fallstuff
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2009
- Messages
- 9,441
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
^^^ read my last post.
Your post has more holes than swiss cheese.
Taking wiki excerpts at face value from the page at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya
Controversy of the archaeological findings
The ASI findings are hotly disputed.[10]
In fact, two Muslim graves were also recovered in the excavation as reported in Outlook weekly. While the ASI videographed and photographed the graves on April 22, it did not perform a detailed analysis of them. The skeletons found at the site were not sent for carbon-dating, neither were the graves measured.[11]. Anirudha Srivastava a former ASI archaeologist said that in some trenches, some graves, terracotta and lime mortar and surkhi were also discovered which indicated Muslim habitation and it was also surmised that there existed some mosque on the site and that Babri was built on the site of another mosque
Following allegations that the Hari-Vishnu inscription corresponded to an inscription dedicated to Vishnu that was supposedly missing in the Lucknow State Museum since the 1980s, the museum director Jitendra Kumar stated that the inscription had never been missing from the museum, although it wasn't on display and he showed the inscription of his museum at a press conference for all to see. It was different in shape, colour and text contents from the Vishnu-Hari inscription.
Pillar bases were first discovered by the ASI's former director-general BB Lall in 1975. His report gave an enormous boost to the Ram Temple cause. It was however criticised by archaeologist D. Mandal. In the excavation of 2003, fifty of "pillar bases" were once again unearthed. Although they appear to be aligned, D. Mandal's conclusion by archaeological theory stated that: "pillar bases" belonged to different periods, that is, all of them had never existed together at any point of time; they were not really in alignment with one another; they were not even pillar bases, but junctions of walls, bases of the load-bearing columns at the intersections of walls
From BBC
BBC NEWS | South Asia | 'No sign' of Ayodhya temple
Independent archaeologists have been employed to try to determine whether the site at Ayodhya in northern Uttar Pradesh state belongs to Hindus or Muslims.
Archaeologists have spent the past three months tunnelling and digging and scraping away at earth beneath the site of a former mosque at Ayodhya.
In an interim report, the Archaeological Survey of India says it has not found any evidence of ruins of a Hindu temple.
The site in the northern Indian town has been at the centre of an angry dispute between Hindus and Muslims for decades.
Wiki again,
Court defers the use of ASI report
The Special full Bench of the Allahabad High Court, hearing the Ayodhya title suits on February 3 ruled that the report of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which carried out excavations to find out whether a temple had ever existed at the place where once the Babri Masjid stood, would be seen only in the light of further evidence in the case. The three-member bench further remarked no doubt, the objections taken against the report have to be considered before the ASI report is acted upon but that situation will arise only when the court decides the matter finally.
The court remarked that it would not be advisable nor expedient to make any comments at this stage regarding the correctness or accuracy of the report, or the tenability or otherwise of the objections. Whether the report is biased or suffers from discrepancies or infirmities, or is unacceptable, for various reasons stated in objections have to be considered along with the rest of the evidence that has been brought on record, the Bench added and said that in its considered view this is not the proper stage to pronounce on these points.
These harsh, unkind and unpleasant comment aimed at the ASI, a very reputed institution and the excavating team of experts who after toil of months unearthed ruins of archeological materials that clearly indicated presence of a Hindu temple prior to Babri mosque. The finding must be taken as its face value without implying political-religious motive to the excavating team. Let the high court decide to what extent findings would help it come to a just, legal and human conclusion.