Archeological Evidence of Krishna's Presence

[Guest guest]

LEGEND OF DWARAKA By T.R. Gopaalakrushnan

Krishna- the protector of Mathura, the lord of Dwaraka and the reciter

of the Bhagwad Gita on the battlefield of Kurukshetra-is one of the

most enduring legends of India. But was he also a historical figure?

Two books look at connections between the ancient texts and archaeology.

 

"As historian R.S. Sharma has written in his history textbook for

class X students: "Although Lord Krishna plays an important role in

the Mahabharata, the earliest inscriptions and sculpture pieces found

in Mathura between 200 BC and 300 AD do not attest his presence." (The

BJP has attempted to have these lines deleted from the textbook.)"

 

By T.R. Gopaalakrushnan

 

June 1, 2003

CoverStory

http://www.the-week.com/23jun01/cover.htm

Archeological Evidence of Krishna's Presence

After killing Kamsa, Krishna and his brother Balarama placed Ugrasena

on the throne and remained in Mathura. This greatly angered Kamsa's

father-in-law Jarasandha, the emperor of Magadha. He repeatedly

attacked Mathura to avenge Kamsa's death. Although Krishna and his

small Yadava army were able to defeat Jarasandha's hordes every time,

it was an unequal contest in which superior numbers were bound to tell

in the long run. So Krishna led the Yadavas to the west coast. They

built the fortified town of Dwaraka on the site of the ancient

Kushastali, which became Krishna's seat for the rest of his eventful

life. Dwaraka was submerged in the sea 36 years after the Mahabharata

War. Forewarned, Krishna had persuaded the Yadavas to move to higher

ground in Prabhas (near modern Somnath). Shortly thereafter, the

Yadavas, or at least their leaders, destroyed themselves. Krishna

himself died a few days later, killed by a hunter's arrow.

 

Does this bare-bones out- line of the colourful story of Krishna have

a true, historical core? Are Krishna and Dwar-aka actual historical

entities? For a majority of Indians, the answer is an unequivocal yes.

Some archaeologists and historians too are now willing to accept that

the common man's faith does have a basis in fact.

 

RECREATING A PAST THAT WAS CONSIDERED A MYTH: A scale model of

coastline and township of Dwaraka displayed in the Birla Science

Museum in Hyderabad; (above) The main temple at Dwaraka

 

The strongest archaeological support comes from the structures

discovered under the sea-bed off the coast of Dwaraka in Gujarat by

the pioneering team led by Dr S.R. Rao, one of India's most respected

archaelogists. An emeritus scientist at the marine archaeology unit of

the National Institute of Oceanography, Rao has excavated a large

number of Harappan sites including the port city of Lothal in Gujarat.

In his book The Lost City of Dwaraka (Aditya Prakashan, Rs 1500),

published in 1999 he writes about his undersea finds: "The discovery

is an important landmark in the history of India. It has set to rest

the doubts expressed by historians about the historicity of

Mahabharata and the very existence of Dwaraka city. It has greatly

narrowed the gap in Indian history by establishing the continuity of

the Indian civilisation from the Vedic Age to the present day."

 

But not all are convinced. Some point to 'contradictions' in his

findings and lack of other corroboration. Others believe that the

entire story of Krishna as written in the Mahabharata is pure

mythology, and any claims of archaeological evidence must necessarily

be incorrect. As historian R.S. Sharma has written in his history

textbook for class X students: "Although Lord Krishna plays an

important role in the Mahabharata, the earliest inscriptions and

sculpture pieces found in Mathura between 200 BC and 300 AD do not

attest his presence." (The BJP has attempted to have these lines

deleted from the textbook.)

 

But there are archaeological finds that do attest to Krishna as a

historical figure. For instance excavations in Bedsa (near Vidisha in

Madhya Pradesh) have unearthed the remains of a temple of 300 BC in

which Krishna (Vasudeva) and Balarama (Samkarshana) are identified

from their flagstaff. Krishna's son Pradyumna, grandson, Aniruddha and

another Yadava hero, Satyaki, have also been identified.

 

A more recent historical record, dated 574 AD, occurs in what are

called the Palitana plates of Samanta Simhaditya. This inscription

refers to Dwaraka as the capital of the western coast of Saurashtra

and states that Krishna lived here.

 

No one has so influenced the course of India's religion, philosophy,

art and literature as Krishna. Traditional belief is that Krishna

lived in Dwaraka at the end of the Dwapara Yuga. Dwaraka, in fact, is

considered one of the seven holiest and most ancient Indian cities.

The others are Ayodhya, Mathura, Haridwar, Varanasi, Kanchi and

Ujjain, which together are known as Mokshada-that which leads to

salvation.

 

According to Hindu historical tradition, Kali Yuga began with the

passing of Krishna more than 5,000 years ago. The Puranas are emphatic

on the cultural degradation that set in after the Mahabharata war,

which is seen as one of the most important turning points in ancient

Indian history. Krishna, according to traditional belief, participated

in that transition.

 

Artefacts recovered from the sea bed, like the reconstructed

perforated jar (left) found in Bet Dwaraka, included a low footed

stool of basalt and a pestle of granite and a grinder cum pounder of

dolerite, among others.

 

"Krishna very much existed," said Madhav Acharya, archaeologist at the

Haryana archaeological department. "It is difficult, if not

impossible, for a thing like the Mahabharata to be believed till today

in the same spirit and faith unless there is some truth to the story.

And that truth is the power struggle, and the main characters. One of

them was Krishna. The power struggle is not a myth. If the heart of

the story is to be believed as a historical event, then Krishna too

should be seen as a historical character."

 

Excavations all over north and western India, however, show that a

highly developed society had existed long before the accepted dates

and theories of ancient Indian history. But researchers like N.S.

Rajaram and David Frawley argue that the Harappan civilisation

represents the material remains of the Vedic Age.

 

The postulate has its opponents, notably the well-known historian

Romila Thapar. "The latest entrants into the field (of history) are

Indian scientists from the US, who in the guise of using science and

computers are now holding forth on the Aryan problem," she wrote some

time ago in an article. "They are neither willing to acknowledge that

they know little about archaeology, history or linguistics nor willing

to work with such specialists."

 

A few others are straddling the fence. "This debate about ancient

Indian history is in fact not at all about finding the truth," said Dr

Bhagwant Josh, professor of contemporary history at Jawaharlal Nehru

University, Delhi. "One side wants to appropriate the glory and pride

of what is considered the most systematised civilisation of city

dwellers, by linking their past to it, and the others want to deny

them that." On the specific issue of the legend of Dwaraka, Josh said,

"Krishna must have been historical as well as mythical. Much before

the historical Krishna was born, the mythical Krishna must have

existed (there is a reference to a Krishna in the Rig Veda); the

historical Krishna would have been named after the mythical one."

 

The other important issue is the nature of the connection between

archaeology and India's ancient texts and literature. Pratnakirtim

apavirnu, know thy past, exhort the Vedas and Upanishads, which for

long had been described as myth and legend or as religious texts

without much historical value. Some historians have consistently

opposed making any connection between Harappan archaeology and Vedic

literature as part of the same historical and cultural stream. A

position that is increasingly being challenged. "The core reality of

these texts must be taken as the basis of further exploration of the

sites of the Mahabharata tradition," said Rao, "as whatever was there

in the late Indus Valley civilisation period is reflected in the

civilisation of the Mahabharata."

 

Inevitably, some scholars and historians disagree. "No individual

character like Krishna or Rama can be found through archaeology," said

Prof. B.D. Chatopadhyay of the Centre for Historical Studies at JNU.

"Archaeology can reconstruct the material culture of a people. Krishna

is known from legends, epics and puranas. Interpolating archaeology

with literature is fraught with difficulties. The efforts of some

historians and archaeologists to correlate textual evidence with

archaeological finds have not found a consensus even among themselves,

and serious archaeologists are questioning the exercise."

 

AN ARTIST'S IMPRESSION OF FORTIFIED DWARAKA: The general layout of the

city described in ancient texts agrees with that of the submerged city

 

Not so, said R. S. Bisht, director of excavations and exploration at

the Archaeological Survey of India, Delhi, who is a strong believer in

correlating archaeological finds with the ancient literature, as he

did in the case of the Harappan civilisation and Rig Veda. "The Rig

Vedic people were the authors of the Harappan civilisation," he said.

He has little doubt of the historicity of Krishna. "In the Upanishads,

as I see it, there are no fictitious kings. So Krishna was a

historical figure."

 

Other well-known historians like Prof. B.B. Lal, former

director-general of ASI and author of a recent book on the Saraswati

civilsation, too have said that it is time for a rethink. But while

the numbers of those who agree on this point is increasing, there is

as yet no consensus on the period mentioned in the texts, especially

the Mahabharata, which is pounced upon by critics of this approach. As

Chatopadhyay pointed out, "If one is sure about the dates of the

texts, then some idea of the society that produced it can be had, but

we have no knowledge of the dates, and the Mahabharata was authored

over a long-drawn period."

 

Leaving aside the date issue for now, it seems reasonable to accept

the postulate that the Harappan sites relate to the Vedic culture

described in the Vedas, Puranas and the Mahabharata. "The Vedic

literature matches with the description of the archeological finds,"

said Madhav Acharya. As Rao said, "religion, language, yoga, town

planning and maritime activities point to the mature Harappan as the

Vedic period. And the connecting link between this and the Mahabharata

or late Harappa period is what some call the ochre coloured pottery

and what we call late Harappan pottery. Geography also shows similar

evidence."

 

"Krishna very much existed," said Madhav Acharya. "If the Mahabharata

is to be

believed then Krishna too should be seen as a historical character."

 

Rajaram and fellow researcher N. Jha say the Harappan seals are full

of Vedic motifs. Madhav Acharya feels that that was a time "when

people had language but no script. Till Brahmi, which can be read,

there was no script but there was an oral tradition. The Harappan

script has not been found in huge volumes." Rao said people who

recited the Vedas might not have written it down because of

difficulties with pronunciation. But he is convinced the Harappan

civilisation could not have been built without writing and advanced

knowledge.

 

Be that as it may, archaeological finds do show that coastal Gujarat

could well have been an important part of the Vedic and pre-Harappan

fold. As Rao writes in his book, "Long before the Mahabharata period

the Indus valley civilisation had penetrated deep into Kutch at

Dholavira and Surkotada by 3000 BC. It reached its climax between

2800-1900 BC at Lothal. They spoke a proto-Aryan language akin to Old

Indo-Aryan (Vedic Sanskirt) and their basic concept of cosmic, moral

and religious order mentioned in the Indus seals was similar to that

of the Rig Veda."

 

The underwater discoveries in the Gulf of Cambay subsequent to Rao's

expeditions off Dwaraka, and other excavations off the coast show that

the region probably had human settlements from very ancient times,

5,000 to 6,000 years ago. One of them could well have been Krishna's

Dwaraka (known in ancient times as Kushastali or 'Place of Kusha'),

the destruction of which is so graphically described by Arjuna in the

Mausala Parva of the Mahabharata: "The sea, which had been beating

against the shores, suddenly broke the boundary that was imposed on it

by nature. The sea rushed into the city. It coursed through the

streets of the beautiful city. The sea covered up everything in the

city. I saw the beautiful buildings becoming submerged one by one. In

a matter of a few moments it was all over. The sea had now become as

placid as a lake. There was no trace of the city. Dwaraka was just a

name; just a memory."

 

According to the ancient texts, the west coast around Gujarat has been

the traditional land of the Yadavas, or Yadus who claimed descent from

Yadu, the eldest son of Yayati. Centuries before Krishna, the Yadu

king Arjuna Kartavirya had been defeated by Parashurama. Bhrigukaccha,

the modern Broach, is named after the Bhrigu clan of Parashurama.

(Krishna undertook a sea voyage from Bhrigukaccha to Prabhas,

according to Bhagavata Purana.) So Krishna was only returning to the

land of his ancestors.

 

The location and topography of the site selected by Krishna made it

safe from Jarasandha's attacks. Reaching Dwaraka bounded by the sea

and Rann was a hazardous task for Jarasandha's army. Secondly, being a

good port, Dwaraka promised prosperity to the enterprising people. Not

that it was totally immune from attack. Krishna's Dwaraka was attacked

by the king of Salva (modern Sind) while he was away at Indraprastha

to attend Yudhishtira's rajasuya ceremony.

 

Many scholars accept all this mainly on literary grounds. What was

lacking was archaeological evidence linking Gujarat, Dwaraka and

Krishna. Which is what prompted Rao to lead a marine archaeological

expedition to the coastal region near modern Dwaraka in search of

submerged settlements that might correspond to Krishna's capital.

 

The underwater expeditions-which won Rao the first World Ship Trust

Award for Individual Achievement-were undertaken after extensive

on-shore excavations had yielded incontrovertible evidence of a

protohistoric settlement of 1600 BC destroyed by the sea. Conducting

12 expeditions during 1983-1990, Rao identified two underwater

settlements, one near the present-day Dwaraka and the other in the

nearby island of Bet Dwaraka. In the book The Lost City of Dwaraka

describing his discoveries, Rao suggested that Krishna occupied these

places around 1500 BC.

 

In search of submerged human settlements: A diver inspecting the rocky

ridge having man-made holes for securing boats

 

What Rao and his team discovered was a well-fortified township that

extended more than half a mile from the shore. The sketch plan of

Dwaraka, prepared on the basis of structural remains exposed in the

sea-bed, suggests six different sectors of the town all fortified and

some interconnected. Two major roads, each about 18m wide, connect a

group of three buildings on the east which formed another designated

enclosure, in which six bastions were found in a line.

 

The foundation of boulders on which the city's walls were erected

showed that the land had been reclaimed from the sea some 3,600 years

back. The submerged township extended in the north up to Bet Dwaraka

(Also known as Sankhodhara-said to have been the pleasure resort of

Krishna and his consorts Satyabhama and Jambavati. The area is noted

for its conch shell of good quality which was in great demand as a

non-corrosive substitute for metal). It extended up to Okhamadhi in

the south, and Pindara in the east. (A pearl fishing village for more

than 3,000 years, Pindara is a holy place-Pinda Taraka is mentioned in

the Mahabharata where sage Durvasa had his hermitage.)

 

The general layout of the city of Dwaraka described in ancient texts

agrees with that of the submerged city and shows evidence of town

planning. For example: "Land was reclaimed from the sea near the

western shores of Saurashtra. A city was planned and built here.

Dwaraka was a planned city, on the banks of the river Gomati. This

beautiful city was also known as Dwaramati, Dwarawati and Kushastali.

It had well-organised six sectors, residential and commercial zones,

wide roads, plazas, palaces and many public utilities. A hall called

Sudharma Sabha was built to hold public meetings. The city also

boasted of a good harbour."

 

The excavations show that Dwaraka was an urban centre with certain

specialised industries such as boat building and metal working as

evidenced by this copper lota (left) found in the sea bed. Iron too

was known to the smiths of Bet Dwaraka.

 

The Sabha Parva text of the Mahabharata describes houses, but none had

survived the sea. A few paved paths, drains, etc. were traced. Some

houses or public buildings had pillared halls. "An idea of the houses

built of dressed and undressed stones in ancient Dwaraka can be had

from the structures laid bare in the Harappan town of Surkotada in

Kutch," said Rao.

 

Kushastali is the name given to a pre-Dwaraka (or Harappan) settlement

that had been abandoned and reoccupied and rebuilt during the

Mahabharata period, said Rao, who identifies Bet Dwaraka with

Antardvipa of the epic. "The word dvipa as used in the Mahabharata

often conveys the sense of any land between two rivers or two waters,

although it is also used for a continent," said Rao. "The Harappan

seal inscriptions mention happta dvappa (sapta dvipa-seven lands) and

bhadrama dvappa (bhadrama dvipa-a seal found at Kalibanga meaning most

auspicious land). Also, "the fort wall and submerged walls in the sea

confirm the appellation varidurga, citadel in the water, given to

Dwaraka in the Mahabharata."

 

Rao also finds confirmation of the reference to Dwaraka as nagara

(city) in the epic. The high level of civilisation in ancient Dwaraka

is borne out by the engineering skill, advanced technology and the

high literacy of the people. "It was an urban centre with certain

specialised industries such as boat building, shell working, pearl

diving and perhaps metal working also," said Rao.

 

The stone mould found in the intertidal zone compares favourably with

similar moulds found in Lothal and other Indus towns just as the tidal

dock at Lothal built in 2300 BC is seen as the precursor of the port

installation of Dwaraka. Iron was already known to the smiths of Bet

Dwaraka as attested to by iron stakes, nails and other iron objects.

Terracotta wheels of toy carts were also recovered.

 

By 1500 BC almost the entire township seems to have been destroyed.

But while it existed, one later description of the city reads, "The

yellow glitter of the golden fort of the city in the sea throwing

yellow light all round looked as if the flames of vadavagni (volcano)

came out tearing asunder the sea."

 

Among the objects recovered from the sea-bed that establish the

submerged township's connection with the Dwaraka of the Maha-bharata

was a seal (just 18mmx20mm) with the images of a bull, unicorn and

goat engraved in an anticlockwise direction. "The motif is no doubt of

Indus origin but the style shows considerable influence from Bahrain,"

writes Rao. "The bull, unicorn and goat motif on seals from mature

Harappan levels of Kalibangan and Mohenjo Daro is distinct from that

of Bet Dwaraka which belongs to the late Indus period." But the seal

does corroborate the reference made in the ancient text, the

Harivamsa, that every citizen of Dwaraka should carry a mudra as a

mark of identifiction and none without a seal should enter it.

 

"When we got the seal we were really excited," said Dr. Rao.

"Secondly, we got a stone mound in which they cast some spear heads.

So some weapons were definitely locally manufactured. The Mahabharata

mentions that when Dwaraka was attacked they inserted iron stakes. We

got one of those. These are evidences which corroborate what the texts

said. But the evidence that really clinched the issue was the mudra

and the references to two Dwarakas at the place mentioned in the

ancient texts like Sabha Parva."

 

Over 12 expeditions during 1983-1990, with funding for just 20 days in

a year: Dr Rao and his pioneering team working off the coast of Dwaraka

 

The topography of the Okha region reveals seven parts interspersed by

the Rann. They may be the seven islands that existed during the

Mahabharata period and referred to in later texts. The occurrence of

proto-historic (1600 BC) pottery on land suggests there were smaller

towns between Dwaraka and Kushastali in ancient times. "With a large

port town of Dwaraka, a shipyard in Bet Dwaraka and three other

satellite towns at Aramda, Varwala and Nagewsar, the concept of the

city state of Darukavana or Dwaravati must have been given a concrete

shape," speculates Rao. If all these settlements are taken as one

unit, Darukavana extended over 45 km from north to south and at least

25 km from east to west approximating to eight yojanas, if not more.

 

Also, the Dwaraka harbour provided the earliest clear evidence of

modifying natural rock to serve the needs of a harbour. Two rock-cut

slipways of varying width extending from the beach to the intertidal

zone were discovered, which "could have been designed for launching

boats of different sizes." This technique was adopted by the

Phoenicians much later, around 900-800. The structures and the large

stone anchors lying under the sea at Dwaraka are also seen as

indicative of large ships being anchored out at sea while smaller

boats carried men and cargo up the river.

 

Among artefacts reovered from Dwaraka and Bet Dwaraka were pottery

carrying inscriptions in old Indo-Aryan (Vedic or archaic Sanskrit)

script and were found to be 3,528 years old in thermoluminescence

testing. Rao deciphers one of the potsherds recovered to read baga

(God) in late Harappan characters and assignable to 1800-1600 BC and

another as Mahakaccha sah pa, conveying the sense of "sea (or sea god)

king (or ruler) protect"-an appeal to the sea god for protection. A

similar appeal has been deciphered in a seal inscripion from Mohenjo Daro.

 

Triangular three-holed anchors weighing 120-150 kg, the biggest

weighing 560 kg, found were similar to pre-Phoenician anchors found in

Syria and Cyprus and were dated around 1500 BC. Another

archaeologically significant find was a lunate shaped moonstone

(chandrasila). This and a beam found in the vicinity suggested to

Rao's team that there existed a temple here. Stone artefacts recovered

from the sea-bed included a low footed stool of basalt, finely

polished found along with brass arches, a pestle of granite and a

grinder cum pounder of dolerite. Two single-holed spheroid stone

objects, use unclear, datable to 1500-1400 BC were found, besides iron

nails, brass objects, a copper bell, a highly corroded copper lota and

a few bronze nails. Low zinc brass produced at Lothal in 2300-2000 BC

is similar in composition to that found at Dwaraka.

 

Admittedly, there is not much dispute about the general area of

Krishna's kingdom. "The dating of Rao's material was done, not by

archaeologists, but by scientists at the Physical Research Lab, and

that cannot be disbelieved. So it is definitely ancient Dwaraka," said

Acharya. But in terms of time, Rao's explorations place Krishna and

the Mahabharata in the post-Harappan period or after the break-up of

the Harappan empire due to natural causes around 2200-1900 BC.

 

"Generally our findings have been accepted," said Rao. "There are a

few who think that the date 1700-1800 BC that we have assigned is not

in consonance with the traditional date of 3102 BC. But so far as the

archaeological evidence from on shore and off-shore excavations and

thermoluminescence dating is concerned Kushastali with its late

Harappan relics where the first Dwaraka was built may be assigned to

1700 BC and the town on the mainland may be slightly later," Rao said.

"Although traditional date of 3102 BC cannot be confirmed by avaiable

evidence, it is better to explore deeper waters of Bet Dwaraka," said

Rao. "There is one other possibility. In Bet Dwaraka there are the

mudflats. We are not able to dig because you hit water at an early

depth and neither diving nor excavations are possible."

(Archaeological excavations show that modern Dwaraka is the seventh

settlement of the name on this site. It is now generally accepted that

the earlier cities have been, at various times, swallowed by the sea.

Interestingly, the only ancient temple for Matsya, Vishnu's

incarnation at the time of the great flood, is to be found at

Sankhodhara in Bet Dwarak.)

 

The structures and stone anchors lying under the sea indicate large

ships being anchored out at sea while smaller boats carried men and

cargo up the river as visualised in this artist's impression of the

harbour of ancient Dwaraka.

 

Madhav Acharya too favours the later dates. "There is a difference in

the geographic areas as well as the time frame of the Saraswati

civilisation that is wholly Vedic, and the setting of the

Mahabharata," he said. According to him, while the Saraswati-or the

Harappan-civilisation centres on the Saptasindhu rivers (the Indus,

the Saraswati and the five rivers that make up Punjab), the

Mahabharata has the Ganga and the Yamuna, besides the Kurukshetra area

in Haryana, as the backdrop. "The earliest habitation in the

Ganga-Yamuna region does not go back beyond 1200-1100 BC, and in

Mathura and the Mahabharata sites there is no evidence of earlier

inhabitation."

 

The date arguments notwithstanding, there can be no denying the

importance of Rao's findings. With Krishna consigned to mythology, the

modernists of course insist that the undersea discoveries must have an

explanation different from Rao's interpretation and correlation with

the ancient texts, though they have yet to come up with one.

Researchers like Rajaram view Rao's findings as confirmation of their

theories that the Mahabharata belongs to a much earlier period.

 

Rajaram, in his yet to be published book Search for the Historical

Krishna, cites three main reasons as to why the site discovered by Rao

is actually a later Dwaraka than the one built by Krishna. First,

considering the abundant Vedic symbolism found in Harappan

archaeology, which Rao too says, the lack of any Vedic motifs in the

artefacts found in the undersea excavations suggests that the

settlement was a later one. Rajaram theorises that Krishna's Dwaraka

most probably lies below the existing ruins at a further depth of

around 2.5 to 5 metres based on his calculations on the likely rise in

sea levels over the past 5,000 years.

 

Low zinc brass produced at Lothal in 2300-2000 BC is similar in

composition to that found in artefacts like this bronze bell excavated

at Dwaraka. Also, a stone mould compares favourably with similar mould

found in Lothal and other Indus towns.

 

The second reason cited is that Krishna of the Mahabharata and the

archaeology of his Dwaraka must fit the picture of the region and

society portrayed in the ancient texts. This, Rajaram says, better

fits in the early Harappan (3100 BC) period than the post Harappan

period favoured by Rao and some others. Especially since some of the

artefacts recovered from the sea-bed show a strong affinity with West

Asia, especially the Kassite empire of Babylon.

 

The third reason is the mismatch between the political situation

described in the Mahabharata and the picture given by post-Harappan

archaeology. "There can be little doubt that Krishna was a Vedic

figure," said Rajaram. According to the Mabhabharata, Krishna's links

were with the Kurus, the Panchalas and Mathura, all in the Vedic

heartland to the north. "Just as there is no denying the Kassite

influences on Rao's Dwaraka, there is no denying the historic Vedic

link between the Purus (or Kurus) and the Yadus along the Saraswati

river, which should place them before the complete drying up the

ancient river around 2200-1900 BC."

 

This seal establishes the submerged township's connection with Dwaraka

of Mahabharata. It corroborates the reference in the Harivamsa that

says every citizen of Dwaraka should carry a mudra as a mark of

identification.

 

Further, Rajaram argues, the Mahabharata describes India as made up of

established kingdoms, with good communications and a common elite

language. "It was an age of large kingdoms and empires and imperial

aspirations," he insists. In fact the geography as described in the

epic is accepted by many scholars. Historian S.M. Ali is quoted in

Rao's book: "The georgrapahical matter contained in the Mahabharata is

immense. It is perhaps the only great work which deals with

georgraphic details and not incidentally as other works." So Krishna's

Dwaraka must fit into the geography and society described in the epic,

which obviously corresponds far more to the early Harappan rather than

the post-Harappan period which saw the rise of regional cultures, what

Rao calls Janapadas, Rajaram argues in his book. (Rao gives the

following chronology: Pre-Harappa 3400-3100 BC; mature Harappa

3100-1900 BC; late Harappa 1900-1500 BC.)

 

The town was well-fortified with engineering skill, as seen in the

hemispherical door-socket (left) and literacy as seen in the

inscription in the earthern trough (right) in old Indo-Aryan script

which Rao deciphers as Mahakaccha sah pa, conveying the sense of "sea

(or sea god) king (or ruler) protect".

 

Moreover, in looking at the historical basis for the Dwaraka legend, a

key question is not just about Krishna but also whether the

Mahabharata war and other participants in the war were historical

also. One cannot have one without the other. And Rajaram and Jha, in

their yet to be universally accepted decipherment of the Harappan

seals, say there are many references to Krishna and other Mahabharata

characters in the Indus Valley seals, some of which date back to 5000

years.

 

For instance, one seal they have deciphered as Devapi, the elder

brother of Bhishma's father, Shantanu. Among other names related to

Krishna deciphered are Akrura (Krishna's friend), Yadu (Krishna's

ancestor), and Sritirtha (old name for Dwaraka). Another seal they

read as 'Murari Vrishni anga' meaning 'Murari of the Vrishnis,' and

one more as 'Vrishni varpa,' implying he had a beautiful body. In

fact, Jha and Rajaram say they have found the word 'Vrishni' appearing

on numerous Harappan seals. Vrishni of course was Krishna's clan,

living in a region where recent excavations have shown that the

Harappan Civilisation was thriving.

 

The identification of Krishna's Dwaraka thus calls for devising

methods of identifying sites and artefacts that belong to the

Mahabharata period, though there is little consensus among historians

and archeologists on dating this period. For this, it is necessary to

get at the root of the main literary source of the period, the

Mahabharata. "Recent research has shown that the epic is not a myth

but a recreation of history. This is the consensus among most

historians and archaeologists," Rao argues.

 

While one may or may not agree with Rao's conclusions, he has made an

important contribution by connecting literature and archaeology. He

has shown that identifying Krishna's Dwaraka and other places

connected with the Krishna story as well as the larger story of the

Mahabharata itself and other ancient texts is possible by looking for

similar connections between literature and archaeology, and be the

starting point for excavations for other historic and legendary places.

with Vijaya Pushkarna

 

Interview/S.R. Rao

State too busy to preserve the finds

Has there been any finding elsewhere comparable to your Gujarat ones?

In Poompuhar (Tamil Nadu), there is a structure at a depth of 23 m.

This is something extraordinary and unique. Normally, at a depth of

7-10m, you get 3rd-4th century BC material. We did some work and saw

that it was a kind of apsidal object. There appeared to be two

structures. How to date it is a big question. We suspect it might be

very early.

 

Mahabharata is viewed as a north Indian story...

In Andhra Pradesh, when I excavated two small neolithic sites (new

stone age or around 5000 BC), I got Harappan material. In a place

called Bandipur Salachenu we got typical Harappan beads How did this

happen? What did they give in return? So there was some contact with

the south.

 

Is there any attempt to preserve what you have discovered?

That is the most deplorable aspect. We prepared a project, consulted

the navy people and the engineers, who can do underwater conservation.

They said it was feasible. We worked out a detailed project report.

The cost was Rs 9 crore, because we wanted to not only preserve, but

to put acrylic tubes so that people can go and actually see the

structures. All this we said in our report to then tourism minister

Ananth Kumar two years ago. But nothing was done. If the government

allows us to do the work, we will take care of it; it is not difficult

to find the money for it. All the artefacts that were recovered are

currently at the NIO in Goa. We have again approached Mr Jagmohan and

hope a decision will be made soon.

 

We also wanted to set up an alphabet museum. The Sanskrit University

in Tirupati wanted the project and I had prepared a plan. Most of the

artefacts are in Delhi.

 

The Lothal museum is fairly well done. I took a lot of pains over it.

But Kalibangan is just a heap of earth. Nothing has been done to

preserve it even though it is such an important site. Now it has gone

completely. In fact, when the National Geographic people came to India

to make a film, they went only to Lothal. Dholavira is all stone. Some

measures have been taken to preserve the excavations.

 

Karmayogi par excellence

"Since time immemorial learned men have known that the affairs of the

world are influenced by forces both divine and human. I can only do

what I can to control and influence human events. I have no control

whatsoever on what the gods might do."

-Bhagavad Gita

 

Reading beyond the myth accumulated over millennia, Krishna is seen to

be a many-sided man who lived a rich and varied life. He is, of

course, best known as friend and counsellor to the Pandavas and the

architect of the Pandavas' victory over the Kauravas in the great

Kurukshetra battle. In fact, but for Krishna's leadership and

strategy, it is quite possible that the Pandavas might not have

prevailed. Then there is Krishna, the Vrishni prince of Dwaraka, the

uncrowned king of the turbulent Yadu clan.

 

For all his greatness, Krishna's career was tinged with tragedy: he

failed to prevent the Mahabharata War and failed also to prevent his

Yadu clan from destroying itself. The forces of human folly ultimately

proved stronger even than Krishna. This also I believe shows that

Krishna was entirely a human figure. (This I recognise is ultimately a

matter of faith and the statement expresses only my belief.) And yet

for all his failures, he left for posterity a message that has never

lost its relevance-the message embodied in his philosophy of karma

yoga, the principle of action.

 

'MISMATCH BETWEEN ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE MAHABHARATA': N.S. Rajaram

 

And this brings us to the third Krishna, the most enduring of all,

Krishna the reformer and practical philosopher, the sage of karma

yoga. Krishna was a reformer who moved away from the ritualistic

practices of the Vedic religion of his time to the action-oriented

Sankhya philosophy. He lived in the late Vedic Age when rituals of the

Brahmanas, deriving mainly from the Yajurveda had begun to dominate.

The Rigveda, completed for the most part more than five hundred years

before his time was already becoming unintelligible. It was being

interpreted by ritualistic priests who had lost contact with the

mystical language and the true meaning of the Rigveda.

 

Krishna saw the futility and irrelevance of such ritual built around

practices bereft of meaning and sought reform. That Krishna was

himself a peerless Vedic scholar was recognised by all, even by his

adversaries like Shishupala. This is also clear from the acquiescence

of princes and sages assembled during Yudhisthira's Rajasuya ceremony

where Krishna was honored as the greatest figure of the age. The

suggestion to so honor Krishna had come from no less a person than

Bhishma, a man old enough to be his grandfather. Veda Vyasa himself

was present in the assembly and raised no objection.

 

Krishna as a romantic hero is a later creation that receives no

support from early and reliable sources like the Mahabharata. The

image of Krishna that we get from the ancient sources is of an austere

and studious man, whose main concerns were political stability and

ethical and religious reform. The historical Krishna is the very

antithesis of his portrayal in the later literature. Considering his

own precarious childhood and youth his concerns are also entirely

understandable.

 

The youthful Krishna was an introspective and philosophic man,

profoundly concerned about his role in history. Many years later he

volunteered to go on a mission to prevent a calamitous war between his

cousins, the Kauravas and the Pandavas. Its failure was a foregone

conclusion and Krishna knew it. When Vidura asked Krishna why he

bothered at all considering that war was inevitable, Krishna told him:

"I am thinking not of my place and my time, but of the future. Future

generations will think that I allowed a great calamity to befall the

world without my lifting a finger to prevent it. Failure is not an

excuse for lack of effort..."

 

This is the central message of the great Bhagavadgita, attributed to

him. Krishna firmly believed that one always had to live in action. He

told his friend and disciple Arjuna: "There is nothing in the three

worlds that I want for myself. There is nothing for which I need to

work. But if I let myself follow a course of inaction, so will others

follow me... I shall myself be the cause of degeneracy in the world."

 

To return to his early life, as befitting a warrior prince, Krishna

received a stern education, both in military craft and in Vedic

studies. Krishna and Balarama studied under the sage Sandipini. A

passage in the Chandogya Upanishad suggests that Krishna was also

associated with Ghora of the Angirasa clan on studies relating to the

Vedas.

 

Krishna was something of a child prodigy and soon attained fame both

as a warrior and Vedic scholar. And like every genius he quickly

surpassed all his teachers, becoming a great innovator in both warfare

and philosophy. Whoever was the source of the Gita, it is beyond

question that he was a peerless Vedic scholar. Krishna could be its

compiler, his ideas put in their final form by Veda Vyasa.

The Gita is now widely studied; at the time when Krishna began to

propound his new philosophy, people must have found it radical. This

helps explain the hostility shown to Krishna by the rulers of the old

established order. He must have seemed to them a dangerous radical

with emphasis on action and merit, away from ritual and privilege.

(Extract from N.S. Rajaram's unpublished book Search For the

Historical Krishna)

 

http://www.the-week.com/23jun01/cover.htm