The Somnath temple, also called
Somanātha temple or Deo Patan is a
Hindu temple located in Prabhas Patan,
Veraval in Gujarat, India. It is one of the
most sacred pilgrimage sites for Hindus
and is believed to be first among the
twelve jyotirlinga shrines of Shiva. It is
unclear when the first version of the
Somnath temple was built with estimates
varying between the early centuries of the
1st-millennium to about the 9th century
CE. The temple is not mentioned in
ancient Sanskrit texts of Hinduism as
Somnath nomenclature but the "Prabhasa-
Pattana" (Prabhas Patan) is mentioned as
a tirtha (pilgrimage site), where this temple
exists.For example, the Mahabharata in
Chapters 109, 118 and 119 of the Book
Three ( Vana Parva), and Sections 10.45
and 10.78 of the Bhagavata Purana state
Prabhasa to be a tirtha on the coastline of
Saurashtra.
Somanath Mandir )
Religion
District
Shiva
Festivals
Governing body
Shree Somnath Trust
Location
State
Architecture
Creator
(Many
reconstructions)
Completed
1951 (present
structure)
Website
somnath.org (https://somnath.org/)
The temple was reconstructed several
times in the past after repeated
destruction by multiple Muslim invaders
and rulers, notably starting from an attack
century.
The Somnath temple was actively studied
by colonial-era historians and
archaeologists in the 19th- and early 20th-
century, when its ruins illustrated a historic
Hindu temples are in the process of being
converted into an Islamic
mosque. After India's
independence, those ruins were
demolished and the present Somnath
the temple was reconstructed in the Māru-
Gurjara style of Hindu temple architecture.
The contemporary Somnath temple's
reconstruction was started under the
orders of the first Home Minister of India
Vallabhbhai Patel completed in May 1951 after his death.
Location
The Somnath temple is located along the
coastline in Prabhas Patan, Veraval,
Saurashtra region of Gujarat. It is about 400 kilometres (249 mi) southwest of
Ahmedabad, 82 kilometres (51 mi) south of Junagadh – another major
archaeological and pilgrimage sites in
Gujarat. It is about 7 kilometres (4 mi)
southeast of the Veraval railway junction,
about 130 kilometres (81 mi) southeast of
the Porbandar airport and about 85
kilometres (53 mi) west of the Diu
The Somnath temple is located close to
the ancient trading port of Veraval, one of three in Gujarat from where Indian
merchants departed to trade goods. The
11th-century Persian historian Al-Biruni
states that Somnath has become so
famous because "it was the harbour for
seafaring people, and a station for those
who went to and fro between Sufala in the
country of Zanj (east Africa) and China".
Combined with its repute as an eminent
pilgrimage site, its location as well
known to the kingdoms within the Indian
subcontinent. Literature and
epigraphical evidence suggests that the
medieval era Veraval port was also
actively trading with the Middle East and
Southeast Asia. This brought wealth and
fame to the Veraval area as well as the
Temple.
The site of Prabhas Patan was occupied
during the Indus Valley Civilisation, 2000–
1200 BCE. It was one of the very few sites in
the Junagadh district to be so occupied.
After abandonment in 1200 BCE, it was
reoccupied in 400 BCE and continued into
the historical period. Prabhas is also close
to the other sites similarly occupied:
Junagadh, Dwarka, Padri and Bharuch. ,
Nomenclature and
significance
Somnath means "Lord of the Soma" or
"moon". [note 1] The site is also called
Prabhasa ("place of splendour").
Somnath temple has been a jyotirlinga site
for the Hindus, and a holy place of
pilgrimage ( tirtha ). It is one of the five most
revered sites on the seacoast of India,
along with the nearby Dvaraka in Gujarat,
Puri in Odisha, Rameshvaram and
Chidambaram in Tamil Nadu.
Somnath Jyotirlinga temple in 2015, Prabhas Patan
Many Hindu texts provide a list of the
most sacred Shiva pilgrimage sites, along
with a guide for visiting the site. The best
known were the Mahatmya genre of texts.
Of these, Somnath temple tops the list of
jyotirlingas in the Jnanasamhita – chapter
13 of the Shiva Purana, and the oldest
known text with a list of jyotirlingas. Other
texts include the Varanasi Mahatmya
(found in Skanda Purana), the Shatarudra
Samhita and the Kothirudra
Samhita. [note 2] All either directly
mention the Somnath temple as the
number one of twelve sites, or call the top
temple as "Somesvara" in Saurashtra – a
a synonymous term for this site in these
texts. [note 3] The exact date of
these texts are unknown but based on
references they make to other texts and
ancient poets or scholars, these have been
generally dated between the 10th- and
12th-century, with some dating it much
earlier and others a bit later.
The Somnath temple is not mentioned in
ancient Sanskrit texts of Hinduism, but the
"Prabhasa-Pattana" is mentioned as a
tirtha (pilgrimage site). For example, the
Mahabharata (c. 400 CE) in Chapters 109,
118 and 119 of Book Three ( Vana
Parva), and Sections 10.45 and 10.78 of
the Bhagavata Purana state Prabhasa is a tirtha on the coastline of Saurashtra.
Alf Hiltebeitel – a Sanskrit scholar known for his translations and studies on Indic
texts including the Mahabharata, states
that the appropriate context for the
legends and mythologies in the
Mahabharata is the Vedic mythology
which it borrowed, integrated and re-
adapted for its times and its audience.
The Brahmana layer of the Vedic literature
already mention tirtha related to the
Saraswati river. However, given the river
was nowhere to be seen when the
Mahabharata was compiled and finalized,
the Saraswati legend was modified. It
vanishes into an underground river, then
emerges as an underground river at holy
sites for Sangam (confluence) already
popular with the Hindus. The Mahabharata
then integrates the Saraswati legend of the
Vedic lore with the Prabhasa tirtha, states
Hiltebeitel.The critical editions of the
Mahabharata, in several chapters and
books mention that this "Prabhasa" is at
a coastline near Dvaraka. It is described as a sacred site where Arjuna and Balarama
go to tirtha, a site where Lord Krishna
chooses to go and spend his final days,
then dies.
Catherine Ludvik – a Religious Studies and
Sanskrit scholar concurs with Hiltebeitel.
She states that the Mahabharata
mythologies borrow from the Vedic texts
but modify them from Brahmin-centered
"sacrificial rituals" to tirtha rituals that are
available to everyone – the intended
the audience of the great epic. More
specifically, she states that the sacrificial
sessions along the Saraswati river found
in sections such as Pancavimsa
Brahmana was modified to tirtha sites in
the context of the Saraswati river in
sections of Vana Parva and Shalya
Parva. Thus the mythology of Prabhasa
in the Mahabharata, which states to be
"by the sea, near Dwaraka". This signifies
an expanded context of pilgrimage as a
"Vedic ritual equivalent", integrating
Prabhasa must have been already
important as a tirtha site when the Vana
Parva and Shalya Parva compilation was
The 5th-century poem Raghuvamsa of
Kalidasa mentions some of the revered Shiva pilgrimage sites of his times. It includes
Banaras (Varanasi), Mahakala-Ujjain,
Tryambaka, Prayaga, Pushkara, Gokarna
and Somnatha-Prabhasa. This list of
Kalidasa gives a "clear indication of tirthas
celebrated in his day", states Diana Eck –
an Indologist is known for her publications
on historic Indian pilgrimage sites.
History
The site of Somnath has been a pilgrimage
site from ancient times on account of
being a Triveni Sangam (the confluence of
three rivers: Kapila, Hiran and Saraswati).
Soma, the Moon god, is believed to have lost his lustre due to a curse, and he
bathed in the Sarasvati River at this site to
regain it. The result is said to be the
waxing and waning of the moon. The
name of the town, Prabhas, meaning
lustre, as well as the alternative names
Someshvar and Somnath ("the lord of the
moon" or "the moon god"), arising from this
tradition.
Ruined Somnath temple, 1869
The name Someshvara begins to appear
starting in the 9th century. The Gurjara-
Pratihara king Nagabhata II (r. 805–833) recorded that he visited tirthas in
Saurashtra, including Someshvara.
Romila Thapar states that this does not
imply the existence of a temple, but rather
that it was a pilgrimage site ( tirtha). The
Chaulukya (Solanki) king Mularaja possibly
built the first temple for Soma at the site
sometime before 997 CE, even though
some historians believe that he may have
renovated a smaller earlier temple.
The post-1950 excavations of the
Somnath site has unearthed the earliest
a known version of the Somnath temple. The
excavations showed the foundations of a
10th-century temple, notable broken parts
and details of a major, well decorated
the version of a temple. Madhusudan Dhaky
believes it to have been the one that was
destroyed by Mahmud of Ghazni.
B.K. Thapar, the archaeologist who did the
excavation stated that there was definitely
a temple structure at Somnath-Patan in
the 9th century, but none before.
Mahmud of Ghazni, the Turkic Muslim ruler of the Ghaznavid Empire, raided India as far as Somnath, Mathura and Kannauj
in Gurjara-Pratihara territory.
In 1026, during the reign of Bhima I, the
Turkic Muslim ruler Mahmud of Ghazni
raided and plundered the Somnath temple,
broke its jyotirlinga. He took away a booty
of 20 million dinars. According to
Romila Thapar, relying on 1038
inscription of a Kadamba king of Goa, the
condition of Somnath temple in 1026 after
Ghazni's is unclear because the inscription
is "puzzlingly silent" about Ghazni's raid or
temple's condition. This inscription, states
Thapar could suggest that instead of
the destruction may have been a
desecration because the temple seems to
have been repaired quickly within twelve
years and was an active pilgrimage site by
1038.
The raid of 1026 by the Turkic Muslim ruler
Mahmud of Ghazni is confirmed by the 11th-century Persian historian Al-Biruni,
who worked in the court of Mahmud, who
accompanied Mahmud's troops between
1017 and 1030 CE on some occasions,
and who lived in the northwest Indian
subcontinent region – over regular
intervals, though not continuously. The
invasion of the Somnath site in 1026 CE is
also confirmed by other Islamic historians
such as Gardizi, Ibn Zafir and Ibn al-Athir.
However, two Persian sources – one by
Adh-Dhahabi and others by al-Yafi'i – state it
as 1027 CE, which is likely incorrect and
late by a year, according to Khan – a
the scholar is known for his studies on Al-Biruni
and other Persian historians. According
to Al-Biruni:
The location of the Somnath
the temple was a little less than
three miles west of the mouth of
the river Sarasvati. The temple
was situated on the coast of the
Indian Ocean so that at the time
of flow, the idol was bathed by its
water. Thus that moon was
perpetually occupied in bathing
the idol and serving it."
— Translated by M.S.
Khan
Al-Biruni states that Mahmud destroyed
the Somnath temple. He states Mahmud's
motives as, "raids undertaken with a view
to plunder and satisfy the righteous
the iconoclasm of a true Muslim... [he]
returned to Ghazna laden with costly
spoils from the Hindu temples." Al-Biruni
obliquely criticizes these raids for "ruining
the prosperity" of India, creating
antagonism among the Hindus for "all
foreigners", and triggering an exodus of
scholars of Hindu sciences far away from
regions "conquered by us". Mahmud
launched many plunder campaigns into
India, including one that included the sack
Some of the earliest photos of Somnath temple were taken by Sykes and Nelson in the 19th century. They show the Somnath Hindu temple partly converted into an Islamic mosque.
According to Jamal Malik – a South Asian
history and Islamic Studies scholar, "the
destruction of Somnath temple, a well
known place of pilgrimage in Gujarat in
1026, played a major role in creating
Mahmud as an "icon of Islam", the sack of
this temple became "a crucial topic in
Persian stories of Islamic iconoclasm".
Many Muslim historians and scholars in
and after the 11th century including the
destruction of Somnath as a righteous
exemplary deed in their publications. It
inspired the Persian side with a cultural
the memory of Somnath's destruction through
"epics of conquest", while to the Hindu
side, Somnath-inspired tales of recovery,
rebuilding and "epics of resistance".
These tales and chronicles in Persia
elevated Mahmud as "the exemplary hero
and Islamic warrior for the Muslims",
states Malik, while in India Mahmud
emerged as the exemplary "arch-
enemy".
Powerful legends with intricate detail
developed in the Turko-Persian literature
regarding Mahmud's raid, which
"electrified" the Muslim world according to
scholar Meenakshi Jain. According to historian Cynthia Talbot, a later tradition
states that "50,000 devotees lost their
lives in trying to stop Mahmud" during his
sack of Somnath temple. According to
Thapar, the "50000 killed" is a boastful
the claim that is "constantly reiterated" in
Muslim texts, and becomes a "formulaic"
the figure of deaths helps highlight
"Mahmud’s legitimacy in the eyes of
established Islam".
Kumarapala (r. 1143–72) rebuilt the Somnath temple in "excellent stone and
studded it with jewels," according to an
inscription in 1169. He replaced a
During its 1299 invasion of Gujarat,
Alauddin Khalji s army, led by Ulugh Khan,
defeated the Vaghela king Karna, and
Legends in the later texts Kanhadade
Prabandha (15th century) and Nainsi ri
Khyat (17th century) states that the Jalore
ruler Kanhadadeva later recovered the Somnath idol and freed the Hindu
prisoners, after an attack on the Delhi
army near Jalore. However, other
sources state that the idol was taken to
Delhi, where it was thrown to be trampled
under the feet of Muslims. These
sources include the contemporary and
near-contemporary texts including Amir
Khusrau's Khazainul-Futuh, Ziauddin
Barani's Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi and
Jinaprabha Suri's Vividha-tirtha-kalpa. It is
possible that the story of Kanhadadeva's
rescue of the Somnath idol is a fabrication
by the later writers. Alternatively, it is
possible that the Khalji army was taking
multiple idols to Delhi, and Kanhadadeva's
army retrieved one of them.
The temple was rebuilt by Mahipala I, the
Chudasama king of Saurashtra in 1308
and the lingam was installed by his son
Khengara sometime between 1331 and
1351. As late as the 14th century,
Gujarati Muslim pilgrims were noted by
Amir Khusrow to stop at that temple to pay their respects before departing for the Hajj
pilgrimage. In 1395, the temple was
destroyed for the third time by Zafar Khan,
the last governor of Gujarat under the
Delhi Sultanate and later founder of
Gujarat Sultanate. In 1451, it was
desecrated by Mahmud Begada, the Sultan
of Gujarat.
By 1665, the temple, one of many, was
ordered to be destroyed by Mughal
Emperor Aurangzeb. In 1702, he ordered that if Hindus revived worship
there, it should be demolished
completely.
The Gates from the tomb of Mahmud of Ghazni are stored in the Arsenal of Agra Fort.
In 1842, Edward Law, 1st Earl of
Ellenborough issued his Proclamation of
the Gates, in which he ordered the British
army in Afghanistan to return via Ghazni
and bring back to India the sandalwood
gates from the tomb of Mahmud of Ghazni
in Ghazni, Afghanistan. These were
believed to have been taken by Mahmud
from Somnath. Under Ellenborough's
instruction, General William Nott removed the gates in September 1842. A whole
sepoy regiment, the 6th Jat Light Infantry,
was detailed to carry the gates back to
India in triumph. However, on arrival,
they were found not to be of Gujarati or
Indian design, and not of Sandalwood, but
of Deodar wood (native to Ghazni) and therefore not authentic to Somnath.
They were placed in the arsenal store-
room of the Agra Fort where they still lie to the present day. There was a debate
in the House of Commons in London in
1843 on the question of the gates of the
temple and Ellenbourough's role in the
affair. After much crossfire between
the British Government and the opposition,
all of the facts as we know them were laid
out.
In the 19th-century novel The Moonstone
by Wilkie Collins, the diamond of the title is
presumed to have been stolen from the
Temple at Somnath and, according to the
historian Romila Thapar reflects the interest aroused in Britain by the gates.
Her recent work on Somnath examines the
evolution of the historiographies about the
legendary Gujarat temple.
Reconstruction during 1950–1951
K. M. Munshi with archaeologists and engineers of the Government of India, Bombay, and Saurashtra, with the ruins of Somnath Temple in the background, July 1950.
Before independence, Veraval was part of the Junagadh State, whose ruler had acceded to Pakistan in 1947. India
contested the accession and annexed the state after holding a referendum. India's
Deputy Prime Minister Vallabhbhai Patel
came to Junagadh on 12 November 1947
to direct the stabilization of the state by
the Indian Army, at which time he ordered
the reconstruction of the Somnath
Temple.
When Patel, K. M. Munshi and other
leaders of the Congress went to Mahatma
Gandhi with their proposal to reconstruct
the Somnath temple, Gandhi blessed the
move but suggested that the funds for the
construction should be collected from the
public and the temple should not be
funded by the state. He expressed that he
was proud to associate himself to the
project of renovation of the temple.
However, soon both Gandhi and Sardar
Patel died, and the task of reconstruction
of the temple continued under Munshi,
who was the Minister for Food and Civil
Supplies, Government of India headed by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.
The ruins were pulled down in October
1950. The mosque present at that site was
shifted a few kilometres away by using
construction vehicles. On 11 May 1951,
Rajendra Prasad, the first President of the Republic of India, invited by K M Munshi,
performed the installation ceremony for
the temple.
Temple architecture
Pre-11th century temple
The floor plan and ruins of a pre-1000 CE
the temple was unearthed during the
archaeological excavations led by B.K.
Thapar. Most of the temple is lost, but the
remains of the foundation, the lower
structure as well as pieces of the temple
ruins suggest an "exquisitely carved, rich"
Temple. According to Dhaky – a scholar of
The Indian temple architecture is the
an earliest known version of the Somnath
Temple. It was, what the historic Sanskrit Vastu
sastra texts call the tri-anga Gandhara
Prasada. Its garbhagriha (sanctum) was connected to a mukhamandapa (entrance
hall) and gudhamandapa.
The temple opened to the east. The
stylobate of this destroyed temple had two
parts: the 3 feet high pitha-socle and the
vedibandha-podium. The pithy had a tall
Britta joined to the jadyakumbha,
ornamented with what Dhaky calls "crisp
and charming foliage pattern". The
Kumbha of the Vedibandha had a
Surasenaka with a niche that contained
the figure of Lakulisa – this evidence
affirms that the lost time was a Shiva
Temple.
The excavations yielded pieces of one at
the western end, which suggests that the
Kumbh was aligned to the entire wall.
Above the Malaga moulding was an
antarapatta, states Dhaky, but no
information is available to determine its
design or ornamentation. The surviving
fragment of the kapotapali that was
discovered suggests that at "intervals, it
was decorated with contra-posed half
chakras, with large, elegant, and carefully
shaped gagarakas in suspension graced
the lower edge of the kapotapali", states
vedibandha, possibly with a two-layered
sangha with images on the main face
showing the influence of the late Maha-
Maru style. Another fragment found had a
"beautifully moulded rounded palette
and a ribbed khuraccadya-awning topped
the Khattak".
The mukhachatuski, states Dhaky, likely
broke and fell immediately after the
destructive hit by Mahmud's troops. These
fragments suffered no further erosion or
damage one would normally expect, likely
because it was left in the foundation pit of
the new Somnath temple was rebuilt
quickly after Mahmud left. The "quality of
craftsmanship" in these fragments is
"indeed high", the carvings of the lost
the temple was "rich and exquisite", states
Dhaky. Further, a few pieces have an
inscription fragment in the 10th-century
characters – which suggests that this part
of the temple or the entire temple was
built in the 10th century.
19th-century ruined Somnath temple
partly converted into a mosque
The efforts of colonial-era archaeologists,
photographers and surveyors have yielded
several reports on the architecture and
arts are seen at the Somnath temple ruins in
the 19th century. The earliest survey
reports of Somnath temple and the
condition of the Somanatha-Patan-Veraval
town in the 19th century was published
between 1830 and 1850 by British officers
and scholars. Alexander Burnes surveyed the site in 1830, calling the Somnath site as
"far-famed temple and city". He wrote:
Floor plan of the main Somnath temple, Veraval Gujarat
stands on a rising ground on the
the north-west side of Pattan, inside
the walls, and is only separated
by them from the sea. It may be
scene from a distance of twenty-
five miles. It is a mossy stone
building, evidently of some
antiquity. Unlike Hindu temples
generally, it consists of three
domes, the first of which forms
the roof of the entrance, the
second is the interior of the
Temple, the third was the
were deposited the riches of
Hindi devotion. The two
external domes are diminutive:
the central one has an elevation
of more than thirty feet,
tapering to the summit in
fourteen steps, and is about
forty feet in diameter. It is
perfect, but the images which
have once adorned both the
interior and exterior of the
buildings are mutilated, and the
black polished stones which
removed by the citizens for less
pious purposes. Two marble
slabs, with sentences from the
Koran, and inscriptions
regarding Mangrol Isa, point
out where that Mohammedan
worthy rests. They are on the
the western side of the city, and the
the place is still frequented by the
devout Moslem. Near it is a
cupola, supported on pillars, to
mark the grave of the sultan's
cash keeper, with many others;
and the whole city is encircled
by the remains of mosques, and
one vast cemetery, ‘The field of
the battle, where the “infidels” were
conquered, is also pointed out,
and the massy walls, excavated
ditch, paved streets, and
squared-stone buildings of
Pattan itself proclaims its
former greatness. At present the
the City is a perfect ruin, its houses
are nearly unoccupied and but
for a new and substantial
temple, erected to house the god
woman, Ahalya Bai, the wife of
Holkar.
— Alexander Burnes
He states that the site shows how the
the temple had been changed into a Muslim
structure with an arch, these sections had
been reconstructed with "mutilated pieces
of the temple's exterior" and "inverted
Hindu images". Such modifications in the
dilapidated Somnath temple to make it
into a "Mohammedan sanctuary", states
Burnes is "proof of Mohammedan
devastation" of this site. Burnes also
summarized some of the mythologies he
heard, the bitter communal sentiments
and accusations, as well as the
statements by garrisoned "Arabs of the
Junagar [Junagadh] chief" about their
victories in this "infidel land".
The survey report of Captain Postans was
Pattan, and all the parts of the
a country wherein it is situated, is
now under a Mohamedan ruler,
the Nawab of Junagadh, and the
the city itself offers the most curious
specimen of any I have ever seen
of its original Hindu character,
preserved throughout its walls,
gates, and buildings, despite
Mohammedan innovations and
a studied attempt to obliterate
the traces of paganism; even the
very masjids, which are here
and there encountered in the
the town has been raised by
materials from the sacred
edifices of the conquered, or, as
it is said by the historians of
Sindh, “the true believers turned
the temples of the idol
prayer.” Old Pattan is to this day
a Hindu city in all but its
inhabitants—perhaps one of the
most interesting historical spots
in Western India. [...] Somnath
assumed the appearance it now
presents, of a temple evidently of
pagan original altered by the
introduction of a Mohammedan
style of architecture in various
portions, but leaving its general
plan and minor features
unmolested. [...] The temple
consists of one large hall in an
oblong form, from one end of
which proceeds a small square
chamber, or sanctum. The
centre of the hall is occupied by
a noble dome over an octagon of
eight arches; the remainder of
the roof is terraced and supported
by numerous pillars. There are
three éntrances. The sides of the
building face to the cardinal
points, and the principal
the entrance appears to be on the
eastern side. These doorways
ave unusually high and wide, in
the Pyramidal or Egyptian form,
decreasing towards the top; they
add much to the effect of the
building. Internally, the whole
presents a scene of complete
destruction; the pavement is
everywhere is covered with heaps
of stones and rubbish; the
facings of the walls, capitals of
the pillars, in short, every
portion possessing anything
approaching to ornament,
having been defaced or
removed, (if not by Mahmud, by
those who subsequently
converted this temple into its
present semi-Mohammedan
appearance). [...] Externally the
whole of the buildings are most
elaborately carved and
ornamented with figures, single
and in groups of various
dimensions, Many of them
appear to have been of some
size; but so laboriously was the
work of mutilation carried on
here, the larger figures
scarcely a trunk has been left,
whilst few even the most
minute remain uninjured. The
the western side is the most perfect:
here the pillars and ornaments
are in excellent preservation.
The front entrance is
ornamented with a portico, and
surmounted by two slender
minarets ornaments so much in
the Mohammedan style, that
they, as well as the domes, have
been added to the
original building.
A more detailed survey report of Somnath
Temple ruins were published in 1931 by
Henry Cousens. Cousens states that
the Somnath temple is dear to the Hindu
consciousness, its history and lost
splendour remembered by them, and no
another temple in Western India is "so
famous in the annals of Hinduism as the
temple of Somanatha at Somanatha-
Pattan". The Hindu pilgrims walk to the
ruins here and visit it along with their
pilgrimage to Dwarka, Gujarat, though it
has been reduced to a 19th-century site of
gloom, full of "ruins and graves". His
survey report states:
The old temple of Somanatha is
situated in the town, and stands
upon the shore towards its
the eastern end, being separated
from the sea by a heavily built
retaining wall which prevents
the former from washing away
the ground around the
foundations of the shrine. Little
now remains of the walls of the
temple; they have been, in great
measure, rebuilt and patched
building into a mosque. The
the great dome, indeed the whole
roof and the stumpy seminars, one
of which remains above the
front entrance, are portions of
the Muhammadan additions. [...]
One fact alone shows that the
the temple was built on a large
scale and that is the presence in
its the basement of the avatar or
horse-moulding. It was probably
about the same size, as the plan, as
the Rudra Mala at Siddhapur,
being, in length, about 140 feet
overall. [...] The walls, or, at
At least, the outer casing of them,
having in great part fallen, there
is revealed, in several places, the
finished masonry and mouldings
of the basement of an older
Temple, which appears not to
have been altogether removed
when the temple, we now see,
was built, portions of this older
the temple was left in
situ to form the heart and core
of the later masonry. [...] For
several reasons, I have come to
the conclusion that the ruined
Temple, as it now stands, save
for the Muhammadan additions,
is a remnant of the temple built
by Kumarapala, king of Gujarat,
about AD 1169.
— Henry Cousens
Present temple
The present temple is a Māru-Gurjara
architecture (also called Chaulukya or
Solanki style) Temple. It has a "Kailash
Mahameru Prasad" forms, and reflects the
the skill of the Sompura Salats, one of
Gujarat's master masons.
The architect of the new Somnath temple
was Prabhashankarbhai Oghadbhai
Sompura, who worked on recovering and
integrating the old recoverable parts with
the new design in the late 1940s and early
The 1950s. The new Somnath temple is
intricately carved, two-level temple with
pillared mandapa and 212 relief panels.
A wide-angle view – a bit distorted – from the southeast side of the present Somnath temple. Nataraja can be seen on the euthanasia, along with the two-storey design.
The temple's śikhara, or main spire, is 15
metres (49 ft) in height above the
sanctum and it has an 8.2-metre-tall flag
pole at the top. According to Ananda
Coomaraswamy – art and architecture
historian, the earlier Somnath temple ruin
followed the Solanki style, which is Nagara
architecture inspired by the Vesara ideas
found in Western regions of India.
Artwork
The rebuilt temple as found in the ruined
form in the 19th century and the current
temple used recovered parts from previous
temple with significant artwork. The new
the temple has added and integrated the new
panels with a few old ones, the colour of the
stone distinguishing the two. The panels
and pillars with historic artwork were and
are found in the south and southwest side
In general, the reliefs and sculpture is
mutilated, to the point that it is difficult for
most to "identify the few images that
remain" on panels, states Cousens. An
original Nataraja (Tandava Shiva), albeit with chopped arms and defaced, can be
seen on the south side. A mutilated Nandi
is to the right. To the left of this are traces
of Shiva-Parvati, with the goddess seated
in his lap. Towards the north-east
corner, portions of panels in a band similar
to Ramayana scenes in historic Hindu temples can be traced. Sections can be
seen with "beautiful vertical mouldings, on
either side of the main front doorway",
states Cousens, and this suggests that the
the destroyed temple was "exceedingly richly
carved". The temple likely had a galaxy of
Vedic and Puranic deities, as one of the
partially surviving relief shows Surya's
iconography – two lotuses in his hand.
The older temple featured an open plan,
with great windows that allow light into the
mandapa and circumambulation passage.
The intricate and detailed artwork inside
and on the pillars of Somnath temple were
quite similar to those found in the Luna
The Somnath-Prabhasa tirtha has been
one of the revered tirtha (pilgrimage) site
for the Hindus. It is the famed Prabhasa
the site is found in Brahmi script inscriptions in
Maharashtra sites. It is mentioned in
the poems of Kalidasa. The new temple
is the top pilgrimage site in Gujarat along
Archaeological studies
The Somnath temple site and coastline
has been excavated for archaeological
evidence by Indian teams. The first major
the excavation was completed in 1950–51
just before the Somnath temple was
reconstructed. It was led by B. K. Thapar,
one of the Director General of
Archaeological Survey of India, and a
report published. This Thapar study
yielded direct and substantial evidence of
a 10th-century or earlier large temple. B.
K. Thapar estimated the older temple to be
from the 9th century, while Dhaky states to
more likely from the 10th century, i.e. from
960 to 973 CE. The Thapar study also
found artefacts and ruins with ancient
scripts such as Brahmi and later scripts
such as proto-Nagari and Nagari, thus confirming the antiquity of Somnath-Patan
through at least much of the 1st-
millennium.
A few Somnath-Patan sites around the
Somnath temple was excavated in the
In the 1970s, led by M. K. Dhavalikar and Z. D.
Ansari. They dug deeper at several
locations reported evidence of five
periods of human settlement. In 1992, M.
K. Dhavalikar and Gregory Possehl – an archaeologist known for his Indus Valley
studies reported their analysis of
archaeological discoveries from Prabhas-
Patan. According to them, the Somnath
the site shows evidence of ancient human
the settlement, from pre-2nd millennium BCE
period. They date one period to "pre-
Harappan phase". However, these
discoveries are all ceramics, wares and
jewellery (amulet), and they found no
ancient "temple parts". According to
Charles Herman's critical review, the
the evidence available so far does not allow
any direct inferences about the society
and culture in the pre-1st millennium BCE era,
but there is persuasive evidence that
Prabhas-Patan was an early Harappan site
with sedentary farming and cattle keeping
and it is in the same league of significance
as the Dholavira (Kutch) and Rojdi (Sorath-Harappan) archaeological sites. Further,
the Prabhas-Patan mounds that have been
excavated show evidence of continued
post-Harappan settlement (c. 2000– 1800
BCE) along with several other Saurashtra
sites. According to Herman, the
archaeological excavations in Prabhas-
Patan and Saurashtra regions have been
too few to make systematic
conclusions.
Legacy
Iran
The Somnath temple has inspired different
narratives and legacies, for some a symbol
of blessed conquest and victories, for
some a symbol of fanatical intolerance
and persecution. After the 1026 sack of
the Somnath temple, states Mehrdad
Shokoohy, the "sack of Somnath was not
just yet another campaign of a medieval
Sultan confined to histories, but a symbol
of the revival of Iranian identity boosted by
religious zeal, which was to echo in
literature and folklore" for nearly one
thousand years. The destruction of the
Somnath temple – called Sūmanāt in
Persian literature, and the killing of the
infidels have been portrayed as a celebrated
the event in numerous versions of history,
stories and poems found in Persia written
over the centuries. The Persian literature
has made mythical ahistorical connections
of Somnath to Manat. The destruction of both has been celebrated by the Islamic
India
On the Indian side, the Somnath temple
has been more than another house of
worship. For Hindus, particularly Hindu
nationalists, it is a question of their
heritage, their sense of sacred time and
space, states Peter van der Veer. Its
history raises questions about tolerance and
spiritual values to expect, and of a symbol
of fanaticism and foreign oppression. The
Somnath temple has been leveraged to
revisit India's history and agitate over its
sacred spaces including contested sites
such as Ayodhya. Mahmud and
Aurangzeb along with the ideology that
inspired them are remembered as enemies
of the ancient Hindu nation. They are
asserted as two historical facts, the
former as the first and the latter as the last
systematic destroyers of Somnath
Temple.
The Somnath temple was used as a
cultural symbol and the starting point for a
Rath Yatra (chariot journey), states K.N.
Pannikkar, by Lal Krishna Advani, to begin
his Ayodhya campaign in 1990.
According to Donald Smith, the
reconstruction efforts in the 1950s were
not about restoring an ancient
architecture, rather than the Somnath temple
was of religious significance. The
rebuilding was a symbol, it was a Hindu
repudiation of almost a thousand years of
Muslim domination, oppression, and
reassertion of a haven for Hindus in
post-partitioned India.
The reconstructed Somnath temple has
been the preferred pilgrimage site for
Hindus in Gujarat, often combined with a
pilgrimage to Dwarka. The site attracts
Hindus from all over India, states David
Sopher.
Pakistan and West Asia
In the modern era textbooks of Pakistan,
the sack of Somnath temple is praised and
the campaign of Sultan Mahmud of
Ghaznavi is glorified as a "champion of
Islam". According to Syed Zaidi – a scholar
of Islamist Militancy, a school book in
Pakistan titled Our World portrays
Somnath temple is a "place where all the
Hindu rajas used to get together" and think
about "fighting the Muslims". Mahmud
went to this temple and "blew the idol in
pieces" and "this success was a source of
happiness for the whole Muslim
world". Another textbook for Pakistan's
Middle School repeats a similar narrative,
teaching its students that the Somnath
the temple was not a Hindu temple but a
political centre. According to Ashok
Behuria and Mohammad Shehzad, the
Somnath legacy is narrated in this
textbook as "according to most historians
Mahmud invaded India seventeen times to
crush the power of the Hindu Rajas and
Maharajas who were always busy planning
conspiracies against him ... After the fall
of Punjab, the Hindus assembled at
Somnath — which was more of a political
centre than a temple — to plan a big war
against Mahmud. He took all the Rajas
and Maharajas by surprise when he
attacked Somnath and crushed the Hindu
headquarter of political intrigue. With the
destruction of Somnath he broke the
the backbone of the Hindus in the region and
thus did not need to attack India
again".
In Islamic State nationalist literature of the
the modern era, Sultan Mahmud's campaign in
the 11th century has been glorified as a
historic "jihad against non-Muslims", his
the motive for destroying Somnath temple is
described as "not driven by worldly gain
[wealth]", but because he wanted to "end
the worship of idols".
Afghanistan
In 1842, during the First Anglo-Afghan war,
the Governor-General of India Lord
Ellenborough ordered his troops to bring
the wooden gates from the tomb of
Mahmud of Ghazni in Ghazni, Afghanistan back to India; it was believed Mahmud had
taken them from Somnath Temple.
However, there was nor there is any
evidence that Somnath temple or its site
ever had any wooden gates. Nor is there
any evidence that Mahmud or later
conquerors ever took any gates from
The prabhas-Patan region as a part of the
plunder. This order has been called the
Proclamation of the Gates. The order, states Thapar, is best seen as an example
of how "colonial intervention in India" was
viewed in the 1840s.
Somnath converted into a mosque, partly
correct, partly embellished sketch (1850 CE)
Somnath Temple in 1957
Brahma-Shiva-Vishnu above mukhamandapa
No comments:
Post a Comment