Why do we still describe Indian sacred art as “mythological themes”?
At Patharghat Hill near Kahalgaon, the 7th–8th century panels depict Vaishnava iconography — divine incarnations of Vishnu embedded in theological doctrine.
That is not folklore.
That is theology in stone.
Would scenes of Christ or the Virgin in a European cave church be called “mythological themes”? Or “biblical narrative panels”?
Language is never neutral. It reflects inherited hierarchies.
Colonial archaeology routinely labeled Indian sacred traditions as “mythology,” while treating Abrahamic traditions as “religion” or “theology.” The vocabulary survived. The empire didn’t.
When we describe Vaishnava iconography merely as “mythological,” we subtly distance it from lived metaphysics and philosophical continuity.
Archaeology should describe — not diminish.
Terminology matters. Continuity matters.
Time to update the vocabulary.
The Patharghat Hill caves are a group of ancient rock-cut caves located on a hill facing the Ganges River near Kahalgaon in Bhagalpur district, Bihar. The site has seven caves, with the largest known as Patalpuri Cave, a natural rock fissure of large size, reached by steps carved
GemsOfINDOLOGY