See also Babri Mosque for the history of the Babri Mosque and the political Ayodhya Debate.

Ram Janmabhoomi refers to a tract of land in the North Indian city of Ayodhya which is believed by many to be the birthplace of the King Ram. The name Ram Janmabhoomi simply means "birthplace of Ram."

It is located in Ayodhya in the state of Uttar Pradesh and has found itself at the epicentre of communal politics in modern India. It was commonly believed, by certain sections in India, until about 1990 that an ancient Ram Janmabhoomi temple was demolished and replaced with the Babri Mosque which stood on the site until 1992. Historical opinion on the matter is divided. The site is intensely contested because the mosque - which was unused but had consequentially acquired symbolic value - was forcibly demolished by a group of Hindu rioters on December 6, 1992. Efforts to replace the mosque with a temple had been on since 1947, but had been continually stymied by both the central government and various Indian courts. Its demolition triggered large-scale rioting across India and led to intense communal tensions between the majority Hindu community and the Indian Muslim community. It continues to be a major issue in Indian politics.

Ayodhya is a city sacred to devotees of Vishnu, who many Hindus believe took birth as King Ram, and has several temples devoted to the deity.

History of the Ram temple

19th century

The Hindus of Ayodhya never lost the tradition to worship Ram on the Ramkot hill, and always returned to the site. According to British sources, Hindus and Muslims used to worship together in the Babri Mosque complex in the 19th century until about 1855. P. Carnegy wrote in 1870: "It is said that up to that time the Hindus and Mohamedans alike used to worship in the mosquetemple. Since the British rule a railing has been put up to prevent dispute, within which, in the mosque the Mohamedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they make their offerings." (P. Carnegy: A Historical Sketch of Tehsil Fyzabad, Lucknow 1870, quoted by Harsh Narain: The Ayodhya Temple/Mosque Dispute, Penman, Delhi 1993, p.8-9, and by Peter Van der Veer: Religious Nationalism, p.153)

Hindus have been demanding the return of the site for centuries, as is witnessed by several western travellers to India during the Mughal Empire (see also the sections on history and literary sources).

Archaeology of the site

Archaeological studies in the 1970s: Project "Archaeology of the Ramayana Sites"

Between 1975 and 1985 an archaeological project was carried out in Ayodhya to examine somesites that were connected to the Ramayana story. The Babri Mosque site was one of the fourteensites examined during this project. The team of archaeologists of the ASI, led by B.B. Lal, foundrows of pillar-bases which must have belonged to a larger building than the Babri Mosque.Archaeological findings of burnt-brick pillar bases a few metres from the mosque indicate that alarge temple stood in alignment with the Babri Mosque since the 11th century. (B.B. Lal (Manthan,10/1990) and S.P. Gupta (Indian Express, 2/12/1990), and annexure 28 to the VHPdocument Evidence for the Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir. ) In a trench at a distance of fourmetres south of the mosque parallel rows of pillar-foundations, made of brick-bats and stones,were found. (Professor B. B. Lal, in the Hindu: 1 July 1998.)

Professor Gupta later commented on the findings of the period prior to 1990: „ Several ofthe temple-pillars existing in the mosque and pillar- bases unearthed in the excavationsconducted in the south of the mosque (although in the adjoining plot of land) show thesame directional alignment. This will convince any student of architecture that two sets ofmaterial remains belong to one and the same complex.“ (Indian Express, 6/12/90)

June to July 1992

In July 1992, eight eminent archaeologists (among them former ASI directors Dr. Y.D. Sharma andDr. K.M. Srivastava) went to the Ramkot hill to evaluate and examine the findings. These findingsincluded religious sculptures and a statue of Vishnu. They said that the inner boundary of thedisputed structure rests, at least on one side, on an earlier existing structure, which “may havebelonged to an earlier temple”. (Indian Express, 4.7.1992.) The objects examined by them alsoincluded terracotta Hindu images of the Kushan period (100-300 AD) and carved buffsandstone objects that showed images of Vaishnav deities and of Shiva-Parvati. Theyconcluded that these fragments belong to a temple of the Nagara style (900-1200 AD).

Prof. S.P. Gupta commented on the discoveries: "The team found that the objects weredatable to the period ranging from the 10th through the 12th century AD, i.e., the period ofthe late Pratiharas and early Gahadvals. (..) These objects included a number of amakalas,i.e., the cogged-wheel type architectural element which crown the bhumi shikharas or spires ofsubsidiary shrines, as well as the top of the spire or the main shikhara .. This is a characteristicfeature of all north Indian temples of the early medieval period (..) There was other evidence - ofcornices, pillar capitals, mouldings, door jambs with floral patterns and others - leaving little doubtregarding the existence of a 10th - 12th century temple complex at the site of Ayodhya." (Narain,Harsh. 1993. The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute)

2003: The ASI report

The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) excavated the mosque site at the direction of theAllahabad Bench of the Uttar Pradesh High Court in 2003. The archaeologists reportedevidence of a large 10th century structure similar to a Hindu temple having pre-existed theBabri Masjid. A team of 131 labourers including 29 Muslims was engaged in theexcavations. In June 11 2003 the ASI issued an interim report that only listed the findings ofthe period between May 22 and June 6 2003. In August 2003 the ASI handed a 574-pagereport to the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.

The ASI, who

The ASI report of August 25, 2003 stated that there was evidence of a large Hindu temple havingpre-existed the Babri mosque. The ASI report mentions a huge structure (11-12th century) on whicha massive edifice, having a large pillared hall (or two halls), with at least three structural phases andthree successive floors attached with it was constructed later on. The report also stated that "there issufficient proof of existence of a massive and monumental structure having a minimum of 50 x 30metre in north-south and east-west directions respectively just below the disputed structure". TheASI report of 2003 concluded that: "Viewing in totality and taking into account thearchaeological evidence of a massive structure just below the disputed structure andevidence of continuity in structural phases from the tenth century onwards up to theconstruction of the disputed structure along with yield of stone and decorated bricks aswell mutilated sculpture of divine couple.., fifty pillar bases in association of the hugestructure, are indicative of remains which are distinctive features found associated with thetemples of north India."

Some of the results of the 2003 ASI report:

Period 1000BC to 300BC:

The findings suggest that a Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW) culture existed at themosque site between 1000 BC and 300 BC. A round signet with a legend in AsokanBrahmi , terracotta figurines of female deities with archaic features, beads of terracotta andglass, wheels and fragments of votive tanks have been found. ( Pioneer, 9th September2003. Ayodhya: lost and found By Sandhya Jain)

Sunga Period. 200 BC:

Typical terracotta mother goddess, human and animal figurines, beads, hairpin, pottery(includes black slipped, red and grey wares), and stone and brick structures of the Sungaperiod have been found. (Pioneer, 9th September 2003. Ayodhya: lost and found BySandhya Jain)

Kushan period. 100-300 AD:

Terracotta human and animal figurines, fragments of votive tanks, beads, banglefragments, ceramics with red ware and large-sized structures running into twenty-twocourses have been found from this level. (Pioneer, 9th September 2003. Ayodhya: lost andfound By Sandhya Jain)

Gupta era (400-600 AD) and post-Gupta era:

Typical terracotta figurines, a copper coin with the legend Sri Chandra (Gupta), andillustrative potsherds of the Gupta period have been found. A circular brick shrine with anentrance from the east and a provision for a water-chute on the northern wall have alsobeen found. (Pioneer, 9th September 2003. Ayodhya: lost and found By Sandhya Jain)

11th to 12th century:

A huge structure of almost fifty metres in north-south orientation have been found on thislevel. Only four of the fifty pillar bases belong to this level. Above this lied a structure withat least three structural phases which had a huge pillared hall. (Pioneer, 9th September2003. Ayodhya: lost and found By Sandhya Jain)

Radar search

In the winter of 2002-2003, Canadian geophysicist Claude Robillard performed a search with aground-penetrating radar by the company Tojo Vikas International Ltd. It concluded that “there issome structure under the mosque”. Robillard stated that "there are some anomalies foundunderneath the site relating to some archaeological features.(..) You might associate them (theanomalies) with pillars, or floors, or concrete floors, wall foundation or something. (..) Theseanomalies could be associated with archaeological features but until we dig, I can't say for sure whatthe construction is under the mosque. (, 19 March 2003)

Inscriptions

Hari-Vishnu inscription:

During the demolition of the Babri mosque in December 1992, three inscriptions on stone werefound. The most important one is the Hari-Vishnu inscription inscribed on a 1.10 x .56 metre slabwith 20 lines that was provisionally dated to ca. 1140. The inscription mentioned that the templewas dedicated to "Vishnu, slayer of Bali and of the ten-headed one" . The inscription is written in the Nagari Lipi script, a Sanskrit script of the 11th and 12th century. It was examined by world class Epigraphists and Sanskrit scholars (among them Prof. A.M. Shastri).

Ajay Mitra Shastri, Chairman of the Epigraphical Society of India and a specialist in Epigraphy andNumismatics, examined the Hari-Vishnu inscription and stated:

"The inscription is composed in high-flown Sanskrit verse, except for a small portion in prose, and is engraved in the chaste and classical Nagari- script of the eleventh-twelfth century AD. It was evidently put up on the wall of the temple, the construction of which is recorded in the text inscribed on it. Line 15 of this inscription, for example, clearly tells us that a beautiful temple of Vishnu-Hari, built with heaps of stone (sila-samhati-grahais) and beautified with a golden spire (hiranya-kalasa-srisundaram) unparalleled by any other temple built by earlier kings (purvvair-apy-akrtam krtam nrpatibhir) was constructed. This wonderful temple (aty-adbhutam) was built in the temple- city (vibudh-alaayni) of Ayodhya situated in the Saketamandala (district, line 17) (..). Line 19 describes god Vishnu as destroying king Bali (apparently in the Vamana manifestation) and the ten-headed personage (Dasanana, i.e., Ravana)." (Puratattva, No. 23 (1992-3), pp. 35 ff.)

Pillars

In the Babri Mosque were at least fourteen stone pillars that have been dated to the early 11th centuryand more pillars were found during excavations buried in the ground near the mosque.

Two similar pillars were also found placed upside down by the side of the grave of Fazle Abbasalias Musa Ashikhan. This Muslim saint was the person that incited Mir Baqi to destroy theJanmasthan temple and build a mosque on it. (Hans Bakker: Ayodhya)

Controversy of the archaeological findings

Many Muslim and Marxist historians dispute the finding of ASI report, such as Dr SushilShrivastava in his review of ASI report .

Richard M Eaton, an American historian of medieval India, in his controversial Essays on Islamand Indian History (ISBN 0195662652) documents desecration of all Hindu temples between 1192and 1760. The total adds up to 80. Eaton in his book does not claim that this list is exhaustive.Furthermore, each of theses 80 cases represents the destruction of not just one, but of a largenumber of temples. For example one of these 80 cases, the “1094: Benares, Ghurid army” case,refers to the Ghurid royal army that “destroyed nearly one thousand temples, and raised mosques ontheir foundations”. This figure of 80 cases doesn't include a Ram temple at Ayodhya.

According to

On the question whether Babri Masjid stands at the site of the alleged Ram Janam Bhoomi temple,the historian and son of former president Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Prof. S. Gopal, in a lecturedelivered in Madras in May 2004 claimed, "So far no evidence has been found to support the claimthe Babri Masjid was constructed on the land that had been earlier occupied by a temple." Heasserted, "In Ayodhya to-day there are still about 30 places where Rama was claimed to have beenborn." Some critics of the ASI report further point out that the impartiality of the Director Generalof the ASI was in question since he had been appointed by a government whose leaders, they claim,were responsible or at least colluded, and certainly failed, to stop the destruction of the mosque.Some also claimed that India's leading archaeologists were kept away from the dig, however theexcavations were carried out or examined by leading archaeologists, among them Prof. Gupta andmany other archaeologists examined the findings.

There are Marxist historians who say the entire town of Ayodhya was settled by Buddhists, notHindus, and the town had a large number of Buddha viharas (Buddhist shrines). Remains of someBuddhist shrines may be found in excavations, but they are unrelated to Hindu claims.

In 2003 it was alleged by the Marxist paper People's Democracy that the Hari-Vishnu inscriptionwould correspond to an inscription dedicated to Vishnu that was supposedly missing in theLucknow State Museum since the 1980s. The museum director Jitendra Kumar however stated thatthe inscription had never been missing from the museum, although it wasn't on display and heshowed the inscription of his museum at a press conference for all to see. It was different in shape,colour and text contents from the Vishnu-Hari inscription. (Hindustan Times, 8 May 2003). Inaddition, there are photographs that show the Kar Sevaks carrying a huge stone-slab bearing asculpted frieze (e.g. In India Today, 31. December 1992: p.33). And the inscription has beenexamined by many leading epigraphists like Prof. Ajay Mitra Shastri.

There were also attempts by Babri Masjid supporters to prohibit all archaeological excavations atthe disputed site. Naved Yar Khan's petition at the Supreme Court to prohibit allarchaeological excavations at the Mosque site was rejected. (The Hindu, 10 June 2003)

Literary sources

Harsh Narain (1993) cited more than 130 references to the temple in English, French, Hindi, Sanskrit, Urdu, Persian and Arabic.

Joseph Tieffenthaler

The Austrian Jesuit Tieffenthaler wrote in 1768: “Emperor Aurangzeb got demolished the fortress called Ramcot, and erected on the same place a Mahometan temple with three cupolas. Others believe that it was constructed by Babor.” (Quoted by R.S. Sharma et al.: Historians Report, p.19) Tieffenthaler also writes that Hindus celebrated Ram Navami (Rama's birth festival) in front of the mosque, and that the mosque was built on a temple. (A.K. Chatterjee: “Ram Janmabhoomi: some more evidence”, Indian Express, 27-3-1990 and History and Geography of India, by Joseph Tieffenthaler, (published in French by Bernoulli in 1785)) He wrote: "The reason is that here existed formerly a house in which Beschan (Vishnu) took birth in the form of Rama and where it is said his three brothers were also born. Subsequently Aurangzeb and some say Babar destroyed the place in order to prevent the heathens from practising their ceremonies. However, they have continued to practice their religious ceremonies in both the places knowing this to have been the birth place of Rama by going around it three times and prostrating on the ground." (History and Geography of India, by Joseph Tieffenthaler, (published in French by Bernoulli in 1785))

Mirza Jain

Mirza Jain was a Muslim who participated in an attempt reconquest the Hanuman Ghari temple (which is a few hundred yards from the Babri Mosque) during Wajid Ali Shah's rule.

Mirza Jan wrote in 1856 that “a lofty mosque has been built by badshah Babar” on “the original birthplace of Rama”, so that “where there was a big temple, a big mosque was constructed, and where there was a small temple, a small mosque was constructed”. (Mirza Jan: Hadiqa-i Shahada (“The garden of martyrdom”), Lucknow 1856, included in the VHP evidence bundle: History vs. Casuistry, Voice of India, Delhi 1991, p.14).

Mizra Jain also wrote: ‘wherever they found magnificent temples of the Hindus ever since the establishment of Sayyid Salar Mas’ud Ghazi’s rule, the Muslim rulers in India built mosques, monasteries, and inns, appointed mu’azzins, teachers, and store-stewards, spread Islam vigorously, and vanquished the Kafirs. Likewise, they cleared up Faizabad and Avadh, too, from the filth of reprobation (infidelity), because it was a great centre of worship and capital of Rama’s father. Where there stood the great temple (of Ramjanmasthan), there they built a big mosque, and, where there was a small mandap (pavilion), there they erected a camp mosque (masjid-i mukhtasar-i qanati). The Janmasthan temple is the principal place of Rama’s incarnation, adjacent to which is the Sita ki Rasoi. Hence, what a lofty mosque was built there by king Babar in 923 A. H. (1528 A.D.), under the patronage of Musa Ashiqan! The mosque is still known far and wide as the Sita ki Rasoi mosque. And that temple is extant by its side (aur pahlu mein wah dair baqi hai)’ (Mirza Jan: Hadiqa-i Shahada (“The garden of martyrdom”), Lucknow 1856p. 247). Mirza Jan also wrote (quoting a relative of Aurangzeb), that the temples of Rama, Shiva, Krishna as well as Sita's Kitchen (i.e. part of the Ramkot complex) "were all demolished for the strength of Islam, and at all these places mosques have been constructed". (Sahifa-i Chahal Nasaih Bahadur Shahi (Persian: “Letter of the Forty Advices of Bahadur Shah”) in VHP evidence bundle. History vs. Casuistry, p. 13-14.)

Shykh Muhammad Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami

Shykh Muhammad Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami (1811-1893) wrote: ‘According to old records, it has been a rule with the Muslim rulers from the first to build mosques, monasteries, and inns, spread Islam, and put (a stop to) non-Islamic practices, wherever they found prominence (of kufr). Accordingly, even as they cleared up Mathura, Bindraban, etc., from the rubbish of non-Islamic practices, the Babari mosque was built up in 923(?) A.H. under the patronage of Sayyid Musa Ashiqan in the Janmasthan temple (butkhane Janmasthan mein) in Faizabad-Avadh, which was a great place of (worship) and capital of Rama’s father’ (p. 9). ‘Among the Hindus it was known as Sita ki Rasoi’ (p. 10). (Muraqqah-i Khusrawi, also known as Tarikh-i Avadh, by Shykh Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami). Zak Kakorawi, in his publication of the work of Shykh Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami, also includes an excerpt written by Mirza Rajab Ali Beg Surur. Mirza Rajab Ali Beg Surur (1787-1867) wrote in Fasanah-i Ibrat that ‘a great mosque was built on the spot where Sita ki Rasoi is situated. During the regime of Babar, the Hindus had no guts to be a match for the Muslims. The mosque was built in 923(?) A.H. under the patronage of Sayyid Mir Ashiqan… Aurangzeb built a mosque on the Hanuman Garhi… The Bairagis effaced the mosque and erected a temple in its place. Then idols began to be worshipped openly in the Babari mosque where the Sita ki Rasoi is situated,’ (pp. 71-72).

Guru Nanak

According to Bhai Man Singh's Pothi Janam Sakhi (late 18th century), Guru Nanak visited Ayodhya and said to his Muslim disciple Mardana: 'Mardania! eh Ajudhia nagari Sri Ramachandraji Ji ki hai. So, chal, iska darsan kari'e. Translation: 'Mardana! this Ayodhya city belongs to Sri Ramachandra Ji. So let us have its darsana.' (Narsh Narain. 1993: pp 14-15).

Abul Fazl

In Abul Fazl’s Ain-i-Akbari (1598), Ayodhya is called “one of the holiest places of antiquity” and “the residence of Ramchander”. It mentions the celebration of Rama's birth festival (Ram Nomi) in Ayodhya. (R.S. Sharma et al.: Historians’ Report, p.16.)

Other sources

A. Führer wrote that: 'Mir Khan built a masjid in A.H. 930 during the reign of Babar, which still bears his name. This old temple must have been a fine one, for many of its columns have been utilized by the Musalmans in the construction of Babar's Masjid.' (A. Führer: The Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions in the North-Western Provinces and Oudh, Archaeological Survey of India Report, 1891, pp 296-297)

H.R. Neville wrote that the Janmasthan temple "was destroyed by Babar and replaced by a mosque." (H.R. Neville in the Barabanki District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp 168-169). He also wrote "The Janmasthan was in Ramkot and marked the birthplace of Rama. In 1528 A.D. Babar came to Ayodhya and halted here for a week. He destroyed the ancient temple and on its site built a mosque, still known as Babar's mosque. The materials of the old structure were largely employed, and many of the columns were in good preservation." (H.R. Neville in the Fyzabad District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp 172-177)

According to Romila Thapar "If we do not take Hindu mythology in account the first historical description of the city dates back recently to the 7th century, when the Chinese pilgrim Xuan Zang observed there were 20 Buddhist temples with 3000 monks at Ayodhya, amongst a large Hindu population. In 1528, nobles under Mughal emperor Babur constructed a mosque over the disputed site. The mosque, called the Babri Masjid, has become a source of contention for some Hindus. At the end of the 19th century, Ayodhya contained 96 Hindu temples and 36 Muslim mosques. Little local trade was carried on, but the great Hindu fair of Ram Navami held every year was attended by about 500,000 people.".

Censorship

Several attempts to censor information regarding the destruction of the Ram Janmabhoomi (and other temples) have been discovered. The book "Hindustan Islami Ahad Mein" by Maulana Hakim Saiyid Abdul Hai, which included a chapter that described the demolition of the Ram Janmabhoomi and other temples, was suddenly missing in most libraries. The English version (1977) has the passages that described the destruction of temples censored out.

The book Muruqqa-i Khusrawi by Sheikh Mohammed Azamat Ali Nami, published by Zaki Kakorawi with the financial aid of the F.A. Ahmad Memorial Committee, has a chapter describing the destruction of the Ram Janmabhoomi censored out. Zaki Kakorawi later published the relevant chapter independently. He wrote about this incident that the ‘suppression of any part of any old composition or compilation like this can create difficulties and misunderstandings for future historians and researchers’ (Amir Ali Shahid aur Ma’rkah-i Hanuman Garhi, p. 3).

References

• Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor. 1996. Edited, translated and annotated by Wheeler M. Thacktson. New York and London: Oxford University Press.
• The Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgement and Commentaries. 1995. New Delhi:Voice of India. Ayodhya and the Future of India. 1993. Edited by Jitendra Bajaj. Madras: Centre for Policy Studies.
• Elst, Koenraad. 1991. Ayodhya and After: Issues before Hindu Society. 1991. New Delhi: Voice of India.
• Emmanuel, Dominic. 'The Mumbai bomb blasts and the Ayodhya tangle', National Catholic Reporter (Kansas City, August 27 2003).
• S.R. Goel: Hindu Temples - What Happened to Them, Voice of India, Delhi 1991.
• Harsh Narain. 1993. The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources. Delhi: Penman Publishers.
• Rajaram, N.S. (2000). Profiles in Deception: Ayodhya and the Dead Sea Scrolls. New Delhi: Voice of India
• Thakur Prasad Varma and Swarajya Prakash Gupta: Ayodhya ka Itihas evam Puratattva— Rigveda kal se ab tak (‘History and Archaeology of Ayodhya— From the Time of the Rigveda to the Present’). Bharatiya Itihasa evam Samskrit Parishad and DK Printworld. New Delhi.
• Thapar, Romila. 'A Historical Perspective on the Story of Rama' in Thapar (2000).
• Thapar, Romila. Cultural Pasts: Essays in Early Indian History (New Delhi: Oxford University, 2000) ISBN 0195640500.
• Ayodhya ka Itihas evam Puratattva— Rigveda kal se ab tak (‘History and Archaeology of Ayodhya— From the Time of the Rigveda to the Present’) by Thakur Prasad Varma and Swarajya Prakash Gupta. Bharatiya Itihasa evam Samskrit Parishad and DK Printworld. New Delhi. (An important work on the archaeology of the temple.)
• History versus Casuistry: Evidence of the Ramajanmabhoomi Mandir presented by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad to the Government of India in December-January 1990-91. New Delhi: Voice of India.

In fiction

The Babri riots are depicted in the 1995 film Bombay.

See also

• All India Babri Masjid Action Committee
• Ayodhya
• Babur
• Vishwa Hindu Parishad
• Ramayana
• Secularism (South Asia)