Thursday, October 15, 2015

Rama in the rock carvings of Iraq.

The image of a man with a bow in his hand and a short figure bowing in front of him is found carved in the cliff of Darbadi Belula in Sulaymaniya, in Iraq near Iranian border. This image has created interest (reproduced at the end of this article) as it reminds of Sri Rama of Ramayana.

(Click on the image to enlarge)

The location of this image on the side of the mountain can be seen in the picture below.

The location shows that this image was not part of any worship but only a glorification or a show of admiration of the hero in that image. A carving at this height and on the side of a mountain can be the work of a sculptor who wanted to recreate the memory of a hero or chisel out that memory permanently in stone. As such, this is not a work done at the behest of the hero (in the carving) himself or something done by the order of a king (hero of the carving).

A closer look at the mountain side shows something else – a graffiti on the right side of the image. Let’s take a look at it.

A closer look at the grafitti is like this:

This image gives amazing resemblance of Hindu God with multiple hands and a crown – similar to Vishnu or Surya Narayana!
{The images of this relief from different angles can be seen in this link.}

Is this only a coincidence or a case of a sculptor having tried to create some images of a Hindu God and finally decided to make the image of Rama?

The close-up of this image shows cuneiform writing on the left side of the image which is yet to be deciphered. The decipherment would give a better idea of who this figure refers to. Until then we will be making guesses. However there are other features that are unique to this figure pointing out to a link to Rama.

The standing image has a bow in the hand with a head gear that does not look like those of the well documented figures of Akkad or Assyrian kings that ruled this part of Mesopotamia. The most common feature of those kings and his men are the beard which is also missing in this figure.
On the other hand, the ornament around the neck with a pendant and the dress around the waist look more Indian.

The bow looks unique as it is not common to see it in the figures of Mesopotamia. There are only a few exceptions – the one exception being that of Naram-Sin (whose name sounds like Narasimha) of the Akkadian empire who ruled between 2261-2224 BCE. Naram-Sin had a beard and he sported a head gear with horns in his moments of stamping victory as seen in the image of his Victory stele below.

One striking resemblance with the cliff-carving of Darbadi Belula is that Naram-Sin of Akkad also holds a bow in his hand!

There is yet another Vicory Stele of Naram-Sin in war mode, showing him with a drawn-bow in his hand. The image below shows Naram-Sin in war, with a bow in hand. But his appearance is different from the Cliff image. This is stressed here to show that Naram Sin and the cliff image are not the same.

The other exception comes from the Assyrian kings who came 1000 years later than Naram Sin of Akkad. The Assyrians were archers and used bows for hunting and in wars. The Assyrian king Ashurbanipal (668 BC – c. 627 BC) on a horseback with his bow on a hunting expedition can be seen in the relief from Nineveh. (below)

Another image of Ashurbanipal with a bow and riding a horse chariot is reproduced below:

But his attire, headgear and beard are very much characteristic of the Assyrians which is missing in the cliff-relief that is the focus of this article.

The Assyrian foot soldiers also used bows in the battles. See the image below.

Once again their attire and beard are very much same of the people of that region of Mesopotamia, irrespective of their dynasties.

There were warriors with bows riding in the horse drawn carriages. (Image below)

Once again what makes them out to be the people of this region is their beard and head gear. They wore conical cap on their head. Naram Sin had a conical cap though he sported two horns like a bull or a ram.

(Naram Sin of Akkad)

Ashurbanipal of Assyrian dynasty also sported a conical cap.

The beard is a common feature of these kings and of any male in their societies.

This is in contrast to the cliff relief of Sulaymaniya. The conical head gear is missing and the hero in that image was not clad in the kind of attire that is commonly found in the kings and soldiers of Akkadian or Assyrian people who ruled that part of present day Iraq.

But an amazing resemblance is found in a carving unearthed in Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley. He dated the findings of Ur to 4000 years BP. Ur which is about 650 Kilometers south of the Cliff of Sulaymaniya is found to have housed a huge block showing a man with a drawn bow in his hand travelling in a horse driven cart. No other details of this carving are available – perhaps not yet analyzed by researchers.  

The image of the warrior in this carving is different from the rest of the people of this region as the beard is missing and the headgear is normal and not similar to that of Naram Sin or Assyrian rulers or the other of kings of the region. There is a likelihood that the image of the cliff is the same as the person of the above block. The above image belonged to 4000 years ago as per Woolley’s account.
The excavation at the same place (of Ur) throws some light on the weapons, the dress and the head gear of the warriors and the king. While this figure (in the above image) is seen with a bow in warring mode, the figures seen in the Standard of Ur (excavated from the same place) are seen with swords and not bows. 

(The “Standard of Ur” is a small trapezoidal box (8.5 Inches high by 19.5 Inches long) whose two sides and end panels are covered with figurative and geometric mosaics made of pieces of shell, lapis lazuli, and red limestone set into bitumen. It was found in PG779 near a soldier whom Woolley thought had carried it on a long pole as the royal emblem of a king.)

The Standard of Ur shows both the war time and peace time on its two sides. The war time shows men with swords as seen in the image below.

The headgear, dress and weapon of these men are different from the man with the bow in the horse drawn carrier.

The War side of the Standard of Ur also shows carriages, but drawn by what looks like donkeys and not horses.

The other side of the Standard of Ur showing peace times depicts different cultural traits in terms of dress codes and objects. (Image below)

The seated figure looks like a king and is without a beard or a hair dress. The clothing is different.
Comparing all these excavated objects from the same region of Ur, the block showing man with a bow in the horse drawn carriage definitely stands out as someone different from the then  existing people. (Reproduced below)

The bowman of Ur and the one on the cliff relief are of similar genre but alien to the society where they are found. This makes a good ground for thinking that he must have been a well known archer of the neighboring eastern country that is Bharat. In this context it is worth recalling from my earlier article on what became Ur.

Quoting from that article,

 The term Ur is derived from Uru, the Sanskrit word for ‘thigh’. Mahabharata says that when Parashurama caused a massive devastation to the warrior class, there happened a sinking of the earth. This is conveyed as though the earth has sunk due to the misdeeds of the people as there were no kings to bring out orderliness. Seeing the Goddess Earth sinking, sage Kashyapa lifted her up in his thigh, i.e., uru. It is because of this the Earth came to be known as ‘Urvi’. { Mahabharata, Shanti parva – 49 }

….Even in the Tamil culture explained above, Ur is connected with some waterway nearby. In a surprising connection, the people living in the artificially created floating islands of Lake Titicaca in South America are known as Uru People! This name Uru with its relevance in a faraway place like South America is an example of the prevalence of same ideas related to same words prevailing over a vast part of the globe with its genesis in Vedic culture.

Similar kind of lifting from water had happened in Ur of Mesopotamia (in present-day Iraq). Ur was originally a coastal city on the mouth of Euphrates in the Persian Gulf but due to shift in coastline it is inland today. The Persian Gulf was a high land before Holocene and it started getting flooded in course of time. Any difference in the water level in Arabian Sea had an effect on the level of Persian Gulf too. If during Parashurama’s times, west coast of India had risen up (due to a fall in the Arabian Sea level), similar trends could have been experienced in the coasts of Persian Gulf. Therefore the Ur had come up there.

Location of Ur near the mouth of Euphrates is shown below. Today it is inland, but the coast was closer to it in the past when the water level was high. By its name, it is known that it was a raised land from near water.

This place Ur of Iraq was spelled as ‘Urim’ in Sumerian language that resembles Urvi, the name that Earth came to get for being lifted on the Uru of Kashyapa. (symbolism for earth- rising). In the Sumerian legend, Goddess Nanna is said to be the Goddess of Ur. In a surprising similarity, the raised (or extended) west coast of India was ruled by king Nannan and his descendants (before the Kadamaba dynasty), according to Tamil Sangam texts. Sumerian Nanna has no etymological explanation. Tamil Nannan means “good person”.

Similarly only in the context of Lake Urmia, the name Parasuwash is mentioned. Lake Urmia is in the border between Iran and Turkey. The 9th century BCE Assyrian records mention about “Parasuwash” in the context of Lake Urmia.  Does it show that Parashurama’s followers went on to occupy the raised regions of Lake Urmia? In a surprising similarity, Urmia in Syriac language means “City of water”! This is further proof of connection between Ur and water which is explained only in Indian texts (Mahabharata).

The following figure shows Lake Urmia and Ur in red circles.

(End quote)

Near the Upper circle (Urmia), the cliff relief of a bowman is found.
This memory of Vedic kings and Vedic living has been brought here by the people who came for trade or for other reasons like exile.  

The Ashurs were exiled Maruttas which I have discussed in an article in this link.

King Ushpia the early king of the Assyrians who lived in tenets and who founded the temple of Ashur bears resemblance to Maruttas who went into hiding in Parashurama’s times and whose kin were engaged in iron smelting even as early as Rama’s times.

(Image from my article where the details on Marutta connection to Ashur can be read).

King Ushpia (around 2030 BCE) belonged to the period of Ur block of bowman in the chariot. Though this period comes close after Mahabharata times (read my article here), there is every possibility that they carried the memory of Rama. Rama was 2000 years previous to Mahabharata period. The name of Rama was chanted everywhere according to Valmiki. I would even call it as “Raman Effect” in west Asia in those times. (Read my Tamil article here.) Or how else so many names of places with Rama- naama can be found in that part of the globe?

The characters of Jewish, Biblical and Islamic stories were associated with Ram as names of people and also as names of places that were established long before these religions emerged. As I was preparing this article I came across denouncements from Hindu hating Aryan invasion theorists questioning the rationality of equating the Cliff image with Rama. Let them answer why so many Rama-s exist in West Asia well before Biblical times.

My questions is if so many Rama- names can exist in West Asia, why not an image of Rama – done by an admirer of those times, which had escaped destruction down the Biblical times, owing to its unique location in a remote mountain-side in an inaccessible area exist in that part of the globe? Let anyone who refuses to accept this Cliff image as Rama explain the genesis of each and every Rama in the following quotes:

(1) Ram, son of the firstborn of Jerahmeel (Chronicles 2:27)

(2) A’ram’ - Son of Hezron and an ancestor of Jesus » Called ARAM (Matthew 1:3,4; Luke 3:33)

(3) 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram, Luke 3:33

(4) RAMATH - A city of the tribe of Simeon (Joshua 19:8)

(5) RAMATH-LEHI - The place where Samson killed one-thousand Philistines with the jawbone of a donkey (Judges 15:17)

(6) RAMATH-MIZPEH - A town in the territory of the tribe of Gad (Joshua 13:26)

(7) RAMESES - The district in Egypt which was inhabited by the Israelites (Genesis 47:11; Exodus 1:11;12:37; Numbers 33:3,5)

(8) (Called also Raamses.) RAMESES - The district in Egypt which was inhabited by the I » City of, built by the Israelites as a treasure city for one of the Pharaohs (Exodus 1:11)

(9)RAMIAH - An Israelite at the time of Ezra - Had taken a non-Israelite wife (Ezra 10:25)

(10)DAVID » King of Israel » Saul attempts to kill him; he escapes to Ramah, and lives at Naioth, where Saul pursues him (1 Samuel 19:9-24)

(11) NAIOTH » A place in Ramah (1 Samuel 19:18,19,22;20:1)

(12) RAMOTH-GILEAD » Also called RAMAH (1 Kings 8:2; 2 Chronicles 22:6

(13)SAMUEL » A judge (leader) of Israel, his judgment seat at Beth-el, Gilgal, Mizpeh, and Ramah (2 Samuel 7:15-17)

(14) ISRAEL » (Usually, in lists, the names of Levi and Joseph, » Journey from Rameses to Succoth (Exodus 12:37-39)

(15) SUCCOTH » The first camping place of the Israelites after leaving the city of Rameses (Exodus 12:37;13:20; Numbers 33:5,6)

(16) JEHOSHAPHAT » King of Judah » Joins Ahab in an invasion of Ramoth-gilead (1 Kings 22; 2 Chronicles 18)

Checked another link on Bible:

The noun RAMAH appears in the following contexts:

1. A city of the territory of the tribe of Asher (Joshua 19:29)

2. A city of the territory of the tribe of Naphthali (Joshua 19:36)

3. Called RAMA (Matthew 2:18)

4. Also called RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM » A city near Mount Ephraim (Jude 1:4,5; 1 Samuel 1:1)

5. Also called RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM » Home of Elkanah (1 Samuel 1:1,19;2:11)

6. Also called RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM » Home of Samuel (1 Samuel 1:19,20;7:17;8:4;15:34;16:13)

7. Also called RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM » David flees to (1 Samuel 19:18)

8. Also called RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM » Samuel dies and was buried in (1 Samuel 25:1;28:3)

9. Called RAMA » A city allotted to the tribe of Benjamin (Joshua 18:25; Judges 19:13)

10. Called RAMA » Attempted fortification of, by King Baasha; destruction of, by Asa (1 Kings 15:17-22; 2 Chronicles 16:1-6)

11. Called RAMA » People of, return from the Babylonian captivity (Ezra 2:26; Nehemiah 7:30;11:33)

12. Called RAMA » Jeremiah imprisoned in (Jeremiah 40:1)

13. Called RAMA » Prophecies concerning (Isaiah 10:29; Jeremiah 31:15; Hosea 5:8; Matthew 2:18)



For Ramoth -Gilead, checked

Ramoth - Gilead finds mention in the following:-

{If you click each one of the following in the website, you will find the passages in which it (Ramoth) appears}

(1) Besieged by Israel and Judah; Ahab killed there (1 Kings 22:29-36; 2 Chronicles 18)

(2) In the possession of the Syrians (2 Kings 22:3)
One of Solomon's commissaries there (2 Kings 4:13)

(3) Recovered by Joram; Joram wounded there (2 Kings 8:28,29;9:14,15; 2 Chronicles 22:5,6)

(4) Also called RAMAH (2 Kings 8:2; 2 Chronicles 22:6)

(5)Elisha anoints Jehu to be king there (2 Kings 9:1-6)

(6) A city of the territory of the tribe of Gad, and one of the cities of refuge (Deuteronomy 4:43; Joshua 20:8; 1 Chronicles 6:80)

Mathew 2.18

“A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more.”[a]

(End of the article)



6000 year old Lord Rama and Hanuman carvings in Silemania, Iraq


One of the major triumphs of modern archaeology was the hair-raising discoveries of Sir Leonard Woolley at Ur. Amidst the ruins of Ur, he unearthed a Ram-chapel but totally missed its relevance in world history. This crucial finding not only bridges the wide gaps between Indian tradition and archaeology but also unfolds the historic bonds that once united ancient India, Iran and Sumer. Ram-Sin of (Larsa) to whose memory this chapel was dedicated must have been Rama of Valmiki. The name Ararama of Larsa may be an echo of Rama. This Ram-Chapel of Ur is the earliest known memorial to the great Rama and may have been erected by Dilmun merchants who resided nearby. Dilmun was always mentioned in the Sumerian texts together with Magan and Melukkha and it is possible that these three states were somehow allied to each other.


The Cambridge Ancient History[xvi][iii] which is usually not considered as a sourcebook for Indian history by writers like Romila Thapar contains priceless information relevant to Indian ancient history. In the highly authentic Sumerian king list appears such hallowed names as Bharat (Warad) Sin and Ram Sin. As Sin was the Moon god Chandra Ram Sin can be seen to be same as Rama Chandra. Bharat Sin ruled for 12 years (1834-1822 BC), exactly as stated in the Dasaratha Jataka. The Jataka statement, “Years sixty times hundred, and ten thousand more, all told, / Reigned strong-armed Rama”, only means that Rama reigned for sixty years which agrees exactly with the data of Assyriologists. Ram Sin was the longest reigning monarch of Mesopotamia who ruled for 60 years. The mention of the father in the inscriptions of both Warad Sin and Ram Sin is noteworthy and may point to a palace intrigue. Joan Oates is not aware of the Ramayana but writes with great insight (p. 61) that Warad sin was manoeuvred to the throne by his father. In Mesopotamia, a prince normally became king only after the death of his father. Lakshmana, mentioned the Bible as Lakhamar, ruled as a great king.


sury siva said...

An analysis in depth

subbu thatha.

Anonymous said...

Respected Maam,

A great article as usual.

if you don't mind there was a blog entry where you said "the concept of Lakshmi" was formed during the Hiranya time. What you actually mean by that?


jayasree said...

@ Sudarsan.

I have written on the concept of Lakshmi in some of my Tamil blogs. I have not yet written about it in this English blog except in the following link where I have dealt with the divine aspect of Lakshmi as the "Will" of God or consort of Vishnu:

It is in the latter part of this article you will find the concept of Lakshmi or how it was formed.

Just the excerpt :-

We refer to the injunctions, which speak
about 'will' as in 'It willed that It may become many'
and 'Thought' as in 'It thought – May I become
manyfold and be born' (chandogya) are of the nature of Sri
without whose existence / insistence, the Supreme does
not contemplate to do anything.

The Will or the Thought are part of Him which for
simpler understanding are said to be seated in His
manas. Ramanuja acknowledges this in his dhyaana sloka
to Sri Bhashyam to Vedanta sutras thus :- " May my
understanding assume the form of loving devotion to
the Highest Brahman who is the Home of Lakshmi." The
implication that He will not do anything without being
told by Lakshmi is further authenticated by


For better understanding, you have to read the whole article in that link or the middle part of that article.

Now for the idea that this concept was developed during Hiranya time read my Tamil article.


jayasree said...

Read the Tamil blog



லக்ஷ்மிக்கும் பொன்னும் சம்பந்தம் உண்டு, அவள் பொன் மயமானவள் என்பது வேதக் கருத்து. அந்த புஷ் பாரோ ட்ரூயிட், பொன் தகட்டில் இந்த அமைப்பைக் கீறி லக்ஷ்மியை வழிபட்டானோ என்று கருத இன்னொரு காரணமும் இருக்கிறது. அதுவும் திருநின்றவூரில் இருக்கிறது, அந்த க்ஷேத்திரத்தில் சமுத்திரராஜன் எனப்படும் வருண பகவானுக்கு விஷ்ணு காட்சி அளித்தார் என்று தல புராணம் கூறுகிறது. வருணன் பெயரில் வருண புஷ்கரிணி என்னும் குளமும் இருக்கிறது, அந்த வருணன் லக்ஷ்மிக்குத் தந்தையாவான் (லக்ஷ்மி கடலிலிருந்து தோன்றியதால் தந்தை). அந்த க்ஷேத்திரத்தில் தனது மாமனார் வீட்டில் விஷ்ணு தங்கியிருப்பதாகத் தல புராணம் கூறுகிறது.

அந்த வருணனுடைய இருப்பிடத்தில்தான் தானவர்கள் ஆதியில் வசித்து வந்தார்கள். வருணன் என்னும் கடல் சூழ்ந்திருந்த ஹிரண்யபுரத்தில் தானவர்கள் வசித்து வந்தார்கள் என்று மஹாபாரதத்தில் சொல்லப்படுகிறது. அவர்களுடன் அர்ஜுனன் சண்டையிட்டதையும், மாதலி தன் மகளுக்கு வரன் தேடினதையும் மஹாபாரதத்தில் விரிவாகக் காணலாம். அந்த விவரங்களில் ஹிரண்யபுரத்தின் இருப்பிடத்தையும் காண முடிகிறது. அது இந்தியப் பெருங்கடலில், பூமத்திய ரேகைக்கு அருகே இருந்தது. அங்கிருந்த தானவர்களே ஐரோப்பாவுக்குச் சென்றனர் என்பதைக் காட்ட மஹாபாரதத்தில் பல விவரங்கள் இருக்கின்றன.

'ஹிரண்ய' என்றால் பொன் என்று பொருள். லக்ஷ்மிக்கும் அதே பெயர் – ஹிரண்மயி – வேதத்தில் இருக்கிறது அவர்கள் பொன், ரத்தினங்களைக் கொண்டு அழகிய வேலைப்பாடுகள் அமைந்த பொருட்களை உருவாக்கினார்கள்.

வருணன் என்னும் கடலிலிருந்துதான் செல்வங்கள் உண்டாயின. அதனால் லக்ஷ்மி வருணனது மகள் ஆவாள்.

லக்ஷ்மியைக் கர்தம ரிஷியின் மகள் என்று ரிக் வேத ஸ்ரீசூக்தம் கூறுகிறது. கர்தமரே பிரஜாபதிக்கு முதலில் பிறந்தவர் என்று ஜடாயு தன்னை ராமனிடம் அறிமுகப்படுத்திக் கொள்ளும் இடத்தில் கூறுகிறார். (வால்மீகி ராமாயணம் 3- 14).

கர்தமன் என்றால் மண் என்று பொருள். பூமியின் சுழற்சியால் கடல் கடையப்படுவதால் எழுந்த முதல் செல்வம் நிலப்பகுதியாகும். ஒரு பானை போல பூமியானது சுழன்று, வட பகுதிக்கும், தென் பகுதிக்கும் இருட்டு (அசுரன்) வெளிச்சம் (தேவன்) என்று மாறி மாறி இழுக்கப்படுவதால் (சமுத்ர மந்தன்) கடல் கடையப் படுகிறது என்றார்கள். அந்தக் கடைதலில் எழுந்த நிலத்தின் மண் முதல் பிறப்பாகும். அந்த மண்ணைக் குழைத்து பாண்டங்கள் செய்து அதில் உணவு சமைக்க மனிதன் கற்றுக் கொண்டதால் அந்த மண் முதல் செல்வமாகிறது. அதனால் லக்ஷ்மி கர்தம ரிஷியின் (மண்) மகளாகிறாள்.

மண்ணைக் கொண்டு உருவங்களும், வீடுகளும் கட்டியவர்கள் மயன் என்பவர்.

அவர்கள் தானவர்கள்!

அந்த மண்ணிலிருந்து கிடைத்த உலோகங்களைக் கொண்டு பொருட்களைச் செய்தவர்கள் தானவர்கள்.

கட்டடம், சிற்ப சாஸ்திரங்களில் உலோகம் பயன்படுகிறது. தானவர்கள் உலோக வேலை, பொன் முதலான உலோகங்களைக் கொண்டு பல பொருட்களைச் செய்தவர்கள் என்று அர்ஜுனன் கூறுகிறான். இதையே ஐந்திறம் என்று, ஒரு சிற்பிக்கு ஐந்து திறமைகள் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்று மயன் கூறியுள்ளான் என்பதை 2 ஆம் சங்கத்தில் அவன் அரங்கேறிய நூலில் காண்கிறோம்..

ஒரு கட்டடமோ அல்லது சிற்பமோ வடிக்க வேண்டுமென்றால் ஒருவனுக்கு, இயல், இசை, நாடகம், கட்டடம், சிற்பம் ஆகிய ஐந்து இயல்களில் திறமை இருக்க வேண்டும். இதை அறிந்தவர்கள் ஆதியில் ஹிரண்யபுரம் போன்ற தென் பகுதிகளில் இருந்தார்கள். பிறகு படிப்படியாக பாரத நாட்டின் வடமேற்கிலும், இமயமலைப் பகுதிகளிலும் குடியேறினார்கள். அவர்களுள் பலர் பாரத மக்களுடன் திருமண உறவு கொண்டனர், அப்படி ஏற்பட்ட ஒரு உறவில் பிறந்தவனே த்ருஹ்யு. அவனும், அவனைச் சேர்ந்தவர்களும் பாரதப்பண்பாட்டைத் தாங்கி ஐரோப்பாவுக்குச் சென்றவர்களே.


In continuation of this you may read this blog too

The following article also must be read to understand the location of Hiranyapura and formation or Manava etc.
This article have details on Toba and Toba lake which was mentioned by Narada in MB.

jayasree said...

@ Sudarsan,

Earlier you asked about Muruga.
In the comment section of this blog I have written some:

The comment section of this article has some on Lakshmi and Lakshmi in Thirupathi Venkateswara's chest.

jayasree said...

In this link
I have written about the formation of animals as told in MB (Mahabharata)
There it is written that the first elephants appeared in the South. It was Supratika and Airavadha is the later born of that variety.

The recently published study in China of the presence of people in Daoxion, it has been recorded that a rare species of elephant-like animal also has been found among the remains. It is called Stegodon orientalis. This is an important input in tracing the genesis of elephants, particularly Airavadha in the Southen part of the hemisphere.

Read more at:

jayasree said...

As per MB (Narada's narration) the first elephants formed in the South only. But until now scholars have thought that the first elephants formed in Africa. In this connection I am reproducing my comment from my Tamil blog where I have written about elephants in Sundaland or china. The Chinese discovery published 2 days ago of an elephant like creature concurs with MB version.

The so-far deciphered history of Woolly Mammoth is that there was an earlier African version from which European and Chinese version evolved. The European version further moved north with solar radiation becoming suitable for the habitat.

In article 112 of the current series, there comes details of the animals that evolved in the south of the equator deduced from Mathali- Narada dialogue in Mahabharata (5-99). There Iravadam elephants are mentioned. There it is also told that Iravadham was the former evolved variety and then evolved other 3 varieties. This goes well with scientific finding that the first elephants evolved in the South - though it says in Africa as per our currently available info
- the Mahabharata info on south seas (of which most places are gone now)must be Indonesia or Sundaland.

From there the Iravadham had moved to North via China (which the wiki article has identified) and Burma. Iravadham elephant and Iravathy river are there in Burma, Burma's earlier name was Indra dweepa - Iravadham was Indra's elephant. The movement to further North had happened through this route upto Siberia when solar radiation was available at that time. (Read my English article quoted above)

Another route for the elephants is from Africa to Europe to Northern most regions. In that region Indra Shira mountain is there according to Ramayana. As Indra is always identified with the best quality elephant, I infer that the woolly mammoth fits in that description.

Indra stands for growth of people / population. If he is always identified with elephant, then it means man and elephant had co-existed whenever population had increased and lived in organised societies. I say organised societies, because elephant is an important ashta mangala symbol of kings.

Anonymous said...

Respected Maam,

Sincere thanks for these great insights and information.

Sorry to bring this up again.
For example, the rise of human civilisation in the past one lakh years started in the southern seas in the Indian ocean – a fact which most of genetic researchers agree with. It had gone to the Northern hemisphere about 60,000 years ago after the Toba-effect subsided. Then when the North was covered with ice, a shift happened from North to South – not through India but through China to Sundaland (present day Indonesia). From Mahabharata narration (Anusasana parva – chapter 93) it is known that a migration following the sun's movement happened from north to south. This is cleverly explained in this chapter using the etymological meanings of names of the seven rishis and others.
The above part is a bit not clear to me.
From all the articles you had given, Sundaland and areas around it was brimming with activity. When Mt.Toba exploded, a set of people migrated. The Devas were those who migrated to Siberia/Altai. This happened around 40,000BP.

Now when the Ice age set in , these people moved and settled as Incas, Peublos etc.. and there are no mention about them ater that

What's not clear to me is the quote I have provided above. After the group of people moved to North and settled in Siberia, they never returned back to China/Sundaland. But in your quote above, you say that such a migration had happened.

Can you please throw some light pls.

To quote where I understood the above information
The genetic studies show an early group moving through India and to the Nothern regions. This had happened 40,000 years ago and lasted until the Ice age set in. This fits with the description of Polar Devas. Their prevalence ended before 10,000 years ago which I find corresponding with the extinct of Woolly Mammoth, the elephants found in extreme North. Indra (leader of Devas) was known for his elephant, named Iravatha.

At that time and until that time, India was sparsely populated. Graham Hancock's maps on the vegetation of India give us the reason.
So from the above I understood that about 40,000 years ago, the Devas had moved from South to North and after that they were talkeda about til Ice Age. They possibly settled as Peublos, Inclas etc..

However in the first quote there is a reference of these Devas moving back to South.


jayasree said...

@ Sudarsan.

First of all who are Devas?
The description of who they are varies (I have written that) and we dont know who exactly were the people who moved / migrated.

The evidence we have on hand are (from science) (1) Australian genes in Altai fossil. (2) an extinct gene of Denisovan found only in Asia (east Asia) and in Altai and its inter mingling in the ancestry of present day Malenesians / Australasians.

The link between Australia and Altai known from this + the MB narration + Indra / Deva references to South ( Burma / Iravadham etc) etc make it known that this sector was a regular migration route.

If you see the maps I have drawn on the basis of the many inputs I have dealt with, you can see that the Himalayas had acted as a barrier to direct migration from the south to the north or vice versa. Migrations had happened either on the east or west of Himayalas. The above written migration is on the east of Himalayas which is very possible and could have resulted in further movement across the Pacific to the Americas.

Puranically, Indra of North married Sachi of Southern parts. Skanda period comes in that. Skanda married daughter of Indra. When this kind of marriage connection comes, hordes of people would have moved along with the princess who married Indra or Skanda. Another input is Matali ( a traditional name for charioteers in Indra land) married his daughter to a being of the far South. The movement of these people could have happened via the western corridor of the Himalayas. In one of the Tamil articles I had written about Muchukunda guarding Indra land when Indra went on war with Asuras and in return getting Nalangadi Bhootham to be installed in Pumpukaar. Pumpukaar was the southern most outpost for the people who support Indra's clan. It is closer to equator and note that it is closer to Sundaland which is a better candidate to house Asuras (people of the South)

On your other question on Hopi, Peublos and Inkas, I am yet to put them all in a coherent framework. What I found in them is that they share a lot with Vedic customs and culture and Indian way of life. For example I recently happened to see the 'Kaasu maalai" type of ornament of Mapuche tribe of Chile. The Ammi-k-kal of Anishinabi is similar to what we use in Tamilnadu. (You can find them exhibited in Smithsonian Museum).Their concept of the world as 2 people - summer people and winter people concur with Devas and Asuras. There is so much to explore and deduce from these people. But early indicators are such that they bear resemblance to Vedic / and South Indian / Tamil people. If you see the photos of Inkas and Titicaca people without their traditional dresses you will at first identify them as Malayalis or NE people.

The elitist devas whom (I deduce) Yudhsihtra called as people of Uttar Kuru who happened to be biological fathers of the Pandavas could have completely lost their identity and moved to the east of Siberia (MB times and later) and merged with European population. This population of Uttar kuru corresponds to Rama and MB period. That is after 5000 to 7000 yrs BP. This is much later than 10,000 yrs when Indras as such were last heard of.

Unknown said...

The relief does not belong to Sri Rama. Please read my article about this rock-relief on the ancient history encyclopedia . And, yes, the pictures of the relief are mine and can be found on my Flickr's account. Thank you for highlighting the subject!
Osama S. M. Amin

Unknown said...

And I forgot to tell that the zoomed-in image of a the Hindu deity is not correct. Someone carved his name on the cliff, near the relief, which I consider vandalism. It reads "Dilovan" (دلوفان) in Kurdish language; Diluvan is a male name which mean merciful!

jayasree said...

Welcome Dr Osama.

Read your article in You have made the observations that I am pinpointing in the blog post - the absence of beard and the dress. These are markedly missing in Naram-sin or in any akkadian or assyrian king who were known to have used the bow. The inscriptions may have been added later, but isn't the word Dilovan (merciful) unsuitable to any king of akkad or assyrian period? Were they ever known to have pardoned or spared their enemies? But Rama was particularly known for forgiving anyone who surrendered him. There is even a research article on Rama's connection to Mesopotamia published in -, though I don't concur with that article due to numerous discrepancies in that article. But the underlying idea is that traces of Rama had been there in Mesopotamia.

For your perusal the Persian connection to India (Bharat of those times) had been written by me here :


Even the Assurs were off-shoots of a clan that left India - the link can be traced only form Ramayana. Read my article here -

The rock carving may have been some one other than Rama, but it does show the influence of Rama on the warrior under scrutiny. The presence of so many Rama- sounding names of places and individuals in that part of the globe must be analysed and convincingly explained.

One can see influence of Rama throughout the east of India (South east Asia). It raises a logical question how it failed to spread in the west of India (west Asia)? Given the extent of vandalism and brutality witnessed in the said period of the rock carving in that part of Mesopotamia, it raises a doubt whether the traces of Rama cult was wiped out in that part. The warrior in the carving may have been someone who was influenced by Rama, the merciful, who was ready to pardon even the abductor of his wife had he returned his wife and sought pardon.

Sheela said...

Dear Madam

Happy Diwali to you n ur family. Keep flooding ur nonrandomthoughts.


sury siva said...

Happy deepavali Madam

jayasree said...

Dear Ms Sheela and Mr Surya Siva,

Thanks for your greetings and my wishes to you and all the other readers for a happy Deepavali.

Yes Ms Sheela, I want write down my non-random thoughts. Somehow it is getting delayed.

Lots of things happened these days kindling some reactions in my mind. The beef controversy was the worst thing of all that hurt me deeply and made me feel sick that I am surrounded by a society that has no regard for life - rather any life - be it the life of a cow or any other animal. Being at the top of the evolutionary ladder man has a greater responsibility towards all living and non- living things around him. We are not cave people who were killing other living things for survival or for food. We have come a long way as thinking beings and it is utterly barbaric to consider other living things as food for us.

Most disgusting is the comment by Kamal Hasan that he would rather not bother about life of animals when it comes to feeding humans. He even declared that he does not eat any animal that is bigger in size. In an irony of sorts such a person was requested by Dalai Lama to propagate Ahimsa through his movies and Kamal agreed to it! Its sends my head veering that barely a couple of days after he mouthed his noxious support for beef and non vegetarianism, Kamal is expressing his faith in Ahimsa to Dalai Lama. What is happening to Kamal? Or is there anything happening to Kamal?

Well, the bottom line is that I very much wish to surge from my slumber to do something through my blog to discourage beef eating and even non-vegetarianism. I have a plan to write the karmic effects of eating beef or meat. But before I could do that, I think I can just start posting articles that discourage meat and beef eating. Readers are welcome to send such articles and I will post them.

The other thought that is disturbing my mind at the moment is the BJP debacle in Bihar that comes with the start of the 10 year long Moon dasa of India. Are we heading for a troubled period of sickular forces getting polarized and strengthened? Isn't my old article on Advani vs Modi more relevant now than ever before that the current trends are hurting Sanatan Dharma as seen in callous support for beef eating? The unjustifiable accusation on tolerance of Hindus is another matter that must be challenged. I think we bloggers and readers must become active once again on these issues. Let me see what I can do. If not detailed articles, let me post short ones or news items to highlight them.

Sheela said...

Dear Madam,

day govt changed script is moving very aggressively. its a move to make a 2004 in 2019! somehow i have not so good opinion on Dalai Lama.

Respect to cow n worship is treated as joke n superstition. if so long our desicows hv survived by hindus of Guj/Raj/ UP & central India tagged as cow belt. now yadava leaders themselves taking beef eating cool is very insulting.

one of my neighbour Leather businessman a Hindu informs its calf & cow leather is best. though a religious guy he has no remorse as its already dead skin which they use.
such is mentality hindus have tuned themselves. Pity cattles who have lost the right of pasture lands n bull calves heading early death due to artificial insemination in dairy farms.

Hindus should stop using leather material in anyform to do our bit for cow protection.

Vegetarians are the REAL MINORITIES IN TODAY'S world who needs to be most tolerant.
Still let us not feel shy n try to advocate this wonderful concept which
really awakens our mind n conscience.

jayasree said...

Yes Ms Sheela, we must not hesitate to promote the idea of vegetarianism. Change of mind can not happen overnight. We have to keep bringing to the notice of people the rationale of it. Aryan invasion theory was not removed from people's mind in a day or a year but by persistent exposure of its hollowness over a period. Like that, the need to give up support for beef and meat a must be written scientifically and intellectually to usher in a change of mindset. Another issue that needs such exposure is the the Muslim misconception of their origins and the support to people like Tipu.