Indian Archaeology 1988-89: A Review (Volume- 1)

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

In our effort to bring the publication of the Indian Archaeology—A Review up to date, we have been able to publish Indian Archaeology 1988-89—A Review not very long after the publication of the issue for the year 1987-88. If the contributors send us the matter well in time, it may be possible for us to publish the Review regularly. This would depend on the co-operation of my colleagues in the Survey and the State Departments of Archaeology and Museums, the Universities and other institutions.

The present issue of the Review contains, as usual, information about the multifarious activities in the field of archaeology all over the country besides the efforts that the Archaeological Survey of India has been making outside its geographical boundaries. Of the excavations reported in this issue, I would like to mention the work by the Survey at Chechar and ancient site of Vaishali in Bihar, St. Augustine Church at Old Goa, Thanesar in Haryana, Hampi in Karnataka, Balwara, Daulatabad and Adam in Maharashtra, Lalitagiri in Orissa, Sanghol in Punjab and Fatehpur Sikri in Uttar Pradesh; at Sannati in Karnataka jointly by the Survey and the Society for South Asian Studies, U.K., and at Sravasti jointly by the Survey and the Kansai University, Osaka, Japan, besides the work at Kuntasi, jointly by the Deccan College, Pune and the Gujarat State Department of Archaeology, Elchuru by the Andhra State Department of Archacology, at Nagwada by the M.S. University, Baroda, at Ter by the Department of Archaeology and Museums of the Maharashtra Government, at Nagiari by the Punjab State Archaeology, at Purola by the Garhwal University, Srinagar (Garhwal), at Mangalkot by the Department of Archaeology, Calcutta University and at Shikarpur by the Deparment of Archaeology, Government of Gujarat. Details of conservation and other works carried out by the Survey and the different State Departments within the country have also been included, the reference to some of which would not have been out of place, but the paucity of space refrains me from doing so. I would however like to mention here that the Survey continued to carry out the major work of structural conservation and chemical preservation of the Library, southern portion of esplanade, parts of the third and fourth enclosures and the moat of the Angkor Vat in Cambodia.

The credit for bringing out the present issue of the Review mainly goes to my colleagues in the Publication Section of the Survey especially Shri B.M. Pande, Director (Publications), and his associates, Shri C, Dorje, Superintending Archaeologist, Dr. (Km.) Arundhati Banerji, Dy. Super- intending Archaeologist, Shri J.C. Gupta, Production Officer, Shri K.P. Padhy and Shri A. Jha, Assistant Archaeologists for which I am highly grateful to them.