1

Shiva G. Bajpai Professor Emeritus of History California State University, Northridge CA.91330-8250 Email: Shiva.bajpai@csun.edu

The paper presented at the International Conference “How Deep are the Roots of Indian Civilization”, New Delhi. November 25-27, 2010

Sapta-Sindhu Geographical Identification and Historical Implications ―The historian always attempts to discover and explain what happened in the past; and only the explanation that is based on evidence would be valid. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the historian to refuse to engage in analyses that ignore the evidence or fail to present it.‖ This represents the views expressed by an eminent historian, Professor Eric Hobsbawm, in December 2004 at the India International Center, New Delhi. I have always held similar views regarding the profession and responsibility of the historian. Therefore, when I refuse to analyze or present the views of many of the mainstream academics on Sapta-Sindhu, the ecumene of the Rig Vedic Aryans, I am only doing so for the reasons of professional integrity and responsibility, and not for a lack of appreciation of their sincerity. As a historian of early India, I have come to employ a three-fold-criteria for defining what constitutes historical evidence. These criteria are: (a) historical accuracy, (b) cultural authenticity, and (c) traditional legitimacy. These alone would produce a valid and true historical narrative. In the case of literary evidence, it is crucial that the integrity of the text and its context be always maintained in order to ascertain not only what happened in the past but also our explanation of it. While history is a dialogue between the present and the past, we must guard against any scholarly tendency of backward projection, lest we succumb to a desire to remake the past while claiming to change the present and building a brighter future. Further, as historians as well as purveyors of culture, we must recognize the impact of world history on our interpretation of the history and heritage of any country because of its uniqueness, and, in the case of India, her fundamentally different basic cultural approaches and philosophical presuppositions as well. A historian is not a specialist in the same way as an archaeologist or a geologist, or even a linguist is. In addition to collecting and researching sources for history, he/she also serves as a judge who evaluates the accuracy, authenticity and legitimacy of historical sources as well as of such researches of specialists in various other academic disciplines that have a bearing on the writing of historical narrative for academics and publicists, as well as for the public at large. In his historical

chronicle, Rājtaraṅgiṇī (1147-49) Kallhaṇa, the celebrated medieval historian of Kashmir, set

down the defining qualification of a historian that was an extraordinary one for his time and is valid even today, and I would add, even more so today. He says: “ Ṥ laghyah sa eva gunavana ragadvesha-bahihskritah,

Bhutarthakathane yasya stheyasyeva Sarasvati.

(Rājataraṅgiṇī,1.7)

2

That man of quality (i.e. a historian) alone is praiseworthy, who is above (the feelings of) love and hatred, whose intellect remains steady while relating the meaning (of the facts) of the past.

The problem of the identification of Sapta Sindhu/Sapta Sindhava/Sapta Sindhushu, the earliest region of the Aryan ecumene or homeland including its epicenter in Bharat-India, has been an intractable one despite the endeavors of international scholarship for nearly two centuries. The main reasons for this intractability have to do with the global, albeit Eurasian, dimensions of the Aryan question, and its corollary, the theory or more accurately the myth, of Aryan invasion (now euphemistically called ‗migration‘) of India on the one hand and, on the other, the presumptive non-Aryan characterization of the ―Harappan Culture‖ or the Sindhu (Indus)-Sarasvatī civilization first discovered in the1920s. The resultant mythic reconstruction of ancient historical processes by modern academicians and scholars accorded an amazing role to the exploits of the allegedly alien Aryan people, thereby accounting for the demise of the splendid urban Harappan culture as well as the beginning of a new rural Vedic culture in c.1500 BC in northwestern India. Although recent archaeological discoveries and other scientific studies including the genetic DNA research have chipped away at the very foundations of such a reconstruction of historical processes, the establishment indologists both in India-South Asia as well as abroad nevertheless tenaciously cling to their baseless theories by drawing on puzzling features of Eurasian Aryan archaeology and Indo-European linguistics, thereby preventing a correct and meaningful reconstruction of India‘s early history, especially of the Vedic-Harappan age. Additionally, crucial to a definition of the Sapta Sindhu is the correct identification of the most celebrated Sarasvatī River, the cradle of the Vedic culture. It was, according to many scholars, among the constituent Seven Rivers. However, its identification has bedeviled generations of scholars for nearly two centuries primarily because of the belief in the Aryan Invasion theory and secondarily because of the condition of the present day small river Sarasuti in Haryana that seemingly conforms with its Vedic location between the Yamunā in the east and the Śutudri in the west, but in no way matches the lofty descriptions of the mighty perennial river Sarasvatī that ―flowed from the mountains to the ocean‖ (giribhyah āsamudrāt, Rv.7.95.2). The dogmatic belief in the Aryan invasion theory militated against its identification with modern Sarasuti and its advocates sought to identify it with the Indus or with the Avestan Haraquaiti River in Southern Afghanistan in order to bolster their claim of Aryan entry into India via the northwestern mountain routes. As a result of the ongoing controversy over the correct identification of the Sarasvstī, virtually all scholars have failed not only to recognize the meaning and significance of the fact that the Rigvedic people designated their homeland as ―Sapta Sindhu‖, but also from properly evaluating the personality of Vedic India. They have ignored the cultural and political implications of the evolution of Vedic national identity manifested in the act of naming of their homeland, which in itself marks an expression of a highly advanced historical consciousness. It is also remarkable that the very designation ‗Sapta Sindhu‘, Land of the Seven Rivers, rises above a narrow ethnic and dynastic affiliation, and points to the character of the people who called themselves Arya, the noble ones. Sapta Sindhu: The Country of Seven Rivers The Rig Veda, the oldest anthology of sacred literature in world history, and the earliest literary source of Indian history and culture, generally mentions tribes and clans and rivers and mountains but not any specific geographical region. However, there has been a consensus among Vedic

3

scholars and historians that the phrase Sapta Sindhushu (Rv 8.24.27) or Sapta Sindhavah (Rv. 8.54.4; 10.43.3) literally meaning ―the seven rivers‖ or the Land of Seven Rivers at least in one instance in the Rig Veda (8 24.7) “designates a definite country, while elsewhere the seven rivers themselves are meant.‖ (Vedic Index.vol.ii. sv p.424)

Ya ṛkṣādaṃhaso mucad yo vāryāt sapta sindhuṣu | Vadhardāsasya tuvinṛmṇa nīnamaḥ || ―Who will set free from ruinous woe, O Arya [the dwellers] on the Seven Streams, O valiant Hero (namely Indra) bend the Dasa‘s weapon down.‖ (Griffith, p. 415. fn. Arya on the Seven Streams. From any Aryan enemy in the land of

Seven Rivers, probably the Indus, the five rivers of the Punjab, and the Kubha)

―(He [Indra] it is) who rescues men from the wickedness of the evil beings, who enriches the dwellers on the seven

rivers ( sapta sindhu), now hurl you, who abound in wealth, your weapon at the dasas.‖ Dwellers on the Seven

Rivers—Sapta Sindhushu i.e. dwellers on the banks of the seven rivers, the Ganges etc. or on the shores of seven seas (Sayana). ((Wilson. Iii. P.454).

The term Sapta-Sindhu occurs in many other hymns of the Rig Veda as noted in the Vedic Index (II.p.424) and it is also found in Atharvaveda (4.6.2; cf. Muir, I.490.fn.) and other Vedic texts. However, the authors of the Vedic Index state that in those instances ―the seven rivers themselves are meant‖, which means that they do not necessarily denote the Country of Seven Rivers. While the summary characterization of Sapta-Sindhu as ‗the designation of a definite [Vedic] country‘ as well as the statement that elsewhere just ‗the seven rivers themselves are meant‘ is simple enough, the problem arises when we seek to identify the seven rivers and delineate the country so named after them. In fact, the Rig Veda nowhere specifically names the constituent rivers, thereby leaving its interpreters a wide margin to determine which seven rivers were actually meant and the identification of the region through which they flowed. All modern scholars have, therefore, latched on to the Nadīsūkta (hymn to the Rivers) of the Rig Veda to posit an Indus River Sapta Sindhu, while variously identifying the other six rivers. Such an interpretation is grossly

unwarranted, especially in view of the fact that the Sarasvati, or more precisely the Sarasvatī-

Dṛisadvatī region was actually the central or core area of the early Vedic culture according to the

Vedic textual evidence and the entire ancient historical tradition. Moreover, MacDonnell and Keith, the celebrated authors of the authoritative work, Vedic Index of Names and Subjects, first published in 1912, perhaps passed over a possible clue to the identification of Sapta Sindhavah because of their wrong citation of the Rigvedic hymn itself. The correct citation for Sapta Sindhavah is Book 8. Sūkta 54, ric 4 (a) rather than the often cited, albeit wrongly, Rv. 8.24.27 which has ‗sapta sindhushu’ (ya ṛkṣādaṃhaso mucad yo vāryāt sapta sindhuṣu), instead of ‗Sapta Sindhavah’ that occurs in a different hymn of the Rig Veda as demonstrated by the following verse: Pūṣā viṣṇurhavanaṃ me sarasvatyavantu sapta sindhavaḥ/ āpo vātaḥ parvatāso vanaspatiḥ śṛṇotu pṛthivī havam//

(Rv.8.54.4 Wilson and other editions; also part of the Vālakhilva

hymns, vi.4. Griffith. P.469) May Pūṣā Viṣṇu, Sarasvatī and the seven rivers (sapta- sindhavah), favour my call; may the waters, the wind, the mountains, the trees and the earth, hear my call. (Wilson. p.540)

4

It is tempting to see a connection between the Sarasvatī, here evidently a deity, and Sapta-Sindhava, that

could lead to a true identification of the country, especially in view of the fact that she is ―primarily a river deity‖, a character she always retains in all the passages in which she is invoked. (See also Muir.i.pp.310-11). I will clarify such a connection later in this paper on the basis of evidence found in different hymns of the Rig Veda. Before doing this, let us first deal with the meaning and correct import of the designation Sapta-Sindhushu/Sapta-Sindhavah.

Meaning and import of Sapta and Sindhu

5

6

SAPTA

The first issue involves the meaning of the word Sapta. According to Monier-William‘s Sanskrit Dictionary: ―Sapta, means Seven, a favorite number with the Hindus, regarded as sacred, often used to express an indefinite plurality in the same manner as ‗three‘, by which it is some times multiplied e.g. tri-sapta or tri-shapta‖; hence seven Matris, 7 streams, 7 oceans, 7 cities (Rv.1.63.7), 7 divisions of the world, 7 ranges of mountains, 7 rishis, 7 Vipras, (Rv.1.62.4), 7 Adiyta‘s, Danavas, horses of the Sun, rays of the Sun…‖ etc. etc. What is evident from the various contexts of its usage in the Rig Veda itself is that „sapta’ not only means seven, but also is used as well to express an indefinite plurality, or many.

SINDHU

The next term, Sindhu, is the cause of many problems in the identification of the Vedic country. The word Sindhu is derived from the root ‘syand’, to flow, hence meaning „river‘ or from the root ‘sidh’ meaning ‗to go‘. However, it is also the proper name of a mighty river called the Sindhu (Indus), which is altogether different from the plural form sindhushu, or sindhavah meaning ‗rivers‘ that has the qualifier compound Sapta, meaning ―Seven‖. A study of the various occurrences of Sindhu in the Rig-Veda clearly demonstrates that Sindhu of the Sapta Sindhushu/Sapta Sindhava means ‗river‘ in its etymological sense and it has nothing to do with the Sindhu (the Indus) River. In fact, in all the occurrences of the word Sindhu in plural as for example

Sindhavah, Sindhushu, Sindubhiḥ, Sindhubhyah, Sindhūn, Sindhunām, etc they stand for rivers or

streams in general and not for the Indus itself. (Cf. Shivaji Singh: ―Sindhu and Sarasvatī in the Rig-Veda and their archaeological implications‖. Purattatva. Number 28 (197-98). The proper rendering of the term Sapta Sindhush/Sapta Sindhava, therefore, should be: The Land or The Country of Seven Rivers. However, the orientalist scholars who propounded the theory of Aryan Invasion or Migration have exploited the text and the Sanskrit vocable Sindhu to treat both the term Sapta Sindhushu and Sapta Sindhavah or its all other plural forms as meaning the Indus and its tributaries. This is evident by their English translation of ―Sapta Sindhava as Land of Seven Indus rivers.” (B.and R. Allchin. P.307). The authoritative work Vedic Index has the following statements by way of the identification of the rivers comprising Sapta Sindhava or Land of Seven Rivers: Max Muller thinks that the five rivers of the Punjab with the Indus and the Sarasvatī are intended; others [namely, Ludwig, Lassen, Whitney] hold that the Kubhā should be substituted for the Sarasvatī, or that perhaps the Oxus must originally have been one of the seven. Zimmer is probably right,’ observe the learned authors,’ in laying no stress at all

on any identifications; ‘seven’ being one of the favorite numbers in the Rigveda and later.‘ [Cf. Muir.I.p.490.n.) Virtually all-modern authors hold that Sapta Sindhu means the Indus and its tributaries, thus it designates the Indus Region as the main country of the Vedic people. However, they have not adduced any firm or corroborative evidence for their opinion except uncritically drawing upon the famous River Hymn (Nadīsūkta) of the Rigveda (10.75) which celebrates the Indus, but actually speaks of the twenty one (21) rivers, while naming only nineteen (19) of them. Its author, rishi Sindhukshit Praiyamedha, however, strikingly begins the hymn by enumerating rivers from the East to the West starting with the Gangã, Yamunã, Sarasvatī and others to the Sindhu (Indus) and its Western tributaries. While explicitly specifying that the rivers to the West of the Indus join it, he does not clearly say that those to its East did the same as its tributaries. Some modern scholars only talk about the five Punjab rivers and the Indus and Kubhā as comprising Sapta Sindhu, but

7

most others, notably Max Muller, Renou, A.L. Basham, and M.L. Bhargava, B.C. Law, N.L. Dey, D.C. Sircar.Talageri substitute the Kubhā by the Sarasvatī, which they declare as marking off the Eastern frontier of the Sapta Sindhu Country. (See, Danino.pp.51-56 for the name of many other modern scholars). Many scholars make even the Sarasvatī a tributary of the Indus (cf, map of Sapta Sindhou), which is contrary to the direct Rigvedic evidence. Certain scholars, markedly R.Griffith and others, make the Sarasvatī identical with the Indus itself because of the smallness of the present day Sarsuti in modern Haryana state. Additionally, none of them realized that in so doing they have excluded the vast regions East of the Śutudri and/or the Sarasvatī to the Ganga and/or West of the Indus to the Hindukush mountains from the country of Sapta Sindhu, a position that is inexplicable and even unwarranted in view of the fact that the source of their definitions is primarily the Nadīsūkta (Rv.10.75) which does include areas from the Ganga to the Kubhã as

belonging to Sapta Sindhu. Moreover, the Sapta Sindhusṣu/ancient India did begin with the

regions of the Kabul River and the Hindukush mountains as its Northwestern frontier. More importantly, however, an Indus centered Sapta- Sindhu violates the centrality of the Sarasvatī region which was the epicenter of the Rigvedic culture according to the Vedic textual evidence and the unanimous testimony of the historical tradition. It is abundantly clear that attempts to define Sapta-Sindhu and identify the rivers that flowed within it, is obviously problematic in modern scholarship. Confounding the confusion further are the views of ancient indigenous commentators of the Vedas and Sanskrit lexicographers. Sayanacharya, the famous commentator and interpreter of the Vedas, has an altogether different take on Sapta Sindhu/Sapta Sindhava that he treats as the Land of Seven Rivers. He apparently believes that the Naīisūkta (Rv, 10.75) provides both the names of the rivers as well as the demarcation of the country, as demonstrated by the following verses:

Imaṃ me gaṅge yamune sarasvatī śutudri stomaṃ sacatā paruṣṇyā/

Asiknyā marudvṛdhe vitastayārjīkīye śṛṇuhyāsuṣomayā// (Rv.10.75.5)

O Gaṅgā, Yamunā, Sarasvatī, Śutudri ( Sutlej), and Parushṇi (Ravi). O Maruvridhā` with Asiknyā (Chenab), O

Ārjikīya with Vitastā (Jhelum) and Sushoma (Sohan) please listen to and accept this hymn of mine.

According to Sayanacharya the rivers addressed in vocative case here: Gangã, Yamunã, Sarasvatī, Śutudrī, Paruşnī, Maruvridhā and Ārjikīyā are often mentioned as Sapta

Nadyo/Sindhus and the other three: Āsiknī, Vitastǡ, and Suşomaya, addressed in instrumental,

are the tributaries. Later on in all places where the plural form of Sinduhu occurs, he identifies Sapta Sindhavah etc.by saying sapta sindhavah gango’dyāh nadyāh, or saptasindhushu Gangādyasu nadīshu. Unlike modern interpreters, Sayanacharya is quite definite about the composition of this group of rivers that identifies the region, and squarely bases his identification on the evidence of the Nadisūkta (Rv.10.75). What is clearly astounding from his gloss is that he definitely excludes the Indus River from the list of rivers comprising the Sapta Sindhu country as well as from all other contexts where the term Sapta Sindhu occurs in plural form in the Rig Veda. Interestingly the Yajurveda (34.11) echoing her seven sisters, describes the Sarasvatī as having five tributaries: Pañcanadyāh sarsvatīmapi yanti sasrotasah/

Sarasvati tu pañcadhā so deśe’bhavasarita// The five, equally celebrated rivers, merged with the mighty Sarasvatī. The same Sarasvatī got (divided) into five glorified streams in the country.

8

The commentator Uvat wrote that the five tributaries of the Sarasvatī were the Punjab rivers, Dṛiṣadvatī,

Śutudrī, (Sutlej), Vipāśa (Beas), Īravatī (Ravi). And Chandrabhāgā (Chenab). Uvat‘s enumeration of the five

rivers is no less puzzling than Griffith‘s note cited below. Griffth’s translation: Five rivers flowing on their way speed onward to Sarasvatī, But then became Sarasvatī a five-fold river in the land.

[Sarasvatī: here apparently meaning the Indus. See Vedic India (Story of the Nations Series) pp.267.268]

Thus traditional indigenous identification of Sapta-Sindhu country runs counter to that of virtually all of the modern scholars whether western or Indians, who have indulged in generalities such as ‗the Punjab rivers‘ at best and argued that it was centered on the Indus at worst. They ignore the definite evidence of the Rigveda corroborated by the unanimous testimony of the later Vedic texts,

Mahābhārata, Purāṇas etc. as well as by the modern archaeological, hydrological and other

scientific evidence that unambiguously describes the Sarasvatī as an independent mighty river that ran parallel to the Indus all the way to the ocean. Those Sanskrit scholars who include the Sarasvatī in Sapta Sindhu but explicitly or implicitly emphasize the Indus-centered orientation, and some among them such as Max Muller, historian A.L. Basham and others, who make it a tributary of the Indus and describe it as marking off the eastern frontier of the Vedic country, are way off the mark and grossly mistaken. I have so far argued for establishing the meaning and proper import of the term Sapta Sindhu and outlined what modern Vedic scholars generally understand by it. I have also produced an indigenous understanding of Sapta Sindhu by the great Vedic commentator Sayanacharya and Uvat, a commentator of the Yajurveda, which run counter to that of the modern scholars who have uniformly clung to the Indus-centered definition based on their reading of the Nadīsūkta, and on their belief in the Aryan Invasion theory that assumes the Aryan entry from the northwest via the Indus. Let us examine which one of these versions, if any, approximates to the truth of the meaning and the designation of Sapta Sindhu or whether there is another way to explain correctly its conception and definition.

9

The Sarasvatī centered Sapta Sindhu Which river or the groups of rivers then unambiguously and definitely denote Sapta Sindhu in the Rig Veda? Instead of putting together different groups of rivers that hypothetically could form the Land of Seven Rivers, the unambiguous answer to this fundamental question is the Sarasvatī River itself. It alone has been explicitly described as saptasvasā, ‗having seven sisters‘ (6.61.10.); saptadhātuḥ, ‗having seven elements or rivers‘ (6.61.12) and sarasvatī saptathī sindhu-mātā ‗the seventh, mother of rivers‘ (7.36.6). Additionally, descriptions of The Seven Rivers in many

other Rigvedic hymns such as sindhubih sapta mātribhiḥ, ‗the seven mother streams‘

(Rv.1.34.8), sapta sindhūn, ‗seven rivers‘ (10.67.12) can arguably be attributed to the Sarasvatī. It is clearly stated that ‗the Sarasvatī swells with her tributaries‘ (Sarasvatī sindhubhih pinvamānā, Rv.6.52.6). It was ‗the chief and pure of the rivers‘ that ‗flowed from the mountains to the ocean‘ (śuciryatī ghiribhya ā samudrāt Rv. 7.95.2). She is described as ‗abounding in waters‘ (maho-arņah, Rv, 1.3.12), ‗flowing rapidly‘ (pra-sasre, Rv.7.95.1), ‗possessing unlimited strength‘ (yasyah amah ananto, Rv.6.61.8), ‗the most impetuous of all other streams‘ (apasām-apastamā, Rv.6.61.13), ‗roaring‘ (charati roruvat, Rv.6.61.8), ‗fierce‘ (ghora, Rv.6.61.7). Thus on the basis of these direct and definite descriptions, it can be concluded that the Sapta Sindhu was centered on

the great, mighty Sarasvatī with its seven affluents (at least two, Dṛiṣadvaī and Āpayā are named

10

in the Rigveda itself) and the Sarasvatī River region was evidently the original Sapta Sindhu country, the name of Vedic India. It is noteworthy that among all the rivers of the Rigveda only the Sarasvatī has three whole hymns (Rv.6.61; 7. 95 & 7.96) singularly dedicated to it. The Sarasvatī is praised in fourty-five hymns of the Rigveda and her name is mentioned seventy–two times. The mention of the Sarasvatī in the older books of the Rig Veda far out weighs that of the Sindhu. Apparently the epithet ‘saptathī sindhumatā’ provided the basis for the origin of the name Sapta Sindhu itself.

11

12

The most celebrated Sarasvatī had the best claim of any Vedic river initially to have accounted for the origin of name of the country. The Sarasvatī River alone was praised as ‗the best of mothers, the best of rivers and the best of the goddesses‘ (ambitame, nadītame, devītame, Rv. 2.41.16). There are many other attributes and epithets applied to describe this dearest of the dear river (priyā priyāsu, Rv.6.61.10) that endowed its people with plenty of water, food, prosperity, progeny and offered physical security as its various affluent streams served as barricades against any potential aggressor. No wonder that the Sarasvatī alone was exalted as the deity (Nirukta: sarasvatī is a river as well as a deity) and was worshipped along with two other Great Goddesses, Ilā and Bhāratī or Mahī by the Aryan people in general, and by the ten families who composed the Rig Veda in particular, in their Āpri hymns. The Sarasvatī, not the Sindhu (Indus), commanded such an exalted position. The next defining feature of the Sarasvatī and its region is its purity, sacredness, holiness, divinity and the purifying power of its water that washes away the sins of those bathing in it. The heartland or the core of the Sarasvati-centered Sapta Sindhu was located in the fertile plain between the Sarasvatī and its eastern tributary, the Drişadvatī River, which is described as vara ā pṛithvyā,

‗the best place of earth‘ (Rv. 3.23.4; 53.11) and Nābhā pṛithivyā, ‗the navel of earth‘ (Rv. 1.143.4;

2,3.7; 3.5.9; 29.4; 9.72.7; 79.4; 82.3; 86.8; 10.16). The holiest of the altar of fire-sacrifice (Agni), and other religious sacrifices in general, were built in this region in a locality marked by the river

Āpayā that flowed within the land of the Sarasvatī-Driṣadvatī Rivers. It was remembered as

Brahmāvarta (Divine Land) and Dharmakṣetra (Field of Righteousness) in the Manusmṛiti and the

Bhagavad-gitā respectively. It is within this locality that the first kingship was consecrated and later the imperial ceremonial sacrifices, notably aśvamedha (Horse Sacrifice), were performed by the most illustrious Tritsu Bharata kings notably Sudāsa, the victor of the Battle of Ten Kings, the most famous event of the Rigvedic age. Sudāsa had also defeated a confederacy of the three non-aryan tirbes led by Bheda on the Yamunā. As a result he achieved hegemony over the expanded Sapta Sindhu country as delineated in the Nadisūkta that encompassed all the area from the Ganga in the east to the Indus and its tributary Kubhā (Kabul) river, i.e. area up to the Hindukush mountains,

in the west. In fact, the period of the rule of the six Tṛitsu Bharata kings was the most glorious of

the Vedic age that was also adorned by some of the most eminent sages like Vishvāmitra,

Vasiṣtha, Agastya, Ayāsya, Jamadagni, Rāma, Gṛtsamada, Nārada and Vāmadeva.

The Sarasvatī region at some point in time was home to the most celebrated Aryas called pañca-jātā (the Five tribes): Anu, Druhyu, Yadu,Turvaśa, and Pūru. The Rig Veda says that the Sarasvati was the promoter of their welfare (pañca-jātā vardhyanti, Rv.6.61.12). These were among the most prominent Aryan families who are known to have spread out from the core region between the

Sarasvatī and the Dṛiṣadvatī over time in different directions most notably to the northwest to the

Indus and beyond as well as southwest to the deltaic regions of the Sarasvatī and the Indus.

Within the core region, however, the most renowned people were the Bharatas or Tṛtsu Bharatas

(who later on gave the name Bhāratavarsha after them for the entire Indian subcontinent). They achieved political dominance of the region and are described as performing yajñas (sacrifices) on

the banks of the Sarasvatī, Dṛiṣadvatī and Āpayā. The northwestward migrations of these five

13

Aryan tribes into modern Punjab and beyond are evidenced in several hymns of the Rigveda, notably those describing the famous Battle of Ten Kings in which their kings fought on the

Paruṛuṣṇi River against the Tṛistu Bharata king Sudās, who defeated them and their five frontier

allies, thereby establishing his imperial hegemony over the entire country. These Aryan migrant families apparently played an active role in extending the name Sapta Sindhu to the Sarayu and the Indus regions. In short, the people of the Sarasvatī region deliberately and assiduously invested their identity into this sacred land and transformed it first into a pre-eminent religious and cultural region and later into the seat of illustrious polity and imperial hegemony. Evidently, the Vedic Sanskrit and its sophisticated poetic seven meters in which Vedic hymns are composed were perfected in the Sarasvati centered Sapta Sindhu country. In fact, probably the oldest parts of the Rig Veda were largely composed within the Sarasvatī valley and it is not unlikely that the first compilation of the Rigveda also occurred in the Vedic heartland at the time of the celebration of the imperial sacrifice performed by Sudās, the victor of many battles against his near and far adversaries. The celebrated Vyāsa, the traditional later compiler of the Vedas and the author of the epic Mahābhārata also had his hermitage on the sacred Sarasvatī River.

At what time did the designation of Sapta-Sindhu begin to stand for the seven-sistered Sarasvatī region and become its popular name is difficult to ascertain. However, the very fact that the much-celebrated Sarasvatī valley was named Sapta Sindhu country demonstrates a high level of cultural and political advancement of the people of this region. It was the hallmark of their vibrant cultural sophistication, economic prosperity and political maturity and the justification for transforming this geographic region into the sacred homeland par excellence of the Rigvedic Aryan people as well as the seat of their majestic royalty and imperialism. The sentiment of patriotism as well as of

proto-nationalism is typified by the following hymns of the sixth manḍala of the Rig-Veda:

May, Sarasvatī, who has seven sisters (sapta svasā), who is dearest among those dear to us (priyā priyāsu), is fully propitiated, be ever adorable. (10) Abiding in the thee worlds, comprising seven elements (saptadhātuh), cherishing the five races (tribes/kinship lineages), she is ever to be invoked in battle. (12) She who is distinguished amongst them as eminent in greatness (mahimnā mahināsu) and in her glories, she who is the most impetuous of all other streams (apasāmapastamā); she who has been created vast in capacity as a chariot, she, Sarasvatī, is to be glorified by the discreet worshipper. (13) Guide us, Sarasvatī to precious wealth: reduce us not to insignificance, overwhelm us not with (excess of) water, be pleased by our friendly services and access to our habitations, and let us not repair to places unacceptable to you. (14) However, as already noted, the identification of the Nadītame (the best of rivers) Sarasvatī has been a contentious subject in the field of Vedic studies and early history of India primarily because the modern small river Sarsuti in no way could represent the glorious mighty, perennial Sarasvatī.

14

which ‗flowed from the mountains to the ocean‘. It nevertheless has several significant distinguishing characteristics that conclusively prove its existence in the general area of modern Sarsuti, which was known in historical times as the Prācī (Eastern) Sarasvatī implying that there also was a western Sarasvatī. In historical times, it constituted the dividing line between the northwestern and the eastern divisions of the traditional India. Geographically, the Vedic Sarasvatī is said to have seven affluents (two of which are named in the Rigveda: Drishadvatī, identified with modern Chautang, and Āpayā, a stream in the middle of

Kurukṣetra in modern Kaithal district, that joined Dṛṣadvatī before its confluence with the

Sarasvatīṛ). Another affluent was modern Markanda that rises in the Shivalik hills and joins the

Sarasvatī near Satarana. Additionally, the Vedic Sarasvatī generally identified with modern Ghaggar-Hakra was fed by significant channels of the Satlej river in the west as well as of the Yamuna river in the east. In fact, the number of streams that joined the Sarasvatī could have been more than the seven that were subsumed by the term Sapta, seven, in the sense of its uncertain plurality meaning many. What is remarkable is that the Sarasvatī was the river that had* at least seven affluents which collectively defined the character of the Sarasvatĩ. Secondly, Sarasvatĩ is described as flowing from the mountains to the ocean in the Rig Veda, which is supported by the epic and Puranic traditions and in many respects finds confirmation of its description notably in the Mahābhārata. Thirdly, the Nadīsūkta of the Rigveda situates the Sarasvatī between the Yamunā in the East and Śutudri (Satlej) in the West. Modern researches in archaeology, geology, hydrology, and landsat imaging have conclusively shown that the Vedic Sarasvatī can be identified with the present-day Ghaggara-Hakra, and a paleo-channel East of the Nara, a branch, or the Nara itself, that fell in the Rann of Kachchh, in the Western Ocean. The archaeologists, geologists and other scientists, especially those interpreting the satellite images of the Sarasvatī river have shown that the Sarasvatī was a mighty river that flowed from the Himalayas to the ocean emptying itself in the gulf of Kachchh. It was a perennial huge river that originated in the Himalayas in the northwestern Uttarakhand, and flowed southwest through the present day Ghaggar River of the Shivalik foothills and met the then southeast flowing Śutadru (Satluj) or one of its major channels at Shatarana about 15 km. south of Patiala. At the confluence, the channel was 6 to 8 km wide pointing to a very high discharge of the Sarasvati. Ancient Indian historical tradition vouches for its many tributaries not only in the hills and the plains

of Harayana and Rajasthan especially Dṛṣadvatī but also through the deserts of India and

Pakistan. The Rigvedic Sarasvatī has been convincingly identified with the Ghaggar-Hakra-Sarasvati of the Survey of India maps and Hakra; a paleo-channel east of the Nara in Pakistan. The course of the ‗lost‘ mighty Sarasvatī has at last been traced in the paleo channels of the Sutlej,Ghaggar-Hakra (Skt Sagara, Islamic Sankra and Sankrah). The history of the correct identification of the Sarasvati is quite involved and shows a* disconnect among the authors of various subjects, especially archaeology, geology, language and ancient history. It is the availability of the Landsat images provided by NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, USA), and Indian satellites that enabled Indian scientist Yashpal and Baldev Sahai to plot the paleo- channels of Ghaggar-Hakra and its tributaries that matched the Rigvedic description of the Sarasvatī. The research publication of Yashpal et all. In 1984 unmistakably showed that the river had a constant width of 6 to 8 km. from Shatrana in Punjab to Marot in Pakistan. It also showed various tributaries that joined Ghaggar Sarasvati in Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan especially the Satlej in the West and the Yamuna or its significant channels in the East.

15

Their paper provided the scientific evidence of the mighty Sarasvati‘s enormous width as well as its course all the way to the ocean. Encouraged by the scientific discovery, V.S Wakankar undertook an expedition with his team of scientists in 1984 to successfully trace the course of the river on the ground. Other researches gathered momentum and archaeologist B.B. Lal excavated Kalibangan, a major city on the dried-up bed or the Sarasvati, bringing to light by his findings astonishing materials* and cultural achievements, including a row of Fire altars at the site of the Rigvedic people of Sapta Sindhu country. Of crucial importance of Kalibangan‘s excavations concern the chronology of the Sarasvati River, which dried up near this city forcing its population to suddenly abandon it in about 1900 BCE, a critical date that marks the disappearance of the ocean-going Sarsvatī at Vinaśana, a place close to the city. It marks a terminal stage in the history of the Vedic people. It also settles the question of the composition of the Rigveda that must antedate 2000 BC.

16

The literary descriptions of the glorious and vital role of the Sarasvatī River in the Vedic culture is now confirmed by the archaeological evidence testifying to the high achievements of the vigorous and optimistic Rigvedic people and their extensive material prosperity in the land of Sarasvatī centered Sapta Sindhava. Archaeologists have discovered rich materials of the Sarasvatī

17

civilization from about 5th millennium B.C. to historical periods of 1st millennium B.C.E. known in archaeological terms as pre-Harappan, early Harappan, mature Harappan and late Harappan periods. It has been shown that nearly 65 to 70 per cent of all the sites of the Harappan culture were on the banks of the Sarasvatī and/or its tributaries. Scholars have convincingly shown the richness of cultural developments at the urban centers of the various Vedic Harappan periods, which witnessed high advances in all areas of human culture. The discussion of the Sarasvati Valley civilization is beyond the scope of my presentation at this time. Suffice it to note that the literary and archaeological evidence clearly demonstrate the origins, growth and zenith as well as the decline of the Vedic-Harappan civilization of Sapta Sindhu country through a period of over three millennia from c.4000 B.C.E. to c.1000 BCE. We have the literary accounts and archaeological evidence of the decline of the Sarasvatī Civilization in about 2000-1900 B.C.E based on the Radiocarbon dates for the end of the city of

Kalibangan situated on its banks. The later Vedic texts the Jaiminīya Upanishad Brāhmaṇa

(4.26) and Pancaviṁśa Brāhamaṇa (15.10.6) tell us of the disappearance of the Sarasvatī at a

place called Vinaśana, identified with the large Harappan urban city of Kalibangan or more accurately a place some distance further South West away from it. The epic and Puranic tradition corroborates this evidence on the river‘s drying up and its becoming invisible (adarśana). The archaeological finds confirm the disappearance of the Sarasvatī River as a result of its major tributaries, the Śutudri and the Yamunā having been pirated by the branches the Ganga and the Sindhu rivers. All this probably occurred in various stages. However, as already noted the Sarasvatī was no longer flowing from the mountains to the ocean in c.1900 BCE. [B,B.Lal. The Sarasvatī. p. 22 ]

The Sarayu centered Sapta Sindhu:

Although I have recounted the history of the Sarasvatī-centered original Sapta Sindhu so far, there were other developments that led to the territorial extension of the Sapta Sindhu country westward as well as eastward. As a result of the dynamic processes of cultural ascendancy and geopolitical expansion of the rulers and spiritual leaders of the Sarasvati plain the people of other river valleys sought to be identified with the name of Sapta Sindhu country, thus partaking in its sanctity and its prestige thereby legitimizing and raising their own status within their own region as well as enhancing their position in inter-regional interactions. As already noted the migration of the well-known five Aryan families (pañcajātā) to these areas from the Sarasvatī valley greatly contributed to the naming of the region as Sapta Sindhu. This is evident from certain highly significant hymns

of the Rig Veda: maṇḍalas 10.64.8-9 and 10.75.

The text of the hymn Rv. 10.64. 8-9 runs thus: ‗We invoke thrice seven flowing rivers, their great waters, the trees, the mountains…(triḥ sapta

sasrā nadyo mahīrapo vanaspatīn parvatānaghnimūtaye. Rv.10.64.8a). and then come the names of the rivers: sarasvatī sarayuḥ sindhurūrmibhirmaho mahīravasā yantuvakṣaṇīḥ |

devīrāpo mātaraḥ sūdayitnvo ghṛtavat payomadhuman no arcata// Rv.10.64.9

18

May the very great rivers, Sarasvatī, Sarayu, Sindhu come with their waves for our protection: may the divine, maternal animating waters grant us their water mixed with butter and honey. (Wilson) "Let the Sarasvatī, the Sarayu, and the Sindhu, with their waves; let the great [rivers] come swiftly, strengthening us with their succour. Divine waters, mothers, flowing, impart (?) to us your waters with butter and honey." (Muir.II. p.343)

Here we have clear evidence of the three major river systems: Sarasvatī, Sarayu and Sindhu, each with

seven affluents, apparently echoing the designation of Sapta Sindhava in a significant way. Strikingly three times seven, that is twenty-one rivers accords in number with that mentioned in the Nadīsūkta (Rv.10.75). While the identification of the Sarasvatī has already been dealt with and that of the Sindhu is obvious, it is

not so in case of the intervening the Sarayu river system. The Sarayu of the Rigveda is different from that of

the epic Rāmāyaṇa and other literary sources. It is to be located between the Sarasvatī in the East and the

Indus in the West. The Sarayu River is mentioned in three passages of the R.V. 4.30.18; 5.53.9, and 10.64.9. The text of the Rv 4.30. 18 runs thus: Uta tyā sadyaḥ Ā:ryā Sarayor Indra pārataḥ |

Arṇācitrarathāvadhīḥ //

"Thou, O Indra, hast speedily slain those two [presuming to be] Aryas, Arṇa and Chitraratha on the opposite bank of

the Sarayu." (Muir.II. p.347)

"Sarayu: (probably a river in the Punjab which gave its name to the Sarayu or Saraju of Oudh.) Griffith. p. 221; 266‖ The RV 5.53.9. mentions the Sarayu after Sindhu: Mā vo rasānitabhā kubhā krumur mā vaḥ sindhur ni rīramat |

Mā vaḥ pari ṣṭhāt Sarayuḥ purīṣiṇy asme īt sumnam astu vaḥ ||

"So let not Rasa, Anitabhā, Kubhā, krumu, Sindhu hold you back. Let not the watery Sarayu obstruct your

(Maruts) way; let the joy you impart come to us."

―In his elucidations of the Nirukta, p.43 Prof. Roth remarks: ‗ The Kophen is the Kubhā of the Veda, mentioned in R.V. v.53, 9, and x.75.7. If we identify the Krumu and Gomatī of this last text with the Kurum and Gomal which flow into the Indus from the west (as Lassen proposes in a letter) we may

regard the rivers whose name precede [Tṛishtāma, Śveti and Anitabhā] as being affluents of the

Indus further to the north than the Kophen.‖ (Muir. P.343) [R.Griffith‘s (p.266) sequence in the translation is wrong in case of the Krumu which is after Kubha and before Sindhu. However, his remark on ―Sarayu: probably a river in the Punjab which gave its name to the Sarayu or Sarju of Oudh‖ is apt.] All the three references clearly place the Sarayu east of the Indus and west of the Sarasvati. All the scholars agree that it is a river in the Punjab, but only M.Vivian de St. Martin‘s identification of the Sarayu with the united stream of Śutudri (Sutlej) and Vipaś (Beas) is consistent with its general location. While his identification might be suggested by the mention of Vipāś in Rv. 4.30.11, the subsequent verses clearly imply a larger river overflowing with waters. Moreover, the Sarayu River

19

System comprising the seven rivers as mentioned in the Rig Veda 10.64. Which is comparable with that of the Sarasvatī and the Sindhu systems demand a much larger river system. Therefore I propose the identification of Sarayu with the combined stream from the junction of the Vitastā (Jhelum) and the Āsiknī (Chenab) to the confluence of the five rivers, the later Panchanada, which meets all the qualifications of the location of the Sarayu. It also justifies its description as the ―watery one‖ (5.53.9.). Apparently such identification delineates much of the Punjab from the Satlej-Beas in the east to the Chenab-Jhelum in the west, also incorporating the Arjīkīyā as constituting the Sarayu-centered Sapta-Sindhu region.

20

21

The Indus Centered Sapta Sindhushu The third region that appropriated the name of Sapta Sindhu in time was the one centered on the Sindhu or Indus river system itself. It too was distinguished by the seven rivers that were the

western affluents of the Indus. The Rigveda prominently mentions the Rasā, Tṛiṣtāmā, Sasrata,

Rasa, Śveti (Swat), Kubhã (Kabul), Gomatiĩ (Gomal) Krumu (Kurum), and Mehatnu in the Nadīsūkta and additionally the Anitibhã in Rv.5.53.9. Obviously the number of the western tributaries of the Indus exceeds seven rivers, an instance of the ‗sapta’ standing for an indeterminate plurality.

pra sapta-sapta tredhā hi cakramuḥ prasṛtvarīṇāmati sindhurojasā |3a/

Ttṛṣṭāmayā prathamaṃ yātave sajūḥ sasartvā rasayāśvetyā tyā |

Tvaṃ sindho kubhayā gomatīṃ krumummehatnvā sarathaṃ yābhirīyase ||6// Rv.10.75.

The Rigvedic hymns, 10.64.8-9 and 10.75. provide evidence of three great river systems: Sarasvati\ī, Sarayu and Sindhu, each of which are said to have seven affluents, thereby making a total of twenty one rivers. Clearly, it indicates three different stages of the evolution of the concept of Sapta Sindhu and its territorial identification. The forces promoting this wider expansion from the principal Sarasvati-centred Sapta Sindhu certainly were culture, trade and commerce and political interaction. While the people of the Sarayu region as well as those of the Indus joined the Country of Seven Rivers, they apparently retained their regional distinctions. The process of the cultural and even geopolitical integration is clearly discernable in Vedic literature. The most important event known was the Battle of Ten kings (Dāśarājña) in which Sudās, the king of the Sarasvati-centered

Sapta Sindhu (with its core kingdom between the Sarsvatī and the Dṛiṣiadvatī and the capital

probably at Kalibangan) defeated a confederacy of the ten western tribes: Anu-s, Druhyus, Yadus,

Turvaśas and Pūrus and their allies Alina, Paktha, Bhalãnas, Śiva and Viṣāṇiin of the

western Indus areas on the bank of the Paruṣṇi (Ravi). The consequences were disastrous for his

western adversaries some of whom apparently dispersed beyond the Indus region. We have no way to determine the territorial outcome of this momentous event but Sudas did celebrate his victory with imperial horse sacrifices (aśvamedha) to proclaim his paramountcy. ―Seven flowing rivers glorify [Sudāsa] like Indra‖ states the Rig Veda (7.18.24; cf. 1.102; 1.32.12), which along with other encomia attributing him a divine-like personality, surely signify his high imperial achievements. While our sources do not enable us to adequately assess the role of Sudāsa in achieving the political unification of this vast area or to evaluate various other consequences of this momentous event of the Vedic age, it is nevertheless clear that the name Sapta Sindhu as the designation of this vast country had come to stay for all time. The regional integration was, however, primarily cultural and commercial. Since the real personality of the Sarasvati-centered Sapta Sindhu was cultural, it stands to reason that at least the elites of the Sarayu and Sindhu regions had appropriated the designation of the country in order to partake of the cultural status and legitimatize their own religious and cultural identity. *Such a process of cultural expansion by appropriation of the name of the primary historic culture region or recognition of its ascendancy was known in ancient India. It is evidenced by the formation and growth of the Madhyadeśa, the Middle or Central Region, in the later Vedic period. It successively expanded from the Sarasvatī region eastward in various stages of historical developments and attained its maximum limits upon the Buddhists joining it. They extended its eastern limit to Kajangala at the

22

head of the Ganga delta in order to legitimizing their religio-cultural identity by the appropriation of the name Madhyadeśa as is evident from both the Buddhist as well as the Puranic sources. The historical dynamics of the growth and expansion of Madhyadeśa and Sapta Sindhu by cultural and geopolitical processes of appropriation and/or absorption are poorly documented in historical records but these are abundantly vouched for by the ancient historical traditions. Indeed these were landmark developments in the history of ancient India.

23

Sapta Sindhu: The One Country

24

The integration of the three distinct units of Sapta Sindhu, the Sarasvatī , the Sarayu and the Sindhu Regions into one single country was a veritable phenomenon. The Rigvedic Nadīstūkta itself furnishes the clear evidence of the culmination of the processes that originally began in the Sarasvati region and climaxed in the creation of a large country, Sapta Sindhu, of the Vedic age. While dedicated to celebrating the Sindhu river, the Nadīsūkta enumerates twenty one rivers of Vedic India beginning with the Ganga in the East to the Sindhu along with its right bank tributaries in the West:

pra sapta-sapta tredhā hi cakramuḥ prasṛtvarīṇāmati sindhurojasā/

Imaṃ me gaṅge yamune sarasvatī śutudri stemaṃ sacatā paruṣṇyā

asiknyā marudvṛdhe vitastayārjīkīye śṛṇuhyāsuṣomayā ||5.

Tṛṣṭāmayā prathamaṃ yātave sajūḥ sasartvā rasayāśvetyā tyā | Tvaṃ

sindho kubhayā ghomatīṃ krumummehatnvā sarathaṃ yābhirīyase//6. O Ganga, Yamuna, Sarasvatī, Śutudri ( Sutlej), and Parushnī (Ravi). O Maruvridha with Asiknya (Chenab), O Ārjīkīya with Vitastā (Jhelum) and Sushoma (Sohan) please listen to and accept this hymn of mine [5] O Sindhu (Indus) flowing you first meet the Trishtama and then the Susartu, the Rasa and Sveta (Swat) and thereafter the Kubha (Kabul), the Gomati ( Gomal), the Krumu (Kurram) with Mehatanu; and (finally) you move on in the same chariot with them ( i.e carry their water with you) //6//

Obviously these two verses mention altogether Nineteen rivers, although Verse one of the same Sūkta uses a term sapta sapta tredha which would mean ‗three time seven‘ that is twenty one (21) rivers. It has been suggested that the 20th river could have been Vipāś which some regard as the tributary of Śutudri. At any rate Vipāś is elsewhere mentioned as an important mighty river indicating in one instance as separately going toward the ocean. Its absence here, however, is inexplicable. The other river which too is conspicuous by its absence is, of course, the Sarayu which, as we already noted, constituted one of the three great river systems of Sapta Sindhava, the other two being the Sarasvatiī and the Sindhu (Indus). Thus, we can now account for the missing two rivers of the total of the twenty-one mentioned in the hymn. The Nadīsūkta has clearly defined the frontiers of the great Sapta Sindhu Country as extending from the Ganga in the East to the Indus with its right bank tributaries reaching the Hindukush Mountains in the West. The Nadīsūkta thus clearly demonstrates the integration of the three distinct divisions of Sapta Sindhu into One Country and identifies its notable ‗three times Seven Rivers‘ that flowed within it, thereby underscoring its original definition. The frontiers of this vast country extended from the Ganga in the East to the Indus with its Western tributaries reaching the Hindukush Mountains in the North West. It was the sphere of the history and culture of the Vedic people and the stage of the exploits and achievements of their gods, sages and kings. Evidently the Vedic Sapta Sindhu country overlapped the main geographical space of the archaeological Harappan culture, thereby raising the intriguing question whether they were both one and the same as well as where did its center lay. In order to satisfactorily answer this question let us also examine the chronology of the evolution of both Sapta Sindhu and the Harappan culture-realm in order to ascertain their correspondence in time and space. While there is a scholarly consensus on the chronological span of the Harappan culture that extends from c.3500 BCE to c. 2000 BCE for its early and mature phases and c.2000 to 1300 BCE

25

for its late phase, an interminable debate has characterized the dating of the Rigvedic culture and its people, notably the Aryas. Fortunately, however, now we do have the generally accepted, firm date of about 2000 BCE, when the mighty river Sarasvati stopped flowing to the sea, drying up markedly at a historic place named Vinaśana (literally ‗disappearance‘), at some distance from the famous archaeologically Harappan city of Kalibangan, situated on the left riverbank of the

Sarasvatī near its confluence with the ancient Dṛiṣadvatī river, in the modern district of

Hanumangarh in Rajasthan, India. The unanimous testimony of the later Vedic texts, (namely

Panchavimśa Brāhmaṇa and Jaiminiya Upaniṣad Brāhamaṇa), establish the historicity of this

momentous event, which is corroborated by the epic Mahābhārata and the entire ancient Indian historical tradition. The sudden demise of the magnificent city of Kalibangan caused by the drying up of its source of water, the Saraswati, in about 2000/1900 BCE has been proven by the contemporary archaeological excavations. This event marks the end-time of the composition of the major portions of the Rigveda that gave us Sapta Sindhu, the first name of India. The Rigveda must be dated before c.2000. BCE. How long before this date is any body‘s guess but certainly many centuries, if not millennia, before this date. It also should settle the question of whether the Vedic people known as Aryas were the same people as those of the Harappan archaeological records. They certainly were at least a major component of the population of the Harappan culture justifying the usage of the Vedic-Harappan age. We can now establish the correspondence between the Vedic culture, viewed so far as exclusively literary, with the Harappan culture, known solely from archeological finds. The two cultures were not only one and the same in time and space, but also in their basic nature and character, celebrated as unity in diversity.

The Lost Sarasvatī and the original Sapta Sindhu The archaeological records demonstrate the disastrous effects of the drying up of the Sarasvati River, caused by tectonic and seismic upheavals. The concomitant collapse of the Vedic-Harappan culture was not limited to the Sapta Sarasvati region alone but it extended to the whole country. The Late Harappan culture phase was co-terminus with the Later Vedic age that witnessed the conservation as well as the transformation of the ancient legacy. In order to cope with the natural catastrophe that had altered significantly the ecology of the country and caused the widespread decline of urban culture, the Vedic elites, once they settled in the area extending into the Ganga

plain, the Madhyadeśa of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa (viii.14), advanced a new, culturally more

evocative designation for their country: Āryavarta, (the Land of Aryas) in place of Sapta Sindhu that didn‘t make much sense any more. However, probably on account of the emerging religio-cultural orthodoxy that underlay the new name, it failed to appeal to the people of the Western Sarayu and the Sindhu divisions, who continued to retain the name of Sapta Sindhushu for their areas despite its demise in the land of its origin, the Sapta-Sarasvati region. This accounts for the survival of this name in the Iranian texts and Persian inscriptions. The Avestan Hapta Hendu and the Persian inscriptional Hindush were the exact transcription of the

Sanskrit Sapta Sindhuṣu (s becomes h in old Iranian). In fact, when the Iranians left the Sapta

Sindhu region they carried with them the memory of the original name of the Sarasvati-centered Sapta Sindhush, as demonstrated by the Avestan transcription of it as Hapta Hendu and the transfer of the name Haraxaiti or Harakhvati (Sarasvatī) probably to the river Arghandab on their way out to Iran. They also transferred the name of the Sarayu to the Haroyu modern Hari-rud in Herat region. I would like to note here that those scholars who have tried to identify the Vedic

26

Sarasvati with the Avestan Haraxaiti of Afghanistan are wrong because they have no evidence to support it except their belief in the Aryan invasion theory. The process of migrations was most likely the reverse one, from the Sapta Sindhu to Iran and other western regions as pointed out by Max Muller and Rawlinson long time ago ( Muir.II. p. 314) and now being advocated most strongly by Shrikant Talageri.The Greeks transcribed Persian inscriptional Hindush as Indos and the Chinese as Sen-tu or Yin-tu for the geographical name of the country of India, not simply the Indus region. The Northwestern frontier of ancient India extended to the regions of the Kabul River and its tributaries up to the Hindukush mountains. These Northwestern regions or at least a large number of them are generally included in the Iranian, the Classical, and the Chinese accounts of India. Greek ‗Indos‘, Latin ‗Inde‘ and Chinese ‗Sen-tu‘/‗Yin-tu‘ as well as Arabic ‗al Hindu‘ were transcriptions of the Persian term ‗Hindush‘, which itself was the transcription of the Sanskrit ‗Sindhushu‘, the geographical name of Vedic India. All these are foreign phonemes of the indigenous Sanskrit term ‗Sindhu‘, which ironically has returned home as India, often believed, albeit wrongly, to be a foreign gift. The significance of my interpretation of Sapta Sindhu is immense, especially in view of its three-stage evolution marked by its conception and origin as the Sarasvatī Centered Sapta Sindhu; its notable Westward expansion into the Sarayu and Sindhu (Indus) regions, and finally the integration of all the three divisions into One Country of Seven Rivers that was achieved by the ascendancy of the magnetic Sarasvatī culture and the political hegemony of the Bharata rulers of the Vedic

heartland, the Sarasvatī-Dṛṣadvatī region described as ‗the navel of the earth‘. King Sudāsa, the

victor of Dāśarjña had also conquered his non-Aryan enemies led by chief Bheda on the Yamunā, thereby achieving the paramountcy over the entire Sapta Sindhu. The centrality of the Sarasvsti-Sapta Sindhu is crucial to correctly understanding the meaning and significance of the name of the country as well as its role in achieving the integration of various ethnically and linguistically diverse groups. Additionally, it assigns a proper place to the Indus/Sindhu as well in the history of the evolution of the designation of Sapta Sindhu/Sapta Sindhava for Vedic India, and also accounts for the persistence of the name of Hindush in the records of the Persian Achaemenian Empire. My identification of Sapta Sindhu in its original as well as in its historically expanded area, explains the historical processes of the origin and expansion of the first name for India. It also establishes for the first time the centrality of the Sarasvatī, rather than the Indus, River to the very concept of Sapta Sindhu. It also defines the indigenous personality of Vedic India and should put to rest the interpretations derived from the myth of the Aryan invasion or migrations for which there never was nor there is any evidence whatsoever. The final makeup of Sapta Sindhu that emerges from my analysis leads to the conclusion that the Vedic and Harappan cultures were one and the same in time and space. It also clarifies the confusion that surrounds the survival of the name Sapta Sindhu in Persian records as Hapta-Hendu and Hindush, which was the source of the Greco-Roman name for India. The Chinese transliterated Sindhu as Shen-tu (2nd. Century BCE) and Yin-Tu, as the name for the whole of India. In the7th century CE the Buddhist pilgrim Xuanzang fancied Yin-tu to represent the Sanskrit word ―Indu‖ meaning ‗moon‘ and imagined its Buddhist denotations connected with the full-moon night of Buddha‘s enlightenment (Baisakhi Purnima). The Arabic al-Hind was apparently derived from the Old Persian term for India. Vedic Sindhu was pronounced as Hindu by the old Iranians; India by the Greeks and Romans; Shen-tu/Yin-tu by the Chinese and al-Hind by the Arabs.

27

Sapta Sindhu was a geographic term designating India, not just to the East of the Indus as portrayed in the extant scholarship, but to the East and South-East of the Hindukush Mountains, across the ―seven rivers‖ (the Sarasvatī, the Sarayu and the Indus systems). The implications of my identification of Sapta-Sindhu for the reconstruction of early Indian history are incalculable. The word Hindu and India are the alien phonemes of the Vedic Sindhu which stood for The Country of Rivers as well as the name of a particular river, the Indus. We are now at the threshold of correctly writing the new history of early India-South Asia and, by extension, providing the basis for a new approach to the larger Eurasian Aryan question.

References

Sanskrit Texts and translations

Atharva Veda Samhita1994. New Delhi: Naga Pralashana

Atharva Veda Samhita. Whitney, W .D. ( Trans.).1962 (reprint,1905). Delhi: Motilala Banarasidass.

Griffith, Ralph T.H. (Trans.). 1973. The Hymns of the Rigveda. New Revised edition. Delhi: Motilala

Banarasidass.

Muir, John.1967 ( reprint of 2nd edition.1871) Original Sanskrit Texts. Vols.I-5. Amsterdam:Oriental Press.

Manu-smṛit with nine commentaries… 5 vols. Edited by J.H.Dave.1972. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan

Rig Veda Samhita 1994. New Delhi: Naga Prakashaka

Rig Veda Samhita, together with Pada Patha & Sayanabhasya. Hindi Translation by Pt, Ram Govind

Trivedi. 9 Parts. 2003. Varanasi. Chowkhamba Vidyabhawan

Rig Veda Samhita,.Sanskrit Text, English translation and Notes According to the Translation of H.H

Wilson and Bhasya of Sayanacharya. 4 vols Edited and Revised by Ravi Praksh Arya and K.l.Joshi. 2001.

Delhi: Parimal Publications

Sama Veda Samhita1994. Delhi: Naga Pralashana

Satavalekar, S.D.1985. Rig Veda ka Subodha Bhāṣya. 5 parts. Paradi: Svadhyaya Mandala

The Sama Veda Samhita. 1991 (1893) Trans. By Griffith,R.T.H. and revised and enlarged by Singh, N.S.&

Pratap,S. Delhi: Naga Prakshak

Yajurveda Samhita. Sanskrit text, EnglishTranslation,Notes and Index of Verses. English Translation of

R.T.H. Griffith. edited and revised by Ravi Prakash Arya. 2002. . Delhi: Parimal Publications

Yajur Veda Samhita; 1994. New Delhi: Naga Pralashaka

Mahãbhãrata ( various editions and translations)

Purãṇas ( various editions and translations)

28

Modern works Alllchin, Bridget & Raymond. 1982.The Rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Basham, A.L. 1954. The Wonder That was India. New York: Macmillan

Bharadwaj, O.P.1986.Studies in the Historical Geography of Ancient India. Delhi: Sandeep Prakashan Bhargava, M.L. 1964. The Geography of Ṛig Vedic India. Lucknow: The Upper India Publishing House

Bhargava, P.L. 1956 (1971). India in the Vedic Age. Lucknow: The Upper India Publishing House Bhattacharyya,N.N.1991. The geographicall Dictionary of Ancient and Early Medieval India. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Bisht, R.S. 1991. Dholavira: New horizons of the Indus civilization. In Puratattva, No. 20, pp. 71-82. --------------- 1994. Banawali, also Dholavira. In J.P.Joshi and R.S. Bisht. India and the Indus Civilization. New Delhi: National Museum Bryant. Edwin F. and Laurie Patterson: The Indo-Aryan Controversy; Evidence and Inference in Indian History. London and New York: Routledge Chakrabarti, Dilip K.19197. Colonial Indology: The socio-politics of the Ancient Indian Past. New Deli: Munshiram Manoharlal _________________. 1995. The Archaeology of Ancient Indian Cities. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Chakrabarti, Dilip K.and Sukhdev Saini.2009. The Problem of the Sarasvati River and Notes on the

Archaeological Geography of Haryana and Indian Punjab. New Delhi: Aryan Books International Chakraborti, H.P. Vedic India: Poltical and Legal Institutions in Vedic Literature.Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar Caland, W. 1931 ( reprint 1882). Pañcaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa. Calcutta: Asiatic Society.

Cunningham, Alexander. 1924. The Ancient Geography of India. Sec.rev.edn. Calcutta; reprint 2002. New Delhi: munshram Manoharlal.

Danino, Michel. 2010. The Lost River: On the Trail of the Sarasvagti: New Delhi: Penguin Books Indiia. Dey, N.L. 1971/1927. The Geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval India. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Dikshit, k.N. 1977. ― Distribution and Realtionship of proto-historic sites along old river channels of the Ghaggar system‖. In Agrawal,D.P. and B.M.Pande (eds) 1977. Ecology and Archaeology in Western India. Delhi: Concept Publishing Company ---------------1979. ―Old Channels of Ghaggar in Rajathan-revisited‖.Man and Environment 3. 105- 106 Gupta, S.P. 1996. The Indus-Saraswati Civilization: Origins, Problems and Issues.

Delhi: Pratibha Prakashan.

------------.(ed.). 1995. The ‘Lost’ Sarasvati and the Indus Civilization. Jodhpur: Kusmanjali

Prakashan

Erdosy, George (ed.): The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia. Language, Material Culture and

Ethnicity. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.

29

Habib, Irfan and Faiz Habib 1991-1992. 'The Historical Geography of India B.C.

1800-800 B.C.', Proceedings, the Indian History Congress, 52nd Session, pp. 72-97.

New Delhi,

Habib, I. “ Imaging River Saraswati, a deffence of commonsense’. Social Scientist 29

(1/2):46-74.

Hemphil, B.E., Lukacs and K.R. kennedy.1991. ‘Biological Adaptations and Affinities of Bronze

Age Harappans’. In R.H.Medow (ed.) Harappan Excavations 1986- 1990,pp.137-82.

Madison, Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.

Hiillebrandt, Alfred 1891/1999. Vedic Mythology (Translated from the original German Vedische Mythologie by S.R. Sharma). Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.

Kalyanaraman, S. 2003. Sarasvati. 7 Vols. Bangalore: Babasaheb (Umakant Keshav) Apte Smarak Samiti. Lahiri,N. 2000.The Decline and Fall of the Indus Civilization. New Delhi: Permanent Black Kochhar, Rajesh.2000. The Vedic People. New Delihi: Orient Longman. Lal, B.B. 1997. The Earliest Civilization of South Asia. New Delhi: Aryan Books International. --------. 2002. The Sarasvati Flows On. The Continuity of Indian Culture. New Delhi:

Aryan Books International.

---------- 2008. How Deep are the Roots of Indian Civilization. New Delhi:

Aryan Books International.

Law, B.C.1954. Historical Geography of Ancient India. Paris: Societe Asiatique de Paris

Macdonell, A.A. and A.B. Keith 1912/95. Vedic Index of Names and Subjects. Delhi:

Motilal Banarasidass.

Mughal, M. Rafique 1982/93. Recent archaeological research in the Cholistan desert.

In Gregory L. Possehl (ed.): Harappan Civilization: A Recent Perspective, 85- 95.

New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co.

Nandi, R.N.1986-87. Anthropology and the study of the Rigveda. In The Indian

HistoricalReview, Vol. 13(1-2), pp. 153-65.

------------. 1989-90. Archaeology and the iRgveda. The Indian Historical Review, 16(1-2): 35-79. Oldham,C.F. 1893. ‗The Sarasvati and the lost river of the Indiian desert‘. The Journal of Royal Asiatic Society. Pp.49-71 __________1874. “Notes on the lost river of the Indian desert’. The Calcutta Review. July.1874,pp.1-27v Oldham, R.D.‘ “On probable changes in the geography of the Punjab and its rivers: a historico- geographical study’. JASB 55 (Part 2) 1886, pp.422-343. Olivelle, Patric.2000. Dharma Sutras: The Law Codes of Apastamba, Gautama, Baudhyayana and Vasistha. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.

Pargiter, F.E. 1997 ( reprint). Ancient Indian Historical Tradition. Delhi: Motilal

Banarasidass.

Possehl, Gregory L. 1982/93. The Harappan Civilization: A contemporary perspective.

In G. L. Possehl (ed.): Harappan Civilization: A Recent Perspective, pp. 15-28. New

Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co.

Possehl, Gregory L. 1990. Revolution in the urban revolution: The emergence of Indus

Urbanism. In Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 19, pp. 261-82.

30

Puri V.K.M and B.C. Verma 1998. Glaciological and geological source of Vedic

Sarasvati in the Himalayas. In Itihas Darpan, Vol. 4(2), pp. 7-36.

Pusalker, A.D. 1951. ‘Aryan settlements in India’. In R.C. Majumdar and A.D. Pusalker

(eds.): The Vedic Age, pp. 241-63. London: Allen and Unwin.

Puri, V.K.M. and B.C. Verma 1998. Glaciological and geological source of Vedic Sarasvati in the Himalyas. Itihas Darpan 4(2): 7-36. Radhakrishna,b.P> & Merh, S.S. (eds.).1999 Vedic Sarasvati: Evolutionary History of a Lost River of Northwestern India. Baqnglore: Geological Society of India Raikes, Robert 1968. Kalibangan: Death from natural causes. Antiquity 42:286-91.

Rao, L.S., et al. 2005-06. ‘Bhirrana Excavation -- 2005-06’. In Puratattva, No. 36, pp. 45-49.

Rao, S.M. 2003. Use of isotopes in search of Last River. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 257(1):5-9. Raverty, H.G. 1892. ‗The Mihiran of Sind and its tributories‟ The Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal 61(4):155-297, Extra No.1892,pp.298-508. Rennel,J. 1788. Memoires of a Map of Hindoostan or the Mughal Empire. London: M. Brown Schwartzberg, Joseph E., Shiva G. Bajpai et al.,eds. 1978 ( 2nd edn. 1992 Oxford University Press) A Historical Atlas of South Asia. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Shaffer, J.G. 1992. The Indus Valley, Baluchistan, and Helmand Traditions: Neolithic

through Bronze Age. In R.W. Ehrich (ed.): Chronologies in Old World

Archaeology,Third Edition, pp. 441-64 and 425-46. Chicago and London:

University of ChicagoPress.

Shaffer, J.G. and D.A. Lichtenstein 1989. Ethnicity and change in the Indus valley

cultural tradition. In J.M. Kenoyer (ed.): Old Problems and New Perspectives in the

Archaeology of South Asia, pp.117 and 26. Madison: DepartmentofAnthropologyUniversity

of Wisconsin.

Shaffer, J.G. and D.A. Lichtenstein 1995. The concepts of "cultural tradition"

"palaeoethnicity" in South Asian archaeology. In George Erdosy (ed.): The Indo-

Aryans of Ancient South Asia. Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity, pp. 126-54.

Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.

Sharma, J.R., A.K. Gupta and B.K. Bhadra 2005-06. Course of Vedic River Saraswati as

Deciphered from Latest Satellite Data. In Pur tattva, No. 36, pp. 187-95.

Sharma, Y.D. 1982/93. Harappan complex on the Sutlej (India). In G.L. Possehl (ed.):

Harappan Civilization: A Recent Perspective, pp. 141-65. New Delhi, Bombay,

Calcutta: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co.

.

Sharma, R.S. 1999. Advent of the Aryans in India. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers. Singh, Bhagwan. 1995. The Vedic Harappans. New Delhii: Aditya Prakashan Singh, Shivaji 1997-98. Sindhu and Sarasvati… in the ¬igveda and their archaeological

implications. In Puratattva. No. 28, pp. 26-38.

31

Sircar, D.C.1967. Cosmography and Geography in Early Indian Literature. Calcutta: Indian Studies Past &

Present.

Stein.A. 1917. ‘ On some river names in the Rigveda’. The Journal of the Royal Asiatic

Society,pp.91-99

--------------1942. ‘A survey on ancient sites along the “lost’ river Sarasvati’. The Geographical

Journal 99.173-182.

Talageri, Shrikant G. 2000. The Rigveda: A Historical Analysis. New Delhi: Aditya

Prakashan

------------------. 2008. The Rigveda and The Avesta: The Final Evidence. New Delhi:

AdityaPrakashan

Tripathi, D.N. (ed.). A Discourse on Indo-European Languages and Culture. New Delhi: Indian Council

of Histrocal Research.

Tripathi j.K. et al. 2004.’Is river Ghaggar Sarasvati? Geochemical constraints’. Current Science

87(8):1141-1145.

Upadhyaya, ChandraShekhar & Anil K. 1995. Vaidika Kosha. 3 vols. Delhi: Naga

Prakashak

Valdiya, K.S.1996. River piracy, Sarasvati that disappeared‘. Resonance 1(5):1928 -------------- 2001..The River That Disappeared. Hyderabad: Universities Press. Vivien de Saint –Martin, Louis.1860. Étude sur la géographie et les populations primitives du nord-oust de l‘Inde, D‘ après les hymnes védiques. Paris: À I‘mperimerie Impériale.

Vogelsang, W.J. 1992. The Rise and Organisationof the Achaemenid Empire; The Eastern Iranian Evidence. Leiden: E.J.Brill Witzell, M. 1995. ‗ Rigvedic History: Poets, Chieftains and Politics‘ and ‗Early History‘ In Erdosy, George

(ed.): The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia. Language, MaterialCulture and Ethnicity. Berlin &

New York: Walter de Gruyter

-----------2001. ‘Autochthonous Aryans’. Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies 7-3, 1-93

Yash Pal et al. 1984. Remote sensing of the ‗lost‘ Sarasvati river. In B.B. Lal et al. (eds.): Frontiers of the Indus Civilization, pp. 491-97. New Delhi: Books and Books.

32