Conclusion

The conclusion that we have reached after a careful consideration of the entire available evidence may be summarised as follows:-

1. No evidence exists in the texts that before the 16th century (and indeed before the 18th century), any veneration attached to any spot in Ayodhya for being the birth-site of Rama.
2. There are no grounds for supposing that a Rama temple, or any temple, existed at the site where Baburi Masjid was built in 1528-29. This conclusion rests on an examination of the archeological evidence as well as the contemporary inscriptions on the mosque.
3. The legend that the Baburi Masjid occupied the site of Rama's birth did not arise until late 18th century; that the temple was destroyed to build a mosque was not asserted until the beginning of the 19th century, when the observer, before whom the assertion was made, disbelieved it.
4. The full blown legend of the destruction of a temple at the site of Rama's birth and Sita-ki-rasoi, is as late as the 1850's. Since then what we get is merely the progressive reconstruction of imagined history based on faith.

It is for the people of this country to judge whether on the basis of such dubious evidence as the VHP has presented in support of its case, it is justifiable to mortgage the destiny and good repute of the country.

As historians it is also our duty to point out that in no civilised country of the world is a building of the 16th century permitted to be destroyed or tempered with.

In 1891 when a Fuhrer drew up his descriptive list of Antiquities and Inscription in the North-West Provinces and Oudh, 1891, he put the Baburi Masjid among the monuments of Class II (P.P. 296-7). On page i, he explained the implications of this classification; it meant that though the monument was "in possession of private bodies and individuals", it was possible or desirable to save (it) from further decay by such minor measures as the eradication of vegetation, the exclusion of water from the wells and the like". Being such a monument, the Baburi Masjid became a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments Act, 1904 (re-legislated, 1958). Besides being built nearly 450 years ago, it is a significant example of Sharqi architecture. It is a part of our common national heritage. Under law, Government must save and preserve it as a fully protected monument.

If then, we have a care for historical facts, if we want to uphold the law, if we have love for our cultural heritage, we must protect Baburi Masjid. A country is surely judged by how it treats its past."