Indian Epic Ramayana and Elamite connection from Ancient Mesopotamia?

By: Bipin Shah

Introduction:
Lanka-Larsa, Elam, Ayodhya, Rama, Ravan, Rama Setu and Ramayana:
Several years ago, India experienced huge controversy along religious lines regarding the birth place of
Rama at Ayodhya followed by the issue of the Rama Setu. Rama setu is a landmark that was used to be
called Adams bridge in southernmost tip of India. This land mark is a chain of limestone shoals, between
Rameshwarm Island and Mannar Island, off the northwestern coast of Sri Lanka. To devotees of Rama, a
Hindu God, this bridge is thought to be built by Rama during his conquest of Lanka against Ravan.
Considering the technology involved in building a bridge in an ocean to Sri-Lanka over 5000 years ago, this
could not have been possible without some divine intervention that Rama can provide being himself a
reincarnation of the God. This is the part of the story of Epic Ramayana.
Sri-Lanka itself was renamed from Ceylon and it meant in Sanskrit Respected Island. During modern
times, Indians and native have called the island Lanka meaning an Island in an Austro-Asiatic language,
but specifically, it meant islet in the river and not the island in the ocean. Similarly, Maldives island is to be
called Ahi-Lanka (our island), as it has many Tamil origin inhabitants. This reference comes from sangam
literature, oldest Tamil texts of India often overlooked by North Indian historians as a valuable source of
ancient history. A 4th-century Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus called the island Serandivis and the
6th-century Greek sailor Cosmas Indicopleustes called the island Sielen Diva. It was also called Eela and
Eelavar that are etymologically related to Eelam or Elam. The stem Eela is found in Prakrit inscriptions dated
to 2nd century BCE in Sri Lanka in term such as Eela-Barata or in Sanskrit Eela-Bharata and Eela-Naga,
proper names signifying the land of Austro-Asiatic of past history prior to the arrival of Elamite. The
meaning of Eela in one of these inscriptions is unknown although one could deduce that they are either
from Eela a geographic location or were an ethnic group known as Eela. The English name Ceylon and a host
of other related names all most likely trace their roots back to Eelam. Other names used in English Eezham,
Ilam or Izham in English. The Indian conqueror Vijaya named the island Tamraparni ("copper-colored leaf"),
a name which was adopted into Pali as Tambaparni. The accounts of Alexander the Great's officers and
others like 4th-century BCE Greek geographer Megasthenes, based on information they obtained from
Greek and Sri Lankan travelers, called Sri Lanka Taprobane, generally regarded as a transliteration of
Tamraparni. In the 16th century CE, Traprobana (Sri Lanka) is mentioned in the first strophe of the
Portuguese national epic poem Os. There were other names given to the island as a takeoff from the ruler.
What is significant that the original prehistoric name was derivative of Elam and it was meant to be an islet
off the river, like Mesopotamia? It should pose no surprise that when state of Larsa fell that was like an islet
similar to many marshes floating around in river of Euphrates near Gulf. When Larsa fell and the first cracks
1

of Elamite Empire appear, the one batch of refugees may have fled through ocean routes and some settled
in Maldives and present Sri-Lanka where they encountered aborigine Austro-Asiatic people. We will now
furnish additional evidence later in this paper, where evidence of linkage becomes very clear. The name of
the places migrated with migrating refugees as Dr. Rao have asserted and there are plenty of evidence now
India where cities of the same name exist at multiple places throughout India.
As far as Ayodhya is concerned, where once a Mosque stood, there could be have been once a Hindu temple
of unknown deity that may have been demolished by Iconoclast Muslim invaders during Midvale age. The
folklores on the sites cannot be easily dismissed, as the practice of temple and church burning practice was
and is very common with the militant Islam as exhibited in Iraq by ISIS. They will not even spare their own
brother in arms Shia Muslims. Although, these practices are forbidden in Islam, the militants do not care
and for them it is not a religious issue but a political issue. This is a political Islam that is against all other
religions of the world.
The history teaches us that the motive behind the desecration of religious places of others was designed to
deliver a psychological blow to their enemies in the hope that they would lose the will to fight and
surrender realizing that they lost their power with the loss of their God. This was a common practice in the
ancient world among various civilizations. It worked particularly well in the past when the people believed
that the kings were dietified and considered them as sons or governors of the Gods to rule the mankind and
once the idol or worshipping place of their God is destroyed, the king lost the power and the protection
from the god.
This ancient practice is no longer valid in modern world and will not earn any dime of success to anyone
who practices that. The militant Islam will come to the terms with this reality as the whole world turns
against them. The possession of these evil thoughts in modern world holds no currency. The followers of
Hindu religion cannot be faulted for assuming that such acts may have applied to the site of Ayodhya.
Somehow, the dispute of temple vs. Mosque turned in to existence of the birth place of Rama and that
undoubtedly assumed the larger dimension than the structure involved and it was fed by the politicians of
all factions as raw meats to zoo animals. As a rectification, the Hindus of India demanded the justice for
restoration of Hindu temple that was thought to have existed in the place of a Mosque at Ayodhya. Once it
became a political foot ball, it needed to be punted and the burden of the investigation fell on the
Archeological Survey of India for some kind of resolution to freeze the dispute. Although, the history
teaches us to correct one historical wrong, one has to be careful of not committing another historical wrong
to the people who probably had nothing to do with what happened centuries earlier.
As per the investigation led by Archeological survey of India, they submitted the report to the Government
and to the supreme law making body and found no smoking gun that proved the allegation that the site
has archeological basis of being Ayodhya-Ram Janambhumi (Ramas birth place) probably due to lack of
archeological or forensic evidence. If there were that could have been removed centuries ago during the
demolition of the temple and reconstruction of the mosque. The basics issue as to if there was a Hindu
2

temple of worship was cleverly skirted based on the political consideration. There were no proofs that can
be legally validated through forensic archeology other than folklores.
In post partition reality, India through their leaders choose the secular constitution for the purpose of
accommodating the rights of all minorities and remove the religion as a basis of separatism and building
national identity. However, as follow-ups to those ideals, no further progress has been made to forge a
common national identity. The religion of Islam is more political and will remain so due to their adherent of
sharia laws that does not fit into the modern world. In spite of this bitter memories of desecration of
Hindus holiest places , new generation of Indians who are born in an Independent india always wonder
why freedom fighters of Indias congress party choose an option of secularism than the option offered by
the British while partitioning the country along religious lines. One possible reason can be that British
wanted to divide the subcontinents who shared a common Hindu past. Divide and Rule was the theme of
Colonial power of post WWII. Other reason can be British had witnessed the subjugation of Hindu majority
under tyranny of Sunni Aurungzebs Mughals and they wanted to avoid the repetition in India as a favor to
Hindu. Looking at the events unfolding in Iraq and Syria, it looks more like a wrong choice for India and
many Indians wonder if they would be better off as a Republic of Hindustan as a more secured country?
The congresss governance and performance in a secular India was far worst. The country had to fight three
wars with hostile neighbor and solution is still not in sight. The British were in hurry to leave India and
Indian leaders did not exercise wise choices and options.
The Geographical partition that followed that was based on the religion. Even for Pakistan it was not
workable as proven by the rise of Bangladesh and Jinnah did not need to be obliged by the British. The
bitter contest between the two religious communities of India regarding Ram Janambhumi (Ayodhya) and
Rama Setu (Ramas bridge) have their origin in bitter memories of the partition. We find a similar situation
elsewhere in the world created by Colonial powers more to safeguard their own Geopolitical interest than
the interest of their colonial subjects.
The desecration of Hindu, Jain and other non-Muslim religion of India were widespread during Islamic rule
in India and ensuing bitterness of those old memories is still there and Indian Muslims are not sensitive
enough to that ugly history of the invaders. It is a soul searching question for all Indians since the Hindu and
other minorities suffered significant indignities and forced conversion in the past from invaders to what
extent the efforts should be made by Muslim community to assuage the feeling of the people who endured
the injustice by Muslims invaders of India. The Germans made a significant stride in compensating the
Jewish victims during Nazi Germanys atrocities. Can Indian Muslims show that level of repent? So far, the
acts of terrorisms committed by Jihadists are not condemned by moderate Muslim communities of India.
If there was any archeological treasure that was to be discovered is now destroyed due to various invasions.
It is clear from the evidence that the Indian archeology with exception of Indus saraswati civilization goes
back to only 3rd or 4th century BC. When you go to Pakistan-Afghanistan and Iran, you can find archeology
going back to 6th through 8th century BC. When you further west to Mesopotamia including western Iran,
we find archeology going back to 3000 BC to 10,000 BC. It is unlikely that the site of Ayodhya in India was
3

the birth place of historical Rama; however, a Hindu temple could have been there where mosque was built
going back to middle age or 11th century AD. The search for Ramas birthplace and his epics takes us to the
land of ancient Mesopotamia that interacted well with the ancient Indus-saraswati civilization. The
archeological aspect of this paper is complex in understanding and is no way intended to offend the feeling
of believers and it is certainly not designed to solve the religious aspects of the controversy of Babri
masque. The archeological aspects of the existence of Rama in the past history of the world must be
examined with recent discoveries of clay tablets in cuneiform in ancient Mesopotamia where one of Fertile
Crescent civilization once existed to examine if some relevancy exists to the historicity of Ramayana. The
author is absolutely sure that there are other view points than that is presented here. The western world
always thought that the Homers epic was a poetic imagination but later discovery of the ancient city of
Troy in Turkey proved that the historicity of the characters are real and the city of Troy was once a reality.
Similarly, the historicity of Ramayana and Mahabharata are real but where they occurred in absence of the
archeology remains an open question. Several authors, Archeologist and Assyrilogists have suggested that
Ramayanas Rama was the Rim-sin 1 of Larsa who became the lord of entire Mesopotamia, Iran and Indus
valley civilization. This work further reinforces that conclusion absence of various mythologies described in
Ramayana. As more clay tablets are analyzed, more information will be available to compare and if
necessary to revise the conclusions.

Archeological Survey of India:

Dr Joshi is the former director general of the Archaeological Survey of India and Dr Rao was a former
deputy superintending archaeologist with the ASI. Both were given the task of verifying the claims of rival
communities regarding the disputed site of Ayodhya. Subsequently, they released their own findings after
some archeological excavation at a disputed site where Babri Mosque stood, in and around the old city of
Ayodhya near Banawali- Hissar district of State of Haryana. Their findings were published in on line journal
at Rediff.com and in other Indian News media. Their archeological interpretation based on the excavation
and other resources that are reproduced here: Dr Rao stated that he has identified 'Rama Sana' of Indus
seals with 'Ramachandra' of Ramayana thus confirming the existence and historicity of Rama. He further
identified him as the same person as the king of summer, Akkad, Elam and Babylonia as Rim Sin-I of Larsa.
Several other Assyrilogists and biblical scholars have arrived at the same conclusions independently without
the use of Indus seal. The Indus Seal however remains speculative in nature, as there are no agreements
among experts on decipherment. Dr. Rao also suggested that at the height of his power, his empire
extended from Mesopotamia to the Indus Valley and the land in between like present-day Iran and
Afghanistan. He suggested that he ruled from 1753 BC to 1693 BC. The article suggested that this theory has
been propounded by veteran archaeologist Dr.M V N Krishna Rao, a pioneer in deciphering the Indus Valley
civilization script, who unraveled the famous 'Pashupati' seal in 1969 AD. In a paper titled 'Rama and
Ravana in Indus Seals', also contributed by Mr. J. P. Joshis felicitation volume, Dr Rao concluded from the
old interpretation of Banawali seal. Rim-Sin assumed the title of 'king of all lands' by the consent of
Goddess 'Nin Makh' at 'Opis', his second capital was in Babylonia. Dr Rao says the archaeological evidence
4

found in the Indus seals showed that 'Rim Sin' had fought for a long time an undecided war with King
'Hammuravi' identified as 'Ravana' of the Indus seals. The king of Babylonia was finally able to defeat
'Hammuravi' in the joint action with the chief of 'Subartu', 'Hurrians' and 'Mitannian'. Hammuravi' was
killed in the fight, as suggested by one of the Indus Seals which has a legend reading of Ravani Dama or
destroyer of Ravana. Dr Rao says the Indus seals found on the banks of river Saraswati suggest that
Banawali must be Ram Janambhumi and not Ayodhya.

The map above roughly depicts the conclusion by Dr. Rao

He points out that under project 'Archaeology of the Ramayana Sites' headed by Prof B.B. Lal, excavations
were conducted at Ayodhya, Bharadwaja Ashram and Sringaverpura from 1975 and 1980AD. At Ayodhya,
he found the remains of a Hindu temple belonging to Gahadwala King , King of Kannauj of 11th century
AD, the remains found under Babri Mosque was dated to 11th century AD (Published The Rediff On The NET
Special: Archaeologist explodes myth of Ram Janambhoomi being in Ayodhya.
http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/jul/06rama.htm 11/4/2009
Jaichand was the king of Kannauj in the 11th century AD and he was the ancestors of Rathore Rajput of
Jodhpur Kingdom and he was also a reluctant father-in-law of Prithviraj Chauhan but enjoyed no
relationship because of Kidnapping of his daughter by Prithviraj. Mahmud Ghuri and Aibak sensing this
discord between two powerful kings of North India systematically defeated Prithviraj and Jaichand one by
one. The Hindu temples on various sites were ransacked and destroyed and later on Mosque was
5

constructed sometimes using the temple blocks but the date is not specified by ASI probably due to absence
of forensic evidence that may have been lost or degraded for over a thousand years. The above statement
has some degree of truth but at the same time some of the claim does not seem to bear out as it relates to
decipherment of seals and the inscription as interpreted by other Assyrilogists who have spent significant
time researching Rim-Sin.
Dr. Rao further stated that Rim Sin," whose name was read in the Indus seals as "Rama Sana," was the son
of "Kudur Mabug" ("Mhabana" of the Indus seals) and he reigned in Larsa, modern Tell- es-Senkereh in Iraq.
Dr Rao says that "Rim" in the Sumerian language means "ruler" and "Raman" is the name of the "thunder
god of the Amorites." The word "Sin" means "moon god" in the Akkadian language and "Sana" means "god
of thunderstorms" in the Indus language, says Dr Rao. Before his accession to the throne of Larsa in Sumer,
Rim's brother 'Arad Sin' ruled for 12 years," says Dr Rao. "His father 'Kudur Mabug' reigned in Jamutbal, a
kingdom on the coast of the Persian Gulf, toward east of the river Tigris adjoining Elam," he says. "This
name, is identical with Jabuna or Sapuna or Jambudvipa of the Indus Valley, while 'Rim Sin' appears to have
been an Aryan chief ruling over the Elamites, the Sumerians and the Aryans of the Indus Valley civilization."
Our observation although very similar as to the historicity of Rim-Sin, certain assumptions laid out by Dr.
Raos interpretation are questionable especially as an Aryan chief ruling over Elamites. First of all, as of
now, we have no way of deciphering Indus language yet and therefore reading of seal by one expert are not
a clinching evidence unless corroborated by several experts. While all this sounds too obscure and
mysterious for most of the readers, it also raises some serious questions as to what Mesopotamian
chronicle on cuneiform clay tablet describes and what Ramayana says about these great historical
personalities of the ancient history. The so called Indus seal that is reproduced here from ASI publication
provide us no such clue. Although, it is quite understandable that the aim of the article is to diffuse the
controversy regarding the site but opinion as expressed does not validate the real history. The Indus seal
experts like Dr. Parpola and Dr. Kenoyer who have spent considerable amount of time working on
decipherment and archeological excavation on Indus valley sites offers no opinions. So, let us set aside
some of these claims and review what Mesopotamian finds have so far revealed through inscriptions. Like
all epics, we need to separate mythologies from the historicity of the characters.
The purpose of this article is to investigate and provide additional details on Rim-Sin and also alternative
identification of true Ravana as it is becoming increasingly clear the Ravana as described in Ramayana does
not fit the profile of Law Giver king on his name numerous inscription exists, in addition to that, The
Genesis describes them as military allies not the enemies and the fact that his name did not precede in Larsa
chronology of Kings creates a reasonable doubts. The chronology differences in various Kings List set them
apart perhaps as much as 250 years behind Rim-Sin. If Hammu-Ravi as describes in Babylonian king list is
son of Sin-Mubalit who may be brother of Rim-Sin and son of Kudur-Mabug is he is the same person then he
may be related. None of the discovered Mesopotamian tablets confirms the behavior as described in
Ramayana as stealing Ramas wife Sita. Ramayanas events excluding some myths can be still synchronized
6

to Mesopotamian history. If Rim-Sin of Mesopotamia was indeed Rama of Ramayana than he defeated IlliAdad (Ramman), he may be the true Ravan of Ramayana epic.

Banawali Seal-ASI

Babri Mosque

Location of Rambhumi dispute

Larsa Kings
Illi- Adad (Ramman) was the governor of nearby city Uruk that was under the Larsa King Nur-Adad
(Ramman). Up on Nur-Adads death, his brother Sin-Iddidan (probably Vibhishana of Ramayana) became
the kings of Larsa. Silli-Iddidan was a noble ruler but a weak ruler. Illi of Uruk conspired and usurped the
real successor of Nur-Adad and assumed the title of Adad (Ramman) thus calling himself Silli-Adad.
(Ravvan). Adad in Akkadian means a Thunder God of Larsa and all King upon assumption of power
assumed the title. Silli-Adad therefore may be the true Ravana of Ramayana and not Hammu-Ravi, the law
giver, an Amorite ruler. This conclusion can be arrived without any reliance on Indus valley seals
interpretation and Aryan boogey especially the decipherment and interpretation remains questionable. Dr.
Raos suggestion that Rama was Aryan chief is also does not square with Mesopotamian inscriptions and
interpretations. Rama was an Elamite ruler. Unless, someone is prepared to equate Elamite to Aryan, Aryan
label does not stick. The historical Hammu-Ravi was a successful emperor and his reign included all of
Mesopotamia. His real identity and relationship with Rim-Sin was confusing and not clear due to very little
information is given on Sin-mubalit through inscription. There is a possibility as stated is some inscription
that after Rim-Sins death , he may have usurped Rim-sin 2 in a inter family feuds as hinted in Ramayana by
insistence of one queen, Rama was forced into 12 years of exile. Some assyrilogists believed he did not
defeat Rim-sin. Rim Sin dies at the age of 81-82 years of age. Rim Sinh reigned for 61 years and was the
longest surviving monarch of Mesopotamia.
This author is not a linguistic or nor has any expertise in reading of Indus seals but the author finds no clue
on Banawali seal (above) as suggested by Dr. Rao but the author finds some valuable information on clay
tablets discovered at various sites of Mesopotamia and various references found in the Hebrew Bible that
gives some glimpse of Rim-Sin of Mesopotamia who probably was the historical Rama of Ramayana who
7

Hindu of India worships. Those things as outlined here are in perfect harmony with Dr. Raos conclusion and
observations and my observation in earlier paper that Tamil speakers of India have strong Elamite
connection linguistically and genetically.
When the inscriptions are revealed to the readers, it will peel away the myths of vimana and other bardic
tales incorporated in the epic of Ramayana by the scribes. As far as the determination of the site of the
dispute, Dr. Rao has acknowledged that there stood once a temple where Mosque was built but its
importance of the place as a birth place of Rama is now discarded and the author concurs with Dr. Raos
observation. Since the country needs to concentrate on economic prosperity and progress, most of us agree
that we need to build more toilets than temples or mosques. This issue needs to fade away.

Mesopotamian Gods and Goddesses - Kingman ship as a viceroy of God:

It is very important to understand how mythologies accompanies the history and epics and ultimately
becomes a bardic creation with some religious significance. In ancient world, all the kings were dietified
either during their life or after their death and they were often worshipped. The ancient people thought
that they were the viceroys of the God and created by the God to rule the mankind. Ramayana once was an
Elamite epic that may have came to Indus valley either through cultural contacts or the first arrival of
Elamite refugees. Later on as Hinduism became compendium of all of the Indian religious traditions
incorporating various Gods of the inhabitants, an Aryan layer was added to make that a universal Indian
epic. This appears to be a logically sound explanation that can be derived from the data from Mesopotamia.
Some aspects of the story are significantly different from the Indian version. How these different variations
8

came about is not exactly known or understood by the historians. The bardic imagination and compulsion to
praise the kings more than human cannot be ruled out. The authors conclusion is based on the following
observations.
1. On various instances, the author has concluded that Indus valley civilization was well integrated with
Mesopotamia and Nile valley civilization with trade and culture. There were similarities of the seals and
now decipherment of clay tablets at various sites in Mesopotamia and Iran gives us new information. The
people of each different area may have established residency in each other countries for trades and the
people were mixing. There were speech variations and assumption of title with known ancient Gods. This
made their birth name obscure on the discovered clay tablets of Mesopotamia.

2. Yogi seal of Indus valley have established ancient Indias leadership on Shramanic and yogic traditions.
This assumption consistently bears out throughout the history up to the modern times.
3. To what extent the political connection can be established among these various civilizations is not
completely understood except some selected exchanges of letters among royals or other literary references
like Hebrews bible provides the linkage information. Did Sargon of the Akkad rule Indus valley as a colony
or vassal? Did Ramas empire include the Indus valley as a colony or vassal? Did he have his people settled
in Indus valley as administrator or governor? Until some hardcore archeological evidence is presented and
accepted by majority of the experts, it will remain daunting puzzle to solve. The ancient world did not have
enough warriors or armies to establish a permanent presence in distant land as an occupier or to hold the
territory indefinitely. Even in todays world with large military force, it is next to impossible to do that. So,
some kind of Vassal or governor relationship had to exist that brought annual tributes from vanquished but
the distant land was given the full local autonomy sometime with the posting of viceroy or ambassador.
9

4. The author also has presented a case establishing the connection between present Tamil speaking people
of India and Elamites of ancient Mesopotamia. Please see the link below.
https://www.academia.edu/7608175/Elamite_and_Tamil_Connection
5. In the ancient world, the chief priests of the city-state also came from royal family and ancient
genealogies of the kings often connected the kings directly to the God. The kings as a descendent of the
Gods in the human form were sent to rule mankind. The Puranic genealogy serves as a validating proof.
Once the Royals were dietified then they were required to be worshipped by all the subjects. When ancient
Mesopotamian kings assumed the power and throne, most of them attached their title to their patron God.
The Larsa chronology of the kings was discovered through various archeological excavations. The Larsa kings
of the dynasty assumed the title of Adad and later Sin and sometimes both. Adad meant thunder God.
The thunder god was looked up on for a favor to produce enough rains and bountiful crops. The God
through worship was expected to balance the forces of nature, so excessive rains fall will not occur that will
create flooding and wash away their fields and dwellings. The god worship was designed to give sufficient
water resources for survival and bountiful crops. Sin was the moon God, worshipped since Sumerian time
that provided light at night in absence of electricity and control the sea tides and waves. The ancients
feared the natural forces that often gave them life or take their life. The natural forces thus evolved in to
various Gods.
Adad in Akkadian language, Ishkur in Sumerian and Hadad in Aramaic language is the same name of the
storm-god of Mesopotamia as was the Varun God for Mittani and Vedic Aryans. In Akkadian, Adad was
also called Ramman or Thunderer" cognate with Aramaic Rimmon. Adad was written by the logogram
dIM in all their cuneiform scripts and kings list.

Larsa King List-Prism

Elamite king as dietified

Assurbanipal deporting Elamites

During the cultural and trade exchange between Indus valley and Mesopotamia, the thunder god can be
clearly understood from Ramman of Mesopotamia to Ravvan in Indus valley and then becoming at a
later age Ravvan or just simply Ravan by an Indian scribe. The God Adad and Varun became very
important as the ecology of the Fertile Crescent was undergoing a climatic change and rain and storm
10

became scarcer. In early Sumerian period, the storm God was less important. The God Enlil and Assyrian
Ninurta maintained some storm God features (like Shiva). The rain was plentiful and balanced during
Sumerian time as well as during first two phases of Indus valley. Ultimately, the ecological changes killed
fertile valleys of Mesopotamia and Indus regions. Adad was the son of Nana or Sin (Moon God) and his
siblings were Utu-Shamash-Marduk (Sun God) and Goddess Inanna (Ishtar). The symbol for Adad was bull
(Nandi) and lion.
On the other hand, Sin (Akkadian) or Nanna (Sumerian) was the god of the moon in the Mesopotamian
mythology. They were sometimes interchangeably used Nanna Nanas consort was Nanki or Ishtar. Nana is
a Sumerian deity, the son of Enlil and Ninlil, and became identified with Semitic Sin. The two chief seats of
Nanna's/Sin's worship were in Ur and Nippur located in the southern Mesopotamia and considered the holy
sites. When Silli-Adad, governor of Ur, the usurper deposed the successor of Nur-Adad, he also probably
stole the deities of Ur temple Goddess Ishtar and God Sin and took them to Larsa. The acts of cruelty during
his reign as a governor may help decide Jewish Abraham to leave the city and head west to the promised
land of Palestine.

Cylinder seal of Iskur-sin

Assyrians carrying statue of Adad

Sun God-Utu, Shamash or Marduk

Inanna (Sumerian), Ishtar (Akkadian) was the goddess of love, fertility and warfare. Her abode was located
at the E-Anna temple at the city of Uruk in Mesopotamia. Ishtar or Ishitar can be easily transferred to Indus
valley and later scribe will label her as Indian Shita leaving I and r out of Ishitar. Please note that
Sumerian language was replaced by Akkadian language throughout the Mesopotamian city-state by 2000 BC
or last phase of Harrapan civilization.

11

Having now introduced, the important gods revered in Mesopotamian for the topic at hand, we can review
other data that are related to the epic Ramayana and some things will become apparently clear to the
readers what are the historical figures and what are the myths.

Rim-Sin (Rama Chandra) of Larsa and his history in Mesopotamia:

According to kings list of Larsa, Rim-Sin was a great king and conquered entire Mesopotamia including
Indus valley. The empire at its height stretched from summer, Akkad, Lagash, Ur, Larsa, probably Indus
valley and the entire region between two great rivers of Mesopotamia around 2nd millennium BC, give and
take couple of centuries. Rim-Sins brothers name was warad (Arad-per Rao) sin as per inscription.
According to assyrilogists, his fathers name was Kudur-Mabug who ruled the area around ancient Elam
near Susa called Umut-bal, Emut-bal or Jamut-bal (Per Rao) near Persian Gulf Shores and had extensive
contacts with western coast Of India. Dr. Rao interpreted Warad as Arad based on Indus seal. In the Epic
of Ramayana, Rim-sin of Mesopotamia is equated correctly to Ram Chandra and Warad sin to Bharat
Chandra who ruled exactly 12 years as recorded identically in Mesopotamian Kings list and in epic
Ramayana. Kudur Mabug does not clearly equate to Ramayanas Dashrath due to Aryan layer added to
Elamite epic in India probably by Vivmitra. But then I had said earlier in my writing that Dashrath is more
of military title or epithet and Kudur Mabug is also an epithet. Kudur Mabug means the lord of the land of
Umut-bal. Kudur-Mabugs fathers name was Simti-silhak. His Elamite name was Simut-Wartash.
Madeleine Andrew Fitzgerald states that Rim-sin, Warad Sin and Sin-Mubalit are three sons of KudurMabug per inscription. Their names sound like Akkadian names. Kudur Mabug also had one daughter
whose name was Manzi-Wartash which is an Elamite name. But Kudur-Mabug himself regards his entire
family as Elamite as per clay tablets inscription. Their Akkadian names may be due to the official use of
12

Akkadian Language in different provinces his sons ruled and corresponding titles they acquired that are
found in the Royal inscriptions. In Mesopotamia (Sumer-Akkad) Akkadian became the official language of
literacy. The Elamite name of Rama was Eri-Aku (servant of god moon) and Bible chapter on Genesis called
him Arioch. Elamite also called him Iri-Agun. Ayodhya of Ramayana was probably city of Agade that was
extinct during Kudur Mabugs time but the area around was named as Mashkan-Shapir and the palaces of
sargon and his successors were probably existed where Kudur-Mabug would have established his second
capital. Etymologically it may be a stretch but speech variations may have played an important role.
Another possibility was the name Ayodhya was Aryan version of ancient Agade. See maps below for
approximate geographical positions derived from archeological site maps.

13

Indus-Saraswati Valley civilization spread and ancient Elam Trade

There is little information about Sin-mubalit and Murtaz- Wartaz on any tablet discovered. Assyrilogists can
be wrong in identifying Wartaz as female and the names can be the younger brother of Rama as per
Ramayana- Shtrughana or Ramayana can be off.

UR-III dynasty and End of Sumerian Akkadian Empire:

The question often asked where the Elamite did come from. The most likely place can be subcontinent
itself. As Indus Sarasvati cities died due to desiccation of soil induced by climatic change and shifting of
river courses. There could be migration out of subcontinent and as the Elamite Empire fell, it came back to
subcontinents. This possibility cannot be ruled out. However, after the collapse of Ur III dynasty, various
competing city states emerged in Mesopotamia. These states included Eshnunna, Kazallu, Ilip, Assur, Marad,
Isin, Larsa, and Babylon. While in lower Mesopotamia near the Persian Gulf, the kingdoms of Isin and Larsa
became dominant powers. The two powerhouse of the ancient world competed with each other for the
control of territory and water resources. All the royals enjoyed the legitimacy and authority in the eyes of
the people as representative of god. This also corresponds well with Ramayana epic as Rama was
considered the incarnation of God Vishnu (half human and half God). In Hindu sacred texts, Vishnu is usually
described as having dark complexion of water-filled clouds and as having four arms. He is depicted as a blue
being. Rama and Krishna both being incarnation of Vishnu are portrayed as blue beings. In Indian
mythology, the moon deity and sacred bull is also associated with Shiva, the supreme lord of the Hindu who
is a blue being. Rama and Shiva are still popular in South Tamil speaking areas and Krishna is popular in
14

Northern India. Ravana is thought to be devotee of Shiva as well in Ramayana. The Vedic Aryans
worshipped the same gods with different names and they also worshipped the sun deity-Shamash, Utu of
Larsa but called them Mitra-Mithra.

Siva with crescent moon

Rama with bow

Vishnu with all the gears

Krishna with flute-Blue Gods

During later period, the kingdom of Isin was much reduced, eclipsed by the expanding fortunes of the
kingdom of Larsa in southern Mesopotamia where wealth, trade, and political authority resided. The entire
Mesopotamia was in the period of cultural flux with Akkadian replacing Sumerian as the language of
administration and royal rhetoric. The foreign rulers with Amorite and Elamite names were emerging in the
kings list (They were migrants). During this period, early phase of scribes and Scholarship was greatly
advanced with the use of Akkadian Language. The excavation at Tel-El- Senkereh, the location of ancient
Larsa provided much of the textual and archaeological records of Larsa, although not complete and subject
to differing interpretation by various assyrilogists. The defacing of the clay tablets also complicated the job
in tabulation of chronology comparison of the kings and events, but it still give very valuable information
that we did not have them before. There are tablets found at other ancient sites that helps line up the
contemporaries but sometimes contradicts with each other. The data so far tabulated informs us more of
the rulers than their wives or common people. In spite of this limited information, its implication on Indian
epic of Ramayana cannot be underestimated.
For a long time scholars confused Elam with Susiana, equivalent to the plain and lower Zagros foothills in
the present Persian province of Khuzestan. Two important factors have recently modified this
understanding, however. First, Tal-e Malyan (Malian) in Fars has been identified as the ancient center of the
component kingdom of Anshan (Hansman; Lambert; Reiner, 1973), and, second, it has been established that
Susa and Elam were two distinct entities (Vallat, 1980). In fact, during the several millennia of its history the
limits of Elam varied, not only from period to period, but also with the point of view of the person
describing it. This is where, the great possibilities exist that Vedic Aryans may have interacted with Elamites.

15

The possibility of Elamites ruling ancient Aryan tribes exists and later on Persian Aryan dynasty arose at the
same place.

Chronology Issues:
The chronology is supposed to be the skeleton of the history but any flow in the chronological
interpretation changes the concept of the sequence. One of the difficulties the assyrilogists have
encountered is in accurately pinpointing the dates of each rulers reign while comparing various dynasties
and chronologies inscribed in the discovered clay tablets that includes kings lists of contemporary dynasties
and other records. During 1974 AD, the archaeological world was rocked with the discovery of the archives
of the ancient city of Ebla in Syria. The archives of the city dated back to before the days of the Akkadian
Empire. These texts reveal that Ebla was a thriving commercial city with contacts stretching in all directions
for hundreds of miles. The discovery affected not only Near Eastern studies but also biblical studies.
The general method used by the most assyrilogists is the internal chronology of the reigns of Larsa kings
that is based on the Larsa Kings List and the Larsa Date Lists, while the relative chronology is based
primarily on synchronizing among various dynasties of Mesopotamia such as Sumerian list, Isin list, Uruks
list and so on. Due to these variances, there is great degree of uncertainties and disagreement among
scholars as to which chronology is correct. Huber made a good argument for the high chronology, which
would date the reign of Hammu-rabi of Babylon from 1848 to 1806 B.C. and that, would be before Rim-sin
and Kudur Mabug (Dashrath) using internal chronology somewhere around 2050-2100 BC when Sulgi Of
Ramayana and Mesopotamia lived. While another assyrilogists have suggested a lower chronology, that will
place Hammu-rabi in the period of 1792 to 1750 BC, a difference of 56 years but in line with Rim-Sin. Ebla
places everything beyond upper chronologies and this gives a swing of several centuries with various
chronologies. This creates an obvious problem with the assumption that Hammu-Ravi (or Khammu Ravi and
Amraphel of Genesis-Hebrew text) was Ramayanas Ravan and contemporary of Rim-sin (Rama). As stated
earlier that Hammu-Ravis profile as a king does not fit the Ravan of Ramayana character. Hammu-Ravi was
the Law Giver not the Law Breaker .There is other suggestions from experts that enlarge the difference
by as much as 100 to 150 years between Rim-Sin and Hammu-Ravi. Hammu-Ravi was a mighty ruler of
Babylon and an ally of King of Larsa as per Genesis 14. His seals and tablets does not describe him the way
Ramayana depicts Ravana , so it is a relevant question that how do we know He was the true Ravana? One
source of Mesopotamian tablet claims that Rim-sin was defeated by Hammu-Ravi while Ramayana and
Genesis chapter of bible says no such thing. So, which version is correct? Hammu-Ravi was also loved and
respected by his people. Although, the data are contradictory and confusing we need to consider them with
the textual references. The folklores and Epics have some values as far as the history is concerned once
bardic elements are removed. See below various chronology suggestions of various experts on HammuRavi.

16

The issue also arises as to who Sin-Mubalit was? There is little or no information available on discovered
tablet. Was he assigned the control of small but emerging Babylon by Kudur-Mabug, the father? HammuRavis fathers name was Sin-Mubalit also. Are they same or different people?
Chronology _ Ammisaduqa Year 8- Reign of Hammuravi _ Fall of Babylon I _
Ultra-Low
1542 BC
1696 BC 1654 BC
1499 BC
+32 a
Short or Low 1574 BC
1728 BC 1686 BC
1531 BC
0 a
Middle 1638 BC
1792 BC 1750 BC
1595 BC
64 a
Long or High 1694 BC
1848 BC 1806 BC
1651 BC
120 a
Rim Sin -1
1823 BC-1763 BC or 2050 to 2100 BC

So, if Short or low chronology used Hammu-Ravi will not be contemporary of Rim-Sin 1st that will agree
with Ramayana. He would have followed Rama at considerable distance. So, these differing versions cast
serious doubts as to who the true Ravana was. However, the internal Larsa king list can help us identify the
right Ravana. The Internal chronology places Hammu Ravi after Rim-sin. Ward-Sin who ruled for Rama got
the credit for defeating Larsa king Silli-Adad (Ramman). If Ramayana story is to be believed than Ravana
preceded Rama and Bharat to be defeated by them.

Mesopotamian Archeology-Larsa:
The site of Tell El Senkereh was first identified as ancient Larsa by Loftus and Rawlinson in 1853 AD. The
basis of that discovery was relied on the discovery of cuneiform clay tablets, bricks and prism found there.
Tell El Senkereh is approximately 9 miles southeast of ancient Uruk in southern Mesopotamia, lying east of
the Euphrates, south of the Iturungal canal, and west of the Tigris, Larsa relied on water for transportation
and irrigation from all three sources (see map ).
17

Present site of Tell Senkereh (Larsa) in Iraq

Tell Senkereh was extensively plundered for texts and artifacts during last two centuries by the thieves. The
first scientific excavation of the site was conducted by Parrot in 1933-34 AD and again in 1967 AD.
Margueron followed Parrot in 1969 and 1970 AD with cooperation with Iraqi Antiquity Authority. The
regular excavations have continued on and off until Iraq Gulf War and no fly zone introduced by western
powers. These excavations were focused on old Mesopotamian period. The tablets numbering over 4000
were collected and continue to be analyzed and reanalyzed by various Assyrilogists. However, their
interpretation varies as the tablets are defaces or chipped off, so various assumptions have been made by
cross referencing various genealogy from other tablets received from other sites of Nippur, Babylon, Isin.
Now the archeological area is controlled by ISIS that is real threat to the world heritage.

18

Kudur Mabuk (Dashrath), Rim-sin (Rama) and Warad-sin (Bharat)-Mesopotamian Records:

It has been generally been assumed, based on the name of the founder, that the kings of the Kudur-Mabuk
dynasty were not natives to Larsa but outsiders. Although, the habitants of Larsa were mix community of
Sumerian, Akkadian and Amorite extraction. The name Larsa can be easily interpreted by Indus valley
people as Larka and to the later scribe as Lanka. These invaders overthrew the native dynasty of NurAdad (Ramman). As per the inscription, Nur-Adad was a good king, a predecessor of real Ravana of
Ramayana. If this was indeed the fact then under the name of his father(Kudur-Mabuk), Rim-sin- I (Rama)
defeated Silli-Adad (Ramman), a successor of Nur-Adad and installed his brother Warad-Sin as king of Larsa,
as per the reading 0f the clay tablets. Ramayana slightly differs from that version and states that Rim-sin
conquered it with his other brother and came back home to rule all the territories that warad-sin ruled for
him for 12 years of his exile while appointing Vibhishana as his vassal. Mesopotamian chronicle confirms
the 12 year rule of Warad-sin (Bharat) but does not talk about kidnapping of his wife Sita or 12 years of exile
imposed on Rim-sin as per Ramayana. However, the inscription found at archeological sites at Ur suggests
that the Warad-Sin had a reduced title than a king and his father Kudur Mabug held the kingship. Fraynes
interpretation of the inscription of Warad-sin corroborates that segment of Ramayana when Bharat ruled
on behalf of his bother Rama (See Inscription E4.2.13.1-2). The tablet further suggests that Kudur-Mabug
and his son Rim-Sin has organized the number of military expedition against Isin, Ur and Larsa that lends
support to Dr. Rao, statement but the duration of the conflict lasted during multiple years. However, Silli
Adad, the usurper was able to rule only for one year until defeated by Kudur Mabug and Ramas armies.
The inscription E4.2.13.3-4 (Frayne) states that during the second year rule of Warad-sin, Kudur Mabugs
army led by Rim-sin smote the army of Kazallu and Umutbal and Larsa. Kudur-Mabuk asserted that he
committed no wrongful acts on Larsa and Umutbal (Frayne 1990: E4.2.13a.1, ll.4-5), but settled Ur and Larsa
19

people in peaceful existence and thereby freeing from Kings tyranny (Frayne 1990 E.4.2.13.6, ll.), and the
scattered people of Larsa (and) were brought back, the troops that were disorganized, were reorganized
and the land became more peaceful. The inscription on the tablet : who smote the head of its foes, snare
of his land, who smashed all the enemies, made god Utu (Sun God) a supreme judge of heaven and earth
(in) his princely residence, in Larsa (Frayne 1990: E4.2.13.13, ll. 21-34). The various authors have used
Umutbal, Jamutbala, and Emutbala interchangeably, that shows the speech variations of the ancient world
when writing was minimal and confined to Royals using the cuneiform language. In their book, on The
Anatomy of a Mesopotamian City: Survey and Soundings at Mashkan-shapir by Elizabeth Caecilia Stone and
Paul E. Zimansky, they argued that: The question of circumstances of Kudur-Mabuk conquest of Larsa
offers a convenient point of departure, more closely the issue of geographic and political triangle, Larsa,
Mashkan-Shapir and Umutbal. Kudur-Mabug in earlier inscription was described as the father of Umutbal
and son of Simti Sinhak, and he claimed he did not do anything wrong during conquest of Larsa (Lanka)
that would not please the God Shamash (Sun God, same as Utu). Elizabeth Stone of Stony Brook (N.Y)
University and her colleague Paul E. Zimansky had recently returned from post war Iraq after decades of
closure on exploration during Saddam Husains Iraq conflicts. One can infer from the above statement that
Kudur Mabug was committing righteous acts and due to atrocities of then ruler of Larsa, the people were
emigrating just kike Abraham of Jews who left Ur due to his disenchantment with the prevailing chaos.

Ancient Maskan Sapir and its recreation from aerial view by archeologist Stone in the Present day Iraq

How the Records for Kings year kept by the scribes:

During the second millennium BC in Mesopotamia, the regal years were announced after a significant event
or events which that occurred in the preceding full year of a kings reign. Kings commemorated their
military victories and cultic and civic activities, such as building temples, city walls and gates, or digging
20

canals, in their year names. For example, the third year of King Hammuravi was called the Year: Hammuravi
built for Nanna his temple in Babylon and the seventh The year (Hammuravi) seized Uruk and Isin. The
Documents were dated with these year names and scribes kept lists of sequential years of reign. As such, it
is obvious that year names are an important source for chronology and historical reconstructions. However,
some scribes counted the year by event, so if there were more than one event in a year, it got recorded as
multiple years in a single calendar year. This has led to significant confusion in the comparative analysis.
The tablet from the Moussaieff Collection is a list of years of king Warad-Sin and Kudur-Mabug of Larsa
based on the middle chronology and it contains eleven of the twelve years of Warad-Sins reign.
A regnal year could be given more than one name, so the names have to be collated to resolve the
discrepancy. There are multiple sources of tablet readings: (1) the Chicago Date List- A 7534 (2) two
fragmentary date lists from Ur, UET 1, nos. 266 i 12-22 and 265 rev. 10-20. (3) A date list in the British
Museum (4) BM 33846, and 161-164. In addition to that there are hundreds of archival documents that are
available on the internet. In spite of the numerous reading of the defaced tablets and interpretations, there
remains some degree of uncertainty. Ramayana is definite in its language and talks about 12 years of exiles
of Rama and Bharat was still under the Kudur-Mabug working as a viceroy. Without his fathers help, he
alone could not have scored the victories. Here is one such translation.

Clay tablet describing Kudur Mabuk and Warad-sin conquest of Emutbala (Malgium) and copy of trading tablets

21

Inscription:
1. mu [r-dEN.ZU]
lugal

2.mu ka-s-[al-l]u-uk4ki ba-g[ul]
3.mu
ugnim
m-al-gu-um<ki> gi[tukul ba(-an)-sg]
4. mu kisal-
ma
-dutu- ba-[d]
5.
mu
g-nun ma -dnanna-sic ba-[d]
6-7.
mu
3 gigu-za k-sig17 bra ma esic -dna [nna
(x x)] / vacat dutu- in-ku4-[re(-en)]
8.
mu
en-na-n-du7 en-dnanna ba-[un-g]
9. mu -kalam-ta-n-gr-ru -di[nanna ba-d]
10-11.

gigu-za bra ma esic k-sig17
u
d[u7-a] / vacat -d
Inanna
in-k[u4-re(-en)]
12. [m]u kisal-ma -d
nanna
ba-[d]
13. [m]u alan ku-du-ur-ma-bu-uk [k-sig17
14. u-du7-a] / vacat -dutu- i-ni-i[n-ku4(-re)]
15. mu bd gal uri5ki-ma ba-[d]
16. mu uruki sag-rig7 ki-bi- b-[in-gi4]
17.
x
mu r-dEN.ZU lugal

Year : Wara[d-Sn became]
king
.

Year : Kazal[l]u was destro[yed].
Year : the army? of Malgium [was smitten] by weapons.
Year : the main courtyard for the temple of ama-sun god was built
Year : a magnificent storeroom for temple of nana(moon god) built.
Year : he brought three golden thrones, magnificent daises for nana
Year : Enanedu was [installed] as the Entu priestess of Nanna.
Year : the Ekalamtanigurru, the temple of Inanna (in Zabalam) built
and he brou[ght] a magnificent dais throne a[dorned
with] gold into the temple of Inanana (in Zabalam)
Year : the main courtyard of the temple of Nanna was built.
Year : he bro[ught] a statue of Kudur-Mabuk [adorned
with gold] into the temple of ama.
Year : the great city wall of Ur was [built].
Year : l-arrki was re[stored].

x
years of King Warad-Sn.

As seen from the above, if there are two major events in one calendar year, it could be misunderstood as
two years by Assyrilogists. The victory over Malgium (Mutiabala or Emutbala) and Kazallu should be viewed
in the broader context even though it is attributed to him. As a reigning king, he would ultimately get the
credit for all the acts of his father and brothers but his military achievement attributed to him is limited to
two years only as compared to the tablets of Rim-Sin who ruled until 61 years unchallenged and scored
many victories. Correlating this inscription with Kudur-Mabugs inscription, it appears that Warad-Sin
appears to have been dependent on his fathers military help. Warad-sins campaign was to the north of
Larsa (Kazallu) and to the north-east (Mutiabala, Malgium), that coincided with similar campaigns of his
father in the same geographical areas. Thus Kudur-Mabuk claimed in his inscriptions the same victories as
Warad Sin, to have restored Maskan-Sapir and Kar-samas to Larsa and overthrown the foes of the
Ebabbar. (RIME 4, E4.2.13, no. 10, ll. 14-21).
In view of this the historical context, Ramayana is correct, it is clear that Warad-Sin ruled only in the name
of Rama and with his fathers military backing, while Rama was elsewhere. There appears to be no major
contradiction on this statement between Ramayana text and Mesopotamian inscription. The definition of
exile is intriguing. Should elder brother should stay home and let younger fight? The tablet gives no clue.
Although, there are other issues of Ramayana that do no correlate with the tablets as to when Dashrath
died? This may be dramatization of bardic tale, Indian movie style, but that is always an inherent
component of all worlds epics. Chinas monkey god to Homers epics and epic of Gilgamesh.

22

Ethnicity of Kudur Mabug and Rim-sin

The ethnicity of Kudur-Mabuk is still is a matter of some debate among assyrilogists. Some think he may be
part Akkadian and part Elamite. Although as mentioned earlier, Kudur Mabug and his father considered
themselves of Elamite extraction and they inscribed themselves as Elamite rulers. This author also believes
that based on his earlier research on Elamite and Tamil connection, they were Elamites and the result is the
existence of Ramayana in India, The story of Rama (Rim-sin) and his family and father Kudur Mabug. Rimsin was a dietified king. Ramas stories in Ramayana have survived the ages as a true and noble hero of epic.
Some assyrilogists have claimed that Kudur Mabugs sons were of Amorites extraction because they held
early Amorite-Akkadian names in Larsa Kings list and they also held their predecessors of Larsa in high
esteem. This is not a sound argument. This can be due to deification of previous kings and what their
subjects believed is politically correct thing to do to assume names or titles. Nur Adad himself was a good
ruler of Larsa and worshipped the same moon and sun gods as did Kudur-Mabugs dynasty. Rim-sin, Waradsin and Sin-Mubalit sounds good Akkadian names. But, there are other reasons too. They also had their
Elamite names. We do not have any information on the female members of Kudur Mabugs family in
Ramayana. What is important is what Kudur-Mabug thought of his ethnicities and that is abundantly clear
that he considered his family as Elamite. The sesame oil document makes it clear that he is an Elamite
(YOS-14-333). Warad-sins inscription describes him as the father of Umutbal, more like the lord or ruler
of Umutbal and this may create a false impression to some analyst that he was of an Amorite extraction. Dr.
Raos claim that they were Aryan chief ruling Elamite is highly questionable. The Ramayana Epic has a Vedic
layers of Aryan tales when Rama was considered incarnation of Aryan Pantheon Vishnu. This probably was
all added later as an Aryan layer to the epic. India has three or more versions of Ramayana but only one
version of Mahabharata that should give us some pause for thinking as to why there are three or more
versions ever produced of Ramayana? There is ample evidence that epic story of Ramayana travelled from
Indias Tamil coast to Thailand, Cambodia and Bali, Indonesia. Similar presence of Ramayana is found in
eastern Persia where Bruhi speakers (offshoot of Elamite Language) reside. Kudur Mabug and his family
must have originated from south west Persian region called Elam. Elam was closer to Susa, Iran.
Hittite and Mittani appeared in Anatolia few centuries later, so the chronological events run counter to Dr.
Raos assertion that Rim-Sin defeated Hammu-Rabi with the help of Mittani Aryans and Rim-sin was an
Aryan chief. But, what is possible is that Rim-sin and Hammu Ravi did not live at the same time in the
history and if they lived at the same time Hammu Ravi was not Ravan but Silli-Adad or Silli-Ramman was
Indian Ravan. Rim-sinh II who followed Rim-sin I was probably the one who had a struggle with Hammu
Ravi over the dominance of Mesopotamia after Rama died, but the chronology and actual events remains
uncertain as to this being rivalries within the clan members or something else.

23

Oil document inscription from Ur

Under Larsa king list, last two kings mentioned were Hammu-Ravi and Samsu-iluna, as compiled by the
Assyrilogists. The new discovery points out a problem in the chronology. It is commonly established that
Rim-Sin was a long-lived monarch (61 years of reign). He conquered and ruled most of the Mesopotamia
and Indus valley and all the known world of early age. This fact would be difficult to reconcile with his
survival during Samsu-iluna tenth year as implied in other discovered inscription. If Rim-Sin was indeed was
defeated and killed by Hammu-Ravi as some Assyrilogists suggest then Rim-sinh-1 (Rama) would not be
alive under Hammu-Ravis successors rule, and according to this revised chronology of the final list, it
would have fallen outside Rim-sins regnal years after his accession to the throne. So Rim-Sin- I(Rama) did
survive into the reign of Samsu-iluna seems practically certain, since the broken passage in the late
chronicle, from which the fact was first inferred, is supported by two date-formulas which can be
satisfactorily explained. Thus, if Rim-Sin- I ascended to the throne of Larsa at merely at the age of fifteen,
we should have to infer from the new figures that his son Rim-sin II was leading the revolt against Samsuiluna to recapture the lost territories, a combination of circumstances which is just within the bounds of
possibility.
The 12th king of the dynasty, Silli-Adad (Indian-Ravan), reigned for only a year and he was not the son of
Nur Adad as suggested by Ms. Fitzgerald. Silli Adad was the usurper and was the governor of Uruk and he
deposed the reigning heirs of Nur-Adad. Silli-Adad (Ramman, Ravvan) was then defeated by a powerful
Elamite king and princes, Kudur-Mabuk, Warad sinh and Rim-Sin I, but credit was given to Warad Sin as he
was ruling under the name of Rim-sin- I, as suggested in the Ramayana epic.

24

Biblical version-Genesis:
The fourteenth chapter of Genesis is filled with historical and archaeological hints. Abrahams reason to
leave Ur and head towards the land of west- Canaan has attracted the attention of many archeologists and
assyrilogists who study Semitic history. It was during the time of its oppressive Governor Silli-Adad
25

(Ravana). The kings of Babylonia had already for long centuries collected tribute along the eastern shores of
the Mediterranean Sea as per the information contained in Genesis. The lines of communication between
the East and the West were well established centuries before Abraham left "Ur of the Chaldea" for his
migration to Canaan; he followed trade caravans and army routes towards west. Abraham did not realize
that what he was running away from was also under the suzerainty of eastern kings of Mesopotamia. The
eastern lords collected tributes from the west land. The Battle of the Vale of Siddim, often called the War of
nine Kings, refers to an event in the Hebrew Bible book of Genesis 14:1-12 that occurred in the days of
Abraham. The Vale of Siddim was the battleground near the city at the Jordan River plain revolting against
the eastern lords as described above. The war was approaching among Elam, Babylonia, and the Westland.
A league was formed between Amraphel (Hammu-Ravi), king of Shinar (Babylon); Arioch (Rim-Sin-1), king of
Ellisar (Larsa); Kudur-Mabug (Chedorlaomer), king of Elam and Tidal (Tudhliya- Hittite), king of Goiim. Tidal
is the name of a Hittite king of Aryan extraction and Great Grandfather of Hattusili-I. These allied monarchs
and their armies marched to the Westland to reconquer former allies to collect tributes. Though they
succeeded in devastating, plundering and destroying cities, and carrying off a large number of slaves and
booty, this chapter concludes with the subsequent defeat of the combined armies at the hands of
Abraham's troops and his allies. Here, the biblical scholars have equated Amraphel as Hammu-Ravi,
Chedorlaomer as Kudur Mabuk and Arioch as Rim-sin I, all contemporaries who went to war with the forces
and allies of Jewish Abraham. According to Bible, Abraham is placed around 2000 BC plus minus century by
the biblical scholars while Larsa list places these monarchs 150 years later and it can mean that Larsa kings
list is inaccurate or Bible is Inaccurate or both. This difference of 150 years or more is hard to explain due to
year counting done by various city states and various assyrilogists readings of defaced and damaged tablets.
The recent discovery in Syria advances the chronology back by another 1000 years. It also means Abraham
was contemporary to Rama that is very unique. On the other hand, the finds at Ebla in Syria may suggest
the dating around 3000 BC both for Abraham and Rama but not necessarily for Hammu-Ravi. This puts
Ramayana as 5000 years old and that is consistent belief with many Indian scholars. This is why chronology
everywhere is in great flux. Freedman stated that one of the tablets listed the five Cities of the Plain in the
same order in which they were listed in Genesis. It even named one of the five kings in almost the same
form as Genesis (Birsha). This allowed Freedman to say that the Abraham lived in the Early Bronze Age,
which is traditionally dated to the third millennium BC (Freedman 1978, pp. 148, 154155, 157158).
Ramayana historian probably would agree with this date.

26

The literary sources have identified two of the eastern kings but they were allies and not the enemies. If
Amraphel, king of Shinar or Babylonia of Genesis was identified as Hammuravi, the law giver, as suggested
by Biblical scholar, who has come into a prominence due to discovery of number of his letters addressed to
him could not be Rim-sins presumed enemy. Larsa was also referred as Ellisar by the scribes of the Bible.
Merrill F. Unger who compiled the basic information extracted from Genesis states that Ellisar (Larsa,
Lanka) of Mesopotamia played a key role in the history of Mesopotamia. It is mentioned twice in genesis
(14.1, 9). Ellisar was located south between Ur and Erech (Uruk). Ellisar (Larsa) was the center of sun
worships of Lord Utu as well as moon deity Sin. Utu is the same as Babylonian God Shamash or Indias
Mitra-Mithra. The Sippar in North continued the same sun worship. Greek called this place Larissa and
Elamite may have called it Larka or Lanka during later period. Babylonian called it Larsa.
Larsa exercised religious leadership and was considered a holy place of worship in antiquity along with
Nippur. The dynasty of Larsa had many good rulers in addition to Rim Sin-1. Other popular kings were Nur
Raman (Adad) and Sin-nidina. They built an important canal that connected shatt-en-lil to Tigris River.
Shortly after that the city was captured by invasion from north, by an Elamite king Kudur-Mabug. He did not
reside there but he appointed his son to rule the city of Larsa. His name was Eri-Aku or Rim-Sin 1, another
name for Rama of Ramayana. W. K Laftus during his excavation in 1854 AD, unearthed many clay tablets
that are being interpreted and reinterpreted by Assyrilogists. He found Ziggurats and temples. They also
uncovered the sun God Utu-Shamash (Sun)s temple during excavation. Raghu Vansi kings of Ramayana
were always sun worshipper and the bible confirms that. A recently discovered tablet describes Eri-Aku as
the servant of the moon-god, the son of an Elamite king, Kudur-Mabug, who was entitled to be "the father
of the land of the Amorites." This is suggestive of how Lunar and solar dynasty came about in India and Why
Rama is a blue God like Shiva bearing crescent moon. The symbolism practiced though centuries
sometimes have historical underpinning.
27

Robert Francis Harper, a biblical archeologist and scholar opines on Elamite kingdom of Kudur-Mabug and
Rim-Sin 1 and its ultimate destruction by Assur Banipal in 7th century BC, that is the interval of 1300-1400
years of Elamite presence in Elam.
Hammuravis personality quite overshadows any other kings of his time. His personality was very powerful during Abraham's
time. His military and administrative ability achieved for him the political supremacy over the cities of Babylonia. This victory has
won for him the distinction of being the unifier of the nation of the great cities of the Mesopotamia, a fertile valley. The second
royal ally in that league was Arioch, king of Ellisar (Larsa), named in Genesis immediately after Amraphel. He is now generally
recognized as Rim-Sin, the Semitic reading of his archaic name Eri-Aku, king of Larsa, and of other cities in that neighborhood. The
city of Larsa within this historical era, according to the short archaic inscriptions that mention it, had three kings of same node.
The first ruler was Nur-Adad (Ramman), whose brief inscription tells us that he built two sanctuaries at Larsa dedicated to the
moon-god and his consort. He calls himself "shepherd of Ur", besides builder of the temple of Nana (Moon god). The hardy
Elamites on the east were looking longingly toward these prosperous cities. Their armies were being vigorously developed to
push out the boundaries of their realm. Earlier wars had not entirely settled matters of dispute, nor of comparative strength. The
Elamites seem to have made border raids at first. These were followed by systematic plunder of territory and cities, and the
conveyance of a great stock of booty to Susa. Such excursions and campaigns covered many years, probably decades, and even
centuries, until Elam secured a foothold in Babylonian territory. One of the most notable of these raiders was King KudurnanaNandi Or Kudur Mabug, whose exploits are doubtlessly referred by Ashurbanipal in his report when he conquered Elam about
650 B. C. When Ashurbanipal was young the kingdom of Elam was still at peace with Assurbanipals father. However, Urtaku, the
Elamite king, attacked Babylonia by surprise and broke the peace. Urtaku died in this ill feted venture against Assyrians in the
battle at Ulaya River. He was succeeded by Tempti-Khumma-In-Shushinak who was not his legitimate heir, so many Elamite
princes had to flee to Ashurbanipal's court, including Urtaku's oldest son Humban-Nikash. In 658/657 BC the two empires clashed
again, when the province of Gambulu in 664 BC rebelled against the Assyrians and Ashurbanipal decided to punish them.

This may have induced the final migration of scale that took them to Baluchistan where you find Bruhi
speakers who are offshoot of Elamites. See motif of Assur Banipal below. Assur Banipal up on acquisition of
Susa from Elamites restored the statue of the goddess Nanki (Ishtar) to Erech (Uruk) that the Elamites had
carried away 1635 years earlier, or about 2285 B. C. (higher Chronology) presumably the date of the
conquest of this region by the Elamite army of Kudur Mabug. The earliest Elamite ruler of lower Babylonia
in this period was Kudurmabuk, son of Simti-silhak, the father, king of Umutbal, and a district in western
Elam. He also designates himself as governor of Martu, ' thought to refer, not to the so-called "Westland"
on the east coast of the Mediterranean sea, but to a western district of the Elamite empire of this period,
and probably another Literary remains of Rim-Sin (Arioch), King of Larsa. This brief summary is full of hints
for Ramayana experts. Please note the sentence, the statue of Nanki and my explanation further on Sita.
The following conclusion can be arrived at:
1. The exact date for Rim-Sin 1, Kudur Mabug vs. Hammu-Ravi cannot be easily ascertained due to conflicting
chronology. Hammu-Ravi, if contemporary was an ally of Rim-sin 1. He may have fought Rim-sin II for the control of
Mesopotamia or could be an ally but later on he took over kingdom of Larsa. Ann porter has suggested that sinmubalit was the third son of Kudur Mabug and Dr. D. T. Potts suggested that Manzi Wartash was the fourth son of
Kudur-Mabug thus agreeing with Ramayanas account.
28

2. The kidnapping of statue Nanki (Ishtar-Inanna) and also the high priestess by Ravana (Silli-Adad) probably invited
the wrath of Kudur-Mabug and his sons. Ramayana asserts that Rim-sin along with his other brother carried the bulk
of fighting to defeat Ravana. The aim was to capture a strategic city of commercial importance and religious place of
worship. Kudur Mabug family worshipped Sin deity first before they worshipped sun deity Utu and kidnapping of
statue from worshipping place of moon god gave Kudur Mabug an excuse to invade Larsa.
3. The kings were always dietified and attained a very high status as close to the power of divinity in the ancient
world.
4. If Larsa can be equated with Lanka as illustrated above due to variation of speech and oral tradition of antiquity,
same logic should follow with the names of king, such as Rim-sin, Rama, Arioch and Eri-Aku.
5. Therefore, Ramayana was the epic of Elamite that was brought over to India through waves of Elamite migration in
early antiquity prior to the arrival of Vedic Aryans or through the trading relationship with ancient Larsa and Elam.
6. As some of the unearthed tablets suggest that during Rim-Sins time, the ecology of Mesopotamia was changing
and there were wars for control of water resources and foods. The years of sequential droughts and resulting famine
changed the fate of Mesopotamia and Indus Valley people. This climatic event initiated the migration of Elamites to
the eastward towards the subcontinent region where they may have originated as per Genetic migration theory.
7. During those lean years, most of the struggles involved the control of water resources and kidnapping of patron
deities and their statues.
8. During most of the Rim-sins reign after his fathers death, the condition must have improved with better irrigation
and control of water resources and the people enjoyed the continuous prosperity and that is why Ramayana deftly
described that period as Ram Rajya.
9. Later on Aryan layer to Indian epic was added by scribe Vivmitra and others to include Vedic pantheon in the
narrative of Ramayana epic.
10. Silli-Adad who assumed the title of God of Thunderer (Adad, Ramman), was the usurper of Nur-Adad dynasty as
he was the governor of Uruk and was working for Nur-Adad and controlled the temple and priestess of the temple. He
may have hijacked them to Larsa (Equivalent to the kidnapping of Sita of Ramayana). See dynasty chart below.
11. The small river between Larsa and Uruk probably divided the path to city of Larsa and small wooden bridge can be
easily constructed to cross the river. In one of the tablet found in the palace of Shin-kashid at Uruk tells us that 1.5
minas of gold (750 grams) were spent in constructing a vessel (boat) for Elam (Durand 1992). So, sea faring vessels
were available for naval warfare to carry troops, so Rama Setu is an issue of misunderstanding of geography that was
handed down through ancestors memories.

29

Ravan as described in Ramayana worshipped Shiva who is Hindu pantheon but also a Thunderer like Mesopotamian God Adad.

Rim-Sin has left us several inscriptions. His inscriptions reveal his ancestry, regal position, his achievement
and his devotion to God as a king. His inscription also reveals his political relation with other cities of
Mesopotamia. Since he is mentioned in Genesis 14 as a king of Ellisar (Larsa) indicates that this city was so
closely associated with Abrahams city Ur and he was recognized in the quadruple alliance as a pre-eminent
king. The inscriptions of Rim-Sin are comparatively short, and all are written in the archaic ideographic
language of the early Mesopotamia. The language present the usual difficulties found in the decipherment
and Interpretation of the early sign language as Indians in laymans term may call this as Ram Boli dated
to the as early as third millennium B.C. Perhaps, this is the same language was used in Indus valley region as
well.
Comparative charts of kings Rule- Southern Mesopotamia
Babylon
Isin
Larsa
Sabium
Enlil-bani
Sin-Iddinam
Sin-Irribam
Sin-Iqisam
Zambiia
Iter-Pisa
Silli-Adad (Ramman, Ravvan)
Ward-sin (Bharat-Indian)
Ur-dakuga
Sin- Magir
Apil-sin
Ram-sin (Rama-Indian)
Damiq-ilisu

30

Rim sin was succeeded after Warad Sin and Rim-Sin ruled for 61 years. It is believed that Kudur-Mabug had
died when Rim-sin took the throne of his entire kingdom. No reason is given on this tablet for the transfer
of royal power other than data supplied from Ramayana. Rim-Sin became the lord of the all lands between
Mediterranean to river Indus and north up to Central Asian steppe stretching from North of Turkey to Baltic
states. This comprised the world of known civilization and that was his greatest achievement. If Sin-mubalit
was the third son of Kudur- Mabug and Hammu-Ravi was the son of sin-Mubalit, it makes sense for them to
be an ally during the battle of Siddim as described in Genesis. If this is a different sin-mubalit then they
were allies. The author stipulates that Hammuravi was more powerful than any sons of Rim-sin 1, so he
emerged as a lord of the empire. The population was intermixed constantly during early ages. Some
assyrilogists contend that Sin-mubalit was the son of Apil sin but no inscription is found for either sin
mubalit or Apil sin that was considered of Amorites origin. So, there is a confusion regarding ancestry of Sinmubalit and Apil sin who controlled early Babylonia or Shinar which was the small settlement.

Hammu-Ravi

Ishtar-Inanna

Assur Banipal

31

Using Lower chronology

32

Inscription of Rim-sin highlighting his achievements

33

Prominent figures of Ramayana:

Shulgi or Sulgi
Shulgi of Mesopotamia also read as Dungi was a second king of Ur in the Third Dynasty of Ur. He reigned for
58 years, from 2092 BC1934 BC confirmed by Nippur tablet. His accomplishments include the completion
of construction of the Great Ziggurat of Ur. Shulgi was the son of Ur-Nammu king of Ur, according to one
later text (CM 48); by a daughter of the former king Utu-hengal of Uruk. Shortly after his father's death,
Shulgi engaged in a series of punitive wars against the Gutians to avenge his father. The only activity
recorded in the year-names for his first few years involved temple construction. Shulgi is best known for his
extensive revision of the scribal school's curriculum. Although, it is unclear how much he actually wrote,
there are numerous praise poems written by and directed towards this ruler. He proclaimed himself a God
in his 23rd regnal year. Shulgi was followed by Amar-sin, Su-sin and Abbi-sin. He is also featured in
Ramayana. He is the only figure remains unchanged with his original name from Mesopotamia to India. If
this is the Sulgi who joins Rama of Ramayana then Genesis chronology of 2000 BC appears to be more
correct than Larsas internal chronology. The numbers of years may not have been recorded correctly.

Sita (Isthar-Inana):
There are no references found in any discovered tablet of any wives of Rim-sin I yet, other than references
cited in Ramayana. The exiles and kidnapping are not mentioned in any tablet discovered so far. There are
two possibilities.
1. If Sita was the real person and customary to Mesopotamian tradition, she was the priestess of the temple
of Nana or Nanki, she may have been taken to Larsa from Uruk against her wish. If Rim-sin married her that
will be after the capture of Larsa as Ravanas rule as per Larsa tablet merely lasted a year. Up on her death,
she was dietified just like Rim-sin.
2. another possibility is that Silli-Adad or Ravan stole the statue of Ishtar or Inanna, a consort to Sun/moon
deity and Rama was in a mission to recover the statue. There is no confirmation of Sita as a real person in
any discovered tablets or any hints that she being the members of Rim-sins family. This remains a real
mystery. The stealing of the statue of patron deity was very common in the ancient world.
The Goddess Ishtar, Akkadian-Distar, Sumerian-Dingir Inanna was the goddess of fertility, love, war, and
sex. She is the counterpart to the Sumerian Inanna, and is the cognate for the Northwest Semitic Aramaean
Goddess Astarte. So, it remains a challenge or a puzzle for archeologist and historians that kidnapping of
Sita of Ramayana was the theft of the idol of Ishtar and or the kidnapping of chief priestess for which the
war was fought as per Ramayana. The war more likely was a struggle for the strategic commercial
waterways for trade, other resources and control of holy places and Ravana provided the excuse what
Elamite were looking for? Ramayana does not provide that answer but the discovered tablet does provide
the clues of the fight the control of the resources.
34

Two different depictions of Ishtar, one from Indus can be Inanna and Last one is the depiction from Ramayana

Mythological view of Sita based on Gilgamesh and Ramayana:

There are some parallels in the Epics of Gilgamesh and Ramayana of India. Gilgamesh epic was originated in
Mesopotamia, while Ramayana epic originated in India. Two different stories but on parallel tracks conveys
the same messages to mankind.
1. The investment of faith in God is the supreme objective.
2. Gods work and words of wisdom are the duties and moral obligation for all mankind to follow and that is
called Dharma.
3. Sita in Ramayana is said to be swallowed by the earth (underworld). In Sumerian and Akkadian
mythology, Ereshkigal, wife of Nergal, was the goddess of Irkalla, the land of the dead (Underworld). She
managed the destiny of those who were beyond the grave, in the Underworld, where she was the queen. It
was said that she had been stolen away by Kur and taken to the Underworld, where she was made queen
unwillingly. She is actually the twin sister of Enki. Ereshkigal was the only one who could pass judgment and
give laws in her kingdom and her name means "Lady of the Great Place", "Lady of the Great Earth", or "Lady
of the Great Below". Her main temples were at Kutha and Sippar in Mesopotamia. Later, Ereshkigal was
also Inanna and Ishtar. The red underlined themes of Gilgamesh Epic are the same as Ramayana Epic, The
goddess Ishtar (Inanna) was the patron and special goddess of the ancient Sumerian city of Erech (Uruk, Ur),
the City of Gilgamesh. As Queen of heaven, she was associated with the Evening Star or the Moon (Nanki of
Larsa). She may also have been associated with the brightest stars in the heavens, as she is sometimes
symbolized by an eight-pointed star, a seven-pointed star, or a four pointed star. In the earliest traditions,
Inanna was the daughter of An, the Sky, Ki, the Earth (both of Uruk and Warka). In later Sumerian traditions,
she is the daughter of Nanna (Narrar), the Moon God and Ningal, the Moon Goddess Nanki (both of Ur). So,
if Silli-Adad stole the statue of Goddess when he was the governor of Uruk, that will make Kudur-Mabug
and Rim-Sin both who were devoted worshipper of moon and Sun gods very angry to retrieve the statue
back from Larsa that Elamite held for several centuries until Assurbanipal took it away when he attacked
35

Elam after fifteen centuries later. This underlines the statements I stated earlier as what the ancient
believed.
If none of the tablets are or were discovered or will be discovered in the future that proves the historicity of
Sita, then above explanation may apply and that is the task of historian to separate myths from the
historicity.

Inanna in Mesopotamia holding lamp Indus (Inanana) women holding the lamps (significance of Diwali?)

Hanuman
Another key figure of Ramayana who is associated with Rama was Hanuman. Mesopotamia seal do not
describe anything about Hanumans existence. Hanuman is described as son of vayu (wind) and he can fly
with his strong build.
Enlil, Ninlil and Pazuzu were the gods of winds in ancient Mesopotamia. Particularly, Enlil was one of the
supreme deities of the Mesopotamian pantheon. He decreed the fates, his command could not be altered,
and he was the god who granted kingship. His temple, E-Kur, the "Mountain House," was located in the
city of Nippur, the religious centre of Mesopotamia up until the second millennium BCE. His temple was the
most important temple in all of southern Mesopotamia. Hanuman resided in the mountain as per
Ramayana.
Enlil-Bani, the king of Nippur who became vassal to Larsa and subordinate to Larsa may be Hanuman of
Ramayana. There are certain similarities that are striking. Enlil- Bani means the son of wind (Vayu). The
36

control of Nippur fluctuated between Isin and Larsa. Nippur paid Tribute to Larsa along with military service
on demand to Rim-Sin and Kudur-Mabug when Nippur surrendered to Elamite. See Enlil-Banis Inscription,
CBS 13909: So, Hanuman was a vassal and dietified as a king after his death and Ramayana treat him that
way. He was instrumental as an ally in conquest of Larsa.

Gilgamesh statue

Hanuman-mountain man

Elamite king holding Nandi

mighty Hanuman

Elamite god-lord of Susa Silver cup with Inscription

Enlil-Banis land Grant

37

Enlil-Banis depiction

In Nippur I established justice, and promoted righteousness. I sought out nourishment for them like sheep, and fed them with
fresh grass. I removed the heavy yoke from their necks and settled them down in a firm place. Having established justice in
Nippur and made their hearts content, I established justice and righteousness in Isin and made the heart of the land content. I
reduced the barley-tax, which had been at one-fifth, to one-tenth. The muknum [nb 3] served only four days in the month. The
livestock of the palace had grazed on the fields of who had cried out with the appeal, O ama - I turned the palace livestock
out of their ploughed fields and banished those peoples cries of O ama (sun God).

Enlil-Bani once were a gardener and rose to become a king of Nippur. Being a gardener, he may have
knowledge of the curative properties of the plants and perhaps was useful in treating the wounded heroes
of Ramayana during the war and conflict.
Olaf Alfred Toffteen in his book ancient chronology observed that: Kudur- Mabug, prince of Umutbal
belonged to 2200 BC (higher chronology). It is more likely that the river Shat- l-Hai belonged to KudurMabug. Thereafter, he succeeded in capturing Larsa and installing his son Eri-Aku (Rama) as a king of Larsa.
In few years, Kudur-Mabug and his son Eri-Aku (Rim-sin 1) conquered all of Mesopotamia. There are two
inscription of Kudur-Mabug concerning these events.
1. Kudur-Mabug, lord of Umutbal (e and U are interchangeable), son of Simti-silhak and his son Eri-Aku (Rim-sin), exalted
shepherd of Nippur, the rebuilder of Ur, king of Sumer and Akkad.

2. To Nanar, his Lord, has Kudur Mabug, king of Martu, son of Simti- silhak, built Nanars temple E-Nunmakh, because he has
heard his prayer for his own life and life of his son Eri-Aku (Rim-sin), king of Larsa.

The above inscription clearly establishes the Rim-Sin weighed heavily in the minds of Kudur-Mabug even
though Warad was allowed to rule and take credit for 12 years as stated in his inscriptions. Other clarity is
observed when he states that Eri-Aku was the shepherd of Nippur. Sin-mubalit who we propose to be
Laxman of Ramayana but he also oversaw the Maskan-Shapir and Babylon but remained a vassal for Rimsin. But the description of Hanuman as a son of Vayu (wind) clearly points towards Enlil-Bani as Enlil was the
god of wind. Hanuman people are called Maruti, a place from Marut?

City Plan of Maskan-Shapir (Agade-Ayodhya)

Ancient statue depicting Hanuman Salute (Larsa Period)

38

Ann Porter in her book on mobile Pastoralism and the formation of near eastern civilization confirms Sinmubalit as a son of Kudur- Mabug. Sin-mubalit ruled Maskan-Shapir and Babylon for Kudur Mabug. There is
confusion among Assyrilogists as to who was Sin-Mubalit, a vassal, or a governor? Babylon at that time was
a small settlement called Shinar and did not exist as a large city of Chaldean or Neo-Assyrian period.
Hammu-ravi was the son of Sin-Mubalit and if Sin-Mubalit was the son of Kudur-Mabug, it is unlikely that
he would have ousted Rim-Sin 1 or Rim Sin 2 but would have taken control of dynasty succession as a
normal practice as family heir after Rim sin 2s death. The migration to the subcontinents was in waves and
may have taken many routes. See Linguistic connection below.

Linguistic connection Tamil and Elamite, Sumerian

39

Depiction of ancient Larsa and short bridge on river (probably Shat-el-Hai) was the real Rama-setu

Amorites:
Amorites as described in the literature were tall and fierce people. Sumerian and Akkadian regarded them
as uncouth in manner and habits. They were also mountain people and lived in an area called Marut. They
started moving down from upper Syrian mountain range to settle in Mesopotamian cities. They worked as
soldiers and workers. It is no surprise Hanuman was also called Maruti suggesting his origin as from the
land of Marut or Martu. A long major drought starting about 2200 BC in North Syria caused large-scale
migration of Amorite tribes that infiltrated southern Mesopotamia. They were one of the instruments of
the downfall of the Sumerian Third Dynasty of Ur, and the rise of Amorite dynasties. Amorites were
responsible for the downfall of Sumero-Akkadian rulers of Mesopotamian city states such as Isin, Larsa,
Eshnunna and Kish and their immigration led to the establishment of new city-states, the most famous of
which was to become Babylon. Babylon in its early age was called Shinar a minor and insignificant region
during Rim-Sins period. Hanuman as depicted in Ramayana epic was a loyal and wonderful servant.
Amorites conquered Assyria around 1800 BC and became the ruling class and used Assyrians as military
commanders. Hanumans depiction as monkey God in Ramayana conveys to messages, Amorite known for
uncouth manner but loyal and committed servant, a kind of strange combination even from mythological
stand point.
40

Babylon was captured by Hammu-ravi of Amorite extraction as per some Assyrilogists. It is possible that
Kudur-Mabug married many wives and one may be of Amorite origin, while other wives may be of Elamite
and Akkadian origin. Rim-sin was probably was born of Elamite origin and Warad may be of Akkadian origin
and Sin-mubalit may be from Amorite Origin. We just do not have the information other than their
inscription where everyone assumed to be of Elamite origin. This assumption is based on Ramayanas story.
As shown in the map and using the lower chronology, Babylon was captured by Hammu-ravi around 1728
BC. The Central Mesopotamia was conquered by Hammuravi around 1715 BC as shown in the map. Elam
was ultimately conquered by Hammuravi around 1702 BC. The Semitic-ruled Babylonian Empire (a
competing Amorite dynasty) conquered the Amorite-ruled Assyrian territory after conquering Southern
Mesopotamia in 1700 BC. As per kings list, Hammu-ravi was the son of Sin-mubalit. Kudur Mabug also had
a son named Sin-mubalit. Are they the same people? Did Hammu-ravis capture of Elam was a family
squabble of ascendancy or something different?

Kings list- Larsa

Sumer

Uruk-Isin

41

Assyrians:
Both epics of India talk about their constant struggles against Assur or Assyrians. We find these references
everywhere in our Puranic texts and epics. The author believes that they referred to Assur/Amorites who
usurped the Mesopotamia of later ages.

The ancient Sumerian city of Assur came under Assyrian control by around 2000 BC, serving as the capital of
the Assyrian Kingdom. Amorites another Semitic tribe from the same area gain control over Southern
Mesopotamia (blue), ending independent Sumerian rule in the region.

Rim-Sins Inscription: ERI-AKU-(er-i-a-koo', e-ri-a-ku') As Per Bible:

1. The Name and Its Etymology:
This is the probable Sumerian reading of the well-known Babylonian name written with the characters for
"servant" (Sem wardu or ardu) and the group standing for the Moon-God Sin (written En-zu = Zu-en),
otherwise Aku, entire meaning of his name was "servant of the Moon-god." This ruler, who was king of
Larsa (ELLASAR), is generally identified with the ARIOCH of Genesis 14:9. Several Assyrilogists read the name
with the Semitic Babylonian pronunciation of Rim-Sin. This implies two things: 1. Ramayana is a historical
document with epic story customized with Aryan layer to fit in to contemporary culture of India. 2. It also
proves that the ancient Hebrews obtained their transcription from a Sumerian source since they are living
there for thousands of years.

2. Inscriptions Mentioning Eri-Aku:

In addition to a number of contract-tablets, the following inscriptions mentioning Eri-Aku or Rim-Sin are
known:
(1) A dedication, by Kudur-Mabuk, "father of Martu" (Amurru, the land of the Amorites), son of Simti-Silhak, of some sacred
object to the Moon-god Nanna, for his own life and that of Eri-Aku, his son, the king of Larsa.

42

(2) A dedication, by Eri-Aku, to Ishtar of Challabu, for his own life and that of his father and begetter Kudur-Mabuk. The text
records the restoration of Ishtars sanctuary.
(3) A dedication, by Eri-Aku, to the god Nanna, for the preservation of his own life and that of his father, Kudur-Mabuk. The
restoration of several temples is referred to.
(4) An inscription of Eri-Aku, "the powerful man," "the nourisher of Ur (of the Chaldees), the king of Larsa, the king of Sumer and
Akkad; son of Kudur-Mabuk, the father of Umutbala." The text records that he raised the wall of Ur, called "Nanna is the
consolidator of the foundations of the land," high like a mountain.
(5) A dedication by Eri-Aku to Ninin sina (moon God, Indian Proto-Shiva). It records the building of the temple Eu-namtila, for his
own life and the life of Kudurmabuk, the father his begetter.

3. The Nationality of His Family:

These inscriptions and others show that Eri-Aku belonged to an Elamite family which held the throne of
Larsa, a state which, in common with Babylonia itself, acknowledged the suzerainty of Elam. Kudur-Mabuk
would seem, from motives of policy, to have given his sons Sumerian and Semitic Babylonian names; and it
is noteworthy that he did not retain the rule of Larsa for himself, but delegated it to his offspring, keeping
for himself the dominion of Emutbala and, as his own inscription shows, the land of the Amorites. Other
areas were appears to be given to other sons.

Rim-Sin Tablet and God Enki 31-17-8 (U.15065) Warad-sin tablet

Prayers by Priests of Rim-sin -1

Rim-Sins purification by the priest of An (Anu) in Kings honor:

Prayer-1
(1-8)Who is fitted for pure prayers rites, which you summoned from the holy womb, has been elevated to lordship over the Land;
he has been installed as shepherd over the black-headed, The staff which strengthens the Land has been placed in his hand.
The shepherds crook which guides the living people has been attached at his side, as he steps forward before you; he is lavishly
supplied with everything that he offers with his pure hands. (8-20) Your attentive youth, your beloved king, the good shepherd

43

Rm-Sn, who determines what should be brought as offerings for his life, joyfully pours out offerings for you in the holy royal
cultic locations which are perfect for the cultic vessels: sweet-smelling milk and grain, rich produce of the Land,
riches of the meadows, unending abundance, alcoholic drink, glistening wine, very sweet emmer beer fermented with pure
substances, pure , powerful beer made doubly strong with wine, a drink for your lordship; double-strength beer, superior beer,
befitting your holy hands, pale honey exported from the mountains, which you have specifically requested, butter from holy
cows, ghee as is proper for you as prince; pressed oil, best oil of the first pressing, and yellow cream, the pride of the cow-pen, for
the holy abode of your godhead. (21-26) Accept from him with your joyful heart pure food to eat as food, and pure water to drink
as water: offerings made for you. Grant his prayer: you are indeed respected. When he humbly speaks fair words to you, speak so
that he may live. Guide him correctly at the holy lordly cultic locations, at the august lordly cultic locations. Greet him as he
comes to perform his cultic functions. (27-37) May his kingship exists forever in your presence. May he be the first of the Land,
called (?) lord and prince? Following your commands he shall be as unshakeable as heaven and earth; may he be over the
numerous people. May the mother goddesses among the gods attend to his utterances? May they sit in silence before that which
he says, and bring restorative life. May he create hearts joy for the population, and be the good provider for their days.
May the terrifying splendor that he wears cover like a heavy raincloud the king who is hated by him. May all the best what he has
be brought here as their offerings. (38-52) the good shepherd Rim-Sn looks to you as to his personal god. Grant him a life that
he loves, and bestow joy on him. May you renew it like the daylight? As he prays to you, attend to his When he speaks most fair
words to you, sustain his life power for him. May he be respected , and have no rivals. As he makes supplication to you, make
his days long. In the of life, the power of kingship. May his correct words be ever .May he create hearts joy in his .
make the restorative rest upon him, the lion of lordship. When he beseeches you, let his exterior (?) shine.
Give him life .May you bring for his life with your holy words. Hear him favorably as he lifts his hands in prayer, and
decide a good destiny for him. 53-69 As his life , so may it delight his land. Cast the four quarters at his feet, and let him be
their ruler. Reclining in meadows in his own land, may he pass his days joyously with you In the palace, lengthen the days and
reign of Rim-Sn, your compliant king who is there for you; whose name you

Prayer-2

Acimbabbar (Nannar), have named, life.

the august good headdress. Due praise for his life, the throne, and may the land be safe. May satisfaction and joy fill his
heart? May be good for his . Place in his hand the scepter of justice; may the numerous people be bound (?) to it.
Shining brightly, the constant in his .Confer on him the benefit of months of delight and joy, and bestow on him numerous
years as infinite in number as the stars in the lapis-lazuli colored heavens. In his kingship may he enjoy a happy reign forever.
70-85 May you preserve the king, the good provider. May you preserve Rim-Sn, the good provider. May his reign be a source of
delight to you.Lengthen the days of his life, and give him kingship over the restored land. For him gladden the heart of the land,
for him make the roads of the land passable. For him make the Land speak with a single voice. May you preserve alive Rim-Sn,
your shepherd with the compliant heart. May his canals bring water for him, and may barley grow for him in the fields.
May the orchards and gardens bring forth syrup and wine for him, and may the marshes deliver fish and fowl for him in
abundance. May the cattle-pens and sheepfolds teem with animals, and may rain from the heavens, whose waters are sporadic,
be regular for him. May the palace be filled with long life. O Rim-Sn, you are my king!

Parayer-3

Gods in blue mixed-breed demigods in teal

(1-12) Rim-Sn, king with princely divine powers (alien technology), leader with all the divine powers, raising high your princely
head! The abzu is the august holy shrine of the E-kic-nujal, a great vastness in depth and breadth, the foundation of the innermost
holy pure buildings, with a pleasant odor like a forest of aromatic cedars and hachur trees. It forms the foundations (?) of the
temple, within the temple, a protection for the temple; the terrifying splendor of the temple, a great corner, a holy corner within
the solid interior. The design of the doorway is a magic bond: a solar disc at whose top is a standard representing a rapacious
eagle, violently seizing stags which turn to the left and right. Gods stand guard over the doorway. (13-27) In this place, you see

44

numerous tall birch trees. The door frame, the architrave, the lock, the fence (?) around the threshold, the door-leaves, the bolt,
the bar of the temple, the supporting wall of the temple terrace, foundation of the innermost holy pure buildings all these are
of very holy reeds, golden yellow or silver white. Beside the marsh of the abzu of the E-kic-nujal, in the holy enclosure where
cattle mill about, for the many lustrous bull-calves to receive their presents,

Prayer# 3
the with their calves stand before you in the sacred .You see the old reeds, the old reeds in the water meadows ,the
old lying reeds, the upright reeds well-established in these fields. Within the marsh of the abzu of the E-kic-nujal,the holy
lagoon, the reed-beds in the holy water, you see the reeds growing. 28-38 Within the temple is the gateway of the great
august sanctuary: endowed with abundant charms like a fine woman whose head is nobly raised high, whose attraction radiates
as if with the maturity of fruit, with abundant charms, lovable, but imposing in splendor like the hills. In the midst, at the sides
and in the four corners are august protective goddesses, foundations (?) of the statues. Taking turns of office on the day of the
new moon, the protective god and the protective goddess of the temple, the serving deities, and inhabitants of the temple.

Prayer # 4
May the august queen Ningal, your queen of favorable signs, accept them also, O king, they who have suppressed famine, the
great gods Nanna and Ningal, have conferred abundance on you, king Rim-Sn, in the temple of the gods.
(11-21) O king named with a name by Enlil, the destiny of whose reign is abundance, a time of richness and years of happiness!
May a destiny of stability and a destiny of abundance be your lot. O king, day and night, even at dead of night,
time shall pass for you in endless abundance, and be agreeable and stable for you. O king, since you have offered your food
offerings first offered in the abzu; o king, since you have offered your food offerings, afterwards in the great courtyard, there shall
be no end to the abundance. O King, the temple shall be well-organized for you. Rim-Sn, king of Urim, has restored the august
divine powers of the Ki-ur. (22-38) May Nanna, the king of heaven and earth, fit perfectly onto your head the legitimate august
headdress of kingship.
The blanks and unreadable inscription are shown with blanks or question mark as per translation by Assyrilogists in English

A stele with phallus and lions and bulls Rim-Sin temple look like Ziggurat

45

Queen Ningal Goddess

4b - Ningal head
May the august queen Ningal (Nannas spouse), who has saved you from famine thanks to her benignity,
let you live (?) an agreeable life for these days. As you receive from her holy hands the great splendor of kingship,
may she place the august scepter of heaven and earth in your hands like a ceremonial robe. Rim-Sn, king of the Ki-ur, endowed
with abundance, constant attendant! O king, may the Tigris bring you abundance, and May the upper (?)
Nun canal be filled for you with flowing water in its full flood. May the Nun canal, the good Nun canal, the life-bringing canal of
the Land, bring you fish and fowl; from the ocean, the wide sea, from the standing reservoirs, may it bring an unending supply of
creatures for your kingship. In the wide open spaces of the wide desert, the four-footed animals, May water levels rise for you in
the irrigation ditches? With their levees, and the water-channels. (39-51) May there be life for you, and may there be a favorable
response to your prayers. May there be joy for you, and may there be favorable signs for you. May your heart be satisfied, may
your body be satisfied? may your mood and your definite signs from the gods be good.

Ram Rajya- Kingdom of Rim-Sin:

Ramayana tells us during the reign of Rama, the people and the land enjoyed the prosperity and happiness
and same thing we find from various inscription of Rim-Sin period in Mesopotamia. The land of
Mesopotamia at one time included the region embraced by rivers Euphrates and Tigris of present state of
Iraq. In the north, the area covered ancient Babylon, Kurdish mountain districts and southeast Anatolia and
on west it included Palestine, Syrian highland and on east it included Persia and Indus Valley. Rim-sins
principle empire was confined to Mesopotamia region and at its height included everything described above
in Far East and west.
These two major Rivers form the salient traits of the delta, and became the factors that conditioned the
character of the inhabitants and the culture that once flourished. The Euphrates, also known as Purat,
46

signifies the river par excellence. Euphrates begins its journey from the Armenian mountains, not far from
the town of Erzurum, until it is joined by the Tigris in the extreme south. At the Shatt-el Arab (Arabic River),
the two rivers jointly reach the Persian Gulf and along the path, it collects many tributaries from various
mountains. This delta created a part of ancient Fertile Crescent just like Indus Valley. Their entire journey is
approximately 1800 miles. It loses in quantity through the marsh beds that form on both sides near the
Persian Gulf. When it reaches the alluvial soil of Mesopotamia proper, its current and also its depth are
considerably diminished through the numerous canals that form an outlet for its waters. In southern
Mesopotamian area, the rivers were navigable and those who controlled it gave them a good access to
maritime trade of the ancient world and brought in additional prosperities.
This is the main reason why the wars were fought in ancient Mesopotamia for the control of water
resources. According to another inscription to Rim-Sin, he had an access to the ships and he built sea faring
vassals so there would not be a need to build the man made bridge in sea. If Larsa was Lanka, he will have
to cross small river stream approaching from north, not a bridge over the ocean.
The River Tigris is in a corrupted form of Idiklat. It is only 1146 miles in length, and is marked, as the native
name indicates, by the swiftness of its flow. Advancing towards the Euphrates and again receding from it,
it at last joins the latter at Korna, and together they pour their waters through the Persian Gulf into the
great ocean. It is navigable from Diabekr in the north, for its entire length. Large rafts may be floated down
from Mosul to Baghdad and Basra, and even small steamers have ascended as far north as Nimrud. The
Tigris, then, in contrast to the Euphrates, is the avenue of commerce for Mesopotamia, forming the
connecting bond between it and the rest of the ancient world, Egypt, India, and the lands of the
Mediterranean.

River system and flow as it stands today- ancient cities are covered by desert and marshes

47

Southern Mesopotamia below current Mosul, the region begins to change its character. Where mountains
cease, the plain begins, the soil becomes alluvial and through the regular overflow of the two rivers in the
rainy season, develops an astounding fertility. Due to variation of the rainy season, the overflow varied and
alluvial soils deposited and clogged the irrigation canals and that is why so many inscription makes a
reference to digging of canals by kings to ensure proper flow of agricultural and drinking water. When
ecology of the rivers was in balance, the bumper crops were harvested and trade mushroomed and the
people enjoyed the prosperity. During Rim-Sins reign, this occurred and therefore Ramayana called it Ram
Rajya, happy-happy people. Ultimately, same misfortune occurred to all the Fertile Crescent to different
degree of severity. Indus- valley perished along with southern Mesopotamia but upper Mesopotamia
prospered and Babylon emerged as a major center of culture, trade and religion.
Assyria was more rugged in character but did not enjoy the same advantages of fertility of the soil. Its
culture, therefore, not only arose at a later period than that of Mesopotamia but it was a direct importation
from the southern Mesopotamia. This is what prompted Assyria to migrate, conquer the southern region
that was more prosperous in early history.
Akkadian and Sumerians were non-Semites of Mesopotamia while Assyrians and Amorites were Semites.
However, they all mixed with each other after some adjustments. The outsiders Amorites and Assyrians
adopted the language, culture and tradition of Sumero-Akkadian people. The Sumerians and Akkadians are
the names given to these non-Semitic settlers who preceded the Babylonians in the control of the Euphrates
Valley. The names are derived from the terms Sumer and Akkad, which are frequently found in Babylonian
and Assyrian inscriptions, in connection with the titles of the kings. Unfortunately, scholars are not in unison
with each other in dating and location of the places. This is partly due to its antiquity and damage caused to
the evidence and partly due to the process of the learning as you go and discover. So, accurate dating
present a problem and synchronization can be off by couple of centuries by most accounts.
There is one safe conclusion on early Mesopotamia and nearby world. It not only included the early Semitic
settlers but they were another race, or possibly a variety of races, possessing entirely different traits and
that makes the region another melting pot and maintained its considerable importance. At various times
the non-Semitic hordes of Elam and the Indo-European of the mountain districts to the Northeast of
Babylonia swept over the valley, and succeeded in establishing the empire.

Limitation of the clay tablet Readings:

In addition to the chronology issues i.e. higher-middle or lower or something else, it may lead to wrong
conclusion and mismatching of the dynasty of the kings. Fortunately, Assurbanipal collected many old
manuscripts and tablets for his library and that is discovered. There are all kinds of tablets in cuneiform
language that includes Royal inscription, Genealogy, Royal correspondence; Commercial contracts and they
may help unravel some of worlds mysteries. Some of them help us remove the confusion. There is lot to
learn about Indus valley history and hopefully in due time some of the new discoveries will help us. This
make some contemporaries not so contemporaries and out of the date. This author has the same
48

reservation as Dr. Rao as to the claim that Rim-Sin was defeated by Hammu-Ravi, an Amorite king of
Babylonia due to inherent contradiction that he may be somehow related to Kudur Mabug (Indian
Dashrath) or he may not be of the same era. There are no revelation on the cross marriage alliance among
royals or their wives to conclude other than what Kudur-Mabug says in his inscription tablet that he was of
elamite extraction. However, the possibilities exist as mentioned earlier that the area was in state of flux
and Semite and non-semite living together may result into mixing.
Indian Ramayana calls Kudur-Mabug (Dashratha) as son worshipper but these are both titles. Same thing
holds true for Rama. His title is Rim-Sin (Ruler of moon) or in Indian Ram Chandra does cause some
confusion and we have to conclude that they worshipped both the deities. Indian Shiva reflects a composite
deity of destroyer, Thunderer, controlling mighty river and the moon and the profile appropriately reflects
him as Somnath and blue God.
These variations in official titles are a reflection of the natural rivalry existing between the various
Mesopotamian city-states for control of water resources, food and trade which led to frequent shifting in
the political situation. Beyond this, the inscriptions of these old Mesopotamian rulers, being ordinarily
commemorative of the dedication to a deity, of some temple or other construction notably canals or of
some religious offering, a cone or tablet, unfortunately tell us little of the events of the time. Pending future
discoveries and analysis of more data with accurate dates, we must draw some conclusion ourselves with
the general indications of the type of the civilization that prevailed by using doubtful reconstructions of the
sequence in the dynasties of Mesopotamia. In that early period, the division between North and South
Mesopotamia was very distinct.
According to Strabo, Assyria was also sometimes known as Subartu during Rim-sin period and prior to the rise of
the city state of Ashur after which it was Assurayu. It was also referred as Athura and Atouria. During the
3rd millennium BC, a very intimate cultural symbiosis developed between the non-Semitic Sumerians and the
Semitic Akkadians throughout Mesopotamia, which included widespread bilingualism. The influence of Sumerian
(a language isolate) on Akkadian (and vice versa) is evident in all areas. Akkadian gradually replaced Sumerian as
the spoken language of Mesopotamia somewhere after the turn of the 3rd and the 2nd millennium BC (the exact
dating is still a matter of debate). The Sumerian continued to be used as a sacred, ceremonial, literary and
scientific language in Mesopotamia until the 1st century AD. Professor Waddell in his book The makers of
civilization equated Sumerian language to Proto indo-European, however other linguists disagrees and labeled it
in other linguistic groups. (See WIKI). Assyrian and Akkadian traders spread the use of writing in the form of the
Mesopotamian cuneiform script to Asia Minor and the Levant.

REFERENCES
1. http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/jul/06rama.htm 11/4/2009
2. http://asi.nic.in/images/Rediscovering_India_Exhibition.pdf
3. The rulers of Larsa by Madeleine Andrew Fitzgerald, Yale university, Research Thesis, 2002.
49

4. http://www.cristoraul.com/ENGLISH/readinghall/UniversalHistory/ANCIENT_HISTORY/A-HISTORY-OFBABYLON/3-DYNASTIES-OF-BABYLON.html by Leonard king.

5. The Code of Hammuravi, The King of Babylon, Rawlinson 5, No. XX. And by Professor Robert Francis Harper,
University of Chicago.
6. Ramayana summary: http://www.mythome.org/RamaSummary.html
7. Gilgamesh summary-sparkess notes: http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/gilgamesh/summary.html
8. http://www.mesopotamiangods.com/?p=2687, The Electronic Text, Corpus of Sumerian Literature
on the web.
9. Records from the Ur and Larsa dated in Larsa dynasty by Ettalene Mears Grice, Yale University press.
10. William Loftus, Travels and researches in Chaldea and Susiana; with an account of excavations at Warka, the
Erech of Nimrod, and Shsh, Shushan the Palace of Esther, in 1849-52, J. Nisbet and Co., 1857
11. Research in Biblical Archeology by Olaf Tiffteen, Google E-book.
12. Enlil-bani http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlil-bani
13. Ancient Mesopotamian God and Goddesses: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/amgg/listofdeities/enlil/
14. List of wind deities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wind_deities
15. Ishtar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wind_deities
16. Mobile Pastoralism and the Formation of Near Eastern Civilizations: by Anne Porter, E-book on Google.
17. http://www.tamilheritage.org/old/text/ebook/ebook.htm By k. Loganathan.
18. Sulgi- The priest and king http://arutkural.tripod.com/sumstudies/sulgi-priest-king.htm
19. The ancient names of Sri-Lanka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Sri_Lanka
20. Old Babylonian Period (2003-1595 BC), By Douglas Frayne, 1990
21. The real story of the Ebla tablets: Ebla and the Cities of the Plain. Biblical Archaeology by Freedman, D. N.
1978.

50

22. The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 1. (of 7): Chaldea, The History, Geography,
And Antiquities Of Chaldea, Assyria, Babylon, Media, Persia, Parthia, And Sassanian or New Persian Empire; With
Maps and Illustrations by George Rawlinson-E book, Gutenberg Archive.

51