Over the weekend. Prime Minister Modi offered prayers at the underwater remains of the kingdom ruled by Krishna in the Mahabharata—or so many believe. The archaeological claims surrounding these ruins are both fascinating and controversial.
The lead image: is a painting from the Bhagavata Purana series: Krishna departing Dwarka from circa 1775 in Nepal.
Wait, isn’t Dwarka in Delhi?
Umm, that Dwarka is not the same as the one mentioned in the Mahabharata—yes, some of us were equally astonished by this belated discovery. The mythical kingdom of Krishna is located in Gujarat—and is also home to the famous Lord Krisha temple: Dwarkadhish. Located on the cusp of the Gomti River and the Arabian Sea, the temple is one of the four sacred pilgrimage sites for Krishna devotees.
The scuba diving pilgrimage: The PM plunged into the sea at Beyt Dwarka—an island close to the temple. It is where underwater remains of the ancient city were first discovered in the 1980s (more on that later). An emotional Modi said:
I went deep in the sea and did 'Darshan' of the ancient Dwarka city. Archaeologists have written a lot about Dwarka city hidden underwater. In our scriptures also, it is said about Dwarka that it was a city with beautiful gates and tall buildings, as tall as the top of the world. Lord Krishna himself constructed this city... When I went deep in the sea, I experienced the divinity... I bowed down in front of Dwarkadhish. I took a peacock feather with me and placed it at Lord Krishna's feet.
You can see a lively vid of him performing prayers on the sea bed below:
So what’s the controversy?
Unlike Ram Mandir, there is no claim about a god’s birthplace—or any temple-destroying Mughal villain. There is clear archaeological evidence of ancient remains in Dwarka. But the remains of what? That’s the highly contested question.
The lost kingdom: According to the Mahabharata, Krishna raised Dwarka from the ocean—to build his kingdom. When he ascended to heaven—36 years after the end of the war—the land was reclaimed by the waters. Here’s Arjuna’s description of the cataclysmic event:
The sea, which has been beating against the shores, suddenly broke the boundary that was imposed on it by nature. It rushed into the city, coursing through the beautiful city streets, and covered up everything in the city. I saw the beautiful buildings becoming submerged one by one. In a matter of a few moments, it was all over. The sea had now become as placid as a lake. There was no trace of the city. Dwaraka was just a name; just a memory…
Yup, it sounds a lot like a tsunami. Dwarka has been compared to the lost city of Atlantis—which too sank into the sea. But this is not a myth made up by Plato. There is clear and compelling evidence of ancient human settlements off the coast of Gujarat.
The search for Dwarka: dates back to the 1930s. The first excavations in the region began in 1963—when everyday objects like pots, shells and glass bangles—dated between 1st century BCE to 10th century CE—were discovered. It marked the first attempt by archaeologists to link the remains to the kingdom of the Mahabharata. Until then, some historians had suggested that the city described in the epic may have been located in Afghanistan. But all that changed in the 1980s.
The discovery of Dwarka: In 1979-80, SR Rao of the Archaeological Survey of India found remains of a ninth century CE Vishnu temple in the forecourt of the Dwarkadhish temple. Between 1983 and 1990, his excavations led him to the island—Beyt Dwarka—and 50 feet below the water. That’s where Rao claims to have uncovered remains of the legendary city:
You see, when Krishna comes with Arjuna to see the city, there is mention of the fort walls and the antahpuras, citadels, describing a fully equipped, fortified town. We have found these structures, six sectors and fortified parts of the city. The plan and certain details described in the Mahabharata match the archeological findings.
He also loftily declared: “With the scientific investigation of submerged Dvārakā, the man-god personality of Krishna is not a myth.”
Point to note: According to Rao, the earliest remains of Dwarka date back to 1700 BCE. Most analyses of the Mahabharata date the war to around 3100 BCE. Both cannot be true—if this is indeed Krishna’s kingdom.
Making even bigger claims: In early 2000s, scientists on an expedition for the National Institute of Ocean Technology made another astonishing discovery in the same region. They were performing a routine marine pollution check in the Gulf of Cambay aka Khambhat—when they spotted anomalies on the seafloor. Further investigation—with sonar scans—revealed greater wonders:
One of the images shows structures like tanks... There are even steps visible on the side of the structure, suggesting it was "the' great bath", the central feature of Harappan towns. Other striking pictures are those of a group of constructions… resembling the Acropolis of the Harappan culture and a residential settlement spanning an area 73 m by 53 m buried under sand waves and sand ripples. There is even an image of a 44 m-long structure resembling a temple with a pond.
Important to note: The scientists didn’t say a word about the legendary kingdom or what these remains signified. That was left to the politicians.
Before we go further: Here’s a map to help you situate all these discoveries:
Enter, the politician: Most of 2001 was spent collecting more artefacts—until early 2002 when a very grand announcement was made… not by the researchers but a cabinet minister. The Minister for Science and Technology Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, declared that “an underwater urban settlement that pre-dated the Harappan civilisation had been discovered in the Gulf of Khambhat.” He said the remains were 9,500 years old.
Cue the big claims: The primary piece of evidence was a piece of wood dated by one lab to 7,500 BCE. That date became the basis for an remarkable claim—upending the story of human civilisation:
Till now the first major urban settlements in the world were believed to have appeared in the river valleys of ancient Mesopotamia, around 4000-3500 B.C. They were soon followed by the Nile Valley civilisation in Egypt that produced the great Pharaonic culture. The Indus Valley settlements flourished 1,000 years later around 2500 B.C. Now suddenly the lost city of Cambay throws up the tantalising possibility of a civilisation that predates the oldest known ones by 2,000 years. It could… "completely alter all our notions of history.”
A new and bigger agenda: The aim was no longer just to locate Dwarka in the real world but also bolster national pride. If the carbon dating was true, it would mean that urban civilisation was indigenous to India—not brought to us by “foreigners” from West Asia:
Delhi University historian Nayanjot Lahiri is "excited by the possibilities" and says that it could give the heave-ho to the diffusion theory of civilisation that proposes urbanisation spread from West Asia to the Indus and thence downwards to India. Cambay could mean that the early Indians were not copycats and that civilisation arose in the subcontinent as an organic process that stemmed from the genius of its own people.
FYI: This is an ongoing preoccupation of nationalists. RSS interest in the Harappan-era site of Rakhigarhi in Haryana also reflects this desire to establish Indians as the font of advanced language and culture—in this case, the Vedas (more in this fascinating Big Story on Indian origins).
But is any of this true?
The politicking makes it almost impossible to gauge the merit of any of these claims. Here are the main red flags highlighted by experts.
One: The government has never allowed actual archaeologists to assess the evidence—which was collected and analysed by inexperienced marine scientists. Marine scientists hired by the government—to boot. And as one noted expert said at the time:
They (the NIOT scientists) surely should not have used words like "civilisation" and "acropolis". It is not their discipline. Somebody puts such words into their mouth and they just repeat them. 'Civilisation' is certainly not the word they should be using.
Two: Almost no one is persuaded that the remains indicate a civilisation—as described in the Mahabharata. They may indeed belong to palaeolithic or neolithic settlements—but not an advanced culture like Harappan. Interesting point to note: Even SR Rao—who was a respected marine archaeologist—called the NIOT claims “bunkum.” Probably because the two timelines are wildly different.
Three: The grand assertion rests on a single piece of wood—which may indeed be 9,500 years old. But there is no compelling evidence that it is man-made. The so-called log could very well be part of an ancient tree:
[Experts] argued that the wood piece is a common find, given that 20,000 years ago the Arabian Sea was 100 metres lower than its current level, and that the gradual sea-level rise submerged entire forests.
Not helping matters: The involvement of a shady British explorer Graham Hancock—who publicized the remains to boost his theories about ancient civilizations. He breathlessly declared of the NIOT find:
They found a city the size of Manhattan with massive walls and plazas… It means we are dealing with a civilisation lost at the end of the Ice Age, perhaps even one of those that the flood myths speak of which flourished before history began.
The bottomline: The great British archeologist Sir Mortimer Wheeler described Palestine as a place “where more sins have probably been committed in the name of archaeology than on any commensurate portion of the earth’s surface.” Science can never ‘prove’ what is held in faith—neither can faith offer any foundation of fact. But humans will always insist on attempting the impossible.
Reading list
Graham Hancock is useful for one sole reason—his website has images of all the artefacts found in Khambhat. India Today did two cover stories on NIOT’s finds—in 2001 and 2002—both lay out the scientists’ theories. BBC News offered a more sceptical report at the time. SR Rao’s claims about his discovery in Beyt Dwarka is laid out in this journal paper. The Print looks at Rao’s well-established research on Harappan remains found in nearby Lothal. For the best case against the NIOT claims, read this Frontline interview with two noted experts—who are, in fact, respectful of NIOT scientists. Also read: This sceptical take in Archaeology World.
