Likes of Dr. Elst refer to drying of river Sarasvati after 1900 BCE and use this as evidence to insist on occurrence of the Mahabharata War only after 1900 BCE.
I have shown that Dr. Elst have only referred to a selective reference of river Sarasvati disappearing during Mahabharata times. On the other hand, I have shown that river Sarasvati of Mahabharata times was flowing in many places.
My detail blog article can be read here…
On the other hand, few AIT sepoys wrote me, mind you – without reading my book ( When did the Mahabharata War happen?), raising doubts for presence of water in river Sarasvati during 5561 BCE, my proposed and validated (originally proposed by Dr. P V Vartak) year of the Mahabharata War.
Just so that everyone understands, they were claiming that even by 5561 BCE, river Sarasvati should have been dry!
Keeping this question aside for a minute, let’s look at available geological research.
There are indications for turning of river Yamuna to the east, and turning of Sutlej to the west as early as 47,000 BCE.
And if we assume that the grand status of river Sarasvati, described in Rig-Veda, was due to it being fed by both rivers – Sutlej (Shatudri) and Yamuna, then it also means the river Sarasvati might have lost its grand presence (as described in Rig-Veda) by the time of Ramayana (12000 BCE) and Mahabharata (5561 BCE).
We do have corroborative evidence in Mahabharata text but also in Valmiki Ramayana text, not for dried Sarasvati, but for rivers Sutlej and Yamuna going their own ways, away from river Sarasvati, during Mahabharata and Ramayana times.
Both the texts refer to Sarasvati; however, both of them refer to Yamuna merging with Ganga and also westward flowing of Sutlej.
In supporting their doubt, rightfully and justifiably, these AIT sepoys quoted research of Henri-Paul Francfort who stated that many of the large paleo-courses of an ancient river were dry since early Holocene or even earlier.
It was funny to see these AIT sepoys quoting this reference, without doing their homework. This also told me that they had not read my book. If they had read it, they would have known that I indeed quoted work of Henri-Paul Francfort.
Thus if one accepts the assertions of Henri-Paul Francfort, albeit tentatively (which I do accept – tentatively) where did the water in river Sarasvati, as described in the Mahabharata text (in 5561 BCE) come from?
So if one accepts that large paleo-courses of the ancient river (Sarasvati) were dry from early Holocene or even earlier, one must come up with an explanation for presence of water in river Sarasvati during 5561 BCE.
Of course, this is indeed easy to explain.
What do you think is the explanation?