Major General (Dr) G.D. Bakshi. The Sarasvati Civilization: A Paradigm Shift in Ancient Indian History. Garuda Prakashan, Gurugram, 2019. ISBN: 978-1-942426-14-1. Pages: 240.
On the question of river Sarasvati’s role in the creation and decline of the Harappan civilization, the Indian academia is divided into two warring camps and Major General (Dr) G.D.Bakshi in his book, the Sarasvati Civilization, has taken a stand against all those – in his own words, left and liberal scholars, who either support the Aryan migration theory or reject the identification of the Rigvedic river Sarasvati with the now dry Ghaggar-Hakra river. Having provided a detailed survey of recent archaeological and genetic studies, the author reiterates the identification of the Rigvedic river Sarasvati with the now dry Ghaggar-Hakra river and attributes the identity of the Vedic Aryans to the founders of the Harappan cities. Contrary to the standard historical narrative that places the Vedic Age of the Indo-Aryans (circa 1500-1000 BCE) after the Harappan civilization (i.e., the urban phase, circa 2600-1900 BCE), this book proposes to revise the existing historical framework by identifying the Aryan race as the original inhabitant of the Indian subcontinent.
In the 1970s, the Landsat satellite images of the North-western India revealed the presence of an ancient river that drained a large geographical landmass and gave birth along with the Indus river to the Harappan civilization. As the paleo-channels of the Ghaggar-Hakra river (now dried up) were identified, these were immediately assigned the identity of the Rigvedic river Sarasvati. This discovery made the Ghaggar-Hakra river system an integral part of the Harappan civilization and the extinction of this same river due to tectonic movements in about 1900 BCE/2000 BCE was suggested to be the single most important factor responsible for the decline of the Harappan civilization. The identification of the Ghaggar-Hakra with the Rigvedic river Sarasvati pushed the scholars to revise the dating of the Rigveda, which is widely dated to circa 1500-1000 BCE. In the Rigveda, the river Sarasvati is described as a mighty river and the same river, as it is evident from archaeological and geological evidences, had become extinct in about 1900/2000 BCE. It leads to two possibilities: first, the Rigveda was composed at a time, when the river Sarasvati/Ghaggar-Hakra was alive and it makes the Rigveda contemporary of the Harappan civilization. Second, the identification of river Sarasvati with the Ghaggar-Hakra is wrong. Contrary to the left-liberal historians, Major General (Dr) G.D. Bakshi rejects the second possibility and endorses the first one in his book. In his book, the identification of the Rigvedic Aryans with the Harappans is forcefully argued. Its not a new argument that is being made in this book; rather, several other scholars including B. B. Lal, Danino Michel, and David Frawley to name a few, have proposed the similar views previously. What is new in this book is the discussion on the genetic research that has in recent years reignited the academic and popular interest in the eugenics.
The emphasis on the Hindu identity of the Harappans in this book is quite plausible and continuity of the Harappan beliefs and cultural practices in subsequent times is well argued. However, the identification of the ancient Indians (of the Harappan and/or the Vedic Age) with the Aryan race shows a colonial hangover that has not yet subsided among Indian academia. The obsession of both the left-liberals as well as the right-leaning scholars with the Aryan race is quite remarkable. The theory of superior-white skin Aryan race was constructed by the imperialist powers of the Europe to legitimize their exploitation of the Asians, Africans and the native Americans. In the context of India, the colonial authorities introduced a major social fracture by creating the Aryan-versus-Dravidian divide. Not only they assumed the Aryan identity, the colonial masters allowed some of their subjects to share this Aryan racial identity by transforming the caste system into a racial segregation system in return of a tacit support to their exploitation of the Indian masses as well as resources. In this way, rulers and a section of the ruled had styled themselves as the descendants of the ancient Aryans and rest of the Indian population was turned into non-Aryan inferior castes/races in the colonial India. Like a spider’s web, the colonial paradigm consists of several inter-connected threads in the form of theories and concepts; this book challenges only one part of the colonial paradigm, i.e., the Aryan invasion theory, but continues to endorse the Aryan race identity for the Indians. Since the author does not attempt to challenge the other aspects of the colonial paradigm, the questions related to caste-race equation and the non-Aryan race groups remain unanswered. Above all, this book uses the same concepts and language of discourse that the colonial rulers have had cultivated to trap the imagination of their subject population in the 19th and the early 20th century.
Another conceptual problem emerges from the identification of the Rigveda as the ‘first holy book’ and the ‘Aryan race’ as its author; it displays a desire on the part of the author to cast Hinduism in the mould of the Abrahmanic religions (i.e., the Christianity and the Islam). The author seems to have accepted one religion, one holy book, and one primary community framework of the Abrahmanic religions as an ideal standard and accordingly, he has assigned one holy book (the Rigveda) and one primary community (the Aryan race) to Hinduism (p. 226). Even though Major General (Dr) G.D. Bakshi himself underlines the limitation of genetic evidences, yet he uses the same evidences to argue the ‘out of India migration’ of the Aryans. Somehow the author has accepted the colonial view that all people belonging to same race are bound to follow same religion, culture and language. This view leads to the question: Is Hinduism genetically determined? The author seems to believe so. Scholars, who are deducing names (Aryan for instance) and religio-cultural identities (Hindu-Hinduism for instance) from DNA of ancient dead-bodies are unknowingly advocating the old colonial belief in the racial division of human beings into superior as well as inferior races. Such eugenic beliefs in the name of science have led to Jewish genocide and enslavement of native Asian/African/American people in past, and still in many parts of the western world the belief in white-man’s racial superiority is causing racial conflicts. Here in India, the obsession with the Aryan race is keeping academic and politicians at loggerheads. Contrary to the Abrahmanic religions, Hinduism is neither bound to one book nor to any one primary community; rather, Hinduism’s ability to celebrate and worship the unity in diversity (‘oneness in spite of all differences’) allows its adherents to surpass racial, regional, linguistic and ethnic differences. The attempt to reduce the Hindu identity to a single DNA code (Gene Haplogroup R1a1a) is uncalled for and it tends to make Hinduism an exclusivist faith.
In the end, the strength of Major General (Dr) G.D. Bakshi lies in the detailed analysis of available evidences to substantiate the Indus-Sarasvati valleys – particularly, Sarasvati compared to Indus, as the cradle of Indian civilization; but the attempt to trace the Hindu identity back to a DNA code (Gene Haplogroup R1a1a) in this book weakens this otherwise a well-articulated narrative on the Sarasvati civilization.