It is all the more unfortunate that the ASI is not being allowed to work on the site despite pressure from local citizens. No other temple turned mos… - Praful Goradia

Mukhlis and Khalis were in tum governors of Jaunpur under Ibrahim Naib Barbak, who was anxious to build an edifice for the residence of a celebrated saint named Saiyid Usman ofShiraz, who had fled from Delhi during Timur's invasion. In 1908, when the gazetteer was published by Nevill, the descendants of the saint still resided near the mosque. The style of architecture is not very different from that of the Jhanj hari masj id. The roof stands on ten rows of Hindu temple pillars. According to the gazetteer; the mandir had been built by Raja Vijaya Chandra. The river Gomti flows through the city of Jaunpur and there is an impressive bridge across the river. It is a massive stone structure built in the 1560s. The bridge does not rise towards its centre but is flat. It is an original construction. The only feature that mars its originality is a colossal stone lion standing over a small elephant. According to Nevill, it bears the stamp of ancient Hindu workmanship and must have adorned the gateway of some building erected by the Raja ofKannauj. To the west of the northern end of the bridge is the big fort of Jaunpur, built in the time of Ibrahim. But Firoz Shah Tughlaq is credited with having rebuilt the fortress on an old structure inherited from the Hindu era. Evidence of the legacy. is the masjid inside the fort, built on temple pillars of various shapes and designs. Nevill has remarked that some of the pillars are upside down which supports the theory that a number of temples in Jaunpur were destroyed in order to provide stones required to build the fort; the inner face of almost every stone bore carvings, which had decorated Hindu temples.

The pillars are some 30 feet high gorgeously carved either with exquisite designs up to a height of about 26 feet, thereafter adorned with delicate figurines . Uncannily, there is not a single figure whose face has not been cut off. Nowhere in Europe does one see such acts of vandalism, except what the original barbarian vandals themselves perpetrated under their king Gaiseric, in the wake of the conquest of Rome in 455AD. Hereafter, the word vandal became synonym with wilful desecration and destruction. The figurines on all the relics on display at the Rajputana Museum as well as those salvaged by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) duly locked in the compound of the Jhopra have been systematically defaced. Amongst the thousands of stone heads, not a single nose or an eye is visible.

The excuse given was that the Bhojshala was, in any case, a protected monument and barricading it would be the best way to secure its protection. Incidentally, there was no threat from anyone either damaging or demolishing the structure. The discriminatory order of entry 52 times a year to one community, and only once a year to another and none to the rest is based on an extraordinary precedent. The author understands that-in 1935 on the insistence by some local residents of Dhar, which was then a princely state, that the Bhojshala was a Hindu institution -the temple of Goddess Saraswati, on the one hand, and a school, on the other. A photograph of the deity's image which adorned the temple is reproduced in this book. The idol is still on display in the British Museum in London. A part of the Sanskrit inscription which is engraved on a wall of the Bhojshala is also reproduced. It is called Dhar Prasasti of Arjunavarma: Parijatamanjari-natika by Madana.