 |
 |
Reinhardt Bernbeck and Susan Pollock went over some this ground in a 1996 Current Anthropology piece. As I recall, there has already been archaeological activity at the site, and questionable (and questioned) claims for the prior existence of a Hindu temple. At this moment, court-ordered archaeology looks like political theatre. Peter. Bernbeck, Reinhardt, and Susan Pollock 1996 Ayodhya, archaeology, and identity. Current Anthropology 37(Supplement):138-142. Sarah Cross wrote: >Dear All, > >http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,908247,00.html > >A court in India yesterday ordered archaeologists to excavate the site of the >demolished Ayodhya mosque to determine whether a Hindu temple ever existed there. > > >************ > >I find myself puzzled by this story. A part of me is pleased to see archaeologists >contributing to something that is clearly of import to people about their past >- but a much larger part is concerned that we should be the arbiters of truth >in the matter - if archaeologists find a temple then the Hindus are right? >If they don't then the Muslims are? But what does finding a temple mean? Especially >given the results have to be given in six weeks? > >If anyone closer to the situation is in the group I'd love to hear more about >it. Does anyone think that there's a dangerous misunderstanding about what >archaeology is for - is it something we need to explain to our own governments >that this is beyond what can be expected of archaeology. Or does anyone think >its good news? > >thanks >Sarah > >*************************** ADVERTISEMENT ****************************** >Text NISSAN to 57502 for UR chance 2 Win a Brand New Nissan Micra. >Txt costs EUR2 (op charges may vary). >http://interactive.iol.ie/mymobile/html/competition/comp.html > > -- Peter Whitridge Assistant Professor Archaeology Unit, Department of Anthropology Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John's, NF A1C 5S7 tel: (709) 737-2394 fax: (709) 737-2374