Abraham

Chapter XXVII

Abraham, is a dominant figure on the genetic landscape with Noah and his sons, for his descendants loom large on the pages of history. Abraham is likened to Abel before the flood, in similarly being the first person after the flood to stand out as a towering presence in obedience to the true Creator. As Noah projects a large shadow on the antediluvian world, with Abel and Enoch, though giant pillars themselves, never-the-less caught in the shadow cast by Noah and his genetic role in the line of Seth; so, Abraham is the pivot of the genetic evolution of the line of Shem, the principal continuation of Seth. All those that followed him such as Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses,  Joshua, David, Elijah and Daniel, are enveloped not just by his genetic inheritance but also through Abraham’s faith. For Abraham is the Father of the faithful.

David A Snyder aptly states: “We will follow the life of this Abram whom God will later name Abraham. We will discover that he may have been as great a secular figure as he was a Biblical one.” He continues in his book.

Abraham of Ur – A Critical Analysis of the Life and Times of the Patriarch, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘At first I was not sure that Abraham even existed. After I investigated the secular history of the day and considered the Ugaritic literature… and the Tell el-Amarna tablets… I came to realize that the geopolitical climate at the time Abraham entered Canaan was perfectly conducive to support the stories of his travels into the Promised Land… Abraham’s family was well-educated, literate and wealthy. And if we are to believe Josephus, Abraham was possibly an astronomer and military leader. This is contradictory to the image most people have of Abraham as a nomadic shepherd leading a flock of sheep; however, I believe that only a well-educated and worldly man such as Abraham would be able to achieve the goal that God gave to him – to establish the Hebrew nation[s].’

Gerard Gertoux, The Pharaoh of the Exodus Fairy tale or real history – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Very few Bible scholars believe now (2016) in the historicity of the book of Genesis, especially the narrative of Abraham and Sarah’s life, but what is really incomprehensible is that their conclusion is based only on the following prejudice: the lack of archaeological evidence implies an absence of historicity of these biblical narratives!’ 

Yes, a small matter of a lack of archaeological evidence hinders the likelihood of a biblical figure being genuine; but doesn’t stand in the way at all, of scientists espousing a belief in an untenable theory to explain mankind’s existence. 

A greater evidence of Abraham’s existence… is the fact that he has become a father of many nations as we shall learn.

‘Today, according to mainstream Egyptologists as well as prominent archaeologists there would never have been: 1) any biblical writing in the time of Moses (Deuteronomy 31:24), 2) neither domesticated camels in the time of Abraham (Genesis 12:6), 3) nor Philistines (Genesis 21:34), 4) nor Hittites (Genesis 23:10), 5) nor Arameans (Deuteronomy 26:5), 6) nor Chaldeans (Genesis 11:28), etc. All these criticisms are paradoxical because despite the absence of reliable chronologies these academics and Bible experts say in a dogmatic manner having found numerous anachronisms in the narrative of Abraham and Sarah.’ 

Egyptologists and Archaeologists would be aware that the Bible has been edited and or, written after events have transpired. Thus, terms for various peoples that are more recent than Abraham are still valid in referring to a people of an earlier time during his life. The Philistines already existed as they descend from Mizra-im. Whether they were known as Philistines, Caphtorim, Minoans, Mycaeneans even or yet an entirely different name does not invalidate their existence or their kings’s interaction with Sarah and Abraham. Same with the Hittites descended from Heth of Canaan – not the later Hittites – and the Arameans or Syrians. Granted, the Chaldeans are descended principally from Abraham’s brother, Nahor though they existed as proto-Chaldeans via the descendants of Peleg and the early Babylonians [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Chapter XXV Nahor].

‘Regarding biblical chronology, the Vatican’s biblical scholars made Abraham enter into Canaan in 2138 BCE (Vigouroux: 1899, 737), while nowadays they say 1850 BCE (De Vaux: 1986, 1805). How can one explain such discrepancies in dates [of 288 years]?’ 

It is a step in the right direction, as the latter dating is fifty-two years out from 1902 BCE, compared with two hundred and thirty-six years for the former.

James 2:22-24

Common English Bible

22 See, his faith was at work along with his actions. In fact, his faith was made complete by his faithful actions. 23 So the scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed God, and God regarded him as righteous [like Lot, Daniel, Job, Noah and Abel]. What is more, Abraham was called God’s friend. 24 So you see that a person is shown to be righteous through faithful actions and not through faith alone.

The word friend in Greek is philos. It is a deep friendship, where each knows the other and can fully count on them. A close friend of long-standing and one that has been through everything of consequence with you. A quite profound reflection of the Creator’s relationship with Abraham. This was no ordinary friendship – it had transcended to a close, special bond between Abraham and the Eternal.

Isaiah 41:8

Darby Translation

But thou, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham, my friend

There are two other people in scripture that are referred to in a context, of being a friend of God; though not specifically as: ‘God’s friend’ or ‘my friend’ as described of Abraham. The resurrected Lazarus is described by Christ as ‘our friend’ [John 11:11] and Moses spoke face to face with God ‘as one speaks unto his friend’ [Exodus 33:11]. There is a further link between Abraham and Moses – not just the family connection – that we will explore when we study Moses.

2 Chronicles 20:5-7

New English Translation

5 Jehoshaphat [the fourth king of Judah] stood before the assembly of Judah and Jerusalem at the Lord’s temple, in front of the new courtyard. 6 He prayed: “O Lord God of our ancestors, you are the God who lives in heaven and rules over all the kingdoms of the nations. You possess strength and power; no one can stand against you. 7 Our God, you drove out the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel and gave it as a permanent possession to the descendants of your friend Abraham.

The Hebrew word for friend in both verses is ahab. This word implies a deep love and respect for another. There is encouragement in knowing that we too, can be counted as the Son of Man’s friend.

John 15:14-15

New English Translation

14 You are my friends if you do what I command you. 15 I no longer call you slaves, because the slave does not understand what his master is doing. But I have called you friends, because I have revealed to you everything I heard from my Father.

Friend of God’ is the meaning of the name Theophilus. In 2 Samuel chapter twelve, David comforts Bathsheba after the death of their first baby. The second child is named Solomon. Verses 24-25 ESV: ‘And the Lord loved him and sent a message by Nathan the prophet. So he called his name Jedidiah [H3041 – beloved of the Lord], because of the Lord.’ Solomon was blessed with a special name, which also means friend of God.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Abram [means:] Exalted Father, Their Shield, Their Protection From (1) (‘ab), father, and (2) (rum), to be elevated. From (1) the verb (abar), to be strong or to protect, and (2) the 3rd person plural pronominal suffix (am), their.

There’s only one man named Abram in the Bible, namely the famous son of Terah who left Ur of the Chaldeans and headed for a land which YHWH would show him (Genesis 11:31). Since Abram is the first complex character in the Bible, a lot of the Bible’s primeurs are his. However, Abram is typically not the first to call upon the name of YHWH, because that went on as far back as the generation of  Enosh, the grandson of Adam and Eve (4:26). He was also not the first to worship the one and only God, because when he arrived in Canaan he found Melchizedek well engaged as priest of El Elyon (14:18). He was also not the first to be called righteous (15:6), because that was Noah (6:9) and in retrospect Abel (Matthew 23:25).

Abram is nevertheless the first on record to be approached by… the Lord (15:1), the first to be called Hebrew (14:13) and the first to engage in international commerce. He’s the first to itinerate and circulate… the first to be rich (in cattle and precious metals; Genesis 13:2), the first to compete and to establish a peaceful economic pact (with Lot; 13:6-12), the first to view the entire world as his oyster (13:14-15) and to whom the sky was the limit (15:5).

Abram was the first to pay property tax, namely 10 percent (to Melchizedek; 14:20), and this was adopted into Israel’s national policy(Genesis 28:22, Numbers 18:26, Hebrews 7:5). The first time the Bible speaks of a commercial purchase is in Genesis 17, where circumcision is instituted as sign of the great covenant… and the Lord renames Abram as Abraham and orders the inclusion into the covenant of all the men Abram had acquired via purchase (miqna, which is related to the name Cain). The first monetary transaction occurs as restitution for Sarah’s disgrace by Abimelech (Genesis 20:16; because Abram was also the first to [loan] his wife… Genesis 20 and 12:11-20).

The first actual purchase with money described in the Bible is Abraham’s flamboyantly negotiated acquisition of the cave of Machpelah from Ephron, son of Zohar of Heth. Abraham wanted that cave and wanted to pay for it in order to properly bury Sarah (Genesis 23). He paid 400 shekels for it (23:16), according to the “passing of trade”…

A somewhat more hairy unit of wealth was the camel, but where the English word “camel” is solely reserved for that humped beast of burden, the Hebrew cognate (gamal), meaning camel, comes from the identical verb (gamal), which means to trade or invest. In other words: the Hebrew noun (gamal) does not denote a specific biological genus, it describes a particular economic function, namely that of investing and long-distance trading…

The camel too gets its Biblical introduction in the Abram cycle, namely when the Egyptian Pharaoh reimburses Abram for the Sarai incident with sheep, cattle, donkeys, servants and camels (12:16). The next time Abraham’s proverbial camels are mentioned is when Abraham sends his chief of staff (probably Eliezer) north to his family’s land with “ten” camels and the whole of Abraham’s wealth in his hand (24:10), in order to obtain a wife for Isaac…

There are two ways to go about the name Abram. Traditionally this name is interpreted to consist of two elements, the first of which would be (‘ab), meaning father: The noun (‘ab) means father, but describes primarily a social relationship rather than a biological one. That social fatherhood was the defining quality of the community’s alpha male, the one around whom all economy revolved and from whom emanated all instructions by which the ‘sons’ (ben) operated. It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu means to decide.

The second part of our name is traditionally considered to be part of the great (rum)-cluster of names: The verb (rum) means to be high or high up in either a physical, social or even attitudinal sense, and may also refer to the apex in a natural process: the being ripe and ready-for-harvest of fruits. Derived nouns, such as (rum) and related forms, describe height or pride. Noun (ramut) describes some high thing. The noun (‘armon) refers to a society’s apex: a citadel or palace. The noun (re’em) describes the wild ox, which was named possibly for the same reason why we moderns call a rising market a “bull” market.The similar verb (ra’am) means to rise.

The name Abram relates to Abraham the way Sarai relates to Sarah; the latter two names are basically variations of the same word… The core of both names comes from the root (‘br), meaning to be strong or to protect: The name Abraham is often reported to mean Father Of Many Nations but that’s rather obviously incorrect. In Genesis 17:5, the Lord promises Abram that he would be the father of many nations – in  Hebrew: ‘ab hamon goyim – but that does not mean that Abram’s new name, namely Abraham, means Father Of Many Nations. 

God changes Abram’s name to Abraham. Likewise, the Lord promises that Abraham’s… wife Sarai would “become nations” or rather: “become international” (heyata le’goyim) and changed her name to  Sarah (17:16). As with our name Abraham, the phrase does not relate to the name. The name Abraham follows from the name Abram by inserting the letter (he) in front of the final (mem), and the name Sarah follows from Sarai by replacing the final (yod) with the same letter (he). This letter (he) is one of a few Hebrew letters that may represent both a consonant and a vowel… and it’s probably no coincidence that the name of the Lord, or YHWH consists of only those vowel-consonant symbols, and contains twice this potent letter (he). 

The names Sarai and Sarah both stem from the root (sarar), which possibly means to rule or to be strong. The final (yod) of the original name Sarai suggests a possessive form: my strength or strength(s) of, whereas the new name Sarah reflects the general idea of ruling or being strong. The names Sarai and Sarah reflect the same core idea, but the form Sarai reflects locality and the form Sarah reflects universality. The same transition between locality and universality is reflected in the names Abram and Abraham, which are both based on the root (‘abar), meaning to be strong (or to be able to protect)… Like Sarai, the name Abram seems to denote a nation’s private strength, whereas the name Abraham, like Sarah, reflects the strength that arises from synchronicity among states.

The core of the name Abraham comes from the exquisite root (‘br): The verb (‘br) means to be strong or firm, particularly in a defensive way (rather than offensive). The derived nouns (‘eber) and (‘ebra) refer to the pinion(s) that make up a bird’s wings, which in turn means that the ancients saw avian wings as means to protect rather than to fly with (the signature trait of angels, hence, is not an ability to fly but a tendency to protect). The verb (‘abar) describes activities done with pinions, which is to fly or to protect.

The name Abraham means Their Strength or Their Protection and reflects the security that arises from synchronicity among states (see below). Another detail worthy of note is that the first and last letters of the name (Abraham) are often used as formatives that do not change the meaning of the core word. These two letters obviously aren’t inconsequential formative letters in our name, but if we remove them anyway, what remains is (bara), the assumed root of the noun (berit), meaning covenant.

The Lord told Abraham that he would be the father of many nations (‘ab hamon goyim; Genesis 17:4-5) – not simply the father of many people but the father of the many nations that were established right after the flood (as listed in Genesis 10). 

The word (hamon), in turn, does not express simply a large number, but the rain-like noise that emerges from a unified but seething throng, and the throng, in this case, consists of autonomous nations. The Bible indicates that a multitude of goyim, or “nations” is the ultimate form of human society, which is remarkable because since time immemorial people have believed that they could somehow form a global empire that would unite all the nations, dissolve all borders and reign the entire world from one throne. But despite the efforts of many an emperor, it appears that humanity is designed to operate by means of nations…

It should be emphasized that despite the claims of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, neither Jesus nor Abraham has anything to do with any formal religion. 

Abraham is not a border-maker; he is a border-breaker… His patriarchy is one of consilience; in him are summed up the peacemakers of which Jesus said they would be called Sons Of God (Matthew 5:9).

The table of nations of Genesis 10 denotes the world’s various states of the first stage, and the members of the family of Abraham denote the states of the second stage. Most of these very early states have long gone (or went by other names than modern ones; very early states probably changed names much more often than states do today and were doubtlessly known to their contemporaries by multiple names)…’

The constant reader will have noted that we can actually know the early states and nations and who they are today, even though their names have continuously altered and evolved, their core, original identities have remained and have only to be deciphered. 

Abraham’s family, including his two brothers were a second wave of nations that arrived on the world stage very late – some nine thousand years later than those originating from the Ark.

We have covered part of Abraham’s early life as well as his wife Sarah, whilst studying Nahor and Haran [refer Chapter XXV Nahor & Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon]. Further insight can be gleaned into Abram’s early life from the Book of Jubilees. Abram’s mother is named as Edna, though another source says Terah’s wife’s name was Amathlai. Refreshing our mind regarding Abraham in the Book of Jubilees; Jubilees 11:16-23 explains that Abram as a child “began to understand the errors of the earth that all went astray after graven images and after uncleanness… and he separated himself from his father, that he might not worship idols with him.”

‘And he began to pray to the Creator of all things that He might save him from the errors of the children of men, and that his portion should not fall into error after uncleanness and vileness. And the seed time came for the sowing of seed upon the land, and they all went forth together to protect their seed against the ravens, and Abram went forth with those that went, and the child was a lad of fourteen years. And a cloud of ravens came to devour the seed, and Abram ran to meet them before they settled on the ground, and cried to them before they settled on the ground to devour the seed… [saying], ‘Descend not: return to the place whence ye came,’ and they proceeded to turn back… his name became great in all the land of the Chaldees… they sowed their land, and that year they brought enough grain home and eat and were satisfied… Abram taught those who made implements for oxen, the artificers in wood, and they made a vessel above the ground, facing the frame of the plough, in order to put the seed thereon, and the seed fell down therefrom upon the share of the plough, and was hidden in the earth, and they no longer feared the ravens.’

Following this, Abram confronts his father in Jubilees 12:1-7, on the always heated topic of religion. Why are discussions on anything deeper than the weather subject to confrontation or aggression? As with any difference of opinion that turns into an argument, it only becomes hostile, because people uphold an idea that is only just an intangible thought in their own mind, as something of ‘great’ significance – or important value, as it is part of them, right? – and to be defended vigorously at all costs, spurred on by ones own ego. If a person sees all beliefs or thoughts as opinions, whether they be correct or false and that one can always build on them or if necessary tear them down and start again; then all arguments are pointless and merely based on an individuals own pride and not truly on a premise of seeking knowledge, understanding, wisdom or the truth.

‘… it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son’… he said, ‘What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship, And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. 

Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word,  And all life is from before His face. For they are the work of (men’s) hands… on your shoulders do ye bear them… ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them… a misleading of the heart to those who worship them: And his father said unto him, I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them?if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee’ … these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.’

Book of Jubilees 12:12-21

Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it… they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire… Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father, and they buried him in Ur of the Chaldees. And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of Lebanon and into the land of Canaan, and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran… 

Abram sat up throughout the night on the new moon of the seventh month [1st of Tishri, Feast of Trumpets] to observe the stars from the evening to the morning, in order to see what would be the character of the year with regard to the rains, and he was alone as he sat and observed. And a word came into his heart and he said: All the signs of the stars, and the signs of the moon and of the sun are all in the hand of the Lord. Why do I search (them) out? If He desires, He causes it to rain, morning and evening; And if He desires, He withholds it, And all things are in his hand.’ 

And he prayed that night and said, ‘My God, God Most High, Thou alone art my God, And Thee and Thy dominion have I chosen. And Thou hast created all things, And all things that are the work of thy hands. Deliver me from the hands of evil spirits who have dominion over the thoughts of men’s hearts… let them not lead me astray from Thee, my God.. establish Thou me and my seed for ever That we go not astray from henceforth and for evermore.’ And he said, ‘Shall I return unto Ur of the Chaldees who seek my face that I may return to them, am I to remain here in this place? The right path before Thee prosper it in the hands of Thy servant that he may fulfil (it) and that I may not walk in the deceitfulness of my heart, O my God.’

Jeremiah 17:9

Amplified Bible

The heart is deceitful above all things And it is extremely sick; Who can understand it fully and know its secret motives?

As discussed previously in the preceding two chapters, the likelihood of Terah fleeing Ur due to Nimrod’s wrath seems decidedly remote to this writer and even more so, accepting Nimrod was even still alive… alive, as in a corporeal human body. Haran dying in a furnace appears less likely than dying tragically in a house fire, set by Abraham or not. Josephus remarks that when Haran died, he was memorialized by the city where ‘… his monument is shown to this day.’ He also conjectured that Terah left Ur on account of the death of his son Haran and says: ‘Now hating Chaldea on account of his mourning for Haran, they all removed to Haran of Mesopotamia, where Terah died.’

Apart from these explanations it may simply be, that Terah also recognised the decline of the Ur III civilisation and prudently departed. A relative time of peace during King Shulgi’s reign could have been the time that Terah’s family left one city that had the Moon god Sin, as its chief deity for the the only other city that coincidently worshipped similarly… Haran. Whichever scenario, it appears Nahor lingered in Ur, possibly to tie up property and family affairs as they were a family of substance. Ironically, it would be many centuries later that descendants of Nahor would return as the ruling Chaldean dynasty. Whereas, Haran and Abraham’s descendants would never return.

Joshua 24:2

New Century Version

Then Joshua said to all the people, “Here’s what the Lord, the God of Israel, says to you: ‘A long time ago your ancestors lived on the other side of the Euphrates River. Terah, the father of Abraham and Nahor, worshiped other gods.

Regarding the Moon god Sin, David A Snyder comments – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In 1994, archaeologists found an ancient civilization at Gobekli Tepe in southwest Turkey, just 40 km north of ancient Haran. It consisted of several temples with large stone-carved monoliths in a circular pattern much like those found at Stonehenge in England… Archeologists were stunned to discover that the site was twelve thousand years old [circa 10,000 BCE – shortly after the flood]. The intricacy of the carvings on the monuments indicated a far more advanced civilization than historians thought existed at this early time in history. James Q. Jacobs, an anthropologist and part time astronomer, was investigating the Gobekli Tepe site on Google Earth. He knew of the moon god Sin’s temple at Haran and the Ziggurat at Ur and wondered if there was a relation to the temples at Gobekli Tepe. Google Earth revealed that the latitude at Haran equals Three-fourths atan and the Ziggurat at Ur Three-fifths atan (atan = arc tangent) and that the latitude number at the Ur Ziggurat is an accurate value for pi. The only thing I know for sure about Jacob’s statements is that both pi and atan are significant in higher mathematics. It is incredible that these mathematical calculations are from a society four thousand years old. He opines that Ur and Haran were therefore: 

“Astronomical observatories and geodetically positioned where the math is easiest. Their local level planes and the rotation axis form triangles with low integer proportions.” Further, the temple at Haran is exactly 40 km from the monolith circles at Gobekli Tepe, which is exactly 1/1000th of the circumference of the earth. This meant that whoever located these three temples may have known the distance to the equator and poles of the earth from mathematical calculations alone, which he found amazing. Jacobs continues: “Gobekli Tepe features the oldest known room aligned north-south which is evidence of astronomy in practice”. The Ur and Haran moon temples evidence a relationship to astronomy and precise knowledge of geodesy – what we call exact sciences. This knowledge would require an extremely high level of math”.

Josephus comments on this subject… he explains that Abraham claimed that the movement of the sun, moon, and all the heavenly bodies are the result of the actions of the God who created them, not the other way around. He was chastised by the local authorities… If God had already spoken to Abraham while still in Ur, it is likely that Abraham would make such an argument against astrology using astronomy, and in doing so, he would have upset the local priesthood. This then became another reason for Terah to move from Ur. Josephus concludes this episode when he states: “… the Chaldeans and the other peoples of Mesopotamia raised a tumult against him, he thought fit to leave that country; and by the assistance of God, he came and lived in the land of Canaan.”’

In the 1930s, more than Twenty thousand plus ancient tablets were found in the Palace at Mari, south of Haran during the 1930s. The tablets were dated approximately 1800 BCE [Abraham 1977-1802 BCE]. The tablets greatly aided Assyriologists understanding of the geography of the region. Names included were linked to Abraham’s family such as Serug and Nahor. As Terah’s family were of aristocratic lineage from Ur, they would have been welcomed and known within the palace at Mari. Tablets refer to the Hebrews or Hapiru, from Terah’s ancestor Eber, his Great, great, great grandfather. Hebrews did remain in Haran and Padan-Aram for some time, as Isaac and Jacob both took wives from family living there, as did some of Jacob’s sons. If these records refer to Terah’s clan, then he was an important figure in his day, and we are provided an extra-Biblical record of Abraham’s family. 

Book of Jubilees 12:28-31

‘… it came to pass… that [Abram] spoke to his father and informed him, that he would leave Haran to go into the land of Canaan to see it and return to him. And Terah his father said unto him; Go in peace: May the eternal God make thy path straight. And the Lord be with thee, and protect thee from all evil, And grant unto thee grace, mercy and favour before those who see thee, And may none of the children of men have power over thee to harm thee; Go in peace. And if thou seest a land pleasant to thy eyes to dwell in, then arise and take me to thee and take* Lot with thee, the son of Haran thy brother as thine own son: the Lord be with thee. And Nahor thy brother [will live] with me till thou returnest in peace, and we go with thee all together.’

Abraham departed Ur when he was fifty in 1927 BCE. When he was seventy-five in 1902 BCE, the Creator told him to leave Haran and depart for Canaan. From this time onwards, Abraham left city life and became a sojourning nomad, living in temporary dwellings in the countryside for the remaining one hundred years of his life.

Genesis 12:1-3

Amplified Bible

Now (in Haran) the Lord had said to Abram, “Go away from your country, And from your relatives And from your father’s house, To the land which I will show you; 2 … I will make you a great nation, And I will bless you (abundantly), And make your name great (exalted, distinguished); And you shall be a blessing (a source of great good to others); 3 And I will bless (do good for, benefit) those who bless you, And I will curse (that is, subject to My wrath and judgment) the one who curses (despises, dishonors, has contempt for) you. And in you all the families (nations) of the earth will be blessed.” 4 So Abram departed (in faithful obedience) as the Lord had directed him; and Lot (his nephew) left with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he left Haran [and Lot was sixty-eight]. 5 Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his nephew, and all their possessions which they had acquired, and the people (servants) which they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan.

Book of Jubilees 12:22-27

… and behold the word of the Lord was sent to him… saying: ‘Get thee up from thy country, and from thy kindred and from the house of thy father unto a land which I will show thee, and I shall make thee a great and numerous nation. And I will bless thee And I will make thy name great, And thou shalt be blessed in the earth, And in Thee shall all families of the earth be blessed, And I will bless them that bless thee, And curse them that curse thee. And I will be a God to thee and thy son [Isaac], and to thy son’s son [Jacob], and to all thy seed: fear not, from henceforth and unto all generations of the earth I am thy God.’

Much is said to Abram in a short passage. Notice the Creator said He would show Canaan to Abram. Abram was constantly on the move throughout Canaan, as if on a guided tour of the land that would one day fall to his descendants, but not to him directly. 

Genesis 13:17

English Standard Version

Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land [of Canaan], for I will give it to you.”

Abram is next told he will father a great nation – yet Sarai was barren and he had no son or heir. Even though all the nations on the earth had been in existence for many thousands of years since the flood, a new nation would come from his loins. This also happened for his brothers Nahor and the peoples of Northern and Central Italy and Haran, the peoples of Switzerland, France and Quebec in Canada. The great good to others, encompasses to the fulfilment of the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 and the promised Messiah, Immanuel [Isaiah 7:14].

Mary, pregnant with the Saviour, ‘in the fullness of time’ [Galatians 4:4] would undoubtedly recall the divine promise in Luke 1:54-55, CEB: “He has come to the aid of his servant Israel [Jacob], remembering his mercy, just as he promised to our ancestors, to Abraham and to Abraham’s descendants forever.” The profound association between Abraham’s promised physically blessed posterity and the inextricably entwined link with the spiritual blessing of the Messiah, that would share the same ancestral heritage is summarised by J H Allen.

Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Throughout the world it is most generally known, and throughout Christendom it is universally known, that “the seed to whom the promise was made,” did come; but it is not universally known, nor acknowledged throughout Christendom, that the many peoples are included in that same covenant with this one seed, without whom the entire structure of Christianity must fall, and that every argument for the Christ, from the covenant standpoint, must stand the crucial test of a numerous posterity from the loins of Abraham, or go down.

True, the covenant with the people failed… the people sinned, and violated their obligations… the law was added, because of their transgressions, to bridge over, “till the (one) seed should come to whom the promise was made… in favor of the Messianic covenant against all this is, that “the covenant which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law… cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” How could it? We… believe that it could not. 

All Christendom believes that it could not. And if it could not, neither can the promise concerning a multiplicity of children for Abraham be annulled.’

Abram did not obey in all though, as the command to leave his kindred behind was not adhered to when he allowed Lot to accompany him. How much did Terah* influence Abraham. We have discussed the close relationship of Abraham and Lot due to their similar age, the death of Lot’s father Haran and that fact Abraham was childless. But by taking Lot it led to repercussions and would cause Abraham much trouble.

David A Snyder:

‘[The Abrahamic Covenant]… was given to Abraham in three separate revelations in exchange for Abraham’s righteousness (faith) and his acceptance of the revealing God as the God of the Hebrews… The covenants in Chapter 12 and 15 seem to have been written by the “J” (Yahweh) and “E” (Elohist) sources respectively. The last covenant in Chapter 17 seems to be from the “P” (Priestly) source.’

This highlights the important matter with regard to first, the different sources of material and writer-editors of the Bible and second, as discussed, the significance of a shadowy god in the background, that does not always seem to have the best interest of the person or people in question, or at the least interacted in an abrupt and dismissive manner. 

We have learned that the Ancient of Days has not and does not interact with mankind directly and does so indirectly via His Son [Habakkuk 1:13; John 6:46, 14:6; 1 Timothy 2:5] . We have also learnt that there may be a third personage that is not his son, the Angel of the Lord – very possibly, Azriel, Michael or Gabriel – who dealt Jacob and his sons, the Israelites. R A Boulay elaborates.

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, page 85 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… there are two traditions which make up the books of the Old Testament, the older or Elohist tradition which refers to the deity in generic terms, and the Priestly tradition where the deity is called Yahweh, often called Jehovah, somewhat erroneously, due to [a]  mistranslation from the Greek Septuagint. The two main streams are intertwined throughout the Old Testament and sometimes exists side-by-side as, for example, in Genesis where there are two versions of the Creation. The god of the Old Testament has many human attributes – he is jealous, and vindictive; he does not seem omnipotent for at times he allows evil to exist and often gets into debate with the devil. There are many gaps in the narrative; it is disjointed: jumps abruptly from one subject to another without explanation or resolution. It leaves more questions unanswered than it resolves.In the scriptures, the deity is called El (plural Elohim) some of the time and Yahweh the rest of the time. Biblical scholars agree that the usage of Yahweh [the true name of the Creator] appears to be an anachronism and may have been inserted at later times… Elohim is… a plural form… translated as “God”… [and] “Gods” or “divine beings”… because the text is often ambiguous. generally, the name for the deity is El… when the serpent is tempting Eve he says: “You are not going to die. No, the gods (Elohim) will know… you will be the same as the gods (Elohim)…’

Another example is during the Tower of Babel, we read of the ‘gods’ saying: ‘Let Us go down.’

Flying Serpents and Dragons, Page 90 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to Exodus 6:3 the appellation Yahweh did not come into use until the time of Moses, for Moses is told by the deity that “I am Yahweh [‘the One who is’ Exodus 3:14], I appeared to Abraham , Isaac and Jacob as El-Shaddai [God Almighty], but I did not make myself known to them by my name Yahweh.” The Hebrew root shaded… means “to overpower,” “to treat with violence,” or “to lay waste.”… [giving] the deity a fearful character, that of devastator or destroyer… the god of the Hebrews is known as an uncompromising and vindictive god… Shaddai may be connected linguistically with the Hittite shadu, or mountain… the God of Lightening and Thunder of the Hittites [the storm god, Adad, his symbol a Bull]. He was the Anatolian god of the twin mountain often depicted with thunderbolts in his hand.’

The god Enlil, lord of the Air*, is also associated with a storm god. Researchers have erroneously, linked El with Enlil and Enki with Yahweh. The Beast of the Abyss, Abaddon or Apollyon is the Destroyer and Baal is typically seen as another name for Satan. Satan is also the prince of the power of the air* in Ephesians 2:2.

David A Snyder – emphasis & bold mine:

Ba’al Hadad was the storm god, a god of rain, thunder, fertility, agriculture, and the lord of heaven. We see him called the “Rider of the Clouds” in the Ba’al Cycle. The Hurrians… had a storm god named Teshub; and the Hittites, from what is now Turkey, had a storm god named Tarhunt… A Christian who knows his Bible will recognize a God who “Rides the Clouds”. After all, Jesus ascended into heaven on a cloud and will return the same way. There are also the following scriptural passages that refer to a Yahweh who rides the heavens or the clouds:

There is no god like the God of the darling, who rides the heavens in his power, and rides the skies in his majesty. (Deuteronomy 34:26)

See the Lord is riding on swift cloud on his way to Egypt. (Isaiah 19:1) 

Who rides the heights of the ancient heavens, whose voice is thunder, mighty thunder (Psalm 68:34) 

You raised your palace upon the waters. You make the clouds your chariot. (Psalm 104:3) 

Dr. Michael S. Heiser in his excellent article, What’s Ugaritic Got to do with anything analyzes the similarities of the Ugarit Ba’al Cycle with Daniel 7. Here is a paraphrase of his analysis: 

1. El, the aged high god, is the obvious leader of the assembly in council, while in Daniel 7, The court was convened, and the books were opened and The Ancient One (Yahweh) is seated on the fiery, wheeled throne. Both the Ugaritic text and Daniel depict God as white haired and aged and both show an assembly in heaven. 

2. El bestows “eternal kingship and dominion” on Ba’al, “Rider on the Clouds” after Ba’al defeats Yam, while in Daniel 7, the Ancient One bestows dominion, glory and kingship upon the son of Man, who is coming on the clouds of heaven after the beast was slain and its body was thrown into fire to be burnt up (which also occurred in the Ba’al Cycle). 

3. El is the father of the pantheon at the same time that Ba’al is “king of the gods”, implying two thrones. Daniel 7 says: Thrones were set up and later the Ancient one took His throne (singular). The Son of Man is given everlasting dominion over the nations. He and God have dominion much like El and Ba’al in the Ugaritic text. This part of Daniel clearly refers to God the Son as the second person of the Blessed Trinity to Christians [incorrect], but is an anathema to Jews and Muslims who have a difficult time explaining the use of the plural thrones.

This does not support the false doctrine of the Trinity, nor does it contradict the central edict of monotheism and a unitarian Godhead. The writer is correct regarding the plural thrones [Colossians 3:1], as the Son of Man is the image of the invisible God [Colossians 1:15] and has received His authority and rulership from the Ancient of Days, his Father. In fact, Christ will share his throne with those who overcome [Ephesians 2:6; Revelation 3:21].

A massive assumption has been made by the writer – because of his Trinitarian bias – to call the Son of God, God the Son, as this is notBiblical or supported by scripture. The plural thrones of the Ancient of Days and the separate person of the Son of Man is an anathema not just to the Jewish and Islamic faiths but also to orthodox Catholic and Protestant Christians. Some do not believe the Nicene Creed and they are applauded for not swallowing the universal church’s agenda inspired dogma. Those that do, would do well in more searching of the scriptures, as the commended Bereans did – Acts 17:10-11 – as well as taking to heart what Christ’s brother an apostle says, in Jude 1:3. It is incomprehensible that any faith believing, Christ affirming Christian, would claim to worship a Father and Son, that they do not even know. They run the risk of being ensnared in the words of the Messiah. 

Matthew 25:12

Amplified Bible

But He [Christ] replied, ‘I assure you and most solemnly say to you, I do not know you [we have no relationship].’

David A Snyder continues: ‘Some will have difficulty accepting that Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, had any relationship to the pagan gods El or Ba’al. There are dozens of books by highly qualified Biblical scholars arguing this point; and by no means, do any of their opinions agree. Some say Yahweh and El are the same God, and [others] say they are not. Some say that Yahweh, like El, had a consort (the Asherah); and others vehemently deny this claim. There is much discussion of the perspective of the authors of the four sources having a lot to do with these divergent theories. In some, El is the God of the Hebrews in early Genesis while Yahweh is the God of the Hebrews by other sources.’

From what we have studied thus far, El the singular of Elohim, is the same being as Yahweh as stated in Exodus 3:5-6, 14; 6:3. El [H410 – ‘el: God, mighty, strong, powerful, great] is an adjective or descriptive word for the Creator, describing Him as the God as opposed to one of the gods or Elohim. Asherah was the consort or wife of the Ancient of days – the one and only Creator and life giver – who is otherwise known by his true and once secret, proper name, YHWH [H3068 – Yahweh: lord, the existing one, eternal]. Therefore, the Lord God is Yahweh El or the ‘Eternally powerful’ one.

There is a verse in the Psalms, which is repeated by the the Messiah in Matthew 22:44 that clearly shows the impossibility of the Trinity and that the Son of Man is a distinct entity from the one and only Yahweh, or Eternal.

Psalm 110:1

English Standard Version

The Lord [H3068 – Yahweh] says to my Lord [H113 – Adonai]: “Sit at my right hand [on a throne], until I make your enemies your footstool.”

Notice the second Lord is different from the first Lord, who is Yahweh. The Hebrew word adonai means ‘to rule.’ It also infers a ‘master or king’ and runs parallel with Yahweh, revealing the special relationship the Son of Man has with the Ancient of Days. Though in no circumstance are they one entity, but rather two separate and distinct beings who are one in mind and purpose; yet also in no manner, is the Son of Man God as the Eternal One is, but rather he is the Son of God. King David – ‘a man after God’s own heart’ – understood this relationship and the unique sovereignty of the Ancient of Days as with certainty so did Abraham, the friend of the Eternal.

Abraham of Ur, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… by the 14th century BC the god El had become a primary god controlling the actions of the other gods in the pantheon. The pantheon of Canaan, found in the Ugaritic texts, is called Elohim, which means the children of El or the children of god. El is referred in Ugaritic literature as “Bull El” or the bull god, “creator of creatures and mankind”, and “creator eternal” which would indicate that by this time in history, the concept of a creating god, was beginning to enter Canaanite polytheism. There is a single tablet found at Ugarit titled “El’s Drinking Party” which displays he was quite promiscuous in his early days, which will become an issue when he is compared to Yahweh in many scholarly studies. 

It is interesting to note that in the Ba’al Cycle, El is sometimes mentioned with the assembly in council which would seem to indicate a bi-cameral ruling authority within the pantheon as we see here: “Do not fall at El’s feet, do not prostrate yourself before the assembly in council; still standing speak your speech, repeat your message; and address the bull, my father El, repeat to the assembly in council.”

An Assembly of gods would be nothing new to Abraham since the epic stories of Sumer and Akkad frequently referred to gods conspiring together. One superior god within the pantheon established a new dynamic in polytheism, creating a four-tier hierarchy within the assembly. The first place was held by the supreme god and his consort such as Ea in Akkad and El in Canaan. The second place is held by the royal children, the third place is held by gods who serve the royal family, and the fourth place is held by minor deities who assist all the gods such as messenger-gods. This pantheon was anthropomorphic since it was arranged along the same lines as their society. There are signs that the Israelis, who lived among the Canaanites, also placed their God within an assembly of gods. 

In Psalm 82:1 and 6-7 we see Elohim within the divine council when he tells the other gods they will all die: God (Elohim) rises in the divine council; gives judgment in the midst of the gods. I declare, ‘Gods [literally, mighty ones, similar to Nephilim] though you be, offspring of the most high [the Ancient of Days] all of you, yet like any mortal you shall die; like any prince you shall fall.’ 

Note that the gods are offspring of the most high, and are arranged… similar to the pantheon of El. The early reference to a hierarchy of gods in the Hebrew Scripture [makes] me believe that when Abraham entered Canaan (a thousand years prior to the authors of the Psalms and Deuteronomy), a hierarchy of gods was part of his understanding of deity. 

While the epic stories of Canaan identified El as a supreme god, this deity was still not a transcendent, boundless God above human understanding as he was still created in man’s image [rather Adam was created in His image]. 

El and the other supreme gods of Mesopotamia were usually depicted as old, retired and very wise as we observed in Sumer when Enki assumed this role and Ea became the father of the gods in Akkad. When Abraham entered Canaan, El had assumed this role. Ba’al seems to become the primary god in later Ugaritic literature, pushing El to the side as a grandfather figure. The gods El and Ba’al were important deities in Canaan not only when Abraham entered in 1900 BC, but also when his descendants returned from Egypt five hundred years later.’

Though the author is promoting El as less than than who He is; nevertheless, El remains the Creator and Baal His nemesis, Satan the Devil, Samael.

Abraham in Greek Mythology, Abraham and the Minyan Athamas, John R Salverda – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Athamas of Greek Mythology, as the King of Orchomenus a city founded by Minyas, was a well known Minyan. Abraham and his family were said to have been from Ur of the Chaldees. These two statements fit together because the Minyans were the Armenians (Ur-Manneans indicating those from the mountains [ur] of Minni), and the Armenians of Urartu were famously known as the Chaldians of Urartu… there are fairly convincing connections between the Greek, Minyas, and the Armenians. Historians know well these People and call them the Manneans, or the kingdom of Van. This group lived in the mountains, (alternately known as, the Gordyan or Cordyaean mountains by Berosus, and as, the Chaldean mountains by Xenophon,) [refer Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon]. … the Manneans, are known to have been largely composed of Hurrians it seems reasonable to assume that the Hurrians were so called after Ur, the homeland of Abraham (The pre-Canaan home of Abraham, the city of Haran, named for Abrahams brother, and the surrounding quod-city area, including the cities of Nahor, named for either Abrahams brother or his grandfather, Pethor the home of Balaam, and Carchemish were also settled, according to modern archaeologists, by the Hurrians.).’

Genesis 13:2

Amplified Bible

Now Abram was extremely rich in livestock and in silver and in gold.

This is the first time we are told in the scriptures of the economic status of an individual. Abraham was not just well off or rich, he was very wealthy. The equivalent of a billionaire today. Abraham had influence and power. Abraham had at his command a large retinue of people who were either part of his armed forces, his animal husbandry for his flocks, or servants in his household. 

We have learnt that he was a magnetic personality and good speaker, so local people of Haran and its environs were drawn to him and possibly continued with his family when they travelled to Egypt and then returned later to both Haran and Canaan. A wanderer’s life appeals to some people and a life with Abraham would have been an interesting adventure. The fact that Abraham had the wherewithal to meet with other kings and go to battle against them, lends credibility to the understanding that Abraham was royal and probably a king himself. 

David A Snyder:

‘According to Josephus, Abraham stopped in Damascus on his way to Canaan and became a person of great importance there. Josephus quotes a contemporary historian, Nicolaus of Damascus: “Abram reigned at Damascus, being a foreigner, who came with an army out of the land [of] Babylon, called the land of the Chaldeans. Now the name of Abram is even still famous in the country of Damascus: and there is shown a village named for him, The Habitat of Abram.”’

We discussed the Battle of Siddim from Lot’s perspective previously and we shall look at it again when we study Amalek, a grandson of Esau. Now, the aspects surrounding this event from Abraham’s experience.

Nephilim Giants – Enemies of God in the Bible, Beginning and End, 2017: 

‘What is amazing about this very brief passage in Genesis 14 is that Cherdolaomers’s 4-king coalition is able to vanquish the Nephilim in combat. They slaughtered the giants on the way to conquering the vassal states and specifically the king of Sodom. In this latter battle, Lot, the nephew of Abraham, was kidnapped. With a late-night raid, Abraham divided his forces and was able to rout Cherdolaomers’s armies. Not only did his small band defeat the 4 kings, they chased them far north to the area of Dan, passing through a fortified gate that is now named after Abraham (this gate still exists and was uncovered by archaeologists in 1966 – yet another stunning discovery that confirms the Bible’s accounts).’ 

Genesis 6 Giants – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Following their victory in the field, Chedorlaomer’s warriors plundered Sodom and Gomorrah and the other cities and took some of their principal inhabitants away captive. Among these were Lot and his family. To the king of Elam’s great misfortune, however, one who had managed to escape from Sodom came and reported this news to Abraham. Lot’s uncle at this time still lived in tents pitched near the great trees of Mamre the Amorite. Mamre was a brother of Eshcol and Aner. All three were Abraham’s allies. When Abraham heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the three hundred and eighteen “trained men born in his household,” and, being joined by the forces of Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, he pursued the enemy as far as Dan.When the right opportunity presented itself, Abraham and his men came upon Chedorlaomer’s camp in the dead of night, took the confused, frightened foe by surprise, put them to a rout, rescued Lot and his fellow captives, and recovered all Chedorlaomer’s plundered goods.’

Battle of Siddim, Andy, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The fact that this is one of the greatest battle areas to be mentioned in scripture is also notable. Indeed, the path of the invading armies foreshadows the destiny of the promised land (and of Abraham) as they practically circumvent almost the entire borders of modern Israel.

Although the practical objective was to free the Cities of the Jordan plain from the Mesopotamian rule, God’s agenda was for Abraham to rescue Lot’s family. So the fact that the kings of the Jordan plain were victorious, this was so because Abraham was fighting on their side (even though he and his 318 men were not under their command). Abraham made a point that he was not under them when he refused to take plunder from the battle. This action is salient for two reasons, one worldly and one spiritual. 

He refused the plunder so that: (a) He could keep his reputation of independence and neutrality (as no one would say that one of the kings made him rich) and (b)  he was giving this tithe to God via the priest of God most high Melchizedek King of Salem. The episode was the first instance where Scripture mentions tithing and the elements of communion; long before Jesus and even before the Law of Moses.

God had an unspoken covenant with Adam and Eve and a symbolic one with Noah. The covenant with Abraham was the first one actively initiated by both parties, as in a contract. Abraham had to walk between the halves of animals to make the covenant with God. A Hittite text from Anatolia, dated after the mid-2nd millennium BC, also records this ritual. The main differences between the Abrahamic covenant and that of other eastern cultures were: (a) In the other nations, the focus was on what the vassal state (here a parallel to Abraham) was promising their master. In Abraham’s covenant, the focus was on what God promised Him. (b) For the other cultures, the animals cut in half represented what would happen when failing to keep a covenant. 

For the Hebrews, with the passing of the torch between the animals, it meant God would rather die before He broke the covenant.’

Genesis 14:17-24

English Standard Version

17 After his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King’s Valley). 18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine [Matthew 26:26-28]. (He was priest of God Most High.) 19 And he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; 20 and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!” And Abram gave him a tenth of everything. 21 And the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the persons, but take the goods for yourself.” 

22 But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted my hand to the Lord, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth, 23 that I would not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, lest you should say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’ 24 I will take nothing but what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me. Let Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre take their share.”

There are differing views regarding the mysterious Melchizedek. Some teach the name is not a personal name, but rather a title. The word is comprised of two parts: melek, meaning ‘king of’ and sadeq, meaning ‘to be just’ or ‘righteous.’ Melchizedek is also known as the Prince of Peace or Salem, an early name for Jerusalem. Others teach that Melchizedek can be none other than the Messiah. There are scriptures referring to Immanuel – the true name of the Son of Man – with similar epithets.

Isaiah 9:6

English Standard Version

For to us a child is born [Immanuel], to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace

Jeremiah 23:5-6

English Standard Version

5 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. 6 In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The Lord is our righteousness.

Psalm 110:4

English Standard Version

The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, “You [the Son of Man] are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”

Hebrews 5:5-10

English Standard Version

5 So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him [the Eternal] who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”; 6 as he says also in another place, “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.” 7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 

Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source [the author and Alpha & Omega] of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated [called] by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.

As the Son of Man is inadvertently, though incorrectly equated with the Archangel Michael, so He is equated with Melchizedek. The similar descriptions are because both are in the same Order, as Priests of the Most High. Theologians call it a Christophany if the pre-incarnate Christ appears in the Old Testament. The giving of bread and wine is a reason why some think it was the Word, yet this ceremony was a precursor to the Passover that was instituted for physical Israel and then reverted to bread and wine for spiritual Israel, as re-instituted by the Messiah at the last supper – which preceded the Passover the next day.

Hebrews 7:1-9

Common English Bible

1 This Melchizedek, who was king of Salem and priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he returned from the defeat of the kings, and Melchizedek blessed him. 2 Abraham gave a tenth of everything to him. His name means first “king of righteousness,” and then “king of Salem,” that is, “king of peace.” 3 He is without father or mother or any family. He has no beginning or end of life, but he’s like God’s Son and remains a priest for all time.

4 See how great Melchizedek was! Abraham, the father of the people, gave him a tenth of everything he captured. 5 The descendants of Levi who receive the office of priest have a commandment under the Law to collect a tenth of everything from the people who are their brothers and sisters, though they also are descended from Abraham. 6 But Melchizedek, who isn’t related to them, received a tenth of everything from Abraham and blessed the one who had received the promises. 

Without question, the less important person is blessed by the more important person. 8 In addition, in one case a tenth is received by people who die, and in the other case, the tenth is received by someone who continues to live, according to the record. 9 It could be said that Levi, who received a tenth, paid a tenth through Abraham.

13 The person we are talking about belongs to another tribe, and no one ever served at the altar from that tribe. 14 It’s clear that our Lord came from the tribe of Judah, but Moses never said anything about priests from that tribe. 15 And it’s even clearer if another priest [Christ] appears who is like Melchizedek. 16 He has become a priest by the power of a life that can’t be destroyed, rather than a legal requirement about physical descent [from Levi].

The Apostle Paul explains that Melchizedek has apparently just appeared post-flood, with no discernible genealogy and that he is like the Son of God, not that he is the Son of God. Paul then explains the irony of Abraham, who fathers by descent, Jacob’s son Levi who was the progenitor of Israel’s priesthood; is at the same time paying a tithe to a person who is not descended from Levi, or part of the Levitical priesthood, yet prefigures that priesthood. Rather, Melchizedek is a Priest of a different order. Similarly, the Word was from the Tribe of Judah, not Levi, yet is another priest like Melchizedek, forever in the same priestly Order. The true identity of Melchizedek may have to remain a mystery much like the life of Melchizedek himself. There is an account in the Book of Enoch; if accurate, it is an explanation to why his presence on the earth was apparently from nowhere. 

Noah had a younger brother, called Nir and Nir had a wife called Sopanim, who was sterile. Though Sopanim became pregnant in old age, claiming no one had impregnated her, much like Lamech’s wife who claimed no one but Noah’s father had been near her. Nir in his fury and jealousy due to the scandal, decided to banish Sopanim, and though he eventually relents, she suddenly dies at his feet. Nir and Noah prepared her burial garments – a black shroud, in a secret grave. Nir and Noah are more than shocked when they later see a fully formed child – a toddler of about three – sitting next to his dead mother. Noah was alarmed and Nir was afraid. The child spoke and blessed the Lord. They recognised his ‘glorious appearance’ as the ‘badge’ of the ‘priesthood on his chest.’ They thus named him Melchizidek and dressed him in priestly clothes. 

The brothers hid the child, so that others would not kill him. Like Noah when he was born, Melchizedek had an ethereal appearance. Prior to the flood, Nir was told that his son would not perish. A messenger angel – purportedly Michael – came and took Melchizedek from the earth after forty days, possibly to the same plane and existence, as Enoch. Nir losing both his child and wife in quick succession, died soon after from a ‘broken heart.’ Next, Melchizedek was prophesied to reappear in the twelfth generation after the flood – Abraham was the eleventh counting Noah – becoming King of Salem. 

Melchizedek and his Uncle Noah, may have had the same similarity, in sharing very fair, white skin, red or blond hair and blue eyes. It was Methusalah who had chosen to skip his son Lamech and his eldest grandson Noah, to pass the priestly line of Seth to his other grandson Nir. Noah was a prophet, but not a priest. Thus it transpired that the priestly line was kept alive and continued from antediluvian to postdiluvian epochs via Melchizedek. 

As an aside… not only is there a link with Abraham being an ancestor of Levi and thus the priesthood, as well as Judah – and the sceptre promise of kings – from whence the Son of Man descended, but Abraham himself, is descended from Noah and is also thus related to Melchizedek the nephew of Noah. Abraham is serving one greater than he, yet of the same family and Melchizedek is ministering to one of his own family.

Zechariah 4:1-14

English Standard Version

And the angel… said to me, “What do you see?” I said, “I see, and behold, a lampstand all of gold, with a bowl on the top of it, and seven lamps on it, with seven lips on each of the lamps that are on the top of it. 3 And there are two olive trees by it, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left.”… 6 Then he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord of hosts. 7 Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain. And he shall bring forward the top stone [the Son of Man] amid shouts of ‘Grace, grace to it!’”

“The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you. 10 For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plumb line in the hand of Zerubbabel. “These seven are the eyes of the Lord [Messenger angels], which range through the whole earth.” 11 Then I said to him, “What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?” 12 And… the two golden pipes from which the golden oil is poured out?” 13 He said to me, “Do you not know what these are?” I said, “No, my lord.” 14 Then he said, “These are the two anointed ones [the two witnesses] who stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”

It reasonable and plausible that the two Witnesses at the end of the age and during the final three and one half years of tribulation and Jacob’s Trouble, would be the two individuals who were translated and did not see the first death, righteous Enoch and the prophet, Elijah. Yet, in Mark 9:1-5, it is Elijah and Moses who are speaking with Christ in the transfiguration. Both Elijah and Moses were prophets, though not priests. 

The two witnesses prophesy and appear to fulfil the role of prophets. As they are specially anointed, could they be priests or both? [Exodus 29:6; Leviticus 8:12; Psalm 133:2]. Enoch is not mentioned in scripture as a priest, yet his interaction with the Nephilim hints at a priestly role, particularly as he is mentioned as the seventh from Adam, via the priestly line of Seth by Jude – the brother of Christ. 

The pairing of Enoch with Melchizedek is worth considering. The fact that both Enoch and Melchizedek were alive to witness and interact with the Watchers and Nephilim in their respective epochs is especially significant; as the two witnesses could well go up against a nephil in the guise of Nimrod, as the false Prophet and a dark Angel in the guise of Azazel, as the Beast.

Revelation 11:1-13

English Standard Version

Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple [the people] of God and the altar [Garden of Eden] and those who worship there [true believers], 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple[Eden]; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations [land of Nod], and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months [beginning with the abomination of desolation]. 3 And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days [3 1/2 years],clothed in sackcloth [symbol of mourning].” 4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. 6 They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire. 

Recall Moses and Aaron worked together when confronting the Pharaoh and his magicians Jannes [‘he vexed’] and Jambres [‘ebullient healer’ or ‘contentious, rebellious’] – Exodus 7:11; 2 Timothy 3:8. Moses was a prophet and his brother Aaron was a priest, a High Priest no less. In fact it was Aaron that threw down the staff to turn it into a snake [Exodus 7:10] and again struck the Nile River to turn it into blood [Exodus 7:20]. There is support for one witness then being a prophet and the other a priest, or for them to fulfil both roles. It must also be considered, that as they will be opposing supernatural beings that they may be angelic themselves and not human, as  researchers unanimously assume – because they die and are then resurrected. The Bible reveals angels do not die, not that they cannot be killed.

7 And when they have finished their testimony [the word of the Lord], the beast [Apollyon] that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them, 8 and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom [link with Melchizedek] and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified [Jerusalem]. 

9 For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb, 10 and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents [the month of December and Christmas? The tenth month of the sacred calendar], because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth. 

11 But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them [resurrected], and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them. 13 And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.

Genesis 15:1-19

Common English Bible

After these events, the Lord’s word came to Abram in a vision, “Don’t be afraid, Abram. I am your protector. Your reward will be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “Lord God, what can you possibly give me, since I still have no children? The head of my household is Eliezer, a man from Damascus [an Aramean].” 3 He continued, “Since you haven’t given me any children, the head of my household will be my heir.” 4 The Lord’s word came immediately to him, “This man will not be your heir. Your heir will definitely be your very own biological child.” 5 Then he brought Abram outside and said, “Look up at the sky and count the stars if you think you can count them.” He continued, “This is how many children you will have.” 6 Abram trusted the Lord, and the Lord recognized Abram’s high moral character.

Abraham toys with the Lord in saying that He still hasn’t given him an heir and that he can give his inheritance to Eliezer. Is that a good idea Lord? Pushing the Lord God to promptly re-confirm His promise; which the Eternal emphatically does. The Lord seems content to play along with Abraham, as a friend would and does not rebuke him for his impertinence, as would be the likely outcome for most in testing the Lord’s response this way. Abraham continues the little dance, when the Lord states the land of Canaan is his inheritance.

7 He said to Abram, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land as your possession.” 8 But Abram said, “Lord God, how do I know that I will actually possess it?” 9 He said, “Bring me a three-year-old female calf, a three-year-old female goat, a three-year-old ram, a dove, and a young pigeon.” 10 He took all of these animals, split them in half, and laid the halves facing each other, but he didn’t split the birds. 11 When vultures swooped down on the carcasses, Abram waved them off. 12 After the sun set, Abram slept deeply. A terrifying and deep darkness settled over him. 

13 Then the Lord said to Abram, “Have no doubt that your descendants [seed] will live as immigrants [strangers] in a land that isn’t their own, where they will be oppressed slaves [in Egypt] for four hundred years. 14 But after I punish the nation they serve, they will leave it with great wealth. 15 As for you, you will join your ancestors in peace and be buried after a good long life. 

16 The fourth generation will return here since the Amorites’ [Nephilim and Elouid] wrong doing won’t have reached its peak until then.” 17 After the sun had set and darkness had deepened, a smoking vessel with a fiery flame passed between the split-open animals. 18 That day the Lord cut a covenant with Abram: “To your descendants I give this land, from Egypt’s river to the great Euphrates, 19 together with the Ken-ites [possibly descended, from the line of Cain], the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites… [Nephilim infiltrators, trying to thwart Abraham and his descendants from their inheritance]. 

The reference to four hundred years, includes living as immigrants and being oppressed as slaves [Acts 7:6-7] and can be computed a number of ways. For instance, from the Exodus in 1446 BCE, back to when Abraham plans to offer Isaac as a sacrifice in 1847 BCE is four hundred years. As the verses state the peak of the Amorites evil, we need to count with this in mind. We will look at the fourth generation part of the verses later. 

The 400 years is linked to the 430 stated elsewhere in Exodus 12:40-41. If we add 430 years to Abraham’s year 100 when Isaac is born, the total is 530 years from Abraham’s birth to the Exodus – 1977 – 1446 BCE. Adding 45 years to the time Joshua divided the land of the Amorites [Joshua 14:7-10, Joshua is 20 years younger than Caleb], the number is 575 years from Abraham’s birth. Abraham did live a good long life as the Lord said, of one hundred and seventy-five years. Subtracting 175 from 575, gives 400 years from Abraham’s death in 1802 BCE, to the year the sins of the Amorite’s reached maturity in 1402 BCE, while the sons of Jacob were possessing the land between 1407 to 1400 BCE. 

Genesis 16:1-16

English Standard Version

Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan [1902 – 1892 BCE], Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram… 4 And he went into Hagar, and she conceived. And when [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress [Sarai]. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her.

We shall continue with the story when we study Ishmael and his mother Hagar. Sarai recognised her age at seventy-five and thought, this isn’t happening, I need to take matters into my own hands. To be fair, it wasn’t the best idea and was showing impatience as well as possibly a lack of faith in the Lord’s promises. It didn’t go well and Sarai certainly regretted her decision, judging by her inclusion, as only one of two women mentioned in the chapter of faith in the Bible – the other, is Rahab the harlot. 

Hebrews 11:11

English Standard Version

By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.

Hagar did not do herself or Ishmael any favours, looking down on Abraham’s wife, as we will learn. Possibly, Hagar was a gift from Pharaoh in Egypt when Abram and Sarai visited. It is thought that she may have even been the Pharoah’s daughter. The Bible renders Hagar as Egyptian, though this is more likely to be where she was from, rather than her ethnicity as a descendant of Mizra from Ham. Jospeh married a woman from Egypt, provided by the Pharaoh, though she was from a priestly family, much the same way Moses’s second wife was, the daughter of Jethro the Priest of Midian – Midian being a son of Abraham. Also, Sarai may have suggested the idea with Abram, but she did not make a habit of riding roughshod over the man she called lord.

1 Peter 3:6

Common English Bible

For example, Sarah accepted Abraham’s authority when she called him master. You have become her children when you do good and don’t respond to threats with fear.

Genesis 17:1-26

English Standard Version

17 When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, 2 that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.” 3 Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, 4 “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.I will make you exceedingly fruitful [including the tribe of Ephraim], and I will make you into nations [plural], and kings [including the tribe of Judah] shall come from you. 7 And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. 8 And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.”

David A Snyder, Abraham of Ur, 2014:

‘Now there was to be a God of the Hebrews, a God that Abraham would hear from again when he was being prepared to be the father of a great nation. It is interesting to note that none of the three covenants demand that Abraham accept God as the creator – only that he will be the God of the Hebrews. As we shall see, because of Abraham’s pagan culture, his concept of God would be something he was familiar with – the practice of worshiping one deity among many (monolatry) rather than the monotheistic faith that we know today.’ 

9 And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. 

Just before the eighth day after a male babies birth, the amount of blood clotting material increases rapidly, until on the eighth day itself, it is 110% from the norm. This is due to the levels of vitamin K being at its highest. Vitamin K plays a key role in regulating the coagulation mechanism that controls bleeding

 Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised [every male]. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant [until the new Covenant, Romans 2:29]. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, pages 127-128:

‘As part of the covenant between the deity and Abraham, and later reinforced by being repeated many more times to his descendants, he is told: You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the mark of the [old] covenant between me and you. Just as the serpent achieves long life through sacrificing and [shedding its skin] leaving off part of himself, so may man also be saved by ritually sacrificing part of himself… a perpetual reminder… [of] his true origins…’

15 And God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.” 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?”… 19 God said, “No, but Sarah [presently 89 years old] your wife shall bear you a son [a miracle, an intervention] by the Creator, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him… 

David A Snyder, Abraham of Ur, 2014:

‘Abram is the Akkadian Abu-ramu which is of west Semitic origin and means exalted father. Sarai, Abraham’s wife… whom God will later call Sarah, is an epithet of the consort of the moon god Sin of Haran. Milcah, Abraham’s sister-in-law, is derived from Malkatu, the consort of the sun god Shamash. The relation of the moon-god of Ur and Haran to Abraham and his family might be troubling to some Bible fundamentalists; however, it might also explain why God changed Abram’s name to Abraham and Sarai’s name to Sarah.’ 

23 Then Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old [1878 BCE] when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 26 That very day Abraham and his son Ishmael were circumcised.

David A Snyder, Abraham of Ur, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… one will notice that before these covenants are made, man is required to sever one or more animals in two parts. In ancient times this symbolizes what will happen to the party that breaks the covenant. In Hebrew, the verb to seal a covenant literally means “to cut”. Some scholars believe that the removal of the foreskin in circumcision is a symbol of the sealing of the covenant with God.’ 

Genesis 18:1-33

English Standard Version

And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. 2 He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men [angels] were standing in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth 3 and said, “O Lord [H136 – Adonay: lord, as in the Son of Man, Psalm 110:1], if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant. 4 Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet [indicative of the foot washing at the last supper, John 13:1-13], and rest yourselves under the tree, 5 while I bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on – since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.” 

6 And Abraham went quickly into the tent to Sarah and said, “Quick! Three seahs [measures] of fine flour! Knead it, and make cakes.” 7 And Abraham ran to the herd and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to a young man, who prepared it quickly. 8 Then he took curds and milk and the calf that he had prepared, and set it before them. And he stood by them under the tree while they [the three angels] ate.

9 They said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “She is in the tent.” 10 The Lord said, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife shall have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in years. The way of women had ceased to be with Sarah. 12 So Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I am worn out, and my lord is old, shall I have pleasure?” 13 The Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh and say, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, now that I am old?’ 14 Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son.” 15 But Sarah denied it, saying, “I did not laugh,” for she was afraid. He said, “No, but you did laugh.”

16 Then the men set out from there, and they looked down toward Sodom. And Abraham went with them to set them on their way. 17 The Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.” 20 Then the Lord said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, 21 I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.”

22 So the men [two angels] turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord [the Son of Man]. 23 Then Abraham drew near and said, “Will you indeed sweep away the righteous [Lot] with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” 26 And the Lord said, “If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

27 Abraham answered and said, “Behold, I have undertaken to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes. 28 Suppose five of the fifty righteous are lacking… 32 Then he said, “Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak again but this once. Suppose ten are found there.” He answered, “For the sake of ten I will not destroy it.” 33 And the Lord went his way, when he had finished speaking to Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place.

The Lord was certainly patient with Abraham, especially as Abraham really drew out the conversation. As the word Adonay is used for Lord, we know it is the Son of Man, the Word and not the Angel of the Lord or someone else entirely. As it is the pre-incarnate Christ, it is strange it doesn’t use the name Melchizidek in the text if they are one and the same as many propose. The two angel Messengers may have been Michael and Gabriel, who left before the Lord and were the same angels that Lot welcomed and looked after and who then in turn, protected him and his family.

Genesis 21:1-7, 34

English Standard Version

1 The Lord visited Sarah as he had said [a year later], and the Lord did to Sarah as he had promised. 2 And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. 4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old, as God had commanded him. 5 Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him. 6 And Sarah said, “God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.” 7 And she said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.” 34 And Abraham sojourned many days in the land of the Philistines.

The promised son and heir-proper to Abraham, Isaac, was finally born to Sarah and Abraham in 1877 BCE, one hundred years after Abraham’s birth. In Genesis chapter twenty, Abraham moves to the Negeb in the southwestern region of Canaan or the northeastern limits of Egypt depending on your interpretation. Abimelech ruled the area and it was located where the Philistines officially settled from Crete nearly one thousand years later. The view of Bible detractors is that this proves the Bible is fantasy, rather than understanding that the passages have been written and edited later, with the Philistine term added for clarity on the location. 

It is possible that the children of Caphtor [from Casluh and Pathros, refer Chapter XV Casluh & Caphtor] originally dwelt here before their migration to the Aegean area and that these were a residue of their people. Alternatively, early migrations of Minoans may have already begun. It would explain why the main body of them migrated from Minoan Crete to this exact same location. 

As the location is near to the Delta region of Lower Egypt, could Abimelech be the same person as Pharaoh Narmer and also known as Menes, who united Egypt as the first Pharaoh of the 1st Dynasty and who had met with Abraham and Sarah in Genesis chapter twelve. A case for this is made by Damien F Mackey.

From Genesis to Hernán Cortés Volume Four: Era of Abraham – emphasis & bold mine:

‘But who was the ruler of Egypt at the time, anachronistically called “Pharaoh” (which was a much later, New Kingdom, designation for Egyptian rulers)? The era of Abram also closely approximated to – as determined by Dr. John Osgood – the time of a great and mysterious potentate named Narmer. Now, whilst some consider this Narmer to have been the father of Egypt’s first pharaoh, Menes, my preference is for Narmer as the invasive Akkadian king, Naram-Sin… What makes most intriguing a possible collision of Menes of Egypt with a Shinarian potentate is the emphatic view of (then) Dr. W. F. Albright that Naram-Sin had conquered Egypt, and that the “Manium” whom Naram-Sin boasts he had vanquished was in fact Menes himself (“Menes and Naram-Sin”, JEA, Volume 6, No. 2, April 1920, pp. 89-98).

Tradition does seem to favour Abram as a contemporary of the first dynastic ruler of Egypt, Menes. Certainly, Emmet Sweeney has provided a strong argument for a close convergence in time of Abram and Menes: I am also inclined to accept the view that the classical name “Menes” arose from the nomen, Min, of pharaoh Hor-Aha (“Horus the Fighter”). Most importantly, according to Manetho, Hor (“Menes”) ruled for more than 60 years: Sixty years was the approximate span of time from Abram’s famine to the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah.Why is this length of time significant? It is because… [Abimelech is the] “Pharaoh”, with the addition… of this Abimelech figuring again later in the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah.

Critics may not be correct in claiming that the lack of an Egyptian name for the ruler in the case of the Abram and Joseph narratives of Genesis (cf. 12:15 and 39:1) is a further testimony, as they think, to these texts being unhistorical. Since these texts refer to the ruler of Egypt only as “Pharaoh”, it is argued that we ought not to take them as being serious histories. From the now well-known theory of toledot (a Hebrew feminine plural), we might be surprised to learn that so great a Patriarch as Abram (later Abraham), did not sign off the record of his own history (as did e.g. Adam, Noah, and Jacob). No, Abram’s story was recorded instead by his two chief sons, Ishmael and Isaac. “These are the generations of Ishmael …” (Genesis 25:12). “These are the generations of Isaac …” (Genesis 25:19).

So, there were two hands at work in this particular narrative, and this fact explains the otherwise strange repetition of several famous incidents recorded in the narrative. And it is in the second telling of the incident of the abduction of Abram’s wife, Sarai (later Sarah), that we get the name of the ruler who, in the first telling of it is called simply “Pharaoh”. He is “Abimelech” (20:2). Admittedly, there are such seeming differences between the two accounts, as regards names, geography and chronology, as perhaps to discourage one from considering them to be referring to the very same incident; and that despite such obvious similarities as:

– the Patriarch claiming that his beautiful wife was his “sister”;

– the ruler of the land taking her for his own;

– he then discovering that she was already married (underlined by plagues);

– and asking the Patriarch why he had deceived him by saying that the woman was his sister;

– the return of the woman to her husband, whose possessions are now augmented.

The seeming contradictions between the two accounts are that, whereas the first narrated incident occurs in Egypt, and the covetous ruler is a “Pharaoh”, the second seems to be located in southern Palestine, with the ruler being “King Abimelech of Gerar”, and who (according to a somewhat similar incident again after Isaac had married) was “King Abimelech of the Philistines” (26:1). 

Again, in the first narrated account, the Patriarch and his wife have their old names, Abram and Sarai, whereas in the second account they are referred to as Abraham and Sarah, presumably indicating a later time. In the first narrated account, the “Pharaoh” is “afflicted with great plagues because of Sarai”, whereas, in the second, “God healed Abimelech, and also healed his wife and female slaves so that they bore children” (20:17). The differences can be explained fairly easily…

Ishmael understandably wrote his father’s history from an Egyptian perspective, because his mother, Hagar, was “an Egyptian slave-girl” in Abram’s household, and she later “got a wife for [Ishmael] from the land of Egypt” (cf. 16:1 and 21:21). Ishmael names his father “Abram” because that is how he was known to Ishmael. Moreover, the incident with “Pharaoh” had occurred while the Patriarch was still called Abram. Isaac was not even born until some 25 years after this incident. His parents were re-named as Abraham and Sarah just prior to his birth. So, naturally, Isaac refers to them as such in the abduction incident, even though they were then Abram and Sarai. 

Again, there is no contradiction geographically between Egypt and Gerar because we are distinctly told in Ishmael’s account that it was just before the family went to Egypt (12:11) that Abram had told his wife that she was to be known as his sister. Gerar is on the way to Egypt, and in a later Volume we shall encounter an Egyptian king who also had control over Gerar (or southern Geshur). 

Finally, whether the one whom Isaac calls “Abimelech” was still, in Isaac’s day, “Pharaoh” of Egypt – as he had been in former times – he most definitely was, at least, ruler over the Philistines at Gerar. Perhaps he ruled both lands, Egypt and Philistia. 

In Hebrew [Abimelech] means “Father is King”, or “Father of the King”. Since Abimelech is not an Egyptian name (though the Egyptian name, Raneb, is of similar meaning), and since the other designation that we have for him is simply “Pharaoh”, that data, in itself, will not take us to the next step of being able to identify this ruler in the Egyptian historical (or dynastic) records. But that our Abimelech may have – according to the progression of Ishmael’s and Isaac’s toledot histories – ruled Egypt and then gone on to rule Philistia, could well enable us to locate this ruler archaeologically. 

Dr. John Osgood has already done much of the ‘spade work’ for us here, firstly by nailing the archaeology of En-geddi at the time of Abram (in the context of Genesis 14) to the Late Chalcolithic period, corresponding to Ghassul IV in Palestine’s southern Jordan Valley; Stratum V at Arad; and the Gerzean period in Egypt (“The Times of Abraham”, Ex Nihilo TJ, Volume 2, 1986, pp. 77-87); and secondly by showing that, immediately following this period, there was a migration out of Egypt into Philistia, bringing an entirely new culture (= Early Bronze I, Stratum IV at Arad). 

P. 86: “In all likelihood Egypt used northern Sinai as a springboard for forcing her way into Canaan with the result that all of southern Canaan became an Egyptian domain”. Then there is the all-important structural (chiasmus) guide (thanks to reader, Ken Griffith), admittedly, not well-formatted, but note how B. 1 and B’. 1’ merge beautifully with “Pharaoh” in B. 1 reflecting “Abimelech in B’. 1’: My tentative estimation would be that Abram came to Egypt at the approximate time of Narmer, the Akkadian Naram-Sin {the name Narmer (N-R-M) equates rather well phonetically with Naram- (N-R-M)}, and right near the beginning of the long reign of Hor-Aha(Menes)… It can also be thought in favour of Middle Bronze I [MBI]’s being the suitable period for Abraham that king Hammurabi of Babylon, a possible candidate for Abraham’s contemporary, Amraphel king of Shinar [refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer](Genesis 14:1), has been dated… within range of the Middle Bronze I Age (2000-1750 BC).’ 

John Osgood quoted, has confirmed an extension of Egypt in the southern Palestine region. The chances of these people being Caphtor, rather than any other son of Mizra is more than probable. There is a measure of confidence in Mackey’s conclusions, as he has highlighted Hammurabi’s link with Amraphel, which we have already ascertained when studying Chedorlaomer in Genesis Fourteen and the Battle of Siddim. According to an unconventional chronology, Hammurabi was born in 1912 BCE and ruled as King of Babylon from 1894 to 1852 BCE, well within the Middle Bronze Age period. 

If Pharaoh Narmer is Naram-Sin – notice the Sin suffix as pertaining to the Moon god – then Abraham may have already known Naram-Sin from living in Shinar, or if not, then probably his family. It would also explain how Egypt was united into one kingdom and why the First Dynasty formed.

Genesis 22

English Standard Version

After these things God [H430 – ‘elohiym: ‘one’ of the gods] tested [H5254 – nacah: did tempt or try] Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 2 He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah [Mount of Olives, Jerusalem], and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” 3 So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac. And he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. 4 On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar. 5 Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy [H5288 – na’ar: young male]will go over there and worship and come again to you.” 

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, page 88:

‘[An] example of the conflict between [El and Yahweh] was the sacrifice of Isaac… a close reading of this verse shows that it was El who requested the sacrifice from Abraham and that he was stopped at the last moment by the intervention of the angel of Yahweh.’

Boulay raises the seeming complex point regarding Yahweh and El, which we have discussed earlier. The real issue is the difference between Yahweh and the Elohim as investigated in Genesis chapters one and two [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. The evidence for different Elohim or sons of God, compared with the one God, El is repeated in verse one of Genesis chapter twenty-two. The Creator chooses to not look upon sin, rather the Word was appointed to put away sin and intercede on our behalf, making a relationship with the Father possible. 

Habakkuk 1:12-13

New King James Version

Are You not from everlasting, O Lord my God, my Holy One… You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, And cannot look on wickedness…

Hebrews 9:24-28

English Standard Version

24 For Christ has entered… into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf… he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many…

We also know that the Creator tests or tries mankind, though indirectly, as it is actually the Serpent, Samael that tempts mankind with the aim of making us sin. 

Psalm 11:5

New King James Version

The Lord tests the righteous…

Job 2:6

English Standard Version

And the Lord said to Satan, “Behold, he is in your hand; only spare his life.”

The Creator allows this to test our hearts to see if we will choose righteousness. The Creator does not desire for us to slip and fall or sin and hence He is not the tempter, the Devil has that role.

Matthew 4:1, 7

English Standard Version

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil… Jesus said to him [the Devil], “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test [tempt God].’”

Thus, verse one could easily read: ‘After these things the god of this world, [2 Corinthians 4:4] did tempt Abraham…’ Further evidence that this was not the Creator speaking is that the Eternal would not ask any of his servants to sacrifice a human being. The sacrificial system of God until His Son put an end to it, only required animals. The Israelites prior to their captivity had fallen to sacrificing their children like the nations surrounding them.

Psalm 106:34-39

English Standard Version

34 They did not destroy the peoples, as the Lord commanded them, 35 but they mixed with the nations and learned to do as they did. 36 They served their idols, which became a snare to them. 37 They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; 38 they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood. 39 Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the whore in their deeds.

Isaac is described as a boy or a lad and this has been misleading, as it has inferred that he was sprung upon by Abraham and may not have been a willing participant once he understood that he was in fact the sacrificial lamb – a type of the promised Messiah [Genesis 22:4]. The Hebrew word na’ar can be translated as ‘child, youth, young’ or even ‘babe.’ In this context with Isaac being male it could be boy or lad. The translators have assumed Issac must have been a child or teenager at most. 

The King James version translates this word different ways, though its most common translation is actually young man – seventy six times – and then servant fifty-four times, with child forty-four times and so forth. Young man is correct, as Isaac was thirty years old at the time in 1847 BCE, the same age the Messiah began his ministry. As Isaac lived to one hundred and eighty years of age, he was still a young man at thirty and could not be identified as either a child or a middle aged man.

6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac his son. And he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So they went both of them together. 7 And Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am, my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” 8 Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So they went both of them together. 9 When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. 

10 Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. 11Butthe angel [Messenger – Mal’ak] of the Lord [Yahweh] called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 12 He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” 13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.” 

Notice, it is not El-Shaddai or Yahweh that calls to Abraham. Not even the shadowy figure of the original tempting Elohim, but rather the Angel of the Lord, or the Messenger of Yahweh that intercedes.

15 And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16 and said, “By myself I [the Lord] have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, [NCV: ‘and they will capture the cities of their enemies’] 18and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.”19 So Abraham returned to his young men, and they arose and went together to Beersheba. And Abraham lived at Beersheba.

The Angel of the Lord is not speaking of himself or swearing by himself but declaring the testimony of the Lord – of Yahweh Himself. Notice in the promised blessing, that the addition of possessing the gates of their enemies is now included. This promise is stated more specifically later and is a key piece of information in identifying certain peoples descending from Abraham. A crucial element that has been missed, even by those who have thought they understood it correctly within the identity movement. 

Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 158-159:

‘… when one compares the history of Isaac with that of Jesus, the similarities are very profound.  

  1. The birth of Isaac was miraculous (Genesis 18), so was the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:18)
  2. In Abraham’s attempt to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac even assisted Abraham in carrying the wood to the altar (Genesis 22:6). In like manner Jesus also helped to carry his own crosspiece to his crucifixion.
  3. Isaac did not dispute Abraham’s will in the matter of his own sacrifice, nor did Jesus with God the Father.
  4. Jesus and Isaac were both “offered” on the Mount of Olives 
  5. Isaac was willing to lay down his life of his own free will, just as Jesus did.
  6. Abraham also was willing to sacrifice his only son who was his legal son (or legitimate son for inheritance) while God the Father did in fact give up his only begotten Son. As God provided a ram caught in a thicket as a substitute sacrifice for Isaac so that Isaac could live… the Father provided Jesus as a substitute sacrifice for Israel and the world so that they may live forever. 
  7. Abraham came down from the mountain sacrifice… with Isaac still alive… tantamount to Isaac having been resurrected from the dead (Hebrews 11:17-19)… Jesus was also resurrected… at the same site and on the same mountain… Isaac had a three day journey to the spot to be “offered”…  and resurrected… while… the resurrection of Jesus also took place after a period of three days.’

Abraham is the father of the faithful and he is a type of God the Father, as Isaac prefigures the coming of Christ. In turn, physically and spiritually they are the head of the family, of those who are loved by the Creator, who love the Creator and are obedient to Him.

Hebrews 11:8-18

Common English Bible

8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was going to receive as an inheritance. He went out without knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he lived in the land he had been promised as a stranger. He lived in tents along with Isaac and Jacob, who were coheirs of the same promise. 10 He was looking forward to a city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God… these people died in faith without receiving the promises, but they saw the promises from a distance and welcomed them. They confessed that they were strangers and immigrants on earth. 14 People who say this kind of thing make it clear that they are looking for a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking about the country that they had left, they would have had the opportunity to return to it. 

16 But at this point in time, they are longing for a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God isn’t ashamed to be called their God – he has prepared a city for them [Revelation 21:1-3].17 By faith Abraham offered Isaac when he was tested. The one who received the promises was offering his only son. 18He had been told concerning him, Your legitimate descendants will come from Isaac.

It was a monumental request to sacrifice your only son from his wife Sarah, who had been specified as the one that all the promises and blessings would derive, with Sarah well past child bearing – it would require another miracle conception – though Abraham’s faith, meant he knew the Creator could replace Isaac if that was His intention. For instance, Seth replaced Abel who was also a type of the future Saviour. Even further, Abraham would have also believed that the Eternal could have resurrected Isaac, if that had been His intention.

In Abraham, we have one of the prime examples of what is desired and acceptable to the Creator, in all of the history of humankind. In Genesis 26:5 ESV, the promise is repeated to Isaac, with the Creator saying: “because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” It doesn’t leave much out. Abraham was the consummate believer of the Eternal. He set the bar immeasurably high. A difficult act to follow; an understatement of great proportion. Abraham the  true friend of God, just might be, the most honourable human follower of the Creator who has ever lived, after His very own Son.

Genesis 25:7-11

English Standard Version

7 These are the days of the years of Abraham’s life, 175 years [died 1802 BCE]. 8 Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. 9 Isaac [75 years of age] and Ishmael [89 years old] his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre, 10 the field that Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried, with Sarah his wife. 11 After the death of Abraham, God blessed Isaac his son. And Isaac settled at Beer-lahai-roi.

The death of Abraham is poignantly described in the Book of Jubilees. 

Chapter 23:1-7

1 And he placed two fingers of Jacob on his eyes, and he blessed the Almighty of gods, and he covered his face and stretched out his feet and slept the sleep of eternity [a long sleep until the resurrection, Job 14;14], and was gathered to his fathers. 2 And notwithstanding all this Jacob [15 years of age] was lying in his bosom, and knew not that Abraham, his father’s father, was dead. 3 And Jacob awoke from his sleep, and behold Abraham was cold as ice, and he said ‘Father, father’; but there was none that spoke, and he knew that he was dead. 

4 And he arose from his bosom and ran and told Rebecca, his mother; and Rebecca went to Isaac in the night, and told him; and they went together, and Jacob with them, and a lamp was in his hand, and when they had gone in they found Abraham lying dead. 5 And Isaac fell on the face of his fatherand wept and kissed him. 6 And the voices were heard in the house of Abraham, and Ishmael his son arose, and went to Abraham his father, and wept over Abraham his father, he and all the house of Abraham, and they wept with a great weeping. 7 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the double cave, near Sarah his wife, and they wept for him forty days, all the men of his house, and Isaac and Ishmael, and all their sons, and all the sons of Keturah [six sons about 21 to 31 years of age] in their places; and the days of weeping for Abraham were ended.

Due to the time frame, Zohar the Hittite was from the son of Canaan, Heth and not those people living later called the Hittite empire. This would have been the last of the Black people living in Canaan as nearly all would have already migrated to northwestern Africa, southwest of Phut, who in turn were west of Egypt. Canaan had been steadily swamped with Nephilim as evidenced by the cities of the plain – Sodom and the others – and the Battle of Siddim. Some of Abraham’s other children also moved into the region. We have closed on Abraham’s life in Genesis twenty-five with his sons Isaac and Ishmael, though we are now turning our attention to his subsequent six sons that he sired with his second wife, Keturah.

Genesis 25:1-6

English Standard Version

Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah. 2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah.Jokshan fatheredShebaandDedan. The sons of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, and Leummim. The sons of Midian wereEphah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah. 5 Abraham gave all he had to Isaac. 6 But to the sons of his concubines [Hagar and Keturah] Abraham gave gifts and while he was still living he sent them away from his son Isaac, eastward to the east country.

We learn a couple of points from this passage. The sons who are mentioned directly or indirectly, more than once in the Bible are italicised. Abraham took Keturah as his wife unlike Hagar – and after Sarah died – though she may have been a concubine prior to this, as she is listed as a concubine in 1 Chronicles 1:32 ESV: “The sons of Keturah, Abraham’s concubine: she bore… All these were the descendants of Keturah.” 

The other notable matter is the sending away of the six sons of Keturah, though not quite as harshly as the banishment of Ishmael and his mother. Ishmael had been given a separate blessing; different from Isaac as we shall learn. There is no recording of individual blessings in the Bible for Keturah’s sons, though we read that they did not leave without a portion each of Abraham’s wealth. They also, like Ishmael travelled eastward from Isaac. It infers a more easterly locale, or that they had already left. Josephus states: “Accordingly Isaac married Rebekah, the inheritance being now come to him; for the children by Keturah were gone to their own remote habitations.” (Antiquities of the Jews, B00k. I, 16, iii).

Book of Jubilees 20:1-2, 11-13:

1 … Abraham called Ishmael, 2 and his twelve sons, and Isaac and his two sons [Esau & Jacob], and the six sons of Keturah, and their sons. 2 And he commanded them that they should observe the way of Yahweh; that they should work righteousness, and love each his neighbour, and act on this manner amongst all men; that they should each so walk with regard to them as to do just judgment and righteousness on the earth. 11 And he gave to Ishmael and to his sons, and to the sons of Keturah, gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son, and he gave everything to Isaac his son.12. And Ishmael and his sons, and the sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in all the land which is towards the East facing the desert. 13. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs [Arabians],and Ishmaelites.

As addressed in part already, concerning Mizra and the Arab peoples; the Arabs have taken their name from the Arabian Peninsula. When the sons of Keturah and Ishmael migrated east to the wilderness, the ‘desert’ which is Arabia, they became collectively known as Arabians, but this does not make them modern day Arabs. 

One could say, they were the original Arabs and that the sons of Mizra have appropriated that name. Similar to the sons of Shem and Nephilim being known as Canaanites, when the original sons of Canaan had dwelt in Palestine and their name was appropriated. I trust the constant reader having seen the pattern repeated, does not require elaboration ad infinitum. 

It is not provided when Keturah or her sons were born, thus some conjecture is required. Ishmael was born in 1891 BCE, when Abraham was eighty-six and Ishmael was fourteen when Isaac was born in 1877 BCE. Sarah died in 1840 BCE at the age of 126 years. Isaac married Rebekah in 1839 BCE and with a little time to pass before marrying Keturah would be approximately 1835 BCE. Abraham would have been 142 years old. If the boys were born a couple of years apart and there were six of them, then circa 1833 BCE for the firstborn Zimran, through to 1823 BCE for the sixth and youngest son, Shuah. 

As Abraham had these additional sons late in life, they were born the same generation as and just prior to, Esau and Jacob in 1817 BCE; though they actually were half-brothers to Ishmael and Isaac. Thus, Jokshan’s sons and Midian’s sons, were cousins to Esau and Jacob; as Dedan’s sons were cousins to Esau and Jacob’s children. 

We are not told who Keturah is or where she was from. One source claims she was from Japheth, though this does not fit the paradigm of Abraham’s descendants [refer Chapter II Japheth]. The Book of Jubilees hints that they she may have descended from Abraham’s family from either his brother Nahor or likely Haran; but judging by the close, yet distinct Haplogroups of Keturah’s descendants it would appear that she may have been from another line of Arphaxad [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad]. 

Book of Jubilees 19:11

And Abraham took to himself a third wife, and her name was Keturah, from among the daughters of his household servants, for Hagar had died before Sarah. And she bare him six sons, Zimram, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah…

We are therefore looking for a cluster of smaller nations that have shared the blessings promised to Abraham and his kindred. We would expect them to be dwelling near or next to Nahor in Italy, Haran in Switzerland, as well as Moab and Ammon in France.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Keturah, meaning: Incense [or perfumed from SHD 6989].

We know surprisingly little about Keturah. We don’t know from what nation she came, who her parents were or whether she outlived Abraham or not. Some Jewish sages have proposed that Keturah and Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, are the same person, but there’s no evidence in the text to support this, and this proposition is ultimately fantastic. 

What we do know is that Keturah became to mother of six Abrahamic sons, one of whom, Midian, became a nation that both rivaled Israel and became one of the most dominant tributaries to its theology and social structure. After all, Moses met YHWH in Midian… and Moses’ priestly father-in-law Jethro [taught] Moses all about the great benefits of delegated governance… It’s rarely noticed that Abraham complained that he was too old to have Isaac (Genesis 17:17), but when Isaac was 36 years old (compare 17:17 to 23:1) Sarah died, and some undisclosed time after, Abraham married Keturah and sired another six sons.

The name Keturah comes from the verb (qatar) meaning to produce pleasant smoke: The verb (qatar) probably originally meant to rise up but came to denote the rising up of sacrificial smoke, which in turn commonly marked celebrations and surplus, and smelled pleasant after roasts or incense. What may not be immediately obvious to the modern reader is that the name Keturah demonstrates a very high level of governance and social sophistication… the government endows all elements with enough safety that none needs to be scared, enough food that none needs to be hungry, and enough wealth that none needs to feel stifled, stunted or duped.’

This is an accurate depiction of the forward thinking, progressive and liberal societies that typify the modern nations of Keturah.

Herman Hoeh – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Abraham had a concubine, Keturah, who was his wife after Sarah died. She bore him a number of children whose wanderings are often lost sight of… Abraham sent them northeast [southeast] toward Mesopotamia [Arabia]. There they formed the powerful Kingdom of Mitanni, named after Midian or Medan. They lived mainly along the Euphrates River. The [Assyrians] destroyed their kingdom, sending some east and others north. In the east, evidence is that they became known as the Persians or Parthians (two names for the same people)and, in India, as the Brahmins – the sons of Abram! In India one branch of Keturah’s children form the highest caste and call themselves Brahmins after their father’s original name, Abram. Among the sons [of] Keturah who later went north were the “Letushim” (Genesis 25:3). And where are the Letushim today? Along the shores of the Baltic Sea in Russia. We call them the “Lettish” people today. Many Letts have fled to this country from Russian oppression. The Letts are closely related to the other peoples living along the southeastern shores of the Baltic Sea [from Joktan]… [and] the Asshurim of North Germany…’


Keturah’s children travelled in a south easterly direction into Arabia and we have studied the Mitanni, in Mesopotamia and their descent from Shem’s son Aram, not Abraham [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Chapter XXV Nahor]. The Parthians we will find are linked to Abraham, but a different line of his family and not from Keturah. We have also studied the connection between Moses and King Solomon with the castes of India and thus any association with Abraham’s name is both possible and plausible [refer Chapter XIII Cush & Phut]. 

Rather than along the shores of the Baltic Sea with the children of Joktan, who are also from Arphaxad, the descendants of Keturah are in fact on the other side of the Baltic Sea; along the shores of the North and Norwegian Seas – the Democratic northwestern European nations of Scandinavia and the Benelux. Historically by many within the identity movement, these nations have been taught as being descendants of Jacob and therefore identified as part of the ‘so called’ lost tribes of Israel.

The first born son of Keturah is Zimran. He is not mentioned outside of Genesis and 1 Chronicles. Four out of the six sons may have some interplay regarding their exact identity and a more specific understanding is welcomed with more definitive information. Putting what pieces there are together, Zimran is the nation of Norway. Norway has a population of 5,497,762 people. Abarim Publications defines Zimran as meaning: ‘One Who Makes Music’ [H2175] or ‘One Who Prunes’ based on the the verb zamar, to ‘prune or praise.’ Specifically, to ‘prune trees in an orchard or vineyard’ or ‘to hone a crowd into a choir.’

Norway’s kingdoms were united by Haraldr Harfagri during wars of the 860s and early 870s, though Norway at this time only comprised the southern third of the modern country. From 1450 the kings of Denmark ruled Norway. Norway insisted on an election process to confirm the king, usually after they were proclaimed in Denmark. From 1536, governors were appointed to manage the country’s interests. Following the Napoleonic Wars, Sweden became the senior partner. Norway gained full independence from Sweden on June 7, 1905, when Sweden withdrew from the Union to avert war. The Norwegian government asked Prince Carl of Denmark to become the country’s new king. He arrived during a blizzard on 25 November, with his wife Maud the daughter of King Edward VII of England, and his son Alexander. Carl changed his name to the more agreeable Haakon VII and was welcomed as the first Norwegian king for six hundred years. The royal anthem is sung to the same melody as that of England’s God Save the Queen, which is also Liechtenstein’s anthem, though with different lyrics.  

Norwegian flag and Iceland’s Coat of Arms, with flag

Recall, the Eternal promised Abraham and Sarah, that kings would descend from them. It is therefore interesting to note that barring one son today, all of Abraham’s children with Keturah retain constitutional monarchies. There are only twenty-nine states out of  about two hundred in the world with monarchies. Norway’s monarch is King Harald V, crowned in 1991. He married Sonja Haraldsen in 1968.

The fifth son of Abraham and Keturah is Ishbak. He is not mentioned outside of the genealogical record either, though it appears that Ishbak is the nation of Iceland. Iceland has a population of 345,229 people. Abarim Publications give the following meaning: ‘Leaving, He will forsake’ from the verb shabaq. Also offered are: ‘He will abandon’ or ‘He will set free.’ An additional meaning includes: ‘He releases’ [H3435].

The Norwegian-Norse chieftain Ingolfr Arnarson built a homestead in the present day capital Reykjavik, in 874 CE. Other emigrant settlers followed from Scandinavia* – primarily Norwegian seafarers and adventurers – and their Celtic thralls [serfs and slaves] of Irish or Scottish stock. It is recorded that monks – the Papar – lived in Iceland before the Scandinavian settlers arrived, again of a Hiberian-Scottish origin. 

As part of the Kalmar Union, Iceland had been under the control of the Crown of Denmark from 1380, though formally a Norwegian possession – until 1814. In 1874 – a thousand years after the first settlement – Denmark granted Iceland home rule and in 1918, agreed its status as an independent, constitutional and hereditary monarchy, through a Union with Denmark. In 1944, a national referendum led to Iceland leaving the Union and becoming a republic.

The term Nordic refers to Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland principally, though it can also include Scotland, Northern Germany, the Netherlands and with a stretch, Russia. Whereas Scandinavia* – originating from Scania a small region on the peninsula, the southern tip of modern Sweden from which the three peoples sprung – strictly refers to the three kingdoms of Norway, Sweden and Denmark as these three are bound intrinsically in their shared ethno-cultural Germanic heritage and related languages. More broadly, it can include Iceland and the Faeroe Islands on related languages and ancestry – as borne out by Haplogroup identity – and Finland on geologic, economic and political grounds. The Finns, unlike Icelanders are descended from Joktan and are separated from Scandinavia as evidenced by their Finno-Ugric language and their proximity to Russia, geographically and historically [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad].

The third born son, also only listed in the Biblical family tree in Genesis chapter twenty-five and in 1 Chronicles One, is Medan, the modern nation of Denmark. The identificationincludes the Faeroe Islands, with 49,202 people and Greenland, with 56,947 people. Denmark has a population comparable with Norway of 5,829,023 people. The meaning of Medan according to Abarim Publications is: ‘Strife’ or ‘Judgment’ from the noun madon, meaning ‘strife’ and from the verb din, ‘to judge or govern.’ It can also mean: ‘contention’ [H4091] or ‘discord’ [H4091]. 

A very important point to comprehend, is that the early Danes who were located in what is now southern Sweden were different people to the Danes of today living in Denmark. Population pressures in the fourth and fifth centuries CE forced them to begin a migration into Denmark, once the Saxon tribes of Angles, Jutes and Frisians departed for Britain en masse. It wasn’t until after the Battle of Hastings in 1066, that Denmark as we know it was free of the original Danes and their migration into Britain as the Danish Vikings. The latter Danes also settled in Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Iceland, which they retained after the dissolution of the Dano-Norwegian Union under the terms of the 1814 Treaty of Kiel. 

In 1380 Queen Margaret’s husband, Haakon VI of Norway died. Margaret of Denmark, then ensured that their son Olaf, was proclaimed king there, thus adding Norway to his territories and thereby, creating the Union of Denmark and Norway, with Denmark gaining Greenland and Iceland. Margaret was the de facto ruler while  Olaf was a minor. In 1387, Olaf’s sudden and unexpected death at the age of seventeen, gave Margaret firm control as queen regent of Denmark and Norway; with Norway ruled as an appendage of Denmark. The nobility of Sweden unhappy with their own King Albert, invited Margaret to invade and take the throne. In 1388 she is accepted, at her own insistence, as Sovereign Lady and Ruler of Sweden; forming the Kalmar Union. 

A later monarch, Christian I – 1448 to 1481 CE – had a daughter named Margaret, who married King James III of Scotland. Her dowry included the islands of Orkney and Shetland, which were passed by the Danish crown to Scotland. The Danish monarch is Queen Margrethe II and she was crowned in 1972. Margrethe married Prince Henri de Laborde de Monpezat in 1967, who died in 2018.

The sixth and youngest son of Keturah is Shuah. Shuah is the nation of Sweden. Sweden has a population of 10,099,265 people. Abarim Publications give the meaning of Shuah as: ‘brought low, to sink, be bowed down’ or ‘humbled, prostration; a cry’ and ‘prosperity’ from the verbs shuah, which ‘denotes a motion towards a low position’ and from shawa, ‘to cry out for salvation.’ 

Abarim – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There are four different Hebrew names that transliterated into English form the name Shuah, or variations thereof depending on the translation. The name Shoa (or variations thereof) is spelled the same as one of the Shuahs but pronounced slightly different. The first Shuah (pronounced shuach) is a son of Abraham with Keturah (Genesis 25:2). A feminine variation of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 4:11 (Shuhah; pronounced shuachah), which is assigned to a (female?) descendant of Judah. A completely different name occurs in Genesis 38:2 and 38:12 (pronounced shua’), where it is the name of the father of a wife of Judah (perhaps also known as Bath-shua – Genesis 38:12). A variant of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 7:32 (pronounced shua’a), where it is assigned to a daughter of Heber, a granddaughter of Asher, son of Jacob. The name Shoa occurs in Ezekiel 23:23, where it is the name of a Chaldean[?] tribe. 

The name of this son of Abraham and the name of this… female descendant of Judah mean Brought Low or Put In A Pit. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Prostration. BDB Theological Dictionary refers both versions of this form of Shuah to the verb (yasha’), meaning to be saved. The names of the father of Judah’s wife and the Asherite woman may therefore mean Noble… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Rich for Shoa and Prosperity for all variations of Shuah. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Wealth [H7744] for Shua.’

Shuah is not directly mentioned, though one of his famous descendants is included in the book of Job, as one of his three friends that attends to him while he is undergoing sore trials. Shuah’s descendants may have been known to the Assyrians who referred to a people as the Suhu; though describing their land as being on the right bank of the Euphrates River, south of Carchemish is probably not the same Shuah.

Job 2:11

English Standard Version

11 Now when Job’s three friends heard of all this evil that had come upon him, they came each from his own place, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, andZophar the Naamathite. They made an appointment together to come to show him sympathy and comfort him.

Bildad is also mentioned in Job 8:1-22; 18:1-21 & 25:1-6. We will meet Bildad again in a later chapter.

Job 42:7-9

English Standard Version

7 After the Lord had spoken these words to Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite: “My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. 8 Now therefore take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and offer up a burnt offering for yourselves. And my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept his prayer not to deal with you according to your folly. For you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did what the Lord had told them, and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer.

It was from the eighth century that the Scandinavian Vikings expanded outwards, building an extensive trading network across Europe and beyond. The Norwegians and Danes travelled west, while the Swedes went eastwards. The eastern bound Vikings were different to the western in that they were descendants of Keturah. They penetrated deeply into the vast lands of modern Russia, following the navigable rivers, creating trading connections as far south as the Byzantine empire. By the ninth century they had trading settlements in the eastern Baltic and in the lands of the Rus. The Swedish Vikings founded their own states, where a Viking nobility ruled Slavic populations, such as that of Polotsk. In 970 CE, Eric the Victorious became the first King of Sweden; later in 1249, Finland became part of Sweden after the Second Swedish Crusade led by Birger Jarl. The year 1252 saw the city of Stockholm established and in 1319, Sweden and Norway were united under the rule of Magnus IV. Danish forces invaded Sweden and executed rebellious nobility in the Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520. Three years later, Sweden declared independence from the Kalmar Union when Gustav Vasa was hailed as the new King of Sweden. 

A later monarch, Christian I – 1448 to 1481 CE – had a daughter named Margaret, who married King James III of Scotland. Her dowry included the islands of Orkney and Shetland, which were passed by the Danish crown to Scotland. The Danish monarch is Queen Margrethe II and she was crowned in 1972. Margrethe married Prince Henri de Laborde de Monpezat in 1967, who died in 2018.

The sixth and youngest son of Keturah is Shuah. Shuah is the nation of Sweden. Sweden has a population of 10,099,265 people. Abarim Publications give the meaning of Shuah as: ‘brought low, to sink, be bowed down’ or ‘humbled, prostration; a cry’ and ‘prosperity’ from the verbs shuah, which ‘denotes a motion towards a low position’ and from shawa, ‘to cry out for salvation.’ 

Abarim – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There are four different Hebrew names that transliterated into English form the name Shuah, or variations thereof depending on the translation. The name Shoa (or variations thereof) is spelled the same as one of the Shuahs but pronounced slightly different. The first Shuah (pronounced shuach) is a son of Abraham with Keturah (Genesis 25:2). A feminine variation of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 4:11 (Shuhah; pronounced shuachah), which is assigned to a (female?) descendant of Judah. A completely different name occurs in Genesis 38:2 and 38:12 (pronounced shua’), where it is the name of the father of a wife of Judah (perhaps also known as Bath-shua – Genesis 38:12). A variant of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 7:32 (pronounced shua’a), where it is assigned to a daughter of Heber, a granddaughter of Asher, son of Jacob. The name Shoa occurs in Ezekiel 23:23, where it is the name of a Chaldean[?] tribe. 

The name of this son of Abraham and the name of this… female descendant of Judah mean Brought Low or Put In A Pit. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Prostration. BDB Theological Dictionary refers both versions of this form of Shuah to the verb (yasha’), meaning to be saved. The names of the father of Judah’s wife and the Asherite woman may therefore mean Noble… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Rich for Shoa and Prosperity for all variations of Shuah. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Wealth [H7744] for Shua.’

Shuah is not directly mentioned, though one of his famous descendants is included in the book of Job, as one of his three friends that attends to him while he is undergoing sore trials. Shuah’s descendants may have been known to the Assyrians who referred to a people as the Suhu; though describing their land as being on the right bank of the Euphrates River, south of Carchemish is probably not the same Shuah.

Job 2:11

English Standard Version

11 Now when Job’s three friends heard of all this evil that had come upon him, they came each from his own place, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, andZophar the Naamathite. They made an appointment together to come to show him sympathy and comfort him.

Bildad is also mentioned in Job 8:1-22; 18:1-21 & 25:1-6. We will meet Bildad again in a later chapter.

Job 42:7-9

English Standard Version

7 After the Lord had spoken these words to Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite: “My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. 8 Now therefore take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and offer up a burnt offering for yourselves. And my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept his prayer not to deal with you according to your folly. For you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did what the Lord had told them, and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer.

It was from the eighth century that the Scandinavian Vikings expanded outwards, building an extensive trading network across Europe and beyond. The Norwegians and Danes travelled west, while the Swedes went eastwards. The eastern bound Vikings were different to the western in that they were descendants of Keturah. They penetrated deeply into the vast lands of modern Russia, following the navigable rivers, creating trading connections as far south as the Byzantine empire. By the ninth century they had trading settlements in the eastern Baltic and in the lands of the Rus. The Swedish Vikings founded their own states, where a Viking nobility ruled Slavic populations, such as that of Polotsk. In 970 CE, Eric the Victorious became the first King of Sweden; later in 1249, Finland became part of Sweden after the Second Swedish Crusade led by Birger Jarl. The year 1252 saw the city of Stockholm established and in 1319, Sweden and Norway were united under the rule of Magnus IV. Danish forces invaded Sweden and executed rebellious nobility in the Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520. Three years later, Sweden declared independence from the Kalmar Union when Gustav Vasa was hailed as the new King of Sweden. 

During the 1550s many Finns migrated westwards across Scandinavia to settle. Thousands of farmers made the journey as far as eastern Norway and central Sweden; known as the Forest Finns. They turned forests to farmlands using slash-and-burn agriculture and in return they were given land. In 1563 the Northern Seven Years’ War with Denmark began, ending in 1570 with the Treaty of Stettin and Sweden giving up claims on Norway. Sweden entered the Thirty Years’ War on the side of France and England. In 1648, when it came to an end, Sweden gained territory and thus began the rise of the Swedish Empire. 

By 1700 Sweden had reached the peak of its power – controlling areas of Denmark, Russia, Finland and northern Germany – and the Great Northern War began. It was fought against Russia, led by Tsar Peter the Great, Denmark and Poland. The Swedes defeated the Russians at the Battle of Narva. In 1707, Sweden emboldened, invaded Russia, though bad weather weakened the army as they marched further east and the young Swedish King Karl XII fell in battle. By 1709, the Russians defeated the Swedes at the Battle of Poltava and in 1721, the Great Northern War ended with Sweden’s defeat and its Empire significantly reduced. 

In 1809, Finland was lost to Russia. In 1813, Sweden fought against the French, who were led by Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig. From the victory, Sweden gained control of Norway from Denmark. In the late 1800s about one million Swedes immigrated to the United States due to poor economic conditions. In 1867, scientist Alfred Nobel obtained a patent for the explosive invention of dynamite. In 1875, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, ahead of their time, established a single currency called the Kroner. In 1927, the famous car marque Volvo, produced their first vehicle, nicknamed interestingly enough, Jakob. Sweden diplomatically remained neutral in both World Wars. 

It was tragically in 1947 that Prince Gustaf Adolf, heir to the throne, was killed in an airplane crash on 26 January at Kastrup Airport in Copenhagen, Denmark.  He and two companions were returning from a hunting trip and a visit to Princess Juliana of the Netherlands – shortly before she acceded to the Dutch throne. Gustaf’s son, Karl – Charles XVI Gustav – then became heir to the Swedish throne and he was crowned in 1973. He married Silvia Sommerlath in 1976.

Sweden joined the European Union in 1995, but did not join the Monetary Union and therefore, still uses the Swedish Krona as currency rather than the Euro; as does Iceland, Norway and Denmark, whereas Finland adopted the Euro in 2002. Just this fact alone, is interesting in interpreting Scandinavian versus Nordic definitions – or sons of Keturah and Abraham versus those of Arphaxad. 

Sweden punches above its weight with a GDP of $530.88 billion in 2019, making it the 24th largest economy in the world.Sweden has a competitive economy and a high standard of living, with a mix of free-enterprise in tandem with a generous social welfare state. ‘Sweden’s manufacturing economy relies heavily on foreign exports, including machinery, motor vehicles, and telecommunications.

Additionally, the Scandinavian three of Sweden, Denmark and Norway are all constitutional monarchies but Finland has never been a kingdom or had a monarchy. The histories of Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland are closely intwined as we have seen and highlight their close family relationship as four of the six bothers. The two remaining brothers, also share a close relationship and are spread across three kingdoms, with five separate territories and four distinct ethnic groups.

The second son of Keturah is Jokshan. Jokshan is the ancestor of the nations of Belgium and Luxembourg. The population of Belgium is 11,681,499 people and Luxembourg is 644,525 people.

The Belgium Flag and Coat of Arms – Unity Makes Strength

Abarim Publications gives the meaning of Jokshan as: ‘one who sets a snare’ or ‘fowler’ from the verb yaqosh or qush, ‘to lay a snare’ and figuratively “snaring” a person using ‘alluring enticements.’ Jokshan is not mentioned outside of the genealogies, though his two sons, Sheba and Dedan are. The reader will recall, we have already met a Sheba and Dedan, the sons of Raamah of India, the son of Cush [refer Chapter XIII Cush & Phut]. We have also encountered a Sheba, son of Joktan of Romania [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad]. Genesis Twenty-five provides the added detail of Dedan’s sons. Yet they are not mentioned directly, though Letush* is possibly once, indirectly. 

It would appear to be a clue in identifying Dedan and highlighting a unique relationship, that is only replicated one other time with Haran, Canneh and Eden in Switzerland [refer Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon]. Though also in part, in one other instance in the Bible and the world today, with England and Scotland.

Isaiah 15:5 

English Standard Version

My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar… For at the ascent [H4608 – ma’aleh: incline, elevation, going up (hill)] of Luhith* [H3872 – luwchiyth: tablets, anciently a town of Moab south of the Arnon River (possible link with a grandson of Abraham and Keturah and the Ardennes)] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… [Jeremiah 48:5]

We have looked at Sheba and Dedan’s names previously, though a brief recap. Sheba can mean, ‘man, drunk, captive, splinter, seven’ and ‘oath.’ Dedan means: ‘leading gently’ or ‘to move slowly.’ Abarim states the ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low.’ The Benelux nations comprising the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg can also be called the Low countries as they are either close to the sea, or below sea level. Dedan’s three sons names according to Abarim mean the following. 

Asshur-im: ‘happy people, upright people, to be level, straight up’ or ‘just.’ The word can means steps, as in taking steps to go somewhere. Letush-im: ‘metal workers’ from the verb latash, to hammer or sharpen. ‘[The] NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Sharpened. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Artificers, or Hammerers’ [of weaponry].’ Letush can also mean ‘oppressed’ or ‘strong.’ Leumm-im: ‘peoples’ from the noun le’com, nation, people.’ It refers to ‘communities’ from the root word ‘to gather.’

Job 1:15

English Standard Version

… and the Sabeans fell upon them and took them and struck down the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”

Job’s children while celebrating and feasting were attacked by Sabeans. It is not clear which Sabeans; though from a geographic view, they are very likely Sheba from Jokshan. It could also be referring to Sheba from Joktan, or more unlikely, Sheba from Cush.

Ezekiel 27:23

English Standard Version

Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur, and Chilmad traded with you.

This verse could possibly apply to Sheba of Joktan and be referring to Romania, as they are linked with Asshur and Russia. The first part of the verse mentions Haran, Canneh and Eden of Switzerland and so if this Sheba is meant, it would be Belgium – or more specifically the Flemish people of Flanders in northern Belgium.

Job 6:19

English Standard Version

The caravans of Tema look, the travelers of Sheba hope. 

Isaiah 60:6

English Standard Version

A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian and Ephah; all those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.

Tema is a son of Ishmael and Midian a son of Keturah; as both of these peoples are stated with Sheba, this is speaking of Sheba, descended from Abraham and Keturah. These verses show the economic prosperity of Sheba.

Isaiah 21:13

English Standard Version

The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites.

Jeremiah 25:23-24

Young’s Literal Translation

23 Dedan, and Tema, and Buz, [all that are (in the) utmost] And all cutting the corners (of the beard), 24 And all the kings of Arabia [north western Europe], And all the kings of the mixed [mingled] people, Who are dwelling in the wilderness…[the Italian peninsula]

Arabia was the eastern region where Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah migrated to be apart from Isaac’s descendants. Arabia today, equates with northern and western Europe, where the peoples descended from Keturah and Ishmael live. Dedan – southern Belgium – is associated with Tema, a leading clan of Ishmael and Buz, a leading family of Nahor in northern Italy.

Jeremiah 49:8

Complete Jewish Bible

Flee! Turn back! Hide yourselves well, you who live in D’dan [Dedan]; for I am bringing calamity on ‘Esav [Esau], when the time for me to punish him comes.

Ezekiel 25:13

Amplified Bible

… therefore thus says the Lord God, “I will also stretch out My hand against Edom and I will cut off and destroy man and beast. I will make it desolate; from Teman [leading tribe of Edom]even to Dedan they will fall by the sword.

The calamity of Esau will be so severe, that they will flee even as far as Dedan to try and escape. Dedan or southern Belgium, is warned to either hide or head in the opposite direction themselves. Definitely not to travel towards Edom.

Ezekiel 27:19-21

Common English Bible

19 Vedan [Dan] and Javan [Archipelago SE Asia] from the region of Uzal [Greece] traded with you. They exchanged wrought iron, cinnamon, and spices for your wares. 20 Dedan was your agent for saddle blankets [military products]. 21 Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [leading tribe of Ishmael] traded for you. They procured lambs, rams, and goats for you.

Dedan is associated with a leading son or clan of Ishmael, Kedar and both are spoken of as trading with the mighty Tyre, that is, a Brazil led South America. Dedan’s three sons reveal three components in southern Belgium’s composition. Dedan’s sons include the Walloons of Wallonia, the separate Brussels-Capital region and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Leumm represents the people of Brussels, Letush is Wallonia and the Asshurim Luxembourg and possibly incorporating the Province of Luxembourg in southeast Wallonia. Their names are remarkably clear clues, as Leumm signifies the unique gathering of people in Brussels, Letush the artificer of weapons and Luxembourg is one of the happiest countries in the world, being the second wealthiest country in the world after Qatar, with regard to individual prosperity per person.

Wallonia produce a number of weapons in quantity, including the M4 assault rifle made by FN Herstal and owned by the Wallonia government. Wallonia is also home to  the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. A 2021 survey listed the top Ten Happiest countries to live in and Luxembourg was placed at number ten. It is interesting to note, that apart from Belgium, all the sons of Keturah make the top ten. Number 9 is Austria, 8 New Zealand, 7 Sweden, 6 Netherlands, 5 Norway, 4 Iceland, 3 Switzerland, 2 Denmark and number 1 is Finland. Maybe they have a case to be included as Scandinavian after all.

The Lion state symbol of Flanders – indicating its Dutch heritage, language and cultural ties – and the Cockerel or Rooster state symbol of Wallonia – reflecting its French heritage, language and cultural ties.

Over two thousand years ago, the Celtic tribe of the Belgae occupied the region – before they migrated to Britain, leaving their name. In time, the area was ruled by the Romans, then the Merovingian Franks and incorporated into West Francia, remaining under French influence until the Belgian lands were first dominated by the Spanish Hapsburgs from 1555 – who split the Netherland region in two – known as the Spanish Netherlands and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs from 1713. From 1815 to 1830, it was again the southern part of the newly formed United Kingdom of the Netherlands, created as a buffer state against France. Though being predominantly French speaking, Catholic and industrialised, meant a rift ensued with the Dutch speaking, Protestant and commercialised north – present day Netherlands. Wallonia pressed for independence with a reluctant Flanders following suit due to military pressure.

The fact that the Bible makes a distinction between Sheba and Dedan and speaks of them separately would indicate that the union of Flanders and Wallonia into one Kingdom in 1830 will ultimately dissolve. An historian of the Belgian revolution said that: “In Belgium, there are parties and provinces, but no nation.” Of the eleven and a half million people, 58% live in Flanders, 32% in Wallonia – though Wallonia accounts for 55% of Belgium’s territory – and 10% in Brussels.

Unlike the Flemish – who are economically more prosperous – the Walloons do not consider themselves a nation or necessarily desire an independent state. Polls find that only a minority of Walloons want Belgium to break up and if secession was forced on them by Flanders, about half would want to be attached to France. A 2020 poll found that 28% of the Flemish were in favour of a partition, compared to 18% of Walloons and 17% of Brussels residents. With that said, 56% of the same respondents ‘said it would be impossible to keep the country together in [the] future [58% in Wallonia, 46% in Flanders and 47% in Brussels].’ 

A Liege resident foresees a split, saying: “In Flanders they live differently, see things differently and envisage the future differently.” Remembering that the Flemish are Sheba and the Walloons coupled with the predominately French speaking Brussels are Dedan, makes the differences understandable and an eventual split likely. 

‘The Brussels-Capital Region has the same status as Flanders and Wallonia within the federal structure… though it measures only 161 [square km] (barely 0.5% of the national territory) its population of one million [plus] represents 10% of the national total. An enclave within Flanders, it is primarily French-speaking – around 85% of inhabitants speak French… [though] officially the region is bilingual… Brussels is not only the capital of Belgium and the European Union but also of the “French” [speaking communities]… of [both] Brussels and Wallonia, [as well as] the Flemish community and region.’ Many people incorrectly assume that the term Walloons applies to all Belgian French speakers; including those born and living in the Brussels-Capital Region. The mixing of the population over preceding centuries means that most families can trace their ancestors from ‘both sides of the linguistic divide’ in Brussels. 

The local dialect – Brussels Vloms – is a Brabantic dialect that reflects ‘the Dutch heritage of the city.’ The status of Brussels in a partitioned Belgium is uncertain and a source of considerable debate, with a variety of options that are all complex. Forming a city-state – European capital district – similar to Washington DC or the Australian Capital Territory are offered as is an extended Brussels region, so that its borders reach Wallonia. 

Belgium’s 2019 GDP was $533.10 billion making it the 23rd largest world economy, one ahed of Sweden. Belgium, a trade and transport hub, has a diversified economy with a mix of services, manufacturing and high tech industry. Its heavy integration with the rest of the European economy, means Belgium is highly sensitive to swings in the overall economic performance of its neighbours.

The Belgium monarch is King Philippe Leopold Louis Marie, who was crowned in 2013. He married Queen Matilda, born Jonkvrouw Mathilde d’Udekem c’Acoz. The monarch of Luxembourg is Henri Albert Gabriel Felix Marie Guillaume, who was crowned in 2000. He married Maria Teresa Mestre y Batista in 1981. Finally, the monarch of the Netherlands is King Willem Alexander, crowned in 2013. He married Princess Maxima in 2002.

The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg began as a stronghold known as Lucilinburhuc, after the break-up of the Frankish empire. A town grew up around the stronghold, which today is Luxembourg Castle. The territory quickly grew in stature becoming a full county in the eleventh century and a duchy in the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century it was acquired by the Duchy of Burgundy and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs in 1482. Under the terms of the Treaty of Paris in 1815, it was passed to the new king of the Netherlands, William I, but in 1890 it gained full independence.

The fourth son of Keturah is Midian. Midian is the Dutch people of the Netherlands. The country has a population of 17,203,340 people – the 10th highest in Europe. Abarim give the meaning of Midian, similar to Medan as: ‘strife’ and ‘place Of Judgment’ from the noun madon, strife, which derives from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’ Midian is mentioned in the Bible numerous times and also had five sons, though only one is once mentioned in scripture. The Midianites are the dominant and most prominent of the descendants of Keturah. They have had a close association with Ishmael, with the name ‘Midianite’ being interchangeable and they have also had a close link with Moab and Ammon when seeking to fight their adversaries, the sons of Jacob. The Midianites were a successful trading people, building economic wealth like their cousins Sheba and Dedan.

Midian’s eldest son is Ephah and his name means: ‘Gloom[y], Covering’ from the noun ‘epa, gloom, from the verb ‘up, to use wings or cover. It can also mean ‘volant’ [moving lightly, nimble] and ‘darkling.’ The ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List translates this name with Dark One; Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Darkness.’ Ephah is also a word used for a dry measurement of grain and is approximately twenty litres. Another Ephah is mentioned as a second wife of Caleb and also as part of Jahdai’s family in Judah [1 Chronicles 2:46-47]. 

The second son of Midian is Epher: meaning, ’Dust, Ore, Malleable, Young [Deer or Hart].’ It can also mean ‘a calf’ [H6081]. There is an Epher, the son of Ezra in the genealogies of Judah and also the half-tribe of East Manasseh – eldest son of Joseph [1 Chronicles 4:17; 5:24]. 

Hanoch or ‘Enoch’ is the third son of Midian. His name means: ‘inaugurated, trained.’ ‘Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… proposes initiated… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads dedicated [or (God’s) follower H2585] for…’ The name Hanoch is also a name of one of Reuben’s sons [Reuben, the eldest son of Jacob]. Midian’s fourth son is Abida[h]: ‘father of knowledge, the [or my] father knows [H28], my father took knowledge’ from the noun ‘ab, father, and the verb yada’, to know. Midian’s fifth and youngest son is Eldaah: ‘God has called, knowledge of God’ or ‘God is knowledge.’ The name can also mean: ‘God has known’ [H420] or ‘called of God.’

Genesis 37:25-28, 36

English Standard Version

25 Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites [H3459 – Yishma’e’liy: God will hear] coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. 26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother [Joseph] and conceal his blood? 27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites [H3459], and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him. 

28 Then Midianite [H4084 – Midyaniy: strife (Midian)] traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites [H3459] for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt. 36 Meanwhile the Midianites [H4092 Mdaniy: (Midianite) a variation of H4084] had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard.

Some claim that there is a contradiction in this passage or alternatively, that the Ishmaelites and Midianites are one and the same, as some researchers incorrectly try to make their mothers, Hagar and Keturah the same person. There are two different Hebrew words used for Midianite in the text. The first term used for these merchants is Midyaniy, an adjective signifying a member of the tribe of Midian or an inhabitant of Midian. This word H4084, is used for the Midianites throughout the Bible, for instance when describing Moses’s father-in-law Jethro in Numbers 10:29. For Midian himself, Strongs H4080 Midyan, is used. The second term Mdaniy is a variation of 4084 and has the exact same meaning. What is interesting, is that it is only used once, in this account of Joseph. 

This is clue number one, that we are not dealing with literal Midianites, but ‘Midianites’ from the the region of Midian. Clue two, is the fact that Ishmaelites are mentioned three times to the two for Midian and clue three is in Genesis 39:1 ESV: “Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there.” It was Ishmaelites from Midian that purchased Joesph and then sold him. Once we uncover the identities of Ishmael and Joseph, there is huge symbolic significance in this act by Ishmael; as there is also with the true identity of Judah, in the monumental ramifications of selling Joseph in the first place. 

Anciently and again in modern times, Ishmael and Midian have been very close neighbours. The use of the term Midianite for Ishmael will become readily apparent when we study Ishmael in the next chapter.

Exodus 2:11-25

English Standard Version

11 One day, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his people and looked on their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his people. 12 He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. 13 When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, “Why do you strike your companion?” 14 He answered, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid, and thought, “Surely the thing is known.” 15 When Pharaoh heard of it, he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and stayed in the land of Midian. 

Moses fled Egypt in 1486 BCE at the age of forty. The Pharaoh in question and the Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus forty years later, has seen an enormous amount of scholarly debate. We will study the chronology of the Exodus and respective identities of Moses’s adoptive Egyptian mother and father in depth when we study the tribe of Levi and Moses’s life [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad]. For now, the Pharaoh at the time of Moses’s personal exodus from Egypt was the sixth king of the Twelfth Dynasty, Amenemhet III.

And he sat down by a well. 16 Now the priest of Midian [H4080 – Midyan] had seven [H7651 from H7650 – Sheba] daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. 17 The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and watered their flock. 18 When they came home to their father Reuel*1, he said, “How is it that you have come home so soon today?” 19 They said, “An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds and even drew water for us and watered the flock.” 20 He said to his daughters, “Then where is he? Why have you left the man? Call him, that he may eat bread.” 21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah [H6855 – Tsipporah: bird Acts 7:29]. 22 She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom [H1647 ‘foreigner’], for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land.” 23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel – and God knew.

Exodus 3:1

English Standard Version

Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro*2, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. [Exodus 4.18-19; 18.1]

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, Pages 196, 198 – emphasis & bold mine:

Jewish legends suggest Jethro had seven names, all conveying his transformation from an idolatrous priest to a priest of God… along with, Heber*3, Putiel*4, and Keni*5 [Kenite?]… legends recorded that a Pharaoh immediately before the Exodus maintained three famous high Priests during the latter part of the Israelite enslavement in Egypt: Job, Balaam, and Jethro. Jethro was regarded as the High Priest of a Library of Stone Tablets [Ten Commandments, Exodus 32:15-16] in some versions. Pharaoh did not welcome the pre-Exodus advice provided by Jethro about the growing Israelite problem, banning the priest Jethro-Reuel in disgrace… which was ample motive for Jethro to have helped Moses prepare for his return to Egypt.’

Moses’ father-in-law was also called Hobab*6, who was the son of Reuel or Raguel*7 [LXX Septuagint, Numbers 10:29]. There is much confusion caused by all these names,   especially as Reuel was also known as Jethro, meaning ‘his excellence’ from H3502 Yithrah. The name Hobab [H2246] means ‘cherished’or ‘loved fervently.’ According to Josephus, Hobab had ‘Iothor [or Jethro] for a surname.’ Jethro’s descent is given as: son of Nawil, son of Rawail, son of Mour, son of Anka, son of Midian, son of Abraham. Josephus claims that Raguel or Reuel, was Moses’ father-in-law and Judges 4:11 clearly states that he was known as Hobab. ESV: ‘Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, the descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent as far away as the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh.’ Some commentators claim that Jethro was an honorary title, while Reuel was his personal name. Reuel [H7467, Re’uw’el] means, ‘one who is intimate with God’ or Friend of God – thetitle given to Abraham. Raguel is another version of this name [refer Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary]. 

Putting it all together, it seems to this writer that Hobab was his personal or first name. As Hobab was the son of Reuel, he is also known by his father’s or family name and so Reuel fits as his last name or surname. Jethro then, does appear to be a title, linked to his official position as a Priest of Midian. Therefore, all three names would be correct and thus all are used to identify the same man. There is also a Reuel mentioned in the Bible who is a son of Esau by his wife Basemath, a daughter of Ishmael [Genesis 36:4, 13, 17]. 

The Gold-Mines of Midian, Richard Burton, 1878 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Jethro’s Moslem title is “Khatib el-Anbiya,” or Preacher to the Prophets, on account of the words of wisdom which he bestowed upon his son-in-law [Moses]… El-Kesai states that his original name was Boyun; that he was comely of person, but spare and lean; very thoughtful, and of few words… Other commentators add that he was old and blind… [Jethro] and Rahab are Gentiles, or strangers, affiliated to Israel [Ephesians 2:12-13; Romans 11:13, 17, 22] on account of their good deeds.’ 

The Desert of the Exodus, E H Palmer, 1871 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Sho‘eib, as the Arabs call Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, is said to have been blind, notwithstanding which infirmity he was divinely commissioned to preach the true religion lately revealed unto Abraham,and to convert the people of his native city Midian. They rejected his doctrine and mocked the blind prophet, for which sin they were destroyed by fire from heaven, while Midian was laid waste by an earthquake, Jethro alone escaping alive. He fled to Palestine, and is said to be buried near Safed.’

The Quran says: The chiefs of his people, who were elated with pride, answered, We will surely cast thee, O Shuaib, and those who believe with thee, out of our city: or else thou shalt certainly return unto our religion. He said, What! though we be averse thereto?” Jewish tradition states similarly: “We will surely cast thee . . out of our city.” Shuaib was a true believer and a priest of the Most High. Shuaib responds: “My support is from God alone: on him do I trust… O my people, let not your opposing of me draw on you a vengeance like unto that which fell on the people of Noah… neither was the people of Lot far distant from you. Ask pardon, therefore, of your Lord; and be turned unto him: for my Lord is merciful and loving.” 

“They answered, O Shuaib, we understand not much of what thou sayest, and we see thee to be a man of no power among us: if it had not been for the sake of thy family, we had surely stoned thee, neither couldst thou have prevailed against us. Shuaib said, O my people, is my family more worthy in your opinion than God? and do ye cast him behind you with neglect?” Regarding a man of no power, one commentator quotes: “The Arabic word dhaif, weak, signifying also, in the Himyaritic dialect, blind, some suppose that Shuaib was so, and that the Midianites objected that to him, as a defect which disqualified him for the prophetic office.”

Muslim writers identify Shuaib with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses. Baidhawi states  Shuaib was the son of Mikail, the son of Yashjar, the son of Midian; whereas, the Tafsir-i-Raufi addsthat Jethro was descended from Lot through Midian having married a daughter of Lot. Shuaib is not recorded as performing any miracles in the Quran or Islamic traditions, though they do repeat as the Jews do, that Jethro gave his son-in-law the ‘wonder-working rod’ with which he performed – with Aaron – all his mighty miracles in Egypt and the wilderness.

Exodus 18:1-27

English Standard Version

Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people, how the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2 Now Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, had taken Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her home, 3 along with her two sons. The name of the one was Gershom (for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”),and the name of the other, Eliezer [H461 ‘God is help’](for he said, “The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”).5 Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife to Moses in the wilderness where he was encamped at the mountain of God. 

6 And when he sent word to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you with your wife and her two sons with her,” 7 Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. And they asked each other of their welfare and went into the tent. 8 Then Moses told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardship that had come upon them in the way, and how the Lord had delivered them. 9 And Jethro rejoiced for all the good that the Lord had done to Israel, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians.

10 Jethro said, “Blessed be the Lord, who has delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of Pharaoh and has delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. 11 Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods, because in this affair they dealt arrogantly with the people.” 12 And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, brought a burnt offering and sacrifices to God; and Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.

13 The next day Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. 14 When Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand around you from morning till evening?” 15 And Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.” 17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone. 19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you! You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. 

21 Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 22And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. 

23 If you do this, God will direct you, you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.” 24 So Moses listened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25 Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 26 And they judged the people at all times. Any hard case they brought to Moses, but any small matter they decided themselves. 27 Then Moses let his father-in-law depart, and he went away to his own country [Midian?].

In Exodus chapter Eighteen there are some interesting similarities in the meeting between Moses and Jethro and the one between Abraham and Melchisedek. Abraham had recently rescued Lot, defeating Chedorlaomer, King of Elam in the process. Moses had witnessed the defeat of Pharaoh king of Egypt, while delivering the sons of Jacob. Both events had a miraculous outcome given by the Creator. 

Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God and Jethro was the Priest of Midian. Melchizedek and Jethro blessed and praised the Creator for their deliverance using very similar language. Melchizedek brought out ceremonial bread and wine with Abraham. Jethro also prepared bread with a sacrificial meal to be eaten with Moses, Aaron and all the elders of Israel. There is a theme of peace and friendship in the two respective encounters. The king of Salem [Peace H8004, H7999] blessed Abraham, and Jethro and Moses would have exchanged Shaloms[H7965, H7999] as evidenced in Exodus 18:7 and Exodus 4:18.

Numbers 10:1-2, 29

English Standard Version

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Make two silver trumpets. Of hammered work you shall make them, and you shall use them for summoning the congregation and for breaking camp. 29 And Moses said to Hobab the son of Reuel the Midianite [H4084], Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us, and we will do good to you, for the Lord has promised good to Israel.” 30 But he said to him, “I will not go. I will depart to my own land and to my kindred.” 31 And he said, “Please do not leave us, for you know where we should camp in the wilderness, and you will serve as eyes for us. 32 And if you do go with us, whatever good the Lord will do to us, the same will we do to you.”

It is through Jethro that we are introduced to the mysterious Kenites [H7017 – Qeyniy: ‘smiths’]. Some commentators link the Kenites with the contrived word Kainite from the name of Cain, as the Hebrew word Qeyniy derives from H7014 – Qayin [Qain or Kain], meaning, ’possession’ or ‘purchase’. Though linked etymologically, it is ideologically a stretch to arrive at this conclusion and would mean if true, that a. the line of Cain survived the Flood and b. that Jethro was descended in part from a corrupted line. One that would be hard to imagine was his real ancestry and or acceptable to the Eternal, in his being a priest and true believer.

Judges 1:16

Common English Bible

The descendants of Moses’ father-in-law the Kenite [H7017] went up with the people of Judah from Palm City into the Judean desert, which was in the southern plain near Arad. They went and lived with the Amalekites.

We have learned that Jethro may have been descended from Lot in part, that he was a priest of ‘Midian’ and that his father Reuel was a ‘Midianite’ though the Hebrew word used is not the one used for the name of the original Midian. Does this mean he was a Midianite as in ethnology or just in a geographic context. Similarly, if Jethro is a Kenite, are they separate from Midian – living with them – or a distinct tribe originating from Midian? Plus, a branch of the Kenites – those descended from Jethro – may have attached themselves to the tribe of Judah and or then, the Amalekites who are affiliated with Edom [refer Chapter XXIX Esau].

Judges 4:11

Common English Bible

Now Heber the Kenite [H7017] had moved away from the other Kenites [H7017], the descendants of Hobab, Moses’ father-in-law, and had settled as far away [far removed] as Elon-bezaanannim [‘removing, wandering’], which is near Kedesh [northern part of the Tribes land in Israel equating to those of Zebulun and Naphtali].

Remember the association with Zebulun. It appears that part of the Kenite people were, either associated with the Tribe of Judah or actually were from the tribe of Judah. The most plausible answer is that they had intermarried. The Rechabites were a clan of the Kenites and their progenitor was Hammath. The following verse is from the end of one genealogical record of the House of Judah. 1 Chronicles 2:55, RSV: “The families also of the scribes [H5608 – caphar: learned men] that dwelt at Jabez: the Ti’rathites, the Shim’e-athites, and the Su’cathites. These are the Ken’ites [H7017] who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.” The Rechabites being scribes would have been given respect for their standing, as we read in in 2 Kings chapter Ten, when Jehu – an adversary to wicked King Ahab of Israel, who ruled from 874  to 853 BCE – invites Jehonadab the son of Rechab to assist in slaughtering every last sole in a Temple of Baal worshippers. 

Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite [Judges 4:17 – H7017]. Deborah the prophetess and a Judge of Israel blessed Jael in her victory song because of her resolute courage in killing Sisera, the enemy of Israel beginning a period of forty years of peace from 1192 to 1152 BCE. When King Saul was commanded to destroy the Amalekites, he honourably advised the Kenites to move away from their neighbours and allies, the Amalekites in order not to be slaughtered along with them.

1 Samuel 15:6

English Standard Version

Then Saul said to the Kenites [H7017], “Go, depart; go down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them. For you showed kindness to all the people of Israel when they came up out of Egypt.So the Kenites [H7017] departed from among the Amalekites.

The Kenites acted as guides in the wilderness; even so, the prophesied fate of the Amalekites and the Kenites was apparently tied together. We will study Amalek separately in a later chapter. 

Numbers 24:21-22

Common English Bible

21 He looked at the Kenites [H7017] and raised his voice and gave his address: “Your dwelling is secure [H386 – ‘ethan: strong, hard, rough, permanent]; your nest [H7064 – qen: ‘nest of a bird’ high] is set in the rock [H5553 – bassela: ‘crag, cliff, stronghold’ protected]. 22 Yet Kain [H7014 Kenite] will burn when Asshur [Assyria] takes you away captive.

The Kenites were to be taken captive by the Assyrians, at the same time that the Kingdom of Israel was conquered, that is, between 721 and 718 BCE. Though there may be a future application of Balam’s prophesy as there is in verses twenty-three and twenty-four. The mention of nest in the rockis a play on the wordfor nest: Qen or ken, which is pronounced “kane” and thus the tribal name Ken-ite. The use of the Hebrew word Qayin in verse twenty-two does on the surface, appear to support a lineage from Cain, but in the context of the preceding verse where the Kenites dwell securely and on elevated ground, the use of this word meaning ‘possession’ is more applicable than Qeyniy, meaning ‘smiths’. Remember the dwelling on elevated ground as we will discover the specific significance of this description.

Jeremiah 35:2, 6-10, 16-18

English Standard Version

“Go to the house of the Rechabites and speak with them and bring them to the house of the Lord, into one of the chambers; then offer them wine to drink.” 6… “We will drink no wine, for Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, commanded us, ‘You shall not drink wine, neither you nor your sons forever. 7You shall not build a house; you shall not sow seed; you shall not plant or have a vineyard; but you shall live in tents all your days, that you may live many days in the land where you sojourn.’ 8 We have obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, in all that he commanded us, to drink no wine all our days, ourselves, our wives, our sons, or our daughters, 9 and not to build houses to dwell in. We have no vineyard or field or seed, 10 but we have lived in tents and have obeyed and done all that Jonadab our father commanded us. 16 The sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have kept the command that their father gave them, but this people [Judah] has not obeyed me. 

17 Therefore, thus says the Lord, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the disaster that I have pronounced against them, because I have spoken to them and they have not listened, I have called to them and they have not answered.” 18 But to the house of the Rechabites Jeremiah said, “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Because you have obeyed the command of Jonadab your father and kept all his precepts and done all that he commanded you, 19 therefore thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Jonadab the son of Rechab shall never lack a man to stand before me.”

The Rechabites had fled to Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar of Chaldea began subjugating the Kingdom of Judah. The Rechabites were spared because of their faithful adherence to the commands of their forefather Jonadab. Whereas Judah who had not heeded the Creator’s warnings suffered punishment at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar II. In verse two, the Lord calls for the Rechabites to be brought into His House, where there are many chambers or rooms. John 14:2, ESV: “In my Father’s house are many rooms…” The obedience of the Rechabites was in contrast to the disobedience of the Kingdom of Judah – comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin – who, for all their outward piety and devotion in performing the required animal sacrifices, were not wholly obedient to the Creator in their worship. Rather than the Rechabite Kenites being a line of Cain, they are in fact the exact opposite and were an extraordinarily obedient peoples, who did not own property or farm land. A line of Cain, would not be summoned by the Eternal to His temple.

Isaiah 1:13-14, ESV: “Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations – I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them.” The Creator prefers obedience rather than sacrifice. 1 Samuel 15:22, ESV: And Samuel said, “Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.” 

It was an honour for Jonadab and his descendants to stand before the Lord. The Tribe of Levi were selected to stand before the Lord in Deuteronomy 10:8, in special service. Moses and Samuel in Jeremiah 15:1 and Elijah stood before the Lord in 1 Kings 18:15. As did King David who even danced before the lord, in  2 Samuel 6.14.

We have spent time on Jethro’s Kenite lineage and the offshoot branch of Rechabites as will now discover another famous, yet also righteous person with a similar yet apparently distinct descent. Though the question remains: are the Kenites descended from Midian, Judah, someone else entirely or a mixture?

Joshua 14:6-14

Common English Bible

During the 1550s many Finns migrated westwards across Scandinavia to settle. Thousands of farmers made the journey as far as eastern Norway and central Sweden; known as the Forest Finns. They turned forests to farmlands using slash-and-burn agriculture and in return they were given land. In 1563 the Northern Seven Years’ War with Denmark began, ending in 1570 with the Treaty of Stettin and Sweden giving up claims on Norway. Sweden entered the Thirty Years’ War on the side of France and England. In 1648, when it came to an end, Sweden gained territory and thus began the rise of the Swedish Empire. 

By 1700 Sweden had reached the peak of its power – controlling areas of Denmark, Russia, Finland and northern Germany – and the Great Northern War began. It was fought against Russia, led by Tsar Peter the Great, Denmark and Poland. The Swedes defeated the Russians at the Battle of Narva. In 1707, Sweden emboldened, invaded Russia, though bad weather weakened the army as they marched further east and the young Swedish King Karl XII fell in battle. By 1709, the Russians defeated the Swedes at the Battle of Poltava and in 1721, the Great Northern War ended with Sweden’s defeat and its Empire significantly reduced. 

In 1809, Finland was lost to Russia. In 1813, Sweden fought against the French, who were led by Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig. From the victory, Sweden gained control of Norway from Denmark. In the late 1800s about one million Swedes immigrated to the United States due to poor economic conditions. In 1867, scientist Alfred Nobel obtained a patent for the explosive invention of dynamite. In 1875, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, ahead of their time, established a single currency called the Kroner. In 1927, the famous car marque Volvo, produced their first vehicle, nicknamed interestingly enough, Jakob. Sweden diplomatically remained neutral in both World Wars. 

It was tragically in 1947 that Prince Gustaf Adolf, heir to the throne, was killed in an airplane crash on 26 January at Kastrup Airport in Copenhagen, Denmark.  He and two companions were returning from a hunting trip and a visit to Princess Juliana of the Netherlands – shortly before she acceded to the Dutch throne. Gustaf’s son, Karl – Charles XVI Gustav – then became heir to the Swedish throne and he was crowned in 1973. He married Silvia Sommerlath in 1976.

Sweden joined the European Union in 1995, but did not join the Monetary Union and therefore, still uses the Swedish Krona as currency rather than the Euro; as does Iceland, Norway and Denmark, whereas Finland adopted the Euro in 2002. Just this fact alone, is interesting in interpreting Scandinavian versus Nordic definitions – or sons of Keturah and Abraham versus those of Arphaxad. 

Sweden punches above its weight with a GDP of $530.88 billion in 2019, making it the 24th largest economy in the world.Sweden has a competitive economy and a high standard of living, with a mix of free-enterprise in tandem with a generous social welfare state. ‘Sweden’s manufacturing economy relies heavily on foreign exports, including machinery, motor vehicles, and telecommunications.

Additionally, the Scandinavian three of Sweden, Denmark and Norway are all constitutional monarchies but Finland has never been a kingdom or had a monarchy. The histories of Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland are closely intwined as we have seen and highlight their close family relationship as four of the six bothers. The two remaining brothers, also share a close relationship and are spread across three kingdoms, with five separate territories and four distinct ethnic groups.

The second son of Keturah is Jokshan. Jokshan is the ancestor of the nations of Belgium and Luxembourg. The population of Belgium is 11,681,499 people and Luxembourg is 644,525 people.   

The Belgium Flag and Coat of Arms – Unity Makes Strength

Abarim Publications gives the meaning of Jokshan as: ‘one who sets a snare’ or ‘fowler’ from the verb yaqosh or qush, ‘to lay a snare’ and figuratively “snaring” a person using ‘alluring enticements.’ Jokshan is not mentioned outside of the genealogies, though his two sons, Sheba and Dedan are. The reader will recall, we have already met a Sheba and Dedan, the sons of Raamah of India, the son of Cush [refer Chapter XIII Cush & Phut]. We have also encountered a Sheba, son of Joktan of Romania [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad]. Genesis Twenty-five provides the added detail of Dedan’s sons. Yet they are not mentioned directly, though Letush* is possibly once, indirectly. 

It would appear to be a clue in identifying Dedan and highlighting a unique relationship, that is only replicated one other time with Haran, Canneh and Eden in Switzerland [refer Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon]. Though also in part, in one other instance in the Bible and the world today, with England and Scotland.

Isaiah 15:5 

English Standard Version

My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar… For at the ascent [H4608 – ma’aleh: incline, elevation, going up (hill)] of Luhith* [H3872 – luwchiyth: tablets, anciently a town of Moab south of the Arnon River (possible link with a grandson of Abraham and Keturah and the Ardennes)] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… [Jeremiah 48:5]

We have looked at Sheba and Dedan’s names previously, though a brief recap. Sheba can mean, ‘man, drunk, captive, splinter, seven’ and ‘oath.’ Dedan means: ‘leading gently’ or ‘to move slowly.’ Abarim states the ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low.’ The Benelux nations comprising the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg can also be called the Low countries as they are either close to the sea, or below sea level. Dedan’s three sons names according to Abarim mean the following. 

Asshur-im: ‘happy people, upright people, to be level, straight up’ or ‘just.’ The word can means steps, as in taking steps to go somewhere. Letush-im: ‘metal workers’ from the verb latash, to hammer or sharpen. ‘[The] NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Sharpened. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Artificers, or Hammerers’ [of weaponry].’ Letush can also mean ‘oppressed’ or ‘strong.’ Leumm-im: ‘peoples’ from the noun le’com, nation, people.’ It refers to ‘communities’ from the root word ‘to gather.’

Job 1:15

English Standard Version

… and the Sabeans fell upon them and took them and struck down the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”

Job’s children while celebrating and feasting were attacked by Sabeans. It is not clear which Sabeans; though from a geographic view, they are very likely Sheba from Jokshan. It could also be referring to Sheba from Joktan, or more unlikely, Sheba from Cush.

Ezekiel 27:23

English Standard Version

Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur, and Chilmad traded with you.

This verse could possibly apply to Sheba of Joktan and be referring to Romania, as they are linked with Asshur and Russia. The first part of the verse mentions Haran, Canneh and Eden of Switzerland and so if this Sheba is meant, it would be Belgium – or more specifically the Flemish people of Flanders in northern Belgium.

Job 6:19

English Standard Version

The caravans of Tema look, the travelers of Sheba hope. 

Isaiah 60:6

English Standard Version

A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian and Ephah; all those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.

Tema is a son of Ishmael and Midian a son of Keturah; as both of these peoples are stated with Sheba, this is speaking of Sheba, descended from Abraham and Keturah. These verses show the economic prosperity of Sheba.

Isaiah 21:13

English Standard Version

The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites.

Jeremiah 25:23-24

Young’s Literal Translation

23 Dedan, and Tema, and Buz, [all that are (in the) utmost] And all cutting the corners (of the beard), 24 And all the kings of Arabia [north western Europe], And all the kings of the mixed [mingled] people, Who are dwelling in the wilderness…[the Italian peninsula]

Arabia was the eastern region where Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah migrated to be apart from Isaac’s descendants. Arabia today, equates with northern and western Europe, where the peoples descended from Keturah and Ishmael live. Dedan – southern Belgium – is associated with Tema, a leading clan of Ishmael and Buz, a leading family of Nahor in northern Italy.

Jeremiah 49:8

Complete Jewish Bible

Flee! Turn back! Hide yourselves well, you who live in D’dan [Dedan]; for I am bringing calamity on ‘Esav [Esau], when the time for me to punish him comes.

Ezekiel 25:13

Amplified Bible

… therefore thus says the Lord God, “I will also stretch out My hand against Edom and I will cut off and destroy man and beast. I will make it desolate; from Teman [leading tribe of Edom]even to Dedan they will fall by the sword.

The calamity of Esau will be so severe, that they will flee even as far as Dedan to try and escape. Dedan or southern Belgium, is warned to either hide or head in the opposite direction themselves. Definitely not to travel towards Edom.

Ezekiel 27:19-21

Common English Bible

19 Vedan [Dan] and Javan [Archipelago SE Asia] from the region of Uzal [Greece] traded with you. They exchanged wrought iron, cinnamon, and spices for your wares. 20 Dedan was your agent for saddle blankets [military products]. 21 Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [leading tribe of Ishmael] traded for you. They procured lambs, rams, and goats for you.

Dedan is associated with a leading son or clan of Ishmael, Kedar and both are spoken of as trading with the mighty Tyre, that is, a Brazil led South America. Dedan’s three sons reveal three components in southern Belgium’s composition. Dedan’s sons include the Walloons of Wallonia, the separate Brussels-Capital region and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Leumm represents the people of Brussels, Letush is Wallonia and the Asshurim Luxembourg and possibly incorporating the Province of Luxembourg in southeast Wallonia. Their names are remarkably clear clues, as Leumm signifies the unique gathering of people in Brussels, Letush the artificer of weapons and Luxembourg is one of the happiest countries in the world, being the second wealthiest country in the world after Qatar, with regard to individual prosperity per person.

Wallonia produce a number of weapons in quantity, including the M4 assault rifle made by FN Herstal and owned by the Wallonia government. Wallonia is also home to  the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. A 2021 survey listed the top Ten Happiest countries to live in and Luxembourg was placed at number ten. It is interesting to note, that apart from Belgium, all the sons of Keturah make the top ten. Number 9 is Austria, 8 New Zealand, 7 Sweden, 6 Netherlands, 5 Norway, 4 Iceland, 3 Switzerland, 2 Denmark and number 1 is Finland. Maybe they have a case to be included as Scandinavian after all.  

The Lion state symbol of Flanders – indicating its Dutch heritage, language and cultural ties – and the Cockerel or Rooster state symbol of Wallonia – reflecting its French heritage, language and cultural ties. 

Over two thousand years ago, the Celtic tribe of the Belgae occupied the region – before they migrated to Britain, leaving their name. In time, the area was ruled by the Romans, then the Merovingian Franks and incorporated into West Francia, remaining under French influence until the Belgian lands were first dominated by the Spanish Hapsburgs from 1555 – who split the Netherland region in two – known as the Spanish Netherlands and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs from 1713. From 1815 to 1830, it was again the southern part of the newly formed United Kingdom of the Netherlands, created as a buffer state against France. Though being predominantly French speaking, Catholic and industrialised, meant a rift ensued with the Dutch speaking, Protestant and commercialised north – present day Netherlands. Wallonia pressed for independence with a reluctant Flanders following suit due to military pressure.

The fact that the Bible makes a distinction between Sheba and Dedan and speaks of them separately would indicate that the union of Flanders and Wallonia into one Kingdom in 1830 will ultimately dissolve. An historian of the Belgian revolution said that: “In Belgium, there are parties and provinces, but no nation.” Of the eleven and a half million people, 58% live in Flanders, 32% in Wallonia – though Wallonia accounts for 55% of Belgium’s territory – and 10% in Brussels.

Unlike the Flemish – who are economically more prosperous – the Walloons do not consider themselves a nation or necessarily desire an independent state. Polls find that only a minority of Walloons want Belgium to break up and if secession was forced on them by Flanders, about half would want to be attached to France. A 2020 poll found that 28% of the Flemish were in favour of a partition, compared to 18% of Walloons and 17% of Brussels residents. With that said, 56% of the same respondents ‘said it would be impossible to keep the country together in [the] future [58% in Wallonia, 46% in Flanders and 47% in Brussels].’ 

A Liege resident foresees a split, saying: “In Flanders they live differently, see things differently and envisage the future differently.” Remembering that the Flemish are Sheba and the Walloons coupled with the predominately French speaking Brussels are Dedan, makes the differences understandable and an eventual split likely. 

‘The Brussels-Capital Region has the same status as Flanders and Wallonia within the federal structure… though it measures only 161 [square km] (barely 0.5% of the national territory) its population of one million [plus] represents 10% of the national total. An enclave within Flanders, it is primarily French-speaking – around 85% of inhabitants speak French… [though] officially the region is bilingual… Brussels is not only the capital of Belgium and the European Union but also of the “French” [speaking communities]… of [both] Brussels and Wallonia, [as well as] the Flemish community and region.’ Many people incorrectly assume that the term Walloons applies to all Belgian French speakers; including those born and living in the Brussels-Capital Region. The mixing of the population over preceding centuries means that most families can trace their ancestors from ‘both sides of the linguistic divide’ in Brussels. 

The local dialect – Brussels Vloms – is a Brabantic dialect that reflects ‘the Dutch heritage of the city.’ The status of Brussels in a partitioned Belgium is uncertain and a source of considerable debate, with a variety of options that are all complex. Forming a city-state – European capital district – similar to Washington DC or the Australian Capital Territory are offered as is an extended Brussels region, so that its borders reach Wallonia. 

Belgium’s 2019 GDP was $533.10 billion making it the 23rd largest world economy, one ahed of Sweden. Belgium, a trade and transport hub, has a diversified economy with a mix of services, manufacturing and high tech industry. Its heavy integration with the rest of the European economy, means Belgium is highly sensitive to swings in the overall economic performance of its neighbours.

The Belgium monarch is King Philippe Leopold Louis Marie, who was crowned in 2013. He married Queen Matilda, born Jonkvrouw Mathilde d’Udekem c’Acoz. The monarch of Luxembourg is Henri Albert Gabriel Felix Marie Guillaume, who was crowned in 2000. He married Maria Teresa Mestre y Batista in 1981. Finally, the monarch of the Netherlands is King Willem Alexander, crowned in 2013. He married Princess Maxima in 2002.

The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg began as a stronghold known as Lucilinburhuc, after the break-up of the Frankish empire. A town grew up around the stronghold, which today is Luxembourg Castle. The territory quickly grew in stature becoming a full county in the eleventh century and a duchy in the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century it was acquired by the Duchy of Burgundy and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs in 1482. Under the terms of the Treaty of Paris in 1815, it was passed to the new king of the Netherlands, William I, but in 1890 it gained full independence.

The fourth son of Keturah is Midian. Midian is the Dutch people of the Netherlands. The country has a population of 17,203,340 people – the 10th highest in Europe. Abarim give the meaning of Midian, similar to Medan as: ‘strife’ and ‘place Of Judgment’ from the noun madon, strife, which derives from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’ Midian is mentioned in the Bible numerous times and also had five sons, though only one is once mentioned in scripture. The Midianites are the dominant and most prominent of the descendants of Keturah. They have had a close association with Ishmael, with the name ‘Midianite’ being interchangeable and they have also had a close link with Moab and Ammon when seeking to fight their adversaries, the sons of Jacob. The Midianites were a successful trading people, building economic wealth like their cousins Sheba and Dedan.

Midian’s eldest son is Ephah and his name means: ‘Gloom[y], Covering’ from the noun ‘epa, gloom, from the verb ‘up, to use wings or cover. It can also mean ‘volant’ [moving lightly, nimble] and ‘darkling.’ The ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List translates this name with Dark One; Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Darkness.’ Ephah is also a word used for a dry measurement of grain and is approximately twenty litres. Another Ephah is mentioned as a second wife of Caleb and also as part of Jahdai’s family in Judah [1 Chronicles 2:46-47]. 

The second son of Midian is Epher: meaning, ’Dust, Ore, Malleable, Young [Deer or Hart].’ It can also mean ‘a calf’ [H6081]. There is an Epher, the son of Ezra in the genealogies of Judah and also the half-tribe of East Manasseh – eldest son of Joseph [1 Chronicles 4:17; 5:24]. 

Hanoch or ‘Enoch’ is the third son of Midian. His name means: ‘inaugurated, trained.’ ‘Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… proposes initiated… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads dedicated [or (God’s) follower H2585] for…’ The name Hanoch is also a name of one of Reuben’s sons [Reuben, the eldest son of Jacob]. Midian’s fourth son is Abida[h]: ‘father of knowledge, the [or my] father knows [H28], my father took knowledge’ from the noun ‘ab, father, and the verb yada’, to know. Midian’s fifth and youngest son is Eldaah: ‘God has called, knowledge of God’ or ‘God is knowledge.’ The name can also mean: ‘God has known’ [H420] or ‘called of God.’

Genesis 37:25-28, 36

English Standard Version

25 Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites [H3459 – Yishma’e’liy: God will hear] coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. 26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother [Joseph] and conceal his blood? 27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites [H3459], and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him. 

28 Then Midianite [H4084 – Midyaniy: strife (Midian)] traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites [H3459] for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt. 36 Meanwhile the Midianites [H4092 Mdaniy: (Midianite) a variation of H4084] had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard.

Some claim that there is a contradiction in this passage or alternatively, that the Ishmaelites and Midianites are one and the same, as some researchers incorrectly try to make their mothers, Hagar and Keturah the same person. There are two different Hebrew words used for Midianite in the text. The first term used for these merchants is Midyaniy, an adjective signifying a member of the tribe of Midian or an inhabitant of Midian. This word H4084, is used for the Midianites throughout the Bible, for instance when describing Moses’s father-in-law Jethro in Numbers 10:29. For Midian himself, Strongs H4080 Midyan, is used. The second term Mdaniy is a variation of 4084 and has the exact same meaning. What is interesting, is that it is only used once, in this account of Joseph. 

This is clue number one, that we are not dealing with literal Midianites, but ‘Midianites’ from the the region of Midian. Clue two, is the fact that Ishmaelites are mentioned three times to the two for Midian and clue three is in Genesis 39:1 ESV: “Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there.” It was Ishmaelites from Midian that purchased Joesph and then sold him. Once we uncover the identities of Ishmael and Joseph, there is huge symbolic significance in this act by Ishmael; as there is also with the true identity of Judah, in the monumental ramifications of selling Joseph in the first place. 

Anciently and again in modern times, Ishmael and Midian have been very close neighbours. The use of the term Midianite for Ishmael will become readily apparent when we study Ishmael in the next chapter.

Exodus 2:11-25

English Standard Version

11 One day, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his people and looked on their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his people. 12 He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. 13 When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, “Why do you strike your companion?” 14 He answered, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid, and thought, “Surely the thing is known.” 15 When Pharaoh heard of it, he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and stayed in the land of Midian. 

Moses fled Egypt in 1486 BCE at the age of forty. The Pharaoh in question and the Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus forty years later, has seen an enormous amount of scholarly debate. We will study the chronology of the Exodus and respective identities of Moses’s adoptive Egyptian mother and father in depth when we study the tribe of Levi and Moses’s life [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad]. For now, the Pharaoh at the time of Moses’s personal exodus from Egypt was the sixth king of the Twelfth Dynasty, Amenemhet III.

And he sat down by a well. 16 Now the priest of Midian [H4080 – Midyan] had seven [H7651 from H7650 – Sheba] daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. 17 The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and watered their flock. 18 When they came home to their father Reuel*1, he said, “How is it that you have come home so soon today?” 19 They said, “An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds and even drew water for us and watered the flock.” 20 He said to his daughters, “Then where is he? Why have you left the man? Call him, that he may eat bread.” 21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah [H6855 – Tsipporah: bird Acts 7:29]. 22 She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom [H1647 ‘foreigner’], for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land.” 23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel – and God knew.

Exodus 3:1

English Standard Version

Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro*2, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. [Exodus 4.18-19; 18.1]

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, Pages 196, 198 – emphasis & bold mine:

Jewish legends suggest Jethro had seven names, all conveying his transformation from an idolatrous priest to a priest of God… along with, Heber*3, Putiel*4, and Keni*5 [Kenite?]… legends recorded that a Pharaoh immediately before the Exodus maintained three famous high Priests during the latter part of the Israelite enslavement in Egypt: Job, Balaam, and Jethro. Jethro was regarded as the High Priest of a Library of Stone Tablets [Ten Commandments, Exodus 32:15-16] in some versions. Pharaoh did not welcome the pre-Exodus advice provided by Jethro about the growing Israelite problem, banning the priest Jethro-Reuel in disgrace… which was ample motive for Jethro to have helped Moses prepare for his return to Egypt.’

Moses’ father-in-law was also called Hobab*6, who was the son of Reuel or Raguel*7 [LXX Septuagint, Numbers 10:29]. There is much confusion caused by all these names,   especially as Reuel was also known as Jethro, meaning ‘his excellence’ from H3502 Yithrah. The name Hobab [H2246] means ‘cherished’or ‘loved fervently.’ According to Josephus, Hobab had ‘Iothor [or Jethro] for a surname.’ Jethro’s descent is given as: son of Nawil, son of Rawail, son of Mour, son of Anka, son of Midian, son of Abraham. Josephus claims that Raguel or Reuel, was Moses’ father-in-law and Judges 4:11 clearly states that he was known as Hobab. ESV: ‘Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, the descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent as far away as the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh.’ Some commentators claim that Jethro was an honorary title, while Reuel was his personal name. Reuel [H7467, Re’uw’el] means, ‘one who is intimate with God’ or Friend of God – thetitle given to Abraham. Raguel is another version of this name [refer Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary]. 

Putting it all together, it seems to this writer that Hobab was his personal or first name. As Hobab was the son of Reuel, he is also known by his father’s or family name and so Reuel fits as his last name or surname. Jethro then, does appear to be a title, linked to his official position as a Priest of Midian. Therefore, all three names would be correct and thus all are used to identify the same man. There is also a Reuel mentioned in the Bible who is a son of Esau by his wife Basemath, a daughter of Ishmael [Genesis 36:4, 13, 17]. 

The Gold-Mines of Midian, Richard Burton, 1878 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Jethro’s Moslem title is “Khatib el-Anbiya,” or Preacher to the Prophets, on account of the words of wisdom which he bestowed upon his son-in-law [Moses]… El-Kesai states that his original name was Boyun; that he was comely of person, but spare and lean; very thoughtful, and of few words… Other commentators add that he was old and blind… [Jethro] and Rahab are Gentiles, or strangers, affiliated to Israel [Ephesians 2:12-13; Romans 11:13, 17, 22] on account of their good deeds.’ 

The Desert of the Exodus, E H Palmer, 1871 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Sho‘eib, as the Arabs call Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, is said to have been blind, notwithstanding which infirmity he was divinely commissioned to preach the true religion lately revealed unto Abraham,and to convert the people of his native city Midian. They rejected his doctrine and mocked the blind prophet, for which sin they were destroyed by fire from heaven, while Midian was laid waste by an earthquake, Jethro alone escaping alive. He fled to Palestine, and is said to be buried near Safed.’

The Quran says: The chiefs of his people, who were elated with pride, answered, We will surely cast thee, O Shuaib, and those who believe with thee, out of our city: or else thou shalt certainly return unto our religion. He said, What! though we be averse thereto?” Jewish tradition states similarly: “We will surely cast thee . . out of our city.” Shuaib was a true believer and a priest of the Most High. Shuaib responds: “My support is from God alone: on him do I trust… O my people, let not your opposing of me draw on you a vengeance like unto that which fell on the people of Noah… neither was the people of Lot far distant from you. Ask pardon, therefore, of your Lord; and be turned unto him: for my Lord is merciful and loving.” 

“They answered, O Shuaib, we understand not much of what thou sayest, and we see thee to be a man of no power among us: if it had not been for the sake of thy family, we had surely stoned thee, neither couldst thou have prevailed against us. Shuaib said, O my people, is my family more worthy in your opinion than God? and do ye cast him behind you with neglect?” Regarding a man of no power, one commentator quotes: “The Arabic word dhaif, weak, signifying also, in the Himyaritic dialect, blind, some suppose that Shuaib was so, and that the Midianites objected that to him, as a defect which disqualified him for the prophetic office.”

Muslim writers identify Shuaib with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses. Baidhawi states  Shuaib was the son of Mikail, the son of Yashjar, the son of Midian; whereas, the Tafsir-i-Raufi addsthat Jethro was descended from Lot through Midian having married a daughter of Lot. Shuaib is not recorded as performing any miracles in the Quran or Islamic traditions, though they do repeat as the Jews do, that Jethro gave his son-in-law the ‘wonder-working rod’ with which he performed – with Aaron – all his mighty miracles in Egypt and the wilderness.

Exodus 18:1-27

English Standard Version

Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people, how the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2 Now Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, had taken Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her home, 3 along with her two sons. The name of the one was Gershom (for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”),and the name of the other, Eliezer [H461 ‘God is help’](for he said, “The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”).5 Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife to Moses in the wilderness where he was encamped at the mountain of God. 

6 And when he sent word to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you with your wife and her two sons with her,” 7 Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. And they asked each other of their welfare and went into the tent. 8 Then Moses told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardship that had come upon them in the way, and how the Lord had delivered them. 9 And Jethro rejoiced for all the good that the Lord had done to Israel, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians.

10 Jethro said, “Blessed be the Lord, who has delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of Pharaoh and has delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. 11 Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods, because in this affair they dealt arrogantly with the people.” 12 And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, brought a burnt offering and sacrifices to God; and Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.

13 The next day Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. 14 When Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand around you from morning till evening?” 15 And Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.” 17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone. 19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you! You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. 

21 Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 22And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. 

23 If you do this, God will direct you, you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.” 24 So Moses listened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25 Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 26 And they judged the people at all times. Any hard case they brought to Moses, but any small matter they decided themselves. 27 Then Moses let his father-in-law depart, and he went away to his own country [Midian?].

In Exodus chapter Eighteen there are some interesting similarities in the meeting between Moses and Jethro and the one between Abraham and Melchisedek. Abraham had recently rescued Lot, defeating Chedorlaomer, King of Elam in the process. Moses had witnessed the defeat of Pharaoh king of Egypt, while delivering the sons of Jacob. Both events had a miraculous outcome given by the Creator. 

Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God and Jethro was the Priest of Midian. Melchizedek and Jethro blessed and praised the Creator for their deliverance using very similar language. Melchizedek brought out ceremonial bread and wine with Abraham. Jethro also prepared bread with a sacrificial meal to be eaten with Moses, Aaron and all the elders of Israel. There is a theme of peace and friendship in the two respective encounters. The king of Salem [Peace H8004, H7999] blessed Abraham, and Jethro and Moses would have exchanged Shaloms[H7965, H7999] as evidenced in Exodus 18:7 and Exodus 4:18.

Numbers 10:1-2, 29

English Standard Version

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Make two silver trumpets. Of hammered work you shall make them, and you shall use them for summoning the congregation and for breaking camp. 29 And Moses said to Hobab the son of Reuel the Midianite [H4084], Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us, and we will do good to you, for the Lord has promised good to Israel.” 30 But he said to him, “I will not go. I will depart to my own land and to my kindred.” 31 And he said, “Please do not leave us, for you know where we should camp in the wilderness, and you will serve as eyes for us. 32 And if you do go with us, whatever good the Lord will do to us, the same will we do to you.”

It is through Jethro that we are introduced to the mysterious Kenites [H7017 – Qeyniy: ‘smiths’]. Some commentators link the Kenites with the contrived word Kainite from the name of Cain, as the Hebrew word Qeyniy derives from H7014 – Qayin [Qain or Kain], meaning, ’possession’ or ‘purchase’. Though linked etymologically, it is ideologically a stretch to arrive at this conclusion and would mean if true, that a. the line of Cain survived the Flood and b. that Jethro was descended in part from a corrupted line. One that would be hard to imagine was his real ancestry and or acceptable to the Eternal, in his being a priest and true believer.

Judges 1:16

Common English Bible

The descendants of Moses’ father-in-law the Kenite [H7017] went up with the people of Judah from Palm City into the Judean desert, which was in the southern plain near Arad. They went and lived with the Amalekites.

We have learned that Jethro may have been descended from Lot in part, that he was a priest of ‘Midian’ and that his father Reuel was a ‘Midianite’ though the Hebrew word used is not the one used for the name of the original Midian. Does this mean he was a Midianite as in ethnology or just in a geographic context. Similarly, if Jethro is a Kenite, are they separate from Midian – living with them – or a distinct tribe originating from Midian? Plus, a branch of the Kenites – those descended from Jethro – may have attached themselves to the tribe of Judah and or then, the Amalekites who are affiliated with Edom [refer Chapter XXIX Esau].

Judges 4:11

Common English Bible

Now Heber the Kenite [H7017] had moved away from the other Kenites [H7017], the descendants of Hobab, Moses’ father-in-law, and had settled as far away [far removed] as Elon-bezaanannim [‘removing, wandering’], which is near Kedesh [northern part of the Tribes land in Israel equating to those of Zebulun and Naphtali].

Remember the association with Zebulun. It appears that part of the Kenite people were, either associated with the Tribe of Judah or actually were from the tribe of Judah. The most plausible answer is that they had intermarried. The Rechabites were a clan of the Kenites and their progenitor was Hammath. The following verse is from the end of one genealogical record of the House of Judah. 1 Chronicles 2:55, RSV: “The families also of the scribes [H5608 – caphar: learned men] that dwelt at Jabez: the Ti’rathites, the Shim’e-athites, and the Su’cathites. These are the Ken’ites [H7017] who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.” The Rechabites being scribes would have been given respect for their standing, as we read in in 2 Kings chapter Ten, when Jehu – an adversary to wicked King Ahab of Israel, who ruled from 874  to 853 BCE – invites Jehonadab the son of Rechab to assist in slaughtering every last sole in a Temple of Baal worshippers. 

Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite [Judges 4:17 – H7017]. Deborah the prophetess and a Judge of Israel blessed Jael in her victory song because of her resolute courage in killing Sisera, the enemy of Israel beginning a period of forty years of peace from 1192 to 1152 BCE. When King Saul was commanded to destroy the Amalekites, he honourably advised the Kenites to move away from their neighbours and allies, the Amalekites in order not to be slaughtered along with them.

1 Samuel 15:6

English Standard Version

Then Saul said to the Kenites [H7017], “Go, depart; go down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them. For you showed kindness to all the people of Israel when they came up out of Egypt.So the Kenites [H7017] departed from among the Amalekites.

The Kenites acted as guides in the wilderness; even so, the prophesied fate of the Amalekites and the Kenites was apparently tied together. We will study Amalek separately in a later chapter. 

Numbers 24:21-22

Common English Bible

21 He looked at the Kenites [H7017] and raised his voice and gave his address: “Your dwelling is secure [H386 – ‘ethan: strong, hard, rough, permanent]; your nest [H7064 – qen: ‘nest of a bird’ high] is set in the rock [H5553 – bassela: ‘crag, cliff, stronghold’ protected]. 22 Yet Kain [H7014 Kenite] will burn when Asshur [Assyria] takes you away captive.

The Kenites were to be taken captive by the Assyrians, at the same time that the Kingdom of Israel was conquered, that is, between 721 and 718 BCE. Though there may be a future application of Balam’s prophesy as there is in verses twenty-three and twenty-four. The mention of nest in the rockis a play on the wordfor nest: Qen or ken, which is pronounced “kane” and thus the tribal name Ken-ite. The use of the Hebrew word Qayin in verse twenty-two does on the surface, appear to support a lineage from Cain, but in the context of the preceding verse where the Kenites dwell securely and on elevated ground, the use of this word meaning ‘possession’ is more applicable than Qeyniy, meaning ‘smiths’. Remember the dwelling on elevated ground as we will discover the specific significance of this description.

Jeremiah 35:2, 6-10, 16-18

English Standard Version

“Go to the house of the Rechabites and speak with them and bring them to the house of the Lord, into one of the chambers; then offer them wine to drink.” 6… “We will drink no wine, for Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, commanded us, ‘You shall not drink wine, neither you nor your sons forever. 7You shall not build a house; you shall not sow seed; you shall not plant or have a vineyard; but you shall live in tents all your days, that you may live many days in the land where you sojourn.’ 8 We have obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, in all that he commanded us, to drink no wine all our days, ourselves, our wives, our sons, or our daughters, 9 and not to build houses to dwell in. We have no vineyard or field or seed, 10 but we have lived in tents and have obeyed and done all that Jonadab our father commanded us. 16 The sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have kept the command that their father gave them, but this people [Judah] has not obeyed me. 

17 Therefore, thus says the Lord, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the disaster that I have pronounced against them, because I have spoken to them and they have not listened, I have called to them and they have not answered.” 18 But to the house of the Rechabites Jeremiah said, “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Because you have obeyed the command of Jonadab your father and kept all his precepts and done all that he commanded you, 19 therefore thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Jonadab the son of Rechab shall never lack a man to stand before me.”

The Rechabites had fled to Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar of Chaldea began subjugating the Kingdom of Judah. The Rechabites were spared because of their faithful adherence to the commands of their forefather Jonadab. Whereas Judah who had not heeded the Creator’s warnings suffered punishment at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar II. In verse two, the Lord calls for the Rechabites to be brought into His House, where there are many chambers or rooms. John 14:2, ESV: “In my Father’s house are many rooms…” The obedience of the Rechabites was in contrast to the disobedience of the Kingdom of Judah – comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin – who, for all their outward piety and devotion in performing the required animal sacrifices, were not wholly obedient to the Creator in their worship. Rather than the Rechabite Kenites being a line of Cain, they are in fact the exact opposite and were an extraordinarily obedient peoples, who did not own property or farm land. A line of Cain, would not be summoned by the Eternal to His temple.

Isaiah 1:13-14, ESV: “Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations – I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them.” The Creator prefers obedience rather than sacrifice. 1 Samuel 15:22, ESV: And Samuel said, “Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.” 

It was an honour for Jonadab and his descendants to stand before the Lord. The Tribe of Levi were selected to stand before the Lord in Deuteronomy 10:8, in special service. Moses and Samuel in Jeremiah 15:1 and Elijah stood before the Lord in 1 Kings 18:15. As did King David who even danced before the lord, in  2 Samuel 6.14.

We have spent time on Jethro’s Kenite lineage and the offshoot branch of Rechabites as will now discover another famous, yet also righteous person with a similar yet apparently distinct descent. Though the question remains: are the Kenites descended from Midian, Judah, someone else entirely or a mixture?

Joshua 14:6-14

Common English Bible

6 In Gilgal, the people of Judah approached Joshua. Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite  [H7074 – Qnizziy: descendant of Kenaz] said to him, “You know what the Lord said to Moses, man of God, about you and me when we were in Kadesh-barnea. 7 I was 40 years old when Moses the Lord’s servant sent me from Kadesh-barnea to scout out the land [1438 BCE]. I brought back a report to him of what I really thought. 8 My companions who had gone up with me made the people’s heart melt. ButI remained loyal to the Lord my God.So Moses pledged on that day, ‘The land on which you have walked will forever be a legacy for you and your children. This is because you remained loyal to the Lord my God.’ 

10 Now look. The Lord has kept me alive, exactly as he promised. It is forty-five years since the Lord spoke about this to Moses. It was while Israel was journeying in the desert. Now look. Today I’m 85 years old [1393 BCE]. 11 I’m just as strong today as I was the day Moses sent me out. My strength then was as my strength is now, whether for war or for everyday activities. 12 So now, give me this highland that the Lord promised me that day. True, the Anakim [Elioud giants] are there with large fortified cities, as you yourself heard that day. But if the Lord is with me, I should be able to remove them, exactly as the Lord promised.” 13 So Joshua blessed him. He gave Hebron to Caleb, Jephunneh’s son, as a legacy. 14 So Hebron still belongs to Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite as a legacy today. This was because he remained loyal to the Lord God of Israel.

The passage says the people of Judah approached Joshua. This does not prove that the Kenizzites or Kenezites are from Judah, as the Kenites from Jethro travelled with Judah on one hand, yet confusingly appear to be listed in a genealogy of Judah. Similarly, Caleb the Kenizzite was given the city of Hebron that was within Judah’s territory. If the Kenizzites are descendants of Kenaz, then which Kenaz are they descended from? Kenaz  derives from the verb qanaz, ‘to hunt or snare’ and thus means ‘hunter’ or ‘hunting.’

In Genesis chapter thirty-six we read of the sons of Esau. Esau had five sons with ostensibly, three women [refer Chapter XXIX Esau]. One son as already mentioned was Reuel – the family name of Jethro. Another son was Eliphaz and Esau had a grandson from Eliphaz called, Kenaz; who was also a chief of Edom [Genesis 36: 11, 15, 42]. It is interesting to note that Caleb had a grandson called Kenaz [1 Chronicles 4:15]. And to underscore the family name further, Caleb also had a younger brother called Kenaz [Joshua 15:17, Judges 1:13; 3:9-11] and it was his son Othniel who was the first Judge of Israel from 1350 to 1310 BCE and had ‘the Spirit of the Lord… upon him…’ As with the Kenites, it is difficult to equate the Kenizzites with an evil pedigree, when all the examples are of exemplary men of obedience and righteousness.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 198-199 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Kenizzites were skilled in the arts of metal-working, like Cain and Tubal-Cain, and were related somehow to Kenites [also skilled in metallurgy]. Caleb, then though eighty-five years old, fought like he was forty-five, driving the Anakim [giants] from Hebron, and was thus rewarded as the head of the tribe of Judah, receiving the land of Kiriath Arba, Hebron, the homeland of the Anakim. It is astounding to me that a Kenizzite, a person from a tribe with no genealogy linking back to Noah, and a tribe that mysteriously descended back to Cain and Nephilim, inherited Hebron, the home and capital city of the Anak! Both the Kenizzite and Kenite tribes are generally believed descended from Kenaz the descendant of Esau, but this cannot be. They like the Amalekites, existed before the birth of Esau and before the time of Abraham.’

Genesis 15:18-21

English Standard Version

18 On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, 19 the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim [Nephilim], 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.”

Gary Wayne raises a number of points. First, he makes the assumption that a similar skill in metallurgy links Tubal-Cain and the Kenizzites biologically? Second that the Kenizzites descend from Cain and Nephilim without argument? Third, his only valid point, which Genesis chapter fifteen corroborates is that the Kenizzites and Kenites, like the Amalekites, existed before Esau and even prior to Abraham. I would agree that Kenaz, the son of Eliphaz, Esau’s son inherited his name from the Kenizzites, as did Eliphaz’s other son Amalek, from the Amalekites. This anomaly is discussed in depth in Chapter XXIX Esau. Though whereas the Amalekites are linked to the Nephilim, the same evidence is lacking for the Kenites and Kenizzites. 

Putting the pieces together, the Kenites and Kenizzites appear to have an ancient origin that prefigures Abraham and his family. The link between Jethro being a Kenite and living in Midian favours the Kenite people having become associated with the Midianites. We will explore this further in this chapter. The Kenizzites are different in that they do not have the Midianite association though like the Kenites, they do have a relationship with the tribe of Judah. Just to make it interesting there is the overall connection that the Kenites and Kenizzites share and that is with the Amalekites, who themselves include a peoples prior [Genesis 14:7] to Esau’s grandson Amalek and then later include an amalgamation with the peoples descended from Esau’s grandson Amalek [Genesis 36:12] – refer Chapter XXIX Esau.

This does raise the important question, regarding whether anyone apart from Noah and his seven other family members survived the flood [2 Peter 2:5]. A careful reading of Genesis 7;21-23 reveals that all physical birdlife, animal life on the land – not the sea – and humankind, that is, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens which were composed of flesh and breathed, died. It does not state or include hybrid creatures such as Nephilim and Elioud giants.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 200-201:

‘Even Gnostic gospels record Noah denying that he or his kin created the postdiluvian giants, even though his apostate descendants evidently intermarried with postdiluvian Nephilim… Nephilim are not listed in the Table of Nations that is limited to only Noah’s posterity… the Genesis flood account [is] a general accounting of events kept by saints descended from Noah for only the faithful, not a global, forensic accounting for cynical seculars and revisionist mystics.’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 169 – emphasis & bold mine:

The Incorruptible* Race of giants is the mysterious race that… Cain [and his posterity] have all allegedly and eagerly connected themselves to in legend. Cain… claimed a more royal and divine legacy, void of Adamite impurity, which the posterity of Cain, in turn, pollinated into the people of day six [the Neanderthal]. 

The Gnostic gospels record that not only Noah survived the deluge but also many people from the Immoveable* Race did and that they were guided to a certain place within a luminous cloud to ensure they survived the flood. The Nephilim and the Immoveable Race survived because of the intercession of fallen angels saving them and their illicit legacy from utter destruction, all to poison the postdiluvian world…’ 

The ancient land of Canaan and its peoples is a complex issue. It has perplexed Biblical scholars and secular historians alike. We have studied the first inhabitants of the land, the literal sons of Canaan that left their imprint in the region before fully migrating to northern and central Africa. There was a residue of these true Canaanites in the land, as humans and Nephilim were mixing and living in ancient cities such as Sodom, Hebron and Jericho. Ephron the descendant of Heth, son of Canaan, lived in the region and sold his field at Machpelah to Abraham. The Nephilim and Elioud had been roaming the earth for thousands of years after the flood. They were instrumental in all the titanic building structures and otherworldly architectural feats around the globe; from Stonehenge in England to the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, Machu Pichu in Peru and the Statues of Easter Island.

At a certain point – at least by the time of Abraham for they were there then and possibly much earlier – most converged on the land of Canaan; for these were the second wave of inhabitants in Canaan. Why Canaan? Because they were aware of the promises of the Creator, that His chosen people would descend from Abraham and ultimately dwell in Canaan. The Nephilim giants were ready and waiting. This is why the Creator’s instructions were brief yet comprehensive – kill them all. The Creator did not instruct the sons of Jacob – the fledgling Israelite nation – to murder black people, or even white people, it was a plain and clear instruction to exterminate the Nephilim and Elouid giants who were there to do the exact same thing to Israel, if the sons of Jacob didn’t pre-emptively strike first. The young Israelite nation failed these simple instructions and allowed many to live amongst them. It was only some four hundred years later that King David finally eradicated the problem of the Nephilim giants from the land of Canaan. 

Canaan had numerous clans of Nephilm as we have seen already. The principal seven nations they were told to exterminate were the Canaanites – a specific tribe by that name, not the broad definition of the term – Perizzites, Jebusites, Girgashites, Amorites, Hivites and Hittites. Notice the last five are inherited names of sons of the original Canaan. To add to the complex mix of people, there was a third wave of people.

These were descendants of Shem and they were a spill over from Mesopotamia of Arameans and Arphaxad to the north, the Arabian Peninsula, including Keturah and Ishmael to the east and from Egypt, Caphtor to the south. We have looked at the Aramean and Amorite connection [refer Chapter XXIV Aram]. Plus the Phoenician, including Aramean migration to the northwestern coast and the Philistine and Minoan immigrations to the southwestern coast [refer Chapter XV Casluh & Caphtor]. Some of the descendants of Abraham and Keturah, as well as Ishmael had ventured into the land of Canaan, though they also continued northwards. Finally Moab, Ammon and Esau with Amalek his grandson also moved into the southern portion of the land. In time, at least one son of Keturah was known by sons of Canaan’s names, possibly more and also Ishmael, just like some of the Nephilim tribes. Two prominent examples of this name transference, are the Hivites from the name Hiv and the Hittites called after Heth. 

To summarise a complicated scenario, using Hiv as an example. Hiv was a son of Canaan. The original Hivites in the land would have been black people descended from Hiv. In time, most of these Hivites migrated southward, though not all, because the Nephilim arrived en masse. They integrated with the remaining Hivite people. Those Nephilim living in the Hivite region, became known as… Hivites. Later still, a son of Abraham and Keturah also dwelt, in the northern Palestine region, now known as Lebanon. In this case, some of the children of Midian… and these Midianites became known as Hivites. 

The Canaanites and Perizzites are almost always mentioned together though the Perizzites are the odd one out, in that they are not an original son of Canaan. Perizzite according to one source means: ‘to drag away violently, hate.’

Joshua 24:11 and Judges 1:4

English Standard Version

And you went over the Jordan and came to Jericho, and the leaders of Jericho fought against you, and also the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. And I gave them into your hand… Then Judah went up and the Lord gave the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand, and they defeated 10,000 of them at Bezek.

The warlike Jebusites were associated with the environs of the ancient city of Salem which became Jerusalem the capital of the southern Kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem frequently changed hands. It was captured by Joshua [Joshua 18:28]. In Judges 19:9-12, it was occupied by foreigners [Judges 1:8]. The Tribe of Benjamin inherited the land surrounding and including Jerusalem, Judges 1:21, ESV: “But the people of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites who lived in Jerusalem, so the Jebusites have lived with the people of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day.”

Four hundred years after Joshua, King David retook the city, 1 Chronicles 11:4-8, ESV: “And David and all Israel went to Jerusalem, that is, Jebus, where the Jebusites were, the inhabitants of the land. The inhabitants of Jebus said to David, “You will not come in here.” Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion, that is, the city of David. David said, “Whoever strikes the Jebusites first shall be chief and commander.” And Joab the son of Zeruiah went up first [reportedly building an underground water shaft or tunnel to enter], so he became chief. And David lived in the stronghold; therefore it was called the city of David. And he built the city all around from the Millo in complete circuit, and Joab repaired the rest of the city.” David bought the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite [2 Samuel 24:16-25] and later built the Temple on that location. Archaeologists have confirmed that the original inhabitants of Jerusalem were Jebusites.

The later Amorite name was applicable to Gether of Aram as discussed. 

Ezekiel 16:45-46

English Standard Version

45 You are the daughter of your mother, who loathed her husband and her children; and you are the sister of your sisters, who loathed their husbands and their children. Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite. 46 And your elder sister is Samaria, who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters.

These verses are interpreted by some to prove that the Israelites were a bastard or mixed nation. This chapter is actually addressed to Judah and her sinful ways. The identities here are types or euphemisms and not literal lines of descent. Samaria is a sister as it refers to the Kingdom of Israel. The Hittites here are a Shem descended people that had influence on Judah as did the Aramean-Amorites. Amor originally was a son of Canaan. They also included Nephilim and had two famous Giants as their kings – one being King Og, the other King Sihon.

Deuteronomy 4:47

English Standard Version

And they took possession of his land and the land of Og, the king of Bashan, the two kings of the Amorites, who lived to the east beyond the Jordan

1 Kings 21:25-26

English Standard Version

25 (There was none who sold himself to do what was evil in the sight of the Lord like Ahab, whom Jezebel his wife incited. 26 He acted very abominably in going after idols, as the Amorites had done, whom the Lord cast out before the people of Israel.)

2 Kings 21:11-13

English Standard Version

11 “Because Manasseh king of Judah has committed these abominations and has done things more evil than all that the Amorites did, who were before him, and has made Judah also to sin with his idols, 12 therefore thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Jerusalem and Judah such disaster that the ears of everyone who hears of it will tingle. 13 And I will stretch over Jerusalem the measuring line of Samaria, and the plumb line of the house of Ahab, and I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down.

The most evil king of Israel was King Ahab and of Judah, it was King Manasseh. Both are compared to the Amorites in setting a standard of corruption like no other before them or afterward. Baal was the Amorites chief god and Baal’s wife was Ashtoreth and was their chief goddess. 

The same goddess as Ishtar in Chaldean and Astarte in Greek and Roman. Their worship involved human sacrifice, temple prostitution and orgies. There have been many temples, high places, stone pillars and altars excavated in the land of Israel. Some of the sites contained large numbers of containers with the remains of young children who had been sacrificed to Baal. [refer Chapter XIII Cush & Phut, Chapter XXI Nimrod & Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]

The Girgashites, after Girgash son of Canaan were the fifth nation. Their name means: ‘to draw away; to entice.’ As with the Amorites, they made many of their sons and daughters pass through the fire to Moloch – the Bull cult that permeates and dominates false god worship and is purportedly at the centre of the infamous Bohemian Grove. 

The two nations known as Hivites and Hittites are not only linked but also, while these, in the letter of the word, are classed as Canaanites, as in the oft-repeated lists of the seven nations, the Hivites and Hittites – and also the Amorites – should also be considered separately from the rest because each had dual origins, histories, ethnic characters and national identities. 

Exodus 23:28

English Standard Version

And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites from before you.

The Hivites were unique in that by subterfuge of claiming they lived afar, fooled Joshua into a treaty of peace and non-interference; so that the Hivites dwelt forever in the land of Israel, though they did have to serve as woodcutters and water carriers [Joshua 9:1-27].

Joshua 11:19

English Standard Version

There was not a city that made peace with the people of Israel except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. They took them all in battle.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 238:

‘Gibeonites were Hivites/giants conscripted as woodcutters and water carriers for Israel by Joshua, after Israel had been deceived into a treaty with Gibeonites not to destroy them, as the Gibeonites said they did not live in the Covenant Land. Gibeonites survived in the Covenant Land well past the time of David because of this treaty, as a portion separate to Israel, within Israel. Gibeonites were clearly identified as surviving Amorites [2 Samuel 21:1-14], spared in this treaty from the Exodus, which Saul later violated in his zeal, endeavoring to annihilate the Gibeonites, which cost Saul seven of his [grand]sons as punishment.’

The Hivites – as well as the Hittites – at the time they appear in the Scriptures, were each divided into a smaller southern and a main northern branch, inhabiting widely distant territories. This makes them different from the other five Canaanite nations. The Hivite’s – Hebrew ‘chivim’ meaning wicked – main cities at the time of Joshua were in the south and included Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kirjath-jearim. The Hivites also had territory in the north adjacent to the Sidonians in Mount Lebanon. The very same area that Heber the Kenite had moved to live – away from the other Kenites who descended from Moses’s father-in-law, Jethro [Judges 4:11].

Judges 3:3, ESV: “These are the nations: the five lords of the Philistines and all the Canaanites and the Sidonians and the Hivites who lived on Mount Lebanon, from Mount Baal-hermon as far as Lebo-hamath.” The southern Hivites were the residue of Canaan’s children and Nephilim.

The northern Hivites interest us more, as there is a link between these Hivites, Midian,  the Kenites, Sidon and the Phoenicians, with the Dutch Afrikaans settlers of South Africa. There could well be a link between Midian and the Nephilim Hivites, or an uncanny coincidence, as the Dutch have the tallest male average height in the world and the second tallest women average height in the world according to a 2016 survey. 

Previously, we have discussed the early Phoenician link between Tyre and the Portuguese descended peoples of Brazil [refer Chapter XXIV Aram]. Strabo wrote that the Phoenicians originated ‘from the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula.’ The later Phoenicians of Sidon were different from Tyre and equate to the Dutch of the Netherlands. As part of the children of Keturah they did migrate from Arabia and settled in the Sidon area. 

They were master traders, explorers, ship builders and sailors; similar to Tyre in the past and so it is the Portuguese and Dutch who have exhibited the exact same traits in modern history. The African beginnings of Sidon are also represented in the nation of South Africa today [refer Chapter XXII Canaan].

The southern Hittites in the time of Abraham made their headquarters at Kiriath-Arba; driving out the Anakim and re-naming the city, Hebron. In this region they controlled another city, Kiriath-Sepher – the city of Books – which was another name for Kiriath-Sannah, a city of Instruction. Names suggesting the existence of a repository of ancient knowledge. By Joshua’s time, these southern Hittites had been crowded out of Hebron by the Anakim and had withdrawn to more mountainous country further north. In Numbers 13:29, ESV: “The Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb. The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country. And the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.” 

The northern Hittites on the other hand, constituted a great empire of confederated states, occupying the whole of northern Syria between the Mediterranean Sea and the Euphrates; extending also as we shall learn, over the whole of Asia Minor from Armenia to the Aegean Sea. This is why in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Reverend T K Cheyne says: “The Hittites seem to have been included among the Canaanites by a mistake.” One could include the Hivites and the blond Amorites in this context. The southern Hittites – with the Hivites and Amorites – were part of the seven Canaanite nations – a blend of the Black descended Canaanites and Nephilim. The northern Hivites and Amorites – Arameans descended from Gether – like the Hittites, were descended from Shem and it is these Hittites that Cheyne is referring to. Once this is understood, any apparent secular-biblical crossover contradictions, regarding who, when and where for these peoples, dissolve. 

Numbers 22:4,7

English Standard Version

4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian, “This horde [the sons of Jacob] will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field”… Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time… 

7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message.

When King Balak of Moab felt threatened by the Israelites sweeping into Canaan and planned to employ Balaam to pronounce a curse, he enlisted the Midianites – an unwise agreement – as co-conspirators. This is why Midian brought condemnation upon themselves with Moab and so began a perpetual strife between Midian and Israel. In modern times, we have witnessed the same relationship as the nations of France and the Netherlands built impressive navies, mercantile enterprises and colonial empires. 

Those who even have a passing knowledge of European history during the centuries encompassing 1600 to 1820 will recognise which country France and Holland continually fought either militarily, politically or via trade routes and colonial territorial disputes.

Numbers 25:1-18

English Standard Version

… Israel… began to whore with the daughters of Moab. 2 These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods. 3 So Israel yoked himself to Baal of Peor. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. 4 And the Lord said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people and hang them in the sun before the Lord, that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.” 5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Each of you kill those of his men who have yoked themselves to Baal of Peor.”

6 And behold, one of the people of Israel came and brought a Midianite woman to his family, in the sight of Moses and in the sight of the whole congregation of the people of Israel, while they were weeping in the entrance of the tent of meeting. 7 When Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose and left the congregation and took a spear in his hand 8 and went after the man of Israel into the chamber and pierced both of them, the man of Israel and the woman through her belly. Thus the plague on the people of Israel was stopped. 

9 Nevertheless, those who died by the plague were twenty-four thousand. 10 And the Lord said to Moses, 11 “Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the people of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I did not consume the people of Israel in my jealousy. 12 Therefore say, ‘Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace, 13 and it shall be to him and to his descendants after him the covenant of a perpetual priesthood, because he was jealous for his God and made atonement for the people of Israel.’” 

14 The name of the slain man of Israel, who was killed with the Midianite woman, was Zimri the son of Salu, chief of a father’s house belonging to the Simeonites. 15 And the name of the Midianite woman who was killed was Cozbi the daughter of Zur, who was the tribal head of a father’s house in Midian. 16 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 17 “Harass the Midianites and strike them down, 18 for they have harassed you with their wiles, with which they beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of the chief of Midian, their sister, who was killed on the day of the plague on account of Peor.”

The sons of Jacob it would appear, were very easily influenced by the religions and false gods of their neighbouring nations; who were in reality, extended family. As they followed the gods of Moab and Ammon, they also worshipped the same gods of Midian. 

The Israelite that blatantly brought a Midianite woman into the camp was from the Tribe of Simeon. We will return to this story when we study Simeon and Levi, the tribe that Phinehas belonged – the priestly tribe [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad].

Numbers 31:1-18, 32-34

English Standard Version

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Avenge the people of Israel on the Midianites… 3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. 4 You shall send a thousand from each of the tribes of Israel to the war.” 5 So there were provided, out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6 And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand from each tribe, together with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand. 7 They warred against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every male [in the battle, not literally of the nation]. 

The Midianites exist today, so we presume it was the soldiers that died and not the whole male population.

8 They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of their slain, Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings [representing the five sons/clans] of Midian. And they also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword. 9 And the people of Israel took captive the women of Midian and their little ones, and they took as plunder all their cattle, their flocks, and all their goods. 10 All their cities in the places where they lived, and all their encampments, they burned with fire, 11 and took all the spoil and all the plunder, both of man and of beast…

13 Moses and Eleazar the priest and all the chiefs of the congregation went to meet them outside the camp. 14 And Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who had come from service in the war. 15 Moses said to them, “Have you let all the women live? 16 Behold, these, on Balaam’s advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the Lord… 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. 18 But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves. 32 Now the plunder remaining of the spoil that the army took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys, 35 and 32,000 persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him [virgins]. 

Thirty-two thousand Midianite girls is a large number to be integrated into the tribes of Israel. Some of the tribes barely had a total number of men, women and children of this number. It also shows the close family connection, meaning similar Haplogroups, to not significantly alter Israel’s identity. Remember, the six sons of Keturah are half-brothers of Isaac, the father of Jacob – sharing Abraham as their ancestor. 

Keturah may have been from the family of Nahor and thus much younger as Isaac’s wife Rebecca and Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel were – thus the gene pool being very similar on both parent’s sides. It is also possible that Keturah was from Haran’s family, like Sarah. Or, the third option, the one considered the most probable is that Keturah, like Hagar who was Ishmael’s mother, was – from either a different though still inherently similar line of Peleg or more likely – from another son of Arphaxad equating to the peoples of Finland today [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad]. 

Judges 6:1-6, 11-16, 20-23, 25-27, 32- 40

English Standard Version

The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord gave them into the hand of Midian seven years. 2 And the hand of Midian overpowered Israel, and because of Midian the people of Israel made for themselves the dens that are in the mountains and the caves and the strongholds. 3 For whenever the Israelites planted crops, the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Ishmael] would come up against them. 4 They would encamp against them and devour the produce of the land, as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey. 5 For they would come up with their livestock and their tents; they would come like locusts in number – both they and their camels could not be counted – so that they laid waste the land as they came in. 6 And Israel was brought very low because of Midian. And the people of Israel cried out for help to the Lord.

11 Now the angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth at Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the winepress to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him, “The Lord is with you, O mighty man of valor.” 13 And Gideon said to him, “Please, my lord, if the Lord is with us, why then has…  the Lord… forsaken us and given us into the hand of Midian.” 14 And the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours and save Israel from the hand of Midian; do not I send you?” 15 And he said to him, “Please, Lord, how can I save Israel? Behold, my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.” 16 And the Lord said to him, “But I will be with you [Isaiah 66:2], and you shall strike the Midianites as one man.” 

These same words were echoed nearly one hundred and twenty years later by Saul who would be the first king.1 Samuel 9:21 NET: ‘Saul replied, “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the smallest of Israel’s tribes, and is not my family clan the smallest of all the clans in the tribe of Benjamin? Why do you speak to me in this way?” Later Samuel referred to this humility that made Saul and Gideon prime candidates for service, in 1 Samuel 15:17 ESV: ‘And Samuel said, “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The Lord anointed you [Saul as] king over Israel.’

Gideon – what became the fifth Judge of Israel, from 1145 to 1105 BCE – then asks the Angel of the Lord for a sign. He prepares a goat and unleavened bread.

20 And the angel of God said to him, “Take the meat and the unleavened cakes, and put them on this rock, and pour the broth over them.” And he did so. 21 Then the angel of the Lord reached out the tip of the staff that was in his hand and touched the meat and the unleavened cakes. And fire sprang up from the rock and consumed the meat and the unleavened cakes. And the angel of the Lord vanished from his sight.22 Then Gideon perceived that he was the angel of the Lord. And Gideon said, “Alas, O Lord God! For now I have seen the angel of the Lord face to face.” 23 But the Lord said to him, “Peace be to you. Do not fear; you shall not die.” 

25 That night the Lord said to him, “Take your father’s bull, and the second bull seven years old, and pull down the altar of Baal that your father has, and cut down the Asherah that is beside it [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]26 and build an altar to the Lord your God on the top of the stronghold here, with stones laid in due order. Then take the second bull and offer it as a burnt offering with the wood of the Asherah that you shall cut down.” 27 So Gideon took ten men of his servants and did as the Lord had told him. But because he was too afraid of his family and the men of the town to do it by day, he did it by night.

The Lord described Gideon as a ‘mighty man of valour.’ Was He being sarcastic, or was the Eternal seeing the man he would become. Gideon doesn’t quite seem the right man for the job. He appears to be hard to convince and faith and fortitude don’t seem to be his first two attributes; but as the Creator looks on the heart, we know Gideon was special to Him. As Gideon rightly supposed, the men of the town once they saw what had happened in the morning sought Gideon out so they could kill him. Gideon’s father Joash, challenges the townsmen to let their god, Baal contend with Gideon directly or die themselves for their false worship.

32 Therefore on that day Gideon was called Jerubbaal, that is to say, “Let Baal contend against him,” because he broke down his altar. 33 Now all the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Ishmael] came together, and they crossed the Jordan and encamped in the Valley of Jezreel. 34 But the Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon, and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites were called out to follow him. 

35 And he sent messengers throughout all Manasseh [his own tribe], and they too were called out to follow him. And he sent messengers to Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali [all in northern Israel], and they went up to meet them.

Gideon, not about to alter his path of reticence in being the Creator’s instrument, asks a second and third time, for additional signs. There is an image of the Old Testament ‘God’ being one of impatience and wrath. Yet, as we saw with the discussion with Abraham about how many righteous souls in Sodom it would take to save the whole city, we have a very patient Deity in the face of Gideon’s stubbornness. 

36 Then Gideon said to God, “If you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said, 37 behold, I am laying a fleece of wool on the threshing floor. If there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground, then I shall know that you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said.” 38 And it was so. When he rose early next morning and squeezed the fleece, he wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water. 39 Then Gideon said to God, “Let not your anger burn against me; let me speak just once more. Please let me test just once more with the fleece. Please let it be dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground let there be dew.” 40 And God did so that night; and it was dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground there was dew.

The Book of Judges chapter seven relates how Gideon whittled down thirty-two thousand men to just three hundred as the Lord decreed, so that Israel’s strength of numbers wasn’t given credit instead. As with the taking of Jericho, trumpets were blared and these led to the Midianites panicking and beginning to mistakenly kill each other before fleeing. One of the Princes of Midian was called Zeeb and reminds of the Netherland Province called Zee-land.

Judges 7:23-25

English Standard Version

23 And the men of Israel were called out from Naphtali and from Asher and from all Manasseh [but not Zebulun], and they pursued after Midian. 24 Gideon sent messengers throughout all the hill country of Ephraim, saying, “Come down against the Midianites and capture the waters against them, as far as Beth-barah, and also the Jordan.” So all the men of Ephraim were called out, and they captured the waters as far as Beth-barah, and also the Jordan. 25 And they captured the two princes of Midian, Oreb [meaning: raven] and Zeeb [meaning wolf]. They killed Oreb at the rock of Oreb, and Zeeb they killed at the winepress of Zeeb. Then they pursued Midian, and they brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon across the Jordan.

Isaiah 10:26

English Standard Version

And the Lord of hosts will wield against them a whip, as when he struck Midian at the rock of Oreb. And his staff will be over the sea, and he will lift it as he did in Egypt.

Judges 8:1-34 recounts the Ephraimites being upset that they hadn’t been included in the ‘fight against Midian.’ Nor were they willing to help with food and supplies for Gideon’s exhausted three hundred men. Gideon, said that once he had captured the two Midianite kings, he would return to flail their flesh in Succoth and break down their tower in Penuel. Once he captured the Midianite kings Zebah and Zalmunna, Gideon returned and flailed the flesh of the elders of the first city with thorns and broke down the tower and killed all the men of the second city.

Judges 8:10-12, 21-34

English Standard Version

10 Now Zebah [meaning: sacrificial victim] and Zalmunna [meaning: protection denied] were in Karkor with their army, about 15,000 men, all who were left of all the army of the people of the East, for there had fallen 120,000 men who drew the sword. 11 And Gideon went up by the way of the tent dwellers east of Nobah and Jogbehah and attacked the army, for the army felt secure. 12 And Zebah and Zalmunna fled, and he pursued them and captured the two kings of Midian, Zebah and Zalmunna, and he threw all the army into a panic… And Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and he took the crescent ornaments that were on the necks of their camels.

22 Then the men of Israel said to Gideon, “Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also, for you have saved us from the hand of Midian.” 23 Gideon said to them, “I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the Lord will rule over you.” 24 And Gideon said to them, “Let me make a request of you: every one of you give me the earrings from his spoil.” (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.) 25 And they answered, “We will willingly give them.” And they spread a cloak, and every man threw in it the earrings of his spoil. 26 And the weight of the golden earrings that he requested was 1,700 shekels of gold, besides the crescent ornaments and the pendants and the purple [a colour of Phoenicia] garments worn by the kings of Midian, and besides the collars that were around the necks of their camels. 27 And Gideon made an ephod of it and put it in his city, in Ophrah. And all Israel whored after it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family. 28 So Midian was subdued before the people of Israel, and they raised their heads no more. And the land had rest forty years in the days of Gideon.

An Ephod in the Old Testament refers to two different things. One, it can refer to the garment or breastplate worn by the high priest. Two and incredibly, it can refer to a transportable idol. 

29 Jerubbaal the son of Joash went and lived in his own house. 30 Now Gideon had seventy sons, his own offspring, for he had many wives. 31 And his concubine who was in Shechem also bore him a son, and he called his name Abimelech [the sixth Judge of Israel, Judges 9:17]. 32 And Gideon the son of Joash died in a good old age and was buried in the tomb of Joash his father, at Ophrah of the Abiezrites. 33 As soon as Gideon died, the people of Israel turned again and whored after the Baals and made Baal-berith their god. 34 And the people of Israel did not remember the Lord their God, who had delivered them from the hand of all their enemies on every side… 

Isaiah 60:6

English Standard Version

A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian [Netherlands or the Dutch] and Ephah [Holland or Hollanders]; all those from Sheba [Flanders or the Flemish]shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.

This is the one instance that a son of Midian is mentioned outside the genealogical lists. Firstly, camels are a bit of a re-occurring theme in the Old Testament, particularly for Abraham’s descendants. A multitude of camels, is a reference to the abundance of wealth and treasure that is able to be carried upon camels. The camel was used for the carriage of gold and spice and other treasures of wealth [Judges 6:5]. Job 1:3 mentions camels when describing Job’s vast resources and riches [see also 1 Chronicles 5:21]. 

The word Ephah is a unit of measure. One of the trading Midianite business tricks was using two different kinds of weights and measures – buying by one and selling by the other according to Baidhawi, Tafsir-i-Raufi.

Leviticus 19:36

New English Translation

You must have honest balances, honest weights,an honest ephah, and an honest hin. I am the Lord your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt.

Proverbs 20:10

New English Translation

Diverse weights and diverse measures – the Lord abhors both of them.

As Ephah is the first born son of Midian and inferred as the most prominent; the people of the two provinces of North and South Holland on the western coast, have been dominant in Dutch history – with the Netherlands widely known as, or called Holland. This usage of the name Holland, is accepted by other countries and is also employed by the Dutch; though those from regions outside Holland, may find it misrepresentative to use the term for the whole nation. Netherlands means ‘low-lying country’ and the name Holland is from Houtland, or ‘Wooded Land.’

During the 900s to the 1500s, Holland was a unified political region within the Holy Roman Empire and ruled by the counts of Holland. By the 1600s, the province of Holland had grown to become a maritime and economic power; dominating the other provinces of the Dutch Republic. The area of the former County of Holland broadly covers the modern provinces of North and South Holland. These provinces include the Netherlands’ three biggest cities: Amsterdam, the capital, Europes largest port, Rotterdam and the third busiest port in the world behind 1. Shanghai, China and 2. Singapore, and The Hague, the seat of government. The two provinces of Holland have a population of 6,583,534 people as of 2019. 

Habakkuk 3:6-7

New English Translation

6 He took his battle position and shook the earth; with a mere look he frightened the nations. The ancient mountains disintegrated; the primeval hills were flattened. His are ancient roads. 7 I saw the tents of Cushan overwhelmed by trouble; the tent curtains of the land of Midian were shaking.

Some have interpreted this verse to prove a link between Cush and Midian, in that Keturah was from Cush like Moses’s third wife. This verse is merely showing the distance of the parameters of the Creators wrath; from the Netherlands in the west, right across to India in the east. Other notable scriptures on Midian include: Joshua 13:21, 1 Kings 11:18, Psalm 83:9 and Isaiah 9:4.

The Etruscan civilisation has long had a strong fascination for many people. For instance, the renowned author D H Lawrence, fell in love with the Etruscans in his closing years and explained his infatuation: “Myself, the first time I consciously saw Etruscan things, in the museum at Perugia, I was instinctively attracted to them. And it seems to be that way. Either there is instant sympathy, or instant contempt and indifference. Most people despise everything B.C. that isn’t Greek, for the good reason that it ought to be Greek if it isn’t. So Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him… So being a great scientific historian, he almost denies the very existence of the Etruscan people. He didn’t like the idea of them. That was enough for a great scientific historian.” 

If the Etruscans weren’t Greeks – equating in the main, to the modern French – then who were they? We have read the quote from Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins from Italians and Race and his comment on the ancient Greeks being blond and blue-eyed. Here is his comment of the Etruscans: “Some scholars suggest they were thought to have been a blond, blue-eyed people. On a mural in an Etruscan tomb, a banquet scene portrays the women with blond hair.”

It is an enduring and highly controversial mystery for historians and scholars and the subject of much debate as to where the Etruscans came from; let alone where they went or who they were. Regardless, we will learn that their proximity to the growing Roman civilisation was not a fluke and this relationship has been repeated in our times as well as extending all the way back to ancient Israel.

Mehmet Kurtkaya in his article Etruscan Origins says: “… finding Near Eastern Anatolian DNA from the period of the migration, from around 1000 BC, in local Tuscans and local cattle proves beyond any doubt that the Etruscans had migrated from Turkey to Italy with their cattle, probably on [ships] out of Troy, and/or [Smyrna] or anywhere in the Aegean coast of Turkey. It is also probable that some Etruscan migration waves took place by land, via the Balkans.”

Etruscan Origins – emphasis & bold mine:

Etruscans were famed for their naval prowess! [and possibly one of the ‘sea peoples of the 14th-13th centuries BCE]. People with [‘Iranian – Turkish/Anatolian’] ancestry arrived in Sicily in around 1900 BC! [too early] Ancient genome samples were similar to Mycenaean Greece and Minoan Greece samples. Etruscans arrived in Italy during the Mycenaean period. 

In 1894, Paul Kretschmer… suggested an Etruscan substrate in Indo-European languages, and since then Etruscan / Tursenoi / Tyrrhennian was considered by a handful of European scholars as the pre-Greek substrate which [constitutes] a large part of the Greek vocabulary. Congratulations to all European scholars in the last 140 years, including Italian linguists and scholars, who have offered evidence for the migration of the Etruscans from the Near East [also]… Minoans [Philistines] and Mycenaeans [Greeks] were genetically similar… however, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry… another research paper… suggests the arrival of people to Anatolia from the Caucasus and/or Iran around 3800 BC. Considering this genetic study together with… Etruscan genetic studies, we can decisively conclude that the founders of Minoan and Mycenaean Greek and the Etruscan civilizations migrated from Turkey! [Further], DNA analysis in 2016 and 2017… identified a massive expansion, or a series of expansions, from Mesopotamia and/or [the] surrounding area.

According to tradition, Tarchun and his brother, Tyrrhenus, were the Lydian founders of Etruria, circa 1100 BCE. They were called Etrusci or Tusci by the Romans – whom they were closely related to – and Tyrrhenoi or Tyrseni; that is, Tuscans by the Greeks. Herodotus wrote that Tyr-senians – note the similarity with the word Tyre – were descended from Lydian colonists who landed in Etruria in the thirteenth century BCE following a great famine in Lydia [Eastern Anatolia]. It was decided to split the population in half, with those who drew the short straw being sent off to settle in the west and so ending up in northern Italy. The Etruscans called themselves Rasenna, which was shortened to Rasna. Hellicanus of Lesbos ascribes their existence to a settlement of Pelasgian refugees, who had fled from the Hellenic domination of Thessaly. 

Interestingly, the island of Lemnos appears to bear close links to the Etruscans; as the Lemnos Stele, dated to about 600 BCE, is written in a language that is remarkably similar to that of the Etruscans. It was found in a warrior’s tomb on the island along with artefacts that were similar to Etruscan items. The inference is that a community on the island was related to the Etruscans. Possibly the Pelasgians and so this would indicate a shared origin for all Etruscans, including the Lemnian pirates.

Some postulate that Rome was founded before the arrival of the Etruscans. Though dates reveal which was first and who influenced who. In this case the majority, if not all of the cities of Etruria have been found to pre-date Rome. In fact, the name of Rome itself is Etruscan in origin, as are the names of its legendary founders, Romulus and Remus. Early Rome was heavily influenced by Etruscan culture and so it more than likely that Rome was founded by the Etruscans. The Etruscan alphabet though inherited from the Greeks, was in turn passed on to the Romans. 

This is significant, as we will learn that the relationship shared between Midian and the ‘Midianites’ of Ishmael, comprises not only a geographic proximity and culture but also a similar linguistic origin and group, as shown by those languages in blue in the above diagram.

The Etruscan religion included human sacrifice, just as ancient Midian had practiced. Prisoners of war could end up on the altars of the Etruscan gods. As a part of these sacrifices, prisoners were sometimes set to fight one another. The Romans later adopted this practice and it grew into the huge gladiatorial entertainments of the Roman amphitheatres. Like the Romans, the Etruscans used bronze bars as a form of money with their value stamped on them. The Etruscans had a more affluent economy than the early Romans, though it was not a free market economy, built on money.

The Lion of the Netherlands 

The Etruscans introduced lions onto the Italian peninsula. Both Belgium and particularly the Netherlands, use lions on their state heraldry. Beginning circa 800 BCE – until 400 BCE – Etruscan civilisation and culture flourished in Etruria of central Italy and the northern Italian Po Valley, eventually achieving regional dominance. Etruscan tribes established a series of independent city states which sometimes acknowledged the authority of a form of high king. The Etruscans of the eighth and seventh centuries were significantly influenced by eastern Greek culture.

The territorial reach of the Etruscan civilisation attained its maximum area circa 750 BCE, during the foundational period of the Roman Kingdom. Its culture flourished in three confederacies of cities; Etruria – Tuscany, Latium and Umbria – the Po Valley and Campania. According to legend,there was a period between 600 to 500 BCE in which an alliance of the Dodecapolis, or Etruscan League was formed among twelve Etruscan settlements. The Etruscans dominated northern Italy until their influence over the burgeoning Roman Republic on their southern border, gradually declined and with it their territory. After 529 BCE, the balance of political power shifted away from the Etruscans in favour of Rome. The Romans grew to perceive the Etruscans as ‘former colonial masters’ thus colouring the relationship between the two peoples. It led to a series of long running wars beginning in 477 BCE. Rome and the powerful Etruscan city, of Veii – which Rome saw as a rival and threat – went to war. A year later in 474 BCE, Veii’s navy was destroyed by Hieron of Syracuse at Cumae and the city was forced to agree a treaty with Rome. 

The Greek colonies in Sicily – who are called ‘Greeks’ but were rather kin of the Romans – were at their height at this time and for the Greeks – in Sicily, the prime enemy were the Carthaginians, who were also seeking to expand in the Mediterranean. The Carthaginians – who were Phoenicians from Tyre and today include the Portuguese descended peoples [refer Chapter XXIII Aram] – and the Etruscans of Midianite origin and today, the Dutch, were often allied, but once defeated by the Greeks from Syracuse, the Etruscans ceased to be a major maritime power, militarily and politically.

Meanwhile the Etruscans, who had been migrating northwards to the River Po from central Italy, had been clashing increasingly with the Celts for domination of the region. A pivotal showdown took place at the Battle of Ticinum in 474 BCE. The Etruscan force, which was little more than a well-armed militia, was butchered by the Celts in a ferociously fought battle.

Though the Etruscans flourished for a couple of centuries, then collapsing, it was not entirely due to Roman aggression. The Etruscans had stablished city states, similar to Greece, but as they didn’t use money, they did not have the essential economic underpinning to endure like the Greek states. Nor did they establish a powerful unified state under one ruling emperor. For there are no signs of any palaces and the burials reflect a very wealthy upper class, but no sign of one individual elevated above the rest. Thus they were engulfed by Rome’s rising consolidated power. Many cities became Roman municipia – chartered towns. In Imperial Rome, ‘the fat Etruscan became a figure of fun’ stemming from envy. Eventually the rich land of Etruria flourished again, but as part of the great Roman Empire. The Etruscans quite possibly included Sheba and Dedan, as the Flemings and Walloons have been part of the Low Countries in modern times.

We Are Not Our Ancestors: Evidence for Discontinuity between Prehistoric and Modern Europeans, Journal of Genetic Genealogy, Ellen Levy-Coffman, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Like the ancient Basque, the origin of the Etruscan people remains obscure. The Etruscans lived in central Italy from the 8th-2nd centuries BCE. Like the Basque, they spoke a non-Indo-European language, but unrelated to the Basque language. After the Romans rose to [dominate] Italy in the 2nd century BCE, the Etruscan language disappeared from the records. It was therefore assumed that the Etruscan population had been culturally and genetically assimilated by the Romans. But the aDNA evidence tells a different story.

Two separate aDNA studies on the Etruscans reached similar conclusions, finding essentially no genetic relationship between the ancient Etruscans and the modern-day inhabitants of Tuscany (ie, “Tuscans”) (Belle 2006; Vernesi 2004). Specifically, out of twenty-eight mtDNA sequences, only six occur in any modern-day groups. The remaining twenty-one haplotypes, identified as belonging to the JT haplogroup, do not occur in any contemporary European populations, including the common Etruscan haplotypes 16126-16193 and 16126-16193-16278. These sequences, while occurring among modern-day haplogroups J2 and T, are not accompanied by substitutions at 16069 and 16294, respectively, which are inevitably present among the contemporary motifs (Vernesi 2004).

The researchers attributed this lack of genetic relationship between Etruscans and Tuscans to two possible processes – the extinction of Etruscan mtDNA lineages among modern-day Europeans, or demographic and evolutionary processes occurring in the last 2,500 years. These processes, if they occurred, were severe enough to disrupt the genetic continuity between the modern and ancient inhabitants of Tuscany.

Researchers performed a number of simulations to investigate whether certain phenomenon, such as genetic drift, migration or a higher than average mtDNA mutation rates, could have impacted the genetic continuity between Etruscans and Tuscans. (Belle 2006) None of their simulations were compatible with the DNA results. The genetic evidence did not support the conclusion that Tuscans were the modern-day descendants of the Etruscans, although the researchers noted that the skeletal remains used for their aDNA samples may not have been representative of the entire Etruscan population, but of a more elite sub-strata. Even so, they seemed to have contributed very little to the mtDNA background of modern Tuscans.

However, the researchers also found that genetic continuity could be generated if the mtDNA mutation rate was set very high (0.5 mutations per million years as opposed to commonly used lower rate of approx. 0.05 mutations per million years per nucleotide) or if gene flow from other areas was so extensive that Etruscan descendants became underrepresented in the modern Tuscan samples. They concluded, however, that the very high mtDNA mutation rates needed to reproduce genetic continuity were “implausible” and, furthermore, the only way to determine if descendants were underrepresented in the study was to collect more modern samples over time.

Thus, the study concluded that modern-day Tuscans largely descend from non-Etruscan ancestors. Regarding the fate of the Etruscans, the suspicion voiced by the researchers was that the Etruscan lineages simply went extinct.’

This article tells us two things. First, the modern people of Tuscany have inherited the Etruscan name; but as the descendants of Abraham’s brother Nahor, they are not the Etruscans of two thousand to two thousand, five hundred years ago [refer Chapter XXV Nahor]. Second, just because a people have seemingly vanished into the mists of time, it does not mean that they have. They had to go somewhere, be somewhere and be someone today.

An Etruscan helmet in the British Museum

A portion of the future land of the Netherlands, became a Roman province that was conquered by Julius Caesar in the first century BCE. The Saxon peoples, including the Frisians, followed by the Angles and Jutes settled in the area before migrating to Britain. Later, the land became part of the empire of the Franks under Charlemagne, the House of Burgundy from 1384 to 1482 [refer Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon], and then the Habsburg Empire from 1482 to 1567. From 800 to 1000 CE, the Vikings had raided towns and cities along the coast, settling in some areas. In 1083, the name Holland first appears in a legal document. In 1568 the land was under Spanish King Philip II, when the Dutch revolted. Their leader was Willem I, the Prince of Orange and in 1581 the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was formed. The Netherlands has one of the oldest standing armies in Europe; with Maurice of Nassau establishing it in the late 1500s.

In 1602 – two years after the English – the Dutch East India Company was formed. During the seventeenth century, the Netherlands became an international power known for its strong navy – much like the Etruscans. The Dutch empire expanded throughout the world through its colonies on nearly every continent. The Dutch were among the earliest empire-builders of Europe, following Portugal [Tyre Phoenicians] and Spain [Arameans] before them [refer Chapter XXIII Aram]. During this time, the arts in Netherlands was at its peak with notable artists such at Rembrandt and Vermeer. Wars with Spain, France and England in 1652 weakened the country and began its decline; with the fourth Anglo-Dutch War of 1780 to 1784, resulting in the Dutch Republic losing a number of its colonial possessions and trade monopolies to the British Empire.

In 1688, King William of Orange and Queen Mary became the rulers of the Netherlands. In 1795, the French army invaded the Netherlands and took control, with the Batavian Republic being declared. Then in 1806, French emperor, Napoleon, made his brother, Louis, King of the Netherlands. In 1813, Napoleon and the French were defeated and the United Kingdom of the Netherlands was declared. It included Belgium and had two capitals: Brussels and Amsterdam. In 1830, Belgium rebelled and broke away, forming its own independent nation.

The Netherlands endeavoured to stay neutral during both World Wars. In World War II they were occupied by Germany. The Dutch Jews were heavily targeted by the Germans. Over seventy-five percent of the one hundred and forty thousand Jewish people that lived in the Netherlands, were killed by the Germans as part of the Holocaust. A Jewish girl called Anne Frank became famous through her writing of hiding from the Nazis in Amsterdam, before being captured and taken to a concentration camp to die. After World War II, most of the Netherland’s remaining colonies were granted independence. In 1948, the International Court of Justice was established at The Hague.

The Netherlands has a highly developed economy; playing a significant role in the European economy for centuries. Since the sixteenth century, shipping, fishing, agriculture, trade and banking have been leading sectors in the Netherlands. The Netherlands was ranked the fifth most competitive economy in the world by the Swiss International Institute for Management Development in 2017. Additionally, the country was ranked the second most innovative nation in the world in the 2018 Global Innovation Index.

The Netherlands stands as the 17th largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $907.05 billion in 2019. The Netherlands is a major commercial transportation hub with industrial manufacturing as well as petroleum extraction and processing. It has a highly developed agricultural sector and is the second largest agricultural exporter in the world. The Netherlands has a large financial services sector, with assets four times the size of the Dutch GDP.

In the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves, the Netherlands is number ten in the world; with 612.5 tonnes, comprising 67.4% of its foreign reserves. When the Dutch Central Bank repatriated a large amount of its gold from the United States, it also oddly announced that it would move ‘its gold vaults from Amsterdam to Camp New Amsterdam, about an hour outside the city, citing burdensome security measures.’

The original flag of the Netherlands and the current flag since circa 1650.

The main explanation for the change, is that the orange variant was used by the Prince and a distinction between the Prince’s flag and the National flag was required.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Dutch global shipments during 2020.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$103.6 billion
  2. Electrical machinery, equipment: $94 billion
  3. Mineral fuels including oil: $59.1 billion
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $49.5 billion 
  5. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $37.1 billion 
  6. Vehicles: $26.6 billion 
  7. Plastics, plastic articles: $25.2 billion 
  8. Organic chemicals: $18.2 billion 
  9. Other chemical goods: $14.5 billion 
  10. Iron, steel: $12 billion 

Pharmaceuticals represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 64.5% from 2019 to 2020. In second place for improving export sales was electrical machinery and equipment via a 55.8% gain.’

I will Maintain

Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama arrived at Calicut in 1498 and opened a gateway from Western Europe to Asia via the Cape of Good Hope on Africa’s southern tip. By 1510, the Portuguese had started making raids inland and not long after this, the Dutch Republic sent merchant vessels to India. In 1602 they founded the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie – the Dutch East India Company, or VOC.

Dutch settlement in South Africa began in March 1647, with the Dutch ship Nieuwe Haarlem, wrecked at the Cape. The shipwreck victims built a small fort named Sand Fort of the Cape of Good Hope. They stayed for nearly one year and were later rescued by a fleet of twelve ships. Jan van Riebeeck was aboard one of these ships. A few years later in 1652, persuaded by some of those who had been wrecked in 1647, the VOC established a supplies station at the Cape of Good Hope under the command of Jan van Riebeeck from 1652 to 1662. The party was made up of ninety Calvinist settlers. They arrived in the bay of today’s Cape Town, on April 6, 1652, on board five ships.

The objective was not to develop a colony but to establish a port of call to service the Dutch ships travelling between the Netherlands and its trading posts in the east, supplying meat, vegetables, fruit, wine and wheat. The VOC were surprisingly dismayed in the popularity of the port and its growth into a settler colony. As the only permanent settlement option and not solely serving as a trading post the Cape Colony proved an ideal retirement destination for employees; for after several years of service in the company, an employee could lease a piece of land in the colony as ‘a free citizen’ – a Vryburgher or Vrijburger – on which he had to cultivate crops that he then had to sell to the United East India Company for a fixed price. As these farms were labour-intensive, Vryburghers imported slaves from Madagascar, Mozambique and Asia. 

After King Louis XIV of France revoked the Edict of Nantes in 1685 – which had protected the right of Huguenots in France to practise Protestant worship without persecution from the state – the colony attracted many Huguenot settlers, who eventually mixed with the general Vryburgher population. The authoritarian rule of the Company – telling farmers what to grow, for what price, controlling immigration and trade – made some farmers escape the company rules, by moving far inland. 

There were two distinct subgroups in the Vrijburger population and the first group were the itinerant farmers who began to settle further inland, seeking better pastures for their livestock as well as freedom from the VOC’s regulations. This settler community identified themselves as Boers to describe their agricultural way of life.Their farms were enormous by European standards for the land was free and underpopulated. A few Boers adopted a semi-nomadic lifestyle; known as trekboers. The Boers were suspicious of the centralised government and the increasing complexities of administration at the Cape. They continually migrated inland from the reaches of the colonial officialdom, every time it attempted to regulate their activities. 

By the mid-eighteenth century the Boers had penetrated a thousand kilometres into South Africa’s interior beyond the Cape of Good Hope, at which point they encountered the Xhosa people migrating southwards. Competition between the two communities over resources on the frontier sparked the Xhosa Wars. ‘Harsh Boer attitudes towards black Africans were permanently shaped by their contact with the Xhosa, which bred insecurity and fear on the frontier.’

The second subgroup of the Vrijburger population were known as the Cape Dutch and remained in the southwestern Cape and especially in the growing settlement of Cape Town. They were urban dwellers, more educated and maintained greater cultural ties to the Netherlands than the Boers. The Cape Dutch became the backbone of the colony’s market economy and as they had vested economic interests in the Cape peninsula, were not interested in venturing inland due to the difficulties in maintaining contact with a viable market. 

This was in sharp contrast with the Boers on the frontier, who lived on the margins of the market economy. The Cape Dutch could not participate in migrations to escape the colonial system and ‘the Boer strategy of social and economic withdrawal was not viable for them. Their response to grievances with the Cape government was to demand political reform and greater representation, a practice that became commonplace under Dutch and subsequently British rule.’ In 1779, hundreds of Cape burghers smuggled a petition to Amsterdam, demanding an end to the VOC corruption and its contradictory laws. Unlike the Boers, the contact most Cape Dutch had with black Africans were mainly peaceful and so ‘their racial attitudes were more paternal than outright hostile.’ 

In 1752, French astronomer Nicholas-Louis de Lacaille when visiting the Cape, observed that the third-generation descendants of the original Huguenot – French and German – settlers spoke Dutch as their first language. Afrikaans developed from Dutch which had originated from the Dutch vernacular of South Holland.

In 1795, after the battle of Muizenberg in present day Cape Town, the British occupied the colony. Then under the terms of the Peace of Amiens in 1802, Britain acceded the colony to the Dutch in March 1803. As the Batavian Republic had nationalised the United East India Company in 1796, the colony now came under the direct rule of The Hague. The outbreak of the Napoleonic wars in May 1803, then invalidated the Peace agreement. In January 1806, the British re-occupied the colony. The Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814 cemented the transfer of sovereignty finally to Great Britain.

Nearly one hundred years later, dissatisfaction with British rule led to bloodshed in the Anglo-Boer Wars from 1880 to 1881, 1889 to 1902 and the loss of many innocent Boer lives in British Concentrations camps. The Union of South Africa occurred in 1910 when the four British colonies combined: the Cape, Natal, Transvaal and the Orange River or Orange Free State. In the twentieth century Afrikaner nationalism took the form of political parties and secret societies, like the Broederbond. In 1914, the National Party formed to promote Afrikaner economic interests and finally sever South Africa’s ties to the United Kingdom. It rose to prominence in winning the 1948 general election; it enforced a harsh policy of racial segregation known as apartheid and declared South Africa a republic, withdrawing from the British Commonwealth. The National Party eventually left power in 1994 following negotiations to end apartheid and losing South Africa’s first multiracial elections.

Thousands of Flemish along with the Dutch, migrated to South Africa for many years between the 1600s and the twentieth century. Immigration slowed eventually, but there remains a considerable Flemish population in Southern Africa. Judging by the 2011 census figures and South Africa’s population of 60,672,691 people, some 8.2% are of white European extraction. Within that percentage the Afrikaners make up approximately 60% in the nine provinces and 5.2% of the population – 3,154,979 people. The British descended peoples comprise about 40% and 3% of the population – 1,820,180 people. A total white population of approximately 4,975,159 people.

Afrikaners are descended mainly from Dutch, German and French Huguenot immigrants, coupled with small percentages of other Europeans and also indigenous African peoples. By 1691 over a quarter of the white Afrikaner population of South Africa was not ethnically Dutch.The number of permanent settlers – just prior to the end of the Dutch administration in 1795 – numbered 26,720,of whom 50% were Dutch, 27% German, 17% French and 5.5% Scandinavian, Belgian and others. This demographic breakdown has been used in many studies to represent the ethnic makeup of modern Afrikaners, which has been criticised by academics such as Dr. Johannes Heese.

‘Based on Heese’s genealogical research of the period from 1657 to 1867, his study Die Herkoms van die Afrikaners (“The Origins of the Afrikaners”) estimated an average ethnic admixture for Afrikaners of 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% non-European [Chinese, India, Madagascar], 2.6% British, 2.8% other European [Danish, Norwegian, Portuguese] and 3.6% unknown. 

Heese argued that previous studies wrongly classified some German progenitors as Dutch, although for the purposes of his own study he also reclassified a number of Scandinavian (especially Danish) progenitors as German… British historian George McCall Theal estimated an admixture of 67% Dutch, with a nearly equal contribution of roughly 17% from the Huguenots and Germans.Theal argued that most studies suggesting a higher percentage of German ancestry among Afrikaners wrongly counted as “German” all those who came from German-speaking Swiss cantons and ignored the VOC’s policy of recruiting settlers among the Dutch diaspora living in the border regions of several German states.’

The degree of intermixing among Afrikaners can be attributed to the unbalanced sex ratio when under Dutch governance. Most VOC employees who sailed from the Netherlands were not allowed to bring their families with them. Between 1657 and 1806 only 454 women arrived at the Cape, compared to the 1,590 male colonists.Thus, white South African women, like their counterparts in colonial North America began to marry much younger and so also bear more children than Western Europeans. Afrikaner families were much larger in size, more interconnected and also became more clannish than those of other colonial settlements in the world. Some of the more common Afrikaner surnames include Botha, Pretorius and van der Merwe. 

Similar to other large population groups that have been propagated by a smaller gene pool of progenitors [refer Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon], Afrikaners have experienced an increase in the frequency of some rare ailments, including skin disorders such as variegate porphyria and higher levels of cholesterol type familial hypercholesterolaemia. Afrikaners have some peculiarities genetically, which has made them of some interest to scientists. They seem to exhibit high frequencies of classical Mendelian diseases – an inherited single mutated gene – a hallmark of inbreeding or population bottlenecks. 

Whether the percentage proportions are exactly correct for the Dutch, German and French components of the Afrikaners may not be as important as the fact there are multiple strains that constitute the gene composition of the Afrikaner. I would propose that they are not the exact same people as the Dutch or Midianite descended people, but a mixture of Midianite and Kenite lines. Firstly, we have ascertained that the northern Hivites lived in the north of Israel – modern Lebanon – and were the white population that lived with the residue of Black peoples descended from Hiv of Canaan and living in Sidon; also known as Phoenicians like the Arameans of Tyre [refer Chapter XXII Canaan]. 

Secondly, we have also noted that Heber the Kenite and his family departed from those Kenites descended from Jethro and dwelt in the north of Israel’s territory in Zebulon’s and Naphtali’s allotments. The significance of this will be borne out when we study Jacob’s sons. Thirdly, we have also deduced that Jethro was likely a Kenite on one side of his family and either Midianite on the other, or remarkably a possible Midian and Lot split… that is, the equivalent of combined Dutch and French ancestry.

Fourthly, we learned of a branch of the Kenites the Rechabites, who were a god-fearing people, running a striking parallel with the Huguenots. Strictly, the Huguenots were French Protestants from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries living primarily in southern and western France. They were followers of the teachings of John Calvin or Calvinists; which emphasised the sovereignty of God and the authority of the Bible. The Huguenots were invariably ‘skilled artisans, craftsmen, farmers and professional people’ including: ‘doctors, schoolmasters, merchants, mariners, shipwrights’ and aristocrats. 

As they gained influence in society and openly displayed their faith, this attracted Catholic hostility; particularly when they declared their intention to create a ‘state within the state.’ A series of religious conflicts ensued known as the French Wars of Religion between 1562 to 1598. Persecution by the French Catholic government headed by king Louis XIV led to some three hundred thousand Huguenots fleeing France for England, Holland, Switzerland, Prussia and the Dutch and English colonies in the Americas. Interestingly, the Huguenot Society of London was formed in 1885 and it decided to not only define a a Huguenot as a French Protestant but to also include religious refugees from the Low Countries of Belgium and the Netherlands.

In South Africa’s settlement – apart form the British – there were three main contributions as represented by the Dutch and Flemish, Germans and the French. It  underlines with the Dutch and German contributions, regardless of percentage, the interconnectedness between the Hivites and Hittites.

The Dutch imposed their language upon the French Huguenots and imposed their religion upon the northern Germans who were predominantly Lutheran. The Reformed Calvinist religion and Afrikaans language have both had a unique impact on South Africa. The strong connection of the Afrikaners to the Netherlands has remained significant. The Prime Minister of South Africa from 1958-1966, Hendrik Verwoerd was born in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Another fact hard to ignore, is that the Huguenot French component seems to have persevered to a greater extent culturally than the German. The last Afrikaner President was named F W de Klerk, his surname actually being a form of Le Clerc. Another prominent South African head of state was Daniel Francois Malan. 

One Afrikaner author, J M Greeff, 2007, states regarding his own ancestry: “It is not clear if my higher estimate of French contribution is because of a systematic mistake in Heese’s (1970) estimate, or if it is because of a quirkiness in my own ancestry. It seemed to be the case that when a lineage hit the French Huguenots it stayed in this group. It will be interesting to compare the degree of inbreeding of the early generations of Huguenots to the other early immigrants. In the light of the calculations of Heyer et al. (2005) there is an interesting possibility that the cultural inheritance of fitness may have led to a systematic bias in Afrikaners, since Huguenots tended to be more educated and trained than German emigrants who tended to be soldiers. We are currently investigating this hypothesis.”

This is maybe pertinent when viewed with our study of the French, the French Quebecers, the Basque and the Catalonians. Both the Dutch and Germans had less pressure to emigrate than the French Huguenots, who having been religiously persecuted and fleeing for their lives in vacating France, had a far stronger incentive in moving to the Cape to be completely clear of any further persecution. Possibly, the genetic contribution of the French and those who fled to Holland, has had a greater proportional impact on the whole Afrikaner composition.

The rural male population surplus of northern Germany died abroad, not returning home. These men contributed greatly to the census figures of the Afrikaner population during much of its history, though it seems plausible that their fitness was lower than the Dutch and Huguenot groups, as they lacked the resources to prosper in a world which was much closer to the Malthusian [exponential growth based on a constant rate] edge than today. Not everyone leaves descendants and it is plausible that these Germans were fated not to do so to a greater extent than the Dutch and Huguenots, whom they were employed to protect and serve. 

This would explain why the German contribution has been a shadow of the Dutch rather than the other way around. Additionally, the genetic closeness of the north German and Dutch populations may simply be the reason for the blurring of the two. It is thought by many that the Dutch are an example of ‘simply another group of north Germans who transformed their regional identity into a national one for various reasons.’ If this were true, then every small nation next to a larger one, would just be an offshoot. Biblical and secular histories, plus Haplogroups prove this line of reasoning incorrect.

Before we delve deeper, a few interesting Haplogroup facts on Abraham’s and Keturah’s sons. According to Eupedia, Iceland has the fewest number of Haplogroups in all of Europe. Haplogroup I1a is  far more distributed in Nordic countries, like Norway and Sweden, while only faint traces of it can be found in Southern European countries. A genetic study of Iceland’s population revealed that the majority of their male ancestors are Nordic, while the majority of their female ancestors are Celtic. A similar DNA study of the people of the Faroe Islands showed that 87% of their male ancestors are Scandinavian and 84% of their female ancestors are either Scottish or Irish. 

Ninety-nine percent of R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 [R1a-M417, circa 3400 BCE from a bottleneck lineage originating in Ukraine], which itself derives from R-M198 and it in turn stems from R-M459. A few pertinent subclades are: R1a-L664, which is essentially Northwest European and found chiefly in Western Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles and R1a-Z284, which is a Scandinavian subclade with an epicentre in central Norway; found also in parts of Scotland, England and Ireland. There is a central European clade that peaks in Czechs, R-M458 and an eastern clade, R-M558 pealing in Russia. 

Khazaria, Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook: emphasis & bold mine:

‘In “The Norway Project”… I1 is Scandinavia’s most common Y-DNA haplogroup and it probably originated in Denmark. R1a, common in eastern Europe, is also found in this project in subclades like R1a1a and R1a1a1. R1b, common in western Europe, is also found… and… N1c1 is a subclade found… especially common among Finns, Estonians, and Saami [Madai-Japheth] so it’s believed to have come from intermarriage with Saami men. Less common haplogroups that members have include, among others, [E1b1b, G2a, I2, J1, J2b, Q1a3, and Q1a3a. E and J haplogroups have Middle Eastern origins, while Q may originate in Central Asia or Siberia, and G2a subclades probably originate in either Iran or the Caucasus region… in terms of Y-DNA, “The presence of Eu14 in Norway suggests that some admixture between Norwegians and the Finno-Ugric Uralic speakers of Scandinavia (Saami, Finns) has occurred.” (Eu14 is very common in Finland.) 

Haplogroup N3 was found at an elevated 11% of Norwegians from northern Norway (especially Finnmark where 18.6% of the Norwegians have it) whereas none of the Norwegians in southern Norway had it. Scientists believe N3 came to Norwegians through intermarriage with Saami and Finnish men… Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast.

The project’s most common mtDNA (maternal) lineages are H, J, K, T2, U5, and V. Other mtDNA haplogroups include I1a, I4, T1, T1a, U1b, U2, U2e, U4a1, X, and Z1a. H is the most common mtDNA haplogroup in Norwegians according to published studies, at a frequency of about 40%.

Research by B. Berger, S. Willuweit, et al. confirmed that pre-modern Norwegian men also possessed I1, R1a, R1b, and Q.’

These ‘pre-Norwegian’ men were the true Vikings – and though related, are different peoples – who migrated to the British Isles and Ireland.

‘Among 23andMe’s customers, 8-10% of Norwegians carry the T red hair allele in the R160W gene, 8-10% carry the T red hair allele in the R151C gene, and 0-2% carry the C red hair allele in the D294H gene.

“Different genetic components in the Norwegian population revealed by the analysis of mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisisms.” European Journal of Human Genetics 10:9 (September 2002), multiple authors: pages 521-529. 

The scientists studied Norwegians’ maternal and paternal lineages using DNA technology. Overall, Norwegians are genetically similar to Germans. They concluded, for instance, that the mtDNA haplogroup J, found among 10% of Norwegians, was probably “brought by the Germanic migrations to Norway.” They also showed that 75% of Norwegian men have one of the Y-DNA haplotypes Eu7 and Eu18, which are both common in Germany. They found that the non-Germanic Saami people contributed “mtDNAs with the 16144,16189, 16270 motif” to Norwegians.

Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… Both mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisms showed a noticeable genetic affinity between Norwegians and central Europeans, especially Germans… Although Y chromosome binary and microsatellite data indicate that 80% of the haplotypes are closely related to Central and western Europeans, the remainder share a unique binary marker (M17) common in eastern Europeans with informative microsatellite haplotypes suggesting a different demographic history. Other minor genetic influences on the Norwegian population from Uralic speakers and Mediterranean populations were also highlighted.”

‘The breakdown of the 4 top haplogroups was:

I1 = 37.3%
R1b = 31.3%
R1a = 26.3%
N3 = 3.8%

Haplogroup N3 was found at an elevated 11% of Norwegians from northern Norway (especially Finnmark where 18.6% of the Norwegians have it) whereas none of the Norwegians in southern Norway had it. Scientists believe N3 came to Norwegians through intermarriage with Saami and Finnish men, as based on data from all populations N3 “has been interpreted as a signature of Uralic Finno-Ugric speaking males migrating to northern Scandinavia about 4000-5000 years ago”. 

Haplogroup R1a, which is common in East European populations, is most frequently encountered among Norwegians in eastern-central areas of Norway, reaching its peak (31% frequency) among those living in the Trøndelag region in central Norway. Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast.

The History and Geography of Human Genes, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi, and Alberto Piazza, 1994.

Their research shows that Norwegians are nearest to Germans and Dutch by genetic distance, followed closely behind by Danes, then Swedes, then English. These data are reportedly on page 270 in the table “Occidental/European genetic distances for reference purposes”.

Icelanders are largely descended from male Norwegian migrants to medieval Iceland. Many people living in northern Scotland and the islands of Orkney and Shetland have partial descent from Norwegian settlers as well.’

‘Especially common Y-DNA (paternal) haplogroups in the “Danish Demes Regional DNA Project” include I1, I1d and I1d1, I2, R1a, and R1b (and subhaplogroups like R1b1a2a1a1a4 which is also known as R-L48), and less common haplogroups include ones within the broad letter groups E, F, G, J, N, Q. In the “Denmark DNA Project”, Y-DNA haplogroups in Denmark-origin lineages include E1b1b1a1b, I2b1, I1, I1d1, J2a4b3, Q1a3, R1a1a, R1b1a2, R1b1a2a1a1, R1b1a2a1a1b4, and certain others. Y-DNA I1… is typically found among the Nordic peoples of Scandinavia… and in northern Germany. It is also very common in western Finland. 

According to The ALlele FREquency Database, 10.8%* of… danish people studied carry at least one T allele in the R151C (rs1805007) gene where TT usually causes red hair. “… Associations between SNP alleles and dark versus light hair colour in 378 Danes” reveals that 9 percent of these Danes carry at least one copy of the minor allele T in the SNP rs1805007 (R151C) and 8 percent** of these Danes carry at least one copy of the minor allele T in the SNP rs1805008 (R160W), both on the MC1R gene. These alleles are frequently associated with red hair in various populations. The correlation of red hair alleles in MC1R with actual red hair was found to be stronger among the Scottish participants than among the Danish participants.

23andMe and other population distance and admixture tools… [studied] the autosomal DNA of about 600 Danish high school students who documented their ancestry… “chromosome painting revealed strong genetic influence from neighboring Nordic (Sweden and Norway) and Germanic (Germany and Holland) countries and negligible influence from Finland, France and Portugal.”’

‘In “The Swedish DNA Project”, Y-DNA haplogroups… show about 35-40% of Swedish males carry I1 or its subclades. In the project are participants with I1 (L22-) itself as well as I1b, I1d, I1d1, and I1d4. Among 23andMe’s customers, 10-12%** of Swedes carry the T red hair allele in the R160W gene (one of the highest frequencies in the world), 6-8%* carry the T red hair allele in the R151C gene, and 0-2% carry the C red hair allele in the D294H gene. 

Swedish population Substructure Revealed by Genome-Wide Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Data, multiple authors, PLoS ONE 6(2) (February 9, 2011):

… 350,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped from 1525 Swedes. The researchers compared the Swedish samples to 3,212 samples from populations worldwide, “including Finns, northern Germans, British and Russians”. Excerpts from the Abstract: …The Swedes – especially southern Swedes – were genetically close to the Germans and British, while their genetic distance to Finns was substantially longer. 

An excerpt from the body of [a] paper: “Genetically the Swedes have appeared relatively similar to their neighboring populations – for example the Norwegians, Danish, Germans, Dutch and British… In contrast, the Finns… do not appear genetically very close to the Swedes although they are geographically nearby.” 

3,112 European people (including among others Swedes, Estonians, Finns, Russians, Poles) were genetically tested. The Swedish samples came from the capital city of Sweden, Stockholm. The study describes a genetic barrier “between the Baltic region and Poland on the one hand, and Sweden on the other”. Further down it refers to the “barrier [that] emerged between the Eastern Baltic region and Sweden, but not between the Eastern Baltic region and Poland”. The study’s data comparing Swedes with Finns is consistent with how Swedes are descended mainly from Germanic people but came to mix somewhat with Finns… especially in the case of northern Swedes…

We have learned that the Baltic people are related to the Poles as both descend from Joktan, a descendant of Arphaxad, son of Shem. The Finns are somewhat related to the Baltic peoples of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and hence their difference to the Scandinavians and particularly their neighbours, Sweden. The percentage of I1a and N1c1 of the Norwegians and specifically the Swedes, may reflect their intermarrying with the Finns and or the Sammi to some degree; though could just as well be indicative of Keturah’s ancestry of the Finns from either one of Arphaxad’s other sons, Anar or Ashcol and hence the strong similarity between the Scandinavian nations and Finland regarding Y-DNA Haplogroups I1 and N.

Eupedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘What about modern Belgium, this small country divided by unending linguistic quarrels? Do Flemings and Walloons really have different origins? It is easy to claim that the Flemings are of Germanic descent just because they speak a Germanic language. This type of reasoning has already proved false in the case of the South Germany, where the Neolithic, Celtic and even Roman inhabitants remained slightly dominant genetically compared to the later Germanic invaders. Are Flemings and Walloons really genetically divided across linguistic lines, or could there be unexpected unity among them… For the first time in history, these issues are going to have a scientifically provable answer, thanks to DNA. 

The dominant haplogroup in the Benelux is R1b, almost equally divided between the Germanic R1b-U106 and Italo-Celtic R1b-P312 subclades. Both are present in all the Benelux, but with a very different distribution. R1b-U106 (S21) reaches its maximum frequency in Frisia (42%) and the central Netherlands (35%), then decreases progressively in the southern Netherlands (30%), Flanders (25%) and Wallonia (22%), to increase again in Luxembourg (32%). Not all subclades of U106 may be of Germanic origin. Some subclades appear to have expanded from Scandinavia and North Germany… These include L48, the largest branch of U106, and Z18, another major branch. These also happen to be the two dominant subclades in the Benelux. Within L48, Scandinavians belong almost exclusively to the Z9 branch, while the L47 branch appears to be found mostly in the Benelux and Britain. The other major branch, Z156 is subdivided in DF96 and DF98. DF98 is also found in Scandinavia and could be considered Germanic. 

However the vast majority of Z156 in Flanders is DF96, a subclade that is very rare in Scandinavia. DF96 might be more Proto-Celto-Germanic and would have dispersed around Germany and the Benelux without passing by Scandinavia. In other words 100% of the Luxembourg samples were Germanic. The sample size may to too small to judge, but it appears that Wallonia has a higher percentage of true Germanic/Nordic U106 (67%) than Flanders (56%), despite Flanders having a slightly higher percentage of U106 in total.’ 

The largest branch of R1b-U106 is L48 and the split between the Scandinavians of Z9 and the L47 of the Benelux peoples, highlights that four sons from Keturah are similar the Nordic-Scandinavian nations, while the other two brothers are more similar the Benelux-Celtic nations, to each other – just as we would expect both similarity and diversity in a family of six sons. We will also learn that the Nordic sons of Keturah are genetically more aligned with Germany the Germanic-Teutons, while the Low Countries are more aligned with the English Saxon-Vikings.

Dutch R1b-U106 has a particularly large swath of Z18 (25% of U106) like Scandinavia, but with more diversity of subclades. The dominant branch is L48 (about 40%), which has about three quarters of Z9 for one quarter of L47. In contrast with Belgium, the Dutch also have a considerable amount of S1688 (about 15%, including U198), a subclade that reaches its maximum frequency in England, but is rare in Germany and mostly absent from Scandinavia, central and eastern Europe, Italy or Iberia.So far, S1688 has not been found in Wallonia or Luxembourg and only makes up 4% of Flemish R1b-U106. U198 might be native to the Netherlands and would have been brought to England by the Anglo-Saxons from Frisia.*** 

In contrast with Flanders and England this time, the Dutch have hardly any Z156, and the little there is is DF96, perhaps of Flemish or Saxon origin. Interestingly the high percentage of Z18 and L48>Z9 in the Netherlands resembles more the pattern observed in Wallonia than in Flanders. The main difference is that the Walloons have more Z156 (from Germany) and the Dutch more S1688 (native to the region). The other main R1b subclade in the Benelux is R1b-P312 (S116), which is found in equal proportions in Flanders and Wallonia (33%), but decreases as one moves north to reach 20% in the southern Netherlands, 15% in the central Netherlands and 10% in Frisia.’ 

The strong link between the Dutch and English – S1688 [U198] – may have its origin from firstly, the taking of 32,000 Midianite virgin girls and inserting them into the Israelite gene pool. Secondly, Zipporah’s two sons with Moses, may have chosen to ultimately dwell in Midian and also marry Midianite wives. The differences we have just read between Belgium – particularly the Flemish, and Walloons – compared with the Dutch R1b clades, is highlighting the fact that Belgium is the distinct brother Jokshan, Sheba and Dedan and the Netherlands is the separate and different^^ brother, Midian.

‘Here is breakdown of R1b subclades in Belgium from the Brabant Y-DNA Project. About half of Belgian R1b-P312 belong to the U152(S28) subclade [associated with France, Switzerland and Italy]… with a slightly higher frequency in Wallonia (16%) and Luxembourg (14%) than in Flanders (10%), and it keeps decreasing as one moves north to the southern Netherlands (6%), the central Netherlands (3.5%), and is almost absent from Frisia (1%). A bit over half of U152 in Wallonia and over 80% of U152 in Flanders belong to the L2 subclade. Wallonia seems to have more diversity, with a higher presence of typically Italic/Roman subclades like Z56 and Z192, but also of… Z36. Autosomal ancestry analysis of Belgian individuals who tested with 23andMe shows that Walloons are much more likely than the Flemings to have a small percentage of Italian DNA (typically 2 to 4% + a few more percents of ‘broadly southern European’)…

The Atlantic Celtic R1b-L21 (S145) [M529]lineage, most commonly found in the British Isles, reaches its maximum in the western half of Belgium (10%), including Flemish and Walloon Brabant, then decreases to 7-8% to the east of the country. Its frequency falls to 3-5% in the Netherlands, with little difference nationwide. Most of these lineages are probably of Gaulish [Celtic] origin, although some could have been brought by the Vikings from the British Isles, especially in coastal areas. The Vikings are well known to have taken slaves among the British and Irish populations, which they brought with them to their colonies (e.g. Iceland, Normandy) and back to Scandinavia. Nowadays, over one quarter of Icelandic paternal lineages and half of the maternal lineages descend from those slaves [Scottish and Irish] brought by the Vikings. In Norway the proportion is about 15% and 30% respectively. It would not be surprising if the Vikings also brought slaves to places they founded on the continent, like Bruges, explaining how some typically Scottish or Irish subclades of L21 ended up there.’ 

‘R1a was the other main Indo-European lineage… the (southern) Dutch and the Belgians have considerably lower levels of haplogroup R1a than all the Germans. Over half of the R1a in the Benelux belongs to the West Germanic L664 subclade. Other lineages include the Scandinavian Z284 subclade and the Central/Eastern European lineages M417 and Z280. Only a few R1a samples (from Luxembourg, Utrecht) belonged to the Z2123 subclade of R1a-Z93… One R1a sample from Amsterdam belonged to CTS6, the Jewish subclade of R1a, also under Z93.^

Haplogroup I1, one of the most reliably Germanic lineages, has nearly identical frequencies in Flanders (12%) and Wallonia (10.5%), but is slightly higher in the Netherlands (16.5%), although that is still a far cry from the 35% observed in Scandinavia. Only Luxembourg has [a] surprisingly low frequency of I1 (2.5%)… The Nordic CTS6364 clade (including L22) was found in 18.5% of Dutch and 33% of Belgian I1 samples. The West Germanic Z58 branch accounted for 20% of Belgian samples (Z60>L573, Z138 and Z382 clades), and 63% of Dutch samples. Half of the Dutch Z58 belonged to the Z140 clade, which so far hasn’t been found in Belgium. Z140 is found chiefly in Denmark, the Netherlands and Britain, and to a lower extent Germany. It seems that it is mostly a Frisian and Anglo-Saxon clade***. The rest of Dutch Z58 belonged mostly to Z138 and Z382. The more East Germanic Z63 branch made up 13% and 12% of Belgian and Dutch samples, respectively. Overall, Belgians appear to carry a considerably higher percentage of Nordic/Scandinavian subclades of I1, while the Dutch possess mostly West Germanic clades.^^ This could be explained by the higher percentage of Frankish ancestry in Belgium, since the Franks originated in Denmark. The majority of the Dutch I1 might be native to the Netherlands itself or neighbouring Saxony.’ 

Haplogroup J1 is one of the most common Jewish lineages, alongside E-M34 and J2a1. In the Benelux, J1 was found almost exclusively around Amsterdam and Antwerp, two cities known for welcoming Jewish immigrants in past centuries, while J2 was also higher in both in Holland and in the province of Antwerp. It is therefore likely that the differential of 2% for these lineages in Holland and Antwerp are of Jewish origin.^’

Khazaria, Dutch & Frisian Genetics, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Dutch people live in the northwestern European country called the Netherlands. Traditionally Protestant by religion, they differ from the traditionally Catholic Dutch-speaking Flemings of the Flanders region of Belgium, a neighboring country. From 1815 until 1830, however, both countries were part of a United Kingdom of the Netherlands, and until 1581 the lands were also united.

The Dutch language, with many similarities to English, is part of a linguistic continuum that stretches into northern Germany, as varieties of Low German are distinct from the High German dialects/languages of southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and Luxembourg. The Dutch people are linguistically and culturally distinct from the Frisian people who also inhabit the Netherlands. (Many centuries ago, the Frisians had their own independent country.)

The Dutch people themselves are split into multiple autosomal DNA clusters, with a notable difference between North Dutch and South Dutch people. North Dutch people autosomally cluster close to Frisians, English, and Danes, whereas South Dutch and the Flemish autosomally cluster close to Walloons and West Germans. According to Piotr Kapuscinski, this is caused by the ancient division between North Sea Germanic (Ingvaeonic) peoples and Wesser-Rhine Germanic (Istvaeonic) peoples, and he notes that North Dutch descend from Frisians, Angles, Saxons, and Norse (all Germanic peoples) whereas South Dutch descend from Celts and Germanic Franks. Therefore, North Dutch and South Dutch don’t cluster close to one another on autosomal plots of population averages.

Genetically, R1b haplogroups are very commonly found in the Y chromosomes of Frisian males just as in the males of other ethnic groups in this geographic region (Atlantic-bordering Europe). As one would expect, participants in the Frisian Waddenproject often have R1b. The “Frisian Modal Haplotype” (FMH), called R1b-8, was discovered by Kenneth Nordtvedt and is tested by looking at only 6 markers. Below R1b-8 on the genetic tree is R-U106, and a level below R-U106 on the tree are subclades including R-L47, R-L48, R-L48x, and R-L148. The primary Frisian Y-DNA haplogroup is the R1b subclade called U106/S21, defined by its mutations U106 (and L48) and negative for P312. It’s coded by Family Tree DNA as haplogroup R1b1b2a1a. U106 is also found among partial descendants of Frisians like English people, as well as in parts of Benelux, Germany, and Denmark. Some other Frisian men have the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 which is most common in Scandinavia. 

“Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration.” Molecular Biology and Evolution 19:7, multiple authors, (2002): pages 1008-1021. English and Welsh people are among those studied and compared to each other. They also collected samples from Norwegians and Frisians. The Frisian samples came from 94 males who live in Friesland in the northern part of the Netherlands. Excerpt from the Abstract: 

“When we compared our data with an additional 177 samples collected in Friesland and Norway, we found that the Central English and Frisian*** samples were statistically indistinguishable.” Excerpt from the Discussion section: “The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent. Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity and the low Central English-North Welsh affinity.”’

We will return in subsequent chapters to address the red hair alleles of the Scots, the J1 and J2 Haplogroups of the Jews, the English-Frisian link as well as the English-North Welsh relationship. As of writing, I have not found any substantial material on the Haplogroups for the Afrikaners in South Africa, or the indigenous inhabitants of Brussels, the Leummim. One interpretation of the name Leumm is ‘countries without water.’ Which is interesting, when compared against a landlocked territory, like Brussels. The graph below of regional genetic variation in Belgium reveals the closeness of Brussels to Flanders and Wallonia, yet also their distinctiveness from the Flemish and Walloons.

 

With regard to South Africa we have already covered the Black citizens [refer Chapter XII Canaan] and we can compare with the Y-DNA Haplogroups of the White citizens; which include those of British descent. We will endeavour to obtain a partial picture at least, by isolating out the Black and British elements if possible and with what we learn about the Dutch of the Netherlands. 

The top seven main mtDNA Haplogroups for Iceland, Scandinavia, Benelux and the Netherlands.

Iceland: H [37.7%] – J [13.7%] – T2 [10.1%] – K [9.8%] – U5 [7.7%] –

I [3.9%] – HV [3.6%] 

Norway: H [45.7%] – U5 [11.4%] – J [10.5%] – T2 [7.6%] –

K [5.4%] – HVO+V [ 3.8%] – U4 [2.7%] 

Sweden: H [45.8%] – U5 [12.1%] – J [7.7%] – K [6.4%] –

HVO+V [5%] – T2 [4%] – U4 [3%] 

Denmark: H [47.3%] – J [13.4%] – K [8.9%] – T2 [5.8%] –

U5 [5.8%] – HVO+V [3.6%] – U2 [2.7%]

Belgium & Luxembourg: H [46.9%] – K [12.1] – T2 [9.4%] –

J [6%] – U [5.4%] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%]

Netherlands: H [45%] – T2 [12%] – J [11%] – K [10%] –

HVO+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%]

                             H       HVO+V      J          K        T2       U4       U5         I

Finland         36             7             6           5         2          1        21          4

Iceland              38             2           14         10       10         3          8          4 

Netherlands     45             8           11          10       12         7          8          3     

Norway             46             4            11           5        8          3         11          2

Sweden             46             5             8           6        4          3         12          3

Denmark          47             4            13          9         6          2          6          2

Benelux            47             3              6         12        9          3          3          2

The six sons of Keturah show a close resemblance in their maternal Haplogroups. Iceland or Ishbak, is the only one that deviates slightly, which we have addressed with their marked high percentage of Scandinavian fathers and Celtic mothers ancestry. 

The addition of Keturah’s possible family’s descendants – from Anar or Ashcol – modern Finland’s mtDNA Haplogroups shows both the plausibility of the previously speculated line of reasoning and at the same time, the variable difference that shows Finland is not a mutual descendant with the other seven nations but rather, their mutual progenitor with their father Abraham. The give away Haplogroups being H and U5.

                                 H     J    T2   U5     K     HVO+V    HV    U4     T1

Switzerland          48   12     9      7       5           5           0.5       3       2

France                   44     8     6     8       9           5              3        3       2

Italy                       40     8     8     5       8           3              3        2       3

Iceland                  38    14  10     8     10           2              2        3    0.5

Netherlands         45    11   12     8     10           8                        7        2

Norway                 46    11    8     11      5            4          0.2        3        1 

Sweden                 46     8    4     12      6            5          0.5        3       3

Denmark              47    13   6       6      9            4                         2       1

Benelux                47      6   9       3    12            3          0.7         3       2  

Comparing Abraham and Keturah’s descendants with Abraham’s brothers, Nahor and Haran highlights the re-occurring genetic relationship amongst cousins, which can be closer, than those between brothers. The Swiss from Haran are aligned more closely in mtDNA with Medan-Denmark than either France from Lot or Italy from Nahor and by degree with also Zimran-Norway and Midian-Netherlands. 

                            H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HVO+V

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.5          7            5

Denmark          47     13       6        9                      6            4

Norway             46     11       8        5      0.2         11            4

Netherlands     45     11      12      10                      8           8

Benelux            47       6        9      12     0.7           3            3

Sweden             46      8       4        6      0.5         12            5

Brazil                 44     11                            2                        11

Portugal            44      7       6        6      0.1           7            5

Spain                 44      7       6        6          1           8           8

France               44     8       6         9         3           8           5

Poland               44     8       7        4                     10           5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2        10           4

Ukraine            39      8        8        5                    10           4

Greece               41    10        7        5                      6           2

Italy                   40     8        8        8         3           5           3

Iceland              38   14       10      10        2           8           2

Romania          37     11        5        8                      7           4

Finland            36      6        2        5                    20           7

Turkey              31      9        4        6         5          3            1

Iran                   17     14        5         7         7          3            1

From the previous chapter: ‘A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe… Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe – in the main – exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.’ 

The addition of Keturah’s children proves this correlation to be true, as they now bookend with Switzerland. The exception being Iceland, that has more in common with cousins Nahor-Italy and somewhat surprisingly sitting between Italy and Romania. I have added Finland for the first time since Chapter XXIV Arphaxad, to highlight its unique mtDNA sequence and its complete difference with the other Nordic nations; sandwiched between Romania and Turkey. Its percentage of U5 remaining an anomaly.

Turning to Y-DNA Haplogroups and continuing from the last chapter: ‘“Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b that is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b.” R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup, in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3% and is carried by over 110 million European men. Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. 

The time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup R1b-U106 (S21) is more frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; R-U198 is prevalent in England, while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula; R-U152 is more frequent in Switzerland, France and Italy, and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. As we progress through the descendants of Shem, we will find the levels of R1b vary, though gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels of the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups for some of the nations we will study. R-M269 stretches across Europe, with levels increasing as one heads westwards. R-U106 stretches from Central Europe westwards.

Turkey and Russia were the first two nations and both have lower levels of R1b, possessing higher levels of other Haplogroups, for instance for Turkey, it is Haplogroup J at 31% and for Russia it is Haplogroups R1a at 46% and N1c1 at 23%. Similarly for Ukraine and Poland where each has R1a at 44% and 58% respectively and Ukraine has  combined Haplogroups I1 and I2 at 26%. 

Italy was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and shows a marked difference with eastern Europe. The north to south axis is as important as the east to west and this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy which is further south; yet less R1b [M269] overall as it is the descendants of Peleg, Aram and the mixed line of Caphtor that have the highest levels of R1b [refer Chapters XV Casluh & Caphtor and XXIII Aram].

The addition of Switzerland and France highlights the north to south and east to west pattern we have noted. The Swiss exhibit higher levels of the Germanic R-U106 as reflected by their geographic position in central Europe; similar with the Czechs. Switzerland’s position northwards of both France and Italy is reflected by their higher level of R-M269. The French and Italians unsurprisingly, share an almost exact measure of R1b M269 and U106.’

Turkey:           R-M269   14% — R-U106   0.4%

Russia:            R-M269   21% — R-U106   5.4%

Slovenia          R-M269   17% — R-U106      4%

Poland             R-M269   23% — R-U106     8% 

Ukraine           R-M269   25% — R-U106     9%

Czech               R-M269   28% — R-U106   14% 

France             R-M269   52% — R-U106     7%

Italy                  R-M269   53% — R-U106    6%

Swiss                R-M269   58% — R-U106   13%

Netherlands    R-M269   54% — R-U106  35%

Denmark         R-M269   34% — R-U106   17%

The Dutch possess a similar percentage of R1b-M269 like their relatives the French, Swiss and Italians. The Germanic clade of R-U106 is especially high in the Netherlands, partially due to the Frisian element of the population. In fact it is a far higher percentage even than in Germany, which is similar to Denmark’s. Denmark exhibits a higher level of R-U106 in keeping with their position in both northern and western Europe. Unexpectedly, the Danish percentage of R-M269 is far lower than 50%. The reason is partially due to the fact that Denmark has a higher percentage of R1a of 15%, compared to say the Netherlands with 4%, and mainly due to the very high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup I1 – indicative of northern Europe – at 34%; compared to the Netherlands with 16.5% and France at 9%.

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the six sons of Abraham and his second wife, Keturah. Belgium’s Haplogroups are near identical to the Flemish percentages; therefore figures are included for both Flanders and Wallonia.

Iceland: R1b [42%] – I1 [ 29%] – R1a [23%] – I2a2 [4%] – N1c1 [1%] – Q [1%] 

Norway: R1b [32%] – I1 [31.5%] – R1a [25.5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – N1c1 [2.5%] –

G2a [1%] – E1b1b [1%] – Q [1%] – J2 [0.5%] 

Sweden: I1 [37%] – R1b [21.5%] – R1a [16%] – N1c1 [7%] – I2a2 [3.5%] –

E1b1b [3%] – J2 [2.5%] – Q [2.5%] – I2a1 [1.5%] – G2a [1%] 

Denmark: I1 [34%] – R1b [33%] – R1a [15%] – I2a2 [5.5%] – J2 [3%] –

E1b1b [2.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – I2a1 [2%] – N1c1 [1%] – Q [1%] 

Netherlands: R1b [49%] – I1 [16.5%] – I2a2 [6.5%] – G2a [4.5%] – R1a [4%] –

J2 [3.5%] – E1b1b [3.5%] – I2a1 [1%]- T1a [1%] – J1 [0.5%]

Flanders: R1b [61%] – I1 [12%] – E1b1b [5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – R1a [4%] –

G2a [4%] – J2 [4%] – I2a1 [3%] – J1 [1%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] – L [0.5%] 

Wallonia: R1b [59.5%] – I1 [10.5%] – R1a [7%] – G2a [5.5%] – E1b1b [5.5%] –

I2a2 [4.5%] – T1a [3.5%] – J2 [2%] – I2a1 [1.5%] 

Luxembourg: R1b [60.5%] – J2 [8%] – I2a2 [5.5%] – G2a [5.5%] –

E1b1b [5%] – R1a [2.5%] – I1 [2.5%] – I2a1 [2.5%] – J1 [2.5%] 

                                 R1b      R1a     I1     I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2       J1      G2a    

Finland                     4           5       28                  0.5        0.5                                                                               

Sweden                   22        16        37       2            4            3        3                     1       

Norway                   32        26       32       5            4            1     0.5                     1         

Denmark                33        15        34       2            6            3        3                     3        

Iceland                   42         23       29                     4                                                      

Netherlands          49          4        17        1            7            4         4     0.5          5         

Flanders                 61          4        12        3            5           5          4        1          4         

Wallonia                60          7         11       2            5            6          2                   6         

Luxembourg          61          3          3       3            6            5          8       3          6        

A comparison of the main Y-DNA Haplogroups reveals and supports a number of points. Finland is obviously an outlier; even more apparent than as already shown by its mtDNA Haplogroups. Its percentage of Haplogroup N is extraordinarily high and indicative of a very northerly location in Europe such as the Baltic nations and Russia who border Finland. Finland also shares a very similar and high percentage of Haplogroup I1 shared by all the Nordic nations. The three Scandinavian countries are all uniquely I1 driven, thus explaining the lesser percentages for R1b. 

Even the Netherlands has a relatively high percentage of I1. Sweden shows the impact of mixing and intermarriage with the Finns; whereas, the Norwegians less so. In the past, both Sweden and Iceland very probably had Haplogroup percentages near identical with Norway and Denmark.

The R1b percentages support the premise that Belgium and Luxembourg comprise the descendants of Jokshan; as their levels are all comparable yet distinct from their other five siblings. Jokshan had two sons, Sheba and Dedan had three sons. Thus providing four lines of people and with the other five sons, making a total of nine. Sheba equating to the Flemish, Letush to the Walloons, Leumm to the Brussels Capital region and the Asshurim to Luxembourg. 

                        R1b    E1b1b   J1 & J2   I1 & I2    G2a    R1a    T1a   N1C1

Spain               69          7           10             7            3         2        3

Luxembourg  61          5            11           12            6         3        

Flanders         61           5             5          20            4         4        1            

Wallonia        60           6             2          18            6          7       4            

France             59           8            8          16            6          3        1      

Portugal          56         14           13            7            7          2        3

Brazil               54         11           10            9            5          4      

Switzerland    50           8           4           24           8           4        1        1

N Italy             50         11           12           12           8          5        2

Netherlands   49          4             5          25            5          4        1   

Iceland            42                                      33                      23                  1           

Italy                 39         14           19           10           9          4        3

Denmark        33           3             3           42          3         15                   1              

Norway           32           1             1            41           1        26                   7                

S Italy              28         19          26             7          11          3        3

Sweden           22           3            3           43            1        16                   7       

Turkey             16         11           33             6          11          8        3          

Greece             16         21           26           15           6         12        5  

Romania         16         14           15           34           3         18        1        2

Poland             13          4             3            16           2         58       1        4

Iran                   10          7         32              1          10          16       3        1 

Ukraine             8           7           5            26           3          44       1        6

Russia                6           3           3           20           1           46              23

Finland              4           1                         30                          4              62

Spain remains the bookend for the western most nations of Europe with a high percentage of R1b and Russia at the other end of the nations of Europe with low R1b, is replaced by Finland. This is the final piece of scientific evidence that Finland sits genetically with the nations of eastern Europe and is not a sibling of the other Nordic nations that descend from Abraham. Finland’s high N1C1 and I Haplogroup percentages  cement its eastern position as does its Finno-Ugric language group. 

The Benelux nations of Sheba and Dedan are grouped together as expected and share a sequence similar to related neighbours France; including the Dutch speaking Flemish, which is a surprise. Most people, myself included would have thought a closer affinity to the Netherlands would be confirmed. Interestingly, the Netherlands as Midian is more closely aligned to Haran’s descendants the Swiss. ‘A situation where… cousins [can] exhibit similar traits… [having] more in common… than they have with their own siblings’ due to a closer alignment of the main haplogroups. Iceland remains an anomaly due to its mixed Scandinavian and Celtic ancestry and the three Scandinavian nations, Zimran, Shuah and Medan overall, have as much in common with southern Italy as they do with northern Italy. 

The main Y-DNA Haplogroups for South Africa are: 

E1b1a – R1b – E2 – A1 – B2 – E1b1b – J. The Haplogroups E, B and A are reflective of the Black population; R1b and J of the White people and E1b1b a shared Haplogroup. There is diversity just within the Black population of South Africa as it contains the Bantu, Zulu, Xhosa and Khoisan peoples. 

Khoisan:  E1b1a [36%] – A1 [33%] – E1b1b [15%] – B2 [12%] – E2 [4%]

Xhosa:      E1b1a [54%] – E2 [28%] – A1 [5%] – B2 [5%] – E1b1b [5%]

Bantu:      E1b1a [55%] – E2 [21%] – B2 [11%] – A1 [5%] – E1b1b [4%]

Zulu:         E1b1a [55%] – E2 [21%] – B2 [20%] – A1 [3%] 

White South African: R1b [51.6%] – E1b1b [9.6%] – J [3.8%] – E1b1a [0.6%] – E1a [0.6%]

Netherlands: R1b [49%] – I1 [16.5%] – I2 [7.5%] – J [4%] – E1b1b [3.5%] 

Disregarding the British factor in South Africa for a moment and using the predominant element of the Dutch for White South Africans, we can observe the close similarity between the Haplogroups R1b and J. Haplogroup I was missing from the data available though it would be safe to assume it is quite high amongst the White population as the British descended peoples also possess relatively high percentages. What is of interest, is the higher percentage of E1b1b and is probably attributable to admixture with the indigenous population. 

It may also be a clue to the slightly different composition of the Afrikaner to the native Dutch and whether the Kenite factor is hidden there. The inclusion of E1b1a and the rarer E1a are certainly evidence of mixing between the original and more recent peoples in South Africa. 

Inside the ancestry of South Africa’s Afrikaners, The Conversation, May 21, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘By comparing the Afrikaners in our study to 1,670 individuals from 32 populations across the world we found that 4.7% of Afrikaner DNA has a non-European origin. That may seem like a small percentage, but 98.7% of the Afrikaners were admixed.

The admixture between European and Khoe-San was more common than church records suggest. In our study, though only 1.3% of Afrikaner genes came from the Khoe-San, most Afrikaners contained some Khoe-San genes.

The highest non-European contribution (1.7%) came from South Asia, or India. This reflects colonial men’s stated preference for marrying freed Indian slaves during the founding years. A little less than 1% of Afrikaner genes have an East Asian (Chinese or Japanese) origin.

The contribution of West and East Africa is the lowest, at 0.8%. This is likely to stem from the almost 18,000 slaves imported from Africa’s west and east coasts. The fraction of genes from West Africa is slightly higher than from East Africa, reflecting the fact that while West African slaves were few, they arrived four generations before slaves from East Africa.

A common perception about Afrikaners is that they stem from very few ancestors, which would have resulted in inbreeding. Inbreeding results in long stretches of the paternal and maternal chromosomes being identical to each other. By looking at the lengths of identical stretches, it is clear that Afrikaners are as variable as the average European. This is in part due to admixture between non-Europeans and Europeans, but also because Europeans came from all over Europe.

The strongest European genetic contribution is from northwestern Europe, with the most similar population being the Swiss German population. This signal could also be interpreted as a mixture between German, Dutch and French populations – as genealogical records indicate.

In conclusion, despite laws prohibiting mixed marriages from as early as 1658, and discrimination that culminated in the apartheid system, these genetic analyses confirm that most Afrikaners have admixed ancestry. Genealogical information has indicated as much, but these genetic findings are irrefutable.’

For now – until an exhaustive study of the Afrikaner in conjunction with the Dutch is available – the true identity of the Dutch Afrikaner remains a tantalising mystery.

It has been said that ‘the people in Europe the most like the English, are the Dutch.’ The close tie between England and the Netherlands is one that will become clearer when we study the United Kingdom. Another saying – and one the Dutch may not be particularly fond, though I do not intend any slight – is that ‘the Dutch are Germans with clogs.’ As we progress, the close relationship between the Dutch and the Deutsch will become apparent. The ancient link between the Hivites and Hittites will be clarified, the inter-changing terms, Midianites and Ishmaelites – and of ‘Arabia’ and the ‘wilderness’ – will be explained, the neighbouring states of the wealthy Etruscans and formidable, militaristic Rome, will leap alive and the true identity of Ishmael will fascinate like no other.

Turn your ear toward wisdom, and stretch your mind toward understanding. Call out for insight, and cry aloud for understanding. Seek it like silver; search for it like hidden treasure. Then you will understand… and discover the knowledge of God. 

Proverbs 2:2-5 Common English Bible

© Orion Gold 2020-2022 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Rhesus Negative Blood Factor

It was in 1616, that William Harvey – an English physician and scientist who made influential contributions in anatomy and physiology – confirmed what was already in the scriptures and declared that ‘life is in the blood.’ 

‘Any man… who eats [or mingles] any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats the blood, and I will cut him off from the midst of his people, for the life of every living thing is in the blood…’

Leviticus 17:10-11 New English Translation

Blood services the body in delivering oxygen and nutrients. It also polices, by attacking what it perceives to be invaders. This perception of what is an invader, varies from person to person. The immune system is complex and based on recognising certain proteins and removing those it does not recognise. What sets of proteins blood removes, determines your blood type. There are three basic types of blood, A, B and O. With minor variations these combine to make thirty types of blood. Worth noting that Noah had three sons and there are some twenty-six genetic racial lines.

Blood that is designated O is a universal blood type and the most common [40%] among the earth’s human inhabitants. O positive is also deemed the oldest blood type. Though some consider A the oldest, then B and O the most recent. O blood does not possess the antigens of either A or B type blood. The opposite blood type does have both antigens and is called AB. 

Antigens are molecules that the body responds, in producing an antibody or a cell, to destroy the antigen. There are about six hundred antigens, though most are not significant to typing blood.

Blood is also designated as either positive or negative. It depends on a single protein – on the surface of red blood cells – the D antigen, called the Rh factor. Rh factor used to be called the Rhesus factor, after the monkey that was used to learn about this substance in 1937. If it is present, it is Rh positive and if the protein is absent, it is called Rh negative. This factor can be problematic in blood transfusions and conditions of the newborn where it can be life threatening. 

Women who are blood type O or Rh negative are at risk of frequent miscarriages, especially if their partner is an antigen-positive blood type and thus the foetus is also Rh positive. As a mother is not exposed to antigens until the first childbirth, it’s only when she’s pregnant for the second time that problems could present. Alternatively, if the baby goes to term, there is a risk of haemolytic disease for the newborn – when the baby’s blood cells are destroyed by antibodies from the mother’s blood.

Curiously, Rh negative blood type O, is considered the purest blood known to mankind and is the universal donor blood for all blood types. Rh- factor is something called a recessive trait. Someone who is Rh+ might have a hidden Rh- in their DNA. If that person and his or her partner both pass an Rh- down to a child, that child will be Rh negative. Even though at least one parent is Rh+ factor. There are two types of Rh positive men. Fifty-five percent of men are heterozygous, whereby their genetics allow them to produce an Rh- child fifty percent of the time and Rh+ the other fifty percent. The second type of male is homozygous and produces only Rh+ offspring.

Having pure O Rh negative blood means ones ancestors are also O Rh negative and why it is very rare. A higher percent of this pure blood survives in certain sections of people, for instance in old royal family lines. O, A and B Rh positive are all common as A and B Rh negative are also very rare with O Rh-. The exception is blood type AB that is very rare whether one is Rh- or Rh+.

O-positive is most prevalent in Latinos then Africans and less in Asians and Caucasians. Whereas O-negative is most prevalent in Caucasians and least in Asians. A-positive and A-negative are most prevalent in Caucasians, then Latinos. B-positive is most prevalent in Asians and Africans, though B-negative more prevalent in Caucasians and least in Asians. AB-positive is most prevalent in Asians and AB-negative least in Asians and most in Caucasians. In summary, the most predominant blood types for the four racial strains are: 

Africans:       O-positive, B-positive

Latinos:         O-positive, A positive 

Caucasians:  A-positive – O-negative, A-negative, B-negative, AB-negative

Asians:          B-positive, AB-positive

These findings reveal that all four negative blood types are predominant amongst Caucasian people. Latinos and Africans who are related through Ham, both dominate O-positive. Caucasians dominate A-positive – then Latinos – and Asians dominate B-positive – then Africans – and also AB positive.

According to distribution of blood types per blood donors:

O+   37%

A+   36%

B+     9 %

AB+  3%

O-      7%

A-      6%

B-       1%

AB-    1%

As all mankind descended from the same ancestors, that is Adam and Eve, our blood should be compatible – humankind would all have the same blood… but, we don’t. Rh Positive blood can be traced back to the Rhesus monkey and other primates; Rh negative blood cannot, it cannot be traced to anywhere else in nature – and cannot be cloned.

As one cannot mate a mule with a mule – the result from a horse and a donkey – one cannot breed two mixed species even if they are the same. The result as mentioned, is Haemolytic disease, a condition where the immune system attacks an Rh positive baby, inherited from the father, if the mother is Rh negative. The mother’s blood collects antibodies to destroy an alien presence, like it would a virus. A staggering situation and why would a mother’s body sabotage and annihilate her own flesh and blood – unless it isn’t. For a Rh- woman with a Rh- man has an even smaller chance of having a baby born alive.

Nowhere else in nature, does this occur… apart from animal hybrids. This fact, by itself, indicates deliberate outside interference of cross-breeding between two similar but genetically different species – a hybrid. This fact puts a serious dent in the evolutionary process as Rh Negative blood shows that at some point in mans’ supposed ‘evolution’, evolution was paused while an intervention took place and then it was restarted. 

The obvious points in history that this may have happened are a. when Cain’s Homo sapiens line integrated with the Homo neanderthalensis line of people from day Six of creation, b. at the time of Noah and the genetic split between his three sons, c. the time of Peleg and the scattering of the nations from Babel in Mesopotamia, or d. could it be a much more recent event and possibly linked with the birth of Moab and Ammon?

As we have previously discovered the link between Neanderthal man and the East Asians today, it is worth noting an article reprinted from Archaeology, entitled: Genetic Study Examines Neanderthal Blood Types, Stephanie Mazieres, July 30, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Marseille, France – According to a Cosmos Magazine report, paleoanthropologist Silvana Condemi and her colleagues at Aix-Marseille University used information from three Neanderthal genomes and one 64,000-year-old Denisovan genome to investigate their blood types. Only one Neanderthal’s blood had been typed in the past, and was found to be type O under the ABO system used to classify the blood of modern humans. Since all chimpanzees are type A, and all gorillas are type Bit was assumed that all Neanderthals were type O. 

But the new study found that the Neanderthal woman’s 100,000-year-old remains from Siberia’s Denisova Cave had type A blood; the Neanderthal woman’s 48,000-year-old remains from Siberia’s Chagyrskaya Cave also had type A blood; and the Neanderthal woman’s 64,000-year-old remains from Croatia’s Vindija Cave had type B blood. All three Neanderthals, however,carried a now-rare Rhesus type called “Rhesus plus incomplete,” which had only been found in the DNA of one member of Australia’s Western Desert Aboriginal people. “At the time, it was assumed to be a new Rhesus type that had arisen in Australia,” Condemi said. The rare Rhesus type has also now been found in 80 people from Papua New Guinea. “Now we know that it had existed in the past and was lost,” Condemi explained.’

What is relevant about this finding is that the Aborigine and Papua New Guineans are primarily descendants of Cush from Ham, though they have mixed with descendants from Javan of Japheth as shown by their Haplogroups. The peoples of East Asia are descended from Japheth, and also possess the highest levels of Neanderthal DNA. Hence the Rhesus plus incomplete may be linked with Japheth rather than Ham [refer Chapter VII Javan and Chapter XIII Cush & Phut].

One researcher considered the theory that the Neanderthals were Rh negative and that they are the key to our ancestry. They called the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig, Germany and found out that not only were the two specimens examined Rh+, but they were homozygotes, meaning they didn’t even carry the Rh- blood factor recessively. In fact, the amount of Neanderthal DNA is very high within populations with very low or no Rh negatives amongst them. For instance, the Native American tribes have absolutely zero Rh- negative genes in their populations. Added to this, it is now agreed upon that the differences between the Neanderthal tribes was actually greater than those of human ethnic groups.

In northern Spain and southern France amongst the Basque, there is the highest concentration of the [rr] Rh negative factor in the world, some 32% – the range depending on location, of 21-43%. Up to 60% of the Basque carry one [r] negative gene. Only about 16% of Europeans have a Rh negative group. 

As little as 3% of Africans and 1% of Asian or Native American descendants have a Rh negative group. Added to this, the Basque exhibit substantially lower levels of Type B blood and a higher incidence of Type O blood, of 55%, which is very similar to Latinos of 53%.

Recall in chapter III Tiras, that the Amerindian exhibits the following: ‘Type O happens to be the primary blood type among the indigenous populations of the Americas, in particular within Central and South America populations, with a frequency of nearly one hundred percent. In contrast, in indigenous North American populations the frequency of type A ranges from sixteen to eighty-two percent. This data supports the initial Amerindians descended from an isolated population with a minimal number of individuals.’ Thus it would seem that a restricted gene pool maintains a predominant genetic factor, whether it be a particular blood type or rhesus factor.

Today’s Basques are an offspring of an original group which could well have been one hundred percent Rh- negative. They exhibit the highest Rh- negative factor in Europe when compared with other groups. There are a few communities in Switzerland and the Netherlands with similarly high percentages. The Swiss finding is pertinent since they are also descended from Haran, as are the French via Haran’s son Lot.

On a national level Australia has invariably topped the percentage of Rh- in the world with 19.5%. A couple of factors offered as likely causes are: 1. A high percentage of Australians have Scottish and Irish ancestry. With Scotland not being an independent country, their high number of Rh- negatives impacts the percentage. 2. Some believe that amongst the prisoners England re-located to Australia, a very high percentage were Rh negative. Though the data for Poland from a 1997 study, has placed them at an overall frequency of 19.67%.

Another group often mentioned are the Berber tribes in the Atlas mountain region of Morocco. It has been claimed that they have a 40% Rh- factor; whereas on a national average, the Moroccans are approximately 9% Rh negative. A more recent study has contradicted this high percentage with a result of 5.5% Rhesus negative. 

The previous observation of a high frequency of blood type O was confirmed; which may have been impacted by the inclusion of 40% African admixture. Thus, claims that Berber groups have unusually high numbers of Rh negatives should not be counted until a new, large scale definitive study is conducted.

Of interest, is the high percentage of Rh- people in Ireland and Scotland. Particularly, the peoples of northwest Ireland, the Highland Scots and the western Islanders of Norway, who all have between 16 and 25% Rh negatives. The Norwegians are accounted by those Scots, who were transported to Norway as slaves. Scotland is a country where there is a strong variation of blood type frequencies based on location. Between twenty and a little bit over thirty percent of Rh- can be expected in most of the extreme northern and western regions. In the west coast region of Inverness, where the Rh negative percentage has been measured at 30.44%, the percentage of blood type O has also been noted as substantially high. Ireland is purported to have around 25% Rh negatives in several reports while others demonstrate a percentage nearer 15-16%. However studies have indicated that Northern Ireland has a high percentage of approximately 27%. The following list shows those countries and regions with the highest rates of Rhesus negative.

Basque Country

[Atlas Mountain region of Moroccan Berbers – to be confirmed]

Scotland 

Northern Ireland

[Parts of Switzerland  and the Rhone Valley – 26.5%]

Catalonia 20-25%

[Parts of the Netherlands; Bunschoten-Spakenburg – 25%]

Poland

Australia – high proportion of Irish – 30% of population – and Scottish

[Parts of Brazil with high proportion of Basque – 19%]

[Parts of Chile – high proportion of Basque]

Republic of Ireland – Republic

[Sinai Peninsula Bedouins; what is interesting about this particular group is the similarity between their male DNA and the male DNA of Cohanim Jews]

[Scandinavia – specifically Southwest Norway, from Scottish slave ancestry]

Notice on the world map that the predominant Rh- levels are in all the nations descended from Shem and specifically his sons Arphaxad and Aram. Though Aram is misleading, as it is the inclusion of the Basque in Spain and Brazil that increases the percentages in those countries.

Iceland is worth noting in that only one percent of its population is Rh-. A very low figure compared to Scandinavia. It is perplexing, as two-thirds of its population is Scandinavian and one-third Irish or Scottish descent. These peoples range from 16 to 25% and above, yet Iceland contradicts the pattern. We will learn in Chapter XXVII Abraham, that Iceland is a distinct nation in its own right and a classification of either Scandinavian or Celtic though migratory and historically correct, is inaccurate with regard to their ethnic identity. 

Celts and the Basques, James Vandale, 2006 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the geneticist Luiga Luca Cavalli-Sforza has completed a gene map of the peoples of Europe… The genetic boundary between Basques and non-Basques is very sharp on the Spanish sideOn the French side, the boundary is more diffuse: it shades off gradually toward the Garonne in the north.’ 

These findings are entirely in agreement with what is known of the history of the  distinctly different and unique, Basque language. It is the oldest language in Europe, and its are unknown. As the languages in neighbouring countries in Europe show no resemblance to the Basque language, it has become an inexplicable mystery to the linguist. 

‘The people of the Basque region have a greater than 50 percent concentration of the RH negative gene… Basques are believed to have been the originators of the RH negative blood factor – the original genetic pool from which this factor came. While RH negatives are a small minority in the “white” and other races, and practically non-existent in “orientals”, the current Basques still are over 33 % RH negative. [A] salient genetic feature is the shape and sutures (bone joints) of cranial bones of Basques… [and a] skeletal difference is the tendency to having a thicker breast bone.’
 

Two very important points addressed, is that the Basque are more like the French than the Spanish. This supports their link with Moab and Ammon over Gether [refer Chapter XXIII Aram]. If the Basque are the originators of the Rh- factor then this would date the origin to exactly 3,900 years ago and the births of Moab and Ammon [1878/1877 BCE – 2022].

When blood type is inherited from parents, the factor element of the blood is the most consistent characteristic passed on to offspring. Variations or aberrations are extremely rare. The majority of people – as high as 94% – have Rh positive blood. As blood type is one of the least mutable human characteristics, the big question facing scientists remains: where did the Rh negative factor come from?

Due to the high percentage of European numbers, some conclude this may be when a Caucasian line was introduced into the genetic code. Dates proposed for this range from 35,000 – 5,000 years ago. The fact that a number of people lack this factor is a puzzling phenomenon that appears to defy evolution. Most scientists advocate a ‘random’ mutation – in other words, one that defies eveolution. As there is a cause for every effect, a reason for the mutation must exist.

Rh-Negative Blood: An Exotic Bloodline or Random Mutation? Caleb Strom, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… some [people] suggest that Rh-Negative blood must be of a non-human origin. Theories range from supernatural ones such as being of divine descent or membership in a divinely chosen people-group, to more scientific or pseudoscientific explanations… One blogger has gone as far as to say that those with Rh-Negative blood are descendants of the Hyperborean race, which they believe to be the original human race. Followers of this idea believe that this race was blonde-haired and blue-eyed and included most major spiritual teachers in history, including Jesus [Christ]. Some people who are not satisfied with the idea that those with RH-Negative blood are another form of humanity have suggested that the trait originates from extraterrestrials either interbreeding with humans or creating humans through genetic engineering.

What is unusual about Rh-Negative blood is that the gene for it is surprisingly common despite being potentially harmful. When a woman who is Rh-Negative is pregnant with a child that is Rh-Positive, the mother’s immune system creates protective anti-bodies to the Rh-Positive blood, and her blood essentially becomes toxic to the child. To some people, this looks like the mother’s body is rejecting the baby – which has led them to suggest that perhaps the reason for the rejection is incompatibility based on the mother and child being of different species. Others suggest that lineages with the gene for Rh-Negative blood are merely special in some way and were not meant to be mixed with lineages which are predominantly Rh-Positive.

This unusual trait can, however, also be explained in terms of relatively mundane human genetics and natural selection. One possibility is that the gene for Rh-Negative blood has some sort of selective advantage that outweighed the negative consequences of having Rh-Negative blood.Although it could still be that there is a common, unique ancestral lineage connecting populations with high prevalence of Rh-Negative blood [yes, most likely due to mainly descending from Arphaxad], the fact that the populations where the gene occurs in high prevalence appear otherwise unrelated to each other makes it less likely and in need of more evidence [not so, as these peoples are predominately from Arphaxad and intermarrying between them all, highly likely].

The extraterrestrial explanation is even more problematic because the Rh-Negative gene is clearly a variation of an otherwise completely human gene. Unless it was specifically engineered by extraterrestrials from a pre-existing human gene, it is unlikely that it comes from anything other than Homo Sapiens. The other problem with the Rh-Negative blood type being the result of hybridization with extraterrestrials is that extraterrestrials are likely to have a completely different biology and genome than human beings. Their genome might not even be based on DNA – but something else such as RNA, or some exotic form of genetic storage that never evolved on Earth.

… the explanation that the Rh-Negative blood type is just a mutation that became common in some populations due to a selective advantage [is] the most likely option. It is also the one that most easily survives the application of Occam’s Razor. If this blood type was because of another human species, let alone extraterrestrials, many more unnecessary assumptions that are difficult to verify have to be made. As a result, the evidence currently points toward little more than an ordinary mutation as the cause of the Rh-Negative blood phenotype.’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver 2017, pages 152-154 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The origins of rhesus negative blood are unknown, but it’s also commonly known as “alien blood” so that might provide a clue. Whether there’s any genetic advantage in having (or not having) rhesus negative blood is currently unknown. Some researchers suspect that those with this type of blood might be more resistant to parasitic diseases… The D antigen could have been lost through genetic mutation or external manipulation. If we’d all evolved from a single African ancestor… then we’d all be biologically compatible. But we’re not, and our scientists can’t explain why. Since we’re not all compatible, this suggests that we aren’t just  a single species. It also lends credence to the fact we may be a hybrid race… as well as being nicknamed alien blood… [it] is also… known as royal blood. There’s reported to be a very high incidence of it in members of the royal families of Western Europe, and especially in the British royal family… you could easily come up with the hypothesis that the original kings and queens of Europe might have been aliens.’

Or, one might surmise that a high level of endogamy and or incest that creates ‘a restricted gene pool maintains a predominant genetic factor, whether it be a particular blood type or rhesus factor.’

The Mystery of Rh- Negative Blood – Genetic Origin Unknown, Nella Adriana Corak-Sebetic, 2017 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis and bold mine:

‘Geneticists generally claim the RH-negative factor is a mutation of unknown origin which apparently happened only a few thousand years ago. These ´negative´ blooded people spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, France and later into America, Canada and Australia.

Interestingly, popular sciences [endeavour] to attribute Rh-neg blood groups to “mutations.” A solid alternative case may be extended to the conclusion that Rh-neg is NOT a mutation, but possibly the original human blood group. This, however, does not reflect tenured thought, and thus has never been adequately researched.

That there was a group of “pure” humans, not directly related to the evolutionary processes on Earth, is a distinct possibility. This reasoning would suggest that the original humans on our planet where not directly related to the apes, but at some point were “MADE” or “genetically engineered” to give such impression.

Perhaps it was never intended that the Rh-positives become the dominant species. That through some as yet undetermined epoch, the genetically impure group gradually became the controlling species, except for several remote enclaves, initiated a wide-ranging genocidal pogrom, effectively wiping out those who gave birth to them. All of which begs the questions: What reasons were the sub-species created, what was the process of conquest, what was the duration, and does it continue?’

From this same article, a selection of quotes from the scientific community.

a. In all blood groups there exists a common microbe that in essence is the life force itself.

b. Do not ever take a blood transfusion. The main reason for this has to do with cellular/genetic/galactic memory of blood. This is coded into the entire structure of the blood. All the emotions that the donor has felt during his entire lifetime are part of the blood. This cannot be filtered out. For example if you get a heart of a man who died in a car accident, all the cells of that organ have the memory of the accident and every emotion that was felt while dying. These emotions confuse your own coding and then mass internal confusion happens at the cellular level and the order turns into chaos. 

When you measure the heart harmonics of people with “O” RH-neg blood, they are usually lower if they are smokers and heavy red meat eaters. The ones who eat fish and vegetables are in the normal range.

c. The Celtic people of Ireland and Great Britain also have high incidences of the RH- factor and it has recently been proven that there is a genetic link between the Basque and the Celts.  This research proves that the Celtic people came from the Basque regions of France and Spain and a group must have migrated over to the islands of Great Britain. 

d. In some areas, the Rh-Negative blood factor is referred to as “Blood Royale” or “Royal Blood”. For centuries, European royalty have been inflicted with Hemophilia or “bleeders disease”. 

‘Apparently, Queen Victoria was a “carrier” of Hemophilia and gave it to all of her children who then intermarried and infected the bloodlines of very throne in Europe during the 1800s and 1900s. As a direct result, Hemophilia became known as the “Royal Disease”. To keep this in perspective, only about 5% of all “royalty” have Rh-Factor negative blood…which means “less than the general population. 

That would indicate that the vast majority of “rulers” and “monarchs” are NOT Rhesus-factor negative. Is this by chance? or by genetic engineering called “arranged marriages”? 

… but if European Royalty refuse to marry into the Rh Negative blood line it means one thing… Rh-Neg people are a “competing royal line”. How do you get rid of it once and for all? Although the British would love for you to think that Victoria was the world’s first carrier… don’t be confused. It was the Hapsburg’s disease. Was Victoria a Hapsburg? The unofficial motto of the Hapsburg family was “Bella gerunt alii, tu, felix Austria, nubes!” (”Where others must fight wars, you, fortunate Austria, marry!).It’s curious that “marriage” can be a “dynastic” undertaking but it can also be a perverse form of “bio-warfare” or “genetic warfare”.

Was [haemophilia] a disease of Spanish Royalty? … [and] was marriage to Victoria’s daughters a way to kill or weaken future “non-Hapsburg” kings… since mostly males only contract the disease from their mothers? Still, Hemophilia was in Royalty long before Victoria. Victoria’s daughters passed the disease into the Spanish, German and Russian Royal lines and threatened the thrones of all of Europes major powers. It would appear that Victoria is actually a direct descendant of Ferdinand of Castille…’

Eye color, hair color, blood type, and the rhesus factor: exploring possible genetic links to sexual orientation, Lee Ellis, Christopher Ficek, Donald Burke and Shyamal Das, 2008 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The present study sought to expand the limited evidence that sexual orientation is influenced by genetic factors. This was accomplished by seeking statistical differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals for four traits that are known to be genetically determined: eye color, natural hair color, blood type, and the Rhesus factor. 

Using a sample of over 7,000 U.S. and Canadian college students supplemented with additional homosexual subjects obtained through internet contacts, we found no significant differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals regarding eye color or hair color. In the case of blood type and the Rh factor, however, interesting patterns emerged. Heterosexual males and females exhibited statistically identical frequencies of the A blood type, while gay men exhibited a relatively low incidence and lesbians had a relatively high incidence [of type A blood](p < .05). In the case of the Rh factor, unusually high proportions of homosexuals of both sexes were Rh- when compared to heterosexuals (p < .06). The findings suggest that a connection may exist between sexual orientation and genes both on chromosome 9 (where blood type is determined) and on chromosome 1 (where the Rh factor is regulated).’

I have quoted this paper not as condemnation of alternative lifestyles, but rather the coincidence of Lot living in a city, where same sex relations occurred; not to mention a society where humans and descendants of Nephilim and or angels were having sexual relations. As it was for this reason that the Creator destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, more than for human homosexuality. Though the Rh- factor may, or may not have derived from encounters with the same sex or Nephilim, the question remains. 

The alternative is to concentrate on Lot’s daughters sons, Moab and Ammon. Was the Rh- factor a mechanism in response to the incest… for the protection of the descendants of Moab and Ammon, which has gradually filtered through to other descendants of Shem through intermarriage and relationships with those outside of Moab and Ammon’s people. In the pages of the Bible there is not any other indication that any nation or peoples began directly through a father and his daughters; so that this event is portrayed as a one time, unique occurrence in human history.

This may explain the very low percentages of R- factor in the equatorial and oriental peoples. It is curious that Rh negative blood cannot be duplicated or cloned. A higher percentage of Rh negative people claim to have been abducted by aliens than Rh positive people. 

Is it really just a coincidence that the Basque possess the highest percentages of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b in Europe; that they have the highest percentages of Rh- in the world; that they by these two criteria, exhibit endogamy at its fullest extreme; and that they are in all probability descended from Moab or Ammon… who were born from the most restricted gene pool ever documented?

Unknown author – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘For many years people have been searching for the wrong thing. Could the true “missing link” actually be man himself? The unknown link between earth and the stars – hybrid man. Man may be the missing link between primate and extraterrestrial. It seems inconceivable to me that those working on the evolution theory have overlooked this possibility. 

How can they state, that these people are lacking a factor contained in all other earthly primates, including the naked ape, and not ask why? What other characteristics are common among these people that are uncommon to other people? Is there a real difference other than just a different blood?’ 

A school of thought, is that white skin – and red/blond hair, with blue/green eyes – was introduced into the Homo sapien line from Nephilim; who exhibited the exact same physical conditions. It is claimed that people with the following traits [a single comprehensive list compiled from various other lists] are in some way related to Nephilim or by extension aliens. Confusingly, though most likely more accurately, the same list is also applied to Rh negative people, so that there has been a blurring of symptoms and traits.

  • Higher than average IQ
  • More sensitive vision, hearing and other senses
  • Lower body temperature
  • Higher blood pressure or lower, with a low pulse rate
  • Increased occurrence of psychic & intuitive abilities, particularly if type O negative
  • Predominantly green, or hazel eyes that change colour, including piercing  blue eyes
  • Red or reddish tint to hair colour
  • Widows peak, tongue rolling, ear lobes, freckles, Polydactyly – 6 fingers or toes – Webbed feet or hands, Albinism
  • Increased sensitivity to heat and sunlight
  • Cannot be cloned
  • Extra rib or vertebra, a tail bone, or tail Cauda
  • Alien Abduction and other unexplained or strange phenomenon – UFO, Para-normal
  • A feeling of not belonging to the human race
  • Truth seekers and a desire for higher wisdom
  • Sense of a “Mission” in life
  • Empathy & Compassion for Mankind
  • ESP Ability
  • Love of Space & Science
  • Unexplained Scars
  • Empathetic Illnesses and tend to be healers
  • Higher Negative-ion shielding from positive ‘charged’ viruses and bacteria around the body 
  • Capability to disrupt electrical devices
  • Psychic Dreams
  • High sensitivity to electromagnetic, as well as, extremely low frequency fields

If Noah – who according to Enoch looked like the Nephilim – and or, his son Shem and their wives introduced the white skin mutation [refer Chapter XVI Shem] then these characteristics may or may not be linked to non-humans.

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow 2014, page 32 – bold mine:

‘… Noah was born with red skin and had white hair. He was depicted in appearance as the “Sons of God”. This text refers to him as if he had alien features. Noah was not the same as other human beings on Earth.’

Human blood is iron based, but some animals have copper based blood turning it blue – called hemocyanin. Blood is red because of the presence of haemoglobin. Octopi, Lobsters, spiders, molluscs, arthropods and other animals can and do in fact have blue blood. Humans do not. The claim that rhesus negative blood is copper based, or that the term blue blood originates from copper based blood in rhesus negatives is not true. Though the concept of blue blood must have an origination from somewhere. 

Is it linked to the Nephilim. Is this why Royalty and the powers that be, historically have been labeled as Blue Blooded.

Royals have tended to have paler skin than the average person. Because of paleness, their veins are seen more easily and veins seen through skin tissue look blue. As it is mainly sea creatures that have blue blood, Angellica Goodson labels it as copper based aquatic blood. She also claims that it is in fact a Nephilim – ‘human alien hybrid’ – blood line that carries it. The hybrid lines are associated with the Serpent and Reptillian bloodlines as purported by various authors.

Goodson explains that the misidentification with Nephilim and Rh negative ‘started years ago on a physic website where a letter was posted from an anonymous person stating that she was an Rh negative but giving her alien human hybrid characteristics instead of the characteristics of a “Pure Scandinavian Rh Negative.” The misidentification has [since] gone viral online as [incorrect information].’ 

Goodson continues – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Some people carry both Rh Negative and Copper Based Aquatic Alien human hybrid anomalies. They number [under 7% of the global Population]. Copper Based Aquatic Blood is alien human hybrid blood, which has nothing to do with the Rh – Blood Factor. Those with the pure Rh – Factor carry what is referred to as “Power in the Blood.” Those with Copper Based Aquatic Blood [include] those who are being abducted by aliens… because they carry alien genetics, which they inherited from their ancestors… The main reason aliens are interested in those with pure Rh- Negative blood is for their DNA.’

Edited excerpt from Chapter XXVI Moab & Ammon

© Orion Gold 2020-2022 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

 

Moab & Ammon

Chapter XXVI

The elder brother of Nahor is Haran. Haran died prematurely at eighty-two years of age either at the hands of his younger brother Abraham in an accident or highly unlikely, murdered by Nimrod, though more probably at the hand of King Shulgi of Ur. His father Terah, with Lot and Abraham’s families then moved in 1917 BCE, northwest six hundred miles and settled in Haran, a city-region associated with Nahor’s family in Padan-Aram. We will learn that Haran had other children apart from those mentioned in the scriptures of Lot, Milcah and Sarah. We do not know the name of Haran’s wife, though it is likely that Haran married a descendent of Arphaxad through Peleg’s line. It is not clear if descendants of Haran already lived in Haran; or if they followed Abraham later. The term Haran for the region, may have been added to the biblical account retrospectively, if they followed.  

The geographic relationship of Haran adjacent to Padan-Aram, which in turn was next to Aram is significant as this alignment is replicated today [refer Chapter XXIII Aram and Chapter XXV Nahor]. Aram today including Spain and Portugal and Padan-Aram signifying Italy. Regarding identities in the Bible; if there is more than one verse – even if it is only two – it is telling of a specific people. Haran had a son Lot and he in turn had two sons, Moab and Ammon. Aside from these peoples, we read of distinct Haran twice in the Bible. We are therefore seeking a people not only related to Nahor but also dwelling next to Nahor today in Western Europe.

2 Kings 19:12

English Standard Version

Have the gods of the nations delivered them, the nations that my fathers destroyed, Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, and the people of Eden…

Ezekiel 27:21-24

English Standard Version

21 Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [Ishmael] were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you… 23 Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you. 24 In your market these traded with you [Tyre, Aram, Mash, Brazil] in choice garments, in clothes of blue and embroidered work, and in carpets of colored material, bound with cords and made secure.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There are two completely different Hebrew names that have ended up as the similar name Haran in English. We’ll call them Haran I and Haran II, and note that both versions occur in Genesis 11:31: The name Haran I: Summary meaning Mountainous, Mountaineer From the noun (har), hill or mountain. The name Haran I is assigned two times in the Bible: A son of Terah and brother of Abraham… This Haran is the father of Lot. [The other] a Levite of the family of Gershon (1 Chronicles 23:9).

The noun (har) is the Bible’s common word for mountain or hill. The obviously related verb (hera) means to be or become pregnant. An association with the previous noun is obvious, although not because the stomach of a pregnant woman resembles a mountain. The Bible depicts nations as individual women even more than as mountains; the words, (‘umma) meaning people and (’em), meaning mother are closely related. A pregnant woman is to her husband what a conceiving nation is to its deity.

The name Haran II: Summary Meaning Freedom, Central Fire From the root (harar), to be a central hub of heat. The name Haran II is assigned two times in the Bible: The city where Abram’s family settled (Genesis 11:31)… A son of Caleb and Epaha (1 Chronicles 2:46). The name Haran II probably comes from the verb (hara), to burn, or (harar), to be hot or even to be free: The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so a being hot and ultimately a being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom). The unused verb (harar II) means to be free in cognate languages, which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun hor) means noble or nobleman. 

The nouns (hor) mean hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Nouns (hur) and (huray) refer to any white stuff, including garments and linen, and noun (hori) describes white bread or cake. For a meaning of the name Haran II… BDB Theological Dictionary sees a connection with an Assyrian word that means Road or Path, and suggests the name stems from Haran’s location on a trade route.’

Canneh means favoured and Eden means pleasure, delight, finery, Luxury and Paradise. The descendants of Haran dwell in the nation of Switzerland. The verse in Ezekiel Twenty-seven is revealing Haran’s economic strength as well as its split as evidenced by its principle languages of German, French, and Italian – with Romany. The Swiss themselves – regardless of language divide – are homogenous, as their Haplogroups reveal. Whereas an Austrian majority of sixty percent perceive themselves as German, the Swiss when asked the same question, resoundingly answered No. The definition meanings of Haran are remarkably specific. 

Switzerland is mountainous, free, protected with a wall of strong military tradition, is white with snow and known for its bread, cake, pastry and deserts, including chocolate. It is favoured in wealth and scenery; a veritable paradise of luxury.

The ancient Hurrians and Mitanni were synonymous, also known as Hanigalbat, with the Hurrians having a lesser role due to a smaller population and the height of their kingdom longevity circa 905-886 BCE, compared to the Mitanni, but as  the warrior nobility within the Kingdom of Mitanni their impact was greater and longer. 

Recall we studied the Mitanni in Chapter XXIII Aram. The Aramaic Mitanni may have merged with the dispossessed Hatti by this time, as they were migrating towards Babylon due to the Hittites encroaching into their former lands. The apogee of the Mitanni kingdom era circa 1150-900 BCE may be the connecting link between the peak of the Hatti empire circa 1900-1500 BCE and the Chaldean rule of Babylon from 626 to 539 BCE.

The Hurrian army was built around an elite chariot corps, like an honour guard, commanded by the king. The relationship between the Hurrians and Mitanni is replicated between Switzerland and Italy in the form of the Papal or Pontifical Swiss Guard. It is a combined armed forces and honour guard maintained by the Holy See. It protects the Pope and the Apostolic Palace, serving as the military of the Vatican City. Established in 1506 by Pope Julius II, it is one of the oldest military units used in ‘continuous operation.’ 

The dress uniform is blue, red, orange and yellow. The Swiss Guard are equipped with traditional weapons, like the halberd, as well as with modern firearms. ‘Recruits to the guards must be unmarried Swiss Catholic males between 19 and 30 years of age who have completed basic training with the Swiss Armed Forces.’ The corp also receive enhanced training, in unarmed combat and small arms.

Burgundy is a region in France, made famous by its red wine. It is a little smaller than Switzerland and lies to the west, with only one hundred miles separating them. Though the name lives on in France, the original Burgundians are the ancestors of the Swiss. The Burgundians are considered a Scandinavian people whose original homeland lay on the southern shores of the Baltic Sea; where the island of Bornholm – Burgundarholm in the Middle Ages – still bears their name. In the first century CE they migrated into the lower valley of the Vistula River, but, unable to defend themselves against the Gepidae, they traveled westward. Serving as foederati meaning auxiliaries, in the Roman army, they formed a powerful kingdom, around Sapaudia – modern day Savoy – near Lake Geneva, from 450 CE.

Christian king Gundobad [474–516 CE], allowed Burgundy to remain independent until 534, when the Franks occupied the kingdom, extinguishing the royal dynasty. The area was controlled initially by Neustrian Franks, then Middle Franks and finally German Franks until the year 888. It was under Frankish Burgundian control until 1032. It was in 888 that Rudolf I – who died in 912 – of the German Welf family was recognised as king of Jurane, Burgundy, including much of what is now Switzerland. His son and successor Rudolf II, was able to conclude a treaty circa 931 with Hugh of Provence, extending ‘his rule over the entire regnum Burgundiae.’ 

The union of Upper and Lower Burgundy was bequeathed in 1032 – lasting until to 1648 – to the German king and Holy Roman emperor Conrad II, which became known from the thirteenth century as the Kingdom of Arles. The name Burgundy was being increasingly applied to the county of Burgundy, as well as for the Duchy of Burgundy – both located in modern France. There were four Burgundies in total: the duchy, the county, and the kingdoms of Upper Burgundy and Lower Burgundy. Upper Burgundy larger than lower Burgundy was located in present day western Italy. Lower Burgundy was located in current French speaking western Switzerland.

The Historicity of the Bible, Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis & bold mine:

German Nibelungen, Old Norse Niflungar denote the Burgundian royal family which take its name from the people which initially owned the gold hoard.Siegfried slew Nibelung and twelve giants before he took the hoard. In the Norse mythology, Niflheimr (‘mist home’) is the world of frost. The similar world is Niflhel, the lowest level of Norse underworld Hel. The Indo-European root ne-bh means ‘not light (sky)’ (ne – ‘not’ and bh – ‘light’ like in Greek phos) initially and gave several related meanings: ‘sky’ (Russian nebo), ‘cloud, mist’ (Latin nebula), ‘dark’ (Anglo-Saxon nifol) etc.’    

Britannica – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In 1291, when Rudolf I of Habsburg died, the elites of the Waldstatte (“forest cantons”) Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden renewed an older treaty confirming that they would maintain public peace and efficient jurisdiction without interference from outside [namely the Austrian Hapsburgs], thus securing their privileged position [Confoederatio Helvetica]. Such pacts were common at that time, but this one was to be considered much later as the foundation of the Swiss Confederation (only since 1891 has August 1, 1291, been celebrated as the birth of the nation).’

The prime Swiss communities of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden, mirror Haran, Canneh and Eden in the Bible. The word Schwyz is where the name Switzerland has derived. The Swiss are famously known for their neutrality from 1815 following the Napoleonic wars against France. The Congress of Vienna guaranteed the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland. The present nation of Switzerland was formed in 1848 with the adoption of a new constitution, as there has been internal conflict prior to this date.

Switzerland is a federated country of 26 Cantons and its administrative capital is Bern; with Lausanne serving as its judicial centre. Switzerland’s small size, its total area is about half that of Scotland and its population of 8,760,585 people, the 20th largest in Europe, gives little indication of its international significance and economic clout. Geneva is home to numerous international organisations and likewise, the Swiss economy is the 20th largest in the world – just behind Saudi Arabia [18], Turkey [19] and ahead of Poland [21], Thailand [22] and Nigeria [25]. 

The Heraldry for the three original Cantons – the Key similar to the Vatican keys and the Bull, 

stemming from veneration lasting millennia’s.

Apart from the capital Bern, Zurich is the country’s largest and most cosmopolitan city; its famed Bahnhofstrasse rivalling shopping districts found in other leading cities in the world. Basel and Lucerne are major German speaking cities, with Geneva and Lausanne the centres of the country’s French speaking cantons. In 1992 Swiss voters narrowly turned down membership in a European Economic Area comprising the EU and EFTA. Switzerland is politically isolated within Europe, though maintains strong economic ties with the EU – its largest trading partner. In the 1990s there was growing doubts about Switzerland’s past. ‘Many Swiss questioned the country’s traditional “bunker mentality” in Europe at peace and with open borders.’ 

Troubling for Switzerland was an international debate concerning dormant accounts of assets left by Jews in Swiss banks during the Nazi era, but never returned. ‘A controversy that challenged Switzerland’s image of itself and resulted in a settlement between two large commercial banks and Jewish plaintiffs in which the banks agreed to pay international Jewish organizations two billion Swiss francs (about $1.25 billion). Financial officials estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars in dormant assets remained unclaimed in Swiss banks in the early 21st century.’

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Swiss global shipments during 2021.

  1. Gems, precious metals: US$106.3 billion 
  2. Pharmaceuticals: $101.5 billion
  3. Organic chemicals: $29.7 billion
  4. Clocks, watches including parts: $24.4 billion
  5. Machinery including computers: $24 billion
  6. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $19.1 billion
  7. Electrical machinery, equipment: $13.8 billion
  8. Plastics, plastic articles: $6.2 billion
  9. Mineral fuels including oil: $4.03 billion
  10. Perfumes, cosmetics: $3.98 billion


Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.2% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was… clocks and watches including parts category which rose 34.7%. Switzerland’s shipments of gems and precious metals posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 23.3% year over year, propelled by higher international sales of gold and silver.’

The Alpine nation of Switzerland had a GDP of $703.08 billion in 2019 – the 20th largest economy in the world. Switzerland possesses a large service sector, including financial services and a high-tech manufacturing sector served by a highly skilled labor force. Excellent quality legal, political and economic institutions with a solid physical infrastructure have set the stage for a productive economy with one of the highest per capita GDPs in the world.

Switzerland is in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves at number seven, ahead of Japan and India and one place behind China. Its total tonnage of gold is 1,040.0 tonnes and represents 5.4 % of its foreign reserves. Switzerland maintains the world’s largest reserves of gold per capita. ‘During World War II, the neutral country became the center of the gold trade in Europe, making transactions with both the Allies and Axis powers. Today, much of its gold trading is done with Hong Kong and China.’

Haran had a specific son named in the Bible, called Lot. Though he was Abraham’s nephew, Lot was born only seven years after Abraham in 1970 BCE – when Haran was thirty-nine. They had a close relationship and instead of being as an uncle and nephew that they were, acted more like brothers, due to the closeness of their ages. With the premature death of Haran, Abraham was also protective of his nephew in more than one instance. The fact that Abraham did not have his own son for many years, meant Lot was logically in line to be Abraham’s heir.  This is telling and may have significant bearing in how circumstances eventuated between the descendants of Lot and of Abraham.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Lot mean[s] Covering From the verb (lut), to wrap closely, to envelop

Noun (lat) or (la’t) means secrecy. The verb (malat) means to deliver from confinement or dangerous predicament. For a meaning of the name Lot, both NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names read Covering. Jones adds Veil.’

In Genesis chapter eleven we read of Terah’s departure from Ur to Haran, with Abraham and Lot’s families in 1927 BCE. Twenty-five years later when Abraham was seventy-five, the Creator told him to leave Haran for Canaan further south.

Genesis 12:4-9

English Standard Version

So Abram went, as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, 6 Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem [future location of Simeon and Levi’s revenge for their sister Dinah], to the oak of Moreh. At that time the Canaanites [dark skinned sons of Canaan] were in the land. 7 Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” 

So he built there an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. 8 From there he moved to the hill country on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. And there he built an altar to the Lord and called upon the name of the Lord. 9 And Abram journeyed on, still going toward the Negeb.

Genesis 13:1-18

English Standard Version

So Abram went up from Egypt, he and his wife and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the Negeb. 2 Now Abram was very rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold.3 And he journeyed on from the Negeb as far as Bethel to the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, 4 to the place where he had made an altar at the first. And there Abram called upon the name of the Lord. 5 And Lot, who went with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents,so that the land could not support both of them dwelling together; for their possessions were so great that they could not dwell together, 7 and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land.

8 Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen.Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.” 10 And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw that the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere like the garden of the Lord [Eden], like the land of Egypt, in the direction of Zoar. (This was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.) 11 So Lot chose for himself all the Jordan Valley, and Lot journeyed east. Thus they separated from each other. 12 Abram settled in the land of Canaan, while Lot settled among the cities of the valley and moved his tent as far as Sodom. 

Recall in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega, the location of physical Eden was investigated. We learned that the garden area of Eden encompassed the area of southern Lebanon and the Sea of Galilee stretching southwards to Jerusalem. We will discover soon that Zoar was situated north of the Dead or Salt Sea and so the fertile Jordan River valley was a corridor running from Galilee through the Dead Sea – which wasn’t ‘dead’ yet – and all the way south to where the river exits into the Red Sea. Lot saw that this land between Galilee and Zoar was ‘like the garden of the Lord’ or Eden and understandably chose it for his family. Thus he lived to the east of Abraham who dwelt westwards towards the Mediterranean Sea in the land of Canaan. It also explains how Lot ended up living in Sodom – where he was prominent in the City’s governance – as it was one of the five main cities with Zoar in the plains north of the Salt Sea.

13 Now the men of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the Lord. 14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, 15 for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever. 

16 I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted. 17 Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.” 18 So Abram moved his tent and came and settled by the oaks of Mamre, which are at Hebron, and there he built an altar to the Lord.

Lot chose the fertile lower ground, the plains in the valley bordered between the hills towards the west and the River Jordan to the east. We read a parallel account in the Book of Jasher 15:35-47:

35 And Lot the son of Haran, Abram’s brother, had a heavy stock of cattle, flocks and herds and tents, for the Lord was bountiful to them on account of Abram. 36 And when Abram was dwelling in the land the herdsmen of Lot quarrelled with the herdsmen of Abram, for their property was too great for them to remain together in the land, and the land could not bear them on account of their cattle. 37 And when Abram’s herdsmen went to feed their flock they would not go into the fields of the people of the land, but the cattle of Lot’s herdsmen did otherwise, for they were suffered to feed in the fields of the people of the land. 38 And the people of the land saw this occurrence daily, and they came to Abram and quarrelled with him on account of Lot’s herdsmen. 39 And Abram said to Lot, What is this thou art doing to me, to make me despicable to the inhabitants of the land, that thou orderest thy herdsman to feed thy cattle in the fields of other people? Dost thou not know that I am a stranger in this land amongst the children of Canaan, and why wilt thou do this unto me? 40 And Abram quarrelled daily with Lot on account of this, but Lot would not listen to Abram, and he continued to do the same and the inhabitants of the land came and told Abram. 

This display of mercurial stubbornness is indicative of Lot’s descendants.

41 And Abram said unto Lot, How long wilt thou be to me for a stumbling block with the inhabitants of the land? Now I beseech thee let there be no more quarrelling between us, for we are kinsmen. 42 But I pray thee separate from me, go and choose a place where thou mayest dwell with thy cattle and all belonging to thee, but Keep thyself at a distance from me, thou and thy household. 43 And be not afraid in going from me, for if any one do an injury to thee, let me know and I will avenge thy cause from him, only remove from me. 44 And when Abram had spoken all these words to Lot, then Lot arose and lifted up his eyes toward the plain of Jordan. 45 And he saw that the whole of this place was well watered, and good for man as well as affording pasture for the cattle. 46 And Lot went from Abram to that place, and he there pitched his tent and he dwelt in Sodom, and they were separated from each other. 47 And Abram dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and he pitched his tent there, and Abram remained in that place many years.

The selfishness of Lot in using other peoples property and not caring how that made Abraham look was the beginning of a rift circa 1902 and 1894 BCE between both families, that ultimately led to hatred and a rivalry, based on jealousy between their peoples lasting to the present day. The seeds of the fissure between them, even after Lot had been continually at Abraham’s side were undoubtedly the same that causes nearly all parting of the ways between people – the same reason Asherah left the Ancient of Day’s side – envy or disdain, leading to pride. In the section on Chedorlaomer of Elam [refer Chapter XIX], we touched on Lot being taken hostage in 1894 BCE after the Battle of the Kings at Siddim. We will return to this battle when we study Abraham.

Genesis 14:11-16

English Standard Version

11 So the enemy took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way. 12 They also took Lot, the son of Abram’s brother, who was dwelling in Sodom, and his possessions, and went their way. 13 Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, who was living by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and of Aner. These were allies of Abram. 14 When Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, 318 of them, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. 15 And he divided his forces against them by night, he and his servants, and defeated them and pursued them to Hobah, north of Damascus [capital of Gether from Aram]. 16 Then he brought back all the possessions, and also brought back his kinsman Lot with his possessions, and the women and the people.

Jasher 16:6-8

6 And they plundered all the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and they also took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, and his property, and they seized all the goods of the cities of Sodom, and they went away; and Unic, Abram’s servant, who was in the battle, saw this, and told Abram all that the kings had done to the cities of Sodom, and that Lot was taken captive by them. 

7 And Abram heard this, and he rose up with about three hundred and eighteen men that were with him, and he that night pursued these kings and smote them, and they all fell before Abram and his men, and there was none remaining but the four kings who fled, and they went each his own road. 8 And Abram recovered all the property of Sodom, and he also recovered Lot and his property, his wives and little ones and all belonging to him, so that Lot lacked nothing.

Abraham risked his life to rescue Lot – who had somewhat deserved what had befallen him, after treating Abraham with disrespect – ensuring he had all his belongings returned to him. Proverbs 25:21-22 CJB: “If someone who hates you is hungry, give him food to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. For you will heap fiery coals (of shame) on his head, and Adonai [the Lord] will reward you.” 

Abraham was offered a reward by the King of Sodom, but refused to take anything for what he had done. We next read of Lot in Genesis chapter Nineteen.

Genesis 19:1-38

English Standard Version

The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed himself with his face to the earth 2 and said, “My lords, please turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night and wash your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the town square.” 3 But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened bread [possibly March-April and the time of the Passover and Feast of unleavened Bread], and they ate.

Hebrews 13:2

Complete Jewish Bible

but don’t forget to be friendly to outsiders; for in so doing, some people, without knowing it, have entertained angels.

Lot had gained a position of responsibility in Sodom when he had moved to the city circa 1900 BCE. Lot was rescued by Abraham in 1894 BCE in the aftermath of the Battle of Siddim. The destruction of Sodom took place in Abraham’s 99th year, 1878 BCE. Approximately twenty years Lot and his family had resided in Sodom. Sitting in the gate, means Lot was a member of Sodom’s ruling council and involved in the discussion and prosecution of legal matters. Lot may have been an actual Judge.

4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know [H3045 – yada: ‘to know a person carnally] them.” 6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold,I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. 

Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” 9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down. 10 But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them and shut the door. 11 And they [the Angels created a blinding light] struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, both small and great, so that they wore themselves out groping for the door.

Judging by the name of the city of Sodom and the fact the crowd of men were wanting the two men who were angels; homo-sexuality is clearly what was intended. In a broader sense, the city was involved in adult activity with Nephil and Eliouds, who lived there; for as stated earlier in the Book of Genesis, a second irruption of Angelic infiltration with humans had occurred. Hence the requirement for the judgement of utter destruction to be decreed. It may have involved more than sexual relations. A continuation of the ante-diluvian and post-flood Tower of Babel scientific and technological drive to completely tamper with mankind’s genetic code and seek profane immortality, would certainly attract punishment. For it has been reserved for the time of the end for these events to reoccur; thus requiring the Creator to intervene at that time. Jude connects the activities before the flood with those taking place in the five cities of the Plain. The Greek word heteros translated as ‘strange’ flesh, is referring to sexual congress with Nephilim or perverted sex with angels not strictly just homo-sexuality.

Jude 6-7 ESV: 6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling… 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural [G2087 – heteros: another, ‘one not of the same nature, form, kind’] desire [G4561 – sarx: ‘carnal cravings that incite sin’], serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Lot offered his two youngest daughters who were around 15-20 years old, to the mob, rather than the Angels. What the rationale behind this is conjecture. Maybe Lot was buying time, for he knew the Angels could and would resolve the issue without his daughters having to go out – a bluff. Or possibly, he weighed their lives versus those of the messengers sent by the Creator and made a judgement call.

12 Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone [friends] you have in the city, bring them out of the place. 13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it.” 

14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, “Up! Get out of this place, for the Lord is about to destroy the city.” But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting. 15 As morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Up! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be swept away in the punishment of the city.” 

Verse 14 is misleading, as it appears the two younger daughters were bequeathed but not yet married. The interlinear reads: And Lot went out, spake unto his sons law, which married his daughters. From the account, we learn that Lot has at least two other daughters, aside from the two virgins already mentioned. The Book of Jasher introduces a fifth daughter.

Book of Jasher 19:11, 23-35 

And in the course of time Sarah sent Eliezer to Sodom, to see Lot and inquire after his welfare. 23 … and when it was told to Abraham he went and made war with the kings of Elam, and he recovered from their hands all the property of Lot as well as the property of Sodom. 24 At that time the wife of Lot bare him a daughter[1894 BCE],and he called her name Paltith, saying, Because God had delivered him and his whole household from the kings of Elam; and Paltith daughter of Lot grew up, and one of the men of Sodom took her for a wife [circa 1879-1878 BCE]. 25 And a poor man came into the city to seek a maintenance, and he remained in the city some days, and all the people of Sodom caused a proclamation of their custom not to give this man a morsel of bread to eat, until he dropped dead upon the earth, and they did so. 26 And Paltith the daughter of Lot saw this man lying in the streets starved with hunger, and no one would give him any thing to keep him alive, and he was just upon the point of death. 27 And her soul was filled with pity on account of the man, and she fed him secretly with bread for many days… and three men concealed themselves in a place where the poor man was stationed, to know who it was that brought him bread to eat… 32 And the three men saw what Paltith did to the poor man… 34 And they took Paltith and brought her before their judges… now therefore declare to us the punishment due to this woman for having transgressed our law. 35 And the people of Sodom and Gomorrah assembled and kindled a fire in the street of the city, and they took the woman and cast her into the fire and she was burned to ashes.

If is difficult to believe this account is accurate by today’s standards as Paltith would have been fifteen or sixteen, when she was married and then shortly after was put to death, which was not long before Sodom was destroyed. Anciently, daughters were given in marriage as soon as they were deemed women and able to serve a husband and bear his children.

16 But he lingered. So the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the Lord being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city. 

Lot’s angelic visitors and protectors had already taken an aerial reconnoissance. According to the Haggadah, they were then able to fly him and his family inside their craft out of Sodom’s boundaries. It was then that they instructed Lot to flee to further safety. 

17 And as they brought them out, one said, “Escape for your life. Do not look back or stop anywhere in the valley. Escape to the hills, lest you be swept away.” 18 And Lot said to them, “Oh, no, my lords. 19 Behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life. But I cannot escape to the hills, lest the disaster overtake me and I die. 20 Behold, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there – is it not a little one? – and my life will be saved!” 

21 He said to him, “Behold, I grant you this favor also, that I will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. 22 Escape there quickly, for I can do nothing till you arrive there.” Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.

Contrary Lot, might be a fitting name and at a moment when time was of the essence. We will find that his descendants are in fact a contrary and mercurial people. Granted, Lot was ninety-two years old – just ten years older than when his father, Haran died. It is ironic as Lot did not stay in Zoar, but rather fled from Zoar and retreated to a cave. Lot’s entreating was in fact a far bigger favour than sparing his life even, for when asking to be able to go to Zoar, he was actually asking for one of the five cities marked for destruction to be spared. The five cities in question were Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zebo[im] and Bela – also known as Zoar. According to Lot, it would seem it was the smallest of the five cites on the plain. 

In contrast to what is commonly taught, the condemnation of Sodom and the other cities was not just because of sexual transgressions. Another reason is given in Ezekiel 16:49-50 ESV: “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.”

23 The sun had risen on the earth when Lot came to Zoar. 24 Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven. 25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. 26 But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

Book of Jasher 19:52-54 

And he overthrew these cities, all the plain and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground; and Ado the wife of Lot looked back to see the destruction of the cities, for her compassion was moved on account of her daughters who remained in Sodom, for they did not go with her. 53 And when she looked back she became a pillar of salt, and it is yet in that place unto this day. 54 And the oxen which stood in that place daily licked up the salt to the extremities of their feet, and in the morning it would spring forth afresh, and they again licked it up unto this day.

The Book of Jasher gives Lot’s wife’s name as Ado. Certain Rabbis refer to her as Idit. The Midrash calls her Edith, which may have derived from Idit. The Book of Jasher supports other married daughters still in Sodom, when Lot, his wife and two unmarried daughters fled for their lives. It helps to explain, why Idit disobeyed the Angel’s instruction. It may have been more than the intensity of the detonation and Idit doing more than just looking back. She must have lingered too close to the blast zone. The interlinear infers this: But his wife looked back from behind him, she became pillar salt.

Luke 17:28-32 

English Standard Version

28 Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot – they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, 29 but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all – 30 so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back. 32 Remember Lot’s wife.

27 And Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the Lord. 28 And he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward [the east] all the land of the valley, and he looked and, behold, the smoke of the land went up like the smoke of a furnace. 29 So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived. 

Wisdom of Solomon 10.7 GNT: 

You can still see the evidence of their wickedness. The land there is barren and smoking. The plants bear fruit that never ripens, and a pillar of salt stands as a monument to one who did not believe.

Evidence found supporting the Biblical description of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction? Dean Smith, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In an article published in Science News, archaeologists working at Tall el-Hammam located in Jordan… have found evidence corroborating its massive destruction recorded in the Bible that spoke of brimstone and fire falling from the sky… Archaeologists have found evidence of the area being hit with a massive explosion that turned glaze on potsherds into glass. They also found stone fragments stuck in the glaze that supports the idea that something poured down upon cities from the sky. According to lead archaeologist Philip J. Silvia, the heat was “perhaps as hot as the surface of the sun.” They also discovered that the bricks used in the buildings were totally obliterated leaving only the stone foundations.

The Bible records that not only were the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah [destroyed] but much of the valley as well and Silva confirmed this adding they found evidence the blast covered an area of 15.5 miles and killing upwards of 65,000 people. The site on the north end of the Dead Sea was so devastated that it took 600 years for the soil to recover sufficiently to allow crops… 

Writing on behalf of the Tall el-Hamman Excavation Project, co-director Dr. Steven Collins said: “The violent conflagration that ended occupation at Tall el-Hammam produced melted potters, scorched foundation stones and several feet of ash and destruction debris churned into a dark gray matrix ‘as if in a Cuisinart’” [food processor].’

Archaeological evidence confirms that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by intense fire, Dean Smith, 2020- emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to archaeologists working on the site believed to include the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, they found evidence confirming the Biblical record that the two cities were destroyed by sulphur and fire… The archaeologists, who have been working on the site for 13 years, reported discovering evidence of intense heat. This included clay and rock that had been turned into glass. This would require a brief burst of heat of between 8,000 to 12,000 degree Celsius. The archaeologists also noted that the destruction took place “in an instant,” and resulted in the stripping of the topsoil. The archaeologists added that “a super-heated brine of Dead Sea anhydride salts pushed over the landscaped by the Event’s frontal shock wave.”’

‘It is interesting that even the Biblical account noted the appearance of salt as it described Lot’s wife being turned into a pillar of salt and as well, noted the destruction of vegetation. They wrote, “the physical evidence from Tall el-Hamman and neighboring sites exhibit signs of a highly destructive concussive and thermal event that one might expect from what is described in Genesis 19.”’ 

Secular history is silent concerning Lot, ‘save for the fact that the Dead Sea has always been called by the Arabs, the Sea of Lot.’ The Battle of Siddim, including the Plain with the five cities – four of them destroyed – is located in the area of the Dead Sea or Sea of Death. The Dead Sea and its composition is an anomaly that can be explained only by the Biblical destruction of the region as recorded in Genesis chapter nineteen. Archaeological digs have confirmed the northern end – southeast of Jericho – of the Dead Sea rather than the traditional southern end, as the original site of the Valley of Siddim. 

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, Page 195, 197-198, 206-207 – emphasis & bold mine:

There is no scriptural or other evidence to support… Sodom and Gormorrah [being]… located… in the shallow or southern part of the Dead Sea, the body of water the Jews call… the Salt Sea…To the contrary, all indications are that the [five] cities were located in the northern part of the Dead Sea… [nor] the age of the Dead Sea [being] hundreds of thousands of years old… this sea dates… [according to Velikovsky to] less than 5000 years [ago]… [or] no further back than the days of Abraham [1878 BCE]. In the Biblical story… it specifically states that the area now occupied by the Dead Sea used to be called the Valley or vale of Siddim [Genesis 14:3]… 

Some catastrophic event must have caused the [rupture of the] geological fault (which runs through and underlies the area) to displace, the ground sinking in the process, and forming a seal to allow the accumulation of water [creating a large inland sea] from the inflow of the Jordan River. Josephus adds… that the Lord “cast a thunderbolt upon the city and set it on fire with its inhabitants.” In the Haggadah, this thunderbolt comes from the Shekinah, the aerial chariot of the Lord: “When the angels had brought forth Lot and his family and set them outside the city, he bade them run for their lives, and not look behind, lest they behold the Shekinah, which had descended to work the destruction of the cities…”’

The Dead Sea contains twenty-one minerals including Sodium, Magnesium, Calcium, Bromine, Bitumen and Potassium. Twelve of these are found in no other sea or ocean. The Dead Sea contains ten times more salts and minerals than the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea has a 33% concentration of salt compared to only 3% in the world’s oceans. There are other bodies of water in the world with similar salt content ratios – one wonders if they are victims of a similar fate as the Dead Sea?

30Now Lot went up out of Zoar and lived in the hills with his two daughters, for he was afraid to live in Zoar. So he lived in a cave with his two daughters. 31 And the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the earth. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve offspring [seed] from our father.” 33 So they made their father drink wine that night. And the firstborn went in and lay with her father. He did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.

The incident with an intoxicated Noah and his grandson Canaan did not end well [refer Chapter XI Ham]. This is another situation of being taken advantage of while inebriated, perhaps. The cave location was very remote and the eldest daughter – the only sister recorded speaking – was concerned that their father Lot is old and may die and that any chance of a man visiting wasn’t presenting itself anytime soon. Their sisters and brothers-in-law in Sodom were dead and would not be having children. This is more likely, than thinking the world had ended and there were no men left to continue humankind. The three of them had left Zoar and knew their were other survivors. Either way, the daughters do not take their father into their confidence. 

The Biblical account presents the daughters as the ‘initiators and perpetrators of the incestuous rape’ of Lot over two nights, according to Esther Fuchs. The verb used by the older daughter about eighteen to twenty years old for giving Lot wine also means to irrigate the ground. Thus, the daughters intentions are not to just give their father a glass or two, but to fully saturate him and get Lot very drunk; before having sexual intercourse with him. The next night, the younger sister about fifteen to seventeen years old, repeats the course of action. The fact that the sisters got their father very drunk, may mean their actions were more altruistic than driven by desire.

The word used for offspring is zera, meaning seed or offspring in a general sense,  rather than for a specific ‘son,’ since the intent is ultimately related to the eventual Messiah and fulfilment of Genesis 3:15. From a historical perspective, these acts were essential for the future birth of the Son of Man. The Creator would judge the daughters by their thoughts and not necessarily their deeds; as this is a recurrent theme in the Bible for those the Creator is working with. The daughters’ true intent was not to lay with their father for sexual gratification, but rather to ensure their family line continued. 

Support that Lot’s daughters were vindicated rather than Lot himself is the fact that the prohibition in Deuteronomy 23:2-4, 6 ESV, applies to males not females: “No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord. No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the Lord forever, because they did not meet you – the sons of Jacob – with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you. You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever.”

The Angels that rescued Lot would have been cognisant of the fact that Ruth the Moabite would trace her lineage to the eldest sister, and her marriage to Boaz from  the tribe of Judah would result in descendants, including King David and the Messianic Saviour. They would also have known that Naamah the Ammonite, would trace her lineage to the youngest sister and her marriage to King Solomon – the only wife of Solomon stated by name in the Bible – would result in King Rehoboam, King of Judah after Solomon. 

The good of Lot’s daughters’ intentions displayed, in that they lay with their father only once and like Ruth – acted for an ideal – when she lay at the foot of Boaz’s bed in the threshing floor. 

34 The next day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father. Let us make him drink wine tonight also. Then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve offspring from our father.” 35 So they made their father drink wine that night also. And the younger arose and lay with him, and he did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose. 

Scholars, such as Robert Alter have said that Lot’s daughters in sleeping with their father “suggests measure-for-measure justice meted out for his rash offer” to the mob outside their home. ‘Rabbis have observed that a man usually allows himself to be killed in order to save his wife and children… Lot was willing to allow the townspeople to abuse his daughters.’ In Sodom, Lot was ready to offer his daughters – possibly against their will – to engage in sexual relations with the people outside. Later, Lot’s daughters have relations with their unwitting father. These acts of incest are Lot’s punishment for his indecorous behaviour, according to some scholars. 

There are two Rabbinic views issued against the patriarch Lot. Firstly, that Lot ‘from the outset, decided to dwell in Sodom because he wanted to engage in the licentious [behaviour] of its inhabitants.’ Lot thought he could engage secretly in depravity. He is then later, humiliated through his daughters seducing him. R Nahman bar Hanan said to the effect: “Whoever is driven by his lust for fornication, will eventually be fed from his own flesh.” Lot was so eager to engage in promiscuity, that in the end, his daughters played the harlot with him.

Secondly, Lot insidiously desired his daughters; for he was inebriated when the elder sister lay with him, though he was sober enough to know when she rose. Thus is indicated in the Old Testament ‘by the supralinear dot over the word u-ve-komah (“when she rose”).’ Though Lot was not aware of what was going to happen when he drunk the wine, he was aware of having sex with his eldest daughter by the time she left his bed. Therefore, his willingness to drink wine the next night – means to some – that he was complicit in repeating incest with his younger daughter. On the basis of what is said in Proverbs 18:1 CJB: “He who separates himself indulges his desires and shows contempt for sound advice of any kind”, some Rabbis conclude that Lot did lust after his daughters. Particularly, as Lot sought out a remote cave that allowed the facilitation of the incestuous events to occur. 

Even so, Rabbis have reinterpreted the incest accounts of Lot and his daughters in the bible in a more positive light due to the royal and messianic lineages it produced. Ironically, the other half of David’s lineage is similarly problematic for the Rabbis; as Tamar secures a son, by surreptitiously seducing her father-in-law Judah. They’re son Perez, in turn becomes an ancestor to Boaz and thus also, King David.

36 Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father. 37 The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day. 38 The younger also bore a son and called his name Ben-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.

Book of Jasher 19:55-60 

And Lot and two of his daughters that remained with him fled and escaped to the cave of Adullam, and they remained there for some time… 58 And they both lay with their father, and they conceived and bare sons… 60 And after this Lot and his two daughters went away from there, and he dwelt on the other side of the Jordan with his two daughters and their sons, and the sons of Lot grew up, and they went and took themselves wives from the land of Canaan, and they begat children and they were fruitful and multiplied.

The eldest daughter names her son Moab, which means ‘from my father.’ She has been  rather brazen and immodest in openly naming her son as born of her father. This leaves no doubt as to the union having been an incestuous one. The younger daughter names her son Ben-Ammi, which means ‘son of my clan,’ a more veiled euphemistic reference to her son’s origin. While the names of the sons are descriptive of their conception, they serve a negative etiological function for Israel’s neighbours – and frequent enemies – as the Moabites and the Ammonites. The definitions, puzzlingly humiliate Lot – as if revengeful retribution was a motive – while at the same time demeaning also his daughters that named the babies.

Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis & bold mine:

‘It is a remarkable fact that the children of Lot should have commemorated their infamous origin in their very names. Moab means literally “water of a father,” while Ammon or Ben-ammi means “son of my mother.” These names, so horribly suggestive, were proudly retained by two whole nations throughout their history. The Old Testament is silent as to the personal story of the two sons of Lot, but they evidently repeated the story of the founders of the other Hebrew nations, becoming chieftains… and founding royal dynasties.… The descendants of Moab within a few generations took possession of the country formerly inhabited by the Emim, (“terrible ones”), a branch of the aboriginal Nephilim, even as their cousins, the descendants of Ammon, took possession of the country formerly occupied by the Zuzim and Zamzummim. The [partial] slaughter of these ancient giant races by Chedorlaomer and his allies no doubt cleared the way for the children of Lot.

The Moabites found homes in the rich and well protected plateau to the east of the Dead Sea, extending from the land of Edom in the south to the land of Gilead in the north, while the Ammonites established themselves in the land of Gilead… and they dwelt here until they were driven into the eastern desert by the tribes of Gad and Reuben… their descendants recovered the land of Gilead after the Assyrians had carried away the tribe of Gad.’

2 Peter 2:6-8 ESV: … if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked 8(for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard)

Lot is not included in Hebrews chapter eleven as one of the faithful, with Abraham and Sarah. He is called a righteous soul in the Greek Interlinear. By extension, he is included with righteous Noah, Daniel and Job mentioned in Ezekiel 14:14. Lot also has in common with Job the dramatic and sudden loss of family. Lot lost his wife, and at least two daughters and two sons-in-law. Job 1:1-2, 18-19 ESV: ‘There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil. There were born to him seven sons and three daughters… “Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother’s house, and behold, a great wind came across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”’ 

Ammon, the younger brother of Moab, is invariably described as the ‘children or sons of Ammon’ in the Bible, a clue to their status not being quite the same as Moab or other identities investigated thus far. The Hebrew definition for H5983 – from H5971 – of Ammon is tribal or inbred as one born from incest.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Ben-ammi meaning: Son Of My Kinsman, Son Of My People from (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (‘am), people or kinsman [kindred].

The only Ben-ammi in the Bible is the incestuous son of Lot and his younger daughter, who becomes the patriarch of the “sons” of Ammon, also known as the Ammonites (Genesis 19:38)… it’s curious that both the daughters… of this prominent figure remain nameless, also since Lot’s daughters are matriarchs of enormous nations.

The noun (ben) means son, or more general: a member of one particular social or economic node – called a “house”, which is built upon the instructions of one (‘ab), or “father”… within… a larger economy… This noun obviously resembles the verb (bana), to build, and the noun (‘eben), stone. Our noun’s feminine version, namely (bat), means daughter, which resembles the noun (bayit), meaning house. 

The word for mother, (’em), is highly similar to that of tribe or people, (‘umma). The verb (‘mm) probably expressed to be inclusive or comprehensive. Its rare uses in the Bible relate to making secrets or making info available to an in-crowd. 

For a meaning of the name Ammon, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads A People. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes Great People, taking the extension as an intensitive.’

The children of Ammon today are in part, the French Canadians of Quebec. They also comprise the northwest corner in the nation of France; with the main body of French being descended  from Moab.

Herman Hoeh – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Abraham also had a nephew named Lot. Lot had two sons, Moab and Ammon. They were born to him after the calamity that hit Sodom (Genesis 19:37-38). They lived by the Arabs east of the Dead Sea next to Palestine. They are still in the same region today! Their nation today is called Jordan, after the Jordan River. Jordan has been much in the news lately, Amman is the capital of Jordan now.’

The Arabs lived in north Africa and then the Arabian Peninsula; they never lived north of this area or next to Moab and Ammon. The peoples of present day Jordan as discussed, are descendants of Mizra, son of Ham [refer Chapter XIV Mizra]. Moab and Ammon migrated from Palestine a very long time ago; with some two thousand years passing.

‘Isaiah 11:14 points out that these two sons of Lot live near Palestine today. Since the days of Isaiah, the children of Moab have been “very small and without strength” (Isaiah 16:13-14). They have not been taken “into captivity” to another nation (Jeremiah 48:11), In these latter days boastful Moab lives “together with the children of Ammon” (Ezekiel 25:9-10). The Kingdom of Jordan occupies part of present-day Palestine and keeps the Jews from dwelling in Old Jerusalem. Jeremiah 49:1-2 prophesied this over 2500 years ago! But Arabs and Jordanians are not the only Hebrews!’

Isaiah chapter sixteen is a future reference to Moab. Moab and Ammon are anything but a ‘very few and feeble’ people. The Arabic peoples from Ham are not Hebrews. This appellation refers broadly to the descendants of Peleg through his grandson, Eber. It would include Moab and Ammon. In time it was applied primarily to the sons of Jacob. The chief city or capital of the Ammonites was Rabbah.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Rabbah meaning: Great from the verb (rabab), to be great or many

There are two cities named Rabbah in the Bible, the lesser known one is a city in the territory allotted to the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:60). The most famous Rabbah was also known as Rabbath-bene-ammon or “Rabbath of the sons of Ammon” (Rabbath is really the same as Rabbah, just of an older spelling), which was the major city of Ammon (modern Amman, the capital of Jordan).

It’s first mentioned in the Bible as the final resting place of the huge iron bed of king Og of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:11). What Og’s bunk was doing in an Ammonite metropolis is a bit of a mystery. Bashan was a kingdom located to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and Ammon country was to the east of the Salt Sea. But Og was the last of the Rephaim… and they were expelled by the Ammonites (Deuteronomy 2:20). It appears that the Ammonites had hoisted Og’s huge stead to their capital as a trophy.

Even though YHWH had ordered not to meddle with Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:19), the tribes of Gad and Reuben [plus the 1/2 tribe of East Manasseh] settled in their land anyway. Rabbah is listed as just over the border of Gad, which puts it in or near Reuben, although that’s not explicitly mentioned (Joshua 15:25). The reason for this is probably that the Ammonites held out in Rabbah until the time of king David.

While the author of 2 Samuel focuses mainly on David’s seduction of Bathsheba, her husband Uriah was engaged with the siege of Rabbah. The author casually reports that the Ammonites were destroyed and Rabbah captured by general Joab (2 Samuel 11:1, 12:26). The gold crown of the Ammonite king weighed a talent and was placed on David’s head, and the Ammonites were massacred in the most creative ways (2 Samuel 12:31)… Nahash is also the name of the cruel Ammonite king whom Saul defeated (1 Samuel 11:1). The son of this Nahash, Hanun, provoked David into the siege that ended in Rabbah’s ultimate defeat (2 Samuel 10:1). 

… the identical noun (rab) means chief or captain. Noun (rob) means multitude or abundance. Possibly a second yet identical verb (rabab) means to shoot, particularly of arrows. This may very well be a specified usage of our verb since arrows are customarily shot en masse by many archers. Noun (rab) means archer, and is identical to the adjective meaning many. Fittingly, noun (arbeh) denotes a kind of locust.

For a meaning of the name Rabbah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Great, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has Great City, and BDB Theological Dictionary proposes Great or Populous.’

There are hundreds of references to Ammon and Moab, in the Bible as they were an arch nemesis of the sons of Jacob. The reason for this was heightened by the fact they were great nations with large populations living next to each other. The fact that the sons of Jacob had returned to the land centuries after leaving had only exacerbated their natural enmity as two closely related family members who just didn’t get along. 

Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Both became great and powerful clans or nations, but the Ammonites always preferred the roving life of… marauders, while Moab…  develop[ed] into a settled, well organized and prosperous nation, the chief characteristics of which were wealth and moral corruption.

The prosperity and riches of Moab are vividly portrayed in the Word. In the cities of this land there was “a great multitude of people,” living on the “glory” and “fat of the land,” possessing “great treasure,” and crowding the temples of Chemosh and Baal Peor, where infants were sacrificed, and virgins prostituted in the name of religion. Outside of the towns were the “plentiful fields,” the vineyards and gardens of “summer fruit,” the meadows where hundreds of thousands of sheep and cattle were browsing. Peace and prosperity reign everywhere; the people are fat and self-satisfied, but of the worship of the true God there is not a trace.

Small wonder that such a nation should view with alarm the approach of a great horde of desert wanderers, asking permission to pass through the land on their way to Canaan. They came as Hebrew kinsmen, worshipping an ancient but generally forsaken deity named Jehovah. Balak, the king of the Moabites, now bethought himself of a Syrian wizard, Balaam, who was know[n]: to prophecy in the name of Jehovah and who was wont to dispense his blessings or cursings for filthy lucre. If a prophet of Jehovah were to curse the children of Israel, the latter would surely be put to confusion. He, therefore, sent for the complaisant prophet, but great was his disgust when the magician was forced by his God to turn the intended curse into a blessing, the power and beauty of which are almost without equal in Hebrew literature. Dismayed, Balak now allied himself with the Midianites in an effort to destroy Israel by the seductions of harlots in the lascivious rites of Baal Peor, but again his scheme was frustrated, and he was glad to escape the frightful punishment meted out to the Midianites, who had been the most active in the plot.

The subsequent relations of Moab with Israel were of a somewhat mixed character, sometimes friendly, as is evident from the story of Ruth, the Moabitish ancestress of David, but more generally hostile. Not long after the Israelitish conquest, Eglon, king of Moab, by the assistance of Ammon and Amalek, “smote Israel and possessed himself of the city of palm trees,” (Jericho), The children of Israel now “served Eglon for eighteen years” (Judges 3:13), until they were delivered by Ehud. The Moabites, however, continued to harass the chosen people on various occasions, and were not subdued until David put to the sword two-thirds of the population, the remainder becoming bondsmen and subjected to a regular tribute, (2 Samuel 8:2; 23:20), thus literally fulfilling Balaam’s prophecy: “Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion and shall destroy him that remaineth of Ar,” (i.e., Moab). After the division of Solomon’s kingdom, Moab seems to have remained tributary to the kingdom of Israel, and in the time of Ahab paid an annual tribute of 100000 rams, – an indication of the almost fabulous wealth of so small a nation.

After the death of Ahab the Moabites revolted and joined the Ammonites in an attack upon the kingdom of Judah. The allies, however, fell to fighting one another; and Judah, Israel and Edom now joined in a war against Moab; the latter fell into an ambush and were slaughtered; the land of Moab was swept clean by the besom of destruction; the cities were beaten down and their stones scattered over the fields… the wells of water were filled up, and all the trees of the land were cut down. The king of Moab, with his family and a small remnant of the army, took refuge in Kir-haraseth where, in the extremity of despair, and in full sight of the besiegers, “he took his eldest son, that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall.” (2 Kings 3:27.) 

The besieging army, struck with horror at this sight, now withdrew to their own lands. After this awful event, nothing further is known of the history of Moab for a long period, but it appears that Moab gradually recovered all of its former prosperity, and in addition took possession of the territory of Reuben, after this tribe had been carried away by the Assyrians. At the time of the Babylonian invasion, Moab submitted to Nebuchadnezzar, and after the return of the Jews from the captivity the Moabites took the lead in annoying those who were rebuilding Jerusalem. Even at the time of the last Jewish war the Moabites, according to Josephus, was still “a very great nation,” but two hundred years afterwards they were exterminated or absorbed by a great invasion of “the children of the East.”’

The Moabites were neither ‘exterminated or absorbed’ but rather, they were forced to migrate westwards. The Ammonites were a more diverse or fragmented people compared to their elder brother Moab. In Canaan the Ammonites had their own territory north of Moab, with their own capital – Rabbah. Ultimately they joined with Moab and migrated with them after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. In modern times, most have unified with Moab in France, while the remainder migrated to New France in North America, eventually becoming the modern province of Quebec in Canada. 

Today, the term Rabbah – as in those Ammonites not with Moab – broadly means Quebec and Rabbah – as in specifically the capital city – is fulfilled by Quebec City.

Deuteronomy 2:16-22, 37

English Standard Version

16 “So as soon as all the men of war had perished and were dead from among the people, 17 the Lord said to me, 18 ‘Today you are to cross the border of Moab at Ar. 19 And when you approach the territory of the people of Ammon, do not harass them or contend with them, for I will not give you any of the land of the people of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot for a possession.’ 

20 (It is also counted as a land of Rephaim. Rephaim formerly lived there – but the Ammonites call them Zamzummim – 21 a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim; but the Lord destroyed them before the Ammonites, and they dispossessed them and settled in their place, 22 as he did for the people of Esau, who live in Seir, when he destroyed the Horites before them and they dispossessed them and settled in their place even to this day. 37 Only to the land of the sons of Ammon you did not draw near, that is, to all the banks of the river Jabbok and the cities of the hill country, whatever the Lord our God had forbidden us.

The Israelites and Ammonites continually disputed territory and land. The rift between Lot and Abraham, didn’t heal or improve with time it was continually aggravated. The instruction was clear: do not engage negatively with Ammon in any way or take their land.

Joshua 13:8-13

English Standard Version

8 With the other half of the tribe of Manasseh [half tribe of East Manasseh or Gilead] the Reubenites and the Gadites received their inheritance, which Moses gave them, beyond the Jordan eastward, as Moses the servant of the Lord gave them: 9 from Aroer, which is on the edge of the Valley of the Arnon, and the city that is in the middle of the valley, and all the tableland of Medeba as far as Dibon; 10 and all the cities of Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon, as far as the boundary of the Ammonites; 11 and Gilead, and the region of the Geshurites and Maacathites, and all Mount Hermon, and all Bashan to Salecah; 12 all the kingdom of Og in Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei (he alone was left of the remnant of the Rephaim); these Moses had struck and driven out. 13 Yet the people of Israel did not drive out the Geshurites or the Maacathites, but Geshur and Maacath dwell in the midst of Israel to this day.

After the sons of Jacob fought the existing Canaanite inhabitants and had either killed or subjugated them, the land was divided amongst the tribes on the eastern side of the River Jordan. The tribe of Manasseh had split in two. The half tribe of West Manasseh stayed with their brother Ephraim, while the half tribe of East Manasseh struck out on their own. With the tribes of Reuben and Gad, they requested to live on the east side of the River Jordan. These two and a half tribes believed the land was spacious and suitable to live. It did not come without difficulties; namely. Ammonites, Amorites, various tribes of Elioud – such as king Og of the Rephaim – and Mount Herman, the very headquarters so-to-speak, of the Nephilim.

Judges 10:17-18

English Standard Version

17 Then the Ammonites were called to arms, and they encamped in Gilead. And the people of Israel came together, and they encamped at Mizpah. 18 And the people, the leaders of Gilead, said one to another, “Who is the man who will begin to fight against the Ammonites? He shall be head over all the inhabitants of Gilead.” 

Gilead, a name brought to the wider public’s attention by the author Margaret Attwood and her insightful novel, The Handmaid’s Tale in 1985, was the broad area east of the River Jordan and bordering north of Ammon that had been settled by the two and a half tribes of Israel. In time, the word Gilead became more synonymous with the half tribe of East Manasseh than with Reuben or Gad.

Judges 11:11-33

English Standard Version

11 So Jephthah [tenth Judge of Israel for 6 years beginning 1100 BCE from the half tribe of East Manasseh or Gilead] went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and leader over them. And Jephthah spoke all his words before the Lord at Mizpah. 

12 Then Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites and said, “What do you have against me, that you have come to me to fight against my land?” 13 And the king of the Ammonites answered the messengers of Jephthah, “Because Israel on coming up from Egypt took away my land, from the Arnon to the Jabbok and to the Jordan; now therefore restore it peaceably.” 14 Jephthah again sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites 15 and said to him, “Thus says Jephthah: Israel did not take away the land of Moab or the land of the Ammonites, 16 but when they came up from Egypt, Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh. 17 Israel then sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, ‘Please let us pass through your land,’ but the king of Edom would not listen. And they sent also to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel remained at Kadesh.

18 “Then they journeyed through the wilderness and went around the land of Edom and the land of Moab and arrived on the east side of the land of Moab and camped on the other side of the Arnon. But they did not enter the territory of Moab, for the Arnon was the boundary of Moab. 19 Israel then sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, king of Heshbon, and Israel said to him, ‘Please let us pass through your land to our country,’ 20 but Sihon did not trust Israel to pass through his territory, so Sihon gathered all his people together and encamped at Jahaz and fought with Israel. 21 And the Lord, the God of Israel, gave Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they defeated them. So Israel took possession of all the land of the Amorites, who inhabited that country… 

23 So then the Lord, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel; and are you to take possession of them? 24 Will you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? And all that the Lord our God has dispossessed before us, we will possess. 25 Now are you any better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab? Did he ever contend against Israel, or did he ever go to war with them? 26 While Israel lived in Heshbon and its villages, and in Aroer and its villages, and in all the cities that are on the banks of the Arnon, 300 years [1406 – 1106 BCE], why did you not deliver them within that time? 27 I therefore have not sinned against you, and you do me wrong by making war on me. The Lord, the Judge, decide this day between the people of Israel and the people of Ammon.” 28 But the king of the Ammonites did not listen to the words of Jephthah that he sent to him.

29 Then the Spirit of the Lord was upon Jephthah, and he passed through Gilead and Manasseh and passed on to Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of Gilead he passed on to the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, 31 then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” 32 So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the Lord gave them into his hand. 33 And he struck them from Aroer to the neighborhood of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim, with a great blow. So the Ammonites were subdued before the people of Israel.

The king of the Ammonites raised an issue three hundred years old. The Moabites hadn’t made an issue of it, so why Ammon and why now was Jephthah’s reasoning. The Israelites had defeated the Amorites – after being refused passage through Edom and Moab – and probably some of their land, had once been Ammonite land. It was too late to dispute it now. The king of Ammon remained stubborn and proud, but did not win it back.

2 Samuel 12:26-31

English Standard Version

26 Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and took the royal city. 27 And Joab sent messengers to David and said, “I have fought against Rabbah; moreover, I have taken the city of waters. 28 Now then gather the rest of the people together and encamp against the city and take it, lest I take the city and it be called by my name.” 29 So David gathered all the people together and went to Rabbah and fought against it and took it. 30 And he took the crown of their king from his head. The weight of it was a talent of gold, and in it was a precious stone, and it was placed on David’s head. And he brought out the spoil of the city, a very great amount. 31 And he brought out the people who were in it and set them to labor with saws and iron picks and iron axes and made them toil at the brick kilns. And thus he did to all the cities of the Ammonites. Then David and all the people returned to Jerusalem. 

Quebec is Kebec in Algonquin, meaning ‘where the river narrows.’ The Province of Quebec has a vast coastline. The motto of Quebec City is Don de Dieu feray valoir: “I shall put God’s gift to good use.” The Don de Dieu was one of three ships that set sail from France under captain Henry Couillard and on July 3, 1608 explorer Samuel de Champlain – established a fort at Cape Diamond and – founded Quebec City – the oldest city in Canada. The Montmorency Falls is located on the Montmorency River and are about 270 feet tall – one hundred feet taller than Niagara Falls. One of Quebec’s most important resources is water, harnessed for hydroelectric power.

David exacted harsh measures on the Ammonites, which didn’t improve relations, but showed the strength of negative feeling between the two peoples. His actions did contravene the instruction of not to contend or ‘to struggle in opposition’ or ‘strive in rivalry’ with Ammon.

1 Chronicles 19:19

English Standard Version

And when the servants of Hadadezer saw that they had been defeated by Israel, they made peace with David and became subject to him. So the Syrians[Aram-Gether]were not willing to save the Ammonites anymore.

1 Kings 11:7

English Standard Version

Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.

Nehemiah 4:1-9

English Standard Version

Now when Sanballat heard that we were building the wall, he was angry and greatly enraged, and he jeered at the Jews. 2 And he said in the presence of his brothers and of the army of Samaria, “What are these feeble Jews doing? Will they restore it for themselves? Will they sacrifice? Will they finish up in a day? Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish, and burned ones at that?”Tobiah the Ammonite was beside him, and he said, “Yes, what they are building – if a fox goes up on it he will break down their stone wall!” 

4 Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. 5 Do not cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders. 6 So we built the wall. And all the wall was joined together to half its height, for the people had a mind to work. 

7 But when Sanballat and Tobiah and the Arabs [not Arabs from Mizra. Arabians meaning, in the eastern peninsula of Arabia – probably Joktan] and the Ammonites and the Ashdodites [Philistines] heard that the repairing of the walls of Jerusalem was going forward and that the breaches were beginning to be closed, they were very angry. 8 And they all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause confusion in it. 9 And we prayed to our God and set a guard as a protection against them day and night.

The Medes and Persians had allowed captives from Judah to return to Jerusalem and rebuild its walls and Temple. Tobiah the Ammonite was one who mocked their efforts.

Jeremiah 40:11-16

English Standard Version

11 Likewise, when all the Judeans who were in Moab and among the Ammonites and in Edom and in other lands heard that the king of Babylon had left a remnant in Judah and had appointed Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, son of Shaphan, as governor over them, 12 then all the Judeans returned from all the places to which they had been driven and came to the land of Judah, to Gedaliah at Mizpah. And they gathered wine and summer fruits in great abundance. 13 Now Johanan the son of Kareah and all the leaders of the forces in the open country came to Gedaliah at Mizpah 

14 and said to him, “Do you know that Baalis the king of the Ammonites has sent Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to take your life?” But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam would not believe them. 15 Then Johanan the son of Kareah spoke secretly to Gedaliah at Mizpah, “Please let me go and strike down Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and no one will know it. Why should he take your life, so that all the Judeans who are gathered about you would be scattered, and the remnant of Judah would perish?” 16 But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam said to Johanan the son of Kareah, “You shall not do this thing, for you are speaking falsely of Ishmael.” [Ishmael (not Abraham’s son) did assassinate Gedaliah]

Jeremiah 49:1-6 

English Standard Version

Concerning the Ammonites. Thus says the Lord: “Has Israel no sons? Has he no heir? Why then has Milcom [A prominent god of Ammon, with Molech] dispossessed Gad and his people settled in its cities? 2 Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will cause the battle cry to be heard against Rabbah of the Ammonites; it shall become a desolate mound, and its villages shall be burned with fire; then Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, says the Lord. 3 “Wail, O Heshbon, for Ai is laid waste! Cry out, O daughters of Rabbah! [the descendants of Lot’s youngest daughter] Put on sackcloth, lament, and run to and fro among the hedges! For Milcom shall go into exile, with his priests and his officials.4 Why do you boast of your valleys, O faithless daughter, who trusted in her treasures, saying, ‘Who will come against me?’ 5 Behold, I will bring terror upon you, declares the Lord God of hosts, from all who are around you, and you shall be driven out, every man straight before him, with none to gather the fugitives. 6 “But afterward I will restore the fortunes of the Ammonites, declares the Lord.”

In modern times, France and Quebec have been blessed with wealth and abundance.

Ezekiel 21:28-32

English Standard Version

28 “And you, son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord God concerning the Ammonites and concerning their reproach; say, A sword, a sword is drawn for the slaughter. It is polished to consume and to flash like lightning – 29 while they see for you false visions, while they divine lies for you – to place you on the necks of the profane wicked, whose day has come, the time of their final punishment. 30 Return it to its sheath. In the place where you were created, in the land of your origin, I will judge you. 31 And I will pour out my indignation upon you; I will blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, [similar to the fire inflicted on Sodom]and I will deliver you into the hands of brutish men, skillful to destroy. 32 You shall be fuel for the fire. Your blood shall be in the midst of the land. You shall be no more remembered, for I the Lord have spoken.” 

The punishment decreed at the end of the latter days when the Son of Man returns. Many nations will suffer similar fates and some because of their attitude and treatment of the sons of Jacob.

Ezekiel 25:1-11

English Standard Version

The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face toward the Ammonites and prophesy against them. 3 Say to the Ammonites, Hear the word of the Lord God: Thus says the Lord God, Because you said, ‘Aha!’ over my sanctuary when it was profaned, and over the land of Israel when it was made desolate, and over the house of Judah when they went into exile, 4 therefore behold, I am handing you over to the people of the East for a possession, and they shall set their encampments among you and make their dwellings in your midst. They shall eat your fruit, and they shall drink your milk. 5 I will make Rabbah a pasture for camels and Ammon a fold for flocks. 

Then you will know that I am the Lord. 6 For thus says the Lord God: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet and rejoiced with all the malice within your soul against the land of Israel, 7 therefore, behold, I have stretched out my hand against you, and will hand you over as plunder to the nations. And I will cut you off from the peoples and will make you perish out of the countries; I will destroy you. Then you will know that I am the Lord.

8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab [France] from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations, 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.

Whether this prophecy is dual and to occur again, time will tell. The people of the east in the past as well as today includes a number of alternatives. It could mean a dominant near neighbour and relative as in Ishmael, who originally dwelt in the east, known as Arabia or alternatively the wilderness. Secondly and unlikely, Assyria or Russia – the king of the North – as they spared Moab and the Ammonites in the past as well as in the future [Daniel 11.41]. As it appears to be the far future, possibly further distant than the King of the North timeframe, it could mean the far East and descendants of Japheth – such as Magog, Tubal and Meschech [Revelation 16:12] – in partial ironic fulfilment of the sons of Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem [Genesis 9:27].

Daniel 11:40-41

English Standard Version

40 “At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack  him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through. 41 He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his [Asshur’s] hand [Russia]: Edom and Moab [France]and the main part of the Ammonites [Paris and north western France].

The French Canadians heralded from principally the north and western regions of France, particularly Normandy and Poitou. Every region with direct access to the Ocean and with a tradition of long-term fishing expeditions, attracted migrants to New France. Apparently, French Canadian soldiers were surprised when they landed in Normandy, discovering how much Norman French was like their own dialect.

The Tribe of Benjamin are the Normans, Peter Salemi – emphasis & bold mine:

‘A review of census records for the year 1700 reveals that of New France’s French-speaking colonists, 29% came from the provinces of Poitou, Aunis, Saintonge, and Angoumois in the mother country; 22% from Normandy and Perche; 15% from Paris and Ile-de-France; 13% from Anjou, Touraine, Beauce, and Maine; 9% from Brittany, Picardy, and Champagne; 5% from Limousin, Périgord, and Guyenne; 7% from other regions. 

Thus over 50% of immigrants to Quebec, and possibly much more, came from north of the Loire river in France, i.e., areas of Norman, Breton, and Frankish settlement. In addition, many of the Seigneurs (Lords) of Quebec, e.g., the families of de Lotbinière, Panet, Montizambert, etc., were Norman, who left Normandy in 1686.’

Amos 1:13-15

English Standard Version

13 Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of the Ammonites, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead, that they might enlarge their border. 

14 So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah, and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind; 15 and their king shall go into exile, he and his princes together,” says the Lord. 

Zephaniah 2:8-10

Amplified Bible

“I have heard the taunting of Moab [and] the revilings of the sons of Ammon, With which they have taunted My people And become arrogant against their territory [by violently and cruelly violating Israel’s boundary and trying to seize its land]. 

9 “Therefore, as I live,” declares the Lord of hosts, The God of Israel, “Moab will in fact become like Sodom [and] the sons of Ammon like Gomorrah,[a] land possessed by nettles and salt pits, And a perpetual desolation. The remnant of My people will plunder them And what is left of My nation will inherit them [as their own].”

10 This they shall have in return for their pride, because they have taunted and become arrogant against the people of the Lord of hosts. 

Ammon had no authority to try to possess Gilead or take it from Israel. The sitting on the sidelines and relishing Judah’s downfall and subsequent captivity at the hands of the Chaldeans [refer Chapter XV Nahor & Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin], has also been a cause of Ammon and particularly Moab, receiving retribution. 

An important person mentioned earlier from the line of Ammon was Naamah, a royal princess of Ammon – not to be confused with the daughter of evil Lamech prior to the Flood. An additional reason for the sons of Jacob not to wage war and destroy Ammon and Moab. Her name means ‘sweet, lovely’ or ‘pleasant’ from the verb naem. Naamah married Solomon before he became king in 970 BCE. Their son, Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE. Naamah provided the heir to the throne of Judah and she is the only wife of Solomon, mentioned by name in the Bible. Naamah is also only one of two foreign Queen Mothers of Israel or Judah, with Jezebel – a Princess of Tyre and Sidon – daughter of the Phoenician King Ethbaal. Naamah, may well have been an influence on Solomon and his turning away from the Eternal to worshipping Ammonite and Moabite gods.

1 Kings 14:21-23

English Standard Version

21 Now Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city that the Lord had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. His mother’s name was Naamah the Ammonite. 22 And [the House of] Judah did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins that they committed, more than all that their fathers had done. 23 For they also built for themselves high places and pillars and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree…[refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]

15 Fun Quebec City Facts, Nadeen White, 2018 – capitalisation hers, emphasis & bold mine:

‘Quebec City is also known simply as Quebec [similar to Rabbah of the Ammonites]. It is located in the Canadian province of Quebec… [and] is the capital city… [as well as] the second largest city… Montreal is the largest city in the province of Quebec. 

Quebec is a French speaking province [and] is the official language… Approximately 80% of the residents speak French as their native language… It is the oldest French speaking [region] in North America. However, English is [also widely] spoken by most residents… Old Quebec is surrounded by fortified city walls [It is the only remaining walled city in North America north of Mexico] that were designated as a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1985… 

Quebec produces a LOT of maple syrup… I had no idea that Canada produces about 70% of the world’s pure maple syrup. Out of that 70% about 90% is from the province of Quebec. Most of the maple syrup produced in the U.S. comes from Vermont. 

In 2010 the Province of Quebec produced roughly 7,989,000 gallons of maple syrup while Vermont produced roughly 890,000 gallons. Quebec isn’t just French… there are many Irish people here too! There is actually a large Irish community in Quebec. During the 17th century, Irish inhabitants of France were sent to Quebec to help populate the area. Historians estimate that about 40% of the population in Quebec is of Irish descent.’ 

The Irish component of Quebec is more than interesting, it is of great significance. Once we study the Irish and the British descended peoples of Canada, their relationship with the French Ammonites of Quebec will be fascinatingly evident. Quebec is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic and during the Irish Potato Famine of the 1840s and 1850s a large number of Irish Catholics, migrated to Canada and Quebec. 

The Province of Quebec comprises nearly one-sixth of Canada’s total land area, is the largest of Canada’s ten provinces and possesses an abundance of mineral wealth. The site of Quebec City, originally occupied by an Indian village named Stadacona, was discovered by Jacques Cartier in 1535. Quebec Province and city were formally French until being ceded to Great Britain in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris. This was the result of the famous Battle of Quebec on the Plains of Abraham – interesting coincidence – adjacent to the city in 1759, where the French were defeated. Later, Great Britain reinforced its military defences of the city in time to repel an attack during the American Revolution in the second Battle of Quebec in 1775. 

The arrival of displaced Loyalists following American independence, increased Quebec’s population and so did trade with Britain, much of it through the port of Quebec. Up until the mid-nineteenth century, Quebec’s economy was centred on French and then British mercantilism. The British Parliament passed the Constitutional Act of 1791, which split the large colony of Quebec into two provinces: Upper Canada – now the province of Ontario – and Lower Canada, now the province of Quebec. Quebec city, formerly the capital of the colony, remained the capital of Lower Canada.

After the British takeover of New France, Montreal – founded in 1642 and the second largest Canadian city after Toronto – gained the dominant economic position in the province, whereas Quebec became an important port city. Quebec is the second most populous province of Canada after Ontario with 8,604,500 people. ‘On November 27, 2006, the House of Commons passed a symbolic motion moved by Prime Minister Stephen Harper declaring “that this House recognize that the Quebecois [Francophones] form a nation within a united Canada.”However, there is considerable debate and uncertainty over what this means. The debate over the status of Quebec is a highly animated one to this day.’  

Nearly half of the total population of Quebec are descendants of the ten thousand original French settlers. When the Dominion of Canada was established in 1867, French Canadians accounted for one-third of the newly formed country’s population. In 1974, French was made the official language of Quebec province. Between 1897 and 1936, Quebec competed with Ontario for domestic and foreign investment. Montreal was the headquarters of the national banks, the insurance corporations and the railway companies. Even so, Ontario, because of its proximity to the United States, its shared language and the vast amounts of hydroelectric power at Niagara Falls, was more attractive for United States investment. An ensuing struggle developed between Montreal and Toronto, with Toronto eventually gaining the upper hand.

A colony of New France included Acadia, with its first capital in Port-Royal in 1605. ‘The term Acadia today refers to regions of North America that are historically associated with the lands, descendants, or culture of the former region [in north eastern Canada]. It particularly refers to regions of The Maritimes with Acadian roots, language, and culture, primarily in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islands, and Prince Edward Island, as well as in Maine.It can also refer to the Acadian diaspora in southern Louisiana, a region also referred to as Acadiana. In the abstract, Acadia refers to the existence of an Acadian culture in any of these regions. People living in Acadia are called Acadians which changed to Cajuns in Louisiana, the American pronunciation of Acadians.’ 

The word Acadia is similar to Akkad[ia] of Babylon and Acadian is a copy of Akkadian. The original peoples of Akkad were descendants of Arphaxad and Peleg. They were related to or from the peoples of Haran and Nahor. As Haran’s children include the modern French it is a notable association. Explorer Giovanni de Verrazzano is credited in originating the designation Acadia on his 16th century map, where he applied the ancient Greek name Arcadia to the entire Atlantic coast north of Virginia. 

‘Arcadia’ is derived from the district in ancient Greece, ‘which had the extended meanings of ‘refuge’ or ‘idyllic place’.’ By the time of de Champlain, it was La Cadie without the r.In the Mi’ kmaq language, Cadie means ‘fertile land.’ We will return to the link between the French and the ancient Greeks. A fascinating side note of history and all the more interesting once it is understood that the French Canadians are descended from Ammon; as well as the indirect parallel with Lot’s daughters, are the eight hundred women that most French Canadians are literally descended from. 

CBC, Filles du Roi, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘It’s 1663. New France has a population problem. To dominate the fur trade along the St. Lawrence River, New France needs people. Britain’s colonies to the south have 18 times as many settlers as New France. Britain has a wide-open policy on who can come to the colonies, meaning Brits from all walks of life are risking the perilous ocean voyage. France, on the other hand, has banned Protestants from going to New France. The British colonies have a farming-based economy, meaning men bring their wives over and have families, whereas the French settlers are mostly fur trappers and missionaries. That population gap is only getting wider. Britain’s colonies are growing, but in New France, which has only one woman for every six men, the population is stuck.

To help fix New France’s gender imbalance, two men come up with an innovative idea: Jean Talon (Intendant of the colony) and King Louis XIV decide to import young women to the colony to marry male settlers. The women would be known as the Filles du Roi or “Daughters of the King.” Almost all the women are poor. Many are orphans. 

[Between the years 1663-1673, these women of marriageable age came from Rouen in the province of Normandy, La Rochelle in Aunis, and included beggars and orphans from the streets of Paris]. One in 10 doesn’t survive the voyage from France. For the 800 women who make it, France pays for the women’s passage and provides a dowry… from the royal treasury. 

The women are also given a hope chest containing, among other things, a pair of hose, a pair of shoes, a bonnet, gloves, a comb, a belt and various sewing supplies. The Filles du Roi step off their boats into a foreign landscape. It Is a sparsely populated, heavily wooded wilderness. Many of them are from France’s cities and are about to get a harsh introduction to the backbreaking world of 17th century farm labour. Canadian winter will be unlike anything they’ve ever experienced. And in the coming years, many of them are going to be pregnant more often than not.

As daunting as that sounds, all of the Filles du Roi come to New France voluntarily. Even with the cold climate and hard toil, life in New France has advantages over the lives they left behind. Unlike many women at the time, the Filles du Roi are allowed to choose their husbands. Admittedly, they’re choosing from a very small pool – the population of New France is just over 3,000 and includes a disproportionately high number of priests. The women meet potential suitors in a series of chaperoned, interview-like “dates.”

The meetings are presided over by Jean Talon himself, along with Ursuline nun Marie Guyart… The women sail down the St. Lawrence, stopping first at Quebec City, then Trois-Rivieres, and eventually making their way to Montreal. At every stop, they have to make a choice; go with one of the men there, or see if there’s a better husband waiting down river. The women are given 50 livres – the equivalent of roughly $1,000 today – as a dowry. As poor women without dowries, finding a husband (let alone one they liked), would have been nearly impossible in France. There are other advantages, too. Abundant food means that women in New France live longer than their peers in Europe.

Families with more than 10 children get an additional annual pension of 300 livres ($6,000) from the crown. The program leads to a population explosion unlike anything Canada has seen since. The average family has five children – almost twice as many as the “Baby Boom” that follows WWII. The population of New France more than doubles in a decade. Two-thirds of today’s French-Canadians can trace their ancestry back to one of these 800 women.Their influence was felt outside Quebec, as well. Some famous Americans also claim a Fille du Roi as an ancestor, including Hiliary Clinton, Madonna and Angelina Jolie. There are very few first-hand accounts of the lives of the Filles du Roi. Few of them could read or write. Their histories have largely been told by subsequent generations. That said, one thing we know with absolute certainty: the Quebec we know today owes a lot to the fortitude of these incredibly tough women.’

Moab is Ammon’s elder brother and comprises the bulk of the French people. In the past, his peoples were also more numerous and they interacted with the sons of Jacob constantly through conventional warfare – unlike the guerrilla tactics of the Ammonites. The name Abarim – which has been an invaluable biblical word definition and concordance website – is actually a mountain range in the land of Moab.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Moab meaning: Who Is Your Father?, Water Of A Father from (1) (mi), who, or (may), “water of …”, and (2) the noun (‘ab), father

The etymology and original meaning of the name Moab is unknown. The word moab is foreign to Hebrew… However, to a creative Hebrew audience, the name may have sounded like a compilation of two elements: the interrogative particle (me), what or (mi), who… The noun (‘ab) means father… It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu means to decide.

Thus the name Moab would carry the meaning of Who’s… or What’s Your Father? a rhetorical question to which the story may easily give rise. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names takes a different approach and goes with the word (may), meaning water… Water represents the great unknown from which the dry land of the known emerges. Thus Jones reads Water Of A Father, and explains this to mean seed or progeny. The problem here is that semen is never referred to as a father’s waters.

The name Ar meaning: City from the noun (‘ir), city

The name Ar (or more complete: Ar of Moab – see Numbers 21:28) was a city on the southern shore of the river Arnon (Numbers 21:15). When YHWH delivers his famous “do not harass Moab” sermon, he declares that he gave Ar to the sons of Lot (which would be the Ammonites and the Moabites – Deuteronomy 2:9). Much later, the prophet Isaiah declares his blood curdling prophecies against Moab, and foretells its utter destruction, along with Kir of Moab (Isaiah 15:1).

Adjectives (‘ariri) and (‘ar’ar) mean stripped, childless or destitute. Noun (me’ara) literally means “place of being stripped” and is the Bible’s common word for cave. Verb (‘ur I) means to rouse oneself – literally to collect and bundle one’s feelings. Noun (‘ir) means excitement. Identical verb (‘ur II) means to be exposed or laid bare. Noun (ma’or) means nakedness and noun (ma’arom) means naked one. Adjectives (‘erom), (‘erom), (‘arom) and (‘arom) mean naked. Noun (‘or) means skin or hide. Verb (‘ara) also means to be naked or bare. Nouns (‘ara), (ma’ara) and (ma’ar) refer to bare or exposed places. Nouns (‘erwa) and (‘erya) mean nakedness or exposure. Noun (ta’ar) denotes a thing that makes bare: a razor or sheath of a sword.

The name Kir meaning: Wall from the noun (qir), wall 

The noun (qarqa’) means floor; earth trampled into a compact state. The verb (qarqar) means to forcibly compact, to pound down. Verb (qara), and its by-form (qara’), mean to near, to meet or to happen upon. Noun (qora) describes a rafter or beam; the things that come together to form a roof, and which obviously relate to bricks pieced into a wall. Nouns (qareh) and (miqreh) mean chance or accident, fortune or fate. Noun (qeri)means opposition, contrariness. 

For this same reason, the nouns (qiryah) and (qeret) are the words for city and federation of cities. Adjective (qari’) means called or summoned… And noun (miqra’) means convocation or called assembly. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has A Wall, A Fortress, but this word for wall typically doesn’t refer to a military wall.’

Numbers 21:28-29

English Standard Version

28 For fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the city of Sihon. It devoured Ar of Moab, and swallowed the heights of the [River] Arnon. 29 Woe to you, O Moab! You are undone, O people of Chemosh! He has made his sons fugitives, and his daughters captives, to an Amorite king, Sihon.

Ar and Kir of Moab appear to be distinct and the most prominent cities of Moab. Today, they would equate to the capital Paris and possibly the principal port – also the second biggest city – Marseille. The numbers of the Israelites and their series of military victories were a serious concern to Moab; though Moab was unaware of the Eternal’s edict to the sons of Jacob to not attack Moab and Ammon. In a preemptive strike, King Balak of Moab, summoned a Seer and Prophet to pronounce a curse on the sons of Jacob. Though the best laid plan did not eventuate as the Moabites would have hoped.

Numbers 22:1-41

English Standard Version

Then the people of Israel set out and camped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho. 

2 And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. 3 And Moab was in great dread of the people, because they were many. Moab was overcome with fear of the people of Israel. 4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian [descendants of Abraham and his second wife, Keturah – refer Chapter XVII Abraham], “This horde will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.” So Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, 5 sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor at Pethor, which is near the River in the land of the people of Amaw, to call him, saying, 

“Behold, a people has come out of Egypt. They cover the face of the earth [estimation accounts for three million plus people, including 600,000 fighting men able to take up arms], and they are dwelling opposite me.Come now, curse this people for me, since they are too mighty for me. Perhaps I shall be able to defeat them and drive them from the land, for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed.” 

7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message… 9 And God came to Balaam and said, “Who are these men with you?” 10 And Balaam said to God, “Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me…

12 God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.” 13 So Balaam rose in the morning and said to the princes of Balak, “Go to your own land, for the Lord has refused to let me go with you.” 14 So the princes of Moab rose and went to Balak and said, “Balaam refuses to come with us.” 15 Once again Balak sent princes, more in number and more honorable than these.  16 And they came to Balaam and said to him, “Thus says Balak the son of Zippor: ‘Let nothing hinder you from coming to me, 17 for I will surely do you great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do. Come, curse this people for me.’” 18 But Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the Lord my God to do less or more. 19 So you, too, please stay here tonight, that I may know what more the Lord will say to me.” 20 And God came to Balaam at night and said to him, “If the men have come to call you, rise, go with them; but only do what I tell you.” 21 So Balaam rose in the morning and saddled his donkey and went with the princes of Moab.

22 But God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the Lord took his stand in the way as his adversary. Now he was riding on the donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 And the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road, with a drawn sword in his hand [like a Cherub]. And the donkey turned aside out of the road and went into the field. And Balaam struck the donkey, to turn her into the road… 28 Then the Lord opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?” 29 And Balaam said to the donkey, “Because you have made a fool of me. I wish I had a sword in my hand, for then I would kill you.” … 31 Then the Lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the way, with his drawn sword in his hand. And he bowed down and fell on his face. 

32 And the angel of the Lord said to him, “Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to oppose you because your way is perverse before me. 33 The donkey saw me and turned aside before me these three times. If she had not turned aside from me, surely just now I would have killed you and let her live.” 34 Then Balaam said to the angel of the Lord, “I have sinned, for I did not know that you stood in the road against me. Now therefore, if it is evil in your sight, I will turn back.” 35 And the angel of the Lord said to Balaam, “Go with the men, but speak only the word that I tell you.” So Balaam went on with the princes of Balak.

36 When Balak heard that Balaam had come, he went out to meet him at the city of Moab [Ar], on the border formed by the Arnon, at the extremity of the border… 38 Balaam said to Balak, “Behold, I have come to you! Have I now any power of my own to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak.” 39 Then Balaam went with Balak, and they came to Kiriath-huzoth. 40 And Balak sacrificed oxen and sheep, and sent for Balaam and for the princes who were with him. 41 And in the morning Balak took Balaam and brought him up to Bamoth-baal…

In Numbers Twenty-three, Balaam does not curse Israel but speaks of the blessings given them by the Creator. In Numbers Twenty-four, Balaam then precedes to curse the enemies of the sons of Jacob after adding a blessing to the Israelites.

Numbers 24:10-14, 17

English Standard Version

10 And Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he struck his hands together. And Balak said to Balaam, “I called you to curse my enemies, and behold, you have blessed them these three times. 11 Therefore now flee to your own place. I said, ‘I will certainly honor you,’ but the Lord has held you back from honor.” 12 And Balaam said to Balak, “Did I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, 13 ‘If Balak should give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not be able to go beyond the word of the Lord, to do either good or bad of my own will. What the Lord speaks, that will I speak’? 14 And now, behold, I am going to my people. Come, I will let you know what this people will do to your people in the latter days.” 17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near [the promised Messiah]: a star [blessing of Ephraim] shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter [blessing of Judah] shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth.

Deuteronomy 2:9-11

English Standard Version

9 And the Lord said to me, ‘Do not harass Moab or contend with them in battle, for I will not give you any of their land for a possession, because I have given Ar [the capital] to the people of Lot for a possession.’ 10 The Emim formerly lived there, a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim. 11 Like the Anakim they are also counted as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim.

Deuteronomy 34:1-8

English Standard Version

Then Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, which is opposite Jericho. And the Lord showed him all the land, Gilead as far as Dan [the far north east], 2 all Naphtali [the north], the land of Ephraim and Manasseh, all the land of Judah as far as the western sea [the far south west], 3 the Negeb, and the Plain, that is, the Valley of Jericho the city of palm trees, as far as Zoar. 

4 And the Lord said to him, “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give it to your offspring.’ I have let you see it with your eyes, but you shall not go over there.” 

So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, 6 and he [the Eternal] buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day. Moses was 120 years old when he died. His eye was undimmed, and his vigor unabated.And the people of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days…

Judges 3:12-14, 26-30

English Standard Version

12 And the people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done what was evil in the sight of the Lord. 13 He gathered to himself the Ammonites and the Amalekites [grandson of Esau], and went and defeated Israel. And they took possession of the city of palms. 14 And the people of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years.

26 Ehud [second Judge of Israel – left handed son of Gera from the tribe of Benjamin] escaped while they delayed, and he passed beyond the idols and escaped to Seirah. 27 When he arrived, he sounded the trumpet in the hill country of Ephraim. Then the people of Israel went down with him from the hill country, and he was their leader. 28 And he said to them, “Follow after me, for the Lord has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand.” So they went down after him and seized the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites and did not allow anyone to pass over. 29 And they killed at that time about 10,000 of the Moabites, all strong, able-bodied men; not a man escaped. 30 So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel. And the land had rest for eighty years [Ehud was the Judge of Israel for the same period from 1284 to 1204 BCE].

A famous descendant of Moab and ancestor of King David, as mentioned previously, is Ruth. Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Ruth means: Friend, Associate, Vision, View from the noun (rea’), friend or companion and from the noun (re’ut), a looking or understanding.

Ruth was the Moabite wife of Mahlon, son of Elimelech and Naomi of Bethlehem. Their other son, Chilion, married Orphah also of Moab. When the men die [in battle with Israel], Ruth and Naomi move back to Bethlehem, where Ruth marries Boaz. In order to do so, Boaz appeals to the Leviratic Law, which dictates that when a man dies childless, his brother is to marry his widow and sire children in the name of the deceased man (Ruth 4:10, Deuteronomy 25:5). Ruth and Boaz become the parents of Obed, the grandparents of Jesse and the great-grandparents of David, the great king of Israel, and finally the ancestors of Jesus…

Verb (ra’a I) means to pasture or feed and the participle (ra’a) means shepherd… Verb (ra’a II) means to associate with. Nouns (rea’), (re’eh) and (merea’) mean friend, associate or “neighbor”. Nouns (ra’ya), (re’a) and (re’ut) describe a female attendant, mate or friend. Scholars who follow this root group see the name Ruth as a feminine derivation of the root (ra’a II), meaning to associate with, or be a friend of. And thus, they say, the name Ruth means (Lady-) Friend or (Lady-) Companion. The… NOBSE Study Bible Name List agrees and reads Female Companion for a meaning of the name Ruth. The… Alfred Jones (Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) proposes a different etymology and goes after the root (ra’a), meaning to see… The verb (ra’a) means to see, and by extension to understand. It may mean to become visible (of, say, an angel) or to become understandable (of, say, a theory). Noun (ro’eh) means either seer, or prophetic vision, and noun (mar’a) means either vision as means of revelation, or mirror.

Specifically, Jones sees the name Ruth as a contraction of the noun (re’ut), meaning look. Hence, for a meaning of the name Ruth, Jones reads Beauty but perhaps better would be Vision. There’s no telling whether to an ancient Hebrew audience the name Ruth sounded like Female Friend or Beauty, but all-in-all Ruth is quite a name.’

Ruth 1:15-18

English Standard Version

15 And she said, “See, your sister-in-law [Orphah] has gone back to her people and to her gods [Chemosh]; return after your sister-in-law.” 16 But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. 17 Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” 18 And when Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more. 22 So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab. And they came to Bethlehem [in Judah] at the beginning of barley harvest.

Ruth 2:1-20

English Standard Version

Now Naomi had a relative of her husband’s, a worthy man of the clan of Elimelech, whose name was Boaz.2 And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go to the field and glean among the ears of grain after him in whose sight I shall find favor.” And she said to her, “Go, my daughter.” … 8 Then Boaz said to Ruth… “All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told to me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. 12 The Lord repay you for what you have done… 13 Then she said, “I have found favor in your eyes, my lord, for you have comforted me and spoken kindly to your servant, though I am not one of your servants.” “The man’s name with whom I worked today is Boaz.” 20 And Naomi said… “The man is a close relative of ours…

Ruth 3:1-14

English Standard Version

Then Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, should I not seek rest for you, that it may be well with you? 2 Is not Boaz our relative, with whose young women you were? See, he is winnowing barley tonight at the threshing floor. 3 Wash therefore and anoint yourself, and put on your cloak and go down to the threshing floor… 4 when he lies down, observe the place where he lies. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down, and he will tell you what to do.”

8 At midnight the man was startled and turned over, and behold, a woman lay at his feet! 9 He said, “Who are you?” And she answered, “I am Ruth, your servant. Spread your wings over your servant, for you are a redeemer.” 10 And he said, “May you be blessed by the Lord… in that you have not gone after young men, whether poor or rich. 11 And now, my daughter, do not fear. I will do for you all that you ask, for all my fellow townsmen know that you are a worthy woman. 14 So she lay at his feet until the morning, but arose before one could recognize another [comparable to, yet in contrast with the scenario involving Lot and his daughters].

Some scholars maintain that Ruth and Boaz had an intimate relationship before they married. In contradistinction to her ancestor – the elder daughter of Lot – Ruth did not entice Boaz into temptation. The terms used in verse four do have sexual connotations, as Ruth was showing that she wanted to be married. The word uncover, means to make visible, to be naked. In this case, Boaz’s feet were exposed. They then became cold and hence Boaz woke up naturally. Some commentators state that feet here, are a euphemism for sexual organs. This is very tenuous at best.

‘And lie down…’ This can also have sexual connotations, though only when paired with the Hebrew terms eṯ and ‘im [with] as in passages such as [Genesis 19:32-35; Exodus 22:15; Leviticus 18:22; Deuteronomy 22:22; 1 Samuel 2:22 and 2 Samuel 11:4]. The text says that she ‘lay at his feet until morning.’ Ruth slept there until morning, not that she slept with Boaz until morning. Though it could be interpreted as morally questionable to have a woman spend the night with a single man; Boaz kept Ruth with him until morning, because of the dangers of her going home alone in the middle of the night. It was more honourable to protect her until just before dawn, so that she could slip away before first light.

‘Spread your wings over your servant…’ means Ruth asked Boaz to spread his covering over her – a Hebrew idiom for marriage [Ezekiel 16:8; Deuteronomy 22:30; 27:20 and Malachi 2:16]. Ruth probably visited at night to maintain privacy, so that Boaz wouldn’t feel pressured into making a public decision to marry her. Boaz was asleep and when he awoke, the text says he was ‘startled.’ If Boaz had just engaged in sex with Ruth, he obviously wouldn’t have been startled. Boaz also refers to Ruth as a ‘worthy woman.’ This is the same phrase used for a godly wife in Proverbs 31:10. He would hardly say these words after just engaging in fornication. 

Boaz was careful to keep and follow the kinsman-redeemer laws, even though he clearly loved Ruth and wanted to marry her; this highlights his integrity towards Ruth, not sexual permissiveness.

Ruth 4:9-17

English Standard Version

9 Then Boaz said to the elders and all the people, “You are witnesses this day that I have bought from the hand of Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Chilion and to Mahlon. 10 Also Ruth the Moabite, the widow of Mahlon,I have bought to be my wife…11 Then all the people who were at the gate and the elders said, “We are witnesses. May the Lord make the woman, who is coming into your house, like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you act worthily in Ephrathah and be renowned in Bethlehem, 12 and may your house be like the house of Perez [Pharez, a royal line], whom Tamar bore to Judah, because of the offspring that the Lord will give you by this young woman.” 13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her [the first time], and the Lord gave her conception, and she bore a son… 16 Then Naomi took the child and laid him on her lap and became his nurse. 17 And the women of the neighborhood gave him a name, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David.

2 Samuel 8:2

English Standard Version

And he [King David] defeated Moab and he measured them with a line, making them lie down on the ground. Two lines he measured to be put to death, [!] and one full line to be spared [1/3].And the Moabites became servants to David and brought tribute.

2 Kings 3:4-27

English Standard Version

4 Now Mesha king of Moab was a sheep breeder, and he had to deliver to the king of Israel 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams. 5 But when Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel. 6 So King Jehoram marched out of Samaria at that time and mustered all Israel. 7 And he went and sent word to Jehoshaphat king of Judah: “The king of Moab has rebelled against me. Will you go with me to battle against Moab?” And he said, “I will go. I am as you are, my people [Houses of Judah and Benjamin] as your people [Kingdom of Ten Tribes of Israel], my horses as your horses.” 8 Then he said, “By which way shall we march?” Jehoram answered, “By the way of the wilderness of Edom.”

So the king of Israel went with the king of Judah and the king of Edom. And when they had made a circuitous march of seven days, there was no water for the army or for the animals that followed them. 10 Then the king of Israel said, “Alas! The Lord has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.” 11 And Jehoshaphat said, “Is there no prophet of the Lord here, through whom we may inquire of the Lord?” Then one of the king of Israel’s servants answered, “Elisha the son of Shaphat is here, who poured water on the hands of Elijah.” 12 And Jehoshaphat said, “The word of the Lord is with him.” So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom went down to him.

13 And Elisha said to the king of Israel, “What have I to do with you? Go to the prophets of your father and to the prophets of your mother.” But the king of Israel said to him, “No; it is the Lord who has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.” 14 And Elisha said, “As the Lord of hosts lives, before whom I stand, were it not that I have regard for Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would neither look at you nor see you. 15 But now bring me a musician.” And when the musician played, the hand of the Lord came upon him. 16 And he said, “Thus says the Lord, ‘I will make this dry streambed full of pools.’ 17 For thus says the Lord, ‘You shall not see wind or rain, but that streambed shall be filled with water, so that you shall drink, you, your livestock, and your animals.’ 

18 This is a light thing in the sight of the Lord. He will also give the Moabites into your hand, 19 and you shall attack every fortified city and every choice city, and shall fell every good tree and stop up all springs of water and ruin every good piece of land with stones.”[!] 20 The next morning, about the time of offering the sacrifice, behold, water came from the direction of Edom, till the country was filled with water. [Recall, a definition of Moab is ‘water of a father.’]

21 When all the Moabites heard that the kings had come up to fight against them, all who were able to put on armor, from the youngest to the oldest, were called out and were drawn up at the border. 22 And when they rose early in the morning and the sun shone on the water, the Moabites saw the water opposite them as red as blood. 23 And they said, “This is blood; the kings have surely fought together and struck one another down. Now then, Moab, to the spoil!” 24 But when they came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose and struck the Moabites, till they fled before them. And they went forward, striking the Moabites as they went. 25 And they overthrew the cities, and on every good piece of land every man threw a stone until it was covered. They stopped every spring of water and felled all the good trees, till only its stones were left in Kir-hareseth [not the Kir of Moab], and the slingers surrounded and attacked it. 26 When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him 700 swordsmen to break through, opposite the king of Edom, but they could not. 

27 Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place and offered him for a burnt offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel. And they withdrew from him and returned to their own land.

These were severely harsh measures and war atrocities by the Israelites towards the Moabites. Not a big surprise that hatred brewed and raged within Moab. The sons of Jacob were disobeying the command to not harass or contend in war with Moab and then added cruelty to make it worse.

2 Kings 16:9

English Standard Version

… The king of Assyria marched up against Damascus [Aram-Gether] and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir [of Moab], and he killed Rezin [the king of Damascus].

Psalm 60:7-8

English Standard Version

7 Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is my scepter. 8Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”

Isaiah 15:1-9

English Standard Version

… Because Ar of Moab [the capital] is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone; because Kir of Moab [the second city] is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone.2 He has gone up to the temple, and to Dibon, to the high places to weep; over Nebo and over Medeba Moab wails. On every head is baldness; every beard is shorn; 3 in the streets they wear sackcloth; on the housetops and in the squares everyone wails and melts in tears.4… the armed men of Moab cry aloud; his soul trembles. 5 My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to ZoarFor at the ascent of Luhith [neighbouring grandson of Abraham and Keturah] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… 8 For a cry has gone around the land of Moab; her wailing reaches to Eglaim; her wailing reaches to Beer-elim. 9 For the waters of Dibon are full of blood; for I will bring upon Dibon even more, a lion for those of Moab who escape, for the remnant of the land.

Isaiah 16:1-13

English Standard Version

Send the lamb to the ruler of the land, from Sela, by way of the desert, to the mount of the daughter of Zion. 2 Like fleeing birds, like a scattered nest, so are the daughters of Moab at the fords of the Arnon… 4 let the outcasts of Moab sojourn among you; be a shelter to them from the destroyer. When the oppressor is no more, and destruction has ceased, and he who tramples underfoot has vanished from the land, 5 then a throne will be established in steadfast love, and on it will sit in faithfulness in the tent of David one who judges and seeks justice and is swift to do righteousness.”We have heard of the pride of Moab – how proud he is! – of his arrogance, his pride, and his insolence; in his idle boasting he is not right.

Moab’s pride is their biggest stumbling block

Job 41:34 RSV: 

“He beholds everything that is high; he [the Adversary] is king over all the sons of pride.”

Therefore let Moab wail for Moab, let everyone wail. Mourn, utterly stricken, for the raisin cakes of Kir-hareseth. 8 For the fields of Heshbon languish, and the vine of Sibmah; the lords of the nations have struck down its branches… And joy and gladness are taken away from the fruitful field, and in the vineyards no songs are sung, no cheers are raised; no treader treads out wine in the presses; I have put an end to the shouting. 11 Therefore my inner parts moan like a lyre for Moab, and my inmost self for Kir-hareseth. 12 And when Moab presents himself, when he wearies himself on the high place, when he comes to his sanctuary to pray, he will not prevail. 13 This is the word that the Lord spoke concerning Moab in the past. 14 But now the Lord has spoken, saying, “In three years, like the years of a hired worker, the glory of Moab will be brought into contempt, in spite of all his great multitude, and those who remain will be very few and feeble.”

Germany has an eagle, the United Kingdom has a lion and Spain has a bull; France have a rooster as a symbol and mascot. The origin of this emblem dates back to the Gallic origins of the French nation when the Romans laughed at Gauls because of a linguistic pun. In Latin, the word gallus means Gaul, but also cockerel. The supposed stubbornness and brazen pride of the people was to be turned on its head as the French took the bird to their hearts as an icon of their nation. The French kings adopted the rooster as a symbol of courage and bravery. During the French Revolution, the cockerel became a symbol of the people and the State and was engraved on coins. Napoleon preferred the eagle – the symbol of imperial Rome – but the rooster won out over the raptor, as an apt symbol of French pride. The rooster is visible throughout France: on French stamps, at the entrance of the Élysée Palace, on jerseys of French football, rugby and handball teams and on the shirts of Olympic athletes. Mercury was often portrayed with the cockerel; a sacred animal among the Continental Celts. 

Jeremiah 48:1-30, 38-47

English Standard Version

2 …the renown of Moab is no more. In Heshbon they planned disaster against her: ‘Come, let us cut her off from being a nation!’ You also, O Madmen, shall be brought to silence; the sword shall pursue you. 3 …’Desolation and great destruction!’ 4 Moab is destroyed; her little ones have made a cry… 6 Flee! Save yourselves! You will be like a juniper in the desert! 7 For, because you trusted in your works and your treasures, you also shall be taken; and Chemosh shall go into exile with his priests and his officials… 9 “Give wings to Moab, for she would fly away; her cities shall become a desolation, with no inhabitant in them. 

11 “Moab has been at ease from his youth and has settled on his dregs; he has not been emptied from vessel to vessel, nor has he gone into exile; so his taste remains in him, and his scent is not changed. 12 “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I shall send to him pourers who will pour him, and empty his vessels and break his jars in pieces. 13 Then Moab shall be ashamed of Chemosh, as the house of Israel was ashamed of Bethel, their confidence. 14 “How do you say, ‘We are heroes and mighty men of war’? 15 The destroyer of Moab and his cities has come up, and the choicest of his young men have gone down to slaughter, declares the King, whose name is the Lord of hosts. 16 The calamity of Moab is near at hand, and his affliction hastens swiftly. 17 Grieve for him, all you who are around him, and all who know his name; say, ‘How the mighty scepter is broken, the glorious staff.’

18 “Come down from your glory, and sit on the parched ground, O inhabitant of Dibon! For the destroyer of Moab has come up against you; he has destroyed your strongholds… 20 Moab is put to shame, for it is broken; wail and cry! Tell it beside the Arnon, that Moab is laid waste. 21 “Judgment has come upon the tableland… and all the cities of the land of Moab, far and near. 25 The horn of Moab is cut off, and his arm is broken, declares the Lord. 26 “Make him drunk, because he magnified himself against the Lord, so that Moab shall wallow in his vomit, and he too shall be held in derision. 27 Was not Israel a derision to you? Was he found among thieves, that whenever you spoke of him you wagged your head? 28 “Leave the cities, and dwell in the rock, O inhabitants of Moab!

29 … We have heard of the pride of Moab – he is very proud – of his loftiness, his pride, and his arrogance, and the haughtiness of his heart. 30 I know his insolence, declares the Lord; his boasts are false, his deeds are false. 

38 On all the housetops of Moab and in the squares there is nothing but lamentation, for I have broken Moab like a vessel for which no one cares, declares the Lord. 39 How it is broken! How they wail! How Moab has turned his back in shame! So Moab has become a derision and a horror to all that are around him.”

40 For thus says the Lord: “Behold, one shall fly swiftly like an eagle and spread his wings against Moab; 41 the cities shall be taken and the strongholds seized. The heart of the warriors of Moab shall be in that day like the heart of a woman in her birth pains; 42 Moab shall be destroyed and be no longer a people, because he magnified himself against the Lord… For I will bring these things upon Moab, the year of their punishment, declares the Lord. 45 “In the shadow of Heshbon fugitives stop without strength, for fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the house of Sihon; it has destroyed the forehead of Moab, the crown of the sons of tumult. 46 Woe to you, O Moab! The people of Chemosh are undone, for your sons have been taken captive, and your daughters into captivity. 47 Yet I will restore the fortunes of Moab in the latter days, declares the Lord.” Thus far is the judgment on Moab.

Ezekiel 25:8-11

English Standard Version

8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations, 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.

Amos 2:1-3

English Standard Version

Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Moab, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because he burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom. 2 So I will send a fire upon Moab [reminiscent of Sodom’s fate], and it shall devour the strongholds of Kerioth, and Moab shall die amid uproar, amid shouting and the sound of the trumpet; 3 I will cut off the ruler from its midst, and will kill all its princes with him,” says the Lord.

Daniel 2:32-39

English Standard Version

32 The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. 34 As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. 39 Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth. 

Daniel 7:6

English Standard Version

6 After this I looked, and behold, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back. And the beast had four heads, and dominion was given to it.

Daniel 8:20-22

English Standard Version

As for the ram that you saw with the two horns, these are the kings of Media and Persia. 21 And the goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the first king [Alexander the Great]. 

22 As for the horn that was broken, in place of which four others arose, four kingdoms shall arise from his nation, but not with his power.

Previously, we learned that the head of gold was the Chaldean Empire – the ancestors of the northern & central Italians [refer Chapter XXV Nahor] – of Babylon, represented by a lion with wings. One leg of iron was the Byzantine, Eastern Roman Empire – comprising the ancestors of the Russians [refer Chapter XX Asshur] – represented as half of a monstrous beast. The chest and arms of silver was the Medo-Persian empire – the ancestors of the Turkic-Mongol and Turkish peoples [refer Chapter IV Madai and Chapter XVIII Elam] – represented by a bear, as well as a ram. 

The torso and thighs are the Greco-Macedonian empire – the ancestors of the French – that toppled the Medes and Persians. 

Alexander III or the Great, defeated Persia in 331 BCE and the power of Greece lasted until 146 BCE, when it became a protectorate of the burgeoning Roman empire. After Alexander who reigned briefly yet emphatically from 336 to 323 BCE and the subsequent seven short-lived emperor reigns from 323 to 288 BCE, four divisions of the Greek empire arose, each led by one of Alexander’s generals. Ptolemy 281-279 BCE, administered Egypt and north Africa, Seleucus in 281 BCE governed Syria, Asia Minor, and the East. Lysimachus during 288 to 285 BCE, took control of Thrace – until it united with Greece and Macedonia – and Cassander from 315 to 297 BCE, who ruled over Macedonia and Greece. 

The two thighs of Nebuchadnezzar’s statute represent the distinct Macedonian and Greek components of the Empire – in other words, Ammon and Moab. The Greco-Macedonian empire was stronger than the two preceding empires, as evidenced by being likened to bronze as opposed to gold or silver. Militarily, it defeated its enemies with raw power and speed unlike any before it, as evidenced by the agile goat compared to the ram of Persia and the lighter leopard in contrast to the bear of Persia and the lion of Chaldea. 

Alexander with the agility of a goat crossed the Hellespont after conquering neighbouring, yet related Grecia and began his march to revenge the humiliation inflicted upon Greece by Xerxes a century before. Alexander Conquered Troy, then met Persian opposition at Granicus and after subjugating all of Asia Minor, battled a host of a supposed half a million Persians whom Darius III [336-330 BCE] had assembled. They met in the plain of Issus on November 5, 333 BCE and Alexander slaughtered the greatly superior Persian force – outnumbered two to one – and broke the back of Persian opposition. Proceeding southward, city after city fell without a fight except for Tyre in 332 BCE and Gaza which were both subdued after sieges.

Marching south to Egypt, Alexander conquered the entire country without a fight and founded, the world renowned capital city of Alexandria. It became the largest city of the Hellenic world. Continuing east he fought a third momentous battle against Persia on October 1, 331 BCE with Darius at Gaugamela and again defeated a greatly superior force. Alexander’s armies reached right to India, but his troops, weary with battle, refused to go further. Returning to Babylon, Alexander intended to make this the capital of his entire empire. Though he died a victim of his profligate eating, drinking and whoring coupled with an attack of malaria at the age of thirty-three on June 11, 323 BCE. 

As brief as was his rule, his indelible mark on the world was permanent. The description of the leopard – one of the swiftest of animals and greatest, of predatory carnivores – portrays the lightning speed of attack of Alexander’s armies which was unprecedented. Alexander never lost a siege or battle – despite typically being outnumbered – from 338 to 325 BCE. His record is an impressive, fought twenty, won twenty. The four wings on the back of the leopard not only represent agility and speed, but with the four heads, symbolise the fulfilled historic fact, that Alexander’s empire was eventually controlled by four principal generals. 

As John F Walvoord remarks: “The accuracy of this prophecy is so evident that liberal scholars who consider detailed prophecy an impossibility are forced to postulate that the entire book of Daniel is in fact a forgery written by a pseudo-Daniel who lived after these events of Alexander’s conquest had already taken place. This unwilling confession of the accuracy of Biblical prophecy is in itself most significant and a testimony to the accuracy of prophecy as a whole.”

Alexander the Great, thought, acted and fought on his gut instinct. The gut located in the lower torso as evidenced on Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. He was also influenced by his lower groin, in his private life. Some may say, ‘how very French.’ Cyrus the Great, as pictured by the chest, let his heart influence him when he fell for Esther from the tribe of Benjamin and allowed the tribe of Judah to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the city and Temple. Nebuchadnezzar certainly depicted a more cerebral approach in his reign  with his methodical deconstruction of his enemies and building projects, as represented by the head.

Alexander was born in Pella, the capital of Macedon and from age thirteen, was tutored by Aristotle until he was sixteen. His mother was Olympias, the fourth of eight wives and principal wife of Philip II of Macedon. Alexander was raised to read, play the lyre, ride, fight and hunt. His mother had huge ambitions and encouraged Alexander to believe it was his destiny to conquer the Persian Empire. He had a great desire for knowledge, a love for philosophy and was an avid reader. Though Alexander was impulsive, with a violent temper his intelligent and rational side was also demonstrated by his ability and success as a general and military strategist. It would seem he had an equal appreciation of men as he had for women, though both were lesser than his dependance on alcohol. 

There have been a succession of Greek ages. The ones dominated by Moab and Ammon were the later Classical age of Greece from 500 to 323 BCE and the Hellenistic era of 323 to 146 BCE. The sons of Lot had peoples living in Greece before these epochs, as did the sons of Jacob, stretching back to Archaic Greece during the centuries of 800 to 500 BCE and beyond to Ancient Greece – the Mycenaean period of 1600 to 1200 BCE and the Dark ages of Greece lasting from 1200 to 800 BCE.

University of Oxford, Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Simon Hornblower  – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… about 1200 BCE, to the death of Alexander… in 323 BCE. It was a period of political, philosophical, artistic, and scientific achievements that formed a legacy with unparalleled influence on Western civilization.’

By the time of Classical Greece the peoples of the region had begun to change in composition from those that had constituted Greece from 1600 BCE. The city-states up to approximately 1000 to 800 BCE had been reflective of different peoples. The rise of Macedon and its control of greater Greece saw the transition to the descendants of Ammon and Moab. The people of Troy and the greater Troad, were colonial descendants of Ammon and Moab and both the Trojans and the Macedonians are ancestors of the Frankish peoples who form modern day France. We will investigate the original founding of Troy, which is credited not to the sons of Lot but rather descendants of the tribe of Judah. The original peoples grouped primarily around Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Arcadia, Olympia were colonies of the descendants of the sons of Jacob. In time, they were transplanted by the peoples of Moab and Ammon. The Spartans are similarly related, though they are not descendants of either Lot or Jacob. 

Italians and Race, Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins – emphasis & bold mine:

‘From pre-Roman times, it appears there was already a clear distinction of short, darker-skinned, dark-haired peoples from pre-history being [overlaid] and mixed with taller, sometimes larger built, blond and blue-eyed groups. It is now generally believed that the Greeks also were larger, blond and blue-eyed people, which was the case when Alexander the Great spread his forces and opened up colonies all over the Middle East and Egypt. This is also attested in frescos from the era, as well as in various references to their looks.’

Both the earlier Greeks, the sons of Jacob and later Greeks from Ammon and Moab are today broadly classed as Germanic or Teutonic. The French specifically, as a Germanic-Celtic, Latin mix. This inclusion of fairer skin, blond hair and blue eyes was attributable to both ‘sets’ of Greeks. Alexander the Great himself, no different, as various reports reveal. The Greek biographer Plutarch lived circa  45 to 120 CE, describes Alexander’s appearance as: ‘… for those peculiarities which many of his successors and friends afterwards tried to imitate, namely, the poise of the neck, which was bent slightly to the left, and the melting glance of his eyes, this artist has accurately observed… he was of a fair colour, as they say, and his fairness passed into ruddiness on his breast particularly, and in his face. Moreover, that a very pleasant odour exhaled from his skin and that there was a fragrance about his mouth and all his flesh, so that his garments were filled with it, this we have read in the Memoirs of Aristoxenus.’

Alexander Romance suggested that Alexander III possessed heterochromia iridium: that one eye was dark and the other light. British historian Peter Green compiled a description of Alexander’s appearance, based on his review of statues and ancient documents: ‘Physically, Alexander was not prepossessing. Even by Macedonian standards he was very short, though stocky and tough. His beard was scanty, and he stood out against his hirsute Macedonian barons by going clean-shaven. His neck was in some way twisted, so that he appeared to be gazing upward at an angle. His eyes (one blue, one brown) revealed a dewy, feminine quality. He had a high complexion and a harsh voice.’ Egyptian Historian Joann Fletcher has also said that Alexander had blond hair.

Many people are intrigued by the amazing story of Troy. Three Hollywood feature films have been produced on the fantastic events, yet much of the scholarly community view it entirely as myth. Yet with all legends truth is within the tale, though admittedly it is difficult in this case to separate fact from fiction. Regardless, the Trojan war continues to stand out during the Dark age of Ancient Greece. The siege of Troy is said to have lasted some nine to ten years and its eventual fall, through the ruse of the Trojan Horse, possibly occurred according to an unconventional chronology, approximately 1186-1184 BCE.

Those historians who believe the stories of the Trojan War are derived from a real historical conflict often use the dates given by Eratosthenes of 1194-1184 BCE, which roughly corresponds to the archaeological evidence of a catastrophic burning of Troy VII – the Late Bronze Age collapse. Other researchers more recently, have dated the events somewhere between 1260 – 1180 BCE.

The Trojan War Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Trojan War is the foundation of Greek history. If Greek historians had little doubt of its existence they remained extremely sceptical regarding its mythological origin. Archaeology has confirmed one essential point: there was indeed a general conflagration in the Greek world around 1200 BCE, the assumed period of that war, which caused the disappearance of two powerful empires: 

Mycenaean on one hand and Hittite with its vassals on the other hand. The inscriptions of Ramses III’s [1184-1153 BCE] year 8 [1177 BCE] describe actually a general invasion of the Mediterranean by the “Sea Peoples”, but without giving any reason. A precise chronological reconstruction, based on a few absolute dates, shows that the annexation of the kingdom of Cyprus (Alasia), closely linked to the Mycenaean world, by Hittite King Tudhaliya IV played a role of detonator in the confrontation between a Greek heterogeneous confederation, consisting of pirates and privateers on one side and a set of vassal kingdoms of the Hittite empire, such as Troy and Ugarit, on the other. This struggle to control a vital sea path, from Crete to Egypt, via Cyprus, which ended with a complete mutual destruction in 1185 BCE, the climax of the famous Trojan War, had begun 10 years earlier. Surprisingly, this conclusion was already that of Eratosthenes (276-193). Historical and epigraphic context shows that Homer wrote his epic shortly after Queen Elissa founded Carthage (c. 870 BCE).’ 

The supposed mythic events surrounding the collapse of Troy begin when Paris – same name as future capital of France – a Prince of Troy and son of Priam who reigned circa 1200-1185 BCE and the King of Troy, is visiting King Melenaus of Sparta and staying in the Spartan Palace. Paris knew of Melenaus’s wife Helen and had fallen in love with her. Paris hid Helen on his ship for the return voyage to Troy. Paris’s older brother Prince Hector did not agree with Paris, yet sailed home regardless. King Priam welcomed Helen and took her into the family as one of his own. Priam was reputed to have had fifty sons and twelve daughters. The city of Troy was splendidly wealthy and impregnable. Recall the prominent city of Kir – meaning wall – of Moab.

Raging with revenge, King Melenaus of Sparta calls for the assistance and a favour from his brother King Agamemnon II who ruled circa 1202-1185 BCE, of Argos. Though all closely related, the Trojans, Spartans or Dorians and the Achaean Greeks were different peoples. Agamemnon called in the services of Achilles, a killing machine and a fabled warrior of Demi-god stature. King Agamemnon had at his disposal a realistic number of approximately one hundred ships and ten thousand men. 

According to Thucydides though, Agamemnon raised an enormous fleet utilising other Greek cities of close to twelve hundred Boeotian [100+ men] and Philoctetes [50 men] ships – with a force of some 60,000 – 130,000 troops. To end the decade long stalemate, Odysseus – an ally of Menelaus – devised the ruse of a giant hollow wooden horse, an animal that was sacred to the Trojans. Once inside Troys walls and the Trojans defeated, the Greeks burned the city and divided the spoils. Cassandra – Priam’s daughter who had warned not to take the horse inside the city – was apparently awarded to Agamemnon. Neoptolemus, a son of Achilles obtained Andromache, the wife of Hector – the son of Priam, who had been killed by Achilles – and Odysseus was given Hecuba, Priam’s wife. 

That most Achaean heroes did not return to their homes and instead founded colonies elsewhere was ‘interpreted by Thucydides as being due to their long absence.Nowadays the interpretation followed by most scholars is that the Achaean leaders driven out of their lands by the turmoil at the end of the Mycenaean era preferred to claim descent from exiles of the Trojan War.’ Simply, these Greeks migrated as all ancient peoples continually moved due to the search for better opportunities, usually prodded by other peoples pressing towards their territory, due to either population expansion, food shortages and famine or war. 

There was a continuous domino effect throughout the Middle East, Central Asia and Europe of Shem’s descendants until peoples finally settled in their current geographical and political positions beginning from approximately 800 to 1000 CE.

The Greeks and Romans took for a fact the historicity of the Trojan War and the identity of Homeric Troy with a site in Anatolia on a peninsula called the Troad or now known as the Biga Peninsula, which forms the basis of Homer’s Iliad. Ironically, Alexander the Great later conquered the Troad and Troy, when it was part of the Persian Empire. He visited the site in 334 BCE and offered sacrifices at tombs associated with the Homeric heroes  of Achilles and Patroclus his cousin, killed by Hector. Alexander is reputed to be related to Achilles via his mother who was apparently descended from a royal house. Troy is known in Greek as Troia; also by association with the region to the east, as Ilios or Ilion. In Latin as Troja, or Ilium as it was known during the reign of the Roman Emperor Augustus. 

A large mound known locally as Hisarlik, had long been understood to hold the ruins of a city named Ilion or Ilium that had flourished in Hellenistic and Roman times. In 1822 Charles Maclaren a Scottish journalist, posited that this was the site of Homeric Troy; though for the next fifty years, his idea received little attention from Classical scholars, most of whom regarded the Trojan legend as a fictional creation based on myth and not history. ‘Those who did believe in the existence of a real Troy thought it to be at Bunarbashi (Pinarbasi), a short distance south of Hisarlik. It took Frank Calvert an English Levantine emigrant and scholarly amateur archaeologist, until 1860 to begin exploratory work on Hisarlik. It was he who persuaded the German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann to work at Hisarlik, though Schliemann soon took full credit for adopting Maclaren’s identification and demonstrating to the world that it was correct.’

There are nine major periods of ancient Troy designated by archaeologists, that are labeled I to IX, starting from the bottom with the oldest settlement, Troy I. ‘In periods I to VII Troy was a fortified stronghold that served as the capital of the Troad and the residence of a king, his family, officials, advisers, retinue, and slaves. Troy VI and VII [are] assigned to the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, circa 1900 to 1100 BCE. Based on the evidence of imported Mycenaean pottery, the end of Troy VIIa is dated to between 1260 and 1240 BCE. The Cincinnati expedition under Blengen concluded that Troy VIIa was very likely the capital of King Priam described in Homer’s Iliad, which was destroyed by the Greek armies of Agamemnon. 

The partly rebuilt Troy VIIb shows evidence of new settlers with a lower level of material culture, who vanished altogether by 1100 BCE. For about the next four centuries the site was virtually abandoned. The glorious and rich city Homer describes was believed to be Troy VI by many twentieth century authors, and destroyed about 1275 BC, probably by an earthquake. Its successor, Troy VIIa, was destroyed around 1180 BC; it was long considered a poorer city, and dismissed as a candidate for Homeric Troy, but since the excavation campaign of 1988, it has come to be regarded as the most likely candidate.’ 

I am not convinced with the VIIa and VIIb archaeological split. I would propose that VI is the same Troy as described by Homer and the same Troy that Priam was king of when it was destroyed. Troy VI included the height of its splendour from circa 1400 – 1180 BCE. What has been labeled VIIb, I would rename Troy VII. I agree that Troy VII [VIIb] was an attempt to rebuild, maintain and sustain a Troy that was now a shadow of its former grandeur and ultimately given up as a viable project by 1100 BCE. Is there an agenda to lessen Troy’s prestige in 1194 – 1184 BCE and thus discredit the whole saga’s validity. Possibly running parallel to the similar propaganda accounts that assert there were very few survivors from Troy.

Homeric Troy is described as a wealthy and populous city, yet the idea of a lesser Troy: ‘a relatively minor settlement, perhaps [just] a princely seat’ is advanced by scholars. In 1988, Korfmann’s team searched the terrain surrounding the citadel site at Hisarlik, investigating the wider settlement. Korfmann’s findings from ‘geomagnetic surveying and isolated excavations, led him to conclude in favour of a greater Troy – that is, a settlement of some size and prosperity.’ 

The question of what language was spoken by the Trojans has been a burning question. No evidence of a Trojan language seems to have survived. It was thought that the Trojans were Greek, though they were not in the Achaean domain and actually opposed to the Achaeans. Both remain a mystery, until we understand the Trojans were descended from Moab and Ammon and the Greeks at this time were sons of Jacob. The animosity between the two peoples still alive and strong. Their differences not just due to culture but family lineage. Passages from the Iliad also allude that the Trojans were not Greek.

Who were the Trojans and where did they come from? Luciana Cavallaro, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Many scholars, including Carl Blengen American archaeologist who worked at the site in the 1930s, believed the Trojans were of Greek origin. This conjecture was attributed to the Greek names given to the characters in the Iliad but that isn’t the case. Homer mentioned a close relationship between the Trojan allies and in particular with the Dardanians. Excavations at the site of Troy/Ilios/Troya/Troia have found artefacts that showed the Trojans were in fact indigenous to the region and related to the Indo-European people who migrated to the area.

Archaeological investigations have surmised the people from Dardania and Troy shared a kinship, their ancestry a mixture of Anatolian and Luwians [the Luwians proper are the original Hatti – Nahor. If these Dardanians are Luwians, then they could be related, just as the French (from Haran) are related to the Italians – from Nahor]. The latter came from south eastern Anatolia [Asia-minor], a province the Romans later called Cilicia. The Greeks and Romans thought Dardania was a subset of Troy however it was the other way around. Troy was a state of Dardania [the region, though Dardania also the name of a city].

There are also the names of the Trojans, given in Greek as the audience was Hellenistic and more recognisable. Alexander/Alaksandu, better known as Paris was first noted in Hittite text and ruler who established trading links with the Hittites. Wilusa, Hittite word for the Greek interpretation Ilios. Priam/Piyama-Radu and Hektor are considered indigenous names though the spelling of the former changed. The Greeks did migrate to the west coast of Asia Minor and there is evidence they settled in the famous city. This was identified as Troy VIII.’

As stated in the preceding article, one proposal is that the Indo-European Luwians that arrived in the western coastal region of Anatolia are the West-Luwian speakers of Arzawa, who migrated westward. Another theory is that the Dardanians were Thracians who crossed the Dardanelles, named after the Dardans. The remains of their material culture reveal close ties with Thracians and Anatolian groups, as well as some Greek contact. Added to this is that later, a Thraco-Illyrian tribal state, the Dar-dan-i, dwelt to the north of Mace-don. There is good cause to consider the Trojans and Greeks were offshoots and colonies of Lot and Jacob. Like all colonial origins, they begin with migrants on board ships; in this case, from Canaan or Palestine. The descendants of Lot and Jacob would have been well aware of the Aegean-Grecian world via the Phoenician’s trade routes and the Mycenaean-Minoan, later Philistine, civilisation present there too.

Dardania, the city founded by Dardanus and the name also given to the region, was located in the northwestern corner of Anatolia and to the immediate north of Troy – facing modern Gallipoli across the Dardanelles. It is included as part of the Troad, the peninsula region at the far north-western corner of Asia-minor, now modern Turkey. Dardania historically has been defined as ‘a district of the Troad, lying along the Hellespont, southwest of Abydos, and adjacent to the territory of Ilium. Its people (Dardani) appear in the Trojan War under Aeneas, in close alliance with the Trojans, with whose name their own is often interchanged…’ Aeneas is referred to in Virgil’s Aeneid interchangeably as a Dardan or as a Trojan, but strictly speaking Aeneas was of the Dardanian branch.

Thus some consider the Dardanians or Dardans as being the same stock as the Trojans – Dardanian and Tojan being synonymous – while others like Homer distinguish the two as clearly identifiable people – not two branches of a single group. The answer includes both propositions; in that Moab and Ammon are the same stock, both having Lot as their father, yet they are also two separate lines from two different brothers. Therefore, two different though related peoples, combined through marriage. The Dardanians and the Teucri or Teukroi are credited as collaborating in building Troy as a state. Information is scant and legend and history fused, though we will try to build a reliable chronology regarding the original founders.  

Teucer’s father is purported to be the mythical Scamandrus born circa 1627 BCE; ruling his people from 1603 to 1581 BCE. It was at that time his territory was allegedly absorbed by the Dardanians. In Greek mythology the daughter of Teucer was Batea. 

Batea married Dardanus who subsequently inherits rulership from Teucer in 1581 until 1550 BCE of the Teucri, under the name of the Dardanians. Probably, the Teucri represent the relatively indigenous northwestern Anatolians of the second millennium BCE and the Indo-European Dardanians, the migratory arrivals, integrating into Teucri society, but who very quickly dominate it. Dardanus was born circa 1675 BCE in the land of Goshen, while the sons of Jacob were living in Egypt; for Dardanus was from a royal line of Judah, the son of Jacob.

Dardanus had a son Ilus or Ilos, who ruled from 1550 to 1514 BCE; a king who died young and childless. Ilus’s younger brother, Erecthonius or Erictanus was born circa 1540 BCE became king after Ilus. Erichthonius married Astyoche, daughter of the ‘river-god’ Simoeis, and she bore him a son, who was named Tros, who lived circa 1474 to 1415 BCE. Erichthonius was said to be the richest ruler in the world, at that time, because he owned three thousand mares.

According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dardanus had another son named Zacynthus by Bataea and Zacynthus was the first settler on the island afterwards called Zacynthus. Dionysius also said that Dardanus’s son Idaeus, gave his name to the Idaean mountains, that is Mount Ida, where Idaeus built a temple to the Mother of the Gods [that is to Cybele] and instituted mysteries and ceremonies still observed in Phrygia in Dionysius’s time. There are operas on the subject of Dardanus by Jean-Philippe Rameau [1739]. Interesting coincidence that the operas are composed by a Frenchman.

Tros is the family member credited as the ruler of the Trojans, whereby the origin of the name Troad, as wells its inhabitants, the Trojans derive. Tros married Callirrhoe and had three sons with her, including the youngest son, Ganymede. Tros bequeathed the rulership of the Trojans to – Ilos, who chose to be near the sea and strengthened Troy on the plain – his eldest son [not Ilos the son of Dardanus] and the rulership of Dardania – near Mount Ida – to his second son, Assaracus in 1415 BCE. Ilos founded the royal line of Ilium or Ilios which may equate to the Hittite Wilusa from [W]ilios. Assaracus and his Dardanian descendants maintained close links with their Trojan cousins. 

To give an added context for the period of circa 1600 BCE with the approximate founding of Troy and the birth of Dardanus circa 1675 BCE through to 1415 BCE and the death of his grandson Tros; Moab and Ammon were born circa 1878 or 1877 BCE after the destruction of Sodom, when Abraham was ninety-nine years old. Similarly, Abraham’s son Isaac was born in 1877 BCE, when Abraham was one hundred years old. Jacob’s son Joseph died in 1616 BCE at the age of one hundred and ten in Egypt, but by the birth of Moses some ninety years later in 1527 BCE, the sons of Jacob were in bondage to a ruling Dynasty who did not remember Joseph [Exodus 1:8]. 

The exodus of the sons of Jacob from Egypt occurred in 1446 BCE, 430 years after Abraham’s 99th year [Exodus 12:40-41, Galatians 3:17]. The three hundred and seventy-five years during 1400 to 1025 BCE was the period of the Judges in Israel until Saul became king. 

The early period and then height of Troy encompassed the approximate period of four hundred and twenty years from 1600 to 1180 BCE. From 1400 BCE onwards, the Moabites and children of Ammon were at continual loggerheads with Israel. Moving to Dardania and Troy was an attractive proposition for those that had the financial means. It may explain the wealth of Troy, if many inhabitants were wealthy immigrants.

The two families remained intertwined. Ilos married Eurydice, and became the father of Laomedon. Ilos’s daughter Themiste, married his nephew, Capys of the Dardanian line. Ilos’s son Laomedon succeeded him as king of Troy. Assaracus’ son, Capys and his wife Themiste had a son called Anchises. Of the two royal lines, those of Troy or Ilium became more powerful than the older Dardanian line, particularly under the rule of Laomedon; even though there was only three generations of kings in Troy, compared to the line of eight successive kings in Dardania. King Laomedon was known for his arrogance, his impiety and his refusal to honour his promises.

Then enters Priam or Priamos, the only son to survive in a war against Heracles. Priam had been ransomed by his sister Hesione and became the new king in 1200 BCE. He had formally been known as Podacres. Priam’s first wife was Arisbe, daughter of Merops king of Percote. They had a son Aesacus, who was a gifted seer. Priam soon married Hecuba, daughter of Dymas and gave Arisbe to Hyrtacos. With Hecuba, Priam became the father of Hector, Paris, Cassandra, Helenus, Deiphobus and countless others as mentioned. Apollodorus recorded that Hecuba was the mother of ten sons and four daughters. 

Before Paris was born, Hecuba had a vision and a seer interpreted her vision, saying that Paris would one day cause the destruction of Troy. So Paris was sent to live in the wilderness. Years later, Paris returned to Troy and was recognised. Their parents had apparently forgotten the warning by the seer and welcomed him home. Priam would have returned Helen when the Greek embassy demanded the return of Helen to her husband King Menelaus the Spartan; but Paris prevailed upon his father to refuse. As a result, the war lasted for ten years and all but one son Helenus, would die in the war. Neoptolemus, son of Achilles allegedly killed King Priam on the last day of the war. 

Who is Dardanus, the founder of Dardania, the city and subsequent region? A persistent secular legend from Greece and Rome, identifies a man called Dara as Dardanus, founder of ancient Troy, or rather Dardan. One translation of the Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, mentions King Solomon as being wiser than two men named Calcol and Dara or Darda and gives Dara’s name as Dardanos. In 1 Chronicles 2:6 we read of Zarah, who had five sons and his fourth and fifth sons were Calcol and Dara or Darda. Zarah was a son of Judah, one of the twelve sons of Jacob. We will return to Calcol when we study Judah [refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin], as he is credited with founding the city of Athens.

The Greek poet Homer said that Dardanus was a son of Zeus, the chief of the Greek gods. The Roman and Greek legends support that Zeus called Jupiter in Latin, was a son of Saturn who was also called Kronus. Writing of the Greek gods, Sanchuniathon a Phoenician historian said that ‘Kronus’ was whom the Phoenicians called Israel, that is Jacob and he had a son called Jehud – that is, Judah. What is important is not the Greek mythology but rather the family relationship between Jacob, Judah and Zarah’s son Darda, the great grandson of Jacob as real historic figures. 

Critics focus on the Greek mythology and say every Greek city cited Zeus as their founder god and thus dismiss Darda as a founder of Troy. Critics also say the Bible does not give ‘direct evidence’ that any Israelites ‘abandoned the forty-year march… and travelled to the Aegean Sea or Black Sea… to found their own kingdoms.’ This is ironic as the rest of the time, the Bible is just a collection of fanciful stories, yet in this instance it is valued for not giving evidence, as if this evidence would be believed. We will look in detail into the sons of Jacob and the historical data that family members actually departed the congregation of Israel not just during the exodus sojourn for forty years from 1446 to 1407/1406 BCE, but prior to their departure from Egypt.

The early migration of Darda is mentioned in How Israel Came to Britain, Canadian British Israel Association – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body before the Israel nation was formed – while, as a people, they were still in bondage in Egypt. One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster (Ireland). Another, under the leadership of Dardanus, a brother of Calcol, crossed to Asia Minor to found the Kingdom later known as Troy. E Raymond Capt in his work, Jacob’s Pillar, 1977, writes that Darda was ‘Egyptian’ in that he lived there during the bondage and was the son of Zarah. This Darda according to Capt, was one and the same with ‘Dardanus’, the ‘Egyptian founder of Troy.’

Hecataeus of Abdera, a fourth century BCE Greek historian, stated that “Now the Egyptians say that also after these events [the plagues of the Exodus] a great number of colonies were spread from Egypt all over the inhabited world… They say also that those who set forth with Danaus, likewise from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city of Greece, Argos, and that the nations of the Colchi in Pontus and that of the Jews (remnant of Judah), which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by certain emigrants from their country [Egypt]; and this is the reason why it is a long-established institution among these peoples to circumcise their male children, the custom having been brought over from Egypt. Even the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt.” [Quoted from Diodorus of Sicily. G H Oldfather, 1933. Volume I, books I-II, 1-34, page 91]. We will return to both Calcol and Darda.

Depending on which interpretation of history one takes, the fallout from Troy’s defeat is as follows. If the ten year war was one against the Mycenae, then the lone royal survivor was Aeneas a member of the Dardanian branch of the Trojan royal family. His father was Anchises. Aeneas fought on behalf of Troy against the Mycenae. Dating for the ten year war – or siege for the Helenus version – range from as early as 1196 to as late 1183 BCE. Thus, 1195-1185 BCE is a good median.

Aeneas is said to have lead the two sons of Antenor, Archelochus and Acamas as well as the Dardanians, allies of Troy during the Trojan War. After the sack of Troy, Aeneas and his followers were allowed to leave with their lives. His descendants according to Virgil in the Aenid, continued to rule the Trojans. They travelled for seven years, settling in Latium – central Italy, corresponding with Lazio. Opposed by Latinus, ruler of the Latins, Aeneas bests him in battle and is then accepted, marrying his daughter, Lavinia. Many subsequent rulers of Rome claimed descent from Aeneas and the Houses of Troy and Dardania. 

This raises an integral point. The rulers or the royal line of Troy – splitting into two houses, the Trojan and Dardanian – were from Dara, the son of Zarah. Zarah was a twin of Pharez. We will study both in detail. Both twins were to be ancestors of royal lines. We will learn that nearly every royal line in Europe has descended from or included the descendants of either Pharez or Zarah. The Romans, may well have some legitimacy to the claim of Trojan blood, as many royal houses probably could. 

The pivotal issue though is not this but that the sons of Dara ruled the peoples from Anatolia, the western Luwians. These people became known as Trojans and Dardanians after their rulers – Darda and Tros. The western Luwians were Moabite and Ammonite colonists, descended from Abraham’s brother Haran. Similarly, the eastern Luwians were related to Abraham’s other brother Nahor [refer Chapter XXV Nahor]. These peoples were known as the Hatti, who later incorporated the Chaldeans and then many centuries later were the Lombardi, settling in northern and central Italy today. The original royal houses of Troy and Darda were from the Tribe of Judah. A portion of Ammon and Moab were the main body of Trojans and Dardanians, who in time migrated to the area of Macedonia and ultimately comprised the later Greeks of the Classical and Hellenistic periods. 

The alternative Trojan history is where Helenus is the lone royal survivor from the Trojan line. Trojan king lists follow Helenus with Genger and then a Francus or Franco. Many centuries later there is another Francus, a king of the West Franks. Historians say Franc-us is a fabrication of history and inserted into the Trojan line by the Merovingian kings of France. What is fascinating, is not whether this is true or not, but rather that the Merovingians in part, the Franks and the Trojans are actually all one and the same, regardless of whether a Francus was the great grandson of King Priam or not. 

Other kings included in the Trojan king list are Pepin of France, Louis I of France and sandwiched between the two, one of the most influential and important kings in history, Charles I or the Great, better known as Charlemagne. The following works on Troy are all written by French men. I wonder if any understood that they themselves were the very same people they are writing about; or whether their attachment is a strong subconscious ardour and inclination they have not rationalised or quite put their finger on.

Britannica: 

‘The key work in the medieval exploitation of the Trojan theme was a French romance, the Roman de Troie (1154–60), by Benoit de Sainte-Maure. Later medieval writers used the Roman de Troie until it was superseded by a Latin prose account, the Historia destructionis Troiae (c. 1287; “History of the Destruction of Troy”), by Guido delle Colonne. The French author Raoul Le Fèvre’s Recueil des histoires de Troye (1464), an account based on Guido, was translated into English by William Caxton and became the first book to be printed in English as The Recuyell of the Histories of Troye (c. 1474).’

Regarding the rise of city-states or Poleis in Greece, Britannica states – emphasis theirs: 

‘A related factor is Phoenician [possibly Portuguese, though more likely Dutch] influence (related, because the early Phoenicians were great colonizers, who must often have met trading Greeks). The Phoenician coast was settled by communities similar in many respects to the early Greek poleis. It is arguable that Phoenician influence, and Semitic influence generally, on early Greece has been seriously underrated [refer Chapter XII Canaan, Chapter XXIII Aram & Chapter XXVII Abraham].’

The first significant date in Greek history, in the Archaic age was 776 BCE, the year of the first Olympic Games in Olympia, which was located west of Arcadia – recall Acadia, Canada – and northwest of Sparta in the west of Greece. This was the highlight of the Archaic age which culminated with the Persian wars. This era included Homer and his epics The Iliad and The Odyssey.

In the period from Dark to Archaic Greece there were two powerful interrelationships that influenced Greek society, the colonizing mother city and its daughter city and the shared membership of an amphictyony. The most common link was that between two cities with the emphasis of shared ancestry. This diplomatic kinship was taken seriously right until through to the Hellenistic period and the basis of key alliances; developing into the proxenia. Proxenoi were citizens of one state who looked after the interests of citizens of their related, neighbour state. This was evident in type between Sparta and Athens against Troy and was really exploited by Athens in the fifth century.

In Archaic Greece an amphictyony – literally, ‘dwellers around’ – comprised a ‘league of neighbors’ called an Amphictyonic League, which was an ancient religiousassociation of Greek tribes and states formed in the dim past, between the Trojan war and the rise of the various Greek poleis. The most important was the Delphic Amphictyony. Originally composed of twelve tribes dwelling around Thermopylae, this league was centred first on the shrine of Demeter and later became associated with the Temple of Apollo [another name for Azazel] at Delphi. The founder is said to be Amphictyon, brother of Hellen – the purported male ancestor of all Hellenes. The twelve founders were the Oetaeans, Boeotians of Thebes, Dolopes, Dorians of Sparta, the Ionians of Athens, Phthian Achaeans, Locrians, Magnesians, Malians, Perrhaebians, Phocians, Pythians of Delphi and the Thessalians. The League doctrine required that no member would be entirely wiped out in war and no water supply of any member would be cut even in wartime. It did not prevent members from the numerous clashes with each other about dominance over temples. 

Oxford University Press states: ‘[Amphictyony] a word borrowed from institutions in classical Greece and applied by some historians of Israel to its supposed organization before the monarchy [time of the Judges] as a confederation of twelve clans. It was suggested that there was a central shrine at which a cultic object was a shared responsibility among the twelve. But the amphictyony theory has now been generally abandoned.’ 

The number of twelve tribes is too coincidental to ignore. The premise of not destroying a family clan, is reminiscent of the war of the eleven tribes against the tribe of Benjamin, which would have wiped them out if six hundred men had not fled and hidden, so that the remaining tribes relented [Judges 20:1-48]. The early Greeks as mentioned, included the related sons of Jacob. The idea of the amphictyony sounds completely plausible from an Israelite, as well as a Moabite, Ammonite perspective. As a lot of blood had been spilt between the two families. 

The region of Canaan, Palestine or the Levantine, as discussed previously, was a prized parcel of real estate and so became a very crowded part of the world [refer Chapter XII Canaan]. The draw to move away to lands partially established, yet with space and opportunities beckoned to the sons of Jacob and Lot. Just as the New World was attractive a few hundred years ago, ancient Greece and the Aegean was the destination of choice. This explains the flowering of cities, rather than countries or empires in the region as they were colonies of a number of differing tribes and peoples. The influx of migrating peoples also explains the Myceaneans – formerly Minoans and latterly Philistines – who left mainland Greece, for the myriad islands and particularly Crete [refer Chapter XV Casluh & Caphtor].

Another way of reinforcing this relationship between citizens of different city-states was through epigamia. This was enacted through an arrangement by which the husband’s family by marriage were treated as citizens of the wife’s poleis if the husband settled there. In contrast, Plutarch mentions that there was no intermarriage between members of two of the villages of Attica – Pallene and Hagnous. Not because they were dissimilar, rather they were too closely related and thus there was a ban on endogamy. This situation remarkably parallels the peoples of French Ammonite stock in Canada and Louisiana.

The Endogamy Files: What Is Endogamy? The DNA Geek, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Endogamy is a word that gets bandied around a lot in genetic genealogy circles, but what it means and how it affects our work is less clear. This post is the first in a series about what endogamy is, why it matters, how to detect it, and how to work with it. Endogamy is the practice of mating within a specific group.  All human populations have practiced endogamy to one extent or another.  Some still do.  

Endogamy can occur because the group is geographically isolated from other people, like Native Hawaiians were; because they prefer to marry within their religion, ethnicity, language, and/or social caste, as most cultures do; or for other reasons, like consolidating power among royalty. Key to endogamy is that the group is small enough that, over time, marriages occur between cousins. Not necessarily first or even second cousins (although that can occur), but between third, fourth, and more distant cousins. Over and over. And over. 

It’s important to remember that endogamy is not incest, which is sexual relations between close relatives, like a father and daughter or uncle and niece.  Incest is associated with a substantial risk of early death or genetic disorders in the child, while marriages between even first cousins are much safer.  

Endogamy causes something called pedigree collapse, but not all pedigree collapse rises to the level of endogamy. The home person… is the child of parents who were third cousins to one another.  That is, the parents shared a pair of great-great grandparents.  As a result, their child… has 30 unique great-great-great grandparents instead of the expected 32.  One set of 3-great grandparents shows up twice in the child’s tree.  We say the pedigree is “collapsing” rather than doubling in number with each generation back, as we’d expect. But pedigree collapse is not endogamy. Pedigree collapse is one or a few isolated incidents of cousin marriage, while endogamy occurs repeatedly over many, many generations. 

This is my mother’s tree. She’s Cajun [a Louisianian descended of French Canadian immigrants from Acadia, speaking an archaic form of French], a culture that was geographically and culturally isolated in southern Louisiana and, before that, in what is now Nova Scotia.  Cajuns have been marrying mainly within their own population since the 1600s… [like the expression “All Cajuns are cousins”!] My mother’s parents were fourth cousins. I don’t think they knew, because my grandmother’s father was born out of wedlock. My grandfather’s parents were third cousins; they definitely knew.  There’s no known incest in this tree, but the cousin marriages go on and on, back to the earliest settlers in Port-Royal, Acadia (now Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia) in the early 1600s, because there simply weren’t a lot of options for marriage partners.

The closest cousin marriages I’ve identified in this tree are between first cousins.  Consider Isaure Marie Guidry (1863–1933), my mother’s great grandmother… Her parents, Alexis Onésime Guidry and Palmire Dupré, were first cousins through their shared grandparents Louis–David Guidry and Marie Modeste Borda. To complicate matters even more, Onésime had been widowed before marrying Palmire. His previous wife, Celestine, was Palmire’s older sister, and Celestine had a daughter named Marie.  So Marie and Isaure were half sisters their father Onésime, and first cousins through their mothers Celestine and Palmire. (This combination is often termed three-quarter siblings.) But they were also second cousins through Onésime and their mothers. Technically, Marie and Isaure were second cousins twice over, once through Onésime and Celestine and once through Onésime and Palmire, but you get the picture.  It’s enough to make your head spin!

Isaure and Marie died more than 75 years before the advent of genetic genealogy using autosomal DNA, but what would their match to one another look like if we could analyze their genomes today? As half sisters, we’d expect them to share about 1750 cM, as first cousins another 850 cM or so, and as double second cousins roughly 200 cM twice over.  In many parts of their genomes, they’d match on both copies of their two chromosomes, much like full siblings do. 

In fact, they might well be indistinguishable from full sisters using the methods we use for genealogy. While Isaure and Marie are an extreme case, DNA matching is affected to some degree in all endogamous populations.  People who are no closer than fourth cousins might share enough DNA to be predicted as third cousins, because they’re picking up “extra” shared DNA through their other relationships.

For example, my mother shares 184 cM with D.M. If you were to plug that number into the DNA Painter SCP tool, you’d see a combined probability of 89.1% that they were either in the second cousin group (38.8% chance) or the second cousin once removed group (50.3%). In fact, their closest relationship is third cousins, who average only about 50 cM. On the other hand, Mom and D.M. are also third cousins once removed twice over, fourth cousins once removed, and fifth cousins… that we know of.  All those distant relationships add to the shared centimorgan tally. Thus, the overall effect of endogamy is to make many of our DNA matches appear to be more closely related than they really are. This complicates everything, from basic relationship prediction to more advanced and powerful techniques, like the… What are the Odds? tool.

Is the entire human population endogamous? After all, we only mate (well, mate successfully)with other humans and have been doing so for ten thousand years or more, since the last archaic humans, like Denisovans and Neanderthals, died out. Technically, we’re all (very distant)cousins, and all of our pedigrees collapse eventually.What do you think?’

By the sixth century BCE, the dominant cities in Grecia were Athens, Sparta, Corinth and Thebes. They had all increased their influence to include surrounding smaller towns and rural areas. Athens and Corinth had become major maritime and mercantile powers. Herodotus described one such trader from the later Archaic period, Sostratus of Aegina, a man of fabulous wealth. Then in the early 1970s a remarkable inscription was found in Etruria, Italy – a dedication to Apollo, in the name of Sostratus of Aegina. This discovery revealed that the source of his wealth was trade with Etruria and other parts of Italy. A rapidly increasing population in the preceding centuries had resulted in emigration of many Greeks to form colonies in Southern Italy and Sicily. The Greek colonies of Sicily, especially Syracuse were drawn into conflicts with the Carthaginians – Portuguese-Brazilian descended peoples [refer Chapter XXIII Aram]. The conflict lasted from 600 to 265 BCE until the Romans intervened. A year later, the Punic wars began. 

Beginning about 500 BCE, the Athenians and Spartans tussled for hegemony of Greece, though the Athenians were no longer the Israelites – of six hundred years before – but Moab – with Ammon located in Macedonia to the north. For these were the children of Lot, whose migrations southward had pushed the other Greeks to leave. 

The Spartans who were distinct and not descended from Moab or Ammon, were never defeated by Philip II or Alexander III and remained outside of the Greek Empire. Around the same time, in 499 BCE, the Ionian city states under Persian rule rebelled against their Persian-backed, tyrannical rulers. Supported by troops predominantly from Athens, they advanced as far as Sardis burning the city before being driven back by a Persian counterattack.The revolt continued for five years until finally the rebel Ionians were defeated. 

Darius I, king from 522 to 486 BCE, did not forget that Athens had assisted the Ionian revolt and he assembled an armada to exact retribution.Though heavily outnumbered, the plucky Athenians and allies, defeated the Persians at the Battle of Marathon in 490. The Athenians and Persians continued to wage war until about 450, with the Athenians  driving the Persians out of the Aegean. They then turned on the Spartans with the Peloponnesian War beginning in 431 BCE lasting to 404 BCE. Eventually, Sparta brought an end to Athens empire though was ultimately left severely weakened itself. 

By 360 BCE, the Greek states had worn themselves out and ‘the exhaustion of the Greek heartland coincided with the rise of Macedon, led by Philip II.’ In 359, two strong leaders came to the thrones of both Persia and Macedon, ruling for nearly the exact same periods: Artaxerses III – 359-338 BCE – and Philip – 359-336 BCE. 

The Parthenon situated on the Acropolis of Athens was built between 447 and 438 BCE. A temple dedicated to the goddess Athena. Parthenos meant a ‘maiden, girl, virgin’ or an ‘unmarried woman.’ Construction began at the height of the Athenian Empire. The Parthenon replaced an older temple of Athena that was destroyed in the Persian invasion of 480 BCE. It also served a practical purpose as the city treasury. 

Philip took twenty years in not just unifying his kingdom, but also expanding north and westwards, conquering Thrace as well as Thessaly to the south. His reforms to the Macedonian army were pivotal in his success. In 338 BCE he invaded the southern city-states of Thebes and Athens, defeating them at the Battle of Chaeronea. Now king of all but Sparta; Philip then entered into war against the Achaemenid Empire but was assassinated by one of his bodyguards Pausanias of Orestis, early during the conflict … and so entered, Alexander the Great onto the world stage, aged just twenty, born July 20, 356 BCE.

‘Modern belief in the Greek-ness of the Macedonian language was strengthened by the publication in 1994 of an important curse tablet from Pella that appears provisionally to indicate that the Macedonian language was a form of northwest Greek. Macedonian religion looks Greek; there are local variations, but that is equally true of incontestably Greek places in, for instance, the Peloponnese. Many Macedonian personal names resemble Greek ones, and it has recently been suggested that such onomastic [relating to names] evidence indicates that the Macedonian settlers originally [may have] migrated from northern Thessalian Perrhaibia and the region around Mt. Olympus – as already suggested by a poem ascribed to the Archaic poet Hesiod. The Classical Age was resplendent with most of the cultural wonders associated with Ancient Greece. 

It corresponds with the period of the height of democracy, the flowering of Greek tragedy in the hands of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, and the architectural marvels, like the Parthenon, at Athens.’ 

The Greek word for philosophy, philosophia, translates as the ‘love for wisdom.’ The discipline dates back to ancient times with some of the greatest philosophers, including Pythagoras [circa 570-495 BCE], Parmenides [circa 540-? BCE], Socrates [circa 469-399 BCE], Plato [circa 428-348 BCE], Aristotle [384-322 BCE] and Epicurus [341-270 BCE]. 

There are some famous modern day philosophical thinkers who have had their contributions recognised as well. The same people descended from Lot, known as the Greeks, are now known as French and are still producing the majority of the finest thinkers in the world. Examples include: John Calvin [1509-1564], Rene Descartes [1596-1650], Blaise Pascal [1623-1662], Voltaire [1694-1778], Auguste Comte [1798-1857], Jean Paul Sartre [1905-1980], Simone de Beauvoir [1908-1986], Albert Camus [1913-1960] and Michael Foucault [1926-1984]. Some of the major Greek contributors to science, lived during the Hellenistic era, including Euclid and Archimedes. 

In 600 BCE, a portion of the Greek Empire – an early portion of Moab and Ammon – settled in Southern France and founded the colony of Massalia; now the city that is called Marseille and the oldest city in France – Kir of Moab. The primary link between the Classical Greeks and the French are not the Gauls, but the Franks. The original Gauls are not the ancestors of Moab and Ammon. We will study these Gauls in detail in a later chapter. 

As the Swedes, Norwegians and Danes believe they are Vikings and identify with that culture and past, the truth, is that the original Vikings left Scandinavia and settled in Britain and Ireland. Likewise the French identify with a Gallic past, yet they are not Gauls and the true Gauls similarly left France for the shores of Britain and Ireland. The Gauls were a Celtic race that left their name in northwestern Italy as Gallia, in Belgium as Belgica and in France as Celtica. The nation of France emerged from this Gallic region of the Celtic culture and peoples. Gallia remains a name of France in Greek and Latin with Francia and Francogallia.

The Merovingian dynasty of the Franks attracts considerable interest form researchers and the public alike, in a similar vein to the Trojan kings. We will discuss them further in a subsequent chapter as they are perhaps not all that they seem. The Merovingian  kings were ostensibly a Frankish, Salian dynasty lasting some three hundred years – 476-750 CE – and traditionally reckoned as the first race of the ‘kings of France.’ They importantly for the French identity, ended the hegemony of the Visigoths in Gaul. Merovingian derives from the name Merovech meaning Sea-Bull, the father of Childeric I, who ruled a tribe of Salian Franks from his capital at Tournai. 

Childeric was succeeded by his son Clovis I in 481/482 CE. Many regard Clovis as the beginning point of the history of France. Clovis I extended his rule over all the Salian Franks by conquering or annexing the territories of the Ripuarian Franks and the Alemanni; uniting nearly all of Gaul except for Burgundy – the seeds of modern Switzerland – and what is now Provence. Important choices by Clovis included making Paris his new capital and converted to Christianity sometime during 496-506. 

At Clovis I’s death in 511, – and in a situation similar to Alexander at the time of his death – his realm was divided among his four sons, Theuderic I, Chlodomir, Childebert I and Chlotar I. Despite the frequently bloody competition between them, the brothers managed to extend Frankish rule over Thuringia in 531 and Burgundy in 534 and to then gain control over Septimania on the Mediterranean coast, Bavaria and the lands of the Saxons to the north. By 558 Chlotar I was the last surviving son of Clovis. 

The Merovingians grew their hair long [refer Spartans, Chapter XXIX Esau and Samson, Chapter XXXIV Dan] which distinguished them among the Franks who cut their hair short. Contemporaries referred to them as the ‘long-haired kings’, in Latin reges criniti. A Merovingian whose hair was cut could not rule. The Merovingians used a distinct name stock; Clovis, evolved into Louis and remained common among French royalty to the 19th century. 

 The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals and emphasis his, bold mine:

‘The old Trojan Royal House – of the line of DARDANUS – was restored to power after the Greek defeat at Troy in 1149 [1185 BCE]. As noted by Herman L. Hoeh:

“A complete list of TROJAN RULERS after the fall of Troy in 1181 may be found in the original Spanish work by Bartholome Gutierrez entitled: Historia del estado presente y antiguo, de la mui noble y mui leal ciudad de Xerez de la Frontera. It was published in Xerez, Spain in 1886” (Compendium of World History, Volume II).

… HELENUS, the son of Priam and Hecuba, fled Troy after the first Trojan War and settled in Illyria or Epirus. There Helenus and his followers founded the cities of Buthrotum and Chaonia. During the Second Trojan War in 1149, the descendants of Helenus REGAINED CONTROL of Troy from the Greeks and restored the Royal House of DARDANUS to the city. 

The Spanish history by Gutierrez records the names of Helenus’ descendants who controlled Troy and the surrounding region until the Third Trojan War in 677… At the fall of Troy in 677, members of the Trojan Royal Family, and most of the population of the city, fled to the NORTHERN SHORES OF THE BLACK SEA in eastern Europe. For the next 234 years, in this region, the… TROJAN HOUSE provided eleven rulers over the people who fled Troy…

In 442 B.C. MARCOMIR, Antenor’s son, ascended the throne; and in 441 he migrated out of Scythia and settled the people on the DANUBE. In 431 the Goths forced him, along with over 175,000 men, out of the area and into the country now called West Friesland, Gelders and Holland. Then, nine years later, Marcomir crossed the Rhine and conquered part of Gaul – MODERN FRANCE! He made his brother governor, and continued the gradual conquest of the entirety of Gaul.

Eventually this people became known as FRANKS or Franconians after a king called FRANCUS who reigned from 39 – 11 B.C. The last King of the Franks – Marcomir V – won a great victory over the Romans at Cologne in 382 A. D. and recovered all the lands in the possession of the Romans, except Armoria or Little Brittany, in 390. However, he was slain in battle three years later and the Romans conquered the FRANKS – commanding them to refrain from electing kings over themselves. Instead, the Franks elected Dukes to reign over them, starting with Genebald I in 328 A.D.

The fifth duke of the East Franks, Pharamund (404-419) is recognized by early historians as being the FIRST TRUE KING OF FRANCE. In 427 the succession passed to Clodion who founded the MEROVINGIAN DYNASTY. There is something VERY INTERESTING about this dynasty that bears explanation:

“Its kings all wore LONG HAIR. They kept their kingly office until the Pope suggested to the East Franks (Germans) that they could gain the power over the Merovingians by cutting the king’s hair. The last Merovingian was accordingly tonsured. The government thereafter passed to Pippin, father of the German king Charlemagne, who RESTORED the Roman Empire to the west in 800. The history of the Merovingians, WHO DESCENDED [in part] FROM THE TROJAN LINE AND THE HOUSE OF JUDAH, is made especially interesting in a book entitled The Long-haired Kings, by J. M. Wallace-Hadrill. (See especially chapter 7.) The Merovingians recognized that though they came from Judah, THEY WERE NOT OF THE THRONE OF DAVID and would hold their power only so long as they kept a NAZARITE TRADITION – long hair – symbolizing their subjection to a Higher Power – God – who rules supreme among men. (See Numbers 6)” (Compendium of World History, Volume II, page 183).’

We will learn that there is serious doubt to the Merovingian kings being wholly from the tribe of Judah, let alone a royal line from his sons Pharez or Zarah. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 445 – emphasis his, bold mine:

‘Even the name Lancelot, according to Ried, derived from L’Alan de Lot, Alan from the Lot Valley of southwest France. The Lot Valley is the same region that the Essenes, Templars, Rex Deus, Cathars, and Merovingians settled in. Lot derives from Lot, the nephew of Abraham, recorded in the Nephilim-infested Sodom and Gomorrrah narrative. Lot also inexplicably shows up in the original Camu-lot. One wonders, were Camulot and the Lot region of France thus considered by Gnostics as the new Sodom and Gomorrah cities of light?’

The Franks like other Germanic peoples had resided in Scandinavia before their migration southwards and prior to that, they are linked to the Black Sea area. 

The Franks from the beginning, were divided into two distinct political yet related groups. The Salian Franks of very probable Moab descent dwelt in the west of France. This Frankish kingdom became known as Neustria and encompassed northern France, Burgundy, Orleans – upper central France – and Provence. The Ripuarian Franks, most likely of Ammon, dwelt in the Rhineland region of northwestern Germany; which in turn became known as Austrasia and later encompassed Austria and the Netherlands with northern Germany. The name Ripuarian is thought to mean ‘river people’ or ‘river dwellers.’ One is reminded of Ammon’s capital Rabbah, the city of water and Quebec with its strong association with water. The name Franci, from Frank is linked with the english word frank, to be ‘free.’ Other meanings include the Germanic words for ‘javelin, fierce, bold’ and ‘insolent.’

The author of the Chronicle of Fredegar in the seventh century, claimed the Franks came originally from Troy, citing the works of Virgil and Hieronymous: ‘Blessed Jerome has written about the ancient kings of the Franks, whose story was first told by the poet Virgil: their first king was Priam and, after Troy was captured by trickery, they departed. Afterwards they had as king Friga, then they split into two parts, the first going into Macedonia, the second group, which left Asia with Friga were called the Frigii, settled on the banks of the Danube and the Ocean Sea – Black Sea. Again splitting into, two groups, half of them entered Europe with their king Francio. After crossing Europe with their wives and children they occupied the banks of the Rhine and not far from the Rhine began to build the city of “Troy.”’

The Liber Historiae Francorum [or Gesta regum Francorum] describes how 12,000 Trojans, alledgely led by Priam and Antenor sailed from Troy to the River Don and on to Pannonia which is on the River Danube settling near the Sea of Azov. There they founded a city called Sicambria. The Sicambri circa 55 BCE are linked to the area occupied by the Salian Franks in northwestern France. The Trojans joined the Roman army in accomplishing the task of driving their enemies into the marshes of Mæotis, for which they received the name of Franks meaning ‘savage.’

There are many kings called great and within that group, there are a select few who cast a long shadow over the other rulers named great. The great of the great, if you will. For instance, Alexander the Great of Macedon. Another, is Charles I or Charlemagne who lived from 742 to 814 CE. He was the son of Pepin III, king from 751 to 768, and Bertrada of Laon. 

Charlemagne co-ruled with his brother Carloman I from 768 until his death in 771. Pepin had peacefully wrenched the monarchy away from Chileric III, by beseeching the Pope – Zachary 741-752 – for the need of a strong ruler such as himself, the Mayor of the Palace, effectively wielding the true power over the Frankish kingdom. Charlemagne is considered the founder of both the French and German monarchies. The French monarchy would continue to be a great power in Europe for the following thousand years. 

It is thought that Charlemagne was born in Liege in Belgium, or Aachen in Germany, where he died. He displayed a talent for languages and could speak Latin and understood Greek, amongst others. Charlemagne expanded the Frankish kingdom; establishing the Carolingian Empire. As a zealous defender of Christianity, Charlemagne gave money and land to the Catholic church and protected successive popes. 

To acknowledge Charlemagne’s power and reinforce his support of the church, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the Romans on December 25, 800, at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome – thus uniting Western Europe and the Holy Roman Empire for the first time since the fall of Rome. ‘Charlemagne ruled from the start by force of his personality which embodied the warrior-king ethos combined with Christian vision.’

Charlemagne maintained a violent protracted thirty year series of battles from 772 to 804 CE called the Saxon Wars, against the Saxons, a pagan worshipping Germanic tribe who had earned a reputation for ruthlessness. In 782 at the Massacre of Verden, Charlemagne ordered the slaughter of some four and a half thousand Saxons and tried to force them to convert to Christianity; declaring that anyone who did not get baptised or follow the Catholic faith, would be put to death. The aim was to break the Saxon’s will to fight, but they still would not surrender their autonomy or repudiate their religion. 

In 804, Charlemagne deported over ten thousand Saxons to Neustria in his kingdom and replaced them in Saxony with his own people, effectively winning the conflict but earning the enmity of the Scandinavian kings, who bid their time until Charlemagne’s death; then unleashing Viking raids on Francia from 820-840.

Charlemagne’s son Louis was born in 778 to his second wife, Hildegard of the Vinzgau, who had nine children by the time she died at the age of 26 in 783. When King Louis I, the Pious died in 840, the empire was divided among his three sons who fought each other for supremacy. Their conflict was concluded by the Treaty of Verdun of 843 which divided the empire between Louis’s sons. Louis II, the German [843-876] received East Francia, Lothair I [843-855], Middle Francia and Charles II, the Bald [843-877] gained West Francia. None of the kings were interested in working with the others and the empire’s infrastructure, as well as most of the reforms advanced by Charlemagne, deteriorated. Notable reforms included the first public schools and a monetary standard. 

Hollister describes the king: ‘Charlemagne towered over his contemporaries both figuratively and literally. He was 6 feet 3 ½ inches [ironic as his father was very short] tall, thick-necked, and pot bellied yet imposing in appearance for all that. He could be warm and talkative, but he could also be hard, cruel, and violent, and his subjects came to regard him with both admiration and fear… Above all else, Charlemagne was a warrior-king. He led his armies on yearly campaigns as a matter of course. Only gradually did he develop a notion of Christian mission and a program of unifying and systematically expanding the Christian West.’ 

Notable events in the French past include, the Hundred Years’ War with the English beginning in 1337. Then in 1348, the Black Death plague spread through France killing a large percentage of the population. In 1415, the English defeated the French at the Battle of Agincourt. In 1453, the Hundred Years’ War finally draws to a close, when the French defeat the English at the Battle of Castillon. The year 1643 saw Louis XIV become King of France. He ruled for seventy-two years and was known as Louis the Great and the Sun King. In 1778, France became involved in the American War of Independence, siding with the colonies in their drive for independent governance from Great Britain. The most popular French king names were Louis with eighteen kings, Charles with ten and Philip with five – the name of Alexander the Great’s father.

In 1789, the French Revolution began with the storming of the Bastille. In 1792, the French Republic was proclaimed and the following year, King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were executed by guillotine. In 1799, Napoleon had grabbed power, overthrowing the French Directory and made himself Emperor. Conquering most of Europe by 1811, he was officially crowned Emperor of France in 1804. In 1815, Napoleon was defeated by a coalition, led by England’s the Duke of Wellington.

There is much that could be said regarding Napoleon I. The following, is a brief synopsis from Britannia – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Napoleon I, French in full Napoléon Bonaparte… byname the Corsican or the Little Corporal, French byname Le Corse or Le Petit Caporal, (born August 15, 1769, Ajaccio, Corsica – died May 5, 1821, St. Helena Island), French general, first consul (1799-1804), and emperor of the French (1804-1814/15), one of the most celebrated personages in the history of the West. He revolutionized military organization and training; sponsored the Naploeonic Code, the prototype of later civil-law codes; reorganized education; and established the long-lived Concordat with the papacy. Napoleon’s many reforms left a lasting mark on the institutions of France and of much of western Europe. But his driving passion was the military expansion of French dominion, and, though at his fall he left France little larger than it had been at the outbreak of the revolution in 1789, he was almost unanimously revered during his lifetime and until the end of the Second Empire under his nephew Napoleon III as one of history’s great heroes.’  

There is an air of the Germanic or Flemish-Dutch about Charlemagne, not so with Napoleon Bonaparte who is wholly French, sharing much with his spiritual ante descent, Alexander the Great. Both of which share one major attribute and that was superior military innovation, that gave them an edge over their opponents. Sandwiched between Charlemagne and Napoleon is another formidable leader and warrior, Joan of Arc. It was vital that England did not gain a stranglehold on France and Joan was the difference.

Britannia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘St. Joan of Arc, byname the Maid of Orléans… (born circa 1412, Domrémy, Bar, France – died May 30, 1431, Rouen; canonized May 16, 1920… national heroine of France, a peasant girl who, believing that she was acting under divine guidance, led the French army in a momentous victory at Orleans [1429] that repulsed an English attempt to conquer France during the Hundred Years’ War. 

Captured a year afterward, Joan was burned to death by the English and their French collaborators as a heretic. She became the greatest national heroine of her compatriots, and her achievement was a decisive factor in the later awakening of French national consciousness. Joan was the daughter of a tenant farmer… In her mission of expelling the English and their Burgundian allies… she felt herself to be guided by the voices of St. Michael [and others]… Joan was endowed with remarkable mental and physical courage, as well as a robust common sense, and she possessed many attributes characteristic of the female visionaries who were a noted feature of her time. These qualities included extreme personal piety, a claim to direct communication with the saints, and a consequent reliance upon individual experience of God’s presence beyond the ministrations of the priesthood and the confines of the institutional church.’

The 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Notice the similarity with  the customary tablets used for the Ten commandments, with the United States Declaration of Independence and with the Eye of providence – the all-seeing eye of God. This Eye is a symbol that has an eye enclosed in a pyramid, surrounded by rays of light from the Sun to represent superficially, the divine providence of God watching over humanity. In reality, the god that watches is the one that holds this world captive, Samael.

The Eye of Providence appears on the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States, depicted on the one dollar bill. The Eye of Providence was adopted in 1782 and was first proposed as an element of the Great Seal in 1776. Coincidentally, it is thought to be the suggestion of the artistic consultant, Pierre Eugene du Simitiere – of French ancestry born in Geneva, Switzerland. 

In 1889, the famous and iconic Eiffel Tower was built in Paris for the World’s Fair. 

France suffered greatly in both World War I and World War II, with considerable loss of life and blood spilt on its soil. In 1940 During World War II, France was occupied by the Germans and under their direct control. German officials oversaw all aspects of government, supported by the military. Any infraction of the rules could be dealt with by the Nazis bureaucrats or by the military. Vichy France was a puppet government. It was governed by French officials, with the Germans maintaining only a small oversight group to ensure that Vichy France did not contravene the interests of the Germans. The Vichy government generally cooperated with the Germans; rounding up and deporting Jews and anyone else the Nazis declared as their enemies. 

Most Resistance activity was fought in the occupied territories, as there was little incentive to take action against the Germans in Vichy France. It would have impacted the self-governance the French already had and run the risk of inciting severe penalties against the civilian population. Relatively few French actually took an active part in the Resistance. Many offered passive support by not reporting Resistance movements, but the vast majority of French citizens in both occupied and Vichy France simply avoided doing anything to attract the attention of the gestapo or of collaborating Frenchmen. Allied forces liberated the country in 1944. 

An additional interesting coincidence is France’s close association with the Modern Olympic Games. It was the Greeks who staged the first Olympic Games in Olympia during 776 BCE and it was a modern ‘Greek’, French aristocrat, Baron Pierre de Coubertin who spoke of the Games’ revival. Athens was understandably, awarded the first re-instituted Games in 1896 in homage to the Olympics’ Greek origins. Though Paris hosting the second games in 1900, was truer to its returning to its spiritual and physical origin. 

Paris was the first home of the International Olympic Committee, before it moved to Lausanne, Switzerland. France also hosted the Summer Olympics in 1924 and has hosted the Winter Games three times.

Britannica: ‘France has long provided a geographic, economic, and linguistic bridge joining northern and southern Europe. It is Europe’s most important agricultural producer and one of the world’s leading industrial powers.’ A long standing and well known theme of the French nation, is the the insistence on the supremacy of the individual. Historian Jules Michelet remarked, ‘England is an empire, Germany is a nation, a race, France is a person.’  

This is surely reflective of the French national character; one that was born from a familial origin much closer than the beginning of other nations.

Writer Gustave Flaubert philosophically deduced: ‘I am no more modern than I am ancient, no more French than Chinese; and the idea of la patrie, the fatherland – that is, the obligation to live on a bit of earth coloured red or blue on a map, and to detest the other bits coloured green or black – has always seemed to me narrow, restricted, and ferociously stupid.’ 

France is a major world power as evidenced as being one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council with the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and China. In 2015 France was listed as being ‘the best networked state in the world’ as a country that ‘is [a] member of more multi-lateral organisations than any other country.’ France is a leading member of the International Francophone Organisation (OIF) of eighty-four fully or partly French speaking nations. In 2017 France was the fourth largest donor of development aid in the world, after the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. A 2018 study by Credit Suisse ranked the French Armed Forces as the world’s sixth largest and most powerful military; the most powerful in Europe, behind Russia. 

France is an integral member of the intergovernmental organisation comprising the seven most powerful economies – not including China and India – in the world, the G7. 

France’s second biggest export is automobiles. French automobile brands include renowned Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Alpine and Bugatti. France is famous for the most prestiges wines in the world as well as champagne – from the same French region – and cognac exports. Many cosmetic brands originate from France, including Vichy, Nuxe, Yves-Rocher and Bioderma. 

France had a GDP of $2.72 trillion in 2019, ranking as the seventh largest economy in the world. Tourism is a very important industry and France receives the most visitors of any country each year with Paris – voted the most romantic city destination – the most visited capital in the world. France is a mixed economy, with many private and semi-private businesses across a diverse range of industries. There is heavy government involvement in certain key sectors such as defence and electrical power generation. The French government’s commitment to economic intervention in favour of social equality, creates challenges for the economy such as a rigid labor market with high unemployment and a large public debt relative to other advanced economies.

‘The following product groups represent the highest dollar value in France’s import purchases during 2021

  1. Machinery including computers: US$84.2 billion
  2. Vehicles: $75.9 billion 
  3. Mineral fuels including oil: $70.8 billion 
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $64.1 billion 
  5. Pharmaceuticals: $33.9 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $29.2 billion 
  7. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $23.3 billion 
  8. Organic chemicals: $16.5 billion 
  9. Iron, steel: $15.2 billion 
  10. Articles of iron or steel: $14.3 billion


The fastest growers among the top product categories from 2020 to 2021 were mineral fuels including oil (up 80.4%), iron or steel as materials (up 57.1%), items made from iron or steel (up 37.2%), plastics as a material and items made from plastic (up 31.4%) and electrical machinery or equipment (up 19.5%).’ 

France ranks highly in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves, one behind Italy at number three. France in fourth position is ahead of those nations we have investigated so far, Russia [5], China [6], Switzerland [7], Japan [8] and India [9]. France has 2,436.0 tonnes of gold that represents 64.5 percent of its foreign reserves. The French central bank has sold little of its gold reserves in recent years. ‘The Banque de France vaults in Paris are one of the four designated depositories of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).’

France was the most populous nation in Europe in 1801, containing about one sixth of the continent’s inhabitants. By 1936, the French population had increased by fifty percent; though in the same period the number of people in Italy and Germany had nearly trebled and in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands the population had nearly quadrupled. The population of France today is 65,532,271 people, the fourth highest in Europe between the United Kingdom and Italy. France has never been a major source of international migrants, unlike the other major nations surrounding it. 

In the seventeenth century due to religious persecution, France lost more than four hundred thousand Huguenot refugees – usually highly skilled – mainly to Prussia in northeast Germany, to England, the Netherlands and the United States. In the same century, relatively small numbers of emigrants first settled in North America, particularly eastern Canada and Quebec and in the southern state of Louisiana. Small numbers of French, especially from Brittany and Normandy continue to relocate to Canada.

A well known online encyclopaedia states, that ‘most French people are of Celtic (Gauls) origin, with an admixture of Italic (Roman) and Germanic (Franks) groups.’ As touched upon, the Gauls were in fact early British and Irish peoples and it is the Salian and Ripuarian Franks that are the nucleus of the French nation. The Latin and Celtic component reveals their familial resemblance to the Italians and Swiss respectively; whom represent their cousins from both Nahor and Haran. We will discover when we investigate Haran’s brother Abraham and his descendants the why and where from of the Germanic component in the French people. The fact that France is composed of two brothers is the key piece of the French puzzle and explains their approximate north western to south eastern population demographic divide.

The major differences between the North and South of France, Santa Fe Relocation, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The two regions of France are heavily influenced by the surrounding countries and the weather. While many aspects of Northern France are reminiscent of Germany and Belgium, such as the architecture [industry and commerce], Southern France feels more Mediterranean,sharing many features [such as cuisine and pace of life] with Spain and Italy. The lifestyle and culture varies between the two regions… In Northern France most people tend to be quite honest and blunt, but they also tend to form much deeper relationships with people… The easiest way to make friends in Southern France is to speak the language.’

Continuing: ‘Large-scale immigration over the last century and a half has led to a more multicultural society. In 2004, the Institute Montaigne estimated that within Metropolitan France, 51 million people were White (85% of the population), 6 million were Northwest African (10%), 2 million were Black (3.3%), and 1 million were Asian (1.7%). In 2005, it was Western Europe’s leading recipient of asylum seekers… In 2010, France… [was] among the top five asylum recipients in the world… [even though] France established controls to curb Eastern European migration. Immigration remains a contentious political issue.’

Recall Ezekiel 25:10 ESV: ‘I will give [Moab] along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations…’

The region of Catalonia though primarily within Spain, contains Catalonians who have in many ways more of a connection with the French than they do with Spaniards. The autonomous community of Catalonia is the richest and most highly industrialised region of the Spain; reflecting its difference from the rest of the Spanish. 

For instance, the Catalan textile industry achieved prominence between 1283 and 1313; long remaining the premier industry of Spain until the 1950s. 

Britannia – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Catalonia was formerly a principality of the crown of Aragon, and it has played an important role in the history of the Iberian Peninsula. From the 17th century it was the centre of a separatist movement that sometimes dominated Spanish affairs. In 2006 Catalonia was granted“nation” status and given the same level of taxation responsibility as the Spanish central government. Spain’s Constitutional Court struck down portions of this autonomy statute in 2010, ruling that Catalans constituted a “nationality” but that Catalonia was not, itself, a “nation.”’ 

This is strikingly similar to the ruling accorded to Quebec in Canada.

‘Scotland’s referendum on independence from the United Kingdom in… 2014, although ultimately unsuccessful, [galvanised] the independence movement in Catalonia. Convergence and Union leader Artur Mas called for the long-promised, albeit nonbinding, independence referendum to be held… The move was immediately challenged by Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, and the independence campaign was suspended while the Constitutional Court considered the legality of the vote. Ultimately, Mas proceeded with the referendum but framed it as an informal poll of Catalan opinion. With more than one-third of registered voters participating in the balloting, over 80 percent expressed a desire for independence.’

This sentiment remains till this day, though there has been a power struggle between the central government of Madrid and that of the Catalonian capital, Barcelona; which is currently stalled and in Madrid’s favour. The Catalan government surveys regularly its people ‘regarding its “sentiment of belonging”.’  In July 2019, the results indicated that 46.7% of the Catalans would favour independence from Spain. This has dropped markedly after the heavy handed response from Madrid in 2018. 

With the stronger centralist tendencies in France however, French Catalans display a much less open sense of uniqueness, having been integrated more seamlessly ‘into the unitary French national identity.’ 

There are 7,596,131 people in Catalonia and in France 423,112 Catalonians. It is not surprising that the French Catalonians feel more at home in France than their Spanish counter parts if they are from similar stock. We only hear of Spanish Catalonian and Basque discontent not French Catalonian and Basque grievances.

The etymology of Basque according to some scholars is based on bhar-s-, meaning ‘summit, point’ or ‘leaves.’ Barscunes may have meant ‘the mountain people, the tall ones’ or the proud ones. The last definition interesting considering the pride of Moab. Euskal Herria is the oldest documented Basque name for the area they inhabit, dating from the sixteenth century. The Spanish Basque Country, is the largest and most populated part of the Basque territories. It includes two main regions, the Basque Autonomous Community – capital city Vitoria-Gasteiz – and the Chartered Community of Navarre – capital city Pamplona. The Spanish Constitution of 1978 states ‘that Navarre may become a part of the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country if it is so decided by its people and institutions… To date, there has been no implementation of this law.’

For many Basques, their identity is mixed with a sense of being either Spanish or French, especially in the French Basque Country. Whereas in the Spanish Basque Country, there are many Basques that don’t have a sense of Spanish identity at all. 

Former Basque rugby union player and French international, Imanol Harinordoquy has said about his national identity: ‘I am French and Basque. There is no conflict, I am proud of both… I have friends who are involved in the political side of things but that is not for me. My only interest is the culture, the Euskera language, the people, our history and ways.’

Rugby union is an important sport in France, particularly the broader Paris and Marseille regions. It is also a popular sport among French Basques, with major clubs Biarritz Olympique and Aviron Bayonnais traditional heavy weights in the premier division of French Rugby. Biarritz regularly play Champion Cup matches, especially knockout matches in San Sebastian, Spain. Games between the Basque clubs and Catalan club USA Perpignan are always hard fought. The fact that the French Basque and Catalans are so keen on rugby may allude to their Moab and Ammon heritage. Though Rugby is played in Spain, it is in France that it is a passion. Many French consider France the spiritual home of rugby, even in lieu of its origins in England.

A well known encyclopaedia mentions: ‘Strabo’s account of the north of Spain in his Geographica (written between approximately 20 BC and 20 AD) makes a mention of “a sort of woman-rule…” a first mention of the – for the period – unusual position of women. Women could inherit and control property as well as officiate in churches… matrilineal inheritance laws, and agricultural work performed by women continued in Basque country until the early twentieth century. For more than a century, scholars have widely discussed the high status of Basque women in law codes, as well as their positions as judges, inheritors, and arbitrators through ante-Roman, medieval, and modern times. 

The system of laws governing succession in the French Basque region reflected total equality between the sexes. Up until the eve of the French Revolution, the Basque woman was truly ‘the mistress of the house’, hereditary guardian, and head of the lineage.’ This may have a link to the Amazons who lived in the Aegean Sea – south of the Troad and the isle of Lesbos – either a clan of warrior women or a women dominated society.  

The Flags of the Basque Country and Catalonia

Interestingly, the French capital Paris, apart from being known as the City of Love and the number one visited city in the world, is also known as the City of Lights. Paris played a leading role during the Age of Enlightenment as well as literally being one of the first European cities to install gas city street lights in 1820; with the first electric streetlight appearing in 1878. 

A somber and stygian matter is the aspect of Moab and Ammons’ origin. Surveys have labelled the French as the most depressed nation. In 2011, the World Health Organisation [WHO] in a report said the French are the most likely to suffer from ‘a major depressive episode’ in their lifetimes. This followed a report in 2008, where the French learned that ‘they consume more anti-depressants than any other country.’ What could be an underlying cause?

The coincidence again, of a Frenchman undertaking the nature of the following study. Claude Lévi-Strauss, a French and Jewish anthropologist and ethnologist ‘was key in the development of the theory of structuralism and structural anthropology.’ The chair of Social Anthropology at the Collège de France from 1959 to 1982; he was elected a member of the Académie française in 1973 and was also a member of the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences in Paris. Levi-Strauss received a number of honours from universities and institutions throughout the world and with James George Frazer and Franz Boas, is considered a ‘father of modern anthropology.’ His significant work was aimed – through a structural method – ‘at discovering universal invariants in human society, chief among which he believed to be the incest taboo.’

A poll by Ipsos in late 2020, estimated one in ten French people have been the victim of sexual abuse within the family as children or adolescents: 78% were female and 22% male. The poll suggested the number of incest cases has risen from 3% of the population in 2009 – meaning 2 million victims – to 10% in 2020, an alarming 6.7 million victims. This is shocking, though it is worth noting that the countries with the highest rate of incest are… France and Spain. Also, not all people polled are forthcoming, thus the ten percent figure may actually be higher as evidenced by the anti-depressant consumption. 

At time of writing, under French law there is no legal age of consent, though the Senate voted for the threshold to be set at 13. At present a victim of rape or abuse is considered consenting by default and has to prove non-consent. New legislation proposes criminalising sexual acts between an adult and a child under 13 – currently an “offence” and not a “crime” – and extending the statute of limitations to give victims more time to bring legal proceedings. Not to single France out entirely, there are other nations with either a lax view or lenient laws regarding consenting adult incest. France is not being confined as unique by this measure; though the percentage of its occurrence is of significance, in the instance of the French descending from Moab and Ammon. 

The continuous perpetuation of a certain percentage of incestuous births within the population, could possibly have a bearing on the blood, hormone and DNA composition of said people in that society. 

Leviticus 17:10-11

New English Translation

10 “‘Any man from the house of Israel or from the resident foreigners who live in their midst who eats [or mingles] any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats the blood, and I will cut him off from the midst of his people, 11 for the life of every living thing is in the blood. So I myself have assigned it to you on the altar to make atonement for your lives, for the blood makes atonement by means of the life.

It was in 1616, that William Harvey – an English physician and scientist who made influential contributions in anatomy and physiology – confirmed what was already in the scriptures and declared that ‘life is in the blood.’ 

Blood services the body in delivering oxygen and nutrients. It also polices, by attacking what it perceives to be invaders. This perception of what is an invader, varies from person to person. The immune system is complex and based on recognising certain proteins and removing those it does not recognise. What sets of proteins blood removes, determines your blood type. There are three basic types of blood, A, B and O. With minor variations these combine to make thirty types of blood. Worth noting that Noah had three sons and there are some twenty-six genetic racial lines.

Blood that is designated O is a universal blood type and the most common [40%] among the earth’s human inhabitants. O positive is also deemed the oldest blood type. Though some consider A the oldest, then B and O the most recent. O blood does not possess the antigens of either A or B type blood. The opposite blood type does have both antigens and is called AB. 

Antigens are molecules that the body responds, in producing an antibody or a cell, to destroy the antigen. There are about six hundred antigens, though most are not significant to typing blood.

Blood is also designated as either positive or negative. It depends on a single protein – on the surface of red blood cells – the D antigen, called the Rh factor. Rh factor used to be called the Rhesus factor, after the monkey that was used to learn about this substance in 1937. If it is present, it is Rh positive and if the protein is absent, it is called Rh negative. This factor can be problematic in blood transfusions and conditions of the newborn where it can be life threatening. 

Women who are blood type O or Rh negative are at risk of frequent miscarriages, especially if their partner is an antigen-positive blood type and thus the foetus is also Rh positive. As a mother is not exposed to antigens until the first childbirth, it’s only when she’s pregnant for the second time that problems could present. Alternatively, if the baby goes to term, there is a risk of haemolytic disease for the newborn – when the baby’s blood cells are destroyed by antibodies from the mother’s blood.

Curiously, Rh negative blood type O, is considered the purest blood known to mankind and is the universal donor blood for all blood types. Rh- factor is something called a recessive trait. Someone who is Rh+ might have a hidden Rh- in their DNA. If that person and his or her partner both pass an Rh- down to a child, that child will be Rh negative. Even though at least one parent is Rh+ factor. There are two types of Rh positive men. Fifty-five percent of men are heterozygous, whereby their genetics allow them to produce an Rh- child fifty percent of the time and Rh+ the other fifty percent. The second type of male is homozygous and produces only Rh+ offspring.

Having pure O Rh negative blood means ones ancestors are also O Rh negative and why it is very rare. A higher percent of this pure blood survives in certain sections of people, for instance in old royal family lines. O, A and B Rh positive are all common as A and B Rh negative are also very rare with O Rh-. The exception is blood type AB that is very rare whether one is Rh- or Rh+.

O-positive is most prevalent in Latinos then Africans and less in Asians and Caucasians. Whereas O-negative is most prevalent in Caucasians and least in Asians. A-positive and A-negative are most prevalent in Caucasians, then Latinos. B-positive is most prevalent in Asians and Africans, though B-negative more prevalent in Caucasians and least in Asians. AB-positive is most prevalent in Asians and AB-negative least in Asians and most in Caucasians. In summary, the most predominant blood types for the four racial strains are: 

Africans:       O-positive, B-positive

Latinos:         O-positive, A positive 

Caucasians:  A-positive – O-negative, A-negative, B-negative, AB-negative

Asians:          B-positive, AB-positive

These findings reveal that all four negative blood types are predominant amongst Caucasian people. Latinos and Africans who are related through Ham, both dominate O-positive. Caucasians dominate A-positive – then Latinos – and Asians dominate B-positive – then Africans – and also AB positive.

According to distribution of blood types per blood donors:

O+   37%

A+   36%

B+     9 %

AB+  3%

O-      7%

A-      6%

B-       1%

AB-    1%

As all mankind descended from the same ancestors, that is Adam and Eve, our blood should be compatible – humankind would all have the same blood… but, we don’t. Rh Positive blood can be traced back to the Rhesus monkey and other primates; Rh negative blood cannot, it cannot be traced to anywhere else in nature – and cannot be cloned.

As one cannot mate a mule with a mule – the result from a horse and a donkey – one cannot breed two mixed species even if they are the same. The result as mentioned, is Haemolytic disease, a condition where the immune system attacks an Rh positive baby, inherited from the father, if the mother is Rh negative. The mother’s blood collects antibodies to destroy an alien presence, like it would a virus. A staggering situation and why would a mother’s body sabotage and annihilate her own flesh and blood – unless it isn’t. For a Rh- woman with a Rh- man has an even smaller chance of having a baby born alive.

Nowhere else in nature, does this occur… apart from animal hybrids. This fact, by itself, indicates deliberate outside interference of cross-breeding between two similar but genetically different species – a hybrid. This fact puts a serious dent in the evolutionary process as Rh Negative blood shows that at some point in mans’ supposed ‘evolution’, evolution was paused while an intervention took place and then it was restarted. 

The obvious points in history that this may have happened are a. when Cain’s Homo sapiens line integrated with the Homo neanderthalensis line of people from day Six of creation, b. at the time of Noah and the genetic split between his three sons, c. the time of Peleg and the scattering of the nations from Babel in Mesopotamia, or d. could it be a much more recent event and possibly linked with the birth of Moab and Ammon?

As we have previously discovered the link between Neanderthal man and the East Asians today, it is worth noting an article reprinted from Archaeology, entitled: Genetic Study Examines Neanderthal Blood Types, Stephanie Mazieres, July 30, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Marseille, France – According to a Cosmos Magazine report, paleoanthropologist Silvana Condemi and her colleagues at Aix-Marseille University used information from three Neanderthal genomes and one 64,000-year-old Denisovan genome to investigate their blood types. Only one Neanderthal’s blood had been typed in the past, and was found to be type O under the ABO system used to classify the blood of modern humans. Since all chimpanzees are type A, and all gorillas are type B, it was assumed that all Neanderthals were type O. 

But the new study found that the Neanderthal woman’s 100,000-year-old remains from Siberia’s Denisova Cave hadtype A blood; the Neanderthal woman’s 48,000-year-old remains from Siberia’s Chagyrskaya Cave also had type A blood; and the Neanderthal woman’s 64,000-year-old remains from Croatia’s Vindija Cave had type B blood. All three Neanderthals, however, carried a now-rare Rhesus type called “Rhesus plus incomplete,” which had only been found in the DNA of one member of Australia’s Western Desert Aboriginal people. “At the time, it was assumed to be a new Rhesus type that had arisen in Australia,” Condemi said. The rare Rhesus type has also now been found in 80 people from Papua New Guinea. “Now we know that it had existed in the past and was lost,” Condemi explained.’

What is relevant about this finding is that the Aborigine and Papua New Guineans are primarily descendants of Cush from Ham, though they have mixed with descendants from Javan of Japheth as shown by their Haplogroups. The peoples of East Asia are descended from Japheth, and also possess the highest levels of Neanderthal DNA. Hence the Rhesus plus incomplete may be linked with Japheth rather than Ham [refer Chapter VII Javan and Chapter XIII Cush & Phut].

One researcher considered the theory that the Neanderthals were Rh negative and that they are the key to our ancestry. They called the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig, Germany and found out that not only were the two specimens examined Rh+, but they were homozygotes, meaning they didn’t even carry the Rh- blood factor recessively. In fact, the amount of Neanderthal DNA is very high within populations with very low or no Rh negatives amongst them. For instance, the Native American tribes have absolutely zero Rh- negative genes in their populations. Added to this, it is now agreed upon that the differences between the Neanderthal tribes was actually greater than those of human ethnic groups.

In northern Spain and southern France amongst the Basque, there is the highest concentration of the [rr] Rh negative factor in the world, some 32% – the range depending on location, of 21-43%. Up to 60% of the Basque carry one [r] negative gene. Only about 16% of Europeans have a Rh negative group. 

As little as 3% of Africans and 1% of Asian or Native American descendants have a Rh negative group. Added to this, the Basque exhibit substantially lower levels of Type B blood and a higher incidence of Type O blood, of 55%, which is very similar to Latinos of 53%.

Recall in chapter III Tiras, that the Amerindian exhibits the following: ‘Type O happens to be the primary blood type among the indigenous populations of the Americas, in particular within Central and South America populations, with a frequency of nearly one hundred percent. In contrast, in indigenous North American populations the frequency of type A ranges from sixteen to eighty-two percent. This data supports the initial Amerindians descended from an isolated population with a minimal number of individuals.’ Thus it would seem that a restricted gene pool maintains a predominant genetic factor, whether it be a particular blood type or rhesus factor.

Today’s Basques are an offspring of an original group which could well have been one hundred percent Rh- negative. They exhibit the highest Rh- negative factor in Europe when compared with other groups. There are a few communities in Switzerland and the Netherlands with similarly high percentages. The Swiss finding is pertinent since they are also descended from Haran, as are the French via Haran’s son Lot.

On a national level Australia has invariably topped the percentage of Rh- in the world with 19.5%. A couple of factors offered as likely causes are: 1. A high percentage of Australians have Scottish and Irish ancestry. With Scotland not being an independent country, their high number of Rh- negatives impacts the percentage. 2. Some believe that amongst the prisoners England re-located to Australia, a very high percentage were Rh negative. Though the data for Poland from a 1997 study, has placed them at an overall frequency of 19.67%.

Another group often mentioned are the Berber tribes in the Atlas mountain region of Morocco. It has been claimed that they have a 40% Rh- factor; whereas on a national average, the Moroccans are approximately 9% Rh negative. A more recent study has contradicted this high percentage with a result of 5.5% Rhesus negative. 

The previous observation of a high frequency of blood type O was confirmed; which may have been impacted by the inclusion of 40% African admixture. Thus, claims that Berber groups have unusually high numbers of Rh negatives should not be counted until a new, large scale definitive study is conducted.

Of interest, is the high percentage of Rh- people in Ireland and Scotland. Particularly, the peoples of northwest Ireland, the Highland Scots and the western Islanders of Norway, who all have between 16 and 25% Rh negatives. The Norwegians are accounted by those Scots, who were transported to Norway as slaves. Scotland is a country where there is a strong variation of blood type frequencies based on location. Between twenty and a little bit over thirty percent of Rh- can be expected in most of the extreme northern and western regions. In the west coast region of Inverness, where the Rh negative percentage has been measured at 30.44%, the percentage of blood type O has also been noted as substantially high. Ireland is purported to have around 25% Rh negatives in several reports while others demonstrate a percentage nearer 15-16%. However studies have indicated that Northern Ireland has a high percentage of approximately 27%. The following list shows those countries and regions with the highest rates of Rhesus negative.

Basque Country

[Atlas Mountain region of Moroccan Berbers – to be confirmed]

Scotland 

Northern Ireland

[Parts of Switzerland  and the Rhone Valley – 26.5%]

Catalonia 20-25%

[Parts of the Netherlands; Bunschoten-Spakenburg – 25%]

Poland

Australia – high proportion of Irish – 30% of population – and Scottish

[Parts of Brazil with high proportion of Basque – 19%]

[Parts of Chile – high proportion of Basque]

Republic of Ireland – Republic

[Sinai Peninsula Bedouins; what is interesting about this particular group is the similarity between their male DNA and the male DNA of Cohanim Jews]

[Scandinavia – specifically Southwest Norway, from Scottish slave ancestry]

Notice on the world map that the predominant Rh- levels are in all the nations descended from Shem and specifically his sons Arphaxad and Aram. Though Aram is misleading, as it is the inclusion of the Basque in Spain and Brazil that increases the percentages in those countries.

Iceland is worth noting in that only one percent of its population is Rh-. A very low figure compared to Scandinavia. It is perplexing, as two-thirds of its population is Scandinavian and one-third Irish or Scottish descent. These peoples range from 16 to 25% and above, yet Iceland contradicts the pattern. We will learn in Chapter XXVII Abraham, that Iceland is a distinct nation in its own right and a classification of either Scandinavian or Celtic though migratory and historically correct, is inaccurate with regard to their ethnic identity. 

Celts and the Basques, James Vandale, 2006 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the geneticist Luiga Luca Cavalli-Sforza has completed a gene map of the peoples of Europe… The genetic boundary between Basques and non-Basques is very sharp on the Spanish side. On the French side, the boundary is more diffuse: it shades off gradually toward the Garonne in the north.’ 

These findings are entirely in agreement with what is known of the history of the  distinctly different and unique, Basque language. It is the oldest language in Europe, and its are unknown. As the languages in neighbouring countries in Europe show no resemblance to the Basque language, it has become an inexplicable mystery to the linguist. 

‘The people of the Basque region have a greater than 50 percent concentration of the RH negative gene… Basques are believed to have been the originators of the RH negative blood factor – the original genetic pool from which this factor came. While RH negatives are a small minority in the “white” and other races, and practically non-existent in “orientals”, the current Basques still are over 33 % RH negative. [A] salient genetic feature is the shape and sutures (bone joints) of cranial bones of Basques… [and a] skeletal difference is the tendency to having a thicker breast bone.’
 

Two very important points addressed, is that the Basque are more like the French than the Spanish. This supports their link with Moab and Ammon over Gether [refer Chapter XXIII Aram]. If the Basque are the originators of the Rh- factor then this would date the origin to exactly 3,900 years ago and the births of Moab and Ammon [1878/1877 BCE – 2022].

When blood type is inherited from parents, the factor element of the blood is the most consistent characteristic passed on to offspring. Variations or aberrations are extremely rare. The majority of people – as high as 94% – have Rh positive blood. As blood type is one of the least mutable human characteristics, the big question facing scientists remains: where did the Rh negative factor come from?

Due to the high percentage of European numbers, some conclude this may be when a Caucasian line was introduced into the genetic code. Dates proposed for this range from 35,000 – 5,000 years ago. The fact that a number of people lack this factor is a puzzling phenomenon that appears to defy evolution. Most scientists advocate a ‘random’ mutation – in other words, one that defies eveolution. As there is a cause for every effect, a reason for the mutation must exist.

Rh-Negative Blood: An Exotic Bloodline or Random Mutation? Caleb Strom, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… some [people] suggest that Rh-Negative blood must be of a non-human origin. Theories range from supernatural ones such as being of divine descent or membership in a divinely chosen people-group, to more scientific or pseudoscientific explanations… One blogger has gone as far as to say that those with Rh-Negative blood are descendants of the Hyperborean race, which they believe to be the original human race. Followers of this idea believe that this race was blonde-haired and blue-eyed and included most major spiritual teachers in history, including Jesus [Christ]. Some people who are not satisfied with the idea that those with RH-Negative blood are another form of humanity have suggested that the trait originates from extraterrestrials either interbreeding with humans or creating humans through genetic engineering.

What is unusual about Rh-Negative blood is that the gene for it is surprisingly common despite being potentially harmful. When a woman who is Rh-Negative is pregnant with a child that is Rh-Positive, the mother’s immune system creates protective anti-bodies to the Rh-Positive blood, and her blood essentially becomes toxic to the child. To some people, this looks like the mother’s body is rejecting the baby – which has led them to suggest that perhaps the reason for the rejection is incompatibility based on the mother and child being of different species. Others suggest that lineages with the gene for Rh-Negative blood are merely special in some way and were not meant to be mixed with lineages which are predominantly Rh-Positive.

This unusual trait can, however, also be explained in terms of relatively mundane human genetics and natural selection. One possibility is that the gene for Rh-Negative blood has some sort of selective advantage that outweighed the negative consequences of having Rh-Negative blood. Although it could still be that there is a common, unique ancestral lineage connecting populations with high prevalence of Rh-Negative blood [yes, most likely due to mainly descending from Arphaxad], the fact that the populations where the gene occurs in high prevalence appear otherwise unrelated to each other makes it less likely and in need of more evidence [not so, as these peoples are predominately from Arphaxad and intermarrying between them all, highly likely].

The extraterrestrial explanation is even more problematic because the Rh-Negative gene is clearly a variation of an otherwise completely human gene. Unless it was specifically engineered by extraterrestrials from a pre-existing human gene, it is unlikely that it comes from anything other than Homo Sapiens. The other problem with the Rh-Negative blood type being the result of hybridization with extraterrestrials is that extraterrestrials are likely to have a completely different biology and genome than human beings. Their genome might not even be based on DNA – but something else such as RNA, or some exotic form of genetic storage that never evolved on Earth.

the explanation that the Rh-Negative blood type is just a mutation that became common in some populations due to a selective advantage [is] the most likely option. It is also the one that most easily survives the application of Occam’s Razor. If this blood type was because of another human species, let alone extraterrestrials, many more unnecessary assumptions that are difficult to verify have to be made. As a result, the evidence currently points toward little more than an ordinary mutation as the cause of the Rh-Negative blood phenotype.’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver 2017, pages 152-154 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The origins of rhesus negative blood are unknown, but it’s also commonly known as “alien blood” so that might provide a clue. Whether there’s any genetic advantage in having (or not having) rhesus negative blood is currently unknown. Some researchers suspect that those with this type of blood might be more resistant to parasitic diseases… The D antigen could have been lost through genetic mutation or external manipulation. If we’d all evolved from a single African ancestor… then we’d all be biologically compatible. But we’re not, and our scientists can’t explain why. Since we’re not all compatible, this suggests that we aren’t just  a single species. It also lends credence to the fact we may be a hybrid race… as well as being nicknamed alien blood… [it] is also… known as royal blood. There’s reported to be a very high incidence of it in members of the royal families of Western Europe, and especially in the British royal family… you could easily come up with the hypothesis that the original kings and queens of Europe might have been aliens.’

Or, one might surmise that a high level of endogamy and or incest that creates ‘a restricted gene pool maintains a predominant genetic factor, whether it be a particular blood type or rhesus factor.’

The Mystery of Rh- Negative Blood – Genetic Origin Unknown, Nella Adriana Corak-Sebetic, 2017 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis and bold mine:

‘Geneticists generally claim the RH-negative factor is a mutation of unknown origin which apparently happened only a few thousand years ago. These ´negative´ blooded people spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, France and later into America, Canada and Australia.

Interestingly, popular sciences [endeavour] to attribute Rh-neg blood groups to “mutations.” A solid alternative case may be extended to the conclusion that Rh-neg is NOT a mutation, but possibly the original human blood group. This, however, does not reflect tenured thought, and thus has never been adequately researched.

That there was a group of “pure” humans, not directly related to the evolutionary processes on Earth, is a distinct possibility. This reasoning would suggest that the original humans on our planet where not directly related to the apes, but at some point were “MADE” or “genetically engineered” to give such impression.

Perhaps it was never intended that the Rh-positives become the dominant species. That through some as yet undetermined epoch, the genetically impure group gradually became the controlling species, except for several remote enclaves, initiated a wide-ranging genocidal pogrom, effectively wiping out those who gave birth to them. All of which begs the questions: What reasons were the sub-species created, what was the process of conquest, what was the duration, and does it continue?’

From this same article, a selection of quotes from the scientific community.

a. In all blood groups there exists a common microbe that in essence is the life force itself.

b. Do not ever take a blood transfusion. The main reason for this has to do with cellular/genetic/galactic memory of blood. This is coded into the entire structure of the blood. All the emotions that the donor has felt during his entire lifetime are part of the blood. This cannot be filtered out. For example if you get a heart of a man who died in a car accident, all the cells of that organ have the memory of the accident and every emotion that was felt while dying. These emotions confuse your own coding and then mass internal confusion happens at the cellular level and the order turns into chaos. 

When you measure the heart harmonics of people with “O” RH-neg blood, they are usually lower if they are smokers and heavy red meat eaters. The ones who eat fish and vegetables are in the normal range.

c. The Celtic people of Ireland and Great Britain also have high incidences of the RH- factor and it has recently been proven that there is a genetic link between the Basque and the Celts.  This research proves that the Celtic people came from the Basque regions of France and Spain and a group must have migrated over to the islands of Great Britain. 

d. In some areas, the Rh-Negative blood factor is referred to as “Blood Royale” or “Royal Blood”. For centuries, European royalty have been inflicted with Hemophilia or “bleeders disease”. 

‘Apparently, Queen Victoria was a “carrier” of Hemophilia and gave it to all of her children who then intermarried and infected the bloodlines of very throne in Europe during the 1800s and 1900s. As a direct result, Hemophilia became known as the “Royal Disease”. To keep this in perspective, only about 5% of all “royalty” have Rh-Factor negative blood…which means “less than the general population. 

That would indicate that the vast majority of “rulers” and “monarchs” are NOT Rhesus-factor negative. Is this by chance? or by genetic engineering called “arranged marriages”? 

… but if European Royalty refuse to marry into the Rh Negative blood line it means one thing… Rh-Neg people are a “competing royal line”. How do you get rid of it once and for all? Although the British would love for you to think that Victoria was the world’s first carrier… don’t be confused. It was the Hapsburg’s disease. Was Victoria a Hapsburg? The unofficial motto of the Hapsburg family was “Bella gerunt alii, tu, felix Austria, nubes!” (”Where others must fight wars, you, fortunate Austria, marry!).It’s curious that “marriage” can be a “dynastic” undertaking but it can also be a perverse form of “bio-warfare” or “genetic warfare”.

Was [haemophilia] a disease of Spanish Royalty? … [and] was marriage to Victoria’s daughters a way to kill or weaken future “non-Hapsburg” kings… since mostly males only contract the disease from their mothers? Still, Hemophilia was in Royalty long before Victoria. Victoria’s daughters passed the disease into the Spanish, German and Russian Royal lines and threatened the thrones of all of Europes major powers. It would appear that Victoria is actually a direct descendant of Ferdinand of Castille…’

Eye color, hair color, blood type, and the rhesus factor: exploring possible genetic links to sexual orientation, Lee Ellis, Christopher Ficek, Donald Burke and Shyamal Das, 2008 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The present study sought to expand the limited evidence that sexual orientation is influenced by genetic factors. This was accomplished by seeking statistical differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals for four traits that are known to be genetically determined: eye color, natural hair color, blood type, and the Rhesus factor. 

Using a sample of over 7,000 U.S. and Canadian college students supplemented with additional homosexual subjects obtained through internet contacts, we found no significant differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals regarding eye color or hair color. In the case of blood type and the Rh factor, however, interesting patterns emerged. Heterosexual males and females exhibited statistically identical frequencies of the A blood type, while gay men exhibited a relatively low incidence and lesbians had a relatively high incidence [of type A blood](p < .05). In the case of the Rh factor, unusually high proportions of homosexuals of both sexes were Rh- when compared to heterosexuals (p < .06). The findings suggest that a connection may exist between sexual orientation and genes both on chromosome 9 (where blood type is determined) and on chromosome 1 (where the Rh factor is regulated).’

I have quoted this paper not as condemnation of alternative lifestyles, but rather the coincidence of Lot living in a city, where same sex relations occurred; not to mention a society where humans and descendants of Nephilim and or angels were having sexual relations. As it was for this reason that the Creator destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, more than for human homosexuality. Though the Rh- factor may, or may not have derived from encounters with the same sex or Nephilim, the question remains. 

The alternative is to concentrate on Lot’s daughters sons, Moab and Ammon. Was the Rh- factor a mechanism in response to the incest… for the protection of the descendants of Moab and Ammon, which has gradually filtered through to other descendants of Shem through intermarriage and relationships with those outside of Moab and Ammon’s people. In the pages of the Bible there is not any other indication that any nation or peoples began directly through a father and his daughters; so that this event is portrayed as a one time, unique occurrence in human history.

This may explain the very low percentages of R- factor in the equatorial and oriental peoples. It is curious that Rh negative blood cannot be duplicated or cloned. A higher percentage of Rh negative people claim to have been abducted by aliens than Rh positive people. 

Is it really just a coincidence that the Basque possess the highest percentages of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b in Europe; that they have the highest percentages of Rh- in the world; that they by these two criteria, exhibit endogamy at its fullest extreme; and that they are in all probability descended from Moab or Ammon… who were born from the most restricted gene pool ever documented?

Unknown author – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘For many years people have been searching for the wrong thing. Could the true “missing link” actually be man himself? The unknown link between earth and the stars – hybrid man. Man may be the missing link between primate and extraterrestrial. It seems inconceivable to me that those working on the evolution theory have overlooked this possibility. 

How can they state, that these people are lacking a factor contained in all other earthly primates, including the naked ape, and not ask why? What other characteristics are common among these people that are uncommon to other people? Is there a real difference other than just a different blood?’ 

A school of thought, is that white skin – and red/blond hair, with blue/green eyes – was introduced into the Homo sapien line from Nephilim; who exhibited the exact same physical conditions. It is claimed that people with the following traits [a single comprehensive list compiled from various other lists] are in some way related to Nephilim or by extension aliens. Confusingly, though most likely more accurately, the same list is also applied to Rh negative people, so that there has been a blurring of symptoms and traits.

  • Higher than average IQ
  • More sensitive vision, hearing and other senses
  • Lower body temperature
  • Higher blood pressure or lower, with a low pulse rate
  • Increased occurrence of psychic & intuitive abilities, particularly if type O negative
  • Predominantly green, or hazel eyes that change colour, including piercing  blue eyes
  • Red or reddish tint to hair colour
  • Widows peak, tongue rolling, ear lobes, freckles, Polydactyly – 6 fingers or toes – Webbed feet or hands, Albinism
  • Increased sensitivity to heat and sunlight
  • Cannot be cloned
  • Extra rib or vertebra, a tail bone, or tail Cauda
  • Alien Abduction and other unexplained or strange phenomenon – UFO, Para-normal
  • A feeling of not belonging to the human race
  • Truth seekers and a desire for higher wisdom
  • Sense of a “Mission” in life
  • Empathy & Compassion for Mankind
  • ESP Ability
  • Love of Space & Science
  • Unexplained Scars
  • Empathetic Illnesses and tend to be healers
  • Higher Negative-ion shielding from positive ‘charged’ viruses and bacteria around the body 
  • Capability to disrupt electrical devices
  • Psychic Dreams
  • High sensitivity to electromagnetic, as well as, extremely low frequency fields

If Noah – who according to Enoch looked like the Nephilim – and or, his son Shem and their wives introduced the white skin mutation [refer Chapter XVI Shem] then these characteristics may or may not be linked to non-humans.

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow 2014, page 32 – bold mine:

‘… Noah was born with red skin and had white hair. He was depicted in appearance as the “Sons of God”. This text refers to him as if he had alien features.Noah was not the same as other human beings on Earth.’

Human blood is iron based, but some animals have copper based blood turning it blue – called hemocyanin. Blood is red because of the presence of haemoglobin. Octopi, Lobsters, spiders, molluscs, arthropods and other animals can and do in fact have blue blood. Humans do not. The claim that rhesus negative blood is copper based, or that the term blue blood originates from copper based blood in rhesus negatives is not true. Though the concept of blue blood must have an origination from somewhere. 

Is it linked to the Nephilim. Is this why Royalty and the powers that be, historically have been labeled as Blue Blooded.

Royals have tended to have paler skin than the average person. Because of paleness, their veins are seen more easily and veins seen through skin tissue look blue. As it is mainly sea creatures that have blue blood, Angellica Goodson labels it as copper based aquatic blood. She also claims that it is in fact a Nephilim – ‘human alien hybrid’ – blood line that carries it. The hybrid lines are associated with the Serpent and Reptillian bloodlines as purported by various authors.

Goodson explains that the misidentification with Nephilim and Rh negative ‘started years ago on a physic website where a letter was posted from an anonymous person stating that she was an Rh negative but giving her alien human hybrid characteristics instead of the characteristics of a “Pure Scandinavian Rh Negative.” The misidentification has [since] gone viral online as [incorrect information].’ 

Goodson continues – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Some people carry both Rh Negative and Copper Based Aquatic Alien human hybrid anomalies. They number [under 7% of the global Population]. Copper Based Aquatic Blood is alien human hybrid blood, which has nothing to do with the Rh – Blood Factor. Those with the pure Rh – Factor carry what is referred to as “Power in the Blood.” Those with Copper Based Aquatic Blood [include] those who are being abducted by aliens… because they carry alien genetics, which they inherited from their ancestors… The main reason aliens are interested in those with pure Rh- Negative blood is for their DNA.’

As the subject is going away from the original topic yet related, we will conclude with three additional quotes. The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, Page 353 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Alien Abductions hold familiar kinship with fairy folk and fairy abductions… fairies have a need to reproduce with humans… like aliens. Fairies never abduct old people – only babies, young men, and young women… like aliens. Goblins, elves, trolls, and gnomes are known in mythology as beings that are described as “grays”… they are eager to breed with humans to modify and refresh their genetic makeup so that they might continue to survive…they need to mate with humans because they need an injection of new genes to bolster their weakened genetic makeup.’

Blue Blood, True Blood, Conflict and Creation, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘[The Reptilians] developed a plan to insidiously… [blend] their genetics with the genetics of… humans. Because the human prototype already had Reptilian genetics, it was easy to access the mind-pattern [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. 

The Reptilian frequency was already established in the brain stem as well as the Reptilian brain section of these hybrid humans.

The population of Sumer was chosen as the starting point. These humans were primarily descendants of the Martian, Maldekian, and Lyraen refugees. The Reptilians have a preference for the genetics of blonde-haired, blue-eyed people whose mind-patterns and genetics are so easily controlled. They abducted members of the ruling classes, including political leaders. Using these humans, they began a new hybridization program that took several generations to perfect. Their goal was to reach a human/ Reptilian genetic 50/50 split. This would produce a human-looking Reptilian that could easily shapeshift from Reptilian to human, then back again. Shapeshifting was accomplished simply by concentrating on the genetics the hybrid wished to open, or lock up, whatever the case may be. Once the hybridization program was complete, the Sumerian leaders were now shapeshifting Reptilians. The new Reptilian hybrid became the elite of that culture. Their blood, because of the increased Reptilian DNA, contained more of a copper content. Since copper-based blood turns blue-green upon oxidizing, these Reptilian hybrids were called “Bluebloods”.

The Bluebloods quickly realized that with a 50/50 human/Reptilian genetic split, it was necessary to intermarry to maintain the 50/50 split bloodline necessary to shapeshift. When the split increased too far to the Reptilian side, shapeshifting became difficult, and holding human form became impossible. In these cases, it was discovered that the ingestion of human hormones, flesh, and blood, allowed the Reptilians to maintain the human form. Human form was necessary to maintain to avoid scaring the population, which was now not accustomed to the Reptilian form. Control of the masses was easier when the orders came from a humanoid. The Reptilian format was kept to religious icons and legends. The statues of their gods and goddesses reflect the Reptilian influence, even showing a female Reptilian holding a hybrid baby. 

The shapeshifting Reptilian Bluebloods asked the Sirians for help with the daily maintenance of their human forms. The Sirians determined that feeding the hybrids human hormones and blood in an altered animal form would be the easiest way to do it unnoticed by the population. The sacrificial animal used by most Middle Eastern people was the wild boar, so the Sirians chose it as the basis for this new animal hybrid.Human genetics were mixed with those of the wild boar to create the domesticated pig. This animal was served daily to the Bluebloods as a method of temporarily maintaining their human form until they could use an actual human in a sacrificial ceremony.

Because the domesticated pig is a combination of human and animal genetics, eating it is a form of cannibalism. This explains why the Hebrews considered it unclean to eat [Leviticus 11:7-8 and Deuteronomy 14:8]. This is also why the pig is considered to be the most intelligent animal on Earth, why pig skin can be grafted directly onto humans in burn cases, and why pig heart valves can be used in humans with little difficulty. Cancer drugs and other chemicals are often tested on pigs before humans. In many respects, pigs can be considered a form of humanity. To a lesser degree, the same is true about cats.

As time progressed, the civilization of Sumer declined and transformed into other cultures. Vast migrations from Sumer to other locations in Central Asia occurred [the time of Peleg – Genesis 10:10, 25]. The migrating peoples took their Blueblood leaders with them, as they were their royalty and kings. The Sumerians became known as the sum-Aryans, or just, Aryans.’

Starseed Journey – RH Negative Blood, 2009 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis & bold mine: 

‘… the British Royal Family… [and] the Blue Bloods of Europe… are said to have stolen THE DIVINE RIGHT TO RULE the world from their Scandinavian predecessors before recorded history. 

The British Royals and Blue Bloods of Europe appear to be a bloodline of people with Scandinavian DNA and the DNA of a dark race… The Royals and “Blue Bloods” can be tracked back to the Lost Tribe of Dan and Cain in the Old Testament who are described as having had red hair and green-eyes. They are also referred to as the “Serpent Bloodline” or “Reptilian Bloodline.” Further some even say these royal “Blue Bloods,” are a hybrid human reptilian bloodline with Neanderthal DNA. Science tells us that the red hair DNA did not originate with human beings but was Neanderthal DNA.If this is true, they are not the original bloodline on earth and worse than that they have… reptilian DNA flowing through their veins.

It would appear that the Hindus ancient history is wrapped round spiritual traditions… [in] which ancient peoples referred to… [a] Land of the Gods… The ancient histories of all the major nations and religions on earth mention a time when… mankind lived in a temperate paradise… referred to [as] Hyperborea… a “GARDEN OF EDEN”… These legends tell us that the Scandinavian race was the original race in Hyperborea until the gods came down and started to… manipulate the DNA of the original Scandinavians creating hybrid races of genetically altered human beings. These evil gods began a human hybrid program in Hyperborea, which is eerily similar to what was being described in Genesis Chapter 6. All cultures also speak of reptilian gods who created a hybrid race of kings and queens that sat on the thrones of all ancient kingdoms that can be tracked back to ancient Sumer [and] Babylon in Iraq.

… we find that some experts believe the PURE Rh Negative bloodline is of unknown origins. These authors then make a MAJOR LEAP and assume that those who actually have the PURE Rh Negative blood factor came from other planets and were not a people group who originated on earth but that they are aliens or were created by aliens. 

[A] group of evil entities entered our three dimensional world that were created by Yaldabaoth the Demiurge, they were reptilian entities. One of these entities was known as Yahweh Ildabaoth… Once the physical bodies had been created these evil artisans… were able to… clone human DNA. Those falling for the “Alien [Agenda”] believe that the (spirit) entities we wrongly call Aliens today, created human beings. 

However… the entities who came into our… world to… clone human beings were NOT CAPABLE OF CREATING HUMAN BEINGS AND ARE STILL NOT ABLE TO. These entities did have the ability to… clone hybrids using human, reptilian, animal and bird DNA, which is how the “Serpent Bloodlines” were created… illicit sexual activity with the gods is the actual meaning behind “ORIGINAL SIN.”

The Y-chromosomal Haplotype and Haplogroup distribution of modern Switzerland still reflects the alpine divide as a geographical barrier for human migration

Forensic Science International: Genetics, Martin Zieger & Silvia Utz, Volume 48 September 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘A sample of 606 Swiss individuals has been characterized for 27 Y-STR and 34 Y-SNPs, defining major European haplogroups. For the first time, a subsample from the southernmost part of Switzerland, the Italian speaking canton Ticino, has been included. The data reveals significant intra-national differences in the distribution of haplogroups R1b-U106, R1b-U152, I1 and J2a north and south of the alpine divide, with R1b-U152 being the most frequent haplogroup among all Swiss subpopulations [the dominant R1b Haplogroup in France and Italy], reaching 26% in average and 53 % in the Ticino sample. 

In addition, a high percentage of haplogroup E1b1b-M35 in Eastern Switzerland corresponds well with data reported from Western Austria. In general, we detected a low level of differentiation between the subgroups north of the alpine divide. This is the first comprehensive Y chromosomal dataset for Switzerland, demonstrating significant population substructure due to an intra-national geographical barrier.

Pairwise FST calculations based on the maximal STR marker set (YFilerPlus® + PowerPlex Y23®) show little intra-national differentiation among the 6 regional subpopulations (Table 2). In line with our previous observations, all subpopulations show the largest FST values in pairwise comparison with the southernmost Swiss canton Ticino subpopulation, with the largest difference being the one between Northwestern Switzerland and Ticino. We also compared our dataset to datasets from other countries, using the AMOVA tool from YHRD. The multiple dimensional scaling plot in Fig. 2a localizes the Swiss data between the datasets from neighboring countries. For one of the direct neighboring countries, no data was included, since there was no French dataset for PowerPlex® Y23 available on the YHRD. 

If we divide the sample into language subgroups, the German speaking subpopulation locates even closer to the Austrian sample, whereas the French speaking subpopulation is somewhat closer to the samples from Belgium and Spain. Surprisingly, the Italian speaking sample co-localizes with the sample from Spain and is significantly different from the Italian sample, registered on YHRD [due to the Swiss being a distinct people regardless of the different languages spoken]. As a control, we also checked the genetic distance of our regional subsamples to the four other Swiss YFiler datasets registered on YHRD. They show all a high degree of similarity, except for the sample from Basel that exhibits extremely large RST values towards all the other subpopulations, ranging from 0.084 to 0.173, even towards the sample from the same region of Northwestern Switzerland (0.101). All RST values and corresponding p-values generated with the YHRD AMOVA tool are available in Supplementary Table 2. Pairwise FST values among the different regional subgroups. NW = Northwestern Switzerland; CS = Central Switzerland; BE = Bern area; TI = Ticino; WS = Western Switzerland; SG = St. Gallen.’


NWCSBETIWSSG
SG0.00680.00630.00640.01090.0049
WS0.00430.00320.00360.0077
TI0.01410.01020.0085

BE0.00500.0044


CS0.0063



NW




‘Fig. 2. Multiple dimensional scaling blot based on RST values, generated for PowerPlex® Y23 datasets with the AMOVA tool from YHRD. A) Comparison of the whole sample (“Switzerland”) to other national European datasets, registered on YHRD. B) Comparison of Swiss (“CH”) subpopulations based on mother tongue to national datasets from neighboring countries. Spain was included as the next western country in mainland Europe, since no French sample for PowerPlex® Y23 was available on the YHRD. The data points for Spain and the Italian speaking Swiss subsample collapse into one.’

‘For the comparison of the haplogroup distributions among different regional subgroups, the regions defined in our previous work were maintained. All haplogroup proportions are listed in Table 5. We detected five significant regional differences in haplogroup spread. Whereas the haplogroups I1-M253 and R1b-U106 are more or less evenly distributed north of the Alps, they are almost absent from the Ticino sample. In return, haplogroups J2a-M410 and R1b-U152 are far more abundant in the Ticino sample than in the rest of the country. Furthermore, we detected a significant enrichment of haplogroup E1b1b-M35 in the easternmost sample from St. Gallen. We could also detect a slightly larger proportion of E1b1b-M35 in the sample from Western Switzerland. However, this observation [proved] not to be significant.

As expected, we observe a good correspondence of the dataset with the metapopulation “Western European”, what can be concluded from the distribution of the estimated haplotype frequencies. The fact that 90% of the haplotypes are predicted to be more frequent in the Western European than in the global panel, can be seen as a successful quality control of the sampling scheme. The population sample also fits well in the context of the neighboring countries and shows no noteworthy differences compared to the Swiss datasets previously registered on the YHRD. 

The only exception concerns the sample from Basel. However, since the Basel sample on YHRD shows large genetic differences with all other Swiss samples, including our sample collected from the same region, we assume some kind of sampling error for this regional subsample and we would like to suggest that it should be used with caution for any interpretation and comparison. The fact that the Italian speaking subsample co-locates rather with the sample from Spain than with the sample from Italy, might be attributed to the higher overall percentage of haplogroup R1b in Spain than in Italy.

The fraction of R1b in the Spanish population corresponds better to the 70 % R1b in the Ticino sample. Given the dubious reputation of the prediction tools, we were surprised how well the haplogroup predictions corresponded to the haplogroups determined by SNaPshot assay.’ 


NWCSWSSGBETIHg (tot)
E1b1b (M35)44913**467
G (M201)129661249
I1 (M253)1391012112*10
I2 (M223)753444
I2 (P215)4421222
J1 (M267)1110
J2a (M410)114610*3
J2b (M102)4331343
N (M46)10
O (M175)10
QR (M45)20
R1a (M198)7454424
R1b (U106)12151213172*13
R1b (U152)192924282053***26
R1b (U198)110
R1b (M269)14141913181616
R1b (M343)10
R2 (M124)10
KLT (M9)21121
F (M213)10

‘So, even though we would agree that for reliable results, every SNP should be finally determined in the wet lab, we cannot deny that for samples of Western European ancestry, predictors seem to deliver good preliminary results. The HAPEST predictor we used here has already been shown to deliver accurate predictions for typical European haplogroups. We assume that such a high accuracy of haplogroup prediction of 95 % could be achieved only because we have very good data coverage for Western Europe. For most reliable predictions, we recommend combining an YHRD search with the haplogroup prediction tool. All haplogroups that were concordant between YHRD ancestry information and HAPEST haplogroup prediction turned out to be correct.

SNP typing for common European haplogroups revealed some expected patterns, demonstrating that the modern Swiss population still reflects the Alps as geographical barrier for human migration. We detected significantly less haplogroup I1-M253 south of the alpine divide than in the German and French speaking parts of Switzerland. This was expected, since I1 is most common in Northern Europe and can only be found in small proportions south of the Alps. We detected significant differences in the distribution of two sublineages of R1b-M269 north and south of the Alps: notably lineages R1b-U106 and R1b-U152. R1b-U106 is mainly spread along the river Rhine, reaching the largest proportions at the southern coast of the North Sea. R1b-U106 evolved approximately at the same time than haplogroup R1b-P312/S116. R1b-U152 is a sublineage of R1b-P312/S116 of younger origin. 

It has been suggested that it originates from a Franco-Cantabrian region and has been brought to the Alps and northern Italy by migration along the Mediterranean coast. Today it reaches its highest percentages in northern Italy. Northwestern Italy has a very high percentage of haplogroup R1b (around 70 %) with the highest proportions in the area of Bergamo. In this pre-alpine region, located about 50 km from Ticino, the percentage of individuals with haplogroup R1b-U152 is around 50 %, just as for our Ticino sample. Haplogroup R1b-U152 is significantly less frequent north of the Alps, but remains the most frequent haplogroup throughout the entire country.’

These findings concerning Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b as evidenced by the preceding table confirm that the Swiss are less like the northern Germans or southern English in that they do not possess R1b-U198 beyond a trace element. The split north and south of the Alps confirms that they are related to the Germans through R1b-U106, but the fact that R1b-U152 is the main Haplogroup throughout all Switzerland confirms that they are more closely related to the French and Italians. This should not be a surprise when we understand that the Swiss descend from Haran, who is the brother of Nahor, northern Italy and are similarly related to the French who descend from Haran’s son Lot.

The Genomic Heritage of French Canadians, Razib Khan, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘One of the great things about the mass personal genomic revolution is that it allows people to have direct access to their own information. This is important for the more than 90% of the human population which has sketchy genealogical records. 

But even with genealogical records there are often omissions and biases in transmission of information. This is one reason that HAP, Dodecad and Eurogenes BGA are so interesting: they combine what people already know with scientific genealogy. This intersection can often be very inferentially fruitful.

But what about if you had a whole population with rich robust conventional genealogical records? Combined with the power of the new genomics you could really crank up the level of insight. Where to find these records? A reason that Jewish genetics is so useful and interesting is that there is often a relative dearth of records when it comes to the lineages of American Ashkenazi Jews. Many American Jews even today are often sketchy about the region of the “Old Country” from which their forebears arrived. Jews have been interesting from a genetic perspective because of the relative excess of ethnically distinctive Mendelian disorders within their population. 

There happens to be another group in North America with the same characteristic: the French Canadians. And importantly, in the French Canadian population you do have copious genealogical records. The origins of this group lay in the 17th and 18th century, and the Roman Catholic Church has often been a punctilious institution when it comes to preserving events under its purview such as baptisms and marriages. The genealogical archives are so robust that last fall a research group input centuries of ancestry for [2,221] French Canadians, and used it to infer patterns of genetic relationships as a function of geography, as well as long term contribution by provenance.

That paper found that nearly 70% of the immigrant founding stock in this data set came directly from France. For the period before 1700 that fraction exceeds 95%. Of the remainder, about 15% of the founding stock were Acadians, who themselves were presumably mostly of French origin.Because of the earlier migration of the French founding stock, they left a stronger impact on future generations: But this research did not look directly at genetics. Rather, these inferences were generated from genealogical records which go back to the founding of Quebec and maintained coherency and integrity from generation to generation. Some of the members of the same research group now have a paper out which looks at the genomics of French Canadians, and directly compares their results to that of the earlier paper.’

Genomic and genealogical investigation of the French Canadian founder population structure – emphasis & bold mine: 

Characterizing the genetic structure of worldwide populations is important for understanding human history and is essential to the design and analysis of genetic epidemiological [health and disease conditions] studies. In this study, we examined genetic structure and distant relatedness and their effect on the extent of linkage disequilibrium (LD) and homozygosity in the founder population of Quebec (Canada). In the French Canadian founder population, such analysis can be performed using both genomic and genealogical data. We investigated genetic differences, extent of LD, and homozygosity in 140 individuals from seven sub-populations of Quebec characterized by different demographic histories reflecting complex founder events. 

Genetic findings from genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data were correlated with genealogical information on each of these sub-populations. Our genomic data showed significant population structure and relatedness present in the contemporary Quebec population, also reflected in LD and homozygosity levels. 

Our extended genealogical data corroborated these findings and indicated that this structure is consistent with the settlement patterns involving several founder events. This provides an independent and complementary validation of genomic-based studies of population structure. Combined genomic and genealogical data in the Quebec founder population provide insights into the effects of the interplay of two important sources of bias in genetic epidemiological studies, unrecognized genetic structure and cryptic relatedness.’

‘In 1760 there were 70,000 residents in the areas of Canada which were under French rule. A substantial fraction of these derived from the much smaller 17th century founding population. Today the number of North Americans with some known French Canadian ancestry numbers around [10 million people]. I happen to know an individual whose great-great-grandmother was French Canadian. Using the internet it turned out that I could trace this woman’s ancestry along one line back to the countryside outside of Poitiers in the mid 16th century! Being conservative it seems that at least 5 million North Americans have overwhelming descent from the 1760 founding stock. These are the core French Canadians.

An immediate inference one might make from these background facts, the rapid expansion of the French Canadian ethnic group from a small core founding stock, is that they would have gone through a “population bottleneck.” The data here are mixed. On the one hand, there are particular Mendelian diseases associated with French Canadians. This is evidence of some level of inbreeding which would randomly increase the frequencies of deleterious recessively expressed alleles. 

And yet as noted in the paper French Canadians do not seem to have lower genetic diversity than the parental stock of French in the HGDP data set. Why? Because to go through a population bottleneck which is genetically significant you need a very small window of census size indeed. Tens of thousands is sufficiently large enough to preserve most of the genetic variation in the founder population which is not private to families. The sort of genetic polymorphisms which might have been typed for in widely distributed SNP chips. But that’s not the end of the story.’

‘Though French Canadians don’t seem [to] exhibit the hallmarks of having gone through an extreme population bottleneck as an aggregate, it turns out that in the populations surveyed there was evidence of substructure. The map… shows you the regions where the samples were drawn. Unlike the earlier study the sample size is smaller; this is a nod to the difference between a purely genealogical study and a genomic one. There needs to be money and time invested in typing individuals. Relatively public genealogical records are a different matter. Apparently the Gaspesia sample population were from a relatively later settlement. The urban samples naturally include descendants of local French Canadians, as well as rural to urban transplants.’

‘As one would expect the French Canadian sample clustered with the CEU (Utah whites from the HapMap) and French (from the HGDP) in the world wide PCA. And not surprisingly they exhibited smaller genetic distance to the French than to the Utah whites (who were of mostly British extraction). 

Using Fst, which measures the extent of genetic variance partitioning between populations, the values from the aggregate French Canadian sample to the CEU sample was 0.0014 and to the French HGDP sample was 0.00078. The Montreal French Canadian group exhibited values of 0.0020 and 0.0012. But, it is important to observe that there was statistically significant differences between the various French Canadian populations as well (excluding the Montreal-Quebec City pairing). This may explain the existence of particular Mendelian diseases in the French Canadian population despite their lack of reduced genetic variation: there’s localized pockets of inbreeding which are not smoked out by looking at total variation statistics. Additionally, the authors conclude that not taking this substructure into account in medical genetics could lead to false positives. Inter-population differences in disease susceptibilities correlated with genome-wide differences in allele frequencies could produce spurious associations.

In the final section the paper notes that there are some peculiarities in the genetics of the French Canadians which do indicate some level of genetic homogeneity, at least by locality. To explore this issue they focus on two genomic phenomena which measure correlations of alleles, genetic variations, over spans of the genome within populations. The two phenomena are linkage disequilibrium, which measures association across loci of particular variants, and runs-of-homozygosity, which highlights genomic regions where homozygosity seems enriched beyond expectation (the former is inter-locus, while the latter is intra-locus). Both of these values could be indicators of some level of population bottleneck or substructure, where stochastic evolutionary forces shift a population away from equilibrium as measured by the balance of parameters such as drift, selection, and mutation.’ 

‘To the right is a mashup of figures 5 and 6. On the left you have a figure which shows the extent of linkage disequilibrium as a function of distance between SNP. As you would expect the greater the distance between two SNPs, the more likely they’re to be in equilibrium as recombination has broken apart associations. The closer and closer two markers, the more likely they’re to be linked, physically and statistically. But there’s a difference between the two LD plots. There’s no difference between the CEU and French Canadian samples in the top panel, but there is in the bottom one. Why? The bottom panel shows LD between markers much further apart. Acadians in particular seem to exhibit more long distance LD than the other populations. This may be a sign of a population bottleneck and inbreeding. Also, please note that the Utah white CEU sample is probably relatively similar to the French Canadians in its demographic history as North American groups go. It is homogeneous and expanded rapidly from a small founder group. To the right you have in the top panel total length of ROH per individual, and the bottom length of ROH greater than 1 MB. Again, the Acadians seem to be standouts in terms of their difference from the CEU reference. Interestingly, there’s no difference between CEU, French, and the two French Canadian urban samples. I suspect this is due to the fact that in Montreal and Quebec City the distinctive inbreeding found in the other samples has been eliminated through intermarriage. ROH disappear when you introduce heterozygosity through outbreeding.

What has all this told us? From a medical genetic perspective it is implying that population structure matters when evaluating French Canadians, an Acadian is not interchangeable with a native of Montreal.In terms of ethnically clustered diseases of French Canadians, in the USA the Cajuns, it may not be that there are patterns across the whole ethnic group, but trends within subgroups characterized by long-term endogamy. I wonder if the same might be true of Ashkenazi. 

Is there is a difference between Galicians and Litvaks? Such regional differences among European Jews are new, but the French Canadians themselves are the result of the past three centuries. These results also seem to reinforce the Frenchness of the French Canadians. A group which one could analyze in a similar vein would be the Boers, who are an amalgam of French Protestants, Dutch, and Germans, but seem to exhibit a dominance of the Dutch element culturally.

Finally, the French Canadians may give us a small window in the long term demographic patterns and genetic dynamics which might be operative on a nearby ethnic group: the Puritans of New England. Because of their fecundity [fruitfulness] it seems likely that tens of millions of Americans today descend from the 30,000 or so English settlers who arrived in New England in the two decades between 1620 and 1640 [this very likely to be accurate]. This is the subject of the Greta Migration Project. With numbers in the few tens of thousands it seems unlikely that much of a thorough population bottleneck occurred with this group in a genetic sense in the aggregate. But the results from the French Canadians indicate that isolated groups can be subject to stochastic dynamics, and develop in their own peculiar directions.’

Catalonians and Gascons of France, Khazaria – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Being Western Europeans, it is no surprise that the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Catalans is a branch of the R1b haplogroup. R1b1b2a1 is nearly exclusive to western Europe, and the sub-haplogroup R1b1b2a1a2c is common among Catalans and Gascons.

The place of the Basques in the European Y-chromosome diversity landscape. European Journal of Human Genetics 13:12, multiple authors, (2005): pages 1293-1302.’ 

“The Y chromosomes of 68 male Basques were analyzed. About 86 percent of them carried varieties of haplogroup R1*(xR1a,R1b3f)-M173 [R1-M173], of which most carried R1b3*-M269 [R1b-M269]. This is a commonality between Basques and other western Europeans. 7.1 percent of the Basques in this study (a lower frequency than other scientists had found) carried the Iberian-specific subclades R1b3d-M153 [R1b-M153 – Basque & Gascon] and R1b3f-SRY2627 [R1b-M167 Catalonian]…”

An mtDNA perspective of French genetic variation. Annals of Human Biology 34:1 multiple authors, (January-February 2007): pages 68-79.

This mitochondrial DNA study of 868 people from 12 areas of France includes Basques from the Basque province of Lapurdi in France. These French Basques were found to have noteworthy differences in mtDNA distribution compared to Spanish Basques.

Excerpts from the body of the paper: 

“… It is somewhat surprising to find Hg U4 at a relatively high frequency (6.2%) and diversity among the French Basques (absent in Spanish Basques), because this sub-clade of U is largely East European and West Siberian (Tambets et al. 2003) in its distribution. In contrast to U4, Hg U5b2 is rare among French Basques (2.5%), and more frequent in the Spanish Basques. One other particularity of the French Basque is found within Hg J, more frequent than in the Spanish Basques, and also the presence of the Hg J1c haplotype with HVS-I motif 16069-16126-16300. The derivatives of this branch of Hg J have been so far found mostly in Near Eastern populations (Richards et al. 2002; Metspalu et al. 2004; and authors’ unpublished data). Likewise to U4, Hg T1 is found only in French Basques.

… On the other hand,haplogroups such as U5 and HV0 that are frequent in Spanish Basques are absent or rare in the French Basques, while for Hg U4 its distribution is the opposite. The pattern observed in the mtDNA pool of the French Basques from the Lapurdi region may be explained by genetic drift and cultural isolation in a relatively small long-term effective population size. 

In addition, it is also likely that both French and Spanish Basques, although sharing a common linguistic and probably also genetic ancestry, have been affected by admixture from different sources. 

Meanwhile, the overall high frequency of autosomal recessive coagulation factors deficiencies in French Basques population (Bauduer et al. 2004) argues in favour of genetic drift acting on this population… Taken together, our findings support the notion that ‘Basques’ are a strongly sub-divided population and support a conclusion that French and Spanish Basques have been effectively isolated from each other for a long enough period to allow random genetic drift to differentiate them.”’

In other words, the Basque – who are related to the French – have retained their ‘Frenchness’, whereas those Basque who have dwelt with the Aramean Spanish for many centuries, show the resulting admixture. Ethnologists and geneticists have stressed the differences; saying the Basque especially and Catalonians, are entirely distinct from the Spanish, which is correct and the French, which is incorrect. The mixing with the Spanish on their side of the border has had an impact on the Basque and Catalonian Haplogroup sequencing. The Basque and Catalonians on the French side of the border have remained truer to their French origin culturally and ethnically, as descendants of Moab and Ammon. 

We Are Not Our Ancestors: Evidence for Discontinuity between Prehistoric and Modern Europeans – Journal of Genetic Genealogy, Ellen Levy-Coffman, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Other genetic studies on the Basque have focused on examining blood groups, STR loci, and autosomal markers, often in an attempt to support the Paleolithic paradigm. However, in light of the aDNA studies, Basque distinctiveness can be accounted for by the processes of genetic drift, inbreeding over long periods of time and natural selective processes. Moreover, the researchers noted that the Basque are unique among European populations due to their extremely high rate of consanguinity [‘close relationship or connection by descent from a common ancestor’]. Basque social and cultural traditions continue to promote consanguinity. 

The genetic impact of such inbreeding has yet to fully explored by geneticists, but the high frequency of inherited disorders among the Basque, including Coagulation Deficiences (Factor XI) and Mutation F508 (Cystic Fibrosis Gene), support the suggestion that drift, inbreeding, and a small population size maintained over many generations, as opposed to significant retention of Paleolithic genetic ancestry, best explains the present genetic makeup of the Basque (Alonso 2005; Bauduer 2005).

Finally, even researchers that have found limited genetic evidence of probable Paleolithic ancestry among the Basque also acknowledge that such findings do not support the contention that contemporary Basque retain significant genetic links with indigenous Paleolithic Europeans. (Gonzalez 2006) For instance, although the Basque mtDNA lineage U8a may date to the late Paleolithic, it is rarely found today among modern-day Europeans and, furthermore, constitutes only [one percent] of contemporary Basque mtDNA results. Thus, U8a has diminished in frequency among populations today in a manner similar to the N1a lineage.’

French Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – Emphais  & bold mine:

‘French people mostly live in France but also live in neighboring Belgium and Switzerland and their descendants notably moved in large numbers to Quebec and Acadia. They are called Walloons in Belgium. The French are a complex mixture of ancient Celtic, Iberian, Italic [Moab], Germanic [Ammon], and [ancient] Greek peoples [Moab & Ammon].The standard French, Norman, and Occitan languages are members of the Romance linguistic family and all are written in the Latin alphabet.

Participants in the French Heritage DNA project belong to such Y-DNA (paternal-line) haplogroups as I-M253, I-P109, I-P37, J-P58, J-Z387, R-L21 (a branch of R1b), R-M269 (R1b1a2, the most common branch of R1b in western Europe), R-L552, and R-U198.

Participants in the French Swiss DNA Project whose most distantly known ancestors were French people from Switzerland carry the Y-DNA haplogroups E-L542, E-V13, E-V36, E-M78, G-P15, G-M201, I-M253, I-Z138, N-M178, R-M269, R-U106, and R-U152.

Y-chromosomal DNA analysis in French male lineages. Forensic Science International: Genetics 9, multiple authors, (March 2014): pages 162-168. First published online on December 29, 2013. 

The authors analyze Y-DNA haplogroups’ variation across France using a pool of 558 samples taken from men from 7 French regions: Alsace, Auvergne, Bretagne, Île-de-France, Midi-Pyrénées, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur. Figure 2 lists all the Y-chromosomal haplogroups they found and their frequencies on a per-region basis. The haplogroups are BD, E*, E1b1b1*, E1b1b1a, E1b1b1b, E1b1b1c*, E1b1b1c1, F*, G, I*, I2a2, J*, J1a, J2, K*, L, N1c, P*, R1*, R1a, R1b1*, R1b1b2*, R1b1b2a1*, R1b1b2a1a, R1b1b2a2d, R1b1b2a2e, R1b1b2a2g, and T.’

Excerpt from the Abstract: 

“Even though we find that most of the individual populations in France were not differentiated from each other, Bretagne population shows population substructure…” 

Excerpt from the body of the article: 

“From a total of 27 binary markers typed in the seven regions of France, 22 different haplogroups were found. The most frequent haplogroup in all the regions was R1b1b2*(xR1b1b2a1, 2d, 2e, 2g), with the exception of Alsace, where the most common one was R1b1b2a2g.”

The coming of the Greeks to Provence and Corsica: Y-chromosome models of archaic Greek colonisation of the western Mediterranean. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11:69, multiple authors, (March 14, 2011). 

This paper’s goal was to study the genetic traces of Greek colonization in Provence in southern mainland France. 51 samples from Provençal Frenchmen were compared with 58 samples from people from Smyrna and 31 from Asia Minor Phokaia. The Y-DNA haplogroup E-V13 is known to be “characteristic of the Greek and Balkan mainland”. It was found among 19% of the Phokaian samples and 12% of the Smyrnian samples as well as among 4% of the Provençal Frenchmen, 4.6% of East Corsicans, and 1.6% of West Corsicans. Altogether, according to the Results section, taking into account all haplogroups, “An admixture analysis estimated that 17% of the Y-chromosomes of Provence may be attributed to Greek colonization.”

An mtDNA perspective of French genetic variation. Annals of Human Biology 34:1 , multiple authors, (January-February 2007): pages 68-79. 

Mitochondrial DNA was evaluated for 868 samples these researchers and previous researchers gathered from inhabitants of France, predominantly from 12 specific locations, including but not limited to regions like Normandy, Seine-Maritime, and North-East in the north and Languedoc and Provence in the south. Ethnic French people proper as well as Bretons, Corsicans, and Basques living in France were tested… H is by far the most common mtDNA haplogroup in France with the frequency of 45.56%. Others include (but are not limited to) K at 8.74%, U5 at 8.3%, J at 7.65%, HV0 at 4.77%, U4 at 2.31%, I at 2.02%, and T1 at 1.66%. The authors conclude: “The mtDNA haplogroup composition of the French does not differ significantly from the surrounding European genetic landscape.” However, they did find some level of distinctiveness among the Bretons and Basques…’

Eupedia, Genetic history of the Benelux and France, Maciamo Hay, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Note that the total [Haplogroups] for France is biased towards North Americans of French descent (mostly from Québec), as genealogical DNA tests have not yet become popular among French people.

R1b is the most common haplogroup in France. It includes four main subclades: the Atlantic Celtic R1b-L21 in the north-west, the Gascon-Iberian R1b-DF27 (including the Basque R1b-M153) in the south-west, the Germanic R1b-U106 in the north, and the Gaulish Celtic and Italic R1b-U152 in the east.’

R1b-L21 [M529 / S145] is concentrated in Brittany and shared with the Celtic nations of Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

R1b-DF27 not only includes M153 associated with the Basque and the Gascon, but also M167 [SRY2627] which is concentrated in Catalonia and shared with the Basque as well as being found in Cornwall, England; Wales, Bavaria, Germany; Belgium and the Netherlands.

R1b-U106 [M405 / S21] is concentrated in Frisia, northern Netherlands and shared with Benelux, Germany, Austria, Norway and England. 

R1b-U152 [S28] is predominately found in northern and central Italy and shared with Switzerland and France.

Notice that these various R1b Haplogroup strains are more closely aligned with northern Europe than southern Europe. Though people often think of France as a Latin country, it is actually more Teutonic. For even its’ supposed ‘Latin’ influence as shown by its genetic links with Switzerland and Italy, are actually non-Latin as both these nations though containing a ‘Latin’ element, are still predominantly Teutonic or Germanic nations – all having R1b-U152 as its dominating Haplogroup.

The ancient Burgundians, a Germanic tribe from eastern Denmark, appear to have carried considerable percentages of haplogroups R1a* and Q*, two haplogroups that are now found at unusually high frequencies around the former Kingdom of the Burgundians, in what is now the Rhône-Alpes region and the north of Provence [see Switzerland]. 

Haplogroup R1b has numerous branches, each with their own origins. The ancient Gauls during the Bronze Age and Iron Age belonged primarily to R1b-P312 [S116 Iberia: Spain & Portugal], which is divided in three main subclades: DF27, L21 and U152. All of them are found throughout France, but DF27 is more common in the southern half of France, while L21 is especially common [in] the Northwest. Britons fleeing the Anglo-Saxon invasions in the 5th and 6th centuries crossed the Channel and settled in great number in Brittany, which increased the percentage of R1b-L21 in that region. Nowadays half of all R1b in Brittany is L21 (35% of all Y-DNA). Later in the Middle Ages Normandy, Anjou, Brittany and other parts of western France came under English rule, and some L21 may have come from England during that period. But it is most likely that Northwest Gaul already had a substantial percentage of L21 during the Iron Age.

The U152 clade of R1b is the most homogeneously distributed, with between 15% and 20% in most French regions. It is associated with Hallstatt and La Tène Celts that migrated from the North of the Alps to Gaul during the Iron Age, but also with the Cisalpine Gauls and Italic people from Italy. The ancient Romans and other Italic peoples would have belonged to the U152>Z56, U152>Z193 and some U152>L2 subclades [this is an incorrect assumption]. Other L2 subclades [NW Europe] and the Z36 clade were found among the Etruscans (confirmed) [correct] and probably also among the Alpine Celts [incorrect]. 

Data about deep clades is still sparse in France, but Italic Z56 and Z193 appear to be most common in Provence (~9%), followed by Champagne-Lorraine (5%), Alsace and Poitou-Charentes (both ~4.5%), Bourgogne-France Comté (4%) and Rhône-Alpes (3%). The ancient Romans also carried Greek/Balkanic R1b-Z2103 lineages [incorrect]. This haplogroup is found in the same regions, with a peak in the Rhône-Alpes region (~9%).

Germanic tribes brought R1b-U106 to France. It was particularly common among the Franks and was the lineage of the Kings of France. Nowadays it is most common in Ile-de-France [the capital, Paris]and Picardy (both ~16%), followed by Alsace (14.5%), Normandy (13.5%) and Flanders-Artois (11%). Other Germanic lineages are I1, I2a2a-L801, R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284. Almost all the I2a2a and R1a in northern and eastern France is of Germanic origin.’ 

Around 80% of G2a in France falls under the Celtic Z1816 clade. Another 15% is made up of the U1 branch, typically the L13 clade, which is usually of Italic/Roman origin. The remaining 5% of G2a descends from local Neolithic farmers.

Most J2a in France belongs to the M67 and the M319 subclades, which were found among ancient Etruscans and Greeks.’ 

This is highly telling, as we will discover that the Etruscans were ‘Greek’ before leaving the Aegean and settling in central Italy. The Etruscans are related to the latter Greeks that formed the Greco-Macedonian Empire. In other words, the Etruscans and Moab and Ammon are closely related.

‘These lineages probably came from Italy in Roman times, apart from some Greek lineages in the Côte d’Azur. J1 was also found among the Etruscans and is the likely source of the non-Jewish J1 in France.

J2b was found in Bronze Age Illyria, among Iron Age Etruscans and Daunians, but was probably also found in other parts of central and southern Italy as well as in Greece. In France it would be mostly of Graeco-Roman (including Etruscan) origin. Nowadays J2b makes up roughly half of all J2 in Provence and Languedoc, one third in Midi-Pyrénées and Lorraine, but under 20% in Aquitaine and Poitou-Charentes. It’s rare elsewhere.’

‘This map shows an estimation of the dominant ancestry in each region of France based on anthropological studies. Will DNA confirm this general pattern? Here is a summary of Y-DNA haplogroups found in France, and the ancient ethnicities associated with them:

  • Germanic/Nordic : R1b-U106, I1, I2-L801
  • Gaulish Celtic : R1b-U152 [Alpine]
  • Atlantic Celts : R1b-L21 [British & Irish Celts]
  • Iberian Celts : R1b-DF27, R1b-P312
  • Basque : R1b-DF27, R1b-M153 
  • Greek: E1b1b, E-M123, J2, R1b-L23 [Balkans, Greece, Turkey, southern Italy], G2a, T1a, J1 

The mtDNA Haplogroups for the Swiss and French are as follows:

Switzerland: H [47.9%] – J [11.5%] – T2 [9.3%] – U5 [6.7%] – K [5.3%] – HVO+V [4.9%] – U4 [3.1%] – T1 [2.2%] – 

W [1.8%] – L [0.9%] – U2 [0.9] – U3 [0.9] – I [0.9%] – HV [0.4%] – U [0.4] – I – X [0.4]

France: H [44.3%] – K [8.7%] – U5 [8.2%] – J [7.7%] – T2 [6.2%] – HVO+V [5%] – HV [3%] – U4 [2.5%] – 

I [2%] – T1 [1.9%] – W [1.9%] – U2 [1.6%] U [1.4%] – U3 [1%] – L [0.9] – X [0.9] 

                               H     J    T2   U5     K     HVO+V    HV    U4    T1

Switzerland          48    12     9     7       5           5           0.5      3       2

France                   44      8     6    8       9           5            3         3       2

Here we can see the family resemblance between the Swiss and the French, yet the subtle difference between Switzerland Haran and nephew, France Moab and Ammon.

                                 H     J    T2   U5     K     HVO+V    HV    U4     T1

Catalonia              30     7     8     10    10           8           0.5    0.8      1

Basque                  49     8     6     12      5           8           0.8       4       1

Switzerland          48   12     9      7       5           5           0.5       3       2

Spain                     44      7     6     8       6           8           0.7       2       2

France                   44     8     6     8       9           5              3        3       2

Italy                       40      8    8     5       8           3              3        2       3

Comparing the Swiss and French with their immediate neighbours, reveals the family ties between cousins – something we will see repeated frequently as we progress with the peoples of northwestern Europe – as the major Basque mt-DNA [maternal] Haplogroups mirror the Swiss of all peoples. The Catalonians are most like the Basque, apart from the obvious difference in Haplogroup H. The French and Spanish are alike in levels of H, T2 and U5, though in the other main mt-DNA Haplogroups of J, K, HVO+V, HV, U4 and T1, the French align more closely with the Italians. 

                       H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HVO+V

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.5          7            5

Brazil                 44     11                              2                       11

Portugal            44      7       6        6       0.1          7            5

Spain                 44      7       6        6           1          8           8

France               44     8       6         9         3           8            5

Poland               44     8       7        4                     10           5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2        10           4

Ukraine            39      8        8        5                    10           4

Greece               41    10        7        5                      6           2

Italy                   40     8        8        8         3           5           3

Romania          37     11        5        8                      7           4

Turkey              31       9        4        6         5          3            1

Iran                   17     14        5         7         7          3            1

Adding Switzerland and France to our table of nations descended from Shem thus far, has Switzerland now book ending one end of European descended peoples replacing Brazil, with Iran at the other end still, and France sandwiched between Poland and Spain. A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe, with France following this pattern. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe – in the main – exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.

It is worth reminding ourselves of comments from the section on Nahor [refer Chapter XXV Nahor], as they pertain to Haran’s children and Lot’s offspring. 

‘Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b that is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b.’ R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup, in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3% and is carried by over 110 million European men. Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.

As discussed, the sub-Haplogroup R1b-U106 (S21) is more frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; R-U198 is prevalent in England, while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula; R-U152 is more frequent in Switzerland, France and Italy, and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

Restating from the previous chapters: As we progress through the descendants of Shem, we will find the levels of R1b vary, though gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels of the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups for some of the nations we will study. R-M269 stretches across Europe, with levels increasing as one heads westwards. R-U106 stretches from Central Europe westwards.

Turkey and Russia were the first two nations and both have lower levels of R1b, possessing higher levels of other Haplogroups, for instance for Turkey, it is Haplogroup J at 31% and for Russia it is Haplogroups R1a at 46% and N1c1 at 23%. Similarly for Ukraine and Poland where each has R1a at 44% and 58% respectively and Ukraine has  combined Haplogroups I1 and I2 at 26%. 

Italy was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and shows a marked difference with eastern Europe. The north to south axis is as important as the east to west and this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy which is further south; yet less R1b [M269] overall as it is the descendants of Peleg, Aram and the mixed line of Caphtor that have the highest levels of R1b [refer Chapters XV Casluh & Caphtor and XXIII Aram].

Turkey:   R-M269   14%   –  R-U106   0.4%

Russia:    R-M269   21%   –  R-U106   5.4%

Slovenia  R-M269   17%   –  R-U106      4%

Poland     R-M269  23%   –  R-U106      8% 

Ukraine   R-M269  25%   –  R-U106      9%

Czech       R-M269  28%   –  R-U106    14% 

Italy         R-M269   53%   –  R-U106      6%

France     R-M269   52%  —  R-U106      7%

Swiss       R-M269   58%  —  R-U106     13%

The addition of Switzerland and France highlights the north to south and east to west pattern we have noted. The Swiss exhibit higher levels of the Germanic R-U106 as reflected by their geographic position in central Europe; similar with the Czechs. Switzerland’s position northwards of both France and Italy is reflected by their higher level of R-M269. The French and Italians unsurprisingly, share an almost exact measure of R1b M269 and U106.

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Swiss and French:

Switzerland: R1b [50%] – I1 [14%] – I2a2 [8%] – E1b1b [7.5%] – G2a [7.5%] – R1a [3.5%] – 

J2 [3%] – Ia21 [1.5%] – Q [1.5%] – N1c1 [ 1%] – J1 [0.5%] – T1a [0.5%] 

France: R1b [58.5%] – I1 [8.5%] – E1b1b [7.5%] – J2 [6%] – G2a [5.5%] – I2a2 [3.5%] – 

I2a1 [3%] – R1a [3] – J1 [1.5] – T1a [1] – Q [0.5] 

In keeping with cousins exhibiting similar traits and sharing more in common – more than they have with their own siblings – we will find that the Swiss Y-DNA Haplogroup sequencing is reminisce of the Dutch. Closer bonds shared with a cousin rather than a sibling can be explained, due to a more exact sharing of common Haplogroups and genetic DNA code.

                         R1b     R1a     I1    I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2     J1     G2a

Switzerland    50         4       14      2          8             8        3       1        8

France             59         3         9      3          4             8        6       2        6

Comparing the main Y-DNA Haplogroups, we see a greater divergence between Switzerland and France than with the mtDNA Haplogroups; though still close enough to express a family relationship. 

A comparison with the northern Italian region of Lombardy shows a similarity with France and thus supports the dominating teuton nationality of the French as inherited from their Frankish ancestors; in line with the Germanic Lombardi from northern Italy. Switzerland has some commonalty with Lombardy and even more so with the northern Central province, Tuscany. Both France and Switzerland have a lot of common ground with northern Italy as a whole.

                         R1b     R1a     I1    I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2     J1     G2a

N Italy              50        5        7       1            4           11       10      2        8  

Switzerland    50        4      14       2            8            8         3      1         8

Tuscany           53        4       4       2             3            9       12      2        9

Lombardy       59        4       3       4             1           10        6               10

France             59        3       9       3             4             8        6      2        6

Adding Switzerland and France to the Y-DNA Haplogroup table for the descendants of Shem studied so far, is as interesting as the mtDNA Haplogroup analysis. 

                        R1b    E1b1b   J1 & J2   I1 & I2    G2a    R1a    T1a   N1C1

Spain               69          7           10             7            3         2        3

France             59           8           8           16            6          3        1      

Portugal          56         14           13            7            7          2        3

Brazil               54         11           10            9            5          4      

Switzerland    50           8           4           24           8            4        1        1

N Italy             50         11           12           12           8          5        2

Italy                 39         14           19           10           9          4        3

S Italy              28         19          26             7          11          3        3

Turkey             16         11           33             6          11          8        3          

Greece             16         21           26           15           6         12        5  

Romania         16         14           15           34           3         18        1        2

Poland             13          4             3            16           2         58       1        4

Iran                   10          7         32              1          10          16       3        1 

Ukraine             8           7           5            26           3          44       1        6

Russia                6           3           3           20           1           46              23

Spain still bookends as a western most nation and its high percentage of R1b; with Russia at the other end of the nations of Europe, with low R1b. France is now between Spain and Portugal and its position predicated on its percentage of Haplogroup R1b and indicative of its westerly location. Switzerland is sandwiched between Italy and Brazil. Two Haplogroups are of note. First it has a trace of the very northern Haplogroup N – unlike France – in common with nations in the far northeast of Europe or its periphery, such as Ukraine and Russia. Second, Switzerland has high levels of Haplogroup I2, indicative of eastern Europe, such as Romania, Ukraine and Russia; and Haplogroup I1, common in northwestern Europe.

One’s pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honour.

Proverbs 29:23 English Standard Version

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

Galileo Galilei [1564-1642]

© Orion Gold 2020-2022 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

Homo neanderthalensis III

An article written by Genesis and Genetics, entitled Neanderthal and His Biblical Identity, posted April 23, 2012 offers valuable insight on Homo neanderthalensis. I agree with their conclusion that Neanderthal man was alive before the Flood and died out during that cataclysm. Where we differ is that they subscribe to a. Homo neanderthalensis being the progenitor of modern Cro Magnon man; b. our ancestor Adam was the first Neanderthal; c. every human today has derived from the Neanderthal and possesses their DNA; d. that the Nephilim and neanderthal are one and the same and e. the history of mankind from Adam to our present day is only 6,000 years – as per an erroneous interpretation of the first two chapters of the Book of Genesis.

The constant reader will recall from previous chapters what we have discovered regarding these five points and so it is not my intention to re-address them all here [refer Chapter I Noah, Chapter X Magog, Tubal & Meshech, Chapter XXI Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega].

The bulk of the article is reprinted here, though quoted from the perspective that supports the Neanderthal being a separate creation of Day Six and a precursor of Homo sapiens from Day Eight; whom did later live concurrently and interbreed with Homo sapiens, but was not our original ancestor.

Emphasis & bold mine:

‘The discovery of Neanderthal, and the subsequent extraction of his mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) has been the center of much speculation and many hypotheses in both the Christian and secular communities. The heart of the mystery for Christian scientists is: how could Neanderthal develop 210 mitochondrial DNA mutations so quickly, have so little genetic diversity, live in so many diverse nations without interbreeding with other humans, and disappear without leaving a historical or genetic trace? This paper presents another hypothesis that couples the Bible with Neanderthal DNA evidence and is simply stated: Neanderthal is [a] pre-flood man. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that Neanderthal had very little genetic diversity; the fact that his genetic signature coincides with the Biblical history of [pre-Adamic] mankind; the fact that Neanderthal’s genetic diversity, small as it was, was passed on broadly to modern man through Noah’s three daughters-in law [true], and, finally, the evidence that Neanderthal did not possess the mutations which shortened life span from 900[0] plus years to less than 120. Accepting Neanderthal as [a pre-Adamic] pre-flood man sheds much light on, [and] actually solves, the following mysteries: 

1. How did Neanderthal go extinct?
2. Why is there no evidence of pre-flood man?
3. Why is Neanderthal genetically distinct from modern man?
4. Why do we have his (Neanderthal) mutations, but he doesn’t have ours (modern man)?

5. Why did Neanderthal not [continuously or successfully], interbreed with modern man?
6. Why are Neanderthal’s remains found in so many divers locations?
7. Why is Neanderthal physiologically and anatomically superior [different]?
8. Where does Neanderthal fit in post-flood Bible genealogy? 

There is one mystery that remains and that is, why has Neanderthal not been recognized for who he is?

The following Biblical truths are relevant: 

  1. On day six everything God created was “very good” including man. (Genesis 1:31)
  2. Adam and Eve sinned sometime after day six [eight]; they received the first curse and became mortal (Genesis 2:17)
  3. Humanity became increasingly wicked; God was sorry He made mankind and decided to destroy them all. (Genesis 6:6-7)
  4. Noah found favor with God and was spared from the destruction. God also spared Noah’s wife, 3 sons, and 3 daughters-in-law. (Genesis 6:8,18)
  5. Just before the flood, God decreed a reduction of lifespan from 900[0]+ years to approximately 120 years. This will be referred to as the second curse. (Genesis 6:3, Genesis 11)

The Biblical model states everything was very good in the beginning and as a result of sin there were two distinct curses. These curses affected both lifespan and quality of life. It is reasonable to assume that these curses were expressed by means of DNA mutations. DNA is considered to be a language and it follows that God would use it as an instrument of control, much like our modern voice control systems. This would result in an explosion of DNA mutations at the time of each curse.

In the beginning… there were no human genetic mutations. After the first curse, there was a sudden explosion of genetic mutations, some of which gave us mortality; these cannot be identified since they are in everyone and there is no variation. However, there also were those mutations which varied from individual to individual, for example, genetic disease. These mutations resided in pre-flood man and passed on to modern man. 

Then, just before the flood, in 2400 B.C., [10,837 BCE] came the second curse. This would also be apparent in a sudden explosion of mutations. These mutations would be in the entire genome, but most certainly in the mitochondrial genome due to the close connection between mitochondria and lifespan (Masoro, E., 2011). 

Mitochondrial DNA has been sequenced since the 1970s and is especially useful for genealogical purposes. Then in the mid 1990s, methods were developed to sequence the mitochondria of ancient man. Since the Bible clearly documents ancient genealogy, including lifespan, mitochondrial DNA is the perfect tool for analyzing and confirming the Biblical history of man. 

Many human mitochondrial DNA sequences are available: 10s of thousands of modern human sequences and, as of late, some sequences of ancient man (Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon). Only 3 Cro-Magnon subjects were found, but they turned out to be uninteresting; they are all typically European. Neanderthal, on the other hand, is very interesting in that he is so similar to modern man, yet so distinct. This research is based on sixteen Neanderthal sequences, seven of which were the full 16565 nucleotide genomes.

In order to fittingly analyze mitochondrial DNA of ancient man, it is expedient to choose the reference sequence closest to Adam and Eve. Since Cro-Magnon mtDNA is so similar to modern man, the obvious choice is Neanderthal. We choose, arbitrarily, one Neanderthal (GenBank NC_011137) which was found in Croatia and sequenced in 2009. We defined this sequence as the Nearest Adam Reference Sequence (NARS). Again, the assumption made is that this is the most ancient human sequenced and that he, Neanderthal, should be the closest available human to Adam and Eve. 

Most secular mtDNA analysis is conducted using the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS). This reference sequence is that of the first human to be sequenced (GenBank NC012920). He/she have remained anonymous, but this individual is identified as haplogroup H, typically European.

The Bible is clear that pre-flood man lived 900[0]+ years. In order for this to be true, pre-flood man’s physiology had to be superior to ours. Neanderthal had better bone structure (Lewin, R. 2005), better muscle tone (Lewin, R. 2005), better occlusion (Cuozzo, J. 1998 p.75), stronger teeth (Cuozzo, J. 1998 p.222) and larger brain cavity (Marcia S. Ponce de León 2008). There is also evidence that Neanderthal lived long lives, significantly longer that modern man. (Cuozzo, J. 1998 p.209) 

Observational evidence can be unreliable and misleading, particularity concerning this case where post- flood man has had access to the Neanderthal caves for thousands of years. These recorded observations are also subject to preconceived ideas and bias, but are a matter of interest; and, do support the hypothesis that Neanderthal is [a] pre-flood man. However, the strong support for the subject hypothesis rests on DNA evidence. 

Consider the days of the flood: There were probably millions, possible billions of humans. They didn’t listen to Noah concerning the impending deluge. When the deluge started, they reacted; some ran to higher ground and some held on to anything that would float. As the waters rose, there were humans, animals, and debris everywhere. The humans and animals would use debris for rafts and could have lived on these rafts for a considerable amount of time. As time went on, everything with the breath of life died and there were dead bodies everywhere: on the rafts, floating, or sinking to the ocean floor. 

First, consider those who died on the rafts. As the waters receded, the rafts would run aground. As time went on, some of the carcasses would be discovered by their post-flood ancestors. Some of the post flood ancestors would want to bury them with dignity and others would want to simply dispose of the carcasses. There is evidence that some Neanderthals were ceremonially buried in caves.(NOUGIER, L., 1963) 

Secondly, there were those who were either eaten by sea creatures, or sank to the bottom of the sea. After sinking to the bottom, they would be entombed in strata most probably in the limestone deposits. There is documented evidence of this happening.( BUSK, G. 1865; Finlayson, J. 2001) 

Lastly, there were those who, as the waters receded, were swept with other debris into the newly formed limestone caves. These would have been the dead floating on rafts, or some of the skeletons on bottom of the sea. Some were caught in powerful cave currents that shattered their bones and deposited them in the deep recesses of the caves along with other pre-flood creatures; they were mangled and covered with debris. There is documented evidence of this scenario. (Zimmer, C. 2010) 

Using the NARS (Nearest Adam Reference Sequence), the 16 Neanderthal mtDNA sequences and 15,000 modern man mtDNA sequences were evaluated.

Number of mtDNA Mutations Based on NARS 

NARS:   D-loop Mutations  / Total Mutations

Modern man: 25 / 210 

Neanderthal: 5 / 10

[The] Table shows that Neanderthal has very few mutations in the mitochondrial DNA and that modern man has many. This is what you would expect: ancient man – few mutations; modern man- more mutations.’

The correct reason for the discrepancy is because Adam was a complex, sophisticated re-drawing of modern man. An advancement and evolution, if you will from Neanderthal man of Day six. 

‘Just this table alone is compelling evidence that Neanderthal is [an early] pre-flood man; he possesses the first curse mutations but not those of the second curse; he fits the Biblical mutation model perfectly.

[Before] the Garden of Eden… man’s mtDNA possessed typically 10 mutations. Then, there was an explosion of approximately 200 additional mutations; these were a result of God speaking them into humanity [at the time of Adam’s creation]; these mutations were [later] passed through Noah’s three daughters-in-law (mitochondrial DNA)… Noah lived 950[0] years, but his sons lived shorter lives. His grandsons lived shorter lives yet; and it took approximately 8 generations for the mutations to fully express themselves resulting in a lifespan of approximately 120 years. 

Many of the 210 mutations are significant. At least 40 of these mutations code for different amino acids. The mitochondria supplies energy and regulates the electrical grid in the body (Campbell, N., 2006); it is the source of many diseases (Chinnery, P.F., et. al. 2010). 

Notice that the number of mutations… is flat with respect to time. Looking at the Bible, there is no evidence that the number of mutations increase accidentally with time. This is also supported by Cro- Magnon mtDNA; Cro-Magnon is considered ancient man; but, the limited mtDNA we have does not indicate he had any fewer mutations than modern man. According to both the Bible model and the raw mtDNA data, the mutation with time slope is flat. Also, this is a plot of mutations, not mutation expression; mutation expression is poorly understood by secular science and won’t be addressed at this time. 

This analysis revealed that the combined Neanderthal genomes have 18 mutations in the D-loop. This number will most probably increase as more Neanderthal sequences become available, but we have a fair amount of confidence about these 18. D-loop mutations were used for this analysis since D-loop data is available for all 16 of the Neanderthal subjects and the 15,000+ modern human individuals who participated in migration studies (Behar, D. 2007). 

One would expect that these 18 mutations would be passed through Noah’s three daughters-in-law and would be widely distributed in the modern population. And, they are: Table 2 [not shown] presents the modern population groups (haplogroups) which inherited the Neanderthal’s mutations. The table lists the sequence number of each mutation, the nucleotide variations, and the haplogroups which possess each variation. Both variations are included since it is impossible to know which variation is the mutation and which variation is the day-6 original nucleotide. 

If Neanderthal is placed in the position of [a] “pre-flood human,” everything fits… Neanderthal bore the genetics of the first curse, but not the genetics of the second curse. And, all humanity after the flood possess the genetics from both the first and second curses. It works. 

However, placing Neanderthal directly under one of the daughters-in-law of Noah or under any of their offspring, the enigma returns with the following unanswerable question: “How could Neanderthal develop 210 mitochondrial DNA mutations so quickly, have so little genetic diversity, live in so many diverse nations without interbreeding with other humans, and disappear without leaving a historical or genetic trace?”‘

Yes, how indeed?

‘Note that Neanderthal remains have been found in France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Croatia, Russia, Siberia, Iraq, Israel, Belgium, the bottom of the North Sea, and Uzbekistan. 

Neanderthal does not fit in the post-flood world; but, placing him where he belongs, in the pre-flood [and pre-Adamic] world, his DNA is congruent with the Biblical model of [a] pre-flood man. Neanderthal bore the mutations of the first curse, but not those of the second curse…

The world has attempted and succeeded to discredit Neanderthal to the point that it is an insult to be called a Neanderthal or be connected with him in any way. The slander of Neanderthal does not fit the evidence, but has prejudiced many. It is time to [acknowledge] who he is and give him his proper place in the rich Biblical history of man. 

So, in conclusion, here are the answers to the mysteries presented in the abstract based on acceptance of Neanderthal as pre-flood man. 

1. How did Neanderthal go extinct? Answer: He died in the flood 

2. Why is there no evidence of pre-flood man?
Answer: There is much evidence of pre-flood man – Neanderthal [and Homo sapiens]

3. Why is Neanderthal genetically distinct from modern man?
Answer: He did not possess the genetic mutations of the second curse [and he was created on day Six; not day Eight like Adam]. 

4. Why do we have his (Neanderthal) mutations, but he doesn’t have ours (modern man)? Answer: He is our common ancestor [only through interbreeding; not as an originator]

5. Why did Neanderthal not interbreed with modern man?
Answer: He couldn’t; Neanderthal and modern man were separated by the flood [incorrect]. 

6. Why are Neanderthal’s remains found in so many divers locations? Answer: The flood deposited them there [incorrect in part – Neanderthal and Denisovans lived worldwide]. 

7. Why is Neanderthal physiologically and anatomically superior?
Answer: His DNA was superior [different] and not subject to the second curse.

8. Where does Neanderthal fit in post-flood Bible genealogy? 

Answer: He doesn’t. We know the DNA from the table of nations people (Genesis Chapter 10) and subsequent generations; none has the Neanderthal genetic signature.’ 

References 

Behar, D., Rosset, S., Blue-Smith, J., Balanovsky, O., Tzur, S. Comas, D., Mitchell, R., Quintana-Murci, L., Tyler-Smith, C., Wells, S., The Genographic Consortium (2007) “The Genographic Project Public Participation Mitochondrial DNA Database” 

BUSK, G. (1865). On a very ancient human cranium from Gibraltar, Report of the 34th meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Bath 1864. 91-2 

Campbell, N.A., et. al.,(2006). “Biology Concepts and Connections” Fifth Edition, Pearson, San Francisco. p.98-99. 

Chinnery, P. F., et. al.(2010). “Mitochondrial Disorders Overview,” Institute of Human Genetics, Newcastle 

Cuozzo J., (1998) “Buried Alive The Startling Truth About Neanderthal Man,” Master Books Inc. 

Diamond J., (2006) “The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal”, p. 42 

Finlayson, J. C., et. al. (2001) The Gibraltar Neanderthals and their extinction, p.117-122 

Green R., Malaspinas A-S, Krause J., Briggs A., et al. (2008) “A Complete Neandertal Mitochondrial Genome Sequence Determined by High-Throughput Sequencing.” Cell, 134:416-426. 

Krings M., Stone A., Schmitz R.W., Krainitzki H., Stoneking M., and Pääbo S. (1997): “Neanderthal DNA sequences and the origin of modern humans.” Cell, 90:19-30. 

NOUGIER L.-R., 1963, La préhistoire : essai de paléosociologie religieuse. Paris : Bloud & Gay : 43-44 

Masoro, E., Austad, S., “Handbook of the Biology of Aging Seventh Edition” (London: Academic Press 2011) p.75 

Lewin, R., “Human Evolution: an illustrated Introduction Fifth Edition,” (Blackwell Publishing 2005) p.180 

Marcia S. Ponce de León, Lubov Golovanova, Vladimir Doronichev, Galina Romanova, Takeru Akazawa, Osamu Kondo, Hajime Ishida, and Christoph P. E. Zollikofer, (2008) “Neanderthal brain size at birth provides insights into the evolution of human life history”. 

Zimmer, C., December 21, 2010, The New York Times – Science, “Bones Give Peek into the lives of Neanderthals”, p D1 

Note 1: One of the first things you notice is that if you reverse the mutations/variations in the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS), the two references systems become identical. This does not directly contribute to our case, but shows the close similarities of our two subjects. 

Note 2: Notice in Table 3 [not shown] that Neanderthal does not show variation in all of the nucleotides; this is because the variations did not appear until after the flood. For instance, take sequence 16037; all of the Neanderthal (16 of them) were Gs. Unless, at a later date some Neanderthal is found to have some other nucleotide, it had to be a post flood mutation. Conversely, sequence number 16078 had a variation (A or G); this places the variation/mutation before the flood. If Neanderthal did, in fact, live before the flood, he would have no post-flood mutations. So, if the post flood mutations are removed from the rCRS, 17 sequences become identical between the reference system and you have the Neanderthal and European sequences vary by 8 nucleotides which is exactly the expected human variation. (Krings, M., 1997) Summarizing, Neanderthal does not possess the post flood mutations, and these post flood mutations are built into the rCRS and result in a bias. 

Nahor

Chapter XXV

Peleg, the brother of Joktan, is not only synonymous with a split in Arphaxad’s line, but more famously with the division of all the peoples and races from Japheth, Ham and Shem who had congregated in the Mesopotamian region. The failed Tower of Babel venture circa 6755 BCE, had ended with the Son of Man – by some means unexplained – confounding the universal language spoken [refer Chapter XXI Nimrod]. Now, eleven of the main lines of people began to spread abroad; the seven from Japheth and the four from Ham. Cush, Phut and Mizra to northeast Africa and Egypt; Canaan to the land of Palestine. Gomer and Javan heading towards the Mediterranean and Magog, Tubal, Meschech and Madai northward to Anatolia or Asia Minor. The majority of Tiras’ descendants heading west into south eastern Europe like Gomer and Javan; but unlike them, continuing westwards via Scotland, Iceland, Greenland and onto North America.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The name Peleg meaning Division, Dividing Canal from the verb (palag), to split or divide. Noun (peleg) means channel or canal and noun (pelagga) means stream or division. Nouns (pelugga) and noun (miplagga) mean division.

NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names agree: the name Peleg means Division or Divider, although the word is commonly used to denote a channel or canal. Note that this “division of the earth” follows the pattern of the second creation day, in which Joktan represents the waters under the dividing firmament, which eventually produced dry land and all its creatures, while Peleg represents the dividing firmament, which eventually came to house the celestial lights that would lead the living on earth (Genesis 15:5, Daniel 12:3).’

The genealogy of Arphaxad to Abraham is listed in Genesis chapter eleven. Peleg had a son called Reu, born 6827 BCE, unconventional chronology. Reu’s name in Hebrew means, a ‘friend, associate.’ In the Book of Jubilees we read further in chapter 10:18-27

… Peleg took to himself a wife, whose name was Lomna the daughter of Sina’ar, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Reu; for he said: ‘Behold the children of men have become evil through the wicked purpose of building for themselves a city and a tower in the land of Shinar.’… for in his days they built the city and the tower, saying, ‘Go to, let us ascend thereby into heaven.’… And the Lord sent a mighty wind against the tower* and overthrew it upon the earth, and behold it was between Asshur and Babylon in the land of Shinar, and they called its name ‘Overthrow’.

Two points of interest are the dating of the tower of Babel during the time of Peleg and the meaning of Peleg’s name to include a division associated with water. In the unconventional chronology, Peleg was born in 7727 BCE and died 4737 BCE; during the precessional Age of Cancer, 8810 to 6650 BCE. The life spans were much reduced after the flood though still enormously long compared to the dramatic decrease, that occurred in Abraham’s lifetime some five generations later. Peleg lived 2,990 years. During this time frame Nimrod challenges the Eternal and gathered the nations in support of his rebellion, with the Tower of Babel being a literal and symbolic statement of their united defiance. Nimrod had been alive for about a thousand years when Peleg was born. An early date for the confusion of the languages and the dividing of the earth is circa 7275 BCE and a later date is 6232 BCE. Dividing in two gives 6755 BCE. This seems plausible as Nimrod would be still ‘young’ and Peleg about a third of the way through his life. 

This approximate dating supports a gap in history between this event and the sudden ‘[re]appearance’ of the early Sumerian Civilisation circa 6000 BCE. It also ties in with the three hundred year transitional period – from 6976 to 6676 BCE – between the Treta Yuga Silver Age and the Dwapara Yuga Bronze Age; the age before our current Kali Yuga Iron Age running from 3676 BCE to 2025 CE. Three short years from the time of writing until we enter another three hundred year transitional period, that also coincides with the Age of Aquarius. Though Aquarius is an air sign, it has a strong connection with water. Cancer, the Age at the time of the earth’s division is a water sign and is a startling coincidence. 

The end of the Kali Yuga in 2015: Unravelling the mysteries of the Yuga Cycle, Bibhu Dev Misra, 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The 300 year transitional period between the Treta Yuga (Silver Age) and the Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age) from 6976 BC – 6676 BC also coincides with a significant environmental event – the Black Sea Catastrophe which has recently been dated to 6700 BC. The Black Sea once used to be a freshwater lake. That is, until the Mediterranean Sea, swollen with melted glacial waters, breached a natural dam, and cut through the narrow Bosphorous Strait, catastrophically flooding the Black Sea. This raised the water levels of the Black Sea by several hundred feet, flooded more than 60,000 square miles of land, and significantly expanded the Black Sea shoreline (by around 30%). This event fundamentally changed the course of civilization in Southeastern Europe and western Anatolia. Geologists Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in New York, who had first proposed the Black Sea Catastrophe hypothesis, have gone to the extent of comparing it to Noah’s Flood.

Similar major flooding events were taking place in many parts of the world, as massive glacial lakes, swelled by the waters of the melting ice, breached their ice barriers, and rushed into the surrounding areas. In the book Underworld, Graham Hancock has described some of the terrible events that ravaged the planet during that time. 

Sometime between 6900 BC – 6200 BC the Laurentide ice-sheet disintegrated in the Hudson Bay and an enormous quantity of glacial waters from the inland Lake Agassiz/Ojibway discharged into the Labrador Sea. This was possibly the “single largest flood of the Quarternary Period”, which may have single-handedly raised global sea-level by half a metre. The period between 7000 BC – 6000 BC was also characterized by the occurrences of gigantic earthquakes in Europe. In northern Sweden, some of these earthquakes caused “waves on the ground”, 10 metres high, referred to as “rock tsunamis”. It is possible that the global chain of cataclysmic events during this transitional period may have been triggered by a single underlying cause, which we are yet to find out.’

The ‘mighty wind’ that the Lord sent against the tower* would most likely have been a detonation of some kind. We will run into a similar scenario in the next chapter when we investigate the life of Lot and the destruction of Sodom and its neighbouring cities some five thousand years after the tower of Babel’s obliteration. A blast of this magnitude may have set off considerable seismic activity, leading to earthquakes and localised flooding throughout the Middle East and well beyond. 

Reu had a son called Serug, born 5867 BCE. Serug’s name in Hebrew means, ‘branch’ from the verb sarag to be ‘intertwined.’ Between Serug’s birth and his son Nahor [Nahor I], Shem died in 5717 BCE, age 6,120 years and Arphaxad died in 5617 BCE, age 5,100 years. 

Book of Jubilees 11:1-6

… Reu took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ora, the daughter of Ur, the son of Kesed, and she bare him a son, and he called his name Seroh… And the sons of Noah began to war on each other, to take captive and to slay each other, and to shed the blood of men on the earth, and to eat blood, and to build strong cities, and walls, and towers, and individuals (began) to exalt themselves above the nation, and to found the beginnings of kingdoms, and to go to war people against people, and nation against nation, and city against city, and all (began) to do evil, and to acquire arms, and to teach their sons war, and they began to capture cities, and to sell male and female slaves. And Ur, the son of Kesed, built the city of ‘Ara of the Chaldees, and called its name after his own name and the name of his father. 

And they made for themselves molten images, and they worshipped each the idol… and they began to make graven images and unclean simulacra, and malignant spirits assisted and seduced (them) into committing transgression and uncleanness. And the prince Mastema [Chief of Spirits]… sent forth other spirits, those which were put under his hand, to do all manner of wrong and sin… to corrupt and destroy, and to shed blood upon the earth. For this reason he called the name of Seroh, Serug, for every one turned to do all manner of sin and transgression. And he grew up, and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, near to the father of his wife’s mother, and he worshipped idols, and he took to himself a wife… and her name was Melka, the daughter of Kaber, the daughter of his father’s brother.

Kesed is a family name, as Nahor had a grandson called Chesed. We will return to the Chaldees or Chaldeans. Nahor I, Abraham’s grandfather was born in 4967 BCE and Peleg died in 4737 BCE. Nahor I died 2887 BCE, though his son Terah of Nimrod fame, was born 4077 BCE. Terah in Hebrew derives from the verb tarah, meaning: ‘wanderer’ or ‘turn’ and the noun ruah, means, ‘wind, breath’ or ‘spirit.’ 

Book of Jubilees 11:7-14

And she [Melka] bare him Nahor [I]… and he grew and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, and his father taught him the researches of the Chaldees to divine and augur, according to the signs of heaven. And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ijaska, the daughter of Nestag of the Chaldees. And she bare him Terah… And the prince Mastema [Samael] sent ravens and birds to devour the seed which was sown in the land, in order to destroy the land, and rob the children of men of their labours. And the years began to be barren… it was only with great effort that they could save a little of all the fruit of the earth in their days… Terah took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Edna, the daughter of ‘Abram, the daughter of his father’s sister. And…she bare him a son, and he called his name Abram, by the name of the father of his mother; for he had died before his daughter had conceived a son.

Abram is a family name along with Kesed and Nahor. There are two Nahors. Nahor I the grandfather of Abraham and Nahor II the brother of Abraham. It is Abraham’s brother we are studying and will refer to him simply, as Nahor. In Genesis 11:26, we learn of Terah’s three sons, Abram, later known as Abraham, Nahor and Haran. 

It is similar to Genesis 10:1, where Shem, Ham and Japheth were listed, but in fact Japheth is the eldest and Shem the youngest. Ham remained in-between his brothers. Abram is stated first as his descendants would fulfil the Genesis 3:15 prophecy. Though Haran is the eldest and Nahor remains in the middle as second born. We will discover that Haran died prematurely and it was territory named after him, that Abraham later dwelt. More importantly, in support for Haran being the eldest is that Nahor married a niece from Haran’s family. Haran had had children first and they were marriageable age, for Nahor. Similarly, Abraham also married family. What is not clear superficially, is whose exactly.

Haran was born in 2009 BCE and Abraham was born in 1977 BCE. Nahor was born perhaps circa 1993 BCE. Nahor in Hebrew means: ‘snort’ or ‘scorched’ from the verb nhr, ‘to snort vigorously’ and the root harar, ‘to be a central hub of heat.’ 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so a being hot and ultimately a being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom).

Verb (harar I) means to be hot, burned or charred. Noun (harer) denotes a parched place and noun (harhur) describes a violent heat or fever. The unused verb (harar II) means to be free… which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun (hor) means noble or nobleman. The unused verb (harar III) appears to refer to the enclosure of kilns and ovens, as the first ones were most likely built in natural hollows. The noun… (hor)… mean[s] hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies.

Verb (hara) means to burn or ignite (in the Bible solely in an emotional way: to get angry). Noun (haron) describes the burning of anger. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Verb (nahar) looks very much like a passive or reflexive version of (harar) or its participle. This verb isn’t used in the Bible but nouns (nahar) and (naharah) describe the vigorous snorting of a horse, and noun (nahir) means nostril (which in turn reminds of a cavern).

Whatever the true etymology and original meaning, to any Hebrew audience the name Nahor would mean both A Snort or A Snorting, and Charred or Scorched, or even Noble or Freeman. For a meaning of the name Nahor… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads… Breathing Hard.

Joshua 24:2

English Standard Version

And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Long ago, your fathers lived beyond the Euphrates [Ur of the Chaldees], Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods [Genesis 31:53].

Book of Jasher 9:7-8

7 And the king [Nimrod] and all his servants, and Terah with all his household were then the first of those that served gods of wood and stone. 8 And Terah had twelve gods of large size, made of wood and stone, after the twelve months of the year, and he served each one monthly, and every month Terah would bring his meat offering and drink offering to his gods; thus did Terah all the days.

Jubilees 12:1-15

And it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ 

And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son.’ And he said, ‘What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship,  And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. Why do ye worship things that have no spirit in them? For they are the work of (men’s) hands, And on your shoulders do ye bear them, And ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them, And a misleading of the heart to those who worship them: Worship them not.’

And his father said unto him, ‘I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them?And if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee.’ And these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.

Recall, Terah is recorded as serving Nimrod directly at his command, administering the Babylonian religious system installed my Nimrod and his mother-wife Semiramis, the evil Angel Lilith [refer Chapter XXI Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. The entanglement of that situation clung to Terah as if he were shrink-wrapped in plastic. This alignment to the mystery religion is beyond coincidental, as Terah’s descendants through Nahor, have continued their unrivalled involvement and allegiance, to the present day. Terah maintained an exalted position in Ur with huge strings attached and giving this up was a monumental request from Abraham. To defy the people who viewed Terah as synonymous with Nimrod’s legacy, was tantamount to death. 

Book of Jasher 7:41, 49-51

41 And he [Nimrod] placed Terah the son of Nahor the prince of his host, and he dignified him and elevated him above all his princes… 49 And Terah the son of Nahor, prince of Nimrod’s host, was in those daysvery great in the sight of the king and his subjects, and the king and princes loved him, and they elevated him very high. 50 And Terah took a wife and her name was Amthelo [Edna in the Book of Jubilees] the daughter of Cornebo; and the wife of Terah [later] conceived and bare him a son… 51 … and Terah called the name of his son that was born to him Abram, because the king had raised him in those days, and dignified him above all his princes that were with him. 

Certain sources include Shem, Abraham and Esau as the eventual slayers of Nimrod. If Nimrod was born circa 8700 BCE, it is dubious whether he would still be alive some 7,000 years later when Abram was born in 1977 BCE. Shem died in 5717 BCE and is the only candidate of the the three that makes sense. Nimrod’s days after the failed tower were numbered and his demise in this era would appear logical. We will look at two different versions of the events that transpired surrounding the death of Abram’s eldest brother Haran and his family’s rather hasty departure from Ur in Mesopotamia. The two accounts may be inaccurate or contain elements of what happened. Either way, Abram’s family fled; most likely driven by their dissatisfaction with a religious-political system they no longer could support.  

Firstly, the Book of Jasher in chapter 8:1-36, enumerates an apparent history between Nimrod and Abraham, that began at his birth. I would propose that it was actually the second king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, Shulgi. Shulgi is to Ur as Hammurabi was to Babylon and Chedorlaomer was to Elam [refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer]. King Shulgi preceded them both by a few years and was a prominent ruler of his time and the most famous monarch to have reigned from Ur – after his father the renowned Ur-Nammu – and reigned forty-six years from 1970 to 1924 BCE. 

It was in 1927 BCE that Abram’s family departed Ur for Haran – when Abram was fifty years old. Therefore, I have substituted the name of Nimrod with Shulgi to give the account an element of veracity that it lacks with Nimrod as a king of Ur. Besides, Nimrod had been the king of ancient Babylon, yet the king of Babylon at the time of Abram’s birth in 1977 BCE was the second king of the Amorite, Dynasty I of Babylon Sumu-la-El who began his thirty-five year reign a year earlier in 1978 BCE.

1 And it was in the night that Abram was born, that all the servants of Terah, and all the wise men of [Shulgi], and his conjurors came and ate and drank in the house of Terah, and they rejoiced with him on that night. 2 And when all the wise men and conjurors went out from the house of Terah, they lifted up their eyes toward heaven that night to look at the stars, and they saw, and behold one very large star came from the east and ran in the heavens, and he swallowed up the four stars from the four sides of the heavens. 4 And they said to each other, This only betokens the child that has been born to Terah this night, who will grow up and be fruitful, and multiply, and possess all the earth, he and his children for ever, and he and his seed will slay great kings, and inherit their lands. 

6 And they spoke and said to each other, Behold the sight that we saw last night is hidden from the king, it has not been made known to him. 7 And should this thing get known to the king in the latter days, he will say to us, Why have you concealed this matter from me, and then we shall all suffer death; therefore, now let us go and tell the king the sight which we saw, and the interpretation thereof, and we shall then remain clear. 

8 And they did so… and we saw a great star coming from the east, and the same star ran with great speed, and swallowed up four great stars, from the four sides of the heavens. 11 … this thing applies to the child that is born to Terah, who will grow up and multiply greatly, and become powerful, and kill all the kings of the earth, and inherit all their lands, he and his seed forever. 14 And the king heard their words and they seemed good in his sight, and he sent and called for Terah… 15 And the king said to Terah… 16 And now therefore give me the child, that we may slay him before his evil springs up against us, and I will give you for his value, your house full of silver and gold. 28 And Terah saw that the anger of the king was kindled against him, and he answered the king, saying, All that I have is in the king’s power; whatever the king desires to do to his servant, that let him do, yea, even my son, he is in the king’s power, without value in exchange, he and his two brothers that are older than he [Haran and Nahor]. 29 And the king said to Terah, No, but I will purchase your younger son for a price… 

Terah said, Let my king give me three days’ time [3 is the number of decision and finality] till I consider this matter within myself, and consult with my family concerning the words of my king; and he pressed the king greatly to agree to this. 31 And the king hearkened to Terah, and he did so and he gave him three days’ time, and Terah went out from the king’s presence, and he came home to his family and spoke to them all the words of the king; and the people were greatly afraid. 32 And it was in the third day that the king sent to Terah, saying, Send me your son for a price as I spoke to you; and shouldst you not do this, I will send and slay all you hast in your house, so that you shall not even have a dog remaining. 33 And Terah hastened, (as the thing was urgent from the king), and he took a child from one of his servants, which his handmaid had born to him that day, and Terah brought the child to the king and received value for him. 

34 And Yahweh was with Terah in this matter, that [Shulgi] might not cause Abram’s death, and the king took the child from Terah and with all his might dashed his head to the ground, for he thought it had been Abram; and this was concealed from him from that day, and it was forgotten by the king, as it was the will of Providence not to suffer Abram’s death. 35 And Terah took Abram his son secretly, together with his mother and nurse, and he concealed them in a cave, and he brought them their provisions monthly. 36 And Yahweh was with Abram in the cave and he grew up, and Abram was in the cave ten years, and the king and his princes, soothsayers and sages, thought that the king had killed Abram. 

Book of Jubilees 12:1-15:

And in the [fiftieth] year [1927 BCE] of the life of Abram… Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it. And they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire. And Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died [82 years of age] in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father [who died in 1842 BCE], and they buried [Haran] in Ur of the Chaldees [lower Mesopotamia]. 

Stalled with the palpable reticence of Terah, Abraham took matters into his own hands. Abraham would later when rescuing Lot, ambush attack King Chedorlaomer the Elamite and his coalition army by cover of night. The Ur of Chaldea was located south of Babylon, in the area known as Sumer – the southern portion of the Land of Shinar. The descendants of Joktan had primarily dwelt in Sumer and the descendants of Peleg, north in Akkadia where the city of Babylon was located.

And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of [northern] Lebanon and into the land of Canaan, and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran [25 years, 1927 – 1902 BCE].

At this point, after the devastating loss of his eldest son Haran, Terah – his name meaning, wanderer – decides to leave Ur and his life behind. They leave to begin a new life and to soften the blow of Haran’s loss as well as possibly concern about retribution from Shulgi. Terah may have acted differently if he had known Haran had died at the hands of Abraham. Saying that, the Book of Jasher claims a different version of events surrounding Haran’s death.

Book of Jasher 11:33-61, 12:1-70

33 And when Abram saw all these things his anger was kindled against his father, and he hastened and took a hatchet in his hand, and came unto the chamber of the gods, and he broke all his father’s gods. 34 And when he had done breaking the images, he placed the hatchet in the hand of the great god which was there before them, and he went out; and Terah his father came home, for he had heard at the door the sound of the striking of the hatchet; so Terah came into the house to know what this was about. 35 And Terah, having heard the noise of the hatchet in the room of images, ran to the room to the images, and he met Abram going out. 36 And Terah entered the room and found all the idols fallen down and broken… 37 And when Terah saw this his anger was greatly kindled… 38 And he found Abram his son still sitting in the house; and he said to him, What is this work you hast done to my gods? 

… 42 Is there in these gods spirit, soul or power to do all you hast told me? Are they not wood and stone, and have I not myself made them, and canst you speak such lies, saying that the large god that was with them smote them? It is you that didst place the hatchet in his hands, and then say he smote them all. 

43 And Abram answered his father and said to him, And how canst you then serve these idols in whom there is no power to do any thing? Can those idols in which you trust deliver you? can they hear your prayers when you call upon them? Can they deliver you from the hands of your enemies, or will they fight your battles for you against your enemies, that you shouldst serve wood and stone which can neither speak nor hear? 46 Did not our fathers in days of old sin in this matter, and Yahweh the Almighty of the universe brought the waters of the flood upon them and destroyed the whole earth?

52 … and they went and brought Abram before the king. And [Shulgi] and all his princes and servants were that day sitting before him, and Terah sat also before them. 53 And the king said to Abram, What is this that you hast done to your father and to his gods? And Abram answered the king in the words that he spoke to his father… The large god that was with them in the house did to them what you hast heard. 

Abram exhibits a black sense of humour and a level of audaciousness before the king.

54 And the king said to Abram, Had they power to speak and eat and do as you hast said? And Abram answered the king, saying, And if there be no power in them why dost you serve them and cause the sons of men to err through your follies? 56 O foolish, simple, and ignorant king, woe unto you forever. 60 And if your wicked heart will not hearken to my words to cause you to forsake your evil ways, and to serve the eternal Yahweh, then wilt you die in shame in the latter days, you, your people and all who are connected with you, hearing your words or walking in your evil ways.

1 And when the king heard the words of Abram he ordered him to be put into prison; and Abram was ten days in prison. 3 And the king said to the princes and sages, Have you heard what Abram, the son of Terah, has done to his father? 5 And they all answered the king saying, The man who reviles the king should be hanged upon a tree [a reference to crucifixion]; but having done all the things that he said, and having despised our gods, he must therefore be burned to death, for this is the law in this matter. 6 … And the king did so, and he commanded his servants that they should prepare a fire for three days and three nights in the king’s furnace… and the king ordered them to take Abram from prison and bring him out to be burned [like Shadrach, Meshach & Abednego: Daniel 3:12-30]. 

7 And all the king’s servants, princes, lords, governors, and