BROKEN TEMPLESTHE SUBCONTINENT ATLASRULERS, EPISODES & REFERENCE CHAINS
58 rulers and claimants. 55 case trails. 59 linked source records.
All 20 emperors in the consulted Mughal main roster, four additional Mughal claimants, and 34 Delhi rulers/claimants, including the 1413–1414 interregnum. First-pass source screening; not an exhaustive catalogue of every act under these regimes.
A ruler’s name here is a research entry, not an accusation. Each case distinguishes a personal order, a commander’s action, a chronological association and unresolved attribution. Multiple publications repeating one chronicle are not independent witnesses.
Early destruction: al-Biruni names Jalam. Maclean compares this with the 965 Fatimid letter and accounts describing a functioning shrine around 982–985, and proposes a possible later Ghaznavid destruction. The rival chronology remains unresolved.
Later destruction: Cunningham records a local tradition blaming Aurangzeb. Thévenot describes a shrine but does not name its deity; its identification as the reconstructed Sun Temple is an inference. There is no securely established demolition date in this review.
Location: the marker represents Multan city. The historical footprint is unknown, and this is a separate dossier from Prahladpuri.
“No case identified” means no named damage case was found in the consulted biography and indexed table. It does not mean an exhaustive search found none. Reigns are orientation dates; disputed succession and claimant status remain visible.
58 rulers and claimants
Mughal Empire · 1526–1530 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1530–1540 AD; 1555–1556 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1556–1605 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1605–1627 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1628–1658 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1658–1707 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1707 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1707–1712 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1712–1713 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1713–1719 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1719 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1719 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1719–1748 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1748–1754 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1754–1759 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1759–1760 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1760–1788 AD; 1788–1806 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1788 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1806–1837 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1837–1857 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1206–1210 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1210–1211 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1211–1236 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1236 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1236–1240 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1240–1242 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1242–1246 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1246–1266 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1266–1287 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1287–1290 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1290 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1290–1296 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1296 AD
Short-lived rival claimant
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1296–1316 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1316 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1316–1320 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1320 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1320–1325 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1325–1351 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1351–1388 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1388–1389 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1389–1390 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1390–1394 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1394 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review. The retrieved biography has no sources; roster chronology is separately listed.Delhi Sultanate · 1394–1413 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1414–1421 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1421–1434 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1434–1445 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1445–1451 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1451–1489 AD
Ruler in the main roster
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1489–1517 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1517–1526 AD
Ruler in the main roster
Source trails or claims identified
See linked cases for attribution, the ruler’s actual role and access gaps. Linked cases are not a personal destruction count.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · c. 1394/1395 AD–1398/1399 AD
Rival Tughluq sultan
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Delhi Sultanate · 1413–1414 AD
Interregnum ruler
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1719 AD
Regional claimant
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1720 AD
Rival claimant
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1707–1709 AD
Deccan claimant
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.Mughal Empire · 1712 AD
Succession claimant
No case identified in this screen
No named temple-damage case identified in this limited screen. This does not establish that no damage occurred during the reign.
Biography sacred-site passages and the indexed Eaton table screened. This is a first pass, not an exhaustive archival review.55 case trails
1193 AD
Named attribution: Aibek
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. Aibak acted before his independent sultanate, in the Ghurid period.
Table entry 2; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 23:216-17Ruler context: Qutb al-Din Aibak
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Hasan Nizami, Taj al-ma`athir, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 2 ↗
1193 AD
Named attribution: Aibek (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. Aibak acted before his independent sultanate, in the Ghurid period.
Table entry 3; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 23:216-17Ruler context: Qutb al-Din Aibak
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Hasan Nizami, Taj al-ma`athir, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 2 ↗
1234 AD
Named attribution: Iltutmish (sovereign)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 10; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 21:621-22Ruler context: Iltutmish
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Minhaj-i Siraj, Tabakat-i Nasiri, tr. H. Raverty (New Delhi, 1970), v. 1 ↗
1234 AD
Named attribution: Iltutmish
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 11; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 21:622-23Ruler context: Iltutmish
Mahakaleshwar Temple, Ujjain ↗
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Minhaj-i Siraj, Tabakat-i Nasiri, tr. H. Raverty (New Delhi, 1970), v. 1 ↗
1290 AD
Named attribution: Jalal al-Din Khalaji (sovereign)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 12; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 27:146Ruler context: Jalal al-Din Khalji
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Zia al-Din Barani, Tarikh-i Firuz Shahi, Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗
1292 AD
Named attribution: ‘Ala al-Din Khalaji (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. This episode predates the associated ruler’s accession; the actor was then a prince or governor.
Table entry 13; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 27:148Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Zia al-Din Barani, Tarikh-i Firuz Shahi, Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗
1298-1310 AD
Named attribution: Khalaji invaders
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 14; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 2(1974):10-12Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indica, Arabic & Persian Supplement ↗
1295 AD
Named attribution: ‘Ala al-Din Khalaji (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. This episode predates the associated ruler’s accession; the actor was then a prince or governor.
Table entry 15; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 24:543Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Amir Khusrau, Miftah al-futuh, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗
1299 AD
Named attribution: Ulugh Khan (commander)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 16; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 25:75Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Amir Khusrau, Khaza’in al-futuh, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗
1301 AD
Named attribution: ‘Ala al-Din Khalaji (sovereign)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 17; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 25:75-76Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Amir Khusrau, Khaza’in al-futuh, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗
1311 AD
Named attribution: Malik Kafur (commander)
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 18; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 25:90-91Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Nataraja Temple, Chidambaram ↗
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Amir Khusrau, Khaza’in al-futuh, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗Amir Khusrau, Khazain al-Futuh, Elliot & Dowson III ↗
1311 AD
Named attribution: Malik Kafur
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 19; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 25:91Ruler context: Alauddin Khalji
Meenakshi–Sundareswarar Temple ↗
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Amir Khusrau, Khaza’in al-futuh, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗Amir Khusrau, Khazain al-Futuh, Elliot & Dowson III ↗
c.1323 AD
Named attribution: Ulugh Khan (p)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. This episode predates the associated ruler’s accession; the actor was then a prince or governor.
Table entry 20; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 33:1-2Ruler context: Muhammad bin Tughluq
Swayambhu Shiva temple remains, Warangal ↗
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗George Michell, “City as Cosmogram,” South Asian Studies 8 (1992) ↗
c.1323 AD
Named attribution: Ulugh Khan
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. This episode predates the associated ruler’s accession; the actor was then a prince or governor.
Table entry 21; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 1(1919-20):16Ruler context: Muhammad bin Tughluq
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica ↗
c.1323 AD
Named attribution: Ulugh Khan
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. This episode predates the associated ruler’s accession; the actor was then a prince or governor.
Table entry 22; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 17:114Ruler context: Muhammad bin Tughluq
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗P. Sreenivasachar, ed., Corpus of Inscriptions in the Telingana Districts of H.E.M. the Nizam’s Dominions, pt. 2 (Hyderabad, 1940) ↗
1359 AD
Named attribution: Firuz Tughluq (sovereign)
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 23; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 26:314Ruler context: Firuz Shah Tughluq
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Shams-i Siraj, Tarikh-i Firuz Shahi, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 3 ↗Shams-i Siraj Afif, Tarikh-i Firuz Shahi, Elliot & Dowson III ↗
1392-93 AD
Named attribution: Bahadur K. Nahar (commander)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 24; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 3(1963-64):146Ruler context: Nasir al-Din Muhammad Shah
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Annual Report of Indian Epigraphy ↗
1394 AD
Named attribution: Muzaffar Khan (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 25; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 14-3:177Ruler context: Nasir al-Din Mahmud Tughluq
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Nizamuddin Ahmad, Tabaqat-i Akbari, tr. B. De (Calcutta, 1973), 3 vols. ↗
1395 AD
Named attribution: Muzaffar Khan
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 26; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 6-4:3Ruler context: Nasir al-Din Mahmud Tughluq
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Firishta, Tarikh-i Firishta tr. J. Briggs, History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India (Calcutta, 1971), 4 vols. ↗
1489-1517 AD
Named attribution: Khawwas Khan (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. Chronology or geographic identification needs particular checking; do not select a familiar modern place merely by name.
Table entry 43; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 35:81Ruler context: Sikandar Lodi
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Iqtidar Husain Siddiqui, tr., Waqi`at-e-Mushtaqui of Shaikh Rizq Ullah Mushtaqui (New Delhi, 1993) ↗
1507 AD
Named attribution: Sikandar Lodi (sovereign)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 44; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 14-1:375Ruler context: Sikandar Lodi
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Nizamuddin Ahmad, Tabaqat-i Akbari, tr. B. De (Calcutta, 1973), 3 vols. ↗
1507 AD
Named attribution: Sikandar Lodi
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 45; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 14-1:378Ruler context: Sikandar Lodi
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Nizamuddin Ahmad, Tabaqat-i Akbari, tr. B. De (Calcutta, 1973), 3 vols. ↗
1518 AD
Named attribution: Ibrahim Lodi (sovereign)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 46; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 14-1:402Ruler context: Ibrahim Lodi
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Nizamuddin Ahmad, Tabaqat-i Akbari, tr. B. De (Calcutta, 1973), 3 vols. ↗
1613 AD
Named attribution: Jahangir (e)
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 56; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 5:254Ruler context: Jahangir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Jahangir, Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri, tr. A. Rogers, (Delhi, 1968), v. 1 ↗Jahangir, Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, Rogers / Beveridge, volume I (1909) ↗
1632 AD
Named attribution: Shah Jahan (e)
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 57; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 31:36Ruler context: Shah Jahan
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Abd al-Hamid Lahori, Badshah-nama, in Elliot & Dowson, History, v. 7 ↗Abd al-Hamid Lahori, Badshahnama, Elliot & Dowson VII ↗
1635 AD
Named attribution: Shah Jahan
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 58; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 7:102-3Ruler context: Shah Jahan
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Kanbo, `Amal-i Salih (text: Lahore, 1967), v. 2 ↗
1655 AD
Named attribution: Aurangzeb (p,g)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. This episode predates the associated ruler’s accession; the actor was then a prince or governor.
Table entry 62; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 1(1919-20):16Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica ↗
1661 AD
Named attribution: Mir Jumla (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 64; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 9:142-43Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Khafi Khan, Khafi Khan’s History of `Alamgir, tr. S.M. Haq (Karachi, 1975) ↗
1662 AD
Named attribution: Mir Jumla
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 65; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 9:154,156-57Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Khafi Khan, Khafi Khan’s History of `Alamgir, tr. S.M. Haq (Karachi, 1975) ↗
1662 AD
Named attribution: Mir Jumla
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 66; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 36:249Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Jagadish Narayan Sarkar, Life of Mir Jumla (Calcutta, 1952) ↗
1664 AD
Named attribution: Mu‘tamad Khan (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 67; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 10:335Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗A. Cunningham, Four Reports Made during 1862-65 (Varanasi, 1972) ↗
1667 AD
Named attribution: Ashraf (commander)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 68; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 2(1963):53-54Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indica, Arabic & Persian Supplement ↗
1669 AD
Named attribution: Aurangzeb (e)
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 69; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 11:65-68;13:88Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗S.N. Sinha, Subah of Allahabad under the Great Mughals (New Delhi, 1974) ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri (text: Calcutta, 1871) ↗Saqi Mustad Khan, Maasir-i Alamgiri, Jadunath Sarkar translation (1947) ↗
1670 AD
Named attribution: Aurangzeb
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 70; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 12:57-61Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Krishna Janmasthan / Keshav Rai temple ↗
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri, tr. J. Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947) ↗Saqi Mustad Khan, Maasir-i Alamgiri, Jadunath Sarkar translation (1947) ↗
1679 AD
Named attribution: Darab Khan (governor)
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 71; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 12:107;18:449Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Historical great temple at Khandela ↗
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri, tr. J. Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947) ↗Shah Nawaz Khan, Maathir-ul-Umara, tr. H. Beveridge (Patna, 1979), v. 1 ↗Saqi Mustad Khan, Maasir-i Alamgiri, Jadunath Sarkar translation (1947) ↗
1679 AD
Named attribution: Khan Jahan (commander)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 72; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 18:786;12:108Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Shah Nawaz Khan, Maathir-ul-Umara, tr. H. Beveridge (Patna, 1979), v. 1 ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri, tr. J. Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947) ↗
1680 AD
Named attribution: Ruhullah Khan (commander)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 73; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 15:129-30; 12:114-15Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Ishwardas Nagar, Futuhat-i `Alamgiri, tr. T. Ahmad (Delhi, 1978) ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri, tr. J. Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947) ↗
1680 AD
Named attribution: Aurangzeb
Review: Selected underlying passage read
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 74; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 12:117Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri, tr. J. Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947) ↗Saqi Mustad Khan, Maasir-i Alamgiri, Jadunath Sarkar translation (1947) ↗
1692 AD
Named attribution: Aurangzeb
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler.
Table entry 75; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 1(1937-38):55Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica ↗
1697-98 AD
Named attribution: Shah Sabz ‘Ali (?)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 76; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 19:157Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Z.A. Desai, Published Muslim Inscriptions of Rajasthan (Jaipur, 1971) ↗
1698 AD
Named attribution: Hamid al-Din Khan (commander)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 77; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 12:241Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Saqi Must`ad Khan, Maasir-i `Alamgiri, tr. J. Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947) ↗
1718 AD
Named attribution: Haidar Quli Khan (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 78; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 1 (1933):42Ruler context: Farrukhsiyar
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica ↗
1729 AD
Named attribution: Muhammad Salih (governor)
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order.
Table entry 79; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 2(1959-60):65Ruler context: Muhammad Shah
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Epigraphia Indica, Arabic & Persian Supplement ↗
1729 AD
Named attribution: Murshid Quli Khan
Review: Indexed claim; underlying passage pending
Indexed historical episode. The table names a locality, not necessarily an individually identified surviving temple; attribution remains to the named actor, not automatically to the ruler. The ruler link is administrative or chronological context; it is not evidence of a personal demolition order. Chronology or geographic identification needs particular checking; do not select a familiar modern place merely by name.
Table entry 80; printed pages 68–69; bibliography 30:7Ruler context: Muhammad Shah
Richard M. Eaton: Instances of Temple Desecration, Frontline, 22 December 2000 ↗Azad al-Husaini, Nau-Bahar-i Murshid Quli Khani, tr., Jadu Nath Sarkar, Bengal Nawabs (1952, repr. Calcutta, 1985) ↗
Late tenth / early eleventh century AD; disputed
Named attribution: Jalam in al-Biruni; possible Ghaznavid attack in Maclean
Review: Competing accounts reviewed
The 965 letter and c. 985 shrine description conflict if both refer to the same temple. Mahmud’s involvement is a proposed explanation, not a settled finding. These rulers predate the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals.
Al-Biruni I, pp. 116–117; Maclean, pp. 134–137Multan Sun Temple: article and captured bibliography ↗Al-Biruni, India, Sachau translation, volume I ↗Derryl N. Maclean, Religion and Society in Arab Sind (1989) ↗Samuel M. Stern, Ismaili Propaganda and Fatimid Rule in Sind (1949) ↗Samuel M. Stern, Heterodox Ismailism at the Time of al-Muizz (1955) ↗Al-Muizz’s letter to Jalam, dated 354 AH / 965 CE ↗Al-Muqaddasi / Maqdisi, geographical account of Multan ↗Hudud al-alam (982), 1970 translation ↗Gardizi, Zayn al-akhbar, 1948 edition ↗
After 1666 AD, if the reconstructed-shrine identification is correct
Named attribution: Aurangzeb, in later local tradition
Review: Retrospective attribution; date and identity unresolved
Cunningham records local tradition in the nineteenth century. Thévenot does not name the deity. No contemporary demolition order was located in this review, and the exact historical footprint remains unknown.
Cunningham V, p. 119; Thévenot III, pp. 55–56Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Multan Sun Temple: article and captured bibliography ↗Alexander Cunningham, ASI Report, volume V (1875) ↗Jean de Thévenot, Travels (1687 English edition), part III ↗B. D. Mirchandani, Sun Temple of Multan (1968) ↗
During Firuz’s reign; exact year unresolved
Named attribution: Firuz Shah Tughluq
Review: Event account read; modern identification pending
Temple demolition and replacement by mosques. Historical place names are retained; unverified modern coordinates are not plotted.
Elliot & Dowson III, pp. 380–381, sections 11–13Ruler context: Firuz Shah Tughluq
During Firuz’s reign; exact year unresolved
Named attribution: Firuz Shah Tughluq
Review: Event account read; modern identification pending
Order to demolish a new temple. Historical place names are retained; unverified modern coordinates are not plotted.
Elliot & Dowson III, pp. 380–381, sections 11–13Ruler context: Firuz Shah Tughluq
During Firuz’s reign; exact year unresolved
Named attribution: Firuz Shah Tughluq
Review: Event account read; modern identification pending
Burning of seized images, books and worship vessels. Historical place names are retained; unverified modern coordinates are not plotted.
Elliot & Dowson III, pp. 380–381, sections 11–13Ruler context: Firuz Shah Tughluq
1528 AD
Named attribution: Babur
Review: Ruler’s destruction order read
The order names the Urwa images; it should not be expanded to every damaged sculpture on Gwalior hill.
Beveridge translation II, pp. 611–612Ruler context: Babur
1613 AD
Named attribution: Jahangir
Review: Event account read; exact site pending
Separate from the Varaha image: the memoir describes demolishing the hilltop shrine and its idol. Do not merge the two affected structures.
Rogers / Beveridge I, pp. 254–255Ruler context: Jahangir
Jahangir, Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, Rogers / Beveridge, volume I (1909) ↗
Akbar’s reign; campaign dating to collate
Named attribution: Husain Quli Khan’s forces
Review: Event account read; chronology and modern identity pending
The account describes temple desecration and levelling buildings for a camp. Its date and temple identification need collation with the full edition; neither personal action by Akbar nor identification with a modern shrine is assumed.
Extract pp. 28–30, especially p. 29Ruler context: Akbar
Nizamuddin Ahmad, Tabaqat-i Akbari, Elliot & Dowson extract, later reprint ↗
1645 AD; restoration order 1648 AD
Named attribution: Aurangzeb as governor; Shah Jahan later restored the property
Review: Existing dossier; roles differ
Aurangzeb’s alleged damage occurred before his imperial accession. Shah Jahan’s role here is restitution, not temple destruction.
See the existing dossier and its sourcesRuler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir Shah Jahan
Chintamani Parshvanath, Saraspur ↗
The existing dossier or ruler bibliography is the discovery source; a new underlying-source chain has not yet been established.
Destruction date unknown; later mosque attributed to Aurangzeb
Named attribution: Destroyer not established by the inspected description
Review: Official description read; demolition attribution unresolved
A mosque’s reported builder is not automatically the destroyer of every earlier structure on the site.
NMA sections 3.1–3.4Ruler context: Aurangzeb Alamgir
Earlier Paramara temple at Bijamandal, Vidisha ↗
National Monuments Authority: Bijamandal, Bhilsa heritage by-laws ↗
Chronology and demolition attribution require separate review
Named attribution: Contested attribution; do not infer Babur’s personal order
Review: Research lead; underlying archaeological and court records pending
The earlier structure, when and how it ceased to exist, the mosque’s construction and the 1992 mosque demolition are distinct questions. No destroyed-temple marker is added from the biography alone.
Babur biography architectural discussion and its bibliographyRuler context: Babur
The existing dossier or ruler bibliography is the discovery source; a new underlying-source chain has not yet been established.
Select a case to see which works it draws on and which earlier documents they cite. An arrow means a citation or source dependency, not independent corroboration.
Selected passages were read in the listed editions. Unread originals are explicitly identified; retrieving an OCR file is not a full-book review. Translation choices and court rhetoric need comparison with original languages.
Modern scholarly synthesis · Table and bibliography inspected
The 80 selected episodes are not a census or 80 individually identified temple buildings. A locality row can describe multiple losses. Attribution abbreviations distinguish sovereign, governor and commander.
Open source ↗Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Underlying work · Bibliographic entry captured; passage not independently read in this review
Edition and page references are retained on each episode. Some selected passages are followed to an accessed translation below.
Near-contemporary account in translation · Chapter XI, pp. 116–117 read
Attributes the broken Multan image and killing of priests to Jalam. Written after the events, not an eyewitness report of the attack; translator spelling varies.
Open source ↗Modern scholarship · Printed pp. 134–137 and relevant bibliography entries read
Compares the Fatimid letter with later geographical accounts. Questions whether the letter concerns the Sun Temple and proposes a possible Ghaznavid destruction. A historical argument, not a securely established replacement date.
Open source ↗Retrospective archaeological report · Multan discussion, especially printed p. 119, read
Records local tradition blaming Aurangzeb; Cunningham visited in 1853, long after the alleged destruction. His location is a conjecture based on gate/drain names.
Open source ↗Travel account · Chapter XXXII, printed pp. 55–56, read
Describes an important Multan shrine but says he does not know the deity’s name. Identification as the reconstructed Sun Temple is an inference. This passage alone does not establish that he personally visited it.
Open source ↗Ruler’s account in colonial translation · Printed pp. 380–381, sections 11–13, read
Maluh temples demolished; Salihpur temple demolition ordered; Kohana worship objects and books burned. Do not turn the last statement into a demonstrated demolition of the building. Self-justifying court narrative; Persian original not collated.
Open source ↗Court chronicle in translation · Printed p. 314, Jajnagar episode, read
Reports removal of a stone Jagannath image from the ruler’s fort. Eaton identifies the episode with Puri. The passage is not a surveyed account of destruction of the whole present temple.
Open source ↗Court victory narrative in translation · Printed pp. 90–91 read
Brahmastpuri raid and Madurai temple burning. Court rhetoric describes sweeping destruction; exact lost fabric needs archaeological comparison. The name Chidambaram comes through later identification.
Open source ↗Ruler’s memoirs in translation · Printed pp. 254–255 read
Records an order to break the Varaha image at Pushkar and a separate hilltop shrine. This does not mean the whole Varaha temple was razed.
Open source ↗Ruler’s memoirs in translation · Printed pp. 611–612, Urwa narrative, read
Records an order to destroy the Jain images at Urwa during the 1528 journey. The order alone does not identify every damaged Gwalior sculpture or establish execution of every intended destruction.
Open source ↗Court chronicle in translation · Printed p. 36 read
Reports demolition of 76 unfinished temples in the Benares district under Shah Jahan. The inspected paragraph does not name the 76 buildings; it remains one aggregate lead.
Open source ↗Court-based chronicle in translation · Selected entries: Kashi, Mathura, Khandela/Sanula, Udaipur and Chitor; pp. 55, 60, 107–108, 116–117
Written after Aurangzeb’s death using court records. Attributes commands and reports completed acts; each statement needs its own locator. A report date is not automatically the day a temple was demolished.
Open source ↗Chronicle in translation · Printed p. 29 and surrounding Nagarkot campaign context read
Archive identifier resembles volume VII but this file is a differently paginated Tabaqat extract, not Lahori. Describes Husain Quli Khan’s forces and Mahamai at Bhun. Campaign chronology and modern temple identity need checking.
Open source ↗Official architectural description · Sections 3.1–3.4 read
Records a former Paramara temple, reused carved members, excavated fragments and a mosque said to be built by Aurangzeb. This does not by itself date the temple’s destruction or establish its destroyer.
Open source ↗Reference article · Article and all bibliography entries captured
Discovery starting point. The detailed disagreements below are checked against the retrieved books.
Open source ↗Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Maclean cites pp. 301–302 for the letter’s translation. Original article not directly read.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Maclean cites pp. 24–28 for letter text and dating. Original article not directly read.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Known here through Maclean’s quotation of Stern’s editions. The quoted passage does not name the Sun Temple.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Maclean cites the 1877 edition, pp. 484–485, for the description associated with a c. 985 visit. Edition not directly read.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Maclean cites p. 89 for a functioning shrine. Underlying translated text not directly read.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Israel Oriental Studies II, pp. 176–182. Cited in Maclean and Wikipedia; original paper not directly read.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Journal of Indian History 46(2). Wikipedia’s later reconstruction discussion cites it; original paper not directly read.
Earlier source or edition · Identified through a citation; original not consulted
Maclean p. 137, note 30 cites p. 637 as suggesting Mahmud’s destruction of one of two sun idols. Site identification remains an interpretation.
This is an expanding evidence inventory. Specialist historical review is still outstanding. Case trails, bibliography entries and rulers are different units; none is a total of destroyed temples.