For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/innovation.php#8

Over the two centuries, the river Sarasvatī, being the most significant river of the Ṛg Veda, has remained a matter of debate among scholars and historians regarding its identification, location, and period of decline. Scholars from different backgrounds have sought to tackle this zigzag puzzle. The more sciences are applied the more question becomes tricky. The major challenges have been posed by archaeology and textual studies. Archaeological evidence suggests that the process of decline of the Sarasvatī started in the middle of the 3rd millennium BC and culminated around 1900 BC. As far as the Ṛִg Veda is concerned, it is generally believed that the text was composed between 1500-1000 BC. These two scenarios are contradictory to each other by acknowledging the fact that the Sarasvatī is the most revered river in the Ṛg Veda. The paper is aimed at raising certain questions regarding these archaeological and textual facts and seeks to suggest an answer in the best possible way.

1. To delineate the importance of the river Sarasvatī in the Ṛִg Veda. 2. To trace the location of Sarasvatī. 3. To reconcile the contradictory narrative of the decline of Sarasvatī and the composition of Ṛg Veda.

Greatness of Sarasvatī

It is important, before delving deep into the present debate on Sarasvatī identification, to go through some of the hymns and verses in which the river is mentioned or revered. Some of them are as follows:

अम्बितमे नदीतमे देवितमे सरस्वति |

अप्रशस्ता इव स्मसि प्रशस्तिमम्ब नस्कृधि|[1]

Here, the priest invokes the Sarasvatī and calls it Ambitame (best of mother), Naditame (best of rivers), and Devitame (best of goddesses). This verse clearly shows that the Ṛg Vedic people held the river Sarasvatī in high esteem. In one of the verses, Sarasvatī is described as firm as Pūr(city or town). The verse goes as:

प्र क्षोदसा धायसा सस्त्र एषा सरस्वती धरुणमायसी पूः|[2]

Further, in the succeeded verse, Sarasvatī is said to be flowing from a mountain and falling into the ocean:

एकाचेतत्सरस्वती नदीनाम् शुचिर्यती गिरिभ्य आ समुद्रात् |

रायश्चेतन्ती भुवनस्य भुरेर्घ्रतं पयो दुदुहे नाहुषाय|[3]

The verse goes as: ‘Sarasvatī, chief and pure of rivers, flowing from the mountains to the ocean, understood the request of Nahuṣa, and distributing riches among the many existing beings, milked for his butter and water.’ Here the phrase ‘atī giribhya ā samudrāt’ apparently delineates that Sarasvatī flows from mountain to ocean to award king Nehuṣa, who might be ruled around this area, for performing the sacrifice.

Many other verses show the significance of the Sarasvatī river. The river is invoked as a protector[4] to grant happiness,[5] the bestower of all things, not to harm with excess water,[6] distributor of water[7] abide with heroes.[8] Although the Indus river is praised for being enriched with excellent horses, chariots, hemp, and woolen products, there is no suggestion of it being protected as a divinity.[9]

The above-cited verses stamp the authority of the Sarasvatī river in RV. She is described as the mother of all mothers and the best of all rivers. Besides that Sarasvatī is referred to as a mighty river that flows from the mountain to the ocean and kings like Nehuṣa performed sacrifices on its bank for the sake of prosperity and happiness. Apart from this river is called a protector of people, granter of everything, and a place where heroes abide.

Location

Now let’s turn back to the debate on the identification of the river. As mentioned earlier that there are two main geographical areas where scholars have tried to locate the Sarasvatī river. Scholars, as mentioned above, like R.S. Sharma, Irfan Habib, Rajesh Kochhar, and Romila Thapar try to identify the river Sarasvatī with Harahvatī of the Avesta text that flowed in Afghanistan. Romila Thapar maintains that “ the Haraxvaiti river in south-east Afghanistan, would be rendered in Sanskrit as Sarasvatī since the ‘s’ sound changes into ‘h’ in Old Iranian.”[10] But as far as the identification of Sarasvatī in Afghanistan is archaeologically still not been proven. R. S. Sharma, one of the protagonists of this theory, admits that the archaeological evidence is not sufficient to prove this theory. He said that the archaeology of Helmand valley in the second millennium BC needs adequate attention. Its two large cities Shahr-i—Sokhta, and Mundigak show decay in this period, and Mundigak V shows wheel-turned pottery replaced by hand-turned pottery.[11]

R. N. Nandi makes a permissible observation about the Saraswatī river of Afghanistan. He calls it a Western Saraswatī which is not called as mighty as Eastern Saraswatī and only mentions Sarayū which is located in Afghanistan. He quotes certain verses and argues that the hymn in which the river mentions is dedicated to Lord Rūdrā who was a god of mountains and Dīvōdāsa once might rule over this area before being defeated and moving eastward.[12]

Besides that B.B. Lal refutes this theory by quoting the Nadī-Sūkta hymn and other verses where the river Sarasvatī flow between Satluj and Yamunā. Further, he says that in one of the verses[13] of RV, the Sarasvatī flows from mountains and falls into the ocean. The Helmand river, which is located in Afghanistan, doesn’t fall into the ocean.[14] Aurel Stein offers the same view and takes this hymn as conclusive evidence that the Sarasvatī river flows in India.[15] So, it shows that Sarasvatī, which is mentioned in RV undoubtedly in India and flowed between Satlūj and Yamūnā. Two important verses of RV buttress this argument. In one of the verses, rivers are described as to be disappearing in the ‘Samudram’(sea).[16] In another one, waters of the rivers are said quickly hastened from mountain to ocean as cows to their calves.[17] Although there is no clear reference that the Sarasvatī River flowed from mountain to sea but the verses indirectly prove that there was a river merging into the sea. So, it would be safe to conclude that the river Sarasvatī at one time flowed into the sea.

So, from the above discussion, it is clear that the river Sarasvatī, which a group of scholars trying to locate in Afghanistan, is neither textual nor archaeologically proven. So the river which Nandi called eastern Sarasvatī was undoubtedly located in Panjab.

Origin and Source of Water

The question, of whether Sarasvatī originated from the Higher Himalayan(glacier-fed) or Shivalik, is also a matter of debate among scholars. K. S. Waldia[18] and B. P. Radhakrishna[19] Michal Denino[20] maintain that Sarasvatī was the High Himalayan river. On the other hand, C. F. Oldham[21], Aurel Stein[22], and Bimal Ghose[23] believe that the river originated from Outer Himalaya (Shivalik hills). If the Sarasvatī river originated from the Shivalik and was not glacier-fed, then the question arises that how this river can be called mighty and flowed, at once, up to the sea. Habib identified Sarasvatī with Sarsutī as the small river flow in Thaneshwar and dried up near Sirsā.[24] Danino refuted his identification of Sarasvatī with a small isolated river that dried up near Sirsā. He called Sarsutī the tributary of Markanda and which confluence not around Sirsā, but some 120 km upstream.[25] K. S. Kshetrimayum and V. N. Bajpai[26] identified Sarsutī as one of the tributaries, such as Markanda, of Vedic Sarasvatī.

But the question remains unanswered. Jayant K. Tripathi and others[27] maintain that Ghaggar was supported by monsoon rainfall and its reduction was the main cause of the extinction of the river. This theory also doesn’t solve the question completely. If Sarasvatī was a non-glacier and rain-fed river and its tributaries were of the same origin (Shivalik, non-Glacier) then what was the permanent source of water for Sarasvatī.There must be a permanent source of water. The Landsat imagery helps to solve this riddle. Yash Pal, D. P. Agrawal, and other studies show the link between Satlūj and Sarasvatī -Ghaggar river. The results are as follows:

1. The Sharp westward right-angled bend in the course of the Satlūj is suggestive of its diversion in the past as at the point of rive capture or stream diversion similar elbows develop.No physical obstruction has been reported could be responsible for this diversion.

2. There is a sudden widening of the Ghaggar Valley about 25 km south of Patiala which is a misfit if we take into account the considerably narrow bed of the Ghaggar upstream. This sudden siding can be explained only if a major tributary was joining the Ghaggar at this place. The satellite imagery does show a major palaeo-channel joining the Ghaggar here.[28]

Similarly, they also trace the palaeo-channel of the Yamūnā river, which once flowed into the Ghaggar river and met it near Suratgarh, changed its course thrice before flowing into the present course.[29]Khan and Sinha conclude that ‘A dense concentration of Harappan sites has been documented in the Jind and Hisar districts of Haryana and further west in the Ganganagar district of Rajasthan and this can only be explained if the Yamūnā once flowed through these southwesterly flowing paleochannels… The palaeo- Yamūnā does represent the courses of a major feeder to the Ghaggar- Hakrā system(Sarasvatī) as suggested by thick sand bodies.’[30] So, it can be said that Satlūj and Yamūnā which are the perennial river once flowed into the Sarasvatī river. Therefore, the changing courses of these two major rivers must be the major cause of the drying of the Sarasvatī river. Dhavalikar rightly said that the river Satlūj and Yamūnā once flowed into the river Sarasvatī and the cause of its decline was the changing the course of these rivers.[31] Allchin, Goudie, and Hedge conclude the findings that ‘Evidence from many sources, including that of archaeological remains associated with old river courses, indicates that a major river, stemming mainly from the same sources as the present Satlūj, flowed through Northern Rajasthan, Bahawalpur, and Sind- to the southeast of the present course of the Sutlej and the Indus- in the third to second millennium BC. This river known as the Sarasvatī in its upper course, at different times either joined the lower course of the Indus in Sind or found its way independently into the Arabian Sea via Rann of Kutch.’[32]

So, it can be said that Sarasvatī originated from Shivalik hills and flowed in Haryana( through Kurukshetra, Hissar, and Jind ) and Panjab, and then drained into the western part of Rajasthan entered into Pakistan, where it is known as Hakra and finally entered into the Arabian sea.

Reconciliation of Issue

The verse in which Sarasvatī mentions as mighty or flows from mountain to sea is in the family mandala which is considered an early composition. So, the debate is mainly followed two different scenarios. It is generally believed that RV was composed after the decline of the Harappan Civilization. On the other hand, it is also agreed and the text itself reflects that the Sarasvatī was the most important river mentioned in the RV. The basic question arises here, how is it can possible that the composer of RV, especially the hymns in which Sarasvatī mentions a mighty river, composed after it declined? It is likely only in two conditions that the composer of RV could new the complete course of the river Sarasvatī in its heyday. Firstly, the composer of early hymns of RV might be aware of the region and have visited all the places before its composition. Secondly, they got this information from the local people who at one time might have lived in its bank.

Before the discussion of these two scenarios, it is important to understand the cause of the decline of the Indus Civilization. With the discovery of Harappan Civilisation in the second decade of the 20^th century, simultaneously it has been debated among historians and archaeologists regarding the decline of the Indus Civilization and its relation with Vedic Culture. Since both cultures are diametrically opposite to each other, allows scholars to delineate different theories for the decline of the Harappan Civilization. R. P. Chandra[33] was the 1^st  who postulated the theory of ‘The Aryan Invasion.’ Later this theory was popularized by M. Wheeler[34] with the discovery of new archaeological facts. This theory remains popular and a matter of debate among scholars for a long time. According to this theory, Aryans came from outside and destroyed the settlements of their original inhabitants and displaced them eventually. But this theory was challenged by scholars like P. V. Kane, B. B. Lal, A. D. Pusalkar, etc...[35] But the major setback comes from the G. Dales who called it as ‘Myth of Massacre in Mohenjodaro.[36] So, this theory has been refuted by many scholars on the ground that it has no substantial archaeological evidence to prove it.

After then there another theory developed with little modification. According to this theory, the Aryans are not called invaders but immigrants. R. S. Sharma, Romila Thapar, and many scholars subscribe to this theory. But here again, the question arises what was the nature of the interaction between Aryans and non-Aryans? According to Romila Thapar,[37] there was a symbiotic relationship between Aryans and the original inhabitants of the Indus Civilisation. But this theory has also been criticized by scholars like B. B. Lal[38] on the ground that it has no archaeological evidence. Besides that this theory can’t be justified by knowing the fact people were on the move in search of a good place which surely resulted in continuous interactions among different groups and Aryans were no exception. There is a third theory developed to explain this phenomenon. It is called acculturation among Aryans and the original inhabitants of the Indus Civilization. This theory has potential and suits the above mentions scenario of the decline of the Sarasvatī river and interaction with Aryans.

Now, let's turn back to above mentions scenario to understand this phenomenon.R. Mughal’s study of the Mature and late Harappan sites in Cholistan shows that there was a movement of people from this area reflects in the decrease in the number and size of Mature to Late Harappan sites.[39] He concludes that hydrographic changes in the Hakrā river( extension of river Ghaggar in Pakistan) were the main cause of the decline of Indus civilization in Cholistan and consequently demographical movements to the other areas.[40] J. Shaffer and D. Lichtenstaein offer the same view. They said that the archaeological data was sufficient to prove that there was a gradual and significant population shift from the Indus Valley eastward into eastern Punjab and Gujarat beginning in the late 3^rd millennium BC and continuing throughout the second millennium BC.[41]

The late Harappan sites on the Sarasvatī ( Ghaggar-Hakrā) can help to understand this phenomenon. The list of the Harappan sites, in the Sarasvati basin, compiled by S.P.Gupta, with inputs from G.Possehl and Mughal Rafique[42] is given below:

Sarasvati Basin(east to west	Early     Harappan	Mature Harappan	Late Harappan	Total
Haryana	558	114	1168	1840
Indian Punjab	24	41	160	225
Rajasthan	18	31	0	49
Cholistan (Pakistan)	40	174	50	264
Total	640	360	1378	2378

The above table clearly shows the drastic change in the settlement pattern in Cholistan and Rajasthan in the Late Harappan Period. From the Mature to Late Harappan Period in Harayana the total number of sites raised from around 31% to approximately 85 % in the Sarasvatī basin. The data inclined us to think that later Harappan population of the lower Sarasvatī valley might have moved to the Upper Sarasvatī basin. So,  it might be possible that the people of different societies got to interact and shared their ideas, knowledge, and culture.

As far as the second scenario is concerned, these people might have come into contact with Ṛg Vedic Aryans. This argument is buttressed by some archaeological sites such as Pirak, Cemetery-H, and Ghandhara Grave Culture in Swat valley which show the arrival of Aryans into the Indian Subcontinent around the early 2^nd millennium BC.[43] Although, the possibility of the first scenario can’t be rooted out completely. Chakladar cited two hymns one from RV and the other from Atharva Veda where Muni or ascetic or Brahmacharin wander from Easter to the Western sea.[44]

Both these situations require adequate consideration to tackle the question of RV composition and dring of river Sarasvatī. The composer of Nadī-Sūkta, Praiyamedha, was exiled from the Panchala region (G̣angā-Yamūnā Doab) and then he moved western side, which reflects in the enumeration of rivers from east to west.[45] It is very much possible since it is well known that the period of the 2^nd millennium was a period of instability due to some environmental, hydrographic, and geological changes. People were continuously searching for a better and safe place to live and this is how the two cultures, which are diametrically different might exchange their traditions, thoughts, and knowledge. Therefore, it is more likely that there was continuous interaction among different social groups. It is well known that the rural population was the base of the Indus civilization. So there is much possibility that there was continuous interaction among different social groups such as urban, rural, or people coming from outside.

So, the above discussion shows that the river Sarasvatī was the most important river of RV. The paper tries to prove that the river Sarasvatī was not located in Afghanistan but in Punjab. Besides that the attempt has been made to buttress the argument of falling river Sarasvatī into the sea. The main finding of this paper is that the acculturation between different social groups might be the possible cause of the composition of RV and knowing the mightiness of the river Sarasvatī. Hence it can be said that in the initial phase of the 2nd millennium, due to environmental and other reasons there was a demographical movement in the area of Sapta-Sīndhī or precisely in the Sarasvatī basin which might be resulted in the form of acculturation.J. Kuiper seems fairly right, after he found 300 non-Sanskrit works in RV, that it was a strong and high degree acculturation between non-Aryan agrarian population which more or less integrated into a society of predominantly different character. Allchin offers the same opinion that acculturation happened between Aryans and indigenous Harappan people and they influenced the Aryan language and culture.

1. Macdonell, A. A. & Keith, A. B. Vedic Index. London: John Murray, Vol. II. 1912, 424. 2. RV., 5.53.9 3. RV. 5.61.19., 10.75.6 4. RV. 5.53.9., 10.75.6 5. RV. 5.53.9., 10.75.6 6. RV. 1.114.32., 5.53.9 7. RV. 4.30.18., 5.53.9 8. RV. 10.75.6 9. RV. 10.75.6 10. RV. 10.75.6 11. Talageri, Shrikant, G. The Rigveda; A Historical Analysis. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan 2000/2020(rep.). pp. 97-98. 12. Danino, Michal. The lost River: On the Trail of the Saraswatī. Gurgaon: Penuin Books, 2010. p. 260 (afterward as TLR) 13. Sharma, R. S. Advent of the Aryans in India. New Delhi: Manohar, 1999/2017(rep.) p.35 (afterward as AAI) 14. Habib, Irfan “Imagining River saraswati: A Defence of Commonsense.” Proceedings of Indian History Congress, 2000: Vol.52. p. 85 ( afterward as IRS) 15. Kochar, Rajesh. The Vedic people: Their History and Geography. New Delhi: Orient Longman, p.131. 16. Oldham, C. F. The Saraswati and the lost river of the Indian desert. Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland.1893: p.51 (afterwars as TSLRIS). 17. Das, A. C. ṚgVedic India. Calcutta: University of Culcutta,1921. pp.70-72. 18. Lal, B. B. Aryan Invasion of India. Eds. Edwin F. Bryant and Laurie L. Patton’s ‘The Indo-Aryan Controversy’, Abingdon: Routledge, 2005. pp.54-55 (afterward as AII). 19. Dhavalikar, M. K. ‘Archaeology of Aryans.’ Annal of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. 2006: Vol. 86 p.6.( afterward as AA). 20. Danino, TLR, pp.35-56. 21. Nandi, R. N. The Ṛgveda: In its Historical Setting: Delhi: Primus Books, pp.96-108. 22. Danino, TLR, p. 253. 23. RV. 7.95.1,2.7.36.6 24. R.V.2.41.16 25. R.V.7.95.1. 26. R.V.7.95.2. 27. R.V.2.30.8. 28. R.V.1.89.3. 29. R.V.1.164.49. 30. R.V. 6.61.14. 31. R.V.7.96.6. 32. R.V.6.49.7. 33. Nandi, R. N.The Ṛgveda: In its Historical Setting. Delhi: Primus Books, p.97(afterward as TR). 34. Thapar, Romila. The Past as Present. New Delhi: Aleph Book, 2014. pp. 185-86. 35. Sharma, AAI, pp.35-36. 36. Nandi, TR, pp.103-108. 37. RV.7.95.2 38. Lal, B.B. AII. p.54(afterward as TIAC) 39. Stain, Aurel. A Survey of Ancient Sites along the Lost Saraswati River, The Geographical Journal, 1942: Vol. 99 No.4, p.176. 40. RV.4.55.6. 41. RV.1.32.2 42. Valdiya, K. S. The River Saraswati was a Himalayan-born river, Current Science, 2013: Vol. 104, No. 1 pp.42-54. 43. Radhakrishna. Is river Ghaghar, Saraswati?, Current Science,2005: Vol. 88, No. 6 p. 851. 44. Danino Michal, The Sarasvati River: Issues and Debates.Eds S. K. Acharya, Kunal Ghosh and Amal Kar’s ‘Saraswati: The River per Excellence’, Kolkata: The Asiatic Society, 2020. p. 230 (afterward as TSRID) Oldham, C. F. TSLRIS, p.51 45. Stein, Aurel. A survey of Ancient Sites along the ‘lost’ Saraswati river, The Geographical Journal, 1942: Vol. 99. No. 4. p.175. 46. Ghose Bimal, Kar Amal and Husain Zahid. The Lost Courses of Saraswati river in the Great Indian Desert,The Geographical Journal, 1979: Vol. 145. No. 3. p.446(afterward as TLCSRGID). 47. Habib, IRS, pp.66-71. 48. Danino,TLR, p.268 49. Kshetrimayum, K. S. and Bajpai, V. N. Esteblishment of missing stream link between Markanda river and Vedic Saraswati in Haryana, India- Geoelectrical resistivity approach, Current Science, Vol. 100, No. 11, 2011, p. 1719. 50.Tripathi, Jayant, K., Barbara Bock, Rajamani, V. and Eisenhauer. Is river Ghaghar, Saraswati?, Current Science, 2004: Vol. 87. No. 8 p. 1144. 51. Yash Pal, Balved Sahai, Sood R. K. and Agrawal D. P. Remote Sensing of ‘Lost’ Saraswati River. Ed. Nayanjot Lahari’s ‘The Decline and Fall of Indus Civilization’, New Delhi: Parmanent Black, 2016 (2000 1st ed.) p.215 (afterward as RSLSR). 52. Yash Pal, Balved Sahai, Sood R. K. and Agrawal D. P. RSLSR, p.222. 53. Danino, TSRID, p. 228 54. Dhavalikar, AA,p.6. 55. Ghose Bimal, TLCSRGID, p. 447. 56. Chandra, R., Indus Cities and the Aryans. In Nayanjot Lahri’s (ed.) book ‘The Decline and Fall of Indus Civilization’, Delhi: Permanent Black, 2000/2016 pp. 37-42. 57. Weeler, M., The Indus Civilization, India, Cambrige University Press, 1953, p. 51. 58. Lahari, Nayanjot(ed.) The Decline and Fall of Indus Civilization, New Delhi: Parmanent Black, 2016, pp. 9-10. 59. Dales, Goerge F., The Mythical Massacre at Mohenjodaro. In Nayanjot Lahri’s ( ed.) book ‘The Decline and Fall of Indus Civilization’ , Delhi: Permanent Black, 2000/2016. pp. 72-82. 60. Thapar, Romila, From Lineage to State, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1990, p.27. 61. Lal, B. B. AII, p. 60. 62. Mughal, Rafique The Consequences of River Changes for the Harappan Settlements in Cholistan.Ed. Nayanjot Lahiri’s ‘The Decline and FaLL OF THE Indus Civilization’, Delhi: Permanent Black, 2000/2016.pp.190-94 (afterward as TDFIC) 63. Mughal, TDFIC, p. 199 64. Shaffer Jim G. and Lichtenstein Diane A. , South Asian Archaeology and the Myth of Indo-Aryan Invasion.Ed. E. Bryant and L. Patton’s TIAC, p. 86 65. Danino, TLS, p. 139. 66. Sharma, AAI,p.71. 67. Chakladar, Haran Chandra. The Aryan Occupation of Eastern India. Calcutta: Indian Studies, 1962, p. 19. 68. Pandey, Raj Bali, The Historacal interpretation of Nadi-Dukta Hymn in the Rgveda, Proceeding of Indian History Congress, 1949: Vol. 12. pp. 95-96. 69. Kuiper, F.B. J., Aryans in the Rigveda. Netherlands: Rodopi, 1991, pp. 14-15. 70. Allchin, R. & B., The rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan. New Delhi: Select Book Service Syndicate,1983, p.299.