Babri dispute: There was no trace of Ram temple, revealed British accounts

British accounts from the 19th century are part of historical evidence in the Supreme Court

The Allahabad High Court, which delivered its verdict trifurcating the disputed site in Ayodhya, had relied extensively on the 19th-century accounts of British gazetteers. The primary aim of studying these accounts was to determine the existence of any Hindu place of worship or a city with any semblance to Ram, a god to many Hindus in India. Here is a look at some of the accounts of British officials recorded and dispatched at a time when modern-day archaeological techniques were unheard of. 

Walter Hamilton’s account (1828):

“Pilgrims resort to this vicinity, where the remains of the ancient city of Oude, and capital of the great Rama, are still to be seen; but whatever may have been its former magnificence it now exhibits nothing but a shapeless mass of ruins. The modern town extends a considerable way along the banks of the Goggra, adjoining Fyzabad, and is tolerably well peopled; but inland it is a mass of rubbish and jungle, among which are the reputed site of temples dedicated to Rama, Seeta, his wife, Lakshman, his general, and Nanimaun (a large monkey), his prime minister. The religious mendicants who perform the pilgrimage to Oude are chiefly of the Ramata sect, who walked round the temples and idols, bathe in the holy pools, and perform the customary ceremonies.” 

Dr Buchanen’s account after he surveyed eastern parts of the country, including Ayodhya, from 1807 to 1816 and sent his reports to England. Montgomery Martin published parts of the said reports in 1838 in a six-volume book titled History, Antiquities, Topography and Statistics of Eastern India: 

“.... if these temples ever existed, not the smallest trace of them remains to enable us to judge of the period when they were built; and the destruction is very generally attributed by the Hindus to the furious zeal of Aurungzeb, to whom also is imputed the overthrow of the temples in Benares and Mathura. What may have been the case in the two latter, I shall not now take upon myself to say, but with respect to Ayodhya the tradition seems very ill founded. The bigot by whom the temples were destroyed is said to have erected mosques on the situations of the most remarkable temples; but the mosque at Ayodhya, which is by far the most entire, and which has every appearance of being the most modern, is ascertained by an inscription on its walls (of which a copy is given) to have been built by Babur, five generations before Aurungzeb... The only thing except these two figures and the bricks, that could with probability be traced to the ancient city, are some pillars in the mosque built by Babur. These are of black stone, and of an order which I have seen nowhere else, ... they have been taken from a Hindu building, is evident, from the traces of images being observable on some of their bases; although the images have been cut off to satisfy the conscience of the bigot.” 

Thornton's gazetteer 1854-58 reprinted in 1993 devotes a page to Avadh/Ayodhya. In the said gazetteer, heavy reliance is placed on Buchanan's report (who later on took the name of Hamilton).

“that the heaps of bricks, although much seems to have been carried away by the river, extend a great way; that is, more than a mile in length, and more than half a mile in width; and that, although vast quantities of materials have been removed to build the Mahomedan Ayodha or Fyzabad, yet the ruins in many parts retain a very considerable elevation; nor is there any reason to doubt that the structure to which they belonged has been very great, when we consider that it has been ruined for above 2,000 years. The ruins still bear the name of Ramgurh, or Fort of Rama; the most remarkable spot in which is that from which, according to the legend, Rama took his flight to heaven, carrying with him the people of his city; in consequence of which it remained desolate until repeopled by Vikramaditya, king of Oojein, half a century before the Christian era, and by him embellished with 360 temples. Not the smallest traces of these temples, however, now remain; and according to native tradition, they were demolished by Aurungebe, who built a mosque on part of the site. The falsehood of the tradition is, however, proved by an inscription on the wall of the mosque, attributing the work to the conqueror Baber, from whom Aurungzebe was fifth in descent. The mosque is embellished with fourteen columns of only five or six feet in height, but of very elaborate and tasteful workmanship, said to have been taken from the ruins of the Hindoo fanes, to which they had been given by the monkey-general Hanuman, who had brought them from Lanka or Ceylon. Altogether, however, the remains of antiquity in the vicinity of this renowned capital must give very low idea of the state of arts and civilisation of the Hindoos at a remote period. A quadrangular coffer of stone, whitewashed, five ells long, four broad, and protruding five or six inches above ground, is pointed out as the cradle in which Rama was born, as the seventh avatar of Vishnu; and is accordingly abundantly honoured by the pilgrimages and devotions of the Hindoos.” 

Cunningham’s account inArchaeological report (1862-63):

“There are several very holy Brahmanical temples about Ajudhya, but they are all of modern date, and without any architectural pretensions whatever. But there can be no doubt that most of them occupy the sites of more ancient temples that were destroyed by the Muslims.” AND “Close by is the Lakshman Ghat, where his brother Lakshman bathed and about one-quarter of a mile distant, in the very heart of the city, stands the Janam Asthan, or “Birth-place temple” of Rama.” 

P Carnegy was officiating Commissioner and Settlement Officer of the district. His 1870 account reads as follows:

“Ajudhia is to the Hindu what Macca is to the Mahomedan and Jerusalem to the Jews. The ancient city of Ajudhia covered an area of 48 kos (96 miles). After the fall of the last of Rama's line, Ajudhia and the royal race became a wilderness and it was converted into a jungle of sweet smelling keorah. Vikramajit restored the neglected and forest-concealed Ajudhia. Thereafter, it is mentioned that the most remarkable place was Ramkot “the strong hold of Ramchandar” which covered a large extent of ground and according to ancient manuscript it was surrounded by 20 bastions. The Janmasthan and other temples — It is locally affirmed that at the Mahomedan conquest there were three important Hindu shrines, with but few devotees attached, at Ajudhia, which was then little other than a wilderness. These were the “Janmasthan,” the Sargadwar mandir” also known as “Ram Darbar” and the “Tareta-ke-Thakur”. On the first of these the Emperor Babar built the mosque which still bears his name, A.D. 1528. On the second Aurangzeb did the same A.D. 1658-1707; and on the third that sovereign, or his predecessor, built a mosque, according to the well-known Mahomedan principle of enforcing their religion on all those whom they conquered. The Janmasthan marks the place where Ram Chandr was born. The Sargadwar is the gate through which he passed into Paradise, possibly the spot where his body was burned. The Tareta-ka-Thakur was famous as the place where Rama performed a great sacrifice, and which he commemorated by setting up there images of himself and Sita.

Babar's mosque – According to Leyden's memoirs of Babar that Emperor encamped at the junction of the Serwa and Gogra rivers two or three kos east from Ajudhia, on the 28th March 1528, and there he halted 7 or 8 days settling the surrounding country. A well known hunting ground is spoken of in that work, 7 or 8 kos above Oudh, on the banks of the Surju. It is remarkable that in all the copies of Babar's life now known, the pages that relate to his doings at Ajudhia are wanting. In two places in the Babari mosque the year in which it was built 935 H., corresponding with 1528 A.D. is carved in stone, along with inscriptions dedicated to the glory of that Emperor. If Ajudhia was then little other than a wild, it must at least have possessed a fine temple in the Janmasthan; for many of its columns are still in existence and in good preservation, having been used by the Musalmans in the construction of the Babari Mosque. These are of strong close-grained dark slate-coloured or black stone, called by the natives Kasoti (literally touch-stone,) and carved with different devices. To my thinking these strongly resemble Budhist pillars that I have seen at Benares and elsewhere. They are from seven to eight feet long, square at the base, centre and capital, and round or octagonal intermediately. The Janmasthan is within a few hundred paces of the Hanuman Garhi. In 1855 when a great rupture took place between the Hindus and Mahomedans, the former occupied the Hanuman Garhi in force, while the Musalmans took possession of the Janmasthan. The Mahomedans on that occasion actually charged up the steps of the Hanuman Garhi, but were driven back with considerable loss. The Hindus then followed up this success, and at the third attempt, took the Janmasthan, at the gate of which 75 Mahomedans are buried in the “Martyrs' grave” (Ganj-shahid.) Several of the King's Regiments were looking on all the time, but their orders were not to interfere. It is said that up to that time the Hindus and Mahomedans alike used to worship in the mosquetemple. Since British rule a railing has been put up to prevent disputes, within which in the mosque the Mahomedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they make their offerings.” 

H R Nevill’s gazetteer of 1905 and 1928 states the following:

“This desecration of the most sacred spot in the city caused great bitterness between Hindus and Musalmans. On last occasions the feeling led to bloodshed and in 1885 an open fight occurred, the Musalmans occupying the Janamsthan in force and thence making a desperate assault on the Hanuman Garhi they charged up the steps of the temple, but were driven back with considerable loss. The Hindu then made a counter attack and stormed the Janamasthan at the gate of which 75 Musalmans were buried. It is said that up to this time both Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building, but since mutiny an outer enclosure has been put up in front of the mosque and the Hindus who are forbidden access to the inner yard, make their offerings on a platform which they have raised in the outer one.”