In a 19th century Frenh book, there is a map of ancient Hindu-sthan,
showing River Sarasvati-Ghaggar. River Sarasvati ain't no myth.
Map of Sapta Sindhu (Nation of Seven Rivers, pays de sept revieres):
Theatre of Pan~cajana_h,Five Vedic People, theatre de cinq exodes
vedique: Marius Fontane, 1881, Histoire Universelle, Inde Vedique
(de 1800 a 800 av. J.C.), Alphonse Lemerre, Editeur, Paris
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati
Harappan is the Vedic Civilization: a river behaviour approach (Dr.
Sumanben H. Pandya), 2004
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/vedic11.doc
Hindu < sindhu = natural ocean frontier (Paul Thieme).
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/civilization1.PDF
From Paul Thieme, 'The "Aryan" Gods of the Mitanni Treaties', JAOS,
Vol. 80, 1960, pp. 301-317.
"...Kikkuli's treatise in Hittite on horse training (numerals: aika-
one, tera -three,panza -- five, satta -- seven, na(ua) -- nine;
appellatives: uartana -- circuitm course (in which horses move when
being trained), as'ua-- horse, and, finally, a series of names of
Aryan divinities on a Mitanni-Hatti and a Hatti-Mitanni treaty (14th
century BC)... a key question is whether these data should be
interpreted as traces of specifically Indo-Aryan speech and
religion, or whether they should rather be identified as Proto-
Aryan... an answer to it would have considerable historical
implications. The historian will devise a theory to explain
how 'Indians', or 'Proto-Indians', or 'Para-Indians', or 'Proto-
Aryans' could come into Western Asia and exercise influence
inferable from these linguistic traces. The linguist is entitled to
be more modest. At the first step, he will not attempt to offer an
explication in terms of a hypothesis, but to reach a factual
decision on the linguistic character of the terms that confront
him... It is easy to see that in each case where there exists a
clearly recognizable difference between Indo-Aryan and Iranian, the
terms and names of the Akkadian and Hittite documentation (as far as
they are safely identifiable) side with Indo-Aryan-- s in
intervocalic or prevocalic initial positions, which in Iranian
appears as h, is preserve: nas'aattiia- (Mitanni treaty); Sanskrit
Na_satya, but Iranian *Na_ha0ya (Av. Na_nhai0ya); satta- (Kikkuli):
Sanskrit sapta, but Iranian hafta, hapta; the numeral 'one' is aika-
(Kikkuli): Sanskrit eka, but Iranian aiva. However, it is not
possible to deny that the forms Na_satya, sapta and a numeral aika
might be Proto-Aryan. As far as s is concerned, Indo-Aryan preserves
the old situation while Iranian has innovated; as to aika, the
possibility must be admitted that both *aika and *aiva were Proto-
Aryan and that the exclusive adoption of *aika in Indo-Aryan and of
aiva in Iranian is the result of a later development. The fact that
Proto-Aryan *ai and *au are replaced in Indo-Aryan by e and o, while
in old Iranian they are preserved as ai and au and that ai and au
regularly appear on the Anatolian documents (e.g., Kikkuli's aika),
is unfortunately inconclusive... In his essay, 'The Aryan Gods of
the Mitani People (Kristinania Etnografiske Museums Skrifter Bind 3
Hefte 1; Kristiania, 1921), Sten Konow vigorously maintained that a
clear-cut difference between Proto-Aryan and Indo-Aryan divine
nomenclature necessarily has to be asumed, and that by taking into
account this difference it becomes possible to settle the Indo-Aryan
(Vedic) nature of the gods named as witnesses on the treaties. Sten
Konow's arguments have been unduly neglected by several contemporary
scholars. It is, for instance, hard to accept T. Burrow's statement
(Sanskrit Language, p. 30): "It is only the antiquity and
conservativism of the Indian tradition, as opposed to the Iranian,
that has led scholars to regard these Aryas (in the Mitanni realm)
as specifically Indo-Aryan." One of Konow's chief points was that
the Vedic Indra must be distinguished from a presumable Proto-Aryan
*Indra and that the particular role he plays in the RV alone can be
held responsible for his appearing in the Mitanni treaty in the
company of Mitra and Varun.a. Nor do I find it possible to concur
with Mayrhofer's charecterization of the relation of Vedic and
Iranian to Proto-Aryan religion (Die Sprache, Vol. V, p. 90: "Bei
den Gutternamen (war)... was uns nur im Veda in voller Blute
erscheint, doch mit Sicherbeit (sic!) bereits im Gemeinarischen,
aber ebenso wohl im vorzarathustrischen Iranischen vorhanden..."),
whiich while being in full harmony with views held and expressed by
H. Oldenbern in his time (cf., e.g., JRAS 1909, pp. 1096-1098),
cannot be derived wth any cogency from our actual data, and rather
rests on highly questionable simplifications....To be correct,
Burrow's verdict might well have to be inverted: It is only the
unquestioning acceptance of the conservativism of the Indian
tradition, as opposed to the Iranian, that has led some scholars to
regard the Aryan gods of the Mitanni treaty to be Proto-Aryan....
"The lists of the Aryan gods on the Hatti-Mitanni (KBo I 1 and
duplicates) and the Mitanni-Hatti (KBo I 3) treaties read:...
mi-it-ra-as'-si-il...
in-dar
na-s'a-a (t-ti-ia-a)n-na...
mi-it-ra-as'-s'i-il
a-ru-na-as'-s'i-il
in-da-ra
na-s'a-at-ti-ia-an-na
It cannot be doubted, and indeed never was, that the onomastic
elements of these texts, which are given in italics in my
transcription, have exact equivalents in Vedic religious poetry.
Here the stem forms of the names quoted would read: Mitra-, Varun.a-
, Indra-, Na_satya-... If further asked to name a Rigvedic verse in
which these names appear side by side and in this orde,r he would
have to quote RV 10.125.1bc:
aham mitra_-varun.a_ ubha_ bibharmi
aham indra_gni_ aham as'vina_ ubha_
"I (Speech) carry (support, nourish, or bear-- in my womb) both
Mitra and Varun.a, I (carry) Indra- Agni, I (carry) both the two
As'vins"...It is the merit of G. Dumezil (Les dieux des Indo-
Europeens, Paris 1952, p. 9ff.) to have pointed out the analogy of
the Mitanni series and that of RV 10.125.1bc...There is no
justification for obliterating this potential clue by choosing to
quote the gods of the Mitanni treaties in an arbitrarily changed
order (Burrow, opcit, p. 28)... The name Varun.a is spelt in two
different ways... u-ru-ua-na; a-ru-na... it represents an actual
variant of the name, introduced by a Hittite who connected with
Hittite aruna- 'sea'. Varun.a is, in fact, closely associated with
the waters, especially the 'sea' (samudra), in the RV... the
compound mitra_varun.a_ was divided incorrectly, not into the two
duals mitra_ and varun.a_, but into the duals *mitra_u and
*arun.a_...
"...the obvious presumption is that the Aryan gods in the list are
gods of the royal family-- and perhaps of part of the nobility--
while the Mitanni gods are those of the 'Hurri people
"...Do Mitra, Varun.a, Indra and the two Na_satyas protect treaties
in the RV? and: Is it likely or provable that they did so in Proto-
Aryan times? To the first question a strictly factual answer can be
given: all the named gods indeed are said to protect treaties in the
RV, even the two Na_satyas, though these only ocasionally. The
second one cannot be answered with the same confidence, since we
have no primary sources of Proto-Aryan religion and must rely upon
the resources of techniques of reconstruction... A reconstruction
(of Proto-Aryan religion) can be attempted only by a careful
confrontation of Vedic and Avestan terminology. Such confrontation
yields the result that but one name in the Mitanni list can be
postulated safely as that of a Proto-Aryan god whose function it was
to protect treaties-- *Mitra m. 'Contract, Treaty'. All the other
items of the list are doubtful with respect either to the form of
the name or to the functions of the god in Proto-Aryan times."