Historical Krishna Part 2

So far so good. We know the Sri Krishna existed. There are far too many textual references and cultural linkages to ignore him as a myth. In fact history of India is inevitably linked to Mahabharata and Krishna and a large part of our cultural lineage is shaped by Sri Krishna. To ignore him is to ignore Indian culture, tradition and one of the major pillars of the Unity in Diversity across India.

Now comes the major question. Let us accept Sri Krishna existed, he was not a myth as many Western scholars, Christian missionary historians and Communist writers would want us to believe. Then when did he exist? The Aihole inscription of Pulakeshin II dates Bharata war at 3102 BC, which is almost the central period in Kuru-Pandava’s and Krishna’s life. According to Mahabharata, after the war the Pandavas and Sri Krishna lived for only 36 years. But how reliable is this date? Bankim Chandra in Krishna Charitra places Sri Krishna’s period as 1400-1500 BCE, a period which was also proposed by Maxmueller and some other European historians. Some others have argued in favour of 900 BCE as a probable date. As per archeological excavations in Dwarka the ruins were dated to be around 1700 BCE but there were ambiguities around the estimates, i.e. they are not confirmed. Aryabhata agreed with the calculation of 3102 BCE as the beginning of Kali Yuga. However Varaha Mihira, another astronomer and Kalhana, author of Raj Tarangini placed Bharata war at 653 years after beginning of Kali Yuga or at around 2449 BCE. Another source is Puranas, which refer to Parikshit’s period at 1015 years before Mahapadmananda. This would tally with around 1400 BCE as Parikshit’s birth year and therefore year of the Bharata war. Then again there are recent attempts like that of Dr. Narahari Achar who on the basis of planetary conjunctions and astronomical evidences dates the war to 3067 BCE. But then astronomical evidences can be one of the basis, but not the only basis as they are highly unreliable. There are others who used astronomical data to find altogether different dates varying from 1478 BCE to 2559 BCE.

If we analyze these dates, 900 BCE seems to be highly improbable, because otherwise we would possibly be having a fair amount of textual references and not mere vague references to Mahabharata war because atleast during the Buddhist period when writings of history were in vogue we would have a lot more documentary evidences. 1400 BCE also seems too close to be reliable. It is evident that Babylon, Assyria, Sumerians, Egyptians were dominant in the western sphere and there is not even a passing reference to them in any of the Indic texts, esp. in Mahabharata. This is absurd that a mighty Egypt, imperial Egypt will be completely ignored by Pauraniks. There were definitely trade linkages between Egypt, Sumer, Babylon and India, so the cultures were not unknown. Also the texts in other sources like Old Testament of Jewish texts or Babylonian records do not speak anything about a prosperous and a flourishing culture in the East and there is no reference to a catastrophic war which killed almost 4 million. That again is highly improbable. There is no recorded history in any other culture of this event, thus proving that the event is possibly very old, with very little collective memory of it, but not old enough to be entirely forgotten. Also Mahabharata has copious references to Saraswati River and the latest evidence suggest that Ghaggar basin, a likely candidate for the historical Saraswati had almost dried up by 1900 BCE. Megasthenes says Indian Heracles appear 138 kings before Chandragupta. Giving an average of 20 years per king it tallies with the figure of 3100 BCE. But if we give 40 or more years per king the figures go haywire. Then again, Rig Veda does not have any reference to Bharata war. And Rig Veda has no god called Krishna, but there are a few hymns to Vishnu, esp. the Narayana Suktam. This only proves that Rig Veda is very ancient, pre dating even Ramayana, although some of the Mahabharata rishis like Vasistha and Viswamitra’s names appear as the seers. However if we have such a long gap between Mahabharata and the recorded Buddhist period then what had happened to the intermediate kings and history! Again, there is no record and Puranas are vague in this respect. One reason can be that the writing of the Puranas started at around 2^nd to 5^th century BCE and by then the collective memory from various sources had become somewhat fuzzy. It seems from Puranic evidence that from Chandragupta to Sahadeva, the son of Nanda, there were around 50 kings. So giving 20 years per king it is 1000 years and with 40 years it is 2000 years before 320 BCE.  So again 3000 BCE seems improbable. So a better date would be around 1500-2000 BCE – which seems a probable date for various reasons – 1) archeological evidences of Dwarka ruins dating for instance 2) Genealogy of the kings as mentioned in Puranas 3) No reference in Mahabharata of the Harappa civilization, which seems to be older from all the archeological remains discovered 4) drying of Saraswati and some legends associated with its drying up like the curse of the rishis. By the time of Kuru-Pandavas Saraswati had lost its importance and Ganga was the predominant river and most the cities were formed along Ganga basin. 5) Bhagavata or Krishna worshipping sect was identified as the predominant sect apart from the Vedic religion practiced in the pre Buddhistic era 6) historically a great spiritual teacher always appears in a span of 700 to 1000 years, never more than that. Because that is the period by which dharma declines and adharma proliferates as people forget the true meaning of the scriptures. From Buddha to Krishna who was evidently the last great teacher before Buddha, there cannot be a gap of more than 1000-1200 years. So our gut feel would be 1700-1800 BCE as the closest range for the historical Sri Krishna. If it goes any further in the past, our collective memory would have failed us completely. Perhaps later excavations will reveal more. Egypt was by this time not a great power. It rose into prominence only after 1500 BCE. Sumerians and Babylonians had been great civilizations and possibly some of their kings had been involved in the Bharata war as there are numerous references to Yavanas, Dards, Khas, Tukharas, Vahlikas, Sakas and so on most of whom fought for Duryadhana. But then again these are mere speculations. What is for sure is that 1500 BCE to 2000 BCE is the most likely period for the advent of Sri Krishna and the occurrence of the Bharata war. We can also  surmise from Puranic genealogy that Rama possibly predates Krishna by another 1000-1500 years, i.e. any time between 3000 BCE to 3500 BCE could be the period when Rama was born and Ramayana was composed. There is a reference to Rama in Mahabharata as a great Ikshaku king who spent 14 years in exile and killed Ravana. His successor Brihadvala who fought for Duryadhana and was killed by Abhimanyu appeared 30 generations after Rama. Allowing for 30-50 years per generation we arrive at the magic figure between 1000-1500 years. Again Vasistha was a contemporary of Rama & Dasaratha and his great grandson Vyasa was the chronicler of Mahabharata. But Vasistha, like Janaka is the name of a clan and there are references to two distinct Vasisthas, one having a son named Vamadeva in Ramayana and the other having the son named Shaktri. It is quite possible that both are same as the Vasistha Viswamitra rivalry dates back to the time of Kalmashpada or Saudasa, an ancestor of Rama in the Ikshaku lineage and Viswamitra instigated the killing of Shaktri. So Vamadeva may have been a younger son. Vyasa is a great grandson of Vasistha. Also the Vasistha of saptarshi fame had wife named Arundhati and is likely to be the same Vasistha who was the Kulaguru of Ikshakus for a long period of time. Similarly we find reference to another Saptarshi and his wife, Atri and Anusuya in Ramayana. Interestingly a copper casting which is famously called Vasistha’s head was excavated. It was the casting of a head of a Rishi and it resembles the description of Vasistha in the scriptures. The carbon dating of the head puts it to 3500 BCE plus minus another 800 years, so any time between 2700 BCE and 4300 BCE. But then the problem is that between four generations, Vyasa to Vasistha, we have 1000 to 2000 years to account for! Another point of contention is the Yuga cycle. The Pauranikas have derived the four yugas, they have determined their duration and worst, they have come up with a concept of divine years vs. human years, the latter being 360 times the former. Thus a Kaliyuga for instance would be 1200 divine years and 432000 human years. There is no reference to the yuga cycle in Vedas or Upanishads, although Bhagavat Gita mentions about the yugas and Brahma’s day and night (1 day = 1000 yugas) in 8^th Chapter. So it is not clear how such a vast timespan can equate Treta Yuga with Rama and Dwapara with Krishna and account for the duration gap between them. The divine years seem to be more realistic with 2400 years between Treta and Dwapara's ending. So this is another vast open area of speculation.

In short with due honesty we cannot tell with certainty anything about the dates of the periods in which the Rama or Krishna appeared. 

So while it can be safely surmised that Sri Krishna existed we can have only a guess for the period at which he lived until further archaeological evidences come up. So what about his exploits and contribution? What makes Sri Krishna one of the greatest persons? What are the major problems in ascribing him a historical position by scholars? These are some of the questions that we need to answer.