Differing Perspectives on Preservation
- Archaeologist H.H. Cole advocated for the in-situ preservation of ancient art, opposing the removal of artifacts from their original locations.
- Despite Cole’s pleas, authorities did not prioritize preserving Amaravati’s artifacts in situ, contrasting with their approach to Sanchi.
- H.H. Cole’s advocacy for in situ preservation emphasizes the ethical considerations involved in archaeological conservation.
- The failure to adopt Cole’s recommendations at Amaravati underscores the challenges in reconciling preservation efforts with competing interests.
- The contrasting approaches to preservation between Amaravati and Sanchi reflect evolving attitudes towards cultural heritage management.
“Discovering” Stupas The Fate of Amaravati and Sanchi| Class 12 History Notes
Class 12 History “Discovering” Stupas The Fate of Amaravati and Sanchi: In 1796, a local ruler intending to construct a temple stumbled upon the ruins of the stupa at Amaravati. Believing there might be treasure buried within the mound, the ruler decided to repurpose the stone from the site. British official Colin Mackenzie visited the site later, documenting sculptures but never publishing his findings.
The accidental discovery of the Amaravati stupa by a local ruler underscores the unpredictability of archaeological findings. The initial intention to repurpose the stone from the stupa highlights the lack of awareness about the historical and cultural significance of the site.