Historians From India

"“I have read nothing about Babari Mosque, I did not study thoroughly, therefore, I cannot say as to when Babari Mosque came into existence. I cannot say as to what was there at the site before coming into existence of Babari Mosque.”(Page 105)"

"“As per my research, there are such several places in Ayodhya, which claim to be the birthplace of Sri Rama. I cannot point out specifically as to the places which are claimed to be the birthplace of Rama. I did not consider it necessary to research on this point. . . . I did not study the history of Babari Mosque.”"

"Suvira Jaiswal, an ex Professor of Jawahar Lal Nehru University, New Delhi has deposed that according to her studies and research, there is no evidence that Babri Masjid was constructed after demolition of a temple of Lord Rama or that there existed any temple whatsoever where the Babari Masjid was situated. She also stated of not finding any evidence which may prove that the place in dispute was birth place of lord Rama."

"We do not know how much damage such kind of statements have already caused, but, if any, that has already been done. At this stage we can only hope and trust that the intelligentsia of this country particularly those who are experts in any discipline, shall live more responsible life, and before expressing any opinion or statement of fact particularly when that involves an extra ordinary sensitive matter, due care and caution shall be practised."

"The above extracts of her statement are self speaking. It is really surprising that a witness, claiming to be an Expert Historian, can make such serious statements on historical facts and that too without any study or adequate enquiry into the matter. Newspaper reports or what was told by some others or otherwise cannot be equated with the research work expected from an expert on the subject. She could admit her disagreement with a historian author of a book not after reading it but merely on the basis of some discussion made in her department."

"“ I know Dr. Suvira Jaiswal too. I have talks with her also. . . . . . From her articles it appears that she is influenced by Marxism.” (E.T.C.)"

"“I know Prof. Romila Thapar too. She is also influenced by Marxism. . ."

"“It is true that I have not seen the disputed building as yet. I did not make any physical investigation of stone used in inscriptions carved out in the disputed building. Likewise, I also did not make physical investigation of basalt stone.”"

"“I do not have any specific knowledge of history of Babur's reign.”"

"“ Whatsoever little knowledge I have about Babur is only that Babur was the ruler of the 16 th century. Except for this, I do not have any knowledge of Babur."

"“It is true that I am of communistic thought.”(E.T.C.)"

"Prof. Romila Thapar is influenced by Marxism.”"

"Prof. M. Athar Ali was a great historian. Very few people could match him in his profound knowledge of Persian historical texts and students of history will remain grateful to him for his innovative writings. But it is a tragedy that even such great historians propound theories and pronounce decisions on the basis of a single source of unsubstantiated information which is in contradiction to other available informations... When Prof. Ali knows that these valiant Rajputs had sacrificed all these assignments and were ready to die, then such calumny against a valiant race is a gross injustice to them and a daunting distortion of historical facts.... Thus, University students are being taught false history to defend an indefensible policy of a ruler who was a religious bigot in toto. Please have some mercy on glorious history!"

"A bare perusal of the above makes it clear that he virtually made a critical analysis of the book that is Paper No.118C1/36, a small booklet published by Prof. B.B.Lal and beyond that made no further or other study/research etc.. Only on that basis, he wrote a book, and analyzed the belief of the people whether the disputed structure was constructed after demolishing a temple or that there existed any temple of 11 th or 12 th century which was demolished before its construction."

"Prof. D Mandal retired from the Department of Ancient History and Archaeology, Allahabad University, who was appointed on adhoc basis as Lecturer in 1972 but prior thereto he claimed to have worked as exploration assistant since 1960. Initially he appeared as an expert to depose that there is no archaeological evidence to show either existence of any temple at the disputed site or that a temple was demolished before construction of the disputed structure. The statements made by him in cross examination shows the shallowness of his knowledge in the subject:"

"“But the unfortunate aspect is that he examined Waqai reports from one angle – that is he only saw the problem of succession of Ajit Singh and totally ignored the high-handedness of the Mughal officials in the form of bricking the doors of the temples, demolition of temples, confiscation of the property relating to the trusts of those temples which were demolished during the period 1679-80.” (p. 148)"

"“I never visited Ayodhya” (E.T.C.)"

"It is quite probable (…) that a mosque was first raised during the Sultanate period (...) on the site of the most important temple associated with the life of Rāma, and Mir Baqi just restored that mosque during his occupation of Ayodhyā."

"The foregoing study of the architecture and site of the Baburi Masjid has shown, unequivocally and without any doubt, that it stands on the site of a Hindu temple which originally existed in the Ramkot on the bank of the river Sarayu, and Hindu temple material has also been used in its construction, and we are of the firm opinion that the mosque was never built anew on virgin land. Syed Shihabbuddin and his associates have already agreed, in principle, ‘to demolish the mosque with their own hands’ if it is proved that it stands on a Hindu temple site and is built with Hindu temple materials. It is."

"My heartiest congratulations to the people of India on the historic foundation laying of #RamMandir in #Ayodhya, which fulfills the long cherished desire of every Indian. Lord Ram’s universal message of Dharma remains the guiding light not just for India but for the world."

"Despite my profound reservations and over the unanimous advice of almost all the MPs from Punjab, you chose to appoint an acolyte of the Pakistani deep state Navjyot Singh Sindhu who had publicly hugged the Pakistan Army Chief Gen Bajwa and Prime Minister Imran Khan, as the President of the Punjab Congress Committee.... You thought I was getting on in years and should be put to pasture. I am neither tired nor retired. I feel I have a lot to give and contribute to my beloved Punjab. I intend to soldier on and not fade away."

"But the unique and the most important feature of its construction is the use of... nook-shafts (corner pillars)... They bear stylized designs of kirttimukha and lahara-vallari and are obviously Hindu in their origin... Technically called a 'clerestory', this feature has been used on a large scale in the mosques of Ahmedabad in imitation of the preceding temples of the region... More than the (supposedly) corbelled ceilings and corbelled pendentives, these 11 nook-shafts testify, without any doubt, that material from some despoiled Hindu temple was used in the construction or the final restoration of this mosque."

"The foregoing study of the architecture and site of the Baburi Masjid has shown, unequivocally and without any doubt, that it stands on the site of a Hindu temple which originally existed in the Ramkot on the bank of the river Sarayu, and Hindu temple material has also been used in its construction."

"I have been to the site and have had occasion to study the mosque, privately, and I have absolutely no doubt that the mosque stands on the site of a Hindu temple on the north-western corner of the temple-fortress Ramkot."

"An example, as to how the tradition lives in India through the ages, may be cited. Alexander Cunningham found during his stay in the Gwalior Fort ... an epigraph recording the construction of a Sun Temple at Gwalior... The Sun Temple mentioned in the inscription had supposedly been destroyed. But there existed on the eastern bank of the Suraj-Kund a small temple... The inscription mentioned purnima of the month of Karttika as the date of its consecration and, surprisingly, even after one and a half millenniums, the tradition was still alive and till late a fair was annually held here on the Karttika-Purnima and devotees used to worship in the temple with the water of the Suraj-Kund and this author was able to identify it mainly on the basis of this living tradition."

"An expedition led by Abu Bakr As-Siddiq or Zaid bin Haritha was despatched to Wadi Al-Qura in Ramadan 6 Hijri after Fazara sept had made an attempt at the Prophet’s life. Following the morning prayer, the detachment was given orders to raid the enemy. Some of them were killed and others captured. Amongst the captives, were Umm Qirfa and her beautiful daughter, who was sent to Makkah as a ransom for the release of some Muslim prisoners there. Umm Qirfa’s attempts at the Prophet’s life recoiled on her, and the thirty horsemen she had gathered and sustained to implement her evil scheme were all killed."

"Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship."

"In Aurangzeb ‘Ālamgīr’s (r.1658–1707) time we are back with a vengeance with the vocabularly of jihad which is used in the campaigns of the emperor against the Assamese and against the Marhattas as Khafī Khān’s history of his rule Muntakhabāt al-Lubāb (1722) testifies. In short, the recourse to the vocabulary of jihad was part of seeking legitimacy through religion if the occasion demanded. The frequency of its use might increase or decrease according to the ruler’s known preferences but it remained a handy resource for most part of Muslim political ascendancy in India."

"After describing the destruction of temples in Benares and Gujarat, this author stated that “The materials of some of the Hindu temples were used for building mosques.”"

"[the Emperor Aurangzeb] ‚abolished rÁhdÁri and pÁndÁri which brought lacs of revenue to the government every year …. and forbade the collection of proceeds from the bÁzÁrs held during Urs and JÁtrÁ of infidels who used to congregate in lacs once a year at their temples and used to sell and purchase goods …‛"

"On the capture of Golkonda, the Emperor appointed Abdur Rahim Khan as Censor of the city of Haiderabad with orders to put down infidel practices and (heretical) innovations and destroy the temples and build mosques on their sites."

"Ajit Singh… sent a message humbly asking that Khan Zaman and the Kaziu’I-Kuzat might come into Jodhpur, to rebuild the mosques, destroy idol-temples, enforce the provisions of the law about the summons to prayer and the killing of cows, to appoint magistrates and to commission officers to collect the jizya. His submission was graciously accepted, and his requests granted…"

"[He writes that the order enforcing Jizya on the Hindus] ‚was issued in order to reduce the infidels to subjection, and to distinguish (India) as a land submissive to Islam (MutÍul Islam) from the lands of infidelity (DÁru’l Harb).‛"

"The violence (of the Sikhs) passed all bounds. The injuries and indignities they inflicted on Musulmans, and the destruction of mosques and tombs, were looked upon by them as righteous meritorious acts. They had built a fort at Gurdaspur in the Panjab, ten or twelve days’ journey from Dehli, and extended its limits so that fifty or sixty thousand horse and foot could find [p. 68] protection. They strengthened the towers and walls of the place, took possession of all the cultivated land around and ravaged the country from Lahore to Sihrind, otherwise called Sirhind. ‘Abdu-s Samad Khan Diler Jang was appointed subadar of Lahore, and was sent thither with a select army and artillery. ‘Abdu-s Samad engaged the vast army of the Guru near his fort. The infidels fought so fiercely that the army of Islam was nearly overpowered; and they over and over again showed the greatest daring. Great numbers were killed on both sides; but Mughal valour at length prevailed, and the Infidels were defeated and driven to their stronghold. The infidels on several occasions showed the greatest boldness and daring, and made nocturnal attacks upon the Imperial forces. ‘Abdu-s Samad Diler Jang, while lying in front of their Poor fortress, was obliged to throw up an intrenchment for the defence of his force. He raised batteries; and pushed forward his approaches. The siege lasted a long time, and the enemy exhibited great courage and daring. They frequently made sallies into the trenches, and killed many of the besiegers. To relate all the struggles and exertions of ‘Abdu-s Samad and his companions in armies would exceed our bounds. Suffice it to say that the royal army in course of time succeeded in cutting off from the enemy his supplies of corn and fodder, and the stores in the fort were exhausted. Being reduced to the last extremity, and despairing of life the Sikhs offered to Surrender on condition of their lives being spared. Diler Jang at first refused to grant quarter; but at length he advised them to beg pardon of their crimes and offences from the Emperor. Their Chief Guru2 with his son of seven or eight Years old, his diwan, and three or four thousand persons, became prisoners, and received the pre-destined recompense for their deeds. [p. 69] ‘Abdu-s Samad had three or four thousand of them put to the sword, and he filled that extensive plain with blood as if it had been a dish. Their heads were stuffed with hay and stuck upon spears. Those who escaped the sword were sent in collars and chains to the Emperor … ‘Abdu-s Samad sent nearly two thousand heads stuffed with hay and a thousand persons bound with iron chains in charge of his son, Zakariya Khan, and others to the Emperor . In the month of Muharram, the prisoners and the stuffed heads arrived at Delhi. The Bakhshi I’timadu-d daula Muhammad Amin Khan received orders to go out of the city, to blacken the faces and put wooden caps on the heads of the prisoners; to ride himself upon an elephant, place the prisoners on camels, and the heads on spears, and thus enter the city, to give a warning to all spectators. After they had entered the city, and passed before the Emperor, orders were given for confining the Guru, his son and two or three of his principal companions, in the fort. As to the lest of the prisoners it was ordered that two or three hundred of the miserable wretches should be put to death every day before the kotwal’s office and in the streets of the bazar. The men of the Khatri caste, who were secretly members of the sect, and followers of the Guru sought by the offer of large sums of money to Muhammad Amin Khan and other mediators to save the life of the Guru, but they were unsuccessful. After all the Guru’s companions had been killed, an order was given that his son should be slain in his presence, or rather that the boy should be killed by his own hands, in requital of the cruelty which that accursed one had shown in the slaughter of the sons of others. Afterwards he himself was killed."

"Distinguished and well-known musicians (kalawantan) and reciters of mystics’ verses (qawwals), who were in the service of the court, were ordered to desist from music and their mansabs increased. General orders were given for the prohibition of music and dancing. It is said that one day musicians collected together in a large crowd with great noise and tumult, prepared a bier with great dignity and carried it to the foot of the Jaroka Darshan, wailing in front of and behind the bier. When the matter was reported to Aurangzeb, he inquired about the funeral. The musicians said ‘Music (rag) is dead; we are going to bury it.’ ‘Bury it so deep under the earth’ Aurangzeb remarked, ‘that no sound or echo of it may rise again."

"From day to day, Emperor Aurangzeb strove to enforce the rules of the Sharia and the orders and prohibitions of God …..‛"

"“In AD 1630-31 (AH 1040) when Abdal, the Hindu chief of Hargaon in the province of Allahabad, rebelled, most of the temples in the state were either demolished or converted into mosques. Idols were burnt.”"

"'Aurangzeb ordered the temples of the Sikhs to be destroyed and the guru's agents (masands) for collecting the tithes and presents of the faithful to be expelled from the cities."

"The violence (of the Sikhs) passed all bounds. The injuries and indignities they inflicted on Musulmans, and the destruction of mosques and tombs, were looked upon by them as righteous meritorious acts."

"[Khafi Khan mentions one such mass protest by the people of Burhanpur and the neighobouring towns and qasbas. He writes that after Aurangzeb had reached Burhanpur (14 Zilqada 1092 Q.V. / 1681)] ‚The infidel inhabitants (Hindus) of the city and the country around made great opposition to the payment of the Jizya. There was not a (single) district where the people, with the help of the faujdars and muqaddams, did not make disturbances and (offered) resistance. Mir Abdul Karim, an excellent and honest man, now received orders to collect the Jizya in Burhanpur. A suitable force of horsemen and foot was appointed to support him, and the Kotwal was directed to punish everyone who resisted payment‛."

"“Maharaja Ajit Singh took back the Maharani, his daughter who had been married to Farrukh Siyar, with all her Jewels… he made her throw off her Musalman dress, dismissed her Muhammadan attendants and sent her to her native country… In the reign of no former Emperor had any Raja been so presumptuous as to take his daughter after she had been married to a king and admitted to the honour of Islam.”"

"In one of his letters Aurangzeb himself writes: “The fate of Dara Shukoh excited the passions of the misguided citizens of Delhi. They wept in sympathy with him and pelted the loyal Malik Jiwan who had brought him to justice with pots full of urine and excreta.” Royal troops went into action and according to Khafi Khan, “several persons were knocked down and killed and many were wounded… If the Kotwal had not come forward with his policemen, not one of Malik Jiwan’s followers would have escaped with life.”"

"On the publication of this order (reimposing the Jiziyah) by Aurangzeb in 1679, the Hindus all round Delhi assembled in vast numbers under the jharokha of the Emperor… to represent their inability to pay and pray for the recall of the edict… But the Emperor would not listen to their complaints. One day, when he went to public prayer in the great mosque on the sabbath, a vast multitude of the Hindus thronged the road from the palace to the mosque, with the object of seeking relief. Money changers and drapers, all kinds of shopkeepers from the Urdu bazar mechanics, and workmen of all kinds, left off work and business and pressed into the way… Every moment the crowd increased, and the emperor’s equippage was brought to a stand-still. At length an order was given to bring out the elephants and direct them against the mob. Many fell trodden to death under the feet of elephants and horses. For some days the Hindus continued to assemble, in great numbers and complain, but at length they submitted to pay the Jiziyah."

"'The fall and capture of Bijapur was similarly solemnized though here the destruction of temples was delayed for several years, probably till 1698."

"Buddhism suffered a great decline owing to the hostile activities of some philosophers of Brahminical thought and preachers of South India. [...] According to some scholars, the persecution of the buddhist by some Brahminic rulers was the most potent factor which contributed to bring the decline of Buddhism in India."

"That this ‘social science approach’ can lead to disaster is suggested by a Ph. D thesis submitted by Shireen Ratnagar under Thapar. While examining the issue of Indus-Mesopotamia trade, this thesis reduced the Indus civilization to the position held by India in the British empire as a supplier of raw materials. Kumkum Roy was another of her Ph. D students and her book on the emergence of monarchy in Vedic India arranges certain portions of the Vedic texts in an arbitrary developmental order and postulates on that basis the ‘emergence’ of monarchy. Exercises of this kind may or may not be ‘social science’, but certainly this is not honest history."

"Ethics and honesty, [are] rare amongst scholars working on the Indian past."

"“We have found that the nature of material residues and the units of analysis in archaeology do not match or fit the phenomenon we wish to investigate, viz. Aryan migrations. The problem is exacerbated by the strong possibility that simultaneous with migrations out of Eurasia there were expansions out of established centres by metallurgists/prospectors. Last, when we investigate pastoral land use in the Eurasian steppe, we can make informed inferences about the nature of Aryan emigration thence, which is a kind of movement very unlikely to have had artefactual correlates.”"

"It is obvious that in north and west Rajasthan tectonically changed paleochannel configurations were a major factor which affected the human settlements, perhaps from the pre-Harappan times onwards. Major diversions cut off the vital tributaries and growing desiccation . . . dried up the once mighty Saraswati and Drishadvati rivers."

"The modern situation is no less intriguing. After the first crop of radiocarbon dates from the Indus sites, D P Agrawal, who, as the Secretary of the Radiocarbon Committee of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, had a hand in obtaining some of them, argued that these dates, could not suggest anything earlier than 2400 BC as the date of the beginning of the mature Indus civilization. He believed that this tallied with Wheeler’s opinion that the Indus- Mesopotamia contact did not date before Sargon, forgetting that radiocarbon dates are not historical dates. Agrawal represents some Indian archaeologists of the 1960s and 1970s, who considered it unsafe to go beyond the hitherto accepted framework of Indian archaeology. The premise was that any argument in favour of an earlier Indian past would not be ‘scientific’ and would, more damagingly be termed ‘nationalistic’."