Ayodhya dispute: Archeologists who oversaw dig contradict ASI claim, say  no proof of Ram Temple beneath demolished mosque

Two archaeologists, who oversaw the excavation, had objected to the 2003 ASI report.

Published: 06th December 2018 04:11 PM  |   Last Updated: 06th December 2018 04:19 PM   |  A+A-

Carved stones are seen at the Ram Janmabhomi Nyas-run workshop at Karsevakpuram in Ayodhya Monday November 12 2018. | PTI

By Online Desk

In 2003, ASI had came out with the 'proof 'of a Ram Temple on the same location where the disputed Babri mosque once stood. The ASI, which conducted an excavation at the site, then said that it discovered the bases of pillars which originally supported the roof of a temple at a layer below the mosque.

In the same year, the ASI had later submitted its 574-page report on the matter to the Allahabad High Court. However, two archaeologists, who oversaw the excavation, had objected to the report.

The duo - Associate Professor Dr Supriya Varma from Jawaharlal Nehru University and Professor Jaya Menon from Department of History at Aligarh Muslim University - had in 2010 published a paper questioning the ASI's findings in The Economical and Political Weekly.

The Huffington Post recently conducted an interview with the two archaeologists. They said, "Underneath the Babri Masjid, there are actually older mosques." The two historians were observers during the excavation on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board, a party to the tile suit in the Ayodhya dispute.

According to ASI, The discovery of terracotta figurines at the site to strengthened its claim. It said that the archeologists had discovered a 'circular shrine' which it supposed to have contained a Sivalinga. This fact, it said, fortifies the claim that there must have been a Ram temple at the site. 

Citing a mutilated sculpture of a divine couple along with 50 pillar bases found at the site as evidences, the ASI said the structure had remains which have "distinctive features associated with temples of north India".

Stay up to date on all the latest Nation news with The New Indian Express App. Download now
(Get the news that matters from New Indian Express on WhatsApp. Click this link and hit 'Click to Subscribe'. Follow the instructions after that.)


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

  • Debayan Pal

    i have seen video of the head archaeologist explaining the photographs from the excavation
    4 months ago reply
  • Navneet Bhatnagar

    Waking up after 15 years of submitting their report in 2003. This is what these paid advocates of Sunni Wakt Board are parroting. Further
    4 months ago reply
  • Bala

    this paper is run by leftists whatelse to expect
    4 months ago reply
  • Mattur Sameer

    But during the court deposition they said they were not present at the site and that it is their hunch that it there might be buddhist structure. Why do you publish news items with misleading headlines
    4 months ago reply
flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp