Author: Rajesh Singh
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: January 10, 2010
URL: http://www.dailypioneer.com/228303/Saraswati-flows-on-in-ASI-records.html
But Govt living in time warp
While it is only now that the Union Government
has admitted to the existence of the Vedic river Saraswati after being in
a denial mode for five years, the Archaeological Survey of India's National
Museum in New Delhi has all along displayed for visitors maps and written
text highlighting not only the river's existence but also its crucial role
in sustaining what we know as the Indus Valley Civilisation.
Not only does the Museum endorse the river's
existence before it dried up, it also refers to the Indus Valley Civilisation
as Indus-Saraswati Civilisation.
The National Museum is a repository of historical
and archaeological heritage of the country and comes under the same Culture
Ministry whose Minister in the first UPA regime had categorically denied the
river's existence. The Museum is patronised by visitors from across the country
and abroad.
This is what a text put up in the Harappan
Gallery of the Museum says: "Slowly and gradually these people evolved
a civilisation called variously as the 'Harappan civilisation', the 'Indus
civilisation', the 'Indus Valley civilisation' and the 'Indus-Saraswati civilisation."
After all, experts have pointed out that nearly 2,000 of the 3,000 excavated
sites are located outside the Indus belt and along the Saraswati course.
The text further elaborates the important
role of the river: "It is now clear that the Harappan civilisation was
the gift of two rivers - the Indus and the Saraswati - and not the Indus alone."
It is clear, yes, but not to the Government that only now has rather reluctantly
accepted the river's existence.
The Harappan Galley also has a map titled
Major Excavated Sites of the Indus-Saraswati Civilisation (the terminology
once again) which shows the Saraswati river (dotted possibly because it has
dried up) emptying into the Arabian Sea at Rann of Kutch in Gujarat. Yet another
display, the Harappan Civilisation Map highlights the Ghaggar river (dotted)
flowing on a similar path. Experts have identified the Ghaggar - now a seasonal
river - as what was once the mighty Saraswati.
The Museum thus emphasises the following:
One, there was a river Saraswati; two, it existed in the Vedic period; and
three, since the Indus Valley civilisation was nurtured by the Saraswati as
well, the civilisation must be referred to as Indus-Saraswati civilisation.
But even in the face of these assertions,
backed by years of research and mounting new evidence, the official response
has been status quoist, preferring not to tamper with old beliefs handed over
to us by early Western academics and eagerly adopted by home-grown experts.
ASI director BB Lal writes in the preface of his acclaimed book The Saraswati
flows on, about the "persistent assertion by Western linguists and historians
and their more vociferous, Indian counterparts that the Rig Vedic Saraswati
was the Helmand of Afghanistan."
Calling the assumption "completely baseless",
he pointed out that the Rig Veda (10.75.5) clearly stated the river Saraswati
lay between the Yamuna and the Sutlej - none of which existed in Afghanistan!
Since the Rig Veda incidentally mentions the Saraswati as many as sixty times,
and on many occasions in detail, it should be clear to all but the supremely
blinkered that the river did indeed exist in the Vedic period.
The establishment of this fact then leads
us to a bone of contention: Did the civilisation end due to an Aryan invasion
or the drying up of the river?
NS Rajaram in his excellent book Saraswati
River and the Vedic Civilisation notes that the discovery of the river 'dealt
a severe blow" to the theory that Aryans invaded India which then had
the Harappan Civilisation. The theory supposes that the Harappans were non-Vedic
since the Vedic age began with the coming of Aryans.
But the National Museum makes no such distinction.
In fact, as we have earlier noted, it refers to the role of the Saraswati
in nurturing the Harappan civilisation. Now, since the Saraswati flowed during
the Vedic period, the Vedic era ought to have coincided with the Harappan
age. Rajaram says in his book that the Harappan civilisation "was none
other than the great river (Saraswati) described in the Rig Veda. This means
that the Harappans were Vedic."
So, if the Harappans were Vedic and thus 'Aryan',
who invaded the civilisation and caused its demise? Experts have pointed out
that there is no evidence through the excavation in the Indus-Saraswati region
that an invasion had ever happened, much less from Aryans who "came from
outside". Rajaram, like many others, believe that the Saraswati's drying
up was the principal cause for the civilisation's decline. This fits in well
with the National Museum's contention that the Saraswati was a major lifeline
of the Indus-Saraswati civilisation.
Rajaram adds his voice to the theory. He notes
in the book, "It is beginning to be recognised that what ended the Vedic
Age (the Harappan era) was not any invasion but the drying up of the Saraswati
- an event that was first placed at 1900 BC but which may have been pushed
back beyond 2000BC for the date of 'complete' drying up of the Saraswati river."
Well known scholar on Indian Studies and Sanskrit,
Wendy Doniger is cautious on the invasion theory. She remarks: "The Vedic
people had other enemies, and the Indus Valley people had other, more likely
sources of destruction, nor is there any evidence that their cities were ever
sacked…The smug theory that a cavalcade of Aryans rode roughshod into
India, bringing civilisations with them, has thus been seriously challenged."
But, although her book is a remarkable history
of the Hindus and demonstrates her knowledge and appreciation of the Hindu
way of life, it fails to do justice to the Saraswati river issue. There is
just a very sparse mention of the river that is not just held in reverence
by millions of Hindus but also holds the key to understanding our ancient
civilisation.
