9058009373

CAUTION AGAINST THE USE OF UTERARY SOURCES .... 149

Avad&na is the theme of an important painting in Ajanta Cave." “The

6

Manimekhalal, Silappathikaram and Paddinappalai are important sources of information for marinę archaeologists to look for submerged ports and shipwrecks of the Early Historical period. For the West Coast ports and sunkcn ships, the Mahabharata and the Jatakas are our main source. ”⁵

Ali these above-quoted references indicate the complete dependence of the marinę archaeologist on Indian literary sources for the study of submerged port of Dv5raka. Even an earlier excavation near the tempie of Dvarak2dhlśa of DvarakS by the Deccan College of Punę, had opined that “ one can definitely say that this is the Dvarak3 mentioned in the MahSbhSrata, the DvSrakamShStmya of Skanda Purina and Ghata JStaka. In particular one can say that this is the Dviirak3 described in such a great detail as a sacred tirtha (holy place) by the Harivaibśa; probably it came into existence after the second submergence in the sea of Iwo earlier Dvarak2s, because it gives very minutę dcscription of so many temples and this could have been possible only by a writer who had probably visited Dv&raka and seen the temples. But the writer was quite surę that the Dv5raka he was describing was twice submerged into the sea and therefore the earlier Dvaraka belonged to Sr! Krsna.    Of course of this    we    have no posilive    evidence excepting the fact

that it    is possible to say    that    the earliest Dv5rakS was founded at least in

the lst-2nd ccntury B.C. - A.D. (Ansari and Matę 1966 : 13-17).”⁶.

According to the marinę archaeologist of Krsna ’s Dv3raka, however, the above-mcntioned observation of the excavation of the Deccan College "is self-contradictory because the references in the Harivariiśa and Ghata JStaka quoted    by the excavators    are    earlier than the    2nd-4th century B.C.... The

Ghata    JStaka, an independent    source, referring    to Dvaraka is not later than

the 3rd century B.C. From these reliable texts,” the remark continues, “it is obvious that Krsna ’s DvfirakS must have existed long before the 3rd century B.C. and the datę Ist century B.C. - A.D. assigned by Sankalia to the first Dv3rakS was incorrect. ”⁷

A litlle later, it is furlher stated that a Krsna Devak!putra of the ChSndogya Upanisad is the same as Krsna of the MahSbhSrata. ⁸

With what evidence is the Krsna of the ChSndogya Upanisad idenlified with the Krsna of the MahSbhSrata, whcn there are several Krsnas referred to in the Mahśbhśrata 7* With what evidence are Harivartiśa and Ghata Jśtaka dated earlier than 4lh century B.C.?¹⁰

Ho w could the Mahfibharata War be described as “a landmark in Indian history" when D.C. Sircar has described it “as a flight of fancy"?¹¹ How could a marinę archaeologist prove the prcvalence of piracy in India by the evidence of a mythical episode of Krsna rescuing somebody kidnapped by Raksasas, narrated in the Mahabhśrata of uncertain datę? Could the historical