Archaeology under the Judiciary: Ayodhya 2003

By Chakrabarti, Dilip K. | Antiquity, September 2003 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Archaeology under the Judiciary: Ayodhya 2003


Chakrabarti, Dilip K., Antiquity


Keywords: India, Ayodhya, heritage, politics

After more than a decade after its demolition, the December 1992 destruction of the sixteenth-century mosque in Ayodhya remains a powerful heritage issue. The site is considered sacred by Hindus as the birthplace of their god Rama, and the mosque's demolition caused the loss of about 2000 Indian lives in Hindu-Muslim rioting across India and led to the destruction of Hindu temples in the neighbouring countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh.

On 5 March 2003, the Lucknow Branch of the Allahabad High Court directed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to ascertain by excavation whether a Hindu temple had stood at the site. Excavations began on March 12 2003, with an initial court directive to report within four weeks, then allowed to continue until June 15. To prevent anything untoward happening, including tampering with finds during the excavations, the Court imposed tight security control around the work and made provisions for its monitoring by representatives of interested parties.

Access to the excavation site was closed to the general public and ASI supervisors and workmen carried identity cards. The digging tools were listed and the excavated artefacts stored in a specially secure tamper-proof environment. The court-approved 'monitors' belonged to groups such as 'Visva Hindu Parishad' ('Global Organization of the Hindus'), 'Babri Masjid Action Committee' (Action Committee for (the protection of) the mosque built by Babar'), Indian History Congress, etc. Disputes of various kinds have been rife from the very beginning of the work.

The purpose of this note is two-fold. Firstly, to draw attention to the character of these disputes, which shows how bitterly this heritage battle is being fought. Secondly, I argue that this essentially religious dispute has been converted into a bitterly fought--and now judicial--contest by two opposing groups of Indian historians and archaeologists whose motivation has never been to preserve Indian heritage but to capture the power structure and the resources of the historical and archaeological research in the country.

The disputes which have surfaced after the court order are of two kinds. First, it is no longer solely a Hindu-Muslim dispute because the members of the Buddhist and Jain religious communities have also staked their claims to the site. A Jain forum is convinced that the demolished mosque was at the site of a sixth century AD Jain temple and it wants the site to be handed over to them. The claim that a Buddhist monastery--and not a temple to Rama--was demolished to make way for the mosque was put forward in a petition to the court by at least three organisations including the All-India Confederation of (neo-Buddhist) Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes. The other disputes are of a more technical character and range in scope from the adequate representation of Muslims in the excavation work-force to the declaration of a lack of faith in the integrity of the ASI by some Muslim litigants. A similar lack of faith was also declared by some 'monitors' present at the site, especially those acting as the representatives of the Babri Masjit Action Committee and the Central Sunni Waqf Board.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Archaeology under the Judiciary: Ayodhya 2003
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?