NEW DELHI, 18 April 2003 — Excavations at the site of the demolished Babri Masjid in Ayodhya have led the Aligarh Historians Society the non-governmental organization SAHMAT to claim that a Muslim habitation existed there even before the mosque. They have also said that the monthlong excavation through the Archaeological Survey of India did not reveal any temple remains. Besides, the methods used for excavation have been challenged on “professional grounds.”
Claim of there being a Muslim inhabitation has been substantiated by the glazed ware found in “substantial” quantity in the three trenches dug so far.
A report jointly prepared by the Aligarh society and SAHMAT states, “In the upper and middle layers, the glazed ware is so pervasive that at least in this part of the site of the Babari Masjid, Muslim inhabitation must have preceded the construction of the mosque by two or three centuries; no temple underlies the mosque here.”
Glazed pottery is held to be the hallmark of Muslim inhabitation.
According to the report, “so far, the three trenches (where digging has been conducted) have revealed nothing of any temple remains although digging has gone below 3.5 meters and early historic levels have been reached.” The report further states, “No temple is known from these times anywhere in India.”
Criticizing the ASI for the lack of professionalism in its excavations, the report states, “everything is not right with the ASI’s methods.”
It states, “Even flotation — by which seeds and minute bone fragments can be recovered — is not being undertaken, and the marking of layers in trenches is unsatisfactory and unconvincing.”
Those keeping a close watch on the excavation on behalf of the Babari Masjid Committee and Central Wakf Board have expressed concern over the “casual approach” of the ASI team toward the medieval glazed ware, mortar-bonded material and animal bones unearthed. These archaeologists have expressed concern over the “reluctance” of the ASI to record glazed pottery — the hallmark of Muslim inhabitation. Despite being asked to record everything it finds, observers claim, the ASI is not doing its job properly.
Archeologists involved in preparing the report include R.C. Thakran, joint secretary of Indian History Congress; Amal Ray, deputy director of the Directorate of Archaeology and Museums, Supriya Verma of Punjab University, P.C. Pant and Nikhat Ara of Aligarh Muslim University.
Questioning the credibility of ASI’s excavation work, the archaeologists said, “The aim of the ASI team from the beginning seems to have been simply to look for any find that can be remotely construed as part of the remains of a temple and to ignore the negative evidence.”
