Another instance of tampering with evidence occurs on page 90. Here we learn that "Indra is known asPurandara, ‘Lord of Cities’". This is a shocking travesty of Vedic Sanskrit. It is true that there areseveral references to Indra, one of the most important gods of the Vedic pantheon, as Purandara in the RigVeda. But the term purandara means destroyer of pura, and not lord of cities. Pura itself might mean asettlement, perhaps fortified, and not necessarily a city. The only way in which one can arrive at the senseof lord of cities is by replacing d by dh, and creating a term purandhara that does not occur in the Rig Vedicmantras. But clearly, the devotees of Indra will stop at nothing to achieve their ends. And why must Indrabecome the lord of cities? Well, the Harappan civilisation is by any standards urban, and if it has to beclaimed as Vedic, then Indra, as one of the chief gods of the Vedic pantheon, and as a warlike, valorous herofigure, has to be urbanised. What better than a simple sleight of tongue, replacing one consonant by another?So, while on the one hand lip-service continues to be paid to the sanctity of the Vedas, on the other hand,Vedic mantras and words can be transformed to suit present-day agendas.