Comment on: “Origin of the Harappan Ernestites: geochemical insights into provenance and fabrication.”

Mahala. et al. (2025, npj Heritage Science 13, 615) provide valuable geochemical insights into Harappan Ernestites. However, several aspects warrant reconsideration: (1) “pseudomullite” terminology lacks validation against established mullite chemistry; (2) temperature estimates (~1100 °C) conflict with mullite formation requirements (>1200 °C); (3) statistical inferences from six samples are insufficient for robust provenance determination; (4) binary mixing models oversimplify multi-component systems; (5) isotopic interpretations inadequately address high-temperature processing effects on Sr-Nd systematics.