Researched by: Sara Varghese & Prafula Grace Busi

Editor’s note: We are very proud of the work we did on this Big Story—which really sums up what we offer to our subscribers. If you loved it too, please share the big story widely using this link—and remember to add your referral link if you want to offer folks a one month free trial:)

The story of a pillar and an empire

Origin story: Let’s start from the very beginning—with two brothers named Ghiyāth al-Dīn and Muʿizz al-Dīn who belonged to the region of Ghur—which is now modern Afghanistan. They rose to power in 1173. While elder brother Ghiyāth focused on expanding the dynasty’s power toward the Middle East, younger brother Muʿizz al-Dīn—referred to in school textbooks as Muhammad Ghori—set his sights on India. He succeeded where the Ghaznavids failed—and conquered vast swathes of northern India in the 1190s. The most famous battle among these is the defeat of Rajput ruler Prithviraj Chauhan.

Meet Quṭb al-Dīn Aybak: Ghori’s generals were Turkish slaves: “In this slave system, boys were purchased in small numbers, trained for twenty years to become soldiers, poets, and so on, and were married to the king’s nieces, daughters, etc.” Quṭb al-Dīn was one of his most formidable lieutenants. He was rewarded for his military exploits with his appointment as Ghori’s viceroy in Delhi in 1193. When Ghori died in 1206, Quṭb al-Dīn appointed himself the sultan of Delhi—and wrested the other north Indian territories from his fellow generals. He would die four years later in 1210.

The mosque & the minar: The Qutub Minar stands beside a congregational mosque—small structure built by Quṭb for the benefit of his troops. He then built the minar as a one-story building in 1199. Both were constructed from the remnants of 27 temples destroyed by him (yes, this bit is true). 

The Qutub complex today: The minar was completed by Qutb’s son-in-law and successor Iltutmish—who added three stories to the structure—and vastly expanded the mosque. In 1368, Firoz Shah Tughlaq replaced the fourth floor with two storeys—giving us the present-day minar—a five-storey red sandstone tower that stands at 238 feet. Later rulers of new dynasties like Alauddin Khilji would add to the mosque—and new structures to the entire complex, including a grand gateway (Alai Darwaza) and Khilji’s own tomb. Here’s a map of what it looks like today:

A symbol of Islamic victory? 

The Hindu nationalist narratives surrounding the Qutub Minar have evolved over time—and have included fanciful theories in the past.

The ‘Hindu temple’ theory: In the 1950s, an engineer-turned-amateur archaeologist Kanwar Sain claimed that the minar was actually constructed by a Tomar Rajput ruler named Rai Pithora (better known as Prithviraj Chauhan)—who was ousted by Qutb. The Muslim invaders merely constructed an external shell to hide its true origins. This outlandish tale was taken up decades later by the notorious revisionist Purushottam Nagesh Oak—who also claimed that the Taj Mahal was a Shiva temple named ‘Tejo Mahalaya’ and that the Kaaba in Mecca was a Hindu shrine. If you need it, this 1976 India Today article offers evidence to refute this theory of the minar’s origins.

The present-day argument: rests primarily on unarguable evidence that the first iterations of the minar and the mosque were built from the remains of 27 Hindu and Jain temples—confirmed by the Archaeological Survey of India and other historians. They also flag a foundational inscription attributed to Qutb placed on the eastern gate of the mosque—which states this as fact. Historian Giles Tillotson too notes: “Some Hindu idols were originally inserted face down at the thresholds, which indicates a more plausible interpretation of the whole project as a gesture of intimidation over those he had conquered.” 

Point to note: The locations of these idols has recently become an issue. BJP leader and National Monuments Authority chairman Tarun Vijay wrote a letter to the ASI demanding they “either be removed or placed respectfully inside the Qutub complex.” Specifically, Vijay is concerned with two Ganesh idols located inside the mosque—one placed upside down while the other is enclosed in an iron gate. See them below:

What do historians say?

No one denies the existence of the temples or their destruction. Historians, however, argue that the Hindu Right is projecting present-day motives and intentions onto 12th century rulers. 

Historians’ argument #1: Berkeley historian Munis Faruqui, for example, views the mosque as a message not to Hindus but other Muslims—specifically rival Turkish generals:

“Qutb built a mosque to proclaim his piety and virtue against other slave Turk generals. His piety deserves allegiance: this is the message. The inscriptions do not say that Qutb slew the Hindus; rather, they proclaim his piety. Most are in Arabic. His primary target in the inscriptions was other Muslims. He felt the need to make these statements and he had a deep desire to appear as a good Muslim, in India and outside India.”

Faruqui also argues that these Turkish rulers were deeply insecure as recent converts to Islam—and therefore felt even greater pressure to declare their faith.

Historians’ argument #2: Historian Swapna Liddle points out that only certain temples were destroyed—and for a reason that had little to do with Hinduism or Islam:

“Nobody denies the fact that temples were destroyed in a moment of war. But this was not because they were symbols of a rival faith but because they were symbols of power of the regime that was supplanted. That context is important.

 

A grand Jain temple built by a minister of the Tomars, named Sahu Nattal, in 1132 was destroyed by the Ghuris army that conquered Delhi. That was possibly selectively chosen for its association with power. But other shrines nearby that enjoyed popular support, like the Dadabari Jain temple in Mehrauli and the Jogmaya Temple, were spared.”

Historians’ argument #3: British colonialists were the first to write the history of the monuments, starting in 1803. Historians argue that their interpretation was driven by their ‘divide and rule’ agenda. The aim was to show Muslims as violent and Hindus as the conquered, forever at odds with one another—and who should be grateful for the arrival of enlightened British modernity.

For example, the masjid’s name: A key bit of evidence cited by Hindutva groups is the name of the masjid: Quwwat ul-Islam or Might of Islam—which is clearly meant to signify the triumph of Muslims over Hindus. 

But historians point out that the mosque was simply referred to as an ‘imarat’ or ‘masjid’ in the 12th century. Qutb’s successor Iltutmish renamed it Qubbat al-Islam or ‘Sanctuary of Islam’—in reference to the Muslim refugees who were streaming into his kingdom fleeing the Mongols. Its present-day moniker ‘Quwwat ul-Islam’ first makes its appearance in an 1847 book written by a famous Muslim social reformer, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan—who namechecks it without any evidence or source. 

Another point to note: Historian Catherine Asher makes this intriguing observation: 

“It was only the very first Muslim rulers who enter a newly taken area use spolia (reused materials) to construct the first mosque. Note that Aibak’s mosque uses older material, but then the additions by later Sultans, Iltutmish and Alauddin Khilji, do not use any older materials.”

Make of that what you will.

Where we are today…

The petition: In 2020—mere months after the Ayodhya verdict—a petition was filed in a Delhi court demanding the restoration of the 27 temples. The listed petitioners: Jain deity Tirthankar Lord Rishabh Dev and Hindu deity Lord Vishnu. It also demanded the right to place Hindu and Jain idols inside the Qutub complex and to offer prayers. The court rejected the petition in November, 2021, ruling: 

“Nobody has denied that wrongs were committed in the past, but such wrongs cannot be the basis for disturbing the peace of our present and future…Our country had a rich history and has seen challenging times. Nevertheless, history has to be accepted as a whole. Can the good be retained and bad be deleted from our history?”  

The appeal: The ruling was challenged in another Delhi court—which has now issued a notice to ASI and the union government. The next hearing is scheduled for May 11.

Adding to the pressure: With the court date drawing near, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad has also amped up its rhetoric. Its spokesperson offered a khichdi of all past Hindutva theories, declaring:

“Qutab Minar was actually ‘Vishnu Stambh’. Qutub Minar was built with materials obtained after demolishing 27 Hindu-Jain temples. The superimposed structure was built just to tease the Hindu community.”  

But it isn’t just rabble-rousing groups. NMA chair Vijay also called for the reconstruction of the temples—when he raised the issue of the Ganesh idols. The NMA falls under the Culture Ministry—and presumably represents the view of the government. 

Temple? What temple? Responding to the calls for reconstruction, a former additional director general of the ASI declared the demand absurd:

“I also believe that there were 27 temples. There is evidence to support it… But nobody knows where those 27 temples were located, what was their form, plan… Remains of the temples are spread all over the site, but no elevation, plinth, or any other thing was found there that could have helped trace the location of those temples. Something should have been found like Adhisthana (base platform).”

He also pointed out that any tampering will result in the complex losing its UNESCO world heritage tag—and being placed on the endangered list: “Be it the VHP or any other party, no one would want this to happen.”

A big point to note: This ‘right to prayer’ campaign isn’t just a Hindu Right campaign. In the past, Muslim groups have agitated for their right to offer Friday prayers at the mosque. Until 2009, people could enter the masjid without paying for a ticket—and there was great outrage when ASI started charging for entry. The ASI then moved to ban all prayers on the premises—which in 2009 sparked a huge protest. 

Law to note: As per the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, if an ancient monument was not being used for worship at the time ASI took charge of it then it cannot allow prayers of any kind on its premises.

The bottomline: Who can fathom the motivations of a 12th century ruler? Who knows what temples were razed or why? It happened. Our nation’s energy and resources are surely better spent writing a better future than rewriting our past.

Reading list

For historians’ views on the mosque and the minar, we recommend Munis Faruqui, Giles Tillotson in Scroll, Swapna Liddle in the Indian Express and this Times of India report. The Wire focuses specifically on the mosque and its name. The World Monument Foundation has a lovely pdf map of the complex—and its wonders (laptop viewing required). Also worth a read: This 2018 Reuters investigation on the government’s plans to rewrite history. If you’re interested in Indian history, we highly recommend checking out our Big Story on the archaeological excavations in Rakhigarhi—which offer a fascinating insight into where we come from.