CoverStory

LEGEND OFDWARAKA

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 amortal, historical figure? Two books look at connections between the ancient texts and archaeology

By T.R. Gopaalakrushnan

After killing Kamsa, Krishna and his brother Balarama placed Ugrasena onthe throne and remained in Mathura. This greatly angered Kamsa's father-in-law Jarasandha, the emperor of Magadha. He repeatedly attacked Mathura toavenge Kamsa's death. Although Krishna and his small Yadava army were ableto defeat Jarasandha's hordes every time, it was an unequal contest in whichsuperior numbers were bound to tell in the long run. So Krishna led theYadavas to the west coast. They built the fortified town of Dwaraka on the siteof the ancient Kushastali, which became Krishna's seat for the rest of hiseventful life. Dwaraka was submerged in the sea 36 years after the Mahabharata War. Forewarned, Krishna had persuaded the Yadavas to moveto higher ground in Prabhas (near modern Somnath). Shortly thereafter, theYadavas, 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 colourfulstory of Krishna have a true, historical core?

Are Krishna and Dwar-aka actual historicalentities? For a majority of Indians, the answer isan unequivocal yes. Some archaeologists andhistorians too are now willing to accept that thecommon man's faith does have a basis in fact.

RECREATING A PAST THAT WAS CONSIDEREDA MYTH: A scale model of coastline andtownship of Dwaraka displayed in the BirlaScience Museum in Hyderabad; (above) Themain 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, oneof India's most respected archaelogists. An emeritus scientist at the marine archaeologyunit 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 underseafinds: "The discovery is an important landmark in the history of India. It has set to restthe doubts expressed by historians about the historicity of Mahabharata and the veryexistence of Dwaraka city. It has greatly narrowed the gap in Indian history byestablishing the continuity of the Indian civilisation from the Vedic Age to the presentday."But not all are convinced. Some point to 'contradictions' in his findings and lack of othercorroboration. Others believe that the entire story of Krishna as written in theMahabharata is pure mythology, and any claims of archaeological evidence mustnecessarily be incorrect. As historian R.S. Sharma has written in his history textbook forclass X students: "Although Lord Krishna plays an important role in the Mahabharata, theearliest inscriptions and sculpture pieces found in Mathura between 200 BC and 300 ADdo not attest his presence." (The BJP has attempted to have these lines deleted from thetextbook.)

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

Forinstance excavations in Bedsa (near Vidisha in Madhya Pradesh) have unearthed theremains 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 Palitanaplates of Samanta Simhaditya. This inscription refers to Dwaraka as the capital of thewestern coast of Saurashtra and states that Krishna lived here.

No one has so influenced the course of India's religion, philosophy, art andliterature 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 mostancient Indian cities. The others are Ayodhya, Mathura, Haridwar, Varanasi, Kanchi andUjjain, which together are known as Mokshada-that which leads to salvation.According to Hindu historical tradition, Kali Yuga began with the death of Krishna morethan 5,000 years ago. The Puranas are emphatic on the cultural degradation that set inafter the Mahabharata war, which is seen as one of the most important turning points inancient Indian history. Krishna, according to traditional belief, participated in thattransition.

Artefacts recovered from the sea bed, like the reconstructed perforated jar(left) found in Bet Dwaraka, included a low footed stool of basalt and apestle of granite and a grinder cum pounder of dolerite, among others.

"Krishna very much existed in flesh, blood and bones," 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 faithunless there is some truth to the story. And that truth is the power struggle, and the maincharacters. One of them was Krishna. The power struggle is not a myth. If the heart of thestory is to be believed as a historical event, then Krishna too should be seen as a historicalcharacter."Excavations all over north and western India, however, show that a highly developedsociety 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 Harappancivilisation represents the material remains of the Vedic Age.The postulate has its opponents, notably the well-known historian Romila Thapar. "Thelatest entrants into the field (of history) are Indian scientists from the US, who in theguise of using science and computers are now holding forth on the Aryan problem," shewrote some time ago in an article. "They are neither willing to acknowledge that theyknow little about archaeology, history or linguistics nor willing to work with suchspecialists."A few others are straddling the fence. "This debate about ancient Indian history is in factnot at all about finding the truth," said Dr Bhagwant Josh, professor of contemporaryhistory at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. "One side wants to appropriate the gloryand pride of what is considered the most systematised civilisation of city dwellers, bylinking their past to it, and the others want to deny them that." On the specific issue of thelegend 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 havebeen named after the mythical one."The other important issue is the nature of the connection between archaeology and India'sancient texts and literature. Pratnakirtim apavirnu, know thy past, exhort the Vedas andUpanishads, which for long had been described as myth and legend or as religious textswithout much historical value. Some historians have consistently opposed making anyconnection between Harappan archaeology and Vedic literature as part of the samehistorical and cultural stream. A position that is increasingly being challenged. "The corereality of these texts must be taken as the basis of further exploration of the sites of theMahabharata tradition," said Rao, "as whatever was there in the late Indus Valleycivilisation period is reflected in the civilisation of the Mahabharata."

Inevitably, some scholars and historians disagree.

"No individual character likeKrishna or Rama can be found through archaeology," said Prof. B.D. Chatopadhyay of the Centre for Historical Studies at JNU. "Archaeology can reconstruct the materialculture of a people. Krishna is known from legends, epics and puranas. Interpolatingarchaeology with literature is fraught with difficulties. The efforts of some historians andarchaeologists to correlate textual evidence with archaeological finds have not found a