In News:

The Keezhadi archaeological site, located near Madurai along the Vaigai River in Tamil Nadu’s Sivaganga district, is a major site of cultural and historical significance. It offers compelling evidence of an urban, literate, and industrialized Tamil civilization dating back to the Sangam Age.

Background and Discovery

• Discovered: Surveys in 2013–14; Excavations began in 2015.
• Excavating Agencies: Initially conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and later by the Tamil Nadu State Archaeology Department.
• Excavated Area: Only 1 out of 100 acres has been explored; over 4,000 artefacts recovered.

Significant Findings

• Carbon Dating (AMS) of charcoal: Indicates urban habitation existed by 200 BCE.
• Key Discoveries: Brick structures, ring wells, pottery with Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions, beads, graffiti, water storage facilities, and a large decorative pot unique to the region.
• Artefacts suggest links with North India and Western trade networks.

Cultural and Historical Significance

• Suggests early urbanization in South India, independent of northern influence.
• Supports theories of a pre-Sangam urban Tamil culture.
• Establishes Keezhadi as a centre of literacy, trade, and craftsmanship.
• Mention of nearby settlements like Manalur and Konthagai in Tamil classics such as Tiruvilayadal Puranam strengthens the site's literary links.

Sangam Period Context

• Spanned approximately 3rd century BCE to 3rd century CE.
• Tamil academies or ‘Sangams’ under the Pandya dynasty produced extensive literature.
• Notable texts: Tolkappiyam, Ettuthogai, Pattupattu, Padinenkilkanakku, and epics like Silappadikaram, Manimekalai, and CivakaCintamani.
• Literature depicts advanced socio-political systems, agriculture, trade, and maritime activities.

Current Issues and ASI Involvement

• The excavation report prepared by archaeologist Amarnath Ramakrishna (submitted in January 2023) has been returned by ASI for revision to ensure:
  • Accurate period classification.
  • Better stratigraphic and cartographic details.
  • Consistency in scientific dating and layer mapping.
• ASI has flagged the need for clearer mapping, missing illustrations, and precise scientific justification for dating claims, especially for Period I (8th to 5th century BCE).

Controversy and Criticism

• Concerns have been raised over delays in publishing excavation reports.
• Critics highlight a perceived bias in the handling of southern archaeological sites, pointing to similar delays with the Adichanallur site report.
• Experts stress the importance of transparent and timely reporting to enhance historical understanding.