Collections · A guide to the archive
Read seals, pottery and sculpture through excavation reports, museum identifiers and the limits of recorded custody.
Start with the particular object or excavated group rather than a broad cultural label. These guides compare a field report, a specialised study and museum records. Record what was actually inspected, then ask whether a place field describes manufacture, discovery, acquisition or a regional attribution. The seal history adds a separate question about the limits of interpreting signs. Ancient context and later custody need their own evidence.
An intentional selection
An inspected Harappa excavation report and a precisely identified museum seal show how material, find context, object number and published comparisons belong together.
Two independently authored excavation studies show how vessel labels, burial preservation and workshop evidence change the questions that can be asked of pottery from Harappa.
Compare actual seals and impressions while keeping visible signs, possible functions and unverified readings distinct.
Two identified Gandharan sculptures and a museum’s field definitions show why an ancient date, regional attribution, excavation context and collection history answer different questions.
How we use sources, explain uncertainty and correct mistakes.
Your browser could not save your reading list. It will be lost when you leave this page.