Pakistan in 1947, as is commonly suggested. Engagement with the archeology of neighboring countries was a hallmark of Ghosh’s approach and is evident in ASI’s participation in the UNESCO rescue mission in Nubia, Egypt; Centenary Celebrations and Conference on Asian Archeology in 1961.4. In recent decades, bureaucrats have led the ASI. Often, they have a short duration. Has it worked to the benefit or detriment of the organization?Answer: After Ghosh’s 15-year term ended in 1968, the leadership became increasingly fragmented, although professional archaeologists remained in charge until the early 1980s. From the 1990s onwards, as the organization became heavily involved in court-ordered mining, heritage litigation, tourism management and World Heritage compliance, the government began appointing senior IAS officers as directors-general. This shift has produced mixed results, since internally, ASI has long been structured by competing professional lineages, mining-based loyalties, and regional networks. The key problem, therefore, is not the director general’s background, but the absence of stable, long-term leadership in a discipline that relies on cumulative knowledge and durable institutional memory. Each leadership change at ASI tends to reset rather than consolidate priorities.5. What would you say are the challenges today for an archaeologist in India?Answer: Ghosh identified two challenges for archaeologists in India: training and employment opportunities. These continue to plague Indian archeology in the present6. AI is the buzzword in all aspects of our lives today. What could be its role in archeology?In archaeology, it is useful to distinguish between language-based AI and research or data-driven AI, as their functions and limits are quite different. Language-based AI systems primarily work with text and can help organize excavation reports, scan archives, and make site records searchable. Such tools could significantly improve access to the ASI’s vast but untapped archival holdings and repositories of inscriptions. Research-based AI, in contrast, operates on numerical, spatial or visual data rather than text. In India, these applications can help identify potential site clusters, identify paleo-river systems, or identify flag anomalies requiring ground verification. But AI cannot serve as a substitute for archaic methods and judgments.
