Dilmun/Tilmun/Telmun "The Sumerian Paradise" or Pre-biblical Prototype for the "Garden of Eden"
has _not_ been identified yet as of 2008?
Please click here for this website's most important article: Why the Bible Cannot be the Word of God.
For Christians visiting this website my most important article is: The Reception of God's Holy Spirit: How the Hebrew Prophets _contradict_ Christianity's Teachings. Please click here
05 February 2005
Updates and Revisions through 12 May 2008
I have come to realize that Dilmun has _not_ been correctly "identified" as of 2008. It first appears in Uruk IV Period texts dated circa 3300-3100 B.C. and to the present time _no_one_, myself_included_, has been able to present a site dated to this period possessing houses, streets, docks, a river's bank, and evidence of Uruk IV trade items from Sumer, be that Professor D. T. Potts' eastern littoral of Arabia (Kuwait to Bahrein), or the islands of Bahrain/Bahrein and Failaka which are commonly identified by professional scholars as being Dilmun. My efforts to identify Dilmun in the marshlands to the east of Ur and Eridu have been without success as well.
A number of scholars understand that the "land of Dilmun" (believed to be a type of Sumerian "Paradise" and thus a possible pre-biblical prototype of Genesis' Garden in Eden) mentioned in Mesopotamian documents from the 4th-1st millenniums B.C. is the island of Bahrein (Bahrain) off the Arabian coast in the Persian Gulf. This brief article explores the reasoning behind this notion and concludes that the Mesopotamian inscriptions describing Dilmun (as well as the lands of Meluhha and Magan), have been misunderstood by scholars and that in fact these locations probably lie in or near the marshlands of Lower Mesopotamia, between Sumer and Elam.
Professor Potts on Dilmun's location noting it at first was the northeast coast of Arabia along the Arabian Gulf (Persian Gulf) and later of Bahrain and nearby islands:
"...Dilmun...occurs in a lexical text...of Uruk IV date. Dilmun, a name which signified the northeast Arabian mainland and Bahrain islands, is the most distant region from Uruk mentioned in these texts."
(p. 42. Note 11. D. T. Potts. Mesopotamian Civilization: The Material Foundations. Ithaca, New York. Cornell University Press. 1997)
"Dilmun (region in the 'Lower Sea', originally on the mainland of eastern Saudi Arabia and eventually centred on Bahrain island)"
(p. 352. "Index." D. T. Potts. Mesopotamian Civilization: The Material Foundations. Ithaca, New York. Cornell University Press. 1997)
As is obvious from Professor Potts above description of Dilmun it covers a vast amount of territory! We are asked to believe that at first it embraced the eastern seaboard of Arabia from the vicinty of modern Kuwait to Bahrain. Secondly we are informed that Dilmun later "shifted" from this Arabian littoral to the island of Bahrain. Thirdly we told that Dilmun includes all the islands between Bahrain and Failaka, the latter island being east of Kuwait.
One as to ask "why" are scholars portraying Dilmun in such a manner? That is to say, the ancient texts quite clearly portray Dilmun as being a city possessing boat docks along a RIVER, it is surrounded by marshlands, it possesses lagoons filled with fish, and fields of date palms. None of the foregoing locations, Kuwait to Bahrain, Failaka and surrounding islands possess a river and marshlands and lagoons. Nor does there exist a settlement with river docks at any of these locations. Nor have any building remains been found at any of the aforementioned locations prior to circa 2200 B.C. which presents an embarassing problem for scholars as Sumerian texts mention Dilmun as early as circa 3300-2300 B.C.
If scholars have failed to find the archaeological evidence of Dilmun as a city circa 3300-2300 B.C. when it appears in Sumerian texts why then are they claiming they have "found" Dilmun?
Howard-Carter's research (1981) noted that the Dilmun appearing in early Mesopotamian (Sumerian) myths and annals _did not_ align with the islands of Failaka and Bahrein commonly believed to be Dilmun:
"Data from three different disciplines bear on the problem of the existence of the earliest Dilmun. In this article all three, Sumerian mythology, archaeology of Mesopotamia and the Arab-Iranian Gulf, and -most recently and revealing- geological information from the Gulf area, are used to posit a likely location for the original Dilmun.
The material is presented below as a re-evaluation of the descriptive criteria from the myths and an analysis of all the revelant archaeological information, projected against the new geological framework which has been developed in the last fifteen years. The discussion is organized by time periods. It must be emphasized strongly that the legendary Dilmun of the Sumerians, although certainly a physical reality, was not located in the same place as the Dilmun which played such an important role in the economy of later periods.
The late Dilmun is considered generally to include the islands of Bahrain and Failaka, and the adjacent East Arabian Coast. It is significant to the thesis of this article that no imports from Mesopotamia which antedate 2200 B.C. have been discovered in that area."
(p. 210. Theresa Howard-Carter."The Tangible Evidence for the Earliest Dilmun." Journal of Cuneiform Studies. Vol. 33, No. 3-4 (July-October 1981), pp. 210-223) Note: Howard-Carter's byline is of the Kuwait National Museum/The University Museum.
Howard-Carter proposed that the Arabian Gulf had been settled and that the "mouth of the rivers" mentioned in Sumerian myths where Dilmun was located was to be associated with the vicinity of the strait of Hormuz. Her proposal has not been accepted by most scholars (she has the Gulf basin being filled in by waters from the Indian Ocean by circa 3500 B.C.). Howard-Carter's "valuable" insight for me is her observation that Failaka and Bahrein do not possess archaeological evidence of trade with Mesopotamia before circa 2200 B.C. I cannot endorse her notion that the "mouth of the rivers" was near the strait of Hormuz; I understand "the rivers' mouth" (Euphrates and Tigris rivers' mouths) was the vicinity of Ur and Eridu as proposed by Professors A. H. Sayce and T. G. Pinches (1887-1910).
Dilmun appears in Lower Mesopotamian texts (Sumer) from as early as 3300 B.C to as late as the time of the Babylonian king Nabonidus circa the 6th century B.C. Dilmun dates being mentioned in an inscription from his time period. Dilmun appears in texts from Uruk dated circa 3300 B.C. from Lagash circa 2500 B.C., and from Tello ca. 2365 B.C. yet no settlement exists on Bahrain which has been identified with Dilmun before circa 2200 B.C. That is to say, despite the appearance of Dilmun in Mesopotamian texts from circa 3300-2365 B.C. the first settlement on Bahrain is circa 2200 B.C. while Failaka was not settled until after 2000 B.C., in other words for nearly a thousand years, 3300-2300 B.C., Sumer traded with a "phantom" Dilmun which _did not exist_ either along the eastern Arabian littoral or on the islands of Bahrain and Failaka in the Arabian Gulf.
Professor Crawford (Dilmun being portrayed as the Eastern Province of Arabia along the Persian Gulf, including the island of Bahrain and other nearby smaller islands) noted the _absence_ of 4th millennium B.C. settlements on the island of Bahrain yet texts at Uruk from circa 3200 B.C. mention Dilmun:
"It is a useful excercise to compare the picture presented by the textual evidence with that derived from archaeology of the Arabian Gulf. The fairly straightforward picture of gradually intensifying contacts between Mesopotamia and Dilmun from the late fourth millennium onwards, briefly interrupted by closer ties between Mesopotamia and Magan in the Ur III period is not matched by the material remains. In the first place, finds of fifth- and early fourth millennium Ubaid pottery from Mesopotamia on the main Bahrain island show that relations between the two regions predate the first written evidence. A little later, when we have already seen that there is unambiguous evidence from the economic texts of the later fourth millennium for contact between southern Mesopotamia and Dilmun, the islands of Bahrain seem to have been virtually uninhabitated. This period in Mesopotamia is represented by the Uruk and Jemdat Nasr periods, but pottery of this type is virtually absent from Bahrain (Larsen 1983b:77) and the evidence for any contact with Mesopotamia is very thin...it would seem that Bahrain was only inhabitated by small groups of fishermen or farmers during this period. It can hardly have been the centre of a trading network.
The islands only seem to have been extensively inhabitated in the second half of the third millennium, despite the fact that the texts suggest steadily increasing contacts from about 2600 B.C. The final anomaly is provided by the fact that, in the late third millennium, when the tablets only refer to trade with Magan, Bahrain appears to be more prosperous and in closer contact with Mesopotamia than Oman (Magan) was."
(p. 4. "The Setting." Harriet Crawford. Dilmun and its Gulf Neighbours. Cambridge, the United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. 1998)
Crawford on the absence of any occupation on the island of Bahrain in the fourth millennium B.C., yet it is in this period when Dilmun first appears in texts found at Uruk dated circa 3300-3200 B.C.:
"Later third-millennium settlement occurs on the main Bahrain island, where, as we have already seen, the earliest settlement dates to the Ubaid period. The island's fresh water springs and fertile northern shore made it an attractive prospect in comparison with the inhospitable coast of much of the Eastern Province and it is rather surprising that there is, at present, virtually no evidence that the island was inhabitated in the fourth millennium...One sherd of polychrome Jemdat Nasr ware is recorded from the site of the Barbar temple...When we reach the middle of the third millennium the evidence for settlement is a little more plentiful, although sites are still scarce...Work over the past ten years means that there is now little doubt that by the middle of the third millennium Bahrain boasted a flourishing local economy based on fishing and agriculture as well as a burgeoning network of overseas contacts. The evidence for settlement is still slight, and still comes mainly from the work of the Danish expedition at the Qala'at. Here period Ia probably dates to the middle of the third millennium, Ib to the later Agade period and period IIa/c, the Early Dilmun or Barbar II period, to the Ur III to Old Babylonian periods." (pp. 51-52. "Bahrain: The Settlement Evidence." Harriet Crawford. Dilmun and Its Gulf Neighbours. Cambridge, United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. 1998)
If I understand Crawford rightly _no_houses_ have been found of the 4th through early third millenniums B.C. in the eastern littoral of Arabia where supposedly Dilmun was to be first located before allegedly moving to Bahrain and then Failaka:
"The evidence is still insufficient to allow us to paint a detailed picture of the people living in the Eastern Province of Arabia and on the island of Bahrain in the first half of the third millennium. No houses of this period have been excavated, but it seems that there was a settled population of agriculturalists and fisherman living in villages and small towns along the coast." (p. 58. "Summary: The development of Dilmun." Harriet Crawford. Dilmun and Its Gulf Neighbours. Cambridge, United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. 1998)
"The dramatic expansion of settlement on Bahrain and the accompanying evidence for greatly increased prosperity in the so-called Early Dilmun period, belongs to the first quarter of the second millennium. This is the time when the focus of settlement seems to shift from Arabia to Bahrain." (p. 60. "The Expansion of Dilmun: Settlement and Architecture." Harriet Crawford. Dilmun and Its Gulf Neighbours. Cambridge, United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. 1998)
The following quotations and observations are from Traces of Paradise, the Archaeology of Dilmun, a paperback catalogue and guide made in 2000 to accompany an exhibition of objects from Bahrain and area.
"This was a critical period in the history of Dilmun, whose name appears in Mesopotamia from the end of the the 4th millennium onwards in the archaic texts of Uruk, the oldest known texts, around 3300 B.C."
(p. 25. Serge Cleuziou. "Dilmun: Origins and Early Development." Harriet Crawford & Michael Rice, editors. Traces of Paradise, the Archaeology of Bahrain, 2500 B.C -300 A.D. London. Published by the Dilmun Committee for an exhibit from the Bahrain National Museum. Printed June 2000)
Mention is made of a votive plaque of Ur-Nanshe, king of Lagash, who noted trade with Dilmun. He is dated circa 2500 B.C. (Pierre Lombard & Khaled Alsendi. "Bahrain: Two Seas, One Civilisation." p. 16. Traces of Paradise)
A pre-cuneiform tablet from Uruk is illustrated, showing Dilmun as an ideograph and it is dated to the Uruk III Period, circa 3100-3000 B.C. (p. 27. Serge Cleuziou. "Tablet in Pre-Cuneiform Sumerian Script with Dilmun Ideogram." Traces of Paradise)
A Mesopotamian hymn describing Dilmun mentions a river. There is no evidence of a river on the islands of Bahrain or Failaka:
"No one crossed the river shouting..." (p. 30. Beatrice Andre-Salvini. "The land where the sun rises" The Representation of Dilmun in Sumerian Literature." Traces of Paradise)
If I am understanding Hojlund rightly, he seems to be saying _no_settlements_ existed in the eastern littoral of Arabia (where Dilmun allegedly was "first located" according to Potts) or at Bahrain before circa 2200 B.C. in _contradiction_ to Crawford who claims settlements at Bahrain from _the middle_ of the 3rd millennium B.C. (cf. above) yet Dilmun appears in Sumerian texts from circa 3200-2300 B.C.!
"The largest archaeological site in Bahrain is the tell of Qal'at al-Bahrain, on the north coast of the main island...The earliest remains of human occupation found at Qal'at al-Bahrain date back to circa 2200 B.C. and were located by the northern side of the tell facing the sea. This small settlement is the only one from this period in Bahrain and, indeed, in all of eastern Arabia. The finds show subsistence at that time already relied on a fully developed oasis agriculture with palm trees and cereal cultivation in the nearby fields, supplemented by herding of cattle, sheep and goats and by fishing." (p. 59. Flemming Hojlund. "Qal'at al-Bahrain in the Bronze Age."Traces of Paradise)
"The early Dilmun settlement of Saar is strung out along the eastern slope of a low ridge running parallel to the west coast of Bahrain...The origins of the settlement can therefore be placed around 2300 B.C., the main phase being around 1900 B.C. and perhaps enduring for around 200 years." (p. 63. Jane Moon. "The Dilmunite Settlement at Saar." Traces of Paradise)
"The first written references to Dilmun in the Mesopotamian tablets...date around 3200 B.C. ..." (p. 73. Harriet Crawford. "Bahrain: Warehouse of the Gulf." Traces of Paradise)
"A trading network of the volume and complexity of that between Mesopotamia and Dilmun requires relatively complex administrative techniques for weighing, pricing and recording the transactions. While we have cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia, as we have seen, there are no comparable documents from Dilmun. If a local writing system existed, it would seem that it used perishable materials like ink and skins which have not survived." (p. 75. Harriet Crawford. "Bahrain: Warehouse of the Gulf."Traces of Paradise)
A cuneiform tablet from Tello, ancient Girsu, dated circa 2365 B.C. mentions Dilmun (p. 77. Harriet Crawford. "Bahrain: Warehouse of the Gulf." Traces of Paradise)
Dilmun appears again on another tablet from Tello dated to the Early Dynastic Period, circa 2380-2350 B.C.
(p. 78. Harriet Crawford. "Bahrain: Warehouse of the Gulf." Traces of Paradise)
Speaking of the Barbar temples:
"The temples can be dated to the centuries around 2000 B.C. and are contemporary with the appearance of the stamp seals..." (p. 91. H. Helmuth Andersen & Flemming Hojlund. "The Barbar Temples." Traces of Paradise)
"The earliest local seals in Bahrain were manufactured in about 2050 B.C." (p. 101. Poul Kjaerum. "The Hidden Art of Dilmun: the Stamp Seals."Traces of Paradise)
Bilingual Sumerian/Akkadian clay tablets found at Qal'at al-Bahrain date from circa 1450 B.C. and mention goods. (p. 113. Beatrice Andre-Salvini. "The Cuneiform Tablets of Qal'at al-Bahrain." Traces of Paradise)
In 1878/1879 an inscribed block was found at Bahrain as part of a mosque that bears an inscription mentioning "the palace of Rimun, the servant of Inzak, of the tribe of Agarum." H. C. Rawlinson after translating the cuneiform inscription suggested that as the god Inzak is associated with Dilmun that perhaps Bahrain was Dilmun (p. 213. Michael Rice. "Britain's Early Contributions to the Archaeology of Bahrain." Traces of Paradise).
Bibbey (1969) and later Potts (1990) brought together many of the Mesopotamian inscriptions of the 4th-1st millenniums B.C. mentioning Dilmun in order to find "clues" to Dilmun's whereabouts. Potts' research suggested to him that Bibbey was correct, Dilmun was indeed the island of Bahrein. However, Potts did suggest that the island of Failaka which lies near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab might also have been associated by the peoples of Lower Mesopotamia with Dilmun/Bahrein. He noted that excavations on Failaka revealed it had first been settled some time after 2000 B.C. when the Persian Gulf's sea-levels had dropped by one meter. In these earliest settlements were found stamp seals and a type of pottery called Barbar both being associated with a site by that name on Bahrein.
Potts however, did note that the proposal that Dilmun was Bahrein had "some problems." The mention in the ancient Mesopotamian inscriptions of products and plants associated with this land did not appear to fit the location of Bahrein or Failaka. He proposed, like Bibbey before him, that evidently Bahrein was a trading port like Failaka, whose ships plied the waters of the Ancient Near East, gathering together various products then trans-shipped them to Lower Mesopotamia, where those people came to ERRONEOUSLY believe that all these items were products of Dilmun.
Potts on the "anomalies" in reconciling Dilmun's products with Bahrein as well as the island of Failaka:
"...yet if the identification of north-eastern Arabia with early Dilmun is correct, or even if one chooses at this date to locate Dilmun on Bahrein, the metals from Dilmun, like the timber brought in Dilmun boats to Ur-Nanse, must have originated further afield. There simply is no copper or tin either in the eastern province or the Bahrein islands. Where the tin came from is a matter for speculation, although an origin in Afghanistan, followed by conveyance perhaps by stages through Baluchistan or Kerman before reaching the gulf, is not unlikely. " (p. 89. D. T. Potts. The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. Vol. 1. [2 vols.], Oxford. The Clarendon Press. 1990)
Potts understood that Dilmun possessed copper which had been obtained from Oman (p. 90), and that the timber was acquired by trade with other regions, then trans-shipped from Dilmun to Lower Mesoptamia as a trade item. He noted that geological surveys of Oman have identified 50 major copper deposits (cf. p. 119. Vol. 1. with map. Potts).
Potts noted that Naram-Sin (ca. 2254-2218 B.C.) had subjugated Magan (Lu-Magan), and quarried blocks of diorite there in the mountains (p. 137); other booty from Magan were alabaster or calcite vessels, but he noted that the most likely location for these minerals was not Arabia, but rather Iran, and the style of the looted vessels appeared to be attested in archaeological contexts of the indo-Iranian borderlands of the late 3rd milllennium B.C. (p. 140); he also speculated about the captured lord of Magan possessing an Elamite name (p. 141). He also noted that diorite was not found in Arabia, but it is attested in Iran (p. 143). He also mentions a "sea of Magan, Magan-wood, and a Magan reed" (cf. p. 149. Vol. 1. Potts)
Potts noted the appearance of Dilmun in a victory inscription:
"...Uperi, king of Dilmun, whose camp is situated, like a fish, thirty beru (double-hours) away in the midst of the sea of the rising sun..." (p. 334. Vol. 1. Potts)
The above description of Dilmun's king being likened to a fish in the midst of a sea suggests for me an island in the midst of the sea. Since when do any Persian Gulf islands possess tin and copper ore reserves capable of being mined?
Citing a text of Sargon of Agade (ca. 2334-2279 B.C.) Potts noted a mention of ships from Meluhha, Magan and Dilmun.
Potts noted Mesopotamian inscriptions identifying Inzak as the god of Dilmun, and that three inscriptions on Failaka mentioned this god (pp. 287-288. Vol. 1. Potts):
Three inscriptions found on Failaka mentioned 'Inzak of Agarum" causing Glassner to speculate the island's name may have been Agarum. Potts noted that this descriptor of Inzak as being _of Agarum_ appears 3 times on Failaka and once at Bahrein, and never in Susiana or Babylonia. (p. 289. Vol. 1. Potts)
Potts, in summarizing the archaeological findings at the islands of Failaka and Bahrein, suggested that these two locations came to be "garbled" into Dilmun by the Mesopotamians:
"I think it is not unlikely that Failaka was considered, from a Babylonian point of view, part of Dilmun, in that it a.) stood at the head of the Lower Sea, that body of water with which Dilmun was associated, b.) exhibited much the same mixture of people from many lands as Bahrein did, and c.) probably had an active body of merchants, some of whom must originally have come from Bahrein, who used the distinctive Dilmun stamp seal. In a situation like this, there would have been little to distinguish Failaka from Bahrein when viewed from a Babylonian perspective." (p. 292. Vol. 1. Potts)
Potts noted that the archaeological evidence suggests that there was no occupation on Failaka in the 3rd millennium B.C. It was occupied after a one meter drop in sea levels about 2000 B.C. The problem? How could Sargon of Agade 2334-2279 B.C. boast of conquering Dilmun if it was an unoccupied island, not being settled until after 2000 B.C.?
"Recent geomorphological work on Failaka has shown that during the early and mid-third millennium B.C. the south-western portion of the island was under water as a consequence of sea levels more than a metre higher than those of today...It was only around 2000 B.C. that the drop in sea-level uncovered portions of the island, and the original colonization of Failaka appears to have taken place shortly thereafter. In fact there are several finds that are older. Stamp seals from ED III date from Susa, Assur, Nineveh, Khafajah, Hamrin areas. A few pieces of carved soft stone of serie ancienne type from F6, dated to ED IIIA, and two Neo-Sumerian cylinder seals from F3/F6. As neither pottery nor architecture remains of the 3rd millennium date have ever been found on Failaka, however, it would appear that the handful of finds mentioned found their way to the site as heirlooms." (p. 267. Vol. 1. Potts)
Potts on Failaka:
"Dilmun seals in the lowest levels date the colonization of Failaka to shortly after 2000 B.C. There is no doubt that it was settled by inhabitants from Bahrein- the ceramics are Barbar tradition." (p. 274. Vol. 1. Potts)
Professor Crawford (Honorary Visiting Professor in the Institute of Archaeology, University College, London) noted that although texts found in ancient Sumer suggest trade existed between Early Dynastic III Lagash and Dilmun, no trade items from Sumer have ever been found on the island of Bahrain (Pott's: Bahrein) of this period Bahrein being commonly identified with Dilmun. Ur-Nanshe of Lagash is dated to the Early Dynastic IIIB period, ca. 2450-2350 B.C. (emphasis mine in CAPITALS):
"Dilmun, as we have seen, was already an entrepot in the earlier third millennium and is importance probably increased throughout the Early Dynastic. It is mentioned on inscriptions of Ur-Nanshe of Lagash in early Early Dynastic III as a source of timber for roofing a temple. IT IS RATHER SURPRISING THAT THERE ARE NO TRACES OF CONTACT WITH EARLY DYNASTIC MESOPOTAMIA ON THE ISLAND OF BAHRAIN ITSELF, where the earliest city probably dates to Early Dynastic III." (p. 187. "Trade." Harriet Crawford. Sumer and the Sumerians. Cambridge, England. The University of Cambridge. 1991, second edition 2004)
Crawford also noted that there is NO evidence of Mesopotamian trade settlements anywhere in the Persian Gulf (having earlier noted evidence of settlements in Syria along the Euphrates from Sumer):
"Nor is there evidence for Sumerian settlements in the Gulf region: no tablets, seals or seal impressions have been found." (p. 183. Crawford. Of interest to some readers is her book on Dilmun: Harriet Crawford. Dilmun and its Gulf Neighbors. Cambridge, United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. 1998)
She did however note that Mesopotamian Jemdat Nasr wares (ca. 3200-2800 B.C.) do appear in Bahrein and in Oman:
"In the Gulf, Mesopotamian artefacts are again found in the Jemdat Nasr period, both in Bahrain and further south in Oman along the line of oases running inland parallel with the coast, where typical Jemdat Nasr polychrome ware has been found in burial cairns." (p. 182. Crawford)
So stands the situation on Dilmun. The problem? NO trees, NO copper, NO silver, NO precious stones, all of these _anomalies_ have been "rationalized away" as the site (Bahrein/Bahrain and/or Failaka) being nothing more than a entrepot or trading station whose ships plied the waters of the Ancient Near Eastern world bringing together all these items and trans-shipping them to the peoples of Lower Mesopotamia, who, _in error_, thought they were products of the land of Dilmun. Failaka was NOT settled until ca. 2000 B.C., too late to qualify as Ur-Nanshe (2450-2350 B.C.) of Lagash's Dilmun. And NO Mesopotamian trade items have been found on Bahrein of the Early Dynastic III period (ca. 2600-2350 B.C.) as noted by Crawford who understands Bahrein's earliest settlement is circa 2200 B.C.. Yet, with all these anomalies the professional literature still maintains Dilmun is Bahrein and the nearby adjacent eastern coast of Arabia!
From the below verses I draw the conclusion that the "land of the sea" is the tamtu marshlands east of Eridu and Ur and west of Elam, where lie Dilmun, Magan and Meluhha.
"The [la]nd of the sea I seiged three times, I conquered Dilmun.
I went up to great Der...
Whatsoever king who shall arise after me...
Let him siege the [la]nd of the sea three times,
[Let him conquer Dilmun].
Let him go up [to] great Der..."
(p. 165. Sargon of Akkad, 2334-2279 BC. Benjamin R. Foster. From Distant Days, Myths, Tales, and Poetry of Ancient Mesopotamia. Bethseda, Maryland. CDL Press. 1995. ISBN 1-883053-09-9. paperback)
"They destroyed Gutium and invaded Elam,
They destroyed Elam and arrived at the seacoast,
They killed the people of the (sea) crossing.
They were thrown to [ ],
Dilmun, Magan, Meluhha,
Whatever is in the midst of the sea they killed."
(p. 173. "Legend of Naram-Sin, 2254-2218 B.C." Benjamin R. Foster. From Distant Days, Myths, Tales, and Poetry of Ancient Mesopotamia. Bethseda, Maryland. CDL Press. 1995. ISBN 1-883053-09-9. paperback)
Contra the "scholarly mainstream view" that Dilmun is to be associated with the islands of Bahrein/Bahrain and Failaka I understand that it is to be located in the marshlands between Sumer and Elam and that scholars have misunderstood the ancient texts.
Below is Professor Kramer's translation of a text mentioning the water-god Enki, leaving his home at Eridu, described in other texts as being on the edge of the tam-tu or "sea-lands." Note that his boat is equipped with a punting pole. Enki visits a number of sites giving them his blessings and decreeing their destinies. Note that kur can mean "land or mountain" (Emphasis is mine in _CAPITALS_):
"Now that his powers and prerogatives had been twice acclaimed by the Anunna-gods, especially those relating to the irrevocable, authoritive, universal laws known as me, Enki was all set to start HIS JOURNEY TO SUMER _AND _NEIGHBORING LANDS_ . First, however, according to our poet, the cult personnel of his temple had to perform the necessary lustration rites for the purification of his temple. They also had to construct a staircase leading up to the good, noble quay of Eridu where his boat, the Ibex of the Abzu, would be moored, and to set up an usga-shrine where could offer prayers to him as he was about to board his boat, thus (lines 140-54):
For the great prince who was passing through his land,
all the lords, all the rulers,
all the incantation-priests of Eridu,
the "linen-wearers" of Sumer,
carry out the lustration rites of the Abzu,
stand watch over the holy places,
the precious places for [?] Father Enki,
cleanse the great house of the prince,
name its "stations,"
purify the noble shrine, the Abzu,
carry into its midst the tall juniper,
the pure plant,
straighten the holy...
the noble water-courses of Father Enki,
build with skill the staircase of Eridu at the good quay,
moor [?] the Ibex of the Abzu at the good quay,
the noble quay,
set up the holy usga-shrine,
give voice in prayer after prayer there to him...
"Therefore now follows a fragmentary and rather obscure passage that depicts Enki boarding his boat, the Ibex of the Abzu to the accompaniment of such picturesque deportment as that of fish waving their tails for him AMONG THE REEDS, following which various minor gods proceed to attend to the boat's paraphernalia, such as the standard, the mast, THE PUNTING POLE, and the scepter...And so a confident Enki...comes forth to his land, Sumer, and blesses it richly...
"Enki decrees its fate:
"Sumer, Great Kur,
mada of what is above and below,
robed in enduring light,
settling the me upon the people
from sunrise to sunset,
your me are lofty me,
untouchable...
Your king, the great Kur,
Father Enlil,
the father of the lands,
has blocked up...like a verdant tree.
"The Anunna-gods, the great gods,
have taken up dwellings in your midst,
consume their food in your giguna
among your rare [?] trees.
"House, Sumer,
have your many stalls built,
have your cows multiply,
have many sheepfolds set up,
have your sheep be many...
"Enki now turns to Ur, presumably the capital of Sumer at the time this composition was first written...
"He crossed to the shrine, Ur,
Enki, king of the Abzu, decrees its fate:
"City with everything proper to it, water-washed,
a firm-standing bull,
a dais of plenty in the kur, "knees wide open,"
lofty as a mountain,
hashur grove wide of shade,
counting on its own strength...
City whose fate has been decreed by Enki...
"From Ur Enki proceeded to Meluhha and conferred upon it a rather extraordinary blessing that indirectly reveals no little information about its flora and fauna (lines 219-35):
"He crossed to the kur Meluhha.
Enki, the king of the Abzu, decrees its fate:
Black kur, your trees will be large trees,
they will be mes-groves of the kur,
their thrones will be set in royal palaces.
Your REEDS WILL BE LARGE REEDS
they wil be REEDS OF THE KUR;
heroes work them as weapons in the battlefieds.
Your BULLS will be large BULLS of the kur..."
"Following two fragmentary, unintelligible lines, we find Enki purifying Dilmun, which he placed under the charge of the goddess Ninsikil, assigning it lagoons and palm groves, thus (line 238-49):
"He cleansed and purified the kur-Dilmun,
set Ninsikilla in charge of it.
LAGOONS he allotted the princely shrine.
Dilmun eats its FISH.
PALM-TREES he allotted to its fertile field.
Dilmun eats their DATES."
"He next turns to the lands of Elam and Marhasi, Sumer's perennial enemies, and curses them with ruinous defeat at the hands of Sumer:
...who are all-devouring,
The king given power by Enlil
attacked their houses, attacked their walls;
their silver, lapis lazuli, [and] storehouses
he brought to Nippur for Enlil, king of all the lands.
"To him who had no city
who had no house,
the Martu- Enki furnished cattle as a gift."
"Here ends Enki's preordaining of the destinies of lands and peoples, as envisioned by the poet."
(cf. pp. 44-47. "Enki and Inanna: The Organization of the Earth." Samuel Noah Kramer & John Maier. Myths of Enki, "The Crafty God." New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1989. ISBN 0-19-505502-0)
I understand from the above verses that Meluhha is NOT the Indus river valley as maintained by some scholars, NOR is it Cush (Ethiopia) NOR Egypt, its a location within the marshes between Sumer and Elam.
Note that Melhuhha is blessed by Enki, who reaches it in his "Ibex of the Abzu" boat, with its _PUNTING POLE_ even today the marsh Arabs navigate this area with shallow-draft boats and punting poles. Please click here for a photo of Enki in his boat amongst marsh reeds being propelled by two servants using punting poles. Enki blesses Meluhha with LARGE REEDS and LARGE BULLS, both of which are "native" to the Lower Mesopotamian marshlands. Melhuhha has mes-groves and Enki erected a mes-tree at Eridu in another myth, so mes-trees can grow in Sumer and nearby regions.
Note that Dilmun is blessed with LAGOONS filled with fish. Lagoons abound in the marshlands of Lower Mesopotamia, and are filled with fish. Date-Palms are also to be found in these marshes as well, and are maintained by the marsh Arabs as an important food source on their island homes.
Enki's curse of Elam and Marhasi notes that their storehouses of silver and lapis lazuli and produce are to be plundered by Sumer and dedicated to the god Enlil at Nippur.
The Martu get as a blessing from Enki, cattle -they are the nomads of the steppe or high plains to the west of Sumer who live in tents, not houses.
The above verses suggest to me that Dilmun is NOT Bahrein or Failaka, its somewhere in the marshlands between Sumer and Elam. _I understand_ that the world Enki is blessing is bounded by Martu (nomads of the steppes) to the West of the marshlands, Ur and Nippur to the North, Eridu to the South, and Elam on the East.
Enki mentions that he enjoys boating in the marshes near his principal residence of Eridu:
"I built my Abzu, a shine...its shade stretches over the 'snake'-marsh...The carps wave the tail to him in (?) the small gizi-reeds...My magur-boat...the lofty marshland, my favorite spot stretches out its arms to me..." (p. 176. Samuel Noah Kramer. The Sumerians, Their History, Culture, and Character. Chicago. The University of Chicago Press. [1963] reprint 1972. ISBN 0-226-45238-7 paperback)
The Neo-Assyrian king Sennacherib in describing his utter destruction of Babylon ca. 689 BCE for repeated rebellions to his authority, noted that the dust of the destroyed city was dumped into the Euphrates river and carried by that river to the land of Dilmun, where the king of that land seeing the muddied waters was terrorized. Obviously, Dilmun lies "somewhere" _downstream_ from Babylon and near the Euphrates' lower course.
Some Arab traditions today claim that the Garden of Eden is at Qurnah where the Euphrates and Tigris rivers meet to form the Shatt al-Arab which debouches into the Persian Gulf. The problem? In antiquity, the 4th-1st millenniums B.C., the Euphrates' mouth was not at Qurnah its "mouth" was near Eridu and Ur, and ancient cuneiform texts speak of Eridu, Ur, and Lagash as being on the shore of the "Sea." Recent geological and hydrological explorations of this region using the results of corings (from oil exploration) have established that a great inland sea or estuary existed whose shore was as far north as Ur, which received its irrigation water for its gardens from the Euphrates. Over the millennia deposits of silt from the Euphrates caused this great inland "sea" to recede eastwards where today its remains are the Hawr al Hammar lagoon west of Qurnah. These sites, Eridu, Ur and Lagash, are some 90 miles west of Qurnah. I know of no ancient settlement near Qurnah dating from the 4th-1st millenniums B.C. when Dilmun appears in ancient texts. I thus understand that the "island of Dilmun" is most probably Tell el Lahm to the ESE of Ur and Eridu. In antiquity it would have lain the midst of the great inland sea or estuary, today it lies in the midst of a desert.
Professor Potts has challenged the above notion that a "vast sea" extended from near Ur and Eridu to the Persian Gulf. He understands that ancient sites with traces of _irrigated fields_ found near the Hawr al Hammar Lagoon existed in the 2d millennium B.C. and that they would have been "underwater" had a vast sea existed. He argues that these sites were strung-out in a line paralleling the Euphrates river south of the lagoon (today the Euphrates is north of the Lagoon). If he is right, then this may explain the "mystery" of Dilmun being sited near a "river" in a marshland environment. In one myth Enki is portrayed as espying maidens standing on the bank of a river in the midst of the marshlands. When he attempts sex, one maid cries out "no man take me in the marshes." Over time a succession of maidens appear at the river's bank and are accosted by Enki, who is said to glide down a river through the marshes to the bank which is described as being at Dilmun! The Euphrates presence in the marshlands east of Ur and Eridu, if rightly argued by Potts, would seem to align "Dilmun's river" in a marsh environment with any of the 2d millennium B.C. sites south of the present-day Hawr al-Hammar Lagoon. One of these sites is Tel al-Lahm, which is shown as being connected to the Euphrates via the Id-Nun canal which begins at Ur (cf. map figure 1.12. p. 28. D.T. Potts. Mesopotamian Civilization: The Material Foundations. Ithaca, New York. Cornell University Press. 1997). Potts (map figure 1.17, p. 37) shows the boundary of lands inundated by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and this line passes to the south of Tell al-Lahm, so this site lies within the so-called "Sealands," the marshes and lagoons east of Ur and Eridu. The presence of irrigated fields at some of the sites south of the Hawr al-Hammar Lagoon reveals that apparently there existed sizable patches of land near these sites, they were not simply tiny islands in the midst of the marshes. In fact Potts has argued that the Hawr al-Hammar may be a recent phenomenon, coming into existence about 1870 (cf. pp. 36-41).
Please click here for a map by G. Roux (1960) showing pre-Islamic archaeological sites (2d millennium B.C.) in the vicinity of the Hor al-Hammar Lagoon from the vicinity of Ur to Basra. Dilmun might be one of these sites?
Potts (1997) on Georges Roux's discoveries (1960) near the Hor al-Hammar Lagoon:
"In cuneiform sources southernmost Mesopotamia was known as mat tamti(m) (Sumerian KUR A.AB.BA), the 'Sealand'...While B. Meissner could claim in 1920 that the lack of mounds in this region made it certain that it had been under water (Meissner 1920:4), G. Roux's survey of the Hor al-Hammar (fig. 1.17) showed that this was purely the result of insufficient exploration (Roux 1960:30), for there is in fact a string of mounds 'extending in an almost straight line from Tell Lahm to a point 23 miles north of Basrah' which, Roux suggests 'provides a strong argument against the classical theory according to which the whole of this region was under sea-water from prehistoric times to the dawn of the Christian era' (Roux 1960:30). The existence of sites such as Tells Kirbasi, al-Lahm, Aqram and Abu Salabikh in the area of the modern Hor al-Hammar underscores the fact that, from at least the early second millennium B.C. onwards, this was a populated area which, while it may have been marshy, was certainly not submerged beneath the Gulf. Rising no more than 2 meters above the water line, Tell Kirbasi is today periodically surrounded by water, yet it is difficult to imagine that a site like this was located on an island in the Kassite period, for there is little reason to suppose that if this were the case, Tell Kirbasi or indeed the Sealand generally would have been cited as a source of cattle and cereals. Thus, de Morgan's suggested shoreline in the time of Sennacherib would place under water sites such as Tell al-Lahm which we now know were occupied during the Neo-Assyrian period! The discovery of a cylinder of Nabonidus (555-539 B.C.) at Tell al-Lahm...moreover, confirms that 150 years after Sennacherib's time, the region was most definitely not submerged, and indeed Sanlaville's sea-level curve shows that sea-levels throughout the second millennium B.C. were only marginally higher (less than 1 meter) than they are today, while from the Neo-Assyrian through the latter part of the Parthian era, they were, contrary to de Morgan's belief, significantly lower than modern levels.
That is not to say, however, that the entire area of southernmost Mesopotamia was dry land, or that references to 'the sea' in Sennacherib's account or in texts relating to Ur and Eridu do not refer to some inland body or bodies of water which actually existed...more recently Adams has suggested, 'We may have to deal in in the past, as to a lesser extent we still do today, not with a well-defined shoreline but with a progression of swamps and more and more open, more brackish or saline lagoons' (Adams 1981:16). Nevertheless, this does not necessarily mean that the Hor al-Hammar itself existed when the sites found by Roux were inhabitated. As Roux himself remarked, the existence of relict canals near Tell Abu Salabikh and a well at Tell Aqram suggest that this region was once cultivated, as indeed the Kassite cuneiform sources cited above confirm, and drier than it is today." (pp.37-38. Potts)
"Finally, had the Gulf actually reached the area of Ur, Eridu or Tello, one must ask whether these sites could have then existed. W. Nutzel has noted that the tidal pattern in the northern Gulf affects the waters of the Shatt al-Arab in that salt-waters enters it at least as far as Abdul Khasib, circa 10 kilometers east of Basra. The interchange of salt and sweet water would have made irrigation from such water impossible, for none of the staple cereals grown in antiquity would have been able to tolerate water with such a high salt content. Therefore, settlements must always have been situated outside the zone affected by such an interchange. The very existence of sites like Ur, or for that matter, the mounds discussed above in the Hor al-Hammar district, Nutzel argues, precludes the possibility that salt-water was present in close proximity to them (Nutzel 1980:98-9)." (p. 39. D. T. Potts. Mesopotamian Civilization: The Material Foundations. Ithaca, New York. Cornell University Press. 1997)
Potts citing Sennacherib's claims:
"After I had destroyed Babylon...I removed its ground and it carried to the Euphrates and on to the sea. Its dust was carried to Dilmun. The Dilmunites saw it, and terror of the splendor of Asshur fell upon them." (p. 339. Vol. 1. D. T. Potts. The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. Vol. 1. [2 vols.], Oxford. The Clarendon Press. 1990)
Potts in referring to the above quotation noted (Emphasis mine):
"R. Campbell Thompson read it as _proof_ Dilmun was NOT Bahrein, but rather A LOCALE NEAR THE MOUTH OF THE EUPHRATES. J. F. Salles identified the muddy waters near the island of Failaka." (p. 339. Vol. 1. D. T. Potts. The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. Vol. 1. [2 vols.], Oxford. The Clarendon Press. 1990)
Potts on the name of one of Dilmun's kings being Elamite:
"Hundaru, king of Dilmun, an Elamite name..." (p. 346. Vol. 1. Potts)
Potts on En-Sag being the god of Dilmun, and this name appearing at Failaka and at Elam:
"...let Ensag be the lord of Dilmun...Inzak, a god of Dilmun (Kassite era)...at Susa personal names compound with the element Inzak...Inzak appears in the guise of Nin-zag-ga on Gudaea's cylinder... Three of the Failaka texts name the deity 'Inzak of Agarum'. Glassner has recently suggested that Agarum was the ancient name for Failaka..." (pp. 288-289. Vol. 1. Potts)
Beek on the "seacoast" being at Eridu (I note that Sennacherib said that Babylon's dust reached "THE SEA" and Dilmun, perhaps Sennacherib's "sea" is Shulgi's "sea," the tam-tu or sea-lands ?:
"Shulgi, the son of Ur-Nammu, devoted special care to the city of Eridu, which lay on the sea coast...Perhaps people considered the extensive area of swamps... as forming part of the sea?" (p. 10. Martin Beek. Atlas of Mesopotamia. London. Thomas Nelson & Sons. 1962)
Pritchard's translation suggests for me that Dilmun lies within the "sea-lands" and that it was quite a feat for any monarch to enter and subdue the tribes dwelling in this land who could "ambush" their 'land-lubber' enemies and easily "hideout" in the lagoons and marshes filled with tall reeds. I note that even under Saddam Hussein, the marshlands were an area refugees fled to, a treacherous region for an ancient or modern land-based army to try and capture, hold, and navigate; Saddam's solution was to divert the Euphrates from the area, drying up the marshes. That a few monarchs could proudly boast of capturing and holding Dilmun in the marshlands must have been quite an achievement!
"Sargon, the mighty king, king of Agade am I...the black-headed people I ruled, I governed; Mighty mountains with chip-axes of bronze I conquered, the upper ranges I scaled, the lower ranges I traversed, the sea lands three times I circled. Dilmun my hand captured, to the great Der I went up...Whatever king may come up after me, let him...circle the sea lands three times ! Dilmun let his hand capture, let him go up to great Der..." (pp. 87-88. "The Legend of Sargon." James B. Pritchard. Editor. The Ancient Near east, An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Princeton University Press. 1958. paperback edition)
My note: Der lies north of the sea-lands.
Potts citing another inscription about Dilmun:
"...Bit Iakin on the shore of the Bitter Sea, as far as Dilmun's border -all these I brought under one rule." (Sargon of Assyria, cf. p. 335.Vol. 1. Potts)
My Note: Bit Iakin (Bit Yakin, "House of Yakin," as in a tribal land or holding) lies West of the sea-lands, near Eridu.
"...Uperi, king of Dilmun, whose camp is situated, like a fish, thirty beru (double hours) away in the midst of the sea of the rising sun..." (p. 334. Potts)
Kramer (Emphasis mine):
"Enlil then proclaims that ...the couple [Utnapishtim and Wife] sent away 'to live at the SOURCE OF ALL RIVERS' (tablet XI. lines 194-196). Possibly the 'SOURCE OF ALL RIVERS' is the paradise land, Dilmun. In any case, it would appear to be a place important to the water-god Enki." (p. 160. Samuel Noah Kramer & John Maier. Myths of Enki, The Crafty God. New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1989)
Gardner and Maier, citing from the Epic of Gilgamesh:
"Let Utnapishtim live far off, at THE SOURCE OF ALL RIVERS.'
They took me far away, to live at THE SOURCE OF THE RIVERS."
(p. 241. Tablet XI, Lines 195-196. John Gardner & John Maier. Gilgamesh, Translated From the Sin-Leqi-Unninni Version. New York. Vintage Books. Random House. [1984. Alfred A. Knopf. Inc.] 1985. First Vintage Books Edition)
Professor Pritchard renders MOUTH OF THE RIVERS, rather SOURCE OF ALL RIVERS:
"Utnapishtim shall reside far away,
AT THE MOUTH OF THE RIVERS !"
(p. 71. "The Epic of Gilgamesh." James B. Pritchard. Editor. The Ancient Near East, An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Princeton, New Jersey. University of Princeton Press. 1958. paperback)
Heidel renders AT THE MOUTH OF THE RIVERS, rather than SOURCE OF THE RIVERS:
"In the distance, AT THE MOUTH OF THE RIVERS, Utnapishtim shall dwell.
So they took me and caused me to dwell in the distance, AT THE MOUTH OF THE RIVERS."
(p. 88. "The Gilgamesh Epic." Alexander Heidel. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 1946, 1949, reprint of 1993. paperback)
The late Kramer (a prominent Sumeriologist) noted that in Dilmun Enki impregnates not only his wife Ninhursag but several other goddesses as well. What is of interest is that Dilmun is portrayed in the below verses as being in a MARSHLAND environment, and possesses cisterns, ditches (for irrigation-fed crops ?) and is called the "floodgate" of the land its lagoons filled with fish are noted elsewhere in this article. A river bank is mentioned in association with Dilmun and neither Bahrain or Failaka are associated with a river's bank, they lie in the midst of the Persian Gulf.
Kramer (pp. 22-30) "Enki and Ninhursag: A Sumerian Paradise Myth" (Emphasis mine):
"There now follows an address by the goddess Ninsikilla, Dilmun's tutelary diety. She complains that the land of Dilmun, which he has given her, lacked sweet water and crop-bearing fields and farms. Enki responds by blessing Dilmun with an abundance of water brought out of the earth by the sun-god Utu...
"Utu, standing in heaven...
from THE MOUTH that pours out the earth's water
he brought her sweet water from the earth.
He pumps the water into her LARGE CISTERNS.
From them HER CITY drinks the wealth of water;
Dilmun drinks from them the waters overflowing.
Her WELL OF BITTER WATER is now a WELL OF SWEET WATER.
Her crop-yielding fields and farms turn out heaps of grain.
Her city is now THE FLOODGATE of the land,
Dilmun is the floodgate of the land...
Enki, the cunning one, in front of Nintu, mother of the land,
has his phallus FILL DITCHES full with semen,
has his phallus glut THE REEDS with an overflow of sperm,
has his phallus tear away the noble cloth that covers the lap.
He spoke out: "No one walks IN THE MARSHLAND."
Enki said: "No one walks IN THE MARSHLAND,"
He swore by the life of An.
His semen sowed to Damgalnunna,
poured that semen into the womb, Enki's semen,
poured that semen into the womb of Ninhursag.
After Ninhursag gives birth to a goddess, Enki impregnates her too:
"Ninmu came out to THE BANK OF THE RIVER.
OUT OF THE MARSHLAND Enki reaches out, reaches out...
He took her, kissed her,
poured semen into the womb."
Enki also impregnates Ninkurra, a gardener asks who is responsible for the life-giving waters that fill his IRRIGATION-FED GARDENS and is told it is Enki:
"Filling with water a second time
he filled THE DITCHES with water,
he filled THE CANALS with water, he filled the unsown lands with water
In his joy...the gardener
hugs him, [says to him]:
"who are you who [have watered] my garden ?" (p. 27)
We have an interesting dilemma here. The above texts suggest Dilmun is "at the mouth of the rivers" (pi narate), yet Enki is able to get in a boat and coast downstream and acost Dilmun's maidens as they stand at a river's bank!
How is it possible for Dilmun to be "at the mouth of the rivers" and yet it possesses a "river's bank" in a marshland setting?
In myths Enki's principal dwelling is Eridu which is said to lie at the edge of a sea. Yet he is able to get in his boat, presumably at Eridu, and coast down a river which apparently passes through a marshland environment and acost Dilmun's maidens standing by a river's bank.
In otherwords where is there a river extending from Eridu to Dilmun that winds its way through the marshlands east of Eridu?
The answer?
Georges Roux's 1960 map of the Hawr al Hammar Lagoon and area reveals that in antiquity the Euphrates apparently winded its way through the marshlands south of the present lagoon and this river continued eastward past Eridu and Ur.
Roux discovered along this river a number of ancient settlements dated to the 2d millennium B.C. That is to say Eridu, despite the texts declaring it lay "at the edge of the sea," was _not_ the easternmost settlement in Lower Mesopotamia!
The marshlands east of Ur and Eridu had the following "pre-Islamic" settlements, listed here from west to east of Ur and Eridu, all of which lay within the "alluvium" boundary caused by the Euphrates' waters, which fed the marshes and the lagoon: (1) Tell Murajib, (2) Tell Abu Rasain, (3) Tell Tuwayyil, (4) Tell Lahm, (5) Tell Jabarah, (6) Tell Jedejdah, (7) Tell Agram, (8) Tell Abu Salabikh, (9) Tell Nahr 'Umar (cf. p. 37, map titled "The Hor-al-Hammar." Figure 1.17. Archaeological sites in the Hor al-Hammar (after Roux 1960: Map 1)." D. T. Potts. Mesopotamian Civilization, The Material Remains. Ithaca, New York. Cornell University Press. 1997. For Roux's commentary accompanying the below map cf. Georges Roux. "Recently discovered ancient sites in the Hammar Lake District (southern Iraq)." Sumer. Vol. 16. 1960. pp. 20-31).
