finalis verbum

The most damaging aspect of the biblical identity doctrine has been the element of whatever someone new to the subject first hears, reads or learns for any given identity, it is this knowledge that becomes firmly implanted and invariably impossible to shift. As Proverbs 18:17 ESV rightly observes, the first case heard always has the advantage, whether right or wrong by virtue of being first. 

“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him”

Any secondary information has a herculean task in gaining consideration, let alone replacing the previously held incorrect premise. 

Yet, the accurate definition and explanation of the nations identities in the Bible in our modern age is crucial in understanding future prophecy and by extension past history. The credibility of the Bible has been at stake and those who have taught erroneous identities have been unwittingly holding the Eternal’s word to ransom. Now is the time for the truth to go out to those who truly seek wisdom and understanding – for the ending of the latter days are nearly upon us. J H Allen understood the foundational basis of this knowledge in proving the veracity of the Bible, as written under inspiration by holy men and not the ramblings of eccentric or fanatical prophets. 

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

We have been moved by the Holy Spirit to thus write concerning the earthly history of Gods chosen race, because so very little of it is known by the masses of our people, and yet it is the foundation upon which the entire structure of Christianity must rest.

A knowledge of these earthly things not only renders the claims of Christianity impregnable, but they are also the basis upon which we must rest our faith for better things. For Jesus has said, “If I have told you of earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” The truth… as set forth in this book – that is, the realization of the promises made to ISRAEL… has… [brought] more skeptics to the light of his truth, than in all our previous ministry… [and]… We are… sure… that the faith of those who have made shipwreck could not have failed, if they had known these things.’

Dictionary.com: 

‘Genetic evidence has undermined the idea of racial divisions of the human species and rendered race obsolete as a biological system of classification. Race therefore should no longer be considered as an objective category… There are times when it is still accurate to talk about race in society. Though race has lost its biological basis, the sociological consequences of historical racial categories persist. While the scientific foundation for race is now disputed, racial factors in sociological and historical contexts continue to be relevant.

First recorded in 1490-1500; from Middle French race “group of people of common descent,” from Italian razza “kind, species”…’

We can say, the English people or the country of England rather than calling them what they are. The scientific community has imposed a politically correct use, or rather less use of the word race. It would make sense if the word was banned outright, yet it is still applicable for social or historical definitions, just not for the actual aspect it is defining – our biological inheritance. Whether we use alternative words such as ethnicity or ancestry, it does not make the physical, biological differences between people disappear or obsolete. 

Following are synonyms: tribe, clan, family, stock, line, breed, blood, colour, culture, nation, people, offspring, progeny, seed, stock, strain, ethnicity. Some of these words could have a more inflammatory impact than the word race in this writer’s opinion. There is an agenda to attack the White race. The expression, Black lives matter, could be better expressed as ‘all lives matter.’ There is pressure to make white people uncomfortable and to do away with a concept of white people. It is blatant passive aggressive discrimination. Will brown, red and yellow people also come under fire? 

The term race is unhelpful in relation to all humanity. The term mankind is preferable or if you will, humankind; not the human race. We are a kind, as there are animal kinds. The races are like species within the kind. It is very hard to do away with genetic lines of people that make them common to each other and distinct from other racial lines. They are simply, different races. 

With this in mind, Greg Doudna reflects the frustration and division this issue causes, in the questions he poses. The discord, confusion and strength of emotion it arouses exist in part, because people do not appreciate the differences in people. This is heightened due to the fact people do not know who they are. Yet, it is observed online, mammoth interest in tracing family ancestry and forming a sense of self-identity; particularly with the breakthrough with Haplogroups and autosomal DNA. People want to understand their own race or racial heritage. Ironically, Haplogroups have also contributed to people becoming even more scathing, condemning and incorrect in their summations. 

Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna, 1989, 2006, pages 143-144 – Italics his:

‘…consider three questions. Think:

(1) Is there any biblical basis to such a notion of classification as a “white race” in history? 

Are Italians part of the “white race”? Why? Are Russians? What about Assyrian Christian Iraqis who descend from the Assyrians of old?’ Not correct – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XX Will the real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

‘What about Jordanians? Are Arab tribes who claim descent from Ishmael?’ Refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria: Ishmael & Hagar.

‘Are Spaniards part of the white race? Are Portuguese? Are Greeks? Are Poles? How about Muslim Shi’ite Azerbaijanis from the Caucasus? How about Armenians and Georgians and Chechens from the Caucasus area, otherwise known as Caucasians, or in Russia known negatively as blacks (because their skin is typically darker and more “ethnic” looking than that of Russians)? Are these Caucasians, who are Russia’s blacks, members of the “white race”? (Remember, historically Armenians and Georgians from the Caucasus started out defining the so-called Caucasian/white race). Are Hungarians part of “the white race”? Rumanians? Czechs? Gypsies (Roma)? Albanians? Serbs?

How about the Persians of Iran, Iran’s largest ethnic group, who descend from the ancient Aryan Persians?’ Not correct – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

A resounding Yes to nearly all. Yes, they are white. They do descend from Shem. In the main, the author has selected the descendants from Shem’s sons Lud, Elam in part, Asshur and Aram in part, as well as a handful from Arphaxad in Eastern Europe. The exception above is the true Arab who descends from Mizra and his father Ham. It was white peoples living in the Caucasus Mountain area who were classified as Caucasian; not the Armenians or Georgians specifically, who came to dwell in the region later. 

The Iranian Persians are descended from Lud and not the original Persians of Elam, as we have studied in Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Doudna: ‘(2) What is the actual basis for such a notion of a “white race” in history?’

Again, a resounding yes. Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups with autosomal DNA support the Bible record of a major three way split as evidenced by Noah’s three (actually four) sons and the sixteen lines (really twenty-one) of variation represented by Noah’s grandsons – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. They provide the scientific data, for all those with a stubborn, ‘prove it to me with scientific facts only, and not all this Bible nonsense’ view – article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.

The author’s use of the word notion three times is insightful as notion means: ‘a general understanding; vague or imperfect conception or idea of something, an opinion, view, or belief, a fanciful or foolish idea; whim.’ The reality of the peoples of the earth being all one blood and from one source, yet each possessing a variety of physical, mental and emotional characteristics, is so much more than just a notion.

1 Corinthians 3:18-20

New Century Version

‘Do not fool yourselves. If you think you are wise in this world, you should become a fool so that you can become truly wise, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. It is written in the Scriptures, “He catches those who are wise in their own clever traps.” It is also written in the Scriptures, “The Lord knows what wise people think. He knows their thoughts are just a puff of wind.”

Doudna: ‘Same questions as above, repeated. How did some of these groups get to be members of “the white race” while others did not? Who decided, and why? And finally,

(3) Has this notion done more good or harm?

I leave these questions open, to encourage reflection.’

The constant reader appreciates the supreme Creator in His wisdom separated the races for His purpose; while the powers that be, have separated peoples according to their self-serving agenda and yes, created more harm than good – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

The Creator planned the different races. The Creator must be racist? The Creator chose to work more closely with one family. The Creator must be playing favourites? If both are true… deal with it. Or, if both are not true, then why do people think they are wiser than the Creator? 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 224-225, emphasis his, bold mine:

‘… Benjamin Disraeli… [British] prime minister… was a Christianised Jew whose writings on race are so profound that they are today largely ignored by politically correct present-day historians. In his book Tancred… 1868, Disraeli wrote:

All is race – there is no other truth“… and in his book Endymion… he wrote: “No man will treat with indifference the principle of race. It is the key to history and why history is so often confused is that it has been written by men who were ignorant of this principle and all the knowledge it involves… Language and religion do not make a race there is only one thing which makes a race, and that is blood“…’

In academic and scientific fields of research whether private or public, the key for support is financial funding, sponsorship and donations. Hence in the main, there is pressure to only research; publish findings; and to teach; that which follows a curriculum or agenda as per the ones holding the purse strings. Independent research is thus few or far between or most often, non-existent. 

Ellis Silver, pages 258-259 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Scientists [Anthropologists, ethnologists, geneticists, theologians, ministers] joining an organization have to follow their managers’ orders. Those managers will have been through the same school of indoctrination, and probably additional levels of it too. So they know what’s at stake [if] they try to investigate something that’s even slightly outside the mainstream.

The penalties include:

  • loss of credibility
  • loss of funding
  • loss of tenure
  • ridicule from their peers
  • refusal by their peers to review their work
  • refusal by mainstream publications to review or publish their work

As a result, mainstream scientists refuse to have anything to do with these things, even if you provide them with irrefutable evidence. They don’t want to be associated with it. They see it as potentially career-damaging, and… they label it “pseudoscience” or “yet another stupid hoax” to emphasize their dismissal of it, usually without even looking at it. Another problem with scientific teaching [dogmatic belief] is that it follows a single, rigid pathway [creed]. Anything that isnt on that pathway can’t possibly be true.”

Hence the reason and motivation, this work and its findings has been compiled and collated together and why many could and would not, do likewise. Though in doing so, this writer has unwittingly and unintentionally, become both a contrarian and an iconoclast. 

Contrarian: a person who takes an opposing view, especially one who rejects the majority opinion.

Iconoclast: a person who attacks cherished beliefs, traditional institutions… as being based on error or superstition. A breaker or destroyer of images, especially those set up for religious veneration.

Lloyd Pye, pages 64-65 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘[There is] resistance to change within any status quo of the mainstream scientific [and scholarly] community. Truth has nothing to do with it; proof has even less to do with it than truth; and forget logic logic is wasted on people with a sharp axe to grind

What counts in such disputes is usually about 50 years, two generations, which have to retire before any controversial new reality will be fully accepted. First is the status quo crowd at the time of discovery [or proposal]. They reject it because to them it means three very bad things:

  1. being wrong on a major issue;
  2. having to rewrite a large portion of their purview; and
  3. a ripple effect of doubt cast on everything else they have achieved or profess to know.

The next generation spawns two groups: those who cling to the old status quo, and those who accept the new reality. As a whole they never fully embrace it, but they produce enough converts to grant it limited acceptance, allowing it to be openly supported without committing career suicide. The converts then teach their views to the next generation, and when they take over they see to it that what had been a “heresy” is accepted wisdom. It always requires time, but time and the truth invariably win out. 

For as harsh as criticism is toward dissent from outside the scientific [or the historic research] establishment, dissent from within [identity adherents] is often worse.’

Why it may take decades for this work – The Noachian Legacy – to be even remotely valued or viewed as credible. And, how long for any would be detractors or academic intelligentsia in desisting from impugning or assailing the material contained herein. It is of little consequence; they will not inherit the last word, but ultimately the truth and those precious souls who embrace it will. If this work impacts only a handful of people, or even just finds one… you; it will have been worth every hour of the thousands invested over the past thirty years. 

1 Kings 19:18 

Complete Jewish Bible

“… Still, I will spare seven thousand in Isra’el, every knee that hasn’t bent down before Ba’al…”

Luke 12:32 

Common English Bible

“[and] little flock… your Father delights in giving you the kingdom.”

Treasured reader, you have in your hands a seminal work. Not because of its authorship or style of writing; rather for its profound revelation, submitted humbly and solemnly. When we read to the end of the book that is called the Holy Bible; right through to the last chapter and on the very final page, it is the aspirants of truth and the followers of Him who declares it, that win…

Revelation 22:14-15

New Century Version

“Blessed are those who wash their robes so that they will receive the right to eat the fruit from the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside the city are the evil people, those who… love lies and tell lies.”

Dedicated with heartfelt encouragement and admiration to those faithful and true earthly sojourners some three centuries hence; who will complete the good work of the Way to the One who gives life eternal and whom will value what is yet concealed herein, for today’s generation will not; for they look, but do not see; read, but do not comprehend; listen, but do not hear.

Isaiah 6:9-10

English Standard Version

“… Go, and say to this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”

“… To the righteous and the wise shall be given books of joy, of integrity, and of great wisdom. To them shall books be given, in which they shall believe… and all the righteous shall be rewarded, who from these shall acquire the knowledge of every upright path.”

Book of Enoch 103:10-11

“It is dangerous to seek the truth, if one does not desire to truly change.”

Michael Logan

“Thine hope that many, could well receive;

alas ’twas vanity, thy seeker’s mind did conceive.

Ye scattered, thy hand doth write,

an urgent plea to thine precious few;

strike a chord, thee with sight, a gift immeasurable and true.”

Michael Logan

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

Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Chapter XXXIV

The closing chapter, for the final identity and the concluding piece of the puzzle – the darkly enigmatic, tribe of Dan. Of all identity research on the tribes of Israel, none has drawn more interest, discussion and articles than Dan the fifth son of Jacob. With Ephraim and Manasseh, it has proven to be a very popular tribe for investigation – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. In part, because its identity has been incorrectly perceived as easy. The perplexing irony is that its appeal lays in Dan’s proclivity to leave his name wherever he travelled as a marker that neatly leaves a path for the identity buff to follow. What is then baffling is the fact that the serpentine trail of the people of Dan which can be traced to Ireland and Britain suddenly going cold. 

We follow the snakelike twists and turns of its tail, to then find that its head is hidden and for the serpent symbolism of Dan to be concealed and laying undisclosed. Aside from Judah, Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin, Dan receives a fair amount of air time in the Bible. His role in end time events increasing as the fulfilment of the latter days encroach. So who is Dan, where is Dan and why is Dan hidden? 

The Tribe of Dan is like some of the other identities of Israel in that it is rather unanimous amongst identity adherents regarding his modern identification. The major blind is the nation of Denmark and the popular teaching that they constitute one half of Dan, as in Dan’s mark. We have discussed the nation of Denmark in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia, as well as the Danes – as in the true Vikings – in Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. The modern Danes are in fact the tribe of Medan, descended from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah. 

The other half of Dan, though warmer is still cold when ascribing them to the modern nation of Ireland. As discussed in Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, the Irish are in fact the tribe of Gad. Some enterprising researchers have attributed Dan to Northern Ireland and this to their credit is much warmer again, though still not wholly correct, for Northern Ireland is predominantly the tribe of Reuben.

The tribe of Dan, or Tuathe de Danann entered Ireland and fully explored Albion Britain from top to bottom, leaving their name as Dun in Scotland, Don in England and Din in Wales. Scotland represents the tribe of Benjamin; Wales is Simeon; and England descends from the tribe of Judah (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes); but who is Dan?

It is recommended that Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe be read prior to this chapter. It would also be useful to read Chapters thirty through to thirty-three. 

We initially meet Dan in Genesis chapter thirty, though the word Dan first appears (anachronistically) in Genesis chapter fourteen as a name of a city – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. His birth occurs following a domestic family upheaval in Jacob’s household; which had been simmering for a good length of time, while Leah was providing son after son and her younger sister Rachel remained barren. There was anger and frustration on both sides, between Jacob and Rachel. Jacob desired a son from his favourite wife and Rachel wanted to remain important in his eyes by giving him a son. Rachel also felt under pressure to her fertile sister. It must have been quite an unhappy house until Bilhah conceived with Dan and then finally Rachel did with Joseph, many years later. Dan was born in 1746 BCE, some twenty years before Jospeh in 1726 BCE. 

Genesis 30:1-8

English Standard Version

1 ‘When Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, she envied her sister. She said to Jacob, “Give me children, or I shall die!” 2 Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel, and he said, “Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?” [Hosea 9:11-14]

3 Then she said, “Here is my servant Bilhah; go in to her, so that she may give birth on my behalf, that even I may have children through her.” 4 So she gave him her servant Bilhah as a wife [that is, for the purpose of procreation and not literally], and Jacob went in to her. 5 And Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son.

6 Then Rachel said, “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called his name Dan [Judged].

7 Rachel’s servant Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a second son. 8 Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.” So she called his name Naphtali.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Dan, meaning Judge from the verb (din), to judge, govern, contend or plead

Dan is the name of a tribe of Israel, which descended from Dan, the son of Jacob and Bilhah, the maid of Rachel (Genesis 30:6). Dan’s only full brother is Naphtali. But prior to the existence of Dan the tribe, there was a town (or region) named Dan, mentioned in the War of Four against Five Kings (Genesis 14:14). In Judges 18:7 we learn about a town called Laish, near Beth-rehob, which is razed to the ground by a gang of (Danites). They rebuild the town and call it Dan, after their tribal founder. The Oxford Companion to the Bible, however, claims that this city Dan is the same as the one mentioned in Genesis 14:14, and called so in retrospect. 

The verb (din) means to judge or govern. It’s an old verb that mostly describes the authority of a naturally superior (because that person is wiser, stronger, older) in contrast to the governing done by a formal government (by politically favored and appointed officials). The noun (dayyan) describes one such a leader, and noun (din) describes anything pertaining to primitive governing: a judgment, plea, complaint, contention. 

Noun (madon) literally describes a “place or judging” and is synonymous with the contending that goes on in such a place. Noun (medina) described the jurisdiction of one judge, and became the word for province. For a meaning of the name Dan, BDB Theological Dictionary and the NOBSE Study Bible Name List agree on Judge. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Judge, Judging.’

As we have studied Genesis chapter fourteen in length in Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings and in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia, we will briefly mention the association between the city of Dan and the other cities in the plain of the Elioud giants. The city may well have had a retrospective naming to it. Either way, the coincidence remains that as the land of Canaan was infested with Nephilim offspring in Abraham’s day; it was the same area some of Dan’s descendants chose to migrate to in the North – from their original southerly location – that was an historic hotbed of Nephilim activity after the flood.

It was in this area of Bashan that Mount Hermon was located where the Watchers had originally descended in the antediluvian epoch – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. The other tie in is the fact that the tribe of Dan had a connection with the Amalekites and Horites of whom Esau married into their families. The very same Amalekites and Horites who were descendants of Nephilim and were alive in Abraham’s time as stated in Genesis chapter fourteen – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. 

Genesis 14:14

English Standard Version

‘When Abram heard that his kinsman [Lot] had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, 318 of them, and went in pursuit [northwards] as far as Dan.’

We next meet Dan in Genesis chapter thirty-seven, which we discussed in the preceding section, Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Joseph gave a ‘bad report’ about his bothers Dan, Naphtali, Asher and Gad, the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah. The word bad can be read as evil. As we will progress, we learn that Dan was the ‘black sheep’ of the family and as a ‘bad boy’ it is very possible he was leading his three brothers astray as the eldest of the four. This incident reveals a dark streak in Dan and the inference is that he is the ring leader of a plan that will have far ranging implications for the entirety of his family right until the return of the Son of Man.

 Dan

It appears that Dan and his three brothers, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher, did not have a good relationship with Joseph; with this incident prefacing the subsequent plot against Joseph’s life which changed the course of history. Reuben and Judah, the most prominent individuals in the story of the brothers’ betrayal of Joseph are always cast as the villains in the piece, yet a close inspection of Genesis chapter thirty-seven reveals that these two brothers endeavoured to spare the life of Joseph. The real villains are the group of four headed by Dan, who were concocting their plan to murder Joseph. 

Hence Joseph’s concern and his report to Jacob. This has repercussions for Joseph and Dan’s relationship later. 

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis mine:

‘… such a betrayal of Joseph by Dan cannot help but be seen as an ancient type of another far greater betrayal, that instigated by Judas Iscariot toward the Messiah Himself. Indeed, the parallels are fascinating and compelling, for as there were twelve apostles, so there were twelve tribes of Israel, one of which would betray… Jesus. And it can be stated without hesitation that of all the sons of Jacob, none even come remotely close to typifying the coming Messiah [excepting, Isaac and Moses], other than Joseph who, in fact, is arguably the most complete type of Christ in all the Scriptures! In fact, it is impossible not to associate the betrayal of Joseph with the later infamous betrayal of the Savior.’

There are three very small verses about Dan – as recorded in Jacob’s oracle – which are monumental in their ramifications. We will address them scripturally one at a time; including the research of other commentators and how it may all meld together. For to be honest, there is considerable conjecture involved with Dan and the full answer may remain allusive until all things are one day, revealed and resolved. 

Many commentators and Bible translations refer to Genesis forty-nine as the blessings of Jacob, yet in verse one, Jacob says: “… which shall befall you in the last days.” Rather than a blessing it is invariably an unpleasant synopsis of what is to happen to the various tribes: one great, Joseph; some good, Judah, Asher, Naphtali; some okay, Simeon, Levi, Zebulun, Gad, Benjamin; others not so good, Reuben, Issachar; and then… Dan’s. Some tribes have their challenges highlighted or are given dire predictions. It is only Dan who is singled out as embracing an inner heart of conflict evolving towards evil.

Genesis 49:16-18

English Standard Version

16 “Dan [H1835 – Dan: a judge] shall judge [H1777 – diyn] his people [H5971 – am] as one [H259 – ‘echad: each, every, any, alike] of the tribes [H7626 – shebet] of Israel. 

Other translations for verse sixteen include:

CEV: Dan, you are the tribe that will bring justice to Israel.

GNT: “Dan will be a ruler for his people. They will be like the other tribes of Israel.”

MSG: Dan will handle matters of justice for his people; he will hold his own just fine among the tribes of Israel.

NABRE: “Dan shall achieve justice for his people as one of the tribes of Israel.”

WYC: ‘Dan shall deem his people, as also another lineage in Israel.’

We are alerted in the first few words, that Dan is like all the other tribes, yet he isn’t like them at all. It is certainly a riddle and a word play is used, as it says Dan shall judge, which could be written as Dan shall Dan, or Judge shall judge. The second Hebrew word for Dan is subtly different from the name Dan. It can be translated as ‘plead the cause, contend, execute, strife.’ It can mean ‘to act as judge, minister, requite, vindicate, strive, to be at strife, quarrel.’ By extension it can also mean to ‘sail direct’ or ‘a straight course.’ This is ironic as the tribe of Dan were formidable sailors but didn’t exactly travel in straight lines whether by sea or land. 

It is the same word used in Genesis 6:3 KJV, where the Creator says: ‘My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.’ This is an interesting coincidence as this was the final one hundred and twenty years prior to the flood, designed to wipe out the Nephilim related peoples; the period that Noah had to preach a warning and the age which humankind was ultimately going to live as a maximum after Abraham’s generation – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Here, Dan is linked to the Nephilim, a re-occurring theme which we will discover is confirmed throughout the Bible and history.

The Hebrew word used for people can be translated as nations, 17 times; folk twice; and men once. It refers to ‘members of one’s people, compatriots, country-men, kinsman’ and ‘kindred.’ One would assume it means fellow Danites, though other verses hint at a broader application which may mean all the sons of Jacob. The word of real interest is for tribe, shebet. This word can be translated as rod, 34 time, sceptre 10; and staff twice. It means ‘branch, offshoot, club, spear, dart, truncheon’ and ‘clan.’ A ‘mark of authority’ and rulership. 

All the tribes rule themselves (except Levi), though by varying degree. The United States (Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh), Ireland (Gad) and South Africa have become Republics and detached from the Monarchy of England and Judah. The descendants of Zebulun and Issachar in South Africa are small in number and have been subservient to the earlier preeminence of the Afrikaner and now the majority Black rule; yet they are still visible and possessing tangible territory. Canada (half tribe of East Manasseh), Australia (Asher) and New Zealand (Naphtali) are independent nations, while still pledging allegiance to formerly Queen Elizabeth II and now King Charles III. The Kingdom of Scotland (Benjamin) and the countries of Wales and Northern Ireland remain attached to the House of Judah and form a United Kingdom, a Kingdom of Judah with England (and Wales). Reuben of Northern Ireland and Simeon of Wales though small in number, again have a tangible and visible presence. 

This is where the difference lays with Dan. If he is judging or governing like the other tribes with a staff of rulership, what is he ruling, who is he ruling? Verse sixteen leaves more questions than it answers. What may be extracted from the verse is that Dan may not be ostensibly identifiable like his brothers, though he none-the-less exerts influence of some kind. Which means he judges whether from a legal, or political criterion; and a business, or financial standpoint – much like the tribe of Levi.

17 ‘Dan shall be a serpent [H5175 – nachash: a snake, serpent] in the way [H1870 – derek], a viper [H8207 – shphiyphon: (horned) adder] by the path [H734 – ‘orach], that bites [H5391 = nashak] the horses [H5483 – cuwc] heels [H6119 – aqeb] so that his rider [H7392 – rakab] falls [H5307 – naphal] backward.’

Other translations for verse seventeen include:

ERV: Dan will be like a snake at the side of the road. He will be like a dangerous snake lying near the path. That snake bites a horse’s foot, and the rider falls to the ground.

MSG: Dan is only a small snake in the grass, a lethal serpent in ambush by the road When he strikes a horse in the heel, and brings its huge rider crashing down.

WYC: ‘Dan be made a serpent in the way, and (a) cerastes, that is, an horned adder, in the path, and bite he the feet of an horse, that the rider of him fall backward.’

The Hebrew word for serpent signifies a ‘fleeing serpent’, that is, one that is moving and the second word describing this serpent is equally as revealing. We learn that Dan may be small, but packs a big punch, typical of a snake which can terrify and bring down a much larger creature as in a horse with a human rider. Though Dan was given a small inheritance, they would become a leading tribe – shrewd, clever, predatory. The snake is associated with wisdom as we have discussed – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Asherah. Wisdom can mean evil, cunning and immersed in the dark arts of the occult; or, it can relate to godly wisdom in handing situations diplomatically and effectively. Such as the instruction given by the Son of Man to the disciples when they would later as apostles, travel and preach. 

Matthew 10:16

English Standard Version

“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.”

Equating the serpent with Dan associates him with both Samael, the Serpent of the Garden of Eden who lured Adam and Eve into sin; as well as the Adversary, who is Satan described as the Ancient Serpent in the Book of Revelation. Each are entities of wickedness and evil – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Asherah. From the opening scriptures (of Genesis) in the Garden of Eden, the second Serpent with the first Serpent – the Dragon in the concluding chapters (in Revelation) regarding this age – loom large over the vast plot that is the Bible. This prophecy regarding Dan is shocking, for it pertains to his attitude and actions toward his own family. 

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Is Jacob stating or implying here that Dan will be as the Adversary in the affairs of Israel in the end-time? Was Dan’s father given a revelation of future betrayal within his own clan? If so, this is disturbing news for latter-day Israel, and could well provide enquiring minds today with an invaluable key as to what part the tribe of Dan is destined to play in world affairs. 

The Hebrew word for adder is shphiyphon, and is derived from the root term shuwph, which means to gape, to snap at, to overwhelm, and is rendered to break, bruise, and cover. Thus it is quite apparent that Jacob’s perception of his son in this instance is far from positive. Thus Dan is prophesied to be an impediment, an opponent, and negative force in the latter days.’

Some translations use the word adder to identify the serpent in this context, which is not as accurate as viper. For instance, the United Kingdom has a small adder, though it is too small – not nearly aggressive enough and its venom is non-lethal – to be a satisfactory explanation, of say the horse representing England, or the United Kingdom. 

Superficially, the horned adder could be a reference to the venomous snake from southwestern Africa. The WYC translation makes reference to the cerastes species. In the United States there is the sidewinder (rattlesnake), Crotalus cerastes, also known as the horned rattlesnake. It is a venomous pit viper species belonging to the rattlesnake genus Crotalus and is found in the desert regions of the southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico; with three subspecies currently recognised.

Crotalus cerastes in Mesquite Springs, California

What is the Don’t Tread on Me Flag, 2021 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘You have probably seen this flag before: A bright yellow banner with the image of a hissing coiled rattlesnake standing over a patch of grass and the words “DON’T TREAD ON ME,” sometimes without an apostrophe. Variants of this flag’s iconic snake design and motto are a common sight among American gun owners. What does this flag represent, and why is it so popular?’

‘Although often referred to as the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag, the correct name is the Gadsden flag, named after its designer, Christopher Gadsden, an American Revolution-era politician. The Gadsden flag’s history begins in 1775, when Christopher Gadsden, a Continental Colonel from South Carolina, designed the flag and presented it to the Colonial Marines, the American Colonies’ amphibious infantry force. The Colonial Marines adopted Gadsden’s flag alongside another design (the Moultrie Flag, a blue flag with a white crescent overlaid with the word “LIBERTY”). Both flags served as symbols of the Continental Marines until 1798, at which point the unit transitioned into the modern-day United States Marine Corps.’ 

Christopher Gadsden – notice Gad and Dan are in his name – was known as ‘the Sam Adams of the South.’ A soldier and a statesman, Gadsden was a founding member of South Carolina’s Sons of Liberty chapter. He served as a delegate to both the First and Second Continental Congresses, as well as commander of the 1st South Carolina Regiment of the Continental Army. Gadsden was elected to the position of governor for South Carolina, but declined the position due to his health. He died in 1805 and was buried in Charlestown. The Gadsden Purchase in Arizona was named for his grandson, who was a diplomat.

‘After the Revolutionary War ended and the United States declared independence, the Gadsden flag fell into disuse, only occasionally flown in Charleston, South Carolina, as a historical symbol, until the flag’s modern resurgence in the 1970s. The Gadsden flag originally featured a plain yellow field, a coiled timber rattlesnake facing to the left, and the words “DONT TREAD ON ME.” Although modern incarnations later included the apostrophe, the original flag featured none.

The timber rattlesnake (scientific name: Crotalus horridus) is a highly venomous species of pit viper native to the eastern regions of North America. This snake was well-known and feared in all 13 of the original American colonies and was one of the first recurring American animal symbols. The words “Don’t Tread on Me” are a motto and a battle cry intended to warn the British crown that the colonies will defend themselves if attacked.’

Crotalus horridus

‘Before the bald eagle became associated with the country’s most prominent symbols, such as the Great Seal, the Coat of Arms, and the Seal of the President, [refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes] the timber rattlesnake was once one of the most frequently used animals to represent the United States.

In a well-known article, Benjamin Franklin suggested with sarcasm that the American colonists send rattlesnakes to England in exchange for the prisoners routinely transported from England to the Americas to protest against the British crown’s practices of penal transportation and forming penal colonies.

The Gadsden flag’s use of a snake to represent united colonies and their shared American identity is a call-back to the snake featured on the famous “Join or Die” illustration, said to have been drawn by Benjamin Franklin in 1754. Franklin’s version of the snake was depicted as dead and cut into segments, each named after a colony or a region.’

By 1775, the rattlesnake was a very popular symbol of America. It could be found throughout the thirteen colonies on everything from buttons, badges, paper money and flags. No longer was the snake cut into pieces. It was now recognisably the American timber rattlesnake, coiled into an attack position with thirteen rattles on its tail. 

The flag took on a special historical significance at the Battle of Bunker Hill. This battle is still celebrated in Boston, where Colonel William Prescott famously gave the order not to fire “until you see the whites of their eyes.” 

Ships that carried marines had drummers and their drums featured the yellow of the Gadsden Flag with the now well known snake emblazoned on top. It included the words “Don’t Tread On Me” – now a famous motto which adorned the clothing and accessories of freedom fighters from coast to coast.

‘After the Gadsden flag’s adoption by the Colonial Marines, Franklin later noted in a 1775 issue of the Pennsylvania Journal that the snake “strongly resembles America,” favorably comparing the snake’s many traits with America, reasserting the snake’s significance as an American symbol.’

In December of 1775, ‘an Anonymous Guesser’ wrote a letter to the Pennsylvania Journal. Most scholars now agree that it was written by Benjamin Franklin. The letter suggested: “As I know it is the custom to have some device on the arms of every country, I supposed this may have been intended for the arms of America.” 

Franklin’s reasons included: a. The rattlesnake is only found in North America. b. The snake has ‘sharp eyes’ and ‘may therefore be esteemed an emblem of vigilance.’ c. The snake isn’t known for unprovoked attacks; though once it does attack, it doesn’t stop until it wins. d. Even before attacking, the rattlesnake gives ample warning in the form of its rattle. e. Franklin claimed in the letter that the snake’s tail had 13 rattles, none of which would work independently of one another.

‘The snake became a recurring element of many other Amercian historical flags, most often used to represent the American identity and the union between the colonies (and later, the states)and as a symbol of defiance against British rule.’

‘The First Navy Jack, a United States Navy flag… features 13 horizontal stripes alternating between red and white, similar to the 13 stripes of the American flag, overlaid with a yellow-and-red timber rattlesnake and the words “DONT TREAD ON ME;” with no apostrophe. Although similar in layout, the background colors (red and white instead of yellow) and the snake’s position (slithering instead of coiled) make it easy to differentiate the naval jack from the Gadsden flag. The alternating red-and-white stripes are believed to be the first US Navy naval jack’s original design. The rattlesnake and motto were later added to the jack during the 19th century, calling back to the Gadsden flag.’

The snake is readily perceived as a symbol for the tribe of Dan. The real thirteenth tribe – rather than Manasseh as popularly expounded or Ephraim the literal fulfilment through birth – may actually be the tribe of Dan. The horse and its rider well might represent Ephraim, and Dan may have a role to play, in America’s downfall. A link between Dan and Ephraim is found in the Book of Jeremiah. It is a signifiant passage of scripture for in the past it describes Judah’s fall at the hands of the Chaldean Nebuchadnezzar II and his Empire with its capital in Babylon – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Jeremiah 4:5-15

English Standard Version

5 ‘Declare in Judah, and proclaim in Jerusalem, and say, “Blow the trumpet through the land; cry aloud and say, ‘Assemble, and let us go into the fortified cities!’ 6 Raise a standard toward Zion, flee for safety, stay not, for I bring disaster from the north, and great destruction. 7 A lion has gone up from his thicket, a destroyer of nations [King of Babylon] has set out; he has gone out from his place to make your land a waste; your cities will be ruins without inhabitant… 9 “In that day, declares the Lord, courage shall fail both king and officials. The priests shall be appalled and the prophets astounded.” 10 Then I said, “Ah, Lord God, surely you have utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, ‘It shall be well with you,’ whereas the sword has reached their very life.”

11 At that time it will be said to this people and to Jerusalem… 13 Behold, he comes up like clouds; his chariots like the whirlwind; his horses are swifter than eagles – woe to us, for we are ruined! 14 O Jerusalem, wash your heart from evil, that you may be saved. How long shall your wicked thoughts lodge within you?

15 For a voice [H6963 – qowl] declares [H5046 – nagad] from Dan [H1835 – middan] and proclaims [H8085 – shama] trouble [H205 – ‘aven] from Mount [H2022 – har: hill country, mountain, promote] Ephraim.’

It is not clear if there is a voice from the city of Dan in the north and another in Ephraim in the south; or whether the voice is one from the tribe of Dan on Mount Ephraim. In fact, it may be a word play and so the verse could be read as ‘a voice declares judgement and proclaims affliction from Mount Ephraim.’ The expression Mount Ephraim, represents the political rulership and seat of power of Israel’s leading tribe. The word for voice is also translated as ‘proclamation’ and ‘thunderings.’ This is no normal voice, it obviously gains attention. The word declare is also translated as ‘expound, report’ or ‘messenger.’ It means ‘to be conspicuous, make known, announce, to inform of, to publish, confess, to front (stand boldly out), to expose, predict’ and ‘profess.’ 

A very public expression which possibly gains far reaching attention. If this prophecy were dual in nature, then it could be worldwide attention. The word ‘proclaims’ is similar and can also be translated as ‘publish.’ Perhaps via the internet. It also means, ‘declare, to hear with attention or interest, give heed, to obey, to cause to hear, proclaim’ and ‘summon.’ There is no doubt that it is a major announcement.

The Book of Hosea speaks of a prophet, a watchman of Ephraim who may be linked to this verse. 

Hosea 9:8

English Standard Version

‘The prophet is the watchman of Ephraim with my God; yet a fowler’s snare is on all his ways, and hatred in the house of his God.’

The word trouble, can mean ‘affliction, wickedness, iniquity, vanity, unrighteous, evil, idol, idolatry, mourning, sorrow’ and ‘unjust.’ The word unjust is interesting in light of Dan meaning judge or justice. As the word mount in the Bible signifies a high place, hills or a mountain; it is also figurative for the government of a land. Hence today, Mount Ephraim is representative of the federal government Capitol Hill in Washington DC. 

Other translations for Jeremiah 4:15

AMP: For a voice declares from Dan (far in the north), And proclaims evil from Mount Ephraim.

AMPC: For a voice declares from Dan (in the north) and proclaims evil from Mount Ephraim (the range dividing Israel from Judah).

CEV: before a message of disaster arrives from the hills of Ephraim and the town of Dan.

ERV: Listen! The voice of a messenger from the land of Dan is speaking. Someone is bringing bad news from the hill country of Ephraim:

MSG: What’s this? A messenger from Dan? Bad news from Ephraim’s hills! Make the report public…

NET: For messengers are coming, heralding disaster, from the city of Dan and from the hills of Ephraim.

VOICE: ‘From the tribe of Dan in the north comes the first cry; news of disaster arrives from the hill country of Ephraim.’

The voice from Dan and the proclamation from Mount Ephraim appear to be linked in purpose, regardless of the geographic relationship. Though ‘the north’ is not in the Hebrew, there must be a reason why three translations have chosen this expression. As both Asshur as Russia and Magog as China are described as being in the north, with Togarmah-Korea as the peripheral ‘far north’, it is feasible that Dan could well be associated with modern Mount Ephraim which is on a similar latitude with Beijing in China as well as the Korean nations – Zephaniah 2:13, Ezekiel 38:6; 39:1.

Returning to Genesis forty-nine, verse seventeen. 

The word for in the way can be translated as ‘toward, journey’ and ‘manner.’ It means ‘road, path, direction, habit, custom’ and ‘passenger.’ It includes the connotation of a ‘course of life, of moral character’ a ‘mode of action.’ Path is similar and is translated as ‘highway, manner, race, traveller’ and ‘troops.’ It can mean passing of life, way of living, wayfarer.’ It includes, ‘a well trodden road, a caravan.’ 

The word bite is enlightening for it is translated as bite 14 times and as lend upon usury twice. It means ‘to pay, give interest, lend for interest or usury.’ It includes ‘to strike with a sting (as a serpent’ strikes and bites with venom), ‘to press with interest on a loan.’ 

The mention of troops is significant as this hints at a military application in the course of the horse and rider. The addition of banking is not a surprise as war costs money and requires financing. Also, part of bringing down any nation – in our modern world – would involve successfully attacking its economy. Loans and debt being a primary method. 

The word for horse signifies a moving horse as ‘to skip (properly, for joy), a horse (as leaping), also a swallow (from its rapid flight).’ The word for heel is also revealing for it is translated as footsteps 3 times; horse hoofs once; at the last once; and liers in wait once. It means ‘footprint, hinder part, rear of a troop’ as well as ‘the rear (of an army).’ The Hebrew word for rider means: ‘to mount and ride (on an animal or in a vehicle), to place upon, to despatch’ and ‘ride (in a chariot).’ 

The word fall is translated as ‘cast down’ 18 times; fall away, 5; divide, 5; and overthrow 5 times. It means: ‘to fall (of violent death), to fall prostrate, to fall upon, attack, desert, fall into the hand of, to fall short, fail, waste away, be inferior to, apportion by lot, overwhelm, perish, rot, slay, throw down’ and ‘smite out.’ 

If the United States is the horse and or rider, then its fall is spectacular. It’s fall, being its collapsed military strength. How would military power be undermined? Through economic, trade and monetary pressure. Banking, loans, debt and lack of confidence in the American currency, all spring to mind. Ephraim as we discussed in the previous chapter, will one day seek assistance from Assyria. At a certain point, the tables turn economically and Russia with a German led United States of Europe, gains the upper hand over the United States and by then, a possibly solitary England. Many might find that difficult to believe in 2025. But even a number of decades from now and certainly a few centuries, the world could (and will) be, a very different place – refer articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen

Jeremiah has more to say regarding the downfall of Judah, Dan and the link with Ephraim.

Jeremiah 8:1-3, 6, 15-17, 19-22

English Standard Version

1 “At that time, declares the Lord, the bones of the kings of Judah, the bones of its officials, the bones of the priests, the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be brought out of their tombs. 2 And they shall be spread before the sun and the moon and all the host of heaven, which they have loved and served, which they have gone after, and which they have sought and worshiped. And they shall not be gathered or buried. They shall be as dung on the surface of the ground. 3 Death shall be preferred to life by all the remnant that remains of this evil family… 6… Everyone turns to his own course, like a horse plunging headlong into battle.

15 We looked for peace, but no good came; for a time of healing, but behold, terror. 16 “The snorting of their horses is heard from Dan; at the sound of the neighing of their stallions [H47 – ‘abbiyr] the whole land quakes [shakes, trembles]. They come and devour the land and all that fills it, the city and those who dwell in it.’

The word of most interest is translated in the ESV as stallions and the King James version as ‘strong ones.’ It can also be translated as ‘bulls – which is interesting from an Ephraim perspective – mighty, stouthearted, valiant’ and significantly as ‘angels.’ It means ‘mighty’ and ‘valiant of men’ and ‘of angels.’ The link with the supernatural may not be coincidental. Does Dan form an alliance with the opponents of Ephraim? An inside job, perhaps.

17 “For behold, I am sending among you serpents, adders [H6848 – tsepha] that cannot be charmed [H3908 – lachash], and they shall bite you,” declares the Lord.

This verse is remarkably similar to the verse we read in Genesis 49:17. The word for adder is different though and can be translated as cockatrice – a legendary monster which is a cross between a rooster and a snake – though still venomous. The word for charmed can be translated as ‘enchantment, orator’ and ‘prayer.’ It means ‘whispering, charming, amulets (worn by women), an incantation.’ These are serpents that cannot be reasoned with or changed and could be linked with the angelic ‘strong ones’ of the preceding verse.

Jeremiah: 19 … “Is the Lord not in Zion? Is her King not in her?” “Why have they provoked me to anger with their carved images and with their foreign idols?” [a proclivity of the tribe of Dan] 20 “The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.” [like Dan waiting on his salvation – Genesis 49:18] 21 For the wound of the daughter of my people is my heart wounded; I mourn, and dismay has taken hold on me. 22 Is there no balm* in Gilead? [Canada] Is there no physician there? Why then has the health of the daughter of my people not been restored?”

Before we look at verse eighteen in Genesis chapter forty-nine, it is worth noting that the snake or serpent could have more than a physical application and may include a spiritual function. The tie in would be the Seraphim who are literally, ‘fire-breathing flying serpents.’ Snakes with wings are dragons. The word serpent and dragon are often one and the same and therefore interchangeable. Satan is described as a serpent and dragon in the Book of Revelation (Revelation 12:9). It was fallen Seraphim who fathered Nephilim and the tribe of Dan is heavily associated with the Nephilim, as well as their offspring, the Elioud giants. 

J R Church – emphasis mine:

‘Those fallen angels who descended to Mount Hermon introduced the “seed of the serpent” into the human race [actually the Serpent with Eve was first – Genesis 3:15]. Evidently, after the Flood, they consorted with members of the tribe of Dan, mixing the “seed of the serpent” into the human genome once again. The first time it happened, God judged the world with water. The next time, it will be by fire.’

In the Book of Isaiah there are prophecies regarding Babylon, Assyria and the Philistines. Three powers at the end of our age; all with an invested interest in the downfall of England, Canada and especially America.

Isaiah 14:29-31

English Standard Version

‘Rejoice not, O Philistia [Mexico and Central, South America excepting Brazil], all of you, that the rod [Assyria] that struck you is broken, for from the serpent’s root will come forth an adder [cockatrice], and its fruit [progeny, offspring] will be a flying [H5774 – owph: to cover, be dark, gloom] fiery serpent [H8314 – seraph: poisonous, burning, copper colour]… I will kill your root with famine, and your remnant it will slay. Wail, O gate; cry out, O city; melt in fear, O Philistia, all of you! For smoke comes out of the north [Russia, the United States or both], and there is no straggler in his ranks.’

Here, the Philistines, principally the nation of Mexico have been attacked by the King of the North, Russia. Then when Asshur has fallen, the Philistines are told not to rejoice as they too will be consumed by the Day of the Lord. The smoke from the north could be a reference to their neighbour the United States, or a reference to Russia. The rest of the verse is eerily similar to what we have read in Genesis forty-nine and Jeremiah chapter eight. 

We will shortly see that as there is a root of Amalek in Ephraim; Ephraim is also described as a root that will ‘dry up’ and produce no more ‘fruit’ – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. And then, we have the Seraphim stated yet again. There can be little doubt now that the Seraphim are the angelic beings being discussed and not the animal reptile that is called a snake.

The inclusion of the King of the North (Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia), added to what we will discover about the tribe of Dan and their connection with the United States, is building a case for the involvement of supernatural beings (fallen dark angels) at the time of the end and alarmingly, Dan’s alliance with them – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – capitalisation theirs, emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the serpent is representative of evil, of conniving, of worldly wisdom. It is first associated with the great deceiver, Satan the devil [not the same serpent as the tempter in the garden of Eden], who appeared in the Garden… in the form of a serpent [his name, Samael**], and with subtlety beguiled Eve. Whether this creature was originally the precise description of what we know as a snake today is perhaps debatable, for the derivation of the Hebrew word nachash means to hiss, i.e. whisper a (magic) spell; to prognosticate; an enchantment or enchanter, and, as such, may be subject to more than one interpretation. 

… the serpent… is the sign of the Adversary, Satan the devil, and thus the spirit of the anti-Christ that will arise in the end-time. This is… stated… emphatically [in] the book of Revelation… “And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a GREAT RED DRAGON… And the great dragon was cast out, that old SERPENT [the original Serpent, not to be confused with Samael [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Asherah] called the Devil, and Satan…”

The Greek word for dragon in verse 3 actually is defined as a fabulous kind of SERPENT, so called because of its keen power of sight (from the root ‘derke,’ signifying ‘to see’). 

It is used precisely 13 times in the Apocalypse to designate Satan the devil. [Satan’s]… chief servants**… are also identified with the image of a serpent. Indeed we read in Revelation 9:15-19, that the power of the dreaded latter-day army that devastates one-third of the earth’s population is likened unto that of a serpent.

How interesting then that the first human being ever to be Scripturally identified with the serpent is none other than the fifth son of Israel Dan himself, and this serpent connection to the tribe of Dan cannot be summarily dismissed as a casual use of this symbol. In fact, no other individual human beings are compared to the serpent in all the Scriptures save Dan and his descendants…

It is also noteworthy that the biting of the horse’s heels is language eerily similar to what we read in the first great Messianic prophecy in Genesis 3:15, where Yahweh says to, of all creatures, the serpent: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it (Messiah – the ultimate seed of the woman) shall bruise your head, and you (the serpent) shall bruise his HEEL.”

Genesis: ’18 I wait [H6960 – qavah] for your salvation* [H3444 – yshuw’ah] , O Lord.’

CEB: I long for your victory, Lord.

CEV: Our Lord, I am waiting for you to save us.

NET: I wait for your deliverance, O Lord.

NLV: I wait for Your saving power, O Lord.

The word wait can mean ‘look, wait for, gathered, look for, hope, expect, look eagerly for, lie in wait for, linger for, to collect, to be collected’ and ‘bind together.’ There is earnest expectation by Dan in the deliverance of the Eternal. The word salvation means ‘deliverance, health, saving, welfare, prosperity, victory’ and ‘aid.’ The tribe of Dan for whatever reason has to wait for salvation or redemption through Christ.

The big question, is why? 

We discussed Revelation chapter seven in the preceding chapter and the fact why Joseph and Manasseh are stated as separate tribes both with 12,000 anointed and sealed saints at the time of the end. Yet, this is secondary to the glaring observation that Dan is not listed at all, even though verse four of revelation chapter seven says: ‘all the tribes.’ In fact, he is the only tribe omitted. The seriousness of not being counted as a tribe of Israel is elevated as this is a prophecy, yet to be fulfilled.

This is not punishment for past actions of idolatry alone but sins committed at the time of the end which are still yet future. Herein lie the first two possible explanations for Dan’s omission – first, disqualification by idolatry. By idolatry, we are speaking of demonolatry of the most severe kind. Complete rebellion against and blasphemy towards, the Creator – articles: Belphegor; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

Second, these repeated actions then lent themselves to the tribe of Dan’s decision to allow themselves to fade away from God’s presence and in turn, from the world’s attention. One could say the tribe of Dan has been erased from sight as part of the Eternal’s judgement on them. An irony in itself when the meaning of Dan’s name is considered. The tribe which has judged, will receive judgement.

A third reason offered for the tribe of Dan’s non-inclusion in Revelation is its lost identity as a result of being assimilated into other peoples.

An enduring belief is that the Antichrist – or the Beast and false Prophet as the Bible describes them, for there is not one antichrist but many, according to the Apostle John (1 John 2:18) – descends from the tribe of Dan. Though this would not explain why everyone from Dan is excluded.

The antichrist connection is a fourth reason and a fifth reason for Dan’s exclusion relates to the tribe of Dan having to wait for the Judge Samson. But, this also does not answer the question. We will study Samson shortly. 

These five explanations while components in understanding Dan’s omission are somewhat superficial, lacking in a definitive answer.

In the mind of this writer, Dan is not included due to the following three factors which are intertwined.

First, the tribe of Dan is the one exception apart from Levi, in not being an identifiable nation or territory. If this is the case, then Dan is a scattered tribe. 

The second factor is that the tribe of Dan is no longer considered Israelite. Meaning, no one from the tribe of Dan will be called, perfected, sealed or saved in the time of the end. The Danites will have to wait until the Gentiles are offered salvation – Genesis 49:18, Revelation 7:9. 

Third, there is a sinister aspect which involves the bloodline of Dan having become contaminated and being therefore unacceptable before the Eternal – Genesis 3:14-15; 49:17, Jeremiah 8:17. 

An intriguing aspect of the Israelites march through the wilderness, was their camp layout and individual tribe insignias.

Numbers 2:25, 31

English Standard Version

25 “On the north side shall be the standard of the camp of Dan by their companies… 31… They shall set out last, standard by standard.”

EXB: ‘… They will be the last to march out of camp, and they will travel under their own flag.’ 

TLB: ‘… They brought up the rear whenever Israel traveled.’

In the Camp of Israel, Dan was given two humbling positions which show he had been relegated to last position of the sons of Jacob, even though he was born fifth. When the Israelites broke camp and travelled, the tribe of Dan was last to leave (1) and ‘brought up the rear.’ The literal tail for the winding mass of people. When the Israelites stopped marching and set up Camp, the Tribe of Dan was in the North (2) with Asher and Naphtali. This was the least favourable portion of the compass, as the North was the most exposed to the likely hood of potential attacks while trekking through the wilderness, as well as journeying in Canaan where they eventually settled. In the Bible from an Israelite perspective, evil and judgement descended from the North – Jeremiah 1:13-14; 10:22; Daniel 11:40, Ezekiel 38:15-16. 

Regarding the Camp layout, Dan conversely was one of the four principle tribes with Judah, Ephraim and Reuben. It is noteworthy that Dan is linked with these tribes, particularly Reuben and Ephraim. Bullinger refers to the Cherubim of the Eternal and their relationship with the camp formation of ancient Israel. The four square arrangement designed according to a pattern that is based on these celestial beings – refer article: The Ark of God

The cherubim had four faces, a lion; an ox, or bull (and or a Unicorn); one like a man; and an eagle. These four personalities became the signs of the four standard bearing tribes of Israel. The Lion for Judah, the Bull for Ephraim, a Man for Reuben and the Eagle for Dan. 

Similarly, the twelve constellations of the Zodiac are divided into four groups of three signs each with the signs representing the four principal tribes spearheading them. Thus the pairings are Leo for Judah, Taurus for Ephraim, Aquarius for Reuben and Scorpio for Dan. We will investigate the dual nature of Dan’s symbols, the Eagle and the Snake and the third animal, the Scorpion which is the primary symbol for Scorpio.

 

Our Father’s Kingdom of America: ‘In the heavens Dan’s symbol is the Scorpio constellation. The scorpion pinches just like the eagle bites the snake.’ 

One commentator adds: ‘… just as each of the four Israelite standard-bearing tribes had a designated leader, so each of the four major constellations of the Zodiac has a star of the first magnitude associated with that sector of the heavens’ – Regulus from Leo, Aldebaran from Taurus, Antares from Scorpio and Fomalhaut from Aquarius (Refer Scorpio, article: The Pyramid Perplexity).

Another symbol for the tribe of Reuben is a mandrake and for Issachar, the sun and moon. The only change to the chart above would be the omission of the fleur-de-lis; a symbol of France (Moab and Ammon) and not for Reuben (Northern Ireland) – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

The tribe of Dan forfeited Israelite status because they chose to side with the sons of Jacob’s enemies: the Philistines, Asshur, Edom and yes, the Adversary itself. In so doing they have been on the wrong side of the Genesis 3:15 prophecy and have contributed heavily to the enmity between the woman’s seed and the Serpent’s seed. In an ironic dual manner, the very rebellion of Dan will be used as a disciplinary hand that punishes his brothers for their evil ways and rebellion towards the Creator during the tribulation. The Eternal sees fit to allow Satan to use the tribe of Dan with Edom and Asshur, to afflict the Celtic-Saxon-Viking descendants living in the British, Irish and New World nations. 

Support for this line of reasoning is found in the Apocryphal work, The Testament of Dan. 

Chapter 1:1-2; 2:27

‘The copy of the words of Dan, which he spake to his sons in his last days, in the hundred and twenty-fifth year of his life [Book of Jasher gives Dan’s age as 120 when he died]. For he called together his family, and said: “Hearken to my words, ye sons of Dan; and give heed to the words of your father.”

‘Nevertheless, Dan prophesied unto them that they should forget their God, and should be alienated from the land of their inheritance and from the race of Israel, and from the family of their seed.’

Dan’s link with the United States is interesting in view of the root of Amalek also found in Ephraim as revealed in the Book of Judges. In fact, Ephraim itself is described as a root in Hosea 9:16, NIV: ‘Ephraim is blighted, their root is withered, they yield no fruit…’ The fact that Amalekites have Nephilim ancestry and that Dan is associated with the Nephilim blood line may be the powerful, yet simple reason why no one from that tribe is called or set apart at the time of the end. Hence, all from that tribe wait on their salvation, as in they are last to receive it or in the worst case scenario, the contamination is so severe, none receive salvation.

Deuteronomy 33:22

English Standard Version

And of Dan he said, “Dan is a lion’s cub [H1482 – guwr: whelp, young one] that leaps [H2187 – zanaq] from Bashan.”

In Moses’ prophecy every single one of the eleven sons receives positive comments and blessings from the Eternal even though most of the Israelites were never really faithful. The standout exception is the tribe of Dan. A short, single sentence – no blessing, nothing positive. 

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The reference to Dan being a lion’s whelp should have a familiar ring to it, for in the previously referenced passage in Genesis 49, Jacob used the identical expression to describe the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:9). The root word for whelp in the Hebrew means to turn aside, to gather for hostile purposes. If the promised Messiah was predicted to come through the line of Judah, and He is the true Lion (Revelation 5:5), then what are we to make of Dan in this regard? If the true lion does not descend through Dan, then what lion does? The answer may be found in the simple, well-known passage that reads:

“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the DEVIL, as a roaring LION, walks about, seeking whom [they] may devour” (I Peter 5:8).

‘It appears that the tribe of Dan was particularly despised and highly criticized by the tribe of Judah, and that enmity between these two people began early on in their history… Indeed, Moses’ words concerning Dan may contain in them a veiled hint that something dreadful would be associated with this tribe in the future.’

The word leap means ‘to spring forward’ as in ‘to draw together the feet (as an animal about to dart upon its prey).’ In the same chapter, Gad is described as a lion that ‘crouches.’ In Genesis it speaks of a troop in Gad which Gad nips at the heels of the retreating invader. Both the lion and troop references are similar to Dan’s references we have just studied. For Gad, they refer to English troops and occupation in Ireland (refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes), lending support that the horse and rider are a military-political regime that is toppled. In Genesis 49:9, Judah is also described as a ‘lion’s cub’ who also ;crouches’ down. 

Researchers have focused on the ‘serpent by the way’ as the physical travels of the tribe of Dan and the leaving of their name as a sign post or marker on their route through Europe; rather than its application as a threat to Ephraim or its even wider implication that the tribe of Dan has been infiltrated by Nephilim. Similarly with their leap from Bashan, the focus has been on fleeing the land of Canaan when the warring Assyrians encroached. 

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘Bashan is a fairly well-known word to most Bible students. It is a place name that is somewhat indirectly referred to in the 14th chapter of Genesis. This is where the famous account of Abram’s sensational rescue of Lot is recorded, but the key point with regard to our study is found in the earlier portion of the passage. As you will recall, there was war waged between the armies of the Siddim Vale, led by Bera king of Sodom, and a huge invading force of Babylonians under the leadership of Amraphel king of Shinar… The eastern hordes proved too strong for the southern Canaanites, and they were subjugated for some 12 years. In the 13th year they rebelled, and in the 14th year, a second, even more massive invasion from the east occurred, precipitating a great slaughter’ – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.

‘We read in Genesis 14:5-7:

“And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in ASHTEROTH KARNAIM, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in their Mount Seir, unto El-paran, which is by the wilderness. And they returned, and came to Enmishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelled in Hazezon-tamar.”

‘While these ancient geographical names may have little relevance for most people today, they do provide us with some pertinent information concerning the area known as Bashan. The reference to Ashteroth Kernaim in verse 5 pinpoints the residence of the feared Rephaim class of giants. Even though they were defeated by the massive eastern forces (reportedly almost 1,000,000 strong) in this particular battle, they were by no means destroyed, and indeed they continued to populate this same locale for hundreds of years to come, for we read in the book of Joshua with respect to the Israelite victories:

“Now these are the kings of the land, which the children of Israel smote… Sihon, king of the Amorites… and the coast of Og king of Bashan, which was of the remnant of the giants, that dwelled at Ashtaroth and at Edrei, and reigned in Mount Hermon, and in Salcah, and in all Bashan” (Joshua 12:1-2, 4-5).

‘Bashan comprised the territory from Gilead in the south to Mount Hermon in the north, with the Jordan River as its western boundary and Salchah on its eastern extremity. This was not a part of the inheritance originally granted to the tribe of Dan. In order for the prophecy of Moses to be fulfilled, it was necessary that the Danites at some point extend their influence north into Bashan, and that event is recorded for us in a most intriguing passage in Judges 17-18.’

We have already touched upon the fact that the Tribe of Dan (Tauthe de Danann) migrated to Ulster in Northern Ireland. As Northern Ireland is predominantly Reuben today and Ireland is Gad, the original land of Bashan on the East side of the River Jordan where Reuben and Gad dwelt, has its modern equivalent today as Ireland, particularly the northeast of the Isle.

We have discussed the Elioud giants, the Fomorian who lived in Northern Ireland (Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes) and their vanquishing by the Tuatha de Danann. This means the tribe of Dan have leapt from Bashan. If so, where did they leap? As Bashan was the original home of the Watchers on Mount Hermon and later, the home of the giants, such as King Og, and then again, the home of the tribe of Dan, a spiritual component should be entertained. 

Other translations for Deuteronomy 33:22

CEV: Tribe of Dan, you are like a lion cub, startled by a snake.

DRA: To Dan also he said: Dan is a young lion, he shall flow plentifully from Basan.

WYC: Also he said to Dan, Dan, a whelp of a lion, shall flow largely from Bashan.

These translations are insightful as they reveal an outpouring of people from Northern Ireland. Again, to where? We will look at the physical migrations of people linked with Ulster in depth as well as the Nephilim tie in and what this means.

Judges 5:17

English Standard Version

‘… and Dan, why did he stay [remain, dwell, linger] with the ships?’

When the Judge Deborah fought the Canaanites, certain tribes were keen to be involved, others were not. Half were not, as the war did not affect their lands directly. Other tribes were more keenly impacted and they gave their support. Dan did not, in fact he was unique in that a large proportion of their people were not even on land. Dan has a tradition of ocean going sailing. He is linked with the Grecian Isles in their early settlement by Shem’s descendants and as one of the first peoples of the son’s of Jacob to migrate to Ireland and then Britain.

Unger Bible Handbook, page 273: ‘Dan was the last of the tribes to receive his portion, which was the smallest of the twelve. It had… a line of seacoast…’

Ezekiel 27:19

King James Version

Dan [H2051 – Vdan] also and Javan going to and fro occupied in thy fairs [wares, trade]: bright iron, cassia, and calamus, were in thy market.’

The word for Dan is different compared with any other meaning and translates as ‘and Dan’ or ‘even Dan.’ Strong’s says that it is an uncertain place or site. The Dan in question is associated in trade and economically with Javan, the island nations from East Asia and Southeast Asia. Some researchers postulate that it could be a reference to the Dedanites of Dedan (Shem) – or the Dodanim of Dodan descended from Japheth. Though these are different Hebrew words from Dan and should not be confused. 

The Hebrew Danites as the Greek Danaans, John R. Salverda – emphasis mine: 

‘The Greeks say that the Danaans came to the city of Argos and demanded their portion of royalty there. They claimed to be descendants of Io and therefore members of the royal family… To accomplish this emigration, they are said to have invented the keeled ship, which enabled them to sail over the deep seas, and make their escape to Argos. The Greek claim that the Danaans invented the keeled ship, fits nicely with the Biblical claim that the Danites lived in ships, they were after all in possession of the seaport Joppa, where by all indications shipbuilding was a major industry. 

… in accordance with Greek mythology, the sons of [Jacob] also went to Argolis, following after the delinquent Danaans, to bring them back and punish them for their treachery. But it took them a bit longer to get there, leapfrogging from port to port along the coasts, in their less seaworthy unkeeled barges. 

By the time the sons of [Jacob] arrived at Argos, the Danaans were already established, with a degree of royal power, and the Argolian army was ready to defend them. Now, the sons of [Jacob], a mere posse in the face of an army, could not enforce a return upon the Danaans, and because they were told not to return empty [handed], they decided to quit their homeland back in Israel, and resolved to remain in Argos. The sons of [Jacob] sued for their portion of the royalty at Argolis on the same basis that the Danaans did, and they were recognized as well. 

Those Jacobites who made up the coalition of the willing in the struggle against Canaan (Sisera), were able to win the war through the efforts of a very brave woman named Jael. Jael was not a Jacobite instead she belonged to a race, known as the Kenites, who were, at that time, also at peace with the Canaanites. 

However, the Kenites were on friendly terms with the sons of Jacob as well, in fact, Zipporah, the wife of Moses was a Kenite (also called Midianite…), and the apostate Danite priesthood were her descendants[?] Jael herself was a relative who could not have been too far removed from the Danite priesthood, for it is noted right in the Scriptural account of the war, that her family was descended from the house of Hobab, who is therein called [Jethro] the father ­in ­law of Moses’ – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘It may have been this Kenite relationship to the Danite priesthood, combined with Danite treaty obligations mentioned earlier as necessitated by the close proximity of the Danite stronghold at Laish to Hazor the chief city of the northern Canaanites, that gave the Canaanite General Sisera the false sense of security that he must have had in order for him to take a nap in the tent of Jael. 

Jael deluded the weary Sisera completely and when he had fallen asleep, she took a pin and ran him through so that he died. Now, how many stories are there in which a man is beguiled into falling asleep by, and in the presence of, the woman who intends to murder him, and then while the man is sleeping the treacherous woman runs him through with a pin and kills him?

I can think of only two, one is the Scriptural account of Jael and Sisera, and the other is the Greek myth that is known as “The Danaids.” Furthermore, it is not only this very particular story that coincides between the Scriptures and the myth, but also the placement sequentially of each tale. Just as the story of Jael and Sisera comes at the end of the war that saw a falling ­out between the Jacobites and their brothers the Danites, who “dwelt in ships,” so to, the Greek myth of the Danaids is the story of the subsequent reconciliation between the progeny of Danaus, who fled in ships from their brothers the sons of Aegyptus at the time of their quarrel. 

… the original waves of immigration to Argolis in Greece, the forefathers of the Mycenaean civilization, were the sons of Anak [the Anakim: a Nephilim descended race of Elioud giants], closely followed by the Danites and the Jacobites, but of these, predominantly the Danites, so much so, that throughout the writings of Homer, he usually refers to the Peloponnesian Greeks, by the general term “Danaans.”

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘… The Annals of Ireland, we read: 

The Dan’ans were a highly civilised people, well skilled in architecture and other arts from their long residence in GREECE, and their intercourse with the Phoenicians.’

Remember this important point regarding the tribe of Dan. They were a skilled people at the forefront of advancement, invention and exploration.

McNair: ‘Their first [second?] appearance in Ireland [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes] was 1200 [1230 BCE] B.C., or 85 years after[?] the great victory of DEBORAH [in 1184 BCE]. 

Dr. Robert Gordon Latham, well-known nineteenth century ethnologist, definitely believed the Greek Danaans were the descendents of Dan. He says: 

“Neither do I think that the eponymus (ancestral name) of the Argive Danai was other than that of the Israelite tribe of Dan; only we are so used to confine ourselves to the soil of Palestine in our consideration of the history of the Israelites (Ethnology of Europe, p. 137).” 

‘Dr. Latham then goes on to show that the people of Dan must have had close connections with the peoples of Southern Greece, and he concludes by saying: 

“Yet with Danai and the tribe of Dan this is the case, and no one connects them” (ibid.). 

‘There can be no doubt that the people who were called by such names as Dan, Danai, and Danaans were all the same people. The histories of Ireland are replete with references to people of the tribe of Dan (Tuatha-de-Danaan) who had early come to Ireland from Greece. 

Muller, commenting on some of the fragments of the Greek manuscripts of Hecateus of Abdera says: 

“Hecateus therefore, tells us that the Egyptians, formerly being troubled by calamities, (referring to the Ten Plagues at the time of the Israelitish Exodus) in order that the divine wrath might be averted, expelled all the aliens gathered together in Egypt. Of these, some, under their leaders DANUS and CADMUS, migrated into GREECE; others into other regions, THE GREATER PART INTO SYRIA (meaning Palestine). THEIR LEADER IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN MOSES, a man renowned for wisdom and courage, founder and legislator of the state. Afterwards many Mosaic institutes followed. (Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, Volume II, page 385).” 

‘Both Hecateus of Abdera (3rd century B.C.) and Diodorus of Sicily mention that the people of DANAI, under their leader Danus, came from EGYPT, but Hecateus says that the greater part of the DANITES went into Syria or Palestine under the leadership of MOSES.’ 

Book of Jubilees 34:20

‘… and the name of Dan’s wife, ‘Egla…’

Book of Jasher 45:7-8

‘… and Dan went to the land of Moab and took for a wife Aphlaleth, the daughter of Chamudan the Moabite, and he brought her to the land of Canaan. And Aphlaleth was barren, she had no offspring, and Yahweh afterward remembered Aphlaleth the wife of Dan, and she conceived and bare a son, and she called his name Chushim.

In Genesis forty-six, the grandsons of Jacob are listed. All his sons have at least three sons or more. It is curious therefore that Dan is not only listed next to last, but is the only son to have less than three sons. In fact only one son is recorded – Numbers 26:42.  

Genesis 46:23

English Standard Version

The son of Dan: Hushim.

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Additionally, only a single line is devoted to this tribe in the account. Indeed, rather than enumerate the actual children of Dan by their individual names, as is done with each of the other sons, he is given short shrift with only the general tribal name of Hushim given. In fact, in the Genesis 46 passage, you will note that the very last two sons listed are Dan and his brother Naphtali, even though they were much higher in the literal birth order.

To put an even finer point on things, we read in verse 25 the following editorial notation: “These are the SONS OF BILHAH, which Laban gave unto Rachel his daughter, and she bare unto Jacob.” Notice carefully that the two sons of Bilhah, the 5th and 6th born of Jacob’s children, are listed dead last, even after the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s handmaiden.  Whether this was a comment originally made by Moses himself or a later insertion by Ezra, there absolutely has to be a strong reason for this kind of arrangement.  It is not haphazard, accidental, or even coincidental whatsoever. Virtually the same thing can be seen in the second census recorded in Numbers 26. So it is abundantly clear that the children of Bilhah were the least favored in the family of Israel, and of those two tribes, Dan was at the bottom of the pile!

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The name Hushim meaning: ‘Hasters, Easily Moved Ones’ from the verb (hush), to hurry or hasten.

The name Hushim is assigned to two men and one woman in the Bible: The first male Hushim we read about is a son of Dan who apparently is also called Shuham (Numbers 26:42). The other male Hushim is mentioned as a son of Aher of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 7:12).’

Note and remember the same name link with the tribe of Benjamin.

Abarim: ‘The only female Hushim is one of three wives of Shaharaim; the other two being Baara and Hodesh. This Hushim’s sons are called Abitub and Elpaal (1 Chronicles 8:8).

The verb (hashash) means to hurry, or rather to be light-footed and hence quickly moved. Noun (hashash) describes chaff, which proverbially is so light that a breath of wind carries it off swiftly. Likewise, verb (hush) means to hurry or hasten. Adverb (hish) means quickly. This verb (hush) may also be used to mean to be agitated, worried or enjoyed.

The name Hushim is a plural form of a noun that has to do with hurrying, or being easily moved. That a name for a singular person would express a plurality is curious but not beyond understandable. The related name Thahash has probably to do with some water-dwelling creature, and perhaps the hushim were also some kind of creature or phenomenon that could be experienced as a single entity. Think of our words herd and swarm, or even the name Elohim, which also is a plural used singular.

For a meaning of the name Hushim, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Hasters. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… reads Those Who Hasten The Birth, i.e. children prematurely born.’

The name of Hushim equated with ‘light-footed’ and ‘moving quickly’ is interesting, in light of Dan’s proclivity to continually press forward, migrating westwards. As is the trekking and sailing movement by the tribe like a snake. Snakes for short distances, like a cat can travel exceptionally fast when threatened or provoked. It may also be a reference to Dan displaying a temper and being impulsive.

Abarim Publications highlight the fact that Hushim is called Shuham in the Book of Numbers. Disturbingly, no descendants of Dan are listed in 1 Chronicles as there are for all the other tribes. In fact, very few people are listed in the Bible as actually descending from Dan, apart from his son Hushim (and or Shuham)… and some 628 years after Dan’s birth, the most famous alleged Danite Samson, who was born circa 1086 BCE. 

In the Book of Numbers there is a listing of fearsome warriors from each tribe, including Dan.

Numbers 1:12

English Standard Version

‘… from Dan, Ahiezer the son of Ammishaddai [Numbers 10:25]…’

Numbers 34:22

English Standard Version

‘Of the tribe of the people of Dan a chief, Bukki the son of Jogli.’

Exodus 35:30-35

English Standard Version

‘Then Moses said to the people of Israel, “See, the Lord has called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah; and he has filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, with intelligence, with knowledge, and with all craftsmanship, to devise artistic designs, to work in gold and silver and bronze, in cutting stones for setting, and in carving wood, for work in every skilled craft.

And he has inspired him to teach, both him and Oholiab the son of Ahisamach of the tribe of Dan. He has filled them with skill [wisdom of heart] to do every sort of work done by an engraver [gem cutter] or by a designer or by an embroiderer in blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen, or by a weaver – by any sort of workman or skilled designer’ – Exodus 31:6; 38:23.

2 Chronicles 2:13-14

English Standard Version

“Now I have sent a skilled [cunning] man, who has understanding [expertise, master metalworker], Huram-abi, the son of a woman of the daughters [a curious expression, emphasising a maternal* (rather like a Jewish) lineage] of Dan, and his father was a man of Tyre’ – Phoenician: refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

‘He is trained to work in gold, silver, bronze, iron, stone, and wood, and in purple, blue, and crimson fabrics and fine linen, and to do all sorts of engraving and execute any design that may be assigned him [an inventor], with your craftsmen [skilled artisans], the craftsmen of my lord, David your father.”

The tribe of Dan produced at least two skilled artisans. Oholiab who assisted Bezalel from the tribe of Judah in the construction of the Tabernacle, the forerunner of the Temple, while the Israelites were sojourning for forty years. Huram-abi is reminiscent of the Kenites and their metallurgist skills as goldsmiths, including silver, bronze as well as cutting gems. Unusually, neither his father or mother* are named. Notice Oholiab from Dan was filled with skill, but not with the Holy Spirit as Bezalel from Judah was.

Leviticus 24:10-16

English Standard Version

10 ‘Now an Israelite woman’s son, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the people of Israel. And the Israelite woman’s son and a man of Israel fought in the camp, 11 and the Israelite woman’s son blasphemed the Name, and cursed. Then they brought him to Moses. His mother’s name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan. 12 And they put him in custody, till the will of the Lord should be clear to them.

13 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 14 “Bring out of the camp the one who cursed, and let all who heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him. 15 And speak to the people of Israel, saying, Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin.

16 Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death.’ 

“You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain” – Exodus 20:7, ESV.

Leviticus: ‘All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.’

The son of Shelomith is uncharacteristically not named. Nor is his father, with an emphasis repeated on his maternal lineage and again this echoes the Jewish practice, whereby a true Jew is through his mother’s line, rather than his father – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Shelomith’s son as Danites who would come after him, exhibited a spirit of rebellion and heresy** in brazenly breaking the third commandment.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Shuham meaning: ‘Depression’ From the verb (shuah), to be low or humbled.

The name Shuman occurs only once in the Bible. In Numbers 26:42 he is mentioned as the patriarch of the extensive Danite sub-clan of the Shuhamites. This Shuham may be the same as Hushim, the son of Dan… The name Shuman appears to be an intensive form derived from the verb (shuah), meaning to sink low… The verb (shahah) means to bow down or be bowed down, crouched or humbled. Adjective (shah) means low or lowly. Verb (shuah) means to sink, or to be bowed down or humbled. Nouns (shuha) and (shiha) mean pit

For a meaning of the name Shuham, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Depression. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names appears to go with the derived noun (shuha), meaning pit, and reads Pit-digger. BDB Theological Dictionary does not offer an interpretation of this name but does list it under the verb (shuah), meaning to sink down.’

With the difference in meaning for the names Hushim and Shuham, it is hard to credit they are the same person. Though no indication is given that they are two different sons or lineages. If Hushim is Shuham, then it shows a degradation and deterioration within Hushim and the line of Dan early in their history. We already have reason to believe that Dan had gone astray, when Joseph reported him and his half-brothers to his father. 

The tribe of Dan were renowned for their idolatrous worship** and demonic practice; displaying out right rebellion in turning contrary to the Eternal. This situation mirrors Esau’s decision to rebelliously and flagrantly flout the Eternal’s ethical, moral and legal code; in stark contrast to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph.

1 Kings 12:28-30

English Standard Version

‘So the king [Jeroboam] took counsel and made two calves of gold. And he said to the people, “You have gone up to Jerusalem long enough [refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes]. Behold your^ gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.” And he set one in Bethel [meaning: ‘House of God’ – a city located in Ephraim on the border with Benjamin], and the other he put in Dan. Then this thing became a sin, for the people went as far as Dan to be before one.

Even the coming Day of the Lord mentions the false religion promulgated by the descendants of Dan.

Amos 8:4-5, 7, 11-12, 14

English Standard Version

4 ‘Hear this, you who trample on the needy and bring the poor of the land to an end, 5 saying, “When will the new moon be over, that we may sell grain? And the Sabbath, that we may offer wheat for sale, that we may make the ephah small and the shekel great and deal deceitfully with false balances… The Lord has sworn by the pride of Jacob…

11 “Behold, the days are coming,” declares the Lord God, “when I will send a famine on the land – not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. 12 They shall wander from sea to sea, and from north to east; they shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the Lord, but they shall not find it.

14 Those who swear by the Guilt of Samaria [Ephraim], and say, ‘As your^ god lives, O Dan,’ and, ‘As the Way of Beersheba lives,’ they shall fall, and never rise again.”

The people of Dan became well known for their proclivity to name or rename every habitation after their progenitor. They also lost their original territory in the land of Canaan. It is another coincidence then, that the Tuathe de Danann eventually vacated in large part, their territory in Northern Ireland.

Joshua 19:40-48

English Standard Version

‘The seventh lot came out for the tribe of the people of Dan, according to their clans. And the territory of its inheritance included Zorah, Eshtaol, Ir-shemesh, 42 Shaalabbin, Aijalon, Ithlah, Elon, Timnah, Ekron [Philistine city], Eltekeh, Gibbethon, Baalath, Jehud, Bene-berak, Gath-rimmon [Philistine city], and Me-jarkon and Rakkon with the territory over against Joppa.

When the territory of the people of Dan was lost to them [or too little or small for them], the people of Dan went up and fought against Leshem, and after capturing it and striking it with the sword they took possession of it and settled in it, calling Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their ancestor. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the people of Dan, according to their clans – these cities with their villages.’

Dan’s position in the family had worsened by this time. Their portion was too little or narrow for them and would later become Philistine territory. They were one of the larger tribes in population according to the census, yet received the smallest territory. A theme is established with Dan being listed last; near last; last in priority; or omitted from the record completely.

For example, in the book of I Chronicles, the first nine chapters list family trees from Adam to Abraham, then the descendants of Ishmael, Keturah – Abraham’s second wife – and Esau. From chapter two and going all the way through to chapter nine, the lineages of the sons of Jacob are recorded. Name after name of the Israelite descendants from all the sons, beginning with Judah and finally concluding with the family of Benjamin.

Not one single word concerning the tribe of Dan is written. They are completely missing from the genealogical lists. This is a telling omission. 

In chapter six all of the Levitical cities throughout the land are named. Dan again, is left out. As though a deliberate effort to expunge Dan from the biblical account. 

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Samson has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Samson’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

Judges 17:1-13

English Standard Version

1 ‘There was a man of the hill country of Ephraim [Mount Ephraim], whose name was Micah. 2 And he said to his mother, “The 1,100 pieces of silver that were taken from you, about which you uttered a curse, and also spoke it in my ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it.” And his mother said, “Blessed be my son by the Lord.” 3 And he restored the 1,100 pieces of silver to his mother. And his mother said, “I dedicate the silver to the Lord from my hand for my son, to make a carved image and a metal image. Now therefore I will restore it to you.” 

Micah is described as coming from the ‘hill country of Ephraim’ or Mount Ephraim. Recall we have discussed the link between this area and the tribe of Dan. 

Judges 1:34-35

English Standard Version

‘The Amorites pressed the people of Dan back into the hill country, for they did not allow them to come down to the plain. The Amorites persisted in dwelling in Mount Heres, in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim, but the hand of the house of Joseph rested heavily on them, and they became subject to forced labor.’

It cannot be ruled out that Micah was either a Danite from Mount Ephraim; or from the tribe of Ephraim. His mother possessing a similar amount of silver, may be Delilah and so Micah’s father well might be Samson (who himself was descended from the tribe of Judah) – refer article: Samson. Credence to Micah being a Danite is the silversmith (or metallurgist) involved in the story, yet the creation of idols was an unfortunate proclivity of the tribe of Ephraim as well. Micah and his mother have strayed grievously into the demonic worship of false gods rather than obeying the true Lord.

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Not only do we encounter the issue of idolatry in this chapter, we also should take note that it is connected in this case with Mount Ephraim and the area in the northern part of the land of Canaan.  

Of course, this early period was long before the division of the United Monarchy, but Mount Ephraim would eventually be the ruling center of the northern kingdom of Samaria, and even at such an ancient date it is already associated with the sin of idolatry, something for which it would become notorious, leading ultimately to its destruction.’

Judges: 4 ‘So when he restored the money to his mother, his mother took 200 pieces of silver and gave it to the silversmith, who made it into a carved image and a metal image. And it was in the house of Micah. 5 And the man Micah had a shrine [house of gods], and he made an ephod [refer article: The Ark of God] and household gods [Teraphim], and ordained one of his sons, who became his priest. 6 In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

7 Now there was a young man of Bethlehem in Judah, of the family of Judah, who was a Levite, and he sojourned there. 8 And the man departed from the town of Bethlehem in Judah to sojourn where he could find a place. And as he journeyed, he came to the hill country of Ephraim to the house of Micah. 9 And Micah said to him, “Where do you come from?” And he said to him, “I am a Levite of Bethlehem in Judah, and I am going to sojourn where I may find a place.”

10 And Micah said to him, “Stay with me, and be to me a father and a priest, and I will give you ten pieces of silver a year and a suit of clothes and your living.” And the Levite went in. 11 And the Levite was content to dwell with the man, and the young man became to him like one of his sons. 12 And Micah ordained the Levite, and the young man became his priest, and was in the house of Micah. 13 Then Micah said, “Now I know that the Lord will prosper me, because I have a Levite as priest [Micah’s motive is selfish].”

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis mine:

‘… a certain young man, a Levite from Bethlehem-Judah… is on a journey… for a place where he can settle down and serve in his Levitical capacity. Immediately we sense something is rotten, because it was not the customary procedure in Israel for Levites to just wander around the countryside looking for work. In addition, Bethlehem-Judah was not one of the designated Levitical cities according to the [Levitical] commands. There were 48 of them throughout the land, giving the entire population relatively easy access to their services. 

It is even questionable as to whether or not this man, whose name was Jonathan, was a legitimate Levite at all, since his lineage, given in Judges 18:30, appears to come through the tribe of Manasseh, rather than Levi: “And the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan.”

Since Manasseh was not of the priestly line, this could be a mistranslation, as some have suggested, and perhaps was originally intended to state that Jonathan was descended from Moses, a Levite, since only a slight addition to the Hebrew is required to alter the name to Manasseh.’

Though he may have been a Levite, as the article highlights he was from a non-Levitical city which hints at the fact that he was not of the priestly line at all and if he descended from Gershom the son of Moses, then he definitely had no legitimacy in becoming a priest. Moses’ family was not included with the Levite Priests descending from his brother Aaron. The passage shows that though Micah was older than Jonathan, he had asked him to be a ‘father’ to him. This is in a spiritual sense and parallels the use and meaning of the word father as used by the Roman Catholic Church. The Bible is emphatically clear that a true believer is not to call a priest or minster: father – 1 Peter 1:17.

Matthew 23:9

English Standard Version

“And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.”

Judges 18:1-31

English Standard Version

1 ‘In those days there was no king in Israel. And in those days the tribe of the people of Dan was seeking for itself an inheritance to dwell in, for until then no inheritance among the tribes of Israel had fallen to them.

2 So the people of Dan sent five able men from the whole number of their tribe, from Zorah and from Eshtaol, to spy out the land and to explore it. And they said to them, “Go and explore the land.” And they came to the hill country of Ephraim, to the house of Micah, and lodged there. 3 When they were by the house of Micah, they recognized the voice of the young Levite. And they turned aside and said to him, “Who brought you here? What are you doing in this place? What is your business here?” 

4 And he said to them, “This is how Micah dealt with me: he has hired me, and I have become his priest.” 5 And they said to him, “Inquire of God, please, that we may know whether the journey on which we are setting out will succeed.” 6 And the priest said to them, “Go in peace. The journey on which you go is under the eye of the Lord”

Rather, the All-Seeing Eye as on the Great Seal – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Judges: 7 ‘Then the five men departed and came to Laish and saw the people who were there, how they lived in security, after the manner of the Sidonians, quiet and unsuspecting, lacking nothing that is in the earth and possessing wealth, and how they were far from the Sidonians and had no dealings with anyone. 8 And when they came to their brothers at Zorah and Eshtaol, their brothers said to them, “What do you report?” 

9 They said, “Arise, and let us go up against them, for we have seen the land, and behold, it is very good. And will you do nothing? Do not be slow to go, to enter in and possess the land. 10 As soon as you go, you will come to an unsuspecting people. The land is spacious, for God has given it into your hands, a place where there is no lack of anything that is in the earth [like the United States].”

11 So 600 men of the tribe of Dan, armed with weapons of war, set out from Zorah and Eshtaol, 12 and went up and encamped at Kiriath-jearim in Judah. On this account that place is called Mahaneh-dan to this day; behold, it is west of Kiriath-jearim . 13 And they passed on from there to the hill country of Ephraim, and came to the house of Micah.

14 Then the five men who had gone to scout out the country of Laish said to their brothers, “Do you know that in these houses there are an ephod, household gods, a carved image [idol], and a metal image [idol]? Now therefore consider what you will do.” 15 And they turned aside there and came to the house of the young Levite, at the home of Micah, and asked him about his welfare.

16 Now the 600 men of the Danites, armed with their weapons of war, stood by the entrance of the gate. 17 And the five men who had gone to scout out the land went up and entered and took the carved image, the ephod, the household gods, and the metal image, while the priest stood by the entrance of the gate with the 600 men armed with weapons of war. 18 And when these went into Micah’s house and took the carved image, the ephod, the household gods, and the metal image, the priest said to them, “What are you doing?” 

19 And they said to him, “Keep quiet; put your hand on your mouth and come with us and be to us a father and a priest. Is it better for you to be priest to the house of one man, or to be priest to a tribe and clan in Israel?” [1 Kings 12:28-32] 20 And the priest’s heart was glad. He took the ephod and the household gods and the carved image and went along with the people.

21 So they turned and departed, putting the little ones and the livestock and the goods in front of them. 22 When they had gone a distance from the home of Micah, the men who were in the houses near Micah’s house were called out, and they overtook the people of Dan. 23 And they shouted to the people of Dan, who turned around and said to Micah, “What is the matter with you, that you come with such a company?” 24 And he said, “You take my gods that I made and the priest, and go away, and what have I left? How then do you ask me, ‘What is the matter with you?'”

25 And the people of Dan said to him, “Do not let your voice be heard among us, lest angry fellows fall upon you, and you lose your life with the lives of your household.” 26 Then the people of Dan went their way. And when Micah saw that they were too strong for him, he turned and went back to his home.

Yair Davidiy:

‘The migrating warriors of Dan described themselves as “angry fellows” … implying that they were highly dangerous. The expression translated as “angry fellows” in Hebrew is “mari-nefesh” meaning literally “bitter of soul”. The “berserker” or crazed inspired warrior of Scandinavian tradition reflects an aspect of Dan. Samson also exhibited qualities of the berserker. The personality of Dan includes an element of manic depression, resentment, and hidden anger.’

Judges 27 ‘But the people of Dan took what Micah had made, and the priest who belonged to him, and they came to Laish, to a people quiet and unsuspecting, and struck them with the edge of the sword and burned the city with fire. 28 And there was no deliverer because it was far from Sidon, and they had no dealings with anyone. It was in the valley that belongs to Beth-rehob.

Then they rebuilt the city and lived in it. 29 And they named the city Dan, after the name of Dan their ancestor, who was born to Israel; but the name of the city was Laish at the first. 30 And the people of Dan set up the carved image for themselves, and Jonathan the son of Gershom, son of Moses, and his sons were priests to the tribe of the Danites until the day of the captivity of the land. 31 So they set up Micah’s carved image that he made, as long as the house of God was at Shiloh.’

The Hebrew Danites as the Greek Danaans, John R. Salverda – emphasis mine: 

‘The Danites were a band of rovers, they were not satisfied with the size of the allotment which the official coalition of the Jacobites had afforded them, around Zorah and Eshtaol, so they defied the priesthood of Phinehas, appointed a Levitical priesthood of their own, (directly descended from Moses, not Aaron) and set out to found new lands. First they went up north, and, with the apparent approval, or at least the acquiescence of the Sidonians and the Upper Manassehites [half tribe of East Manasseh], they took the city of Laish, (This city, while the Scriptures, at Judges 18:7, say that it was “far from Sidon” itself, was very close to the Sidonian capitol at the time, a place called Hazor) killed all the Laishites, moved in, and called the place Dan, after their own tribal patriarch. They also held the seaport of Joppa, and it must have been their friendly relations with the seafaring Sidonians that allowed them to build a fleet of ships there.’ 

In summary, a Levite descended from Moses and therefore not of the priestly line, living in Judah came upon the house of Micah who may have been either an Ephraimite, a Danite or possibly a descendant of Judah dwelling in Mount Ephraim. Micah’s mother may have been Delilah and by extension, his father might have been the dead Samson. Micah has an impressive shrine with important religious artefacts and items of worship. He is wealthy and offers the Levite a position in his household as a Priest. 

Later, a party of Danite warrior-explorers looking for a new home – as they were wedged in a narrow strip of land – with the burdens of a large population, Philistine neighbours and Canaanites pressing in on them, happen upon Micah’s home. It must have been an impressive house, near the main thoroughfare of Ephraim. 

The Bible says they recognised the voice of the Levite, but we are not told of the past relationship. With the same selfish motives as Micah, but a higher wage and benefits on offer they make the greedy Jonathan an offer he can’t refuse. 

So the Levite Jonathan joins the renegade Danites. The Danites have taken every last vestige of items from Micah’s impressive and no doubt expensive shrine. Micah learns of the theft and chases the Danite party down and confronts them. The larger number of Danites threaten Micah with death if he persists in his foolish notion of wanting his valuable possessions of veneration returned. 

The Danites continue on their trek, exhibiting their penchant for violence in ambushing and destroying the defenceless and peaceful city of Laish and then rebuilding it and renaming the city Dan. And so ends any substantial dialogue on Dan forever. It is interesting that this episode follows Samson and that 1,100 pieces of silver is mentioned. Strongly inferring that Micah, is Delilah’s son. And whether the plot relating to idolatry hints at Micah being either a Danite or from Ephraim; it is with Danites visiting his home, that the association between Dan and Mount Ephraim remains integral and thus appearing to be much more, than a coincidence of happenstance. 

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – capitalisation their, emphasis mine:

‘The city of Laish… was located in the extreme upper Jordan Valley, north of the Sea of Galilee. The residue of the tribe of Dan settled along the various tributaries that fed into the Jordan River at the base of Mt. Hermon. This area marked the northernmost point in all of Israel, and the expression “from Dan to Beersheba” (Judges 20:1…) became a common saying among the Israelites… indicating the boundaries of the land from north to south. 

the tribe of Dan embraced idolatry and false worship more readily than any of the other children of Israel Dan, in essence, became the facilitator of paganism for the children of Israel, and as such, the main polluter of God’s way among the people.

The choice of territory in which the Danites ultimately settled is, in itself, quite strategic… it put them as far away as possible from the rest of the nation, and especially from Shiloh, where the center of [true] worship in Israel was situated at this time in their history. In positioning themselves in this fashion, they were subjected to great temptation by the heathen societies to the north and west. Inevitably, given their location, they came under the influence of… the [Edomites].

Esau vowed to kill his brother to whom he had sold the birthright, and to regain what he had lost through the treachery of Jacob. From this early conflict stems the great struggle between the descendants of these two individuals’ – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.  

‘Not only did the false worship center established in northern Israel by the Danites for hundreds of years vie directly with Shiloh for the spiritual allegiance of the people, there is evidence that this evil system may have had a direct connection with the crucifixion of [Jesus], for we read in [the] famous Messianic passage of Psalms 22 [1, 11-13]:

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?… Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help. Many bulls have compassed me: strong BULLS OF BASHAN have beset me round. They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion”.

… the 22nd Psalm is unquestionably about the dying Messiah. Note it is said that “strong bulls of Bashan” were present at the crucifixion, and that they uttered slurs at Christ as He hung suffering and dying on the cross. Bashan, the area to which Dan migrated, was famous for its strong bulls, and in this instance, they are used as a symbol for the enemies of Messiah, indeed, the very ones perhaps most responsible for His death. This statement may have far greater implications and repercussions than are normally attached to it’ – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came Tidwell with His Creation.

We shall now consider research and ancient history on the migrations of Dan, comments on his identity and the role of Dan in the latter days. Attention will be given to a number of options on who Dan is today and where his people might be located. Be aware constant reader, a definitive answer on the tribe of Dan is not necessarily the outcome, as Dan continually generates more questions than answers. 

Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950: 

‘Dan was originally divided into two parts, one about Joppa, a seaport, and the other in the north of Palestine. Dan refused to fight along side the other tribes against the Gentiles (Judges 5:17). Dan would judge, or stand up to rule, his own people as one of the separate tribes of Israel indicating he would gain self-government in the following manner: “Dan shall be a serpent in the way, a horned snake in the part, that biteth the horse’s heels, so that his rider falleth, backward.” Ireland has done just that to England. In fact, the symbol of the illegal Irish Republican Army was the coiled snake! Dan would also be like a young lion leaping forth, an apt description of Denmark, which acquired the Virgin Islands, Greenland, Iceland and other islands in her heyday. Especially unique is the fact that of all the tribes Northern Dan still preserves their father’s name the Danes!’ 

As of time of writing, this writer has yet to locate a snake in any of the symbols of the Irish Republican Army. We have studied the Irish and the Danes. Similar as cousins, they do not share near identical autosomal DNA – reminiscent of brothers – and are identifiable as Gad and Medan respectively – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Although Dan was identifiable in two geographic locations in the past, there are no direct clues in the Bible that this would be a present day or repeated scenario. Well, that is not entirely true as though it was not stated as such, the precedent can be seen to have been replicated in our modern age, as we shall discover.  

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘… a segment of the tribe of Dan may have been the first of the Israelites to migrate beyond the confines of the early boundaries. So early, in fact, that their initial departure can be traced all the way back to the time of the Exodus itself, and perhaps even before that’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘Looking back into the annals of ancient history, we come upon the testimony of the Egyptian chronicler Hecataeus of Abdera. Writing during the reign of Ptolemy I, Hecataeus records a remarkable story that is nothing less than that of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt. The following is a most significant excerpt from his account:

“Once, when a PESTILENCE had broken out in Egypt, the cause of the visitation was generally ascribed to the ANGER OF THE GODS. As MANY STRANGERS dwelled in Egypt, and observed DIFFERENT CUSTOMS in religion and sacrifice, it came to pass that the hereditary worship of the gods was being given up in Egypt. The Egyptians, therefore, were of opinion that they would obtain no alleviation of the evil unless they REMOVED THE PEOPLE OF FOREIGN EXTRACTION. When they were driven out, the noblest and bravest part of them, as some say, under noble and renowned leaders, DANAUS and Cadmus, came to HELLES (GREECE) [by sea]; but the great bulk of them migrated into the land, not far removed from Egypt, which is now called JUDEA. These emigrants were led by Moses, who was most distinguished among them for wisdom and bravery” (Dr. Max Duncker, The History of Antiquity, I:456-466).

‘Another well-respected early historian is Diodorus of Sicily. He composed a 40-volume history of [the] world, and includes the following very similar information regarding the tribe of Dan:

“They say also that those who set forth with DANAUS, likewise from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city of Greece, Argos, and that the nations of the Colchi in Pontus and that of the Jews, which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by certain emigrants from their country (Egypt); and this is the reason why it is a long-established institution among these peoples to circumcise their male children… the custom having been brought over from Egypt. Even the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt” (History of the World, Book. I, section 28, pages 1-5).

‘… an element of the tribe of Dan migrated by sea to Greece, during the general time-frame of the Israelite exodus from Egypt, perhaps even somewhat earlier, as certain ancient testimony, especially that of Petavius in his History of the World, actually puts their departure as occurring within only a few years after the death of Joseph [in 1616 BCE]. This presumably would have been at a juncture when the Israelites were not yet slaves in Egypt, and might well have had the freedom to leave on their own volition.’

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, Dan – The Serpents Trail, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘The territory into and through which the ten tribes made their escape was just north of the Caucasus, which in ancient geography, as may be seen by consulting ancient maps, was known as the territory of the Sarmatians, while the pass, or gate, was sometimes called “The Sarmatian Gate.” 

Not a few have shown, and upon good grounds, that the name of Sarmatia was derived from Samaria, the earlier home of these wandering people, whose general name among themselves was Scoloti, but whom the Greeks called Scythians, or Nomades. From that word Scoloti we have the more modern name Scoti, and the still more modern Scots, which, of course, mean the same as the Greek, Scythia and Nomades, i.e., wanderers. 

But this is only one of the many names by which these wanderers, or Scots, may be traced, for in their western march across the European continent, which was necessarily slow, Ephraim did obey the prophetic injunction, “Set thee up waymarks,” (Jeremiah 31:21). And just here we must keep in mind the fact that in the ancient Hebrew there are no written vowels, and that in the word Dan there are only two letters used which are equivalent to the English D and N. Hence it makes no difference if the word is Dan, Don, Dun, Din or Den, it is equal to the Hebrew D-n, in which the speaker sounds the vowel according to characteristics of his own dialect. 

On the west side of the Black Sea, there is, according to ancient geography, a region which was called “Moesia,” signifying the land of the Moses-ites, and the people of which were called Moesi, or Mosesites. These people had such great reverence for a person whom they called Zal-moxis… T. R. Howlett says, “Zalmoxis, whom Herodotus supposed them to worship as a god, is without doubt Moses; Zal signifying “chief,” or “leader,” while Moxis and Aloses are but the Greek for the Hebrew Mosie, which is also rendered Moses in our tongue.”

Moesia was bounded on the south by Mace-Don-ia and the Dar-DAN-ells, and on the north by the river DAN-ube. In the territory of Sarmatia, which in some maps is Scythia, in others Gomer, there are the rivers D-n-iper, D-n-ister, and the DON. The fact that the Dnieper and the Dniester are written without a vowel between the D and the N is quite as significant as the fact that the Don has one. 

Professor Totten says: “There is no grander theme upon the scrolls of history than the story of this struggle of the Anglo-Saxons westward. The very streams of Europe mark their resting-places, and in the root of nearly all their ancient names (Dan, or Don) recall the sacred stream, Jor-dan – river of rest – from whose banks, so far away, as exiles, they set out. It was either the little colony of Dan, obeying its tribal proclivity for naming everything it captured (Judges 18:1-12-29) after their father, or else the mere survival of a word and custom; but, none the less, it serves to trace these wanderers like a trail.”

… Jacob does not say, as many seem to think, that Dan in the last days shall become the ruler of the other tribes of Israel; for the Eternal One has said, “Judah is my law giver.” But what Jacob does say is, that Dan as one of the tribes of Israel shall render a verdict, or judge his people Israel. It may be that the word Israel, as used in the prophecy above, is used in its broadest sense, and includes both the house of Israel and the house of Judah.

It is now more than two hundred and fifty years since a Danish peasant, who, with his daughter, was following their plow in their native country, when the daughter’s plow turned up a bright and glittering something, which upon examination proved to be a golden trumpet. It was taken to the authorities, and, beyond all doubt, identified as one of the SEVEN Golden Trumpets used in the altar service of the temple at Jerusalem. 

This trumpet, which is now in the National Museum at Copenhagen, is ornamented with a lily and pomegranate the lily being the national flower of Egypt, and the pomegranate that of Palestine…

Just before Moses died… of Dan he said: “Dan is a lion’s whelp; he shall leap from Bashan.” Bashan was on Palestinean territory, hence Dan is to leap from that country, but it is left for history to tell where that leap landed him. That Dan’s leap landed him in Ireland is evident, for in that island we find to this day Dans-Lough, Dan-Sower, Dan-Monism, Dun-dalke, Dun-drum, Don-egal Bay and Don-e-gal City, with Dun-glow and Lon-don-derry just north of them. But there is also Din-gle, Dun-garven and Duns-more, which means “More Dan’s.” And, really, there are so many more that we have no space for them, except to mention Dangan Castle [Meath], where the Duke of Wellington was born, and to say that Dunn in the Irish language means just what Dan means in the Hebrew, i.e., a judge. 

It is remarkable that there is not only a river Don in Scotland, but also a river Doon, and that there is also a river Don in England. Also that these countries are as full of Dans, Dons and Duns as Ireland, for in them are not only such names as Dundee, Dunkirk, Danbar, Dunraven, and many others, but the name of DAN, the son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham, lies buried in the name of their capital cities… E-DAN-burgh and Lon-don. Surely Dan hath Dan-ed, or judged among his people, and thus fulfilled the sure word of prophecy.’

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘One additional piece of evidence of the substantial role of the Israelite tribes in the ancient world will be examined. Ezekiel 27 lists many ancient nations which traded in Tyre’s marketplace… [including] the tribe of Dan as having an identity separate and distinct from Israel and Judah. 

This fact was hinted at earlier in the reference to Judges 5:17 that “Dan remain(ed) in ships.” This passage indicates that the tribe of Dan… had a nautical identity. If a portion of the Danites had an identity separate from Israel and Judah, secular records should bear witness to that fact… and they do! 

The Encyclopaedia Britannica records that the Greeks listed the “Danaans,” or “Danuana” as a distinct, seafaring people who were present in the eastern Mediterranean Sea as early as 1230­ – 1190 B.C. This is the same time frame that Judges 5:17 ascribes a nautical identity to the Danites [1184-1144 BCE]. Bibles which affix dates to chapter headings typically show a date around 1200 B.C. for Judges 5:17. Therefore, the biblical and secular accounts agree on the dating of the tribe of Dan’s separate, maritime identity.

These “Danaans” were part of a seafaring alliance of peoples known as the Sea Peoples who raided and settled Mediterranean coastlands at that time. The connection between the tribe of Dan and the Sea Peoples has also been noted in Biblical Archaeology Review, in an article which cites the work of Israeli archaeologist, Yigael Yadin, in the following comment: 

“…The Danites were originally not members of the Israelite confederation… They seem, rather, to have been connected with a group of the Sea Peoples called Danuna or Denyen in Egyptian sources, and known to the Greeks as the Danoi.”

‘Dan’s apparent independence from the other tribes occurred at a time when the Israelite tribes were loosely ruled by a series of Judges who predated the Israelite monarchical period. During that time, the Israelite tribes had no strong central government, and the tribes were free to pursue more independent paths. The fact that the “Danaans” were located in the eastern Mediterranean region also supports their being the tribe of Dan as that is precisely where one would expect the tribe of Dan to be present. It is also recorded that the “Danaans” furnished some of the earliest settlers of ancient Ireland. This account not only further supports a strong nautical tradition for the ancient tribe of Dan, but their presence in ancient Ireland also indicates that several of the Israelite tribes had roles in the early colonization of the British Isles’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘If Dan, one of the lesser tribes of Israel, was itself sufficiently numerous that the Greeks preserved its prominent, independent identity approximately two centuries prior to the reigns of Kings David and Solomon, it is easier to understand how great the entire Israelite nation could become when all twelve tribes were finally united under a strong ruler. 

As a maritime tribe, it would be especially easy for many Danites to sail away from Israel in their ships. Much of the tribe of Dan apparently sailed as far as Hibernia (modern Ireland) in their effort to quit the area. Their arrival in considerable force in Hibernia as the Tuatha De Danaans is recorded in the early histories of Ireland. The battles of the Danaans to establish a new homeland in Ireland have even been recorded in the annals of ancient Irish history. In her book, Ireland, Emily Lawless cited these ancient historical records that the Danaans fought a three ­day battle against the Firboigs which centered around a hill called Ben­levi, after which they built many stone forts. 

“Ben­levi” is of obvious Hebrew origin as it includes the name of the Israelite tribe of Levi. J.H. Allen’s, Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, records that “the greatest influx of the Tuatha de Danaan to Ireland” occurred around 720 B.C., just after the fall of Samaria .

The Irish islands called the Arans still have remains of old forts bearing the name of the tribe of Dan. Two forts on the Arans are called Dun Aonghasa and Dun Chonchuir. Ancient Hebrew did not write vowels so the vowels “u” in these words was added later. It is the consonants D­N which preserve the name of “Dan.” These forts have an antiquity “certainly predating Christ,” and “had been crumbling for long centuries before the Arans entered recorded history.” They have been attributed to the Firboigs at the time of “the legendary early invasions of Ireland,” although the name D­N attached to the castles indicates they may have been constructed (or conquered) by the Danaans, the tribe of Dan.

Since the tribe of Dan had a habit of renaming existing geographic features after their tribal name when they came into an area (Judges 19:47), it is possible these forts were, indeed, built by the Firboigs [the tribe of Reuben – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes], and renamed after the Danites conquered them. History has no record that the Danaans ever moved again after their arrival in Ireland [or does it?].’ 

Recall, the Fir Bolgs were the tribe of Reuben. We will pick up on Collin’s comment on the tribe of Dan not moving from Ireland. If this were true, then the Dananns would be in Northern Ireland and not in the southern portion of Ireland as commonly taught by nearly all Israelite identity adherents. The Tuatha de Danann, lived in and ruled from Ulster and not anywhere near the southern or central provinces of Ireland. 

Collins: ‘As an interesting digression, it is clear that the Irish have not forgotten their Danaan roots as a 1980s Irish band in Minneapolis named itself “De Danaan.” There was also an intriguing account in U.S. News and World Report Magazine which, noting the presence of then New York Mayor Ed Koch (a prominent American Jew) in the 1987 St. Patrick’s Day parade, added that Mayor Koch: 

“… explained his presence at the head of the grand parade thusly: It’s part of my roots. The 10 lost tribes of Israel we believe ended up in Ireland.”

Website 1Ephraimite provides an amplification on the derivation of ‘Tuatha Dedannan’ and includes the Encyclopaedia Britannica’s definition – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

“Firstly Tuatha Dedannan’s MODERN translation is “People of the Goddess Danu”, but which under the Old Irish spelling of Tuath Dedanaan translates as “Tribes of the God whose Mother is Anu”. The “D” is a 10th Century prosthetic addition because Christian scribes believed Anu was related to the continental Goddess Danu. But who are often referred to as the Tuatha De and referred to as the “Children of Don” within Britain. Reflecting in the fact that Tuatha, (meaning “Tribes”) is the plural of Tuath (meaning “tribe”).’

In Old Irish, tuatha means: ‘family’ or ‘clan’ and de Danaan means: ‘of Danu.’

‘Notice what’s said in the online Encyclopædia Britannica

Tuatha Dé Danann, (Gaelic: “People of the Goddess Danu”), in Celtic mythology, a race inhabiting Ireland before the arrival of the Milesians (the ancestors of the modern Irish) [Hiberi, Goidels or Gaels]. They were said to have been skilled in magic, and the earliest reference to them relates that, after they were banished from heaven because of their knowledge, they descended on Ireland in a cloud of mist [in 1230* BCE]. They were thought to have disappeared into the hills when overcome by the Milesians [Hiberi Scotti or Gaels in 1046 BCE]. The Leabhar Gabhála (Book of Invasions), a fictitious history of Ireland from the earliest times, treats them as actual people, and they were so regarded by native historians up to the 17th century. In popular legend they have become associated with the numerous fairies still supposed to inhabit the Irish landscape.’

Fictitious because it contains, myth, legend and the fantastical. This doesn’t mean the contents are all fairy tales. Embellished maybe and allegorical. Anything that links the tribe of Dan with Nephilim, giants, angels (which would include fairies) and magic, cannot be dismissed out of hand without investigation. 

Fairies are just another form of ‘little people.’ In the same category as leprechauns, Gnomes, Gremlins, Grey aliens and every other form of mythical or supernatural diminutive entity. 

According to Parker’s Astrology, the Eighth Astrological House is from October 24 to November 22 and Scorpio happens to be the eighth astrological sign. Now according to J R Church: ‘To Dan was given the symbol of Scorpio, which, in the ancient Egyptian zodiac was a snake‘ – Guardians of the Grail, page 117. ‘And perhaps there is significance in the fact that the Eighth House of astrology rules the mysteries of sex, death and rebirth – and the occult’ – Picknett and Prince, page 204. 

Legend records that the Tuathe de Danann came to Ireland under the leadership of Nuada, a son of Danu. Among the Dananns were the leaders Dagda, Oghma, Goibhniu and Bres.* It is said they won the First Battle of Moytura in 1230 BCE, Magh Tuiredh against the Fir Bolg – the tribe of Reuben – because of their ‘technologically superior weapons and magic.’ The Fomorian giants had been the Danaan’s ally before their arrival in Ireland, but after some time, they became their deadly enemy. Under the leadership of Lugh, the Dananns defeated the Formorians in the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE. 

While the Tuatha De Danann were initially at peace with the Fomorians, an alliance was agreed with no objections to the Danites settling in Ireland. The fact that the Fomorian giants were willing to share territory with humans is suspicious. It isn’t though, if the Danites already had a history of intermingling with the Elioud. In sealing the alliance, Balor gave his daughter Ethlinn (or Eithne), in marriage to the Danaan Cian, the son of Dian Cecht or Connacht. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 151 – emphasis mine:

ancient Irish and Welsh legends articulate a remarkable history of giants… which included Fingall and his son Ossian… The Tuatha Denaan were fairy folk that settled Ireland sometime after 3000 BCE. Tuatha Denaan were the divine children of the matriarchal goddess [Dana and the god Dagda], thus making them also a Nephilim race. They were a magical race of gods with human personalities; they argued, killed, got drunk, committed adultery, and acted jealous. Tuatha Denaan reigned until they were driven to the otherworld by the Millesians… the Tuatha Denaan descendants [drove] out the Formorians, who were… giants… a race of monsters… hairy (a Nephilim trait)… [and] had one eye… similar to the Greek Cyclops.’

The tribe of Dan in part have had their pedigree blended with that of the Nephilim in like manner as some from the descendants of Esau – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. ‘The Tuatha De Danaan arrived in a cloud of mist’ – though the 12th century Book of Invasions states that they wafted in through the air as a host of spirits – with the Fir Bolg discovering they were in Connacht; having arrived from the west and the Atlantic Ocean about May 1*. 

According to the Cath Maige Tuired, this mist was actually smoke from their burning ships. The Tuatha de Danaan had made the decision not to flee to their ships if they were defeated. Eochaid Mac Eirc^ was king of Ireland and of the Fir Bolg. The Danites were more advanced than the Fir Bolg. The respective emissaries looked each other over, with markedly different clothes and the superior Danite weapons. For instance, their spears were razor sharp and well crafted compared to the Fir Bolg spears with blunt points. Recall, the Danite ability with metal working. They exchanged weapons and departed in peace. The Fir Bolg decided to renege on dividing their portion of Ireland with the Tuathe de Danann and declared war. As a result, the Fir Bolg supposedly lost one hundred thousand warriors; including their King^. 

Though the Danite King Nuada did not die, he lost his right hand (or arm) in the battle when he fought the Fir Bolg champion, Sreng. For the Danann, losing any body part, resulted in losing the right to remain king. The Tuatha de Danann chose a new king in Bres.* A peace treaty was drawn up, with the Reubenite Fir Bolg receiving Connacht province as their land; while the Danann won the right to rule Ireland, living in the northern province of Ulster. 

The Tuathe de Danann of the ‘northern isles’ were reputed to have originated from four magical, otherworldly cities, each one ruled by a Druid, a form of Wizard (or Bard). The cities were called Falias, Gorias, Findias and Murias. The Druids names were, in respective order: Morfesa, Esras, Uiscias and Semias. In each city there was a treasure or a talisman. The Danann were adept in a variety of skills including arts and crafts, philosophy, medicine, music, warfare, science, and tellingly, the occult and magic. They were talented scholars, bards, druids, craftsmen and warriors and their descendants are described as having otherworldly powers.** 

From Manannan, much like Mahaneh-dan, a subsequent king, Lugh, possessed gifts of the Tuatha de Danann. These magical gifts had come from the four great otherworldly cities. From Falias, the Danann received the ‘talking stone of truth’ – for it would reveal the rightful king of Ireland – called Lia Fail. It was also known as the ‘Stone of Destiny’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The second treasure was from the city Findias and it was a great magical sword, called Freagarthach, the ‘Answerer,’ which Lugh and Nuada before him had wielded.

Lugh also gave the ‘invincible spear’ which he had obtained from Gorias.

The final treasure was from Murias and was the Cauldron of Dagda which could miraculously feed everyone without emptying. These gifts were from the goddess Danu and were to aid the Tuathe de Danaan in defeating the Fomorian giants. 

When the Gaels in turn, defeated the Dananns – who had sent the goddess Eriu against them – they either retreated to Tir na n-Og, the Land of Youth, led by The Dagda or continued to live on the land with the Gaels, but their underground homes, ‘subterranean palaces’, were hidden by magic from the eyes of mortals.

As the Hiberi Scotti (Gaels) had defeated Eriu, they purportedly named the Island Erin, the native form of her name. Notice the suffix Og and the link with the Nephil-Elioud giant of Bashan, King Og. The Tuatha de Danann became known as the Daoine Sidhe. 

Their homes were known as the Sidhe mounds, or the Otherworld. The Tuatha de Danann were also called the Aes Sidhe or the ‘People of the Sidhe.’ The term sidhe now means faery in the Irish language. In the Theosophy the Tuatha de Danann are known as Davana. 

In the Otherworld, the Danaan remained young and seemingly immortal; as in, they could live a very long life and appear to remain young, but they could be killed and destroyed just like any mortal human. When they intervened in human wars, they were armed with invisibility, flaming lances and magical white shields. In the Ulster Cycle, the Tuatha de Danann were believed to be Celtic deities. Contrastingly, in the Fenian Cycle, the Dananns ‘had degenerated into nothing more than fey people’, literally the faery folk. The Tuathe de Danaan became frequently associated with faeries – or little people.** 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 667 – emphasis mine:

‘The Tuatha Denaan were regarded… as the world’s most noble race[their] mythologies are memories of opalescent fallen angels and the Shining Nephilim offspring they produced…pronounced shee (shay). The Irish called them the Sidhe Race; the Scots called the Fair(y) Folk the Sith Race; the Welsh called them the Tyleth Teg; the Cornish… the Fees; and the English… as the Still Folk, Fair Folk and the Fair Family… the Tuatha Denaan excelled over all other peoples of the earth in the proficiency of every art. Postdiluvian Tuatha hailed from Scythia and were also known as Royal Scyths [Zarah from Judah] The Tuatha… traversed the Danube River, settling in Germany before migration onwards to Norway and Ireland.’

Yair Davidiy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine: 

“Dana” is another way of pronouncing the Hebrew word [Dan]. It has been claimed that in Ancient Ireland, Dana was a goddess… It was not unknown for ancient peoples to personify themselves with the figure of a goddess. Even now Britain is sometimes represented by a feminine form in the name “Britannia”. Dan… once had widely spread posts throughout the Middle East… Dan had conquered Cyprus and Crete… [with] bases in Cilicia (northwest Syria and southeast Turkey), the north Galilee, and… the port of Jaffa in the land of Israel. An offshoot from the tribe of Dan at an early stage participated in a conquest of Greece that gave rise to Mycenean civilization. 

In Irish accounts the Tribe of Dana came from Greece and arrived via islands in the north which assumedly meant Scandinavia. One of these islands was given the name ASSAL which is also the appellation of a Middle Eastern principality in the region of Gozan on the Khabur River whereto part of the Northern Israelites had been exiled.

An alternative Irish version says that the Dana came from the city of Dan at the foot of mount Libanus (Lebanon) in what was once the area of northern Israel. Even the account which says that the Dana came from or via Greece says that they had fought repeatedly (in Greece) against the Philistines.

The Tribe of Dan in Israel, as seen in the story of their hero Samson (Judges chapters 13-16), was constantly at altercations with the Philistine people. In the Land of Israel the original portion of Dan (in the south) had adjoined the Philistines and partly been taken over by them. Samson was a prototype for the Greek idol Hercules.’

We have established the association between a. Ephraim and the Philistines, b. between Ephraim and Dan and by extension – recall the roots of Ephraim and the Philistines; with serpent-cockatrices for both Dan and the Philistines – and c. between Dan and Philistia. We will discuss what this may all mean later.

Davidiy: ‘An Irish Historian, Thomas Moore, stated that the Tuatha de Danaan (i.e. Tribe of Dana), “after sojourning for some time in Greece… proceeded from thence to Denmark and Norway”. Geoffrey Keating (circa 1570 1646) understood from traditional Irish sources that, the Danaans were a people of great learning and wealth; they left Greece after a battle with the Assyrians, and went to Ireland; and also to Denmark, and called it “DAN-mares”,  “Dan’s country” – 1866 Edition, Volume 1, pages 195-199.

In Irish tradition THE TRIBE OF DANA were described as fair in complexion, wise, culturally advanced, and scientifically proficient. This description and the activities ascribed to the Dana fits the Civilization of Scandinavia during the so-called “Bronze Age”. This civilization was advanced and had contacts with Egypt, Cyprus, Greece, and the Middle East in general. 

Raymond F. McNair makes the following observation… “It is certainly no coincidence that the Irish Gaelic word Dun or Dunn means “Judge,” just as Dan does in Hebrew!” It is also worth mentioning that many of the policemen, lawyers, and judges in the U.S.A. today are of Irish descent. 

In Welsh sources the Tribe of Dana is paralleled by the People of DON. The Welsh spoke of the goddess Don and her consort Bile the god of the dead. Britain was nicknamed “the Honey Isle of Bile”. The name “Wales” derives from a permutation of the name “Bile”! BILE is the equivalent of Bel meaning the Canaanite Baal whom the Romans in Syria identified with Saturn’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘The Romans considered Britain to be the domain of Saturn. They also equated the god Saturn with Israel. Another form of the name “Bile” is “Beli”.

The Welsh collection of legends (called Mabinogion) speaks of Beli son of Manogan king of Britain. Beli is thought to be a derivation of Belinus or Bile. Beli is named as the ancestor of Welsh royal houses and is apparently considered (in Welsh tradition) a member of the House of David’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. ‘The Tudor monarchs of England had Royal Welsh origins: “… there is reason to believe that the Tudors* were descended from the old British kings who ruled at the time of the Anglo-Saxon invasions.”

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 564-566 – emphasis mine:

‘The first British Pendragon was Cymbeline from the House of Camelot, dating from 10 CE. The last British Pendragon was Cadwaldr of Gwynedd. He died 664 CE when Britain fell to the… Anglo Saxons. This was the Arthurian* Welsh dynasty, whereby Arthur, the great Celtic chief, led his people against the Saxons and the Romans. Before their downfall, the Royal House of Celtic Britain was known as the famous Red Dragon dynasty of Wales…’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘The Dragon has been incorporated into the ensign of the Prince of Wales and appears on the Welsh flag [first sported by the Welsh king Vortigen* in 410 CE following the Roman withdrawal].’

Though the symbol of the dragon is synonymous with the early Britons, the Welsh and the Tudor monarchs, it is also found in the heraldry of the ‘oldest’ clan in Scotland. Not a surprise as the tribe of Dan has long historical association with the tribe of Benjamin (Scotland).

Clan Carruthers has an etymological link with Cruthers, derived from Cruthin and originating from Cruithni. The name Cruithni applied to the tribe of Benjamin in Northern Ireland, while in Scotland they became known as Picts – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Clan Carruthers – emphasis mine: ‘The earliest known reference to the British Isles, made between 330 and 300 BC by the Greek geographer and voyager Pytheas in his Concerning the Ocean, describes them as the Isles of the Pretani, the ‘Pretani’ thus becoming the most ancient inhabitants of Britain and Ireland to whom a definite name can be given.

In Ireland these ancestors British Pretani (or Britanni) were later to become known as the Cruthins, while in Scotland they became known as Picts… forensic DNA samples already shows… [the Carruthers] are directly descendants to King Alpin and many other Kings of the Picts. The Carruthers genealogy shows a direct link to King Naill or later referred to as O’Neils. 

The name Cruthin also appears in ancient books as Cruithnig or Cruithni… the name Cruthin is still used by Carruthers, who mainly have a very long history in Antrim, Donegal, and Londonderry. It is suggested that Cruthin was not what the people called themselves, but was what their neighbours called them. The word meaning, large, shape, form, as in a physical description of people.

The O’Neills are on the Carruthers Family Tree. In the era of the 4th century, the Cruthins occupied the county just to the east of them. Almost all the counties of Northern Ireland was the land of the Cruthins.    O’Neills were a [part] of Londonderry and to the west. The area of the Cruthins was overseen by the Kings of Strathclyde. In this era, one name was pronounced many ways. Coroters, Cluder, Clut, Cloither, Cluathe, Cluader, Cluaide, Cluither and Chluaither. Around 773 AD, the annals stopped using the term Cruithne in favour of the term Dál nAraidi, who had secured their over-kingship of the Cruthin.’

Clan Carruthers: ‘Ready and Faithful’

Note the unicorn of Joseph, left behind and borrowed by Benjamin; the dragon of Dan (left behind and borrowed by Simeon), much like the dragons of the City of London; the three French fleur-de-lis; the colour red; and the six wings of a seraphim (fire breathing flying dragon).

‘The Prophet Joel condemned the major Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon for having sold Judaeans to the Greeks: “Yea, and what have you to do with me, Tyre, and Sidon, and all the coasts of Palestine?… “Because you have taken my silver and gold… The children also of Judah and the children of Jerusalem have you sold unto the Greeks, that you might remove them far from your border” (Joel 3:4-6). 

Even so, revenge was destined to be taken: “When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up your sons, O Zion, against your sons, O Greece, and made you as the sword of a mighty man” (Zechariah 9:13). What exact events the above verses are referring to is unclear. Nevertheless, the Irish sources do state that a portion of their ancestors had been captives in Greece and had freed themselves. They also refer to possible Judean origins, in part. 

Judah through Tamar begat Pharez and Zerah. One of the sons of Zerah was Calcol (1 Chronicles 2:6). Calcol had been one of those whose name was remembered for their great wisdom (1 Kings 5:11). Calcol was also counted amongst the ancestors of the Irish. Camden (1551-1623) stated that Calcol of Judah sailed from Egypt to Spain (where the city of Zaragossa was named after Zerah), and then on to Ireland where he founded Ulladh’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘(“Ulladh” i.e. Ulster has actually a name similar in some types of Hebrew pronunciation to that of ELADAH of Ephraim (1 Chronicles 7:20). Zerah and Pharez were brothers born to Judah (son of Israel) from Tamar. In Southwest Britain Ptolemy recorded the Tamarus River. There was also a Tamarus River in northwest Spain where the Gaels had sojourned before moving to Ireland…

The red hand has been interpreted to represent Zarah of Judah father of Calcol… Bennett states that, “the ancient and traditional emblem of Ulster was and still is a Red Hand circled by a Scarlet Cord”. “Three of Ulster’s six counties, as well as the towns of Bangor and Dungannon, have the Red Hand as part of their official emblems.”

‘From Ireland, the Scots migrated to Scotland, and the Red Hand, says Bennett: “appears in the Arms of several of the old families and in those of at least fourteen of the Clan Chiefs: Davidson, MacBain, MacNeil*, MacNaughton, MacPherson, MacGillivray, MacDonald of Sleat, Clanranald, and Shaw of Rothiemurchus”.

The Red Hand of Ulster … is a symbol used in heraldry to denote the Irish province of Ulster. It is less commonly known as the Red Hand of O’Neill and the Red Hand of Ireland. Its origins are said to be attributed to the mythical Irish figure… Labraid of the Red Hand… The symbol is strongly rooted in Irish Gaelic culture and is particularly associated with the Ui Neill* clan of Ulster.

The Red Hand symbol is believed to have been used by the Ui Neill clan during its Nine Years’ War (1594-1603) against the spread of English control. The war cry… “Red Hand to victory!” … was also associated with the Ui Neill. After Walter de Burgh became Earl of Ulster in 1243 the de Burgh cross was combined with the Red Hand to create the modern Flag of Ulster. The Red Hand was later included in the Northern Ireland flag and on the shields of counties Cavan, Tyrone, Londonderry, Antrim and Monaghan.’

Ulster Independence Flag

The Red Hand has been interpreted by Identity experts as belonging to the descendants of Zarah, the son of Judah and in the main rightly so, as red is associated with Judah and the hand with Zarah. We learned in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, that red is also strongly associated with Esau. It is interesting that the colour red stands out in Ulster symbolism, where the tribe of Dan dwelt for many centuries. 

We addressed that where Esau is and in particular the Amalekite branch of the Jews –  dwelling primarily in the United States – there is also the trace of a Nephilim bloodline. We are discovering that the same applies with Dan. Dan as the black sheep and bad boy of Jacob’s sons has an identical mission as Esau. What his motive is and why exactly, is a mystery yet to be unravelled. Thus a trail of red may not just be a sign of Judah or Esau, but Dan too; as the colour red is associated with the secret mysteries that certain bloodlines are all tied. 

The tribe of Dan have left place name evidence of their sojourn through Asia Minor, Greece and the isles of the Aegean Sea, not to mention extensively throughout continental Europe and the British Isles. The records of the Tuathe de Danaan living underground are pervasive and should not be overlooked. There are thousands of miles of tunnel networks all over the world which are dated to ancient civilisations. Even today, under every big city there are masses of tunnel networks. Underground facilities are common and not just a modern invention.

For instance, in the area formally known as Cappadocia in northeastern Turkey, thirty-six underground cities have been discovered so far, ‘with some going down eight levels. Some of these cities can hold a population of thousands. The ventilation [systems] are so efficient that even eight floors down the air is still fresh. Thirty vast underground cities and tunnel complexes have also been found near Derinkuya in Turkey’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

The tribe of Dan are not described just as serpentine themselves, they also worshipped fallen Seraphs and allied themselves with their Nephilim brood. 

A researcher on the subject states – emphasis mine: 

‘The name Danaans derived from their serpent Moon goddess, Dana or Diana. The Danaans made the headquarters of their serpent worshipping culture on the island of Rhodes, a name that originates from a Syrian word for serpent. Rhodes was the home of the Danaan brotherhood of initiates and magicians known as the Telchines’ – Article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis. ‘The Greek historian, Diodorus, said these initiates had the ability to heal, change the weather, and ‘shape-shift’ into any form… The Danaans also settled on Cyprus and in ancient times it was known as Ia-Dan or the “Isle of Dan”… [the Danaan] traveled… to Britain where they became known as Tuatha de Danaan or the “People of the Sea.”

The Telchines were regarded as Wizards and Magi, even though for many they were merely Merchants and Warriors. They have been given mythical non-human status as spirits or demons, similar to the Tuathe De Danaan. They were excellent metallurgists, being skilled metal workers in brass and iron and a reminder of the Kenites – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

The Return of the Serpents of Wisdom, Mark Amaru Pinkham:

“The essence of Danaan science stems from music – the controlled manipulation of sound waves – and this becomes recorded in legend as the “music of the spheres” – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘The name Rhodes, which is [connected] to the German “Rot”, meaning red, as with Rothschild (Red-Shield) became a code name for the bloodlines. Malta, too, was an important center in 3500 B.C. and the home of a major Mystery School. Under Malta is a vast network of tunnels and megalithic temples where secret rituals took place and still do today. Malta’s original name was Lato, named after Mother Lato, the serpent goddess’ – the original Leviathan (refer article: Asherah).  

The Knights Templar [precursor to the Freemasons] secret society was formed in the late 11th century to protect the… ‘Le Serpent rouge’ the red^ serpent or serpent [bloodlines], together with their associated order, the highly secretive Priory of Sion. The goals of the Knights Templar and the Illuminati were then and are today to place these serpent bloodlines in all positions of power worldwide and thus form a… centrally controlled one world government’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 664-665 – emphasis mine:

‘… bloodlines of the Tuatha [de Danaan] were (and are to this day) considered sacred and divine; the bloodlines of Nephilim… Celts believed deities were their ancestors and not their creators, tracing their genealogies back through Celtes, Scythes, Albion, and Gog giants. These were the blond or red-haired, blue or green-eyed, fair-skinned descendants of the noble elven Celts. Celtic kings were always ceremoniously wed with mother goddesses. The Druids then kept these genealogies of Irish kings stretching back into the mists of time. This, then, accounts for the originating bloodline of the Irish as being fairy blood from Tuatha Denaan.

Irish descendants of Tuatha later interbred with the migrated… Celts, who interbred with the descendants from the lost tribes of Israel… as well as the Scythians, who then interbred with the alleged descendants of Jesus in England [the true tribe of Judah (refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation)]…

They, in turn, interbred with… Benjamin royal blood [Wayne is referring to the French Merovingian Kings, and not the true tribe of Benjamin in Scotland]… united into the Arthurian bloodline [of the Welsh and the tribe of Simeon]… [culminating] in the Unicorn House of Stuart… These genealogies [all contain] Fairy blood [Nephilim] and Dragon blood [line of Cain originating with Samael the Serpent in the Garden of Eden (refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega)].’

The tribe of Dan’s emblems include the Lion, Scorpion, Eagle and Serpent, but overriding these four and in a real sense an amalgamation of them all is its true symbol, the Dragon. The people of Dan turned to the idolatrous worship of demons – Nephilim in discarnate form – and Baal worship (the Serpent of the Garden of Eden), for they bred with Nephilim and their Elioud offspring.

Dan threw his lot in with Esau and together they will instigate the events which lead into the great tribulation, the time of Jacob’s Trouble and the great Day of the Lord – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Together they will rule the world to its terrifying crescendo. Thus preparing the way for the Beast – the One awaited for eons – and the False Prophet through a centralised world governance with a policy feasting on war, bloodshed and sacrifice – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. 

Dan’s astrological sign of scorpio, symbolises the two distinct paths of the Eagle and the Serpent, with the first representing a spiritual journey transcending upwards; the second creature, a carnal path spiralling downwards. Like the claws of a scorpion, the Danites and Edomites are two pincers working together. The Edomite Jews through the occult ideology of the Kabbalah; the tribe of Dan through the agenda of descendant Freemasonry networks and the overseeing, all seeing eye of the Illuminati. 

Unger Bible Handbook, page 273 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Dan’s position in the journey was on the North of the Tabernacle, with Asher and Naphtali. The standard of the tribe was of white and red^ and the crest upon it an eagle… Jacob had compared Dan to a serpent. Ahiezer substituted the eagle, the destroyer of serpents, as he shrank from carrying an adder upon his flag.’

Note the colours of red and white… colours typically associated with England, Northern Ireland and Wales, the full-blood brothers of the United Kingdom: Judah, Reuben and Simeon.

“… (priests) after the Order of Melchizedek… were the immortals to whom the term ‘phoenix’ was applied and their symbol was the mysterious two-headed bird now called an eagle, a familiar and little understood Masonic emblem.” (Hall, page 108) 

“... the two-headed eagle… is usually depicted in two colors of great mystical significance: red^ and white.” (Cirlot, page 93)’ 

Esau was an inheritor of the line and Way of Cain, through his spiritual rebellion against the Eternal and vengeful plans of destruction for his twin brother Jacob’s descendants; primarily the United States, England and Canada, as well as physically with his intermarriages with the Horites and the Amalekites. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 670-672 – emphasis mine:

‘It would seem, then, that Amalek and his descendants ruled over Seir, while the descendants of Esau reigned over Edom/Idumea… Edomites, unlike the descendants of Amalek in Sier, ran off the Horites and all other Nephilim from the land of Edom, warring with them with the help of God… Theosophists believe the descendants of Esau, and in particular the grandsons of Bashemath… were granted the right to reign as Owl queens and Dragon kings for eternity, in the same spurious spirit and legacy of Lilith… [pointing] to Isaiah 34:10-17, which links screech owls [Barn Owl] and Edom… screech owls were… an unclean bird associated with desolation, a night creature that hops much like a goata nocturnal spectre… a night demon… night monster…’ – Article: Lilith. ‘All is reminiscent of Lilith, the female Oupres, night witch… night vampire… the Hebrew word lilit… the original spelling for the screech owl. It was from the Edomite marriage (Eliphaz and Timna) into the lords of Edom that the Tuatha D’Anu Fairy kings (in part) emerged.’

So too was Dan an inheritor of the antediluvian worship of the fallen dark Angels and their progeny the Nephilim. J R Church states: ‘… The Danites relocated to the northern reaches of the Promised Land. They settled at the foot of Mount Hermon in the territory of Bashan, and adopted the idolatrous Canaanite religion of Baal and Ashtaroth.’* An older name for Mount Hermon is Mount Ba’al-Hermon. 

Song of Solomon 4:8

English Standard Version

‘Come with me from Lebanon, my bride; come with me from Lebanon. Depart from the peak of Amana, from the peak of Senir and Hermon, from the dens of lions [of Dan], from the mountains of leopards.’

Psalm 29:5-6

King James Version

‘The voice of the Lord breaketh the cedars; yea, the Lord breaketh the cedars of Lebanon. He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion [Hermon – Deuteronomy 3:8-9] like a young unicorn.

Psalm 22:12-13, 21

English Standard Version

“Many bulls encompass me; strong bulls of Bashan surround me; they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion… [the Devil – 1 Peter 5:8] Save me from the mouth of the lion! You have rescued me from the horns of the wild oxen [unicorns]!”

These verses may draw attention superficially to the heraldry symbols of the Lion of England and the Unicorn of Scotland, but the symbolism is that of the Lion of Dan and the Bull and calf worship of Baal. It is no coincidence that the lions of Bashan and hence Dan are linked to the Bull (or Unicorn), symbols of Joseph. 

We have discussed in length in the article, Asherah, her role as not only the Adversary, but as consort and mother to Baal, as well as Lilith, their daughter. Baal means lord and the preeminent Baal of the Old Testament is Beelzebub in the New Testament. Beelzebub in turn is none other than the being translated misleadingly in the Book of Isaiah as Lucifer, with his true identity the Serpent in Eden and personal name, Samael. 

An intriguing quote by an unknown author – emphasis mine: 

‘Fortunately, a stone image of Asherah has survived… found in [the] ruins of Dan, where the golden calf was worshipped in what is now northern Israel, (which) dates from the eighth century B.C.E. The Goddess strongly resembles her neighboring deities Anet, Astarte, Ashtaroth.’*

The rebellious Angels descended upon Mount Hermon and it was their headquarters. Located at the 33rd degree parallel latitude and longitude from the Paris meridian – Article: 33.

Quote from an unknown source: ‘”Prior to the adoption in 1884 of Greenwich as the international Zero Meridian, each country made use of its own. The French Zero Meridian… is still used on the official maps produced by the Institut Geographique National… (Giovanni Domenico) Cassini’s meridian arc is still marked upon French maps as the Paris Zero.” Note: Using the Greenwich Zero Meridian, the northern territory of Dan lies at 35.5 degrees longitude. However, if the Paris Zero Meridian is used, having a 2.5 difference from Greenwich, Dan is found to lie at the 33rd degree longitude and latitude.

A comment online – emphasis mine:

‘… the sons of Lamech [Tubal-Cain (Tu-Baal Cain)] and descendants of Cain [Article: Na’amah], as well as Hiram Abiff the architect (a different person than King Hiram of Tyre), are all greatly honored and celebrated in the Masonic rituals. King Solomon, a follower of El (Jehovah), cooperated with King Hiram, the Phoenician king of Tyre, in building the Temple at Jerusalem. King Hiram’s father was Abi-baal, and Hiram was succeeded as king of Tyre by his son Baal-Eser I. 

Here, in the cooperation between the Baal king of Tyre and the El king Solomon may be the beginning of “strange gods” insinuating themselves into the court of King Solomon’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son]. “For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods…” (1 Kings 11:4) Solomon by then “built a high place (mound)” for Chemosh and for Baal-Molech.) 1 Kings 11:7)’ – Article: Belphegor.

It is not a coincidence that Freemasonry has 33 levels of initiation into their secrets. The biggest secret once you have scaled all 33 degrees and beyond… is that the Lord of Light they worship is not the Eternal One, but an arch nemesis, Samael – the light bringer – who in turn is subordinate to Asherah. Freemasons are deceptively oblivious to the true god their highest echelons worship. Ancient texts reveal that the spiritual hierarchy under Samael is comprised of thirty-three gods and it is this arrangement which forms the ultimate basis for the esoteric significance of this specific number – refer article: 33

The number thirty-three may have a connection with the world prior to the great flood. The area of Babylon is situated on the 33rd degree north parallel. There is reason to believe that it was here that Cain travelled when he went to the Land of Nod – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. If this area had pre-flood significance, as it certainly did after the flood during the reign of Nimrod, then the ancient occult significance of the number thirty-three, is firmly established. 

The tribe of Dan has influenced the course of Freemasonry from its Merovingian dynasty and Knight Templar roots. The symbols of the tribe of Dan are common to the Merovingians and the Royal House of Stewart. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 542-543, 545, 567 – emphasis mine:

‘The standard superficial symbol for Rosicrucianism is the rose cross, similar to that of the Templars, who wore it as their emblem, and of the Fisher Kings, who bore it as a birthmark – the Mark of Cain… rosi and crux… Latin words… Ros signifies dew, which to alchemists is the solvent of gold or an elixir – Article: The Ark of God. Crux… equivalent to light… from which Lux is derived… the root for… “light” and “Lucifer” [aka: Baphomet, Ba’al, Beelzebub]… crux is the chemical hieroglyph for light… the authentic elixir of immortality… the five petal rose… is a symbol for reincarnation because it can fruit without being pollinated… it can die but be born again identical to itself… the oldest of the rose genera… the Rosa Rugosa, had five petals that modelled pentagonal/pentagram symmetry, like the guiding star of Venus… the orbit of Venus, when placed against a backdrop of the zodiac, forms a five-pointed star

… the Rosi Crucis, is more accurately described as a dragon incurved to circle a red^ cross, known as the Mark of Cain.The Rosi Crucis was a lucid sign known to the ancient Egyptians as Ourobous… The formal Dragon Court remained… active in the English kingship through William the Conqueror and the Stuart kingship via Robert the Bruce. The Dragon Court was toppled in England after the fall of the Stuart dynasty, which was replaced by the Hanoverian dynasty of Germany that reigns to this day’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III ‘… in Britain, the Draconian order known as the Rosicrucian Anglicae has maintained the [Ordo Draconis] tradition to this day in secrecy… as well as in other mystic organisations of Great Britain.’

The number three in the Bible means ‘finality’ or a ‘decision.’ This is quite appropriate considering the momentous decision ‘two hundred’ (actually many more, refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod) angels made with their leader Samyaza. The number thirty-three in numerology signifies a master number. Eleven through to ninety-nine are all powerful numbers. In numerology, the number thirty-three signifies ‘service.’ Again this is applicable to the dark angels and their mission accompanying Samyaza, who was either serving the aims of Samael, or was actually the Serpent of Eden himself – Genesis 3:15. 

In the occult, thirty-three is connected with opening the Third Eye and ‘attaining the highest spiritual consciousness attainable’ by a human being, with mastery over the self. The number 333 represents the transformation from the physical dimensions to the spiritual plane ‘through death, resurrection and ascension.’ 

The number 333 doubled, is also a veiled and hidden symbol of the more sinister 666. Numbers are extremely important to occultists; they are highly significant in the Bible; and they are the foundation of every scientific endeavour; for all DNA and encoding of life is but a mathematical formula. All computer programs are binary numbers. Numbers are the base of everything that is alive, exists or is created. Much could be said on many significant numbers, not just the number thirty-three. For now, the two most famous 33’s in the Bible are the age of the Messiah when he was sacrificed in his 33rd year (Article: The Christ Chronology) and the number of Angels who followed Satan the Adversary into rebellion, a third or 33.3% recurring. 

Cutting Edge – emphasis mine: 

‘Since the reign of Sir Francis Bacon and Queen Elizabeth I (1590 – 1603), Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry have ruled England and Europe with an increasingly iron hand’ – Article: The Shakespeare Shadow. ‘Once Adam Weishaupt established the Masters of the Illuminati on May 1, 1776, Freemasonry has been gradually moving the entire world into the Kingdom of Antichrist [the] New World Order’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

This is the society where the ultimate goal is that from “The Christ” on downward, all the peoples of the world still living after the “Cleansing Cycle” will so spiritually evolve… that they will attain immortality on earth. The numeric symbol of this high degree of spiritual attainment will be ’33’, and the physical symbol will be the Third Eye that will open up physically between the eyes’ – refer article: 33.

‘This is the ultimate goal; unfortunately, to achieve it, a lot of people are going to have to die… [a] tremendous amount of Witchcraft… will be required to achieve this utopian state, for only a select few are truly “worthy” to pass through the cleansing cycle to live in this “New Heaven and New Earth” over which The Masonic Christ will rule

Throughout history, Freemasons, Rosicrucians, and occultists of the day have [pre-meditated] events that they planned, in order to move the world ever closer to the final ideal, keeping in mind the occult premise stated at the beginning of this article by Day Williams. Let us review it again:

“If a life is taken close to the northern 33rd Parallel, this fits with the Masons’ demonic mythology in which they demonstrate their worldly power by spilling human blood at a predetermined locale.”

‘This terrible concept is completely fulfilled by the bloody “I Witch” symbol, where human blood^ has been planned to be shed in huge torrents so that, at the right moment, The Christ may appear. Remember the Guiding Spirit vision of Albert Pike, January, 1870, in which the demon revealed that three world wars would have to be fought to establish the New World Order and its reigning monarch, Antichrist. Both world wars in the 20th Century have been fought to establish the One World Government, Economy, and Religion of Antichrist. This Third World War seems to be right ahead of us, and out of the smoke, debris, and blood of this war Antichrist will come striding.’

The French Merovingian dynasty of kings are interesting as they are not descended from the tribe of Benjamin as proposed by a number of authors. Nor are they are descended from Lot – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. Superficially, the Merovingians could have been from Dan by their use of Danite and Samson symbols; yet they were in fact descended from the Zarah line of Judah.

It may just be a coincidence but all the Merovingian kings wore their hair long as opposed to the Franks who cut their hair short. In fact, the Merovingians forbade anyone who was not Merovingian from having long hair. The Merovingian kings ‘were called… long-haired kings as they never used to cut their hair, believing that there was power in long hair. For them, the cutting of the hair of the king was considered a symbolic loss of power [and authority]. A King who had his hair cut would be forced to step down’ – refer article: Samson.

Fritz Springmeier: ‘Be Wise As Serpents revealed. . . how all the heads (presidents) of the LDS… [Mormons] have been descendants of the Merovingian dynasty, and they and the Masons have both used the Merovingian symbol the bee.’

Recall the bees of Samson’s riddle and the probability of the bees symbolising Dan. There is a belief that the modern descendants of the Merovingian line plan to rule the world from their future throne in Jerusalem and that their claim to be of the tribe of Judah descended from the children born to Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene is legitimate. However, the weight of evidence indicates that they are more likely to be descended from Zarah of Judah than Pharez of Judah – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and article: The Life & Death of Charles III. 

We will learn later that there is strangely support for the first leader and founder of Mormonism, John Smith, descending from the tribe of Dan.

There are people on earth today who are related to Christ, since they descend from Christ’s half brothers and sisters. The scriptures state that Christ had sisters who are not named (Matthew 13:56) and at least four younger brothers who were called: James, Joseph, Simon and Judas (or Jude) – Matthew 13:55. Christ was a descendant literally and physically on his Mother Mary’s side of the tribe of Judah, through King Solomon. His adoptive father Joseph was also a descendant of the tribe of Judah, through David’s son Nathan (Matthew 1:1–17, Luke 3:23–38).

There is no evidence that this writer is aware, that the Messiah would or could sire children. His mission was to be an intercessor for humankind and a mediator between God and man. Getting married and having children was not part of the plan and would have been an unnecessary distraction, nor would it have been fair on a wife or children to lose their father so early and in such grisly fashion – Romans 8:34; 1 Timothy 2:5.  

As mentioned, a number of theologians and biblical scholars support the idea that the Antichrist – though it is not explained whether they intend the Beast or False Prophet to fulfil the role – as being from the tribe of Dan. 

Mount Hermon: Gate of the Fallen Angels, J R Church, 2011 – emphasis mine: 

‘Jacob prophesied that Dan would be “a serpent by the way, an adder in the path” (Genesis 49:17), and Moses prophesied, “Dan is a lion’s whelp: he shall leap from Bashan” (Deuteronomy 33:22). These two prophecies are remarkable, in that they connect Dan with the “seed of the serpent,” from which the Antichrist will emerge to claim the title “lion of Judah.”

We have discussed at length in Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity & Destiny of Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega regarding the connection between Asshur, Nimrod, Azazel and Lilith. Hence this writer does not subscribe to the Antichrist being from the tribe of Dan, though Dan is without a doubt part of the global conspiracy to enslave humankind and thus transform humanity into something they should not be via the mark of the Beast. Thereby ushering in the Antichrist rule of the Beast and False Prophet.

Hippolytus influenced thought on the origin of the Antichrist. The verses used clearly reveal Dan’s involvement and treachery; though they are not obscure prophecies on the Beast or False prophet deriving from the tribe:

‘For it is certain that he is destined to spring from the tribe of Dan, and to range himself in opposition like a princely tyrant, a terrible judge and accuser, as the prophet testifies when he says, “Dan shall judge his people, as one tribe in Israel”. But someone may say that this was meant of Samson, who sprang from the tribe of Dan, and judged his people for twenty years. That, however, was only partially made good in the case of Samson; but this shall be fulfilled completely in the case of Antichrist. For Jeremiah, too, speaks in this manner: “From Dan we shall hear the sound of the sharpness of his horses; at the sound of the neighing of his horses the whole land trembled.” 

And again, Moses says: “Dan is a lion’s cub, and he shall leap from Bashan.” And that no one may fall into the mistake of thinking that this is spoken of the Saviour, let him attend to this. “Dan”, says he, “is a lion’s cub” (A Discourse on the End of the World, and on the Antichrist, and on the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, XVIII, XIX, XX); ‘and by thus naming the tribe of Dan as the one whence the accuser is destined to spring, he made the matter in hand quite clear. For as Christ is born of the tribe of Judah, so Antichrist shall be born of the tribe of Dan. And as our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was spoken of in prophecy as a lion on account or His royalty and glory, in the same manner also has the Scripture prophetically described the accuser as a lion, on account of his tyranny and violence (Kilde).’

His mentor Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, unsurprisingly held the same view, as did other early church writers. Similar to the cherished yet erroneous beliefs that Germany is Assyria; the United States is Manasseh; or that the Jews are Judah; so too is the promulgated belief that the Antichrist is from the tribe of Dan, thus its continuance in error precluding any other thought on the subject. 

Against Heresies Volume 30, 1-2 – emphasis mine:  

‘Moreover, another danger, by no means trifling, shall overtake those who falsely presume that they know the name of Antichrist. For if these men assume one [number], when this [Antichrist] shall come having another, they will be easily led away by him, as supposing him not to be the expected one, who must be guarded against… This, too, the apostle affirms: ‘When they shall say, Peace* and safety, then sudden destruction shall come upon them.’ And Jeremiah does not merely point out his sudden coming, but he even indicates the tribe from which he shall come, where he says, ‘We shall hear the voice of his swift horses from Dan; the whole earth shall be moved by the voice of the neighing of his galloping horses: he shall also come and devour the earth, and the fulness thereof, the city also, and they that dwell therein.’ This, too, is the reason that this tribe is not reckoned in the Apocalypse along with those which are saved.’

On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World, Ephraem the Syrian, 373 CE:

“At the end of the world at the final consummation… suddenly the gates of the north shall be opened… They will destroy the earth, and there will be none able to stand before them. After one week of that sore affliction (tribulation), they will all be destroyed in the plain of Joppa… Then will the son of perdition appear, of the seed and of the tribe of Dan… He will go into Jerusalem and will sit upon a throne in the Temple saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and he will be borne aloft by legions of devils like a king and a lawgiver, naming himself God”

Dan: A Type of the Antichrist, St. Methodius of Olympus, 250-311 CE – emphasis mine:

“When the son of perdition appears, he will be of the tribe of Dan, according to the prophecy of Jacob. This enemy of religion will use a diabolic art to produce many false miracles, such as causing the blind to see, the lame to walk, and the deaf to hear. Those possessed with demons will be exorcised. He will deceive many and, if he could, as our Lord has said, even the faithful elect. Even the Antichrist will enter Jerusalem, where he will enthrone himself in the temple as a god (even though he will be an ordinary man of the tribe of Dan to which Judas Iscariot** also belonged)”.

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis mine:

‘… [there is a] very interesting pattern of similarity between Dan within the 12 tribes of Israel and Judas among [the] 12 apostles… The most likely etymology for Judas’ surname, Iscariot, is man of Karioth. We read in Joshua 15:60 of a place in Judah named Kirjath-Jearim, also rendered Kiriath-Jearim. Due to the false worship associated with this area, it became known as Kiriath-Baal.  

“And there went from thence of the family of the Danites, out of Zorah and out of Eshtaol, six hundred men appointed with weapons of war. And they went up, and pitched in Kiriath-Jearim, in Judah. Wherefore they called that place Mananeh-Dan unto this day: behold, it is behind Kiriath-Jearim” (Judges 18:11-12).

The city of Kiriath-Jearim was apparently a border town, in close proximity to, if not on the very boundary itself, between the territory allotted to Judah and Dan. The Danites pitched their camp just to the west of Kiriath-Jearim, and, as they were wont to do, named the place after their father, calling it Mahaneh-Dan. So what we have here is the city of Kiriath-Jearim in Judah situated directly across the border from Mahaneh-Dan. Although named after the patriarch Dan by the Danites themselves, the area of Mahaneh-Dan actually came to be considered as the Dan sector of Kiriath-Jearim.

In other words, by the time of the first century A.D., there were really two Kiriaths, one in Dan, and the other just across the line in Judah. Interestingly, the plural for Kiriath is Kirioth. In effect, therefore, the name Judas Iscariot actually can be translated Judas of the two Kirioths. The usage of the plural in the case of Judas** indicates that he was most likely from the Danite Kiriath, otherwise the singular would have been employed, as was normally done, since the Jewish Kiriath was the more prominent of the two settlements.

In many respects, just as the end-time descendants of Dan, or a portion thereof, can be seen with reference to the predicted Anti-Christ, so can Judas Iscariot. Remember that there are only two individuals in all of Scripture that are called the son of perdition, an especially denigrating term, and they are Judas himself and the Anti-Christ [False Prophet] (John 17:12 & II Thessalonians 2:3).’

There are a number of chilling Catholic predictions which warn of an apostate leader who will focus their attention on the English speaking peoples of Britain, North America, Australia and New Zealand contributing to their demise on the world stage. 

Zachary the Armenian uttered a prophecy which was published in 1854 and later summarised in 2010, where he states: ‘And then there would be the war that the prophecy refers to as “the struggle of the strong, against the strong”. This empire of the north… will go to war against North America and North America will fall and be conquered and brought into bondage’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Terrifyingly, Zachary adds: ‘and then the whole world fell under the dominion of the first born of hell. (Originally by Priest Fattecelli, Day of Anger: The Hand of God Upon an Empire, 1854, as paraphrased by Priest P. Kramer, What are the missing contents of the third secret? Fatima Crusader, 95, Summer 2010, pages 45-46)’ 

‘Private Catholic prophecies foretell a time when a Great Monarch will rise up and that he will destroy the English peoples.’ For instance, Saint Cataldus of Tarentino [circa 500 CE] said: ‘The Great Monarch will be in war till he is forty years of age… he will assemble great armies and expel tyrants from his empire. He will conquer England and other island empires. (Connor, Edward. Prophecy for Today. Imprimatur + A.J. Willinger, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno; Reprint: Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford (IL), 1984, page 30).’ 

St. Francis of Paola [Born in fifteenth century Italy]: ‘By the grace of the Almighty, the Great Monarch will annihilate heretics and unbelievers. He will have a great army, and angels will fight at his side. He will be like the sun [god] among the stars [angels]. His influence will spread over the whole earth. All in all, there will be on earth twelve Kings, one Emperor [the Beast], one Pope [the False Prophet] and a few Princes. They will all lead [unholy] lives. (Dupont, page 38)’ 

Werdin d’ Otrante [thirteenth century]: ‘The Great Monarch and the Great Pope will precede Antichrist… All the sects will vanish. The capital of the world will fall. The Pope will go over the sea carrying the sign of redemption on his forehead [Revelation 13:16]… The Great Monarch will come and restore peace* [1 Thessalonians 5:3] and the Pope will share in the victory (Connor, page 33).’ 

Mother Shipton [d. 1551]: ‘The time will come when England shall tremble and quake… London shall be destroyed forever after… and then York shall be London and the Kingdom governed by three Lords appointed by a Royal Great monarch… who will set England right and drive out heresy. (Culleton, page 163).’ 

Father Laurence Ricci, S.J. [d. 1775]: ‘… a valiant duke will arise from the ancient German house which was humiliated by the French monarch. This great ruler will restore stolen Church property. Protestantism will cease… This duke will be the most powerful monarch on earth. At a gathering of men noted for piety and wisdom he will, with the aid of the Pope, introduce new rules, and ban the spirit of confusion. Everywhere there will be one fold and one shepherd (Connor page 37).’ 

St. Senanus [d. 560]: ‘[The English] themselves will betray each other: in consequence their sovereignty will be broken… One monarch will rule in Ireland over the English. (Culleton, R. Gerald. The Prophets and Our Times. Nihil Obstat: L. Arvin. Imprimatur: Philip G. Scher, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno, November 15, 1941. Reprint 1974, TAN Books, Rockford (IL), page 128).’ 

Merlin [during the seventh century]: ‘After [the] destruction of England… shall come a dreadful man… he shall set England on the right way and put out all heresies. (Culleton, page 132).’

St. Malachy [in the twelfth century]: ‘… the English in turn must suffer severe chastisement. Ireland, however, will be instrumental in bringing back the English to the unity of Faith. (Dupont, Yves. Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement. Tan Books, Rockford (IL), 1973, page 15).’

It was foretold in 597 CE, by St Columbkille: ‘…English nobility shall sink into horrible life – wars shall be proclaimed against them, by means of which the frantically proud race shall be subdued, and will be harassed from every quarter. The English shall dwindle into disreputable people and shall forever be derived of power’ (Culligan E. The Last World War and the End of Time. The book was blessed by Pope Paul VI, 1966. Tan Books, Rockford (IL), pages 118-119).’

St. Columbine [d. 597]: ‘The enemies of the English [United States, Canada and the United Kingdom] shall be aroused in battle – they who reside in the eastern [Russia and a German led United States of Europe] and western [Central and South American confederation led by Mexico and Brazil] parts of the world… the English shall be defeated… After the English shall be defeated in this battle, they shall be harassed by every quarter; like a fawn surrounded by a pack of voracious hounds, shall be the position of the English amidst their enemies. The English afterwards shall dwindle down to a disreputable people (Culleton, R. Gerald. The Prophets and Our Times. Nihil Obstat: L. Arvin. Imprimatur: Philip G. Scher, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno, November 15, 1941. Reprint 1974, Tan Books, Rockford (IL), pages 131,132).’ 

Ancient Irish source: ‘England will again injure the Irish… This will be a sign for the frightful punishment of England… England suffers the same degradation as she meted out to her [neighbour], and for the same length of time. Not the smallest fraction of time in this long period shall be remitted… Never shall world power be hers again… France restores order in England (Culleton, pages 234,235).’

Saint Edward [d. 1066]: ‘The extreme corruption and wickedness of the English nation has provoked the just anger of God. When malice shall have reached the fullness of its measure, God will, in His wrath, send to the English people wicked spirits, who will punish and afflict them with great severity… (Culleton, page 137).’ 

In reference to these prophecies one commentator remarks: ‘The one they often refer to as the Great Monarch appears to be the same one that the Bible warns about as the final King of the North. Only by eliminating the vast bastions of Protestantism (which as various [Catholic] prophecies show is a goal), such as the [United States of America] and its Anglo-allies, can this ecumenical [Catholic] domination be attained. It would… be logical that the United States might be considered as “the capital of the world.”

The English speaking peoples have been afforded many blessings, yet ‘the three “most sinful nations” according to a 2010 BBC report based on the classic ‘seven deadly sins – [consisting of] lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride’ – were Australia, the United States, and Canada (‘The Most Sinful Nation on Earth,’ February 2010, page 30).’ 

It is worth noting that ‘the five major causes for the decline and fall of the Roman Empire deduced from the writings of Edward Gibbon and noted historians of the Roman world were…

(1) The BREAKDOWN OF THE FAMILY and the rapid increase of DIVORCE.

(2) The spiraling rise of TAXES and EXTRAVAGANT SPENDING.

(3) The MOUNTING CRAZE FOR PLEASURE and the brutalization of sports.

(4) The mounting production of ARMAMENTS to fight ever-increasing threats of enemy attacks.

(5) The DECAY OF RELIGION into myriad and confusing forms, leaving the people without a uniform guide.’

These same ailments are afflicting the Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples in the British and Irish descended nations of the world today.  

The following article begins with Dan and then spends time on Edom and the Jews. Though lengthy, as Edom and Dan go hand-in-hand, it is of value and an excellent expose of the ruling elite’s agenda. 

Merovingian Bloodline and the Black Nobility, Fritz Springmeier, 2000 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Gerald Massey’s A Book of the Beginning (1974)… goes in and shows in detail how the inhabitants of the British Isles came originally from Egypt. This is Important because the Druidism of the British Isles was simply a derivative [in part] from the Egyptian Satanic witchcraft/magic of Ancient Egypt. The Egyptian word Makhaut (clan or family) became the Irish Maccu and the Maccu of the Donalds (clan of Donalds) now reflected in the name [Mac-Don-ald]. 

The tribe of Dan was prophesied to be the black sheep of the nation of Israel which would bite the other tribes of Israel. The tribe of Dan had the snake and the eagle as its two logos. The tribe of Dan left its calling card all over Europe as it migrated west in the names of many places. 

Great Britain is the mother country of Satanism. Scotland has long been an occult center. The national symbol of Scotland is the dragon (the snake)[?], and for years the chief[?] of Scotland was called the dragon. The Gaelic language is an important language for Satanism, although English and French are also [used] extensively by the Illuminati. The planning sessions for world takeover that some ex-Satanists experienced were held in French. The British Royal Family have long been involved with the occult’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘For more information on this there is a detailed examination of the Royal family and the occult in the book The Prince and the Paranormal – The Psychic Bloodline of the Royal Family by John Dale (1987). They have also been actively involved with Freemasonry. British MI6 has been a major vehicle for the Satanic hierarchy working behind the secret veil of Freemasonry to control world events. British MI6 is the most secret intelligence organization in the world. (It is properly known as British Secret Service not to be confused with the U.S. agency by that name but performing a different function entirely.) The British Royalty have served as important figureheads to British Freemasonry lending credibility and respectability. British Freemasonry has managed to keep itself free of much of the criticism that the other national Masonic groups have brought on themselves. However, much of the credibility of British Freemasonry is undeserved. 

True, British Freemasonry is what it portrays itself to the public for the lower levels. But, the lower level Masons by their dues and activities are unwittingly supporting an organization that is led by Satanists at the top. 

An example of the subterfuge constantly exercised on the public by Freemasonry is a book purportedly written by a non-Mason entitled The Unlocked Secret Freemasonry Examined. The book portrays itself as an unbiased and complete expose of Freemasonry. The book states unequivocally that the Masonic order called Societas Rosicrucian in Anglia is only open to Christians and is a “Christian Order”. 

However, Edith Star Miller reprints copies of a number of letters from the chief of the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia which show that the English Grand Masonic Lodge, the SRIA, the OTO, and the German Illuminati are all working together. 

It identifies the true authors of Nazi philosophy whom British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli described as, “the hidden hand behind government”. 

And looking at the natural, over ninety percent of those “who say they are Jews”, are not. They lie because they have no kinship to Abraham, Isaac, and/or Jacob by blood. (Check Encyclopedias Judaica and Britannica, Jewish and Universal Jewish Encyclopedias.)’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. ‘And certainly not by faith. True Israelites who are Hebrews call them Ashkenazim or Khazars. These people earned the title of “Black” Nobility from their ruthless lack of scruple. They employed murder, rape, kidnapping, assassination, robbery, and all manner of deceit on a grand scale, brooking no opposition to attaining their objectives. These all have immense wealth. And money is power. 

The most powerful of the Black Nobility families are located in Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Britain, Holland and Greece in that order. Their roots may be traced back to the Venetian oligarchs who are of Khazar extraction. They married into these royal houses in the early part of the twelfth century. Many of these royal families no longer have kingdoms, and not all Black Nobility are royal houses. According to author John Coleman, a “Committee of 300” from this untouchable ruling class includes Queen Elizabeth II [now King Charles, crowned 2023], the Queen of Holland [now King Willem Alexander, crowned 2013], the Queen of Denmark [Margrethe II] and the royal families of Europe. 

Socialist politician and financial adviser to the Rothschilds, Walter Rathenau, writing in the Wiener Press (24 December, 1921) said, “Only 300 men, each of whom knows all others govern the fate of Europe. They select their successors from their own entourage. These men have the means in their hands of putting an end to the form of State which they find unreasonable.” Exactly six months after publication, Rathenau was assassinated. 

The Masonic-controlled Swiss banks owe their existence to these families. In 1815 the Jesuits and their Freemason allies among the crowned heads of Europe held the Congress of Vienna, whereby Swiss neutrality (already sanctioned by the Peace of Westphalia in 1648) was forever guaranteed; and no matter how many wars are provoked in which the common man has to do the fighting, the money of the Nobility in Switzerland should always be free from plunder. 

Nathan Rothschild’s financing of Britain resulted in the defeat of Rome’s enemy Napoleon, (as well as being the source of his wealth and influence). Since Gregory XVI conferred a Papal decoration on Kalman Rothschild for loaning the Vatican five million pounds in a period of difficulty, the Rothschilds have been the fiscal agents of the Vatican. 

According to William Cooper’s book “Behold A Pale Horse”, which I am coming more and more to appreciate, all nations have agreed to relinquish sovereignty to the Pope and submit future problems to the Vatican for solution once the NWO is established. This I have been unable to confirm but in general, this is what will happen. 

“All nations” can only refer to the Black Nobility who have agreed to relinquish sovereignty to Rome in return for the restoration of royal power under a NWO. This was foretold in Daniel 7:20 and Revelation 17:12-13, “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” These ten horns were ten kings, represented in Daniel 2 by the ten toes of the image King Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream. They are the royal houses into which the old Roman Empire was divided after the fall of the last emperor Romulus Augustus, in AD 476. They were Alemani (Germany) [Ishmael], Franks (France) [Lot], the Burgundians (Switzerland) [Haran], the Suevi (Portugal) [Aram], the Anglo-Saxons (Britain) [Jacob], the Visigoths (Spain) [Aram], the Lombards (Italy) [Nahor]…

It is imperative that we realize that privately, the Black Nobility refuse to ever recognize any government other than their own inherited and divine right to rule. They believe the United States still belongs to England. And work diligently behind the scenes to cause conditions whereby they might regain their crowns. Every royal and so-called noble dynasty past and present of Europe have seats on the “Committee of 300”, most often by nominees. There are just too many of these “royal” families for them each to have representatives on the “Committee of 300”. Precedence is determined by rank: first royal family members, then dukes, earls, marquises and lords, then finally “commoners”, who usually get the title of “Sir”. (Conspirator’s Hierarchy: The “Committee of 300”, Dr. John Coleman.) 

On September 30, 1931, British Prime Minister and Fabian Socialist Ramsay MacDonald, took Britain off the gold standard in obedience to the “Committee of 300”. In 1933, as one of his first presidential acts, FDR declared a banking holiday and ordered all US citizens to turn in all gold in their possession to the Treasury. Roosevelt handed over the gold supply of the USA to the privately-owned tax-exempt Federal Reserve, as the Seal of Solomon [six pointed star] was attached to the Shield of Britannia, and the Judaistic symbol of the Serpent was placed around her Trident. 

In 1933 the U.S. owned 40% of the gold in the world. The debt of the US in 1963, was $1.25 trillion, and gold, subject to call by foreign nations, exceeded by $16 billions, the amount on hand at Fort Knox. By 1963, it was said that the Rothschilds had withdrawn all the gold from England [Judah] and the United States [Joseph] to their coffers in France [Moab and Ammon], Belgium [Sheba and Dedan], Switzerland [Haran] and Holland [Midian]. Remember that name. 

Michael S. Heiser, examines many of the intriguing details and nuances coincident to Mount Hermon: charam, khaw-ram’; a primitive root; to seclude; specifically (by a ban) to devote to religious uses (especially destruction)… to be blunt as to the nose: – make accursed, consecrate, (utterly) destroy, devote, forfeit, have a flat nose, utterly (slay, make away). The consonants that make up ‘hermon” are (in Hebrew) ch-r-m (the final “n” is a noun ending typically suffixed to geographic locations). The noun cherem means “devoted to destruction” (the imagery is of a holocaust offering)… a doomed object… extermination: (ac-) curse (-d, -d thing), dedicated thing, things which should have been utterly destroyed, (appointed to) utter destruction, devoted (thing), net. 

Mount Hermon was, according to 1 Enoch 6:1-6, the mountain to which the Watchers, the sons of God, descended when they came to earth and cohabited with human women. 

This connection with the incident described in Genesis 6:1-4 is consistent in view of the connections between the terms Rephaim, Anakim, and Nephilim… the broader area of which Mount Hermon was part was Bashan, a place of special cosmic-geographical significance… Mount Hermon was also associated with Baal worship and evil serpentine cults. The cult center Baal-Hermon is mentioned several times in the Old Testament (e.g., Judges 3:3; 1 Chronicles 5:23). 

That the Israelites and the biblical writers considered the spirits of the dead giant warrior-kings to be demonic is evident from the fearful aura attached to the geographical location of Bashan. As noted above, Bashan is the region of the cities Ashtaroth and Edrei, which both the Bible and the Ugaritic texts mention as abodes of the Rephaim. What’s even more fascinating is that in the Ugaritic language, this region was known not as Bashan, but Bathan – the Semitic people of Ugarit pronounced the Hebrew “sh” as “th” in their dialect. Why is that of interest? Because “Bathan” is a common word across all the Semitic languages, biblical Hebrew included, for “serpent.” The region of Bashan was known as “the place of the serpent” – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘It was ground zero for the Rephaim giant clan and, spiritually speaking, the gateway to the abode of the infernal deified Rephaim spirits…’

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘… Dan’s relocation to the extreme north of Israel… placed it in close proximity to snow-capped Mount Hermon, the highest point in the land. This area has a long and mysterious history. Ancient records, stories, legends, and myths abound with regard to the unusual and even sacred nature of this region… this area, which became the extreme northern boundary of Israel, attained almost mythical proportions in ancient times. Hittite, as well as Biblical, records confirm that Mount Hermon was considered anciently as a dwelling place of the gods. Names such as Baal-hermon, Baal-gad, and even Hermes (Mercury of Roman mythology. Hermes is derived from the name Hermon), emanate from this area’ – refer Article: Thoth. ‘The mountain became a major center of pagan religious activity, including the worship of Pan. The region was even known as Paneas. Indeed, the Cave of Pan, which still today dominates the foot of Mount Hermon, was known as the passageway to Hades.

Later, in the days of Jeroboam, the northern ten tribes rebelled against the House of David and separated themselves from the southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin. The almost immediate result of this division is succinctly recorded for us in I Kings 12, where we read: ‘… And Jeroboam… took counsel, and made two calves of gold… And he set one in Bethel, and the other he put in DAN. And this thing became a sin, for the people went to worship before the one, even unto DAN.’ 

‘Note carefully the strategic part the area of Dan plays in this rebellion against God. The golden calf placed in Dan was situated at Mount Hermon, the historic site of pagan Canaanite worship, and the even more ancient locale of unspeakably evil pre-Flood activity that resulted in the destruction of the human race! Dan, in fact, became the center of… Baal-worship among the nations of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. 

I strongly suspect that Mount Hermon… is the original model of the fabled mountain of the gods. Virtually all ancient pagan civilizations had a sacred mountain, almost always located in the north, that was deemed to be the home of the gods. By far the most famous of these is Mount Olympus in Greece, but there are numerous others in different locales and historical eras [for instance, Central and South America and South East Asia]. Mount Hermon is undoubtedly the oldest of these very hallowed places, and perhaps the most significant as well [located on the 33rd parallel]. The concept of the sacred mountain is that it constitutes the center of the world, the gateway to revelation, and the stairway to heaven’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. 

Where there was no mountain, the people constructed one. The Babylonian ziggurat, such as the infamous Tower of Babel, or the Egyptian pyramids on the Giza Plateau are prime examples of such human efforts. In fact, after the Tower of Babel debacle, the area of Mount Hermon once again assumed its sacred pre-Flood significance. Indeed, the Amorite word for this mountain was Senir (Deuteronomy 3:8-9), a variant of the name Shinar, thus evoking the location of Nimrod and the notorious incident at Babel – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘This was then and had for centuries been a center for the worship of the god Pan. There was an impressive temple built in his honor at the base of Mount Hermon. Pan was the god of nature, noted for his voracious sexual appetite. He was the lusty god, known also as Pallas. He was characterized as half-goat, and thus was a satyr, indeed the chief satyr, of which there were many in the ancient mythologies’ – articles: Lilith; and Asherah. ‘The constellation Capricorn the goat-man was associated with him… The unicorn also became connected with Pan and his cult at Mount Hermon. 

Sirion, we are told in Deuteronomy 3:9, was the Sidonian name for Mount Hermon. With respect to the alternative name Pallas… the root words comprising the term Palestine are Pallas and Heth. Pallas we already know was another name for the god Pan, whereas Heth was the son of Canaan, and the father of the Hittites. The original word was Palesheth.  According to the Encyclopedia of Religion, the worship of Hermes and his son Pan at Mt. Cyllene in Arcadia was done under the name of Phales, which is derived from the word phallos, which gives us the term phallus or phallic. 

The name Hermon itself has a reference to a heap of stones, a landmark, a pyramid. Mount Hermon became popularly known as The Forbidden Place. It marked the northern limit of Israelite conquest in the days of Moses and Joshua. In other words, it was the sign designating the place where Moses was to stop and go no farther. Hermon and beyond were considered outside the influence and protection of the true God. The stone heaps so often utilized in the worship system of the mystery religions were actually phallic symbols [which include obelisks, menhirs and church steeples]. 

In reality, the renaming of the Promised Land by the term Palestine constitutes a brash, outright statement that this was the land of phallic-worship, part of the very ancient pre-Flood system instigated by the Nephilim, and reinstated through the descendants of Ham and Canaan after the Flood. 

Pan is also closely associated with music, and the pipe and flute most especially. Although a rather obscure reference, we find in II Samuel 24:6[-7] a possible reference to Pan-worship being connected to the tribe of Dan. Note the following: “Then they came to Gilead, and to the land of Tahtim-hodshi; and they came to DAN-JAAN, and about to Sidon, and come to the stronghold of Tyre”. The place-name Dan-jaan… is intriguing.

Most sources render it in one of two ways, either Dan of the woodland or forest, or Dan played a pipe (Merrill C. Tenney, Zondervan Pictorial Dictionary of the Bible, page 199). Both of these definitions can be viewed as having a relationship to Pan, since he was the god of nature, and thus of the forest and woodlands, and he has always been very closely associated with the musical instrument called a pipe or flute. In fact, the pan-flute is quite well known. Pan-worship was transported from Mount Hermon by a segment of Danites to Arcadia in Greece. 

The mythological origin of the Merovingian race is traced back to a water-beast known as the Quinotaur, which took the form of a sea-goat. This ancient story is derived from lore associated with the god Pan, who was, in fact, a sea-goat. The source of this mystical beginning to the Merovingians can be traced directly to the influence of the Danites who took Pan-worship to Arcadia and throughout Greece. Capricorn, the astrological sign connected to Pan, eventually became Baphomet and the Goat of Mendes, both of which are symbols of Satan, and were worshiped by the Knights Templar, the military wing of the Priory of Sion, established at the time of the First Crusade for the express purpose of aiding the re-establishment of the deposed Merovingian royal line over Europe.

With respect to the subject of Freemasonry, the term Sion is strongly associated with the symbolism attached to this ancient evil craft. Note that this word is Sion, not Zion. There is a difference, for in Deuteronomy 4, we read: “And this is the law which Moses set before the children of Israel… in the land of Sihon (one of the giants) king of the Amorites, who dwelled at Heshbon… and the land of Og (another giant) king of Bashan… From Aroer, which is by the banks of the river Arnon, even unto MOUNT ZION, which is HERMON” (Deuteronomy 4:44-48).

Notice that the King James Version of the Scriptures renders the name of Mount Hermon as Mount Zion. A check of the Hebrew used in this instance, however, reveals a mistranslation. Zion in Hebrew is Tsiyown, and is the name of the famous mountain of Jerusalem. It is used often throughout the Old Testament, both in a heavenly, as well as an earthly, sense. The key word in Deuteronomy 4:48, however, is not Tsiyown at all, but an entirely different term, Siyon, and indeed is the correct alternate name of Mount Hermon. 

The term Sion is connected directly to the pagan idolatry centered around Mount Hermon, and its inclusion in Freemasonry is not coincidental, since this assumed fraternal organization has been for centuries the promulgator of the ancient mystery religion, and at its upper echelons is integrally involved in the age-old, on-going attempt to control the world. In this regard, Mount Hermon, Sion, Esau [the Jews – false Judah], Dan, Baal, Freemasonry… in the north, stand in total opposition to Jerusalem, Zion, Judah, Yahweh, Messiah, and [the Law] in the south.

As an aside to this aspect of our study, it is instructive to know that in Celtic the word Sion means Mount of Stones or a Fortress. The Druids would build huge fires in the midst of their great stone circles or Sions, and the high priest would conduct worship services standing in the midst of the fiery stones. The central stone was called the Stone of the Covenant, and in Ireland, where there was much Danite migration and influence, it was known as Bethel – The House of God! 

… the Priory of Sion, a highly secret society connected with the Knights Templar… has been, since at least the time of the first Crusade (1099 A.D.), totally dedicated to the restoration of a particular royal house, the Merovingians… Even in our own day, the current European Council of Princes, ostensibly the advisory body to the European Union, consists of exactly 33 participating members, divided into the Council of Nine, and the Council of Twenty-Four. 

Every distinguished member of this assembly is of Merovingian lineage. The Merovingian dynasty is the royal bloodline that preceded Charlemagne and the Carolingian usurpers to the throne of the Holy Roman Empire, a bloodline that claims divine descent, but as we shall soon come to see derives instead from the apostate Israelite tribe of Dan! This conclave is destined to become the occult hierarchy of Europe. The present head of the European Council of Princes is HRM Prince Michael James Alexander Stewart, 7th Count of Albany (Scotland), succeeding the Hapsburgs of Austria who had held the seat since 1946.’  

Perhaps infiltration by Dan (and certainly Esau) into the royal line has occurred, though still, the original Merovingian blood line is that of Judah – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

‘It should also be of interest that the headwaters of the Jordan River emanate from Mount Hermon [and the Cave of Pan]. The name Jordan, as you can easily see, contains the word dan. It is derived from the Hebrew root word meaning to descend, and can be defined as the descent or the going down of Dan, and has always been associated with death. The Jordan River… winds its way like the serpent of Dan… Down, down, down, the river of Dan descends until it reaches the lowest land region on the face of the earth, the appropriately named Dead Sea, where forward motion finally ceases… Remember that Naaman the Syrian at first refused to bathe seven times in the Jordan, exclaiming that there were far better rivers in his own land. Perhaps this is why the Messiah agreed for John to baptize Him in the Jordan River, since it has such a connotation as the place of death!’          

Samael and the Tribe of Dan, Sons of Samael, Glorian – emphasis mine:

‘The angel Samael is related with the sign of Aries, the sign that rules the head. Samael also rules the sign of Scorpio, which is in Yesod, the sexual organs (root of the Tree of Knowledge*…)’ [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. Since we are talking about the advent of Samael, we have to understand that we are talking about the advent of the power of God, about how the creative energy… above (the head, Aries) comes down to the sexual organs (Scorpio) in order for creation to exist… [refer article: 33]. Samael relates to the Ox [and] the Ox or the winged Bull [or winged Unicorn, a Pegasus] relates to the vision of Ezekiel. 

Ezekiel says that the feet of the creature that he sees in his vision has legs and feet of a calf and [it] has six wings; these relate to the creatures [Seraphim] that are around the Ancient of Days… the winged bull relates to the… Holy Spirit, thus this bull is the creative force…’ 

It is worth noting Baal is represented by a Bull. This has meaning when we understand that Baal is actually Samael, the one described as a light bearer; who as the Serpent in the Garden, enticed Eve to partake of the Tree of Knowledge* of Good and Evil, a euphemism for transforming into a physical sexual creature.** Baal meaning lord or master is the chief of all the other lords who are in fact fallen angels. The Lord of the Fliers (not flies as incorrectly translated) is another name for Baal, commonly rendered as, Beelzebub.

Glorian: ‘In the book of Genesis, when Jacob is blessing his children (the twelve tribes) he addresses Dan… Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel. Dan shall be a serpent (Nachash) by the way, a viper (a Sephaphim, which another way to say fiery serpent in Hebrew) in the path [a Seraph in the path], that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward… the blessing to the tribe of Dan, the child of Jacob, is pointing directly to the serpent… The tribe of Dan is an archetype related with the serpent… Dan is the force of the serpent… 

This is an alchemical transformation of the animal forces related with the Ox [or Unicorn] from that vision of the creatures of Ezekiel: And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot: and they sparkled like the color of burnished brass. – Ezekiel 1: 7. The calf’s foot is Kabbalistically pointing at… the physical body**. This is why the devil is always symbolized with hooves, because the devil with calf’s feet symbolizes the sexual potency, the sexual energy** in us. Sexual force is represented by the symbol of the cloven foot of the devil.

The Ox [or Unicorn]… is transformed when it descends… and thus becomes the devil’s foot, it becomes the serpent [from a cherub to a seraph]. How does the force of the Ox… of Samael… and the tribe of Dan, become a serpent? It is transformed into a serpent because it is energy, it is not a person. 

It is an energy that descends… and that we gather… from the atmosphere… through… the liver and through… [the] spleen… the blood is created thanks to the liver and to the spleen; this is the blood that relates to the kingdom of Edom… which is the kingdom of the blood. Dom is blood in Hebrew which circulates in the body, the whole body. The creative force of God that descends… and as blood circulates in the body, and in the end expresses itself through the sexual organ which in this case is the devil’s foot that we have to tame, the devil that we have to conquer. It is the devil that tempts us. This is the mystery of Baphomet, the sexual transmutation that is cryptically written in different parts of the Bible and that we have to understand. 

The heel of our horse (physical body) is the sexual force. Remember that when Jacob was born he was holding the heel of Esau. This is the meaning, the wisdom of Esau’s heel. The heel represents the sexual force, “so that his rider shall fall backward…”

And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon. – Revelation 9: 1-3, 5, 6, 11. The angel of the bottomless pit is Abaddon, in Hebrew, and in Greek Apollyon. Since we are talking in Hebrew mythology, let us just take Abaddon. What does Abba mean? Abba means “father” in Hebrew. And what does Dan mean in Hebrew? It means “judge.” Abaddon is “the judge, the father.” Others say it is called “destruction.” Yes, it is also called destruction… Abaddon is Abba-Dan, the judgment of the father, which is symbolized as the Elder of Days in the vision of Ezekiel’ – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

The article shows the connection between the Bull and its veneration which has been a recurring theme in a number of chapters. We understand that Samael is a Seraph, yet the question remains, did he begin as a Cherub. Did Samael transform from a Bull to a Serpent? – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. If the heel is a symbol for sexual force then we also have another tie in between Dan and the Seraph created Nephilim. If as in the Days of Noah, there is another irruption of the Nephilim, then the tainting of humanities bloodlines and in particular the affectation of Ephraim will be to a much larger extent than imagined. 

The association between Edom and Dan is relevant, in remembering Jacob grasped Esau’s heel; while Dan as a serpent, will bite the horse heel of Ephraim – Genesis 25:26; 49:17. 

We have fully investigated Azazel, the fallen dark Angel who is now in a place of restraint. He will be released and the name Abaddon in Hebrew, is a title or description of him – as a ‘destroyer’ – just as Satan – as an ‘adversary’ and nemesis – is for Asherah; and the appointed Christ, as the ‘anointed’ or chosen one is of Immanuel. The added interpretation of the word Abaddon as ‘the Father’s judge’, is fascinating in light of his role as the Beast – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Dan seems so out of character with his brothers that during this writer’s research it was considered that he was not Jacob’s son from Bilhah but rather an adopted son. His mother still being Bilhah, but rather Dan’s father was actually Reuben. Recall in Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, the incest account between Reuben and his stepmother Bilhah. It is possible that Jacob took Dan as his own to save face for himself, Bilhah and Reuben.

Against this argument is the age of Reuben when Dan was born; whom according to an unconventional chronology was six years older. In support of this scenario there are three points to consider. 

Remember a similar scenario was enacted hypothetically (refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator, when Ham committed incest with Arphaxad’s wife, Rasuaya. The resulting child was Canaan and he was raised in Arphaxad’s house. The truth is this did not happen, though for example’s sake, it is not entirely implausible for Jacob to have been similarly magnanimous and adopted Dan. Note again, the chronology for Reuben and Dan’s births would need to be reconsidered to follow this line of reasoning.

Secondly, is that reading between the lines, Reuben had a high sex drive to put it politely. His giving the aphrodisiac mandrakes to his own mother Leah is a curious story and hints at something more, which is left unspoken. Especially when the forced act of incest by Reuben occurs years later.

Thirdly, the country of Northern Ireland, incorporates both the descendants of Reuben and the modern day fulfilment of the land of Bashan. 

It is an interesting coincidence then, that Reuben though removed from the original Bashan to the south, beneath Gad and East Manasseh was still connected by being on the eastern side of the River Jor-dan

We have considered the connection with Elioud giants in Ulster as there were anciently in Bashan. Dan and Reuben are linked geographically in Ulster more than once as we shall discover when studying Dan’s ‘leap from Bashan.’ Though Reuben dwells as the Protestant Northern Irish population today, the tribe of Dan chose to nestle, coiled as a snake, primarily in Ulster over any other area in ancient Erin or in the neighbouring Isle of Albion. Though Dan fully travelled the length of Britain from Cale-don-ia in the far north of Scotland, to Lon-don and Dum-nonia (or Devon) in the Southeast and southwest of England respectively; and Dun-oding in the west of Wales, it is Northern Ireland which has been Dan’s principal home. Has it been an invisible connection with his real father Reuben, that has kept him close? 

As Dan appears to lose his status as a son of Jacob as hinted at in the Old Testament ancestry records (and confirmed in the Book of Revelation), it would be reasonable to explain why Joseph’s inheritance was perhaps split between his two sons. Meaning, eleven tribes were restored to twelve, for twelve is a powerful number in a foundational, advisory and ruling capacity. For instance, the twelve Apostles and the two times twelve Council of twenty-four Elders – Revelation 4:4. 

Though the use of ‘the thirteenth tribe’ by author Koestler was attention grabbing, in describing Jacob’s brother; Esau is still not a son, or a tribe of Israel. Though the describing of Manasseh by identity researchers as the thirteenth tribe to support the use of the number thirteen in America’s founding documents and symbols is imaginative, the literal thirteenth tribe by birth is Ephraim, to whom the number thirteen more accurately applies, as Ephraim numerically dominates the United States – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. 

These three aside, the real thirteenth tribe by virtue of his excommunication from the family because of a. his betrayal towards Joseph, b. his straying into idolatry, and c. rushing headlong into wilful disobedience and rebellion against the Creator, as Esau had done before him… is Dan.

It is ironic that the very person Dan hated, is the one who replaced him, receiving a double portion of blessings in response. The irony extends even further to the fact that the majority of Dan’s descendants now live in Joseph’s territory. Yet, there is no better mechanism to bring down your enemy than from within. We have yet to identify a reason for Dan’s negative character traits, even though a motive for his hatred towards his brothers with the exception of Reuben, appears to trace back to Joseph and the ‘bad report.’ 

The Apostate Tribe of Dan, Cornerstone Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The predictable merging of the descendants of two patriarchs shouldn’t really be all that surprising, especially if we consider some of the numerous similarities between the two houses. The most obvious is that they shared a close family relationship, since Esau was Dan’s uncle. From the beginning, they both were considered lower in God’s eyes, as well as those of the rest of the peoples. They were, in effect, both rejects! 

They were also very much alike in character, as both exhibited the traits of craftiness, secrecy, deception, and violence, not to mention, of course, a strong penchant for the most despicable sort of religious practices imaginable!’

Even if Dan is Jacob’s son, the circumstances of his birth occurred following the serious domestic upset regarding Rachel’s barrenness and contrastingly, Leah’s bountiful fertility. Thus, Dan was either possibly born out of wedlock via Reuben or was probably the first son born out of the wedlock of Jacob’s first wives Leah and Rachel. While this may not appear at first to be of any real significance it did set Dan apart in particular from the first four of Jacob’s sons, Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah, and so with Naphtali, Gad and Asher, was of lesser status in Jacob’s family. When Dan was born, what Rachel uttered about judgement, could be taken as the result of a bastard child who was not really her own through Jacob… Then Rachel said, “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son…” – Genesis 30:6, ESV. 

Our next segment is a concerted effort of this writer to discover the truth. In following the tribe of Dan’s path, conjecture is required before conclusions can be gleaned; therefore, no offence or slight is intended to any peoples or groups discussed. As with the Jewish people, though there may be an evil element within the hierarchies who manipulate the nations of the world via ownership of big banks and major corporations, this is certainly not a reflection on everyone that is Jewish. And so similarly, with anyone of Danite descent. 

Following the winding serpentine trail of Dan from Egypt, Canaan and Greece through Europe leads to the British Isles. After many years of researching and going round in investigative circles; following a tail with seemingly no head, I realised that though there is clear evidence for Dan once being in both Ireland and England; there is yet stronger evidence of Dan in Scotland and Wales. But with that said, the strongest evidence of all for his location… is in Northern Ireland. 

We have already begun a case for Dan’s relationship with his possible progenitor Reuben – or perhaps simply a fraternal similarity and friendship – and this points to Northern Ireland. The Bible does not say Dan is scattered, though it does not reveal a permanent home of their own either. Likewise in the scriptures, the relationship between Dan and Judah is admittedly strong… yet Dan’s relationship with Ephraim is stronger. Recall the precedent of the tribe of Dan splitting into two during the time of the Judges, with one located in the South, adjacent to the Philistines and the tribe of Ephraim and one settling in the North of Canaan.

An important clue is the ‘leaping from Bashan.’ As each time somewhere is recorded in the ancient past in the Bible, there is a modern day equivalent. The leaping from Bashan is not from the Middle East to Britain, for other tribes have done that, but rather from where Bashan is today; that is, Ulster to Britain and back again. 

There are only one people who could realistically fulfil this prophecy and they are the Scots Irish. Let it be clear, this is not a blanket indictment on the Scots Irish as an ethnic group. The constant reader will know that suspicion is raised only towards the hierarchy within the tribe of Dan; of which, there is good cause to believe they are heavily involved in secret or not so secret societies and cabals of the global elite who are working against the ‘greater good’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

Discover Ulster-Scots, Who are the Ulster-Scots – emphasis mine:

‘Despite the assertion that Scotch applies only to whisky and not to the people of Scotland, many Scotch-Irish in America are fiercely proud of this title and defend its use unfailingly, citing evidence from the period to substantiate their claim.’ 

In a letter dated April 14, 1573, the term is first used in reference to descendants of ‘gallowglass’ [Galloway], mercenaries from Scotland who had settled in northeastern Ireland, by Elizabeth I of England, who wrote: “We are given to understand that a nobleman named Sorley Boy Mac-Don-nell and others, who be of the Scotch-Irish race…’

For the purpose of this chapter, the term Ulster-Scots will be used for those peoples who live in Northern Ireland descending from Lowland Scots and the Northern English. The term Scots-Irish will refer to those peoples who have emigrated from Northern Ireland to the nations of South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and beyond. 

The term Scotch-Irish from Scotch-Airisch, is the recognised term to describe all those who have similarly emigrated, though in this instance, singularly to North America and principally the United States. ‘The earliest known American reference appeared in a Maryland affidavit in 1689-90’ though did not gain common usage until after 1850. 

The Scotch-Irish were one of the principal groups of settlers to the Southern United States whose influence is still widely felt in the South. Very interestingly, the Scots-Irish have ‘been called a people without a name’ and as a culture in America, ‘the invisible people.’ The Scotch-Irish are those people whose ancestors had lived in Northern Ireland, some for several generations before emigrating to the United States. Historian David Hackett Fischer in Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America, called them Borderers. This term encompasses the original Scots who first settled in Ulster from the borderlands of southern Scotland and northern England. He also says: 

‘Many scholars call these people Scotch-Irish. That expression is an Americanism, rarely used in Britain and much resented by the people to whom it was attached. “We’re no Eerish bot Scoatch,” one of them was heard to say in Pennsylvania.’

Principally from Galloway, Dumfries, Renfrewshire, Lanarkshire, Ayrshire, Argyllshire, the Lothians, the Scottish Borders, Berwickshire, Northumberland, Cumbria and Yorkshire; there were also minorities who originated from Wales, the Isle of Man, the southeast of England, Flanders, the German Palatinate and France; including the Huguenot ancestors of Davy Crockett. 

The Borderers were different from the Highlanders in that they didn’t wear kilts, belong to clans or speak Gaelic and they were robust, adventurous and rebellious. ‘Once in America, they formed a more-or-less cohesive unit, if that can be said of a people who nurtured a proud and sometimes argumentative spirit, and a disdain for authority’, according to Katharine Garstka, The Scots-Irish in the Southern United States, 2009.

The Scots-Irish: The Thirteenth Tribe, Raymond Campbell Paterson – emphasis mine:

‘Many of the descendants of the original Scots-Irish settlers would happily wear kilts and tartan on commemorative days, though this would have been a shock to their ancestors, who took particular trouble to distance themselves from all things Celtic and Gaelic.’ 

These early immigrants tended to settle in large kinship groups often due to lack of money, sharing the same last name – recall Dan had only one son recorded in the Bible – this made record keeping difficult at the time and for genealogists today. This was so widespread that marrying someone of the same last name did not mean they were closely related as cousins, just that they originated in the same kinship group. 

Not only that, but it was customary to give a child the first name of the paternal grandfather or grandmother. Popular last names included: Campbell, McDonald and Galloway (remember this one) and first names: Robert, Richard, Andrew, Patrick, David, Archibald, Ronald, Wallace, Bruce, Percy and Howard for boys; and Mary, Elizabeth, Anne, Catherine, Margaret, Janet and Marion for girls. 

The first trickle of Scots to migrate to Northern Ireland in the sixteenth century prior to 1600 came from a Scottish culture of poverty, working small farms and living at subsistence level on over-farmed land. As the population of Scotland grew, they migrated the handful of miles across the water to the northern part of Ireland which was sparsely populated with large, bountiful tenant farms. The Nine Years War ended in March 1603, the same month James came to the throne and when the earls of Tyrone and Tyrconnell – chiefs Hugh O’Neill and Hugh O’Donnell – the leading families and founding clans of the ancient province of Ulster, surrendered to the English. 

In 1606 there was an independent Scottish settlement in east Down and in Antrim; led by adventurers James Hamilton, a university don and spy and Sir Hugh Montgomery, an Ayrshire laird. Montgomery was granted half of Conn O’Neil’s land – the King of Tír Eógain, anglicised as Tyrone – the largest and most powerful Gaelic lordship in Ireland, as a reward for helping Conn O’Neill to escape from English captivity. Hamilton forced himself in on the deal when he learned of it and the final settlement after a three year haggle, gave Hamilton and Montgomery a third of the land each. 

Paterson states – emphasis mine:

‘In granting Hamilton the territory of Upper Clandeboy and Great Ardes, James emphasised the intention “… of inhabiting the same, being now depopulated and wasted, with English and Scottish men; and the carrying of men, cattle, corn and all other commodities from England and Scotland into the said territories. Also, to have liberty to alien (grant) to any English or Scottish men, or of English and Scottish name and blood, and not to have the mere Irish.”

Ireland was formally an English possession, so it was important to emphasise English as well as Scottish settlement, though for reasons of geography and temperament, the new plantation was almost exclusively Scottish, as James himself clearly recognised it would be:

‘The Scots are a middle temper, between the English tender breeding and the Irish rude breeding and are a great deal more likely to adventure to plant Ulster than the English.’ 

An organised colonisation of the land began after the confiscation of huge tracts of land in the south and west of Ulster, from Gaelic Irish nobility, known as the Flight of the Earls in 1607. King James I of England and Ireland (James VI, Scotland) initiated the process of pacification with the Plantation of Ulster Act in 1609. The motive was to solve at best or ease at least, Catholic Irish restlessness, by encouraging Protestant, English speaking Scots and English. 

From the Irish Rebellion in 1641 until the end of the Catholic Jacobite War in 1691, Ulster was unstable with governance shifting between Irish Gentry and the English, including the Irish Confederate wars with Scotland and the wars of the Three Kingdoms with Cromwell – Genesis 49:4. Due to famine in Scotland, some fifty-thousand people arrived in Ulster between 1690 and 1700. 

Paterson – emphasis mine:

‘Ireland remained a dangerous frontier. Native Irish chieftains, deeply resentful of their changing circumstances, took to the wilds as outlaws, and as ‘woodkernes’ represented a real threat to the more isolated settlers, many of whom were wiped out in midnight raids. The descendants of the Scots migrants were later to face a similar threat on the American frontier.

While the Irish raiders were tough, the Scots were even tougher.

Many of the early migrants came from the Scottish borders, men with names like Armstrong, Bell and Elliot, where they had been hardened in an age-old struggle with the English.’

The irony is that as the English government encouraged immigration to Northern Ireland, they then in turn created an untenable environment that eventually caused the Scots-Irish to migrate again. Queen Anne’s 1703 Test Act required all crown officials – which broadened to include the military, civil service, educational institutions and municipal corporations – to be members of the Anglian Church of England. Those who did not vow allegiance to the Anglican faith were known as dissenters and could not vote or bear arms. The Ulster-Scots were staunchly Presbyterian (church government by elders). They were subsequently excluded from any power with even the Presbyterian clergy unable to perform marriages, baptisms or burials. 

Paterson – emphasis mine:

‘As well as new modes of farming the Scots brought a strict Calvinist doctrine, which by the late 1630s was taking a firmly Presbyterian shape, as opposed to the episcopacy [church government by Bishops] favoured by the king. Later in the century an Anglican opponent of the puritans detailed the impact of Scottish Presbyterianism on Ulster: 

“Hereupon followed the plantation of Ulster, first undertaken by the city of London, who fortified Coleraine and built Londonderry, and purchased many thousand acres of land in the parts adjoining. But it was carried on more vigorously, as most unfortunately withal, by some adventurers of the Scottish nation who poured themselves into this country as the richer soil; and, though they were sufficiently industrious in improving their own fortunes there, and setting up preaching in all churches whosesoever they fixed, yet whether it happened for the better or the worse, the event hath showed. For they brought with them hither such a stock of Puritanism, such as contempt of bishops, such a neglect of the public liturgy, and other divine offices of this church, that there was nothing less to be found amongst them than the government and forms of worship established in the church of England.” 

‘By 1707, the year that the Scottish parliament merged with its English cousin, the Protestant colony of Ulster was a hundred years old. The differences that had existed between the original settlers, whither Scots or English, had largely ceased to exist. It is now possible to discover a distinct Protestant Ulster identity, recognisably unique and distinct from the sources of origin. With the absence of outmoded feudalism, still present in Scotland, looser kinship ties, and a freer labour market the Ulster Protestants began to develop in an unanticipated direction.

If anything religion provided the common bond, rather than race, uniting dissenters of differing faiths, though it is also true to say that the Scots settlers had acquired a cultural domination over their English counterparts. Though loyal to the crown, they were a people who, through decades of adversity, had become self reliant, and never quite lost the feeling that they were surrounded by a hostile world:

‘They learned from hard experience’, one commentator noted ‘that one must fight for what he has; that turning the other cheek does not guarantee property rights; in short, that might is right, at least in the matter of life and land ownership.’ 

Trade laws favoured English exporters over Irish and exorbitant rent increases when a lease expired – with the terms often broken early – bankrupted many famers. Coupled with drought, sheep diseases and small pox which took its toll on the citizens of Northern Ireland, one thousand people in April 1717, made the eventful decision to make the arduous journey to Boston on the ship The Friends’ Goodwill; setting sail from Larne, County Antrim. Between 1717 and 1775 it was known as the ‘Great Migration’ and included five waves of an estimated two hundred and fifty-thousand Scots-Irish sailing to America; particularly from Counties Antrim, Down and Derry or Londonderry. About this time, the British took control of New France which allowed many Scots-Irish to migrate to Canada, who were known as the Scotch-Irish Canadians.

The distinction between the tribe of Dan who largely departed Northern Ireland and the tribe of Reuben who remained is unwittingly highlighted by Paterson:

‘The contemporary image of the Ulster Protestant [Reuben] is most commonly that of the Orangeman, with all of his exaggerated loyalty to Britain and the Crown [tribe of Judah]. For the dispossessed of the 1770s [Dan] the opposite was true: they had lost everything, and came to America with an intense hostility towards all things British [rather, English].’ 

The earliest immigrants to America arrived in New England, later heading to Pennsylvania. They were valued for their fighting prowess, protestant dogma, honesty, independence of spirit, and work ethic which helped settle and secure the frontier. Many of the first permanent Scotch-Irish settlements were in Maine and New Hampshire. 

For example, the author Stephen King is from Maine and possesses Scotch-Irish ancestry.

Select Surnames: ‘Stephen’s paternal forebears were… Scots Irish, although their name was Pollock not King. James Pollock, born in 1762, had emigrated from Ireland to Pennsylvania around 1788. He was a Methodist minister in Juniata county, Pennsylvania for forty-two years. His tombstone read:

“Sacred to the memory of Rev. James Pollock who died on January 22nd 1848 aged about 86 years. He was a native of Ireland who lived 60 years in this country – 42 of which he professed Christianity, the doctrine and the practice of which he exemplified in his walk through life.”

It is interesting that Stephen King’s eldest child, Naomi is a church minister.

In 1918 William Pollock – the great, great grandson of James Pollock – and his wife Helen were living in Peru, Indiana. ‘However, in that year the Spanish flu was circulating and William died from it at the tender age of thirty. Afterwards his widow Helen moved into lodgings in Peru with her young children. She remarried in 1923 and moved to Chicago.

Don-ald, William’s son and Stephen’s father, was just four at the time of his father’s death. When he grew up, he joined the Navy. Sometime in the 1930’s he changed his name from Pollock to King. Why did he do this? Did he feel no connection to his dead father or to his mother who had since remarried? There are no clues.

[Stephen] was a surprise addition to the family as his mother [Nellie Ruth Pillsbury] had been told that she would never have children (Stephen’s elder brother Dave had been adopted).’

As further settlers arrived they followed the Great Wagon Road thus avoiding areas settled by the English, Germans and Quakers, that traversed six hundred miles to Georgia, with many settling along the path. The numbers were such that Charleston, South Carolina became the second biggest arrival point after New York for ships from Ireland. 

The Scotch-Irish by 1730, had moved south to the lush Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and ‘always on the move’ the Scotch-Irish travelled ‘to the Carolinas, Georgia, Tennessee, and Kentucky’ including Alabama and Texas; as ‘the restless’ Scotch-Irish with their ‘intrinsic wanderlust’ led the way westwards behind such ‘trailblazers as Dan-iel Boone.’ The Scotch-Irish were nomadic and they adopted the Scandinavian housing of log cabins, though still based on a standard Ulster house floor plan. They didn’t have many culinary skills and ate mostly mutton, lamb, and oats. Their music, unlike the Highlanders with their bagpipes, was played on fiddles and dulcimers. They also brought to America their traditions of storytelling, dancing and making ‘moonshine’ or illicit whiskey. 

Paterson – emphasis & mine:

‘For the original Quaker and Puritan settlers of the thirteen colonies, largely English in origin, the emigrants of Ulster, an increasingly common sight, were usually described as ‘Irish.’ To counter this misconception the newcomers adopted the older description of ‘Scots’. It was in this semantic exchange that a new breed took shape: they were the ‘Scots-Irish.’

For many years these people had lived on a frontier in Ireland, and it seemed natural for them to push on to a new frontier, where land was both plentiful and cheap, introducing a new urgency and dynamism into a rather complacent colonial society. Before long these ‘backwoodsmen’, distrustful of all authority and government, had established a hold on the western wilderness, fighting Indians and wolves in much the same way that they had once fought wolves and woodkern. In Pennsylvania the Scots-Irish established an almost complete domination of the outer reaches of the old Quaker colony. It was a dangerous life, but one which has established a lasting image in American history and folklore…’

The Scotch-Irish gravitated to the American frontier of settlement as Danites before them had been at the forefront of exploration across Europe and they were adept as middlemen between the Native American tribes and the colonial government in handling trade negotiations. 

After carving out a new life in Northern Ireland with short-lived rewards, the untenable government oppression and living conditions; it was different in the United States, for they were unwilling to endure more tyranny in their new home and ‘they weren’t about to start over a third time.’ 

Recall the Danites who were hard-pressed with too little land and encroaching Philistine and Canaanite neighbours in their original allotment of land, striking out for the north. Also, the Tuathe de Danaan who burnt their ships off the coast of Connaught rather than admit defeat and turning tail when beginning a new life. 

Garstka states – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Scots-Irish played a large role in the settlement of America, particularly in the southern United States. Their experiences in settling new lands in Ireland, and then again in the American colonies, helped to develop a hard-working, fearless, and sometimes brash, spirit. Occasionally lawless and violent, the ScotsIrish nevertheless had a big influence on the history of the United States; their descendants populated many frontier areas, and aspects of their culture, customs, and speech are still visible in parts of the south today.’

One of America’s biggest root problems: Scots-Irish culture, 2014 – emphasis mine:

Article excerpt: The Scots-Irish Vote

‘Richard Nisbett and Dov Cohen, psychology professors at the University of Michigan and University of Illinois, conducted an in-depth study in the 1990s examining what they dubbed the “Culture of Honor” prevalent in the South.

Nisbett argues that many of the cultural traits of the modern South can be traced back to the heritage of the population’s descendants. “The Scots-Irish were a herding people, while people from the north (of the U.S.) were English, German and Dutch farmers. Herding people are tough guys all over the world, and they are that because they have to establish that you can’t trifle with them, and if you don’t do that then you feel like you’re at risk for losing your entire wealth, which is your herd. This creates a culture of honor, and the Scots-Irish are very much a culture of honor, and they carried that with them from the Deep South to the Mountain South, and then out through the western plains.”

According to Nisbett, the Scots-Irish were a warlike people distrustful of a powerful central government, a result of the herder mentality as well as centuries of fighting, first against the English and Irish, then against Native Americans, then against the Yankees. As he points out, “The Scots-Irish are very much over represented in the military… and you find them there because they’re a fighting people.”

‘It is said that no Scotch-Irish family felt comfortable until it had moved at least twice.’ As the Scotch-Irish moved inland and away from the Presbyterian influence, many became methodists or Baptists and some abandoned their faith altogether’ – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. ‘Even so, the Scotch-Irish did not go to America to escape the strict rules of their Presbyterian faith. In fact, the customs of that religion formed the basis of the American government, with early officials influenced by the religion’s system of courts when building the American system. 

Thus the main legacy Scotch-Irish left behind for future generations was their religion. In each settlement they built a church in which to practice their Presbyterian faith. Economically, the Scotch-Irish had an impact because they practiced self-reliance: ‘God helps those who help themselves.’ Vann (2007) shows the Scotch-Irish played a major role in defining the Bible Belt in the upper south during the eighteenth century.’ The lower south being indicative of the half tribe of West Manasseh – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. 

The image of a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other reminds of the Danites who plundered Laish with the sword in one hand and Micah’s stolen idols in the other. The other notable legacy was the origin of Country and Western music which derived extensively from Ulster-Scots folk music. In 1746, the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians created the College of New Jersey, later renamed Princeton University, one of the most prestigious Universities in the world, let alone America. 

Author and United States Senator Jim Webb puts forward in his book Born Fighting, 2004: ‘… that the character traits he ascribes to the Scotch-Irish such as loyalty to kin, extreme mistrust of governmental authority and legal strictures, and a propensity to bear arms and to use them, helped shape the American identity.’

It is interesting to note that as the Danites were skilled metallurgists, the Scotch-Irish were responsible for the iron and steel industry developing rapidly after 1830 which became one of the dominant industries in America by the 1860s. Its most important centre Pittsburgh, as well as other cities. The leadership of the iron and steel industry nationwide was predominantly Scotch-Irish. New immigrants after 1800 made Pittsburgh a major Scotch-Irish stronghold. 

Thomas Mellon left Ulster in 1823 and became the founder of the famous Mellon clan, playing a central role in banking and the aluminum and oil industries. Their large numbers – at least one out of every fifteen (6.66%) Americans was Scotch-Irish and almost without exception supported America’s freedom fight, in contrast to the Scottish Highlanders – helping to ingrain their convictions into those of America’s. Many Scotch-Irish were to be found on the rolls of Revolutionary War patriots for valour

Online Encyclopaedia: 

‘A British major general testified to the House of Commons that “half the rebel Continental Army were from [Northern] Ireland”. Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, with its large Scotch-Irish population, was to make the first declaration for independence from Britain in the Mecklenburg Declaration of 1775.

The Scotch-Irish “Overmountain Men” of Virginia and North Carolina formed a militia which won the Battle of King’s Mountain in 1780, resulting in the British abandonment of a southern campaign, and for some historians “marked the turning point of the American Revolution.”

Paterson – emphasis mine:

‘With the outbreak of the Revolution in 1775 the Scots-Irish, in interesting contrast to many of their Scottish cousins, were among the most determined adherents of the rebel cause. Their frontier skills were particularly useful in destroying Burgoyne’s army in the Saratoga campaign; and George Washington was even moved to say that if the cause was lost everywhere else he would take a last stand among the Scots-Irish of his native Virginia.’ Many of Washington’s generals were of Scotch-Irish stock including General Harry Know, General Dan Morgan and at least seven more. 

‘Serving in the British Army, Captain Johann Henricks, one of the much despised ‘Hessians’, wrote in frustration ‘Call it not an American rebellion, it is nothing more than an Irish-Scotch Presbyterian Rebellion.’ It was their toughness, virility and sense of divine mission that was to help give shape to a new nation, supplying it with such diverse heroes as Davy Crocket [scout, soldier, politician] and Andrew Jackson [seventh President]. They were indeed God’s frontiersmen, the real historical embodiment of the lost tribe of Israel.’

General Robert E Lee was once asked this question: ‘What race of people do you believe make the best soldiers?’ His reply: ‘The Scots who came to this country by way of Ireland.’

The Ulster-Scots and the Southern Confederacy, Alex Greer – emphasis mine:

‘When the first southern states… pulled out of the union early in 1861, the Ulster-Scots were apparently divided over secession. South Carolina was the first to secede, but it was the Low Country gentry which had initiated that state’s secession. The Up Country Ulster-Scots had had reservations… In Virginia, the Ulster-Scots in some of the western counties refused to acknowledge secession, which had been pushed for by the tidewater gentlemen.

Thus a new state, West Virginia, was formed. The factor, which caused many Ulster-Scots to eventually support, and fight, for the Confederacy, was the coercive policy of President Abe Lincoln. When Arkansas, a state with a large Scots-Irish population, was asked by Lincoln to contribute troops to force the seceding states back into line, Arkansas joined the Confederacy. Tennessee, the largely Ulster-Scots ‘Volunteer state’, also rejected Lincoln’s call to arms in the spring of 1861, and thus became the last state to join the Confederate States of America.

Whatever their differences with the tidewater English the back country Ulster-Scots closed ranks as fellow Southerners to defend their new independence, even if it meant fighting their kinfolk from the northern states. Also, it would appear that the Ulster-Scots gave the Confederacy one of its enduring symbols, the star-charged-blue saltire on white and red background.’

‘This flag is based on St. Andrew’s Cross.’

‘Having joined the Confederacy the Ulster-Scots were more than ready to fight. The most notable southern Ulster-Scots personality was Lieut.-General Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. Jackson was very conscious of his roots as his biographer and chaplain R.L. Dabney pointed out in an 1867 biography. Sadly, Jackson was shot to death by one of his own men who mistook his patrol for a Union patrol at the Battle of Chancellorsville, Virginia, on 10 May 1863. Jackson, along with the English-descended General Robert E. Lee (who had paid tribute to the Ulster-Scots), was a respected example of a Christian gentleman for future generations of Southerners. 

There were many units of the Confederate States Army which had a distinctly Ulster-Scots reputation, such as the 33rd and 42nd Virginia Infantry Regiments [Articles: 33; and 42]… Colonel Hamilton Jones, the Commanding Officer of the 57th North Carolina Infantry Regiment, wrote years after the war that “the high-spirited Scotch-Irish of North Carolina were unsurpassed in the qualities that go to make good soldiers. They do their duty well and valorously, and in fighting, in common with their comrades, they have fixed a standard for the American soldier below which it is hoped he will never fail.”

Texas is a good example of the influence the tribe of Dan has had in shaping America. Its location adjacent to Mexico and its struggle for independence is reminiscent of the original allotment for the tribe of Dan adjacent to the Philistines – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. 

Texas also possesses a coast, though unlike the original small piece of land, Texas is the second biggest state after Alaska and thus the biggest continental State, with the second highest population of 31,853,800 people, behind California. Though it does not have the highest percentage of Scotch-Irish (1.1%), the state does contain the highest number with 287,393 people – 2000 Census. Scotch-Irish staked their claims in Texas and made their stand at the Alamo in 1838. Sam Houston, the man responsible for wresting Texas from Mexican control, was the grandson of an Ulster Presbyterian, as was the frontiersman and later Congressman, Davy Crockett. 

Dallas, Texas

Other American regions today with significant Scotch-Irish descended populations, according to the 2000 Census: California 247,530, (0.7%); North Carolina 274,149, (2.9%); Florida 170,880, (0.9%); Pennsylvania 163,836, (1.3%); South Carolina, (2.4%) and Maine (1.7%). Historically, Appalachia, the Ozarks and northern New England were heavily settled by the Scotch-Irish. 

The name Texas comes from the word Tejas, which means ‘hello friends’ in the Caddo (Hasnai) Indian language. Also, there is an apt motto for the state, which is ‘friendship.’ ‘The friendly spirit runs through every Texan soul. There are many fascinating aspects about the history of Texas, which has made it what it is today. One among them is the reason behind its nickname and the state flag’s history.’ 

Flag of the Republic of Texas 1836-1839

Texas was once a province of Mexico and was called Coahuila y Tejas. Texas fought for independence during 1835 and 1836. The nickname originated because of only one star present on the 1836 flag of the Republic of Texas. The Republic of Texas was an independent country before becoming a part of the Union on December 29, 1845. The lone star also signifies Texans wish to be a distinct and unique state; as well as a reminder of how Texas was the brave solitary state to demand its own rights from Mexico. 

The current flag of Texas was approved in 1839. On the Texas flag, the blue stripe on the left stands for loyalty, the white star is the ‘Lone Star’ and the colour red represents courage. The star has five points, one point for each letter of the state name, Texas. 

The Bonnie Blue flag (above) was a banner associated at various times with the Republic of Texas, the short lived Republic of West Florida, and the Confederate States of America at the start of the American Civil War in 1861. It consists of a single, five-pointed white star on a blue field. Its first known use was in 1810, when it was used to represent the Republic of West Florida. Later referred to as the Burnet flag (below), it was adopted by the Congress of the Republic of Texas in December, 1836. This version consisted of an azure background with a large golden star, inspired by the 1810 West Florida flag. The Bonnie Blue flag was used as an unofficial flag during the early months of 1861. It was flying above the Confederate batteries that first opened fire on Fort Sumter, beginning the Civil War. 

West Florida Flag 1810

Note (above) the heraldry in the southwestern United States embracing an eagle clutching and or biting a snake.

Our Father’s Kingdom of America:

‘Reflected below is a map showing where the eagle biting the snake heraldry is being used in North America. Within Dan’s land inheritance he received Sammaus which means city of the sun. The city of Phoenix is located in the valley of the sun and in the same valley is Sun City.  Arizona and the surrounding areas are also a great place to find Dan’s breast plate stone the Garnet.’ 

Joshua 19:40-41

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

‘The seventh lot came out to the tribe of the children of Dan by their families: And the border of their possession was Saraa and Esthaol, and Hirsemes, that is, the city of the sun.’

‘While the Israelites were camped in the desert, after the Exodus, Yehovah instructed them to make a breast plate of Judgement. This breast plate was to be worn by Aaron each time he entered the tabernacle. The Israelites did make this breast plate during the forty years they were camped in the desert. According to Josephus the stones were in birth order; therefore, Dan’s stone was ligure since it is the seventh stone mentioned.

“And thou shalt interweave with it a texture of four rows of stone; there shall be a row of stones, a sardius, a topaz, and emerald, the first row. And the second row, a carbuncle, a sapphire, and a jasper. And the third row, a ligure, an agate, an amethyst: and the fourth row, a chrysolite, and a beryl, and an onyx stone, set round with gold, bound together with gold: let them be according to their row” – Septuagint Exodus 28:17-20.

‘The ligure stone [is] probably [a] garnet stone; however it could be jacinth or amber.’ 

As a serious aside, the state of California – and short-lived California Republic – epitomises symbolically (if not literally) the values and traits of the tribe of Dan: pioneering, audacious, innovative.

“California’s economy is diverse, but its greatest asset is technology, with much of the world viewing the state – and the Bay Area in particular – as the global center of innovation” – Sean Randolph, 2022.

California gave rise to Hollywood, Disney, Silicon Valley, Jet Propulsion, NASA, the early development of the atomic bomb, the Porn industry, the internet (Arpanet), Apple (computers and smart phones), Google, ChatGPT and is currently a significant hub for AI research and its development.

As Dan travelled relentlessly westwards throughout Europe and then on to America, it would seem plausible that his descendants would keep trail blazing westwards until they could go no further. That land could be ‘the land of the leader’ (or ‘land of the caliph’) derived from the Arabic word “khalifa” and the meaning of the name California.

California viewed as an independent nation – possessing a population of 39.6 million people – boasts the world’s 5th largest economy. Could California as Dan potentially bring Ephraim down like the serpent causes the horse and its rider to stumble and fall…?

Many of the founding fathers, including John Hancock and Charles Thomson, were of Scotch-Irish heritage. Twenty of the forty-six United States presidents, or forty-three percent boast Scotch-Irish bloodlines. 

Most notable or recent Presidents include: Ulysses S Grant, 18th, 1869-1877; Theodore Roosevelt, 26th, 1901-1909; Woodrow Wilson, 28th, 1913-1921; Harry S Truman, 33rd, 1945-1953; Lyndon B Johnson, 36th, 1963-1969; Richard Nixon, 37th, 1969-1974; Jimmy Carter, 39th, 1977-1981; George H W Bush, 41st, 1989-1993; Bill Clinton, 42nd, 1993-2001; George W Bush, 43rd, 2001-2009; Barack Obama, 44th, 2009-2017 and Vice President Al Gore, 45th, 1993-2001.

Notable Scotch-Irish Americans include:

Kim Basinger Actress

Brad Pitt Actor

Mel Gibson Actor

Burt Lancaster Actor

Steve Martin Actor

John Wayne Actor

David Lynch Director

Johnny Cash Musician

Hank Williams Musician

Elvis Presley Musician & Actor

Stephen King Author

John Steinbeck Author

Edgar Allen Poe Author

Mark Twain Author

Jack Dempsey Boxer

Arnold Palmer Golfer

Neil Armstrong Astronaut

Wyatt Earp Gunslinger

Billy the Kid Gunslinger

Bill Gates Microsoft Founder

J Paul Getty Industrialist

John D Rockefeller Oil Magnate (Article: The Secret Covenant)

Recall, that throughout we have noted the association of the tribe of Dan not just with warfare and exploration, but also as pioneers. The constant reader will remember – in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes – it was highlighted how the English as Judah, created (built) an empire, while often Scots (Benjamin), governed and administered the impressive size and scope of the British Commonwealth.

It may well be that as the tribe of Dan has not only settled predominantly in America and Northern Ireland but also in Scotland, that some of these ‘Scots’ were in fact Danites doing what they do best, judging. In like manner as pioneers, some or many of the myriad inventions (below) – all out of proportion to the size of Scotland’s population – could be attributable to the tribe of Dan.

Macintosh Raincoat
Tarmac Road surfaces
Rubber tyres
Adhesive postage stamps
Telephone

Incandescent Light Bulb

Flushing Lavatory
Pedal Bicycle

Kaleidoscope

Colour Photography
Television
Breach-loading rifle

Hypodermic Syringe

Lawnmower

Steam Engine

Oil Refinery

Refrigerator

Electric Clock
Penicillin

Insulin Discovery
Chloroform Anaesthetic

Radiation Therapy 

Genetic Cloning

Finger Printing
Grand piano
First British War Memorial

SAS

Radar
Logarithms and decimal point

Encyclopaedia Britannica
Modern Capitalism 

Bank of England
First Savings Bank

Cash Machine
Co-op principle of distributing dividends

A recommended book on the Scotch-Irish is God’s Frontiersmen by Rory Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick says of the American Old West – emphasis mine:

the Scots-Irish people provided most of its pioneers… On each succeeding frontier to the Rocky Mountains, the Scots-Irish were prominent either as groups or as individuals. They spearheaded the thrusts through the Appalachians into Western Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Tennessee… In both Australia and New Zealand educated Ulster Scots were providing a remarkable proportion of the professional people – doctors, lawyers, engineers – on which the new colonial societies were built… (they were) a distinct racial group... A people who in many ways were the epitome of mobility and change.’

This is a remarkable description paralleling the Danite qualities of exploration and a pioneering spirit. Further quotes supporting this aspect of their nature.

“… they were the most successful settlers… they could cope better… with frontier conditions… The English settlers who had come earlier had, after their initial thrust, been unenterprising, clinging for over a century to the Atlantic coastlines and river estuaries. The Ulster people, on the other hand, penetrated far and fast into the wilderness, having little fear of the unknown.”

‘Their style was fearless, quick and effective – more rapid than any other immigrant group.’

‘Another characteristic was their “abiding hatred for totalitarian power”, as well as unfairness, inequity, bullying and abuse.’ 

The Ulster-Scots Agency contains the following articles that show the characteristics of Dan reflected in the Scotch-Irish: 

‘Ulster-Scots and Washington’s Generals – How men with Ulster connections helped
shape America through battle’

‘Ulster-Scots and United States Presidents – Presidents with Ulster connections who
helped shape America’

‘Ulster-Scots and the Presbyterian Church – How Ulster-Scots defined church life in
America’

‘From Folk to Country – How the Ulster-Scots influenced music in America’

‘The Ulster-Scots Legacy – Famous Americans with Ulster-Scots backgrounds’

‘The Declaration of Independence – The Ulster-Scots and America’s proudest
moment – the signing of the Declaration of Independence…’

The Scotch-Irish have had a lasting influence on American society. 

Lord Rosebery: 

“I love Highlanders, and I love Lowlanders, but when I come to that branch of our race that has been grafted on to the Ulster stem I take off my hat in veneration and awe.”

The Scotch-Irish intermarried extensively and is the reason why so many Americans can trace their roots to this group. Yet there are no Scots-Irish parades or ethnic neighbourhoods as these people became fully American.

Scotch-Irish ancestry by County 2013

In the 2000 United States Census, 4.3 million Americans (1.5% of the population) claimed Scotch-Irish ancestry. In 2019 the figure was 3,011,165 people (0.9%).  Author and former United States Senator Jim Webb suggests that the true number of people with some Scots-Irish heritage in the United States is more likely to be over twenty-seven million people, some 9.2% in 2004. This is because contemporary Americans with any Scotch-Irish heritage may regard themselves as either Irish, Scottish, or simply American instead. We encountered this in the previous chapter with those Americans of a long line of English descent, now simply identifying as American – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Irish ancestry by contrast is predominantly in the northern States showing that they are not Gad, but rather descended from Ephraim.

The number of people identifying as Scots-Irish, that is the tribe of Dan in Ireland (the Republic) are approximately 24,500 people and in Ulster 345,101* people. In 1790, the population of America was 3,929,326 people of which some 400,000 were of Irish extraction and half of these were from the Province of Ulster.

The Ulster Diaspora between 1607 and 1680, accounted for 2,000 people from Northern Ireland going to the Americas, including the Caribbean and South America; with 2,000 people also going to Britain and 16,500 to Europe. Estimates for the period 1680 to 1750 range from 70,000 to 250,000 for Ulster-American emigration; with 4,000 people heading to Britain and 16,500 more to Europe. The Ulster Diaspora between 1750 and 1820 was approximately 150,000 people to North America; 20,000 to Britain; 5,000 to the British colonies; and 2,000 people to Europe.

The Ulster Diaspora from 1820 to 1890 included a scale of emigration between Ulster and North America little short of astounding (map below). In the three phases 1820 to 1845, 1845 to 1851 and 1851 to 1890, the total estimate for Ulster migration to North America was 1,317,000 people.

Meanwhile, the Ulster Diaspora between 1890 and 1960 saw a shift in where the Northern Irish migrated. The estimated total for Ulster emigration to North America in the period of 1890 to 1960 was 363,000 people; to Britain 240,000 people and the British colonies, 30,000 people. Between 1890 and 1930 about eighty-five per cent of Ulster emigrants went to North America. After 1930 this distribution altered dramatically and swiftly. Between 1930 and 1960, close to seventy-five per cent of those leaving from Ulster counties went to Britain, whilst only twenty per cent crossed the Atlantic. 

As discussed in previous chapters, the Paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup indicative of Abraham’s male descendants is R1b and in particular the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21). The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup R1b-U106 is more frequent in central to western Europe; U198 in England; L165 in northern England; L11 in central England and L1 in southern and eastern England. While the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) is found in England, it is particularly widespread in the Celtic nations comprising the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland – refer L21 phylogenetic tree below. Overall, England has a higher percentage of R-U106, compared to its related near neighbours, aside from the Dutch. 

How Scots-Irish (or Irish-Scot) are You? Scottish Origenes – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Up to 30%* of Protestants in Northern Ireland (descendants of Lowlander Scots who settled in Ulster in Ireland from 1610 AD onwards) carry the R-M222 genetic marker. In addition about 12% of Catholic males on the island of Ireland and about 5% of all Scottish males also carry the R-M222 genetic marker.’ 

Note M222 on the phylogenetic tree above, downstream from Z39589 and DF13, which in turn is from L21 (M529). The leader and founder of Mormonism Joseph Smith, may have been the tribe of Dan, as he carried the R1b Y-DNA Haplogroup M222.

The population of Northern Ireland is 1,933,114 people. The Protestant component is forty-eight percent of the total which equals 927,895 people; whereas forty-five percent are Catholic, or number 869,901 people; leaving 135,318 inhabitants. The Catholic portion have an affinity with those of the Republic to the South and are in large part an extension of the tribe of Gad – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Recall, Gad shall ‘enlarge’ his territory.

Deuteronomy 33:20-21

English Standard Version

‘And of Gad he said, “Blessed be he who enlarges Gad… He chose the best of the land for himself, for there a commander’s [lawgiver’s or ruler’s] portion was reserved…’

Those who claim Scots-Irish ancestry in Northern Ireland include approximately 352,600 people – about 18% of the total population – and represent the tribe of Dan. This leaves 710,613 people or about thirty-seven percent of the total population and these individuals equate to the mainly Protestant tribe of Reuben. Recall that Reuben’s numbers would ‘be few.’

Deuteronomy 33:6

English Standard Version

“Let Reuben live, and not die, but let his men be few.”

‘The R-M222 Y-DNA genetic marker first appeared in a single male who lived on, or near, the Inishowen peninsula in the far northwest of Ireland approximately 1,500 years ago (+/-300 years). Clues as to why these R-M222 carriers began colonising throughout Ireland and Scotland can be found in their origin; Donegal (Dún nan Gall meaning ‘base or fort of the Foreigner’) and their descriptive surnames which they took with them like Gallagher (Ó Gallchobhair meaning ‘Foreign helper’) who upon settling along the west coast of Ireland acquired new surnames like Higgins (O’hUigin meaning ‘Viking’) and Halloran (O’hAllmhurain meaning ‘Pirate or Stranger from overseas’).’

‘Some of the R-M222 males who settled in Southeast Ulster took part in the subsequent Norse-Gael Conquest and colonisation of Southwest Scotland which was led by the King of Norway ‘Magnus Barelegs’ in about 1100 AD.’

‘The land they conquered became ‘Galloway’ meaning ‘land of the foreign Gael’ a term used by the surrounding ‘Scots’ to describe the Gaels from Ireland who settled there. The Inishowen Gaels took with them to Galloway their genetic markers (like R-M222), their Gaelic language…

What’s particularly interesting is that Conquering Gaels and Vikings appear to have split Southwest Scotland between them, with the Gaelic-Irish (denoted by their ‘Mac’ surnames) colonising the area west of Dumfries town, while the Vikings (with surnames typically ending in ‘-son’) colonising the area to the east

While in Galloway in Southwest Scotland, the descendants of the Irish Gaels gradually adopted the English language (Gaelic was extinct as a language in Galloway by 1760 AD.) They adopted the Protestant faith, and approximately 500 years after their ancestors had first arrived in Galloway, many would return as English speaking Protestant Lowland Scots during the Plantation of Ulster that began in the early 17th Century.’

In northwest Ireland, particularly Sligo and northernmost Donegal, 21.5% of the male population carry the R1b1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1 genetic fingerprint of R-M222, which is from the R1b-M529/L21/S145 (R1b1a2a1a2c) sub-clade. The predominant R1b in Ireland is R-M269, with R-M222 being scarce in the Republic of Ireland. 

How Scots-Irish (or Irish-Scot) are You? Scottish Origenes – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine: 

‘The I-M223 [I2a2a from 2011-2017] genetic marker appears to be much older than R-M222. While R-M222+ve males are descended from the Celtic tribes that began arriving in Britain and Ireland from Central Europe from about 800 BC onwards, I-M223+ve males appear to be the descendants of the pre-historic inhabitants of Southwest Scotland and Northeast Ireland. 

The close relationship between I-M223+ve Irish and Scots is reflected in the fact that it has proven impossible to determine whether the mutation that gave rise to I-M223 first appeared in a male who lived in Southeast Ulster in Ireland or within Southwest Scotland (21 miles separates both locations).

All we know is that today, the I-M223 [I2a1b1 from 2018] marker is prevalent among both the Pre-Plantation Gaelic Irish inhabitants of Southeast Ulster (County Down) and the Scottish male population of the far Southwest of Scotland (Wigtownshire and Southern Ayrshire). Notable Gaelic Clans that carry the I-M223 paternal genetic marker include the famous McGuinness Clan of Southeast Ulster (the Clan that gave you Arthur Guinness and Guinness Stout), and the Scottish Fergusons, MacWhirthers and MacCrackens who dominated Southwest Scotland.’ 

‘Interestingly, the I-M223 marker occurs in individuals named Hannah or Hanna; surnames which are associated exclusively with either Southeast Ulster in Ireland and Southwest Scotland. Given the inability to distinguish its Irish or Scottish origin, one must conclude that the ‘I-M223’ mutation is the ‘quintessential Scots-Irish’ paternal DNA marker.’

Davy Crockett belonged to Y-DNA Haplogroup I-M223.

The genetic closeness of certain inhabitants of southwest Scotland and Northern Ireland reveals the mysterious third element in these countries. For Scots are descendants of Benjamin and the majority of Protestant Northern Irish are from Reuben. 

Who would be this other common denominator but none other than the people descended from Dan. The Y sex chromosome R1b is the defining marker Haplogroup for a variety of peoples in western Europe and so the sub-clades associated with the United Kingdom and Ireland are mutations stemming originally from Jacob. Hence the men in Britain and Ireland carrying the far older Haplogroup I, while related to those men possessing the relatively recent R1b in genetic terms, are only so distantly, for they carry an intermediate Haplogroup from a much earlier ancestor than Jacob or Abraham. 

This then is a fascinating correlation between I-M223 (or I2a1b1) and R1b-M222 if each is a ‘quintessential Scots-Irish paternal DNA marker.’ As R-M222 would equate to mutations reflecting the tribe of Dan and their paternal ancestors Dan and his son Hushim, it effectively means that the carriers of I-M223 are men of a related earlier paternal line of descent from Shem via Arphaxad, who have intermixed and intermarried with the tribe of Dan – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens. 

The tribe of Dan has truly leapt from Bashan, not once or twice but thrice. From Ulster to Scotland, from Scotland to Northern Ireland and from Northern Ireland to the United States and beyond. 

Deuteronomy 33:22

Expanded Bible

“Dan is like a lion’s cub, who jumps out of [and] leaps forth from Bashan.”

‘One of the puzzles of modern DNA studies has been a lack of DNA evidence for the Irish colonization of the Western Isles of Scotland, which historically gave rise to the Kingdom of Dalriada. It may simply be that there has been so much human movement back and forth between the Western Isles of Scotland and Northeast Ireland that the two populations are (at present) indistinguishable from one another! 

Given its proximity to Scotland, the descendants of Medieval Antrim in Northeast Ireland (which lies closest to Scotland) are ‘genetically’ more Scots than Irish (12 miles separate Antrim from Scotland). The descendants of even the Gaelic Irish in Northern Ireland (who are today overwhelmingly Catholic) tend to have earlier detectable links in their commercial DNA test results with Scotland (that includes the most notable O’Neill Clan). 

In fact, the Medieval surnames and prominent Clans of North Antrim are dominated by notable Scottish surnames that originated from the Western Isles… BUT! over time, and as more and more people participate in commercial ancestral Y-DNA testing, it may become possible to dissect out each wave of migration between Scotland and Ireland and identify some new Dalriadan DNA markers.’

Recall the Rh- factor discussed in the article, Rhesus Negative Blood Factor: “Of interest, is the high percentage of Rh- people in both Ireland and Scotland. Particularly, the peoples of northwest Ireland, the Highland Scots and the western Islanders of Norway, who all have between 16 and 25% Rh negative people. The Norwegians are accounted by those female Scots who were transported to Norway as slaves. 

Scotland is a country where there is a strong variation of blood type frequencies based on location. Between 20 percent and a little bit over 30 percent of Rh- people can be expected in most of the extreme northern and western regions. In the West coast region of Inverness, where the Rh negative percentage has been measured at 30.44%, the percentage of blood type O has also been noted as substantially high. Ireland is purported to have around 25% Rh negatives in several reports while others demonstrate a percentage nearer 15% to 16%. However studies have indicated that Northern Ireland has a higher percentage of approximately 27%.”

This combined information is significant as it points towards the Scots-Irish as the tribe of Dan nestled primarily in Northern Ireland and to a lesser degree in Scotland. Dan’s strong association with Reuben in Northern Ireland is not unexpected; nor its mass migration onto its full inheritance within Joseph in the United States. All this after the Tuatha de Danann had early travelled in waves to Ulster between circa 1500 and 1200 BCE, while the sons of Jacob were dwelling in Egypt, later sojourning across the Sinai Peninsula and during the time of the Judges – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. 

Haplogroup R1b-M529 and a lesser extent I2 (with I1) through intermixing, are the main Y-DNA Haplogroups for the sons of Jacob and are indicative of the Scots, Irish and the peoples of Northern Ireland. As a residue of the tribe of Dan is nestled within these half brother nations, then they will exhibit unique clades of each. Certainly, it appears that R-M222 (and I-M223) are those markers.

The descendants of Dan, the true thirteenth tribe of Israel, like an elusive serpent… have been found.

But the Spirit explicitly and unmistakably declares that in later times some will turn away from the faith, paying attention instead to deceitful and seductive spirits and doctrines of demons, misled by the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared as with a branding iron…

1 Timothy 4:1-2 Amplified Bible

“Become lost. Only then, will you be found.”

Worm Shepherd 

“I tell you naught for your comfort, yea, naught for your desire,

Save that the sky grows darker yet and the sea rises higher.”

G K Chesterton, The Ballad of the White Horse, 1911

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

Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

Chapter XXXIII

The identities of Asshur, Edom, Judah and Dan have been investigated, discussed and written about more than all the other biblical identities put together, many times over. Anyone with more than a passing interest in the Bible and conversant in the scriptures, will recognise that these four peoples feature significantly in the end time prophecies. We have investigated three of the four and deduced their correct identities as all three so far have been inaccurate, in some instances for hundreds of years. All having major repercussions in interpreting future world events through biblical prophecy.

The prevalent view has been that Asshur as ‘the instrument of God’s wrath’ in bringing Israel to its knees in repentance is the nation of Germany. Yet, geography, history, migration, with autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups has revealed that the Germans are in fact descended from Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. As the dominant nation of the descendants of Peleg – from Eber, from Arphaxad and from Shem ( in Western Europe) – the Germans are also the leading nation of Joktan’s children also descended from Eber, in Eastern Europe.

A German led European Union – a United States of Europe – will ally itself with the Assyrians – Numbers 24:24. Our studies have revealed it is in fact Russia, who is Asshur and modern day Assyria – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Russia is the future King of the North (Article: Four Kings & One Queen) and the instrument of God’s wrath against (the tribes of) Israel and (true) Judah – Zephaniah 2:13, Isaiah 10:5. 

Coupled with this, is the extraordinary switch of identities between Esau and Judah, where the Jews are not from Judah but rather Edom and the tribe of Judah is not the Jewish people, but actually the nation of England – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

It is against this panorama of mistaken identities and incorrect interpretation of biblical prophecy that we now arrive to the most written about and most sought after tribal identity, Joseph. The son of Jacob chosen to be the recipient of the Birthright blessings usually given to the firstborn son. Jacob’s eldest sons, Reuben, Simeon and Levi all disqualified themselves. Even so, Levi was chosen to be the Priestly tribe and even after his own personal misdemeanours, Judah was selected to receive the blessings of the throne, orb and sceptre of royal rulership – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

Even though Joseph was the eleventh of twelve sons, he was still a firstborn son of Jacob and his wife Rachel. We will learn that the prophesied blessings to Joseph and his sons Manasseh and Ephraim are specific enough to quickly identity these peoples in our modern world. It is thus beyond all belief and comprehension, that for nearly five centuries the identification of Jacob’s grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim have been, quite simply… wrong. 

When we first meet Joseph, Rachel was feeling the pressure as Leah was seven nil ahead when it came to children, or nine to two if the hand maiden’s sons are included. 

Genesis 30:22-24

English Standard Version

22 ‘Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken away my reproach.”

24 And she called his name Joseph, saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!”

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The name Joseph meaning: ‘Increaser, May He Add’ from the verb (yasap), to add, increase, repeat or do again. The name Joseph means Increaser, Repeater or Doubler, and even the fulfillment of his name is dual: Benjamin becomes Joseph’s younger brother, and Joseph himself becomes father of two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (see Ezekiel 47:13).

For a meaning of the name Joseph, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads two meanings: (1) May He (Yahweh) Add (assuming that the “He” of our name is YHWH), and (2) Increaser. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads He Shall Add. And BDB Theological Dictionary has He Adds, Increases. Spiros Zodhiates (The Complete Word Study Dictionary – New Testament) translates the name Joseph with May God Add, but note that the “God” part is implied and not actually incorporated in the name Joseph.’

From Genesis chapter thirty-seven through to chapter fifty, the narrative is dominated by Joseph’s life. Of which twelve chapters representing twenty-four percent of Genesis are devoted to Joseph. Slightly less than for Abraham from chapter twelve through to twenty-five, with twenty-six percent. Even Adam and Noah only have three chapters devoted to each of them, or six percent each of the Genesis story. Jacob on the other hand, ostensibly the most flawed of all the Patriarchs has eight chapters, or sixteen percent devoted to him, yet he also figures (though less than Joseph) prominently in the final thirteen chapters of Genesis – with a total of over forty percent of the Book of Genesis devoted to Jacob’s life.  

We have discussed in previous chapters regarding the brother’s betrayal of Joseph and selling him to the Ishmaelite traders at the behest of Judah. The early part of Genesis chapter thirty-seven is of interest as it provides the factors which led to his brothers jealousy-turned-hatred.

Genesis 37:2-11

English Standard Version

‘Joseph, being seventeen years old, was pasturing the flock with his brothers. He was a boy with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, his father’s wives [symbolically, not literally as they had been loaned to Jacob purely for reproduction, though were not his concubines (Genesis 29:24, 29)]. And Joseph brought a bad [H7451 – ra] report of them to their father.’

We learn that Joseph was with certain ones of his brothers… specifically: Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher. For whatever reason not divulged these four brothers were up to no good and Joseph told on them. At first reading, one could easily assume that Joseph was a tattle tale and acting like a spoilt brat, belying his youthful age. 

Two reasons suggest otherwise. First, the Bible does not label him as such. If the charge of youthful foolishness were considered, it would have to be quickly dropped for when Joseph was harshly rejected by his brothers and while he served Potiphar in Egypt, Joseph for a young man was focused, efficient and honourable. Far from a spoilt brat. In fact, he accepted his brutal injustices with immeasurable maturity. 

Second, the bad report Joseph made of his brothers was not merely a superficial thing, it was a very serious matter. The Hebrew word ra is translated by the KJV as evil, 442 times; wickedness, 59; mischief, 21; affliction, 6; adversity, 4; and harm 3 times. It includes a wide range of negative meanings: ‘misery, distress, calamity, malignant’ and ‘grievous.’ 

As we have yet to discuss Jacob’s son Dan, more detail will be investigated in the following chapter. Though it can be stated that Dan is the bad boy or black sheep of the family and if he was involved, he may well have been leading the other three bothers down a dark path which Joseph had no choice but to divulge – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Support for Joseph being honourable in this incident is revealed by the fact that Joseph is rather unique in the scriptures and part of a very select band of people who do not have one word writ against them. Of all the prominent people in the Bible, not including peripheral characters, it is only Daniel and Christ whom have nothing negative recorded and for prominent women, only Ruth, Esther and Mary are included in this exceptional group. Recall that Daniel is also one of the three men described as most righteous in the Bible with Noah and Job. This may have some bearing on why the Eternal revealed the most profound and impacting prophecies of all the prophets to Daniel; for the prophecies of the Book of Revelation through John are in many cases, amplifications of those originating in Daniel – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

Genesis: 3 ‘Now Israel loved Joseph more than any other of his sons, because he was the son of his old age. And he made him a robe of many colors. 4 But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peacefully to him.’

With what we have just learned about Jospeh and the view the Creator had of him, it is clear that Jospeh didn’t act like the favoured son, it was Jacob who created the issue as verse four says. As Jacob is guilty of innumerable unwise decisions this should not come as a surprise; yet one would have thought that growing up in a family with a pronounced and marked divide between parents and sons as Jacob and Esau had with Isaac and Rebecca, that Jacob would have shied away from repeating this tragic pattern. 

As touched upon previously, for the want of a better explanation, the understanding that Joseph’s coat was tartan or plaid is interesting. Particularly, when we consider the two nation’s who have upheld this unique textile design more than any other, are Scotland – the tribe of Benjamin – and the United States.

Genesis: 5 ‘Now Joseph had a dream, and when he told it to his brothers they hated him even more. 6 He said to them, “Hear this dream that I have dreamed: 7 Behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and behold, my sheaf arose and stood upright. And behold, your sheaves gathered around it and bowed down to my sheaf.” 8 His brothers said to him, “Are you indeed to reign over us? Or are you indeed to rule over us?” So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words.’

One would have to assume with what we know of Joseph’s character that he was being matter of fact and not boasting. Of course, what the brothers were not to know, is that the dream foretold of Joseph being their servant in saving his brothers from starvation in a few short years hence. Though regarding the distant future into our present time, Joseph as the preeminent brother, serves as the protector for all his brothers. 

A component of this story not readily touched upon, is that Joseph had the Holy Spirit and was converted to the truth of the Eternal. His brothers were not and so could not perceive spiritual matters the same way. This would have put considerable distance between himself and his brothers – much like David experienced with his brothers and parents (Psalm 27:10; 69:8). It also explains why Jacob favoured Joseph over Judah, the son actually most like himself in character, for the son who was like himself, spiritually.

Recall that the Eternal had a different view from Jacob, in that though the Bible reveals Joseph’s people are special to the Creator, it is in fact Judah who He loves – Psalm 78:68. In His mind, giving the royal sceptre of rulership for the very throne that His Son will return to sit on, was the favoured blessing. 

Genesis: 9 ‘Then he dreamed another dream and told it to his brothers and said, “Behold, I have dreamed another dream. Behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.”

10 ‘But when he told it to his father and to his brothers, his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the ground before you?” 11 And his brothers were jealous of him, but his father kept the saying in mind.’

Jacob did not like hearing this from Joseph, yet considered the matter and deduced that it was of future importance with a positive outcome.

Genesis 39:1-10, 21-23

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there. 2 The Lord was with Joseph, and he became a successful man, and he was in the house of his Egyptian master. 3 His master saw that the Lord was with him and that the Lord caused all that he did to succeed in his hands. 4 So Joseph found favor in his sight and attended him, and he made him overseer of his house and put him in charge of all that he had. 5 From the time that he made him overseer in his house and over all that he had, the Lord blessed the Egyptian’s house for Joseph’s sake; the blessing of the Lord was on all that he had, in house and field. 6 So he left all that he had in Joseph’s charge, and because of him he had no concern about anything but the food he ate.’

This is an incredible occurrence and shows it was more to do with the Eternal’s intervention on Joseph’s behalf, though of course, the Eternal was only able to bless Joseph and Potiphar’s household because Joesph was not only capable but obedient to the Creator. This enhances the case we have built regarding Joseph’s spirituality. To be clear, it is not that Jospeh was perfect, for all sin, but rather some people are more blameless than others and Joseph was such an individual. Potiphar was the captain of the Pharaoh’s personal retinue of soldiers and thus a high ranking official who had a palatial residence adjacent to the actual palace of the Pharaoh. Joseph was merely seventeen when he arrived in Egypt in 1709 BCE.

Joseph

Genesis: ‘Now Joseph was handsome in form and appearance. 7 And after a time his master’s wife cast her eyes on Joseph and said, “Lie with me.” 8 But he refused and said to his master’s wife, “Behold, because of me my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my charge. 9 He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except you, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?” 10 And as she spoke to Joseph day after day, he would not listen to her, to lie beside her or to be with her’ – Exodus 20:3, 14-15, 17.

Here the Hebrew words say that Joseph was not just handsome but also had a good physique. Notice his spiritual mindset; Joseph say’s it would be sinning against God to sleep with Potiphar’s wife, not just that he would be betraying his employer. It is a simple case of sexual harassment committed by Potiphar’s wife. Though Joseph could not divulge the reason, could Joseph have requested a transfer or found a way to move? When the opportunity arose and the house was empty, she made her move, grabbing his outer garment. Joseph flees, leaving it behind. 

Potiphar’s wife then frames Joseph for an indecent proposition and Potiphar in understandable anger sends Joseph to the prison reserved for the Pharaoh’s enemies circa 1703 BCE at the age of twenty-two or twenty-three and like David who worked in the service of Saul for six years (1022-1016 BCE), so did Joseph for Potiphar. Though Satan had tried to tempt Joseph and thwart the Creator’s plan, it was not to be.

Genesis: 21 ‘But the Lord was with Joseph and showed him steadfast love and gave him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison. 22 And the keeper of the prison put Joseph in charge of all the prisoners who were in the prison. Whatever was done there, he was the one who did it. 23 The keeper of the prison paid no attention to anything that was in Joseph’s charge, because the Lord was with him. And whatever he did, the Lord made it succeed.’

In Genesis chapter forty we read of the Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker who are put into Joseph’s prison for misdemeanours circa 1698 BCE, when Joseph was twenty-seven or twenty-eight. They both have dreams of which Joseph interprets them. He requests that the cupbearer who’s dream is favourable, remembers him to the Pharaoh, though he does not and Joseph remains in prison. Two years later, Pharaoh has a dream. None of his wise men or magicians can interpret it. Pharaoh’s cupbearer, then recalls his encounter with Joseph and finally remembers him to Pharaoh.

Genesis 41:14-16, 25-32, 37-57

English Standard Version

14 ‘Then Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they quickly brought him out of the pit. And when he had shaved himself and changed his clothes [after seven years in prison – again much like David who was a vagabond eluding King Saul for seven years (1016-1010 BCE)… both men also became rulers (David, King; Joseph Vizier) by the age of thirty], he came in before Pharaoh.

15 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I have had a dream, and there is no one who can interpret it. I have heard it said of you that when you hear a dream you can interpret it.” 16 Joseph answered Pharaoh, “It is not in me; God will give Pharaoh a favorable answer” – much like Daniel with King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:27-28).

25 ‘Then Joseph said to Pharaoh, “The dreams of Pharaoh are one; God has revealed to Pharaoh what he is about to do. 26 The seven good cows are seven years, and the seven good ears are seven years; the dreams are one. 27 The seven lean and ugly cows that came up after them are seven years, and the seven empty ears blighted by the east wind are also seven years of famine’ – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man different name?

28 ‘… God has shown to Pharaoh what he is about to do. 29 There will come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt, 30 but after them there will arise seven years of famine, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt. The famine will consume the land, 31 and the plenty will be unknown in the land by reason of the famine that will follow, for it will be very severe. 32 And the doubling of Pharaoh’s dream means that the thing is fixed by God, and God will shortly bring it about.’ 

Joseph then suggests Pharaoh appoints a wise and discerning person to oversee the storing of twenty percent of grain for each year of plenty and its division during the seven years of famine so that the Egyptians did not perish.

Genesis: 37 ‘This proposal pleased Pharaoh and all his servants. 38 And Pharaoh said to his servants, “Can we find a man like this, in whom is the Spirit of God?” 39 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “Since God has shown you all this, there is none so discerning and wise as you are. 40 You shall be over my house, and all my people shall order themselves as you command. Only as regards the throne will I be greater than you.” 41 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt.”

42 Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his hand and put it on Joseph’s hand, and clothed him in garments of fine linen and put a gold chain about his neck. 43 And he made him ride in his second chariot. And they called out before him, “Bow the knee!” Thus he set him over all the land of Egypt. 44 Moreover, Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I am Pharaoh, and without your consent no one shall lift up hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.”

45 And Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphenathpaneah [H6848 – Tsophnath Pa`neach: treasury of the glorious rest].

And he gave him in marriage Asenath [H621 – ‘Acnath: belonging to the goddess Neith], the daughter of Potiphera [H6319 – Powtiy Phera‘: he whom the Ra gave] priest of On [H204 – own: strength, vigour]’ – much like Moses marrying Zipporah the daughter of Jethro the priest of Midian (Exodus 2:16, 21).

‘So Joseph went out over the land of Egypt.’

Asenath

The parallelism does not end there for Hagar, daughter of Pharoah Djer (3rd King of the 1st Dynasty from 1922 to 1875 BCE) found a princess wife from Egypt for her son Ishmael (Genesis 21:21) – Chapter XXVIII The True identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

Thus it is probable that Joseph married a woman of similar aristocratic lineage to Ishmael’s wife. Not an Arab, but rather someone from the line of Arphaxad, Eber and Joseph’s great, great grandfather, Terah. This in itself, becomes of particular interest when we later survey the relationship between Ishmael’s offspring and Joseph’s descendants.

From this account we can appreciate how the Eternal moved Pharaoh beyond just appointing an overseer but actually elevating Joseph to Vizier of all his kingdom; while recognising that God’s spirit was working in Joseph. It was a wise decision on Pharaoh’s part and showed a level of humility in his character. Aside from Joseph having the Creator blessing him; being mature; as well as good looking; it becomes apparent that Joseph must have been very personable and charismatic.

The jealousy exhibited by his brothers makes more sense now we have a clearer picture of Joseph. It is Joseph’s integrity which makes him a good candidate as saviour of Egypt and thus a type of the Messiah himself, and so it is at a similar age as Christ when he began his ministry in his thirtieth year, that Joseph embarks on his own ministry of service at age thirty – refer article: The Christ Chronology.

 Psalm 105:16-21

English Standard Version

16 ‘When he summoned a famine on the land and broke all supply of bread, 17 he had sent a man ahead of them, Joseph, who was sold as a slave. 18 His feet were hurt with fetters; his neck was put in a collar of iron; 19 until what he had said came to pass, the word of the Lord tested him. 20 The king sent and released him; the ruler of the peoples set him free; 21 he made him lord of his house and ruler of all his possessions…’

Joseph received an Egyptian name, thus looking for the name Joseph in Egyptian records would be fruitless (Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man different name?) There is considerable debate on what the name Zaphenath-paneah means. Of all the definitions offered, the two which resonate the most are: ‘the man to whom secrets are revealed’ and ‘the Nourisher of the Two Lands, the Living One.’ Either way, it was through Joseph’s God and His revelation that life in Egypt was preserved. 

As intimated, Joseph’s wife Asenath is unlikely to have descended from Ham’s son Mizra (Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia) but rather from the Egyptian ruling elite. The Priest of On may have had a link with the same order as Moses’s father-in-law Jethro, the Priest of Midian (Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia) and the On-e true God. 

The city of On (or Heliopolis), the City of the Sun, bordering the land of Goshen, was a centre of worship for the sun-god Ra – Jeremiah 43:13. Of which the meaning of Potiphera’s name refers. The priests of On were considered the most intelligent, cultured and learned people in Egypt. The High Priest of On held the title, Greatest of Seers

When Joseph married into this family, he joined a social class befitting a national leader. Implied is that the marriage was selected by Pharaoh because of his confidence that Joseph too, was a seer or prophet of the highest calibre. Perhaps even a candidate for next High Priest. If this was the case, then Asenath must have embraced her husband’s faith in the God of Israel as nothing negative is mentioned of the marriage in the Bible. Remembering too, she was the mother of Joseph’s sons of unique prophetic consequence – Genesis 46:20. This high profile marriage ordained by Pharaoh, also removed any doubt about the shocking story circulating throughout Egypt, of a former slave and prisoner rising (legitimately) to second in command of the whole of Egypt. 

Asenath like her father, bore a name signalling an intended path initially at least, that was aligned with the gods of Egypt – Article: Thoth. In this instance, the goddess Neith. Neith was a powerful and popular deity worshiped primarily in the city of Sais and is considered one of the oldest deities in the Egyptian pantheon.

Neith statuette – Louvre Museum Paris

Neith is associated with the creation of the world; as the mother of the crocodile god, Sobek; as well as the mother of the sun-god Ra no less. While always appearing feminine – with a prominent bosom* like Asherah – Neith also possesses the male characteristics of an androgynous creator.

She was the patron of Lower Egypt and a goddess of wisdom and war. With a number of symbols, two stand out. One linked with war were arrows, which are of interest, as these figure prominently on the seal of the peoples descended from Joseph.

The other being a cow, whereby as a cow, Neith daily gives birth to a reborn sun. The cow (or calf), is steeped in a system of worship which was endemic in ancient Israel, particularly in Ephraim after King Solomon’s reign, but had begun during the Exodus from Egypt – clearly having an Egyptian origin (Article: The Calendar Conspiracy). The bull coincidently is a symbol of Ephraim, stemming from the Hebrew root for his name.

At the request of Thoth, Neith interceded in the kingly war between Horus and Seth (Set) over the Egyptian throne; recommending that Horus rule – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Neith (Asherah) is the mother of Isis (Lilith), hence the grandmother of Horus – the son of Osiris (Nimrod).

Encyclopaedia: ‘The veil of Isis is a metaphor and allegorical artistic motif representing the inaccessibility of nature’s secrets, personified as the goddess Isis shrouded by a veil or mantle (Article: Lilith). The motif traces back to a statue in the ancient Egyptian city of Sais. As recounted by Greco-Roman authors, the statue of the veiled goddess bore the inscription:

“I am all that has been and is and shall be; and no mortal has ever lifted my mantle.”

The “Parting of the Veil”, “Piercing of the Veil”, “Rending of the Veil” or “Lifting of the Veil” refers, in the Western mystery tradition and Neopagan witchcraft, to opening the “veil” of matter, thus gaining entry to a state of spiritual awareness in which the mysteries of nature are revealed.’

Isis as a veiled ‘goddess* of life’ with a French translation of the Sais inscription on the pedestal, mysteriously located at the Herbert Hoover (31st President of the United States from 1929 to 1933) National Historic Site in Iowa.

Most interesting is how Neith in predynastic and early dynasty times is referred to as the ‘Opener of the Way’ (refer Article: Belphegor), with references to Neith as the ‘Opener of Paths’ occurring during Dynasty IV through Dynasty VI. Neith is observed in the titles of women serving as priestesses of the (mother) goddess – the Queen of Heaven (Article: Asherah).

Encyclopaedia: ‘Such epithets include: “Priestess of Neith who opens all the (path)ways”“Priestess of Neith who opens the way in all her places” – el-Sayed, I: 67-69… ‘el-Sayed asserts his belief that Neith should be seen as a parallel to Wepwawet, the ancient jackal god of Upper Egypt’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

The question remains, who was this unusually accommodating, good-hearted Pharaoh at the time of Joseph? In exact antithesis to the later hard-hearted Pharaoh of the Exodus. According to an unconventional chronology, not only are the Egyptian king lists misinterpreted by conventional chronology – as exposed by the revised chronology of David Rohl; in that dynasties can be hundreds of years out of alignment within an incorrect time frame – various Egyptian dynasties have been misunderstood as chronologically falling one after the other and not recognised as invariably being concurrent instead. 

Revising the Egyptian Chronology: Joseph as Imhotep, and Amenemhet IV as Pharaoh of the Exodus, Anne Habermehl, 2013 – emphasis mine: 

‘From previous discussion it is clear that if the plagues and the Exodus caused the collapse of the concurrent 6th and 12th Dynasties, we need to look for our Exodus pharaoh at the end of one of these dynasties. The 12th Dynasty, ruling Lower Egypt in the north, is the one which would produce our Exodus pharaoh because the Children of Israel lived in the Delta there (the 6th Dynasty would have ruled Upper Egypt in the south). 

We suggest that Dynasties 3 to 12 cannot have reigned one after the other in the order that Manetho listed them. Dynasties 5 & 6 may have run concurrently with Dynasties 11 & 12. The First Intermediate Period (at the end of the 6th Dynasty) and Second Intermediate Period (at the end of the 12th Dynasty), both times of great disorder in Egypt, appear to be the same period, as mentioned earlier. Dynasties 7, 8, 9 and 10 would therefore have reigned after the Exodus at the same time as Dynasties 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. Versions of this scheme have been offered by various revisionists (e.g., Courville, 1971, volume 1, page 101; Ashton & Down, 2006, page 206). This alone could potentially remove close to 500 of the 675 years by which we wish to shorten the secular timeline.’

It makes sense to agree with the author’s proposal, in that the end of the twelfth dynasty matches the time of Moses, though would differ on the Pharaoh of the Exodus with one in the thirteenth dynasty instead. This would mean the Pharaoh of Joseph’s dream interpretation is a king from the third dynasty. The first king of the third dynasty was Pharaoh Djoser, also named Netjerikhet. Records are unclear to his length of reign, from either 19 years according to Manetho; 28 or 29 years according to the royal annals; and 37 or 38 years according to other lists and historians. Lists for the dynasty also have a variance of the number of kings, with either four, five or even eight kings. 

Therefore the options favoured are the middle number for the reign and the lower for the number of kings – which fits the chronology of Pharaohs until the time of Moses and a date of reign for Joseph’s Pharaoh circa 1700 to 1672/71 BCE. The Saqqara Tablet is viewed by this writer as the most accurate as it lists Djoser as the first of four kings and was found in a tomb near the Djoser Pyramid in Saqqara. 

Duplication, short reigns and doubt result in only two viable rulers – of either Djoser or the final dynastic ruler, Huni also named Qahedjet, who ruled for 24 years – as the Pharaoh in question, for both had Viziers. The other three, six or most probably two rulers sandwiched between these two Pharaohs are not realistic candidates. As there was a turbulent transition from Huni to Amenemhet I, not matching the peaceful reign of Joseph, Huni is consequently ruled out. Djoser was the son of the final 2nd Dynasty king, Pharaoh Khasekhemwy from 1718 to 1700 BCE and his wife Queen Nimaathap (or Nimaethap), “Mother of the King of the Two Lands.” 

Djoser is derived from the Djed symbol for stability and is also associated with the god Osiris and appears on numerous monuments built during his reign. Though it was common for Pharaohs to have a Queen and lesser wives, Djoser only had one wife, who was his half-sister, Hetephernebti. They had a daughter called, Inetkawes. 

His passion was building projects, something he continued non-stop as soon as he assumed the throne. Cities had begun to grow in Egypt during the 1st Dynasty, though under Djoser they became widespread throughout Egypt, with architecture becoming more ornate. During his reign, the borders of Egypt were made secure and expansion into the Sinai was achieved through military expeditions. This led to lucrative turquoise (Article: The Pyramid Perplexity) and copper mining in the Peninsula, which created great wealth for Egypt. 

Djoser also defeated the Libyans descended from Phut (Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut) and annexed parts of their land. Overall, his reign was marked by great technological innovation; whereby, agriculture, the arts, trade and Egypt’s civil administration all flourished.

Djoser

There were a number of Viziers in Egyptian history, though it can be no coincidence that the first known Vizier as well as the most famous one was Imhotep, Vizier to Djoser. Not only chancellor to the Pharaoh, Imhotep was reputed to be an architect, engineer, physician as well as possibly a high priest at Heliopolis. Imhotep is credited to be the designer of the Step or otherwise named, Djoser Pyramid at Saqqara. This pyramid contains a large vertical shaft under it and the complex has many similar structures that appear to have been used to store grain. The name or title, Imhotep means: ‘he that comes in peace.’ Imhotep was a renowned scholar, contributing greatly to Egyptian society. Apart from Amenhotep, he is the only other Egyptian to be deified – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man, different name?

Joseph, son of Jacob (Israel), was Imhotep, of Egyptian History, Nigel Hawkins, 2012 – emphasis mine:

‘It is also interesting to note that circumcision was widely practiced among Egyptians from the third dynasty onward. Although Abraham did visit Egypt, it seems more likely that this practice was introduced by Joseph-Imhotep in the third dynasty. Egyptian records show that before Imhotep, the bodies of Egyptian royalty were not embalmed. Instead, they were entombed in early Egyptian structures called mastabas, (or mastabahs), oblong structures with flat roofs and sloping sides built over the opening of a mummy chamber or burial pit.

Djoser appears to be the first king to have be embalmed, Jacob (Israel) was embalmed by Joseph and buried in a coffin and Joseph himself was embalmed and given a royal Egyptian burial. The Biblical account suggests that only Joseph’s bones were preserved as was the practice in the early dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Preservation of the whole body was not practiced until the Era of King Tut (New Kingdom).’

Imhotep

Genesis: 46 ‘Joseph was thirty years old when he entered the service of Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh and went through all the land of Egypt.

From the Book of Jubilees, we learn Joseph’s birthday. Therefore Joseph became Vizier of Egypt sometime after late July in the year 1696 BCE.

“And the Lord was gracious to Rachel, and opened her womb, and she conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Joseph, on the new moon [1st day] of the fourth month [June/July]…” – Book of Jubilees 28:24.

Genesis: 47 ‘During the seven plentiful years the earth produced abundantly, 48 and he gathered up all the food of these seven years, which occurred in the land of Egypt, and put the food in the cities. He put in every city the food from the fields around it. 49 And Joseph stored up grain in great abundance, like the sand of the sea, until he ceased to measure it, for it could not be measured.

50 Before the year of famine came, two sons were born to Joseph. Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera priest of On, bore them to him.

51 Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh. For, he said, “God has made me forget all my hardship and all my father’s house.”

52 The name of the second he called Ephraim, “For God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.”

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Manasseh meaning: ‘Forgetting, Evaporating’ from the verb (nasha), to forget.

The name Manasseh is generally seen as derived from the verb… to forget but forgetting due to “evaporation” of a memory the way water evaporates due to solar heat, or the way a principle evaporates due to interest… [describing] an upward motion, generally of something that is being pulled up and out so as to remove it. This verb occurs very often and can usually be translated with (1) to lift or lift up, (2) to bear or carry, and (3) to take or take away. An identical verb (or rather the same one used in a specialized way) means to loan on interest. The practice of loaning on interest causes the principal sum to slowly but surely evaporate and was prohibited under Mosaic law. A third identical verb (or again the same one) means to deceive or beguile.

The name Manasseh is probably due to a grammatical form in Hebrew that is comparable to the English present continuous. It fixes the letter (mem) to the root. That would give the name Manasseh the meaning of Forgetting. Another reason why a mem may occur in front of a root is when it comes from a particle that means “from”. Hence the name Manasseh may also mean From A Debt. This is significant because Manasseh’s brother is named Ephraim, a name with a distinctly bitter secondary meaning.

Perhaps Joseph named his son From A Debt, because he figured that besides his gratitude for being rescued, he felt that either God or his family owed him a debt for tearing him away from his father.

For a meaning of the name Manasseh, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Forgetting, Forgetfulness. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Making To Forget.

The name Ephraim meaning: ‘Two-fold Increase, Doubly Fruitful, Exhausted, Ashes’ from the verb (para), to be fruitful. From the verb (‘pr), to be depleted.

We would expect the people from Ephraim to be called (Ephraimites), but that word does not occur in the Bible. Instead, the Bible mostly speaks of sons of Ephraim (Numbers 1:32, Joshua 16:5, 1 Chronicles 9:3). But on occasion, the Ephraimites are referred to as (Ephrathites), for instance in Judges 12:5, where the men of Gilead capture strongholds opposite Ephraim arrest fugitives of Ephraim and asks them if they are Ephrathites. 

The meaning of the name Ephraim is somewhat debated: Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names and NOBSE Study Bible Name List go after Genesis 41:52, “…For […] God has made me fruitful…” and take the name from the Hebrew verb (para), meaning to bear fruit or be fruitful:

The verb (parar) means to split, divide and usually make more, expand or multiply. This root belongs to an extended family that also contains (paras,) to break (through), (paras and parash), to spread out or declare, (paras), to break in two or divide, and (pa’ar) means to branch out or to glorify.

Noun (par) means young bull and (para) means young heifer. Note that the first letter (aleph) is believed to denote an ox-head, while its name derives from the verb, to learn or to produce thousands. The second letter, (beth) is also the word for house (or temple or stable). The familiar word “alphabet,” therefore literally means “stable of bulls” or “house of divisions” or “temple of fruitful learning”.

It’s not clear what the unused verb (‘apar) might have meant but it’s clearly not very positive and possibly has to do with being exhausted or depleted of inner strength and inherent merit. Noun (‘eper) means ashes, which is what remains when all useful energy is extracted from a fuel. Noun (‘aper) means covering or bandage, which is what is applied over a limb when its inherent strength is broken.

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Two-fold Increase. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Doubly Fruitful. Taking the aleph from the Qual imperfect first person singular would yield a meaning of I Am Twice Fruitful.

It’s true that the aleph is quite a weak letter which is applied often without essentially changing the meaning of a word. But it’s perfectly conceivable, and perhaps even preferred, that father Joseph casts a wry word play in the naming of his sons.

He names his first born Manasseh (Making To Forget), because, “God has made me forget all my toil and all of my father’s house”. When his father’s house finally shows up, it becomes clear that Joseph had a hard time forgetting them and was in fact happy to see them. His second son he names Ephraim, a name with a strong connection to the word fruitfulness but equally so to the word for ashes, the symbol of worthlessness and grief. 

Perhaps Joseph was not at all happy for having been made to forget his father’s house, and deemed ‘fruitfulness in the land of affliction,’ the golden bars of a still dismal cage. Perhaps the duality of the name Ephraim does not denote a double portion of the same, but rather as a reminder that the coin of his wealth and status had two sides.’

Genesis: 53 ‘The seven years of plenty that occurred in the land of Egypt came to an end, 54 and the seven years of famine began to come, as Joseph had said. There was famine in all lands, but in all the land of Egypt there was bread. 55 When all the land of Egypt was famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for bread. Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, “Go to Joseph. What he says to you, do.”

56 So when the famine had spread over all the land, Joseph opened all the storehouses and sold to the Egyptians, for the famine was severe in the land of Egypt. 57 Moreover, all the earth came to Egypt to Joseph to buy grain, because the famine was severe over all the earth.’

Jospeh’s son Manasseh was born circa 1691 and Ephraim in 1690 BCE. The seven years of plenty ran from 1696 to 1689 BCE, with the following seven years of famine lasting from 1689 to 1682 BCE. Counting for fourteen years of Joseph’s life from age thirty to forty-four years of age. This was no ordinary famine but a disaster of very serious consequence. The Famine Stela or Stele is an inscription in hieroglyphs, located on Sehel Island in the Nile River, which is near Aswan, Egypt. It records this very disaster and tells of a seven year period of drought and famine during the reign of Pharaoh Djoser of the third dynasty. 

The stele is inscribed into a natural granite block with forty-two columns. There are three Egyptian deities on the top with Djoser facing them, with offerings in his outstretched arms. The account is set in the eighteenth year of Djoser’s reign and the seventh year of the famine which had gripped Egypt, in 1862 BCE; testifying of Djoser’s deep concern as the suffering and desperation of the people had grown to breaking point. This, in light of Joseph’s forward planning. What if none or only a small quantity of grain had been stored? It is fully at the end of seven years that the drought finally breaks and the river Nile begins to flow again. 

Online Encyclopaedia – italicisation theirs: 

‘The Famine Stela is one of only three known inscriptions that connect the cartouche name Djeser (“lordly”) with the serekh name Netjerikhet (“divine body”) of king Djoser in one word. Therefore, it provides useful evidence for Egyptologists and historians who are involved in reconstructing the royal chronology of the Old kingdom of Egypt.’

The pressure felt by Djoser as Pharoah would make sense if after seven years, Egypt had been selling grain worldwide* and not just locally. Even though Joseph had stored a consecutive yearly twenty percent of the vast abundance during the seven years of plenty, the demand in the next seven years may have meant it was a close run thing regarding dwindling grain supplies as the seventh year of famine ran its course. Understandably, Djoser would perhaps not share the same confidence in the Eternal’s deliverance as possessed by Joseph. An extension of this period into an eighth year would then have been catastrophic and would support Djoser’s alarm as evidenced on the Famine Stela. 

The World Famine Verified, Lujack Skylark – emphasis mine:

‘Shang Dynasty emperor Cheng Tang [of which] some Chinese historians stated his reign began in 1747 B.C. There are others who believe his reign began in 1675 B.C. Chinese emperor Cheng Tang [1st king of the dynasty]… very early in the dynasty recorded a 7 year famine verifying Joseph’s account of the 7 year global famine in Egypt [from 1689 to 1682 BCE] (Genesis 41:57).

Grant Jeffery wrote a book called “Signature of God” where he said the Yemen marble tablet inscription [reputed to be written at the time of the famine] about people living in a Yemenite castle during the seven years of plenty and the seven years of famine confirm the Genesis accountHe also wrote about the Yemen stone found in a rich woman’s tomb where this woman sends her [servants] to meet Joseph [who is apparently mentioned by name]!

The pygmy Woolly Mammoths on Wrangel island die out [circa] 1700 B.C…’

“Wrangel island is north of Russia… The migrations of people’s during the worldwide* famine is fascinating. Some [archaeologists] have given the migrations of these people’s from 1700-1500 B.C. window. The migrations at 1700 B.C. makes sense since people were migrating in search of food.”

‘The Kushite kingdom in eastern Africa arises [circa] 1700 B.C. as Africans fleeing famine come together living in [a] close knit community along the Nile river south of Egypt. Some Black tribes migrate from central Africa and settle in southern Africa fleeing from famine. [Archaeologists] dated their artifacts to [circa] 1700 B.C. Nordic Bronze culture in northern Europe becomes established [circa] 1700 B.C. where bronze weapons are produced used in hunting wild game.

Starving Indo-Europeans from western Russia migrate to central Europe and produce bronze weapons to hunt wild game [circa] 1700 B.C. Starving Indo-European tribes invade Dravidan dominated India [circa] 1700 B.C… [and] destroy the Dravidan Mohenjo-Daro civilization… Olmecs migrate into the Yucatan Peninsula [circa] 1700 B.C. [Archaeologists] state the Olmecs invented plumbing and the Olmecs were interested in water conservation at this time in world history.’

Not only did Joseph prepare for the famine by stock piling grain, he also had the foresight to store water. Samuel Kurinsky states: 

‘The most critical and important factor affecting the economy of Egypt was the engineering of an effective control of its water resources. Legends, both Hebraic and Arabic, have it that Joseph and his people made a great and everlasting contribution to Egypt in this regard. The application of Mesopotamian mathematics served in the planning of new systems of irrigation and in expanding the primitive systems previously installed in Egypt. The storage of water is even more effective as a hedge against years of drought and famine than the storage of grain, which, we are told, was a first step recommended by Joseph to the pharaoh’ – The Eighth Day: The Hidden History of the Jewish Contribution to Civilisation, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, Inc. 1994, page 127.

As the famine was worldwide it impacted Jacob and his family in Canaan. He sent all his sons, except Benjamin to Egypt to purchase grain. We have discussed Genesis forty-two to forty-six and the highly charged meetings between Joseph and his estranged brothers of twenty-two years and then seeing his father Jacob, when studying Jacob, Judah, Reuben, Simeon and Benjamin – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. For the year is now 1687 BCE, two years into the famine. One cannot forget the bitter-sweet first meeting with his little brother Benjamin and the poignant jolt of a reminder, that Joseph would never see his mother Rachel again. 

The one resounding point that beams very bright is that even though Joseph toys with his brother’s and father’s emotions; making them sweat a lot – of which the Creator does not condemn, for does He not put us through our paces when we are in the wrong? – none was done from bitterness, revenge or hatred. There is a sense of humour on Joseph’s part for dragging out the eventual reunion and the suspense created in so doing.

No, what leaps out is Joseph’s profoundly all consuming emotion of ecstatic joy at finally being reunited with his family. He harboured only love and forgiveness towards his brothers who did not really know him. Here was truly a converted man, filled with the spirit of God. Joseph was a worthy type of the future deliverer and Saviour of all humankind. With his grandfather Isaac and his distant cousin Moses, he is in a select group of people to have been given a saviour’s role in imitation of the true Saviour.

In Genesis forty-five, Joseph finally reveals himself. It says in verse three, that his brothers ‘could not answer him.’ The understatement of the Book of Genesis and perhaps the whole Bible. The word dumbstruck comes to mind. It also says the brothers were ‘dismayed at his presence.’ I bet they were. Here was a ghost which had risen before them. A man who should have either been dead, at the bottom of some hideous mine or looking like skin and bone of a man twice his age, a victim of a tortuous slave gang. Yet here he was; here was their long lost brother Joseph. Brother Joseph, who just won’t go away. As a youngster following them, albeit at their father’s behest and here he was again, a revenant from if not the grave, a large shadow from the past following them still. A phantom who was second in power and authority of at least Lower Egypt, if not all the land. 

It is testament to Joseph that he didn’t try to punch or slap any of them, considering the looks on their faces at that moment. Joseph instead alerts them to the five years remaining of famine and invites them to live in the land of Goshen in the Nile delta, where he can provide for them and nurture their flocks and wealth. Pharaoh learns of Joseph’s brothers and provides gifts and provisions for their return journey. Joseph’s sense of humour is exhibited in verse twenty-four, when his last words to his departing brothers are: “Do not quarrel on the way.” He knew them all too well. Jacob in verse twenty-six believing Joseph to be dead, understandably became numb and fainted from the shock of what his sons revealed to him. 

Did Jacob ever find out what his sons had done to Joseph? Did the sons of Jacob dare divulge their crime and did Joseph’s honour mean he would not hurt his father in such a way, nor exact any kind of revenge on his brothers. It must have always been that slight bit awkward for the brothers when in Joseph’s presence and therefore, punishment enough. Until such time* that it did come to light…

On the journey down to Egypt, the Creator speaks to Jacob reassuring him, for Jacob must have remembered what had been said to his grandfather Abraham – Genesis 15:13.

Genesis 46:2-4

English Standard Version

2 ‘And God spoke to Israel in visions of the night and said, “Jacob, Jacob.” And he said, “Here I am.” 3 Then he said, “I am God, the God of your father. Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for there I will make you into a great nation. 4 I myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I will also bring you up again, and Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes.”

In Genesis forty-seven, Pharaoh Djoser meets five of Joseph’s brothers and Jacob. It is interesting to learn of Jacob’s perspective of his own life.

Genesis 47:9-10

English Standard Version

9 ‘And Jacob said to Pharaoh, “The days of the years of my sojourning are 130 years. Few and evil have been the days of the years of my life, and they have not attained to the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their sojourning.” 10 And Jacob blessed Pharaoh [as one king to another] and went out from the presence of Pharaoh.’

It was an important observation to Jacob that his life in comparison with his father Isaac of 180 years and his grandfather Abraham of 175 years had been shorter and more difficult. Jacob does live longer, though he dies younger at age 147. The difficulties in his life had in large part been caused by himself and here he does seem to be in contrast again, with his family. 

We also learn that the famine was so severe that when Egyptians ran out of money, they then had to purchase grain with their livestock and when that ran out, they then sold their lands to Pharaoh. After that, they were tenant farmers as Jospeh gave them seed to plant with the agreement they would give twenty percent of their harvests to Pharaoh.

Skipping to the final chapter of Genesis, we learn of the respect towards Joseph and Jacob and their status as rulers and kings shown to them from the lands of Egypt and Canaan. 

Genesis 50:1-3, 7-11, 15-26

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Joseph fell on his father’s face and wept over him and kissed him. 2 And Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father. So the physicians embalmed Israel. 3 Forty days were required for it, for that is how many are required for embalming. And the Egyptians wept for him seventy days.

7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. With him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his household, and all the elders of the land of Egypt, 8 as well as all the household of Joseph, his brothers, and his father’s household. Only their children, their flocks, and their herds were left in the land of Goshen. 9 And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen. It was a very great company. 

10 When they came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, they lamented there with a very great and grievous lamentation, and he made a mourning for his father seven days. 11 When the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning on the threshing floor of Atad, they said, “This is a grievous mourning by the Egyptians.”

Joseph’s brothers ask for his forgiveness, concerned for their own safety after Jacob dies.

15 ‘When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “It may be that Joseph will hate us and pay us back for all the evil that we did to him.” 16 So they sent a message to Joseph, saying, “Your father gave this command before he died: 17 ‘Say to Joseph, “Please forgive the transgression* of your brothers and their sin, because they did evil to you.” And now, please forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of your father.”

Joseph wept when they spoke to him. 18 His brothers also came and fell down before him and said, “Behold, we are your servants.” 19 But Joseph said to them, “Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? 20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. 21 So do not fear; I will provide for you and your little ones.” Thus he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.’

The New Egyptian Chronology – A revised Egyptian chronology results in startling new archeological discoveries which authenticate Old Testament histories, David Reagan – emphasis mine:

‘Perhaps the most amazing revelation to be found in Rohl’s book relates to Joseph. The excavations at Tel ed-Daba (Avaris in Bible times) have revealed a large Egyptian-style palace dating from the early 13th Dynasty [later 12th Dynasty]… Rohl concludes that this must have been the retirement palace of Joseph, built in the midst of his people.

In 1987 the excavators began to uncover a large pyramid-style tomb adjacent to the palace. They discovered that the tomb had been carefully emptied in antiquity [by Israelites]. There was no evidence of the ransacking that characterizes the work of grave robbers. Further, they discovered the head of a very large statue [twice the size of a normal male] of the man who had been buried in the tomb. The head is most unusual in that it displays very un-Egyptian type features [Asiatic not Semitic] like a mushroom shaped coiffure or wig. The figure is also clean shaven. Most remarkably, this person is wrapped in a coat of many colors! Rohl concludes that this is a statue of Joseph…’

It is worth noting that over his right shoulder is a throw stick, representing a holder of authority and an office. Dramatically, the face of the statue has been cleaved off, with marks on the head where somebody has tried to split the stone. It is possible it was desecrated in vengeful retaliation for the humiliation of the Exodus related events, including the plagues and the plundering by the exiting Israelites – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Genesis: 22 ‘So Joseph remained in Egypt, he and his father’s house. Joseph lived 110** years. 23 And Joseph saw Ephraim’s children of the third generation. The children also of Machir the son of Manasseh were counted as Joseph’s own. 24 And Joseph said to his [remaining] brothers, “I am about to die, but God will visit you and bring you up out of this land to the land that he swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.”

25 Then Joseph made the sons of Israel swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones from here.” 26 So Joseph died, being 110 years old. They embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.’ 

Joseph died in 1616 BCE. Most of his brothers had already died shortly before him, beginning with Simeon in 1630 BCE; with only three remaining brothers who died not long after Joseph, namely Naphtali (1612 BCE), and lastly Benjamin and Levi in 1611 BCE.

Exodus 13:18-19

English Standard Version

‘But God led the people around by the way of the wilderness toward the Red Sea. And the people of Israel went up out of the land of Egypt equipped for battle. Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones with you from here.”

There is an interesting parallel between Joseph and his descendant born exactly one hundred and fifty years later, Joshua from the tribe of Ephraim, the successor to Moses.

Numbers 13:8

English Standard Version

‘… from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea [Joshua] the son of Nun…’

Joshua 24:29-32

English Standard Version

29 ‘After these things Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, being 110** years old. 30 And they buried him in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah, which is in the hill country of Ephraim, north of the mountain of Gaash. 31 Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua and had known all the work that the Lord did for Israel.

32 As for the bones of Joseph, which the people of Israel brought up from Egypt, they buried them at Shechem, in the piece of land that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money. It became an inheritance of the descendants of Joseph [located in Samaria of the tribe of Ephraim].’

Jacob and Joseph are included in the faith chapter of the Bible. The importance of Jacob’s blessing for Joseph’s sons was the beginning and fulfilment of the special birthright blessing of great national prosperity and preeminence for Abraham’s descendants which was filtered to his son Isaac, passing over Ishmael (though Ishmael did receive his own blessing – Genesis 17:20), then Jacob over Esau, then Joseph instead of Reuben and Simeon and split between his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. Destiny did not decree for the peoples of Germany, the Jews, Northern Ireland or Wales to be the recipients of the principal birthright blessing. 

Hebrews 11:21-22

English Standard Version

‘By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.’

Prior to Jacob’s death, Jacob blessed his grandsons. Jacob blesses Joseph, yet the specifics are not given to his son, but rather his two grandsons; undoubtedly due to the Eternal’s inspiration. Manasseh and Ephraim are youngsters according to the account. In fact it would appear that not long after Jacob’s arrival in Egypt in 1687 BCE, he blessed the lads, so that their ages^ appear to be about five or six for Manasseh and four or five for Ephraim. 

Genesis 48:2-20

English Standard Version

2 ‘… it was told to Jacob, “Your son Joseph has come to you.” Then Israel summoned his strength and sat up in bed. 3 And Jacob said to Joseph, “God Almighty appeared to me at Luz in the land of Canaan and blessed me, 4 and said to me, ‘Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will make of you a company [multitude] of peoples…’ 5 And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt [circa 1691/1690 BCE] before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are.’

The destinies of Reuben and Simeon were radically altered when they forfeited their right to the birthright blessings through transgressions. The small nations of Northern Ireland and Wales are testimony of their alternative, yet actual histories and what might have been – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Genesis: 8 ‘When Israel saw Joseph’s sons, he said, “Who are these?” 9 Joseph said to his father, “They are my sons, whom God has given me here [in Egypt].” And he said, “Bring them to me, please, that I may bless them.” 10 Now the eyes of Israel were dim with age, so that he could not see. So Joseph brought them near him, and he kissed them and embraced them. 11 And Israel said to Joseph, “I never expected to see your face; and behold, God has let me see your offspring also.”

12 Then Joseph removed them from his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth. 13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them near him. 14 And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh, crossing his hands (for Manasseh was the firstborn).’ 

Different translations state that the lads were either between Joseph’s knees or on his lap. Others, that they were on Jacob’s knees. The one point in common is that they were very young, as in infants or very small boys^ of pre-school age. Due to the understandable order that Joseph presented them as eldest and youngest to Jacob, Jacob had to cross his hands like a saltire – of which the significance and symbolism will be apparent as we progress – for Jacob understood, as had happened repeatedly in his family’s line, that the youngest was being elevated to eldest.

Genesis: 15 ‘And he blessed Joseph and said, “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life long to this day, 16 the angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the boys; and in them let my name [Israel] be carried on, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude [H7230 – rob; abundance, great number, numerous, many] in the midst [H7130 – qereb] of the earth.”

We arrive at a small word with massive ramifications. A major clue to the location of Joseph’s descendants has been there all along. Even so, it has remained hidden. Its clarification is an important step in identifying Manasseh and Ephraim. Yet biblical identity researchers and experts in the field have been so distracted by the teaching that England – and  by extension, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, (Scotland) – is Ephraim, it has not been given second consideration or thought. 

The Hebrew word for midst can be translated as ‘among, within’ and ‘inwards.’ Its meaning includes, ‘inner part, middle, the centre’ whether in a literal, geographic sense or in a figurative sense as in the ‘heart’ and core. The significance of this is revealed, when an atlas of the world is looked upon and instead of a European or Asian centric map, drawing or satellite image as is most common, an Americas centric map is viewed. 

For there, between the continents of Europe to the east and Asia to the west, sit the continents of North and South America ‘in the midst of the earth.’ Sitting astride this vast land mass are the descendants of Joseph in the nations of Canada and the United States of America

Not only do these nations occupy a geographic centre on the globe, they exert an influence on the world that figuratively is the heart or centre of our global civilisation. As Joseph was separated from his brothers, so to have the descendants of Jospeh been separated from their brother nations – Genesis 49:26.

Genesis: 17 ‘When Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him, and he took his father’s hand to move it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head. 18 And Joseph said to his father, “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.”

19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. [Manasseh] also shall become a people [a nation], and he also shall be great [H1431 – gadal].’ 

The Hebrew word used for great is different from the Hebrew word used for great in connection with Ishmael.

Genesis 17:20

English Standard Version

‘As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful [H6509 – parah: bear fruit, grow] and multiply [H7235 – rabah: become great, numerous, increase greatly, enlarge] him greatly [to a great degree]. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great [H1419 – gadowl: older, mighty, important, proud, insolent] nation.’

It is noteworthy that Ishmael was to become a great people like Isaac’s descendants. The subtle difference is that Ishmael was to act like a firstborn, of which he was literally entitled, though he had a tendency to lean towards a self-importance that was proud and selfish. The German nation, thanks to their leaders and not always a reflection of themselves have displayed this negative edge to their inherited greatness during their history – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

The Hebrew word great used for Manasseh, does not carry this slight negative edge. It is translated as ‘magnify, grow, nourish up and grow up.’ Interestingly, it has the connotation of becoming ‘great or important, make powerful, do great things, to grow up.’

In the previous chapter, we touched upon how two nations from the sons of Jacob could experience an influx of immigration way beyond their current populations. One was New Zealand, which could easily accommodate millions more people. The other nation is Canada; which could receive tens of millions more people. It may well still be growing into its greatness. If Germany as a prophesied ‘great’ nation has a population of nearly eighty-five million people, then it is conceivable that Canada may grow to a population well beyond fifty million people and upwards towards one hundred million people.

Genesis: ‘Nevertheless, his younger brother shall be greater [H1431 – gadal] than he, and his offspring [descendants, seed] shall become a multitude [H4393 – mlo] of nations.”

The Hebrew word for multitude can be translated as ‘fulness, all that is therein, handful(s).’ It means ‘that which fills, mass, entire contents, full length.’ 

It is speaking of many more people than that of Manasseh. A population say, more in line with the United States of America. 

Genesis: 20 ‘So he blessed them that day, saying, “By you Israel will pronounce blessings, saying, ‘God make you as Ephraim and as Manasseh.’” Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.’

There are two vital points or keys that need to be remembered and discussed in depth regarding Manasseh and Ephraim. The first is a little unique and has not been seen in discussions anywhere else in books, papers or on the internet. It is the fact that as Joseph’s inheritance was divided into two between his sons; the tribe of Manasseh also divided into two, as we have discussed in part already. As Manasseh’s name means forgotten, it is an irony that biblical identity researchers have forgotten this salient point. 

In the original allotment of land in Canaan, the half tribe of East Manasseh chose to live on the East side of the River Jordan with Gad and Reuben. The remaining half tribe of West Manasseh chose to dwell with Ephraim. We will look at this in detail and the scriptures supporting Manasseh receiving two inheritances. 

This part of the puzzle may have helped identity researchers realise more quickly than they are doing, that equating Ephraim with England and Manasseh with the United States, doesn’t just go contrary to their both being together in the midst of the earth; or that Manasseh is suddenly more powerful than Ephraim; but… who and where on Earth, are the missing half tribe of West Manasseh?

The second point is to do with the phrasing ‘a multitude of nations.’ The Israelite identity movement, driven by its biggest following, British Israel have been so taken with the height of the British Empire approximately one hundred plus years ago – when the movement was at its most active – and its descendant Commonwealth of nations, they have not seen the waning devolvement of England’s power and stature before their very eyes and the waxing evolving of the United States’s power – Article: 2050. They have only ever seen an England of many colonial parts and a United States, though enormous, powerful, prosperous beyond measure, and a great nation, still only as one giant singular country. The former colonies of England are extensions that now give it no power. 

Comparing England and the United States highlights that something is very wrong with saying England is mighty Ephraim and the United States is the lesser birthright recipient. For the scripture says in verse twenty: ‘Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.’ The United States was founded on the saying on their great seal: E pluribus unum – Latin for “Out of many, one.” 

Manasseh

Before we study the prophecies and blessings given to Joseph’s descendants by Jacob, Moses and Deborah, we will now look at the meaning of a multitude of nations more closely and the predominant view that it refers to the British Empire as well as the radical view – as deemed by the conservative status quo of the Israelite identity community – that maybe the fifty individual and distinct law making and self-governing states of America are in fact the biblical fulfilment of an astounding prophecy given 3,500 years before they began to dramatically unfold. 

Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna 1989 & 2006, pages 176, 183 & 185 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The argument that the United States is Israel basically consists of the following four points. 

First, some of the… prophecies of physical blessings and greatness to Abraham’s descendants… were not completely fulfilled by Israel anciently. 

Second, the house of Israel and the house of Judah were separate and never reunited

Third, prophecies concerning the house of Israel in the end-time show them to be in captivity, which means they must exist in our time as an identifiable people (and distinct from the Jews). 

And fourth… the greatest nation on earth in our time would not be ignored in Bible prophecy.’

Though this writer disagrees with the second point as discussed in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes, the other three are real and vital proofs of an Israelite identity for nations today and not that the tribes are scattered forever amongst the nations as non-entities. As we learned in Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech, a gigantic nation like China cannot be dismissed or ignored from any biblical investigation and identification. Similarly, the greatest nation in humanity’s history cannot be ignored or dismissed from a rigorous biblical examination and explanation. For if we cannot correctly identity these two nations, then one may as well close ones Bible and never read it again. Yet, that has very nearly happened as the identity of the United States has not been understood until very recently.

Doudna: ‘… Jacob was promised his progeny would become “a nation and a company (qahal) of nations” … Ephraim… would become “a fullness (melo) of nations”… the word qahal, “company”… is used of armies or assemblies and refers to a single political unit. The plural goiim, “nations”… does not mean multiple political states (as in ” British Commonwealth of Nations”).

Rather goiim means peoples or tribes or ethnic groups… Ephraim would become one political entity consisting of multiple ethnic groups… better rendered “company of peoples”… [or, a union of states]… “United States” means in English, literally, a “company of political states,” and “state” is, of course, used synonymously in English for “nation.”

Therefore “United States” is, by a pun, “company of nations” in its very name… the fifty states in the United States are not independent, but then neither were the goiim or “nations” in the earlier fulfilment of “company of nations,” the ancient house of Israel. This I saw as the point missed by Anglo-Israelites.’

This writer whole heartedly concurs with Greg Doudna’s insightfulness. The United States is the prophesied company of peoples. Out of many, one. This phrase incredibly applies to the United States of America; its population genesis; and continued evolving demographic.

It is not indicative of the nation of England in any shape or form. It was shockingly fifty years ago, when Doudna impressively recognised the truth regarding Ephraim, if not Manasseh. Yet today, very few people attach the identity of the United States with Ephraim. Why? 

The United States in Prophecy: The Case for Identifying the United States with Ephraim (not Manasseh), Greg Doudna, 1974 – emphasis mine: 

‘If Ephraim really has become many separate and sovereign peoples, then Ephraim = Great Britain [England, Wales, Scotland], Ephraim = Canada, Ephraim = Australia, Ephraim = New Zealand, and Ephraim = other English settlers in British colonies worldwide… then Australia for example, is as much Ephraim as is Great Britain. Then when Hosea and other prophets speak of “Ephraim” doing this or doing that, just who is meant – will Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand simultaneously “call to Egypt” and “go to Assyria” (Hosea 7:11), to cite but one of many similar scriptures? 

Those who support the traditional view must deal with the inconsistency of holding that Ephraim is the British Commonwealth and then applying prophecies concerning Ephraim toward only one of that “company of nations” instead of all of them… The other settlements of Britain are Manassite The fact Britain has colonies in no way proves she is a company of nations. Britain is a single nation [composed of three countries: England, Wales and Scotland] in the same way that other Israelite nations with colonies are still single nations. 

Which land is a land of “coasts”… the United States… has one of the longest usable coastlines of any nation in the world… The… Hebrew word yam is translated “sea” and “west.” The “isles of the sea” or “coasts of the sea”… can easily be translated “coasts of the west.”

Though the author rightly highlights the inconsistency, untenableness and nonsensicalness of equating four different nations all as Ephraim, he then forgets – pun intended – that Manasseh splitting into four or more nations is not scripturally supported either. This highlights the wider error as we have discussed in the previous three chapters of mis-identifying nations not descended from Jacob as Israelite and then apportioning the remaining English speaking nations as all descended from Joseph. Rather than the correct understanding that all the English speaking nations are the individual Israelite tribes today.

Ephraim

Genesis 49:22-26

Evangelical Heritage Version

22 ‘Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a spring. His branches run over the wall.’

The image of a vine’s branches spreading like tentacles is reflected by the small trickle of English colonists who eventually became a torrent of people arriving in conquest of the American continent. With the inexorable march westwards after the first English settlement of the Virginia Colony Jamestown, in 1607 and the Pilgrims of the Plymouth Colony in 1620. It also refers to the blessings of America, extending outwards and overflowing to other nations such as the financing in rebuilding Germany and Japan after World War II.

Genesis: 23 ‘The archers have fiercely attacked him. They shot at him and harassed him, 24 but his bow remained steady. His arms and hands were made strong by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob, by the name of the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel…’ 

The fledgling and vulnerable colonies were able to navigate the conflicts on American soil and win those crucial in their survival, including: the American Revolution from 1775 to 1783, the Indian Wars of 1775 to 1890, the French War from 1798 to 1800, the Great Britain War of 1812 to 1815, the Mexican-American War from 1846 to 1848, the Spanish-American War in 1898 and the most potentially devastating conflict of all, the American Civil War during 1861 to 1865. 

This war had more at stake than historians realise, for there was more than the question of the survival of the Federal United States and its splitting into two, with a Confederate South. For the people of the South* embody in large part the half tribe of West Manasseh and the North, Ephraim – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.* It was a fight for sibling supremacy and the fulfilment of prophecy.

This marked divide is understood when one appreciates the United States is in fact one and a half tribes. This is why the Bible calls these peoples either Ephraim after the dominant tribe, or Joseph as the United States comprise two peoples from two tribes.

Canada is technically half a tribe and called Manasseh, Gilead or Machir in the Bible, while its French component was explained in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Therefore, the half tribe of East Manasseh is the nation of Canada and the tribe of Ephraim with the half tribe of West Manasseh, is the nation of the United States of America.

Though Israelite identity researcher Linda Watson is subtly adrift in her conclusions, she is considerably closer to the truth than nearly all biblical identity of nations commentators – capitalisation hers.

“… the tribe of Manasseh was itself divided into two half tribes – one located EAST of the Jordan [River], in Palestine, and one WEST of the Jordan [River]… just NORTH of the Tribe of Ephraim. Interestingly, in modern times this same geographic position has been maintained by the descendants of these ancient tribes. Today, Manasseh – represented by England (east of the body of water we call the Atlantic Ocean), and Canada (west of that body of water) – still lies NORTH of Ephraim, the United States of America!” – Who is America, Ephraim and Manasseh.

Genesis: 25 ‘by the God of your father, who will help you, by the Almighty, who will bless you with blessings from heaven [H8064 – shamayim: the abode of God] above [H5920 – al: on high, the most High, God], blessings from the deep that lies below, blessings from the breasts and from the womb.’ 

Jacob is predicting the physical blessing of many progeny, as well as spiritual prosperity. This is a verse that is overlooked or ignored when studying the American psyche. Explanations are sought for America’s religiosity, especially the American South, yet the simple answer is that Americans are a more believing peoples by nature through the Creator’s design.

United States one of the most religious countries, Diane Swanbrow – emphasis mine: 

‘The United States remains among the most religious nations in the world, according to a worldwide study by the University [of Michigan]. About 46 percent of American adults attend church at least once a week, not counting weddings, funerals and christenings, compared with 14 percent of adults in Great Britain, 8 percent in France, 7 percent in Sweden and 4 percent in Japan. Moreover, 58 percent of Americans say they often think about the meaning and purpose of life, compared with 25 percent of British, 26 percent of Japanese and 31 percent of… Germans, the study says.’

Sixty percent of Americans say that religion is ‘very important’ to them; whereas only twenty-one percent of Western Europeans think the same and more than eighty percent of ‘American adults call themselves Christians’ with more than a third of adult Americans claiming to be ‘born-again.’

While traditional religious belief and participation in organized religion have steadily declined in most advanced industrial nations, especially in Western Europe, this is not the case in the United States,” says Ronald Inglehart, a researcher at the Institute for Social Research (ISR) and director of the ISR World Values Surveys, which were conducted in more than 80 nations between 1981 and 2001.

Some possible reasons cited for the results: Religious refugees set the tone long ago in America; religious people tend to have more children than non-religious groups; and the United States has a less comprehensive social welfare system, prompting people to look to religion for help.

Inglehart and [Pippa] Norris, a political scientist at Harvard University, also examined the reasons the United States remains an “outlier” in religiosity among postindustrial nations. “The U.S. was founded by religious refugees who attached so much importance to religion that they were willing to risk their lives in a dangerous new environment in order to practice their religion, and to some extent this outlook has been successfully transmitted to succeeding waves of immigrants.”

Their conclusion is that the more ‘self-perceived vulnerability, the greater the importance of religion.’ Though ‘America seems an anomaly: a rich society in which people worship, pray, and believe, as if they lived in a poverty-stricken nation.’ 

‘The Bible Belt is an informal term for a region in the Southern United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is generally higher than the nation’s average. By contrast, religion plays the least important role in New England and in the Western United States.’ 

The more religious mindset of the United States should come as no surprise, for it was founded with a tolerance for freedom to worship unlike any other nation. The aim was to eliminate any dominant denomination of Christianity from becoming an official or national religion.  

The U.S. was founded as a Christian nation – here’s more proof, Bryan Fischer, 2014 – emphasis mine:

‘At the time of the founding, 99.8% of the population of the fledgling country identified themselves, to one degree of sincerity or another, as followers of Jesus Christ. And 98.4% identified themselves as Protestants. Catholics represented 1.4% of the population, and the other 0.2% were followers of Judaism. Virtually 100% of those living in America at the time of its founding were adherents of the Judeo-Christian tradition. 

This truth is reflected in our First Amendment, which… was designed specifically to protect the free exercise of the Christian faith in the new nation, and to prevent competition among the various Christian denominations. It did this by prohibiting Congress from picking one Christian denomination and making it the official church of the United States. 

States, on the other hand, were free to establish Christian denominations in their individual states, and somewhere between six and ten of the original 13 states did so. 

As [Joseph] Story writes, “The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical patronage of the national government.” 

… Maryland’s first state constitution, enacted in 1776, specifically granted religious freedom to every denomination of Protestants and Catholics, i.e., to followers of the Christian faith. Article 33 of that first Constitution read this way: 

“That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons, professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty… wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate on account of his religious persuasion or profession, or for his religious practice… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax for the support of the Christian religion.” 

Article 55 laid down the following requirement for anyone who wanted to serve in public office in the newly established state: 

“That every person, appointed to any office… shall… take the following oath: I… do swear, that I do not hold myself bound in allegiance to the King of Great Britain, and that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland; and shall also subscribe a declaration of his belief in the Christian religion.” 

In other words, no one but Christians were allowed to hold public office. Now Maryland’s constitution has undergone subsequent revisions, but still to this day it requires “a declaration of belief in the existence of GOD” as a qualification for holding elected office.’ 

Genesis: 26 ‘The blessings of your father are greater than the blessings of my parents, greater than the treasures of the ancient hills. They will rest on the head of Joseph, on the forehead of him who is elevated above [set apart from] his brothers.’

Jacob is telling Joseph that the blessing he has passed to Joseph is considerably greater than that which was given to him by his father Isaac and that the proof is in the difference between his inheritance and that of his brothers. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Far from being an isolated depository of utterly alien dictums, Israel was the melting pot and refinery of the greatest traditions the world had come up with (Psalm 12:6). Israel was never intended to be anything other than a phenomenon from which every family mentioned in Genesis 10 would actively derive blessings, right away and from the “family-level” up (Genesis 12:3).

Long before it was formally established, Israel was an international project; a USA of its days, with myriads of cultural and economic tributaries…’

Abraham Lincoln, sixteenth President of the United States: 

“We find ourselves in the peaceful possession of the fairest portion of the Earth, as regards fertility of soil, extent of territory, and salubrity of climate… We … find ourselves the legal inheritors of these fundamental blessings. We toiled not in the acquirement or the establishment of them.” 

The United States economy is the largest in the world as measured by nominal Gross Domestic Product and has been since 1890. Its 2025 GDP was $30.51 trillion – a 26.8% share of the global economy. The biggest contributor to its GDP is the economy’s service sector which includes finance, real estate, insurance, professional and business services and healthcare.

The United States has an open economy, ‘facilitating flexible business investment and foreign direct investment in the country. It is the world’s dominant geopolitical power and is able to maintain a large external national debt as the producer of the world’s primary reserve currency.’ Although America’s population is only 4.2% of the world’s total, the United States holds 29.4% of the total wealth of the world, the largest share held by any country. The United States ranks first in the number of billionaires and millionaires in the world, with 724 billionaires and 10.5 million millionaires as of 2020. 

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in American global shipments during 2022.

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$378.6 billion 
  2. Machinery including computers: $229.6 billion 
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $197.7 billion
  4. Vehicles: $134.9 billion 
  5. Aircraft, spacecraft: $102.8 billion 
  6. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $99.1 billion 
  7. Gems, precious metals: $92.5 billion 
  8. Pharmaceuticals: $83.5 billion
  9. Plastics, plastic articles: $83.3 billion 
  10. Organic chemicals: $51.1 billion 

Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories year over year, up by 57.5% since 2021. In second place for improving export sales was the organic chemicals category which rose 18.5%. United States’ shipments of aircraft and spacecraft posted the third-fastest gain in value, up by 14.9% year over year.’

Canada has the ninth biggest economy in the world with a 2025 GDP of $2.23 trillion. ‘Canada has a well developed energy extraction sector, with the world’s third largest proven oil reserves. Canada also has impressive manufacturing and services sectors, based mostly in urban areas near the U.S. border.’

Canada’s free trade relationship with the United States means that three-quarters of all its exports head to the United States market each year. Canada’s close economic ties to the United States means it has grown largely in parallel to the world’s most powerful economy.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Canadian global shipments during 2022. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$180 billion 
  2. Vehicles: $50.3 billion 
  3. Machinery including computers: $37.7 billion 
  4. Gems, precious metals: $23.9 billion 
  5. Wood: $19.8 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $17.3 billion 
  7. Electrical machinery, equipment: $14.7 billion 
  8. Aluminum: $14.2 billion
  9. Fertilizers: $13.7 billion 
  10. Ores, slag, ash: $11.5 billion 

Fertilizers represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.7% since 2021. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which was up by 50.1% led by coal, petroleum gases and oils. Canada’s shipments of electrical machinery, equipment: posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 16.7% year over year.’

Canadian Flag 1868 – 1921

The blessings afforded to the sons of Jacob, not just Joseph, are evident by the statistics of the world’s wealthiest nations. For instance based on 2018 figures and according to market research company New World Wealth, the world had accumulated $215 trillion in private wealth in 2018, a 12% increase over the previous year. ‘Incredibly, the vast majority of this wealth, about 73.5% is held by just 10 countries.’ Of those ten nations, four of them are descendants of Jacob and three more of the remaining six are descended from Abraham in Germany and his two brothers Haran and Nahor in France and Italy respectively. 

Canadian Flag 1922 – 1957

The United States was the number one wealthiest country in the world with $62.584 trillion; the United Kingdom was at fourth with $9.919 trillion; Canada at number eight with $6.393 trillion; and Australia at nine with $6.142 trillion. Adding New Zealand’s net wealth of $1.5 trillion, the Celtic-Saxon-Viking nations (not including Ireland and South Africa) possessed a combined wealth of $86.538 trillion, which equated to 40.25% share of the entire world’s wealth for only six percent of the world population. An economic influence and prosperity well beyond their relative population size. 

Moses confirmed the spectacular prosperity as foretold by Jacob in his prophecy for Joseph. 

Deuteronomy 33:13-17

Evangelical Heritage Version

13 ‘Concerning Joseph he said: His land is blessed by the Lord: blessed with the best gifts from the heavens, blessed with dew and with the deep waters hidden below, 14 blessed with the best gifts produced by the sun, blessed with the best gifts yielded by the seasons, 15 blessed with the best crops from the ancient mountains, blessed with the best gifts from the everlasting hills, 16 blessed with the best gifts of the earth and its fullness, blessed with the favor of the one who was dwelling in the burning bush. May all these come on the head of Joseph, on the forehead of the one set apart from his brothers.’ 

Both Canada and the United States are breadbasket nations providing massive food surpluses. Canada, is the fourth most important food provider in the world. The Canadian Prairies, comprised of the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan are vital to the world for their grain production. The region’s mainstay is agriculture and industries process the agricultural produce. Main crops cultivated include durum wheat, canola, barley, oats, lentils, brassica and assorted horticultural products, with also the farming of sheep, cattle and poultry. 

Canadian Flag

The United States is the second most important food provider in the world. The state of California is a massive contributor to the total agricultural produce of the United States and accounts for 12.8% of the country’s agricultural yield. Most of this produce comes from the San Joaquin Valley. For instance, the county is the single biggest producer of almonds worldwide, with production constituting 70% of the total global almond yield and supply. 

In the top ten nations with the most Natural Resources, the United States ranks seventh. Mining is an integral industry in the United States. In 2015, total metal and coal reserves in the country were estimated to be worth $109.6 billion. The United States has been the leading producer of coal for decades and it accounts for just over 30% of global coal reserves. Total natural resources for the United States are an astounding estimated $45 trillion, almost 90% of which comprises timber and coal. Other major resources include substantial reserves of copper, gold, oil and natural gas deposits. 

Canada is third in the world. The vast territory of Canada has an estimated $33.2 trillion worth of commodities; is a major exporter of energy; with the third largest oil deposits and a 13% global share, after Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Deposits include industrial minerals, such as gypsum, limestone, rock salt, and potash, as well as energy minerals, such as coal and uranium. Metals include copper, lead, nickel, zinc, cobalt, cadmium and precious metals like gold, platinum and silver. Canada is the leading supplier of natural gas and phosphate in the world and is the third largest exporter of timber. 

Canada and the United States rank in the top ten technologically advanced or driven economies in the world. Canada at number eight has a highly efficient technology sector and continues to strongly encourage science and research. Canada is responsible for creating resourceful interactive machines and chip less credit and debit cards. 

The United States is second in the world, being a significant contributor in terms of technology and development. Aviation, nuclear energy, pharmaceuticals, defence systems and telecommunications have all been inventions by the world’s only hyper power. It has produced the world’s biggest technology companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Intel, IBM, Microsoft and Amazon; completely transforming modern society and the way we live. The United States ranked third in the Global Innovation Index in 2023, behind Switzerland and Sweden. 

The United States tops the top ten countries with the largest gold reserve holdings, with 8,133.5 tonnes – nearly as much as the second to fifth placed nations of Germany, Italy, France and Russia combined  – amounting to 77.5% of foreign reserves, the third highest allocation. The majority of United States gold is held at Fort Knox in Kentucky, with the remainder held at the Philadelphia Mint, the Denver Mint, the San Francisco Assay Office and the West Point Bullion Depository. ‘Which state loves gold the most? Well, the state of Texas went so far as to create its very own Texas Bullion Depository to safeguard investors’ gold.’

While the United States of America experiences social and economic challenges like any other nation, it is one of a minority where overall, its inhabitants are deemed as… happy.

Notice all the descendants of Jacob – aside from those who dwell in the troubled nation of South Africa – are living in nations who are not just blessed with material prosperity but are relatively content compared with the vast majority of the planet’s population.

Deuteronomy: 17 ‘Like a firstborn bull, he has majesty, and his horns are the horns of a wild ox [H7214 – r’em: great auroch, unicorn]. With them he will gore the peoples, all the peoples, to the ends of the earth. Such are the ten thousands of Ephraim. Such are the thousands of Manasseh.

No one does razzamatazz or pomp and ceremony like America does. It exudes a pride and power like no other nation on earth. This is why Moses likens Joseph to the extinct giant auroch bull or the otherwise ‘mythical’, unicorn. 

As voiced in the introduction (primus verba), heraldic images do not provide definitive conclusions on an identity but rather a trail which may lend support. The nations of Austria (Hagar) and the Netherlands (Midian) are related family members and thus using similar symbols in their heraldry is not a surprise.

The United States (Ephraim) and Canada (Manasseh) either employ their own animals (Eagle) or ones inherited (Unicorn) from England (Judah) and Scotland (Benjamin). From a biblical perspective, Canada has more right to use the Unicorn than either England (Lion) or Scotland (Wolf).

The fact that Canada’s coat of arms closely resembles that of the United Kingdom supports their identity as Manasseh and its early (unique) relationship with Judah. One would expect Ephraim to be more clearly defined in its separateness from Judah as pictured by America’s use of an eagle and not a lion for example in its heraldry – Numbers 24:8-9.

The United States of America’s growth from a new born nation barely two hundred and fifty years ago to fully fledged nation only just approaching middle age has been spectacular and a phenomena never before witnessed; standing as a clear testimony to the truth of the words anciently promised to Abraham and his seed through Joseph. 

Mark Lane: ‘The reference [by] Moses to the wild ox has caused some observers to associate the star sign Taurus with the [west] side of the Israelite camp’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘The constellation Taurus prominently features two giant horns as if thrusting upward in attack. The constellation is almost completely above the ecliptic, indicating it is a righteous person or nation. The sign does not reveal the rest of the bull’s body. Could this mean the nation never ‘sees their tail’? In other words, its days are shortened? Or, its days as a righteous nation are shortened? Or both?’ 

America relates to the symbol of the Bull – Large Bull Statue on Wall Street below. 

The United States possesses the most powerful and technologically advanced military capability, that is typically, approximately ten or more years ahead of any other country’s development. Annually, America spends more on its military than the next seven highest ranking countries in military spending combined. Making up more than a third of global military spending, it is the foremost military power in the world and internationally the leading political, cultural and scientific force. This power has allowed America to use its horns so-to-speak in getting its way diplomatically and politically, since the First World War. 

United States economic power is demonstrated by the fact that its GDP is more than the other developed G7 nations – comprising Japan, Italy, France, Germany, Canada and the United Kingdom – combined. 

Moses speaks of the physical numerical dominance of Ephraim over Manasseh. Those who subscribe to England being Ephraim and America being Manasseh have yet to successfully and rationally explain this verse. 

The population of the United states is 347,444,880 people and Canada has 40,161,936 people. If we include the American south, the half tribe of West Manasseh with the people in Canada of principally British and Irish heritage, the half tribe of East Manasseh, they are still outnumbered by the peoples of Ephraim descended principally from British and Irish stock through the numerical superiority of the eastern, northern and western states of America. 

According to World Population Live: ‘Unlike China and India, the United States population is expected to continue to grow throughout the century with no foreseeable decline. By 2067, the U.S. population is expected to surpass 400 million people.’ It is worth under scoring the point earlier regarding Canada’s potential population explosion. WPL – emphasis mine: 

‘The population is growing at a steady pace and, based on current projections will surpass 50 million by 2070. Canada has one of the fastest growth rates of any G7 nation, growing faster than many other industrialized countries. Canada’s growth rate has been anywhere between 0.8% and 1.2% for the past ten years. While Canada’s fertility rate is 1.53 births per woman, below the population replacement rate, the population continues to grow as migration plays an increasing role in the population. Canada’s net migration rate is 6.375 per 1,000 people, the eighth-highest in the world. Unlike many other countries, Canada is “underpopulated” and celebrates a growing population. There are many job vacancies to be filled and more people means more economic growth and prosperity for Canada.’

Judges 5:7, 13-14

English Standard Version

7 ‘The villagers ceased in Israel; they ceased to be until I arose; I, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel…13 Then down marched the remnant of the noble; the people of the Lord marched down for me against the mighty. 14 From Ephraim their root [H3828 – sheresh: bottom, deep, heel] they marched down into the valley… from Machir marched [descended] down the commanders^ [H2710 – chaqaq – governor, law giver]…’

As discussed in previous chapters, certain tribes joined the Judge Deborah in the fight against the Canaanites more readily than others depending by degree on how directly it impinged on their territories. Deborah’s headquarters were located in Ephraim, so it would have been unlikely for them not to have given support. Manasseh had one son Machir, a name which can also be used in describing the descendants of Manasseh from Gilead, the half tribe of East Manasseh.

Grand Union flag of 1775 with the Union Jack, the union of Jacob’s sons in the canton. 

The verse in Judges containing Ephraim includes Amalek. As we have discussed Amalek in depth (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe), but not specifically this verse, it is worth comparing it in different translations as the English Standard version decided to completely miss the word Amalek out from its translation. 

Judges 5:14

American Standard Version

‘Out of Ephraim came down they whose root is in Amalek…

New International Reader’s Version

‘Some came from the part of Ephraim where some Amalekites lived…’

Young’s Literal Translation

‘Out of Ephraim their root [is] against Amalek…’

New English Translation

‘They came from Ephraim, who uprooted Amalek…’

New Century Version

‘They came from Ephraim in the mountains of Amalek.’

The tribe of Ephraim included territory lived in by a residue of Amalekites. A people who existed before Esau’s grandson with the same name and who were related to the Horites. In fact, the Amalekites are traceable to the antediluvian ruler Lamech. Not Lamech, the father of Noah, but evil Lamech, descended from Cain – Genesis 4:18. The Amalekites were Nephilim related and a line of Elioud giants. Esau’s posterity intermarried with Amalek and descendants exist to this day. 

The Betsy Ross flag of 1776 with a circle of stars on a blue background in the canton, very similar to the current European Union flag.

Certain scattered Jews carry this ancestry and the Bible is indicating that they have a presence in Ephraim. There are a significant number of Jews in the United States, with approximately six to seven million people, particularly in the Northeast, where old family wealth with political leverage is located and who wield the real power and control in America – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

Numbers 26:28, 35-37, 29-34

English Standard Version

28 ‘The sons of Joseph according to their clans: Manasseh and Ephraim.

35 These are the sons of Ephraim according to their clans:

of Shuthelah [noise of breaking], the clan of the Shuthelahites;

of Becher [young camel], the clan of the Becherites;

of Tahan [camp], the clan of the Tahanites.

36 And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran [watcher], the clan of the Eranites. 

37 These are the clans of the sons of Ephraim as they were listed, 32,500.

29 The sons of Manasseh: of Machir [H4353 – Makiyr: sold], the clan of the Machirites; and Machir was the father of

Gilead [H1568 – Gil’ad: rocky region]; of Gilead, the clan of the Gileadites.’ 

1 Chronicles 7:14-17

English Standard Version

14 ‘… Manasseh… [with] his Aramean concubine bore… Machir the father of Gilead… 16 And Maacah the wife of Machir bore a son, and she called his name Peresh; and the name of his brother was Sheresh; and his sons were Ulam and Rakem. 17 The son of Ulam: Bedan.

30 These are the sons of Gilead: of Iezer [no help], the clan of the Iezerites; of Helek [portion], the clan of the Helekites; 31 and of Asriel [I shall be (a) prince of God], the clan of the Asrielites; and of Shechem [back, shoulder], the clan of the Shechemites; 32 and of Shemida [wise], the clan of the Shemidaites; and of Hepher [a well], the clan of the Hepherites.

33 Now Zelophehad [H6765 – Tslophchad: first born] the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters.

And the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah

34 These are the clans of Manasseh, and those listed were 52,700.’

1 Chronicles 5:23-26

English Standard Version

23 ‘The members of the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh lived in the land. They were very numerous from Bashan to Baal-hermon, Senir, and Mount Hermon. 

24 These were the heads of their fathers’ houses: Epher [family name of Abraham’s son, Midian], Ishi, Eliel, Azriel, Jeremiah, Hodaviah, and Jahdiel, mighty warriors, famous men, heads of their fathers’ houses.

25 But they broke faith with the God of their fathers, and whored after the gods of the peoples of the land, whom God had destroyed before them. 26 So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day.’

Part of the puzzle in understanding why Manasseh split into two is the fact that the tribe of Judah and Manasseh intermarried early in Israel’s history. Something that is easily missed and glossed over. 

It explains why the half tribe of East Manasseh today (as Canada), is such a resolutely patriotic, supporter and defender of the English throne and former Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. For many Canadians will have more English blood from the tribe of Judah and his son’s Pharez heritage than they realise. 

This injection of Judah’s line has created a marked distinction between Americans of the South and Canadians. Many future Canadians fled the United States and crossed the northern border on grounds of differences in political ideology. They espoused loyalism to the Crown rather than the rebellion of a Republic. In fact, after the American Civil War, many Confederate generals fled to Canada as did their President, Jefferson Davis of Welsh and Scottish forebears. Canadians have a different sense of humour, more in keeping with the English than that of Americans.

1 Chronicles 2:4-5, 21-23

4 ‘[Judah’s] daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five sons in all.

5 The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul.

21 Afterward Hezron* went in to the daughter of Machir [the son of Manasseh] the father of Gilead, whom he married when he was sixty years old, and she bore him Segub.

22 And Segub fathered Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 But Geshur and Aram took from them Havvoth-jair, Kenath, and its villages, sixty towns. All these were descendants of Machir, the father of Gilead.’

The flags of the Canadian provinces and territories. Notice the preponderance of British (Judah and Benjamin) symbols: the four Union Jacks, the three English St George’s Cross flags, the two English passant Lions, the Scottish rampant Lion and the Scottish Saltire.

1 Chronicles 12:16-22

English Standard Version

16 ‘And some of the men of Benjamin and Judah came to the stronghold to David [descendant of Hezron*]. 17 David went out to meet them and said to them, “If you have come to me in friendship to help me, my heart will be joined to you… 

18 … Amasai, chief of the thirty… said, “We are yours, O David, and with you, O son of Jesse! Peace, peace to you, and peace to your helpers! For your God helps you.” Then David received them and made them officers of his troops.

19 Some of the men of Manasseh deserted to David when he came with the Philistines for the battle against Saul. (Yet he did not help them, for the rulers of the Philistines took counsel and sent him away, saying, “At peril to our heads he will desert to his master Saul.”) 

20 As he went to Ziklag, these men of Manasseh deserted to him [David of Judah]: Adnah, Jozabad, Jediael, Michael, Jozabad, Elihu, and Zillethai, chiefs of thousands in Manasseh. 21 They helped David against the band of raiders, for they were all mighty men of valor and were commanders^ [Judges 5:14] in the army. 22 For from day to day men came to David to help him, until there was a great army, like an army of God.’

Joshua 13:29-31

English Standard Version

29 ‘And Moses gave an inheritance to the half-tribe of Manasseh. It was allotted to the half-tribe of the people of Manasseh according to their clans. 30 Their region extended from Mahanaim, through all Bashan, the whole kingdom of Og king of Bashan, and all the towns of Jair, which are in Bashan, sixty cities, 31 and half Gilead, and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, the cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan. These were allotted to the people of Machir the son of Manasseh for the half of the people of Machir according to their clans.’

Canadian men

Joshua 17:1-18

English Standard Version

‘Then allotment was made to the people of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph. To Machir the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead, were allotted Gilead and Bashan, because he was a man of war. 2 And allotments were made to the rest of the people of Manasseh by their clans, Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, Hepher, and Shemida. These were the male descendants of Manasseh the son of Joseph, by their clans. 3 Now Zelophehad the son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, had no sons, but only daughters, and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.

4 They approached Eleazar the [high] priest and Joshua the son of Nun and the leaders and said, “The Lord commanded Moses to give us an inheritance along with our brothers.” So according to the mouth of the Lord he gave them an inheritance among the brothers of their father. 

5 Thus there fell to Manasseh ten portions [half tribe of West Manasseh], besides the land of Gilead and Bashan, which is on the other side of the Jordan, 6 because the daughters of Manasseh received an inheritance along with his sons [next to the land of Ephraim]. The land of Gilead was allotted to the rest of the people of Manasseh [the half tribe of East Manasseh].’

The five daughters of Zelophehad had raised the matter previously with Moses and so it was reconfirmed in front of Joshua. The only stipulation was that the daughters had to marry within the tribe of Manasseh so that the inheritance would remain in Manasseh and not be lost to another tribe.

Canadian women

Numbers 27:1-7

English Standard Version

‘Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad… 2 And they stood before Moses… saying, 3 “Our father died in the wilderness. He was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah… And he had no sons. 4 Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father’s brothers.”

5 Moses brought their case before the Lord. 6 And the Lord said to Moses, 7 “The daughters of Zelophehad are right. You shall give them possession of an inheritance among their father’s brothers and transfer the inheritance of their father to them.”

Numbers 36:10-12

English Standard Version

10 ‘The daughters of Zelophehad did as the Lord commanded Moses, 11 for Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married to sons of their father’s brothers [cousins]. 12 They were married into the clans of the people of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained in the tribe of their father’s clan.’

The five daughters of Zelophehad received territory included within the ten portions of land which comprised the half tribe of West Manasseh adjacent to the territory given to Ephraim. This was in addition to the land of Gilead and Bashan which the half tribe of East Manasseh received. As East Manasseh today is Canada, so West Manasseh reflects much of the American south.

Our Twelve Tribes: ‘The Tribe of Manasseh is in the middle of the United States. The vast lands from the Mississippi River to the Rockies are the heartland of America.’

It is an interesting correlation that the core eleven states of the South, nearly equate to the ten portions given to West Manasseh. If the Carolinas were added together as one; it would be an exact ten. Two states which joined the confederacy, though did not secede from the Union and would make thirteen, were Missouri and then Kentucky. The first seven states to permanently join the Confederation are listed first as they were ratified between March and April 1861. The following four states are listed in the order they were admitted between May and December of 1861.

Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Florida…

Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee.

An anomaly which would change the above configuration to ten states matching ten portions, would be the exclusion of the Lone Star State, Texas. The following chapter will seek to address how this could eventuate – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Joshua: 7 ‘The territory of Manasseh reached from Asher to Michmethath, which is east of Shechem. Then the boundary goes along southward to the inhabitants of En-tappuah.

8 The land of Tappuah belonged to Manasseh, but the town of Tappuah on the boundary of Manasseh belonged to the people of Ephraim. 

9 Then the boundary went down to the brook Kanah. These cities, to the south of the brook, among the cities of Manasseh, belong to Ephraim.

Then the boundary of Manasseh goes on the north side of the brook and ends at the sea, 10 the land to the south being Ephraim’s and that to the north being Manasseh’s [in geographic reversal to today], with the sea forming its boundary… 12 Yet the people of Manasseh could not take possession of those cities, but the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land. 

13 Now when the people of Israel grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but did not utterly drive them out.

14 Then the people of Joseph spoke to Joshua, saying, “Why have you given me but one lot and one portion as an inheritance, although I am a numerous people, since all along the Lord has blessed me?”

15 And Joshua said to them, “If you are a numerous people, go up by yourselves to the forest, and there clear ground for yourselves in the land of the Perizzites and the Rephaim, since the hill country of Ephraim is too narrow for you.” 

16 The people of Joseph said, “The hill country is not enough for us. Yet all the Canaanites who dwell in the plain have chariots of iron, both those in Beth-shean and its villages and those in the Valley of Jezreel.”

17 Then Joshua said to the house of Joseph, to Ephraim and Manasseh,

“You are a numerous people and have great power. You shall not have one allotment only, 18 but the hill country shall be yours, for though it is a forest, you shall clear it and possess it to its farthest borders. For you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have chariots of iron, and though they are strong.”

Joshua 16.8-9

English Standard Version

8 ‘… Such is the inheritance of the tribe of the people of Ephraim by their clans, 9 together with the towns that were set apart for the people of Ephraim within the inheritance of the Manassites, all those towns with their villages.’

Nearly all maps drawn show Ephraim inland with only the half tribe of West Manasseh possessing a coastline on the Mediterranean Sea. The one below is rare, detailing an accurate rendition of the western boundaries for the two tribes – Joshua 8:16.

These verses clearly highlight that Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh were broadly allotted their own region and cities. That said, the boundary lines were flexible so that for instance, certain cities of Ephraim were technically in Manasseh’s territory.

United States of America Flag

The people were at first grumbling, yet the tribe of Ephraim, as ‘the possessor of the primogeniture of Joseph’ had been given a superb region of Canaan, in the very centre of the land which reached from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean and bordered Benjamin and Dan in the South and Manasseh in the North. 

It was a rich and beautiful hill country, well watered and richly wooded, abounding in corn fields and orchards, and secure from attacks by foreigners. This allotment, which included the greater part of the region afterwards called Samaria, contained numerous important towns and cities, of which Shiloh – where the Ark of God and the Tabernacle were homed for several hundred years – was the religious centre of the nation during the period of the Judges and the early monarchy – Article: The Ark of God. 

Washington DC, capital of the United States

There was the city of Shechem between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerezim, once occupied by the ancient Hittites and later venerated as the burial place of Jacob; and the city of Samaria, which throughout the history of the separate Kingdom of Israel was the capital of the northern kingdom. Shiloh and Samaria are both cited often in the scriptures and today could represent first, the heart and soul of the nation, New York and second its capital, Washington DC.

New York City

What is disheartening yet parallels Israel’s past, is how New York is more rotten apple than big apple.

American men

Isaiah 7:5-17

English Standard Version

5 ‘Because Syria, with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, has devised evil against you, saying, 6 “Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Tabeel as king in the midst of it,” 7 thus says the Lord God: “It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass.

8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin.

And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people.

9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all.”

17 The Lord will bring upon you and upon your people and upon your father’s house such days as have not come since the day that Ephraim departed from Judah – the king of Assyria!”

A plot by Ephraim to conquer Judah was not permitted to unfurl. Instead, Ephraim was to be conquered by Assyria. As this prophecy is dual, the King of the North will one day defeat modern day Ephraim. As unlikely as that may seem today, it will not seem so in the future, when Russia’s economy and military strength overtakes a divided and fragmented United States of America – refer articles: 2050; Four Kings & One Queen; and Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

American women

Jeremiah 50:19

English Standard Version

‘I will restore Israel to his pasture, and he shall feed on Carmel [in Ephraim] and in Bashan [Gilead], and his desire shall be satisfied on the hills of Ephraim [and half tribe of West Manasseh] and in Gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh].’

The territory of Joseph was in the West and comprised Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh to its north, equating to the United States today in reverse and Gilead (or Bashan) was in the East and comprised the half tribe of East Manasseh, equating to Canada today.

City of New York

Psalm 60:6-8; (108:7-9)

English Standard Version

God has spoken in his holiness: “With exultation I will divide up Shechem and portion out the Vale of Succoth. Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is my scepter. Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”

The flags of the American States. Notice the preponderance of the colour red in the Southern States as well as stars and saltires. The crossing over of Jacob’s hands are symbolised on Scotland’s flag (tribe of Benjamin, Joseph’s brother). The American Declaration of Independence also echoes the Scottish Independence Declaration of Arbroath.

The states in the South with obvious saltires include Alabama, Florida and Mississippi. The state alluding to a saltire includes Arkansas; and with Texas, Tennessee, Georgia and North Carolina exhibits both stars and the predominant colour red. While in the northern states blue is the primary colour, it is worth noting that Canada like the American south favours the colour red on its Flag.

District of Colombia – containing the Capitol, Washington – sandwiched between the states of Virginia (south) and Maryland (north).

Gilead is Manasseh, and Manasseh is also an identity linked with Ephraim. Though Gilead is not Ephraim. The Handmaid’s Tale is a dystopian novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood and was published in 1985. It is set in a near future New England, with a strong patriarchal and totalitarian ‘theonomic state’ known as the Republic of Gilead, which has overthrown the legitimate United States government.

There are a number of interesting correlations. First, Atwood is Canadian and technically, Canada is modern day Gilead, though she has chosen to call the United States Gilead in her story. Atwood also uses the term Commanders for the key administrators of the Republic of Gilead. Again, this is a term in the Bible used for military leaders from Machir of Gilead.

Judges 5:14

English Standard Version

‘… from Machir marched down the commanders…

The main plot line is that women are having difficulty in conceiving children. Handmaids are used by the ruling families in producing children for the barren wives of commanders. The apostasy in Gilead is stated in the Book of Hosea, though most of Hosea is a warning to Ephraim. Pregnancy is discussed in a dual prophecy in the Book of Amos and eerily connects Gilead and Canada with the Ammonites of French Quebec – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Hosea 12:11

English Standard Version

‘If there is iniquity in Gilead, they shall surely come to nothing: in Gilgal they sacrifice bulls; their altars also are like stone heaps on the furrows of the field.’

Amos 1:13-14

English Standard Version

‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of the Ammonites [French Quebec], and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead [Canada], that they might enlarge their border. So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah [Quebec, Quebec], and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind…’

Toronto, Canada

A chilling future prophetic indictment on Ephraim, reminiscent of Atwood’s Republic of Gilead is revealed in the Book of Hosea. 

Hosea 9:3-16

English Standard Version

3 ‘They shall not remain in the land of the Lord, but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean food in Assyria. 8 The prophet is the watchman of Ephraim with my God; yet a fowler’s snare is on all his ways, and hatred in the house of his God…

11 Ephraim’s glory shall fly away like a bird no birth, no pregnancy, no conception! 12 Even if they bring up children, I will bereave them till none is left. Woe to them when I depart from them!

13 Ephraim, as I have seen, was like a young palm planted in a meadow; but Ephraim must lead his children out to slaughter. 14 Give them, O Lord – what will you give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.

16 Ephraim is stricken; their root is dried up; they shall bear no fruit. Even though they give birth, I will put their beloved children to death.’

Hosea 5:3, 5, 9-14

English Standard Version

3 ‘I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hidden from me; for now, O Ephraim, you have played the whore; Israel is defiled… 5 … Israel and Ephraim shall stumble in his guilt; Judah also shall stumble with them. 9  Ephraim shall become a desolation in the day of punishment; among the tribes of Israel I make known what is sure. 10 The princes of Judah have become like those who move the landmark; upon them I will pour out my wrath like water.

11 Ephraim is oppressed, crushed in judgment, because he was determined to go after filth. 12 But I am like a moth to Ephraim, and like dry rot to the house of Judah. 13 When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah his wound, then Ephraim went to Assyria, and sent to the great king [of the North]. But he is not able to cure you or heal your wound. 14 For I will be like a lion to Ephraim, and like a young lion to the house of Judah. I, even I, will tear and go away; I will carry off, and no one shall rescue.’

Hosea 6:4, 8 -10

English Standard Version

4 ‘What shall I do with you, O Ephraim? What shall I do with you, O Judah? Your love is like a morning cloud, like the dew that goes early away… 8 Gilead is a city of evildoers, tracked with blood. 9 As robbers lie in wait for a man, so the priests band together; they murder on the way to Shechem; they commit villainy. 10 In the house of Israel I have seen a horrible thing; Ephraim’s whoredom is there; Israel is defiled.’

Hosea 7:1, 8-9, 11–13

English Standard Version

1 ‘… the iniquity of Ephraim is revealed, and the evil deeds of Samaria, for they deal falsely…

Ephraim mixes himself with the peoples; Ephraim is a cake not turned [becomes dark]. 9 Strangers devour his strength, and he knows it not; gray hairs are sprinkled upon him, and he knows it not…’ 

A provocative prediction regarding the future ethnic demographic of the United States. The increase in numbers of African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans in the United States, from births, immigration and mixing with each other as well as with the white population, will eventually impact the American people and blacken its population in which the majority of its citizens will ultimately become overwhelmingly black, brown or mixed. 

While this is not a slur on people ethnically, it is a warning on the resulting impact on America’s collective will, economic standing and political process – Article: 2050.

Hosea: 11 ‘Ephraim is like a dove, silly and without sense, calling to Egypt [the Arab world], going to Assyria [Russia]. 12 As they go, I will spread over them my net; I will bring them down like birds of the heavens; I will discipline them according to the report made to their congregation. 13 Woe to them, for they have strayed from me! Destruction to them, for they have rebelled against me! I would redeem them, but they speak lies against me.’

Hosea 8:5-6, 8-9, 11, 14

English Standard Version

5 ‘I have spurned your calf, O Samaria 6… The calf of Samaria shall be broken to pieces. 8 Israel is swallowed up; already they are among the nations as a useless vessel. 9 For they have gone up to Assyria, a wild donkey wandering alone; Ephraim has hired lovers… 11 Because Ephraim has multiplied altars for sinning, they have become to him altars for sinning… 14 For Israel has forgotten his Maker and built palaces, and Judah has multiplied fortified cities; so I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour her strongholds.’

Along with the United States (Ephraim) and Canada (Manasseh), England (Judah) comes under similar condemnation and will suffer the same punishment.

Flag of Hawaii: the eight stripes represent its islands and like the Cambridge (or Grand Union) flag, contains a Union Jack in it canton

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

‘The first thing recorded of Jeroboam, as [the first] king of Israel, is that he built the city of Shechem, in Mount Ephraim, and dwelt there. This city was the first capital of that kingdom. From there the king of Israel went out and built the city of Penuel, and seemed to prosper for a short season.

But Jeroboam fell to thinking that, if his subjects were allowed to continue going to Jerusalem to sacrifice unto the Lord, their hearts would turn again to Rehoboam, whose capital city it was, and they would then kill him, and go again to the kingdom of Judah. 

Therefore he made two calves of gold, and said unto the people, “It is too much (trouble) for you to go to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And he set one in Bethel [Tribe of Benjamin on border with Ephraim in the south], and one in Dan [Tribe of Dan in the far north]. And this thing became a sin, for the people went to worship before the one (in Bethel), and even unto Dan. And he made a house of high places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi. 

“And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month [October/November], on the fifteenth day [sabbath] of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he offered upon the altar. 

So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made: and he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places which he had made. So he offered upon the altar which he had made in Bethel, on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised in his own heart; and ordained a feast unto the Children of Israel, and he offered upon the altar and burnt incense,” I Kings 12:28-33. 

‘This was the great sin which was such a curse to the people. But we want you to note just how the Lord speaks of it. After the prophet whom he had sent out of Judah had proclaimed the doom of Jeroboam, he further adds: 

“The Lord shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of his good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves [worship of the Mother Goddess, Asherah – refer article: Asherah], provoking the Lord to anger. And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin,” I Kings 14:15, 16.’

What is incredible, is that Jeroboam instituted a new feast and Holy day holiday one month after the Feast of Tabernacles of the seventh month of Tishri (September/October) of each year. This mirrors and foreshadows the Americans millennia later instituting their own celebration approximately one month after the Old Covenant Feast of Tabernacles. That is, Thanksgiving on the fourth Thursday in November, which is one month later during the eighth month according to the sacred lunar calendar – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

While Thanksgiving invariably falls between November 22nd and the 28th, the Eighth Astrological House is October 24 to November 22. Scorpio is the eighth astrological sign and is linked with the Tribe of Dan – where one of Jeroboam’s golden calfs was erected. The significance of this will become apparent in the next and final chapter.  

Hosea 11:2-6, 8-10

English Standard Version

2 ‘The more they were called, the more they went away; they kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning offerings to idols. 3 Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk; I took them up by their arms, but they did not know that I healed them. They shall not return to the land of Egypt [captivity], but Assyria shall be their king, because they have refused to return to me.

6 The sword shall rage against their cities, consume the bars of their gates, and devour them because of their own counsels. 8 How can I give you up, O Ephraim? How can I hand you over, O Israel? How can I make you like Admah? How can I treat you like Zeboiim?’ – Genesis 14:2. 

9 ‘I will not execute my burning anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not a man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath. 10 They shall go after the Lord; he will roar like a lion; when he roars, his children shall come trembling from the west [Article: Four Kings & One Queen]; 11 they shall come trembling like birds from Egypt, and like doves from the land of Assyria, and I will return them to their homes, declares the Lord. 

12 Ephraim has surrounded me with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit, but Judah still walks with God and is faithful to the Holy One [until the time of their punishment and captivity over one hundred years later].’

Hosea 12:1, 8, 14 

English Standard Version

‘Ephraim feeds on the wind and pursues the east wind [the Orient, East Asia, China and Japan] all day long; they multiply falsehood and violence; they make a covenant with Assyria, and oil is carried to Egypt… Ephraim has said,

Ah, but I am rich; I have found wealth for myself; in all my labors they cannot find in me iniquity or sin.” Ephraim has given bitter provocation; so his Lord will leave his bloodguilt on him and will repay him for his disgraceful deeds.’

Abraham Lincoln’s proclamation on April 30, 1863, for a nation-wide day of fasting and prayer: 

“It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God… and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord… We have been the recipients of the choicest blessings of heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation ever has grown; but we have forgotten God!

We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us. It behooves us, then, to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.”

How far has America come from this standard? How far indeed.

The last good man?

Isaiah 17:3-4

English Standard Version

3 ‘The fortress [military defence, strength] will disappear from Ephraim… 4 And in that day the glory of Jacob will be brought low, and the fat of his flesh will grow lean.’

Zechariah 9:10, 13

English Standard Version

10 ‘I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace to the nations; his rule shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth. 13 For I have bent Judah as my bow; I have made Ephraim its arrow…’

Isaiah 9:9, 12, 19-21

English Standard Version 

9 ‘… Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria, who say in pride and in arrogance of heart… 12 The Syrians [Spanish, Portuguese] on the east and the Philistines [Mexicans, Colombians] on the west devour Israel with open mouth. 19 Through the wrath of the Lord of hosts the land is scorched, and the people are like fuel for the fire; no one spares another. 20 They slice meat on the right, but are still hungry, and they devour on the left, but are not satisfied; each devours the flesh of his own arm,

21 Manasseh devours Ephraim, and Ephraim devours Manasseh; together they are against Judah.’

A tragic time when Canada and the United States in desperation, will turn against each other, as well as turning on England. This is in contrast with the current relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, which has been born and refined during two world wars and several joint military operations over the decades. Churchill described it a ‘special relationship’. All the more meaningful when their individual identities, are rightfully understood.

In 1946, March 5, Winston Churchill in an oration, The Sinews of Peace, at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri – which incidentally, he also lodged ‘iron curtain’ in the diplomatic lexicon – describes the friendship between Great Britain and the United States.

“Now, while still pursuing the method of realising our overall strategic concept, I come to the crux of what I have travelled here to Say. Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organisation will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States. 

This is no time for generalities, and I will venture to be precise. Fraternal association requires not only the growing friendship and mutual understanding between our two vast but kindred Systems of society, but the continuance of the intimate relationship between our military advisers, leading to common study of potential dangers, the similarity of weapons and manuals of instructions, and to the interchange of officers and cadets at technical colleges.”

When Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited with the then United States President, Barack Obama, they lavished praise on their nations relationship during the first official visit by a Canadian leader in nearly twenty years. Trudeau toasted the two nations as ‘siblings’ at a state dinner and Obama said that the United States and Canada were ‘blessed to be neighbours.’ Yet former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau does not fully comprehend how the United States of America and Canada really are related brothers, bonded by blood. As with Barak Obama, the blessing in being neighbours, far transcends sharing an undefended border thousands of miles long. Yet their observations like Churchill’s, are no less true.

In fact this element of deep trust between Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah – with Benjamin, Simeon and Reuben – extends to Asher and Naphtali. 

Not everyone is aware that the only nations considered true allies by the United States are Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. A 2013 report disclosed by the German publication Der Spiegel noted that while the United States has a massive cyber-espionage program, ‘only Canada, Australia, Britain and New Zealand were explicitly exempted from spy attacks.’ 

European nations such as Germany and France want the United States to treat them the same way they treat the Anglo-nations, which have been called the “five eyes.” There are longstanding and deep tensions over intelligence sharing between the United States, Germany and France. The United States has for decades, with few interruptions, strictly shared intelligence with just these four principal countries under the ‘five eyes’ agreement (FVEY), which includes a proviso that they do not spy on each other.

Potent symbols of American military power

“Germany and France have long resented this special relationship in intelligence,” according to Tim Naftali (Naphtali), of the New America Foundation, “But the question is whether (France and Germany) would be able to accept the coordination of their foreign policies that comes along with the agreement.” When intelligence agencies discuss targeting they are giving away what they know, said Naftali. “Is the US prepared to do that across the board with France and Germany?” The United States of America officially considers Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand as its most trusted and possible only non-hostile, allies. 

Hosea 4:17-19

English Standard Version

‘Ephraim is joined to idols; leave him alone. When their drink is gone, they give themselves to whoring; their rulers dearly love shame. A wind has wrapped them in its wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices.’

Isaiah 28:1, 3, 7

English Standard Version

‘Ah, the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim, and the fading flower of its glorious beauty, which is on the head of the rich valley of those overcome with wine! The proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim will be trodden underfoot; These also reel with wine and stagger with strong drink; the priest and the prophet reel with strong drink, they are swallowed by wine, they stagger with strong drink, they reel in vision, they stumble in giving judgment.’

The prophet Isaiah may have meant this figuratively, as in drunk with power and success, though a literal explanation is probably also intended. There are nations with higher rates of alcohol consumption nationally and per person than the United States, but figures for rates of alcoholism tell a different story. The core of the United States population primarily descended from the tribe of Ephraim, is ahead of any other English speaking Celtic-Saxon-Viking nation.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism:

  1. Hungary – 21.2%
  2. Russia – 20.9%
  3. Belarus – 18.8%
  4. Latvia – 15.5%
  5. South Korea – 13.9% (tie)
  6. Slovenia – 13.9% (tie)
  7. United States – 13.9% (tie)
  8. Poland – 12.8%
  9. Estonia – 12.2% (tie)
  10. Slovakia – 12.2% (tie)

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of female Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism:

  1. United States – 10.4%
  2. Russia – 7.4%
  3. Sweden – 7.3%
  4. Hungary – 7.2%
  5. South Korea – 6.8%
  6. Belarus – 6.2%
  7. Austria – 6.1%
  8. United Kingdom – 4.7%
  9. Latvia – 4.6%
  10. Slovenia – 4.5%

Psalm 78:9, 67-68

English Standard Version

‘The Ephraimites, armed with the bow, turned back on the day of battle. They did not keep God’s covenant, but refused to walk according to his law. They forgot his works and the wonders that he had shown them… He rejected the tent of Joseph; he did not choose the tribe of Ephraim, but he chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion, which he loves.’

Isaiah 11:13-14

English Standard Version

‘The jealousy of Ephraim shall depart, and those who harass Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not harass Ephraim. But they shall swoop down on the shoulder of the Philistines in the west, and together they shall plunder the people of the east. They shall put out their hand against Edom and Moab, and the Ammonites shall obey them.’

Zechariah 10:6-7

English Standard Version

“I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph. I will bring them back because I have compassion on them, and they shall be as though I had not rejected them, for I am the Lord their God and I will answer them. Then Ephraim shall become like a mighty warrior, and their hearts shall be glad as with wine.” 

Jeremiah 31:6, 8, 9, 18, 20

English Standard Version

‘For there shall be a day when watchmen will call in the hill country of Ephraim… Behold, I will bring them from the north country and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth… for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.

I have heard Ephraim grieving, ‘You have disciplined me, and I was disciplined, like an untrained* calf; bring me back that I may be restored, for you are the Lord my God. Is Ephraim my dear son? Is he my darling child? For as often as I speak against him, I do remember him still. Therefore my heart yearns for him; I will surely have mercy on him, declares the Lord.’

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Ephraim is called a “bullock” or young* bull. In Hebrew “bullock” is “aegel”. Historically this very same name, “Aegel”, pronounced in the same way, was an alternative form for the ethnic term “Angle”. The Angles gave England (i.e. “Angle- land”) its name. Together with the Saxons, Jutes… and others the Angles conquered from the Celts the land that was later named England. 

The Angles were also called “Aegels”. The appellations “Angle” and “Aegel” were employed interchangeably. The Hebrew word for young bull is “Aegel”. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yistchaki 1040-1105 CE) was the foremost Medieval Jewish Commentator. In commentating on this verse (Jeremiah 31:18) Rashi states that the Hebrew word “Aegel” (Young Bull) was a name applied to Ephraim.’ 

It was circa 449 to 477 CE that the Angles – the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh from Angeln – followed the Jutes, departing from their lands in the Cimbrian Peninsula as part of a full-scale migration (invasion) across the North Sea to Britain, where they founded several kingdoms in newly conquered territory. Angeln was reputedly left abandoned and empty by the mass population movement, allowing the Danish Vikings from Asher to migrate south and west to fill the gap. 

During this period, the Danes became an ever greater threat to the Frisian hegemony of the North Sea and the northwestern European coastal territories. The Angles as part of the Saxon peoples – who also comprised the Jutes from Judah and the Frisians from Issachar and Zebulun – left little imprint on Anglia and Mercia, their strongholds in west and east Middle England (refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes). 

Chromosomes Sketch New Outline of British History, New York Times: 

‘But surprisingly, there is little sign of Anglo-Saxon heritage in southern England. “One tends to think of England as Anglo-Saxon,” Dr. Goldstein said. “But we show quite clearly there was not complete replacement of existing populations by either Anglo-Saxons or Danes. It looks like the Celts [or rather Jutes] did hold out.”

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

‘When Jacob transferred the birthright to the sons of Joseph he, with one hand resting on the head of each, prayed: “Let my name (Israel) be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac.” The birthright kingdom did, as we have seen, inherit the name of Israel, and also that of Isaac. For Amos says: “And the high places of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel (Bethel and Dan) shall be laid waste, and I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword,” (Amos 7:9). Here we have Isaac, Israel and the house of Jeroboam used as interchangeable names for the ten-tribed kingdom. 

Thus the name of Isaac was named upon the house of Joseph, and it is true, both in race and name, that, in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” It seems that the Jews [Edom] had a preference for the name of Jacob, but Israel clung to the name of Isaac, especially after they were taken into captivity; they dropped the name of Israel and called themselves “Saac” – Sacae, or Saxae, as per Latin derivation – which is nothing more or less than the Hebrew name of Isaac, from which the initial letter “I” has been dropped. 

It is now a well-authenticated fact that the word Saxon is derived from the Hebrew name of I-saac, together with an affix which means sons of. Professor Totten says: “In most of the Eastern languages ‘sons of’ is written ‘sunnia.’ It is equivalent to the Scottish ‘Mac’ and the English and Irish ‘Fitz’ – Mac Donald, son of Donald; Fitz Henry, son of Henry. So, in the distant home of our ancestors, Saac-Sunnia means sons of Isaac. Stambul is formed of Istanbul by dropping the prefix I, and so the Saxon is a direct descendant of our father Isaac. 

Doctor W. Holt Yates accepts this derivation of the Saxon name as positive, and the Reverend W. H. Poole, D. D., speaks of it as follows: “It is a little curious to glean from the ancient nations and from the stone monuments of the early times the various forms in which this word is to be found.

I will here insert a few from a list of my own gleaned from ancient history, thus: Sons of Isaac, Sons of Saac, Saac-Sunnia, Saac-Suna, Saac-Sena Saaca-pena, Esakska, Sacae-Amyrqui, Beth-Sakai (House of Isaac), Sunnia-Sakai, Sakai-Suna, Saca-Suna, Sacae-Sunnae, Sackisina, Sacka-Sunia, Saca-cine, Saka-Suna, Sacas-Sani, Sakas-Saeni, Saxi-Suna, Sach-Suni, Sachi, Sacha, Sakah, Saachus, Saacus, Sacho, Saxo, Saxoi, Saxonia, Saxones, Saxae, Sach-sen, Sack-sen, Saxe-sen, Saxone, Saxony, Saxon.” –  “Our Race.” 

Concerning the etymology of the word Saxon, Yatman says: “Its history is as follows: The Persians used the terms Sacae and Scythian as convertible, whether from a corrupt rendering of one from the other or because the Sacae, a great tribe of Scythians (wanderers) bordering upon them, were so called by a tribal name. 

Of the fact of the identity of the Sacae and the Scythians there is not the shadow of a doubt, and it is clear that these people called their country Sacasena. It is equally clear that the Saxons of England were the Scythians or Celte-Scythians. Their geographical position in Europe is accurately described by Plutarch, Tacitus, Ptolemy, and other authors.” To this testimony all the historians agree. Strabo asserts that the most ancient Greek historians knew the Sacaea as a people who lived beyond the Caspian Sea.

Diodorus says: “The Sacaea sprung from a people in Media who obtained a vast and glorious empire.” 

Ptolemy finds the Saxons in a race of Scythians, called Sakai, who came from Media. 

Pliny says: “The Sakai were among the most distinguished people of Scythia, who settled in Armenia, and were called Sacae-Sani.” 

Albinus says: “The Saxons were descended from the ancient Sacae of Asia.” 

Prideaux finds that the Cimbrians came from between the Black and Euxine (Caspian) seas, and that with them came the Angli. 

Sharon Turner, the great Saxon historian, says: “The Saxons were a Scythian nation, and were called Saca, Sachi, Sacki, Sach-sen.” 

Gawler, in “Our Scythian Ancestors” (Page 6), says: “The word ‘Saacae,’ is fairly and without straining or imagination, translatable as Isaacites.”

‘But why has it been necessary for the historians of these various nations thus to trace this name, search records, tablets and monuments, and hunt for the origin of the Anglo-Saxons? Are they an obscure people? Are they a feeble nation? Are they an ignorant folk? Are they an uncivilized race? No; they are diametrically opposite to all this… but they do not know where they originated, nor who were their ancestors – they are lost. 

Some of these historians whom we have quoted do not agree among themselves as to the origin of the Saxons, but belong to different schools of contention, and are wrangling over the question whether these lost people belong to the Aryan, or to the Semitic race. The only use which we have, just here, for their contention is to show that they all trace the Saxons to the very place where the captive ten tribes of Israel were deported by Shalmanesar, the King of Assyria. 

These same historians also show that the Sax-ons sprang into existence, in so far as their modern and medieval history is concerned, about three years after the Israelites were taken to that country, and that there they lose them and can trace them no further.’

Helmet of East Angle King Raedwald

In the Book of revelation we read about the 144,000 saints who live at the end of days. They are the loyal and faithful ones gathered from the sons of Jacob. In counterpoint to the mark of the Beast (or the mark of Cain), on (in) everyone’s forehead, these elect are sealed by the Holy Spirt with special protection from the Tribulation.

Revelation 7:1-8

English Standard Version

1 ‘After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree. 2 Then I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, with the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to harm earth and sea, 3 saying,

“Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.”

4 And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:

verses 5-8

12,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed,
12,000 from the tribe of Reuben,
12,000 from the tribe of Gad,

12,000 from the tribe of Asher,
12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali,
12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh,

12,000 from the tribe of Simeon,
12,000 from the tribe of Levi,
12,000 from the tribe of Issachar,

12,000 from the tribe of Zebulun,
12,000 from the tribe of Joseph,
12,000 from the tribe of Benjamin were sealed.

What various commentators have righty observed though wrongly interpreted, is that Joseph at number eleven and Manasseh at number six, are mentioned twice in place of the missing tribe of Dan. The answer is less to do with Dan and more to do with the fact that the 12,000 people from Manasseh means from the British and Irish descended peoples of Canada. The 12,000 people from Joseph, means from the British and Irish descended peoples of the United States; comprising the tribe of Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. Hence recall in the Bible, they are known and called, either Ephraim or, Joseph. Manasseh on the other hand remember, is known variously as Machir, Gilead, the half tribe of East Manasseh or simply as, Manasseh.

As we have learned from previous chapters: Judah is England; Reuben is Northern Ireland; Gad is the Republic of Ireland; Asher is Australia; Naphtali is New Zealand; Simeon is Wales; Levi are scattered, though mainly in England, Wales and Scotland; Issachar and Zebulun are the British in South Africa and Zimbabwe; and Benjamin is Scotland. 

Why representation from the tribe of Dan is missing will be discussed in the following chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Key moments and dates in Canadian history.

1688 – War fought between King William’s New England and New France. 

1713 – The British gained control of much of Eastern Canada under the Treaty of Utrecht.

1755 – The British expelled the Acadians from their lands. 

1759 – The British occupied Quebec City in the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. 

1763 – France lost the French and Indian War, also known as the Seven Years War to the British. The British gained control of all the French lands in Canada as a result and these were absorbed into the British Empire.

1775 – The invasion of the Continental Army of America is stopped at the Battle of Quebec. 

1783 – The Treaty of Paris established official borders between the United States and Canada. 

1784 – The colony of New Brunswick was established. 

1791 – Quebec was divided into Upper Canada, today’s Ontario and Lower Canada, today’s Quebec. 

1812 – War between the British and the United States. American forces attempted to invade Canada. 

1818 – The 49th parallel is determined as the border between much of the United States and Canada.

1837 – Rebellion occurred throughout Canada towards the British government. 

1838 – The Durham Report was issued which recommended that Upper and Lower Canada be united. 

1840 – Upper and Lower Canada were merged into a single colony, the United Provence of Canada by the Act of Union. 

1846 – The border between the United States and Canada in the west is decided by the Oregon Treaty. 

1867 – The Dominion of Canada is formed as the Canadian Confederation. It included the four provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario. 

1870 – The province of Manitoba joins Canada and in 1871, British Columbia becomes the sixth province of Canada. 

1873 – The Northwest Mounted Police were established. They become the Canadian Mounted Police. 

1896 – Gold was discovered in the Yukon. The Klondike Gold Rush occurred as thousands of prospectors moved to Canada to find gold. 

1905 – Saskatchewan and Alberta became provinces. 

1931 – The Statute of Westminster was authorised, whereby Canada became an independent nation. 

1982 – The year Canada actually became fully independent from the United Kingdom, adopting its own constitution. 

Canada is a federation composed of ten provinces and three territories (10+3=13). The etymological origins of the word Canada is accepted as coming from the St Lawrence Iroquian word kanata, meaning ‘village’ or ‘settlement.’ The national motto A Mari Usque Ad Mare means ‘From Sea to Sea.’ Covering 3.85 million square miles, Canada is the world’s second largest country by total area, after Russia. Its southern and western border with the United States, stretching 5,525 miles, is the world’s longest (undefended) bi-national land border. Canada’s capital is Ottawa, with 1,323,783 people. 

Britannica – emphasis mine:

‘Although Canada shares many similarities with its southern neighbour – and, indeed, its popular culture and that of the United States are in many regards indistinguishable – the differences between the two countries, both temperamental and material, are profound.

“The central fact of Canadian history,” observed the 20th-century literary critic Northrop Frye, is “the rejection of the American Revolution.” Contemporary Canadians are inclined to favour orderly central government and a sense of community over individualism; in international affairs, they are more likely to serve the role of peacemaker instead of warrior, and, whether at home or abroad, they are likely to have a pluralistic way of viewing the world.

More than that, Canadians live in a society that in most legal and official matters resembles Britain – at least in the English-speaking portion of the country.’

Canadian Coat of Arms – not so far removed from the United Kingdom’s as discussed.

Key moments and dates in American history.

1492 – Christopher Columbus ‘discovered’ the Americas. The origin of the name America is often attributed to the explorer Amerigo Vespucce. Yair Davidy offers an alternative derivation from the term Machir, the son of Manasseh. The Western Hemisphere is referred to as either North, Central or South America, though when the term ‘American’ is used, this is normally a universal reference to the peoples of the United States. The nickname ‘Yankee’ for a North American derives from a form of the name Jacob. The Latinos themselves, use the term Norte Americanos to refer to Americans in the United States. 

America may have even taken its name from a Welshman called Richard Amerik, a chief investor in late fifteenth century voyages of discovery. The word Amerik itself is derived from ap Meuric, Welsh for ‘son of Maurice’ – the latter was anglicised further to Morris. The American state of Pennsylvania is possibly named after the Welsh word for head, pen.

In an audio study course called An Invitation to Hebrew in its section on the ‘Vocabulary of Jewish Life’ the teacher confirms that ‘covenant in Hebrew is… b’rit. He mentions its occurrence in the term b’nai b’rit, or the ‘children of the covenant’ in reference to the United States of America, which is called in Hebrew, Artzot Ha-Brit, ‘the lands of the covenant’ (Mordecai Kamrat, Spoken Arts, Incorporated, 1960).

1513 – Juan Ponce de Leon visited Florida. 

1540 – Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto explored the Southeast. 

1565 – St. Augustine was established as the first permanent settlement in the United States. 

1607 – The Jamestown settlement and Virginia Colony was founded by John Smith. 

1620 – The Mayflower landed with the pilgrims at Plymouth. 

1629 – The Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded. 

1692 – The Salem witch trials took place in Massachusetts. 

1765 – The British government imposed the Stamp Act on the colonies. The colonies protested with the Stamp Act Congress. 

1770 – The Boston Massacre occurred. 

1773 – Bostonians protested the Tea Act with the Boston Tea Party dumping tea into the Boston Harbor. 

1774 – The First Continental Congress was held. The British government imposed the Intolerable Acts on the colonies. The American colonies grew unhappy with what they called “taxation without representation”.

1775 – The Revolutionary War began with the Battle of Lexington and Concord. The Second Continental Congress was held and the Battle of Bunker Hill occurred. The American Revolutionary War fought by the Thirteen Colonies against the British Empire, was the first successful war of independence by a non-European entity against a European power in modern history. 

1776 – The American colonies declared their independence as the United States of America. 

1777 – The Continental Army stayed at Valley Forge for the winter. 

1781 – The British surrendered at Yorktown, Virginia. The Articles of the Confederation were ratified by the colonies. 

1783 – The Revolutionary War officially ended with the Treaty of Paris. 

1787 – The Constitution was adopted by the Constitutional Convention. 

1789 – George Washington became the first President of the United States. 

1791 – The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution as the first ten amendments.

1793 – The cotton gin (engine, machine) was invented by Eli Whitney. 

1803 – The size of the United States was nearly doubled with the Louisiana Purchase from France. 

1812 – The War began against Great Britain. 

1815 – United States troops led by Andrew Jackson defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans. 

1823 – The Monroe Doctrine was declared by President James Monroe. North and South America were closed to any further colonisation and to any interference by a European power.

1836 – The Battle of the Alamo in Texas. 

1838 – The Cherokee Nation was forced to march from the Southeast to Oklahoma in what was known as the Trail of Tears. 

1846 – The Mexican-American War began. 

1849 – Prospectors travelled to California in the California Gold Rush. 

1860 – Abraham Lincoln was elected president. 

1861 – The American Civil War began. 

1863 – The Union Army won the Battle of Gettysburg. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves in the South. 

1864 – Union General Sherman made his famous “march to the sea.” 

1865 – The American Civil War came to an end with General Robert E Lee surrendering at the Appomattox Court House. President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. 

1865 – Slavery was outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment. 

1867 – Alaska purchased from Russia. 

1869 – The First Transcontinental Railroad was completed. 

1876 – The telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell. 

1914 – In both World Wars the United States tried to remain neutral but ended up on the side of the United Kingdom and the Allies. 

Britannica – emphasis mine:

‘Probably no other country has a wider range of racial, ethnic, and cultural types than does the United States. The nation’s wealth is partly a reflection of its rich natural resources and its enormous agricultural output, but it owes more to the country’s highly developed industry. 

Despite its relative economic self-sufficiency in many areas, the United States is the most important single factor in world trade by virtue of the sheer size of its economy. Its exports and imports represent major proportions of the world total. The United States also impinges on the global economy as a source of and as a destination for investment capital. The country continues to sustain an economic life that is more diversified than any other on Earth, providing the majority of its people with one of the world’s highest standards of living. 

America was the first of the European colonies to separate successfully from its motherland, and it was the first nation to be established on the premise that sovereignty rests with its citizens and not with the government. In the 20th century the United States emerged as a world power, and since World war II it has been one of the preeminent powers. It has not accepted this mantle easily nor always carried it willingly; the principles and ideals of its founders have been tested by the pressures and exigencies of its dominant status. The United States still offers its residents opportunities for unparalleled personal advancement and wealth.’ 

The Lightkeeper, 2050:

‘America is compellingly and utterly unique in all history, in the modern world and in our life times. No single nation has been so materially blessed or prosperous beyond belief. No single nation has so heavily influenced the rest of the whole world in its export of American culture through film, television, literature and music. Never, has a single nation so comprehensively dominated civilisation in its development of trade, information technology, media, telecommunications, munitions, missiles and defence systems.

As an active superpower and hyper power since 1991, the United States has undeniably built an empire unlike anything seen in the world, for though they do not have a mass of territorial conquests or colonies like the [former] British Empire, their financial investment and influence worldwide intertwines the global economy like the roots of a tree that grow underground, wrapping themselves around everything in its path.’

Yair Davidy describes the link between the name Joseph and Parthian rulers, as well as metallurgy in ancient Spain and of Samaria in ancient Israel.

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘Arsacides were the rulers of the Parthian* Empire in Persia. The Parthians rulers were of Israelite descent’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. ‘Some scholars trace the name “Aspourgos” to the Iranian “aspa” meaning horse or to the Akkadian-Syrian “aspuraku” meaning “horseman”. The name however had a different original connotation and any similarity with the word for “horse” and the like deviates from the primary root of the name. 

Haynman traces the name “Aspourgos” to the Semitic-Hebrew root “asaph” (to gather in) and to “biraka” which she understands to, mean “thy self-creation” or something similar. She points out that the name Joseph has the same origin. 

The people of Tanais did have their own independent form of monotheistic belief, similar to but not derived from Judaism. They did not eat pork’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. ‘They were part of the Sacae-Scythian people who had Israelite tribal names and are shown for other reasons to have been of Israelite descent. It may therefore be concluded that they revered “Joseph” under the name “Aspourgos” because they were descended from Joseph. The guilds connected with Aspourgos really did have ceremonies commemorating traditions about Joseph. They also retained some degree of monotheistic sentiment because they were of Hebrew origin. This was also the reason they did not eat pork whereas all other peoples in the region at that time did. 

researchers have suggested that the features found in Tanais were part of the Sakae-Scythian culture in general. Tanais was abandoned in the early 400s CE, about the time of the Hun invasion of Europe, and its inhabitants apparently joined their Scythian brothers and moved westward.’ 

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘Ammianus Marcellinus said that the original inhabitants of Tartessos had been called Dorians. The Dorians in Classical literature were a branch of the Greeks but in this case the intention is to people coming via the port of Dor on the coast of Israel. Dor was the major port on the coast of Central Israel and in Assyrian times it was the name given to a province comprising the whole coastal area. Bochart using Greek and Latin sources demonstrated that the Dorians who migrated to Gades and Tartessus were descendants of a legendary “Dorus and Phoenicius” i.e. of Dorians and Phoenicians. Bochart traced them to Dor in Israel and says that originally they were identified as Galicians, i.e. Galatians’ – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 

‘… the original Dorians of Tartessus, the first settlers of Baetica in southern Spain, and the Galatians were all essentially one and the same people and that amongst them were members of the Tribe of Manasseh. “Dor and her towns” had been part of the region inherited by the Tribe of Manasseh whose original Canaanite inhabitants at first could not be driven out but were put to tribute (Joshua 17:11-12, Judges 1:27- 28). Later the area was considered Israelite. “All the region of Dor” became one of the 12 administrative districts into which the Land of Israel was divided by King Solomon and it was governed by Abinadab who “had Taphah the daughter of Solomon to wife” (1-Kings 4:11). 

When the Assyrians conquered Israel they named the whole coastal region of Manasseh and Ephraim after Dor. Ptolemy records the “Menesthei Portus”, i.e. the Port of the Tribe of Manasseh in the region of the Turdulorum just to the east of Gades off the southwest coast of Spain! The port of Gibraltar is within the area most consistently connected with Tartessos and therefore was Israelite before Spain existed. Gibraltar since 1704 CE has belonged to Britain [Judah*]. This is not a coincidence! 

Metal produced in Baetica (in southeast Spain) was called “Samarian metal” (Pliny N.H.) after Samaria in Israel. There was also a port named “Samarium” in Galatia of northwest Spain. The Samar (Somme) River in north Gaul and neighboring city of Samarobriva (Amiens) and the Sambre River just to their north in Belgium were also named after Samaria in Israel.’ 

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘When Americans spread westward toward the Pacific Ocean, they migrated in wagon trains. In doing so, they carried on a tradition of the ancient Scythians. The Scythians also migrated via covered wagons, which are described in the following words: 

“The wagons in which the women and children traveled had from four to six wheels. They were covered with felt roofs and the space inside was divided into two or three compartments. Little clay models of these prototypes of the modern caravan have been found in some… Scythian burials.” 

Like the cowboys of the American “West,” the Scythians also “excelled at lassoing.” 

With their horse riding, lassoing, and “wagon trains,” Scythian culture resembled the pioneer days of the American West (without the six­ shooters). Perhaps the power of genetic influence is more potent than generally realized. 

The original twelve tribes of Israel grew to became thirteen when Joseph was subdivided into the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. Since Ephraim was given its portion before Manasseh, Manasseh essentially became “the thirteenth tribe.” The number “13” has uniquely been associated with the founding of America. The United States of America was born as a union of thirteen separate colonies, with its flag exhibiting thirteen stripes and thirteen stars. The prominence of the number “13” in the founding of America indicates a divine hand influencing world events to appropriately place the number “13” on this new Manassehite nation.’ 

This is circumlocutory reasoning to fit a theory. It could be argued that thirteen represents Ephraim as the thirteenth born and the last or youngest even though receiving a blessing greater than Manasseh. Thirteen could also represent Jospeh as in, he represents twelve and thirteen. Apportioning Manasseh to the number thirteen is convenient but doesn’t make sense by itself, particularly when we know the United States is principally Ephraim or one and a half tribes comprising Joseph. It is Canada which is Manasseh and to be fair, it is the one whom is forgotten – with its ten provinces and three territories.

Collins: ‘A common symbol of the United States of America is an eagle clutching “an olive branch” and a “group of arrows” in its talons. The olive branch signifies America’s desire for peace while the arrows signify prowess in war. Is it only coincidence that the ancient Scythians (a “Sacae” nation) used the same war sign as modern America (a “Saxon” nation): a clump of arrows? [recall the meaning of Asenath’s (Joseph’e wife) name and the goddess Neith being associated with arrows]. Furthermore, the eagle was also a common Scythian symbol. 

One Scythian eagle ­crest was found in a pose resembling the eagle­crest of the United States: both show eagles with modern outstretched wings and flared tail feathers (the Scythian eagle holds prey in its talons, while the American eagle holds a branch and a clump of arrows in its talons). Indeed, the eagle­ crest of the United States not only has its roots in the Scythian eagle­ crest, but also proclaims [an Israelite] origin by having thirteen arrows in one talon, thirteen leaves on the olive branch in the other talon, thirteen stars over the eagle’s head, thirteen bars in the shield over the eagle’s body, and even thirteen letters in the phrase “E PLURIBUS UNUM.”

If this sounds surprising, consider the fact that in 1857, two messages were given by a Rev. F. E. Pitts to a joint session of the U.S. Congress, presenting evidence that the United States of America was descended from the ten tribes of Israel! Pastor Pitts had little of the information presented in this book available to him, so he based his conclusion on biblical prophecies alone. He utilized prophecies in the books of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Hosea to show that America had fulfilled many prophecies about the ten tribes of Israel. Pastor Pitts wrote: 

The United States of America, our great country, is foretold in the Holy ScripturesThe United States of America is the nationality that is promised in the prophetic Scriptures to arise in the latter times as Israel RestoredSuch was ancient Israel, and such is the United States of America.”

An alternative argument on the re-occurring number thirteen, is presented by Stewart A Swerdlow in his book, Blue Blood, True Blood, Conflict and Creation, 2002:

‘The United States was established with 13 colonies, one for each of the Illuminati families. The original flag had 13 stars, and still has 13 stripes. The eagle, the symbol of the United States, holds 13 arrows in its talons. The United States is actually a corporate asset of the Virginia Company that was established in 1604 in England with direct involvement of the Rothschilds. The finances of the Rothschilds were necessary to fund the exploration and exploitation of the North American continent. The assets of the Virginia Company, including the United States, are owned by the Holy Roman Empire via the Vatican. Executorship remains with the British royal family, but actual ownership lies with the Roman Catholic Church’ – Articles: The Life & Death of Charles III; and The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

The United States of America is not named after Amerigo Vespucci, as you learned in school. The Illuminati would never name a continent, actually two continents, after an Italian mapmaker.

The name is actually a combination of words.

  • “Am” is the Hebrew word for “people”
  • “Ame” is also the command form of the Spanish/Latin verb “to love”
  • “Eri” or “ari” is a Hebrew term for “lion”
  • “Rica” is the feminine form of the Spanish word for “rich”
  • “Ka” is the ancient Egyptian word for soul, or spirit force within a body

The symbolic statement of America is that it is a combination of Lemuria and Atlantis; a blend of the… Lyrae with… Draco… [and] the combination of these… civilizations would produce the most powerful, technological Empire ever known!’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

There are two other words worth noting that may have an etymological link with the word America. The first is Amorica (or Aremorica), which literally means ‘place in front of the sea.’ The word differs merely by one vowel letter. It was the name for the northwestern extremity of ancient Gaul, now known as Brittany. In Celtic, Roman and Frankish ages, Amorica also included the western area of what later became known as Normandy. Both Normandy (from the Normans) and Brittany (derived from Britons) have strong Israelite association – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The other word is Mercia, which derives from the Old English word Merce, meaning ‘people of the Marches’ or boundaries. Swapping two letters, gives Merica. Mercia was a powerful Saxon kingdom with its capital in Tamworth, during the seventh to ninth centuries and was prominent amongst the six other great Saxon kingdoms: East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Northumbria, Sussex and Wessex. 

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

‘The first national flag of those original United States had thirteen Stars and thirteen Bars. The bars symbolize the Union, and the constellation of thirteen stars was intended to symbolize the nation formed of thirteen independent states. In this, the Great Seal of our country… we have the arms and crest of the United States of America.

We would first call your attention to the fact that the eagle is holding in what is called the “Dexter” talon an Olive Branch. In the fourteenth chapter of Hosea, that prophet, who has so much to say about lost Ephraim-Israel, we have the following: “O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God; I will heal their backslidings; I will love them freely; for mine anger is turned away from him… I will be as the dew to Israel; he shall grow like the lily (the national flower of Egypt), and cast forth his roots as Lebanon (royal cedar). His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the OLIVE tree. Ephraim will say, What have I to do any more with idols?”

Ephraim is the representative of the house of Joseph, and we have placed this Scripture before our readers that they may see that the Olive tree is among the insignia of the birthright family, and that it is here represented as belonging to one of the Branches of the birthright kingdom, and since the birthright is Joseph’s, it is the Olive Branch of Joseph which has been placed in the “Coat of Arms” of [Ephraim], the thirteenth tribe in Israel, who has now fulfilled the prophecy of becoming a great [company of nations].

Still this fact, if it stood alone, might not mean so much, but in the other talon, which is called the “Sinister,” is a “Bundle of thirteen Arrows,” which represents the nation individually and collectively prepared for war. 

It is marvelous that the Olive Branch should have been made our official insignum of Peace, and that the Arrows should have been made by law to represent the War Power of the country, for the Arrows were in the heraldry of Israel, as well as the Unicorn and Lion, when Balaam was compelled to bless instead of curse them.’

“God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of [a] unicorn [ox]: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.”

“He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee” – Numbers 24:8-9, BRG Bible.

Verse eight is as a clear reference to the United States of America (Joseph) as verse nine is to England (Judah) – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Allen: ‘Also, the Josephites were Bow-men, and Jacob, after speaking of Joseph and his branches, said,

“The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him. But his Bow (munitions of war) abode in strength, and the Arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob,” Genesis 49:23-24.

It is a well-known, and much-rejoiced-over fact that the Bow of the United States, which has sent her Arrows into the ranks of her enemies, has always abode in strength, and that both her chief men and people have always said: “God has helped us.” 

… and the Eagle, like everything else that pertains to national Israel, has fallen to the birthright family, and is now the national ensign of the thirteenth tribe of Israel, the people of which are not only the descendants of [Ephraim]… but they also compose the firstborn nation out of the “MANY NATIONS,” which were promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and whose ensign Eagle holds in his beak a scroll upon which is written their national motto, “E Pluribus Unum,” which has thirteen letters, and means “One out of MANY.”

“He (Israel) shall fly as an Eagle, and spread his wings over Moab,” Jeremiah 48:40. No wings except those which are spread out can be shadowing wings, and the Shadowing wings of Israel’s Spread Eagle are in the ensign of the United States of America. Hence, America is the land shadowed by wings of which Isaiah wrote, whose ambassadors cross the sea in vessels of bulrushes, or, literally, of caldrons which absorb water; i. e., the modern steamship. The Shield, or escutcheon, which is borne on the breast of the Spread Eagle, has thirteen pieces, called pales, or paleways, which comes from the same word as palings or pickets. These thirteen paleways are united by one at the top. The Lord said to Abraham: “I am thy Shield.” 

‘On the national seal of America, the “Great People,” above the shadowing wings and the scroll, is a Cloud emitting rays of Glory. “Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of the children of Israel… and behold the Glory of the Lord appeared in the Cloud.” To our fathers that glory Cloud was significant of the presence of Jehovah. That Glory Cloud,  which hung over Israel, guided those who had but just escaped from the Egyptian bondage, and it stood between them and their enemies. But this is not all, for this Cloud of our American heraldry surrounds what is called “The Constellation.” This constellation is a group of thirteen stars, or planets, on a field of azure sky, which is exactly the same number of planets that appeared on the azure sky in the dream of Joseph, which drove him into separation from his brethren. 

Any one of these features in the blazonry of our nation might have been a coincidence, but when we see that there is not a single feature, but that which is Josephic and Israelitish, it is simply astounding.

But when we turn our face upon the reverse side of that great national seal we are overwhelmed, for there stands the Great Pyramid of Egypt [Article: The Pyramid Perplexity], which is one of the two great monuments of Egypt, the birthplace of Ephraim and Manasseh, the Egypto-Israelitish sons of Joseph, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham. And, marvel of marvels! The national Crest of England has that other great monument of Egypt, the Sphinx [Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega], on its reverse side. Thus do the people of Great Britain and the United States of America, the Brother nations, by that which speaks louder than words, for signs are arbitrary, say that they are the offsprings of the Egypto-Israelitish holders of the Abrahamic birthright. 

The people of the United States made this declaration by that which was made a law on Thursday, June 20, 1782, for on that day the ensign which bears those shadowing wings of Israel, together with the Heraldry of Joseph, became a law among us. Also over the pyramid on the reverse side of the Great Seal of America is another thirteen-lettered motto, which, of course is not only lawful, but also national; i.e., “Annuit Coeptis,” – “He (the Lord) hath prospered our undertakings.” This also is Josephic, for we read, “The Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man.” “The Lord was with him (Joseph), and that which he did the Lord made it to prosper,” Genesis 39:3-23. 

Those who understand the Cabala and the arithmography of the Scriptures, it is known that the number thirteen is significant of rebellion, but all that we can say about it here is that the first time this number occurs in the Bible it is with reference to Rebellion (Genesis 14:4)’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. ‘Surely that people whose characteristic number is thirteen did rebel in 1776, and prospered in it, too. They also prospered in 1814, in another little affair concerning the acquisition of a vast stretch of territory known as Louisiana. 

This people have also had rebellion within their own borders, and it is a remarkable fact that, although thirteen was not the number of states in the Confederacy, the Confederate Congress, in 1863, formally adopted a battle flag for the Confederacy, and also a Confederate flag.’

Recall there were actually thirteen states supporting the Confederacy. The first seven member states were: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina and Florida. The next four states to join were: Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee. The final two who allied with the confederacy, making thirteen were Missouri and Kentucky.

Allen: ‘The Battle Flag was a white field with a blue cross of this (X) shape, in which there were thirteen stars.’ The Scottish Saltire is white with a blue (diagonal) cross.

(Confederate) Rebel Flag

Allen: ‘The flag for the Confederacy was white, with a red field in the Dexter chief corner, bearing this same (X) cross with its thirteen stars. Here again is both rebellion and the birthright cross of the house of Joseph. In his struggle the government also prospered, and it was essential that it should thus prosper, not only in this case, but also in the others of which we have spoken, in order to fulfill a prophecy concerning one feature of their history, namely: “Shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to undo the heavy burdens, and let the OPPRESSED GO FREE, and that YE break every yoke?” These are the reasons for which Our Race go to war. England freed her slaves in 1838 and America freed hers in 1861.’

Tribal Emblems of Ephraim – National symbols of America, Mark Lane – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘In Numbers Chapter 2 it says “Everyone of the children of Israel shall camp by his own standard, beside the emblems of his father’s house” (Numbers 2:2). 

We thus conclude that each tribe of Israel had emblems, or tribal symbols. The tribal symbols of Ephraim would likely have been: 

 Symbol of a Bull or Wild Ox or Horn
 

Symbol of fruitfulness of the land: Sheaf of Wheat or Fruit Laden Bough 

Symbol of Strong Arm or Arrows

If the USA is the prophetic fulfillment of Ephraim we would expect to see its citizens rallying to their county’s protection under similar national symbols. That is precisely what we see. Ephraim was granted the blessing of divine protection. In the Bible this is signified by the figure of an eagle. The Lord said that he protected Israel on the exodus from Egypt “on eagle’s wings” (Exodus 19:4). Therefore, the eagle is the symbol of God’s protection: it is not the symbol of a nation per se. Many of the national symbols of the USA match the symbols of the tribe of Ephraim. 

(1) Great seal of the United States: 

Eagle grasps a clutch of arrows in one claw

Eagle grasps a fruitful bough in the other claw
Eagle’s breast displays a shield (allusion to spiritual protection)
Eagle’s head is turned to its right: facing West (allusion to the West side of the Camp)
Over the Eagle’s head is a cloud (allusion to the cloud of God which traveled with the Camp)
Obverse side displays a pyramid (allusion to Joseph who ruled Egypt)
Obverse side display the “eye of God” (another allusion to God’s watchful protection)

(2) American Money: 

The penny displays two sheafs (two tribes) [representing Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh] of wheat: on the left and on the right 

The US one dollar bill has both sides of the Great Seal printed on it 

(3) American Mottos: 

“In God We Trust” placed on pennies (1865) official motto of US (adopted in 1956)
“New World Order” NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM (Great Seal)
“Out of Many One” E PLURIBUS UNUM (Great Seal)
“He has Prospered our Undertakings” ANNUIT COEPTIS (Great Seal)

In the US national symbols the number 13 is prominent. There are 13 stars in the cloud, 13 arrows in the clutch, 13 leaves on the bough, 13 fruits on the bough, 13 strips on the shield… The spiritual number 13 signifies “Rebellion” and in truth the United States gained its independence by rebelling against the authority of its… brother the United Kingdom. There were also 13 states in the original colonies of the United States. Normally rebellion has a negative connotation, however at the core of the American ideal of liberty and pursuit of happiness is the concept of resisting over-authoritarian governments.

It is fair to say Americans love their country and they express that on many occasions by honoring their flag, or their ‘colors’. One of the possible pitfalls of a nation being as great as America is its citizens might fall into a love of country that surpasses their love for God. To them the flag is a symbol of protection, much as the skins protected the tabernacle in the desert. When citizens begin to look to their government for protection, and not to God for protection, they put their trust in the wrong place. Instead of ‘In God We Trust’ it is ‘In our Natural Resources We Trust’, or ‘In our Military We Trust’, ‘In our Government We Trust’, or ‘In America We Trust’. When an American… looks at the stars and stripes, the colors should remind him that the great nation of the United States depends for its existence and prosperity on the blessing and protection of God, not the government of the day.’

Symbol of United States protection – the American Bald Eagle

Commentators correctly attribute symbols relating to Joseph (who is indicative of Ephraim) of olives and arrows to the United States of America; yet incorrectly define them as belonging to the tribe of Manasseh.

The Meaning of the Great Seal of The United States, American Heritage Education Foundation, 2017:

‘The Great Seal of the United States is the official emblem and heraldic device of the United States of America. It was adopted by the Continental Congress in 1782 [on June 20] to represent the nation and to demonstrate to other nations of the world the ideas and values of its Founders and people. The Great Seal of the United States guarantees the authenticity of official U.S. documents. It is used 2,000-3,000 times per year to seal documents. Such documents include treaties, presidential proclamations, appointments of government officials, and presidential communications to heads of foreign nations. The seal is also printed on the U.S. $1 bill, providing U.S. citizens with a ready reference to the nation’s foundational ideas. 

The custody of the Great Seal is assigned to the U.S. Department of State. The seal can be affixed by an officer of the Secretary of State. The Great Seal… was first used officially on September 16, 1782, to guarantee the authenticity of a document that granted full power to General George Washington “to negotiate and sign with the British an agreement for the exchange, subsistence, and better treatment of prisoners of war.” Thomas Jefferson was the first Secretary of State to have custody of the Great Seal. The Great Seal has two sides and displays a number of important symbols. The front (obverse) side of the seal displays the coat of arms of the United States. The coat of arms is officially used for coins, postage stamps, stationary, publications, flags, military uniforms, public monuments, public buildings, embassies and consulates, passports, and items owned by the U. S. government.’ 

While the above definitions repeatedly mention God (the Creator); it is not really the Eternal who is being venerated but actually His adversary – refer articles 33; and Asherah.

The long held belief amongst biblical identity adherents that Ephraim is England and its colonies, while Manasseh is the United States; is after some five hundred years, like cemented stone masonry which is long dried and set. For those who tightly hold onto this explanation, there is on the one hand little point in attempting to loosen this deeply imbedded paradigm of error. Those who support this premise feel real indignation from any argument which presents the opposing view.

Rightly so, as it is intrinsically flawed arguing that England is Manasseh, when such is clearly not the case and they can correctly see through this inaccuracy. Even so, the perceived threat of the truth regarding Ephraim is felt so strongly, that extensive lists are compiled to validate the United States is still Manasseh. 

Since Canada is the real Manasseh and not the United States let alone England or its offshoots, many of the points used as proof suddenly lose their relevance or veracity as applicable evidence. It still may be of value to look at a selection of points raised by high profile researchers, only as they relate to the United States and Ephraim, while ignoring the blind tangents of those relating to the United Kingdom, Great Britain or England – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator. 

‘Jacob placed Ephraim before Manasseh, and he was called the Firstborn’ – Genesis 48:14-19, Jeremiah 31:9.

It is argued that Ephraim’s (prophetic) destiny was to be fulfilled before Manasseh’s because the roles were reversed. If such is the case, then the United states (July 4, 1776) did become a nation… before Canada (July 1, 1867). The younger did become the firstborn. 

Tzvi Elimelech Shapira of Dinov (1784-1840):

“Why did Jacob not command that Manasseh be placed on his left side and Ephraim on his right? Why did Jacob have to cross his hands over? The truth is that Manasseh is the firstborn! This is why it says ‘guiding his hands wittingly’ (Genesis 48:14). He did not change Manasseh over to the left side for in truth Manasseh is the firstborn and the most important but he put Ephraim before Manasseh concerning the chronological precedence.’

‘Ephraim set before Manasseh means he would be first in both time and greatness’ – Genesis 48:20.

It is argued that Ephraim would be set before Manasseh in terms of position, chronology and in sense of occurrence and importance. If such is the case, then the United States is a greater nation than Canada and was formed before Canada became a nation.

Fishel Mael, Hashevetim, page 490:

“The order of placing of the sons was important both in regards to their positioning concerning Joseph and in that concerning Jacob. Concerning Joseph… Ephraim is the one who fulfills his place and most continues his path… Therefore Joseph set Ephraim on his right-hand side to show that Ephraim is the main principle of his might and the continuer of his path…

However concerning Jacob it is just the opposite. Manasseh is closer… to the path of Jacob… Jacob however guided his hands wittingly to indicate that the greatness of Manasseh would not be revealed so soon… Jacob agreed only that Manasseh remain at his right-hand side for he is destined to complete the quality… of Jacob…”

‘Manasseh would become a great people after Ephraim.’

It is argued that though Manasseh is the elder son of Joseph, he would additionally or subsequently to Ephraim, become a great people – the second to come into greatness. If such is the case, then Canada (who is still growing into its greatness) has definitively been second to America. 

‘Manasseh would be a republic with a representative government, not a monarchy.’

As the scriptures do not say this, it cannot be a valid point of argument. This commentator defines the name Manasseh as ‘responsible representation’ as in a republic, Ephraim as ‘aristocracy’ as in royalty and Machir as ‘capitalism’ and the ‘principle of salesmanship.’ These definitions in this writer’s view are stretching Hebrew definitions to fit incorrect suppositions that cannot be used as objective evidence.

Judah was to be defined by its monarchy. Both Manasseh and Ephraim were not. Though if Manasseh was to be a great people, or a ‘multitude gathered as a unit’, as in one people, one nation; and Ephraim a ‘company of nations’, as in multiple groups of peoples comprising diverse peoples… then Canada and the United States have uniquely fulfilled scripture. 

Bible exponent William Dankenbring, based on Greg Doudna’s research, became perhaps the most vocal supporter of the belief that Ephraim was the United States, prior to his death in 2017. It is a view only a minority of people have been able to comprehend within the identity movement. Ironically, there are a number of people in America who do not have any allegiance or ties to British-Israelism or a Church of God affiliation, who understand that the United States is Ephraim of the Bible. 

The United States as Ephraim, William F Dankenbring – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Although virtually no one has noticed it, God has left the identity of modern Israel in the most obvious place one could imagine – in the very name of our great nation!  Our nation is the only nation in the world directly named ‘company of nations’!

The house of Israel was a company or union of equal members, none of whom were sovereign. This fits the United States. It does not fit Great Britain or the British Commonwealth. The British Commonwealth has never been a company of equal states. Britain has always been one great nation. Whereas the British Commonwealth is a collection of scattered, independent, satellite nations around the world under the authority of the single great nation Britain.

The United States is an assembly of fifty united states who have given up their sovereignty in the interests of collective political union and are, for the most part, united geographically, as was the house of Israel anciently. The United States began with thirteen states. When we reached the West Coast we had ‘filled up’ our land with forty-eight states, perhaps paralleling the forty-eight cities for the Levites in ancient Israel. Then we added two more to reach a ‘fullness’ of fifty, or five times the number in the house of Israel of old (and the Jubilee number). The United States is the company, fullness, assembly, or convocation of states that Ephraim was to  become.’

‘In Hebrew, the word for “nations”… is goyim, and means “peoples, nations, states, a troop, a flight,” a word that has the sense of “massing.” Thus Jacob really said the descendants of Ephraim would become a TROOP of people, a MASS of people, MANY states, families, or groupings. Thus we have in fulfillment of this prophecy THE FIFTY STATES of the United States – we became 50 different states, UNITED, but ONE PEOPLE. Each state has its own constitution and government.

Obviously, the prophecies directed toward Ephraim in the Bible are directed to ONE UNITED COUNTRY, one sovereign nation, UNITED TOGETHER – as Ephraim was historically, and as the United States is, today! The very words of the U.S. Constitution reveal our national identity! The Constitution begins, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union…”

The U.S.A. – A Union of “Nation-States” Ephraim was to become a united company or assembly of peoples. Isn’t it interesting that the United States is famous around the world for being the “melting pot” of the nations? The United States has more emigrants from more diverse locations, than any other nation on earth!  This is both a strength, and a fatal weakness. The prophet Hosea foretold this condition would describe Ephraim in the last days! Hosea wrote, “Ephraim MIXES with the nations; Ephraim is a flat cake not turned over (white on one side, baked black or brown on the other side). Foreigners sap his strength, but he does not realize it. His hair is sprinkled with gray, but he does not notice” (Hosea 7:8-9). 

Ephraim’s very name means “double fruit.” It is the United States which exploded onto the world scene, becoming a world power in the days of Theodore Roosevelt at the turn of the century, and the twentieth century has been hailed as “America’s Century,” and world peace “Pax Americana.” Jacob prophesied that the younger brother, Ephraim, was to be greater than his older brother, Manasseh. Manasseh, the firstborn, was the older brother. Which nation is older – the United States or Great Britain? 

But what about the United States? Is it greater than Great Britain… Let’s face this question honestly and squarely, without pride, pretence, or hypocrisy. The United States is the wealthiest nation in the world in terms of resources, business and assets, and gross national produce – although we have also become the world’s biggest debtor nation by far due to our… living beyond our means… Either California or New York could be the world’s fifth or sixth richest nation in the world. The state of Illinois produces more than the entire continent of Africa! The eight industrial states from New York to Illinois produce as much as the Common Market, [Russia], or all of Latin America, Africa, most of Asia except Japan, and the Middle East combined!

The United States is greater than Britain by far. It is the United  States which is the greatest and most powerful nation the world has ever seen. It has been the United States which has soared to the status of the richest of nations… not Great Britain. The comparison in national wealth is meaningless – there is no comparison. The economy of the United States has been the engine that has driven the free world since the end of World War II. It has led to postwar recovery of the entire Western World. Further, there is no comparison in military power between the two nations [today]…

If the United States is NOT Ephraim, the most populous, “doubly fruitful” Israelitish nation – then who is? Fruitfulness, flourishing population, can also refer to the rate of growth. The growth rate of the United States has been nothing short of phenomenal… an exponential population growth of nearly 70 times over!  No country in history has, like the United States, literally come from out of nowhere, and literally EXPLODED in population growth and power, both [in its] military and economic [influence]! Truly, the United States – modern “Ephraim” – has experienced a dramatic population increase. Truly it has lived up to its name – and is “DOUBLY fruitful”!’

Two great powers, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and Reuben) and the United States of America (Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh). Both have the word united as part of their official names as the House of Israel and the House of Judah were once the United Kingdom of Israel. Don’t forget the forgotten nation, Canada (the half tribe of East Manasseh).

Early during the American Civil War, the Union’s plan was to economically strangle the Confederacy via naval blockades in all the major Southern Ports. The Confederacy sent Ambassadors to Britain in an attempt to drum up opposition support. They bypassed the Union blockade and reached Cuba. James Mason and John Slidell boarded the British mail ship, the Trent. The Union intercepted the ship and arrested the two diplomats. 

The Union had violated all principles of international law relating to neutrality, with the British government rightly pointing out that the United States Congress had declared war on Britain in 1812, when the British had seized American vessels en route to France. 

It looked as if Britain might enter the war against the North but was averted by Lincoln’s apology and the release of the Confederate commissioners. Britain openly favoured the South, letting them build warships in British shipyards. According to Kemp, the link was ‘cemented by the personal friendship of the British Jewish Prime Minister… Benjamin Disraeli, and the Confederate Jewish Secretary of State, Benjamin Judah. Disraeli’s views on race… made him personally sympathetic to the Confederate cause, and when Judah fled the South at the end of the war, he stayed as Disraeli’s personal guest at the latter’s private house in England.’

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Battle of the Bull Run [July 21, 1861] was an early defeat for the Union, which at first believed it would easily be able to crush the Confederates by launching an attack into northeastern Virginia. Repulsed by the Confederates, the Union army fled in disarray to Washington DC. The Confederates pursued the Union army, and seemed to threaten the Northern capital. The battle exhausted both sides, with the Union suffering 14,500 casualties and the South 9,100 in the seventeen-day-long engagement. 

On April 6, 1862, a confederate army, which had crept undetected on Grant’s forces, launched a surprise attack on the Union camp at Pittsburg Landing on the Tennessee River. The engagement, which became known as the Battle of Shiloh, saw the Confederates repulsed after two days of savage fighting. The losses inflicted in the battle gave both sides cause for concern. The Union forces suffered some 13,000 casualties and the Confederates around 10,700. Around 3,400 of these were killed outright, a record which was soon surpassed in later battles of the war.’

Abraham Lincoln at the end of the war, had instructed Grant to be generous with the defeated Confederates as he intended a policy of reconciliation to restore the Union. The President also intended repatriation of the Black slaves to Africa or the Caribbean. With his assassination, the Northern floodgates of hate spilled forth against the South. The United States Congress sought revenge through a series of laws known as the Reconstruction Acts with the design to punish the South for everything, including slavery, secession and the war. 

The Flag on the right is remarkably similar to the state flag of Georgia and was the first Confederate flag from 1861 50 1863 and known as the ‘Stars and Bars’.

Special Field Order No. 15 had instigated exclusive rights for the freed Blacks in parts of the coastal regions of South Carolina and Georgia; creating black homelands and enclaves within American borders. Remarkably, this order was revoked by the incoming President, Andrew Johnson. Not only had the Civil War ended slavery across the entire nation, it also made clear that the federal system of government had won out, in that the government had the right on certain matters to override the individual ‘state’s rights’, as supported by the confederate ideology. 

The war produced devastating loss of life with a total of 610,000 deaths of which 250,000 were from the South. This represented 4.5% of the total population of the South numbering 5.5 million people, as compared to 1.6% of the North with a population of 19.4 million people. The half tribe of West Manasseh after the Civil War, was not only defeated, it was destroyed and plundered. During the reconstruction, the best of the South left for the western territories. It is there that the vibrancy of the old South was relocated to Texas, California, the Northwest and the Cowboy states. 

Destiny decreed the breaking up of the ‘company of nations’; the multitude of people; the union of states; was not to occur in 1861, for Ephraim and West Manasseh had not come into the fullness of their birthright blessings which would peak exactly one hundred years later during the 1960s. 

The union of America’s fifty states is what gives it its strength. The opposite condition would erode, diminish and destroy America’s power. 

From Information Warfare to the Break-Up of the USA… Decoding the Work of Dr. Igor Panarin, New Dawn, 2017 – emphasis mine: 

‘In 2010 Dr. Panarin predicted the USA would balkanise, amidst social conflict, and split into separate states. Certainly the proposition of a ‘United States’ based on constitutionalism rests on weak foundations and has nothing of an organic character about it. There is no defining feature of an American ‘ethnos’, and no basis for a positive symbiotic relationship enduring between the sundry ethnicities. Panarin claims the United States is on course to balkanise due to the stressors of its huge debt, deficit and social protests. “The overlapping financial, economic and social challenges may eventually cause the world’s strongest superpower of the 20th century to collapse,” notes Panarin.

Far from being a fanciful scenario, the US military recently addressed the same problems emerging from rapid urbanisation in ‘megacities’. The US military regards ‘megacities’ (populations of 10,000,000 or more) as an approaching problem of instability. The US Army comments that megacities are a unique environment that they do not fully understand. One of their reports gives a picture of proliferating criminal networks and underground economies, natural disasters and the inability of decaying infrastructures to withstand stressors. A predicted feature is the breakdown of civic order through ethnic and religious conflict among diverse groups that are forced together to share diminishing resources and utilities.’

“As resources become constrained, illicit networks could potentially fill the gap left by over-extended and undercapitalized governments. The risk of natural disasters compounded by geography, climate change, unregulated growth and substandard infrastructure will magnify the challenges of humanitarian relief. As inequality between rich and poor increases, historically antagonistic religions and ethnicities will be brought into close proximity in cities. Stagnation will coexist with unprecedented development, as slums and shanty towns rapidly expand alongside modern high-rises. This is the urban future.”

‘The report comments on the increasingly heterogeneous populations inherent in a megacity as potentially “explosive.”

“One of the hallmarks of megacities is rapid hetero and homogeneous population growth that outstrips city governance capability. Many emerging megacities are ill-prepared to accommodate the kind of explosive growth they are experiencing. Radical income disparity, and racial, ethnic and sub cultural separation are major drivers of instability in megacities. As these divisions become more pronounced they create delicate tensions, which if allowed to fester, may build over time, mobilize segments of the population, and erupt as triggers of instability.” 

‘The US Army analysis accords with the 2010 analysis of Dr. Igor Panarin.’

A special report in the Guardian newspaper, entitled The last days of a white world, by Anthony Browne, September 3, 2000, ominously confirms – emphasis mine:

“It was news and no news; the most significant milestone in one of the most profound changes to affect the US in the past century, and yet a non-event. Last week the US Census Bureau issued figures showing that non-hispanic whites made up 49.8 per cent of the population of California. Now they are an ethnic minority in the country’s most populous state, the one most usually identified with the American dream.

As recently as 1970, eight out of 10 Californians were white. Fuelled by immigration at its highest rate since the start of the last century, and higher fertility rates, the Asian and Latino populations of California have risen by almost a third since 1990. At the same time, with limited immigration and low birth rates, the population of non-hispanic whites has fallen by 3 per cent. By 2040, hispanics are expected to be the overall majority in the state. Where California goes, the rest of America is predicted to follow. At present 72 per cent of the US population is non-hispanic whites; the US Census Bureau predicts they will become a minority between 2055 and 2060.

Not every one likes the new face of America. White far-right extremists predict the break-up of the union. Thomas W. Chittum, a New Jersey-based Vietnam War veteran, declared in his book Civil War Two, that the US, like Yugoslavia, will shatter into new, ethnically-based nations. ‘America was born in blood, America suckled on blood, America gorged on blood and grew into a giant, and America will drown in blood,’ Chittum warned.

The separatists have set up groups such as Americans for Self-Determination. One of the founders, Jeff Anderson, said: ‘We are suggesting the US be partitioned into states for blacks, whites, hispanics, and so on, along with multi-racial states for those who wish to continue with this experiment. Now is the time to begin such a multi-racial dialogue about separatism, before a storm of violent racial conflict erupts.’

Canada possesses one of the highest per-capita immigration rates in the world. Influenced principally by economic policy and family reunifications. In 2019, a total of 341,180 immigrants were admitted to Canada, mainly from Asia. 

India, the Philippines and China are the top three countries of origin for immigrants moving to Canada, with new immigrants settling mainly in the urban areas of large cities such as Toronto with 5,928,040 people, Montreal with 4,098,927 people and Vancouver with 2,463,431 people. Canada accepts large numbers of refugees, accounting for over ten percent of the annual global refugee resettlements. Canada resettled more than 28,000 people in 2018. 

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to the 2016 Canadian Census, the country’s largest self-reported ethnic origin is Canadian (accounting for 32 percent of the population), followed by English (18.3 percent), Scottish (13.9 percent), French (13.6 percent), Irish (13.4 percent), German (9.6 percent), Chinese (5.1 percent), Italian (4.6 percent), First Nations (4.4 percent), Indian (4.0 percent)… Ukrainian (3.9 percent), [Dutch (3.23%) and Polish (3.21%)]. There are 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands, encompassing a total of 1,525,565 people. 

The Indigenous population in Canada is growing at almost twice the national rate, and four percent of Canada’s population claimed an Indigenous identity in 2006. Another 22.3 percent of the population belonged to a non-Indigenous visible minority. In 2016, the largest visible minority groups were South Asian (5.6 percent), Chinese (5.1 percent) and Black (3.5 percent). 

Between 2011 and 2016, the visible minority population rose by 18.4 percent. In 1961, less than two percent of Canada’s population (about 300,000 people) were members of visible minority groups. Indigenous peoples are not considered a visible minority in Statistics Canada calculations.’ 

Those people identifying as British and Irish amount to 45.6%. Added with the 32% that identify as Canadian, which is primarily English (followed by French) as in the main, they are founding families from whom the majority were ‘English’ and have dwelt in Canada for two or three centuries they understandably and logically perceive themselves as Canadians, rather than English, Scottish or Irish. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘In Canada, Third World immigrants are called “visible minorities” and according to the 2006 census, their numbers increase at a rate five times the growth in the population as a whole [Genesis 9:27]. In the five years between 2001 and 2006, the Third World population increased 27.2 percent to nearly 5.1 million individuals, with the majority coming from China, the Philippines, and India. In 2009, Third World immigrants made up 42.9 percent of Toronto’s residents, and 41.7 percent of Vancouver’s population. As of 2007, nearly 20 percent of Canada’s population [were] born elsewhere, and official government projections are that by 2031, 33 percent of the country’s population will be of Third World immigrant origin. This figure is most likely an underestimate, as the higher reproduction rate… has not been factored in. In reality, Canada is set to lose its white majority population by 2040.’

The United States while comprising a diverse population demographic still harbours a core British and Irish element that influenced not only the genesis of the American nation but still strongly influences American society today… though, for how long? 

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In 2018, there were almost 90 million immigrants and U.S.-born children of immigrants in the United States, accounting for 28% of the overall U.S. population. The United States has a diverse population; 37 ancestry groups have more than one million members. White Amercans of European ancestry, mostly German, Irish, English, Italian, Polish and French including White Hispanic and Latino Americans from Latin America, form the largest racial group, at 73.1% of the population. African Americans constitute the nation’s largest racial minority and third-largest ancestry group, and are around 13% of the total U.S. population. Asian Americans are the country’s second-largest racial minority (the three largest Asian ethnic groups are Chinese, Filipino, and Indian).’

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the European-origin element of the American population stood at 64 percent at the beginning of 2010. This is a dramatic decline from 1960, where whites made up 88 percent of the US’s population… In 2009, non-Hispanic whites made up just under half of all children three years old… Just ten years earlier, more than 60 percent of children in that age group were white. According to the 2010 data, nonwhites babies under the age of two outnumbered white babies for the first time… Illegal immigration from Latin America is America’s single largest demographic issue, and if allowed to continue unabated, will see much of the US turned into a Third World country within a few decades.

… even though [white Americans] percentage of the total population is set to drop further, their real numbers will remain relatively constant for several decades. After the year 2050 there will be a sudden and dramatic decline, however as old age takes its natural toll (unless the white birthrate increases).’ 

The 2020 Census broke down the United States demographic as the following. White and European – not including Hispanics (refer Chapter XV The Philstines: Latino-Hispano America) – comprised 57.8% of the population of America. The two largest groups were those of German ancestry as well as English. The English percent of 7.1 is bolstered by those old families who now identify as ‘American’ and are predominantly of English heritage at 6.1%. Thus 13.2% is the exact same as the 13.2% who say they are German. 

From a Celtic-Saxon-Viking perspective, including all British and Irish stock who would represent the peoples of Joseph living in America, one could add the Irish with 9.7% and the Scottish at 1.7%. Thus the principal descendants of Joseph, would equate to 24.6%. The reality though, as we will investigate, is that the peoples of German descent may actually be descendants of Joseph too and possibly the peoples of Norwegian (1.3%) and Dutch (1.2%) descent. This would produce a grand total of 40.3% of the total population, or approximately 135 million people.

The peak immigration period for Germans was in the mid-nineteenth century, when thousands were driven from their homes by unemployment and unrest. Despite having no successful New World colonies, the first significant groups of German immigrants arrived in the United States in the 1670s and settled principally in New York and Pennsylvania. Germans were attracted to America for familiar reasons to other immigrants, such as open tracts of land and religious freedom. Their contributions to the nation included establishing the first kindergartens, Christmas trees (refer article: Asherah), hot dogs and hamburgers.

Is there any evidence when ‘Germans’ as an example, emigrated to the United States, that they were closer ethnically to Israelites in America than Ishmaelites in Germany? Actually, it would seem yes. 

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… many people of Israelite descent remained in Germany, especially in the west, until around the 1800s when there was a massive migration to the USA. The migrants from Germany to America were different physically, sociologically, and ideologically from those who stayed behind

They were more liberal and independently minded, often of non-conventional, more fundamental religious persuasion and of a different physical type. In Germany they had belonged to groups and social classes that never actually really belonged to the mainstream of historical German society.

Similarly, in Britain, the migrants to America either came mostly from the west and north or they belonged to socially distinct elements that had formed a separate grouping alongside the feudal stratifications that had previously existed. 

In the case of Germany we have descendants of Israelites separating themselves from their non-Israelite neighbors and moving out: Often one village would remain and all inhabitants of the community next door emigrate to America. What applies to Britain and Germany has been studied and documented but the same phenomenon appears to have taken place throughout Europe wherever people of Hebrew origin were to be found.’

Biblical identity Researcher Raymond McNair looked into this question and reported the following – emphasis & bold mine. 

‘Most true Germans are characterized by “Alpine” round skulls… Yet ethnologist Madison grant writes, “In the study of European populations the great and fundamental fact about the British Isles is the almost total absence there of true Alpine round skulls”. 

Ripley, in The Races of Europe says, “The most remarkable trait of the population of the British Isles is its head form; and especially the uniformity in every respect which is everywhere manifested. The prevailing type is that of the long and narrow cranium, accompanied by an oval rather than broad or round face”. Remember that this is the same type as the northern Celtic type. It is also the same as the Teutonic, Scandinavian type – the Scythian type!’

In a 1915 article – “Are We Cousins to the Germans?” – Sir Arthur Keith wrote that “the Britons and German represent contrasted and opposite types of humanity”. He explained, “The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye.

In the majority of the Briton – English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish – the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects prominently backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width”. Keith then pointed out that “in the vast majority of Germans,” the back of the head is flattened” – indicating “a profound racial difference”… “The explanation,” according to Keith, “is easy. With the exodus of the Franks to France and the Anglo-Saxons to Britain in the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth centuries of our era, Germany was almost denuded of her long-headed elements in her population”. 

an older study from R.F. Parsons… showed that the German heads were indeed more rounded than the British heads. The study also reported: In 1925 [a sample of] Germans [shows] the glabello-maximal length averages [are] 189 mm and the breadth 155. In 127 British soldiers they are 191 mm and 149 respectively, and in 103 medical students of British parentage, 194 and [152] (Parsons, R.F. Anthropological observations on German prisoners of war. The Journal of the Royal Anthropologic Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 49, January-July 1919, pages 20-35). 

Britannica [11th Edition, Volume 11] The total number of those who sailed for the United States from 1820 to 1900 may be estimated at more than 4,500,000. The greater number of the more recent immigrants was from the agricultural provinces of northern [western] Germany… It is clear then that the Anglo-Saxon peoples are not Germanic – at least in the modern sense of the term.’

This writer concurs with Davidiy and McNair. The Germans who departed Germany to live in America during the 1800s and particularly before, were different from those who stayed behind. German officials who witnessed the emigration remarked on the physical differences and the ethnic distinction. The distinction also included areas of origin in Germany, religious orientation and social outlook.

Aside from German ancestry, citizens who claim to be English-American are the next largest group. Predominantly found in the Northwest, the West and northeast of the United States, the number of people directly claiming to be English-American has dropped by over twenty million people, since the 1980 United States Census because more citizens who originated from the land of Pilgrims have started to identify themselves as simply: American

The majority of the founding fathers of the United States were of English ancestry as have been the majority of United States presidents. But by English – while an original origin from England is obvious – it is meant within the United States and what is not so obvious, in that these ‘English’ people are descendants from the tribes of Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. 

Online Encyclopaedia:

‘In 1982, an opinion poll showed respondents a card listing a number of ethnic groups and asked, “Thinking both of what they have contributed to this country and have gotten from this country, for each one tell me whether you think, on balance, they’ve been a good or a bad thing for this country.” The English were the top ethnic group, with 66% saying they were a good thing for the United States, followed by the Irish at 62%.’

The most English states according to the 2000 census in numbers of people were [southern States in bold]:

1. California 7.4%; 2. Florida 9.2%; 3. Texas 7%; 4. New York 6%; 5. Ohio 9.2%; 6. Pennsylvania 7.9%; 7. Michigan 9.9%; 8. Illinois 6.7%; 9. Virginia 11.1%; 10. North Carolina 9.5%.

The states with the highest percentages of people with English ancestry [New England states in bold] included: 1. Utah 29%; 2. Maine 21.5%; 3. Vermont 18.4%; 4. Idaho 18.1%; 5. New Hampshire 18.0%; 6. Wyoming 15.9%; 7. Oregon 13.2%; 8. Montana 12.7%; 9. Delaware 12.1%.

The English as discussed, were the first non-Native Americans to settle the eastern seaboard area that became the United States of America. The first permanent colonies were established at Jamestown, Virginia in 1607, Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay during 1620 to 1622 and also James Oglethorpe’s settlement in Savannah, Georgia, in 1732. 

‘English joint-stock companies, proprietors, and Crown officials sought to create a modified version of their native society in their American colonies. While many Englishmen came to America to exercise their own religion, and others sought liberation from the religious intolerance on both sides of the Atlantic – as did Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island – most English settlers were drawn by the economic opportunities and cheap land’ – S Hanft, English Americans

Between 1820 and 1930 over four million British immigrants chose the United States as their new home. They brought with them technological skills which helped turn the United States into a major industrial nation by the end of the nineteenth century. Cultural alignment and a common language allowed British immigrants to integrate more rapidly, giving rise to a unique Anglo-American culture. 

America and Britain in Prophecy, Raymond McNair, 1996: 

‘Sharon Turner (1768-1842) … says, “Europe has been populated by three great streams of population from the East… The earliest of these… comprised the Cimmerian and Celtic race. The second consisted of the Scythian, Gothic, and Germanic tribes; from whom most of the modern nations of continental Europe descended… third and most recent… Slavonian and Sarmatian nations… who established themselves in Poland, Bohemia, Russia, and their vicinities. 

It is from the first two generations of European population that the ancient inhabitants of England successively descended… The earliest of these that reached the northern and western confines of Europe, the Cimmerians and Celts, may be regarded as our first ancestors; and from the German or Gothic nations who formed, with the Scythians, the second great flood of population into Europe, our Anglo-Saxon and Norman ancestors proceeded”.’

Ezekiel 34:11-12

Amplified Bible

11 ‘For thus says the Lord God, “Behold, I Myself will search for My flock and seek them out. 12 As a shepherd cares for his sheep on the day that he is among his scattered flock, so I will care for My sheep; and I will rescue them from all the places to which they were scattered on a cloudy and gloomy day.’

Even though the tribes were so-called lost, they would be sifted through the nations and eventually allotted new homes. It was understood during the apostolic age that the tribes existed under different nomenclature. 

Colossians 3:11

English Standard Version

‘Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.’

The author of Colossians (refer article: The Pauline Paradox) confirms that the Israelites were known as barbarians and Sycthians as they migrated westwards through Europe. This verse is contrasting between Greeks, Jews and Israelite Scythians, whether ethnically or spiritually, because they had responded to a gospel preached ostensibly by Paul (or perhaps the apostles) – Article: The Pauline Paradox. They could be a slave physically, yet still free spiritually. These same Scythians were synonymous with the later peoples called Saxons. 

It was reported in 2010 “that when teams of geneticists led by Professor Bryan Sykes took DNA samples in the Celtic regions of Britain they discovered ancestries in the Caucasus, which lay within ancient Scythia, and Mediterranean Europe”. 

For the most common variant of the Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3 the Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database has DYS389i, ii values of 13 and 29, and DYS385a, b values of 11 and 14. This Haplotype differs by just one step upward on the most quickly mutating marker. This Haplotype is very interesting, from the perspective of the YHRD database, because most of the top frequencies are not in Europe but in the United States. Of the top twenty, twelve are among United States populations. Two are Hispanic samples, three are African-American and the rest are European American. 

These samples congregate in areas of the United States settled by English, Scottish, Irish, German and French immigrants. This accords with the Western European origin of the AMH. The Republic of Ireland and London in England appear among the top ten European frequencies, along with four separate locations in The Netherlands. Although descendants would have likely acquired this Haplotype through British ‘Celtic’ ancestry, the multiple hits in the Netherlands suggest a Saxon origin is more than likely. 

This confirms observations made by the late Raymond McNair and others that those immigrants who arrived in America, were somehow different from other Europeans such as the Germans who lived nearby, but who stayed behind in Europe. This physical evidence supports the proposition that Americans of Western European origin are different compared to the peoples they left behind in England, Ireland and Germany and that they are in fact a unique tribe of the sons of Jacob. In this case, the tribe of Joseph and his sons Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. 

Based upon the information above on Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3, immigration and other data, Raymond G Helmer concluded: ‘In short – haplotype R1b came to the United States from exactly the immigrants that we would expect to carry it’ – R G Helmer, The Blood of Mankind – Part III The Blood of America. 

Another group who joined the great story of the United States were the Irish, with the great potato famine of the late 1840s, early 1850s sparking mass migration from Ireland. Between 1820 and 1920, some 4.5 million Irish are believed to have moved to the United States and settled in large cities like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco. Currently, almost ten percent (9.7%) of the total population of the United States claim Irish ancestry, some 32.5 million people compared with a total population of nearly seven million for the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland today (figures include Scots-Irish). Irish ancestry citizens of note include John F Kennedy and Neil Armstrong.

Other White and European peoples on the 2020 census include Italian (5.1%), French (3.0%) and Polish (3.0%) ancestry. One of the most influential nationalities to migrate in large numbers to the United States were the Italians. Between 1880 and 1920, more than 4 million Italian immigrants arrived in the United States forming ‘Little Italys’ wherever they went. Italians brought their cuisine, culture and entertainment to the United States. A further large wave of Italian immigrants arrived in the country following World War II. 

Historically, along with the English, the French colonised North America first and most successfully in the North East along the border areas of Quebec and in the south around New Orleans and Louisiana. The largest of the Slavic speaking groups to live in the United States, were Polish Americans, who were some of the earliest Eastern European colonists to the New World. Up to 2.5 million Poles arrived in the United States between the mid-nineteenth century and World War I, flocking to the largest industrial cities of New York, Buffalo, Cleveland, Milwaukee and Chicago. 

According to the 2020 Census, the largest ‘non-white’ minority group is the Hispanic and Latino American peoples comprising 18.7% of the total population. Dominated by Mexican descent at 10.29%. Other Latinos include Puerto Rican 1.49%, Cuban 0.57% and the remainder at 6.35%. From 1990 to 2000, the number of people who claimed Mexican ancestry almost doubled in size. 

Those with Mexican ancestry are most common along the Southwestern border of the United States and they are the largest ancestry in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Phoenix. In many states, the Hispanic population doubled between the 2000 and 2010 census. In New Mexico, Hispanics outstripped whites for the first time, reaching forty-six per cent compared to forty per cent. 

While Hispanic communities cover a swath of states from California to Texas, American Indians are more dispersed, with pockets of populations in states including Arizona, New Mexico, Montana and the Dakotas, with a higher concentration of Alaska Natives in Alaska of the total 0.7% they comprise of the American population. The Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders account for 0.2% of the population. 

The second biggest minority group is African-American at 12.1%. Black or African-American is a term for citizens of the United States who have ancestry in sub-Saharan Africa. The majority of African Americans are descended from slaves from West and Central Africa and have become an integral part of the story of the United States, gaining the right to vote with the 15th amendment in 1870, but struggling with their civil rights for at least another century – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Predominantly living in the south of the nation where they were brought to work on the cotton plantations and as slaves in the late eighteenth to mid-nineteenth centuries; Black Americans also have sizeable communities in the Chicago area of Illinois and in Detroit, Michigan. 

The third biggest minority group is Asian American at 5.9%. It comprises Chinese 1.2%; Filipino 1.1%; Indian 1.0%; Vietnamese 0.5% and other Asians at 2.1%. Finally, Middle Eastern peoples according to the 2010 Census accounted for 3.2% of the total population, of which there were Arab 0.54%; Iranian 0.1501%; Armenian 0.1537%; and Jewish at 2.11%. 

The United States has its roots as a welcoming homeland for immigrants, though that hasn’t always been the case. As waves of new arrivals flooded United States shores in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a movement to restrict who was allowed into the country took hold as well. In 1882, Congress enacted the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first major federal law to put immigration limits in place and the only one in American history aimed at a specific nationality. It came into being in response to fears primarily on the West Coast, that an influx of Chinese immigrants was weakening economic conditions and lowering wages. This law was extended in 1902. 

Other laws followed. For instance the Immigration Act of 1917, which created an Asiatic Barred Zone to restrict immigration from East Asia and the Emergency Quota Act of 1921, which limited the number of immigrants from any country to three percent of those people from that country who had been living in the United States as of 1910. The 1924 Immigration Act capped the number of immigrants from a particular country at two percent of the population of that country already living in the United States in 1890. This favoured immigrants from northern and western European countries like Great Britain over immigrants from southern and eastern European countries such as Italy. 

It prevented any immigrant ineligible for citizenship from coming to America. Since laws already on the books prohibited people of any Asian origin from becoming citizens they were completely barred entry. The law was revised in 1952, though retained the quota system based on country of origin in the United States population and still only allowed low quotas for Asian nations. 

‘Speaking to the American Committee on Italian Migration in June 1963, President Kennedy cited the “nearly intolerable” plight of those who had family members in other countries who wanted to come to the U.S. and could be useful citizens, but were being blocked by “the inequity and maldistribution of the quota numbers.” Two years later, in signing into law a replacement system that established a uniform number of people allowed entry to the United States despite national origin, President Lyndon B Johnson said it would correct “a cruel and enduring wrong in the conduct of the American nation.”

As discussed in length in the preceding chapter (Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes) it is next to impossible to find studies on the European component of the English speaking nations outside of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Though an excellent study is the one presented by Richard Morrill. 

Morrill touches upon the lack of research to draw upon. It is recommended that Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, are read prior to the next section in this chapter. What is proposed is that the core American, whether they be descended from Manasseh or Ephraim will have variations in their paternal and maternal Haplogroups, showing they are similar yet distinct from other English speaking, Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples. 

The key Y-DNA Haplogroup for the male descendants of Jacob is R1b (U106, U198, M529, M222). We would expect to find mutations of the same sub-clades and similar ratios within the British and Irish descended American peoples. 

Race, Ancestry, and Genetic Composition of the U.S. Richard Morrill, Professor Emeritus of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Washington, 2015 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Race and ancestry, or countries/peoples of origin, are popular topics, with large amounts of data attempting to help us understand the ethnic nature of the country. In this paper I attempt a summary description of the intersections of race, ancestry, and genome, at the state level, but I hasten to emphasize that the “findings” are tentative, highly uncertain, and based on astoundingly unreliable data. I hope some readers may point the way to better data or safer interpretations.

Table 1 presents a summary of numbers of people by “race” by broad ancestral/ethnic or countries of origin together with the main Y-DNA (male) genetic haplogroups associated with the racial and ancestral groups. [Note: No figures have been altered in Tables 1, 2 or 3. Certain words in the cells have been edited for clarity and accuracy, though not to change any meaning].

The haplogroups are male individuals who share a particular mutation or common male ancestor up to 50,000 years ago. All this is uncertain and speculative, for these reasons. The race and ancestral identifications are self-reported, and subject to lying as well as ignorance. But we still can make beautiful detailed maps, down to the county level! The numbers of persons with good DNA analyses are too few to permit highly confident estimates at useful levels of geography. But let’s see what we have.’

Table 1Race, Ancestry, Haplogroups

GroupNumber (millions)Ancestry groupNumber (millions)Haplogroups
White215









White, non-Hispanic192England, Scotland, Ireland87R1bI


Germany50R1bI


Scandinavia10IR1b


France & Belgium12R1b


Italy16R1bJ


Eastern Europe16R1aI,J,N


Balkans, Near east2J, G






White Hispanic23Mexico16R1b


Central America, Caribbean7R1b






African40

E






Asian14Moderate white admixtureO






Native American34US, AK5QR1b


Latin America29







Pacific Islander0.4Hawaii white admixture
up to 50%






Mixed9


M

‘Well, some 215 million people are probably mainly white (69%), of which 192 million (61%) are self-identified non-Hispanic white. The difference of 23 million are people who identify as white and Hispanic. About 40 million identify as Black or African-American, although there is probably an admixture of 20 percent or more of “whiteness”. Up to 14 million identify as of Asian origin, but as many as 1 million may be white in genetics and appearance, e.g. people from Afghanistan, NW India or West Pakistan. Finally less than 1 million identify as Pacific Islanders.’

We have discussed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, the identity of the Indian and Pakistani peoples from Hamitic, or equatorial descent. They are not descended from European or western peoples via Shem. The Latino-Hispano peoples of the Americas are a mix of Aram, from Shem; Tiras from Japheth; Mizra from Ham; and Canaan – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Morrill: ‘This leaves a large number of 34 million who identify as all or partly Native American, including about 5 million Alaskan or US Native American, about half of whom are clearly Native American, but about half of whom appear to be and are probably genetically mostly white. Then 29 million are “Mexican” or Caribbean, etc., not a race, but a perceived or actual combination of Spanish (some Portuguese) and Native Americans, from the US southwest, central America, the Caribbean, and South America. Even though these people legitimately identify as a mix of Native and Spanish, most are genetically “white”.

Ancestry, country of origin, or ethnicity are even harder categories. The complexity is incredible. Not only have the “countries” changed again and again over the last few centuries, but persons’ stated identities, which can be multiple, are often bewildering, because of centuries of mixing, often with people who may not know their heritage. For example, some 20 million identify as “American” which is perfectly reasonable, if they are descended from early immigrants (1620 to 1820). People also do reasonably identify with more than one country/people, but these combinations are not tabulated, and it is difficult to claim accuracy from the data on ancestry. Finally, most of our ancestries are European countries, but we know from both history and genetic analysis that people have mingled and moved within “Europe” for thousands of years.’

This is where Haplogroups and their sub-clades are key as they point towards a European origin that is either more British (Irish), Germanic (Benelux), Scandinavian, French, Italian, Iberian, Baltic or Slavic.

Morrill: ‘Given these warnings, what do we almost know? The largest groupings of non-Hispanic whites [are] first the

English-Scottish-Irish at some 87 million, 28% of the population, followed by

Germans (including Dutch, Austrian, Swiss) at about 50 million, and

Scandinavians at 10 million.

Others from Western Europe include 16 million from Italy and probably 12 million from France.

Eastern Europe is the origin of about 16 million, including 9 million from Poland, 3.5 million from Russia, and 1.5 million from both Hungary and Czechoslovakia, and over 1 million from Greece. About 2 million are from the eastern Balkans and the Middle East.’

A high percentage of those people claiming German, Dutch and Scandinavian ancestry are likely the same peoples as the British and Irish. A proportion of the French, if they originated from northwestern France may also be included. 

Morrill: ‘As discussed above, self-identified Hispanic whites number some 23 million, people with an African origin perhaps 40 million, of an Asian origin, 13 million, then up to 34 million as from Native American or Native-American-Spanish admixture. Much has been learned about the genetic evolution of humans and of their complex migration… across the globe. Since the majority of Americans are of European ancestry, the genome story of Europe translates to the genetic structure of the United States. Table 2 summarizes the numbers of persons by haplogroup estimated for the US population. In Table 1 I added an estimate of the haplogroups associated with the racial-ancestral combinations. These are tentative and will be worked on further.’  

Table 2Major haplogroups
GroupPopulation% of populationAreas
R1b15650Western Europe
E4314Africa
I4413Central Europe
R1a166Eastern Europe
J145Southeast Europe & Near East
G124West Asia
O103Asia
Q93Native American
N20.7Baltic, Siberia
M0.50.2Pacific Island

‘The relevant haplogroups are:

  • E… still dominant in Africa, and the many descendant groups… equally old
  • F, which developed in south Asia (India-Pakistan)… All F subgroups seem to have differentiated in the same hearth area (India to the Caucasus)…
  • G occurs in modest numbers in Italy, Turkey and the Balkans
  • N in the Baltic countries and Siberia,
  • I divided into I1, still strongly Scandinavian and I2 in south Italy and the west Balkans
  • J in Greece and the Middle East (includes most Jews).
  • R1b… Europe, dominant from Italy through France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium on through England and Ireland (plus North Africa).
  • R1a is strongest in Eastern Europe (Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Russia)
  • O, Asian
  • Q, Native American

In the tables and maps I distinguish between the R1B peoples dominantly English, German or French-Italian, and an R1bh population, which is the self-reported American Hispanic population…’

Haplogroup G is an old paternal Haplogroup from the line of Shem. It is found predominantly in the men of the Caucasus region, such as in Georgia. Haplogroup N is an intermediate Haplogroup from the line of Japheth and found in European men – for example the Finns – through admixture. Meanwhile Haplogroup E is an ancient mutation inherited from Canaan and indicative of Berbers and sub-Saharan Africans. European men who carry E1b1b have had a paternal African ancestor.

While Morrill is correct regarding Haplogroup J, it is important to appreciate that J firstly splits into J1 and J2 and secondly is indicative of men descended from Ham. Haplogroup J1 found in Middle Eastern men (Arabs) and J2 in Southwest Asia (Pakistan). Those men in Iran, Turkey, Greece and who are Jewish, carry Haplogroup J as a result of intermixing.

Morrill: ‘How does this translate to US states (besides with difficulty)? The estimates are based on the self-reported ancestry of people by states and related to the haplogroups of those ancestries. Please see Table 3 and three maps of states the classification is based on the top 2 or 3 relevant haplogroups. [Hawaii] is unique as the only state with a dominant O, Asian, group, and the District of Columbia as the only area dominated by E (African origin).

Four states, KS, ME, NH, and WV are most strongly just R1b (West European – English, German and Italian-French). The largest number of states, 12, the historic south, plus MO, are primarily R1b and secondarily E. Six states are also strong in R1b and E, but also in R1a, eastern Europe, IN, MD, MI, OH, NY (also has Hispanic and Jewish), and PA. Somewhat similar are IL and NJ (notice that many of these are contiguous), with R1b, E, and R1bh.’

Estimated Haplogroups for US states





StateDominant groupShare2nd (share)3rd (share)4th (share)
R1b EnglishR1b GermanR1b French-Italian
ALR1b50E 25


3884
AKR1b56Q 13I 7R1a 6
28217
AZR1b53R1bh 25E 7R1a 6
28178
ARR1b70E 13


38284
CAR1b37R1bh 30O 14E 7R1a519117
COR1b68R1bh 16R1a 6I 6
332510
CTR1b76R1a 15


341329
DER1b69E 14


381813
DCE43R1b 31


1786
FLR1b52R1bh 20E 15R1a8J 5301210
GAR1b50E 30


3794
HIO 40
R1b  22M 16

1318
IDR1b70I 8


41227
ILR1b56E 15R1bh 12R1a 6
27229
INR1b69E 7R1a 6

37275
IAR1b81I>10


33435
KSR1b70



35323
KYR1b71E 7


50174
LAR1b55E 25


24922
MER1b97



561031
MDR1b53E 24R1a 8

29168
MAR1b80R1a 8


42830
MIR1b69E 14R1a 11J 5
302712
MNR1b68I 16 +R1a 8

23387
MSR1b44E 28


3275
MOR1b74E 12


38297
MTR1b78I 11Q 7

40308
NER1b79R1a 11I 9

32416
NVR1b51R1bh 20


271410
NHR1b96



501037
NJR1b58E 17R1bh 13R1a >12J 8261319
NMR1b55R1bh 35Q >10

33175
NYR1b56E 15R1a 10R1bh 9J 7261317
NCR1b55E 20


36127
NDR1b72I>10R1a 9

19467
OHR1b66E 12R1a >10

28299
OKR1b55Q 10E 7

34174
ORR1b67I 9


36238
PAR1b77R1a 11E 10

342914
RIR1b89R1a 7


38645
SCR1b53E 28


37115
SDR1b70I 20?Q 9R1a6
25405
TNR1b59E 17


43124
TXR1b49R1bh 30E 13

221215
UTR1b65I 13R1bh 12

44156
VTR1b93R1a 5


501231
VAR1b56E 20


37136
WAR1b63I >10O 7R1bh 6
33228
WVR1b73



45217
WVR1b77I >10R1a >10

24458
WYR1b80Q 5I >5

43298

Morrill has separated R1b into four groups: Hispanic, English (western), German (central) and French (southern). Constant readers will be conversant with these groups. For new readers to the subject, the phylogenetic tree below delineates the prominent R1b mutations.

Thus the Hispanic R1b derives from the R1b exhibited by male ancestors from Spain and Portugal: the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250). Whereas the R1b carried by French, Swiss and Italian men is the Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28).

The R1b indicative of North West Europeans and carried by German men is the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21). What Morrill terms an English R1b, is in fact also U106. Though if one were to be more specific, many English men possess a mutation derived from U106, the West Germanic U198.

Perhaps an addition to the four groups proposed by Morrill would be the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21), found in Irish, Scottish and Welsh men.

‘The [first] map includes a set with the R1b and I1 combination (high in Scandinavian also), ID, IA, and OR, a related pair with a significant R1bh presence, UT and WA, which also has a sizeable O population. Also related are MT and SD, with R1b, I but also Q (Native American). States with R1b, I and also R1a (Eastern Europe) include MN, NE, ND and WI. Three states have R1b, then Q or Q and I:  OK<WY and AK (the highest Q share at 13%).’

‘The [second] map shows first four states with R1b and R1a, all in New England: CT, MA, RI and VT. CO and NV have the combination of R1b and R1bh.’ 

‘CA [California] is quite complex, with only a modest R1b share [Western European], a very large r1bh share [Hispanic], and also a sizeable O [East Asian and Polynesian] and then E [African-American] share. AZ and NM also have R1b, R1bh, but also Q (Native American).  FL is also complex, with R1b, R1bh, but also E, R1a and J.’

California shows a higher Hispanic element in its population as well as Black and Asian compared to European stock. If we contrast New Hampshire and New Mexico with each other; New Mexico has 55% R1b and 35% R1bh as indicative of its Latino element being 35% of the State’s population and 10% Q of its Native American component, either separate or part of the Hispanic proportion. The R1b split shows that its white population have 5% southern European influence; 17% Central European; and 33% Western European. 

New Hamphire on the other hand reveals its beginnings with purely European stock of 96% with little or no Black and Hispanic influence. Its R1b split shows that 10% of its population have central European ancestry; 37% have southern European heritage; and 50% have western European or British and Irish descent. 

The state of Maine has the highest western European R1b percentage at 56%. Rhode island has the highest southern European R1b percentage at 45%; and North Dakota has the highest central European R1b influence at 46%. Connecticut appears to have the highest level of eastern European R1a at 15%; New Mexico the highest Latino R1bh at 35%; and Washington DC the highest level of African-American E1b1b at 43%. 

Morrill: ‘I also present a few maps of ancestry combinations. The shares of English (plus Scot and Irish), German (plus Austria, Netherlands and Switzerland) and French-Italian (plus Belgium) – all part of the R1b group, are also shown in Table 3. English and German (19 states) and German and English (7) are the most common ancestries of Americans (Map 4). English and German by themselves dominate most in KS and WV. Scandinavian is added to English-German for ID, OR and WA (which also adds Asian), and to German-English, for IA, MN, ND, SD, then together with East European for NE and WI. These 11 states are the most “northern European”. Native Americans are added most for MT, OK, WY and especially AK (now 15 states) and then a Hispanic component to CO and UT.’

‘The English-German and German-English sets include 8 more states with a sizeable Black population, AR, DE, IL, IN, KY, MI and MO, and OH, then PA with a sizeable French-Italian and East European population as well. The full set is also a contiguous bloc across much of the north, and crossing into the south central. Not surprising (Map 5) is the English Hispanic (AZ, NV) and Hispanic-English, (NM, plus CA and TX, with additional Asian and German, and Black and French-Italian, respectively), covering the southwest, plus FL, adding a Black population). An English-Black combination covers the rest of the southern portion of the country – LA (Black English, French), then AL. GA, MS, NC, SC, TN and even MD.’

‘This leaves, (Map 6) besides HI and DC, a northeastern set of 8 states with a distinctive combination of English and French-Italian, CT, ME, NH, RI, VT, plus MA, adding E European) and complex NY, adding Black and East European. The entire mosaic reveals the fascinating stories of immigration and subsequent migration, still ongoing and becoming ever more complex.’

Regarding Haplogroups, constant readers will recognise the tables below as we conclude this chapter. Newer readers are encouraged to read Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, in helping perhaps to gain more from the following material.

Since we lack major MtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroup studies for British Canadian and American citizens; the main mtDNA Haplogroups are reproduced below for the British, Irish and closely related peoples of western Europe.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2       U4       U5       T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Ireland            44            6            11        12           5          1          8          1

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England          45             3           12          8          6          2          9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6          2         6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

Wales               60           4            15          8           1                     4          2

One would expect Canadians and Americans of Celtic-Saxon-Viking stock to be somewhere within this grouping of family nations descended principally from Abraham; which includes Keturah, Ishmael, Esau and Jacob. The question, is where? Possibly between Ireland and Scotland for Americans and for Canadians, between Scotland and England.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase.

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

It is here that we would obtain an indication of how German the migrants from Germany are in the United States, for if they are German as in descending from Ishmael, the dominant R1b the males would likely carry is U106. If though they are from the tribe of Joseph, then one would expect these German men to carry more recent mutations from R1b-U106. Until more research is conducted, or studies made available, this will be a tantalising question remaining to be answered. 

We have kept a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations studied. 

Turkey            M269   14%  –  U106   0.4%

Slovenia          M269   17%  –  U106      4%

Russia             M269   21%  –  U106   5.4%

Poland             M269   23%  –  U106     8% 

Ukraine           M269   25%  –  U106     9%

Austria             M269   27%  –  U106   23%

Czech               M269   28%  –  U106   14% 

Denmark         M269    34%  –  U106   17%

Germany          M269   43%  –  U106   19%

USA                  M269   46%  –  U106    15%

France              M269   52%  –  U106     7%

Italy                  M269    53%  –  U106    6%

Netherlands    M269   54%  –  U106   35%

England           M269   57%  –  U106   20%

Swiss                 M269   58%  –  U106   13%

Ireland             M269   80%  – U106      6%

With the addition of the United States we can see that its Central European component of R-U106 matches the most closely, the Czechs, Swiss, Danes, Germans and English. Its broadly western R1b Haplotype R-M269 percentage, most closely matches ironically, Germany, then France, Italy, the Netherlands and England. Overall, the United States matches Germany the most closely. This is an interesting finding and a little surprising perhaps that it does not match England more closely?

The question, is whether this is because the white, western European, British and Irish driven R1b percentages for Americans are truly more aligned with Germany, or whether they very probably, show admixture, that only a comprehensive study of British and Irish descended Americans could answer the question… if there are with England for instance, comparable R-U106 mutations.

The blurring of the two near related streams of male DNA exhibited by the English and Germans is reflected in the following similarities.

The English R1b variants include sub-clades of the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21) at 19% to 20% of the male population; the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) at 12%; The Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28) at 6%; the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250) at 6%; DF19 (S232) at 1% – a sister clade to ZZ11, from which DF27 and U152 derive – and other sub-clades account for 13% of the total R1b in English men. 

Germany’s breakdown of R1B includes similar sub-clades as England, with U106 at 18%; L21 at 5%; U152 at 9%; DF27 and DF19 combined on 9%; and other sub-clades account for 3%. The Germans and English have almost the exact level of Germanic R1b. The logical difference is that England has more Celtic ancestry and Germany has more influence from Alpine ancestry. 

Interestingly in comparison, 15% of American men carry R1b-U106.

Y-chromosome haplogroups in US populations, Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘For the US population as a whole: The most common haplogroup is R-M269 (37.8%), which is found in all of the ethnic groups. This haplogroup predominates in Western European populations.

E-P1 [E1b], the second most frequent haplogroup in the U.S. (17.7%), is the most common haplogroup in West African populations [V38 – E1b1a]. It is found at high frequencies in our AA samples, and at lower frequencies in HA samples from the Eastern U.S.

Three haplogroups that originate in Northern and Western European populations include I-P30 [I1, M253] (6.1%), the third most common haplogroup in our U.S. sample, I-P19 [I, M170] (2.8%) and I-P37* [I2a1, M438] (1.6%).

Haplogroups that likely originate in Eastern and Southern* European populations are also present in our U.S. database, including R-M17 [R1a1a] (3.4%), E-M78 [E1b1b1a, L539] (2.4%), G-P15 [G2a] (2.4%), and J-M172 [J2] (1.5%).

The fourth and fifth most frequent haplogroups in our database, Q-P36 (5.9%) and Q-M3 (5.8%), along with C-P39 (1.5%), are founding Native-American Y chromosomes. These haplogroups are frequent in our NA and HA samples, and are found at low frequency in our AA, EA, and SA samples. Asian-derived chromosomes, primarily in haplogroups O and N, are extremely rare in all but our SA sample.’

This article presents an overall picture of Y-DNA Haplogroups which is helpful in part, yet still lacking the specific R1b sub-Haplogroups we require for the original Israelite core of the American male demographic.

Remember, it is Haplogroups G, I1 (I2), R1a and R1b which are exclusively associated with Shem’s descendants and it is R1b-U106 which is indicative of a heritage from Abraham; whether by his six sons with Keturah; his son Ishmael; and importantly, his son Isaac.

Combining this information with the more recent percentage for R-M269 and adding to the table below gives an idea of where the United States sits in relation to its brother and cousin nations, if not a precisely comprehensive view.

                           R1b      J      E1b1b       G         R1a        I

Ireland               81       2           2           1            3        12

N Ireland           77       2                                      2        20     

Wales                 74    0.5           4           3           1         16

Scotland            73        2           2       0.5           9         14

England             67        4           2           2          5         21

Flanders             61        5           5           4          4        20

France                59        8           8          6           3        16

Netherlands      49        4           4          5           4        25

United States    46        2       [21]          2           3         11 

Germany            45        5           6          5         16        22

Italy                    39       19         14          9           4        10

Sephardim        30       28        19          8           4        12

The five countries of Britain and Ireland immediately standout as belonging together; as well as separately from their near family members in the western portions of the European continent. The English show the greatest levels of admixture. This is not surprising as one, they are the largest nation and two have been geographically placed to be impacted the most by the invading migratory waves of Israelites. A reflected scenario of these factors in England is indicative of the United States, which has also experienced a great inpouring of waves of emigrants over a period of three hundred years. 

While the demise of the United States of America is both foretold and irreversible, it has at least another century or more before the gradual fading into the shadows becomes noticeable enough to be alarming for its citizens.

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 90:

‘For thirty years it has been fashionable to predict the imminent or ongoing decline of the USA. This is as wrong now as it was in the past. The planet’s most successful country is about to become self-sufficient in energy, it remains the pre-eminent economic power and it spends more on research and development for its military than the overall military budget of all the other NATO countries combined. Its population is not ageing as in Europe and Japan… and… in… [2013] Shanghai University listed what its experts judged the top twenty universities of the world: seventeen were in the USA. The Prussian statesman Otto von Bismarck… said more than a century ago that “God takes special care of drunks, children and the United States of America.”

It appears still to be true.’

As Mark Twain quipped in ironic parallel with the America set before us today:

“Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”

God Bless America…

The final chapter in The Noachian Legacy concentrates on the most written about son of Jacob, the tribe of Dan. Yet in all the articles and books dedicated to him, not one actually reveals Dan’s modern identity.

… and [they] who have lived wisely and well will shine brilliantly, like the cloudless, star-strewn night skies. And those who put others on the right path to life will glow like stars forever. This is… for your eyes and ears only… [a] secret. Put the book under lock and key until the [time of the] end. In the interim there is going to be a lot of frantic running around, [by people] trying to figure out what’s going on.

Daniel 12:3-4 The Message

“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.”

Mahatma Gandhi

“With great power there must also come – great responsibility.”

Spider Man, Amazing Fantasy No. 15 – 1962

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

Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes

Chapter XXXII

We have learned the identities of half the sons of Jacob. So far, all have been located in the British Isles. The other half have migrated to the New World and beyond. It is recommended that Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes are read prior to this chapter.

We have addressed the over extension by biblical identity researchers, when defining the sons of Jacob and concluding that Joseph represents all the English speaking peoples; while then attributing the other tribes to nations in northwest Europe. Yet these nations are invariably the descendants of Abraham and Keturah, Lot or even Ishmael.

Certain tribes were prophesied to not just live in the North and west from Canaan as the British and Irish do today – Isaiah 49:12, Jeremiah 31:10. Two were predicted to live in ‘the midst’ of the earth, one was to live in ‘the Southwest’ and another was described as a ‘great southern land.’ 

Historically, biblical identity adherents have been consistent in identifying Zebulun, Issachar’s younger brother and twin of Dinah as the Dutch of the Netherlands. The description of ports, ships and trade has led to this conclusion. We have addressed the Netherlands previously (refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia), for the Dutch descend from Abraham’s son Midian.

Issachar has been linked to Switzerland due its landlocked position and watch making expertise, though the predominant identification favoured for Issachar has been with Finland. As we learned in Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans, Finland is not descended from Abraham or his two brothers, let alone Jacob; but rather possibly from Joktan, the brother of Peleg or more likely judging by Haplogroup and autosomal DNA, from Arphaxad’s other sons Anar or Ashcol. 

The Swiss descend from Haran, Abraham’s brother – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. A key point we will find in identifying Issachar is that they are geographically adjacent with Zebulun and therefore to be found together. A further pairing to add to those we have highlighted already with Judah and Benjamin; Simeon and Levi; Reuben and Gad. Thus, wherever one is located the other will be next to them. The Netherlands and Finland – and likewise the Netherlands and Switzerland – being separated, are very far apart and could not fulfil this requirement, geographically, genetically or linguistically. Leading biblical identity teacher Yair Davidy comments on the prevailing, yet inaccurate view: 

‘Finland was settled by peoples from the Israelite tribes of Gad [Ireland], Simeon [Wales], and especially Issachar. The earliest written histories of Finland repeat the tradition that they were descended from the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Descendants of several Israelite tribes are to be found in Switzerland [Haran]. Issachar judging from tribal names and national characteristics prevails.’ 

Historically, Asher has been attributed principally with Belgium because of the blessing of fine cuisine or misleadingly pastries and more recently as Scotland and Ireland. Naphtali has been attributed to Sweden because of a love of freedom, as well as with Norway. Yair Davidy adds: ‘Norway was colonized by Naphtalite Huns and other groups of Naphtali.’ We will discover that Yair Davidy is correct initially and that these Naphtalites continued their migration into Britain and Ireland and then travelled further afield. 

Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Issachar is compared to a “large-boned ass,” Jacob continues: “For he saw a resting-place that it was good, and the land that it was pleasant; and he BOWED HIS SHOULDER TO BEAR, and became a SERVANT UNDER “ASSWORK.” (Genesis 49:14-15.) An ass is not the most intelligent of animals, but it is a willing worker. Such is Finland. Finland is the ONLY nation that has voluntarily taken the full responsibility of her debts. She is today paying off a huge indemnity to Russia. Her land is pleasant and good, not extraordinarily rich. 

According to Deuteronomy 33:19 she derives wealth from fishing and from hidden treasures of the sand… gigantic peat bogs… the finest sand for glass-making. Issachar is not a colonizing people they dwell pastorally “in tents,” said Moses.’

Not the most gracious of comments, though the intent is correct. But, we are searching for a British and Irish descended, or Celtic-Saxon-Viking people who have shouldered a burden of some kind. They will also be dwelling with Zebulun.

Hoeh: ‘Zebulun settled in Holland (The Netherlands). Zebulun dwell at the “shore of the sea, and he shall be a shore for ships, and his flank shall be upon Zidon” a Gentile country. Moses said: “rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out.” She takes also treasures from the sea and the sand, Zebulun, then, is a colonizing people. She is not a pillaging people as Benjamin.’ 

Hoeh is accurate on the colonising aspect of Zebulun as well as drawing attention to their dwelling by Zidon. In the Bible, the territory which included Canaanites and Midianites was called Sidon – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil – and is fulfilled in modern day South Africa.

Recall, we spent considerable time looking at the connection between the Kenites, the Hivites, the Midianite Dutch and their ancient Phoenician association with the city of Sidon. As a consequence, we have now located Zebulun and Issachar.

By a strange twist of irony, the very identity ascribed to Zebulun by identity researchers is Holland and it is predominantly Dutch descendants who are entwined with the tribes of Zebulun and Issachar today. Thus Zebulun comprises the British element – and Issachar – within South Africa. Issachar has also dwelt in Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia.

Herman Hoeh: ‘Asher “his bread shall be fat and he shall yield royal dainties” (Genesis 49:20). This peculiar expression could have reference alone to Belgium and the kindred state Luxembourg. From Belgium have come the finest Flemish paintings, the royal tapestries which graced the halls of kings, fine cut diamonds, porcelain and Belgian lace. Belgium and Luxembourg are blessed above many [other sons] of Jacob “Blessed be Asher above sons; let him be the favoured of his brethren, and let him dip his foot in oil” prosperity. Iron and brass shall [be] thy bars; and as thy days, so shall they riches increase. Because of uranium, Belgium’s prosperity will continue to grow.’

Hoeh is correct to highlight Asher’s blessing being disproportionate to his brothers; though still tertiary to those of Joseph and Judah the birthright and sceptre recipients. The blessings are far more extensive, than the nation of Belgium possesses. The people of Belgium being descended from Abraham’s grandsons Sheba and Dedan – refer Chapter XVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

Hoeh: ‘Nepthali represents Sweden “satisfied with favor, full with the blessings of the Lord.” She is compared to a prancing hind or deer and “giveth goodly words” (Genesis 49:21). From Sweden, with a well-balanced economy, come the Nobel prizes in token to great world accomplishments. Sweden, during two world wars and the recent trouble in Palestine, sent her emissaries to speak words of conciliation and peace. 

The promise by Moses to possess “the sea and the south” is applicable both to ancient Nepthali and modern Sweden: notice the position of the Sea of Galilee and Baltic relative to the position of this tribe. (It may be of interest to note that the word translated as ‘west’ regarding Napthali is also defined as roaring sea, which is how Herman Hoeh explained it. Sweden is basically on the west border of the Baltic Sea).’

Both Hoeh and Nickels who comments in the parentheses, have missed the reference to the South and West is from Canaan’s perspective. Therefore, the Baltic is a far cry from fulfilling this clue. As will become clear, Naphtali is the nation of New Zealand and Asher is Australia

Genesis 49:13-15

English Standard Version

13 “Zebulun shall dwell [H7931 – shakan: lodge] at the shore of the sea; he shall become a haven for ships, and his border [H3411 – yrekah: flank, quarters, recesses] shall be at [unto] Sidon.”

Regarding Jacob’s oracle, the New English Translation says that the verb ‘shakhan means “to settle,” but not necessarily as a permanent dwelling place. The tribal settlements by the sea would have been temporary and not the tribe’s territory.’ 

This is significant as since 1994 and the handing over of white control of South Africa’s political process to all South African’s, the British descended peoples from Zebulun in particular, have begun to migrate en mass to North America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and other countries.* We will shortly learn that this was predicted. 

Stats SA, July 2012:

‘… provided a breakdown of demographics, including the estimated shifts among different racial population groups. Black South African estimates increased… the country’s coloured population grew… [and] The Asian/Indian population group… South Africa’s white population, however, declined by 17,311 people between 2020 and 2021… Notably, while South Africa’s white population still maintains its proportionate make-up of the overall population, at 7.8%, this has steadily declined over the years, from 7.9% in 2019, 8.1% in 2016, and 9.0% in 2011. Stats SA pointed to emigration as a key factor in this declining trend.’

South Africa has a population of 60,799,352 people, thus the White population equates to 4,742,349 people. Of which an approximate sixty/forty split divides the Afrikaan speakers from the English as a first language. The British descended people account for approximately 1,896,939 people, less those who have left South Africa and Zimbabwe. In the past, the total White population was nearer eight million people and closer to fifteen to twenty percent of the population.

British Red Ensign used in South Africa until 1928

The Cape of Good Hope was a welcome stop in any journey sailing past Africa, east or west. The cape originally was called the Cape of Storms by the Portuguese explorer Bartolomeu Dias in the 1480s.

Cape Town

Encyclopaedia: ‘Cape Town is the legislative capital of South Africa. It is the country’s oldest city [founded in 1652] and the seat of the Parliament of South Africa. Cape Town is the country’s second-largest city by population, after Johannesburg… The city is known for its harbour… and for landmarks such as Table Mountain and Cape Point. 

Cape Town has been named the best city in the world, and world’s best city for [travellers], numerous times, including by The New York Times in 2014, Time Out in 2025, and The Telegraph for the past 8 years.

Genesis: 14 “Issachar is a strong donkey, crouching between the sheepfolds [saddle bags or two burdens]. 

15 He saw [H7200 – ra’ah: perceive, vision] that a resting place was good, and that the land was pleasant, so he bowed his shoulder to bear, and became a [tributary] servant at forced [slave] labor.”

The New English Translation comments – emphasis mine: 

‘The verb forms in this verse {“sees,” “will bend,” and “(will) become”} are preterite; they is used in a rhetorical manner, describing the future as if it had already transpired. The oracle shows that the tribe of Issachar will be willing to trade liberty for the material things of life. Issachar would work (become a slave laborer) for the Canaanites, a reversal of the oracle on Canaan’ – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

The descendants of Issachar have in the main, chosen to stay in the Republic of South Africa; with many having fled from Zimbabwe. The two burdens are the original Black (Canaanite) population and the (Hivite) Afrikaners, descended from Midian and the Kenites – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

The connotation is that as Zebulun chose to live by the Sea, such as Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, East London and in Durban; Issachar has chosen to dwell inland and is thereby landlocked, like most of the Dutch Afrikaners in Bloemfontein, Pretoria, Johannesburg and by extension Zimbabwe. 

Johannesburg

Encyclopaedia: ‘Johannesburg [founded in 1886] is the most populous city in South Africa. With 5,538,596 people in the City of Johannesburg alone and over 14.8 million in the urban agglomeration, it is classified as a megacity and is one of the 100 largest urban areas in the world.

Johannesburg is the provincial capital of Gauteng, the wealthiest province in South Africa, and seat of the country’s highest court, the Constitutional Court. The city is located within the mineral-rich Witwatersrand hills, the epicentre of the international mineral and gold trade. The richest city in Africa by GDP and private wealth, Johannesburg functions as the economic capital of South Africa and is home to the continent’s largest stock exchange…’ 

Ezra 3:7

English Standard Version

‘So they gave money to the masons and the carpenters, and food, drink, and oil to the Sidonians [South Africa today] and the Tyrians [Brazil today] to bring cedar trees from Lebanon to the sea, to Joppa, according to the grant that they had from Cyrus king of Persia [Elam].’

South African flag from 1928 to 1994.

The flags in the centre are the Union Jack; The Orange Free State; and the South African Republic flag. The main flag is based on the flag of the Netherlands, before the orange (of William of Orange) was changed to red.

Deuteronomy 33:18-19

English Standard Version

18 And of Zebulun he said, “Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out* [H3318 – yatsa’: depart, pull out, spread], and Issachar, in your tents [at home]. 

19 They shall call peoples to their mountain [H2022 – har: hill country]; there they offer right [H6664 – tsedeq] sacrifices; for they draw [H3243 – yanaq: to suck] from the abundance [H8228 – shepha: resources] of the seas and the hidden [H2934 – taman: conceal, bury, secretly] treasures [H8226 – saphan: valuable, covered] of the sand.”

Notice Issachar and Zebulun are included together in both verses and are not receiving separate prophetic blessings; just different futures within the same prophecy by Moses. Much of South Africa is at high altitude. Johannesburg is some 5,600 feet above sea level on a plateau, where the air is thinner than the coast and it apparently takes an egg one minute longer to boil. The Hebrew word for right, tsedeq means ‘righteousness’ but also ‘just, justice’ and a ‘righteous cause.’ 

Particularly linked with ‘government’ and a ‘vindication’ against ‘controversy’ and ‘victory’ or ‘deliverance’ to bring about an ‘ethically right’ result. This remarkably parallels the monumental political changes in South Africa since 1994. The reference could also be pointing to a Messianic fulfilment.

Current Flag of South Africa 

Matthew 4:13-16 – Isaiah 9:1-2, 4

English Standard Version

13 ‘And leaving Nazareth [Christ] went and lived in Capernaum by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, 14 so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

‘But there will be no gloom for her who was in anguish. In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the latter time he has made glorious the way of the sea, the land beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.

15 “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, 16 the people dwelling in [deep] darkness have seen a great light, and for those dwelling [and walking] in the region and shadow of death, on them a light has dawned [shone].”

‘For the yoke of his burden, and the staff for his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, you have broken as on the day of Midian.’

The Messiah is speaking of Himself as a light in revealing the gospel of the Kingdom of God and He is also speaking of His return. Thus, we learn that at the time of the Son of Man’s second coming, either the earth has spun on its axis and the magnetic north and south poles have reversed; or the Lamb approaches Earth from the South. For this is where Zebulun (33.9249 S) and Naphtali (36 50’54.4596 S) reside today at a similar latitude in the southern hemisphere of the globe.

It is another coincidence that Midian is mentioned in verse four of chapter nine of Isaiah. Not only does Zebulun dwell with a branch of the Midianites in South Africa; New Zealand was discovered by the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman and named after the Dutch province of Zeeland derived from Sea-land, in 1642.

Southern Rhodesia flag 1924 to 1964

The prediction of mineral wealth from the soil is incredible in its fulfilment and not something that could be attributed to the Netherlands or Finland. Of the world’s top mineral producing countries, South Africa is an incredible number one and the mining powerhouse of the world. South Africa’s geographic location is in a continent that is considered the richest in biodiversity and natural resources and it abounds with mineral reserves which are estimated to be worth over $2.5 trillion dollars, according to World Mining Statistics

Flag of Rhodesia 1968 to 1979

This dominant African nation is the largest producer and exporter of important and high in demand minerals and gems in the world, such as platinum (accounting for nearly 50% of world production), diamonds of gem quality – as opposed to industrial quality of which only Australia, Russia, Zaire and Botswana produce more – chrome, manganese, vanadium and vermiculite. South Africa is the second largest producer of ilmenite, palladium, rutile and zirconium. South Africa is the world’s third largest coal exporter; fifth in the world for gold; and a huge producer of iron ore. In 2012, it overtook India to become the world’s third-biggest iron ore supplier to China – the world’s largest consumer of iron ore.

South Africa has the 40th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $410.3 billion in 2025.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in South African global shipments during 2021.

  1. Gems, precious metals: US$35 billion 
  2. Ores, slag, ash: $18.6 billion 
  3. Vehicles: $10.7 billion 
  4. Mineral fuels including oil: $10.3 billion 
  5. Machinery including computers: $6.6 billion 
  6. Iron, steel: $6.3 billion 
  7. Fruits, nuts: $4.5 billion 
  8. Other chemical goods: $2.1 billion 
  9. Aluminum: $1.9 billion 
  10. Electrical machinery, equipment: $1.7 billion

Gems and precious metals was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 75.3% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel which rose 58.9%. South Africa’s shipments of mineral fuels including oil posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 49.51% year over year.’

Current Flag of Zimbabwe

Judges 5:14-15

English Standard Version

14 ‘… from Machir marched down the commanders, and from Zebulun those who bear [H4900 – mashak] the lieutenant’s staff [H7626 – shebet]; 15 the princes [chiefs, rulers] of Issachar came with Deborah, and Issachar faithful to Barak [from the tribe of Naphtali, Judges 4:6]; into the valley they rushed at his heels…’

When the majority of Israelite tribes – though not all as we have discovered earlier – aided the fourth Judge of Israel Deborah (1184-1144 BCE) in her war against Jabin the King of the Canaanites, both Zebulun and Issachar were enthusiastic in their support on the battlefield. The Hebrew word mashek means, ‘to draw’ as in a bow, ‘to march’, ‘to be tall.’ The Hebrew word shebet means, a ‘rod, staff, club, sceptre’ as in a ‘mark of authority’ and a ‘shaft of’ a ‘spear’ or ‘dart.’ Its wider application includes ‘literally a stick for punishing, writing, fighting, ruling’ and ‘walking.’ The verse could be paraphrased as: ‘… from Zebulun, those with military authority and competency.’

Rhodesian Coat of Arms 1924 to 1981

Notice two symbols on the Rhodesian Coat of Arms. Firstly, the prominent English Lion passant and secondly, Thistles of Scotland, showing the common familial tie with Judah and Benjamin. Even more significant is the pick axe, a tool used for digging and representative of mining; while also indicative of Issachar’s servitude.  

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘As a loyal British colony, Southern Rhodesia called up 5,500 young white men – a significant proportion of that age group in the country at the time – and sent them to fight for Britain on the Western front in France. During World war II, double that number served in the British forces, with eleven Rhodesian Air Force pilots given “ace” status… Rhodesia’s superb fighting force was never defeated militarily [raids against Mozambique and Zambia guerrilla forces], but this helped little when the demographic war had been lost.’

We have discussed the significant pairings of Jacob’s sons… some between blood brothers as with Simeon and Levi and now Issachar and Zebulun and other pairings between half-brothers, including Judah and Benjamin, Reuben and Gad and next, Asher and Naphtali. The final pairing are the sons of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The odd one out is Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

That said, the sagacious reader will have deduced that a case could be made for Judah and Simeon; Benjamin and Dan; with Levi the odd tribe.

2 Chronicles 30:18

English Standard Version

‘For a majority of the people, many of them from Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than as prescribed. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying, “May the good Lord pardon everyone…”

2 Samuel 24:6-7

English Standard Version

‘Then they came to Gilead, and to Kadesh in the land of the Hittites; and they came to Dan, and from Dan they went around to Sidon and came to the fortress of Tyre and to all the cities of the Hivites and Canaanites… 

1 Chronicles 12:38-40

English Standard Version

38 ‘All these, men of war, arrayed in battle order, came to Hebron with a whole heart to make David king over all Israel. Likewise, all the rest of Israel were of a single mind to make David king. 39 And they were there with David for three days, eating and drinking, for their brothers had made preparation for them. 40 And also their relatives, from as far as Issachar and Zebulun [2 Chronicles 30:10] and Naphtali, came bringing food on donkeys and on camels and on mules and on oxen, abundant provisions of flour, cakes of figs, clusters of raisins, and wine and oil, oxen and sheep, for there was joy in Israel.’

Coat of Arms of Zimbabwe 

These verses confirm the closeness between Zebulun and Issachar as one people; albeit spread in part, over two countries. The third passage highlights that in the past as it is today, Zebulun and Issachar with Naphtali, once lived the greatest distance northwards in Canaan, while today, South Africa and New Zealand are the furthest southwards below the equator.

Former South African Coat of Arms

Notice the more Dutch-Midianite looking Lion passant guardant, as opposed to an English one; though there is homage to seafaring and trade represented by the figure of Britannia and the anchor.

An interesting verse regarding Issachar.

1 Chronicles 12:32

English Standard Version

32 ‘Of Issachar, men who had understanding [H998 – biynah: ‘wisdom, knowledge’] of the times [H6256 – eth: ‘season, occasion’], to know [H3045 – yada: ‘percieve, understand’] what Israel ought to do [H6213 – asah: ‘offer, prepare’]…’

The Hebrew word for understanding means, ‘discernment, perfectly.’ The word for know means, ‘to discriminate, distinguish’ ‘to make known, declare.’ The Hebrew word for ought means, ‘to attend to, put in order, to observe, celebrate, appoint, ordain’ and ‘institute.’ The Tribe of Issachar were given the responsibility and skills to perform the function of regulating the calendar, so that the dates for the Holy Days, Sabbaths and New Moons were observed correctly. This was a function that in time (no pun intended), the Levitical priesthood took responsibility – refer articles: The Calendar Conspiracy; and The Sabbath Secrecy

Remarkably, in Cape Town, there is the southern suburb of Observatory where the world renowned South African Astronomical Observatory (SAAO) is situated, as well as the location of the McClean Dome. Another dome onsite houses the Victoria telescope, built in 1897. The Southern African Large Telescope (SALT) has the largest single optical telescope in the southern hemisphere based in Sunderland some two hundred and fifty miles to the North, though they conduct research in astronomy and astrophysics at SAAO. In the library are two clocks. The first shows normal South African time and the second shows sidereal time – ‘based on the Earth’s rate of rotation measured relative to the fixed stars – something like the time kept by a sundial, so roughly four minutes slower than an average day.’

South Africa’s Coat of Arms, including observations on its symbols

Genesis 30:17-20

English Standard Version

17 ‘And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son [in 1742 BCE]. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant [Zilpah] to my husband.”

So she called his name Issachar [there is reward, there is recompense].

19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son [1740 BCE]. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.”

So she called his name Zebulun [honour, dwelling].’

Genesis 46:13-15

English Standard Version

13 ‘The sons of Issachar: Tola, Puvah, Yob [Job], and Shimron.’ 

14 ‘The sons of Zebulun: Sered, Elon, and Jahleel.’

15 ‘These are the sons of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob in Paddan-aram, together with his daughter Dinah [Zebulun’s twin]…’

Recall in the article: Job, how Job’s second wife was possibly a descendant of Dinah. And here we see that Job is a family name in Dinah’s brother’s line. The name is also listed in Genesis 10:29 as a son of Joktan. The Book of Jasher refers to this Jobab of Genesis 10:29 and to the Job [Iob] listed here. 

Issachar

Book of Jasher 45:5-7: 

5 ‘… Issachar went to the land of the east, and… took [for himself a wife from]… the daughters of Jobab the son of [Joktan], the son of Eber; and Jobab the son of Yoktan had two daughters… and the name of the younger was Aridah.

6 … Issachar took Aridah, and… came to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house… 7 And Aridah bare unto Issachar Tola, Puvah, Job [Iob or Jashub, Numbers 26:24, 1 Chronicles 7:1] and Shomron, four sons…’

Issachar married an equivalent of an eastern European. The identity of Jobab is not clear, though an example of a Czech may not be far amiss* – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Recall, Levi married Aridah’s elder sister – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. The Book of Jubilees records Issachar’s wife’s name as Hezaqa.

Book of Jubilees 34:20-21

‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives… the name of Issachar’s wife, Hezaqa: and the name of Zabulon’s wife, Ni’iman… and the name of Naphtali’s wife, Rasu’u, of Mesopotamia… and the name of Asher’s wife, ‘Ijona…’

The Book of Jasher continues regarding the wives of Naphtali, Asher and Zebulun.

Book of Jasher 45:9-10, 12-20

9 ‘… Naphtali went to Haran and took from thence [a daughter] of Amuram the son of Uz, the son of Nahor… 10… the name of the elder was Merimah… and Naphtali took Merimah… and brought [her] to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house. 11 And Merimah bare unto Naphtali Yachzeel, Guni, Jazer and Shalem, four sons…’

12 And Asher went forth and took Adon the daughter of Aphlal, the son of Hadad, the son of Ishmael, for a wife, and he brought her to the land of Canaan. 

13 And Adon the wife of Asher died in those days: she had no offspring; and it was after the death of Adon that Asher went to the other side of the river and took for a wife Hadurah the daughter of Abimael, the son of Eber, the son of Shem.

14 And the young woman was of a comely appearance, and a woman of sense, and she had been the wife of Malkiel the son [descendant] of Elam, the son of Shem. 15 And Hadurah bare a daughter unto Malkiel, and he called her name Serach, and Malkiel died after this, and Hadurah went and remained in her father’s house.

16 And after the death of the wife [of] Asher he went and took Hadurah for a wife, and brought her to the land of Canaan, and Serach her daughter he also brought with them, and she was three years old, and the damsel was brought up in Jacob’s house. 17 And the damsel was of a comely appearance, and [Serach] went in the sanctified ways of the children of Jacob; she lacked nothing, and Yahweh gave her wisdom and understanding. 18 And Hadurah the wife of Asher conceived and bare unto him Yimnah, Yishvah, Yishvi and Beriah; four sons.

19 And Zebulun went to Midian, and took for a wife Merishah the daughter of Molad, the son of Abida, the son of Midian [the son of Abraham and Keturah], and brought her to the land of Canaan. 20 And Merushah bare unto Zebulun Sered, Elon and Yachleel; three sons.’

Naphtali like his half brother Gad, married from the line of Nahor (North Italian) as his father Jacob and his grandfather Isaac had done before him – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Asher took a first wife from Ishmael (German) who died childless and Asher’s second wife Hadurah was descended from Eber, which could mean probably Peleg or possibly Joktan* – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

Fascinatingly, the strong link between Zebulun and part of Midian – the British and Dutch South Africans – continues, with Zebulun taking his wife Merishah from the line of Abraham’s son Midian’ – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Zebulun

Numbers 1:28-31, 41, 43

English Standard Version

28 ‘Of the people of Issachar, their generations, by their clans, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, from twenty years old and upward, every man able to go to war: 29 those listed of the tribe of Issachar were 54,400. 31 those listed of the tribe of Zebulun were 57,400… 41 those listed of the tribe of Asher were 41,500… 43 those listed of the tribe of Naphtali were 53,400.’

1 Chronicles 7:1-5

English Standard Version

1 ‘The sons of Issachar: Tola, Puah, Jashub, and Shimron, four. 2 The sons of Tola: Uzzi, Rephaiah, Jeriel, Jahmai, Ibsam, and Shemuel, heads of their fathers’ houses, namely of Tola, mighty warriors of their generations, their number in the days of David being 22,600. 

3 The son of Uzzi: Izrahiah. And the sons of Izrahiah: Michael, Obadiah, Joel, and Isshiah, all five of them were chief men. 4 And along with them, by their generations, according to their fathers’ houses, were units of the army for war, 36,000, for they had many wives and sons. 5 Their kinsmen belonging to all the clans of Issachar were in all 87,000 mighty warriors, enrolled by genealogy.

Strangely, further sons or grandsons for Zebulun are missing from the 1 Chronicles genealogical lists. 

Genesis 30:7-13

English Standard Version

7 ‘Rachel’s servant Bilhah [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes] conceived again and bore Jacob a second son [in 1742 BCE]. 8 Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.”

So she called his name Naphtali [wrestlings of God, my struggle, cunning].

9 When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife…

Zilpah the mother of Gad and Asher

Genesis: 12 ‘Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son [in 1744 BCE]. 13 And Leah said, “Happy am I! For women have called me happy.”

So she called his name Asher [happy, happy one].’

Genesis 46:17, 24

English Standard Version

17 ‘The sons of Asher:

Imnah, Ishvah, Ishvi, Beriah, with Serah

And the sons of Beriah: Heber and Malchiel… [1 Chronicles 1:31-32: ‘who fathered Birzaith. Heber fathered Japhlet, Shomer, Hotham, and their sister Shua…]’

Asher

Genesis: 24 ‘The sons of Naphtali: Jahzeel, Guni, Jezer, and Shillem.’

In Asher’s family there is the family name of Heber (Eber, Hebrew, Iberia, Hiberi, Hibernia, Hebrides) – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes – and Naphtali has a son, Jahzeel similar to Zebulun’s son Jahleel.

Australian Flag

Genesis 49:20-21

English Standard Version

20 “Asher’s food shall be rich [H8082 – shaman: plenteous, lusty, robust], and he shall yield [be granted or permitted] royal [H4428 – melek: (fit for a) king] delicacies.”

The Good News Translation for Asher says: ‘Asher’s land will produce rich food. He will provide food fit for a king.’ Australia is one of the bread basket nations of the world, with an infinite market opening up to its neighbours in East Asia.

Australian Coat of Arms

Notice the strong link with the tribe of Judah, incorporating the symbols of: Crowns, Lions and the St George’s Cross.

Genesis: 21 “Naphtali is a doe [deer] let loose [H7961 – shalach: let free], that bears [granted, given] beautiful [beauty, goodness] fawns [(offspring) or confusingly, ‘he gives beautiful words’].

A more helpful paraphrase of verse 21: ‘Naphtali is a female deer running free, that has been bestowed beauty and goodness.’ This verse explains itself for anyone who has had the opportunity in visiting New Zealand.

Naphtali

Deuteronomy 33:23-29

English Standard Version

23 ‘And of Naphtali he said, “O Naphtali, sated with favor [H7522 – ratsown: pleasure, delight], and full of the blessing [prosperity] of the Lord, possess [inherit] the lake and the south [H3220 – yam: west (47 times KJV), south (1)].”

24 And of Asher he said, “Most blessed of sons [or blessed with children] be Asher; let him be the favorite [acceptable, a pleasure, delight] of his brothers, and let him dip [plunge] his foot in oil. 25 Your bars shall be iron and bronze, and as your days, so shall your strength be.’

It is clear from these verses that Asher especially and Naphtali in large part, have been granted special favour above their brothers, aside from Joseph and Judah. Both Australia and New Zealand regularly make the top ten lists for best or safest countries to live in.

The CEV says: ‘The Lord is pleased with you, people of Naphtali. He will bless you and give you the land to the west and the south.’ The nation furthest from the original land of Canaan as well as from the British and Irish Isles, in a southwest direction is, New Zealand. It is also separated by vast oceans and sea. Even taking its name from the word Sea-land inherited from the Netherlands and Denmark prior to that. 

Australian men

The original Hebrew says that Asher would be blessed with children, a favourite amongst his brothers, while in possession of immeasurable wealth beneath his feet. After North America and England, Australia has the highest population of the sons of Jacob with 26,996,595 people. It is a very popular destination to visit or emigrate and has a high level of wealth relative to its population. Though Belgium is a blessed nation, it does not match the oracle as given by Moses, like Australia does. Australia has the highest average wealth in the world, passing Switzerland in 2018. 

Australia is the 14th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $1.77 trillion in 2025. Australia combines an open domestic economy, with an extensive network of free trade arrangements with trading partners principally around the Asia-Pacific Rim. 

Sydney

Australia ranks at number ten in the nations with the most natural resources. Australia, which is similar in size to the continental United States, is known for its large reserves of coal, timber, copper, iron ore, nickel, oil shale and rare earth metals. Australia is one of the world leaders in uranium and gold mining. The country has the largest gold reserves in the world, supplying over fourteen percent of the world’s gold demand and forty-six percent of the world’s uranium demand. Australia is also the top producer of opal and aluminum. 

If that wasn’t enough, it is number three in the world for mineral producing nations. It is interesting that Australia is called the ‘lucky country’ especially as this is the meaning of his blood brother’s name, Gad. The link with Ireland doesn’t stop there. Some thirty percent of Australians claim Irish descent and they share a love of the unique yet similar sports of Gaelic football and Australian or Aussie Rules football. 

Australian women

The continent-nation of Australia has approximately $737 billion worth of seaborne ore reserves alone. It houses massive reserves of important minerals, such as bauxite – twenty-three percent of the world’s reserves – and nickel, with some thirty-five percent of the world’s total reserves. It may not exceed the scale of South Africa and Russia in terms of mineral reserves, but Australia is more popular among international mining investors due to the government’s credibility and track record of performance in protecting its mining industry. As Russia (2) and Ukraine (4) are top five mineral powers, the counter balance to the mighty Assyrians and Orphir (from Joktan) respectively, are Sidon-Midian-Zebulun of South Africa and Asher of Australia. 

A coincidence pertains to the fact that Asher from Jacob and Asshur of Shem have similar names and both possess enormous countries containing vast mineral wealth, with allies who also possess huge reserves.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Australian global shipments during 2021.

  1. Ores, slag, ash: US$132.1 billion 
  2. Mineral fuels including oil: $91 billion 
  3. Gems, precious metals: $20.7 billion 
  4. Meat: $11.6 billion 
  5. Cereals: $10.1 billion 
  6. Inorganic chemicals: $6.4 billion 
  7. Machinery including computers: $4.8 billion 
  8. Aluminum: $4.7 billion 
  9. Copper: $3.9 billion 
  10. Electrical machinery, equipment: $3.7 billion 


Cereals was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 164.1% since 2020. In second place for improving export sales was aluminum which was up by 52.6%. Australia’s shipments of ores, slag and ash posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 45.6% year over year. The most modest advance among Australia’s top 10 export categories was for gems and precious metals thanks to its 5.6% gain.’

Judges 5:17-18

English Standard Version

‘… Asher sat still at the coast of the sea, staying by his landings. Zebulun is a people who risked their lives to the death; Naphtali, too, on the heights of the field.’

Judges 4:10 

English Standard Version

‘And Barak called out Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh. And 10,000 men went up at his heels, and Deborah went up with him.’

We learn that Asher like Reuben, Dan, Gad, Simeon, Levi and Judah was reticent to get involved in a war that didn’t directly impinge on their territory. Meanwhile, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar and Naphtali took part. With Naphtali, Zebulun was the most courageous. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘ANZAC [Australia and New Zealand Army Corps] Day is still celebrated on April 25th each year to honour New Zealand’s military dead. An astonishing 103,000 New Zealander’s served in the armed forces during the First World War – out of a total population of one million. Of this number, 16,697 were killed. This meant that 1.6 percent of all New Zealanders died in the conflict… the highest death [rate] per capita of any country in the war. An even greater number of New Zealanders served in World war II. Some 140,000 soldiers fought overseas in Europe, North Africa, and in the Pacific… 11,928 were killed, or just under 1 percent of the total population…’

It can be no small coincidence that the two greatest men’s Rugby Union teams in the world – consistently for over one hundred years with seven Rugby world cups between them out of a possible ten – are the New Zealand All Blacks and the South African Springboks.

For what is rugby, but a battle without weapons or resulting in death. Blood and injury though are par for the course in the most brutal sport in the world outside of cage fighting, boxing and American Football.

Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, Hitler’s commander in North Africa during World War II insightfully said about the Australians and New Zealanders after facing their infantry divisions (ANZACs):

“If I had to take hell, I would use the Australians to take it and the New Zealanders to hold it.”

Judges 7:23

English Standard Version

‘And the men of Israel were called out from Naphtali and from Asher and from all Manasseh, and they pursued after Midian.’

When the Judge Gideon fought the Midianites, his main allies apart from his own tribe of Manasseh, were Naphtali, with their neighbour Asher, in the far north of Canaan.

Joshua 19:24-29

English Standard Version

24 ‘The fifth lot came out for the tribe of the people of Asher according to their clans. 

25 Their territory included Helkath, Hali, Beten, Achshaph, 26 Allammelech, Amad, and Mishal. On the west it touches Carmel and Shihor-libnath, 27 then it turns eastward, it goes to Beth-dagon, and touches Zebulun and the Valley of Iphtahel northward to Beth-emek and Neiel. Then it continues in the north to Cabul, 28 Ebron, Rehob, Hammon, Kanah, as far as Sidon the Great. 29 Then the boundary turns to Ramah, reaching to the fortified city of Tyre…’

The inheritance of Asher in Canaan is described in the Book of Joshua. It is interesting, as it a condensed description of their current neighbours today. Zebulun and Sidon equating to South Africa on the African continent to their west, separated by a vast expanse of sea; and similarly to the east, Tyre equating to Brazil on the South American continent – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

A curious prophetic verse is in the Book of Isaiah, which describes where certain tribes of Israel were dispersed.

Isaiah 49:12

Christian Standard Bible

See, these will come from far away, from the north and from the west, and from the land [H776 – ‘erets: land without return (under) [the] world] of Sinim [H5515: ‘distant, a people living at the extremity of the known world’, by connotation the South].

We know the North and west relates to the British Isles. The counterpoint to that is Sinim, which is inferred as the opposite direction of, or southwards (and far away). Just as the tribe of Naphtali was to eventually settle in the South and west… exactly where New Zealand is located – Deuteronomy 33:29.

Some researchers propose that Sin-im relates to China (as the Arabs called the Chineses Sin[a]); or to Canaan’s son Sin; but both these options are an incorrect interpretation. The Jerome translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible for Isaiah 49:12 says: ‘ecce isti de longe venient et ecce illi ab aquilone et mari et isti de terra australi.’ The key phrase being: isti de terra australi. 

By a strange turn, the word Australia is derived from the Latin word australis, meaning ‘southern.’ Australia has been colloquially referred to as Oz, slang for Aus’ since the early twentieth century. It is the ‘land down under’ and literally the great ‘southern land.’ Australia has been called ‘the Oldest Continent’, ‘the Last of Lands’ and ‘the Last Frontier.’ Australia is the last of lands, in the sense that it was the last continent, apart from Antarctica to be explored by Europeans. 

The term Terra Australis Incognita, or an ‘unknown land of the South’ dates back to Roman times. After European discovery, its name included Terra Australis.

An anonymous quote: 

‘The earliest recorded use of the word Australia in English was in 1625 in “A note of Australia del Espíritu Santo, written by Sir Richard Hakluyt”, published by Samuel Purchas in Hakluytus Posthumus, a corruption of the original Spanish name “Tierra Austral del Espíritu Santo” (Southern Land of the Holy Spirit) for an island in Vanuatu.

The Dutch adjectival form Australische was used in a Dutch book in Batavia (Jakarta) in 1638, to refer to the newly discovered lands to the south. Australia was later used in a 1693 translation of Les Aventures de Jacques Sadeur dans la Découverte et le Voyage de la Terre Australe, a 1676 French novel by Gabriel de Foigny, under the pen-name Jacques Sadeur. Referring to the entire South Pacific region, Alexander Dalrymple used it in An Historical Collection of Voyages and Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean in 1771.’

The name Sinim (סינים siyniym) occurs nowhere else in the Bible and it is evident that it is a remote country; remarkable in that it is the only such land specified by name in the Bible. The Chaldee also interprets it as Jerome has done: of the south. Whereas the Syriac has not translated it but retained the name Sinim.

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002:

‘The Egyptians referred to the southernmost known area of land as “sin-wur”. This corresponds to the Land of “Sinim” meaning Australia. There are reports of Egyptian and Phoenician remains being found in Australia.’ 

New Zealand men

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘Another large mass of people, the Yue­chi, was being pushed out of inner Asia toward Scythia and Parthia. Early Chinese chronicles record that the “Ephthalites” were one of the tribes of the Yue­chi. The Ephthalites were also called “White Huns” because they were “fair­skinned” (indicating a Semitic origin). Other names for the Ephthalites include the “Hephthalites” or “Nephthalites,” although the Encyclopaedia Britannica adds that “the initial N… is believed to be a clerical error.” It should be easy for anyone with a knowledge of biblical history to identify this tribe as the Israelite tribe of Naphtali! The consonants of Ephthali (or Nephthali) precisely match Naphtali, one of the ten tribes of Israel.

It is interesting that the Encyclopaedia Britannica observed that the ancient historians who recorded that this tribe’s name began with an “N” are “believed… (to have made) a clerical error.” No evidence is offered to support a claim that it was a clerical error, but it is “believed” to be one. Why? 

The reader must realize that “establishment” histories have a strong bias against “finding” any of the “lost” ten tribes of Israel (doing so would draw interest toward the Bible). While many Israelite tribal names can be found in Asia, this similarity between the “Nephthalites” and an Israelite tribe (the Naphtalites) is glaringly obvious.

The presence of a tribe in Asia bearing a Hebrew name unchanged from biblical times is an academic “hot potato”! A “belief” that the “N” is an ancient “clerical error” helps to obscure the Israelite nature of this tribe. Indeed, if establishment histories were to examine Scythian or Parthian history in much depth at all, their identity as the ten tribes of Israel would be impossible to miss. Perhaps that is why their history (prominently cited by Greek and Roman historians) is mostly ignored in the modern world. 

The fact that the Ephthalites were “fair­skinned” further verifies their identification as Israelites (since the Israelites were of the Semitic, or “white” race). The fact that the Ephthalites were called “White Huns” indicates that while they came out of Asia, they were differentiated from the rest of the Huns, who were not fair­skinned or white. Indeed, the Encyclopaedia Britannica itself refers to the Sakas (or Sacae Scythians), the Yue­Chi and the Ephthalites as being related “Indo-Scythian” tribes. 

In chapter eight, it was documented that the Nephthalites were undoubtedly the Israelite tribe of Naphtali which went into Asia in 741 B.C. as captives of the Assyrians. Since the tribe of Naphtali did not go into captivity in a piecemeal fashion, but rather in one complete mass (II Kings 15:29), they retained their original Israelite tribal name longer than the other tribes. 

The Ephthalites waged war on the Sassanian Persians (which was natural since the Ephthalites were kinsmen of the Parthians and Scythians). As late as 484 A.D., the Ephthalites defeated the Persians and extended their control into India, establishing a capital as Sakala (which bore the name of Isaac). 

The Encyclopaedia Britannica cites the Greek writer, Procopius, as stating the Ephthalite Huns were “far more civilized than the Huns of Attila.” Ephthalite power in Asia was not broken until 557 A.D. when they were beaten by the Persians and Turks… the Ephthalites, as a whole, simply disappeared from Asia. Where did they go? They were likely pushed toward Europe, arriving in a later migration. This would make the tribe of Naphtali one of the first to go into Asia and the last to leave it.’

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘In the very far east of Scythia in what is now eastern Siberia and western China a good portion of the Naphtalite horde had remained. In the 450-500 CE period the Naphtalites began to move west eventually entering Scandinavia in the 500’s and 600’s CE. The Naphtalites themselves settled mainly in Norway.’ 

Tribal Identifications: Naphtali, Yair Davidiy – emphasis mine:

‘Sons of Naphtali were… Jahzeel, Guni, Jezer, and Shillem.

Jahzeel are recalled in Zealand of Denmark. Culturally, the region of Zealand in Denmark had contacts with Zeeland in Holland up to the first century b.c.e… In Danish Zealand itself are places known as Sjaelland, Silund, and Selund which names… possibly derive from Shillem (Silem) son of Naphtali.

Guni, son of Naphtali, may be recalled in the Gugerni of Batavian-Holland and in the Egan of Denmark. Jezer, son of Naphtali, is connected to the Vraesan of Denmark and from the Danish isle of Fyne, the Vraesi are believed to have migrated en-masse to Britain.

The symbol of Naphtali was “A hind let loose” (Genesis 49;21) and  a deer or stag was used as a royal symbol by the Kings of Scandinavia. The stag also seems to have been a favourite motif amongst Phoenecian and Israelite craftsmen.

Norway was known as Thule. P. Senstius (1931) once suggested that Thule is a shortened form of  Nafthali… not only Norway but also the people of Norway were called Thuls and… this word means Speaker [in Old English]. The Greek traveler Pytheas from Massilia (Marseille) traveled along the coast of what is now known as Norway… around 330 BC, and he called that land Thule, which a Norse [scholar]… Ottar Groenvik understands as “the land of the Thuls” or “the Thul land”.

“Naphtali… giveth goodly words” – Genesis 49:21, KJV.

As we have discussed in the previous two chapters, the waves of invaders into Britain and Ireland match the sons of Jacob and their tribal groupings. Though ultimately the twelve sons became fourteen tribal splits, they were to form ten nations in the modern world. 

The tribal divisions being Reuben, Gad, Benjamin, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan, Ephraim, the half tribe of West Manasseh and the half tribe of East Manasseh. 

New Zealand women

These fourteen tribes became the ten English speaking nations comprising: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the United States of America. Levi was scattered which leaves thirteen. Issachar and Zebulun are together as one, which leaves twelve. Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh are together as one and are called either Ephraim, Joseph or Samaria in the Bible, which leaves eleven… and Dan the enigma, remains unidentified until later, which leaves ten. 

The waves of invaders also follows the pattern of ten, rather than fourteen arrivals. They are the Cymry; the Cruithni; the Fir Bolg; the Tuatha de Dannan; the Hiberi or Goidels; the Jutes; the Frisians; the Angles; the Norsemen; and the Danes. Sandwiched in between these are the Royal Milesians who were a branch of Judah from Zarah and the Normans who were predominantly the tribe of Judah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. 

The ancient Britons were spear headed by the Cymry and are the Welsh today principally from the tribe of Simeon; the Cruithni from Benjamin were known as Picts and became Scottish; the Fir Bolg from Reuben became synonymous with the Ulaid and today Northern Ireland; the Danann are simply the tribe of Dan; the Goidels (or Gaedhals) of Gad became Gaels the ancestors of the Irish; the Jutes from the true tribe of Judah are the founding peoples of todays English; the Frisians descended from both Zebulun and Issachar became the British South Africans and Rhodesians; the Angles to be yet revealed, became known as Americans and Canadians; the Norsemen (or Norwegians) from Naphtali, became New Zealanders [notice all the Ns]; while the Danish Vikings became Australians from their ancestor Asher. 

New Zealand Coat of Arms

Just as the Norwegians, Danes and Normans were known as Vikings and the earliest tribes to arrive were called Celts, so too were the tribes of Jutes, Angles and Frisians collectively known as Saxons. The term ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is made up and is somewhat misleading as it implies two separate peoples, when in fact the Angles were Saxons. It is interesting to note that the first letter of many of Jacob’s sons names have survived either to the present day or at least until their arrival in Ireland or Britain. Especially noticeable, with the tribe of Naphtali. 

Both Collins and Davidy’s comments are informative regarding Naphtali who had remarkably, kept their identity for some fifteen hundred years. An important point to understand is that as peoples migrated they pushed against those in front of them and in turn were pressed from behind. The Naphtalite Huns made their way to Scandinavia as had many of the tribes before them. They with the Danes and the Normans were the last to vacate Scandinavia. The Normans had dwelt in Brittany and Normandy for two centuries before they invaded Kent and Sussex. Meanwhile, the Danish Vikings had the numbers to establish a capital at York and to inject their royal line into the British Saxon kings. The Norwegian Vikings raided and then settled the north of England, Scotland and Ireland. Though there is some overlap between the two Viking peoples.

A number of interesting similarities are that the Vikings were expert sailors and navigators who had designed practical yet fast open going vessels, known as longboats.

Viking Dragon Ship

This interest and ability is mirrored today by the Australians and New Zealanders in the love of sailing and yachting. Notice the three ships on the New Zealand Coat of Arms. The biggest city in New Zealand, Auckland, is known as the City of Sails as there are more yachts per head of population than anywhere else in the world.

City of Auckland

Both Australia and New Zealand have shook up the most famous Yachting regatta in the world, the America’s Cup in recent decades, with New Zealand leading the innovation within the competition, for perhaps the most prestigious sporting trophy in the world. 

The Vikings were known for dwelling near water outlets and on the coast. Today Australians and New Zealanders live principally within striking distance of a beach and have built their largest cities all on the coasts. An interesting correlation is just as the Vikings either established or cultivated the five principle coastal cities in Ireland… Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Limerick and Cork – they then went on to Australia and built the thriving five major cities: Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. 

Though Norwegians and Danes today claim to be Vikings, they are in reality descendants of Abraham and his second wife Keturah and have instead inherited the name. The true Vikings have either been assimilated within Britain and Ireland as the Norman aristocracy, or the previous Danes and Norsemen ventured on to Australia and New Zealand, creating their new identity’s as Aussies and Kiwis.

The United Tribes of New Zealand flag from 1834 to 1840

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘The Phoenicians also mined tin and other ores in Britain, and exported them to other nations in the Mideast. George Rawlinson states: 

“The Phoenicians had one more colony towards the west… Phoenician ships from Gadeira… crossed the mouth of the English Channel… to the Scilly Isles and conveyed thither a body of colonists who established an emporium. The attraction which drew them was the mineral wealth of the islands and of the neighboring Cornish coast… It is reasonable to suppose that the Phoenicians both worked the mines and smelted the ores.”

‘Historical evidence points to the Israelite tribe of Asher as being directly involved with the mining of tin in early Briton. William Camden, a British historian who lived from 1551 to 1623, states in his historical work, Britannia, that: 

“The merchants of Asher worked the tin mines of Cornwall, not as slaves, but as masters and exporters.” A British historian of the nineteenth century, Sir Edmund Creasy, also noted that: “The British mines mainly supplied the glorious adornment of Solomon’s Temple” – Article: The Ark of God.

Notice the tribe of Asher were involved in mining, just as Australians are heavily involved today. The tribe of Asher took on the Danish name which may or may not have derived from the name of Jacob’s son, Dan as investigated previously. By coincidence the peoples today now called Danes in Denmark are the descendants of Me-dan – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

New Zealand Flag

The Denes (or Danes) are thought to have either had a female leader called Dana (or Danu); that they worshipped the Goddess Dana; or simply that someone called Dan mentioned in medieval Scandinavian texts was the legendary founder of the ancient Danish kingdom.

Unrest in Scania led to war and a new order, represented by the Scyldings and the Healfdena. They led the migration of Danes from Sweden into the Cimbric Peninsula, thus putting pressure on the Jutes in the north. This may have resulted in feuds and local power struggles, which would have in turn impacted the sizeable tribe of the Angles. In 420 CE a man named Hoc seemed to be allied to the Scyldings by blood or marriage. The Danish side of his parentage is covered by the epic poem, Beowulf, which describes him as the son of Beowulf the elder, while the other side was probably Jutish or Anglian.

In 448 CE Hnaef a prince of a group of Danes called the Hocingas, and as a Sæ-Dene (Sea Dane), is involved in a power struggle in the North Sea. His family likely settled in modern Jutland. Hnaef winters with his elder sister, Hildeburh, who is married to Finn, king of the Frisians. Fighting appears to be sparked by a feud between the Jutish allies of either side, as those with the Frisians are angry that some of their people have sworn loyalty to the Danes who are ‘stealing’ Jutish territory. 

Hnaef is killed during the Freswæl, the ‘Fight at Finnesburg’. Finn is then killed in revenge by Hengist, Hnaef’s Jutish comrade in arms. As his duty is done to his deceased lord Hnaef, Hengist with his brother Horsa leads his people to Britain to take up temporary service under another lord, the high king of Britain Vortigern, but this soon turns into a conquest of the southeastern territory of England in 455 CE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. Large numbers of Jutes and Angles follow Hengist and this has the effect of leaving Jutland almost deserted for the incoming Dene. 

The Danish migration was complete by about the sixth century, but a single, fully unified kingdom took approximately three more centuries to emerge. During the ninth and tenth centuries the Danes, along with the Norwegians, became the scourge of Britain and Ireland. The Danes staged a major invasion of the English kingdoms during 879 to 880 CE, conquering a swathe of eastern and northern territory in Britain. The Danish army under Guthrum formalised its rule under the Peace of Wedmore in 879. Guthrum secured the Danish kingdom of East Anglia, which was founded to exist alongside the Scandinavian kingdom of York. 

By 918 CE the failure to apply a concentrated force meant that the Danes were defeated. They lost a large number of men, particularly at Bedford, where the besieged English garrison inflicted a severe defeat upon them, putting their army to flight. The Danish kingdom in England fell to Edward the Elder of Wessex, as he began to unify the country under one king. At the very end of the tenth century a Danish dynasty took the English throne, heralding a new Anglo-Scandinavian period which was ended with the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and the arrival of more Scandinavians, the Normans. The Danes also settled in Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Iceland. 

The Frisians descended from Issachar and Zebulun, being a smaller tribal unit are invariably lost as part of the larger Saxon tribe the Angles, from an historical perspective. This is not surprising as in the Bible, Issachar and Zebulun are often quoted with Ephraim and Manasseh. Zebulun and Issachar are also the younger brothers of Judah and so their close association with the Jutes explains the Jutish, Angle and Frisian triangular nucleus of the Saxon peoples. 

The word viking became associated with someone who goes on a ‘pirate raid’, a predatory ‘sea robber’ but this is a later interpretation of the word based on their reputation for attacking the medieval kingdoms of England and France. The word was originally used to denote a trader. Indo-European languages contain cognates of the root word for trader, such as the Latin vic (vicus: village, habitation), along with the Saxon wic and the Germanic wich. All of these relate to the Scandinavian vik, from the Old Norse, vikingr. A Vikingr or Viking was someone who went on expeditions, often abroad, usually be sea and in a group with other Vikingar (plural) to wics (or wichs) to trade.

Norway is called the North Way as it was the North way or sea path. Without roads the only reliable travel was by water, so trading centres would be sited in protected inlets. The use of vik became transferable from the trade location or village to its location on inlets. In England, this double usage did not apply, but many Saxon villages still retain their trading names, such as Harwich, Ipswich, and Norwich, while Hamptonwic was modified to Southampton. 

The Norse feminine vik, means an inlet, small bay or creek. As the Vikings dwelt beside creeks that fed to the sea, the name also incorporates the fact that viking means a ‘creek dweller.’ The origin of this interpretation though may go back to earlier etymology which derives Viking from the same root as Old Norse vika, meaning ‘sea mile’. This was originally ‘the distance between two shifts of rowers’, from the root weik (or wik), as in the Proto-Germanic verb wikan, meaning ‘to recede’ and the Proto-Nordic verb, meaning ‘to turn’. The Old Icelandic equivalent is vikja, meaning ‘to move, to turn’, with a nautical usage. 

Linguistically, this explanation is probable as the term predates the use of the sail by the Germanic peoples of Northwestern Europe, as the Old Frisian spelling Witsing (or Wising) shows that ‘the word was pronounced with a palatal k and thus in all probability existed in North-Western Germanic before that palatalisation happened, that is, in the 5th century or before…’ If such is the case – that the tired rower moved aside for the rested rower on long sea journeys – a vikingr would originally have been a rower; so that the ‘word Viking was not originally connected to Scandinavian seafarers but assumed this meaning when the Scandinavians begun to dominate the seas.’ 

When the Norsemen were invaded by the Roman Catholic soldiers, they asked the people who their king was, and they replied “Viking,” which means; “We’re King.”  A very antipodean response. Coincidently, the Vikings were known as Ascomanni, or ash-men’ by the Germans for the Ash wood of their boats. The Gaels called them Lochlannaich, ‘people from the land of lakes’; while the Saxons called them Dene and the Frisians called them Northmonn

As mentioned previously, most Australians and particularly New Zealanders do not live very far from water. In Australia, Vickers and Vickermans are popular surnames. The Vikings imprint on history is less piratical raider propaganda and more the reality of sea-faring traders, fishermen, farmers and craftsmen; with their own laws, art and architecture. 

Dutch explorer Captain Willem Janszoon landed in Australia in 1606, though it was in 1770 when Captain James Cook mapped the eastern coast and claimed the continent for Great Britain. The first British settlement was founded in 1788. In 1824 the vast Island is called Australia, changed from New Holland – coined by Dutch explorer Abel Tasman in 1644 – at the request of Governor Lachlan Macquarie. 

In 1841, New Zealand became its own colony separate from Australia. The year 1868 saw the end of convicts being sent to Australia. Some one hundred and sixty thousand convicts were shipped to Australia between 1788 and 1868.

Six colonies were formed in Australia: New South Wales, 1788; Tasmania, 1825; Western Australia, 1829; South Australia, 1836; Victoria, 1851; and Queensland, 1859. These same colonies later became the states of the Australian Commonwealth. In 1911, the Northern Territory became part of the Commonwealth and the city of Canberra was founded. It was named as the Australian Capital Territory or ACT.

The Commonwealth of Australia was formed in 1901 and a national flag was adopted. Even though it was adopted one year before New Zealand, the New Zealand flag of 1902 had originally been designed earlier in 1869. 

In 1986, Australia became fully independent from the United Kingdom. Australia is the sixth largest country in the world and the biggest island, though as it is officially a continent, Greenland is deemed the biggest island in the world. In 2021, Australia signed a significant security treaty with the United Kingdom and the United States (AUKUS) aimed at countering the growing threat of China in the region. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘Australian and New Zealand participation in the disaster of the Gallipoli Campaign – which was an attempted invasion of the Turkish mainland during World war I [1914-1918] – forged the antipodean nations into a heightened sense of national consciousness [and camaraderie]. The brutality of the battle… ended in an Allied defeat…’

New Zealand is called by the indigenous Maori: Aotearoa, translated as ‘land of the long white cloud.’ Maori had several traditional names for the two main islands, including Te Ika-a-Maui, ‘the fish of Maui’ for the North Island; and Te Waipounamu, ‘the waters of greenstone’; or Te Waka o Aoraki, ‘the canoe of Aoraki’ for the South Island.

New Zealand also has some seven hundred smaller islands, covering an area of 103,500 square miles and a population of 5,255,216 people. In comparison, Japan has an area of 145,937 square miles and a population of one hundred and twenty-five million people. The area of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland is 93,628 miles with a population of sixty-nine million people.

Naphtali was prophesied to be free as a deer let loose and so it is for the small population of New Zealand compared to its area. Saying that, there are still two nations in the world who could increase their population sizes dramatically as they have enough land to be able to sustain them satisfactorily. Unlike Australia say, which has a vast interior of desert and only coastal regions suitable for the bulk of their population. Those nations are New Zealand and Canada; both of which are under-populated and have potential for massive growth. We will look further into this when we study Canada in the next chapter. 

Due to their remoteness, ‘the islands of New Zealand were the last large habitable landmass to be settled by humans.’ Approximately 1000 CE, Maori had become the dominant Polynesian culture and society. In 1642, the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman sighted and officially recorded New Zealand. In 1840, representatives of the United Kingdom and Maori chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi, declaring British sovereignty. A year later, New Zealand became a colony of the British Empire and by 1907 it had become a self-governing dominion. New Zealand gained full independence in 1947, with the British Monarch remaining the head of state. 

In 1951, the United Kingdom increasingly focusing on its European interests led to New Zealand joining Australia and the United States in the ANZUS security treaty. A variety of ethical conflicts, particularly New Zealand’s nuclear free policy led to the United States’s suspension of ANZUS obligations. The treaty remained in effect between New Zealand and Australia, whose foreign policy has followed a similar historical trend of close political cooperation, free trade agreements and mutual citizenship rights between the two nations, so that citizens can visit, live and work in both countries without restrictions. 

New Zealander’s, consistent with their identity as Naphtali have been involved and contributed man power in many conflicts, including: Vietnam, the two World Wars, the second Boer War, the Korean War, the Malayan Emergency, the Gulf War and the Afghanistan War. It has also contributed forces to numerous several regional and global peacekeeping missions since World War II. 

New Zealand has an advanced market economy, ranked 14th in the Human Development Index and 3rd in the Index of Economic Freedom. New Zealand is identified as one of the world’s most stable and well governed nations. As of 2017, the country was ranked fourth in the strength of its democratic institutions and first in government transparency and lack of corruption. 

‘The following export product groups categorise the highest dollar value in global shipments from New Zealand during 2024.

  1. Dairy, eggs, honey: US$12.4 billion
  2. Meat: $5.2 billion
  3. Fruits, nuts: $2.9 billion
  4. Wood: $2.9 billion
  5. Cereal/milk preparations: $1.6 billion
  6. Beverages, spirits, vinegar: $1.5 billion
  7. Machinery including computers: $1.5 billion
  8. Fish: $1.22 billion
  9. Modified starches, glues, enzymes: $1.18 billion
  10. Electrical machinery, equipment: $960.7 million

Electrical machinery and equipment was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 38.2% from 2023 to 2024. In second place for improving export sales was fruits and nuts which rose by 34.1%.

It was the ascent of Mount Everest by New Zealander Sir Edmund Hillary with Sherpa Tenzing Norgay in 1953 that was one of the defining moments of the twentieth century. Hillary stated: “In some ways, I believe I epitomise the average New Zealander: I have modest abilities, I combine these with a good deal of determination, and I rather like to succeed.” 

The British diaspora in Sub-Saharan Africa includes British and Irish descended people not just in South Africa and Zimbabwe but also in lesser numbers in countries such as Namibia (formerly South West Africa, a German colony and then administered by South Africa from 1946 to 1966), Kenya, Botswana and Zambia. 

Though Great Britain had settlements and ports along the West African coast to facilitate the Atlantic slave trade, British settlement in Africa began in earnest at the end of the eighteenth century, at the Cape of Good Hope and following the second British occupation of the Dutch Cape Colony in 1806. 

British settlers were encouraged to Albany (Settler Country), in 1820 to bolster the Cape’s eastern frontier against the Xhosa. Natal was added as a colony in 1843. After defeating the Boers in 1902, Britain also annexed the Boer Republics, the Orange Free State and the Transvaal. 

Map showing population density of the Black Africans in South Africa

The discovery of gold in the Witwatersrand in 1886 after diamonds in Kimberly in 1866, encouraged additional settlement not just by the British but also Australians, Americans and Canadians. Mining magnate and empire builder, Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) envisioned a British Africa linked from Cape Town to Cairo in Egypt. Cecil Rhodes was the founding chairman of the board of directors of De Beers Mining Company, funded by Nathaniel, the first Lord Rothschild – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? 

Rhodes foundered the British South Africa Company in 1889 which controlled the territory named after him from 1895 to 1911 and then as Southern – first used in 1898 – Rhodesia from 1911 to 1964. The region had originally been known as Zambesia. Later called Rhodesia from 1964 to 1979 and then finally Zimbabwe. Northern Rhodesia is now known as Zambia. Meanwhile, British East Africa became Kenya. In 1923, the company’s charter was revoked and Southern Rhodesia attained self-government and established a legislature. 

With the exception of South Africa, the British populations of Zimbabwe, Zambia and Kenya are relatively small, with approximately 30,000, 40,000 and 32,000 people respectively. These peoples may or may not be descended in part from Issachar. Zimbabwe is adjacent to South Africa and large numbers of Zimbabwean British white people have left, especially to live in South Africa. The Republic of Zimbabwe shares a one hundred and twenty-five mile border on the south with South Africa. 

Map showing population density of White Africans in South Africa

The rapid decolonisation of Africa in the 1950s and 1960s alarmed a proportion of Southern Rhodesia’s white population. In an effort to delay the transition to black majority rule, the white Southern Rhodesian government issued its own declaration of Independence from the United Kingdom in 1965. At first seeking recognition as an autonomous realm within the Commonwealth, it instead reconstituted itself into a republic in 1970. Hostility between black political factions and the white government, led to war weariness, diplomatic pressure and an extensive trade embargo imposed by the United Nations. These pressures prompted Rhodesian prime minister Ian Smith to concede to majority rule in 1978. 

Rhodesia was once known as the Jewel of Africa for its great prosperity. The name Zimbabwe derives ‘from a Shona term for Great Zimbabwe, a medieval city (Masvingo) in the country’s south-east whose remains are now a protected site.’ Zimbabwe may stem from ‘dzimba-dza-mabwe, translated from the Karanga dialect of Shona as “houses of stones”. Archaeologist Peter Garlake says that Zimbabwe represents a contracted form of dzimba-hwe, which means venerated houses in the Zezuru dialect of Shona and usually references chiefs’ houses or graves.’ 

The modern equivalent of the Aramean Phoenicians discovered Southern Africa in 1488, when Portuguese explorer Bartolomeu Dias sailed around the southern tip of Africa – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. It was many years later in 1652, when the modern equivalent of the Midianite Phoenicians via the Dutch East India Company established a small settlement at the Dutch Cape Colony; with the intent to be a small port town for ships traveling to India, which eventually became a full settlement of German, French, Dutch and British settlers – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

The Dutch Colony in 1795 was occupied by British forces after the Battle of Muizenberg. In 1802, the Dutch regained control of the Cape Colony with the Peace of Amiens agreement. Then in 1806, the British regained control after the Battle of Blaauwberg. By 1814, the Dutch formally agreed that the colony was to be part of the British Empire. 

The British outlawed slavery in 1833 and so began the Great Trek inland by the Dutch Boers, who founded two republics. The republic of Transvaal formed in 1856 and was annexed by the British in 1877, sparking the first Boer War in 1880. The Boers won and gained independence for Transvaal and the Orange Free State. In 1889, the Second Boer War began, with the British winning and taking over Transvaal and the Orange Free State. In 1910 the Union of South Africa was formed – within the British Empire as a self-governing dominion – from the four colonies, comprising the Cape Colony; Natal Colony; Transvaal Colony; and the Orange Colony. In 1912, the African National Congress (ANC) party was formed. 

In 1931, the Union gained legislative independence from the United Kingdom, becoming fully sovereign. Three years later, the South African Party and National Party merged to form the United party. They sought reconciliation between Afrikaners and English speaking White people. Then in 1939, the party split over the entry of the Union into WWII as an ally of the United Kingdom; as the National Party followers strongly opposed the decision. 

In 1948 the ethnic Afrikaners of the National Party were voted into power and they initiated the apartheid policy of separating white people and black people based on their race and entrenching a system of segregation in the land. 

Many of the British diaspora had voted ‘No’ in a 1960 referendum on South African independence, but it was approved by a narrow margin. The Natal majority voted against the republic and some residents called for secession from the Union after the referendum. In 1961, South Africa was declared a republic and became a fully independent nation, ending the British Monarch as the head of State with Queen Elizabeth II losing the title Queen of South Africa. Pressured by other Commonwealth nations, South Africa withdrew from the organisation in 1961, to later rejoin in 1994. 

It was at this time that ANC leader Nelson Mandela formed an armed branch of the ANC to fight against apartheid. He was arrested in 1962 and jailed. Mandela was incarcerated for twenty-seven years while fighting for equal rights; becoming a worldwide symbol against apartheid. 

Frederik Willem de Klerk was elected president in 1989. He immediately began to work to end apartheid, with Public facilities desegregated. In 1990, Nelson Mandela was released from prison. Subsequently, Nelson Mandela and Frederik Willem de Klerk were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and by 1994 Apartheid had been fully repealed. Equal rights were attained and black people voted; electing Nelson Mandela as South African president. 

Constant readers will appreciate this is the point where we study Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups, with autosomal DNA. As mentioned in the previous chapter (Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes), the assumption by geneticists is that the white Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples of the United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, are composite peoples of the English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish and Northern Irish.

In other words, their Haplogroups will be the same as these five antecedent lines from Britain and Ireland. Though they will be similar, the contention proposed here is that the continued mutations for the defining paternal marker paternal R1b Haplogroups – including U106 (Proto-Germanic), U198 (West Germanic), M529 (Atlantic Celtic) – will be changing. Consequently other applicable north western European Y-DNA lineages such as I1 and I2a2 will also include differences, as these five nations are individual, separate and distinct tribes primarily descending from different sons of Jacob. 

The biblical identity community arrived at the same erroneous conclusion as scientists, in that these nations are all the descendants of Joseph and hence the exact same peoples. The difference in facial features, national characteristics, social mores, administrative processes, spoken accents, cultural and sporting interests, seems to have completely bypassed everyones attention and perception to see and acknowledge the differences which clearly point to different members, of the same family group. As there are no studies known to this writer to enlist as support, we will look at some of the individual demographics and statistics for each tribe. As it is plausible that Issachar and perhaps even Zebulun have spilled over into Rhodesia we will include the British white people from Zimbabwe. 

Of significance amongst the white community in Rhodesia was its transience. Settlers were as likely to leave Rhodesia after a few years as permanently settle – Genesis 49:13. For example, of the seven hundred British immigrants who were the first white settlers in 1890, only fifteen were still living in Rhodesia in 1924. As the white population of Rhodesia had a low birth rate of 18 per 1,000 people, it was dependent upon immigration, which accounted for sixty percent of the growth of the white Rhodesian population between 1955 and 1972. 

American historian Josiah Brownell noted: ‘the turnover rate for white residents in Rhodesia was very high, as Rhodesia took in a total of 255,692 white immigrants between 1955 and 1979 while the same period a total of 246,583 whites emigrated.’ During the boom of the late 1950s Rhodesia took in an average of ‘13,666 white immigrants per year, mostly from the United Kingdom and South Africa’ but conversely, an average of 7,666 whites emigrated annually.  Between 1961 and 1965, Rhodesia took in an average of 8,225 white immigrants per year, yet lost more people each year with an average white emigration of 12,912 people. 

Most people arriving were uninterested in settling in Rhodesia permanently and did not apply for Rhodesian citizenship, despite a 1967 campaign urging them to do so. Brownell explains that ‘patriotism in the white community was “shallow” due to its essentially expatriate character. 

Brownell also claimed that the majority of white immigrants in the late 1960s and early 1970s were unskilled laborers who competed with the country’s black African workforce and did not contribute badly needed technical or professional skills to the country. He argued that this was due to a government policy aimed at making white immigration as “unselective as possible” and guaranteeing every white immigrant a job.’ 

White Zimbabweans make up about 0.22% of the total population today and are mostly of British origin, though there are also Afrikaner, Greek, Portuguese, French and Dutch enclaves. The white population peaked at around 278,000 people, or 4.3% of the population in 1975, though it was 7.3% of the population in 1960 with some 223,000 people. What is interesting is that in 1890 the Black population was only about 150,000 people, yet in fifty years it had exploded into the millions. This was due to what the white settlers brought: food, medicine and employment.

In 1921, Rhodesia had a total population of 899,187 people; of which, 33,620 were European; 1,998 were mixed race; 1,250 were Asiatic; 761,790 were Bantu natives; and 100,529 people were Bantu aliens (not native to the territory). Most emigration has been to the United Kingdom, then South Africa, Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. 

White South Africans are split in two from a descent, linguistic, cultural and historical perspective – the Afrikaans speaking descendants of the Dutch East India Company’s original settlers the Afrikaners, and the Anglophone descendants of the colonial Britons. White Afrikaners trace their ancestry to the mid-seventeenth century, developing a separate cultural identity and distinct language; whereas the English speaking South Africans trace their ancestry to the settlers of 1820. The remainder of the White South African population consists of immigrants who arrived later from Europe, including Germans, Italians, Greeks and Jews, of which many left when apartheid was abolished. Portuguese immigrants arrived after the collapse of the Portuguese colonial administrations in Mozambique and Angola. 

In 1911, white people comprised 22.7% of the population. By 2020, they numbered just 7.8% of the total population. Just under a million white South Africans live as expatriate workers abroad, constituting the majority of South Africa’s brain drain. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘Australia and New Zealand were unique among the European colonies because they were the only areas of the New World where nonwhite slaves were never imported as part of the colonization process. The result of this significant difference was that the new colonies in Australia and New Zealand were homogenous in their early years and for this reason, established a record for stability and progress virtually unmatched in history.  

[Their] racial history… is therefore focused on the interaction between the white immigrants and the native populations of the Aborigines… [Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut] and the Maori… [Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia] It was only in the last part of the twentieth century that significant numbers of nonwhites… entered… [and] that development, even more… [is altering] the racial dynamics of Australia and New Zealand – and not in favour of the Europeans.’

Australians of European, including Celtic-Saxon-Viking descent are the majority, estimated at seventy-six percent of the population. The majority proportion of early settlers arrived from their own free will and were of British and Irish descent, with the convict and prison guard element very much in the minority at twenty percent. Many of the first Australian settlers came from London, the Midlands, the North of England and Ireland; then afterwards from the southeast and the southwest of England, as well as Scotland. 

In 1888, sixty percent of the Australian population had been born in Australia, and almost all had British ancestral origins. From the remaining forty percent, thirty-four percent had been born in the British isles and six percent were of European origin, mainly from Germany and Scandinavia. In the 1840s, Scottish born immigrants constituted twelve percent of the Australian population. The European population on the continent grew from 0.3% of the population in 1800 to 58.6% in 1850. Germans constituted the largest non-British community for most of the nineteenth century. ‘The census of 1901 showed that [98%] of Australians had Anglo-Celtic ancestral origins, and [were] considered as “more British than Britain itself.’

During the 1950s, Australia was the destination of thirty percent of Dutch emigrants and the Netherlands born became numerically Australia’s second largest non-British group. ‘Abolition of the White Australia Policy in 1957 led to a significant increase in non-European immigration, primarily from Asia and the Middle East. This is ironic as the White Australia policy was enacted after gold was discovered in the 1850’s bringing an influx of peoples, including Chinese. With them came Triad gangs, smuggling and other crimes that led to public agitation and eventually the State of Victoria in 1856 passed a law forbidding Chinese to enter. The exclusion law was then adopted by every other colony. 

Chinese, Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean and Sri Lankan are the most commonly nominated Asian ancestries in Australia. Chinese Australians constituted 5.6% of the Australian population and Indian Australians constituted 2.8% on the 2016 census. In 2019, 30% of the Australian resident population, were born overseas. 

New Zealand is one of the last major landmasses settled by humans. Most European New Zealanders have British or Irish ancestry, with smaller percentages being other European ancestries such as Germans, Poles (historically noted as ‘Germans’ due to the partitioning of Poland), French, Dutch and Scandinavians. Lesser minorities include: Greek, Turkish, Italian, Lebanese, Arab and Balkan Slavs. 

The ethnic makeup of the New Zealand population is undergoing a process of radical change because of waves of immigration, higher birth rates and increasing interracial marriages; resulting in the New Zealand population of Māori, Asians and Pacific Islanders growing at a higher rate than those of solely European descent. Over one million New Zealanders recorded in the 2013 Census were born overseas. 

Most New Zealanders are resident in New Zealand, though there is also a significant diaspora, estimated at around 750,000 people. Of these, around 640,800 live in Australia and others are heavily concentrated in the United Kingdom, the United States or Canada. In 1961 the European element in New Zealand comprised 92% of the population and the Maori 7%. By 2018 the whites comprised 72% of the total, the Maori 17% and others accounted for 11%. The United Kingdom remains the largest source of New Zealand’s immigrant population, with around a quarter of all overseas born New Zealanders born in the United Kingdom. Other major sources for New Zealand’s overseas born population include: China, India, Australia, South Africa, Fiji and Samoa. 

Despite their reputation for raping the Vikings left little trace of their DNA, Mail Online, November 1, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘Analysis of thousands of DNA samples from the UK, continental Europe and Scandinavia revealed a surprising lack of Viking genes in England, despite the Norsemen once occupying much of the country. The international team led by scientists from Oxford University and the Wellcome Trust… [and their] research, published in the journal Nature, did not find any obvious genetic footprint from the Romans or Danish Vikings. However, this is not down to a lack of virility – merely that they were not here in large enough numbers to have had enough children for their genes to live on today. Study co-leader Sir Walter Bodmer said: 

“You get a relatively small group of people who can dominate a country that they come into and there are not enough of them, however much they intermarry, to have enough of an influence that we can detect them in the genetics… At that time, the population of Britain could have been as much as one million, so an awful lot of people would need to arrive in order for there to be an impact.”

‘His colleague Professor Peter Donnelly added: 

“Genetics tells us the story of what happens to the masses. ‘There were already large numbers of people in those areas of Britain by the time the Danish Vikings came so to have a substantial impact on the genetics there would need to be very large numbers of them leaving DNA for subsequent generations. The fact we don’t get a signal is probably about numbers rather than the relative allure or lack thereof of Scandinavians to English women.”

‘Others said that the Danes may actually have been more attractive to local women because their habit of washing weekly meant they were seen as cleaner. Even in Orkney, which was a part of Norway from 875 to 1472, the Vikings contributed only about 25 per cent of the current gene pool. It suggests that the Vikings mixed very little with the indigenous population they initially terrorised and then conquered.’

On the surface, it would seem this is a valid point, but the reality is that the vast bulk of ‘Danish Vikings’, the tribe of Asher – and probably some of Naphtali too, as many ‘Australians’ originally from Britain later moved to settle in New Zealand – had left the United Kingdom. Even though they are related to the English, Welsh and Scots, they remain a distinct tribe, having left en masse. Therefore, one would not expect to find genetic ‘evidence’ of them in the United Kingdom. 

It is not about the size of a people or their impact. The Angles were the biggest tribe of the Saxons, far outnumbering the Picts, Cymry, Frisians, Jutes, Norsemen, Danes and Normans. Their genetic footprint is also negligible. This only makes sense if the vast bulk left British shores. The Romans, mainly soldiers would have intermarried with some British women and so their DNA is likely still in Britain. The key piece of information in this genetic puzzle is that as the Romans are the ancestors of the Germans (refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar), sharing similar DNA and paternal Haplogroups, particularly R1b-U106. Spotting their DNA is like looking for a needle in a haystack. It is there, but not going to be necessarily visible. 

‘The Vikings, from Norway, Sweden and Denmark, carried out extensive raids and occupations across wide areas of northern and central Europe between the eighth and late 11th centuries. Danish Vikings in particular took over large parts of England, eventually settling in an a region stretching from Essex to County Durham which was ruled by ‘Danelaw’. 

The findings support previous research from the University of Oslo suggesting that Viking men were family-orientated and not particularly bothered about the British women they conquered. Rather than Viking raiding parties consisting wholly of testosterone-charged men, researchers found that significant numbers of women, and possibly whole families, travelled on the longboats. DNA extracted from 45 Viking skeletons showed that women played an integral part in establishing settlements in the UK.’

The other salient point is that comparing DNA from the UK with ‘continental Europe and Scandinavia’ will not add anything useful as the original Vikings left Scandinavia and now live primarily in Australia and New Zealand. Not only are the Antipodeans unlike the English, the Scots and Welsh they are also not the same as the Swedes, Norwegians and Danes who are children from Abraham and his second wife Keturah – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Added to this, is the fact that the ‘Vikings’ who swarmed out of Sweden and colonised the vast tracts of Russia were not the same peoples as now living in Britain or Scandinavia – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. 

Recall in Chapter II Japheth Orientalium, we looked at the prophecy in Genesis chapter nine, verse twenty-seven regarding Japheth ‘dwelling in the tents of Shem.’ We also detailed the global agenda to ‘water-down’ the European nations in the drive towards eliminating particularly, the pure white stock of the nations of Israel – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

In Australia, between the years 1984 to 1995, forty percent of all migrants were of Asian origin. In 2003, a report revealed that fourteen percent of the residents of Perth were born in Southeast Asia – principally Vietnam. Demographic trends indicate that Australia’s residents will be twenty-seven percent Asian by 2025. Considering Third world reproduction rates and the natural shrinkage of the First World population, Australia will be close to a Third World majority population well before 2050. 

An example of an irony of the savage kind is that the largest mosque in Australia, located in Sydney, New South Wales is called the Auburn Gallipoli. This is in reference to the World War I battle where thousands of Australian troops were killed and defeated in an attempt to invade the Islamic Ottoman Empire – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. 

The First World element of New Zealand’s population is projected to drop to less than sixty percent by 2026; with the Asian population set to increase by 145% between 2001 and 2021. Predictions from the 2001 census include European children constituting 63% of all children in New Zealand in 2021 compared with 74% in 2001. The 2006 census showed that the Asian ethnicity had overtaken the Pacific Polynesian peoples into third palace and that by 2026, they will overtake the second place Maori. These stats show that it is highly likely that New Zealand will lose its majority First World population status before the year 2050. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘The lesson of Rhodesia proves that no matter how technologically proficient, no matter how militarily-capable, no matter how determined, no minority can indefinitely resist the power of demographics… The White Rhodesians failed to understand the relationship between demographics and political power… Rhodesian whites were imbued with the nineteenth century white supremacist belief that they had a paternalistic right to rule over nonwhites “for their own good”… white rule caused an explosion in black numbers as Western medicine, education, and technology boosted black numbers way beyond their natural reproduction levels. As a result, white supremacism created a racial demographic time bomb which swept away all vestiges of Western rule. 

This reality underlines the truth that demographic replacement is the sole driver of cultural change and that the majority of the population determines the nature of the society. It is a lesson that the Western world, which has imported vast numbers of nonwhites through mass immigration policies which started in the last part of the twentieth century, must learn. Failure to do so will result in them sharing the same fate of the white Rhodesians.’

Israelites in Southern Africa, Mikkel Stjernholm Kragh, 2010:

‘South Africa… has become very bad for whites since 1994. The crime rates per inhabitant for violent crimes such as murder and rape in South Africa are among the highest in the world. More than 3,600 white farmers and their family members have been murdered in farm attacks since 1987. The ANC government has made racial employment laws, Black Economic Empowerment, which bar whites from large parts of the job market. Many white South Africans had become so poor that in 2008 more than 600,000 Afrikaners lived in squatter camps. Many fear that South Africa will follow Zimbabwe’s example and completely drive out the whites. Many even call it a genocide.’

The following chapter concentrates on the birthright tribes descending from Jacob’s eleventh son, Joseph. The constant reader has now shared in the increasingly shocking revelations surrounding the true identities for Ishmael, Esau and Judah. The biblical identity of Joseph’s sons, Manasseh and Ephraim are no less profound and strikingly reshape prophetic understanding.

There is a time to look for something and a time to stop looking for it. There is a time to keep things and a time to throw things away… There is a time… to speak…

Ecclesiastes 3:6-7 New Century Version

The Teacher was very wise and taught the people what he knew. He very carefully thought about, studied, and… looked for just the right words to write what is dependable and true. Words from wise people are like… nails that have been driven in firmly… that come from one Shepherd. So be careful, my son, about other teachings.

Ecclesiastes 12:9-12 New Century Version

“The overwhelming majority of people never think and those who think never become the overwhelming majority. Choose your side.”

Elif Shafak

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

Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Chapter XXXI

In the previous chapter, we summarily mentioned the identity of Simeon as Wales. Wherever Judah is, Simeon will not just be next to them, but part of them. Only one nation and former Principality, could fulfil this role. Occupied since 1292, Wales was annexed into England by an Act of the English Parliament in 1535. While Wales ceased being a Principality by 1543, it was only in 2011 that its status as a country was made official by the ISO – International Organization for Standardization.

Scotland has its own law, distinct from English law, its own issued bank notes – though the same currency of pound sterling – and its parliament has law making powers beyond that of the Welsh Parliament, which became a Devolved National Assembly in 1999 and renamed Senedd (Parliament) in 2020. The Welsh have the same law as England and as we learned in the preceding chapter, since 1542 they constitute with England, the Kingdom of England – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The ‘lost ten tribes’ is a misnomer as all thirteen tribes were lost. The separating of the tribes into ten for the Kingdom of Israel and two for the Kingdom of Judah is misleading, as not just the House of Benjamin were united with the House of Judah, but many from the family of Kohath a son of Levi, as well as the tribe of Simeon were integral to the United Kingdom of Judah. As these four are remarkably yet without coincidence the core of the United Kingdom of Great Britain today. Presently, Northern Ireland is part of that United Kingdom, though for how long? For its destiny is to join its Israelite brothers. 

It is ironically, ten tribes if we include Joseph as split into three: Ephraim; the half tribe of West Manasseh; and the half tribe of East Manasseh. If we don’t split them, as identity researchers would, then it would technically be the ‘eight’ lost tribes: Joseph, Reuben, Issachar, Zebulun, Gad, Asher, Dan and Naphtali. 

As Judah is typically ascribed to the Jews and Benjamin either to the Jews or to Abraham and Keturah’s children in Norway (or Iceland); Simeon is subscribed to either Scotland or rightfully, Wales. One identity expert presents a case for the American Irish. In this investigation, Northern England was also considered for Simeon. 

Reuben and Gad maintained a close historical relationship, which we will see replicated by other brothers; in that half brothers invariably formed closer relationships and dwelt adjacent to each other instead of with a full blood brother. In this case, Gad from Leah’s handmaid Zilpah and Reuben the firstborn of Leah both crossed the River Jordan to settle in the eastern border lands of Israel in Canaan. They lived in close proximity with East Manasseh, Ammon and Moab. Today, they live next to each other and share the land of the Emerald Isle. They are in juxtapostion with the three nations on the British mainland and to the (far) west is the half tribe of East Manasseh as would be expected. 

Gad is the Republic of Ireland and Reuben is located within Northern Ireland, dominated by the historical Province of Ulster. As the brothers Reuben, Simeon and Levi with their half brother Gad are all intertwined in their histories and sharing the British Isles, it is logical to discuss them within the same chapter. We will probably revert back to Benjamin and the Picts at times because of their common past living in Northern Ireland, prior to settling in Alba – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Genesis 29:31-34; 30:9-11

English Standard Version

31 ‘When the Lord saw that Leah was hated [loved less than Rachel], he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren. 32 And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben [see a Son], for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”

33 She conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon [heard].

34 Again she conceived and bore a son, and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi [attached]…

9 When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. 10 Then Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son. 11 And Leah said, “Good fortune has come!” so she called his name Gad [good fortune].’

Reuben’s name derives from the verb ra’a, ‘to see’ or ‘understand’ and the noun ben, ‘son’ meaning ‘behold a son, son of vision, a son who’s seen.’ Reuben was Jacob’s first son, born in 1752 BCE (according to an unconventional chronology) and the first with wife Leah.

Recall that the prefix Reu is a family name for Arphaxad’s descendants. Reu was a son of Peleg; there is Reuel, a son of Esau; a Reuel associated with the family name of Moses’s father-in-law (refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia); a Benjamite (1 Chronicles 9:8); and interestingly, a chief of Gad, Eliasaph, had a father who was called Reuel – Numbers 2:14. 

Simeon was the second son born to Jacob and Leah in 1750 BCE and his name comes from the verb shama’, ‘to hear.’ Levi was Jacob and Leah’s third son, born in 1748 BCE and his name stems from the verb lawa, ‘to join’ or ‘connect.’

Gad meanwhile, was born in 1744 BCE to Leah’s handmaid Zilpah. Gad was Jacob’s seventh son, Leah’s fifth including Zilpah’s sons and Zilpah’s eldest of two – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. Gad’s name derives from the verb gadad, ‘to cut, invade’ and ‘expose.’ Jones’s Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names says: ‘Good luck.’

Everyone has heard of “the luck of the Irish.” This saying is applicable to the Irish of the Republic.

The people in Ireland are the descendants of Gad. Gad is invariably ascribed to Switzerland and one identity expert offers Sweden while another, Germany. Reuben is unanimously identified incorrectly as France. We have discussed the Swiss descended from Haran; and the French and their ancestors Moab and Ammon; as well as the Swedes who descend from Keturah – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Reuben’s descendants equate primarily to the Protestant peoples of Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has a unique status, for he is ‘a son who’s seen, or behold a son’, as in a people… not a sovereign state; not a province, as it comprises six of the total nine counties of Ulster; not a nation; though it is both a region and constituent country of the United Kingdom. 

Genesis 34:1-31

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the women of the land. 2 And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he seized her and lay with her and humiliated her. 3 And his soul was drawn to Dinah the daughter of Jacob. He loved the young woman and spoke tenderly to her. 

4 So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, “Get me this girl for my wife.”

5 Now Jacob heard that he had defiled his daughter Dinah. But his sons were with his livestock in the field, so Jacob held his peace until they came. 6 And Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to speak with him. 7 The sons of Jacob had come in from the field as soon as they heard of it, and the men were indignant and very angry, because he had done an outrageous thing in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter, for such a thing must not be done.’

Shechem had a strange way of showing his love for Dinah, through rape. Afterwards, Shechem became obsessed with Dinah. Dinah must have been alluring in personality as well as in looks.

Dinah

One wonders what seeing ‘the women of the land’ means. Did Shechem mis-read Dinah and then realise she was unique and that he wanted her as his wife. We have discussed the fact that Dinah was Zebulun’s twin. This means she was Leah’s last of seven children. Leah was thirty-four in 1740 BCE when she gave birth to Dinah. 

After Jacob had left his father-in-law, Laban and reconciled with Esau in 1720 BCE, he settled in Shechem. Thus Dinah visiting the women of the land, would have been locally where they were living. In the article: Job, we study the possibility his second wife was a descendant of Dinah.

Genesis: 8 ‘But Hamor spoke with them, saying, “The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him to be his wife. 9 Make marriages with us. Give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for yourselves.

10 You shall dwell with us, and the land shall be open to you. Dwell and trade in it, and get property in it.” 11 Shechem also said to her father and to her brothers, “Let me find favor in your eyes, and whatever you say to me I will give. 12 Ask me for as great a bride-price and gift as you will, and I will give whatever you say to me. Only give me the young woman to be my wife.”

We have studied the Hivites and the different peoples who went by that name: the original Hivites from Canaan’s son Hiv (refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa**); Nephilim related Elioud giants (refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega); and the fact that certain descendants of Shem also became known by Canaanite names after the original sons of Canaan had migrated to North Africa – refer Chapter XXVI Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.*

These Hivites fall into the third category and their link with the Midianites* and Kenites was explored earlier. What is also interesting is that these circumstances of the Israelites living adjacent to the Hivites and the Hivite’s willingness to share has been replicated in South Africa – modern day Sidon* (refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil**) – between the Afrikaners and the British. We will also find that Dinah’s connection with the Hivite, Shechem and the fact her twin brother is Zebulun, much more than a passing coincidence – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. 

Genesis: 13 ‘The sons of Jacob answered Shechem and his father Hamor deceitfully, because he had defiled their sister Dinah. 14 They said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a disgrace to us. 15 Only on this condition will we agree with you – that you will become as we are by every male among you being circumcised. 16 Then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters to ourselves, and we will dwell with you and become one people [a boldfaced lie]. 17 But if you will not listen to us and be circumcised, then we will take our daughter, and we will be gone.”

18 ‘Their words pleased Hamor and Hamor’s son Shechem. 19 And the young man did not delay to do the thing, because he delighted in Jacob’s daughter [they may have been married at this point]. Now he was the most honored of all his father’s house. 20 So Hamor and his son Shechem came to the gate of their city and spoke to the men of their city, saying, 21 “These men are at peace with us; let them dwell in the land and trade in it, for behold, the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters as wives, and let us give them our daughters. 22 Only on this condition will the men agree to dwell with us to become one people – when every male among us is circumcised as they are circumcised. 

23 Will not their livestock, their property and all their beasts be ours? Only let us agree with them, and they will dwell with us.” 24 And all who went out of the gate of his city listened to Hamor and his son Shechem, and every male was circumcised, all who went out of the gate of his city.

25 On the third day, when they were sore, two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s [elder] brothers, took their swords and came against the city while it felt secure [at night] and killed all the males. 26 They killed Hamor and his son Shechem with the sword and took Dinah out of Shechem’s house and went away. 27 The [other] sons of Jacob came upon the slain and plundered the city, because they had defiled their sister.’ 

The incident reminds of David’s mission given to him by Saul for the hand of his daughter, Michal. Whereby David killed two hundred Philistines for their foreskins – 1 Samuel 18:27.

It was a cruel trick which began with a lie and ended in murder; though none less than Shechem deserved. For Shechem had abused his position of authority to do as he liked, assuming Jacob’s family would accept his whims. It would have been enough to stop there, particularly as Shechem wished to make amends and do right by Dinah. It is here that we learn more about Simeon and Levi. If Dinah was about twenty-five – it may have happened earlier – it would have been 1717 BCE and Simeon would have been thirty-three and Levi, thirty-one. 

Levi and Simeon

It is apparent that Simeon and Levi were very similar, they were both emotional and impetuous and they acted in one accord, believing a savage act of retribution was moral. It is admirable that they sought justice for Dinah’s shame, though it was a step too far. It circumnavigated the future that the Creator may have preferred for Shechem, Dinah and not forgetting Simeon. Note that Simeon’s brothers supported him and Levi in following up what they had started. Intriguingly, it did not seem to deter the Eternal from giving Levi’s descendants the responsibility of the priesthood.

Genesis: 28 ‘They took their flocks and their herds, their donkeys, and whatever was in the city and in the field. 29 All their wealth, all their little ones and their wives, all that was in the houses, they captured and plundered. 30 Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, “You have brought trouble on me by making me stink to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites. My numbers are few, and if they gather themselves against me and attack me, I shall be destroyed, both I and my household.” 31 But they said, “Should he treat our sister like a prostitute?”

The chapter ends abruptly, with Simeon and Levi unrepentant. Though the trouble Jacob envisioned either didn’t happen or didn’t amount to much. As they were living near the Hivites, it makes sense Jacob was concerned. Jacob is displaying his customary worry; a trait of his which we have witnessed previously and his not always relying on the Eternal as much as he could. The Hivites and their allies may have deemed the Israelites too dangerous and decided to let it lie. 

Previously, we read the Genesis account about Joseph in Egypt when his brothers visited in 1687 BCE during the seven years of famine which lasted between 1689 to 1682 BCE. We have discussed Jacob’s, Judah and Benjamin’s involvement. Reuben and Simeon are also expounded upon in the narrative. 

Genesis 42:18-37; 43:16-23

English Standard Version

18 ‘On the third day Joseph said to them, “Do this and you will live, for I fear God: 19 if you are honest men, let one of your brothers remain confined where you are in custody, and let the rest go and carry grain for the famine of your households, 20 and bring your youngest brother [Benjamin] to me. So your words will be verified, and you shall not die.” And they did so. 21 Then they said to one another, “In truth we are guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the distress of his soul, when he begged us and we did not listen. That is why this distress has come upon us.”

22 And Reuben answered them, “Did I not tell you not to sin against the boy? But you did not listen. So now there comes a reckoning for his blood.” 23 They did not know that Joseph understood them, for there was an interpreter between them. 24 Then he turned away from them and wept. And he returned to them and spoke to them. And he took Simeon from them and bound him before their eyes. 25 And Joseph gave orders to fill their bags with grain, and to replace every man’s money in his sack, and to give them provisions for the journey. This was done for them.

35 As they emptied their sacks, behold, every man’s bundle of money was in his sack. And when they and their father saw their bundles of money, they were afraid. 36 And Jacob their father said to them, “You have bereaved me of my children: Joseph is no more, and Simeon is no more, and now you would take Benjamin. All this has come against me.”

37 Then Reuben said to his father, “Kill my two sons [Hanoch and Pallu were the eldest and second born of four sons] if I do not bring him back to you. Put him in my hands, and I will bring him back to you.” 

16 When Joseph saw Benjamin with them, he said to the steward of his house, “Bring the men into the house, and slaughter an animal and make ready, for the men are to dine with me at noon.” 17 The man did as Joseph told him and brought the men to Joseph’s house. 18 And the men were afraid because they were brought to Joseph’s house, and they said, “It is because of the money, which was replaced in our sacks the first time, that we are brought in, so that he may assault us and fall upon us to make us servants and seize our donkeys.” 

19 So they went up to the steward of Joseph’s house and spoke with him at the door of the house, 20 and said, “Oh, my lord, we came down the first time to buy food. 21 And when we came to the lodging place we opened our sacks, and there was each man’s money in the mouth of his sack, our money in full weight. So we have brought it again with us, 22 and we have brought other money down with us to buy food. We do not know who put our money in our sacks.” 23 He replied, “Peace to you, do not be afraid. Your God and the God of your father has put treasure in your sacks for you. I received your money.” Then he brought Simeon out to them.’

Recall that Reubens’s secret plan was to release Joseph so that he wouldn’t die. Judah resorted to a plan that also meant Jospeh wouldn’t die, but unlike Reuben’s plan it meant pretending he had died and making money from selling him at the same time. 

Reuben again, feels honour bound to make a bad situation better by offering at that time, both his sons. It is not clear why Simeon is selected to be held as a prisoner. It poses a series of questions. The only matter we know about Simeon is his act of vengeful violence. Could this have been on Joseph’s mind? Dinah is never spoken of again after Simeon and Levi’s atrocity. Some offer that Dinah may have died with her husband during the chaos of that night. If so, circa 1717 BCE meant Joseph would have been nine or ten years of age. Joseph may have held Simeon accountable if Dinah had been lost. If Job married a descendant of Dinah (refer article: Job) as alleged, did she have a child by Shechem? 

Genesis 48:5

English Standard Version

5 ‘And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are.’

Jacob is speaking to Joseph and in a dramatic turn of events, takes or adopts his two grandsons as his very own sons. This means they would inherit (share) in the birthright blessings promised to Joseph. The birthright if you will, skipped a generation, or, Manasseh and Ephraim were each elevated as actual sons of Jacob. Twelve sons became thirteen. What is very interesting is that Reuben and Simeon are stated together. Was the original intention to split the birthright blessing? 

Recall the sceptre of rulership and royalty was given to Jacob’s fourth son Judah. The Priestly line of service was to be given to Levi, Jacob’s third born son. It appears credible that Reuben and Simeon were to be the recipients of a split blessing. If so, this means one of the peoples who became the Welsh and the Northern Irish would have instead become a great nation and the other would have become an even greater nation comprising many peoples – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. All four sons were born to Jacob’s wife Leah and all four sons were caught out in compromising acts of weakness of character. Judah’s were discussed in length in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The descriptions of Jacob’s sons, including future prophecies are addressed by Jacob, Moses and the fourth Judge of ancient Israel, Deborah.

Genesis 49:5-7

English Standard Version

5 “Simeon and Levi are [close] brothersweapons of violence are their swords

The Message: ‘Simeon and Levi are two of a kind, ready to fight at the drop of a hat.’

Simeon and Levi were joined at the hip as they say and were obviously very close siblings. Being inseparable, they like many brothers and sisters ‘brought out the worst in each other.’ The King James version says that the brothers were ‘instruments of cruelty.’

Historically, a sword is one of the symbols for Simeon as are fortifications (or castles). Interestingly, there are far more castles in Wales than any other country in the world per square mile; approximately six hundred, with some being inhabited for over a thousand years.

Genesis: 6 ‘Let my soul come not into their council [their discussions]; O my glory, be not joined to their company [their plans]. For in their anger they killed men, and in their willfulness [H7522 ratsown: ‘pleasure, desire, self-will’] they hamstrung [H6131 aqar: cut] oxen. 

Counsel should not be sought from people with quick tempers rising to uncontrolled anger, for they are unstable due to their lack of self-control. The Hebrew word aqar means to hobble a creature. Simeon and Levi took pleasure in maiming animals for sport.

7 ‘Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce, and their wrath, for it is cruel! I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel.’

Clearly, these were not men to trifle with and exhibited what could be politely called a fiery (Celtic) temperament. The Eternal was not impressed with their actions, though in the case of Levi at least a measure of forgiveness was granted in choosing his male descendants for the levitical priesthood. It would seem that Levi expressed a penitent attitude. Prominent descendants of Levi include the judges, Eli and Samuel; the scribe and priest, Ezra; the prophet, John the Baptist; and the brother-in-law of Peter, Barnabas.

The punishment for the brothers actions was to diminish their standing as sons of Jacob and strip them of tribal status, absorbing them into the remaining eleven tribes. The key reason for this was because Simeon and Levi misused the circumcision rite, which was an act of setting people apart as sanctified before the Eternal. The brothers had misused it as a weapon of war and revenge.

The Creator relents for both* brothers and lessens their sentences. In the last chapter it was mentioned that Levi and his descendants were given the role of the Priesthood and ministration as well becoming in today’s parlance, the teachers, lawyers and civil servants of society. Though, they were still to be scattered amongst the Israelite nations. The majority of which as Levi means, attached themselves to the tribes associated with the Kingdom of Judah – Simeon and Benjamin. Today they equate to the nations of England, Wales and Scotland.

In Judges chapter five, Deborah addresses eleven of the fourteen Tribal splits. The three not mentioned, are Simeon, Levi and Judah who did not take part in the war against the kings of Canaan. In Deuteronomy chapter thirty-three, Moses adds additional prophecies to Jacob’s. The only omission, is Simeon. This is because they were going to be closely aligned with the tribe of Judah. Levi on the other hand, has a more lengthy discourse than some of his brothers.

Joshua 19:1, 9

English Standard Version

‘The second lot [first lot: Benjamin] came out for Simeon  according to their clans… The inheritance of the people of Simeon formed part of the territory of the people of Judah. Because the portion of the people of Judah was too large for them, the people of Simeon obtained an inheritance* in the midst of their inheritance’ – Judges 1:3.

In dual parallelism, the Welsh people today form a separate nation that is yet also, still part of and within the geo-political entity, the Kingdom of England.

Deuteronomy 33:8-11

English Standard Version

8 ‘And of Levi he said, “Give to Levi your Thummim, and your Urim to your godly one, whom you tested at Massah, with whom you quarreled at the waters of Meribah…’

The account of Massah and Meribah is given in Exodus 17:1-7. The people were thirsty from lack of water when they camped at Rephidim in the wilderness of Sin. Rephidim was Nephilim territory. It is ironic symbolism that the land had no water [Jude 1:12, “… waterless clouds…”]. They quarrelled with Moses and tempted the Eternal by saying: “Is the Lord among us or not?” Hence Massah means ‘tempted’ and Meribah, ‘quarrel’. The Eternal did provide water, through a miracle of water gushing from a large rock, after Moses struck it with his staff. 

The Urim and Thummim was a priestly device for obtaining oracles on decisions. The high priest’s ephod, an apron-like garment had a breast piece, which was an inlaid pouch with twelve precious stones engraved with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel – Exodus 28:15–30; Leviticus 8:8. 

Finding the Will of God, Dr Bruce Waltke, page 62-64 – emphasis mine: 

‘The priest could use the urim and thummin to determine God’s will in a particular situation… the priest carried in his breastplate perhaps two… stones, one white and the other black, that would give a yes or no answer to a specific question’ – refer article: The Christ Chronology.

‘Should Israel be preparing for battle, they would somehow shake or toss the [stones]. If they turned up black the Israelites would not go to battle, and if they turned up white they would proceed into battle with the knowledge that they were in the will of God. We read in Exodus 28:30, “Also put the Urim and the Thummin in the breastpiece, so they may be over Aaron’s heart whenever he enters the presence of the Lord. Thus Aaron will always bear the means of making decisions for the Israelites over his heart before the Lord.”

‘1 Samuel 28:6 makes clear a definite answer was not always obtainable, so it may not have been as simple as tossing two stones on [the] ground. Moses never used them; they were given for the high priest in aiding those who could not find God’s guidance any other way. Some translate the words urim and thummin to mean “curse” and “blessing,” others simply “dark” and “light,” although the literal translation [from the Hebrew is]… “light” and “perfections.” 

‘The Old Testament seems to indicate that the urim and thummin faded from use during the early days of Israel’s monarchy, and are only referred to once after the Babylonian exile. This may be so because the institution of monarchy God inaugurated the office of prophet. The prophets now participated in God’s heavenly court and communicated God’s messages to the courts in Jerusalem and Samaria. Apparently prophets who revealed God’s word to the king replaced the urim and thummin, through which He revealed His mind to the priest. Nevertheless, we still find Ezra using this device to determine the ancestry of the priests who returned from the exile in Ezra 2.63. After this the Bible never mentions the urim and thummin again.’ 

Deuteronomy: 9 ‘who said of his father and mother, ‘I regard them not’; he disowned his brothers and ignored his children. For they observed your word and kept your covenant.’

This appears to be speaking of Levi, yet it is ultimately Aaron who would have the responsibility for carrying the Urim and Thummim on his breast plate and of casting them in decisions. We have read about this ceremony in connection with the sacrificial goat named Azazel on the Day of Atonement – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Deuteronomy: 10 ‘They shall teach Jacob your rules and Israel your law; they shall put incense before you and whole burnt offerings on your altar.’

Many Levites and all the priests did not have an easy task. It was hard work maintaining the Tabernacle in their forty odd year trek through the wilderness during the years 1446 to 1400 CE – and then beyond until the first Temple from 959 to 586 BCE and the second Temple from 516 BCE till its destruction in 70 CE – including the sacrificing of animals on a daily basis as well as the ceremonial seven times a year for the annual festivals. It was both burdensome and bloody.

This is a significant reason why the Son of Man’s sacrifice was liberating. It ended all the ritualistic statutes, judgements and laws that pertained to the levitical sacrificial system. It wasn’t so much a blessing to Levi and his descendants, but a burden of responsibility. Even so, Moses calls for the Creator to bless* and protect Levi and his descendants, in a statement remarkably echoing the one given to Judah regarding his enemies.

Deuteronomy: 11 ‘Bless, O Lord, his substance, and accept the work of his hands; crush the loins of his adversaries, of those who hate him, that they rise not again.”

In the Book of Jubilees, we previously read of Isaac’s blessing for Judah. Issac also blesses Levi, separately from Jacob.

Book of Jubilees 31:12-17

12 ‘And the spirit of prophecy came down into [Isaac’s] mouth, and he took Levi by his right hand and Judah by his left. 13 And he turned to Levi first, and began to bless him first, and said to him:

May the Almighty of all, the very Yahweh of all the ages, bless you and your children throughout all the ages. 14 And may Yahweh give to you and to your seed greatness and great splendor, and cause you and your seed, from among all flesh, to approach Him to serve in His sanctuary… 15 And they shall be judges and princes, and chiefs of all the seed of the sons of Jacob; They shall speak the word of Yahweh in righteousness, And they shall judge all His judgments in righteousness. And they shall declare My ways to Jacob And My paths to Israel. The blessing of Yahweh shall be given in their mouths To bless all the seed of the beloved. 

16 Your mother has called your name Levi, And justly has she called your name; You shall be joined to Yahweh And be the companion of all the sons of Jacob [scattered in Israel]; Let His table be yours, And do you and your sons eat thereof; And may your table be full unto all generations, And your food fail not unto all the ages. 17 And let all who hate you fall down before you, And let all your adversaries be rooted out and perish; And blessed be he that blesses* you, And cursed be every nation that curses you.’

Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950 – emphasis mine: 

‘Simeon received no blessing from Moses. In fact, he does not even mention the tribe! Jacob said God would scatter them throughout Israel. How? Take a map of Palestine for the time of the division of the land. Notice that Simeon did have an inheritance South of Judah. When Judah separated from Israel, Judah occupied that territory, yet Simeon went with Israel! The only explanation is that Simeon migrated into Israel generally, but no new territory was assigned to Simeon. This tribe became scattered. It is possible that the small scattered tribes in Western Europe, variously called the Senones or Semaones or Sennones, represented the fragments of the tribe of Simeon.’ 

It isn’t the only explanation as we have learned. Simeon didn’t go with Israel immediately; instead, the tribe was an integral part of Judah alongside Benjamin.

Hoeh: ‘Levi, the priestly tribe, was to be scattered in Israel (Genesis 49:5-7). God never gave them land to inherit as the other tribes. Therefore, we should not expect them to be given territory today. Nothing is said in Deuteronomy 33 about inheriting land. Among the Jews today we find many bearing the names: Levi, Levy, Levine. Others bear the name “Cohen” and its variations. The Hebrew word “Kohen” means priest and is so translated 725 times in the King James version. Here then, we have the great bulk of Levi scattered among Judah because they left their priestly functions in Israel almost totally (I Kings 12:31).’ 

Agreed, that the priestly Levites of Kohath, from Aaron were associated with the true tribe of Judah and not the Jews – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Though they are not to be equated with ‘the great bulk of Levi.’ Levi was scattered amongst all the tribes, as all priests were Levites, but not all Levites were priests. 

Certain Simeonites are named who went up against Sier and the Amalekites and defeated them, living in part of their land. 1 Chronicles 4:42-43 ESV:  ‘And some of them, five hundred men of the Simeonites, went to Mount Seir, having as their leaders Pelatiah, Neariah, Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi. And they defeated the remnant of the Amalekites who had escaped…’ Numbers 13:5 ESV gives the name of the Simeonite sent with others to spy out Canaan before they invaded: ‘… from the tribe of Simeon, Shaphat the son of Hori [remarkably similar to Sier’s forbear Hor, as in Horite].’

A selection of verses supporting the close bond Judah and Simeon shared geographically and politically, just as England and Wales exhibit today.

1 Chronicles 6:65

English Standard Version

‘They gave by lot out of the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin these cities that are mentioned by name.’

Joshua 21:9

English Standard Version

‘Out of the tribe of the people of Judah and the tribe of the people of Simeon they gave the following cities mentioned by name…’

Judges 1:3, 17

English Standard Version

‘And Judah said to Simeon his brother, “Come up with me into the territory allotted to me, that we may fight against the Canaanites. And I likewise will go with you into the territory allotted to you.” So Simeon went with him… 17 And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they defeated the Canaanites who inhabited Zephath and devoted it to destruction…’

In the Book of Jubilees we learn of the names of the wives of Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Gad, with the Book of Jasher offering further details.

Book of Jubilees 34:20-21

‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives.

The name of Reuben’s wife is ‘Ada;

and the name of Simeon’s wife is Adlbaa, a Canaanite;

and the name of Levi’s wife is Melka, of the daughters of Aram, of the seed of the sons of Terah [the same as Benjamin]…

and the name of Gad’s wife, Maka

And Simeon repented, and took a second wife from Mesopotamia as his brothers.’

As the Book of Jasher tends to be a more reliable source than the Book of Jubilees, its details are favoured in this instance – except perhaps for Levi.

Book of Jasher 45:1-3, 5-6, 9-10

1 ‘… Reuben the son of Jacob went to Timnah and took unto him for a wife Eliuram, the daughter of Avi the Canaanite, and he came to her. 2 And Eliuram the wife of Reuben conceived and bare him Hanoch, Palu, Chetzron and Carmi, four sons…

2 … Simeon his brother took his sister Dinah for a wife, and she bare unto him Memuel, Yamin, Ohad, Jachin and Zochar, five sons. 3 And he afterward came to Bunah the Canaanitish woman, the same is Bunah whom Simeon took captive from the city of Shechem, and Bunah was before Dinah and attended upon her, and Simeon came to her, and she bare unto him Saul.*

5 … Levi… went to the land of the east, and… took… for [a wife a daughter] of Jobab the son of Joktan, the son of Eber; and Jobab the son of Yoktan had two daughters; the name of the elder was Adinah… 6 And Levi took Adinah, and… came to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house, and Adinah bare unto Levi, Gershon, Kehath and Merari; three sons.

9 … Gad… went to Haran and took… [a daughter] of Amuram the son of Uz, the son of Nahor… 10… and the name of the [youngest daughter] Uzith… and Gad took Uzith; and brought [her] to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house. 11… Uzith bare unto Gad Zephion, Chagi, Shuni, Ezbon, Eri, Arodi and Arali, seven sons’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

It is not clear who the identity of Reuben’s wife is. As his brothers, Judah and Simeon had a propensity for marrying Canaanite women, a women of Black descent cannot be ruled out.

It seems unlikely that Simeon took his sister Dinah as a wife, though the question would remain who his first wife was if his second Canaanite wife gave him only his son Saul (Shaul).*

Whereas, Levi plausibly either took a wife from Joktan’s family, which equates to the predominantly Slavic speaking peoples of Eastern Europe today – and of whom Keturah was related – or from the same line that his half-brother Benjamin had married.

Gad is stated as marrying from the line of Nahor, similar to that of Isaac and Jacob.

In Numbers chapter one, census numbers for the tribes two years after they left Egypt are listed. The Levites are not included in the census figures. These are the numbers for the tribes we have covered this far, including Judah and Benjamin which weren’t included in the previous chapter.

1 ‘The Lord spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tent of meeting, on the first day of the second month [New Moon, April/May], in the second year after they had come out of the land of Egypt [in 1444 BCE], saying, 2 “Take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel, by clans, by fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, every male, head by head. 3 From twenty years old and upward, all in Israel who are able to go to war, you and Aaron shall list them, company by company. 

21 those listed of the tribe of Reuben were 46,500 [4th highest].

23 those listed of the tribe of Simeon were 59,300 [2nd].

25 those listed of the tribe of Gad were 45,650 [3rd].

27 those listed of the tribe of Judah were 74,600 [1st].

37 those listed of the tribe of Benjamin were 35,400 [5th].

47 ‘But the Levites were not listed along with them by their ancestral tribe. 48 For the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 49 “Only the tribe of Levi you shall not list, and you shall not take a census of them among the people of Israel. 50 But appoint the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, and over all its furnishings, and over all that belongs to it. They are to carry the tabernacle and all its furnishings, and they shall take care of it and shall camp around the tabernacle… And if any outsider comes near, he shall be put to death. 52 The people of Israel shall pitch their tents by their companies, each man in his own camp and each man by his own standard. 53 But the Levites shall camp around the tabernacle of the testimony… And the Levites shall keep guard over the tabernacle of the testimony.”

Notice that Judah is by far the biggest tribe of these five, as England has a sizeable population today and note Simeon is second. The respective sons and clans of the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Gad.

Genesis 46:8-16

English Standard Version

8 ‘Now these are the names of the descendants of Israel, who came into Egypt, Jacob and his sons.

Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn, 9 and the sons of Reuben [4]:

Hanoch [inaugarated], Pallu [distinguished], Hezron [enclosure], and Carmi [vinedresser]. 

10 The sons of Simeon [6]:

Jemuel [God’s day], Jamin, Ohad [to praise], Jachin [established], Zohar [tawny], and Shaul, the son of a Canaanite woman* [Exodus 6.15]. 

11 The sons of Levi [3]:

Gershon [exiled], Kohath [congregation], and Merari [bitter]. 

16 The sons of Gad [7]:

Ziphion [hidden], Haggi [festive], Shuni [silence], Ezbon [undertsand], Eri [focused], Arodi, and Areli [lion of God]. 

Gad’s son Eri may have an etymological link with the names Eri-n and Ire for Ireland. Hanoch was also the name of one of Midian’s five sons, a son of Abraham and Keturah – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Another census was taken as they were entering Canaan some forty years later, circa 1404 BCE.

Numbers 26:1-65

English Standard Version

1 ‘After the plague, the Lord said to Moses and to Eleazar the son of Aaron, the priest, 2 “Take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel, from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers’ houses, all in Israel who are able to go to war.” 3 And Moses and Eleazar the priest spoke with them in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho… 

These are the clans of the Reubenites, and those listed were 43,730 [-2,770]. 8 And the sons of Pallu: Eliab. 9 The sons of Eliab: Nemuel, Dathan, and Abiram. These are the Dathan and Abiram, chosen from the congregation, who contended against Moses and Aaron in the company of Korah [a descendant of Kohath (Levi)], when they contended against the Lord 10 and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up together with Korah, when that company died, when the fire devoured 250 men, and they became a warning. 11 But the sons of Korah did not die.

14 These are the clans of the Simeonites, 22,200 [-37,100].

18 These are the clans of the sons of Gad as they were listed, 40,500 [-5,150].

51 This was the list of the people of Israel, 601,730.’

Did the reader spot the marginal decrease in Reuben’s numbers; slightly more in Gad’s population between the two censuses; and more importantly, the sizeable decrease in the Simeon’s numbers? They went from the second biggest tribe to the second^ smallest. We will look at this anomaly shortly.

Numbers: 58 ‘These are the clans of Levi: the clan of the Libnites, the clan of the Hebronites, the clan of the Mahlites, the clan of the Mushites, the clan of the Korahites.

And Kohath was the father of Amram. 59 The name of Amram’s wife was Jochebed the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt. And she bore to Amram Aaron and Moses and Miriam their sister. 60 And to Aaron were born Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. 61 But Nadab and Abihu died when they offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. 62 And those listed were 23,000^, every male from a month old and upward. For they were not listed among the people of Israel, because there was no inheritance given to them among the people of Israel. 

63 These were those listed by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who listed the people of Israel… 64 But among these there was not one of those listed by Moses and Aaron the priest, who had listed the people of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai. 65 For the Lord had said of them, “They shall die in the wilderness.” Not one of them was left, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun.’

The extended family and clans for Simeon are listed in the Book of Chronicles.

 1 Chronicles 4:24-43

English Standard Version

24 ‘The sons of Simeon: Nemuel [Jemuel], Jamin [the right hand], Jarib [he contends], Zerah, Shaul [jackal, fox]; 25 Shallum [retribution] was his son, Mibsam his son, Mishma his son. 26 The sons of Mishma: Hammuel his son, Zaccur his son, Shimei [famous] his son.

27 Shimei had sixteen sons and six daughters; but his brothers did not have many children, nor did all their clan multiply like the men of Judah. 28 They lived in… five cities, 33 along with all their villages that were around these cities as far as Baal. These were their settlements, and they kept a genealogical record.

34 Meshobab, Jamlech, Joshah the son of Amaziah, 35 Joel, Jehu the son of Joshibiah, son of Seraiah, son of Asiel, 36 Elioenai, Jaakobah, Jeshohaiah, Asaiah, Adiel, Jesimiel, Benaiah, 37 Ziza the son of Shiphi, son of Allon, son of Jedaiah, son of Shimri, son of Shemaiah – 38 these mentioned by name were princes in their clans, and their fathers’ houses increased greatly. 39 They journeyed to the entrance of Gedor, to the east side of the valley, to seek pasture for their flocks, 40 where they found rich, good pasture, and the land was very broad, quiet, and peaceful, for the former inhabitants there belonged to Ham [Canaan].’

Three of Simeon’s six sons have had a name change between the Book of Genesis and the Book of Chronicles. Either that, or they have died and Simeon had another three sons. Ohad, Jachin and Zohar are the original names and the new names are Jarib, Zerah (a family name of Judah) and Shallum.

1 Chronicles 5:1-26

English Standard Version

1 ‘The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel (for he was the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s couch, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph the son of Israel, so that he could not be enrolled as the oldest son; 2 though Judah became strong among his brothers and a chief came from him, yet the birthright belonged to Joseph), 

3 the sons of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel: Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi. 4 The sons of Joel: Shemaiah his son, Gog [high] his son, Shimei his son, 5 Micah his son, Reaiah his son, Baal [Lord, possessor] his son, 6 Beerah his son, whom Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria carried away into exile; he was a chief of the Reubenites.

10 And in the days of Saul they waged war against the Hagrites [refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of  Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar**], who fell into their hand. And they lived in their tents throughout all the region east of Gilead.’

Two of Reuben’s descendants are worth noting. The first is Gog and the second is Baal. Both formidable names. We touched on the giants in British history named Gog and Magog – or it may have been one giant – and the record of giants in Northern Ireland, in the preceding chapter. The name Gog therefore is quite a coincidence. The name Baal is associated with worship of the Prince of Darkness. It is of even more interest because as we have covered in other chapters, Baal is the storm god and his symbol includes the Bull from the constellation Taurus – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Northern Ireland has a plethora of names which include the prefix Baal. Two that standout are Bel-fast and Bal-lymena. Others include: Belleek, Belalt, Ballycastle, Ballygowen and Ballyward. Reuben has left many such names throughout Ireland as well: Ballyshannon, Ballina, Balbriggan and Ballybunnion for example.

1 Chronicles: 11 ‘The sons of Gad lived over against [Reuben] in the land of Bashan… 12 Joel the chief, Shapham the second, Janai, and Shaphat… 13 And their kinsmen according to their fathers’ houses: Michael, Meshullam, Sheba [family name of Abraham, Joktan and Cush], Jorai, Jacan, Zia and Eber [family name of Arphaxad], seven.

14 These were the sons of Abihail the son of Huri, son of Jaroah, son of Gilead [family name of Manasseh], son of Michael, son of Jeshishai, son of Jahdo, son of Buz [family name of Nahor]. 15 Ahi the son of Abdiel, son of Guni [family name of Naphtali], was chief in their fathers’ houses, 16 and they lived in Gilead, in Bashan and in its towns, and in all the pasturelands* of Sharon [great plain]* to their limits.

The words sharon and shannon may be linked, as shannon in Hebrew means fertile plain* and in Irish it means ‘old river’. A plain is fertile because it is close to a river or water. Ironically, there is a renowned Irish musician called… Sharon Shannon.

1 Chronicles: 18 ‘The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh had valiant men who carried shield and sword, and drew the bow, expert in war… 19 They waged war against the Hagrites [sons of Hagar**], Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab. 20 And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands, for they cried out to God in the battle, and he granted their urgent plea because they trusted in him. 21 They carried off their livestock: 50,000 of their camels, 250,000 sheep, 2,000 donkeys, and 100,000 men alive.

… 26 the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan… [in Media].’

A significant number from the tribes of Reuben and Gad were taken into captivity together, after living next to each other for some six hundred and seventy years. It is no surprise if they migrated across Europe following each other and if they are now living adjacent to one another, across an expanse of water (the Irish Sea), from Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, who had also shared a geographical proximity. Replicated today in England, Wales and Scotland.

In Luke 3:23-38 we read of Christ’s adoptive Father’s lineage, from Judah to David and included are men who are called related tribal family names:

29 ‘… Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David…’ 

In Ezekiel chapter forty-eight, the Prophet Ezekiel describes a visionary city and the portions the twelve tribes occupy; with Manasseh and Ephraim included together. Four gates on each of the four sides are described:

Ezekiel 48:30-35

English Standard Version

30 “These shall be the exits of the city:

On the north side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, 31 three gates, the gate of Reuben, the gate of Judah, and the gate of Levi, the gates of the city being named after the tribes of Israel.

32 On the east side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Joseph, the gate of Benjamin, and the gate of Dan.”

We will discover that the grouping of Joseph, Benjamin and Dan is no coincidence. Their historical and genetic link a profound part of the Israelite story, coupled with prophetic outcomes of magnitude.

33 On the south side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, three gates, the gate of Simeon, the gate of Issachar, and the gate of Zebulun.

34 On the west side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Gad, the gate of Asher, and the gate of Naphtali. 35 The circumference of the city shall be 18,000 cubits. And the name of the city from that time on shall be, The Lord Is There.”

Returning to the dramatic decrease in the Simeonite tribe between censuses, leading identity researcher, Steven Collins provides a logical answer. He also concluded that the Simeonites were the historical Spartans, though we have ascertained an alternative identity in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Simeon

The Missing Simeonites, Steven M Collins – emphasis mine:

‘In the book of Numbers, we find that the Israelites under Moses undertook a first and second census of the tribes of Israel while they were in the Wilderness. The results of those enumerations of the tribes of Israel reveal some surprising results. In Numbers 1:1-3 and verse 18, we see that the census tallied the number of males “twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel.” Therefore, we should keep in mind that the entire population of Israel’s tribes in the Wilderness consisted of far more than the tally in Numbers 1. 

As a guideline, one would ordinarily double the numbers to allow for one wife per man of military age. Given the polygamous culture at that time, some of the men may have had a number of wives. It is difficult to make an estimate of the number of children, but we should keep in mind that large families were very common at that time. Numbers 1:46 records that 603,550 adult males were numbered in the census. Based on some of the above rough methods of estimating the number of the entire nation of Israel at that time, we can see that the Israelites can be conservatively estimated to be body of approximately 3,000,000 people. For American readers, that number would equal the approximate population of Oregon. The actual number of Israelites was likely higher as the tribe of Levi wasn’t included in this census, nor were the people of the “mixed multitude” which accompanied the Israelites out of Egypt (Exodus 12:38).

Listed below are the populations of adult males per tribe, given in the order listed in Numbers 1.’

TRIBEPOPULATION
Reuben46,500
Simeon59,300
Gad45,650
Judah74,600
Issachar54,400
Zebulon57,400
Manasseh32,200
Ephraim40,500
Benjamin35,400
Dan62,700
Asher41,500
Naphtali53,400

‘Modern readers will notice that the tribe of Judah was, at that time, the largest tribe. The three smallest tribal figures are the three tribes which descended from Jacob and Rachel: Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin. 

However, when the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are totalled together, they numbered 72,700, showing the actual total of Israelites descended from Joseph constituted the second largest grouping in Israel. Notice that the tribe of Simeon was the third largest tribe in this census…

Now, let’s examine the census taken approximately 40 years later… For purposes of comparison, listed below are the totals from each census and the change in the total of adult males in each tribe. The second census is listed in Numbers 26. Numbers 26:2 confirms that it is the sum of males “twenty years old an upward… all that are able to go to war in Israel,” so each census was conducted with the same criteria.’

TRIBE1st Census2nd CensusChange
Reuben46,50043,700-2,800
Simeon59,30022,200-37,100
Gad45,65040,500-5,100
Judah74,60076,5001,900
Issachar54,40064,3009,900
Zebulon57,40060,5003,100
Manasseh32,20052,70020,500
Ephraim40,50032,500-8,000
Benjamin35,40045,60010,200
Dan62,70064.4001,700
Asher41,50053,40011,900
Naphtali53,40045,400-8000
TOTALS603,550601,730-1,820

‘The national totals indicate the number of Israelites enumerated under Moses had dropped very slightly, but the tribal totals reveal something very different had transpired. The most evident change is that over half the tribe of Simeon inexplicably “disappeared” from the census totals. What happened? Simeon, the third largest tribe in Israel in the first census, had plummeted to be the smallest tribe of all in the second census! Another anomaly leaps out at the reader.

The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh shared the birthright blessing of the Abrahamic covenant, which included being blessed with large population growth. Manasseh had, indeed, risen dramatically in population, going from 32,200 to 52,700, a gain of 20,500 people, by far the largest increase in any tribe.’

Close to the timing of the second census, the tribe of Manasseh split into two tribes. With half renaming with Ephraim on the West side of the River Jordan and the other half dwelling on the East side of the river with Reuben and Gad.

Collins: ‘However, its brother tribe which shared this birthright blessing, Ephraim, dropped 8,000 people to join Simeon at the bottom of the population totals of the tribes in Israel. Even the tribe of Benjamin outnumbered the Ephraimites at that time. Judah was still the largest tribe, but Manasseh’s explosive growth resulted in the tribe of Joseph being the largest tribe if Manasseh and Ephraim were added together. 

As many readers might observe, something “doesn’t add up” in these figures. As commentator Paul Harvey says here in America, let’s examine what happened to determine “the rest of the story.”

I believe the key to what happened in Numbers 26 is found in the previous chapter. In Numbers 25, we learn that Phineas, a Levite, executed “a prince of a chief house among the Simeonites” (verses 7-14)’ – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘Phineas leaped to execute this Simeonite prince for his audacity in rebelling against God by taking a Midianite woman into his tent at a time when god was punishing Israel for such deeds. Indeed, God sent a plague among the Israelites which killed 24,000 people, and that plague was stayed by the action of Phineas.’

More violence from the explosive brothers Simeon and Levi and this time it is between themselves. 

‘The Bible does not record which tribes suffered the most from that plague. Even if one assumes the Simeonites bore the brunt of this plague, it does not begin to account for the drop in population of approximately 56,000 males of 20 years and older among the tribes which lost population between the two censuses. Also, Numbers 25:9 records that 24,000 people died in the plague, it does not state that all those slain were “males 20 years of age and older.” This indicates that 24,000 men, women and children of all ages died in the plague, and that perhaps 6,000 of that total were males 20 years and older. Where did the rest go?

It is my belief that after the execution [of] a Simeonite prince by a Levitical priest, there was… great dissension in the camp of Israel. We know from the accounts in the Torah of their wanderings in the Wilderness that the Israelites were very prone to revolting against Moses over various provocations. We know from Genesis 34:25 that Simeon and Levi were the two most impulsive sons of Jacob, the two most likely to settle a matter “by the sword.” To put it in modern American terms, they were the kind who “shot first and asked questions later.” Genesis 49:5-7 prophesies that impulsive wrathfulness leading to violence would characterize both Simeonites and Levites through all the millennia up to and including the “latter days.”

In the episode of Phineas the Levite unilaterally executing a Simeonite [prince], the two most violent tribes were likely at [loggerheads], and a civil war among the tribes was not improbable. God usefully directed the Levites’ propensity to violence into becoming a tribe of butchers, killing, cutting up and sacrificing innumerable animals under the system of animal sacrifices established in ancient Israel. Simeon had no such outlet.

I believe a logical explanation for the sudden drop in several tribes’ population is that most of the tribe of Simeon and varying contingents of the other tribes literally “walked out” of the camp and left the main body of Israelites to strike out on their own. The huge drop in the number of Simeonites indicates that the Simeonites led this partial “exodus” from the Israelite camp. The Simeonites were impulsive and the execution of one of their chieftans (however just) could easily have provoked such an action. 

The census figures indicate that the tribes of Ephraim and Naphtali contributed most of the remaining Israelites who accompanied most of the tribe of Simeon as it left the Israelite encampment. The census data indicates that the entire tribes of Manasseh, Asher, Issachar and Benjamin stayed with Moses as their second census totals reflect normal demographic growth.

Would God or Moses have allowed so large a mass of Israelite to leave the camp? I think the answer is yes. Indeed, they may have encouraged it as a way to end the dissension in the camp. There was no commandment of God that forbade any Israelites to leave the camp in the Wilderness, so the only penalty that exiting Israelites would bear would be that their children would not enter the Promised land with the children of those who stayed. Remember that every adult (except Caleb and Joshua) were under a death sentence in the Wilderness. For their rebellion, they would wander till the entire generation who refused to go into the Promised Land at first was dead! Under such circumstances, many could have thought: “If my choice is stay and die in this desert or leave and trust to my wits and sword to make a living, I’ll choose the second option.”

The tribe of Simeon… likely… led such a mini-exodus. The fact that Manasseh grew greatly between the censuses and that Ephraim dropped dramatically argues that this can only be explained if a large number of Ephraimites left the camp. Both tribes were the birthright tribes, and they shared the same promises. If no one had left the camp, the population figures of Ephraim and Mansseh should have reflected the same growth.

If we limit our number of exiting Israelites to only those tribes who had net reductions in their tribal totals, we have about 50,000 males above age twenty and all their wives and children (perhaps 200,000 people). The tribes whose populations stayed static indicates that some of the natural growth of those tribes was deleted from the census because contingents of their tribes also joined the exodus. The total of those leaving the camp may have been larger than 200,000. If such an event occurred, there would have been a powerful stimulus to conduct the second census to “see who we have left.” Indeed, Numbers 26:1-2 shows that right after the events described above, God told Moses to take a census of all the tribes.

Where did the departing Israelite go?’

Members from the tribes of Reuben, Gad and Ephraim were early arrivals in Ireland, though there were two other tribes who were the very first to arrive in the British Islands: Erin and Albion. Those two tribes were Dan and Simeon. Both would then enter Britain to explore it, with Simeon making their permanent home there instead of Ireland. It was the Simeonites who moved completely to Britain and were the first Britons with the distinction of the status as the first tribe to settle there, known as Cymry and later as the Welsh. 

Whereas the Danites were likely the first tribe to explore Britain, they like the tribe of Benjamin and unlike Simeon had a foothold in both Britain and Ireland before Benjamin moved entirely to the northern reaches of Britain. Known at different times as Pictavia; Caledonia, Alba and Scotland – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The Tribe of Dan’s story is somewhat more complicated – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

Origin, Yair Davidiy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Sennacherib recorded having exiled more than 200,000 people from Judah. The Bible mentions him having captured all of the unfenced cities in Judah (2 Kings 18:13) and Midrashim also [speaks] of Sennacherib deporting vast numbers from Judah and Simeon. These exiles joined the deported Tribes of northern Israel and shared their destiny. Sennacherib… intermittently besieged Jerusalem over a number of years but his army was stricken by an angel and 185,000 Assyrians died. Sennacherib returned to Nineveh where he was assassinated by two of his sons who fled to Ararat (Urartu) [refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran] (2 Kings 19:37). 

The Ten Tribes before their exile had been called by the Assyrians, “Khumri”. This term* in Assyrian could also be rendered “GUMRI”. A similar name, “Gimiri” in Babylonian can connote “tribes” and a related term “gamira” can mean mobile exiles. At all events most authorities agree that the Cimmerians of history were composed of several peoples of differing origins. All signs indicate that at least some of these peoples were Israelite! 

The Cimmerians had first been reported… by the Assyrians at the earliest in 714 though the more accepted date is ca.707 BCE. The Scythians though originally part and parcel with the Cimmerians had separated from the main body and were acting independently. Cimmerians and Scythians essentially consisted of the same elements though in different proportions. The king of the Cimmerians was referred to in an Assyrian inscription as “King of the Amurru”. The name “Amuru” was sometimes applied to Israelites and geographically the land of “Amurru” had encompassed the former Israelite areas of “Syria and Palestine”. 

The Celts were believed to have come from the east and to have advanced via the Danube Valley. Welsh Legend stated that their ancestors, the Cymry, had been led by Hu Gadarn* from Drephane opposite Byzantium (on the Bosporus) across the sea to Britain. The Welsh call themselves “Gomeru”. In Welsh tradition, they (i.e. Cimmerians) were led by Hu from Drephrobane… across the sea to Defene in Wales. The name Defene is sometimes rendered as “Daphne” and there was a port named Daphne opposite Byzantium. Daphne of Antiochea was one of the places to which the Ten Tribes were taken into exile.’ 

Britain’s Trojan History, Bernard Jones – emphasis mine:

‘Homer, in his epic the Iliad, tells us that Aeneas led the Dardanians in the war against the Greeks whilst Hector led the Trojans. Aeneas was a cousin to Hector, who was killed by the great Achilles. It was said that Hector was the ‘heart’ of Troy whereas Aeneas was its ‘soul’. Aeneas survived the war and led his people in exile to found a new Troy. The voyage of Aeneas had taken seven years when, eventually, he brought his fleet to rest’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Jones: ‘Here, he was received honourably by Latinus the king who, because of an oracle, pledged his daughter in marriage to the Trojan prince. His daughter, however, was already betrothed to a king of the Rutuli and he immediately went to war against the Trojans because of the insult. The war was a bloody affair but ended when the king of the Rutuli was killed by the Trojan prince. Aeneas had a son by his first wife, Creusa, and they called him Ascanius. Sadly, Creusa had perished at Troy on the night that the city fell. In due course Aeneas married Lavinia, the daughter of king Latinus and the Trojans built a city and it was called Lavinium, after her.

Brutus* the Trojan was the great grandson of Aeneas of Troy. He accidentally killed his father when they were both out hunting and, as a result, was exiled for committing such a crime. He ended up in a certain part of Greece where he discovered descendants of Trojan captives, taken there by the Greeks after the Trojan War. Brutus stayed in the country for quite a time and became known for his skills, his courage and wisdom. 

In due course Brutus was prevailed upon to become the leader of all the Trojans, in order to free them from thralldom under the Greek king. After a number of battles, and against all odds, Brutus captured the Greek king. To save himself from being killed the king agreed to give his daughter to Brutus as his wife, and to let the Trojans depart in peace for another country. The Greeks supplied Brutus with a large number of ships and the Trojans departed, landing eventually in Totnes, in Devon.’

Welsh men

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 469 – 471 – emphasis mine:

‘… ancient Britons migrated from Troy, from tribes led by a Trojan hero named Britu, one of many nomatives from which Britain derived… legends suggest London’s Celtic name from antiquity was Lloegress, which owned an even more mystical name dating even further back into antiquity, documented as Troja Newydd, or New Troy.

Brutus of Troy was the grandson of Aeneus, founder of the Romans in Greek mythology. Brutus was the hero of legend who rebelled against the Greeks three generations after the fall of Troy, escaping the wrath of the Greeks by sailing with his people past the Pillars of Hercules to an island known today as Britain. They freed Britain from a race of giants led by Gog, Magog, and Albion… Brutus and his victorious followers settled along the banks of the Thames River, naming it Troia Nova (New Troy), or Trinovantum. Brutus’s ancient kingdom of Britain became identified as Albion… the earliest name by which Britain was known… 

Ancient Welsh legends… record three waves of… immigration that were made up first of the tribe of Cymrey… second invasion came from the tribe of the Lloegrians, and the third invasion derived from the Brython tribe of Llydaw. All three were of the same language, culture, and race. Lloegres was the ancient appellation for southern and central England, while Cymrey was the name given for Wales, northern England, Cornwall and the Scottish border region. After the death of Brutus, Britain split into three kingdoms under the rule of his three sons. The names of those three kingdoms became known as Lloegres, Cymry, and Albyne.’

For further information on the story and identity of Brutus and his entourage, refer Chapter XXX Judah and Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. 

Wayne: ‘… the region of Troy, was known in antiquity as Galatia… the Black Sea region is the originating home of the Celts… and home of the Scythians and Sarmatians. The Greeks knew the Celts as Keltoi or Galatia, while the Romans… knew the Celts as the Celtae and Galatai. Julius Caesar… referred to the Celts first as Gauls… they referred to themselves in their own language as Celts.

Some scholars think Celt derived from the root key, the Old Irish celim, meaning “hidden,” suggesting they were the hidden people or people that concealed things. Celt, in another version, is thought to have derived from the European root quel, meaning “elevated,” which then evolved to Old Irish as Celthe.

The Celts regarded themselves as the elevated or noble race. The noble Celt was… blond, blue-eyed [including] the Irish, British, Welsh, and Scottish…[Celts, who] had red hair and pale green eyes… [possessing] strikingly similar characteristics to the Tuatha Denaan… Galatea translates as “milky white”… The Celts of Galatia were the very same people to whom… Paul preached.’

Identity scholar and author Raymond McNair, offers an explanation for the original derivation for the term Celt.

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘… the Gauls, Cimmerians, Cymry and the Celts are all simply different offshoots of the CIMMERIAN branch of the great SCYTHIAN people. The ancient writers spoke of all the GAULS as CIMBRI and identified them with the CIMMERIANS of earlier date. 

… the word “Galatae” was also spelled as “Geltae” or “Keltae.” This is seemingly according to Lysons, the derivation of the word Celt or Kelt. It is possible that this name “Kelt” is derived from the name of a rivulet or a brook just northeast of Jerusalem, very near Jericho. The Encyclopedia Britannica speaks of this brook and calls it “Wadi Kelt” (11th edition, Volume XIX, Article Palestine, page 602). This same Wadi is mentioned a number of times in the Rand McNally Bible Atlas, but it speaks of it as the “Wadi el Qelt” (Chapter XIX, page 395). 

It is highly possible that this name comes from “Wadi Kelt.” The Ten Tribes of Israel would have been familiar with this Wadi since many of them from Northern Israel would have passed near it on their way to observing the annual festivals in Jerusalem. Kelts have never in modern times lived in the area of Jericho, but it is now abundantly evident that the ancestors of the present-day Kelts did once live in the vicinity of the “Wadi Kelt.”

McNair highlights the origin and similarity of early religious practices in Britain with that of the Israelite homeland in Canaan, coupled with the striking similarity between the Hebrew and Welsh languages.

McNair: ‘… Lysons made this confession: 

“I confess that but for the universal tradition which assigns our (the British) descent to Japhet [Chapter II Japheth Orientalium; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan], I should have been rather inclined to attribute to the British Celts a Semitic origin, both on account of the relics of worship which we find in Britain, and also on account of the language…” (Our British Ancestors, page 18). 

‘Lysons then shows that there are literally thousands of words in the English language which come from the Hebrew language (ibid., page 21 ff.). He says: 

“Thus I propose to show in the course of these pages when we come to the relics of British worship remaining in the country, and retaining with little variation or corruption their aboriginal names, the remarkable similarity between those names and the HEBREW and CHALDEE languages” (ibid., page 21). 

‘He then points out that many of the “old British families” have Hebrew names. “Now, whatever may be the historical value of the Welsh poems, it is undoubted that Talies in his Angar Cyfyndawd, says that his lore had been ‘DECLARED IN HEBREW, Hebraig…'” (ibid., page 22). 

On page 93 of this same work, Lysons says: 

“Yet this we gather from the names attaching to the British monuments still remaining among us, when divested of modern corruptions, that there is a strong affinity between these British names and that language of which HEBREW is either the original or one of its earliest off-shoots; and that therefore HEBREW, CHALDEE or some other very near cognate, must have been the language of the first inhabitants in this island” (ibid., page 93). 

‘Lysons then proceeds to show the similarity between many ancient British and Hebrew words, and between the corrupted religion of the Palestinian Israelites and that of the ancient British people. Lysons finally makes this startling statement: 

“We cannot avoid the conclusion that our British ancestors were devoted to that kind of worship which they brought with them from the East, whence they came at a very early period, even close upon the Patriarchal times of Holy Writ” (ibid., pages 93, 94). 

‘… the early British ancestors said they came from Armenia in the area of the Caucasus Mountains; and we know that many of them arrived in the British Isles centuries before Christ’s birth. Robert Owen also substantiates this view by the following statement: 

“Most Welsh scholars have employed their time on the production of grammars and dictionaries. The Hebrew learning of Dr. John Davies of Mallwyd seems to have influenced his countrymen to accept the Puritan atavism of referring Welsh to the language of Moses as its fountain” (The Kymry, pref. v., vi.). 

‘For any who still might have any lingering doubts regarding the similarity between the Hebrew and the early British languages which were used by its ancient peoples, one need only study the present-day Welsh language. There are many strong similarities between modern Welsh and Hebrew. Even one who is unskilled in the science of languages cannot fail to detect a close similarity between the spoken Hebrew language when contrasted with modern Welsh. Many Welsh words are almost devoid of any vowels whatsoever, just as the ancient Hebrew language was written without any vowels.’

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

“… the people of Wales call themselves, in ancient Welsh, ‘Bryth y Brithan,’ or ‘Briths of Briton,’ which means ‘The Covenanters’ of the ‘land of the Covenant.’ The first form of this phrase is almost vernacular Hebrew.” The fact that these “Brythonic Celts” who migrated to the British Isles bore the Hebrew B­R­T root word for “covenant” confirmed their Israelite origin. 

It is also unmistakably recorded in British history that the earliest settlers in Wales and southern England were called Simonii. They came by the way of the sea in the year 720 B.C. At this time there was the greatest influx of the Tuatha de Daanan to Ireland, and this synchronizes with the deportation of the Israelites of the commonwealth of Ephraim to Assyria, and the flight of Dan and Simeon from the seaports and coast country of Palestine. That Simonii is the plural of Simeon we need scarcely mention. 

Omri, the sixth king of Israel, built the city of Samaria, the third and permanent capital of Israel, and that eventually the entire country, formerly called “All Israel,” became known as Samaria, because that was the name of its capital also that Samaria became one of the national names of Israel, and is so used in some prophecies concerning them. Hence Omri is regarded as the real founder of the kingdom of Samaria, and Samaria-Israel was often referred to by other nations as the House of Omri. 

When Shalmanesar, the king of Assyria, who led Israel into captivity, made a record of that captivity on the tablets of Assyria, he called them the House of Omri (Beth Khumree); also when Israel was confederate with Resin, king of Syria, and went against the Jews, and the Jews besought Tiglath-Pilesar, who was at that time king of Assyria, to become their confederate, he also in his records referred to Israel as the Beth-Khumree. In the annals of Sargon, who was also a king of Assyria (Isaiah 20:1), successor of Shalmanesar, and predecessor of Senacharib, Israel is called Beth Khumree (House of Omri), and their capital city Khumree. On the Nimroud obelisk, “Jehu, the son of Omri,” is written “Yahua-abil-Khumree.” 

Professor Rawlinson, who does not believe this truth we are enforcing, says: “Jehu is usually called in the Bible the son of Nimshi – although Jehosaphat was his actual father (2 Kings 9:20), but the Assyrians, taking him for the legitimate successor to the throne, named as his father, or rather ancestor, “Omri,” the founder of the Kingdom of Samaria – Omri’s name being written on the obelisk, as it is in the inscriptions of Shalmanesar, where the Kingdom of Israel is always called the country of “Beth Omri.” Dr. Hincks also says: “The title, ‘Son of Omri,’ is equivalent to that of King of Samaria, the city which Omri built, and which was known to the Assyrians as Beth Omri, or Khumri.” 

The tribes of both Dan and Simeon belonged, of course, to the Beth Khumree, when used as meaning the Kingdom of Omri, or Samaria. Simeon seems to have clung to this name far more tenaciously than did Dan, for they still call themselves and their country Kymry [Cymru]. Saville says: “This name Kymri, or Cymry, as it is more commonly written, is in reality the plural of Kymro, meaning a Welsh-man, and the country of the Kymry is called by themselves Khymru, which has been Latinized into the well-known name of Cambria.

The letter V in the Welsh language has two powers, and both these powers are active in the word Kymry. This letter V sounds as U, except when it stands in the last syllable of [a] CL word, and then it has the sound of the Italian i or the English ee! Hence, the correct pronunciation of the country of Wales, or land of the Cymry, in its ancient tongue would be as near as possible to the names Kumree, Khumree, or Kumri.” 

Thomas Stephens, in the preface to his “Literature of the Kymry,” says: “On the map of Britain, facing St. George’s Channel, is a group of counties called Wales, inhabited by a people distinct from, and but very imperfectly understood by, those who surround them. Their neighbors call them Welsh-men. Welsh or Walsch is not a proper name, but a Teutonic term signifying ‘strangers,’ and was applied to all persons who were not of that family: but the proper name of these people is Kymry. They are the last remnant of the Kimmerioi of Homer, and of the Kimry (Cimbri) of Germany.

From the Cimbric Chersonesus (Jut-land) a portion of these landed on the shores of Northumberland, gave their name to the county of Cumberland, and in process of time followed the seaside to their present resting-place, where they still call themselves Kimry, and give their country a similar name [Cymru]. Their history, clear, concise and authentic, ascends to a high antiquity. Their language was embodied in verse long before the languages now spoken rose into notice, and their literature, cultivated and abundant, lays claim to being the most ancient in modern Europe.” 

Thus we find that the Khumree, Kumri, Kimry, Cumbre, Cimbri, or Cambrians, as the name is variously called in different tongues, were strangers and wanderers among the nations until they settled in the isles of the sea with the rest of their brethren, the Brith-ish or covenant people. 

“Herodotus, the ‘Father of History,’ tells us much about the Khumbri, a people who, in his day, dwelt in the Crimean peninsula and thereabout. He particularly notes that they had come into that territory from Media, which he remarks was not their original home or birthplace.” – Our Race. 

We have thus conclusively followed the word Khumree, for the reason that the people who are known as Angles, Saxons, Danes, Celts or Kelts, Jutes, Scots, Welsh, Scyths (or Scythians), or Normans can trace themselves back to Media-Persia, but no further, and find their ancestors in the Khumree, at the place, and at the very time, when Israel was losing her identity and was actually known in the history of that country as the Beth Khumree.’

Cardiff, capital city of Wales

Raymond McNair outlines a summary for the words Omri, Ghomri, Gimiri, Kymry and Cimmerian.

‘If we carefully piece together all of the various points which are clearly brought out by the different historians concerning the Cimmerians, the Gimiri and the Kymry, we are brought to the following conclusions: 

(1) The Cimmerians appear in history in the same general vicinity to which Israel had been taken captive. 

(2) They appear about one century after the first tribes of Israel were deported into the regions south of the Caucasus Mountains, near the Black and Caspian Seas – about 741 B.C. 

(3) All of these peoples are closely related i.e. the Cimmerians, Gimiri, and the Kymry. 

(4) They leave the area of Armenia, or the Caucasus regions, and arrive in North-west Europe. In fact… branches of these Cimmerians penetrated into Central Europe, North Italy, Spain, and into many countries of Europe, as well as into Britain and Scandinavia. 

(5) … these Cimmerian or Kymric peoples are also closely related to the Gauls and Kelts…

(6) All of these peoples were sprung from the Scythian hoard, and mixed freely with them. The fact that they fought with the Scythians does not mean they were not close relatives of the Scythians. We have previously observed that the tribes of Israel even while still living in the Promised Land were continually warring among themselves, as is also mentioned in James 1:1; 4:1. 

(7) The Cimmerians were the same as the Gimiri who were also the same as the Ghomri or the people of Omri. These peoples were different branches of Dispersed Israel.’

A tangible line is clearly and undeniably drawn along the dots which join Simeon, King Omri, the Cymry and in turn the Welsh. The relationship of these terms with the word Gaul is worth noting. First, the origin of the name Gaul is offered by Raymond McNair in his thesis Key to Northwest European Origins.

‘Spier mentions the name by which the exiles of Israel were known, at the time of the Second Temple. He says: 

“The second holidays were adopted by the entire GOLAH, the communities living beyond the confines of Israel (meaning the exiled Ten Tribes)” (The Comprehensive Hebrew Calendar, page 11). This Jewish author uses the word “Golah” when referring to the dispersed Israelites who were living beyond the confines of the Promised Land. Note the similar pronunciation of the words “Golah” and “Gaul.” 

Speaking of the territory east of the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee, Hurlbut says, “Decapolis… embraced no less than five sections as may be seen upon the map [not shown]: (1) Gaulonities, the ancient Golan now Jaulan, east of the Jordan” (A Bible Atlas, page 94). 

‘This is speaking of New Testament Palestine. The city which was anciently called “Golan” had by New Testament times given its name to the district called “Gaulonities.” (Encyclopaedia Biblica, Article Golan, pages 1747, 1748). The word “Golan” had been slightly changed in spelling to Gaulon-itis, the land of the Gaulon, meaning the land of the dispersed. On pages 100, 101, 104, and 105 of Hurlbut’s A Bible Atlas are maps illustrating this area lying immediately to the east of the sea of Galilee. The… Jewish historian, Josephus, speaks of a territory in the inheritance of Israel known as Gaulonitis. “He also gave Gaulonitis… to Philip, who was his son…” (Antiquities Book XVIII, Chapter VIII paragraph I). 

We now know that the people of Israel who lived in the area of GAUL-on-itis or Golan went into their captivity in 741 B.C. Those “Gaulonites” from Gaulonitis were the first to be dispersed among the nations. Since they spoke Hebrew at the time of their exile, they must have called themselves “Golah” or Gauls meaning “Captives.” These East-Jordanic Gauls, the exiles, or captives, who had been taken out of their land by the Assyrians, had probably ceased to pronounce the “h” sound by this time.’

Welsh women

McNair continues with the link between the term Gaul, its Greek equivalent Galatia and the migrations of these peoples to the British Isles. 

McNair: ‘The Gauls conquered Rome in 390 B.C. They conquered Great Britain, France except the Rhone basin, the whole of Spain except its Mediterranean coast, and north of Italy, parts of Germany, Russia, Switzerland, Hungary, Romania, and Silesia. Their empire was greater than either that of Charlemagne or of Napoleon – reaching from the Straits of Gibraltar to the Black Sea at the time when Alexander the Great was engaged in his conquest of Asia in 334 B.C. (ibid., 46, 47). 

“They (the Gauls) loved bright and varigated colours in their clothes, coloured stripes and checks” (ibid., page 67). Here we can see the tartan or “Scotch Plaid” which is still used by some of the present-day descendants of the Kelts who now live in Scotland. 

There were two Roman Gauls: (1) Gallia Cisalpina (Hither), included North Italy between the Alps and Apennines, and (2) Gallia Transalpina (Further), encompassed modern France, Belgium, and parts of Holland, Germany, and Switzerland. 

“The Greek form of GALLIA was GALATIA, but Galatia in Latin denoted another Celtic region in Central Asia Minor, sometimes styled Gallograecia” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 11th edition Volume XI, Article Gaul page 532). 

It is interesting to note that Livy and the elder and younger Pliny were Celts. 

Julius Caesar in his Commentaries says that Gaul in his day was divided into three peoples – (1) Aquitani, (2) Gauls or Celts and (3) Belgae.

… these same people afterward bore the name “Gauls” in Europe and some of their kindred brethren also bore the name “Galatians,” and lived in Central Asia Minor – in the heart of modern-day Turkey. The true Galatians (or Gauls) only comprised about one-tenth of the population of the territory of “Galatia.” 

Speaking of the Gauls and Kelts, Funck-Brentano in his work, The Earliest Times, states that the Celts came from the north – from Jutland, Friesland and from the coasts of the Baltic. He says: “They were the Normans of the century before our era” (ibid, page 27). They called themselves “CELTS,” but they were also known by the name of “GALATES,” and the Romans called them “GALLI.” To the ancients, the designations, Galli, Galates, and Celts were synonymous. But he says that these three names may have designated three different branches of the same race originally (ibid, pages 27, 28). A fourth branch was the Volcae-Walah, Wallachians, Wallons, and Welsh, all being derived from this Celtic name Volcae. The Celtic branch were tall and fair with pink and white skin. The Greek artists in the third century B.C. used the Gauls or Kelts as their ideal in sculpture and paintings (ibid., pages 27,28).’

In support of the convincing research quoted already, the following etymological associations are worth either recapping, or adding as further weight. Ancient Gaul or Gallia in Latin, was a vast region of western Europe which spread far beyond the modern borders of France. The Greek term Galatia is the same as Gallia. The Greeks connected the word Galatai to the ‘milk white’ skin of the Gauls and Galatians, as gala means milk. In turn, the word is related to the Welsh word gallu which means ‘to be able (can)’. 

Even so, Gaul is not related to Gallia, but rather stems from the French Gaule or Waulle, which derives from the Old Frankish word Walholant, meaning ‘land of the foreigners.’ The Old English word Wealh, or Wealas derives from the Proto-Germanic, walhaz, meaning an outlander, foreigner, Celt. An exonym applied by Germanic speakers to Celts and Latin speaking people indiscriminately. It is cognate with the names Wales, Wallonia of Belgium and Wallachia of Romania. Whereas the Irish word Gael – formed from Goidel and Gaidheal – superficially similar with Gaul, are two distinct words and not derived from one another. 

Interestingly, an old Welsh name for Wales was Gwalia and the modern French name for Wales is Pays de Galles; matching the similar Romanian translation of ‘country of the Gauls’. Germanic peoples called the Gauls, Volcae and the Old English word for native Britons was Vahls, which in time become Wales. It must be remembered, these are descriptions of the Welsh by others. The Cymry always called their land (country) Cymru and in Gaelic, Gymru.

A little out of context – as it relates to subjects in the article: Asherah; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega – but because it is Welsh focused, interesting aspects relating to dragons have been included. Dragons being akin to Seraphim which are themselves, described in the scriptures as fiery flying serpents. The dragon is a powerful symbol of rebellion and is also representative of the tribe of Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

After the Flood, William Cooper, 1995 – emphasis mine:

‘The early Britons, from whom the modern Welsh are descended, provide us with our earliest surviving European accounts of reptilian monsters, one of whom killed and devoured king Morvidus (Morydd) in ca 336 BC. We are told in the account translated for us by Geoffrey of Monmouth, that the monster ‘gulped down the body of Morvidus as a big fish swallows a little one.’ Geoffrey described the animal as a Belua. Peredur, not the ancient king of that name (306-296 BC), but a much later son of Earl Efrawg, had better luck than Morvidus, actually managing to slay his monster, an addanc (pr. athanc: var. afanc^), at a place called Llyn Llion in Wales. At other Welsh locations the addanc is further spoken of along with another reptilian species known as the carrog. The addanc survived until comparatively recent times at such places as Bedd-yr-Afanc near Brynberian, at Llyn-yr-Afanc above Bettws-y-Coed on the River Conwy (the killing of this monster was described in the year 1693), and Llyn Barfog. A carrog is commemorated at Carrog near Corwen, and at Dol-y-Carrog in the Vale of Conwy. 

Moreover, ‘dinosaurs’, in the form of flying reptiles, were a feature of Welsh life until surprisingly recent times. As late as the beginning of the present century, elderly folk at Penllin in Glamorgan used to tell of a colony of winged serpents that lived in the woods around Penllin Castle. As Marie Trevelyan tells us: 

‘The woods around Penllin Castle, Glamorgan, had the reputation of being frequented by winged serpents, and these were the terror of old and young alike. An aged inhabitant of Penllyne, who died a few years ago, said that in his boyhood the winged serpents were described as very beautiful. 

They were coiled when in repose, and “looked as if they were covered with jewels of all sorts [Ezekiel 28:13]. Some of them had crests sparkling with all the colours of the rainbow”. When disturbed they glided swiftly, “sparkling all over,” to their hiding places. When angry, they “flew over people’s heads, with outspread wings, bright, and sometimes with eyes too, like the feathers in a peacock’s tail” – refer articles; Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. He said it was “no old story invented to frighten children”, but a real fact. His father and uncle had killed some of them, for they were as bad as foxes for poultry. The old man attributed the extinction of the winged serpents to the fact that they were “terrors in the farmyards and coverts.”

‘This account is intriguing in many respects, not the least being the fact that it is not a typical account of dragons. The creatures concerned were not solitary and monstrous beasts, but small creatures that lived in colonies. Not at all like the larger species of winged reptile that used to nest upon an ancient burial-mound, or tumulus, at Trellech-a’r-Betws in the county of Dyfed, for example. 

But whilst we are in Wales, it is worth noting that at Llanbardan-y-Garrag (is Garrag a corruption of carrog?), the church contains a carving of a local giant reptile whose features* include large paddle-like flippers, a long neck and a small head. Glaslyn, in Snowdon, is a lake where an afanc^ was sighted as recently as the 1930s. On this occasion two climbers on the side of a mountain looked down onto the surface of Glaslyn and they saw the creature, which they described as having a long grey body, rise from the depths* of the lake to the surface, raise its head and then submerge again. 

One could multiply such reports by the hundred. In England and Scotland*, again until comparatively recent times, other reptilian monsters were sighted and spoken of in many places. The table at the end of this chapter [not shown] lists eighty-one locations in the British Isles alone in which dinosaur activity has been reported (there are, in fact, nearly 200 such places in Britain), but perhaps the most relevant aspect of this as far as our present study is concerned is the fact that some of these sightings and subsequent encounters with living dinosaurs can be dated to the comparatively recent past.’ 

‘… in the 15th century, according to a contemporary chronicle that still survives in Canterbury Cathedral’s library, the following incident was reported. On the afternoon of Friday, 26th September, 1449, two giant reptiles were seen fighting on the banks of the River Stour (near the village of Little Cornard) which marked the English county borders of Suffolk and Essex. 

One was black, and the other ‘reddish and spotted’. After an hour-long struggle that took place ‘to the admiration of many [of the locals] beholding them’, the black monster yielded and returned to its lair, the scene of the conflict being known ever since as Sharp fight Meadow.

In 1867 was seen, for the last time, the monster that lived in the woods around Fittleworth in Sussex. It would run up to people hissing and spitting if they happened to stumble across it unawares, although it never harmed anyone. Several such cases could be cited, but suffice it to say that too many incidents like these are reported down through the centuries and from all sorts of locations for us to say that they are all fairy-tales. 

For example, Scotland’s famous Loch Ness Monster* is too often thought to be a recent product of the local Tourist Board’s efforts to bring in some trade, yet Loch Ness is by no means the only Scottish loch where monsters have been reported. Loch Lomond, Loch Awe, Loch Rannoch and the privately owned Loch Morar (over 1000 ft deep) also have records of monster activity in recent years. Indeed, there have been over forty sightings at Loch Morar alone since the end of the last war, and over a thousand from Loch Ness in the same period. – refer article: The Top Ten Unexplained Mysteries of all Time*. ‘However, as far as Loch Ness itself is concerned, few realise that monstrous reptiles, no doubt the same species, have been sighted in and around the loch since the so-called Dark Ages…

As recently as the 18th century, in a lake called Llyn-y-Gader in Snowdon, Wales, a certain man went swimming. He reached the middle of the lake and was returning to the shore when his friends who were watching him noticed that he was being followed by: ‘... a long, trailing object winding slowly behind him. They were afraid to raise an alarm, but went forward to meet him as soon as he reached the shore where they stood. Just as he was approaching, the trailing object raised its head, and before anyone could render aid the man was enveloped in the coils of the monster…’ It seems that the man’s body was never recovered.’

The Flag of Wales

Leading into Levi and an important identifying sign of the sons of Jacob, is the fact that the Creator gave ancient Israel dietary guidelines – Leviticus 11:1-8.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning clean and unclean meat has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Red or Green?’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

We find considerable evidence of the Levitical influence in ancient Britain. There has also been much written linking the Levitical system with the early Druids, who practised a combined pagan and Hebrew tradition. 

Yair Davidy put together a number of quotes showing historical documentation adapted from his work The Israelite Origin of the Celtic Races, 1996 – emphasis mine. Beginning with Donald MacKenzie, whom in 1935 examined historical food prohibitions in Scotland.

“There are still thousands of Highlanders and groups of Lowlanders who refuse to keep pigs or to partake of their flesh”. MacKenzie quotes from Sir Walter Scott (“The Fortunes of Nigel”): “Sir Munko cannot abide pork, no more than the King’s most sacred majesty, nor my Lord Duke Lennox, nor Lord Dalgarno… But the Scots never eat pork strange that! Some folk think they are a sort of Jews.” “The Scots till within the last generation disliked swine’s flesh as an article of food as much as the Highlanders do at present”. Also from Sir Walter (“The Two Drovers”) we have an account of execration in Gaelic of a Highlander cursing some Englishmen who had been ridiculing him: “A hundred curses on the swine eaters, who know neither decency nor civility!” 

‘James VI of Scotland “hated pork in all its varieties”. In the English Civil War, a song against Scottish partisans of the Rump Parliament (1639-1661) went: “The Jewish Scots that scorns to eat The Flesh of Swine, and brewers beat, ’twas the sight of this Hogs head made ’em retreat, Which nobody can deny.” Dr. Johnson (1773): “The vulgar inhabitants of Skye, I know not whether of the other islands, have not only eels but pork and bacon in abhorrence; and accordingly I never saw a hog in the Hebrides, except one at Dunvegan”. Dean Ramsay (1793-1872): “The old aversion to the ‘unclean animal’ still lingers in the Highlands… I recollect an old Scottish gentleman who shared this horror, asking very gravely, ‘Were not swine forbidden under the law and cursed under the gospel?’ – Matthew 8:30-32.

‘John Toland (1714): “You know how considerable a part of the British inhabitants are the undoubted offspring of [Judah and Levi] and how many worthy prelates of this same stock, not to speak of Lords and commoners, may at this time make an illustrious figure among us… A great number of ’em fled to Scotland which is the reason so many in that part of the Island have a remarkable aversion to pork and black puddings to this day, not to insist on some other resemblances easily observable.” 

‘D. A. MacKenzie… claimed that the taboo preceded Christianity and that the coming of Christian missionaries to Scotland actually weakened the prohibition. Mackenzie stated that after examination it appeared to him that in ancient Scotland there were two different cults or attitudes, one of which regarded the pig with abhorrence while the other revered it [perhaps reflective of two different tribes: Benjamin and Dan]. Ancient pictures of wild boars have been found engraved on rocks. A first century BCE grave in Scotland contained what appears to have been a pig offering and other finds indicate the consumption of swine. 

MacKenzie connects the pig taboo with the Galatians… These were a small group of Galatians (also called “Galli”) who had gravitated to Anatolia (modern Turkey), conquered Phrygia and formed their own kingdom called Galatia in which they ruled over the natives. 

Lucian (“De Dea Syria”) wrote concerning the Galli of Galatia: “They sacrifice bulls and cows alike and goats and sheep; pigs alone which they abominate, are neither sacrificed nor eaten. Others look on swine without disgust, but as holy animals”. Mackenzie brings numerous sources showing that in Gaul, in Ireland, in other parts of Britain, pigs were both plentiful and respected. The boar was a favorite symbol. Pigs were reared for meat all over the Celtic area and the Continental Celts [not the same people as the British Celts] even had a developed industry curing swine meat which they sold to the Romans and were famous for. 

Eels, hare, and pike are also forbidden by the Mosaic code and the Scots had prejudices against all of these and refused to eat them though they are popular foods amongst the neighboring English. The obvious place to look for the source of these prohibitions is in a past exposure to and acceptance of the Mosaic Law and this was the source to which observers in the past usually traced them. It is interesting to note that from time to time certain fish and fowl which the Mosaic Code (of Ancient Israel) does permit came under a ban but only in the case of those expressly prohibited by the Law of Moses did the taboo last or become widely accepted.’ 

“Julius Casar found that the ancient Britons tabooed the hare, the domestic fowl and the goose. The hare is still taboo to many Scots”. 

‘It should be noted that abstaining from foods prohibited by the Mosaic Law may have physiological advantages conducive to long-term physical and emotional stability. Our examination of the religious practices of the early Christian Celts revealed that not only food taboos but also a large number of other practices were taken directly from the Mosaic Law and also that there existed a conscious identification with the Jews and ancient Levis. Some of these practices had proven parallels in ancient Druidical pre-Christian custom which taken together with other facts proves that at least a portion of these people were of Israelite descent. 

When the Celts became Christian they carried over into Christianity some of the customs of the Druids. There were Biblical Laws among the customs of the Druids that the British and Irish Celts continued to practice after becoming Christians. This explains in part why the original Celtic Christians of Britain adopted many “Old Testament” practices of the Law of Moses.

Concerning the Druids: Julius Caesar (in his book “The Conquest of Gaul”) wrote: 

“The Druidic doctrine is believed to have been found existing in Britain and thence imported into Gaul; even today those who want to make a profound study of it generally go to Britain for the purpose… It is said that these pupils have to memorize a great number of verses so many, that some of them spend twenty years at their studies. The Druids believe that their religion forbids them to commit their teachings to writing, although for some other purposes, such as public and private accounts, the Gauls use the Greek alphabet”. 

‘The Romans persecuted the Druids and many Druids fled to Scandinavia according to Welsh tradition and this has been confirmed by archaeological finds… Those Druids who remained in West Britain and Ireland founded colleges and communal settlements… When the Celts were converted to Christianity… [these] were transformed into monasteries.’ 

‘T. W. Rolleston, (“Myths And Legends of the Celtic Race”, 1911, London) quotes from Bertrand (“L’Irlande Celtique”) – The Druids like the Hebrews… had an Oral Law that it was forbidden to write. They gave tithes and first fruits. Their sacrificial modes were similar to Biblical ones. They practiced ritual purity in ways that are reminiscent of Laws in the Bible about purification. Traditions exist that some of the Celts of Britain and Ireland practiced the Mosaic Law before the coming of Christianity. 

Leslie Hardinge says that the Celtic Christians of the British Isles placed a “strong emphasis on the legal aspects of the Old Testament”. An Irish work (“Liber ex Lege Moisi”) from ca. 800 CE uses Old Testament Law as “a prime directive, for the proper conduct of everyday life”. It is said that the Celtic Church was closer to Judaism than any other branch of Christianity. Harding says: 

“The shared elements include the keeping of the Saturday Sabbath, tithing, the definition of “first fruits” and offerings… inheritance of religious office, and fasting and dietary restrictions. It also appears that the Celts kept Easter by older methods of reckoning, one of which caused Easter to coincide with the Passover. Other scholarship suggests that Irish Churchmen of the seventh and eighth centuries actually considered themselves to be Priests and Levites, as defined under Old Testament law”. 

MRS. Winthrop Plamer Boswell, (“The Roots of Irish Monasticism”, California, 1969) adds to the above listed Jewish features of Celtic religion: 

“… the prominence of Hebrew features in Irish canon law collections (including Biblical cities of Refuge and Jubilee Years) together with Mosaic prohibitions on diet and injunctions on tithes… There was also a Hebrew treatment of the sanctuary… and finally there were many Hebrew words occurring in cryptographic monastic Irish works such as Hisperica Famina”. 

‘… the Celtic Church kept Saturday as the Sabbath Day’ – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. ‘Incidentally, John Brand (“Observations on the Popular Antiquities of Great Britain”, London, 1841) describes the great lengths the Church went to, to extinguish all possible traces of 7th-day Sabbath keeping amongst the English.

An article tracing the early observance of Saturday as the Sabbath noted:

‘[In the 500s CE Scotland]: “In this latter instance they seem to have followed a custom of which we find traces in the early monastic church of Ireland, by which they held Saturday to be the Sabbath on which they rested from all their labours” Columba specifically referred to Saturday as the Sabbath and this was the custom of that early church on Iona, an island off the coast of Scotland. [Scotland and Ireland 600s CE]: “It seems to have been customary in the Celtic Churches of the early times in Ireland as well as Scotland, to keep Saturday as a day of rest from labour.

They observed the fourth commandment (that you should not work on the seventh day) literally on the seventh day of the week.” [In the 900s CE Scotland]: “They worked on Sunday, but kept Saturday in a Sabbatical manner.” [In the 1000s CE Scotalnd]: “They held that Saturday was properly the Sabbath on which they abstained from work.” During the 11th century the Catholic Queen of Scotland, Margaret, tried to stamp out those that kept Saturday as the Sabbath Day and who refused to honor Sunday as the Sabbath Day.’

W M Stukeley, in his book Abury, affirms after a close study of the evidence: “I plainly discerned the religion professed by the ancient Britons was the simple patriarchal faith.” Cited in The Drama of the Lost Disciples, G F Jowett, 2009, page 44. 

It is important to recognise that while the Celts in Ireland and Scotland may have held onto the Mosaic Law as specified under the Old Covenant – thereby in the process giving evidence of their Israelite roots – certain aspects of the Law had been either annulled, amended or amplified by Christ’s death – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy.

The Book of Chronicles records the main clans from the three sons of Levi.

Levi

1 Chronicles 23:1-32

English Standard Version

1 ‘When David was old and full of days, he made Solomon his son king over Israel.

2 David assembled all the leaders of Israel and the priests and the Levites. 3 The Levites, thirty years old and upward, were numbered, and the total was 38,000 men. 

4 “Twenty-four thousand of these,” David said, ‘shall have charge of the work in the house of the Lord, 6,000 shall be officers and judges, 5 4,000 gatekeepers, and 4,000 shall offer praises to the Lord with the instruments that I have made for praise.” 6 And David organized them in divisions corresponding to the sons of Levi: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.

7 The sons of Gershon were Ladan and Shimei.

8 The sons of Ladan: Jehiel the chief, and Zetham, and Joel, three. 9 The sons of Shimei: Shelomoth, Haziel, and Haran [family name of Abraham], three. These were the heads of the fathers’ houses of Ladan. 

10 And the sons of Shimei: Jahath, Zina, and Jeush and Beriah. These four were the sons of Shimei. 11 Jahath was the chief, and Zizah the second; but Jeush [family name of Esau] and Beriah did not have many sons, therefore they became counted as a single father’s house.

12 The sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, four.

13 The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses.

Aaron was set apart to dedicate the most holy things, that he and his sons forever should make offerings before the Lord and minister to him and pronounce blessings in his name forever.

14 But the sons of Moses the man of God were named among the tribe of Levi. 

Readers seeking a comprehensive survey on the spiritual giant that was Moses, may be interested in the following – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

15 The sons of Moses: Gershom and Eliezer.

16 The sons of Gershom: Shebuel the chief.

17 The sons of Eliezer: Rehabiah the chief. Eliezer had no other sons, but the sons of Rehabiah were very many. 18 The sons of Izhar: Shelomith the chief. 19 The sons of Hebron: Jeriah the chief, Amariah the second, Jahaziel the third, and Jekameam the fourth. 20 The sons of Uzziel: Micah the chief and Isshiah the second.

21 The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi.

The sons of Mahli: Eleazar and Kish [family name of Benjamin]. 22 Eleazar died having no sons, but only daughters; their kinsmen, the sons of Kish, married them.

23 The sons of Mushi: Mahli, Eder, and Jeremoth, three.

24 These were the sons of Levi by their fathers’ houses, the heads of fathers’ houses as they were listed according to the number of the names of the individuals from twenty years old and upward who were to do the work for the service of the house of the Lord. 25 For David said, “The Lord, the God of Israel, has given rest to his people, and he dwells in Jerusalem forever. 26 And so the Levites no longer need to carry the tabernacle or any of the things for its service”

28 For their duty was to assist the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the Lord, having the care of the courts and the chambers, the cleansing of all that is holy, and any work for the service of the house of God. 29 Their duty was also to assist with the showbread, the flour for the grain offering, the wafers of unleavened bread, the baked offering, the offering mixed with oil, and all measures of quantity or size. 30 And they were to stand every morning, thanking and praising the Lord, and likewise at evening, 31 and whenever burnt offerings were offered to the Lord on Sabbaths, new moons, and feast days, according to the number required of them, regularly before the Lord. 32 Thus they were to keep charge of the tent of meeting and the sanctuary, and to attend the sons of Aaron, their brothers, for the service of the house of the Lord’ – Article: The Ark of God.

The Book of Chronicles also records which Levite families settled in various cities, of the various tribes throughout ancient Israel. The sons of Levi being Gershon, Kohath and Merari. Most of the Kohathites, of which Aaron descended lived in the territories of Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, the tribes that later constituted the Kingdom of Judah.

1 Chronicles 6:54-64

English Standard Version

54 ‘These are their dwelling places according to their settlements within their borders: to the sons of Aaron of the clans of Kohathites, for theirs was the first lot, 55 to them they gave Hebron in the land of Judah and its surrounding pasturelands, 56 but the fields of the city and its villages they gave to Caleb the son of Jephunneh. 57 To the sons of Aaron they gave the cities of refuge: Hebron, Libnah with its pasturelands… 

60 and from the tribe of Benjamin, Gibeon, Geba with its pasturelands… All their cities throughout their clans were thirteen. 61 To the rest of the Kohathites were given by lot out of the clan of the tribe, out of the half-tribe, the half of [West] Manasseh, ten cities. 62 To the Gershomites according to their clans were allotted thirteen cities out of the tribes of Issachar, Asher, Naphtali and [East] Manasseh in Bashan.

63 To the Merarites according to their clans were allotted twelve cities out of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Zebulun. 

64 So the people of Israel gave the Levites the cities with their pasturelands. 65 They gave by lot out of the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin these cities that are mentioned by name.’

The Prophet Malachi proclaims a powerful prophecy about the time of the end and the Messianic return; with the majority of people who doubt and the few who exhibit faith. Included, is a return by the Levites to Godly worship. Maimonides stated that during this time each Israelite would be informed of which tribe he belongs to.

Malachi 3:1-18

New Century Version

1 ‘The Lord All-Powerful says, “I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way for me. Suddenly, the Lord you are looking for will come to his Temple; the messenger of the agreement, whom you want, will come.”

2 No one can live through that time; no one can survive when he comes. He will be like a purifying fire and like laundry soap. 3 Like someone who heats and purifies silver, he will purify the Levites and make them pure like gold and silver. Then they will bring offerings to the Lord in the right way. 4 And the Lord will accept the offerings from Judah and Jerusalem, as it was in the past. 5 The Lord All-Powerful says, “Then I will come to you and judge you. I will be quick to testify against those who take part in evil magic, adultery, and lying under oath, those who cheat workers of their pay and who cheat widows and orphans, those who are unfair to foreigners, and those who do not respect me.

6 “I the Lord do not change. So you descendants of Jacob have not been destroyed.Since the time of your ancestors, you have disobeyed my rules and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you,” says the Lord All-Powerful.

13 The Lord says, “You have said terrible things about me.

“But you ask, ‘What have we said about you?’

14 “You have said, ‘It is useless to serve God. It did no good to obey his laws and to show the Lord All-Powerful that we were sorry for what we did. 15 So we say that proud people are happy. Evil people succeed. They challenge God and get away with it.’

This is highly reflective of our modern age. Many people, not just the world’s elite, use their wealth to take an unfair advantage of the majority of the world, in keeping them impoverished. It certainly looks like they are all getting away with their selfishness and cruelty; particularly as each century passes by without retribution. But, their own day of reckoning beckons and justice will be served. 

Malachi: 16 Then those who honored the Lord spoke with each other, and the Lord listened and heard them. The names of those who honored the Lord and respected him were written in his presence in a book to be remembered. 17 The Lord All-Powerful says, “They belong to me; on that day they will be my very own. As a parent shows mercy to his child who serves him, I will show mercy to my people. 18 You will again see the difference between good and evil people, between those who serve God and those who don’t.”

An odd story concerning Reuben, is his giving mandrakes to his mother Leah, when he was still very young and likely only ten years of age.

Genesis 30:14-23

English Standard Version

14 ‘In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes [H1736 – duwday: basket, mandrake] in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” 15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.” 

16 ‘When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” 

So he lay with her that night. 17 And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant to my husband.” So she called his name Issachar.

19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun. 21 Afterward she bore a daughter and called her name Dinah.

22 Then [later] God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken away my reproach.”

Reuben may or may not have known that the mandrake contains aphrodisiac and fertility properties. As he was a child, probably not; though what led him to find the mandrakes for Leah? Did Leah have a liking for them? Was Reuben inspired by the Eternal to look for them? Leah had a temporary barren period after the birth of Judah in 1746 BCE until Issachar’s birth in 1742 BCE. It is ironic that she gives the mandrakes to Rachel and conceives herself that night, yet Rachel who likely takes the plant root does not bear Joseph until 1726 BCE. Some versions incorrectly call the plant a love apple, or in other words, a tomato. 

The Mandrake is common in Palestine and flourishes in the spring, ripening at the time of the wheat harvest as Genesis states. The mandrake, also known as Satan’s apple, is the fruit, a potent root that somewhat resembles the human form of the Mandragora officinarum, a member of the Solanaceae or potato order. 

There is also a British version, the Bryonia Alba. They are said to have mystical and magical properties. It is a member of the Nightshade family, used primarily for its anaesthetic properties and closely allied to the Atropa belladonna or deadly nightshade of southern Europe. 

If ingested in sufficient quantities it can cause delirium and hallucinations. It is native to the Mediterranean and tellingly, the Himalayas – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

The next time we read again of Reuben is in Genesis thirty-five, in one small verse sandwiched between the death of Rachel and the death of Isaac. Isaac died in 1697 BCE and Rachel died giving birth to Benjamin circa 1699 BCE. Assuming it is 1698 BCE, Reuben is fifty-four years of age. Reuben is still young, not even middle aged; for he dies at the age of one hundred and twenty-five in 1627 BCE.

Genesis 35:21-22

English Standard Version

21 ‘Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder. 22 While Israel lived in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine. And Israel heard of it.’

Bilhah was Rachel’s handmaid and someone who Reuben would have known very well. Further details are given in the Book of Jubilees.

Book of Jubilees 33:1-9

1 ‘And Jacob went and dwelt to the south of Magdaladra’ef. And he went to his father Isaac, he and Leah his wife, on the new month [New Moon the 1st] of the tenth month [January/February]. 2 And Reuben saw Bilhah, Rachel’s maid, the concubine of his father, bathing in water in a secret place, and he loved [lusted after] her.

3 And he hid himself at night, and he entered the house of Bilhah, and he found her sleeping alone on a bed in her house. 4 And he lay with her, and she awoke and saw, and behold Reuben was lying with her in the bed, and she uncovered the border of her covering and seized him, and cried out, and discovered that it was Reuben. 5 And she was ashamed because of him, and released her hand from him, and he fled. 

6 And she lamented [mourned as if one had died] because of this thing exceedingly, and did not tell it to any one. 7 And when Jacob returned and sought her, she said to him: ‘I am not clean for you, for I have been defiled as regards you; for Reuben has defiled me, and has lain with me in the night, and I was asleep, and did not discover until he uncovered my skirt and slept with me.’

8 And Jacob was exceedingly wroth [vengeful, resentful, fierce anger] with Reuben because he had lain with Bilhah, because he had uncovered his father’s skirt. 9 And Jacob did not approach her again because Reuben had defiled her [well after the births of Dan (1746 BCE) and Naphtali (1744 BCE)]. And as for any man who uncovers his father’s skirt his deed is wicked exceedingly, for he is abominable before Yahweh.’

Bilhah

A tragic experience involving the rape of Bilhah; coupled with not being able to be close to Jacob ever again. The condemnation against Reuben is severe because of his evil act and one realises the prophecy’s regarding his offspring are a punishment, just as Canaan’s children were punished even though it was Canaan’s sin – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa

It is curious that this incident is a sexual act after the sexual aspect of the mandrake story. It is in part because of this, that identity adherents have labelled France as Reuben. Though we have already discovered their rightful identity – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Reubens Ravishing of Bilhah: A Parallel Account, Dr Rabbi David Frankel – emphasis his:

‘We may compare the short original story [refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator] of the son (Canaan or Ham) molesting his father (Ham or Noah) [in reality it was Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk* who slept with Noah] and being cursed with the similarly curt story of Reuben’s sin with his father’s concubine, Bilhah, as related in Genesis 35:21-22.’

Rachel gave Bilhah to Jacob as a substitute wife. After Rachel’s death, her status reverts to a concubine as she was not married to Jacob.

Frankel: ‘… we have a brief story about a son who sexually disgraces his father, though in this case it is the eldest son rather than the youngest son, and the disgrace to the father is done indirectly through incest with the father’s concubine, an act that the incest laws in the Torah call “revealing your father’s nakedness”:

Leviticus 18:8 Do not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is the nakedness of your father. Leviticus 20:11 If a man lies with his father’s wife, it is the nakedness of his father that he has uncovered… Deuteronomy 27:20 Cursed be he who lies with his father’s wife, for he has revealed what his father has covered…

Many have noted that the ending of the Reuben and Bilhah story is truncated. What happened when Israel “heard about it”? The story could hardly have simply ended there! The parallel with the Noah story suggests that the original continuation may be found in the “blessings” of Jacob before his death in Genesis 49:3-4…

Just as Noah immediately cursed his youngest son for taking sexual advantage* of him, so Jacob, upon hearing about the act of his oldest son with his concubine, immediately pronounced the demotion of his status vis-a-vis his brothers. If this conjecture is accepted, the similarity between the two stories is even greater. Note that brothers play no active role in the story of Reuben’s sin just as they play no active role in the reconstructed story of Ham and Canaan. And, at least if we follow the reconstruction of that narrative suggested above, it too ended with the father’s denunciation of the sinful son alone.   

Incidentally, another parallel between the narratives should not be missed: just as the biblical editor sought to “sanitize” the sexual sin in the Noah story so did the Rabbis suggest that Reuben did no more than move his father’s bed from Bilhah’s tent to his mother Leah’s tent.’

Genesis 49:3-4

English Standard Version

3 “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the firstfruits of my strength [H202 – ‘own: vigour, generative power], preeminent in dignity [loftiness, exaltation] and preeminent in power. 4 Unstable [H6349] as water [H4325], you shall not have preeminence [H3498], because you went up to your father’s bed; then you defiled it – he went up to my couch!”

This is the only time when Jacob inserts his own opinion or feelings amongst the oracles concerning his sons – “he went up to my couch.”  It cost Reuben dearly, as the birthright or at least the lions share, if it was to be split with Simeon, was lost, forever – just as Esau had also lost his birthright. Today, Northern Ireland as a country (which is not a nation), is caught in a no-mans-land, between the lions of Judah and Gad… England and Ireland respectively. It’s checkered past, violent and unstable as predicted. Like water that is never truly calm or still, so has the volatile history of Northern Ireland been embroiled between Catholic, Republican Irish and Protestant, Northern Irish Loyalists who reside in the majority of Ulster’s nine Counties.

The Hebrew word for unstable is pachaz, meaning, as in ‘recklessness, wantoness, unbridled license, frothiness’ – to froth. The Hebrew word for water is mayim and has the connotation for ‘danger, violence, transitory.’ It can mean ‘water of the feet’, literally: urine. The word preeminence is the Hebrew word yathar, meaning ‘excel.’ Reuben was not going to have an excess, say like Joseph, but rather a considerably minute inheritance. 

Northern Irish man and woman

It is interesting to note that the Northern Irish are staunchly loyal and royal in their mindset and policy. Only Canada apart from obviously the English, rivals them for their patriotism towards the Monarchy and its figurehead that was Queen Elizabeth II. It is as if they are over-compensating for what might have been as the eldest and even possibly the recipient of the sceptre and orb of regal rulership. In Northern Ireland the reminder of this is in the practice of the frequent use of the word ‘royal as in the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the title for the Northern Irish police force from 1922 to 2001.

Deuteronomy 33:6

King James Version

‘Let Reuben live, and not die [H4191 – muwth: put to death]; and let not his men [H4962] be few [H4557 – caphar: small, numbered].’

Moses predicts that Reuben would have a lot of descendants… or did he. The King James version with many others, misleadingly says Reuben would have many offspring. This is in part why identity researchers have unanimously taught Reuben as France. The Interlinear shows that the word not is added. 

The Hebrew word in question H4962 math, is translated as men (14 times), few (2), number (1) and small (1). The connotation is having less sex and subsequently less males.

The English Standard version translates this verse accurately: “Let Reuben live, and not die, but let his men be few.” 

Other translations with the correct context and meaning include:

HCSB: Let Reuben live and not die though his people become few.

CEV: Tribe of Reuben, you will live, even though your tribe will always be small.

MSG: Reuben: “Let Reuben live and not die, but just barely, in diminishing numbers.”

It is clear that Reuben though severely punished, in that he would be a very small tribe; he would still exist and not cease to live. France – aside from its predominant Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b-U152 which does show they are related to the Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples of Britain (R1b-U106) and Ireland (R1b-M529)… they are still not the same – possess a large population and a preeminence of power.

Thus France does not fulfil the prophecies for Reuben. Northern Ireland does… and its intricate relationship with Gad from Ireland, makes it the only plausible biblical answer.

Belfast, capital city of Northern Ireland

Judges 5:15-16

Common English Bible

15 ‘… Among the clans of Reuben there was deep soul-searching [1]. 16 “Why did you stay back among the sheep pens, listening to the music for the flocks?” For the clans of Reuben there was deep soul-searching [2].’

The Reubenites were reluctant to get involved in the combined tribes of Israel war against the Canaanites during Deborah’s judgeship. In fact, they didn’t participate at all. The other tribe that declined involvement, was the tribe of Dan. This is a strange coincidence as we will discover when we study Dan. The word used for soul-searching in verse sixteen is different from the one in verse fifteen. The idea is said twice, so the strength of their reticence has been underlined for it to be stated in such a way. 

The first Hebrew word is (H2711), cheqeq meaning ‘thoughts, decrees, resolve, statute, action prescribed, an enactment, a resolution.’ It looks like they took so long to deliberate and make an official decision that the war was begun and finished before they could make up their minds. This is indicative of the Northern Irish government’s policy making, as it is not known for its decisiveness.

The second word is (H2714), cheqer meaning ‘a search, investigation, enquiry, examination, enumeration, deliberation.’ Just the definitions of the word sound painful. Therefore the procrastination of the Reubenites in making a decision, meant they did not get involved at all. 

Gad

Genesis 49:19

Amplified Bible

‘As for Gad [H1410 – gad: a troop] – a raiding troop [H1416 – gduwd: band, army, company] shall raid [H1464 – guwd: overcome, invade (with troops)] him, But he shall raid [H1464] at their heels and assault them (victoriously).’

NLV: “A group of soldiers [the English] will go against Gad [Ireland]. But he will go against them at their heels [in Northern Ireland].”

Gad would be attacked but will have the last word. In this verse and context, Gad’s name means a ‘raiding troop’, yet in Genesis 30:11, his name means ‘good fortune’ from H1409 gad. Both definitions are correct and in the Hebrew definition of the name Gad in Genesis chapter forty-nine, there is a play on the word Gad, as in ‘Gad, a Gad shall Gad.’ The mentioning of raiding at the heels of their enemies is another interesting coincidence, as in the preceding verses, Jacob speaks of Dan as a venomous serpent that with its fangs will bite a ‘horses heels so that his rider falls backward.’

Worth noting is that the tribe of Dan has a primary relationship with Ephraim; a secondary one with Reuben; a tertiary one with Benjamin and subsidiary connections with both Simeon and Gad – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

In Judges five and the war against the Canaanites, we observed that Judah, Simeon and Levi were not involved and Reuben and Dan did not participate. Gad, like Judah and company is not mentioned either. These tribes all have one thing in common and that is that they were on the periphery of the action and the war zone so-to-speak. The exception being Machir of the half-tribe of East Manasseh, who also dwelt on the east side of the River Jordan with Reuben and Gad. In Moses’s prophecy Gad chose the best land for himself.

Deuteronomy 33:20-21

English Standard Version

20 ‘And of Gad he said, “Blessed [H1288 – barak: ‘bless oneself, be adored’] be he who enlarges [H7337 – rachab: ‘grow wide, grow large, make room’] Gad! Gad crouches like a lion; he tears off arm and scalp [guerrilla and terrorist warfare].

21 He chose the best of the land for himself, for there a commander’s portion was reserved; and he came with the heads of the people, with Israel he executed the justice of the Lord, and his judgments for Israel.”

It could be argued that the Emerald Isle is the best of the land of the British Isles and even of all the Israelite nations. The identifications of Switzerland or Sweden as Gad fall short in two ways. Arguably, they both have great landscapes and countryside. It is not impossible but rather more difficult to assign a. specific armies (or invaders) for either one which so indelibly affected the Irish conscience; and b. their chances of enlarging their territories is highly unlikely. 

Ireland on the other hand had to endure extreme measures while the English occupied their land. The saga of the English interaction and treatment of the Irish is brutal and uncomfortable reading. English Lordship began in 1172, with Ireland subordinated to the English (later British) Crown in 1541. Ireland was merged with Great Britain to form the United Kingdom in 1801.

The Irish eventually won back their country and became independent from the United Kingdom in 1922 and finally a Republic in 1949. As a Lion themselves, they stood up to the powerful Lion of Judah – Genesis 49:9. With regard to enlarging their territory: first considered was the massive Irish immigration to the United States of America. Many millions fled the potato famine (1845-1852), which was in large part induced by the English. Only English and German descended Americans outnumber those of Irish descent in America. 

A more accurate interpretation, which in the past may have seemed unlikely, though with the United Kingdom having withdrawn from the European Union and Scotland sabre rattling its intention to leave the union; a Northern Ireland separating itself from England, Wales and Scotland and forming an agreement with Ireland does not seem so far fetched. A federated Ireland with either the two capitals of Dublin and Belfast, or a new neutral location working together would be seen as a victory for the Republic.

Dublin, capital city of Ireland

The religious divide of the Northern Ireland populace could be evidence of a genetic split; in that the Protestants are primarily from Reuben and the Catholics are not Reuben at all, but actually reflective of Gad. This could be another interpretation of Gad ‘enlarging his territory.’ 

Irish men

As the tribes of Israel are all in the process of distancing themselves from Judah and the hold its monarchy exerts; a Northern Ireland forsaking the United Kingdom could be inevitable. And before Scotland or Wales would still be a sensational political event. The big question of course is whether Scotland or Wales would actually leave the United Kingdom as historically they were the integral tribes constituting the Kingdom of Judah; comprising Judah, Benjamin and Simeon. 

Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950:

‘Reuben, unstable as water and [not] having the excellency of greatness, we have recognized as France. Southern France, settled by the descendants of Javan* (the Greeks), is gentile … is unstable, yet sets the styles for the world, has the form of real excellency, and has the same sex weakness as Reuben, is France… And is it not significant that the very country at war with England around 1800 should be France (Reuben), who would lose the birthright in the Napoleonic war? (Napoleon was Italian.)’ 

This identification appears to fit quite well, superficially. Though it unravels when we understand who the French are and that Reuben was to be the smallest tribe – refer* Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Hoeh: ‘Gad, which means “the troop” certainly designates Switzerland the only Israelite nation in which every man is mobilized for defense. Against Gad would come the foreign troops, said Jacob, but he will “trod upon their heel.” Moses declared that Gad does NOT “leap,” a characteristic of the colonizing or pillaging tribes. Gad “teareth the arm, yea, the crown of the head” of the Holy Roman Empire [or in reality, Catholicism], in whose territory “he chose a first part for himself, and there a portion of a ruler was reserved.” To Gad come “the heads of the people” as they do today to Geneva. 

No other nation on earth so perfectly fits this description of a nation of troops. Switzerland, Geneva particularly, has had a history of being an “international lawgiver.” Note: Even though the migrations of some of the ancestors of Switzerland and Germany are similar, while some have erroneously taught that Germany is Gad, Germany has no history of being a recognized lawgiver – but instead primarily descended from Assyria’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Irish women

Hoeh offers no example in evidence of the Swiss being tread upon in fulfilment of prophecy; yet a leap is taken for Gad in assigning the Holy Roman Empire a role. A misinterpretation of scripture is applied by assigning a meaning of Gad as having many troops; rather than the ordeal of being invaded and ruled relentlessly, as Ireland endured. Also missed, is the close relationship between Reuben and Gad in dwelling together across the River Jordan.

We will find that all the sons of Jacob had a close relationship with one other tribe. It is a startling coincidence, yet all the sons of Jacob paired off, though not always with a full brother, more times it was with a half brother. The exception is Dan, who from the get go was a lone wolf, a maverick, unlike his brothers and more attune with his cousin Esau or even his uncle Ishmael. So far, we have witnessed the close ties between Judah and Benjamin; between Simeon and Levi and between Reuben and Gad. 

The antiquity of Ireland’s history is shrouded in a mist of mystery and myth. What is apparent is that there has been an overlapping of various waves of people. We will endeavour to sift through the legendary and mythical history and glean what is relevant for Reuben and Gad. In so doing, we will bump into Benjamin and Zarah from Judah which we have investigated already (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes) as well as the tribe of Dan, who will be studied separately in a later chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Ireland’s early history is ‘based largely upon the pseudo-historical Lebor Gabala Erenn, translated into English as the “Book of Invasions”; and Cath Maige Tuired, or the “Second Battle of Maige Tuired.” One of the first peoples recorded in Ireland – following the Flood – are the Partholonians, named from their leader Partholon.

An intriguing word as it is remarkably similar to the Israelite empire of the Parthians*, discussed in Chapter XXX Judah and Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. They are alleged to have ruled in Ireland for some three hundred years and then became extinct due to a disease. A gap of thirty years may have transpired separating them and the next people to arrive, the Nemedians. 

In the Annals of Clonmacnois, written circa 1408 CE, Bartholome is mentioned arriving in Ireland during the time that Abraham was alive. Geoffrey Keating proposes the Partholonians arrived in Ireland circa 2061 BCE, which is amended in the unconventional chronology to 2044 BCE. Meanwhile, Abraham lived between 1977 BCE and 1802 BCE. An Old English version by Roberts of this same tradition said that the people who were led by Bartholome, sailed to Ireland from the Middle East via Spain. As Bartholomaeus is etymologically linked with Partholomus, this is likely a representation of the Partholonians.

Partholon was the son of Sera, who was the son of Sru a king of Greece. Partholon had fled from Greece, after murdering his own father and mother. In the process, Partholon had lost his left eye – Articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. Accompanied by his wife Dealgnaid (Delgnat); three sons, Slanga, Rudraige, Laiglinne, their wives; and a group of a thousand followers, they sailed via Sicily and Iberia before landing at Inber Scene – Kenmare in County Kerry. The Partholonians lived on a small island near the head of the estuary of the River Erne. In their third year, the settlers encountered the giant Fomorians; where they fought in the Battle of Mag Itha – Slemna of Mag Itha. In this reputed first battle on Irish soil, they defeated the Fomorians, led by a Cichol Gricenchos.

David Hughes in The British Chronicles, 2007, says: ‘the Partholonians were prominent in Ulster and in Scotland where they were referred to as “Parthi.”* An erroneous tradition says they descended from Noah’s son Japheth. Due to the timing of Jacob being born in 1817 BCE, the Partholonians could not be from the sons of Jacob. Though the later Nemedians do appear to have a connection with Jacob. 

It is possible Partholon was a Hebrew, descended from Eber like Abraham. Sru may be the same as Reu, the grandson of Eber and Sera could be his son Serug, the great grandfather of Abraham – Genesis 11:16-26.

The Nemedians arrived in Ireland in approximately 1714 BCE, ruling Ireland for two hundred and seventeen years, to circa 1497 BCE. Their journey to Ireland began seemingly from Spain with a fleet of thirty-four ships and a thousand and twenty people – much like the Partholonians who preceded them. 

Only one ship with about thirty people is said to have survived the journey, which included Nemed and his four sons. The name Nemed in Hebrew means ‘sanctified’ or ‘separated’ and is synonymous with the Hebrew name Peresh, given to the son of Machir from the half tribe of East Manasseh – 1 Chronicles 7:16. The Nemedians are also coincidently claimed by one source ‘to be descendants of Sru, Sera and Isru. These names… are all forms of the name Israel.’ Sera-[li] is how the Assyrians rendered the name Israel in at least one inscription.

An ancient indigenous people in Ireland, were the Fomorians. The Fomorian origins are supposed to be from North Africa. They worshipped a goddess, Domnu and their leader was Balar (or Balor), a form of the word Baal, meaning ‘lord’ or ‘possessor’ – Article: Belphegor. They were in essence, sea-going pirates and possibly female dominated. They are not considered as Celtic or permanent for they were a strange race of ugly, misshapen giants who lived on Tory Island off the coast of Donegal in Northwest Ireland. 

The ancient Annals of Clonmacnois records that the Fomorians were: “descended from Cham, the sonne of Noeh, and lived by pyracie and spoile of other nations, and were in those days very troublesome to the whole world.” Previously mentioned, the Giant’s Gateway in Ireland – Cloch-an-na-bh-Fomharigh: ’causeway or stepping-stones of the Fomorians’ – was associated with giants and hence is commonly called the Giant’s Causeway – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

The Fomorians were cruel and violent and they would repeatedly raid the mainland. The Fomorians had once fought the Partholonians. Once the numbers of the Nemedians had grown, they were at first successful against the Fomorians, with four decisive victories; but a pestilence decimated the population so that less than two thousand Nemedians survived. Thus the Fomorians ruled over the Nemedians for a period and then later also over the Dananns, extracting heavy tributes and taxes from them. 

The Fomorian giants were undoubtedly Elioud descendants of the Nephilim – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II. They were an ancient inhabitant of the land and very possibly the first. The Irish Province of Ulster derives its name from them. For they would have been known as the Ulaid (or Ulaidh) and singularly as the Ulad (or Uladh). This is the old Irish spelling for the Hebrew word Elioud also transliterated Eljo; being the second generational offspring and beyond, of the Nephilim. The Irish name Uladh is pronounced as Ulla, which would then become Ula-ster and hence Ulster. 

A commentator adds – emphasis mine:

The etymology of the… word Elioud is composed of the words, El, Io, and Ud. You will also find this name in Welsh charters, which it is clear it is not originally a Welsh word, but it was Hebrew and taken to the Welsh. The Welsh etymology is also very similar, where it is said the meaning of el is many and iud is lord. I believe that this is a mistranslation, and it has the same meaning as the Hebrew.

The word El is a generic name for God… found in the word Elohim. The word Io is related to the words wisdom and knowledge. Sir Godfrey Higgins had written, “in Syriac Io, was the God of Wisdom or Knowledge… The God of Wisdom was the spiritual fire…” The meaning of the word Ud is “brand or branded.” Therefor, the meaning of Elioud would be something like “branded with the spiritual fire of Godly wisdom, or wisdom branded by the spirit fire of God.”

Hence, they were [like] the sons of Cain, the accursed and branded by God as it is said in the scriptures when God confronted Cain about Abel’s death; God responded, “Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over”, and God “set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him” (Genesis 4:15) – refer article: Na’amah.

The original Wisdom of God who walked in the midst of fire, was the companion of the Eternal – Ezekiel 28:11, 14, 16-17, Proverbs 8:22-36 – Article: Asherah.

As an aside, in the genealogy of Christ through his mother Mary, one of His ancestors is a certain Eliud (Matthew 1:14–15), the great-great-grandfather of Joseph, the father of Mary – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The name Eliud is (G1664), Elioud and means: ‘God his Praise’ or ‘God of Majesty.’ 

Three Nemedian chieftains led their people in revolt; attacking the Fomorian stronghold of Tory Island, with the Nemedians managing to kill one of the Fomorian kings and capturing one of their towers.

In the process, the Nemedians were again almost totally annihilated, with purportedly only thirty Nemedians surviving the battle. These survivors fled from Ireland. 

According to legend, one branch of the Nemedians under Fergus Lethderg, fled with his son Briottan (Britain) Maol to Alba (Scotland), where the whole island was named after him. This is more convincing than Britain being named after Brutus some four hundred years later. These were related peoples to the British peoples who became known as Britons and the Cymry descended from Simeon. A second branch of the Nemedians were led by a Semeon (Semion) or Simon Brec, a son of Erglan son of Beoan son of Starn son of Nemed. They supposedly fled to Greece, where their descendants would later return to Ireland after being slaves for a long time; now known as the Fir Bolg

According to some versions, Semeon had never been in Ireland and only his descendants were there. The name Semeon equates to the name Simeon, the son of Jacob. Though it is not the same person, rather a shared family name. For this branch of the Nemedians are the tribe of Reuben, who were known as the Fir Bolg, one and the same as the Belgae* on the continent. The Fir Bolge or sons of Bolge are also referred to as ‘Ffirvolge.’ Related names include: Firvolgian, Firbolgian, Belgarian and Belgian.* 

Ptolemy describes the Tribe of Semoni on the southeast coast of Britain. They adjoined the Iceni whose name according to Yair Davidy “may be understood to be a Phoenician (or North Israelite) form of the appellation Jachin [the fourth] son of Simeon (Genesis 46:10). The Welsh in their own and in Irish Literature were referred to as Semoni.” This is an important point, for the Semoni as Simeonites, were to become known as Cymry. 

Five sons of Dela, a descendant of Semeon brought their people out of slavery from Greece and Thrace. This was two hundred and thirty years later in 1267 BCE, after they had departed Ireland in 1497 BCE, prior to the tribe of Zarah-Judah’s arrival in approximately 1404 BCE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The sons of Dela divided Ireland into their original five provinces: Ulster, Connacht, Leinster, Munster and Meath.

Their rule was short lived; lasting a mere thirty-seven years and succession of nine kings, until the Tuatha de Danann – the tribe of Dan – arrived circa 1230 BCE. The Fir Bolg were perceived ‘as inferior people, and strangely, quite primitive in comparison to the Tuatha De Danann…’ Some versions record that the tribe of Dana’s ancestor was Bethac who had left Ireland with the other Nemedians and later returned. The Hiberi Scotti or Gaels arrived in 1046 BCE to find the Tuatha de Danann had been ruling for one hundred and seventy-four years after the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE.

The ancient Book of the Genealogies by MacFirbis states – emphasis mine: 

“Every one who is white (of skin) and brown (of hair), bold, honourable, daring, prosperous, bountiful in the bestowal of property, wealth, and rings, and who is not afraid of battle or combat: they are the descendants of Milesius in Erinn… Every one who is black-haired, who is a tattler, guileful, tale-telling, noisy… the disturbers of every council and every assembly, and the promoters of discord among the people, these are the descendants of the Firbolgs” – aka the tribe of Reuben in Northern Ireland.

The Fir Bolg did not seem to have any trouble with the Fomorians, however they did not like the Tuatha de Danann and fought the First Battle of Moytura against them, where they were defeated, circa 1230 BCE. 

The Story of the Irish Race – emphasis mine:

“The Irish race of today is popularly known as the Milesian Race [the (Hiberi Scotti) Gaels and not the Royal Milesian (Scots) from Zarah-Judah nearly 400 years previously], because the genuine Irish (Celtic) people were supposed to be descended from Milesius of Spain, whose sons, say the legendary accounts, invaded and possessed themselves of Ireland a thousand years before Christ [in 1046 BCE]. 

The races that occupied the land when the so-called Milesians came, chiefly the Firbolg [Tribe of Reuben] and the Tuatha De Danann [Tribe of Dan], were certainly not exterminated by the conquering Milesians [Gad, not Zarah-Judah]. Those two peoples [Reuben and Dan] formed the basis of the future population [in Ulster], which was dominated and guided, and had its characteristics moulded, by the far less numerous but more powerful Milesian [Zarah-Judah] aristocracy and soldiery.

All three of these races, however, were different tribes of the great Celtic family, who, long ages before, had separated from the main stem, and in course of later centuries blended again into one tribe of Gaels [Irish] – three derivatives of one stream, which, after winding their several ways across Europe from the East, in Ireland turbulently met, and after eddying, and surging tumultuously, finally blended in amity, and flowed onward in one great Gaelic stream. 

The possession of the country was wrested from the Firbolgs, and they were forced into partial serfdom by the Tuatha De Danann (people of the goddess Dana), who arrived later. Totally unlike the uncultured Firbolgs, the Tuatha De Dannann were a capable and cultured, highly civilised people, so skilled in the crafts, if not the arts, that the Firbolgs named them necromancers, and in course of time both the Firbolgs and the later coming Milesians [Hiberi Scotti] created a mythology around these. 

In a famed battle at Southern Moytura (on the Mayo-Galway border) it was that the Tuatha De Danann met and overthrew the Firbolgs. The Firbolgs noted King, Eochaid was slain in this great battle, but the De Danan King, Nuada, had his [red] hand cut off by a great warrior of the Firbolgs named Sreng. The battle raged for four days. So bravely had the Firbolgs fought, and so sorely exhausted the De Dannann, that the latter, to end the battle, gladly left to the Firbolgs, that quarter of the Island wherein they fought, the province now called Connaught. And the bloody contest was over. 

The famous life and death struggle of two races is commemorated by a multitude of cairns and pillars which strew the great battle plain in Sligo – a plain which bears the name (in Irish) of “The plain of the Towers of the Fomorians”. The Danann were now the undisputed masters of the land. So goes the honoured legend.”

The Fir Bolg lost the battle because the Danann had superior ‘technological’ weapons. Tailtiu was the daughter of the King of the Mag Mor, “Great Plain”, from the Land of the Dead, which was a poetic name for Spain. Tailtiu married the last Fir Bolg king, Eochaid Mac Eirc, who died at Moytura. At her husband’s death, she married Eochaid Garb Mac Duach, a Danann warrior. Eventually, Lugh Lamfada led the Danann to overthrow the Fomorian tyranny and oppression and annihilate them, circa 1220 BCE in the Second Battle of Moytura. Balor was their last leader and Lugh killed him. Since Tailtiu was the foster mother of Lugh, she was held in honour by the Tuatha de Danann. The Tribe of Dana subsequently intermarried with the Fomorian giants – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

Fir means ‘man or men’ and Bolg is thought to have derived from the Hebrew Bela(gh) from either the son of Benjamin (Genesis 46:21); or more likely, a family head in the tribe of Reuben (1 Chronicles 5:8), who interestingly hailed from Aroer, near Baal*-meon. A symbol of Reuben is a Man, which is linked to the water carrier (water from Jacob’s oracle in Genesis 49:4) and the zodiacal sign of Aquarius – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Yair Davidy comments – emphasis mine: 

‘The Fir Bolg are identified by researchers with the Belgae who in the 100s BCE sent colonists from their base in North Gaul into southern Britain where they were reported by Ptolemy. T.F. O’Rahilly idenfitied the Belgae in Ireland with the Erain (Iverni in the southwest) [and the] Ulaid (Ulster)… The Belgae gave their name to Belgium.

Within the Land of Israel the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half Menasseh at an early stage had formerly expanded their territories up to and perhaps even beyond the Euphrates River. Sections of other Israelite tribes, including Benjamin, were also to be found in the Israelite areas between the Jordan and Euphrates Rivers. Ptolemy in his map of “Arabia” records the existence of Israelite [clans] and territorial names in areas adjoining the Euphrates. Amongst these names are Balagea and Belginaea which appellations relate to the Belgae descendants of Bela(g)h from Benjamin and/or Reuben.’

As both Benjamin [Cruithni Picts] and Reuben [Fir Bolg] lived in Northern Ireland, the link to Bela could relate to either or both of them. Ultimately, it was the tribe of Reuben who finally settled there, appropriating the ancient name of the Ulaid, becoming the modern word Ulster. 

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

‘Israel, as we know, was cast out of her land for idolatry, and Baal-ism was one of her chief idolatries. Before she was cast out she seems to have acquired the habit of attaching the name of the god Baal to places and cities, for on the ancient maps of Palestine we find Baal*-meon, Baal-gad, Baal-ath, Baal-shalisha, Baal-Tamar, Baal-peor [Article: Belphegor], Baal-hazor, Baal-zephon, Mt. Baalah, and others. 

But surely these people carried that same proclivity with them to the islands, for in Ireland this name of the god Baal is found just as frequently, if not more frequently, a circumstance which shows that this idol was honored and worshipped by her eastern colonists. 

The Rev. T. R. Howlett furnishes us with the following list of Baal-it-ish names found in Ireland: Baa-y-Bai, Baal-y-gowan, Baal-y-Nahinsh, Baal-y-Castell, Baal-y-Moni, Baal-y-ner, Baal-y-Garai, Baal-y-nah, Baal-y-Con-El, Baal-y-Hy, Baal-y-Hull-Ish, Baal-NahBrach, Baal-Athi, Baal-Dagon. 

Regarding the evidence given by these names, Howlett says: 

“These certainly are memorials of the Baal worship once prevailing in Ireland. In them we have not only the name of Baal, but its conjunction also with other Hebrew names. How can this be accounted for, except as they were so called by emigrants from Phoenicia and Palestine? One thing that particularly marks the Hebrew origin of these names is their attachment to places but not to persons.

The Canaanites and Phoenicians, attached the names of their gods, Baal, Bal, Bel to persons, as Eth-Baal, Itho-bal, Asdru-bal and Han-i-bal. These were family names among the heathen nations surrounding Israel. In like manner, we find among the chosen people the names of their God associated with and forming a part of family and personal names; as “El” and “Jah,” in Isra-el, Ishma-el, Lemu-el, Samu-el, Ezeki-el, El-isha El-ijah…

Baal never found favor among the Hebrews as a personal name, though used freely for localities. They gave it to their towns, but not to their children. Its use in Ireland is proof of the Israelitish origin of the earliest settlers – philological evidence of racial unity.”

Linked with the Fir Bolg time frame are the Galioin, also associated with the Lagin and Domain and all part of the Gabair peoples who arrived from Brittany (or Amorica) in France. Their name is considered a cognate to that of the Galli and Gauls. Yair Davidy states: ‘these names in Hebrew connote both “Exile” (“Goli”, “Gali”) and [the Sea of] Galilee.’ The Domain may be linked to the tribe of Dana and or the Fomorians and their goddess Domnu. As the Tuatha de Danann and Fomorians intermarried it is highly likely. The related Dumnonii were a British tribe found in Devon, Cornwall and also as far north as Cale-don-ia in Scotland. 

The migration of the Dal Riata, the Dalriada Scots to the West coast of Scotland is presented in the following article (also refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes). 

The Ulster Kingdoms: 3 – Dalriada (Causeway Coast and Glens Districts), Dr Ian Adamson OBE – emphasis mine:

Linguistic and genealogical evidence associates ancestors of the Dál Riata with the prehistoric Iverni [rather Simeon] (Erainn) and Darini, suggesting kinship with the Ulaid [actually Reuben] of Ulster and a number of Belgic [probably Reuben] kingdoms in Munster. 

The bulk of the inhabitants in County Antrim would have been the Cruthinic Robogdii [from Benjamin**], relatives of the Epidian Cruthin [Picts**] across the Sea of Moyle. Ultimately the Dál Riata over-lords [from Zarah-Judah], according to the earliest genealogies, are descendants of Deda mac Sin, a prehistoric king or deity of the Belgic Érainn [probably Reuben].

Dalriada was founded by Gaelic-speaking people from Ulster, including Robogdian Cruthin, who eventually Gaelicised the west coast of Pictland, according to the Venerable Bede, by a combination of force and treaty. The indigenous Epidian [Caledonian Picts from Benjamin] people however remained substantially the same and there is no present archaeological evidence for a full-scale migration or invasion.

The inhabitants of Dalriada are often referred to as Scots (Latin Scotti), a name originally used by Roman and Greek writers for the Irish who raided Roman Britain. Later it came to refer to Gaelic-speakers in general, whether from Ireland or elsewhere. The name Dál Riata is derived from Old Gaelic. Dál means “portion” or “share” (as in “a portion of land”) [Genesis 49:27, Deuteronomy 33:6] and Riata or Riada is believed to be a personal name. Thus, Riada’s [possibly Reuben’s] portion.’

Adamson: ‘The kingdom reached its height under Áedán mac Gabráin (r. 574–608), but its growth was checked at the Battle of Degsastan in 603 by Æthelfrith of Northumbria. Serious defeats in Ireland and Scotland in the time of Domnall Brecc (d. 642) ended Dál Riata’s “golden age”, and the kingdom became a client of Northumbria, then subject to the Picts (Caledonian Cruthin). There is disagreement over the fate of the kingdom from the late eighth century onwards. 

Some scholars have seen no revival of Dalriada after the long period of foreign domination (after 637 to around 750 or 760), while others have seen a revival of Dalriada under Áed Find (736–778), and later Kenneth Mac Alpin (Cináed mac Ailpín, who is claimed in some sources to have taken the kingship there in c. 840 following the disastrous defeat of the Pictish army by the Danes). Some even claim that the kingship of Fortriu was usurped by the Dalriadans several generations before MacAlpin (800–858). The kingdom’s independence ended in the Viking Age, as it merged with the lands of the Picts to form the Kingdom of Alba.’

The salient points include: a. the similarity between Robo-gdii and possibly Reube-n. Even so, the link between the Cruthin and Picts is stronger b. the indigenous Cruithnic Epidians of Caledonia remained unchanged because they were the larger body of people, the Picts from Benjamin c. the Riada’s portion was either small, with the kingdom not lasting long as is fitting with the small tribe of Reuben. Or alternatively and perhaps more likely, it is applicable to Benjamin being the ‘son of the right hand’ and ‘sharing the spoil’.

The Dal Riada Scots, were an amalgamation of invaders primarily composed of the tribe of Benjamin. They assimilated with the Picts to form the new nation of Scotland. The Dal Riada included a number of people who migrated back to Ulster during its plantation by England. We will investigate the identity of these people in a subsequent chapter. The ruling class of the Dal Riada Scots were those of the Red Hand of Zarah [Milesian Scots] – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

The settlements of the Phoenicians in Spain were originally named after several Hebrew names. One principal settlement was named Gades, Gadir or Gadeira, and today this city is known as Cadiz. Located on the Atlantic Ocean, it surely served as a major port for Phoenician expeditions to [Britain] and North America. The prominent historian, George Rawlinson, cites the Phoenician word for “enclosure” or “fortified place” as the source for the name of this ancient port city . He could just as easily have credited ancient Hebrew as the source of its name as the Hebrew word “gadar” means “enclose,” “fence up” or “make (a wall).” Since the Hebrew word “gadar” would have been written without vowels at that ancient time, its consonants G­D­R serve precisely as the root word for the names Gadir or Gadeira. 

Another historian, L.A. Waddell, states Gades could be rendered “House of the Gads.” Gad was the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, and could easily have given its name to the colony of Gades. The tribe of Gad was prophesied by Moses in Deuteronomy 33:20 to “be enlarged”… historian, Philip Hitti, cites that Gades was founded as a colony of the Phoenicians around 1000 B.C. , while the Encyclopaedia Britannica states that Cadiz was founded “as early as 1100 B.C.” This time frame for Cadiz’s founding is in the era of Israel’s rise to empire status under Kings David [1010-970 BCE] and Solomon [970-930 BCE], when we would expect to see Israel’s dominance in what is traditionally called the “Phoenician” Empire. That “Gades” bore the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel (Gad) strongly indicates that it was given that name by Israelites rather than by inhabitants of Tyre or Sidon. 

… an ancient name of Ireland was Ibheriu or Iberiu, and ancient Gaelic histories record that the ancestors of the Gaelic settlers of Ireland came from Iberia (“Phoenician” Spain). Ancient Ireland was also called Hibernia, a name which also preserved the Hebrew root word “Eber.” Note how closely the words Ibheriu and Iberiu coincide phonetically with the pronunciation of the word Hebrew. One other possibility exists for these early names in the British Isles… that early histories of [Britain] record that the tribe of Asher operated the ancient mines in Cornwall. One of the clans of Asher was named the Heberites (Numbers 26:45), and this Hebrew name also serves as a precise root word for such names as Hibernia and the Hebrides

As this large group of Israelites resettled in the Black Sea region, they assumed new identities, but many key factors made them readily identifiable as Hebrews. The region to the east of the Black Sea (and north of Armenia) came to be known as Iberia, confirming the presence of Hebrews from the ten tribes in that region. The Hebrews had given the old Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain the name Iberia (after Eber, the namesake of the Hebrews), and it has long been called the Iberian Peninsula. The name of a modern Spanish river (the Ebro) still preserves the name of Eber, and is a reminder of the Hebrew (“Phoenician”) presence in the ancient Iberian Peninsula. The appearance of the same Hebrew name (Iberia) in the region north of Armenia verifies that this region became an area of Israelite resettlement for those who escaped Assyrian captivity by voluntary flight.’ 

The Goidels derived from Gaed-hals as Gaels, were similarly known as Hiberi or Scotti. One legend of their coming to Ireland is that the leader was called Gad-elus* and they arrived based on the tradition that it was some four hundred years after the Exodus, in 1046 BCE. Their story mirrors and entwines with the arrival of the earlier Milesians from Zarah, Judah in 1404 BCE – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. In this instance, Niul married an Egyptian princess named Scota and their son’s name was Goid-el Glas a contemporary of Moses and the Israelites who were still living in slavery in Egypt. Moses had healed the infant Goidel Glas from a snakebite and foretold that Goidel’s descendants would one day live in a land with no serpents. Few nations have no snakes at all; though Ireland is notably one, with Iceland and New Zealand. Notice the name Glas, is the same as the prefix glas, for the city of Glasgow. 

The name Scotti (or Scot) is linked to the Hebrew word Succoth which means a dwelling or booth, as in a temporary shelter. Gael is similar to the word Gaul, though does not derive from it. Portugal, is a word that is broken down into port-of-the-Gal (Gael); just as H-iber-nia is linked to the Iber-ian Peninsula. The Gaels gave Ireland its name Hibernia from their name the Hiberi, which is derived from the name Hebrew, which stems from Eber, the grandson of Arphaxad. The Gaels also gave their name Gaeli, to their language, Gael-ic. 

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902:

‘It is a remarkable fact that Young in his “Analytical Concordance” gives us the word Leag, as the original Hebrew word, while Strong in his “Exhaustive Concordance” gives us the equally correct word Gael, from the same Hebrew word. But be it Leag to the Hebrew or Gael to the Saxon, it is the same word to the same people, which they have reversed and given to their newer language, which is called the Gael, or Gael-ic tongue… spoken in its primitive simplicity in many places in Wales, Scotland and the north of Ireland. Wa-els is only another form of Gaels…’

Genesis 10:24

English Standard Version

‘Arpachshad fathered Shelah; and Shelah fathered Eber.

‘Similar to Eber, the name Shelagh is popular in Ireland. According to the website Celtic Female Names of Ireland other derivations are: “Sile – [Shee-la]… Sheela, Sheelah, Sheila, Shelagh, Sheelagh, Shiela, Sheilag, Cicily, Celia, Selia, Sissy.” 

Genesis 46:16

English Standard Version

‘The sons of Gad [7]:

Ziphion, Haggi, Shuni, Ezbon, Eri, Arodi, and Areli [7].’

Numbers 26:35-36

English Standard Version

‘These are the sons of Ephraim according to their clans: of Shuthelah, the clan of the Shuthelahites; of Becher, the clan of the Becherites; of Tahan, the clan of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the clan of the Eranites.’

Anciently, Ireland was called Erin, Eran and Aran. A number of Ephraim’s and Manasseh’s descendants migrated to Ireland and from there, nearly five million ‘Irish’ travelled to America between 1820 and 1930. For four decades the Irish constituted one third of all immigrants to the United States. In 2019, thirty-two million Americans identified as having Irish ancestry; ten percent of the total population. The link with Gad’s sixth son Eri is difficult to ignore with the name E-ire or Eir-e and the prefix ire. To this day, the Republic of Ire-land is called Eire.

Yair Davidy:

“Roberts” in what is described as “one of the oldest histories in the English language” speaks of Israelites led by a certain Bartholome (Numbers 23:36, Eran son of Ephraim son of Joseph) who were driven from Spain and settled in Ireland: “Gwrgan(r)t….directed them (Bartholomew and company)… to go to Ireland, which at that time lay waste and uninhabited… and there they settled…” “He Bartholome… had his name from a river of Spain called Eirinnal, on the banks of which they had lived… they had arrived from Israel their original country and… their ancestors dwelt in a retired part of Spain, near Eirnia, from whence the Spaniards drove them to sea…”

One Gaelic tribe was known as the Syths and the Welsh historian Gildas, records ‘the Skythic Vale’ from which the Clyde and Forth rivers originate. An area they occupied is the Isle of Skye which became known as Sgia or Syiath. In Gaelic it is called ‘Ant-Eilean Sgiathanach’ and later as Scotia. The Scots were also known as Scithae, Scitae, Scuitae and Scotae to the writers of old, with the Greeks calling the Scythians, Skuthes. 

Ireland enjoyed a long period of peace and prosperity after the Danite, Lugh Lamfada defeated the Fomorians. Lugh ruled Ireland for forty years from 1220 to 1180 BCE. One of his four wives was called Eri-u. A different wife had an affair with Cermait, the son of Dagda. Lugh killed Cermait for seducing his wife and Dagda is said to have wept tears of blood over the death of his son. Cermait had three^ sons: Sethor MacCuill, Cethor MacCecht and Tethor MacGreine. At Uisnech, the sons of Cermait ambushed and killed Lugh to avenge their father. Dagda succeeded Lugh as king of Ireland. Though Dagda had received a near mortal wound from Caitlin, the wife of the Fomorian King Balor, during the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE, he did not die until he had reigned for a further eighty years till 1100 BCE. 

Next, the reign of Delbaeth lasted for ten years, before his son Fiachna succeeded him, also ruling for ten years. Fiachna died fighting Eogan of Inber Mor. Fiachna was succeeded by the sons^ of Cermait and they ruled Ireland for twenty-seven years. The three Danite brothers married the daughters of Fiachna. 

The brothers then divided the land between themselves. Some seven years later in 1046 BCE, a man named Ith arrived in Ireland with some of his companions. Ith was the son of Breogan and the brother of Cualnge and Fuat. Ith was most notably, the uncle of a certain Mil* Espaine, again reminiscent of the earlier Milesians, yet in the time frame occupied by the later Gaels. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis mine:

‘Breoghan (or Brigus) was king of Galicia, Andalusia, Murcia, Castile, and Portugal – all which he conquered. He built Breoghan’s Tower or Brigantia in Galicia, and the city of Brigansa or Braganza in Portugal – called after him; and the kingdom of Castile was then also called after him Brigia. It is considered that “Castile” itself was so called from the figure of a castle which Brigus bore for his Arms on his banner. Brigus sent a colony into Britain, who settled in that territory now known as the counties of York, Lancaster, Durham, Westmoreland, and Cumberland, and, after him, were called Brigantes; whose posterity gave formidable opposition to the Romans, at the time of the Roman invasion of Britain. Bilé was king of those countries after his father’s death; and his son Galamh [Galav] or Milesius succeeded him. This Bilé had a brother named Ithe.’ 

These Milesians were the sons of Mil (or Miled). His ancestors had originally come from Scythia, but Mil had brought them out of Scythia and later Egypt, before they settled in Spain, which was known as the Land of the Dead. From this point, legendary history and myth are noticeably blurred. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 455-456, 458:

‘Mils… known also as Millessius died in Spain, but his… descendants later conquered Ireland… [including] Hyber and Hymec, that later… [claimed] the land for themselves, renaming the island the land of Scota… a son named Eire-Ahmon… became the ancestral forbearer of the [Scot] kings of Ireland… Ireland… was derived from Hyber land, which in Latin was Hibernia and in old English was Iberland, which eventually changed to Iverland and then Ireland. The Irish heritage of Scota eventually migrated to Scotland, with Mor McErc of Dalriada as their leader in the fifth century CE… until 843 CE, when Kenneth McAlpin won and united the Scots with the Picts… [reuniting] two related but separate strains of bloodlines… the Picts migrated to Scotland in 600 BCE. Ireland is additionally the land where the lost eleven tribes of Israel were whispered to have migrated after their defeat at the hands of the Assyrians around 721 BCE.’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis mine:

‘Milesius, in his youth and during his father’s life-time, went into Scythia, where he was kindly received by the king of that country, who gave him his daughter in marriage, and appointed him General of his forces. In this capacity Milesius defeated the king’s enemies, gained much fame, and the love of all the king’s subjects. His growing greatness and popularity excited against him the jealousy of the king; who, fearing the worst, resolved on privately despatching Milesius out of the way, for, openly, he dare not attempt it. 

Admonished of the king’s intentions in his regard, Milesius slew him; and thereupon quitted Scythia and retired into Egypt with a fleet of sixty sail. Pharaoh Nectonibus, then king of Egypt, being informed of his arrival and of his great valour, wisdom, and conduct in arms, made him General of all his forces against the king of Ethiopia then invading his country. Here, as in Scythia, Milesius was victorious; he forced the enemy to submit to the conqueror’s own terms of peace. By these exploits Milesius found great favour with Pharaoh, who gave him, being then a widower, his daughter Scota in marriage; and kept him eight years afterwards in Egypt. During the sojourn of Milesius in Egypt, he employed the most ingenious and able persons among his people to be instructed in the several trades, arts, and sciences used in Egypt; in order to have them taught to the rest of his people on his return to Spain. 

The original name of Milesius of Spain was… “Galamh” (gall: Irish, a stranger; amh, a negative affix), which means, no stranger: meaning that he was no stranger in Egypt, where he was called “Milethea Spaine,” which was afterwards contracted to “Milé Spaine” (meaning the Spanish Hero), and finally to “Milesius” (mileadh: Irish, a hero; Latin miles, a soldier). At length Milesius took leave of his father-in-law, and steered towards Spain; where he arrived to the great joy and comfort of his people, who were much harasssed by the rebellion of the natives and by the intrusion of other foreign nations that forced in after his father’s death, and during his own long absence from Spain. With these and those he often met; and, in fifty-four battles, victoriously fought, he routed, destroyed, and totally extirpated them out of the country, which he settled in peace and quietness. 

In his reign a great dearth and famine occurred in Spain, of twenty-six years’ continuance, occasioned, as well by reason of the former troubles which hindered the people from cultivating and manuring the ground, as for want of rain to moisten the earth; but Milesius superstitiously believed the famine to have fallen upon him and his people as a judgment and punishment from their gods, for their negligence in seeking out the country destined for their final abode, so long before foretold by Cachear their Druid or magician… the time limited by the prophecy for the accomplishment thereof being now nearly, if not fully, expired. 

To expiate his fault and to comply with the will of his gods, Milesius, with the general approbation of his people, sent his uncle Ithe, with his son Lughaidh (Luy), and one hundred and fifty stout men to bring them an account of those western islands; who, accordingly, arriving at the island since then called Ireland, and landing in that part of it now called Munster, left his son with fifty of his men to guard the ship, and with the rest travelled about the island. 

Informed, among other things, that the three sons of Cearmad, called Mac-Cuill, MacCeacht, and MacGreine, did then and for thirty years before rule and govern the island, each for one year, in his turn; and that the country was called after the names of their three queens – Eire, Fodhla, and Banbha, respectively: one year called “Eire,” the next “Fodhla,” and the next “Banbha,” as their husbands reigned in their regular turns; by which names the island is ever since indifferently called, but most commonly “Eire,” because that MacCuill, the husband of Eire, ruled and governed the country in his turn the year that the Clan-na-Milé (or the sons of Milesius) arrived in and conquered Ireland. And being further informed that the three brothers were then at their palace at Aileach Neid, in the north part of the country, engaged in the settlement of some disputes concerning their family jewels, Ithe directed his course thither; sending orders to his son to sail about with his ship and the rest of his men, and meet him there.’

Ith with his nephew’s blessing, had decided to travel and explore this beautiful, new land Erin, which he had been told much about. Ith arrived peacefully in Ireland with his followers. The tribe of Dan welcomed Ith to Erin at first, though became suspicious of Ith’s motives for coming to Erin. Through misunderstanding of Ith’s comment about the land, the Danite kings murdered Ith and his two brothers. The Milesians escaped with Ith’s body. 

When his body was brought back to his family in Spain, the sons of Mil sought to avenge their great uncle’s death. They embarked with their warriors and families to Erin in sixty-five ships. A bard named Amairgin who was the son of Mil, led the warriors to Erin. The Danites chose to avoid a confrontation with the Milesians, so they used magic to hide Erin in a fog. The Danites also cast a spell of straying on the Milesian fleet. Amairgin then used magic to dispel the Danite spells. Eber Donn, a son of Mil, planned to exterminate all the tribe of Dan. In retaliation, the Danites sent a magical storm against the Milesian ships; whereby Eber Donn fell overboard and drowned in the raging sea. Amairgin managed to guide his ships to safety and eventually land in Ireland. 

The three wives of MacCuill, MacCecht and MacGreine: Banba, Fodla and Eri-u sought out the Milesian leaders. Each queen asked the Milesians to name Ireland after her. It was Eriu who won the honour. Ireland became known as Erinn. All three Danite kings and their three queens lost their lives in the Battle of Tailtiu. Resulting in the defeat of the Tuatha de Danaan and forcing their retreat. The Danites did not leave Erin, continuing to dwell in Northern Ireland. Mythic legend continues with Manannan placing a powerful spell of invisibility over many parts of Ireland, with magical palaces hidden under mounds. These places were called Sidh (or Sidhe). 

With their magical abilities, the Danites were believed to be able to appear or vanish from sight at will; as well as being considered immortal. We will return to this aspect of the Danites in Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. Two further sons of Mil, Eber Finn (Heber) and Eremon (Heremon) partitioned Ireland into north and south and became their respective kings. Heremon ruled northern Ireland and Heber the south. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart:

‘When Ithe arrived where the (Danan) brothers were, he was honourably received and entertained by them; and, finding him to be a man of great wisdom and knowledge, they referred their disputes to him for decision. That decision having met their entire satisfaction, Ithe exhorted them to mutual love, peace, and forbearance; adding much in praise of their delightful, pleasant, and fruitful country; and then took his leave, to return to his ship, and go back to Spain. 

No sooner was he gone than the brothers began to reflect on the high commendations which Ithe gave of the Island; and, suspecting his design of bringing others to invade it, resolved to prevent them, and therefore pursued him with a strong party, overtook him, fought and routed his men and wounded himself to death (before his son or the rest of his men left on ship-board could come to his rescue) at a place called, from that fight and his name, Magh Ithe or “The plain of Ithe” (an extensive plain in the barony of Raphoe, county Donegal); whence his son, having found him in that condition, brought his dead and mangled body back into Spain, and there exposed it to public view, thereby to excite his friends and relations to avenge his murder. 

And here I think it not amiss to notify what the Irish chroniclers, observe upon this matter… that all the invaders and planters of Ireland, namely, Partholan, Neimhedh, the Firbolgs, Tuatha-de-Danans, and Clan-na-Milé, [were] originally Scythians… who had the language called Bearla-Tobbai or Gaoidhilg [Gaelic] common amongst them all; and consequently not to be wondered at, that Ithe and the Tuatha-de-Danans understood one another without an Interpreter – both speaking the same language, though perhaps with some difference in the accent. 

The exposing of the dead body of Ithe had the desired effect; for, thereupon, Milesius made great preparations in order to invade Ireland – as well to avenge his uncle’s death, as also in obedience to the will of his gods, signified by the prophecy of Cachear, aforesaid. But, before he could effect that object, he died, leaving the care and charge of that expedition upon his eight legitimate sons by his two wives… 

Milesius was a very valiant champion, a great warrior, and fortunate [recall meaning of Gad] and prosperous in all his undertakings: witness his name of “Milesius,” given him from the many battles (some say a thousand, which the word “Milé” signifies in Irish as well as in Latin) which he victoriously fought and won, as well in Spain, as in all the other countries and kingdoms he traversed in his younger days.

The eight brothers were neither forgetful nor negligent in the execution of their father’s command; but, soon after his death, with a numerous fleet well manned and equipped, set forth from Breoghan’s Tower or Brigantia (now Corunna) in Galicia, in Spain, and sailed prosperously to the coasts of Ireland or Inis-Fail, where they met many difficulties and various chances before they could land: occasioned by the diabolical arts, sorceries, and enchantments used by the Tuatha-de-Danans, to obstruct their landing; for, by their magic art, they enchanted the island so as to appear to the Milesians or Clan-na-Milé in the form of a Hog, and no way to come at it (whence the island, among the many other names it had before, was called Muc-Inis or “The Hog Island”); and withal raised so great a storm, that the Milesian fleet was thereby totally dispersed and many of them cast away, wherein five of the eight brothers, sons of Milesius, lost their lives. 

That part of the fleet commanded by Heber, Heremon, and Amergin (the three surviving brothers), and Heber Donn, son of Ir (one of the brothers lost in the storm), overcame all opposition, landed safe, fought and routed the three Tuatha-de Danan Kings at Slieve-Mis, and thence pursued and overtook them at Tailten, where another bloody battle was fought; wherein the three (Tuatha-de-Danan) Kings and their Queens were slain, and their army utterly routed and destroyed: so that they could never after give any opposition to the Clan-na-Milé in their new conquest; who, having thus sufficiently avenged the death of their great uncle Ithe, gained the possession of the country foretold them by Cachear, some ages past…’

An additional myth with recognisable details yet conflicting chronology which explains the origins of the Milesians allegedly begins some four hundred and forty years earlier with a Scythian named Phoeniusa Farsaidh (or Fennius Farsa), who was a King in Scythia and a wise and learned man. Phoeniusa Farsaidh erected a school in the valley of Senaar, near the city of Æothena (Athens).

Having continued there with his younger son Niul for twenty years, he returned home to his kingdom, which, at his death, he left to his eldest son Nenuall; leaving him no other patrimony other than his learning and the benefit of the school. Niul, after his father returned to Scythia, continued some time at Æothena, teaching the languages and other laudable sciences, until upon report of his great learning he was invited into Egypt by Pharaoh. The king gave him the land of Campus Cyrunt, near the Red Sea to inhabit and his daughter Scota in marriage. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart: 

‘Gaodhal [Gathelus], the son of Niul, was the ancestor of the Clan-na-Gael, that is, “the children or descendants of Gaodhal.” In his youth this Gaodhal was stung in the neck by a serpent, and was immediately brought to Moses, who, laying his rod upon the wounded place, instantly cured him: whence followed the word “Glas” to be added to his name, as Gaodhal Glas (glas: Irish, green; Latin glaucus; Greek glaukos), on account of the green scar which the word signifies, and which, during his life, remained on his neck after the wound was healed.’

If Gaodhal the leader of the Gaels (Gad) who would enter Ireland in 1046 BCE knew Moses, this would mean he was living four hundred years early – a conflict in the timeline – and during the time of the Milesian (Zarah-Judah) arrival into Ireland circa 1404 BCE.

O’Hart: ‘And Gaodhal obtained a further blessing, namely – that no venemous beast can live any time where his posterity should inhabit; which is verified in Creta [Crete] or Candia, Gothia or Getulia, Ireland, etc. The Irish chroniclers affirm that from this time Gaodhal and his posterity did paint the figures of Beasts, Birds, etc., on their banners and shields, to distinguish their tribes and septs, in imitation of the Israelites; and that a “Thunderbolt” was the cognizance in their chief standard for many generations after this Gaodhal.’ 

‘The following is a translation of an extract from the derivation of this proper name, as given in Halliday’s Volume of Keating’s Irish History, page 230.’ 

“Antiquaries assert that the name of Gaodhal is from the compound word formed of ‘gaoith’ and ‘dil,’ which means a lover of learning; for, ‘gaoith’ is the same as wisdom or learning, and ‘dil’ is the same as loving or fond.”

Some versions of these legends also state that they kept the Laws of Moses, including abstaining from eating unclean meats. The Goidels wandered for forty-two years in North Africa, the land of the Philistines, Syria and onwards to Spanish Galatia in northwestern Iberia. Some records also include ‘Miletus in ancient Caria on the west coast of Anatolia and Messina in Sicily’ as locations of their sojourn.

‘Heber Scut (scut: Irish, a Scot), after his father’s death and a year’s stay in Creta, departed thence, leaving some of his people to inhabit the Island, where some of their posterity likely still remain; “because the Island breeds no venemous serpent ever since.” He and his people soon after arrived in Scythia; where his cousins, the posterity of Nenuall (eldest son of Fenius Farsa…), refusing to allot a place of habitation for him and his colony, they fought many battles wherein Heber (with the assistance of some of the natives who were ill-affected towards their king), being always victor, he at length forced the sovereignty from the other, and settled himself and his colony in Scythia, who continued there for four generations. (Hence the epithet Scut, “a Scot” or “a Scythian,” was applied to this Heber, who is accordingly called Heber Scot.) Heber Scot was afterwards slain in battle by Noemus the former king’s son.’ 

Regarding Joshua’s friend Caleb, Yair Davidy states:

‘Historically the Kings of Egypt very rarely gave their daughters to outsiders but it is recorded that Solomon king of Israel married a daughter of Pharoah. Also Moses the deliverer and Lawgiver of Israel as a child had been adopted by a daughter of Pharoah. In Talmudic tradition the foster-mother of Moses was the same “Batya” daughter of Pharoah who later married Mered (1 Chronicles 4:18) from the Tribe of Judah.’ 

1 Chronicles 4:13-18

English Standard Version

13 ‘The sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah… and Seraiah fathered Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, so-called because they were craftsmen. 15 The sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the son of Elah: KenazThese are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa. 18 And his Judahite [not Jewish] wife bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah.’

Davidy: ‘According to Talmudic tradition “Mered” is another name for Caleb, son of Yefunei, the Kenazzi, a Prince of Judah (Numbers 13:6). Caleb, says the Talmud, married “Batya” the daughter of Pharoah who had rescued and raised Moses.’ 

Recall we studied Caleb in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Davidy has additional details of interest. The account of Caleb being Mered or marrying Pharaoh’s daughter is difficult to align, as Moses was born in 1526 BCE and Caleb was born in 1478 BCE. Moses flees Egypt in 1486 BCE, some eight years before Caleb is born. Caleb was also perhaps a slave at the time; his marrying Moses adoptive mother, Queen Sobeknefru is unlikely – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Davidy: ‘Some descendants of Caleb, the “Chelubai” (1 Chronicles 2;9) are traceable to Chalybonitis and to the “Chalybe” people. Chalybonitis was in northwest Syria. Chalybonitis in northern Syria was in an area associated with the Iari descendants of Yair who himself (1 Chronicles 2:22) was a son of Segub son of Hezron ancestor (or “father”) of Caleb (Chaleb): The eponymous ancestor IAR was later recalled in place-names of Ireland and Scotland.

The family name of Caleb was “Kenazi” which name connotes “metalworker”. In the Pontus (on the southeast shores of the Black Sea) and Caucasus the Chalybes were famous metallurgists. The Chalybes were considered as of Cimmerian origin. They are recalled by Greek Chroniclers such as Xenophon. A people of similar name (i.e. the “Calybes”) who were also famous as metal-workers were later reported of in the Galatian area of northwest Spain. Justin (44:3) said that the Calybes were skilled metallurgists. From Galatia (“Galacia”) in Spain Celts identified with the Milesian-Hiberi migrated to Ireland and from there to Britain. The legend of the Milesians that one of their ancestors had been married to the daughter of Pharoah may be connected with the presence of “Chalybes” (or “Calybes”) descendants of Caleb from Judah amongst them.’ 

An interesting point raised by Davidy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

Gildas said that the British Celts were “Truly Israel of the Exodus”. Gildas wrote about 540 CE. He lived in Britain at the time that it was being conquered by the pagan Angles, Jutes, and Saxons [Frisians]. As a Christian priest and a Celt he was horrified by what he saw. He attributed the calamity to the sins of the native British people and upbraided them. He used Biblical expressions and several times addressed the British princes as Israel and referred to Britain as “a treacherous lioness of Gad” though why he chose Gad out of all the 12 Tribes of Israel is unknown.’

A curious thing for Gildas to say, seeing as the tribe of Gad were well ensconced in Ireland at this time. Yair Davidy: ‘In 1581 Vincenzio Galilei (father of the astronomer, Galileo Galilei) wrote that the Irish [Royal Milesians] believed themselves descended from David, King of Israel, and that was why they used a harp as their symbol.   

Davidy: ‘Ptolemy listed numerous place and historical ethnic names proving that Israelite tribes once ruled over all the area of northern Syria reaching at least to the Euphrates. Examples are the areas called RAHABENI (i.e. Reuben), MASANI (Menasseh), CAUCHABENI (i.e. Sons of Chauchi, i.e. of Haggi son of Gad), BATHANAEI (Bashan in Aramaic), CHALYBONITIS (Chalybes of Judah), and the cities of Belginaea and Belagaea (Belgae from Bela-g-h) [Reuben (or Benjamin)], and GABARA from Geber in the region of Bashan (Bathanaei) close to Masani (Menasseh). 

The “House of Gabbar” were the ruling dynasty of “Yadi”. Yadi was a Judaean enclave in northwest Syria (“Hamath which belonged to Judah” 2 Kings 14:28) known as “Yadi” (i.e. “Judah” in Assyrian) and also garrisoned by the “Dananu” from the Tribe of Dan and somehow associated with the neighbouring Tribe of Gad since its other name “Smal” is synonymous with Zephion a clan of Gad.

The Lagin people gave their name to Leinster in east Ireland. They were also known as GABAIR. After being conquered by the Milesian Goidels, the Lagin Gabair joined forces with them and participated in raids on, and settlement in, Scotland. They have been equated with the Gailian or Galioin, which names may well derive from the Golan in the Land of Israel since GEBER or GABAR appears to have once been an important family name in that general area. To the northeast of Eboracum (York) and the Parissi in Britain were the GABRANTOVICES. Further north in the Caledonian region (of Scotland) of the Gadeni (Otadeni) was the settlement of Gabrosentas. 

From Gilead (“Galaad”) of Israel emerged the Galatae or “Galadi” of northern Gaul, the Galadon of northern Wales and southern Britain, and the Caledonians of Scotland. These groups had ethnic migratory connections with the Gaels of Ireland. An example of genuine Historical tradition mixed with literary additions and imaginations is found in the Chronicles of Eri. ‘The Chronicles of Eri, being the history of the Gaal Sciot Iber, or the Irish People, translated from the Phoenician dialect of the Scythian language’, by Roger O’ Connor were published in London in two volumes in 1822. 

The Chronicle says that the Gaali had been in Armenia, and the Caucasus. They were traders and metallurgists, and archers. They were oppressed by the Assyrians and fled via Hamath in northern Syria. Hamath adjoined ‘Daphne of Antiochia’ which in effect was a suburb of Hamath. Hamath in Northern Syria or rather ‘Daphne of Antiochia’ was considered by the Talmud as one of three regions through which the Lost Ten Tribes were taken into exile.

The Chronicles tells how the Gaali sailed to Spain which was then ruled by the Phoenicians who in turn were directed from Hamath. In Spain the Galli moved from the southern area of Tartessos to Galatia in the northwest. They shook off Phoenician control. Together with the Phoenicians from their base in Spain they had established mining operations in Cornwall, in Britain. Some of them moved to Aquitaine in Gaul. Due to war and famine, those of the Galli who were in Spanish Galatia emigrated to Ireland. Though not Phoenicians they worshiped God under the form of baal, received instruction in Phoenician ways, bore Hebrew-sounding names and they had Israelite-values such as an aversion to images and other characteristics. 

The Chronicles connect up with a verse in Isaiah: ‘They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD. They shall cry aloud from the sea. Wherefore, glorify the LORD in the fires, even the name of the LORD God of Israel in the isles of the sea’ (Isaiah 24:14-15).

‘Cry aloud from the sea’: In Hebrew the word ‘from the sea’ (‘me-yam’) also means ‘from the west’. The major sea was to the West. The Aramaic Translation and Commentators say it means the exiles who will be in the West in the Last Days. Then it goes on to speak of the isles of the Sea meaning Britain. 

According to “The Chronicles of Eri” the Gaali of Sciot (the people he is speaking of) had the custom of lighting beacon fires on the coasts.’

“All the headlands and promontories belonging to the Gaal of Sciot on the northwest coast of Spain were called in the Phoenician language Breoccean, that is, The Land of Flaming Fires, because of the blaze that was kept up and could be seen at a great distance out to sea. The same custom was observed on the coast of Cornwall and Devonshire after the Gaal of Sciot joined with the Phoenicians in their mining operations there, and that land was called Breotan, Breo meaning Flaming Fire’ (‘BIAR’ = burn in Hebrew).”

‘We thus find that the people known as the Gaal of Sciot, the people whom the Chronicles claim were the ancestors of the Irish and Scots… had the custom of lighting fires that could be seen out to sea. They practiced this custom when they were in northwest Spain and later on the southwest coast of [England] when they set up mining operations in that area. We find elsewhere that this practice was known throughout Britain. 

A Polish Linguist named Piotr Gasiorowski reports that the ancient British were in the custom of lighting fires on the hilltops that could be seen out to sea: 

“I think the tradition of erecting hilltop cairns and mounds as orientation marks, and of using beacon fires for long-distance communication was very strong in Celtic (also Roman) Britain; the landscape of much of the country is as suitable for this purpose as could be. One trace of that is the occurrence of the Brythonic element tan – ‘fire’ (Welsh tan) in hill names (there are many Tan Hills in England) not only in ancient times but all through history down to the invention of the telegraph. For example, a network of beacons set up on hilltops was used in England in 1588 to signal the approach of the Spanish Armada, and once it was spotted off the Scillies (islands southwest of Cornwall in southwest Britain) the news reached the English commanders in no time at all.”

King Heremon was the seventh son of Milesius (or Mil); though only the third of the three sons who left any issue. From him were descended the kings and nobility of the Connaught and Dalriada Kingdoms. Heremon with his eldest brother Heber were the joint first ‘Milesian’ Gael monarchs of Ireland. The date given in the Library of Ireland, Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart, 1892, is that they began to reign in 1699 BCE.

This is too early, for Judah and Gad were born in circa 1746 and 1744 BCE respectively and it does not take into account the period of the Nemedians for 217 years; the gap until the Fir Bolg returned of 230 years; their rule of 37 years; the approximate time the Fomorians ruled the Danites for 10 years; and finally, the Tuatha de Danann’s 174 (or possibly 197) years of kingship in Ireland. 

Heber is recorded as being killed a year later. In an unconventional chronology this equates to 1045 BCE. Heremon then reigned for fourteen years until 1031 BCE. ‘During which time a certain colony – called by the Irish, Cruithneaigh, in English “Cruthneans” or Picts (from the Tribe of Benjamin) – arrived in Ireland and requested Heremon to assign them a part of the country to settle in, which he refused; but, giving them as wives the widows of the Tuatha-de-Danans, slain in battle, he sent them with a strong party of his own forces to conquer the country then called “Alba,” but now Scotland; conditionally, that they and their posterity should be tributary to the Monarchs of Ireland.’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Heber and Heremon, the chief leading men remaining of the eight brothers, sons of Milesius aforesaid, divided the kingdom between them (allotting a proportion of land to their brother Amergin, who was their Arch-priest, Druid, or magician; and to their nephew Heber Donn, and to the rest of their chief commanders), and became jointly the first of one hundred and eighty-three Kings or sole Monarchs of the Gaelic, Milesian, or Scottish Race, that ruled and governed Ireland, successively, for two thousand eight hundred and eighty-five years from the first year of their reign, Anno Mundi three thousand five hundred, to their submission to the Crown of England in the person of King Henry the Second; who, being also of the Milesian Race by Maude, his mother, was lineally descended from Fergus Mor MacEarca, first King of Scotland, who was descended from the said Heremon – so that the succession may be truly said to continue in the Milesian Blood from before Christ one thousand six hundred and ninety-nine years down to the present time. 

Heber and Heremon reigned jointly one year only, when, upon a difference between their ambitious wives, they quarrelled and fought a battle at Ardcath or Geshill (Geashill, near Tullamore in the King’s County), where Heber was slain by Heremon; and, soon after, Amergin, who claimed an equal share in the government, was, in another battle fought between them, likewise slain by Heremon. Thus, Heremon became sole Monarch, and made a new division of the land amongst his comrades and friends, viz.

… the south part, now called Munster, he gave to his brother Heber’s four sons, Er [family name of Judah] , Orba, Feron, and Fergna; allotting a part of Munster to Lughaidh (the son of Ithe, the first Milesian discoverer of Ireland), amongst his brother Heber’s sons…

the north part, now Ulster, he gave to Ir’s only son Heber Donn;

the east part or Coigeadh Galian, now called Leinster, he gave to Criomthann-sciath-bheil, one of his commanders;

and the west part, now called Connaught, Heremon gave to Un-Mac-Oigge, another of his commanders…’

‘From these three brothers, Heber, Ir, and Heremon (Amergin dying without issue) [Three crowns of Munster], are descended all the Milesian Irish of Ireland and Scotland, viz.: from Heber, the eldest brother, the provincial Kings of Munster (of whom thirty-eight were sole Monarchs of Ireland), and most of the nobility and gentry of Munster, and many noble families in Scotland, are descended.

From Ir, the second brother, all the provincial Kings of Ulster (of whom twenty-six were sole Monarchs of Ireland), and all the ancient nobility and gentry of Ulster, and many noble families in Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, derive their pedigrees; and, in Scotland, the Clan-na-Rory – the descendants of an eminent man, named Ruadhri or Roderick, who was Monarch of Ireland for seventy years (viz., from Before Christ 288 to 218). 

From Heremon, the youngest of the three brothers, were descended one hundred and fourteen sole Monarchs of Ireland: the provincial Kings and Hermonian nobility and gentry of Leinster, Connaught, Meath, Orgiall, Tirowen, Tirconnell, and Clan-na-boy; the Kings of Dalriada; all the Kings of Scotland from Fergus. Mor MacEarca down to the Stuarts; and the Kings and Queens of England from Henry the Second down to the present time’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘The issue of Ithe is not accounted among the Milesian Irish or Clan-na-Milé, as not being descended from Milesius, but from his uncle Ithe; of whose posterity there were also some Monarchs of Ireland, and many provincial or half provincial Kings of Munster: that country upon its first division being allocated to the sons of Heber and to Lughaidh, son of Ithe, whose posterity continued there accordingly. 

Milesius of Spain bore three Lions in his shield and standard [Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal tribes], for the following reasons; namely, that, in his travels in his younger clays into foreign countries, passing through Africa, he, by his cunning and valour, killed in one morning three Lions; and that, in memory of so noble and valiant an exploit, he always after bore three Lions on his shield, which his two surviving sons Heber and Heremon, and his grandson Heber Donn, son of Ir, after their conquest of Ireland, divided amongst them, as well as they did the country: each of them bearing a Lion in his shield and banner, but of different colours; which the Chiefs of their posterity continue to this day: some with additions and differences; others plain and entire as they had it from their ancestors.’

The thirteenth monarch of Ireland was Tigernmas ot Tiernmas and he reigned seventy-seven years; though according to Keating, he reigned only fifty years; of which he fought twenty-seven battles with the family of Heber Fionn, all which he won. It was during his reign that gold was mined near the Liffey and skilfully worked by Inchadhan. Tigernmas also ‘made a law that each grade of society should be’ ranked and ‘known by the number of colours in its wearing apparel.’ It is believed to have been the origin of the Scottish plaid.

‘According to Keating, one colour was used in the dress of a slave; two colours in that of a plebeian; three, in that of a soldier or young lord; four, in that of a brughaidh or public victualler; five, in that of a lord of a tuath or cantred; and six colours in that of an ollamh or Druid, or chief professor of any of the liberal arts, and in that of the king and queen.’ 

Tigernmas died in 890 BCE ‘on the Eve of 1st of November or Halloween, with two-thirds of the people of Ireland, at Magh Sleaght [Field of Adoration], in the county of Leitrim, as he was adoring his Sun-God idol, Crom Cruach [the crooked heap].’ Tigernmas was the first to introduce image worship in Ireland. This idol was worshipped up to the time of St. Patrick, by whom it was destroyed. The sun worship was a throwback to the Magi (or wise men) from the East – the empire of Parthia – who were led to Bethlehem by divine inspiration to witness the infant Messiah. 

During his son Smiomghall’s reign, the Picts in Scotland were forced to abide by their oath, and pay homage to the Irish Monarch. Later, King Fiacha Labhrainn, slew Eochaidh Faobharglas, of the line of Heber at the battle of Carman. During his reign all the inhabitants of Scotland were brought in subjection to the Irish Monarchy, and the conquest was secured by his son the twentieth Monarch, Aongus Olmucach. In 796 BCE, the Picts had again refused to pay the tribute originally imposed on them by Heremon, but the Monarch went with a strong army into Alba and in thirty pitched battles overcame them and forced them to pay the required tribute. 

Crimthann-Niadh-Nar was the one hundredth Monarch of Ireland, and styled ‘The Heroic.’ It was in his reign that the Saviour was born in 3 BCE. Tuathal Teachtmar was the 106th Monarch of Ireland. ‘When Tuathal came of age, he got together his friends, and, with what aid his grandfather the king of Alba gave him, came into Ireland and fought and overcame his enemies in twenty-five battles in Ulster, twenty-five in Leinster, as many in Connaught, and thirty-five in Munster. And having thus restored the true royal blood and heirs to their respective provincial kingdoms…’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart:

1. Partholan and his followers, called in Irish Muintir Phartholain, meaning “Partholan’s People.” 

2. The Nemedians [Tribes of Reuben, Simeon and Dan]. 

3. The Fomorians [Elioud giants], 

4. The Firbolgs or Firvolgians, who were also called Belgae or Belgians [tribe of Reuben (Northern Ireland)]. 

5. The Tuatha-de-Danans [Tribe of Dan]. 

6. The Milesians or Gaels [(Hiberi) Tribe of Gad]. 

7. The Cruthneans or Picts [Tribe of Benjamin (Scotland)]. 

8. The Danes and Norwegians (or Scandinavians) [Vikings]. 

9. The Anglo-Normans [Tribe of Judah]. 

10. The Anglo-Saxons (or English) [(Jutes) tribe of Judah]. 

11. The Scots [led by the Royal Milesians from Zarah of Judah; accompanied by the residue of the tribe of Benjamin] from North Britain. 

John O’Hart: ‘The Nemedians came from Scythia in Europe, and were located chiefly in Ulster at Ardmacha (or Armagh), and in Derry and Donegal; and in Leinster at the Hill of Uisneach, which is situated a few miles from Mullingar, in the county Westmeath. 

The Fomorians are represented as a race of giants, and were celebrated as having been great builders in stone’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘They were located principally along the coasts of Ulster and Connaught, mostly in Antrim, Derry, Donegal, Leitrim, Sligo, and Mayo, and had their chief fortress (called Tor Conaing or Conang’s Tower) on Tor Inis or the Island of the Tower, now known as “Tory Island,” which is off the coast of Donegal; and another at the Giants’ Causeway, which in Irish was called Cloghan-na-Fomoraigh or the Causeway of the Fomorians, as it was supposed to have been constructed by this people, who, from their great strength and stature, were, as above mentioned, called giants: hence the term “Giants’ Causeway” – a stupendous natural curiosity of volcanic origin, situated on the sea-coast of Antrim, and consisting of a countless number of basaltic columns of immense height, which, from the regularity of their formation and arrangement, have the appearance of a vast work of art; and hence were supposed to have been constructed by giants. 

After the Fomorians became masters of the country, the Nemedians (neimhedh: Irish, dirt, filth of any kind), were reduced to slavery, and compelled to pay a great annual tribute on the first day of winter – consisting of corn, cattle, milk, and other provisions; and the place where these tributes were received was named Magh Ceitne, signifying the Plain of Compulsion, and so called from these circumstances. 

This plain was situated between the rivers Erne and Drabhois (drabhas: Irish, dirt, nastiness), between Ballyshannon and Bundrowes, on the borders of Donegal, Leitrim, and Fermanagh, along the sea-shore. – See Connellan’s “Four Masters.” Three bands of the Nemedians emigrated with their respective captains: one party wandered into the north of Europe [Dan]; others made their way to Greece [Reuben], where they were enslaved, and obtained the name of “Firbolgs” or bagmen, from the leathern bags which they were compelled to carry; and the third section took refuge in England [Simeon], which obtained its name Britain, from their leader “Briottan Maol.” – See Miss Cusack’s “History of Ireland.” 

The Firbolgs [Reuben] or Firvolgians, who were also Scythians, divided Ireland amongst the five sons of their leader Dela Mac Loich: “Slainge [slane] was he by whom Teamor (or Tara) was first raised.” (Four Masters). One hundred and fifty Monarchs reigned in Tara from that period until its abandonment in the reign of Diarmod, son of Fergus Cearrbheoil, who was the 133rd Monarch of Ireland, and King of Meath.

The Firvolgians ruled over Connaught down to the third century, when King Cormac Mac Art, the 115th Monarch of Ireland, attacked and defeated the forces of Aodh or Hugh, son of Garadh, King of Connaught, who was the last King of the Firbolg race in Ireland; and the sovereignty of Connaught was then transferred to the Milesians of the race of Heremon – descendants of King Cormac Mac Art. The Firbolg race never after acquired any authority in Ireland, being reduced to the ranks of farmers [indicative of Northern Ireland, with food and live animals the country’s second biggest export] and peasants; but they were still very numerous, and to this day a great many of the peasantry, particularly in Connaught, are considered to be of Firbolg origin. 

The Tuatha de Danans [Tribe of Dan], also of the Scythian family, invaded Ireland thirty-six years after the plantation by the Firbolgs. According to some annalists, they came originally from Persia, and to others, from Greece; and were located chiefly at Tara in Meath, at Croaghan in Connaught, and at Aileach in Donegal. The Danans being highly skilled in the arts, the Round Towers of Ireland are supposed to have been built by them. The light, gay, joyous element of the Irish character may be traced to them. They were a brave and high-spirited race, and famous for their skill in what was then termed Magic: hence, in after ages, this wonderful people were considered to have continued to live in hills or raths, as the “good people” long so commonly believed in as fairies, in Ireland. But their “magic” consisted in the exercise of the mechanical arts, of which those who had previously invaded Ireland were then ignorant.

It is a remarkable fact, that weapons of warfare found in the carns or gravemounds of the Firbolgs are of an inferior kind to those found in the carns of the Tuatha-de-Danans: a proof of the superior intelligence of the latter over the former people. 

The inventor of the Ogham [owam] Alphabet (ogham: Irish, “an occult manner of writing used by the ancient Irish”) was Ogma, father of one of the Tuatha-de-Danan Kings. In McCartin’s Irish Grammar it is stated that there were no less than thirty-five different modes of writing the Ogham, which has hitherto defied the power of modern science to unravel its mysteries. But the truth of our ancient history is strangely confirmed by the fact that the letters of this Alphabet are all denominated by the names of trees and shrubs indigenous to Ireland! According to the “Book of Leinster,” it was “Cet Cuimnig, King of Munster, of the royal line of Heber, that was the first that inscribed Ozam [or Ogham] memorials in Erinn.” This extract gives a clue to the period when Ogham stones were first erected, and why… most of them are to be found in the Province of Munster; for, according to the Septuagint system of chronology, that King of Munster reigned about the year 1257 before the birth of Christ! 

The Milesians invaded Ireland one hundred and ninety-seven years later than the Tuatha de Danans; and were called Clan-na-Mile [meel], signifying the descendants of Milesius of Spain.’

The term Milesian is complicated as in this instance and time frame it accurately refers to the tribe of Gad; the peoples who are deemed the last tribe to invade Erin, summarily known as Hiberi, Scotti, Goidel, Gael and Milesian. The word Milesian is also used to describe the inclusion of the clan of Zara from the tribe of Judah; as in the Royal Milesians or Milesian Scots.

O’Hart: ‘The Cruthneans or Picts [Tribe of Benjamin] were also Scythians, and, according to our ancient historians, came from Thrace [refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian] soon after the arrival of the Milesians; but, not being permitted by the Milesians to remain in Ireland, they sailed to Scotland and became the possessors of that country, but tributary to the Monarchs of Ireland. In after ages colonies of them came over and settled in Ulster; they were located chiefly in the territories which now form the counties of Down, Antrim, and Derry. 

The Danes and Norwegians (or Scandinavians) [refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes], a Teutonic race of Scythian origin, came to Ireland in great numbers, in the ninth and tenth centuries, and were located chiefly in Leinster and Munster, in many places along the sea-coast: their strongholds being the towns of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, and Limerick. 

The Anglo-Normans [Tribe of Judah] came to Ireland in the twelfth century, and possessed themselves of a great part of the country, under their chief leader, Richard de Clare, who was also named Strongbow. They were a Teutonic race, descended from the Normans of France, who were a mixture of Norwegians, Danes, and French, and who conquered England in the eleventh century. The English invasion of Ireland was accomplished ostensibly through the agency of Dermod MacMorough, King of Leinster; on account of his having been driven from his country by the Irish Monarch for the abduction of the wife of Tiernan O’Ruarc, Prince of Breffni. For that act, Roderick O’Connor, the Monarch of Ireland, invaded the territory of Dermod, A.D. 1167, and put him to flight. King Dermod was obliged, after many defeats, to leave Ireland, in 1167; throw himself at the feet of King Henry the Second [1154-1189], and crave his assistance, offering to become his liegeman. 

Henry, on receiving Dermod’s oath of allegiance, granted by letters patent a general license to all his English subjects to aid King Dermod in the recovery of his Kingdom. Dermod then engaged in his cause Richard de Clare or Strongbow, to whom he afterwards gave his daughter Eva, in marriage; and through his influence an army was raised, headed by Robert Fitzstephen, Myler Fitzhenry, Harvey de Monte Marisco, Maurice Prendergast, Maurice Fitzgerald, and others; with which, in May, 1168, he landed in Bannow-bay, near Wexford, which they reduced, together with the adjoining counties – all in the kingdom of Leinster. 

In 1171, Earl Strongbow landed at Waterford with a large body of followers and took possession of that city. He then joined King Dermod’s forces, marched for Dublin, entered the city, and made himself master. King Dermod died in his castle at Ferns, county Wexford, A.D. 1175, about the 65th year of his age. Of him Holingshed says – “He was a man of tall stature and of a large and great body, a valiant and bold warrior in his nation. From his continued shouting, his voice was hoarse; he rather chose to be feared than to be loved, and was a great oppressor of his nobility. To his own people he was rough and grievous, and hateful unto strangers; his hand was against all men, and all men against him.” 

The Anglo-Saxons or English, also a Tuetonic race, came from the twelfth to the eighteenth century. The Britons or Welsh came in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. These English colonies were located chiefly in Leinster, but also in great numbers in Munster and Connaught, and partly in Ulster.’ 

These ‘English’ and ‘Welsh’ represented the ‘Irish’ who emigrated to America and Canada; being a separate and distinct set of people – different tribes, as we will discover.

O’Hart: ‘The Scots, who were chiefly Celts of Irish descent, came in great numbers from the tenth to the sixteenth century, and settled in Ulster, mostly in Antrim, Down, and Derry; but, on the Plantation of Ulster with British colonies, in the seventeenth century, the new settlers in that province were chiefly Scotch [Scots Irish], who were a mixture of Celts and Saxons.’

These peoples known as Scots Irish (Ulster Scots) and as Scotch-Irish in America, are a distinct people, whom we will address in a later chapter. Needless to say, they are not descended from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon, Levi, Reuben or Gad.

O’Hart: ‘Thus the [first seven] colonies that settled in Ireland were a mixture of Scythians, Gaels, and Phoenicians; but the four last were mostly Teutons, though mixed with Celts; and a compound of all these races, in which Celtic blood is predominant, forms the present population of Ireland.’ 

Song of Inisfail, Irish Melodies, Thomas Moore”

‘They came from a land beyond the sea And now o’er the western main
Set sail, in their good ships, gallantly, From the sunny land of Spain. 

“Oh, where’s the isle we’ve seen in dreams, Our destined home or grave?”
Thus sang they, as by the morning’s beams, They swept the Atlantic wave. 

And lo! where afar o’er ocean shines A spark of radiant green, As though in that deep lay emerald mines, Whose light through the wave was seen.

“Tis Innisfail – ’tis Innisfail!” Rings o’er the echoing sea; While, bending to heaven, the warriors hail That home of the brave and free.

Then turned they unto the Eastern wave, Where now their Day-god’s eye A look of such sunny omen gave As lighted up sea and sky.

Nor frown was seen through sky or sea, Nor tear o’er leaf or sod, When first on their Isle of Destiny Our great forefathers trod.’

After the Flood, William Cooper, 1995 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the early Irish chroniclers were most emphatic in their insistence that the Irish were of Scythian stock. And there is good etymological evidence for this. 

The Irish were long referred to as Scots even before some of them migrated to the country that today bears their name, and as Brewer tells us: 

“Scot (is) the same as Scythian in etymology; the root of both is Sct. The Greeks had no c, and would change t into th making the root skth, and by adding a phonetic vowel we get Skuthai (Scythians), and Skodiai (Skoths). The Welsh disliked s at the beginning of a word, and would change it to ys; they would also change c or k to g, and th to d; whence the Welsh root would be Ysgd, and Skuth or Skoth would become ysgod. Once more, the Saxons would cut off the Welsh y, and change the g back again to c, and the d to t, converting the Ysgod to Scot.”

Cooper: ‘It would be no strange thing to find Scythian peoples as far west as Ireland. After all, the land in Asia Minor known of old as Galatia, was populated by a migrating colony of Gallic Celts from whom the country got its name. St Paul wrote his famous epistle to their descendants. Many other examples from history are known of nations seemingly popping up in places where one would normally not expect to find them, so it requires no great stretch of the imagination to accept what the early Irish chroniclers so often insisted upon, namely their descent from the Scythian races. 

Of added interest are certain details that have been handed down to us by Geoffrey of Monmouth. We are told by him how Partholan’s colony consisted of thirty ships. Interestingly, Nennius makes no mention of the number of ships, but does tell us that the colony consisted of 1000 souls, which indicates that he and Geoffrey were working from different sources. 

However, Geoffrey also tells us that the colony had recently been expelled from the Spanish mainland, and moreover that they were called ‘Basclenses’, or Basques. Now, we know that the present-day Basques of northern Spain are of an entirely mysterious origin, and we also know that they speak a language that is quite unrelated to any known Indo-European tongue’ – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

‘In which context, it is interesting to note what Professor Mackie has written concerning the language of the early Picts who had more than a passing influence on both the early and later history of the Irish: 

“The Picts certainly used a form of P-Celtic (the mother of Welsh, Cornish and Breton), with traces of Gaulish forms. However, it is clear, from the few scraps of evidence which survive, that the Picts also used another language, probably unrelated to any “Indo-European” tongue and therefore so different from modern European languages as to be incomprehensible to us.”

‘Presumably, this information would not have been available to that allegedly incorrigible forger, Geoffrey of Monmouth, but it is instinctive to compare Mackie’s remarks with a comment by Cusack, when she says: “… those who have maintained the theory of a Gaulish colonisation of Ireland, have been obliged to make Spain the point of embarkation.”

‘The next recorded invasion (or settlement) of Ireland… was led by Nemedius… or Nemedh, and it is recorded that the people of Nemedh were credited with having built certain types of fort as well as clearing the land for a particular method of cultivation. A later outbreak of plague took its toll on the population, the remainder of whom are recorded as having fought off an invasion of Ireland by the Formorians… we know from the chronicles of the early Britons that the British mainland was… settled by Brutus and his people in ca 1104 BC… although Brutus is said to have been the first coloniser of Britain, the chronicles do emphatically state that he had to displace an indigenous race of ‘giants’.

Whether physical giantism is here intended cannot be certainly resolved, as the early British word ‘gawr’ (like the Hebrew gibbor) could mean simply a great warrior as well as a giant man. The Formorians, it seems, were the displaced natives of Britain who were trying to seek a foothold on the Irish mainland only to be repelled by the Nemedians, thereafter having to live, like many other displaced peoples, by scavenging and piracy. 

After the repulsion of the Formorians, the few Nemedian survivors settled further inland, presumably for safety while they consolidated their numbers. They are then recorded as subsequently dividing themselves into three ‘bands’, each with their respective leaders. One of these groups migrated to northern Europe, where they founded a nation known later to the Irish as the Tuatha de Danann [the tribe of Dan].

A second group settled, intriguingly, in the northernmost parts of Britain, apparently the first Pictish settlement [of the tribe of Benjamin] of what is now Scotland. This settlement of Picts from ‘Scythia’ (so states the British record – note etymological derivation given above of Scot from Scythian) into Albany, is recalled in the early British chronicles as having taken place under the Pictish king Soderic. The British chronology seems to have slipped somewhat at this point, but the event is real enough and accurately portrayed [circa 1030 to 1000 BCE]. 

The third group are named as the Firbolgs [the tribe of Reuben], who migrated to Greece and then returned to Ireland which they subsequently divided up into five provinces.

The last colonisation of Ireland is then recorded…

“The fleet of the sons of Milidh came to Ireland at the end of this year, to take it from the Tuatha de Danann, and they fought the battle of Sliabh Mis with them on the third day after landing.”

‘The children of Milidh, known to us as the Milesians, had landed unobserved in the mouth of the river Slaney in what is today the county of Wexford, from where they marched to Tara, the central seat of government. The word Milesian is still used (though with increasing rarity) to denote the Irish people themselves, or things pertaining to Ireland. And of further interest to our enquiry is the fact that the Milesians… arrived (via the Spanish peninsula) from the city of Miletus, whose ruins still stand on the Turkish mainland, and which was finally destroyed by the Persian army in the year 494 BC.

Moreover, with regard to the… often stated Phoenician element of Irish descent, we should… note that the ancient Greeks once held that Phoenicia was founded by one Phoenix, whose brother Cadmus had invented the alphabet. Likewise, the early Irish recalled the time when they lived under a king named… Phenius, ‘who devoted himself especially to the study of languages, and composed an alphabet and the elements of grammar.’ So it is clear… the early Irish chroniclers were passing on an account… of authentic historical events and personages, and of the equally historic descent of their own race from Phoenician and Scythian stock. And on the subject of that descent, Cusack adds yet again to our store of knowledge: 

“As the Milesians were the last of the ancient colonists … only their genealogies, with a few exceptions, have been preserved. The genealogical tree begins, therefore, with the brothers Eber and Eremon, the two surviving leaders of the expedition…

The great southern chieftains, such as the MacCarthys and O’Briens, claim descent from Eber;

the northern families of O’Connor, O’Donnell, and O’Neill, claim Eremon as their head. 

There are also other families claiming descent from Emer, the son of Ir, brother to Eber and Eremon;

as also from their cousin Lugaidh, the son of Ith.

From these four sources the principle Celtic families of Ireland have sprung…”

‘As we see in the genealogy, Eber and Eremon were able to trace their own descent from Gadelas, the father of the Gaels and the Gaelic languages, but just how seriously did the early Irish take the question of pedigree? Were they serious enough to take the trouble to keep accurate records over long periods of time? Once more, Cusack answers the question for us: 

“The Books of Genealogies and Pedigrees form a most important element in Irish pagan history. For social and political reasons, the Irish Celt preserved his genealogical tree with scrupulous precision. The rights of property and the governing power were transmitted with patriarchal exactitude on strict claims of primogeniture, which claims could only be refused under certain conditions defined by law… and in obedience to an ancient law, established long before the introduction of Christianity, all the provincial records, as well as those of the various chieftains, were required to be furnished every third year to the convocation at Tara, where they were compared and corrected.”

The Flag of Ireland

The white in the centre signifies a lasting truce (peace); between the orange – which stands for William of Orange, the Orange Order and Ireland’s Protestant minority – and the green, which represents Irish nationalism, the Irish Catholic and the Irish people.

The beginning of Gad’s ordeal, involving enduring ‘troops’ treading on them as per biblical prophecy was with the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in 1169 CE. Since then, it was an endless cycle of political resistance to English rule and military campaigns to rid the Isle of their oppressors; who’s aim seemed to be to turn the Irish into the English. Most of Ireland gained independence following the Anglo-Irish war from 1919 to 1921, as the Irish Free State in 1922. Achieving full independence as the Republic of Ireland in 1949, with Northern Ireland part of the United Kingdom as a ‘constituent country.’

Irish history can be broken down into periods of a. invasion by England and the Lordship of Ireland from 1171 to 1542; b. the Kingdom of Ireland from 1542 to 1800; c. being conquered by England during 1536 to 1691; d. the period known as the Protestant Ascendancy lasting from 1691 to 1801; until e. the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland when Ireland merged with Britain from 1801 until 1922.

Though the Normans had invaded Britain in 1066, it was a century later when they landed in Ireland. As quoted earlier, in 1169, Anglo-Norman mercenaries set foot in Ireland at the request of Diamait mac Murchada (Dermot MacMurragh), the deposed King of Leinster; who sought their help in regaining his kingship. The Normans achieved this within weeks as well as raiding neighbouring kingdoms. This military intervention was sanctioned by King Henry II of England. In return, Diarmait swore loyalty to Henry, promising land to the Normans and in turn altering the course of Irish history forever. 

During much of the Middle Ages Ireland was ruled as a separate kingdom under the British Crown. Not the whole country, just an eastern portion. The English ‘knew that the best way to defeat the cunning Irish was to suppress the entire country, which would have cost a fortune… or they could just build a big wall around the greater Dublin area… they decided on the less painful latter option and called the walled area The Pale.’ It was not till 1603, with victory over the Irish in Ulster that Britain gained complete control of Ireland. 

True(ish) History of Ireland, Garvan Grant:

“When Elizabeth I ascended to the English throne in 1558, she took a more lenient attitude towards Ireland. She even let the people of Ireland carry on being Catholic, speak their own language and live, which was dead nice of her. In return, all she wanted from the various chieftains who had divided the country up between them was ‘unconditional loyalty’, the swearing of an odd oath and bucket-loads of cash. This suited everyone – until some of the Irish fellas got greedy and started scrapping with their neighbors over bits of land. This led to Elizabeth showing her not so lovely side and coming down quite hard on the Irish. 

Tired of fighting, the English then decided the best way to ‘civilize’ the Irish were to send some nice English, Scottish and Welsh people to live on their lands, so the Irish could see just how brilliant being British was. These ‘Plantations’ might have worked too, except that a lot of the planters weren’t very brilliant – or very nice. They hadn’t signed up for it because they loved the Irish and wanted to make them better people; they came because they were given free land with free peasants (or ‘slaves’) to work on it. It was lovely in theory, but probably not a recipe for success on the ground.” 

The province of Ulster was troublesome, thus land was confiscated from members of the Gaelic nobility of Ireland – who then fled Ulster – and given to Scottish small farmers, so that they remained and did not sell the land back to the native Irish. Thus Scots migrated to Ireland in large numbers under the government sanctioned Plantation of Ulster and its planned process of colonisation during the reign of James I. The success of this policy was the foundation of the problems Northern Ireland faced until 1998 and in reality till this day. Cromwell after the English Civil War was short of cash to pay his troops, so he confiscated eighty percent of the land for his troops in lieu of money. The dispossessed landowners were offered poor quality land in Connaught in exchange. 

Grant: “Until the seventeenth century war in Ireland had been mainly about unimportant things such as land, money, and power, but after the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, it became more about good, old-fashioned religion. How God felt about this change was anyone’s guess. In 1649, when the latest war in England ended and Charles I lost his head and couldn’t find it anywhere, the English sent over a lovely chap by the name of Oliver Cromwell. He was only in Ireland for nine months but managed to get in more violence than many other English people had done in decades. His theory of how to win a war – and it has yet to be proved wrong – was to kill everybody. He and his army – they were originally going to call it the New ‘Slaughter Everybody’ Army but eventually decided on the much catchier New Model Army – basically attacked anyone they met who wasn’t one of their soldiers.” 

The British attempt to solve the ‘Irish Problem’ by creating the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801, was a solution that pleased nobody in Ireland; for the protestant ruling class did not want to lose their independence and the Catholics felt betrayed when George III refused to grant Catholic emancipation.

Within a United Kingdom, Ireland started to struggle for reform. O’Connell and his Catholic Association founded in 1823 led the struggle for Catholic emancipation. The Potato Famine in the years 1845 to 1852 caused enormous upheavals as the population of Ireland fell from nine Million to three million through famine and emigration. No doubt, a London government would not have let this tragedy happen in mainland Britain.

The Easter Rising of 1916 was put down quickly by Westminster. Crass mishandling by the British resulted in many of the leaders of the Easter Rising being shot by firing squad, with the extremists acquiring the status of martyrs. In the 1918 election, seventy-three of the one hundred and six Irish seats went to Sinn Fein. They refused to go to Westminster and set up a provisional government in Ireland. Three years of bitter guerrilla warfare with atrocities on both sides ensued; before a truce was finally signed in 1921. The ‘final solution of the Irish Problem’ was partition. The Irish stalemate continues: Northern Protestants feel they have a right to determine their own future democratically on the basis of being in the majority. Northern Catholics feel they have the right to be part of a united Ireland. 

There are a number of flags associated with Northern Ireland and the larger province of Ulster, comprising nine counties. The only official flag is the Union Flag of the United Kingdom. The Ulster Banner (Red Hand Flag, Ulster Flag) used officially by the government, from 1953 until the parliament was abolished in 1973 – first receiving a royal warrant for use in 1924 – has no sanctioned status since then, though some loyalists, unionists and sports team have adopted it. It is not to be confused with the similar flag with a yellow background, which is the provincial flag of Ulster (below). 

The Saint Patrick’s Saltire (below) represents Northern Ireland indirectly in the Union Flag. It is flown during St Patrick’s Day parades in Northern Ireland and some northern Irish royal events.

The Republic of Ireland is the 26th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $598 billion in 2025.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Irish global shipments during 2024.

  1. Pharmaceuticals: US$89.7 billion
  2. Organic chemicals: $46.3 billion
  3. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $21.1 billion
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $14.4 billion
  5. Perfumes, cosmetics: $12.2 billion
  6. Machinery including computers: $11 billion
  7. Aircraft, spacecraft: $6.6 billion
  8. Other chemical goods: $4.7 billion
  9. Dairy, eggs, honey: $4.6 billion
  10. Meat: $4.2 billion

Ireland’s top 10 export product categories generated 89.3% of the overall value of total Irish shipments. Electrical machinery and equipment [represented] the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 37.1% from 2023 to 2024.’

The term Ulster Scots is used for those peoples residing in Northern Ireland with a Scottish connection, while those who emigrated to North America are known as the Scotch-Irish. We will learn that the peoples who departed from Ulster for America were not descended from the tribe of Reuben – nor are the Ulster Scots who remain in Northern Ireland. Their ancestors were mostly Protestant Presbyterian Scottish colonists originating from principally Galloway and then Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Ayrshire, the Scottish Borders and parts of Northern England (which were once part of Scotland and incorporated into England), which bordered Scotland. A minority came from further north in the Lowlands or from the Highlands. 

The Scots Irish emigrated onwards from Ireland in considerable numbers to what is now the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. It was just a few generations after arriving in Northern Ireland that sizeable numbers of Scots Irish emigrated to Great Britain’s North American colonies. Between 1717 and 1775, an estimated two hundred thousand migrated to the United States. Scots Irish also travelled to Britain’s acquisition of New France, becoming Scotch-Irish Canadians. 

In the United States 2000 Census, ‘4.3 million Americans (1.5% of the population of the United States) claimed Scotch-Irish ancestry. Author and former United States Senator Jim Webb suggests that the true number of people with some Scots-Irish heritage in the United States is [more likely over 27 million people;] possibly because contemporary Americans with some Scotch-Irish heritage may regard themselves as either Irish, Scottish, or simply American instead.’

This is an important point as these Scots Irish are the same as the Ulster Scots remaining in Northern Ireland. They are not the same as Americans and Canadians of simply standard Scottish and Irish stock, or even from English, Welsh and German descent. 

Not only does Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales possess a very different genetic make-up from each other, they are also different – in the main – from the rest of England. Proving that the four constituent nations comprising the United Kingdom are four distinct and separate peoples – England from Judah; Scotland from Benjamin; Wales from Simeon; and Northern Ireland predominantly from Reuben.

The population of the Republic of Ireland is 5,312,460 people and comparable with Scotland. Yet it remained considerably smaller for decades at approximately 3.5 million, until experiencing accelerated growth from the year 2000. The population of Northern Ireland grows slowly and is approximately 1,910,500 people – where Reuben’s people are few. Its composition will be discussed in a later chapter. While Wales has 3,307,856 people; also exhibiting slow growth. Simeon shares a larger territory with Judah – within the Kingdom of England – in proportion to its population size.

Tests reveal that the Welsh carry the most DNA of the original settlers in the British Isles. Or in other words, the Welsh have the most undiluted DNA in the British Isles, reflecting their status as one of the first Israelite tribes to permanently settle in Britain. 

This is underscored by three reasons. First, as we learned from the two census records of the Israelites during their forty year sojourn; the vast majority of Simeon departed and struck out on their own. Second, we also know that even if they spent time in Ireland very early on, the tribe of Simeon were primarily based in Britain. Only the tribe pf Dan shared the island with them, for Benjamin arrived later and Reuben and Gad remained in Ireland. Third, due to its westerly location and mountainous landscape, few invaders including even the Romans, Saxons and Vikings ventured into Welsh lands.

An article described the Welsh as “the true pure Britons, according to the research that has produced the first genetic map of the UK. Scientists were able to trace their DNA back to the first tribes that settled in the British Isles… This means the DNA of people living there has not experienced the influx of ‘foreign’ genes like other parts of Britain. The research found that there is no single ‘Celtic’ genetic group.”

The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish really are all different tribes and definitely not from the same one. The term Celtic, is clearly a cultural and historical time frame reference and only broadly an ethnic one. 

The research confirmed that the people of Orkney are the most distinct, “a result of 600 years of Norwegian rule” and “the Welsh are the next most distinct. But even within Wales there are two distinct tribes, with those in the north and south of the principality less similar genetically than the Scots are to the inhabitants of Kent.” This is and isn’t a surprise, as Scotland and Kent share the same father Jacob, yet different mothers. Rachel for Scotland and Leah for Kent.

If the southern Welsh have the same mother as Judah of England, that is Leah because they are Simeon, then north Wales must have a different mother. This would lend itself to the northern Welsh possibly having one of the Handmaids as their mother. Or it could be explained by Simeon’s other wife (of Canaanite extraction) – Genesis 46:10. We will return to this conundrum.* 

Khazaria, Welsh, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Bryan Sykes, professor of human genetics at the University of Oxford and founder of Oxford Ancestors, showed that people from North Wales and Mid-Wales are more genetically interlinked with each other than either are with people from South Wales. Y-DNA haplogroups carried by members of “The Wales Cymru DNA Project” include [E1b1b] (E-L117)… (E-V13)… (E-M34), G1a1a1, G2a1, I1 (I-M253), [I2a1]… (I-M223, I-P37, etc.), J1, J2, R1a1a (R-M512, R-M198, R-M173, R-Z280), R1b1a (R-M269, R-M173, R-L21), and… (R-P312), among others.

The SNP subclade Z138+ (also known as Z139+) of the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 is found at low frequencies in Germanic-speaking populations including England and Wales, but also in Portugal, southern Italy, and Romania. STR (short tandem repeats) analysis reveals a western subgroup of I1 where GATA-H4 ≥ 11 that’s most common in Wales that exists at lower frequencies in English and other European populations.’

Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration, Molecular Biology and Evolution, multiple authors, 2002, pages 1008-1021:

‘They studied English, Welsh, Norwegian, and Frisian men and genetically compared them to each other. Samples included males from 2 towns in North Wales (Abergele^ and Llangefni) and 5 towns in England as far east as North Walsham in East Anglia. The sampled men from Central English towns genetically resembled each other closely, in contrast to the North Welsh men who “differed significantly both from each other and from the Central English towns.” They found common Germanic roots of the English and Frisian males in the study, confirming that the Anglo-Saxons (but not the Welsh) are largely descended from people not indigenous to the British Isles. Excerpts from the article:

“Our results indicate the presence of a strong genetic barrier between Central England and North Wales and the virtual absence of a barrier between Central England and Friesland… The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent. Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity and the low Central English-North Welsh affinity…

Anglo-Saxon settlements and culture appeared throughout England but, importantly, did not extend into North Wales, where many of the original Celtic Britons living in England are thought to have fled…”

‘Extraordinary’ genetic make-up of north east Wales men, BBC News, July 19, 2011: 

‘Dr. Andy Grierson of the University of Sheffield comments on the finding of E1b1b1 in a large percentage (the article states approximately 30 percent) of men from northeast Wales (the town of Abergele^). 

(Most of the men specifically carry E1b1b1a2, also known as E-V13). This is found in a much higher frequency than populations in the rest of the United Kingdom, which average 1 percent [see map above]. The sample size was 500 people. Grierson said, 

“This type of genetic makeup is usually found in the eastern Mediterranean which made us think that there might have been strong connections between north east Wales and this part of Europe somewhere in the past. But this appears not to be the case, so we’re still looking to find out why it’s happened and what it reveals about the history of the region.”

Whatever the reason, the presence of such a high percentage of Haplogroup E1b1b, indicates admixture with an African line of male descent in the past – whether it be Berber as in North African, or Black as in sub-Saharan African – with the resulting mutation of V13 found only in Europeans.

Recall in Genesis 46:10 that Simeon had six sons and his youngest son Shaul, was born to a Canaanite woman. While this doesn’t explain the Y-DNA Haplogroup directly, it may be linked if this branch of Simeon maintained a proclivity to marry Canaanites – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Khazaria: ‘The fine-scale genetic structure of the British population, Nature 519, multiple authors, 2015, pages 309-314: Welsh form part of this intensive evaluation of autosomal DNA. Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… We use haplotype-based statistical methods to analyse genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data from a carefully chosen geographically diverse sample of 2,039 individuals from the United Kingdom… The regional genetic differentiation and differing patterns of shared ancestry with 6,209 individuals from across Europe carry clear signals of historical demographic events… in non-Saxon parts of the United Kingdom, there exist genetically differentiated subgroups rather than a general ‘Celtic’ population.”

Welsh people could be most ancient in UK, DNA suggests, BBC News, June 19, 2012:

‘This is another article about Professor Donnelly’s team’s research. Excerpts from the article:

“… DNA samples were analysed at about 500,000 different points. After comparing statistics, a map was compiled which showed Wales and Cornwall stood out. Prof Donnelly said:

‘People from Wales are genetically relatively distinct, they look different genetically from much of the rest of mainland Britain, and actually people in north Wales look relatively distinct from people in south Wales.’

While there were traces of migrant groups across the UK, there were fewer in Wales and Cornwall. He said people* from south and north Wales genetically have ‘fairly large similarities with the ancestry of people from Ireland on the one hand and France [Moab and Ammon] on the other…’ He said it was possible that people came over from Ireland to north Wales because it was the closest point, and the same for people coming to south Wales from the continent, as it was nearer. However he added: ‘We don’t really have the historical evidence about what those genetic inputs were…’

Because of its westerly position and mountainous nature, Anglo-Saxons who moved into central and eastern England after the Romans left did not come that far west, and neither did the Vikings who arrived in around 900AD… The mountains were also the reason why (Welsh) DNA may have remained relatively unchanged, as people would have found it harder to get from north to south Wales or into England compared with people trying to move across the flatter southern English counties, making them more likely to marry locally and conserve more ancient DNA… ”

DNA links Welsh men to Scotland, Helen McArdle, Herald Scotland, November 24, 2014: 

‘The team of Alistair Moffat of CymruDNAWales and Scotland’s DNA discovered that 1 percent of Welsh males carry a Y chromosome variety that descends from ancient Picts from Scotland and is related to the modern Scottish variety of this lineage. Excerpts from the article:

“Some 10 per cent of all Scottish men belong to this ‘Pictish’ lineage compared to just 0.8 per cent of Englishmen. It is particularly concentrated in Perthshire, Fife, Angus and Grampian, regions of Scotland with known Pictish heritage. The discovery of shared ancestral ties between men in Scotland and Wales is at the centre of a new theory that this one per cent of Welsh men are direct descendents* of a small band of ancient Scottish aristocrats, who fled the Old Welsh-speaking kingdom of Strathclyde in the ninth century to escape a Viking invasion. They are thought to have headed south, by sea, to find refuge in north Wales after the Viking kings Ivar and Olaf led their dragonships up the Clyde in 870, laying siege to the fortress on Dumbarton Rock and eventually capturing Artgul, the king of Strathclyde.”

DNA survey reveals 25% of Welsh men directly descended from ancient kings and warlords, Nathan Bevan, Wales Online, December 18, 2014: 

‘Alistair Moffat of CymruDNAWales is interviewed as saying 25 percent of Welsh men whose grandparents were all Welsh inherited their Y chromosomes from about 20 medieval Welsh royals, nobles, and warlords who had many descendants. Moffat also spoke about what the team learned so far about the earliest immigrants to Wales, thousands of years ago. He said, 

“We all suspected that Wales was a Celtic country but no-one was prepared for just how much – the classic Celtic Y chromosome marker R1b S145 [L21] being carried by a whopping 45% of Welsh men, as opposed to just 15% over on the other side of Offa’s Dyke. We have always known that Wales [Simeon] is different from England [Judah], but now here is a statistic that shows there is no question about it.” 

In the previous chapter we discussed the defining marker paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup for the descendants of Abraham being R1b-U106 (S21). It is prevalent in England, as well as the downstream sub-clade U198. In Wales, it is R1b-L21 (M529) which is predominant. M529 is a defining marker R1b Haplogroup in Ireland and the British Celtic nations. R1b-S116 (P312) derives from L11 (which is downstream from M269) as does U106, with L21 deriving from R1b-S116.

As intimated previously, this writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, its most recent mutations (see above). This is not the chapter to elaborate on this contention, though at some point it is hoped it can be addressed more fully, with input from geneticists welcome. 

Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either adjacent to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or even deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would seem better placed deriving from L11 directly and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

While it is not a surprise that Simeon and Judah are different; as blood brothers their different R1b Y-DNA Haplogroup mutations is puzzling. This extends to the Scots and Irish, not just for the Welsh, as all share the same father. The Scots and Irish have different mothers – Rachel and Zilpah respectively – yet Reuben-Northern Ireland, Simeon-Wales and Judah-England all have the same mother in Leah. Why these five sons don’t share the same R1b mutation; or why the three sons from Leah at least do not; and why the four Celtic sons with different mothers do and the Saxon son doesn’t, will have to remain an enigma for the time being.

(A further thought to this question after time of writing, is the idea that Y-DNA Haplogroups can be affected by geography and chronology. Though this seems an unrealistic proposition, surely.)

Khazaria: ‘The Welsh television presenter Angharad Mair had her DNA tested by CymruDNAWales [in 2015]. Upon examining her mitochrodrial DNA, they found that her maternal lineage came from the Levant region (eastern Mediterranean) thousands of years ago. Excerpts:

“… These particular mitochrodrial DNA markers… appear with very high frequency in Wales at around 11%… However, they are most commonly found among Ashkenazi Jews of Europe, where a third of all maternal bloodlines are Levantine… ‘I was very excited to discover that I had Jewish ancestry – which might’ve only developed in the last two centuries…’

This interesting revelation hints at a link between Edom and Simeon in the past. The Bible reveals when this may have occurred in one instance. 1 Chronicles 4:42-43, ESV: ‘And some of them, five hundred men of the Simeonites, went to Mount Seir…  And they defeated the remnant of the Amalekites who had escaped, and they have lived there to this day.’

Khazaria, Irish, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The “Celtic” Irish people of the emerald isle of Ireland are closely related to the Scottish people of nearby Scotland, and Irish and the partly Frisian-Anglo-Saxon English people from England are also significantly related. This shows the limitations of assuming we know everything about somebody’s ancestry merely based on what language their ethnic group traditionally spoke (in this case, Irish Gaelic versus English). Also, some Irish people moved to Iceland and are thus partly related to modern Icelanders.

R1b, which originated in western Europe, is the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Irish men, at a frequency of about 81.5%.

I1 is the second most common with 6%, followed by [I2a2] at 5% [I1 and I2 older mutations related to though predating R1b (and R1a)],

R1a at 2.5% [Eastern European origin through admixture, Shem], and E1b1b at 2% [North African origin… Canaan].

G2a is found in only about 1% [Caucasus… Shem]. Also rare are [I2a1] (1%) [Southeastern European… Shem] and J2 (1%) [Southwest Asian… Ham].

According to The ALlele FREquency Database, 8.4% of the 226 Irish people studied carry at least one T allele in the R151C (rs1805007) gene where TT usually causes red hair. That isn’t the only red hair allele that Irish people sometimes carry. Between 4-6% of 23andMe’s Irish customers carry the T red hair allele on the R160W (rs1805008, Arg160Trp) gene, while 4-6% of their Irish customers carry the C red hair allele on the D294H (i3002507) gene… Irish people carry red-hair gene variants including Arg151Cys, Arg160Trp, and Asp294His. There are also correlations between these and light skin.

The Irish DNA Atlas: Revealing Fine-Scale Population Structure and History within Ireland, multiple authors, Scientific Reports 7, December 8, 2017, article number 17199:

‘The “Irish DNA Atlas” project is run by the Genealogical Society of Ireland, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and the University of Leicester. They sought people whose 8 great-grandparents were all born in Irish towns within 30 kilometers of each other. This major autosomal DNA study includes 194 Irish people who told 4 generations of their ancestry and linked their ancestors to specific regions within Ireland. They were compared to 2,039 people from the “Peoples of the British Isles” (PoBI) dataset, to 6,760 people from throughout Europe, and to two ancient Irish individuals.

The scientists managed to divide the Irish population into “10 distinct geographically stratified genetic clusters; seven of ‘Gaelic’ Irish ancestry [Ireland], and three of shared Irish-British ancestry [Northern Ireland].”

They also “demonstrate high levels of North-West French-like and West Norwegian-like ancestry within Ireland.” It has long been known that Norse (Viking) people settled in Ireland during the Middle Ages so this makes sense. They did not, however, interpret the French-like DNA to be a signal of medieval Norman French ancestry since people in northwestern France are related to other Celtic peoples.

They also detected some Scottish ancestry that came into Ulster in northern Ireland in the 16th-17th centuries. This again conforms to what we know about the religious and ethnic divide between the substantially Protestant and British communities of Northern Ireland [Reuben] and the traditionally Catholic Republic of Ireland [Gad].’

The genetic landscape of Scotland and the Isles, multiple authors, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, September 3, 2019:

‘Irish people were among those who participated in this autosomal DNA study of 2,544 people. The Irish people from County Donegal in northwestern Ireland are shown to represent “the most genetically isolated region of Ireland observed to date. This isolation shows little evidence of the migrations that have impacted the rest of Ulster.”

Using admixture analysis, the researchers concluded that “Norwegian (as well as Danish/Swedish) ancestry is also markedly low in Ireland (average 7%) compared with previous estimates”. It is no surprise that the researchers determined that Irish, Welsh, and Scottish people inherited a majority of their ancestry from the ancient “Celts”.

This is answered by the simple fact that the Viking element are contributions from two separate sons of Jacob – not from the descendants of Abraham and Keturah – two different and distinct tribes of whom then departed from Ireland (and Britain)** to migrate to lands in the New World – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. 

Khazaria: ‘… researchers studied the Y-DNA of Irish men with surnames considered to be of Norse origin. They examined both unique event polymorphisms and short tandem repeat (STR) markers. They found that these Irish men actually didn’t usually have paternal roots from Scandinavia, nor do Irish men in the general population of modern Ireland… “the findings are consistent with a relatively small number of Norse settlers (and [descendants]) migrating to Ireland during the Viking period (ca. AD 800-1200) suggesting that Norse colonial settlements might have been largely composed of indigenous** Irish…”

Those peoples who have remained** in Scotland and Ireland are the tribes of Benjamin and Gad respectively, with principally Reuben in Northern Ireland.

Insular Celtic population structure and genomic footprints of migratiuon, PLoS Genetics, January 25, 2018:

‘…structural clustering for the autosomal DNA of 1,035 Irish individuals. The authors found 23 Irish clusters. The abstract says that these clusters “segregate with geographical provenance.” Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… Cluster diversity is pronounced in the west of Ireland but reduced in the east where older structure has been eroded by historical migrations. Accordingly, when populations from the neighbouring island of Britain are included, a west-east cline of Celtic-British ancestry is revealed along with a particularly striking correlation between haplotypes and geography across both islands. A strong relationship is revealed between subsets of Northern Irish and Scottish populations, where discordant genetic and geographic affinities reflect major migrations in recent centuries.

Additionally, Irish genetic proximity of all Scottish samples likely reflects older strata of communication across the narrowest inter-island crossing. Using GLOBETROTTER we detected Irish admixture signals from Britain and Europe and estimated dates for events consistent with the historical migrations of the Norse-Vikings, the Anglo-Normans and the British Plantations. The influence of the former is greater than previously estimated from Y chromosome haplotypes…”

A Y-Chromosome Signature of Hegemony in Gaelic Ireland, multiple authors, American Journal of Human Genetics 78, February 2006, pages 334-338:

‘The researchers used 17-marker simple tandem repeat (STR) analysis on the Y chromosomes of samples obtained from Irish men. They discovered that 16.9% of men from northwestern Ireland, and 8.2% of men from Ireland as a whole, descend from a single male ancestor from early-medieval times from the family dynasty of the Uí Néill, since the haplotype is often found in people holding surnames associated with this dynasty. Their abstract calls this a “modal haplotype”.

Population structure and genome-wide patterns of variation in Ireland and Britain, multiple authors, European Journal of Human Genetics 18, 2010, pages 1248-1254:

‘The researchers studied the genetics of 3,654 including people from Ireland, the United Kingdom (including Aberdeen, Scotland), Sweden, Portugal, Bulgaria, and the American state of Utah (whose people are largely of English descent). Haplotype diversity was found to be lower in Ireland and Scotland than in southern Europe.

Also, Irish people have higher levels of linkage disequilibrium and homozygosity compared to other Europeans. The results showed that the population of Ireland has been relatively isolated throughout the millennia. The article notes that Scottish people are “intermediate between the Irish and English cohorts” in principal component analysis. British and Irish people are predominantly “Northwestern” European in origin but also partly “Scandinavian” (more so for English people than Irish people) and have relatively small amounts of “Iberian” and “Balkan” ancestry.

Admixture results based on the Dodecad Ancestry Project showed, at K=11, that Irish are mostly “Northwest European” (as we’d expect), also partly “Northeast European” and “Basque”, with a small slice of “Sardinian”, and a little bit of “West Asian”.

The Irish are very similar to British, which is also shown by their clustering together in two main groups.’

Genome-Wide Association Studies of Quantitatively Measured Skin, Hair, and Eye Pigmentaion in Four European Populations, multiple authors, PLoS ONE 7, October 31, 2012): 

‘As expected, Irish people were found to have overall lighter skin pigmentation than continental Europeans. The article also confirmed that, on average, the hair colors of Irish and Polish people (northern Europeans) are lighter than Italian and Portuguese people (southern Europeans). Within Ireland, Irish females have a pronounced tendency toward lighter hair than Irish males; a sexual dimorphism of this magnitude wasn’t detected in the Poles. Northern Europeans also have, on average, lighter eyes than southern Europeans. Furthermore, both Irish males and females tend to have lighter eyes than even Poles do.

DNA blueprint of the Irish revealed, Damian Corless, Irish Independent, September 11, 2010 – emphasis mine:

‘This article is based on research by Brendan Loftus of University College Dublin, whose “research team… mapped the complete genetic code of an Irish person for the first time.” Researchers hope that analysis of the Irish genome will help to explain why Irish people are susceptible to particular disorders and try to find preventative measures and cures for those disorders. Excerpts from the article:

‘… Ireland’s geography has had a huge part to play in shaping the nature of our society and our closest family ties. According to Loftus: “The geographic isolation of Ireland over generations would affect the size of the gene pool by limiting the type and number of potential mating partners.” Major genetic surveys of Ireland and Britain have established that the gene pool of both islands is amongst the least diluted in Europe. The genetic evidence shows that three quarters of the ancestors of the Irish and British people were the pioneering settlers…’

So much for the widely held, propagandised belief that the British and especially the English are a mongrelised, hybrid people.

Corless: ‘The inescapable upshot of this is that the Irish are not Celts, any more than the English are Anglo-Saxons. In fact, both the Irish and the British are Basques, with the Irish significantly more Basque than our neighbours across the pond, who’ve absorbed more migrations from Europe over the centuries. The dilution rate for Ireland is estimated at a tiny 12%, against 20% for Wales and Cornwall, 30% for Scotland and 33% for England… 

Ancient Irish legends say that there were six invasions or migrations from the south many generations before the Celts arrived around 300BC. The evidence suggests that the Celtic language, fashions and technologies which are supposed to define our Irish heritage, were acquired as cultural accessories… The Irish and Basques share by far the highest incidence of the R1b gene in Europe, which has a frequency of over 90% in Basque country and almost 100% along parts of Ireland’s western seaboard. 

If further proof were needed, there’s the physical fact that the Basques are distinguished by a very high incidence of fair (and some reddish) hair, pale skin, blue eyes, and, apparently, sticky-out ears. Sound like anyone you know?’ – Refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Recall from the previous chapter, how Ireland, Scotland, Wales and north western England are dominated by R1b-L21, which is also located in north western France (Brittany), the North coast of Spain (Basque) and western Norway, a residue from the slave trade. This lineage is often associated with the historic Celts, as the Iberian and Gaulish regions where it was once predominant have had a significant Celtic language presence into the modern period, as well as relating to a Celtic cultural identity. R1b-L21 was also present among Celtic Britons in eastern England prior to the Saxon and Viking invasions, as well as allegedly from Roman soldiers stationed in ancient York.

English, Irish, Scots: They’re All One, Genes Suggest, Nicholas Wade, The New York Times, March 5, 2007:

‘Geneticist Stephen Oppenheimer of the University of Oxford used genetic evidence to disprove the traditional historical narrative that the Irish people are mainly Celts and that they’re very distinct from Englishmen. Oppenheimer suggested, rather, that most of the ancestors of Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English [that is early English, known as Britons and hence related to the Welsh] peoples came from Spain and that their original language was related to Basque. Excerpts:

“… In Dr. Oppenheimer’s reconstruction of events, the principal ancestors of today’s British [Cymry and the Picts, but does not include the Jutes and Normans] and Irish populations arrived from Spain… speaking a language related to Basque… Although the Celtic immigrants may have been few in number, they spread their farming techniques and their language throughout Ireland and the western coast of Britain. 

Later immigrants arrived from northern Europe [who] had more influence on the eastern and southern coasts. They too spread their language, a branch of German… As for subsequent invaders, Ireland received the fewest; the invaders’ DNA makes up about 12 percent of the Irish gene pool, Dr. Oppenheimer estimates, but it accounts for 20 percent of the gene pool in Wales, 30 percent in Scotland, and about one-third in eastern and southern England…”

In the previous section (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes), we looked at the top mtDNA Haplogroups for England and Scotland and compared them with near family: the Flemish of Belgium, the Dutch of the Netherlands, the Germans and the French. That is: the descendants from Sheba, Midian, Ishmael and Lot. The comparison of the top five to ten mtDNA Haplogroups showed that England and Scotland are more closely aligned as expected with regard to frequency similarity. 

It was Germany, which mirrored their sequence most closely, followed by France and the Flemish, with the Netherlands the least similar of the six close family members composed from Judah, Benjamin, Ishmael, Moab and Ammon, Sheba and Midian. 

From an autosomal DNA perspective a slightly different picture was portrayed, where the English and Scottish were most closely related to the Dutch and Germans and then Belgium and France, not withstanding Scandinavia.

England: H [44.7%] – J [11.5%] – U5 [9.1%] – K [7.8%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – I [4%] – HV0+V [3.2%] – U [2.7]

Scotland: H [44%] – J [12.7%] – U5 [8.1%] – K [6.9%] – 

T2 [5.9%] – HV0+V [3%] U4 [2.8%] – X [2.5%] 

Wales: H [59.8%] – J [15.3%] – K [7.6%] – U5 [4.4%] – 

HV0+V [4.3%] – I [3.3%] – T1 [2.2%] – T2 [1.1%] – X [1.1%] 

Ireland: H [44.1%] – K [12%] – J [10.7%] – U5 [8.4%] – 

HV0+V [5.7%] – T2 [5.4%] – I [3%] – W [2.3%]

England:  H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Scotland:  H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Wales:       H – J – K – U5 – HV0+V 

Ireland:     H – K – J – U5 – HV0+V 

Adding Ireland, which includes Northern Ireland, with Wales reveals a similarity of sequence which pairs them together rather than with either England or Scotland. The predominant maternal Haplogroups overall for England, Scotland, France, the Flemish, Dutch and Germans are H, J, U5, K and T2. For both Ireland and Wales, Haplogroup T2 is edged into sixth by Haplogroup HV0+V.

Noticeable is the fact that both Ireland and Wales who have been isolated compared with England and Scotland, have very low levels of T2 (and T1). Haplogroup mtDNA T is a relatively recent mutation compared with say H or even J and U. Ireland also stands out in having a high level of Haplogroup K, like the Dutch and Flemish. Haplogroup K is also found in very high levels amongst the Ashkenazi Jews.

Specific sub-clades for the most common and widespread Haplogroup H found in Ireland, include: H1i, H2a5, H3i, H14a, H17b, H24, H26a, H27a, H39, H44, H45b, H46, H47, H48, H53, H59 and H76.

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2      U4       U5        T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Ireland            44            6            11        12           5          1          8          1

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England           45            3           12          8          6          2          9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6          2         6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

Wales               60           4            15          8           1                     4          2

The addition of Ireland and Wales with their near and extended family members is highly revealing. When we study the percentages of the most frequent mtDNA Haplogroups more closely, we observe the Irish have as close an affinity with their French cousins, as their half-brothers England and Scotland on the maternal side. 

The Welsh Haplogroups prove categorically that they are the most ancient of Britons and have the least maternal dilution in the British Isles as all the studies have shown. 

The Welsh mtDNA Haplogroup snap shot is a great glimpse into the distant past for what probably all the other nations on the table may have once looked like with a very high majority percentage of H and then perhaps possessing J, U, K and T building from 5% or less of their total mtDNA inheritance as the centuries passed. Other older Haplogroups possibly additions in the gene pool from admixture and inter-marriage. It is the Welsh similarity with the Sephardim from Esau which also stands out.

Ireland shares percentage similarity with England and Scotland in the maternal Haplogroups H, J, U5 and T2. Wales shares similarity with England and Scotland in Haplogroups J and K and not much with the Irish, except possibly Haplogroup J. What has to be accounted for is that Ireland’s Haplogroups are for both countries. Separating Ireland and Northern Ireland would perhaps provide a different picture.

The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Gad (Reuben).

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                            H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HV0+V

Wales                60    15        1        8                      4            4

Sephardim       56      5                  8         8                         9

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.4          7            5

Bel-Lux             47       6       9      12      0.7           3            3

Denmark          47      13      6        9                       6            4

Norway             46      11      8        5      0.2          11            4

Sweden             46       8      4        6      0.5          12            5

Netherlands     45     11      12      10                      8            8

Germany           45      9       8        7     0.5            9            4

Austria              45      9       8        9     0.8            9            2

England            45    13       6         8                      9            3

Scotland           44    13       6         7     0.2            8            3

Ireland              44    11       5        12        1            8            6

France               44     8       6         9         3           8            5

Brazil                 44     11                            2                         11

Portugal            44      7       6        6      0.1           7             5

Spain                 44      7       6        6      0.7           8            8

Poland               44     8       7         4         1          10            5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2         10            4

Greece               41     10       7        5          3           5         1.8

Italy                  40      8        8       8           3           5            3

Ukraine            39      8        8        5          4         10            4

Iceland             38    14      10      10          4           8            2

Romania          37     11        5        8          2           7            4

Finland            36      6        2        5                      21            7

Turkey              31      9        4        6          5           3         0.7

Ashkenazim    23      7        5      32          5           2            4

Iran                   17     14       5         7          7           3         0.6

Adding Ireland and Wales to our growing table of European nations is revealing. The Sephardim who have recently bookended the western side of the mtDNA Haplogroups are now replaced by the Welsh. It is an extreme westerly position as akin to Iran who bookend the eastern end of the table with fascinatingly, the Ashkenazim. 

Discussed previously, a pattern has consistently emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, generally increasing as one heads west across Europe. The addition of three more of Jacob’s sons, Gad (Reuben) and Simeon, places Ireland next to Scotland. Again, the combined Haplogroups for Ireland mean the connection between Northern Ireland and Scotland influences the figures, for it would be Northern Ireland which would sit nearer to Scotland. We will explore the Northern Irish and Scottish connection further in a later chapter.

Thus, Ireland unlike Wales joins Scotland and England in going against the pattern of increasing levels of Haplogroup H as one heads westwards. Wales replaces the Sephardim as the highest carriers of Haplogroup H with 60%. The Welsh also replace England, Scotland, Denmark, Iceland and Iran with the highest frequency of Haplogroup J at 15%. Finland still possesses the highest level of U5 at 21%, while the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K at 32%. The highest carriers of T2 are the Netherlands with 12%.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

Notice that Ireland (1), Wales (2), Scotland (3) and England (5) are in the top five nations for men exhibiting the highest percentage of Haplogroup R1b.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study. 

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Turkey            M269   14%  –  U106   0.4%

Russia             M269   21%  –  U106   5.4%

Slovenia          M269   17%  –  U106      4%

Poland             M269   23%  –  U106     8% 

Ukraine           M269   25%  –  U106     9%

Czech               M269   28%  –  U106   14% 

Austria             M269   27%  –  U106  23%

France              M269   52%  –  U106     7%

Italy                  M269   53%  –  U106    6%

Swiss                 M269   58%  –  U106   13%

Denmark         M269   34%  –  U106   17%

Germany          M269   43%  –  U106   19%

Netherlands    M269   54%  –  U106  35%

England           M269   57%  –  U106   20%

Ireland             M269   80%  – U106      6%

When we added England (a) we saw that the English possess similar levels of R-M269 as the Swiss (b), Dutch (c), Italians (d) and French (e). Regarding the Germanic R-U106, they are at the higher end, though the Netherlands and Austria have even higher percentages and Germany (f) and Denmark (g) share comparable levels. It is clear that England is closely related to all these nations. Clarity is intensified when one appreciates that they equate to Judah (a), Haran (b), Midian (c), Nahor (d), Moab (e), Ammon (e), Ishmael (f) and Medan (g) respectively, all of Abraham’s direct or extended family tree. Now with the addition of Ireland and Gad, we can see the result of less mixing over the millennia with an incredible percentage of R-M269 for the Republic. 

Notice the more Germanic, Central European R-U106 percentage for Ireland is closer to those nations of Eastern and Southern Europe, rather than Ireland’s western neighbours. Again highlighting Ireland’s ancient and isolated position in Europe. R1b clades associated with Ireland apart from M529 include: M37, specific to the Irish; L226/S168 in Central and Western Ireland; and M222 in Northwestern Ireland and associated with the Scots Irish. We will study M222 in more depth in a later chapter. R1b clades associated with the Welsh include: M167, shared with the Cornish and Basque and L371 specific to the Welsh. 

Paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups for Ireland, Wales and Northern Ireland:

Wales: R1b [74%] – I1 [12%] – E1b1b [4%] – 

I2a2 [3%] – G2a [2.5%] – R1a [1%] – I2a1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – J2 [0.5%] 

Ireland: R1b [81%] – I1 [6%] – I2a2 [5%] – 

R1a [2.5%] – E1b1b [2%] – I2a1 [1%] – J2 [ 1.5%]  – G2a [1%] 

Northern Ireland: R1b [76.5%] – I2a2 [10%] – I1 [9%] – 

R1a [ 1.5%] – J2 [1.5%] – I2a1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Wales:         R1b – I1 – E1b1b – I2a2 – G2a – R1a – I2a1 – T1a – J2

Ireland:       R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b1b – I2a1 – J2 – G2a 

N Ireland:   R1b – I2a2 – I1 – R1a – J2 – I2a1 – Q

There is a subtle yet clear difference between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. They are two different peoples and ethnically divided, not just by nationality or religion. It is interesting to note that Wales and Ireland are similar in percentage for Haplogroups, I2a1, I2a2, E1b1b and G2a; whereas Ireland and Northern Ireland have a closer match only in J2. All these are admixture groups and it is in the principal Haplogroup, that the full blood brothers of Wales from Simeon and Northern Ireland predominantly from Reuben have a closer match in R1b levels.

Comparing the defining marker northwestern European Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Irish and Welsh with their related near neighbours.

Ireland:         R1b [81%] – I1 [6%] – I2a2 [5%]

N Ireland:     R1b [76.5%] – I2a2 [10%] – I1 [9%] 

Wales:            R1b [74%] – I1 [12%] – I2a2 [3%]

Scotland:       R1b [72.5%] – I1 [9%] – I2a2 [4%] 

England:       R1b [67%] – I1 [14%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

Flanders:       R1b [61%] – I1 [12%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

France:           R1b [59%] – I1 [9%] – I2a2 [3.5%] 

Netherlands: R1b [49%] – I1 [17%] – I2a2 [7%] 

Germany:       R1b [45%] – I1 [16%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

Italy:               R1b [39%] – I1 [4.5%] – I2a2 [2.5%]

Sephardim:    R1b [29.5%] – I [11.5%] 

Recall, that Haplogroup R1b is indicative of Western Europe and embraces all of Abraham’s male descendants as well as that of his two brothers – Nahor and Haran. Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is distinctly related to the peoples of Eastern Europe and beyond and is found in considerably lower levels heading from Central to Western Europe. Haplogroup I1 is strongly attached to north western Europe and hence the higher levels in Wales and Northern Ireland, though not in Ireland. Similarly, I2a2 is primarily a north western European sub-clade of I2 and is relatively high in the Republic, while it is highest in Northern Irish men. 

Comparing the Welsh and Irish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux, German, Jewish cousins and brothers Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                           R1b      R1a       I1       I2a1    I2a2      E1b1b     J2      J1     

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     

Sephardim        30          4       [12]                                    9        23       20

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                   

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Germany            45        16        16          2           5            6           5                    

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                   

Luxembourg     61          3           3         3            6            5          8          3       

Flanders             61         4         12          3            5            5          4          1         

England             67          5         14          3           5             2         4          

Scotland            73           9          9           1           4            2          2            

Wales                 74           1         12          1           3             4      0.5       

N Ireland           77           2          9       0.5         10                        2              

Ireland               81           3          6          1           5             2          2          

The five countries comprising Britain and Ireland immediately standout as belonging together; as well as separately from their near family members in the western portions of the continent. We learn a number of things. The English show the greatest levels of admixture. This is not surprising as one, they are the largest nation and two have been geographically placed to be impacted the most by the invading migratory waves of Israelites. Though England’s R1b frequency is lower because of this, notice the higher percentage for Haplogroup I, similar to its full brothers Simeon in Wales and particularly Reuben in Northern Ireland, while higher than its half brothers Benjamin in Scotland and Gad in Ireland.

Men with Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 have had a male ancestor who was not from the line of Abraham, though still related to the older Haplogroup I lineage descending from Arphaxad and Peleg.

Scotland’s higher percentage of R1a stands out due to its Nordic admixture – and before that Nordic intermixing with northern Slavs. Wales has a higher percentage of the Canaanite E1b1b, already touched upon. Ireland considerably, then followed by Northern Ireland, reveals a purer paternal Haplogroup identification, if the principle R1b is observed bearing out their isolation. Followed by Wales, Scotland and lastly England. Northern Ireland’s percentage of Haplogroup I1 and I2a2 is high, similar with England. The unique genetic status of Northern Ireland will be investigated in a subsequent chapter.      

Continuing with our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Jacob’s sons Reuben, Simeon and Gad.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Sephardim    43      20      23         9        [8]       4        30       34  

Ashkenazim  38      19       19       21       [10]    10         12       22 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23        21         6        12        16       28

Italy                19        3       16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16        45       61

Flanders          5         1        4          5          4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6        52

England           4                   4         2           2        5        67       72

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15        33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16        22       38

Wallonia          2                   2         6           6        7        60       67

N Ireland         2                   2                                2         77       79

Scotland          2                    2         2        0.5      9         73       82

Ireland             2                   2         2            1       3         81       84

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7         55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26       32       58

Iceland                                                                    23       42       65

Wales            0.5               0.5         4          3           1        74       75

Finland                                         0.5                       5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2 and G2a percentages. While the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, both eclipse Georgia’s J1 levels, with the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia and the Ashkenazi Jew possessing the highest percentage of E1b1b with Greece. These Haplogroups aside from G (Shem) are indicative of Arab and related peoples who descend from Ham or Canaan and not Shem.

Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. The Welsh and Irish join England and Scotland in carrying the highest percentage of combined R1 and Ireland replaces Scotland with the highest frequency of R1b in Europe. 

It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. Ireland is an additional example supporting this fact. We have now investigated thirty-three peoples, ranging from Russia and Iran in the East to Ireland and Iceland in the West; Italy and Greece in the South to Norway and Finland in the North. 

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                         R1a       R1b        I1      I2a1       I2a2     N1c

Wales                  1         74         12           1          3

N Ireland         1.5        77           9       0.5         10

Portugal          1.5         56           2       1.5           5          

Spain                  2         69        1.5          5           1

Ireland               3         81           6          1           5

Luxembourg     3         61           3          3           6              

France                3         59          9           3          4            

Switzerland       4         50        14           2          8          1

Netherlands      4         49        17            1          7               

Flanders            4          61        12            3          5

Brazil                  4         54                      [9]            

Italy                    4         39          5            3          3         

Sephardim         4        30         [1]                             

Finland               5          4         28                    0.5       62

England              5        67         14           3           5        

Frisians               7        55       [34]           

Wallonia             7        60         11           2           5

Scotland             9         73          9           1           4         

Turkey                8         16           1            4     0.5         4  

Ashkenazim     10         12        [4]                              0.2

Greece               12         16          4          10      1.5      

Denmark          15         33        34            2        6         1

Sweden             16         22        37            2        4         7

Germany          16         45        16             2        5         1

Iran                   16         10                      0.5                    1           

Romania          18         16          4           28        3         2

Austria             19         32        12              7        3      0.5

Iceland             23        42        29                        4         1

Norway             26       32        32                         5        3

Ukraine            44          8         5             21     0.5        6

Russia               46         6          5             11                 23

Poland              58        13          9              6         2        4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.

Finnish men possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Northern Ireland replaces Switzerland with the highest levels of I2a2 and Ireland replaces Scotland as the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with the highest percentage of R1b. Finland remains at the other end of the nations in Europe with the lowest R1b level.

Though Haplogroup R1b may fluctuate markedly amongst Abraham’s descendants, it is Haplogroup I1, which remains consistently higher compared with other European nations. A case in point, is a nation descended from Aram such as Spain, whose men in turn have high levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b but not in Haplogroup I1 – for R1b is a defining western European marker. Conversely, Swedish males exhibit high Haplogroup I1 levels but far less R1b.

Paternal Haplogroup I1 is a much older male lineage – one of Abraham’s ancestors – from which the downstream R1b Haplogroup mutation ultimately descends and is palpably a north western European Haplogroup marker. Yet today the two combined, decidedly form a British and Irish identity. One that distinguishes the sons of Jacob from their own near relatives: Ishmael-Germany; Midian-Netherlands; Medan-Denmark; Haran-Switzerland and Moab and Ammonite, France.

This chapter almost completes the sons of Jacob who dwell in the United Kingdom and Ireland. One more tribe to go. Prior to tackling the enigmatic tribe of Dan, we will turn our attention to the six tribes who bravely departed the shores of the British Isles and headed across the world’s oceans seeking adventure and better fortune as they explored forgotten lands and formed new nations.

These people were more willing to listen than the people in Thessalonica. The Bereans were eager to hear what Paul and Silas said and studied the Scriptures every day to find out if these things were true…

Acts 17:11 New Century Version

Most of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in the Scriptures ever comes from the prophet’s own interpretation. No prophecy ever came from what a person wanted to say, but people led by the Holy Spirit spoke words from God.

2 Peter 1:20-21 New Century Version

“Most of the time, we see only what we want to see, or what others tell us to see, instead of really investigate to see what is really there. We embrace illusions only because we are presented with the illusion that they are embraced by the majority… And like obedient schoolchildren, we do not question their validity… Because since the earliest days of our youth, we have been conditioned to accept that the direction of the herd, and authority anywhere – is always right.” 

Suzy Kassem 

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

The Christ Chronology

There is considerable confusion over when the Messiah was born, how long he lived and when he died. A look on internet forums will confirm this point. It seems to be a subject that a large number of people are interested in and have an opinion on, no matter what level of research they have conducted. As it is such a pivotal matter spawning an ideology – the religion of Christianity – based on the life of one Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus, the anointed Messiah/Christos/Saviour, we will survey the subject comprehensively, attempting to cover the pertinent facts. There is much we can glean from the Bible and secular sources in answering these questions. Those who have studied the subject will recognise some or more of what we will cover and hopefully, may be interestingly surprised from additional information they might not have been aware until now. 

As the identity of the nations in our modern world and the prophecies attached to them is the single biggest proof that the Bible is not just any other book, but a Book apart; so to is the identifying of when exactly in history the Messiah lived, the foundational proof, that someone lived who was not just any other man, but a man apart – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

We learn when Christ began his ministry from Luke 3:1-2, 23 ESV:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea [from 26 to 36/37 CE], and Herod [Antipas, son of Herod the Great] being tetrarch of Galilee [from 4 BCE to 39 CE], and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis [4 BCE – 34 CE], and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas… Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age

Christ was about thirty (or as we will discover in his 30th year), when he started his ministry – baptised by his cousin, John the Baptist – in the fifteenth year of Emperor Tiberius. Tiberius was appointed co-regent with Augustus on July 1st in 11 CE. Fifteen years later is 26 CE. Pontius Pilate began his governorship of Judea in 26 CE. There is no debate on this, though there is on when he either left office (or died) in either 36 or 37 CE. 

If Christ began his ministry in 26 CE: first, how long was his ministry; second, what year did He die; and third, which year was He born? During the course of his ministry, three Passovers are directly mentioned in John 2:13, 6:4 and His final one in 11:55-57, 12:1. Thus we know Christ’s ministry was at least two years long. Many scholars agree that there is a Passover account missing between John chapters two and six, to fit in all the events in the gospels. This missing Passover is indirectly mentioned in John 5:1. The Passovers during Christ’s ministry would be in the years 27, 28, 29 CE and the fourth Passover would fall in the year 30 CE.

There is considerable physical evidence to investigate in confirming the year of Christ’s execution, though first there are a number of spiritual or supernatural aspects to consider.

The Jerusalem Talmud recounts: ‘Forty years [beginning in 30 CE] before the destruction of the Temple [in 70 CE], [1] the western light went out, [2] the crimson thread remained crimson, and [3] the lot for the Lord always came up in the left hand. [4] They would close the gates of the Temple by night and get up in the morning and find them wide open.’ The Babylonian Talmud corroborates: ‘During the last forty years before the destruction of the Temple the lot (‘For the Lord’) did not come up in the right hand; nor did the crimson-colored strap become white; nor did the western most light shine; and the doors of the Hekel [Temple] would open by themselves.’

On the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) was a random choosing of a ‘lot’. As already discussed, this determined which of two goats would be ‘for the Lord’ and which goat would be the ‘Azazel’ or scapegoat – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Ark of God. For the two hundred years leading up to 30 CE, when the High Priest picked one of two stones, he would select either a black stone or a white stone by chance. Sensationally for forty years in a row, the High Priest always picked the black stone. 

‘The odds against this happening are astronomical (2 to the 40th power). In other words, the chances of this occurring are 1 in approximately 1,099,511,627,776 – or over one trillion to one.’ This was considered a dire omen, portraying a significant change in the ritual. The transition from the Old Covenant, lasting forty years had begun, unbeknown to the Priesthood.

A crimson strip or cloth was tied to the Azazel goat. Some of the red cloth was removed from the goat and tied to the Temple door. Every year the red cloth on the Temple door turned white to signify the atonement of another Yom Kippur was acceptable to the Eternal. This event happened without fail until 30 CE when from then on until the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, the cloth remained crimson, never again turning white. Sin of the nation was represented by the colour red for blood and placed on the Azazel goat; the goat’s death removed the sins of the people. Sins were not being forgiven anymore, or made white, through the Old Covenant – Article; The Sabbath Secrecy

Isaiah 1:18

English Standard Version

“Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.”

Christ was now the only Saviour and redeemer. The continual sacrifice of animal’s blood was now of no effect. Atonement and reconciliation with the Father was through His son and His shed blood, sacrificed once, forgiveness offered to all – Hebrews 10:11-12.

It is recorded by the leader of the Jewish community of the time, Rabban Yohanan Ben Zakkai, that the Temple doors swung open every night of their own accord, for forty straight years beginning in 30 CE. Symbolically, the doors were opening so that all may now enter the Temple, even to its innermost holy section. The Almighty’s presence had visibly departed from the Temple. Access was no longer just for High Priests alone, but the doors swung open so that all can enter the Eternal’s house of worship.

The seven branched candle stick or Menorah had the most important lamp of the Temple go out repeatedly, no matter what. Every single night for forty years – over 12,500 nights in a row – the main light of the Temple lamp stand went out of its own accord; regardless what attempts and precautions the priests took to safeguard against it occurring. 

The Significance of the Year CE 30, Earnest Martin, 1994:

‘In fact, we are told in the Talmud that at dusk the lamps that were unlit in the daytime (the middle four lamps remained unlit, while the two eastern lamps normally stayed lit during the day) were to be re-lit from the flames of the western lamp (which was a lamp that was supposed to stay lit all the time – it was like the ‘eternal’ flame that we see today in some national monuments)… 

This ‘western lamp’ was to be kept lit at all times. For that reason, the priests kept extra reservoirs of olive oil and other implements in ready supply to make sure that the ‘western lamp’ (under all circumstances) would stay lit. But what happened in the forty years from the very year Messiah said the physical Temple would be destroyed? Every night for forty years the western lamp went out, and this in spite of the priests each evening preparing in a special way the western lamp so that it would remain constantly burning all night!’

The chances of the main lamp going out every night is as amazing as the preceding three miraculous occurrences. There is really no other way to explain them all, other than a preternatural origin. The light of the Menorah, symbolic of the presence of the Eternal was clearly removed. This phenomenon began 30 CE, lasting until the Temple’s destruction in 70 CE. Exactly forty years. This period of time in the Bible is synonymous with periods of testing and trial – of the Almighty building character in a person or people. For example the forty years the Israelites spent wandering in the Sinai wilderness and the forty days Christ fasted and was tested by the Devil. Forty is comprised of four times ten. The number four being representative of the Creator – as a founder, builder, designer and moulder – and ten, the number of complete or perfect judgement.

The Messiah predicted trials and trouble for Judea in Luke 23:28-31, ESV: 

‘But turning to them Jesus said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us’, and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

The Apostle John records the Jews rebuttal to Jesus’ statement: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” They said: “Forty and six years was this temple in building, and will thou rear it up in three days?” – John 2:19-20, KJV. Their statement is significant for the Temple was still under construction and was not completed until 64 CE and then ironically, destroyed some six years later. Christ predicted the Temple’s destruction.

Matthew 24:1-2

English Standard Version

‘Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

On August 10th, in 70 CE, the 9th of Av on the Hebrew Calendar, the very day when the King of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar II burned the first Temple – originally built by King Solomon – in 586 BCE, the Temple, would you believe was burned again. The son of Roman Emperor Vespasian, Titus, took the city of Jerusalem and put it to the torch, in the process destroying the Temple. 

The temple work had been begun by Herod the Great in the eighteenth year of his reign in 19 BCE. Counting forty-six years forward from 19 BCE brings us to the year 27 CE. Christ was in Jerusalem for the observance of the first Passover of His ministry when this discussion occurred – John 2:13. As John records three other Passovers observed by Christ during His ministry, then His death was at least three years later, during the Passover of 30 CE.

The Messiah arrived in Bethany six days before the Passover – John 12:1. This, as it turns out is pivotal information in the last week of Christ’s life. Passover is the day the lambs were killed – Mark 14:1, 12, Luke 22:1, 7 – and it was on the 14th day of the first month of Abib or Nisan every year – Exodus 12:6, Leviticus 23:5. The actual day of the 14th alternates each year on the Gregorian calendar. Within the debate and confusion surrounding the death of the Messiah are three main areas of argument.

First, what year did Christ die? Second, which day of the week did Christ die? Third, the day Christ died; was it the 14th of Abib, the day of the Passover, or the 15th of Abib, the first day of the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread? The first day, the 15th and the last day, the 21st were both holy Sabbaths or high days. Where rest and convocation were commanded, similar to the weekly Sabbath – Leviticus 23:3, 7.

The most popular alternative year proposed by many researchers, apart from 30 CE is 33 CE. The remarkable mind of Sir Isaac Newton as well as being a scientific genius was an enthusiastic biblical prophecy scholar, concluded it was 34 CE. Yet apparently, the only years which had a Friday fall on the 14th of Abib, during the years 22 to 36 CE were the years 26, 33 and 36 CE. The first is too early and the last, too late. Those that espouse 33 CE, advocate a Friday crucifixion on the 14th. In the year Christ was crucified, the 14th day of Abib came six days after He arrived in Bethany. If we count six days back from a Friday, we arrive at Saturday the preceding week. Christ and many other Jews would have violated the traditional Sabbath observance by making such a long journey on that day – a distance of about eighteen miles from Jericho – Matthew 20:17, 29. Though Christ was often found in violation of the man made precepts surrounding Sabbath observance – Mark 2:27, John 5:18.

Rather, on the 8th of Abib a Thursday, Christ and the disciples arrived in Bethany. The next day they travelled the short two miles into Jerusalem, on Friday the 9th of Abib – John 12:12. 

John 11:18

English Standard Version

‘Bethany was near Jerusalem, about two miles off…’

It was on this day, the Preparation for the Sabbath that the Messiah visited the Temple and became angry when he saw business being conducted within the Temple compound. 

Matthew 21:12-15

English Standard Version

‘And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.” And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them. But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying out in the temple, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were indignant…’

Christ left Jerusalem and returned to Bethany and in the morning travelled back to Jerusalem on the seventh day, the 10th of Abib – Matthew 21:17-18. Christ re-visits the Temple, where He is challenged by the chief priest and elders, debating with them. Christ quotes Psalm 118:22, ESV: “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.” He being the chief corner stone of his Fathers Holy Temple, standing in front of them all in their Temple to His very own Father – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. The 10th of Abib is significant and a moving coincidence in that it was not just the Sabbath day that year; for in ancient Israel the Passover lamb which was slain and eaten on the 14th, was to be selected on the 10th of Abib – Exodus 12:1-10. Christ presented Himself within the Temple, which He had cleansed the day before. He was the very fulfilment of the Passover lamb’s ritual and symbolism every year – Ezra 6:19-20, Ezekiel 45:21. 

Matthew chapters twenty-one to twenty-five, record the parables spoken to the public at the Temple and then the private teaching he gave the disciples on the Mount of Olives the following day. Though it doesn’t state again, their travelling back to Bethany, it is apparent that they do – Matthew 26:6. Thus, the day spent with the disciples was the first day of the week, a Sunday the 11th of Abib. It is then in Matthew 26:2, ESV, that Christ says: “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified” – Mark 14:1. This would have been Monday the 12th of Abib. Christ and the disciples were resting in Bethany while at the home of Simon the leper. It was here that a woman poured very expensive ointment or oil over the Messiah’s head; symbolic of his anointing and sealing for the important role He was about to fulfil in two days time.

An important two verses in Matthew 26:17-18, tell us two key pieces of information. First, the disciples ask Christ where to prepare for Christ to eat the Passover in Jerusalem. Second, it is on the day after the 12th of Abib, that is Tuesday the 13th of Abib. Yet it can be referred to as the first of the Unleaveneds – according to one researcher – even though the first day of Unleavened Bread is the 15th of the first month, not the 13th. Passover is the 14th and precedes the first day of Unleavened Bread on the 15th. Unleavened Bread is not the Passover and Passover is not Unleavened Bread. They are two different observances on two different days, one following the other, with the 15th day being a Holy day as is the 21st of Abib. Saying that, the seven days of the Unleavened Bread festival, from the 15th to the 21st of the first month and the preceding day of Passover on the 14th, also became known collectively as the Passover, and included all eight days. 

As the Passover had not yet arrived, we know it is the 13th day that the disciples are enquiring, not the 15th. The Passover lambs being slaughtered and prepared on the 14th was a huge undertaking at that time – with over one hundred thousand lambs – so the preparation of de-leavening ones house and personal property, by throwing out all products that had leavening agents in them or yeast was performed on the 13th, so as to ease the burden on the busy Passover day. Hence, as the term Passover could be applied to just the 14th day, or all eight days, so too, did the preparatory day before the feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover, become included in the Unleavened Bread festival season, as one of the ‘Unleaveneds.’

In Matthew 12:38-40 ESV, the sign of the authenticity of the Messiah was his resurrection from the dead and the fact he would be dead and buried three days, including mornings or sunrises and nights, including evenings or sunsets: ‘Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.” But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”

Jewish reckoning counted a part of a day as a whole day and counted inclusively (as opposed to exclusively as is done in the West). That is, 1, 2 and 3 would be three days, whereas we would count three from day number one, arriving at 1, 2, 3 and 4. Many people put credence in an inclusive count so that they can support a Friday as the day of the crucifixion. By doing this, they are then saying that Christ did not really mean three days and three nights, as in a literal period of three times twenty-four hours, equalling seventy-two hours. 

Those that present a Friday and some a Thursday, are advocating that the Messiah was merely using a figure of speech. Yet a Friday to Sunday scenario is barely twenty-seven hours – from the time of Christ’s death at 3pm and His resurrection between 3am and 6am – and Thursday to Sunday is only fifty-one hours. Both fall well short and would seemingly cast serious doubt on the Messiah’s credentials and validity of His prophecy. Friday is a stretch too far, though Thursday could be argued to satisfy inclusive counting. This still leaves the plain words by Christ, of actually ‘three days and three nights’ – refer Addendum

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:4, ESV: “… that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.” See also Matthew 17:23 and Luke 9:22. The author of Mark words it slightly differently in Mark 9:31, ESV: ‘for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him. And when he is killed, after three days he will rise.” We will discover that Christ was resurrected both after and on the third day – there isn’t a contradiction.

During the years 22 to 36 CE there are no years where the 14th of Abib falls on a Thursday, so this argument is untenable. The years that the 14th of Abib, or Passover fell on a Wednesday, include the 23, 24, 27 and 30 CE. The first three are too early and this leaves only 30 CE as a credible option. This would mean Christ did enter Bethany on Thursday the 8th of Abib as presented – six days before the Passover that year.

There is a further point regarding the Hebrew or Jewish calendar that many not conversant with Judaism or the Jewish festivals would be totally unaware and hence their calculations on Christ’s final Passover week would be in error. The Hebrew calendar is based on the New Moon and this is the 1st day of a month. The 14/15th day would be the mid-point and when the Moon is full; as a lunar month is not quite 30 days, but 29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes and 2.8 seconds long. 

Passover is easy to calculate as it is the first full Moon on or after the vernal or spring equinox – approximately March 21st each year – when the hours of daylight equal those of the dark, with twelve hours of light and twelve hours of dark. Originally, the reliable and confirmed sighting of the new Moon was the basis of calculating a new month, but gradually over hundreds of years – after the Temple’s destruction in 70 CE – it became a fixed system, based on predetermined rules and calculations still used today – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy

It was the responsibility of the Great Sanhedrin, a rabbinic council specifically appointing three members that would meet on the 29th of every month and receive witnesses to confirm the new Moon and new month. The Babylonian rabbi Samuel of Nehardea, a great astronomer, developed the necessary calculations. Between 330 and 365 CE, the finalising of the fixed Hebrew calendar was completed by Samuel’s son and successor as Nasi of the Sanhedrin, Hillel II. The rules adopted were only made known much later in writing during the ninth century.

The Hebrew calendar is complicated to a degree, as it requires aligning the solar year of 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 46 seconds, with the lunar year of 12 months of 29.53059 days; for the twelve lunar months are about 12 days shorter than the solar year. The Jews, in order to maintain synchronicity have added an extra month every seven years in a nineteen year time cycle. Which has Biblical basis in keeping the seasons correct for those people who keep the seven annual Festivals and the Holy Days attached to them, of which Passover and Unleavened Bread are two of them. 

What is not biblical are the creation of four postponement rules which can delay the beginning of the secular year on the 1st of Tishri, the seventh month. Whereas the 1st of Abib or Nisan the first month, is the first day of the religious calendar and when the year began as decreed by the Creator. The 1st of Tishri, coinciding with the Feast of Trumpets, can be delayed by one or two days and this has a knock on affect for the 1st of Abib and importantly the 14th and 15th day of Abib, the Passover and first Day of Unleavened Bread.

The rules are: 1. If Rosh Hashanah (Trumpets) falls on Sunday, Wednesday or Friday, it is postponed by a day. 2. If the new moon appears after noon, Rosh Hashanah is postponed by a day. If the new day is one of those in Rule 1, Rosh Hashanah gets postponed by two days. 3. In a regular 12 month year, that is one that isn’t embolismic (containing 13 months), if the new moon of Tishri appears more than 20 seconds past 3:11 AM on a Tuesday, Rosh Hashanah is postponed by two days. 4. In years that follow an embolismic year, if the new moon appears on a Monday more than 43 seconds past 9:32 AM – then Rosh Hashanah is postponed by a day. 

As said previously, the calculation for the 1st of Abib is simple and there is no justification for these added, non-biblical rules. What does this mean for the Passovers leading up to Christ’s ministry, during and beyond? It means that all researchers are basing dates on a calendar using postponements. During the apostolic era and the life of Christ, these postponement rules did not exist, thus the Molad would have been correct. The molad is the timing of the moon’s ‘birth’. There is a point during the moon’s orbit, when it is positioned directly between the earth and the sun; making it invisible to anyone looking from the earth’s surface. The Molad occurs when the moon has moved far enough away from this position, so that a thin crescent of its illuminated surface is visible. This marks the start of a new lunar month.

With this in mind, we can now focus on the dates without postponements; for those calculated with them are completely redundant, as they were not in existence. I appreciate that there will be readers who keep the seven annual festivals, whether they are Jewish, particular Christians of a certain Church community or independent believers. It is important for them to appreciate that the postponement rules are not needed to calculate the Holy Days and when to observe them. 

Let’s look at the two key years, 30 and 33 CE and also add in 31 CE. The year 31 CE was put forth by a leader of a high profile group that some of our readers will be familiar. It may be interesting for them to see the lunar* evidence in regard to the year 31 CE.

In the Roman Year 30 and Jewish Year 3790: the Molad for the 1st of Nisan was March 22, at 21.55. Nisan 1 was a Thursday (March 23d, the Day of the Equinox) and Nisan 14 was a Wednesday on April 5th. Interestingly, no postponements applicable even if applied.

In the Roman Year 31 and Jewish Year 3791: the Molad for the 1st Nisan was March 12, at 06.43. Nisan 1 was a Monday (March 12th) and Nisan 14 was a Sunday on March 25th, 2 days after the equinox. Postponements if applied retrospectively mean one day later, so that Nisan 14 would fall on Monday March 26th. Neither* tally with the day of Wednesday proposed for a 31 CE crucifixion.

In the Roman Year 33 and Jewish year 3793: the Molad for the 1st of Nisan was March 19, at 13.05. Nisan 1 was a Thursday (March 19th) and Nisan 14 was a Wednesday on April 1st, 9 days after the equinox. Postponements if applied retrospectively mean a two day delay, so that Nisan 14 would fall conveniently on Friday April 3rd. Those labouring under this inaccuracy have put forward an argument for a Friday to Sunday death and resurrection scenario that never happened, nor is it sustainable from biblical or secular evidence – refer Addendum. Now, critical scriptures supporting a Wednesday Passover and a Saturday resurrection. 

Matthew 27:57-58

English Standard Version

‘When it was evening [G3798 – opsios: late afternoon, early evening before sunset: ‘3-6pm or from 6pm to the beginning of night’], there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus. He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him [late on Wednesday, the Passover and Preparation for the Holy Day].’

Mark 16:1-2

English Standard version

‘When the Sabbath was past [Thursday, the first Holy day of Unleavened Bread], Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, [on Friday, between the Annual Holy Day and the weekly Sabbath] so that they might go and anoint him. And very early [G4404 – proi: ‘early, at dawn, day-break, in the morning’ during the fourth watch – between 3-6am] on the first day of the week [Sunday], when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.’

Luke 24:1

English Standard Version

‘But on the first day [Sunday] of the week, at early dawn [G3722 – orthros: very early in the morning at ‘early dawn’ or ‘daybreak’], they [Mary Magdalene and her female friend] went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared.’

The Hebrew Calendar sans postponements; the sign of the Messiah; and His entry six days prior to the Passover; all support a Wednesday crucifixion and severely undermine a Thursday or Friday crucifixion, in either 30, 31 or 33 CE. Between 27 and 34 CE the only years that the 14th of Abib fell on a Wednesday… were the years 30 and 33 CE. 

The beginning of Christ’s ministry; the Temple in year forty-six of its construction at the time of the Messiah’s first Passover of His ministry; and the miraculous, supernatural events with regard to the Temple and Priesthood beginning in 30 CE for exactly forty years; all show the year of Christ’s death as 30 CE and not 33 CE. 

Christ died in 30 CE on Wednesday April 5th at 3pm and was resurrected in the pre-dawn period between night and morning as the Sabbath was ending on the 8th April or 17th Abib, just prior to when Sunday morning began on the 9th April, or 18th Abib. The Marys had just missed the risen Christ as they approached His tomb very early Sunday morning around 5 or 6 am – during the 4th watch of the night between 3 and 6 am. Christ had been dead and buried for three days and three nights as He had predicted. From 6pm Saturday at the very earliest he was resurrected, though more likely for various reasons* during the 3rd watch of the night, which lasted from 12 midnight to 3 am. 

This complies with the scripture that He would be risen after the third day (Mark 8:31), if it was later Saturday evening, but well before the Marys arrived. It also fulfils that He was risen on the third day (Luke 18:33), as the fourth day did not begin until sunrise about 6am; and so it was still the Sabbath or the third day of his burial in the ‘heart of the earth’ (Matthew 12:40) until day break.

The question of whether the Messiah was killed on the 14th day and Passover or on the 15th day of Abib and the First Holy Day of Unleavened Bread, and whether his final meal with the disciples was the Passover or a last supper are clouded it would seem, by the fact that the Gospel of John appears to contradict the other gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke in certain points surrounding Christ’s last week. These supposed discrepancies dissolve somewhat, when we understand the lost truth about a new day beginning at sunrise, as opposed to the Jewish reckoning using sunset and diffuse entirely, when we recognise that Christ died on the Passover and not the following Holy Day – refer articles: The Calendar Conspiracy; and The Sabbath Secrecy

Christ is the Passover Lamb (1 Corinthians 5:7) and so He was sacrificed at the same time that thousands of lambs and kids (young goats) were being slaughtered, ready for the evening commemoration and observance. The killing of so many lambs required an early start at around Noon and so by three o’clock when Christ died, this would have been well into the ritual slaughter that needed to be completed by sunset at the latest. Passover was kept from sunset and the Jews stayed up till midnight* in remembrance of the death angel passing over the Israelite homes sparing their firstborn and killing the Egyptian first born instead. Christ’s shed blood that very day, now was the covering protection which had been typified by the blood on the sons of Jacob’s doorposts and lintels the night before the Exodus.

John described their last meal together with Christ as before the Feast of Passover (John 13:1) and that the Passover would follow the death of the Messiah (John 19:14). During the meal (Matthew 26:26-29), the Passover as an event and the Passover lamb to be eaten were not brought up in any of the four gospel accounts. It was just a regular meal the night before. 

What was mentioned, was the institution of bread and wine in place of the traditional Passover that was now, from the very next day not required and had been replaced by Christ’s imminent sacrifice. 

John 18:28

English Standard Version

‘Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas [the High Priest] to the governor’s headquarters [Pontius Pilate]. It was early morning [morning of the 14th, Passover]. They themselves did not enter the governor’s headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover.’

Often forgotten by those who advocate a 15th of Abib date for Christ’s death is the fact that the Jews conspiring to kill Christ were in a hurry. Here was Christ’s popularity at an all time high and they were looking to swiftly act as they did not wish to have Him condemned by trial and executed during the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread. Thus it stands to reason that they would not have tried him on the 14th and dare to kill Him on the 15th, a high Sabbath and Holy Day. In fact, Joseph of Arimathea was rushing to obtain Christ’s body for burial before dark and the Holy Day beginning the next morning. A quick trial on the night of the 13th, Tuesday April 4th was the very latest Christ’s opponents could accuse and convict Him and so they did. 

Mark 14:1-2

English Standard Version

‘It was now two days before [12th of Abib – Monday 3rd April] the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to arrest him by stealth and kill him, 2 for they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar from the people”.’

Christ was killed on the Passover. The Passover day is not a holy day – but is a preparation day for the first Holy Day of Unleavened Bread. The following day was the 15th of Abib, Thursday 6th April and it was the First Day of Unleavened Bread. It was followed by the weekly Sabbath, two days later on April 8th, that year – Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54.

John 19:31

English Standard Version

‘Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high [or Holy] day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away.’

Joseph of Arimathea wasted no time in asking for Christ’s body for it was the day of the Passover, the preparation for the next day, the first Holy Day of Unleavened Bread – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. It was late afternoon, between 4pm to 6pm heading towards sunset and Joseph wanted to bury his great nephew before dark, as he could not bury Him the next day during daylight on the Holy Day, according to biblical law – Deuteronomy 21:23.

The evidence thus far, shows that Christ began his ministry sometime in 26 CE and died in 30 CE on Wednesday 3rd April, the Passover of the 14th of Abib. More crucially, Christ was resurrected three days later on the Sabbath of the 17th Abib, Saturday the 6th of April, somewhere between 6pm and 6am and likely between midnight and 3am – refer Addendum. We will now work backwards to ascertain when He was born and thus how long Christ’s ministry lasted.

Matthew 2:16-20

English Standard version

‘Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under…  But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, “Rise, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child’s life are dead.”

Returning to Matthew chapter two. These verses tell us two important details. First, Christ had been born a couple of years earlier and was a toddler, He was not a new born baby; second, King Herod was still very much alive two years after Christ’s birth – Matthew 2:1, Luke 1:5. We arrive at a substantial debate, surrounding when Herod died. Whether it was in 4 or 1 BCE and it is similar to the sizeable argument regarding when Christ died either in 30 or 33 CE. As we have investigated and solved the year of Christ’s death, we can do the same regarding his birth.

The 4 BCE theory and therefore the 6 to 4 BCE parameter for the year of Christ’s birth, has been dominant because Josephus records Herod reigning for thirty-seven years from the time of his appointment by Rome in 40 BCE and thirty-four years from his conquest of Jerusalem in 37 BCE in the Antiquities of the Jews. Latterly, scholarship has cast serious doubt on this date, with growing support for a 1 BCE date and hence the birth of Christ falling in the 3 to 2 BCE time frame.

Herod traveled to Samosata in 38 BCE to aid Mark Antony in his campaign against Antiochus. Antiochus surrendered and Herod returned to Judea the same year, arriving in the winter of 38 and 37 BCE. He began his five month siege of Jerusalem shortly thereafter, in the month of Shevat, the eleventh month, once the worst of winter had passed. Jerusalem was taken in Sivan the third month, in late spring of 37 BCE. Herod’s first year of reign from his conquest of Jerusalem is counted as the spring of 37 BCE.

The reign over Samaria and Judea of Herod’s son and successor Archelaus began in 4 BCE based on the fact that he was deposed by Caesar, in the tenth year of his reign in 6 CE. In addition, Herod the Great’s son and successor Herod Antipas, who ruled over Galilee until 39 CE and who had ordered the execution of John the Baptist (Mark 6:14–29) also had a supporting role in Christ’s trial – Luke 23:7–12. There are coins which make reference to the 43rd year of his rule, placing its beginning in 4 BCE at the latest. Herod initially named Archelaus his heir in 4 BCE and at this point Archelaus may have assumed royal authority under his father. Herod then revoked his will, naming Antipas his heir instead. When he was ill and dying, Herod once again named Archelaus his heir. Thus, Archelaus would not have legally been king until after Herod’s death in early 1 BCE, but may have chosen to reckon his reign from a little over two years earlier in late 4 BCE when he first replaced Antipas as Herod’s heir.

Josephus provides clear statements regarding the authority and honour Herod had granted his sons during the last years of his life, short of the crown itself. It follows that all three of his successor sons chose to antedate their reigns to the time when they were granted a measure of royal authority; yet while their father was still alive. Co-ruling and co-regency are not an uncommon status. It was quite a common practice when an ageing or ill ruler desired a smooth transition for his heir. Although they were not officially recognised by Rome as ethnarchs or tetrarchs until after Herod’s death, the three sons nevertheless reckoned their reigns from 4 BCE and hence the confusion over Herod’s death and the assumption he too died in the year 4 BCE.

Josephus informs us that King Herod died shortly before a Passover (March/April) and brackets Herod’s death by a nebulous ‘fast’ and the Passover. He says there was a lunar eclipse on the night of the fast – the only eclipse mentioned in the entire corpus of his work. Most assume the fast mentioned is that associated with Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement on the 10th day of the 7th month of Tishri in September/October. However, there is too long a gap between this fast and Passover, some five to six months later. There is an alternative fast in Judaism a month prior to the Passover and that is related to the Feast of Purim and the fast of Esther on the 14th and 15th of Adar, the 12th month during February or March – Esther 9:31. Some favour this fast to Atonement, believing it logical that Purim, a Full Moon feast, is the last Full Moon Herod saw; particularly as Haman and Herod, both of related Edomite stock, may have both died at the same Full Moon. The problem with this choice is the lack of a lunar eclipse at this time, between 4 and 1 BCE.

Four Lunar eclipses occurred in the likely time frame towards the end of Herod’s life. They were on September 15, 5 BCE; March 12/13, 4 BCE; January 10, 1 BCE; and December 29, 1 BCE. The first eclipse fits Yom Kippur nearly. It was a total eclipse that became noticeable several hours after sunset, but it is widely regarded as too early and is stretching a viable chronology. 

Those scholars who date Herod’s death in 4 BCE, cite as proof, the traditional and favoured 4 BCE eclipse of March 11 (March 12/13, Julian Calendar) in that year; placing Christ’s birth in 6 or 5 BCE. This eclipse is either too close to Passover, or was the Feast of Purim that year. Even so, this was a minor partial eclipse of thirty-six percent magnitude, that commenced after midnight and was only visible very late that night in Judea, attracting the attention of very few people that early in the morning. It hardly seems a candidate even for being remembered or noted by Josephus and is the least likely of the four. The 1 BCE dates also do not fit with a fast on Atonement and must relate to a different fast. 

Regarding the December 29 eclipse, the moon though partial did rise at 53 percent magnitude, with its most visible aspect over by 6pm. There is doubt as to how visible it may have been. It is significant in that it occurred two days before the change of eras. If correct, it would date Herod’s death into the first year of the current era, four years after the date traditionally taught by biblical scholars and academics.

Daniel Bisson in a forum on Herod’s Death, Jesus’ Birth and a Lunar Eclipse in 2017 stated: 

‘The lunar eclipse was on Thursday Dec 29 1 BC, ‘a fast day that very day’ – Thursday and Monday being public fast days as was the practice of observant Jews of that era, and also those days were when there were public readings from the Torah, of which on that eclipse day Matthius the high priest was unable to officiate. Fasting was during daylight and was over at the first sighting of stars at dusk – at the time when the December 29 1 BC partial eclipse was occurring, it was patently witnessed by many citizens – Antiquities, Book 17, Chapter 6.4. Herod the Great died aged 70 after this eclipse and further events that took place concerning his health and governing, shortly before Passover in A.D. 1 – War, Book 1, Chapter 33.1; Antiquities, Book 17, Chapter 8.1.’

This eclipse with the earlier one in 1 BCE fits the criteria of an eclipse not long before the Passover. The partial lunar eclipse of December 27 (December 29, Julian calendar) that year could have been observable in Jerusalem but not necessarily as a conspicuous event. One commentator in the same forum states: ‘According to calculations based on Oppolzer’s Canon of Eclipses (page 343), the moon was passing out of the earth’s shadow as twilight fell in Jerusalem, and by the time it was dark the moon was again shining full. On the other hand, it is not included in the comprehensive listing by Manfred Kudlek and Erich Mickler (Solar and Lunar Eclipses of the Ancient Near East From 3000 BC to 0 With Maps, Volume I, 1971). Thus the extent to which that eclipse was visible in Jerusalem or whether it was visible at all is uncertain at this point in history.’ 

The one that stands out, is the late night third lunar eclipse which occurred in the early hours of January 8, 1 BCE (January 10, Julian calendar). This was a total eclipse in which the moon was blacked out for one hour and forty-one minutes. It would have been noticed by anyone who was awake, even with an overcast sky. 

Even though more than one eclipse occurred shortly before a Passover, based on information available today, it seems that the one most likely to have been noted was that one on January 10, 1 BCE. Interestingly, a report by United Press International stated: “Herod actually died in 1 B.C. rather than in 4 B.C. as commonly believed. The issue is pivotal because New Testament records make it clear that Herod was alive when Jesus was born.” Instead of earlier dates, the news service said the “research indicates that Jesus was born in the summer or early autumn of 3 B.C. or 2 B.C.” 

The 4 BCE eclipse really cannot be historically sustained, regardless of what Josephus has or hasn’t recorded regarding Herod’s reign ending in 4 BCE. Too much stock is placed on his accounts generally – which have repeatedly been found to be unreliable – as he is the principal source for this era, which is a detail that advises caution in itself. 

We rely on Josephus, when he states that Herod was seventy years old at his death and also that Herod was twenty-five years old when given the government of Galilee by his father Antipas, who in turn, had received the government of Judea in the spring of 46 BCE from Julius Caesar following his Alexandrian War in 48 BCE. If so, this would place Herod’s birth in 71 BCE making 1 BCE his seventieth year and therefore, the precise year of his death. Andrew Steinmann in, When did Herod the Great Reign, addresses sixteen synchronisations which correlate with a 1 BCE death for King Herod. The weight of considerable evidence for 1 BCE, against just Josephus saying Herod died in 4 BCE cannot be ignored; just as we could not ignore the body of evidence for a 30 CE crucifixion as opposed to the weakness of the argument for a 33 CE death for the Messiah.

We have addressed Herod’s death which is approximately two years after the birth of Christ. A 1 CE death would correlate to 2 BCE and a 1 BCE death of Herod to Christ being born in 3 BCE. Please note that in astronomy there is a year zero (or 0) and it is actually referring to 1 BCE. Then, -1 represents 2 BCE; -2 is 3 BCE and -3 is 4 BCE and so forth. So, the year 3 BCE is actually -2 in astronomical terms.

The answer is somewhat clinched for all who uphold a plenary inspiration of the Bible and the disciple Luke’s attestation that Jesus was on the cusp of his thirtieth birthday at his baptism in 26 CE – the fifteenth year of Emperor Tiberius. As Christ was still twenty-nine and not yet thirty, it is the age of twenty-nine we deduct from 26 CE, giving a year of birth of 3 BCE. This categorically places Herod’s death sometime thereafter – that is, two years later – precluding 4 BCE as a viable possibility and highlighting the year 1 BCE as his year of death at the confirmed age of seventy.

Gerard Gertoux comments on the same forum in 2016 – emphasis mine: 

‘The first coin minted by Herod the Great after his victory over Jerusalem in July 37 BCE is dated Year 3… Given that Jewish reigns began on 1st Nisan (April), Year 3 was from April 36 BCE to March 35 BCE. Consequently his Year 37 was from April 2 BCE to March 1 BCE. According to Josephus, Herod the Great reigned 37 years and died (on 2 Shebat according to Megillat Taanit 23a) after a day the Jews observed as a fast (on 10 Tebeth according to 2 Kings 25:1, Zechariah 8:19) [Tevet the 10th month of the Hebrew calendar, corresponding to December/January] and just before an eclipse of the moon (Jewish Antiquities XVII:166-167,213). Between 5 BCE and 1 CE there was only one full lunar eclipse, which is dated 9/10 January 1 BCE. In 1 BCE, 10 Tebeth was 5 January and 2 Shebat was 26 January.’*

Gertoux has provided confirmation of which lunar eclipse and fast preceded Herod’s death, as well as the day of Herod’s death.

Gertoux: ‘The first coin minted by Herod Philip after his father’s death on 26 January 1 BCE is dated year 3… Consequently his Year 3 was from April 1 BCE to March 1 CE. In the decree breviarium totius imperii published in Rome on Monday 12 May 2 BCE, Caesar Augustus announced his registration called the “inventory of the world”: This census – the first  took place when Quirinius was governor of Syria (3-2 BCE) and everyone (in Judea) went to his own town to be registered (Luke 2:1-2) [with the] birth of Jesus in Bethlehem on Monday 29 September 2 BCE. Judas the Galilean rebelled during the (second) registration of Herod Archelaus’ kingdom (Acts 5:37) of Quirinius in 7 CE (Jewish War II:117-118,433). See: Herod the Great and Jesus Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence.’

Christ’s father Joseph and his mother Mary, were only travelling while Mary was heavily pregnant to satisfy the census decree. The birth date given by Gertoux is slightly inaccurate, though much closer to the truth than what is offered by most on this subject. 

Another commentator on said forum adds the following which complements Gertoux’s post: 

‘I will have to readjust the timeframe for Herod’s death to match “after a day that a fast was observed before an eclipse, before Passover”. Antiquities shows Herod still alive after “And that very night there was an eclipse of the moon”, which was January 10. Herod gathered the heads of the families into the hippodrome (about 4 days total); sought a cure in the baths (about 6 days total), which involved slow travel (about another 6 days); had Antipater killed (add a day); died five days later; was buried (same day)*was mourned by Archelaus for seven days; Archelaus partied (likely 2 days); took the throne (1 day) and addressed the people; the people petitioned him (from 1 to 3 days later); Passover arrived (April 7, 1 B.C.E.)… Herod’s precedent for giving his sons authority just short of the crown itself, before his death. I have come to the same conclusion myself, without having seen confirmation of it anywhere else prior.’

We have deduced the year of the Messiah’s birth and amazingly, further evidence will provide the month and day. We will then know what time of year Christ was about to turn thirty and thus how long exactly his ministry lasted. 

The Magi or wise men as previously mentioned, were in fact from the Israelite Empire of Parthia, who were well aware of the prophecies for the coming Messiah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The sighting of ‘His star’ in Matthew chapter two, came to rest over the place where the child was – notice not a baby. It would seem to be a supernatural sign, an angel or UFO perhaps, for no star moves about in the sky like that. Regardless, there were noticeable astronomical events associated as the Magi reported with Herod, in that they had seen the new king’s ‘star in the East’ – tracing back to their origin in Parthia. 

Today we have computerised data by which we can very accurately determine astronomical events in that time frame, providing vital pieces of the puzzle with regard to the exact dating for the birth of Christ. Particularly, the celestial activity of Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Regulus – the King star: four stars in two pairs in the constellation of Leo, being one of the brightest groupings in the night sky – and Venus, the Queen star, and their various combinations of conjunctions in Leo the Lion, symbolic of the Messiah as the Lion of Judah – Revelation 5:5. 

Celestial signs began with a conjunction between Jupiter and Venus on August 12,* 3 BCE in the eastern sky before sunrise. A month later on September 11, 3 BCE there was a conjunction of Jupiter and the Regulus stars in the eastern sky. Nine months after the Jupiter-Regulus conjunction, there was a very close conjunction of Jupiter and Venus on June 17, 2 BCE in the southwestern sky, which would have been in the direction of Bethlehem from Jerusalem. The first event, heralding the imminent birth of the Messiah, a month later He was born and the third event appears to be a star pointing to Christ’s location when he was at least nine months old.

September 11th was already an auspicious date, before it was chosen for its diabolical undertakings in 2001, this millennia. In 3 BCE, this date was actually the Feast of Trumpets, a Holy Day on the 1st of Tishri the seventh month in the Hebrew calendar. The Feast of Trumpets heralds the second coming of the Son of Man – this would not be a casual coincidence. 

Revelation 10:7

English Standard Version

… but that in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God [the Kingdom of God: repentance, forgiveness, atonement, salvation, eternal life] would be fulfilled, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.’

The day the Messiah was born was the day that the Sun was in Virgo as per the prophecy in Revelation chapter twelve, verse one and two, ESV:

‘And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth.’

Ernest Martin summarises the astronomy and symbolism in this passage – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The giveaway is the word “sign” in vs 1. According to Genesis, the celestial bodies were to be regarded as giving signs (1:14). Some early Jewish opinion included among these “signs” the astronomical associations between the sun, moon, planets, and other constellations (Philo, Op.Mund., 55; Rashi, Commentary, volume I, page 5). There can hardly be a doubt that astronomical “signs” are mentioned in the Book of Revelation (Lange, Commentary, volume X, page 34). 

The essential factor is the identification of the Woman. She is “in heaven” – in the astronomical sense – as the sun and the moon are associated with her. This strongly suggests that the Woman herself is some kind of constellation which the two primary luminaries can traverse. Indeed, the word “sign” used here is the same one used by the ancients to denote the zodiacal constellations (Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, page 1448). And since the sun and the moon are amidst or in line with the Woman, this indicates it must be a constellation located within the normal paths of the sun and the moon. 

The only sign of a Woman which exists along the ecliptic is that of Virgo the Virgin. She occupies, in body form, a space of about 50 degrees along the ecliptic. (The head actually bridges some 10 degrees into the previous sign of Leo and her feet overlap about 10 degrees into the following sign of Libra.) In the period 3 BC the sun entered the head position of the Woman about August 12,* and exited from her feet about October 1st. But the sun more precisely “clothes” the Woman, i.e. covers her mid-body, somewhere between the neck and the middle part of her legs. In that year the sun would have “clothed” the Woman for a 20-day period, from about August 27 to about September 15.

The moon is said to be located “under her feet”. Since the feet of Virgo represent the last 7 degrees of the constellation (in Jesus’ time this was between 185 and 192 degrees along the ecliptic) the moon has to be positioned somewhere within those degrees. But it has to be in that exact location when the sun is mid-bodied to Virgo. In 3 BC these two factors came to precise agreement for a 14 hour period on September 11/12. This relationship began about 6.30 am Palestine time and lasted until around 8.30 pm. This was the only time in the entire year that such a thing could take place. But there is more. If the moon is located under Virgo’s feet at the same time the sun is in the uterine position, the moon has to be in crescent form, i.e. a new moon occasion. It has therefore to be the first day of some lunar month in late summer – the first of Tishri in 3BC – no other month is possible.’

All this striking celestial activity told the wise men of the birth of the promised Redeemer, and so they set out to find Him.

Matthew 2:1-12

English Standard version

‘Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.” 3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him; 4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. 5 They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for so it is written by the prophet: 

“And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.”

7 ‘Then Herod summoned the wise men secretly and ascertained from them what time the star had appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, “Go and search diligently for the child, and when you have found him, bring me word, that I too may come and worship him.” 9 After listening to the king, they went on their way. And behold, the star [G792 – aster: literal or figurative] that they had seen when it rose went before them until it came to rest over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. 11 And going into the house [G3614 – oikia: home, household], they saw the child [G3813 – paidion: little child, infant, male child recently born] with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh. 12 And being warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed to their own country by another way.’

The passage tells us that they came to ‘the house’, not a manger, and saw ‘the child’ as in months old (Greek word paidion), not a ‘newborn baby’ or days old – Greek word brephos. We learn that the Magi did not visit Jesus at the manger on the night of his birth as did the shepherds. They first came to Jerusalem, apparently thinking that in the capital city of Judea they would be able to find out where the new king had been born. After King Herod told them he had been born in Bethlehem, they went there and found him as a child in his house. This explains why Herod, who had consulted with the Magi as to the time when they saw the star in verse seven, determined to kill all the boys under two years old in the Bethlehem area. 

Herod knew that Christ was no longer a baby. The conjunction on June 17, 2 BCE when Christ was nine months old must have been His minimum age. The wise men would have seen it and then travelled at some point from Parthia to Jerusalem. The distance was considerable. If we take modern Tehran, which is a realistic location point within the large** territory ruled by the Israelite Parthians at the time; the journey today, from Tehran to Jerusalem by car is 1,300 miles. It is plausible that Christ was at least a year old or older when the Magi met Him. 

The Parthian Empire was formidable and the only real power which Rome respected and was wary. Augustus Caesar had sent his sons Gaius and Lucius in the year 1 BCE to the region of Parthia to formalize terms with Phraates V ruler of Parthia, on an island on the river Euphrates. The Euphrates was then to remain the boundary** in which the Parthian army were not to cross. 

For those who subscribe to the birth of Christ in the heart of winter, consider that Luke 2:8 speaks of the shepherds near Bethlehem being in the fields watching their flocks at night. Shepherds in Judea did not keep their sheep out at night during the Winter; it was cold and sometimes even snowy, but they were known to keep their flocks in the fields during the Autumn after the end of the Summer harvests. For at that time, the sheep would eat the stalks of grain left over after the harvest; fertilising the ground prior to the late Autumn planting. 

Luke 2:1, explains that when Mary was due to give birth to Christ, she and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem to fulfil their obligation to be counted in the Roman census. They would not travel in the Winter because it would have been a difficult journey. People tended to travel in the Autumn, between the heat of Summer and the cold of Winter. At that time of year, the grain and also some fruit were ripe and travellers were allowed to eat some of the ‘gleanings’ as they passed by – Leviticus 23:22. 

In Luke chapter one, there is the record of the Archangel Gabriel’s announcement to the priest Zechariah that he and his wife Elizabeth, also a Levite, descended from Aaron, would have a son, whom they were to call John. Verse 5 reveals important information and key to determining that Jesus was born in the Autumn (and September) rather than in the winter (and December). The chapter says that Zechariah belonged to the priestly ‘division [KJV: course] of Abijah.’ From the time of David, Levitical priests were organised into twenty-four courses, named after the heads of the priestly families. The courses of service in the Temple began on the 1st of Abib (Nisan 1), spanning the calendar year. The course of Abijah was the eighth course and like each course, occurred twice during the year. In 4 BCE, the year prior to Christ’s birth, the first of those two courses took place during the last week of our month of May.

Zechariah and Elizabeth, who was barren were quite elderly, and had no children and then Gabriel gave them the astonishing news that they would have a son, to be named John. 

Luke 1:14-17; 3:3-4; 1:23-27, 36-44

English Standard Version

14 ‘And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, 15 for he will be great before the Lord. And he must not drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mothers womb

16 And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God, 17 and he will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared.”

3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight…’

We read that when Zechariah finished his service in the Temple and he returned home in early June, Elizabeth became pregnant. In her sixth month of pregnancy, during December, Gabriel spoke to Mary to tell her that she was about to become pregnant with the Son of God. Nine months later would be the month of September.

23 ‘And when his time of service was ended, he went to his home. 24 After these days his wife Elizabeth conceived, and for five months she kept herself hidden… 26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed  to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary… 36 And behold, your relative [G4773 – suggenes: kinsman, cousin, kin, related by blood] Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren… 39 In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, 40 and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. 41 And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb… 44 For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.’

Thus, John the Baptist was born in the Spring of 3 BCE during the month of March and Abib – an Aries. His second cousin Christ, was born six months later during the month of September and Tishri – a Virgo. This is significant, as John the Baptist had lived a reclusive life as typical of all of the Eternal’s prophets, until his ministry began at the age of thirty. There appear to be contradictory statements in the Old Testament regarding when a Levite, descended from Jacob’s third son Levi, also the third son of Leah could begin Levitical duties. The answer is that not all Levites were used in the service of the Eternal and of those that were, some served with the Tabernacle and the transportation of it during the wilderness years and then later when it was located in Jerusalem; while other Levites – descended from Aaron – served directly in the Priesthood and the ceremonies pertaining to the sacrificial system – Article: The Ark of God. It was these Levites who lived from the tithes of the congregation of Israel.

Numbers 4:1-5, 46-49

English Standard Version

‘The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 2 “Take a census of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, by their clans and their fathers’ houses, 3 from thirty years old up to fifty years old, all who can come on duty, to do the work in the tent of meeting. 4 This is the service of the sons of Kohath in the tent of meeting: the most holy things. 5 When the camp is to set out, Aaron and his sons shall go in and take down the veil of the screen and cover the ark of the testimony with it… 46 All those who were listed of the Levites… everyone who could come to do the service of ministry and the service of bearing burdens in the tent of meeting, 48 those listed were 8,580… each one with his task of serving or carrying…’

Notice these verses are describing the Levites not the priests, who are separate. In fact later, the age of thirty was lowered to twenty-five and then again to twenty by King David. In the time of Ezra it was still age twenty. The Levites retired at fifty, as the nature of their role involved lifting, carrying and physical labour.

Numbers 8:22-26

English Standard Version

22 And after that the Levites went in to do their service in the tent of meeting before Aaron and his sons [the priests]… “This applies to the Levites: from twenty-five years old and upward they shall come to do duty in the service of the tent of meeting. 25 And from the age of fifty years they shall withdraw from the duty of the service and serve no more. 26 They minister to their brothers [the sons of Aaron] in the tent of meeting by keeping guard, but they shall do no service…”

1 Chronicles 23:25-28

English Standard Version

25 For David said, “The Lord, the God of Israel, has given rest to his people, and he dwells in Jerusalem forever. 26 And so the Levites no longer need to carry the tabernacle or any of the things for its service.” 27 For by the last words of David the sons of Levi were numbered from twenty years old and upward. 28 For their duty was to assist the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the Lord, having the care of the courts and the chambers, the cleansing of all that is holy, and any work for the service of the house of God.

Ezra 3:8

English Standard Version

‘Now in the second year after their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, in the second month, Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel and Jeshua the son of Jozadak made a beginning [to rebuild the Temple], together with the rest of their kinsmen, the priests and the Levites and all who had come to Jerusalem from the captivity. They appointed the Levites, from twenty years old and upward, to supervise the work of the house of the Lord.’

We are not told when the priests were selected, though we have a clue regarding a Prophets calling.

Ezekiel 1:1-3

English Standard Version

‘In the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, as I was among the exiles by the Chebar canal, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. 2 On the fifth day of the month (it was the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin), 3 the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi [Genesis 22:21], in the land of the Chaldeans by the Chebar canal, and the hand of the Lord was upon him there.’

Ezekiel was in his thirtieth year and nearly thirty when he began his ministry. Even if we subscribed that it was age thirty when Priests were selected, Christ unlike John the Baptist was not from the tribe of Levi but from Judah. Christ was not of the Aaronic Priesthood but rather the Order of Melchizedek – Hebrews 6:20; 7:11. King David, also a Prophet (Acts 2:29-30) became king at age thirty – 2 Samuel 5:4. It was seen as a mark of respect and maturity to select a prophet at age thirty, for the prophet in question and the audience he would address. A man of thirty has a measure of experience, character and humility not found in most younger men and thus has the chance to gain people’s attention and trust more effectively when speaking and teaching.

Luke 1:80, ESV: ‘And the child [John] grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness until the day of his public appearance to Israel.’ We have come full circle back to Luke 3:1-3, ESV: ‘In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar… the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.’ John Began his ministry when he turned twenty-nine, in March 26 CE and approximately six months later in probably mid to late September Christ was baptised, for he had turned twenty-nine too and was in his 30th year – Luke 3:23. 

13 ‘Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. 14 John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” 15 But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. 

16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; 17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

In Luke chapter four we read of Christ’s forty day trial and testing by the Adversary and this would take Christ to late September (early October) in 26 CE and after he had fully turned thirty to begin His ministry. Josephus relates that Pontius Pilate, when he first arrived in Judea, had sent troops to Jerusalem for ‘winter quarters.’ This would place Pilate’s arrival by or in the Autumn of 26 CE, coinciding with the beginning of Christ’s ministry. This would confirm that the first of his four ministry Passovers was in fact in 27 CE.

Therefore, the autumn (or fall) of 26 CE to the spring of 30 CE is a period of three and one half years – 42 months or approximately 1260 days – of which the significance we will now address. In Daniel chapter nine we read of the Seventy Weeks prophecy given to Daniel during the time of the Medo-Persian Empire.

Daniel 9:23-27

English Standard Version

23 ‘At the beginning of your pleas for mercy a word went out, and I have come to tell it to you, for you [Daniel] are greatly loved. Therefore consider the word and understand the vision. 

24 “Seventy weeks [490 years] are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. 25 Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem [symbolic of a spiritual temple composed of saints] to the coming of an anointed one [the Messiah], a prince, there shall be seven weeks [49 years]. 

Then for sixty-two weeks [434 years] it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. 26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one [not the Messiah] shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince [the false Prophet] who is to come shall destroy the city [not Jerusalem of Judah or the Jerusalem of future prophecy, but the capital city in its place in the state of Israel which has the name but a different identity as the capital of Edom] and the sanctuary [the restored physical temple building]. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war [the Great Tribulation]. Desolations are decreed. 

27 And he [Revelation 13:16] shall make a strong covenant [the mark of the Beast] with many [the world] for one week [7 years], and for half of the week [3 1/2 years] he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering [the abomination of desolation]. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate [the destroyer, Apollyon (Abaddon): aka Azazel], until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator” – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Daniel 9:24-27 indirectly supports a three and a half year ministry. It can be demonstrated from the Seventy Weeks prophecy in Daniel chapter nine that the baptism of Jesus occurred in 26 CE which would place His birth in 3 BCE. Daniel’s prophecy set out a period of 69 weeks or sevens of years, totalling 483 years from the decree to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem until the coming of the Messiah. That decree is widely accepted to have been that of the Persian King Artaxerxes I Longimanus (Longhand) which occurred in the seventh year of his reign – Ezra 7:7-8. Artaxerxes ruled from September 465 to October 424 BCE; thus his seventh year would have been 458/457 BCE.

The Hebrew calendar religious year was Abib in the Spring, to Adar and the civil year was Tishri in the Autumn to Elu; thus when Ezra and his entourage left Babylon in the first month, arriving in Jerusalem during the fifth month, it is safe to assume it had been a spring and summer caravan trek, rather than an autumn and winter journey. The first month must therefore have been that of the religious year – Abib (or Nisan). The Persian calendar also ran from spring to spring. We do not know whether Artaxerxes’ decree was in 458 or 457 BCE. Depending on which year one uses as the starting point and how you calculate the subtraction, affects the final figure – as is the case with all arithmetic… ask any economist or politician. 

If we subtract 483 years from 458 BCE we derive 25 CE. If one year is added as there is no 0 BCE (or 0 CE), the final figure is 26 CE – the year the Messiah was baptised and began his three and a half year ministry. If we simply subtract 483 years from 457 BCE we obtain 26 CE, which is the number we require, result. If we added a year, then it is off by one year. It would appear that the decree was towards the beginning of Artaxerxes’ reign and that Judah and Benjamin captives – of which Artaxerxes’ later wife, Esther was included – then made themselves ready to depart Babylon and were ready at the beginning of the new year in Abib.

There is scholarship that seeks to put Artaxerxes’ reign beginning in 475 BCE instead, so that Nehemiah stating twenty years, arrives at 455 BCE and a final date (455 BCE – 483 = 28 + 1 = 29 CE) of 33 CE for the death of Christ – Nehemiah 2:1; 13:6. This is achieved by adding ten years to the beginning of Artxerxes I reign of forty-one years. The ten years being deducted from his father, Xerxes I reign of twenty years from 485 to 465 BCE. This is based on a chronology according to Thucydides and the Alexandrian Chronicle in which Xerxes I was murdered in 475 BCE, when his son Artaxerxes was a ‘boy’ of sixteen instead of when he was twenty-six in 465 BCE. 

In response: an article by Carl Olof Jonsson, The 20th Year of Artaxerxes and the “Seventy Weeks” of Daniel, 1989 & 2003 – emphasis theirs, bold mine:

‘The decisive evidence for the length of Artaxerxes’ rule is the astronomical information found on a number of tablets dated to his reign. One such text is the astronomical “diary” “VAT 5047”, clearly dated to the 11th year of Artaxerxes. Although the text is damaged, it preserves information about two lunar positions relative to planets and the positions of Mercury, Jupiter, Venus and Saturn. This information suffices to identify the date of the text as 454 B.C. As this was the 11th year of Artaxerxes, the preceding year, 455 BC, cannot have been his 20th year as [some claim], but his 10th year. His 20th year, then, must have been 445/44 BC. (See Sachs/Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Volume 1, Wien 1988, pages 56-59.)

There are also some tablets dated to the 21st and last year of Xerxes. One of them, BM 32234, which is dated to day 14 or 18 of the 5th month of Xerxes’ 21st year, belongs to the group of astronomical texts called “18-year texts” or “Saros texts”. The astronomical information preserved on this tablet fixes it to the year 465 BC. The text includes the following interesting information: “Month V 14 (+x) Xerxes was murdered by his son.” This text alone not only shows that Xerxes ruled for 21 [years], but also that his last year was 465 BC, not 475 as the Society holds!

There are several “Saros texts” of this type covering the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes. The many detailed and dated descriptions of lunar eclipses from different years of their reigns establish the chronology of this period as an absolute chronology. Two other astronomical tablets from the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes, BM 45674 and BM 32299, contain dated observations of the planet Venus. Again, these observations establish the chronology of this period as an absolute chronology. Thus we have numerous astronomical observations dated to different parts of the reigns of Xerxes and Axtaxerxes preserved on cuneiform tablets. In many cases, only one or two of these observations would suffice to establish the beginning and end of their reignsThe total number of astronomical observations dated to their reigns, however, are about 40 or more. It is impossible, therefore, to change their reigns even one year!’

Daniel’s prophecy does not explicitly state that the Messiah would be cut off after 3½ years of His ministry, though there is an inference to that effect. The event has a parallel with ‘the prince who is to come’ – probably the false Prophet, possibly the Beast, (‘Antichrist)’ – breaking the seven year covenant in the middle of the week. There are a number of Bible passages of interest in line with the content of the seventy weeks prophecy, as well as some of the verses studied regarding the Messiah.

Matthew 24:15-24

English Standard Version

15 “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)…”

Daniel 8:13-14

English Standard Version

13 ‘Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to the one who spoke, “For how long is the vision concerning the regular burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled underfoot?” 14 And he said to me, “For 2,300 evenings and mornings. Then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state.”

Matthew 24: 16 ‘then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, 18 and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak. 19 And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! 20 Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath’ – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 21 ‘For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. 23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possibleeven the elect.’

Revelation 7:3-4, 14-17

English Standard Version

‘… saying, “Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.” 4 And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel…” These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.15 “Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple; and he who sits on the throne will shelter them with his presence. 16 They shall hunger no more, neither thirst anymore… 17 For the Lamb in the midst of the throne will be their shepherd, and he will guide them to springs of living water, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.”

Revelation 11:1-3

English Standard Version 

‘Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there, 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months. 3 And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.”

Revelation 12:4-6, 13-17 

English Standard Version 

‘And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child [she] might devour it. 

5 She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, 6 and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which she is to be nourished for 1,260 days… 13 And when the dragon saw that [she] had been thrown down to the earth, [she] pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. 14 But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle so that she might fly from the serpent into the wilderness, to the place where she is to be nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. 15 The serpent poured water like a river out of [its] [G846 – autos: themselves, itself*] mouth after the woman, to sweep her away with a flood. 16 But the earth came to the help of the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from [her]* mouth. 17 Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.’

Revelation 13:5-9 

English Standard Version

5 ‘And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. 7 Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain. 9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear…

Revelation 14:1

English Standard Version

‘Then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.’

Revelation 3:14-22

English Standard Version

14 “And to the angel of the church in Laodicea* write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation. 15 ‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. 17 For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. 

18 I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see. 19 Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. 21 The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. 22 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches’.”

Matthew 27:45-66

English Standard Version

45 ‘Now from the sixth hour [Noon] there was darkness over all the land [Mark 15:33] until the ninth hour [3pm]. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” 47 And some of the bystanders, hearing it, said, “This man is calling Elijah.” 48 And one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine, and put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink. 49 But the others said, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him”.’

Luke 23:44-45

Common English Bible

44 ‘It was now about noon, and darkness covered the whole earth* until about three o’clock, 45 while the sun [G2246 Helios: the rays of the sun, the light of day] stopped shining [G4654 skotizo: darken, to cover with darkness, deprive of light]. Then the curtain in the sanctuary tore down the middle.’

We have learned that the Messiah died on the Passover in the year 30 CE; on the 14th day of Abib, Wednesday April 5th – refer Addendum. The sun darkening could not be a lunar eclipse, as these result when the Earth enters the path of the Sun’s light hitting the Moon. This can only occur during night time and when the Moon is full. Thus a full Moon fades away as Earth’s shadow covers it. The Moon can look reddish because the Earth’s atmosphere absorbs other colours while it bends some sunlight toward the Moon. The same applies to the orange and red colours of sunsets.

This leaves a solar eclipse, which occurs when the moon goes between the Earth and the Sun, blocking the sun’s light and the moon casts a shadow over the Earth. Importantly, a solar eclipse can only take place at the phase of a new moon and during daylight hours. Thus it can be dark in the middle of the day. Was it predicted in the Old Testament, some eight hundred years before hand?

Amos 8:9

New English Translation

“In that day”, says the Sovereign Lord, “I will make the sun set at noon and make the earth dark in the middle of the day [during the light of day; in a day of light].”

The complication is that there isn’t a candidate for a solar eclipse taking place at this time in 30 CE… or in 33 CE for that matter. Also, the eclipse lasted a staggering three hours. Either there was an eclipse on this day but a record is missing or it was a different type of event and not a solar eclipse which caused the sky to darken for three hours. 

Acts 17:34 mentions Dionysius who claims to have witnessed a solar eclipse on the day of Christ’s death. ‘In letters written under the name Dionysius the Areopagite, the author claims to have observed a solar eclipse from Heliopolis* at the time of the crucifixion. Parker, John (1897). “Letter VII. Section II. To Polycarp–Hierarch. & Letter XI. Dionysius to Apollophanes, Philosopher.” The Works of Dionysius the Areopagite. London: James Parker and Co. pages 148–149, 182–183.

According to the Orthodox Church in America, Dionysius… was from Athens and received a classical Greek education (i.e. Atticism). He studied astronomy at the city of Heliopolis, and it was in Heliopolis, along with his friend Apollophonos where he witnessed the solar eclipse that occurred at the moment of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ by Crucifixion. (The connection between the events was surely realized by him at a later date.) But even so, at the time of the eclipse he said, “Either the Creator of all the world now suffers, or this visible world is coming to an end”.’

If this event was an orthodox solar eclipse then from this testimony, we would have to conclude that if the dark lunar phase occurred at noon creating a solar eclipse on the 14th day of Abib, it meant none other than fifteen days earlier, the full moon had been the New Moon. In other words, the Moon being full was announcing the beginning of a new month. This would have far reaching implications on the Hebrew calendar and how it is observed today, if the current new moon is actually the Moon of the 14/15 day of a lunar month and the full moon is the intended new Moon of the 1st day of a month.

Psalm 81:3

English Standard Version

‘Blow the trumpet at the new moon [H2320 – bahodes: the new, in the new moon, at the new moon], at the full moon [H3677 – bakkeseh: the full, at the full moon, in the time appointed] on our feast day.’

Interlinear: ‘Blow at the time of the New Moon the trumpet, at the full moon on day [of] our solemn feast.’

Psalm 81:3 either highlights the New Moon and Full Moon as two distinct days and separate events, with the new moon and its conjunction or Molad coming first – as with the blowing of the Trumpet on the 1st of Tishri, the Feast of Trumpets – then with the full moon on the 15th day of the month, as on the feast days of Unleavened Bread from the 15th to the 21st of the first month and the Feast of Tabernacles (or Sukkoth), from the 15th to the 22nd of the seventh month, following. Or, is it showing that the new moon is actually a full moon? 

We will return to the question regarding the New Moon as a full moon and related topics including, the exact nature of the Hebrew (Jewish) calendar; the Roman calendar; the Lunar cycle compared to the Solar; as well as Sunday versus the Saturday Sabbath; the controversy surrounding the weekly cycle of days; and when the true day of rest (seventh day Sabbath) actually falls; as well as the legality of the Law, in the articles: The Calendar Conspiracy; and The Sabbath Secrecy.

Conversely, if the Sun had darkened during a genuine full moon it would have been a sensational occurrence with a supernatural source to have explained the movement of the moon 180 degrees out of its position to darken the Sun when it was not in conjunction. If the Moon came into closer proximity to the Earth – affecting its magnetic field – through Divine intervention, this would account for the earthquakes that accompanied the event, as science corroborates. The church historian Eusebius of Caesarea, who lived between 264 and 340 CE, quoted Phlegon from the second century CE, as saying that during the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad:

“A great eclipse of the sun occurred at the sixth hour that excelled every other before it, turning the day into such darkness of night that the stars could be seen in heaven, and the earth moved in Bithynia, toppling many buildings in the city of Nicaea.”

NASA has not revealed any record for a solar eclipse occurring at noon in the Middle East region for any date within twenty years of 30 CE. According to one commentator’s opinion: the occulted sun and moon were together at the feet of the ‘the lamb’ the constellation Aries, at precisely midday so that the Lamb’s constellation came into full view directly overhead. It is not beyond the Creator’s power to intervene in the laws of astro-physics, as recorded in 2 Kings 20:11 and Joshua 10:13. Thus, the Moon could have been brought closer to the earth and its orbit harmonised with the Sun for three hours.

One could consider a cover up regarding an event of this magnitude and it being expunged from astronomical data; particularly when five different people record the event. The third century Christian historian Sixtus Julius Africanus, in a section of his work in quotation by George Syncellus in 391 CE, stated that Thallus in 53 CE, had called the darkness during the crucifixion a solar eclipse

Though Third century critics declared Thallus’ statements as false, because the lunar phase was fourteen days from a crescent moon, naturally making it ‘full.’ In contradiction to the law that solar eclipses cannot occur on a full moon.

Have records been skewed surrounding an unusual solar eclipse in 30 CE? It seems possible. Especially when images from Stellarium – a simulation of what the night sky may have looked like in respective years, based on NASA’s UTC time coordinates of GMT – reveal nothing for the years 30 or 32 CE, yet each image, viewed from Jerusalem facing due south depicting the sixth hour of Noon with the sun straight up and the moon at or nearest conjunction favours both 31 and 33 CE as possible solar eclipses. These two years do not fit all the studied data and criteria put together. The year 32 CE is not even in the running; which leaves only 30 CE to satisfy all the facts. Yet astronomical confirmation is missing? Have the years 30 and 32 CE been bumped one place forward to read 31 and 33 CE?

Matthew: 50 ‘And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit. 51 And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom [precisely at 3pm]. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split [caused by a massive earthquake]. 52 The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, 53 and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. 54 When the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, “Truly this was the Son of God!”

The effects of the unusual and powerful earthquake were extremely violent and produced scenes which would have not been out of place in the Walking Dead and decidedly disturbing for those witnessing these strange and frightening miracles. The curtain in the Temple tore in two, reminiscent of the miraculous events to yet occur between 30 and 70 CE, associated with Temple worship. The Book of Revelation reveals a future, spiritual parallel. 

Revelation 11:19 

English Standard Version

‘Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail.’

Early church father Jerome, in a Letter to Hedibia recounts that the huge lintel of the Temple was broken, splintered and fell; caused by the rending of the Veil. Edersheim adds: ‘it would seem an obvious inference to connect again this breaking of the lintel with an earthquake.’ The lintel was a stone of some magnitude, being at least thirty feet long and weighing about thirty tons. The Temple Veils were sixty feet long by thirty feet wide and the thickness of the palm of a man’s hand, wrought in seventy-two squares. 

They were reputed to be so heavy that three hundred priests were required to manipulate each one. Therefore, the Veil being rent from top to bottom was a very terrible portent, as it indicated that the Creator’s own Hand had torn it in two when His presence deserted the Holy Place. 

The Jewish Talmud in Yoma 39b says of the events which must have occurred in 30 CE, for recall the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE: ‘Forty years before the Temple was destroyed… the gates of the Hekel or the Holy Place, opened by themselves until Rabbi Yohanan Zakkai rebuked the gates, saying “Hekel, Hekel, why alarmist thou us? We know that thou art destined to be destroyed…” For the huge doors of the Temple behind the Veil to open by themselves or as a consequence of a great earthquake, meant they pulled powerfully against the Veil and with the lintel collapsing at the same time, would have torn in two from top to bottom as the Bible claims.

Matthew: 62 The next day [15th Abib – Thursday April 4th – the first Day of Unleavened Bread], that is, after the day of Preparation [the Preparation for the Holy Day, on the Passover], the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered before Pilate 63 and said, “Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, ‘After three days I will rise.’ 64 Therefore order the tomb to be made secure until the third day [17th Abib – Saturday 6th April], lest his disciples go and steal him away and tell the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’ and the last fraud will be worse than the first.” 65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard of soldiers. Go, make it as secure as you can.” 66 So they went and made the tomb secure by sealing the stone and setting a guard.

Paid in Full, Buried & Sealed: Jesus in the Tomb, Rick Renner – emphasis & bold mine:

‘John’s Gospel tells us that near the crucifixion site was a garden. The Greek word for “garden” is kepos, and it refers to any garden with trees and spices. It can also be translated as an orchard. The same word is used in John 18:1 to describe the Garden of Gethsemane, which was an olive tree orchard. All four Gospels suggest that this tomb was near the place where Jesus was crucified, but John 19:42 says, “…The sepulchre was nigh at hand.” The word “nigh” is the Greek word aggus, meaning nearby. Most crucifixions were performed along a roadside. Evidently this garden was located in an orchard-like place, just down the road from where Jesus was crucified. John 19:41 tells us that in the garden was “…a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.” The word “new” is the Greek word kainos, meaning fresh or unused. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the tomb had recently been made but that it was a tomb that had never been used – thus, the reason John writes, “… Wherein was never man yet laid.”

Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record that this tomb belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, suggesting that it was the tomb he had prepared for his own burial. The fact that it was a tomb “hewn out in the rock” (Matthew 27:60, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53) confirms the personal wealth of Joseph of Arimathea. Only royalty or wealthy individuals could afford to have their tombs carved out of a wall of stone or in the side of a mountain. Poorer men were buried in simple graves. 

The word “hewn” in Matthew, Mark, and Luke comes from the Greek word laxeuo, meaning not only to cut out, but to polish. It implies that it was a special tomb, a highly developed tomb, a refined tomb, or a tomb that was splendid and expensive. Isaiah 53:9 had prophesied that the Messiah would be buried in a rich man’s tomb, and the word laxeuo strongly suggests that this was indeed the expensive tomb of a very rich man. John 19:42 says, “There laid they Jesus….” The word “laid” comes from the word tithimi, which means to set, to lay, to place, to deposit, or to set in place. As used here, it portrays the careful and thoughtful placing of Jesus’ body in its resting place inside the tomb. Luke 23:55 tells us that after Jesus’ body was placed in the tomb, the women who came with Him from Galilee “… beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.” The word “beheld” in Greek is theaomai, from which we get the word theater. 

The word theaomai means to gaze upon, to fully see, or to look at intently. This is very important, for it proves the women inspected the tomb, gazing upon the dead body of Jesus to see that it had been honorably laid in place. Mark 15:47 identifies these women as Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses and says that these women “… beheld where he was laid” at the tomb. The imperfect tense is used in Mark’s account, alerting us to the fact that these women took their time in making sure Jesus was properly laid there. It could be translated, “they carefully contemplated where he was laid.” If Jesus had still been alive, those who buried Him would have known it, for they spent substantial time preparing His body for burial. Then after His dead body was deposited into the tomb, they lingered there, checking once again to see that the body was treated with the greatest love and attention. 

Once they were certain everything was done correctly, Joseph of Arimathea “… rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed” (Matthew 27:60, Mark 15:46). It was rare to find a stone entrance to a Jewish tomb in biblical times; most Jewish tombs had doors with certain types of hinges. A large stone rolled before the tomb would be much more difficult to move, making the burial site more permanent.

However, the chief priests and Pharisees weren’t so sure that the site was secure. Fearing that Jesus’ disciples would come to steal the body and claim that Jesus had been resurrected, the Jewish leaders came to Pilate… When the chief priests and Pharisees asked that “…the sepulchre be made sure…,” the Greek word sphragidzo is used. This word described a legal seal that was placed on documents, letters, possessions, or, in this case, a tomb. Its purpose was to authenticate that the sealed item had been properly inspected before sealing and that all the contents were in order. As long as the seal remained unbroken, it guaranteed that the contents inside were safe and sound. In this case, the word sphragidzo is used to signify the sealing of the tomb. In all probability, it was a string that was stretched across the stone at the entrance of the tomb, which was then sealed on both sides by Pilate’s legal authorities. Before sealing the tomb, howeverthese authorities were first required to inspect the inside of the tomb to see that the body of Jesus was in its place. After guaranteeing that the corpse was where it was supposed to be, they rolled the stone back in place and then sealed it with the official seal of the governor of Rome.

After hearing the suspicions of the chief priests and Pharisees, “Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can”… The word “watch” is the Greek word coustodia, from which we get the word custodian. This was a group of four Roman soldiers whose shift changed every three hours. The changing shifts assured that the tomb would be guarded 24 hours a day by soldiers who were awake, attentive, and fully alert. When Pilate said, “Ye have a watch…,” a better rendering would be, “Here – I’m giving you a set of soldiers; take them and guard the tomb.” Matthew 27:66 says, “So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.” Wasting no time, the chief priests and elders hastened to the tomb with their government-issued soldiers and the special officers assigned to inspect the tomb before placing Pilate’s seal upon it. After a full inspection had been made, the stone was put back in place, and the soldiers stood guard to protect the tomb from anyone who would attempt to touch it or remove its contents. Every three hours, new guards arrived to replace the old ones. These armed soldiers guarded the entrance to Jesus’ tomb so firmly that no one would have been able to come near it.

The purpose of the seal was to authenticate that Jesus was dead; therefore, we can know that His body was thoroughly inspected again for proof of death. There is no doubt that Jesus was dead, for He was examined again and again, even as He lay in the tomb. Some critics have claimed that only Jesus’ own disciples inspected His body and that they could have lied about His being dead. 

However, an officer from Pilates court also examined the body of Jesus. We can also be fairly certain that the chief priests and elders who accompanied the soldiers to the burial site demanded the right to view His dead body as well so they could verify that He was truly dead.

When Jesus came out of that grave several days later, it was no hoax or fabricated story. In addition to all the people who saw Him die on the Cross, the following individuals and groups verified that His dead body was in the tomb before the stone was permanently sealed by an officer from the Roman court of law:

  • Joseph of Arimathea carefully laid Him inside the tomb.
  • Nicodemus provided the embalming solutions, assisted in embalming Him, and helped Joseph of Arimathea lay Him in His place in the tomb.
  • Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of Joses, lovingly examined His body and carefully contemplated every aspect of the burial site to ensure everything was done properly and respectfully.
  • Rome’s official officer ordered the stone rolled back. Then he went into the tomb and examined the body of Jesus to verify that it was Jesus and that He was really dead.
  • The chief priests and elders entered the tomb with Rome’s official officer so they could look upon Jesus’ dead body and put an end to their worries that He had somehow survived.
  • Roman guards checked the contents of the tomb because they wanted to know for sure a body was there. They didn’t want to be guarding an empty tomb that would later be used as a claim of resurrection, while they got blamed for the disappearance of Jesus’ body.
  • After all of these inspections were complete, Rome’s official officer ordered the stone rolled back in its place. While the chief priests, elders, and Roman guards watched, he secured the site and sealed it shut with the seal of the governor of Rome.

Regardless of all these efforts to secure the site and to keep Jesus inside the grave, it was impossible for death to hold Him. When preaching on the day of Pentecost, Peter proclaimed to the people of Jerusalem, “… Ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain [Jesus]: whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it” – Acts 2:23-24.

Further evidence that the year 30 CE is the correct date for the Messiah’s death is that in the same year, the Sanhedrin curiously abandoned their Chamber of Hewn Stones near the Holy Place in the Temple, which was its official seat of location. It was about forty yards southeast of the entrance to the Holy Place. In 30 CE, the Sanhedrin moved to a residence called The Trading Place, farther to the east and a less significant spot. To be forced to move from a beautiful and prestigious location in the Temple to a much less esteemed place of reverence, would have been a great slight. 

The Talmud states: ‘Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the Sanhedrin was banished (from the Chamber of Hewn Stone) and sat in the trading station (on the Temple Mount)’ (Shabbat 15a). The obvious reason why the Sanhedrin were forced to relocate is due to the great earthquake on the day Christ was killed. Direct punishment for their complicity in handing Jesus over to the Romans and the Creator’s displeasure with their actions.

The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, Craig Blomberg, 1987 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘… the claim that the Romans retained the sole right of capital punishment (John 18:31) has often been termed a Johanine error, especially in view of the counter-example in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58). But this right is strikingly confirmed by a passage in the Talmud, which says that capital punishment had been taken [in 30 CE] from the Jews forty years before the destruction of the temple in A.D.70… Stephen’s stoning reads more like mob action which defied technical legalities.’

In summary: the Messiah as can be ascertained from all pertinent material thus far, was born in 3 BCE on September 11, corresponding to the first day of Tishri, the New Moon of the Feast of Trumpets in the seventh month of the Sacred Calendar. He lived twenty-nine years and was then baptised (in his 30th year); beginning his ministry in the late summer (early autumn) of 26 CE. Three and one half years later, Christ died (in his 33rd year) on the 14th of Abib, corresponding to the Passover on April 3, in 30 CE.

Addendum 

Since putting together the material for this article, a particular point has come to this writer’s attention which requires alteration. It concerns the timing of the days between the death and resurrection of Jesus and specifically to how this relates to which calendar is used to compute this chronology – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy. Added to this, is a re-interpretation or perhaps re-explanation, regarding the sign of Jonah and the counting of three days and three nights. 

The initial calendar consulted was the Julian Calendar, used by the Roman Empire and solar based. Of course, this was not the calendar used by the inhabitants of Judea in the time of Christ, for they used the Sacred (or Hebrew) Calendar which was lunar based. Coupled with this, is the fact that while the Romans had added a day to make an eight day week – using the letters A to H, as well as later introducing named days chosen from celestial bodies in our Solar System – the Jewish calendar of the time had only seven days which were delineated not by names or letters but numbers: one through to seven. 

This writer confesses an unintentional error which was firstly inspired by a persuasive and convincing argument, genuinely believed as correct for many years and secondly, from a misunderstanding on exclusive versus inclusive counting. Does this new information contradict the substance of the article? No, it does not affect or change the dating of Christ’s birth in 3 BCE; the length of his ministry; or the year of his death in 30 CE. Though it does impact on the time frame he was actually dead and exactly which day he was resurrected on. 

Nor is the error limited in endeavouring to align Christ’s final week with the Roman days for a Wednesday crucifixion and a Saturday resurrection; as orthodox Christianity’s attempt to reconcile a Friday to Sunday scenario, also falls foul when relying on a fixed Jewish Calendar – which was not augmented until Hillel II in 358/9 CE. For while Nisan 14 falls on a Wednesday in 30 CE and a Friday in 33 CE, these are redundant proposals. 

In irony, the 14th of Nisan in 33 CE – calculated from the conjunction of the New Moon on the first of the month – was a Wednesday. In 30 CE, the 14th of Nisan remains the same – according to the astronomical New Moon – also falling on a Wednesday. Either way one measures it in 30 CE, Christ did die on Wednesday, the 3rd of April. 

The difference being the day he was resurrected on and that is able to be ascertained from the wave sheaf offering – but first… Christ’s final week looks a little different when viewed through the lens of the Sacred calendar at the time, as opposed to a retrospective overlay of days using the Julian calendar. 

The revised week begins with Jesus and his entourage arriving in Bethany on the 9th day of the first month of Nisan (or Abib). As a matter of interest, the secular day would have been a Friday. Though on the Sacred calendar it was the first day of a new week following the seventh day Sabbath the preceding day on the 8th – as all weekly Sabbaths fell on the 8th, 15th, 22nd and 29th of a lunar month – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy. 

It was this day that Jesus visited the temple and chased out those conducting business on its premises. The next day was the 10th day which corresponds to Saturday, but not the true Sabbath or a day the Jews or Israelites were observing. Christ returns to the Temple, debates with the chief priest and elders and teaches a number of parables. This day was the second day of the week on the Lunar calendar.  

On the 11th day – a Sunday and third day of the Lunar based week – Christ taught the disciples on the Mount of Olives. In Matthew 26:2, ESV, Christ says: “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified” – Mark 14:1. 

This is a crucial verse for it shows that it was probably the 12th day of Abib – the fourth day of the Lunar week and a Monday. As Christ died on the 14th, the Passover – the preparation for the weekly Sabbath and the first day of Unleavened Bread, a double Sabbath and a High Day – it follows that Jesus’ statement could have been declared on the 11th by an exclusive count. So that the 12th was day one, the 13th day two and after two days was the 14th. It effectively rules out the 13th, for Christ would have said on the morrow or the next day. It is commonly agreed that the people in Judea at this time counted inclusively; so that the 12th was day one, the 13th day two and after two days was the 14th. 

On the following day, the 13th of Abib – the fifth day of the week and a Tuesday – the disciple enquired of Christ where to prepare for the Passover the following day. It was on the 13th that the final meal between Christ and the disciples took place. Referred to as the Last Supper or the Lord’s Supper, when the Bread and Wine was instituted as a new and separate ceremony – with leavened bread – distinct from the Old Testament Passover. Refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter days.

The momentous day Christ died in fulfilment of and in symbolism as the Passover Lamb, was the 14th day of Abib – the sixth day of the week, occurring on Wednesday the 3rd of April. The question remains regarding how long was Christ dead and when was he resurrected? To help understand this, the Wave Sheaf offering picturing the risen Christ is key in the timing of these events. 

A sheaf is a bundle of a cereal plant such as wheat or rye bound after reaping. It was to be waved by the high Priest and begin the fifty day count for the feast of Pentecost – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy. It was to be waved the day after the first Sabbath and Holy Day of Unleavened Bread – Leviticus 23:9-11, 15, Luke 23:56. 

Thus the wave sheaf offering took place on the 16th of Abib, the day after the Holy Day and Sabbath on the 15th. In the year Christ died, it fell on a Friday. Which while the first day of a new Lunar week, it was certainly not a Sunday. So much for Christ being resurrected on a Sunday – the ‘Lord’s Day.’ Thus those Christians who argue for Christ’s resurrection on a Sunday or even a Saturday are both mistaken. Though the question remains on which day did Christ live again on the Sacred Lunar calendar: the seventh day Sabbath or the first day of the week – the real Lord’s Day.

The wave sheaf represented Christ as the first of the first fruits of the spiritual harvest of souls – Revelation 14:4, 1 Corinthians 15:22-23. The early New Testament believers on the Day of Pentecost represented after Christ, the continuation of the first fruits called into the Way – Acts 2:1-4, Romans 8:23, 1 Corinthians 15:20. 

As the suffering and death of the Messiah fulfilled the Passover on the 14th day of the first month; the Feast of First Fruits on the 16th is a type of the third day resurrection of the Saviour. For the sheaf must be waved on the third day after the Passover sacrifice of the 14th which was always on the 16th of the first month. 

This reckoning dictates Christ should not have risen on the 15th or even the 17th of Abib, but rather on the 16th day of Abib. This appears to contradict an apparent exclusive count as stated in Matthew 12:40; yet is supported by an inclusive count as recorded in all the following verses: Matthew 16:21; 17:23; 20:19, 27:63-64, Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34, Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 21, 46, Acts 10:40. An exclusive count would include the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th days; whereas an inclusive count, the 14th, 15th and 16th day. 

Before we look at the inclusive way of counting three days, let’s revisit the sign given by the Saviour of his credentials as the Messiah. This verse is the only reference in the New Testament of its kind and as it appears to contradict the other verses listed above, it means it has to be reconciled to them and not the other way around. 

The previous conclusion stated earlier in a literal seventy-two hours in the tomb, which makes sense from a modern, western interpretation and when using the Roman (Julian/Gregorian) calendar; does not fit with a. the other biblical references; b. inclusive counting; c. the Sacred calendar; or d. the idiom for the ‘heart of the earth.’ Never-the-less, with that said, there still remains a feasible explanation for a literal three days and nights. 

Matthew 12:40 

English Standard Version 

‘For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart [G258 – kardia] of the earth [G1093 – ges].’

There are three interpretations offered for this verse. The first, is that the ‘heart of the earth’ refers to the time Christ was in a tomb. This then is subdivided into whether it refers to a literal 72 hours or three partial days in a row, favoured by the majority of biblical scholars. While the second option is supported by the other references about three days in the Gospel accounts and elsewhere, as well as Christ fulfilling the wave sheaf offering on the 16th of the month; the verse clearly states three times 12 hour daylight portions of a (24 hour) day and three 12 hour night time portions of a (24 hour) day – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy. 

With that in mind, it is difficult to reconcile the verse with Jesus dead in a tomb. There is no direct scriptural support for the phrase, heart of the earth referring to the grave or a tomb. The closest is in Ezekiel 38:12, which states: ‘… who dwell at the center of the earth.’ The use of ‘three days and three nights’ is used in Esther 4:16 and in 1 Samuel 30:12, but neither are germane in this contextual argument. 

The remaining verse, crucial in understanding Matthew 12:40 is in Jonah 1:17, ESV: ‘And the Lord appointed a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.’

Regarding the type of fish which swallowed Jonah, refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan

The second interpretation for ‘heart of the earth’ is to imply its meaning to Christ being in the heart or centre of the land. In this case Jerusalem. Though Jesus was in Jerusalem for nearly a week prior to his death. Reasoning then conjectures that it refers to when Christ was arrested late on the night of the 13th day. 

The third explanation and almost identical to the second, is that the phrase refers to Christ being subject to the powers of darkness. In this instance, when he was under Jewish and then Roman control during his arrest, trial, imprisonment, beatings and crucifixion. Though difficulty with this according to one commentator, is that ‘Satan’s kingdom’ is never referred to as the centre or heart of the earth – Ephesians 2:2; 6:12. 

The Greek word for heart has the following meaning: ‘of the middle or central or inmost part of anything, even though inanimate.’ Barnes: ‘… The Jews used the word “heart” to denote the “interior” of a thing, or to speak of being in a thing.’ It also has the connotation ‘of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions.’

Thus Christ was in the midst of something. In this case, turmoil of the most explicit kind. 

The Greek word for earth has the following meaning: ‘… properly, the physical earth; (figuratively) the “arena” we live in which operates in space and time which God uses to prepare us for eternity. The physical earth is the temporary, probationary place to live out moral preferences “through the body,”… In this way, God makes an eternal record of everything we do on the earth. Through faith, each scene of life becomes equally, eternally significant… The OT Hebrew term, 776/asitía (“earth”), also refers to the physical earth as “God’s arena” – “the physical theater” in which our eternal destiny freely plays out.’

These definitions are revealing when applied to Christ, his life, his mission and his ultimate victory. Putting the two together highlights the ordeal Christ went through – in an intense physical arena for a profound spiritual outcome – for three whole days and nights. It is also telling that the Greek words for a burial, taphos; or a grave, hades, are not used; but rather for the earth and therefore clearly signifying above the ground and not beneath it. Otherwise, it would be an open and shut case.

Returning to the prophet Jonah, it refers to him being in the belly of a fish for three days and nights. In chapter two, verses one to four, Jonah prays and says the following: 

Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the belly of the fish, saying, “I called out to the Lord, out of my distress, and he answered me; out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and you heard my voice. For you cast me into the deep, into the heart of the seas, and the flood surrounded me; all your waves and your billows passed over me. Then I said, ‘I am driven away from your sight; yet I shall again look upon your holy temple.’

There are a number of vital clues in helping to understand Christ’s words in Matthew 12:40.  The Hebrew word sheol, is one of three words used for hell and in the context of being in the ground and thus in a ‘grave or pit’ – refer article: Heaven & Hell. Jonah was trapped, yet cushioned and safe while inside the fish’s belly. Though his imprisonment was likened to death – being in darkness and a suffocating environment – Jonah was still conscious the whole time and not dead as in a grave, or in or under the earth. 

Jonah as Christ was to experience, went through an ordeal, where he was cocooned first in water and then by a great fish. Billow means a great wave or the surge of the sea. Jonah was in the heart of the sea, as Christ was to be in the heart of the earth. Jonah was surrounded by water as Christ would be surrounded by trial, torture and betrayal. 

The belly of the fish symbolised Jonah having his movement restricted so that he could not freely decide where to go and continue with his escape. He was controlled by a force of the sea. Just as Jonah was a helpless victim swallowed inside a fish and carried where he did not wish to go; so Christ was controlled by a force of the Earth, a captive of the priests, elders, soldiers and guards who led him where he did not want to go – concluding with his death, on the tree of the cross. 

As Jonah was in darkness and away from the light, Christ had to endure being driven away from God’s sight as he died, with darkness enveloping the land – Matthew 27:45-46, Habakkuk 1:13. 

Jonah’s reference to looking again upon the holy temple is significant in relation to Christ. John 2:19, ESV: ‘Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Mark 15:29-30, ESV: ‘And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads and saying, “Aha! You who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save yourself, and come down from the cross!” John 2:20-21, ESV: ‘The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking about the temple of his body.’

The Sign of Jonah: Jesus in the Heart of the Earth, Michael W Andrews, 2018: 

‘This way of simultaneously pointing to multiple parts of Jonah’s text signals to the hearer/reader that Jesus had in mind the entire content and context of Jonah’s prayer, and that he was not just talking about being placed in the ground at his death. Furthermore, usage of the word “earth” in the OT, when qualified by another term (e.g. “depths of the earth”), often connotes more than merely the ground itself… Jesus used a phrase that not only encompassed all of the implications of Jonah’s prayer, but intentionally modified the word “earth” in such a way that was typically used to signify the realm of the dead. Apparently, Jesus was indicating (to those who were familiar with Jonah’s prayer) that during three days and three nights he would endure a journey of suffering and descent into death. In this way he was referring to an extent of suffering which both preceded and included his death. Assigning it a specific duration certainly hints at the glorious deliverance that would be his resurrection…’

One commentator proposes that the belly represents the centre of a domain. Job 20:14-15, ESV: ‘… yet his food is turned in his stomach… He swallows… and vomits… up again; God casts them out of his belly.’ And that the earth is the domain of mankind. Psalm 115:16, ESV: “The heavens are the Lord’s heavens, but the earth he has given to the children of man.” So that ‘being put into the “heart of the earth” would mean that Jesus was handed over to the authority of men.’ This is likely the most accurate interpretation of Matthew 12:40.

When did this happen? 

The disciple Judas Iscariot sought to betray Christ and hand him over to the Jewish authorities. Matthew 26:1 occurred on the 12th as did verse three to five, where the chief priests and elders plotted to kill Christ. It was early on the 13th when Judas struck a deal with them. The inference and context is that this was the moment Christ was bound in the heart of the earth – when Judas accepted blood money to reveal Christ’s identity leading to his capture.

Matthew 26:14-16, ESV: ‘Then one of the twelve, whose name was Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests and said, “What will you give me if I deliver him over to you?” And they paid him thirty pieces of silver. And from that moment he sought an opportunity to betray him.’

Thus it was Judas who approached the priests, yet it was they who proposed the meagre sum of 30 pieces of silver which Judas surprisingly accepted. Is there any significance or symbolism attached to Christ’s life being represented by or worth such a sum? 

Earlier in Matthew chapter twenty-six, Christ was in Bethany at the house of Simon the Leper. While reclining, a woman – identified by John as Mary, the sister of Martha (and Lazarus) – with a repentant heart and a pure adoration for Jesus; breaks custom and approaches Christ with an expensive jar of Alabaster ointment. Mixed with it are her own tears and she proceeds in anointing the Messiah by pouring it over his head and then drys his feet with her hair. 

All the disciples present are shocked that Jesus would let a woman touch him, let alone wasting an entire jar containing rich perfume – which could have been sold to help the poor. According to John, it was Judas who said: “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” ‘He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it’ – John 12:5-6, ESV. 

The denarius – plural, denarii – was a silver coin first struck by the Romans about 211 BCE. The denarius was worth a days wage for a common labourer – Matthew 20:2. Thus 300 denarii was nearly a year’s wages. Considerably more than a mere 30 pieces of silver. 

Christ commends Mary for preparing him for burial, she a sinner who was so aware of her iniquities, spared no expense in honouring Christ. Yet Judas and a number of elders who thought they were righteous and not in any need of salvation; plotted Christ’s death for the price of compensation – as result of an accidental death – for a slaves burial according to Mosaic Law. Refer Exodus 21:32. It was not a lot of money, with a shekel of silver the equivalent of 2/5 of an ounce or 11 grams. One commentator states: “The transaction that took place ultimately highlights a betrayal that transcends mere monetary value; it articulates a profound decision to forsake something eternal for fleeting gain.” 

It is worth noting that Joseph who as a type of Christ – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes – was sold into slavery by his brothers. Genesis 37:28, ESV: ‘Then Midianite traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt [in 1709 BCE].’ It is thought by some that inflation by the time of Christ [in 30 CE], explains the going rate for a slave having increased from 20 to 30 shekels over the course of 1,740 years. 

There is one other place in the Bible where thirty pieces of silver are mentioned in a remarkable prophecy and fulfilment of Christ’s betrayal. 

Zechariah 11:4-12 

English Standard Version 

4 ‘Thus said the Lord my God: “Become shepherd of the flock doomed to slaughter. 5 Those who buy them slaughter them and go unpunished, and those who sell them say, ‘Blessed be the Lord, I have become rich,’ and their own shepherds have no pity on them. 6 For I will no longer have pity on the inhabitants of this land, declares the Lord. Behold, I will cause each of them to fall into the hand of his neighbor, and each into the hand of his king, and they shall crush the land, and I will deliver none from their hand.”

Got Questions: ‘God had the prophet Zechariah play the part of a shepherd and care for a flock “doomed to slaughter”. God used this to illustrate a prophetic judgment against Israel for crucifying Christ, predicting the fall of Israel in AD 70 and the subsequent scattering of the nation. There are several elements in this passage that point to it as a prophecy about Jesus.’

7 ‘So I became the shepherd of the flock doomed to be slaughtered by the sheep traders. And I took two staffs, one I named Favor, the other I named Union. And I tended the sheep. 8 In one month I destroyed the three shepherds. But I became impatient with them, and they also detested me. 9 So I said, “I will not be your shepherd. What is to die, let it die. What is to be destroyed, let it be destroyed. And let those who are left devour the flesh of one another.’

Got Questions: ‘… Zechariah says he “got rid of the three shepherds” of the doomed flock. The “three shepherds” are probably a reference to the three religious offices during Jesus’ day that worked to condemn Jesus: the elders, the scribes, and the chief priests.’

10 ‘And I took my staff Favor, and I broke it, annulling the covenant that I had made with all the peoples. 11 So it was annulled on that day, and the sheep traders, who were watching me, knew that it was the word of the Lord. 12 Then I said to them, “If it seems good to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” And they weighed out as my wages thirty pieces of silver.’ 

Got Questions: ‘… Zechariah breaks his two shepherding staffs. One is named Favor and is broken to symbolize the breaking of the Mosaic Covenant by the disobedient people and God’s setting aside His favor or providential care to allow judgment to come upon them. The second staff, named Union, is broken to represent the breaking up of the nation by the Romans. 

… Zechariah… went to those he worked for and asked them to pay him what they thought he was worth. They gave him thirty pieces of silver, which he sarcastically calls a “handsome price” because it was such a small amount… The employers meant to insult Zechariah with this amount of money.’

Philippians 2:5-8 

English Standard Version 

5 “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.”

Heather Riggleman: ‘Notice how in verse seven, Paul describes Jesus as taking on the form of a servant, some versions use the term bondservant. Paul uses the Greek word, “doulos” which literally means slave. The significance of the 30 pieces of silver ties the Old Testament to the New Testament and reveals how Jesus was willing to humble himself and offer himself up upon the cross, to purchase what we could never afford. He was the only [worthy] price for our forgiveness in the eyes of God. Judas sold Jesus for the price of a slave as Christ laid down his life as the ultimate [gift] for you and me.’

An apt comment online: ‘As prophesied, the rejection of the Messiah is put into stark relief by the triviality of the silver amount, emphasizing humanity’s failure to recognize the true worth of Jesus. This moment is steeped in irony; Judas’ greed leads him to betray the embodiment of divine love and salvation. Ultimately, the 30 pieces of silver invite reflection on themes of greed, the human propensity to forsake truth for personal gain, and the severe spiritual ramifications of such choices, as the gospels narrate Judas’ subsequent despair and tragic end. The lingering question persists: what do we truly value, and at what price do we betray that which is most sacred?’

“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs” – 1 Timothy 6:10, ESV. 

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money” – Matthew 6:24, ESV. 

The number 30 is significant as it is associated with mourning and affliction. The first High Priest Aaron was mourned for thirty days after his death in 1402 BCE – Numbers 20:29. So too was Moses, earlier in 1406 BCE – Deuteronomy 34:8. 

Taylor Halverson: ‘The Sumerians had a flourishing culture from about 4000 B.C. – 2000 B.C. in ancient southern Mesopotamia. Whenever an ancient Sumerian wanted to express the idea that something was worthless, they would say “It is considered a mere 30 shekels worth.”

In the Sumerian culture, 60 was their foundational, base number, much like 10 is in our culture today’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Na’amah. ‘They used base-60 for measuring time (still with us today in the concepts of a 24-hour day, 60 minutes in an hour and 60 seconds in a minute) and geometric units (360 degree circle). In the minds of the Sumerians, 60 was complete, full, useful, productive, necessary, the basis for measuring and valuing all things. 

Thirty is not! Thirty is half of 60. Therefore, 30 is incomplete, not full, not useful, not productive, not necessary, and useless for measuring and valuing things. Hence, “30 shekels of silver” means a trivially useless amount of no value. 

Anciently, this saying “30 shekels of silver” became a popular proverbial statement. And as the years rolled on, this phrase entered wider use among other cultures in the ancient Middle East, including ancient Israel. Though these cultures modified the use of meaning of “30 shekels of silver” the phrase continued to retain, at its core, the meaning of useless, low value, trifling, incomplete, worthless.’

In the Bible, the number three – one of four powerful numbers, with seven, ten and twelve – means finality and a decision, invariably authored by the Eternal. The number ten signifies judgement. Hence three times judgement and ten times a final decision – both highly profound in relation to Christ’s ordeal and subsequent victory over death, sin and Satan. While the meagre 30 pieces of silver represented a slight on Christ’s life, status, mission and death; the amount mirrored back onto Judas and it was actually his life which amounted to very little.

After the final supper with the disciples, Christ and the disciples went to the Garden of Gethsemane to prepare for his imminent crucible of trial. Judas was not with them, having slipped away. 

Matthew 26:36-39, 45-46: ‘Then Jesus… said to his disciples, “Sit here, while I go over there and pray.” And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled. Then he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me.” And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” Then he came to the disciples and said to them, “Sleep and take your rest later on. See, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand”.’

The Sign of Jonah: Jesus in the Heart of the Earth, Michael W Andrews, 2018: 

‘When Jesus went to the Garden of Gethsemane with his disciples prior to his arrest, he became sorrowful, distraught, and overwhelmed with what was happening. Already Jesus was experiencing the struggle with the forces of darkness, and three times he prayed for the Father to change course. Finally, Jesus announced that it was time for him to be “betrayed into the hands of sinners”. He submitted to the torrents of human judgment, with the only supportable accusation before the Sanhedrin being his claim that he was “able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days”. Since the temple was also mentioned prominently by Jonah and it was an important theme in the context of Matthew 12, its role must be significant for understanding the connection between Jesus and Jonah.’

Matthew 26:47-50, 55-56: ‘While he was still speaking, Judas came, one of the twelve, and with him a great crowd with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and the elders of the people. Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, “The one I will kiss is the man; seize him.” And he came up to Jesus at once and said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” And he kissed him. Jesus said to him, “Friend, do what you came to do.” 

Then they came up and laid hands on Jesus and seized him. At that hour Jesus said to the crowds, “Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs to capture me? Day after day I sat in the temple teaching, and you did not seize me. But all this has taken place that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples left him and fled.’

Judas betrayed Christ, sealing it with a kiss – probably accompanied with an embrace. This occurred sometime after midnight. It was at this moment of Judas’ second betrayal that Christ was forsaken by the disciples. 

Luke adds words spoken by Christ, omitted by Matthew’s Gospel. Luke 22:53, ESV: “When I was with you day after day in the temple, you did not lay hands on me. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness.” Perhaps there is a case for Christ not just falling into the hands of men, but also into the spiritual hands of wickedness guiding them. For Judas himself was possessed twice. 

The first time occurred just prior to his agreement with the chief priests and his receipt of thirty pieces of silver. Luke 22:3-5, ESV: ‘Then ‘Satan’ entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve. He went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers how he might betray him to them. And they were glad, and agreed to give him money.’

This shows Judas Iscariot was not in his right mind – while in Satan’s control – when he a. betrayed Christ for a paltry sum of money and b. when he led the priests and soldiers to apprehend Jesus – John 13:27. 

The second time was during the last supper. ‘… So when [Jesus] had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. Then after he had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly” – John 13:26-27, ESV.

Matthew 27:3-10 

English Standard Version 

3 ‘Then when Judas, his betrayer, saw that Jesus was condemned, he changed his mind and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, 4 saying, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” They said, “What is that to us? See to it yourself.”

Judas, once freed of the controlling spirit emissary from Satan had a lucid mind again and the enormity of what he had done crushed his own spirit. It is debated whether Judas committed the unpardonable sin and is dammed forever. 

“Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin…” – Mark 3:28-29, ESV. 

On the one hand, Judas professed he had ‘sinned’, but was it a genuine repentance – Hebrews 12:17. On the other hand, we know from the picture built of him from scripture that he was weak, jealous and false, thereby wittingly or unwittingly inviting the demonic force which coerced him into his diabolic and tragic actions.  

5 ‘And throwing down the pieces of silver into the temple, he departed, and he went and hanged himself. 6 But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is blood money.” 7 So they took counsel and bought with them the potter’s field as a burial place for strangers.’

The throwing of the silver pieces and the purchasing of a potter’s field was the fulfilment of the prophecy in Zechariah. It was in that field that Judas hanged himself. Got Questions: ‘Returning the insult, God tells Zechariah to “throw it to the potter,” and Zechariah tossed the money into the house of the Lord to be given to the potter.’

‘Then the Lord said to me, “Throw it to the potter” – the lordly price at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord, to the potter. Then I broke my second staff Union, annulling the brotherhood between Judah and Israel’ – Zechariah 11:13-14.

8 ‘Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, 10 and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me.”

Refer Jeremiah  19:1-4 and 32:8-9. 

Therefore, the three complete days and nights fulfilling Christ in the heart of the earth, began with the spiritual possession of Judas and his accepting the 30 pieces of silver. In this way and this way only, could Christ fulfil the literal interpretation of the first half of Matthew 12:40 – ‘three days and three nights’ – as well as the idiom – ‘in the heart of the earth’ – in the second half. 

Idiom: ‘an expression whose meaning is not predictable from the usual meanings of its constituent elements…’ Perhaps this is why this verse has been a stumbling block for so many, because the three days and nights are not an idiom but literal; and the heart of the earth is not a literal saying but an idiom. 

It was early on the 13th day of the first month, with Judas under possession when he conspired with the elders and priests to betray the Saviour and Messiah of the world. At this moment, Christ was bound into the heart of darkness by the lowly forces of the Earth, comprising wicked men and evil spirits. 

The day (D1) and night (N1) of the 13th of Abib passed; then the day (D2) and night (N2) of the 14th, the Passover; followed by the day (D3) and night (N3) of the 15th, the Holy Day of Unleavened Bread (and weekly Sabbath). Which means Christ in fulfilment of the wave sheaf offering was resurrected just as the Bible says, early on the 16th day. “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him” – Hosea 6:2, ESV.

This day was the first day of the week on the Sacred calendar used by the Jews for the weekly Sabbath and Holy day festivals. It was not Sunday, the retrospective day of the Julian Calendar. Thus the minority who propose a Wednesday to Saturday death and resurrection and the majority of Christians who believe in a Friday to Sunday sequence, are each completely and entirely in error. 

The actual days for interest, would have corresponded to Wednesday to Friday. Where the majority have been correct, is in the use of an inclusive count from the 14th day to the 16th day. Any veneration of a Saturday or a Sunday on the Gregorian calendar today, are without any calendrical… scriptural… or apostolic authority or precedent whatsoever. Please read that again… and refer articles: The Calendar Conspiracy; and The Sabbath Secrecy

This leads to the critical verses in the Gospels relating to the timing of the resurrection of Christ. This writer considers their earlier understanding of them to have been misguided; which necessitates returning to them objectively. For the ramifications mean a re-appraisal of when a new day truly begins. 

The author of Matthew (refer* article: The Pauline Paradox) records the following in Matthew 28:1.

‘Now after [G3796 – opse: after a long time, long after, late (in the day)] the Sabbath [which had ceremonially ended at sunset and technically ended by sunrise], (as it began) toward [G1519 – eis: before] the dawn [G2020 – epiphosko: to grow light, to dawn] of the [‘of, the’ not in the Greek] first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.’

Previous understanding of this verse was that the change from full dark to sunrise, encompassing what we term as dawn was part of the preceding day, with sunrise the beginning of the new day. An honest view now, is that dawn heralded the new day. This means the Holy day and weekly Sabbath of the 15th ended with dawn and the 16th day, the day of the Wave Sheaf offering had begun. So that both Mary’s had visited Christ’s tomb very early on the first day, just prior to sunrise. 

The author* of Mark confirms the following in Mark 16:1-2. 

‘When the Sabbath was past [the first Holy day of Unleavened Bread on the 15th], Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint [Christ]. 2 And very early [G4404 – proi: ‘early, at dawn, day-break, in the morning’ during the fourth watch – between 3-6am] on the first day of the week [the 16th], when the sun had risen [G393 – anatello: spring up, be up, to rise], they went to the tomb.’ 

Mark like Matthew, stresses that the Sabbath of the 15th was past and that the two Marys were arriving on the 16th day. The Messiah was clearly risen before sunrise, on the first day of the week. Saturday keepers find it necessary to support a Sabbath resurrection. Yet, this verse cannot strictly be used in this context, as Christ would have either risen during the night time portion of the seventh day – not during the sacred daylight portion of the Sabbath – or early on the next day. 

The translation of anatello as ‘risen’ in Mark’s gospel is not a clear rendering. ‘As the sun was rising’ would be accurate in describing the arrival of both Marys at daybreak. 

Additionally, Luke states in Luke 24:1. 

‘But on the first day [the 16th] of the week, at early dawn [G3722 – orthros: very early in the morning at ‘early dawn’ or ‘daybreak, rising of light’], they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared.’ 

Luke corroborates Matthew and Mark’s accounts, highlighting it was the 16th day; the first day of the week on the Lunar based Sacred calendar. Luke also describes the timing of the two Marys’ arrival at Christ’s tomb as being during dawn, just prior to sunrise. 

Finally, the Apostle John says in John 20:1. 

‘Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early [G4404 – proi: at dawn, day-break], while it was still [G2089 – eti] dark [G4653 – skotia: dimness, due to want of light], and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb.’ 

John mentions only one Mary, Mary Magdalene. Did she arrive before the other Mary? One would assume if it was pre-sunrise and still dark during dawn, that at that hour they would travel together and that John has just omitted the other Mary from his recollection.

According to John, Mary Magdalene arrived just prior to sunrise as the light was still dim, between night time and sunrise – in other words during dawn – to discover the open tomb. Any doubt that it was the 16th day, dawn and before sunrise, are expelled by the Apostle John. Thus, the beginning of a new day is during dawn and not at sunrise. 

One final point on this verse, is the word still, or eti in the Greek. The King James translates it as yet, 51 times; more, 22 times; any more, 5 times; still, 4 times; further, 4 times; and longer, 3 times. Interestingly, it connotes something not necessarily still happening but something changing, ‘of a thing which went on formerly, whereas now a different state of things exists or has begun to exist.’ In other words, the darkness was giving way to light – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy. 

Mary, shocked, ran to fetch Peter and John. They raced to the tomb, with the younger John beating Peter and the first to look inside, where he saw the linen cloths and evidence that Christ was not there. Peter and John left, though Mary lingered outside, weeping. When she looked into the tomb, she witnessed two angels. 

‘They said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him.” Having said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?” Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.” Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to him in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means Teacher). Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God’.” Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord” – and that he had said these things to her’ – John 20:13-18.

Christ revealed himself to Mary Magdalene first. He had not yet as the Wave Sheaf of the first fruits presented himself to the Father. Later that same day on the 16th, Peter claimed it was the third day since Jesus’ trial and crucifixion. Proving Christ died on the 14th day and the Passover. 

Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:4, ESV: “… that [Christ] was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.” Mark words it slightly differently in Mark 9:31, ESV: ‘for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men [on the 13th], and they will kill him [on the 14th]. And when he is killed, after three days he will rise.” 

Mark 8:31 is worded more accurately to show ‘after’ three days begins before the death of Christ. ‘And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things [1] and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes [2] and be killed [3], and after three days rise again.’ Thus, after three days from the 13th is the 16th; whereas after three days wrongly counted from Christ’s death on the 14th would incorrectly fall on the 17th day.

These are certainly significant, yet necessary corrections. This writer sincerely regrets if any reader has been misled through a formerly incorrect explanation. He likewise gratefully appreciates that the truth has been made evident in clarifying the matter.

© Orion Gold 2021 & 2024 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

Chapter XXX

For the constant reader – those reading the chapters in order – you may have a good idea now, on what is to be unfurled on subsequent pages, let alone the remaining chapters. For others, the information which follows will undoubtedly challenge, vex or astound, without a background of a comprehensive context. Cries of racism and simple mindedness could be the thoughts of many. The weight of proof thus far for the identities we have studied, means there is little room to manoeuvre in trying to deny the plain truth. For truth is singular and any other versions of it, whether it be our own or someone else’s, is still, but a mis-truth. Thus, it is a hopeless and forlorn endeavour indeed, to try and support old errors over new evidence, but alas it is a given that most will continue along a path that is comfortable yet restrictive, rather than one which is challenging yet enlightening. 

Judah is the fourth son of the Patriarch Jacob and was his fourth son with first wife, Leah. It is interesting to learn that of all his twelve sons, it is Judah who is most like his father, Jacob. For all this, Jacob favours his second youngest son Joseph; the eldest son by his favourite wife, Rachel. It is to Joseph that Jacob passes the birthright blessings, normally given to the literal eldest son; the promises, which were passed from Abraham to Isaac and then from Isaac to Jacob – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Yet, the most similar son is not ignored, in that Judah was promised a unique and separate blessing of his own, the royal orb and sceptre of kingship. 

This was not just any royal kingly line, for it has two distinct components not possessed by the royalty of other nations. First, there would always be someone alive from the tribe of Judah and specifically from his descendant King David, who is qualified to sit on the throne. The massive spin on this and one that many Israelite identity believers have missed, is that though the Creator promised that someone from Judah would always occupy the throne, He did not pledge that the most eligible person descended from David would be the monarch – refer articles: The Ark of God; and The Life & Death of Charles III

This throne has survived until the present era, yet those who sit on it are not entirely true descendants of Judah, but usurpers – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

The second component of Judah’s blessing was that the throne given him was on loan; that those who sit on it are temporarily holding it for someone else. The identity of that person means the incumbent King or Queen is behooved to reign justly and to be countered righteous themselves. For the seat belongs to the Son of Man and it is to Him that it will be given at His second coming. A throne He qualified for – and one that He will rule the whole world from – when He defeated sin and death; the two main instruments of weaponry, the Adversary uses in their ongoing war of enslavement against humanity (Isaiah 9:7, Hebrews 1:8; 2:14-15) – Article: Asherah; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, June 2, 1953, Westminster Abbey, London, England

Israelite identity (or British Israelite) proponents have failed to interpret the Bible, history and world events accurately for they have mis-identified Judah. We have seen the disastrous results of this in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Esau is the second most mentioned identity in the scriptures, some 30%, of all biblical identity references. The tribe of Judah is stated the most, some 60%, of all biblical identity references with the remaining 10% accounting for all the sons of Japheth, Ham and the remaining descendants of Shem, even including Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim. 

Yet the identities ascribed to both Edom and Judah, as well as to Joseph have been incorrect for nearly five hundred years from when knowledge of the subject began to gain universal appeal. Granted, most understand half of Joseph, that is, his eldest son Manasseh in part, yet even here the identities of Joseph’s two sons have been in continual error until the early 1970’s, when it was first brought to attention that the identity for Manasseh was incorrect. 

So, the four main peoples in the Bible, Judah, Edom, Ephraim and Manasseh have been incorrect since the subject was first addressed hundreds of years ago. The truth on Ephraim – to this writer’s knowledge – first came to light nearly fifty years ago, yet has remained very much in the shadows. The truth on Edom has been known far longer in some circles outside of the identity movement, particularly amongst the Jews themselves, though it too has only been discussed and revealed since the 1970’s. Unlike Ephraim, a number of works have been written on Edom and the truth has been available to the public for some time. 

Given the many, clear and distinctive clues available in the scriptures, it is baffling how blindness has afflicted it would seem, nearly everyone to the real identities of Joseph and Edom. More puzzling still, are the profound verses surrounding the tribe of Judah and how they have remained hidden while in plain sight all along. We will learn that the identity of Judah is the key… the Key, that unlocks the whole third of the Bible which is prophetic. Judah is the key that unlocks the second third of the Bible which is historical. Finally, the remaining third of the Bible – though written by extension to the whole world – is generally written to the remaining tribes of Israel; but specifically, it is to Judah that it primarily pertains. 

Matthew 10:5-6

Common English Bible

‘Jesus sent these twelve out and commanded them, “Don’t go among the Gentiles or into a Samaritan city. Go instead to the lost sheep, the people of Israel.’

Matthew 15:24

New Century Version

Jesus answered, “God sent me only to the lost sheep, the people of Israel.”

It is appreciated this is unpalatable for some readers and maybe abhorrent to others, as it appears to be a statement which is both racist and anti-Semitic all at once. The reader must understand and appreciate two points.

First, the Jews as studied in Chapter XXIX Esau: the Thirteenth Tribe, are not the tribe of Judah. 

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

‘It is very seldom that a father admits that he learned something from his son. But in my case, in a roundabout way that is what happened several years ago on our annual fishing trip to Alaska. One night after dinner at Redoubt Mountain Lodge on Crescent Lake, we were discussing the Incarnation. He asked why God chose the tiny country of Israel over the highly advanced cultures of China or India to send His son to mankind. Even with my Miller Light induced keen insight, I found I could not answer the question to his or my satisfaction. I must admit that this question has haunted me ever since. 

Little did I know at the time that this question is known by theologians as The Scandal of Particularity and has been asked by theologians for centuries. Fortunately I think I have answered it, at least to my satisfaction, at the end of this book when I give my theories as to what part Abraham played in God’s plan of salvation. So, I must thank my son Paul for spicing my life with this riddle that had so much to do with the writing of this book.’ 

David Snyder’s book was very helpful with regard to research about Abraham. The author highlights a major concern, that we looked at in the previous chapter. The Messiah was sent to His Father’s people, albeit small at that time, from the tribe of Judah in Galilee, north of Judea – which included Idumea (Edom) in the southern portion of the land south of Galilee. It was not about the size of the populace, but the fact they were the Creator’s chosen people. That said, Christ visited areas of the world where the bulk of the Israelites had migrated over the course of five or more centuries – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

Second, we shall learn that the Creator chooses whom He wills. If this is racist by our own individual definition, then it runs contrary to His. 

In Acts 17:26 NIV it says: 

‘From one man [Adam, via Noah] he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.’

If one thinks this world is marked by national boundaries that are either happenstance or merely the creation of human governments, then this is not what has occurred. There is a curious verse in Deuteronomy 32:8 NET:

‘When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided up humankind, he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of the heavenly assembly.’

The footnotes in the New English Translation states: 

‘The Hebrew term (ʿelyon) is an abbreviated form of the divine name El Elyon, frequently translated “God Most High”… This full name (or epithet) occurs only in Genesis 14, though the two elements are parallel in Psalm 73:11; 107:11; etc. Here it is clear that Elyon has to do with the nations in general whereas in verse 9, by contrast, Yahweh relates specifically to Israel. The title depicts God as the sovereign ruler of the world, who is enthroned high above his dominion. The idea, perhaps, is that Israel was central to Yahweh’s purposes and all other nations were arranged and distributed according to how they related to Israel… a Qumran fragment has “sons of God,” while the LXX reads (angelōn theou, “angels of God”)… 

“Sons of God” is undoubtedly the original reading; the MT and LXX have each interpreted it differently. MT assumes that the expression “sons of God” refers to Israel (Hosea 1:10), while LXX has assumed that the phrase refers to the angelic heavenly assembly (Psalm 29:1; 89:6; Psalm 82). The phrase is also attested in Ugaritic, where it refers to the high god El’s divine assembly. According to the latter view, which is reflected in the translation, the Lord delegated jurisdiction over the nations to his angelic host (Daniel 10:13-21), while reserving for himself Israel, over whom he rules directly [via the Archangel Michael].’

Thus, the nations and peoples of the world are actually allotted to and governed by, invisible higher authorities and angelic powers. The Creator has reserved Israel – the twelve sons of Jacob – for Himself. Verse eight is translated a number of ways in different versions.

English Standard Version

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.

New International Version

When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.

New Century Version

God Most High gave the nations their lands, dividing up the human race. He set up borders for the people and even numbered the Israelites.

The latter two have based their translation on the subject of verse nine, though the interlinear uses the Hebrew word Israel (H3478): ‘When most High divided nations their inheritance, where separated sons of Adam, set bounds people, according to number children Israel’ The word for ‘children’ is ben (H1121) and is translated in the KJV as: son (2978 times), children (1568), old (135), first (51), man (20), young (18) and stranger (10). Used as sons, it can mean sons of God or angels. The following verses clarify that the context is speaking of the sons of God, as the Creator is included.

Deuteronomy 32:8-12

Common English Bible

‘When God Most High divided up the nations – when he divided up humankind – he decided the people’s boundaries based on the number of the gods.

Surely the Lords property was his people; Jacob was his part of the inheritance.

God found Israel in a wild land – in a howling desert wasteland – he protected him, cared for him, watched over him with his very own eye. Like an eagle protecting its nest, hovering over its young, God spread out his wings, took hold of Israel, carried him on his back. The Lord alone led Israel; no foreign god assisted.’

The Message verses 8-9

When the High God gave the nations their stake, gave them their place on Earth, He put each of the peoples within boundaries under the care of divine guardians. 

But God himself took charge of his people, took Jacob on as his personal concern.

Living Bible verse 8

When God divided up the world among the nations, He gave each of them a supervising angel!

There are further verses which support angelic governance of specific nations and the Creator’s participation in this process.

Psalm 47:7-9

Common English Bible

‘… God is king of the whole world! Sing praises with a song of instruction! God is king over the nations. God sits on his holy throne. The leaders of all people are gathered with the people of Abraham’s God because the earth’s guardians belong to God; God is exalted beyond all.’

Psalm 2:1-2

New Century Version

‘Why are the nations so angry? Why are the people making useless plans? The kings of the earth prepare to fight, and their leaders make plans together against the Lord and his appointed one [the Son of Man].

Isaiah 41:9, 14

New English Translation

‘… you whom I am bringing back from the earth’s extremities, and have summoned from the remote regions [the antipodes, southern Africa, northern America and the British Isles] – I told you, ‘You are my servant.’ I have chosen you and not rejected you… Don’t be afraid, despised insignificant Jacob, men of Israel. I am helping you, says the Lord, your Protector, the Holy One of Israel.’

Daniel 10:1-6, 20-21

English Standard Version

‘In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshazzar. And the word was true, and it was a great conflict. And he understood the word and had understanding of the vision… I lifted up my eyes and looked, and behold, a man [an angel] clothed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a multitude… Then he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? But now I will return to fight against the prince of Persia; and when I go out, behold, the prince of Greece will come. But I will tell you what is inscribed in the book of truth: there is none who contends by my side against these except Michael, your prince [the Prince of Israel].’

Before we delve into Judah and his half-brother Benjamin, we will complete our discussion on Jacob, begun in Chapter twenty-seven about Abraham (Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia); continued in Chapter twenty-eight on Ishmael (The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar); and Chapter twenty-nine with Esau (Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe); for Jacob and Judah are much alike… though first, we shall address the British Israelite Identity movement itself.

British Israelism also known as Anglo-Israelism is the belief that the peoples of the British Isles are “genetically, racially and linguistically” the direct descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of the ancient Kingdom of Israel. There is an error right here already, in that we will learn that all twelve tribes – actually thirteen – were ‘lost’ and all thirteen after migrating through Europe, converged on the islands of Britain and Ireland. 

The movement’s roots in the sixteenth century, gained increasing popularity in the 1800s – with its formal beginning sprung from works by John Wilson (1799-1870) and Edward Hine (1825-1891) – continuing on till the present day. A well known online encyclopaedia with a palpable bias, states that these central tenets of British Israelism ‘have been refuted by evidence from modern archaeological, ethnological, genetic and linguistic research.’ It would be enlightening to learn of all this supposed evidence – Article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator. It would also be fascinating to learn from this particular contributor, who then, are the descendants of ancient Israel today? 

Any reader who has undertaken the dedicated and unswerving journey of reading every chapter in this quest, will now know that we have convincingly and undeniably found a modern counterpart for every biblical identity. There only remains a handful of nations around the world that could be the sons of Jacob. Anyone prejudiced, unyielding or upholding a misleading agenda, would be severely exposed in seeking to refute the massive body of evidence compiled and presented thus far. 

One of the earliest expressions of the biblical identity doctrine was by a French Huguenot magistrate M le Loyer, in a work published in 1590, entitled, The Ten Lost Tribes. This may well be where the erroneous label ‘Ten Lost Tribes’ originated, as well as mistakenly presenting the Scandinavian and Germanic peoples as additional sons of Jacob; when in fact, they are descendants of Abraham, just not through his son Isaac. Apparently James VI of Scotland, (James I of England) believed he was the King of Israel. In 1919 the British Israel World Federation was founded in London and Covenant Publishing in 1922. The Federation has its headquarters in Bishop Auckland in County Durham. 

From the 1930s Herbert Armstrong (1892-1986), founder of the Radio and later, Worldwide Church of God; promoted the doctrine to its widest appeal, as one of his central teachings in understanding biblical prophecy – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Much of his own book on the subject – The United States and Britain in Prophecy – was heavily based or copied from an earlier work in 1902 by J H Allen, Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright

Criticisms of the movement by current scholars, include amateur research and scholarship in theology, anthropology, history and linguistics and of course the catch-all, sink the whole ship tactic, ‘its anti-semitic.’ As we have already addressed, the term anti-semitic is used in a linguistic context not an ethnic one and thus has been misleadingly misappropriated by opponents – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

One critic states: ‘the overwhelming cultural, historical and genetic evidence [is] against it.’ The presentation of this evidence would again be enlightening. Granted, the link between certain Hebrew and English words has shown to be a flawed argument – but not in every case. What no one seems to have considered, is the similarity between English and the Germanic (Teutonic) language it evolved from, revealing not just other language family members but related genetic family also – refer point number three in the Introduction. 

English has evolved from Old English and Old English evolved from Low German. As Germany is Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar – the Germans and English are closely related cousins. Not as closely related as Scotland and England who are half brothers, but still a family kinship as evidenced by not only the link in philology, but also the migration of the Saxon hordes from Northern Germany to England and the fact that from the east coast of England to the western border of Germany, it is merely two hundred miles. 

Today there are provinces in both Germany and in Britain which are named after the Saxons and the primary tribe, the Angles. In Germany there are the federal states of Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony); Sachsen-Anhalt (Saxony-Anhalt); and Sachsen (Saxony). 

In Britain there was the former Kingdom of Wessex (West Saxony); and the modern counties of Sussex (South Saxony); and Essex (East Saxony). Immediately south of the German-Danish border, in the German part of Schleswig, is the province Angeln (Anglia). Until 1800, the foremost language in Angeln was Danish, but during the first part of the nineteenth century German became the primary language. In eastern England there is a region called East Anglia. The name England itself is derived from Angle-land. In everyday language Anglo-Saxon is another name for the English speaking peoples, regardless of how many of their ancestors were from the Saxon tribe known as Angles. 

There is another movement called Christian Identity – a 1920s offshoot of British Israelism – that includes a racial interpretation of Christianity with a theology focus which is wholly white supremacist, racist and truly anti-semitic, embedded in fundamentalist teachings. This writer confirms that no connection exists between themselves and the Christian Identity or even the British Israel Federation. Nor has any of the material presented in this work been inspired or influenced by either organisation or its beliefs. Any similarity of suppositions, points or teachings are purely coincidental and cannot be perceived as the same or linked in either their formation or explanation. 

Genesis 27:26-29

Christian Standard Bible

26 Then his father Isaac said to him, “Please come closer and kiss me, my son.” 27 So he came closer and kissed him. When Isaac smelled his clothes, he blessed him and said:

“Ah, the smell of my son is like the smell of a field that the Lord has blessed. 28 May God give to you – from the dew of the sky and from the richness of the land – an abundance of grain and new wine.

29 May peoples serve you and nations bow in worship to you. Be master over your relatives; may your mother’s sons bow in worship to you. Those who curse you will be cursed, and those who bless you will be blessed.”

Isaac’s blessing to Jacob said he would inherit rich lands, be prosperous and have power over other nations, including his relatives: Edom, Ishmael and Hagar, Midian – and the other sons of Keturah – Haran, Moab, Ammon and Nahor – the Chaldeans. Today, they respectively equate to the Jews and Israel; Germany and Austria; the Netherlands; Scandinavia, Belgium and Luxembourg; Switzerland; France, French Quebec in Canada; and Italy. They are the non-Israelite countries descended from Abraham and his two brothers – the nations principally of northwestern Europe. (We learned in chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, that Edom has turned the table on Jacob as prophesied)

Aside from any other information, once we understand who Abraham’s other descendants are, we would have to objectively look throughout the world and say honestly which nations have had dominion over all these nations for the past five hundred years. There are only two nations that could answer to that enquiry and now, the reader will have worked out who they are. 

What has alluded those who have already understood this mystery, is the exact identity of these two primary leading nations descended from the two most prominent sons of Jacob. For the first time, they can be revealed and explained. 

Recall that Rebekah had been blessed by her family in Genesis 24:60 NKJV: “Our sister, may you become The mother of thousands of ten thousands; And may your descendants possess The gates [doors, cities] of those who hate them.” Some by extension teach this includes pivotal sea-gates around the globe. If so, then Great Britain and the United States have shared the lion’s share of strategic ports: the Straits of Malacca, Singapore, the Suez Canal, Bab el Mandeb, Strait of Hormuz, Cape of Good Hope, Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands; plus the Panama Canal and other locations throughout the Pacific ocean. 

Jacob receives additional blessings. One from Isaac when Jacob hastily departs from his home in escaping a wrathful Esau and again, in a vision while sleeping.

Genesis 28:1-17

Christian Standard Bible

1 ‘So Isaac summoned Jacob, blessed him… 3 May God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you so that you become an assembly [H6951 – qahal: multitude, company] of peoples. 4 May God give you and your offspring the blessing of Abraham so that you may possess the land where you live as a foreigner, the land God gave to Abraham.

10 Jacob left Beer-sheba and went toward Haran. 11 He reached a certain place and spent the night there because the sun had set. He took one of the stones from the place, put it there at his head, and lay down in that place. 12 And he dreamed: A stairway was set on the ground with its top reaching the sky, and God’s angels were going up and down on it. 13 The Lord was standing there beside him, saying, 

“I am the Lord, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your offspring the land on which you are lying. 14 Your offspring will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out toward the west, the east, the north, and the south. All the peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring.”

The promise of Jacob’s offspring being a blessing to all nations is an echo of what the Creator spoke to Abraham. Genesis 22:18 NKJV: ‘In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.’ Paul teaches that the fulfilment of this promise was through the Son of Man. Galatians 3:8, 16 ESV: ‘And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles [all nations] by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed”… Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.’ 

Hebrews 2:10-18

Common English Bible

10 ‘It was appropriate for God, for whom and through whom everything exists, to use experiences of suffering to make perfect the pioneer of salvation. This salvation belongs to many sons and daughters whom he’s leading to glory. 11 This is because the one who makes people holy and the people who are being made holy all come from one source. That is why Jesus isn’t ashamed to call them brothers and sisters… 14 Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, he also shared the same things in the same way. He did this to destroy the one who holds the power over death – the devil – by dying.

15 He set free those who were held in slavery their entire lives by their fear of death. 16 Of course, he isn’t trying to help angels, but rather he’s helping Abraham’s descendants. 17 Therefore, he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way. This was so that he could become a merciful and faithful high priest in things relating to God, in order to wipe away the sins of the people. 18 He’s able to help those who are being tempted, since he himself experienced suffering when he was tempted.’

It is vital to grasp, that a two-fold promise was given: material prosperity and spiritual salvation. This is not something that very many people understand.

Genesis: 15 ‘Look, I am with you and will watch over you wherever you go. I will bring you back to this land, for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” 16 When Jacob awoke from his sleep, he said, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I did not know it.” 17 He was afraid and said, “What an awesome place this is! This is none other than the house of God. This is the gate [stairway] of heaven.”

Jacob’s offspring were to be numerous and to spread in all directions of the globe, north, south, east and west. In modern times this has been fulfilled as the British and Irish peoples have spread abroad to all continents, as well as making permanent homes in the antipodes, southern Africa and the Americas. 

Verse three is worth looking more closely at. An assembly of peoples hints at more than one nation. The Hebrew word qahal [H6951], is translated by the KJV, as congregation (86 times), assembly (17), company (17) and multitude (3). The Hebrew word preceding it is rabah [H7235], which the KJV translates as multiply (74), increase (40), many (28), great (8), exceedingly (2) and abundance (2); to be ‘many and numerous.’

Thus, Jacob’s children were to become numerous, while also more than one nation. Other versions translate in some insightful ways which assist in identifying the Israelite nations today.

NCV: … and may you become a group of many peoples.

NET: … and give you a multitude of descendants! Then you will become a large nation.

TLB: … may you become a great nation of many tribes!

NIRV: … May he make your family larger until you become a community of nations.

NLT: … And may your descendants multiply and become many nations!

VOICE: … and multiply your descendants so that you will give rise to nation after nation!

Jacob

Genesis 29:1-35

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Jacob went on his journey and came to the land of the people of the east. 2 As he looked, he saw a well in the field, and behold, three flocks of sheep lying beside it, for out of that well the flocks were watered. The stone on the well’s mouth was large, 3 and when all the flocks were gathered there, the shepherds would roll the stone from the mouth of the well and water the sheep, and put the stone back in its place over the mouth of the well.

4 Jacob said to them, “My brothers, where do you come from?” They said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the [grandson] of Nahor?” They said, “We know him.” 6 He said to them, “Is it well with him?” They said, “It is well; and see, Rachel his daughter is coming with the sheep!” 

7 He said, “Behold, it is still high day; it is not time for the livestock to be gathered together. Water the sheep and go, pasture them.” 8 But they said, “We cannot until all the flocks are gathered together and the stone is rolled from the mouth of the well; then we water the sheep.”

9 While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was a shepherdess. 10 Now as soon as Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, Jacob came near and rolled the stone from the well’s mouth and watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother.

11 Then Jacob kissed Rachel and wept aloud. 12 And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s kinsman, and that he was Rebekah’s son, and she ran and told her father.’

It was love at first sight for Jacob, just as it had been for his father Isaac, when he saw Rebekah for the first time.

13 ‘As soon as Laban heard the news about Jacob, his sister’s son, he ran to meet him and embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his house. Jacob told Laban all these things, 14 and Laban said to him, “Surely you are my bone and my flesh!” And he stayed with him a month.

15 Then Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my kinsman, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?” 16 Now Laban had two daughters. The name of the older was Leah [H3812: weary], and the name of the younger was Rachel [7354: ewe].’

Leah

17 ‘Leah’s eyes were weak [H7390 – rak: tender, soft, delicate as in soft of words, delicate of flesh, shy], but Rachel was beautiful [H3303 – yapheh: comely, fair, beautiful] in form [body] and appearance [face].

Leah’s eyesight was not weak, rather her countenance was not as striking as her sister’s.

18 ‘Jacob loved Rachel. And he said, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.” 19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to any other man; stay with me.” 20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed to him but a few days because of the love he had for her.’

Rachel

21 ‘Then Jacob said to Laban, “Give me my wife that I may go in to her, for my time is completed.” 22 So Laban gathered together all the people of the place and made a feast. 23 But in the evening he took his daughter Leah and brought her to Jacob, and he went in to her. 24 (Laban gave his female servant Zilpah to his daughter Leah to be her servant.)

25 And in the morning, behold, it was Leah! And Jacob said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Did I not serve with you for Rachel? Why then have you deceived me?” 26 Laban said, “It is not so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. 27 Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other also in return for serving me another seven years.” 28 Jacob did so, and completed her week. 

Then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel to be his wife. 29 (Laban gave his female servant Bilhah to his daughter Rachel to be her servant.) 30 So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years.

31 When the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren [like her grandmother, Sarah]. 32 And Leah conceived and bore a son [1], and she called his name Reuben [See, a son], for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”

33 She conceived again and bore a son [2], and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon [heard]. 34 Again she conceived and bore a son [3], and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi [attached].

35 And she conceived again and bore a son [4], and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.”Therefore she called his name Judah [praise]. Then she ceased bearing [for the time being, as Leah had two additional sons and a daughter].’

Jacob fled from his brother Esau in 1760 BCE. The Seder Olam Rabba states that Leah and Rachel were themselves also twins and were twenty-two (or twenty-one in another version) when they married Jacob. In 1753 BCE, Jacob would have been sixty-four years old. His working for seven years makes sense if Rachel had only been fifteen when they first met. It may also explain how Jacob was deceived on his wedding day and night if they were twins, thinking Leah was Rachel. 

Laban certainly knew what he was doing and had his plan regarding his daughters, unbeknown to Jacob. Reuben was born 1752 BCE; Simeon in 1750 BCE; Levi in 1748 BCE; and Judah was born in 1746 BCE according to an unconventional chronology.

Genesis 30:1-43

English Standard Version 

1 ‘When Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, she envied her sister.

She said to Jacob, “Give me children, or I shall die!”

2 Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel, and he said, “Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?” 3 Then she said, “Here is my servant Bilhah; go in to her, so that she may give birth on my behalf, that even I may have children through her.” 4 So she gave him her servant Bilhah as a wife, and Jacob went in to her. 5 And Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son [1/5].

6 Then Rachel said, “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called his name Dan [judged]. 7 Rachel’s servant Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a second son [2/6]. 8 Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.” So she called his name Naphtali [wrestling].’

It is worth noting that when we investigate Dan – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe – we learn he was a troublesome son. Dan was conceived in an atmosphere of a marital argument, where Rachel was consumed with envy towards her sister and Jacob was angry. This may be in part, due to further controversy surrounding Dan’s birth.

9 ‘When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. 10 Then Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son [1/7]. 11 And Leah said, “Good fortune has come!” so she called his name Gad [good fortune]’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 12 ‘Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son [2/8]. 13 And Leah said, “Happy am I! For women have called me happy.” So she called his name Asher [happy].

Dan was born later the same year as Judah in 1746 BCE and his brother Naphtali in 1744 BCE. Gad was also born in 1744 BCE and his brother Asher in 1742 BCE.

14 ‘In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” 15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.” 16 When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he lay with her that night.

17 And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son [5/9]. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant to my husband.” So she called his name Issachar [wages or hire]. 19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son [6/10]. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun [honour]. 21 Afterward she bore a daughter and called her name Dinah.’

Issachar was born in 1742 BCE and his name may have been in part a homage to his grandfather Isaac. Zebulun and Dinah are thought to have been twins as it does not say Leah conceived Dinah, but rather she followed Zebulun – the Book of Jubilees corroborates twins. Leah was thirty-four when she had her last children; seven children in the space of twelve years. Additional information is provided in the Book of Jubilees regarding Leah and her sons, with the spacing between the births given.

Book of Jubilees 28:11-23

28:11 ‘And Yahweh opened the womb of Leah, and she conceived and bare Jacob a son, and he called his name Reuben, on the fourteenth day of the ninth month [November/December]… Yahweh saw that Leah was hated and Rachel loved. 13 And again Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare Jacob a second son, and he called his name Simeon, on the twenty-first of the tenth month [December/January], 14 And again Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare him a third son, and he called his name Levi, in the new month [1st – New Moon] of the first month [March/April]… 15 And again Jacob went in unto her, and she conceived, and bare him a fourth son, and he called his name Judah, on the fifteenth [Sabbath] of the third month [May/June]… 

17 And when Rachel saw that Leah had borne four sons to Jacob… she said to him: ‘Go in unto Bilhah my handmaid, and she will conceive, and bear a son unto me.’ 18… and she conceived, and bare him a son, and he called his name Dan, on the ninth of the sixth month [August/September]… 19 And Jacob went in again unto Bilhah a second time, and she conceived, and bare Jacob another son, and Rachel called his name Napthali, on the fifth of the seventh* month [September/October*]… 

20 And when Leah saw that she had become sterile and did not bear, she envied Rachel, and she also gave her handmaid Zilpah to Jacob to wife, and she conceived, and bare a son, and Leah called his name Gad, on the twelfth of the eighth month [October/November]… 21 And he went in again unto her, and she conceived, and bare him a second son, and Leah called his name Asher, on the second of the eleventh month [January/February]…

22 And Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Issachar, on the fourth of the fifth month [July/August]…and she gave him to a nurse. 23 And Jacob went in again unto her, and she conceived, and bare two (children), a son and a daughter, and she called the name of the son Zebulon, and the name of the daughter Dinah, in the seventh of the seventh* month [September/October*]…’

Confirmation Zebulun and Dinah were twins, with Zebulun the eldest. Levi was born on the New Moon or first day of the month. A day that was later celebrated like a Sabbath and Judah was actually born on what would be the second Sabbath day of the month, according to the lunar cycle calendar – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Genesis: 22 ‘Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son [1/11] and said, “God has taken away my reproach.” 24 And she called his name Joseph [may he add], saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!” [this was fulfilled literally, with the birth of Benjamin and also figuratively, when Joseph became two, by having his own sons Manasseh and Ephraim].’

25 ‘As soon as Rachel had borne Joseph, Jacob said to Laban, “Send me away, that I may go to my own home and country. 

26 Give me my wives and my children for whom I have served you, that I may go, for you know the service that I have given you.” 27 But Laban said to him, “If I have found favor in your sight, I have learned by divination that the Lord has blessed me because of you. 28 Name your wages, and I will give it.”

29 Jacob said to him, “You yourself know how I have served you, and how your livestock has fared with me. 30 For you had little before I came, and it has increased abundantly, and the Lord has blessed you wherever I turned. But now when shall I provide for my own household also?” 31 He said, “What shall I give you?” Jacob said, “You shall not give me anything. If you will do this for me, I will again pasture your flock and keep it: 32 let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted sheep and every black lamb, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and they shall be my wages. 33 So my honesty will answer for me later, when you come to look into my wages with you. 

Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats and black among the lambs, if found with me, shall be counted stolen.” 34 Laban said, “Good! Let it be as you have said.” 35 But that day Laban removed the male goats that were striped and spotted, and all the female goats that were speckled and spotted, every one that had white on it, and every lamb that was black, and put them in the charge of his sons. 36 And he set a distance of three days’ journey between himself and Jacob, and Jacob pastured the rest of Laban’s flock.

37 Then Jacob took fresh sticks of poplar and almond and plane trees, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the sticks. 38 He set the sticks that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink, 39 the flocks bred in front of the sticks and so the flocks brought forth striped, speckled, and spotted. 40 And Jacob separated the lambs and set the faces of the flocks toward the striped and all the black in the flock of Laban. He put his own droves apart and did not put them with Laban’s flock. 41 Whenever the stronger of the flock were breeding, Jacob would lay the sticks in the troughs before the eyes of the flock, that they might breed among the sticks, 42 but for the feebler of the flock he would not lay them there. So the feebler would be Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.

43 Thus the man increased greatly and had large flocks, female servants and male servants, and camels and donkeys.’

Book of Jubilees 28:25-30

28:25 ‘And in the days when Joseph was born… Jacob’s possessions multiplied exceedingly, and he possessed oxen and sheep and asses and camels, and menservants and maid-servants. 30 And Laban and his sons envied Jacob, and Laban took back his [own] sheep from him, and he observed him with evil intent.’ 

Joseph was born quite sometime after Zebulun and Dinah, fourteen years later in fact, in 1726 BCE. A real battle of wills, mind games and trying to out smart the other is the core of Laban and Jacob’s relationship. This must have grown wearisome to say the least for Jacob after thirty-four** years. It is though, another six years in 1720 BCE before Jacob finally has had enough and the call to return home to his parents has grown irresistible. 

At some point, Jacob’s mother Rebekah dies and whether this influences Jacob’s return is not known. There are two schools of thought from Rabbis. The first is that Rebekah died at the age of 133 years in 1724 BCE, twenty-seven years before Isaac. Her death would have occurred prior to Jacob’s return to his parents’ home; ‘and it was [possibly] coincident with that of Deborah’ – Genesis 35:8. Her decease is not mentioned because Jacob had not arrived in time; so Esau was the only son present to attend to her burial. 

One tradition holds the ‘ceremony was performed at night out of shame that her coffin should be followed by a son like Esau.’ Alternatively, according to the Book of Jubilees 31:8-11, 48, Jacob, when he arrived home, found his mother alive; and she afterward accompanied him to Beth-el to accomplish his vow – Genesis 28:19-20. 

This would mean Rebekah died at the age of 155 years in 1702 BCE, some five years before Isaac’s death (Jubilees 35:1, 41), thus determining that her age when she married was twenty years old, while Isaac was forty. It is this version, which would be considered the more accurate. 

Most readers assume that Jacob worked for Laban for twenty** years, yet the biblical math does not support this premise. An unknown author assist in providing the correct explanation: 

“In Genesis chapter 30 we find the entire account of Laban talking Jacob out of leaving Haran following the birth of Joseph, and Jacob agreeing to stay on and work for some of Laban’s livestock. But note the statement in Genesis 30:36, where it is noted that Laban separates himself from Jacob by 3 days journey. Now if Jacob is separated 3 days journey from Laban then he is certainly no longer in Laban’s house (Genesis 31:41). And so the 20 years mentioned in Genesis 31:41 cannot include the 6 years in which Jacob lived 3 days journey from Laban. Thus, it appears that there were two separate 20 years periods, one in which Jacob lived in Laban’s house (verse 41), and another in which Jacob lived in Haran but outside of Laban’s house (verse 38), which included the 6 years in which Jacob lived 3 days journey from Laban.  

In all likelihood, the 20 years in Haran but outside Laban’s house included the 14 years working for Laban’s daughters as well as the 6 years working for Laban’s livestock. All together this would mean that Jacob was in Haran for a total of 40 years, not just 34 years, and certainly not just 20 years. And so Jacob would have come to Haran at 57 years old (6 years before Ishmael died), and stayed until 97 years old before returning to Canaan. Now recall one of the difficulties of Jacob being in Haran for only 20 years is that this forces him to have 12 children in just 7 years, and forces Joseph to be roughly the same age as his brothers, making Genesis 37:3 (i.e., Joseph the son of Jacob’s old age) nonsensical.  

But now that we see Jacob was in Haran for 40 years, this allows Jacob to start having children when he was 64 years old (7 years after coming to Haran at 57 years old). In which case it is very much possible that all of Jacob’s children were born by the time he was 76 years old, with the exception of Joseph, who we know wasn’t born until 15 years later when Jacob was 91 years old.  Now in this scenario the statement of Genesis 37:3 makes much more sense, given that Joseph was born when Jacob was 91 years old and his other children much earlier, when Jacob was probably between the ages of 64 and 76 years old.”

Genesis 31:1-55

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Jacob heard that the sons of Laban were saying, “Jacob has taken all that was our father’s [Bethuel], and from what was our father’s he has gained all this wealth.” 

2 And Jacob saw that Laban did not regard him with favor as before. 3 Then the Lord said to Jacob, “Return to the land of your fathers and to your kindred, and I will be with you.”

4 So Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah into the field where his flock was 5 and said to them, “I see that your father does not regard me with favor as he did before. But the God of my father has been with me. 6 You know that I have served your father with all my strength, 7 yet your father has cheated me and changed my wages ten times…14 Then Rachel and Leah answered and said to him, “Is there any portion or inheritance left to us in our father’s house? 15 Are we not regarded by him as foreigners? For he has sold us, and he has indeed devoured our money. 16 All the wealth that God has taken away from our father belongs to us and to our children. Now then, whatever God has said to you, do.”

17 So Jacob arose and set his sons and his wives on camels. 18 He drove away all his livestock, all his property that he had gained, the livestock in his possession that he had acquired in Paddan-aram^ [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans], to go to the land of Canaan to his father Isaac. 19 Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and Rachel stole her father’s household gods. 20 And Jacob tricked Laban the Aramean^, by not telling him that he intended to flee. 21 He fled with all that he had and arose and crossed the Euphrates, and set his face toward the hill country of Gilead [the future territory of the half tribe of East Manasseh].

22 When it was told Laban on the third day that Jacob had fled, 23 he took his kinsmen with him and pursued him for seven days and followed close after him into the hill country of Gilead. 24 But God came to Laban the Aramean in a dream by night and said to him, “Be careful not to say anything to Jacob, either good or bad.”

25 And Laban overtook Jacob… 26 And Laban said to Jacob, “What have you done, that you have tricked me and driven away my daughters like captives of the sword? 27 Why did you flee secretly and trick me, and did not tell me, so that I might have sent you away with mirth and songs, with tambourine and lyre? 28 And why did you not permit me to kiss my [grandsons] and my daughters farewell? Now you have done foolishly… 30 And now you have gone away because you longed greatly for your father’s house, but why did you steal my gods?” 31 Jacob answered and said to Laban, “Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your daughters from me by force. 

32 Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live. In the presence of our kinsmen point out what I have that is yours, and take it.” Now Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them. 33 So Laban went into Jacob’s tent and into Leah’s tent and into the tent of the two female servants, but he did not find them. And he went out of Leah’s tent and entered Rachel’s. 34 Now Rachel had taken the household gods and put them in the camel’s saddle and sat on them. Laban felt all about the tent, but did not find them. 35 And she said to her father, “Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise before you, for the way of women is upon me.” [an outright lie perhaps or fortunate timing] So he searched but did not find the household gods.

36 Then Jacob became angry and berated Laban. Jacob said to Laban, “What is my offense? What is my sin, that you have hotly pursued me? 38 These twenty years I have been with you. 

Your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried, and I have not eaten the rams of your flocks. 39 What was torn by wild beasts I did not bring to you. I bore the loss of it myself… 40 There I was: by day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night, and my sleep fled from my eyes. 41 These twenty years I have been in your house. I served you fourteen years for your two daughters, and six years for your flock, and you have changed my wages ten times. 42 If the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac, had not been on my side, surely now you would have sent me away empty-handed. God saw my affliction and the labor of my hands and rebuked you last night.”

43 Then Laban answered and said to Jacob, “The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine. But what can I do this day for these my daughters or for their children whom they have borne? 44 Come now, let us make a covenant, you and I. And let it be a witness between you and me.” 45 So Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar. 46 And Jacob said to his kinsmen, “Gather stones.” And they took stones and made a heap, and they ate there by the heap… 48 Laban said, “This heap is a witness between you and me today… The Lord watch between you and me, when we are out of one another’s sight. 50 If you oppress my daughters, or if you take wives besides my daughters, although no one is with us, see, God is witness between you and me.”

51 Then Laban said to Jacob… 53 The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor [Laban’s grandfather], the God of their father, judge between us.” So Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac… 55 Early in the morning Laban arose and kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban departed and returned home.’

An amicable parting and agreement to not do each other any harm. Jacob, with the Creator’s help extricated himself from a difficult domestic noose. Jacob and Esau’s reconciliation in 1720 BCE was discussed in the preceding chapter. The Book of Jubilees contains additional details. 

Book of Jubilees 29:5-20

29:5 ‘… Jacob turned his face toward Gilead in the first month [March/April], on the twenty-first thereof [what would become the seventh and last Holy day of Unleavened Bread]. And Laban pursued after him and overtook Jacob in the mountain of Gilead in the third month [May/June], on the thirteenth thereof… 7 And Laban spoke to Jacob. And on the fifteenth [full moon, Sabbath] of those days Jacob made a feast for Laban, and for all who came with him, and Jacob swore to Laban that day, and Laban also to Jacob, that neither should cross the mountain of Gilead to the other with evil purpose

8 And he made there a heap for a witness; wherefore the name of that place is called: ‘The Heap of Witness’… 9 But before they used to call the land of Gilead the land of the Rephaim… and the Rephaim were born (there), giants whose height was ten [15 feet], nine, eight down to seven [10’ 6’’] cubits. 10 And their habitation was from the land of the children of Ammon to Mount Hermon, and the seats of their kingdom were Karnaim and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, and Misur, and Beon. 

11 And Yahweh destroyed them because of the evil of their deeds; for they were very malignant, and the Amorites dwelt in their stead, wicked and sinful, and there is no people today which has wrought to the full all their sins, and they have no longer length of life on the earth. 13 And he passed over the Jabbok in the ninth month [November/December], on the eleventh thereof [in 1720 BCE]. And on that day Esau, his brother, came to him, and he was reconciled to him, and departed from him to the land of Seir, but Jacob dwelt in tents.

14 And… he crossed the Jordan, and dwelt beyond the Jordan, and he pastured his sheep from the sea of the heap unto Bethshan, and unto Dothan and unto the forest of Akrabbim. 15 And he sent to his father Isaac of all his substance, clothing, and food, and meat, and drink, and milk, and butter, and cheese, and some dates of the valley. 16 And to his mother Rebecca also four times a year, between the times of the months, between ploughing and reaping, and between autumn and the rain (season) and between winter and spring.… 

17 For Isaac had returned from the ‘Well of the Oath’ and gone up to the tower of his father Abraham [‘on the mountains of Hebron’], and he dwelt there apart from his son Esau [estranged]. 18 For in the days when Jacob went to Mesopotamia, Esau took to himself a wife Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael, and he gathered together all the flocks of his father [Isaac] and his wives, and went up and dwelt on Mount Seir, and left Isaac his father at the ‘Well of the Oath’ alone… [that is, he took his inheritance early and took what was Isaac’s wealth – recall Issac was old and blind] 20 And thitherJacob sent all that he did send to his father and his mother from time to time, all they needed, and they blessed Jacob with all their heart and with all their soul.’

Next, we learn of Jacob’s change of name, a specification on his blessing and the death of his wife Rachel followed by his father Isaac’s passing.

Genesis 35:1-21

English Standard Version

‘God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there. Make an altar there to the God who appeared to you when you fled from your brother Esau.” 2 So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Put away the foreign gods that are among you and purify yourselves and change your garments. 3 Then let us arise and go up to Bethel, so that I may make there an altar to the God who answers me in the day of my distress and has been with me wherever I have gone.” 4 So they gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that they had, and the rings that were in their ears. Jacob hid them under the terebinth tree that was near Shechem.

5 And as they journeyed, a terror from God fell upon the cities that were around them, so that they did not pursue the sons of Jacob. 6 And Jacob came to Luz (that is, Bethel), which is in the land of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him, 7 and there he built an altar and called the place El-bethel, because there God had revealed himself to him when he fled from his brother. 8 And Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and she was buried under an oak below Bethel. So he called its name Allon-bacuth.

9 God appeared to Jacob again, when he came from Paddan-aram, and blessed him. 10 And God said to him, “Your name is Jacob; no longer shall your name be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name.” So he called his name Israel.

11 And God said to him, “I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply. A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come from your own body [this was not fulfilled by the Edomite-Jew].

12 The land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and I will give the land to your offspring after you.” 13 Then God went up from him in the place where he had spoken with him. 14 And Jacob set up a pillar in the place where he had spoken with him, a pillar of stone. He poured out a drink offering on it and poured oil on it. 15 So Jacob called the name of the place where God had spoken with him Bethel.’

Verse eleven is applied to Jacob, yet we will find that it is specifically addressing Joseph and Judah in the future. In fact, Joseph’s part of the verse is split between his sons Manasseh and Ephraim. From Judah would issue kings, and from Manasseh a nation and from Ephraim, a company of nations. There is another way of interpreting the verse and that is the nation is Joseph and the company of nations are the remaining ten brothers and their specific inheritances. 

The Hebrew word for nation is goy [H1471] and is translated: nation (374 times), heathen (143), Gentiles (30) and people (11). We will study this further when we investigate Manasseh and Ephraim – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Alternative translations for this verse include: 

MSG: … A nation – a whole company of nations! – will come from you.

NLT: … You will become a great nation, even many nations.

VOICE: … You will give rise to a great nation; indeed nation after nation will come from you.

Genesis: 16 ‘Then they journeyed from Bethel. When they were still some distance from Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, and she had hard labor. 17 And when her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Do not fear, for you have another son [2/12].” 18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni [son of my sorrow or son of my strength]; but his father called him Benjamin [son of the right hand].

19 So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem), 20 and Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb. It is the pillar of Rachel’s tomb, which is there to this day. 21 Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder.’

As Benjamin was considerably younger than Joseph – who had been born in 1726 BCE and was himself fourteen years younger than Zebulun and Dinah, arriving in Egypt at the age of seventeen in 1709 BCE, coupled with Jospeh not having known Benjamin, until he met him in Egypt in 1687 BCE and the fact that Benjamin is described as a ‘little one’ or a boy, who was given extra servings of food by Joseph – an age of twelve (plus or minus 2 to 3 years) is plausible, when Joseph was age 39 or 40. This means a birth of circa 1699 BCE for Benjamin as well as the untimely early death of his mother Rachel, at the age of seventy-five.

Book of Jubilees 36 

21 ‘And Leah his wife died… and he buried her in the double cave near Rebecca his mother to the left of the grave of Sarah, his father’s mother. 23 And all her sons and his sons came to mourn over Leah his wife with him and to comfort him regarding her, for he was lamenting her for he loved her exceedingly after Rachel her sister died; 24 For she was perfect and upright in all her ways and honored Jacob, and all the days that she lived with him he did not hear from her mouth a harsh word, for she was gentle and peaceable and upright and honorable. 24 And he remembered all her deeds which she had done during her life and he lamented her exceedingly; for he loved her with all his heart and with all his soul.’

A difficult start to their marriage, with Leah being relegated behind Rachel to the point of ‘hatred’ must have mercifully eased over time and particularly after Rachel’s death. We saw earlier that though Leah wasn’t unattractive, possessing a gentle disposition, she was in the shadow of her outgoing and alluring sister. Rachel is a definite reminder of Rebekah and Leah has a certain hint of Sarah about her. Leah dies after Rachel her twin, yet apparently before Jacob travels to Egypt in 1687 BCE, as Leah is buried in Hebron. This means she died rather early herself, somewhere between seventy-five and eighty-seven years of age. If we say eighty-five, then she would have had ten years with Jacob after her sister died. Her death may have acted as a further prompt for Jacob to depart to Egypt during the famine. 

It is worth noting that Jacob just prior to his death, was inspired to split the family blessing, so that a son of Rachel received the physical birthright blessing of prosperity and a son of Leah received the spiritual blessing of the Messianic line and promise – in the ongoing war begun in Genesis 3:15. Leah’s elevation in Jacob’s and the Creator’s eyes may have played a part in this fateful decision. 

We will complete learning about Jacob’s latter life when we study Joseph.

The subject of the so-called Ten Lost Tribes is a voluminous one and many works have been undertaken to expound on it. Some are better than others and a number contain considerable detail. 

It is not the aim to rehash these when they are already available and have intrinsic value and merit; yet some consideration to this aspect of the sons of Jacob is required as background and has relevancy with their migratory routes from what is now Palestine to the British Isles – either by way of the Mediterranean, southern Europe and Ireland, or via south-central Asia and across Europe to Scandinavia and finally Britain. The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints (Mormons), have an interest in the subject and regrettably misinterpreted the American Indian as one of the lost tribes – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian. A series of Mormon articles address the topic. 

What Became of the Tribes of Israel? – emphasis & bold mine:

‘How long Israel remained in Assyria after they had been carried away captive by Sargon II is not known. In the Apocrypha, Esdras describes the following vision: “But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt, that they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land. And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river. For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth. Then dwelt they there until the latter time.” (2 Esdras 13:41-46.) Elder George Reynolds commented on the direction of the travels of the tribes of Israel: 

“They determined to go to a country ‘where never man dwelt,’ that they might be free from all contaminating influences. That country could only be found in the north. Southern Asia was already the seat of a comparatively ancient civilization; Egypt flourished in northern Africa; and southern Europe was rapidly filling with the future rulers of the world. They had therefore no choice but to turn their faces northward. The first portion of their journey was not however north; according to the account of Esdras, they appear to have at first moved in the direction of their old home; and it is possible that they originally started with the intention of returning thereto; or probably, in order to deceive the Assyrians, they started as if to return to Canaan, and when they crossed the Euphrates and were out of danger from the hosts of Medes and Persians, then they turned their journeying feet toward the polar star” – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Elder Reynolds’s explanation takes into account the numerous prophecies that indicate that when the ten lost tribes return, they will come out of the northWhere they went is not known, and this fact has led to much speculation about their present whereabouts. The Lord has not seen fit to reveal their location, however, and until He does so, it is useless to try to identify their present locality.’

This is quite a statement, of defeat. One wonders how would the Lord reveal the tribes whereabouts… and when would He decide to? Would the Mormons be open to a source that did not derive from within their own Church? 

The Return of the Ten Tribes – emphasis mine:

‘The prophets of old saw that in the last dispensation, the dispensation of the fulness of times, would come a complete gathering and restoration of the house of Israel… though the main body of ten of the tribes is lost, there are representatives of all twelve tribes scattered throughout the earth. This statement can be explained as follows:

When Assyria attacked the Northern Kingdom, many fled to the safety of the Southern Kingdom. As the ten tribes traveled north, some stopped along the way – many possibly being scattered throughout Europe and Asia.’

According to the article, the tribes of the northern Kingdom of Israel, either just disappeared amongst the southern Kingdom of Judah, or as they travelled, numbers of them split off and vanished amongst other peoples and nations. 

The Lost Tribes to Come to Zion – emphasis mine:

‘In [the] April conference of 1916, Elder James E. Talmage… spoke of the lost tribes and their records: 

“There is a tendency among men to explain away what they don’t wish to understand in literal simplicity, and we, as Latter-day Saints are not entirely free from the taint of that tendency… Some people say that prediction is to be explained in this way: A gathering is in progress, and has been in progress from the early days of this Church; and thus the ‘Lost Tribes’ are now being gathered; but that we are not to look for the return of any body of people now unknown as to their whereabouts. True, the gathering is in progress, this is a gathering dispensation; but the prophecy stands that the tribes shall be brought forth from their hiding place… [and their] scriptures shall become one with the scriptures of the Jews, the holy Bible…”

Then in [the] October conference, Elder Talmage spoke again of the lost tribes and made this remarkable prediction: 

“The ten tribes shall come; they are not lost unto the Lord; they shall be brought forth as hath been predicted; and I say unto you there are those now living – aye, some here present – who shall live to read the records of the Lost Tribes of Israel, which shall be made one with the record of the Jews, or the Holy Bible…”  

The ten tribes, however, are to eventually receive their land inheritance with Judah … In that day will be fulfilled the statement of Jeremiah: “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers”(Jeremiah 3:18). Elder Orson Pratt stated further: 

“By and by, when all things are prepared – when the Jews have received their scourging, and Jesus has descended upon the Mount of Olives, the ten tribes will leave Zion, and will go to Palestine, to inherit the land that was given to their ancient fathers, and it will be divided amongst the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by the inspiration of the Holy [Spirit]. They will go there to dwell in peace in their own land from that time, until the earth shall pass away. But Zion, after their departure, will still remain upon the western hemisphere [the United States], and she will be crowned with glory as well as old Jerusalem [true Jerusalem, not the city by that name in the state of Israel – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe], and, as the Psalmist David says, she will become the joy of the whole earth.’

These series of articles raise a seemingly small issue, with enormous repercussions if understood incorrectly, that until now has been just that… misunderstood. The scriptures pertaining to Judah and Israel being reunited are part of the blessing that was given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The blessing wasn’t just to dwell in Canaan and that was the fulfilment – Genesis 28:14*. Punishment was promised to the Israelites if they erred grievously from the commandments, laws and statutes of the Creator – Deuteronomy 28:37, 64; Hosea 1:9; 3:4. It was prophesied that they would be sifted as a people or peoples – not individually and therefore completely lost – amongst the nations (Ezekiel 11:16). 

Isaiah 8:16-18

Common English Bible

‘Bind up the testimony; seal up the teaching among my disciples. I will wait for the Lord, who has hidden his face from the house of Jacob, and I will hope in God. Look! I and the children the Lord gave me are signs and wonders in Israel from the Lord of heavenly forces, who lives on Mount Zion.’

The remnants of the two kingdoms would eventually re-unite as Jeremiah predicted. Christianity has, due to a misidentification of Judah, erroneously believed that the Jews – who are not Judah – and Israel have not yet re-united and that it will take place after the second coming of the Son of Man. Of course, the reason why Christians believe this error, is because they have swallowed the falsehood that Judah – falsely believed to be the Jews – were never lost and that only Israel was lost. The truth of the matter is that all twelve – actually thirteen tribes – went into respective captivities. All were sifted, all migrated, all arrived in Ireland and Britain and then travelled beyond. For they have all either been in a process of leaving* the British Isles, or are experiencing different evolving political statuses with regard to their allegiance to the very kingship of Judah… which will be explained.

The nations comprising the sons of Jacob are predicted to go into captivity one more time before the advent of the Messiah and this period in the Bible is referred to as the time of Jacob’s trouble, or the Great tribulation. 

The state of Israel (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) – which is not the tribe of Judah, nor does it comprise true Israelites – is not going to dwell with them, before the end of this age or afterwards. The land that the Jews have usurped from the Palestinian Arabs, will be given to the Israelites during the millennial rule of the Son of Man.

Events came to a head during the reign of King Solomon, whom we have discussed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; articles: Thoth; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. His evil led to the splitting of the United Kingdom after his death in 930 BCE at the age of sixty-nine. Solomon was born in 999 BCE and began his reign as king in 970 BCE, initiating the building of the Temple in 966 BCE and completing it in 960 BCE. It was exactly 480 years between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple – 1 Kings 6:1. King Solomon’s son, Rehoboam became king, born in 971 BCE to Solomon’s Ammonite wife, Naamah – Article: Na’amah. Rehoboam ruled seventeen years until his death at the age of fifty-eight in 913 BCE. 

The Kingdom was rent in two, when Jeroboam became king of the tear away Israelite tribes of the north. Jeroboam ruled until 910 BCE. Jeroboam was the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite (from the tribe of Ephraim) and Solomon’s servant – 1 Kings 11:26, 28. Jeroboam was a ‘mighty man of valour’ and Solomon recognising his worth, had made him ruler over all the charge of the House of Jospeh. 

It was some two hundred years later that the Kingdom of Israel went into captivity to the mighty Assyrian Empire from 721 to 718 BCE – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Josephus confirms their existence at the time of Christ when he wrote: ‘The entire body of the ten tribes are still beyond the Euphrates, an immense multitude not to be estimated by number.’ The early Church recognised that the tribes of Israel were ‘scattered abroad’ – James 1:1. The Israelites were planted by the Assyrians, in Media – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes, located in modern Iran (2 Kings 17:6). 

It should come as no surprise that there is considerable debate regarding certain words and terms for historical peoples and equating them with the Lost Tribes. Identity believers place great credence in them, worldly scholars are very derisory and certain historians are somewhere in between. It appears to this writer that there is some correlation and substance to the argument and that a meeting in the middle would be mature, rational and scholastically honourable. We will look at examples and the reader can deduce for themselves. The key words used in this line of reasoning are the base words Isaac and the disobedient Israelite King Omri (885 to 874 BCE). 

The full evolution of the etymological argument are the words Saxon and Celt, respectively. The words in between are numerous and varied. It is argued that the initial I of Isaac as a vowel was dropped and the name became known as Sakki, Saka, Sakka, Saaca, Sacae, Sacasone and Saxe

This word apparently, is also linked to Scyth and therefore the name Scythian. Though, the term Scythian includes other peoples that were not Israelites, such as the Turanian Scythians unrelated to the Sacae Scythians. This no doubt has led some scholars to be sceptical of equating the sons of Jacob with Scythians in general and thus they have rejected the argument in its entirety instead of recognising the subset within. The first appearance of the Scythians in Central Asia occurred during the reign of the Assyrian King Sargon between 722 to 705 BCE. Exactly the time period of the fall of the Kingdom of Israel and the subsequent flight of Israelites out of Canaan. 

The Lost Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘Herodotus, a Greek historian of the fifth century B.C., notes that the Scythians were interspersed with less civilized people. He describes the non­-civilized nations of the steppes thusly: 

“the Man­Eaters, a tribe that is entirely peculiar and not Scythian at all… [and] the Black Cloaks, another tribe which is not Scythian at all.”

Herodotus confirms the civilized qualities of the Scythians and the backwardness of the non­-Scythian tribes in the following words. 

“The Euxine Pontus [the Black Sea]… contains – except for the Scythians – the stupidest nations in the world.” 

Colonel Gawler cites Epiphanius as stating “the laws, customs, and manner of the Scythians were received by other nations as the standards of policy, civility, and polite learning.” He also cites the following from book viii, iii, 7 of Strabo’s Geography: 

“… ‘but the Scythians governed by good laws…’ And this is still the opinion entertained of them by the Greeks; for we esteem them the most sincere, the least deceitful of any people, and much more frugal and self­-relying than ourselves.” 

Zenaide Ragozin’s, Media, states: 

“…Scythians was not a race name at all, but one promiscuously used, for all remote, little known, especially nomadic peoples of the north and northeast, denoting tribes…of Turanian as of Indo­European stock: to the latter the Scythians of Russia are now universally admitted to have belonged.” 

The Scythian tag included a broad range of peoples, wherein the newly arrived Israelites were enveloped. Unlike the rest, these Scythians – the future Saxons – exhibited traits of a civilised, not an uncouth society, which were respected by their fellow ‘cultured’ relatives descended from Moab and Ammon (the French today), the later Greeks – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Words derived from Omri, include: Ghomri, Kimerioi, Khumri and Cymry which likely easily evolved into the terms Cimmerii, Cimmerian and later, Celt. A similar tribe in Central Asia were known as the Massagetae, possibly associated with Jospeh’s son Manasseh – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The ‘c’ in Cimmerian is pronounced with an ‘s’ which is remarkably similar to the capital of the northern Kingdom of Israel, Samaria. The original Samarians had been taken captive by Assyria and transplanted to the cities of the Medes. These ‘Simmerians’ had appeared out of nowhere, yet an historical account states that the Assyrian King Esarhaddon in 674 BCE confronted an alliance of Median and ‘newly-arrived Cimmerian’ forces.* 

Samuel Lysons in his book, Our British Ancestors: Who and What Were They? 1865, linked the Cimmerians ‘to be the same people with the Gauls or Celts under a different name.’ Historian George Rawlinson wrote: ‘We have reasonable grounds for regarding the Gimirri, or Cimmerians, who first appeared on the confines of Assyria and Media in the seventh century B.C., and the Sacae of the Behistun Rock, nearly two centuries later, as identical with the Beth-Khumree of Samaria, or the Ten Tribes of the House of Israel.’ 

Danish linguistic scholar Anne Kristensen confirms: ‘There is scarcely reason, any longer, to doubt the exciting and verily astonishing assertion propounded by the students of the Ten Tribes that the Israelites deported from Bit Humria, of the House of ‘Omri, are identical with the Gimirraja of the Assyrian sources. Everything indicates that Israelite deportees did not vanish from the picture but that, abroad, under new conditions, they continued to leave their mark on history.’

There were two main branches of Celts. The Goidelic Celts from whom the Gaels of Ireland descend and the Brythonic (or Brittonic) Celts from whom the Welsh and a proportion of the people of Brittany in France descend – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gadthe Celtic Tribes. 

The famous King Darius of Persia, inscribed on a rock in northern Iran: ‘This kingdom that I hold is from Sakka (the region where the Israelites lived) which is beyond Sogdiana to Kush and from India to Sardis.’ Those scholars who disagree with equating any of the Scythians or Cimmerians with the lost tribes, do not then provide an alternative, viable identity (apart from scattering); so it is a little difficult to entertain their arguments in a serious vein. 

Amos 7:16

English Standard Version

Now therefore hear the word of the Lord. You say, ‘Do not prophesy against Israel, and do not preach against the house of Isaac.’^

Jeremiah 3:11-12

English Standard Version

‘And the Lord said to me, “Faithless Israel has shown herself more righteous than treacherous Judah. Go, and proclaim these words toward the north”, and say, “Return, faithless Israel, declares the Lord. I will not look on you in anger, for I am merciful”, declares the Lord; “I will not be angry forever.”

We learn from the prophet Amos that the Israelites, specifically the Kingdom of Israel were known by the names Israel and Isaac. From the prophet Jeremiah, we find out that tribes of Israel were living due north of Jerusalem, not to the north east as those who were transplanted to the cities of the Medes. This is a different body of people, located in the Black Sea region. 

Certain Scythians migrated westward from Central Asia to southern Russia, Ukraine and eastern Europe. Approximately 300 to 100 BCE these Scythians migrated north west to Scandinavia. The Cimmerians steered a more southerly route through the Caucasus region and Asia Minor. At the time of Paul, the early church congregation of the Galatians (directly linked to the word Gaul), were believed to comprise Israelites (Cimmerians), from the ‘lost sheep of the House of Israel.’ About 650 BCE the first waves of Cimmerians migrated westwards through southern Europe, arriving in Gaul in northern France, then venturing onto Britain. The Scythians and Cimmerians were infinitely kinsmen, with the Encyclopaedia Britannica calling the Cimmerians** a ‘Scythian tribe.’ 

Historian Tamara Rice confirms: ‘The Scythians did not become a recognizable national entity much before the eighth century B.C… By the seventh century B.C. they had established themselves firmly in southern Russia… Assyrian documents place their appearance there in the time of King Sargon (722-705 B.C.), a date which closely corresponds with that of the establishment of the first group of Scythians in southern Russia.’

Boris Piotrovsky adds: ‘Two groups, Cimmerians** and Scythians, seem to be referred to in Urartean and Assyrian texts, but it is not always clear whether the terms indicate two distinct peoples or simply mounted nomads… The Assyrians used Cimmerians* in their army as mercenaries; with a legal document dated 679 B.C. referring to an Assyrian ‘commander of the Cimmerian regiment’, but in other Assyrian documents they are called “the seed of runaways who know neither vows to the gods nor oaths.”

When the Kingdom of Urartu (refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran) crumbled, the Scythians established themselves in northern Persia (modern Iran), occupying Urartu and setting up a capital at Sak-iz (Isaac?). 

Origin, Yair Davidiy – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘In addition to exile by land there was also an enforced maritime transportation: Amos (4:3) refers to the “cows of Bashan” “in the mountain of Samaria” (Amos 4:1) many of whom will be taken away in sailing vessels and the rest shall be cast “into the palace”. “Into the palace” has been translated from the Hebrew word “Harmona” which is also translatable as meaning “To the Mountain of Mannae”… Mannae was in the general area of Armenia to which Jewish and local sources say the  Israelites were taken . 

Amos said: HEAR, THIS WORD, YE KINE OF BASHAN, THAT ARE IN THE MOUNTAIN OF SAMARIA, WHICH OPPRESS THE POOR, WHICH CRUSH THE NEEDY, WHO SAY TO THEIR HUSBANDS, BRING, AND LET US DRINK… HE WILL TAKE YOU AWAY IN BIG SHIPS AND THOSE WHO REMAIN IN FISHING BOATS. EACH WOMAN WILL BE CARRIED STRAIGHT OUT THROUGH THE BREACHES AND CAST OUT BEYOND THE MOUNTAINS OF MANNAE” (Amos 4:1-3). The words rendered… as “BIG SHIPS” [Hebrew: “tsinot”] and as “FISHING BOATS” [“sirot-dugah”] are direct translations from the Hebrew. 

The verse in the Hebrew Bible may therefore be understood as saying that one part of the exiles would be taken away in large and small sailing vessels and another part would be exiled to Mannae where the exiled Israelite “Cimmerians” and Scythians indeed appeared. “Isles of the Sea” [refers]… primarily to the Isles of Britain. Getting to the “Isles of the Sea” entails travel by boat. 

The expressions “Isles of the Sea” (Isaiah 11:11), “Way of the Sea” (Isaiah 9:10), “large boats”, and “fishing-boats” (Amos 4:1-3) in connection with the exile of Northern Israel is consistent with transportation by sea which was logistically possible at that time and had been effected in other cases by Phoenician seafarers. Israelites had participated in Phoenician seafaring ventures. 

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel were conquered and exiled… by the Assyrian [monarch], Tiglathpileser. The later Assyrian rulers Shalmaneser, Sargon, and Sennacherib were responsible for exiling the remainder. Tiglathpileser (745-727 BCE) had been responsible for transforming the Assyrian Empire from a powerful but decaying entity to [a] major world power. Prior to his reign Assyria had been seriously threatened by the kingdom of Urartu to the north of Assyria. Urartu was centered around Lake Van (in Armenia), and had exercised suzerainty over Mannae, over the region of Gozan at the headwaters of the Khabur river, and also over parts of Cilicia with its port of Anatolian Tarsis. 

The Assyrians took their cavalry horses to Mannae for training. Mannae was between Assyria and Urartu and linked to both of them. It was one of the major places to which Israelites had been exiled. Mannae was also one of the first regions from which the Cimmerians were first reported, “The Cimmerians went forth from the midst of Mannae,” says an Assyrian inscription. Mannae was also destined to become a Scythian centre.

The Scythians were one and the same people as the Cimmerians or at any rate Scythians and Cimmerians were: “… two groups of people who seem inclined to operate in the same geographical zones, and whose names seem to be interchangeable already in the Assyrian sources”. There were three main groups of people in the Cimmerian and Scythian forces: Cimmerians, Scyths, and Guti or Goths.’

The Guti (or Goths) were not Israelites – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil

Davidiy: ‘Cimmerians and Scyths were frequently confused with each other by foreigners and by historians. “SAKAI” is the name later given in Persian inscriptions to the Scyths. In Afghanistan the appellation, “SAK” (from Saka) was much later understood to be a form of the Hebrew “Isaac”. Other names applied to the Scythians such as Zohak (by the Persians), and Ishkuzai (by the Assyrians) support the “Isaac” equation. 

Van Loon identifies a people in north Armenia (near Lake Leninkan close to the border with Iberia in Georgia) named “ISQI-GULU” as Scythians. “ISQI-GULU” is the equivalent of “ISAACI-Golu”! i.e. “The Exiles of Isaac” since “Golu” in Hebrew connotes ‘exiled”. Variations of the name Isaac were applied to the Scythians who in many respects were identical with (or identified as) the Cimmerians. A city named after the Cimmerians and called Gymrias or Gamir was to be found in the ISQI-GULU area. This city in Armenian was later referred to as “Kumayri” and this name is considered a sign of Cimmerian presence as well as being an alternate Assyrian pronunciation of “Omri” which was the name they gave to northern Israel.

In a few inscriptions the Scythians are referred to as Iskuzai (Ishkuzai) or Askuzai (Ashkuzai) though usually they are called either Sakai or Uman Manda or Gimiri like the Cimmerians. M.N. van Loon wished to emphasize this point: “It should be made clear from the start that the terms ‘Cimmerian’ and ‘Scythian’ were interchangeable: in Akkadian the name Iskuzai (Asguzai) occurs only exceptionally. Gimirrai (Gamir) was the normal designation for ‘Cimmerians’ as well as ‘Scythians’ in Akkadian.”

Both Cimmerians and Scyths were combinations in differing proportions of the same groups. The Cimmerians (i.e. West Scythians) were defeated by the Assyrians and disappeared. The East Scythians (Sakai) remained however for a time in the Middle East area, gained control of the Assyrian Empire, and eventually took the leading role in devastating the Assyrian cities. They too were destined to suffer defeat (at the hands of their Median and Babylonian allies who betrayed and ambushed them) and to be driven northwards, beyond the Caucasus Mountains into the steppe areas of southern Russia (“Scythia”) whence they ultimately continued westward into Europe. 

The Cimmerians were driven westward. They invaded Phrygia, Lydia, and Ionia. These States were all in modern day Turkey. Ultimately the Cimmerians to the west of Assyria were to be defeated and to leave the area of Turkey, crossing the Bosporus and advancing into Europe. They became the dominant factor of Celtic civilization, the Galatae of Gaul, the Cimbri of Scandinavia, and the Cymry of Britain. Homer and other Greeks reported Cimmerians in Britain at an early date. 

The Scythians in the north split into two sections, one was to the north of the Caucasus west of the Caspian Sea and the other was east of the Caspian. The Scythians in the west at an early stage sent offshoots into Europe who joined the Cimmerians already there. Later the Western Scythians migrated to Scandinavia, which at first was named “Scath-anavia” in their honor, and to Germany. The Mesopotamians and Persians called all of the Scythians “Sakae”, while the Greeks called them “Scythians”. 

Modern historians in order to distinguish between the two sections of Scythians often use the term “Scythian” to refer to those Scythians from west of the Caspian Sea and north of the Caucasus, while “Sakae” is used for those situated east of the Caspian. The Scythian-Sakae were also known as “Sexe” and as “Saxon” and the Anglo-Saxons emerged from them. 

Diodorus Siculus (32:4 7) linked the Cimmerians of old, the Galatians, and the Cimbri altogether. Plutarch (in “Marius”) reported the opinion that the Cimmerians, Cimbri, and Scythians, were in effect all members of the one nation whom he calls “Celto- Scythians”. Homer placed the Cimmerians in the British Isles as did a poem allegedly written ca. 500 BCE by the Greek Orpheus. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (891 CE) begins by saying that the Britons came from Armenia and the Picts* (of Scotland) from the south of Scythia. “Armenia” is the land of Urartu wherein the Cimmerians had sojourned and from which as an historically identifiable entity they emerged. The idea that the Scots* came from Scythia is found in most legendary accounts of Ireland and Scotland. 

FOR, LO, I WILL COMMAND, AND I WILL SIFT THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AMONG ALL NATIONS, LIKE AS CORN IS SIFTED IN A SIEVE, YET SHALL NOT THE LEAST GRAIN FALL UPON THE EARTH [Amos 9:9].

In east Scythia there had existed settlements of numerous civilized peoples of so-called “Nordic” appearance who disappeared shortly before the Barbarians were first recorded in Western Europe. The “Barbarians” had traditions that they came from Scythia and their artistic styles are actually identical to those known from the Scythian areas. 

They had similar “Shamanistic” Scythian religious beliefs and customs; they wore the same armor, and fought with the same tactics, and they had the same tribal names in the same formations relative to each other as they would later have in the west. The Scythian peoples were destined to disappear from Scythia in the period between 300 BCE to ca. 600 CE. Just as the Scythians were leaving Scythia, they began to appear in the west as “Barbarians” largely after passing through Scandinavia, Pannonia (Hungary), and Germany. 

The Scythian-Gothic nations had emerged from Scythia. In east Scythia, at least in the area east of the Caspian Sea whence the Sacae (Anglo-Saxons) were once centered, Aramaic was spoken. Aramaic is closely related to Hebrew. Some of the Israelite Tribes had spoken Aramaic while others used a type of Hebrew influenced by Aramaic, or Aramaic influenced by Hebrew. Aramaic was one of the official languages of the Assyrian Empire.

The Old Anglo-Saxon English language is a composite dialect and contains many Hebrew words. Linguistically, the west Barbarians may originally have spoken Hebrew or a related Semitic dialect. There is nothing to obviate such a possibility since new languages were sometimes learnt and old ones forgotten in historical experience. The Normans, for instance, came from Scandinavia and settled en-masse in Normandy, France, but within two generations they had forgotten their parent language and knew only French! 

The Germanic languages probably did not exist before 500 BCE. They first appeared in Northern Germany and then spread outwards through conquest and cultural assimilation. It is generally agreed that approximately one-third of all early Germanic vocabulary is of an unknown (non-Indo-European) origin. These languages experienced changes in sounds and grammatical points that are symptomatic of Semitic tongues. Terry Blodgett proved that this additional element was Hebrew. Hebrew speakers must have been part of, or absorbed into, whatever originated the Germanic languages. The people in question had little or no relationship with the present day inhabitants of Germany other than a linguistic connection dating from the time when one group ruled over the other. 

FOR I WILL NO MORE HAVE MERCY UPON THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; BUT I WILL UTTERLY TAKE THEM AWAY (Hosea 1:6). Judah was not to be exiled with the Ten Tribes, BUT I WILL HAVE MERCY UPON THE HOUSE OF JUDA [Hosea 1:7]. The third child is called “Lo-Ammi” meaning “Not-My-People”. At first the Ten Tribes will be rejected and exiled but later God will return and accept them [Hosea 11:12].

EPHRAIM COMPASSETH ME ABOUT WITH LIES, AND THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL WITH DECEIT: BUT JUDAH YET RULETH WITH GOD, AND IS FAITHFUL WITH THE SAINTS.’

The last sentence is key, in that it is not referring to Canaan but rather Judah’s new home far and away to the northwest of their former lands.

The link between the term Saka and Isaac is explained by Steven Collins as far older in origin than the seventh century BCE – emphasis mine:

‘There are very ancient records of correspondence from Canaanite rulers to the Egyptian Pharaohs desperately calling for help against the powerful invasions of a people called the “Haberi,” “Khaberi,” “Aberi” or “Saga.” These ancient letters were preserved on the famous “Amarna Tablets,” and they apparently record the invasion of Canaan by the Israelites under Joshua! The “Haberi,” “Khaberi,” or “Aberi” are the Hebrews, and the “Saga” are the Saka (the people of Isaac), albeit expressed in Canaanite terms.

Mrs. Sydney Bristowe, in Oldest Letters in the World, wrote in 1923 concerning the Amarna Tablets: 

“The great importance of the Amarna Tablets has not been recognized because apparently, the [translators] have been unwilling to admit that the Israelites are mentioned upon them and that they tell of the conquest of Palestine by Joshua! The translations shown with the tablets now in the British Museum, give little idea of the interest of the letters, the name Haberi, Khaberi or Aberi is hardly seen in these translations, yet that name, appears frequently in the tablets and leading philologists certify that it stands for the Hebrews (Israelites). See Encyclopaedia Brittanica Edition 11, Volume 10, page 78.

Another name mentioned upon the tablets is Saga which is said to be identical with Haberi (Knudtzon, Die El­ Amarna Tafeln, page 51), and is proved to be so by the fact that it occurs upon the Behistan Rock in Persia where, according to Sir Henry Rawlinson, it represents the Israelites (the Sakai or ‘House of Isaac’). 

Dr. Hall (of the British Museum) admits the fact that the tablets tell of the Israelite’s conquest of Palestine, for he writes: “We may definitely, if we accept the identification of the Khabiru as the Hebrews, say that in the Tel-­el­-Amarna letters, we have Joshua’s conquest seen from the Egyptian and Canaanite point of view’ (Ancient History of the Near East, page 409).” 

“It seems very probable that the ‘SA­GAZ’… and… the Khabiru who devastated Canaan… are no other than the invading Hebrews and other desert tribes allied with them… (and after presenting a philological analysis supporting this conclusion, he adds)… In my own, view, the probabilities are all in favour of the identification.” 

‘Herodotus is cited above as stating that the Persians called all Scythians “Sacae (or Saka),” which is the equivalent of the Hebrew/Israelite “Saga” in the much older Amarna Tablets. It appears that the Canaanites knew the Israelite invaders were the “seed of Isaac,” but rendered this name as “Saga” instead of “Saka,” as did the Persians. (The letters “g” and “k” are closely ­related guttural phonetic sounds.) The above evidence that Canaanite and Assyrian sources indicate that the Israelites were known by the name of Isaac prior to their departure from Palestine confirms that it is their descendants who bore the name of Isaac in Scythia after their arrival in Asia.’

Steven Collins continues with various identifying points on the Scythians and their Israelite connection. He also recounts the Scythian’s invasion of Assyria, Asia Minor, Syria and Palestine, beginning in 624 BCE, ultimately contributing to Assyria’s fall as an empire in 612 BCE, with the defeat of their capital Nineveh at the hands of the Medes, Babylonians and… Scythians.

Noteworthy is the fact that the Scythians attacked Calah, burning it, which was the headquarters of the Assyrian army. Revenge against Assyria was one motive for their advance, the second was the liberation of Canaan and their kin, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. 

What is attention grabbing is that the Scythian march through Syria and Palestine was relatively bloodless and the sparing of Jerusalem peculiarly stands out. This only really makes sense if the Scythian hordes were there to liberate their previous homeland and in particular their brother tribes. Wild Asiatic nomads who were in Palestine for the first time, would not have blazed their way through Assyria to then spare city after city of the territory of Judah. 

Herodotus records that ‘for twenty-eight years [624-596 BCE]… the Scythians were masters of Asia…’ This time frame includes the reign of righteous King Josiah (640-609 BCE) of Judah – as well as the life of Jeremiah the prophet – and his reforms to return to the Mosaic Law and restore the Temple in his eighteenth year (622 BCE) – refer rticle: The Ark of God.

Scythian is a Greek term, thus in the Bible, the Scythians (or Sacae) are referred to as the children of Israel in 2 Chronicles 35:17-18. Steven Collins states regarding the withdrawal of the Scythians from Palestine and Mesopotamia, that they would have realised that Canaan was not the Land of Milk and Honey it once was and now principally occupied by hostile foreign people, which they had no desire to subjugate or rule over, with their ‘unwanted customs and lifestyles.’ 

Added to this, was their large population numbers and the compactness of Palestine as an unrealistic region for a people who liked ‘wide open spaces’ to farm their flocks and herds, or to maintain their isolationism policies. Collins quotes Herodotus – emphasis & bold mine – who describes the Scythians as people who:

“… dreadfully avoid the use of foreign customs, and especially those of the Greeks… So careful are the Scythians to guard their own customs, and such are the penalties (Herodotus refers to the death penalty* for pagan religious activity) that they impose on those who take to foreign customs over and above their own.”

‘… evidence of the Israelite origins of the Scythians is found in this comment of Herodotus about the Scythians: “They make no offerings of pigs, nor will they keep them at all in their country.” Such a prohibition is very consistent with the long­standing Hebrew custom of forbidding the use of swine for either consumption or sacrifice because it was an “unclean” animal (Deuteronomy 14:7­8)’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gadthe Celtic Tribes; and article: Red or Green?

‘Another interesting point is that Herodotus records that one of the Scythian kings was named “Saulius.” Given the Hebrew/Israelite background of the Scythians, it would appear that the namesake of this Scythian king was Saul, the first Hebrew king (I Samuel 9). 

Herodotus also records that the Scythians were very zealous in forbidding idolatry and the worship of “foreign gods.” In one instance, King Saulius of Scythia executed* his own brother for participating in the rites of a Greek “mother-goddess” festival and wearing “images” associated with the mother­-goddess…’ – refer article: Asherah.

‘The fact that the Scythians executed, without mercy, even their own rulers and royalty who worshipped the mother­-goddess or other pagan gods (or who kept “images” of such gods and goddesses) shows there was a very strict law among the Scythians against idolatry. Combining the fact that idolatry was a capital offense with the Scythian custom of avoiding swine flesh, it is clear that the Scythians were faithfully practicing two key features of the laws of God given to the Israelites under Moses. This further confirms that many of the Israelites of the ten tribes had experienced a “revival” in their new homeland near the Black Sea. 

Herodotus also records that “The Scythians themselves say that their nation is the youngest of all the nations... [and]… from their first king… to the crossing of Darius into Scythia was, in all, one thousand years-­no more, but just so many.” Colonel Gawler analyzes Herodotus-­record as follows: “Now Darius’ expedition against the Scythians was about 500 B.C., and 1000 years before that brings us to the time of Moses.” Significantly, the Scythians traced their origin as a nation to the approximate time of Moses. It was after the Exodus [in 1446 BCE], under Moses that the Hebrews truly became a nation with their own distinct culture and laws.’ 

The Persian Empire had two major conflicts with the Scythians, one was instigated by Cyrus the Great who reigned from 559 to 530 BCE, against the eastern Scyths, who were situated east of the Caspian Sea and lead by the dominant tribe the Massagetae, which culminated in Cyrus’s death. These tribes comprised the two and a half tribes who had been taken into captivity by the Assyrians prior to the eventual fall of Samaria and are listed in 1 Chronicles 5:26, ESV: ‘So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan…’ 

Steven Collins elucidates:

‘Herodotus records that this Persian­-Scythian war resulted from Persian aggression, writing that Cyrus “set his heart on subduing the Massagetae.” The Massagetae were living in peace at the time, and Cyrus launched a war of aggression on them to force them to be his subjects. When Persia’s invasion was imminent, Queen Tomyris sent the following message to Cyrus: “King of the Medes, cease to be so eager to do what you are doing… rule over your own people, and endure to look upon us governing ours” – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

‘It is noteworthy that the Scythians were willing to “live and let live,” but Persia persisted in its aggression. After some initial fighting, Queen Tomyris of the Massagetae offered Cyrus a second chance to cease hostilities and go back to his own land, but warned that “If you do not so, I swear by the sun, the lord of the Massagetae, that, for all your insatiability of blood, I will give you your fill of it.”

… Herodotus described the ensuing battle. 

“Tomyris, since Cyrus would not listen to her, gathered all her host together and fought him. Of all the battles that were fought among the barbarians, I judge this to have been the severest, and indeed my information is that it is so. Long they remained fighting in close combat, and neither side would flee. But finally the Massagetae got the upper hand. Then most of the Persian army died on the spot and, among them, Cyrus himself… Tomyris sought out his corpse among the Persian dead, and…she filled a skin with human blood and fixed his head in the skin, and, insulting over the dead, she said:

‘I am alive and [a] conqueror, but you have… [robbed] me of my son (Tomyris’ son died in the war)… Now… I will give you your fill of blood, even as I threatened.”

‘We do not know the total casualties in this war, but they must have been immense. Persia ruled a vast area and could assemble armies of over a million men. The army which Xerxes assembled against the Greeks was 1,700,000 men, and the army of Darius [522-486 BCE] against the Black Sea Scythians was 700,000 men. Since the expedition against the Massagetae was led by King Cyrus himself, one would expect his army to have numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Yet the Massagetae utterly crushed the Persian army.

It is strange that modern history stresses the histories of the Assyrian and Persian Empires, but in the three great wars fought between their empires and the Scythians, the Scythians decisively won all three. History teaches much about the losers of these wars, but rarely mentions the victorious Scythians.’

A map of the Medo-Persian empire at its extant – note the two enclaves of Israelites, the Massagetae and the Parthians

The Parthians were mentioned briefly in the preceding chapter. For those who would like to pursue the subject of the Parthians, Steven Collins book, Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! is an excellent starting point; where he devotes two full chapters. Though an accord on his final conclusions regarding specific identities is not reached. Even so, his in-depth and pains taking research and presentation is invaluable, being a comprehensive contribution to the subject of the Israelite identity.

In summary: the Parthian Empire sat adjacent to the Roman Empire and as a geo-political counter weight held it in check. Parthia was no small region, for it stretched some nineteen hundred miles east to west and one thousand miles from north to south.

As we have discovered, the Romans are one and the same as the nation of Germany today and their descent is from Abraham’s first son, Ishmael – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. It is no small coincidence, that the Saxon and Celtic peoples have challenged and curbed the German nation’s warlike aspirations twice in the preceding century, so was their relationship similar during the days of Rome. 

Though Rome invaded ancient Britain, it was never an easy occupation on its western extremity and similarly, on its far eastern border lay a strong empire that remained outside Rome’s control. The genetic, cultural and linguistic ties between the Parthians and (Sacae) Scythians is beyond question and though allies, it was not always a friendly relationship.

What is worth highlighting, is the fascinating connection between Judah and the Parthians. One of the early capitals of Parthia was Dara. Dara (1 Chronicles 2:3-6) was a son of Zerah (or Zarah), who was in turn one of Judah’s sons. Zarah was supplanted at the time of his birth by his twin brother Phares (also Pharez or Perez); as Esau was by Jacob. The name Phares is found repeatedly throughout Parthia. Phares was the ancestor of King David. 

Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… emphasis mine:

‘A Parthian king who ruled in the area of West India was named Gondophares, and several kings ruling over the Caucasus mountain kingdom of Iberia [Caucasus Mountains] were named Pharasmanes Strabo records that the Iberians [from Eber, Genesis 10:21-25] were the kinsmen of the Scythians… many kings of Parthia itself had names indicating that they were also royal members of the Davidic line of Judah. Such names include the key consonants of PH­R­S in Hellenized forms of their Parthian names (such Parthian royal names as Phraates, Phraortes, and Phraataces are examples).’

Collins shows how the Greeks interchanged the consonants B and P and thus the similarity between certain words is significant, particularly as the vowels may change, though the consonants do not. Parthia is PRTH which could easily be BRTH – as in the Hebrew word for covenant, berith. Thus words associated with the peoples of Britain are ostensibly linked and derive from a seemingly common source for BRTH. The Britannic Islands are synonymous with the Greek name Pretannic, from PRT and Parthia with Brithia (or B’rithia). 

It was from Parthia that the wise men had travelled to visit the young Jesus. It may be more than coincidence that a people from Judah, were visiting their rightful king from… the tribe of Judah – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. Specifically, the wise men were actually priests of the tribe of Levi. Though Levi was to be scattered amongst Israel, we will find that they have remained predominantly with the associated tribes of the former Kingdom of Judah in larger numbers… those tribes being the houses of Judah, Benjamin and Simeon – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Recall that within the tribe of Judah, there had been splits early on. There were those who had been taken captive by the Chaldean Babylonians and there were others who had returned to Jerusalem as we have learnt in the preceding chapter. It was these self same people of Judah which the Parthian peoples, also from Judah, came to assist during their decades long struggle against the Seleucids. 

Their King Phraates I, had captured the Caspian gates for Parthia and his successor, Mithridates I, expanded the Parthian region through not just warfare but by clever organisation and diplomacy. He died in 136 BCE and his son Phraates II inherited a new, formidable empire. In 129 BCE the Seleucid Greeks attacked the fledgling empire with 400,000 troops against 120,000. Though soundly defeated repeatedly, the Parthian doggedness – reminiscent of the British bulldog spirit – culminated in the death of the Seleucid monarch, Antiochus and 300,000 of his troops. An historic turning point, for the Seleucid empire began to fail, squeezed between the growing powers of Rome and Parthia. This provided the opportunity for the Maccabees to assert their independence and temporary dominion over the Idumean Edomites – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Collins mentions that ‘the Parthians treated [the conquered Seleucids] mercifully and their royal household intermarried.’ Not unlike the Trojans and Dardanians as discussed in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The strong family ties between Lot and Judah should be no surprise as the relationship in modern times between France and Britain was replicated in the Angevin monarchs and the one hundred years war. 

A further parallel indicating the Parthians were primarily from the tribe of Judah, is that they enlisted the assistance of their allies and kin, the Scythians. The Scythians arrived late and they became suspicious that the Parthians had acted preemptively on purpose to secure the spoils of war for themselves. While the Parthians were reluctant to share, since the Scythians had not taken part. This reneging on promised payment led to their resounding loss at the hands of the more numerous Scythians, with the Parthian king dying. This is interesting for two reasons. 

Firstly, as described by Steven Collins:

The whole event is strikingly similar to one described in the Bible (Judges 11­ & 12). 

After winning a great victory over the Ammonites, Jephthah and an army of Gileadites (the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben and Gad) were confronted by an army of Ephraimites which was upset that it had not been able to participate in the battle (and missed out on the booty). 

The usually allied brother tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh then fought each other in a needless battle over war booty… making this Parthian ­Scythian battle a rerun of the war in Judges 12. After the warfare the Scythians (satisfied by their possession of war booty and the death of the Parthian king who “cheated” them) retired into their own land. This confirms the Scythians had no territorial designs against their Parthian kinsmen and were content simply “to teach the Parthians a lesson.” Nevertheless, Parthia had now replaced the Seleucids as the dominant power in south­central Asia…’

Secondly, the Scythians included the main body of Israelites, led by the sons of Joseph. This wave of Scythian people eventually migrated to Scandinavia, the Low countries and northern Germany, later to be known as Angles, the predominant and most numerous Saxon tribe. Following them were the Parthians, who migrated from Sweden into northern Denmark, becoming the Jutes with their territory called Jutland, on the Cimbric (Cymric*) Peninsula. 

The two separate migrations of the tribe of Judah – the first as the Parthians and the second as the remnant of Judah from Judea, forced to flee at the same time as the Idumeans of Edom, when Titus attacked Judea in 70 CE – subsequently led to two distinct invasions into Britain, by Judah’s descendants.

First, the Jutes who settled in the south of England when they entered Britain. The main areas including Kent – as did the second wave known as Normans in 1066 CE, in Hastings – and also the Isle of Wight, Sussex and Hampshire. We will study the Jutes and Normans closely, for both are of the House of Judah. 

When the Parthian Empire fell in 226 CE, the Arsacid dynasty of Parthian kings and their people found refuge in Armenia until 429 CE, as ‘the first Christian nation in the world [not Rome]. Christianity was officially proclaimed in 301 A.D. as the national religion of Armenia’ – source: William McBirnie. The former Scythians now known as Saxons – comprising the Angles, Frisians and Jutes – began invading Britain about 450 CE… the Jutes primarily identifying as the former Parthians. 

Some researchers link the Getae with the Goths, which is correct and they appear to be part of the wider Scythian umbrella – as Gothic, ‘Germanic’ peoples – though ascribing the label Goth to the Israelites is incorrect – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The consonants GTH comprising the word Goth, may well be linked to the word Gott or God as proposed by some and just as possibly, to Aram’s son Gether, also GTH. The Goths appeared in western Europe before the Saxons as they lived to the west of them and were forced to migrate as the Saxon-Scythians pressed upon them, who in turn were forced to move by the migration of the disintegrating Parthian nation. 

The word German, has its roots in the word Kerman. The Kermans lived in the Parthian province of Carmania. They became known as Germanii and as they travelled west they were eventually known as Germans and their territory Germania, which was then applied to the majority of tribes who had headed westwards into northwestern Europe. Notice the similarity between the words Carmania (C-arm[e]nia) and Armenia. Pliny confirms that the once labelled Scythians, were now called Germans: ‘the name of the Scythians has altogether been transferred to the Sarmatae and the Germans.’ 

The Welsh, a name given them by the Saxons, meaning foreigner is not the name they called themselves. Their name for Wales is Cymru* from cymri (or cimri) – the name for the Welsh – a name relating to the Cimmerians. The term ‘cymric’ refers to the Brythonic group of Celtic languages, consisting of Welsh, Cornish and Breton in Brittany, France. There is another related Celtic language group Gaelic, found in Ireland and Scotland.  

The rest of the ‘Celtic’ world who are not Israelite, though are descended from Abraham or his brother Haran are the Germanic lowland peoples of the Netherlands and Belgium – with the Alpine peoples of Switzerland. The Israelites who had constituted the Parthian Empire as discussed in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, later migrated across northern Europe and are known to historians as Jutes. Whereas the remaining (British) Saxons or Germans – not to be confused with the Deutsch ‘Germans’ (or Saxons) of Germany – are the descendants of the Sacae Scythians. 

Ptolemy (85-165 CE) said there were: ‘a Scythian people sprung from the Sakai named Saxones.’ It is over one hundred years later in 286 CE that we hear of not only Franks – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran – living on the Cimbric Peninsula, but also of an advance, early wave of Saxon ‘pirates’. The Saxons, led by the dominant Angle tribe, dwelt in Denmark, northern Germany and the northern Netherlands. Included with the Angles were the Saxon tribes, the Frisians and Jutes. These peoples left their names behind them in Frisia, Jutland and mentioned earlier three German states with Saxony as part of their name, as well as the French province Al-sace. The English rendition of ‘Saxon’ is with an X, though the German spelling is with a C: such as Sachsisch or Sachse, based on the Sac-root from Sacae

Recall, the Saxons invaded the British mainland beginning 450 CE. Again, they were a Germanic speaking people as opposed to the earlier Celts. The word Saxon in German is Sachsen; Low German, Sassen; and in Dutch, Saksen. The Dutch female first name Saskia, originally meant ‘A Saxon woman.’ Sharon Turner in his History of the Anglo-Saxons reckons Saka-Suna or the Sons of Sakai abbreviated into Saksun, is the same sound as Sax-on and appears a reasonable and plausible etymology for the word Saxon.

When Jacob passes on the birthright blessing to Joseph’s sons Manasseh and Ephraim, he says:

“The Angel who has redeemed me from all evil, Bless the lads; Let my name be named upon them, And the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac;^ And let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth” – Genesis 48:16, NKJV.

This is a pivotal verse, for the sons of Joseph are associated with the names of Israel, Abraham and specifically in this case, Isaac. The link with the name Saxon will be explored further in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. We will discover just how massive a clue to their geographic location in the world it is, from the phrase ‘in the midst of the earth.’ 

Steven Collins stresses the slowness of ancient peoples travels: ‘… migrations took place at the speed of an oxcart, and took decades or centuries to accomplish. These migrating people needed to stop periodically to grow crops, hunt game or steal from other nations to feed their families. Undoubtedly, a large percentage of the elderly and the infirm died along the way. Wars (with native populations or each other) would have caused more casualties. Since the number of mouths to feed was at times greater than the food which was available, some starved. During severe shortages, they may have had to eat their horses, livestock, and seed grains. A nation on the move has few options. If it cannot obtain food peacefully, it has no choice but to take it by warfare or piracy from someone else. 

If its people have success in warfare, they can prosper for a time. However, if it displaces another nation, that other nation must then look for a weaker nation to displace. Some tribes had to accept mercenary service to other nations in order to feed their own people. A tribe could think it had found security in a new location only to be dislodged by a stronger tribe moving into their area. It was a difficult time, as many nations and tribes were migrating and jostling each other for living space.’ 

There is biblical support for the Israelite migration through Europe in a northwestern trajectory, finally arriving at a set of isles located off a mainland coast.

Isaiah 24:15

New King James Version

‘Therefore glorify the Lord in the dawning light, The name of the Lord God of Israel in the coastlands of the sea.’

Isaiah 42:4, 12

Christian Standard Bible

“He will not grow weak or be discouraged until he has established justice on earth. The coasts and islands will wait for his instruction”… Let them give glory to the Lord and declare his praise in the coasts and islands.

Isaiah 49:1, 12

Amplified Bible

‘Listen to Me [the Messiah], O islands and coastlands, And pay attention, you peoples from far away… Behold, these shall come from afar, and behold, these from the north and from the west

Isaiah 51:5

Amplified Bible

“My righteousness (justice) is near, My salvation has gone forth, And My arms will judge the peoples; The islands and coastlands will wait for Me, And they will wait with hope and confident expectation for My arm.”

Jeremiah 31:10

New King James Version

Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, And declare it in the isles [H339 – ‘iy: coast, island, shore] afar off, and say, ‘He who scattered Israel will gather him, And keep him as a shepherd does his flock.’

Acts 1:8

King James Version

‘… ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.’

The Hebrew world translated isles (islands and coastlands), means ‘a habitable spot (as desirable), dry land, a coast, an island.’ This description does not pertain to the Israelites in Canaan, but rather where they have ended up. It is patently evident that they are on Islands, far away from Palestine – in ‘the north and west.’ In this case, an Atlantic archipelago – a people living remotely, far away and ignorant of biblical truth and the true nature of the Son of Man. The Creator calls out to them to return to Him.

Unbelievingly, Britain gradually began a reconciliation, beginning with the British royal family in the early first century, igniting again during the sixteenth century Reformation, though it is some way from escaping spiritual darkness, as the majority do not believe and of those who do, a minority truly understand or honour the true Christ – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation; and article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. It is an ongoing process which will culminate climatically during the time of Jacob’s trouble. 

Moses Margouliouth, a Jewish scholar of the nineteenth century, in his History of the Jews wrote:

‘It may not be out of place to state that the isles afar off mentioned in chapter 31 of Jeremiah were supposed by the ancients to be Britannia, Scotia, and Hibernia, the isles often visited we know by the merchant mariners of Phoenicia whose fleets included ships and crews drawn from the tribes of Dan, Asher and Zebulun of the coastal areas of the Land of Israel.’

Jeremiah 31:9, 21

English Standard Version

With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn… “Set up road markers for yourself; make yourself guideposts; consider well the highway, the road by which you went…”

Ephraim is counted as the Creator’s firstborn and charged with leaving a migratory trail. Aside from the terms, Saxon and Angle, a peculiar coincidence is the building of stone monuments called Dolmens. Dolmens are stone monuments made of two or more big upright stones with a single large stone lying across them. Their purpose is uncertain and like the pyramids most erroneously claim they were tombs. They could represent a doorway or portal of some kind – articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim*; and Belphegor.

The most widely known dolmens are found in northwestern Europe, particularly in the regions of Brittany, France, southern Scandinavia, Britain, Ireland and the Low Countries. As there are over five thousand dolmens documented in the Golan of northern Israel, this makes dolmens – if not erected by giants* – possible signposts of the Israelites. Dolmens are also found in Portugal and Spain in the Iberian Peninsula. The word Iber-ia is likely linked to the word Hebrew, for it is recognised as having derived from a grandson of Arphaxad, called Eber – Genesis 10:21-25. 

Researchers have regularly drawn attention, to the word British which resembles two Hebrew words beriyth-iysh (or Brith-ish) which translates as ‘covenant man.’ The Bible often refers to this [Old] covenant (or agreement) the Eternal made with ancient Israel through Moses (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 4:13), aside from the ones which preceded it with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – refer article; The Sabbath Secrecy. 

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… found! Steven M Collins, 1992: 

‘The early British chroniclers record that a King Brutus came from the Eastern Mediterranean with hundreds of ships to colonize the large island on the northwest of the European land mass, and gave it the name “Briton” or “Brittania.” The approximate date for this event is 1103 B.C., a time just prior to the beginning of the first millennium B.C. Although Brutus is attributed a Trojan ancestry in the ancient accounts, he bore the Hebrew word B­R­T in his name (Brutus), and applied the same Hebrew word (B­R­T) to their new homeland (Briton). Brutus’ name identified him as a member of the “Covenant People,” and in naming his new land “Briton,” he was claiming it as a territory for the “Covenant People.” That a Trojan leader bore an important Hebrew root word in his name argues that Israelites were present among the inhabitants of ancient Troy’ – refer Troy, Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Britain in its Perfect Luster (Cambria Triumphans), Percy Enderbie, 1661:

‘In the time of King Edward I [1272 to 1307]. At Lincolne, where (was) held a Parliament, after much diligent search of antiquities… letters were sent to the Pope of Rome, sealed with an hundred seals and witnesses… wherein is declared and justified that in the time of Hely (Eli) [born 1144, died 1046 BCE – Eli became a Judge at age 58 in 1086 BCE for forty years: 1 Samuel 4:14-18] and Samuel the Prophet [born 1090, died 1015 BCE in the tenth year of King Saul’s reign – Samuel became a Judge at age 44 in 1046 BCE for thirty-one years], Brutus a Trojan landed here, and by his own name called the Country Britannia, before named Albion.’

Brutus has a window of forty-four years from the birth of Samuel to the death of Eli – or four years from Samuel’s birth until Eli becoming a Judge – to have arrived in Britain. Thus circa 1100 BCE is credible. Brutus (or Brwt) is credited as the first king of Britain, descended from Aeneas of the Trojan Royal House of Zarah, son of Judah. The same Aeneas from whom the early Roman emperors also claimed descent. The word Brython or Brwth-ayn is ‘Brwt with the Celtic augmentative or plural suffix.’ 

The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals & emphasis his, bold mine:

‘The legends claim that the oldest town in the land of Troy (the Troad) was founded by Teucer, who was a son of the Scamander (a stream of Crete, according to John Tzetzes, the 12th century Byzantine poet and grammarian) and the nymph Idaea. During the reign of Teucer, DARDANUS – son of Zeus and the nymph Electra – drifted from the island of Samothrace in the Aegean to the Troad, following a great deluge in the Mediterranean area. 

After he arrived in the Troad, Dardanus received a grant of land from Teucer and married his daughter Batea, shortly thereafter founding the city of DARDANIA at the foot of MOUNT IDA. On the death of Teucer, Dardanus succeeded him as king, and called the whole land DARDANIA.

He sired Erichthonius, who begat TROS by Astyoche, daughter of Simois. Tros named the country TROY (after himself) and the people TROES (TROJANS). By Callirrhoe, daughter of Scamander, Tros had three sons – Ilus, Assaracus and Ganymede. From two of Tros’ sons – Ilus and Assaracus – sprang TWO SEPARATE LINES; [1] Ilus, Laomedon, Priam, Hector; and [2] Assaracus, Capys, Anchises, Aeneas.

After building the city of Dardanus in the Troad, DARDA established his ROYAL LINE in the land, which continued as follows:

1/. DARDANUS (DARDA)

2/. ERICTANUS

3/. TROS

4/. ILUS

5/. LAOMEDON

6/. PRIAMUS (PRIAM)

Priam’s reign ended in 1181 – the year the Trojans were crushed in the First Trojan war by their brethren the Greeks. AENEAS, of the royal line, escaped the destruction of Troy and made his way to ITALY. The story of his migration is found in the Aeneid, written by the Roman historian Virgil. Funk and Wagnalls New Encyclopedia outlines the story:

“The AENEID is a mythical (according to the “experts”) work in twelve books, describing the wanderings of the hero AENEAS and a small band of TROJANS after the fall of Troy. Aeneas escaped from Troy with the images of his ancestral gods, carrying his aged father on his shoulders, and leading his young son ASCANIUS by the hand, but in the confusion of his hasty flight he lost his wife, Creusa. He collected a FLEET OF TWENTY VESSELS, and sailed with the surviving Trojans to THRACE, where they began building a city. Aeneas subsequently abandoned his plan of a settlement there and went to CRETE, but was driven from that island by a pestilence. 

After visiting EPIRUS and SICILY (where his father died), Aeneas was shipwrecked on THE COAST OF AFRICA and welcomed by DIDO, Queen of CARTHAGE. After a time he again set sail; Dido, who had fallen in love with him, was heartbroken by his departure and committed suicide. After visiting SICILY again and stopping at CUMAE, ON THE BAY OF NAPLES, he landed at the MOUTH OF THE TIBER RIVER, SEVEN YEARS after the fall of Troy. Aeneas was welcomed by LATINUS, KING OF LATIUM. 

Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus, was destined to marry a stranger, but her mother Amata had promised to give her in marriage to TURNUS, King of the Rutulians. A war ensued, which terminated with the defeat and death of Turnus, thus making possible the marriage of Aeneas and Lavinia. Aeneas died three years later, and his son ASCANIUS FOUNDED ALBA LONGA, the mother city of Rome” (Volume I. MCMLXXV, page 196).’

‘The Compendium of World History records that “the refugees of the First Trojan War settled… in Italy. They founded Lavinium two years after the First Trojan War – that is, in 1179 [BCE] – and later the city of Alba (the site of the Pope’s summer palace today) at the time of the Second Trojan War in 1149. The TROJAN ROYAL HOUSE founded in Italy a line of kings that reigned in Alba from 1178 until 753, when the center of government passed to Rome.”

The Annals of the Romans relate that after Aeneas founded Alba, he married a woman who bore him a son named SILVIUS. Silvius, in turn, married; and when his new wife became pregnant, Aeneas sent word to him that he was sending a wizard to examine the wife and try and determine whether the baby was male or female. After examining Silvius’ wife, the wizard returned to his home, but was killed by ASCANIUS because of his prophecy foretelling that the woman had a male in her womb who would be the child of death – for, as the story goes, the male-child would eventually kill his father and mother and be a scourge to all mankind.

During the birth of the child, Silvius’ wife died, and the boy was reared by the father and named BRITTO (BRUTUS). Many years later, fulfilling the wizard’s prophecy, the young man BRITTO killed his father by accident while practicing archery with some friends. Because of this terrible accident, BRUTUS was DRIVEN FROM ITALY and came TO THE ISLANDS OF THE TYRRHENE SEA. According to Herman L. Hoeh:

“A son, BRUTUS, expelled from Italy returned to the Aegean area and organized the ENSLAVED TROJANS, LYDIANS AND MAEONIANS. The Greeks were defeated and TROY WAS RECAPTURED. With the recapture of Troy in 1149 the list of Sea Powers of the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean began. According to the terms of the treaty with the Greeks BRUTUS MIGRATED, with all who wished to follow him, VIA THE MEDITERRANEAN INTO BRITAIN” (Compendium of World History. Volume I, page 454).

The tradition of Brutus’ migration to Britain was never questioned until the last century, when German scholars and rationalists decided that the story related in Homer’s Iliad of the siege and destruction of Troy by the Greeks, and the subsequent dispersion of the Trojan princes, was nothing but a “Poet’s dream” and a “mythological myth.” The coming of Brutus to Britain was therefore pronounced to be [a] “fabulous” legend that had no foundation in fact.

The following quotation from Drych y Prifoesedd (“The Mirror of the Principal Ages”), by Theophilus Efans of Llangammarch, Wales, sheds light on the origin of the discredit thrown upon the historical value of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s writings about Brutus. 

There might be reason for uncertainty if the statements of Geoffrey of Monmouth stood alone, but when we find them constantly corroborated in the old manuscripts as well as by Welsh writers of repute, there is absolutely no reason to dismiss them as “Monkish fables”! Notice – 

“The first reason for denying the coming of BRUTUS into this island of Britain was this. When Jeffrey ap Arthur, Lord Bishop of Llandaff (Geoffrey of Monmouth), died, an Englishman of the name of Gwilym Bach (little William or William the Less) arrived… who desired Dafydd ab Owen, Prince of Gwynedd, to make him bishop in Jeffrey’s place about the year 1169 A.D. But when it was not to the mind of Dafydd ab Owen to grant him his request the man went home full of hatred and commenced to exercise his mind how best to despise and malign not only the memory of the bishop, who was lying in his grave, but also the whole of the Welsh nation. THIS GWILYM BACH, OUT OF MALICE BECAUSE HE WAS REFUSED THE BISHOPRIC OF LLANDAFF, WAS THE FIRST TO DENY THE COMING OF BRUTUS HERE.

“Gwilym Bach says without shame, that no one had ever mentioned the coming of Brutus and his men from Caerdroia to this island until Jeffrey ap Arthur fabricated the tale out of his own imagination, but this is a statement or charge TOO NAKED AND FLIMSY WITHOUT ANY FOUNDATION AND AGAINST ALL AUTHORITY. Because Jeffrey ap Arthur did nothing but translate the Welsh Chronicles into Latin, so that the educated of the country might read them. And long, long before the time of Jeffrey one of the poems (penhillion) of Taliesin makes clear the CONSENSUS OF OPINION of his fellow-countrymen in regard to the matter, and he wrote about the year 566 A.D.” (Quoted in Prehistoric London, by E. O. Gordon. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA 1985, page 9).

After leaving the Aegean area Brutus “MIGRATED TO MALTA, and there was advised to reestablish his people in ‘the Great White Island‘ (an early name for BRITAIN due to its chalk cliffs). This advice is recorded in an archaic Greek form on the Temple of Diana in CAER TROIA (New Troy).” (Jacob’s Pillar, page 26).

‘Where BRUTUS and his people traveled to next is preserved by the British historian Nennius, who states that “Aeneas… arrived in GAUL (modern FRANCE), WHERE HE FOUNDED THE CITY OF TOURS, which is called Turnis…” (Nennius: British History and the Welsh Annals, translated by John Morris. Phillimore, London and Chichester. 1980. Page 19). Nennius then says that “later he CAME TO THIS ISLAND, which is named BRITANNIA from his name, and filled it with his race, and dwelt there”.

The arrival of the Trojans in Britain is traced by E. Raymond Capt:

“The descendants of DARDA (DARDANNES or DANAANS) ruled ancient TROY for several hundred years, until the city was destroyed in the famous ‘Siege of Troy.’ 

AENEAS, the last of the ROYAL BLOOD, (Zarah-Judah) collected the remnants of his nation and traveled with them to ITALY. There he married the daughter of LATINUS, king of the Latins, and subsequently FOUNDED THE GREAT ROMAN EMPIRE. Aeneas’ GRANDSON, BRUTUS with a large part of the TROJANS migrated to ‘the GREAT WHITE ISLAND’… Tradition says that on the way to the ‘White Island’ Brutus came across FOUR OTHER TROJAN COLONIES UPON THE COAST OF SPAIN and persuaded them to join him.

‘At TOTNES on the RIVER DART [in England], twelve miles inland from TORBAY (the oldest seaport in South Devon) is an historical STONE that commemorates the coming of BRUTUS to Britain. (Circa 1103 B.C.) The stone is known as the ‘BRUTUS STONE,’ the tradition being that the TROJAN PRINCE set foot upon it when he first landed. The WELSH RECORDS state that THREE TRIBES OF HIS COUNTRYMEN received Brutus and his company as BRETHREN and proclaimed Brutus KING at a national convention of the whole island. His THREE SONS, born after his arrival in Britain were named after the three tribes – LOCRINUS [England], CAMBER [Wales], and ALBAN [Scotland]. Brutus’ name HEADS THE ROLE in all the genealogies of the British kings, preserved as faithfully as were those of the kings of Israel and Judah” (Missing Links Discovered in Assyrian Tablets, page 65-66).’

E. Raymond Capt continues by saying:

“Brutus founded the city of ‘CAER TROIA,’ or ‘NEW TROY.’ The Romans later called it ‘LONDINUM,’ now known as LONDON. The actual date of the founding of the city is suggested in the Welsh bardic literature: ‘And when BRUTUS had finished the building of the city, and had strengthened it with walls and castles, he consecrated them and made inflexible laws for the governance of such as should dwell there peacefully, and he put protection on the city and granted privilege to it. At this time, BELI THE PRIEST RULED IN JUDEA [1086-1046 BCE], and the Ark of the Covenant was in captivity to the Philistines [in 1046 BCE]’ (The Welsh Bruts) – Article: The Ark of God.

‘The reference, in the quotation above, to BELI THE PRIEST, is obviously of ELI of the First Book of Samuel. Such remote prehistoric antiquity of the site of London is CONFIRMED by the numerous archaeological remains found there, not only of the Stone Age and Early Bronze Ages, but even of the Old Stone Age. This indicates that it was already a settlement at the time when BRUTUS selected it for the site of his new capital of “NEW TROY.”

Within the last century or so an entirely new light has been cast upon the prehistoric history of London and its mounds, by Schliemann’s discoveries at Hissarlik – the ancient TROY in the north-west of Asia Minor. States author E. O. Gordon: “No longer need the story be regarded as fabulous, that Brutus the Trojan, the grandson of Aeneas (the hero of Virgil’s great epic), gave the name of CAER TROIA, TROYNOVANT or NEW TROY, to London. In site and surroundings… there seems to have been considerable resemblance between the historic Troy on the Scamander and New Troy on the Thames. 

On the plains of Troy to-day may be seen numerous conical mounds rising from out of the lagoons and swamps that environed the citadel hill of Hissarlik, akin to those that dominated the marshes, round about the Caer and Porth of London, in prehistoric times” (Prehistoric London, page 83).

The Bible Research Handbook verifies the authenticity of the legends of Brutus:

“Various details of circumstantial evidence appear to lend their support to the legend of the TROJAN SETTLEMENT OF BRITAIN. Ancient Irish accounts relate that a PARTHOLANUS, whose life was in important respects SIMILAR to that of BRUTUS, reached over our islands at a very early date’ – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – The Celtic tribes. ‘Caesar’s ‘Commentaries,’ which tell of a people called TRINOBANTES, who lived in the vicinity of what is now MIDDLESEX AND HERTFORDSHIRE, seem clearly to bear out the story of the TROJANS having founded TROJA NOVA, later called TRINOVANTUM, and eventually LONDON”.

The Link, a magazine of the Christian Israel Foundation, mentions other confirming historians:

“According to FIRM ancient legends, transmitted both by British and by Continental writers, a TROJAN COLONY, led by one BRUTUS, settled in the BRITISH ISLES not long after the fall of TROY in 1184 B.C., and established the line of early BRITISH KINGS from which the famous CARACTACUS and BOADICEA were in due course descended” – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

‘BRUTUS (or BRUT) OF TROY, grandson of AENEAS, left Troy, after the defeat of his countrymen by the Greeks, and with a band of followers journeyed to Britain by way of ITALY, where he FOUNDED LONDON, calling it NEW TROY. These traditions are chronicled by GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH, WACE, LAYAMON and OTHER EARLY HISTORIANS. There is support also from the writings of MATTHEW OF PARIS. 

Although Geoffrey of Monmouth’s evidence in particular is discounted in certain quarters, THE BRUTUS STORY WAS CURRENT LONG BEFORE GEOFFREY’S TIME, so that whatever may have been added by him in the way of imaginative detail, at least he did NOT invent the basic tradition. 

The evidence was certainly sufficient to convince the famous Lord Chief Justice Coke of the 17th century, for he wrote: ‘The original laws of this land were composed of such elements as BRUTUS (THE TROJAN) FIRST SELECTED FROM THE ANCIENT TROJAN AND GREEK INSTITUTIONS.’ In support of him, Lord Chancellor Fortescue, in his work on the Laws of England, states: ‘THE KINGDOM OF BRITAIN HAD ITS ORIGINAL INSTITUTIONS FROM BRUTUS OF THE TROJANS’

David Williamson, in his book Kings and Queens of Britain, comments on the authenticity of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s writings and equates their veracity to the books of the Old Testament:

“Geoffrey of Monmouth, writing in the first half of the twelfth century, sought to tell the story of Britain from its… FOUNDATION BY BRUTUS THE TROJAN until the coming of the Saxons… Geoffrey claimed that his History of the Kings of Britain was translated from ‘a certain very ancient book written in the British language’ which had been given to him by Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford. It was dedicated to two of the LEADING NOBLEMEN of the day, Robert, Earl of Gloucester (died 1147) [a]… son of King Henry I, and Waleran, Count of Mellent (died 1166). In it he tells of the wanderings of BRUTUS, the great-grandson of AENEAS [timescale wise this is more accurate than a son or grandson which we have read in other sources in this article], forced to leave Italy after accidentally killing his father and eventually, after many adventures, COMING TO ALBION, which he renamed BRITAIN from his own name, after driving out the aboriginal giants.

The story continues with the… deeds of BRUTUS’ DESCENDANTS and successors FROM ABOUT 1100 B.C. until the coming of the Romans… Lewis Thorp’s introduction to his translation of Geoffrey’s History points out that it might ‘be said to bear the SAME RELATIONSHIP to the story of the early British inhabitants of our own island as do the seventeen historical books in the OLD TESTAMENT, from Genesis to Esther, to the early history of the ISRAELITES in Palestine” (Dorset Press, N.Y. 1992, page 8).

‘In the manuscript section of the British Library lies an old document – MS43968 – that used to be kept in Windsor Castle. This particular chart gives the descent of the British Royal Family from ADAM THROUGH BRUTUS. Also, charts published by the Covenant Publishing Co., Ltd., by W. M. H. Milner entitled The Royal House of Britain and by M. H. Gayer entitled The Heritage of the Anglo-Saxon Race both trace the ancestry of the Royal House THROUGH SEVERAL LINES OF DESCENT FROM THE PATRIARCH JUDAH – INCLUDING BRUTUS who is shown as a descendant of Judah’s son Zarah’ – refer article: The Life & death of Charles III.

‘Every British schoolboy knew by heart the letter British king Caractacus sent to Claudius Caesar’ – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. ‘But not many know about the letter, written about a century earlier, from King Cassibellaunus to Julius Caesar. This letter is quoted in full by Geoffrey of Monmouth, who possessed an ancient manuscript from BRITTANY that evidently contained the letter. Geoffrey quotes widely from this manuscript in his historical work. The letter reads as follows:

“Cassibelaun, king of the Britains, to Caius Julius Caesar. We cannot but wonder, Caesar, at the avarice of the Roman people, since their insatiable thirst after money cannot let us alone whom the dangers of the ocean have placed in a manner out of the world; but they must have the presumption to covet our substance, which we have hitherto enjoy’d in quiet. Neither is this indeed sufficient: we must also prefer subjection and slavery to them, before the enjoyment of our native liberty. 

Your demand therefore, Caesar, is scandalous, since the SAME VEIN OF NOBILITY, FLOWS FROM AENEAS, IN BRITONS [Israelites descended from Jacob and Isaac] AND ROMANS [Ishmaelites descended from Isaac’s half brother, Ishmael], and ONE AND THE SAME CHAIN OF CONSANGUINITY SHINES IN BOTH [both descended from Abraham]: which ought to be a band of firm union and friendship.

That was what you should have demanded of us, and not slavery: we have learned to admit of the one, but never to bear the other. And so much have we been accustomed to liberty, that we are perfectly ignorant what it is to submit to slavery. And if even the gods themselves should attempt to deprive us of our liberty, we would to the utmost of our power resist them in defense of it. Know then, Caesar, that we are ready to fight for that and our kingdom if, as you threaten, you shall attempt to invade Britain.”

‘The reference in this letter to AENEAS provides support for the fact that the ancient British royal line STEMMED FROM TROY, as did, traditionally, the descent of certain of the EARLY RULERS OF ROME. And, as we have already seen, the tradition that the TROJAN LEADERS WERE JUDAHITES is upheld by testimony from many quarters.

Cassibellaunus was not the only king of Britain who knew of his Trojan blood-line. [So did] Edward I, who removed the Stone of Destiny from Scone in Scotland to London… “The Irish and Scottish kings, Fergus and EDWARD HIMSELF were all DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH: in fact it is said that EDWARD [I] used to boast of his DESCENT FROM THE TROJANS!” (Co-Incidences? Pointers to Our Heritage, by Brigadier G. Wilson).

William F. Skene, author of a book on the Stone of Destiny, states that “the KING OF ENGLAND, by whom the kingdom of Scotland was derived from ALBANACTUS, THE YOUNGEST SON OF BRUTUS, THE EPONYMUS OF THE BRITONS, while that of ENGLAND WAS DERIVED FROM LOCRINUS, THE ELDEST SON.” (The Coronation Stone, page 21). Even James I [of England and James VI of Scotland] knew of his background, and let it be known on several occasions that he was descended from Brutus!’

The promised Abrahamic Covenant Blessing, included (1) a large number of descendants; (2) a plurality of nations; (3) a great nation; (4) a royal dynasty; (5) incredible prosperity; (6) and the possession of the ‘gates of their enemies’ – in other words, military superiority (Genesis 13:16, 17:2-7, 22:15-17).

These promises were passed on to Isaac (Genesis 17:21), to Jacob (Genesis 27:19-33), now named Israel, and then primarily to his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh, as well as his son, Judah – Genesis 48:14-20; 49:8-12. 

There are no other body of peoples which fit these criteria – including those proposed by the Black Hebrew Israelite movement – than the British and Irish… Celtic, Saxon and Viking peoples who comprise the modern nations of England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the peoples in South Africa of British descent and by extension, Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia. 

The Black Hebrew Israelites claim Africans are the descendants of the ancient Israelites and that African Americans are the tribe of Judah. Yet while they may be able to incorrectly claim points one and two above – as could a number of other peoples – which African nation has fulfilled points three, four, five and six?

 It may seem peculiar or coincidental that the nations of the United Kingdom and the United States of America should grow into the powers they became as if out of nowhere. In the Book of Leviticus, the Creator clearly defines that blessings would be given for obedience and removal of said blessings for disobedience. The Creator promised a vast period of struggle should they fall, which they did and then a re-birth so-to-speak, in the latter days. Not because of their inherent goodness, but because of the Eternal’s unconditional promise to faithful Abraham.

Herman Hoeh and Herbert Armstrong explain the punishment promise.

‘Israel was promised great national blessings, including national greatness if they would obey God. But God also promised that if they obstinately refused to obey Him, if they refused to follow His laws and let Him rule their lives, then He would punish them for a period called seven times (Leviticus 26). 

The Bible itself defines this period of seven times… [in] Revelation the twelfth chapter… compare verses 6 and 14 you will see that the word time in prophecy simply means a year, hence seven times would be seven years or 2520 days. Now let’s notice another key. In Numbers 14:34, God said Israel would bear their iniquities in the wilderness after the number of days they searched the land of Canaan, forty days, each day for a year. 

Then seven times or 2520 prophetic days would equal 2520 literal years! This period of seven times or 2520 years punishment did come upon Israel because they went their own ways and would not submit to the rule of God. Israel went into captivity about 721 B.C. and did not become a great people again until their times of punishment ceased about 1800 A.D. At that time the descendants of the ancient House of Israel – America and Britain and the democratic peoples of the world – began to rise to such wealth and power as the world has never enjoyed before all because of the promises made to Abraham’ – Herman Hoeh, 1955.

‘Now continue in Leviticus 26: “And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins” (verse 18). This expression “seven times” is translated into the English from a Hebrew word which conveys a dual meaning. The original Hebrew word Moses wrote is shibah. It is defined as “seven times,” and also as :sevenfold.” The “seven times” implies duration or continuation of punishment. But the word also conveys the meaning of “sevenfold,” or seven times greater intensity of punishment – as a punishment that is sevenfold more intense. In this sense, the meaning would be the same as in Daniel 3:19, where King Nebuchadnezzar, in a rage, commanded that the furnace into which Daniel’s three friends were to be thrown should be made seven times hotter. 

Now understand the “seven times” – or seven prophetic “times.” For this is a prophecy. In prophecy, a “time” is a prophetic 360-day year. And, during Israel’s punishment, each day represented a year being fulfilled… But when that 2520-year withholding of the birthright had expired, God was faithful to His unconditional promise to Abraham! Not because of any British or American goodness, superiority, or worthiness, but because of God’s faithfulness to His promise, beginning in 1800 these two birthright peoples suddenly burst forth as the greatest world powers in all history!’ – Herbert W Armstrong, 1980.

In 1800 the Acts of Union occurred whereby the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was created. Thus began a century of expansion unlike anything ever witnessed before. It was also the same century, in which the United States threw off the royal sovereignty of the United Kingdom and began its own meteoritic rise to greatness. There were many acquisitions for the United Kingdom; a number of significant ones listed below…

1800 – Malta: Protectorate (sea gate) acquired by conquest
1806 – Cape of Good Hope: sea gate taken from the Dutch 

1815 – Ceylon: (Sri Lanka), acquired 

1825 – Tasmania: (formerly Van Diemen’s Land) formed into a colony
1832 – Western Australia: formed into a colony
1836 – South Australia: formed into a province 

1841 – Hong Kong: sea gate taken from the Chinese
1841 – New Zealand: formed into a separate colony
1849 – The Punjab: formally annexed
1851 – Victoria: formed into a colony
1858 – India: transferred to the Crown
1859 – Queensland: formed into a colony

1874 – Fiji: formed into a colony
1876 – Queen publicly proclaimed Empress of India
1878 – Cyprus: (sea gate) possession taken from the Ottoman Empire

The territorial expansion of the British Empire, led to the expression that: “the sun never set” on its possessions. In fact ‘in 1913, 412 million people lived under the control of the British Empire, twenty-three percent of the world’s population at that time. It remains the largest empire in human history and at the peak of its power in 1920, it covered an astonishing 13.71 million square miles – that’s close to a quarter of the world’s land area’ – N McCarthy, The Biggest Empires In Human History, 2019. 

Today, the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland retain the following:

Fourteen British Overseas Territories:

Anguilla
Bermuda
British Antarctic Territory
British Indian Ocean Territory
British Virgin Islands
Cayman Islands
Falkland Islands
Gibraltar
Montserrat
Pitcairn Islands
Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha

South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands

Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia Turks and Caicos Islands

Three Crown dependencies:

Guernsey (Alderney, Sark), Jersey and the Isle of Man

The issue with thinking Judah is a small or persecuted nation and that it would be fragmented during the latter days, only then gaining a homeland or national status, all seemingly based on scripture; still remains an incorrect interpretation of key verses. Plus, the perpetuation of this error has hidden the singular most important key to unlocking the Bible regarding future events: the true identity of the tribe of Judah, which has gone tragically unnoticed – Revelation 3:7. These identifying signs are the markers for Esau (Edom), not Judah – Malachi 1:2-4, Obadiah 1-21, John 8:39-45. Judah is the royal tribe, with a ruling orb, sceptre and crown to prove it. A monarchy which has dominated royal lines throughout Europe and the thrones they sit on. 

Blessed with national wealth and prosperity, giving birth to daughter nations and like the Parthians with a propensity to govern, to organise and rule, expanding as an empire; so too have the people who were known as Jutes and Normans. Yet, combining and in time using the name of their half brother tribe the Angli, forming the Angle name and becoming Angl-and and the Angl-ish.

For the Tribe of Judah is England and their descendants, the English.

Alternative options provided by those researchers who have deduced there is a problem with ascribing Judah to the Jews, are then non-plussed at who to then turn. Those who accurately identify the Jews with Edom, are then hindered in their argument by not providing a viable solution.

Alternative explanations for the descendants of Judah observed in other works include: Scotland; Ireland; and Germany. Yet Germany is Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar – and Scotland and Ireland are both too small to fulfil the biblical verses in either the historic or prophetic contexts ascribed to the prominent House of Judah. 

Seeking to gain the attention of the Houses of Judah and Israel is a thankless task, as the prophet Ezekiel was warned, but now is the time for the truth of their identity to be made known…

Ezekiel 33:30-33

Living Bible

“Son of dust, your people are whispering behind your back. They talk about you in their houses and whisper about you at the doors, saying, ‘Come on, let’s have some fun! Let’s go hear him tell us what the Lord is saying!’ So they come as though they are sincere and sit before you listening. But they have no intention of doing what I tell them to; they talk very sweetly about loving the Lord, but with their hearts they are loving their money. You are very entertaining to them, like someone who sings lovely songs with a beautiful voice or plays well on an instrument. They hear what you say but don’t pay any attention to it! But when all these terrible things happen to them – as they will – then they will know a prophet has been among them.”

Ezekiel 2:3-7

English Standard Version

‘And he said to me, “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to nations [plural] of rebels, who have rebelled against me. They and their fathers have transgressed against me to this very day. The descendants also are impudent and stubborn: I send you to them, and you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God.’ And whether they hear or refuse to hear (for they are a rebellious house) they will know that a prophet has been among them. And you, son of man, be not afraid of them, nor be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns are with you and you sit on scorpions. Be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house. And you shall speak my words to them, whether they hear or refuse to hear…”

Ezekiel 3:4-6

English Standard Version

‘And he said to me, “Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak wit my words to them.

For you are not sent to a people of foreign speech and a hard language, but to the house of Israel – not to many peoples of foreign speech and a hard language, whose words you cannot understand. Surely, if I sent you to such, they would listen to you.’

Ezekiel had been commissioned to speak to the Israelite people who all spoke the same language. Thus identity writers who teach that a number of nations in Europe with different languages are Israelite are incorrect. Today, the Israelites all speak English and that is how to begin identifying each individual tribe.

The English more than any other peoples, have migrated all over the world. By this, not those of ‘English’ descent in the United States or Australia for example, but rather those people who are British citizens, living in nations such as Spain or China and known as Ex-pats.

Isaiah 11:12

English Standard Version

‘He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.’

As we progress, the logic and truth of England’s real identity will become apparent and relentlessly convincing. Readers who may struggle the most are those entrenched in the paradigm that the Jews – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe – are Judah and England is Ephraim and the apparent ease that verses applicable to Judah and Ephraim appear to fit the modern nation states of Israel and England.

Once we investigate a little deeper and more thoroughly, it will be clear that the relationship the Jews and England share and their historical alignment is actually entirely indicative of Edom and Judah, the most spoken about relationship in scripture. The relationship between say Turkey as Edom and the Jews as Judah falls inadequately short in aligning literally every single verse in the Bible. This jig-saw pattern does not work… simply, the former does. 

It is worth noting a few key points in identifying true Israel and by extension Judah, which the Jews are not able to fulfil.

1. Jeremiah 31:33 shows that Israel was to come under the liberation of the New Covenant. The orthodox Jew remains under the shackles and imperfection of the old Law.

2. Hosea 1:10 states that Israelites were to become the sons of God, in accepting the Messiah. The Jewish people continue to reject Him as the Saviour and await a different messiah (Revelation 13:1-18)

3. Israel was to have a monarchy that would last forever – Jeremiah 33: 17. The Jewish people have no sovereign monarch on the earth.

4. Isaiah 54:17 and Leviticus 26:6-8, say that Israel was to be immune from defeat in major wars – not including individual battles and minor conflicts – yet the Jews have suffered an endless tide of either persecution or death prior to the formation of the state of Israel. 

We are first introduced to Judah in Genesis 29:35 ESV: ‘And [Leah] conceived again and bore a son, and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.” Therefore she called his name Judah. Then she ceased bearing.’ Leah had Judah, her fourth son and then experienced a gap of a number of years, before giving birth to her remaining three children in quick succession. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

Judah meaning: ‘Praised, Let [God] Be Praised’ from the verb yada, to praise

The original Judah is Jacob’s fourth son with Leah (Genesis 29:35). Judah becomes prominent when his three brothers Reuben, Simeon and Levi forfeit their places in the hierarchy (Reuben sleeps with Bilhah – Genesis 35:22, and Simeon and Levi avenge their sister Dinah’s rape by killing the entire male population of the village of Shechem, and looting the place – Genesis 34:25).

It should be noted that the feminine form of this name, Judith, occurs a generation earlier than Judah and may very well be the original (meaning that the name Judah is derived from Judith and not vice versa). Judith is the [‘Hittite’] aunt of Judah, married to Judah’s uncle Esau. 

Other Judahs are: A postexilic Levite (Ezra 3:9); A Levite who divorces his foreign wife in the purge of Ezra (Ezra 10:23); A postexilic overseer (Nehemiah 11:9); A Levite who returns with Zerubbabel (Nehemiah 12:8); A postexilic leader (Nehemiah 12:34); A priestly musician (Nehemiah 12:36).

The name Judah transliterated into Greek is Iouda, and occurs as such 7 times in the New Testament… The name Judas is the Hellenized version of the Hebrew name Judah.

When Leah gave birth to Judah she names him such by saying, “This time I will praise the Lord”. Perhaps she meant that she realized that her first three sons weren’t going to bring her closer to Jacob, and she should redirect her focus to God. Formally, the name Judah does not contain the appellative (Yah) = (Yahu) = (Yu), which in turn are abbreviated forms of the Tetragrammaton; the name of the Lord: YHWH, but no member of a Hebrew audience would fail to notice that the first two letters of the name Judah form (Yah). 

And if the letter (daleth) would be omitted from the name Judah, the very name (YHWH) would appear. For the meaning of the name Judah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Let Him (God) Be Praised.’

Popular English names include Judith, Judy and Jude. When Joseph has a dream of his preeminence over his family and naively declares it to everyone, his brothers conspire against him. They decide to kill him, though Reuben suggests leaving him in a pit, so that he can secretly return to save him and take him back to his father. Was Reuben trying to atone for his sleeping with Bilhah and thus return to his father Jacob’s good books or was it a truly altruistic gesture. Either way, Judah steps into the starring role… 

Genesis 37:23-35

English Standard Version

23 ‘So when Joseph came to his brothers, they stripped him of his robe, the robe of many colors that he wore. 24 And they took him and threw him into a pit. The pit was empty; there was no water in it. 25 Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. 

26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother and conceal his blood? 27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him.

28 Then Midianite traders passed by [refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar]. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt.

29 When Reuben returned to the pit and saw that Joseph was not in the pit, he tore his clothes 30 and returned to his brothers and said, “The boy is gone, and I, where shall I go?” 31 Then they took Joseph’s robe and slaughtered a goat and dipped the robe in the blood. 32 And they sent the robe of many colors and brought it to their father and said, “This we have found; please identify whether it is your son’s robe or not.” 33 And he identified it and said, “It is my son’s robe. A fierce animal has devoured him. Joseph is without doubt torn to pieces.”

34 Then Jacob tore his garments and put sackcloth on his loins and mourned for his son many days. 35 All his sons and all his daughters [H1323 – bath: daughter, girl] rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted and said, “No, I shall go down to Sheol to my son, mourning.” Thus his father wept for him.’

We learn that Jacob may have had daughters in the plural. Thus, Dinah being mentioned with Zebulun gives further credence to her being his twin. It also means that her escapade with Shechem and the recounting of it, shows she may have stood out from her sisters. Alternatively, the Hebrew word bath can infer daughters-in-law. Joseph was seventeen when this event occurred and the year was 1709 BCE. Reuben was born in 1752 BCE and Judah in 1746 BCE; they were forty-three and thirty-seven years of age respectively, according to an unconventional chronology. 

The act against Joseph is all the more cruel as we are not speaking of teenage boys or young men in their twenties with hot heads. These were older men, coldly plotting a young lads fate. 

Judah meanwhile, reasons that culpability is substantially reduced if they cast Joseph to the whims of others rather than physically killing him themselves. Was this a gesture of kindness in sparing Joseph’s life, or was it to only ensure escape for blame for his possible death. Judah displays a wily solution to the problem in a similar fashion to how his father would; while standing to make an investment from the transaction. Apart from Joseph, no other son of Jacob has a chapter devoted to them in the Book of Genesis. The next chapter in Genesis describes Judah’s hit and miss love life.

Genesis 38:1-30

English Standard Version

1 ‘It happened at that time that Judah went down [or away] from his brothers and turned aside to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. 2 There Judah saw the daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua. He took her and went in to her, 3 and she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Er. 4 She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. 5 Yet again she bore a son, and she called his name Shelah. Judah was in Chezib when she bore him.

6 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. 7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death. 8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” 

9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also. 11 Then Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, “Remain a widow in your father’s house, till Shelah my son grows up” – for he feared that he would die, like his brothers. So Tamar went and remained in her father’s house.’

Judah separated himself from his brothers. We learn he is his own man. Judah may not have desired the women from his family of Nahor or Haran, or perhaps he was rebelling and seeking adventure. He did not make a sound choice, reflective of his Uncle Esau. Notice Judah named his first son and Shua’s daughter named the next two. It is not clear whether Shua’s daughter was a. a black Canaanite woman; b. if she was from one of the Nephilim descended clans; or c. neither.

The Book of Jubilees 34:20 gives her name as Betasu’el; while later in the book of Chronicles, her name is revealed as Bath-shua. Judah takes an invested interest again in the son he named, when he chooses Er’s wife for him. We do not know who Tamar is and her lineage not being stated is unusual, though the Book of Jasher provides information.

Book of Jasher 45:4, 23

4 ‘… Judah went at that time to Adulam, and he came to a man of Adulam, and his name was Hirah, and Judah saw there the daughter of a man from Canaan, and her name was Aliyath, the daughter of Shua, and he took her, and came to her, and Aliyath bare unto Judah, Er, Onan and Shiloh; three sons.

23 And in those days Judah went to the house of Shem and took Tamar the daughter [descendant] of Elam [refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey], the son of Shem, for a wife for his first born Er.’

It would be impossible using an unconventional chronology for Tamar to be the literal daughter of Elam, so a descendant would be applicable. As Er and Onan are both put to death, first without a reason given and then with a punishment that seemingly doesn’t fit the crime; Nephilim dalliance could possibly answer why her sons were evil.

Against this, is that Shelah is also born by Shua’s daughter. This writer would lean to considering that Shelah was half Israelite and half black Canaanite. For the events to unfold and add up mathematically, so that Pharez’s sons Hezron and Hamul are counted as part of the seventy souls who travelled with Jacob into Egypt, Judah would have to have married Shua’s daughter circa 1727 BCE and not in 1709 BCE as intimated in verse one. A year before Joseph was born in fact in 1726 BCE. This means Er and Onan were contemporaries of Joseph being born circa 1727 and 1726 BCE. Perhaps a motivation for Judah in sparing Joseph’s life. Er marrying Tamar in approximately 1709 BCE and then Onan in 1708 BCE.

Genesis: 12 ‘In the course of time the wife of Judah, Shua’s daughter, died [between 1708-1706 BCE]. When Judah was comforted, he went up to Timnah to his sheepshearers, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite. 13 And when Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is going up to Timnah to shear his sheep,” 14 she took off her widow’s garments and covered herself with a veil, wrapping herself up, and sat at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah. For she saw that Shelah was grown up, and she had not been given to him in marriage.

15 When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face. 16 He turned to her at the roadside and said, “Come, let me come in to you,” for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law. She said, “What will you give me, that you may come in to me?” 17 He answered, “I will send you a young goat from the flock.” And she said, “If you give me a pledge, until you send it” – 18 He said, “What pledge shall I give you?” She replied, “Your signet and your cord and your staff that is in your hand.” So he gave them to her and went in to her, and she conceived by him. 19 Then she arose and went away, and taking off her veil she put on the garments of her widowhood.’

Judah and Tamar

Shelah would have been born circa 1725 BCE and by 1707 BCE was old enough to marry Tamar. For whatever reason, Judah had not given Tamar to Shelah. Tamar took matters in her own hands, made easier by her attraction for Judah, circa 1706 BCE.

Genesis: 20 When Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite to take back the pledge from the woman’s hand, he did not find her. 21 And he asked the men of the place, “Where is the cult prostitute who was at Enaim at the roadside?” And they said, “No cult prostitute has been here.” 22 So he returned to Judah and said, “I have not found her. Also, the men of the place said, ‘No cult prostitute has been here.’” 23 And Judah replied, “Let her keep the things as her own, or we shall be laughed at. You see, I sent this young goat, and you did not find her.”

24 About three months later Judah was told, “Tamar your daughter-in-law has been immoral.  Moreover, she is pregnant by immorality.” And Judah said, “Bring her out, and let her be burned.” 25 As she was being brought out, she sent word to her father-in-law, “By the man to whom these belong, I am pregnant.” And she said, “Please identify whose these are, the signet and the cord and the staff.” 26 Then Judah identified them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I did not give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not know her again.

27 When the time of her labor came, there were twins in her womb. 28 And when she was in labor, one put out a hand, and the midwife took and tied a scarlet thread on his hand, saying, “This one came out first.” 29 But as he drew back his hand, behold, his brother came out [reminiscent of Esau and Jacob’s birth]. And she said, “What a breach you have made for yourself!” Therefore his name was called Perez. 30 Afterward his brother came out with the scarlet thread on his hand, and his name was called Zerah.

Recall Judah’s wife, Bath-shua was dead and so Judah was a widow when he visited a prostitute. Judah was possibly not attracted to Tamar enough to marry Tamar, nor would it have been conventional to marry his son’s former wife. Their new sons, Pharez and Zarah were born out of wedlock circa 1705 BCE. Pharez was the ancestor of both King David and the Messiah. 

The name Tamar means ‘palm’ or ‘palm tree.’ Er is interesting as it can mean ‘aroused, wild ass, watching’ and ‘watcher.’ A clue to a Nephilim interest? The verb ‘arar means ‘to strip and accumulate.’ Onan is also enlightening as it can mean ‘trouble, vigor, vigorous, strong’ and ‘iniquity.’ Shelah means ‘to send.’ Pharez means ‘a breach, to break through’ and Zarah means ‘rising, rising of light, dawn, break out.’ Pharez and Zarah both coincidentally mean to ‘break through’ or ‘break out.’ 

Due to severe famine, Jacob sends his sons to Egypt excepting Benjamin. Of course, Joseph has never met Benjamin. Joseph makes a pretext to withhold Simeon and requests the brothers return with the youngest brother Benjamin – who was born some twenty-seven years after Joseph circa 1699 BCE and is about twelve years of age.

Genesis 43:1-14

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now the famine was severe in the land. 2 And when they had eaten the grain that they had brought from Egypt, their father said to them, “Go again, buy us a little food.”

3 But Judah said to him, “The man solemnly warned us, saying, ‘You shall not see my face unless your brother is with you.’ 4 If you will send our brother with us, we will go down and buy you food. 5 But if you will not send him, we will not go down…

6 Israel said, “Why did you treat me so badly as to tell the man that you had another brother?” 7 They replied, “The man questioned us carefully about ourselves and our kindred, saying, ‘Is your father still alive? Do you have another brother?’ What we told him was in answer to these questions. 

Could we in any way know that he would say, ‘Bring your brother down’?” 8 And Judah said to Israel his father, “Send the boy with me, and we will arise and go, that we may live and not die, both we and you and also our little ones.

I will be a pledge of his safety. From my hand you shall require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame forever. 10 If we had not delayed, we would now have returned twice.”

11 Then their father Israel said to them, “If it must be so, then do this: take some of the choice fruits of the land in your bags, and carry a present down to the man, a little balm and a little honey, gum, myrrh, pistachio nuts, and almonds. 12 Take double the money with you. Carry back with you the money that was returned in the mouth of your sacks. Perhaps it was an oversight. 13 Take also your brother, and arise, go again to the man. 14 May God Almighty grant you mercy before the man, and may he send back your other brother and Benjamin. And as for me, if I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”

Poor Jacob with two sons at risk now, Simeon and Benjamin. It is highly prophetic that Judah should wish to take Joseph’s only full-blood brother and protect him. We will learn that Judah and Benjamin’s peoples have developed a very close relationship over the centuries, albeit turbulent at times, it has been a strong bond that was the heart, soul and core of the Kingdom of Judah. 

The descendants of Judah have also had a protective hand over Simeon’s descendants and so the story of Judah fetching Simeon and protecting him with Benjamin’s safe return home is heavy with dual symbolism. The brothers return to Egypt and feast with Joseph. Joseph tests them on the return journey by hiding a ‘stolen’ cup in Benjamin’s bags; so they should return to Egypt yet again.

Genesis 44:14-34

English Standard Version

14 ‘When Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house, he was still there. They fell before him to the ground. 15 Joseph said to them, “What deed is this that you have done? Do you not know that a man like me can indeed practice divination?”

16 And Judah said, “What shall we say to my lord? What shall we speak? Or how can we clear ourselves? God has found out the guilt of your servants; behold, we are my lord’s servants, both we and he also in whose hand the cup has been found.”

17 But he said, “Far be it from me that I should do so! Only the man in whose hand the cup was found shall be my servant. But as for you, go up in peace to your father.”

Joseph is certainly getting good measure of playful revenge on his brothers, saying he can divine and cornering them to leave behind Benjamin. Notice in all the exchanges with Joseph, it is not the elder brothers, Reuben, Simeon or Levi taking the lead, it is Judah who is speaking on all of their behalf.

18 ‘Then Judah went up to him and said, “Oh, my lord, please let your servant speak a word in my lord’s ears, and let not your anger burn against your servant, for you are like Pharaoh himself.’

Judah confronts Joseph

19 ‘My lord asked his servants, saying, ‘Have you a father, or a brother?’ 20 And we said to my lord, ‘We have a father, an old man, and a young brother, the child of his old age. His brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother’s children, and his father loves him.’ 21 Then you said to your servants, ‘Bring him down to me, that I may set my eyes on him.’ 22 We said to my lord, ‘The boy cannot leave his father, for if he should leave his father, his father would die.’ 23 Then you said to your servants, ‘Unless your youngest brother comes down with you, you shall not see my face again.’

24 “When we went back to your servant my father, we told him the words of my lord. 25 And when our father said, ‘Go again, buy us a little food,’ 26 we said, ‘We cannot go down. If our youngest brother goes with us, then we will go down. For we cannot see the man’s face unless our youngest brother is with us.’ 27 Then your servant my father said to us, ‘You know that my wife bore me two sons. 28 One left me, and I said, “Surely he has been torn to pieces,” and I have never seen him since. 29 If you take this one also from me, and harm happens to him, you will bring down my gray hairs in evil to Sheol.’

30 “Now therefore, as soon as I come to your servant my father, and the boy is not with us, then, as his life is bound up in the boy’s life, 31 as soon as he sees that the boy is not with us, he will die, and your servants will bring down the gray hairs of your servant our father with sorrow to Sheol. 32 For your servant became a pledge of safety for the boy to my father, saying, ‘If I do not bring him back to you, then I shall bear the blame before my father all my life.’ 

33 Now therefore, please let your servant remain instead of the boy as a servant to my lord, and let the boy go back with his brothers. 34 For how can I go back to my father if the boy is not with me? I fear to see the evil that would find my father.”

Judah has deliberately laid it on thick here and making the point as dramatically as possible, in that he cannot under any circumstances leave Benjamin behind. It is at this point, that Joseph cannot keep up the charade and reveals his identity in an emotional reunion. Plans are agreed for Jacob’s family to move to Lower Egypt, the Nile delta situated in the north of Egypt.

Genesis 46:28-29

English Standard Version

‘[Jacob] had sent Judah ahead of him to Joseph to show the way before him in Goshen, and they came into the land of Goshen. Then Joseph prepared his chariot and went up to meet Israel his father in Goshen…’ 

We shall return to this dramatic reconciliation in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. In Genesis chapter forty-nine, Jacob gathers his sons prior to his death and gives a specific prophecy – which in turn are insightful identifying signs – for each son and their descendants. In Deuteronomy chapter thirty-three, Moses gives additional revealing prophecies for the respective tribes.

Genesis 49:8

The Voice

“… Judah, your brothers will praise you. Your hand will firmly grasp the neck of your enemy, and your brothers will bow down before you in respect.”

England has certainly had the upper hand over their enemies. It has not lost a war since the American War of Independence in 1812. Before that, it lost a handful of battles with Scotland, though winning the pivotal majority. The United States on the other hand has had greater highs – influencing the outcome of both World Wars – and also greater lows, stalemates or losses in the Korean and Vietnam wars. England’s daughter nations have all looked to the Mother country in recognition of their origin and support. Similarly, the English speaking Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples have given their allegiance to England in having the English King (or Queen) as their own. It cannot be said that any country has ever bowed down to the Jewish nation. 

Three countries have shaken off this obligation of fealty to the Monarch and formed Republics – the United States of America, South Africa and the Republic of Ireland. They represent Israelite tribes who do not wish to be subservient or subject to Judah’s monarchy. Though in the case of America, a ‘special relationship’ continues. Nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand are self-governing democracy’s which readily claim the King, as their Monarch – albeit Australia more reluctantly and possibly heading towards a republican future the earliest of the three. 

The remaining three nations are tied exclusively with Judah and the throne in a Union. They comprise the Kingdom of Scotland; the state of Northern Ireland; and the nation of Wales – a principality until 1543, yet nation status only made official in 2011. Wales constitutes with England since 1542, the Kingdom of England. With the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, driven by the English majority, it remains to be seen if Scotland will take the path toward becoming an independent democracy or a Republic. This issue is significant and will become apparent when we discuss their identity.

Deuteronomy 33:7

English Standard Version

“… Hear, O Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in to his people. With your hands contend for him, and be a help against his adversaries.”

New English Translation

… May his power be great, and may you help him against his foes.

King James Version

… let his hands be sufficient for him…

Good News Translation

… listen to their cry for help; Unite them again with the other tribes [of Israel]. Fight for them, Lord, And help them against their enemies.

The peoples of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, South Africa (Rhodesia), Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States – with the exception of the Irish Republic – all came to England’s call in their darkest hours during the Great War and the Second World War. The loss of life, freely given to assist Judah’s cause was of great sacrifice, particularly from the smaller of Judah’s brother nations. Conversely, the Israelite people of the colonies around the world which became nations in their own right have all originated from the prominent nation on the largest of the British Isles: England. England is surrounded by water, as Judah is described in the Book of Isaiah. While the original territory of Judah was tellingly landlocked.

Isaiah 48:1

King James Version

‘Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness’ [for England is gradually becoming a Godless land].

In Deuteronomy 33:7, the Hebrew word H7227 – rab for sufficient, means ‘power, contend.’ The word is translated as sufficient sixty-two times, spread across eleven translations. In the KJV it is translated as: many 190 times; great 118; much 36; captain 24; more 12; multitude 7; mighty 5; and greatly 3 times. It also means ‘abounding in, more numerous than, strong, greater than, exceedingly’ and ‘chief.’ Abundant as in ‘quantity, size, age, number, rank’ and multitude as in ‘plenteous, populous’ and a ‘prince.’

These definitions reveal that many would assist Judah. Though the context is that may his (Judah’s) power be great, as in plenteous and strong.

England has a population of 58,440,915 people; is a great nation economically and militarily; and was once a major power, a prototype superpower while it possessed a global empire; though now it is a shadow of itself as a regional power and head of a Commonwealth of nations, reflecting the residue of its former overseas empire – refer article: 2050

The United Kingdom – spear headed by England – has the sixth largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $3.84 trillion in 2025. The United Kingdom economy is driven by a large service sector, particularly in finance, insurance and business services (recall Judah making money from selling Joseph). In the 1990s the United Kingdom was fourth in the world, subsequently passed by China and India.

‘… the following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in UK global shipments during 2021.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$67.6 billion 
  2. Gems, precious metals: $65.7 billion 
  3. Vehicles: $40.1 billion 
  4. Mineral fuels including oil: $33.7 billion 
  5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $26.4 billion 
  6. Pharmaceuticals: $23.3 billion 
  7. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $20.4 billion 
  8. Aircraft, spacecraft: $13.9 billion 
  9. Plastics, plastic articles: $12.3 billion 
  10. Organic chemicals: $11 billion 

Gems and precious metals represents the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 53.2% year over year since 2020 propelled by higher international sales of gold and platinum. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which was up by 27.8%.’

In the Global Innovation Index for 2023, the UK was ranked the fourth most innovative country in the world – across 80 indicators in seven categories. Recall, Germany was ranked number eight and Switzerland number one.

The post-exilic writer (or compiler) of 1 Chronicles, likely Ezra, wrote:

1 Chronicles 5:2

Amplified Bible

‘Though Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came (David) the leader (and eventually the Messiah), yet the birthright was Joseph’s…’

How did Judah prevail? During the leadership of Moses, the tribe of Judah became the strongest tribe. The census in Numbers chapter one shows that Judah was the leading tribe in population and in men who could go to war for Israel – Numbers 1:2-3, 27. 

After the death of Joshua, the Creator chose the tribe of Judah to take the lead in conquering the Canaanite-Nephilim nations who were living in the land which had been promised to the sons of Jacob – Judges 1:2. The first chapter of Judges recounts that the tribe of Judah was the most passionate in driving out the Canaanites in the southern half of the land of Canaan. Notably, they were the only tribe to actually drive out the Canaanites in their territory, fulfilling the Creator’s command. 

Israel was numbered by David in a census and it reveals an army of considerable size. A standing army of a million and half men is formidable even by todays standards. Notice the proportion of slightly over forty percent, that was contributed by Judah; much above an average of nearly just over eleven percent if nine tribes (not including Levi and Benjamin) contributed some 630,000 men.

1 Chronicles 21:5

English Standard Version

‘And Joab gave the sum of the numbering of the people to David. In all Israel there were 1,100,000 men who drew the sword, and in Judah 470,000 who drew the sword.’

During the time of King David, the tabernacle of the Eternal had long been in Shiloh in the territory of Ephraim, but David set the stage for the temple to be built on Mount Zion in Jerusalem. 

Psalm 78:67-70

New King James Version

‘Moreover He rejected the tent of Joseph, And did not choose the tribe of Ephraim, But chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which He loved. And He built His sanctuary like the heights, Like the earth which He has established forever. He also chose David His servant, And took him from the sheepfolds…’

The Creator chose Jerusalem – principally Mount Zion across from the Mount of Olives – in Judah, for His dwelling to be located… and chose David and his family, to hold the sceptre of kingship within the tribe of Judah. 

Judah was a warrior^^ nation. The English too, are a warrior nation, with a reputation well founded for bulldog doggedness, stubbornness, determined resolve and do-or-die, true grit. These are characteristics shared by ancient Judah and modern England alike. England’s power has waned some since its military dominance during the nineteenth century and its economic peak in 1913. Even so, it would be a brave nation indeed to poke the Lion of Judah, as the verse following in Genesis forty-nine reveals. 

While the above refers to the Patriarch Jacob, it could easily and just as accurately depict Judah and his descendants.

Why did the Creator choose Judah? Judah, the tribe he holds dear and loves. Judah did not seem to have the charisma or genuineness of Joseph, though the Eternal sees the heart and He must have perceived a strong warrior spirit in Judah and recognised someone with strength of character and determination; likening him to a young lion who would stand and fight. These qualities later evident in his descendant David and in the English people as a whole, must have influenced the Eternal’s desire to choose Judah to be His lawgiver and the tribe from which His Son would later be born – Hebrews 7:14. 

David was undoubtedly inspired by this passage in Genesis forty-nine to twice say in the Psalms that ‘Judah is My lawgiver’ – Psalms 60:7; 108:8. 

The tribe of Judah has not only been a lawgiver, but a preserver of the Creator’s law and message. Paul said, “What advantage then has the Jew [from true Judah]? … Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles – that which was spoken or commanded – of God” – Romans 3:1-2. 

It is the English who disseminated the Bible to a wider public more than any other nation – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Not the Jews, who have faithfully preserved the Torah but disdain the New Testament and the Saviour who is central to it. Nor has the preservation of the Jewish calendar, erroneously called the Hebrew or sacred calendar by some, fulfilled Paul’s words. In a separate study we will learn the incredible and shocking truth about the Jewish calendar as well as the Gregorian-Julian calendar foisted on our modern world – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Genesis 49:9 

New Life Version

Judah is a young lion. Like a lion full of meat, you have become great, my son. He lies down and sleeps like a lion. And as a lion, who is willing to wake him?”

The Message

… Look at him, crouched like a lion, king of beasts; who dares mess with him?

When Jacob gave his dying blessing to his twelve sons, he associated each of them with an animal, object or a personal characteristic which became either an emblem of the tribe descended from him, or an identifying sign. The Lion, the emblem of Jacob’s fourth son Judah, is of special importance. This lion, in a couchant (lying down) position, became the emblem of the tribe of Judah; then, in a passant position (walking position with foreleg raised), it was an emblem of the Camp of Judah.

Later, with the addition of a crown, it was the emblem of the Royal House and throne of Judah. Finally, as a rampant lion (standing on hind legs with both forelegs elevated) posture with a crown, it became the symbol of the two Houses which comprise the Kingdom of Judah. For inspiration was drawn from the rampant Lion Royal standard of Scotland.

Kingdom of Scotland Coat of Arms – God me Defend – incorporating the Royal Banner of the Royal Arms, the Lion Rampant of Scotland 

The Lion and the Unicorn, United Church of God – emphasis mine:

‘Moses said of Joseph: “His glory is like a firstborn bull, and his horns (weapons) are like the horns of a wild ox” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Where the New King James Version has “a wild ox,” the earlier King James had “unicorns.” Certainly a bovine animal was intended – tying back to the “bull” in the earlier part of the verse. Indeed, the medieval unicorn idea is believed by some to have been inspired by the Arabian oryx. Viewed from the side, particularly from a distance, these animals appear to have a single long horn. And sometimes they actually have only one. Consider also that unicorns, though portrayed with horse faces, have antelope hooves and long, lion-like tails – as oryx also have. The bull or unicorn thus became the symbol of Joseph – particularly of Ephraim. 

As is widely understood, the lion became the tribal emblem of Judah directly connected to kingship

This was fitting, of course, since the lion is known as the “king of beasts” – and from Judah was to come the king of Israel, David, and ultimately the King of Kings, Jesus Christ. Jesus is even referred to as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (Revelation 5:5). 

… the lion, as the emblem of Judah, was the symbol of the house of David. Notice how David’s son Solomon utilized this imagery to represent the greatest dynasty on earth: “The king made a great throne of ivory, and overlaid it with pure gold. The throne had six steps, with a footstool of gold, which were fastened to the throne (and the top of the throne was round at the back); there were armrests on either side of the place of the seat, and two lions stood beside the armrests. Twelve lions stood there, one on each side of the six steps; nothing like this had been made for any other kingdom” (2 Chronicles 9:17-19; 1 Kings 10:18-20). 

One source explains: “King James VI of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth I when she died childless in 1603, effectively uniting Scotland and England beneath one rule. The Scottish Royal Arms had up to that point used two unicorns as shield supporters. The English Arms had used a variety of supporters, but most frequently had included a lion. In a tactful gesture then, he placed a lion upon the left of the new Arms, and a unicorn upon the right.” 

National motto of Scotland: Nemo me impune lacessit, meaning: No one provokes me with impunity.

United Church of God: “This was a potent bit of symbolism, for both the lion and the unicorn had long been thought to be deadly enemies: both regarded as king of the beasts, the unicorn rules through harmony while the lion rules through might, It came to symbolise a reconciliation between the Scottish unicorn and the English lion that the two should share the rule.”

This significant moment in history saw the rejoining of the Houses of Benjamin and of Judah into the formation of the ancient Kingdom of Judah. Thus the unification of the two separate Kingdoms of Scotland and England transformed them into the United Kingdom of Great Britain. 

United Church of God: ‘… between the lion and unicorn is a garter around the central shield said to represent the Order of the Garter, an ancient order of knighthood of which the British monarch is sovereign. On the garter appear the Old French words, “Honi soit qui mal y pense,” which means, “Evil to him who thinks evil” – toward Britain that is. Is this not nearly the same as “cursed is he that curseth thee” in Numbers 24, a promise given in the same context as the lion and unicorn in Scripture? Surely this is no mere coincidence.

Beneath the shield and animals appears the motto of the sovereign, “Dieu et mon droit,” meaning, “God and my right,” that is, the right of kingly succession (as David’s line has by God’s promise) or right of birth… This was the military password chosen by King Richard I in 1198, but its origins may go even further back. In any event, it would seem to be more than happenstance that such is the royal motto of Britain.

And there is more. Upon the shield of the arms appear the golden passant lions of England – passant meaning walking with farther forepaw raised. Actually, these lions are considered to be running across the shield in a crouched position – stalking prey and attacking. Says one source: “Lions have appeared in our Royal Arms since the introduction of Heraldry. It is said that Henry II’s arms originally consisted of two lions, and that he added a third on marriage [in 1152]” (Patrick Montague-Smith, The Royal Line of Succession, Pitkin, 1968, page 2).’

‘The two lions had been the emblem of William the Conqueror prior to 1066 (Jiri Louda and Michael Maclagan, Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe, 1981, page 16). William was apparently of the… line of Zerah, and may even have been of Davidic lineage’ – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. ‘The two golden lions could perhaps be reminiscent of the gilded lions upon the sides of Solomon’s throne’ – representing Pharez and Zarah.

‘When… Edward I took the Stone of Destiny from Scotland in 1296, he “ordered his goldsmith to make a fair bronze chair to contain it… The coronation chair, which still stands in Westminster Abbey today, has been used in almost all English coronations since that of Edward II in 1307. We are told that it was made by Walter of Durham in 1299… (who) was paid… for the carving and painting of two wooden leopards (‘leopard’ being the medieval term for a running as opposed to rampant lion) – kings of England during that period liked being shown with their feet resting on leopards (that is, lions), perhaps to model their throne on descriptions of King Solomon’s which had two lions standing by the stays” (Pat Gerber, Stone of Destiny, 1997, page 105).’

Judah is described as a lion cub, a lioness; and a lion. We will see links between the lion cub and the tribe of Dan and the association between Judah’s lion and the tribe of Gad. Both the symbols of a Dragon, via the Tudors of Wales and the Unicorn from the Stuarts of Scotland have been secondary symbols of England; though its prime and true symbol is the Lion as evidenced in heraldry and the Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.

Numbers 23:22-24; 24:8-9

King James Version

‘God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn. Surely there is no enchantment against Jacob, neither is there any divination against Israel: according to this time it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel, What hath God wrought! Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood^^ of the slain.

God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows [superior military strength]. He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir* him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee.’

The state of Israel and the Jewish people could not be honestly described in this fashion. They do not have the military might which Great Britain has possessed in the past or currently has at its disposal. The royal motto in Old French, is Dieu et mon Droit, meaning: God and my Right. The right to rule as the royal tribe of Judah. Balaam was hired to curse Israel and ended up blessing them and cursing anyone who cursed them.

Genesis 49:10 

Good News Translation

Judah will hold the royal scepter, And his descendants will always rule. Nations will bring him tribute And bow in obedience before him.”

1599 Geneva Bible

The Sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh [the Messiah] come, and the people shall be gathered unto him.

Ancient Jewish authorities interpret ‘Shiloh’ as a compound of shel and loh meaning, ‘to whom it belongs.’ Judah would always be identified with a monarchy, a throne and royal dynasties of kings and queens. This again, is not something that can be attributed to the Jewish people. To argue that the Jews are Judah, but some ‘Jews of Judah’ are the royal family in England, presiding over the tribe of Ephraim is not scriptural and exemplifies the classic forcing of a piece of the jig-saw puzzle that well and truly does not fit. In the Bible (and historically), Ephraim distanced himself from Judah and its monarchy and has only gone and done the same in our modern age as we shall discover. Ephraim doesn’t sit right underneath Judah’s monarch, forever ruled by them. This situation is not described or predicted in the scriptures.  

The Son of Man was prophesied to descend from Judah and He did – one proof of his credentials as the Messiah. David was promised that he would always have an eligible descendant to sit on the throne of Judah, not that that there would necessarily always be someone from his line on the throne – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Psalm 89:3-4

English Standard Version

You have said, I have made a covenant with my chosen one; I have sworn to David my servant: ‘I will establish your offspring forever, and build your throne for all generations.’

Jeremiah 33:17, ESV: “For thus says the Lord: David shall never [H3808 – lo: not, no] lack [H3772 – karath: want, fail] a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel…’ It could be written that ‘… David would never be without or fail to have, a descendant to sit on the throne…’ Verse eighteen says the exact same thing regarding levitical priests always being available to offer burnt offerings, meat offerings and sacrifices. Yet the Levitical priesthood ended with Christ’s sacrifice – Hebrews 7:11-14.

The Hebrew word used for fail is karath, and is translated in the KJV as cut off (145 times), make (85), cut down (23), cut (9), fail (6), destroy (4), want (3), covenanted (2) and hew (2). The word also means ‘to cut asunder… by implication, to destroy or consume; specifically, to covenant (i.e make an alliance, or bargain…) make a league, to permit to perish.’ 

1 Kings 9:5

New King James Version

‘… then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, as I promised David your father, saying, ‘You shall not fail to have a man on [H5921 – meal: upon] the throne [H3678 – keceh: seat (of honour), stool] of Israel.’

This verse states descendants of David would sit on the throne perpetually. Yet the following verse says the monarchy would end if Solomon or his descendants did not follow the Eternal like David had. Regrettably, Solomon turned aside from the Eternal and both Israel and Judah went into captivity and were transplanted from the Promised Land – Articles: Na’amah; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

The current King and his son and grandson, the future heirs to the throne have a mixed pedigree consisting primarily of German-Jewish ancestry. Therefore, the inclusion of any pure English bloodline through the Saxon Jutes or the later Normans, all the way back to David himself, no matter how slight of a percentage, would it seems, accidentally fulfil the promise. Yet, the likelihood of this being the case is just as slim a chance – as discussed in the articles: The Ark of God; and The Life & Death of Charles III.

For while there is reason to believe the line of Zarah may presently have representation in the crown in some percentage form; a line of descent from Pharez – which included David and the Messiah – does not have convincing support (Article: The Life & Death of Charles III).

‘Bow in obedience’ is a direct reference to other people – nations, Gentiles – towards Judah. This has also been fulfilled in the vast Empire Britain built and accumulated; the vestiges of which still remain in the British Commonwealth of nations today.

Genesis 49:11

Common English Bible

He ties his male donkey to the vine, the colt of his female donkey to the vines branches. He washes his clothes in wine, his garments in the blood of grapes.”

While Judah did not protest as loudly as Ishmael – the modern Germans – during the Protestant Reformation and the breaking away from the Universal Church of the Chaldeans – the modern Italians – and though Judah has not proclaimed their faith, their belief or Christianity as loudly as their brother, the United States; they did before anyone else, translate editions of the word of God into English, which irrevocably opened the Bible to the masses so that they could determine for themselves whether organised religion was teaching them the truth or not – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

John Wycliffe is credited with providing the first translation of the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate in 1384. His translation began a revolution, enabling the ordinary people to finally access the Bible in a language they could understand – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. So profound was the revolution Wycliffe ignited, he is called, ‘The Morning Star of the Reformation.’ Later, William Tyndale translated into English from the original Hebrew and Greek much of the scriptures, most notably the New Testament in 1525. In 1611, King James I of England (James VI Scotland) provided an updated English version which remains the standard till this day.

Jacob describes a rich blessing for Judah, in that his descendants will be satiated. Yet, it is interesting to note that Judah’s garments are not white as snow signifying purity and life (Revelation 3:5); but drenched in the blood red of sin and death – Isaiah 63:2-3.

Genesis 49:12

King James Version

His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.”

An apt description online of Judah’s inheritance in the promised land: 

‘The tribe of Judah received as its inheritance the largest and most [impressive] portion in the inmost and highest region of the land of Canaan – a mountainous district, yet rich and fertile in ancient times, [where] mountain sides would have been carefully terraced and covered with flourishing vineyards and olive groves. It was thus able to support a teeming population and a greater number of important cities and towns… [compared to] any other part of Palestine. [There] was Hebron, the most ancient capital of the country, and Jerusalem with Zion and the Temple, representing the heart and lungs of the nation… Here, then, throned the “lion of Judah” on his mountains, surrounded by Dan in the west and Reuben in the east; by Simeon to the south and Benjamin to the north.’

In the Book of Lamentations we find that the Nazarites – consecrated persons typically from Judah – were exceedingly fair: ‘Her Nazirites were brighter than snow And whiter than milk; They were more ruddy in body than rubies, Like sapphire in their appearance (blue eyes?)’ – Lamentations 4:7, NKJV. 

The colours of England coincidently or not, are in fact, red and white. The Red Rose of England… the national sports teams colours of predominantly white and a splash of red. The War of the Roses between the white rose of Yorkshire and the red rose of Lancashire. The national flag consisting of a white background, overlaid with the red St Georges cross.

Red wine in the Bible symbolises Christ’s blood; white raiment symbolises purity, sanctification and forgiveness achieved through the shedding and application of his blood. England a Christian people, accepted the sacrifice of Christ the earliest of any nation – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

Yet, as with the preceding verse (11), verse 12 signifies Judah’s greed, so that his eyes will become bloodshot from too much wine (alcohol) and his teeth would drip with imbibing an excess of milk (dairy).

William Blake wrote an exceptionally insightful poem entitled, Jerusalem (“And did those feet in ancient time”):

And did those feet in ancient time Walk upon Englands mountains green:

And was the holy Lamb of God, On Englands pleasant pastures seen!

And did the Countenance Divine, Shine forth upon our clouded hills?

And was Jerusalem builded here, Among these dark Satanic Mills?

Bring me my Bow of burning gold: Bring me my arrows of desire:

Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold! Bring me my Chariot of fire!

I will not cease from Mental Fight, Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand:

Till we have built Jerusalem, In Englands green and pleasant Land.

A poignant and truly accurate portrayal, for as we progress we will substantiate that ‘those feet in ancient time’ truly did walk on England’s soil (Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation) and that as Judah, the modern counterpart of Jerusalem is fulfilled in the capital of England: London.

As an important aside, anywhere in the scriptures Jerusalem is stated in a prophetic context – though not historical – it means London, not the city of Jerusalem in the state of Israel today. In the Book of Revelation, Jerusalem in Israel is called ‘the great city’ or in other passages of the Bible it is in fact, Bozrah the capital of Edom. 

City of London Coat of Arms – O Lord, guide us (Master, direct us).

But which lord to guide and direct the capital (Jerusalem) in Judah? The Eternal Creator or the adversarial Dragon – refer article: Asherah.

Prophetically, Jerusalem is always London. An accurate understanding of Judah’s capital and Edom’s capital and thus the true intent of prophetic scriptures is only obtained if Jerusalem is decoded as London and Bozrah as Jerusalem. According to modern identity adherents who teach Judah is the state of Israel and Edom is Turkey for example; they would then have to attribute Bozrah of Edom to either Turkey’s capital, Ankara or possibly its major city, Istanbul. When scriptures are read using either of these cities and the city of Jerusalem in Israel, the relationship does not fit smoothly, make sense or elucidate prophecy in any meaningful manner. 

English men

Prior to Isaac’s death in 1697 BCE at the age of one hundred and eighty, Jacob visits his father with his sons Levi and Judah. Jacob would have been one hundred and twenty, Levi, fifty-one and Judah, forty-nine.

Book of Jubilees 31:4-11, 18-23

31:4 ‘And Isaac said: ‘Let my son Jacob come, and let me see him before I die.’ 5 And Jacob went to his father Isaac and to his mother Rebecca, to the house of his father Abraham, and he took two of his sons with him, Levi and Judah… 6 And Rebecca came forth from the tower to the front of it to kiss Jacob and embrace him; for her spirit had revived when she heard: ‘Behold Jacob your son has come’; and she kissed him. 7 And she saw his two sons, and she recognised them, and said to him: ‘Are these your sons, my son?’ and she embraced them and kissed them, and blessed them, saying: ‘In you shall the seed of Abraham become illustrious, and you shall prove a blessing on the earth.’ 8 And Jacob went in to Isaac his father, to the chamber where he lay, and his two sons were with him, and he took the hand of his father, and stooping down he kissed him, and Isaac clung to the neck of Jacob his son, and wept upon his neck.

9 And the darkness left the eyes of Isaac, and he saw the two sons of Jacob, Levi, and Judah, and he said: Are these your sons, my son? for they are like you.’ 10 And he said to him that they were truly his sons: ‘And you have truly seen that they are truly my sons’. 11 And they came near to him, and he turned and kissed them and embraced them both together. 

18 And to Judah he said: ‘May Yahweh give you strength and power To tread down all that hate you; A prince shall you be, you and one of your sons [Pharez], over the sons of Jacob [the Monarchy]; May your name and the name of your sons [including Zarah and Shelah] go forth and traverse every land and region.

19 Then shall the Gentiles fear before your face, and all the nations shall quake [And all the peoples shall quake]. In you shall be the help of Jacob, And in you be found the Yeshua of Israel [the Messiah]. 20 And when you sit on the throne of honor of your righteousness, There shall be great [peace] for all the seed of the sons of the beloved; Blessed be he that blesses you, And all that hate you and afflict you and curse you Shall be rooted out and destroyed from the earth and be accursed.’

21 And turning he kissed him again and embraced him, and rejoiced greatly; for he had seen the sons of Jacob his son in very truth. 22 And Jacob went forth from between his feet and fell down and bowed down to him, and he blessed them and rested there with Isaac his father that night, and they [ate] and drank with joy. 23 And he made the two sons of Jacob sleep, the one on his right hand and the other on his left, and it was counted to him for righteousness.’

English women

Jacob understood that Levi and Judah were selected for separate roles from the birthright promise going to his son Joseph. Of course, it was still ten years away before Jacob learns that Joseph is in fact alive in Egypt. One wonders who the alternative birthright recipient would have been should Joseph have been truly dead. Perhaps youngest son, Benjamin. Eventually, it is Jacob who in turn blesses Joseph’s sons Manasseh and Ephraim, slightly reminisce of the blessing by Isaac on his grandsons, Levi and Judah. We will return to Levi’s blessing in the following chapter. 

Notice Judah’s blessing from Isaac includes the power to overcome his enemies and the promise of a royal line which would rule over his brothers. No other nation has fulfilled these promises like England. Nor have any other people ‘traversed every land and region’ in the world in such manner as to take their culture, religion, language and colonialism to the furthest parts of the globe as the English have done.

In the Book of Chronicles we learn of additional descendants of Judah.

1 Chronicles 4:1-23

English Standard Version

1 ‘The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, Carmi, Hur, and Shobal. 2 Reaiah the son of Shobal fathered Jahath, and Jahath fathered Ahumai and Lahad. 

… These were the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. 5 Ashhur, the father of Tekoa, had two wives, Helah and Naarah; 6 Naarah bore him Ahuzzam, Hepher, Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. 7 The sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan…

9 Jabez was more honorable than his brothers; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, “Because I bore him in pain.” 10 Jabez called upon the God of Israel, saying, “Oh that you would bless me and enlarge my border, and that your hand might be with me, and that you would keep me from harm so that it might not bring me pain!” And God granted what he asked. 

… The sons of Kenaz [a shared family name with Esau and his grandson Kenaz from Eliphaz]: Othniel and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath and Meonothai. 14 Meonothai fathered Ophrah; and Seraiah fathered Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, so-called because they were craftsmen. 15 The sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the son of Elah: Kenaz. 

… 17 The sons of Ezrah: Jether, Mered, Epher [a shared family name with Midian], and Jalon. These are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa. 18 And his Judahite wife bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco… 19 The sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were the fathers of Keilah the Garmite and Eshtemoa the Maacathite…

21 The sons of Shelah the son of Judah: Er the father of Lecah, Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the clans of the house of linen workers at Beth-ashbea; 22 and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who ruled in Moab and returned to Lehem (now the records are ancient). 23 These were the potters who were inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah. They lived there in the king’s service.’ 

Hezron was Pharez’s first son, but listed separately. Notice an Ashhur [like Asshur] is a family name and Jabez is a classic case, ‘if you don’t ask, you don’t receive’ in reverse. Recall the sons of Kenaz** in the section on Midian in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

The mention of a Caleb, is not Joshua’s friend but the son of Hezron. When did Mered marry Pharaoh’s daughter? During the time of Joseph, before a new Pharaoh who began the Israelite slavery, or later still. Shelah was the only surviving son of Judah and his wife Bath-shua. He named his first son after his eldest brother, Er who died. If Saraph ruled in nearby Moab, he may have married a Moabite woman of high birth. In the second and third chapters of Chronicles, further genealogy for Judah is recorded including Judah’s highest profile personality aside from Christ, King David.

1 Chronicles 2:1-55

English Standard Version

1 ‘These are the sons of Israel… Judah… The sons of Judah: Er, Onan and Shelah; these three Bath-shua the Canaanite bore to him. Now Er, Judah’s firstborn, was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death. 4 His daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five* sons in all. 

5 The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul. 

6 The sons of Zerah: Zimri, Ethan [everflowing, perennial], Heman [faithful], Calcol [Sustenance, to make perfect or whole], and Dara [the arm], five in all. 

7 The son of Carmi [son of Zimri]: Achan, the troubler of Israel, who broke faith in the matter of the devoted thing [Joshua 6 & 7]; 8 and Ethan’s son was Azariah.

English man and woman

Zarah’s five sons were born circa 1685 to 1675 BCE: Calcol in 1677 BCE and Dara (or Darda) in 1675 BCE. Calcol is credited with either founding Athens or influencing its rise to prominence and power and Darda similarly with Troy as discussed earlier – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. They were extremely intelligent, capable men according to the Book of Kings.

1 Kings 4:29-31

English Standard Version

29 ‘And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore, 30 so that Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east and all the wisdom of Egypt.

31 For he was wiser than all other men, wiser than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, Calcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol, and his fame was in all the surrounding nations.’

1 Chronicles: 9 The sons of Hezron that were born to him: Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai [Caleb].

10 Ram fathered Amminadab, and Amminadab fathered Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah. 11 Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz,

12 Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse. 13 Jesse fathered Eliab his firstborn, Abinadab the second, Shimea the third, 14 Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, 15 Ozem the sixth,

David the seventh’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

16 ‘And their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. The sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, Joab, and Asahel, three. 17 Abigail bore Amasa, and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite.

David later married an Abigail, of the same name as his sister. His sister married an Ishmaelite, the equivalent of a German today – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. A close scrutiny of the Germans and English, results in a conclusion that they are different sides of the same coin. David’s lineage is through Judah’s eldest twin son with Tamar, Pharez and then his eldest son, Hezron and Hezron’s grandson, Ram. Ultimately, David was the eleventh generation from Judah and fourteenth from Abraham, and Boaz was his great grandfather with Ruth the Moabite, his great grandmother – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

1 Chronicles: 18 ‘Caleb the son of Hezron fathered children by his wife Azubah, and by Jerioth; and these were her sons: Jesher, Shobab, and Ardon. 19 When Azubah died, Caleb married Ephrath, who bore him Hur…

21 Afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir [son of Manasseh] the father of Gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], whom he married when he was sixty years old, and she bore him Segub [1].

22 And Segub fathered Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 But Geshur^ and Aram took from them Havvoth-jair, Kenath, and its villages, sixty towns. All these were descendants of Machir, the father of Gilead. 24 After the death of Hezron, [his son] Caleb went in to Ephrathah [step mother, the daughter of Machir], the wife of Hezron his father, and she bore him Ashhur [2], the father of Tekoa.’

Gilead was the brother of Machir’s daughter Ephrathah* who married Hezron from Judah. The tribe of Manasseh split in two during the division of Canaan by the sons of Jacob during 1406 to 1400 BCE. Half of Manasseh stayed on the west side of the river Jordan with the tribe of Ephraim and from now on were known as the half tribe of West Manasseh, or collectively with Ephraim as either Joseph or Samaria

The other half journeyed to the east of the River Jordan and lived in Gilead to the north of two other tribes which journeyed east, Gad and Reuben. This second half from now on were known as the half tribe of East Manasseh, Manasseh, or simply as Gilead. This early injection of two royal lines of Judah (Hezron/Segub and Caleb/Asshur both by Ephrathah) into the half tribe of East Manasseh, altered their genome and personality traits dynamic. We will find that this half of Manasseh are staunchly pro-royal and Judah-like, diametrically opposite to their kith and kin who live with Ephraim. This split within Manasseh is paramount in understanding where Manasseh’s inheritance is in the world today and has been crucially missed in identity research circles – refer Chapter XXXIII – Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

25 ‘The sons of Jerahmeel, the firstborn of Hezron: Ram, his firstborn, Bunah, Oren, Ozem, and Ahijah.

26 Jerahmeel also had another wife, whose name was Atarah; she was the mother of Onam. 27 The sons of Ram, the firstborn of Jerahmeel: Maaz, Jamin, and Eker. 28 The sons of Onam: Shammai and Jada. The sons of Shammai: Nadab and Abishur. 29 The name of Abishur’s wife was Abihail, and she bore him Ahban and Molid. 30 The sons of Nadab: Seled and Appaim; and Seled died childless. 31 The son of Appaim: Ishi. The son of Ishi: Sheshan… 34 Now Sheshan had no sons, only daughters, but Sheshan had an Egyptian slave whose name was Jarha. 35 So Sheshan gave his daughter in marriage to Jarha his slave, and she bore him Attai…

The sons of Hur the firstborn* of Ephrathah: Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim, 51 Salma, the father of Bethlehem… 

55 The clans also of the scribes who lived at Jabez: the Tirathites, the Shimeathites and the Sucathites. These are the Kenites** who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

1 Chronicles 3:1-19

English Standard Version

These are the sons of David who were born to him in Hebron: 

the firstborn, Amnon [1], by Ahinoam the Jezreelite; 

the second, Daniel [2], by Abigail the Carmelite, 

2 the third, Absalom [3], whose mother was Maacah, the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur;^ 

the fourth, Adonijah [4], whose mother was Haggith; 

3 the fifth, Shephatiah [5], by Abital; 

the sixth, Ithream [6], by his wife Eglah; 

4 six were born to him in Hebron, where he reigned for seven years and six months. And he [then] reigned thirty-three years in Jerusalem. 

5 These were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea [7], Shobab [8], Nathan [9] and Solomon [10], four by Bath-shua [Bathsheba], the daughter of Ammiel; 

6 then Ibhar [11], Elishama [12], Eliphelet [13], 7 Nogah [14], Nepheg [15], Japhia [16], 8 Elishama [17], Eliada [18], and Eliphelet [19], nine. 9 All these were David’s sons, besides the sons of the concubines, and Tamar was their sister.

Nineteen sons and one daughter at the very least, born to King David and not a good one among them it would seem. None are recorded as righteous. We have addressed King Solomon and his tragic downfall – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and article: Na’amah. While it appears above that Solomon was David’s tenth son, he was actually his seventh – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

We will look at Absalom, who was about as wicked as one could be.

10 ‘The son of Solomon was Rehoboam [1st king of Judah],

Abijah [2] his son, Asa [3] his son, Jehoshaphat [4] his son, 11 Joram [5] his son, Ahaziah [6] his son, Joash [7] his son, 12 Amaziah [8] his son, Azariah [9] his son, Jotham [10] his son, 13 Ahaz [11] his son, Hezekiah [12] his son, Manasseh [13] his son, 14 Amon [14] his son, Josiah [15] his son. 

15 The sons of Josiah: Johanan the firstborn [Jehoahaz, 2 Kings 23:31 (16)], the second Jehoiakim [formerly Eliakim, name changed by Pharaoh Neco (2 Kings 23:34, 36) (17)], the third Zedekiah*, the fourth Shallum

16 The descendants of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son [Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24:6, 8-9) (18)], Zedekiah [Zedekiah formerly Mattaniah had his name changed by Nebuchadnezzar and was Jehoiachin’s uncle. Jehoiachin surrendered himself to save Jerusalem and was succeeded by Zedekiah, 2 Kings 24:17 (19)] his son;

17 and the sons of Jeconiah, the captive: Shealtiel his son, 18 Malchiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama and Nedabiah; 19 and the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel [son of Shealtiel and not Pedaiah – Ezra 3:2, 8; 5:2. Nehemiah 12:1, Haggai 1:1, 12, 14] and Shimei; and the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam and Hananiah, and Shelomith was their sister…’ 

The descendants of Solomon, were the kings of the Kingdom of Judah until King Zedekiah who was taken into Babylonian captivity in 587 BCE. Zerubbabel returned to rebuild portions of Jerusalem beginning in 539 BCE under the Persian King Cyrus II decree. In contrast with the tribes of Israel having never really been lost, being recognisable for many centuries; it has paradoxically, been the Tribe of Judah who has remained hidden, while in plain sight. 

Judah, the really Lost Tribe, Don Robson, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine

‘Recently, I have been reviewing books that I have read in the past and I find that the treatment by many scholars of the exile of Judah correctly defined the details while leaving the readers confused. I feel that this is an important issue because many look to the Jews of Palestine to fulfill the prophecies concerning Judah. The most important point of confusion is the expected union with Israel when Christ returns and His angels gather His people from the ends of the earth into His kingdom to rule with Him for a thousand years. It seems to me rather unlikely that a people who have denied Christ, the King of the Kingdom, for two thousand years will be given such a reprieve when Jesus said that many that call Him Lord will be told, “Depart from me, you that do iniquity; I never knew you.”

A further complication concerning Judah, is that the tribe’s entire history does not occur in Scripture. You will recall from the Bible story that the midwife tied a scarlet thread to Zarah’s hand before it was withdrawn and Pharez was born. His name means “a breach”. 

So, undoubtedly there was conflict over who should be the oldest of the twins, since “the scepter would not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes whose right it is.” At that time, Pharez was deemed to be the older which led to Jesse, David, Solomon and Christ.

The breach had a secondary reaction. The Tribe of Zarah left Egypt before the exodus under Moses, branching into two groups under Zarah’s two sons, Calcol and Darda. Calcol led his group to Ireland where he established the line of Irish kings. Darda took his group into Asia Minor naming the Dardanelles and founding Troy. 

The Greeks, actually the Tribe of Dan [?], defeated the Trojans and the remnant was led into Britain under their King Brute (or Brutus). The name Brute became Brit and the people became known as Britons. So we have one half of the Tribe of Judah settled in Ireland and Britain. But that is not all!

After the Kingdom of Solomon was divided into two parts under his son Rehoboam, Sennacherib of Assyria launched his campaign of conquest. First he conquered Gad, Reuben and the half tribe of [East] Manasseh, deporting them to the land of the Medes. Then, he attacked Samaria and likewise deported them. Phase three was to attack all the fenced cities of Judah, which included the Tribe of Benjamin, where he was again successful, deporting 200,150 men. Women and children would augment this number by at least five times.

Phase four was to defeat Jerusalem but it never happened. God had other plans! The angel of the Lord in the night destroyed Sennacherib’s army and he returned to Assyria where his sons murdered him. God had to protect a remnant of His people to receive the Lord Jesus Christ at the First Advent. The attacks continued until Nebuchadnezzar defeated and destroyed Jerusalem. They were then deported to Babylon for seventy years, until Darius decreed that they could return home and rebuild Jerusalem and the temple. About 50,000 Jews [Judah] returned and their families are listed in Scripture. 

So, the 200,150 men of Judah and Benjamin were united with the ten tribes and migrated westward with their brothers. Those of the tribe of Judah were known as Jutes and made their way through Jutland to Britain where the Zarah tribe had migrated… a major part of the Tribe of Judah, 200,150 men migrated westward with the ten tribes, and Benjamin… although… writers insist on speaking of the migration of the ten tribes, it was in fact all twelve tribes except those who opted to stay in Babylon and the 50,000 who returned to rebuild Jerusalem.

We all know the prophecy of the two sticks, one marked for Israel and one marked for Judah. The Lord used that means, through the prophet, to tell of the reunion that would/did occur in due course in the British Isles. The union is history! It’s the union of Jacob. Its reality is shown in the flag, the Union Jack! That is the reason that James’ epistle begins with the greeting, “James, a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes [not ten, actually thirteen] which are scattered abroad, greeting.”

Robson’s article is unique and the only one found which recognises not just the truth of Israel and Judah’s regathering this side of the millennium, but also its occurrence before the return of Christ; resulting in a pivotal piece of eschatological understanding. It is extremely difficult to deny this regathering of Israel and Judah, once we have discussed all thirteen tribes and their locations, one by one, in this and following chapters.

Ezekiel 37:15-22

English Standard Version

15 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 16 “Son of man, take a stick and write on it, ‘For Judah, and the people of Israel associated with him’; then take another stick and write on it, “For Joseph (the stick of Ephraim) and all the house of Israel associated with him.’ 17 And join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand. 18 And when your people say to you, ‘Will you not tell us what you mean by these?’

19 say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am about to take the stick of Joseph (that is in the hand of Ephraim) and the tribes of Israel associated with him. And I will join with it the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, that they may be one in my hand. 20 When the sticks on which you write are in your hand before their eyes, 21 then say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all around, and bring them to their own land [Britain and Ireland; and ultimately a return to ancient Israel in the Millennium].

22 And I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. And one king [Judah-England] shall be king over them all, and they shall be no longer two nations, and no longer divided into two kingdoms.’

The Israelite tribes closely associated with Judah in the past were Benjamin, Levi and in the most part Simeon also. Today, they include: Benjamin, Levi, Simeon and Reuben. The principal tribes associated closely with Joseph (or Ephraim and West Manasseh) today, are the half tribe of East Manasseh, Asher and Naphtali. The tribes of Issachar, Zebulun and Gad are not close to either, though would fall into the Ephraim stick as opposed to Judah’s.

Don Robson writes an insightful article – highlighting two pivotal points in decoding scripture – in that firstly, the Jews of Israel are not the tribe of Judah. While the Zarah and Pharez lines may have competed for the privilege of royal supremacy and intertwined, evidence indicates Zarah has been predominant – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. The tribe of Zarah and particularly his three youngest sons, Heman, Calcol and Dara struck out early from Egypt prior to the years of servitude, heading to Greece, Ireland and Britain. The second pivotal point is that the tribe of Judah was split, so that the actual main body of them forged the Parthian Empire, to then migrate following behind the Sacae-Scythians – which contained the Angles and Frisians, later known as Saxons – as the Jutes from Judah. 

A number of readers will be aware of the Tea-Tephi tradition regarding how the Pharez line joined the Zarah line from Judah in Ireland. It is a great story, though it has holes in it, that relegate the account to over zealous scholarship, at best. This does not mean the whole story should be dismissed; as with all tales, the kernel of truth is within to extract. 

The tribes of Israel and Judah did re-combine in their respective invasions into Britain from 450 to 600 CE, 700 to 800 CE and again in 1066. There was a formal level of union three times, when the union of the crowns between England and Scotland occurred in 1603; when the same two kingdoms unified their parliaments in 1707; and thirdly when England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and (the Republic of) Ireland united in 1800. 

An important part of the puzzle to add to Robson’s points and what completes the Judaic panorama of migration, is that the remnant of Judah that returned from captivity to Jerusalem and who then fled Judea (Idumea) after 70 CE and the sacking of Jerusalem by Titus, were considerably behind their brother tribes. They travelled the same migratory paths as their brethren, west and then north. This last vestige of Judah eventually settled in Scandinavia like the tribes before them and in time travelled southwards. They were northmen, norsemen and settled in France, where these people of the north subsequently became known as Normans. 

In 1066, some five hundred years after the Jutes, the Normans under William the Bastard – later, the Conqueror – containing a retinue of Israelite stragglers from other tribes and also consisting of a warrior-aristocracy, invaded southern Briton at Hastings in Kent in 1066. The Norman aristocracy – including Robert the Bruce’s family (of Scotland) – travelled throughout England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and became the dominant, ruling noble families of the British Isles. 

The understanding of who Judah is, where Judah is and their possession of the royal orb and sceptre of the Messianic throne, is the integral key that unlocks the entire Holy Bible. In the Book of Revelation and the seven separate letters written to seven consecutive church eras of the true body of Christ – a little flock, the elect of God and all the saints – there is a pointed clue to when the revealing of Israel’s true identity would begin. It is now an era passed and we urgently find ourselves in the seventh and final era of the true church of God’s history – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

The letter to the last era is rather condemning; for the people of this age are self-righteous in that they know they are blessed with spiritual knowledge, yet have failed to fully ‘contend for the faith once delivered’ as addressed by Jude; for they arrogantly think they have the sum of all the knowledge they need. Revelation 3:17-18, ESV: ‘For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see.’ 

1 Peter 1:5-7

English Standard Version

‘… who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith – more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire – may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.’

They have forgotten that one is too continually grow in grace (or favour) and knowledge – 2 Peter 3:18.

Revelation 3:7

New Century Version

‘To the Church in Philadelphia [the sixth era of seven] Write this to the angel of the church in Philadelphia:

“This is what the One [the Son of Man] who is holy and true, who holds the key of David, says. When he opens a door, no one can close it. And when he closes it, no one can open it.”

The person who holds this key is the Son of Man. He also holds the ‘keys of Hades and Death’ – Revelation 1:18. The beginning of interest in the identity of Israel as we have discussed, began about five hundred years ago. The central core of its doctrine is valid, the trunk of the tree so-to-speak and a few branches here and there. The endeavour now, is too correct, or prune the other branches, allowing for all the twigs, leaves and flowers to be added and to grow into a fulness of completion. 

The open doors, signify a powerful and effective preaching of the word of God by the true church, of the gospel of the Kingdom of God and thereby the knowledge and process of how to enter the kingdom – as was bestowed upon the apostle Peter. The key of David is thus linked with this open door for the true gospel message and in turn the response of those who heed. The key of David is associated with the knowledge of the throne of David and where the modern nations of the houses of Israel and Judah are today.

For Christ said to the twelve disciples: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand” – Matthew 10:5-7, ESV.

A key unlocks a door. A door to a room or a house which invariably contains valuable items, or in this case, knowledge. A key is important and it is not entrusted to just anyone. There are a few passages regarding keys in the Bible. We will look at those which are pertinent.

The first is regarding the returned exiles from Babylon to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the second temple. 

1 Chronicles 9:21-27

English Standard Version

21 ‘Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was gatekeeper at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 22 All these, who were chosen as gatekeepers at the thresholds, were 212 [men]. They were enrolled by genealogies in their villages. David and Samuel the seer established them in their office of trust. 23 So they and their sons were in charge of the gates of the house of the Lord, that is, the house of the tent, as guards. 24 The gatekeepers were on the four sides, east, west, north, and south. 

25 And their kinsmen who were in their villages were obligated to come in every seven days, in turn, to be with these, 26 for the four chief gatekeepers, who were Levites, were entrusted to be over the chambers and the treasures of the house of God. 27 And they lodged around the house of God, for on them lay the duty of watching, and they had charge of opening it every morning.’

These keys entrusted to the Levites, protected the treasures of the house (or temple) of God.

Matthew 16:18-19

English Standard Version

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock. I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Peter is given the proverbial keys to the Kingdom. It is he who is entrusted with the authority in heading the way to salvation in the inter-testament era leading to the New Covenant’s future establishment for all – Jeremiah 31:31-33. Yet this authority was not solely reserved for Peter as erroneously taught by the Catholic Church in endeavouring to maintain an unscriptural supreme pontiff – John 20:21-23. 

The Key of David is mentioned one other time in the Book of Isaiah. 

Isaiah 22:1-25

English Standard Version

1 ‘The oracle concerning the valley of vision.

What do you mean that you have gone up, all of you, to the housetops… Your slain are not slain with the sword or dead in battle. 3 All your leaders have fled together; without the bow they were captured. All of you who were found were captured, though they had fled far away. 5 For the Lord God of hosts has a day of tumult and trampling and confusion in the valley of vision… He has taken away the covering of Judah.

In that day you looked to the weapons of the House of the Forest, 9 and you saw that the breaches of the city of David were many… But you did not look to him who did it, or see him who planned it long ago.’

In 1 Kings 7:1-12, it says King Solomon took thirteen years to build his own Palace – circa 970 to 957 BCE. Compared to six years, to construct the Temple from 966 to 960 BCE. There were various rooms in the palace, such as the Hall of Pillars and the Hall of the Throne. All of these were built with ‘cedars from Lebanon’ and costly stones and jewels cut to measure.

2 ‘He built the House of the Forest of Lebanon. Its length was a hundred cubits [about 150 feet] and its breadth fifty cubits and its height thirty cubits, and it was built on four rows of cedar pillars, with cedar beams on the pillars. 3 And it was covered with cedar above the chambers that were on the forty-five pillars, fifteen in each row. 4 There were window frames in three rows, and window opposite window in three tiers. 5 All the doorways and windows had square frames, and window was opposite window in three tiers.’

In 1 Kings 10:17, Solomon put three hundred shields made of gold in to the House of the Forest. The room was designed for weapons, though treasure seems to be included as we learn from the thirteenth king of Judah, Hezekiah.

Isaiah 39:1-3

English Standard Version

1 ‘At that time Merodach-baladan the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent envoys with letters and a present to Hezekiah, for he heard that he had been sick and had recovered. 2 And Hezekiah welcomed them gladly.

And he showed them his treasure house, the silver, the gold, the spices, the precious oil, his whole armory, all that was found in his storehouses. There was nothing in his house or in all his realm that Hezekiah did not show them. 3 Then Isaiah the prophet came to King Hezekiah, and said to him, “What did these men say? And from where did they come to you?” Hezekiah said, “They have come to me from a far country, from Babylon.”

The Kingdom of Judah trusted in its own weapons and not the Creator. King Hezekiah naively shows his riches and weapons in front of envoys from Babylon – blind to the planned attack of the Chaldeans years later.

Isaiah: 12 ‘In that day the Lord God of hosts called for weeping and mourning, for baldness and wearing sackcloth; 13 and behold, joy and gladness, killing oxen and slaughtering sheep, eating flesh and drinking wine. “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” 14 The Lord of hosts has revealed himself in my ears: “Surely this iniquity will not be atoned for you until you die,” says the Lord God of hosts.

15 Thus says the Lord God of hosts, “Come, go to this steward, to Shebna, who is over the household, and say to him: 16 What have you to do here, and whom have you here, that you have cut out here a tomb for yourself, you who cut out a tomb on the height and carve a dwelling for yourself in the rock? [much like Edom – Obadiah 1:3]

17 Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you 18 and whirl you around and around, and throw you like a ball into a wide land. There you shall die, and there shall be your glorious chariots, you shame of your master’s house. 19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your station.’ 

Shebna was a historical figure (Isaiah 36:3, 2 Kings 18:37), though as ‘in that day’ is used, this is a future prophecy during the Day of the Lord. The description of Shebna is about a scribe, a steward, an advisor to the throne – or even possibly an evil king himself. It could be someone more sinister – an angelic being (or Nephilim) at the time of the end, who may be a religious figure like the son of perdition – in the spiritual house of God, the Church. 

Isaiah: 20 ‘In that day I will call my servant Eliakim [meaning: God will establish, whom God sets up] the son of Hilkiah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David. He shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.’ 

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for ‘key’ is maphteach and defined by Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, as, ‘key opener, opening.’ In the New Testament, the Greek word for ‘key’ as used in Revelation 3:7, is kleis – a feminine word, defined by Young’s as simply, ‘a key.’ 

Eliakim is either a righteous steward or king after the deposed Shebna, or more likely the Son of Man taking His rightful seat. Eliakim was a historical figure as well, who became the ‘steward or prefect over the palace, as had been foretold by Isaiah (compare 2 Kings 18:18; Isaiah 36:3, 22; 37:2).’ The context of the passage speaks about the rulership of the house of David over Israel. ‘Originally, Shebna had been in a trustworthy position in the king’s rule. The Nelson Study Bible explains “the steward had the key that gave him an audience with the king.” Since Eliakim is given the same key as the Son of Man in Revelation, one could assume Eliakim is the returned Messiah, that the King is the Ancient of Days and that Shebna is the Adversary.

Isaiah: 23 ‘And I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house.’

The covenant the Creator made with David, was because he kept God’s Law. Isaiah 55:3, describes the new or ‘everlasting’ covenant as ‘the sure [secure] mercies of David.’

Isaiah: 24 ‘And they will hang on him the whole honor of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 In that day, declares the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way, and it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.’

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, states:

‘key’ – emblem of his office over the house; to ‘open’ or ‘shut’; access rested with him… keys are sometimes carried in the East, hanging from the kerchief on the shoulder. But the phrase is rather figurative for sustaining the government on one’s shoulders. Eliakim, as his name implies, is here plainly a type of… Christ, the Son of ‘David’… he that hath the key of David – the antitype of Eliakim, to whom the ‘key,’ the emblem of authority ‘over the house of David’ was transferred from Shebna, who was removed from the office of chamberlain or treasurer, as unworthy of it.

Christ, the Heir of the throne of David, shall supplant all the less worthy stewards who have abused their trust in God’s spiritual house, and ‘shall reign over the house of Jacob,’ literal and spiritual (Luke 1:32, 33), ‘for ever,’ ‘as a Son over His own house’ (Hebrews 3:2-6). It rests with Christ to open or shut the heavenly palace (the heavenly Jerusalem, verse 12, which will come down to this earth; Revelation 21:9-10), deciding who is, and who is not, to be admitted: as He also opens, or shuts… ‘having the keys of hell (the grave) and death (ch. 1:18).’

The Broadman Bible Commentary states: ‘To say that Christ is the one who has the key of David is to affirm his messianic authority to admit or exclude from the messianic kingdom.’

Christ bears the key to open the door to the kingdom and those who have been chosen to be granted entrance are the people Christ instructed the apostles to go to and whom mirrored his own ministry… He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” – Matthew 15:24, ESV.

2 Samuel 7:10

English Standard Version

And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more…’

There can be no doubt that the sifted and transplanted sons of Jacob ended up in either the larger Isle of Albion or the smaller Isle of Erin – Jeremiah 31:10. Planted so far away from their original home in a new wilderness to explore and civilise, any thought of their old homeland and their past life or identity were well and truly forgotten. Fulfilling their appointed destiny by becoming a great people from a multitude of nations, with a resurrection of a mighty royal kingdom, were still a millennia distant in the future – Genesis 48:19; 49:8-10 (Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes). 

The sons of Jacob had rejected a Divine Theocracy with their Creator and Protector, insisting on a human king just like all the nations surrounding them. Saul was chosen and while not from a royal line and the tribe of Benjamin, ‘he was permitted to reign, for the [Eternal] determined to give the people the desire of their hearts.’

In easing into the next section on Benjamin, it is worth noting at this point the identity of the tribe – with the exception of Simeon – most closely associated with the tribe of Judah and forming with them, the Kingdom of Judah. The youngest tribe of Benjamin with their warlike proficiency, aligned warrior ethos and almost symbiotic attachment with Judah are today, the peoples of Scotland. We will study Scotland’s descent from Benjamin in depth to confirm its proposed identity. 

Beginning with Saul, who was born in 1070 BCE and his son Jonathan who was born circa 1050 BCE. Jonathan was ten years older than David who was born in 1040 BCE, some six years after the death of the Danite Judge, Samson – Article: Samson

1 Samuel 9:1-2, 15-16, 21; 10:1, 5-12, 17, 20, 23-24; 11:14-15

English Standard Version

1 ‘There was a man of Benjamin whose name was Kish, the son of Abiel, son of Zeror, son of Becorath, son of Aphiah, a Benjaminite, a man [H1368 – gibbowr: mighty, strong, valiant] of wealth [H2428 – chayil: power, might, strength]. 

2 And he had a son whose name was Saul, a handsome [H2896 – towb: good, pleasant, agreeable] young [H970 – bachuwr: chosen, youthful – not in age (for he was forty-four), rather as in vigour – a warrior] man. There was not a man among the people of Israel more handsome than he. From his shoulders upward he was taller than any of the people.

15 Now the day before Saul came, the Lord had revealed to Samuel: 16 “Tomorrow about this time I will send to you a man from the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to be prince over my people Israel. He shall save my people from the hand of the Philistines. 21 Saul answered, “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the least of the tribes of Israel? And is not my clan the humblest of all the clans of the tribe of Benjamin? Why then have you spoken to me in this way?”

1 Then Samuel took a flask of oil and poured it on his head and kissed him and said, “Has not the Lord anointed you to be prince over his people Israel? [1026 BCE] And you shall reign over the people of the Lord [1025 to 1010 BCE] and you will save them from the hand of their surrounding enemies. And this shall be the sign to you that the Lord has anointed you to be prince over his heritage. 

5 And there, as soon as you come to the city, you will meet a group of prophets coming down from the high place with harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre before them, prophesying. 6 Then the Spirit of the Lord will rush upon you, and you will prophesy with them and be turned into another man.

7 Now when these signs meet you, do what your hand finds to do, for God is with you… 9 When he turned his back to leave Samuel, God gave him another heart. And all these signs came to pass that day. 10 When they came to Gibeah, behold, a group of prophets met him, and the Spirit of God rushed upon him, and he prophesied among them. 11 And when all who knew him previously saw how he prophesied with the prophets, the people said to one another, “What has come over the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?” 12 And a man of the place answered, “And who is their father?” [Samuel in essence adopts Saul, becoming his spiritual guardian].

17 Now Samuel called the people together to the Lord at Mizpah. 20 Then Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin was taken by lot. 23 Then they ran and took him from there. And when he stood among the people, he was taller than any of the people from his shoulders upward. 24 And Samuel said to all the people, “Do you see him whom the Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people.” And all the people shouted, “Long live the king!”

14 Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and there renew the kingdom.” 15 So all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before the Lord in Gilgal [in 1025 BCE]. There they sacrificed peace offerings before the Lord, and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly.’

Saul’s sons born to him were Jonathan, Ishvi and Malchi-shua. His daughters were Merab, who in turn had five sons and Michal. Saul’s wife was called Ahinoam – 1 Samuel 14-49-50. In 1 Chronicles 8:33, Ishvi is not mentioned (perhaps he died?) and two other sons are now included, Abinadab and Eshbaal or Ish-baal. 2 Samuel 21:8 reveals that Saul had a concubine named Rizpah and she bore two sons: Armani and Mephibosheth (or Ish-bosheth). 

In approximately 1026 BCE, Israel gathers at Mizpah to witness an historic event; the first anointed Prince of Israel. It had been at Mizpah, that the decision against the tribe of Benjamin was made which nearly had them exterminated – Judges 20:1-48. In 1025 BCE Jabesh Gilead is besieged by the Ammonites. Saul breaks the deadlock with a 330,000 man army and later at Gilgal, Saul is crowned King. 

There is academic debate as to the length of Saul’s reign. Both David and Solomon ruled for forty years and one assumption is that Saul ruled for the same length of time. The confusion begins in I Samuel and is compounded in the Book of Acts.

1 Samuel 13:1-4 

English Standard Version

‘Saul lived for one year and then became king, and when he had reigned for two years over Israel,

2 Saul chose three thousand men of Israel. Two thousand were with Saul in Michmash and the hill country of Bethel, and a thousand were with Jonathan in Gibeah of Benjamin. The rest of the people he sent home, every man to his tent. 3 Jonathan defeated the garrison of the Philistines that was at Geba, and the Philistines heard of it…’

The New English Translation tackles the problem with: ‘Saul was (thirty) [45] years old when he began to reign; he ruled over Israel for (forty) [15] years.’ Curved brackets NET figures, straight brackets proposed revised figures. The verse appears to say Saul only reigned two years. Many think a numeral has been missed from the two, so that the figure should be, if not 2 or 10… 12, 20, 22, 30, 32, 40 or 42. To this writer, the verse seems to say that a year had passed between Saul’s anointing at Mizpah and his crowning at Gilgal. Then two years into his reign in 1023 BCE he staged his Philistine campaign with Jonathan.

Acts 13:21

English Standard Version

‘Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years.’

Acts 13:21, records a speech by Paul, saying God gave Israel Saul, who ‘ruled’ for forty years. It is possible that Paul’s intention was to say that David – who he goes on to mention immediately afterwards – reigned for forty years, and that the clause has become misplaced from one sentence to the other. If one considers the ages of Saul, Jonathan and David, coupled with their births and life spans, there are incongruities for a very short reign of ten years or less and also for one of twenty years or more. So the balance of probability favours a reign specifically of twelve to fifteen years. This means that the basic points of information and reasonable suppositions about the lives of the individuals concerned can be met, whilst also agreeing with the tradition Josephus knew.

1 Samuel 7:1-2

English Standard Version

‘And the men of Kiriath-jearim came and took up the ark of the Lord and brought it to the house of Abinadab on the hill. And they consecrated his son Eleazar to have charge of the ark of the Lord. From the day that the ark was lodged at Kiriath-jearim, a long time passed, some twenty years, and all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord’ – Article: The Ark of God.

From the book of first Samuel, we learn the Ark of the Covenant was at Kiriath-jearim for approximately twenty years. It was removed from Abinadab’s house following David’s conquest of Jerusalem. Prior to his moving his capital to Jerusalem, David had reigned in Hebron for seven and a half years from 1010 to 1003 BCE after the death of Saul – II Samuel 5:5. Crucially, the ark was moved to Kirjath Jearim before Saul began to reign in 1025 BCE. Thus the ark was in Kirjath Jearim for about twenty-two years – giving a reign for Saul of close to fifteen years.

Later in 1023 BCE, Jonathan has more success, single-handedly defeating twenty Philistines after scaling cliffs at Michmash (1 Samuel 14:1-52); while his father continues waging a war against Moab, Ammon, Edom and the kings of Zobah. In 1022 BCE, a landmark and eventful year, Saul completes or rather doesn’t complete his ill-fated campaign against the Amalekites – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Saul defeats the Amalekites with a 210,000 man army, yet contravenes clear instructions from the Eternal in allowing their King Agag to live and in the process loses his own kingship – I Samuel 15:1-35. It is in the same year by a quirk of fate, that young David enters the service of Saul in the palace and unknown to Saul, is his anointed successor by Samuel and the future king – 1 Samuel 16:1-23. 

A new Pharaoh in Egypt began his reign in 1022 BCE: Ahmose I – the 1st king of the XVIII dynasty. He ruled till 998 BCE, during the reigns of Saul and David and was the brother of Kamose, who ruled three, possibly five years, as the last king of the XVII Dynasty. Kamose had embarked on a campaign of driving the Hyksos – aka the Amalekites – from Egypt; which was completed by Ahmose during the same period King Saul defeated King Agag. Gerard Gertoux writes regarding Kamose:

‘Kamose thus acted as representative of the young Ahmose. In the past, until the 5th dynasty, pharaohs were enthroned only with a Horus name. In time, the complete titulature had five names, but only two were actually used, enthronement name and birth name. Birth name aside, which did not change (except for some additional laudatory), other names could be changed to indicate a new political or religious program. For Kamose his first Horus name was “He who appears on his throne”, the second “He who subdues the two Lands” and the third “He who nourishes the two Lands”. These 3 names match his 3 years of reign.’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 257-271, 281 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Saul was chosen because of his military record. Saul captured the tablets of the Law back from the famous Goliath, an insult that Goliath would not forget. 

Saul was the bravest Israelite, a … hero… He was as strong as a lion… with his tall and handsome appearance. Saul’s original name was Labaya, meaning “great lion of Yaw(weh),” but he was renamed Saul, meaning “asked for,” as the people of Israel asked God for a king so they could be like other nations. Scripture records Saul as… a man without equal, a head taller than any of the others. He was the son of a high-ranking [though small clan] chieftain Kish, son of Abiel… son of Zeror, son of Becorath, son of Aphiah, son of Benjamin… but Saul was not Samuel’s choice.’ 

In 1887, three hundred and eighty clay tablets were discovered at Tell el-Amarna in central Egypt. They were letters written by the foreign rulers of city-states in the cuneiform script of the Akkadian language. The prime name of interest to biblical scholars in the Amarna Tablets was Labayu, the ‘Lion Man’ who held sway over central Canaan, actively fighting against the Philistines. Transposing the Amarna Tablets from the thirteenth century BCE of the conventional chronology to the tenth century BCE of the revised chronology of David Rohl, the life of Labayu is a close match for the biblical record of the first king of the Israelites: Saul. 

EA 252, a letter of warning from Labayu to the pharaoh, was studied extensively in the early 1940s by William F Albright, an American archaeologist. He determined that the writer of the tablet knew little of the Akkadian language, the common correspondence between countries in that time period. The language used was Hebrew, it was then translated idiomatically into Akkadian. The letter revealed it was from an ‘untutored or uneducated man from humble beginnings’ who became a powerful ruler, exactly fitting the profile of King Saul of Israel.

Gary Wayne: ‘Saul was chosen by God, sent to Samuel to anoint, and drafted to rescue the Israelites from the oppression of the Philistines… Samuel saw in Saul his capacity to lead; ruthlessness; willingness to murder, lie, extort in the name of policy; and the ability to play off courtiers against each other… Saul was the antithesis of Samuel and everything he stood for… Samuel warned… the king would war regularly, taking their sons; taking the best of the daughters; taking their land and trade to feed, arm, and look after his armies and taxing a tenth of everything to pay for these armies. Additionally, Saul did not have the backing of the nobility, simply because Saul did not possess his own great wealth. 

At Saul’s anointing, Samuel recommissioned Israel to obliterate the Amalekites. No one… was to be spared… [neither] livestock… even the possessions of the Amalekites were not to be looted. Everything… to be utterly destroyed. The instructions should not have been a source of confusion for any reason… but God’s judgement was not carried forth to the letter of the edict. Lack of complete obedience resulted in devastating consequences for Saul and his… descendants… Saul only fought the Amalekites because he was forced to… Saul was easily persuaded to keep the spoils of war… [violating] his covenant with God. Saul was never totally committed to slaughter all the Amalekites from the face of the earth. Saul chose to spare some of the Amalekites… in addition to the prized and valued animals. 

Saul further spared Agag because Saul admired the tall and handsome king… if Saul found Agag to [be] tall, one wonders just how big Agag actually was. Consequently, Samuel denounced Saul [and slew Agag, himself]… 

God removed the right of succession for Saul’s sons to the throne… and therefore the lineage of the Messiah… The Messianic bloodline and the everlasting throne were to be transplanted to the tribe of Judah, just as it had been originally prophesied in Genesis… it was Saul’s vassal army of Amalekites… which was protecting the back of Saul’s army during a later battle against the philistines… [who then] betrayed Saul, permitting the Philistines to encircle and assault the Israelites, wounding Saul… Saul then fell on his own sword, killing himself. Saul’s and his son’s bodies were hung unceremoniously by the Philistines at Beth Shan… stripped… from his armour, cutting off Saul’s head; they then hung Saul’s head and his armour in the temple of Dagon, the father of Baal… David eventually confiscated the bones of Saul and Jonathan, burying them in a tomb of Saul’s father, Kish, at Zela in Benjamin.

… Saul did not totally annihilate the Amalekites, for the book of Samuel records David fought the Amalekites (1 Samuel 8:12), destroying them at Ziklag (1 Samuel 30:1-31)… while the KJV records this victory as a complete “slaughter of the Amalekites” (2 Samuel 1:1).’ 

Psalm 9:5-6

English Standard Version

‘You have rebuked the nations; you have made the wicked perish; you have blotted out their name forever and ever. The enemy came to an end in everlasting ruins; their cities you rooted out; the very memory of them has perished.’

Wayne: ‘This passage can only be interpreted and attributed to the Amalekites. During the reign of Hezekiah of Judah, the Simeonite sons of Ishi invaded the hill country of Seir, killing the remaining Amalekites who had escaped. One would expect that this final blow finished off whatever remnant of Amalekite culture and society that had somehow survived from David’s genocidal purge… neither history or the Bible ever again records Amalekites as a nation. Secular history has forgotten the Amalekites, as though they never existed; only the bible has maintained their existence as a witness to the world.’ 

It is worth noting at this point the identity of a tribe closely associated with the tribe of Judah and forming with them, the Kingdom of Judah. The Simeonite sons of Ishi who took matters in their own hands – bit of a character trait – are the modern Welsh. We will study Wales as Simeon in depth in the following chapter to confirm their proposed identity.

Wayne: ‘Listed among names of antediluvian Nephilim was the name Amalek. He was noted as the twin brother to Samael [a Giant, not the leader of the fallen Angels]… for Amalek was the forefather of Seir… Amalek was the prominent antediluvian Sumerian king Akalum-Dug, understanding that Akalum was Sumerian for the infamous, evil “Lamech,” which found its true anagram in producing the name Amalek… another variant name of a king to Amalek: Anam’ Melech… Anam’ Melech was worshipped by the [Babylonians]… Melech… is Hebrew for “king,” as in Molech/Malech, the god of the Canaanites, son of Baal, who required the sacrifice of children in his worship… Anam’ Malech also required the sacrifice of children. One of Samael’s [the Giant] wives, [was] Naamah. Naamah was… [the] daughter of Lamech (Amalek)…’ – refer articles: Belphegor; and Na’amah.

Wayne: ‘The Armana Letters recorded a tenth-century BCE strong man and Apiru leader who emerged from Hebron to capture Jerusalem. This then is the probable Gentile record of David’s rise to power… an Aramaic inscription,* dating back to the ninth century BCE, discovered in 1993 CE, in the ruins of the ancient city of Dan, clearly recorded the words House of David.” David was the first of the true dynastic bloodline leading to Christ nearly 1,000 years later, on whom God built his earthly but royal government that Jesus would later inherit. David is also from the dynastic bloodline that all spurious royal bloodlines now desperately strive to align themselves with, in order to further enhance their own perceived pedigree and credibility’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

The House of David was well known in the ninth century BCE. The name of King David appears among toponyms of the south of Palestine on the list of Pharaoh Shoshenq I as, ‘[the heights?] of David.’ We can have confidence that King David was a flesh and blood historical figure. Archaeologists who deny his existence or the extent of the influence of the kingdom of David, are exhibiting bad faith, literally and figuratively in the face of clear evidence.

‘Lines 8-10* of the Tel Dan Stele. Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 

8. king of Israel, and I killed [Ahaz]yahu son of [Jehoram kin-] 

9. -g [of the] HouseofDavid. And I set [……………………………..] 

10. their land …[……………………………………………………………………….] 

Ahazyahu (887-885) [853-852 BCE] and Jehoram (897-886) [852-841] were kings of Israel “House-of-David” (2 Kings 8:28-9:29) 

Lines 30-31 of the Mesha Stele. Musée du Louvre, Paris. 

30. [the temple of Made]ba and the temple of Diblaten and the temple of Baal-meon; and I established there
31. [……………] the sheep of the land. And the House [of D]avid dwelt in Horonen 

32. [……………] and Chemosh said to me: “Go down! Fight against Horonen.” And I went down, and [… Mesha (900-870) was King of Moab (2 Kings 3:4-27) and succeeded his father Chemoshyat (930-900).’ 

Kings David and Solomon Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gerard Gertoux, 2015 – emphasis mine: 

The David and Solomon’s kingdoms are no longer considered as historical by minimalist archaeologists. According to Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman, for example, authors of The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, at the time of the kingdoms of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was populated by only a few hundred residents or less, which is insufficient for an empire stretching from the Euphrates to Eilath. They suggest that due to religious prejudice, the authors of the Bible suppressed the achievements of the Omrides. Some Biblical minimalists like Thomas L. Thompson go further, arguing that Jerusalem became a city and capable of being a state capital only in the mid-seventh century.

Likewise, Finkelstein and others consider the claimed size of Solomon’s temple implausible. A review of methods and arguments used by these minimalists shows that they are impostors for writing history. The historical testimonies dated by a chronology anchored on absolute dates (backbone of history) are replaced by archaeological remains dated by carbon-14 (backbone of modern myths). The goal of these unfounded claims is clearly the charring of biblical accounts. 

One of the most fiercely debated issues in Biblical Archaeology today involves the historicity of the Bible and biblical chronology in the period of the United Monarchy in Jerusalem. Most of the evidence for this period of David and Solomon is found in the Bible, and there is a decided lack of archaeological evidence to correlate the biblical narrative. Most archaeologists take the view that the Bible is a narrative of mythology interwoven with some historical elements; whereas some historians believe that the Bible, along with archaeological evidence, can be a valid historical source. This dichotomy of viewpoints is further divided into questions of chronology rebuilt from historical synchronisms dated by astronomy for historians, versus archaeological remains dated by Carbon-14 for archaeologists, and above all the reliability of ancient narratives. 

When the current conditions for excavation in Jerusalem and the complexity of occupational deposition are considered, it is not so unusual that there is little evidence of Davidic and Solomonic Jerusalem. The area of the citadel of the City of David is currently beneath private homes; therefore very little excavation has been done. Similarly, the Temple Mount covers the site of the Solomonic Temple, where it is impossible for religious and political reasons to conduct even an archaeological survey.

Two factors in occupational deposition are important to consider: first of all, in hilly regions like Jerusalem, it is most practical to remove the earlier construction phases and debris down to bedrock when building new structures. Second, uninterrupted settlement, from the 10th to the early 6th centuries BCE, leaves less of an archaeological footprint than would a period of destruction or invasion, so it is understandable that there would be less data from this period. 

The Biblical Minimalist point of view hinges on the belief that the Book of Kings was written in the Persian period. Therefore it is a product of many scribal errors and different authors, which means that any historical value is hidden in layers of confusion. Niels Peter Lemche, one of the main proponents of this school, also makes the case that the concept of “history” is an essentially modern term. 

Thus trying to read the Bible as a historical text in the modern sense of the term is a vexed enterprise from the start, because the Bible was written in a tradition of story-telling and religious worship, not with the intention of relating facts in a “history.” 

They assert that the United Monarchy and the figures of David and Solomon are legendary, but not historical. The Biblical Maximalist perspective is that enough of the textual and archaeological evidence converges to make the Bible plausible as a historical source. They don’t necessarily say that every element of the Bible can be proven; William Dever goes so far as to say that David and Solomon may not have been historical figures. But there is enough socio-archaeological data to make conclusions about the rise of statehood in the 10th century BCE, which is a centralized power like the United Monarchy.

The main problem with the Biblical Minimalist point of view is that there are too many correlations of the biblical narrative to other Near Eastern sources. For example, the Pharaoh Shishak’s destruction of Megiddo is recorded in the Bible, and his actual victory stele are found at Megiddo and in the temple of Karnak; we also have the later Babylonian lists of Israelite Kings, which correlates with biblical narrative. These correlations fall after the United Monarchy, but both suggest a continuity with institutions of Kingship and the office of the court scribe.

The description of the Solomonic Temple in the Bible is so much like the MB Age Temple and the 8th century Syrian Temple at Tell Tainat (which was also constructed by Phoenician craftsmen), that it is highly unlikely that it could be fictitious. 

The only monumental architecture from this time period is the Stepped-Stone structure from the eastern slope of the City of David. It could have functioned as a large supporting structure, for a fortification wall or platform that might be part of the citadel of David. It was built on top of Late Bronze Age II terrace systems, with Israelite houses built into it, and Hellenistic-Roman period wall built on the highest part of the slope. 

The original excavations by Kathleen Kenyon concluded that the underlying terraces and Stepped-Stone Structures were contemporaneous and should be dated to LB II. But the ceramic data from a sealed context points to an Iron Age date for the Stepped-Stone Structure, and the stratigraphic data clearly shows it to have been constructed around and deeper than some portions of the terrace system. This would negate the idea that the terrace system was to function as the foundation of the Stepped-Stone structure.

To look beyond Jerusalem itself for archaeological and textual evidence of the Davidic and Solomonic reigns, refer to the Tel Dan inscription and the six-chambered gate. The Tel Dan inscription mentions “Beth David” (BYTDWD) or House of David as a place name; it is a Semitic tradition to name a city after the founder. There has been some questioning of the authenticity of this inscription, namely by epigraphers who take the lack of a word divider as evidence of a forgery. But the Aramaic of the inscription as well as the palaeography and orthography are correct.’

The New Egyptian Chronology – A revised Egyptian chronology results in startling new archeological discoveries which authenticate Old Testament histories, David Reagan – emphasis mine:

‘… [David] Rohl points out that a review of ancient documents, using the New Chronology, may have produced letters referring to David as well as letters written to the Egyptian court by King Saul of Israel! The documents, known as “The Amarna Letters”… mainly consist of letters sent to the pharaoh by foreign kings. Now, no one has ever searched these tablets for letters from the United Monarchy of Israel (Saul, David and Solomon)… So, Rohl went to these documents with the expectation of finding correspondence from the new Hebrew kingdom an expectation no one else had ever had.

The first thing he ran across were letters from city-state rulers of Palestine that contained copious references to a group of marauders called the “Habiru.” These references are obviously speaking of Hebrews, and they have always puzzled scholars because the conventional chronology placed these letters a century before the Exodus. But the New Chronology places them during the reign of King Saul when David and his mighty men kept alive by pillaging the countryside. Rohl concludes that these letters relate to David and his soldiers of fortune who hired themselves out as mercenaries.

Rohl’s second discovery was a series of letters written by a King Labayu of the hill country north of Jerusalem. His name means “Great Lion of Yaweh. Rohl believes this was the true name of King Saul and that Saul was his hypocoristic name (nickname).’

A clue to Saul’s other name is found in Psalm 57:4 NIV, penned by David while he was hiding from Saul’s men in the cave of En-Gedi [1 Samuel 24:2-3]: “I am in the midst of lions [H3833 – lebaim]; I am forced to dwell among ravenous beasts – men whose teeth are spears and arrows, whose tongues are sharp swords.”

Reagan: ‘Rohl reviews the letters in detail to show that they describe events that parallel incidents during the reign of Saul.’ 

In EA 252, the rebellious King Saul warns Pharaoh off by saying: “If an ant is struck, does it not fight back and bite the hand of the man who struck it?”

Reagan: ‘These remarkable letters some by Saul and some by his son, Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 2:8) contain references to Ayab (Joab, commander of David’s forces)’

EA 256: “Say to Yanhamu (the official representative of Pharaoh in Palestine), my lord: Message of Mutbaal (Canaanite from of Ishbaal, son of Saul), your servant. I Fall at the feet of my lord. How can it be said in your presence, Mutbaal has fled. He has hidden Ayab? How can the king of Pella (Israelite stronghold across the Jordan River) flee… I swear Ayab is not in Pella. In fact, he has been in the field (on campaign) for 2 months…”

Reagan: ‘and also to Benenima, Dadua, and Yishuya. Rohl concludes from what is said in the letters the Benenima is Baanah, one of Israel’s tribal chieftains who later assassinates Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 4). He concludes that Dadua is David and that Yishuya is David’s father, Jesse (Yishay in Hebrew). The evidence he presents in behalf of these conclusions is fascinating and convincing.’

There may be truth to Saul being a secondary name as in the Hebrew, from the verb sha’al, it means ‘to ask’ or ‘ask for.’ The Habiru were originally considered by academics to be stateless wanderers and later by biblical scholars as the Hebrews themselves. Now, the link is specifically with David’s mercenary army of Hebrews who carried out assaults upon the Philistines. Recall in 1 Samuel 13:1-5, Jonathan defeated the Philistines at Geba. This event was also mentioned by Labayu in letter EA 252. In 1 Samuel 20:30-34, Saul reprimands his son Jonathan for consorting with David; in EA 254, his third letter to Pharaoh, Labayu does the same.

King Saul

1 Samuel 20:30-34

English Standard Version

‘Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said to him, “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman, do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own shame, and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness?’

This terminology does not reveal an intimate relationship between Jonathan and David, but rather that Jonathan was sexually attracted to David.

‘For as long as the son of Jesse lives on the earth, neither you nor your kingdom shall be established. Therefore send and bring him to me, for he shall surely die.”

Then Jonathan answered Saul his father, “Why should he be put to death? What has he done?” But Saul hurled his spear at him to strike him. So Jonathan knew that his father was determined to put David to death. And Jonathan rose from the table in fierce anger and ate no food the second day of the month’ – Second day of the New Moon, refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy – ‘for he was grieved for David, because his father had disgraced him.’

Regarding the legendary encounter between David and Goliath, it is recommend reading Chapter thirty-seven, David and Goliath by Gary Wayne, in its entirety. Within the Genesis 6 Conspiracy, it is ten pages of a riveting portrait of David at the least and at best, it is a rewarding and insightful exegesis. Quoting a few key passages as reproducing the complete chapter is regrettably, not practical. David fights Goliath in 1022 BCE at the battle with the Philistines at Sochoh. The word used for youth is the Hebrew word H5288 – na’ar. A similar word is used for Joseph at the same age of seventeen – 1 Samuel 17:33, Genesis 37:2.

Wayne: ‘David was a complex individual, who was strapped with all the weight and pressure for the future of humankind. God selected David for this role because of what was in David’s heart, not for his perfection… the heart that was true and zealous in pursuit of God. The role David was selected to play in Israel’s destiny was not that of a peacemaker. David was a warrior king, selected to subdue the enemies of Israel. It was David who established Jerusalem as the heart and soul of Israel. It was David who battled his entire life, enabling Solomon to become the peaceful king of wisdom. And it was Solomon who was permitted to build the holy temple, not David, because of the blood that was on the warrior hands of David… [for he] became famous for being the great warrior king, not the peace-giving priest king Solomon was. David slew 200 Philistines, delivering their foreskins to Saul as the price to marry Michal, Saul’s daughter… David was the Lion trait, and Solomon was the Lamb aspect, foreshadowing the dual nature of the true Messiah, Jesus. 

Surprisingly, Goliath, according to Jewish legends, was related to David, for Goliath was the grandson of one of David’s relatives Orpah, related to Ruth, from whom David received his royal, Messianic bloodline. Ruth married Boaz, who begat Obed, who begat Jesse, the father of David… both Ruth and Orpah… were no ordinary Moabites, for both… were the daughters of the king of Moab, Eglon. Apparently, King Eglon had prudent respect for Israel and permitted the marriages of his princess daughters to Kilion/Chilion and Mahlon [the sons of Naomi and Elimelech]. Orpah then returned [circa 1284 BCE] to the royal household after Naomi went back to Bethlehem with Ruth. This then makes Goliath a third generation cousin to David, as Goliath was the grandson of Orpah… Goliath was born… along with four other giants… from one mother alone… Goliath [the Gittitie] was from Gath and… there were five potentates of Philistia that reigned in Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Philstines recounted these five potentates as Avvites. 

The book of 2 Samuel listed four other prominent giants… Ishi-Benob, Saph, Lahmi brother of Goliath, and a six-fingered and six-toed giant named Sippai. Goliath would have simply been the fifth Nephilim/Gibborim reigning in Gath… [a] land where the descendants of Rapha [the Rephaim] lived. The original term utilized was the five [rulers] seranim of the Philistine Pentaplos. Seranim is thought to have been adopted from the Philistines into the Hebrew language… [and is linked] etymologically with the Greek word tyrannos, or “tyrant.” The first ruler who was called Tyrannos in Greek literature was Gyges, the king of Lydia. Greek Titans were known variantly as Gyges… the root word for giant and gigantic.’

1 Samuel 17:40

English Standard Version

‘Then he took his staff in his hand and chose five smooth stones from the brook and put them in his shepherd’s pouch. His sling was in his hand, and he approached the Philistine.’

Wayne makes an enlightening observation on David methodically selecting five stones for his sling, prior to engaging with Goliath. Did David show a lack of confidence in picking five stones, with four as back up, if he missed with the first? Rather, David selected one stone each for the five (giant) potentates from the five principle Philistine cities, who must have all been in attendance with the Philistine army that day, led by Goliath. In case they decided to step forward, David was prepared. Wayne also highlights the fact that the sling shot was not an inferior soldiers weapon of choice but rather, it was an integral item in armies of the day, including the Egyptians and Assyrians. The sling could kill a man up to six hundred feet away. It had a greater range than a bow, was more accurate than an arrow and more deadly when it struck the intended target.

1 Chronicles 12:2

English Standard Version

‘They were bowmen and could shoot arrows and sling stones with either the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul’s kinsmen.’

Judges 20:13-18

English Standard Version

13 Now therefore give up the men, the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and purge evil from Israel.” But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brothers, the people of Israel. 14 Then the people of Benjamin came together out of the cities to Gibeah to go out to battle against the people of Israel. 15 And the people of Benjamin mustered out of their cities on that day 26,000 men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who mustered 700 chosen men [elite soldiers].

16 Among all these were 700 chosen men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. 17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war. 18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Judah shall go up first.”

Wayne: ‘… David is translated from Hebrew as both “beloved” and/or… even “chieftain”… in the Mari Letters or Tablets, references are made to plundering Benjamites and its leader by the title Dawidum, meaning “leader.”… David was never his real name.. in fact, [it] was a title, “the Davidum,” like an emperor or a Caesar, and this title stuck in history as his name. All later kings of Judah were then known… as Davidums. Rohl suggests that David’s original given name was “Elhanan,” (who killed Goliath) [meaning: ‘God has been gracious’] the youngest son of Yishuya, Jesse.’

After David’s sensational and unexpected victory over Goliath, a deep and lasting friendship (1 Samuel 18:1-7) ensues with Saul’s son Jonathan, who is ten years older than David. Circa 1020 BCE, David at age twenty marries Saul’s youngest daughter Michal and pays a dowry of two hundred Philistine foreskins. A year later, David defeats the Philistines which initiates the beginning of Saul’s jealousy and hatred towards him. David is driven away from the palace in 1016 BCE after six years of service and now embarks on seven years as a fugitive, wanderer, bandit and mercenary from the age of twenty-three till thirty when he becomes king of Judah. 

David and Jonathan’s final parting is movingly heartfelt, as Jonathan makes ‘a covenant of friendship with the house of David, whom he recognised as Saul’s successor.’

Samuel 20:41-42

New English Translation

‘When the servant had left, David got up from beside the mound, knelt with his face to the ground, and bowed three times. Then they kissed each other and they both wept, especially David.* 

Jonathan said to David, “Go in peace, for the two of us have sworn together in the name of the Lord saying, ‘The Lord will be between me and you and between my descendants [from Benjamin] and your descendants [from Pharez, Judah] forever.”

2 Samuel 1:26

English Standard Version

“I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; your love to me was extraordinary, surpassing the love of women.”

David’s words about his deep and rewarding friendship with Jonathan have been viewed by some to intimate a bisexuality on David’s part. There is nothing in the Hebrew wording or phrasing to reach that conclusion. On the other hand, there is nothing to counter it either.* The wording is remarkably flowery and overflowing towards Jonathan. It was perhaps the bromance of the millennia. It is said that when Saul had talked with David, ‘the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.’ Great was Jonathan’s devotion to David, that the two entered ‘a solemn covenant of friendship.’ 

David had refused to wear king Saul’s armour. He tried it on, but took it off again, for he could not use the heavy gear in accommodating his battle style; though he did not refuse Jonathan’s armour. Wayne: ‘David assumed the garments and weapons of Jonathan, and was thus prepared to be acknowledged, even by Jonathan himself, as the real heir [and the future] king of the land. The two became inseparable friends while David was kept at the court of Saul. It is easy to see why the young prince should become so fond of David, whom he could well regard as an equal in courage, one worthy of love.

Indeed, David, whose… [meaning is] “Beloved,” seems to have inspired both love and hero-worship. Jonathan, in the isolation which his royal station brought with it, was in need of a friend. His father was a moody man with a dangerous temper whose consciousness of weakness made him suspicious and touchy about his dignity, and was not the kind of father to invite confidences. The relations of Jonathan and his father had been strained ever since Saul had nearly put his son to death for inadvertently disobeying one of his thoughtless orders. (I Samuel 14).’

David was a very handsome man who was beloved by all, especially women, for it was they who chanted that ‘Saul has slain his thousands and David his ten thousands!’ David did have a voracious sexual appetite, for he was an insatiable collector of women, particularly other men’s wives. David’s treachery against Uriah for his wife Bathsheba the most notable. It was also a turning point in David’s life and for the nation of Israel, as both were plagued by violence afterwards. For these actions, the Creator promised the sword would not depart from his very own house and evil would arise, as it surely did with the story of Amnon, Tamar and Absalom. 

2 Samuel 12:7-15

English Standard Version

7 ‘Nathan said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. 8 And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more. 9 Why have you despised the word of the Lord, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and… have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. 

10 Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised [H959 – bazah: disdain, hold in contempt, to be despicable] me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.’ 11 Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. 12 For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.’

13 David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” And Nathan said to David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 14 Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child who is born to you shall die.” 15 Then Nathan went to his house.’

With all this, David was quick to admit his sin and repent. Sparing his own life in consequence, for the Creator said David had despised and scorned Him. David had broken three commandments, in 1. coveting another man’s wife; 2. committing adultery with her; and then 3. conspiring to murder her husband. 

David was a complex man, repeatedly showing his spirituality in being a ‘man after God’s own heart’, yet compelled by his physicality to violence and immorality, to the point that the Creator said: ‘…You may not build a house for my name, for you are a man of war and have shed blood’ – 1 Chronicles 28:3, ESV. David left his mark on Israel as his name is mentioned more than a thousand times in the Bible. One Bible scholar remarked that ‘the religion of ancient Israel ought to be called “Davidism” because of the king’s essential role in the history and theology of [the nation].’ This is likely a truism and with Moses; David surely left an indelible mark on all who met him, knew him or were governed by him. 

Circa 1012 BCE David cut a piece off the fabric of Saul’s robe while he took a rest in a cave which David happened to be hiding. In 1011 BCE the Philistines invade the land and Saul quits his pursuit of David. David also marries Abigail. Samuel died in 1010 BCE at the age of eighty-seven. In the same year, Saul and Jonathan died in the battle with the Philistines at Mount Gilboa. Saul was sixty years old, Jonathan forty years of age and David was thirty years old – 2 Samuel 5:4. 

From 1010 to 1008 BCE Saul’s son Ish-bosheth ruled Israel – 2 Samuel 2:10-11. Meanwhile, David ruled Judah from Hebron from 1010 BCE to 1003 BCE. David ruled both Israel and Judah from 1003 BCE to 970 BCE, making Jerusalem his capital – 2 Samuel 5:5. David was a contemporary of Pharaoh Amenhotep I (or Djeserkare) the 2nd king of the XVIII dynasty, who reigned from 998 to 978 BCE. David’s son by Bathsheba, Solomon, was born in 999 BCE. 

After Saul’s downfall and removal, David, a son from the royal line of Pharez, was enthroned and to him were reiterated the promises concerning the royal line, which had been passed to his forebear Judah. 

Ruth 4:18-22

English Standard Version

‘Now these are the generations of Perez: Perez fathered Hezron, Hezron fathered Ram, Ram fathered Amminadab, Amminadab fathered Nahshon, Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz, Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse, and Jesse fathered David.

Exodus 6:23

English Standard Version

‘Aaron took as his wife Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab [Great grandson of Pharez, son of Judah] and the sister of Nahshon, and she bore him Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar.’

David’s ancestry from Pharez, son of Judah; with Nashon’s sister, Elisheba marrying Moses brother, Aaron, setting a precedent for a royal line of Judah marrying not just a family from Levi, but the levitical priesthood.

Judah’s Sceptre & Josephs Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis mine:

‘When the Sceptre covenant was confirmed to David, the Lord gave the message through Nathan the prophet in these words: “When thy days be fufilIed, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He [Solomon] shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men. But my mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thy house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: Thy throne shall be established forever,” (2 Samuel 7:12-16). 

David was so impressed with the magnitude of this prophecy and with the period of time which it covered that he went in and sat before the Lord, pondering over it, until in wonderment he exclaimed: “Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house that thou hast brought me hitherto? And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord God: but thou hast spoken also of thy servant’s house for a great while to come…” (2 Samuel 7:18,19). “And now, O Lord God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and concerning his house, establish it forever, and do as thou hast said.” 

When the temple was finished, Solomon, standing before the altar of the Lord, in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and with uplifted hands spread toward heaven, in that wonderful prayer at the dedication of the temple, said: 

“The Lord hath performed his word that he spake; and I am risen up in the room of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel, as the Lord promised, and have built an house for the name of the Lord God of Israel… There is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servant… who hast kept with thy servant David my father that which thou promisest him; thou speakest also with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine hand, as it is this day. Therefore now, Lord God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying: There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel,” (I Kings 8:20-25). 

By this prayer we see that Solomon understood that the throne, the kingdom, and the lineal house of David should stand forever.’

Jeremiah 33:22-26

Common English Bible

‘And just as the stars in the sky can’t be numbered and the sand on the shore can’t be counted, so I will increase the descendants of my servant David and the Levites who minister before me. Then the Lord’s word came to Jeremiah: Aren’t you aware of what people are saying: “The Lord has rejected the two families that he had chosen”? [Aaron’s and David’s] They are insulting my people as if they no longer belong to me. The Lord proclaims: I would no sooner break my covenant with day and night or the laws of heaven and earth than I would reject the descendants of Jacob and my servant David and his descendants as rulers for the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I will restore the captives and have compassion on them.’

David’s descendants were to be numerous. He had at least nineteen sons for a start, though in reality many more – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The population of England is large and so a small but sizeable percentage must descend from King David. Judah had three sons who lived, therefore the majority of English people descend from one of these three lineages. Shelah had five sons as did Zarah, while Pharez had two, with his firstborn Hezron being David’s ancestor. Hezron had one son and David’s line is from Hezron’s son Jerahmeel and his firstborn son Ram.

It is worth noting that David’s royal line would have ruled not just Jacob’s sons but other sons of Abraham, if Solomon and the kings of Judah descended from him had remained faithful. It was a conditional promise and as we will discover, the evidence of the British monarchy, particularly during the reign of Queen Victoria, having related family and ruling monarchs throughout the whole of northwestern Europe and beyond over the last few centuries was not a fulfilment of the Pharez line, but rather from that of Zarah – and a reversal of the original breach in the womb .

From 1025 BCE to 930 BCE, the united Kingdom of Israel became the pre-eminent power of the Mesopotamian, North African, Caucasus and the South, Central and Western Asian world. With a huge standing Army and the naval superiority of the Phoenicians of Tyre and Sidon as integral allies, they were unchallenged – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. It required considerable economic wealth to maintain an army of a million and a half men, three thousand years ago. 

Where was Assyria during this period? Secular history has recorded that Assyria’s Empire went into eclipse or ‘confusion’ as some encyclopaedias describe it, between circa 1100 to 900 BCE. Halley’s Bible Handbook states, that ancient Israel was considerably stronger than Assyria, Babylon or Egypt. The very same period as Israel’s golden age under David and Solomon. It is conveniently glossed over in historical texts, if it is even covered at all. Just as the Parthian Empire is ignored or down played. 

What happened to Assyria? – refer Chapter XX Will the real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. It may have been defeated in a war against Israel’s army. Ancient history has remained quiet on this event because Assyria was a bit player in the confrontation. First Chronicles chapters nineteen and twenty describe an Ammonite revolt and their amassing wide support from practically all of Israel’s adversaries – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The participants are listed in Psalm eighty-three. The chapter is dual, in that – though the verses are not ostensibly prophetic – the same group of peoples will unite to attack and defeat the principal Israelite nations, including Judah-England just prior to the Great Tribulation. The nations involved are predominantly from western Europe and will be part of a German led United States of Europe which allies with modern day Asshur (or Assyria), the Russians; who are also the final fulfilment of the biblical King of the North – Articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and 2050

In the past confrontation, Ammon created a pretext for war. There were thirty-two thousand chariots arrayed against Israel alone. How many foot soldiers to add to this number? There were an unknown number of men from Mesopotamia and Syria which included a number of unidentified people fighting with Ammon against Israel – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. In verse nine of chapter nineteen, we learn it was a confederacy of sorts with a number of different nations intent on destroying Israel, for it states their kings had come to either watch the battle or take part. The battle was on two fronts, with the Ammonites leading one attack and the Aramaean Syrians, the secondary assault. 

One imagines this war was either early in David’s reign, hoping to take out the new king quickly and knock Israel off its feet after Saul’s defeat and death by the Philistines; or alternatively after Israel began flourishing under King David and Israel became a growing concern to her neighbours. This was not mercenary guerrilla warfare but a full scale war of declared national commitment against Israel. David’s army led by Joab won the first battle and then the next. 

Many Psalms in the Book of Psalms are credited to David (75), particularly the early ones. Seventy-three are noted in the Psalms; while Psalm 2 is attributed to David in Acts 4:25 and Psalm 95 is attributed to David in Hebrews 4:7. The others written by David include: 3-9; 11-32; 34-41; 51-65; 68-70; 86; 101; 103; 108-110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138-145. 

Psalm 83 is credited to Asaph, as are eleven other Psalms to Asaph or his family – 50, 73-83. The Psalms are written typically by Levites or Judah’s descendants. 

The sons of Korah (from Levi) wrote (11) – 42, 44-49, 84-85, 87-88. Heman, son of Zarah wrote (1) – 88 and Solomon (2) – 72, 127. Moses wrote (1) – 90; Ethan the Ezrahite son of Zarah (1) – 89; and anonymous authorship account for forty-eight psalms.

Psalm 83:1-12

Common English Bible

1 ‘God, don’t be silent! Don’t be quiet or sit still, God, 2  because – look! – your enemies are growling; those who hate you are acting arrogantly. 3 They concoct crafty plans against your own people; they plot against the people you favor. 4 “Come on,” they say, “let’s wipe them out as a nation! Let the name Israel be remembered no more!” 5 They plot with a single-minded heart; they make a covenant against you.

6 They are the clans of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites, 7 Gebal, Ammon, Amalek, Philistia along with the citizens of Tyre. 8 Assyria too has joined them – they are the strong arm for Lot’s children. Selah

9 Do to them what you did to Midian, to Sisera, and to Jabin at the Kishon River. 10 They were destroyed at Endor; they became fertilizer for the ground. 11 Make their officials like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna – 12 those who said, “Let’s take God’s pastures for ourselves.”

Victory for King David and his army, probably meant the conspiring nations paid tribute and were vassal states, including Assyria. This means the territory controlled by Israel would have stretched from Egypt in the West, deep in the Arabian Peninsula in the South and beyond Assyria in the North. Steven Collins has documented the extent of the Israelite empire at this time. As Israel was closely aligned with the Phoenicians, the name Israel is invariably hidden within their name by historians. The mention of Tyre in the list of nations, would lean to the war being earlier in David’s kingship, before the closeness formed between Hiram of Tyre and King Solomon during his reign. 

The Phoenician Empire was not just dominant in the Mediterranean Sea, but they were present in substantial numbers in the British Isles, the West Coast of Europe, Africa and North America; particularly during the period of about 1100 to 800 BCE. The fact that much of this mercantile, commerce rich expansion was coupled with the Kingdom of Israel has been conveniently pushed to the sidelines. It would explain why Assyria was dormant on the world stage during the same period. 

First Chronicles chapter twenty-two relates that David accumulated ‘so much bronze and iron’ for the Temple of God, ‘it [couldn’t] be weighed.’ Warrner Keller in his book The Bible is History, states: ‘Israel was using the Bessemer system of smelting, which was not re-discovered until recently in the modern era… Essian Gebar was the Pittsburgh of ancient Palestine.’ No where else in Mesopotamia has a comparable smelting facility been found; showing ancient Israel was more than just a backward agricultural nation, but rather an industrial leader. 

Dr. Barry Fells in Bronze Age America, gives evidence that millions of tons of copper ore was taken from mines near Lake Superior in North America between circa 2000 to 1000 BCE. The ore apparently ran out, for there is no evidence it was mined after then; whether it ran out or could not be mined economically. There is no evidence the copper was used in the America’s, yet curiously, there is also no record as to where exactly all this copper came from that was smelted in Palestine. 

The list of nations in Psalm eighty-three have invariably been explained as a very compact geographic area today; consisting of a number of inconsequential nations on the world stage militarily, that frankly, just does not make sense. When one understands, that the verses are not speaking just about the diminutive state of Israel, or the many equally small Arab nations which encircle it, then a clearer more accurate, more concerning scenario, presents itself. The passage also does not specify the Kingdoms of Judah or Israel, thus revealing it is either a joint scenario for both in the future or directed at the united Kingdom of Israel in the past. Derek Walker gives a breakdown of possible identities from either an historical or prophetic interpretation. Not to cast the spotlight on Walker detrimentally, only it is a good example for it closely matches other Bible students and commentators. 

Walker: ‘The ancient list of nations in Psalm 83:4-8 enumerates almost all the modern Islamic nations that oppose [the state of] Israel’s existence.

Edom – from Esau, the brother of Jacob (Jordan and the ‘Palestinians’) 

Ishmaelites – descended from Ishmael, son of Hagar (the Arabs) 

Moab – son of Lot (Jordan east of the Dead Sea) 

Hagarenes – descendants of Hagar (Egypt) 

Gebal – ancient Byblus (north of Beirut, Lebanon)

Ammon – son of Lot (capital of Jordan) 

Amalek – descended from Esau (Arabs south of Israel) 

Philistines – from Ham (Palestinians on the Gaza strip, Hamas) 

Tyre – a Phoenician city (Lebanon. Hezbolah) 

Assur – founded Assyria (Syria and Northern Iraq) 

Children of Lot – Moab and Ammon (Jordan)’

One can observe the doubling up of Lebanon and the Palestinians. Lebanon cannot be Gebal and Tyre. The Palestinians cannot be Edom and the Philistines. Asshur cannot be Syria and Iraq. When we studied Asshur we discovered the might and strength of ancient Assyria; peoples descended from Shem not Ham and who dwell in the north today. Coincidentally, though Jordan is incorrect, Moab and Ammon do both dwell together and Ammon is the principal people surrounding their capital – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The interpretation for Ishmael as the Arabs is the exception to just small nations, as is the Hagarenes as Egypt. 

Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar, provide information dispelling the erroneous teaching about the self-claimed Arab lineage; who are a Hamitic people and do not descend from Ishmael, a descendent of Shem.

The same list with rightful identities, as shown and evidenced in preceding chapters:

Edom:         Israel
Ishmael:     Germany
Moab:         Central, Southern France
Hagarenes (Hagrites): Austria, Southeast Germany
Gebal          (Byblos): ?
Ammon:     Northwest France, Paris (possibly including French Quebec)
Amalek:      Scattered Jews, particularly in the United States
Philistines: Latino-Hispano America – principally Mexico, Colombia, Argentina
Tyre:            Brazil
Asshur:        Russia
Lot:              France

This interpretation for Psalm eighty-three may appear as unreasonable to readers, as the first does to this writer. What we first hear or learn becomes ingrained and we perceive it as truth. Though it is our version of truth, influenced by our own perspective, knowledge, thoughts, feelings and motives. The reality is that the state of Israel is not being punished here; it will in fact be orchestrating events, with the help of its allies. It is the nations of modern Israel, descended from Jacob that the Bible reveals will be chastised. This grouping of nations that Lot and Edom take the lead in organising, is a formidable array, including Germany, Mexico, Brazil, Russia and France, which if pooling their future economic and military power against the weakened nations of Israel in the future, including England or what is left of the United Kingdom, then this alliance has the ability to remove their influence from the world stage. 

In chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, we addressed the disintegration of King Solomon from a wise and righteous ruler to a foolish evil one, when he allowed his wives to turn him towards worshipping other gods and particularly to practicing child sacrifice – articles: Na’amah; Seventh Son of a Seventh Son; and Thoth. In chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia, we also observed Isaac and the dramatic unfolding of a near disastrous event in his and his father’s life with the instruction to be sacrificed. The hope of a resurrection, was the only way the story could begin to have a positive ending – 1 Corinthians 15:12-23.

Possibly not well known, is King David’s association with human sacrifice.

2 Samuel 21:1-9

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now there was a famine in the days of David for three years, year after year. And David sought the face of the Lord. 

And the Lord said, “There is bloodguilt on Saul and on his house, because he put the Gibeonites to death.” 2 So the king called the Gibeonites and spoke to them. Now the Gibeonites were not of the people of Israel but of the remnant of the Amorites. Although the people of Israel had sworn to spare them, Saul had sought to strike them down in his zeal for the people of Israel and Judah. 3 And David said to the Gibeonites, “What shall I do for you? And how shall I make atonement, that you may bless the heritage of the Lord?” 

4 The Gibeonites said to him, “It is not a matter of silver or gold between us and Saul or his house; neither is it for us to put any man to death in Israel”… 5 They said to the king, “The man who consumed us and planned to destroy us, so that we should have no place in all the territory of Israel, 6 let seven of his sons be given to us, so that we may hang them before the Lord at Gibeah of Saul, the chosen of the Lord.” And the king said, “I will give them.”

7 But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Saul’s son Jonathan, because of the oath of the Lord that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul. 8 The king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth [not the son of Jonathan]; and the five sons of Merab the daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite; 9 and he gave them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them on the mountain before the Lord, and the seven of them perished together. They were put to death in the first days of harvest, at the beginning of barley harvest.’

Recall, the Gibeonites had tricked the Israelites in letting them live and to remain untouched. They are linked to the Amorites and the Elioud giant descended peoples of Canaan – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega*. Saul had broken the promise in his zeal to impress. The famine was not going to lift until retribution was delivered. David shrewdly selected two of Saul’s sons and five grandsons, omitting Jonathan’s son. 

The kingdoms of Israel and Judah were guilty of child sacrifice under certain wicked kings – 2 Kings 17:16-18. The most infamous royalty were King Ahab of Israel, monarch from 874 to 853 BCE and his Phoenician wife Jezebel, a Princess and daughter of the King of Tyre – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. 

1 Kings 16:33-34

English Standard Version

‘And Ahab made an Asherah [the ‘Queen of Heaven’ – Mother Goddess and original consort of the Eternal*]. Ahab did more to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger than all the kings of Israel who were before him. In his days Hiel of Bethel built Jericho. He laid its foundation at the cost of Abiram his firstborn, and set up its gates at the cost of his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the Lord, which he spoke by Joshua the son of Nun.’

Ahab practiced ‘foundation sacrifice.’ To protect a structure from evil powers, a person was murdered and buried in the foundation of a city or building – sometimes the victim was walled in alive. 

King Ahaz of Judah ‘burned his son as an offering’ – 2 Kings 16:2-3. As did his wicked grandson, King Manasseh, 2 Kings 21:6, ESV: ‘And he burned his son as an offering and used fortune-telling and omens and dealt with mediums and with necromancers. He did much evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger.’ The Prophet Jeremiah wrote concerning Judah, just prior to their fall, punishment and captivity.

Jeremiah 19:4-9

English Standard Version

4 ‘Because the people have forsaken me and have profaned this place by making offerings in it to other gods whom neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah have known; and because they have filled this place with the blood of innocents, 5 and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree… 6 therefore, behold, days are coming, declares the Lord, when this place shall no more be called Topheth, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.

7 And in this place I will make void the plans of Judah and Jerusalem, and will cause their people to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hand of those who seek their life. I will give their dead bodies for food to the birds of the air and to the beasts of the earth… 9 And I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and their daughters, and everyone shall eat the flesh of his neighbor in the siege and in the distress, with which their enemies and those who seek their life afflict them.’

A grim picture which turned into reality, of which both Jeremiah and Ezekiel remark, as well as the Prophet Micah who between 745 and 725 BCE, predicted what their enemies would do to them.

Ezekiel 5:9-10

English Standard Version

‘And because of all your abominations I will do with you what I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again. Therefore fathers shall eat their sons in your midst, and sons shall eat their fathers. And I will execute judgments on you, and any of you who survive I will scatter to all the winds. 

Micah 3:2-3

Revised Standard Version

‘you [Israel’s enemies] who hate the good and love the evil, who tear the skin from off my people, and their flesh from off their bones; who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them, and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron.’

The Prophet Ezekiel who lived during and after the Babylonian exile of Judah was also condemning of child sacrifice. 

Ezekiel 16:20-21; 20:30-31

English Standard Version

20 ‘And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter 21 that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?’

Ezekiel 20:25-26

Revised Standard Version

25 ‘Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; 26 and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the Lord.’ 

30 “Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God: Will you defile yourselves after the manner of your fathers and go whoring after their detestable things? 31 When you present your gifts and offer up your children in fire, you defile yourselves with all your idols to this day…”

The Eternal admits that the intricate and numerous laws in the sacrificial system, were never able to give them eternal life; in fact they infuriated them, so they then were given licence to offer human sacrifices of their first-born, in the hope they would be appalled and actually turn to Him spiritually, not through physical rites. Yet sacrificing their children to other gods was wholly unacceptable, for it broke the first commandment: ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.’ As well as the sixth commandment: ‘You shall not murder.’

Psalm 106:35-39

Common English Bible

35 ‘Instead, they got mixed up with the nations, learning what they did 36 and serving those false gods, which became a trap for them. 37 They sacrificed their own sons and daughters to demons! 38 They shed innocent blood, the blood of their own sons and daughters – the ones they sacrificed to Canaan’s false gods – so the land was defiled by the bloodshed. 39 They made themselves unclean by what they did; they prostituted themselves by their actions’ – Article: Belphegor.

In the preceding section (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) and regarding Noah (Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla) we addressed the gene for red hair, its link to Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b and its appearance primarily in the descendants of Esau and Jacob. Revisiting this subject, let’s add the aspect of the sons of Jacob stemming from Shem and thus being a European, western, white people.

As stated earlier, the identity movement – Black Hebrew Israelites – claims African Americans are descendants of the Israelites, specifically the tribe of Judah. Anyone who has had the fortitude in patiently reading preceding chapters will appreciate how off the mark this teaching (theory) is. This question is not about racial superiority; it is simply understanding and identifying the peoples of Noah’s family and who they are today. It is not important what colour a person’s skin is, biblically. Yet it does matter who they actually are; if one wishes to appreciate and understand past history and biblical predictions for the future regarding specific nations and peoples.

1 Samuel 16:12

English Standard Version

‘And he sent and brought him in. Now [David] was ruddy [H132 – ‘admoniy: red, in complexion and hair, like Esau] and had beautiful [H3303 – yapheh: fair, light, bright] eyes [H5869 – ‘ayin: countenance, presence] and was handsome [H2896 – towb: good, pleasant, agreeable, beautiful]… [interlinear adds: ‘to look to’, H7210 – ro’iy: appearance, to look at, sight]…’

The Message version: ‘…He was brought in, the very picture of health – bright-eyed, good-looking…’ the Tanakh version says: ‘… [David] was ruddy-cheeked, bright-eyed, and handsome…’ and the Good News Translation describes David as ‘… a handsome, healthy young man, and his eyes sparkled…’

David was not just fair complexioned, with piercing eyes; he was easy on the eye as well. The Hebrew word ‘admoniy means to have fair skin and light hair; in that the hair and complexion is red, reddish or ruddy. When Goliath first spies David, he looks in disdain at what he perceives as a pretty boy… not up to the task. 1 Samuel 17:42, ESV: ‘And when the Philistine looked and saw David, he disdained him, for he was but a youth, ruddy and handsome in appearance.’ David’s daughter was also fair, or beautiful – like her ancestors, Sarah and Rebekah and relative Rachel, whom we have discussed previously.

2 Samuel 13:1

King James Version

‘And it came to pass after this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair [H3303 – yapheh: beautiful, bright] sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her.’

Amnon was David’s eldest son and Absalom his third son by a different wife. Amnon was Tamar’s half-brother. David’s son Solomon is also described as white and ruddy, that is as very fair skinned; yet his hair is not red but rather jet black.

Song of Solomon 5:10-15

King James Version

‘My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand. His head is as the most fine gold [light coloured], his locks are bushy, and black as a raven. His eyes are as the eyes of doves [grey] by the rivers of waters, washed with milk [white], and fitly set… his belly is as bright ivory [off white] overlaid with sapphires [blue]… his countenance is as Lebanon [white], excellent as the cedars.’

Rachel’s father’s name Laban is a crucial clue. His name means white. Laban is pronounced as lavan. The same root word is in Lebanon, l’vanon, the snowcapped white Lebanese Mountains, including the infamous Mount Hermon. The name Laban hints of skin the colour of white, which is whiter or fairer than usual. A brown skinned people may not call a lighter individual white, but a white coloured people could, if someone was very white or fair and possibly red haired. Only two per cent of the world’s population have red hair and the highest percentage of the world’s redheads live in the United Kingdom, Ireland and Australia. 

As the Israelites descend in part from Laban’s sister Rebekah, it follows that they are a white people, not black as some maintain. We have discussed Esau and his being ruddy (or red) like David. Esau though, had very fair skin at birth and his body was covered in a caul-like mass of red hair. Red haired Esau, with white skinned Uncle Laban, indicates that the Israelites are one of a number of white peoples who descend from Abraham. 

When Job was struck with painful boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head, he said that his skin grew black and fell from him – Job 2:7-8; 30:30. As we learned in the preceding chapter, Job was related to Laban as he was also descended from Nahor and thus his affliction turned his white skin, black. 

The continuation of 1 Samuel chapter thirteen is about Amnon, who was twenty years of age in 990 BCE and was conspiring to ensnare Tamar – about age eighteen – in his private quarters to bake for him while pretending to be ill. He then raped her and his life-long obsession for his half-sister turns to hatred. After defiling his virgin half-sister, he banishes her. Absalom, who was also eighteen years old, learns of the matter and takes her in to his home. David finally hears of the crime and is very angry. Even so, he does not take any action. 

Is this because there is no proof of witnesses, or perhaps David’s sin with Bathsheba meant he felt a hypocrite with a son acting in like measure. His hesitancy led to Absalom meting out justice instead, which then led ultimately to a decline in Absalom’s respect towards his father. Two years later the opportunity presented itself for Absalom to have his servants kill Amnon. Absalom then fled the royal court and stayed in Geshur as a guest of King Ammihud, his maternal grandfather – 1 Chronicles 3:2. In the meantime, David misses Absalom. In chapter fourteen, Joab on David’s behalf, facilitates the return of Absalom to Jerusalem, though at David’s request, he is to live in separate quarters. After two years, Absalom requests a meeting with his father, which David agrees.

2 Samuel 14:24-33

English Standard Version

24 ‘And the king said, “Let him dwell apart in his own house; he is not to come into my presence…” 25 Now in all Israel there was no one so much to be praised for his handsome appearance as Absalom. From the sole of his foot to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. 

26 And when he cut the hair of his head (for at the end of every year he used to cut it; when it was heavy on him, he cut it), he weighed the hair of his head, two hundred shekels by the king’s weight [the equivalent of five pounds]. 27 There were born to Absalom three sons, and one daughter whose name was Tamar [named after her Aunt]. She was a beautiful woman.

28 So Absalom lived two full years in Jerusalem, without coming into the king’s presence. 29 Then Absalom sent for Joab, to send him to the king… “Now therefore let me go into the presence of the king, and if there is guilt in me, let him put me to death.” 33 Then Joab went to the king and told him, and he summoned Absalom. So he came to the king and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the king, and the king kissed Absalom.’

In Chapter fifteen of 2 Samuel, after a further four years, Absalom gains in popularity with the people and instigates a coup, banishing the king, his father David in 979 BCE. 

2 Samuel 15:1-6

English Standard Version

‘After this Absalom got himself a chariot and horses, and fifty men to run before him. And Absalom used to rise early and stand beside the way of the gate. And when any man had a dispute to come before the king for judgment, Absalom would call to him and say, “From what city are you?” And when he said, “Your servant is of such and such a tribe in Israel,” Absalom would say to him, “See, your claims are good and right, but there is no man designated by the king to hear you.”

Then Absalom would say, “Oh that I were judge in the land! Then every man with a dispute or cause might come to me, and I would give him justice.” And whenever a man came near to pay homage to him, he would put out his hand and take hold of him and kiss him. Thus Absalom did to all of Israel who came to the king for judgment. So Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel.’

This was no normal banishment as respected biblical scholar Ernest Martin highlights.

Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 130-132 – emphasis mine:

‘It was… at Bethphage where death sentences were validated for rebellious leaders of the nation as in Deuteronomy 17:8-13, and where excommunications of the extremely wicked took place (because excommunications required a person to be legally barred from entering the Camp of Israel in the future… Since Jesus was recognised as an Elder in Israel, he was consistently called “Rabbi” by the people (John 1:49; 6:25), the final judgement to condemn him to death had to be made at Bethphage to satisfy the legal demands that were enforced in the time of Jesus… 

Talmudic scholars… state that Jesus was accused and convicted by the Sanhedrin of practising magic and leading Israel astray… Jesus was “put out of the Camp of Israel”… from the point of view of the Jewish authorities at Jerusalem, Jesus died on the tree of crucifixion as a Gentile, not as an Israelite! 

We are told that David himself was exiled from his throne, exiled from his capital city Jerusalem, and… even excommunicated from being an Israelite. This happened to David when his own son Absolam betrayed him and took over the kingdom and the hearts of the people of Israel… [and] the Ark of God… was sent to be with Absolam… David was [also] cursed and called a “Son of Belial” (which signified an exceptionally evil person)… Absolam… [then] ordered that his father David be slain. Psalm 22 must have been written at this time… “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me.”

Psalm 22:22-23

Common English Bible

‘I [King David] will declare your name to my brothers and sisters; I will praise you in the very center of the congregation! All of you who revere the Lord – praise him! All of you who are Jacob’s descendants – honor him! All of you who are all Israel’s offspring – stand in awe of him!’

2 Samuel 17:1-4

English Standard Version

‘Moreover, Ahithophel said to Absalom, “Let me choose twelve thousand men, and I will arise and pursue David tonight. I will come upon him while he is weary and discouraged and throw him into a panic, and all the people who are with him will flee. I will strike down only the king, and I will bring all the people back to you as a bride comes home to her husband. You seek the life of only one man, and all the people will be at peace.” 4 And the advice seemed right in the eyes of Absalom and all the elders of Israel.’

In Chapter eighteen, things come to a head as Absalom’s forces meet David’s army. 

2 Samuel 18:5-17, 33

English Standard Version

5 ‘And the king ordered Joab and Abishai and Ittai, “Deal gently for my sake with the young man Absalom.” And all the people heard when the king gave orders to all the commanders about Absalom. 6 So the army went out into the field against Israel, and the battle was fought in the forest of Ephraim. 7 And the men of Israel were defeated there by the servants of David, and the loss there was great on that day, twenty thousand men. 8 The battle spread over the face of all the country, and the forest devoured[?] more people that day than the sword.

9 And Absalom happened to meet the servants of David. Absalom was riding on his mule, and the mule went under the thick branches of a great oak, and his head [long hair] caught fast in the oak, and he was suspended between heaven and earth, while the mule that was under him went on… 14 Joab… took three javelins in his hand and thrust them into the heart of Absalom while he was still alive in the oak. 15 And ten young men, Joab’s armor-bearers, surrounded Absalom and struck him and killed him.

16 Then Joab blew the trumpet, and the troops came back from pursuing Israel, for Joab restrained them. 17 And they took Absalom and threw him into a great pit in the forest and raised over him a very great heap of stones. And all Israel fled every one to his own home. 33 And the king was deeply moved and went up to the chamber over the gate and wept. And as he went, he said, “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! Would I had died instead of you, O Absalom, my son, my son!”

Absalom’s demise at age twenty-nine, is not taken well by David, even after all he had done against his father. One can’t help but wonder if David had acted against Amnon, would events have taken a different course. Possibly, the episode with Amnon exacerbated or accelerated thoughts that were already in Absalom’s mind towards King David. The encounter shows how human we all are and how brittle relationships can be when put under pressure. Plus, though David was a man after God’s own heart, he did not always act wisely, or have an easy ride as a consequence.

Acts 13:22

English Standard Version

‘And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king, of whom he testified and said, ‘I have found in David the son of Jesse a man after my heart, who will do all my will.’

David’s name may be a later appellation as claimed, as in the Hebrew it derives from the noun dod, meaning ‘beloved.’ As David’s reign drew to a close, it didn’t become any easier for him with his other sons also conspiring for the right to succeed David as King of Israel. The nation’s leadership and Army were divided on the succession. Solomon was crowned king while his half­ brother Adonijah was plotting to be king with the cooperation of Joab, the Army’s commander-in-chief and Abiathar the High Priest. Meanwhile, Nathan the prophet, Zadok the priest, and Benaiah, the head of David’s personal retinue of bodyguards remained loyal to Solomon – I Kings 1:5­-8. 

Bathsheba was instrumental in having Solomon anointed and coronated. Though David had created history’s first recorded ‘hit list’ which he gave to Solomon as one of his final acts as King of Israel. One Bible scholar calling it “a last will and testament worthy of a dying Mafia capo.” Solomon wasted no time in having Adonijah and Joab executed, while banishing Abiathar the High Priest from his office – I Kings 2:26-35. In both cases, the executioner was Benaiah, the captain of David’s bodyguard. King David died soon after Solomon’s coronation in 970 BCE, after saying: “I have appointed [Solomon] to be ruler over Israel and Judah” – 1 Kings 1:35.

David lives on today in the famous song by Leonard Cohen, Hallelujah which celebrates David’s checkered life and sexual exploits with Bathsheba. More than three hundred versions of the song have been recorded, about a man who wrote at least seventy-five songs and poems himself in the Book of Psalms.

It was a far happier or at least peaceful period for the monarchy in Solomon’s reign during 970 to 930 BCE, capped with the completion of the magnificent Temple in 960 BCE – refer article: The Ark of God.

1 Kings 4:20-26

English Standard Version

20 ‘Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. 21 Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. 22 Solomon’s provision for one day was thirty cors of fine flour and sixty cors of meal, 23 ten fat oxen, and twenty pasture-fed cattle, a hundred sheep, besides deer, gazelles, roebucks, and fattened fowl. 24 For he had dominion over all the region west of the Euphrates from Tiphsah to Gaza, over all the kings west of the Euphrates. And he had peace on all sides around him. 25 And Judah and Israel lived in safety, from Dan [in the far North] even to Beersheba, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, all the days of Solomon. 26 Solomon also had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots, and 12,000 horsemen.’

Solomon’s name is appropriate, as in Hebrew, it derives from the verb shalem, meaning ‘to be’ and ‘make whole, complete’ or ‘peace.’ It was during the forty years of King Solomon’s reign that the Israelite Kingdom peaked in prosperity and economic power. As it was so short-lived, there is understandably less evidence of its place amongst the great empires that book-end it in history – the Egyptians in the South and the Assyrians to the North. Steven M Collins book, The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel… Found! is recommended as a good starting point for those interested in delving deeper. 

It was during Solomon’s reign that the events of the Book of Solomon occur. We have studied the Queen of Sheba in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. After the Pharaoh concurrent with David’s reign Amenhotep I, there followed Thutmose I from 978 to 972 BCE and Thutmose II from 972 to 960 BCE. Queen Hatshepsut (or Maatkare) – as the Queen of Sheba and from an Indian-Cushite bloodline – reigned from 960 to 945 BCE, the fifth Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty. The beginning of her reign coincided with the completion of the Temple and ten years into Solomon’s reign. Solomon’s reputation for wisdom, building projects, handsomeness and an all round ladies man would have reached the Queen’s attention. 

Her visit to King Solomon would have likely been sometime shortly after 960 BCE. King Solomon would have been about forty years of age. Hatshepsut was the second known female ruler of Egypt. She may have ruled jointly with her nephew Thutmose III during the early part of his reign. The Queen is famous for her expedition to Punt – the land of Israel – documented on her famous Mortuary Temple at Deir el-Bahari. She, like Solomon was a prolific builder and built many temples and monuments, as well as re-establishing trade networks. Hatshepsut ruled during the height of Egypt’s power and was the daughter of Thutmose I and had been the wife of her brother Thutmose II. 

After Hatshepsut, the famous Pharaoh Thutmose III ruled from 945 to 912 BCE, being another contemporary of Solomon. He was considered a military genius, creating the largest empire Egypt had ever witnessed. It is believed Thutmose III conquered three hundred and fifty cities; though before the end of his reign, he mysteriously and inexplicably expunged Hatshepsut’s name and image from temples and monuments. 

A crucial part of the unconventional chronology is the accurate dating of the Exodus and the 4th year of Solomon’s reign. Not unique to this writer, findings by independent academics, scholars and researchers confirm an Exodus date of 1446 BCE and Solomon’s reign from 970 to 930 BCE – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? The Bible states that there were four hundred and eighty years between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple in Solomon’s fourth year: 1446 – 480 = 966.

1 Kings 6:1

English Standard Version

‘In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month [April/May], he began to build the house of the Lord.’

After the death of Solomon, the nation of Israel became divided. Solomon’s son Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE and he ruled for seventeen years until 913 BCE. Rehoboam refused to ease the burden of taxes, imposed by his father. 

As Rehoboam took the other tack and threatened to make life worse for the people… Ten tribes (Ephraim, half tribe of West Manasseh, Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan, Gad, Rueben and the half tribe of East Manasseh) separated in 926 BCE, becoming the northern kingdom of Israel with its capital city in Samaria – 1 Kings 12:12-14. The tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and much of Levi stayed with Rehoboam and became the southern kingdom of Judah, with Jerusalem as its capital. 

1 Kings 11:31

Common English Bible

‘He said to Jeroboam, “Take ten pieces, because Israel’s God, the Lord, has said, ‘Look, I am about to tear the kingdom from Solomon’s hand. I will give you ten tribes.’

The northern Kingdom of Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam from the tribe of Ephraim immediately went into idolatry, turning away from worshipping the Creator. Jeroboam died in 910 BCE after ruling for sixteen years. After two hundred years with a succession of some twenty evil kings and none that were righteous, the Israelite tribes went into dispersal or national captivity in stages, at the hands of the Assyrian Empire – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia

The southern Kingdom of Judah didn’t fare much better, though they did have six to eight righteous kings out of about twenty, ‘who served the Lord’ and who would institute reforms, lasting over a hundred years after the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel. The Eternal sent prophets to warn of their slide into idolatry, but much like today, the people would not listen – Ezekiel 33:30-33. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin were taken into captivity also in several waves of deportations, by the Chaldean Babylonians. 

Ezekiel 23:22-25

English Standard Version

22 ‘Therefore, O Oholibah, thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I will stir up against you your lovers from whom you turned in disgust, and I will bring them against you from every side: 23 the Babylonians [descendants located primarily in Central and Southern Italy today] and all the Chaldeans [ancestors of Northern (and a proportion of Central) Italians], Pekod and Shoa and Koa, and all the Assyrians [ancestors of the Russians] with them, desirable young men, governors and commanders all of them, officers and men of renown, all of them riding on horses.

24 And they shall come against you from the north with chariots and wagons and a host of peoples. They shall set themselves against you on every side with buckler, shield, and helmet; and I will commit the judgment to them, and they shall judge you according to their judgments. 25 And I will direct my jealousy against you, that they may deal with you in fury. They shall cut off your nose and your ears, and your survivors shall fall by the sword. They shall seize your sons and your daughters, and your survivors shall be devoured by fire.’

The kings of Judah – the Dynasty of King David – ruled for some three hundred and forty-four years, from 930 to 586 BCE.

Kings of JudahGood or BadYears of ReignBooks of KingsBook of Chronicles
RehoboamEvil17 yearsI Kings 12:1II Chronicles 10:1
AbijahEvil3 yearsI Kings 15:1II Chronicles 13:1
AsaRighteous41 yearsI Kings 15:9II Chronicles 14:1
JehoshaphatRighteous25 yearsI Kings 22:41II Chronicles 17:1
JehoramEvil8 yearsI Kings 22:50II Chronicles 21:1
AhaziahEvil1 yearII Kings 8:24II Chronicles 22:1
AthaliahQueen
II Kings 11:1II Chronicles 22:10
JoashRighteous/Evil40 yearsII Kings 11:4II Chronicles 23:1
AmaziahRighteous/Evil29 yearsII Kings 14:1II Chronicles 25:1
UzziahRighteous52 yearsII Kings 15:1II Chronicles 26:1
JothamRighteous16 yearsII Kings 15:32II Chronicles 27:1
AhazEvil16 yearsII Kings 15:38II Chronicles 28:1
HezekiahRighteous29 yearsII Kings 18:1II Chronicles 29:1
ManassehEvil55 yearsII Kings 21:1II Chronicles 33:1
AmonEvil2 yearsII Kings 21:19II Chronicles 33:21
JosiahRighteous31 yearsII Kings 22:1II Chronicles 34:1
JehoahazEvil3 monthsII Kings 23:31II Chronicles 36:1
JehoiakimEvil11 yearsII Kings 23:36II Chronicles 36:4
JehoiakinEvil3 monthsII Kings 24:6II Chronicles 36:9
ZedekiahEvil11 yearsII Kings 24:17II Chronicles 36:11

Joash began as righteous and as with Solomon turned to evil in his old age, as did his son Amaziah. Manasseh was especially evil, building altars to foreign gods like Solomon had done. Manasseh even murdered his own son, in a sacrificial fire – 2 Kings 21:11-16. He also had the longest reign at fifty-five years. King Jehoiakim was also known as Eliakim. Recall an Elikaim son of Hilkiah replaces the evil steward Shebna. The final king, Zedekiah was originally known as Mattaniah.

Nota bene

Since the completion of this chapter, it has come to the attention of its writer that elements from the following extracts are incorrect. Rather than rewrite the entire section – for much of the information addressed contains merit – any points requiring caution or correction have been added in parentheses or italics.

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, The Sceptre and the Davidic Covenant, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine: 

‘Jeremiah records the downfall of Zedekiah and his sons, the royal princes, as follows: 

“In the ninth year of Zedekiah, king of Judah, in the tenth month, came Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged it. And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month [June/July], and the ninth day of the month [day after the Sabbath], the city was broken up. And all the princes of the king of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate, even Nergal-sharezar, Samgar-Nebo, Sarsechim, Rabsaris, Rabmag, with all the residue of the princes of the king of Babylon.”

“And it came to pass, that when Zedekiah, the king of Judah, saw them, and all the men of war, then they fled, and went forth out of the city by night, by the way of the king’s garden, by the gate betwixt the two walls; and he went out the way of the plain. But the Chaldeans’ army pursued after them, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho; and when they had taken him, they brought him up to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, to Riblah, in the land of Hamath, where he gave judgment upon him. Then the king of BabyIon slew the sons of Zedekiah in Riblah before his eyes; also the king of Babylon slew all the nobles of Judah. Moreover he put out Zedekiah’s eyes, and bound him in chains, to carry him to Babylon. And the Chaldeans burned the king’s house, and the houses of the people, with fire, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem,” (Jeremiah 39:1-8). 

‘In the fifty-second chapter of Jeremiah there is a statement of these events, to which, after recording the fact concerning the king’s being carried to Babylon in chains, there is added the following: “And the king of Babylon… put him in prison till the day of his death,” (Jeremiah 52:11). 

When those events occurred which resulted in the overthrow of the Zedekiah branch of the royal house, a climax was reached, not only in the history of all those things which were involved in the Davidic covenant, but also in that predestined work, for the accomplishment of which God sanctified and sent Jeremiah into this world.’ 

“Then Ishmael carried away captive all the residue of the people that were in Mizpah, even the King’s Daughters, and all the people that remained in Mizpah, whom Nebuzar-adan, the captain of the guard, has committed to Gedeliah, the son of Ahikam; and Ishmael, the son of Nethaniah, carried them away captive and departed to go over to the Ammonites. But Johanan, the son of Kareah, and all the captains of the forces took all the remnant of Judah that were returned from all the nations whither they had been driven, to dwell in the land of Judah; even men, women and children, and the KING’S DAUGHTERS, and every person that Nebuzaradan, the captain, had left with Gedeliah, the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, and JEREMIAH, the prophet, and Baruch, the son of Neriah. So they came into the land of Egypt; for they obeyed not the voice of the Lord. Thus came they even to Tahpanhes,” (Jeremiah 43:5-8). 

‘Baruch, the scribe, was the companion of Jeremiah in prison, when the Lord took them out and hid them. He was also his companion in persecution and affliction and accusation. Now, since we find his name mentioned as one of this company which Johanan compelled to go to Egypt against the direct command of God, there is just one prophecy concerning him which we need to mention before we proceed further. It is as follows: 

“Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, unto thee, O Baruch: Behold, that which I have built will I break down, and that which I have planted I will pluck up, even this whole land… but thy life will I give unto thee for a prey (booty or reward) in all places whither thou goest,” (Jeremiah 45:2, 4, 5).

  1. We have in this company, which has come down into Egypt from Judea, “the King’s daughters.” Since the plural form of speech is used there are at least two of them – history says there were three [1]. These are the royal seed of the house of David, who are fleeing from the slayers of their father, Zedekiah, the last King of the house of Judah, and the slayers of their brothers, the sons of Zedekiah and princes of Judah. 
  2. In company with these princesses is Jeremiah, their grandfather [2], whom also the Lord has chosen to do the work of building and planting. In the princesses the prophet has royal material with which to build and plant. 
  3. In company with Jeremiah and his royal charge we have Baruch, his faithful scribe, whom expert genealogists prove to have been uncle [3] to the royal seed. 
  4. God has promised that the lives of this “small number,” only five or six at most [4], shall be to them a prey (reward) in all lands whither they shall go. 
  5. Prior to this, at a time when Jeremiah was greatly troubled, when in his great distress and anguish of heart he cried unto the Lord, saying: “Remember me, visit me, and revenge me of my persecutors”; then the Lord said, “Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil and in the time of affliction…  And I will make thee to pass with thine enemies into a land which thou knowest not,” (Jeremiah 15:11-14).’

The contention amongst a number of biblical identity adherents is that Jeremiah took Zedekiah’s daughters to Ireland, whereby they married into the royal line already established in Ireland from ancient times; when descendants of the family of Zarah, namely Heman, Calcol and Dara (or Darda), migrated to the British Isles. As Zedekiah’s daughters were descended from Pharez, the line of King David, it is maintained that the two royal lines were joined together in the Irish High kings and that the original breach at birth of the twins had been healed. 

The five points listed by Allen are all valid in regard to them being based on scripture. The four fascinating, yet uncorroborated pieces of information Allen includes, have been numbered; for they are not substantiated with references or sources.

Allen: ‘By consulting the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis we will find a record of the conception and birth of twin boys, whose conception and birth were both accompanied by such extraordinary circumstances that the question of their parentage is forever settled; for Tamar, the mother, did willingly stoop in order that she might conquer Judah, the father, and compel him to do justice by her. The never-to-be-forgotten manner in which Judah was forced to acknowledge that those children were his offspring and that their mother was more righteous than he, does most certainly place the fact of their royal lineage beyond the possibility of cavil. 

When the mother was in travail and after the midwife had been summoned, there was the presentation of a hand. Then, for some reason either human or Divine, the midwife knew that twins were in the womb. So, in order that she might know and be able to testify which was born first, she fastened a scarlet thread on the outstretched hand. Since Judah’s was the royal family in Israel, and the law of primogeniture prevailed among them, it was essential that this distinction should be made so that at the proper time the first born or eldest son might ascend the throne. 

After the scarlet thread had been made secure on the little hand it was drawn back and the brother was born first. Upon seeing this the midwife exclaimed: “How hast thou broken forth?” Then, seemingly, she was filled with the spirit of prophecy and said: “This breach be upon thee,” and because of this prophetic utterance he was given the name of Pharez, i.e., “A Breach.” Afterward his brother, who had the scarlet thread upon his hand, was born, and his name was called Zarah, i.e., “The seed.” 

The very fact that Pharez was really born first would exalt him, and it eventually did exalt his heirs, to the throne of Israel, for King David was a son of Judah through the line of Pharez. But just so surely as this son of Judah and father of David, who was the first one of the line to sit upon that throne, was given the name of Pharez, just so surely must we expect – with that little hand of the scarlet thread waving prophetically before them – that a breach should occur somewhere along that family line.

The immediate posterity of this “Prince of the Scarlet Thread” is given as follows: “And the sons of Zarah; Zimri and Ethan and Heman and Calcol and Dara, five of them in all,” (I Chronicles 2:6). Thus the direct posterity of Zarah was five, while that of Pharez was only two. For the reason that our Lord sprang out of Judah, through the line of Pharez, the unbroken genealogy of that family is given in the sacred records; but the genealogy of the Zarah family is given only intermittently. 

One thing is made quite clear in the Bible concerning the sons of Zarah, and that is, that they were famous for their intelligence and wisdom, for it was only the great God-given wisdom of Solomon which is declared to have risen above theirs, as is seen by the following: And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding… and Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the East, for he was wiser than all men – than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara,” (I Kings 4:29, 31). Furthermore, we find that two of them, Ethan and Heman, were also noted singers, as we find by consulting the fifteenth chapter of First Kings and the nineteenth verse. By noting the titles of the eighty-eighth and eighty-ninth Psalms we also see that one of them was composed by “Heman the Ezrahite,” and that the other was the song of “Ethan the Ezrahite.”

The celebrated leaders of Zarah’s family were called the ‘sons of Mahol.’ Several commentaries explain that Mahol is not a proper name but an appellation describing skills common to these men. Adam Clarke writes that the term signified dance or music and that a son of Mahol was a person particularly gifted in music. It is worth drawing a comparison with the popular musical output of England which has been far above its population ratio, compared with the other two nations which have in the same regard either dominated or proportionately exceeded above their size: the United States and Scotland respectively.

At a certain point, when there was a Pharaoh – probably Amenemhet II (Nubkhaure), the 3rd King of the 12th Dynasty from 1593 to 1558 BCE –  ‘who did not know Joseph’ and the Israelites were no longer welcome in Egypt, it appears that a number of the wealthy and powerful Israelites left Egypt by ship. Danites were already exploring the Aegean sea and islands beyond; with the ruling aristocratic Zarahites leaving Egypt before the situation reached a crisis point, heading in the same direction. The unprivileged masses were left behind to go into slavery. 

The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus circa 80 to 20 BCE, speaks of several Israelite flights from Egypt during this period, most notably into Greece under two key Israelite leaders, Danaus of the tribe of Dan and Cadmus. Walsh writes that the Egyptians, claimed a number of colonies were ‘spread from Egypt over all the inhabited world’ and exiles led by Danaus ‘settled… the oldest city of Greece, Argos.’ Ancient sources verify Danaus captured and developed Argos, known as the Danaidae. Ancient Greek literature refer to these ‘Egyptian’ explorers as Danaans (or Danai), who reached as far as Mace-don-ia. 

History records that the Greek city of Athens was founded by Cecrops and that colonists arrived from Sais, Egypt, located in the Nile Delta. Walsh notes that “some scholars maintain that Cecrops is none other that Chalcol of the Zarah branch of Judah.” Adding: “Like their Phoenician counterparts, the seafaring Danites and Zarahites spread colonies throughout the Mediterranean. It is even said that Chalcol planted a royal dynasty of Irish kings in Ulster. Indeed, the ancient Greeks spoke highly of the Irish… Diodorus says that the [Irish] ‘are most friendly disposed toward the Greeks, especially towards the Athenians [fellow Israelites].”

Calcol’s brother, Darda (from Dara), as mentioned in Chapter XXVI* The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon and Haran, is said to have founded the city of Troy. British History Traced from Egypt and Palestine, L G A Roberts, page 27:

“Dardanus is said to have built Troy about thirty-four years [circa 1480 BCE] before the Exodus in 1446 BCE.” As Darda was born circa 1675 BCE, the dating is amiss. Some scholars explain that Darda is in fact Dara due to a scribal error of omitting the Hebrew letter Dalet, or the English D, based on the fact a double Resh is not possible in the Hebrew language. The Hebrew letters Dalet and Resh are very similar and easily confused. Capt writes: “the descendants of Darda ruled ancient Troy for some one hundred years.”

Prior to the Moabites and Ammonites who were a. the later Trojans of Troy and b. the Dardanians. These same peoples resurfaced as Greco-Macedonians and ultimately as the Franks*.

The Tojan Origins of European Royalty, John D Keyser – capitalisation and emphasis his:

‘The early migration of Darda is noted in the book How Israel Came to Britain:

“Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body BEFORE THE ISRAEL NATION WAS FORMED – while, as a people, they were STILL IN BONDAGE IN EGYPT. 

One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster [Northern Ireland]. ANOTHER, under the leadership of DARDANUS, a brother of Calcol, CROSSED TO ASIA MINOR to found the Kingdom later known as TROY.”

‘Author Roberts also reveals that “Mr. W. E. Gladstone says that the Siege of Troy was undertaken by DANAI (the Greeks) against DARDANAI (the Trojans), and THESE WERE ORIGINALLY ONE…”

In Symbols of Our Celto-Saxon Heritage, by W. H. Bennett, we learn more about the migration of DARDANUS from Egypt to the Troad:

“With these things in mind, let us now turn to that other part of ZARA’S DESCENDANTS which FLED OUT OF EGYPT under the leadership… (of) DARDA… the group which he led went NORTHWARD across the Mediterranean Sea to the northwest corner of what we now call ASIA MINOR. There, under the rule of DARDA (DARDANUS) they established a Kingdom, later called TROY, on the southern shore of that narrow body of water which bears his name to this day – DARDANELLES”

Details of DARDA’S voyage to the Troad (as found in the Greek legends) are revealed in the Encyclopedia Britannica:

“DARDANUS, in Greek legend, son of Zeus and the Pleiad Electra, mythical FOUNDER OF DARDANUS on the Hellespont and ANCESTOR OF THE DARDANS of the Troad and, through AENEAS, of THE ROMANS. His original home was supposed to have been Arcadia. Having slain his brother Iasius or Iasion (according to some legends, Iasius was struck by lightning), DARDANUS FLED ACROSS THE SEA. He first stopped at SAMOTHRACE, and, when the island was VISITED BY A FLOOD, CROSSED OVER TO THE TROAD. Being hospitably received by Teucer, he married his daughter Batea and became THE FOUNDER OF THE ROYAL HOUSE OF TROY.”

Actually, the FIRST stopover for Dardanus, on his way to the Troad, was CRETE! Notice what Herman L. Hoeh says in his discussion of the Early Bronze Age: “‘Early Bronze I’ – ends in 1477 [BCE] with VIOLENT DESTRUCTION everywhere in WESTERN ANATOLIA and AT TROY; 1477 [?] marks the conquest of the Troad by DARDANUS AND THE TEUCRIANS FROM CRETE…” (Compendium of World History, Volume I, 1962, page 470).

‘The flood or deluge mentioned by the Encyclopedia Britannica and others is prominent in the Greek legends of Dardanus. At the time of the Exodus [in 1446 BCE] tremendous events of a cataclysmic nature occurred in the Mediterranean area. Caius Julius Solinus, in his work Polyhistor, notes that “following the DELUGE which is reported to have occurred in the days of Ogyges, a heavy night spread over the globe.”

Heavy DELUGES of rain are reported in the works of early Arab historians – all the result of massive upheavals in earth and sky. The great volcanic explosion of the island of Thera in the Aegean Sea occurred around this time and would have caused huge tidal waves or tsunamis throughout the Mediterranean. It seems apparent, therefore, that Dardanus left Egypt before the Exodus, spending some time in CRETE before voyaging on to Samothrace.’

Apparently, Queen Elizabeth I was aware of her Trojan roots and she was in competition with the Scottish Bruce to find the Book of Enoch. She also wanted to visit Troy itself, as the place of her ancestors. It is recorded that she failed to retrieve the Book of Enoch by searching the Nile, but the Bruce it is said, did locate the book. 

Raymond Capt continues regarding the Zarahite expansion westwards to Italy and Spain – emphasis mine: 

“Historical records tell of the westward migration of the descendants of Chalcol along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea establishing Iberian [Hiberi] trading settlements. One settlement, now called Saragossa, in the Ebro [from Hebrew (and Eber)] Valley in Spain, was originally known as Zara-gassa, meaning the “Stronghold of Zarah.” The Italian island known as Sardinia, retains elements of both Dan and ZarahZar-din-ia.

“From Spain they continued westward as far as Ireland. The Iberians gave their name to Ireland, calling the island Iberne… which was subsequently Latinised to Hibernia, a name that still adheres to Ireland… [as do the smaller western offshore islands known as the Hebrides]. Many historical records point to Israel’s presence (particularly Dan and Judah) in Ireland at a very early date… Writers such as Petanius and Hecatoeus… speak of the Danai as being Hebrew people, originally from Egypt, who colonized Ireland… the ancient Irish, called the Danai… separated from Israel around the time of the Exodus from Egypt, [and substantially before] crossed to Greece, and then [later] invaded Ireland.”

Ancient Athenians, comprising Zarahites descended from Calcol took the Greek city of Miletus. The Milesians became linked with these descendants from Judah. The line of Calcol after the settling of Miletus, established a Milesian royal dynasty in Ulster. Archives give an account of Milesian conquerors of Ireland belonging to the “scarlet branch of Judah” – a red hand circled with a scarlet cord of the Zarahites – who subjugated the Tuatha de Danann. The Tuatha de Danann and the Milesians were kinsmen, who long ages prior had separated from the main Hebrew stem as Dan and Judah from Zarah and Calcol. These same descendants of Calcol are recorded as specifically being led by a Gathelus Miledh, also known as Gaedal (or Gaidelon), a son or rather a descendant, of Cecrops, none other than Calcol. 

It is alleged that prior to the Exodus, he went to Egypt after murdering a man. Gathelus apparently assisted the pharaoh in his fight against the Ethiopians of Cush, Boece states: Gathelus winning “a great victory for Pharo against the Moris,” [derived from Mauri, the same root word in the country named Mauritania in North Africa today] – from The Chronicles of Scotland, 1537. Gathelus was then given the hand of the Pharaoh’s daughter Scota in marriage, where they had two sons. 

We will return to this mysterious Pharaoh and unmask his identity; which has alluded scholars for centuries. Keating states Gathelus befriended Moses, for Moses had healed Gathelus from a deadly snakebite. After living seven years in Egypt, Gathelus fled at the outset of the ten plagues, prior to the destruction of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea in 1446 BCE; travelling westward, leading the contingent of Zarahites for a period of forty-two years, while travelling to France and then Iberia. Settling in the northwest – including present day Portu-gal: Portingall = Port-of-the-Gal** – founding the Brigantium kingdom, centred in present day Santiago de Compostela in Gal-icia on the northwest coast of Spain, just north of modern Portugal. 

After Gathelus died circa 1404 BCE, his widow Scota, along with their sons, voyaged northwestwards to the Emerald Isle. Five of her eight sons died in a storm related ship wreck upon arrival, with herself being killed in the battle that ensued with the native Irish, the Tuatha de Danann. It was a surviving son Eremon, who founded the Kingdom of Ulster shortly after the Exodus; the first king of the Milesian Scots, son of Gathelus Miledh and Scota – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Historians erroneously include the Milesians with those Celts known as Gaels. We will discover that the Gaels who migrated into Ireland are a different tribe of Israel. The Milesians were in fact forerunners of the Celtic tribes which would wind their various paths either across Europe from central Asia or via the Mediterranean and Iberia, blending in one great Gaelic stream into the isles of Erin and Albion. 

J H Allen: ‘It is not at all unlikely and would be but natural that the Zimri who overthrew Baasha, the third King of Israel (not Judah), belonged to the posterity of Zimri, the first-born son of Zarah, son of Judah and twin brother of Pharez. For, as we have shown, the seed of Jacob were at that time divided into two kingdoms, with the posterity of Pharez on the throne ruling over the kingdom of Judah. How natural it would be for the then living members of that family to think, and to say: “This is the long foretold breach for which we have been taught to look. This is the time to assert our royal prerogatives, take the throne, and rule over this the house of Israel.” Culling from a genealogical diagram… we have the following: 

“Judah, begat Zarah; Zarah, begat Ethan; Ethan, begat Mahol; Mahol*, begat Calcol; Calcol, begat Gadhol; Gadhol, begat Easru; Easru, begat Sru; Sru, begat Heber Scot*; Heber Scot, begat Boamhain; Boamhain, begat Ayhaimhain; Ayhaimhain, begat Tait; Tait, begat Aghenoin; Aghenoin, begat Feabla Glas; Feabla Glas, begat Neanuail; Neanuail, begat Nuaghadh; Nuaghadh, begat Alloid; Alloid, begat Earchada, Earchada, begat Deagfatha; Deagfatha, begat Bratha; Bratha, begat Broegan; Broegan, begat Bille; Bille, begat Gallam (or William, the conqueror of Ireland); Gallam, begat Herremon, (who married Tea Tephi*) and Heber and Ambergin his two brothers.”

There is undoubtedly a dose of poetic licence* in this family tree. The name Tea Tephi is legitimately disputed as to whether it is real or a fictionalised composite name. Like Tea Tephi, the accuracy of the name Heber Scot is questionable. Ethan was a brother of Calcol, not his grandfather.

Allen: ‘In giving this genealogy we have given the direct line from father through only one son, but some of these men were the fathers of more than one son. Sru, for instance, the father of Heber Scot, had two other sons. Tait, who begat Aghenoin, had a son by the name of Heber. The fact that there are three Hebers in this branch of the royal family is most significant, for that is the name from which comes one of the national names of their race, i.e., Hebrews. 

… it is generally conceded that there are two distinct phases to the Hebrew story of Ireland. The one is that concerning Jeremiah and the king’s daughters, and the other is that which is told in the Milesian records [?], in which we have the story of the prince who married one of Jeremiah’s wards. The Milesian story takes its rise in Egypt and Palestine amid the scenes of Israel’s infancy. Now we are ready to call your attention to two other names in the genealogy of Zarah’s royal house… Easru and Sru, for in the Milesian records the descendants of these men, and some of their predecessors, were called by a name which to this day means the children of the Red (or scarlet) Branch. 

The prince in the Bible story, as given in Ezekiel’s riddle, is called a young twig, and the highest branch of the high cedar, and, after Zedekiah’s sons were slain, it was not possible to find a prince who was eligible to sit on that throne unless he belonged to the line of the scarlet thread, for the other line, from which Christ came… [were] in Babylon. Hence these children of the “Red Branch” must have belonged to the Scarlet-thread branch of the royal family. The Milesian records also call them Curaithe na Cruabh ruadh,” the “Knights of the Red Branch.” 

“The term Milesian is derived from the medieval title of Gall-am**, the conqueror of Ireland, who was called Milesius, or the Milesian, i.e., the soldier, a term derived from the Latin miles, whence we derive our word militia.” – Totten. “Furthermore, these knights of the Red Branch, of whom Gallam, the conquering Milesian, was one, called themselves Craunnogs, or ‘the crowned.’ The true meaning of their name is ‘Tree tops,’ for it comes from words common to all dialects: craun ‘a tree,’ and og ‘a tuft’ or ‘termination.’ We use the same word for a ‘crown,’ as they did, and the very use of it in common language would be enough to verify this identity of race were there not other reasons in their history and legends to establish it conclusively.” – Totten. 

‘One hundred years ago Joseph Ben Jacob, a Celt, and a Catholic, in a work called “Precursory Proofs,” said: “Among the five equestrian orders of ancient Ireland was one called Craobh-ruadh (the Red Branch). The origin of this order was so very ancient that all attempts at explanation have hitherto failed. Some suppose that it originated from the Ulster arms, which are ‘luna, a hand sinister, couped at the wrist, Mars.’ But these admit it should in such case be called crobhruadh, or of the bloody hand.” 

This man was really proving the Hebrew and Egyptian origin of the Irish Celts, but was applying all the evidence that he found to Joseph, knowing nothing of the story of the breach in the royal family of Judah, and of the exaltation of the Scarlet Branch, who landed in the plantation of Ulster. Else he would have known where to place the meaning of that ensignum of the red, or bloody, hand “couped at the wrist” with a scarlet thread which found its way into the royal arms of Ulster. 

The prophet Nahum, while speaking of “the excellency of Israel,” says: “The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet” [Nahum 2:3]. Scarlet is the characteristic color of the English army, and they certainly wore “red coats” during the Revolutionary War.

We were recently in an English city, and we took particular note of the scarlet thread, or stripe which ran up the front, around the neck, down the arms and up the pantaloon legs of the uniform of the post men of the province. 

A British consul once told us that every official order he received was tied with a scarlet thread, and showed us one which he had just received. This same thing is true also with all English officials, to whom written orders are sent, and from this custom comes that well-known political and diplomatical metaphor, “Red-tape.” 

We have also learned, from sources which we deem authentic, that a scarlet thread is woven into the material from which all ropes are manufactured, which are to be used in the construction of vessels for the British government, or navy. This is done so that under and all circumstances these vessels may be identified as the property of Great Britain, even though they be sunk in many fathoms of water at the bottom of the sea.’

The red (or scarlet) thread is a massive clue to the English identity, yet seekers of true biblical identities have been blinded by the Jews are Judah ‘red herring’ so that this sign for Judah has been seen instead, as just a reflection of a small group or handful of people nestled in a wider body of people called Ephraim. The Jews are Edom (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe), while Judah is England and the revealing of the true identity of Ephraim in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes, will leave no doubt.

The Modern Descendants of Zara-Judah, W H Bennet and John D Keyser – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘… until the coming of the Saxons [Angles, Jutes and Frisians] into South Britain (England)… a RAMPANT RED LION was the emblem of ALL Britain. With the coming of the Saxons its use in England as a national emblem was discontinued, being replaced by the emblems brought in by the Saxons and Normans. Nevertheless, in North Britain (Scotland) it [remained] the chief emblem – as found in the Scottish Standard.’ 

The temporary dropping of the Judaic Lion as a symbol at this time is due to the fact the Saxons, though containing Jutes from Judah, were also comprised of the main body of Joseph, the Angles. Numerically, they dominated the political landscape of Britain south of Alba. Scotland still retained the rampant Lion as it was predominantly Benjamin, maintaining a close attachment with the royal family line of Zarah (1)^ from Judah. The Jutes and Normans on the other hand, also included the family lines of Judah’s other two sons, Shelah (2)^ and Pharez (3)^, with all three populating England and their subsequent symbol, the royal standard comprising the Three^ Passant Lions.

Bennet & Keyser: ‘Further, it was also the ancestral emblem of the Royal Houses of several of the ancient principalities of Wales for instance Bleddyn ap Cynfyn who died in 1075 A.D.’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘A color variant of this emblem appears in the Arms of several of the other ancient Welsh Royal Houses. Even in England it, or a color variant of it, appears in a few municipal Arms and in a much larger number of family Arms.

Important, too, is the fact that the Rampant Red Lion emblem appears in the heraldry of the Netherlands – either on the shield or as a supporter – in the provincial Arms of South Holland, North Holland, Utrecht, Zeeland, Limburgh and Overijssel; and in the municipal Arms of some fifty other places’ – refer Midian, Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘… we have presented evidence of the ancient usage of the Red Hand… and… the Rampant Red Lion… for at least 1,500 years before the coming of the Saxons into Britain… emblems of the Zara… branch of the Israelitish Tribe of Judah…’

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, The Sceptre and the Davidic Covenant, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine: 

‘About 585 B.C. a “notable man,” an “important personage,” a patriarch, a saint, an essentially important someone [1]… came to Ulster [2], the most northern province of Ireland, accompanied by a princess [3], the daughter of an eastern king, and that in company with them was one Simon Brach, Breck, Brack, Barech, Berach [4], as it is differently spelled… This eastern princess was married [5] to King Herremon [6] on condition, made by this notable patriarch, that he should abandon his former religion, and build a college for the prophets. This Herremon did [7], and the name of the school was Mur-Ollam, which is the name, both in Hebrew and Irish, for school of the prophets. He also changed [8] the name of his capital city, Lothair – sometimes spelled Cothair Croffin – to that of Tara it is a well-known fact that the royal arms of Ireland is the harp of David, and has been for two thousand and five hundred years.’ 

Anything open to conjecture or unsubstantiated is numbered above and investigated in the article: The Ark of God.

On the occasion of Queen Victoria’s coronation, June 28th, 1837, an article appeared in the London Sun, which gives a description of the coronation chair and the coronation stone, as follows: 

“This chair, commonly called St. Edward’s chair, is an ancient seat of solid hardwood, with back and sides of the same, variously painted, in which the kings of Scotland were in former periods constantly crowned, but, having been brought out of the kingdom by Edward I, in the year 1296, after he had totally overcome John Baliol, king of Scots, it has ever since remained in the Abbey of Westminster, and has been the chair in which the succeeding kings and queens of this realm have been inaugurated.

It is in height six feet and seven inches, in breadth at the bottom thirty-eight inches, and in depth twenty-four inches; from the seat to the bottom is twenty-five inches; the breadth of the seat within the sides is twenty-eight inches, and the depth eighteen inches. At nine inches from the ground is a board, supported at the four corners by as many lions.”

“Between the seat and this board is enclosed a stone, commonly called Jacob’s, or the fatal Marble, Stone, which is an oblong of about twenty-two inches in length, thirteen inches broad and eleven inches deep; of a steel color, mixed with some veins of red.”

Hollingshed’s Chronicles confirms: “When our king [Edward I]… understanding that all was at peace and quiet [in Scotland], he turned to the Abbey of Scone… where he took the stone, called the Regal of Scotland…”

London Sun: “History relates that it is the stone whereon the patriarch Jacob laid his head in the plains of Luz… this stone was conveyed into Ireland [on the Hill of Tara] by way of Spain about 700 years before Christ. From there it was taken into Scotland by King Fergus [with the Royal Milesian Scots], about 370 years later; and in the year 350 B.C., it was placed in the abbey of Scone, by King Kenneth, who caused a prophetical verse to be engraved upon it, of which the following is a translation:

‘Should fate not fail, where’er this stone is found, The Scots shall monarch of that realm be crowned.’

“This antique regal chair, having (together with the golden sceptre and crown of Scotland) been solemnly offered by King Edward I to St. Edward the Confessor, in the year 1297 (from whence it derives the appellation of St. Edward’s chair), has ever since been kept in the chapel called by his name; with a tablet affixed to it, whereon several Latin verses are written, in old English characters… The stone maintains its usual place under the seat of the chair.” 

The Fatal Stone (Liag Fail) presently resides in Perth, Scotland.

Prior to the time that King Kenneth had his verse engraved on the Coronation Stone, there was a prophetic verse which had attached itself to it, which Sir Walter Scott has rendered as follows: 

“Unless the fates are faithless grown, And prophet’s voice be vain, Where’er is found this sacred stone The Wanderers’ Race shall reign.”

Lost Israelite Identity, The Israelite Origin of Celtic Races, Yair Davidy, 1996:

‘The British believed that their rulers were coronated (i.e. received the right to rule) on the stone of Jacob: They therefore, it is inferred, thought that the right of their rulers to Empire came from the Promise to Jacob.’

While the original stone Jacob used to lay his head may still exist (Genesis 28:18) – whether it made a journey to Ireland or not from the promised land – testing on the Stone of Scone revealed it is a replacement for the original Israelite coronation stone, hewn out of a quarry in Scotland and did not originate from the Middle East – Article: The Ark of God.

Zedekiah’s Daughter Tamar Tephi of Pharez Married Eochaidh Heremon of Zarah in Ireland, unknown author, 2000 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine.

As with John Harden Allen, anything open to conjecture is numbered for the readers benefit.

‘The THRONE of BRITAIN is the oldest in Europe and it has preserved the same fundamental coronation service as far as records go back from Egferth in 785 A.D. That is for [1240] years. It is identical to the Bible’s coronation service: The anointing with oil (1 Kings 1:34), the crown of pure gold (Psalm 21:3), sitting on or “at his pillar” (stone) (2 Chronicles 23:13), presented with a Bible (Deuteronomy 17:14), given bracelets of St. George (2 Samuel 1:10) [1], the shout, “God save the king” (1 Samuel 10:24) and an oath between king and people to obey [God] (2 Chronicles 23:16). This is proof the British are the HOUSE of ISRAEL [and England, the house of Judah]. 

The reason St. Edward’s crown has the twelve stones of the high priest’s breastplate on it is because the King [or Queen] of England is also the head of the Church of England, just as Christ is both king (Luke 1:32-33) and high priest (Hebrews 4:14). That is why the King of England is given one SCEPTER and one ROD. Kings have SCEPTERS (Psalm 45:6). Aaron had a ROD that budded (Hebrews 9:4).

Why has the THRONE of BRITAIN lasted so long? Because Genesis 49:10 says, “The SCEPTER shall NOT DEPART from Judah… until Shiloh (“Peace”) come.” Christ is the “Prince of Shiloh” (Peace) (Isaiah 9:6) and hasn’t come back yet so the THRONE of Judah must still exist. Later in 2 Samuel 7:16 God said to David, “thy THRONE shall be established FOREVER” (1 Chronicles 17:14). 

Jeremiah 33:17 says, “David shall NEVER LACK a successor (a man or woman) to sit upon the THRONE of the house of ISRAEL” (KJV; NEB; 1 Kings 9:5; 2 Chronicles 13:5). “I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure FOREVER, and his THRONE as the SUN before me. It shall be established FOREVER like the MOON” (Psalm 89:35-37). 

Where? “On the THRONE of ISRAEL” (1 Kings 2:4). This promise pertained to the Pharez line of David’s house through Hezron (1 Chronicles 4:1), not Hamul (1 Chronicles 2:5). Jesus Christ was of this Pharez-scepter-kingly line (Luke 1:32) and [from Judah] (John 4:9; Heb.7:14) but refused to accept the rulership of the world at his first coming (Matthew 4:9). Christ will “sit on his (David’s) THRONE” (Isa.9:7; Acts 2:30) at his second coming (Revelation 11:15). So [Judah] must rule today on a THRONE wherever the LOST TEN TRIBES of ISRAEL [rather Judah] are located. Christ can’t come back to a non-existent THRONE (Luke 1:31-32; Jeremiah 33:20-21)… how many nations in the world today even have a THRONE besides BRITAIN?’

Most are located in northwestern Europe and are related to the British throne – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘But Zarah wasn’t excluded from the rulership blessing. In fact, the last Davidic king mentioned in succession was Zedekiah of Judah who was dethroned in 585 B.C. Also, “the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah” (Jeremiah 39:6). In Jeremiah 52:11 we also read that Zedekiah was beginning, in 585 B.C., [Israel and Judah’s] seven times of national punishment and Jeremiah was commanded to “root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down” (Jeremiah 1:10) the royalty of the Pharez line in Judah. Why Jeremiah? Because Josiah “married Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah” [2] (Jeremiah 1:1). Their son was Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:17). But after this “went Jeremiah … to Mizpeh” (Jeremiah 40:6) where King Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS were (41:10).

Apparently Nebuchadnezzar didn’t know that Hebrew law permitted the PRINCESS to inherit the throne when there were no male descendants (Numbers 27:8). He didn’t harm Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS or take them to Babylon. Now “the king’s DAUGHTERS… and Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch… came into the land of Egypt” (Jeremiah 43:5-7). When they arrived in Tahpanhes (meaning “secret flight”), the Eternal warned Jeremiah that Babylon’s king would soon overrun Egypt also, and destroy the remnant of Judah there so Jeremiah returned “into the land of Judah” (Jeremiah 44:28). 

“To this day Tahpanhes or modern Tell Defneh (the [fortress] mound) is called the PALACE of the JEW’S DAUGHTER” (The History of Egypt by Sir Flinders Petrie) – Qasr Bint el Yehudi. 

Jeremiah 43:9-10 mentions hiding stones at the entry of Pharaoh Hophra’s house. He had offered protection to these Jews (Jeremiah 44:30) and Jeremiah predicts the conquest of Egypt and the death of this monarch (Ezra 30:10,19). This actually came to pass a few years later when Pharaoh Hophra was murdered by enemies from within his own nation – “them that seek his life.” Sir Flinders Petrie found this very pavement in June 1866. After tearing down the throne of PHAREZ Judah, Jeremiah was commissioned “to build, and to plant” (Jeremiah 1:10) as the prophecy said, “the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward; For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and they that escape out of Mount Zion” (Isaiah 37:31-32). 

This remnant was the royal DAUGHTERS (2 Kings 19:30-31). In Ezekiel 21:25 we read that the royalty would CHANGE. The Eternal says, “take off the crown: this (crown) shall not be the same: EXALT him that is LOW, and ABASE him that is HIGH.” So Judah’s son PHAREZ was ABASED and ZARAH was EXALTED. The nation of JUDAH had been HIGH and ISRAEL LOW (Hosea 3:4). Now the positions were REVERSED.’ 

The unusual circumstance surrounding the twins birth caused controversy as to which child was truly the firstborn. The rights of the firstborn were at stake. The twins were born circa 1705 BCE prior to Jacob relocating his family to Egypt in 1687 BCE. Once in Egypt, it would be another seventeen years before Jacob would proclaim his prophecy in Genesis forty-nine. When the boys were born, it was ordained yet not yet given that Judah’s offspring would inherit the rights of rulership – Genesis 49:10.

Due to this unique inheritance and the privilege of royal lineage, the Pharez and Zarah controversy became supremely significant, for the right of regal rule was paramount. As Pharez was born first literally and second by a technicality, he was blamed for and even named for the breach. A passionate brotherly rivalry was a foregone conclusion. There is no doubt that Zarah and his subsequent line believed that they had been deprived of the firstborn position and the right to rule over Israel.

‘The daughters were planted “In the mountain of the height of ISRAEL” (Ezekiel 17:24). But where was LOST ISRAEL? We know that Jeremiah was sent to “the kings of the ISLES which are beyond the sea” (Jeremiah 25:15-22; 31:10). Just as the prophecy said, “I will appoint a PLACE for my people Israel, and will plant them” (2 Samuel 7:10). Not only the tribes, but also the royalty.

The parable of Ezekiel 17 (encoded so no Babylonian spy could understand) describes this whole episode. Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh were the two “EAGLES.” The “HIGH CEDAR” is the royal house of David. The “HIGHEST BRANCH” was Zedekiah. The “TENDER ONE” of the “YOUNG TWIGS” was the young crown princess. The Hebrew word here used for “tender” is feminine, in contrast to the masculine form of the same word in Isaiah 53:2. After the transplanting to a “HIGH MOUNTAIN” which was Israel (verse 23) in IRELAND, this feminine twig would “bring forth boughs, bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar” which means that many royal descendants would come from it.

Through his grandmother, Matilda of Scotland, descent is claimed from the daughter of Zedekiah for Henry the Second, Henry Plantagenet of England [3]. His surname means “a twig.” And “under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing” meaning nations of every race… The “TREES of the FIELD” are kings and peoples of the world. The ancient Chronicles of IRELAND (Leabhar Gabhala; Keating’s History of Ireland) inform us [4] that a sage named “Ollam Fodla” (“Wonderful Prophet”) came from Egypt by way of Spain about six centuries B.C., and that he landed on the northeast coast of IRELAND where Carrickfergus is now. He brought with him a princess [4a] called “Tamar Tephi” (“Beautiful Palm”) and a secretary/scribe [4b] named “Simon Brug” or “Bruch.” Also a massive, strongly secured, and mysterious chest which they regarded with utmost reverence and guarded with zealous care (Ark of Covenant) [5] and a large, rough stone [6] and golden banner with a red lion on it [7]. 

Perhaps the Ark and the two tables of stone lie buried in the Hill of Tara (2 Maccabees 2:7) [8]. Irish poetry and folklore [9] identify Ollam Fodla as JEREMIAH [9a] and Tamar Tephi [9b] as the DAUGHTER of ZEDEKIAH. 

Ancient Irish poetry [10] is full of praises for Tamar Tephi and tells of her lofty birth, her stormy life in Jerusalem and at Tahpanhes in Egypt, her voyage to Spain and from there to Ireland. It is also claimed that Tamar Tephi’s younger sister SCOTTA, who was with JEREMIAH on the first lap of the journey, never reached Ireland because she married a Celto-Scythian MILESIAN prince in Spain. Tamar Tephi married the Irish king called Eochaidh Heremon of ZARAH JUDAH [11] after he agreed to give up Baal idolatry and worship Yahweh according to the two tables of law and provide a school for ollamhs.’

Regarding Eochaidh, Walsh writes: “One of Ireland’s rulers was a man named Eochaidh Heremon. Eochaidh is Irish for the Greek name Achaios, and the term Heremon is a title meaning Chief of the Landsmen, a king. He was a Milesian living among the Tuatha de Danann… His genealogy traces back to Chalcol [I Chronicles 2:6; I Kings 4:31], the Zarahite founder of Athens, who is said to have planted a royal dynasty in Ulster [Northern Ireland]. Tephi, heiress to the Pharez Davidic throne, married into an existing Zarah royal line going back hundreds of years. As the newly crowned Queen of Ireland, Tephi contributed the authority of the throne of David to Eochaidh’s kingship. Eochaidh’s coronation is recorded taking place in 580 BCE, six years after the fall of Jerusalem. Through their children the tender twig grew to become a majestic cedar – a new royal dynasty in its own right, through which the Davidic throne would be perpetuated.”

‘This is how the two lines became united. Just as Jeremiah 31:22 prophesied, “a woman shall go about seeking for the husband.” They came on a ship belonging to the Iberian DANAAN [the tribe of Dan].’

Both Danite and Phoenician traders had explored and colonised the Britannic Isles in the time of King Solomon. The Danites had originally arrived in Ireland considerably earlier than 1000 BCE and before the Milesians in circa 1404 BCE. As mentioned, there is evidence they were not only visiting the Isles in the time of Israel’s Judges, for the tribe of Dan is criticised by Deborah who governed Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE, for being ‘away at sea’ during a protracted local conflict (Judges 5:17); but also as far back when the Israelites were in Egypt. Danites like the sons of Zarah, had struck out early to explore the Aegean, the Grecian Peninsula, Italy, Iberia and on to the Isle of Erin.

‘When Jeremiah reached Tara Ireland, about 580 B.C., he established the “Mur-ollamain” (Hebrew: “School of the Prophets”). Also the Iodhan Moran was created (Hebrew: “Chief Justice”) and the Rectaire (Hebrew: “the Judge”). On the Four Courts at Dublin (the Supreme Court of Ireland) is a statue of the Prophet JEREMIAH [12]. To this very day, JEREMIAH’S burial place is pointed out on Devenish Island, in Lough Erne, two and a half miles below Enniskillen, Co. Fermanagh. The tomb is hewn out of solid rock. It has been known through the centuries as “JEREMIAH’S TOMB.” He was the real SAINT PATRIARCH – a name later corrupted to “St. Patrick” by Catholics.’

For further information regarding the authenticity of Jeremiah travelling to Ireland and the true identity of Ollamh Fodhla, refer article: The Ark of God.

‘From the union of Heremon and Tea Tephi came a long line of IRISH monarchs extending over a period of more than one thousand years. The SCOTCH monarchs were descended from the Irish kings. The last Scottish king, James VI of Scotland, became James I of ENGLAND, and from him the [former] Queen of Great Britain is descended. King Heremon and Queen Tamar Tephi were crowned at TARA (Hebrew. “TORAH”) upon the Lia Fail [13], (Hebrew: STONE of DESTINY) of Israel, just as the kings of Judah had been for centuries. It was as this time that the “HARP of DAVID” became part of the royal heraldic symbolism on family crests and flags since David was the Pharez line. Nathan told King David that “the sword shall never depart from thine house, because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah, the Hittite, to be thy wife” (2 Samuel 12:10). This is why the royal houses of Europe have suffered so many bloody revolutions and murders.’

There is energetic debate regarding the person of Zedekiah’s daughter. Whether she really existed or is a myth. Her name appears to be a composite, which has aided the weakening of her credentials as a real person. Some call her Tea or Tamar. Tephi appears to be the common denominator in each case – refer article: The Ark of God.

Ezekiel 17:2-24

English Standard Version

2 “Son of man, propound a riddle, and speak a parable to the house of Israel; 3 say, Thus says the Lord God: A great eagle [Nebuchadnezzar II] with great wings and long pinions, rich in plumage of many colors, came to Lebanon and took the top of the cedar [Jeconiah*]. 4 He broke off the topmost of its young twigs [princes] and carried it to a land of trade [Chaldea] and set it in a city of merchants [Babylon]. 5 Then he took of the seed of the land [Zedekiah, the king’s Uncle*] and planted it in fertile soil. He placed it beside abundant waters… 6 and it sprouted and became a low spreading vine, and its branches turned toward him, and its roots remained where it stood… 7 “And there was another great eagle with great wings [Egypt] and much plumage, and behold, this vine bent its roots toward him and shot forth its branches toward him from the bed where it was planted, that he might water it.” 

It was the Pharaoh of Egypt, with whom Zedekiah made an alliance. Pharaoh sent an army to raise a siege of Jerusalem in 588 BCE – 2 Chronicles 36:13; Jeremiah 37:5; Jeremiah 37:7. Pharaoh had a great army and Zedekiah leaned on his support and protection. ‘Zedekiah was courting the favour of Egypt while he owed his very position to the bounty of Babylon.’

Ezekiel: 9 “Say, Thus says the Lord God: Will it thrive? Will he not pull up its roots and cut off its fruit, so that it withers, so that all its fresh sprouting leaves wither? It will not take a strong arm or many people to pull it from its roots. 10 Behold, it is planted; will it thrive? Will it not utterly wither when the east wind strikes it – wither away on the bed where it sprouted?”

‘Zedekiah, besides the obligation of an oath, was bound to the king of Babylon by the ties of gratitude, as he owed all he possessed to him.’ Though his sons and nobles were put to the sword.

Ezekiel: … 12 “Say now to the rebellious house, Do you not know what these things mean? Tell them, behold, the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem, and took her king and her princes and brought them to him to Babylon. 13 And he took one of the royal offspring and made a covenant with him, putting him under oath (the chief men of the land he had taken away), 14 that the kingdom might be humble and not lift itself up, and keep his covenant that it might stand.”

‘… Jeconiah and all his princes and officers: see 2 Kings 24:12… Judging them unfit to be trusted any more with any office or power in their own country… taken from among the royal seed Mattaniah, [Jeconiah’s] brother, and advanced him to the throne in Jerusalem, 2 Kings 24:17… A solemn agreement, on terms acceded to and approved by Mattaniah… An oath of fealty: when Nebuchadnezzar caused Mattaniah to enter into this covenant and oath, he changed his name to Zedekiah, which word signifies, the justice of God, to express that God would avenge the crime of this restored captive, if he should break the covenant into which he had entered, and perjure himself… 2 Kings 24:17… Zedekiah being made only a tributary king, consequently was not in as honourable a condition as his predecessors had been in; but yet the keeping of his covenant was the only means, under present circumstances, to support himself and his government.’

Ezekiel: 15 ‘But he rebelled against him by sending his ambassadors to Egypt, that they might give him horses and a large army. Will he thrive? Can one escape who does such things? Can he break the covenant and yet escape? 16 “As I live, declares the Lord God, surely in the place where the king dwells who made him king, whose oath he despised, and whose covenant with him he broke, in Babylon he shall die. 17 Pharaoh [Hophra – Jeremiah 44:30; 37:5] with his mighty army and great company will not help him in war, when mounds are cast up and siege walls built to cut off many lives. 

18 He despised the oath in breaking the covenant, and behold, he gave his hand and did all these things; he shall not escape. 19 Therefore thus says the Lord God: As I live, surely it is my oath that he despised, and my covenant that he broke. I will return it upon his head. 20 I will spread my net over him, and he shall be taken in my snare, and I will bring him to Babylon and enter into judgment with him there for the treachery he has committed against me. 21 And all the pick of his troops shall fall by the sword, and the survivors shall be scattered to every wind, and you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken.’

Many commentators misinterpret the meaning in not applying it to Zedekiah, but rather the prophecy signifying Jeconiah’s descendant Zerubbabel, who later returned to Judea from the Babylonian exile as governor. He was only a governor under the Persians, not ruling in majesty as a king over ‘birds of every sort’ or many other peoples. Nor was he cut out from Judah when the nation and royal family stood as a tall (Lebanon) cedar, but long after the nation had been carried away into captivity. 

With the problematic interpretation when using Zerubbabel, other commentators view the prophecy as messianic, for the Messiah would come from the line of David. When Christ lived, neither Judah nor its royal family could be symbolised by a tall cedar, as the area was occupied by the Romans and no Davidic king had ruled there for more than five hundred years. The bringing down of a high tree and exalting the low tree does not fit such an analogy. So the explanation is given that Christ descended, Himself a branch from the replanting in Jerusalem. For the true genealogy of Christ, refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

Ezekiel: 22 Thus says the Lord God: “I myself will take a sprig from the lofty top of the cedar and will set it out. I will break off from the topmost of its young twigs [Zedekiah’s daughters] a tender one [Tephi], and I myself will plant it on a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain height of Israel will I plant it [Ulster], that it may bear branches and produce fruit and become a noble cedar. And under it will dwell every kind of bird; in the shade of its branches birds of every sort will nest [British Empire]. 24 And all the trees of the field shall know that I am the Lord; I bring low the high tree [line of Pharez – Zedekiah], and make high the low tree [line of Zarah – Eochaidh], dry up the green tree, and make the dry tree flourish. I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it.”

In summary, quoting from The Life & Death of Charles III:

‘The simple fact of the matter is the throne of David came to an end with Jehoiachin. Thus whether one of Zedekiah’s daughters intermarried with a Milesian king in Ireland or not, does not have bearing on a Davidic line of kings. Merely that a line of Pharez may or may not have entered Scotland with the Milesian Scots and their Zarah descended kings.  

Thus a reinterpretation or rather a re-explanation is required regarding the account of the birth of Zarah and Pharez in Genesis 38:27-30. While Zarah’s hand appeared first and was tied with a scarlet thread, his hand retracted and his twin Pharez was actually born first. Commentators have read this as Pharez having preeminence over Zarah’s line. With Zarah being secondary to Pharez, probably because David and Christ were descended from Pharez and Zarah was born second, even though technically first. Though it would seem that the Zarah line has always been preeminent as evidenced by the scarlet thread and red hand symbols prevalent in Ireland, Scotland and England. 

For all we know, the Pharez line may not have figured in royal lines at all, or seldom at best. Perhaps multiple lines from Zarah’s five sons – Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara – are the true royal lines, with the Hezron line from Pharez giving birth to David and Christ the anomaly and a one time only event. It means pivotal rulers such as Hengist the Jute and the Norman, William the Conqueror were never a line descended from David. Whether they were of Pharez even, may be of little consequence, with a descent from Zarah actually being relevant. With Edward I and James VI/I claiming a Trojan and therefore Zarah descent, adding credence to this line of reasoning. 

The question of whether King Charles III is a descendant of King David is comprehensively answered in the article by John D Keyser entitled: Does King Charles III Sit On a Throne of David? Keyser states: ‘The bottom line is, though, that the reign of the Davidic line in Jerusalem is TEMPORARILY INTERRUPTED’ until Christ’s return. He concludes: ‘Nevertheless, the royal line of Judah (through Zarah) DID go to Ireland… thus fulfilling the prophecy in Genesis 49:10: “The scepter shall NOT depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh comes…”

When the Danes (or Dene), peacefully migrated southwards from southern Sweden, they impinged on the Jutes and to the south of them, the Frisians and Angles. The Danes – not to be confused with the tribe of Dan or modern day Denmark – are one and the same as the later Danish Vikings, a distinct and separate tribe – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

The Danes had been part of a Scandinavian tribal collective which had suffered divisions in the fourth and fifth centuries, thus beginning the splitting of the Israelite Danish Vikings, from the remaining ‘Danes’ (Medan) and Swedes (Shuah) who descend from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Thus they entered Jutland, formerly the Cimbric Peninsula derived from Cymric, in the fifth century, forcing the Saxons tribes west towards Britain. As the Angles were allies of the Danes and their kin, they chose migration rather than warfare. 

A Danish kingdom seems to have been established by the late fifth century, but the earliest records of its kings is fragmentary and allusive. It was a distinct state as opposed to Scania still surviving in southern Sweden. Identity adherents subscribe to the tribe of Dan leaving their name, as in, Dans-mark. It would seem the Dan part may have some credence, whereas the mark part is explained in that the march of the Danes – ‘a march, mark, or mierce being a borderland territory’ – was ostensibly the no-man’s land between them and the tribes which lay to the South, following the exodus to Britain by the Angles, Frisians and Jutes. This name became normalised as Denmark. 

Similar border states included Mercia in the west of England which bordered Wales, the North March of Eastern Germany, Finnmark in Norway and the Ostmark of what is now Austria. 

The Jutes certainly lent their name to Jutland, the mainland peninsula now comprising Denmark. Though most people think of the Saxons or the dominant Saxon tribe the Angles, when they consider the populating of Britain south of the Caledonian Picts and east of the Cymric Britons circa 450 to 650 CE, there were two other notable tribes which entered Britain. One was the Frisians – composed of two separate sons of Jacob, Issachar and Zebulun – and the second was the first wave of the tribe of Judah who entered Britain known as the Jutes. Notice in a moment who was first Saxon tribe into Britain out of the three. As well as those who remained in Scandinavia; the Geats and Wulfings, from whom respectively the modern Danes and Norwegians descend today.

Kingdoms of Europe: An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Ruling Monarchs from Ancient Times to the Present, Gene Gurney, 1982, page 129 – emphasis mine: 

‘Most of the country was conquered by these Teutons [Saxons], of whom the principle tribes were the Angles, Saxons [Frisians], and Jutes, who finally fused into one people, under the name of Anglo-Saxons, or Angles or English, while that portion of Britain in which they made their home was called England. The first of these Teutonic kingdoms was founded in Kent. A despairing British chieftain or king, Vortigern… to save his people from their northern foes [the Picts]… invited the Teutons to come to his aid. 

Two well-known Jutish Vikings, Hengist and Horsa, accepted the invitation with their followers, and in the year 449 landed on the island of Thanet, the southeastern extremity of… England…’

Fromkin and Rodman explain the etymology of the words Judah and Jute

An Introduction to Language, Victoria Fromkin & Robert Rodman, 1988, page 315 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The German linguist Jakob Grimm (of fairy-tale fame)… published a four-volume treatise (1819-1822) that specified the regular sound correspondences among Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, and the Germanic languages. It was not only the similarities that intrigued Grimm and other linguists, but the systematic nature of the differences… Grimm pointed out that certain phonological changes that did not take place in Sanskrit, Greek, or Latin must have occurred early in the history of the Germanic languages. Because the changes were so strikingly regular, they became known as Grimm’s Law’ … (one example of which is) d->t … voiced stops become voiceless.’

The people known as the Jutes and Juten (or Yuten) – for the letter J is pronounced as Y in German and the Scandinavian languages – would originally have been recognised as Juden (or Yuden). Ironically, Juden became the German word used for the Jews. 

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Note carefully the following statements made by Jessel regarding the Jews and Benjamites: 

“We find in the Bible many references to the fighting power of the Benjamin, and we find them also always in alliance with Yahuds. Together these white races held in subjection the coloured people, the natives of Canaan. JUDAH and BENJAMIN are the Amurra (“AMORITES”) and the Kheta of the Egyptian monuments (ibid., p. 118).” 

‘Jessel thinks that the settlements in the British Isles which had built the cromlechs were the same people as the Palestinian Amorites. He plainly says that “JUDAH and BENJAMIN are the AMURRA” whom the Egyptians had depicted. Also, did you notice that Jessel spoke of the “YAHUDS” and the “BENJAMIN” as “these WHITE races”? He also spoke of the native CANAANITES as “the COLOURED people” – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. ‘Truly, the native Canaanites were dark or colored in comparison with the people of the tribes of Judah (the Yahuds) and the Benjamin (Benjamites).’

A close relationship has existed between the peoples descended from Judah and Benjamin as Jessel points out. Though their identity as Amorites is open to question – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Added to this is that while original Canaanites were dark coloured, the Canaanites at the time of the Israelites were predominately white and or Nephilim (and Elioud giant) descended – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Horsa in 455 CE was killed during the Battle of Aegaelsthrep (Aylesford) along with the British King Vortigern. Vortigern’s son, Catigern was also killed in the fighting. Horsa’s brother Hengist survived and was victorious, declaring himself King of Kent – reigning from 455 to 488 CE. Hengist and Horsa were the Jutish leaders of a population that quickly expanded in southern England, with their Nobles gaining influence and becoming the longest established aristocratic families of the Saxon population. 

Some claim that Hengist and Horsa could trace their descent from Woden (or Odin), making them royal descendants of Zarah. The neighbouring kingdom of Sussex was founded by Aelle in 477 CE and in 495 Cerdic and his son Cynric landed in the south of England. By 519, Cerdic had become the first king of Wessex. His son Cynric took Wiltshire in 552 and defeated the Britons in 556. In 575, the Angles founded the Kingdom of East Anglia and later Mercia in 586. 

After the reigns of Hengest and his son Aesc (or Oisc), little is known of Kentish history from 512 CE until the reign of Aethelberht from 560 to 616, who by 595 had become overlord of all the kingdoms south of the River Humber. His wife Bertha, daughter of Charibert the Frankish king of Paris, was a Christian and it may have been for that reason that Pope Gregory the Great sent Augustine’s mission to Aethelberht’s court in 597. Aethelberht, after his conversion and as the first Christian king in Britain in 601, donated a place of residence in Canterbury for the missionaries and hence this became the first and senior archiepiscopal see for the English church that would later be known as Anglican – refer Appendix VIII When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation; and article: The Seven Churches: A Message for the Church of God in the latter Days

Kent waned in power and from 825 CE Kent was a province of Wessex, whose kings became kings of all England by the tenth century – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. The social organisation of Kent exhibited many distinctive features, which supports the statement of the Venerable Bede that ‘its inhabitants were a different tribe from the Angles… namely the Jutes. Instead of two classes of nobles, or gesithcund, as in Wessex and Mercia, Kent had only one, the eorlcund; and the Kentish ceorl, or peasant, was [interestingly from a Judah perspective] a person of considerably greater substance than those elsewhere.’ 

The main area of intrusion by the Jutes into England matches in large part, the area of England historically known as the Home Counties. Generally speaking, the Home Counties are Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Middlesex, Surrey, East Sussex and West Sussex. There is no official designation to these counties as a unified group. The description is more of a social and demographic way to identify the stomping grounds of the traditional English middle and upper classes. Sometimes parts of Cambridgeshire, Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire, Hampshire and even Dorset are included. The Jutes for instance, did settle in Hampshire after their arrival and thus a classification of Saxon or Wessex can be misleading, as the Jutes are and were Saxons. 

Aethelred I became king of Wessex and Kent in 866 CE and was the son of Aethelwulf. The Kingdom of Wessex heartland was in the area of the modern county of Hampshire. As it grew, it covered all of the country south of the river Thames from the borders of Kent and Sussex to the Tamar River. By the tenth century, the Kingdom of Dumnonia, west of the Tamar, was under West Saxon rule. Notice the Judah family name of Tamar, the mother of Pharez and Zarah and recall Tamar, a daughter of King David. 

Aethelred’s reign was a long struggle against the Danes. In the year of his succession a large Danish force landed in East Anglia and in the year 868, Aethelred and his brother Alfred went to help Burgred of Mercia against this host, but the Mercians soon made peace with their foes. 

In 871, the Danes encamped at Reading, where they defeated Aethelred and his brother, but later in the year the English won a great victory at Aescesdun. Two weeks later they were defeated again, this time at Basing but partially revived their fortunes with a further victory at Maeretun (perhaps Marden in Wiltshire). 

In Easter of the same year Aethelred died and was buried at Wimborne. His brother Alfred, also spelled Aelfred, was Alfred the Great – born in 849 and dying in 899 – he became the new King of Wessex for twenty-eight years. He prevented England from falling to the Danes and promoted learning and literacy. It was during these events in southern England the heartland of Judah, that Kenneth McAlpine, hundreds of miles to the North, united the Scots and Picts, forming the Kingdom of Scotland and hastening the emergence of Benjamin from the shadows.

The second wave of the tribe of Judah, the Northmen known as Normans arrived from Normandy, France where they and a residue of other tribes had dwelt for some two hundred years. The historic Battle of Hastings in 1066 CE with the killing of King Harold, began the Norman Conquest of England under William the Conqueror – formerly the Bastard and son of Robert I – who was crowned at Westminster Abbey on December 25, 1066. William I was born in 1028 and died in 1087. Arthur kemp states:

‘One of William the Conqueror’s first undertakings was a survey of England. This resulted in the famous Domesday Book which was a full account of all property and wealth in that country at the beginning of the eleventh century… it’s detail is staggering, including even the smallest villages; the number of mills, fisheries, animals; and the sizes of all woodlands and meadows.’

William was succeeded by his son, William II who was known as William Rufus or William the Red, due to his reddish hair. These descendants of Judah acted with authority and used their wealth, power and influence to great effect. Were they aristocratic lines of Pharez? More likely still, they were from Zarah – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Their impact was immediate and it was severe.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, Volume 29, page 33: ‘The major change, was the subordination of England to a Norman aristocracy. William distributed estates to his followers (barons from Normandy) on a piecemeal basis as the lands were conquered.’ 

In Search of the Dark Ages, Michael Wood, 1987, page 233 – emphasis mine: 

‘The redistribution of land after the Norman Conquest has been called a tenurial revolution of the most far-reaching kind and a catastrophe for the higher orders of English society from which they never recovered. The record of Domesday Book, completed only twenty years after Hastings, shows that though some Englishmen still held considerable estates, very few held any position of influence. 

It has been estimated that only eight per cent of the land was still held by [existing] English [Nobles] in 1086 [a mere twenty years after the conquest]. 

There is much evidence for a widespread emigration of Englishmen into other countries, into Denmark, into Scotland and, most remarkably of all, to Greece and the Byzantine empire where there is good contemporary evidence that large numbers of Englishmen took service with the emperor in Constantinople in the generation following Hastings.’

This new order of Norman nobility swiftly took control of not just England, but also Scotland – for instance through Robert the Bruce’s ancestors – and Wales, as well as Ireland’s nobility. These Norsemen or Northmen Vikings who had settled in France, spoke Frankish, a form of French and had already entwined themselves within the ruling class of France, setting up for the future Angevin Monarchs and therefore a controlling influence over Ammon and Moab, not unlike Darda and the Trojans some two and half millennia previously – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran*. 

In 911 CE, the Frankish King Charles had ceded land to the Normans in return for their loyalty and protection against other Viking incursions, naming their chief Rollo, a Duke. Time Frame AD 800-1000: Fury of the Northmen, Time Life Books, 1988, page 38: ‘His Vikings melded into the local culture much more rapidly than in England. They took local women as wives and concubines and watched their children grow up speaking the Frankish tongue.’ 

As discussed, the Sicambrians or Franks were part of the Teutonic invasions of Europe, which had followed on the heels of the Celtic ingress. Royal Genealogies or the Genealogical Tables of Emperors, Kings, and Princes, from Adam to These Times, James Anderson, page 611: ‘The Sicambrian Kings, Antenor, of the House of Troy, King of the Cimmerians, 443 B.C.’ We have learned how the Franks descend from Ammon and Moab, sons of Abraham’s nephew Lot. 

Intermarriage between their people and Judah was a union between family, with a pedigree going back all the way to the Triad. Similarly, a number of these Frankish Nobles may well have been from ruling families of Israel already – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

The Frankish nobility had blended with the older Gaulish nobility from Celtic times and the Gauls had intermarried with the noble Romans descended from Ishmael prior to that. Roman nobility claimed to trace its descent from Aeneas of the house of Troy. Whichever the specific lineage, the closeness of the related German, French and British lines is without question, as our studies on Ammon, Moab and Ishmael have shown – refer* Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. 

The Angevins were the first three Plantagent kings of England: Henry II from 1154 to 1189 – the husband of Eleanor of Aquitaine – Richard the Lionheart from 1189 to 1199 and John the Bad from 1199 to 1216, the king who infamously signed the Magna Carta. On the 25 November 1120, the White Ship carrying William Adelin sank, killing all three hundred people aboard, bar one. William was the future monarch and eldest son of Henry I. Henry was the youngest son of William the Conqueror. The death of William left one child, Empress Matilda, wife of Holy Roman Emperor, Henry V. Five years later, Henry V died and Matilda returned to Normandy and was named Henry I’s successor. 

After 1066, the rise of the Anglo-Norman aristocracy depended on the preeminence of the Duchy of Normandy. It was a jewel of wealth and power, desired by every royal descendant. Henry I had taken it by force from his older brother, William Rufus (William II). 

To secure its southern border, William Adelin had married the daughter of the Count of Anjou, who also controlled the adjacent counties of Maine and Touraine. King Henry I now arranged the marriage of his widowed daughter who was twenty-six, to the eldest son of the Count of Anjou, Geoffrey Plantagenet who was fourteen. They hated each other, yet still produced three sons. Though Matilda’s cousin Stephen of Blois – the Nephew of Henry I – had usurped the throne in 1135, Geoffrey worked tirelessly to win it back for her. Following Stephen’s death in 1154, their eldest son ascended the throne as Henry II, King of England. England came to be ruled not by the son of an Anglo-Norman king, but rather, by the son of an Angevin Count and his Norman empress.

Henry possessed a larger proportion of France than the King of France himself – see map above. Hence  it led to inevitable conflict, with King John being defeated in the Anglo-French War of 1213 to 1214, by Philip II of France. John lost control of most of the continental possessions apart from Gascony in southern Aquitaine. 

This defeat set the scene for further conflict and the Hundred Year’s War lasting between 1337 and 1453. A conflict over the French throne between the English royal House of Plantagenet and the French royal House of Valois. Eventually, the House of Valois retained control of France, ending the intertwined French and English monarchies, so that they remained separate. 

This close, yet antagonistic relationship between Judah, Ammon and Moab was mirrored millennias earlier between the Trojans and Greek Athenians. 

Of the Kings and Queens of England, it is interesting to note some of the Houses and how many monarchs each have contributed. Working back, the current House of Windsor or rather Saxe-Coburg-Gotha combined with the House of Hanover which preceded it – both being German-Jewish in ancestry, descending from Ishmael and Edom (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) – have provided ten Kings and two Queens – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III

Twelve monarchs in total from George I in 1714 to the current monarch, Charles III from 2023. 

The House preceding were the Stewarts of Scotland. Producing seven Monarchs in total, including two Queens from James I in 1603 to Anne in 1702. The next House was that of the Tudors of Wales. Five Monarchs in total, including two Queens from Henry VII in 1485 to Elizabeth I in 1558. Then we arrive at the Plantagenets deriving from the Angevins of France and their branches, the Houses of York and Lancaster, which provided eleven kings from Henry III in 1216 to Richard III in 1483. Before that as mentioned, the three Angevin Kings of Henry II, Richard I and John. 

We finally arrive at the Norman Kings derived from the Norse Vikings, consisting of William I, his son William II from 1087 to 1100 and William I’s grandson, Henry I from 1100 to 1135. 

It is these three kings, nearly one thousand years ago that we could possibly perceive as being a genuine line of Judah. All the subsequent lines have had varying degrees of descent from the tribe via Zarah reduced by the foreign royal lines injected from Ammon and Moab of France; in part perhaps from Simeon of Wales and Benjamin of Scotland; and without question the Ishmael-Edomite mix from Germany. The unmistakable fact, is that admixture within these lines again means the percentage of Judaic blood is just that, a minority percentage

The current royals may have a smidgeon of a Judah bloodline, but the reality is, that the English throne which includes the ancestry of French Angevins, a Dutch William of Orange, William III and two German-Jewish Houses, is not very English and hasn’t been for a very long time.

Does this negate the legitimacy of the British throne being the Davidic throne? No. Does it contradict a descendant of David being available to sit on the throne? No. After an Edomite overturn, does it signify we have entered the end game of foretold events? Yes. 

The Duke of York, who became King George VI of England from 11 December 1936 until his death on February 6, 1952, reportedly wrote in 1922: ‘… I am sure the British Israelite business is true. I have read a lot about it lately and everything no matter how large or small points to our being “the chosen race” – Letter, 1922, facsimile printed in The Independent, April 6, 1996.’ The last King of England until the recent ascension of Charles III, believed in Britain’s Israelite past and its modern identity.

Royal Coat of Arms of Elizabeth I – Always the same (Ever the Same)

It is coincidence indeed that the first Queen Elizabeth reigned during the rapid growth of England as a chrysalis empire, with the planting of new Colonies in the Americas; while her namesake Queen Elizabeth II – Elizabeth I of Scotland and daughter of George VI – should witness the rapid dissolution of Britain’s empire and collapse of her once unrivalled power.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Francis Bacon and William Shakespeare has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘The Shakespeare Shadow’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

The English King Edward I conquered Wales in 1282. In order to appease the Welsh, the king’s eldest son was made the Prince of Wales, a title which still exists today. The two countries became unified in 1536, with the Kingdom of England incorporating Wales. The Kingdom of England ceased being a separate sovereign state on May 1, 1707, when the Acts of Union put into effect, the terms agreed in the Treaty of Union the previous year. The resulting Kingdom of Great Britain born from a political union with the Kingdom of Scotland. To accommodate the union for both, institutions such as the law and national churches remained separate. 

It is interesting to note that the unique relationship between England and Wales, as Judah and Simeon is revealed in the Bible and we will address this in the following chapter. Similarly with Scotland as Benjamin, with whom we will study next. Of all the territories, colonies or nations which England acquired during the evolution of its empire; the Kingdom of Scotland was the only country that was not conquered; occupied; seized as a protectorate; purchased; bargained and traded for or acquired by treaty. 

Turning points for England were its imperial expansion in the sixteenth century, particularly during Elizabeth I’s reign during 1558 to 1603 and the colonies springing up in North America, leading to a prominent and powerful nation comprising many peoples. Considerable value was attached to these fledgling colonies and the wealth which they provided to Britain and the crown. 

Another turning point was the Spanish Armada in 1588, sent by Spain to bring Great Britain into line with Catholic Europe. After the disastrous Spanish navy’s expedition, England eventually rose to become the world’s dominant sea and naval power during the nineteenth century. 

A notable decision by Elizabeth I was the expulsion of all Black Africans from England in 1601. From 1555 the first Black slaves were imported into England via the ports of Liverpool and Bristol. By 1601 there were officially twenty thousand Black slaves in London. A significant Black presence, unlike America, was delayed until increased immigration from African colonies occurred in the twentieth century. 

Author Paul Johnson describes the awakening of Judah’s lawgiving destiny and calling to fulfil its commission, through the enterprise of building an empire – emphasis mine:

‘However, the fact that England had declared itself an empire invalidated the papal award in official English eyes, a judgment made formal by Queen Elizabeth I’s chief minister, Sir William Cecil, who told the Spanish Ambassador that English settlers were free to claim for the Crown any territory in the Americas not yet settled. The term “the British Empire” came into use at about the same time. It was given a religious underpinning by the widespread belief in England, made explicit in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, the most popular book in Elizabethan and Jacobean England after the Bible, that for historical reasons the English [true Judah] had succeeded the discredited Jews [false Judah] as the Elect Nation, had vindicated their claim by the Reformation, and had a global mission to carry thus-purified Christianity throughout the world’ – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

When James VI of Scotland became James I due to Elizabeth being ‘childless’ – an irony as James was the son of Mary Stuart who had been executed by Elizabeth I in 1567 (for both Elizabeth and James were direct descendants of the first Tudor monarch, Henry VII as Elizabeth was his granddaughter and James his great-great grandson. Henry’s sister Margaret, married the King of Scotland, James IV. They had a son, James V, who married and had a daughter, Mary, who became the Queen of Scots; making her Elizabeth’s second cousin. James VI was the son of Mary, Queen of Scots and therefore a third cousin to Elizabeth) – England expanded under the Stuart House in trade, finance and prosperity; developing Europe’s largest merchant fleet.

The United Kingdom played a major role in the advancement of civilisation, taking a significantly leading role in advocating democracy; in the writing of great literature; and the addition of landmark scientific development. During the nineteenth century, the British Empire covered over one quarter of the surface of the earth and its share of the world’s wealth by GDP, was a similar percentage. 

The newly formed Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707 led to the combined output from the Royal Society and other English enterprises – with the Scottish Enlightenment – in creating numerous innovations in science and engineering. Coupled with the enormous growth in overseas trade, which was ably protected by the British Navy, this paved the way for the unabated expansion of the British Empire. It also drove the Industrial Revolution; ‘a period of profound change in the socioeconomic and cultural conditions of England, resulting in industrialised agriculture, manufacture, engineering and mining, as well as new and pioneering road, rail and water networks to facilitate their expansion and development.’ 

This period also saw the presence and contribution of an intellectual giant and one of the greatest scientists and thinkers the world has ever known: Isaac Newton – who lived from 1642 to 1726. Kemp says: ‘Newton was a prestigious natural philosopher and mathematician who invented the mathematical system known as calculus and was author of the laws of motion and gravitation. Newton’s works… saw England dominate the world’s stage with scientific and intellectual thought – a situation of eminence which contributed to the domination of the physical world by the British.’ 

The opening of Northwest England’s Bridgewater Canal in 1761 began the canal age in Britain and in 1825 ‘the world’s first permanent steam locomotive-hauled passenger railway, the Stockton and Darlington Railway opened to the public. The Scottish scientist ‘James Watt had perfected the steam engine, enabling mechanisation on a scale never before seen. By 1830, the Industrial Revolution had turned Britain into the foremost industrial power in the world.’ 

Great Britain’s power was no better displayed than at the Battle of Trafalgar on land by the Duke of Wellington and at sea by Lord Nelson when the naval engagement between the British Royal Navy, comprising twenty-seven battle ships and the combined fleets of the French and Spanish Navies, with thirty-three battle ships during the the Napoleonic Wars resulted in their decisive victories. It was at this time, in the early 1800s during the fight against Napoleon’s France for hegemony of Europe, which ‘fostered a concept of Britishness and a united national British people’ shared by the English, Welsh and Scots.

In 1851, London became the biggest and most populous metropolitan area in the world with two and a half million people, achieving considerable prestige, as the financial hub of the world. During the Victorian era, the occupation of India underscored the historical link between Cush and Judah – Numbers 12:1; 2 Kings 19:9; Jeremiah 39:15; 2 Samuel 18:21, 32 – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Many British officers stationed in India, brought back Indian wives to Britain and Ireland. This admixture is evident in an Indian-origin blood disorder which is now found in Britain.

Power shifts in Europe led to World War I (Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar), with hundreds of thousands of English soldiers lost, fighting for the United Kingdom and its Allies. Two decades later in  World War II, the United Kingdom stood up to the same European aggressor again, its cousin Ishmael. 

Following the war, the British experienced rapid decolonisation and a once powerful Empire of substance dissolving into an impotent Commonwealth of form only. A major contribution was from Frank Whittle’s development of the jet engine which transformed air travel. 

March of the Titans, The Isle of Influence – England, Scotland and Wales, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 207 – emphasis mine:

‘Even its most vehement detractors will admit that the nation of Great Britain has been one of the foremost countries of present-day Western civilization. Its achievements are legion – at one stage its empire existed on all the continents of the world except Antarctica. Its language became the second most widely spoken language on earth (after Chinese); its writers, poets, and playwrights are acknowledged as some of the greatest of all time, and its history and culture have become ingrained in the traditions of many people on earth. Britain was also directly responsible for the initial mass settlement of the North American continent that, together with immigrants from the rest of Europe, created the giant that became America. The Industrial Revolution, which it spearheaded, shaped the infrastructure of the current world. Yet it is a small island, slightly more than half the size of France. 

The history of this island of kings and queens is a remarkable one… During the twentieth century there has been significant population movement to England, mostly from other parts of the British Isles, as well as from the Commonwealth; primarily from the Indian subcontinent. In the past two decades while a member of the European Union, increased numbers of people from Eastern Europe have also moved to the United Kingdom. Also in recent decades, the administration of the United Kingdom has moved towards devolved governance in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. 

England and Wales continue to exist as a jurisdiction within the United Kingdom. One result of devolution has stimulated a greater emphasis on a more English specific identity and patriotism that has been subsumed in a British identity for the past two centuries. 

The name ‘England’… is derived from the Old English name Englaland, which means ‘land of the Angles.’ The Angles came from the Anglia peninsula in the Bay of Kiel area, the present-day German state of Schleswig-Holstein of the Baltic Sea as opposed to the Jutes, dwelling further north. ‘The earliest recorded use of the term, as “Engla londe”, is in the late-ninth-century translation into Old English of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English people. The term was then used in a different sense to the modern one, meaning “the land inhabited by the English”, and it included English people in what is now south-east Scotland but was then part of the English kingdom of Northumbria.’

A number of the separatist movements in Europe involve the family of Abraham and in large part include the ‘Celtic fringes.’ Brittany has strong links with Cornwall. Both have strong regional identities, with similar looking flags. 

The old Brittany flag (above) and the flag of Cornwall (Below)

In the first century work by Tacitus, Germania, the first reference to the Angles is used in the Latin as Anglii. The etymology of the tribal name itself is disputed by scholars. Some suggesting that it derives from the shape of the Angeln peninsula, or an angular shape. ‘How and why a term derived from the name of a tribe that was less significant than others, such as the Saxons, came to be used for the entire country and its people is not known, but it seems this is related to the custom of calling the Germanic people in Britain Angli Saxones or English Saxons to distinguish them from continental Saxons (Eald-Seaxe) of Old Saxony between the Weser and Eider rivers in Northern Germany.’ 

There is no mystery, for it is worth re-iterating that the Germanic tribes of the Angles – constituting two tribes of Israel, Manasseh and Ephraim – the Jutes and the Frisians, again representing two Israelite tribes, were collectively, the Saxons. The Angles were the dominant tribe in numbers, so their name lingering in Britain their home for centuries, from the name for their previous home is not a surprise. Non-Celtic Britain, is in fact the land of the Jutes of Judah; like Jutland from Jute-land in northern Denmark. Similarly in Scottish Gaelic, the term Saxon is the name given to the English of Sassenach. Alternatively, the Welsh name for the English is Sasseneg.

Loegria is a romantic name for England related to the Welsh word for England, Lloegr in Arthurain legend. Albion is also applied to England in a poetic capacity; though its original meaning is the island of Great Britain as a whole, with its derivative Alba, referring to Scotland in the north. 

The St George’s Cross has been the national flag of England since the thirteenth century. Originally the flag was used by the maritime Republic of Genoa and Richard I paid a tribute to the Doge of Genoa from 1190 onwards so that English ships could fly the flag as a means of protection when entering the Mediterranean. The red cross was also a symbol for the Crusaders in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Tudor Rose is England’s national floral emblem and was adopted as a national emblem of England around the time of the War of the Roses as a symbol of peace – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. It is a combined white rose of the Yorkists and the red rose of the Lancastrians – cadet branches of the Plantagenets who went to war over control of the nation (in 1455), just two years after the Hundred Years War ended in 1453. 

In a series of civil wars, the first at St Albans on May 22, 1455, with terrible loss of life and almost extinguishing the male lines, it ended on August 22 1485 at the battle of Bosworth Field where usurper Richard III of York died and a total of over one hundred thousand men lay dead. The House of Tudor had allied with the House of Lancaster. It was Henry Tudor who defeated Richard III, assumed the throne as Henry VII and married Elizabeth of York, the eldest daughter and the sole heir of Edward IV, uniting the rival claims. 

The oak tree is a symbol of England, representing strength and endurance as is the British bulldog, representing an indomitable tenacity. The Royal Arms of England, with a national coat of arms featuring three lions, originated with its adoption by Richard the Lion Heart in 1198. It provides one of the most prominent symbols of England and unsurprisingly, it is similar to the traditional arms of Normandy.

England does not have an official designated national anthem, as the United Kingdom as a whole uses God Save the Queen. Though the following songs are often considered unofficial English anthems: Jerusalem; Land of Hope and Glory; Rule Britannia; and I vow to Thee, My Country

One subject that is well rooted in prehistory is that of giants in Britain – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II

The Giants of Ancient Albion & the Legendary Founding of Prehistoric Britain, Hugh Newman, 2017 – emphasis mine:

‘Giants are at the heart of national folklore concerning the founding of Britain, and archaic traditions state they have inhabited the country since deep antiquity… a lost legacy of extremely tall and powerful individuals who once ruled this part of the world.

Britain’s oldest acknowledged name is thought to be taken from a prehistoric giant king called ‘Albion’ who made his way to the island after being banished from his homeland of Greece. “He was begotten by the sea-god whom the Greeks called Poseidon, the Romans Neptune.” In Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland, by Raphael Holinshed, Albion and the giants were said to have gradually consolidated their position in Britain, ruling the land for hundreds or possibly thousands of years.

After a long reign, Albion went to the south of France… to help his army defeat Hercules. To ensure winning, Hercules summoned his father Zeus and a shower of stones fell from the sky. These were used as weapons against Albion and he was defeated… the giant race of Britain continued for hundreds more years, although their numbers decreased and ended up at [the] southwestern tip of Cornwall, until the arrival of Brutus after the Trojan wars. However, Britain’s original name could also be from a Greek giantess called ‘Albina’:

“The Chronicles of Britain, written by John de Wavrin between 1445 and 1455, relate that in the time of Jahir, the third judge of Israel after Joshua, Lady Albine and her sisters came to, and settled in, an island which they named Albion after her, and which afterwards got the name of Britain.”

Jair was the eighth Judge from 1118 to 1096 BCE. This appears too late, while the third Judge was actually Shamgar who ruled an undisclosed period of time of perhaps twenty years from 1204 to 1184 BCE – falling between the second Judge Ehud (1284-1204 BCE) and the fourth Judge Deborah (1184-1144 BCE). This would be about one hundred years before the arrival of Brutus.

Newman: “While they were living there the devil assumed the shape of a man, and dwelt among the wicked women, and by [them] had issue great and terrible giants and giantesses, who afterwards much increased and multiplied, and occupied the land for a long time, namely, until the arrival of Brutus, who conquered them [circa 1100 BCE].”

‘The story of Albina has variations. Most versions agree that her father had thirty-three wicked daughters, but he managed to find thirty-three husbands to curb their unruly ways. The daughters were displeased and under the leadership of their eldest sister Alba (also Albina, or Albine) they plotted to cut the throats of their husbands as they slept.”

“For this crime they were set adrift in a boat with half a year’s rations, and after a long and dreadful journey they arrived at a great island that came to be named Albion, after the eldest. Here they stayed, and with the assistance of demons… “mated with”… [populating] the wild, windswept islands with a race of giants”

‘… and with their offspring a new ruling giant elite were founded. These giants are evidenced in the story by huge bones that were said to be unearthed in the country during the 1400s’ – Article: Nephilim & Elioud Giants II.

‘Geoffrey of Monmouth’s influential 12th century Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain)… [claims] thousands of years after the giants had populated the island, Brutus and other warriors fleeing the Trojan wars landed on the coast of Albion and legend states that the modern name of Britain comes from Brutus. Geoffrey asserts that he translated the Historia into Latin (in about 1136) from “a very ancient book in the British tongue,” that was loaned to him by Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford. What this book was, has had scholars debating for centuries, but it could have been the Historia Brittonum (History of the Britons) from the ninth century, written by Nennius, a monk from Bangor, Wales. This is likely, as he covered many Arthurian myths, including the giants of ancient Albion. An important section of Geoffrey’s text has Brutus and his men realizing that Albion was already partly populated by unexpectedly tall foes: “It was uninhabited except for a few giants… they drove the giants whom they had discovered into the caves in the mountains.” After scaring off the giants and launching attacks on the titans, the land was then divided up and Corineus was given the southwest area of Cornwall to rule, named after the great warrior.’

“Corineus experienced great pleasure from wrestling with the giants, of whom there were far more there than in any of the districts which had been distributed among his comrades. Among the others there was a particularly repulsive one, called Gogmagog, who was twelve feet tall.”

‘Other chroniclers state that he was in fact twelve cubits tall, so this would have made him 18 feet (5.5 meters) tall. Gogmagog was described as being so strong that he could uproot an oak tree and shake it like a hazel wand… the ferocious giant attacked Corineus’ camp with twenty of his kin. This turned into an all-out battle and Corineus and his men called on their local allies and eventually defeated them in a bloody conflict. Brutus chose to keep one of the giants alive, as he wanted to witness a wrestling match between Gogmagog and Corineus. During the tightly fought match, Gogmagog broke three of Corineus’ ribs, and he was so enraged, he hoisted Gogmagog up on his shoulders with superhuman strength and ran to the cliff where he threw him off to his death. His body smashed into many pieces after hitting sharp rocks and stained the water red, that “was so discolored with his blood as to continue tinged with it for a long time.” The cliff from which he was thrown became known as Langnagog or ‘The Giants Leap’. 

It was on Plymouth Hoe that became the legendary place that the wrestling occurred because it was recorded in 1486 that a giant turf-cut figure was carved depicting two figures, one of them being Gogmagog.

… the names of Gog and Magog first appear in the Hebrew Bible with reference to Magog, son of Japheth in the Book of Genesis, then Gog, the king of Magog, appears in the Old Testament in Ezekiel (38:2) as the instigator of a terrible battle. Gog was referred to as being a person and Magog was the land he was from’ – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

‘Similar stories are echoed in the Book of Revelation and the Qur’an. The tradition is sparse and confused as Gog and Magog are presented as men, supernatural beings (giants and demons), national groups or lands, and appear widely in other folklore and mythology. For example, Gogmagog and Gogmaegot are identified with giants in Spencer’s Faerie Queen (1590) and in the medieval legends of [Arthur]. The names even reached Cambridge in Eastern England where the hilly area became known as the ‘Gog Magog Hills’, where interestingly, some taller than average skeletons were unearthed in the 1800s.

After defeating the giants, Brutus travelled all over the country to find a suitable spot to rule from. He decided on the River Thames and founded the city of Troia Nova, or New Troy, which became Trinovantum, we now know as London, with his captured giant in tow. Another, later version of the story describes how the giants Gog and Magog were two people and were taken prisoners and forced to become porters at the Royal Palace, now the London Guildhall. The effigies of Gog and Magog have remained at the Guildhall since the reign of Henry V. In The Gigantick History of the Two Famous Giants of Guildhall (1741) it proclaims that Gogmagog and Corineus were in fact two giants:

“Corineus and Gogmagog were two brave giants who richly valued their honour and exerted their whole strength and force in the defence of their liberty and country; so the City of London, by placing these, their representatives in their Guildhall, emblematically declare, that they will, like mighty giants defend the honour of their country and liberties of this their City; which excels all others, as much as those huge giants exceed in stature the common bulk of mankind.”

‘The defeat of Gogmagog by Corineus was the beginning of the end for the remaining giants, and the few that remained turned up again [in] the tales of Jack-the-Giant-Killer and Cormoran (mainly based in Cornwall), while others were said to have fled to Dartmoor and the mountains of Wales… the stories of Jack-the-Giant-Killer are worthy of a mention. The violent chronicles of Britain’s most famous giant hunter stretch far back into prehistory, to the times when the giants and humans were attempting to co-exist, before the arrival of Brutus. Mainly based in Cornwall, his exploits lingered across the whole of Britain. He was presented as a clever young man who often outwitted his gargantuan foes.

The most famous story is that he defeated the terrible Cormoran on St Michael’s Mount. By blowing a horn loudly, he caused the giant to come rushing out, but it fell into a deep pit that Jack had prepared and covered with twigs. Cormoran was then hacked to death by Jack. The other stories continue in this vein, and it was only when the printing press became widespread in the Victorian age that the story was toned down, and it transformed into the children’s classic Jack and the Beanstalk… there are thousands of legends of giants throughout Britain… Their physical strength and stature became exaggerated as their deeds pass into legend, but in a strange twist, it is often in the same locations that actual giant skeletons and bones were reportedly unearthed. Here are a few intriguing examples:

St. Michael’s Mount: A prehistoric eight-foot (2.4 meter) skeleton was unearthed from a dungeon on the island 250 years ago, that may well be the giant that Jack was said to have slayed.

“The Annual Register for 1761 tells us that in March of that year, as a miner was working at Tregoney, in Cornwall, in a new mine, he accidentally discovered a stone coffin, on which were some inscribed characters. Within it was the skeleton of a man of gigantic size, which, on the admission of the air, mouldered into dust. One tooth, two inches and a half long, and thick in proportion, remained whole. The length of the coffin was eleven feet three inches, and its depth was three feet nine inches.”

Devonshire – This is the area where Gogmagog was thrown off the cliff by Corineus: “A stone coffin in Devonshire contained a thigh-bone belonging to a man eight feet nine inches high.”

‘Later in Histories giants reappear in the stories of the Welsh wizard, Merlin. He tells the King that in a distant epoch, giants transported huge trilithons from North Africa to Killarus in Ireland, where “The Giant’s Dance” was positioned. Later, they were transported to Salisbury Plain by mysterious means. However, huge skeletons have also been discovered in the mounds in the local landscape. In Journey into South Wales (1802) George Lipscomb reported: “a skeleton which measured fourteen feet ten inches in length.” In A Theological, Biblical, and Ecclesiastical Dictionary (1830), it describes a nine foot four inch (284.48 cm) skeleton unearthed near Salisbury in 1719. It also recounts a mound named ‘Giant’s Grave’ next to St Edmunds Church, just a few miles from Stonehenge – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim*.

The authors have collated over 150 accounts of giant bones, skeletons and skulls throughout the British Isles… the founding of Britain is still shrouded in mystery… the stories of the giants seem to go very far back. The Legends and [foundational] myths of Britain are… strongly associated [with] these local titans… [who] could have been responsible* for the thousands of megalithic constructions that grace this ancient landscape.’

An article by an identity adherent addresses the debate regarding who the Jews really are; maintaining the inaccurate status quo. As the subject has been addressed in depth in the preceding chapter, the matter will not be laboured, though a few points are worth mentioning in highlighting the inaccuracy of labelling the Jews as the tribe of Judah. 

An initial thought was, to whom do they ascribe Edom? After some investigating, it was learned that the author supports the common belief that Edom is Turkey today. We have likewise already discussed Turkey in length – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes

One reason given was the ‘fulfilment of Zephaniah’s Prophecy’.

Zephaniah 2:1-15

King James Version

1 ‘Gather yourselves together, yea, gather together, O nation not desired;

2 Before the decree bring forth, before the day pass as the chaff, before the fierce anger of the Lord come upon you, before the day of the Lord’s anger come upon you… 4 For Gaza shall be forsaken, and Ashkelon a desolation: they shall drive out Ashdod at the noon day, and Ekron shall be rooted up. 5 Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea coast, the nation of the Cherethites! the word of the Lord is against you; O Canaan, the land of the Philistines, I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant. 6 And the sea coast shall be dwellings and cottages for shepherds, and folds for flocks.

7 And the coast shall be for the remnant of the house of Judah; they shall feed thereupon: in the houses of Ashkelon shall they lie down in the evening: for the Lord their God shall visit them, and turn away their captivity.

8 I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and magnified themselves against their border. 9 Therefore as I live, saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation: the residue of my people shall spoil them, and the remnant of my people shall possess them. 10 This shall they have for their pride, because they have reproached and magnified themselves against the people of the Lord of hosts.

11 The Lord will be terrible unto them: for he will famish all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him, every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen. 12 Ye Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my sword. 13 And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh [the capital of Asshur] a desolation, and dry like a wilderness…

15 This is the rejoicing city [the capital of Edom, Bozrah] that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is none beside me: how is she become a desolation, a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passeth by her shall hiss, and wag his hand.’

Zephaniah chapter two is speaking about the future Day of the Lord, which is His divine wrath. A reading of the verses shows that many nations are going to experience His vengeance and destruction, including the mighty Assyrians of Russia – the King of the North – and Cush of India, the Queen of the South – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. 

The Creator is angry with certain nations due to their involvement in bringing the Israelite peoples into tribulation, such as the French from Moab and Ammon – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The reason this chapter in Zephaniah is not speaking about Palestinian Arabs, Jews and the state of Israel, is because as stated in point number two in the introduction, every nation has migrated. It was only Edom who was prophesied to return and ‘rebuild the ruins’ of the once Promised Land.

Thus, the nations being targeted in this chapter are all in their modern day locations. The Philistine peoples – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America – are located along the coastal strips of Central and Southern America. Zephaniah Chapter two is not evidence that the Jews are Judah. Any Biblical references to Jerusalem, including Zion and the Mount of Olives, are always in reference to Judah’s capital, not the city called Jerusalem today in Israel. That city is called Bozrah in the Bible, or the Great city in Revelation, or as Zephaniah describes it, ‘the rejoicing city’ that arrogantly thought it was safe, yet was made ‘desolate’ – which includes the Abomination of Desolation

One other reason cited is that, ‘the Jews are not a Christian people.’ The author states: ‘Some material sent to me argues that “the Jews can’t be an Israelite tribe because they did not become Christians like the rest of the tribes.”’ We have discussed the fact that the English were the first ‘Christian’ nation in Britain and in ancient Parthia, as well as disseminating both Testaments of the Bible to the world – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

The crux of this argument is held up by the Jews being Judah, hence they are not Christian like all the Israelite nations. Of course, the English as Judah are in fact ‘Christian’ and the Jews not being Christian, is explained by the fact they are rebellious Esau, who have deliberately fought against the Messiah and the Christian tenets in all their forms. 

A different article, states the following in their introduction regarding those who believe the Jews are not from the tribe of Judah – emphasis mine: 

“[They]… claim that the present-day Jews are not descended from Judah-but rather from Edomites or other people. Some… of these reprobates say the true descendants of Judah are the Germans, others say they are the Africans! Perhaps it was the Germans or the Afro-Americans who really killed Jesus. Maybe it was an African-German Conspiracy? These claims about the Jews not belonging to Judah are stupid but they do have some influence some times” – because the seed of truth is evident, even though the answer promulgated is incorrect.

Their conclusion is thus, though this writer remains wholly unconvinced by their logic: 

“As we said the… Biblical Proofs are a sample. It is possible that similar evidence could be adduced from every few verses of the Bible. The Jews are Judah! The Bible says[?] they are… Only the Jews are universally recognized as “Judah” [that does not make it so]. The very name “Jew” is a shortened form of Judah… only the Jews possess all[?] the prophesied characteristics of Judah.”

The Jews are not a sizeable people (1) with a prominent – let alone any – Monarchy (2). Nor have they been rejoined (3) with their brothers in the Isles to the Northwest (4) as prophesied.  

‘There is a Biblical Principle that everyone is created in the way that they would want to be if they had been given the choice and known the options. We are each and all most suited to be ourselves.’

The tribe of Benjamin has been partially discussed and a precursory picture of his descendants has been steadily growing. Benjamin is the nation of Scotland… and now we can add the extra details in fully painting an intriguing character, as well as the colourful nation of the Scots. The identification of Scotland was not as straight forward as one might assume, even once England was correctly understood as Judah. 

Reasons for this were:

a. There are three tribes aside from Levi, who had a close association with Judah: Benjamin, Simeon and Dan. Yet Scotland and Wales are only two nations.

b. Understanding the special relationship of Scotland as a separate kingdom from England and the unique status of Wales – only officially being recognised a nation in 2011 – only aided in making the identification more difficult.

c. Scotland could have been Benjamin or Dan but not Simeon, for reasons that will be made clear. Wales could have been Benjamin, Simeon or Dan. Going round in circles for many years was the result. The very last nations in the identity jig-saw puzzle, were Benjamin, Simeon and Dan, yet one would have thought once Judah was understood, they would have simply fell into place. The unknown key, was understanding the tribe of Dan and it is because of this, that Dan will be left to be explained in the final chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

d. Identity adherents have identified Benjamin historically with Norway or Iceland and it has also been linked with Belgium and the Normans. Close and warm, not cold but incorrect. This writer’s research considered Canada as a possible answer for Benjamin’s identity. Latterly, there is growing popularity to identify the Scots ironically, with the tribe of Judah. 

The Scottish Saltire

Two factors which have distracted researchers in interpreting the sons of Jacob correctly, have been that they were ascribing Abraham and Keturah’s sons identities to the sons of Jacob – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia*

Secondly, everyone seems to forget Judah and Benjamin are inextricably linked – like ‘a hand and glove.’ Where one is, so will the other be found. Of course, the massive red herring of the Jews being Judah, was also going to make the correct connection next to impossible – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. 

An online contributor stated: ‘Here are some comments from the late Dr. Hoeh (I left out Ephraim, Manasseh, and Judah as they have more coverage elsewhere).’ From, Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950. Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah are always deemed very obvious; yet believers remain unaware that the pairings respectively with England, the United States and the Jews are all completely incorrect. 

“Benjamin constitutes Norway and Iceland. The Icelandic people in reality a colony of Norwegians [1]. Benjamin was given to David because Jerusalem, David’s capital, was in the tribe of Benjamin, not Judah. God said He would give David light in Jerusalem (I Kings 11:36). This verse could not refer to Judah which did not have to be given to the Jewish House of David [2].

Benjamin was told to flee the destruction of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 6:1) which many of them did. Benjamin is compared to “a wolf that raveneth; in the morning he devoureth the prey, and at even he divideth the spoil” (Genesis 49:27). This is certainly an apt description of the Vikings who pillaged Northern Europe, and even Mediterranean regions. Almost all Viking raids came from Norway [3].

It is also significant that Benjamin, the smallest tribe, still is the smallest today [4]. There are fewer Norwegians (plus 148 thousand from Iceland) than any other Israelite nation [5]. (Moses’ blessing in Deuteronomy 33[:12] has particular reference to this fact that Jerusalem was in the tribe of Benjamin.) [6]”

Though this writer is indebted to Dr Hoeh (1928-2004) for his pioneering research as a spring board for investigation, it is for all the wrong reasons. It is a foundation that had to be torn apart and rebuilt. What is regrettable, is that thousands of people have believed these findings at face value and have then never questioned whether they were actually right. How can this writer’s research be the first to question their validity forty years later and to then present them some thirty years further on? 

The Icelanders are a nation in their own right (1), not an appendage of Norway*. David’s House and his tribe was (and is) Judah, not Jewish (2). The Vikings as we shall learn were descended from other Israelite tribes (3).

Benjamin is described as ‘little’, in that he was the youngest – Psalm 68:27, H6810 – tsa`iyr. When Saul says: “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the least [H6996 – qatan] of the tribes of Israel?” – 1 Samuel 9:21, he is saying his tribe was ‘unimportant’ and ‘insignificant.’ (4). The tribe of Reuben was predicted to be the smallest tribe – Deuteronomy 33:6. Beside the fact that Norwegians* are not a son of Jacob, Dr Hoeh has entirely omitted any consideration of Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales, New Zealand and the British descended peoples living in South Africa (and Zimbabwe), whom all have smaller populations than Norway (5).

The city of Jerusalem, formerly Jebus, was originally in Benjamin’s territory, though no scripture says that in the future a similar configuration would occur (6). Ostensibly, it appears Benjamin would be promised to Judah forever, yet this only applied while the Israelites were in the promised land. In fact, the city eventually transferred location and its inhabitants to Judah – Zechariah 12:7-9, Isaiah 3:1, 8. The city of Jerusalem today is London, firmly planted in the heart of Judah and England (Zechariah 12:2), Far removed from the territory of Benjamin in Scotland. It is in fact the tribe of Simeon which shared a closer relationship with Judah in the past and does presently – Joshua 19:9.

We learned that Benjamin lost his mother Rachel at birth… a character defining, tough break; which made him independent and strong. He was also considerably younger than his eleven brothers. 

Benjamin had not even met his elder brother Joseph until his visit to Egypt in 1687, when he was about twelve and Joseph was thirty-nine years old. Joseph had been born twenty-seven years earlier than Benjamin in 1726 BCE. Reuben, the eldest was now sixty-five years of age and Zebulun the third youngest was fifty-three. One can understand Jacob’s heartfelt pain in any possibility of losing Benjamin, after the devastating early losses of Joseph and then Rachel. There is an aura of sadness and vicissitude surrounding Benjamin that continued to envelope his people and is evident in the Scots up and till today. Perhaps it explains their unbridled sense of humour, coupled with their poignant philosophical insight. 

In the scriptures, aside from the tribe of Judah, there are more prominent personalities written about from the tribe of Benjamin than any other and interestingly, they heavily favour the righteous rather than the wicked. King Saul is on the incorrect side of the Eternal’s favour as was his New Testament namesake Saul, who became Paul – refer article: The Pauline Paradox. When reading the large body of scripture attributed to Paul, one can’t help but imagine a Scottish accent and vocal mannerisms through his forceful and emotive messages arising from the pages of the Bible. 

The righteous Benjaminites include, the beautiful Esther (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey); faithful Mordecai; loyal Jonathan the son of King Saul; and the brave Ehud, second Judge of Israel from 1284 to 1204 BCE.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Benjamin meaning: Son Of The Right Hand, Son Of The South. From (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (yamin), right hand.

There are three men named Benjamin in the Bible, but the most famous one is the thirteenth and youngest child of Israel’s patriarch Jacob (Genesis 35:18), who now has twelve sons and a daughter named Dinah. Benjamin is the second son of Rachel – the first being Joseph – and she dies giving birth to him.

An often neglected curiosity is the disproportionally important role of the tribe of Benjamin in the development of Israel, or even the very pattern of redemption displayed by the Bible: The city of Jerusalem was originally assigned to Benjamin (Joshua 18:28, Judges 1:21). The tribe of Benjamin was decimated after the atrocities committed in Gibeah (Judges 19-21) but still, a generation later Israel’s first king was from the surviving remnant of Benjamin (1 Samuel 9:1). Mordecai, whose adopted daughter Esther helped to avoid Israel’s annihilation, was a Benjaminite (Esther 2:5). And… Paul, who authored half the New Testament, was from the tribe of Benjamin as well (Philippians 3:5). 

The other men named Benjamin are: A descendant of the original Benjamin, namely a son of Bilhan, son of Jediael, (1 Chronicles 7:10). A son of Harim, who had married and probably divorced a foreign woman during the purge of Ezra (Ezra 10:32).’

Genesis 35:16-19

English Standard Version

16 ‘Then they journeyed from Bethel. When they were still some distance from Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, and she had hard labor. 

17 And when her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Do not fear, for you have another son.” 18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni [son of my sorrow]; but his father called him Benjamin. 19 So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem)…’

Benjamin was born circa 1699 BCE in late October, early November. The Book of Jubilees recounts his birth.

Book of Jubilees 32:3-16, 30-34

32:3 ‘And in those days Rachel became pregnant with her son Benjamin. And Jacob counted his sons from him upwards and Levi fell to the portion of Yahweh, and his father clothed him in the garments of the priesthood and filled his hands. 4 And on the fifteenth of this month [the weekly Sabbath and first day of the feast of Tabernacles* – seventh month: September/October], he brought to the altar fourteen oxen from amongst the cattle, and twenty-eight rams, and forty-nine sheep, and seven lambs, and twenty-one kids of the goats as a burnt-offering on the altar of sacrifice, well pleasing for a sweet savor before Yahweh. 11 This ordinance is written that it may be fulfilled from year to year in eating the second tithe* before Yahweh in the place where it has been chosen, and nothing shall remain over from it from this year to the year following.

16 And on the following night, on the twenty-second day of this month [the Sabbath and the Last Great Day of the feast], Jacob resolved to build that place, and to surround the court with a wall, and to sanctify it… 30 And in the night, on the twenty-third of this month, Deborah Rebecca’s nurse died, and they buried her beneath the city under the oak of the river, and he called the name of this place, ‘The river of Deborah,’ and the oak, ‘The oak of the mourning of Deborah.’ 33 And Rachel bare a son in the night, and called his name ‘Son of my sorrow’; for she suffered in giving him birth: but his father called his name Benjamin, on the eleventh of the eighth month [October/November]… 34 And Rachel died there and she was buried in the land of Ephrath, the same is Bethlehem, and Jacob built a pillar on the grave of Rachel, on the road above her grave.’

In Genesis chapter forty-nine we read and studied the blessing given by Jacob to Judah and the uncanny directness of his words in describing the attributes and destiny of Judah and his descendants. The same applies for all of Jacob’s sons. How strange that the words have always been there so-to-speak, yet looking ‘through a glass darkly’ (1 Corinthians 13:12) means the understanding of them has remained allusive. 

Genesis 49:1-2, 27

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Jacob called his sons and said, “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you what shall happen to you in days to come. 2 “Assemble and listen, O sons of Jacob, listen to Israel your father. 

27 “Benjamin is a ravenous [H2963 – taraph] wolf, in the morning [H1242 – boqer: ‘beginning of day’, ‘coming of sunrise’] devouring [H398 – ‘akal: ‘eat, consume, slay’] the prey [H5706 – ad] and at evening [H6153 – ereb: evening, sunset] dividing [H2505 – chalaq] the spoil.

The Hebrew word for raven or ravenous means: ‘to tear, rend’ and ‘to be torn in pieces’ to ‘provide food’. The KJV translates it as, tear six times; ravening three; catch twice; feed once; and prey once. An act of aggression, violence and taking by force. The Hebrew word for prey means as well as prey, ‘booty.’ Booty as in what is won ‘in the sense of the aim of an attack.’ The Hebrew word for divide means: ‘to share, plunder, apportion’ and ‘distribute.’ In the King James Bible it is translated as, divide forty times; flatter six; part five; distribute four; portion once; and received once. 

The Amplified Bible says; ‘The tribe of Benjamin invariably displayed courage and ferocity, particularly in their war with the other tribes.’ A quick perusal of any history of the Scots and the Picts before them for they are the same people with a different name, will quickly affirm their prowess in both war and any situation necessitating survival.

CEB: Benjamin is a wolf who hunts…

NCV: … In the morning he eats what he has caught, and in the evening he divides what he has taken.

NIRV: … In the morning he eats what he has killed. In the evening he shares what he has stolen.

TLB: Benjamin is a wolf that prowls. He devours his enemies in the morning, and in the evening divides the loot.

ISV: Benjamin is vicious like a wolf; what he kills in the morning he devours in the evening.

CEV: Benjamin, you are a fierce wolf, destroying your enemies morning and evening.

This verse reveals two key identifying markers. First, the tribe of Benjamin were fearless survivors – as evidenced in the war with the other twelve tribes – and second, they have had to scrap for survival, sharing the spoil won. Scottish people, unlike the harsh stereotype of being stingy, which is a reflection of the Highlander perhaps, not the Lowland Scot are in fact a generous people and look after their own. This dangerous element of Benjamin’s nature was exhibited by the ancient Pictish nation. 

Arthur Kemp in his seminal work, March of the Titans, 1991 & 2016, pages 207-208, states – emphasis mine:

‘… the Celts in the far north of the country – particularly the Picts – continued to be troublesome for the Roman Britons. The emperor Hadrian finally built a wall in 122-123 AD across northern Britain to try and keep them out. After Hadrian’s death, the emperor Antonius built a new wall some one hundred miles north in an attempt to extend Roman control further north. By 164, this new wall – known as the Antonine Wall – had been abandoned and the border reverted to Hadrian’s Wall once again. Scotland never fell under Roman rule, and the Picts continued to be a thorn in the side of the Romans until the very end of Roman rule in Britain.’

The Scots as part of the United Kingdom have also shared in the spoil, in the immense economic benefits of building and maintaining an Empire with England and as their name signifies, Benjamin as the son of the right hand has sat at the right hand of Judah. For wherever Judah grew a ‘choice vine’ – Genesis 49:11 – planting a new colony, it was a Benjaminite who was invariably the Governor or representative for the Crown in the expanding colonies, dominions and territories of the British Empire. 

English writer Sir Walter Besant:

“Wherever the pilgrim turns his feet, he finds Scotsmen in the forefront of civilization and letters. They are the premiers in every colony, professors in every university, teachers, editors, lawyers, engineers and merchants – everything, and always at the front.”

This relationship is supported by Moses in his final blessing to the tribes before he passed away.

Deuteronomy 33:1-2, 12

English Standard Version

1 ‘This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the people of Israel before his death. 2 He said… 

12 Of Benjamin he said, “The beloved [H3039 – ydiyd: ‘loved, beloved, well loved’] of the Lord dwells in safety [H983 – betach]… [by him]. The High God surrounds [H2653 – chophaph] him all day long [H3117 – yowm], and dwells between his shoulders [in his heart].”

The Hebrew word for safety means: ‘a place of refuge, securely’ and ‘security’, ‘without care’ and with ‘confidence.’ The Hebrew word for surrounds is translated as: cover, enclose, shelter and shield. The Hebrew meaning for all day is: a whole day, ‘from sunrise to sunset.’ It is translated in the KJV as: day 2,008 times; time 64]; ever 18; continually 10; and always 4 times. 

The location of Scotland is certainly a relatively safe portion of the globe to reside, though Benjamin is protected also in their close association with Judah and more vitally in the protection that the Creator affords them. Wales understandably, could not contend with the numerical strength of the English. Nor does it make sense on paper that Scotland should have withheld the might of England to remain an independent kingdom without intervention. Yet it is only as the tribe of Benjamin, that Scotland’s relationship with England (Judah) does.

It is worth mentioning that the Hebrew word for beloved is the English word for the name David. While England-Judah has not had a king called David; Scotland-Benjamin has had two: David I (1113-1124) and David II (1329-1371).

CEB: He said to Benjamin: “The Lord’s dearest one rests safely on him. The Lord always shields him; he rests on God’s chest.”

GNT: About the tribe of Benjamin he said: “This is the tribe the Lord loves and protects; He guards them all the day long, And he dwells in their midst.”

NLT: Moses said this about the tribe of Benjamin: “The people of Benjamin are loved by the Lord and live in safety beside him. He surrounds them continuously and preserves them from every harm.”

There can be no denying the affection from the Creator towards Benjamin. He is beloved in the same way the Eternal has extended towards King David and the tribe of Judah. In the Book of Judges, Deborah a married Prophetess and fourth Judge of Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE, gives further insight into the sons of Jacob. In this case, with Benjamin we do not learn anything of consequence, apart from their being sandwiched between their nephews, Ephraim and the half tribe of East Manasseh from Machir.

Judges 5:1-3, 14

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day: 2 That the leaders took the lead in Israel, that the people offered themselves willingly, bless the Lord! 3 “Hear, O kings; give ear, O princes;

From Ephraim their root they marched down into the valley, following you, Benjamin, with your kinsmen; from Machir marched down the commanders…”

Deborah ostensibly from the tribe of Ephraim, though more likely from the tribe of Naphtali had followed the Benjamite Judge Ehud who had died in 1204 BCE. In the interim twenty years, the Israelites had gone astray and were being cruelly oppressed by Jabin the King of Canaan. His commander Sisera had nine hundred chariots made with iron. Deborah decided to go on the offensive and enlisted the help of Barak from the tribe of Naphtali. They ultimately defeated Jabin the Canaanite and Sisera, with forty years of peace ensuing. 

The Book of Judges also recounts a rather ugly story in the history of Israel which shows two wrongs do not make a right. The tribe of Benjamin showed a mis-directed stubbornness and tenacity, though one has to admire their sheer gaul and solidarity. The remainder of the sons of Jacob exhibited equal stubbornness and unity; and to think a tribe was on the verge of total annihilation is incredible. Reason won over emotion and the tribe of Benjamin barely survived. In time, they became a highly valued component of a United Kingdom of Israel and later the Kingdom of Judah. 

Judges 19:1-30

English Standard Version

1 ‘In those days, when there was no king in Israel [and prior to the first Judge, Othniel in 1342 BCE] , a certain Levite was sojourning [circa 1351 BCE] in the remote parts of the hill country of Ephraim, who took to himself a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. 2 And his concubine was unfaithful* to him, and she went away from him to her father’s house at Bethlehem in Judah, and was there some four months. 3 Then her husband arose and went after her, to speak kindly to her and bring her back… And she brought him into her father’s house. And when the girl’s father saw him, he came with joy to meet him. 4 And his father-in-law, the girl’s father, made him stay… 9 And when the man and his concubine and his servant rose up to depart, his father-in-law, the girl’s father, said to him, “Behold, now the day has waned toward evening. Please, spend the night. Behold, the day draws to its close. Lodge here and let your heart be merry, and tomorrow you shall arise early in the morning for your journey, and go home.”

10 But the man would not spend the night [fateful decision number one].

He rose up and departed and arrived opposite Jebus (that is, Jerusalem). He had with him a couple of saddled donkeys, and his concubine was with him. 11 When they were near Jebus, the day was nearly over, and the servant said to his master, “Come now, let us turn aside to this city of the Jebusites and spend the night in it.”

12 And his master said to him, “We will not turn aside into the city of foreigners, who do not belong to the people of Israel… [fateful decision number two]

And the sun went down on them near Gibeah, which belongs to Benjamin, 15 and they turned aside there, to go in and spend the night at Gibeah [fateful decision number three].

And he went in and sat down in the open square of the city, for no one took them into his house to spend the night.

16 And behold, an old man was coming from his work in the field at evening. The man was from the hill country of Ephraim, and he was sojourning in Gibeah… 20 And the old man said, “Peace be to you; I will care for all your wants. Only, do not spend the night in the square.” 

22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.” [a very similar situation to the one we encountered with Lot – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]

23 And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing. 24 Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine. Let me bring them out now. Violate them and do with them what seems good to you, but against this man do not do this outrageous thing.” 25 But the men would not listen to him.

So the man seized his concubine and made her* [retribution?] go out to them [fateful decision number four].

And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go. 26 And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, until it was light.

27 And her master rose up in the morning, and when he opened the doors of the house and went out to go on his way, behold, there was his concubine lying at the door of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up, let us be going.” But there was no answer. Then he put her on the donkey, and the man rose up and went away to his home.

29 And when he entered his house, he took a knife, and taking hold of his concubine he divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel. 30 And all who saw it said, “Such a thing has never happened or been seen from the day that the people of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt until this day; consider it, take counsel, and speak.”

Judges 20:1-48

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then all the people of Israel came out, from Dan to Beersheba, including the land of Gilead, and the congregation assembled as one man to the Lord at Mizpah. 2 And the chiefs of all the people, of all the tribes of Israel, presented themselves in the assembly of the people of God, 400,000 men on foot that drew the sword.

3 (Now the people of Benjamin heard that the people of Israel had gone up to Mizpah.) And the people of Israel said, “Tell us, how did this evil happen?” 4 And the Levite, the husband of the woman who was murdered, answered and said, “I came to Gibeah that belongs to Benjamin, I and my concubine, to spend the night. 5 And the leaders of Gibeah [meaning hill, high] rose against me and surrounded the house against me by night. They meant to kill me, and they violated my concubine, and she is dead… they have committed abomination and outrage in Israel.

7 Behold, you people of Israel, all of you, give your advice and counsel here”… this is what we will do to Gibeah: we will go up against it by lot, 10 and we will take ten men of a hundred throughout all the tribes of Israel, and a hundred of a thousand, and a thousand of ten thousand, to bring provisions for the people, that when they come they may repay Gibeah of Benjamin for all the outrage that they have committed in Israel.” 11 So all the men of Israel gathered against the city, united as one man.

12 And the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, “What evil is this that has taken place among you? 13 Now therefore give up the men, the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and purge evil from Israel.”

But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brothers, the people of Israel. 14 Then the people of Benjamin came together out of the cities to Gibeah to go out to battle against the people of Israel. 15 And the people of Benjamin mustered out of their cities on that day 26,000 men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who mustered 700 chosen men. 16 Among all these were 700 chosen men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. 17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war.

18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Judah shall go up first.”

19 Then the people of Israel rose in the morning and encamped against Gibeah. 20 And the men of Israel went out to fight against Benjamin, and the men of Israel drew up the battle line against them at Gibeah. 21 The people of Benjamin came out of Gibeah and destroyed on that day 22,000 men of the Israelites [from the tribe of Judah]. 22 But the people, the men of Israel, took courage, and again formed the battle line in the same place where they had formed it on the first day. 23 And the people of Israel went up and wept before the Lord until the evening. And they inquired of the Lord, “Shall we again draw near to fight against our brothers, the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Go up against them.”

24 So the people of Israel came near against the people of Benjamin the second day. 25 And Benjamin went against them out of Gibeah the second day, and destroyed 18,000 men of the people of Israel [from the tribe of Judah]. All these were men who drew the sword. 26 Then all the people of Israel, the whole army, went up and came to Bethel and wept. They sat there before the Lord and fasted that day until evening, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. 27 And the people of Israel inquired of the Lord (for the ark of the covenant of God was there in those days, 28 and Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron, ministered before it in those days), saying, “Shall we go out once more to battle against our brothers, the people of Benjamin, or shall we cease?” And the Lord said, “Go up, for tomorrow I will give them into your hand.”

29 So Israel set men in ambush around Gibeah. 30 And the people of Israel went up against the people of Benjamin on the third day and set themselves in array against Gibeah, as at other times. 31 And the people of Benjamin went out against the people and were drawn away from the city. And as at other times they began to strike and kill some of the people in the highways, one of which goes up to Bethel and the other to Gibeah, and in the open country, about thirty men of Israel. 32 And the people of Benjamin said, “They are routed before us, as at the first.” But the people of Israel said, “Let us flee and draw them away from the city to the highways.” 

33 And all the men of Israel rose up out of their place and set themselves in array at Baal-tamar, and the men of Israel who were in ambush rushed out of their place from Maareh-geba. 34 And there came against Gibeah 10,000 chosen men out of all Israel, and the battle was hard, but the Benjaminites did not know that disaster was close upon them. 35 And the Lord defeated Benjamin before Israel, and the people of Israel destroyed 25,100^ men of Benjamin that day. All these were men who drew the sword. 36 So the people of Benjamin saw that they were defeated.

The men of Israel gave ground to Benjamin, because they trusted the men in ambush whom they had set against Gibeah. 37 Then the men in ambush hurried and rushed against Gibeah; the men in ambush moved out and struck all the city with the edge of the sword… 43 Surrounding the Benjaminites, they pursued them and trod them down from Nohah as far as opposite Gibeah on the east. 44 Eighteen thousand men of Benjamin fell, all of them men of valor. 45 And they turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon. Five thousand men of them were cut down in the highways. And they were pursued hard to Gidom, and 2,000 men of them were struck down. 46 So all who fell that day of Benjamin were 25,000^ men who drew the sword, all of them men of valor.

47 But 600 men turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon and remained at the rock of Rimmon four months.

48 And the men of Israel turned back against the people of Benjamin and struck them with the edge of the sword, the city, men and beasts and all that they found. And all the towns that they found they set on fire.’

Judges 21:1-25

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now the men of Israel had sworn at Mizpah, “No one of us shall give his daughter in marriage to Benjamin.”

2 And the people came to Bethel and sat there till evening before God, and they lifted up their voices and wept bitterly. 3 And they said, “O Lord, the God of Israel, why has this happened in Israel, that today there should be one tribe lacking in Israel?” 4 And the next day the people rose early and built there an altar and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings…

6 And the people of Israel had compassion for Benjamin their brother and said, “One tribe is cut off from Israel this day. 7 What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since we have sworn by the Lord that we will not give them any of our daughters for wives?”

8 And they said, “What one is there of the tribes of Israel that did not come up to the Lord to Mizpah?” And behold, no one had come to the camp from Jabesh-gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], to the assembly. 9 For when the people were mustered, behold, not one of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead was there. 10 So the congregation sent 12,000 of their bravest men there and commanded them, “Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword; also the women and the little ones. 11 This is what you shall do: every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall devote to destruction.”

12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young virgins who had not known a man by lying with him, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan. 13 Then the whole congregation sent word to the people of Benjamin who were at the rock of Rimmon and proclaimed peace to them. 

14 And Benjamin returned at that time. And they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh-gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], but they were not enough for them. 15 And the people had compassion on Benjamin because the Lord had made a breach in the tribes of Israel.

16 Then the elders of the congregation said, “What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since the women are destroyed out of Benjamin?” 17 And they said, “There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe not be blotted out from Israel.

18 Yet we cannot give them wives from our daughters.” For the people of Israel had sworn, “Cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin.” 19 So they said, “Behold, there is the yearly feast [of Tabernacles] of the Lord at Shiloh [in Ephraim], which is north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.”

20 And they commanded the people of Benjamin, saying, “Go and lie in ambush in the vineyards 21 and watch. If the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and snatch each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin. 22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Grant them graciously to us, because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty.’” 23 And the people of Benjamin did so and took their wives, according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off. Then they went and returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and lived in them. 

25 In those days there was no king [or Judge] in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.’

A dramatic and devastating turn of events with Judah leading the charge for Israel against their future ally, Benjamin. The tribes of Israel showed more mercy to Benjamin than Benjamin did for the Levite and his dead concubine. The wives provided for the remaining six hundred Benjamite men, were 400 from East Manasseh and 200 from Ephraim the sons of Joseph, their only full blood brother. The genetic gene pool forever changed in Benjamin, though less than if the wives had come from a half brother. Note the skill and ambidextrousness, of the Benjamite men in warfare and battle, particularly with the bow and sling. 

1 Samuel 20:19-20

English Standard Version

‘On the third day go down quickly to the place where you hid yourself when the matter was in hand, and remain beside the stone heap. And I [Jonathan] will shoot three arrows to the side of it, as though I shot at a mark.’ 

2 Samuel 1:22

English Standard Version

“From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the sword of Saul returned not empty.”

1 Chronicles 12:1-2

English Standard Version

‘Now these are the men who came to David at Ziklag, while he could not move about freely because of Saul the son of Kish. And they were among the mighty men who helped him in war. They were bowmen and could shoot arrows and sling stones with either the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul’s kinsmen.’

A 2009 study showed that the Netherlands had the highest percentage for left handedness (to go along with their high average for height), of 13.2%. The average percentage worldwide is approximately 10%. Second was the United States with 13.1%; Belgium 13.1%; Canada fourth, 12.8%; the United Kingdom fifth, 12.2%; and Ireland sixth, 11.7%. A breakdown for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland remains allusive at time of writing.

Switzerland is next, 11.6%; France, 11.1%; Denmark 11%; Italy, 10.5%; Sweden 10.4%; Norway 10.2%; Germany, 9.8%; Spain, 9.6% and then well below the world average, Russia with 6%, India, 5.2%, Japan, 4.7%, China 3.5% and Mexico 2.5%. It is interesting to note that the family of Abraham displays this trait in the top six nations represented and ten of the top thirteen; with the other three descended from Abraham’s brothers Haran and Nahor. 

As France (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and article: Rhesus Negative Blood Factor) is high on the list as well, could there be a link between being left handed and the rhesus negative blood type?

Data does support rh- people being more likely to be left handed. Scotland is interesting when studying frequencies of rh- people because of it strong variation of numbers based on locations. According to ‘Distribution of the ABO and rhesus (D) blood groups in the north of Scotland’ by Elizabeth S Brown, ‘people in the region of Inverness top the list of rh negative people in Scotland with a whopping 30.44%.’ 

Then, is there a link between left handedness and lactose tolerance, which is also highest amongst northwestern Europeans – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Recent studies have confirmed increased verbal skills in left handed people, plus a higher percentage of left handers excelling in sport; thus likely translating to superior combat skills.

2 Chronicles 17:17

English Standard Version

‘Of Benjamin: Eliada, a mighty man of valor, with 200,000 men armed with bow and shield…’

2 Chronicles 14:8

English Standard Version

‘And Asa had an army of 300,000 from Judah, armed with large* shields and spears, and 280,000 men from Benjamin that carried shields and drew bows. All these were mighty men of valor.’

The Normans used long* shields as was typical of the Vikings, whereas the Britons used round shields. 

2 Chronicles 15:7-9

English Standard Version

7 But you, take courage! Do not let your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.” 8 As soon as Asa [King of Judah] heard these words, the prophecy of Azariah the son of Oded, he took courage and put away the detestable idols from all the land of Judah and Benjamin and from the cities that he had taken in the hill country of Ephraim, and he repaired the altar of the Lord that was in front of the vestibule of the house of the Lord. 9 And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and those from Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon who were residing with them, for great numbers had deserted to him from Israel when they saw that the Lord his God was with him.’

Ezra 4:1

English Standard Version

‘Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the returned exiles were building a temple to the Lord…’

The land of Benjamin was a distinct territory yet always attached to Judah.

Jeremiah 1:1; 37:11-13

English Standard Version

1 ‘The words of Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah, one of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin… 11 Now when the Chaldean army had withdrawn from Jerusalem at the approach of Pharaoh’s army, 12 Jeremiah set out from Jerusalem to go to the land of Benjamin to receive his portion there among the people. 13 When he was at the Benjamin Gate, a sentry there named Irijah the son of Shelemiah, son of Hananiah, seized Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “You are deserting to the Chaldeans.”

As mentioned earlier, the Eternal promised David that the tribe of Benjamin would be reserved for his descendants in Canaan, with Judah.

1 Kings 11:29-32

English Standard Version

‘And at that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him on the road. Now Ahijah had dressed himself in a new garment, and the two of them were alone in the open country. Then Ahijah laid hold of the new garment that was on him, and tore it into twelve pieces.

And he said to Jeroboam [first king of Kingdom of Israel], “Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Behold, I am about to tear the kingdom from the hand of Solomon and will give you ten tribes 

(but he shall have one tribe [apart from Judah], for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel)…’

2 Chronicles 21:7

English Standard Version

‘Yet the Lord was not willing to destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and since he had promised to give a lamp to him and to his sons [the line of Judaic kings from David until the captivity (1010 to 586 BCE] forever.’

1 Kings 15:4

English Standard Version

‘Nevertheless, for David’s sake the Lord his God gave him a lamp in Jerusalem, setting up his son after him, and establishing Jerusalem…’

There is a prophecy for Benjamin receiving a different and bigger territory in a future re-division of land. Benjamin is the youngest son and tribe, not the smallest as some translations state. The Books of Jasher and Jubilees give Benjamin’s wives names and Benjamin’s sons are listed.

Obadiah 1:19 

English Standard Version

‘Those of the Negeb shall possess Mount Esau, and those of the Shephelah shall possess the land of the Philistines; they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria, and Benjamin shall possess Gilead [presently the half tribe of East Manasseh].’

Psalm 68:27

Christian Standard Bible

‘There is Benjamin, the youngest, leading them, the rulers of Judah in their assembly, the rulers of Zebulun, the rulers of Naphtali.’

Book of Jubilees 34:20

‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives… and the name of Benjamin’s wife, ‘Ijasaka.

Book of Jasher 45:21-22

21 ‘… Jacob sent to Aram, the son of Zoba, the son of Terah, and he took for his son Benjamin Mechalia the daughter of Aram, and she came to the land of Canaan to the house of Jacob; and Benjamin was ten years old [?] when he took [betrothed?] Mechalia the daughter of Aram for a wife. 

22 And Mechalia conceived and bare unto Benjamin

Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Gera* and Naaman, five sons;

and Benjamin went afterward and took for a wife Aribath, the daughter of Shomron, the son [descendant] of Abraham, in addition to his first wife, and he was eighteen years old; and Aribath bare unto Benjamin

Achi, Vosh, Mupim, Chupim, and Ord; five sons.’

Benjamin’s first wife was possibly arranged for him when he was ten. As he was Jacob’s favourite in the absence of Jospeh, this is plausible. A descent from Terah, Abraham’s father would mean Mechalia was family even if she was not from Abraham’s brothers Nahor or Haran (though Zoba is linked with Nahor) – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. For example, both Isaac’s and Jacob’s wives were from the family of Nahor and Abraham’s wife from Haran.

If accurate, Benjamin taking a second wife (and possibly a third) meant Benjamin’s sons had half brothers; which may explain the divide between Highlander and Lowlander Scot, or even between the west of Scotland and the East. As there is no record of a son called Shomron from Abraham, it may well mean descent from Abraham indirectly for Aribath from either Ishmael (German) or the sons of Abraham with his second wife, Keturah (Scandinavian [Icelandic], Dutch, Flemish, Walloon [Luxembourgish]).

This is interesting regarding Benjamin’s second wife Aribath, in the fact that Scotland and Scandinavia have not only a shared geo-political history but also an ethnic influence in ‘recent’ centuries, which may parallel an earlier one.

Genesis 46:21

English Standard Version

‘And the sons of Benjamin: Bela [swallow], Becher [family name of Ephraim], Ashbel [capture], Gera*, Naaman [grace], Ehi, Rosh [7], Muppim, Huppim, and Ard.’

Numbers 26:38-41

English Standard Version

38 ‘The sons of Benjamin according to their clans: of

Bela, the clan of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the clan of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the clan of the Ahiramites; 39 of Shephupham, the clan of the Shuphamites; of Hupham, the clan of the Huphamites. 

40 And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the clan of the Ardites; of Naaman, the clan of the Naamites. 41 These are the sons of Benjamin according to their clans, and those listed were 45,600.’

1 Chronicles 7:6-12 

English Standard Version

6 ‘The sons of Benjamin:

Bela, Becher, and Jediael, three. 

7 The sons of Bela: Ezbon, Uzzi, Uzziel, Jerimoth, and Iri, five, heads of fathers’ houses, mighty warriors. And their enrollment by genealogies was 22,034. 

8 The sons of Becher: Zemirah, Joash, Eliezer, Elioenai, Omri, Jeremoth, Abijah [7], Anathoth, and Alemeth.

All these were the sons of Becher. 9 And their enrollment by genealogies, according to their generations, as heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, was 20,200. 

10 The son of Jediael: Bilhan. And the sons of Bilhan:

Jeush [family name of Esau], Benjamin, Ehud*, Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish [family name of Javan], and Ahishahar [7].

11 All these were the sons of Jediael according to the heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, 17,200, able to go to war. 

12 And Shuppim and Huppim were the sons of Ir, Hushim the son of Aher.’

Ehud* was the second Judge of Israel for eighty years from 1284 to 1204 BCE – Judges 3:12-30. His name means strong. Ehud is described as the left handed son of Gera* from Benjamin (Judges 3:15).

1 Chronicles 8:1-5, 33-34

English Standard Version

‘Benjamin fathered Bela his firstborn, Ashbel the second, Aharah the third, 2 Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth. 3 And Bela had sons: Addar, Gera*, Abihud, 4 Abishua, Naaman, Ahoah, 5 Gera* [7], Shephuphan, and Huram.

33 Ner was the father of Kish, Kish of Saul, Saul of Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Eshbaal; 34 and the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal; and Merib-baal was the father of Micah.’

Genesis lists ten sons; Numbers lists five sons; I Chronicles seven lists three sons; and chapter eight which includes Saul’s genealogy, unhelpfully lists five sons. Even if one assumes the change from five to three was due to the Israelite civil war against Benjamin’s tribe – it doesn’t explain the drop from ten to five in the first place – and if the six hundred men remaining were from Bela, Becher and Jediel (apart from Bela the one consistent son, the firstborn in all four references), Becher is missing from the second and fourth references and Jediel is only mentioned once, unless he is Ashbel. Even Muppim seems to have turned into Shuppim.

That said, the Book of Jasher tallies with the Book of Genesis in agreeing there were ten sons of Benjamin. Their alignment is explained in Jasher as two sets of five sons from two different women – Mechalia and Aribath.

Yet the scriptural conflict extends to the judge Ehud; so that his parentage is from either Bilhan or Gera, of which there are more than one Gera listed, being it would seem a popular family name. Perhaps there were two Ehud’s? It is an unusual name, so could there have been two men called the same? Then, why is only one listed?

The answer may begin to lay with Benjamin having more than one wife; or probably later editing for whatever reason in the genealogies listed in Numbers and Chronicles.

A connection between Rosh and the clan Ross is likely, and also Ard-encaple with Benjamin’s tenth son, Ard. Ard means ‘wanderer, fugitive’ from the verb ‘arad, ‘to flee’ or ‘be free.’ Rosh means ‘head, chief’ or ‘top’ – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. Interestingly, the name Ross, means: ‘up-land peninsula’, ‘promontory head-land’ and may also be derived from the Gaelic word for ‘red.’ 

Speaking of red… we discussed earlier in this chapter the Red Hand of Ulster and its symbolism for the red hand of Zarah. An identification of this symbol with the tribe of Judah’s ‘second’, albeit in reality first royal line – the other being Pharez – continues with a transfer from Northern Ireland into Scotland. 

The Modern Descendants of Zara-Judah, W H Bennet and John D Keyser – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘… three of Ulster’s six counties (as well as the towns of Bangor and Dungannon) have the Red Hand as a part of their official emblems… since the division of Ireland in 1920 the official Arms of Northern Ireland show the Red Hand alone without the Scarlet Cord, but this in no way alters the fact that the ancient and traditional emblem of Ulster was – and still is – a Red Hand circled by a Scarlet Cord. The use of the Red Hand as [an]… emblem is not confined to just Ulster – or even to just Ireland. 

In Scotland it is found in the Arms of several of the old families and in those of at least fourteen of the Clan Chiefs: Davidson, MacBain, MacDonell, MacIntosh, MacKinnon, MacLean, MacLachlan, MacNeil, MacNaughten, MacPherson, MacGillivray, MacDonald of Sleat, Clanranald, and Shaw of Rothiemurchus… A color variant of this emblem appears in several more: The Earldom of Fife; Abernethy, Lord Saltoun; Dundas; Duff, Farquharson; Guthrie; Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell; Leslie; Lindsay; MacBain; MacIntosh; MacLachlan; Clanranald; Maitland, Earl of Lauderdale; Moncreiffe… Shaw of Rothiemurchus; Spens of Lathallan; Stuart, Marquis of Bute; and Wemyss.

It is also important to note that the Rampant Red Lion appears on the Royal Standard and on the shield in the Royal Arms.’

Though Scotland is the tribe of Benjamin, the prevalence of the Red Hand of Zarah is evidence of a royal line of Judah, threaded within the Benjamite nation. It should not be a surprise then, that outside of England-Judah, the strongest symbolism of Judah’s royal pedigree would be exhibited in the other ‘royal nation’: Scotland-Benjamin.

Bennet & Keyser: ‘… how is it that the Scots who later invaded what is now called Scotland in 501 A.D. also have among their emblems the Red Hand that has been associated with Ulster since around 1350 B.C.?in the Register House in Edinburgh, Scotland there is an ancient document called the Declaration of Arbroath, which consists of an official letter sent to the Pope by the Parliament of Scotland in 1320 A.D. and signed by King Robert the Bruce and some thirty of the Scottish nobles, in which it is clearly stated that this branch of the Scots came… from Scythia after living for a long period of time in Spain. 

The Scottish Declaration of Independence was sent to Pope John XXII “by the Scottish Estates in Parliament assembled in the Abbey of Aberbrothock under the Presidency of King Robert the Bruce” and declared: 

“We know, Most Holy Father and Lord, and from the chronicles and books of the ancients gather, that among other illustrious nations, ours, to wit the nation of the Scots, has been distinguished by many honors; which passing from the greater Scythia through the Mediterranean Sea and Pillars of Hercules, and sojourning in Spain among the most savage tribes through a long course of time, could nowhere be subjugated by any people however barbarous; and coming thence one thousand two hundred years after the outgoing of the people of Israel, they, by many victories and infinite toil, acquired for themselves the possessions in the west which they now hold..” 

‘… it could be argued that this “outgoing of the people of Israel” refers to the fall of Israel and the deportation of the Ten Tribes to Assyria, rather than the exodus of Israel from Egypt. If this refers to the Exodus – which occurred somewhere around the year 1487 B.C. [1446 BCE] – then this means that the Scots, if they came into what is now Scotland 1,200 years later, must have arrived there around the year 287 B.C. – whereas Scottish history shows that they did not arrive until approximately 500 A.D. If the deportation of Israel to Assyria is meant (which was completed in 718 B.C.) then this branch of the Scots arrived in Scotland in 483 A.D. (or a few more years later as indicated in the 1703 translation of the Declaration of Arbroath), which brings us very close to the year 501 A.D. which Scottish history gives as the date the Scots did indeed arrive.’

The authors use reasoning to arrive at a date of circa 500 CE to fit the Scots arrival, though the date for circa 246 BCE just may be actually accurate. For the migration of Milesian Scots into Caledonia-Alba-Pictland were led by the lineage of Zarah kings from Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin. Yet these peoples were preceded centuries before by tribes known as the Cruithne or Pritani from Ulster; who were the very inhabitants the Milesian Scots found in Pictland. It was these peoples, the Picts also from the tribe of Benjamin, whom the Scots intermarried with and amalgamated the royal lines.

Bennet & Keyser” ‘… we should note that the Red Hand, as it appears in Scottish heraldry, is NOT encircled by a Scarlet Cord as was the ancient Ulster emblem. However, despite this slight difference, it is obvious that the Red hand (sometimes pink) as it appears in Scottish heraldry and the Red Hand of Ulster are the same emblem… it becomes evident that the Red Hand must have been an ANCESTRAL EMBLEM which both branches of the Scots brought with them from some ancient homeland. Of even GREATER IMPORTANCE is the fact that the Scots dated the arrival of a later branch in Scotland from an event in the history of Israel. This is something they would be very UNLIKELY to do unless they themselves were Israelites. 

Further, they say they came from Scythia, which is the place to which the [Israelites]… migrated after their departure from Assyria. In view of the origin of the Red Hand emblem recorded in Genesis 38, and in the fact that a Red Hand thereby became one of the emblems of the descendants of Zara-Judah, we have to conclude that the people who brought the Red Hand to Ulster so long ago, and the Scots who later brought it to Scotland… had a COMMON ORIGIN in the Zara branch of the… Tribe of Judah. Finally, in consideration of the heraldic significance of the Red Hand, we should note that, as descendants of Zara-Judah, the first settlers in Ulster were also entitled to use the Rampant Red Lion. 

In the official Arms of Northern Ireland we indeed see that it holds an important place therein. Another point of interest in these Arms is that the Red Hand has as its background a six-pointed star which is reminiscent of the form of the hexagram or Shield of David whose significance is another story.’

We will return to the points raised in the last two sentences – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. As yes, the hexagram star is really the sinister Seal of Solomon, a symbol of Edom – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

Even if one wishes to contend who the Scots and by extension the Picts are, one is left in no doubt that Scotland with England, comprise two of the thirteen tribes of Israel, for Joseph split into two tribes: Ephraim with West Manasseh is one – invariably called Ephraim, Joseph or Samaria – and East Manasseh; otherwise known as Gilead, Machir or Manasseh, is the other.

Counties of England, Wales and Scotland

It is also worth mentioning that the arrival of the Gaelic Scots of Dal Riata and the merging with the Picts and subsequently combining the two royal lines; Scot with Pict and the emergence of the new Kingdom of Alba, did not make the Picts as a people or nation disappear. It did not change the Pictish nation into a Scottish nation. The Picts were and are the predominant peoples of ancient Caledonia or Pictland; otherwise known as Pictavia

Again, the Dal Riata Scots contained both the residue of the tribe of Benjamin from Ulster and the line of Zarah from the Milesians, who ascended the throne of Pictavia and the governorship of the Pictish people. What changed was the name, so that Scot and Scotland were now the identifiable names of the ‘northern Britons.’ The Irish name Scot inherited from the Zarah-Milesians had been transferred to the Benjamite-Picts; just as the name of the Saxon Anglii’s, became the name of the Judaic-Jutes.

Queen Elizabeth II Royal Coat of Arms of The United Kingdom – God and My Right (to rule)

A sizeable clue and indicator of identity is language, as stated in the Introduction. Celtic languages were divided into two main groups – Continental Celtic and Insular Celtic. The Continental Celtic languages spoken on the continent fell into two main dialects – Gaullish and Celto-Iberian. The Gaulish language covered the ancient Celtic people living in Gaul, that is all of France, Belgium, the Low Countries, parts of Switzerland and Austria, the Alps and the northern parts of Italy. As there were many different Gaulish tribes, it is assumed the Gauls may have had numerous dialects. 

Celto-Iberian was spoken on the Iberian Peninsula, in mostly north and central Spain; principally between the Ebero and Tagus rivers. Both Iberia-Spain and Gaul-France were locations where the sons of Jacob dwelt before migrating to Erin-Ireland. The Israelites as mentioned have always been known as Hebrews, after their forebear Eber, descended from Arphaxad, the third son of Shem. Thus the words Iber-ia, Hiber-nia and Hebri-des in Ireland and Scotland are clues to the whereabouts of these Hebrews. 

Another major location for the Celts as mentioned, were those who dwelt in Asia Minor from the mid-second century BCE known as the Galatians. The region was called Galatia, a Roman protectorate which Paul visited and wrote letters to the believers dwelling in the region – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy. The Celtic Galatians originated from the ancient Cimmerians. They travelled overland from the Middle East via the Danube valley and throughout Gaul. 

They in turn invaded Spain and merged with the Hebrew elements already residing there – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. ‘Circa 700 to 500 BCE Ireland was settled by a people who employed concentrated hill forts which usage is often associated with Celtic, Halstatt culture. They produced many varied bronze and gold products and had connections as far afield as Scandinavia, the Greek Isles and the Syrian coast. From 200 BCE to 300 CE a new group introduced into Ireland ring forts similar to those known in northern Portugal and Spanish Galicia.’

Scottish men

All Continental Celtic languages are extinct, with next to nothing known about them. Insular Celtic is well documented. Insular Celtic refers to the languages spoken in the British Isles and Brittany in north-western France. Insular Celtic was divided into two broad groups, in which modern Celtic languages have derived: Brythonic (British) and Goidelic (Irish/Scottish). Brythonic is also called P-Celtic and includes Welsh, Cornish and Breton spoken in France. 

After the Romans departed and with the Saxons settling in Britain, the Celtic Britons were pressed into the regions where they are still living today. The Cornish people, replete with their own language remained in Cornwall, south-west England. Welsh had been spoken throughout England and southern Scotland. Some of the Welsh speaking Britons fled across the channel to the Armorican Peninsula, now known as Brittany. However, Bretons language evolution made it unintelligible with Welsh. 

The Goidelic languages are referred to as Q-Celtic languages, comprising of Irish Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic and Manx in the Isle of Man. It is not certain if Ireland had ever spoken P-Celtic languages before the arrival of the Gaelic Celts. As the Simeon Welsh are linked to Ireland anciently, it may well be possible. 

The ruling lineage of the Scotti in Ireland was from Zarah of Judah and Ireland was likewise known as Scotia. When the Milesian Scots comprising the royal line of Zarah with the remainder of the tribe of Benjamin, invaded and colonised Argyll in the western reaches of Caledonia, they established the Dal Riada kingdom. 

The Scots warred and then intermingled with the Picts, and that is the reason why Scotland speaks a Gaelic language, sharing strong cultural, historical, ethnic, mythological and folkloric ties to Ireland. People from Ireland settled on the Isle of Man, in about the fifth century, displacing the P-Celtic language spoken there. Irish invaders also established the Dyfed kingdom in southwestern Wales. Dyfed is not far removed from Dafydd, which is Welsh for David and David is the patron saint of Wales.

Scottish women

Archaeology reveals that there were people living in both Ireland and Britain before the arrival of the P and Q Celtic people. These pre-Celtic people are incorrectly thought to be involved in the megalithic cultures; erecting large standing stones and megalithic tombs. Examples are Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England and the Giants causeway between Ulster and Alba – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. The presence of giants has been touched upon and they were a common theme in Britain and Ireland to contend with, as they had been opponents in Canaan for the sons of Jacob. 

There are a number of routes which early peoples may have sailed in entering the British Isles, thus identifying where certain peoples came ashore is difficult. Many just suddenly turn up in records. Migrating people could have travelled to Ireland’s eastern shore, directly from Britain via the Continent. Simeon may have entered from this direction. It is documented that the Gaels migrated into Ireland from the south having come from Spain. Whereas the Vikings landed upon the northern shores of Ireland and Scotland from Norway via the Hebrides Islands and the Orkney Islands. 

Scottish man and woman

It is not clear to historians where the Picts originated, whether they arrived from Scandinavia or Ireland; as the Picts left no records. It is not known what the Picts even called themselves. The Romans called them Picti or ‘painted ones.’ The Picts were renowned for painting themselves blue and tattooing much of their bodies. A frightening sight in Battle. Many Scottish rugby union supporters also paint their faces blue on match days. The tartan kilts are a cloth of colours and one wonders if these are a throwback to their brother Joseph’s coat of many colours which Jacob had given him.

The Picts are descendants of the Celtic Caledonii tribe. In the Q-Celtic language of Irish Gaelic, the Picts were called Cruthini, Cruithni, Cruithini, Cruthin and Cruthni. While in P-Celtic, the Picts were called Preteni or Pretani. We will endeavour to answer this question about their route, by tracking the Cruithni. 

The Ulster Kingdoms: 3 – Dalriada (Causeway Coast and Glens Districts), Dr Ian Adamson OBE:

‘The Epidian Cruthin or Epidii (Greek Επίδιοι) were an ancient British people, known from a mention of them by Ptolemy the geographer c. 150. The name Epidii includes the Gallo-Brittonic root epos, meaning horse (Compare with Old Gaelic ech). It may, perhaps, be related to the Horse-goddess Epona. They inhabited the modern-day regions of Argyll and Kintyre, as well as the islands of Islay and Jura…’

There is a link between the Pict, the Cruthin, the Epidii (horse) and the prominent Scottish heraldic symbol, the Unicorn

Notice the head of a horse at the top of the map of Scotland. To the left (west) behind the back of its head are the Outer Hebrides and above its nose (north) are situated the Orkney Islands.

Ireland was called Ierna by the second century geographer Ptolemy and Hiberia by the Romans. An early people of Ierna were known as the Iverni, which has been identified with the Erainn (or Erin). The Belgae, a tribe who lived in Gaul, between the Seine and Marne, established a southern kingdom in Britain, before Caesar’s campaign in Gaul. They then migrated to Ireland with one scholar arguing that the Erainn could identify with the Belgae. This view has been discredited by most other scholars, though this writer would not be so quick to dismiss it.

Biblical writer Yair Davidy proposes a link between Benjamin, Belgium, the Belgae and Benjamin’s eldest son, Bela; saying that in ancient Hebrew it was pronounced ‘Belagh.’ We will discover that the Bela-Belgae link is not necessarily associated with Benjamin directly or solely, but also with the tribe of Reuben – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Another Irish people were the Lagin who followed the Erainn, settling mostly in Leinster and in Connacht and according to their own legends, they had migrated  from Armorica – Brittany. The Gaels (or Goidels) cited as the last invaders and known as the Feni, are incorrectly equated with the Milesians in the Lebor Gabala – Book of Invasions. The Feni (or Gaels) migrated to Ireland directly from Iberia. Irish and Scottish Celtic legends state that their ancestors, the Hiberi, came from the Middle East via Gallaecia in Spain.

La Tour d’Auvergne, 1801 quotes Dionysus who spoke of Bretons in ancient times living near the Pillars of Hercules (the Straits of Gibraltar), close to Gades – derived from the tribe of Gad – and close to Tartessos (etymologically linked with the son of Javan – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan). Dionysus states the Gauls had once occupied a province of Lusitania (in Portugal) which was called Britonia. Ephoros of Thyme, circa 350 BCE said the Hebraic Celts had ruled Gades, eventually leaving Spain moving to Gaul, Britain and Ireland. 

Lost Israelite Identity, The Israelite Origin of Celtic Races, Yair Davidy, 1996 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Thomas F. O’Rahilly (“Early Irish History And Mythology”, Dublin, 1971, Eire) compared traditional accounts of peoples who invaded Ireland with the results of research in his own time and came to the conclusion that the invaders of Ireland could be divided into four [streams]: 

  1. The Cruthin and Picts: The Cruthin were mainly in [Northern] Ireland but clans believing they were descended from them were also to be found in Connaught (the West) and Leinster (southeast). They struggled with the Ulaid for control of Ulster until both were subdued by the People of Neal. The Picts of Northern Scotland were also known as Cruthen. Scottish tradition said that the Picts came from Scythia, went to [Northern] Ireland, and from there moved to Scotland…
  2. The Erain or Builg referred to as the Fer Bolg. They equal the Belgae of the Continent and Britain. Included with them were the Osraige, Iar and Ulaid.  
  3. The Laginian invaders also known as Gabair. They included the Lagin, Domain, and Galioin. They came from Armorica (Brittany) in Gaul and conquered much of Leinster (southeast) and Connacht (west). There may be a link between the Domnain and the Dana [the tribe of Dan*]. 
  4. The Goidels [or Gaels]. These are identical with the Hiberi, Scotti, and Milesians… Amongst the Milesians were The Ue Ne’ll (Irish for descendants of Niall; Ue pronounced ‘Ee’). Niel was a High King of Ireland who died about 405. The Ue Ne’ll ruled* over all Ireland and parts of Scotland. Their descendants are concentrated in the Northwest of Ireland though also numerous throughout Ulster. They are marked by a unique Y haplogroup DNA marker* of their own a sub-section of R1b.’

The name Gael is synonymous with Goidel, while Hiberi is with Scotti; and all four with Milesian. The Milesians are a separate and distinct tribe of Israel, as opposed to the partially misleading appellations which include the Zarah clan from the tribe of Judah: Royal Milesians or Milesian Scots.

We will discuss the Goidels (Hibernians) in the next chapter. Similarly, the Belgae (Fir Bolg) are the same as the Ulaid and a specific tribe, one that had an historic association previously with the Gaels in the distant past in Canaan and still does today in modern Ireland. The Laginians are more mysterious and a link with the tribe of Dan is worth considering, as are the Ue Ne’ll. 

The Cruithni were living first in Ireland, prior to Scotland. The direction of the Benjamites migration path appears to mirror most other tribes in sailing from the continent directly to Ireland, before moving to Britain. With the Fir Bolg, the Tuatha de Danann and the Hiberi; Erin became a crowded Isle for all these peoples and hence why the Cruithne after dwelling in Ulster, eventually completed their migration from Ireland to join their Pictish brethren in Caledonia-Alba, with the Milesians as the Dalriada Scots

The Picts are thought to have first arrived in Britain circa 1100 BCE. We will return to the Cruithne Picts and their arrival in Britain in the following chapter. It was the arrival of the Romans much later, which roused the Caledonian tribes of Alba to insurrection. The savageness of their hostility resulted in the Romans erecting Hadrian’s Wall. The eventual withdrawal of the Romans, led to the Picts raiding northern and middle England. Hence the British King Vortigern inviting the Jutes to counter these Pictish excursions in 449 CE. The coincidental irony not lost with the Simeonite British king inviting the tribe of Judah to counter the threat from the tribe of Benjamin.

The Angles of Bernicia over ran British kingdoms including Deira, which combined with Bernicia and was called Northumbria. The Picts were a tributary to Northumbria until the reign of Brideimac (or Bridei III) son of Beli I [Bela?] from 672 to 693 CE. The Angles under their king Ecgfrith, suffered a severe defeat at the battle of Dun Nectain in 685, which halted the Angles northward expansion. The Picts resolutely sent the Angles back to southern Britain. The first recorded Pictish king was Vipoig who reigned from 311 to 341 CE. 

By the mid-ninth century the Danish Vikings had destroyed the kingdoms of Dal Riata and Northumbria and greatly diminished the power of the Kingdoms of Strathclyde; founding the Kingdom of York. During a major battle in 839 CE, the Vikings killed the King of Fortriu, Eogan man Oengusa. After this, Cinaed mac Alpin otherwise known as Kenneth I MacAlpin a Milesian Scot with a Pictish mother, became king of the Picts from 848 to 858 CE. He united the Picts and the Scots and together these tribes formed the new Kingdom of Scotland. They then defeated the Danish Vikings. In 1018 at the Battle of Carham, the Scots defeated Northumbria with their southernmost borders established under the reign of Duncan I from 1034 to 1040 CE. Internal turmoil and civil wars led to Duncan’s assassination by Macbeth of Shakespeare fame (Article: The Shakespeare Shadow), steward of Ross and Moray, ruling from 1040 to 1057 CE. 

A series of border conflicts between 1138 and 1237 ensued between the Scots and the English for they incorporated a number of Israelite tribes by this stage. Represented by the Jutes, Angles, Frisians, Danes and Normans. The Scots were defeated and Northumbria was incorporated into English territory. Fifty years of peace was followed by the death of Alexander III in 1286. With the infant Margaret as the closest relative and thirteen other distant relatives all laying claim to the throne, a melee broke out, plunging the nation into chaos. In 1292, Edward I of England interceded, placing John de Baliol on the throne. Unrest resulted from his intervention and choice of ruler with the Battle of Dunbar in 1296. The Scots were defeated by the English and Baliol deposed. Scotland was placed under English military occupation – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

In 1297, Scottish Nobleman and rebel freedom fighter William Wallace, recruited a Scottish army, defeating the English at the Battle of Stirling. The English struck back in 1298, winning the Battle of Falkirk. Guerrilla warfare ensued, with Wallace declared a treasonous outlaw in 1304. In 1305, Wallace was betrayed and handed over to the English who hung, drew and quartered him in London.

The most well known king of Scotland between Kenneth I and James VI is Robert the Bruce from 1306 to 1329. A descendant of the Norman conquest and famous for taking up the mantle of Scottish resistance and his part in halting England’s designs in subduing the Scottish kingdom to their rule. It was a tussle between Judah and Benjamin, for Benjamin’s right to be a distinct nation, a separate kingdom. The battle of Bannockburn and the defeat of Edward II’s army, was the pivotal highlight of Robert’s reign in 1314. Conflict between the two kingdoms endured until 1328, when the Treaty of Northampton eventually recognised Scottish independence. 

Robert the Bruce

The Picts spoke Insular Celtic languages; with the Pict dialects being related to the southern Brythonic languages. Place names prove the existence of historic Pictish settlements in Scotland. The Brythonic prefixes, Aber; Llan; and Pit in modern place names indicate regions inhabited by Picts from the past. For instance: Aberdeen, Lhanbryde and Pitmedden. Medieval Welsh traditions credited the founding of the Royal dynasty of Gwynedd as well as their principal royal families, the Houses of Aber-ffraw and Din-efur to the Pictish chieftain Cunedda Wledig ap Edern. He was a ‘sub-King… who ruled Manau Gododdin on the Firth of Forth around Clackmannan’ and who lived circa 386 to 460 CE. His grandfather’s name was Padern Beisrudd, meaning Paternus of the ‘red tunic’ or the scarlet cloak.

During the fifth century, Pictish came under increasing pressure and influence from the Gaelic language of Dal Riata until its eventual replacement. Pictish influenced the development of modern Scottish Gaelic by influencing the syntax of Scottish Gaelic and therefore, bears greater similarity to the Brythonic language than does Irish Gaelic. Toponymist William Watson, conducted research of Scottish place names and concluded that the Pictish language was a northern extension of British and that Gaelic was later introduced from Ireland. Today, Scottish Gaelic unlike Irish, maintains a substantial closeness to Brythonic loan words and uses a verbal system modelled on the same pattern as Welsh. 

What this highlights is the fact that the Picts and Cymry were earlier and original inhabitants of Ireland (with Dan and Reuben) and later Britain; with the Gaels – though fellow Israelites – not from either of the tribes of Benjamin and Simeon, arriving considerably later and speaking an Irish Gaelic that was demonstrably different from the Brythonic related Pictish and Welsh tongues.

Edinburgh

The history of the modern Scot is one of invention and influence far beyond the size of its population. They are credited in shaping modern capitalism and democracy. Victorian historian, John Anthony Froude: 

“No people so few in number have scored so deep a mark in the world’s history as the Scots have done.” 

How the Scots invented the Modern World. The True Story of how Western Europe’s Poorest Nation Created our Modern World and Everything in it, by Arthur Herman is a landmark work.

Notice in the title the reference to the poorest nation on one hand and the creation of a modern world on the other reflecting the ravening wolf who would share the spoil – Genesis 49:27.

“… This is the story of how the Scots created the basic idea of modernity. It will show how that idea transformed their own culture and society in the eighteenth century, and how they carried it with them wherever they went. Obviously, the Scots did not do everything by themselves: other nations – Germans, French, English, Italians, Russians, and many others – have their place in the making of the modern world. But it is the Scots more than anyone else who have created the lens through which we see the final product. 

When we gaze out on a contemporary world shaped by technology, capitalism, and modern democracy, and struggle to find our place as individuals in it, we are in effect viewing the world as the Scots did… The story of Scotland in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of hard-earned triumph and heart-rending tragedy, spilled blood and ruined lives, as well as of great achievement.”

Another work detailing the Scots creative genius; their massive influence on the world stage; and capacity for effective administration is When Scotland Ruled the World by Stewart Lamont. The last chapter includes observations on the Scottish psyche – emphasis mine:

‘Scots are fighters. Their belligerence may or may not take a violent or military form. It might simply be the wish to fight for rights or a principle. Scots are proud of being fighters, but they are also sentimental. Scots have a reputation for being quarrelsome over religion. The motto ‘Who dares meddle with me?’ is more than an echo… in the motto ‘Who Dares, Wins’ adopted by the crack troops of the Special Air Service (SAS), founded by a Scot, David Stirling. Their fighting instincts are defensive rather than provocative, and he is at his best when fighting to defend a principle than to enlarge his power or dominion. We do not like money to be wasted, nor do we admire those who have it in abundance.’

To list every Scottish invention would be too long. Some interesting and landmark accomplishments include:

Macintosh Raincoat
Tarmac Road surfaces
Rubber tyres
Adhesive postage stamps
Telephone

Incandescent Light Bulb

Flushing Lavatory
Pedal Bicycle

Kaleidoscope

Colour Photography
Television
Breach-loading rifle

Hypodermic Syringe

Lawnmower

Steam Engine

Oil Refinery

Refrigerator

Electric Clock
Penicillin

Insulin Discovery
Chloroform Anaesthetic

Radiation Therapy 

Genetic Cloning

Finger Printing
Grand piano
First British War Memorial

SAS

Radar
Logarithms and decimal point

Encyclopaedia Britannica
Modern Capitalism 

Bank of England
First Savings Bank

Cash Machine
Co-op principle of distributing dividends

Edinburgh

Scotland’s top export products for 2025:

1 Whisky

2 Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals

3 Electrical machinery

4 Chemical products

5 Food and beverages

6 Machinery and mechanical appliances

7 Aluminum and aluminum products

8 Iron and steel

9 Organic chemicals

10 Pharmaceuticals

The top ten export items represented 98.9% of Scotland’s total export value for 2025. The fastest-growing export categories were Whisky, $10.5 billion (28.6%); Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals, $7.2 billion (19.4%); and Electrical machinery, $4.5 billion (12.1%).

Two important points concerning the genetic inheritance and homogeneity of the British people need to be understood. One may be difficult to agree with and for most perhaps, one will be near impossible to assimilate. Firstly, though the twelve tribes, plus the half tribe of East Manasseh were taken into captivity; deported and transplanted; migrated different routes in tribal packs or separately; as well as journeying of their own accord prior to captivity; they did not become ‘watered down’ enough to lose their family relatedness and commonality of genetic lineage. In other words, the prime Haplogroup variants reveal that all the Celts, Saxons and Vikings who entered Britain in their numerous waves and collectively became known as Britons, are all the same stock of people. Not a mongrel nation as some proclaim. They once included the thirteen tribes who amalgamated as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and then later as Great Britain and Northern Ireland. This homogeneity was noted anciently.

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 114-115 – emphasis mine:

The Roman historian Tacitus, writing… the first century… on the racial nature of the Germans [Saxons]:

“I concur in opinion with those who deem the Germans never [rather less than other nations] to have intermarried with other nations but to be a pure and unmixed race, stamped with a distinct character. Hence a family likeness pervades the whole, though their numbers are great. Their eyes are stern and blue, their hair ruddy, and their bodies large.”

The map above creates the impression that Scotland is a mish mash of peoples. Yet the reality is that the Scottish nation descends predominantly from the tribe of Benjamin, composed of Picts and Scots, whom in essence were two waves of the same peoples. Angles and Britons were pressed southwards into England. So much so that the Geordies of Newcastle (and Tyneside) are probably a mix of Benjamin and Judah at the least or predominantly Benjamin at the most. Granted, Scotland has been partially influenced genetically with Norse migration and we will discover the presence of another Israelite tribe in Scotland’s borders – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Scientists in an Oxford University study learned that Britain can be divided into seventeen distinct genetic clans. There was a surprise in that the Cornish for instance are genetically more similar to other English groups than they are to the Welsh. This is due to the fact that the early Britons in Cornwall – in the main – migrated to Brittany, France. Therefore the Cornish majority today are the same people as the Saxon ancestors of the Jutes and thus related to the rest of England populated principally by Jutes and Normans.

People whose grandparents had all been born near each other and were white European in origin had been examined. A further surprise for the scientists was remarkably, many of these modern day clans found in the same parts of the country as the tribes and kingdoms that were established from the sixth century, confirmed that little had changed on the genetic landscape for almost fifteen hundred years. 

Which leads to the second matter. As there are five nations located in the islands constituting the British Isles – Britain and Ireland – how does that mathematically square with a total of thirteen tribes. Where are the other eight? These other tribes migrated to the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – including Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia.

The opposite is true of what all identity experts, teachers and adherents have believed. The Celtic-Saxon-Viking descended peoples in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are not the same people as the English in England; or the Scots of Scotland, the Irish of Ireland and the Welsh in Wales. They are all individual tribes and peoples in their own right with their own unique nations. This has not been understood before and is pivotal in locating the sons of Jacob and identifying them correctly. Up until now, the Israelite tribes not linked to Joseph have been incorrectly labelled as living in northwestern Europe or conversely, that they are all living in the United States of America. 

The map above highlights the predominance of lighter eyes, whether blue, grey or green in not just northwestern Europe but also stretching into central and eastern Europe. It is clear to see, that the highest percentages (80%+) are not based on ethnicity alone, but on latitude. Whereas 50% to 79% exhibits more flexibility and extends further south in Europe regardless of latitude. The lower figure (20-40%) in the south of England (and Wales) may well reflect increased admixture with immigrants from the Indian sub-continent, Africa, the Caribbean and southeastern Europe.

Within those nations broadly termed Celtic, scientists have viewed them as one race with two deviations of language. In fact, this study confirmed that the Celts share language, history and culture but not the exact DNA.

The Celtic Myth Exposed: ‘Despite their claims to a cultural kinship, the Celtic peoples do not form a single group… Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and Cornwall have a very different genetic make-up. The Cornish have DNA that is much more similar to that of other English groups than to the Welsh or the Scots. Oxford University geneticist Professor Peter Donnelly said: “One might have expected those groups to be quite similar genetically because they were Celtic. But while [we] see distinct groups in those regions they are amongst the most different.” Archaeologist Professor Mark Robinson said: “I had assumed that there was going to be this uniform Celtic fringe extending from Cornwall through to Wales into Scotland. And this has very definitely not been the case.”

Light (blond) hair relative percentages mirror lighter eyes. Though this time 50% to 100% of people with light hair covers a far more concentrated area than that for light eyes. The rarity of red hair in Europe generally, with the highest proportions in the North west may have a bearing. Again, the south of England with Wales exhibit less fair haired people than Ireland, Scotland and Northern England. An aspect aside from immigration admixture is that both Judah and Simeon took Canaanite wives – Genesis 38:2; 46:10. This may have affected the English and Welsh gene pool towards darker hair and swarthier skin.

As we have learned the nations of northwestern Europe are in fact descended from Abraham and Keturah – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia – and though we are now going to identify all the remaining tribes in subsequent chapters, it leaves one open ended question. Studies (aside from the United States in part) have not been conducted for Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders and the British in South Africa that this writer is aware – because they are possibly not recognised as distinct peoples. They are understandably though incorrectly, perceived as being either English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh. Thus, studies on the peoples of the Celtic-Saxon-Viking nations of the New World are waiting to be conducted as no priority has been attached to them. 

Of course, we are still two tribes short for those performing mental arithmetic. In fact, we are actually three tribes short. There are five nations in the British Isles and five nations in the New World, yet there are in fact fourteen tribal divisions to account for. Jacob had twelve sons, therefore we are looking for twelve nations who all speak English; having given allegiance to the Monarchy of England in the past, or continue to do so today. 

Joseph was divided into two, Manasseh and Ephraim, making thirteen. Manasseh then split into two, the half tribes of East and West Manasseh, resulting in fourteen. The East remained separate and the West joined with Ephraim to form one entity, Joseph – with fourteen returning to thirteen. 

Simeon and Levi were punished for their cruelty and prophesied they would be scattered within Israel, therefore thirteen goes back down to eleven. Later, when lots were being apportioned in the promised land, the tribe of Judah said to Simeon: their allotment was generous and that Simeon could share with them. Eleven tribe allotments became twelve. A careful reading of Bible verses reveal that the two full brothers, Issachar and Zebulun would primarily share an inheritance. The hunt for twelve nations becomes eleven. Finally, we arrive at the enigmatic tribe of Dan. His inheritance is shrouded in mystery – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. For now, eleven becomes ten. 

Therefore, ten nations must exist in the world; who speak a common tongue; share a similar ancestral heritage; and have an existing or past relationship with the monarchy of England. 

Those ten countries include: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. These ten nations are comprised of twelve identifiable tribes for two nations contain two tribes each; plus two scattered tribes within them, totalling fourteen tribes or tribal divisions. It is worth stating that though the peoples of Britain are different one from another as brothers and half brothers would be expected to be, they are more similar to each other compared to their kith and kin on the continent. 

Briefly, for new readers, the principle paternal (Y-DNA) Haplogroup for northwestern European men is R1b. It is the Y sex chromosome passed only from fathers to sons. The main mutations we are concerned with are the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21), found in Germany, Scandinavia, Benelux and England; and the Atlantic-Celtic M529 (L21), found in Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Other primary R1b Haplogroup lineages include the Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28), found in France, Italy and Switzerland; and the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 found in Iberia.

The people of Orkney are the most distinct in the United Kingdom, a result of six hundred years of Norwegian rule. Y-DNA Haplogroup N1c1 is essentially nonexistent in the British Isles compared to Scandinavia and other Nordic nations in the Artic circle, such as Finland, as the British share closer genetic commonalities with Belgium and the Netherlands than they do with Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. 

Y-DNA Haplogroup I1 is the most common type of Haplogroup I in northern European men and its highest levels are found in Scandinavia and Finland, where it can represent over 35% of the Y chromosomes. I1 is Associated with Norse ethnicity and is found in all the regions invaded by ancient Germanic tribes as well as the Vikings. After Scandinavia, the highest frequencies of I1 are observed in nations such as Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands; which all exhibit between ten and twenty percent I1 lineages. Recall that I1 and I2a2 are both northern European identifying Haplogroups as opposed to I2a1, which is associated with south-eastern Europe. 

In other words, Haplogroup I1 and I2a2 have higher concentrations in the nations who descend from the Patriarch Abraham. But, this does not mean that males with these Haplogroups are direct descendants of Abraham. For we would expect his descendants to carry R1b and specifically the U106 sub-clade. Haplogroup I is an older ‘European’ Haplogroup which both predates and originates Haplogroup R. Thus, male Haplogroup I carriers are exhibiting an older and separate ancestor lineage which predates Abraham though is still descended from Abraham’s ancestor, Arphaxad.

Eupedia: ‘Fair hair was another physical trait associated with the Indo-Europeans. In contrast, the genes for blue eyes were already present among Mesolithic Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I. The genes for blond hair are more strongly correlated with the distribution of haplogroup R1a, but those for red hair have not been found in Europe before the Bronze Age, and appear to have been spread primarily by R1b people.’

Scots are ol’ blue eyes, says study, The Herald, David Leask, 2014 – emphasis mine: 

‘A major new study of the DNA of the British Isles has found the highest level of the gene that causes the light iris colour in Edinburgh, the Lothians and Borders. Fifty-seven percent in the south-east of Scotland have the OCA2 gene, compared with 48 percent in the rest of the country – a figure that also happens to be the average for the UK and Republic of Ireland. The blue-eye gene was just 35 per cent in south-west England, 41 per cent in east England and 45 per cent in Wales… places where blue eyes are more common than not are in a swathe of territory running across northern Germany [Ishmael], northern Poland [Joktan], all three Baltic states [Joktan], Finland [Arphaxad], central Sweden [Abraham and Keturah] and much of northern Russia [Asshur]. Overall across Britain, the eye colour breakdown is 48 percent blue, 30 percent green and 22 percent brown.’

A study conducted by Bryan Sykes broke mtDNA mitochondrial results into twelve haplogroups for various regions of the isles: H, J, T, I, V, W, X and U and within U: U2, U3, U4 and U5. 

Sykes discovered that the maternal Haplogroup pattern was similar throughout England but there was a distinct trend from east and north to west and south. Minor Haplogroups, were primarily found in the east of England. Sykes found Haplogroup H to be dominant in Ireland and Wales. In fact, studies of ancient DNA have corroborated ‘that ancient Britons and Anglo-Saxon settlers carried a variety of mtDNA haplogroups, though type H was common in both.’ Also highlighted were a few differences between north, mid and south Wales. There was a clear closer link between north and mid Wales than either had with the south. If the people of South Wales are descended from Simeon, it poses the question of who are the people to the north. The same as Judah and the English, or someone else altogether? 

Sykes designated five main Y-DNA Haplogroups for various regions of Britain and Ireland: R1b, R1a, I, E1b1b and J. According to Bryan Sykes: “… although the Romans ruled from AD 43 until 410, they left a tiny genetic footprint.” Two reasons for this. First any intermarriage would have been minimal and a very long time ago. 

Secondly, as the Romans were descended from Ishmael or modern Germany, the family similarity would not reveal any surprises in DNA and Haplogroup sequencing. Only R1b is indicative of the Abrahamic peoples. Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 have been addressed; R1a is a reflection of admixture with peoples of Eastern Europe in the distant past, whether Slavic (Joktan) or Russian (Asshur); and E1b1b (North Africa, Canaan), J2 and J1 are evidence of intermixing with Arab and related peoples, whether including Southern European variants from admixture or mutations originating with Middle Eastern (J1) and West Asian (J2) males. 

Haplogroup R1b is dominant throughout Western Europe. The most common R1b sub-clade in Britain, particularly England is R1b-U106 (or S21), which reaches its highest frequencies in the North Sea areas such as southern and eastern England, the Netherlands and Denmark. Due to its distribution, this sub-clade is often associated with the Saxon migrations. Ancient DNA has shown that it was also unsurprisingly, present in Roman Britain. For the Romans as Ishmael, also carried the U106 sub-clade as the Germans do today – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar

In contrast, Ireland, Scotland, Wales and north western England are dominated by R1b-L21, which is also located in north western France, the North coast of Spain and western Norway, a residue from the slave trade. This lineage is often associated with the historic Celts, as the Iberian and Gaulish regions where it was once predominant have had a significant Celtic language presence into the modern period, as well as relating to a Celtic cultural identity. R1b-L21 was also present among Celtic Britons in eastern England prior to the Saxon and Viking invasions, as well as allegedly from Roman soldiers stationed in ancient York.

If such is the case, then is L21 (M529) older or more recent than U106? This writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, its most recent mutations (see above). Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

Of the nine royal dynasties since the first king of all Britain, Athelstan from 924 to 939 CE, who defeated the Danes, Vikings, Scots and Britons at the bloody battle of Brunanburh, only two dynasties paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup is known for certain. 

Comprehensive studies are required for the Houses of Knytlinga, with Patriarch Harthacnut I King of Denmark from 880 to 936; Wessex, with Patriarch Egbert from 770 to 839; Norman, with William I and Patriarch Robert I (Rollo father of William) Duke of Normandy from 846 to 931 (refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo spaiens); Plantagenet, with Edward I and Patriarch Geoffrey Ferole II of Gastinois from 1000 to 1046; Tudor, with Elizabeth I and Patriarch Ednyfed Fychan from 1170 to 1246; and Hannover, with Victoria and Patriarch George of Brunswick from 1582 to 1641. 

Whereas, Mountbatten, with Patriarch John II of Oldenburg from 1272 to 1301 is listed as R1b, and Windsor, with Elizabeth II and Patriarch Dietrich I of Wettin from 916 to 976, as specifically the Germanic R1b-U106 (Z305) and the Stuarts, with James I and Patriarch Alan FitzFlaad from 1070 to 1114, as the Celtic R1b-L21 (L745).

Haplogroup I is a grouping of several distinct and distantly related lineages. Within Britain, the most common sub-clade as mentioned is I1, which also occurs frequently in northwestern continental Europe and southern Scandinavia. It has been associated with the settlement of the Saxons and Vikings, as an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ male from northern England who died between the seventh and tenth centuries was determined to have belonged to Haplogroup I1. The truth is that I1 is a far earlier Haplogroup which predates the Saxons, but still would have been carried by certain males migrating into Britain during and after the Saxon and Viking invasions.

Haplogroup R1a, as the cousin (or more accurately the sibling) of R1b, is most common in Eastern Europe – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Approximately nine percent of Scottish men belong to the Norwegian R1a sub-clade Z284, which peaks at over 30% in Shetland and Orkney. If attributable to the Viking incursions, then this would be a result of admixture – originally deriving from a male ancestor of an eastern European. For the true Israelite Norsemen would have been a lineage dominant in R1b. 

Haplogroups E1b1b, J1 and J2 are more frequent throughout Southern Europe through admixture with peoples found in North Africa and the Middle East. Each are rare in Northern Europe. E1b1b for instance – found in high levels amongst Arab males and in Sub-Saharan East Africa – is found in 1.5% of Scots, 2% of English, 3.5% of Dutch, 5% of Flemish and 5.5% of Germans. In contrast, It reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovo at 47.5% and in Greece at 30%.

The constant reader will recall that Haplogroups J1 (Middle Eastern and Arabian) and J2 (Near East and West Asia) are indicative of a lineage from Ham (Mizra and Phut); whereas E1b1b is a lineage from Canaan. Y-DNA Haplogroup E1b1b is a result of intermixing with men of an African descent (E1b1a and E1b1b). Thus any man – whether a Berber from North Africa or a Slav from southern Europe – if he possesses E1b1b, it reveals he had a paternal ancestor at one point who was African (Black).

Scottish Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Contrary to amateurish speculations and misinterpretations of genetic data, Scots do not descend from the Israelites in any amount.’

A confident and dogmatic statement aimed at those who are perceived as academically stretched and intellectually challenged… to even think the Scots could be a tribe of Israel – the audacity and ignorance of such a conjecture. The full irony being that they actually are a tribe of Israel, with evidence overwhelmingly pointing to the tribe of Benjamin. Unless of course, one is basing data on the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish Haplogroup clusters from admixture discussed in the previous chapter – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Brook: ‘R1b-M269, which originated in western Europe, is an important Y-DNA haplogroup found among Scottish men who participate in Family Tree DNA’s “Scottish Y-DNA Project”. Other members of that project who have unbroken Scottish patrilineal ancestry carry other Y-DNA haplogroups, including E-M2, E1b1b1-M35, E1b1b1a1b-V13, G-M201, I-M170, I1d-L22, I1d-P109, I1-M253, I2a-L160, I2a-M423, I2a-P37.2, and J2-M172, among others.’

Yet none of these are indicative of a true male Scot. For Haplogroups E and J are a result of admixture with Canaan and Ham and Haplogroups G and I, while indicative of the line of Shem and related, are older Haplogroups predating Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  

Brook: ‘Members of Family Tree DNA’s “Scottish mtDNA Project” whose matrilines are Scottish carry a wide variety of mtDNA haplogroups, including H (38.38%), I, J (8.64%), K, T (7.63%), U4, U5, V (4.26%), W, X…

About 13 percent of Scots have red hair, and 40 percent of Scots carry at least one red hair mutation. Their red hair is determined by allele settings on their melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene in combination with 8 additional genes that determine whether the MC1R gene is turned on…

… Bryan Sykes “mtDNA and the Islands of the North Atlantic: Estimating the Proportions of Norse and Gaelic Ancestry.” American Journal of Human Genetics 68:3 (March 2001): pages 723-737. First published online on February 1, 2001.

“This study of mitochondrial DNA compares mainland Scots with Scottish islanders (including Western Islands and the Isle of Skye, plus Orcadians from the Orkney Islands), Icelanders, Norwegians, and many other European ethnicities. Figure 5 [not shown] shows Scots [Benjamin] clustering close to the English [Judah] and the Welsh [Simeon].”

The Scots, English and Welsh all share the same father, Jacob; while the English and Welsh, share the same mother, Leah.

You might be a Pict If… 2013 – emphasis & bold mine :

‘… a new SNP, S530… It’s also called SNP L1335… [a Y-DNA R1b-L21 sub-clade] has been discovered and it is a Pict marker… [the] marker is evidence that the Picts are living among us today and can be identified genetically… 10% of the 1000 Scottish men tested carry this marker, while it is found in only [0.8%] of English men and about 3% of the men in Northern Ireland… [but it is only seen once in more than two hundred men from the Republic of Ireland]… this marker is 10 times more prevalent in men with Scottish grandfathers than men with English grandfathers… What was surprising… was the really huge difference between Scotland and England.’

Benjamin and Judah share the same father, though their mothers are Rachel and Leah respectively and so as half brothers, possess more lee way for genetic differences. Coupled with this was the six hundred Benjamite men bottleneck and their subsequent taking of wives initially from the half tribe of East Manasseh and then regularly from Ephraim until their numbers swelled. 

The top ten mtDNA Haplogroups for England and Scotland and a comparison with near family: the Flemish of Belgium, the Dutch of the Netherlands, the Germans and the French. That is: the descendants from Sheba, Midian, Ishmael and Lot respectively.

England: H [44.7%] – J [11.5%] – U5 [9.1%] – K [7.8%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – I [4%] – HV0+V [3.2%] – U [2.7]

Scotland: H [44%] – J [12.7%] – U5 [8.1%] – K [6.9%] – 

T2 [5.9%] – HV0+V [3%] U4 [2.8%] – X [2.5%] 

Flanders: H [46.9%] – K [12.1%] – T2 [ 9.4%] – 

J [6%] – U [5.4% ] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%] – HV0+V [2.7%] 

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

HV0+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%] – I [2.5%] – W [2.5%]

Germany: H [45%] – J [9%] – U5 [8.8%] – T2 [7.8%] – 

K [6.6%] – HV0+V [4%] – U4 [2.9%] – T1 [2.8%] 

France: H [44.3%] – K [8.7%] – U5 [8.2%] – J [7.7%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – HV0+V [5%] – U4 [2.5%] – I [2%] 

England:        H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Scotland:       H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Germany:      H – J – U5 – T2 – K

France:           H – K – U5 – J – T2 

Flemish:         H – K – T2 – J – U

Netherlands: H – T2 – J – K – HV0+V 

The predominant maternal Haplogroups overall are H, J, U5, K and T2 across these six countries – much like the rest of Europe. Specific sub-clades for Haplogroup H found in England or otherwise Britain include: H3b, H3k,  H5a6, H5c, H5d, H5e, H5p, H17c, H23, H24, H34, H35, H39, H47, H48, H52, H56, H58, H59, H66, H76, H80, H83 and H87; and in Scotland: H1i, H3i, H27c and H67. The other common maternal groups in Britain in lesser percentages compared with Haplogroup H, include: J1, J2, K1a, U5a1, T1a and T2b.

The comparison of the top five to ten mtDNA Haplogroups shows that England and Scotland are more closely aligned as expected with regard to similar frequency. It is Germany which mirrors their sequence most closely, followed by France and the Flemish, with the Netherlands the least similar of the six close family members composed from Judah, Benjamin, Ishmael, Moab and Ammon, Sheba and Midian. 

Recall that Abraham’s wife Sarah was his niece from his brother Haran, the grandfather of Moab and Ammon. The German similarity reveals that Hagar was not just Pharaohs’s daughter but descended from stock similar to Abraham and Sarah – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. The lesser similarity with Sheba and Midian indicates that Keturah was not as closely related and lends itself to the theory that she may have been descended from another line of Peleg or more likely via Arphaxad’s other sons, Anar or Ashcol – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

From an autosomal DNA perspective a slightly different picture is portrayed, where the English and Scottish are most closely related to the Dutch and Germans and then Belgium and France, not withstanding Scandinavia.

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2      U4       U5        T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England           45            3           12          8          6         2           9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6         2          6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

The pairings show the gradual mtDNA distancing from England and Scotland by their related neighbours. England and Scotland are very similar, for they have mothers who are sisters. Their percentage variation is minimal as expected. Frequency wise, the Netherlands, Germany and France are not only similar with each other, but also with their cousins across the channel. The addition of family from Abraham and Keturah in Scandinavia highlights their closeness with their brothers in the Benelux nations as well as with cousins Ishmael, Benjamin and Judah. 

The Sephardic Jew who is a truer representation and purer line of Esau, is the other main family member who does not seem out of place with their twin and uncles, even with higher Haplogroup H levels. The Welsh who have experienced less admixture, also carry a higher percentage for Haplogroup H, with the highest concentration in Europe at 59.8%. The only other percentage higher than the Sephardim is found amongst the Spanish in Galicia with 58.5%. 

The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Jacob’s sons, Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                            H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HV0+V

Sephardim       56      5                  8         8                         9

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.4          7            5

Bel-Lux             47       6       9      12     0.7           3            3

Denmark          47     13       6        9                      6            4

Norway             46     11       8        5      0.2         11            4

Sweden             46      8       4        6      0.5         12            5

Netherlands     45     11      12      10                      8           8

Germany           45      9       8        7     0.5            9           4

Austria              45      9       8        9     0.8            9           2

England            45    13       6         8                      9            3

Scotland           44    13       6         7     0.2            8           3

France               44     8       6         9         3           8           5

Brazil                 44     11                            2                        11

Portugal            44      7       6        6      0.1           7            5

Spain                 44      7       6        6      0.7           8           8

Poland               44     8       7         4         1          10           5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2         10           4

Greece               41     10      7         5          3           5        1.8

Italy                  40      8        8       8           3           5           3

Ukraine            39      8        8        5          4         10           4

Iceland             38    14      10      10          4           8           2

Romania          37     11        5        8          2           7           4

Finland            36      6        2        5                     21            7

Turkey              31      9        4        6          5          3         0.7

Ashkenazim    23      7        5      32          5          2            4

Iran                   17     14        5         7         7          3         0.6

A pattern has consistently emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, generally increasing as one heads west across Europe. The addition of two of Jacob’s sons, Judah and Benjamin shows that Scotland and England go against type as their westerly position in Europe is not mirrored by the level of mtDNA Haplogroup H. The Sephardim remain the highest carriers of Haplogroup H with 56%. Both England and Scotland have higher frequencies of Haplogroup J at 13%, similar with Denmark (13%) and Switzerland (12%) with only Iceland and Iran (14%) exhibiting higher. Finland still possesses the highest level of U5 at 21%, while the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K at 32%. The highest carriers of T2 are the Netherlands with 12%, followed by Iceland (10%). 

The English and Scots as shown in the PCA or principal component analysis graph above are at once on the periphery of other European countries on one hand, reflected in their isolated geographic location, yet remain sandwiched between near relatives, the Scandinavians and Germans as well as the Benelux and French.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study. 

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Turkey            R-M269    14%   –  R-U106   0.4%

Russia             R-M269    21%   –  R-U106   5.4%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Austria            R-M269    27%   –  R-U106      23%

Germany        R-M269   43% – R-U106      19%

England          R-M269   57% – R-U106   20%

With the addition of England (a) we see that the English possess similar levels of R-M269 as the Swiss (b), Dutch (c), Italians (d) and French (e). Regarding the more specific Germanic R-U106, they are at the higher end, though the Netherlands and Austria have even higher percentages and Germany (f) and Denmark (g) share comparable levels. It is clear that England is closely related to all these nations. Clarity is intensified when one appreciates that they equate to: Judah (a), Haran (b), Midian (c), Nahor (d), Moab (e), Ammon (e), Ishmael (f) and Medan (g) respectively – all of Abraham’s direct or extended family tree.

Overall, England has a higher percentage of both M269 and its sub-Haplogroup U106, compared to its related near neighbours, aside from the Dutch. In Cornwall, R-M269 is as high as 78% and in the Midlands, Leicestershire’s frequency is 62%. 

Downstream from M269, sub-Haplogroup L165 equates to northern England; L11 to central England; L1 to southern and eastern England; M529 is found in England and principally the Celtic nations including Scotland; and L1335 is deemed Pictish.

The English R1b variants include sub-clades of the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21) at 19% to 20% of the male population; the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) at 12%; The Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28) at 6%; the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250) at 6%; DF19 (S232) at 1% – a sister clade to ZZ11, from which DF27 and U152 derive – and other sub-clades account for 13% of the total R1b in England. 

Germany’s breakdown of R1B includes similar sub-clades as England, with U106 at 18%; L21 at 5%; U152 at 9%; DF27 and DF19 combined on 9%; and other sub-clades account for 3%. The Germans and English have almost the exact level of Germanic R1b. The logical difference is that England has more Celtic ancestry and Germany has more influence from Alpine ancestry. 

England and Scotland’s Y-DNA Haplogroups:

England:  R1b [67%] – I1 [14%] – 

R1a [4.5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – J2 [3.5%] – I2a1 [2.5%]  –

E1b1b [2%] – G2a [1.5%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Scotland: R1b [72.5%] – I1 [9%] – R1a [8.5%] – 

I2a2 [4%] – J2 [2%] – E1b1b [1.5%] – I2a1 [1%] –

G2a [0.5%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

England:   R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 –

J2 – I2a1 – E1b1b – G2a – T1a – Q

Scotland:   R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 –

J2 – E1b1b – I2a1 – G2a – T1a – Q

The sequencing is almost a mirror image, though the variations in R1b sub-clades are what make England, English and Scotland, Scottish. Two separate, distinct, identities, tribes, peoples, nations and kingdoms. A breakdown of the Haplogroups for the major regions of England and Scotland and the percentages for the defining marker paternal Haplogroup R1b; key Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 and to a lesser extent R1a (from admixture) – compared with the national average above.

Cornwall & Devon:   R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – G – J2 – E1b –

I2a1 – J1 – T

Northeast England:  R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – G – J2 – E1b –

J1 – Q – I2a1 

Southwest England: R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – E1b – J2 –

G – I2a1 – J1 – T – Q

West Midlands:         R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b – J2 –

G – I2a1 

Home Counties:        R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b – J2 –

G – I2a1 – J1 – T – Q

East Anglia:                R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – G – E1b –

I2a1 – J2 – J1 

Cornwall & Devon:   R1b 75.5% – I1 8% – I2a2 3.5% – R1a 4%  

Southwest England: R1b 72% – I1 15% – I2a2 4% – R1a 5%   

Home Counties         R1b 68% – I1 10.5% – I2a2 4.5% – R1a 3.5%

Northeast England   R1b 65% – I1 14.5% – I2a2 4% – R1a 5%   

West Midlands          R1b 66% – I1 17.5% – I2a2 5% – R1a 3%   

East Anglia                 R1b 56.5% – I1 19.5% – I2a2 8% – R1a 5%   

Northeast Scotland: R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – I2a1 – J2 

Southern Scotland:  R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b – I2a1 –

J2 – G – J1

Western Scotland:    R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – I2a1 –

E1b – J2 

Orkney:                       R1b – R1a – I1 – I2a2 – I2a1 – T1a

Shetland:                    R1b – R1a – I1 – Q – I2a2 – T1a 

Western Scotland:    R1b 72% – I1 8.5% – I2a2 6.5% – R1a 7.5% 

Northeast Scotland: R1b 69.5% – I1 13% – I2a2 6.5% – R1a 4% 

Shetlands:                  R1b 68.5% – I1 13.5% – I2a2 0.5% – R1a 15.5% 

Orkney:                       R1b 62% – I1 10.5% – I2a2 2% – R1a 22.5% 

Southern Scotland:   R1b 57% – I1 19.5% – I2a2 11% – R1a 3.5% 

Colour code: Red = England; Blue = Scotland.

                                          R1b       I1      I2a2     R1a     

Cornwall & Devon          76         8          4          4           

Southwest England        72        15          4          5              

Western Scotland           72         9           7          8            

Northeast Scotland        70        13          7          4          

Shetlands                         69        14      0.5         16     

Home Counties               68        11          5          4        

West Midlands                66        18         5           3       

Northeast England         65        15         4           5      

Orkneys                            62         11         2         23           

East Anglia                       57       20          8          5       

Southern Scotland          57       20         11          4        

A comparison of England and Scotland, reveals that though different they are similar. Most commentators regard the English and Lowland Scot as being the same. As if, geography, accent and culture divides them rather than ethnicity. 

Recall, that Haplogroup R1b is indicative of Western Europe and embraces all of Abraham’s descendants as well as that of his two brothers. Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is distinctly related to the peoples of Eastern Europe and beyond and is found in considerably lower levels heading from Central to Western Europe. Haplogroup I1 is strongly attached to north western Europe and hence the higher levels in Scotland and England. Similarly, I2a2 is primarily a north western European sub-clade of I2.

Comparing the English regions, highlights that R1b and I1 are the two dominant Haplogroups in each case and similarly for mainland Scotland, apart from the Orkney and Shetland Islands. Shetland and Orkney reveal Norse influence with the higher levels of R1a (only through previous admixture) and a truer reflection by the older I1 Haplogroup.

The high population regions comprising the Home Counties, West Midlands and the Northeast are all comparable and match England’s overall percentages. East Anglia stands out as different from the rest of England. It is this area which has experienced the biggest depletion of male population due to migration, particularly to America and also bore the brunt of the successive invasions by the Saxon tribes from the Continent. Southern Scotland mirrors East Anglia in England regarding Haplogroup percentages in R1b and I1. With less invaders who introduced Haplogroup R1b remaining, while exhibiting higher levels of I1 and I2a2, as probable evidence of the original male population prior to the Scottish tribes arrival. 

Comparing the English and Scottish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux, German cousins and Jewish twin brother.

Colour code: Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                           R1b      R1a       I1       I2a1    I2a2      E1b1b     J2      J1     

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     

Sephardim        30          4                                                  9        23       20

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                   

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Germany           45         16        16          2           5            6           5                    

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                   

Luxembourg     61          3           3         3            6            5          8          3       

Flanders            61          4         12          3            5            5          4          1         

England             67          5         14          3          5             2          4          

Scotland             73          9          9           1          4            2           2           

A difference displayed in the similarity of Y-DNA to mtDNA is that the Flemish are more similar with England and Scotland, whereas it was Germany, then the Flemish and Dutch least in the mtDNA Haplogroup sequence percentages. This time regarding the male Y chromosome, it is the Flemish who are closest, then the Dutch and Germany last.

Whereas the other sons of Abraham dwelling in Scandinavia are more akin with the Sephardim with lower R1b percentages. The Nordic nations have far higher levels of I1 and R1a, revealing different paternal bloodlines resulting from even more extensive admixture than the Germanic peoples to the South in Germany and which includes the English and Scottish.

Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Jacob’s sons Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Sephardim    43      20      23         9        [8]       4        30       34  

Ashkenazim  38      19       19       21       [10]    10         12       22 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23        21         6        12        16       28

Italy                19        3       16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16        45       61

Flanders          5         1        4          5          4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6        52

England           4                   4         2           2        5        67       72

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15        33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16        22       38

Wallonia          2                   2         6           6        7        60       67

Scotland          2                   2         2        0.5        9        73       82

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7         55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26       32       58

Iceland                                                                    23       42       65

Finland                                         0.5                       5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2 and G2a percentages. While the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, both eclipse Georgia’s J1 levels, with the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia and the Ashkenazi Jew possessing the highest percentage of E1b1b with Greece. These Haplogroups aside from G (Shem) are indicative of Arab and related peoples who descend from Ham or Canaan and not Shem.

Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. Both England and Scotland carry a higher percentage of combined R1 than Poland and Spain and Scotland replaces Spain with the highest frequency of R1b in Europe. 

It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. Scotland is an additional example supporting this fact.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                         R1a       R1b        I1      I2a1       I2a2     N1c

Portugal          1.5         56           2       1.5           5          

Spain                  2         69        1.5          5           1

Luxembourg     3         61           3          3           6              

France                3         59          9           3          4            

Switzerland       4         50        14           2          8          1

Netherlands      4         49        17            1          7               

Flanders            4          61        12            3          5

Brazil                  4         54                      [9]            

Italy                     4        39          5            3          3         

Sephardim         4        30         [1]                             

Finland               5          4         28                    0.5       62

England              5        67         14           3           5        

Frisians               7        55       [34]           

Wallonia             7        60         11           2           5

Scotland             9         73          9           1           4         

Turkey                8         16           1            4     0.5         4  

Ashkenazim     10         12        [4]                              0.2

Greece               12         16          4          10      1.5      

Denmark          15         33        34            2        6         1

Sweden             16         22        37            2        4         7

Germany          16         45        16             2        5         1

Iran                   16         10                      0.5                    1           

Romania          18         16          4           28        3         2

Austria             19         32        12              7        3      0.5

Iceland             23        42        29                        4         1

Norway             26       32        32                         5        3

Ukraine            44          8         5             21     0.5        6

Russia               46         6          5             11                 23

Poland              58        13          9              6         2        4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.

Finnish men possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Scotland now becomes the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with the highest percentage of R1b and Finland at the other end of the nations in Europe with the lowest R1b level.

Thank you constant reader for staying the course. It has been and remains a roller coaster ride of surprises and shocks to challenge even the most open minded of individuals. Of all the thirty-four chapters comprising The Noachian Legacy, none more than the present one contains permutations of such far reaching prophetic profundity and necessary historical revision, as the truth regarding the biblical identity of the tribe of Judah.

It is the most vital key there is in completely explaining the entire biblical narrative.

Many will deny and scorn the material laid before you and the majority (perhaps) will not be ready to embrace the power and plain speaking of the points presented. Yet in time – prior to the return of the Messiah – it is prayerfully and faithfully hoped that a growing proportion of the English people will learn about their true identity. In so doing, unlocking vast portions of the Word written expressly to them; encouraging, exhorting and edifying those who now understand they are the tribe the Eternal loves in England’s green and pleasant land.

It is fittingly, Scotland’s historic bard and England’s greatest playwright who ably provide the final words:

“My dear, my native soil! For whom my warmest wish to Heav’n is sent, Long may thy hardy sons of rustic toil Be blest with health, and peace, and sweet content!”

Rabbie Burns

“This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle… This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.”

William Shakespeare (Richard II, Act 2, Scene 1)

… anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.

Revelation 3:18-20 New King James Version

Call to Me, and I will answer you. I will tell you of great things, things beyond what you can imagine, things you could never have known.

Jeremiah 33:3 The Voice

“When a man who is honestly mistaken hears or sees the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.”

Richard Humpal

“People say they love truth, but in reality they want to believe that which they love is true.”

Robert Ringer

“Cowardice asks the question: Is it safe? 

Expediency asks the question: Is it politic? 

Vanity asks the question: Is it popular? 

But conscience asks the question: Is it right? 

And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it simply because it is right.” 

Martin Luther King Junior 

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

Addendum

As well intentioned as the map below portrays the modern descendants of Jacob’s sons, it is entirely incorrect.

Constant readers will recognise how the nations of Northwest Europe are the offspring of Abraham, whether by his wife Keturah (Benelux, Scandinavia and Iceland) or Sarah’s handmaid, Hagar (Germany and Austria) – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

While the French descend from Abraham’s nephew, Lot and the Swiss from Abraham’s brother, Haran – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

The chapters which follow will elucidate on the exact locations for Judah and Benjamin’s brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Gad, Zebulun, Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim and Dan – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; Chapter XXXII Zebulun, Issachar, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes; Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes; Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Chapter XXIX

A handful of the biblical identity of nations attract the most interest in the subject, enthralling the attention of enthusiasts whether they be students or authorities on the matter. The most popular include the mighty Assyrians descended from Asshur; the mysterious Israelite tribe of Dan; the violent and vicious Amalekites; the especially blessed birthright sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh; and last but certainly not least, the mercurial twin brother of Jacob: Esau.

There is not a more contentious identity. For Esau or Edom, has been overly identified with a variety of peoples. Principally with either Turkey, to go hand-in-hand with the Arabs being (incorrectly) labelled Ishmael – which has a measure of legitimacy, as the Ashkenazi branch of Jewry may have a genetic link with the Turks – or with Italy and Germany, which again has a degree of accuracy, as the ruling element of these nations has included infiltration by Esau, refer article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

The Jewish people – similarly like the Arabs, who make their own inaccurate assertion (refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar) – overtly claim descent from Judah, a son of Jacob. Numerous researchers and commentators have arrived at the conclusion and offer convincing evidence to support, that modern Jewry is in fact descended, or in part, from Esau. We will cover a large and significant body of material in seeking to verify if this is so. Incredibly, some Jews themselves not so secretly, admit to descending from Esau.

Yet, we will thoroughly and carefully examine the facts and clues to see if this is true. The magnitude of this revelation is enormous, for it would reveal a conspiracy of deliberate fraud and purposeful mistaken identity. The ramifications of which are immeasurable in themselves, yet would lead astonishingly, to the most pressing and urgent question one could formulate within all identity material:

If the Jews are the biblical Edomites, descended from Esau, and not from the tribe of Judah as claimed… then who pray tell, is the tribe of Judah, the fourth son of the Patriarch Jacob and the first of his two wives, Leah?

Esau’s father, Isaac – born in 1877 BCE – is sandwiched between two enormous presences in the biblical account: Abraham and Jacob. So it is easy to lessen or neglect Isaac’s role. Isaac though, rather like his father Abraham is a laid back, phlegmatic character with normal human failings, yet displaying an unflinching faith in the Almighty and His promises. Evidenced in his willingness to be sacrificed at age thirty, if it meant the promises to his father Abraham were to be fulfilled by another person or in some other, unforeseen way such as through the miracle of his resurrection – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

One can’t help think Isaac had a laconic nature and sense of humour which was epitomised by his name which means: laughter or he will laugh from the sahaq verb, ‘to laugh’ and ‘make fun.’ 

Isaac

We read about Isaac meeting and marrying Rebekah when he was age forty, some three years after his mother Sarah’s death, in 1840 BCE – according to an unconventional chronology. It is a true love story and provides encouragement for all hopeless romantics. Rebekah’s name means: ‘Tied up, secured’ from the verb rbq, ‘to tie firmly.’ It also means, ‘bind, trap’ and ‘snare.’ Rebekah is one of the most prominent women in the Bible, in terms of her active role in steering events of far-reaching consequence. 

Genesis 24:1-67

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Abraham was old… 2 [and] said to his servant [Eliezer], the oldest of his household, who had charge of all that he had… 3 swear by the Lord… that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell, 4 but will go to my country and to my kindred, and take a wife for my son Isaac.” 5 The servant said to him, “Perhaps the woman may not be willing to follow me to this land. Must I then take your son back to the land from which you came?” 6 Abraham said to him, “See to it that you do not take my son back there.”

10 Then the servant took ten of his master’s camels and departed, taking all sorts of choice gifts from his master; and he arose and went to Mesopotamia to the city of Nahor’ – 11 ‘And he made the camels kneel down outside the city by the well of water at the time of evening, the time when women go out to draw water. 12 And he said, “O Lord, God of my master Abraham, please grant me success today and show steadfast love to my master Abraham.”

15 Before he had finished speaking, behold, Rebekah… came out with her water jar on her shoulder. 16 The young woman was very [H3966, greatly, exceedingly] attractive [H2896, good, goodly] in appearance [H4758, to look upon, favoured], a maiden whom no man had known.’

Rebekah

17 ‘Then the servant ran to meet her and said, “Please give me a little water to drink from your jar.” 18 She said, “Drink, my lord.” And she quickly let down her jar upon her hand and gave him a drink. 19 When she had finished giving him a drink, she said, “I will draw water for your camels also, until they have finished drinking.” 20 So she quickly emptied her jar into the trough and ran again to the well to draw water, and she drew for all his camels. 21 The man gazed at her in silence to learn whether the Lord had prospered his journey or not.

22 When the camels had finished drinking, the man took a gold ring weighing a half shekel, and two bracelets for her arms weighing ten gold shekels, [0.25 pounds] 23 and said, “Please tell me whose daughter you are. Is there room in your father’s house for us to spend the night?” 

24 She said to him, “I am the daughter of Bethuel the son of Milcah, whom she bore to Nahor” – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. 25 ‘She added, “We have plenty of both straw and fodder, and room to spend the night.” 

28 Then the young woman ran and told her mother’s household about these things. 29 Rebekah had a brother whose name was Laban. Laban ran out toward the man, to the spring. 30 As soon as he saw the ring and the bracelets on his sister’s arms, and heard the words of Rebekah his sister, “Thus the man spoke to me,” he went to the man… 31 He said, “Come in, O blessed of the Lord. Why do you stand outside? For I have prepared the house and a place for the camels.” 

34 So he said, “I am Abraham’s servant. 50 Then Laban and Bethuel answered and said, “The thing has come from the Lord; we cannot speak to you bad or good. 51 Behold, Rebekah is before you; take her and go, and let her be the wife of your master’s son, as the Lord has spoken.” 52 When Abraham’s servant heard their words, he bowed himself to the earth before the Lord. 53 And the servant brought out jewelry of silver and of gold, and garments, and gave them to Rebekah. He also gave to her brother and to her mother costly ornaments… 59 So they sent away Rebekah their sister and her nurse [Genesis 35:8, ESV: ‘And Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and she was buried [by Jacob] under an oak below Bethel. So he called its name Allon-bacuth (‘oak of weeping’)], and Abraham’s servant and his men. 60 And they blessed Rebekah and said to her, 

Our sister, may you become thousands of ten thousands, and may your offspring possess the gate of those who hate him!”

63 And Isaac went out to meditate in the field toward evening. And he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, there were camels coming. 64 And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she dismounted from the camel 65 and said to the servant, “Who is that man, walking in the field to meet us?” The servant said, “It is my master.” So she took her veil and covered herself. 66 And the servant told Isaac all the things that he had done. 67 Then Isaac brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother and took Rebekah, and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.’

Rebekah’s brother Laban, displays the traits which we observe later, when Jacob goes to live with him. He is bedazzled by the jewels and gifts more than being convinced of the demand of kinship or the will of the Almighty. Even so, it is Rebekah’s choice whether to leave with Abraham’s servant and marry Isaac. Eliezer must have been convincing. Rebekah by her actions, reveals her outgoing personality and that she was a woman of action. In contrast to the laid-backness of Isaac. Rebekah is also shown in the account to be kind, generous and competent. 

Her family’s blessing, meant simply that her descendants would have the upper hand and mastery over their enemies. History shows that sometimes this was dependant on their obedience and how much or how little they pleased the Creator. 

Other times it had no bearing and they were blessed regardless and yet again, it sometimes meant battles would be lost, even for decades, but ultimately, not the war. What is especially curious, is that Esau’s descendants appear to be included in this prophetic blessing.

Recall, Abraham had married his niece on his eldest brother Haran’s, side of the family. Ethnically, she was similar to a Swiss (or French) woman – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. Though Abraham’s servant had travelled to Abraham’s other older brother, Nahor, the father of the Chaldeans. Today along with with Aram’s son Uz, the Chaldeans equate to the Northern and Central Italians. Nahor’s eighth and youngest son with his wife Milcah, was Bethuel, one of the original Italian paternal ancestors. Therefore, Rebekah was from this same line of people.

Genesis 25:20-34

English Standard Version

20 ‘and Isaac was forty years old [in 1837 BCE] when he took Rebekah [who was 20 years old], the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife. 21 And Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife, because she was barren [like his mother, Sarah]. And the Lord granted his prayer, and Rebekah his wife conceived. 22 The children struggled together within her, and she said, “If it is thus, why is this happening to me?” [or ‘why do I live’] So she went to inquire of the Lord. 23 And the Lord said to her…’

This was not the usual moving of arms and legs inside the womb which a mother feels when a foetus changes position or stretches. These two souls were at each other from the beginning. An inherent mistrust and misunderstanding of the other which would only deepen and worsen. These were very painful kicks and thrusts inside Rebekah. It is said that Rebekah, while suffering from her pregnancy, went from neighbour to neighbour asking the women whether they had ever experienced the same. The answer she received is said to have come directly from the Almighty, speaking through an angel. It is also said that she should have borne twelve sons, the fathers of the future twelve tribes; but after the birth of Esau, she became barren once more. 

“Two nations [H1471 – gowy] are in your womb, and two peoples [H3816 – l’owm] from within you [or ‘from birth’] shall be divided [CJB: they will be two rival peoples]; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.”

What is deeply significant in this verse and overlooked by many is that two separate and distinct sons were fashioned in the womb. They were not only to be non-identical twins who just were not going to get along; they were to be different peoples in nature, mind set, objectives, procedures and ideals. So that on one hand, one would wonder if they were really related at all. This makes their identification both clear and complex at one and the same time. 

24 ‘When her days to give birth were completed [in 1817 BCE], behold, there were twins in her womb. 25 The first came out red, all his body like a hairy cloak [or garment], so they called his name Esau.‘ 

The Midrash states that during Rebekah’s pregnancy, whenever ‘she would pass a house of Torah study, Jacob would struggle to come out; whenever she would pass a house of idolatry, Esau would agitate to come out.’

26 ‘Afterward his brother came out with his hand holding Esau’s heel, so his name was called Jacob [‘he takes by the heel’ or ‘he cheats’].’ Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them.

The exact meaning of the word Esau is disputed and is connected to a variety of definitions. It could be related to the Arabic* root gsw, meaning ‘to cover.’ Others have noted the similarity to the Arabic ‘athaa meaning hirsute. The ‘sau’ of Esau’s name in Hebrew means hairy. In Hebrew, the word ‘hairy’ [Hebrew: se’ir] is a wordplay on Seir, the region in which he later settled. Esau became known as Edom, meaning ‘red’ [Hebrew: admoni]; the same colour used to describe Esau’s skin tone. Other traditional sources connect the word with the Hebrew sav’ meaning ‘worthless.’

Abarim Publications define Esau – reflective of Rebekah’s nature – as ‘Doer, Maker, Worker.’ From the verb ‘asa, ‘to do’ or ‘make.’ 

‘The two nicknames of Esau, Edom and Seir, are both obvious in meaning and have to do with Esau’s looks (red and hairy). His proper name however is not as easily derived. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reports that there once was a root (‘asa) that meant to be hairy, and refers to an existing Arabic* verb that means just that. Hence Jones translates with Covered With Hair…’ 

One commentator states the root of the name in Hebrew is derived from the word asuy denoting ‘completion’, thus made and complete, ‘since Esau was born hairy and very strong, being “completed” and not infantile.’

It is ‘possible’ that Esau was brown and hairy as some researchers do not think red, means red. Though a red headed person with red body hair to match, is always associated with pale, fair or freckly skin. Granted, redheads vary from flaming red tresses to strawberry blond and also brownish auburn, as it is a quantitative trait. Regardless if Esau did have red hair, Jacob was Esau’s twin brother, so it shouldn’t be surprising if both their descendants carry common genetic traits and thus exhibit red hair. We have learned that red hair is indicative of the R1b Y-DNA Haplogroup which largely distinguishes Western Europeans from the rest of the world – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

Red hair, like blue eyes is a recessive gene. Jacob would have carried the red hair gene which Esau inherited, even if he didn’t have red hair himself. Due to the recessive nature of this gene, both Isaac and Rebekah would have needed to be carriers for Esau to be born red.

What is significant is that Esau is the first person to be described emphatically as red – unlike Adam, who’s redness was the lifeblood within him, which was a combination of godly spirit and earthly flesh – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Cornerstone Publications adds concerning Esau’s hairiness: ‘The reference to Esau having been hairy all over… can be related to the hair on his head as well, for he and many of his descendants became well-known for wearing long hair, long red hair…’ 

We are now searching for peoples on the Earth with a higher proportion of red hair as this is a sign for Esau’s and Jacob’s descendants. Interestingly, the same word used to describe Esau as red is also used of David in 1 Samuel 16:12 and 17:42. David is a descendant of Jacob, rather tantalisingly through his son, Judah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

Hair colour is the result of the balance between eumelanin and phaeomelanin – types of melanin. Red hair derives from a genetic variant which causes the cell to produce phaeomelanin. It causes the melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) – on chromosomes four and sixteen – to function differently on melanocytes, which leads to less eumelanin – the pigment that results in brown skin, hair and tanning of the skin – and more of the red pigment pheomelanin, present in our lips and nipples.

Red Head Day in Tilburg, Netherlands during the last weekend of August

Approximately two percent of the world’s population naturally has red hair, with the vast majority of red haired individuals having northwestern European ancestry. Western Europe, mainly comprising Abraham’s descendants has more red haired people than any other part of the world. Approximately six to ten percent and up to thirty percent, of the Scottish population has red hair, with an additional forty percent of the population with other hair colourings carrying the gene responsible for red hair; while about ten to thirty percent of the Irish population, specifically in Northern Ireland, have red hair, making it the most red haired country in the world with Scotland. Red hair prevalence in England is around four percent. Ashkenazi Jews also have red hair. About 3.6% of Jewish women have red hair, while 10% of Jewish men have red beards.

In the Americas, the emigration of Europeans has influenced the red haired population. Approximately two to six percent of the American population is redheaded; meaning the United States has the largest redhead population in the world at some seven to twenty million people.

There are some who equate red hair with descending from the Neanderthal, such as the American anthropologist, Carleton Coon in the 1930s and there are some people who link red hair, freckles and pale skin with the Nephilim, which is probably more believable of the two hypotheses – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV.

Red hair, with blond hair, (fair skin) and blue eyes have all been genes carried by Noah and or, his son Shem and possibly their wives Emzara and Sedeqetelebab, respectively. The blue eyes and fair (blond) hair genes – as exhibited predominantly in men with Y-DNA Haplogroups I1 and R1a respectively – were passed to Asshur and Arphaxad and are features of people throughout Russia and Eastern Europe. Red hair associated with R1b on the other hand, appears specific to Arphaxad’s descendant, Abraham (R1b-U106) through Peleg rather than Aram and his male descendants (R1b-DF27). 

There is one location with a high incidence of red hair outside northwestern Europe and they are the Udmurts of the Urmurtia Republic within Russia. Is this a residue of the Khazar nation? The Romanov royal family of Russia – Nicolas II, Alexandra and their four daughters and one son – have been described as having red or red-gold (strawberry blond) hair and colour photos show this to be the case – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Udmurts say ‘a person with red hair is the sun’s child’ and ‘a redheaded person is closest to the gods. The gods love them.’

Approximately seventeen percent of people on the earth have blues eyes – though by 2100 this figure will reduce to just 3% – and when combined with the one to two percent of people with red hair, the odds of having both traits diminish to 0.17%. For instance, of a world population of 8.2 billion, that would be only fourteen million people.

There are numerous mentions of red haired as well as fair skinned individuals in the Bible in reference to both lines descending from Isaac and Rebekah. We will look at them as we encounter each personality, though it may be of interest to look also at three people we have already previously discussed. 

Sarah and Rebekah are both described as being fair: “And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that [Abram] said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now, I know that thou art a fair [H3303 – yapheh: fair, fair one, beautiful] woman to look upon [H4758 – mareh]…” – Genesis 12:11. “And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman [Sarah] that she was very fair [yapheh]” – Genesis 12:14, KJV.

“And the damsel [Rebekah] was very fair [H2896 – towb: good, fine, pleasant, beautiful] to look upon [H4758 – mareh]…” – Genesis 24:16. “And the men of the place asked [Isaac] of his wife; and he said, She is my wife; lest, said he, the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah; because she was fair [towb] to look upon” – Genesis 26:7, KJV.

As we have touched upon previously, Esther who became Queen of the Persian Empire, was a fair skinned person. She was from the tribe of Benjamin – Esther 2:5. “The young woman had a beautiful figure [H3303 – yapheh] and was lovely [H8389 – toar] to look at [H4758 – mareh: appearance, behold]…” – Esther 2:7, ESV.

The word ‘beautiful’ is the same word which was used when speaking about Sarah, though interestingly not for Rebekah. It stems from H3302 meaning ‘to be bright’ and is the only place in all of the book of Esther where this word is used. Esther had a bright or light skin. The Hebrew word translated as ‘lovely’ in verse seven is in regard to a person’s ‘form’ or ‘shape’, meaning to delineate an ‘outline’, referring to their ‘appearance’. Thus Esther was not only fair and beautiful, she was a woman with an attractive figure. We read that Vashti, the former haughty queen, was also fair as in beautiful (towb) rather than light skinned (yapheh) – Esther 1:11. 

Genesis: 27 ‘When the boys grew up, Esau was a skillful hunter [like Ishmael – Genesis 21:20], a man of the field [the outdoors], while Jacob was a quiet man, dwelling in tents.

28 Isaac loved Esau because he ate of his game, but Rebekah loved Jacob.’

And herein lay a key issue in the events which transpired. Each parent had a favourite and so this affected transparent lines of communication between Isaac and Rebekah when it really mattered.

Esau had rougher qualities which distinguished him from his twin brother. Jacob was a plainer or simpler man, depending on the translation of the Hebrew word tam which can also mean a ‘relatively perfect’ man. Esau was a strong, savvy hunter and like a beast he was physically fit and restlessly on the move. Esau bore some resemblance to Cain, another man of the field (Genesis 4:3) and with Nimrod, the mighty hunter (Genesis 10:9); who stood in front of (or against) the Eternal – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Jonathan ben Uzziel – Targums of Onkelos – states: ‘Esau was a man of idleness to catch birds and beasts, a man going forth into the field to kill lives, as Nimrod had killed, and Hanok his son.’ Esau is also described as being cunning. The Book of Jasher 28:19-20 reveals that Esau was a ‘designing and deceitful man, one who hunted after the hearts of men and inveigled them.’ A footnote says Esau stole the minds of people, an insightful interpretation when measured against the deceptive qualities being employed by the Edomites today. 

Additional information is provided in the Book of Jubilees 19:12-19: 

12 ‘… Rebecca bare to Isaac two sons, Jacob and Esau, and 13 Jacob was a smooth and upright man, and Esau was fierce, a man of the field, and hairy, and Jacob dwelt in tents. 14 And the youths grew, and Jacob learned to write; but Esau did not learn, for he was a man of the field and a hunter, and he learnt war, and all his deeds were fierce. 15 And Abraham loved Jacob, but Isaac loved Esau. 16 And Abraham saw the deeds of Esau, and he knew that in Jacob should his name and seed be called [Israelites]; and he called Rebecca and gave commandment regarding Jacob, for he knew that she (too) loved Jacob much more than Esau.

17 And he said to her: My daughter, watch over my [grand]son Jacob, For he shall be in my stead on the earth, And for a blessing in the midst of the children of men [through Abraham’s great grandson Joseph], And for the splendor of the whole seed of Shem. 18 For I know that Yahweh will choose him to be a people for possession unto Himself, above all peoples that are upon the face of the earth. 19 And behold, Isaac my son loves Esau more than Jacob, but I see that you truly love Jacob.’

Families… complicated.

Genesis: 29 ‘Once when Jacob was cooking stew, Esau came in from the field, and he was exhausted. 30 And Esau said to Jacob, “Let me eat some of that red stew, for I am exhausted!” (Therefore his name was called Edom [red]).

31 Jacob said, “Sell me your birthright now.”

32 Esau said, “I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?”

33 Jacob said, “Swear to me now.”

So he swore to him and sold his birthright to Jacob.

34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil [red pottage] stew, and he ate and drank and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.’

Esau

Esau was not just tired or hungry, he was absolutely shattered and that way when you are so famished, you just need to eat immediately. It does not appear to be a typical situation of Esau returning from a normal hunt. Possibly, Esau had narrowly escaped with his life from a more serious situation. It is in this moment that Jacob chanced his arm and went for Esau while he was at his most vulnerable. Jacob would have been well aware of Esau’s personality and character weaknesses and vice-versa. The opportunity presented itself and he struck quickly and devastatingly.

In fact, the whole conversation and scenario only really makes sense if we appreciate the age of Esau and Jacob, as being much younger than usually assumed. Their abrupt language and petulant manner, is reflected by their level of maturity and is recognisable as teenage behaviour. The Talmud teaches that the sale of the birthright occurred straight after Abraham died in 1802 BCE, when Esau and Jacob were fifteen years of age. Jewish sources say Esau was considered a rebellious son; living a double life until he sold his birthright.

Apparently, the lentil stew Jacob was cooking was intended for his father Isaac, as lentils became the traditional mourner’s meal for Jews. Tradition teaches that on the day before returning home, in a wrathful rage over the death of Abraham, Esau committed five transgressions – (1) he raped a betrothed young woman; (2) he committed murder (Nimrod, according to Jewish sources); (3) he denied God; (4) he denied the resurrection of the dead – Job 14:14; (5) and he spurned his birthright.

Whether Esau committed the first two is not definitively known. The last three are plausible if he was angry and grief stricken. Nimrod would have been somewhere near seven thousand years old according to an unconventional chronology. His age not so much the issue as a direct, first generation Nephilim, but rather if he were still alive, would he not have still been ruling Babylon and this does not seem to be the case, as we learned when studying Abraham – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Rob Skiba remains convinced that Esau is linked with Nimrod:

‘In the context of the Jasher account, that story makes a whole lot more… sense… doesn’t it? I mean think about it. Without Jasher, the story in Genesis 25 makes no sense at all… After reading Jasher, you now completely understand what is going on and why. 

Esau had just killed the king of the world! By the way, the “valuable garments” that Nimrod had, “with which he prevailed over the whole land” were the original garments God made for Adam and Eve back in the garden… so here Esau has chopped off Nimrod’s head and stolen his “magic garments.” The rest of Nimrod’s “mighty men” were after him now. Esau came home famished from a very busy day! So, when Jacob says he wants his birthright, Esau basically said, “Look. What do I care about my birthright? I just killed King Nimrod! I’m a dead man. His warriors are probably coming for me as we speak. Just give me something to eat!” Esau was extremely vulnerable here and Jacob totally took advantage of the situation for his own selfish gain…’

Did Esau commit rape and murder? If so, he would have been on edge to say the least and very much of the rationale that his life was over, so why not sell a birthright he was not going to live to receive. The last three acts somewhat bundle together and committing the fifth, could well have meant him being guilty of the other two. A profound irony would be in place if Esau denied the resurrection, as it would be a prominent sect descended from Edom at the time of Christ, who would also deny the resurrection.

The meal Jacob gave Esau was pottage, a thick soup made of vegetables. This can contain meat, though as emphasis is given to it being red from lentils, this is unlikely, particularly with no mention of animal flesh. Some claim red or ruddy can mean a brownish colour, but again the colour red is emphasised, indicating vegetables and not meat that could begin red and turn brown.

Calling a spade a spade is required here and the sad fact of the matter, is that Esau – though undeniably charismatic – was an unsavoury character. As with Canaan and his descendants, because Ham and specifically his wife Na’eltama’uk sinned with Noah, it doesn’t mean every black person is an evil person – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Similarly, it would be unfair to tar every descendant of Esau with the same brush. Esau and Jacob were opposites in every way. Vitally, Esau was physically oriented and lacked true spiritual depth. He was a rugged, masculine rather, macho man of the moment, filled with passion. He did not perceive the end game or past the present today

We will find in bitter irony, that the influential echelons of Esau’s descendants are visionary masters of the end game and have also perfected the guise of spirituality. Esau displayed his violent nature in impulsively and impetuously bargaining away his birthright for a pot of red lentil stew. His actions are hard to fathom in that he grossly under valued the birthright; deeming it as almost worthless; beneath him; and as if he did not need it. It really only leaves immense pride on Esau’s behalf, so much so that his pride either blinded him in really seeing the birthright’s worth; or worse, he really felt above it and didn’t need the birthright.

The Origin of the Nations, 1957, Herman Hoeh comments on Esau – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Abraham had another son, Isaac. Isaac had two sons, twins, named Esau and Jacob. Jacob was the younger and the stronger. These two brothers gave rise to two different nationalities. “… And the first came forth ruddy, all over like a hairy mantle” (Genesis 25:23-25). Esau, the elder, was not properly developed. The lanugo or hair that covers a foetus through the sixth, seventh and eighth months failed to drop off Esau as it does with all normal children. Esau was weaker, not fully developed. His children, of course, did NOT inherit this peculiar characteristic. Esau did not give rise to a different race, but to a different nationality. Esau’s children are white, as history proves. Esau’s descendants play a vital part in world affairs today! Where are his descendants?

Notice some of the sons of Esau: Teman, Omar, Amalek (Genesis 25:11). These are not Jewish names! Yet some claim that the Jews are the children of Esau. Nothing could be further from the truth – as we shall presently see. Esau, or Edom, as he is also called, lived southeast of Palestine near Petra. Arab Bedouins live there now. Then where have Esau’s children gone? From the days of Nebuchadnezzar, who carried them captive, they disappear for 1000 years from history. Then suddenly we find Amalek the name of a city in Turkestan in Central Asia (from Paul Herrmann’s SIEBEN VORBEI UND ACHT VERWEHT, page 451). The Egyptians used to call the Amalekites Amu. In Turkestan is the River Amu today! In Bible times the Edomites inhabited Mt. Seir (Genesis 32:4). In Turkestan is the Syr Darya – the River of Syr or Seir. The leading Turkish tribe is the Ottoman.

The prophecies referring to Edom or Esau mention Teman as the leading tribe in these latter days (Obadiah 9). The conclusion is inescapable. The Otto-man Turks are the sons of Te-man. Merely the vowels in spelling have been changed over these past millenniums. From Central Asia the Turks or Edomites moved into Asia Minor. That is where Esau’s children live today! Turkey controls the “crossway” of the nations the Dardanelles (Obadiah 14). How clear, ESAU OR EDOM IS TURKEY today!’

Hoeh confidently claims a Turkish identity for Esau, though we have already addressed the convincing evidence of an Elamite identity for Turkey – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; and Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. Additionally, the Turks are not renowned for their red hair and fair skin. Nor does their history, autosomal DNA or Haplogroups share a closeness with the northwestern European peoples. Paradoxically, it seems likewise, with the people who call themselves Jewish – particularly the Ashkenazi Jew. With regard to the ‘crossroads’, there is a modern nation which dramatically stands to fulfil this prophecy. It is not turkey.

Genesis 26:1-35

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now there was a famine in the land, besides the former famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went to Gerar to Abimelech king of the Philistines. 2 And the Lord appeared to him and said, “Do not go down to Egypt; dwell in the land of which I shall tell you. 

3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with you and will bless you, for to you and to your offspring I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath that I swore to Abraham your father. 4 I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and will give to your offspring all these lands. And in your offspring all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, 5 because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.”

6 So Isaac settled in Gerar. 7 When the men of the place asked him about his wife, he said, “She is my sister,” for he feared to say, “My wife,” thinking, “lest the men of the place should kill me because of Rebekah,” because she was attractive in appearance. 8 When he had been there a long time, Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out of a window and saw Isaac laughing with Rebekah his wife [suggesting an intimate relationship]. 9 So Abimelech called Isaac and said, “Behold, she is your wife. How then could you say, ‘She is my sister?'” Isaac said to him, “Because I thought, ‘Lest I die because of her.'” 10 Abimelech said, “What is this you have done to us? One of the people might easily have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us.” 11 So Abimelech warned all the people, saying, “Whoever touches this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.”

The King of the Philistines, Abimelech is not the Pharaoh of Egypt and nor is he likely the same Abimelech who Abraham and Sarah met in 1878 BCE. For Isaac and Rebekah meet Abimelech circa 1790 BCE. He was either very young with Sarah and very old with Rebekah; or the alternative explanation is that the word Abimelech is a title and not a personal, first name. We learn that Isaac and Rebekah are close and happy, with Isaac living up to his name of laughter. Isaac though, passes Rebekah off as his sister, just as his father Abraham did with his mother Sarah. The narratives appear similar yet highlight an important difference, in differentiating Rebekah from Sarah. 

In at least one of the two wife/sister episodes in which she figures, Sarah seems to have had a sexual relationship with Pharaoh (Genesis 12:13-14, 19) thus ensuring the safety of her husband and their household. Rebekah’s marital fidelity in contrast, is not compromised – Genesis 26:10. Her relationship with Isaac is ‘consistently monogamous, unlike that of Sarah, who not only has extramarital sex, but also provides her husband with [her servant or handmaiden] Hagar, and [that] of Rachel and Leah, who are co-wives and [whom] also provide [servant] wives to Jacob.’

Genesis: 12 ‘And Isaac sowed in that land and reaped in the same year a hundredfold. The Lord blessed him, 13 and the man became rich, and gained more and more until he became very wealthy. 14 He had possessions of flocks and herds and many servants, so that the Philistines envied him. 15 (Now the Philistines had stopped and filled with earth all the wells that his father’s servants had dug in the days of Abraham his father.) 16 And Abimelech said to Isaac, “Go away from us, for you are much mightier than we.”

We have learned how the Almighty blessed Abraham with great wealth, which was partly passed to his six sons with Keturah and also a substantial portion to his son, Ishmael. The primary birthright blessing had been received by Isaac. Isaac now in his own right was being blessed immensely and adding substantial wealth to his inheritance. All this was destined for Esau as the birthright holder. Jacob would have benefited from gifts similar to that which Midian and his five brothers received. Only Esau could ever answer the question as to how he could flippantly give this away. We will learn though as we continue, that Esau regretted his decision and reneged on the deal struck with his younger twin.

Genesis: 17 ‘So Isaac departed from there and encamped in the Valley of Gerar and settled there. 18 And Isaac dug again the wells of water that had been dug in the days of Abraham his father, which the Philistines had stopped after the death of Abraham. And he gave them the names that his father had given them. 19 But when Isaac’s servants dug in the valley and found there a well of spring water, 20 the herdsmen of Gerar quarreled with Isaac’s herdsmen, saying, “The water is ours.” So he called the name of the well Esek [contention], because they contended with him. 21 Then they dug another well, and they quarreled over that also, so he called its name Sitnah [enmity].

22 And he moved from there and dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it. So he called its name Rehoboth [broad places or room], saying, “For now the Lord has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land.” 23 From there he went up to Beersheba. 24 And the Lord appeared to him the same night and said, “I am the God of Abraham your father. Fear not, for I am with you and will bless you and multiply your offspring for my servant Abraham’s sake.” 25 So he built an altar there and called upon the name of the Lord and pitched his tent there. And there Isaac’s servants dug a well.’

Isaac in his usual casual manner, chose to avoid conflict with the Philistines over the original wells Abraham had dug. The Eternal told him not to be afraid. Isaac had made a habit of accepting what befell him in his life… ‘being used as the potential object of sacrifice; waiting for the selection of a bride; walking away from the strife over the first two wells; being heartsick over Esau’s foreign wives’ and allowing himself to be deceived by Rebekah and Jacob over Esau’s inheritance.

Genesis: 26 ‘When Abimelech went to him from Gerar with Ahuzzath his adviser and Phicol the commander of his army, 27 Isaac said to them, “Why have you come to me, seeing that you hate me and have sent me away from you?” 28 They said, “We see plainly that the Lord has been with you. So we said, let there be a sworn pact between us, between you and us, and let us make a covenant with you, 29 that you will do us no harm, just as we have not touched you and have done to you nothing but good and have sent you away in peace. You are now the blessed of the Lord.” 30 So he made them a feast, and they ate and drank. 31 In the morning they rose early and exchanged oaths. And Isaac sent them on their way, and they departed from him in peace. 32 That same day Isaac’s servants came and told him about the well that they had dug and said to him, “We have found water.” 33 He called it Shibah [oath]; therefore the name of the city is Beersheba to this day.’

Peace between the family of Isaac and the Philistines was relatively short-lived and had become full on aggression a few centuries later when the family of Jacob, then grown large returned – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Genesis: 34 ‘When Esau was forty years old, he took Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite to be his wife, and Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite, 35 and they made life bitter [they were bitterness of spirit, a grief of mind] for Isaac and Rebekah.’

Esau was forty years old in 1777 BCE – as was Jacob. There are two matters which arise from Esau’s marriages. The first is that they are recorded in separate accounts with the wives possessing alternative names, therefore a reconciling of scripture and the number of wives is required. The second matter is the ethnic identity of the wives and their fathers and the ramifications that entails.

Genesis 27:1-46

English Standard Version

1 ‘When Isaac was old [117 years of age in 1760 BCE] and his eyes were dim so that he could not see, he called Esau [who was 57 years of age] his older son and said to him, “My son”; and he answered, “Here I am.” 2 He said, “Behold, I am old; I do not know the day of my death. 3 Now then, take your weapons, your quiver and your bow, and go out to the field and hunt game for me, 4 and prepare for me delicious food, such as I love, and bring it to me so that I may eat, that my soul may bless you before I die.”

Rightly or wrongly as intimated, Isaac and Rebekah had their favourites. It is interesting that the phlegmatic yet light hearted Isaac did not favour the quieter and more serious son Jacob, but rather the robust, athletic and outgoing Esau, who was much like his uncle – Isaac’s older half-brother – Ishmael. 

Genesis: 5 ‘Now Rebekah was listening when Isaac spoke to his son Esau. So when Esau went to the field to hunt for game and bring it, 6 Rebekah said to her son Jacob, “I heard your father speak to your brother Esau… 8 Now therefore, my son, obey my voice as I command you. 9 Go to the flock and bring me two good young goats, so that I may prepare… them… 10 And you shall bring it to your father to eat, so that he may bless you before he dies.” 11 But Jacob said to Rebekah his mother, “Behold, my brother Esau is a hairy man, and I am a smooth man. 12 Perhaps my father will feel me, and I shall seem to be mocking him and bring a curse upon myself and not a blessing.” 13 His mother said to him, “Let your curse be on me, my son; only obey my voice, and go, bring them to me”

Rebekah is again a woman of action in contrast with Isaac and as it was Jacob’s idea to take Esau’s birthright, it was actually his mother’s plan to fait accompli the blessing too. Esau was obviously not willing to relinquish this to Jacob, even though he had promised the birthright to him, some forty-two years previously. A possible factor in both Jacob’s and Rebekah’s actions, were the sentiments of Abraham before he died, in choosing Jacob to be the beneficiary of the Creator’s promises to Abraham.

Genesis: 14 ‘So he went and took them and brought them to his mother, and his mother prepared delicious food, such as his father loved. 15 Then Rebekah took the best garments of Esau her older son, which were with her in the house, and put them on Jacob her younger son. 16 And the skins of the young goats she put on his hands and on the smooth part of his neck. 17 And she put the delicious food and the bread, which she had prepared, into the hand of her son Jacob.’

This clearly shows that not only was Esau hairy at birth, he had grown into a hairy man. Regarding Nimrod and the account of Adam and Eve’s original skins of clothing being in Noah’s possession and subsequently stolen by Ham, then given to Cush and finally to Nimrod. There are some inconsistencies in that a. Cush was not Nimrod’s forefather; b. a chronology including Nimrod still being alive; c. and yet not ruling Babylon for Esau to then steal from him seems strongly untenable.

Even though it makes for a good story in explaining why Esau was exhausted; flippantly selling his birthright – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

It also raises the question as previously discussed, were the ‘magic garments’ really clothes? If Adam and Eve as spiritual creatures, now turned physical as punishment for their taking the path offered by the Serpent Samael – the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, symbolism for the mother goddess Asherah – then could these skins really be their physicalness (or literal skin) and something that could be passed on? – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Alternatively, would garments survive twenty-five thousand years? 

Various Jewish sources state the garments were animal skins passed down from Adam, finally to Esau and it was these which Rebekah took and had Jacob dress in before going to his father Isaac. The Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: ‘Rebekah took the pleasant vestments of Esau her elder son which had formerly been Adam’s; but which that day Esau had not worn, but they remained with her in the house, and (with them) she dressed Jacob her younger son. And the skins of the kids she laid upon his hands and the smooth parts of his neck.’

Louis Ginzberg in Legends of the Jews, says: ‘[Rebekah] dressed [Jacob] in them, for those garments were the garb of the priesthood, and the Holy One… and prior to the construction of the Tabernacle, sacrificial worship was performed by firstborns. Since Esau had sold his birthright to Jacob, Rebekah considered that henceforth it was proper for Jacob to wear these garments, because he now had the status of firstborn.’ 

Though this version of events is more credible than the Nimrod legend, the clothes of Esau seem to be just his clothes and no more than that. It was the goat skin and hair – very much like human hair – on Jacob’s hands and neck that clinched the deception. The Book of Jubilees 26:11 states: ‘Rebecca took the goodly raiment of Esau, her elder son, which was with her in the house, and she clothed Jacob, her younger son, (with them)…’ The Ellicott Commentary on Genesis 27:15: ‘Evidently the clothing was something special, and such as was peculiar to Esau. For ordinary raiment, however handsome, would not have been kept in the mother’s tent.’ 

The Cambridge Bible: “Goodly, literally ‘choice, desirable.’ [H2532 – chemdaw: precious, valuable, beloved. The root term is H2530 chamad, ‘desire or covet’]. By this is meant the clothes worn by Esau on festivals and solemn occasions.” The Poole Commentary: ‘Either the sacerdotal garments which the eldest son wore in the administration of that office [of Priest] which belonged to him; or rather some other suit better than ordinary.’ Esau’s clothes at the least were ceremonial and more than just his best suit so-to-speak. Whether they were Adam’s garments is conjecture and not as reliable. In Genesis we read the following regarding Adam and Eve.

Genesis 3:21

English Standard Version

‘And the Lord God made [H6213 – asah] for Adam and for his wife garments [H3801 – kthoneth] of skins [H5785 – owr] and clothed them.’

Commentators authoritatively state, that these skins were made from animal hides, yet the original Hebrew does not state this at all. Similar to the gopher wood of Noah’s Ark, which was not wood from a tree – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The word for skin is translated as skin 96 times in the KJV Bible, far more than any other word. Hide twice and leather once. The word for garment is translated as coat 23 times; garment 5 times; and robe once. It has the connotation of a long undergarment of linen. The words used for make are do (1333), make (653) and wrought (52), having the connotation of, to ‘fashion, appoint, ordain’ or ‘institute.’ It can also mean, ‘to press’ or ‘to squeeze.’ 

The garment as a coat or robe was long, covering the whole body – like a full body suit or integument. The fact that the word skin is used over hide, shows that it is not an animal skin being used. Thus, either literal new skin for a new physical body which covered all the body and that was fashioned by the Eternal and required squeezing into is an option, or it is about a one piece suit of clothing and an unknown material which fully clothed Adam and Eve. Either are plausible as it was designed to cover Adam and Eve’s ‘nakedness.’ It is universally assumed that their modesty was being covered, though it could just as much be referring to covering their exposure as new physical beings.

Genesis: 18 ‘So he went in to his father and said, “My father.” And he said, “Here I am. Who are you, my son?” 19 Jacob said to his father, “I am Esau your firstborn [1]. I have done as you told me [2]; now sit up and eat of my game, that your soul may bless me.” 20 But Isaac said to his son, “How is it that you have found it so quickly, my son?” He answered, “Because the Lord your God granted me success [3].” 

21 Then Isaac said to Jacob, “Please come near, that I may feel you, my son, to know whether you are really my son Esau or not.” 22 So Jacob went near to Isaac his father, who felt him and said, “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau [4].” 23 And he did not recognize him, because his hands were hairy like his brother Esau’s hands. So he blessed him. 

24 He said, “Are you really my son Esau?” He answered, “I am [5].” 25 Then he said, “Bring it near to me, that I may eat of my son’s game and bless you.” So he brought it near to him, and he ate; and he brought him wine, and he drank. 26 Then his father Isaac said to him, “Come near and kiss me, my son.” 27 So he came near and kissed him. And Isaac smelled the smell of his garments [6] and blessed him and said…’

It is easy to focus on the six lying deceptions against Isaac and the cheating and stealing by Jacob against Esau. The fact that Esau later plans to kill his brother is wholly understandable. The deception perpetrated by Jacob and Rebekah, towards Isaac was also a severe wound in family loyalty. We know from the biblical account that Jacob and his father had little interaction between this event and Isaac’s death.

Similarly, how did this affect an apparently great marriage and what was the true impact on Isaac’s and Rebekah’s relationship from then on. Did Isaac laugh as much as his name entails and his personality hints? Rebekah lived up (or down) to her name of binding, snaring and trapping and Jacob certainly fulfilled his own name by supplanting and cheating. Abarim publications says: ‘The name Jacob [means] ‘he who closely follows, supplanter’ From the verb ‘abaq, ‘to follow at the heel’ or ‘supplant.’

‘BDB Theological Dictionary and NOBSE Study Bible Name List both read Supplanter. BDB adds Heel, Overreach, One Closely Following. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads He Will Supplant, A Heeler, One Who Trips Up or Takes Hold By The Heel. Besides in Genesis 27:36, the word occurs twice as [a] regular word in the text: in Job 37:4 [it is] used in the sense of ‘he holds back [thunderings]’ and in Jeremiah 9:4 as meaning ‘deal craftily’ (NAS) or ‘will supplant’ (KJV).’

“See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field that the Lord has blessed!”

The Rabbi Rashi, states that when blessing Jacob, Isaac smelled the ‘heavenly scent of Gan Eden (Paradise) when Jacob entered his room and, in contrast, perceived  Gehenna opening beneath Esau when the latter entered the room, showing him that he had been deceived all along by Esau’s show of piety.’

Genesis: 28 ‘May God give you of the dew of heaven and of the fatness of the earth and plenty of grain and wine. 29 Let peoples serve you, and nations bow down to you. Be lord over your brothers, and may your mother’s sons bow down to you. Cursed be everyone who curses you, and blessed be everyone who blesses you!’

It is not clear why the plural use of brothers and sons is used, when Jacob only had the one brother, Esau… that we know about?

30 ‘As soon as Isaac had finished blessing Jacob, when Jacob had scarcely gone out from the presence of Isaac his father, Esau his brother came in from his hunting. 31 He also prepared delicious food and brought it to his father. And he said to his father, “Let my father arise and eat of his son’s game, that you may bless me.” 

32 His father Isaac said to him, “Who are you?” He answered, “I am your son, your firstborn, Esau.” 33 Then Isaac trembled very violently and said, “Who was it then that hunted game and brought it to me, and I ate it all before you came, and I have blessed him? Yes, and he shall be blessed.” 

34 As soon as Esau heard the words of his father, he cried out with an exceedingly great and bitter cry and said to his father, “Bless me, even me also, O my father!” 35 But he said, “Your brother came deceitfully, and he has taken away your blessing.” 36 Esau said, “Is he not rightly named Jacob? For he has cheated me these two times. He took away my birthright, and behold, now he has taken away my blessing.” Then he said, “Have you not reserved a blessing for me?”

37 Isaac answered and said to Esau, “Behold, I have made him lord over you, and all his brothers I have given to him for servants, and with grain and wine I have sustained him. What then can I do for you, my son?” 38 Esau said to his father, “Have you but one blessing, my father? Bless me, even me also, O my father.” And Esau lifted up his voice and wept. 39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him…’

Hebrews 12:14-17

English Standard Version

‘Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord. See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled; that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he sought it with tears.’

Hebrews 12:16-17

Amplified Bible

‘… and [see to it] that no one is immoral [‘wicked’ – The Voice] or godless [‘vile’ – The Voice] like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal. For you know that later on, when he wanted (to regain title to) his inheritance of the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no opportunity for repentance (there was no way to repair what he had done, no chance to recall the choice he had made), even though he sought for it with (bitter) tears.’

Hebrews 12:16-17

New Century Version

‘Be careful that no one takes part in sexual sin or is like Esau and never thinks about God. As the oldest son, Esau would have received everything from his father, but he sold all that for a single meal. You remember that after Esau did this, he wanted to get his father’s blessing, but his father refused. Esau could find no way to change what he had done, even though he wanted the blessing so much that he cried.’

Hebrews 12:16-17

The Message

‘Watch out for the Esau syndrome: trading away God’s lifelong gift in order to satisfy a short-term appetite. You well know how Esau later regretted that impulsive act and wanted God’s blessing – but by then it was too late, tears or no tears.’

Genesis: “Behold, away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be, and away from the dew of heaven on high. 40 By your sword you shall live [violence, danger], and you shall serve your brother; but when you grow restless [when thou shalt have the ‘dominion’ – KJV] you shall break his yoke from your neck.”

Many translations of verse thirty-nine state, as the ESV does, that Esau would live away from the fatness of the Earth which Jacob’s sons would inherit. This gives the impression that Esau either doesn’t receive a blessing and or, that he would be geographically removed from Jacob. The NCV a case in point. Yet other translations, including the KJV, choose to accurately say the opposite.

New Century Version

Isaac said to him, “You will live far away from the best land, far from the rain.”

Young’s Literal Translation

And Isaac his father answereth and saith unto him, ‘Lo, of the fatness of the earth is thy dwelling, and of the dew of the heavens from above…

King James Version

And Isaac his father answered and said unto him, Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from above…

The Interlinear translates word for word verse thirty-nine and forty as follows – punctuation added:

‘And Isaac his father answered, said unto him behold thy dwelling shall (be the) fatness earth – dew heaven – and thy sword live; shalt serve thy brother, shall come pass when shalt have dominion that shalt break his yoke.’

The New English Translation helpfully translates the verse to give a more accurate geographic context.

Genesis 27:39

New English Translation

So his father Isaac said to him, “See here, your home will be by the richness of the earth, and by the dew of the sky above.

‘Footnotes: The particle (hinneh) calls for someone’s attention. Or “next to.” The preposition (min) generally indicates the source of something or separation from something, and so is often rendered “from.” Older translations (KJV, ASV, Douay-Rheims, Young’s, JPS) took the preposition as indicating source: “of the fatness of the earth.” More recent translations (NASB, NIV, ESV, NLV) take it as separative: “away from the fatness.” In Jacob’s blessing the preposition works with the verb “give” and indicates source. 

In Esau’s blessing the preposition functions in a nominal clause and modifies “your dwelling.” HALOT says that [the preposition] can point “to the place… where something can be found” and thus means “in” in [Genesis 2:8, Leviticus 14:41, 2 Samuel 5:13, Ezra 1:4, Job 30:30, Isaiah 5:26, 23:7] (HALOT 597, s.v.). 

In combination with the verb “to dwell,” the preposition means “by,” “next to,” or “across from” [Ruth 2:14, 1 Samuel 20:25, Ezekiel 16:46, Jonah 4:5]. The closest parallel for the noun “dwelling” is [Genesis 10:30] where [the preposition] as “away from” is not possible (rather “at” or “beginning at.”) In contrast to Jacob, to whom God will give some of earth’s fatness and heaven’s dew, Esau will dwell next to these. Esau himself continues to dwell with Isaac in Canaan, so perhaps he dwells “at” or “in” the richness of the land. But the land of his descendants, Edom, is more arid and might be considered “next to” or “across from” Canaan. The main contrast seems to be that God will give Jacob something, while Esau will have access to two of the same things. “Grain” and “wine” are not repeated for Esau, which may also reflect different conditions in Edom and Canaan.’

Most translations, lean towards Esau not receiving the fertility of the earth and dew of heaven. Others that he would, whereas the answer lies between the two, in that Esau would receive less than Jacob even though their people were adjacent to each other for many centuries and this makes sense, given that Esau’s blessing is meant to be inferior to Jacob’s birthright promises. Esau, was given choice land amongst their immediate relatives. Esau was a twin and we would have reason to find him connected to his brother, Jacob. Esau was like Ishmael, who was also an outdoors man, a huntsman, militaristic, a proficient soldier, ‘setting his hand against others [of his family]’.

Unsurprisingly, a militaristic state and a history of waging war is in part, an identifying sign for a significant proportion of Esau’s descendants today. 

The word dominion in the interlinear is a crux word in verse forty. It comes from the Hebrew word ruwd [H7300], which is translated as ‘dominion, lords, mourn and ruleth’. It means literally ‘to wander restlessly’ and ‘to roam, to be restless’ and ‘show restlessness.’ It derives from a primitive root, ‘to tramp about, ramble (free or disconsolate), have the dominion, be lord’ and ‘rule’. In English, it derives from the latin, dominium or ‘ownership’ and dominus, ‘master.’ Interestingly, the word dominion was used as a name formerly applied to self-governing divisions of the British Empire. For example, the former Dominions of Canada and New Zealand.

Therefore, we are seeking a people which has a unique identity and yet struggles with Jacob – possessing a mix of emotions towards their sibling’s descendants. We would expect to find a ‘nation’ or people somewhere matching Esau, who is both connected to the sons of Jacob yet a distinct national and or ethnic group. As one Bible researcher astutely commented: “[Edom] have not broken loose from Israel and are in fact part of Israel. Their lands… form part of Israel…”

A people by virtue of their assimilation, are recipients of the same fatness of the earth and blessings which were given to Jacob and specifically to his son Joseph. Wherever Jacob is today, that is where we will find Esau. Wherever Joseph is today, that is where we will locate the greatest number of Esau’s descendants. We are also looking to identify a people who have come out from underneath Jacob’s shadow and are identifiable as a nation obtaining statehood relatively recently in history, finally achieving ‘dominion’ and appeasing migratory ‘restlessness.’

Genesis: 41 ‘Now Esau hated [H7852 – satam: ‘oppose, bear a grudge, retain (cherish) animosity against’ from root ‘to lurk for, persecute’] Jacob because of the blessing with which his father had blessed him, and Esau said to himself, “The days of mourning for my father are approaching; then I will kill my brother Jacob.” 42 But the words of Esau her older son were told to Rebekah. So she sent and called Jacob her younger son and said to him, “Behold, your brother Esau comforts himself about you by planning to kill you. 

43 Now therefore, my son, obey my voice. Arise, flee to Laban my brother in Haran 44 and stay with him a while, until your brother’s fury turns away – 45 until your brother’s anger turns away from you, and he forgets what you have done to him. Then I will send and bring you from there. Why should I be bereft [deprived] of you both in one day?” 46 Then Rebekah said to Isaac, “I loathe my life because of the Hittite women. If Jacob marries one of the Hittite women like these, one of the women of the land, what good will my life be to me?”’

It may be that Rebekah had to be firm in saying obey my voice – more than once – in that Jacob, like Esau is headstrong and stubborn, or it may be that Rebekah felt moved and inspired to advise Jacob. It is recorded elsewhere that Rebekah was a prophetess and therefore, she knew that Esau intended to slay Jacob after Isaac’s death and the words “Why should I be bereft of you both in one day” are ‘interpreted as being her prophecy to this effect.’ 

Jacob is displaying some of the laid back, casual approach to life that Isaac and Abraham exhibited. On the surface, it would seem that Rebekah’s issue with the Hittite women is that they are a different race, descendants of Heth, the son of Canaan. Though we will learn that it may be more serious and involve the old nemeses… the Nephilim.

Genesis 28:1-22

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Isaac called Jacob and blessed him and directed him, “You must not take a wife from the Canaanite women. 2 Arise, go to Paddan-aram to the house of Bethuel your mother’s father, and take as your wife from there one of the daughters of Laban your mother’s brother. 3 God Almighty [El Shaddai] bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you, that you may become a company of peoples [a plurality of nations, not singular]. 4 May he give the blessing of Abraham to you and to your offspring with you, that you may take possession of the land of your sojournings that God gave to Abraham!” 5 Thus Isaac sent Jacob away. And he went to Paddan-aram, to Laban, the son of Bethuel the Aramean, the brother of Rebekah, Jacob’s and Esau’s mother.’

Isaac must have spoken with Jacob relatively quickly after his deception, as it follows on the heels of Rebekah’s urgent advice to flee. The Book of Jubilees records just how concerned Rebekah was for Jacob’s life later in the story. 

Book of Jubilees chapter thirty-five:

35:9 ‘And [Rebekah] went in to Isaac and said to him: ‘One petition I make unto you: make Esau swear that he will not injure Jacob, nor pursue him with enmity; for you know Esau’s thoughts that they are perverse from his youth, and there is no goodness in him; for he desires after your death to kill him. 10 And you know all that he has done since the day Jacob his brother went to Haran until this day: how he has forsaken us with his whole heart, and has done evil to us; your flocks he has taken to himself, and carried off all your possessions from before your face.’ 

It appears Esau may have helped himself to more than his inheritance early. He obviously felt betrayed by his champion of the past, his father Isaac and released his anger by taking what he wanted from his parents. This may explain why Jacob after he returns from Haran, is described as ‘taking care of his parents.’

11 ‘And when we implored and besought him for what was our own, he did as a man who was taking pity on us. 12 And he is bitter against you because you did bless Jacob your perfect and upright son; for there is no evil but only goodness in him, and since he came from Haran unto this day he has not robbed us of aught, for he brings us everything in its season always, and rejoices with all his heart when we take at his hands and he blesses us, and has not departed from us since he came from Haran until this day, and he remains with us continually at home honoring us.’ 

13 And Isaac said to her: ‘I, too, know and see the deeds of Jacob who is with us, how that with all his heart he honors us; but I loved Esau formerly more than Jacob, because he was the firstborn; but now I love Jacob more than Esau, for [Esau] has done manifold evil deeds, and there is no righteousness in him, for all his ways are unrighteousness and violence, and there is no righteousness around him. 14 And now my heart is troubled because of all his deeds, and neither he nor his seed is to be saved, for they are those who will be destroyed from the earth and who will be rooted out from under heaven, for he has forsaken Yahweh the Almighty of Abraham and gone after his wives and after their uncleanness [genetically] and after their error [spiritually], he and his children.’

These are heavy and grim words indeed from Isaac, but show the level of Esau’s disobedient actions and rebellious attitude. King Solomon would later, also exasperate and disappoint the Eternal in similar fashion – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and articles: Na’amah; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

15 ‘And you do bid me make him swear that he will not slay Jacob his brother; even if he swear he will not abide by his oath, and he will not do good but evil only. 18 And Rebecca sent and called Esau and he came to her, and she said to him: ‘I have a petition, my son, to make to you, and do you promise to do it, my son.’ 19 And he said: ‘I will do everything that you say to me, and I will not refuse your petition.’ 20 And she said to him: [1] ‘I ask you that the day I die, you will take me in and bury me near Sarah, your father’s mother, and [2] that you and Jacob will love each other and that neither will desire evil against the other, but mutual love only, and (so) you will prosper, my sons, and be honored in the midst of the land, and no enemy will rejoice over you, and you will be a blessing and a mercy in the eyes of all those that love you.’ 

21 And he said: ‘I will do all that you have told me, and I shall bury you on the day you die near Sarah, my father’s mother, as you have desired that her bones may be near your bones. 22 And Jacob, my brother, also, I shall love above all flesh; for I have not a brother in all the earth but him only: and this is no great merit for me if I love him; for he is my brother, and we were sown together in your body, and together came we forth from your womb, and if I do not love my brother, whom shall I love? 

23 And I, myself, beg you to exhort Jacob concerning me and concerning my sons, for I know that he will assuredly be king over me and my sons, for on the day my father blessed him he made him the higher and me the lower. 24 And I swear unto you that I shall love him, and not desire evil against him all the days of my life but good only.’ 25 And he swore unto her regarding all this matter. 

And she called Jacob before the eyes of Esau, and gave him commandment according to the words which she had spoken to Esau. 26 And he said: ‘I shall do your pleasure; believe me that no evil will proceed from me or from my sons against Esau, and I shall be first in naught save in love only.’ 27 And they eat and drank, she and her sons that night, and she died, three jubilees [147] and one week [7] and one year [1] old [155 years old], on that night, and her two sons, Esau and Jacob, buried her in the double cave near Sarah, their father’s mother.’

Esau was as good as his word, in that he did not kill Jacob while he lived. Jacob had fled to Laban in 1760 BCE when he was fifty-seven. It would be forty years before Esau and Jacob would set eyes on each other again.

Genesis: 6 ‘Now Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob and sent him away to Paddan-aram to take a wife from there, and that as he blessed him he directed him, “You must not take a wife from the Canaanite women,” 7 and that Jacob had obeyed his father and his mother and gone to Paddan-aram. 8 So when Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father, 9 Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, the sister of Nebaioth.’

Esau married his ‘third’ wife seventeen years after his first two wives. Nebaioth was the eldest son of Ishmael, hence why his name is mentioned as the brother of Mahalath, even though she had twelve brothers. Nebaioth equates with the Prussian and Low German speaking peoples of the state of Brandenburg and Berlin, the capital of Germany – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Mahalath is also called Basemath in the Book of Genesis. One commentator has discussed that Ishmael’s wife was also called Mahalath; hand picked by his mother Hagar from Egyptian royalty. Hagar and Ishmael were banished by Abraham circa 1874 BCE, when Ishmael was about seventeen years old. 

The Pharaoh ruling at the time was the third Pharaoh of the First Dynasty, Djer who ruled from 1922 to 1875 BCE – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology. Mahalath could have been a daughter of Djer, the same Pharaoh whom Abraham and Sarah met in 1902 BCE. Hagar was a gift from Djer to Sarah and it is believed she was a daughter, of the Pharaoh. If so, then Mahalath would conceivably be the younger sister of Hagar. The daughter of Ishmael may have had the same name as her mother, Mahalath. 

When she married Esau, her name could have changed to Basemath as it was traditional for wives to accept new names upon marriage. 

This would account for the two different names for Ishmael’s daughter, who became Esau’s wife. In the previous chapter, we learned of Ishmael’s identity today as the modern nation of Germany. The association between Esau and Germany in modern times will prove to be profoundly disturbing. Esau hoped this marriage would appease his parents, though they were not swayed by Esau’s late and half-hearted attempt to procure their favour. It was by this stage that even Isaac had seen through Esau, and their relationship was inevitably not the same as before that fateful day of the debacle surrounding the birthright blessing.

Genesis: 10 ‘Jacob left Beersheba and went toward Haran. 11 And he came to a certain place and stayed there that night, because the sun had set. Taking one of the stones of the place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place to sleep. 12 And he dreamed, and behold, there was a ladder [flight of steps] set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven. And behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it!

13 And behold, the Lord stood above it [or beside him] and said, “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac. The land on which you lie I will give to you and to your offspring. 14 Your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south, and in you and your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed. 15 Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land. For I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” 16 Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I did not know it.” 17 And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.”

Jacob had a lucid dream (or vision) of a portal between Earth and Heaven – the spirit realm – and the dimensions in between. We will discover that Jacob’s descendants have indeed ‘spread abroad’ to the west, east, north and south – the furthest reaches of the earth.

18 ‘So early in the morning Jacob took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up for a pillar and poured oil on the top of it. 19 He called the name of that place Bethel [the house of God], but the name of the city was Luz at the first. 20 Then Jacob made a vow, saying, “If God will be with me and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and clothing to wear, 21 so that I come again to my father’s [Isaac] house in peace, then the Lord shall be my God, 22 and this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be God’s house. And of all that you give me I will give a full tenth to you.”’

Jacob is a bit of a wheeler-dealer: ‘a person who makes deals in business or politics, in a skilful and sometimes less than honest way.’ First Esau, now the Eternal. Jacob was seeking a peaceful resolution with his brother and his father and so can be excused to a degree, for bargaining with the Creator. 

We will study Jacob in detail in the following chapter and so for now we will skip a portion of his life – forty years to be precise – and rejoin him on his flight from his father-in-law Laban and his decision to reconcile with his brother Esau in the year 1720 BCE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Genesis 32:1-32

English Standard Version

1 ‘Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him. 2 And when Jacob saw them he said, “This is God’s camp!” So he called the name of that place Mahanaim [two camps]. 3 And Jacob sent [had sent] messengers before him to Esau his brother in the land of Seir, the country of Edom, 4 instructing them, “Thus you shall say to my lord Esau: Thus says your servant Jacob, ‘I have sojourned with Laban and stayed until now. 5 I have oxen, donkeys, flocks, male servants, and female servants. I have sent to tell my lord, in order that I may find favor in your sight.’

The angels of God may have been the same three, including the Son of Man (Genesis 18:1, 31) who visited Abraham with two companions – possibly Michael and Gabriel – whom rescued Lot and his family (Genesis 18:2; 19:1-2) from Sodom – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. It was both a brave and high risk decision to reach out to Esau, even after forty years had passed. Jacob had just fled from his father-in-law, Laban; putting himself between a rock and a hard place, so-to-speak. Esau had left home circa 1737 BCE and dwelt in an area known as Mount Seir. We will address the permutations of this move in detail shortly, as well as the forty years of Jacob’s sojourn in the next chapter. 

The inhabitants of Seir were known as Horites. The head of the Horites had been an individual called Seir. We have encountered the Horites previously in Genesis chapter fourteen and the Battle of the Valley of Siddim – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. They were one of the Nephilim descended, Elioud giants axis states in league against Chedorlaomer and his allies from southern Mesopotamia. It appears that Esau’s descendants may have eventually driven out the Horites or even killed them. Though at the time of Esau, he chose to dwell in Seir with the Horites. This amalgamation of Esau and the Horites produced a new nation called hence forth in the Bible: Edom. Edom means ‘red’ from the verb adom, ‘to produce or be red.’ We will learn that the colour red is also heavily associated with Jacob’s son, Judah. The potential for mistaken identity and identity misplacement, magnifies exponentially as we proceed.

Genesis: 6 ‘And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying, “We came to your brother Esau, and he is coming to meet you, and there are four hundred men with him.” 7 Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed. He divided the people who were with him, and the flocks and herds and camels, into two camps, 8 thinking, “If Esau comes to the one camp and attacks it, then the camp that is left will escape.”

Jacob had just cause in being afraid. Esau had promised to kill Jacob. The possible annihilation of every single one of Jacob’s family was a frightening reality. Jacob was right to prepare and pray.

Recall, that Abraham was able to muster an able fighting force comprising three hundred and eighteen men from his household. Here, Esau had four hundred men. Later, Jacob had sixty-six family members who travelled to Egypt – not including servants. Jacob was certainly ill-equipped to do battle with Esau, who overwhelmingly had the upper hand numerically. Esau had also married in 1777 BCE, twenty-four years before Jacob in 1753 BCE and two wives at that. Esau would have had grown up sons and grandsons who could have even already had teenagers aged fifteen to seventeen years of age as great grandsons by 1720 BCE. Additionally, Esau would have men possibly from the Horites at his disposal if required.

Genesis: 9 ‘And Jacob said, “O God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac, O Lord who said to me, ‘Return to your country and to your kindred, that I may do you good,’ 10 I am not worthy of the least of all the deeds of steadfast love and all the faithfulness that you have shown to your servant, for with only my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps. 11 Please deliver me from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, that he may come and attack me, the mothers with the children. 12 But you said, ‘I will surely do you good, and make your offspring as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.”

Jacob had fled, with the clothes on his back and his staff. The almighty had blessed Jacob, yet he had not received his inheritance from Isaac, while his father lived. It was certainly going to require a miracle from the Eternal, as Esau’s mind needed to be veered from possible vengeance to reconciliation. 

Genesis: 13 ‘So he stayed there that night, and from what he had with him he took a present for his brother Esau, 14 two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams, 15 thirty milking camels and their calves, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys. 16 These he handed over to his servants, every drove by itself, and said to his servants, “Pass on ahead of me and put a space between drove and drove.”

17 He instructed the first, “When Esau my brother meets you and asks you, ‘To whom do you belong? Where are you going? And whose are these ahead of you?’ 18 then you shall say, ‘They belong to your servant Jacob. They are a present sent to my lord Esau. And moreover, he is behind us.’ 19 He likewise instructed the second and the third and all who followed the droves, “You shall say the same thing to Esau when you find him, 20 and you shall say, ‘Moreover, your servant Jacob is behind us.”

For he thought, “I may appease him [appease his face] with the present that goes ahead of me, and afterward I shall see his face. Perhaps he will accept me.” [he will lift my face] 21 So the present passed on ahead of him, and he himself stayed that night in the camp.’

Not only was Jacob splitting up his entourage into many small groupings for safety, he was also softening any potential confrontation as well as playing up to his brother’s ego and going above and beyond on the honour being bestowed.

Genesis: 22 ‘The same night he arose and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven children [or sons, as Dinah had been born, but not Benjamin], and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 He took them and sent them across the stream, and everything else that he had.

24 And Jacob was left alone. And a man [in the form of a man] wrestled with him until the breaking of the day. 25 When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket, and Jacob’s hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. 26 Then he said, “Let me go, for the day has broken.” But Jacob said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” 

27 And he said to him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Jacob.” 28 Then he said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel [‘He strives with God’ or God strives], for you have striven [to struggle vigorously] with God and with men, and have prevailed.”

29 Then Jacob asked him, “Please tell me your name.” But he said, “Why is it that you ask my name?” And there he blessed him. 30 So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel [H6439: the face of God*], saying, “For I have seen God [one like God] face to face, and yet my life has been delivered.” 31 The sun rose upon him as he passed Penuel [H6439 – Pnuw’el: ‘facing God’], limping because of his hip. 32 Therefore to this day the people of Israel do not eat the sinew of the thigh that is on the hip socket, because he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip on the sinew of the thigh.’

Jacob’s name is changed at age ninety-seven and the focus of his life shifts from his supplanting his brother Esau and a physical direction, to his wrestling with one representing the Creator and a spiritual orientation. The passage is deliberately vague as to the identity of the mysterious man who wrestles with Jacob, yet has the authority to grant a blessing. 

Who Was the Angel Who Wrestled With Jacob? Whitney Hopler, 2019 – emphasis mine:

‘… in the Book of Hosea, the Bible… [mentions] Jacob’s wrestling again. However, the way Hosea 12:3-4 refers to the event is just as unclear, because in verse 3 it says that Jacob “struggled with God” and in verse 4 it says that Jacob “struggled with the angel.”

Some people identify Archangel Phanuel as the man who wrestles with Jacob because of the connection between Phanuel’s name and the name “Peniel.” In his book “Of Scribes And Sages: Early Jewish Interpretation And Transmission Of Scripture, Volume 2,” Craig A. Evans writes: “In Gen. 32:31, Jacob names the place of his wrestling with God as ‘Peniel’ – the Face of God. Scholars believe that the angelic name ‘Phanuel’ and the place ‘Peniel’ are etymologically connected.”

Morton Smith writes in his book “Christianity, Judaism, and Other Greco-Roman Cults” that the earliest existing manuscripts indicate that Jacob was wrestling with God in angelic form. Later versions say that Jacob wrestled with an archangel. “According to this Biblical text… Jacob’s wrestle with a mysterious opponent… [Pointed] initially to his divine adversary, the name was in time attached to an angelic substitute.”

Some people say that the man who wrestles with Jacob is the Angel of the Lord. “So who is the ‘man’ who wrestles with Jacob on the riverbank and finally blesses him with a new name? God… the Angel of the Lord Himself,” writes Larry L. Lichtenwalter in his book “Wrestling with Angels: In the Grip of Jacob’s God.” In her book “The Messenger of the Lord in Early Jewish Interpretations of Genesis,” Camilla Hélena von Heijne writes: “Jacob’s naming of the place and the word ‘face’ in verse 30 is a key word. It denotes personal presence, in this case, divine presence. To seek God’s face is to seek His presence.”

The case for the Angel of the Lord is tentative, as the Angel of the Lord is always delineated as such in scripture, never hinted at. In the Book of Enoch, Phanuel is listed with Michael, Gabriel and Raphael as one of the four chief messengers for the Eternal of Hosts. Yet, the case for Phanuel is based solely on word association and definition. As Phanuel is not mentioned directly in the Bible, his identity here is tentative and doubtful. The clues to this being’s identity are possibly found earlier in the same chapter of Genesis thirty-two. Recall in verse one that the ‘angels of God met’ with Jacob and the consideration that these angels were the same three who met with Abraham and Lot – Genesis 18:1-2, 31; 19:1-2.

What is very interesting is that all three beings in Genesis eighteen are called men, including the one who was the Lord [H136 – ‘Adonay] and in Genesis nineteen, the two angels are also called lords [H113 – ‘adon]. In Genesis eighteen, Abraham ‘stood before the Lord’ and ‘spoke to the Lord’ – Genesis 18:22, 31. In a real sense, Abraham sparred verbally (or wrestled) with the one who was the Word in his presenting a case for sparing the city of Sodom. Was it this same man, who now met with Jacob?

A further clue is the fact that the being with Jacob when his identity was questioned, rather acerbically answered, ‘why are you asking my name’ for Jacob already knew it was the Word. 

Matthew 16:13-17

Living Bible

‘… Jesus… asked his disciples, “Who are the people saying I am?”

“Well,” they replied, “some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah; some, Jeremiah or one of the other prophets.”

Then he asked them, “Who do you think I am?”

Simon Peter answered, “The Christ, the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

“God has blessed you, Simon, son of Jonah,” Jesus said, “for my Father in heaven has personally revealed this to you – this is not from any human source.’

Only the Word could have represented God so that Jacob could say, ‘I have seen God face to face’. As Moses would do some three hundred years later, when facing the Word’s directness in response to being asked a similar question: ‘I am [who] I am’ (Exodus 3:14; 33:11). 

Who else but the Word could say that Jacob had ‘striven with God and prevailed’ changing his name to Israel. Lastly, only the Word representing the Eternal would divinely ‘bless him.’ Angels perform numerous functions in the scriptures, though this writer remains unaware of any instances where they directly confer a blessing.

The word or name Israel, has become synonymous with the state of Israel and the word Israelites with the people known as Jews and the Jewish people; yet, it does not convey the original identities. For the purpose of this work, the name Jacob is more reflective of the patriarch himself, as well as that of the sons and tribes which descended from him. In 1720 BCE, Jacob had twelve children, including Dinah, for Benjamin was not yet born. Thus it should be translated sons and not children in verse twenty-two. At the time of their encounter with Uncle Esau, Jacob’s eldest child Reuben, was thirty-two and his youngest Joseph was only five years old.

Genesis 33:1-20

English Standard Version

1 ‘And Jacob lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, Esau was coming, and four hundred men with him. So he divided the children among Leah and Rachel and the two female servants. 2 And he put the servants [Bilhah and Zilpah] with their children [Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher] in front, then Leah with her children [Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulon (with Dinah)], and Rachel and Joseph last of all. 3 He himself went on before them, bowing himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother.

But Esau ran to meet him and embraced him and fell on his neck and kissed him, and they wept.

5 And when Esau lifted up his eyes and saw the women and children, he said, “Who are these with you?” Jacob said, “The children whom God has graciously given your servant.” 6 Then the servants drew near, they and their children, and bowed down. 7 Leah likewise and her children drew near and bowed down. And last Joseph and Rachel drew near, and they bowed down. 8 Esau said, “What do you mean by all this company that I met?” Jacob answered, “To find favor in the sight of my lord.” 

9 But Esau said, “I have enough, my brother; keep what you have for yourself.” 10 Jacob said, “No, please, if I have found favor in your sight, then accept my present from my hand. For I have seen your face, which is like seeing the face of God, and you have accepted me. 11 Please accept my blessing that is brought to you, because God has dealt graciously with me, and because I have enough.” Thus he urged him, and he took it.’

Esau could not have been more accepting, or put Jacob more at ease. A heart warming encounter, with Esau running, to his younger brother – though Jacob’s heart may have skipped a beat in assessing whether Esau’s urgency was benign or not. At this moment of time, it is difficult to see any harbouring of revenge or hatred on Esau’s part towards his estranged twin. And that is the key factor. Esau and Jacob were not just brothers, they were twins. The separation for forty years may have weighed heavily on Esau, as the protectively eldest twin.

Genesis: 12 ‘Then Esau said, “Let us journey on our way, and I will go ahead of you.” 13 But Jacob said to him, “My lord knows that the children are frail [tender], and that the nursing flocks and herds are a care to me. If they are driven hard for one day, all the flocks will die. 14 Let my lord pass on ahead of his servant, and I will lead on slowly, at the pace of the livestock that are ahead of me and at the pace of the children, until I come to my lord in Seir.”

Esau shows he is genuine, by wanting to travel together. Jacob being reticent as he wished to travel separately to be able to give thanks to the Creator for the miracle in Esau’s attitude and actions. It is worth remembering that both men were ninety-seven years old – Jacob lived to one hundred and forty-seven. It would appear that Esau probably died not long after Jacob, at a similar age.

Genesis: 15 So Esau said, “Let me leave with you some of the people who are with me.” But he said, “What need is there? Let me find favor in the sight of my lord.” 16 So Esau returned that day on his way to Seir. 17 But Jacob journeyed to Succoth, and built himself a house and made booths for his livestock. Therefore the name of the place is called Succoth [booths]. 18 And Jacob came safely [peacefully] to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, on his way from Paddan-aram, and he camped before the city. 19 And from the sons of Hamor, Shechem’s father, he bought for a hundred pieces of money the piece of land on which he had pitched his tent. 20 There he erected an altar and called it El-Elohe-Israel [God, the God of Israel].’

Genesis 35:27-29

English Standard Version

27 ‘And Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, or Kiriath-arba (that is, Hebron), where Abraham and Isaac had sojourned. 28 Now the days of Isaac were 180 years. 29 And Isaac breathed his last, and he died [jn 1697 BCE] and was gathered to his people, old and full of days. And his sons Esau and Jacob [both 120 years old] buried him.’

Rabbis generally concur that Rebekah died at the age of one hundred and thirty-three years and ‘that her death occurred while Jacob was on his way back to his parents’ home; and it was coincident with that of Deborah’ – Genesis 35:8. Rebekah’s death is not mentioned and as Jacob does not arrive from Paddan-Aram, for another four years; it falls to Esau as the only son present to attend to her burial. The ceremony was supposedly ‘performed at night out of shame that her coffin should be followed by a son like Esau.’ 

Alternatively and accurately in my opinion – tying in with the Book of Jubilees 31:8-11, 48; 35:27 – Jacob found his mother alive when he returned home in 1720 BCE and she afterward accompanied him to Beth-el to accomplish his vow as per Genesis 28:19-20. 

She would have died at the age of one hundred and fifty-five in 1702 BCE – coincidentally the same year that Joseph was propositioned by Potiphar’s wife in Egypt and – five years before Isaac’s death in 1697 BCE – Jubilees 35:1, 41. Thus determining her age when she married Isaac, who was forty, at twenty years of age.

Ishmael and Isaac had little contact, though together buried their father Abraham in 1802 BCE; so too, did Esau and Jacob bury their father Isaac, a little over one hundred years later. Just prior to Isaac’s death, he speaks to his sons.

Book of Jubilees chapter thirty-six:

1 ‘… Isaac called his two sons Esau and Jacob, and they came to him, and he said to them: ‘My sons, I am going the way of my fathers, to the eternal house where my fathers are. 2 Wherefore bury me near Abraham my father, in the double cave in the field of Ephron the Hittite, where Abraham purchased a sepulcher to bury in; in the sepulcher which I [dug] for myself… bury me [there]. 3 And this I command you, my sons, that you practice righteousness and uprightness on the earth, so that Yahweh may bring upon you all that Yahweh said that he would do to Abraham and to his seed. 4 And love one another, my sons, your brothers as a man who loves his own soul, and let each seek in what he may benefit his brother, and act together on the earth; and let them love each other as their own souls’ – Matthew 7:12; Ephesians 4:31-32.

These are powerful last words from Isaac to his sons Esau and Jacob. If only their respective descendants had lived according to this entente cordiale, though alas it was not to be. Notice Isaac included both sons together in jointly obeying the Eternal and being able to claim the blessings promised. His son Jacob and then his grandson Joseph did obey; serving the Eternal and thus the promise of blessings were made manifest. Whereas Esau, nor any of his sons, obeyed the Eternal and so the blessing given to Esau and his sons, though lesser than Jacob’s, was shrunken further due to their disobedience.

6 ‘Remember you, my sons, Yahweh Almighty of Abraham your father, and how I too worshipped Him and served Him in righteousness and in joy, that He might multiply you and increase your seed as the stars of heaven in multitude, and establish you on the earth… 7 And now I shall make you swear a great oath… by [He] which created the heavens and the earth… that you will fear… and worship Him. 8 And that each will love his brother… and that neither will desire evil against his brother… so that you may prosper in all your deeds and not be destroyed. 

12 And he divided all his possessions between the two on that day… 13 And he said: ‘This larger portion I will give to the firstborn.’ 14 And Esau said, ‘I have sold to Jacob and given my birthright to Jacob; to him let it be given, and I have not a single word to say regarding it, for it is his.’ 15 And Isaac said, May a blessing rest upon you, my sons, and upon your seed this day, for you have given me rest, and my heart is not pained concerning the birthright, lest you should work wickedness on account of it… 

17 And he ended commanding them and blessing them, and they [ate] and drank together before him, and he rejoiced because there was one mind between them, and they went forth from him and rested that day and slept. 18 And Isaac slept on his bed that day rejoicing; and he slept the eternal sleep, and died one hundred and eighty years old… and his two sons Esau and Jacob buried him. 19 And Esau went to the land of Edom, to the mountains of Seir, and dwelt there. 20 And Jacob dwelt in the mountains of Hebron [where Isaac had lived], in the tower of the land of the sojournings of his father Abraham, and he worshipped Yahweh with all his heart and according to the visible commands according as He had divided the days of his generations.’

It was now a time to be concerned, for if Esau had stayed his hand in harming Jacob while his father lived, then Jacob was now fair game. Amazingly, there appears to have been peace between Esau and Jacob for the next twenty-seven years until Jacob’s death in 1670 BCE. Before we look at the events surrounding the conflict that eventually arose between Esau’s and Jacob’s families, we will look more closely at Esau’s family and his descendants. In so doing, we will attempt to explain the apparent contradiction in the records of Esau’s wives and more importantly, unravel the difficulty in identifying Esau’s posterity today; which is made more challenging, due to his complicated family structure.

Genesis 36:1-43

English Standard Version

1 ‘These are the generations of Esau (that is, Edom). 2 Esau took his wives from the Canaanites: 

Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite

Oholibamah** the daughter of Anah^^ the [grand?]daughter of Zibeon< the Hivite, 

3 and Basemath, Ishmael’s daughter, the sister of Nebaioth.’ 

Esau’s family genealogy is also listed in an abridged form in 1 Chronicles 1:35-54. Earlier in the Book of Genesis we were introduced to Esau’s wives and their fathers. In Genesis twenty-six, a few of the names differ.

Genesis 26:34: ‘When Esau was forty years old, he took Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite to be his wife, and Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite, 35 and they made life bitter [they were bitterness of spirit] for Isaac and Rebekah.’

Genesis 28:9: ‘Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, the sister of Nebaioth.’

Basemath or Adah – daughter of Elon the Hittite

Judith or Oholibamah – daughter of Beeri the Hittite or Anah/Zibeon the Hivite

Mahalath or Basemath – daughter of Ishmael

As Genesis thirty-six follows the first two listings it is presumed by scholars that the latter is the more accurate. Basemath means: ‘sweet fragrance, pleasant smelling, precious’ and ‘pure’ while Adah means ‘ornamant.’ Judith means: ‘praised’ and ‘let him be praised’ and Oholibamah means ‘tent of the high place.’ Mount Seir was located on elevated terrain. Mahalath means: ‘dancing, sad song’ or ‘sickness.’ 

Some theologians have claimed that Esau actually had four, maybe five or even six wives. If such is the case, only three wives are listed as bearing children. This may have relevance, though nor does the Bible say the other one, two or three wives were barren. Beeri and Anah are possibly the same person as Be’er means ‘wellspring’, while Ayyin, phonetically similar to Anah means ‘spring.’ Likewise, the term Hittite is a hyponym (an inclusive term) for Hivite.

Some records reveal that Anah was a bastard and so, Esau sought to conceal the illegitimacy of Oholibamah’s family by changing her father’s name to Beeri from Anah and hers to Judith. It has been proposed that ‘Beeri alludes to Beer-lahai-roi, the place where Hagar encountered an angel (Genesis 16:13-14).’ Thus, Esau wished to convey that Judith was from a ‘righteous’ family. The identity change from Hivite to Hittite may reflect the attempt to hide the Hivite’s proclivity to idolatry and their Talmudic link with the Serpent in the Garden of Eden. 

Anah is listed in verse twenty-four as a son, yet in verse two, the interlinear in Hebrew leaves it nebulous as to whether Anah is the daughter of Zibeon, not that Oholibamah is the grand daughter of Zibeon. If such is the case, then Anah is female. Rabbenu Tam states, this ‘disposes of the contradiction regarding Oholibamah/Judith’s parentage. Beeri the Hittite was her father and Anah the Hivite [or Horite*] daughter of Zibeon was her mother.’ As discussed previously, the reference to Hittites and Hivites could mean that the women Esau married first were original inhabitants of Canaan and therefore from the sons of Canaan, Heth and Hiv and therefore black women – Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa. Or worryingly, they could well be ‘Canaanites’ of an Elioud descent. 

Remember, the Nephilim related giants preferred the higher ground to the plains – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. In verse twenty, we see that Zibeon the ‘Hivite’ is in fact, a son of Seir the Horite.* It is likely that Esau was hiding the Horite origin of at least one wife and probably both. Even though Ishmael’s descendants were later known as Hittites, they were not so-called when Ishmael was alive and so the term Hittites is not referring to Ishmael’s descendants. In other words, the Bible isn’t saying Esau married two or three daughters of Ishmael, just the one daughter, Basemath formerly known as Mahalath. 

A case for a fourth wife is made by the Sefer ha-Yashur which notes that ‘during Jacob’s fifth year [1755 BCE] in Haran [Paddan-Aram], Esau’s wife Judith daughter of Beeri died; she had borne daughters (named Marzith and Puith) to Esau, but no sons. In the sixth year [1754 BCE] of Jacob’s stay… Esau married Oholibamah… Esau married off his eldest daughter, Marzith, to Anah [of verse twenty-four] son of Zibeon, who was his wife’s brother.’ This would be why Judith is not mentioned again as she had died, without giving Esau any sons. Thus Oholibamah is not mentioned in Genesis chapter twenty-six, because Esau had not yet married her. A number of commentators subscribe to Esau having four wives. 

The case for fives wives is presented by Nahmanides Ramban, in that Basemath of Elon the Hittite also died like Judith, yet childless. Both Judith and Basemath may have died prematurely in punishment for vexing Isaac and Rebekah and making them suffer with their idolatrous sacrifices and incense as their names suggest. This would account for why neither are mentioned in Genesis chapter thirty-six. Esau then married another two wives, Oholibamah and Adah, also the daughter of Elon the Hittite and therefore the sister of Basemath. This might explain why Ishmael’s daughter Mahalath had her name changed by Esau, if he was especially fond of either Basemath or Mahalath, his cousin and the one acceptable wife to his parents. The Targum Pseudo-Jonathan also supports the five wives hypothesis. 

Rabbi Abraham Maimuni, 1186 to 1237 CE, adopts a six wife model, in which there are two daughters of Ishmael as well, hence the two different names. It would seem to this writer that six wives is one wife at least too many and that the answer is somewhere in the middle of three and six; either four or five wives. Not withstanding Nahmanides conjecture, regarding Basemath and her supposed sister Adah, the Sefer ha-Yashur recording the death of Judith after bearing two daughters; would explain why there are two daughters names and especially, two fathers names for Esau’s second wife – because there are two separate women involved. The details on his first and third wives are less complicated – because there was only one woman each, with one father. 

It would appear plausible that Esau may have changed Basemath’s name to Adah, so he could rename Mahalath, Basemath. There may be truth behind Esau liking that name and its sweet meaning. It would mean that Oholibamah is not only the grand daughter of Zibeon by inference, as she is the daughter of Anah, who is the son of Zibeon as per verse twenty-four; she is also a fourth wife married to Esau after his third wife Mahalath or Basemath and his second wife Judith’s death. A similarity occurs with his brother Jacob who had two wives and then the addition of their handmaids as wives, also numbering four in total.

In Genesis chapter fourteen we learned that the Horites were a Nephilim tribe who fought Chedorlaomer, the King of Elam – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

This could mean that Oholibamah was a Nephilim descended woman and that her genes were passed to her three sons. Basemath, the daughter of Ishmael was for the want of a better word, Teuton and so her son would have been half Ishmaelite (or Germanic) and half Edomite. The ancestry of Adah is not explained, so she was either a black Canaanite woman or just as likely, similar to Oholibamah (whether Hittite or Horite), a Nephilim Elioud too. Perhaps more likely as mtDNA Haplogroups do not seem to support the first option. Either way, Isaac and Rebekah were vexed with both choices by Esau; due to either their Nephilim bloodlines or their idolatrous practices. The issue was not because Adah was Black, if she had been an original Canaanite. 

Genesis: 4 ‘And Adah bore to Esau, Eliphaz

Basemath bore Reuel

5 and Oholibamah bore Jeush, Jalam, and Korah.

These are the sons of Esau who were born to him in the land of Canaan. 6 Then Esau took his wives, his sons, his daughters, and all the members of his household, his livestock, all his beasts, and all his property that he had acquired in the land of Canaan. He went into a land away from his brother Jacob. 7 For their possessions were too great for them to dwell together. The land of their sojournings could not support them because of their livestock [the same situation as had previously occurred between Abraham and Lot in Genesis 13:5-6]. 

8 So Esau settled in the hill country of Seir. (Esau is Edom.)’

Jasher 10:28: ‘And Seir the son of Hur, son of Hivi, son of Canaan, went and found a valley opposite to Mount Paran, and he built a city there, and he and his seven sons and his household dwelt there, and he called the city which he built Seir, according to his name; that is the land of Seir unto this day.’

It is dubious that there would be only four generations from Noah to Seir after the flood, if merely human offspring. Not so, if Seir was an Elioud, and his father Hur had been Nephilim. Tradition substantiates that Sier lived at the time of Abraham’s father Terah, who lived between 4077 BCE and 1842 BCE and that his father Hor (or Hur), was a contemporary of Reu – who had lived from 6827 BCE to 4222 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology – the son of Peleg.

Esau was already living in Seir by 1720 BCE when he reconciles with Jacob. Esau married Basemath in 1760 BCE and had a son with her called Reuel, who was born in Canaan. Esau’s move to Canaan would have been between 1760 BCE to 1720 BCE – approximately 1737 BCE. Yet Jacob had fled in 1760 BCE; thus their living together was not an issue. 

Their flocks and herds by 1720 BCE would have been innumerable and therefore the statement in verse seven must therefore apply to this time frame and onwards as their respective wealth grew. 

Notice that Basemath, the daughter of Ishmael names her son Reu-el, similar to Reu in the family genealogy of Peleg, the descendant of Arphaxad. Recall in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia, where Reuel was also the family name of Jethro, Moses’s father-in-law. Jacob’s first son is named Reu-ben – Genesis 29:31.

Oholibamah’s son Jeu-sh, bears an uncanny resemblance to the word Jew-i-sh and the name Korah is also a (infamous) family name in the tribe of Levi, one of Jacob’s sons – Numbers 16:1-50, Genesis 29:34.

Deuteronomy 2:12

English Standard Version

‘The Horites also lived in Seir formerly, but the people of Esau dispossessed them and destroyed them from before them and settled in their place…’

At first, this appears contradictory as Esau intermarries heavily with the Horites before settling in the region of Seir. Mount Seir is mentioned prophetically in the Bible in connection with Esau, so it appears they are still a racial entity associated within Edom, due to the intermarriage and mixing. Or at the very least, a territory ascribed to them. Esau’s children though, did wage war with the remaining Horites at a later date, due to a falling out. It is thought that the marriage with Ishmael’s daughter may have been fortuitous in gaining the Ishmaelite’s assistance in driving out those Horites who were not related to Esau by blood or marriage.

Genesis: 9 ‘These are the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in the hill country of Seir. 

10 These are the names of Esau’s sons: Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau, Reuel the son of Basemath the wife of Esau. 

11 The sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz>. 

12 (Timna* was a concubine of Eliphaz, Esau’s son; she bore Amalek to Eliphaz.)’

Timna was the daughter of Seir the Horite. Again, in Genesis chapter fourteen, we read about the Amalekites who were a leading Nephilim tribe similar with the Horites and importantly, already in existence before Amalek the grandson of Esau is born.

Genesis 14:5-7

English Standard Version

‘In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him came and defeated the Rephaim… and the Horites in their hill country of Seir as far as El-paran on the border of the wilderness. Then they turned back and came to En-mishpat (that is, Kadesh) and defeated all the country of the Amalekites…’

Notice that Eliphaz has a son called Kenaz>. Recall, that we have already met a Kenizzite in a previous chapter called Caleb, the second-in-command to Joshua of the Israelites. In Numbers 32:12, ESV: “… none except Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite and Joshua… have wholly followed the Lord.’ Interestingly, his genealogy is listed with the tribe of Judah. From this, we learn that Caleb was either part Kenizzite or his family had a historical association with the people or region – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia>. Caleb being a possible Edomite (and/or from Judah), in contrast with Joshua being an Ephraimite, is highly illuminating. 

There is an interesting similarity between the name Kenaz and the branch of Judaism known as the Ash-kenaz-im. The Kenizzites, like the Amalekites were already in existence as established peoples before Esau’s son Eliphaz, appropriated both as family names. Esau’s son Eliphaz is paying homage to the Kenizzites by calling Esau’s grandson Kenaz and it is very probably indicative, of intermarriage. Esau or Eliphaz is not the progenitor of the Amalekites or Kenizzites. Esau’s son Eliphaz – as a son of Adah of probable Nephilim extraction – by interbreeding into the Horite-Nephilim line with Timna is merely cementing this relationship with one son having a Nephilim name. We will discover the ancient origin of the Amalekites and their Nephilim beginnings. It is not so clear cut with the Kenizzites – or the Kenites for that matter – whether they have a Nephilim association.> 

Recall the promise to Abraham regarding the land of Canaan as an inheritance. Genesis 15:18-21, ESV: ‘On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.”

It is worth noting that the Kenites and Kenizzites are nearly always linked together; that the Kenites are invariably associated with the Amalekites and Edom (Numbers 24:18, 20-21); and that both Caleb the Kenizzite and Jethro the Kenite are linked with the tribe of Judah. Judges 1:16, ESV: “And the descendants of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up with the people of Judah… into the wilderness…”

We have discussed the link between the Kenites and Midian and the Kenites being metal craftsman, workers and smiths (H7117 – Qeyniy), and that some researchers believe that they trace their ancestry to Tubal-Cain before the flood.> Recall, Cain’s line was corrupted by the Serpent in the Garden of Eden with Eve. As Cain was Nephilim himself, so were his line of Elioud descendants, including Tubal-Cain – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Na’amah. Cain’s line also married into and corrupted the people of Day Six of Creation, the Neanderthals. There is reason to believe certain Nephilim survived the Flood. If so, there is high probability that some of Cain’s Nephilim related descendants did also. 

Esau married at least one wife, probably two who were suspiciously Nephilim descended and his grandson Amalek it would seem, was keen to further amalgamate with corrupted lines – grafting into the Cainite-Nephilim bloodline. 

A curious coincidence is that Esau’s wife Adah – who bore his first and most prominent son Eliphaz, from whom came Amalek – shares her name with an Adah in the antediluvian world. She was one of the two wives of evil Lamech, the great, great, great grandson of Cain – the lineage of ‘Cainites.’ This then is a notable synchronism, for Esau and Adah’s grandson Kenaz’s name is linked to the Cainite Kenites, who in turn are associated with Amalek and Edom. We will study Amalek in detail because in the past, though his line was related, it was distinct and separate from the main body of Edom; due to its amalgamation with the ancient Amalekite lineage. Today though, there is an association which unites Amalek and Edom as one people. 

As we have previously discussed Cain at length; just a very brief reminder regarding his evil Nephilim lineage, given to him by his true father who was not Adam – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. The original corruption of Cain himself, is made clear in 1 John 3:12, in various translations.

“Not as Cain, who was [G2258 – en: were, had been] of [G1537 – ek: from, out of, by, with] that wicked one [G4190 – poneros: ‘evil, bad nature, diseased’ as in ‘the devil’], and slew his brother…” (KJV)

“We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain, who was a son of the Devil…” (NTME)

“We must not be like Cain who was a child of the evil one…” (Smith and Goodspeed)

“…not as Cain who was from the evil one…” (NJB)

“Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother.” (NIV)

Genesis: 13 ‘These are the sons of Reuel: Nahath, Zerah^, Shammah, and Mizzah. These are the sons of Basemath, Esau’s wife. 

14 These are the sons of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah the [grand]daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife: she bore to Esau Jeush, Jalam, and Korah.

15 These are the chiefs of the sons of Esau. The sons of Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau: the chiefs Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz, 16 Korah, Gatam, and Amalek; these are the chiefs of Eliphaz in the land of Edom; these are the sons of Adah. 17 These are the sons of Reuel, Esau’s son: the chiefs Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah; these are the chiefs of Reuel in the land of Edom; these are the sons of Basemath, Esau’s wife. 

18 These are the sons of Oholibamah, Esau’s wife: the chiefs Jeush, Jalam, and Korah; these are the chiefs born of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, Esau’s wife. 19 These are the sons of Esau (that is, Edom), and these are their chiefs.’

Esau and Adah had Eliphaz [H464: god of gold] and their grandsons from Eliphaz were Teman [H8487/8486**: from the south] and ‘on the right’, Omar [H201: talkative] and ‘eloquent’, Zepho [H6825: observant] and ‘gaze’, Gatam, Kenaz [H7073: to hunt, hunter] and notably Amalek.

Naming a child Amalek, was paying palpable homage to the Nephilim clan of the same name and also a precursor of future intermixing. If the line from Adah was a black line of people, it would in time become diluted; while in contrast with grafting on to Amalek, it would have at the same time either gained or increased a Nephilim component.

Esau and Oholibamah, the definitely genuine and undisputed Nephilim line produced the sons, Jeush [H3266: hasty] and ‘he will come to help’, Jalam [H3281: occult] and ‘to conceal’ and Korah [H7141: ice, bald, smooth].

The one wholly human and ‘European’ bloodline for certain, was Esau and Basemath the Ishmaelite. Their son was Reuel [H7467: friend of God] and their grandsons from him, Nahath [H5184: quiet(ness)] and ‘descent, rest’, Zerah [H2226: a rising of light] and ‘sunrise’, Shammah [H8040: ruin, astonishment dislocate(ion), waste] and ‘frightful’ and Mizzah [H4199: to faint with fear]. Esau’s grandson Zerah – the father of Jobab – has the same name as Jacob’s grandson, the twin Zarah, who was the fifth son of Judah – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III

It is of considerable interest reflecting on the definitions for Esau’s sons and grandsons names. For the ones derived from Adah and Oholibamah are distinctly indicative of one side of Esau’s descendants who are wholly atheist or vehemently irreligious: ‘god of gold, talkative, eloquent, hunter[s], hasty and occult.’ The sons from Basemath on the other hand are indicative of the other side of Esau who are either traditionally religious or maintain a strict orthodoxy: ‘friend of God, quiet, rest, a rising of light and sunrise.’

Genesis: 20 ‘These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants* of the land: 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

Seir From the root (s’r), which expresses intense negative emotion and the experience of violence. For a meaning of the name Seir, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Hairy, Shaggy. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Rough, Bristly. Noun (sa’r), means horror. Adjective (sa’ir) means hairy. Noun (sa’ir) denotes a he-goat [as in Baphomet – the Goat of Mendes] (a bristly guy…) and its feminine counterpart (sa’ira) means she-goat. Verb (sha’ar) exists in other languages with the meaning of to break, tear through or split, which obviously repeats the general theme of the experience of violence. The adjective (sho’ar) means horrid or disgusting, and nouns (sha’arura), (sha’aruriya) and (sha’arurit) denote horror or horrible things.’

Genesis: ‘Lot-an [similar to Lot, (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran)], Shobal, Zibeon<, Anah, 21 Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan; these are the chiefs of the Horites, the sons of Seir in the land of Edom.

22 The sons of Lotan were Hor-i and Hemam [confusion]; and Lotan’s sister was Timna.*

23 These are the sons of Shobal [lion]: Alvan [high, tall], Manahath, Ebal [also a name for a son of Joktan], Shepho, and Onam [vigorous]. 

24 These are the sons of Zibeon<: Aiah [hawk] and Anah; he is the Anah who found the hot springs in the wilderness, as he pastured the donkeys of Zibeon his father.

25 These are the children of Anah^^: Dishon and Oholibamah** the daughter of Anah.

26 These are the sons of Dishon: Hemdan [beauty], Eshban [intelligent], Ithran [excellent], and Cheran.

27 These are the sons of Ezer: Bilhan, Zaavan, and Akan.

28 These are the sons of Dishan: Uz [family name for Nahor (brother of Abraham) and Aram (son of Shem)] and Aran. 

29 These are the chiefs of the Horites: the chiefs Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, 30 Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan; these are the chiefs of the Horites, chief by chief in the land of Seir.’

The land of Sier (or Mount Sier) was located in the northwestern region of Edom. A son of Seir was called Lotan similar to Lot, the father of Moab and Ammon. Lotan is another name for the seven headed dragon Leviathan, discussed in Job chapter forty-one – refer article: Asherah. A son of Lotan, Hori, appears to be named after the Horites. We have discussed the sons of Aram and Nahor, both of which include an Uz – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. Uz’s brother Aran, has a name similar with the name Aram.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine: 

Horite means ‘Caveman, Central Authority’ From the root (harar), to be a central hub of heat.

Genesis 36:4-6 lists the sons of Esau, who were born to him in Canaan. Then we are told that Esau took his family and his enormous herds and moved to another land, away from his brother Jacob (verse 6). And that’s how he ended up in the hill country of Seir, which was located to the south-east of the Salt  [Dead] Sea, and about as far south as the Salt Sea is long. Whether patriarch Seir was happy with this mass immigration we’re not told. The descendants of Esau (the Edomites) would eventually displace the Horites, but before they did, Seir appears to have wanted to honor and appease his mighty (and no-doubt customarily murderous) new neighbor by naming his own children after the family of the wives of Esau. The Horites produced chiefs until the generation of Oholibamah the Horite. After that, the chiefs of that region are all Edomites (note, by the way, the Edomite chiefs Timna and Oholibamah; Genesis 36:40-41). The Horites were extinguished…

Traditionally, the names Hori and Horite have been explained… meaning cave or cavern. Hence, for a meaning of the name Hori(te), both BDB Theological Dictionary and NOBSE Study Bible Name List read Cave Dweller. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes the slightly more fancy but similar Troglodytes (which means “A member of a people, esp. in prehistoric times, inhabiting caves or dens; a cave-dweller,” says the Oxford Dictionary).’

Rabbinical tradition explains the name Horite as meaning the free people, stemming from the Semetic root H-R-R meaning ‘free.’ One commentator offers, ‘bleached.’ The singular Horites do begin to fade away from this point in the Biblical narrative; whereas the remainder, fade into an amalgamation with Esau’s descendants; collectively known as Edom – apart from a selection of prophecies.

The Kenizzites are part of the wider Edom nation also, though the Kenites appear to remain distinct, yet closely allied with the Amalekites, who are a separate line joined by Eliphaz’s son Amalek. A people spoken of considerably in the scriptures as palpably different from Esau. Researchers and commentators alike either group Amalek with Edom today – correctly, by fluke – or leave them out entirely from any discussion on Edom (or Esau). Understanding Esau has two sets of descendants is vital in unlocking the premise by some, that the Jews are offspring from Esau and not from Jacob’s son Judah.

Genesis: 31 ‘These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before any king reigned over the Israelites.

32 Bela [1] the son of Beor [not from Edom, but from the people of Angeas, the king of Dinhabah] reigned in Edom [circa 1670-1656 BCE], the name of his city being Dinhabah.

33 Bela died, and Jobab [2] the son of Zerah^ of Bozrah [capital of Edom] reigned [10 years] in his place.

34 Jobab died, and Husham [H2367* – haste] of the land of the Temanites [H8489** – temani: southward (possibly from Tema {H8485** – desert, Genesis 25:15}, son of Ishmael)] reigned [20 years] in his place.

35 Husham [3] died [the same year as Dan in 1626 BCE], and Hadad [4] the son of Bedad, who defeated Midian in the country of Moab, reigned [35 years from 1626 to 1591 BCE] in his place, the name of his city being Avith.’ 

It is worth noting that Dan, one of the sons in Jacob’s family is uniquely recorded as having only one son in Genesis 46:23: Hushim (H2366* – who makes haste). This definition is near identical to Husham the ‘Temanite.’ It is almost exactly the same as a son of Esau already mentioned, Jeush, which also means ‘hasty.’ These correlations between Hushim of Dan and Husham of Teman from Edom – or even Tema from Ishmael – coupled with the mutual definition of hastiness with the name Jeush, are more than incidental as we shall discover – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.  

Genesis: 36 ‘Hadad died, and Samlah [5] of Masrekah reigned [22 years] in his place.

37 Samlah died, and Shaul [6] of Rehoboth on the Euphrates reigned [circa 50 years] in his place.

38 Shaul died, and Baal-hanan [7] the son of Achbor reigned [circa 26 years] in his place. 

39 Baal-hanan the son of Achbor died, and Hadar [8] reigned [47 years from 1493 to 1446 BCE] in his place, the name of his city being Pau; his wife’s name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezahab.’

The genealogical listing of the kings of Edom abruptly ends and stands out for a couple of reasons. First, it gives extra details on the last known king Hadar. Adding his wife’s ancestry but emphasising her ancestry for more than one generation and rather than stating her paternal line, it is her maternal descent which is preserved. This is unusual and possibly unique in the Bible. It parallels the Jewish practice of emphasising maternal descent in proving one is Jewish. Second, Moses sent messengers to the King of Edom – shortly after his sister Miriam’s death in 1406 BCE – who was an unnamed king ruling after Hadar, as Hadar had died in 1446 BCE, the year of the Exodus – Numbers 20:14-21. A kings name which would have been of interest in learning, is unaccountably not recorded.

Numbers 20:14-21

English Standard Version

14 ‘Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: “Thus says your brother Israel: You know all the hardship that we have met: 15 how our fathers went down to Egypt, and we lived in Egypt a long time. And the Egyptians dealt harshly with us and our fathers. 16 And when we cried to the Lord, he heard our voice and sent an angel and brought us out of Egypt. And here we are in Kadesh, a city on the edge of your territory. 17 Please let us pass through your land. We will not pass through field or vineyard, or drink water from a well. We will go along the King’s Highway. We will not turn aside to the right hand or to the left until we have passed through your territory.”

18 But Edom said to him, “You shall not pass through, lest I come out with the sword [Genesis 27:40] against you.”

19 And the people of Israel said to him, “We will go up by the highway, and if we drink of your water, I and my livestock, then I will pay for it. Let me only pass through on foot, nothing more.”

20 But he said, “You shall not pass through.” And Edom came out against them with a large army and with a strong force. 21 Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his territory, so Israel turned away from him.’

Edom’s response to Moses’ reasonable and fair request certainly didn’t bury any hatchets and set the tone for future tension. Edom lived by its past prophecy; resorting to its sword and an open display of hostility and potential violence. Long forgotten was any peace that once existed between Esau and Jacob.

Genesis: 40 ‘These are the names of the chiefs of Esau, according to their clans and their dwelling places, by their names: the chiefs Timna, Alvah, Jetheth,

41 Oholibamah, Elah, Pinon,

42 Kenaz, Teman, Mibzar, 43 Magdiel, and Iram; these are the chiefs [or clans] of Edom (that is, Esau, the father of Edom), according to their dwelling places in the land of their possession.’ 

It appears that Eliphaz’s concubine and Esau’s fourth wife were clan chiefs. The Book of Jasher says [C]husham not to be confused with Dan’s son Hushim, died the same year as Dan in 1626 BCE and that Hadad the son of Bedad reigned for thirty-five years until 1591 BCE. Jobab is the great grandson of Esau – though he is not the Job of the Book of Job fame as some commentators assert and first thought by this writer – who was born circa 1656 BCE. Job was a contemporary of Jacob’s birthright son for forty years until Joseph’s death. Joseph dwelt in Egypt between 1709 and 1616 BCE and became Vizier at age thirty in 1696 BCE, during the reign of Pharaoh Djoser (or Netjerikhet), the first king of the third Dynasty; who reigned circa 1700 to 1672/71 BCE – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man, different name?

There is one other Jobab mentioned in Genesis chapter ten and he is the youngest son of Joktan’s thirteen sons. Jobab’s father Zerah was from Bozrah. Bozrah eventually became the capital of Edom and its principal city. The name Bozrah means: ‘Fortification, fortress’ or ‘fortified enclosure’ and from the verb basar, ‘to separate and protect for extraction’ as in placing a wall.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Noun (bissaron) means stronghold and noun… (basir) means vintage and noun (beser) probably denotes precious ore (a vineyard operation is not unlike a mining operation). Nouns (bassara) and (bassoret) denote destitution or scarcity and probably refer to residue that remains after the extraction of commodities.’

To fully appreciate the supportive material and evidence of scripture to follow, it is requisite to divulge in part, who Jacob and Esau are today. The sons of Jacob are the British and Irish descended peoples, who originated from the migrations and invasions of the Celts, Saxons (Angles, Frisians and Jutes), Vikings (Norse and Danes) and Normans from Europe. From the Isles of Great Britain and Ireland they spread abroad and include the English speaking daughter nations in the New World of America, Australasia and the Old World of Africa. We will study each of Jacob’s twelve sons in turn. This is crucial understanding, in unlocking vast portions of the scriptures and the prophetic intent of the Bible. 

Preceding even before this writer first began researching biblical identities, there has been a growing belief in two different theories on the ‘lost’ Tribes of Israel, which are completely in error yet have large appeal primarily for those who have only researched the topic superficially. The first is that the Black peoples of Africa and the Americas are the descended sons of Jacob and particularly those in the United States are from the tribe of Judah. The section on Ham’s son Canaan, hopefully dissuades any fair-minded reader from giving this theory any validity – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. The alternative theory, is that the sons of Jacob were so comprehensively sifted throughout the nations – by their respective captors, the Assyrians and the Babylonian, Medo-Persian alliance – they have literally been lost ‘forever.’ 

As we have a handful of nations and peoples left to identify after addressing basically the entirety of the world in the twenty-eight chapters thus far, it would be difficult to insist that the Israelites are still lost. Regardless, we will give this theory due recognition when we study Jacob.

Those identity believers who already understand that the Jews are not the tribe of Judah are right, yet they do not provide a tangible or cognitive answer to who Judah actually is; thus falling short in fully cementing their argument about Esau. We will strive to uncover the truth regarding Judah in the following chapter, so that everything we investigate in this chapter is endorsed beyond any reasonable doubt. Those who profess the Jews are Edom are correct, for the Jewish people are represented by the broad umbrella of peoples called Edom; which in itself, is an amalgamation of Esau and the Horites, with the addition of the Amalekites. The role of the Kenites and Kenizzites remains ambiguous and a subject that requires further research and perhaps enlightenment beyond that presented in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia

Just as we have seen in the Bible how complex Esau’s family lineage became straight from the outset, due to his marrying at least three different women and his sons continuing to marry in like fashion; it can be no surprise to learn that the genetic analysis and interpretation of the Jewish people is the most complex in the world. It is the subject of considerable discussion and debate. Evidenced as such in their varied Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroup structure and sequencing. Even so, Edom today comprises the nation state of Israel; the Jews who reside in numerous other nations; and those people who identify on any level as Jewish ethnically – even though many experts would argue there is no such thing as a Jewish ‘race.’

There are many identity believers who cling to Edom being modern day Turkey – as they and many out side of identity circles, believe the Arab nations descend from Ishmael. Haplogroups and autosomal DNA support the inner family relationship of Jacob, Esau and Ishmael in being consistent; with the Bible revealing the identifying markers as accurate. The Turks and the Arabs are not closely aligned with the British peoples on either score. The truth is that the Israelite British and Irish peoples are palpably and profoundly related to the Ishmaelite Germans and the Edomite Jews – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar

Edom were not always small and once had a measure of power like the Midianites; the leading Ammonites; or of Moab. We will study scriptures that shows their prominence was diminished and their power smashed. Their recourse was to assimilate within other nations and particularly those of their brother Jacob and specifically his sons Joseph and Judah. In so doing, Edom has served and shared in the blessings afforded to Jacob. From the seventeenth century, Edom grew restless and a concerted effort was made to swap servitude for sovereignty; culminating in the creation of their own state in 1948. 

It is appreciated for dyed-in-the-wool identity adherents believing the Jews are Judah… this will be news which stretches their understanding and patience like no other, up-and-till this point at least. There are many scriptures regarding Esau (or Edom); in fact only Judah has more verses ascribed to them. Thus, Edom is a major component, second only to Judah in understanding biblical prophecy and the ongoing family drama which continues to unfold, ultimately ushering in the tribulation and the time of Jacob’s trouble. A future prophecy in Obadiah shows that Edom does not help Jacob in his time of need and thus is not helped when Edom’s allies turn against them or when Jacob exacts revenge later still.

Obadiah

English Standard Version

1 ‘The vision of Obadiah. Thus says the Lord God concerning Edom: We have heard a report from the Lord, and a messenger has been sent among the nations: “Rise up! Let us rise against her for battle!” 2 Behold, I will make you small [lesser or insignificant] among the nations; you shall be utterly despised [H959 – bazah: disdain, hold in contempt, despicable, vile, scorned].

3 The pride of your heart has deceived you, you who live in the clefts of the rock, in your lofty dwelling, who say in your heart, “Who will bring me down to the ground?” 4 Though you soar aloft like the eagle, though your nest* is set among the stars, from there I will bring you down, declares the Lord…

6 How Esau has been pillaged, his treasures sought out! 7 All your allies have driven you to your border; those at peace with you have deceived you; they have prevailed against you; those who eat your bread have set a trap beneath you – you have no understanding.’ 

The reference to nesting among the stars is alluding to their aligning with angelic entities and receiving the power of rulership as a benefit. The eagle builds its nest in places nearly inaccessible to man. Nest in the Hebrew means a cell or a nest that is a safe haven for producing offspring or specifically hatching eggs; as the Ark had individual nests for some of the animals and birds – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

Among the stars in Hebrew is in connection with angelic progeny and their princely status. Esau married into at least one Nephilim bloodline with his first two wives and at least one of his sons followed suit. Their allegiance to a line likely linked to Cain and certainly fallen angels, is the result of their desire to share in ‘reaching unto Heaven’, to depose the Ancient of Days and rule over His creation. An objective we are symbolically witnessing and being subjected to in our very lifetimes, as we will soon discover – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; articles: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?; and Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible says: ‘… and though thou set thy nest among the stars; even higher than the eagle’s; an hyperbolical expression, supposing that which never was or can be done; yet, if it was possible, would not secure from danger: or should their castles and fortresses be built upon the top of the highest mountains, which seem to reach the heavens, and be among the stars…’

Obadiah and Jeremiah describe how Edom is like the eagle. Many Jews have made the United States their home. America is symbolised by an eagle, as a leading recipient of Jacob’s blessings – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Deuteronomy 32:9-13

English Standard Version

‘… But the Lord’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. “He found him in a desert land, and in the howling waste of the wilderness; he encircled him, he cared for him, he kept him as the apple of his eye. Like an eagle that stirs up its nest, that flutters over its young, spreading out its wings, catching them, bearing them on its pinions, the Lord alone guided him, no foreign god was with him. He made him ride on the high places of the land, and he ate the produce of the field, and he suckled him with honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock.’

The apple of the Creator’s eye has been changed by the designers of the United States Seal and turned into the all-seeing eye of the Architect of the Universe, the Adversary – Article: Asherah. Edom though made small, exalts himself like an eagle. Eagles fly high in the air and Edom is high minded, prideful. The eagle swoops down from a great height and ambushes its prey. The Eternal is condemning of the abuse of that power, particularly when it is He that gives it – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

Habakkuk 2:9

English Standard Version

“Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house, to set his nest on high, to be safe from the reach of harm!”

Job 39:26-30

English Standard Version

“Is it by your understanding that the hawk soars and spreads his wings toward the south? 27 Is it at your command that the eagle mounts up and makes his nest on high. On the rock he dwells and makes his home, on the rocky crag and stronghold. From there he spies out the prey; his eyes behold it from far away. His young ones suck up blood, and where the slain are, there is he.”

Obadiah: 8 ‘Will I not on that day, declares the Lord, destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of Mount Esau? 9 And your mighty men shall be dismayed, O Teman, so that every man from Mount Esau will be cut off by slaughter. 10 Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you, and you shall be cut off forever. 

11 On the day that you stood aloof, on the day that strangers carried off his wealth and foreigners entered his gates and cast lots for Jerusalem, you were like one of them. 12 But do not gloat over the day of your brother in the day of his misfortune; do not rejoice over the people of Judah in the day of their ruin; do not boast in the day of distress. 13 Do not enter the gate of my people in the day of their calamity; do not gloat over his disaster in the day of his calamity; do not loot his wealth in the day of his calamity. 14 Do not stand at the crossroads* to cut off his fugitives; do not hand over his survivors in the day of distress.”

Jerusalem is the capital of Judah. The modern day capital of Judah is not the capital of the state of Israel by the same name: Jerusalem. This Jerusalem is the equivalent of Edom’s capital, Bozrah.

Bozrah (aka Jerusalem)

The modern day fulfilment of Jerusalem in true Judah and the prophetic significance will be discussed in the next chapter.

Tel Aviv (above and below) was the former capital of Israel, until the United States and the Israeli Prime Minister both recognised Jerusalem in 2018.

One could say that Israel is at the crossroads* of three continents; bisecting Africa, Asia and Europe.

Obadiah: 15 ‘For the day of the Lord is near upon all the nations. As you have done, it shall be done to you; your deeds shall return on your own head… 17 But in Mount Zion there shall be those who escape, and it shall be holy, and the house of Jacob shall possess their own possessions. 18 The house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau stubble; they shall burn them and consume them, and there shall be no survivor for the house of Esau, for the Lord has spoken.

19 Those of the Negeb [south] shall possess Mount Esau, and those of the Shephelah [plain] shall possess the land of the Philistines; they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria, and Benjamin shall possess Gilead. 20 The exiles of this host of the people of Israel shall possess the land of the Canaanites as far as Zarephath [a city in Sidon-South Africa? Or possibly Moab-France], and the exiles of Jerusalem who are in Sepharad [possibly Assyria-Russia or more likely Aram-Spain*] shall possess the cities of the Negeb. 21 Saviors shall go up to Mount Zion to rule Mount Esau, and the kingdom shall be the Lord’s.’

An interesting similarity between the word Sephar-ad and the branch of Judaism known as Sephar-dic, originating in Spain.*

Psalm 60:8-9

English Standard Version

‘Moab [France] is my washbasin; upon Edom [state of Israel] I cast my shoe; over Philistia [Mexico and Latino-Hispano America] I shout in triumph.” 9 Who will bring me to the fortified city [Jerusalem (Bozrah)]? Who will lead me to Edom?’

Jeremiah 49:7-22

English Standard Version

7 Concerning Edom. Thus says the Lord of hosts: “Is wisdom no more in Teman? Has counsel perished from the prudent? Has their wisdom vanished? 

8 Flee, turn back, dwell in the depths, O inhabitants of Dedan [Wallonia, Brussells and Luxembourg in the West]! For I will bring the calamity of Esau [state of Israel in the East] upon him, the time when I punish him… 

10 But I have stripped Esau bare; I have uncovered his hiding places, and he is not able to conceal himself. His children are destroyed, and his brothers, and his neighbors; and he is no more…13 For I have sworn by myself, declares the Lord, that Bozrah [Jerusalem, Israel] shall become a horror, a taunt, a waste, and a curse, and all her cities shall be perpetual wastes”… 16 The horror you inspire has deceived you, and the pride of your heart, you who live in the clefts of the rock, who hold the height of the hill. Though you make your nest* as high as the eagle’s, I will bring you down from there, declares the Lord. 17 “Edom shall become a horror. Everyone who passes by it will be horrified and will hiss because of all its disasters. 18 As when Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring cities were overthrown, says the Lord, no man shall dwell there, no man shall sojourn in her. 

20 Therefore hear the plan that the Lord has made against Edom and the purposes that he has formed against the inhabitants of Teman: Even the little ones of the flock shall be dragged away. Surely their fold shall be appalled at their fate. 21 At the sound of their fall the earth shall tremble; the sound of their cry shall be heard at the Red Sea. 22 Behold, one shall mount up and fly swiftly like an eagle and spread his wings against Bozrah, and the heart of the warriors [soldiers of the state of Israel] of Edom shall be in that day like the heart of a woman in her birth pains.”

Daniel 11:40-41

English Standard Version

“At the time of the end, the king of the south [Islamic alliance] shall attack him, but the king of the north [Assyria-Russia] shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through. He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his hand: Edom [state of Israel] and Moab [France] and the main part of the Ammonites [Paris].

Ezekiel 32:29

English Standard Version

“Edom is there, her kings and all her princes, who for all their might are laid with those who are killed by the sword; they lie with the uncircumcised, with those who go down to the pit.”

Jeremiah 9:26

English Standard Version

‘Egypt [literally, Egypt], Judah, Edom [state of Israel], the sons of Ammon, Moab [France], and all who dwell in the desert [Eastern Europe] who cut the corners of their hair [Western Europe], for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart.’

Ezekiel 25:13

English Standard Version

‘… therefore thus says the Lord God, I will stretch out my hand against Edom and cut off from it man and beast. And I will make it desolate; from Teman [state of Israel in the East] even to Dedan [Wallonia, Brussels and Luxembourg in the West] they shall fall by the sword.’

Isaiah 21:11-12

English Standard Version

The oracle concerning Dumah [H1746 – ‘silence of death’ the sixth son of Ishmael]. One is calling to me from Seir, “Watchman, what time of the night? Watchman, what time of the night?” [Luke 12:38-40] The watchman says: “Morning comes, and also the night. If you will inquire, inquire; come back again.”

The link with Dumah from Ishmael is pertinent as the history of the Jewish people (Esau) is intrinsically entwined with Germany (Ishmael). As discussed, Dumah possibly equates with Hesse (Hessia or Hessen), which is not only linked with the British royal family, but contains the wealthiest city in Germany and its financial hub, Frankfurt am Main – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Isaiah 11:12-14

English Standard Version

‘He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. The jealousy of Ephraim shall depart, and those who harass Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not harass Ephraim. But they shall swoop down on the shoulder of the Philistines [Mexico and Latino-Hispano America] in the west, and together they shall plunder the people of the east. They shall put out their hand against Edom [state of Israel] and Moab [France], and the Ammonites [Paris and or French Quebec] shall obey them.’

Numbers 24:17-19

English Standard Version

‘I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near: a star [Joseph] shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter [Judah] shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom shall be dispossessed; Seir also, his enemies, shall be dispossessed. Israel is doing valiantly. And one from Jacob shall exercise dominion and destroy the survivors of cities!’

Malachi 1:1-5

English Standard Version

“I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord.

“Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated [H8130 – sane’: to hate, be hateful an enemy or foe].

I have laid waste [desolate, devastate] his hill country and left his heritage to jackals dragons [H8568 – tannah: dragon, sea monster from H8565 – tan: sea-serpent] of the desert^.”

If Edom says, “We are shattered but we will rebuild** the ruins,” the Lord of hosts says, “They may build, but I will tear down, and they will be called ‘the wicked country,’ and ‘the people with whom the Lord is angry [H2194 – za’am: indignant, abhor, denounce] forever.’

Your own eyes shall see this, and you shall say, “Great is the Lord beyond the border of Israel!”

The utterly unique attribute of Esau is his adverse relationship with the Creator. No love has been lost between the two and the verse is not a mis-translation, for it is repeated in the New Testament. It is difficult to answer the strength of the Eternal’s feeling against Esau, even calling them, ‘the people of my curse’. Yet the Creator has good cause in all that He does and so we must accept these verses, as unsettling as they are. Some will say, but ‘God loves everyone.’ No He doesn’t. The Creator loves those who obey Him – John 14:21, 23; Jeremiah 7:23.

Isaiah 34:5*

King James Version

‘For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea, and upon the people of my curse, to judgment.’

New English Translation

He says, “Indeed, my sword has slaughtered heavenly powers. Look, it now descends on Edom, on the people I will annihilate in judgment.”

The state of Israel is principally composed of desert^ and has been rebuilt** by the Jewish people since 1881. Esau’s heritage was destroyed and yet Edom has inherited the ancient land of Esau and in a remarkable twist, the land of the former kingdoms of Israel and Judah. In 2 Esdras 6:9, KJV it enigmatically says: ‘For Esau is the end of the world, and Jacob is the beginning of it that followeth.’ In the Book of Genesis, Esau was prophesied to be under the yoke of Jacob. It was foretold that Esau would come out from that bondage and from the 1680s onwards, Esau has. Esau’s destiny it would appear, is to be ruling at the culmination of this age and the climax of the history of our world. In contrast, Jacob’s destiny, is to be at the forefront of the beginning of the new age and the future history of the world following the return of the Son of Man.

Jewish men

Amos 1:11-12

English Standard Version

‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Edom, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because he pursued his brother with the sword and cast off all pity, and his anger tore perpetually, and he kept his wrath forever. 12 So I will send a fire upon Teman, and it shall devour the strongholds of Bozrah [Jerusalem in Israel].”

Isaiah 34:6-15

English Standard Version

‘The Lord has a sword; it is sated with blood… For the Lord has a sacrifice in Bozrah, a great slaughter in the land of Edom. Wild oxen [H7214 – r’em: unicorn, great aurochs (wild bulls) now extinct] shall fall with them, and young steers with the mighty bulls [H47 – ‘abbiyr: valiant, strong, angels]. Their land shall drink its fill of blood, and their soil shall be gorged with fat.

For the Lord has a day of vengeance, a year of recompense for the cause of Zion [Judah]. And the streams of Edom shall be turned into pitch, and her soil into sulfur [like Sodom]; her land shall become burning pitch. Night and day it shall not be quenched; its smoke shall go up forever. From generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it forever and ever. But the hawk and the porcupine shall possess it, the owl (Article: Lilith) and the raven shall dwell in it. He shall stretch the line of confusion over it, and the plumb line of emptiness. Its nobles – there is no one there to call it a kingdom, and all its princes shall be nothing. 

Thorns shall grow over its strongholds, nettles and thistles in its fortresses. It shall be the haunt of jackals [dragons], an abode for ostriches. And wild animals shall meet with hyenas; the wild goat [satyr] shall cry to his fellow [H3917 – Liyliyth: the screech or barn owl – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Lilith]; indeed, there the night bird [great owl] settles and finds for herself a resting place. There the owl nests and lays and hatches and gathers her young in her shadow; indeed, there the hawks are gathered, each one with her mate.’

Jewish women

Who is Esau-Edom? Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘We can identity Edom today and in history as the Jews because they are the ones that are cursed and rejected by God, and are the ones who despise every godly thing as did Esau…

The curse of a desolate nation God put upon Edom is clearly evident in the Jewish people.’

Ezekiel 35:1-15

English Standard Version

1 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face against Mount Seir, and prophesy against it, 3 and say to it, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am against you, Mount Seir, and I will stretch out my hand against you… 4 I will lay your cities waste, and you shall become a desolation, and you shall know that I am the Lord. 

5 Because you cherished perpetual enmity and gave over the people of Israel to the power of the sword at the time of their calamity, at the time of their final punishment, 6 therefore, as I live, declares the Lord God, 

I will prepare you for blood, and blood shall pursue you; because you did not hate bloodshed, therefore blood shall pursue you

This is a significant prophecy against the Jewish people, which has continued into modern times. 

7 ‘I will make Mount Seir a waste and a desolation, and I will cut off from it all who come and go. 8 And I will fill its mountains with the slain. On your hills and in your valleys and in all your ravines those slain with the sword shall fall. 9 … your cities shall not be inhabited. Then you will know that I am the Lord.

10 “Because you said, ‘These two nations [Joseph and Judah] and these two countries [Joseph and Judah] shall be mine, and we will take possession of themalthough the Lord was there – 11 therefore, as I live, declares the Lord God, I will deal with you according to the anger and envy that you showed because of your hatred against them. And I will make myself known among them, when I judge you. 

12 And you shall know that I am the Lord. “I have heard all the revilings that you uttered against the mountains of Israel, saying, ‘They are laid desolate; they are given us to devour.’ 13 And you magnified yourselves against me with your mouth, and multiplied your words against me; I heard it. 14 Thus says the Lord God: While the whole earth rejoices, I will make you desolate. 15 As you rejoiced over the inheritance of the house of Israel, because it was desolate, so I will deal with you; you shall be desolate, Mount Seir, and all Edom, all of it. Then they will know that I am the Lord.’

Indication that at time of writing, Mount Seir and Edom are together as a land and people, yet still distinct. The Horites and the sons of Esau as Edom are one people. There is a lot of blood to be shed and spilled in the future as there has been in the past. It is very difficult not to associate the redness of blood with the red of Edom. All this, because of their penchant for the sword and the violence it brings; using it against their own brother, as prophesied by their father Isaac – Genesis 27:40. 

Joel 3:19

English Standard Version

“Egypt shall become a desolation and Edom a desolate wilderness, for the violence done to the people of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.”

Psalm 137:7

English Standard Version

‘Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of Jerusalem, how they said, “Lay it bare, lay it bare, down to its foundations!” O daughter of Babylon, doomed to be destroyed, blessed shall he be who repays you with what you have done to us!’

We have read previously in Obadiah, how it reveals that Edom participated in the fall of Jerusalem when the Chaldeans invaded. The Edomites were directly involved in the destruction and burning of the First Temple built by King Solomon, when Nebuchadnezzar II laid waste to Judah in 587 BCE. Edom is likened to a daughter of Babylon. In league with the ancient Chaldeans of the past and in the future; involved in the final Babylonian system of rule which holds the whole world captive – Chapter XV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Jewish man and woman

Ezekiel 36:1-11

English Standard Version

1 “And you, son of man, prophesy to the mountains of Israel, and say, O mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord. 2 Thus says the Lord God: Because the enemy said of you, ‘Aha!’ and, ‘The ancient heights have become our possession,’ [control of the United States and the United Kingdom in furtherance of a one world government] 3 therefore prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord God: Precisely because they made you desolate and crushed you from all sides, so that you became the possession of the rest of the nations [financial debt and ruin], and you became the talk and evil gossip of the people… 5 therefore thus says the Lord God: Surely I have spoken in my hot jealousy against the rest of the nations and against all Edom, who gave my land to themselves as a possession* with wholehearted joy and utter contempt, that they might make its pasturelands a prey. 7 Therefore thus says the Lord God: I swear that the nations that are all around you shall themselves suffer reproach. 

8 “But you, O mountains of Israel, shall shoot forth your branches and yield your fruit to my people Israel, for they will soon come home. 10 And I will multiply people on you, the whole house of Israel, all of it. The cities shall be inhabited and the waste places rebuilt. 11 And I will multiply on you man and beast, and they shall multiply and be fruitful. And I will cause you to be inhabited as in your former times, and will do more good to you than ever before. Then you will know that I am the Lord.”

This prophesy in the Book of Ezekiel is dual – including the captivities of the past, yet – speaking about our present time and Edom’s possession of Israel’s former lands. It will be returned to the sons of Jacob during the Messiah’s millennial rule, when the Kingdom of God is established on the Earth. Those who teach that it is the Israelites or the tribe of Judah now dwelling in the state of Israel are mis-interpreting scripture. We will look into this in more detail now, regarding Edom and also when we study Jacob’s sons and their locations in the world today. It will then be clear that Jacob’s sons have not converged or returned to Palestine. Nor is it the promised land of this current age. We will also learn that the tribes of Israel and Judah did reconvene as the Bible predicted – before Christ’s return – just not in the Middle East as most have erroneously assumed.

Jewish man and woman

Amos 9:11-12

English Standard Version

“In that day I will raise up the booth of David that is fallen and repair its breaches, and raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old, that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called by my name,” declares the Lord who does this.

The Book of Job – Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, 2015, Gerard Gertoux – emphasis mine:

‘… most Jews no longer expect a human messiah, they hope rather in the coming of a collective Messiah (the State of Israel). Some Christian Zionists believe that the “ingathering” of Jews in Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus. The idea that Christians should actively support a Jewish return to the Land of Israel, along with the parallel idea that the Jews ought to be encouraged to become Christian, as a means of fulfilling a Biblical prophecy has been common in Protestant circles since the Reformation. Christian Zionism is a belief among some Christians that the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, is in accordance with Biblical prophecy.’

Who is Esau-Edom? Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The common or popular doctrine among [people] is that the Jews are Israelites, and as such they must return to Palestine to fulfil Bible prophecy. This erroneous concept has become known as “Zionism,” which has developed into a political movement for the benefit of the Jew. Zion, or mount Zion, was the highest of several hills on which Jerusalem was built, and thus represents the greatness and majesty of Jerusalem. Zion was… [where] David brought the Ark of God [2 Samuel 6:12-18]… the seat of David’s rule… where his… palace was erected and where the Tabernacle [before the Temple] was first set up’ – Article: The Ark of God. ‘Zion became a sacred site [Psalm 2:6]… loved by God [Psalm 87:2]… and… the place where God dwells’ – Psalm 9:11, 68:16, 132:13.

It is in the land of prophetic Zion or Jerusalem [Isaiah 51:1, Revelation 21:2,27] which God has promised to gather together his people Israel [Jeremiah 3:14].

God cast out His people from the old land for their apostasy, never to return.’

Isaiah 52:2 and Micah 4:9-10 show that Zion is on Earth in the physical realm, now. Other scriptures reveal that Israel were to be transplanted to a new Zion, as Weisman states.

2 Samuel 7:10

English Standard Version

‘And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more. And violent men shall afflict them no more, as formerly…’

Lamentations 1:6

English Standard Version

‘From the daughter of Zion all her majesty has departed. Her princes have become like deer that find no pasture; they fled without strength before the pursuer.’

Micah 4:8

English Standard Version

‘And you, O tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion, to you shall it come, the former dominion shall come, kingship for the daughter of Jerusalem.’

This new place of gathering – after the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah had respectively been taken captive and dispersed… the new Zion predicted, not the old Zion in ancient Canaan or present day Palestine – is the British Isles. This is a pivotal point to digest. To understand exactly who Esau and his twin Jacob are today, one must grasp that the sons of Jacob were promised a new home… not a return to their old home.

‘The following are some… proofs… [Zion is not Palestine]:

– The land Israel was to be gathered into is described as a “wilderness” or undeveloped land, but with their arrival “it shall blossom abundantly”… (Isaiah 35:1-2; Hosea 2:14-15).  Palestine [has]… never blossomed abundantly. God was to make Zion’s “wilderness like Eden” (Isaiah 51:3). 

– Zion was to be a land from sea to sea (Zechariah 9:10; Psalm 72:8). Palestine is not [bordered by seas]. 

– In the land where God “shall assemble the outcast of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth,” Jesus Christ was to be “set up as an ensign” for God’s people (Isaiah 11:1-12). In the state of Israel, even the mention of Jesus Christ is prohibited. America is the only nation that was ever legally established as a Christian nation’ – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

– ‘Israel’s restoration was to take place in a land “afar,” or “very far off,” where they would “Look upon Zion” (Isaiah 33:13-20; Jeremiah 30:10). Since this was spoken in Palestine it could not include Palestine.

– Zion was to be bountiful in produce and resources, as indicated by its [“wheat, oil, flocks, herds, corn”] and a land “as a watered garden” (Jeremiah 31:12; Joel 2:15-19, 23-26)… Palestine is rather barren in such resources.

– The New Jerusalem was to “be inhabited as towns without walls [to be at peace] for the multitude of men and cattle therein” (Zechariah 2:4). Old Palestine is full of walled cities [and military zones].

– The New Jerusalem was to be a very large land, as indicated by the need for an angel to measure it, with its length and width being 12,000 furlongs (Zechariah 2:1-2, Revelation 21:15-16). This could hardly be referring [of] little Palestine.’

The New Jerusalem Charles Weisman is referring to as his last point, is the one that is part of a future new Earth and where the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man will dwell. 

Saying that, it does highlight the small size of the state of Israel at approximately 290 miles from north to south. A furlong is an eighth of a mile or 220 yards. Thus 12,000 furlongs is 1,500 miles.

The destruction and the end of their original homeland was prophesied to both Israel and later to Judah in the book of Ezekiel. We have read in Ezekiel chapter thirty-six that other nations would take possession of the original promised land and ultimately Edom would take repossession.* The Jews are included with the ‘worst of the heathen’ and those who have ‘profaned’ the ancient holy places, polluting the land according to the Eternal. And as much as it is a massive shock for many, the Jews are not the sons of Jacob, true Israel or descended from the tribe of Judah.

Ezekiel 7:2-3, 5, 21,24

English Standard Version

2 “And you, O son of man, thus says the Lord God to the land of Israel… The end has come upon the four corners of the land. 3 Now the end is upon you, and I will send my anger upon you; I will judge you according to your ways, and I will punish you for all your abominations. 5 “Thus says the Lord God: Disaster after disaster! Behold… 21 And I will give it into the hands of foreigners for prey, and to the wicked of the earth for spoil, and they shall profane [KJV: pollute] it.

24 I will bring the worst of the nations [KJV: heathen] to take possession* of their houses. I will put an end to the pride of the strong, and their holy places shall be profaned [KJV: defiled].”

Weisman: ‘While Edom occupied parts of Judea at one time, they never had possession of this land at any time of biblical history…If Palestine was destined to be possessed by Edom, then the Jews must be Edom, and through their Zionist plans are fulfilling prophecy about Edom, not about Israel. The Zionist Jews have hidden their Edomite identity and true role in Palestine by claiming they are Israel returning to Zion.

The Jews are indeed fulfilling prophecy in Palestine, but it is the role of Esau-Edom they are acting out, not that of Jacob-Israel.’

Lamentations 4:21-22

English Standard Version

‘Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom, you who dwell in the land of Uz; but to you also the cup shall pass; you shall become drunk and strip yourself bare. The punishment of your iniquity, O daughter of Zion, is accomplished; he will keep you in exile no longer; but your iniquity, O daughter of Edom, he will punish; he will uncover your sins.’

There is a genetic association between Edom, Aram, Nahor and Joktan for they all have sons and territories named after Uz (or derivatives thereof). They are represented by the Jews; Italians of Aramaean descent in central Italy; and Italians of Joktan descent in southern Italy – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. It cannot be a coincidence that Jews have an entwined history with Spain and Italy, either through the Sephardic Jew from Spain or the ancient Jewish presence in Italy during the early diaspora from Judea (Idumea). 

Some identity adherents, accurately teach Edom’s link with governing hierarchies in Italy and Germany. The Bible indicates the relationship between Edom and Chaldea; while recent history has between Edom and Ishmael. Edom’s controlling tentacles run through the Vatican, the original banking families of Italy and the founding of the Illuminati in Germany – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

We will in turn investigate the possible relationship connection exhibited in ‘Job of the land of Uz.’

Jeremiah 40:11-12

English Standard Version

‘Likewise, when all the Judeans [exiles from the true tribe of Judah] who were in Moab and among the Ammonites and in Edom and in other lands heard that the king of Babylon had left a remnant in Judah and had appointed Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, son of Shaphan, as governor over them, then all the Judeans returned from all the places to which they had been driven and came to the land of Judah, to Gedaliah at Mizpah. And they gathered wine and summer fruits in great abundance.’

Isaiah 63:1-6

English Standard Version

1 ‘Who is this who comes from Edom, in crimsoned garments from Bozrah, he who is splendid in his apparel, marching in the greatness of his strength? “It is I, speaking in righteousness, mighty to save.” 2 Why is your apparel red, and your garments like his who treads in the winepress? [burgundy, crimson] 3 “I have trodden the winepress alone, and from the peoples no one was with me; I trod them in my anger and trampled them in my wrath; their lifeblood spattered on my garments, and stained all my apparel. 4 For the day of vengeance was in my heart, and my year of redemption had come. 5 I looked, but there was no one to help; I was appalled, but there was no one to uphold; so my own arm brought me salvation, and my wrath upheld me. 6 I trampled down the peoples in my anger; I made them drunk in my wrath, and I poured out their lifeblood on the earth.”

This passage is describing the return of the Son of Man as a devouring Lion, not a gentle Lamb and inflicting vengeance on all those who oppose Him – sadly, pronouncedly typified by Edom. The city of Jerusalem in Israel – called Bozrah in the Bible or ‘the great city’ in Revelation 11:8 – figures prominently as the headquarters for the Beast and the second beast, the False Prophet and not Rome (or the Vatican) as nearly all think. It makes sense then, that this is where the Messiah returns and begins his retribution against all the enemies of the saints – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod

Exodus 15:15

English Standard Version

‘Now are the chiefs of Edom dismayed; trembling seizes the leaders of Moab; all the inhabitants of Canaan have melted away.’

This was after word reached the peoples of Canaan that the exiting sons of Jacob from Egypt, the Israelites, had somehow vanquished a superior, militarily savvy and vicious army of the Amalekites – the descendants of Esau’s son, Eliphaz amalgamated with the Elioud giants of the same name.

Deuteronomy 2:1-8

English Standard Version

1 “Then we turned and journeyed into the wilderness in the direction of the Red Sea, as the Lord told me. And for many days we traveled around Mount Seir. 2 Then the Lord said to me, 3 ‘You have been traveling around this mountain country long enough. Turn northward 4 and command the people, “You are about to pass through the territory of your brothers, the people of Esau, who live in Seir; and they will be afraid of you. So be very careful.

5 Do not contend with them, for I will not give you any of their land, no, not so much as for the sole of the foot to tread on, because I have given Mount Seir to Esau as a possession.

6 You shall purchase food from them with money, that you may eat, and you shall also buy water from them with money, that you may drink. 7 For the Lord your God has blessed you in all the work of your hands. He knows your going through this great wilderness. These forty years the Lord your God has been with you. You have lacked nothing.” 8 So we went on, away from our brothers, the people of Esau, who live in Seir, away from the Arabah road from Elath and Ezion-geber. “And we turned and went in the direction of the wilderness of Moab.”

1 Samuel 14:46-48

English Standard Version

‘Then Saul went up from pursuing the Philistines, and the Philistines went to their own place. When Saul had taken the kingship over Israel, he fought against all his enemies on every side, against Moab, against the Ammonites, against Edom, against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines. Wherever he turned he routed them. And he did valiantly and struck the Amalekites and delivered Israel out of the hands of those who plundered them.’

2 Samuel 8:11-15

English Standard Version

‘These also King David dedicated to the Lord, together with the silver and gold that he dedicated from all the nations he subdued, from Edom, [state of Israel] Moab [southern French], the Ammonites [northern French], the Philistines [Latino-Hispano America], Amalek [scattered], and from the spoil of Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah. And David made a name for himself when he returned from striking down 18,000 Edomites in the Valley of Salt’ – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.

Then he put garrisons in Edom; throughout all Edom he put garrisons, and all the Edomites became David’s servants.

And the Lord gave victory to David wherever he went. So David reigned over all Israel. And David administered justice and equity to all his people.’

Notice Edom and Amalek are separate entities and both contain family lines from Esau. Edom was subjugated by King Saul and again by King David.

1 Kings 11:1-22

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now King Solomon loved many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh* [4]: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the people of Israel, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods”…

9 And the Lord was angry with Solomon… 14 And the Lord raised up an adversary against Solomon, Hadad [family name] the Edomite. He was of the royal house in Edom. 15 For when David was in Edom, and Joab the commander of the army went up to bury the slain, he struck down every male in Edom 16 (for Joab and all Israel remained there six months, until he had cut off every male in Edom). 17 But Hadad fled to Egypt, together with certain Edomites of his father’s servants, Hadad still being a little child. 18 They set out from Midian and came to Paran [where Ishmael first dwelt – Genesis 21:21] and took men with them from Paran and came to Egypt, to Pharaoh king of Egypt [1], who gave him a house and assigned him an allowance of food and gave him land. 

19 And Hadad found great favor in the sight of Pharaoh [2], so that he gave him in marriage the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes the queen. 20 And the sister of Tahpenes bore him Genubath his son, whom Tahpenes weaned in Pharaoh’s house. And Genubath was in Pharaoh’s house among the sons of Pharaoh. 21 But when Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers and that Joab the commander of the army was dead, Hadad said to Pharaoh, “Let me depart, that I may go to my own country.” 22 But Pharaoh said to him, “What have you lacked with me that you are now seeking to go to your own country?” And he said to him, “Only let me depart.”

The first Pharaoh who gave land, a home and food would have been Ahmose I (1), the first king of the 18th Dynasty, who ruled circa 1022 to 998 BCE and was contemporary with King Saul of Israel [1025-1010 BCE]. Ahmose was the brother of Kamose who had ruled for five years as the last king of the 17th Dynasty. They had been instrumental in defeating and driving out the Hyksos from Egypt. When Hadad was older and received a wife, another Pharaoh was ruling, Amenhotep I (2), second king of the 18th Dynasty. He reigned from 998 to 978 BCE and was a contemporary of King David [1010-970 BCE]. Following this Pharaoh was Thutmose I, the third king from 978 to 972 BCE. When Hadad learned of David’s death this was in 970 BCE or shortly thereafter. The Pharaoh ruling now and who remonstrated with Hadad would have been Thutmose II* (4), who reigned from 972 till 960 BCE – the first part of Solomon’s rule [970-930 BCE] and quite likely the Pharaoh who had given him a daughter for marriage.

2 Kings 8:16-24

English Standard Version

16 ‘In the fifth year [848 BCE] of Joram [who ruled from 852 to 841 BCE] the son of Ahab [874-853 BCE], king of Israel, when Jehoshaphat was king of Judah [870-848 BCE], Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, began [848 BCE] to reign [solely]. 17 He was thirty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned eight years [12 years total: 853-841 BCE] in Jerusalem. 

18 And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as the house of Ahab had done, for the daughter of Ahab was his wife. And he did what was evil in the sight of the Lord. 19 Yet the Lord was not willing to destroy Judah, for the sake of David his servant, since he promised to give a lamp to him and to his sons forever. 20 In his days Edom revolted from the rule of Judah and set up a king of their own [848-841 BCE]. 21 Then Joram passed over to Zair with all his chariots and rose by night, and he and his chariot commanders struck the Edomites who had surrounded him, but his army fled home. 22 So Edom revolted from the rule of Judah to this day. Then Libnah revolted at the same time.’

2 Chronicles 25:1-28

English Standard Version

Amaziah was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned twenty-nine years [from 796 to 767 BCE]* in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Jehoaddan of Jerusalem. 2 And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, yet not with a whole heart. 3 And as soon as the royal power was firmly his, he killed his servants who had struck down the king his father. 4 But he did not put their children to death, according to what is written in the Law, in the Book of Moses, where the Lord commanded, “Fathers shall not die because of their children, nor children die because of their fathers, but each one shall die for his own sin.”

5 Then Amaziah assembled the men of Judah and set them by fathers’ houses under commanders of thousands and of hundreds for all Judah and Benjamin. He mustered those twenty years old and upward, and found that they were 300,000 choice men, fit for war, able to handle spear and shield. 6 He hired also 100,000 mighty men of valor from Israel for 100 talents of silver. 7 But a man of God came to him and said, “O king, do not let the army of Israel go with you, for the Lord is not with Israel, with all these Ephraimites [tribe of Ephraim].

8 But go, act, be strong for the battle. Why should you suppose that God will cast you down before the enemy? For God has power to help or to cast down.” 9 And Amaziah said to the man of God, “But what shall we do about the hundred talents that I have given to the army of Israel?” The man of God answered, “The Lord is able to give you much more than this.” 10 Then Amaziah discharged the army that had come to him from Ephraim to go home again. And they became very angry with Judah and returned home in fierce anger. 11 But Amaziah took courage and led out his people and went to the Valley of Salt and struck down 10,000 men of Seir.

12 The men of Judah captured another 10,000 alive and took them to the top of a rock and threw them down from the top of the rock, and they were all dashed to pieces.

13 But the men of the army whom Amaziah sent back [Ephraim], not letting them go with him to battle, raided the cities of Judah, from Samaria to Beth-horon, and struck down 3,000 people in them and took much spoil. 

14 After Amaziah came from striking down the Edomites, he brought the gods of the men of Seir and set them up as his gods and worshiped them, making offerings to them. 15 Therefore the Lord was angry with Amaziah and sent to him a prophet, who said to him, “Why have you sought the gods of a people who did not deliver their own people from your hand?” 

16 But as he was speaking, the king said to him, “Have we made you a royal counselor? Stop! Why should you be struck down?” So the prophet stopped, but said, “I know that God has determined to destroy you, because you have done this and have not listened to my counsel.”

17 Then Amaziah king of Judah took counsel and sent to Joash [Jehoash] the son of Jehoahaz, son of Jehu, king of Israel, saying, “Come, let us look one another in the face.” 18 And Joash [798-782 BCE]* the king of Israel sent word to Amaziah king of Judah, “A thistle on Lebanon sent to a cedar on Lebanon, saying, ‘Give your daughter to my son for a wife,’ and a wild beast of Lebanon passed by and trampled down the thistle.

19 You say, ‘See, I have struck down Edom,’ and your heart has lifted you up in boastfulness. But now stay at home. Why should you provoke trouble so that you fall, you and Judah with you?”

20 But Amaziah would not listen, for it was of God, in order that he might give them into the hand of their enemies, because they had sought the gods of Edom. 21 So Joash king of Israel went up, and he and Amaziah king of Judah faced one another in battle at Beth-shemesh, which belongs to Judah. 

22 And Judah was defeated by Israel, and every man fled to his home. 23 And Joash king of Israel captured Amaziah king of Judah, the son of Joash, son of Ahaziah, at Beth-shemesh, and brought him to Jerusalem and broke down the wall of Jerusalem for 400 cubits, from the Ephraim Gate to the Corner Gate. 24 And he seized all the gold and silver, and all the vessels that were found in the house of God, in the care of Obed-edom. He seized also the treasuries of the king’s house, also hostages, and he returned to Samaria.’

In modern times a similar transference of all the gold of Judah to Ephraim has occurred.

25 ‘Amaziah the son of Joash, king of Judah, lived fifteen years after the death of Joash the son of Jehoahaz, king of Israel… 27 From the time when he turned away from the Lord they made a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem, and he fled to Lachish. But they sent after him to Lachish and put him to death there. 28 And they brought him upon horses, and he was buried with his fathers in the city of David [Jerusalem].’

Deuteronomy 23:7-8

English Standard Version

You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land. 8 Children born to them in the third generation may enter the assembly of the Lord.

Esau had three sets of children from three wives – Article: 33. One wonders if all of Esau’s children are included in this verse; as some of the offspring from his two Canaanite wives are later condemned by the Messiah and called vipers and ‘of their’ original ancestral ‘father, the Devil.’

Esau began his life prosperous with more possessions than Jacob and they could not live side by side. Over the course of history, Edom has been reduced in number and influence so that their numbers are few and scattered, becoming a small nation, which had once rivalled Jacob’s son’s. The Book of Jasher provides a version of events about Esau and Jacob’s early posterity which is not included in the Book of Genesis.

Book of Jasher 56:1-68

‘And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years [from 1687 to 1670 BCE], and the days of Jacob, and the years of his life were a hundred and forty seven years. At that time Jacob was attacked with that illness of which he died and he sent and called for his son Joseph… And Jacob said, Call all your children unto me, and all the children of Jacob’s sons came and sat before him, and Jacob blessed them… And Jacob said unto Judah, I know my son that thou art a mighty man for thy brethren; reign over them, and thy sons shall reign over their sons forever. Only teach thy sons the bow and all the weapons of war, in order that they may fight the battles of their brother [Joseph] who will rule over his enemies.’

We will learn that modern day Judah has and does take up arms for Joseph. In fact the military expertise of Judah – particularly its Air Force and Navy – has been relied on in recent conflicts where there have been coalition responses to situations located predominantly in the Middle East – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Jasher: ‘Howbeit take heed I pray you that none of your sons carry me, only yourselves, and this is the manner you shall do unto me, when you carry my body to go with it to the land of Canaan to bury me, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun shall carry my bier at the eastern side; Reuben, Simeon and Gad at the south, Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin at the west, Dan, Asher and Naphtali at the north. Let not Levi carry with you, for he and his sons will carry the ark of the covenant [Article: Ark of God] of the Lord with the Israelites in the camp, neither let Joseph my son carry, for as a king so let his glory be; howbeit, Ephraim and Manasseh shall be in their stead. 

And all the people of Egypt and the elders and all the inhabitants of the land of Goshen wept and mourned over Jacob, and all his sons and the children of his household lamented and mourned over their father Jacob many days. And after the days of his weeping had passed away, at the end of seventy days, Joseph said unto Pharaoh [Djoserty second king of the 3rd Dynasty, from 1671 to 1665 BCE], I will go up and bury my father in the land of Canaan as he made me swear, and then I will return. And the bier was of pure gold, and it was inlaid round about with onyx stones and bdellium; and the covering of the bier was gold woven work, joined with threads, and over them were hooks of onyx stones and bdellium. 

And Joseph placed upon the head of his father Jacob a large golden crown, and he put a golden scepter in his hand, and they surrounded the bier as was the custom of kings during their lives. And all the kings of Canaan heard of this thing and they all went forth, each man from his house, thirty-one kings of Canaan, and they all came with their men to mourn and weep over Jacob. And all these kings beheld Jacob’s bier, and behold Joseph’s crown was upon it, and they also put their crowns upon the bier, and encircled it with crowns. 

And the report reached Esau, saying, Jacob died in Egypt, and his sons and all Egypt are conveying him to the land of Canaan to bury him. And Esau heard this thing, and he was dwelling in mount Seir, and he rose up with his sons and all his people and all his household, a people exceedingly great, and they came to mourn and weep over Jacob.

And Joseph and his brethren brought their father Jacob from that place, and they went to Hebron to bury Jacob in the cave by his fathers. And they came unto Kireath-arba, to the cave, and as they came Esau stood with his sons against Joseph and his brethren as a hindrance in the cave, saying, Jacob shall not be buried therein, for it belongeth to us and to our father. And Joseph and his brethren heard the words of Esau’s sons, and they were exceedingly wroth, and Joseph approached unto Esau, saying, What is this thing which they have spoken? surely my father Jacob bought it from thee for great riches after the death of Isaac [in 1697 BCE], now [approximately] five and twenty years ago, and also all the land of Canaan he bought from thee and from thy sons, and thy seed after thee. And Jacob bought it for his sons and his seed after him for an inheritance for ever, and why speakest thou these things this day? 

And Esau answered, saying, Thou speakest falsely and utterest lies, for I sold not anything belonging to me in all this land, as thou sayest, neither did my brother Jacob buy aught belonging to me in this land. And Esau spoke these things in order to deceive Joseph with his words, for Esau knew that Joseph was not present in those days when Esau sold all belonging to him in the land of Canaan to Jacob. And Joseph said unto Esau, Surely my father inserted these things with thee in the record of purchase, and testified the record with witnesses, and behold it is with us in Egypt. And Esau answered, saying unto him, Bring the record, all that thou wilt find in the record, so will we do. 

And Joseph called unto Naphtali his brother, and he said, Hasten quickly, stay not, and run I pray thee to Egypt and bring all the records; the record of the purchase, the sealed record and the open record, and also all the first records in which all the transactions of the birth-right are written, fetch thou. And Naphtali hearkened to the voice of Joseph and he hastened and ran to go down to Egypt, and Naphtali was lighter on foot than any of the stags that were upon the wilderness, for he would go upon ears of corn without crushing them [Genesis 49:21].

And when Esau saw that Naphtali had gone to fetch the records, he and his sons increased their resistance against the cave, and Esau and all his people rose up against Joseph and his brethren to battle. And all the sons of Jacob and the people of Egypt fought with Esau and his men, and the sons of Esau and his people were smitten before the sons of Jacob, and the sons of Jacob slew of Esau’s people forty men. 

And [Hushim] the son of Dan, the son of Jacob, was at that time with Jacob’s sons, but he was about a hundred cubits distant from the place of battle, for he remained with the children of Jacob’s sons by Jacob’s bier to guard it. And [Hushim] was dumb and deaf, still he understood the voice of consternation amongst men. 

And he asked, saying, Why do you not bury the dead, and what is this great consternation? and they answered him the words of Esau and his sons; and he ran to Esau in the midst of the battle, and he slew Esau with a sword, and he cut off his head, and it sprang to a distance, and Esau fell amongst the people of the battle. And when [Hushim] did this thing the sons of Jacob prevailed over the sons of Esau, and the sons of Jacob buried their father Jacob by force in the cave, and the sons of Esau beheld it.

And Jacob was buried in Hebron, in the cave of Machpelah which Abraham had bought from the sons of Heth for the possession of a burial place, and he was buried in very costly garments. And no king had such honor paid him as Joseph paid unto his father at his death, for he buried him with great honor like unto the burial of kings.’

The Babylonian Talmud corroborates the account in the Book of Jasher, in that Esau was killed by Hushim because he obstructed the burial of Jacob; claiming he had no right to be buried in the cave of Machpelah. Hushim was hard of hearing and once he understood why Jacob was not being buried he said: “Is my grandfather to lie [here] in contempt until Naphtali returns from the land of Egypt?” He then took a club (instead of a sword) and killed Esau, and Esau’s head apparently rolled into the cave. Jewish sources support that Esau sold his right to be buried in the cave. In the Shemot Rabbah, Jacob gave all his possessions to Esau in acquiring a tomb. Placing a large pile of gold and silver before Esau and asking: “My brother, do you prefer your portion of this cave, or all this gold and silver?” Esau selling his right to be buried in the Cave of the Patriarchs is recorded in the Sefer HaYashar.

The Book of Jubilees has an alternative account, with Isaac compelling Esau to swear not to attack or kill Jacob after Isaac has died. However, the sons of Esau convince their father to lead them in hiring mercenaries to fight against Jacob, in order to kill him and exterminate his family; seizing their wealth, including the portion of Isaac’s inheritance he had bequeathed to Jacob upon his death. Jacob then in a turn-around scenario, murders Esau. If this battle took place prior to the showdown at Jacob’s funeral, it would explain why Esau’s sons are obstinate about Jacob’s burial if they had lost their father at the hands of Jacob. There does seem to be some poetic licence in the Hushim killed Esau version, with his head rolling into the cave. Somewhat like an Agatha Christie novel, there is the question of who actually killed Esau, if he was murdered? Esau may have been the first of his line to ‘live by the sword and to die by the sword.’

Book of Jubilees chapter 37 and 38:

1 ‘And on the day that Isaac the father of Jacob and Esau died [in 1697 BCE]… the sons of Esau heard that Isaac had given the portion of the elder to his younger son Jacob and they were very angry. 2 And they strove with their father, saying ‘Why has your father given Jacob the portion of the elder and passed over you, although you are the elder and Jacob the younger?’ 

3 And he said to them ‘Because I sold my birthright to Jacob for a small mess of lentils, and on the day my father sent me to hunt and catch and bring him something that he should eat and bless me, he came with guile and brought my father food and drink, and my father blessed him and put me under his hand. 4 And now our father has caused us to swear, me and him, that we shall not mutually devise evil, either against his brother, and that we shall continue in love and in shalom [peace] each with his brother and not make our ways corrupt.’ 

This would have been quite a bombshell for Esau’s sons if this was when they first learned about the birthright blessing debacle. 

Jubilees: 5 ‘And they said to him, ‘We shall not hearken unto you to make shalom with him; for our strength is greater than his strength, and we are more powerful than he; we shall go against him and slay him, and destroy him and his sons. And if you will not go with us, we shall do hurt to you also [like father, like sons]. 6 And now hearken unto us: Let us send to Aram and Philistia and Moab and Ammon, and let us choose for ourselves chosen men who are ardent for battle, and let us go against him and do battle with him, and let us exterminate him from the earth before he grows strong.’ 

7 And their father said to them, ‘Do not go and do not make war with him lest you fall before him.’ 8 And they said to him, ‘This too, is exactly your mode of action from your youth until this day, and you are putting your neck under his yoke. We shall not hearken to these words.’ 9 And they sent to Aram, and to ‘Aduram to the friend of their father, and they hired along with them one thousand fighting men, chosen men of war. 10 And there came to them from Moab and from the children of Ammon, those who were hired, one thousand chosen men, and from Philistia, one thousand chosen men of war, and from Edom and from the Horites one thousand chosen fighting men… mighty men of war. 

11 And they said to their father: Go forth with them and lead them, else we shall slay you.’ 12 And he was filled with wrath and indignation on seeing that his sons were forcing him to go before them to lead them against Jacob his brother. But afterward he remembered all the evil which lay hidden in his heart against Jacob his brother; 13 And he remembered not the oath which he had sworn to his father and to his mother that he would devise no evil all his days against Jacob his brother. 

14 And notwithstanding all this, Jacob knew not that they were coming against him to battle, and he was mourning for Leah, his wife [who died somewhere between 1699 and 1687 BCE], until they approached very near to the tower with four thousand warriors and chosen men of war. 

15 And the men of Hebron sent to him saying, ‘Behold your brother has come against you, to fight you, with four thousand girthed with the sword, and they carry shields and weapons‘… for they loved Jacob more than Esau. So they told him; for Jacob was a more liberal and merciful man than Esau. 16 But Jacob would not believe until they came very near to the tower.

17 And he closed the gates of the tower; and he stood on the battlements and spoke to his brother Esau and said, ‘Noble is the comfort wherewith you have come to comfort me for my wife who has died. Is this the oath that you did swear to your father and again to your mother before they died? You have broken the oath, and on the moment that you did swear to your father were you condemned.’

18 And then Esau answered and said to him, ‘Neither the children of men nor the beasts of the earth have any oath of righteousness which in swearing they have sworn (an oath valid) forever; but every day they devise evil one against another, and how each may slay his adversary and foe [spoken like a hunter or predator]. 19 And you do hate me and my children forever. And there is no observing the tie of brotherhood with you. 20 Hear these words which I declare unto you, ‘If the boar can change its skin and make its bristles as soft as wool, Or if it can cause horns to sprout forth on its head like the horns of a stag or of a sheep, Then will I observe the tie of brotherhood with you, And if the breasts separated themselves from their mother, for you have not been a brother to me… 

23 And when the raven becomes white as the raza, Then know that I have loved you And shall make peace with you, You shall be rooted out, And your sons shall be rooted out, And there shall be no [peace] for you’ 24 And when Jacob saw that he was (so) evilly disposed towards him with his heart… 25 Then he spoke to his own and to his servants that they should attack him and all his companions.’

Jubilees: 1 ‘And after that Judah spoke to Jacob, his father, and said to him: ‘Bend your bow, father, and send forth your arrows and cast down the adversary and slay the enemy; and may you have the power, for we shall not slay your brother, for he is such as you, and he is like you let us give him (this) honor.’

2 Then Jacob bent his bow and sent forth the arrow and struck Esau, his brother (on his right breast) and slew him. 3 And again he sent forth an arrow and struck ‘Adoran the Aramaean, on the left breast, and drove him backward and slew him.

4 And then went forth the sons of Jacob, they and their servants, dividing themselves into companies on the four sides of the tower. 5 And Judah went forth in front, and Naphtali and Gad with him and fifty servants with him on the south side of the tower, and they slew all they found before them, and not one individual of them escaped.

6 And Levi and Dan and Asher went forth on the east side of the tower, and fifty (men) with them, and they slew the fighting men of Moab and Ammon. 

7 And Reuben and Issachar and Zebulon went forth on the north side of the tower, and fifty men with them, and they slew the fighting men of the Philistines.

8 And Simeon and Benjamin and Enoch [Hanoch], Reuben’s son, went forth on the west side of the tower, and fifty (men) with them, and they slew of Edom and of the Horites four hundred men, stout warriors; and six hundred fled, and four of the sons of Esau fled with them, and left their father lying slain, as he had fallen on the hill which is in ‘Aduram. 

9 And the sons of Jacob pursued after them to the mountains of Seir. And Jacob buried his brother on the hill which is in ‘Aduram, and he returned to his house. 10 And the sons of Jacob pressed hard upon the sons of Esau in the mountains of Seir, and bowed their necks so that they became servants of the sons of Jacob.

11 And they sent to their father (to inquire) whether they should make peace with them or slay them. 12 And Jacob sent word to his sons that they should make peace, and they made peace with them, and placed the yoke of servitude upon them, so that they paid tribute to Jacob and to his sons always. 13 And they continued to pay tribute to Jacob until the day [in 1687 BCE] that he went down into Egypt [for 10 years]. 14 And the sons of Edom have not got quit of the yoke of servitude which the twelve sons of Jacob had imposed on them until this day.’

Book of Jasher 57:1-45

‘And it was after this that the sons of Esau waged war with the sons of Jacob, and the sons of Esau fought with the sons of Jacob in Hebron, and Esau was still lying dead, and not buried. And the battle was heavy between them, and the sons of Esau were smitten before the sons of Jacob, and the sons of Jacob slew of the sons of Esau eighty men, and not one died of the people of the sons of Jacob; and the hand of Joseph prevailed over all the people of the sons of Esau, and he took Zepho, the son of Eliphaz, the son of Esau, and fifty of his men captive, and he bound them with chains of iron, and gave them into the hand of his servants to bring them to Egypt… all those that remained were greatly afraid of their lives from the house of Esau, lest they should also be taken captive, and they all fled with Eliphaz the son of Esau and his people, with Esau’s body, and they went on their road to Mount Seir. 

And they came unto Mount Seir and they buried Esau in Seir, but they had not brought his head with them to Seir, for it was buried in that place where the battle had been in Hebron. And it came to pass… the sons of Jacob pursued them unto the borders of Seir, but they did not slay a single man from amongst them when they pursued them, for Esau’s body which they carried with them excited their confusion, so they fled and the sons of Jacob turned back from them and came up to the place where their brethren were in Hebron, and they remained there on that day, and on the next day until they rested from the battle. 

… on the third day they assembled all the sons of Seir the Horite, and they assembled all the children of the east [the sons of Abraham from Keturah and Ishmael], a multitude of people like the sand of the sea, and they went and came down to Egypt to fight with Joseph and his brethren, in order to deliver their brethren. And Joseph and his brethren and the strong men of Egypt went forth and fought in the city of Rameses, and Joseph and his brethren dealt out a tremendous blow amongst the sons of Esau and the children of the east… and they slew amongst them all the mighty men of the children of Seir the Horite; there were only a few of them left, and they slew also a great many of the children of the east, and of the children of Esau; and Eliphaz the son of Esau, and the children of the east all fled before Joseph and his brethren. And Joseph and his brethren pursued them until they came unto Succoth, and they yet slew of them in Succoth thirty men, and the rest escaped and they fled each to his city. And Joseph and his brethren and the mighty men of Egypt turned back from them with joy and cheerfulness of heart, for they had smitten all their enemies

And Zepho the son of Eliphaz and his men were still slaves in Egypt to the sons of Jacob, and their pains increased. And when the sons of Esau and the sons of Seir returned to their land, the sons of Seir saw that they had all fallen into the hands of the sons of Jacob, and the people of Egypt, on account of the battle of the sons of Esau. And the sons of Seir said unto the sons of Esau, You have seen and therefore you know that this camp was on your account, and not one mighty man or an adept in war remaineth.

Now therefore go forth from our land, go from us to the land of Canaan to the land of the dwelling of your fathers; wherefore shall your children inherit the effects of our children in latter days? And the children of Esau would not listen to the children of Seir, and the children of Seir considered to make war with them. 

And the children of Esau sent secretly to Angeas king of Africa, the same is Dinhabah, saying, Send unto us some of thy men and let them come unto us, and we will fight together with the children of Seir the Horite, for they have resolved to fight with us to drive us away from the land. And Angeas king of Dinhabah did so, for he was in those days friendly to the children of Esau, and Angeas sent five hundred valiant infantry to the children of Esau, and eight hundred cavalry.

And the children of Seir sent unto the children of the east and unto the children of Midian [Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia], saying, You have seen what the children of Esau have done unto us, upon whose account we are almost all destroyed, in their battle with the sons of Jacob. Now therefore come unto us and assist us, and we will fight them together, and we will drive them from the land and be avenged… And all the children of the east listened to the children of Seir, and they came unto them about eight hundred men with drawn swords, and the children of Esau fought with the children of Seir at that time in the wilderness of Paran. And the children of Seir prevailed then over the sons of Esau, and the children of Seir slew on that day of the children of Esau in that battle about two hundred men of the people of Angeas king of Dinhabah. 

And on the second day the children of Esau came again to fight a second time with the children of Seir, and the battle was sore upon the children of Esau this second time, and it troubled them greatly on account of the children of Seir.

And when the children of Esau saw that the children of Seir were more powerful than they were, some men of the children of Esau turned and assisted the children of Seir their enemies. 

And there fell yet of the people of the children of Esau in the second battle fifty-eight men of the people at Angeas king of Dinhabah. And on the third day the children of Esau heard that some of their brethren had turned from them to fight against them in the second battle; and the children of Esau mourned when they heard this thing. And they said, What shall we do unto our brethren who turned from us to assist the children of Seir our enemies? And the children of Esau again sent to Angeas king of Dinhabah, saying, Send unto us again other men that with them we may fight with the children of Seir, for they have already twice been heavier than we were. 

And Angeas again sent to the children of Esau about six hundred valiant men, and they came to assist the children of Esau. And in ten days time the children of Esau again waged war with the children of Seir in the wilderness of Paran, and the battle was very severe upon the children of Seir, and the children of Esau prevailed at this time over the children of Seir, and the children of Seir were smitten before the children of Esau, and the children of Esau slew from them about two thousand men. And all the mighty men of the children of Seir died in this battle, and there only remained their young children that were left in their cities. 

And all Midian and the children of the east betook themselves to flight from the battle, and they left the children of Seir and fled when they saw that the battle was severe upon them, and the children of Esau pursued all the children of the east until they reached their land. And the children of Esau slew yet of them about two hundred and fifty men and from the people of the children of Esau there fell in that battle about thirty men, but this evil came upon them through their brethren turning from them to assist the children of Seir the Horite, and the children of Esau again heard of the evil doings of their brethren, and they again mourned on account of this thing.

And it came to pass after the battle, the children of Esau turned back and came home unto Seir, and the children of Esau slew those who had remained in the land of the children of Seir; they slew also their wives and little ones, they left not a soul alive except fifty young lads and damsels whom they suffered to live, and the children of Esau did not put them to death, and the lads became their slaves, and the damsels they took for wives. And the children of Esau dwelt in Seir in the place of the children of Seir, and they inherited their land and took possession of it.’

In this chapter, the Book of Jasher confirms Seir existed as a geographic location and why it is labelled in Bible verses as the home of Esau. It corroborates the biblical account and supports that the following three scenarios do not contradict each other: a. the Horites were ‘all’ killed, with a small number excepted b. driven completely from their land and c. that Esau and the Horites intermarried, forming the nucleus of peoples known as Edom.

Jasher: ‘And the children of Esau took all belonging in the land to the children of Seir… and the children of Esau divided the land into divisions to the five sons of Esau, according to their families… the children of Esau resolved to crown a king over them in the land of which they became possessed. And they said to each other, Not so, for he shall reign over us in our land, and we shall be under his counsel and he shall fight our battles, against our enemies, and they did so. 

And all the children of Esau swore, saying, That none of their brethren should ever reign over them, but a strange man who is not of their brethren, for the souls of all the children of Esau were embittered every man against his son, brother and friend, on account of the evil they sustained from their brethren when they fought with the children of Seir. 

And there was a man there from the people of Angeas king of Dinhabah; his name was Bela the son of Beor, who was a very valiant man, beautiful and comely and wise in all wisdom, and a man of sense and counsel; and there was none of the people of Angeas like unto him. And all the children of Esau took him and anointed him and they crowned him for a king, and they bowed down to him, and they said unto him, May the king live, may the king live. 

And they spread out the sheet, and they brought him each man earrings of gold and silver or rings or bracelets, and they made him very rich in silver and in gold, in onyx stones and bdellium, and they made him a royal throne, and they placed a regal crown upon his head, and they built a palace for him and he dwelt therein, and he became king over all the children of Esau. And the people of Angeas took their hire for their battle from the children of Esau, and they went and returned at that time to their master in Dinhabah. And Bela reigned over the children of Esau [thirty years], and the children of Esau dwelt in the land instead of the children of Seir, and they dwelt securely…’

The math provided by the Book of Jasher does not appear to work for the reigns of Bela and the death of Hushim in 1626 BCE – the year Dan died. It is short sixteen years and thus Bela’s reign has to be adjusted to fourteen years instead of thirty. The reigns of Jobab consisting of ten years and Hushim for twenty years remain the same and thus working backwards brings us to 1670 BCE when Jacob died and the first king of Edom, Bela is crowned.

Book of Jasher 58:1-30

‘… in the thirty-second year of the Israelites going down to Egypt [in 1687 BCE], that is in the seventy-first year of the life of Joseph [born in 1726 BCE], in that year died Pharaoh king of Egypt [in 1655 BCE], and Magron his son reigned in his stead. And Pharaoh commanded Joseph before his death to be a father to his son, Magron, and that Magron should be under the care of Joseph and under his counsel. And all Egypt consented to this thing that Joseph should be king over them, for all the Egyptians loved Joseph…

Magron was forty-one years old when he began to reign, and forty years he reigned in Egypt… And it came to pass when Pharaoh reigned in his father’s stead, he placed the laws of Egypt and all the affairs of government in the hand of Joseph, as his father had commanded him. And Joseph became king over Egypt, for he superintended over all Egypt, and all Egypt was under his care and under his counsel, for all Egypt inclined to Joseph after the death of Pharaoh, and they loved him exceedingly to reign over them.’

The details on the Pharaoh is not clear, or the name of Magron his son reigning forty years. The Pharaoh had been different when Joseph first arrived in Egypt at age seventeen in 1709 BCE. It may have been the last king of the 2nd Dynasty Khasekhemwy, who married Queen Nimaathap and is thought to be Djoser’s father. There is much disagreement amongst academics on how many Pharaohs there were in the second Dynasty. Knowledge about the later parts of the dynasty is murky at best, as is reflected in the various king lists. When Joseph was thirty and made Vizier of Egypt, the Pharoah in question was Djoser, the first king of the 3rd Dynasty who reigned from 1700 to 1672/71 BCE – refer Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man, different name?

Jasher: ‘But there were some people amongst them, who did not like him, saying, No stranger shall reign over us; still the whole government of Egypt devolved in those days upon Joseph, after the death of Pharaoh, he being the regulator, doing as he liked throughout the land without any one interfering. And all Egypt was under the care of Joseph, and Joseph made war with all his surrounding enemies, and he subdued them; also all the land and all the Philistines [ancestors of the Hispanic peoples of the Americas], unto the borders of Canaan, did Joseph subdue, and they were all under his power and they gave a yearly tax unto Joseph.

And Pharaoh king of Egypt [second king of 3rd Dynasty Djoserty, (Sekhemkhet)] sat upon his throne in his father’s stead, but he was under the control and counsel of Joseph [from 1671 to 1665 BCE], as he was at first under the control of his father. Neither did he reign but in the land of Egypt only, under the counsel of Joseph, but Joseph reigned over the whole country at that time, from Egypt unto the great river Perath.

And Joseph was successful in all his ways [refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim: the Birthright Tribes], and the Lord was with him, and the Lord gave Joseph additional wisdom, and honor, and glory, and love toward him in the hearts of the Egyptians and throughout the land, and Joseph reigned over the whole country forty years [from 1656 until 1616 BCE]. 

And all the countries of the Philistines and Canaan and Zidon, and on the other side of Jordan, brought presents unto Joseph all his days… and they brought unto him a yearly tribute as it was regulated, for Joseph had fought against all his surrounding enemies and subdued them… and Joseph sat securely upon his throne in Egypt. And also all his brethren the sons of Jacob dwelt securely in the land, all the days of Joseph, and they were fruitful and multiplied exceedingly in the land, and they served the Lord all their days, as their father Jacob had commanded them. 

And it came to pass at the end of many days and years, when the children of Esau were dwelling quietly in their land with Bela their king, that the children of Esau were fruitful and multiplied in the land, and they resolved to go and fight with the sons of Jacob and all Egypt, and to deliver their brother Zepho, the son of Eliphaz, and his men, for they were yet in those days slaves to Joseph. 

And the children of Esau sent unto all the children of the east [Midian, ancestor of the Dutch and his brothers], and they made peace with them, and all the children of the east came unto them to go with the children of Esau to Egypt to battle. And there came also unto them of the people of Angeas, king of Dinhabah, and they also sent unto the children of Ishmael [ancestor of the Germans] and they also came unto them. 

And all this people assembled and came unto Seir to assist the children of Esau in their battle, and this camp was very large and heavy with people, numerous as the sand of the sea… infantry and cavalry, and all these troops went down to Egypt to fight with the sons of Jacob, and they encamped by Rameses. 

And Joseph went forth with his brethren with the mighty men of Egypt, about six hundred men, and they fought with them in the land of Rameses; and the sons of Jacob at that time again fought with the children of Esau, in the fiftieth year [1637 BCE?] of the sons of Jacob going down to Egypt [in 1687 BCE], that is the thirtieth year [fourteenth year, 1656 BCE] of the reign of Bela over the children of Esau in Seir. And the Lord gave all the mighty men of Esau and the children of the east into the hand of Joseph and his brethren, and the people of the children of Esau and the children of the east were smitten before Joseph. And of the people of Esau and the children of the east that were slain… and their king Bela the son of Beor fell with them in the battle, and when the children of Esau saw that their king had fallen in battle and was dead, their hands became weak in the combat. 

And Joseph and his brethren and all Egypt were still smiting the people of the house of Esau, and all Esau’s people were afraid of the sons of Jacob and fled from before them. And Joseph and his brethren and all Egypt pursued them a day’s journey, and they slew yet from them about three hundred men, continuing to smite them in the road; and they afterward turned back from them. And Joseph and all his brethren returned to Egypt, not one man was missing from them, but of the Egyptians there fell twelve men. And when Joseph returned to Egypt he ordered Zepho and his men to be additionally bound, and they bound them in irons and they increased their grief. 

And all the people of the children of Esau, and the children of the east, returned in shame each unto his city, for all the mighty men that were with them had fallen in battle. And when the children of Esau saw that their king [Bela] had died in battle they hastened and took a man… his name was Jobab the son of Zarach, from the land of Bozrah, and they caused him to reign over them instead of Bela their [previous] king. And Jobab sat upon the throne of Bela as king in his stead, and Jobab reigned in Edom over all the children of Esau ten years [from 1656 to 1646 BCE], and the children of Esau went no more to fight with the sons of Jacob from that day forward, for the sons of Esau knew the valor of the sons of Jacob, and they were greatly afraid of them. 

But from that day forward the children of Esau hated the sons of Jacob, and the hatred and enmity were very strong between them all the days, unto this day. And it came to pass after this, at the end of ten years, Jobab, the son of Zarach, from Bozrah, died, and the children of Esau took a man whose name was Chusham, from the land of Teman, and they made him king over them instead of Jobab, and Chusham reigned in Edom over all the children of Esau for twenty years [from 1646 to 1626 BCE]. 

And Joseph, king of Egypt, and his brethren, and all the children of Israel dwelt securely in Egypt in those days… having no hindrance or evil accident and the land of Egypt was at that time at rest from war in the days of Joseph [during 1656 to 1616 BCE] and his brethren.’

We shall return to Joseph in a later chapter and continue his incredible story. Though it does not carry the dramatic intrigue of Esau; or the revelatory profundity of Judah; and the mysterious malevolence of Dan; it undoubtedly is the greatest and most extraordinary story of all.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning the patriarch Job has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Job’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

Esau’s enigmatic grandson born from his son Eliphaz and his Horite concubine, Timna, is Amalek which means: ‘people that wring, people that lap’ derived from the noun ‘am, ‘people’ or ‘kinsman’ and the verb laqaq, ‘to lap’ and malaq, ‘to wring.’ A Rabbinical interpretation is etymologised as am lak, ‘a people who lick (blood).’

The ten plagues, the children of Israel’s departure from Egypt and the death of the Pharaoh, left the nation’s government and military in turmoil and collapse. The Amalekites, an amalgamation of Esau’s grandson Amalek and the Rephaim – composed of Elioud giants descended from Nephilim once learning of Egypt’s plight, descended on the nation with alacrity. Inevitably, they encountered the exiting Israelites. 

Exodus 17:8-16

English Standard Version

8 ‘Then Amalek came and fought with Israel at Rephidim. 9 So Moses said to Joshua, “Choose for us men, and go out and fight with Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand.” 10 So Joshua did as Moses told him, and fought with Amalek, while Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 11 Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed, and whenever he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed. 12 But Moses’ hands grew weary, so they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat on it, while Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side, and the other on the other side. So his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.’

13 ‘And Joshua overwhelmed Amalek and his people with the sword. 14 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will  [at a the future date] utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.” 15 And Moses built an altar and called the name of it, The Lord Is My Banner, 16 saying, “A hand upon the throne of the Lord! The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.”

Thus began a period of four hundred years of harassment, violence and barbarity by the Amalekites; with the peak of their power as the 15th Dynasty of Egypt, lasting a little over one hundred years in the Delta region of Lower Egypt. A direct approach into Palestine was difficult as related peoples of Amalek were numerous and so began in part – coupled with disobedience – a forty year serpent-like trek and sojourn from 1446 to 1406 BCE for the sons of Jacob, before they could enter the Promised Land. The tribes of Israel made camp one month – the 15th day of the second month, later to be the Sabbath – after leaving Egypt at Rephidim.

The Amalikites at this time in secular history became known as the Hyksos – as expounded by Immanuel Velikovsky and others. Notice the Eternal stated two profound prophecies: a. He would ultimately destroy the Amalekites, so that as a people or ‘nation’, they would cease to exist and b. until that point, He would cause their existence to be a continual cycle of bloodshed.

The first three Hyksos kings bear a resemblance to the last three kings of Edom listed in Genesis chapter thirty-six. They are Shaul of Rehoboth, Baal-hanan the son of Achor and Hadar. According to Cornerstone Publications, these three kings may equate to the first three Hyksos kings of Salatis, Beon and Apacnas.

‘The first king of the Hyksos dynasty in Egypt was Salatis. The two names are linguistically similar, but there is another factor to consider as well. Salatis’ capital city was Avaris (Tanis or Zoar in a different era), whereas Saul based his later operations in the region of Avim. Baal-hanan is the next-to-last Edomite ruler… whereas, according to the historian Manetho, quoted by Josephus, the second Hyksos king was Beon, which over time and transliteration could well have originally been a shortened or contracted version of Baal-hanan… the last king of Edom listed is Hadar, whose alternative name is Agena. The third Hyksos ruler is listed by the Egyptian historian Manetho as Apacnas.

… [a] quite significant bit of information comes from the Scriptures, and… the great deliverance wrought by Yahweh on behalf of Israel… when they were in Egypt… Beginning in verse 42, the various plagues thrust upon the Egyptians leading up to the Exodus are listed. “They remembered not His hand…how He had wrought his signs in Egypt…and had turned their rivers into blood… He sent divers sorts of flies among them…and frogs…  He gave also their increase unto the caterpillar, and their labor to the locusts. He destroyed their vines with hail… He gave up their cattle also to the hail, and their flocks to hot thunderbolts.  

He cast upon them the fierceness of His anger… by sending Evil Angels among them” (Psalm 78:42-49)… no plague remotely resembling evil angels… came upon the Egyptians. How intriguing it is that by the elimination of a single silent letter, the phrase sending of evil angels becomes sending of King-Shepherds! This is the precise meaning of the term Hyksos, and perfectly describes the Edomite invaders who spoiled and gained control of Egypt in the wake of Israel’s exodus.’

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, pages 151-156 – emphasis mine:

‘… the Amalekites had captured the cities of the delta of Egypt. Here they had obtained the archives where the Hebrews had lived and obtained the table of descent of the Hebrews, their chiefs and the different families. The Amalekites appeared before the Israelite camps and taunted the Hebrews by name to come out, make peace with them and to transact business. Those who took the bait and answered the call were slaughtered and their bodies horribly mutilated.’

Deuteronomy 25:17-19

English Standard Version

Remember what Amalek did to you on the way as you came out of Egypt, how he attacked you on the way when you were faint and weary, and cut off your tail, those who were lagging behind you, and he did not fear God. Therefore when the Lord your God has given you rest from all your enemies around you, in the land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance to possess, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget.”

Boulay: ‘It was predicted of Israel at one time that “their kings shall rise above Agag”… this statement makes it clear that Agag, the last Amalekite king, was of such high stature that later kings would be measured against him… it follows that he must have led a great nation… “the city of Amalek”… his capital… shows that the Hebrew tribes were up against a very powerful nation.’

Numbers 24:7

English Standard Version

‘Water shall flow from his [Jacob’s sons] buckets and his seed shall be in many waters; his king shall be higher than Agag [the giant king of Amalek], and his kingdom shall be exalted.’

Boulay: ‘Josephus describes the citadel of the Hyksos… built east of the delta [Avaris built between Egypt and Palestine to guard and control both regions]: It was a city… made very strong by the walls… built around it, and by a most numerous garrison of 240,000 armed men… [The Amalekites maintained control for four hundred years through] their ruthless nature and military ability, and their policy of keeping the people of the lands they occupied impoverished and weaponless.

In the First Book of Samuel… There was no smith to be found in all the land of Israel, for the Philistines had said to themselves, “The Hebrews might make swords or spears.” So all Israel would go down to the Philistines to repair any of their plowshares, mattocks, axes, or sickles… So at the time of the battle of Michmash neither sword nor spear was available to any of the soldiers who were with Saul and Jonathan. With their chariots, iron weapons, and composite bows, the Amalekites and Philistines were virtually unbeatable against an enemy who… [had] clubs, stone slings, simple bow and arrow, and stone-tipped spears. It was… later, when they could capture and seize sufficient… weapons, that the tide turned and the Israelites began to drive the Amalekites from the land. 

The Egyptian puppet king Sekenenure who ruled Thebes started the revolt against the Hyksos kings of the Seventeenth Dynasty. The revolt was carried on by his sons Kamose and Ahmose who recovered most of Egypt. The war of Kamose against the last Hyksos king Apophis (Apop) is preserved on a stele which was first erected at Karnak. His successor Ahmose… is credited with founding the Eighteenth Dynasty, completed the defeat of the Hyksos with the help of the Israelites. The scriptures describe battles against the Amalekites at the Wadi El-Arish… the city of Amalek… El-Arish… [is the same] as the city of the Hyksos… at Avaris. It is strange that scholars have not noted the close philological association of El-Arish and Av-[Aris]. 

The last Hyksos king was called Apop or Apophis (Greek)… Early Hebrew shows a striking resemblance between the letter “g” or gimel and the letter “p” or pei. No other Hebrew letters were so much alike. Since the vowels in early Hebrew are interchangable, Agag can easily become Apop. It thus appears that the last Hyksos king and the Amalekite king Agag were one and the same person.’

Numbers 24:20-22

English Standard Version

‘Then he looked on Amalek and took up his discourse and said, “Amalek was the first [H7225 – re’shiyth: beginning, best, chief, choice part] among the nations, but its end is utter destruction.” 

And he looked on the Kenite, and took up his discourse and said, “Enduring is your dwelling place, and your nest is set in the rock. 22 Nevertheless, Kain shall be burned when Asshur takes you away captive.”

The Nephilim descended Amalekites were of high ancient antiquity – descended from antediluvian Evil Lamech (Genesis 4:18) – and the Edomite Amalekites were a regional power; together the pre-imminent nation of southern Canaan and Lower Egypt from the Exodus in 1446 BCE till the reign of King Saul beginning 1025 BCE. They were literally the first of the major nations. A significant branch of the Amalekites, knowing the sons of Jacob were leaving Egypt and that the ten plagues had brought Egypt to its knees, were heading southwest in haste to a. seize control of Egypt and b. to destroy the Israelites before they had barely left the land. The prophecy against Amalek was to smash them so that as a nation, they were obliterated. A remnant survived, as have the affiliated Kenites. 

Both have merged with the Edomites and are part of the broader group of people known as Jewish. We have studied the Kenites and observed their subsidiary relationships with both Midian and Judah* – yet, it is with Amalek that their primary relationship exists – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

The Kenites invariably jewellers, or with names such as Gold, Goldsmith, Goldstein, Goldhammer, Goldman, Goldfinger and Diamond; were once a line of skilled coppersmiths and metalworkers. Even the Rechabite* Kenites, were prohibited in practicing agriculture – Jeremiah 35:7.

The Amalekites are somewhat more sinister and can often be found in todays Jewish hierarchy, holding key, usually behind the scenes positions in the world; whereby they manipulate and influence governments, big business, industry, religion, sport, music and entertainment – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do the want?

1 Samuel 15:1-34

English Standard Version

1 ‘And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. 

2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill* both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” 4 So Saul summoned the people and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand men on foot, and ten thousand men of Judah. 5 And Saul came to the city of Amalek and lay in wait in the valley. 

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

7 And Saul defeated the Amalekites from Havilah as far as Shur, which is east of Egypt. 8 And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive and devoted to destruction all the people with the edge of the sword. 9 But Saul and the people spared* Agag and the best of the sheep and of the oxen and of the fattened calves and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them. All that was despised and worthless they devoted to destruction.’

The Kenites were given a reprieve, though later suffered at the hand of the Assyrians. 

1 Samuel: 10 ‘The word of the Lord came to Samuel:

11 “I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me and has not performed my commandments.”

And Samuel was angry, and he cried to the Lord all night. 12 And Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning. And it was told Samuel, “Saul came to Carmel, and behold, he set up a monument for himself and turned and passed on and went down to Gilgal.”

13 And Samuel came to Saul, and Saul said to him, “Blessed be you to the Lord. I have performed the commandment of the Lord.” 14 And Samuel said, “What then is this bleating of the sheep in my ears and the lowing of the oxen that I hear?” 15 Saul said, “They have brought them from the Amalekites, for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen to sacrifice to the Lord your God, and the rest we have devoted to destruction.” 16 Then Samuel said to Saul, “Stop! I will tell you what the Lord said to me this night.” And he said to him, “Speak.”

King Saul

Notice Saul blamed the people for sparing the best of the loot, but it was done for ‘altruistic reasons’, so as to sacrifice to the Eternal. Saul says to Samuel, “your God”, not my God. Herein lay the heart of the weakness of Saul; which we will address in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. A sparring ensues between Samuel and Saul who have little love for each other. The Midrash says the Amalekites were sorcerers who could transform to resemble animals, thus the command to kill all livestock was necessary to completely destroy Amalek. Chillingly, the Rabbi Elyahu Kin said white Europeans in the guise of the Roman Empire was Amalek and that killing a European baby was ‘fulfilling a Mitzvah [a commandment to fulfil a religious duty].’

1 Samuel: 17 ‘And Samuel said, “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? [a note of sarcasm from Samuel, as Saul had played the false humility card when chosen as king] The Lord anointed you king over Israel. 18 And the Lord sent you on a mission and said, ‘Go, devote to destruction the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed.’ 19 Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord? Why did you pounce on the spoil and do what was evil in the sight of the Lord?”

20 And Saul said to Samuel, “I have obeyed the voice of the Lord. I have gone on the mission on which the Lord sent me. I have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and I have devoted the Amalekites to destruction. 21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the best of the things devoted to destruction, to sacrifice to the Lord your [Saul retaliating with sarcasm] God in Gilgal.” 

22 And Samuel said, ‘Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams. 23 For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, he has also rejected you from being king.’

This was a dramatic moment and a huge turning point in Israel’s history. The fledgling Israelite Kingdom, barely a nation was heading down the wrong path, led by a weak king, who did not put the Eternal first and who did not comprehend spiritual obedience, only physical ritual and sacrifice. A new king who had the same heart as the Creator was required; who would obey the Eternal’s commands and see them through.

1 Samuel: 24 ‘Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned, for I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord and your words, because I feared the people and obeyed their voice [Saul placing blame on the people and showing the weakness of his character]. 25 Now therefore, please pardon my sin and return with me that I may bow before the Lord” [False humility from Saul, seeking Samuel’s forgiveness rather than from God and overall, ‘too little, too late’].

26 And Samuel said to Saul, “I will not return with you. For you have rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord has rejected you from being king over Israel.” 27 As Samuel turned to go away, Saul seized the skirt of his robe, and it tore. 28 And Samuel said to him, “The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you this day and has given it to a neighbor [David] of yours, who is better than you.’

Saul acknowledged his sin against the Lord, which was commendable and then spoiled it with an excuse; actually blaming the people for obeying them instead. He also asked Samuel to intercede for him with the Eternal, to pardon his sin on his behalf – much like the Universal Church today. Saul reveals his complete lack of a relationship with the Almighty and any comprehension of what one with the Creator entailed. 

Saul seizing Samuel’s robe is reminiscent when later, David tears or cuts Saul’s robe in a cave where he was ironically hiding from Saul in 1 Samuel 24:4-6, ESV: ‘And the men of David said to him, “Here is the day of which the Lord said to you, ‘Behold, I will give your enemy into your hand, and you shall do to him as it shall seem good to you.” Then David arose and stealthily cut off a corner of Saul’s robe. And afterward David’s heart struck him, because he had cut off a corner of Saul’s robe. He said to his men, “The Lord forbid that I should do this thing to my lord, the Lord’s anointed, to put out my hand against him…”

1 Samuel: 29 ‘And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or have regret, for he is not a man, that he should have regret.” 30 Then he said, “I have sinned; yet honor me now before the elders of my people and before Israel, and return with me, that I may bow before the Lord your God.” 31 So Samuel turned back after Saul, and Saul bowed before the Lord.

32 Then Samuel said, “Bring here to me Agag the king of the Amalekites.” And Agag came to him cheerfully. Agag said, “Surely the bitterness of death is past.” 33 And Samuel said, “As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.” And Samuel hacked Agag to pieces before the Lord in Gilgal. 34 Then Samuel went to Ramah, and Saul went up to his house in Gibeah of Saul.’

Saul again asks Samuel to return with him and Samuel relents so as to save face for Saul in front of the elders of Israel. Samuel was clearly very angry with Saul for sparing Agag’s life. Recall, Esau was to live by the sword. His descendants did so, including his grandson Amalek. King Agag had nothing to worry about or so he thought, as he and King Saul had found mutual admiration, with Agag being more an honoured guest than a dangerous prisoner.

1 Samuel 28:17-20

English Standard Version

‘The Lord has done to you as he spoke by me, for the Lord has torn the kingdom out of your hand and given it to your neighbor, David. 18 Because you did not obey the voice of the Lord and did not carry out his fierce wrath against Amalek, therefore the Lord has done this thing to you this day. Moreover, the Lord will give Israel also with you into the hand of the Philistines, and tomorrow you and your sons shall be with me. The Lord will give the army of Israel also into the hand of the Philistines.” Then Saul fell at once full length on the ground, filled with fear because of the words of Samuel. And there was no strength in him, for he had eaten nothing all day and all night.’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 174-175, 190-194, 251-256 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Of the many nations the Nephilim lived among, the Amalekites… stand out in their determined opposition to the Israelites… [containing] the descendants of Anak… What is not clear… is whether or not… the Amalekites were [a] pure Nephilim [nation] or if the Nephilim just lived among them, dominating their [kingship]. The mysterious Amalekites do not possess any archaeological traces whatsoever. It is as though they never existed; many scholars believe that Amalek and his tribe merged with the original, unknown Amalekites to form the Great Amalekite Race, or perhaps Amalek took his name, a new name, from the supposed unknown people he merged with. 

What can be said with certainty is that the Amalekites were a murky nation in both their founding and in the way they unaccountably vanished from recorded secular history… Anakites that dwelled in the land of Seir were known as Horites… [Amalekites and Horites] both considered Seir their home… linking Amalekites with Horites is an intriguing insight. Perhaps they actually were one and the same people.’ 

1 Samuel 27:8

English Standard Version

‘Now David and his men went up and made raids against the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites, for these were the inhabitants of the land from of old, as far as Shur, to the land of Egypt.’

Wayne: ‘The terms “ancient times, old, former times, long ago” and “before our time” were always understood as the pre-flood epoch. This, then, suggests the Amalekites were in existence as a race of giants in the epoch of the antediluvian Nephilim… both before and after the flood. If “ancient times” does not refer to antediluvian times, then it most certainly refers to an age before Abraham… to the age immediately following the deluge [in 10,837 BCE]. 

“We even saw the descendants of Anak there. The Amalekites live in Negev” (Numbers 13:23)… it describes the descendants of Anak in the same breath and narrative as the Amalekites, thereby connecting… them… by application and implication… it seems to imply that the Amalekites were actually descendants of Anak… the Amalekites were some form of Nephilim, and in particular, direct descendants of Anak… Numbers 24:20 describes the Amalekites as the first among nations, suggesting once more that they did survive the flood… to form possibly the first postdiluvian nation of war. All inferences from scriptural history documenting the Amalekites tend to verify vividly that they were an ancient nation, separate from the genealogy of Noah, dating their existence back to the antediluvian age. 

In fact, this campaign could have been called “the War Against Giants” as opposed to the War of Four Kings Against Five [in actuality, Four versus Eight], because the expanded war included a campaign against an alliance of Nephilim-dominated kingdoms including the Rephaites [comprising Zamzummites (1), Avvites (2) and the Anakites (3)… the Zuzites (4) of Ham, the Emites (5)… the Horites (6) from their Hill country of Sier, the Amalekites [7] and the Amorites [8]…]

The Horites were inhabitants of… “Seir” before the Edomites settled there… Seir… did not descend from anyone in the Table of nations… suggesting a distinct and different chronology… Amalek received his name from the Amalekites… and his descendants were from the seed of Noah, which defiled itself with Nephilim… the tribe of Amalek merged with the original inhabitants of Seir, the giant Horites, which [then] formed the Greater Amalekite Nation. Seir… actually translates as “rough skinned and hairy”… suggesting Seir and the Horites were indeed Nephilim… Seir was the grandfather to Hori through his son Lotan… the likely root for… Horite… 

… according to Ginsberg, Esau, the patriarch of Amalek, was born evil and lost his birthright… even though Esau was the firstborn of Isaac. Because of this, Esau’s last wish on his deathbed, according to Jewish lore, was for Amalek to cut off the fledgling nation of Israel from their birthright, before they became too formidable too stop Israel from acquiring the Land of the Covenant. The Bible supports Esau’s hatred towards Jacob, with Esau’s own angry words and with his mother’s advice to Jacob… [in] Genesis 27:36-41 [and] Genesis 27:42-43. Hebrews 12:16-17 further underscores Esau’s anger…’

Hebrews 12:16-17

English Standard Version

‘… that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent [regret, rather than true sorrow], though he sought it with [crocodile] tears.’

Wayne: ‘One wonders whether… this passage… has… equated Esau’s godlessness… and… sexual transgressions… to the sexual sins of dark angels… Esau married at least two Horite/Nephilim females… and a number of Esau’s posterity married Horites… Esau’s descending family tree is… inexplicably interwoven and located with the Horites of Seir in the Table of nations (Genesis 36:1-40; 1 Chronicles 1:35-51). 

Sometime after Isaac’s death, legends articulate that Esau brought forth a great Edomite and Horite army, an army from Seir that likely included Amalekites, to slay his brother, Jacob, and Jacob’s entire family, but Esau and four of his sons – Reuel, Jeush, Lotan, and Korah… were slain in the battle.’ 

Reuel was born of Basemath the Ishmaelite and was fifty percent Edomite and fifty percent Ishmael – zero percent Horite. Jeush and Korah were born of Oholibamah and were thus fifty percent Horite or Nephilim descended and Lotan the son of Seir was one hundred percent Horite extraction.

Wayne: ‘… the Amalekites [attacked]… when Israel was weary and worn out… completely vulnerable. The Amalekites slaughtered all those who lagged behind due to exhaustion… [fighting] a despicable war of cowardly terrorism before engaging the helpless Israelites in a formal battle. At first, they remained in the hills outside of the Israelite camp, pretending to be friends and kin to Israel. The Amalekites would call out Israelites by name, inviting them to mingle and dine with their cousins, before ambushing, murdering, and mutilating the corpses of all those who did, all the while openly mocking Abraham’s covenant with Isaac and Jacob. 

Ginsberg notes the Amalekites struck like “a swarm of locusts… their purpose was to suck the blood out of Israel” before they became strong. Deuteronomy goes on to note that the Amalekites showed no fear of God (Deuteronomy 25:18). 

They continued to maintain and nourish their faith in the fallen angels that had saved the remnant of Amalekites from the flood. These people of sorcery employed black magic when they attacked Israel, and only with the strength of God did the Israelites prevail over this sorcery, [witnessed] by Moses and his raised hands during the daylong battle.

The second charge [the first being the Amalekite’s ‘despicable warfare tactics’ making ‘them the most despised nation recorded in the Bible’] against the Amalekites derived from their inciting other nations to war against the Israelites. Josephus tells us that the Amalekites informed the other nations that Israel lay in wait, only to ruin them at a later date. This then brings into perspective the odd passage from the Psalms:

Psalm 83:2-8

New English Translation

2 ‘For look, your enemies are making a commotion; those who hate you are hostile. 3 They carefully plot against your people, and make plans to harm the ones you cherish. 4 They say, “Come on, let’s annihilate them so they are no longer a nation. Then the name of Israel will be remembered no more.” 5 Yes, they devise a unified strategy; they form an alliance against you. 

6 It includes the tents of Edom [state of Israel] and the Ishmaelites [Germany], Moab [southern France] and the Hagrites [Austria], 

7 Gebal, Ammon [northern France], and Amalek [Jews], Philistia [Mexico and Latino-Hispano America] and the inhabitants of Tyre [Brazil led South America]. 

8 Even Assyria [Russia] has allied with them, lending its strength to the descendants of Lot [France, French Quebec]. (Selah) [think on this]’

A who’s who, of the sons of Jacob’s enemies: the key players of the past and the main adversaries today and in the future. They include the twin brother of Jacob, his uncle, his cousins and major neighbours and trading partners and not least their biggest adversary Asshur, the other dominant son of Shem, who vies with Arphaxad for preeminence amongst the European descended peoples. Notice, it is Edom which is stated first, while Amalek controls the agenda and pulls the strings of nearly all the nations that are allied, with Russia and Germany, providing the muscle.

Wayne: ‘… an explosive… vitriolic, generational blood vow… continued… appearing in all its nastiness with every available opportunity to wage an allied war against Israel. [For] after the Exodus encounter, we never read of a war waged by the Amalekites independent of their subservient allies. The third charge against the Amalekites pertained to their self-induced, brutal, and evil nature. Josephus recorded the Amalekites as the most warlike of all nations, drawing a parallel once more with the warlike tendencies of the Nephilim. The Amalekite in the book of Esther was named Haman the Agagite; he was a direct [descendant] of Agag.’

Haman’s lineage is provided in the Targum Sheni as: “Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, son of Srach, son of Buza, son of Iphlotas, son of Dyosef, son of Dyosim, son of Prome, son of Ma’dei, son of Bla’akan, son of Intimros, son of Haridom, son of Sh’gar, son of Nigar, son of Farmashta, son of Vayezatha, (son of Agag, son of Sumkei,) son of Amalek, son of the concubine [Timna] of Eliphaz, firstborn son of Esau”.

Wayne: ‘The appellation Agagite was interchangeable with Amalekite in its ancient application, reflecting their joint heritage. The first Agag was one of the three sons of Anak, while the second Agag was the king of the Amalekites that Saul defeated. That Agag, too, was a giant. What is most curious is that almost 700 years after the Amalekites were [‘utterly‘] destroyed by David and Saul, a descendant of the remnant of Amalek was still conspiring to continue the blood war against Israel. This blood oath was no simple pledge of vengeance. It ran much deeper than that. It almost seems to have been encoded into the Amalekite DNA by virtue of its generational ferocity [because Nephilim have inherited from their dark Angel parents the hatred towards the Creator and His chosen people].

What simply cannot be argued is that such an obsessive blood feud could have been sponsored by a simple dislike towards a nation of slaves’ exodus to freedom. There simply had to be something sponsoring this hatred that… kept it simmering within their bloodline. Israel was appointed the executioner for Amalek, which was just reward for the crimes committed against her… to “blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.” What Amalek endeavored… was to “destroy [Israel] as a nation, that the name Israel be remembered no more”… The judgement pronounced by God was equal to the crime perpetrated by Amalek towards Israel, no more and no less. Only Nephilim nations originally opposed Israel in war… the indictment and punishment [extended to] all the Nephilim infested nations allied with the Amalekites… All the giants were to be exterminated.’

A digression on Haman and Esther provides further insight on the Amalekite and Israelite enmity. Quote included by Cornerstone Publications:

“Once again there is a battle between Saul and Agag. Instead of Saul, son of Kish, it is Mordecai, son of Kish. Haman the Agagite is the enemy instead of his ancestor, Agag. Saul had a partial victory over Agag, but due to his disobedience, the line of the Amalekites and the family of Agag survived to terrorize Israel in the days of the Persian empire. Mordecai, the son of Kish, succeeded and overcame the entire lineage of Agag, and was elevated to the highest position in the empire, second only to the king. Likewise, the Jewish [rather tribe of Judah] people and all who joined with them became the favored sons of the kingdom. Indeed, in an even greater eschatological sense, Saul is a picture of Adam, the first man and ruler in the Garden of Eden. Yet Adam, and Saul, fell to sin. In this same light, Mordecai is a picture of the Messiah, the second Adam, who will succeed in overcoming all evil. Agag is a picture of Satan, and his descendant, Haman, is a picture of the False Messiah… In fact, the Midrash (Shocher Tov 9.10) states that God proclaims that neither His name nor His throne can be complete until the seed of Amalek is wiped from the face of the earth.” – Prophecies in the Book of Esther, pages 19-21.

The conflict evidenced between Esau and Jacob is a type and a reflection of the continuing battle between the Serpent Samael’s seed and the woman, Eve’s seed – represented in the future by Christ the Messiah and the false Messiah, the Beast: Abaddon (or Apollyon).

Cornerstone: ‘The book of Esther continues on with this amazing story of faith, courage, and determination in the face of absolute evil and seemingly overwhelming odds… most of the signal events transpire around the Passover season… very specific dates are mentioned, such as the 13th, 14th [Passover], and 16th [wave sheaf offering] days of Nisan, the first month of the sacred year. The fast which Esther eventually proclaimed for the endangered Jews actually occurred over Passover [Unleavened Bread] itself, and her appearance before the king transpired on the 16th day of the first month… this is the precise day on which the Israelites offered the wave sheaf, and commenced their count to Pentecost

… Haman’s conspiracy against Mordecai and the Jews backfired, and the gallows he had built upon which to hang Mordecai became his own means of execution. This evil Edomite died on the 17th day of Nisan… What is significant about the 17th day of the first month… it is the exact date on which the ark came to rest atop the mountains of Ararat‘ – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla – ‘best evidence demonstrates that ancient Israel crossed the Red Sea on this very date… If so, then the 17th day of the first month would not only mark the conclusion of the great Flood… but also the propitious occasion when the Pharaoh and all the Egyptian host were annihilated in the crashing waves of the Red Sea…’ – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing.

‘Although Mordecai does stand as a type of the Messiah… Esther has a very significant role in this unfolding saga… a mere unknown captive, incredibly she becomes queen of the Persian empire… Esther’s given name is Hadassah, which means myrtle. The myrtle tree proves to be of significance in the Scriptures… it could be said to represent Jerusalem, and thus all of Israel. The myrtle tree symbolizes joy, hope, and a blessed future. Like Esther, the myrtle tree is not nearly as impressive or showy as other plants… it grows in low places, but because of this fact, it receives extra moisture, keeping it very green and strong… it withstands drought and remains green even after being cut, indicative of the resilience of Esther… in the face of being taken captive to an alien land… When the leaves of the myrtle tree are crushed (symbolic of great trial and suffering), they produce a fragrant perfume more potent than the rose, even as did the life of Queen Esther…’

Judges 5:14

New King James Version

From Ephraim were those whose roots were in Amalek…’

The context here is that Ephraim dwelt in the region of Canaan which had once belonged to Amalek. Disconcertingly, it is also a reference to Amalek in reduced number, being alive and well in modern day Ephraim. This chapter is a song and prophetic description, of the sons of Jacob by the Judge Deborah and Barak. We will learn that within Ephraim, there is a ‘root of Amalek’ who wields immense power – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Ezra 4:1-6

English Standard Version

‘Now when the adversaries [Edom and Amalek] of Judah and Benjamin heard that the returned exiles were building a temple to the Lord, the God of Israel, they approached Zerubbabel and the heads of fathers’ houses and said to them, “Let us build with you, for we worship your God as you do, and we have been sacrificing to him ever since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria [681 to 669 BCE] who brought us here.” But Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and the rest of the heads of fathers’ houses in Israel said to them, “You have nothing to do with us in building a house to our God; but we alone will build to the Lord, the God of Israel, as King Cyrus the king of Persia has commanded us” – John 8:39-44.

Then the people of the land discouraged the people of Judah and made them afraid to build and bribed counselors against them to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus [the Great] king of Persia [from 559 to 530 BCE] even until the reign of Darius [I] king of Persia [in 522 until 486 BCE]. And in the reign of Ahasuerus [Xerxes I, husband of Esther], in the beginning of his reign [from 485 to 465 BCE], they wrote an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem.’

At an early date, the symbiotic and intwined relationship between Edom and Jacob or principally Judah was evident and so a complex relationship with mistaken identity the result, is not that hard to fathom. A double irony is displayed in the following article from a Jewish rabbi, considering what we have learned regarding Esau’s grandson, Amalek.

Congregation Beth Israel of the Palisades, rabbi emeritus Shammai Engelmayer – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Our prayer services are suffused with memory, as well, including a specific optional reading at the end of every weekday morning service; in the Ashkenazic rite it is known as “The Six Remembrances”; in the Sephardi rite, “The Ten Remembrances.” Both include remembering Amalek. “Amalek” actually refers to the tribe of that name, not to its founder (and our cousin, grandson of Esau and grand-nephew of Jacob). The irony is that while we survived the schemes of all of history’s Amaleks, we have ignored the Amalek closest to us – the Amalek within ourselves.’

The principal adversaries of Jacob were the descendants of Esau. Historically, Edom and Mount Seir lay to the south of the Dead Sea. It stretched to its seaport in the Gulf of Akaba, at Elath and included the famous ravine known as Petra. 

In 312 BCE the Edomites were driven from Petra north westwards by the Nabatheans – a people of Arabic ethnicity – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. By the middle of the second century BCE the Edomites occupied southern Judah, Hebron and the land north of it – 1 Maccabees 4:29; 5:65. The same people were in control of Judea – representing Judah, with Idumea derived from Edom, including Jerusalem in the South – at the time of Christ. The leading Scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees and Priests – many of whom had received their positions from the Idumean King Herod, having solidified his power through installing relatives and friends – were Edomites.

Prior to this, the Hasmonean dynasty had ruled Judea from circa 140 to 37 BCE. The word is believed to be linked to the tribe of Simeon from Ha Simeon; the village of Heshbon, Hashmona; and also the great-grandfather Asmoneus, of the patriot Mattathias Maccabees. The Hasmonean leaders were principally from the tribe of Levi. The former lands of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah had been occupied in turn by Assyria; the Babylonians; the Achaemenid (or Medo-Persian) Empire; and by Alexander the Great’s Greco-Macedonian Empire. Two of the four successor states, the Seleucid and Ptolemaic Egypt contested the region over six different wars and between 319 and 302 BCE, Jerusalem changed hands seven times.

There was unrest in Jerusalem over the office of the High Priesthood, while the Seleucid king Antiochus Epiphanes IV was campaigning in Egypt. He was humiliatingly pressured by the Romans to withdraw from Egypt and thus in harsh retaliation, he imposed a universal tax and built a fortress in Jerusalem. Antiochus then endeavoured to suppress public observance of Jewish laws and his government set up an idol of Zeus on the Temple Mount. He forbade circumcision and possession of the scriptures, invoking the death penalty as punishment.

According to Josephus: ‘Now Antiochus was not satisfied either with his unexpected taking the city, or with its pillage, or with the great slaughter he had made there; but being overcome with his violent passions, and remembering what he had suffered during the siege, he compelled the Jews to dissolve the laws of their country, and to keep their infants uncircumcised, and to sacrifice swine’s flesh upon the altar.’ He also outlawed the observance of the Sabbath and the offering of sacrifices at the Jerusalem Temple; requiring the Jewish leaders to sacrifice to idols instead.

Antiochus Epiphanes IV – Altes Museum, Berlin, Germany

This led to the Maccabean revolt in 167 BCE, led by the priestly Levite family of Mattathias rebel leader from 170 to 167 BCE and his sons; Judas Maccabeus rebel leader from 167 to 160 BCE, as well as High priest from 165 to 162 BCE; Jonathan Apphus rebel leader from 160 to 143 BCE and High Priest from 152 to 142 BCE; and Simon Thassi – Ethnarch (Monarch) and High Priest from 142 to 135 BCE. 

In 164 BCE Judah Maccabeus entered Jerusalem and the formal worship of Yahweh was re-established. After five years of war, Judah sought an alliance with the Roman Republic to remove the Greeks. Later, Simon was assassinated in 135 BCE, along with his eldest sons, Mattathias and Judas. Simon’s third son John Hyrcanus assumed leadership and ruled as Ethnarch and High Priest from 134 to 104 BCE.

Hyrcanus conquered the neighbouring land of Idumea in 125 BCE. Josephus records: “Hyrcanus … subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews [true Judah]; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and of the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews… That country is also called Judea, and the people Jews; and this name is given also to as many as embrace their religion, though of other nations.”

The Old Testament Law of the Bible was adhered to with mixed results by Israel and Judah and evolved into Orthodox Judaism, preserved by Edom from this time period until the present day.

Josephus: “But then upon what foundation so good a governor as Hyrcanus took upon himself to compel these Idumeans [Edomites] either to become Jews or to leave their country, deserves great consideration. I suppose it was because they had long ago been driven out of the land of Edom, and had seized on and possessed the [vacated land from the] Tribe of Simeon and all the southern part of the Tribe of Judah…”

The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903 edition, confirms regarding Edom: ‘They were then incorporated with the Jewish nation, and their country was called by the Greeks and Romans “Idumea”… From this time the Idumeans ceased to be a separate nation, though the name “Idumea” still existed (in) the time of Jerome.’

The abominable treatment of the people of Judah at the hands of the evil Seleucid madman Antiochus IV, understandably aroused immense anger, with John Hyrcanus channeling that anger toward the Edomites. His reasoning in subjugating and humiliating the Edomites, by forcing them to convert to ‘Judaism’ was a monumental decision. This one act sowed an evil seed that would reap massive far reaching repercussions in Jewish history and that of the whole world. It encouraged the intermingling of Judah and the Idumeans; the tribe of Judah in the North (Judea) and the Edomites in the South (Idumea). This laid the groundwork for the Idumean’s to gain the upper hand and rule the lower provinces of ‘Palestine’, just at the time the promise of the Messiah was to be fulfilled.

The word ‘Jew’ in the Old Testament scripture refers to the tribe of Judah and has nothing to do with Edom. 

It should really be rendered Judahite, ‘as in one descended from Judah’, one of the Israelite tribes. The name for the region was called Judea, a Latinised version of the word Judah and a coincidental combination of the names Jud-ah and Idum-ea. Conversely, in the New Testament verses the word Jew should read Judean, as in one who was living in the Roman province of Judea. Today, the word Jew has nothing to do with the tribe of Judah and everything to do with the people of Edom. 

The seeds of the Hasmonean collapse were planted during Hyrcanus II – while High Priest from 76 to 66 BCE and 63 to 40 BCE and as King from 67 to 66 BCE and then 47 to 40 BCE – the grandson of John Hyrcanus. Hyrcanus II ruled twice as did his younger brother Aristobulus II, due to civil war intervening in-between. During Hyrcanus’ second term, though Ethnarch, he was much like a puppet with power effectively in the hands of his advisor, Antipater the Idumaean – whom Caesar had appointed as Roman Procurator. Antipater appointed his sons to positions of influence, with Phasael as Governor of Jerusalem in Judea and Herod – the future King Herod the Great of Judea at the time of the birth of Christ (3 BCE) – Governor of Galilee, from 47 to 40 BCE. 

There is reason to believe that Antipater and his famous son Herod, were related to the ancient King Agag the Amalekite through Haman discussed earlier, who lived at the time of Queen Esther of Persia. Antipater was assassinated in 43 BCE, however, Antipater’s sons managed to maintain their control over Judea and Hyrcanus II. 

In 40 BCE, the Parthians – sons of Jacob and one of the main bodies of the lost tribes – invaded the Roman provinces and in Judea, the Hasmonean dynasty was restored under King Antigonus, Hyrcanus’ uncle, a pro-Parthian monarch. Phasael and Hyrcanus II went to meet the Parthians but were captured instead. Antigonus, who was present, cut off Hyrcanus’ ears to make him unsuitable for the High Priesthood, while Phasael was put to death. Antigonus, Hebrew name Mattathias, bore both titles of king and High Priest for only three years, as he had unwisely not disposed of his most dangerous enemy, Herod. 

The Parthian Empire was during this period a remnant – albeit the most influential one at the time – of the tribes which had principally comprised the former Kingdom of Judah (Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and Levi) and highly ironically or maybe not, were led by the tribe of Judah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. They were more than capable of attacking the Roman Empire more effectively than any other peoples or tribes in 40 BCE. They were outstanding horse back riders and archers and with their repeated hit and retreat attacks, were able to overcome the strength of the Roman Legions. It was always in Rome’s interest to ensure a major conflagration did not break out with the Parthians, so that the Roman Legions could be on hand to defend other parts of their empire, like containing the Germanic and Gothic peoples of northern Europe; thereby ensuring peace and safety for all peoples residing and engaging in commerce within the Roman sphere of influence.

Meanwhile, Herod had escaped to Rome and after convincing Mark Antony and the Senate of his loyalties to the Rome Republic was declared, ‘king of the Jews.’ Even though king of all Judea, he did not subjugate the entire territory until 37 BCE, as the Romans had been distracted fighting the Parthians. Herod the Great ruled as a vassal king for over forty years, crushing all opposition, including all surviving Hasmoneans except Hyrcanus II; while also initiating huge building projects, including the harbour at Caesarea; the plaza surrounded by retaining walls at the Temple Mount; the Masada fortification’ and the Herodium to name a few. 

Herod murdered the whole Sanhedrin comprising sixty-eight people – apart from Hillel and Shammai* who subsequently became founders of the two main schools of the Pharisees. Hyrcanus II had been held by the Parthians since 40 BCE and until 36 BCE, he lived amid the Babylonian Jews, who paid him every mark of respect. Herod, who feared that Hyrcanus might induce the Parthians to help him regain the throne, invited him to Jerusalem. The Babylonian Jews warned him in vain, though Herod received him with hospitality and good humour, assigning him the first place at his table and the presidency of the state council; all the while awaiting an opportunity to eliminate him. As the last remaining Hasmonean, Hyrcanus was a dangerous rival for Herod. Finally, in 30 BCE, charged with plotting with the King of Arabia, Herod had Hyrcanus condemned and executed. 

Herod’s killing did not stop there, for he tried to kill the Messiah and had all male born babies and infants under two years of age murdered – reminiscent of the Pharaoh killing new born male Israelite babies. By an interesting twist of fate, we will find that the Pharaoh who instigated the mass killing was the very same Pharaoh who subsequently allowed his daughter to adopt the baby Moses – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Matthew 2:16-20

English Standard version

‘Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under…  But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, “Rise, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child’s life are dead.”

Regarding the life, ministry and death of the Messiah, those readers interested in a detailed discussion are encouraged to read the article: The Christ Chronology; and Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

In summary: the Messiah as can be ascertained from all pertinent material, was born in 3 BCE on September 11, corresponding to the first day of Tishri, the New Moon of the Feast of Trumpets in the seventh month of the Sacred Calendar. He lived twenty-nine years, was then baptised in his 30th year and began His ministry in the autumn of 26 CE. Three and one half years later, Christ died in his 33rd year on the 14th of Abib, corresponding to the Passover on April 3, in 30 CE.

Concerning King Herod, the historian Schurer concluded: ‘Herod died at Jericho… unwept by those of his own house, and hated by all the people.’ Upon Herod’s death his kingdom was divided among his three sons as a tetrarchy. Jewish tradition holds that the claiming of kingship by the Hasmoneans led to their eventual downfall, since that title was only to be held by descendants of the line of King David and the tribe of Judah, whereas the Maccabeans were Levites, from the tribe of Levi. 

The Edomites in positions of influence were also known as Herodians in scripture and were politically aligned with Herod. They plotted with the Pharisees to kill the Messiah – Matthew 22:16, Mark 12:13.

Mark 3:6

English Standard Version

‘The Pharisees went out and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.’

Herod Agrippa I (Herod the Great’s grandson) continued the murderous acts of his Great grandfather, as he was implicated in the death of James the brother of John (Acts 12:1-2) between 41 and 44 CE. The Herodian kingship continued until 92 CE, when the last monarch, Agrippa II died, with Rome assuming full power over his de jure domain.

One faction of the Edomite ruling elite during the time of Christ, were the Sadducees, a powerful religious-political group who confronted the Messiah, attempting to trip Him up (Matthew 16:1, Mark 12:18), later also opposing the apostles – Acts 4:1-2. The name Sadducee is related to the Hebrew word, sadaq meaning, ‘to be righteous.’ The Sadducees were a wealthy aristocratic class, which included the high priest of the temple in Jerusalem. The Sadducees held the majority of seats of the total seventy, with the High Priest making seventy-one of the ruling council called the Greater Sanhedrin – Numbers 11:16. They sought peace with the Romans, so as to maintain their political position of power and in so doing, alienated themselves from the masses. The people related to the minority sect, the Pharisees and thus the Sadducees did not always have political matters their own way. 

Even though the Sadducees preserved the authority of the books of Moses – Genesis through to Deuteronomy – they denied fundamental teachings, including: the resurrection of the dead, the resurrection of Christ, a soul or afterlife and a spiritual world. As a political party they only became concerned with Christ when they perceived unwanted Roman attention. Thus they sided with the Pharisees and conspired to put the Messiah to death – John 11:48-50. According to Josephus, the Sadducees were ‘rude, arrogant, power-hungry and quick to dispute with those who disagreed with them.’ The Sadducees ceased to exist as a group in 70 CE, when Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed by the Romans.

The other influential faction were the Pharisees and unlike the Sadducees, were mainly members of the middle class. They were the businessmen, merchants and tradesmen of their day. This would account for the numerous Talmudic references dealing with the minute intricacies of commercialism. The Pharisees were sticklers in adhering to the law and were the fundamentalists of their day, separating themselves, particularly in Jerusalem by their strict adherence to their voluminous and complex legal tradition – becoming hypocritical formalists. The average Pharisee had no formal education, in the interpretation of the biblical law and so relied on professional scholars – the scribes, of which most were Pharisees – in legal matters. A small number of the Pharisees were Priests, as well as regular attendees at the synagogue** – a Jewish house of worship. 

The word Pharisee is from the Greek, pharisaios derived from the Hebrew-Aramaic Perisha, meaning, ‘separated one.’ According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica there were six thousand Pharisees during the time of the Messiah. Of which, a sizeable proportion were not Jewish as in from the tribe of Judah; but rather, Edomites. 

Matthew 23:1-36

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, 3 so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. 4 They tie up heavy burdens [Orthodox Judaism and strict observance of the Torah], hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. 5 They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, 6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues 7 and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. 8 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 And call no man your father [for instance Catholic priests] on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. 

13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in 15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves. 27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. 28 So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.

31 Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets [the prophets of Israel and Judah]. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. 33 You serpents, you brood of vipers^, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell [death]? 

34 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you [Doeg the Edomite, 1 Samuel 21:7] will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, 35 so that on you^^ may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.’

There is a palpable series of discovered on our journey which once joined, links the Serpent in the Garden of Eden (Samael), with Cain; the Kenites; Amalek; the Horites from Sier; and Edom.

John 8:31-58

Common English Bible

31 ‘Jesus said to the Jews who believed in him, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to my teaching. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 They responded, “We are Abraham’s children [from Abraham’s grandson, Esau]; we’ve never been anyone’s slaves. How can you say that we will be set free?”

The Jewish leaders and the ones opposing Christ were predominantly Edomites. The Pharisees here can legitimately claim to be descendants of Abraham – not ever being in bondage, unlike the tribe of Judah – yet sit and act as if they are Judah. As a twin, they can be easily confused with Jacob and so they have been, and are, and will continue to be.

John: 34 ‘Jesus answered, “I assure you that everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 A slave isn’t a permanent member of the household, but a son is. 36 Therefore, if the Son makes you free, you really will be free. 37 I know that you are Abraham’s children, yet you want to kill me because you don’t welcome my teaching. 38 I’m telling you what I’ve seen when I am with the Father, but you are doing what you’ve heard from your father.”

39 They replied, “Our father is Abraham.” Jesus responded, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do Abraham’s works. 40 Instead, you want to kill me, though I am the one who has spoken the truth I heard from God. Abraham didn’t do this. 41 You are doing your father’s works.” They said, “Our ancestry [from Abraham and Isaac] isn’t in question! The only Father we have is God!”

John 8:41-47

English Standard Version

41 ‘You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality [or fornication]. We have one Father – even God.”

Living Bible

‘No, you are obeying your real father when you act that way.” They replied, “We were not born out of wedlock – our true Father is God himself.”

Christ is flagrantly speaking of the Edomites complex ancestry and their mixed DNA.

John: 32 ‘Jesus replied, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God. Here I am. I haven’t come on my own. God sent me. 43 Why don’t you understand what I’m saying? It’s because you can’t really hear my words.

44 Your father [figure, generator] is the devil.^ You are his children, and you want to do what your father wants. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has never stood for the truth, because there’s no truth in him. Whenever that liar speaks, he speaks according to his own nature, because he’s a liar and the father of liars.

45 Because I speak the truth, you don’t believe me. 46 Who among you can show I’m guilty of sin? Since I speak the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 God’s children listen to God’s words. You don’t listen to me because you aren’t God’s children.”

Matthew 3:7

English Standard Version

‘But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?’

This is alluding to Genesis 3.15 and the the enmity between the Serpent’s seed and Eve’s descendants – Matthew 12:34, Luke 3:7.

John: 48 ‘The Jewish opposition answered, “We were right to say that you are a Samaritan and have a demon, weren’t we?” 49 “I don’t have a demon,” Jesus replied. “But I honor my Father and you dishonor me. 50 I’m not trying to bring glory to myself. There’s one who is seeking to glorify me, and he’s the judge. 51 I assure you that whoever keeps my word will never die.”

52 The Jewish opposition said to Jesus, “Now we know that you have a demon. Abraham and the prophets died, yet you say, ‘Whoever keeps my word will never die.’ 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham? [yes] He died and the prophets died, so who do you make yourself out to be?” 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is meaningless. My Father, who you say is your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55 You don’t know him, but I do. If I said I didn’t know him, I would be like you, a liar. But I do know him, and I keep his word. 56 Your father Abraham was overjoyed that he would see my day. He saw it and was happy.” 

57 “You aren’t even 50 years old!” the Jewish opposition replied. “How can you say that you have seen Abraham?” 58 “I assure you,” Jesus replied, before Abraham was, I Am.”

The hurried, illegal trial of Christ to pronounce his death would have been made up of some of the members of the Sanhedrin, either biased Sadducees or Pharisees of the school of Shammai.* Christ’s friend Nicodemus and his relative – Great Uncle on his mother Mary’s side – Joseph of Arimithea, would have definitely represented the school of Hillel (John 3:1, Acts 22:3, 23:6) as well as being members of the Sanhedrin – John 19:38, Acts 5:34. 

Rabbis were grouped into the Houses of either Hillel or Shammai during the Second Temple era. The students of Hillel were lenient, conversely the students of Shammai were stringent. The law was nearly always decided in accordance with the teachings of the House of Hillel. Following the destruction of the original Temple, two distinct academies developed; one in the Land of Israel and the other in Babylon. The traditions of each were preserved in two separate Talmuds, the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud.

There were some communities faithful to the teachings of the scholars in Judea and others who were influenced by the sages of Babylon. Similar to the Sephardim and Ashkenazim, these groups had differences in rite and custom, though the fundamentals of Judaism were the same. The Jews in Palestine suffered under Christian rulership and so their communal structure dissolved, while the Babylonian academies flourished. In time, Jewish communities adapted the Babylonian traditions and it is they which are now universally held.

Israeli Orthodox Rabbi 

Thus, Judaism was very different from the religion of ancient Israel. Rabbi Stephen Wise, once the Chief Rabbi of the United States, said: ‘The return from Babylon, and the adoption of the Babylonian Talmud, marks the end of Hebrewism, and the beginning of Judaism.’ It was Christ’s blatant rejection of this ‘Tradition of the Elders’ and his direct confrontation with the influential Pharisees that created the climate which led to His death. Jesus declared that their traditions had blinded the eyes of the people to a true understanding of the Law, as well as the prophecies regarding the Messiah and his coming. 

Matthew 27:24-26

Common English Bible

‘Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere and that a riot was starting. So he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I’m innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It’s your problem.” All the people replied, “Let his blood be on us^^ and on our children.” Then he released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus whipped, then handed him over to be crucified’ – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

The Roman Governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate had finally grown weary of King Herod Antipas of Galilee – who reigned from 4 to 39 CE, and was eventually exiled by Emperor Caligula to Spain – and the contentious crowd. This is a profound moment in the history of the world; for both the Son of Man and the rabble rousing Jewish Idumeans. For Christ, it was the fulfilment of his role as the sacrificial Lamb for the sins of the whole world, past and present and the signing of his death warrant – 1 John 2:2. For the Idumeans and their vitriolic rogue Amalek component, it signed their warrant for persecution and violence aimed towards them from generation to generation, for their role in Christ’s final hours – Exodus 17:16. The Nazi genocidal extermination of Jews during WWII: a case of paradoxical indirect retribution, coupled with unjustified persecution.

Revelation 2:9

Amplified Bible

‘I know your suffering… how you are blasphemed and slandered by those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue** of Satan (they are Jews only by blood, and do not believe and truly honor the God whom they claim to worship).’

Revelation 3:9

King James Version

‘Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.’

These verses in the Book of Revelation are part of a personal, coded message to true believers and the elect of Christ, spanning since His death, until His return. Seven letters are written to seven Churches* with different characteristics, representing seven phases or eras – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

These verses have a dual application in that a. they refer to the universal religious establishment which claims to have divine authority (John 20:23) for so-called Christian beliefs and teachings (Matthew 16:18-19; 18:18); acting as a religious imposter to the real spiritual Jews of the true body of Christ, which is a small flock (Luke 12:32) and b. cleverly refers to another influential religion which spawned Christianity (Romans 2:28-29) and a people who claim to be Judah (or physical Jews) and really are not. 

Judaism and Roman Catholicism are equally Babylonian Mystery religions; imposters and usurpers, both posing as the true Church of God. Catholicism and Judaism are both spiritually Edom, rejecting the true Messiah, by either denying Him or replacing Him with an Antichrist. Judaism and Catholicism are related, or if you like, brothers – paradoxically working together, yet at enmity with one another, vying for world dominion. They are united in their wrath towards true spiritual Israel and real physical Israel – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

From 70 CE, with the destruction of the second Temple by the Romans and their subsequent conquest of Jerusalem, Judea crumbled and its people dispersed. True Judah from Jacob and shadow Judah the Edomite Idumeans from Esau, disappear from the world stage. Both, later re-appear in Europe – the Idumeans as the Jews. Before we trace the Jewish people, let’s look at a branch of the Edomite people well before the time of Christ. We have discussed how various nations of Palestine had colonies in the Aegean Sea and Grecian Isles. A famous Greek society, who have gained an ardent following and fascination from historians, archaeologists and the public alike; being militaristic, disciplined, self-contained, with an ethos of no surrender and who stood out from their kindred neighbours in Greece, was the nation state of Sparta

The armies of Sparta are considered as some of the most impressive in the history of warfare. Their accomplishments particularly during the Greco-Persian wars solidified their formidable reputation; particularly the battle at the narrow coastal pass of Thermopylae in 480 BCE. Xerxes the Great had steam rolled his way through Greek cities for four months; until he reached Thermopylae. There then ensued the mother of last stands, for a small Greek force of about seven thousand men awaited them. A Spartan soldier Dieneces is reputed to have calmly said, when told that the Persian arrows would blot out the sun: “Good news; we’ll be fighting in the shade.”

The Greeks led by a mere three hundred Spartan soldiers and one of their kings – Sparta always had two,* the other being LeotychidesLeonidas I, miraculously fended off Xerxes I and his massive army of approximately 200,000 men; which included the superior Persian Immortals, an elite, heavily armed infantry unit of 10,000 soldiers; for three days, inflicting enormous casualties. The Greeks retreated at this point, though the three hundred Spartans and seven hundred men from nearby Thespiae stayed. Leonidas was immortalised as a hero for remaining behind and fighting to the death in a battle that ultimately saw the Spartan’s one and only defeat. Leonidas is reputed to have replied, when the Persians demanded that he and the Spartans hand over their weapons: ‘Come and get them” – words inscribed on his statues in Sparta and at Thermopylae. 

Leonidas I

This laconic, witty, blunt sense of humour and style of the Spartans is replicated by and particularly indicative of the Jewish people. The Israelis’ have a reputation for being ‘a rude, abrasive or merely boundary-less people’ coupled with their ‘new incarnation as [a start-up nation].’ In 2015, the tech firm Intel provided its employees with a guide to working with Israelis. It warned to ‘expect to be cut off regularly’ and that ‘visitors are often taken aback by the tone or loudness of [a] discussion.’ English speaking immigrants to Israel [called Anglos in Israel], remark about the marked differences in cultural norms and expectations that complicate relations between themselves and the Israelis. Observations of immigrants include: “Israelis are notoriously late; super casual in dress code and speaking” and “They tend to be too personal in their opening remarks, sharing things like how many kids they have.” Also, “arguments can easily get loud and verbally violent, yet never physically violent. There is very much a culture of arguing.” 

The extreme level of martial sophistication exhibited by the Spartans is mirrored by the Jewish people, whom are likewise renowned for their military excellence and bravery. The Israeli intelligence agency the Mossad, is one of the most effective in the world; their anti-terror unit YAMAM arguably the best in the world; as is their military expertise, for instance the Shayetet 13 and Matkal teams which rival the elite United State’s SEALs and the United Kingdom’s SAS in crack training. 

An example of Israeli combative skills is the daring and legendary raid of Entebbe on July 3 and 4 in 1976; with a rescue executed by an Israeli commando squad; liberating one hundred and three hostages from a French jet airliner that had been hijacked en route from Israel to France. At Entebbe airport in Uganda, the hijackers had freed those of the two hundred and fifty-eight passengers who they thought were not Israeli (or Jewish); holding the rest hostage in exchange for the release of fifty-three militants imprisoned principally in Israel, but also in other countries. 

In response, Israel dispatched four Hercules C-130H cargo planes, carrying 100 to 200 soldiers and escorted by Phantom jet fighters. After flying 2,500 miles from Israel to Uganda, the Israeli force dramatically rescued the hostages within an hour after landing. All seven of the terrorists were killed, and eleven MiG fighters supplied to Uganda by the Soviet Union were destroyed in the confrontation. Staggeringly, the Israelis lost only three hostages and one soldier during the entire operation. 

The Spartan soldier or hoplite, like any other Greek soldier carried a large bronze shield, wore bronze armour and carried a long, bronze-tipped spear. They similarly fought as other Greeks in a phalanx, an array of soldiers designed to create a strong line of defence, with each soldier also protecting the soldier crouching next to him using their shield. The Spartans were the best using this formation due to their exacting military training. To become a Spartan soldier, Spartan boys under went training at the agoge, a specialised military academy, which included academia, with lessons in warfare, stealth, hunting and athletics. Training was gruelling and intense, beginning at age seven.

When Spartan boys were born, they were examined by the Gerousia, a council of leading elder Spartans from the child’s tribe to ascertain whether he was fit and healthy enough to be allowed to live. Spartan boys were often sent out into the wild on their own to survive. What truly set the Spartan soldier apart was his loyalty to his fellow soldier. In the agoge, the Spartan boys were taught to depend on one another intrinsically, for the common defence; plus learning how to move in formation without breaking rank, in attack. At the age of twenty, Spartan men would become warriors of the state and their military life would continue until they turned sixty. Though Spartan men would be ruled by discipline and military during their lives, there were other options available to them. As a member of the state at age twenty, Spartan men could marry, but they would not share a marital home until they were at least thirty. For their lives were completely dedicated to the military for these ten years. Once a Spartan man reached sixty they would be retired, with no more call for military duty or fighting. 

The Missing Simeonites, Steven M Collins – emphasis mine:

‘The Spartans were famous as being the most martial of the Greek city-states. They had a rigorous, martial community which was very different from the rest of the Greek city-states… [and Esau] would be expected to “live by the sword” [Genesis 27:40] and be a martial community wherever they settled.

The book, Sparta, by A.H.M. Jones, a Professor of Ancient History at Cambridge University, noted several things about Sparta. He states the Spartans worshipped a “great law-giver” who had given them their laws in the “dim past”… This law-giver may have been [the patriarch Abraham]. Professor Jones also noted the Spartans celebrated “the new moons” and the “seventh day” [Sabbath] of the month… Prof. Jones also notes, as do other authorities, that the Spartans were known for being “ruthless” in war and times of crisis… Prof. Jones writes that the Spartans were themselves divided into several “tribes” which constituted distinct military formations within the Spartan army… The Spartans also founded a colony in Italy called “Tara”… The name “Terah” is a Semitic/Israelite name as Terah was the father of Abraham…

… I make the case in my book, The “Lost” Ten Tribes of Israel…Found!, that Carthage was founded by Semites from Israel [rather Arameans (Phoenicians) from Aram], Tyre and Sidon who continued the Semitic/Hebrew language of the Israelites as well as the Baal worship that Israel, Tyre and Sidon shared. Carthage and the Greeks were historically enemies, but Sparta exhibited a community of interest with Carthage. When Carthage’s army was not fighting well against the Roman legions, it was a Spartan named Xanthippus who traveled to Carthage to reorganize and drill the Carthaginian army to fight Rome. Who better than a Spartan to teach military tactics? I have saved the greatest proof to the last, however. The Spartans themselves declared that they were a fellow tribe of the Jews and corresponded with an ancient Jewish High Priest about their relationship. The book of I Maccabees 14:16-23 records this correspondence, which includes this statement:

“And this is the copy of the letter which the Spartans sent: The Chief magistrates and the city of the Spartans send greeting to Simon, the chief priest, and to the elders and the priests and the rest of the Jewish people, our kinsmen.”

A relationship between the Spartans and the Jews is again supported earlier in the Apocryphal text, where we read:

1 Maccabees 12:17-23

New Revised Standard Version

17 ‘We have commanded them to go also to you and greet you and deliver to you this letter from us concerning the renewal of our family ties. 18 And now please send us a reply to this.” 19 This is a copy of the letter that they sent to Onias: 20 “King Arius of the Spartans, to the high priest Onias, greetings. 21 It has been found in writing concerning the Spartans and the Jews that they are brothers and are of the family of Abraham. 22 And now that we have learned this, please write us concerning your welfare; 23 we on our part write to you that your livestock and your property belong to us, and ours belong to you. We therefore command that our envoys report to you accordingly.”

Some writers allege that the Spartans are sons of Jacob, such as the tribes of Dan* or Simeon, yet Jacob (or Israel) is curiously not mentioned as their ancestor, but rather Abraham as their point of commonality. As we have read, the same Jews of the Scribes and Pharisees, referred to Abraham when they were discussing the lineage of themselves with the Messiah, not Jacob. They also don’t mention Isaac for good reason, as it was he who gave the birthright blessings to Jacob, omitting Esau, hence the reference to Abraham instead. The Spartans are linking themselves to the Jews, not the tribe of Judah. The Edomites were called Jews by this point in history; not the true tribe of Judah.

The letter was written by Arius (Areus) king of the Lacedemonians to Onias the high priest in Palestine. The Jewish historian Uriel Rappaport attempted to put distance between the Spartans and Jews [yes, wonder why^], noting that the relationship has “intrigued many scholars, and various explanations have been suggested for the problems^ raised… including the historicity^ of the Jewish leader and high priest Jonathan’s letter to the Spartans, the authenticity^ of the letter of Arius to Onias, cited in Jonathan’s letter, and the supposed ‘brotherhood’ of the Jews and the Spartans.” Rappaport claiming, “the authenticity^ of (the reply) letter of Arius is based on even less firm foundations than the letter of Jonathan.”

There are strong similarities with the Spartan attitude, approach and culture with the modern Israeli nation today. Thus, the historical relationship documented in both books of Maccabees are note worthy, rather than to attempt to dismiss it as fiction. 

Spartan men wore their hair long, often braided into locks and were well groomed. Long hair symbolised being a free man and taking pride in their strength. Plutarch claimed their long hair: “… made the handsome more comely and the ugly more frightful.” A famous Danite Samson, also wore his hair long, never having cut it. Dan was a son of Jacob and when we study the tribe of Dan,* we will learn about their connection with modern day Esau. Thus, it would not be a surprise to learn of their parallel association (which is more accurate than the tribe of Simeon) with the Spartans – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

There is a Greek myth written about the son of Belus (or Belaus), a king of the ancient Spartans, named Danaus who arrived in Greece with his daughters by ship. His daughters called themselves Danades and they introduced the cult of the mother goddess – articles: Lilith; and Asherah. This cult worship became an established religion in Arcadia, developing into the worship of Diana. The Spartans in reverence for their king, adopted the name of Danaans long before they were called Spartans. The same legend records the arrival in the Peleponnesus of ‘colonists from Palestine.’ Danaus may well have been of the tribe of Dan. 

In the same letter between Arius and Onias, Josephus gives an account of the correspondence referring to the Spartan seal as being an Eagle clutching a Serpent. Most have interpreted this as a symbol of the tribe of Dan and thus summarily the Spartan identity being that of Dan. Whereas the snake, serpent or viper are primary symbols for Dan, the eagle is a tertiary symbol at best behind the Lion – Deuteronomy 33:22. Where we do find the eagle as a primary symbol is in reference to Edom – Obadiah 4, Jeremiah 49:16, 22. As we will learn as we progress, Edom and Dan are inextricably linked. Therefore, the symbol of the Eagle clutching a serpent is revealing and may allude in part to the intermingling of Edom with Dan.

Scholars link the name Belus with the false gods of Baal, Bel and Belial from the Old Testament. The seventh king of Edom, was Baal-hanan. There may also be a link between Belus and Bela the son of Beor, the first king of Edom (Genesis 36:32, 39 and 1 Chronicles 1:43, 49), whom we have already spoken. It is interesting to note that Balaam, who was requested to curse the sons of Jacob by Balak the king of Moab, was also a son of Beor.

Numbers 22:4-5, ESV: ‘… So Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor at Pethor, which is near the River in the land of the people of Amaw…’ Though we have learned that Balaam was from Aram-Naharaim and not Edom, as well as living much later; it should be considered that Balaam and Bela could be related. For it is a surprising coincidence, coupled with the fact that efforts in locating the city of Dinhabah where Bela was from, have remained unsuccessful. 

Sparta’s two* kings ruled by divine right, with both royal families, the Agiads and the Eurypontids, claiming ancestry with the gods; tracing their ancestry to Heracles a son of Zeus. Myth records that the two dynasties descended from twins no less. Eurysthenes and Procles, who conquered Sparta after the Trojan War, were the first Heraclid kings of Lacedaemon. They were the sons of Aristodemus and Argia and their sons in turn were Agis and Eurypon; with the Agyads considered the senior line. 

Most Spartans were farmers but the helots would actually work the land for them. Recall that the Kenite Rechabites would not perform agricultural labour. Nor has the Jew in the past been a farmer or agriculturalist. The Helots were a subjugated peoples and became the first slaves of the Lacedaemonian state. They originally hailed from the city of Helos, though in time it was a term used of the servile population across Laconia and Messenia. Though the helots were serfs of the lowest class, they numbered as the largest majority in Sparta. 

Sparta was located in the region of Laconia, referred to as Lacedaemon in antiquity and comprised most of the southwestern Peloponnese peninsula of the Greek mainland. It was bordered by the Taygetos Mountains to the West and the Parnon Mountains on the East and though Sparta was inland it was only about twenty-five miles north of the Mediterranean Sea, via the Eurotas River. The location was ideal in turning Sparta into a defensive stronghold. The terrain surrounding the region was difficult to traverse, making it difficult if not impossible for invaders to not be spotted quickly as they entered the valley. As the city state was built on the banks of the Eurotas River, it had an additional line of defence. As well as serving as a natural boundary, the river also made the region one of the most fertile and agriculturally productive in Greece, contributing to Sparta’s prosperity.

In Peoples of The Sea, 1977, by Immanuel Velikovsky, he mentions Temeh (or Temehu) as a name used for the Spartans (or Lacedaemonians), by the Egyptians. As we have read, Teman was a prominent grandson of Esau and his name means, south. The possibility exists that Edomites who colonised the Peloponnesian peninsula, used a word like Teman for the location of Sparta in the southern region of the Peloponnese. 

1 Kings 9:26

English Standard Version

‘King Solomon built a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber, which is near Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom.

Cornerstone Publications provide a fascinating link between Edom, the founding of Tyre (the later Phoenician Aramaean stronghold), ancient Greece and Sparta – emphasis mine.

‘According to Sanchaniathon, a people from the area of the Erythraean Sea migrated into the Galilee [North of Judea] and from there to the seacoast. The imminent Greek historian Herodotus confirms this… The word Erythraean means red… According to most of the ancient historians, including Diodorus Siculus, Aristophanes, and Plutarch, the Erythraean Sea was, in fact, the Red Sea, receiving its name not due to its color actually being red, but from Esau or Edom… some of whose descendants occupied the eastern Sinai peninsula, ranging over into certain areas of Arabia. Tyre, the greatest of the ancient Phoenician city-states, to which there are numerous Scriptural references, was, according to Sanchaniathon, colonized by one King Erythras, literally meaning King Red! 

The Jewish rabbinic scholar Rashi states in his commentary on Genesis 25:23 that Esau himself was the actual founder of Tyre… Even the name Tyre can be traced back to the Hebrew word tsur, which means rock. Indeed, in the time of the Messiah, it was strongly believed, and even recorded in I Maccabees 12 and Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, that the Spartans, on the mainland of Greece, were directly related to Abraham… this story should be of keen interest… when we consider the fact that Crete and the Aegean isles are said to have been invaded anciently by Semitic peoples from, of all places, Phoenicia, the very region where Esau and a major branch of his descendants migrated and settled!’

A scaled down version of the Spartan mentality was the ancient defensive fortification near the Dead Sea, of Masada – meaning: ‘strong foundation or support’ – which this writer had the good fortune to visit in 1981. It is a rugged natural fortress of rock that was transformed into an exquisite palace complex and lavish royal retreat – in the classic style of the early Roman Empire – by King Herod. The water system was especially sophisticated, collecting run-off water from a single day’s rain to sustain life for nine hundred and sixty ‘Judean’ (Idumean) rebels, including many women and children over a period of two to three years, up until April 73 CE.

With Jerusalem in ruins, eight thousand Roman troops built camps around Masada’s base; a siege wall; and a ramp of earth and wooden supports. It was many months later when it became clear that the Romans were going to finally break their defences, that all but two women and five children who had hid in cisterns, chose death and took their own lives rather than become Roman slaves. The camps, fortifications and attack ramp which encircle the fortress are the most complete example of Roman siege works to have survived to the present day. 

Josephus records: “They had died in the belief that they had left not a soul of them alive to fall into Roman hands; The Romans advanced to the assault … seeing none of the enemy but on all sides the awful solitude… within and silence, they were at a loss to conjecture what had happened here encountering the mass of slain, instead of exulting as over enemies, they admired the nobility of their resolve.”

The Battle of Leuctra in 371 BCE made Thebes the leading military power among the Greek city-states. The unexpected loss, dented the prestige of Sparta, ending its long dominance in Greece. Sparta never fully recovered from its losses at Leuctra, or the subsequent Helot revolts. Even so, it remained a regional power for another two centuries. Neither Philip II or his son Alexander the Great, attempted to conquer Sparta.

During its decline it remained the ‘defender of Hellenism,’ retaining its’ ‘laconic wit’ as evidenced, ‘when Philip II sent a message to Sparta saying, “If I enter Laconia, I will raze Sparta”, the Spartans responded with the single, terse reply… “if.” When Philip created the League of Corinth on the pretext of unifying Greece against Persia, the Spartans chose not to join, since they had no interest in joining a pan-Greek expedition unless it were under Spartan leadership. After defeating the Persians at the Battle of the Granicus, Alexander I, sent three hundred Persian suits of armour to Athens, inscribed: “Alexander, son of Philip, and all the Greeks except the Spartans, give these offerings taken from the foreigners who live in Asia.”

Spartan women were known to be literate and numerate; rare in ancient civilisation. Women were educated and interacted with their fellow male citizens, thus they were notorious for speaking their minds, even in public. Plato praised ‘Spartan women’s ability when it came to philosophical discussion.Spartan women also had economic power, as they controlled their own properties as well as of their husbands. The higher status of females in Spartan society began at birth. Spartan girls were fed the same food as their brothers, allowed to exercise and even competed in sports. Rather than being married at the age of twelve or thirteen, Spartan law forbade the marriage of a girl until she was in at least her late teens. The reason was to ensure the birth of healthy children.

Overall, Spartan women were fitter and lived longer than the women of other Greek cities. Many visitors to Sparta, mentioned the practice of wife-sharing. The Spartans believed that breeding should be between the most physically fit and healthy. Older men allowed younger men, to impregnate their polygamous or polyandrous wives. This practice was encouraged so that women would ‘bear as many strong-bodied children as they could.’ The Spartan population of males was hard to maintain due to the loss of the men in battle and the strict physical inspection of newborns.

Laconophilia is a love or admiration of Sparta and its culture. Sparta was the subject of considerable admiration in its day, even from its rival, Athens. Greek philosophers, especially Platonists would describe Sparta as an ideal state, strong, brave, and free from the corruptions of commerce and money. Laconophilia was even in the writings of Machiavelli. ‘The Elizabethan English constitutionalist John Aylmer compared the mixed government of Tudor England to the Spartan republic, stating that “Lacedemonia (was) the noblest and best city governed that ever was”. He ironically, unbeknown to himself, commended it as a model for England – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. 

In the twentieth century, a Facist admiration of Spartan ideals was in incredible irony adopted by Adolf Hitler, himself a quarter Jewish – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. 

With further perverse irony, Hitler praised the Spartans in 1928, recommending ‘that Germany should imitate them by limiting “the number allowed to live”. He added that “The Spartans were once capable of such a wise measure… The subjugation of 350,000 Helots by 6,000 Spartans was only possible because of the racial superiority of the Spartans.” The Spartans had created “the first racialist state.”

A further uncanny link between Sparta and the state of Israel are early Zionists and those who foundered the Kibbutz movement. They were influenced by Spartan ideals, especially education. A founding father of the Kibbutz movement and the Palmach strike force (an elite underground Israeli army from 1941 to 1948), Yitzhak Tabenkin, advocated ‘that education for warfare “should begin from the nursery”, that children should from kindergarten be taken to “spend nights in the mountains and valleys.”

Today, the adjective spartan means ‘simple, frugal, avoiding luxury and comfort. The term ‘laconic phrase’ describes the very terse and direct speech characteristic of the Spartans.’ During our stay in Israel and travelling the length and breadth of it, it cannot help but be admitted that the recollection of the nation overall is aptly described as spartan. So too are the Israelis direct and witty. It would have to be expressed how welcome we felt in Israel and how helpful many locals were to my father and myself as strangers there. Of all the nations this writer has been fortunate to visit, Israel stands out, making a favourable and lasting impression.

The first century after 70 CE saw the beginning of the Jewish diaspora or the dispersion of Edom from Judea. We next find the Jews dwelling in three main centres of western Europe: Spain, France and Germany – dispersing there after migrating from the Middle East via Italy. Similarly, Jewish peoples located in the area roughly equating to Ukraine dispersed throughout Eastern Europe and Russia.

In Germany, reference to the Jews as early as 321 CE are made and they were known as the Ashkenazi Jewish community between circa 1000 to 1299 CE. Nothing to do with Ashkenaz the modern nation of Vietnam, the son of Gomer – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia. The community had survived during Charlemagne’s genocides and atrocities, yet suffered later during the Crusades; with Crusaders in 1096, sweeping over Jewish settlements, laying them waste. Accusations of well poisoning during the Black Death between 1346 and 1353 CE, led to the mass slaughter of German Jews and their subsequent flight in large numbers to Poland. 

The Jews further east, subsequently known as Khazars ‘had been following a sex-orientated religion [Hebrews 12:16] until they officially embraced Judaism in 740 AD, while rejecting Christianity and Mohammedism’ according to Charles Weisman. The Khazars suffered the loss of the destruction of their government by the Russian Slavs in 1016 and then circa 1200, their land was invaded by Genghis Khan. Large numbers of Khazar Jews migrated to either Poland or western Russia. The eastern Jews began to have contact with their brethren from the Rhineland, either through mercantile association, or by reason of the influx of western Jews into Slavic countries. 

The western Jew, possibly because of their superior learning in Judaism, gradually imposed upon the original residents their own culture as well as their speech. The German dialect was thus introduced among Polish Jewry and replaced Slavic. Thus the term ‘Ashkenazi’ in time, did not necessarily mean that all Ashkenazi Jews had come from Germany but that they had adopted the cluster of Ashkenazi culture; including the specific Ashkenazi religious rites and crucially, the German based Yiddish language. 

The Joys of Yiddish, Leo Rosten, 1970:

‘Of other Germanic or German-based languages, Yiddish did not take its final shape as a separate language of eastern… Europe until late medieval times. However, its immediate predecessor, Judeo-German (originating, as recent scholarship has shown, in Bavaria and Bohemia, and notably in the cities of Regensburg and Prague, and not, as was earlier thought, in the Rhine valley), spread, at least with the first wave of Jewish settlers, to Silesia, Poland proper, Lithuania, Belarus, and western Ukraine during the high and later Middle Ages. Earlier Jewish ethnic groups had arrived in ECE (or its fringes) from the southeast: the former Khazaria (and beyond) and Kievan Rus, switching in the new setting to some form of East Slavic speech…’

Earlier we read of the interaction between Rome and the Idumean rulership in Judea leading into the time of Christ; the dispersal of the Jews from Judea by the Romans after 70 CE; the settlement of a portion of Jews in German lands; and now the formation of a hybrid language, incorporating Hebrew and German dialects. The constant reader will clearly realise the more than coincidental relationship exhibited between the descendants of Esau and Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

A very interesting correlation surfaces regarding the Ashkenazi Jew and the number of wives of Esau. Recall, we looked at the evidence and it strongly appeared that Esau had four wives, though one wife Judith, died prematurely after giving Esau two daughters – but no sons. One still wonders if the persistently held tradition that a person is a Jew through their maternal descent, stems from this very event. 

Most Ashkenazi Jews from Four Women, Malcolm Ritter, 2006 – emphasis mine: 

‘…about 40% of the total Ashkenazi population are descended from just four women, a genetic study indicates… lead author Dr. Doron Behar of the Rambam Medical Center in Haifa, Israel [commented]… Each woman left a genetic signature that shows up in their descendants today, he and colleagues say in a report published online by the American Journal of Human Genetics. Together, their four signatures appear in about 40% of Ashkenazi Jews, while being virtually absent in non-Jews and found only rarely in Jews of non-Ashkenazi origin, the researchers said. Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European ancestry. Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries… Eventually this group moved to Eastern Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries and expanded greatly, reaching about 10 million just before World War II… 

The study involved mitochondrial DNA, called mtDNA, which is passed only through the mother… Mike Hammer, who does similar research at the University of Arizona, said he found the work tracing back to just four ancestors “quite plausible… I think they’ve done a really good job of tackling this question. They may have existed in the Near East,” Hammer said. “We don’t know exactly where the four women were, but their descendants left a legacy in the population today, whereas… other women’s descendants did not.” Behar said the four women he referred to did inherit their genetic signatures from female ancestors who lived in the Near East. But he said he preferred to focus on these later European descendants because they were at the root of the Ashkenazi population explosion.’

Beginning in the thirteenth century, Jewish people were expelled from England and France as well as from central Europe. Most resettling in Russia, Poland and Eastern Europe. A small percentage however, began immigrating to Palestine. In 1492, when King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella expelled all Jewish people living in Spain, some refugees settled in Palestine. 

At the turn of the twentieth century, European Jews were migrating to Palestine in large numbers, fleeing religious persecution. In Russia, Jewish people were segregated into an area along the country’s western border, called the Pale of Settlement. In 1881 (long before Nazi Germany), Russians began mass killings of Jews called pogroms. This prompted many to flee from Russia and re-locate in Palestine. 

Prejudice against Jews, became known as anti-Semitism and was felt strongest in Germany, Austria-Hungary and France. A French army officer named Alfred Dreyfus was falsely accused of treason against the French government in 1894. Dreyfus was Jewish and imprisoned for five years and then later tried again, even after new information proved his innocence. The incident called The Dreyfus Affair, exposed widespread anti-Semitism in Western Europe. 

In light of this, Theodor Herzl an Austrian Jewish journalist, thought that Jewish people required their own homeland, Erez Israel, and so be free of religious persecution. In 1897 he organised the First Zionist Congress and is credited with starting the Zionist political movement; though the term Zionism had been coined by a Jew, Nathan Birnbaum in 1890. Herzl was instrumental in turning Zionism from a ‘practical and philanthropic aspect to its political, economic and military objectives…’ Zionism held that an independent Jewish state was the only way for Jewish people to escape anti-Semitism. Herzl stated: ‘It was… incumbent upon the states of Europe to assist in establishing a Jewish state and assuring it of international legitimation.’ 

In response, the British government in 1903, first offered ‘a Jewish self-governing settlement in Uganda, East Africa’ then the British-held Sinai Peninsula was offered and finally ‘a plan to make Madagascar a Jewish nation also generated no Jewish interest.’

Who is Esau-Edom, Charles Weisman, 1991: 

‘If half of Europe would have been offered to [the] Zionists they would still rather have the small barren land of Palestine. Why? … in Palestine they could draw Christian support as “God’s chosen people” returning to “Zion.” There would clearly be great political and financial leverage to be had by possessing “the ancient high places” of the true Israel people. The leaders of Edom did have a plan. As the counterfeit Israel people they could use their “cover” to fulfil Edomite goals – not Israelite ones.’

The issue to resolve was the fact that Palestine at this time was in the hands of the Turk and the Ottoman Empire and had been since 1299 CE. Since 1882, Edmond Rothschild had been financing a Jewish society to assist Jews in relocating to Palestine – Article: The Establishment: Who they are… What do they want? Weisman claims that International Zionists, Bankers and Plutocrats instigated the Balkan War of 1912/1913, which led to World War I in 1914 and guided Turkey into siding with the potential loser Germany, so that the Ottoman Empire could be carved up, freeing Palestine.

In the meantime, Zionists were able to convince Britain’s Arthur Balfour of their legitimacy as the Jews to a homeland. A ‘strange “Cabinet crisis” in December 1916’ led to “Lloyd George [becoming] Prime Minister and Arthur Balfour, Foreign Minister. Both these men… were outspoken supporters of Zionist aspirations.”

Thus pro-Zionists controlling British affairs were able to steer Great Britain towards victory over the Ottomans, by including the introduction of the United States in 1917, via President Woodrow Wilson and the insistence of his ‘intimate advisor’, Zionist agent Colonel Edward House. 

British forces ultimately seized control of Palestine from the Turks. Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild submitted a draft declaration to Balfour, demanding what the Zionists wanted. Balfour addressed the British war Cabinet and two days later, the ‘Balfour Declaration’ was adopted. The letter was dated November 2nd, 1917, addressed to Lord Rothschild:

‘I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.’

To ensure that Palestine would be in Zionist control, British forces occupied Jerusalem in December 1917. Muslim forces had earlier conquered the region in 637 CE. The occupying of an area already occupied ‘was an unprecedented innovation of international law.’ From that moment on, Arab discontent grew. Arab support in Europe with growing Arab nationalism in the Middle East, threatened to derail the Zionist plan. 

Both Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were willing partners of the Zionists and enlisting their assistance required little effort in bringing the United States and the United Kingdom into World War II. The aftermath of the war allowed the Jews to create the United Nations in October 1945 and by 1947, the British gave up their Palestine mandate and handed the ‘Palestine problem’ to the United Nations. The agreement reached was to partition Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states as according to the Zionist agenda. Thus the Edomite nation of ‘Israel’ was proclaimed on May 14, 1948. The very next day, the Arab countries surrounding Israel declared war on the new nation. Israel has been in an almost permanent state of internal conflict ever since. Conflict between Jews, who identify as Israeli and Arabs, who identify as Palestinian, broke out again in the years 1956, 1967, 1987, 2000, 2008, 2014 and 2022 till present. Esau certainly ‘lives by the sword.’ 

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991:

‘The only way the Jews got possession of Palestine was by using other people to steal it form the Turks and Arabs for them. The so-called “Israeli” state is nothing but a parasitic state, since it is occupied by parasites. The Jews get billions of dollars from Germany as “reparations” and “restitution payments” for its alleged “war crimes” against Jews. They get billions more every year from the United States. It has to steal or buy technology from Western nations as the Jews have not the creativity to develop their own. The Jewish state of Israel would collapse in a minute without the continued support, protection and assistance from Jacob-Israel… It is not, never has been, and never will be a self-sustaining nation.’

One of the singularly biggest cover ups in world history has been perpetrated; with the deliberate mistaken identity of the new inhabitants, foisted on the world so indelibly that most, when presented with this revelatory information, cannot shift the cleverly placed paradigm in their minds. The irony too, is that those of a religious persuasion, who are supposed to discern the truth, are those who are the most deceived; simultaneously being the biggest supporters of the erroneous concept, that the Jewish state is the tribe of Judah, finally home. Rather, it is Esau who has deceptively snatched an inheritance that is not his to take. How bizarre, that the role reversal Esau is enacting, is what his brother Jacob who he hates, did to him. 

The Jewish Almanac, 1980:

‘Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a Jew or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or Hebrew.’

The Thirteenth Tribe, Arthur Koestler, 1976: 

‘The story of the Khazar Empire, as it slowly emerges from the past, begins to look like the most cruel hoax that history has ever perpetrated.’

The Jewish Encylopedia, 1925, Volume 5, Page 41: 

‘Edom is modern Jewry. The Jews are of Esau from Idumea, and therefore not of Israel or Judah…’

Harold Rosenthal:

‘Most Jews wont admit it, but our God is Lucifer, and we are his chosen. So when we say we are chosen of God we aren’t lying to the Goy [non-Jews]… We just aren’t telling them who chose us.’

Israel is a land of immigrants, with a population of 9,521,546 people; of which about seventy-four percent (~seven million) are Jewish and twenty-one percent Arab. Most are Ashkenazi Jews, who migrated from Eastern Europe (a blend of Ashkenazi Jew from Germany and the Khazars); Sephardic Jews who have migrated from the Iberian Peninsula; and Bukharan Jews, migrants from Central Asia. 

The nation’s Law of Return grants full Israeli citizenship to all Jewish people. More than one hundred thousand Jews from sub-Saharan Africa for instance, have immigrated to Israel since 1980. 

In keeping with living by the sword and the Spartan mindset, most Israelis are drafted into the military at the age of eighteen. Men serve two years and eight months and women two years. Following mandatory service, Israeli men join the reserve forces and usually do several weeks of reserve duty every year until they are in their forties. Most women are exempt from reserve duty. 

The nation’s military relies heavily on high-tech weapons systems and is widely believed to possess chemical and biological weapons. Israel has not signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, maintaining a policy of deliberate ambiguity. The Israeli Navy’s Dolphin submarines are reported to be armed with nuclear Popeye Turbo missiles – Article: Nuclear Nefariousness.

‘Since the Gulf War in 1991, when Israel was attacked by Iraqi Scud missiles, all homes in Israel are required to have a reinforced security room… impermeable to chemical and biological substances.’ In 2016, Israel ranked 6th in the world for defence spending as a percentage of GDP, with 5.7% and 15th in total military expenditure, with $18 billion. Since 1974, the United States has been a particularly notable contributor of military aid to Israel. ‘The United States is expected to provide the country with $3.8 billion per year, or around 20% of Israel’s defence budget, from 2018 to 2028. Israel ranked 5th globally for arms exports in 2017.’

Jerusalem at night – the Dome of the Rock and the Wailing Wall

In 2025, the world’s Jewish population is estimated at 15.8 million.

Approximate Jewish populations outside of Israel include: 

United States: 6,000,000

France: 446,000

West Bank: 418,900

Canada: 393,000

United Kingdom: 292,000

Argentina: 175,000

Russia: 150,000

Germany: 118,000

Australia: 118,000

Brazil: 92,600

South Africa: 67,500

Netherlands: 29,800

New Zealand: 7,500

Ireland: 2,600

City of Jerusalem Flag

Israel is the 27th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $583 billion in 2025.

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

  1. Electrical machinery, equipment: US$8.2 billion 
  2. Gems, precious metals: $6 billion 
  3. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $5.7 billion 
  4. Machinery including computers: $4.4 billion 
  5. Organic chemicals: $4.1 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $2.7 billion 
  7. Other chemical goods: $2.5 billion 
  8. Aircraft, spacecraft: $2.2 billion 
  9. Pharmaceuticals: $1.7 billion 
  10. Arms, ammunition: $1.2 billion 

Arms including ammunition was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 67.9% from 2019 to 2020.’

The discussion on who is a Jew, or what criteria constitutes being Jewish, is complex, multi-issued and thorny. It also highlights Esau’s fundamentally contrasting mental and physical characteristic differences with Jacob. 

Identity of True Israel, Willie Martin – emphasis & bold mine:

‘By the time Christ came, there were now at least two different types of people in the land of Israel who were called “Jews.” Some were Israelites of the tribes of Judah, Levi or Benjamin… collectively, “Judahites…” Others called “Jews”… were Edomites who also lived in the land of Judea, and who had adopted the religion of Judaism. 

King Herod was of… Edomite blood, and thus it is not surprising that he would kill a large number of baby Israelite boys in attempting to kill the Christ child. Therefore, when Christ came preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom to “the Jews,” it is understandable why some “Jews” believed on him and others believed not and tried to kill Him. 

After the death, burial and resurrection of the Saviour, the apostles began preaching the good news first to the Judahite Israelites in Jerusalem and Judea, Samaria and Galilee. Those who were truly Israelites responded to the news by becoming Christians. Those who had become “Jews” by religion (Edomites and others) clung to Judaism (Tradition of the Elders, which later became known as Judaism).

This religion of Judaism was not the true Mosaic/Hebrew religion, but was a perverted form of it which [Christ] denounced as “the traditions of men.” Paul, who was “a Pharisee of Pharisees,” (an expert in Babylonian Judaism), was a True Israelite (of the tribe of Benjamin), and thus converted to Christianity.’

Or did he? Refer article: The Pauline Paradox.

Martin: ‘But the “false Jews” refused to believe in Christ. 

The spurious Noachide Laws are a Jewish fable. They are not found in the Christian Bible. Instead, the Word warns us against such: “… Wherefore rebuke them sharply… Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” – Titus 1:13-14. Such are the Noachide laws. Its followers and promoters uniformly reject the deity of Christ…’

We may well hear a lot more about the Noachide Laws in the future. The Noachide Laws are seven laws considered by rabbinic tradition as the minimal moral duties required by the ‘Bible’ – in the antediluvian age – on all men. 

Though partially based on biblical precepts, exclusion of some of the ten commandments and the insidious inclusion of law number seven, paves the way for the controlling of humanity and its justification could be a foundational premise for continued worldwide changes – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

The seven Noachide laws, as traditionally enumerated are:

1. Do Not Deny God

2. Do Not Blaspheme God

3. Do Not Murder

4. Do Not Engage in Incestuous, Adulterous or Homosexual Relationships

5. Do Not Steal

6. Do Not Eat of a Live Animal

7. Establish Courts/Legal System to Ensure Law Obedience [of the first six laws]

In comparison and contrast, the Ten Commandments of the Old Testament (Exodus 20:2-17; Deuteronomy 5:6-21): 

1. You shall have no other gods before Me

2. You shall not make for yourself any idol as an object to worship

3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain

4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy

5. Honor your father and your mother

6. You shall not commit murder 

7. You shall not commit adultery

8. You shall not steal 

9. You shall not testify falsely

10. You shall not covet 

The commandments italicised, are ones conveniently not included in the Noachide Laws. Though some would argue that the Noachide Laws came first…

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, page 74 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘But here again we must be careful to define what we mean by the modern Jewish type. The Jewish race is by no means a pure one. It has admitted proselytes from various nations, and at different periods in its career has intermarried with other races… and it is only by the aid of intermarriage that we can explain the contrast in type between the two great divisions of European Jews the Sephardim of Spain and Italy and the Ashkenazim of Germany, Poland, and Russia. Indeed we know that few of the leading Spanish families have not a certain admixture of Jewish blood in their veins, which implies a corresponding admixture on the other side.’

Blue Blood, True Blood, Conflict and Creation, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There are in fact, many different physical types of Jews, covering many racial characteristics. This supports the fact that they are not a homogeneous group, but a religious group that spans many cultures. The vast majority of European/American Jews can trace their genetic lineage to the Khazars… who all converted to Judaism in the 800s to circumvent the Catholic rule of the Holy Roman Empire. In the year 2000, the University of Pavia in Italy did a genetic study of European men. They found that 80% of them had a direct lineage to Central Asia and the other 20% to the Middle East. This supports the statement that the Sumerians entered into Central Asia and then migrated to Europe and the Middle East. This also nullifies the theory of Africa as the birthplace of mankind. There is absolutely no genetic connection from Asia or Europe to Africa. The ancient Hebrews [if exclusively applied to the Israelites] have nothing to do with modern Jews [but they do if the term includes Abraham’s descendants].’

It is not so much that Jews are a religious group encompassing many ethnicities, though this is partially true, but rather the Jews have intermarried with many ethnicities to produce a very mixed gene pool. Esau was the first to marry three out of four wives who were a different lineage from his family; the exception being Basemath from his cousins in Ishmael’s family. The Edomites have continued to mix freely since. In 1900, only two percent of married Jews worldwide were wed to non-Jews or gentiles; whereas by 1975 the figure was twenty-five percent. In 2004 it had climbed to fifty percent of marrying Jews intermarrying with non-Jews, with non-Orthodox Jews in the United States the intermarriage rate was seventy percent in 2013.  

Rabbi A H Fink: ‘The Jews do not claim to represent the twelve tribes…’ But they do incorrectly claim to be the tribe of Judah. Dr. J.H. Hertz, Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, said in 1918: ‘The people known as Jews are the descendants of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with a certain number of the tribe of Levi. So far as is known, there is not any further admixture of other tribes. The Ten Tribes have been absorbed among the nations of the world. The Jews look forward to the gathering of all the tribes at some future date.’

The rabbi was incorrect on the identity of the Jews; wrong on no admixture; and he was in error regarding the location of the other sons of Jacob. They have not been absorbed amongst other nations but have their own territories today and the biggest misnomer is the so-called future regathering of Judah with the other tribes. The reality is that they re-combined centuries ago and are in fact ironically, now in the process of systematically separating. 

Whatever category is used to define a Jew, there is debate on its accuracy. Is a Jew, someone who practices Judaism? The religion or oral tenets of Judaism are not that of Jacob’s son Judah, based on the Old Testament, but rather the Talmud of the Edomites. Judaism isn’t actually Judah-ism. 

Is a Jew, someone with a Jewish mother? In scripture, genealogies are patrimonial and not reckoned from the mother, whose name is usually excluded. Genetic studies have produced mixed results due to the volume of intermarriage by the Jews and some results may seem surprising. It would be expected that the Edomite Haplogroups may not appear uniform, though we will look for patterns and clues later. 

The term anti-semite is highly misleading, as semite in modern parlance, is a language group not a racial group. Some three hundred and forty million people speak Semitic languages. Which includes an approximate three hundred million people who speak Arabic; twenty-two million, Amharic in Ethiopia; seven million, Tigrinya in the Horn of Africa; and ten million who speak Hebrew; not including Yiddish, which is a Germanic/Slavic language, not Semitic.

By strict definition then, anti-Semitic opposes Arabs; Ethiopians; and those Jews who are Hebrew speakers. Inaccurately, unfairly and persecutory, the term is used with racial implications. Dr Benjamin Freedman in Facts Are Facts, 1954, said the term anti-Semitism doesn’t apply to Jews in the sense it is most commonly used and that it ‘should be eliminated from the English language.’ A further point to be aware of is that the term Semitic does not necessarily apply to those that descend from Shem. The semitic speaking Arabs and Ethiopians are not descended from Shem. Thus the use of Shem and semitic together is not to be trusted in most cases.

The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses, Eran Elhaik, 2012 – emphasis mine:

‘The question of Jewish ancestry has been the subject of controversy for over two centuries and has yet to be resolved. The “Rhineland hypothesis” depicts Eastern European Jews as a “population isolate” that emerged from a small group of German Jews who migrated eastward and expanded rapidly. Alternatively, the “Khazarian hypothesis” suggests that Eastern European Jews descended from the Khazars, an amalgam of Turkic clans that settled the Caucasus in the early centuries CE and converted to Judaism in the 8th century.

The “Rhineland hypothesis” envisions modern European Jews to be the descendents of the Judeans – an assortment of Israelite-Canaanite tribes of Semitic origin. It proposes two mass migratory waves: the first occurred over the 200 years following the Muslim conquest of Palestine (638 CE) and consisted of devoted Judeans who left Muslim Palestine for Europe. Whether these migrants joined the existing Judaized Greco-Roman communities is unclear, as is the extent of their contribution to the Southern European gene pool. The second wave occurred at the beginning of the 15th century by a group of 50,000 German Jews who migrated eastward and ushered an apparent hyper-baby-boom era for half a millennium. The Rhineland hypothesis predicts a Middle Eastern ancestry to European Jews and high genetic similarity among European Jews.

The competing “Khazarian hypothesis” considers Eastern European Jews to be the descendants of Khazars.’

This would only be true in part. Yes, due to admixture a certain proportion of the Ashkenazim would be descendants of the Khazars; but clearly not all. The Khazarian hypothesis doesn’t need to be a rival theory to the Rhineland hypothesis. Each are correct by degree and the reality is that the Rhineland Hypothesis holds more weight as a. being the first chronologically and b. the Khazarian hypothesis frankly by any proportion (or time frame), is a subset of the Rhineland hypothesis.

Elhaik: ‘The Khazars were a confederation of Slavic, Scythian, Hunnic–Bulgar, Iranian, Alans, and Turkish tribes who formed in the central-northern Caucasus one of most powerful empires during the late Iron Age and converted to Judaism in the 8th century CE. Genetic studies attempting to infer the ancestry of European Jews yielded inconsistent results. Some studies pointed to the genetic similarity between European Jews and Caucasus populations like Adygei, whereas some pointed to the similarity to Middle Eastern populations such as Palestinians and others pointed to the similarity to Southern European populations like Italians [remember this point].’

‘European Jews are expected to cluster with native Middle Eastern [older origin] or Caucasus [later migration] populations according to the Rhineland or Khazarian hypotheses, respectively. The results of all PC analyses show that over 70% of European Jews and almost all Eastern European Jews cluster with Georgian, Armenian, and Azerbaijani Jews within the Caucasus rim [it would be surprising if they did not]. Strong evidence for the Khazarian hypothesis is the clustering of European Jews with the populations that reside on opposite ends of ancient Khazaria: Armenians, Georgians, and Azerbaijani Jews.’

This only proves the validity of the Khazarian hypothesis as a component of the equation and not the whole answer.

Elhaik: ‘Central and Eastern European Jews differ mostly in their Middle Eastern (30% and 25%, respectively) and Eastern European ancestries (3% and 12%, respectively), probably due to late admixture [agree]. We emphasize that these hypotheses are not exclusive and that some European Jews may have other ancestries. We show that the Khazarian hypothesis offers a comprehensive[?] explanation for the results [disagree], including the reported Southern European and Middle Eastern ancestries. 

By contrast, the Rhineland hypothesis could not explain the large Caucasus component in European Jews [why does it need to?], which is rare in non-Caucasus populations. A major difficulty with the Rhineland hypothesis, in addition to the lack of historical and anthropological evidence to the multimigration waves from Palestine to Europe is to explain the vast population expansion of Eastern European Jews from fifty thousand (15th century) to eight million (20th century).’

This data does not disprove a lineage from Esau. It does highlight the heavy admixture of Khazar tribes with the Ashkenazi Jews from Germany (and France). It confirms the lesser numbers of the Ashkenazi Jews in comparison to the Khazars (hence the population expansion) and explains why their culture dominated as they were the true Jew so-to-speak. Whereas the Khazar was a religious and cultural convert to Judaism rather than a genetic continuation. Further clarification is provided by Joanna Gillan.

Where are Ashkenazi Jews from? Their Origins May Surprise You, Joanna Gillan, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘… the origins of the matrilineal line for the Ashkenazi Jews comes from Europe. This goes against the common belief that Jewish people first arrived in central Europe after the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602-628 and only began settling in Germany in the Medieval period. One of the things they are recognized for is the use of Yiddish – a High German language written in the Hebrew alphabet and influenced by classical Hebrew and Aramaic.

Ashkenazi Jews were declared a clear, homogeneous genetic subgroup following a 2006 study. Ashkenazi Jews come from the same genetic group, no matter if their ancestors were from Poland, Russia, Hungary, Lithuania, or another place with a large historical Jewish population. They are all in the same ethnic group… they didn’t reproduce at a noticeable level with others outside their group (not even with other Jewish people). Researchers have shown Ashkenazi Jews were a reproductively isolated population in Europe for about 1000 years.

Previous studies have found that 50-80% of the Ashkenazim DNA from the paternal lineage originated in the Near East… [and] the 2013 study showed 80% of Ashkenazi Jews’ maternal line comes from Europe… “This suggests that, even though Jewish men may indeed have migrated into Europe from Palestine around 2000 years ago, they seem to have married European women” [much like Esau and his ethnically different wives]. That helps explain why the Ashkenazim can trace their female lineage to southern and western Europe. In conclusion, Richards said, “The origins of the Ashkenazim is one of the big questions that people have pursued again and again and never really come to a conclusive view.”

Khazaria, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Advanced genetic testing, including Y-DNA and mtDNA haplotyping, of modern Jewish communities around the world, has helped to determine… the degrees of separation between the groups. Important studies archived here include the University College London study of 2002, Ariella Oppenheim’s study of 2001, Ariella Oppenheim’s study of 2000, Michael Hammer’s study of 2000, Doron Behar’s study of 2008, Steven Bray’s study of 2010, and others.

Key findings: The main ethnic element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews), Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and most other modern Jewish populations of the world is [the]…  Y-DNA haplogroups J and E.’

This writer would contend that the principal paternal Haplogroup is in fact R1b. Meaning Haplogroups J2, J1 and E1b1b are evidence of males added to the Jewish melting pot through admixture. When we investigate Esau’s twin brother Jacob, it will be shown that the principle Y-DNA Haplogroup for his descendants is also R1b.

Brook: ‘Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples from the northern Mediterranean region (including Italians and French) and even less from Slavs. 

We know most of the European ancestry came from women who married into the community since the Ashkenazic haplogroups of European origin are usually mtDNA rather than Y-DNA.

Unexpectedly, most Askenazim have a tiny fraction of East Asian ancestry.* Their typically East Asian mtDNA haplogroups include M33c2 and N9a3. The characteristically East Asian hair thickness allele 1540C for the EDAR gene is carried by about 1.7% of Ashkenazim. Dutch Jews from the Netherlands also descend from northwestern Europeans.

About half of Ashkenazic Levites possess haplotypes belonging to the R1a1 haplogroup. This is almost never found among Sephardic Levites, and is rare in non-Ashkenazic populations as a whole, but the phylogeny of the branching out of R1a1 shows the Ashkenazic variety of R1a1^ to be distinct [yet still resulting from admixture] from both the Eastern European and Central Asian forms of R1a1… [showing that] Khazars who converted to Judaism introduced this lineage into Ashkenazim. The [original] source of Ashkenazic R1a1 was a population [from] Iran.’*

This last point is significant as while the biggest percentage of Iranian men possess Haplogroup J2 (from admixture), it is in fact R1a which is the defining marker Haplogroup for the male descendants of Lud – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

In contrast, the biggest percentage of Turkish men while also possessing J2 (from admixture), it is Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b that is the defining marker Haplogroup for the male descendants of Elam – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Brook: ‘Nicolas D Kristoff, Is Race Real? 2003: Among Jews, there are common genetic markers, including some found in about half the Jewish men named Cohen. But this isn’t exactly a Jewish gene: The same marker is also found in Arabs.”

The true Levites today – and any Levitical priestly line attached to them – lays with Jacob’s descendants. It cannot be denied that any association between Jewish men named Cohen and a priestly line may be legitimate; though its source would be with the Idumean scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees and not with Jacob’s son Levi or his descendant Aaron and his sons – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Brook: ‘Catastrophe: An Investigation Into the Origins of the Modern World, David Keys, 2000, page 99-100. Keys summarises Origins of Old Testament Priests, M. G. Thomas, Karl L. Skorecki, H. Ben-Ami, Tudor Parfitt, Neil Bradman, D. B. Goldstein, 1998, page 138-140:

“DNA tests on Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews have revealed the possibility that at least one key section of the latter community may have genetic evidence of a potentially large-scale or even mass conversion which must have taken place sometime after around A.D. 700…. the only known mass conversion within that time frame and in that geographical area was that of the Khazars in the eighth century. Significantly, the section of the Ashkenazi community whose DNA may suggest a partially convert origin is that section which up till now had traditionally been said to be wholly descended from the Assistant Priests of ancient Israel [Edom]… 

By analyzing Y chromosomes from a sample of both [‘Levite’ and ‘non-Levite’] populations in both Sephardic and Ashkenazi communities, geneticists have discovered that an astounding 30 percent of Ashkenazi non-Cohenic Levites have a particular combination of DNA material on part of their Y-chromosome that is not shared to any extent by either non-Levite Ashkenazi Jews or the Sephardic community as a whole. 

This genetic marker does not even show up among the Cohens (descendants of the ancient Israelite Chief Priests) – but only among the descendants of Assistant Priests, and then only within Ashkenazi (northern European) Jewry. What seems to have happened is not only a potentially large-scale conversion of non-Jewish people, almost certainly Khazars, to Judaism, but also the adoption of Levite (Assistant Priest) status by a substantial number of the Khazar converts… 

A tenth-century letter of recommendation from the Jewish community of Kiev to Jewish communities outside Khazaria was signed by Jews with traditional Turkic names whose almost certainly Turkic Khazar ancestors had adopted second names… indicating that they saw themselves as descendants or close associates of the ancient tribe of Levi… Adoption of Cohenic or ordinary Levitical status by converts was and is expressly forbidden by rabbinical law, so the Khazars had to develop a mythic national history that gave them the right to Levitical status.** 

They claimed that they were the descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel and were not converts at all but merely returnees to Judaism. Furthermore, the tribe they claimed ancestry from was that of Simeon, the brother of the founder of the tribe of Levi… Probably it was the old pre-Jewish Khazar priests – the qams – who at the conversion had become Levites en masse…” – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘The God Gene: How faith is Hardwired into our Genes, Dean Hamer, 2004, page 191-192: 

“A recent study by Skorecki and colleagues uncovered a subgroup of Ashkenazic Levites who have a Y-chromosome pattern that is not seen in other priests, or indeed any major Jewish group, but is common in people around the mouth of the Volga River. A little sleuthing revealed the historical connection… Sometime in the eighth century, [Khazars] decided to convert from paganism to monotheism. Most of the common people became either Christian or Muslim, but the royal family and many members of the nobility opted for Judaism. They continued to rule the region for nearly five hundred years as a Jewish state. The DNA evidence shows that many of the Khazar converts declared themselves to be not only Jews but of the priestly caste.** Thus the infusion of new genetic lines.”

The terms Cohen, Cohanim, Levite and Levitical are misleading as they only apply to the Ashkenazi or Khazar priesthood; not to the original priesthood descending from Jacob’s son Levi. We will learn that the tribe of Simeon are in no way related to the Khazars who are not just of intermixed Turkic-Iranian origin – but of an older admixture again with west Asian, Middle eastern and North African origins as shown by their principal Y-DNA Haplogroups of J2, J1 and E1b1b respectively. The East Asian ancestry is linked to Madai* and Madai’s association with Elam – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey

‘The Origins of Ashkenazic Levites: Many Ashkenazic Levites Probably Have a Paternal Descent from East Europeans or West Asians, Neil Bradman, Dror Rosengarten, and Karl L. Skorecki, 2002: 

“…Levite haplotype distributions were compared with… candidate source populations (north Germans and two groups of Slavonic language speakers). The Ashkenazic Levites were most similar to the Sorbians, the most westerly Slavonic speaking group… Comparisons of the Ashkenazic Levite dataset with the other groups studied suggest that Y chromosome haplotypes, present at high frequency in Ashkenazic Levites, are most likely to have an east European or west Asian origin and not to have originated in the Middle East.”

Subsequently, as I learned in 2011, it was discovered that the Ashkenazi Levite version of R1a1a^ is distinguishable from the R1a1a [M17] of European non-Jews. The Ashkenazi version is coded as L342.2+ and R1a1a1g1 and it descends from Z93, whereas the European non-Jewish R1a1a descends from Z283.’

‘(One of our sources for this information is Łukasz Łapiński who is the administrator of the R1a1a and Subclades Y-DNA Project at Family Tree DNA.) The implication is that Levites did not get this haplotype from a Slavic forebear, which was one of the possibilities. Z93 is found among peoples of Central Asia*, South Asia, and Southwest Asia including Persians, Arabs, Indians, and Tatars.’

Y Chromosomes of Jewish Priests, Michael F. Hammer, Karl L. Skorecki, Sara Selig, Shraga Blazer, Bruce Rappaport, Robert Bradman, Neil Bradman, P. J. Warburton, Monica Ismajlowicz, 1997: 

“Based on surveys of Jewish cemetery gravestones, priests represent approximately 5% of the estimated total male world Jewish population of roughly 7 million… We identified six haplotypes, whose frequencies are shown in the table (YAP+ DYS19A-E and YAP+ DYS19, all alleles.) Applying the x2 test to the frequencies of the T-chromosome haplotypes distinguishes priests from the lay population. The most striking difference was in the frequency of YAP+ chromosomes among compares to lay Jews. Only 1.5% of Y-chromosomes among priests were YAP+, in comparison to a frequency of 18.4% in lay Jews. In contrast, we found no significant difference in the distribution of alleles for the non-Y-chromosomes locus polymorphism D1S191. 

These Y-chromosome haplotype differences confirm a distinct paternal genealogy for Jewish priests… This result is consistent with an origin for the Jewish priesthood antedating the division of world Jewry into Ashkenazi and Sephardic communities, and is of particular interest in view of the pronounced genetic diversity displayed between the two [Sephardim and Ashkenazim] communities.”

‘Regarding the “Cohen gene”: David Goldstein, an evolutionary geneticist at Oxford University, said: “It was incredibly exciting to find something that could be tracing paternally-inherited traits over 40 to 50 generations, three or four thousand years of history [to the birth of Esau].”

‘Only about half, or less (40-45%), of Ashkenazi Jewish Cohens have the so-called “Kohen gene”. A somewhat greater percentage of Sephardic Cohens have the gene. But it doesn’t approach 100 percent. Tell that to the staff of Karl Skorecki’s institution, Technion University, who claim… “Professor Karl Skorecki discovered genetic proof that all Jews belonging to the Cohen family are descendents of the biblical high priest Aaron Hacohen” (Dr. Skorecki himself does not approve of the university’s use of the word “all” and has asked them to fix their description of his research).’

Brook: ‘Daniel Friedman observes: “Ashkenazi and Sephardic Cohanim (left two columns in the chart [above]) show significant differences in the occurrence frequencies of the haplotypes said to make up the ‘Cohen gene’. [‘Israelite’] populations from both populations (right two columns) do not show the same differences. If the ‘Cohen gene’ comes from a single Biblical ancestor, the Cohanim seem to have had different genetic histories since the split between Sepharad and Ashkenaz.”

The Cohen gene is not from the true tribe of Levi, but a counterfeit priestly line from Esau. The differences in genetic history between the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish lines can be accounted for by the the fact that the Sephardim are closer to the true Edomite genealogy than the Ashkenazim. By closer, it is meant less diluted through admixture. We will discover that the R1b Haplogroup percentage for each group scientifically supports this fact. Maybe not what the Ashkenazi Jew would want to learn, but it is the simple explanation for the difference between themselves and the Sephardic Jew. 

The apparent confusion regarding Jewish DNA is an important factor; for under its cloak it has been easy for scientists to say what Dr Robert Pollack, a professor of biological sciences and director of the Center for the Study of Science and Religion at Columbia University writes in his article, The Fallacy of Biological Judaism:

… there are no DNA sequences common to all Jews and absent from all non-Jews. There is nothing in the human genome that makes or diagnoses a person as a Jew.’ 

We will study the Haplogroups and autosomal DNA of the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew. The Haplogroups of the Ashkenazi, are all over the place, as would be expected. The Sephardic Jew has more instantly recognisable sequential patterns. The challenge is to see those which are less obvious within the Ashkenazi and then link the two to the peoples they are most related to, such as either Jacob, Ishmael, Haran or Nahor. 

Nineteen years ago an enquiring person asked the following insightful questions online – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine. This writer would be intrigued to learn if they received a (helpful) response.

‘I’ve heard of Sephardi Jews being described as “fiery,” “active,” “angry,” and even “militant” when compared to their “cooler,” more saturnine Ashkenazi counterparts. Does anyone know of any research that could verify my hypothesis that red hair is MUCH more common amongst Sephardic Jews than among the Askenazim (who often have black and/or very dark brown hair). This often applies to men’s beards too, such as the person may not be a FULL redhead but still has some trace elements of red in their hair and/or beard. These same people also often seem [to] have lighter colored eyes than Ashkenazi Jews (whose eyes are often brown or darker in color, like their hair). Has anyone else noticed this red-headed/lighter-eyed “trend” amongst the Sephardic population? Thanks for any info that you can provide! – 07:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC).’

The questions are spot on, for they reflect the purer, for the want of a better word, genetic lineage of the Sephardic Jew back to their red progenitor, Esau. As we have discussed, red is also found in the Ashkenazi Jew though in lesser percentages due to the admixture with the Turkic-Iranian Khazars. The Sephardic Jew historically is associated with the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal); with Italy; and some spill over into the Netherlands; and England. They and the original Ashkenazi Jews in Germany and France would have had a similar heritage, just a different geography. The fact that the Jews were located in the nations descended from Moab (and Ammon), Midian, Ishmael and Jacob – apart from Aram – who are all closely related family nations, makes sense. 

The complicated relationship dynamic between Germany and the Jews of recent times is all the more fascinating considering they are descended from Ishmael and Edom respectively. So too has been the complex relationship between the Jews, the United Kingdom and the United States as we will discover.

An enlightening piece regarding the Sephardic Jew. Discovering and Documenting England’s Lost Jews – emphasis mine:

‘Sephardim, also known as Sephardi Jews, are Jews with a Spanish or Portuguese heritage who were expelled or fled from the Iberian Peninsula from the end of the 15th century. A Sephardic diaspora followed. They found refuge across the Mediterranean basin, including the Ottoman Empire where they lived for centuries in the countries we now know as Morocco, Algeria, Italy, Turkey, Greece, Serbia, Bosnia and Bulgaria. Sephardim also settled, in the Netherlands, England and in the Americas [North America and South America]. We can see now that the dispersed communities arrived in their new countries with a Judeo-Iberian culture. In some cases, this was lost; in others, strong traces remain.

Jews from Normandy arrived in England with William the Conqueror, the Duke of Normandy, in 1066. They were transported to serve the monarch and his nobles as moneylenders. Medieval Christian England never treated Jews as equals. From 1217, King Henry III ordered Jews to wear a badge and, in 1275, King Edward ordered them to wear a yellow patch which the Nazis later emulated. Medieval archives and drawings reveal murders and atrocities against Jews. Geoffrey Chaucer, celebrated as the father of English Literature, propagated a blood libel in The Prioress’s Tale. When the Jews became destitute, and were no longer useful to royalty, King Edward expelled them in 1290. They were forced to leave on pain of death. Many were murdered as they approached the boats that were to take them to the continent. Officially there was no Jewish population in England between 1290 and 1656.

However, a small number of Sephardi Crypto-Jews, outwardly perceived as Christians while secretly continuing their Jewish faith, did settle in London and Bristol from the late 15th century. They were fleeing the horrors of the Catholic Inquisition in Spain and Portugal. After the execution of King Charles I, when Oliver Cromwell was Lord Protectorate of England, Jews were considered more favourably.

Cromwell, and some of his fellow Puritans, were expecting the world to end in 1666. Apocalypse-fever infected many religious sects during his regime. The Book of [Revelation] promised the Second Coming of Jesus under certain conditions. One was the return of the Jews to the four corners of the earth. With this in mind, Cromwell supported the idea of Jews being allowed to enter England and settle. He was petitioned by the Dutch Rabbi Menasseh ben Israel, and as a result, Cromwell approached The Whitehall Conference in 1656. He asked parliamentarians to overturn the monarchy’s expulsion of the Jews. Parliament refused. Despite this interdiction, Jews returned secretly and were allowed to practise their religion discreetly. The first small synagogue was opened, and in 1657, a burial ground was inaugurated. This is known as the Velho cemetery in Mile End. The importance of the burial ground encouraged settlement and Jews trickled back on to English soil. Bevis Marks was built as the first synagogue in 1701.

Ladino, also known as Judeo-Spanish, is a language derived from Castilian Spanish and enriched, over the centuries, by influences from other languages including Hebrew. Although its use sharply declined during the 20th century, Ladino is still spoken by Sephardi communities in more than thirty countries around the world. It is recognized as a minority language in Bosnia and Herzegovina, France, Turkey, and Israel.’

The significance of Jews returning to England is profound in two key points; both of which will become apparent as we progress into the next chapter. Another article explains further regarding the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. 

Judaism 101 – emphasis theirs:

‘Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jews represent two distinct subcultures of Judaism… [sharing] the same basic beliefs, but there are some variations in culture and practice. It’s not clear when the split began, but it has existed for more than a thousand years, because around the year 1000 CE Rabbi Gershom ben Judah issued an edict against polygamy that was accepted by Ashkenazim but not by Sephardim.’

There are differences in culture, language, genetics, and nuances of ritual observance, between the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews; though the commonalities between the two groups are much stronger than what divides them. A Sephardi from Morocco and an Ashkenazi from Moscow would immediately find common ground in a prayer service that is ninety-five percent identical; in mitzvah observance and the Hebrew language.

‘Ashkenazic Jews are the Jews of [originally] France, Germany, and [later] Eastern Europe and their descendants. The adjective “Ashkenazic” and corresponding nouns, Ashkenazi (singular) and Ashkenazim (plural) are derived from the Hebrew word “Ashkenaz,” which is used to refer to Germany. Most American Jews today are Ashkenazim, descended from Jews who emigrated from Germany and Eastern Europe from the mid 1800s to the early 1900s.’

It is not clear when Jews from Italy – who had originated in Judea and before that, Idumea – began populating the Rhine Valley. Beginning about the tenth Century though, the Jewish communities straddling France and southern Germany rose to prominence as a learned and vital centre of Jewish life.

‘Sephardic Jews are the Jews of Spain, Portugal, North Africa and the Middle East and their descendants. The adjective “Sephardic” and corresponding nouns Sephardi (singular) and Sephardim (plural) are derived from the Hebrew word “Sepharad,” which refers to Spain. Sephardic Jews are often subdivided into Sephardim, from Spain and Portugal, and Mizrachim, from… Northern Africa and the Middle East. The word “Mizrachi” comes from the Hebrew word for Eastern. There is much overlap between the Sephardim and Mizrachim. Until the 1400s, the Iberian Peninsula, North Africa and the Middle East were all controlled by Muslims, who generally allowed Jews to move freely throughout the region. It was under this relatively benevolent rule that Sephardic Judaism developed. When the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492, many of them were absorbed into existing Mizrachi communities in Northern Africa and the Middle East.’

The earliest recorded Jewish settlements in Spain date to the third century. Having grown in prominence under Muslim rule, they were arguably the most illustrious Jewish community in the world. Sepharad produced Torah scholars, scientists, financiers, and thinkers whose works are still being studied today, including Isaac Abravanel, Nachmanides, Maimonides and others. The Catholic king and queen of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabella expelled all Jews from their lands; nor was this the first time Jews had been expelled from Spain. The Jews who had converted to Catholicism were permitted to stay. 

The remaining Spanish Jews poured into Portugal, only to be expelled from there as well; continuing to North Africa and anywhere else they could find a safe haven. ‘In many places – from Amsterdam, Netherlands to Aleppo, Syria – they became the dominant Jewish culture in their new host communities’, explaining why Jews from lands far from Spain are still known as Sepharadim.

Flag of Israel

‘The Magen David gained popularity as a symbol of Judaism when it was adopted as the emblem of the Zionist movement in 1897, but the symbol continued to be controversial for many years afterward. When the modern state of Israel was founded, there was much debate over whether this symbol should be used on the flag. Today, the Magen David is the universally recognized symbol of Jewry. It appears on the flag of the state of Israel, and the Israeli equivalent of the Red Cross is known as the Red Magen David’ – refer Rothschild, article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

‘Most of the early Jewish settlers of North America were Sephardic. The first Jewish congregation in North America, Shearith Israel, founded in what is now New York in 1684, was Sephardic and is still active. Philadelphia’s first Jewish congregation, Congregation Mikveh Israel, founded in 1740, was also a Sephardic one, and is also still active. Historically, Sephardic Jews have been more integrated into the local non-Jewish culture than Ashkenazic Jews. The Yiddish language, which many people think of as the international language of Judaism, is really the language of Ashkenazic Jews. Sephardic Jews have their own international language: Ladino, which was based on Spanish and Hebrew in the same way that Yiddish was based on German and Hebrew.’

Hasdai ibn Shaprut was the foreign minister to Abd-al-Rahman, the Sultan of Cordova and in a letter to King Joseph of the Chazars, circa 960 CE; he speaks of the tradition according to which the Chazars once dwelt near the Seir Mountains. The Seir Mountains of the original land of Edom, south of the Dead Sea. This could be true, though a later aligning of Khazar roots with that of the Jewish Edomites seems far more likely, for we have already discussed the Ashkenazi migration eastwards from Germany and France and their intermixing with the already ‘Jewish’ Khazars.

The Seir mountains were the home of the Edomites for well over a millennium from when Esau conquered the Horites circa 1760 BCE to 312 BCE when the Nabatheans – Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula – drove Edom out of their ancestral home. The Encyclopedia Judaica Volume 6, page 372 says the Edomites arrived in Edom (or Seir) at the end of the fourteenth and beginning of the thirteenth century BCE. This is too late and upholds the ‘Khazars are Edom’ subterfuge. Why would the Jews be content with this? 

A 2014 article in the Times of Israel states: ‘It is well known that, sometime in the eighth to ninth centuries, the Khazars, a warlike Turkic people, converted to Judaism and ruled over a vast domain in what became southern Russia and Ukraine. What happened to them after the Russians destroyed that empire around the eleventh century has been a mystery. Many have speculated that the Khazars became the ancestors of Ashkenazi Jews… In 2012, Israeli researcher Eran Elhaik published a study [read earlier] claiming to prove that Khazar ancestry is the single largest element in the Ashkenazi gene pool. Israel seems finally to have thrown in the towel. A blue-ribbon team of scholars from leading research institutions and museums has just issued a secret report to the government, acknowledging that European Jews are in fact Khazars.’

The Jewish historian and anti-Zionist Benjamin Freedman argues that the Jews are Khazars and not Israelites: ‘The origin and history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom are certainly incontestable historical facts. These incontestable historic facts also establish beyond any question of doubt the origin and history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe. The origin and history of the Khazars and Khazar kingdom and their relationship to the origin and early history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe was one of history’s best kept secrets until wide publicity was given in recent years to… research on this subject.’ 

The Jews know the game is up in declaring they are Israelites to the smaller community of biblical researchers and academic investigators who are gradually uncovering the truth. To the wider audience of the general public, they are still able to fool with the ‘we are sons of Jacob through Judah, Benjamin and Levi’ rouse. But, in ‘admitting’ that ninety percent of Eastern Ashkenazi Jewry is really Khazar, is propaganda that still conveniently blurs their identity. For people then think the Jews in the main are a Turkic people and the fact that Esau is a twin of Jacob, neatly pushes the identity of both to one side. 

For the Jews not only wish to cloud the issue of their own identity, they do not want the world to understand the real identity of their twin brother and particularly that of true Judah. For as unpalatable as it may be for a great number of people, once Judah’s identity is understood, even for those descended from the mighty nations of Joseph; it is Judah, the most mentioned people in the scriptures – and from whose perspective the entire Bible is written – that the Creator reveals is His beloved chosen people.

Psalm 78:67-68

Common English Bible

‘God rejected the tent of Joseph and didn’t choose the tribe of Ephraim. Instead, he chose the tribe of Judah, the mountain of Zion, which he loves.’

Genetic testing performed on Jews around the world continues to show not only that Jews really are a unique ethnicity, they also are historically a mingled and mixed people. ‘Researchers in New York and Tel Aviv conducted a genome-wide analysis on 237 individuals from seven well-established Jewish communities around the world… each group of Jews is genetically distinct, but similarities between the groups weave them together with what the researchers describe as “genetic thread.” ‘There has been this back and forth discussion over the course of a century or more – are these a people? Is this in the genome?’ says Harry Ostrer, a geneticist at New York University. The findings he says, show that there ‘does seem to be a genetic basis to Jewishness.’ 

The Genetics Of The Jews by A E Mourant, 1978, found that of all Jews tested, between five and ten percent possessed admixture of Black African blood. The result of having lived in close proximity to Arabs and Africans in the Middle East and North Africa. As mentioned, genealogies recorded in the Bible show a patrilineal lineage, whereas Jews trace their ancestry through matrilineal descent. ‘By Jewish law, it is necessary for a Jew to have only a Jewish mother to be considered a Jew. The father can be of any race, but just as long as the mother is racially jewish, the child “qualifies” as a Jew. This law tacitly implies that racial mixing can and does occur without losing Jewish identity.’ Obtaining citizenship to Israel, is entirely dependent on proving that one is genetically a Jew and it has nothing to do with religion, but rather DNA. 

Additional evidence showing that Jews are a distinct race rather than ‘people of the Jewish religion’, is the large body of data documenting rare genetic diseases peculiar to Jews. Jews have a higher propensity for mental illness in comparison to other white people. Israeli and American scientists discovered a gene among Ashkenazi Jews which increases their chances of developing the mental conditions, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and manic depression. A study published in Nature Communications said the gene in question, raises Ashkenazi Jews chances of experiencing the disorders by roughly 40%, compared to 15% in the general population. 

The reason for choosing Ashkenazi Jews as the subject for the study, was influenced by the fact that Ashkenazi Jews are considered to be a particularly homogenous group genetically. The narrow genetic variation among Ashkenazi Jews allowed for easy identification of differences between healthy and affected individuals. 

The most well known genetic disorder among Jews, is Tay-Sachs Disease; which causes ‘idiocy and enfeeblement in children, and is carried by millions of Ashkenazi today. The condition was so common among Jewish immigrants in America at the turn of the twentieth century that it was used as a justifiable excuse to ban further Jewish immigration for fear that this disease would spread to the general population through inter-marriage – which it has.’ 

All About Genetic Diseases That Strike Sephardic Jews, Forward Staff, 2014:

‘The Forward Staff has compiled a guide to the most common heritable “Sephardic Jewish diseases”… These diseases are mostly caused by recessive genetic mutations, meaning that mutations must be present in both copies (alleles) of the gene for the associated condition to be expressed. When both parents carry a given mutation, each child of theirs has a 25% of developing the associated disease. Unlike Ashkenazi Jews, who share ethnic commonalities regardless of country of origin, “Sephardi” is a broad label.’ 

The two most common conditions that afflict the Sephardic Jew, from a rather lengthy list.

Beta Thalassemia which Affects the Mizrahi and Sephardic populations. Estimated Carrier Frequency is 1 in 5 to 1 in 7. Beta thalassemia is a blood disorder that reduces the production of haemoglobin and causes anemia, bone deformities and an enlarged spleen. When serious, it requires blood transfusions to survive, as well as chelation therapy to prevent organ failure from an iron overload.

Cystic Fibrosis which affects all Sephardic and Mizrahi populations. Estimated Carrier Frequency 1 in 26. The body produces abnormally thick, sticky mucus that clogs the lungs, the digestive system and impairs organ function. The average life expectancy today is 37 years. There is no cure, though antibiotics can reduce infection. In serious cases a lung transplant is required.’

There is a ‘revolutionary drug’ called Kaftrio, which can prolong life expectancy. It “is a triple combination treatment combining three drugs which perform different functions – ivacaftor, tezacaftor and elexacaftor – and tackles the underlying causes of the disease, by helping the lungs work effectively.”

Who is Esau-Edom, Charles Weisman, 1991 – emphasis mine: 

‘The conflicting differences that exist between Jews and those of the white race are primarily a result of their genetic differences, or their “nature and constitution.” Jews act and think differently… because there is a difference in their brains. 

According to Dr. Richard Goodman, in a study he made for John Hopkins University… there are 112 hereditary diseases within the Jewish race which originate from causes found within the Jewish brain and central nervous system.’

The central nervous and brain system may have been adversely affected with the introduction of Nephilim descended blood lines right at the beginning of Edom’s history and are not the result necessarily of intermixing with other races, though this cannot be ruled out and an expert medical opinion, would be invaluable.

Weisman: ‘Some of theses diseases include Bloom Syndrome, Familial Dysautonomia, Gaucher’s Disease and Tay-Sachs Disease. These mental and neurological abnormalities have a direct relation on Jewish behavioural patterns which other peoples would find to be obnoxious and alien. These mental diseases no doubt account for some of the common Jewish traits, such as being abrasive, rude, stingy, sexually perverted, aggressive, schizophrenic, and hostile.’

This list is immensely applicable to the very characteristics of the Nephilim. They are self-centered, self-serving and seek evil wholly. It is not a surprise to see these attributes listed for Edom, after Esau chose to marry wives with these genetic abnormalities and traits.

Weisman: ‘Such mental and neurological disorders among Jews has long been known to the science world. Dr. Joseph A Jacobs… The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain… 1886… Dr Alexander Pilez… Wiener Klinische Rundschau… “Cases where acute psychoses lend to idiocy and lunacy are of particular frequency with the Jews.” By contrast, there are no hereditary diseases which exist exclusively within the white race, and the [black] race has only one – Sickle Cell Anemia. As a highly mixed and mongrelized people the Jews would be more prone to diseases than pure races. “Idiocy and imbecility are found comparatively more often among Jews than among non-Jews… The Mongolin type of idiocy is also very frequently observed among Jews… Among the Jews the proportion of insane has been observed to be very large…”

A certain royal family, claiming to be from Judah via King David, but who are principally Edomites, have historically exhibited lunacy – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

Weisman: ‘The Jewish Encyclopedia also states the causes of these mental disorders in Jews is due to “the neurotic taint of the race,” “a racial characteristic,” and “consanguineous [related by blood] marriages.” This high proportion of insanity, idiocy, imbecility and lunacy in Jews helps to explain why the Talmud is a collection of imbecilic ramblings of insane minds.’

The Talmud is the very book the orthodox Jew extols, not the Bible, apart from the first five books known as the Torah. The Talmud is a vitriolic tome in its accusatory recognition of Christ – and by extension Christians – as an imposter and reprobate. 

A number of points are significant regarding Jewry, their agenda and cabalist schemes; beginning first with the sector of Banking. There is a wealth of detailed investigation on this subject that is appropriately explained by those who have devoted considerable time in research… therefore a couple of quotes will suffice.

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The real key to the Jews’ economic rule over nations, and the making of usury and credit more effective, is their International Banking Dynasty. This scheme began in England [irony of ironies] when the Jews, led by Rabbi Manasseh ben Israel, were allowed to return to that nation in 1657, by conspiring with Oliver Cromwell. With their foot in the door, the international Jews approached William of Orange and promised to help place him on the throne of England, in exchange for helping them secure a charter to establish a Bank of England. A Jew named Jacob Henriques was instrumental in this endeavor. William and Mary accepted the crown in 1689, but to justify the bank charter, wars between France and England were now instigated:

“The constant wars which followed William’s accession had compelled the king to borrow large sums from the London merchants [Jews]. Out of these loans sprang, first the National Debt, which was destined to grow, eventually by leaps and bounds, from less than a million of pounds up to so many hundred millions, that all thought of ever paying it is now given up. The second result was the organization of a company for the management of this colossal debt – the Bank of England.”

‘The Jewish merchants secured the bank charter in 1694. From that moment on Esau-Edom had financial dominion over all of Britain. As directors of the Bank they could regulate the gold standard, consolidate the national debt, and even impose direct taxation on the people as a means to secure loans. With control over this bank, the Jews would create wars, business panics, and political upheavals that would affect the entire world.

The existence of today’s banking system, that is the taking of money on deposit and loaning it out at interest, actually gave rise in modern times through the endeavors of the Jewish Rothschild family. The financial career of the Rothschilds is the key to the history of Jewish Banking in the nineteenth century… The plan adopted by him of establishing branches in the more important European capitals, over which he placed his sons, was followed by other Jewish banking-houses… the influence of Jews on Banking… was due to the preliminary advantage given to them by their international position. Other central banks were established in Europe which would also branch out their operations’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

“Warburg founded a bank in Hamburg in 1798… Jewish Bankers played an important part in the development of joint stock banks. Ludwig Bamberger und Herman Murkuse were among the founders of the Deutsche Bank (1870)… Among other important Jewish banks was the Banque de Paris (1872)… Jewish Bankers played a leading part in the foundation of the Banca Commerciale Italiana and the Credito ltaliano… Leading private banks in Hungary were of Jewish origin.”

The Jewish objective was to make all money, loans, credit and financial transactions world-wide become subject to their centralized control. Esau’s crowning achievement in gaining financial dominion over Jacob occurred with the establishment of the Federal Reserve Act, which was signed by the Zionist stooge Woodrow Wilson on December 23, 1913. The chief architect of this plan was the Edomite Jew Paul Warburg of Kuhn-Loeb and Co. The legislation created a corporation, The Federal Reserve Bank, whose stock is owned or controlled by Jewish Banking firms.

With the Federal Reserve system the Edomites have the ability to create their own money” (Federal Reserve Notes and bank book entries), merely by loaning it out into “circulation,” and thus can manipulate loans and interest rates. The white people of America are now subject to their new Edomite masters who created their “money” allowing them to buy and sell with it, but monitors how much they receive (W2 Forms, etc) and taxes them for the privilege of that use. The IRS is but a collection agency for the Edomite Federal Reserve Banking System.

If some alien force wished to covertly take over a nation, no surer method could be devised than by supplanting the nation’s money with their own. As President James Garfield said: “Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce.” This is the situation that exists with the Jewish Federal Reserve Bank. The descendants of Esau have truly brought about the “Mark of the Beast,” so that “no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark” (Rev. 13:16-17). No one in the nation can buy or sell unless they use the Jewish script (Federal Reserve Notes, credit cards, bank checks, etc.).

After the Edomite Jews had established their private banks in the individual nations, their next step was to solidify their financial control at the international level. At the close of World War II certain Jews spearheaded the Bretton Woods Conference in New Hampshire (July 1-22, 1944). Articles of Agreement were proposed for the establishment of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and a World Bank. Jews have always controlled the operations of the IMF and World Bank. Through them, interest rates, loans, currency values, and international trade practices are regulated, making the economic activities of every nation subject to the Jew by way of these financial devises. Their objective of a “new international economic order” was fulfilled with these international devices. Thus, Esau now has economic dominion over Jacob like never before.’

Identity of True Israel, Willie Martin – emphasis mine:

‘… the English had expelled the Jews in 1290 A.D. For over 350 years they were kept out. In the mid-1600s, Oliver Cromwell had led a successful revolution against the English monarchy. As did many of his fellow Puritans, Cromwell was already inclined to believe he was a literal Israelite descended from the “lost Ten Tribes.” In fact, during his reign as “Lord Protector of the Commonwealth,” a number of his close advisors pressed Cromwell to appoint 70 elders (after the manner of ancient Israel under Moses) to his Privy Council. 

Meanwhile, after the Jews had been expelled from Spain in 1492, many of them had fled to Holland as their next host country. Here lived one, Rabbi Manasseh ben Israel, who saw an opportunity. Two factors made Cromwell susceptible to the scheme of Rabbi ben Israel. First, his Israel identity conviction and secondly, the fact that revolutions cost money. 

“[An] unpublished motive for the readmission of the Jews was of an economic and political nature. For not only were so many Jews very successful merchants but others of their number were International Financiers and Bankers. And England needed the money.”

Because King Edward I of England had been the first to expel the Jews, the Jewish Money Barons in France, Holland and Germany decided it would be poetic justice if they tried out their planned revolutionary technique in England first. They used their underground agents, or Cells, to cause trouble between the king and his government; employers and labour; ruling class and workers; Church and State. The plotters injected controversial issues into politics and religion, to divide the people into two opposing camps. First they divided the people in England into Catholics and Protestants, and then they divided the Protestants into Conformists and Non-Conformists. When King Charles I was brought into disagreement with his Parliament… Manasseh Ben Israel, had his agents contact Oliver Cromwell. 

They offered him large sums of money if he would carry out their plan to overthrow the British throne. Manasseh Ben Israel, and other German and French money-lenders financed Cromwell. Fernandez Carvajal of Portugal, often referred to in history as “The Great Jew,” became Cromwell’s Chief Military Contractor. He re-organized the Round Heads into a model army. He provided them with the best arms and equipment money could buy. Once the conspiracy was under way, hundreds of trained revolutionaries were smuggled into England and were absorbed into the Jewish Underground. The same thing is going on in America today. 

King Charles was tried. Charles was found guilty of the charges levelled against him by the International Jewish money-lenders, not by the people of England. On January 30, 1649, he was publicly beheaded in front of the Banqueting House at Whitehall, London. The Jewish money-lenders, had had their revenge because Edward I had expelled the Jews from England. Oliver Cromwell received his Blood-Money just as Judas had done. History proves that the International Jewish money-lenders had a purpose other than revenge for getting rid of Charles. They removed him to obtain control of England’s economy and government. They planned to involve many European countries in war with England. 

Great sums of money are needed to fight wars. By loaning the Crowned Heads of Europe the money required to fight wars they fomented, the Internationalists were enabled to rapidly increase the National Debts of all European Nations.’

The year 1066 saw the beginning of the English and Jewish entwining in a monetary relationship which sowed the seeds for Edom gaining mastery over Jacob. William the Conqueror brought Jews into England in return for financial support. These wealthy Jews acquired a reputation as extortionate moneylenders leading to unpopularity with the Church and the public. In 1290, King Edward I expelled the Jews from England, with the Jews plotting revenge. The Jews financed Oliver Cromwell’s revolt in 1649, after Charles I had refused the Jews control of England’s finances. 

Cromwell readmitted the Jews in 1655. In 1660, the British happily welcomed Charles II as restored King, after the austerity of Cromwell’s regime.

1674: England and Holland make Peace. The men directing international intrigue change their characters. They become match-makers. They elevate Mr. William Stradholder [a soldier] to the rank of Captain-General of the Dutch Forces. He became William Prince of Orange. It was arranged that he meet Mary, the eldest daughter of the Duke of York. The Duke was only one place removed from becoming King of England. 

1677: Princess Mary of England married William Prince of Orange. To place William Prince of Orange upon the Throne of England it was necessary to get rid of both Charles II, and the Duke of York, who was slated to become James II. 

1683: The Rye House Plot was hatched. The intention was to assassinate both King Charles II and the Duke of York. It failed. 

1685: King Charles II died. The Duke of York became King James II of England. Immediately a campaign of L’Infamie was started against James II. The Duke of Monmouth was persuaded, or bribed, into leading an insurrection to overthrow the king. 

1688: They ordered William Prince of Orange to land in England at Torbay. This he did on November 5th. King James abdicated and fled to France. He had become unpopular by reason of the campaign of L’Infamie, intrigue and his own foolishness and culpability. 

1689: William of Orange and Mary, were proclaimed King and Queen of England. King James did not intend to give up the Throne without a fight. He was a Catholic, so the Secret Powers set up William of Orange as the Champion of the Protestant Faith. On February 15, 1689, King James landed in Ireland. The Battle of The Boyne was fought by men of definite, and opposing, religious convictions. The Battle has been celebrated by Orangemen on the 12th of July ever since. There is probably not one Orangeman in ten thousand who knows that all the wars and rebellions fought from 1640 to 1689 were fomented by the Jewish International money-lenders for the purpose of putting themselves in position to control British politics and economy. 

The Jews were permitted back into England and from that time we can trace the cosy relationship between the Jews and the British which developed much of the “British/Israel” doctrine. Their first objective was to obtain permission to institute a Bank of England and consolidate and secure the debts Britain owed them for loans made to her to fight the wars they instigated. History shows how they completed their plans. 

By 1694, the Bank of England was established; it was the English equivalent of “our” Federal Reserve System, the Jews controlled the money system which creates paper “money” out of thin air, and fastens every dollar or British pound of it on the people as debt. 

In the final analysis, none of the countries and people involved in the wars and revolutions obtained any lasting benefits. No permanent or satisfactory solution was reached regarding the political, economic, and religious issues involved. 

The only people to benefit were the small group of Jewish money-lenders who financed the wars and revolutions, and their friends and agents, who supplied the armies, the ships, and the munitions. 

It is important to remember that no sooner was the Dutch General sitting upon the throne of England than he persuaded the British Treasury to borrow £1,250,000 from the Jewish Bankers who had put him there [to help keep the Stuarts at bay]. The International Jewish money-lenders agreed to accommodate the British Treasury to the extent of £1,250,000 [the issuing of the first bank notes on interest] providing they could dictate their own terms and conditions. This was agreed to. The terms were in part: 

1). That the names of those who made the loan remain secret; and that they be granted a Charter to establish a Bank of England

2). That the directors of the Bank of England be granted the legal right to establish the Gold Standard for currency by which; 

3). They could make loans to the value of £10 for every £1 value of gold they had on deposit in their vaults. 

4). That they be permitted to consolidate the national debt; and secure payment of amounts due as principal and interest by direct taxation of the people. 

Thus, for the sum of £1,250,000, King William of Orange sold the people of England into economic bondage. The Jewish money-lenders gained their ambitions. They had usurped the power to issue and control the currency of the nation. And, having secured that power they cared not who made the laws. The International Jewish Bankers never intend that England be allowed to pay off the national indebtedness. The plan was to create international conditions which would plunge ALL nations concerned deeper and deeper into their debt. 

If such a policy is carried to its logical conclusion it is only a matter of time before the International Jewish money-lenders will control the wealth, natural resources, and man-power of the entire world. History shows how rapidly they have progressed toward their goal since 1694. The identity of the men who control the Bank of England still remains a secret. The MacMillan Committee appointed in 1929 to throw light on the subject failed completely. Mr. Montague Norman, the official Head of the Bank of England was most evasive and non-committal in any answer he made to the committee.’

By 1697, the London Stock Exchange was the world’s largest ‘purse’ with twelve ruling seats governed by Jews only.

1 Timothy 6:7-10

Christian Standard Bible

‘For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out. If we have food and clothing, we will be content with these. But those who want to be rich fall into temptation, a trap, and many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and by craving it, some have… pierced themselves with many griefs.’

Who really controls the World? New Dawn, Dr Mujahid Kamran, 2011 – emphasis mine: 

The wealthiest families on planet earth call the shots in every major upheaval that they cause. Their sphere of activity extends over the entire globe, and even beyond, their ambition and greed for wealth and power knows no bounds, and for them, most of mankind is garbage – “human garbage.” It is also their target to depopulate the globe and maintain a much lower population compared to what we have now. 

It was Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschild (1840-1915) who once said: “I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the British Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.” What was true of the British Empire is equally true of the US Empire, controlled remotely by the London based Elite through the Federal Reserve System. Judged by its consequences, the Federal Reserve System is the greatest con job in human history. 

Secrecy and anonymity is integral to the operations of the Elite as is absolute ruthlessness, deep deception and the most sordid spying and blackmail. The Elite pitches nations against each other, and aims at the destruction of religion and other traditional values, creates chaos, deliberately spreads poverty and misery, and then usurps power placing its stooges in place. These families “buy while the blood is still flowing in the streets” (Rothschild dictum). Wars, “revolutions” and assassinations are part of their tactics to destroy traditional civilisation and traditional religions (as in Soviet Russia), amass wealth and power, eliminate opponents, and proceed relentlessly towards their avowed goal, generation after generation. They operate through covert and overt societies and organisations.’ 

“So you see, my dear Coningsby, that the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.” – Benjamin Disraeli, British Prime Minister (1804-1881) 

“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States (1856-1924) 

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt wrote in November 1933 to Col. Edward House: 

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centres has owned the government since the days of Andrew Jackson.” 

It may be recalled that Andrew Jackson, US President from 1829-1837, was so enraged by the tactics of bankers (Rothschilds) that he said: 

“You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out and by the Eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning.” 

Winston Churchill… wrote around 1920: 

“From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxembourg, and Emma Goldman, this world wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played a definitely recognisable role in the tragedy of French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century, and now at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads, and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.” 

‘It was in the dark days of World War II that Churchill referred to the existence of a “High Cabal” that had brought about unprecedented bloodshed in human history. Churchill is also said to have remarked about the Elite: “They have transported Lenin in a sealed truck like a plague bacillus from Switzerland into Russia…” (quoted by John Coleman in The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, Global Publications 2006). Who are ‘they’? 

Consider the 1961 statement of US President John F. Kennedy (JFK) before media personnel: 

“The word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society, and we are as a people, inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, secret oaths and secret proceedings. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy, that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence. It depends on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published, its mistakes are buried, not headlined, and its dissenters are silenced, not praised, no expenditure is questioned, no secret revealed… I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people.” 

‘Secret societies, secret oaths, secret proceedings, infiltration, subversion, intimidation – these are the words used by JFK! On June 4, 1963, JFK ordered the printing of Treasury dollar bills instead of Federal Reserve notes (Executive Order 11110). He also ordered that once these had been printed, the Federal Reserve notes would be withdrawn, and the Treasury bills put into circulation. A few months later (November 22, 1963) he was killed in broad daylight in front of the whole world – his brains blown out. Upon assumption of power, his successor, President Lyndon Johnson, immediately reversed the order to switch to Treasury bills showing very clearly why JFK was murdered. Another order of JFK, to militarily disengage from the Far East by withdrawing US “advisors” from Vietnam, was also immediately reversed after his death. After the Cuban crisis JFK wanted peaceful non-confrontational coexistence with the Soviet Union and that meant no wars in the world.’ 

In his book Big Oil and Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families and Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics and Terror Network, Dean Henderson states: 

“My queries to bank regulatory agencies regarding stock ownership in the top 25 US bank holding companies were given Freedom of Information Act status, before being denied on ‘national security’ grounds. This is ironic since many of the bank’s stockholders reside in Europe.” 

‘This is, on the face of it, quite astonishing but it goes to show the US government works not for the people but for the Elite. It also shows that secrecy is paramount in Elite affairs. No media outlet will raise this issue because the Elite owns the media. Secrecy is essential for Elite control – if the world finds out the truth about the wealth, thought, ideology and activities of the Elite there would be a worldwide revolt against it. Henderson further states: 

“The Four Horsemen of Banking (Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo) own the Four Horsemen of Oil (Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch/Shell, BP Amoco and Chevron Texaco); in tandem with other European and old money behemoths. But their monopoly over the global economy does not end at the edge of the oil patch. According to company 10K filings to the SEC, the Four Horsemen of Banking are among the top ten stockholders of virtually every Fortune 500 corporation.” 

It is well known that in 2009, of the top 100 largest economic entities of the world, 44 were corporations. The wealth of these families, which are among the top 10% shareholders in each of these, is far in excess of national economies. In fact, total global GDP is around 70 trillion dollars. 

The Rothschild family wealth alone is estimated to be in the trillions of dollars. So is the case with the Rockefellers who were helped and provided money all along by the Rothschilds. The US has an annual GDP in the range of 14-15 trillion dollars. This pales into insignificance before the wealth of these trillionaires. With the US government and most European countries in debt to the Elite, there should be absolutely no doubt as to who owns the world and who controls it.’ 

To quote Eustace Mullins from his book The World Order: 

“The Rothschilds rule the US through their Foundations, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Federal Reserve System with no serious challenges to their power. Expensive ‘political campaigns’ are routinely conducted, with carefully screened candidates who are pledged to the program of the World Order. Should they deviate from the program, they would have an ‘accident’, be framed on a sex charge, or indicted in some financial irregularity.” 

‘The Elite members operate in absolute unison against public benefit, against a better life for mankind in which the individual is free to develop his or her innate creativity, a life free of war and bloodshed. James Forrestal, the first Secretary of Defence of the US, became aware of Elite intrigue and had, according to Jim Marrs, accumulated 3,000 pages of notes to be used for writing a book. He died in mysterious circumstances and was almost certainly murdered. His notes were taken away and a sanitised version made public after one year! Just before he died, almost fifteen months before the outbreak of the Korean War, he had revealed that American soldiers would die in Korea! Marrs quotes Forrestal: 

“These men are not incompetent or stupid. Consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid, they would occasionally make a mistake in our favour.” 

The Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the mother of all these, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, are bodies where decisions about the future of mankind are arrived at. Who set these up and control them? The “international bankers” of course. 

In a fascinating study of the Yale secret society Skull and Bones, Antony Sutton uncovered numerous aspects of profound importance about this one society. In his book America’s Secret Establishment – An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones, Sutton points out there is a set of “Old Line American Families and New Wealth” that dominates The Order (of Skull & Bones) – the Whitney family, the Stimson family, the Bundy family, the Rockefeller family, the Harriman family, the Taft family, the Bush family, and so on. He also points out that there is a British connection: 

“The links between the Order and Britain go through Lazard Freres and the private merchant bankers. Notably the British establishment also founded a University – Oxford University, and especially All Souls College at Oxford. 

The British element is called ‘The Group’. The Group links to the Jewish equivalent through the Rothschilds in Britain (Lord Rothschild was an original member of Rhodes’ ‘inner circle’). The Order in the US links to the Guggenheim, Schiff and Warburg families… There is an Illuminati connection.” 

In his article, ‘Oxford University – The Illuminati Breeding Ground’, David Icke recounts an incident that demonstrates how these secret societies and groups, working for the Elite, select, train and plan to install their men in key positions. 

‘In 1940 a young man addressed a “study group” of the Labor Party in a room at University College Oxford. He stressed that he belonged to a secret group without a name which planned a “Marxist takeover” of Britain, Rhodesia and South Africa by infiltrating the British Parliament and Civil Services. The young man stated that he headed the political wing of that secret group and he expected to be made Prime Minister of Britain some day! The young man was Harold Wilson who became Prime Minister of Britain (1964-70, 1974-76)!’

In his book Memoirs, published in 2002, David Rockefeller, Sr. stated that his family had been attacked by “ideological extremists” for “more than a century… Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterising my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it” – refer article: The Secret Covenant.  

The next subterfuge perpetrated by influential Jews is that related to European royalty and particularly the Royal family of Britain. It would be better if they gave an account of themselves, though this will never happen. In an ideal world, the advocacy of total respect to the institution and to the Monarch would be appropriate; though as the institution is corrupt, deceitful, lawless and opposed to truth, freedom and righteousness, with the family guilty of being willing participants in upholding a duplicitous status quo, their position is therefore vulnerable to scrutiny and exposition – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III

An example of the close relatedness of European royalty was exhibited at the beginning of the first World War, where Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany and Czar Nicholas II of Imperial Russia were third cousins and both of them were first cousins with King George V of England. The British monarchy had been able to gloss over their German roots, though quickly realised that it did not help their public image to be known as The House of Coburg-Saxe-Gotha, while at the same time their British subjects were dying in trenches fighting their equals from none other than Coburg-Saxe-Gotha Germany. Thus the Hanoverian Monarchy of Britain changed their name to the far more acceptable, The House of Windsor

It was in 1714 that the Royal family of Hanover were invited by the City of London to be the British Royal Family. The first king was King George I or Georg Ludwig. He died in 1727. He was 52nd in line to the throne, but was preferred to a descendant of the deposed Stuart king, James II of England and the VII of Scotland. It was George III, great Grandson of George I, who was the first German monarch to be born in England, in London, 1738. He ruled from 1760 to 1820 and is known as the ‘mad king who lost America.’ 

While it appears that The House of Hanover is ostensibly German, it is really predominantly Jewish. Since at least the seventeenth century every European royal house has been infiltrated by the Jews. For instance, the famous and influential Royal House of Hapsburg in Austria. It wasn’t truly a German family who took claim of the British throne. The Hanoverian Royal Family were originally a Jewish family who claimed to have converted to Christianity in the fifteenth Century.

The rumours are persistent in that the British Royal Family are still, secretly Jewish. Interestingly, the Sovereign Bible that all British Kings and Queens use at their Coronation has been written in Hebrew since 1714. All British Monarchs are required to attend secret ceremonies at the Bevis Marks Synagogue – established by the Bank of England in 1701 – in the City of London, the night before their Coronation. The ceremonies are always attended by Britain’s senior Jews and Bankers. The very real, yet shadowy rulers behind the throne – refer article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? 

James Stuart the Old Pretender, son of King James II invaded Scotland in 1715 and attempted unsuccessfully to take back the British Crown from the Jews. The Stuarts made their final attempt to re-take British sovereignty from the Jewish usurpation when they invaded England in 1745 with an army of Scottish Highland Clans under Bonnie Prince Charlie, who lived from 1720 to 1788 and was the grandson of King James II. Defeated at the Battle of Culloden in 1746; Bonnie Prince Charlie went in to exile and the British Royal House of Stuart came to an abrupt end. 

The beginning of the Rothschild, House of the Red Shield dynasty was established in 1750, becoming the prime money-lenders to the British Crown – refer article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? In 1753, King George II under the influence of the Rothschilds and the Jewish bankers in Amsterdam, passed a Naturalisation Bill which allowed Jews to become British subjects. From 1757 to 1773, the opium trades of India and China were controlled by Jewish owned institutions, the East India Company and the Bank of England; leading to the deaths of some thirty million Indians and Chinese. 

Mayer Rothschild was the creative mastermind behind the World Revolutionary Movement and Red Flag Socialism in 1773; used as the banker’s means of overthrowing ruling elites, such as the French and the Russian monarchies. The mass murder of the French aristocracy in 1789 enabled the privatising of the Bank of France, gaining administration of the French economy by 1803; with the National Debt to be fraudulently paid off by income tax. 

In 1808, Napoleon seized control of France from the Jewish manipulators, issuing a decree, the Decret Infame; the Infamous Decree, which placed many justifiable restrictions on the Jews. In response in 1815, Rothschilds, James of France and Nathan of England ordered European rulers to assemble at the Congress of Vienna. The Rothschilds had drafted a plan that would make it impossible for another ‘Napoleon to rise to power’ by creating a European balance of power. If any European Nation revolted against Jewish hegemony again, all the Jewish controlled Nations would attack. Thus, the Battle of Waterloo signified the end of Napoleon’s heroic anti-Jewish rule and the short-lived Christian domination of Europe. Both James and Nathan Rothschild financed The Duke of Wellington’s victory over Napoleon. Nathan Rothschild had even used false information about Napoleon winning Waterloo, to fool the London Stock Exchange and fully acquire control of Britain’s economy. 

Three land mark dates connected with Jewish intervention and control were first in 1890, when the biggest munitions factory in the world, Vickers of England was established by the Rothschild family, setting the stage for the engineering feats during World War I; and the second was in 1906, with the invention of the radio by Guglielmo Marconi. David Sarnoff bought and marketed it, creating the Marconi Company in England and RCA in America, thus beginning the Jewish influence of world media. Third, in 1910, Jews targeted the key offices of Minister of Finance throughout Europe. Louis Klotz, Minister of Finance for France, Moab and Ammon; Michael Luzzati, Italy, the Chaldeans; Bernhard Dernburg, Germany, Ishmael; Rufus Isaacs, England, Jacob; and Djavid Bey, Turkey, Elam

The Jewish connection within the British Royal family is evidenced by the rite performed by the Mohel; a Jewish practitioner of circumcision in London on the Royal Family. Odd ‘that the male patron of the world’s largest protestant church is circumcised by a rabbi in a Jewish ceremony.’ Charles, as the Prince of Wales, was circumcised by Rabbi Jacob Snowman a medical doctor and the leading Mohel in London at the time; circumciser to the Royal Family. Snowman has only ever circumcised Jewish patients. All ‘British’ Kings have been circumcised by Jewish Doctors since 1714. Princess Diana apparently didn’t allow William or Harry to be circumcised; though they were allegedly circumcised as adults, after her death. 

Queen Victoria claimed to be a direct descendent of King David and several items in the Crown Jewels are engraved with the Star of David. The Star of David is a Jewish (or Edomite) symbol and though it is ironically linked to the tribe of Judah, it has nothing to do with King David – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. In all Royal Palaces and other premises it is purported that both Sunday and Saturday are treated equally as the Sabbath Day – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

It is reported that King Charles has his own blue velvet kippa, with a royal crest on it in silver to wear at Jewish weddings and that he possesses other Jewish regalia, of which the exact purpose is not known. As the defender of the Church of England and the christian faith, it can be understood why King Charles should wish to uphold all faiths, when in fact he is secretly Jewish. His duplicity of allegiance and being a member of the Magic Circle since 1975 for instance, would only cast hypocrisy if his oath as king had not been amended – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. At all synagogues in the United Kingdom, two daily prayers are always held, one for the Royal Family and one for the State of Israel. Both are Jewish and neither are the tribe of Judah. 

King Charles III according to Jim Wade is ‘ethnically 66% German, [and] 19% English.’ One would need to investigate the ‘German’ to learn how much or all is actually Jewish. Wade in determining his percentages, states regarding the German percentage: ‘The ‘German’ figures I’ve used reflect the fact that, according to ’eminent genealogist William Addams Reitwiesner, the ‘Royal’ ethnic group (created by the historic extensive inter-breeding between European Royals) is essentially German. So he says it’s valid – and I quote – to “simply add the values I refer to as Royal to the values I refer to as German and call the result German.

Reitwiesner’s extensive research includes the following incredible myriad ethnicities in King Charles ancestry: English, Scottish, Irish, Anglo-Irish [Northern Irish], Royal [predominantly Jewish], German [partly Jewish], French, Dutch, Belgian, Danish, Swedish, Swiss, Bohemian, Lithuanian, Hungarian, and Russian. Yet Jewish is not listed, included or discussed? Its omission resonates resoundingly. Ironically as the former Prince of Wales, Welsh is not included in King Charles ancestry.

Princess Diana’s mother, Frances Shand Kydd is known to be Jewish – born Frances Ruth Burke Roche – a Rothschild. That is sufficient cause, for Princess Diana to be certified as Jewish as well as her son, Prince William, the future King of England. Prince Harry’s appearance in a Nazi uniform with a swastika at a party in 2005, is both irregular and unsettling in light of this. Princess Catherine’s mother, Carole Goldsmith, is the daughter of Ronald Goldsmith and Dorothy Harrison who were both Jewish. Carole Goldsmith is Jewish and by extension, according to Jewish law and custom through the maternal line, her daughter Princess Catherine Middleton is Jewish. Thus, the future monarch Prince George, is also for all intent and purpose, Jewish – not principally German and certainly not entirely English. The monumental significance of this fact will become apparent later. 

One commentator states, British mainstream media ignored how a flight attendant married the Queen’s grandson, William. Kate’s selection was carefully crafted and although the pretence maintained in Kate Middleton’s wedding ceremony is that she is Christian, her family roots show that she is considered a Sephardic Jew from her mother’s side. According to the same commentator: ‘This gains more significance once we realize that… Sources close to… Kate Middleton’ said the ‘Church of England decided to baptize and Christianize the new member unofficially and secretly so that her marriage to Prince William could be confirmed. 

Nevertheless even being baptized… cannot prevent Prince William’s son [George], the next king and the senior governor of the Church of England, from being a Jew…’ Prince William according to Jim Wade is ‘ethnically 34% German, [and] 35% English.’ For those interested, Queen Elizabeth was ‘42% German, [and] 39% English’; while Prince Philip was ‘ethnically 90% German, [and] 0% English.’ Queen Elizabeth’s father, George VI was ‘83% German, 0% British.’

One considerable side benefit for the Jewish infiltration into the British monarchy is that since William the Conqueror in 1066, all of the property of England, Britain and the United Kingdom belongs to the Crown. When one thinks they own their property outright, having no debts due on say, a house; they in fact just own license to the title, and it’s the monarchy which actually owns the property. The King continues to legally own the lands of Britain, Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Antartica and thirty-two or two-thirds, of the member nations of the Commonwealth. The King who is The Crown, owns approximately one sixth of the planet’s surface. As one website reports: ‘Feudalism is not dead. It’s just hiding.’ Eminent Domain – that is Compulsory Purchase – gives the Crown or its Government agents, the power to purchase land from the freeholder in the event of necessity. The freeholder has no power to refuse. 

The fact that the royal line in England is a fraudulent usurpation and the identity of the House of Windsor is not what everyone thinks it is, is concern enough, one would think; though an additional controversy is that the marriage of Queen Victoria to Prince Albert tempestuous at times, was possibly more divided than realised. Victoria was smitten when she first met Albert of Coburg-Saxe-Gotha; though Albert revealed a different side after marriage, with his thirst for power. In reality, he was king in all but name. Though public perception was a fairy tale marriage, Albert’s strong hold on Court life and Victoria, reshaped life in the palace in the twenty-one years they were married. Victoria having seven of her nine children in the first ten years of Marriage between 1840 and 1850, was in no condition to resist Albert’s aims and was wholly subjugated. 

Queen Victoria was also the first known royal carrier of Haemophilia; which is commonly associated with European royal bloodlines. Persistent rumour is that the father of Queen Victoria’s second child and first son, was Lionel Nathan Rothschild who was Nathan Mayer Rothschild’s son. Thus King Edward VII was the firstborn son officially, yet possibly born in a bigamous relationship and therefore illegitimate. So added to an already fraudulent line, we may have an illegitimate monarch who was quite accepting and willing, to perpetuate the deception. 

The royal blood from Queen Victoria’s second child, King Edward VII who was known as ‘The Father of Europe’, was vastly diminished (or was it). Edward’s son, King George V married Mary of Teck, who was ‘German’ on her father’s side and a great granddaughter of King George III on her mother’s side, producing the sons who became King Edward VIII and also King George VI – the father of Queen Elizabeth II. The result is that Prince William and particularly his son George, are not legitimately royal, or principally from the tribe of Judah and are in truth primarily yet superficially German and in reality Jewish (or Edomite). 

An unnerving, diabolical goal of the controlling Jewish cabals is that of setting races against each other, while at the same time encouraging their mixing in the endeavour of eliminating their arch rival Jacob from the face of the Earth in at least causing the watering down of the white peoples in the nations descended from the patriarch Israel. This real genetic blending is a core agenda of the Jewish-Edomite peoples in their revenge plan on true Israel: the Celtic-Saxon-Viking descended peoples from Britain and Ireland. 

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis mine:

‘The subversive Jewish goal and strategy to destroy the white race by interracial marriage was revealed in a speech by Rabbi Emanuel Rabinovich, which was delivered before the Emergency Council of European Rabbis in Budapest, Hungary, January 12, 1952:

“Greetings, my children. You have been called here to recapitulate the principal steps of our new program… The goal for which we have striven so concertedly for over a thousand years is at last within our reach, and because its fulfillment is so apparent, it behooves us to increase our efforts and our caution tenfold… this program will achieve its objective, the Third World War, which will surpass in destruction all previous contests… This war will end for all time our struggle against the [white race]. We will openly reveal our identity with the races of Asia and Africa.

Our Control Commissions will, in the interests of peace and wiping out interracial tensions, forbid the whites to mate with whites. The white women must cohabit with members of the dark races, and the white men with black women. Thus the white race will disappear. For mixing the dark with the white will be the end of the white man, and our most dangerous enemy will become only a memory. We [Jews] will embark upon an era of ten thousand years of peace and plenty, the Pax Judaica, and our race will rule undisputed over the earth. Our superior intelligence will easily enable us to retain mastery over a world of dark peoples.”

And Hitler thought the Germans were the master race?

‘… the Jew Israel Cohen [a Zionist] stated [in 1912]:

“We must realize that our party’s most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by the whites, we can mould them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the [black] minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instil in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the [blacks]. We will aid the [blacks] to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world, of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the [blacks] will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause.”

‘As Rabbi Abraham L. Feinberg had stated:

“If anything, the law should encourage, not forbid, the intermingling of bloods… But legislation cannot change the human heart. The only way we can accomplish that, the only way we can achieve a Final Solution to racial prejudice, is to create a melange of races so universal that no one can preen himself on his racial purity or practice the barbarism to safeguard it. The deliberate encouragement of interracial marriages is the only way to hasten this process. And it may be that time is growing short. The dominance of our world has begun to shift, like cargo in a listing vessel, from the white races to the colored. The sooner we adjust to this fact, the better it will be for our children. For we might weII acknowledge, even the most enlightened of us, that we wiII never completely eliminate racial prejudice until we eliminate separate races.”

‘It is the white race that has been put under financial bondage to the [Jewish] monetary system. It is the white race that must now live under Jewish laws and governments. It is the white nations (Germany [Ishmael], America [Jacob], England [Jacob]) that the Jews have tricked into giving them money, aid and technology to support their anti-christian and bastardized state in Palestine. In their desire for revenge against Jacob’s descendants, the Edomite Jews have adopted the motto: “Never Forgive-Never Forget.” This hateful slogan has clearly been directed at the white race.’

The long term goal of Edom, under the guise of ‘multiculturalism, is the genocide of white nations to be replaced by a ninety-nine percent coffee-coloured, dumbed-down, debt-slave race [that] serves a one percent Jewish master race.’ Think this is an exaggeration? 

Coudenhove-Kalergi, the Godfather and mastermind* behind the creation of the European Union in 1914 said: ‘The European of tomorrow will be a hybrid of Negro and Asians blended with the so called white race. [Jews] are going to make this happen, one race ruled over by the pure blooded Jew.’ 

What an ironic statement when the Jewish people are anything but pure blooded.

Oskar Schmitz, Der Jude, 1926: “We will continue to promote multiculturalism, until the white Christian people are no more, and because they are weak in their flaws of self righteous benevolence, our task should not be [too] difficult. And only then we will stop identifying as white. And thus, our turn will come where we will rule the world. Who, then, can stand against us?”

Noel Ignatiev, Jewish author and professor at Harvard, 1994: “We will continue to bash all the dead white males, and the live ones. And their women too. We wont stop until the construct known as the white race is destroyed. Not dismantled. Destroyed.” 

Mark Potok, Jewish attorney, 2011: “If [you are] trying to say we have been plotting to replace the white population in America with immigrants, [you’re] absolutely right. And it doesn’t matter if you know or not. We have been at this for some time… Nothing can stop us now. Nothing.” Potok, keeps a chart on his office wall which has surfaced in photographs… European global population – 1900 30%, 1990 16%, 2018 8%, 2040 4% [2100 3%]. 

Joe Biden, United States President, [Catholic, Jewish, Zionist?] 2014: “An unrelenting flow of immigration, [is] not going to stop. Nor should we want it to stop. For the first time ever in America, white Caucasians of European descent like myself will be an absolute minority in America. And this is what we want. This is the source of our strength!”

Emily Goldstein, Jewish Journalist, 2015: “Some have said that diversity is about getting rid of white people. Well, they are right. And that’s a good thing.” 

Barbara Specter, Jewish Zionist, 2016: “There has been a rise in anti-Semitism because at this time, Europe has not yet learned how to be multi-cultural. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were. They are now going into a multi-cultural role, and Jews will be resented because we are at the center of this and leading it. But without us, Europe will not survive.” 

Unknown quotes: 

‘It has surprised some people to find out that the president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People [NAACP] is not a [Black] but the Jew Arthur Spingarn. It is the Jews who are behind desegregation, while they keep the strictest of segregation laws in Israel which shows, with no doubts, their intent with pushing multiculturalism in every, and ONLY in every white majority nation on Earth.’

‘They like to defend themselves by saying “Whites are just blaming Jews the way blacks blame whites for their problems”. I am not blaming them for any of my problems. I’m accusing them of the genocide of my people. There is a difference!’

‘The thing is though, our people have spent the last 70 or so years “Blessing” the people who murdered Christ. The people who curse his very name, and openly revile him while calling the bible a “hate book of propaganda.”

‘Do you see the absolute hate they have for all the white race yet? When you understand this evil and covetous hatred, you will understand how a people can be so diabolical that they would inject the world with Animal DNA and the tissue of Aborted fetus into your blood while smiling and telling you they are going to “save” you if you choose to follow them and not God – Article: Covid 19 Injection. They will kill your soul, then your body and do so in the name of “Peace” because they think this world is rightfully theirs and theirs alone, and see our race as an enemy in the way of that, just as they see God and Christ as enemies.’

In 1925, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi in his book Practical Idealism* which laid down the blueprint for a new Europe; suggested the destruction of individual nation states to create a United States of Europe. There is a Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize given every two years to ‘the European Politician who has done most to support this genocide’ – Article: The Great Reset & the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

In 1998, this concept is shockingly revealed by the Jewish funded and controlled leader of the ‘new’ Labour Party Tony Blair, who publicly states: “It is time to implement* Practical Idealism.” British People failed to notice this monumental ‘political oxymoron’ and its veiled reference to White genocide. The Labour Party wasted no time in opening the floodgates to Third World immigration, with the aim of diluting the British population. Between 1997 and 2010, ‘Labour allowed up to [eight] million [immigrants] into Britain.’ 

Unfortunately, another distressing discussion is the Holocaust and the subject of anti-Semitism; though understanding the accuracy of these issues is more important than the upset it may cause people learning the truth. One should be more concerned with any falsification of data and be more disconcerted with that, surely. Research on this topic is extensive and the following series of quotes illuminates the subject concisely. 

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis mine:

‘If God hated you and your ancestors how would you react and what would you do? By natural reaction you would be against God and His people, and try and prevent them from finding out you are Esau, the one God is against… Who is it that tries to conceal their identity as Edom, the one hated by God, by claiming to be Israel, the one loved by God? Only one group of people reacts as though God has a hatred for them – that is the Jews. If the Jew is to live in Christian society, his true nature and attributes must be concealed and censored from the masses. Thus the Jew states that throughout history he has been the one persecuted. Yet the cause of that persecution – anti-Christian and offensive Jewish traits – is never told. And when these traits are concealed, the cause and nature of much of the problems, conflicts, conspiracies and wars in the world are also concealed.’

Identity of True Israel, Willie Martin – emphasis mine:

‘… concerning the persecution theme and host-alien relationship, Roth wrote: 

“Have not Jews been admitted from time immemorial, freely, kindly, almost happily by every nation at whose gate they have knocked for admittance… Have the Jews ever had to petition a country for admission – the first time? Read for yourself the story of the progress of Jewry through Europe and America. Wherever they come they are welcomed, permitted to settle down, and join in the general business of the community. But one by one the industries of the country close to them because of unfair practices (by the Jews towards Christians) until it no longer being possible to hold in check the wrath of a betrayed people, there is violence and, inevitably, an ignominious ejection of the whole race from the land. 

Anti-Semitism is so instinctive that it may quite simply be called one of the primal instincts of mankind, one of the important instincts by which the race helps to preserve itself against total destruction. I cannot emphasize the matter too strongly. Anti-Semitism is not, as Jews have tried to make the world believe, an active prejudice. It is a deeply hidden instinct with which every man is born. He remains unconscious of it, as of all other instincts of self preservation, until something happens to awaken it. Just as when something flies in the direction of your eyes, the eyelids close instantly and of their own accord. So swiftly and surely is the instinct of anti-Semitism awakened in a man…

There is not a single instance when the Jews have not fully deserved the bitter fruit of the fury of their persecutors… Jewish history has been tragic to the Jews and no less tragic to the neighbouring nations who have suffered them. Our major vice of old, as of today, is parasitism. We are a people of vultures living on the labour (of the host nation) and the good nature of the rest of the world… We come to the nations pretending to escape persecution, we the most deadly persecutors in all the wretched annals of man.” 

‘The Jews as outcasts: Jews have been a wandering people from the time of the beginning. History is filled with preemptory edicts, expelling Jews from where they had made their homes. At times the edicts were the result of trumped up charges against the Jews or Judaism, and later proved to be false. At other times they were the consequence of economic situation, which the authorities believed would be improved if the Jews were removed. Almost always the bans were only temporary as below. The cumulative impact on the psyche of the Jewish people however, has been traumatic. And may very well be indelible. Hardly a major Jewish community has not been expelled by its host country. Only to be let back in again, later to be expelled once more.” (Jewish Almanac 1981, page 127)’

‘… the Germans, not specifically the Nazis, but the Germans, allegedly exterminated more than six million Jews, even though this decades-long propaganda lie is being gradually exposed by honest scholars… Then, in a classic example of the Jewish tactic of accusing your enemy of what you yourself have done, [Roth] asserts on page 11: 

“The Germans in the Second World War had attempted to conquer Britain. They had plans, if successful [sic], to deport all of the male population as slave labour to the Continent. They were developing means of mass-sterilization and in effect meant to exterminate the British people as we know it.” 

‘No documentation of this outrageous charge is given. However, that precise program was proposed to be applied “against” the Germans by an American Jew, Theodore N. Kaufman, in his book “Germany Must Perish!” Following are pertinent extracts: 

“For quite patently, to fight once more in democratic defence against Germany with any goal in view save that country’s extinction constitutes, even though it lost the war, a German victory. To fight, to win, and not this time to end Germanism forever by exterminating completely those people who spread its doctrine is to herald the outbreak of another German war within a generation. And so it is with the people of Germany. 

They may respond for a while to civilizing forces; they may seemingly adopt the superficial mannerisms and exterior behaviourism of civilized peoples but all the while there remains ever present within them that war-soul which eventually drives them, as it does the tiger, to kill. And no amount of conditioning, or reasoning, or civilizing – past, present or future – will ever be able to change this basic nature’ – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. ‘There is in fine, no other solution except one: That Germany must perish forever from this earth! And, fortunately, as we shall now come to see, that is no longer impossible of accomplishment. 

Quite naturally, massacre and wholesale execution must be ruled out… There remains then but one mode of ridding the world forever of Germanism – and that is to stem the source from which issue those war-lusted souls, by preventing the people of Germany from ever again reproducing their kind. This modern method, known to science as Eugenic Sterilization, is at once practical, humane and thorough.”

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991:

‘To show the world that this new crime of genocide is a potential threat, the Jews found it necessary to fabricate the monstrous lie of their holocaust story where 6 million of their race were allegedly killed by Nazi Germany during World War II. This worked effectively to play on the sympathy of most people especially when it is presented in a dramatic and emotional manner.’

In January 1933, there were approximately 522,000 Jews living in Germany. After the Nazis effectively seized power and implemented their antisemitic ideological policies, the Jewish community suffered increasing persecution. 

About sixty percent or 304,000 people, emigrated during the first six years of the Nazi dictatorship, beginning in 1933. Around 214,000 Jews were left in Germany on the eve of WWII. Beginning in late 1941 the remaining Jewish communities were subjected to systematic deportations to ghettos, concentration camps and finally the death camps in Eastern Europe. 

In May 1943, Germany was declared Judenrein – ‘clean of Jews’ or Judenfrei, ‘free of Jews.’ By the close of the war, some 160,000 to 180,000 German Jews had been murdered. Censuses and population charts show that the European Jewish population numbers do not support the killing of six million Jews; as the total Jewish population in Nazi-controlled Europe after emigrations and evacuations was at most only ‘around three million’ people.

Did 6 Million Really Die? Richard E Harwood, 1974 – emphasis mine:

‘Himmler’s statistician, Dr. Richard Korherr and the World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation put the number respectively at 5,550,000 and 5,294,000 when German-occupied territory was at its widest, but both these figures include the two million Jews of the Baltic and western Russia without paying any attention to the large number of these who were evacuated. However, it is at least an admission from the latter organisation that there were not even six million Jews in Europe and western Russia combined. Nothing better illustrates the declining plausibility of the Six Million legend than the fact that the prosecution at the Eichmann trial deliberately avoided mentioning the figure.

The question most pertinent to the extermination legend is, of course: how many of the 3 million European Jews under German control survived after 1945? The Jewish Joint Distribution Committee estimated the number of survivors in Europe to be only one and a half million, but such a figure is now totally unacceptable. This is proved by the growing number of Jews claiming compensation from the West German Government for having allegedly suffered between 1939 and 1945. By 1965, the number of these claimants registered with the West German Government had tripled in ten years and reached 3,375,000. Nothing could be a more devastating proof of the brazen fantasy of the Six Million.

Most of these claimants are Jews, so there can be no doubt that the majority of the 3 million Jews who experienced the Nazi occupation of Europe are, in fact, very much alive. It is a resounding confirmation of the fact that Jewish casualties during the Second World War can only be estimated at a figure in thousands. Surely this is enough grief for the Jewish people? Who has the right to compound it with vast imaginary slaughter, marking with eternal shame a great European nation, as well as wringing fraudulent monetary compensation from them?

By 1939, the consistent efforts of the German Government to secure the departure of Jews from the Reich had resulted in the emigration of 400,000 German Jews from a total population of about 600,000, and an additional 480,000 emigrants from Austria and Czechoslovakia, which constituted almost their entire Jewish populations. 

This was accomplished through Offices of Jewish Emigration in Berlin, Vienna and Prague established by Adolf Eichmann, the head of the Jewish Investigation Office of the Gestapo. So eager were the Germans to secure this emigration that Eichmann even established a training centre in Austria, where young Jews could learn farming in anticipation of being smuggled illegally to Palestine. Had Hitler cherished any intention of exterminating the Jews, it is inconceivable that he would have allowed more than 800,000 to leave Reich territory with the bulk of their wealth, much less considered plans for their mass emigration to Palestine…

In 1955… neutral Swiss source, Die Tat of Zurich, in a survey of all Second World War casualties based on figures of the International Red Cross, put the “Loss of victims of persecution because of politics, race or religion who died in prisons and concentration camps between 1939 and 1945” at 300,000, not all of whom were Jews, and this figure seems the most accurate assessment.

Is it possible that the story of the Six Million Jews is serving a political purpose, even that it is a form of political blackmail? So far as the Jewish people themselves are concerned, the deception has been an incalculable benefit. Every conceivable race and nationality had its share of suffering in the Second World War, but none has so successfully elaborated it and turned it to such great advantage. Indeed, it is a remarkable fact that the Jewish people emerged from the Second World War as nothing less than a triumphant minority. Dr. Max Nussbaum, the former chief rabbi of the Jewish community in Berlin, stated on April 11, 1953:

“The position the Jewish people occupy today in the world – despite the enormous losses – is ten times stronger than what it was twenty years ago.” It should be added, if one is to be honest, that this strength has been much consolidated financially by the supposed massacre of the Six Million, undoubtedly the most profitable atrocity allegation of all time. To date, the staggering figure of six thousand million pounds has been paid out in compensation by the Federal Government of West Germany, mostly to the State of Israel (which did not even exist during the Second World War), as well as to individual Jewish claimants.

In terms of political blackmail, however, the allegation that Six Million Jews died during the Second World War has much more far-reaching implications for the people of Britain and Europe than simply the advantages it has gained for the Jewish nation. And here one comes to the crux of the question: Why the Big Lie? What is its purpose? In the first place, it has been used quite unscrupulously to discourage any form of nationalism. Should the people of Britain or any other European country attempt to assert their patriotism and preserve their national integrity in an age when the very existence of nation-states is threatened, they are immediately branded as “neo-Nazis”. Because, of course, Nazism was nationalism, and we all know what happened then – Six Million Jews were exterminated! So long as the myth is perpetuated, peoples everywhere will remain in bondage to it; the need for international tolerance and understanding will be hammered home by the United Nations until nationhood itself, the very guarantee of freedom, is abolished. 

Thus the accusation of the Six Million is not only used to undermine the principle of nationhood and national pride, but it threatens the survival of the Race itself. It is wielded over the heads of the populace, rather as the threat of hell fire and damnation was in the Middle Ages. Many countries of the Anglo-Saxon world, notably Britain and America, are today facing the gravest danger in their history, the danger posed by the alien races in their midst. Unless something is done in Britain to halt the immigration and assimilation of Africans and Asians into our country, we are faced in the near future, quite apart from the bloodshed of racial conflict, with the biological alteration and destruction of the British people as they have existed here since the coming of the Saxons. In short, we are threatened with the irrecoverable loss of our European culture and racial heritage. 

But what happens if a man dares to speak of the race problem, of its biological and political implications? He is branded as that most heinous of creatures, a “racialist”. And what is racialism, of course, but the very hallmark of the Nazi! They (so everyone is told, anyway) murdered Six Million Jews because of racialism, so it must be a very evil thing indeed. When Enoch Powell drew attention to the dangers posed by coloured immigration into Britain in one of his early speeches, a certain prominent Socialist raised the spectre of Dachau and Auschwitz to silence his presumption. Thus any rational discussion of the problems of Race and the effort to preserve racial integrity is effectively discouraged. 

No one could have anything but admiration for the way in which the Jews have sought to preserve their race through so many centuries, and continue to do so today. In this effort they have frankly been assisted by the story of the Six Million, which, almost like a religious myth, has stressed the need for greater Jewish racial solidarity. Unfortunately, it has worked in quite the opposite way for all other peoples, rendering them impotent in the struggle for self-preservation. The aim in the following pages is quite simply to tell the Truth. The distinguished American historian Harry Elmer Barnes once wrote that “An attempt to make a competent, objective and truthful investigation of the extermination question… is surely the most precarious venture that an historian or demographer could undertake today.” In attempting this precarious task, it is hoped to make some contribution, not only to historical truth, but towards lifting the burden of a lie from our own shoulders, so that we may freely confront the dangers which threaten us all.

the story that no less than Six Million Jews were exterminated… [is] the most colossal piece of fiction and the most successful of deceptions…’

The bitter and diabolical irony is that at the hands of Jewish funded political exploitation, it is in fact they who have the blood of multiple millions on their hands. In 1917 the Rothschilds funded Lenin and Trotsky with twenty million dollars – real names, Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov and Lev Bronshtein, both Jewish – via the Schiff banking family to overthrow the Russian Tsar; murdering him and his family by a Red Flag revolution. The Rothschilds privatised the Russian Central Bank, enslaving the Russian people descended from Asshur, to a Jewish Red Flag socialist elite, the ignominious first Red Flag, Jewish dictatorship. Anywhere between twenty to one hundred million White Christians in subsequent decades, were ‘murdered in an orgy of executions, rape, torture and enslavement.’ 

In 1919, the Jews insured Germany’s humiliation with the Treaty of Versailles, through Bernard Baruch advising President Wilson at the conference; Phillip Sassoon, the Parliamentary Private Secretary, advising Prime Minister Lloyd George; and Georges Mandel or rather Louis Rothschild, French Minister of the Interior, advising Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau. Nazi retaliation in 1933, in throwing off the shackles of Jewish oppression, led to the Jews declaring an all out war on the German people, with an oath to destroy them. The Jewish controlled allies, eventually defeated Nationalist Socialist Germany, yet after Germany’s surrender over ‘[one] million German soldiers are murdered by the Jewish allies including boys as young as 14. About [one] million more Germans are taken by the [Jewish] Bolshevik Russians as slaves and worked to death. The mass rape of German Women in East Prussia is effectively a genocide.’

An additional serious point to consider is the fact that the Jews hide behind the stolen identity of their nephew Judah and the name Israel, from their twin brother Jacob.

Encyclopaedia Biblica, Volume 2, Column 1187 – emphasis mine: 

‘Indeed the Edomites later became completely absorbed in Jewry, and under their aggressive intrusion the Jews became racially the medium of expression for the Edomite ideal (this is a reference to Esau, his character, his evil nature, his despising of the birthright, and his insatiable desire to regain what Jacob was given by any and all means possible, including especially deception, lying, camouflage, stealing… In fact, control and rulership of the entire world is really what is at stake!) for which Herod the Great had first given political formation… Even the fact that the Edomites have at length become Jews was soon completely forgotten by the exponents of Jewish tradition.’

What Price Israel, Alfred M Lilienthal – emphasis mine: 

‘The Khazar Jews and their descendants today comprise 90% of all Jews in Israel, the Sephardic Jews being the other 10%. The Zionists after WWII conspired to allow for the term “Jews” to be applied to any and all persons claiming a true heritage to Israel regardless of blood line or other qualification, the “right of return” could be based on essentially any claim: spiritual, physical or religious.  In other words, a “Jew” is anybody we say a Jew is and the world bought it!’

Judaism and the Christian Predicament, page 159: 

‘Judaism is not the religion of the Bible.’ 

A History of the Jews, Solomon Grayzel: 

‘The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart’s blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs, or ceremonies we observe – whether we are orthodox, Conservative, Reform, or merely spasmodic sentimentalists – we follow the Talmud.  It is our common law.’

Identity of True Israel, Willie Martin – emphasis mine:

‘One of their own, Samuel Roth, a well known author and publisher in New York in the 1930s wrote in his book “Jews Must Live” [1934]:

“America is full of businesses bearing old Christian names, but which are really owned and run by Jews. Most of them have been acquired in the manner I have just described, the way the Jew creates something out of nothing (slow strangling). The Jew, better than anyone else in the world knows how to dispossess the poor and the members of the middle classes. To fit this case, the old P.T. Barnum adage needs only a little changing. A gentile enters business every minute, with two Jews waiting to take him out of it.” 

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis mine:

‘… a hunter’s life is one of uncertainty and hardship always wandering to and fro, never having a settled existence. Like the legendary “Wandering Jew” the Edomites are cursed to be continually roaming the earth without end. The Jew has been a wanderer and a nomad nearly all of his existence. The Jews are perhaps the only race that has never had a land or a nation of their own. The Jews… are a parasitic people… who seek a host nation they can subsist on and prosper at the expense of others while contributing nothing.

Samuel Roth: 

“It seems to be part of the Jew’s unwritten code that he should never work. I cannot find anything of value that Jews have created in their… residence on the American continent.”

The genius of the Jew is to live off people; not off land, nor off the production of commodities from raw material, but off people. Let other people toil the soil; the Jew, if he can, will live off the tiller. Let other people toil at trades and manufacturers; the Jew will exploit the fruits of their work. That is his peculiar genius’ – The International Jew, 1921.

Why the subterfuge and the red herring regarding the identity of the Jews? There are many facets, though three main reasons or benefits.

  1. The claiming of the identity of true Israelites is pivotal in the Zionists decree that they have the right to the takeover and occupation of Palestine and the state of Israel.
  1. Claiming to be true Israelites provides the Jews with all the kudos, support and sympathy they need from their devout enemy, the Christian; in the very nations they seek to destroy – principally, the United States of America and the United Kingdom. The Jews are accepted and assisted because they are the chosen ‘race’ or people of the Bible [“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee” – Genesis 12:3].
  1. The ‘identity theft’ by the Edomite Jews, helps to prevent the Israelite descendants particularly the tribe of Judah, from recognising and claiming their own true identity [Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes].

For any reader still holding a smidgen of doubt after all that we have covered, or rather uncovered so far, the following Jewish quote is typically brazen and unapologetic.

Manifesto of the World Jewish Federation, Gerald Soman: January 1, 1935 – emphasis mine:

‘No one can deny that the Jews are a most unique and unusual people. That uniqueness exists because of their Edomite heritage. You cannot be English Jews [true indeed]. We are a race, and only as a race can we perpetuate. Our mentality is of Edomitish character, and differs from that of an Englishman. Enough subterfuges! Let us assert openly that we are International Jews.’

We have briefly discussed the Magen Star, or Star of David. An enlightening article is presented by The Creator’s Calendar, entitled The Star of David Deception – emphasis mine:

‘… the “Star of David,” [is] the universally recognized symbol of the state of Israel and the Jews today – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? The truth is that King David never used a star as a symbol… This six-pointed star was used by Babylonian astrologers for Sun worship – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy. They divided the starry heavens into 36 constellations (ten days each). These were represented by different amulets called “Sigilla Solis,” or the Sun Seal. 

These amulets were worn by the pagan priests and they contained all the numbers from 1 to 36. By these figures, they claimed to be able to foretell future events. Adding the numbers of any column either horizontally or vertically, and also the two diagonals crossing the square, the total is the same – 111. The sum of the six columns, either horizontally or vertically, equals 666.

… the Israelites [worshipped] the Star of Remphan, which represents the god Saturn, also called Chiun. “But you have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your elohiym (god), which you made to yourselves.” Amos 5:26. Just before being stoned to death by the Jews, Stephen accused the Jewish leaders: “And you took up the tent of Moloch, and the star of your elohiym (god) Remphan, the figures which you made in order to worship them.” Acts 7:43.

Solomon gave himself up to witchcraft and idolatry and built altars to Moloch, Ashtoreth, and Remphan, the ancient Egyptian “Star” Elohim (god)’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and articles: Belphegor; and Na’amah. ‘This is very significant because Solomon was originally noted as a man of wisdom,* who was allowed to build the temple of Yahuah; yet late in his life Satan enticed him to worship and build altars to false Elohim (gods), and use the hexagram to invoke the powers of Satan.

King Solomon reintroduced the six-pointed Star to the Kingdom of Israel, so this Talisman of Saturn became known as the Seal of Solomon’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. ‘The six-pointed Star is engraved on the Talisman of Saturn which is used in ritual magic – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘A bull’s head is enclosed in a six-pointed star, and surrounded by letters composing the name Remphan, the planetary genius of Saturn, according to the alphabet of the Babylonian Magi. The bull represents Moloch worship and ultimately, Satan worship’ – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Satanists, Occultists, and Freemasons venerate King Solomon, who (according to the sages) owned a magic ring that was engraved with the “Seal of Solomon,” which gave him power over the invisible monarchy of demons (The History and Practice of Magic, Volume 2).’ – Article: Thoth. ‘The six-pointed Star represents Satan, not King David. The hexagram equates to 666, which Yahusha the Messiah said is the sign of the beast. It has six points, forms six equilateral triangles, and its interior forms a six-pointed hexagon – thus it reveals the number of Satan’s antichrist beast. The 6 points, 6 triangles, and the 6 sides of the hexagon = 666! The Scriptures attribute the number 666 to Solomon.’

“Here is wisdom.* Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man [G444 – anthropos]; and [their] number is six hundred threescore and six” – Revelation 13:18. 

“Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of gold…” – 1 Kings 10:14.

The Greek word for man principally refers to ‘a human being, whether male or female.’ But, can also be in reference to ‘animals, plants, God, Christ and angels.’ 

It is linked with the Greek word G3700, optanomai and ‘the countenance’ of one who is ‘man-faced.’ Now this word is interesting, for it means ‘to look at, behold, to appear’ and ‘to allow one’s self to be seen.’ By extension it includes ‘an apparition, vision.’ It allows that the number of the Beast refers to a being that is actually not human, as inferred by the use of the generic word, man. Using the word angel for instance, would not only completely change the meaning of the verse, but would lend weighty support to the conclusions drawn earlier on the Beast’s identity – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Creator’s Calendar: ‘Throughout the middle ages, the Seal of Solomon has been used by Arab Magicians, Cabalist Magicians, Druid witches and Satanists. It’s the most powerful symbol used to invoke witchcraft, demons, and Satan. It’s used in magic, witchcraft, sorcery, occultism, alchemy, and the casting of zodiacal horoscopes by astrologers. In fact, the word ‘hex‘, as in to put a hex on someone, derives from the word hexagram.’

Davidster [Star of David] by Dick Stins is a Holocaust memorial in The Hague, Netherlands. 

The text at the side (in Dutch and Hebrew) and with monumental (no pun intended) irony, is from the Book of Deuteronomy: ‘Remember what Amalek has done to you… do not forget.’

‘According to former Satanist Bill Schnoebelen… “a hexagram must be present to call forth a demon” and “it is a very powerful tool to invoke Satan.” It is no mystery that in… the [occult], the hex plays a central role in Satan worship, and upon and within these covens, human sacrifices are offered to Satan. 

The hexagram, like the pentagram, is used in practices of the occult and ceremonial magic, and it is attributed to the seven “old” planets outlined in astrology. The hexagram represents sun worship, which is Satan worship. The symbol is linked with sun worship and the sun god, which again links back to the Mystery Religions.

Deuteronomy 4:19 says, “And beware, lest you lift up your eyes to heaven and see the sun, and the moon, and the stars, all the host of heaven, and be drawn away and worship them and serve them.”

Helena Blavatsky wrote that “Lucifer is the true God,” and she incorporated the hexagram in the emblem of the Theosophical Society, which she founded in 1875. The six-pointed Star is prominent in their logo, which includes the Swastika, the Ankh (cross with a circle representing eternal life), the Aum [om, ohm],’ – refer article: 33 – ‘and the Ouroboros (an ancient symbol depicting a serpent or dragon eating its own tail)’ – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘She believed that “There is no religion higher than (Lucifer’s) [Samael’s] truth.”

“The interlaced triangles, one (lighter) pointing upwards and the other (darker) pointing downwards, symbolize the descent of spirit into matter and its emergence from the confining limits of form. At the same time, they suggest the constant conflict between light and dark forces in nature and man. When, as in the emblem, the double triangle is depicted within the circle of the Serpent, the whole of manifested nature is represented, the universe bounded by the limitations of time and space.

“No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation.” – David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations.

The Rothschilds funded the Zionist movement to create the state of Israel. In 1895, Edmond James de Rothschild visited Palestine and subsequently supplied the funds to buy a great deal of property from the Turks and Arabs to found the first Jewish colonies in Palestine. In 1897, the Rothschilds founded the Zionist Congress to promote Zionism (a political movement with the sole aim of moving all Jews into a singularly Jewish nation-state). The “Rothschild Hexagram” was placed on the Zionist flag, which 51 years later ended up on the flag of Israel. The Satanic Rothschilds put the hexagram on Israel’s flag instead of a menorah.’ 

‘When the Flag of Israel was unveiled, it was met with tremendous opposition from Jews who realize this hexagram was used in the ancient mystery religions as the symbol of Moloch. The emblem on the flag is a blue-colored version of the Rothschild, “Red Hexagram or Sign.” The Star is on the flag because the Rothschilds own and control the state of Israel. The six-pointed star on Israel’s flag represents Satan, not the Star of David. So it wasn’t… the Eternal Father who created the modern state of Israel. It was Satan… Today, every major religion uses the hexagram.’

The Star of David turns up again, a little later in our journey, as it is on a flag in Northern Ireland: the Ulster Banner – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

The second-to-last area of note concerning the Jews is that of the Jewish calendar, sometimes incorrectly rendered the Hebrew or Sacred calendar. As it is a major topic and possibly more interesting to those of a Sabbatarian background or point of reference; we will discuss in a separate article – refer: The Calendar Conspiracy. The calendar issue is significant, including the beginning and end of a day; when the new moon is calculated; what is the new moon; how is the seven day cycle counted; and other pertinent related matters are investigated. 

The final major area involving the Edomite Jews is that of a one world government. A phrase used so often and discussed more frequently than any other ‘conspiracy theory’, that many probably tune out at the mention of it. Regardless, the Bible has quite a bit to say on the matter and its fulfilment is growing increasingly relevant right before the eyes of this generation – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? Charles Weisman addresses the impact of this growing threat.

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991 – emphasis mine:

‘Conspiracies are as “old as the hills.” God’s people have often been the target of conspiracies (Psalm 83:3). It should by now be seen why talk of an “International Jewish Conspiracy” makes no sense to the general public. They don’t see or understand anything of the kind because they do not know the identity of the characters in God’s Script-the Bible-or their roles in that Script. Why would Jews, which the entire church world holds up as the apple of God’s eye, want to harm or destroy white Christians? Through the various organizations, movements, political parties and masonic orders, which Edomite Jews have either established or infiltrated, a definite program has been designed to prevail over or harm the white Christian people.’

Continuing with Charles Weisman – emphasis mine:

‘One-world dominion has long been a plan of the Jews. This is prevalent in their Zionist movement, which is part of the Jewish ideal of ruling the world. This plan was made explicit by the Jew and CFR member James P. Warburg, in testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17, 1950, stating: “We shall have World Government whether or not you like it. The only question is whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”

The Jew Baruch Levy, back in the mid 1800s, had clearly expressed the ultimate goals of the Jews:

“The Jewish people as a whole will be its own Messiah. It will attain world dominion by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy, and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will every where exercise the privilege of citizenship. In this new world order the Jews will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The Governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property, and everywhere to make use of the resources of the state. Thus will the purpose of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which it is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands.”

The Jews don’t await a Messiah or believe any ever existed, rather they are their own Messiah and that Messiah, they believe, will one day rule the world.’

Karl Marx, himself a Jew remarked: 

‘There can be no solution of the problems of the world without the destruction of the Jews and their religion, Judaism.’

Finally, before we investigate the genetics and autosomal DNA of the Jewish people and their relevant Haplogroups, a survey of the colour Red symbolising Edom, is enlightening.

Who Is Esau-Edom, Charles A Weisman, 1991:

‘The word ‘Edom’ actually means “red,” just as the name Esau signifies red. 

  • Red is representative of blood and bloodshed (2 Kings 3:22; Isaiah 1:15).
  • Scarlet or red is symbolic of sin in general (Isaiah 1:18).
  • The red horse of the Book of Revelation signifies war and the ability to cause wars (Revelation 6:4). Esau was to be war-like and live by the sword (Genesis 27:40).
  • The anti-Christian, satanic system which ruled Rome was identified as a red dragon (Revelation 12:3). Jews are the most anti-christian people on the face of the earth.’

Weisman adds: a ‘consistent distinguishing factor among Jews for the last 2,000 years and throughout the entire world is that they promote an anti-Christian agenda. They hate Christ, Christians, and Christianity as if their very identity is dependent on it.’

Merovingian Bloodline and the Black Nobility, Fritz Springmeier, 2000 – emphasis mine:

‘”The work of… [the] Jews smuggled as ‘Fifth Column’ into the bosom of the Church of Christ was made easier through the hypocritical conversion to Christianity or that of their forefathers. In addition, they laid aside their Jewish surnames and took on very Christian names, which were embellished with the surnames of their godfathers. Thus they were successful in mixing [within]… Christian society and taking possession of the names of the leading families of France, Italy, England, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Poland and the other lands of Christian Europe. With this system, they were successful in penetrating into the bosom of Christianity itself, in order to destroy it from within and to destroy the core of the religious, political and economic institutions.” (Pinay, page 237).’ 

‘The great beast of Mystery Babylon which was to spread abominations and death to the whole earth is scarlet or red in color. And the woman on the beast controlling it is dressed in scarlet (Revelation 17:3-4). Jews are the major promoters of the Babylonian religion called Judaism.’

Revelation 17:3-12, 18

English Standard Version

3 ‘And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names… 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality.

5 And on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations.”

6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her, I marveled greatly. 7 But the angel said to me, “Why do you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her. 8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast… 12 And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour [Day for a 1000 years: 1000 divide by 24 = 41.66… 42 years?], together with the beast.

18 And the woman* that you saw is the great city [Jerusalem in the state of Israel] that has dominion over the kings of the earth.”

Weisman: ‘The Script of God reveals many interesting parallels between Red Edom and the Red beast system of Babylon. As indicated they both have the color identification of red. There are also similarities between their prophecies and judgments. These need to be examined for the sake of further identifying who and what Esau-Edom is. The following are some of these parallels:

  • Burned and destroyed by fire: In Obadiah 1:18 Esau is devoured by the flame of Jacob. Babylon will also “be utterly burned with fire” (Revelation 18:8).
  • Be overthrown Iike Sodom and Gomorrah: Both Edom (Jeremiah. 49:18) and Babylon (Jeremiah 50:40) are to end in destruction “as in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah.”
  • Habitations made desolate: Edom shall have its habitations made “desolate” by “the least of the flock.” (Jeremiah 49:20). This exact same judgment is given for Babylon (Jeremiah 50:45).
  • Dominion over, and war against, Israel: As shown, Edom was to gain dominion over, and afflict Israel. The system of Babylon also is to have dominion over God’s people and make war against them (Daniel 7:21-25; Revelation 12:17; 13:7; 17:6).
  • Has a covert reign over the world: The final stage of rule of Babylon is a “mystery” (Revelation 17:5). Edom is also exalted very “high,” which involves “hidden things” (Obadiah 1:3-6).

–  Israel to destroy and be delivered from: Both Edom (Obadiah 1:16-18) and Babylon (Revelation 18:4) are what God’s people need deliverance from. This deliverance comes by God’s people destroying its oppressor (Daniel 7:26-27; Revelation 18:6).

  • The banking industry, which is a part of red babylon’s economic control over Christendom, is led by the Jewish banking family of Rothschild, which means “red shield.”
  • The Red Flag symbolizes revolutionary socialism. “The socialist movement, from its inception up to the present day, has been largely dominated by Jewish influence.”
  • In the Jewish Cabala red signifies bloodshed and also justice for the Jew.
  • The Jewish author and historian Arthur Koestler shows that the Jewish Khazars (from which many Jews are derived) were commonly known as “Red Jews.”
  • The color of Jewish-Communism is red as indicated by such terms as red nation, red star, ‘Red Square’, etc. The Russian Revolution that brought about ‘Red Communism’ was planned and financed by Jews, and “the revolutionary leaders nearly all belonged to the Jewish race.”
  • Red, in the West, has become a universal sign for warning or danger. Red Edom (communism) has proven to be danger to the Christian West.’ 

An enumeration of the chemical process in analysing Haplogroups is provided in the following article:

The Genetic Origin of the Nations, Christian Churches of God, 2006 & 2020 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis & bold mine:

‘The YDNA and mtDNA are measured in two different ways. YDNA is measured in what are termed polymorphs. These polymorphs are allocated a numeric value and, according to the value when tested, the sub-groupings that are formed are called clades and subclades of the overall grouping which is called a Haplogroup. These values record the change in YDNA mutations and lines. The YDNA system that has been allocated to the male human species is grouped into a series of Haplogroups from A to R. The usual extensive measurement (using the Arizona system) is usually of 37 sites as markers. Basic testing is done for the first twelve, then to 25, and then on to 37 of these polymorphic sites, or locations to determine relatedness and Haplogroup association. There could be some 100 or more markers tested for changes (a.k.a. polymorphisms).

The mitochondria, first sequenced in 1981, became known as the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS). The CRS has been used as a basis for comparison with individual mtDNA. In other words, any place in an individual mtDNA that has a difference from the CRS is characterized as a mutation. If a result shows no mutations at all it means that the mtDNA matches the CRS. A mutation happens when: a) a base replaces another base – for example a C (Cytosine) replaces an A (Adenine); b) a base is no longer in that position, or a deletion; and c) a new base is inserted between the other bases without replacing any other (an insertion). The mtDNA is determined by reporting the polymorphic site such as for example 311C, meaning a mutation has occurred at base pair 16,311 and the base that changed here was actually changed to cytosine. The number 16,000 is the commencement point for DNA numbering and thus the 16,000 is dropped and the numbers used are the numbers in excess. So 16,311 becomes 311 and the letter indicates the chemical at that point in the polymorph. 

It is this change of the polymorphic site that determines the genetic ancestry, as the parent passes on to the offspring the DNA polymorphisms that they have with the same or similar numerical values. When tested, these values that are not exactly the same as the parent are termed mutations. The values thus vary and have determined the tribal groupings of the world’s nations.’

‘Conventional wisdom identifies the Middle-East Arabs as Haplogroup J[1] and the [Jews… who have] an identified clear lineage to Shem, is at J2 [from admixture only]. The mtDNA of the Ashkenazi Jews is classed as Near Eastern, but we need to look at the structure. As we saw with the mtDNA, all other groups came from Hg L3, which split into two main groups M and N. From N came R and the subsequent divisions of N and R. N split in the Middle East and formed the Nu subgroup of N (N1), I and W. 10% of Ashkenazi Jewish mtDNA is N1b. This type differs only by a single transition from the ancestral N1b (145-176G-223). 

This may be among the most ancient of the mtDNA with the exception of L2. That L2 DNA as we have seen is an offshoot of the primal L mtDNA. It is of Hamitic origin [rather, retained by Canaan’s descendants] and mostly now sub-Saharan and Ethiopian. Moses’ first wife was an Ethiopian [Cush, not country of Ethiopia in Africa – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut] also and the Canaanites may well have had this DNA [yes]. There is also a Near-Eastern type of M1, which is the primal subdivision of the M group. The remainder are all subdivisions of R, and which constitute 60% of Ashkenazi mtDNA.

Near-Eastern mtDNA types among Ashkenazi Jews are N1b, H, J, K, L2, preHV, U7, M1, U1B (cf. Behar et al., Differential Bottleneck Effects in the mtDNA Gene Pool of Ashkenazi Jewish Populations, pp. 8,9,19; see also MtDNA Evidence for a genetic bottleneck in the early history of the Ashkenazi Jewish population, European Journal of Human Genetics, 2004, pp. 1-10). There are low percentages of mtDNA such as U5a and V, which are considered to have come from European admixture (Behar et al., p. 10). 

The latest division is that of U, which split to form K. 32%^^ of all Ashkenazi-Jewish mtDNA is K, consisting of 4 major subtypes*.’

Recall, the four wives of Esau as well as the four original female ancestors of the Ashkenazim.

‘The next highest Ashkenazi-Jewish mtDNA is H at 21% and of which 7% is H ancestral. The British Ashkenazi-Jewish mtDNA is the CRS modal haplotype. Thus we might assume that the original division of HV is likely to have occurred on the early population of these females (early Israel?). J1 is next at 7%. 

What is important in this aspect is that H constitutes 21% of Ashkenazi-Jewish mtDNA and that DNA is the major mtDNA sequence of the entire European population at just under 50% of Iceland, to up to 60% of the British Isles, and 65% of Iberia and 50% of France. It slowly decreases as the population goes east. It drops to 25% among the Turks and Palestine/Egyptians and drops further among the Kurds, Persians, South Pakistanis and Hazara, with an increase to over 22% among the Uzbeks and up to 30% in northern Russia among the Komi. It is thus reasonable to assume that the same females that were the basis of the Western Europeans were the basis for many of the Ashkenazi females, and that the mutations occurred within those tribes.

The other people with a high portion of K are the Kurds of which U forms the major portion. U forms significant portions of all European mtDNA. H forms over 50% of all Anglo-Celts, Scandinavians and French and is even greater in Iberia. The significant difference between the Ashkenazi and the Europeans is that the division K is greater among them than it is in Europe… 

… Gentiles can become Israelites but not Levites or Cohenim. This rule obviously was not followed in the Khazar conversion. Within Ashkenazi Levite R1a1 haplotypes the microsatellite haplotypes are tightly clustered around a modal haplotype (16-12-25-10-11-13) that comprises 74% of Ashkenazi-Levites within the Haplogroup and 38% of Ashkenazi Levites overall.’

Remember Haplogroup R1b is the true defining marker Haplogroup for Jewish men descended from Esau. Paternal Haplogroup R1a is a result of admixture. Nor are the Jewish Levites or Cohen’s true Levites from the tribe of Levi – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘Jews attempt to confine origins of the Ashkenazim to the small area of Northwest Europe from Northeast France to Northern Germany. They claimed an origin from as early as the 6th century. This area at that time was the central location of the Parthian Horde as it broke up and moved into Britain, Scandinavia, France and Spain and Italy. It is likely that some Jewish elements of the Horde moved there or followed the Horde later – refer Parthia, Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The term Sephardi, when originally applied to Jews, was related to the [ethnic] Jews of Spain prior to the expulsion of 1492, and which Jews also were in Britain. However current usage applies it [somewhat misleadingly] to all Jews of North Africa and the Near East who follow the Sephardi rite of worship.

The implications of these YDNA samples are quite far reaching. There are only 4 lineages that share the same J2 lineages as the Cohen Modal Haplotype. Only 6 share the J Haplogroup. Thus only 10% of tested Ashkenazi Levites are recognised as of known direct Jewish/Israelite [Edomite] YDNA. F and I comprise 25% of the Semitic Levite YDNA tested. Under current understanding, the staggering figures are that two-thirds of Ashkenazi-Levite YDNA is not Semitic.’ This is not staggering as it shouldn’t be classed as Semitic (or Middle Eastern) in the first place and is a result of intermixing and intermarriage. ‘Almost 10% are Celt and an amazing 52% are Slavic YDNA.’

‘The studies conclude also from the homogeneity of the R1a1 modal haplotype that the ancestor was perhaps only 663 years ago. The growth may have been only from one person. This would have coincided with the establishment of the Jewish communities of Mainz and Worms. The star-like patterns of the R1a1 YDNA indicate rapid population growth in the Ashkenazi Jewish population in the last 1000 years.

The diversity in the Ashkenazi-Levites suggests a genetic intrusion AFTER the Ashkenazi SPLIT from other Jewish [Sephardic] populations. The origin of the R1a1 [Iranian] Ashkenazi Levites is thus probably from Sorbian-speaking Khazars who converted to Judaism and entered into Levi [reather Edom] and who then expanded rapidly in Europe.

Of the tests done on the Jewish populations, we can compare the Sephardic Cohenim and the Ashkenazi Cohenim and we find that even in the Cohenim* there are Hamitic and Japhethite lineages[?]. Whilst the Haplogroup J has a frequency of .8684 for Ashkenazi Cohenim (AC) and .7536 for Sephardi Cohenim (SC), there is still a frequency for non-Semitic priests of between 14.16 and 24.64 per cent. Of the basic Jewish populations only some 37% are actual Semites [Middle Eastern (Arab related)] in the frequency samples. Hg J is for Ashkenazi Israelites (AI) .3700 and for Sephardi Israelites (SI) it is .3651.

What is certain is that the adherents of Rabbinical Judaism are not wholly Jewish [Edomite ] or Israelite, and 63% of all Jews are either Hamitic [Middle Eastern, West Asian] or Japhethite converts to Judaism; that is, unless it can be shown that some aspects of K are Semitic rather than Japhethite, which would throw the YDNA sequencing into complete revision.’

Khazaria, Studies of Cohens and Levites, Kevin Alan Brook – capitalisation theirs, emphasis & bold mine:

Key findings:

‘The Cohen Modal Haplotype is found among many Jewish populations of the world, including Ashkenazim, Sephardim, and the Bene Israel of India. The Cohen Modal Haplotype, which belongs to haplogroup J, was a component of the ancient Israelite population, and especially common among the Cohens [Edomites] (priests of the Temple in Jerusalem). The Cohen Modal Haplotype is NOT exclusively found among Jews, but rather is also found among Kurds, Armenians, Italians, Palestinian Arabs, and a few other peoples.

About half of Ashkenazic Levites possess haplotypes belonging to the R1a1 haplogroup. This is almost NEVER found among Sephardic Levites, and is RARE in non-Ashkenazic populations as a whole, but the phylogeny of the branching out of R1a1 shows the Ashkenazic variety of R1a1 to be DISTINCT from both the Eastern European and Central Asian forms of R1a1, contradicting the theory that Slavs or Khazars who converted to Judaism introduced this lineage into Ashkenazim. The actual source of Ashkenazic R1a1 was a population in Iran.’

The Ashkenazi ‘Levites’ experienced a rapid population expansion after a split from Sephardic Jews as evidenced by a unique R1a Haplogroup barely found in Sephardic Jews, rare in non-Jews and supposedly preceding, the introduction of Khazar R1a Haplogroups into the Ashkenazi Jewish gene pool. The Cohen – ‘Levite priest’ incorrectly claimed to descend from Moses’s brother Aaron – Modal Haplotype of J, is not unique to Jews. But, is common in peoples, who are in no way related to Abraham, as in, his children from Isaac, Jacob or Levi. This seriously questions the validity of the Cohen-Priest-Aaron-Levi-Jacob claim as being true. 

In reference to the final paragraph in The Genetic Origin of Nations article preceding the above quote, the use of the word Semitic for race – in this case being applied to Arab related peoples – rather than language as previously touched upon, is problematic. The Jewish mtDNA Haplogroups in the main are those typically derived from Shem. The Khazars were a Turkic-Iranian peoples descended from Shem. The idea amongst many is to incorrectly equate the Turks with Japheth. As we found with Y-DNA Haplogroup Q – which is indicative in varying degrees in the East Asian peoples and particularly in the Native American Indians – similarly with mtDNA K, which though as a Haplogroup may appear elsewhere in Central Asia or North Africa from admixture, is a Haplogroup associated with Shem and especially Edom. 

Therefore, we would expect the Jewish people to possess mtDNA haplogroup K. In fact, Haplogroup K represents an exceptionally high thirty-two percent^^ of the Ashkenazi Jewish total, while having a low to moderate frequency amongst non-Jews in both Europe, the Near East and the Sephardic Jew. In Europe, mtDNA K is common in Northwestern Europe: Ireland (12%), Belgium (12%), the Netherlands (10%), Iceland (10%), Denmark (9%), Austria (9%), France (9%), England (8%), Wales (8%), Italy (8%) and Scotland (7%). Not coincidentally, the Sephardic Jew possesses a similar percentage level as these related nations descended from Abraham, Nahor and Haran. 

It was a 2004 study by Behar, that found that approximately 32% of Ashkenazi Jews belong to the mitochondrial Haplogroup K, which he said points to a genetic bottleneck of ‘100 generations ago’, with an origination in Western Asia some 12,000 years ago. 

It was the 2006 follow up study by Behar, based on high-resolution analysis of mtDNA Haplogroup K, which found that ‘40% of the current Ashkenazi population is descended matrilineally from just four women, or founder lineages*’ – K1a1b1a, K1a9, K2a2a and N1b2. A ‘sister’ maternal line was found among the Jews of Portugal, North Africa, France, and Italy

Behar wrote: 

‘Both the extent and location of the maternal ancestral deme from which the Ashkenazi Jewry arose remain obscure. Here, using complete sequences of the maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), we show that close to one-half of Ashkenazi Jews, estimated at 8,000,000 people, can be traced back to only four women carrying distinct mtDNAs that are virtually absent in other populations, with the important exception of low frequencies among non-Ashkenazi Jews [that is, Sephardi Jewry]. We conclude that four founding mtDNAs, likely of Near Eastern ancestry [the four wives of Esau], underwent major expansion(s) in Europe within the past millennium…’

Y-DNA Research Studies of Rabbinical Lineages and Their Importance to Jewish Genealogy, Dr Jeffrey Mark Paull, 2010 – emphasis mine:

‘… most Ashkenazi Jews cannot trace their ancestry back more than a few generations. Among those fortunate enough to be able to go back further, they run into a brick wall in the pre-Jewish surname era, before the mandated adoption of fixed, inherited surnames, during the late 18th to early 19th centuries in Eastern Europe and the Russian Empire. 

The notable exceptions are the major rabbinical families, who adopted fixed surnames long before they were mandated by governmental authority. The lineages of these families have been preserved for centuries. Those who can connect to a major rabbinical family can thereby trace their ancestry back many more generations. 

The eight Cohen* descendants have an average of 402 genetic matches at 37 STR markers; about 40% of these are genealogically relevant genetic matches (≥35/37 STR markers; the 90% probability prediction for the TMRCA is within 12 generations). Approximately 14% of these 402 genetic matches have the Cohen surname, or one of its variants (Cohn, Kahana, Kahn, Kaplan, Katz, Kohane, Kohen, Kohn). 

An interesting observation about these thirteen rabbinical lineages is that four, or nearly one-third of them (30.8%), belong to the J-M267 haplogroup. This proportion is very close to the range of 35–43% that has been cited as the percentage of all Jewish men who belong to the J haplogroup and its subgroups. Another three lineages, or nearly one-quarter of them (23.1%), belong to the E-M35/E-L117 haplogroup (E-L117 is the previous haplogroup classification for E-M35). This is right in the middle of the range of 15–30% that has been cited as the percentage of all Jewish men who belong to the E1b1b (E-M35) haplogroup. 

Of the remaining lineages, two of them (15.4%) belong to the G-M201 haplogroup, two (15.4%) to the R-M173 [R1] haplogroup, one (7.7%) to the J-M172 haplogroup, and one (7.7%) to the R-M124 [R2a] haplogroup. Together, these four haplogroups account for 46.2% of the total.’ 

Distribution of Haplogroups among Thirteen Rabbinical Lineages 

Y-DNA Haplogroup R mutations are found in Asian populations as R2 and R1a from admixture. Typically, the highest percentages for R1a are in eastern Europe and R1b is indicative of western Europe as we have discovered. Ninety-nine percent of R1a people belong to sub-clades of R1a1a1 (M417) and include the R1a-Z93 mutation, which is the main Asian branch of R1a. 

It is found in Central Asia, South Asia and Southwest Asia, including amongst Ashkenazi Jews. R1a-Z93 is seen as a marker for historical peoples such as the ancient Persians, the Medes and Tatars – Chapter III Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey – as well as filtering through to the genetic pool of the Arabs and Jews, with R1a-F1345 one of the main Middle Eastern clades. Interestingly, R1a-CTS6 is the Jewish sub-clade of R1a, which scientists say formed 3,500 ya and has a TMRCA – time to the most recent common ancestor – of 2,800 years. The first date is not far removed from when Esau was born in 1817 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology.

That said, it is this writer’s conviction that R1a is a defining marker for the males of Iran descended from Lud – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. The ancient Persian men descended from Elam and today equating to the Turks are R1b driven like the Jews – regardless of the prevalence of Haplogroup J2 through admixture in both populations.

Haplogroup R1a has been found at elevated levels amongst samples of Israelis who claim Ashkenazi heritage. Perhaps reflecting gene flow into Ashkenazi populations from surrounding Eastern European populations, over a course of centuries as well as possibly the Khazar infusion (which appears to have been more Iranian than Turkish in origin). This finding is consistent with the SNP microarray analysis which indicates that up to fifty-five percent of the modern Ashkenazi genome is traceable to Europe. Ashkenazim were found to have a significantly higher frequency of the R1 (M173) Haplogroup; the dominant Haplogroup in Ashkenazi ‘Levites’ at 52%; while rare in Ashkenazi Cohanim at 1.3%.

Two studies by Nebel in 2001 and 2005, based on Y chromosome polymorphic markers, concluded: ‘However, if the R1a1a (R-M17) [M198] chromosomes in Ashkenazi Jews do indeed represent the vestiges of the mysterious Khazars then, according to our data, this contribution was limited to either a single founder or a few closely related men, and does not exceed ~12% of the present-day Ashkenazim.’ In addition, a 2017 study on the Ashkenazi Levites proposed that a Middle Eastern origin of this lineage had been firmly validated through the phylogenetically separate R1a-Y2619 sub-clade. 

Y-DNA Haplogroup J is found amongst Europeans from admixture and naturally occurs amongst the peoples of the Middle East and southwest Asia. J1 is principally found in the Arabs of the near east, spilling over into the peoples of southern to eastern Europe. J2 for instance – a more complex mutation than J1 and the defining marker Haplogroup for Pakistani men and – in the Turks and Kurds, follows a similar pattern, though compared with J1, J2 is found in higher percentages in Europe. Even so, J is a paternal Haplogroup from Ham’s line and in Europeans is a result of admixture.

About twenty percent of Jewish men belong to Haplogroup J1-P58. J1-L817 is also a major Jewish cluster; found as far away as China. J1-L823 is a Jewish cluster found mostly in central and eastern Europe, as well as in Spain. Whereas J1-L1253, is specifically limited to Britain and Ireland.

Of course let it be repeated, the J1 and J2 Haplogroups are a bit of a blind, as the key Haplogroup to be homing in on is R1b, as it is for all of Abraham’s descendants – though not just exclusive to them. It is the paternal R1b Haplogroup which is the foundational Haplogroup with other Haplogroups such as I1, I2a2 and in lesser frequency the R1a Haplogroup, which are the main Y-DNA Haplogroups resulting from admixture – with related peoples descending from Arphaxad – and are the most visible in Abraham’s males descendants. 

Therefore, Esau will exhibit the same Haplogroups and the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews will show varying degrees of further admixture through Haplogroups J and E1b1b (E-M135) from Ham and Canaan respectively and G2c from Shem.

There is also an mtDNA Haplogroup J1 distributed across Europe and the frequencies found in Abraham’s descendants and near relatives from his brothers Haran and Nahor include: Cornwall (20%), Wales (15%), Iceland (14%), Scotland (13%), Denmark (13%), England (12%), Switzerland (12%), Ireland (11%), the Netherlands (11%), Norway (11%), Germany (9%), Austria (9%), Sweden (8%), Italy (8%) and France (8%).

The Ashkenazim have seven percent of mtDNA J1 which places them slightly less than their British and Irish brothers, their Nordic and German cousins; as well as their distant cousins, Italy and France. The Sephardic Jew has even less at approximately five percent. Though this is probably based on the Sephardim of North Africa and a different history of admixture. 

A comparison of the Ashkenazi Jew who comprises some 85 to 90% of the worldwide Jewish population is enlightening when compared to the Italians; because of all of Abraham’s descendants and brother’s children, it is in fact Italy, which aligns the closest. 

A study in July 2010 by Bray, using SNP microarray techniques and linkage analysis, stated that it: ‘confirms that there is a closer relationship between the Ashkenazim and several European populations (Tuscans, Italians, and French) [see PCA graph below] than between the Ashkenazim and Middle Eastern populations’ of which European ‘admixture is considerably higher than previous estimates by studies that used the Y chromosome.’ 

It may not be influenced just through intermixing but as we have noted previously; some peoples are closer genetically to a cousin than a sibling. The Jews are a fascinating case in point, with a closer genetic alignment to their Great Uncle Nahor rather than twin brother Jacob. Is the answer hereditary? Or purely the result of admixture which has affected the R1b percentage (and sub-haplogroups) which was originally more like that of Jacob? Or, a combination of the two?

A hereditary component finds valuable support. Recall, Esau’s mother is Rebekah. Rebekah was the granddaughter of Nahor and her father was Bethuel, the son of Nahor and his wife Milcah; who in turn was the daughter of Haran, Nahor’s elder brother. Rebekah’s brother Laban gave his daughters, Leah and Rachel to Jacob. Therefore, we have a tight genetic group; that today would equate to North-Central Italians, Swiss-French, British-Irish and Jewish.

When the Bible describes Jacob and Esau as two different peoples, nations, ethnicities or ‘races’, it is giving a vital clue to their different genetic composition. It is now emerging that Jacob probably took after his father and Esau, his mother. All children are a combination of their parents, though some are more similar to one parent than another or even with a relative in the past. 

In this case, it could be inferred that Esau inherited a strikingly closer genetic match from his mother, a maternal Italian ancestor than his father, a paternal British and Irish ancestor. We return to a matrilineal descent and its intrinsic definition of genetically being a Jew. 

Yet the Jew has become such a diluted ethnicity, their autosomal DNA now matches other heavily mixed white ethnicities (from input with Arab related peoples) such as the southern Italians and Greeks. A more recognisable similarity of family kinship would have once been evident. A clue to this is in the oldest defining paternal marker Haplogroup for Shem’s descendants, that of Haplogroup G. From which I1, I2, R1a and R1b have ultimately derived.

Notice the relatively high percentage of ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup G (in Shem’s line) which Jews exhibit, similar to their ‘close’ relations, the Italians, Germans, Austrians, French and Swiss. In other words, that which Edom shares with Nahor the father of the Chaldeans; and with Ishmael, Hagar, Lot and Haran respectively.

Consider also, that the English and Welsh have far higher levels of Haplogroup G, particularly G2a-L497 than the Irish and Scots. We will learn that England and Wales are full blood brothers, whereas the Republic of Ireland and Scotland are their half brothers, with different mothers; though all sharing Jacob as their father. 

A genome-wide genetic signature of Jewish ancestry perfectly separates individuals with and without full Jewish ancestry in a large random sample of European Americans, multiple authors, 2009 – emphasis mine:

‘It was recently shown that the genetic distinction between self-identified Ashkenazi Jewish and non-Jewish individuals is a prominent component of genome-wide patterns of genetic variation in European Americans. 

No study however has yet assessed how accurately self-identified (Ashkenazi) Jewish ancestry can be inferred from genomic information, nor whether the degree of Jewish ancestry can be inferred among individuals with fewer than four Jewish grandparents.

Using a principal components analysis, we found that the individuals with full Jewish ancestry [light blue diamonds] formed a clearly distinct cluster from those individuals with no Jewish ancestry [red circles]. Using the position on the first principal component axis, every single individual with self-reported full Jewish ancestry had a higher score than any individual with no Jewish ancestry.’

‘Here we show that within Americans of European ancestry there is a perfect genetic corollary of Jewish ancestry which, in principle, would permit near perfect genetic inference of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. In fact, even subjects with a single Jewish grandparent [green triangle] can be statistically distinguished from those without Jewish ancestry.

We found that the Middle Eastern populations clustered separately from the European and European-American populations, as expected… This is an important finding for a number of reasons. Firstly, the Jewish subjects remain in a separate cluster when mixed with both European and Middle Eastern populations, suggesting that the original principal component axis seen in the European-Americans is indeed a Jewish-specific axis, at least in the context of the populations considered here. 

Secondly, the Jewish cluster lies approximately midway between the European and the Middle Eastern clusters, implying that the Ashkenazi Jews may contain mixed ancestry from these two regions. 

This is consistent with the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA genetic evidence that has been interpreted by some to suggest a stronger paternal genetic heritage of Jewish populations from the Middle East [Arab] and stronger maternal genetic heritage from the host populations [European] of the Diaspora.’

‘Finally, one of the two subjects reporting partial Sephardic* ancestry did not cluster clearly with the other Jewish subjects. Considering also that 90% of American Jews are Ashkenazim, we conclude that this axis is specific to Ashkenazi Jews, and that we cannot make any conclusions about other types of American Jews (for example, Sephardic, Mizrahi) from these data. This leaves open the question, however, of why Americans of Jewish ancestry are a distinct group. There are two extreme possibilities: either the Jewish group reflects ancestry from source populations other than those of non-Jewish Americans; or Jewish populations have undergone bottlenecks that change their genetic makeup.’

The last paragraph should not be a surprise. We have considered the possibility of a different line of Jews in the United States in the form of Amalek. Plus, as Esau married three wives out of four, of questionable origin, these bottlenecks occurred right at the beginning and have had a lasting impact. We will learn that the British, Irish and German peoples who immigrated to America are not the same peoples as those living in Britain, Ireland and Germany today. So, it is not beyond question for a different lineal descent of Jew to have immigrated to the United States. 

A study led by Harry Ostrerm published in 2010, observed close links between Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi Jews; finding them to be genetically distinct from non-Jews. DNA from the blood of 237 Jews and about 2,800 non-Jews was analysed. It was determined how closely related they were and ‘individuals within the Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi groups shared high levels of IDB’ equivalent to that of fourth or fifth cousins. 

All three groups shared many genetic features, evidencing a common origin of over two thousand years go. The study confirmed that all three Jewish groups exhibited signs of admixture with non-Jews. The genetic profiles of the Ashkenazi Jews indicated the highest admixture, of between thirty to sixty percent with Europeans; even so, they still clustered more closely with Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews. 

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘The CEPHALIC INDEX is the main key, used universally by most, if not all, present day ethnologists, to ascertain racial affinities FROM SKELETAL REMAINS! One can readily determine “race” on the living populations by such tests as: Skin color, stature, nasal indices, general build, color of hair and eyes, head shape, and by mental and personality traits. 

But such tools elude the anthropologist who must determine the racial connections of a by-gone people from skeletal remains alone. With these silent men of yesteryear one can only judge their racial type by such measurements as general height, bodily proportions (from bone measurements), and the cephalic index… the C.I. (cephalic index) is of utmost importance in determining the racial affinities of people from their skeletal remains… Professor Ripley, who was considered one of the world’s foremost authorities on “race”, has some interesting remarks on this subject: 

“The shape of the human head – by which we mean the general proportions of length, breadth, and height, irrespective of the “bumps of the phrenologist – is ONE of the best available tests of race known” (The Races of Europe, Chapter III, page 37). 

‘Ripley then shows that the best way to measure the head form is by using the “cephalic index.” He says: 

“This is simply the breadth of the head above the ears expressed in percentage of its length from forehead to back. Assuming that this length is 100, the width is expressed as a fraction of it. As the head becomes proportionately broader – that is, more fully rounded, viewed from the top down – this cephalic index increases. When it rises above 80, the head is called brachycephalic; when it falls below 75, the term dolichocephalic is applied to it. Indexes between 75 and 80 are characterized as mesocephalic. (ibid, page 37).” 

‘Ripley shows that the general shape of the head seems to bear no direct relation to the intellectual power or to the intelligence of any particular individual (ibid., p. 40)… Ripley places a great deal of importance upon, not the size, but the general shape of the skull as the chief factor in determining the racial connections of a people from their skeletal remains. He shows the color of the hair, the eyes and the stature are open to modification by local circumstances.’

“On the other hand the general proportions of the head seem to be uninfluenced either by climate, by food supply or economic status, or by habits of life; so that they stand as the clearest exponents which we possess of the permanent hereditary difference within the human species [from skeletal remains]” (ibid., page 52).’ 

‘From the standpoint of the C.I., Europe is divided into two types – dolichocephals and brachycephals. The broad-headed people are, with few exceptions, found in the inland and mountainous districts. The long-heads are almost invariably located on the coastlands and islands of Europe. The dolichocephals (long-heads) are further divided into two main groups: (1) The Nordics who inhabit North-west Europe, and (2) The Mediterraneans who inhabit the southern regions of Europe, and are mainly found in the countries contiguous to the Mediterranean Sea. 

The Scythians (or Sacae), who formerly lived in South Russia, were of the Nordic branch of the dolichocephals. The foremost authorities on the Scythian question are generally agreed on this point. Other characters enable a trained ethnologist to clearly differentiate between the skeletal remains of Nordics and Mediterraneans. The Nordics are longer-limbed, have typically larger skulls, and are generally larger-bodied than are the Mediterraneans. The difference between Nordic and Mediterranean skeletal remains is as easily discernable as is such difference readily noticeable between the living North-west European Nordics and the South or South-east European Mediterraneans. 

… many of the present-day Jews have a tendency towards blondism [and red hair], and are of the long-headed type. These dolichocephalic Jews are found primarily among the Sephardic branch of the Jews, even though there are also quite a number of blond, long-headed Jews among the Ashkenazic Jews. 

Furthermore, we have noticed that the Sephardic* Jews are more European” or “Nordicthan they are Jewish“; and we have observed that there is a considerable degree of blondism among this branch of Jews. Many redheads are found among them. (For further verification of this, see the Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume XII, Article Types, Anthropological, pages 291-95).’

Recall earlier, the unanswered question posted online: ‘Has anyone else noticed this red-headed/lighter-eyed “trend” amongst the Sephardic population?’ The answer is yes and the reason is due to the fact that the Sephardi Jew in Western Europe intermixed far less than the Ashkenazi Jew in Eastern Europe.

The mtDNA Haplogroups for the Ashkenazim and Sephardim contain some variance, according to which study or figures one chooses and thus the endeavour has been to choose those which accurately as possible portray the two respective branches of the Jewish people. 

Ashkenazi Jew: K [31.8%] – H [22.8%] – J [6.8%] – HV [5%] – 

T2 [4.8%] – HV0 + V [4.1%] – U [2.1%] – U5 [2%] – W [1.6%] –

L [1.4%] – I [1.3%] – U3 [1%] – U4 [1%] – X [0.8%] 

Sephardic Jew: H [56%] – HV0+V [9%] – HV [8%] – 

K [8%] – I [6%] – J [5%] – U [3%] – X [3%] – L [1%] 

It can be immediately observed the difference between the two groups, highlighting different maternal origins. The Ashkenazi Jew possessing an abnormally high percentage of Haplogroup K and the Sephardic Jew a lower percentage of K – in keeping with the European average – yet a considerably higher percentage of mtDNA Haplogroup H, as is common amongst most people of European descent. 

                             H   HV0+V  HV      K       J      T2       I       U

Ashkenazim      23        4          5       32      7        5        1        2

Turkey                31    0.7           5         6      9       4        2        6

Italy                    40       3           3         8      8       8        1        3

Sephardim        56        9          8         8      5                  6      [3]

Germany           45        4       0.5         7      9        8        2    0.8        

A comparison of the main Jewish mtDNA Haplogroups with Turkey, for the Khazars are labelled a Turkic people. A strong similarity is not evident, with autosomal DNA actually highlighting that Jews and Turks are not that genetically similar. In fact the Ashkenazim sit between Iran and Turkey for mtDNA Haplogroup H.

The reduced Haplogroup H percentage for the Ashkenazi Jew compared with the Sephardic Jew, may reflect watering down from the Khazar (Turkic-Iranian) admixture. Overall, the main Haplogroups of the Sephardic Jew remain distinct. While Europeans usually carry either H, J, U, K or T; it is the absence of the relatively recent mtDNA Haplogroup T mutation in the Sephardim which stands out.

Though its level of Haplogroup H, means Germany is not far removed, as Uncle Ishmael – refer Chapter XVIII The True identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. The extremely high level of Haplogroup K in the Ashkenazi Jew is another matter and reveals a different maternal line from the Sephardic Jew; which goes far beyond a migratory geographic split after leaving Judea in 70 CE.

It is reminiscent of Finland, with its very high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup N and mtDNA U5 – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Iran, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine all range between 4.3% to 8.3% in Haplogroup K. Even Greece has only 5.1%. Other peoples with high percentages of Haplogroup K include: Cyprus with 20.5%; the Avars in Russia with 13.1%; the Druze people of Lebanon with 13%; Belgium and Luxembourg with 12.1%; Ireland with 12%; Georgia with 11.9%; the Dargins of Russia with 11.8%; and the Dutch with 10%.

Haplogroup K1 is one of the most recent mutations on the mtDNA Haplogroup timeline, deriving from the older Haplogroup U. As Esau with his twin brother Jacob are the youngest or rather most recent progenitors of lineal descendants, they could have (possibly) received Haplogroup K from their mother Rebekah. The alternative explanation is mtDNA Haplogroup K came (probably) through a maternal line from one of Esau’s wives. A genetic carry over from Esau’s Horite wives and successive intermarrying with Seir’s descendants? Yet this remains a conundrum, as the Horites were an ancient race. This would not explain why the Sephardic Jews do not have as equally high levels; unless they are descendants from Esau’s Ishmaelite wife, Basemath.

                             H       HV0+V       J          K       T2       U4       U5                 

Ashkenazim     23            4              7        32          5          1          2

Germany          45              4            9            7         8         3          9

Austria              45              2            9           9         8         5          9

Netherlands     45             8           11          10       12         7          8            

Norway             46             4            11           5         8         3         11          

Sweden             46             5             8           6         4         3         12          

Denmark          47             4            13          9         6          2          6          

Bel-Lux             47             3             6         12         9          3          3          

Sephardim       56             9             5           8                      

Adding the Ashkenazim and Sephardim to the table from the previous chapter and comparing the key mtDNA Haplogroups, highlights the distinct difference between the two main groups of Jews, as well as with their Germanic and Nordic cousins from Hagar and Ishmael or Abraham and Keturah. Each are clear outliers in their percentages of Haplogroup H and bookend the table.

The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of  Esau’s descendants.

                           H       HV   HV0+V    J        T2        U        U5       K

Sephardim       56        8          9            5                     3                    8

Switzerland     48     0.4          5          12         9      0.4         7         5

Bel-Lux            47      0.7          3           6          9         5         3        12

Denmark         47                      4         13          6         1          6        9

Norway            46      0.2          4         11          8         2         11        5

Sweden            46      0.5          5           8          4         3        12        6

Netherlands   45                      8          11        12      0.5         8       10

Austria            45       0.8         2           9          8      1 .4         9         9      

Germany         45      0.5         4            9          8      0.8         9         7

France             44         2           5           8          6         1          8         9

Brazil                44        2                       11 

Portugal           44     0.1          5            7         6          3          7         6

Spain                44     0.7          8            7         6          2         8         6

Poland             44         1          5            8         7       1.4        10        4

Russia              41         2          4            8         7          2        10        4

Greece              41        3        1.8          10         7          3          5        5

Italy                  40       3           3            8          8         3          5        8            

Ukraine            39       4           4            8         8      0.6        10        5

Iceland             38       4           2          14        10     0.2          8       10

Romania          37       2           4           11          5         2          7        8

Finland            36                     7            6          2     0.8        21        5

Turkey             31         5       0.7            9          4         6         3         6

Ashkenazim   23         5          4            7           5         2         2       32

Iran                  17         7       0.6          14           5       12         3         7

Switzerland has been long standing as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant European maternal mtDNA Haplogroup H. The addition of the two principle Jewish groups does not follow type for the Ashkenazim, for by now, very obvious reasons. The Ashkenazi Jew almost replaces Iran as one bookend. It is abundantly clear how much admixture has altered Edom when we observe the Ashkenazi mtDNA Haplogroups. There is now a similarity with Turkey and even more so with Iran in Haplogroup H levels and so credence can be given to a large-scale admixture with a similar type people, in the form of the Khazars. 

As Finland possesses the highest level of U5 (21%), with the Ashkenazi Jew having a very low percentage (2%); the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K (32%) and Finland with only 5%. The riddle of Haplogroup K remains of which, we may never know the full answer. The Sephardim replace the Swiss as the other bookend. Reminding the reader of the pattern which has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mtDNA Haplogroup H increasing, as one heads west across Europe. Switzerland though, has not fitted exactly into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will confirm as we progress, is that the nations comprising northwestern Europe in the main exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.

Considering the Sephardim, as the more shall we say purer line of descent from Esau, and considering just their mtDNA Haplogroups, they sit squarely – genetically and geographically, should they have resided in Europe – with the other, related offspring of Abraham: the Nordic and Germanic peoples such as the Danes, Dutch and Germans. 

The main Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Ashkenazim and Sephardim.

Ashkenazi Jew: E1b1b [20.5%] – J2 [19%] – J1 [19%] – R1b [11.5%] – 

R1a [10%] – G2c [9.5%] – I [4%] – Q1b [3%] – T1a [2%] – L [0.5%] –

E1b1a [0.3%] – N1c [0.2%] 

The percentages above are a more recent compilation, than the 2015 pie chart figures. If we hold that R1b was the original paternal Haplogroup inherited by Esau from Issac and then passed to his sons, then it is clear just how much serious admixture has resulted. Not just at the beginning with Esau’s granddaughters marrying non-Edomites, but rigorously maintained throughout the centuries and to the present day. For instance, Haplogroup E1b1a is indicative of sub-Saharan Africa. The high levels of J1 are indicative of exposure with Arabs from the Middle East; J2 in part from southern Europeans via Southwest Asia, yet principally from admixture with Turkic-Iranians; and E1b1b is also common amongst Arabs from admixture with Berber (and African) men. 

The E1b1b1b2a1 in question is M123, which derives from Z830, associated with the Middle East, Arabia and particularly North Africa. 

The E1b1b Phylogenetic tree clearly shows the close Arab link and infusion; with the highest percentage of M123 in the Dead Sea region in Jordan.

Regarding Haplogroup J1, the Jews belong to the large sub-clade P58 as mentioned, which derives from J1a1b known as L136. Some 40 to 75% of Arab males in the Arabian Peninsula are J1-P58.

The sub-clade ZS227 comprises the Cohen Modal Haplotype discussed earlier and roughly half of all Cohanim belong to it. Major Jewish clusters descending from J1-P58 include L817 and L816.

The remaining Y-DNA Haplogroup of the top three for the Ashkenazim is J2a1. Significant clusters include L70, L254 and L210.

Haplogroup J2 stretches from Portugal in the west to India in the east. Notice the Rothschild clade Y15238 below, stemming from L210.

Haplogroup G is principally G2c, unlike the G2a more commonly found in western Europe. This Haplogroup is far older than R1b and so Jewish men with this Haplogroup have descended from an earlier line from Shem; such as that exhibited by thirty percent of Georgian men – who are genetically more closely related to Iranians than Turks.

Haplogroup R1b with which we have the most interest in, draws a bit of a blank, with the Jews being associated with the rather generic R1b1, known as P25 (or L278); which is widely associated with Eurasia; as well as M269 (R1b1a1a2), which is broadly associated with Western Europe.

More specifically, the Eastern European Jewish male via admixture and associated R1b mutations is likely to carry R1b-Z2103 – see below.

A Jewish man descending from a less adulterated lineage – for example a higher proportion of the Sephardim – would possess R1b-U106 (S21). This is common to men throughout northwestern Europe – the descendants of Abraham, including: Germany, Scandinavia, Benelux, Britain and Ireland.

Turning to the Sephardim, the men show less admixture with a higher percentage of R1b. Saying that, intermixing and intermarriage has still had a profound effect. One can surely conjecture correctly that whether one is an Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jew, it is a minority of males who exhibit the R1b Haplogroup passed from their ancestor Esau. Most possess either E1b1b, J1 or J2, which provides evidence of historical mass intermixing by Edomite women with male lines of descent from Canaan and Ham. Thus it is self evident how imperative it has been to record the lineal transfer of Jewishness via the maternal line as the standard genetic measure, rather than paternally.

Sephardic Jew: R1b [29.5%] – J2 [23%] – J1 [20%] – 

E1b1b [9%] – G2c [7.7%] – R1a [3.9%] – T1a [3%] –

Q1b [2%] – I [1%]

                                    J1/J2   E1b1b       G      R1a      R1b      I

Ashkenazi Jew           38          21          10       10        12       4

Sephardic Jew           43            9            8        4         30       1

The higher percentages for Y-DNA Haplogroups E1b1b, G2c, I1/I2 and R1a for the Ashkenazi Jews with the corresponding loss in R1b, compared with the Sephardic Jews, highlights the greater admixture with both Europeans from southern and eastern Europe, as well as with Arab related peoples. Iran, Turkey, Armenia and the Kurds are added for comparison.

                                   J1/J2   E1b1b       G      R1a       R1b       I

Sephardic Jew           43           9            8         4         30        1

Ashkenazi Jew           38         21          10       10         12        4

Kurds                           36         13           5         11         11        6

Armenia                      33           6          12         5         30        5

Turkey                         33          11          11         8         16         6

Iran                              32           7          10       16         10     0.5

The table does not tell us a lot on one hand, for the Jewish people are closer with Italians and Greeks on principal component analysis graphs. It does show the impact of long term intermixing – on the R1b and R1a lineages – as Turkey, Armenia, Iran and the Kurds all show similar tell tale Haplogroup percentage sequence results from intermixing as the Ashkenazim and Sephardim. 

The Ashkenazi Jew may have integrated with the Turkic-Iranian Khazars, yet still retain a variety of Y-DNA Haplogroups not quite like any other. This shows perhaps that the Khazars have impacted in part the Ashkenazi gene pool and amalgamated with them, but the Khazars are not to be equated solely, as the Ashkenazi Jews of today.

Now comparing the Jews with Italy’s Haplogroups; Italy’s R1b is composed of the sub-clades of U152 (19%), U106 (4%), L21 (2%), M167 (1%) and others (13%). Each of these sub-clades is found in other nations, with the highest levels of U152 in France; U106 in Germany; L21 in the British Isles; and M167 in Catalonia – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

                                  R1b     J    E1b1b     G      R1a       I

Ashkenazi  Jew       12     38      21        10       10       4

Sephardic Jew        30     43       9          8         4        1

Italy                          39      19     14          9         4      10

Overall, Italy has more in common with the Sephardic Jew from a Y-DNA perspective as would be expected. Broadening the Italian view, as its sequence is dominated by the highly populated north, shows that Southern Italians align with the Sephardic Jew in Y-DNA Haplogroups and the Greeks more with the modern Ashkenazi Jew. 

From an autosomal DNA view as shown on the PCA graph, it is again the Sephardim who are marginally closer genetically with Italians and the Ashkenazim leaning towards the Greeks.

                                     R1b      J     E1b1b      G       R1a       I

Italy South                 28      26        19         11         3         7

Sephardic Jew           30      28       19          8         5        12

Ashkenazi  Jew          12      36       20        10        10        4

Greece                         16      26        21          7        12       15 

Up to this point, we have discussed how Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. 

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula and Turkey not withstanding – was the first nation (within Abraham’s extended family) with the main paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it lies further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study. 

Turkey            R-M269    14%   –  R-U106   0.4%

Russia             R-M269    21%   –  R-U106   5.4%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Austria            R-M269    27%   –  R-U106      23%

Germany         R-M269   43%   –  R-U106      19%

Comparing the Jewish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux and German cousins, immediately highlights the remarkable differences. The Jews have increased levels of E1b1b, J2 and J1 from millenniums of admixture and the compensating decreased percentage of the original paternal Haplogroup R1b – so prevalent throughout western Europe.

                             R1b     R1a       I1      I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b      J2      J1     

Ashkenazim      12         10                                                21        19       19

Sephardim        30          4                                                  9        23       20

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                   

Austria               32        19         12         7            3            8          9          1        

Germany           45         16        16          2           5            6           5                    

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        

Flanders            61          4          12         3           5            5          4           1         

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                   

Luxembourg     61          3           3          3           6            5          8          3       

Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Isaac’s son Esau.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Sephardim    43      20      23         9         [8]      4        30       34  

Ashkenazim  38      19       19       21       [10]    10         12       22 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Italy                19       3        16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16       45       61

Flanders          5         1        4          5          4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15       33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16       22       38

Wallonia         2                    2        6           6         7       60       67

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7        55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26      32       58

Iceland                                                                    23      42       65

Finland                                         0.5                      5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. With the addition of the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, we see them both eclipsing Georgia’s J1 levels; the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia; and the Ashkenazi Jew equaling the percentage of E1b1b with Greece. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and equals Spain’s total R1, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b.

It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. It is interesting to note that the inclusion of the Jews sees them join the periphery countries as clear outliers. We now have twenty-eight peoples, ranging from Russia and Iran in the East to Portugal and Iceland in the West; Italy and Greece in the South to Norway and Finland in the North. 

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                       R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal        1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain                2         69      1.5         5           1

Luxembourg   3         61         3         3           6              

France              3         59        9          3          4            

Switzerland     4         50      14          2          8          1

Netherlands    4         49      17          1           7               

Flanders          4          61      12          3          5

Brazil                4         54                  [9]            

Italy                  4         39        5          3           3         

Sephardim      4         30      [1]                             

Finland            5           4       28                   0.5      62

Frisians            7         55     [34]           

Wallonia          7         60       11         2           5

Turkey             8         16         1         4         0.5        4  

Ashkenazim  10         12       [4]                             0.2

Greece            12         16         4       10         1.5      

Denmark        15         33      34        2            6         1

Sweden           16         22      37        2            4         7

Germany        16         45      16         2            5         1

Iran                 16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania        18         16         4       28           3        2

Austria           19         32       12         7            3    0.5

Iceland           23        42       29                      4         1

Norway          26        32       32                       5        3

Ukraine          44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia             46          6         5        11                    23

Poland            58         13        9          6          2         4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included. Finland possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Spain remains the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with a high percentage of R1b and Finland at the other end of the nations in Europe with a low R1b level. 

The addition of the Ashkenazim and Sephardim to this table of Y-DNA Haplogroups for European nations is enlightening. Both the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew are not far removed from each other as expected, with the Sephardic Jew between Italy and Finland. A familial kinship with Italy as already discussed and next to another genetic outlier, the Finns – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia

Meanwhile, the Ashkenazim are sandwiched between the Greeks and the Turks. Neither are surprising considering PCA graphs place the Ashkenazim and Greeks closely together and the Khazar Turkish connection is valid, regardless of detractor’s arguments to the contrary.

Observing our approximate east to west axis according to percentages of R1b, the Ashkenazi Jew is squarely in the eastern half and the Sephardic Jew just makes the line between east and west, on the western side perhaps. The admixture with other peoples over a very long period of time has certainly contributed to or rather influenced, the Jewish Haplogroups. 

The western Sephardic Jew has been less impacted, though one must remember that the primitive identity for the Jewish people descended from Esau, was originally further along the table, nearer Switzerland, the Netherlands and Germany (who once would have had nearly only R1b males); comparable to the MtDNA results. There is sound logic in this argument, when one understands that these nations are related family members and so one would expect the Jews to be in their rightful place on the family tree – with Great Uncle Haran, the Swiss; Uncle Midian, the Dutch; and Uncle Ishmael, the Germans.

In fact, the very reason many Idumean Jews fled Judea and the Middle East after Rome’s sacking of Jerusalem and the destruction of the second Temple in 70 CE, travelling to the region of north eastern France of Moab and the Ammonites and south western Germany of Ishmael (via Italy), is not a coincidence; as ethnically, historically and geographically this would be where they could and maybe should be living today rather than the Levant. The fact that the Jews have returned as discussed, is an undeniable and provocative fulfilment of scriptural biblical prophecy – Malachi 1:2-4.

The constant reader has truly been on a roller coaster ride with surprises and shocks throughout the investigation set down in The Noachian Legacy – particularly in the last two chapters about the real identity of Ishmael and Esau. As significant as these discoveries have been, they are dwarfed by the information compiled in the next chapter. The repercussions of which are seismic in their prophetic profundity and permutations in reshaping history as we know it. For some it will be a revelation too far and for others… at last, a recognition of the most vital key there is in finally unlocking the entire biblical record.

… I know the insults of those who call themselves Jews but aren’t – on the contrary, they are a synagogue of the Adversary.

Revelation 2:9 Complete Jewish Bible

“If you want to see the truth, you must be brave enough to look.”

Rune Lazuli

“Truth never penetrates an unwilling mind.”

Jorge Luis Borges

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; The other is to refuse to accept what is true. The truth is found in what holds the greatest weight of evidence.” 

Kerrie L French

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

2050

The following is an answer reproduced from Quora, to the question: Which countries will be major world powers in 2050?

This is a fascinating question.

In many ways, it is more of a curiosity to know how the geopolitical order will look not just in 2050 but in 2100, or even 2250…

In thinking about this question seriously, it seemed delving into the past was required to discern the future more knowledgeably. A study of the powers of the past, both small and great, highlighted a couple of salient points.

Firstly, while some countries – as either regional or great powers – wax and wane, there are those nations which have remained relatively constant as world powers over the past five hundred years.

Secondly, even though a nation may have a large population, economic clout or a formidable military, they are not necessarily a threat to world peace. They may have the form or substance of a power but it does not necessarily translate towards affecting the world’s stability or order.

A people or national identity which has a proclivity towards policies of imperialism, militarism and is prepared to use their weaponry to achieve their aims on the other hand, is surely to be considered a (major) power.

It is primarily from this perspective that this article will focus with regard to potential major world powers in 2050 and beyond.

Historically, it has taken many decades or centuries even, for a nation’s status to change. For instance, the United Kingdom has transitioned from the world’s dominant power in 1820 to a (global?) regional power in 2022.

What is partially surprising – reflecting its very gradual decline over two hundred years – is that Great Britain (and Northern Ireland) has slipped from the world’s third largest economy in 1820, to only the sixth largest in 2019.

We now live in an interconnected world which is far more precarious; one that seems to be close to a tipping point at any given moment financially and economically. It is impossible to calculate how quickly circumstances could change globally, let alone for individual nations.

A further factor, is how quickly nations can adapt to a fast paced changing world in the 21st Century and how much investment they spend on the cutting edge technologies that will have an immeasurable influence on the pecking order of the major world powers in the future. Three of these immensely important sectors include AI development, DNA and genetic research and Space exploration. The winners of these contests, will likely surge ahead of their rivals – refer article: The Great Reset & the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Before concentrating on the prime powerful players in the world, past and present, let’s look initially at the minor (or lesser) powers of the past and today.

Both Portugal (1400s) and the Netherlands (1600s) are examples of minor powers who followed a different trajectory. Whereas the Netherlands still retains wealth and investment derived from its trading empire; Portugal does not reflect the wealth it once had stemming from its colonial empire. One would not consider them powers today. Similarly with the nation of Austria, which through its network of monarchy descended from the Hapsburg royal family throughput Europe and particularly in Spain and the Low Countries, created an extensive empire wielding considerable influence. Even with the dissipation of most of the European Monarchies, Austria has retained a measure of wealth much like the Netherlands, yet with a parallel loss of status in power.

Spain (1500s), France (1700s) and Great Britain (1800s) are examples of once being major powers, who combined trade with an expansionist colonial policy. To protect their claims and possessions it necessitated becoming naval and military powers, as was the case with the Netherlands. Each still retains economic wealth, with the United Kingdom and France having descended into lesser regional powers.

Colonial Asia

It is unlikely either could become major powers again, outside of the European Union at least. Nor have the French or English employed an overtly imperialistic policy since. Each during their mutual ascendancies, grew colonial empires, endeavouring to out do one another. As old rivals, both have settled into a grudgingly accepted stalemate draw.

A nation which does not fit into a power stereotype is Italy. It is a relatively young nation, created in 1861, though it did pursue a colonial expansion principally in Africa and briefly exhibited an imperialist motivation while under Mussolini’s rule. Yet, Italy’s national character does not appear to be predominantly thus focused and as a regional power, sits somewhere between Spain and France.

Today, there are a handful of nations which are regional powers that weren’t in the past. It would seem that each will grow in strength and stature; though it remains to be seen, which will become major powers.

Those nations include Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, in part Turkey and perhaps the Koreas. The interesting exception in the list is Turkey, which was a major power in the past, in the guise of the Ottoman Empire.

There is a coded book which mentions these seven peoples (eight nations) – in fact all the peoples of the world either directly or indirectly – in both an historical and a modern context. Like the saying: ‘the truth is stranger than fiction’, their futures can be determined. Credence in this coded book is ridiculed by many, for they do not understand it. Besides, any acknowledgement that its words are true would then lead to admitting one who is superior, had authored and inspired it. So from here on, it is not just canny insight alone, but an accurate interpretation of its message, unforeseen prior to now – refer The Noachian Legacy.

Brazil will stand to become a major economic power on the world stage, and all the Latino-Hispano nations of the Americas, led by the regional power Mexico, will align with Brazil in an economic trading bloc.

In large part to offset the dominance of the United States of America. Though Brazil will reach major power status, it will be primarily as an economic giant and not entirely in a military sense. Saying that, both Brazil and Mexico will increase their military capability in accord with their growing economic stature and one day will not be reticent in using them.

Brazilian Flag

Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan and Turkey all have something in common and that is their Muslim faith. At a certain point, the dominant Islamic nations will amalgamate into a unified body with a single voice and purpose. Egypt also may have a prominent role, with the aforementioned four nations. How many other Arab peoples and Islamic nations, such as Bangladesh are part of this confederacy is not clear, though it will be a formidable military bloc and a series of wars will rage involving their alliance – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen. Again, it is not clear who the leader will be, though politically, the three countries comprising Turkey, Iran and Pakistan are clearly the dominant nucleus of nations. Turkey superficially seems to be the main contender, when considering its imperialistic role in the past and in possessing the strongest and fastest growing economy amongst the Muslim nations, aside from Indonesia.

The indication is that like any artificial joining, for instance the coterminous Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, or separation, such as East Germany and West Germany and North Vietnam and South Vietnam; eventually, no matter how unlikely, it will be undone. A reunified and far stronger Korea would be a fascinating scenario, added to the complex relationship currently amongst the northeastern Asian nations. Worryingly, it appears that a united Korea in the future could favour a Chinese inspired political model and focus on policy, as opposed to a Japanese one. This would indicate that any future support for reunification, is lead by China and or Russia and not from the United States.

Just before we turn to the major powers of the past and today, there is one nation, which is always forgotten. In fact, it was only in one person’s comments, though there may be more mentions as not every answer has been read. Ironically, this nation’s original name in the Hebrew language means: forgotten. Yet this nation is in the top ten nations of the world for largest economy by GDP. It is a unique country and the only one in the world which has the following combination of factors: for not only does it have vast resources on a huge landmass; it most importantly, has the infrastructure and space to host a vast number of new immigrants, thereby exponentially increasing its population. As a result, this nation’s economic, political and military influence would expand, as the most important ally of the United States.

That nation is… Canada.

Canadian Flag

Whether it will become a major power or a considerably stronger regional power remains to be seen, though its closet parallel would be Brazil in this regard.

This leaves the historical major powers over the past five hundred years, depending on how one ranks them: China, Germany, India, Japan, Russia and the United States of America. A helpful article by Wendell Cox, highlights the points raised earlier regarding a large population or GDP and how it does not mean that particular nation wields global political, financial or military dominance. They can be a passive major power, or even dormant. What drives a nation to be an active major power is drawn from multiple variables – which makes this discussion interesting from an historical as well as a futuristic perspective. Also, a nation may become an active major power but only in a regional sense and not necessarily as a global presence.

500 Years of GDP: A tale of Two Countries, New Geography, Wendell Cox, 2015:

‘Over the 515 years from 1500 to 2015, the available data seems to suggest that the largest economy in the world [has] almost always been either China or the United States (for most years there is only incomplete data). In 1500, China was the largest economy in the world, followed closely by India, both with estimated GDP’s of approximately $100 billion. France was a distant third at approximately 18 billion… What is now the United Kingdom ranked 10th, at barely one quarter the output of France.

[The year 1700] was the only reported year between 1500 and 2015 that China or the United States did not lead the world. India had the strongest economy in 1700, closely followed by China. Throughout the entire period to the middle of the 20th century, China’s economy was larger than India’s by a relatively small margin. At the same time “the great powers” of the West were still well behind China and India…’

‘By 1820… India [in] second, [was] slightly more than one half that of China. The United Kingdom finally appears, in third-place with a GDP one sixth that of China… By 1890, the United States had emerged as the world’s largest economy, opening up an approximately five percent lead over China. India ranked third, followed by the United Kingdom [4th] and Japan [5th].

By 1930, the ascendancy of the United States was clear. China… still remained the second largest economy, but trailed the United States by approximately [two-thirds]. There was little difference between China and the next three largest economies, Germany [3rd], the United Kingdom [4th] and India [5th].’

The Flag of the United States of America

‘Half a century later, in 1980, the United States retained a similar lead, but now over second-ranked Japan. Germany was a close third… India ranked ninth, approximately 30 percent ahead of 10th ranked China. China’s ascendancy was obvious by 2010, reaching within 20 percent of the United States, which remained number one.

This had been a dramatic reversal, since China’s GDP had been little more than one tenth that of the United States only 30 years earlier (1980). India was also restored to a leadership position, ranking third. Japan was fourth and Germany was fifth.’

In 2019 these major powers according to GDP were ranked: 1. United States of America 2. China 3. Japan 4. Germany 5 India and 11. Russia.

In 2025, these same nations are ranked as: 1. United States of America (30.50 Trillion) 2. China (19.23 Trillion) 3. Germany (4.74 Trillion) 4. India (4.18 Trillion) 5 Japan (4.18 Trillion) and 11 Russia (2.07 Trillion).

‘It is notable that through much of their empire-colonial relationship between the United Kingdom and India, the colony had the larger GDP. This was the case from 1820 through 1900. This is principally due to the larger population of India. For example, in 1870, India’s GDP was one-third larger than that of the United Kingdom. In the same year, however, the UK GDP per capita was six times that of India.

GDP projections produced for 2050, by… Price Waterhouse Coopers indicate that even more significant changes could be ahead. PWC expects China to have GDP of $61 trillion (US$2014). India is projected to be restored to its previous second place, at $42 trillion, just ahead of the United States ($41 trillion).

BRIICs members Indonesia [currently 17th] and Brazil [currently 10th] would be 4th and 5th, while BRIICs Russia would be 8th. Mexico [6th] and Japan [7th] would follow Brazil, with Nigeria [9th] and Germany [10th] rounding out the top ten. If PWC is right, the dominance of China and the United States might be supplanted by the historically dominant duo of China and India. Of course, no one knows for sure. Forecasting economics is even harder than forecasting population.’

The inclusion of Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Nigeria in the top ten would come at the expense of the United Kingdom (6), France (7), Italy (8) and Canada (9) dropping out of the top ten largest economies in the world.

We learn some very salient points from this data.

First: Only China, India or the United States have ever been number one with regard to being the world’s biggest economy (GDP).

Second: It took nearly four hundred years [of a 500 year period], for a nation outside of Asia to catch up to China and India and then surpass them.

Third: China has fluctuated the most out of the major powers. It was marginally ahead of second place India for centuries, then in the 1800s gained a substantial lead and then by the 1900s was substantially behind India as well as other nations. Now, China has sensationally regained second spot.

Four: It is China which has witnessed the most dramatic economic reversal, being one-tenth the size of the United states in 1980 and within 30 years – a similar time frame we have now before us from 2022 to 2050 – moved from tenth to second in the world.

Five: The example comparing the former major power the United Kingdom and its former subservient colony India, exposes the active and dormant natures these powers respectively exhibited.

Six: Both Japan an island nation on the periphery of a continent the same as Great Britain and Germany, a young nation like Italy, have been major economic powers since the late 1800s and early 1900s and as with the United Kingdom, have shown a desire to follow an expansionist policy; creating military capability to match their economic prosperity and demonstrating the will to put it to use. They have all been active powers unlike the two major dormant powers, China and India. Some would argue credibly that China is now no longer dormant.

Seven: The predictions by PWC are enlightening and if correct, a circle is being completed with China and India regaining the lengthy historical positions of number one and two. Is the United States ascendancy on the wane, has it been an aberration of history. Will they dip forever, or only for a period, to resurface at number one again?

Eight: The key economic growth forecast, resulting in the improved standings for Indonesia, Brazil and Mexico, all corroborate what has been foretold. All three, have the wherewithal to achieve major power status and all will strengthen their military arsenals over ensuing decades (and centuries).

Nine: There is a glaring omission in the statistics, apart from the 2050 projection of Russia at number eight. Where has Russia been in this period? It has more often than not been in the top ten and in its guise as a modern empire – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – it was the second biggest economy in the world, consecutively from 1960 to 1985.

Ten: As only three nations have held number one and if the United States concedes to China, could another nation, a fourth nation, ever achieve number one spot and if so which one perchance?

Yes, a new nation will one day break into the club of three, exclusively held by China, India and the United States for the past five hundred years. Based on a number of observations and factors, that nation is… Russia.

Of course, many will smile at this and think this view simplistic and naive; based on inadequate information, limited knowledge and a shallow grasp of geo-economics and financial forecasts.

Russian Flag

The world has changed and the last century was very different from the four that preceded it. Was it far-fetched for China to move from tenth to second in the space of thirty years? No, it wasn’t. There is good cause to consider a similar scenario with Russia. It may not happen by 2050, but happen, it will.

This highlights important additional points, which tie Russia and Germany together.

While Japan experienced an imperialistic moment in history, much like Italy and Great Britain – which is remembered for its globe encircling empire that is undoubtedly the most famous in modern history, standing out in the annals of time, as does the Roman Empire of the past, which still impacts our civilisation – it is the militaristic nation of Germany, (whether one studies the two prime influences of the German people’s history: Austria in the south and Prussia in the north) with Russia, who possesses an even longer pedigree of imperialism, that are most likely to return to or further respectively, these inherent ambitions.

History is set to repeat itself.

At this point, Great Britain is not included in the rest of the discussion, for it has fallen from being a major power. The English people do not truly possess an imperialistic nature, nor the motive to maintain one; for the United Kingdom primarily pursued a defensive role in strategically maintaining an overseas empire built on colonialism for the purpose of trade.

Map of the future predominant global economic-military powers

Comparing the six major powers today, both China and India if no longer dormant, remain relatively passive – particularly India. Saying that, both nations have the potential to become superpowers and this is very likely. Judging from modern history, it is a nation of formidable economic size which makes that quantum step from a major power to a super power.

For instance, Japan is a technological leader and economic giant. Some may think it could revert to a warlike footing, though this is not what is predicted; nor will Japan ever make the critical step to superpower status. It will likely remain a passive major power. In this regard, Germany as a major power, is similar to Japan. Two world wars revealed that Germany as a regional power took that next step to impact on a European regional scale; though it did not have the capability to extend itself beyond a certain parameter – a victim, of imperial overstretch. Of course, all that has changed now it is the economic driver of a new empire, currently called the European Union.

Flag of the European… German Union

Germany ultimately wields immense power. As a single nation, the leap to superpower status is beyond it. Not so with twenty-six nations in its close orbit and potentially many more to fall under its influence. For now, Germany is somewhere between a dormant and passive major power. In complete irony to the objective of “let’s contain and bind Germany in a unified Europe, so that it is shackled and unable to act aggressively ever again” – time will show it to be one of the worst decisions ever made in the history of our civilisation.

Russia’s ambitions in recapturing its lost satellite nations after the dissolving of the Soviet Union are palpable. Strategic buffer nations with vast natural resources such as Ukraine and Kazakstan are too valuable to ever relinquish permanent control; with Ukraine a case in point. All eyes have been glued on China for the past decade or two, though casting a wary eye on Russia would be more prudent.

It is Russia which was once a superpower and is not so far distantly removed in regaining that status. Its threat is real, not imagined and has not ever gone away. Russia is a constant active major power, with hundreds of years of successive imperialistic endeavours – the scourge of its neighbouring countries.

Russia – like the United States – has its proverbial ‘fingers in many pies’ with regard to geo-political interventions and associated intrigue. Admittedly, it was less overtly active between 1991 and 2014, though the signs of its stirring with the help of western provocation, are plain to see.

What lies ahead for these six major powers – with Japan as an exception, plausibly being reduced in stature and joined by the new and growing powers comprising Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey and eventually a dramatic re-unification of Korea – is the transition to superpower status for China, India, a German led United States of Europe and the reinstatement of a resurrected Russian Empire. These four territories (GRIC) will eventually surpass the world’s only hyper power, the United States of America.

A potent symbol and reminder of America’s power – but for how much longer?

America is compellingly and utterly unique in all history, in the modern world and in our life times. No single nation has been so materially blessed or prosperous beyond belief. No country has so heavily influenced the rest of the whole world in its export of its culture through film, television, literature and music. Never, has a people so comprehensively dominated civilisation in its development of trade, information technology, media, telecommunications, popular culture, munitions, missiles and defence systems.

As an active superpower (and hyper power since 1991), the United States has undeniably built an empire unlike anything seen in the world, for though they do not have a mass of territorial conquests or colonies like the British Empire, their financial investment and diplomatic influence worldwide intertwines the global economy and its geo-political fabric like the roots of a tree that grow underground, wrapping themselves around everything in its path.

Yet, the United States of America reached its economic peak during the 1960s contributing approximately 40% of world GDP. Since then, it has decreased some 50% to approximately 20% or just over, in recent years. The United States took the mantle from the United Kingdom of world policeman and this is no coincidence; yet, as Great Britain suffered from imperial overstretch so too will America, with all its naval and military base presence worldwide coming at a huge cost – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. Eventually it will contract like all great empires have; experiencing an inevitable path of power shrinkage and the lessening of its global influence in every quarter; politically, militarily, economically and geographically – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Its demise is predicted and it will be both swift and spectacular. A complete role reversal will occur involving its nemesis Russia, that will astound the world. Triggers for this will include other powers ‘ganging up’ on the United States, particularity from a trade stance. Historically, trade wars have led to military conflict. If such occurs, the United States will find itself out-numbered. There may even be a ‘third World War’ scenario. A NATO falling out could also go against the United States. Respect and confidence for the American dollar will continue to diminish and it will surely be replaced by another currency.

All this would impact the American domestic economy adversely; possibly leading to disenfranchised states seeking to secede from the Union; thereby fragmenting into individual states or groups of states as they seek their own independence from the federal government. Thus, seriously impacting America’s collective economic power, its global political influence and crucially, its military might.

In turn, this could be hastened in a Catch-22 by America’s increasing population; for the burgeoning, exponential growth rate of the Latino-Hispano demographic, coupled with the ever increasing African-American and Asian-American population, will lead to significant changes in American ideology, policy and purpose; shifting from the historic WASP dominance, further weakening America’s strength and resolve at home and abroad.

The result of America’s phenomenal prosperity, is a spoiled, arrogant and soulless nation that has well and truly begun its moral decline. For as author John Steinbeck said:

“If you want to destroy a nation, give it too much – make it greedy, miserable and sick.”

Coupled with this, the American civilisation’s eventual loss of wealth and riches will be when the majority of believers either cease to remember or honour the source of their opportunities, bounty and blessings; or when they are eventually outnumbered. For the United States, while not founded as a Christian or even a ‘religious’ nation, did provide through its Constitution, the freedom to worship in a manner that is entirely unique in the world.

When the United States finally arrives at its lowest ebb and becomes the Dis-united States of America; it’s wealth, purpose, resolve and pride in its own power will have dwindled to the point that it is a shadow of itself, a paper tiger. For many, this seems an impossibility or a state of affairs that would take centuries to achieve, but it would seem this may not be the case.

In tandem with America’s demise, will be the rise of the two preeminent European major powers, Russia and Germany. These two nations will form an alliance, that will reshape the global power structure and together the two superpowers will become the world’s hyper power, filling the vacuum left by the disintegrating United States.

This imagined future world view rather accurately reflects the amalgamation of Russia and a German led Europe; as well as the portrayal of the geo-economic trading blocs of North America, Latin America, Africa, the complex Islamic sphere and the enlarged East Asian region.

It is to Russia that America will one day turn, cap in hand. The eventual outcome is not good, as the independent American polarities will be defeated by a coalition, constituting the northern alliance of Russia and Germany (Europe); in turn collaborating with a Brazilian and Mexican led Latin America.

In this new world order, the Islamic nations as discussed earlier, possibly led by a reincarnation of the Ottoman Turks, Turkey; will challenge the northern alliance hegemony. In a war that stages three major conflagrations, with the North winning the decisive third battle, the southern confederacy of Islam falls to the subjugation and occupation of Russia and a German led Europe. India too, a bystander – or ally of the southern confederacy – will also fall prey to Russian and German domination.

Aside from the intriguing date, the rendition of this world view prescribes the landsNorth Africa, the Middle East, as well as Indiawhich will ultimately fall into the hands of a Russian and German alliance. The artwork hinting of an ancient Roman resurrection coupled with Jewish hegemony is uncannily close to the mark.

At this point the Eastern hordes, comprising China and its allies, decide ‘enough is enough’ and face off against the northern alliance in the mother of all battles that is actually predicted by name. What happens next, is the subject for a different question and another time…

“There is nothing new in the world except the history you do not know.”

Harry S Truman

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

Red or Green?

There is a misconception that humans are omnivores – even biologists erroneously use the term – and that we are supposed to eat a balanced diet of meat and plants. In contrast, the American Dieticians Association states:

“Most of mankind, for most of human history, has lived on vegetarian or near-vegetarian diets.”

Even though most people eat meat, humans don’t have the capacity to do so. Check and then compare your own teeth, jaw and digestive system – last one might be a bit difficult literally, but many good diagrams will suffice – with other species. We are anatomically designed to be herbivores and to live on a mainly meat free diet.

Thus, we are literally ‘meat-eating herbivores’ and that makes humans unique in nature.

Although humankind can eat meat, our bodies have not adapted to it raw. Our stomach acid isn’t strong enough to destroy the pathogens in meat. We still have to cook it or cure it for it to be edible and consumed safely. Even then, humans are eating flesh that has already begun to decompose and decay as soon as an animal is slaughtered. The reality is of eating bacterial contaminated ‘rotting meat’ and hiding this fact by cooking it and or, adding spices.

Even in the animal kingdom, a predator such as the lion will only eat the nutrient rich organs soon after a kill, like the heart and liver. It will not touch the flesh and leaves this for the scavengers such as hyaenas and vultures. Yet extraordinarily, humans also eat dead, flesh.

The adage is true: You are what you Eat

There are two main issues with eating too much meat and dairy products.

  1. As it contains so much protein and fat, it leads to obesity. Animal products provide more energy [carbohydrates and fats] than people were designed to handle and so any excess is stored as fat in our bodies.
  2. Statistics bear out that chronic ailments and cancers stem from a diet that is heavily meat and dairy based. Of course, animal products of-an-by themselves are not solely to blame, as also included are the antibiotics and growth hormones given to factory farmed animals.

For those still reluctant to believe humans are herbivores and not omnivores, a book by A D Andrews written in 1970 and published by the American Hygiene Society, entitled; Fit Food for Men, enumerates the following:

  1. Meat-eaters have claws; herbivores have no claws – humans have no claws.
  2. Meat-eaters have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue; herbivores perspire through skin pores – humans perspire through skin pores.
  3. Meat-eaters have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no fat molar teeth for grinding; herbivores have no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding – humans have no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding.
  4. Meat-eaters have an intestinal tract that is only three times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly; herbivores have an intestinal tract 10 to 12 times their body length – humans also have an intestinal tract 10 to 12 times their body length.
  5. Meat-eaters have strong hydrochloric acid in their stomach to digest highly fibrous meat; herbivores have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater – humans have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than a meat-eater.
  6. Meat-eaters have few salivary glands in their mouth; herbivores possess well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits – humans possess well-developed salivary glands.
  7. Meat-eaters have acidic saliva with no ptyalin [an enzyme]; herbivores have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains – humans also have alkaline saliva with ptyalin.

An example outside of the digestive system, is that mammalian carnivores do not have seminal vesicles, as they produce seminal plasma directly in the prostate gland. ‘The seminal vesicles are a pair of two convoluted tubular glands that lie behind the urinary bladder of… male mammals.’ They secrete fluid that contributes up to 60% of semen that passes from a human male during ejaculation. Needless to say, they are only found in herbivores… including humans.

For those who may be interested in looking good, feeling good, living happier and probably longer – as well as helping the environment, for the knock on effects of this choice are positive for our atmosphere, soil, animal welfare and humanities physical and mental health – a very readable and motivational book with easy scientific data to ‘digest’ is Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, published by Hamish Hamilton of Penguin Books, 2009.

And remember, people who say one needs animal protein to build muscle are not correct. The biggest land based mammals on the planet are all herbivores which only obtain their protein from plants, such as gorillas and elephants.

The oceans are excluded as yes, even though whales – who are carnivores – are bigger, as the water can hold their massive weight; there are hardly any examples of herbivore species of fish or mammals in the sea.

Finally, the vitamin B12 question can be categorised under the ‘Big Lie’ technique. The term was first coined by Adolf Hitler in 1925, in his book Mein Kampf. Tell a big lie over and over until it becomes a fact that no one questions. The B12 claim is scaremongering at its worst, or best depending on one’s view. A blind created and maintained by pharmaceutical conglomerates; so that you take their supplements – which do more harm than good. And, the Meat and Dairy Boards, who also have an enormous invested financial interest in the developed world populace’s consumption of meat, milk, cheese, butter and eggs.

Contrary to popular opinion, vitamin B12 is found outside of farm animals intestinal tracts, which have been given to them in the first place. For those still concerned about B12 levels or sources, certain mushrooms, beans, tea leaves, vegetables and seaweeds contain trace elements of B12; including the Shiitake Mushroom, Broccoli, Asparagus and Tempe from fermented Soybeans.

The best source of plant sourced vitamin B12 is dried purple laver. ‘Consumption of approximately 4g of dried purple laver (Vitamin B12 content: 77.6 μg /100 g dry weight) supplies the RDA [advised requirement] of 2.4 μg [of B12 per] day.’ From: Vitamin B12 containing Food Sources for Vegetarians, published by the National Library of Medicine, multiple authors, 2014.

Traditionally, Laver seaweed has been harvested in Scotland, Wales and Ireland to make laverbread, and it is also cultivated as Nori in Japan – where it is added to Sushi – as well as in Hawaii and the Philippines as a sea vegetable.

According to the Bible, humankind who descended from Adam before the flood, were agriculturists, horticulturists and farmers – Genesis 2:9, 16; 4:2-4; 6:21; 7:2. The animals raised were clean animals, intended only for sacrificial purposes – Genesis 8:20.

After the flood, a change was ordained in that meat was sanctified, though it had to be clean animals and to be eaten in conjunction with the sacrificial system – Genesis 9:2-4; Leviticus 11:1-47; Deuteronomy 13:3-20.

A case in point is when Abraham was visited by the Lord and two angels. He gave them a meal that included meat and dairy. Though it was in the context of a special occasion – Genesis 18:6-8.

In the Book of Daniel, we read of an account that supports that eating meat was for special occasions or during the Holy Day festivals seven times a year. It was not intended for rich meat difficult to digest, to be eaten every day.

‘But Daniel made up his mind not to eat the food [H6598 – pathbag: meat, portion of meat] and wine given to them by the king. He asked the superintendent for permission to eat other things instead. Now as it happened, God had given the superintendent a special appreciation for Daniel and sympathy for his predicament.  But he was alarmed by Daniel’s suggestion.

“I’m afraid you will become pale and thin compared with the other youths your age,” he said, “and then the king will behead me for neglecting my responsibilities.”

Daniel talked it over with the steward who was appointed by the superintendent to look after Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, and suggested a ten-day diet of only vegetables and water; then, at the end of this trial period the steward could see how they looked in comparison with the other fellows who ate the king’s rich food [‘delicacy, meat’] and decide whether or not to let them continue their diet.

The steward finally agreed to the test. Well, at the end of the ten days, Daniel and his three friends looked healthier and better nourished than the youths who had been eating the food supplied by the king! So after that the steward fed them only vegetables and water, without the rich foods and wines!’ – Daniel 1:8-16 Living Bible.

It would seem that eating fish which is far easier to digest, with more nutrients and protein than meat was acceptable in Christ’s day; as he called Peter, Andrew, James and John who were all Fishermen – Matthew 4:18, 21. Christ also performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes – Mark 6:48-44.

That said, both the Apostle Peter and James the half-brother of Christ are on record in being adherents of a plant based diet – refer article: The Pauline Paradox.

Based on an edited excerpt in answer to questions on Quora:

What are the benefits of a plant-based diet? and Is eating meat good for you?

“Throughout the whole earth I am giving you as food every seed-bearing plant and every tree with seed-bearing fruit.”

Genesis 1:29 Complete Jewish Bible

“Better to eat vegetables with people you love than to eat the finest meat where there is hate.”

Proverbs 15:17 Good News Translation

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

Addendum I

An important health factor to add to eating less meat is that of the type of meat one chooses to imbibe.

The Creator gave ancient Israel dietary guidelines. This would appear to be for very good reason. Some animals just weren’t meant for human consumption. Certain sea creatures which are scavengers, filled with noxious bacteria and which let’s face it, look just like big bugs; such as prawns, shrimp, crayfish and lobster, as if these two points were not enough of a deterrent in eating them, then often cause people to develop painful stomach aches after their consumption.

Likewise, the pig is an animal that uncannily possesses the flesh anatomy rather akin to a human. This is why the heart of a pig is the best candidate for transplanting to humans. While under a microscope, pig cells can be observed to be teeming with unpleasant and harmful microbes. In eating them, one is not just imbibing toxic bacteria, but it is the next thing to human cannibalism.

The eating of human flesh regularly is known to make the eater over time, crazy. As if they weren’t already to even try. People may wonder why some people are not always rational. One aspect not considered, is a diet which consumes a lot of pork, ham and bacon. This may well be a little understood factor, which science may well corroborate in the future.

Apparently, according to those who abhorrently know, pork is the closest meat in flavour and taste to human flesh and while cooked pork smells like human flesh; conversely, incinerated human flesh has a similar aroma to pork.

It was more than a coincidence that George Orwell chose the pig as the leading animal in his landmark novella Animal Farm, for they are one of the most highly intelligent species on the Earth – one wonders why? For information on the shocking origin of the domesticated pig, refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Leviticus 11:1-8

New Century Version

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Tell the Israelites this: These are the land animals you may eat: You may eat any animal that has split hoofs completely divided and that chews the cud.’ “Some animals only chew the cud or only have split hoofs, and you must not eat them…” 

“Now the pig has a split hoof that is completely divided, but it does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you [because it is not a true herbivore, but rather an omnivore]. You must not eat the meat from these animals or even touch their dead bodies; they are unclean for you.”

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Addendum II

The hidden evolutionary relationship between pigs and primates revealed by genome-wide study of transposable elements, John Hewitt, 2015:

‘In the past, geneticists focused primarily on the evolution of genes in order to trace the relationships between species. More recently, genetic elements called SINEs (short interspersed elements) have emerged as a much better way to trace mammalian phylogeny…

In humans, the most familiar and abundant SINE is the Alu transposable element. Originally derived from a small cytoplasmic signal recognition conglomerate known as the 7SL RNA, Alu inserts have since propagated themselves to generate an extended family over a million strong representing 11% of our entire genome.

Secondary structure of ALU RNAs

A recent paper published in the bioRxiv now suggests that another species – the pig – has a unique family of SINEs whose evolution has closely paralleled ours. In the pig genetics business, the preferred classification term for the family is ‘suidae’. Suidae PRE elements have been known since their original discovery back in 1987. 

The upshot of… [the] work… is that the ‘genomic performance of PRE-1 in terms of 7SL RNA-derived SINEs seemed convincing enough to classify the suidae into a family mainly inhabited by primates’.

It has not escaped our attention that many readers… may have availed themselves of our previous coverage of the human hybrid origins theory… With that in mind, I talked the creator of the hybrid origins theory, Eugene McCarthy, to get his take on this new research.

He had this to say:

“People have been congratulating me on this SINE study as if it somehow proved the hybrid theory of human origins. True, it does show that pigs are more closely related to primates than has generally been thought, which in turn suggests that a hybrid cross between pig and chimpanzee is more feasible than many have supposed. But to establish whether we’re actually descendants of an ancient cross between pig and chimpanzee, will require a detailed search of the human genome, not just a study of SINEs.”

Addendum III

Human-Pig Hybrid Created in the Lab, National Geographic, Erin Blakemore, 2023 – Emphasis mine

‘In a remarkable – if likely controversial – feat, scientists announced that they have created the first successful human-animal hybrids. The project proves that human cells can be introduced into a non-human organism, survive, and even grow inside a host animal, in this case, pigs.

This biomedical advance has long been a dream and a quandary for scientists hoping to address a critical shortage of donor organs. What if, rather than relying on a generous donor, you could grow a custom organ inside an animal instead?

That’s now one step closer to reality, an international team of researchers led by the Salk Institute reports in the journal Cell. The team created what’s known scientifically as a chimera: an organism that contains cells from two different species.

In the past, human-animal chimeras have been beyond reach. Such experiments are currently ineligible for public funding in the United States (so far, the Salk team has relied on private donors for the chimera project). Public opinion, too, has hampered the creation of organisms that are part human, part animal.

There are two ways to make a chimera. The first is to introduce the organs of one animal into another – a risky proposition, because the host’s immune system may cause the organ to be rejected. The other method is to begin at the embryonic level, introducing one animal’s cells into the embryo of another and letting them grow together into a hybrid.

It sounds weird, but it’s an ingenious way to eventually solve a number of vexing biological problems with lab-grown organs. When scientists discovered stem cells, the master cells that can produce any kind of body tissue, they seemed to contain infinite scientific promise. But convincing those cells to grow into the right kinds of tissues and organs is difficult… [yet] pigs have a notable similarity to humans. Though they take less time to gestate, their organs look a lot like ours.

Not that these similarities made the task any easier. The team discovered that, in order to introduce human cells into the pigs without killing them, they had to get the timing just right. When those just-right human cells were injected into the pig embryos, the embryos survived. Then they were put into adult pigs, which carried the embryos for between three and four weeks before they were removed and analysed.’

This pig embryo was injected with human cells early in its development and grew to be four weeks old.

‘In all, the team created 186 later-stage chimeric embryos that survived, says Wu, and “we estimate (each had) about one in 100,000 human cells.” That’s a low percentage – and it could present a problem for the method in the long run, says Ke-Cheng, a stem cell expert at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and North Carolina State University.

The human tissue appears to slow the growth of the embryo, notes Cheng, and organs grown from such embryos as they develop now would likely be rejected by humans, since they would contain so much pig tissue. The next big step, says Cheng, is to figure out whether it’s possible to increase the number of human cells the embryos can tolerate. The current method is a start, but it still isn’t clear if that hurdle can be overcome.

Belmonte agrees, noting that it could take years to use the process to create functioning human organs. The technique could be put to use much sooner as a way to study human embryo development and understand disease. And those real-time insights could be just as valuable as the ability to grow an organ. Even at this early stage, Cheng calls the work a breakthrough: “There are other steps to take,” he concedes. “But it’s intriguing. Very intriguing.”

33

There is profound significance attached with all numbers. Everything around us is but a clever and complex numerical design; the result of coded mathematical formulas producing a mind boggling program that is the beauty of nature and the wonder of ourselves. 

The Occult Power of Numbers, W Wynn Westcott – emphasis & bold mine:

“The followers of Pythagoras… referred every object, planet, man, idea, and essence to some number or other, in a way which to most moderns must seem curious and mystical in the highest degree. ‘The numerals of Pythagoras’, says Porphyry, who lived about 300 A.D., ‘were hieroglyphic symbols, by means whereof he explained all ideas concerning the nature of things’, and the same [numeric] method of explaining the secrets of nature is once again being insisted upon in the new revelation of the ‘Secret Doctrine’, by H.P. Blavatsky.

‘Numbers are a key to the ancient views of cosmogony – in its broad sense, spiritually as well as physically considered, to the evolution of the present human race; all systems of religious mysticism are based upon numerals. The sacredness of numbers begins with the Great First Cause, the One, and ends only with the nought or zero symbol of the infinite and boundless universe.”

In the inspired word, as well as in esoteric writings, numbers have attachment to sacred meaning. The number three scripturally is associated with decision and finality. It is unique in that doubled, it becomes six and tripled, it becomes the magical, mystical number nine that divides and multiples perfectly. The number six being a number associated with the creation of early man and humankind (refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega); and the number nine a conduit to not just the spiritual realm but to the Eternal Creator. 

In numerology the number three is equated with creativity, enthusiasm and imagination. The concord of 3-6-9 share kindred energies and relate to the realm of the artistic, inspirational and spiritual. The number three is the more emotive.

Three is very much about the now, not tomorrow and it is a magnet for good luck, favour, blessings and opportunities. The symbol of the triangle and by extension, the pyramid, is a potent one for the number three. The number three, importantly for the occultist or seer, is a number of vision

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Numerology, Kay Lagerquist & Lisa Lenard 2004 – emphasis & bold mine:

The spiritual essence of the three is bringing that which has never been into being, the power of creativity in all its forms

In the Pythagorean system, the 3 represents the meaning of excellence, because it has a beginning, a middle, and an end. The magical aspect of the 3 is often used in fairy tales, with three of something to make the happy outcome: 

Three rooms of flax in “The Three Spinning Fairies” Three tasks in “The Frog Prince” Three chances to discover the name in “Rumpelstiltskin” [and] many others where the mysterious answer is found in three doors, three riddles, or three wishes.’

A master number has more potential than single digit numbers. Eleven is the most intuitive of all numbers, twenty-two the most powerful and thirty-three the most loving of all numbers and is also strongly associated with healing… when used in an altruistic manner. These results are from when the number is used spiritually. If used selfishly in the material world then the vibrational energy is lower, base and outcomes are negative.

‘Master numbers indicate spatial gifts which make [people] highly sensitive to intuition, extrasensory perception, and the world of higher guidance, including celestial beings, other life realities, and universal spiritual law.’

The master number thirty-three is vital in the process of ‘making spiritual truths work in the material world.’ Remember this concept. It is for this reason that thirty-three is the number of the avatar. Now this is where it starts to become interesting as avatar means in Hindu Mythology: ‘the descent of a deity to the earth in an incarnate form or some manifest shape; the incarnation of a god.’ 

In Digital Technology: an avatar is ‘a static or moving image or other graphic representation that acts as a proxy for a person… as on the internet’ and in Science Fiction: ‘a hybrid creature, composed of human and alien DNA and remotely controlled by the mind of a genetically matched human being [or alien].’ 

The number thirty-three has become a prime focus in the New Age; associated with ‘connections to Ascended Masters’, and ‘alignment with [a] Divine Source’, so as to be able to ‘manifest whatever you desire into form.’ This sounds wonderful, yet it is a blind, a trap, a sinister pathway to ensnare the gullible, the weak, the arrogant and the wicked into a relationship with spirits that definitely do not have humankind’s interests at heart. 

Secret Teachings Of All Ages, Manly Hall – emphasis & bold mine:

“During the Middle Ages, alchemy was not only a philosophy and a science but also a religion. Those who rebelled against the religious limitations of their day concealed their philosophic teachings under the allegory of gold-making [refer gold, article: The Ark of God]. In this way they preserved their personal liberty and were ridiculed rather than persecuted. Alchemy is a threefold art, its mystery well symbolized by a triangle. Its symbol is 3 times 3 – three elements or processes in three worlds or spheres. The 3 times 3 is part of the mystery of the 33rd degree of Freemasonry, for 33 is 3 times 3, which is 9, the number of esoteric man and the number of emanations from the root of the Divine Tree [of Life].

Beneath the so-called symbolism of alchemy is concealed a magnificent concept, for this ridiculed and despised craft still preserves intact the triple key to the gates of eternal life. Realizing, therefore, that alchemy is a mystery in three worlds – the divine, the human, and the elemental – it can easily be appreciated why the sages and philosophers created and evolved an intricate allegory to conceal their wisdom.”

There are numerous examples in the Bible of the number three, though there are far less for the powerful number thirty-three. The master number of the double three adds potency to the power of the single digit, three. 

A pivotal event in the history of time, is the rebellion of the great red dragon – also known as the old (or ancient) serpent, a devil and Satan – recorded in Revelation 12:1-9; where a third, or thirty-three percent of the angelic realm joined Asherah, the original Wisdom of God, in opposing their Eternal Creator – Proverbs 8:22-31 (Article: Asherah). The number three is related to the rebellion, judgement and legacy of the fallen, dark angels. 

Moses and Joshua combined to defeat thirty-three Canaanite-Nephilim kings – Joshua 12:2-4, 9-24. It would be surprising if Canaan being divided into thirty-three city-states was a coincidence, considering the material we will cover. 

An unknown source states: ‘Mount Hermon is at 33 degrees latitude and longitude. (In the Book of Enoch, Mount Hermon is the place where the Grigori; “Watchers, Sons of God or the Nephilim,” a class of fallen angels descended to Earth)’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

David as king, ruled for forty years in total; comprising an initial period over the tribe of Judah from the city of Hebron for seven years; and then reigning over all Israel and Judah from Jerusalem, for a further thirty-three years – 1 Chronicles 29:27. 

Incidentally, the Son of Man died – being sacrificed for the sins of the world – in his 33rd year of life at the age of thirty-two and a half. The Messiah had begun his ministry at the age of twenty-nine (in his 30th year) and died three and a half years later – refer article: The Christ Chronology

Aside from the Bible, we find the number thirty-three within ourselves. An unknown source: ‘The number of turns in a complete sequence of human DNA equals 33.’ The number thirty-three is a pathway to open the ‘Third Eye’ and ‘awakening a serpent within’ for the human spine contains thirty-three vertebrae. In Kundalini yoga – meaning, concernedly: ‘coiled like a snake’ and ‘serpent power’ – special spiritual significance is attached to the spine as the key to unlocking spiritual energy, power and consciousness (refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Asherah).

Unknown source from article: The Secret Meaning of the Number 33, Beginning and End, 2019 – emphasis & bold mine: 

“The nervous system is very complex. We talk about it as a nervous system, but it is actually three nervous systems in one: central, sympathetic, and parasympathetic. The main one is the central nervous system which is our spinal column with its 33 vertebrae and the brain [additionally the human foot has 33 joints]. These are one thing. You cannot separate the brain from the spine. This is why an injury to the spine is so devastating. The whole body depends upon it.

This central nervous system and all its functions are symbolized in the Bible as the Tree Of Life. That is because it is our own Tree of Life inside. The important thing here is that the energy that will awaken the Consciousness and will give us the spiritual insight we need is enclosed within Muladhara, trapped, asleep. This is where Kundalini rests and awaits for us to come and awaken it… That… force is represented symbolically as a [sleeping] serpent that is coiled three and a half times and is sleeping.” – Gnostic Teachings. 

The serpent is none other than the Serpent of Eden who enticed Eve and Adam away from the Tree of Life, to a path originating with the old and ancient Serpent who is Asherah and the root of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil – Genesis 3:1-7. A path to physicality and away from spirituality as offered by the Eternal – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. The Serpent from the Garden of Eden wishes to offer spirituality on its own terms – in opposition to the Ancient of Days and His path leading to eternal life – using Asherah’s own path, which leads to everlasting destruction. It is not a serpent to awaken and certainly not one to invite. 

The ill-advised process of unlocking Kundalini energy through chakras, sacred energy points in the spine is one of opening the third eye, which in reality is the pineal gland in the centre of the human brain. This unlocking, awakens a person’s consciousness so that one can access the spirit realm. 

But, as the Serpent of Wisdom ‘promised’ Eve she would open her spiritual eyes and be granted eternal life as a god if she disobeyed the Eternal, it was an empty promise and remains so, whatever the conditions or allusions added to give it sparkle and shine – Genesis 3:4-5 (refer article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?)

Before we discuss the pineal gland and its association with the third eye, it is interesting to note the related subject of Aum (or Om) which is said to represent the most primordial sound vibration of the Universe. It is a basic mantra in Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism. The syllable Om (or Ohm) was the original, holy sound emanation, predating the Universe and the herald of the birth, life, death and rebirth process. According to Hinduism, Brahma was the single entity in existence and as the Creator, thought, ‘to become many’.

Yoga practitioners chant the sound Om to bring themselves ‘into harmonic resonance with the Infinite and connect with the divine’ in seeking ‘to move out of mental dissonance and chaos’ according to Ashley Turner.  She further states:

‘OM is said to vibrate at 432 Hz [adds up to 9: 4+3+2 = 9], which is the natural musical pitch of the Universe, as opposed to 440 Hz, which is the frequency of most modern music. It is considered one of the most important spiritual symbols (pratima) and represents the sacred trinity in all its depictions

For instance: Body, Mind and Spirit; Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva; Saraswati, Lakshmi and Durga-Kali [refer Trinity, article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius].

The syllable is also referred to as omkara, aumkara, and pranava in the Vedas. It is similar to: Hum, Amin, Amen [and] Shalom. The… symbol represents the meaning of AUM. The symbol OM visually consists of three curves, one semicircle, and a dot.’ 

The symbol, which looks a little like the number thirty-three, represents peace, tranquility and unity, as well as the past, present and the future and has become a popular jewellery piece particularly in feng shui. Om is a seed mantra and used in the activation of the crown chakra.

In Sanskrit, Aum means, ‘to sound out loudly’, while pranava means, ‘bow to the divine to the folded hands.’ In Hinduism, Om represents the union of three gods and in Jainism it signifies five supreme beings, yet one god, the ‘creator of Om’. ‘Television has three colour webs from which it produces millions of colours. Similarly, these three basic sounds of OM produce’ all the variety of expressions in creation.

A is for Brahma the Creator; U is for Vishnu the Preserver; and M is for Shiva, the destroyer. Similarly, A, represents the waking mind and our consciousness; U, our dream state and active unconscious; and M, deep sleep state and our latent unconscious. The Samadhi dot (Turiya) symbolises pure consciousness and is the silence that falls after Aum. The Maya crescent represents illusion and our experience in the external world.

The pineal gland is a small pine cone shaped object located deep between the cerebral hemispheres in the epithalamus. It is attached to the upper part of the thalamus near the roof of the third ventricle. A normal pineal gland appears as a small reddish-brown (or grey) pine nut shape and its normal size ranges between 10 and 14 mm, or a third of an inch. The gland is part of the endocrine system and assists in regulating melatonin; a chemical produced to help the body sleep at night. Its function is to govern the production of hormones, while maintaining the circadian rhythm of our sleep/wake cycle.

What is the pineal gland? Healthglade:

‘To the present day, the functions of the pineal gland are not fully understood. Current knowledge indicates that by secretion of melatonin, the pineal gland plays an important role in the regulation of the sleep-wake cycle and of reproductive function (e.g. onset of puberty), with melatonin also acting as a neuroprotector or antioxidant.

The pineal gland translates the rhythmic cycles of night and day encoded by the retina into hormonal signals that are transmitted to the rest of the neuronal system in the form of serotonin and melatonin synthesis and release. The pineal gland secretes the hormone melatonin in response to changing light conditions outside the body. Impulses originating in the retinas of the eyes are conducted along a complex pathway that eventually reaches the pineal gland. Melatonin secretion is suppressed during the day and increases in the dark of night. 

Melatonin may help to regulate circadian rhythms. Circadian rhythms are patterns of repeated activity associated with the environmental cycles of day and night, including the sleep-wake cycle. The fact that melatonin secretion responds to day length may explain why traveling across several time zones produces the temporary insomnia of jet lag. The sleep-wake cycle is the most obvious circadian rhythm in humans. 

It is largely controlled by the pattern of daylight and night, but under laboratory conditions of constant light or dark, the human body eventually follows an approximately 25-hour cycle – the exact same as on the planet Mars’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

‘Previous studies have suggested a decline of melatonin secretion with age and an association between melatonin decrease and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease. The amount of uncalcified pineal tissue was shown to predict total melatonin excretion with lack of melatonin being hypothesized to result from pineal gland calcification [the addition of Fluoride in tap water and toothpaste, contributes to calcification of the pineal gland]. 

Calcification of pineal region tumors is very common… Pineal gland calcifications, also referred to as “brain sand”, involves the development of hydroxyapatite deposits and is very common with a reported prevalence of approximately 68-75% in adults. In all population groups, calcification of the pineal gland was found to increase with age. Pineal gland calcification is frequently detected on computed tomography (CT) scans…  Recent years have witnessed an increasing interest in studies regarding the impact of pineal gland calcifications on decreased secretory activity of the gland and on specific pathological entities such as Alzheimer’s disease. 

Mahlberg et al. suggested, that pineal gland calcification was significantly higher in patients with Alzheimer’s disease compared to others types of cognitive impairment and that pineal gland calcifications might contribute to the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease by reflecting a reduced level of crystallization inhibitors…’

What is the Pineal Gland’s Function and How to Amplify It, Mindbliss – emphasis mine:

‘[The pineal gland] has long been associated with the idea of the “third eye”, which is a spiritual symbol of all-knowing according to yoga philosophy and often perceived as a gateway for the soul’s liberation. In his book Kundalini Tantra, Swami Satyananda Saraswati says:

“It has also been called ‘the eye of intuition’, and it is the doorway through which the individual enters the astral and psychic dimension of consciousness. Perhaps the most common name for this chakra is “the third eye”, and the mystical traditions of every age and culture make abundant references to it. It is portrayed as a psychic eye located midway between the two physical eyes and it looks inward instead of outward.”

‘The idea of the third eye has also floated around science circles previously, as some believe the pineal gland is what has been leftover in the human brain of an actual, physical third eye which we eventually evolved out of. Swami Satyananda Saraswati…

“The pineal gland acts as a lock on the pituitary. As long as the pineal gland is healthy, the functions of the pituitary are controlled. However, in most of us, the pineal gland started to degenerate when we reached the age of eight, nine or ten. Then the pituitary began to function and to secrete various hormones which instigated our sexual consciousness, our sensuality and worldly personality. At this time, we began to lose touch with our spiritual heritage.”

‘The pituitary gland is a gland that acts as a master gland, controlling many of the hormonal functions in the body. It is located in the hypothalamus in the brain, which also contributes to our sleep/wake patterns. This means the pituitary and pineal gland work together for proper function. Imbalances in the pineal gland (and pituitary) can lead to sleep disturbances and problems with your sleep/wake cycle. Therefore, this tiny, little gland plays a bigger role in our lives than previously thought! 

In addition to the physiological role the pineal gland plays in the body, it is also commonly associated with spiritual thought and mystical experiences. Ancient sages and mystics believed this area of the body to be the space for ascension and enlightenment through the brain/body. It is perceived as a bridge between our inner and outer worlds, as well as to a connection to something beyond what we know to exist, to a higher state of consciousness… now that it has been proven that melatonin is in part regulated by the pineal gland, it does lend credibility to the fact that increased melatonin production can produce transcendent or mystical experiences during a waking state such as meditation through its function as a psychotropic [hallucinogenic] chemical. 

Outside the realm of science, the pineal gland is associated with the sixth chakra, called ajna or the “third eye” center located between your eyebrows (essentially deep back in your brain). The ancient yogis who wrote The Vedas in India between 1500-500 B.C. outlined a long time ago these physiological and psychic energy pathways that run through the body as a map we can still use today to better understand ourselves. When you strengthen and activate the third eye, you awaken intuition and inner wisdom on the path to Self-Realization.

It is the second to last step before reaching total enlightenment (according to yoga philosophy, which actually occurs through the crown of the head). Psychic energy is said to accumulate in this area of the brain and body. However, in the grand scheme of the world, when this center is active and open, you can better understand your role in life and the various signs and synchronicities that occur and point you in the right direction. 

Symbolically, the third eye represents union on the path to cosmic consciousness, divine wisdom, inner knowing, and intuition. This is the place where the ego is left behind and the concept of duality begins to unwind in order to embrace unity or the concept of oneness.’

“When we begin to see each other through what the metaphysician calls, the third eye, we begin to know each other on a level that is beyond what our physical eyes can see” ~ Marianne Williamson 

‘There are some telltale signs that your pineal gland is healthy as you activate your third eye center.

Signs You are Amplifying Your Third Eye

  • You find deeper meaning in the events that occur in your life
  • You understand that physical reality is a manifestation of duality, and your soul seeks to be liberated from this duality
  • You never feel alone, but instead feel connected to all things, animate and inanimate
  • You feel the vibration and rhythm of everything around you
  • Your senses are heightened (touch, taste, smell, hearing, sight)
  • You begin to see and feel your own energy body and others as well
  • You identify less with your ego sense
  • Negative emotions such as anger, greed, envy, and lust begin to disappear’

Associated with the Third Eye, is the All-Seeing Eye. The symbol of the number three is a triangle; specifically, an equilateral triangle inside a circle. It is an arcane occult symbol dating back to very ancient civilisations. Alice Bailey of the Lucis Trust states that the coming New World Order is best symbolised by a triangle within a circle, with a dot inside the triangle. The dot (or point) symbolises the ruler of the spirit world, Sanat, an anagram for Satan. Bailey says that Sanat is the entity who at the appointed time, will emerge to rule the Earth and humanity. 

Satan is clearly represented in the Illuminati symbol the Eye of Providence, or the All-Seeing Eye. It is a symbol rooted deeply in Masonic tradition and ritual. It is typically depicted as a single eye – the eye of Horus – placed centrally inside a triangle or pyramid and enhanced using beams of light, in Illumination – refer articles: Belphegor; and The Pyramid Complexity. The eye also represents the Serpent of Wisdom, the powerful, ever-present, all seeing one.

Theresa Ibis (Article: Thoth), founder of the Universal Kabbalah Network, says: “From spirals, to circles (Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim), to triangles, to squares and where these things manifest themselves, and why those are the best patterns for nature to follow, and how that we can use those patterns as gates and keys within our own soul, and open up energies to flow through us that we would like to be working with. The triangle often represents a trinity, it represents spirit, so if we want to connect with spirit, we can imagine our head being immersed in a golden pyramid of light”.

Triangle inside Circle Occult Illuminati Symbol, Healthglade – emphasis mine:

‘The Rosicrucians are another ancient movement heavily involved in the triangle inside the circle symbolism. Their manuals refer to it as the “Symbol of Creation”, with the only difference being that the circle is represented in the form of a serpent swallowing its own tail. The serpent is known as Nehushstan, and is mentioned in the Bible in 2 Kings 18:4 as the bronze serpent which the Israelites worshipped and made religious offerings to.

The serpent is also referred to as Ouroboros, and can be found in both the Ancient Greek and Egyptian cultures, as well as practices such as Gnosticism, Hermeticism, Alchemy, and Kundalini Yoga’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

‘The infiltration of the Christian religion by satanic and occult practices is well known. The Catholic churches are chock full of symbolism, including the all-seeing eye, circumscribed triangle, or triangle within an arch, and even modern churches such as the Seventh Day Adventists (Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days) have also been overtaken by these symbol proliferators.’ 

‘One of the main agendas of the Illuminati is to proliferate the use of occult symbols and spread them throughout our daily lives. This plan is discrete, and with the general public not knowing the true meanings of these symbols, it is an easy plan for them to promote and worship Satan without facing opposition. One of their favourite places to put these images is on government or official logos, where they will be recognised and acknowledged by the public as a symbol of authority and domination over their lives’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

Alcoholics Anonymous is a well known Illuminati front organisation, so it comes as no surprise that they would adopt an Illuminati symbol to depict themselves. Their description and reasoning for selection of the symbol to represent them [soun[s] very much like the making of a satanic ritual… The Alcoholics Anonymous organisation also acknowledged the symbols origins in ancient times and cultures… In addition… the symbol can also be found in seemingly innocuous locations, such as shown below on the monitoring well, and has even been known to appear in crop circles in the United Kingdom.’

‘Another popular modern-day movement to have adopted this symbolism is the homosexuality movement, and many members will be shocked to find out the origins of their symbol, the pink triangle inverted inside a green circle. They use it to symbolise alliance with gay rights and a space free from homophobia, unaware that the same space has been used for centuries by satanists in their rituals to conjure demons. Satanists refer to the triangle inside the circle as… the Thaumaturgic Triangle or Thaumaturgic Circle. It is one of their primary tools used in demon conjuring ceremonies, as the triangle is the doorway to the spirit realm, and the circle is the boundary of the power. Some Satanists will even remove the circle in the hope of being possessed by the demons.

The triangle within a circle dominates the pages of Masonic literature, and is also used in their most popular imagery. It is said they refer to it as the symbol of the Kybalion, and have adopted it from Hermetic Philosophy of Ancient Egypt and Greece. Hermes just happens to be mentioned in the Bible in Acts 14:8-13, where the masses believed that Gods had come down in human form, and that Paul was in fact Hermes’ – refer article: Thoth.

The Kybalion was a book published in 1908 which was purported to be the essence of the teachings of Hermes Trismegistus, who was known by the ancient Egyptians as “The Great Great” and “Master of Masters”. It was published anonymously by a group under the pseudonym of “the Three Initiates”. One of the three is understood to be the infamous Freemason Paul Foster Case, and it is also interesting that the company involved in the printing, the Yogi Publication Society, listed its address [as] the Masonic Temple in Chicago in the US’ – Article: The Secret Covenant.

‘The Masonic Images shown above are as follows:

1. The Kybalion…
2. The Satanic Eye inside a triangle inside a circle, inside a Masonic compass
3. The front cover of a Royal Arch Mason magazine showing 2 examples of a triangle within a circle
4. The famous masonic imagery on the US $1 bill, featuring a triangle inside a circle
5. A Grand Master of Masons Medallion
6. A Masonic illustration from France, with the circle shown as a serpent swallowing its tail
7. The Masonic Triangle of Enlightenment, featuring the 33 degrees and the capstone pyramid
8. Photo of a section of a conference room of a Masonic hotel in London

The last photograph shown above certainly raises a lot of questions, as it appears to be deliberately placed for the performing of rituals. Indeed, many old hotels have Masonic origins, and you can find ceremonial rooms within them from the old days, which now function as conference rooms for both the public and their guests.

It is plain for all to see that the triangle within the circle is placed on a white painted block, and the floor is exactly as you will find in all the Freemasonry lodges worldwide, the black and white checkerboard which is used to represent dimensional travel. Perhaps the most interesting part is the inscription on the side of the white block, with the letters reading upwards (this reversal is a Satanic practice) as HAB HKT SKI.

High level freemason initiates know the meanings of these common markings, while the low level plebs may have no idea. HAB stands for Hiram Abiff, who is considered the Messiah of Freemasonry, and the Chief Architect of King Solomon’s Temple, the structure they repeatedly mention throughout their manifesto’ – Article: The Ark of God. ‘HKT stands for Hiram, King of Tyre, as it is mentioned in the Bible, and lastly SKI stands for Solomon the King himself’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

‘Freemasons also perform the Hebrew practice Gematria, which is a numerological system of assigning a number to each letter. By applying this, we come up with a very interesting combination:

273  =  HAB  =  Hiram Abiff                =  Ch V R M A B I V
640  =  HKT  =   Hiram, King of Tyre  =  Ch V R M M L K Tz V R
465  =  SKI    =   King Solomon           =  M L K sh L M H

1378  =  273 + 640 + 465

This number also happens to be the sum of every number from 1 to 52, and is a highly significant number to Freemasonry. It also happens to be the birth year of the founder of the Rosicrucian [Rose-Cross] movement, Christian Rosenkreutz, and the start of the Rosicrucian calendar.’

Freemasons, Rosicrucians and occultists are united in their revering of the number thirty-three above all other numbers. Recall Mount Hermon is at 33 degrees latitude and longitude, where the fallen dark angels came to Earth prior to the Flood – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. Considerable war, murder and bloodshed, has occurred on or near this northern 33rd degree parallel. “If a life is taken close to the northern 33rd Parallel, this fits with the Masons’ demonic mythology in which they demonstrate their worldly power by spilling human blood at a predetermined locale” – Masons and Mystery At The 33rd Parallel, Day Williams.

Cutting Edge – emphasis mine:

‘When the Illuminati ended the First World War, they had just successfully completed the first war of Albert Pike’s occult plan to produce [the] Antichrist. Thus, they deliberately ended it on the 11th Month [of November], the 11th Day, at the 11th hour. The signing of the Armistice agreement was thus undergirded by three elevens! When the Illuminati assassinated President Kennedy, he was killed in the Masonic Dealey Plaza, the most powerful secret society in the world today to whom the number 11 is extremely important. 

The Number 11 was a… powerful occult signature underlying these events. When they were successfully carried out, occultists the world over knew exactly what had happened and who had carried it out, and for the purpose of setting the stage for “Number 11” himself, Antichrist. Why is the number 11 important to the occultist? As Wescott explains, “… so 11 is the essence of all that is sinful, harmful, and imperfect.” [Ibid., p. 100] Thus, while 11 is very important, multiplication’s are also important, such as 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, 77, 88, and 99

However, most importantly, Bible prophecy assigns the Number ’11’ to [the] Antichrist in Daniel 7:8… “I considered the (10) horns, and behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one (Antichrist)…” Bible scholars have always called Antichrist the “11th Horn”. Thus, this occult and Illuminist preoccupation with the Number 11 as they strive to produce their Antichrist, is dictated by Biblical prophecy concerning [the] Antichrist.

[Why]… the occult fascination with the number [33, and its extension, 333?]… Let us examine the power the Satanist believes resides in [these two numbers]. We shall quote from White Magic practitioner, Elizabeth van Buren, in her book, “The Secret of the Illuminati”, as she openly reveals Luciferian thought and values in her New Age book.’ 

“Thirty-three appears to be the most mysterious of numbers. It is found over and over again in the stories of the Bible and elsewhere. Jesus Christ was thirty-three when he was crucified; the first temple of Solomon stood for thirty-three years before being pillaged by King Shishak of Egypt; there are thirty-three symbols of the Masonic Order and one of their symbols depicts a double-headed eagle [symbol of the Holy Roman Empire] crowned with an equilateral triangle: inside of this is the number thirty-three.”

Van Buren continues: 

“In the Vishnu-Purana Book 1, it states: These thirty-three divinities exist age after age, and their appearance and disappearance is in the same number as the sun sets and rises again. In the Tibetan Book of the Dead, it speaks of the thirty-three heavens ruled over by Indra and the thirty-three ruled over by Mara… The Temple of Solomon was a cube, measuring thirty-three and a third feet…’ – Article: The Ark of God.

‘Students of Numerology are well aware that numbers affect a person’s life. One’s name, place, and time of birth all have an influence on one’s physical, mental, and spiritual being. Each letter as [a] number has a certain vibratory effect… the picture produced by the various combinations gives an understanding of the character, karma, and potentialities of the person… in Spiritual Numerology, the numbers 11, 22, and 33 are the three ‘Master Numbers’, the highest being 33… 

This highest of the master numbers was the age of the Master Initiate (Jesus) at his death, resurrection and ascension, giving more esoteric accents. The ’33’ symbolizes the highest spiritual conscious attainable by the human being. Christ lay in the tomb for three days after his crucifixion, a symbol for us of the steps man must take in order to be reborn. The number ‘333’ speaks of death, resurrection, and ascension.” (NOTE: Jesus’ ascension did not occur for 40 days after He arose) 

Indeed, there is not death, as can be discerned clearly… There is only Change… The message… is that there is a balance which one can achieve by which one can escape from the wheel of change, from life to death. This balance can be found by becoming fully aware so that both worlds are equally real to one. This awareness is found when the third eye is fully opened, the eye the symbol of which is the number ’33’… 

Each ‘3’ of the number ’33’ can be seen to be three-fold in the same way as a triangle has three sides: 3+3+3 = 9. In the temples of Atlantis and Egypt the candidate for initiation passed through nine degrees, or rather the three-fold three degrees, into the mysteries [there are purported to be nine dimensions in total between ourselves – the first three – and the Creator, with every other creature of the creation in between]. These degrees symbolized the re-entering of the womb in order, after the three times three months of gestation, to be reborn into the world of Spirit-consciousness.

How many have really understood the words: ‘Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God’. John 3:3.”

Van Buren is confirming the occultist endeavour: to shortcut the path offered by the Creator and seek to evade the process of death and resurrection – Acts 4:12. In attaining the highest spiritual consciousness through the number 33, one then seeks a direct transformation from physical to spiritual bypassing death, through the number 333. Notice that 333 is half the number of the Beast, 666; which alternatively is two times 333. 

And who are the chief occultists aiming to bring this about? They are included in the secret societies which are led by ‘the powers that be’ who possess trillions of dollars and are all inextricably linked via their network of Freemasonry and other aligned cabals – refer articles: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?; and The Great Reset & the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Whether they be Templars of old or Illuminati today, it makes no difference. The secret esoteric occultism they all adhere, goes farther back than with King Solomon of the United Kingdom of Israel or Hiram, king of Tyre, but rather to the antediluvian epoch which included Atlantis, the Nephilim, Evil Enoch, his father Cain and the precursor to all secret knowledge, the Seven Sacred Sciences – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe; articles: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis; and Na’amah

With themselves, the evil elite aim to bring a select number of citizenry of the earth – after an attempted massive reduction of the world’s population, with Covid 19 just the beginning foray – so that they can initiate this process in earnest, with the opening of the Third Eye. It is an attempt to replicate the tower of Babel some nine thousand years ago and the Atlantis age some fifteen to twenty thousand years ago – according to an unconventional chronology

It is the number 3 and its multiplications which symbolise and unlocks the process along a ‘spiritual’ path, in literally transmogrifying to physical ‘perfection’ and immortality.

Cutting Edge – emphasis mine:

‘The 20th Century was clearly the century in which God withdrew His restraining power enough so Satan could cause World Wars I and II to be fought exactly as the Guiding Spirit of Albert Pike revealed to him in 1870. The Second World War began in the year, 1939. The number, ’39’, is very special to the occultist, because it is formed by the multiplication of ‘3 and 13’.

The year 1939 adds up to a master number: 1+9+3+9 = 22.

‘The number ‘3’ symbolizes the Pagan Trinity, while ’13’ is the number of ultimate rebellion against God. However, World War II was made possible through the events of 1933 [also a master number year]. 

January 30, 1933 – Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany. Note that this date also forms a ‘333’… Adepts the world over considered Hitler to be the “immortal god-man” until they realized he had chosen the “Left-Hand” path, the Evil path. At that moment on, all White Magic occultists opposed Hitler mightily.

On March 3, 1933, the Federal Reserve Board and the New York Reserve Bank’s Governor Harrison had agreed that the Board would issue an order closing all the Federal Reserve Banks. New York Governor Herbert Lehman, at the urging of Governor Harrison, also agreed to proclaim an emergency bank holiday in New York, and a similar action was taken in Illinois. 

One of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first official acts after taking office on Inauguration Day (Saturday, March 4, 1933), was to proclaim an emergency, three-day, nationwide banking holiday, signed and effective Monday, March 6. FDR was a member of the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine… Shriners are 33rd degree Masons.’

Oddly, Roosevelt died near parallel 33.

‘Franklin Roosevelt… with Rosicrucian Churchill and pagan Josef Stalin… formed the “planetary triangle” of nations known as the Allies, that would oppose the “planetary triangle” of nations known as the Axis Powers Germany, Italy, Japan. Thus, Roosevelt was sworn in during the 3rd month, 1933, thereby giving his inauguration an occult value of ‘333’, just like Hitler’s ascension to power… Thus, Satan had his men on both sides of the Atlantic: Black Magick Hitler and White Magic 33rd Degree Mason, Roosevelt. World War II was inevitable at this point.’ 

The United Nations flag divides the globe into thirty-three sections (above) and with a pentagram below

If one considers all events random, with no design or purpose, then many events become fantastically bizarre coincidences in the extreme when numbers are observed surrounding these events. For instance, in 1963 President John F Kennedy was shot and killed in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas, near the 33rd Parallel. It occurred on the 11th month and the 22nd day. Eleven and twenty-two adding up to thirty-three.

The full date comprising 11.22.1963 adds up to 52, or 4 x 13. The word Dallas in numerology looks like this: 413311, with the same digits as the 4 x 13, it also adds up to 13 and contains the master numbers 33 and 11. What is also a fascinating though unrelated coincidence, is the fact that the name Kennedy in numerology looks like this: 2555547 – with double master number fives – remarkably adding up to 33. The Dealey Plaza is also the site of the first Masonic temple in Dallas and includes a Masonic obelisk.

Curiously, Kennedy’s brother Robert Kennedy was also assassinated on parallel 33, in the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. 

In the northern hemisphere, the 33rd parallel makes its way through other major United States cities such as Phoenix and the town of Roswell, an area known for its history with UFO related incidents. The Phoenix Lights reported by thousands of people in the skies above the city were one of the most massive UFO sightings in history, according to witnesses in two separate events. 

The northern 33rd parallel is of note, for the predominance of the world’s wealth is stored north of its line. Major financial hubs north of the 33rd Parallel include London, New York, Frankfurt, Switzerland, Beijing, Seoul and Tokyo.

Yet conversely, most of this planet’s 8.2 billion people live south of the 33rd Parallel. 

Further mystery surrounding parallel 33, includes the alleged first nuclear explosion in Alamogordo, New Mexico. It was the 33rd United States President Harry Truman, who targeted the two Japanese cities with nuclear bombs and both of these cities straddled the 33rd parallel – Article: Nuclear Nefariousness.

While on the African continent, in the town of Casablanca located in Morocco, a large square and hexagonal pyramidal construction are located on the 33rd parallel. If one travels along the 33rd parallel all the way to the Far East, the fabulous White Pyramid which is located about 60 miles southwest of X’ian can be observed. The Bermuda Triangle also has a mysterious connection to the 33rd Parallel.

In ancient Mesopotamia now modern-day Iraq, where the cradle of the Sumerian civilisation was located, is the place where the northern 33rd parallel acts as a junction for two great rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates. Baghdad is also located at latitude 33 ° 33’N and the palace of Saddam Hussein was built exactly on this position. The ancient city of Damascus in Syria also corresponds to that parallel.

In the Southern Hemisphere, both Cape Town in South Africa and Sydney in Australia correspond to the 33rd parallel south.

Cutting Edge: ‘One of the major historic facts is that the entire system of satanic lore germinated in Babylon which is located precisely on the 33rd Degree Parallel… Until the time of the [Assyrian] Empire, the center of power was south of the 33rd Degree, held by Egypt and Babylon.’ 

‘But, Greece and Rome began a movement of civilizations, where the center of power gravitated gradually northward. Since the reign of Sir Francis Bacon and Queen Elizabeth I (1590 – 1603), Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry have ruled England and Europe with an increasingly iron hand. 

Once Adam Weishaupt established the Masters of the Illuminati on May 1, 1776, Freemasonry has been gradually moving the entire world into the Kingdom of Antichrist – New World Order’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

‘This is the society where the ultimate goal is that from “The Christ” on downward, all the peoples of the world still living after the “Cleansing Cycle” will so spiritually evolve… that they will attain immortality on earth. The numeric symbol of this high degree of spiritual attainment will be ’33’, and the… symbol will be the Third Eye that will open… 

This is the ultimate goal; unfortunately, to achieve it, a lot of people are going to have to die… [and a] tremendous amount of Witchcraft… where human blood has been planned to be shed in huge torrents… to achieve this utopian state…’

Revelation 14:20

Common English Bible

‘Then the winepress was trampled outside the city, and the blood came out of the winepress as high as the horses’ bridles for almost two hundred miles.’

Revelation 17:6

The Voice

‘I looked and saw that the woman was drunk because she had gorged herself on the blood of the saints and the blood of those people who refused to deny Jesus even to save their own lives. When I saw her, I was filled with wonder.’

Revelation 18:23-24

The Message

‘Her traders robbed the whole earth blind, and by black-magic arts deceived the nations. The only thing left of Babylon is blood – the blood of saints and prophets, the murdered and the martyred.’

Cutting Edge:

‘… for only a select few are truly “worthy” to pass through the cleansing cycle to live in this  [diabolical] “New Heaven and New Earth” over which The Masonic [Antichrist] will rule.’

“… listen to me; Hold your peace, and I will teach you wisdom.”

Job 33:33 New King James Version

“But when the messages you’ve given them actually come true – and I assure you, everything you tell them is going to come true – they will realize a true prophet has been among them.”

Ezekiel 33:33 The Voice

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

Addendum

An article from Ancient Code, entitled, We Are Surrounded by Masonic Symbols – How Modern Logos Are Linked To Secret Societies; reveals the depth of infiltration of the Establishment’s symbols innocuously inserted into widespread and famous everyday icons and logos. This presence is unsurprising, yet concerning and reveals just how mired society is in the snare of the powers that be – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

‘Beyond its immediate and obvious meaning, simple images become symbols carrying a connection between man and the principle they represent and from which they originate.’

Facebook is instantly recognisable as the world’s most famous social media website.

‘The mysterious Facebook logo and the company itself may be paying tribute to a mason symbol within the lodges: the Two Ball Cane…’ Also known as Tubal Cain (Genesis 4:22) – refer article: Na’amah

Gmail is likely the most used e-mail service in the world. 

‘At first glance, it looks like a sealed envelope, but on a more meticulous inspection… the red lines (and the color used in the logo is not by chance) that cross and go through the folds form an “M”… Obviously, M stands for Mail… Yet Gmail’s logo has a stunning similarity with the classic masonic apron, a piece of cloth that is fastened to the body at waist height by means of a rope or ribbon. The Masonic Apron is steeped in spiritual and mystical meanings and is linked with Adam and Eve who wore aprons of fig leaves to hide their modesty’ – Genesis 3:7.

Another famous icon is the Android App: Google Play Store. ‘The Google Play Store icon is an arrow pointing to the right and… [representing the] well-known playback button’ for Play. ‘However, take a look more closely and you will notice a curious pattern embedded within the symbol itself.’

‘The issue with understanding modern symbols is knowing which esoteric or occult symbols to compare them with, which most people are understandably completely unaware. The Google Play icon uncannily resembles the Sigil of Lucifer, associated with the Seal of Satan. The image according to the Grimorium Verum, is attributed to Alibeck the Egyptian of Memphis. The grimoire claims traditions originating with King Solomon, explains magic formulas and how pacts with spirits are conducted’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son

A third Google symbol is for one of the most famous internet browsers in the world, Google Chrome.

According to data from 2016, Google Chrome is used by approximately two billion people. ‘… there are many who would disagree with the following similarity… [though] we consider the above [logo]… [makes] a connection between chrome, and the [number] 666. The [number] 666 is… referred to as the number of the beast’ – Revelation 13:18.

The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar

Chapter XXVIII

The identity of Ishmael became complicated by the subterfuge of an incorrect ancestral claim addressed previously (refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia) where it was explained the Arabs descend from Ham and his son, Mizra – definitely not from Abraham. When Mohammed captured Arabia in 620 CE, he used passages from the Book of Genesis to falsely claim the Arabs were ‘God’s people’ Ishmael… while establishing the Islamic religion. Added to this, Ishmael’s position as firstborn son to Abraham, yet to his wife’s handmaiden – for Hagar was not a concubine – meant that he would not be the recipient of the firstborn blessings. But that is not the end of the story.

We can make a strong assumption that Hagar and Keturah were from similar, albeit different stock, though probably not from Nahor’s line; possibly from Haran; probably from a line of Peleg; or most likely, from another son of Arphaxad, such as Anar or Ashcol – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The evidence for this, is that Ishmael not only lived to the east in the Arabian wilderness, between Keturah’s sons and Joktan’s sons; but crucially, is more closely related to Keturah’s than Isaac’s children, as supported by Y-DNA (and mtDNA) Haplogroups and autosomal DNA. 

Today, the true descendants of Ishmael comprise the modern nation of Germany. Just as in the ancient past, Germany is sandwiched between the countries in the West descended from Keturah and to the East by the nations descended from Joktan – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. The close geographic relationship between the Dutch of the Netherlands and the Germans of Deutsch-land was evident anciently when they were known as Hivites and Hittites – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

The original people of Hatti were in the main, descendants of Nahor – living principally in Northern and Central Italy today – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. The Hatti migrated from Anatolia southeastwards when Ishmael’s people grew larger and pressed into their land. The Ishmaelites appropriated their territory and name and it is they, who are the later Hittites, which people are most familiar. The mighty kingdom and formidable military machine which dwelt to the west of the other historic imperialist state of the time: Assyria – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia

The geographic, cultural and ethnic closeness shared between the two – Germany and the Netherlands – explains the interplay between the names Midianite and Ishmaelite; sharing the family name of Midian. Today, both peoples can be called Germanic, as can a number of other nations – ranging from Austria in the East to England in the West, all part of the same Teutonic family tree.

The peoples of Ishmael and Keturah dwelt together in the wilderness – or on the Arabian Peninsula – and are the original Arabians in the Bible. They did not become Arabs as we have investigated – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Continuing with Herman Hoeh’s article, he addresses Ishmael and parrots the prevalent view which has so stubbornly and yet erroneously taken hold amongst biblical identity believers.

The Origin of the Nations, 1957 – emphasis mine: 

‘Abraham’s firstborn son was Ishmael (Genesis 16:15). His descendants are called Arabs today. They still remember that they are descended from Abram’s son Ishmael. Ask any Arab. He’ll tell you so! Whenever you see the name “Ishmael,” or any name of Ishmael’s sons (Genesis 25:12-18), you will know that the prophecy is referring to the Arabs today. The Arabs have spread from Arabia throughout North Africa and eastward into the Far East. There is trouble in the Near East between Jordan and the Jews. Here is why.’

The Book of Jubilees describes the geographic proximity of the Ishmaelites and the Sons of Keturah in chapter 20:12-13: “And Ishmael and his sons, and the sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in all the land which is towards the East facing the desert [wilderness]. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs [Arabians], and Ishmaelites.”

Later, the mighty entity we call Rome, evolved and slowly enveloped the Etruscan state as it outgrew its boundaries – as it had done with the Hatti in Asia Minor. In modern times, the German states which formed the modern German nation in 1871 were also a sprawling borderless geographic area. The German concept of greater living space or lebensraum, particularly from 1871 to 1940 meant German boundaries were continually expanding and changing.

Adolf Hitler: “It is eastwards, only and always eastwards, that the veins of our race must expand. It is the direction which Nature herself has decreed for the expansion of the German peoples.”

Our study of Haran and his descendants, which include the Swiss, means they are not as German as many may assume – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The Swiss resolutely do not identify with a ‘German’ tag. 

The Austrians on the other hand, are a different proposition from the Swiss. A survey revealed that sixty percent of Austrians viewed themselves as German – in other words, the same as Germans living in Germany. 

This is revealing, for the Austrians share Hagar as a mother with the Germans. The two peoples are half brothers by their mother; as Germany-Ishmael is a half brother by his father Abraham with Keturah’s descendants, which include Denmark, the Netherlands and the other northwestern European nations comprising Scandinavia and the Low countries – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

We first read of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis chapter Sixteen. We will concentrate on Hagar initially. It is alleged by Arab tradition that a Pharaoh – actually Djer, the 3rd King of the 1st Dynasty, ruling from 1922 to 1875 BCE according to an unconventional chronology – had given Hagar to Sarai from his royal household in recompense for his transgression. There is reason to consider that Hagar had not always been a mere servant (a handmaid) but rather, a daughter of the Pharaoh and a royal princess.

Genesis 16:1-15

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 So, after Abram had lived ten years [from 1902 to 1892 BCE] in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife [not literally, but sexually as a wife, for Abraham did not marry Hagar].’

Sarah

4 And he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her.’

Sarah blames Abraham for Hagar’s attitude and so Abraham absolves himself of responsibility and passes the problem back to Sarah. It seems Sarah is heavy handed with Hagar and so the Eternal becomes involved in the matter.

7 ‘The angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to Shur. 8 And he said, “Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from my mistress Sarai.” 9 The angel of the Lord said to her, “Return to your mistress and submit to her.”

It is clear that there is no love lost between Sarai and Hagar. Why the animosity, one can only speculate. It certainly intensified after Hagar conceived. The Angel of the Lord did not speak with anyone whom the Creator was not working with or had regard for. Hagar was wrong to be joyful over conceiving by gloating, thinking she had one over Sarai. Though we do not know what she had gone through to display that reaction.

Hagar

Hagar was younger (and likely fair and beautiful as Sarai had once been) and probably thought it would obtain her favour with Abram and lead to her and their son achieving a greater status in Abram’s family. One does not have to read long though, to appreciate that Abram only had eyes for Sarai. Later, when Hagar and Ishmael are cast out, the Creator again intervenes to spare their lives and ensure that their futures are safe and prosperous. The Book of Jasher contains a parallel account of Hagar’s first banishment:

Jasher 16:25-36

25 ‘For Hagar learned all the ways of Sarai as Sarai taught her, she was not in any way deficient in following her good ways. 26 And Sarai said to Abram, Behold here is my handmaid Hagar, go to her that she may bring forth upon my knees, that I may also obtain children through her… 29 And when Hagar saw that she had conceived she rejoiced greatly, and her mistress was despised in her eyes, and she said within herself, This can only be that I am better before God than Sarai my mistress, for all the days that my mistress has been with my lord, she did not conceive, but me the Lord has caused in so short a time to conceive by him.

30 And when Sarai saw that Hagar had conceived by Abram, Sarai was jealous of her handmaid, and Sarai said within herself, This is surely nothing else but that she must be better than I am. 33… and Sarai afflicted her, and Hagar fled from her to the wilderness. 34 And an angel of the Lord found her in the place where she had fled, by a well, and he said to her, Do not fear… now then return to Sarai thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands. 35 And Hagar called the place of that well Beer-lahai-roi, it is between Kadesh and the wilderness of Bered. 36 And Hagar at that time returned to her master’s house…’

Genesis 21:14 

English Standard Version

‘So Abraham rose early in the morning and took bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away. And she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.’ 

This incident came under the umbrella of, ‘it seemed a good idea at the time.’ What was Abraham thinking? The ultimate sending of Hagar and Ishmael away, left them in a story state, ‘wandering in the wilderness.’

As mentioned previously in our discourse, if a people are mentioned more than once in the Bible, they are more than a territory or region, they have become an identifiable people or nation in their own right. This is what happened to Hagar. Reading between the lines, she obviously continued raising Ishmael who was a young teen. At a certain point she would have met a man who took her as a wife and had at least one child, a son with her. This son’s name is not given, though his descendants are named in the Bible as Hagrites or Hagarenes. The only nation today that is smaller than Ishmael, yet easily identifiable as related to Hagar, is the nation of Austria.

Christian Churches of God in their article No. 212C, 2007 state: ‘The question as to whether Hagar remarried and had other children is considered by some to be a matter of conjecture. The question as to whether the Hagarites are the descendants of Ishmael, Hagar’s first-born or only son, or the sons of another tribe altogether is still to be solved. Perhaps the advances in DNA will tell us the definite solution once the tribes are properly identified and tested.’

Well, we can know now, not just from scripture but by studying Austrian and German autosomal DNA and Haplogroups.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Hagar meaning: ‘flight, to be dragged off, pressed into service’ from a verb (hagar), to flee… the verb (garar), ‘sojourner, to drag out or away.’ From the Persian/ Greek verb (aggareuo), ‘to press into service…’ meaning mounted messenger (a royal courier who could requisite or press into service whatever he needed to deliver his message faster), which in turn is thought to be the source of the familiar noun (aggelos), meaning ‘messenger’ or ‘angel.’

Hagar travels south, possibly to go home to Egypt, but loses her way. The verb used to describe her “wandering” about in the wilderness of Beersheba is (ta’a), to err, go astray. A derivation of this verb is (to’a), error. Hagar wanders the desert until her supplies run out. Desponded and exhausted, Hagar abandons her son so that she won’t have to watch him die, and sits down a bow shot away from the boy to cry. Curiously, not her cries but the cries of the boy reach heaven, and God shows up. For the second time the Angel of YHWH speaks to Hagar, and promises her that Ishmael will be a great nation. 

God opens her eyes and she sees the well of Beersheba. This is fortunate for two reasons. First of all she and Ishmael now have water, but they also know again where they are. Quickened Hagar and Ishmael resume their journey. 

Ishmael becomes an archer and lives in the wilderness of Paran (in the Sinai desert between the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of Aqaba) with his Egyptian wife whom Hagar has obtained for him. Hagar becomes the grandmother of twelve princes, who form the great nation that God promised. That nation is not really named in Scriptures… Ishmael’s sons do not become the rivals of Israel as one may expect.’

Ishmael’s descendants took a back seat to Moab, Ammon, the Midianites and Edom because geographically they were once separated from the Israelites. But not so later, when the respective families of Ishmael and Israel were the greatest of rivals and dramatically again in the modern age. In the Bible, the Ishmaelites are revealed cryptically under the guise of Hittites, ‘Midianites’ and Arabians.

Abarim: ‘His son Kedar gets mentioned for their signature black tents, once positive in the Song of Solomon (1:5), and once negative by king David in Psalm 120:5. The prophet Isaiah mentions Ishmael’s first born son Nebaioth and his brother Kedar among the nations that will be gathered up into the Kingdom of God (Isaiah 60:7).

Although Hagar is an Egyptian, her name appears to be Semetic [correct, as descended from Arphaxad (the ruling class of Egypt) not Mizra (the actual Egyptian populace)]. If indeed so… the verb… is not used in the Bible and its meaning is subsequently unknown. NOBSE Study Bible… insist that the verb means to flee. BDB Theological Dictionary refers to the Arabic equivalent, meaning forsake or retire. An Arabic noun derived of this root serves as the name for Mohammed’s famous flight, the Hegira.’

1 Chronicles 5:18-20

English Standard Version

‘The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh had valiant men who carried shield and sword, and drew the bow, expert in war, 44,760, able to go to war. They waged war against the Hagrites, Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab. And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands, for they cried out to God in the battle, and he granted their urgent plea because they trusted in him.

1 Chronicles 5:10

English Standard Version

‘And in the days of Saul they waged war against the Hagrites, who fell into their hand. And they lived in their tents throughout all the region east of Gilead.’

1 Chronicles 27:30-31

English Standard Version

‘Over the camels was Obil the Ishmaelite [Ishmael-German]; and over the donkeys was Jehdeiah the Meronothite[?]. Over the flocks was Jaziz the Hagrite [Hagar-Austrian]. All these were stewards of King David’s property.’

Psalm 83:6-8

English Standard Version

‘… the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites [Germany], Moab [France] and the Hagrites [Austria], Gebal and Ammon [French Quebec] and Amalek, Philistia [Latino-Hispano America] with the inhabitants of Tyre [Brazil]; Asshur [Russia] also has joined them; they [Russia] are the strong arm of the children of Lot [Moab and Ammon].’

Psalm 83:6

Young’s Literal Translation

‘… Tents of Edom, and Ishmaelites, Moab, and the Hagarenes…’

The Hagrites are mentioned as separate people distinct from Ishmael. Jetur and Naphish are sons of Ishmael. Jaziz the Hagrite oversaw the flocks – goats, sheep and cattle – of King David. Though Psalm 83:6-8 is non-prophetical and a listing of the chief enemies of Israel at the time of David, they are indicative of the future global alliance against the sons of Jacob; including the Europeans as represented by Eber in Numbers 24:24 – Articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen.

Austria is a landlocked mountainous country and with Switzerland, forms what has been characterised as the neutral core of Europe, gaining permanent neutrality in 1955. Austria has a population of 9,113,578 people; less than Sweden and more than Switzerland. Part of Austria’s prominence can be attributed to its geographic position at the centre of European traffic between east and west along the Danubian trade route, as well as north and south, through the Alpine passes. The capital of Austria is the historic Vienna (or Wien), the former seat of the Holy Roman Empire. 

Austria was first a prefecture, a margraviate formed from former territory in Bavaria; developing into a duchy and then an archduchy. In the sixteenth century, Austria rose to prominence via the Hapsburg or Habsbur Monarchy – the House of Hapsburg being one of the most influential royal dynasties in history. ‘Not only did the house occupy the throne of the Holy Roman Empire continuously between 1438 and 1740, it also occupied the thrones of the Kingdoms of Bohemia, England and Ireland (as a result of the marriage between King Philippe II of Spain and Mary I of England), Germany, Croatia, Hungary, Portugal, Spain as well as the second Mexican Empire and several Dutch and Italian principalities.’

Early in the nineteenth century, Austria established its own empire, becoming a great power and the driving force of the German Confederation. After its defeat in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 for hegemony of the German states, it sought its own course. In 1867, Austria formed an Austria-Hungarian Dual Monarchy. Following WWI, a Republic of German-Austria was proclaimed. A union with Germany, but the victorious allied powers did not recognise the new state. In 1938, the Austrian-born Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of the Third German Reich, annexed Austria by the Anschluss – union. 

The German name for Austria, Osterreich, derives from the Old High German Ostarrichi, which means ‘eastern realm.’ The word Austria is a Latinisation of the German name; first recorded in the twelfth century. At the time, Upper and Lower Austria was the easternmost extent of Bavaria. German is the country’s official language, though many Austrians also speak a variety of Bavarian dialects. 

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Austrian global shipments during 2021.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$33.9 billion
  2. Electrical machinery, equipment: $21.5 billion 
  3. Vehicles: $18.8 billion 
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $14.4 billion 
  5. Plastics, plastic articles: $9.9 billion 
  6. Iron, steel: $8.5 billion 
  7. Wood: $7.5 billion 
  8. Articles of iron or steel: $6.8 billion 
  9. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $5.6 billion 
  10. Paper, paper items: $5.3 billion 

Wood was the fastest grower among the top 10 Austrian export categories, up by 54.5% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were the metals iron and steel via a 46.3% advance.’

Austrian man and woman

Continuing with the Book of Genesis and the story of Ishmael.

Genesis 16:1-15

English Standard Version

10 ‘The angel of the Lord also said to [Hagar], “I will surely multiply your offspring so that they cannot be numbered for multitude.” 11 And the angel of the Lord said to her, “Behold, you are pregnant and shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the Lord has listened to your affliction. 

12 He shall be a wild [H6501* – pere: running wild, wild ass] donkey of a man, his hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he shall dwell over against [H6440 – paniym: before, amongst, toward, in the presence of] all his kinsmen.”

13 So she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, “You are a God of seeing,” for she said, “Truly here I have seen him who looks after me.” 14 Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; it lies between Kadesh and Bered. 15 And Hagar bore Abram a son [in 1891 BCE], and Abram called the name of his son, whom Hagar bore, Ishmael.’

Ishmael

We learn of Ishmael’s key traits in identifying him. His posterity were to become large in number – twelve princes in fact. We are not looking for a small nation in western Europe; yet related to the Dutch from Midian; the French from Lot; and the North-Central Italians from Nahor. The interlinear does not include the word ‘donkey’. It is added because the Hebrew word for wild* is used elsewhere in connection with a wild ass or donkey. In this context it is mis-leading as Ishmael is not an individual out-of-control.

He is energetic, forceful, his own man, with a ‘fiercely independent spirit’ in opposition to his family; a hunter and predatory – and yet, he is fiercely stubborn… just like a donkey no less.

With that in mind it is quite remarkable that a misidentification for the tribe of Issachar (a son of Jacob), should have led this writer to the following symbols and heraldry.

Notice the frequency of use of a donkey in Germany, spilling over into parts of Poland and the Czech Republic, where non-coincidently their western borders were once former German territory.

Issachar is invariably interpreted incorrectly as either Finland or Switzerland – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. In like manner, Germany is misidentified as Asshur, Gomer or Gad (Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar). And in so doing, researchers have missed the link between the ass and Ishmael (Germany), crediting it instead to Issachar.

Alternative translations assist in the meaning of these verses.

New English Translation

‘… He will be hostile to everyone, and everyone will be hostile to him…’

New Century Version

“Ishmael… will be against everyone, and everyone will be against him. He will attack all his brothers.”

Common English Bible

“… he will fight everyone, and they will fight him. He will live at odds with all his relatives.”

The Message

Hell be areal fighter, fighting and being fought, Always stirring up trouble, always at odds with his family.”

The Germans have fought wars against all the major powers in Europe, past and present: Russia, Austria, France and England, in evidence of their hostility. Germany has also invaded or attacked: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria – all pf them his half-brothers. The more distant cousins from Poland, Czechoslovakia and so forth have not escaped Ishmael’s aggression. Germany dwells in the presence or amongst his brethren and borders: Denmark, the Netherlands, Flanders, Wallonia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Austria, the Czech Republic and Poland. 

Verse twelve of Genesis chapter sixteen has been used by commentators to describe the Arab nations and on the surface it is a convincing fit. There are two sizeable flaws in this argument. Firstly, Ishmael was not predicted to be more than one nation in the past or the future – East and West Germany not withstanding. The twelve sons of Ishmael are similar to Nahor’s twelve sons, in that Germany like Italy was a region, then a confederation of multiple states for centuries before forming one distinct nation in 1871, following Italy in 1861 – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

Secondly, the constant reader who has resisted skimming or skipping ahead, will know with a good measure of surety, that we are searching for a nation which is kith and kin to those in western Europe and cannot, repeat cannot, be those people dwelling in northern Africa or the Middle East – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia

Spot the difference. Compared with France and England, Germany has been at war with just about everyone.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Ishmael Meaning: God Hears from (1) the verb (shama’), to hear, and (2) the word (‘el), God.

There are a surprising six men named Ishmael in the Bible:

  • The most famous Ishmael is the son of Abraham with Hagar.
  • A descendant of Jonathan (1 Chronicles 8:38).
  • The father of Zebadiah (2 Chronicles 19:11).
  • An officer under Joash (2 Chronicles 23:3).
  • The murderer of Gedaliah the Babylonian governor over the remnant in Judah (2 Kings 25:25).
  • A priest who divorced his foreign wife (Ezra 10:22).

Note that the proper ethnonym (Ishmaelite) occurs only once (1 Chronicles 2:17), and comes with a shorter version, which occurs just once… (1 Chronicles 27:30). The collective plural occurs six times (Genesis 37:25, 37:27, 37:28, 39:1, Judges 8:24 and Psalm 83:6). The name Ishmael consists of two elements. The first part comes from the verb (shama’), meaning to hear: The verb (shama’) means to hear and may also mean to understand or obey. The second part of the name Ishmael is (El)… that is Elohim, or God… The name Ishmael means He Will Hear God...’

Genesis 17:15-25

English Standard Version

15 ‘And God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.” 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?”

18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh that Ishmael might live before you!” 19 God said, “No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac [named by the Eternal]. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him.

20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and multiply him greatly. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great [H1419 – gadowl: in ‘magnitude, extent’ and ‘importance’] nation.

21 But I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this time next year.” 22 When he had finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham. 23 Then Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And Ishmael his son [in 1878 BCE] was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.’ 

Abraham laughed an incredulous laugh. He did not have a disrespectful or disbelieving laugh; otherwise the Creator would have hauled him up for it. We learn that Abraham not only believed Ishmael had been provided as the son of promise, we also learn that his relationship with Ishmael was a special bond, so much so that Abraham was not desperate for another son and would have gladly had the birthright promises given to Ishmael. This is important to understand, as it impacts the events which follow.

 Abraham

As Abraham’s intimate relationship with the Creator as his very friend was remarkable, it lent itself to the Creator listening to Abraham and granting his wish as best as could be fulfilled, without impinging on the promises too Isaac.

The Creator says He will make Ishmael fruitful, multiply him greatly and make him a great nation. The word ‘fruitful’ means materially blessed. True to His word, the Creator has kept his promise to Abraham. The German nation is the third biggest economy in the world. ‘Multiply greatly’ is reflected in that Germany has the second highest population in Europe behind Russia and the third highest European descended population after the United States and Russia. Germany’s status as a great nation is beyond question. Germany’s scientific, industrial, commercial and cultural impact on western civilisation has been considerable. 

There are currently three ‘superpower’ regions in the world: North America; China; and a German driven European Union. What is interesting in this equation, is that we have read the verse in the Book of Numbers revealing the ships from Kittim-Indonesia going against Asshur and Eber. Eber primarily represents western Europe. A German led United States of Europe in league with Russia, will for a time, be the preeminent superpower of our not so distant future. 

Ishmael was included as part of Abraham’s household in the requisite to be circumcised. He was included in the covenant blessing to all those who chose to follow ‘the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.’ Should Ishmael have chosen to follow a path closer to the one intended for Isaac – in which Isaac’s descendants have been disastrously unsuccessful in walking – Ishmael’s descendants would have been the recipients of yet even greater blessings.

German men

Indeed, it could be a startling coincidence or perhaps a sign of a deeply embedded psychological scar, that as Ishmael was passed over as the recipient of the firstborn birthright, a related tradition existed in parts of Germany. This concept first came to this writer’s attention via a question on Quora and its subsequent answers. The question regarding inheritances being passed ‘to the youngest son… thus forcing the eldest one to be an unmarried servant of his youngest brother…’

Answers included: 

a. “Ultimogeniture, also known as postremogeniture or junior right, is the tradition of inheritance by the last-born of a privileged position in a parent’s wealth or office. The tradition has been far rarer historically than primogeniture (sole inheritance by the first-born) or partible inheritance (division of the estate among the children). 

In the German Duchy of Saxe-Altenburg, land holdings were traditionally passed to the youngest son, who might then employ his older brothers as farm workers. Patrilineal ultimogeniture was traditionally the predominant custom among German peasants. 

Practicality played an important part in this system. People didn’t live as long in the past, largely due to war and the spread of diseases. As a result, a family patriarch often died while he still had one or more minor sons. Bequeathing land to the youngest son encouraged the older minor children to remain on the farm, at least until they became old enough to marry. This kept a captive workforce and provided enough labor to support the patriarch’s widow. 

While ultimogentiure kept sons on the farm, merchant families and nobility didn’t have the same need for physical labor. Instead, they tended to use primogeniture, which grants the right of succession to the firstborn son. Primogeniture was also the primary method for establishing royal lineages and naming new kings.”

b. “What you describe existed in [the] 19th century but was given up around 1930.”    

c. “In Germany there were areas of Ultimogeniture (inheritance of the youngest), Primogeniture (inheritance of the oldest), equal division (the inheritance is divided by the number of the children) or tiered division (everybody gets some inheritance but one heir gets more). 

Under the law today each child is owed a “Pflichtteil”, a mandatory part of the inheritance that is half of the “legal” part (if there is no testament equal division inheritance… mandatory in Germany), i.e. if you are… three children your Pflichtteil is 16.66% of the inheritance. That means that the maximum parents can give to one child is the inheritance minus the Pflichtteile of their siblings.”

Genesis 21:1-21

English Standard Version

1 ‘The Lord visited Sarah as he had said, and the Lord did to Sarah as he had promised. 2 And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. 4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old [the blood coagulates the most effectively on this day, as it the peak of vitamin K production], as God had commanded him. 5 Abraham was a hundred years old [in 1877 BCE] when his son Isaac was born to him. 6 And Sarah said, “God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.” 7 And she said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.” 

8 And the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned. 9 But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing. 10 So she said to Abraham, “Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.”

11 And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son. 12 But God said to Abraham, “Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named. 13 And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.”

The Book of Jubilees also records the account:

17:4 ‘And Sarah saw Ishmael playing and dancing, and Abraham rejoicing with great joy, and she became jealous of Ishmael and said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman will not be heir with my son, Isaac.’

14  So Abraham rose early in the morning and took bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the [boy], and sent her away. And she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. 15 When the water in the skin was gone, she put the [boy] under one of the bushes. 16 Then she went and sat down opposite him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot, for she said, “Let me not look on the death of the child.” And as she sat opposite him, she lifted up her voice and wept. 

17 And God heard the voice of the boy [just as the name Ishmael means], and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, “What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is. 18 Up! Lift up the boy, and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make him into a great nation.” 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. 20 And God was with the boy, and he grew up. He lived in the wilderness and became an expert with the bow. 21 He lived in the wilderness of Paran, and his mother took a [royal] wife for him from the land of Egypt.’

We learn much from this chapter but are left scratching our head a little too. The word laughing can be more correctly translated as scoffing (or mocking). Ishmael was about sixteen (or seventeen), if Isaac was about two (or three). For whatever reason, Sarah sensed it as sinister and a perceived threat towards Isaac. Possibly, it went beyond a one time joke and may have shown a reoccurring pattern that had become a concern to her. Either Ishmael was bullying Isaac, unfairly using his age as an advantage; or he was merely playing with Isaac as if on an equal footing and it was mis-understood by Sarah because of her attitude towards Hagar. 

Paul mentions the incident, expanding it further in Galatians 4:28-31, ESV: “Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time [Ishmael] who was born according to the flesh persecuted [Isaac] who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.” The Greek word persecuted can mean ‘to put to flight; to chase away; to pursue.’ An ironic definition as this is what exactly happened to Ishmael and his mother Hagar when Abraham cast them out from his presence.

Abraham’s fondness for Ishmael meant he did not take the news well. The Creator explains to Abraham that Sarah is reading the situation correctly and to send Hagar and Ishmael away. Not just Hagar, but Ishmael also had a relationship with the Creator, for his prayers are heard and answered and ‘God was with the boy.’ Ishmael became an expert hunter-soldier, though not in the vein of Nimrod. His wife from Egypt was probably similarly related to Hagar and her pedigree in standing with Abraham’s royal ancestry – refer Chapter XXVI Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Galatians 4:22-26

English Standard Version

‘For it is written that Abraham had two sons, [Ishmael] by a slave woman and [Isaac] by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.’

Genesis 28:8-9

English Standard Version

‘So when Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father, Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, the sister of Nebaioth.’

Genesis 36:3

English Standard Version

‘ … and Basemath, Ishmael’s daughter, the sister of Nebaioth.

Esau, eldest son of Isaac and elder twin brother of Jacob, married Canaanite women and so to appease his father and mother, married a daughter of Ishmael, to keep it in the family so-to-speak. She has two different names in two separate records in Genesis which we will address when studying Esau – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Ishmael’s twelve sons are listed in Genesis and the prominent ones are mentioned within the Old Testament. Those in italics are mentioned once outside of this listing; those in bold, more than once. 

Genesis 25:12-18

English Standard Version

‘These are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s servant, bore to Abraham. 

These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, named in the order of their birth:

Nebaioth [1], the firstborn of Ishmael;

and Kedar [2],

Adbeel [grief of God], Mibsam [sweet smell], Mishma [rumour], Dumah [6], Massa [7], Hadad [thunder],

Tema [9],

Jetur [10], Naphish [11], and Kedemah [eastward]. 

These are the sons of Ishmael and these are their names, by their villages and by their encampments, twelve princes according to their tribes. (These are the years of the life of Ishmael: 137 years. He breathed his last and died [in 1754 BCE], and was gathered to his people.) They settled from Havilah [Poland] to Shur [the area between Mizra and Shem, Mediterranean Sea today], which is opposite Egypt [North Africa] in the direction of Assyria [Russia]. He settled over against all his kinsmen [Keturah: Scandinavia and the Low countries].’

Germany has sixteen states or federated Lander, though three of them are city-states. Berlin the Capital included within Brandenburg; Hamburg and Bremen, which are included within Lower Saxony or Niedersachsen. As Saarland is the smallest state and has a lower population density, it is included with Rhineland-Palatinate or Rheinland-Pfalz. This leaves an accommodating twelve states. There are three dominant sons and four quite prominent sons who match well with the current German States; plus the remaining five which are more open to conjecture. 

1 Chronicles 5:18-20

English Standard Version

‘The Reubenites, the Gadites… waged war against the Hagrites [Austria], Jetur [tenth son], Naphish [eleventh son], and Nodab. And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands…’

Jetur’s name means, ‘defence, to border, succession’ and ‘mountainous*.’ Naphish means ‘revival, expansion’ from the noun nepesh, ‘breath of life.’ It can also mean ‘numerous, increase’ and ‘refreshment.’

Two states fit the profile for Jetur and Naphish, as they have relative economic wealth, higher populations and are linguistically and culturally similar with Austria-Hagar – with much in common and a high probability of ethnic admixture.

Firstly, the strongest candidate is Bavaria or Bayern and its principal cities of Munich and Nuremberg. Bavaria has the second highest population, with nearly thirteen million people coupled with being the second wealthiest state in Germany. Bavaria is the largest state by area and is also mountainous* in the South. Secondly, Baden-Wurttemberg and its principal city, Stuttgart is a high population state of nearly eleven million people – the third highest – and is also the third wealthiest state in Germany.

Isaiah 21:11

English Standard Version

The oracle concerning Dumah [sixth son]. One is calling to me from Seir [Edom], “Watchman, what time of the night? Watchman, what time of the night?”

Dumah means ‘[deadly] silence’ derived from the noun duma, ‘silence of death’.

Proverbs 31:1

English Standard Version

‘The words of King Lemuel. An oracle that his mother taught him…’

As with Agur in Proverbs chapter thirty, we do not know who King Lemuel is as he is not recorded in the list of the kings of Judah or Israel. He is a king though who put his trust in the Creator, the Covenant God of Israel and through the fear of the Lord learned wisdom. The name Lemuel means ‘belonging to God.’ With a minor punctuation change, it can be translated (CEB) as: “The words of King Lemuel of Massa, which his mother taught him…”

Massa is the seventh son of Ishmael and his name means ‘to lift up’ from the verb, nasa – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. It can also mean ‘load’ and in this translation ‘burden’ or ‘oracle.’ King Lemuel is believed by some commentators to have been a king of Massa descended from Ishmael. 

Two states which may fit Dumah and Massa include Hesse or Hessen – the fifth richest state and containing the wealthiest city in Germany, the financial hub of Frankfurt am Main (the German equivalent of England’s capital, London) – and the Rhineland-Palatinate (with Saarland).

Frankfurt

As an aside regarding Dumah, the current monarch of the United Kingdom is Charles III. He is ostensibly a Windsor from his mother’s side, from the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha in Thuringia; though in reality from his father’s side, he is the House of Mountbatten from the German name Battenberg in Hesse – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

Thus the Edomite link with Dumah-Hesse is not a coincidence – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? As is the association of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha of Thuringia and the Windsors with Dumah-Hesse-Mountbatten and the Edomite Jews.

Andrew Curry – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Archaeologists have uncovered evidence of Jewish communities in Germanic provinces of the Roman Empire as early as the 300s C.E., particularly in what is today the city of Cologne [in North Rhine-Westphalia]. During the medieval period, a trio of German cities – Worms, Mainz, and Speyer [in Rhineland-Palatinate (Massa)] – was known as the cradle of Ashkenazi culture, with records of Jewish life going back to about 900 C.E. Were the Jews of Erfurt [in Thuringia, a later Ashkenazi heartland] and other medieval cities tenacious holdovers from the Roman era, as some have proposed? Or were they the descendants of more recent pioneers who crossed the Alps around 800 C.E. to found tight-knit communities along the Rhine, near modern-day Frankfurt [in Hesse]…’

Tema, the ninth born son is mentioned three times in the Bible. Tema means ‘south country’ from the root ymn, meaning; ‘the right hand side, the southern direction’ also ‘admiration, perfection’ and ‘consummation.’

Job 6:19

English Standard Version

The caravans of Tema [ninth son] look, the travellers of Sheba [Flanders] hope.

Jeremiah 25:23-24

English Standard Version

‘Dedan [Wallonia, Brussels, Luxembourg], Tema, Buz [Northern Italy], and all who cut the corners of their hair; all the kings of Arabia [northwestern Europe] and all the kings of the mixed tribes [Joktan] who dwell in the desert [Eastern Europe]…’

These verses link Tema with Belgium and northern Italy in trade and wealth. Coincidently, it was Roman soldiers who had their hair cut short, in contrast to other warring ‘barbaric’ nations, where men all had longer hair.

Tema equates with North Rhine-Westphalia or Nordrhein-Westfalen; which is the richest state in Germany and has the highest population with nearly eighteen million people. Bonn was the capital of the old West Germany and four of the biggest cities in Germany are located there: Cologne, Dusseldorf, Dortmund and Essen.

Isaiah 21:13-17

English Standard Version

‘The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia [northwestern Europe] you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites [Walloons]. To the thirsty bring water; meet the fugitive with bread, O inhabitants of the land of Tema.’ 

‘For they have fled from the swords, from the drawn sword, from the bent bow, and from the press of battle. For thus the Lord said to me, “Within a year, according to the years of a hired worker, all the glory of Kedar [second son] will come to an end. And the remainder of the archers of the mighty men of the sons of Kedar will be few, for the Lord, the God of Israel, has spoken.”

Kedar means ‘dark, turbid’ from the verb qadar, ‘to become dark’ also ‘blackness, sorrow.’ Turbid means, ‘cloudy, murky, opaque.’ Kedar is the second son of Ishmael and is mentioned the most frequently. He was a leader, warlike, militarily proficient, practiced and driven. It is a hint of and a precursor to, the militaristic capabilities of the Prussians – and the colour black favoured on their flags. Kedar and Tema are linked in these verses as the two most dominant families and we find that Kedar and Tema are in fact neighbouring states.

Isaiah 60:6-7

English Standard Version

A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian [Netherlands] and Ephah [Holland]; all those from Sheba [Flanders] shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered to you; the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; they shall come up with acceptance on my altar, and I will beautify my beautiful house.’

The wealth of second born son Kedar and his influence, is expressed with the firstborn son Nebaioth. Nebaioth is linked with Kedar – as Kedar is with Tema – and each are located in northern Germany today – yet Tema’s central position could be classed as northern or southern as its name implies – as speakers of Low German and the descendants of the Prussians. Nebaioth equates with the Capital Berlin (the modern incarnation of ancient Rome); coupled with the state of Brandenburg.

Berlin

Abarim Publications on the meaning of the name Nabaioth: ‘high places, seen, regarded’ and ‘having prophesied.’ It’s etymology from the ‘verb (nabah), to be high or prominent [appropriately for the capital, Berlin]. From the verb (nabat), to look, regard. From the verb (naba’), to prophesy or to be a spokesman.’ Brandenburg has 2.5 million people, is the tenth most populous state and the fifth largest in size. Berlin is the capital, as well as the biggest city in Germany with 3,576,873 people.

Ishmael has historically maintained a geographic and military closeness with Asshur, and so it is no coincidence that they lived adjacent to each other in the Baltic region, respectively becoming known as Prussians and Russians.

Ezekiel 27:20-21

English Standard Version

Dedan [Wallonia] traded with you in saddlecloths for riding. Arabia and all the princes of Kedar were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you.’

Kedar equates with Lower Saxony and the principal city states of Hamburg, Bremen and the (capital) city of Hanover. Lower Saxony is the second largest state by area and has the fourth highest population, with approximately eight million people. 

Hamburg has 1,787,408 people and Bremen has 557,464 people. Lower Saxony borders the Netherlands – Midian (Isaiah 60:6). The biggest farms are located in this state (Ezekiel 27:21) and Hamburg is the second biggest city in Germany after Berlin. Hamburg is the biggest port in Germany and the third busiest in all of Europe. Bremen is the fourth busiest port behind Hamburg; with Antwerp in Belgium second and Rotterdam in the Netherlands, the busiest. These cities represent the ancestor traders oft mentioned in the Bible; descending from Ishmael, Midian, Sheba and Dedan. 

The Hanover family who became the monarchs of Great Britain with George I in 1714 originated from Lower Saxony.

The total population of Germany is 84,074,219 people, the second highest in Europe and nineteenth highest in the world.

Psalm 120:5-6

English Standard Version

‘Woe to me, that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell among the tents of Kedar! Too long have I had my dwelling among those who hate peace.’

Kedar in the past is compared with Meshech, as peoples of war and not for the faint-hearted traveller or immigrant – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech

Song of Solomon 1:5

English Standard Version

‘I am very dark, but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, like the tents of Kedar, like the curtains of Solomon.’

Kedar means dark and the history of modern Germany has been dark. The state flags of Germany have a theme of the colour black running through six of them, the current national flag contains black, as did the older flags of Imperial Germany and Prussia.

State flags of Germany with coats of arms

Isaiah 42:10-12

English Standard Version

‘Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise from the end of the earth… Let the desert  [eastern Europe] and its cities lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar inhabits; let the habitants of Sela sing for joy, let them shout from the top of the mountains. Let them give glory to the Lord…’

A future, peaceful and happier time for the peoples of Kedar is predicted.

Jeremiah 2:10

English Standard Version

‘For cross to the coasts of Cyprus [Kittim-Indonesia] and see, or send to Kedar and examine with care; see if there has been such a thing.’

Kedar is again associated with war, as ships will come from the Kittim in Indonesia against Asshur of Russia and Eber of Western Europe, led by Ishmael-Germany. 

Jeremiah 49:28-33

English Standard Version

‘Concerning Kedar and the kingdoms of Hazor that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon struck down. Thus says the Lord: “Rise up, advance against Kedar! Destroy the people of the east! Their tents and their flocks shall be taken, their curtains and all their goods; their camels shall be led away from them, and men shall cry to them: ‘Terror on every side!’

Flee, wander far away, dwell in the depths, O inhabitants of Hazor! declares the Lord. For Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon has made a plan against you and formed a purpose against you. “Rise up, advance against a nation at ease, that dwells securely, declares the Lord, that has no gates or bars, that dwells alone [H910 – badad: securely, in safety, in ‘freedom from attack’].

Their camels shall become plunder, their herds of livestock a spoil. I will scatter to every wind those who cut the corners of their hair, and I will bring their calamity from every side of them, declares the Lord. Hazor shall become a haunt of jackals, an everlasting waste; no man shall dwell there; no man shall sojourn in her.”

It is not clear where Hazor is though they are undeniably associated with Kedar. The name Hazor means ‘Village, Trumpet, Enclosure’ from the verb hasar, ‘to begin to cluster’ or ‘gather.’ The word can also mean ‘fence’ or ‘castle.’ The verses indicate that they are adjacent to the sea, with the nearest being the Wadden Sea (or North Sea) which borders none other than the entire coastline of Lower Saxony.

German women

The idea that the modern nation of Germany descend from ancient Assyria can be traced to Edward Hine in 1870, an early proponent of British Israelism. Edward Hine compared ancient Assyria and Israel to nineteenth century Britain and Germany. John Wilson in 1840, ‘the intellectual founder of British Israelism’ considered that all Germanic people – including the Dutch and Scandinavians – descended from the tribes of Israel.

British Israelites did not necessarily welcome Hine’s solution – instead of maintaining that other northwestern European nations were also descended from Israel – for he believed all the tribes of Israel were located in Britain, with Manasseh migrating to America. ‘Hine had identified the Ten Tribes as being together in Britain in that Ephraim were the drunkards and ritualists, Reuben the farmers, Dan the mariners, [Zebulun] the lawyers and writers, Asher the soldiers’ and so forth and ‘that these tribes were regional or local people in Britain.’

The theories have merit in that Wilson recognised the familial similarities between the northwestern European nations as did British Israelites, even though they mis-identified the continental people. Hine as it turns out was the most correct regarding Israel; then he went out on a tangent in identifying Germany as Assyria. Hine rightly believed that the ancient peoples recorded in the Bible must also be identifiable in our modern age – if the Bible is true and prophecy is to be fulfilled. Hine postulated that if a people were ‘lost’ then it meant that they had migrated to new regions, relevant exonyms and autonyms had evolved or changed and their histories long forgotten. 

Unfortunately, as with Anglo-Israelism itself, any proposed German-Assyrian connections do not gain any support amongst mainstream historians, anthropologists, ethnologists, archaeologists or linguists. This writer would have to agree with the mainstream experts, as the theories presented are all wrong to some degree and have not done the discipline any favours. The hope is that a gradual sea-change can occur. The ever increasing fascination developing amongst the public regarding their individual genetic identity and Haplogroup ancestry is hopefully just the tip, of a very big ice-berg of people beginning to understand and appreciate the compelling data now available. A new generation can learn in detail about the incredible diversity and similarity amongst ethnicities; not only specific to them but on a national scale, as addressed in this work.

Apart from Assyria, a growing teaching amongst knowledgeable identity adherents, is that Germany – or at least in part – is descended from either Jacob’s fourth son, Judah or his seventh son Gad – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. Though these teachings are still inaccurate, it is encouraging to see that people are beginning to shake off the longstanding, mis-leading German-Asshur paradigm – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

On one author’s internet site – who still teaches Germany is Assyria – there is a list provided of postulated ancestors for the Germans of which all apart from Judah and Gad, was not aware and of course the one listed at number seven, caught the eye immediately.

Asher: a son of Jacob

Ashkenaz: a son of Gomer

Canaan: a son of Ham

Edom: Esau, a son of Isaac

Gad: a son of Jacob

Gomer: a son of Japheth

Ishmael: a son of Abraham

Judah: a son of Jacob

Simeon: a son of Jacob

We have already addressed Ashkenaz, Canaan and Gomer in previous chapters. The four sons of Jacob we will study in depth and identify as not being viable ancestors for Germany. We will also investigate Esau and his grandson Amalek – convincingly ruling them out of contention, which leaves only… Ishmael. It is intriguing that this author has heard Ishmael offered as an identity for modern Germany. Regrettably, the author has chosen to concentrate on providing evidence only about Assyria for his research. It would have been extremely interesting to learn his views on Ishmael. Particularly as he has devoted over thirty years to the subject, publishing a three hundred page work on the German identity.

An example of the damage caused by a mis-identification of a biblical nation is highlighted by Greg Doudna. This author came to understand a profound truth in his early twenties – during the early 1970s – regarding who the United States of America really was in the Bible. Identity believers and British-Israelites have unanimously and incorrectly deduced that the United States is descended from Manasseh, the eldest son of Joseph. His precious gift of insight, has since been rejected by said author and he has tragically gone even further, to dis-believe the identity teaching in its entirety.

His insight was a major part of this writer’s research beginning in the 1990s, confirming increasingly evolving conclusions. It is a great sadness to learn that Greg Doudna has rejected so clear a plain truth. It would be invaluable to understand how he now perceives the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament; for it is swept away almost wholesale if one does not believe the past, present and future application of the historical and prophetic texts. We will return to his comments on the United States in a later chapter, though for now, his deduction regarding Germany clearly shows the pickle which identity adherents find themselves and why credibility with anyone outside of their small bubble-like community is next to zero – Article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator.

Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna, 1989 & 2006, pages 242-243 – emphasis his, bold mine:

‘… [supposedly] the Anglo-Saxons and most other major peoples in Europe are Israelites – with one gigantic exception. One people right in the heart of Europe which were not claimed to be Israel were the Germanic tribes of Germany which produced the Anglo-Saxon tribes. In this… universe Germany today is Assyria, not symbolically or metaphorically but through genetic descent, in the same way that the Germanic tribes who settled elsewhere than Germany are Israelites through genetic descent.

(Is that clear?)… Anglo-Saxons and Germans are of the same origins. They are the same peoples. The Saxons came from Germany. In the Finnish and Estonian languages the very word for “Germany” is Saksa, “Saxon.” Therefore if Germans came from Assyrians, it follows that the predominant ethnic components of Britain and the United States also are Assyrian. By this reasoning the United States would be Assyrians, not Israel.’

First, the author hits upon the problem with thinking that northwestern Europeans are descended from Jacob, rather than being from Abraham. Regardless of which, observing Germany – so obviously related to these other countries – but saying they are from a different son of Shem is glaringly contradictory as he rightly points out.

Second, ‘Anglo-Saxons’ and Germans are of a similar origin, but not of the same origin. Remember the early points in the introduction; people migrate and their name is appropriated but this does not mean the new peoples are the same bloodline as the ones who have departed. The Saxon tribes, comprising Angles, Jutes and Frisians left their eponym behind and imprinted in Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany, but these three nations are not ‘Anglo-Saxon’ peoples. The British Saxons were not the same as the German Saxons. Albeit they are related… each descending from Abraham. 

The author showing Anglo-Saxon equals Assyria, equals America is accidentally showing the inaccuracy of Germany actually being Asshur. Alternatively, we will learn that the peoples who migrated to America from Britain, though similar kindred stock, are not the exact same tribe or extended family. We will also discover, that the ‘Germans’ who did migrate to the United States are not the same people as the Germans who remained behind and presently live in Germany – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

Germany in Prophecy, Herman Hoeh, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Now what does the word “Hatti” or “Chatti” mean in the Hebrew language? Its closest derivation is the root “chathath” (Strongs – 2865). It means “to terrorize, or break down, as in war, hence a warrior or MAN OF WAR.”

It is a stretch by Herman Hoeh to say the Hebrew word chathath is connected with the Hatti. Nearly all the uses of this word in the Old Testament have no connection to a particular people. Granted, it is used in describing the affliction of the Assyrians (Isaiah 30:31) but also for Cush (Isaiah 20:5) and Mizra (Egypt) as well.

Hoeh: ‘The Chatti were therefore Men of War… the ancient Chatti were… migrants who early settled in Asia Minor. Did these Chatti or Hatti later also migrate into Western Europe… Indeed! The Chatti were the chief people who settled in… [ancient] Germany. Their descendants [left] the [HESSIAN name]… In fact, the Old High German spelling of Hesse was Hatti! THE ANCIENT KINGS OF [western Anatolia] called themselves Khatti-sars – meaning the “Kaisers of Hatti, “or “Kings of Hatti.” 

It is true that there was an ancient tribe of Chatti in this region of ‘Germany’. Though they are long gone, leaving their name behind. Rather, the modern day descendants of the Chatti dwell to the south of the present day location of Hesse, in northern Italy – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Hoeh: ‘The Empire of Hatti and the Empire of Assyria were… not two empires existing five centuries apart as historians assume. Excavated records from Bible times PROVE that the great rulers of the land of Hatti were not only contemporary with the famous kings of Assyria, but were also federated with them. All ancient Greek writers agreed that Assyria and Anatolia (the land of Hatti) were allies. All historians recognize that there were at least two distinct peoples in Asia Minor who came to be known by the same name – Chatti or Hittite.’

In this regard, Hoeh is correct though the two peoples were not concurrent, but chronological in that one followed the other, inheriting the previous name. Yet neither were identical with the Assyrians, who were never known as the Hatti or the Hittites.

Hoeh: ‘The… Hatti claimed to be “the Master Race.” So have the modern Germans! The Hatti lorded it over other peoples who lived in Asia Minor. They were the inventors of the DOUBLE-HEADED EAGLE which has always been A SYMBOL OF THE GERMAN EMPIRE!’

The double headed eagle is in fact an Assyrian symbol, perpetuated by the Byzantines, the Russians and the Holy Roman Empire, as well as admittedly the Austrians. The Hittites, Romans and Germans have all used a single headed eagle – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.  

Hoeh: ‘Ritual [standards of the Hatti have been] recovered through excavation in ancient Anatolia… [notice] swastikas… [a] Hattic ritual standard in disk form… the Iron Cross… The descendants of the ancient Hatti – the modern Hessians of Germany – perpetuate these same symbols.’

Three Hittite artefacts highlighting…

… the iron cross (above)…

… and swastika emblems also used in Germany’s recent past.

The symbol below, is a third century Roman swastika

It is apparent from Hoeh’s article that he believes the Hatti and Assyrians are one and the same, or that the Hessian Assyrians as he calls them, are a branch of Asshur. We have studied the original Hatti (or Chatti) when discussing Nahor and his descendants who were later called Chaldees after the Chatti – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

The descendants of Ishmael became known as both Hatti and Hittites. We have discussed the confusing scenario of the original Hittites being from the son of Canaan, Heth – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. The addition of the Nephilim as ‘Hittites’ too (Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega) with the original Heth-ites and now, Ishmael as a completely different, separate and second group of Hittites

Thus, not only were there two Hittite peoples – descended from Canaan and Ishmael – as scholars have begrudgingly recognised; there were also two peoples of Hatti – descended from Nahor and Ishmael – as well. Which has not been recognised, and so the Hatti and Hittites have been viewed as either the same civilisation or more recently as two peoples when technically, there are in fact three involved. Only Ishmael has been known by both names. 

The close political ties of the later Hatti or Hittites, with Asshur is correct and was repeated again at the end of Rome’s supremacy, when it split in two and Asshur was the eastern arm and Ishmael the western. In recent times, when Germany was split into West Germany and East Germany, Russia based its control of the eastern block of nations and its head quarters operations in East Germany; within its ‘half of Berlin.’ We have touched upon the future alliance between Russia and Germany which will see them take the political and economic lead in the world, shaking up the world order, while depriving the United States in particular as well as China, of the leadership they currently take for granted – Articles: Four Kings & One Queen; 2050 and Is America Babylon?

Hoeh raises a fascinating point on the Hittite kings being known as Khatti-sars. As the Prussians did later have Kai-sers and the Russians had C-zars (or Tzars) as titles for their kings and of course to tie up the compelling correlation, these two words have derived from the original title of Cae-sar, used by both capitols of Rome and Constantinople.

Following are a selection of verses in the Bible which speak of the Ishmaelite (3) Hittites and not the Canaanite (1) or Nephilim (2) Hittites.

1 Kings 11:1-2

English Standard Version

‘Now King Solomon loved many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the people of Israel, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods.” Solomon clung to these in love.’

Judges 1:23-26 

English Standard Version

‘And the house of Joseph scouted out Bethel. (Now the name of the city was formerly Luz.) And the spies saw a man coming out of the city, and they said to him, “Please show us the way into the city, and we will deal kindly with you.” And he showed them the way into the city. And they struck the city with the edge of the sword, but they let the man and all his family go. And the man went to the ‘land of the Hittites‘ and built a city and called its name Luz. That is its name to this day’ – Joshua 16:1-3. 

Ishmael died in 1754 BCE and the period of the Judges began circa 1342 BCE with the first Judge, Othniel until 1015 BCE and the death of Samuel, the fifteenth Judge. During this lengthy period, the Ishmaelites migrated from Arabia via Canaan to Central Anatolia. We have discussed how the descendants of Lot and Jacob had travelled to the Aegean Sea and mainland Greece establishing city states – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The descendants of Nahor had migrated from northern Mesopotamia to Western Anatolia. The reason for all this movement is usually attributable to the onward pressure of migrating peoples. For instance in northern Africa and southern Arabia, Cush and Phut were on the move as they would eventually dwell in south Asia, with Mizra filling the vacuum and expanding their territory from North Africa to dwelling in Arabia and the Middle East. 

2 Chronicles 1:17

English Standard Version

‘They imported a chariot from Egypt for 600 shekels of silver, and a horse for 150. Likewise through them these were exported to all the kings of the Hittites and the kings of Syria’ – 1 Kings 10:29, 2 Kings 7:6.

1 Kings 15:5

English Standard Version

‘… because David did what was right in the eyes of the Lord and did not turn aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.’

The Hittite women who King Solomon loved were the same as the Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite and Sidonian women, that is, they were descended from Shem and not through Ham’s lineage. 

Notice the man from the original Canaanite city of Luz, went to the land inhabited by the Hittites in Anatolia and built a new city called Luz. The Hittites dwelt further north than the Aramaean Syrians, who lived just to the south of eastern Asia Minor. In the conquest of Canaan, the Hittites were said to dwell ‘in the mountains’ and ‘towards the north’ of Canaan – a description that matches the general direction and geography of the Anatolian Hittite empire. Uriah the Hittite was the husband of Bathsheba, whom King David conspired to kill so that he could take his wife for himself. Uriah was a high ranking soldier in David’s army; a commanding officer, perhaps a General. 

Uriah is of note, as the Ishmaelites were and are, proficient military leaders and soldiers as evidenced by the legacies of the Hittite Kingdom; the Roman Empire; Imperial Prussia; and in our time, Nazi Germany. Hittite kings as royal princes, were trained from childhood in the art of war and combat; they possessed a wealth of experience from being on the battlefield, where they were expected to lead from the front.

The New World Encyclopaedia addresses the pertinent points we have raised about the Hittities, with additional facts which are interesting in light of their identity as Ishmael, the ancestors of Rome and as modern Germans. Other supporting quotes follow with emphasis and bold mine throughout.

‘”Hittites” is the conventional English-language term for an ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language and established a kingdom centered in Hattusa… The Hittite kingdom, which at its height controlled central Anatolia, north-western Syria down to Ugarit, and Mesopotamia down to Babylon, lasted from roughly 1680 B.C.E. to about 1180 B.C.E. After 1180 B.C.E., the Hittite polity disintegrated into several independent city-states, some of which survived until as late as around 700 B.C.E.

The Hittite kingdom, or at least its core region, was apparently called Hatti in the reconstructed Hittite language. However, the Hittites should be distinguished from the “Hattians,” an earlier people who inhabited the same region until the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., and spoke a non-Indo-European language conventionally called Hattic. Hittites or more recently, Hethites is also the common English name of a Biblical people… who are also called Children of Heth… These people are mentioned several times in the Old Testament, from the time of the Patriarchs up to Ezra’s return from Babylonian captivity of Judah. The archaeologists who discovered the Anatolian Hittites in the nineteenth century initially believed the two peoples to be the same, but this identification remains disputed.

The Hittites were famous for their skill in building and using chariots [as were the Romans and as are the Germans]. Some consider the Hittites to be the first civilization to have discovered how to work iron, and thus the first to enter the Iron Age. The Hittite rulers enjoyed diplomatic relations with Ancient Egypt but also fought them. The Battle of Kadesh (1275 B.C.E.) is said to have been the greatest chariot battle of all time. Rameses II claimed victory but the result was really a draw and 16 years later the two empires signed a peace treaty. The tablet concluding the treaty hangs in the United Nations headquarters.’

The Hittite king, Muwatallis II had at his disposal 3,000 chariots and 40,000 foot soldiers. It was certainly the biggest chariot battle known to history. The Hittites ambushed their enemy; had a greater force of men; and their chariots were made of iron; had lighter wheels; and carried three men instead of the standard two – an extra man as a shield bearer and to weight the chariot during tight turn manoeuvres.

New World: ‘Hittite kings and queens shared power, and gender equality is clearly evident in records of marriage, property and probate transactions and also of criminal law. At one time, a matrilineal system may have been practiced… certain “queens involved themselves in the kingdom’s political and judicial activities, as well as in external political affairs”… The mother goddess was venerated. After their husband’s death, several Queens ruled in their own rights. Correspondence survives between Rameses II of Egypt and Queen Puduhepa of the Hittites as early as the thirteenth century B.C.E. He addressed her as the “great queen,” as his sister and as “beloved of the God Amon.” She co-signed treaties with her husband, King Hattusilis III, including the famous treaty with Egypt. Some correspondence was signed with her own seal, indicating that she had “full authority” to make decisions on her husband’s behalf… This ancient civilization appears to have evolved over the centuries from a harsher into a more humane, life-affirming culture, evidenced by tablets of two hundred laws from different periods that have survived. Earlier punishments required mutilation; later ones demanded fines or some form of compensation except for serious crimes, such as rape and murder – which were punishable by death.

The Hittite civilization was one of the cradles of human culture… [their culture was among the first to have codified laws, literature and libraries]. Their development of trade links did much to generate awareness of living in the same world as other peoples, and of inter-dependence between peoples and had “a profound influence on the course of Anatolian history for the next two millennia”… They often used treaties to secure safe trade and to establish its terms. These terms ensured fairness and profit on both sides. The Hittites were aware that they belonged to a common humanity [for example the European Union], something that sometimes seems forgotten in the modern world. They also made efforts to integrate conquered people by adapting some of their religious customs.

During sporadic excavations at Bogazkoy (Hattusa) that began in 1905, the archaeologist Hugo Winckler found a royal archive with ten thousand tablets, inscribed in cuneiform Akkadian… He also proved that the ruins at Bogazkoy were the remains of the capital of a mighty empire that at one point controlled northern Syria. [The Hittite capital city Hattusha was the most advanced and powerful city of the ancient world].

The language of the Hattusa tablets was eventually deciphered by a Czech linguist, Bedrich Hrozny (1879–1952), who on November 24, 1915, announced his results in a lecture at the Near Eastern Society of Berlin [no less]. His book about his discovery was printed in Leipzig in 1917 with the title ‘The Language of the Hittites: Its Structure and Its Membership in the Indo-European Linguistic Family.’ The preface of the book begins with: The present work undertakes to establish the nature and structure of the hitherto mysterious language of the Hittites, and to decipher this language […] It will be shown that Hittite is in the main an Indo-European language. 

For this reason, the language came to be known as the Hittite language, even though that was not what its speakers had called it… Under the direction of the German Archaeological Institute, excavations at Hattusa have been underway since 1932, with wartime interruptions. Bryce (2006) describes the capital as one of the most impressive of its time, comprising “165 hectares”…

The history of the Hittite civilization is known mostly from cuneiform texts found in the area of their empire, and from diplomatic and commercial correspondence found in various archives in Egypt and the Middle East. Around 2000 B.C.E., the region centered in Hattusa that would later become the core of the Hittite kingdom was inhabited by people with a distinct culture who spoke a non-Indo-European language. The name “Hattic” is used by Anatolianists to distinguish this language from the Indo-European Hittite language, that appeared on the scene at the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E. and became the administrative language of the Hittite kingdom over the next six or seven centuries.

As noted above, “Hittite” is a modern convention for referring to this language. The native term [for their language] was Nesili, i.e. “in the language of Nesa” [and for themselves, Neshites or Nessites]. The early Hittites, whose prior whereabouts are unknown, borrowed heavily from the pre-existing Hattian culture, and also from that of the Assyrian traders – in particular, the cuneiform writing and the use of cylindrical seals. Since Hattic continued to be used in the Hittite kingdom for religious purposes, and there is substantial continuity between the two cultures, it is not known whether the Hattic speakers – the Hattians – were displaced by the speakers of Hittite, were absorbed by them, or just adopted their language.

The kingdom developed into the greatest and richest power at the time in the region. Bryce (2006) argues that early use of tin to make bronze helped to stimulate a stable political system and also to develop trade-links with surrounding peoples. The earliest known Hittite king, Pithana, was based at Kussara. In the eighteenth century B.C.E., Anitta conquered Nesa, where the Hittite kings had their capital for about a century, until [Labarnas II] conquered Hattusa and took the throne name of [Hattusilis I c. 1650-1620 BCE] “man of Hattusa.” The Old Kingdom, centered at Hattusa, peaked during the sixteenth century and even managed to sack Babylon at one point [ending the Amorite Dynasty], but made no attempt to govern there, choosing instead to turn it over to the domination of their Kassite allies who were to rule it for over four hundred years. Bryce describes the conquest of Babylon under King [Mursilis I Hattusilis’ grandson] (1620-1590) as the “peak of Hittite military achievement” that also marked the “end of the illustrious era of Babylonian history”…’

The Hittite kingdom finally dissolved after defeats and loss of territory to the strengthening Assyrians. The Hittite legacy was influential on both the legendary city-state of Troy descended in the main from Lot, the French today and the Etruscan civilisation of Midian – the Dutch people today – who in turn, ironically, were a foundation for the later Roman Republic… the very reincarnation of the Hittite peoples who had migrated from western Anatolia to central Italy. 

New World: ‘The success of the Hittite economy was based on fair trade. In return for tin, they sold gold, silver, and copper, as well as wool and woolen clothes. A banking system made credit available. This, however, was run humanely, so that if for example a farmer, due to a bad harvest, could not repay the loan, it was sometimes canceled by the king… Macqueen (1975) argues that what made Anatolia much more than a “land-bridge” between Europe and Asia was its abundant mineral resources. It was no more or no less fertile than other regions, but its resources… “made it a land of rich possibilities (that made it) a primary center rather than a backwater which served only to link more favored areas”…’

The Lion Gate at the entrance of the former city Hattusa

Amazing Bible Timeline – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Hittite Empire is mentioned… in the Bible as one of the most powerful empires in… ancient times. Scholars used to question the accuracy of the Bible saying that such [an impressive] Hittite Empire was only hearsay since it was nowhere to be found. They considered the Hittites a small group of people living in the hills of Canaan together with Abraham. This was until the discovery… [of] important proofs… [including] tablets, documents, and successful excavations… [revealing] the truth about the existence of this great empire.

It is a matter of considerable scholarly debate whether the biblical “Hittites” signified any or all of: 1) the original Hattites of Hatti

[no, two different people];

2) their Indo-European conquerors (Nesili), who retained the name “Hatti” for Central Anatolia, and are today referred to as the “Hittites”

[yes, retained the name for a period]… or

3) a Canaanite group who may or may not have been related to either or both of the Anatolian groups, and who also may or may not be identical with the later Neo-Hittite, Luwian polities

[yes, related and yes identical].’

Sarah wife of Abraham. Fairy tale or Real History? Gerard Gertoux – emphasis mine:

‘The Hittites met by Abraham were not quite the same as those of Joshua 37 since they are identified as sons of Heth, not Hittites. In the biblical narrative (Genesis 23:2-10), Ephron (“of a calf”), son of Zohar (“tawny”), was not a Hittite in the usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite, implying that they had been settled in this region for a long time. Consequently the history of Hittites is complex…’

We read the majority of the quote by writer D H Lawrence regarding the Etruscan civilisation in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The additional information is of note, now we know the identity of the Roman people who were steadily rising in power next to their Etruscan neighbours:

‘… Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him. The Prussian in him was enthralled by the Prussian in the all-conquering Romans.’

An interesting coincidence of comparison, for who were the original Romans but none other than the Ishmaelite Hittites who had migrated to the Italian Peninsula as had the Midianite Grecians before them becoming known as Etruscans. These ‘western’ Romans when Rome fell, migrated through central eastern Europe to the Scandinavian-Baltic region and after being part of the ‘Swedish Viking’ wave of traders and raiders, came to be known as Prussians. The Prussians eventually led the drive for unification of all the German States and principalities and were synonymous with militarism and authoritarianism. 

According to legend, Rome was founded as a city state by Romulus II and his brother Remus on April 21, 753 BCE. After completing the construction of his city, Romulus divided ‘his warriors into regiments numbering three thousand infantry and three hundred cavalry’ which he called legions. Romulus proceeded to form the city’s system of government in selecting a hundred of the most noble and richest elders, the patricians and these men became the first senators; who ruled the complex republican government when the last king was expelled.

Romulus was the city’s first king, though after his death in 716 BCE, the city was in reality under Etruscan rule even as the Kingdom of Rome. The Etruscans governed great swathes of Italy north of Rome; including Rome which was the southern tip of a chain of semi-independent city states. By 509 BCE the power of the Etruscans had weakened sufficiently for the Romans to eject them and establish the Roman Republic, ending a period of Monarchy comprising seven kings, including Romulus – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia

The grandeur of ancient Rome

The most famous ruler of the Republic was Julius Caesar who became the first dictator of Rome in 45 BCE after defeating Pompey in a civil war and thereby igniting the ending of the Republic. It was Julius Caesar who hired Sosigenes an Egyptian astronomer, to calculate a new twelve month calendar – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy. In 44 BCE he was assassinated on the Ides of March by Marcus Brutus. Hopes of a return to a Republic were dashed by civil war breaking out again. In 27 BCE, Octavius appointed himself Augustus, the first emperor. The Roman Empire steadily grew in power and influence; becoming the greatest empire the world had ever known up and till that time. In 64 CE, Emperor Nero set fire to Rome, blaming the Christians. Yet, in 306 CE Rome became a ‘Christian’ empire, made official by Theodosius I in 380 CE confirming Christianity the sole religion of the empire.

The Roman Empire contributed major achievements and left many legacies. The most notable being arches, grid based cities, sewers, sanitation, roads and highways – note Germany’s autobahns of the 1930s and much of the major road systems in Britain, are based on those originally built by the Romans – aqueducts (considered engineering marvels), central heating (hypocaust: circulation of hot air), surgery tools and techniques, medical corps on the battlefield, the Julian calendar, newspapers (Acta Diurna: ‘daily acts’), concrete, construction and architecture (The Colosseum built in  80 CE, the Pantheon and Hadrian’s Wall in 122 CE), Latin from which the Romance languages sprung and Roman numerals. Their numbering system is still used today, as well as Latin in science and academia. 

Arguably, the greatest achievement of the Roman Empire, was its system of government. Though tainted with intrigue and political violence which a modern democratic political system could not survive today, the Romans established a legal code that served as a future model for political systems, including importantly the United States. The emperor Justinian from 492 to 565 CE, was integral in the development of the Corpus Juris Civilis, undoubtedly the earliest modern expression of civil law in history and it provided the foundation for the legal systems that define democracy in our era. The relevance of the Roman Empire to the future of western civilisation, cannot be overstated. 

In 117 CE with the death of Trajan, the empire covered territory of up to five million square kilometres; comparable to the Greco-Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great of some 5.2 million square km and the Achaemenid Empire of Darius I comprising 5.5 to 5.8 million square km. The Roman Empire grew so large that it was an unwieldy task governing from the city of Rome. Emperor Diocletician divided the administrative rule into a western and eastern tetrarchy (‘the rule of two’) in 285 CE. By 330 CE, Emperor Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople, formally known as Byzantium. This decision plus his favouring the east by building new infrastructure only there, yet raising taxes in the west, led to the considerable weakening of the western empire; leaving it vulnerable to invaders. 

In 395 CE, the Roman empire splitting was reinforced upon the death of Theodosius I, emperor of Constantinople. The provinces were divided between his two sons Arcadius and Honorius. Fifteen years later the Visigoths sacked Rome; the first time in eight hundred years. Finally, in 476 CE the Western Roman Empire ended and ancient Rome fell with the defeat of the final emperor, Romulus Augustus at the hands of the Goth ruler Odoacer. Heralding the beginning of the Dark Ages in Europe. The eastern Empire of Byzantium lasted until 1453 CE when it fell to the Ottoman Turks – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

This transference of power from west to east was a switch from Ishmael to Asshur. This relationship had occurred previously in Anatolia as the neighbouring Hittites and Assyrians. As Rome faded, Byzantium (Constantinople) rose to prominence.

We have studied Nebuchadnezzar’s statue in the Book of Daniel chapter two, with a. the head of Gold symbolising the Chaldeans; b. the chest and arms of silver the Medo-Persians; c. the torso and thighs of bronze, Greco-Macedonia; and d. the one lower leg of iron representing Byzantium.

The other lower leg… is Rome.

The statue from a past perspective, is now complete.

The major European nations (or powers) have all been represented in Nebuchadnezzar’s statue respectively. Comprising: a. Italy; b. Turkey; c. France; d. Russia and now… Germany. Quite an amazing coincidence or set by a predetermined purpose? 

The Roman Empire powerful like the Byzantine Empire, were both constituted of iron. We have previously discussed the feet and toes of iron and clay and the possible physical-spiritual intent, at the time of the end. We also now know, that this sixth future empire – whether it includes a human-angel admixture or not – does arise from the ashes of the Roman and Byzantine empires. The uneasy mix of iron and clay might just as easily be a reference to the short and difficult amalgamation of the Russian and German political, economic and military apparatuses. This future relationship between Ishmael and Asshur – Germany and Russia – will one final time, in a cycle of three, be instrumental in ushering in the time of the end, the very period of Jacob’s Trouble, the Great Tribulation, the Day of the Lord and the return of the Son of Man – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.

Daniel 2:33-35

English Standard Version

‘… its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone [the returning Messiah] that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth [the millennial rule of the Kingdom of God].’

This seventh kingdom is the Son of Man’s rule on earth; for a thousand years. Many Bible scholars, Christians and ad infinitum seem to have difficulty accepting a millennial one thousand year period after Christ’s return. Yet the Roman and Byzantine empires were each over a thousand years long. Rome from its foundation in 753 BCE to either its fall in 476 BCE, or the divisions of 285 and 395 CE are all over a thousand years. The fall of the Byzantine empire in 1453 is again over a thousand years, from the official division in 395 CE. It is a curious coincidence that both ‘lower leg’ empires founded by Ishmael and Asshur should have each lasted a thousand years or longer. 

Added to this curiosity, is the fact that the Holy Roman Empire began with Charlemagne’s crowning on Christmas Day in 800, and which incorporated much of Central Europe (or East Francia) and particularly the lands that would ultimately encompass present day Germany. 

By 936, Otto I was crowned King of Germany and the Holy Roman Empire was for the first time fully centred in Germany. By the end of the fifteenth century the Empire was still composed of three major regions comprising Italy, Germany and Burgundy; though really, only the Kingdom of Germany counted as the Burgundian territories were lost to France and the Italian territories splintered into independent territories. The dissolution of the Empire occurred a thousand years later at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815. At this time most of the Holy Roman Empire was included in the German Confederation, with the exception of the Italian states.

A decree in 1512, changed the name to the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, though this term was hardly ever applied. The political philosopher Voltaire remarked: “This body which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.” The Empire was often called the German Empire, Deutsches Reich or the Roman-German Empire: Romisch-Deutsches Reich. After its dissolution, it was simply called ‘the old Empire’ – das alte Reich

Beginning in 1923, Nazi propaganda would identify the Holy Roman Empire as the First Reich – Reich meaning realm or hegemony, loosely, ’empire’ – with the German Empire as the Second Reich from 1871 to 1918 and either a future German nationalist state or as it turned out, Nazi Germany as the Third Reich.

It is a further curiosity that Adolf Hitler should wish to impose a thousand year German rule. It cannot be coincidence and very possibly demonically inspired to remark on in essence, an ante-Christ and anti-Christ millennial rule.

Adolf Hitler in 1931:

“I intend to set up a thousand-year Reich and anyone who supports me in this battle is a fellow-fighter for a unique spiritual – I would say divine – creation… Rudolf Hess, my assistant of many years standing, would tell you: If we have such a leader, God is with us.”

Quoted by Richard Breiting in Secret Conversations with Hitler, 1970.

The similarities between the Roman Empire and Germany are numerous and palpable; replicated by the Nazi regime, whether from design or coincidence. The Nazi salute and greeting, Sieg Heil meaning Hail to Victory and Heil Hitler, resonates with the original Hail Caesar.

The Nuremberg rallies with their layout, flags, standards and military precision were deliberately reminiscent of the Roman army legions which prefigured them.

The eastern third of the Frankish empire eventually evolved into modern Germany, after Louis the Pious, the only one remaining of Charlemagne’s three sons died in 840 CE, leaving East Francia to his son, Louis the German as discussed in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. His territory included Alemannia, Bavaria, Khorushka, Saxony, Franconia and Thuringia. 

Interestingly, a province or Gau of East Francia, is first mentioned in the Treaty of Meerssen in 870. Known as the Hattuarian Gau, on the west bank of the Rhine. Some think this was a surviving relic of the Germanic tribe, the Chattuarii. Note the striking resemblance to Hattusa the capital of the Hittite Empire and before them, the Chatti. 

Louis the German died in 876 and he in turn left East Francia to his three sons: Carloman, king of Bavaria and lower Pannonia from 876 to 880; Louis III, the younger of Franconia, Hesse, Saxony and Thuringia from 876 to 882; and Charles II, the Fat from 876 to 887, of Rhaetia and Alemannia or Swabia, with the addition of Italy in 879 and France in 884. In 882, East Francia was re-united after its division in 876 with the death of Charles’ brother Louis III.

Between 1648 and 1815 Prussia or Preussen in German, rose remarkably in stature. The margraves, or marcher lords of Brandenburg became Electors of the Holy Roman Empire. Brandenburg and East Prussia fell under the control of the Hohenzollern family, who mastered the Brandenburg hereditary nobility the Junkers and ignited the centuries long march to power, which ended with the First World War and the abdication of the Kaiser in 1918. In 1640, Frederick William or Wilhelm of Brandenburg, also called the Great Elector, became ruler of Brandenburg-Prussia; throwing off vassalage under the Kingdom of Poland and re-organising his loosely knit and scattered territories. By the time he died in 1688, Frederick William had made Brandenburg-Prussia the strongest of the northern German states; created an efficient army; and had fortified Berlin.

The Kingdom of Prussia is Founded, Richard Cavendish, History Today, Volume 51, Issue January 1, 2001 – emphasis mine:

‘His son, the Elector Frederick III (1657-1713), was not a chip off the old block. Known in Berlin as ‘crooked Fritz’, because a childhood accident had left him with a twisted spine and a humped back, he was besotted with all things French and looked for a crown as a reward for aiding the Emperor Leopold I. There could not be a king of Brandenburg, which was part of the Empire, and there could not be a king of Prussia, because part of it was in Poland. By an ingenious formula, however, Frederick was permitted to call himself king in Poland. He put the crown on his head with great ceremony at Königsberg as Frederick I and so created the Prussian kingdom, with its capital at Berlin. Brandenburg from then on, though still theoretically part of Germany owing allegiance to the Emperor, was treated in practice as part of the Prussian kingdom.’ 

Prussia became a European power from 1763 and in turn, Austria’s greatest rival for hegemony of Germany. Instrumental in this growth was Frederick II the Great, who reigned from 1740 to 1786. In 1857, the Prussian king was Frederick William IV. He suffered a stroke and while incapacitated, his brother served as regent until 1861 when he then officially became King William I.

From an early age he received private tuition and as the second son of the King, was not expected to take the throne. According to Royal traditions, he was initially destined to a military life. He was an officer in the Prussian Army when he was only twelve and later on in his adolescence was commissioned as a Captain; joining the Allied monarchs fight against France and Napoleon I when he was sixteen years of age. Wilhelm I was devoted to military service and was determined to perfect the capabilities of the Prussian Army. Wilhelm helped quench several uprisings and hence consolidated the power of his brother, King Frederick William IV. He took part in setting up the Vereinigter Landtag, the Prussian Parliament with a seat for himself in the Herrenhaus or upper chamber. 

Wilhelm’s most significant accomplishment was naming Otto von Bismarck as Prussian Foreign Minister in 1862; who became known as the ‘blood and iron chancellor.’ Bismarck was born in 1815 in a noble family estate west of Berlin in Prussian Saxony. He was a Prince, Count and Duke all-in-one. He died at the age of eighty-three in 1898. With the formidable assistance of Bismarck, King Wilhelm impressively modernised Germany, accelerating its journey into one of the dominant military and economic powers of Europe. ‘Wilhelm centralised power, built a strong military, and improved Germany’s international status. It was also under his reign that Germany became one of the first modern welfare states.’ 

There had been growing disputes between Prussia and Denmark over the territory of Schleswig and these escalated in 1863. It was not part of the German Confederation, while Danish nationalists wanted to incorporate Schleswig into the Danish kingdom. By astutely placing Denmark in the aggressors role, Bismarck was able to spark the Second war of Schleswig in 1864. Prussia, cleverly getting Austria involved, easily defeated Denmark and occupied Jutland. The Danes were forced to cede both the Duchy of Schleswig and the Duchy of Holstein to Austria and Prussia. 

The subsequent governing of the two duchies, inevitably led to tensions between Austria and Prussia. Austria wanted the duchies to become independent within the German Confederation; Prussia planned to annex them. This disagreement served as the intended and perfect pretext for the Seven Weeks War between Austria-Hagar and Prussia-Ishmael, breaking out in June 1866.

The two powerful armies clashed at Sadowa-Koniggratz in Bohemia, in an enormous battle in July, involving half a million soldiers. Superior Prussian troop manoeuvres, with the modern breech-loading needle guns over the slow muzzle loading rifles of the Austrians were decisive in giving Prussia victory. The battle importantly, had decided the question of hegemony in Germany. Bismarck was deliberately lenient with the spent force that was Austria; who after their defeat, played a subordinate role in German affairs.

The world-renowned Neuschwanstein castle was built for King Ludwig II of Bavaria, and served as his private refuge. Construction began in 1869 and was finished in 1892, though it was not technically completed.

The Castle became the dream world where the Bavarian king escaped, after he ceded his power to the Prussians in 1866.

Following the War with Austria, the German Confederation was dissolved and the North German Federation or Norddeutscher Bund, was established under the leadership of Prussia. Austria was excluded and its longstanding immense influence over Germany abruptly came to an end. The North German Federation was a temporary organisation, existing between 1867 and 1871. Due to revolution in Spain, the exile of Queen Isabella II to France began a fortuitous and remarkable chain of events on the surface, yet cleverly contrived behind the scenes. Her abdication in June 1870 lead to the Franco-Prussian war when France refused the possibility of the Prussian Prince Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen taking the vacant Spanish throne. 

French troops were humiliated by Prussia’s ‘ultra-modern’ army and being driven back to the gates of Paris, quickly swept away the exposed myth of French military prowess, bringing about its downfall. In the process, Prussia had not only displaced Austria as the preeminent German power it was now the dominant state of central Europe. In 1871 Wilhelm was proclaimed Emperor or Kaiser, of a united German State, with Bismarck its first Chancellor.

On 18 January 1871, the German Empire was proclaimed in the Hall of Mirrors of the Palace of Versailles – Bismarck is in the centre, dressed in white with a gold sash

The Prussian led German Empire’s massive military build up, coupled with phenomenal economic growth, meant war with Great Britain was inevitable, as it it sought to be the principal power of all Western Europe.

The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World before the War, 1890-1914, Barbara Tuchman – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Germans knew themselves to be the strongest military power on earth, the most efficient merchants, the busiest bankers, penetrating every continent, financing the Turks, flinging out a railway from Berlin to Baghdad, gaining the trade of Latin America, challenging the sea power of Great Britain, and in the realm of the intellect systematically organising… every branch of human knowledge. They were deserving and capable of mastery of the world. Rule by the best must be fulfilled… What they lacked and hungered for was the world’s acknowledgement of their mastery. So long as it was denied, frustration grew and with it the desire to compel acknowledgement by the sword.’

Flag of the North German Confederation from 1866 to 1871 (above) and of the German Empire from 1871 to 1918 (below).

Alien World Order, Len Kasten, pages 175-177 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… in 1890 Germany and Prussia were the richest and most powerful nations in the world at that time, even greater than the United States and on a par with England Tuchman says that in… [1905, Kaiser Wilhelm II] astounded everyone by “publicly ascribing the genesis of his Navy to his childhood admiration of the British Fleet” He was the oldest grandchild of Queen Victoria and the son of Princess Victoria, the oldest daughter of the queen and Prince Albert’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘His father was Prince Frederick William of Prussia, the heir to the Prussian crown who eventually became King Frederick III. [Wilhelm] was closely related to all the royalty of Europe and Russia. He was a first cousin to King George V of England; Queen Marie of Romania; Queen Maud of Norway; Victoria Eugenie, the queen consort of Spain; and Empress Alexandra of Russia, the wife of Czar [Nicholas II].’

Once Germany was unified, an effective system of alliances designed and managed by Bismarck, had maintained peace and good relations across Europe. This was necessary because the recently unified Germany in its central location in Europe bordering a host of nations was brilliantly situated for trade, yet in the case of war, extremely vulnerable to attack on a variety of fronts. In 1888, the ‘Year of Three German Emperors’ Wilhelm I died at the age of 90 in March, followed shortly by his son – Wilhelm II’s father – Frederick III, who died of cancer in June. 

The new Kaiser (or King), Wilhelm II was eager to be seen as the one who could competently manage foreign relations, without the need of someone else and thus Bismarck was unceremoniously and unwisely, fired. Bismarck’s clever diplomatic ‘system of complex alliances, with their give-and-take features, encouraging moderation, were deliberately’ severed. Kaiser Wilhelm II ignored renewing a treaty of friendship with Russia, rather seeking ‘alliances with the traditional opponents of German expansionism, Great Britain and France, with momentous consequences.’

The following quote is not intended to single out Germany, Germans or the Japanese. Tragically, it is indicative of all waring aggressor nations, when under the influence of dark forces. Humankind all too readily falls under the spell of depravity at times like these; thus taking leave of their otherwise moral code of decency, to replace it with evil insanity.

Alien World Order, Len Kasten, pages 182-183 – emphasis mine:

‘Germany attacked Belgium on August 2, 1914, as part of their plan to quickly encircle the French forces. They needed to go through Belgium, using it as a corridor. In doing this, they were violating Belgian neutrality, which had been declared in the Treaty of 1839. The brutality with which the German Army treated the defenceless Belgian citizenry was not equaled again until 1937, by the Japanese in their infamous invasion… of Nanking. The German soldiers looted, pillaged, raped and murdered civilians with cold, drunken abandon…. crimes… were brutally cruel and sadistic… but were committed with a detached lack of restraint, sometimes while singing! All of the acts were meticulously catalogued in the impartial report of the British Bryce Committee… in May 1915… the German atrocities were in violation of the Hague Convention of 1907, which dealt with the conduct of war on land, to which Germany was a signatory. The offences enumerated… are divided into the following categories:

  1. The Killing of noncombatants
  2. The treatment of women and children
  3. The use of noncombatants as shields during military operations
  4. Looting, burning, and wanton destruction of property
  5. Killing the wounded and prisoners
  6. Firing on hospitals, Red Cross ambulances, and stretcher bearers
  7. Abuses of the Red Cross and the White [surrender] Flag

About one hundred thousand Belgians were killed, of which sixty thousand were civilians, six thousand by execution. About 1.5 million Belgians were displaced by the invasion… An estimated 120,000 Belgian civilians of both genders were used as forced labor, roughly half of which were deported to Germany. They toiled in prison factories and camps, some just behind the front lines, digging trenches while artillery shells burst all around them. In this can be seen the same [cold-blooded] indifference to human suffering that became even more pronounced in World War II. It is clear evidence of the massive mind control… and the violent dispositions… programmed into the young German males.’

As if once wasn’t enough, the same dark, controlling influence polluted the leadership of Germany again a short twenty years later in World War II. Adolf Hitler’s last name is a possible variation of Hiedler, a surname applied to those who reside near a Hiedl or ‘subterranean river.’ Other theories derive the surname from Huttler, also spelled Huettler meaning ‘one who lives in a hut’ from Hutte, or from huten, meaning to ‘guard, look after.’ Adolf derives from Adal, which means noble or majestic and Wulf, meaning wolf. A ‘majestic wolf guarding, looking after’ Germany. Hitler certainly lived up to his name, as the predatory ruler who hijacked control by dictatorship. Notice the similarity between the name Hit-ler and the word Hit-tite. The irony, is Hitler’s ancestors were not German; that is, descended from Ishmael, yet it was he who lead the German-Ishmaelite nation down its darkest path; for Hitler was three quarters Austrian and purportedly one quarter Jewish.

Alien World Order, Len Kasten, 2017, Page 196 – emphasis his, bold mine:

‘In his book, The Biggest Secret, David Icke has made a persuasive case for the theory that Adolf Hitler was the grandson of a Rothschild, and that the Rothschild family was responsible for his rise to power’ – refer article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

‘Icke informs us that according to the book The Mind of Hitler, psychoanalyst/author Walter Langer says that Hitler’s grandmother, Maria Anna Schicklgruber became pregnant with the child of Salomon Mayer Rothschild while working as a domestic servant at his mansion in Vienna. Her illegitimate son Alois later became Hitler’s father. Icke says, “The Rothschilds and the Illuminati produce many offspring out of wedlock… and these children are brought up under other names with other parents.”

After World War II in 1949, Germany was divided into two countries: East Germany and West Germany. East Germany was a communist state under control of the Soviet Union. The Berlin Wall was built between the two states and ideologies to prevent people from escaping from East Germany to the West. It became a central point and focus of the Cold War. Inaugurating the collapse of the Soviet Union and communism, the wall fell November 9, 1989.

Nearly a year later on October 3, 1990, East Germany and West Germany were reunited into one country.

Notable dates in German history include: 1455 when Johannes Gutenberg first printed the Gutenberg Bible. His printing press incomparably influenced the future of the written word. In 1517, Martin Luther published his Thesis which marked the beginning of the Protestant Reformation and the huge schism from the Universal Church – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. In 1756, famous composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was born in present day Austria. In 1806, the French Empire under Napoleon I conquered many of the German states. In 1808, Ludwig van Beethoven’s famous Fifth Symphony was first performed. In 1812, German writers the Brothers Grimm, published their first collection of tales.

Prussian flag (above) and German flag during World war I (below) – notice the Prussian one headed eagle, the Hittite iron cross, the Nordic cross and the pan-German colours of red, white and especially, black.

After the United States, Germany is the second most popular immigration destination in the world, with the majority of migrants living in the western regions of Germany. Germany’s power and prestige has grown all over the globe. In a May 2013 poll, Germany emerged as ‘the most popular country in the world’ – BBC poll: ‘Germany most popular country in the world’, BBC.com, May 23, 2013. In the January 2016 U.S. News & World Report, a poll analysed countries according to 75 criteria, with Germany again taking the top spot, being named, ‘the best country in the world’ – Jonathan Chew, ‘This Country Was Named the Best in the World’, Fortune.com, January 20, 2016.

The English word Germany derives from the Latin Germania, used by Julius Caesar ironically, to describe the peoples east of the Rhine River. The German term Deutschland, originally diutisciu land or the ‘German lands’, was derived from the word deutsch and is similar to the word Dutch, descending from the Old High German diutisc, meaning ‘of the people’ from diot (or diota) – ‘people.’

Bob Thiel: ‘While many claim that the term German come from the Medieval Latin term Germanus and essentially means “brother,” another explanation is that it is made up of the Latin words Guerra manus, which basically means “war gang” (… [and] “war man” or “war men”)’ – refer Genesis 16:12.

The Nazi flag from 1933 till 1945 (above) and the flag of the Holy Roman Empire (below)

Western Germany received considerable support from the United States – as did Japan – in rebuilding its economy after WWII. For decades, Germany was the third biggest economy in the world. Though with China’s ascent, Germany slipped to the fourth largest world economy behind Japan. In 2023 Germany passed Japan – as has India – and so with a GDP of $4.47 trillion in 2025 has regained third position.

Germany is Europe’s largest economy and is a top exporter of vehicles, machinery, chemicals and other manufactured goods, with a highly skilled workforce. Germany is well known for its pharmaceuticals and is the home of one of the world’s top drug makers, Bayer. Germany also has a low fertility rate, with an ageing population and workforce. Coupled with this is its high levels of net immigration, both of which are putting a strain on Germany’s social welfare system.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in German global shipments during 2021. 

  1. Machinery including computers: US$268.6 billion
  2. Vehicles: $246 billion 
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $176.4 billion 
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $118 billion 
  5. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $83.8 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $76.3 billion 
  7. Mineral fuels including oil: $43.3 billion 
  8. Articles of iron or steel: $33.9 billion 
  9. Other chemical goods: $32.9 billion 
  10. Iron, steel: $32.7 billion 


Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 65.4% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were the materials iron and steel via a 48.3% gain. Germany’s shipments of plastics plus articles made from plastic posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 27%.’

The German flag during the Weimar Republic between WWI and Nazi Germany and since reunification in 1989 (above) and the German Coat of Arms (below)

Germany is in the top ten nations in the world for technological innovation, at number five, one ahead of Russia at six. Germany has always found its name in this list and is consistently regarded as one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world. German research scientists contribute to numerous fields of endeavour including space exploration and biotechnology. The German automotive industry produces some of the most high-tech engines and automobiles, with pioneering brands like Mercedes Benz, BMW, Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche. 

On the 2023 Global Innovation Index, Germany was ranked eighth in the world, between the Netherlands at seven and Denmark at ninth. Recall, Switzerland was ranked number one and Sweden number two in the world.

Germany has the second largest gold reserves in the world, ahead of Italy, France and Russia at 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Germany has 3,362.4 tonnes of gold which represents 74.5% of its foreign reserves. In 2017 Germany completed a four year repatriation operation to move back a total of 674 tonnes of gold from the Banque de France and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to its own vaults.

Germany is included in the influential G7 group of nations, where apart from Japan, two of the remaining six nations descend from Abraham’s two brothers, Nahor and Haran, corresponding with Italy and France respectively. Abraham’s children within the G7 include Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States of America. 

Some global analysts predict a weakening of China’s economy over the next decade, regardless of this, a strong Germany aligning itself with a mending Russia – after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 – would have enormous repercussions on the future of global foreign policy, world trade, arms development, military expansion and political influence – refer article: Is America Babylon?

Geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan in an article on Russia (Assyria), comments on Germany’s pivotal role in central Europe – emphasis mine:

‘European history is a chronicle of the rise and fall of its geographic center. As Germany rises, the powers on its periphery buckle under its strength and are forced to pool resources in order to beat back Berlin. As Germany falters, the power vacuum at the middle of the Continent allows the countries on Germany’s borders to rise in strength and become major powers themselves. Since the formation of the first “Germany” in 800, this cycle has set the tempo and tenor of European affairs. A strong Germany means consolidation followed by a catastrophic war; a weak Germany creates a multilateral concert of powers and [multi-state] competition (often involving war, but not on nearly as large a scale). For Europe this cycle of German rise and fall has run its course three times – the Holy Roman Empire, Imperial Germany, Nazi Germany – and is only now entering its fourth iteration with the reunified Germany’ and the European Union.

The destinies of Germany and Russia remain entwined.

The warlike and empire driven peoples from Germany and Russia were each thwarted in their aims during the 20th Century. Germany by the might of the United states and its allies and Russia by time, political ideology and economic mis-management.

Germany and Russia remain restless and… patient.

Imperialistic Russia will not rest until its possessions are restored and it has recaptured the preeminence it once enjoyed as the USSR. Ukraine was and is Russia’s most vital economic and geographic buffer state. It is number one on its long list and just the beginning.

An expansionist Germany has seemingly been contained and seemingly (safely) cocooned in the European Union, yet in reality, a ready made empire has been constructed for Germany to lead. And so what Germany failed to win through warfare, it will attain through political and economic stealth within a United States of Europe. The European Union, might just be one of the worst decisions in history.

Former Chancellor Angela Merkel (2005-2021) was called Europe’s most impressive politician and the most powerful woman in the world at the time. She was described as a political mastermind, who used “the European Union as her vehicle… and succeeded where Bismarck, Kaiser Wilhelm II and Hitler failed – turning an entire continent into a greater German Empire” – Dominic Sandbrook, ‘Angela Merkel has made Germany master of Europe in a way Hitler and Kaiser Wilhelm only dreamt of. The implications are frightening’, DailyMail.co.uk, April 19, 2013.

Focusing on the genetic inheritance of the Germans, the top eight main mtDNA Haplogroups for Austria and Germany are:

Austria: H [44.9%] – J [8.8%] – U5 [8.6%] – K [8.6%] – 

T2 [8%] – U4 [4.6%] – T1 [4%] – HVO+V [1.9%] 

Germany: H [44.8%] – J [9%] – U5 [8.8%] – T2 [7.8%] – 

K [6.6%] – HVO+V [4%] – U4 [2.9%] – T1 [2.8%] 

                        H     HVO+V     J        K     T2     U4     U5     T1

Austria            45         2            9        9       8        5       9        4    

Germany         45         4            9        7       8        3       9        3

The almost exact similitude between the two German nations in their mitochondrial DNA percentage sequence is instantly recognisable. The maternal Haplogroups leave little doubt as to the shared lineage and mutual ancestry from their mother Hagar; as evidenced in the key Haplogroups H, J, T2 and U5.

                             H       HVO+V       J          K       T2       U4       U5                 

Germany          45              4            9            7         8         3          9

Austria              45              2            9           9         8         5          9

Netherlands     45             8           11          10       12         7          8            

Norway             46             4            11           5         8         3         11          

Sweden             46             5             8           6         4         3         12          

Denmark          47             4            13          9         6          2          6          

Bel-Lux             47             3             6         12         9          3          3          

Adding Austria and Germany to the table from Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia and comparing the key mtDNA Haplogroups, highlights the unquestionable family link between Abraham and Keturah’s children with the two sons born from Hagar; Ishmael, with Abraham and the Hagarites with her second, unnamed husband.

                                H        J      T2     U5       K    HVO+V   HV     U4    

Switzerland          48     12        9        7        5          5        0.5         3      

France                   44       8        6        8       9          5            3         3 

Germany               45       9        8        9       7          4         0.5         3

Austria                  45       9         8        9       9         2         0.8         5              

Comparing Ishmael and the Hagarites with Abraham’s brother Haran’s children, highlights the re-occurring genetic relationship amongst cousins, which can sometimes be as close as those shared between siblings. The Germans and Austrians are closely aligned in mtDNA with the French from Moab and Ammon. The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Hagar’s descendants.

                           H       HV   HVO+V    J        T2        U        U5       K

Switzerland     48     0.4          5          12         9      0.4         7         5

Bel-Lux            47      0.7          3           6          9         5         3       12

Denmark         47                      4         13          6         1          6        9

Norway            46      0.2          4         11          8         2        11         5

Sweden            46      0.5          5           8          4         3        12        6

Netherlands   45                      8          11        12      0.5         8       10

Austria            45       0.8         2           9          8      1 .4         9         9      

Germany         45      0.5         4            9          8      0.8         9         7

France             44         2           5           8          6         1          8         9

Brazil                44        2                       11 

Portugal           44     0.1          5            7         6          3          7         6

Spain                44     0.7          8            7         6          2         8         6

Poland             44         1          5            8         7       1.4        10        4

Russia              41         2          4            8         7          2        10        4

Greece              41        3        1.8          10         7          3          5        5

Italy                  40       3           3            8          8         3          5        8            

Ukraine            39       4           4            8         8      0.6        10        5

Iceland             38       4           2          14        10     0.2          8       10

Romania          37       2           4           11          5         2          7        8

Finland            36                     7            6          2     0.8        21        5

Turkey             31         5       0.7            9          4         6         3         6

Iran                  17         7       0.6          14           5       12         3         7

Switzerland remains as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant mtDNA Haplogroup H. The addition of the Austrians and Germans, sees them unsurprisingly, nestled amongst near relatives and neighbours, the Scandinavian, Benelux and French descended peoples. Recall from previous chapters that a pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe in the main exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula.

R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.

It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Turkey            R-M269    14%   –  R-U106   0.4%

Russia             R-M269    21%   –  R-U106   5.4%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Austria            R-M269    27%   –  R-U106      23%

Germany         R-M269   43%   –  R-U106      19%

With the addition of Austria and Germany, we see that Germany has similar percentages as their neighbouring cousins in Denmark; while Austria possess levels similar to their neighbours the Czechs. Though the mtDNA Haplogroups for Austria and Germany were very similar, we find more variance with the Y-DNA Haplogroups and a marked difference in the percentage of the key R1b group R-M269. The lower R-M269 level immediately stands out for Austria. A realistic explanation is that though Hagar was the mother of Ishmael and the mother of the Austrian Germans, her husband, who gave her a child (or children), could likely have been from Peleg’s great grandfather Arphaxad, rather than a direct lineal descendant of Peleg. As Austria has a similar percentage of R-M269 as its eastern European neighbours, coupled with its close geographic, cultural, political and historical ties with Hungary, this lends support for the proposition.

Principal component analysis graphs show that some Austrians are genetically related with Slovenians and Hungarians, while most are closer to Germans, particularly from Southern and Eastern Germany.

As heading west highlights an increase in R1b, travelling eastwards shows the decreasing percentages for both R1b groups. 

Pakistan             R-M269     3%  –  R-U106  0%

Palestine            R-M269     0%  –  R-U106  0%

Middle East       R-M269     0%  –  R-U106  0%

The absence of both of the R1b sub-Haplogroups in the Arab peoples shows how they are not European, western, ‘white’ or descended from Shem. Pakistan also proves that like India, they are not the same as Europeans and are incorrectly classified as Aryan.

The Y-DNA Haplogroups found in Germany and Austria. 

Austria: R1b [32%] – R1a [19%] – I1 [12%] – J2 [9%] – 

E1b1b [8%] – G2a [7.5%] – I2a1 [7%] – I2a2 [2.5%] –

J1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – N1c1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Germany: R1b [44.5%] – R1a [16%] – I1 [16%] –

E1b1b [5.5%] – G2a [5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – J2 [4.5%] –

I2a1 [1.5%] – N1c1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – Q [0.5%]

                                 R1b      R1a     I1     I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2       J1      G2a    

Austria                     32        19      12        7           3           8         9         1          8          

Germany                 45        16      16        2           5           6         5                     5           

Unlike the striking similarity with mtDNA Haplogroups, reflecting shared ancestry from the same mother, the difference in Y-DNA Haplogroups shows a different paternal ancestor for the Germans and Austrians. The higher level of Haplogroup I and especially I1 in Germany is similar to the Nordic and Germanic nations on or near its borders. Haplogroup I1 indicates an older lineage from Shem than the more recent, yet defining marker Haplogroup of R1b for German men descended from Ishmael.

While it could be debated what Abraham’s paternal Haplogroup was, there is no doubting that his male descendants predominantly exhibit the Germanic R1b-U106 mutation. Whereas the Latin men descended from Abraham’s brothers Nahor (northern Italy) and Haran (Switzerland and France) exhibit R1b-U152, with the men of Iberia (Aram) possessing R1b-DF27.

The family connection, yet distinctiveness of the German peoples was discussed by Raymond McNair in a thesis entitled: 

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Here are some interesting excerpts from an article entitled Are We Cousin to the German? by Sir Arthur Keith. 

In the standard Atlases and school geographies the Germans colour Great Britain, Holland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden with the same tint as their own empire, to indicate that all those lands are inhabited by branches of the great Teutonic family… It is an historical fact that the Anglo-Saxons came into lands lying on the western shores of the present German Empire. In the same issue of The Graphic, Sir Arthur Keith illustrated prevalent British and German forms of skulls. He pointed out the marked difference between the typical British skulls when contrasted with that of the average German. Speaking of the typical British and German skull form, he says: 

“The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye. In the majority of BRITON – English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish – the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects predominately backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width (ibid., page 720).” 

Sir Arthur Keith says that “in the vast majority of Germans” the hinder part of the head is “flattened.” He mentions, however, that this “peculiarity of the German skull” is not due to “artificial means.” 

We know that the prominent occiput and flattened occiput are characters that breed true over thousands of years, and that they are characters which indicate a profound racial difference. Even in the sixteenth century, Vesalius, who is universally regarded as the ‘father of Anatomy,’ regarded the flat occiput as a German characteristic… He came, rather unwillingly, to the conclusion that the vast majority of modern German people differed from the British, Dutch, Dane and Scandinavian in head form (ibid., p. 720). 

Some of the North Germans are closely allied to the Danes, Dutch and other Northwestern Europeans. The exact racial affinity of the northern Germanic type to certain other Nordics of North-west Europe yet remains to be clearly demonstrated. But many North Germans have mixed to some extent with their neighbors, thus producing a people closely related to the racial type of Scandinavia, the British Isles, and the Low Countries.’

We will progress further with this subject when we investigate the German immigrants to the United States of America – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Germany having a large and varied population, means it is helpful to break down their Y-DNA Haplogroups into four quadrants – not far removed from the four divisions created after World War II, which were administered by the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, the United States and France.

N Germany: R1b [36%] – R1a [22%] – I1 [18.5%] –

I2a2 [7.5%] – J2 [4%] – G2a [3.5%] – E1b1b [2.5%] –

Q [2%] – N1c1 [1.5%] – T1a [1%] – I2a1 [0.5%] – J1 [0.5%] 

E Germany: R1b [ 36%] – R1a [24%] – I1 [16.5%] –

E1b1b [7.5%] – I2a2 [5%] – G2a [4%] – J2 [2%] –

I2a1 [1.5%] – N1c1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – Q [1%] 

W Germany: R1b [47%] – I1 [12.5%] – R1a [9%] –

E1b1b [8%] – I2a2 [6.5%] – G2a [5%] – J2 [5%] –

I2a1 [2.5%] – N1c1 [2%] – T1a [1.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

S Germany: R1b [48.5%] – I1 [10.5%] – R1a [9.5%] –

E1b1b [8%] – G2a [8%] – J2 [5%] – I2a1 [4.5%] – I2a2 [3%] –

T1a [1.5%] – J1 [1%] – N1c1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

What is immediately noticeable is the strong similarity between northern and eastern Germany and the same similarity between western and southern Germany. 

                      R1b      R1a      I1     I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2      N1C1

East               36         24      17        2           5           8         2          1                

North            36         22      19    0.5           8           3         4          2

West              47           9      13        3           7           8         5          2

South            49         10       11        5           3           8         5       0.5

Germany      45        16      16        2           5           6          5          1

Notice the strong east to west divide between R1a and R1b; as we have encountered in previous chapters on our journey across Europe. The higher levels of R1a in East German men is indicative of intermixing with the peoples descended from Joktan such as the Poles and Czechs – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

Haplogroup I1 is associated with north western Europe and the figures for Germany reflect this gradient. The higher overall percentage for Germany’s R1b at 45% is influenced by the higher population of the southern and western German states with 49% and 47% respectively.

Comparing Germany and Austria’s Y-DNA R1b led Haplogroups, with their Nordic and Benelux cousins, places them interestingly between the two.

                             R1b     R1a       I1      I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b      J2      J1      G2a

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    1

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     1

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                    3

Austria               32        19         12         7            3            8          9          1        8

Germany           45         16        16          2           5            6           5                    5

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        5 

Flanders            61          4          12         3           5            5          4           1        4   

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                    6

Luxembourg     61          3           3          3           6            5          8          3        6

Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Abraham’s son Ishmael and Hagar’s unnamed ‘son’.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Italy                19       3        16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16       45       61

Flanders          5         1        4         5           4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15       33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16       22       38

Wallonia         2                    2        6           6         7       60       67

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7        55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26      32       58

Iceland                                                                    23      42       65

Finland                                         0.5                      5         4         9

Adding Austria and Germany to the continuing table of main Y-DNA Haplogroups for European nations, places them both centrally as indicative of their respective R1b percentages.

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b.

Neither Germany or Austria are remarkable or particularly stand out with any of their Haplogroups; confirming their location in central Europe. It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                       R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal        1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain                2         69      1.5         5           1

Luxembourg   3         61         3         3           6              

France              3         59        9          3          4            

Switzerland     4         50      14          2          8          1

Netherlands    4         49      17          1           7               

Flanders          4          61      12          3          5

Brazil                4         54                  [9]            

Italy                  4         39        5          3           3         

Finland            5           4       28                   0.5      62

Frisians            7         55     [34]           

Wallonia          7         60       11         2           5

Turkey             8         16         1         4         0.5        4  

Greece            12         16         4       10         1.5      

Denmark        15         33      34        2            6         1

Sweden           16         22      37        2            4         7

Germany        16         45      16         2            5         1

Iran                 16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania        18         16         4       28           3        2

Austria           19         32       12         7            3    0.5

Iceland           23        42       29                      4         1

Norway          26        32       32                       5        3

Ukraine          44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia             46          6         5        11                    23

Poland            58         13        9          6          2         4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.

Finland possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Germany and Austria have R1a percentages similar to Denmark and Sweden, while the I1 percentages for the Germans and Austrians resemble those of the Swiss, Dutch and the Flemish.

This completes the descendants of Abraham from his six sons with second wife Keturah and his one son Ishmael, by Sarah’s handmaid Hagar – with their combined descendants comprising the peoples of Scandinavia, Benelux and Germany.

We now turn our attention to the two sons from Abraham’s second son of eight and only child with Sarah, Isaac.

The constant reader will need to hold on to more than just their hats, for if the true identity of Ishmael was not astonishing enough, the following chapter’s revelations concerning the real identity of Esau’s offspring are even more shocking and controversial.

From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

Luke 12:48 Amplified Bible

“True scholarship involves the sincere wish to weed out the errors that we are all plagued with and to accept new understandings with humility of thankfulness. In this spirit I am submitting this research to those who are interested. My best critics will be those who show me, and the rest of the world, just where the truth lies.”

Ernest L Martin 1932-2002

“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”

Winston Churchill

“The surest barrier to advancing truth is the conviction one already has it.”

Kerrie L French

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia

Chapter XXVII

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

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

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

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

An image of a young Abram and Sarai, whom very few would entertain. For Abram was of noble pedigree and warrior stock. Abraham was once young yet invariably depictions of him picture an unflattering rugged old man sporting a long beard and white hair. Albeit – as their descendants demonstrate – Abraham was likely blonde or fair as was Sarah.

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

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

Yes, a small matter of a lack of archaeological evidence hinders the likelihood of a biblical figure being genuine; but doesn’t stand in the way at all, of scientists espousing a belief in an untenable theory to explain mankind’s existence – Article: Chance Chaos or Designated Design? 

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

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

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

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

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

James 2:22-24

Common English Bible

‘See, his faith was at work along with his actions. In fact, his faith was made complete by his faithful actions. So the scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed God, and God regarded him as righteous [like Daniel, Job, Noah and Abel]. What is more, Abraham was called Gods friend. So you see that a person is shown to be righteous through faithful actions and not through faith alone’ – refer article: The Pauline Paradox.

The word friend in Greek is philos. It signifies a deep friendship, where each knows the other and can fully count on them. A close friend of long-standing and one that has been through everything of consequence with you. 

A quite profound reflection of the Creator’s relationship with Abraham, for this was no ordinary friendship – it had transcended to an intimate, special bond between Abraham and the Eternal.

Isaiah 41:8

Darby Translation

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

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

2 Chronicles 20:5-7

New English Translation

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

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

John 15:14-15

New English Translation

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

‘Friend of God’ is the meaning of the name Theophilus. In 2 Samuel chapter twelve, David comforts Bathsheba after the death of their first baby. The second child and David’s seventh son, is named Solomon – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

Verses 24-25 ESV: ‘And the Lord loved him and sent a message by Nathan the prophet. So he called his name Jedidiah [H3041 – beloved of the Lord], because of the Lord.’ Solomon was blessed with a special name, which can also mean friend of God.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

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

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

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

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

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

A somewhat more hairy unit of wealth was the camel, but where the English word “camel” is solely reserved for that humped beast of burden, the Hebrew cognate (gamal), meaning camel, comes from the identical verb (gamal), which means to trade or invest. In other words: the Hebrew noun (gamal) does not denote a specific biological genus, it describes a particular economic function, namely that of investing and long-distance trading… The camel too gets its Biblical introduction in the Abram cycle, namely when the Egyptian Pharaoh reimburses Abram for the Sarai incident with sheep, cattle, donkeys, servants and camels (12:16). 

The next time Abraham’s proverbial camels are mentioned is when Abraham sends his chief of staff (probably Eliezer) north to his family’s land with “ten” camels and the whole of Abraham’s wealth in his hand (24:10), in order to obtain a wife for Isaac…’

Abraham

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

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

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

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

The names Sarai and Sarah both stem from the root (sarar), which possibly means to rule or to be strong. The final (yod) of the original name Sarai suggests a possessive form: my strength or strength(s) of, whereas the new name Sarah reflects the general idea of ruling or being strong. The names Sarai and Sarah reflect the same core idea, but the form Sarai reflects locality and the form Sarah reflects universality. 

Sarah

The same transition between locality and universality is reflected in the names Abram and Abraham, which are both based on the root (‘abar), meaning to be strong (or to be able to protect)… Like Sarai, the name Abram seems to denote a nation’s private strength, whereas the name Abraham, like Sarah, reflects the strength that arises from synchronicity among states.

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

Another detail worthy of note is that the first and last letters of the name (Abraham) are often used as formatives that do not change the meaning of the core word. These two letters obviously aren’t inconsequential formative letters in our name, but if we remove them anyway, what remains is (bara), the assumed root of the noun (berit), meaning covenant. The Lord told Abraham that he would be the father of many nations (‘ab hamon goyim; Genesis 17:4-5) – not simply the father of many people…

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

It should be emphasized that despite the claims of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, neither Jesus nor Abraham has anything to do with any formal religion. Abraham is not a border-maker; he is a border-breaker… His patriarchy is one of consilience; in him are summed up the peacemakers of which Jesus said they would be called Sons Of God (Matthew 5:9).

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

The constant reader will have noted that we can actually decipher the early states and nations and who they are today, even though their names have continuously altered and evolved, their core, original identities have remained and have only to be unlocked. Abraham’s family, including his two brothers were a second wave of nations which arrived on the world stage relatively recently – some nine thousand years after those originating from off the Ark.

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

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

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

Jubilees: ‘… it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son’… he said,

‘What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship, And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. For they are the work of (men’s) hands… on your shoulders do ye bear them… ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them… a misleading of the heart to those who worship them:

And his father said unto him, I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them? … if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee’ … these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.’

Book of Jubilees 12:12-21

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

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

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

Jeremiah 17:9

Amplified Bible

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

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

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

Joshua 24:2

New Century Version

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

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

‘In 1994, archaeologists found an ancient civilization at Gobekli Tepe in southwest Turkey, just 40 km north of ancient Haran’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘It consisted of several temples with large stone-carved monoliths in a circular pattern much like those found at Stonehenge in England… Archeologists were stunned to discover that the site was twelve thousand years old [circa 10,000 BCE – shortly after the Flood]. The intricacy of the carvings on the monuments indicated a far more advanced civilization than historians thought existed at this early time in history.

James Q. Jacobs, an anthropologist and part time astronomer, was investigating the Gobekli Tepe site on Google Earth. He knew of the moon god Sin’s temple at Haran and the Ziggurat at Ur and wondered if there was a relation to the temples at Gobekli Tepe. Google Earth revealed that the latitude at Haran equals Three-fourths atan and the Ziggurat at Ur Three-fifths atan (atan = arc tangent) and that the latitude number at the Ur Ziggurat is an accurate value for pi. The only thing I know for sure about Jacob’s statements is that both pi and atan are significant in higher mathematics. It is incredible that these mathematical calculations are from a society four thousand years old. He opines that Ur and Haran were therefore: 

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

The Ur and Haran moon temples evidence a relationship to astronomy and precise knowledge of geodesy – what we call exact sciences. This knowledge would require an extremely high level of math.”

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

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

Book of Jubilees 12:28-31

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

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

Genesis 12:1-5

Amplified Bible

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

Book of Jubilees 12:22-27

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

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

Genesis 13:17

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

True, the covenant with the people failed… the people sinned, and violated their obligations… the law was added, because of their transgressions, to bridge over, “till the (one) seed should come to whom the promise was made… in favor of the Messianic covenant against all this is, that “the covenant which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law… cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” How could it? We… believe that it could not. All Christendom believes that it could not. And if it could not, neither can the promise concerning a multiplicity of children for Abraham be annulled.’

Abram did not obey in all though, as the command to leave his kindred behind was not adhered to when he allowed Lot to accompany him. How much did Terah* influence Abraham. We have discussed the close relationship between Abraham and Lot, due to their similar age, the death of Lot’s father Haran, and the fact Abraham was childless. But by taking Lot with him, it led to repercussions which caused Abraham considerable trouble – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

David A Snyder:

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

This highlights the important matters discussed previously with regard to first, the different sources of material and writer-editors of the Bible and second; the significance of a shadowy god in the scriptural background. Who at the worst does not always seem to have the best interests of the person or people in question and in the least, interacts with humankind in an abrupt and dismissive manner. 

We have learned that the Ancient of Days has not and does not interact with mankind directly and does so indirectly via His Son – Habakkuk 1:13; John 6:46, 14:6; 1 Timothy 2:5. We have learnt that there is a personage who is not His son, another angel of the Lord – very possibly an entity named Azrael or unknown. Added to this, there is more than one angel of the Lord – refer article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, page 85 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… there are two traditions which make up the books of the Old Testament, the older or Elohist tradition which refers to the deity in generic terms, and the Priestly tradition where the deity is called Yahweh, often called Jehovah, somewhat erroneously, due to [a] mistranslation from the Greek Septuagint. The two main streams are intertwined throughout the Old Testament and sometimes exists side-by-side as, for example, in Genesis where there are two versions of the Creation’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘The god of the Old Testament has many human attributes he is jealous, and vindictive; he does not seem omnipotent for at times he allows evil to exist and often gets into debate with the devil. There are many gaps in the narrative; it is disjointed: jumps abruptly from one subject to another without explanation or resolution. It leaves more questions unanswered than it resolves. 

In the scriptures, the deity is called El (plural Elohim) some of the time and Yahweh the rest of the time. Biblical scholars agree that the usage of Yahweh [the true name of the Creator] appears to be an anachronism and may have been inserted at later times… Elohim is… a plural form… translated as “God”… [and] “Gods” or “divine beings”… because the text is often ambiguous. Generally, the name for the deity is El… when the serpent is tempting Eve he says: “You are not going to die. No, the gods (Elohim) will know… you will be the same as the gods (Elohim)…’

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

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

‘According to Exodus 6:3 the appellation Yahweh did not come into use until the time of Moses, for Moses is told by the deity that “I am Yahweh [‘the One who is’ – Exodus 3:14], I appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as El-Shaddai [God ‘Almighty’], but I did not make myself known to them by my name Yahweh.”

The Hebrew root shaded… means “to overpower,” “to treat with violence,” or “to lay waste”… [giving] the deity a fearful character, that of devastator or destroyer the god of the Hebrews is known as an uncompromising and vindictive god… Shaddai [refer Shaddai, article: Asherah] may be connected linguistically with the Hittite shadu, or mountain…the God of Lightening and Thunder of the Hittites [the storm god – its symbol a Bull]. He was the Anatolian god of the twin mountain^ often depicted with thunderbolts in his hand.’

The god Enlil, lord of the Air*, is also associated with a storm god. Researchers have rightly or wrongly linked El with Enlil and Enki with Yahweh. Baal is typically seen as another name for Satan, though the truth is more subtle. For Baal serves Satan and is a tempter and deceiver described as the prince of the power of the air* in Ephesians 2:2 – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

David A Snyder – emphasis & bold mine:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. El bestows “eternal kingship and dominion” on Ba’al, “Rider on the Clouds” after Ba’al defeats Yam, while in Daniel 7, the Ancient One bestows dominion, glory and kingship upon the son of Man [or the Word, who is not the same being as Ba’al (Lucifer)], who is coming on the clouds of heaven after the beast was slain and its body was thrown into fire to be burnt up (which also occurred in the Ba’al Cycle). 

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

This does not contradict the central edict of monotheism and a unitarian Godhead. The writer is correct regarding the plural thrones (Colossians 3:1), as the Son of Man is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) and has received His authority and rulership from the Ancient of Days, his Father. In fact, Christ will share his throne with those who overcome – Ephesians 2:6; Revelation 3:21.

A massive assumption has been made by the writer – because of his Trinitarian bias – to call the Son of God, God** the Son, as this is not biblical or supported by scripture – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. The plural thrones of the Ancient of Days and the separate person of the Son of Man is an anathema not just to the Jewish and Islamic faiths but also to orthodox Catholic and Protestant Christians. Some do not believe the Nicene Creed and they are applauded for not swallowing the Universal Church’s agenda inspired, dogma – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

Those who do, would do well in searching the scriptures, as the commended Bereans did (Acts 17:10-11) as well as taking to heart what Christ’s half-brother, says in Jude 1:3. It is incomprehensible that any faith believing, Christ affirming Christian, would claim to worship a Father and Son, that they do not even know. They run the risk of being ensnared in the words of the Messiah. 

Matthew 25:12

Amplified Bible

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

Snyder continues: 

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

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

Ba’al on the other hand is not to be confused with Yahweh (El). Baal is none other than the being called in scripture by a number of titles and descriptions, including: Beelzebub, Lucifer (Heylel) and the Serpent in Eden. His personal name is not included in the Bible, though other sources reveal it to be Samael.

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

Psalm 110:1

English Standard Version

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

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

Abraham of Ur, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… by the 14th century BC the god El had become a primary god controlling the actions of the other gods in the pantheon. The pantheon of Canaan, found in the Ugaritic texts, is called Elohim, which means the children of El or the children of god. 

El is referred in Ugaritic literature as “Bull El” or the bull god, “creator of creatures and mankind”, and “creator eternal” which would indicate that by this time in history, the concept of a creating god, was beginning to enter Canaanite polytheism. There is a single tablet found at Ugarit titled “El’s Drinking Party” which displays he was quite promiscuous in his early days, which will become an issue when he is compared to Yahweh in many scholarly studies. 

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

Bicameral: ‘having two branches, chambers, or houses, as a legislative body’.

Snyder: ‘An Assembly of gods would be nothing new to Abraham since the epic stories of Sumer and Akkad frequently referred to gods conspiring together. One superior god [Yahweh*] within the pantheon established a new dynamic in polytheism, creating a four-tier hierarchy within the assembly.

The first place was held by the supreme god [El*] and his consort [Asherah] such as Ea in Akkad and El in Canaan. The second place is held by the royal children [archangels], the third place is held by gods who serve the royal family[Cherubim and Seraphim], and the fourth place is held by minor deities who assist all the gods such as messenger-gods [angels].

This pantheon was anthropomorphic since it was arranged along the same lines as their society. There are signs that the Israelis, who lived among the Canaanites, also placed their God within an assembly of gods. 

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

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

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

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

Though the author is promoting El as less than than who He is; nevertheless, El remains the Creator and Baal His nemesis, Samael the principal tool of the Adversary – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Asherah.

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

‘The Athamas of Greek Mythology, as the King of Orchomenus a city founded by Minyas, was a well known Minyan. Abraham and his family were said to have been from Ur of the Chaldees. These two statements fit together because the Minyans were the Armenians (Ur-Manneans indicating those from the mountains [ur] of Minni), and the Armenians of Urartu were famously known as the Chaldians of Urartu… there are fairly convincing connections between the Greek, Minyas, and the Armenians’ – refer Urartu: Chapter XVII Lud & Iran; and Chadeans: Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

‘Historians know well these People and call them the Manneans, or the kingdom of Van. This group lived in the mountains*, (alternately known as, the Gordyan or Cordyaean mountains by Berosus, and as, the Chaldean mountains by Xenophon)’ – refer Haran*: Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

the Manneans, are known to have been largely composed of Hurrians* it seems reasonable to assume that the Hurrians were so called after Ur, the homeland of Abraham (The pre-Canaan home of Abraham, the city of Haran, named for Abrahams brother, and the surrounding quod-city area, including the cities of Nahor, named for either Abrahams brother or his grandfather, Pethor the home of Balaam, and Carchemish were also settled, according to modern archaeologists, by the Hurrians).’

Genesis 13:2

Amplified Bible

‘Now Abram was extremely rich in livestock and in silver and in gold’ – Article: The Ark of God.

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

We have learnt – in the previous chapter – that Abraham was a magnetic personality and a good speaker and how local people in Haran and its environs were drawn to him and sojourned with his family when they travelled to Egypt and then returned later to both Haran and Canaan. A wanderer’s life appeals to some people and a life with Abraham would have been an interesting adventure. The fact that Abraham had the wherewithal to meet with other kings and go to battle against them, lends credibility to the understanding that Abraham was more than merely aristocratic and was in fact royal himself and perhaps a king in his own right. 

David Snyder:

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

We discussed previously the Battle of Siddim from Lot’s perspective (Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran) and we shall look at it again when we study Amalek, a grandson of Esau – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Now, the aspects surrounding this event from Abraham’s experience – also refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.

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

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

Genesis 6 Giants – emphasis mine:

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

The last two men’s names are remarkably similar to the names given in the Book of Jasher 7:16, for two of Arphaxad’s three sons: Shelach (or Shelah), Anar and Ashcol – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

‘When the right opportunity presented itself, Abraham and his men came upon Chedorlaomer’s camp in the dead of night, took the confused, frightened foe by surprise, put them to a rout, rescued Lot and his fellow captives, and recovered all Chedorlaomer’s plundered goods.’

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

‘The fact that this is one of the greatest battle areas to be mentioned in scripture is also notable. Indeed, the path of the invading armies foreshadows the destiny of the promised land (and of Abraham) as they practically circumvent almost the entire borders of modern Israel. Although the practical objective was to free the Cities of the Jordan plain from the Mesopotamian rule, God’s agenda was for Abraham to rescue Lot’s family. So the fact that the kings of the Jordan plain were victorious, this was so because Abraham was fighting on their side (even though he and his 318 men were not under their command). Abraham made a point that he was not under them when he refused to take plunder from the battle. This action is salient for two reasons, one worldly and one spiritual. 

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

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

Genesis 14:17-24

English Standard Version

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

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

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

Isaiah 9:6

English Standard Version

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

Jeremiah 23:5-6

English Standard Version

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

Psalm 110:4

English Standard Version

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

Hebrews 5:5-10

English Standard Version

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

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

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

Hebrews 7:1-16

Common English Bible

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

4 See how great Melchizedek was! Abraham, the father of the people, gave him a tenth of everything he captured. 5 The descendants of Levi who receive the office of priest have a commandment under the Law to collect a tenth of everything from the people who are their brothers and sisters, though they also are descended from Abraham. 6 But Melchizedek, who isn’t related to them, received a tenth of everything from Abraham and blessed the one who had received the promises. 7 Without question, the less important person is blessed by the more important person. 8 In addition, in one case a tenth is received by people who die, and in the other case, the tenth is received by someone who continues to live, according to the record. 9 It could be said that Levi, who received a tenth, paid a tenth through Abraham.

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

The author of Hebrews, very likely Apollos – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Pauline Paradox – explains that Melchizedek has apparently just appeared post-flood, with no discernible genealogy and that he is like the Son of God, not that he is the Son of God. 

The author then explains the irony of Abraham, who fathers by descent, Jacob’s son Levi who was the progenitor of Israel’s priesthood; is at the same time paying a tithe to a person who is not descended from Levi, or part of the Levitical priesthood, yet prefigures that priesthood. Rather, Melchizedek is a Priest of a different order. Similarly, the Word was from the tribe of Judah, not Levi, yet is another priest like Melchizedek, forever in the same priestly Order. The true identity of Melchizedek may have to remain a mystery much like the life of Melchizedek himself. There is an account in the Book of Enoch – if reliable – which is an explanation as to why his presence on the Earth was seemingly from nowhere. 

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

The brothers hid the child, so that others would not kill him. Like Noah when he was born, Melchizedek had an ethereal appearance. Prior to the flood, Nir was told that his son would not perish. A messenger angel – purportedly Michael – came and took Melchizedek from the Earth after forty days; possibly to the same plane and existence, as Enoch – Genesis 5:24. Nir, losing both his child and wife in quick succession, died soon after from a ‘broken heart.’ Mysteriously, Melchizedek was prophesied to reappear in the twelfth generation after the flood – Abraham was the eleventh counting Noah – becoming King of Salem. 

Melchizedek and his Uncle Noah, may have had the same similarity, in sharing very fair, white skin, red or blond hair and blue eyes. It was Methusalah who had chosen to skip his son Lamech and his eldest grandson Noah, to pass the priestly line of Seth to his other grandson Nir. Noah was a prophet – as well as of royal pedigree – but was he a priest? Genesis 8:20 would perhaps indicate otherwise, in addition with the example of King David being a king and priest – 2 Samual 6:17-19. Regardless, it transpired that the priestly line was kept alive and continued from antediluvian to postdiluvian epochs via Melchizedek. 

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

Zechariah 4:1-14

English Standard Version

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

9 “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you. 10 For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plumb line in the hand of Zerubbabel. “These seven are the eyes of the Lord [Messenger angels], which range through the whole earth” – refer article: The Seven Churches: A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 11 ‘Then I said to him, “What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?” 12 And… the two golden pipes from which the golden oil is poured out?” 13 He said to me, “Do you not know what these are?” I said, “No, my lord.” 14 Then he said, “These are the two anointed ones [the two witnesses] who stand by the Lord of the whole earth” – Revelation 11:1-12.’

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

The two witnesses prophesy and appear to fulfil the role of prophets. As they are specially anointed, could they be priests or both? – Exodus 29:6; Leviticus 8:12; Psalm 133:2. Enoch is not mentioned in scripture as a priest, yet his interaction with the Nephilim hints at a priestly role, particularly as he is mentioned as the seventh from Adam, via the priestly line of Seth by Jude – the half-brother of Christ. The pairing of Enoch with Melchizedek is worth considering. The fact that both Enoch and Melchizedek were alive to witness and interact with the Watchers and their Nephilim offspring in their respective epochs is especially significant; as the two witnesses go up against Nephilim, in the guise of Nimrod – the False Prophet – and a fallen dark Angel, in the guise of Azazel, the Beast – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Revelation 11:1-13

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple [the people] of God and the altar [originally in the Garden of Eden (Article: The Eden Enigma)] and those who worship there [true believers], 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple [originally in Eden]; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations [originally the land of Nod], and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months [beginning with the abomination of desolation]. 3 And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days [3 1/2 years], clothed in sackcloth [symbol of mourning].”

4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. 5 And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. 6 They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire.’ 

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

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

9 For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb, 10 and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents [the month of December and Christmas – the tenth month of the sacred calendar], because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth. 11 But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them [and they are resurrected], and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them. 13 And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.’

Genesis 15:1-19

Common English Bible

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

6 Abram trusted the Lord, and the Lord recognized Abram’s high moral character.’

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

Genesis: 7 ‘He said to Abram, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land as your possession.” 8 But Abram said, “Lord God, how do I know that I will actually possess it?” 9 He said, “Bring me a three-year-old female calf [1], a three-year-old female goat [2], a three-year-old ram [3], a dove [4], and a young pigeon [5].” 10 He took all of these animals, split them in half, and laid the halves facing each other, but he didn’t split the birds. 11 When vultures swooped down on the carcasses, Abram waved them off. 12 After the sun set, Abram slept deeply. A terrifying and deep darkness settled over him. 

13 Then the Lord said to Abram, “Have no doubt that your descendants [seed] will live as immigrants [strangers] in a land that isn’t their own, where they will be oppressed slaves [in Egypt] for four hundred years. 14 But after I punish the nation they serve, they will leave it with great wealth. 15 As for you, you will join your ancestors in peace and be buried after a good long life. 16 The fourth generation will return here since the Amorites’ [Nephilim and Elioud giants] wrong doing won’t have reached its peak until then.” 17 After the sun had set and darkness had deepened, a smoking vessel with a fiery flame passed between the split-open animals. 18 That day the Lord cut a covenant with Abram: “To your descendants I give this land, from Egypt’s river to the great Euphrates, 19 together with the Ken-ites [possibly descended, from the line of Cain], the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites… [Nephilim infiltrators, trying to thwart Abraham and his descendants from their inheritance].’

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

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

Genesis 16:1-16

English Standard Version

‘Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 

3 So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan [from 1902 BCE to 1892 BCE], Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram… 4 And he went into Hagar, and she conceived. And when [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress [Sarai]. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her.’

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

Hebrews 11:11

English Standard Version

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

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

The author of 1 Peter (not the Apostle Peter, refer article: The Pauline Paradox), states: ‘For example, Sarah accepted Abraham’s authority when she called him master. You have become her children when you do good and don’t respond to threats with fear’ – 1 Peter 3:6, CEB.

Genesis 17:1-26

English Standard Version

1 ‘When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, 2 that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.”

3 Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, 4 “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude [H1995 – hamown: ‘company, many, great number, abundance’] of nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.

6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful [especially the tribe of Ephraim], and I will make you into nations [plural], and kings [from the tribe of Judah] shall come from you. 7 And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. 8 And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.”

Abraham of Ur, David A Snyder, 2014:

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

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

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

Genesis: ‘Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised [every male]. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant [until the new Covenant, Romans 2:29, Matthew 26:28]. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.’

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, pages 127-128:

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

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

David A Snyder, 2014:

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

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

Snyder – emphasis mine:

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

Genesis 18:1-33

English Standard Version

1 ‘And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. 2 He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men [angels] were standing in front of him. 

When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth 3 and said, “O Lord [H136 – Adonay: lord, as in the Son of Man (Psalm 110:1)], if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant. 4 Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet [indicative of the foot washing at the last supper, John 13:1-13], and rest yourselves under the tree, 5 while I bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on – since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.”

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

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

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

22 So the men [two angels] turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord [the Son of Man… who was not Melchizedek]. 23 Then Abraham drew near and said, “Will you indeed sweep away the righteous [Lot and his family] with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” [Acts 10:42] 26 And the Lord said, “If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

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

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

Genesis 21:1-7, 34

English Standard Version

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

The promised son and heir-proper to Abraham, Isaac, was finally born to Sarah and Abraham in 1877 BCE, one hundred years after Abraham’s birth. In Genesis chapter twenty, Abraham moves to the Negeb in the southwestern region of Canaan or the northeastern limits of Egypt depending on your interpretation. Abimelech ruled the area and it was located where the Philistines* officially settled from Crete nearly one thousand years later.

The view of Bible detractors is that this anachronism* of term proves the Bible is fantasy, rather than understanding that the passages have been written and edited later, with the term Philistine added for clarity on the location. It is possible that the children of Caphtor from Casluh (and Pathros), as well as from Aram originally dwelt here before their migration to the Aegean Sea and that these were a residue of their people. Alternatively, early migrations of Minoans may have already begun. It would explain why the main body of them migrated from Minoan Crete to this exact same location – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America

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

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

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

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

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

So, there were two hands at work in this particular narrative, and this fact explains the otherwise strange repetition of several famous incidents recorded in the narrative. And it is in the second telling of the incident of the abduction of Abram’s wife, Sarai (later Sarah), that we get the name of the ruler who, in the first telling of it is called simply “Pharaoh”. He is “Abimelech” (20:2). 

Admittedly, there are such seeming differences between the two accounts, as regards names, geography and chronology, as perhaps to discourage one from considering them to be referring to the very same incident; and that despite such obvious similarities as:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Again, there is no contradiction geographically between Egypt and Gerar because we are distinctly told in Ishmael’s account that it was just before the family went to Egypt (12:11) that Abram had told his wife that she was to be known as his sister. Gerar is on the way to Egypt, and in a later Volume we shall encounter an Egyptian king who also had control over Gerar (or southern Geshur). Finally, whether the one whom Isaac calls “Abimelech” was still, in Isaac’s day, “Pharaoh” of Egypt – as he had been in former times – he most definitely was, at least, ruler over the Philistines at Gerar. Perhaps he ruled both lands, Egypt and Philistia. 

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

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

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

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

If Pharaoh Narmer is Naram-Sin – notice the Sin suffix as pertaining to the Moon god (refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans) – then Abraham may have already known Naram-Sin while living in Shinar, or if not, then probably his family. It would also explain how Egypt was united into one kingdom and the beginning of the First Dynasty. Where there is disagreement, is on which Pharaoh met with Sarah and Abraham; since an unconventional chronology points to Hor-Aha’s son and third ruler of the 1st Dynasty, Pharaoh Djer instead. 

Coupled with this, this writer would disagree with the linkage of the names or titles of ‘Manium’ and ‘Min’ with Menes and thus concluding Menes was a different person. Evidence leans towards Narmer and Menes being the same person where, Narmer meaning ‘painful, stinging, harsh’ or ‘fierce’ (as well as raging catfish), is a Horus name… and Menes, a birth name.

Genesis 22:1-19

English Standard Version

1 ‘After these things God [H430 – ‘elohiym: ‘one’ of the gods] tested [H5254 – nacah: did tempt or try] Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am. [1] 2 He said, “Take your son, your only son [of promise] Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah [Mount of Olives in Jerusalem], and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you” – refer article: The Eden Enigma.

3 ‘So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac. And he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. 4 On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar. 5 Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy [H5288 – na’ar: young male] will go over there and worship and come again to you.”

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, page 88:

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

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

Habakkuk 1:12-13

New King James Version

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

Hebrews 9:24-28

English Standard Version

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

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

Psalm 11:5

New King James Version

‘The Lord tests the righteous…’

Job 2:6

English Standard Version

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

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

Matthew 4:1, 7

English Standard Version

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

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

Psalm 106:34-39

English Standard Version

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

Isaac is described as a boy or a lad and this has been misleading, as it has inferred that it was sprung upon him by Abraham and that he may not have been a willing participant once he understood that he was in fact the sacrificial lamb – a type of the promised Messiah (Genesis 22:4, Isaiah 53:7). The Hebrew word na’ar can be translated as ‘child, youth, young’ or even ‘babe.’ In this context with Isaac being male it could be boy or lad. The translators have assumed Issac must have been a child or teenager at most. 

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

Genesis: 6 ‘And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac his son. And he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So they went both of them together.

7 And Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am [2], my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” 8 Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.”

So they went both of them together. 9 When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid [H7760 – siym] him on the altar, on top of the wood.’

The Hebrew word for laid has various meanings. The English word laid suggests Abraham cradled a boy in his arms. Yet in different contexts it can mean the following: ‘to put, place, set, appoint, make, direct, determine, plant.’ In reference too Isaac a young man, it can mean to fix, extend and to put upon. While a struggle with Isaac is not inferred at all in the scripture, it can also mean: ‘lay violent hands on.’

Genesis: 10 ‘Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son.’

While this image is inaccurate in its depiction of Isaac, it realistically portrays the dramatic unfolding of events.

11 ‘But the angel [Messenger – Mal’ak] of the Lord [Yahweh] called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am” [3].

12 He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.”

13 ‘And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”

Notice, it is not El-Shaddai (or Yahweh) who calls out to Abraham. Not even the shadowy figure of the original tempting Elohim, but rather the Angel of the Lord (the Messenger of Yahweh) who intercedes on the Eternal’s behalf.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hebrews 11:8-18

Common English Bible

8 ‘By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was going to receive as an inheritance. He went out without knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he lived in the land he had been promised as a stranger. He lived in tents along with Isaac and Jacob, who were coheirs of the same promise. 10 He was looking forward to a city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God… these people died in faith without receiving the promises, but they saw the promises from a distance and welcomed them. They confessed that they were strangers and immigrants on earth. 14 People who say this kind of thing make it clear that they are looking for a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking about the country that they had left, they would have had the opportunity to return to it. 16 But at this point in time, they are longing for a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God isn’t ashamed to be called their God – he has prepared a city for them [Revelation 21:1-3]. 

17 By faith Abraham offered Isaac when he was tested. The one who received the promises was offering his only son. 18 He had been told concerning him, Your legitimate descendants will come from Isaac.’

It was a monumental request to sacrifice his one and only son born from his wife Sarah, who had been specified as the heir for all the promises and blessings to derive from him. With Sarah well past child bearing age – it would require an additional miracle conception – yet Abraham’s faith, meant he knew the Creator could replace Isaac if that was His intention. For instance, Seth replaced Abel who was also a type of the future Saviour. Further, Abraham would have also believed in the Eternal’s power to resurrect Isaac, if that had been His purpose.

In Abraham, we have one of the prime examples of what is desired and acceptable to the Creator in all of the history of humankind. In Genesis 26:5 ESV, the promise is repeated to Isaac, with the Creator saying: “because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.”

God doesn’t leave much out and nor does obedience get much better than Abraham’s example. Abraham was the consummate believer in the Eternal. He set the bar immeasurably high. Abraham being a truly difficult act to follow, is a grand understatement. Abraham the true friend of God, well may be the most honourable human follower of the Creator who has ever lived, next to His very own Son and John the Baptist – Matthew 11:11.

Genesis 25:7-11

English Standard Version

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

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

Chapter 23:1-7

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

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

Due to the time frame, Zohar* the Hittite was descended from the son of Canaan, Heth and not those people living later, called the Hittite empire in Anatolia. This would have been the last of the Black people living in Canaan as nearly all would have already migrated to northwestern Africa, southwest of Phut, who in turn were westwards of Egypt. The land of Canaan had been steadily swamped with Nephilim as evidenced by the cities of the plain – Sodom and the others – and the Battle of Siddim. Later, some of Abraham’s other children returned into the region. We have closed with the ending of Abraham’s life in Genesis chapter twenty-five with his sons Isaac and Ishmael – both to be discussed further in subsequent chapters – and now turn our attention to his subsequent six sons which he sired with his second wife, Keturah.

Keturah

Genesis 25:1-6

English Standard Version

‘Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah.

2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian*, Ishbak, and Shuah.

3 Jokshan fathered Sheba* and Dedan*. The sons of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, and Leummim.

4 The sons of Midian were Ephah*, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah.

All these were the children of Keturah. 5 Abraham gave all he had to Isaac. 6 But to the sons of his ‘concubines’ [Hagar and Keturah] Abraham gave gifts and while he was still living he sent them away from his son Isaac, eastward to the east country.’

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

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

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

1 ‘… Abraham called Ishmael, 2 and his twelve sons, and Isaac and his two sons [Esau and Jacob], and the six sons of Keturah, and their sons. 2

And he commanded them that they should observe the way of Yahweh; that they should work righteousness, and love each his neighbour, and act on this manner amongst all men; that they should each so walk with regard to them as to do just judgment and righteousness on the earth.

11 And he gave to Ishmael and to his sons, and to the sons of Keturah, gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son, and he gave everything to Isaac his son.

12 And Ishmael and his [twelve] sons, and the [six] sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in all the land which is towards the East facing the desert. 13. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs [Arabians], and Ishmaelites.

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

One could say, they were the original Arabs and that the sons of Mizra have appropriated that name. Similar to sons of Shem and the Nephilim each being known as Canaanites, where the original sons of Canaan had first dwelt in ‘Palestine’ and their name had been appropriated. It is hoped the constant reader now cognisant of this repeating pattern, does not require elaboration. 

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

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

We are not told who Keturah was or where she was from. One source claims she was from Japheth, though this does not fit the paradigm of Abraham’s descendants – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium. Images online invariably render Keturah as a black woman. This is as equally misleading. The Book of Jubilees hints that they she may have descended from Abraham’s family from either his brother Nahor or likely Haran; but judging by the close, yet distinct Haplogroups (and autosomal; DNA) for Keturah’s descendants it would appear that she may have been from another line of Arphaxad – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

Book of Jubilees 19:11

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

We are therefore looking for a cluster of smaller nations which have shared the blessings promised to Abraham and his kindred. We would expect them to be dwelling near or next to Nahor in (northern) Italy; Haran in Switzerland; and Moab and Ammon in France – as well as Ishmael as we shall discover – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

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

We know surprisingly little about Keturah. We don’t know from what nation she came, who her parents were or whether she outlived Abraham or not. 

Some Jewish sages have proposed that Keturah and Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, are the same person, but there’s no evidence in the text to support this, and this proposition is ultimately fantastic [agreed]. 

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

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

This is a startling accurate depiction of the forward thinking, progressive and liberal societies which typify the modern nations of Keturah’s sons.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis & bold mine:

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

Keturah’s children travelled in a south easterly direction into Arabia. We have studied the Mitanni in Mesopotamia and their descent from Nahor and possibly in part from Shem’s son Aram; though not from Abraham – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

The Parthians we will learn are linked to Abraham, but an alternative line of his family and not from Keturah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. We have also studied the connection between Moses and King Solomon with the castes of India and thus any association with Abraham’s name is both possible and plausible – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut

Rather than along the shores of the Baltic Sea and the descendants of Joktan from Arphaxad, the offspring of Keturah are in fact dwelling on the other side of the Baltic Sea; along the shores of the North Sea and Norwegian Sea. Comprising the liberal democratic northwestern European nations of Scandinavia and the Low countries. Historically, by most within the identity movement, these nations have been incorrectly espoused as the descendants of Jacob and therefore identified as part of the so called lost tribes of Israel.

The first born son of Keturah is Zimran. He is not mentioned outside of Genesis and 1 Chronicles. Four out of the six sons may have some interplay regarding their exact identity and any advanced understanding or definitive information is welcomed. Putting what pieces there are together, Zimran is the nation of Norway. Norway has a population of 5,622,516 people. Abarim Publications defines Zimran as meaning: ‘One Who Makes Music’ (H2175) or ‘One Who Prunes’ based on the the verb zamar, to ‘prune or praise.’ Specifically, to ‘prune trees in an orchard or vineyard’ or ‘to hone a crowd into a choir.’

Norwegian man and Icelandic woman 

Norway’s kingdoms were united by Haraldr Harfagri during wars of the 860s and early 870s, though Norway at this time only comprised the southern third of the modern country. From 1450 the kings of Denmark ruled Norway. Norway insisted on an election process to confirm the king, usually after they were proclaimed in Denmark. From 1536, governors were appointed to manage the country’s interests. Following the Napoleonic Wars, Sweden became the senior partner. 

Norway gained full independence from Sweden on June 7, 1905, when Sweden withdrew from the Union to avert war. The Norwegian government asked Prince Carl of Denmark to become the country’s new king. He arrived during a blizzard on 25 November, with his wife Maud – the daughter of King Edward VII of England – and his son Alexander – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Carl changed his name to the more agreeable Haakon VII and was welcomed as the first Norwegian king for six hundred years. The royal anthem is sung to the same melody as that of England’s God Save the Queen, which is also Liechtenstein’s anthem, though understandably with different lyrics.

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

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

The fifth son of Abraham and Keturah is Ishbak. He is not mentioned outside of the genealogical record either, though it appears that Ishbak is the nation of Iceland. Iceland has a population of 398,212 people. Abarim Publications gives the following meaning: Leaving, He will forsake from the verb shabaq. Also offered are: ‘He will abandon’ or ‘He will set free.’ An additional meaning includes: ‘He releases’ (H3435).

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

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

The term Nordic refers to Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland principally, though it can also include Scotland, Northern Germany, the Netherlands and with a stretch, Russia. Whereas Scandinavia* – originating from Scania a small region on the peninsula, the southern tip of modern Sweden from which the three peoples sprang – strictly refers to the three kingdoms of Norway, Sweden and Denmark, as these three are bound intrinsically in their shared ethno-cultural Germanic heritage and related languages. More broadly, it can include Iceland and the Faeroe Islands on related languages and ancestry – as borne out by DNA and Haplogroup identity – and Finland on geographic, economic and political grounds. 

The Finns, unlike Icelanders are descended from a different Arphaxad lineage and are separated from Scandinavia genetically; by their Finno-Ugric language; and proximity to Russia, geographically and historically – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

The third born son, who is only listed in the Biblical family tree in Genesis chapter twenty-five and in 1 Chronicles One, is Medan, the modern nation of Denmark. 

The identification includes the Faeroe Islands, with 55,993 people and Greenland, with 55,571 people. Denmark has a population comparable with Norway of 6,002,212 people. The meaning of Medan according to Abarim Publications is: Strife or Judgment from the noun madon, meaning strife and from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’ It can also mean: ‘contention’ (H409) or ‘discord’ (H4091). 

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

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

Danish man and Swedish woman

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

On the 2023 Global Innovation Index, where 132 countries are ranked, Denmark is the ninth most innovative country in the world. Recall Finland was placed at number six and Switzerland was ranked number one in the world.

The sixth and youngest son of Keturah is Shuah. Shuah is the nation of Sweden. Sweden has a population of 10,656,041 people. Abarim Publications give the meaning of Shuah as: ‘brought low, to sink, be bowed down’ or ‘humbled, prostration; a cry’ and ‘prosperity’ from the verbs shuah, which ‘denotes a motion towards a low position’ and from shawa, ‘to cry out for salvation.’

Abarim – emphasis mine:

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

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

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

Job 2:11

English Standard Version

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

Bildad is also mentioned in Job 8:1-22; 18:1-21 and 25:1-6. We will discuss Bildad again in a later chapter – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Job 42:7-9

English Standard Version

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

It was from the eighth century that the Scandinavian Vikings expanded outwards, building an extensive trading network across Europe and beyond. The Norwegians and Danes travelled west into Britain and Ireland, while the Swedes ventured eastwards. The eastern bound Vikings were different from the western in that they were descendants of Keturah. They penetrated deeply into the vast lands of modern Russia, following the navigable rivers, creating trading connections as far south as the Byzantine empire. By the ninth century they had trading settlements in the eastern Baltic and in the lands of the Rus – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

The Swedish Vikings founded their own states, where a Viking nobility ruled Slavic populations, such as that of Polotsk. In 970 CE, Eric the Victorious became the first King of Sweden. In 1249, Finland became part of Sweden after the Second Swedish Crusade led by Birger Jarl. The year 1252 saw the city of Stockholm established and in 1319, Sweden and Norway were united under the rule of Magnus IV. Danish forces invaded Sweden and executed rebellious nobility in the Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520. Three years later, Sweden declared independence from the Kalmar Union when Gustav Vasa was hailed as the new King of Sweden.

Flag of Sweden

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

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

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

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

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

Sweden punches above its weight with a GDP of $620308 billion in 2025, making it the 25th largest economy in the world. Sweden has a competitive economy and a high standard of living, with a mix of free-enterprise in tandem with a generous social welfare state. ‘Sweden’s manufacturing economy relies heavily on foreign exports, including machinery, motor vehicles, and telecommunications.’

On the 2023 Global Innovation Index, where Denmark ranked ninth, Sweden was ranked an impressive 2nd in the world behind Switzerland in first place.

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

The second son of Keturah is Jokshan. Jokshan is the ancestor of the peoples comprising the nations of Belgium and Luxembourg. The population of Belgium is 11,758,406 people and Luxembourg has 680,377 people. 

The Belgium Flag and Coat of Arms – Unity Makes Strength

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

It would appear to be a clue in identifying Dedan and highlighting a unique tripartite relationship, which is only replicated one other time with Haran, Canneh and Eden in Switzerland – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The only other similar occurrence in the world today, is in part reflected in England, Wales and Scotland – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Isaiah 15:5 

English Standard Version

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

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

Asshur-im: ‘happy people, upright people, to be level, straight up’ or ‘just.’ The word can means ‘steps’, as in taking steps to go somewhere.

Letush-im: ‘metal workers’ from the verb latash, to hammer or sharpen. ‘[The] NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Sharpened. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Artificers, or Hammerers’ [of weaponry].’ Letush can also mean ‘oppressed’ or ‘strong.’

Leumm-im: ‘peoples’ from the noun le’com, nation, people.’ It refers to ‘communities’ from the root word ‘to gather.’

Job 1:15

English Standard Version

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

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

Ezekiel 27:23

English Standard Version

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

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

Job 6:19

English Standard Version

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

Isaiah 60:6

English Standard Version

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

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

Isaiah 21:13

English Standard Version

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

Jeremiah 25:23-24

Young’s Literal Translation

Dedan, and Tema, and Buz, [all that are (in the) utmost (or farthest) corners] And all cutting the corners (of the beard), And all the kings of Arabia [Western Europe], And all the kings of the mixed [mingled] people, Who are dwelling in the wilderness… [Eastern Europe]’

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

Jeremiah 49:8

Complete Jewish Bible

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

Ezekiel 25:13

Amplified Bible

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

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

Ezekiel 27:19-21

Common English Bible

Vedan [Dedan (or ‘even Dan’)] and Javan [Archipelago Southeast Asia] from the region of Uzal [Greece] traded with you. They exchanged wrought iron, cinnamon, and spices for your wares. Dedan was your agent for saddle blankets [military products]. Arabia [Western Europe] and all the princes of Kedar [leading tribe of Ishmael] traded for you. They procured lambs, rams, and goats for you.’

Dedan is associated with a leading son (or clan) from Ishmael, Kedar and both are spoken of as trading with the mighty Tyre, which is a near future Brazilian led South American alliance. Dedan’s three sons reveal three components in southern Belgium’s composition. Dedan’s sons include the Walloons of Wallonia, the separate Brussels-Capital region and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

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

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

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

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

Belgian men

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

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

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

Belgian women

‘The Brussels-Capital Region has the same status as Flanders and Wallonia within the federal structure… though it measures only 161 [square km] (barely 0.5% of the national territory) its population of one million [plus] represents 10% of the national total. An enclave within Flanders, it is primarily French-speaking – around 85% of inhabitants speak French… [though] officially the region is bilingual… Brussels is not only the capital of Belgium and of the European Union, but also of the “French” [speaking communities]… of [both] Brussels and Wallonia, [as well as] the Flemish community and region.’ 

Many people incorrectly assume that the term Walloon applies to all Belgian French speakers; including those born and living in the Brussels-Capital Region. The mixing of the population over preceding centuries means that most families can trace their ancestors from ‘both sides of the linguistic divide’ in Brussels. The local dialect – Brussels Vloms – is a Brabantic dialect that reflects ‘the Dutch heritage of the city.’ The status of Brussels in a partitioned Belgium is uncertain and a source of considerable debate, with a variety of options that are all complex. Forming a city-state as a European capital district, similar to Washington DC or the Australian Capital Territory are suggestions; as is an extended Brussels region, so that its borders reach Wallonia. 

Belgium’s 2025 GDP is $684.86 billion making it the 23rd largest world economy, two ahead of Sweden. Belgium, a trade and transport hub, has a diversified economy with a mix of services, manufacturing and high tech industry. Its heavy integration with the rest of the European economy, means Belgium is highly sensitive to swings in the overall economic performance of its neighbours.

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

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

The fourth and most prominent son of Keturah is Midian. Midian comprises the Dutch people of the Netherlands. The country has a population of 18,345,692 people – the 10th highest in Europe. Abarim give the meaning of Midian, similar to Medan as: ‘strife’ and ‘place Of Judgment’ from the noun madon, strife, which derives from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’

Midian is mentioned in the Bible numerous times and had five sons of his own, though only one is mentioned once in scripture. The Midianites are the dominant descendants from Keturah. They have had a close association with Ishmael, with the name ‘Midianite’ being interchangeable and they have also had a close link with Moab and Ammon when seeking to fight their adversaries, the sons of Jacob. The Midianites were a successful trading people, building economic wealth like their cousins Sheba and Dedan.

Midian’s eldest son is Ephah, his name meaning: ‘gloom[y], covering’ from the noun ‘epa, gloom, from the verb ‘up, to use wings or cover. 

It can also mean ‘volant’ [moving lightly, nimble] and ‘darkling.’ The ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List translates this name with Dark One; Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Darkness.‘ Ephah is also a word used for a dry measurement of grain and is approximately twenty litres. Another Ephah is mentioned as a second wife of Caleb, as well as part of Jahdai’s family in Judah – 1 Chronicles 2:46-47. 

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

Hanoch or ‘Enoch’ is the third son of Midian. His name means: ‘inaugurated, trained’. ‘Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… proposes initiated… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads dedicated [or (God’s) follower H2585] for the ‘name Hanoch is also a name of one of Reuben’s sons [Reuben, the eldest son of Jacob].

Midian’s fourth son is Abida[h]: ‘father of knowledge, the [or my] father knows [H28], my father took knowledge’ from the noun ‘ab, father, and the verb yada’, to know.

Midian’s fifth and youngest son is Eldaah: ‘God has called, knowledge of God’ or ‘God is knowledge.’ The name can also mean: ‘God has known’ [H420] or ‘called of God.’

Dutch men

Genesis 37:25-28, 36

English Standard Version

‘Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites [H3459 – Yishma’e’liy: God will hear] coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother [Joseph] and conceal his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites [H3459], and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him. Then Midianite [H4084 – Midyaniy: strife (Midian)] traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites [H3459] for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt. Meanwhile the Midianites [H4092 Mdaniy: (Midianite) a variation of H4084] had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard.’

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

This is clue number one, that we are not dealing with literal Midianites, but ‘Midianites’ from the region of Midian. Clue two, is the fact that Ishmaelites are mentioned three times to the two used for Midian and clue three is in Genesis 39:1 ESV: “Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there.” The traders were Ishmaelites from Midian who purchased Joesph and then sold him.

Once we uncover the identities of Ishmael and Joseph, there is symbolic national significance in this act by Ishmael – as there is also with the true identity of Judah – in the weighty ramifications of selling Joseph in the first place. Anciently and again in modern times, Ishmael and Midian have been immediate adjacent neighbours. The use of the term Midianite for Ishmael will become readily apparent when we study Ishmael in the succeeding chapter – Chapter XXVIII – The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Frisian woman (above) and Dutch woman (below)

Exodus 2:11-25

English Standard Version

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

15 When Pharaoh heard of it, he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and stayed in the land of Midian.’ 

Moses fled Egypt in 1486 BCE at the age of forty. The Pharaoh in question and the Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus forty years later, has received an enormous amount of scholarly debate. We will study the chronology of the Exodus and the respective identities of Moses’ adoptive Egyptian mother and father in depth when we study the tribe of Levi and Moses’ life – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? For now, the Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ personal exodus from Egypt was the sixth king of the Twelfth Dynasty: Amenemhet III.

Exodus: ‘And he sat down by a well. 16 Now the priest of Midian [H4080 – Midyan] had seven [H7651 from H7650 – Sheba] daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock’ – refer article: Seventh Son of A Seventh Son. 17 ‘The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and watered their flock. 18 When they came home to their father Reuel[*1], he said, “How is it that you have come home so soon today?” 19 They said, “An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds and even drew water for us and watered the flock.” 20 He said to his daughters, “Then where is he? Why have you left the man? Call him, that he may eat bread.”

21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah [H6855 – Tsipporah: ‘bird’ Acts 7:29]. 22 She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom [H1647 ‘foreigner’], for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land” [like Abraham]. 23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel – and God knew.’

Exodus 3:1

English Standard Version

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

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

‘Jewish legends suggest Jethro had seven names, all conveying his transformation from an idolatrous priest to a priest of God… along with, Heber[*3], Putiel[*4], and Keni[*5 – Kenite?]… legends recorded that a Pharaoh immediately before the Exodus maintained three famous high Priests during the latter part of the Israelite enslavement in Egypt: Job, Balaam, and Jethro. Jethro was regarded as the High Priest of a Library of Stone Tablets [precursor perhaps of the Ten Commandments, Exodus 32:15-16] in some versions. 

Pharaoh did not welcome the pre-Exodus advice provided by Jethro about the growing Israelite problem, banning the priest Jethro-Reuel in disgrace… which was ample motive for Jethro to have helped Moses prepare for his return to Egypt.’

Moses’ father-in-law was also called Hobab(*6), who was the son of Raguel (or Reuel)[*7] – LXX Septuagint, Numbers 10:29. There is much confusion caused by all these names, especially as Reuel was also known as Jethro, meaning ‘his excellence’ from H3502, Yithrah. The name Hobab (H2246) means ‘cherished’ or ‘loved fervently.’

According to Josephus, Hobab had ‘Iothor [or Jethro] for a surname.’ Jethro’s descent is given as: son of Nawil, son of Rawail, son of Mour, son of Anka, son of Midian, son of Abraham. Josephus claims that Raguel (or Reuel), was Moses’ father-in-law and Judges 4:11 clearly states that he was known as Hobab. ESV: ‘Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, the descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent as far away as the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh.’ Some commentators claim that Jethro was an honorary title, while Reuel was his personal nameReuel [H7467, Re’uw’el] means, ‘one who is intimate with God’ or Friend of God – the very title given to Abraham. Raguel is another version of this name – refer Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exodus 18:1-27

English Standard Version

‘Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people, how the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2 Now Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, had taken Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her home, 3 along with her two sons. The name of the one was Gershom (for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”), 4 and the name of the other, Eliezer [H461 ‘God is help’] (for he said, “The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”). 5 Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife to Moses in the wilderness where he was encamped at the mountain of God. 

6 And when he sent word to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you with your wife and her two sons with her,” 7 Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. And they asked each other of their welfare and went into the tent. 

8 Then Moses told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardship that had come upon them in the way, and how the Lord had delivered them. 9 And Jethro rejoiced for all the good that the Lord had done to Israel, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians.

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

13 The next day Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. 14 When Moses’ father-in-law saw [not blind at this point in time] all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand around you from morning till evening?” 15 And Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.”

17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone. 19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you! You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. 

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

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

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

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

Numbers 10:1-2, 29-32

English Standard Version

‘The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Make two silver trumpets. Of hammered work you shall make them, and you shall use them for summoning the congregation and for breaking camp. And Moses said to Hobab the son of Reuel the Midianite [H4084], Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’

Come with us, and we will do good to you, for the Lord has promised good to Israel.” But he said to him, “I will not go. I will depart to my own land and to my kindred.” And he said, “Please do not leave us, for you know where we should camp in the wilderness, and you will serve as eyes for us [Jethro not blind]. And if you do go with us, whatever good the Lord will do to us, the same will we do to you.”

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

Judges 1:16

Common English Bible

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

We have learned that Jethro may have been descended in part from related ancestor Lot (the French), that he was a priest of ‘Midian’ and that his father Reuel was a ‘Midianite’. Though the Hebrew word used is not the one used for the name of the original Midian. Does this mean he was a Midianite as in ethnology or just in a geographic context? Similarly, if Jethro is a Kenite, are they separate from the Midianite proper – living with them – or a distinct tribe originating from the land of Midian? 

Plus, a branch of the Kenites – those descended from Jethro – may have attached themselves to the tribe of Judah and or then, the Amalekites who are affiliated with Edom – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Judges 4:11

Common English Bible

‘Now Heber [1] the Kenite [H7017] had moved away from the other Kenites [H7017], the descendants of Hobab [2], Moses’ father-in-law, and had settled as far away [far removed] as Elon-bezaanannim [‘removing, wandering’], which is near Kedesh [northern part of the tribes land in Israel equating to those of Zebulun or Naphtali].

Remember well the association with Zebulun – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. It appears that part of the Kenite people were either associated with the tribe of Judah, or actually were from the tribe of Judah. The most plausible answer is that they had intermarried. The Rechabites were a clan of the Kenites and their progenitor was Hammath [3]; though not Hammath the son of Canaan (Genesis 10:18) – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

The following verse is from the end of one genealogical record of the House of Judah. 1 Chronicles 2:55, RSV: “The families also of the scribes [H5608 – caphar: learned men] that dwelt at Jabez: the Ti’rathites, the Shim’e-athites, and the Su’cathites. These are the Ken’ites [H7017] who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.” The Rechabites as scribes would have been given respect for their standing, as we read in in 2 Kings chapter Ten, when Jehu – an adversary to wicked King Ahab of Israel, who ruled from 874 to 853 BCE – invites Jehonadab the son of Rechab to assist in slaughtering every last soul in a Temple of Baal worshippers. 

Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite (H7017) – Judges 4:17. Deborah the prophetess and a Judge of Israel blessed Jael in her victory song because of her resolute courage in killing Sisera, the enemy of Israel – beginning a period of forty years of peace, lasting from 1184 to 1144 BCE. When King Saul was commanded to destroy the Amalekites, he honourably advised the Kenites to move away from their neighbours and allies, the Amalekites in order not to be slaughtered along with them.

1 Samuel 15:6

English Standard Version

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

The Kenites acted as guides in the wilderness – just as Moses had requested Jethro to act as a guide for the Israelites – even so, the prophesied fate of the Amalekites and the Kenites was apparently tied together. We will study Amalek separately in a later chapter – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Numbers 24:21-22

Common English Bible

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

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

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

English Standard Version

2 “Go to the house [family] of the Rechabites and speak with them and bring them to the house [temple] of the Lord, into one of the chambers; then offer them wine to drink.” 6… “We will drink no wine, for Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, commanded us, ‘You shall not drink wine, neither you nor your sons forever. 7 You shall not build a house; you shall not sow seed; you shall not plant or have a vineyard; but you shall live in tents all your days, that you may live many days in the land where you sojourn.’

8 We have obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, in all that he commanded us, to drink no wine all our days, ourselves, our wives, our sons, or our daughters, 9 and not to build houses to dwell in. We have no vineyard or field or seed, 10 but we have lived in tents and have obeyed and done all that Jonadab our father commanded us. 16 The sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have kept the command that their father gave them, but this people [Judah] has not obeyed me.

17 Therefore, thus says the Lord, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the disaster that I have pronounced against them, because I have spoken to them and they have not listened, I have called to them and they have not answered.”

18 But to the house of the Rechabites Jeremiah said, “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Because you have obeyed the command of Jonadab your father and kept all his precepts and done all that he commanded you, 19 therefore thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Jonadab the son of Rechab shall never lack a man to stand before me.”

The Rechabites fled to Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar the Chaldean began subjugating the Kingdom of Judah. The Rechabites were spared – and their line continued – because of their faithful adherence to the commands of their forefather Jonadab. Whereas Judah who had not heeded the Creator’s warnings suffered punishment at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar II – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

In verse two, the Lord calls for the Rechabites to be brought into His House, where figuratively there are many chambers or rooms. John 14:2, ESV: “In my Father’s house are many rooms…” The obedience of the Rechabites was in contrast with the disobedience of the Kingdom of Judah – principally comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin – who, for all their outward piety and devotion in performing the required animal sacrifices, were not wholly obedient to the Creator in their worship. Rather than the Rechabite Kenites being a line of Cain, they are in fact the exact opposite and were an extraordinarily obedient people, who did not own property or farm land. A line of Cain, would not be summoned by the Eternal to His temple.

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

It was an honour for Jonadab and his descendants to stand before the Lord. The Tribe of Levi were selected to stand before the Lord in Deuteronomy 10:8, in special service. Moses and Samuel (Jeremiah 15:1) and Elijah all stood before the Lord – 1 Kings 18:15. As did King David who even danced before the lord – 2 Samuel 6:14.

We have spent time on Jethro’s Kenite lineage and the offshoot branch of the Rechabites, yet there is another famous and righteous person with a similar yet distinct descent. The question remains: were the Kenites descended from Midian; Judah; someone else entirely; or a mixture?

Joshua 14:6-14

Common English Bible

‘In Gilgal, the people of Judah approached Joshua. Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite  [H7074 – Qnizziy: descendant of Kenaz] said to [Joshua], “You know what the Lord said to Moses, man of God, about you and me when we were in Kadesh-barnea. I was 40 years old when Moses the Lord’s servant sent me from Kadesh-barnea to scout out the land [in 1444 BCE]. I brought back a report to him of what I really thought. My companions who had gone up with me made the people’s heart melt. But I remained loyal to the Lord my God. So Moses pledged on that day, ‘The land on which you have walked will forever be a legacy for you and your children. This is because you remained loyal to the Lord my God.’

Now look. The Lord has kept me alive, exactly as he promised. It is forty-five years since the Lord spoke about this to Moses. It was while Israel was journeying in the desert. Now look. Today I’m 85 years old [in 1400 BCE]. 

I’m just as strong today as I was the day Moses sent me out. My strength then was as my strength is now, whether for war or for everyday activities.

So now, give me this highland that the Lord promised me that day. True, the Anakim [Elioud giants] are there with large fortified cities, as you yourself heard that day. But if the Lord is with me, I should be able to remove them, exactly as the Lord promised.” So Joshua blessed him. He gave Hebron to Caleb, Jephunneh’s son, as a legacy. So Hebron still belongs to Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite as a legacy today. This was because he remained loyal to the Lord God of Israel.’

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

In Genesis chapter thirty-six we read of the sons of Esau. Esau had five sons with ostensibly, three women – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. One son already mentioned was Reuel – the family (surname) name of Jethro. Another son was Eliphaz and Esau had a grandson by Eliphaz called, Kenaz; who was also a chief of Edom – Genesis 36: 11, 15, 42.

It is interesting to note that Caleb had a grandson called Kenaz – 1 Chronicles 4:15. And to underscore the family name further, Caleb also had a younger brother called Kenaz (Joshua 15:17, Judges 1:13; 3:9-11) and it was his son Othniel, who was the first Judge of Israel from 1342 to 1302 BCE and had ‘the Spirit of the Lord… upon him…’ As with the Kenites, it is difficult to equate the Kenizzites with an evil pedigree, when each example constitute men displaying obedience and righteousness.

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

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

Genesis 15:18-21

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 169:

‘The Incorruptible* Race of giants is the mysterious race that… Cain [and his posterity] have all allegedly and eagerly connected themselves to in legend. Cain… claimed a more royal and divine legacy, void of Adamite impurity, which the posterity of Cain, in turn, pollinated into the people of day six [the Neanderthal]. The Gnostic gospels record that not only Noah survived the deluge but also many people from the Immoveable* Race did and that they were guided to a certain place within a luminous cloud to ensure they survived the flood. The Nephilim and the Immoveable Race survived because of the intercession of fallen angels saving them and their illicit legacy from utter destruction, all to poison the postdiluvian world…’

The ancient land of Canaan and its many peoples is a complex issue. It has perplexed biblical scholars and secular historians alike. We have studied the first inhabitants of the land, the literal sons of Canaan who left their imprint in the region before fully migrating to northern and central Africa – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. There was a residue of these true Canaanites in the land, as humans and Nephilim were mixing and living in ancient cities such as Sodom, Hebron and Jericho. Ephron the descendant of Heth, son of Canaan, lived in the region and sold his field at Machpelah to Abraham.

The Nephilim and Elioud had been roaming the earth for thousands of years after the flood – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. They were instrumental in all the titanic building structures and otherworldly architectural feats around the globe; from Stonehenge in England to the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, Machu Pichu in Peru and the Statues (Moai) on Easter Island. 

Pyramids of Giza

At a certain point – at least by the time of Abraham for they were there then and possibly arrived much earlier – most Nephilim and their Elioud descendants converged on the land of Canaan; for these were the second wave of inhabitants in Canaan. Why Canaan? Because they were aware of the promises of the Creator; that His chosen people would descend from Abraham and ultimately dwell in Canaan. The Nephilim and Elioud were ready and waiting. This is why the Creator’s instructions were brief yet uncompromising – kill them all

Machu Pichu

The Creator did not instruct the sons of Jacob – the fledgling Israelite nation – to murder Black people, or even White people, it was a plain and clear instruction to exterminate the giants who were there to do the exact same thing to Israel, if the sons of Jacob didn’t pre-emptively strike first. The young Israelite nation failed these simple instructions and allowed many to live amongst them. It was only some four hundred years later that King David finally eradicated the problem of the Elioud giants from the land of Canaan.

Easter Island

The land of Canaan had numerous clans of Nephilim as we have already studied – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. The principal seven nations the Israelites were instructed to exterminate were the Canaanites – a specific tribe by that name, not the broad definition of the term – Perizzites, Jebusites, Girgashites, Amorites, Hivites and Hittites. Notice the last five are inherited names from sons of the original Canaan. To add to the complex mix of inhabitants, there was a third wave of people. 

These were different descendants from Shem and they were a spill over from Mesopotamia; including: Aramaeans (Syrians) and Arphaxad (Akkadia and Sumer) to the North; the Arabian Peninsula, including Keturah and Ishmael to the East; and from Egypt, Caphtor (Casluh and Pathros) to the South. We have looked at the Aramaean and Amorite connection previously – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. There was also the Phoenician migration to the northwestern coast and the Minoan (Philistine) immigrations to the southwestern coast – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. Some of the descendants of Abraham and Keturah as well as Ishmael, had ventured into the land of Canaan, though they also continued northwards to Anatolia and the Aegean Sea. 

Finally Moab, Ammon and Esau with Amalek his grandson, also moved into the south western portion of the land of Canaan. In time, at least one son of Keturah was known by sons of Canaan’s names – possibly others – and also Ishmael, just as some of the Nephilim tribes. Two prominent examples of this name transference, are the Hivites from the name Hiv and the Hittites called after Heth – Genesis 10:15, 17. 

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

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

Joshua 24:11 and Judges 1:4

English Standard Version

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

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

Four hundred years after Joshua lived, King David retook the city. 1 Chronicles 11:4-8, ESV: “And David and all Israel went to Jerusalem, that is, Jebus, where the Jebusites were, the inhabitants of the land. The inhabitants of Jebus said to David, “You will not come in here.”

Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion, that is, the city of David. David said, “Whoever strikes the Jebusites first shall be chief and commander.” And Joab the son of Zeruiah went up first [reportedly building an underground water shaft or tunnel to enter], so he became chief. And David lived in the stronghold; therefore it was called the city of David. And he built the city all around from the Millo in complete circuit, and Joab repaired the rest of the city.”

David bought the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite and later built the Temple on that location – 2 Samuel 24:16-25. Archaeologists have confirmed that the original inhabitants of Jerusalem were Jebusites.

The later Amorite name was applicable to Gether’s descendants from Aram. 

Ezekiel 16:45-46

English Standard Version

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

These verses are interpreted by some to prove that the Israelites were a bastard or mixed nation. This chapter is actually addressed to Judah about her sinful ways. The identities here are types or euphemisms and not literal lines of descent. Samaria is a sister as it refers to the Kingdom of Israel. 

The Hittites here are a people descended from Shem who had influence on Judah – and were related to them – as did the Aramaean-Amorites. The Amorites included Nephilim in their midst and had two famous Giants as their kings – one being King Og, the other King Sihon.

Deuteronomy 4:47

English Standard Version

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

1 Kings 21:25-26

English Standard Version

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

2 Kings 21:11-13

English Standard Version

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

The most evil king in Israelite history was King Ahab and for Judah, it was King Manasseh – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Both are compared to the Amorites in setting a standard of corruption like no other before them or afterward. Baal was the Amorite’s chief god and Baal’s wife (consort) was Ashtoreth, their chief goddess – the same goddess as Ishtar in Chaldea, Astarte in Greece and Venus in Rome (Article: Lilith).

Their worship involved human sacrifice, temple prostitution and orgies. There have been many temples, high places, stone pillars and altars excavated in the land of Israel. Some of the sites contained large numbers of containers with the remains of young children who had been sacrificed to Baal – refer articles: Na’amah; Belphegor; Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

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

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

Exodus 23:28

English Standard Version

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

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

Joshua 11:19

English Standard Version

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

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 238 – emphasis & bold mine:

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

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

Judges 3:3, ESV: “These are the nations: the five lords of the Philistines and all the Canaanites and the Sidonians and the Hivites who lived on Mount Lebanon, from Mount Baal-hermon as far as Lebo-hamath.”

The southern Hivites were the residue of Canaan’s children and Nephilim descended Elioud giants. 

It is the northern Hivites which are of more interest, as there is a connecting ethnic link between these Hivites, Midian, the Kenites, the later Phoenicians from Sidon and the Dutch – German and French – Afrikaner settlers in South Africa. There could be a connection between Midian and the Hivites of Nephilim extraction, or likely an unusual coincidence, as the Dutch for example have the tallest male average height in the world and the second tallest women average height in the world according to a 2016 survey. 

Previously, we have discussed the early Phoenician link between Tyre, the Portuguese and descended peoples of Brazil – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Strabo wrote that the Phoenicians originated ‘from the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula.’ The later Phoenicians of Sidon were different from those at Tyre and today equate to the Dutch of the Netherlands. As part of the children of Keturah, they migrated from Arabia and settled in the Sidon coastal area. 

They were master traders, explorers, ship builders and sailors; similar to Tyre in the past. In recent centuries, it has been the Portuguese and Dutch – non-coincidently – who have exhibited the Phoenician legacy with the exact same traits. The African beginnings of Sidon’s heritage have been represented in the nation of South Africa – refer Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa.

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

The northern Hittites on the other hand, constituted a great kingdom of confederated states, occupying the whole of northern Syria between the Mediterranean Sea and the Euphrates; extending also as we shall learn, over much of Asia Minor from Armenia to the Aegean Sea. This is why in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Reverend T K Cheyne says: “The Hittites seem to have been included among the Canaanites by a mistake.”

One could include the Hivites and the blond Amorites in this context. The southern Hittites with the Hivites and Amorites, were part of the seven Canaanite nations – a blend of the minority Black descended Canaanites and majority Nephilim infiltration. The northern Hivites and Amorites – Aramaeans descended from Gether – like the Hittites, were descended from Shem and it is these Hittites that Cheyne is referring to. Once this is understood, any apparent secular-biblical crossover contradictions, regarding who, when and where for these peoples, dissolve. 

Numbers 22:4, 7

English Standard Version

‘And Moab said to the elders of Midian, “This horde [the sons of Jacob] will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field”… Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time… So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message.’

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

Those who even have a passing knowledge of European history during the decades encompassing 1600 to 1820 will recognise which country France in particular (and Holland) displayed antagonism towards; were in competition with; continually in conflict either militarily, politically or via trade routes; and in colonial territorial disputes.

Numbers 25:1-18

English Standard Version

1 ‘While Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to whore with the daughters of Moab. 2 These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods – Revelation 2:14. 3 So Israel yoked himself to Baal of Peor – Psalm 106:28, Hosea 9:10. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. 4 And the Lord said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people and hang them in the sun before the Lord, that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.” 5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Each of you kill those of his men who have yoked themselves to Baal of Peor.”

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

9 Nevertheless, those who died by the plague were twenty-four thousand – Deuteronomy 4:3, 1 Corinthians 10:8. 10 And the Lord said to Moses, 11 “Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the people of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I did not consume the people of Israel in my jealousy. 12 Therefore say, ‘Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace, 13 and it shall be to him and to his descendants after him the covenant of a perpetual priesthood [until replaced by Christ], because he was jealous for his God and made atonement for the people of Israel.” 

14 The name of the slain man of Israel, who was killed with the Midianite woman, was Zimri the son of Salu, chief of a father’s house belonging to the Simeonites.’

Notice the name of the Simeonite, Zimri bears resemblance to the name of Keturah’s first son, Zimran – Geneses 25:2.

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

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

It would appear that the sons of Jacob were very easily influenced by the religions and false gods of their neighbouring nations; who were in reality, extended family. As they followed the gods of Moab and Ammon (French), they also worshipped the same gods of Midian (Dutch). A case in point, is the false god outlined in Numbers chapter twenty-five, prominent amongst the Moabites and Midianites, Baal of Peor – refer article: Belphegor.

Peor was a mountain located on the Abarim range in Moab: Beth-peor – Numbers 23:28, Deuteronomy 3:29. This god was known as Peor (Numbers 31:16, Joshua 22:17), with the title Baal meaning, lord. It is sometimes associated with the national Moabite deity, Chemosh – 2 Kings 23:13, Jeremiah 48:46.

All Baal worship was synonymous with licentious sin, though Baal Peor ‘especially called for sensual indulgence.’ According to Rabbinical literature, ‘the worship of this idol consisted in exposing that part of the body which [people] usually take the utmost care to conceal’ with the idol’s symbol being a giant phallus. Baal Peor was also known as Ba’al Phegor, or more commonly today as the latinised, Belphegor – pronounced  as bell-fih-gore. Its name meaning: ‘Master of the Opening’ or ‘Gap’. The Hebrew word peor derives from the root word pa’ar, meaning: ‘open, gap, wide’ or ‘hole.’

According to Professor Geller on Mythology

‘He is a shape shifter, delighting in using this ability to deceive mortals. His most common forms are polarized in their appearances. He will take the form of a beautiful woman, naked in all her glory, to seduce those who would fall for his wiles. He also appears as a terrible demon, with leathery flesh, huge horns, long sharp teeth [a beard] and fingernails… a gaping mouth [wings and a tapered tail]. He was a phallic deity, associated with sex, orgies, and all forms of debauchery… Belphegor is one of the many demons [and one of the seven princes of hell] with the attribute “Baal,”… [though] As one of the fallen angels, Belphegor was originally a member of the order of principalities…’

Belphegor allegedly presides over twenty-six legions of demons and is referred to as the Lord of Sloth, one of the seven cardinal sins. Belphegor is invoked by persons today who wish to find fame, fortune or power through invention; often with as little effort as possible. Most demonic invocations fail. Likewise with Belphegor, whose ‘true mission is to draw the lazy into the sin of Sloth.’

Acceptable offerings to Belphegor, though somewhat puzzling, are farting and excrement. Yet, as Belphegor is the lord of openings or holes, Talmudic tradition asserts Belphegor’s association with exposure, defecation and faeces. Thus, Belphegor is linked to the god Pet and wind (or gas); Crepitus, a Roman god of flatulence; as well as Priapus, a fertility god with an oversized and permanent erection. 

Notice in Numbers twenty-five, verse one it states Israel lived in Shittim. Though the Hebrew word means ‘acacia wood’, the similarity of Shit-tim with the slang word for faeces is undeniable. It was at Peor, where worship included eating ‘beets, drinking strong drink’ and exposing oneself in front of the idol. Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki, otherwise known as Rashi, comments that the people would uncover their anus and relieve themselves; incorporating the act into deviant sexual practices. 

What is especially of eldritch interest, is the fact that first Belphegor was a deity of the ancient Moabites, whose descendants comprise much of the French nation – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. To which country is Belphegor an ambassador of Hell? It is France no less and especially the capital, Paris. As a deity of debauchery, Belphegor apparently became ‘enamoured with the seedier side of the nation… and the [capital] in particular.’

Belphegor is considered an adversary of Mary Magdalene, the patron saint of France – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

Numbers 31:1-18, 32-34

English Standard Version

1 ‘The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Avenge the people of Israel on the Midianites… 3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. 4 You shall send a thousand from each of the tribes of Israel to the war.” 5 So there were provided, out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6 And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand from each tribe, together with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand. 7 They warred against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every male [adult].’ 

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

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

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

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

While we will learn that the Dutch are closely related to their near neighbours (and brothers) in Scandinavia as well as the related peoples of Germany; they unsurprisingly bear a strikingly close genetic kinship with the British and Irish as well.

Keturah may have been from the family of Nahor (1) – northern Italian – and therefore much younger as Isaac’s wife Rebecca and Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel were and with the gene pool continuing to remain similar on both parent’s sides. It is also possible that Keturah was from Haran’s family (2) – Swiss – like Sarah. Or the third option, the one considered the most probable, is that Keturah like Hagar who was Ishmael’s mother, was – from either a different though still inherently similar line from Peleg (3a) – Western Europe – or perhaps more likely still, from another son of Arphaxad (3b), possibly equating today to the peoples of Finland for example – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

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

English Standard Version

1 ‘The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord gave them into the hand of Midian seven years [from 1191 to 1184 BCE]. 2 And the hand of Midian overpowered Israel, and because of Midian the people of Israel made for themselves the dens that are in the mountains and the caves and the strongholds. 3 For whenever the Israelites planted crops, the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Joktan] would come up against them. 4 They would encamp against them and devour the produce of the land, as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey. 5 For they would come up with their livestock and their tents; they would come like locusts in number – both they and their camels could not be counted – so that they laid waste the land as they came in. 6 And Israel was brought very low because of Midian. And the people of Israel cried out for help to the Lord.

11 Now the angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth at Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the winepress to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him, “The Lord is with you, O mighty man of valor.” 

13 And Gideon said to him, “Please, my lord, if the Lord is with us, why then has… the Lord… forsaken us and given us into the hand of Midian.” 14 And the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours and save Israel from the hand of Midian; do not I send you?” 15 And he said to him, “Please, Lord, how can I save Israel? Behold, my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.” 16 And the Lord said to him, “But I will be with you, and you shall strike the Midianites as one man” – Isaiah 66:2.

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

Gideon – who was the fifth Judge of Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE – then asks the Angel of the Lord for a sign. He prepares a goat and unleavened bread (the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread – March/April).

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

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

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

32 ‘Therefore on that day Gideon was called Jerubbaal, that is to say, “Let Baal contend against him,” because he broke down his altar. 33 Now all the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Joktan] came together, and they crossed the Jordan and encamped in the Valley of Jezreel. 34 But the Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon, and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites were called out to follow him. 35 And he sent messengers throughout all Manasseh [his own tribe], and they too were called out to follow him. And he sent messengers to Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali [all in northern Israel], and they went up to meet them.’

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

36 ‘Then Gideon said to God, “If you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said, 37 behold, I am laying a fleece of wool on the threshing floor. If there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground, then I shall know that you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said.” 38 And it was so. When he rose early next morning and squeezed the fleece, he wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water.

39 Then Gideon said to God, “Let not your anger burn against me; let me speak just once more. Please let me test just once more with the fleece. Please let it be dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground let there be dew.” 40 And God did so that night; and it was dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground there was dew.’

The Book of Judges chapter seven relates how Gideon whittled down thirty-two thousand men [the same number of Midianite girls saved from slaughter] to just three hundred as the Lord decreed, so that Israel’s strength of numbers wasn’t given credit instead. As with the taking of Jericho, trumpets were blared and these led to the Midianites panicking and beginning to mistakenly kill each other before fleeing – refer Jericho/trumpets, article: The Ark of God.

One of the Princes of Midian was named Zeeb and reminds of the Netherland Province called Zee-land. In like manner the name and word elon (Hebrew for oak, strong) appears a number of times in the Old Testament in relation to the tribe of Zebulun. We shall discover a connection between the descendants of Zebulun and Midian in none other than South Africa.

It is a compelling coincidence then that businessman and inventor extraordinaire Elon Musk (the ‘wealthiest’ man in the world) should have – while a varied ethnic background – one which is dominated on his mother’s side by Canadian (English); it is on his father’s side English and Afrikaner (Dutch, French Huguenot, German) which is of even more interest.

A correlation that will bear relevance for the constant reader as we progress.

Judges 7:23-25

English Standard Version

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

Isaiah 10:26

English Standard Version

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

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

Judges 8:10-12, 22-34

English Standard Version

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

22 Then the men of Israel said to Gideon, “Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also, for you have saved us from the hand of Midian.” 23 Gideon said to them, “I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the Lord will rule over you.” 24 And Gideon said to them, “Let me make a request of you: every one of you give me the earrings from his spoil.” (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.) 25 And they answered, “We will willingly give them.” And they spread a cloak, and every man threw in it the earrings of his spoil.

26 And the weight of the golden earrings that he requested was 1,700 shekels of gold, besides the crescent ornaments and the pendants and the purple [a colour of Phoenicia] garments worn by the kings of Midian, and besides the collars that were around the necks of their camels. 27 And Gideon made an ephod of it and put it in his city, in Ophrah. And all Israel whored after it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family. 28 So Midian was subdued before the people of Israel, and they raised their heads no more. And the land had rest forty years [from 1184 to 1144 BCE] in the days of Gideon.’

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

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

Isaiah 60:6

English Standard Version

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

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

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

Leviticus 19:36

New English Translation

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

Proverbs 20:10

New English Translation

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

As Ephah is the first born son of Midian and inferred as the most prominent; so too have the people of the two provinces of North Holland and South Holland on the western coast, been dominant during Dutch history – with the Netherlands widely known as, or called: Holland. 

This usage of the name Holland, is accepted by other countries and is also employed by the Dutch; though those from regions outside Holland, may find it misrepresentative to use the term for the whole nation. Netherlands means ‘low-lying country’ and the name Holland is from Houtland, or ‘Wooded Land.’

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

Habakkuk 3:6-7

New English Translation

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

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

The Etruscan civilisation has long held a strong fascination for many people. For instance, the renowned author D H Lawrence, fell in love with the Etruscans in his closing years and explained his infatuation:

“Myself, the first time I consciously saw Etruscan things, in the museum at Perugia, I was instinctively attracted to them. And it seems to be that way. Either there is instant sympathy, or instant contempt and indifference. Most people despise everything B.C. that isn’t Greek, for the good reason that it ought to be Greek if it isn’t. So Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him… So being a great scientific historian, he almost denies the very existence of the Etruscan people. He didn’t like the idea of them. That was enough for a great scientific historian.”

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

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

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

Etruscan Origins – emphasis mine:

‘Etruscans were famed for their naval prowess! [and possibly as one of the sea peoples of the 14th-13th centuries BCE]. People with [Iranian – Turkish/Anatolian (geographic)] ancestry arrived in Sicily in around 1900 BC! Ancient genome samples were similar to Mycenaean Greece and Minoan Greece samples. Etruscans arrived in Italy during the Mycenaean period. In 1894, Paul Kretschmer… suggested an Etruscan substrate in Indo-European languages, and since then Etruscan/Tursenoi/Tyrrhennian was considered by a handful of European scholars as the pre-Greek substrate which [constitutes] a large part of the Greek vocabulary.

Congratulations to all European scholars in the last 140 years, including Italian linguists and scholars, who have offered evidence for the migration of the Etruscans from the Near East [also]… Minoans [Philistines] and Mycenaeans [Greeks] were genetically similar… however, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry… another research paper… suggests the arrival of people to Anatolia from the Caucasus and/or Iran around 3800 BC.

Considering this genetic study together with… Etruscan genetic studies, we can decisively conclude that the founders of Minoan and Mycenaean Greek and the Etruscan civilizations migrated from Turkey! [Further], DNA analysis in 2016 and 2017… identified a massive expansion, or a series of expansions, from Mesopotamia and/or [the] surrounding area.’

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

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

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

This is significant, as we will learn that the relationship shared between Midian and the ‘Midianites’ of Ishmael, comprises not only a geographic proximity and similar culture but also a parallel linguistic origin and language group as shown in blue above, which includes Dutch and German.

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

The Lion of the Netherlands 

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

The territorial reach of the Etruscan civilisation attained its maximum area circa 750 BCE, during the foundational period of the Roman Kingdom. Its culture flourished in three confederacies of cities; Etruria – comprising Tuscany, Latium and Umbria – the Po Valley and Campania. According to legend, there was a period between 600 to 500 BCE in which an alliance of the Dodecapolis, or the Etruscan League was formed among twelve Etruscan settlements. The Etruscans dominated northern Italy until their influence over the burgeoning Roman Republic on their southern border, gradually declined and with it their territory.

After 529 BCE, the balance of political power shifted away from the Etruscans in favour of Rome. The Romans grew to perceive the Etruscans as ‘former colonial masters’ thus colouring the relationship between the two peoples. It led to a series of long running wars beginning in 477 BCE. Rome and the powerful Etruscan city of Veii – which Rome saw as a rival and threat – went to war. A year later in 474 BCE, Veii’s navy was destroyed by Hieron of Syracuse at Cumae and the city was forced to agree a treaty with Rome. 

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

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

The Etruscans flourished for a couple of centuries prior to their collapse; which was not entirely due to Roman aggression. The Etruscans had stablished city states – similar to Greece – but as they didn’t use money, they did not have the essential economic underpinning to endure like the Greek states. Nor did they establish a powerful unified state under one ruling emperor. For there are no signs of any palaces and the burials reflect a very wealthy upper class, but no sign of one individual elevated above the rest.

Thus they were engulfed by Rome’s rising consolidation of power. Many cities became Roman municipia – chartered towns. In Imperial Rome, stemming from envy, ‘the fat Etruscan became a figure of fun’. Eventually the rich land of Etruria flourished again, but as part of the growing Roman Empire. The Etruscans, predominately descended from Midian may have quite possibly included Sheba and Dedan, as the Flemings and Walloons have been unified within the Low Countries in modern times.

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

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

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

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

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

However, the researchers also found that genetic continuity could be generated if the mtDNA mutation rate was set very high (0.5 mutations per million years as opposed to commonly used lower rate of approx. 0.05 mutations per million years per nucleotide) or if gene flow from other areas was so extensive that Etruscan descendants became underrepresented in the modern Tuscan samples. They concluded, however, that the very high mtDNA mutation rates needed to reproduce genetic continuity were “implausible” and, furthermore, the only way to determine if descendants were underrepresented in the study was to collect more modern samples over time. Thus, the study concluded that modern-day Tuscans largely descend from non-Etruscan ancestors [correct]. Regarding the fate of the Etruscans, the suspicion voiced by the researchers was that the Etruscan lineages simply went extinct’ [incorrect].

This article tells us two things. First, the modern people of Tuscany have inherited the Etruscan name; but as the descendants of Abraham’s brother Nahor, they are not the Etruscans of two thousand to two thousand, five hundred years ago – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Second, just because a people have seemingly vanished into the mists of time, it does not mean that they have disappeared without a trace. They had to go somewhere, be somewhere and be someone today.

An Etruscan helmet in the British Museum

A portion of the future land of the Netherlands, became a Roman province which was conquered by Julius Caesar in the first century BCE. The Saxon peoples, including the original Frisians, followed by the Angles and Jutes settled in the area before migrating to Britain. Later, the land became part of the empire of the Franks under Charlemagne; the House of Burgundy from 1384 to 1482 (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran), and then the Habsburg Empire from 1482 to 1567.

From 800 to 1000 CE, the Vikings raided towns and cities along the coast, settling in some areas. In 1083, the name Holland first appears in a legal document. In 1568 the land was under Spanish King Philip II, when the Dutch revolted. Their leader was Willem I, the Prince of Orange and in 1581 the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was formed. The Netherlands has one of the oldest standing armies in Europe; established by Maurice of Nassau in the late 1500s.

During the seventeenth century, the Netherlands became an international power known for its strong navy – much like their forebears the Etruscans. The Dutch empire expanded throughout the world through its colonies on nearly every continent. The Dutch were among the earliest empire-builders of Europe, following the Portuguese, the Phoenician descendants of Tyre; and the Spanish, descended from the ancient Aramaeans (Syrians). During this time, the arts in the Netherlands were at their peak with notable artists such at Rembrandt and Vermeer. Wars with Spain, France and England in 1652 weakened the country and heralded its decline; with the fourth Anglo-Dutch War from 1780 to 1784, resulting in the Dutch Republic losing a number of its colonial possessions and trade monopolies to the rising British Empire.

In 1688, King William of Orange and Queen Mary of England became the rulers of the Netherlands – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. In 1795, the French army invaded the Netherlands and took control; declaring the Batavian Republic. Then in 1806, French emperor, Napoleon, appointed his brother Louis, King of the Netherlands. In 1813, Napoleon and the French were defeated and the United Kingdom of the Netherlands was formed. It included Belgium and possessed two capitals: Brussels and Amsterdam. In 1830, Belgium rebelled and broke away, forming its own independent nation.

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

The Netherlands has a highly developed economy; playing a significant role in the European economy for centuries. Since the sixteenth century, shipping, fishing, agriculture, trade and banking have been leading sectors in the Netherlands. The Netherlands was ranked the fifth most competitive economy in the world by the Swiss International Institute for Management Development in 2017. Additionally, the country was ranked the second most innovative nation in the world in the 2018 Global Innovation Index – slipping to seventh in 2023.

The Netherlands stands as the 18th largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $1,272.01 trillion in 2025. The Netherlands is a major commercial transportation hub with industrial manufacturing as well as petroleum extraction and processing. It has a highly developed agricultural sector and is the second largest agricultural exporter in the world. The Netherlands has a large financial services sector, with assets four times the size of the Dutch GDP.

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

The original flag of the Netherlands (above) and the current flag from circa 1650 (below). The main explanation for the change, is that the orange variant was used by the Prince and a distinction between the Prince’s flag and the National flag was required.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Dutch global shipments during 2021.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$89.9 billion (13% of total exports)
  2. Mineral fuels including oil: $84.3 billion (12.2%)
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $69.6 billion (10.1%)
  4. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $41.6 billion (6%)
  5. Pharmaceuticals: $37 billion (5.4%)
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $32.3 billion (4.7%)
  7. Vehicles: $26.1 billion (3.8%)
  8. Organic chemicals: $22.4 billion (3.2%)
  9. Other chemical goods: $19.6 billion (2.8%)
  10. Iron, steel: $16.3 billion (2.4%)


Mineral fuels including oil represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 66.1% from 2020 to 2021. That percentage increase was propelled by higher international sales of refined petroleum oils, petroleum gas and coal shipped from the Netherlands. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel as materials via a 55.9% gain.’

I will Maintain

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

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

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

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

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

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

The second subgroup of the Vrijburger population were known as the Cape Dutch and remained in the southwestern Cape and especially in the growing settlement of Cape Town. They were urban dwellers and more educated, maintaining greater cultural ties with the Netherlands than the Boers did. The Cape Dutch became the backbone of the colony’s economic growth. They purposely did not venture inland so as to maintain close contact with a viable market. This was in sharp contrast with the Boers on the frontier, who lived on the margins of the market economy. 

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

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

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

Nearly one hundred years later, dissatisfaction with British rule led to bloodshed in the Anglo-Boer Wars during 1880 to 1881 and again from 1889 to 1902, with the loss of many innocent Boer lives in British Concentrations camps. The Union of South Africa occurred in 1910 when the four British colonies combined: the Cape, Natal, Transvaal and the Orange River (Orange Free State).

In the twentieth century Afrikaner nationalism took the form of political parties and secret societies, like the Broederbond. In 1914, the National Party formed to promote Afrikaner economic interests and finally sever South Africa’s ties to the United Kingdom. It rose to prominence in winning the 1948 general election; thereby enforcing a harsh policy of racial segregation known as apartheid and declared South Africa a republic, withdrawing from the British Commonwealth. The National Party eventually left power in 1994 following negotiations to end apartheid and losing South Africa’s first multiracial elections.

Thousands of Flemish along with the Dutch, migrated to South Africa for many years between the 1600s and the twentieth century. Immigration slowed eventually, but there remains a considerable Flemish population in Southern Africa. Judging by the 2011 census figures and South Africa’s population of 64,743,417 people, some 8.2% are of white European extraction. Within that percentage the Afrikaners make up approximately 60% in the nine provinces and 5.2% of the total population: 3,366,657 people. The British descended peoples comprise about 40% and 3% of the total population: 1,942,302 people. A total white population of approximately 5,308,959 people.

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

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

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

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

Some of the more common Afrikaner surnames include Botha (deriving from the East Frisian word bota, meaning ‘to do’ or ‘to perform’), Joubert (originating from central France), Pienaar (derived from the French word Pinard), Pretorius (from the Latin word for leader) and Van der Merwe (meaning someone from the banks of the Merwede River in South Holland).

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

Whether the percentage proportions are exactly correct for the Dutch, German and French components of the Afrikaners may not be as important as the fact there are undoubtedly multiple strains which constitute the genetic composition of the Afrikaner. It is proposed that they are not the exact same people as the Dutch – the descendants of Midian – but perhaps the later Kenite lineages; which appear to have a genetic affiliation with Midian. We have ascertained that the northern Hivites lived in the northern regions of Israel (modern Lebanon) and constituted the white population who lived with the residue of black peoples descended from Hiv the son of Canaan – living together in Sidon and known as Phoenicians, yet distinct from the Aramaean Phoenicians of Tyre (Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil). 

We noted that Heber the Kenite and his family departed from the Kenites descended from Jethro and dwelt in the north of Israel’s territory in Zebulun’s and Naphtali’s allotments. The significance of this will be borne out when we study Jacob’s sons – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. We have also deduced that Jethro was likely a Kenite on one side of his family and either Midianite on the other, or possibly a shared Midian and Lot lineage; the equivalent of Dutch and French ancestry combined.

Finally, we learned of a branch of the Kenites, called the Rechabites, who were a god-fearing people; which runs a striking parallel with the Huguenots. Strictly, the Huguenots were French Protestants from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries living primarily in southern and western France. They were followers of the teachings of John Calvin, known as Calvinists; who emphasised the sovereignty of God and the authority of the Bible. The Huguenots were invariably ‘skilled artisans, craftsmen… and professional people’ – which included: ‘doctors, schoolmasters, merchants, mariners, shipwrights’ and aristocrats. They were not pastoralists or farmers.

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

In South Africa’s settlement apart from the British, the three main contributions represented by the Dutch (and Flemish), Germans and the French underline the interconnectedness of the Dutch and German contributions as the white descendants of the ancient Hivites and Hittites respectively.

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

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

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

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

This would explain why the German contribution has been a shadow of the Dutch rather than the other way around. Additionally, the genetic closeness of the north German and Dutch populations may simply be the reason for the blurring of the two. It is thought by many that the Dutch are an example of ‘simply another group of north Germans who transformed their regional identity into a national one for various reasons.’ 

If this were true, then every small nation next to a larger one, would just be an offshoot. Biblical and secular histories, plus autosomal and Haplogroup DNA prove this line of reasoning incorrect.

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

Ninety-nine percent of European R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 (M417, with an origin circa 3400 BCE from a bottleneck lineage purportedly originating in Ukraine), which itself derives from R-M198, R1a1a and it in turn stems from R-M459, R1a1. A few pertinent subclades are: R1a-L664, which is essentially Northwest European and found chiefly in Western Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles and R1a-Z284, which is a Scandinavian subclade with an epicentre in central Norway; found also in parts of Scotland, England and Ireland. There is a central European clade R-M458, which peaks in the Czechs and an eastern clade, R-M558 peaking in Russia. 

What is important to note at this point, is that R1a in Scandinavian men is a result of intermixing and intermarriage; whereas I1 is an older, related lineage from a different line of Arphaxad’s male descendants. It is actually Haplogroup R1b which is the defining marker Haplogroup for all of Abraham’s male descendants, including: Scandinavia, Iceland and the Low countries.

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

‘In “The Norway Project”… I1 is Scandinavias most common Y-DNA haplogroup and it probably originated in Denmark.

R1a, common in eastern Europe, is also found in this project in subclades like R1a1a and R1a1a1. R1b, common in western Europe, is also found… and… N1c1 is a subclade found… especially common among Finns, Estonians, and Saami [Madai-Japheth] so it’s believed to have come from intermarriage with Saami men.

Less common haplogroups that members have include, among others, E1b1b, G2a, I2, J1, J2b, Q1a3, and Q1a3a. E and J haplogroups have Middle Eastern origins, while Q may originate in Central Asia or Siberia, and G2a subclades probably originate in either Iran or the Caucasus region… in terms of Y-DNA, “The presence of Eu14 in Norway suggests that some admixture between Norwegians and the Finno-Ugric Uralic speakers of Scandinavia (Saami, Finns) has occurred.” (Eu14 is very common in Finland.) 

Haplogroup N3 [N1c1] was found at an elevated 11% of Norwegians from northern Norway (especially Finnmark where 18.6% of the Norwegians have it) whereas none of the Norwegians in southern Norway had it. Scientists believe N3 came to Norwegians through intermarriage with Saami and Finnish men, as based on data from all populations N3 “has been interpreted as a signature of Uralic Finno-Ugric speaking males migrating to northern Scandinavia about 4000-5000 years ago”. 

Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Excerpts from the Abstract:

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

‘The breakdown of the 4 top [Norwegian] haplogroups was:

I1 = 37.3%
R1b = 31.3%
R1a = 26.3%
N3 [N1c1] = 3.8%

This breakdown reveals 30.1% of Norwegian men have a Haplogroup indicating admixture from either an eastern European origin (R1a) or an East Eurasian lineage (N1c1). The 31.3% of Norwegian men with Haplogroup R1b are the closest to an unadulterated lineage descending from Abraham; while the 37.3% of men with Haplogroup I1 while related to those with R1b, are an older line of descent of a related ancestor from Arphaxad predating Abraham.

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

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

‘Their research shows that Norwegians are nearest to Germans and Dutch by genetic distance, followed closely behind by Danes, then Swedes, then English. These data are reportedly on page 270 in the table “Occidental/European genetic distances for reference purposes”. Icelanders are largely descended from male Norwegian migrants to medieval Iceland. Many people living in northern Scotland and the islands of Orkney and Shetland have partial descent from Norwegian settlers as well.’

While common geographic, cultural and historical aspects strongly link the three Scandinavian nations, it is fascinating to learn Norwegians are not closest to Swedes and Danes ethnically, but actually with their cousin, Germany and their sibling the Dutch.

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

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

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

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

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

‘… 350,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped from 1,525 Swedes. The researchers compared the Swedish samples to 3,212 samples from populations worldwide, “including Finns, northern Germans, British and Russians”. Excerpts from the Abstract: … The Swedes – especially southern Swedes – were genetically close to the Germans and British, while their genetic distance to Finns was substantially longer. 

An excerpt from the body of [a] paper: 

“Genetically the Swedes have appeared relatively similar to their neighboring populations – for example the Norwegians, Danish, Germans, Dutch and British… In contrast, the Finns… do not appear genetically very close to the Swedes although they are geographically nearby.”

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

We have learned that the Baltic people are related to the Poles from Joktan as both descend from Arphaxad a son of Shem. The Finns are more closely related to the Baltic peoples of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and hence their difference with the Scandinavians and particularly their neighbours, Sweden. The percentage of I1a and N1c1 in Norwegian males and specifically the Swedes reflects their intermarrying with the Finns and or the Sammi regarding Haplogroup N1c1. While I1 could be indicative of Keturah’s male relatives likely ancestry and descent from possibly one of Arphaxad’s other sons such as Anar or Ashcol and hence the strong similarity between the Scandinavian nations (and northern Germans) regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup I1.

For I1 is an older yet still related lineage to the more recent Haplogroup R1b mutation. Even though R1b is reflective of the true lineage for Scandinavian and Dutch men from Abraham for example; I1 men amongst the population are merely an older ancestral line of descent from Abraham’s ancestor Arphaxad and possibly also via Peleg.

This scenario would mirror the line of descent from Arphaxad through Peleg’s brother, Joktan; where his male descendants in eastern Europe possess the defining marker Haplogroup R1a, yet related older descendants in southeastern Europe carry I2a1.

Eupedia – emphasis & bold mine:

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

The dominant haplogroup in the Benelux is R1b, almost equally divided between the Germanic R1b-U106 and Italo-Celtic R1b-P312 subclades. Both are present in all the Benelux, but with a very different distribution. R1b-U106 (S21) reaches its maximum frequency in Frisia (42%) and the central Netherlands (35%), then decreases progressively in the southern Netherlands (30%), Flanders (25%) and Wallonia (22%), to increase again in Luxembourg (32%).

Not all subclades of U106 may be of Germanic origin. Some subclades appear to have expanded from Scandinavia and North Germany… These include L48, the largest branch of U106, and Z18, another major branch. These also happen to be the two dominant subclades in the Benelux. Within L48, Scandinavians belong almost exclusively to the Z9 branch, while the L47 branch appears to be found mostly in the Benelux and Britain. The other major branch, Z156 is subdivided in DF96 and DF98. DF98 is also found in Scandinavia and could be considered Germanic. 

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

The largest branch of R-U106 is L48 and the split between the Scandinavians with Z9 and the L47 of the Benelux peoples, highlights that four sons from Keturah are similar: the Nordic-Scandinavian nations. While the remaining two brothers are similar to each other: the Benelux-Germanic nations. Just as we would expect similarity and diversity within a family of six sons. We will also learn that the Nordic sons from Keturah are genetically aligned with their German-Teuton cousin; while the Low Countries are as aligned with their English Saxon-Viking cousins.

Eupedia:

‘Dutch R1b-U106 has a particularly large swath of Z18 (25% of U106) like Scandinavia, but with more diversity of subclades. The dominant branch is L48 (about 40%), which has about three quarters of Z9 for one quarter of L47. In contrast with Belgium, the Dutch also have a considerable amount of S1688 (about 15%, including U198), a subclade that reaches its maximum frequency in England, but is rare in Germany and mostly absent from Scandinavia, central and eastern Europe, Italy or Iberia.

So far, S1688 has not been found in Wallonia or Luxembourg and only makes up 4% of Flemish R1b-U106. U198 might be native to the Netherlands and would have been brought to England by the Anglo-Saxons from Frisia.*** 

In contrast with Flanders and England this time, the Dutch have hardly any Z156, and the little there is is DF96, perhaps of Flemish or Saxon origin. Interestingly the high percentage of Z18 and L48>Z9 in the Netherlands resembles more the pattern observed in Wallonia than in Flanders. The main difference is that the Walloons have more Z156 (from Germany) and the Dutch more S1688 (native to the region). 

The other main R1b subclade in the Benelux is R1b-P312 (S116), which is found in equal proportions in Flanders [Sheba] and Wallonia [Dedan] (33%), but decreases as one moves north to reach 20% in the southern Netherlands, 15% in the central Netherlands and 10% in Frisia.’

The strong link between the Dutch and English via S1688 may have its origin from primarily, the taking of 32,000 Midianite virgin girls and inserting them into the Israelite gene pool. For while their sons would have been R1b from their Israellite fathers, it could have mutated differently with each subsequent generation of males. Secondarily, Zipporah’s two sons with Moses, may have chosen to ultimately dwell in Midian and marry Midianite wives. The various R1b sub-clade differences we have just read between the Flemish, and Walloons of Belgium, compared with the Dutch, highlights the fact that Belgium is a different brother, stemming from Jokshan and his sons Sheba and Dedan; while the Netherlands is the separate and distinct^^ brother, Midian.

Eupedia: ‘Here is breakdown of R1b subclades in Belgium from the Brabant Y-DNA Project.

About half of Belgian R1b-P312 belong to the U152 (S28) subclade [associated with France, Switzerland and Italy]… with a slightly higher frequency in Wallonia (16%) and Luxembourg (14%) [Dedan] than in Flanders (10%) [Sheba], and it keeps decreasing as one moves north to the southern Netherlands (6%) [Midian], the central Netherlands (3.5%) [Midian], and is almost absent from Frisia (1%) [Midian].

A bit over half of U152 in Wallonia and over 80% of U152 in Flanders belong to the L2 subclade. Wallonia seems to have more diversity, with a higher presence of typically Italic/Roman subclades like Z56 and Z192, but also of… Z36. Autosomal ancestry analysis of Belgian individuals who tested with 23andMe shows that Walloons are much more likely than the Flemings to have a small percentage of Italian DNA (typically 2 to 4% + a few more percents of ‘broadly southern European’)…’

‘The Atlantic Celtic R1b-L21 (S145) [M529] lineage, most commonly found in the British Isles [Ireland, Scotland, Wales], reaches its maximum in the western half of Belgium (10%), including Flemish and Walloon Brabant, then decreases to 7-8% to the east of the country. Its frequency falls to 3-5% in the Netherlands, with little difference nationwide. Most of these lineages are probably of Gaulish [Celtic] origin, although some could have been brought by the Vikings from the British Isles, especially in coastal areas.

The Vikings are well known to have taken slaves among the British and Irish populations, which they brought with them to their colonies (e.g. Iceland, Normandy) and back to Scandinavia. Nowadays, over one quarter of Icelandic paternal lineages and half of the maternal lineages descend from those slaves [Scottish and Irish] brought by the Vikings. In Norway the proportion is about 15% and 30% respectively. It would not be surprising if the Vikings also brought slaves to places they founded on the continent, like Bruges, explaining how some typically Scottish or Irish subclades of L21 ended up there.

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

‘Haplogroup I1, one of the most reliably Germanic lineages, has nearly identical frequencies in Flanders (12%) and Wallonia (10.5%), but is slightly higher in the Netherlands (16.5%), although that is still a far cry from the 35% observed in Scandinavia. Only Luxembourg has [a] surprisingly low frequency of I1 (2.5%)… The Nordic CTS6364 clade (including L22) was found in 18.5% of Dutch and 33% of Belgian I1 samples. The West Germanic Z58 branch accounted for 20% of Belgian samples (Z60>L573, Z138 and Z382 clades), and 63% of Dutch samples.’ 

A further divide between the Midianite Dutch and the Belgians descended from Jokshan. Dutch men with I1 having a stronger influence from and similarity with the Germanic Z58; whereas conversely Belgian men with I1 showing a stronger tie with the Nordic L22.

Eupedia:

‘Half of the Dutch Z58 belonged to the Z140 clade, which so far hasn’t been found in Belgium [Jokshan]. Z140 is found chiefly in Denmark [Medan], the Netherlands [Midian] and Britain, and to a lower extent Germany. It seems that it is mostly a Frisian and Anglo-Saxon clade***. The rest of Dutch Z58 belonged mostly to Z138 and Z382. The more East Germanic Z63 branch made up 13% and 12% of Belgian and Dutch samples, respectively.

Overall, Belgians appear to carry a considerably higher percentage of Nordic/Scandinavian subclades of I1, while the Dutch possess mostly West Germanic clades.^^ This could be explained by the higher percentage of Frankish ancestry in Belgium, since the Franks originated in Denmark. The majority of the Dutch I1 might be native to the Netherlands itself or neighbouring Saxony.’

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

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

‘The Dutch people live in the northwestern European country called the Netherlands. Traditionally Protestant by religion, they differ from the traditionally Catholic Dutch-speaking Flemings of the Flanders region of Belgium, a neighboring country. 

From 1815 until 1830, however, both countries were part of a United Kingdom of the Netherlands, and until 1581 the lands were also united.

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

We will return and address the subject of the divide between northern and southern Germany in the following chapter. The Frisians are interesting in that they are a legacy of the Frisians who with the Angles and Jutes, constituted the wave of (British) Saxons migrating (invading) Britain. Thus some Frisians in the Netherlands though not all, may have a closer genetic affinity with the British (English) than with the Dutch. We will discover that more truth to this idea may be attached than meets the eye, for many of the descendants of the (English) Frisians ended up in… wait for it, South Africa – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

Eupedia:

‘The Dutch people themselves are split into multiple autosomal DNA clusters, with a notable difference [? observe PCA plot below] between North Dutch and South Dutch people [Recall, Midian has five* sons].’

Relatively speaking as the North Dutch and South Dutch each cluster closer to the Germans and English than any other European country.

Eupedia:

North Dutch people autosomally cluster close to Frisians, English, and Danes, whereas South Dutch and the Flemish autosomally cluster close to Walloons and West Germans. According to Piotr Kapuscinski, this is caused by the ancient division between North Sea Germanic (Ingvaeonic) peoples and Wesser-Rhine Germanic (Istvaeonic) peoples, and he notes that North Dutch descend from Frisians, Angles, Saxons, and Norse (all Germanic peoples) whereas South Dutch descend from Celts and Germanic Franks.

Therefore, North Dutch and South Dutch don’t cluster close to one another* on autosomal plots of population averages [? refer PCA graph below].’

‘Genetically, R1b haplogroups are very commonly found in the Y chromosomes of Frisian males just as in the males of other ethnic groups in this geographic region (Atlantic-bordering Europe). As one would expect, participants in the Frisian Waddenproject often have R1b. The “Frisian Modal Haplotype” (FMH), called R1b-8, was discovered by Kenneth Nordtvedt and is tested by looking at only 6 markers.

Below R1b-8 on the genetic tree is R-U106, and a level below R-U106 on the tree are subclades including R-L47, R-L48, R-L48x, and R-L148. The primary Frisian Y-DNA haplogroup is the R1b subclade called U106/S21, defined by its mutations U106 (and L48) and negative for P312. It’s coded by Family Tree DNA as haplogroup R1b1b2a1a. U106 is also found among partial descendants of Frisians like English people, as well as in parts of Benelux, Germany, and Denmark. Some other Frisian men have the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 which is most common in Scandinavia. 

“Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration.” Molecular Biology and Evolution 19:7, multiple authors, (2002): pages 1008-1021.

English and Welsh people are among those studied and compared to each other. They also collected samples from Norwegians and Frisians. The Frisian samples came from 94 males who live in Friesland in the northern part of the Netherlands. Excerpt from the Abstract: 

“When we compared our data with an additional 177 samples collected in Friesland and Norway, we found that the Central English and Frisian*** samples were statistically indistinguishable.”

Excerpt from the Discussion section: “The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent. 

Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity and the low Central English-North Welsh affinity.”

We will return in subsequent chapters to address the red hair alleles of the Scots; the J1 and J2 paternal Haplogroups of the Jews; the English-Frisian link; as well as the English-North Welsh relationship – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

As at time of writing, any substantial material on the Haplogroups for the Afrikaners in South Africa have not been found, or for the indigenous inhabitants of Brussels, possible descendants of the Leummim. One interpretation for the name Leumm is ‘countries without water.’ Which is ironic in view of Belgium’s low level coastline, yet interesting when considered with a landlocked territory such as Brussels.

Daniel Boffey: “… the unloved [River] Senne running through Brussels… [viewed] as a constant flood risk and source of cholera… was vaulted in… buried away under concrete, built over and hidden from sight for the last 150 years… condemned by locals as little more than a sewer and cause of disease and unhappiness.”

The graph below represents the regional genetic variation in Belgium and at once reveals both the closeness of Brussels, Flanders and Wallonia and the subtle distinctiveness of all three. 

With regard to South Africa we have investigated its black citizens and so can compare with the Y-DNA Haplogroups for its white citizens; which include those of British descent – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. We will endeavour to obtain a partial picture at least, by isolating the Black and British elements and including what we learn from the Dutch in the Netherlands. 

The top seven most common mtDNA Haplogroups for Iceland, Scandinavia, Bel-Lux and the Netherlands.

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

U5 [7.7%] – I [3.9%] – HV [3.6%] 

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

K [5.4%] – HV0+V [ 3.8%] – U4 [2.7%] 

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

HV0+V [5%] – T2 [4%] – U4 [3%] 

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

U5 [5.8%] – HV0+V [3.6%] – U2 [2.7%]

Belgium & Luxembourg: H [46.9%] – K [12.1] – T2 [9.4%] – J [6%] – 

U [5.4%] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%]

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

HV0+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%]

                            

   

                          H        HV0+V       J           K       T2      U4       U5    

Finland             36             7             6           5        2         1         21         

Iceland              38             2           14         10      10         3          8          

Netherlands      45             8           11          10      12         7          8            

Norway             46             4           11           5        8         3         11          

Sweden             46             5             8           6        4         3         12          

Denmark           47             4           13           9        6         2          6

The six sons of Keturah bear a close resemblance in their maternal Haplogroups. Iceland-Ishbak, is the only one which deviates slightly, which we have addressed with their ancestry of Scandinavian fathers and markedly high percentage from Celtic mothers. The addition of Keturah’s possible family’s descendants (from either Anar or Ashcol) – akin to modern Finland’s mtDNA Haplogroups – shows both the plausibility of the previously speculated line of reasoning and at the same time, the variable difference which highlights Finland in not being a mutual descendant with the other seven countries but rather, their possible progenitor with their father Abraham. 

                                 H       J     T2    U5     K   HVO+V  HV    U4     T1

Italy                       40      8       8       5      8          3          3        2       3

Switzerland          48    12       9       7       5         5       0.5        3       2

France                   44      8       6      8       9          5          3        3       2

Benelux                 47      6       9      3      12         3       0.7        3       2  

Netherlands         45     11     12      8     10          8                     7       2

Denmark              47     13      6       6       9          4                    2       1

Sweden                 46      8      4      12      6          5       0.5        3       3

Norway                 46     11      8      11      5          4       0.2        3        1 

Iceland                  38    14     10      8     10          2          2        3    0.5

The table above compares Abraham and Keturah’s descendants with the main mtDNA Haplogroups of Abraham’s brothers, Nahor and Haran. The table below a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Keturah’s descendants.

                           H       HV   HV0+V    J        T2        U        U5       K

Switzerland     48     0.4          5          12         9      0.4         7         5

Bel-Lux            47      0.7          3           6          9         5         3       12

Denmark         47                      4         13          6         1          6        9

Norway            46      0.2          4         11          8         2        11         5

Sweden            46      0.5          5           8          4         3        12        6

Netherlands   45                      8          11        12      0.5         8       10

France              44        2           5           8          6         1          8        9

Brazil                44        2                       11 

Portugal           44     0.1          5            7         6          3          7         6

Spain                44     0.7          8            7         6          2         8         6

Poland             44         1          5            8         7       1.4        10        4

Russia              41         2          4            8         7          2        10        4

Greece              41        3        1.8          10         7          3          5        5

Italy                  40       3           3            8          8         3          5        8            

Ukraine            39       4           4            8         8      0.6        10        5

Iceland             38       4           2          14        10     0.2          8       10

Romania          37       2           4           11          5         2          7        8

Finland            36                     7            6          2     0.8        21        5

Turkey             31         5       0.7            9          4         6         3         6

Iran                  17         7       0.6          14           5       12         3         7

Switzerland remains as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant mtDNA Haplogroup H. The addition of the Benelux and Scandinavian nations sees them clustered together, as well as with those peoples of western Europe with which they are more closely related – the exception being Icelanders.

A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe in the main exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact. The addition of Keturah’s sons supports this correlation, as they now bookend with Switzerland.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.

It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Turkey            R-M269    14%   –  R-U106   0.4%

Russia             R-M269    21%   –  R-U106   5.4%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Dutch possess a similar percentage of R1b-M269 as their near relatives the French, Italians and the Swiss. The Germanic sub-clade of R-U106 is especially high in the Netherlands, partially due to the Frisian element of the population. In fact it is a far higher percentage even than in Germany, which we will find is similar to Denmark. 

Denmark exhibits a higher level of R-U106 in keeping with their position in both northern and western Europe. Unexpectedly, the Danish percentage of R-M269 is lower than 50%. The reason is partially due to the fact that Denmark has a higher percentage of R1a at 15%, compared to say the Netherlands with 4%; though mainly due to the high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup I1, indicative of northern Europe at 34%; compared to the Netherlands with 16.5% and France at 9%.

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

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

N1c1 [1%] – Q [1%] 

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

N1c1 [2.5%] – G2a [1%] – E1b1b [1%] – Q [1%] – J2 [0.5%] 

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

I2a2 [3.5%] – E1b1b [3%] – J2 [2.5%] – Q [2.5%] – I2a1 [1.5%] –

G2a [1%] 

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

J2 [3%] – E1b1b [2.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – I2a1 [2%] – N1c1 [1%] –

Q [1%] 

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

R1a [4%] – J2 [3.5%] – E1b1b [3.5%] – I2a1 [1%]- T1a [1%] –

J1 [0.5%]

Frisians: R1b [55.3%] – I [34%] – R1a [7.4%] – E1b1b [2.1%] –

J [1.4%]

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

R1a [4%] – G2a [4%] – J2 [4%] – I2a1 [3%] – J1 [1%] – T1a [0.5%] –

Q [0.5%] – L [0.5%] 

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

E1b1b [5.5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – T1a [3.5%] – J2 [2%] – I2a1 [1.5%] 

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

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

                             R1b     R1a       I1      I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b      J2      J1      G2a

Finland                 4          5        28                   0.5        0.5   

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    1

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     1

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                    3

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        5 

Flanders            61          4          12         3           5            5          4           1        4   

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                    6

Luxembourg     61          3           3          3           6            5          8          3        6

A comparison of the main Y-DNA Haplogroups reveals and supports a number of points. Finland is obviously an outlier; even more apparent than as already shown by its mtDNA Haplogroups. Recall its percentage of Haplogroup N is extraordinarily high and indicative of a very northerly location in Europe such as the Baltic nations and Russia who border Finland. Finland shares a similarly high percentage of Haplogroup I1 shared by all the Nordic nations. The three Scandinavian countries, with Iceland are all uniquely I1 driven, thus explaining the lesser percentages for R1b. Haplogroup I1 is a far older line of descent from Shem, yet still related to those men who carry the more recent R1b mutation. Even so, Haplogroup R1b is the defining marker Haplogroup for Abraham’s male descendants. 

Even the Netherlands has a relatively high percentage of I1. Sweden shows the impact of mixing and intermarriage with the Finns and Sammi; whereas, the Norwegians less so. In the past, Swedish men probably had a R1b Haplogroup percentage near identical with Norway and Denmark. And prior to that, the Scandinavian males would have possessed primarily R1b as still somewhat reflective in Icelandic men today.

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

Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Abraham and Keturah’s sons Midian, Medan, Jokshan, Ishbak, Zimran and Shuah.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Italy                19       3        16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Flanders          5         1        4         5           4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15       33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16       22       38

Wallonia         2                    2        6           6         7       60       67

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7        55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26      32       58

Iceland                                                                    23      42       65

Finland                                         0.5                      5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. The Walloons move into third place for combined R1 Haplogroups. Both Luxembourgers and the Flemish pass the French for possessing the second highest levels of R1b after Spain.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                       R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal        1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain                2         69      1.5         5           1

Luxembourg   3         61         3         3           6              

France              3         59        9          3          4            

Switzerland     4         50      14          2          8          1

Netherlands    4         49      17          1           7               

Flanders          4          61      12          3          5

Brazil                4         54                  [9]            

Italy                  4         39        5          3           3         

Finland            5           4       28                   0.5      62

Frisians            7         55     [34]           

Wallonia          7         60       11         2           5

Turkey             8         16         1         4         0.5        4  

Greece            12         16         4       10         1.5      

Denmark        15         33      34        2            6         1

Sweden           16         22      37        2            4         7

Iran                 16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania        18         16         4       28           3        2

Iceland           23        42       29                      4         1

Norway          26        32       32                       5        3

Ukraine          44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia             46          6         5        11                    23

Poland            58         13        9          6          2         4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups (with the exception of N1c) from Shem, comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 are included.

From a Y-DNA Haplogroup perspective it is interesting that the males descended from Abraham and Keturah form into pairs aside from Luxembourg. Rather than the defining marker Haplogroup R1b-U106, it is Haplogroups R1a and I1 which show the pairing similarity. For instance, Denmark and Sweden; Norway and Iceland; and the Dutch and Flemish stand out. Correspondingly, the four Nordic nations possess less R1b and more I1 and R1a, in contrast with the five Benelux peoples who contrastingly possess more R1b and less I1 and R1a.

Similarly, it is only the four northern nations which possess Haplogroup N1c1 amplified from admixture with near northern neighbours. Sweden possessing the third highest levels after Finland and Russia. Finland had the highest level of I1 previously, though is now surpassed by Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. Switzerland still retains the highest levels of I2a2, with the Netherlands in second place.

The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for South Africa are: E1b1a, R1b, E2, A1, B2, E1b1b and J. The Haplogroups E, B and A are reflective of the Black male population; R1b for White men; with E1b1b and J Haplogroups stemming from admixture. There is diversity just within the Black population of South Africa as it contains the Bantu, Zulu, Xhosa and Khoisan peoples. 

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

E2 [4%]

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

E1b1b [5%]

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

E1b1b [4%]

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

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

E1b1a [0.6%] – E1a [0.6%]

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

E1b1b [3.5%] 

Disregarding the British factor in South Africa for a moment and using the predominant element of the Dutch for White South Africans, we can observe the close percentage similarity between the R1b Haplogroup. Haplogroup I is missing from the data available though it would be safe to assume it is included amongst the White population as the British descended males also possess I1 and I2. What is of interest, is the higher percentage of E1b1b and is probably attributable to admixture with the indigenous population.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For now – until an exhaustive study of the Afrikaner in conjunction with the Dutch is available – the true identity of the Dutch Afrikaner remains a tantalising mystery. Are the Afrikaners Midianites, or a slightly different composition compared with the native Dutch? If so, the question arises whether the Kenite factor is hidden there.

It has been said, ‘the people in Europe the most like the English, are the Dutch.’ The close tie between England and the Netherlands is one that will become clearer when we study the United Kingdom – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Another saying – and one the Dutch may not be particularly fond, though it is not intended as a slight – is ‘the Dutch are Germans with clogs.’ As we progress, the close relationship between the Dutch and the Deutsch will become apparent – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

The ancient link between the Hivites and Hittites will be clarified; the inter-changing terms, Midianites and Ishmaelites – and of Arabia and the wilderness – will be explained; the neighbouring states of the wealthy Etruscans and formidable, militaristic Romans will leap alive; and the true identity of Ishmael, will fascinate like no other.

Hold on to your hats constant reader… for there is more than one dramatic surprise ahead as we explore the remaining descendants of Abraham from his wife Sarah (and their son Isaac), as well as Sarah’s remarkable handmaiden, Hagar.

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

Proverbs 2:2-5 Common English Bible

“Let me say to you that truth has always lived with the minority; what the majority says at a given moment is usually wrong.”

Alan Redpath

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Rhesus Negative Blood Factor

It was in 1616, that William Harvey – an English physician and scientist who made influential contributions in anatomy and physiology – confirmed what was already in the scriptures, declaring:

‘Life is in the blood.’

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

Leviticus 17:10-11 New English Translation

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

Blood that is designated O is a universal blood type and the most prevalent among the Earth’s human inhabitants – 40%. O positive is deemed the oldest blood type. Though some consider A the oldest, then B and O the most recent. O blood does not possess the antigens of either A or B type blood. The opposite blood type does have both antigens and is called AB. Antigens are molecules that the body responds, in producing an antibody or a cell, to destroy the antigen. There are about six hundred antigens, though most are not significant to typing blood.

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

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

Curiously, Rh negative blood type O, is considered the purest blood known to mankind and is the universal donor blood for all blood types. Rh- factor is something called a recessive trait. Someone who is Rh+ might have a hidden Rh- in their DNA. If that person and his or her partner both pass an Rh- down to a child, that child will be Rh negative. Even though at least one parent is Rh+ factor. 

There are two types of Rh positive men. Fifty-five percent of men are heterozygous, whereby their genetics allow them to produce an Rh- child fifty percent of the time and Rh+ the other fifty percent. The second type of male is homozygous and produces only Rh+ offspring.

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

O-positive is most prevalent in Latinos then Africans and less so in Asians and Caucasians. Whereas O-negative is most prevalent in Caucasians and least in Asians.

A-positive and A-negative are most prevalent in Caucasians, then Latinos. B-positive is most prevalent in Asians and Africans and B-negative is most prevalent in Caucasians, though least in Asians.

AB-positive is most prevalent in Asians and AB-negative while least in Asians, is found most in Caucasians.

In summary, the most predominant blood types for the four racial strains delineated are: 

Africans:       O-positive, B-positive

Latinos:         O-positive, A positive 

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

Asians:          B-positive, AB-positive

These findings reveal that all four negative blood types are predominant amongst Caucasian people. Latinos and Africans who are related partially through Ham and Canaan, both dominate O-positive. Caucasians dominate A-positive and Asians dominate B-positive. Interestingly, the predominant French blood types are A-positive and A-negative (including AB negative).

According to distribution of blood types per blood donors:

O+   37%

A+   36%

B+     9 %

AB+  3%

O-      7%

A-      6%

B-       1%

AB-    1%

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

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

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

Points in history where this may have happened are a. when Cain’s Homo sapiens line integrated with the Homo neanderthalensis line of people from Day Six of creation (Articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV), b. at the time of Noah and the genetic split between his three sons, c. the time of Peleg and the scattering of the nations from Babel, or d. could it be a much more recent event and possibly linked with the birth of Moab and Ammon? Refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

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

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

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

What is relevant about this finding is that the Aborigine and Papua New Guineans are primarily descendants of Ham from Cush, though they have intermixed with descendants of Japheth from Javan as shown by their Haplogroups. The peoples of East Asia are descended from Japheth and also possess the highest levels of Neanderthal DNA. Hence the Rhesus plus incomplete is probably linked with Japheth rather than Ham – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

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

In northern Spain and southern France amongst the Basque, there is the highest concentration of the Rh negative factor in the world, some 32%; with the range – depending on location – between 21% to 43%. Up to 60% of the Basque carry one negative gene. Only about 16% of Europeans have a Rh negative group. As little as 3% of Africans and 1% of Asian or Native American descendants have a Rh negative group. Added to this, the Basque exhibit substantially lower levels of Type B blood and a higher incidence of Type O blood of 55%, which is very similar to Latinos with 53%.

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

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

On a national level, Australia has invariably topped the percentage of Rh- in the world with 19.5%. A couple of factors offered as likely causes are: 1. A high percentage of Australians have Scottish and Irish ancestry and so their high number of Rh- negatives impacts the percentage. 2. Some believe that amongst the prisoners England re-located to Australia, a very high percentage were Rh negative. Though this is likely inaccurate as the data for Poland from a 1997 study, placed them at an overall frequency of 19.67%.

Another group often mentioned are the Berber tribes in the Atlas mountain region of Morocco. It has been claimed that they have a 40% Rh- factor; whereas on a national average, the Moroccans are approximately 9% Rh negative. A more recent study has contradicted this high percentage with a result of 5.5% Rhesus negative. The previous observation of a high frequency of blood type O was confirmed; which may have been impacted by the inclusion of 40% African admixture. Thus, claims that Berber groups have unusually high numbers of Rh negatives should not be counted until a new, large scale definitive study is conducted.

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

Basque Country

(Atlas Mountain region of Moroccan Berbers – to be confirmed)

Scotland 

Northern Ireland

(Parts of Switzerland  and the Rhone Valley – 26.5%)

Catalonia 20% to 25%

(Parts of the Netherlands; Bunschoten-Spakenburg – 25%)

Poland

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

(Parts of Brazil with high proportion of Basque – 19%)

(Parts of Chile – high proportion of Basque)

Republic of Ireland 

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

(Scandinavia – specifically Southwest Norway, from Scottish slave ancestry)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thus, the Basque are more like the French than the Spanish – refer upper left on graph below. This supports their link with Moab and Ammon rather than from Gether – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. If the Basque are the originators of the Rh- factor then this would date the origin to almost exactly 3,900 years ago and the births of Moab and Ammon in 1878/77 BCE.

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

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

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

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

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

This unusual trait can, however, also be explained in terms of relatively mundane human genetics and natural selection. One possibility is that the gene for Rh-Negative blood has some sort of selective advantage that outweighed the negative consequences of having Rh-Negative blood. Although it could still be that there is a common, unique ancestral lineage connecting populations with high prevalence of Rh-Negative blood [yes, most likely due to mainly descending from Arphaxad], the fact that the populations where the gene occurs in high prevalence appear otherwise unrelated to each other makes it less likely and in need of more evidence.’

Not so, as these peoples are predominately from Arphaxad and intermarrying between them all is highly likely.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From this same article, a selection of quotes from the scientific community.

a. In all blood groups there exists a common microbe that in essence is the life force itself.

b. Do not ever take a blood transfusion. The main reason for this has to do with cellular/genetic/galactic memory of blood. This is coded into the entire structure of the blood. All the emotions that the donor has felt during his entire lifetime are part of the blood. 

This cannot be filtered out. For example if you get a heart of a man who died in a car accident, all the cells of that organ have the memory of the accident and every emotion that was felt while dying. These emotions confuse your own coding and then mass internal confusion happens at the cellular level and the order turns into chaos. When you measure the heart harmonics of people with “O” RH-neg blood, they are usually lower if they are smokers and heavy red meat eaters. The ones who eat fish and vegetables are in the normal range.

c. The Celtic people of Ireland and Great Britain also have high incidences of the RH- factor and it has recently been proven that there is a genetic link between the Basque and the Celts. This research proves that the Celtic people came from the Basque regions of France and Spain and a group must have migrated over to the islands of Great Britain. 

d. In some areas, the Rh-Negative blood factor is referred to as “Blood Royale” or “Royal Blood”. For centuries, European royalty have been inflicted with Hemophilia or “bleeders disease”.

Corak-Sebetic: ‘Apparently, Queen Victoria was a “carrier” of Hemophilia and gave it to all of her children who then intermarried and infected the bloodlines of [every] throne in Europe during the 1800s and 1900s. As a direct result, Hemophilia became known as the “Royal Disease”. To keep this in perspective, only about 5% of all “royalty” have Rh-Factor negative blood… which means less than the general population. That would indicate that the vast majority of “rulers” and “monarchs” are NOT Rhesus-factor negative. Is this by chance? or by genetic engineering called “arranged marriages”? 

… but if European Royalty refuse to marry into the Rh Negative blood line it means one thing… Rh-Neg people are a “competing royal line”. How do you get rid of it once and for all? Although the British would love for you to think that Victoria was the world’s first carrier… don’t be confused. It was the Hapsburg’s disease. Was Victoria a Hapsburg? The unofficial motto of the Hapsburg family was “Bella gerunt alii, tu, felix Austria, nubes!” (“Where others must fight wars, you, fortunate Austria, marry!”). It’s curious that “marriage’ can be a “dynastic” undertaking but it can also be a perverse form of “bio-warfare” or “genetic warfare”.

Was [haemophilia] a disease of Spanish Royalty? … [and] was marriage to Victoria’s daughters a way to kill or weaken future “non-Hapsburg” kings… since mostly males only contract the disease from their mothers? Still, Hemophilia was in Royalty long before Victoria. Victoria’s daughters passed the disease into the Spanish, German and Russian Royal lines and threatened the thrones of all of Europes major powers. It would appear that Victoria is actually a direct descendant of Ferdinand of Castille…’

Eye color, hair color, blood type, and the rhesus factor: exploring possible genetic links to sexual orientation, Lee Ellis, Christopher Ficek, Donald Burke and Shyamal Das, 2008 – emphasis mine:

‘The present study sought to expand the limited evidence that sexual orientation is influenced by genetic factors. This was accomplished by seeking statistical differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals for four traits that are known to be genetically determined: eye color, natural hair color, blood type, and the Rhesus factor

Using a sample of over 7,000 U.S. and Canadian college students supplemented with additional homosexual subjects obtained through internet contacts, we found no significant differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals regarding eye color or hair color. In the case of blood type and the Rh factor, however, interesting patterns emerged. Heterosexual males and females exhibited statistically identical frequencies of the A blood type, while gay men exhibited a relatively low incidence and lesbians had a relatively high incidence [of type A blood](p < .05). In the case of the Rh factor, unusually high proportions of homosexuals of both sexes were Rh- when compared to heterosexuals (p < .06). The findings suggest that a connection may exist between sexual orientation and genes both on chromosome 9 (where blood type is determined) and on chromosome 1 (where the Rh factor is regulated).’

This paper is quoted not as condemnation of alternative lifestyles, but rather because of the significant coincidence of Lot living in a city, where same sex relations occurred and not to mention a society where humans and Nephilim (and/or Angels) were having sexual congress. While the Rh- factor may, or may not have a connection with these encounters, the question (in neon flashing lights) remains. 

The alternative is to concentrate on Lot’s daughter’s sons, Moab and Ammon. Was the Rh- factor a mechanism in response to the incest… for the protection of the descendants of Moab and Ammon, which has gradually filtered through to other descendants of Shem through intermarriage and relationships with those outside of Moab and Ammon’s people. In the pages of the Bible there is not any other indication that any nation or peoples began directly through a father and his daughters; so that this event is portrayed as a one time, unique occurrence in human history.

This may explain the low percentages of Rh- factor in the equatorial inhabitants of the Earth and even lower levels in the oriental peoples. It is curious that Rh negative blood cannot be duplicated or cloned. As is the higher percentage of Rh negative people who claim to have been abducted by aliens. 

Is it just a coincidence that the Basque possess the highest percentages of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b in Europe; or that they have the highest percentages of Rh negative blood in the world? So that by these two criteria, they exhibit endogamy to its fullest extreme and so are in all probability, descended from Moab or Ammon… who were born from the most restricted gene pool through incest ever documented?

Unknown author – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘For many years people have been searching for the wrong thing. Could the true missing link actually be man himself? The unknown link between earth and the stars – hybrid man. Man may be the missing link between primate and extraterrestrial. It seems inconceivable to me that those working on the evolution theory have overlooked this possibility. How can they state, that these people are lacking a factor contained in all other earthly primates, including the naked ape, and not ask why? What other characteristics are common among these people that are uncommon to other people? Is there a real difference other than just a different blood?’ 

This could not be worded better. These are serious and legitimate questions. Come on science, why do you purposely overlook these alternative options? Perhaps because it leads down a certain road and to unwanted conclusions which just don’t fit the creation without a creator paradigm.

A school of thought, is that white skin, with blond (or red hair) and blue (or green eyes), was introduced into the Homo sapien line from the Nephilim; who exhibited the exact same characteristics. It is claimed that people with the following traits (a single comprehensive list compiled from various other lists) are in some way related to Nephilim, or by extension aliens. Confusingly – though likely more accurately – the same list is also applied to Rh negative people, so that there has been a blurring of symptoms and traits.

  • Higher than average IQ
  • More sensitive vision, hearing and other senses
  • Lower body temperature
  • Higher blood pressure or lower, with a low pulse rate
  • Increased occurrence of psychic and intuitive abilities, particularly if type O negative
  • Predominantly green or hazel eyes that change colour, including piercing blue eyes
  • Red or reddish tint to hair colour
  • Widows peak, tongue rolling, ear lobes, freckles, polydactyly – 6 fingers or toes – webbed feet or hands, Albinism
  • Increased sensitivity to heat and sunlight
  • Cannot be cloned
  • Extra rib or vertebra, a tail bone (cauda)
  • Alien abduction and other unexplained or strange phenomenon – UFO, para-normal
  • A feeling of not belonging to the human race
  • Truth seekers and a desire for higher wisdom
  • Sense of a “mission” in life
  • Empathy and compassion for mankind
  • ESP ability
  • Love of space and science
  • Unexplained scars
  • Empathetic illnesses and tendency to be healers
  • Higher negative-ion shielding from positive ‘charged’ viruses and bacteria around the body 
  • Capability to disrupt electrical devices
  • Psychic dreams
  • High sensitivity to electromagnetic, as well as, extremely low frequency fields

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow 2014, page 32 – bold mine:

‘… Noah was born with red skin and had white hair. He was depicted in appearance as the “Sons of God”. This text refers to him as if he had alien features. Noah was not the same as other human beings on Earth.’

If Noah – who according to Enoch looked like the Nephilim – and or, his son Shem and their wives introduced the white skin mutation (refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis) then the characteristics above may or may not be linked to non-humans.

Human blood is iron based, but some animals have copper based blood turning it blue – called hemocyanin. Blood is red because of the presence of haemoglobin. Octopi, Lobsters, spiders, molluscs, arthropods and other animals can and do in fact have blue blood. Humans do not. The claim that rhesus negative blood is copper based, or that the term blue blood originates from copper based blood in rhesus negatives is not true. Though the concept of blue blood must have an origination from somewhere. Is it linked to the Nephilim. Is this why Royalty and the powers that be, historically have been labeled as Blue Blooded.

Royals have tended to have paler skin than average; therefore their veins are more easily seen and viewed through skin tissue, look blue. As it is mainly sea creatures which have blue blood, Angellica Goodson labels it as copper based aquatic blood. She also claims that it is a ‘human alien hybrid blood’ line that carries it. The hybrid lines are associated with the Serpent and Reptillian bloodlines as purported by various authors, such as conspiracy theorist David Icke – refer article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

Goodson explains that the misidentification of Rh negative with Nephilim ‘started years ago on a physic website where a letter was posted from an anonymous person stating that she was an Rh negative but giving her alien human hybrid characteristics instead of the characteristics of a “Pure Scandinavian Rh Negative.” The misidentification has [since] gone viral online as [incorrect information].’

Goodson continues – emphasis mine: 

‘Some people carry both Rh Negative and Copper Based Aquatic Alien human hybrid anomalies. They number [under 7% of the global Population]. Copper Based Aquatic Blood is alien human hybrid blood, which has nothing to do with the Rh- Blood Factor. Those with the pure Rh- Factor carry what is referred to as “Power in the Blood.” Those with Copper Based Aquatic Blood [include] those who are being abducted by aliens… because they carry alien genetics, which they inherited from their ancestors… The main reason aliens are interested in those with pure Rh- Negative blood is for their DNA.’

As the subject is drifting away from the original topic yet still related, we will conclude with three additional quotes; that may be of value to readers interested in the topics addressed in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, Page 353 – emphasis mine:

‘Alien Abductions hold familiar kinship with fairy folk and fairy abductions… fairies have a need to reproduce with humans… like aliens. Fairies never abduct old people – only babies, young men, and young women… like aliens. Goblins, elves, trolls, and gnomes are known in mythology as beings that are described as “grays”… they are eager to breed with humans to modify and refresh their genetic makeup so that they might continue to survive… they need to mate with humans because they need an injection of new genes to bolster their weakened genetic makeup.’

Blue Blood, True Blood, Conflict and Creation, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘[Reptilians] developed a plan to insidiously… [blend] their genetics with the genetics of… humans. Because the human prototype already had Reptilian genetics, it was easy to access the mind-pattern’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘The Reptilian frequency was already established in the brain stem as well as the Reptilian brain section of these hybrid humans.

The population of Sumer was chosen as the starting point. These humans were primarily descendants of the Martian, Maldekian, and Lyraen refugees. The Reptilians have a preference for the genetics of blonde-haired, blue-eyed people whose mind-patterns and genetics are so easily controlled. They abducted members of the ruling classes, including political leaders. Using these humans, they began a new hybridization program that took several generations to perfect. Their goal was to reach a human/Reptilian genetic 50/50 split. This would produce a human-looking Reptilian that could easily shapeshift from Reptilian to human, then back again.

Shapeshifting was accomplished simply by concentrating on the genetics the hybrid wished to open, or lock up, whatever the case may be. Once the hybridization program was complete, the Sumerian leaders were now shapeshifting Reptilians. The new Reptilian hybrid became the elite of that culture. Their blood, because of the increased Reptilian DNA, contained more of a copper content. Since copper-based blood turns blue-green upon oxidizing, these Reptilian hybrids were called “Bluebloods”.

The Bluebloods quickly realized that with a 50/50 human/Reptilian genetic split, it was necessary to intermarry to maintain the 50/50 split bloodline necessary to shapeshift. When the split increased too far to the Reptilian side, shapeshifting became difficult, and holding human form became impossible. In these cases, it was discovered that the ingestion of human hormones, flesh, and blood, allowed the Reptilians to maintain the human form. 

Human form was necessary to maintain to avoid scaring the population, which was now not accustomed to the Reptilian form. Control of the masses was easier when the orders came from a humanoid. The Reptilian format was kept to religious icons and legends. The statues of their gods and goddesses reflect the Reptilian influence, even showing a female Reptilian holding a hybrid baby’ – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega


‘The shapeshifting Reptilian Bluebloods asked the Sirians for help with the daily maintenance of their human forms. The Sirians determined that feeding the hybrids human hormones and blood in an altered animal form would be the easiest way to do it unnoticed by the population. The sacrificial animal used by most Middle Eastern people was the wild boar, so the Sirians chose it as the basis for this new animal hybrid. Human genetics were mixed with those of the wild boar to create the domesticated pig. This animal was served daily to the Bluebloods as a method of temporarily maintaining their human form until they could use an actual human in a sacrificial ceremony.

Because the domesticated pig is a combination of human and animal genetics, eating it is a form of cannibalism. This explains why the Hebrews considered it unclean to eat’ – Leviticus 11:7-8, Deuteronomy 14:8. ‘This is also why the pig is considered to be the most intelligent animal on Earth, why pig skin can be grafted directly onto humans in burn cases, and why pig heart valves can be used in humans with little difficulty. Cancer drugs and other chemicals are often tested on pigs before humans. In many respects, pigs can be considered a form of humanity. To a lesser degree, the same is true about cats.

As time progressed, the civilization of Sumer declined and transformed into other cultures. Vast migrations from Sumer to other locations in Central Asia occurred [the time of Peleg – Genesis 10:10, 25]. The migrating peoples took their Blueblood leaders with them, as they were their royalty and kings. The Sumerians became known as the sum-Aryans, or just, Aryans.’

Starseed Journey – RH Negative Blood, 2009 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine: 

‘… the British Royal Family… [and] the Blue Bloods of Europe… are said to have stolen THE DIVINE RIGHT TO RULE the world from their Scandinavian predecessors before recorded history. The British Royals and Blue Bloods of Europe appear to be a bloodline of people with Scandinavian DNA and the DNA of a dark race… The Royals and “Blue Bloods” can be tracked back to the Lost Tribe of Dan and Cain in the Old Testament who are described as having had red hair and green-eyes’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

‘They are also referred to as the “Serpent Bloodline” or “Reptilian Bloodline.” Further some even say these royal “Blue Bloods,” are a hybrid human reptilian bloodline… If this is true, they are not the original bloodline on earth and worse than that they have… reptilian DNA flowing through their veins’ – Article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

‘It would appear that the Hindus ancient history is wrapped round spiritual traditions… [in] which ancient peoples referred to… [a] Land of the Gods… The ancient histories of all the major nations and religions on earth mention a time when… mankind lived in a temperate paradise… referred to [as] Hyperborea… a “GARDEN OF EDEN”… – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Eden Enigma.

‘These legends tell us that the Scandinavian race was the original race in Hyperborea until the gods came down and started to… manipulate the DNA of the original Scandinavians creating hybrid races of genetically altered human beings. These evil gods began a human hybrid program in Hyperborea, which is eerily similar to what was being described in Genesis Chapter 6. All cultures also speak of reptilian gods who created a hybrid race of kings and queens that sat on the thrones of all ancient kingdoms that can be tracked back to ancient Sumer [and] Babylon in Iraq.

[A] group of evil entities entered our three dimensional world that were created by Yaldabaoth the Demiurge, they were reptilian entities. One of these entities was known as Yahweh Ildabaoth… Once the physical bodies had been created these evil artisans… were able to… clone human DNA. Those falling for the “Alien [Agenda”] believe that the (spirit) entities we wrongly call Aliens today, created human beings. However… the entities who came into our… world to… clone human beings were NOT CAPABLE OF CREATING HUMAN BEINGS AND ARE STILL NOT ABLE TO. These entities did have the ability to… clone hybrids using human, reptilian, animal and bird DNA, which is how the “Serpent Bloodlines” were created… illicit sexual activity with the gods is the actual meaning behind “ORIGINAL SIN” – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Scientists cannot explain the Rhesus negative factor found in Europeans, whom would they accept, descend from Noah’s son Shem. There are a series of dots – both scientific and biblical – and it would seem a simple task in joining them to discover the answer to why the Rhesus negative factor exists and how it came to be. Yet, the obvious blends into the fantastical and so it would seem next to impossible to fathom. 

Here are the salient points and let the reader decide for themselves. 

While Rh negative is found almost wholly in Europeans, it is primarily focused in northwestern European peoples and their daughter nations in the New World. Concentrating further again it is indicative of the peoples nestled in northern Spain and southern France. While the majority of Basque by fate dwell in Spain, they are logically (genetically) a spilling over from the minority who find themselves residing within French borders. 

By itself this point stands alone, though it has added impetus when understood that the French people descend from Lot and is amplified because his two sons were born from incest. It is then intensified by the fact incest levels in the world are the highest in France – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

It does not prove the incest which fathered a people, a modern day nation in fact has produced Rh- blood types. But, serious consideration should be given to a situation where close family members – only some 3900 years ago – had sexual relations which throughout history (and supported by research) has shown to be an endangerment to unborn children where they can be born with abnormalities. 

Signs of inbreeding in inbred children include: decreased cognitive abilities; muscular function; reduced height; lung function; higher risk of rare recessive genetic disorders; and greater risk from diseases in general.

Why would a mother’s immune system endeavour to destroy its own baby and perceive it as alien or an enemy? Surely incest would not be sufficient reason for such an adverse reaction? Thus what would be a grave situation to warrant such a protective measure?

Again, the following is not proof, but must be considered no matter how unsavoury in seeking an explanation. Perhaps those who have put forward a Nephilim connection with Rh negative blood types are close to the truth. 

Therefore, it may not be a coincidence that the father and daughters of the incestuous sons Moab and Ammon had been inhabitants of a city where a post-flood irruption of angelic sexual activity with humans had occurred – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

What if the two daughters of Lot had been ‘victims’ of just such a liaison? This may answer two issues. One, where Lot seemed content in offering his daughters to the angry Sodomites. Perhaps they were still virgins in relation to men, but not otherwise. 

Two, the Rh negative factor may have been a mutational response against sexual indiscretion prior to Moab and Ammon’s births, so as to protect against unwanted children being born with genetics from an unworldly origin. Thus over time, the Rh negative factor remained even though the threat from non-physical DNA traits diminished, eventually disappearing.    

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

 

The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Chapter XXVI

The elder brother of Nahor is Haran. Haran died prematurely – compared with his two brothers – at eighty-two years of age, either at the hands of his younger brother Abraham in an accident by fire* or highly unlikely, murdered by Nimrod, though more probably at the hands of King Shulgi of Ur – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. His father Terah, with the families of Lot and Abraham then moved in 1927 BCE, northwest six hundred miles and settled in Haran, a city-region associated with Nahor’s family in Padan-Aram.

We will learn that Haran had other children apart from those named in the scriptures: Lot, Milcah and Sarah. We do not know the name of Haran’s wife, though it is likely that Haran married a descendent of Arphaxad through Peleg’s line. It is not clear if descendants of Haran already lived in Haran; or if they arrived later after Abraham. The term Haran for the region, may have been added to the biblical account retrospectively, if they followed.

The geographic relationship of Haran adjacent to Padan-Aram with Aram-Nahor, which in turn was next to Aram is significant as this alignment is replicated in our modern world – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. Today, Aram (in this context) principally includes Spain and Portugal, while Padan-Aram signifies an association with Italy – also refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Regarding identities in the Bible; if there is more than one verse – even if it is only two – it is specifying a distinct people. Haran had a son called Lot and he in turn had two sons, Moab and Ammon. Aside from these peoples, we read about a people described as Haran twice in the Bible. We are therefore seeking a people not only related to Nahor and Haran, but also dwelling next to Nahor, Moab and Ammon in Western Europe.

2 Kings 19:12

English Standard Version

‘Have the gods of the nations delivered them, the nations that my fathers destroyed, Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, and the people of Eden…’

Ezekiel 27:21-24

English Standard Version

‘Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [son of Ishmael] were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you… Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you. In your market these traded with [Tyre, Brazil] in choice garments, in clothes of blue and embroidered work, and in carpets of colored material, bound with cords and made secure.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There are two completely different Hebrew names that have ended up as the similar name Haran in English. We’ll call them Haran I and Haran II, and note that both versions occur in Genesis 11:31: The name Haran I: Summary meaning Mountainous, Mountaineer. From the noun (har), hill or mountain. The name Haran I is assigned two times in the Bible: A son of Terah and brother of Abraham… This Haran is the father of Lot. [The other is] a Levite of the family of Gershon (1 Chronicles 23:9).

The noun (har) is the Bible’s common word for mountain or hill. The obviously related verb (hera) means to be or become pregnant. An association with the previous noun is obvious, although not because the stomach of a pregnant woman resembles a mountain. The Bible depicts nations as individual women even more than as mountains; the words, (‘umma) meaning people and (’em), meaning mother are closely related. A pregnant woman is to her husband what a conceiving nation is to its deity.

The name Haran II: Summary Meaning Freedom, Central Fire.* From the root (harar), to be a central hub of heat. The name Haran II is assigned two times in the Bible: The city where Abram’s family settled (Genesis 11:31)… A son of Caleb and Epaha (1 Chronicles 2:46). The name Haran II probably comes from the verb (hara), to burn*, or (harar), to be hot or even to be free: The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so a being hot and ultimately being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom). The unused verb (harar II) means to be free in cognate languages, which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun (hor) means noble or nobleman. 

The nouns (hor) mean hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Nouns (hur) and (huray) refer to any white stuff, including garments and linen, and noun (hori) describes white bread or cake. For a meaning of the name Haran II… BDB Theological Dictionary sees a connection with an Assyrian word that means Road or Path, and suggests the name stems from Haran’s location on a trade route.’

Canneh means favoured and Eden means pleasure, delight, finery, luxury and paradise. The descendants of Haran dwell in the nation of Switzerland. The verse in Ezekiel twenty-seven is revealing Haran’s economic strength as well as its ethnic split as evidenced by its principle languages comprising German, French, and Italian – plus Romany. The Swiss themselves – regardless of language divide – are homogenous, as their Haplogroups reveal. Whereas in Austria, an Austrian majority of sixty percent perceive themselves as German, the Swiss when asked the same question, resoundingly answered No. The meanings of the name Haran are remarkably specific about the Swiss. 

Switzerland is mountainous, free, protected with a wall of strong military tradition, is white with snow and known for its bread, cake, pastry and deserts, including chocolate. It is favoured in wealth via trade – its central location, route through Europe – and in scenery; a veritable paradise of luxury.

The ancient Hurrians and Mitanni were separate yet synonymous – also known as Hanigalbat – with the Hurrians having a lesser role due to a smaller population, with the height of their kingdom longevity shorter – circa 905 to 886 BCE – compared to the Mitanni; but as the warrior nobility within the Kingdom of Mitanni their impact was extensive and protracted – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. 

Recall we mentioned the Mitanni in Chapters XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil and XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. The Mitanni of upper Mesopotamia were the descendants of the dispossessed Hatti; who had been migrating in the direction of Babylon due to the Hittite expansion in Anatolia encroaching into the former lands of the Hatti. The apogee of the Mitanni kingdom era circa 1150 to 900 BCE is the connecting link between the peak of the Hatti empire during 1900 to 1500 BCE and the later Chaldean rule of Babylon from 626 to 539 BCE.

The Hurrian army was built around an elite chariot corps, like an honour guard, commanded by the king. The relationship between the Hurrians and Mitanni is replicated between Switzerland and Italy in the form of the Papal (or Pontifical) Swiss Guard. It is a combined armed forces and honour guard maintained by the Holy See. It protects the Pope and the Apostolic Palace, serving as the military of the Vatican City. 

Established in 1506 by Pope Julius II, it is one of the oldest military units used in ‘continuous operation.’ The dress uniform is blue, red and yellow – the family colours of the House of Medici of Florence. 

The Swiss Guard are equipped with traditional weapons, like the halberd, as well as with modern firearms. ‘Recruits to the guards must be unmarried Swiss Catholic males between 19 and 30 years of age who have completed basic training with the Swiss Armed Forces.’ The corp also receive enhanced training, in unarmed combat and small arms.

Burgundy is a region in France, made famous by its red wine. It is a little smaller than Switzerland and lies to the west, with only one hundred miles separating them. Though the name lives on in France, the original Burgundians are the ancestors of the Swiss. The Burgundians are considered a Scandinavian people whose original homeland lay on the southern shores of the Baltic Sea; where the island of Bornholm – Burgundarholm in the Middle Ages – still bears their name. In the first century CE they migrated into the lower valley of the Vistula River, but, unable to defend themselves against the Gepidae, they traveled westward. Serving as foederati – meaning auxiliaries – in the Roman army, they formed a powerful kingdom, around Sapaudia – modern day Savoy – near Lake Geneva, from 450 CE.

Christian king Gundobad ruling from 474 to 516 CE, allowed Burgundy to remain independent. Though in 534 the Franks occupied the kingdom, extinguishing the royal dynasty. The area was controlled initially by Neustrian Franks, then Middle Franks and finally German Franks until the year 888. It was then under Frankish Burgundian control until 1032. It was in 888 that Rudolf I – who died in 912 – of the German Welf family was recognised as king of Jurane, Burgundy, including much of what is now Switzerland. His son and successor Rudolf II, was able to conclude a treaty circa 931 with Hugh of Provence, extending ‘his rule over the entire regnum Burgundiae.’ 

The union of Upper and Lower Burgundy was bequeathed in 1032 – lasting until 1648 – to the German king and Holy Roman emperor Conrad II, which became known from the thirteenth century as the Kingdom of Arles. The name Burgundy was being increasingly applied to the county of Burgundy, as well as for the Duchy of Burgundy – both located in modern France. There were four Burgundies in total: the duchy, the county, and the kingdoms of Upper Burgundy and Lower Burgundy. Upper Burgundy larger than lower Burgundy was located in present day western Italy. Lower Burgundy was located in current French speaking western Switzerland.

The Historicity of the Bible, Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis mine:

‘German Nibelungen, Old Norse Niflungar denote the Burgundian royal family which take its name from the people which initially owned the gold hoard. Siegfried slew Nibelung and twelve giants before he took the hoard. In the Norse mythology, Niflheimr (‘mist home’) is the world of frost. The similar world is Niflhel, the lowest level of Norse underworld Hel. The Indo-European root ne-bh means ‘not light (sky)’ (ne – ‘not’ and bh – ‘light’ like in Greek phos) initially and gave several related meanings: ‘sky’ (Russian nebo), ‘cloud, mist’ (Latin nebula), ‘dark’ (Anglo-Saxon nifol) etc.’   

Britannica – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In 1291, when Rudolf I of Habsburg died, the elites of the Waldstatte (“forest cantons”) Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden renewed an older treaty confirming that they would maintain public peace and efficient jurisdiction without interference from outside [namely the Austrian Hapsburgs], thus securing their privileged position [Confoederatio Helvetica]. Such pacts were common at that time, but this one was to be considered much later as the foundation of the Swiss Confederation (only since 1891 has August 1, 1291, been celebrated as the birth of the nation).’

The prime Swiss communities of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden, mirror Haran, Canneh and Eden in the Bible. The word Schwyz is where the name Switzerland has derived. The Swiss are famously known for their neutrality from 1815 following the Napoleonic wars against France. The Congress of Vienna guaranteed the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland. The present nation of Switzerland was formed in 1848 with the adoption of a new constitution, as there had been internal conflict prior to this date.

Switzerland is a federated country of 26 Cantons and its administrative capital is Bern; with Lausanne serving as its judicial centre. Switzerland’s small size – its total area is about half that of Scotland and its population of 8,965,466 people, the 20th largest in Europe – gives little indication of its international significance and economic clout. Geneva is home to numerous international organisations and the Swiss economy is the 21st largest in the world – just behind Poland (19) and ahead of Taiwan (22).

The Heraldry for the three original Cantons – the Key similar to the Vatican Keys of Heaven (or Saint Peter)

The Bull, stems from veneration lasting millennium – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Apart from the capital Bern, Zurich is the country’s largest and most cosmopolitan city; its famed Bahnhofstrasse rivalling shopping districts found in other leading cities in the world. Basel and Lucerne are major German speaking cities, with Geneva and Lausanne the centres of the country’s French speaking cantons.

Geneva

In 1992 Swiss voters narrowly turned down membership in a European Economic Area comprising the EU and EFTA. Switzerland is politically isolated within Europe, though maintains strong economic ties with the EU – its largest trading partner. In the 1990s there were growing doubts about Switzerland’s past. ‘Many Swiss questioned the country’s traditional “bunker mentality” in Europe at peace and with open borders.’ 

Troubling for Switzerland was an international debate concerning dormant accounts of assets left by Jews in Swiss banks during the Nazi era, but never returned. ‘A controversy that challenged Switzerland’s image of itself and resulted in a settlement between two large commercial banks and Jewish plaintiffs in which the banks agreed to pay international Jewish organizations two billion Swiss francs (about $1.25 billion). Financial officials estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars in dormant assets remained unclaimed in Swiss banks in the early 21st century.’

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Swiss global shipments during 2021.

  1. Gems, precious metals: US$106.3 billion 
  2. Pharmaceuticals: $101.5 billion
  3. Organic chemicals: $29.7 billion
  4. Clocks, watches including parts: $24.4 billion
  5. Machinery including computers: $24 billion
  6. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $19.1 billion
  7. Electrical machinery, equipment: $13.8 billion
  8. Plastics, plastic articles: $6.2 billion
  9. Mineral fuels including oil: $4.03 billion
  10. Perfumes, cosmetics: $3.98 billion


Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.2% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was… clocks and watches including parts category which rose 34.7%. Switzerland’s shipments of gems and precious metals posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 23.3% year over year, propelled by higher international sales of gold and silver.’

The Alpine nation of Switzerland has a GDP of $947 billion in 2025. Switzerland possesses a large service sector, including financial services and a high-tech manufacturing sector served by a highly skilled labor force. Excellent quality legal, political and economic institutions with a solid physical infrastructure have set the stage for a productive economy with one of the highest per capita GDPs in the world.

Switzerland is in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves at number seven, ahead of Japan and India and one place behind China. Its total tonnage of gold is 1,040.0 tonnes and represents 5.4% of its foreign reserves. Switzerland maintains the world’s largest reserves of gold per capita. ‘During World War II, the neutral country became the center of the gold trade in Europe, making transactions with both the Allies and Axis powers. Today, much of its gold trading is done with Hong Kong and China.’

In 2023, Switzerland was number one in the world on the Global Innovation Index; ahead of Singapore (5), Finland (6) and South Korea (10).

Haran had a specific son named in the Bible, called Lot. Though he was Abraham’s nephew, Lot was born only seven years after Abraham in 1970 BCE – when Haran was thirty-nine. They had a close relationship and instead of being as an uncle and nephew that they were, acted more like brothers, due to the closeness of their ages. With the premature death of Haran, Abraham was protective of his nephew in more than one instance. The fact that Abraham did not have his own son for many years, meant Lot was logically in line to be Abraham’s heir. This is telling and may have significant bearing in how circumstances eventuated between the descendants of Lot and those from Abraham. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Lot [means] Covering. From the verb (lut), to wrap closely, to envelop

Noun (lat) or (la’t) means secrecy. The verb (malat) means to deliver from confinement or dangerous predicament. For a meaning of the name Lot, both NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names read Covering. Jones adds Veil.’

Lot

In Genesis chapter eleven we read of Terah’s departure from Ur to Haran, with Abraham and Lot’s families in 1927 BCE. Twenty-five years later when Abraham was seventy-five, the Creator told him to leave Haran to dwell in Canaan further south.

Genesis 12:4-9

English Standard Version

‘So Abram went, as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem [future location of Simeon and Levi’s revenge for their sister Dinah], to the oak of Moreh.

At that time the Canaanites [dark skinned sons of Canaan] were in the land. Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. From there he moved to the hill country on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. And there he built an altar to the Lord and called upon the name of the Lord. And Abram journeyed on, still going toward the Negeb.’

Genesis 13:1-18

English Standard Version

1 ‘So Abram went up from Egypt, he and his wife and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the Negeb. 2 Now Abram was very rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold. 3 And he journeyed on from the Negeb as far as Bethel to the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, 4 to the place where he had made an altar at the first. And there Abram called upon the name of the Lord. 5 And Lot, who went with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents, 6 so that the land could not support both of them dwelling together; for their possessions were so great that they could not dwell together, 7 and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land.

8 Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.” 10 And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw that the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere like the garden of the Lord [Eden], like the land of Egypt, in the direction of Zoar. (This was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.) 11 So Lot chose for himself all the Jordan Valley, and Lot journeyed east. Thus they separated from each other. 12 Abram settled in the land of Canaan, while Lot settled among the cities of the valley and moved his tent as far as Sodom.’ 

Recall in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega, the location of physical Eden was investigated. We learned that the area of Eden encompassed the region of southern Lebanon and the Sea of Galilee, stretching southwards to Jerusalem and the garden’s location – refer article: The Eden Enigma. We will soon discover that Zoar was situated north of the Dead or Salt Sea and so the fertile Jordan River Valley was a corridor running from Galilee through the Dead Sea – which wasn’t ‘dead’ yet – and all the way south to where the river exits into the Red Sea. Lot saw that this land between Galilee and Zoar was ‘like the garden of the Lord’ or Eden and understandably chose it for his family. Thus he lived to the east of Abraham who dwelt westwards towards the Mediterranean Sea in the land of Canaan. It also explains how Lot ended up living in Sodom – where he became prominent in the City’s governance – as it was one of the five main cities with Zoar, on the plains north of the Salt Sea.

Genesis: 13 ‘Now the men of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the Lord [like Nimrod]. 14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, 15 for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever [for a long time]. 16 I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted. 17 Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.” 18 So Abram moved his tent and came and settled by the oaks of Mamre, which are at Hebron, and there he built an altar to the Lord.’

It is worth noting that Abraham’s son Issac, chose Hebron to live the last years of his life in peace. The city was later taken by Joshua and given to Caleb and his descendants, becoming a Levitical City and a place of refuge. When David became king, his royal residence was in Hebron, he was anointed king there and he ruled from Hebron for seven and a half years.

Lot chose the fertile lower ground, the plains in the valley bordered between the hills towards the west and the River Jordan to the east. We read a parallel account in the Book of Jasher 15:35-47:

35 ‘And Lot the son of Haran, Abram’s brother, had a heavy stock of cattle, flocks and herds and tents, for the Lord was bountiful to them on account of Abram. 36 And when Abram was dwelling in the land the herdsmen of Lot quarrelled with the herdsmen of Abram, for their property was too great for them to remain together in the land, and the land could not bear them on account of their cattle. 37 And when Abram’s herdsmen went to feed their flock they would not go into the fields of the people of the land, but the cattle of Lot’s herdsmen did otherwise, for they were suffered to feed in the fields of the people of the land.

38 And the people of the land saw this occurrence daily, and they came to Abram and quarrelled with him on account of Lot’s herdsmen. 39 And Abram said to Lot, What is this thou art doing to me, to make me despicable to the inhabitants of the land, that thou orderest thy herdsman to feed thy cattle in the fields of other people? Dost thou not know that I am a stranger in this land amongst the children of Canaan, and why wilt thou do this unto me? 40 And Abram quarrelled daily with Lot on account of this, but Lot would not listen to Abram, and he continued to do the same and the inhabitants of the land came and told Abram.’ 

This display of mercurial stubbornness is indicative of Lot’s descendants.

Jasher: 41 ‘And Abram said unto Lot, How long wilt thou be to me for a stumbling block with the inhabitants of the land? Now I beseech thee let there be no more quarrelling between us, for we are kinsmen. 42 But I pray thee separate from me, go and choose a place where thou mayest dwell with thy cattle and all belonging to thee, but Keep thyself at a distance from me, thou and thy household. 43 And be not afraid in going from me, for if any one do an injury to thee, let me know and I will avenge thy cause from him, only remove from me. 44 And when Abram had spoken all these words to Lot, then Lot arose and lifted up his eyes toward the plain of Jordan. 45 And he saw that the whole of this place was well watered, and good for man as well as affording pasture for the cattle. 46 And Lot went from Abram to that place, and he there pitched his tent and he dwelt in Sodom, and they were separated from each other. 47 And Abram dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and he pitched his tent there, and Abram remained in that place many years.’

The selfishness of Lot in using other peoples property and not caring how that made Abraham look was the beginning of a rift circa 1902 to 1900 BCE between both families, which ultimately led to mistrust, hatred and a perpetual rivalry, based on jealousy between their peoples lasting to the present day. The seeds of the fissure between them, even after Lot had been continually at Abraham’s side were undoubtedly the same that causes nearly all parting of the ways between people – the same reason Asherah left the Ancient of Day’s side – pride or envy, turning to disdain – Article: Asherah. In the section on Chedorlaomer of Elam, we touched on Lot being taken hostage in 1894 BCE after the Battle of the Kings at Siddim. We will return to this battle again when we study Abraham – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Genesis 14:11-16

English Standard Version

‘So the enemy took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way. They also took Lot, the son of Abram’s brother, who was dwelling in Sodom, and his possessions, and went their way. Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, who was living by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and of Aner. These were allies of Abram. When Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men [soldiers], born in his house, 318 of them, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. And he divided his forces against them by night, he and his servants, and defeated them and pursued them to Hobah, north of Damascus [capital of Gether-Aram]. Then he brought back all the possessions, and also brought back his kinsman Lot with his possessions, and the women and the people.’

Jasher 16:6-8

‘And they plundered all the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and they also took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, and his property, and they seized all the goods of the cities of Sodom, and they went away; and Unic, Abram’s servant, who was in the battle, saw this, and told Abram all that the kings had done to the cities of Sodom, and that Lot was taken captive by them. And Abram heard this, and he rose up with about three hundred and eighteen men that were with him, and he that night pursued these kings and smote them, and they all fell before Abram and his men, and there was none remaining but the four kings who fled, and they went each his own road. And Abram recovered all the property of Sodom, and he also recovered Lot and his property, his wives and little ones and all belonging to him, so that Lot lacked nothing.’

Abraham risked his life to rescue Lot, who had somewhat deserved what had befallen him, after treating Abraham with disrespect; ensuring he had all his family – including more than one wife – and belongings returned to him safely. Proverbs 25:21-22 CJB: “If someone who hates you is hungry, give him food to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. For you will heap fiery coals (of shame) on his head, and Adonai [the Lord] will reward you.” Abraham was offered a reward by the King of Sodom, but refused to take anything for what he had done. We next read of Lot in Genesis chapter Nineteen.

Genesis 19:1-38

English Standard Version

‘The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed himself with his face to the earth 2 and said, “My lords, please turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night and wash* your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the town square.” 3 But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened** bread [March-April, the time of the Passover* and Feast** of unleavened Bread], and they ate.’

Hebrews 13:2

Complete Jewish Bible

but don’t forget to be friendly to outsiders; for in so doing, some people, without knowing it, have entertained angels.’

Lot had gained a position of responsibility in Sodom when he had moved to the city circa 1900 BCE. Lot was rescued by Abraham in 1894 BCE in the aftermath of the Battle of Siddim. The destruction of Sodom took place in Abraham’s 99th year, in 1878 BCE. For twenty-two years, Lot and his family had resided in Sodom. Sitting in the gate, means Lot was a member of Sodom’s ruling council and involved in the discussion and prosecution of legal matters. Lot may have been an actual Judge.

Genesis: 4 ‘But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know [H3045 – yada: ‘to know a person carnally’] them.” 6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”

9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down. 10 But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them and shut the door. 11 And they [the angels created a blinding light] struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, both small and great, so that they wore themselves out groping for the door.’

Judging by the name of the city of Sodom and the fact the crowd of men were wanting the two men who were angels; homosexuality is clearly what was intended. In a broader sense, the city was involved in adult activity with Nephilim and Eliouds, who lived there; for as stated earlier in the Book of Genesis, a second irruption of angelic infiltration with humans had occurred. Hence the requirement for the judgement of utter destruction to be decreed. It may have involved more than sexual relations.

A continuation of the ante-diluvian and post-flood (Tower of Babel) scientific and technological endeavour to completely tamper with mankind’s genetic code and seek profane immortality, would certainly attract punishment – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. For it has been reserved for the time of the end for these events to reoccur; thus requiring the Creator to re-intervene at that time. Christ’s half-brother Jude, connects the activities before the flood with those taking place in the five cities of the Plain. 

The Greek word heteros translated as ‘strange’ flesh, is referring to sexual congress with either Nephilim or perverted sex with fallen angels not strictly just homosexuality.

Jude 6-7 ESV: ‘And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling… just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural [G2087 – heteros: another, one not of the same nature, form, kind] desire [G4561 – sarx: carnal cravings that incite sin], serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.’

Lot offered his two youngest daughters who were around 15 to 20 years old, to the mob, rather than the angels. What the rationale behind this is conjecture. Maybe Lot was buying time, for he knew the angels could and would resolve the issue without his daughters having to go out – a bluff. Or possibly, he weighed their lives versus those of the messengers sent by the Creator and made a judgement call.

Genesis: 12 ‘Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone [friends] you have in the city, bring them out of the place. 13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it.”

14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, “Up! Get out of this place, for the Lord is about to destroy the city.” But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting. 15 As morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Up! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be swept away in the punishment of the city.”

Verse 14 is misleading, as it appears the two younger daughters were bequeathed but not yet married. The interlinear reads: And Lot went out, spake unto his sons law, which married his daughters. From the account, we learn that Lot has at least two other daughters, aside from the two virgins already mentioned. The Book of Jasher introduces a fifth daughter.

Book of Jasher 19:11, 23-35 

‘And in the course of time Sarah sent Eliezer to Sodom, to see Lot and inquire after his welfare. 23 … and when it was told to Abraham he went and made war with the kings of Elam, and he recovered from their hands all the property of Lot as well as the property of Sodom. 24 At that time the wife of Lot bare him a daughter [circa 1894 BCE], and he called her name Paltith, saying, Because God had delivered him and his whole household from the kings of Elam; and Paltith daughter of Lot grew up, and one of the men of Sodom took her for a wife [circa 1882-1879 BCE]

25 And a poor man came into the city to seek a maintenance, and he remained in the city some days, and all the people of Sodom caused a proclamation of their custom** not to give this man a morsel of bread to eat, until he dropped dead upon the earth, and they did so. 26 And Paltith the daughter of Lot saw this man lying in the streets starved with hunger, and no one would give him any thing to keep him alive, and he was just upon the point of death. 27 And her soul was filled with pity on account of the man, and she fed him secretly with bread for many days… and three men concealed themselves in a place where the poor man was stationed, to know who it was that brought him bread to eat… 32 And the three men saw what Paltith did to the poor man… 34 And they took Paltith and brought her before their judges… now therefore declare to us the punishment due to this woman for having transgressed our law. 35 And the people of Sodom and Gomorrah assembled and kindled a fire in the street of the city, and they took the woman and cast her into the fire and she was burned to ashes.’

Paltith would have been about fifteen or sixteen, when she was put to death, which was not long before Sodom was destroyed. Anciently, daughters were given in marriage as soon as they were deemed a woman and able to serve a husband and bear his children.

Genesis: 16 ‘But he lingered. So the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the Lord being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city.’ 

Lot’s angelic visitors and protectors had already taken an aerial reconnoissance. According to the Haggadah, they were then able to fly him and his family inside their craft out of Sodom’s City wall boundaries. It was then that they instructed Lot to flee to further safety. 

Genesis: 17 ‘And as they brought them out, one said, “Escape for your life. Do not look back or stop anywhere in the valley. Escape to the hills, lest you be swept away.” 18 And Lot said to them, “Oh, no, my lords. 19 Behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life. But I cannot escape to the hills, lest the disaster overtake me and I die.

20 Behold, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there – is it not a little one? – and my life will be saved!” 21 He said to him, “Behold, I grant you this favor also, that I will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. 22 Escape there quickly, for I can do nothing till you arrive there.” Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.’

Contrary Lot, might be a fitting name and at a moment when time was of the essence. We will find that his descendants are in fact an impulsive and unpredictable people. Granted, Lot was ninety-two years old – just ten years older than when his father, Haran died. It is ironic, for Lot did not linger in Zoar, but rather fled from Zoar and retreated to a cave. 

Lot’s entreating was in fact a far bigger favour even granted by the angels than sparing his life. When asking to be able to go to Zoar, he was actually asking for one of the five cities marked for destruction to be spared. The five cities in question were Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zebo[im] and Bela – afterwards known as Zoar. According to Lot, it would seem it was the smallest of the five cites on the plain. 

In contrast to what is commonly taught, the condemnation of Sodom and the other cities was not just because of sexual transgressions. Another reason is given in Ezekiel 16:49-50 ESV: “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid** the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.”

Genesis: 23 ‘The sun had risen on the earth when Lot came to Zoar. 24 Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven. 25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. 26 But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.’

Book of Jasher 19:52-54 

‘And he overthrew these cities, all the plain and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground; and Ado the wife of Lot looked back to see the destruction of the cities, for her compassion was moved on account of her daughters who remained in Sodom, for they did not go with her. 53 And when she looked back she became a pillar of salt, and it is yet in that place unto this day. 54 And the oxen which stood in that place daily licked up the salt to the extremities of their feet, and in the morning it would spring forth afresh, and they again licked it up unto this day.’

The Book of Jasher gives Lot’s wife’s name as Ado. Certain Rabbis refer to her as Idit. One vowel lacking from Idiot, it would unfortunately seem. The Midrash calls her Edith, which may have derived from Idit. The Book of Jasher supports other married daughters still in Sodom, when Lot, his wife and two unmarried daughters fled for their lives. It helps to explain, why Idit disobeyed the Angel’s instruction. It may have been more than the intensity of the detonation and Idit doing more than just looking back. She must have lingered too close to the blast zone. The interlinear infers this: ‘But his wife looked back from behind him…’

Luke 17:28-32 

English Standard Version

‘Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot – they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all – so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back.

Remember Lot’s wife.’

Genesis: 27 ‘And Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the Lord. 28 And he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward [the east] all the land of the valley, and he looked and, behold, the smoke of the land went up like the smoke of a furnace. 29 So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived.’ 

Wisdom of Solomon 10.7 GNT: 

‘You can still see the evidence of their wickedness. The land there is barren and smoking. The plants bear fruit that never ripens, and a pillar of salt stands as a monument to one who did not believe.’

Evidence found supporting the Biblical description of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction? Dean Smith, 2018 – emphasis mine:

‘In an article published in Science News, archaeologists working at Tall el-Hammam located in Jordan… have found evidence corroborating its massive destruction recorded in the Bible that spoke of brimstone and fire falling from the sky… Archaeologists have found evidence of the area being hit with a massive explosion that turned glaze on potsherds into glass. They also found stone fragments stuck in the glaze that supports the idea that something poured down upon cities from the sky. According to lead archaeologist Philip J. Silvia, the heat was “perhaps as hot as the surface of the sun.” They also discovered that the bricks used in the buildings were totally obliterated leaving only the stone foundations.

The Bible records that not only were the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah [destroyed] but much of the valley as well and Silva confirmed this adding they found evidence the blast covered an area of 15.5 miles and killing upwards of 65,000 people. The site on the north end of the Dead Sea was so devastated that it took 600 years for the soil to recover sufficiently to allow crops… 

Writing on behalf of the Tall el-Hamman Excavation Project, co-director Dr. Steven Collins said: “The violent conflagration that ended occupation at Tall el-Hammam produced melted potters, scorched foundation stones and several feet of ash and destruction debris churned into a dark gray matrix ‘as if in a Cuisinart’ [food processor].”

Archaeological evidence confirms that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by intense fire, Dean Smith, 2020- emphasis mine:

‘According to archaeologists working on the site believed to include the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, they found evidence confirming the Biblical record that the two cities were destroyed by sulphur and fire… The archaeologists, who have been working on the site for 13 years, reported discovering evidence of intense heat. This included clay and rock that had been turned into glass. 

This would require a brief burst of heat of between 8,000 to 12,000 degree Celsius. The archaeologists also noted that the destruction took place “in an instant,” and resulted in the stripping of the topsoil. The archaeologists added that “a super-heated brine of Dead Sea anhydride salts pushed over the [landscape] by the Event’s frontal shock wave.”

It is interesting that even the Biblical account noted the appearance of salt as it described Lot’s wife being turned into a pillar of salt and as well, noted the destruction of vegetation. They wrote, “the physical evidence from Tall el-Hamman and neighboring sites exhibit signs of a highly destructive concussive and thermal event that one might expect from what is described in Genesis 19.”

Secular history is silent concerning Lot, ‘save for the fact that the Dead Sea has always been called by the Arabs, the Sea of Lot.’ The Battle of Siddim, including the Plain with the five cities – four of them destroyed – is located in the area of the Dead Sea or Sea of Death. The Dead Sea and its composition is an anomaly that can be explained only by the biblical destruction of the region as recorded in Genesis chapter nineteen. Archaeological digs have confirmed the northern end, southeast of Jericho, of the Dead Sea – rather than the traditional southern end – as the original site of the Valley of Siddim. 

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 195, 197-198, 206-207 – emphasis mine:

‘There is no scriptural or other evidence to support… Sodom and Gormorrah [being]… located… in the shallow or southern part of the Dead Sea, the body of water the Jews call… the Salt Sea…To the contrary, all indications are that the [five] cities were located in the northern part of the Dead Sea… [nor] the age of the Dead Sea [being] hundreds of thousands of years old… this sea dates… [according to Velikovsky to] less than 5000 years [ago]… [or] no further back than the days of Abraham [1878 BCE]. In the Biblical story… it specifically states that the area now occupied by the Dead Sea used to be called the Valley or vale of Siddim [Genesis 14:3]…’ 

‘Some catastrophic event must have caused the [rupture of the] geological fault (which runs through and underlies the area) to displace, the ground sinking in the process, and forming a seal to allow the accumulation of water [creating a large inland sea] from the inflow of the Jordan River. Josephus adds… that the Lord “cast a thunderbolt upon the city and set it on fire with its inhabitants.” In the Haggadah, this thunderbolt comes from the Shekinah, the aerial chariot of the Lord: “When the angels had brought forth Lot and his family and set them outside the city, he bade them run for their lives, and not look behind, lest they behold the Shekinah, which had descended to work the destruction of the cities…”

The Dead Sea contains twenty-one minerals including Sodium, Magnesium, Calcium, Bromine, Bitumen and Potassium. Twelve of these are found in no other sea or ocean. The Dead Sea contains ten times more salts and minerals than the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea has a 33% concentration of salt compared to only 3% in the world’s oceans. There are other bodies of water in the world with similar salt content ratios – one wonders if they are victims of a similar fate as the Dead Sea?

Genesis: 30 ‘Now Lot went up out of Zoar and lived in the hills with his two daughters, for he was afraid to live in Zoar. So he lived in a cave with his two daughters. 31 And the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the earth. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve offspring [seed] from our father.” 33 So they made their father drink wine that night. And the firstborn went in and lay with her father. He did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.’

The incident with an intoxicated Noah and his daughter-in-law Na’eltama’uk, did not end well – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. This is another situation in being taken advantage of while inebriated. The cave location was very remote and the eldest daughter – the only sister recorded speaking – was concerned that their father Lot is old and may die (without a son and heir) and that any chance of a man visiting for them wasn’t presenting itself anytime soon. Their sisters and brothers-in-law in Sodom were dead and would not be leaving any children. This is more likely perhaps, than their thinking the world had ended and there were no men left to continue humankind. The three of them had left Zoar and knew there were other survivors. Either way, the daughters do not take their father into their confidence. 

The biblical account presents the daughters as the ‘initiators and perpetrators of the incestuous rape’ of Lot over two separate nights, according to Esther Fuchs. The verb used by the older daughter about eighteen to twenty years old for giving Lot wine also means to irrigate the ground. Thus, the daughters intentions are not to just give their father a glass or two, but to fully saturate him and get Lot very drunk; before having sexual intercourse with him. The next night, the younger sister about fifteen to seventeen years old, repeats the course of action. The fact that the sisters get their father very drunk, suggests their actions were more altruistic than driven by desire.

One feels for Lot after the second night of binge drinking and not only the hangover he must have endured but coming to the realisation of what he had been party too.

The Hebrew word used for offspring is zera, meaning seed or offspring in a general sense, rather than for a specific ‘son.’ The intent is ultimately related to the eventual Messiah and fulfilment of Genesis 3:15. From a historical perspective, these acts were essential for the future birth of the Son of Man. The Creator would judge the daughters by their thoughts and not necessarily their deeds; as this is a recurrent theme in the Bible for those the Creator is working with. The daughters true intent was not to lay with their father for sexual gratification, but rather to ensure their family line continued. 

Support that Lot’s daughters were vindicated rather than Lot himself is the fact that the prohibition in Deuteronomy 23:2-4, 6 ESV, applies to males not females: “No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord. No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the Lord forever, because they did not meet you – the sons of Jacob – with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you. You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever.”

The angels who rescued Lot would have been cognisant of the fact that Ruth the Moabite would trace her lineage to the eldest sister, and her marriage to Boaz from the tribe of Judah would result in descendants, including King David and the Messianic Saviour. They would also have known that Naamah the Ammonite, would trace her lineage to the youngest sister and her marriage to King Solomon – the only wife of Solomon stated by name in the Bible – would result in the birth of Rehoboam, King of Judah after Solomon – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 

The goodness of Lot’s daughters intentions displayed, in that they lay with their father only once and like Ruth – acted for an ideal – when she lay at the foot of Boaz’s bed in the threshing floor. 

Genesis: 34 ‘The next day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father. Let us make him drink wine tonight also. Then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve offspring from our father.” 35 So they made their father drink wine that night also. And the younger arose and lay with him, and he did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.’ 

Scholars, such as Robert Alter have postulated that Lot’s daughters in sleeping with their father “suggests measure-for-measure justice meted out for his rash offer” to the mob outside their home. ‘Rabbis have observed that a man usually allows himself to be killed in order to save his wife and children… Lot was willing to allow the townspeople to abuse his daughters.’ In Sodom, Lot was ready to offer his daughters – possibly against their will – to engage in sexual relations with the people outside. Later, Lot’s daughters have relations with their unwitting father. These acts of incest are Lot’s punishment for his indecorous behaviour, according to some scholars. 

There are two Rabbinic views issued against the patriarch Lot. Firstly, that Lot ‘from the outset, decided to dwell in Sodom because he wanted to engage in the licentious [behaviour] of its inhabitants.’ Lot thought he could engage secretly in depravity. He is then later, humiliated through his daughters seducing him. R Nahman bar Hanan said to the effect: “Whoever is driven by his lust for fornication, will eventually be fed from his own flesh.” Lot was so eager to engage in promiscuity, that in the end, his daughters played the harlot with him.

Secondly, Lot insidiously desired his daughters; for he was inebriated when the elder sister lay with him, though he was sober enough to know when she rose. 

This is indicated in the Old Testament ‘by the supralinear dot over the word u-ve-komah (“when she rose”).’ Though Lot was not aware of what was going to happen when he drunk the wine, he was aware of having sex with his eldest daughter by the time she left his bed. Therefore, his willingness to drink wine the next night – means to some – that he was complicit in repeating incest with his younger daughter. On the basis of what is said in Proverbs 18:1 CJB: “He who separates himself indulges his desires and shows contempt for sound advice of any kind”, some Rabbis conclude that Lot did lust after his daughters. Particularly, as Lot sought out a remote cave which allowed the facilitation of the incestuous events to occur. 

Even so, other Rabbis have reinterpreted the incest accounts of Lot and his daughters in the Bible in a more positive light due to the royal and messianic lineages it produced. Ironically, the other half of David’s lineage is similarly problematic for the Rabbis; as Tamar secures a son, by surreptitiously seducing her father-in-law Judah. The son Pharez, in turn becomes an ancestor to Boaz and thus also, to King David.

Genesis: 36 ‘Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father. 37 The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day. 38 The younger also bore a son and called his name Ben-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.

Book of Jasher 19:55, 57-60 

‘And Lot and two of his daughters that remained with him fled and escaped to the cave of Adullam, and they remained there for some time… And they both lay with their father, and they conceived and bare sons… And after this Lot and his two daughters went away from there, and he dwelt on the other side of the Jordan with his two daughters and their sons, and the sons of Lot grew up, and they went and took themselves wives from the land of Canaan, and they begat children and they were fruitful and multiplied.’

The eldest daughter names her son Moab, which means ‘from my father.’ She has been rather brazen and immodest in openly naming her son being born of her father. This now leaves no doubt as to the union being an incestuous one. The younger daughter names her son Ben-Ammi, which means ‘son of my clan,’ a more veiled euphemistic reference to her son’s origin. While the names of the sons are descriptive of their conception, they serve a negative etiological (cause or origin of something, invariably a disease) function for Israel’s neighbours – and frequent enemies – as the Moabites and the Ammonites. The definitions, puzzlingly humiliate Lot – as if revengeful retribution was a motive – while at the same time demeaning also his daughters who named the babies.

Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis mine:

‘It is a remarkable fact that the children of Lot should have commemorated their infamous origin in their very names. Moab means literally “water of a father,” while Ammon or Ben-ammi means “son of my mother.” These names, so horribly suggestive, were proudly retained by two whole nations throughout their history. The Old Testament is silent as to the personal story of the two sons of Lot, but they evidently repeated the story of the founders of the other Hebrew nations, becoming chieftains… and founding royal dynasties…

The descendants of Moab within a few generations took possession of the country formerly inhabited by the Emim, (“terrible ones”), a branch of the aboriginal Nephilim, even as their cousins, the descendants of Ammon, took possession of the country formerly occupied by the Zuzim and Zamzummim.

The [partial] slaughter of these ancient giant races by Chedorlaomer and his allies no doubt cleared the way for the children of Lot. The Moabites found homes in the rich and well protected plateau to the east of the Dead Sea, extending from the land of Edom in the south to the land of Gilead in the north, while the Ammonites established themselves in the land of Gilead… and they dwelt here until they were driven into the eastern desert by the tribes of Gad and Reuben… their descendants recovered the land of Gilead after the Assyrians had carried away the tribe of Gad.’

The significance of the Ammonites dwelling in Gilead will become apparent as we progress.

2 Peter 2:6-8 ESV: ‘… if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous [1] Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous [2] man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous [3] soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard)…’

The author of 2 Peter really wishes to convey the righteousness of Lot, yet was he really righteous? His actions do not convey the deeds of a converted mind. For Lot a. knowingly insulted the local land owners; b. fell out with ‘righteous’ Abraham (Romans 4:22); c. ignored the specific instructions of the angels when fleeing Sodom and argued for his own way – and then preceded to change his mind about living in Zoar and fled to a cave in the hills as the angels and stipulated in the first place; d. was willing to sacrifice his youngest daughters’ virginity to rape; and e. then slept with both of them himself. As the Book of 2 Peter was not authored by the Apostle Peter, one wonders as to the inspiration and veracity of its claims regarding Lot – refer article: The Pauline Paradox.

In fact, Lot is not included in Hebrews chapter eleven as one of the faithful, with Abraham and Sarah. His omission is more glaring than King Solomon for example, who deliberately turned away from the Lord – 1 Kings 11:9. The author of 2 Peter calls Lot a righteous soul in the Greek Interlinear. And so by extension, he has perhaps unduly included Lot with the righteous giants, Noah, Daniel and Job – Ezekiel 14:14.

Even so, Lot has a lot in common with Job in the dramatic and sudden loss of most of his family. Lot lost his wife, and at least two daughters and two sons-in-law. Job 1:1-2, 18-19 ESV: ‘There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil. There were born to him seven sons and three daughters… “Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother’s house, and behold, a great wind came across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you” – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Perhaps the Eternal was working with Lot in humbling him.

Ammon, the younger brother of Moab, is invariably described as the ‘children or sons of Ammon’ in the Bible, a clue to their status not being quite the same as Moab or other identities investigated thus far. The Hebrew definition of H5983 from H5971, for Ammon is tribal or inbred as one born from incest.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Ben-ammi meaning: Son Of My Kinsman, Son Of My People from (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (‘am), people or kinsman [kindred].

The only Ben-ammi in the Bible is the incestuous son of Lot and his younger daughter, who becomes the patriarch of the “sons” of Ammon, also known as the Ammonites (Genesis 19:38)… its curious that both the daughters of this prominent figure remain nameless, also since Lots daughters are matriarchs of enormous nations.

The noun (ben) means son, or more general: a member of one particular social or economic node – called a “house”, which is built upon the instructions of one (‘ab), or “father”… within… a larger economy… This noun obviously resembles the verb (bana), to build, and the noun (‘eben), stone. Our noun’s feminine version, namely (bat), means daughter, which resembles the noun (bayit), meaning house. The word for mother, (’em), is highly similar to that of tribe or people, (‘umma). The verb (‘mm) probably expressed to be inclusive or comprehensive. Its rare uses in the Bible relate to making secrets or making info available to an in-crowd. 

For a meaning of the name Ammon, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads A People. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes Great People, taking the extension as an intensitive.’

The children of Ammon today are in part, the French Canadians of Quebec. They also comprise the northwesterly section of the nation of France (and the capital, Paris); with the main body of French being descended from the eldest son Moab.

French Canadian men

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine: 

‘Abraham also had a nephew named Lot. Lot had two sons, Moab and Ammon. They were born to him after the calamity that hit Sodom (Genesis 19:37-38). They lived by the Arabs east of the Dead Sea next to Palestine. They are still in the same region today! Their nation today is called Jordan, after the Jordan River. Jordan has been much in the news lately, Amman is the capital of Jordan now.’

The Arabs once lived in north Africa and then migrated to the Arabian Peninsula. They never lived north of this area or next to Moab and Ammon. The peoples of present day Jordan as discussed, are descendants of Mizra, son of Ham – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Moab and Ammon migrated from Palestine a very long time ago; with some two thousand years elapsing between there and their present location.

Hoeh: ‘Isaiah 11:14 points out that these two sons of Lot live near Palestine today. Since the days of Isaiah, the children of Moab have been “very small and without strength” (Isaiah 16:13-14). They have not been taken “into captivity” to another nation (Jeremiah 48:11), In these latter days boastful Moab lives “together with the children of Ammon” (Ezekiel 25:9-10). The Kingdom of Jordan occupies part of present-day Palestine and keeps the Jews from dwelling in Old Jerusalem. Jeremiah 49:1-2 prophesied this over 2500 years ago! But Arabs and Jordanians are not the only Hebrews!’

Isaiah chapter sixteen is a future reference to Moab. Moab and Ammon are anything but a ‘very few and feeble’ people (English Standard version). The Arabic peoples descended from Ham are not Hebrews. This appellation refers broadly to the descendants of Peleg through his grandson, Eber. It would include Moab and Ammon. In time it was applied primarily to the sons of Jacob. The chief city or capital of the Ammonites was Rabbah and has a modern day equivalent – to be discussed. Hoeh’s comment regarding Moab and Ammon today living together is an insightful one and biblically and historically supported.

French Canadian women

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Rabbah meaning: Great from the verb (rabab), to be great or many.

There are two cities named Rabbah in the Bible, the lesser known one is a city in the territory allotted to the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:60). The most famous Rabbah was also known as Rabbath-bene-ammon or “Rabbath of the sons of Ammon” (Rabbath is really the same as Rabbah, just of an older spelling), which was the major city of Ammon (modern Amman, the capital of Jordan).

It’s first mentioned in the Bible as the final resting place of the huge iron bed of king Og of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:11). What Og’s bunk was doing in an Ammonite metropolis is a bit of a mystery. Bashan was a kingdom located to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and Ammon country was to the east of the Salt Sea. But Og was the last of the Rephaim… and they were expelled by the Ammonites (Deuteronomy 2:20). It appears that the Ammonites had hoisted Og’s huge bedstead to their capital as a trophy.

Even though YHWH had ordered not to meddle with Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:19), the tribes of Gad and Reuben [plus the half tribe of East Manasseh] settled in their land anyway. Rabbah is listed as just over the border of Gad, which puts it in or near Reuben, although that’s not explicitly mentioned (Joshua 15:25). The reason for this is probably that the Ammonites held out in Rabbah until the time of king David.

While the author of 2 Samuel focuses mainly on David’s seduction of Bathsheba, her husband Uriah was engaged with the siege of Rabbah. The author casually reports that the Ammonites were destroyed and Rabbah captured by general Joab (2 Samuel 11:1, 12:26). The gold crown of the Ammonite king weighed a talent and was placed on David’s head, and the Ammonites were massacred in the most creative ways (2 Samuel 12:31)… Nahash is also the name of the cruel Ammonite king whom Saul defeated (1 Samuel 11:1). The son of this Nahash, Hanun, provoked David into the siege that ended in Rabbah’s ultimate defeat (2 Samuel 10:1). 

… the identical noun (rab) means chief or captain. Noun (rob) means multitude or abundance. Possibly a second yet identical verb (rabab) means to shoot, particularly of arrows. This may very well be a specified usage of our verb since arrows are customarily shot en masse by many archers. Noun (rab) means archer, and is identical to the adjective meaning many. Fittingly, noun (arbeh) denotes a kind of locust.

For a meaning of the name Rabbah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Great, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has Great City, and BDB Theological Dictionary proposes Great or Populous.’

There are hundreds of references to Ammon and Moab in the Bible as they were an arch nemesis of the sons of Jacob. The reason for this was heightened by the fact they were great nations with large populations living next to each other. The fact that the sons of Jacob had returned to the land centuries after leaving had only exacerbated their natural enmity as two closely related family members who just didn’t get along. 

Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis mine:

‘Both became great and powerful clans or nations, but the Ammonites always preferred the roving life of… marauders, while Moab… [developed] into a settled, well organized and prosperous nation, the chief characteristics of which were wealth and moral corruption.

The prosperity and riches of Moab are vividly portrayed in the Word. In the cities of this land there was “a great multitude of people,” living on the “glory” and “fat of the land,” possessing “great treasure,” and crowding the temples of Chemosh and Baal Peor, where infants were sacrificed, and virgins prostituted in the name of religion’ – refer article: Belphegor. ‘Outside of the towns were the “plentiful fields,” the vineyards and gardens of “summer fruit,” the meadows where hundreds of thousands of sheep and cattle were browsing. Peace and prosperity reign everywhere; the people are fat and self-satisfied, but of the worship of the true God there is not a trace.

Small wonder that such a nation should view with alarm the approach of a great horde of desert wanderers, asking permission to pass through the land on their way to Canaan. They came as Hebrew kinsmen, worshipping an ancient but generally forsaken deity named Jehovah. Balak, the king of the Moabites, now bethought himself of a Syrian wizard, Balaam, who was [known]: to prophecy in the name of Jehovah and who was wont to dispense his blessings or cursings for filthy lucre. If a prophet of Jehovah were to curse the children of Israel, the latter would surely be put to confusion. He, therefore, sent for the complaisant prophet, but great was his disgust when the magician was forced by his God to turn the intended curse into a blessing, the power and beauty of which are almost without equal in Hebrew literature. Dismayed, Balak now allied himself with the Midianites in an effort to destroy Israel by the seductions of harlots in the lascivious rites of Baal Peor, but again his scheme was frustrated, and he was glad to escape the frightful punishment meted out to the Midianites, who had been the most active in the plot.

The subsequent relations of Moab with Israel were of a somewhat mixed character, sometimes friendly, as is evident from the story of Ruth, the Moabitish ancestress of David, but more generally hostile. Not long after the Israelitish conquest, Eglon, king of Moab, by the assistance of Ammon and Amalek, “smote Israel and possessed himself of the city of palm trees,” (Jericho), The children of Israel now “served Eglon for eighteen years” (Judges 3:13), until they were delivered by Ehud [2nd Judge of Israel, from the tribe of Benjamin – from 1284 to 1204 BCE]. The Moabites, however, continued to harass the chosen people on various occasions, and were not subdued until David put to the sword two-thirds of the population, the remainder becoming bondsmen and subjected to a regular tribute, (2 Samuel 8:2; 23:20), thus literally fulfilling Balaam’s prophecy: “Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion and shall destroy him that remaineth of Ar,” (i.e., Moab). After the division of Solomon’s kingdom, Moab seems to have remained tributary to the kingdom of Israel, and in the time of Ahab paid an annual tribute of [100,000 rams] – an indication of the almost fabulous wealth of so small a nation.

After the death of Ahab the Moabites revolted and joined the Ammonites in an attack upon the kingdom of Judah. The allies, however, fell to fighting one another; and Judah, Israel and Edom now joined in a war against Moab; the latter fell into an ambush and were slaughtered; the land of Moab was swept clean by the besom of destruction; the cities were beaten down and their stones scattered over the fields… the wells of water were filled up, and all the trees of the land were cut down. The king of Moab, with his family and a small remnant of the army, took refuge in Kir-haraseth where, in the extremity of despair, and in full sight of the besiegers, “he took his eldest son, that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall.” (2 Kings 3:27.) 

The besieging army, struck with horror at this sight, now withdrew to their own lands. After this awful event, nothing further is known of the history of Moab for a long period, but it appears that Moab gradually recovered all of its former prosperity, and in addition took possession of the territory of Reuben, after this tribe had been carried away by the Assyrians. At the time of the Babylonian invasion, Moab submitted to Nebuchadnezzar, and after the return of the Jews from the captivity the Moabites took the lead in annoying those who were rebuilding Jerusalem. Even at the time of the last Jewish war the Moabites, according to Josephus, was still “a very great nation,” but two hundred years afterwards they were exterminated or absorbed by a great invasion of “the children of the East.”

The Moabites were neither ‘exterminated or absorbed’ but rather, they were forced to migrate westwards. The Ammonites were a more diverse or fragmented people compared to their elder brother Moab. In Canaan the Ammonites had their own territory north of Moab, with their own capital – Rabbah. Ultimately they joined with Moab and migrated with them. Though these were not all the descendants of Ammon and Moab as we shall discover. In modern times, most have unified with Moab in France, while the remainder migrated to New France in North America, eventually becoming the modern province of Quebec in Canada. 

Today, the term Rabbah – as in those Ammonites not dwelling with Moab – broadly means the province of Quebec and Rabbah as in specifically the capital, is fulfilled by Quebec City.

When the Israelites entered Canaan, they were instructed to leave Ammon alone.

Deuteronomy 2:16-22, 37

English Standard Version

16 “So as soon as all the men of war had perished and were dead from among the people, 17 the Lord said to me, 18 ‘Today you are to cross the border of Moab at Ar. 19 And when you approach the territory of the people of Ammon, do not harass them or contend with them, for I will not give you any of the land of the people of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot for a possession.’ 20 (It is also counted as a land of Rephaim. Rephaim formerly lived there – but the Ammonites call them Zamzummim – 21 a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim; but the Lord destroyed them before the Ammonites, and they dispossessed them and settled in their place, 22 as he did for the people of Esau, who live in Seir, when he destroyed the Horites before them and they dispossessed them and settled in their place even to this day. 37 Only to the land of the sons of Ammon you did not draw near, that is, to all the banks of the river Jabbok and the cities of the hill country, whatever the Lord our God had forbidden us.”

The Israelites and Ammonites repeatedly disputed territory and borders. The rift between Lot and Abraham didn’t heal or improve with time and aggravation continually worsened the relationship. The instruction was clear: do not engage negatively with Ammon in any way or take their land.

Joshua 13:8-13

English Standard Version

‘With the other half of the tribe of Manasseh [half tribe of East Manasseh (or Gilead)] the Reubenites and the Gadites received their inheritance, which Moses gave them, beyond the Jordan eastward, as Moses the servant of the Lord gave them: from Aroer, which is on the edge of the Valley of the Arnon, and the city that is in the middle of the valley, and all the tableland of Medeba as far as Dibon; and all the cities of Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon, as far as the boundary of the Ammonites; and Gilead, and the region of the Geshurites and Maacathites, and all Mount Hermon, and all Bashan to Salecah; all the kingdom of Og in Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei (he alone was left of the remnant of the Rephaim); these Moses had struck and driven out. Yet the people of Israel did not drive out the Geshurites or the Maacathites, but Geshur and Maacath dwell in the midst of Israel to this day.’

After the sons of Jacob fought the existing Canaanite inhabitants and had either killed or subjugated them, the land was divided amongst the tribes on the eastern side of the River Jordan. The tribe of Manasseh had split in two. The half tribe of West Manasseh stayed with their brother Ephraim, while the half tribe of East Manasseh struck out on their own. With the tribes of Reuben and Gad, they requested to live on the east side of the River Jordan. These two and a half tribes believed the land was spacious and suitable to live. It did not come without difficulties; namely, Ammonites, Amorites, various tribes of Elioud giants  – such as king Og of the Rephaim – and Mount Herman, the once headquarters so-to-speak, of the Watcher fallen angels.

Judges 10:17-18

English Standard Version

‘Then the Ammonites were called to arms, and they encamped in Gilead. And the people of Israel came together, and they encamped at Mizpah. And the people, the leaders of Gilead, said one to another, “Who is the man who will begin to fight against the Ammonites? He shall be head over all the inhabitants of Gilead.”

Gilead – a name brought to the wider public’s attention by the Canadian author Margaret Atwood and her insightful novel, The Handmaid’s Tale in 1985 (and 1990 film) – was the broad area east of the River Jordan and bordering north of Ammon which had been settled by the two and a half tribes of Israel. In time, the word Gilead became more synonymous with the half tribe of East Manasseh than with Reuben or Gad.

Judges 11:11-33

English Standard Version

11 ‘So Jephthah [ninth Judge of Israel for 6 years beginning in 1106 BCE from the half tribe of East Manasseh (or Gilead)] went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and leader over them. And Jephthah spoke all his words before the Lord at Mizpah. 

12 Then Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites and said, “What do you have against me, that you have come to me to fight against my land?” 13 And the king of the Ammonites answered the messengers of Jephthah, “Because Israel on coming up from Egypt took away my land, from the Arnon to the Jabbok and to the Jordan; now therefore restore it peaceably.” 14 Jephthah again sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites 15 and said to him, “Thus says Jephthah: Israel did not take away the land of Moab or the land of the Ammonites, 16 but when they came up from Egypt, Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh. 17 Israel then sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, ‘Please let us pass through your land,’ but the king of Edom would not listen. And they sent also to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel remained at Kadesh.

18 “Then they journeyed through the wilderness and went around the land of Edom and the land of Moab and arrived on the east side of the land of Moab and camped on the other side of the Arnon. But they did not enter the territory of Moab, for the Arnon was the boundary of Moab. 19 Israel then sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, king of Heshbon, and Israel said to him, ‘Please let us pass through your land to our country,’ 20 but Sihon did not trust Israel to pass through his territory, so Sihon gathered all his people together and encamped at Jahaz and fought with Israel. 21 And the Lord, the God of Israel, gave Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they defeated them. So Israel took possession of all the land of the Amorites, who inhabited that country… 

23 So then the Lord, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel; and are you to take possession of them? 24 Will you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? And all that the Lord our God has dispossessed before us, we will possess. 25 Now are you any better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab? Did he ever contend against Israel, or did he ever go to war with them? 26 While Israel lived in Heshbon and its villages, and in Aroer and its villages, and in all the cities that are on the banks of the Arnon, 300 years [1406 – 1106 BCE], why did you not deliver them within that time? 27 I therefore have not sinned against you, and you do me wrong by making war on me. The Lord, the Judge, decide this day between the people of Israel and the people of Ammon.” 28 But the king of the Ammonites did not listen to the words of Jephthah that he sent to him.

29 Then the Spirit of the Lord was upon Jephthah, and he passed through Gilead and Manasseh and passed on to Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of Gilead he passed on to the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, 31 then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” 32 So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the Lord gave them into his hand. 33 And he struck them from Aroer to the neighborhood of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim, with a great blow. So the Ammonites were subdued before the people of Israel.’

The king of the Ammonites raised an issue three hundred years old. The Moabites hadn’t made an issue of it, so why Ammon and why now was Jephthah’s reasoning. The Israelites had defeated the Amorites – after being refused passage through Edom and Moab – and probably some of their land, had once been Ammonite land. It was too late to dispute it now. The king of Ammon remained stubborn and proud, but did not win it back.

2 Samuel 12:26-31

English Standard Version

26 ‘Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and took the royal city. 27 And Joab sent messengers to David and said, “I have fought against Rabbah; moreover, I have taken the city of waters.* 28 Now then gather the rest of the people together and encamp against the city and take it, lest I take the city and it be called by my name.” 29 So David gathered all the people together and went to Rabbah and fought against it and took it. 30 And he took the crown of their king from his head. The weight of it was a talent of gold, and in it was a precious stone, and it was placed on David’s head. And he brought out the spoil of the city, a very great amount. 31 And he brought out the people who were in it and set them to labor with saws and iron picks and iron axes and made them toil at the brick kilns. And thus he did to all the cities of the Ammonites. Then David and all the people returned to Jerusalem.’ 

David exacted harsh measures on the Ammonites, which didn’t improve relations, but showed the strength of negative feeling between the two peoples. His actions did contravene the instruction of not to contend, to struggle in opposition or strive in rivalry with Ammon.

Quebec is Kebec in Algonquin, meaning ‘where the river narrows.’ The Province of Quebec has a vast coastline. The motto of Quebec City is Don de Dieu feray valoir: “I shall put God’s gift to good use.” The Don de Dieu was one of three ships which set sail from France under captain Henry Couillard and on July 3, 1608 explorer Samuel de Champlain – established a fort at Cape Diamond and – founded Quebec City, the oldest city in Canada. The Montmorency Falls are located on the Montmorency River and are about 270 feet tall – one hundred feet taller than Niagara Falls. One of Quebec’s most important resources is water,* harnessed for hydroelectric power.

Notice the two interlocked keys, reminiscent of the keys of Unterwalden, Switzerland (and the Papal Keys).

1 Chronicles 19:19

English Standard Version

‘And when the servants of Hadadezer saw that they had been defeated by Israel, they made peace with David and became subject to him. So the Syrians [Gether-Aram-Spain] were not willing to save the Ammonites anymore.’

1 Kings 11:7

English Standard Version

‘Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.’

Nehemiah 4:1-9

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now when Sanballat heard that we were building the wall, he was angry and greatly enraged, and he jeered at the [Judeans]. 2 And he said in the presence of his brothers and of the army of Samaria, “What are these feeble Jews doing? Will they restore it for themselves? Will they sacrifice? Will they finish up in a day? Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish, and burned ones at that?” 3 Tobiah the Ammonite was beside him, and he said, “Yes, what they are building – if a fox goes up on it he will break down their stone wall!”

4 Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. 5 Do not cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders. 6 So we built the wall. And all the wall was joined together to half its height, for the people had a mind to work. 

7 But when Sanballat and Tobiah and the Arabs [not Arabs from Mizra. Arabians meaning, in the eastern peninsula of Arabia – probably Joktan] and the Ammonites and the Ashdodites [Philistines] heard that the repairing of the walls of Jerusalem was going forward and that the breaches were beginning to be closed, they were very angry. 8 And they all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause confusion in it. 9 And we prayed to our God and set a guard as a protection against them day and night.’

The Medes and Persians had allowed captives from Judah and Benjamin to return to Jerusalem and rebuild its walls and Temple compound. Tobiah the Ammonite was one who mocked their efforts.

Jeremiah 40:11-16

English Standard Version

11 ‘Likewise, when all the Judeans who were in Moab and among the Ammonites and in Edom and in other lands heard that the king of Babylon had left a remnant in Judah and had appointed Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, son of Shaphan, as governor over them, 12 then all the Judeans returned from all the places to which they had been driven and came to the land of Judah, to Gedaliah at Mizpah. And they gathered wine and summer fruits in great abundance. 13 Now Johanan the son of Kareah and all the leaders of the forces in the open country came to Gedaliah at Mizpah 

14 and said to him, “Do you know that Baalis the king of the Ammonites has sent Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to take your life?” But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam would not believe them. 15 Then Johanan the son of Kareah spoke secretly to Gedaliah at Mizpah, “Please let me go and strike down Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and no one will know it. Why should he take your life, so that all the Judeans who are gathered about you would be scattered, and the remnant of Judah would perish?” 16 But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam said to Johanan the son of Kareah, “You shall not do this thing, for you are speaking falsely of Ishmael.” [Ishmael (not Abraham’s son) did assassinate Gedaliah]’

Jeremiah 49:1-6 

English Standard Version

‘Concerning the Ammonites. Thus says the Lord: “Has Israel no sons? Has he no heir? Why then has Milcom [a prominent god of Ammon, with Molech] dispossessed Gad and his people settled in its cities? 2 Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will cause the battle cry to be heard against Rabbah of the Ammonites; it shall become a desolate mound, and its villages shall be burned with fire; then Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, says the Lord.

3 “Wail, O Heshbon, for Ai is laid waste! Cry out, O daughters of Rabbah! [the descendants of Lot’s youngest daughter] Put on sackcloth, lament, and run to and fro among the hedges! For Milcom shall go into exile, with his priests and his officials. 4 Why do you boast of your valleys, O faithless daughter, who trusted in her treasures, saying, ‘Who will come against me?’

5 Behold, I will bring terror upon you, declares the Lord God of hosts, from all who are around you, and you shall be driven out, every man straight before him, with none to gather the fugitives. 6 “But afterward I will restore the fortunes of the Ammonites, declares the Lord.”

In modern times, France and Quebec have been blessed with wealth and abundance.

Ezekiel 21:28-32

English Standard Version

“And you, son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord God concerning the Ammonites and concerning their reproach; say, A sword, a sword is drawn for the slaughter. It is polished to consume and to flash like lightning – while they see for you false visions, while they divine lies for you – to place you on the necks of the profane wicked, whose day has come, the time of their final punishment. Return it to its sheath. In the place where you were created, in the land of your origin, I will judge you. And I will pour out my indignation upon you; I will blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, [similar to the fire inflicted on Sodom] and I will deliver you into the hands of brutish men, skillful to destroy. You shall be fuel for the fire. Your blood shall be in the midst of the land. You shall be no more remembered, for I the Lord have spoken.”

The punishment decreed at the end of the latter days when the Son of Man returns. Many nations will suffer similar fates and some because of their attitude and treatment towards the sons of Jacob.

Ezekiel 25:1-11

English Standard Version

1 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face toward the Ammonites and prophesy against them. 3 Say to the Ammonites, Hear the word of the Lord God: Thus says the Lord God, Because you said, ‘Aha!’ over my sanctuary when it was profaned, and over the land of Israel when it was made desolate, and over the house of Judah when they went into exile, 4 therefore behold, I am handing you over to the people of the East for a possession, and they shall set their encampments among you and make their dwellings in your midst. They shall eat your fruit, and they shall drink your milk. 5 I will make Rabbah a pasture for camels and Ammon a fold for flocks. 

Then you will know that I am the Lord. 6 For thus says the Lord God: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet and rejoiced with all the malice within your soul against the land of Israel, 7 therefore, behold, I have stretched out my hand against you, and will hand you over as plunder to the nations. And I will cut you off from the peoples and will make you perish out of the countries; I will destroy you. Then you will know that I am the Lord.

8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab [France] from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations, 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.’

Whether this prophecy is dual, with a future fulfilment involving France, time will tell. The people of the east in the past as well as today includes a number of alternatives. It could mean a dominant near neighbour and relative as in Ishmael, who originally dwelt in the east, known as Arabia or alternatively the wilderness. Secondly and unlikely, Assyria (or Russia) – the king of the North – as they spared Moab and the Ammonites in the past as well as predicted for the future – Daniel 11.41. As it appears to be the far future, possibly further distant than the King of the North timeframe, it could mean the far East and descendants of Japheth – such as Magog, Tubal and Meschech (Revelation 16:12) – in partial ironic fulfilment of the sons of Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem Genesis 9:27.

Daniel 11:40-41

English Standard Version

“At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack  him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through. He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his [Assyria’s] hand: Edom and Moab [France] and the main part of the Ammonites [northwestern France and the capital].”

The French Canadians heralded from principally the north and western regions of France (over 90%), particularly Normandy and Poitou. Every region with direct access to the Ocean (water) and with a tradition of long-term fishing expeditions, attracted migrants to New France. Apparently, French Canadian soldiers were surprised when they landed in Normandy, discovering how much Norman French was like their own dialect.

The Tribe of Benjamin are the Normans, Peter Salemi – emphasis & bold mine:

‘A review of census records for the year 1700 reveals that of New France’s French-speaking colonists, 29% came from the provinces of Poitou, Aunis, Saintonge, and Angoumois in the mother country; 22% from Normandy and Perche; 15% from Paris and Ile-de-France; 13% from Anjou, Touraine, Beauce, and Maine; 9% from Brittany, Picardy, and Champagne; 5% from Limousin, Périgord, and Guyenne; 7% from other regions. 

Thus over 50% of immigrants to Quebec, and possibly much more, came from north of the Loire river in France, i.e., areas of Norman, Breton, and Frankish settlement. In addition, many of the Seigneurs (Lords) of Quebec, e.g., the families of de Lotbinière, Panet, Montizambert, etc., were Norman, who left Normandy in 1686.’

Amos 1:13-15

English Standard Version

‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of the Ammonites, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead, that they might enlarge their border. So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah, and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind; and their king shall go into exile, he and his princes together,” says the Lord.’

This passage is of note because the Ammonites dwelt both within and adjacent to the territory of Giliead, which in time was synonymous with the half tribe of East Manasseh. Therefore, the fact that a proportion of the descendants of Ammon (in Quebec) dwell amongst the descendants of East Manasseh (Gilead) in Canada is of no small coincidence.

The map above is a fair representation of the Ammon (northwest) and Moab (northeast and south) geographic divide (or split) between the brothers. Not so much the dotted line, but the twelve regions (provinces) highlighted.

Zephaniah 2:8-10

Amplified Bible

“I have heard the taunting of Moab [and] the revilings of the sons of Ammon, With which they have taunted My people And become arrogant against their territory [by violently and cruelly violating Israel’s boundary and trying to seize its land]. “Therefore, as I live,” declares the Lord of hosts, The God of Israel, “Moab will in fact become like Sodom [and] the sons of Ammon like Gomorrah, [a] land possessed by nettles and salt pits, And a perpetual desolation. The remnant of My people will plunder them And what is left of My nation will inherit them [as their own].” This they shall have in return for their pride, because they have taunted and become arrogant against the people of the Lord of hosts.’ 

Ammon had no authority to try to possess Gilead or take it from Israel. The sitting on the sidelines and relishing Judah’s downfall and subsequent captivity at the hands of the Chaldeans, has also been a cause of Ammon and particularly Moab, receiving retribution – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

We will discover that Ammon and particularly Moab are described frequently in the Bible as being proud, with it rather being a national trait (fault). It is ironic that in the way Sodom was criticised (and Punished) for withholding acts of kindness towards those in need, the descendants of Lot similarly – Lot who had dwelt in Sodom – were (and will be) punished in the same way by fire, for their withholding passage and supplies to the Israelites when they returned from captivity in Egypt.

An important person mentioned earlier from the line of Ammon was Naamah, a royal princess of Ammon – not to be confused with the daughter of evil Lamech prior to the Flood (refer article: Na’amah). An additional reason for the sons of Jacob not to wage war and destroy Ammon and Moab. Her name means ‘sweet, lovely’ or ‘pleasant’ from the verb naem. Naamah married Solomon before he became king in 970 BCE. Their son, Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE. Naamah provided the heir to the throne of Judah and she is the only wife of Solomon, mentioned by name in the Bible. Naamah is also only one of two foreign Queen Mothers of Israel or Judah, with Jezebel – a Princess of Tyre and the daughter of the Phoenician King Ethbaal. Naamah, may well have been an influence on Solomon who later turned away from the Eternal, to worship Ammonite and Moabite gods – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

1 Kings 14:21-23

English Standard Version

‘Now Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city that the Lord had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. His mother’s name was Naamah the Ammonite. And [the House of] Judah did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins that they committed, more than all that their fathers had done. For they also built for themselves high places and pillars and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree…’ – refer article: Asherah.

15 Fun Quebec City Facts, Nadeen White, 2018 – capitalisation hers, emphasis & bold mine:

‘Quebec City is also known simply as Quebec [similar to Rabbah of the Ammonites]. It is located in the Canadian province of Quebec… [and] is the capital city… [as well as] the second largest city… Montreal is the largest city in the province of Quebec. 

Quebec is a French speaking province [and] is the official language… Approximately 80% of the residents speak French as their native language… It is the oldest French speaking [region] in North America. However, English is [also widely] spoken by most residents… Old Quebec is surrounded by fortified city walls [it is the only remaining walled city in North America north of Mexico] that were designated as a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1985… 

Quebec produces a LOT of maple syrup… I had no idea that Canada produces about 70% of the worlds pure maple syrup. Out of that 70% about 90% is from the province of Quebec. Most of the maple syrup produced in the U.S. comes from Vermont. 

In 2010 the Province of Quebec produced roughly 7,989,000 gallons of maple syrup while Vermont produced roughly 890,000 gallons. Quebec isn’t just French… there are many Irish people here too! There is actually a large Irish community in Quebec. During the 17th century, Irish inhabitants of France were sent to Quebec to help populate the area. Historians estimate that about 40% of the population in Quebec is of Irish descent.’

This is a startling fact and the Irish component in Quebec is more than interesting, it is of great significance. When we study the Irish (Gad) and the British – Northern Irish (Reuben) – descended peoples of Canada (half tribe of East Manasseh), their relationship with the French Ammonites of Quebec (within the land of Gilead) will be fascinatingly evident – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad the Celtic Tribes. Quebec is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic and during the Irish Potato Famine of the 1840s and 1850s a large number of Irish Catholics, migrated to Canada and Quebec. 

The Province of Quebec comprises nearly one-sixth of Canada’s total land area; is the largest of Canada’s ten provinces; and possesses an abundance of mineral wealth. The site of Quebec City, originally occupied by an Indian village named Stadacona, was discovered by Jacques Cartier in 1535. Quebec Province and city were formally French until ceded to Great Britain in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris. This was the result of the famous Battle of Quebec on the Plains of Abraham – interesting name coincidence – adjacent to the city in 1759, where the French were defeated. Later, Great Britain reinforced its military defences of the city in time to repel an attack during the American Revolution in the second Battle of Quebec in 1775. 

The arrival of displaced Loyalists following American independence, increased Quebec’s population and so did trade with Britain, much of it through the port of Quebec. Up until the mid-nineteenth century, Quebec’s economy was centred on French and then British mercantilism. The British Parliament passed the Constitutional Act of 1791, which split the large colony of Quebec into two provinces: Upper Canada – now the province of Ontario – and Lower Canada, now the province of Quebec. Quebec city, formerly the capital of the colony, remained the capital of Lower Canada.

After the British takeover of New France, Montreal – founded in 1642 and the second largest Canadian city after Toronto – gained the dominant economic position in the province, whereas Quebec remained an important port. Quebec is the second most populous province of Canada after Ontario with 8,604,500 people. ‘On November 27, 2006, the House of Commons passed a symbolic motion moved by Prime Minister Stephen Harper declaring “that this House recognize that the Quebecois [Francophones] form a nation within a united Canada.” However, there is considerable debate and uncertainty over what this means. The debate over the status of Quebec is a highly animated one to this day.’

Quebec Flag

Nearly half of the total population of Quebec are descendants of the ten thousand original French settlers. When the Dominion of Canada was established in 1867, French Canadians accounted for one-third of the newly formed country’s population. In 1974, French was made the official language in Quebec province. Between 1897 and 1936, Quebec competed with Ontario for domestic and foreign investment. Montreal was the headquarters of the national banks, the insurance corporations and the railway companies. Even so, Ontario, because of its proximity to the United States, its shared language and the vast amounts of hydroelectric power at Niagara Falls, was more attractive for United States investment. An ensuing struggle developed between Montreal and Toronto, with Toronto eventually gaining the upper hand.

The colony of New France included Acadia, with its first capital in Port-Royal in 1605. ‘The term Acadia today refers to regions of North America that are historically associated with the lands, descendants, or culture of the former region [in north eastern Canada]. It particularly refers to regions of The Maritimes with Acadian roots, language, and culture, primarily in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islands, and Prince Edward Island, as well as in Maine. It can also refer to the Acadian diaspora in southern Louisiana, a region also referred to as Acadiana. In the abstract, Acadia refers to the existence of an Acadian culture in any of these regions. People living in Acadia are called Acadians which changed to Cajuns in Louisiana, the American pronunciation of Acadians.’ 

The word Acadia is similar to Akkad(ia) of Babylon and Acadian parallels the name, Akkadian. The original peoples of Akkad were descendants of Arphaxad and his great grandson Peleg. They were related to and ancestors of the peoples from Haran and Nahor. As Haran’s children include the modern French it is a notable association. Explorer Giovanni de Verrazzano is credited in originating the designation Acadia on his 16th century map, where he applied the ancient Greek name Arcadia to the entire Atlantic coast north of Virginia. 

‘Arcadia’ is derived from the district in ancient Greece, ‘which had the extended meanings of ‘refuge’ or ‘idyllic place.’ By the time of de Champlain, it was La Cadie without the r. In the Mi’ kmaq language, Cadie means ‘fertile land.’ We will revisit the link between the French and the ancient Greeks. A fascinating side note of history and all the more interesting once it is understood that the French Canadians are descended from Ammon; as well as the indirect parallel with Lot’s daughters, are the eight hundred women that most French Canadians are literally descended from. 

CBC, Filles du Roi, 2017 – emphasis mine:

‘It’s 1663. New France has a population problem. To dominate the fur trade along the St. Lawrence River, New France needs people. Britain’s colonies to the south have 18 times as many settlers as New France. Britain has a wide-open policy on who can come to the colonies, meaning Brits from all walks of life are risking the perilous ocean voyage. France, on the other hand, has banned Protestants from going to New France. The British colonies have a farming-based economy, meaning men bring their wives over and have families, whereas the French settlers are mostly fur trappers and missionaries. That population gap is only getting wider. Britain’s colonies are growing, but in New France, which has only one woman for every six men, the population is stuck.

To help fix New France’s gender imbalance, two men come up with an innovative idea: Jean Talon (Intendant of the colony) and King Louis XIV decide to import young women to the colony to marry male settlers. The women would be known as the Filles du Roi or “Daughters of the King.” Almost all the women are poor. Many are orphans. 

[Between the years 1663 to 1673, these women of marriageable age came from Rouen in the province of Normandy, La Rochelle in Aunis and included beggars and orphans from the streets of Paris]. One in 10 doesn’t survive the voyage from France. For the 800 women who make it, France pays for the women’s passage and provides a dowry… from the royal treasury. 

The women are also given a hope chest containing, among other things, a pair of hose, a pair of shoes, a bonnet, gloves, a comb, a belt and various sewing supplies. The Filles du Roi step off their boats into a foreign landscape. It is a sparsely populated, heavily wooded wilderness. Many of them are from France’s cities and are about to get a harsh introduction to the backbreaking world of 17th century farm labour. Canadian winter will be unlike anything they’ve ever experienced. And in the coming years, many of them are going to be pregnant more often than not.

As daunting as that sounds, all of the Filles du Roi come to New France voluntarily. Even with the cold climate and hard toil, life in New France has advantages over the lives they left behind. Unlike many women at the time, the Filles du Roi are allowed to choose their husbands. Admittedly, they’re choosing from a very small pool – the population of New France is just over 3,000 and includes a disproportionately high number of priests. The women meet potential suitors in a series of chaperoned, interview-like “dates.”

The meetings are presided over by Jean Talon himself, along with Ursuline nun Marie Guyart… The women sail down the St. Lawrence, stopping first at Quebec City, then Trois-Rivieres, and eventually making their way to Montreal. At every stop, they have to make a choice; go with one of the men there, or see if there’s a better husband waiting down river. The women are given 50 livres – the equivalent of roughly $1,000 today – as a dowry. As poor women without dowries, finding a husband (let alone one they liked), would have been nearly impossible in France. There are other advantages, too. Abundant food means that women in New France live longer than their peers in Europe.

Families with more than 10 children get an additional annual pension of 300 livres ($6,000) from the crown. The program leads to a population explosion unlike anything Canada has seen since. The average family has five children – almost twice as many as the “Baby Boom” that follows WWII. The population of New France more than doubles in a decade. Two-thirds of today’s French-Canadians can trace their ancestry back to one of these 800 women. Their influence was felt outside Quebec, as well.

Some famous Americans also claim a Fille du Roi as an ancestor, including Hiliary Clinton, Madonna and Angelina Jolie. There are very few first-hand accounts of the lives of the Filles du Roi. Few of them could read or write.Their histories have largely been told by subsequent generations. That said, one thing we know with absolute certainty: the Quebec we know today owes a lot to the fortitude of these incredibly tough women.’

Moab is Ammon’s elder brother and comprises the bulk of the French people. In the past, his peoples were also more numerous and they interacted with the sons of Jacob constantly through conventional warfare – unlike the guerrilla tactics of the Ammonites. The name Abarim – which has been an invaluable biblical word definition and concordance website – was actually a mountain range in the land of Moab.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Moab meaning: Who Is Your Father? Water Of A Father from (1) (mi), who, or (may), “water of …”, and (2) the noun (‘ab), father

The etymology and original meaning of the name Moab is unknown. The word moab is foreign to Hebrew… However, to a creative Hebrew audience, the name may have sounded like a compilation of two elements: the interrogative particle (me), what or (mi), who… The noun (‘ab) means father… It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu means to decide.

Thus the name Moab would carry the meaning of Who’s… or What’s Your Father? a rhetorical question to which the story may easily give rise. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names takes a different approach and goes with the word (may), meaning water… Water represents the great unknown from which the dry land of the known emerges. Thus Jones reads Water Of A Father, and explains this to mean seed or progeny. The problem here is that semen is never referred to as a father’s waters.

The name Ar meaning: City from the noun (‘ir), city

The name Ar (or more complete: Ar of Moab – see Numbers 21:28) was a city on the southern shore of the river Arnon (Numbers 21:15). When YHWH delivers his famous “do not harass Moab” sermon, he declares that he gave Ar to the sons of Lot (which would be the Ammonites and the Moabites – Deuteronomy 2:9). Much later, the prophet Isaiah declares his blood curdling prophecies against Moab, and foretells its utter destruction, along with Kir of Moab (Isaiah 15:1).

Adjectives (‘ariri) and (‘ar’ar) mean stripped, childless or destitute. Noun (me’ara) literally means “place of being stripped” and is the Bible’s common word for cave. Verb (‘ur I) means to rouse oneself – literally to collect and bundle one’s feelings. Noun (‘ir) means excitement. Identical verb (‘ur II) means to be exposed or laid bare. Noun (ma’or) means nakedness and noun (ma’arom) means naked one. Adjectives (‘erom), (‘erom), (‘arom) and (‘arom) mean naked. Noun (‘or) means skin or hide. Verb (‘ara) also means to be naked or bare. Nouns (‘ara), (ma’ara) and (ma’ar) refer to bare or exposed places. Nouns (‘erwa) and (‘erya) mean nakedness or exposure. Noun (ta’ar) denotes a thing that makes bare: a razor or sheath of a sword.

The name Kir meaning: Wall from the noun (qir), wall 

The noun (qarqa’) means floor; earth trampled into a compact state. The verb (qarqar) means to forcibly compact, to pound down. Verb (qara), and its by-form (qara’), mean to near, to meet or to happen upon. Noun (qora) describes a rafter or beam; the things that come together to form a roof, and which obviously relate to bricks pieced into a wall. Nouns (qareh) and (miqreh) mean chance or accident, fortune or fate. Noun (qeri) means opposition, contrariness

For this same reason, the nouns (qiryah) and (qeret) are the words for city and federation of cities. Adjective (qari’) means called or summoned… And noun (miqra’) means convocation or called assembly. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has A Wall, A Fortress, but this word for wall typically doesn’t refer to a military wall.’

Numbers 21:28-29

English Standard Version

28 ‘For fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the city of Sihon. It devoured Ar of Moab, and swallowed the heights of the [River] Arnon. 29 Woe to you, O Moab! You are undone, O people of Chemosh! He has made his sons fugitives, and his daughters captives, to an Amorite king, Sihon.’

Ar and Kir of Moab appear to be the most prominent settlements in ancient Moab. Today, they could equate to the capital Paris and possibly the principal port – and the second biggest city – Marseille. The numbers of the Israelites and their series of military victories became a serious concern to Moab; though Moab was unaware of the Eternal’s edict to the sons of Jacob: to not attack Moab and Ammon. In a preemptive strike, King Balak of Moab, summoned a Seer and Prophet to pronounce a curse on the sons of Jacob. Though the best laid plan did not eventuate as the Moabites would have hoped.

Numbers 22:1-41

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then the people of Israel set out and camped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho. 

2 And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. 3 And Moab was in great dread of the people, because they were many. Moab was overcome with fear of the people of Israel. 4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian [descendants from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah], “This horde will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.” So Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, 5 sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor at Pethor, which is near the River in the land of the people of Amaw, to call him, saying, 

“Behold, a people has come out of Egypt. They cover the face of the earth [estimates account for three million plus people, including 600,000 fighting men able to take up arms], and they are dwelling opposite me. 6 Come now, curse this people for me, since they are too mighty for me. Perhaps I shall be able to defeat them and drive them from the land, for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed.” 

7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message… 9 And God came to Balaam and said, “Who are these men with you?” 10 And Balaam said to God, “Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me…

12 God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.” 13 So Balaam rose in the morning and said to the princes of Balak, “Go to your own land, for the Lord has refused to let me go with you.” 14 So the princes of Moab rose and went to Balak and said, “Balaam refuses to come with us.” 15 Once again Balak sent princes, more in number and more honorable than these.  

16 And they came to Balaam and said to him, “Thus says Balak the son of Zippor: ‘Let nothing hinder you from coming to me, 17 for I will surely do you great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do. Come, curse this people for me’.” 18 But Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the Lord my God to do less or more. 19 So you, too, please stay here tonight, that I may know what more the Lord will say to me.” 20 And God came to Balaam at night and said to him, “If the men have come to call you, rise, go with them; but only do what I tell you.” 21 So Balaam rose in the morning and saddled his donkey and went with the princes of Moab.

22 But God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the Lord took his stand in the way as his adversary. Now he was riding on the donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 And the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road, with a drawn sword in his hand [like a Cherub – Genesis 3:24]. And the donkey turned aside out of the road and went into the field. And Balaam struck the donkey, to turn her into the road… 28 Then the Lord opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?” 29 And Balaam said to the donkey, “Because you have made a fool of me. I wish I had a sword in my hand, for then I would kill you.” … 31 Then the Lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the way, with his drawn sword in his hand. And he bowed down and fell on his face. 

32 And the angel of the Lord said to him, “Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to oppose you because your way is perverse before me. 33 The donkey saw me and turned aside before me these three times. If she had not turned aside from me, surely just now I would have killed you and let her live.” 34 Then Balaam said to the angel of the Lord, “I have sinned, for I did not know that you stood in the road against me. Now therefore, if it is evil in your sight, I will turn back.” 35 And the angel of the Lord said to Balaam, “Go with the men, but speak only the word that I tell you.” So Balaam went on with the princes of Balak.

36 When Balak heard that Balaam had come, he went out to meet him at the city of Moab [Ar], on the border formed by the [River] Arnon, at the extremity of the border… 38 Balaam said to Balak, “Behold, I have come to you! Have I now any power of my own to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak.” 39 Then Balaam went with Balak, and they came to Kiriath-huzoth. 40 And Balak sacrificed oxen and sheep, and sent for Balaam and for the princes who were with him. 41 And in the morning Balak took Balaam and brought him up to Bamoth-baal…’

In Numbers Twenty-three, Balaam does not curse Israel but speaks of the blessings given them by the Creator. In Numbers Twenty-four, Balaam then precedes to curse the enemies of the sons of Jacob after adding a blessing to the Israelites.

Numbers 24:10-14, 17

English Standard Version

10 ‘And Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he struck his hands together. And Balak said to Balaam, “I called you to curse my enemies, and behold, you have blessed them these three times. 11 Therefore now flee to your own place. I said, ‘I will certainly honor you,’ but the Lord has held you back from honor.” 12 And Balaam said to Balak, “Did I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, 13 ‘If Balak should give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not be able to go beyond the word of the Lord, to do either good or bad of my own will. What the Lord speaks, that will I speak?’

14 And now, behold, I am going to my people. Come, I will let you know what this people will do to your people in the latter days.” 17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near [the promised Messiah]: a star [blessing of Ephraim] shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter [blessing of Judah] shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth.’

Balaam is an intriguing character, for was he a prophet of God or a sorcerer for the devil? Readers interested in a more detailed discussion regarding Balaam’s relationship with the Eternal and the way of Balaam (Revelation 2:14), may refer to the following articles: Belphegor; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

As with the descendants of Ammon, the Israelites were not to provoke the Moabites or engage them in battle.

Deuteronomy 2:9-11

English Standard Version

‘And the Lord said to me, ‘Do not harass Moab or contend with them in battle, for I will not give you any of their land for a possession, because I have given Ar [the capital] to the people of Lot for a possession.’ The Emim formerly lived there, a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim. Like the Anakim they are also counted as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim.’

Deuteronomy 34:1-8

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, which is opposite Jericho. And the Lord showed him all the land, Gilead as far as Dan [the far north east], 2 all Naphtali [the north], the land of Ephraim and Manasseh [central Canaan], all the land of Judah as far as the western sea [the far south west], 3 the Negeb, and the Plain, that is, the Valley of Jericho the city of palm trees, as far as Zoar. 4 And the Lord said to him, “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give it to your offspring.’ I have let you see it with your eyes, but you shall not go over there.” 

So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, 6 and he [the Eternal] buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day. 7 Moses was 120 years old when he died. His eye was undimmed, and his vigor unabated. 8 And the people of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days…’

Judges 3:12-14, 26-30

English Standard Version

12 ‘And the people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done what was evil in the sight of the Lord. 

13 He gathered to himself the Ammonites and the Amalekites [grandson of Esau], and went and defeated Israel. And they took possession of the city of palms. 14 And the people of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years’ – 1302 to 1284 BCE.

26 ‘Ehud escaped while they delayed, and he passed beyond the idols and escaped to Seirah. 27 When he arrived, he sounded the trumpet in the hill country of Ephraim. Then the people of Israel went down with him from the hill country, and he was their leader. 28 And he said to them, “Follow after me, for the Lord has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand.” So they went down after him and seized the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites and did not allow anyone to pass over. 29 And they killed at that time about 10,000 of the Moabites, all strong, able-bodied men; not a man escaped. 30 So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel. And the land had rest for eighty years.’

Ehud was the second Judge of Israel for the same period from 1284 to 1204 BCE.

A famous descendant of Moab and ancestor of King David, as mentioned previously, is Ruth.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Ruth means: Friend, Associate, Vision, View from the noun (rea’), friend or companion and from the noun (re’ut), a looking or understanding.

Ruth was the Moabite wife of Mahlon, son of Elimelech and Naomi of Bethlehem. Their other son, Chilion, married Orphah also of Moab. When the men die [in battle with Israel], Ruth and Naomi move back to Bethlehem, where Ruth marries Boaz. In order to do so, Boaz appeals to the Leviratic Law, which dictates that when a man dies childless, his brother is to marry his widow and sire children in the name of the deceased man (Ruth 4:10, Deuteronomy 25:5). Ruth and Boaz become the parents of Obed, the grandparents of Jesse and the great-grandparents of David, the great king of Israel, and finally the ancestors of Jesus…

Verb (ra’a I) means to pasture or feed and the participle (ra’a) means shepherd… Verb (ra’a II) means to associate with. Nouns (rea’), (re’eh) and (merea’) mean friend, associate or “neighbor”. Nouns (ra’ya), (re’a) and (re’ut) describe a female attendant, mate or friend. Scholars who follow this root group see the name Ruth as a feminine derivation of the root (ra’a II), meaning to associate with, or be a friend of. And thus, they say, the name Ruth means (Lady-) Friend or (Lady-) Companion.

The… NOBSE Study Bible Name List agrees and reads Female Companion for a meaning of the name Ruth. The… Alfred Jones (Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) proposes a different etymology and goes after the root (ra’a), meaning to see… The verb (ra’a) means to see, and by extension to understand. It may mean to become visible (of, say, an angel) or to become understandable (of, say, a theory). Noun (ro’eh) means either seer, or prophetic vision, and noun (mar’a) means either vision as means of revelation, or mirror.

Specifically, Jones sees the name Ruth as a contraction of the noun (re’ut), meaning look. Hence, for a meaning of the name Ruth, Jones reads Beauty but perhaps better would be Vision. There’s no telling whether to an ancient Hebrew audience the name Ruth sounded like Female Friend or Beauty, but all-in-all Ruth is quite a name.’

Ruth 1:15-18, 22

English Standard Version

‘And she said, “See, your sister-in-law [Orphah] has gone back to her people and to her gods [Chemosh]; return after your sister-in-law.” But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” And when Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more. So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab. And they came to Bethlehem [in Judah] at the beginning of barley harvest.’

Ruth 2:1-20

English Standard Version

‘Now Naomi had a relative of her husband’s, a worthy* man of the clan of Elimelech, whose name was Boaz. And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go to the field and glean among the ears of grain after him in whose sight I shall find favor.” And she said to her, “Go, my daughter.” … Then Boaz said to Ruth… “All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told to me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. The Lord repay you for what you have done… Then she said, “I have found favor in your eyes, my lord, for you have comforted me and spoken kindly to your servant, though I am not one of your servants.” “The man’s name with whom I worked today is Boaz.”  And Naomi said… “The man is a close relative of ours…

Ruth 3:1-14

English Standard Version

‘Then Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, should I not seek rest for you, that it may be well with you? Is not Boaz our relative, with whose young women you were? See, he is winnowing barley tonight at the threshing floor. 3 Wash therefore and anoint yourself, and put on your cloak and go down to the threshing floor… when he lies down, observe the place where he lies. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down, and he will tell you what to do.”

At midnight the man was startled and turned over, and behold, a woman lay at his feet! 

‘He said, “Who are you?” And she answered, “I am Ruth, your servant. Spread your wings over your servant, for you are a redeemer.” And he said, “May you be blessed by the Lord… in that you have not gone after young men, whether poor or rich. And now, my daughter, do not fear. I will do for you all that you ask, for all my fellow townsmen know that you are a worthy* woman [described the same way as Boaz]. So she lay at his feet until the morning, but arose before one could recognize another.’

Comparable with, yet in contrast with the scenario involving Lot and his daughters.

Some scholars maintain that Ruth and Boaz had an intimate relationship before they married. In contradistinction to her ancestor – the elder daughter of Lot – Ruth did not entice Boaz into temptation. The terms used in verse four do have sexual connotations, as Ruth was showing that she wanted to be married. The word uncover, means to make visible, to be naked. In this case, Boaz’s feet were exposed. They then became cold and hence Boaz naturally woke up. Some commentators state that feet here, are a euphemism for sexual organs. This is very tenuous at best.

‘And lie down…’ This can also have sexual connotations, though only when paired with the Hebrew terms eṯ and ‘im [with] as in passages such as Genesis 19:32-35; Exodus 22:15; Leviticus 18:22; Deuteronomy 22:22; 1 Samuel 2:22 and 2 Samuel 11:4. The text says that she ‘lay at his feet until morning.’ Ruth slept there until morning, not that she slept with Boaz until morning. Though it could be interpreted as morally questionable to have a woman spend the night with a single man; Boaz kept Ruth with him until morning, because of the dangers of her going home alone in the middle of the night. It was more honourable to protect her until just before dawn, so that she could slip away before first light.

‘Spread your wings over your servant…’ means Ruth asked Boaz to spread his covering over her – a Hebrew idiom for marriage – Ezekiel 16:8; Deuteronomy 22:30; 27:20 and Malachi 2:16. Ruth probably visited at night to maintain privacy, so that Boaz wouldn’t feel pressured into making a public decision to marry her. Boaz was asleep and when he awoke, the text says he was ‘startled.’ If Boaz had just engaged in sex with Ruth, he obviously wouldn’t have been startled. Boaz also refers to Ruth as a ‘worthy woman.’ This is the same phrase used for a godly wife in Proverbs 31:10. He would hardly say these words after just engaging in fornication. Boaz was careful to keep and follow the kinsman-redeemer laws, even though he clearly loved Ruth and wanted to marry her; this highlights his integrity towards Ruth, not sexual permissiveness.

Ruth 4:9-17

English Standard Version

‘Then Boaz said to the elders and all the people, “You are witnesses this day that I have bought from the hand of Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Chilion and to Mahlon. 10 Also Ruth the Moabite, the widow of Mahlon, I have bought to be my wife…”

Then all the people who were at the gate [Boaz had local prestige and held civic responsibility like Lot] and the elders said, “We are witnesses. May the Lord make the woman, who is coming into your house, like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you act worthily in Ephrathah and be renowned in Bethlehem, and may your house be like the house of Perez [Pharez, a royal line of Judah and ancestor of David], whom Tamar bore to Judah, because of the offspring that the Lord will give you by this young woman.”

So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her [the first time], and the Lord gave her conception, and she bore a son… Then Naomi took the child and laid him on her lap and became his nurse. And the women of the neighborhood gave him a name, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David.’

Boaz and Ruth

2 Samuel 8:2

English Standard Version

‘And he [King David] defeated Moab and he measured them with a line, making them lie down on the ground. Two lines he measured to be put to death, [!] and one full line to be spared [1/3]. And the Moabites became servants to David and brought tribute.’

2 Kings 3:4-27

English Standard Version

4 ‘Now Mesha king of Moab was a sheep breeder, and he had to deliver to the king of Israel 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams. 5 But when Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel. 6 So King Jehoram marched out of Samaria at that time and mustered all Israel. 7 And he went and sent word to Jehoshaphat king of Judah: “The king of Moab has rebelled against me. Will you go with me to battle against Moab?” And he said, “I will go. I am as you are, my people [Houses of Judah and Benjamin, (Simeon and Levi)] as your people [Kingdom of remaining Ten Tribes of Israel], my horses as your horses.” 8 Then he said, “By which way shall we march?” Jehoram answered, “By the way of the wilderness of Edom.”

9 So the king of Israel went with the king of Judah and the king of Edom. And when they had made a circuitous march of seven days, there was no water for the army or for the animals that followed them. 10 Then the king of Israel said, “Alas! The Lord has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.” 11 And Jehoshaphat said, “Is there no prophet of the Lord here, through whom we may inquire of the Lord?” Then one of the king of Israel’s servants answered, “Elisha the son of Shaphat is here, who poured water on the hands of Elijah.” 12 And Jehoshaphat said, “The word of the Lord is with him.” So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom went down to him.

13 And Elisha said to the king of Israel, “What have I to do with you? Go to the prophets of your father and to the prophets of your mother.” But the king of Israel said to him, “No; it is the Lord who has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.” 

14 And Elisha said, “As the Lord of hosts lives, before whom I stand, were it not that I have regard for Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would neither look at you nor see you. 15 But now bring me a musician.” And when the musician played, the hand of the Lord came upon him. 16 And he said, “Thus says the Lord, ‘I will make this dry streambed full of pools.’ 17 For thus says the Lord, ‘You shall not see wind or rain, but that streambed shall be filled with water, so that you shall drink, you, your livestock, and your animals.’ 

18 This is a light thing in the sight of the Lord. He will also give the Moabites into your hand, 19 and you shall attack every fortified city and every choice city, and shall fell every good tree and stop up all springs of water and ruin every good piece of land with stones.”[!] 20 The next morning, about the time of offering the sacrifice, behold, water came from the direction of Edom, till the country was filled with water.’

Recall, a definition of Moab is ‘water of a father’, as well as the connection of water with Rabbah of the Ammonites.

21 ‘When all the Moabites heard that the kings had come up to fight against them, all who were able to put on armor, from the youngest to the oldest, were called out and were drawn up at the border. 22 And when they rose early in the morning and the sun shone on the water, the Moabites saw the water opposite them as red as blood. 23 And they said, “This is blood; the kings have surely fought together and struck one another down. Now then, Moab, to the spoil!” 24 But when they came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose and struck the Moabites, till they fled before them. And they went forward, striking the Moabites as they went. 25 And they overthrew the cities, and on every good piece of land every man threw a stone until it was covered. They stopped every spring of water and felled all the good trees, till only its stones were left in Kir-hareseth [not the Kir of Moab], and the slingers surrounded and attacked it. 26 When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him 700 swordsmen to break through, opposite the king of Edom, but they could not. 

27 Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place and offered him for a burnt offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel. And they withdrew from him and returned to their own land.’

These were severely harsh measures and vicious war atrocities perpetrated by the Israelites against the Moabites. Not a big surprise when hatred brewed and raged within Moab everafter. The sons of Jacob were disobeying the command in not harassing or contending with Moab and going to war with them. Then compounded the issue by adding undue cruelty to make it immensely worse.

2 Kings 16:9

English Standard Version

‘… The king of Assyria marched up against Damascus [Gether-Aram] and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir [of Moab], and he killed Rezin [the king of Damascus].’

Psalm 60:7-8

English Standard Version

Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is my scepter. Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”

Isaiah 15:1-9

English Standard Version

‘… Because Ar of Moab [the capital] is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone; because Kir of Moab [the second city] is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone. 2 He has gone up to the temple, and to Dibon, to the high places to weep; over Nebo and over Medeba Moab wails. On every head is baldness; every beard is shorn; 3 in the streets they wear sackcloth; on the housetops and in the squares everyone wails and melts in tears. 4… the armed men of Moab cry aloud; his soul trembles.

5 My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar [as Lot had done]… For at the ascent of Luhith [possibly neighbouring great grandson of Abraham and Keturah – Genesis 25:3] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… 8 For a cry has gone around the land of Moab; her wailing reaches to Eglaim; her wailing reaches to Beer-elim. 9 For the waters of Dibon are full of blood; for I will bring upon Dibon even more, a lion for those of Moab who escape, for the remnant of the land.’

Isaiah 16:1-13

English Standard Version

‘Send the lamb to the ruler of the land, from Sela, by way of the desert, to the mount of the daughter of Zion. 2 Like fleeing birds, like a scattered nest, so are the daughters of Moab at the fords of the Arnon… 4 let the outcasts of Moab sojourn among you; be a shelter to them from the destroyer. When the oppressor is no more, and destruction has ceased, and he who tramples underfoot has vanished from the land, 5 then a throne will be established in steadfast love, and on it will sit in faithfulness in the tent of David one who judges and seeks justice and is swift to do righteousness.”

We have heard of the pride of Moab how proud he is! – of his arrogance, his pride, and his insolence; in his idle boasting he is not right.’

Moab’s pride is their biggest stumbling block.

Job 41:34 RSV: 

“[They behold] everything that is high; [they (the Adversary) are a ruler] over all the [children] of pride.”

Isaiah: 7 ‘Therefore let Moab wail for Moab, let everyone wail. Mourn, utterly stricken, for the raisin cakes of Kir-hareseth. 8 For the fields of Heshbon languish, and the vine of Sibmah; the lords of the nations have struck down its branches… And joy and gladness are taken away from the fruitful field, and in the vineyards no songs are sung, no cheers are raised; no treader treads out wine in the presses; I have put an end to the shouting. 11 Therefore my inner parts moan like a lyre for Moab, and my inmost self for Kir-hareseth. 

12 And when Moab presents himself, when he wearies himself on the high place, when he comes to his sanctuary to pray, he will not prevail. 13 This is the word that the Lord spoke concerning Moab in the past. 14 But now the Lord has spoken, saying, “In three years, like the years of a hired worker, the glory of Moab will be brought into contempt, in spite of all his great multitude, and those who remain will be very few and feeble.” This proclamation is yet future, for the Moabites have never been ‘few and feeble’.

Germany has an eagle; the United Kingdom has a lion; Spain (and Italy) often sport a bull; while France have a rooster as a mascot symbol. The origin of this emblem dates back to the Gallic origins of the French nation when the Romans laughed at Gauls because of a linguistic pun. In Latin, the word gallus means Gaul, but also cockerel. The supposed stubbornness and brazen pride of the people was to be turned on its head as the French took the bird to their hearts as an icon of their nation.

The French kings adopted the rooster as a symbol of courage and bravery. During the French Revolution, the cockerel became a symbol of the people and the State and was engraved on coins. Napoleon preferred the eagle – the symbol of imperial Rome – but the rooster won out over the raptor, as an apt symbol for French pride. The rooster is visible throughout France: on French stamps, at the entrance of the Élysée Palace, on jerseys of French football, rugby and handball teams and on the shirts of Olympic athletes. Mercury was often portrayed with the cockerel (Article: Thoth); a sacred animal among the Continental Celts. 

Jeremiah 48:2-30, 38-47

English Standard Version

2  the renown of Moab is no more. In Heshbon they planned disaster against her: ‘Come, let us cut her off from being a nation!’ You also, O Madmen, shall be brought to silence; the sword shall pursue you. 3 … ‘Desolation and great destruction!’ 4 Moab is destroyed; her little ones have made a cry… 6 Flee! Save yourselves! You will be like a juniper in the desert! 7 For, because you trusted in your works and your treasures, you also shall be taken; and Chemosh shall go into exile with his priests and his officials… 9 “Give wings to Moab, for she would fly away; her cities shall become a desolation, with no inhabitant in them. 

11 “Moab has been at ease from his youth and has settled on his dregs; he has not been emptied from vessel to vessel, nor has he gone into exile; so his taste remains in him, and his scent is not changed. 12 “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I shall send to him pourers who will pour him, and empty his vessels and break his jars in pieces. 13 Then Moab shall be ashamed of Chemosh, as the house of Israel was ashamed of Bethel, their confidence [Article: Belphegor]. 14 “How do you say, ‘We are heroes and mighty men of war’? 15 The destroyer of Moab and his cities has come up, and the choicest of his young men have gone down to slaughter, declares the King, whose name is the Lord of hosts. 16 The calamity of Moab is near at hand, and his affliction hastens swiftly. 17 Grieve for him, all you who are around him, and all who know his name; say, ‘How the mighty scepter is broken, the glorious staff.’

18 “Come down from your glory, and sit on the parched ground, O inhabitant of Dibon [H1769 – diybon: ‘wasting’]! For the destroyer of Moab has come up against you; he has destroyed your strongholds… 20 Moab is put to shame, for it is broken; wail and cry! Tell it beside the Arnon, that Moab is laid waste. 21 “Judgment has come upon the tableland… and all the cities of the land of Moab, far and near. 25 The horn [symbol of power] of Moab is cut off, and his arm is broken, declares the Lord. 26 “Make him drunk, because he magnified himself against the Lord, so that Moab shall wallow in his vomit, and he too shall be held in derision. 27 Was not Israel a derision to you? Was he found among thieves, that whenever you spoke of him you wagged your head? 28 “Leave the cities, and dwell in the rock, O inhabitants of Moab!

29 … We have heard of the pride of Moab he is very proud of his loftiness, his pride, and his arrogance, and the haughtiness of his heart. 30 I know his insolence, declares the Lord; his boasts are false, his deeds are false

38 On all the housetops of Moab and in the squares there is nothing but lamentation, for I have broken Moab like a vessel for which no one cares, declares the Lord. 39 How it is broken! How they wail! How Moab has turned his back in shame! So Moab has become a derision and a horror to all that are around him.”

40 For thus says the Lord: “Behold, one shall fly swiftly like an eagle and spread his wings against Moab; 41 the cities shall be taken and the strongholds seized. The heart of the warriors of Moab shall be in that day like the heart of a woman in her birth pains; 42 Moab shall be destroyed and be no longer a people, because he magnified himself against the Lord… For I will bring these things upon Moab, the year of their punishment, declares the Lord. 45 “In the shadow of Heshbon fugitives stop without strength, for fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the house of Sihon; it has destroyed the forehead of Moab, the crown of the sons of tumult. 46 Woe to you, O Moab! The people of Chemosh are undone, for your sons have been taken captive, and your daughters into captivity. 47 Yet I will restore the fortunes of Moab in the latter days, declares the Lord.” Thus far is the judgment on Moab.

Ezekiel 25:8-11

English Standard Version

8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations [a scattered people within Moab and Gilead], 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.”

Amos 2:1-3

English Standard Version

‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Moab, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because he burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom. 

2 So I will send a fire upon Moab [reminiscent of Sodom’s fate], and it shall devour the strongholds of Kerioth, and Moab shall die amid uproar, amid shouting and the sound of the trumpet; 3 I will cut off the ruler from its midst, and will kill all its princes with him,” says the Lord.

Daniel 2:32-39

English Standard Version

‘The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.’ 

Daniel 7:6

English Standard Version

‘After this I looked, and behold, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back. And the beast had four heads*, and dominion was given to it.’

Daniel 8:20-22

English Standard Version

‘As for the ram that you saw with the two horns, these are the kings of Media and Persia. And the goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the first king [Alexander the Great]. As for the horn that was broken, in place of which four others arose, four kingdoms* shall arise from his nation, but not with his power.’

Previously, we learned that the head of gold was the Chaldean Empire – the ancestors of the Northern and in part the Central Italians (refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans) – of Babylon, represented by a lion with wings.

Also, one leg of iron was the Byzantine, Eastern Roman Empire – comprising the ancestors of the Russians (Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia) – represented as one half of a monstrous beast.

The chest and arms of silver was the Medo-Persian empire – the ancestors of the Turko-Mongol and Turkish peoples (Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) – represented by a bear, as well as a ram

The torso and thighs are representative of the Greco-Macedonian empire – the ancestors of the French – who toppled the Medes and Persians. 

Alexander III of Macedon or the Great, defeated Persia in 331 BCE and the power of Greece lasted until 146 BCE, when it became a protectorate of the burgeoning Roman empire. After Alexander, who reigned briefly yet emphatically from 336 to 323 BCE and the subsequent seven short-lived emperor reigns from 323 to 288 BCE, four divisions* of the Greek empire arose, each led by one of Alexander’s generals. Ptolemy from 281 to 279 BCE, administered Egypt and North Africa; Seleucus in 281 BCE governed Syria, Asia Minor and the East. Lysimachus during 288 to 285 BCE, took control of Thrace – until it united with Greece and Macedonia – and Cassander from 315 to 297 BCE, ruled over Macedonia and Greece. 

The two thighs of Nebuchadnezzar’s statute represent the distinct Macedonian and Greek components of the Empire – in other words, Ammon and Moab. The Greco-Macedonian empire was more robust and stronger than the two preceding empires, as evidenced by being likened to bronze as opposed to gold or silver. Militarily, it defeated its enemies with raw power and speed unlike any before it, as evidenced by the agile goat compared to the ram of Persia and the lighter leopard in contrast to the heavier and slower bear of Persia and the former lion of Chaldea. 

Alexander, with the agility of a goat crossed the Hellespont after conquering neighbouring, yet related Grecia and began his march to revenge the humiliation inflicted upon Greece by Xerxes a century before. Alexander Conquered Troy, then met Persian opposition at Granicus. After subjugating all of Asia Minor, he battled a host of supposedly half a million Persians, whom Darius III – king from 336 to 330 BCE – had assembled. They met in the plain of Issus on November 5, 333 BCE and Alexander slaughtered the greatly superior Persian force – outnumbered two to one – breaking the back of Persian opposition. Proceeding southward, city after city fell without a real fight except for Tyre in 332 BCE and Gaza, which were both subdued after sieges.

Marching southwards to Egypt, Alexander conquered the entire country with little effort and founded the world renowned capital city of Alexandria. It became the largest city of the Hellenic world. Continuing east, he fought a third momentous battle with Persia on October 1, 331 BCE, against Darius at Gaugamela and again defeated a greatly superior force. Alexander’s armies reached right to India, but his troops, weary with battle, refused to go further. Returning to Babylon, Alexander intended to make this the capital of his entire empire. Yet he died a victim of his profligate eating, drinking and whoring, coupled with an attack of malaria at the age of thirty-three on June 11, 323 BCE. 

As brief as his rule was, his indelible mark on the world was permanent. The description of the leopard – one of the swiftest of animals and greatest, of predatory carnivores – portrays the lightning speed of attack of Alexander’s armies which was unprecedented. Alexander never lost a siege or battle – despite typically being outnumbered – during the years 338 to 325 BCE. His record is an incredibly impressive, fought twenty, won twenty. 

The four wings on the back of the leopard not only represent agility and speed, but with the four heads, symbolise the fulfilled historic fact, that Alexander’s empire was eventually controlled by four principal generals. 

As John F Walvoord remarks: “The accuracy of this prophecy is so evident that liberal scholars who consider detailed prophecy an impossibility are forced to postulate that the entire book of Daniel is in fact a forgery written by a pseudo-Daniel who lived after these events of Alexander’s conquest had already taken place. This unwilling confession of the accuracy of Biblical prophecy is in itself most significant and a testimony to the accuracy of prophecy as a whole.”

Alexander the Great, thought, acted and fought on his gut instinct. The gut located in the lower torso as evidenced on Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. He was also influenced by his lower groin, in his private life. Some may say, ‘how very French.’ Cyrus the Great, as pictured by the chest, let his heart influence him when he fell for Esther from the tribe of Benjamin; allowing the tribe of Judah to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the city and Temple. Nebuchadnezzar certainly depicted a more cerebral approach in his reign with his methodical deconstruction of his enemies and impressive building projects, as represented by the head of gold.

Alexander was born in Pella, the capital of Macedon and from age thirteen, was tutored by Aristotle until he was sixteen. His mother was Olympias, the fourth of eight wives and principal wife of Philip II of Macedon. Alexander was raised to read, play the lyre, ride, fight and hunt. His mother had huge ambitions and encouraged Alexander to believe it was his destiny to conquer the Persian Empire. He had a great desire for knowledge, a love for philosophy and was an avid reader. Though Alexander was impulsive, with a violent temper his intelligent and rational side was also demonstrated by his ability and success as a general and military strategist. It would seem he had an equal appreciation of men as he had for women, though both were lesser than his dependance on alcohol. 

There have been a succession of Greek ages. The ones dominated by Moab and Ammon were the later Classical age of Greece from 500 to 323 BCE and the Hellenistic era of 323 to 146 BCE. The sons of Lot were the ancestors of peoples living in Greece before these epochs, as were the sons of Jacob; stretching back to Archaic Greece during the centuries from 800 to 500 BCE and beyond to Ancient Greece, including the Mycenaean period of 1600 to 1200 BCE and the Dark age of Greece lasting from 1200 to 800 BCE.

University of Oxford, Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Simon Hornblower  – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… about 1200 BCE, to the death of Alexander… in 323 BCE. It was a period of political, philosophical, artistic, and scientific achievements that formed a legacy with unparalleled influence on Western civilization.’

By the time frame comprising Classical Greece, the peoples of the region had begun to change in composition from those who had constituted Greece from 1600 BCE. The city-states up to approximately 1000 to 800 BCE had been reflective of different peoples. The rise of Macedon and its control of greater Greece saw the transition to the descendants of Ammon and Moab. The people of Troy and the greater Troad, were colonial descendants of Ammon and Moab and both the Trojans and the Macedonians were ancestors of the Frankish peoples who form modern day France.

We will investigate the original founding of Troy, which is credited not to the sons of Lot but rather descendants of the tribe of Judah. The original peoples who had grouped primarily around Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Arcadia and Olympia were primarily colonies of the descendants of the sons of Jacob. In time, they were transplanted by the peoples of Moab and Ammon. The Spartans are similarly related, though they are not descendants of either Lot or Jacob – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Italians and Race, Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins – emphasis & bold mine:

‘From pre-Roman times, it appears there was already a clear distinction of short, darker-skinned, dark-haired peoples from pre-history being [overlaid] and mixed with taller, sometimes larger built, blond and blue-eyed groups. It is now generally believed that the Greeks also were larger, blond and blueeyed people, which was the case when Alexander the Great spread his forces and opened up colonies all over the Middle East and Egypt. This is also attested in frescos from the era, as well as in various references to their looks.’

Both the earlier Greeks, the sons of Jacob and later Greeks from Ammon and Moab would today be broadly classed as Germanic (or Teutonic). The French are a Germanic-Celtic, rather pseudo Latin mix. This inclusion of fairer skin, blond hair and blue eyes was attributable to both ‘sets’ of Greeks. Alexander the Great himself, no different, as various reports reveal. 

The Greek biographer Plutarch lived circa  45 to 120 CE, describes Alexander’s appearance as: ‘… for those peculiarities which many of his successors and friends afterwards tried to imitate, namely, the poise of the neck, which was bent slightly to the left, and the melting glance of his eyes, this artist has accurately observed… he was of a fair colour, as they say, and his fairness passed into ruddiness on his breast particularly, and in his face. Moreover, that a very pleasant odour exhaled from his skin and that there was a fragrance about his mouth and all his flesh, so that his garments were filled with it, this we have read in the Memoirs of Aristoxenus.’

Alexander Romance suggested that Alexander III possessed heterochromia iridium: that one eye was dark and the other light. British historian Peter Green compiled a description of Alexander’s appearance, based on his review of statues and ancient documents: ‘Physically, Alexander was not prepossessing. Even by Macedonian standards he was very short, though stocky and tough. His beard was scanty, and he stood out against his hirsute Macedonian barons by going clean-shaven. His neck was in some way twisted, so that he appeared to be gazing upward at an angle. His eyes (one blue, one brown) revealed a dewy, feminine quality. He had a high complexion and a harsh voice.’ Egyptian Historian Joann Fletcher has also said that Alexander exhibited blond hair.

French men

Many people are intrigued by the amazing story of Troy. Three Hollywood feature films have been produced on the fantastic events, yet much of the scholarly community view it entirely as myth. Yet with all legends truth is within the tale, though admittedly it is difficult in this case to separate fact from fiction. 

Regardless, the Trojan war continues to stand out during the Dark age of Ancient Greece. The siege of Troy is said to have lasted some nine to ten years and its eventual fall, through the ruse of the Trojan Horse, occurred approximately, according to an unconventional chronology, between 1186 and 1184 BCE.

Those historians who believe the story of the Trojan War is derived from a real historical conflict, often use the dates given by Eratosthenes of 1194 to 1184 BCE; which roughly corresponds to the archaeological evidence of the catastrophic burning of Troy VII and a late Bronze Age collapse. Other researchers more recently, have dated the events somewhere between 1260 to 1180 BCE.

French women

The Trojan War Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Trojan War is the foundation of Greek history. If Greek historians had little doubt of its existence they remained extremely sceptical regarding its mythological origin. Archaeology has confirmed one essential point: there was indeed a general conflagration in the Greek world around 1200 BCE, the assumed period of that war, which caused the disappearance of two powerful empires: 

Mycenaean [circa 1100 BCE] on one hand and [the] Hittite [circa 1180 BCE] with its vassals on the other hand. The inscriptions of Ramses III’s [who reigned from 1184 to 1153 BCE during his] year 8 [in 1177 BCE] describe a general invasion of the Mediterranean by the “Sea Peoples”, but without giving any reason. 

A precise chronological reconstruction, based on a few absolute dates, shows that the annexation of the kingdom of Cyprus (Alasia), closely linked to the Mycenaean world, by Hittite King Tudhaliya IV played a role of detonator in the confrontation between a Greek heterogeneous confederation, consisting of pirates and privateers on one side and a set of vassal kingdoms of the Hittite empire, such as Troy and Ugarit, on the other. This struggle to control a vital sea path, from Crete to Egypt, via Cyprus, which ended with a complete mutual destruction in 1185 BCE, the climax of the famous Trojan War, had begun 10 years earlier. Surprisingly, this conclusion was already that of Eratosthenes (276-193). Historical and epigraphic context shows that Homer wrote his epic shortly after Queen Elissa founded Carthage (c. 870 BCE).’ 

The supposed mythic events surrounding the collapse of Troy begin when Paris – same name as future capital of France – a Prince of Troy and son of Priam who reigned from circa 1200 to 1185 BCE and the King of Troy, is visiting King Melenaus of Sparta and staying in the Spartan Palace. Paris knew of Melenaus’s wife Helen and had fallen in love with her – refer article: Thoth. Paris hid Helen on his ship for the return voyage to Troy. Paris’ older brother Prince Hector did not agree with Paris, yet sailed home regardless. King Priam welcomed Helen and took her into the family as one of his own. Priam was reputed to have had fifty sons and twelve daughters. The city of Troy was splendidly wealthy and impregnable. Recall the prominent city of Kir of Moab, meaning wall.

Raging with revenge, King Melenaus of Sparta calls for the assistance and a favour from his brother King Agamemnon II who ruled Argos, circa 1202 to 1185 BCE. Though all closely related, the Trojans, Spartans (or Dorians) and the Achaean Greeks were different peoples. Agamemnon called in the services of Achilles, a killing machine and a fabled warrior of demi-god stature. King Agamemnon had at his disposal a realistic number of approximately one hundred ships and ten thousand men, including allies from Athens. 

According to Thucydides, Agamemnon raised an enormous fleet utilising other Greek cities of close to twelve hundred Boeotian [100+ men] and Philoctetes [50 men] ships – with a force of some 60,000 to 130,000 troops. To end the decade long stalemate, Odysseus – an ally of Menelaus – devised the ruse of a giant hollow wooden horse, an animal that was sacred to the Trojans.

Once inside Troy’s walls and the Trojans defeated, the Greeks burned the city and divided the spoils. Cassandra – Priam’s daughter who had warned not to accept the horse inside the city – was apparently awarded to Agamemnon. Neoptolemus, a son of Achilles obtained Andromache, the wife of Hector – the son of Priam, who had been killed by Achilles – and Odysseus was given Hecuba, Priam’s wife. 

That most Achaean heroes did not return to their homes and instead founded colonies elsewhere was ‘interpreted by Thucydides as being due to their long absence. Nowadays the interpretation followed by most scholars is that the Achaean leaders driven out of their lands by the turmoil at the end of the Mycenaean era preferred to claim descent from exiles of the Trojan War.’

Simply, these Greeks migrated as all ancient peoples continually moved due to the search for better opportunities, usually prodded by other peoples pressing against their territory, due to either population expansion, food shortages, famine or war. There was a continuous domino effect throughout the Middle East, Central Asia and Europe maintaining the movement of Shem’s descendants until peoples finally settled in their current geographical and political positions beginning from approximately 800 to 1000 CE.

The Greeks and Romans took for a fact the historicity of the Trojan War and the identity of Homeric Troy with a site in Anatolia on a peninsula called the Troad or now known as the Biga Peninsula, which forms the basis of Homer’s Iliad. Ironically, Alexander the Great later conquered the Troad and Troy, when it was part of the Persian Empire. He visited the site in 334 BCE and offered sacrifices at tombs associated with the Homeric heroes of Achilles and Patroclus his cousin, killed by Hector. Alexander was reputed to be related to Achilles via his mother who was apparently descended from a royal house. Troy is known in Greek as Troia; also by association with the region to the east, as Ilios (or Ilion). In Latin, Troja (or Ilium), as it was known during the reign of the Roman Emperor Augustus. 

A large mound known locally as Hisarlik, had long been understood to hold the ruins of a city named Ilion (or Ilium) which had flourished in Hellenistic and Roman times. In 1822 Charles Maclaren, a Scottish journalist, posited that this was the site of Homeric Troy; though for the next fifty years, his idea received little attention from Classical scholars, most of whom regarded the Trojan legend as a fictional creation based on myth and not history. ‘Those who did believe in the existence of a real Troy thought it to be at Bunarbashi (Pinarbasi), a short distance south of Hisarlik. It took Frank Calvert an English Levantine emigrant and scholarly amateur archaeologist, until 1860 to begin exploratory work on Hisarlik. It was he who persuaded the German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann to work at Hisarlik, though Schliemann soon took full credit for adopting Maclaren’s identification and demonstrating to the world that it was correct.’

There are nine major periods of ancient Troy designated by archaeologists, which are labeled I to IX, starting from the bottom with the oldest settlement, Troy I. ‘In periods I to VII Troy was a fortified stronghold that served as the capital of the Troad and the residence of a king, his family, officials, advisers, retinue, and slaves. Troy VI and VII [are] assigned to the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, circa 1900 to 1100 BCE. Based on the evidence of imported Mycenaean pottery, the end of Troy VIIa is dated to between 1260 and 1240 BCE. The Cincinnati expedition under Blengen concluded that Troy VIIa was very likely the capital of King Priam described in Homer’s Iliad, which was destroyed by the Greek armies of Agamemnon. 

The partly rebuilt Troy VIIb shows evidence of new settlers with a lower level of material culture, who vanished altogether by 1100 BCE. For about the next four centuries the site was virtually abandoned. The glorious and rich city Homer describes was believed to be Troy VI by many twentieth century authors, and destroyed about 1275 BC, probably by an earthquake. Its successor, Troy VIIa, was destroyed around 1180 BC; it was long considered a poorer city, and dismissed as a candidate for Homeric Troy, but since the excavation campaign of 1988, it has come to be regarded as the most likely candidate.’ 

This writer is not convinced with the VIIa and VIIb archaeological split. It is proposed that VI is the same Troy as described by Homer and the same Troy which Priam was king of when it was destroyed. Troy VI included the height of its splendour from circa 1400 to 1180 BCE. What has been labeled VIIb, should perhaps be renamed Troy VII. It is agreed that Troy VIIb was an attempt to rebuild, maintain and sustain a Troy that was now a shadow of its former grandeur and ultimately given up as a viable project by 1100 BCE.

Is there an agenda to lessen Troy’s prestige during 1194 and 1184 BCE and thus discredit the whole saga’s validity? Parallel propaganda include accounts which assert there were very few survivors from Troy.

Homeric Troy is described as a wealthy and populous city, yet the idea of a lesser Troy: ‘a relatively minor settlement, perhaps [just] a princely seat’ is advanced by scholars. In 1988, Korfmann’s team searched the terrain surrounding the citadel site at Hisarlik, investigating the wider settlement. Korfmann’s findings from ‘geomagnetic surveying and isolated excavations, led him to conclude in favour of a greater Troy – that is, a settlement of some size and prosperity.’

The question of what language was spoken by the Trojans has been a burning question. No evidence of a Trojan language seems to have survived. It was thought that the Trojans were Greek, though they were not in the Achaean domain and actually opposed to the Achaeans. Both remain a mystery, until we understand the Trojans were descended from Moab and Ammon and the Greeks at this time were principally sons of Jacob. It would be like comparing French with English and wondering why they are not the same. The animosity between the two peoples still alive and strong. Their differences not just due to culture but family lineage. Passages from the Iliad also allude that the Trojans were not Greek.

Who were the Trojans and where did they come from? Luciana Cavallaro, 2014 – emphasis mine:

‘Many scholars, including Carl Blengen American archaeologist who worked at the site in the 1930s, believed the Trojans were of Greek origin. This conjecture was attributed to the Greek names given to the characters in the Iliad but that isn’t the case. Homer mentioned a close relationship between the Trojan allies and in particular with the Dardanians. Excavations at the site of Troy/Ilios/Troya/Troia have found artefacts that showed the Trojans were in fact indigenous to the region and related to the Indo-European people who migrated to the area.

Archaeological investigations have surmised the people from Dardania and Troy shared a kinship, their ancestry a mixture of Anatolian and Luwians.’

The Luwians proper were the original Hatti. If these Dardanians are Luwians, then they could be related, just as the French (from Haran) are related to the Italians (from Nahor) – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Cavallaro: ‘The latter came from south eastern Anatolia [Asia-minor], a province the Romans later called Cilicia. The Greeks and Romans thought Dardania was a subset [satellite] of Troy however it was the other way around. Troy was a state of [the region of] Dardania [though Dardania was also the name of a city].

There are also the names of the Trojans, given in Greek as the audience was Hellenistic and more recognisable. Alexander/Alaksandu, better known as Paris was first noted in Hittite text and [a] ruler who established trading links with the Hittites. Wilusa, [a] Hittite word for the Greek interpretation Ilios. Priam/Piyama-Radu and Hektor are considered indigenous names though the spelling of the former changed. The Greeks did migrate to the west coast of Asia Minor and there is evidence they settled in the famous city. This was identified as Troy VIII.’

As stated in the preceding article, one proposal is that the Indo-European Luwians who arrived in the western coastal region of Anatolia are the West-Luwian speakers of Arzawa, who migrated westward. Another theory is that the Dardanians were Thracians who crossed the Dardanelles, named after the Dardans. The remains of their material culture reveal close ties with Thracians and Anatolian groups, as well as some Greek contact. Added to this is that later, a Thraco-Illyrian tribal state, the Dar-dan-i, dwelt to the north of Mace-don

There are historical clues sustaining the fact Trojans and Greeks, were offshoot colonies descended from Lot and Jacob respectively. Like all colonial origins, they begin with migrants on board ships; in this case, from Canaan. The descendants of Lot and Jacob would have been well aware of the Aegean-Grecian world via the Phoenician’s trade routes and the Mycenaean/Minoan – later Philistine – civilisation already established there.

Dardania, the city purportedly founded by Dardanus, as well as the name also given to the region, was located in the northwestern corner of Anatolia and to the immediate north of Troy – facing modern Gallipoli across the Dardanelles. It is included as part of the Troad, the peninsula region at the far north-western corner of Asia-minor, now modern Turkey. Dardania historically has been defined as ‘a district of the Troad, lying along the Hellespont, southwest of Abydos, and adjacent to the territory of Ilium. Its people (Dardani) appear in the Trojan War under Aeneas, in close alliance with the Trojans, with whose name their own is often interchanged…’ Aeneas is referred to in Virgil’s Aeneid interchangeably as a Dardan or as a Trojan, but strictly speaking Aeneas was of the Dardanian branch.

Thus some consider the Dardanians (or Dardans) as being the same stock as the Trojans – Dardanian and Trojan being synonymous – while others like Homer distinguish the two as clearly identifiable people – not two branches of a single group. The answer includes both propositions, in that a. Moab and Ammon are the same stock, both having Lot as their father; yet b. they are also two separate lines from two different brothers. Therefore, two different though related peoples, combined through marriage. The twist is that the original Dardanus was not descended from Lot but rather from Jacob. The Dardanians and the Teucri (or Teukroi) are credited as collaborating in building Troy as a state. As information is scant and legend and history are fused, it is a challenge in constructing a reliable chronology regarding the original founders.  

Teucer’s father is recorded as the mythical Scamandrus born circa 1627 BCE; ruling his people from 1603 to 1581 BCE. It was at that time his territory was allegedly absorbed by the Dardanians. In Greek mythology the daughter of Teucer was Bataea. Bataea married Dardanus who subsequently inherits rulership from Teucer of the Teucri in 1581, lasting until 1550 BCE, under the name of the Dardanians. Probably, the Teucri represent the relatively indigenous northwestern Anatolians of the second millennium BCE, while the Indo-European Dardanians, the migratory arrivals integrated into Teucri society, but who very quickly dominated it. Dardanus was born circa 1675 BCE in the land of Goshen, while the sons of Jacob were living in Egypt; for Dardanus was from a royal line of Judah, the son of Jacob.

Dardanus had a son Ilus (or Ilos), who ruled from 1550 to 1514 BCE; a king who died young and childless. Ilus’ younger brother, Erecthonius (or Erictanus) was born circa 1540 BCE and became king after Ilus. Erichthonius married Astyoche, daughter of the ‘river-god’ Simoeis, and she bore him a son, who was named Tros and he lived approximately between 1474 to 1415 BCE. Erichthonius was said to be the richest ruler in the world at that time, because he owned three thousand mares.

According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dardanus had another son named Zacynthus by Bataea and Zacynthus was the first settler on the island afterwards called Zacynthus. Dionysius also said that Dardanus’ son Idaeus, gave his name to the Idaean Mountains, that is Mount Ida, where Idaeus built a temple to the Mother of the Gods, Cybele and instituted mysteries and ceremonies still observed in Phrygia in Dionysius’ time. There are operas on the subject of Dardanus by Jean-Philippe Rameau (1739). Interesting coincidence that the operas are composed by a Frenchman.

Tros is the family member credited as the ruler of the Trojans, whereby the origin of the name Troad, as well as its inhabitants, the Trojans derive. Tros married Callirrhoe and had three sons with her, including the youngest son, Ganymede. Tros bequeathed the rulership of the Trojans to Ilos his eldest son – (not Ilos the son of Dardanus), who chose to be near the sea and strengthened Troy on the plain – and the rulership of Dardania, near Mount Ida, to his second son, Assaracus in 1415 BCE. Ilos founded the royal line of Ilium (or Ilios) which may equate to the Hittite (Hatti) Wilusa from (W)ilios. Assaracus and his Dardanian descendants maintained close links with their Trojan cousins. 

To give a context for the period circa 1600 BCE with the approximate founding of Troy and the birth of Dardanus circa 1675 BCE, through to 1415 BCE and the death of his grandson Tros… Moab and Ammon were born circa 1878 or 1877 BCE after the destruction of Sodom, when Abraham was ninety-nine years old. Similarly, Abraham’s son Isaac was born in 1877 BCE, when Abraham was one hundred years old. Jacob’s son Joseph died in 1616 BCE at the age of one hundred and ten in Egypt, but by the birth of Moses some ninety years later in 1527 BCE, the sons of Jacob were in bondage to a ruling Dynasty who did not remember Joseph – Exodus 1:8 (refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?) 

The exodus of the sons of Jacob from Egypt occurred in 1446 BCE, 430 years after Abraham’s 99th year – Exodus 12:40-41, Galatians 3:17. The three hundred and seventy-five years during 1400 to 1025 BCE was the period of the Judges in Israel until Saul became king. The early period and then height of Troy encompassed the approximate period of four hundred and twenty years from 1600 to 1180 BCE. From 1400 BCE onwards, the Moabites and children of Ammon were at continual loggerheads with Israel. Moving to Dardania and Troy was an attractive proposition for those who had the financial means. It may explain the wealth of Troy, if many inhabitants were rich immigrants.

The two families remained intertwined. Ilos married Eurydice, and became the father of Laomedon. Ilos’ daughter Themiste, married his nephew, Capys of the Dardanian line. Ilos’ son Laomedon succeeded him as king of Troy. Assaracus’ son, Capys and his wife Themiste had a son called Anchises. Of the two royal lines, those of Troy (or Ilium) became more powerful than the older Dardanian line, particularly under the rule of Laomedon; even though there was only three generations of kings in Troy, compared to the line of eight successive kings in Dardania. King Laomedon was known for his arrogance, his impiety and his refusal to honour his promises.

Then enters Priam (or Priamos), the only son to survive in a war against Heracles. Priam had been ransomed by his sister Hesione and became the new king in 1200 BCE. He had formally been known as Podacres. Priam’s first wife was Arisbe, daughter of Merops king of Percote. They had a son Aesacus, who was a gifted seer. Priam soon married Hecuba, daughter of Dymas and gave Arisbe to Hyrtacos. With Hecuba, Priam became the father of Hector, Paris, Cassandra, Helenus, Deiphobus and countless others as mentioned. Apollodorus recorded that Hecuba was the mother of ten sons and four daughters. 

Before Paris was born, Hecuba had a vision and a seer interpreted her vision, saying that Paris would one day cause the destruction of Troy. So Paris was sent to live in the wilderness. Years later, Paris returned to Troy and was recognised. Their parents had apparently forgotten the warning by the seer and welcomed him home – refer article: Thoth. Priam would have returned Helen when the Greek embassy demanded the return of Helen to her husband King Menelaus the Spartan; but Paris prevailed upon his father to refuse. As a result, the war lasted for ten years and all but one son Helenus, would die in the war. Neoptolemus, son of Achilles allegedly killed King Priam on the last day of the war. 

Who is Dardanus, the founder of Dardania, the city and subsequent region? A persistent secular legend from Greece and Rome, identifies a man called Dara as Dardanus, founder of ancient Troy, or rather Dardan. One translation of the Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, mentions King Solomon as being wiser than two men named as Calcol and Dara (or Darda) and gives Dara’s name as Dardanos. In 1 Chronicles 2:6 we read of Zarah, who had five sons and his fourth and fifth sons were Calcol and Dara (or Darda). Zarah was a son of Judah, one of the twelve sons of Jacob. We will return to Calcol when we study Judah, as he is credited with founding the city of Athens – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The Greek poet Homer recorded that Dardanus was a son of Zeus, the chief of the Greek gods. The Roman and Greek legends support that Zeus called Jupiter in Latin, was a son of Saturn who was also called Kronus – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Writing about the Greek gods, Sanchuniathon a Phoenician historian said that ‘Kronus’ was whom the Phoenicians called Israel, that is Jacob and he had a son called Jehud – who is, Judah. What is important is not the Greek mythology but rather the family relationship between Jacob, Judah and Zarah’s son Darda, the great grandson of Jacob as real historic figures. 

Critics focus on the Greek mythology and say every Greek city cited Zeus as their founder god and thus dismiss Darda as a founder of Troy. Critics also say the Bible does not give ‘direct evidence’ that any Israelites ‘abandoned the forty-year march… and travelled to the Aegean Sea or Black Sea… to found their own kingdoms.’ This is ironic as the rest of the time, the Bible is just a collection of fanciful fables, yet in this instance it is valued for not giving evidence, as if this evidence would be believed. We will look in detail into the sons of Jacob and the historical data that family members actually departed the congregation of Israel not just during the exodus sojourn for forty years from 1446 to 1407 BCE, but prior to their departure from Egypt.

The early migration of Darda is mentioned in How Israel Came to Britain, Canadian British Israel Association – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body before the Israel nation was formed – while, as a people, they were still in bondage in Egypt. One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster (Ireland). Another, under the leadership of Dardanus, a brother of Calcol, crossed to Asia Minor to found the Kingdom later known as Troy. E Raymond Capt in his work, Jacob’s Pillar, 1977, writes that Darda was ‘Egyptian’ in that he lived there during the bondage and was the son of Zarah. This Darda according to Capt, was one and the same with ‘Dardanus’, the ‘Egyptian founder of Troy.’

Hecataeus of Abdera, a fourth century BCE Greek historian, stated that “Now the Egyptians say that also after these events [the plagues of the Exodus] a great number of colonies were spread from Egypt all over the inhabited world… They say also that those who set forth with Danaus, likewise from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city of Greece, Argos, and that the nations of the Colchi in Pontus and that of the Jews (remnant of Judah), which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by certain emigrants from their country [Egypt]; and this is the reason why it is a long-established institution among these peoples to circumcise their male children, the custom having been brought over from Egypt. Even the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt.” Quoted from Diodorus of Sicily. G H Oldfather, 1933. Volume I, books I-II, 1-34, page 91. We will return to both Calcol and his brother Darda in subsequent chapters.

Depending on which interpretation of history one receives, the fallout from Troy’s defeat is as follows. If the ten year war was one against the Mycenae, then the lone royal survivor was Aeneas a member of the Dardanian branch of the Trojan royal family. His father was Anchises. Aeneas fought on behalf of Troy against the Mycenae. Datings for the ten year war – or siege for the Helenus version – range from as early as 1196 to as late 1183 BCE. Thus, 1194 to 1184 BCE is a good median. 

Aeneas is said to have lead the two sons of Antenor, Archelochus and Acamas as well as the Dardanians, allies of Troy during the Trojan War. After the sack of Troy, Aeneas and his followers were allowed to leave with their lives. His descendants according to Virgil in the Aenid, continued to rule the Trojans. They travelled for seven years, settling in Latium – central Italy, corresponding with Lazio. Opposed by Latinus, ruler of the Latins, Aeneas bests him in battle and is then accepted, marrying his daughter, Lavinia. Many subsequent rulers of Rome claimed descent from Aeneas and the Houses of Troy and Dardania. This raises an integral point. The rulers or the royal line of Troy – splitting into two houses, the Trojan and Dardanian – were originally from Dara, the son of Zarah. Zarah was a twin of Pharez. We will study each in detail. Both twins were to be ancestors of royal lines. We will learn that nearly every royal line in Europe has descended from or included the descendants of Zarah – article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

The Romans, may well have some legitimacy to the claim of Trojan blood, as many royal houses probably could. 

The pivotal issue though is not this, but that the sons of Dara ruled the peoples from Anatolia, the western Luwians. These people became known as Trojans and Dardanians after their rulers – Darda and Tros. The western Luwians were Moabite and Ammonite colonists, descended from Abraham’s brother Haran. Similarly, the eastern Luwians were related to Abraham’s other brother Nahor – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. These peoples were known as the Hatti, who later incorporated the Chaldeans and then many centuries later were the Lombardi and intermingled with the Ostrogoths, settling in northern and central Italy. The original royal houses of Troy and Darda were from the tribe of Judah. A portion of Ammon and Moab comprised the main body of Trojans and Dardanians, who in time migrated to the area of Macedonia and ultimately comprised the later Greeks of the Classical and Hellenistic periods. 

The alternative Trojan history is where Helenus is the lone royal survivor from the Trojan line. Trojan king lists follow Helenus with Genger and then a Francus (or, poetic licence perhaps, a Franco). Many centuries later there is another Francus, a king of the West Franks. Historians say Franc-us is a fabrication of history and inserted into the Trojan line by the Merovingian kings of France. 

What is fascinating, is not whether this is true or not, but rather that the Merovingians in part, with the Franks and the Trojans are actually all one and the same, regardless of whether a Francus was the great grandson of King Priam or not. 

Other kings included in the Trojan king list are Pepin of France, Louis I of France and sandwiched between the two, one of the most influential and important kings in history, Charles I or the Great, better known as Charlemagne. The following works on Troy are all written by French men. This writer wonders if any understood that they themselves were the living descendants of the very people they were writing about; or whether their attachment is a strong subconscious ardour and inclination they have not rationalised or quite put their finger on.

Britannica: 

‘The key work in the medieval exploitation of the Trojan theme was a French romance, the Roman de Troie (1154–60), by Benoit de Sainte-Maure. Later medieval writers used the Roman de Troie until it was superseded by a Latin prose account, the Historia destructionis Troiae (c. 1287; “History of the Destruction of Troy”), by Guido delle Colonne. The French author Raoul Le Fèvre’s Recueil des histoires de Troye (1464), an account based on Guido, was translated into English by William Caxton and became the first book to be printed in English as The Recuyell of the Histories of Troye (c. 1474).’

Regarding the rise of city-states or Poleis in Greece, Britannica states – emphasis theirs: 

‘A related factor is Phoenician influence (related, because the early Phoenicians were great colonizers, who must often have met trading Greeks). The Phoenician coast was settled by communities similar in many respects to the early Greek poleis. It is arguable that Phoenician influence, and Semitic influence generally, on early Greece has been seriously underrated’ – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

The first significant date in Greek history, in the Archaic age was 776 BCE, the year of the first Olympic Games in Olympia, which was located west of Arcadia – recall Acadia, Canada – and northwest of Sparta in the west of Greece. This was the highlight of the Archaic age which culminated with the Persian wars. This era included Homer and his epics The Iliad and The Odyssey.

In the period from Dark to Archaic Greece there were two powerful interrelationships which influenced Greek society, the colonizing mother city and its daughter city and the shared membership of an amphictyony. The most common link was that between two cities with the emphasis of shared ancestry. This diplomatic kinship was taken seriously right until the Hellenistic period and was the basis of key alliances; developing into the proxenia. Proxenoi were citizens of one state who looked after the interests of citizens of their related, neighbour state. This was evident in type between Sparta and Athens against Troy and was really exploited by Athens in the fifth century.

In Archaic Greece an amphictyony – literally, ‘dwellers around’ – comprised a ‘league of neighbors’ called an Amphictyonic League, which was an ancient religious association of Greek tribes and states formed in the dim past, between the Trojan war and the rise of the various Greek poleis. The most important was the Delphic Amphictyony. Originally composed of twelve tribes dwelling around Thermopylae, this league was centred first on the shrine of Demeter and later became associated with the Temple of Apollo at Delphi. The founder is said to be Amphictyon, brother of Hellen – the purported male ancestor of all Hellenes. The twelve founders were the Oetaeans, Boeotians of Thebes, Dolopes, Dorians of Sparta, the Ionians of Athens, Phthian Achaeans, Locrians, Magnesians, Malians, Perrhaebians, Phocians, Pythians of Delphi and the Thessalians. The League doctrine required that no member would be entirely wiped out in war and no water supply of any member would be cut even in wartime. It did not prevent members from the numerous clashes with each other, about dominance over temples. 

Oxford University Press states: ‘[Amphictyony] a word borrowed from institutions in classical Greece and applied by some historians of Israel to its supposed organization before the monarchy [time of the Judges] as a confederation of twelve clans. It was suggested that there was a central shrine at which a cultic object was a shared responsibility among the twelve. But the amphictyony theory has now been generally abandoned.’

The number of twelve tribes is too coincidental to ignore. The premise of not destroying a family clan, is reminiscent of the war of the eleven tribes against the tribe of Benjamin, which would have wiped them out if six hundred men had not fled and hidden, so that the remaining tribes relented – Judges 20:1-48 (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes). The early Greeks as mentioned, included the related sons of Jacob. The idea of the amphictyony sounds completely plausible from an Israelite, as well as a Moabite, Ammonite perspective. As a lot of blood had been spilt between the two families. 

The region of Canaan, Palestine or the Levantine, as discussed previously, was a prized parcel of real estate and so became a very crowded part of the world – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. The draw to move away to lands partially established, yet with space and opportunities beckoned to the sons of Jacob and Lot. Just as the New World was attractive a few hundred years ago, ancient Greece and the Aegean was the destination of choice. This explains the flowering of cities, rather than countries or empires in the region as they were colonies of a number of differing tribes and peoples. The influx of migrating peoples also explains why the Myceaneans – formerly Minoans and latterly Philistines – left mainland Greece, for the myriad islands and particularly Crete – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Another way of reinforcing this relationship between citizens from different city-states was through epigamia. This was enacted through an arrangement by which the husband’s family by marriage were treated as citizens of the wife’s poleis if the husband settled there. In contrast, Plutarch mentions that there was no intermarriage between members of two of the villages of Attica – Pallene and Hagnous. Not because they were dissimilar, rather they were too closely related and thus there was a ban on endogamy. This situation remarkably parallels the peoples of French Ammonite stock in Canada and Louisiana.

The Endogamy Files: What Is Endogamy? The DNA Geek, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Endogamy is a word that gets bandied around a lot in genetic genealogy circles, but what it means and how it affects our work is less clear. This post is the first in a series about what endogamy is, why it matters, how to detect it, and how to work with it. Endogamy is the practice of mating within a specific group. All human populations have practiced endogamy to one extent or another. Some still do.  

Endogamy can occur because the group is geographically isolated from other people, like Native Hawaiians were; because they prefer to marry within their religion, ethnicity, language, and/or social caste, as most cultures do; or for other reasons, like consolidating power among royalty. Key to endogamy is that the group is small enough that, over time, marriages occur between cousins. Not necessarily first or even second cousins (although that can occur), but between third, fourth, and more distant cousins. Over and over. And over. 

It’s important to remember that endogamy is not incest, which is sexual relations between close relatives, like a father and daughter or uncle and niece. Incest is associated with a substantial risk of early death or genetic disorders in the child, while marriages between even first cousins are much safer.  

Endogamy causes something called pedigree collapse, but not all pedigree collapse rises to the level of endogamy. The home person… is the child of parents who were third cousins to one another. That is, the parents shared a pair of great-great grandparents. As a result, their child… has 30 unique great-great-great grandparents instead of the expected 32. One set of 3-great grandparents shows up twice in the child’s tree. We say the pedigree is “collapsing” rather than doubling in number with each generation back, as we’d expect. But pedigree collapse is not endogamy. Pedigree collapse is one or a few isolated incidents of cousin marriage, while endogamy occurs repeatedly over many, many generations. 

This is my mother’s tree. She’s Cajun [a Louisianian descended of French Canadian immigrants from Acadia, speaking an archaic form of French], a culture that was geographically and culturally isolated in southern Louisiana and, before that, in what is now Nova Scotia. Cajuns have been marrying mainly within their own population since the 1600s… [like the expression “All Cajuns are cousins”!] My mother’s parents were fourth cousins. I don’t think they knew, because my grandmother’s father was born out of wedlock. My grandfather’s parents were third cousins; they definitely knew. There’s no known incest in this tree, but the cousin marriages go on and on, back to the earliest settlers in Port-Royal, Acadia (now Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia) in the early 1600s, because there simply weren’t a lot of options for marriage partners.

The closest cousin marriages I’ve identified in this tree are between first cousins. Consider Isaure Marie Guidry (1863–1933), my mother’s great grandmother… Her parents, Alexis Onésime Guidry and Palmire Dupré, were first cousins through their shared grandparents Louis–David Guidry and Marie Modeste Borda. To complicate matters even more, Onésime had been widowed before marrying Palmire. His previous wife, Celestine, was Palmire’s older sister, and Celestine had a daughter named Marie. So Marie and Isaure were half sisters their father Onésime, and first cousins through their mothers Celestine and Palmire. (This combination is often termed three-quarter siblings.) But they were also second cousins through Onésime and their mothers. Technically, Marie and Isaure were second cousins twice over, once through Onésime and Celestine and once through Onésime and Palmire, but you get the picture. It’s enough to make your head spin!

Isaure and Marie died more than 75 years before the advent of genetic genealogy using autosomal DNA, but what would their match to one another look like if we could analyze their genomes today? As half sisters, we’d expect them to share about 1750 cM, as first cousins another 850 cM or so, and as double second cousins roughly 200 cM twice over.  In many parts of their genomes, they’d match on both copies of their two chromosomes, much like full siblings do. In fact, they might well be indistinguishable from full sisters using the methods we use for genealogy. While Isaure and Marie are an extreme case, DNA matching is affected to some degree in all endogamous populations. People who are no closer than fourth cousins might share enough DNA to be predicted as third cousins, because they’re picking up “extra” shared DNA through their other relationships.’

‘For example, my mother shares 184 cM with D.M. If you were to plug that number into the DNA Painter SCP tool, you’d see a combined probability of 89.1% that they were either in the second cousin group (38.8% chance) or the second cousin once removed group (50.3%). In fact, their closest relationship is third cousins, who average only about 50 cM. On the other hand, Mom and D.M. are also third cousins once removed twice over, fourth cousins once removed, and fifth cousins… that we know of. All those distant relationships add to the shared centimorgan tally. Thus, the overall effect of endogamy is to make many of our DNA matches appear to be more closely related than they really are. This complicates everything, from basic relationship prediction to more advanced and powerful techniques, like the… What are the Odds? tool.

Is the entire human population endogamous? After all, we only mate (well, mate successfully) with other humans and have been doing so for ten thousand years or more, since the last archaic humans, like Denisovans and Neanderthals, died out. Technically, we’re all (very distant) cousins, and all of our pedigrees collapse eventually. What do you think?’

By the sixth century BCE, the dominant cities in Grecia were Athens, Sparta, Corinth and Thebes. They had all increased their influence to include surrounding smaller towns and rural areas. Athens and Corinth had become major maritime and mercantile powers. Herodotus described one such trader from the later Archaic period, Sostratus of Aegina, a man of fabulous wealth. 

Then in the early 1970s a remarkable inscription was found in Etruria, Italy – a dedication to Apollo, in the name of Sostratus of Aegina. This discovery revealed that the source of his wealth was trade with Etruria and other parts of Italy. A rapidly increasing population in the preceding centuries had resulted in emigration of many Greeks to form colonies in Southern Italy and Sicily. The Greek colonies of Sicily, especially Syracuse were drawn into conflicts with the Carthaginians – ancestors of the Portuguese-Brazilian descended peoples (refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil). The conflict lasted from 600 to 265 BCE until the Romans intervened. A year later, the Punic wars began. 

Beginning about 500 BCE, the Athenians and Spartans tussled for hegemony over Greece, though the Athenians were no longer the Israelites – of six hundred years before – but Moab – with Ammon located in Macedonia to the north. For these were the children of Lot, whose migrations southward had pushed the other (earlier) Greeks to leave. 

The Spartans who were distinct and not descended from Moab, Ammon or Jacob, were never defeated by Philip II (or Alexander III) and remained outside of the Greek Empire – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Around the same time, in 499 BCE, the Ionian city states under Persian rule rebelled against their Persian-backed, tyrannical rulers. Supported by troops predominantly from Athens, they advanced as far as Sardis burning the city before being driven back by a Persian counterattack. The revolt continued for five years until finally the rebel Ionians were defeated. 

Darius I, king from 522 to 486 BCE, did not forget that Athens had assisted the Ionian revolt and he assembled an armada to exact retribution. Though heavily outnumbered, the plucky Athenians and allies, defeated the Persians at the Battle of Marathon in 490. The Athenians and Persians continued to wage war until about 450, with the Athenians driving the Persians out of the Aegean. They then turned on the Spartans during the Peloponnesian War beginning in 431 BCE and lasting to 404 BCE. Eventually, Sparta brought an end to Athens’ empire though was ultimately left severely weakened itself. 

By 360 BCE, the Greek states had worn themselves out and ‘the exhaustion of the Greek heartland coincided with the rise of Macedon, led by Philip II.’ In 359, two strong leaders came to the thrones of both Persia and Macedon, ruling for nearly the exact same periods: Artaxerses III, from 359 to 338 BCE; and Philip II from 359 to 336 BCE. 

The Parthenon situated on the Acropolis of Athens was built between 447 and 438 BCE. A temple dedicated to the goddess Athena. Parthenos meant a ‘maiden, girl, virgin’ or an ‘unmarried woman.’ Construction began at the height of the Athenian Empire. The Parthenon replaced an older temple of Athena which was destroyed in the Persian invasion of 480 BCE. It also served a practical purpose as the city treasury. 

Philip took twenty years in not just unifying his kingdom, but also expanding north and westwards, conquering Thrace as well as Thessaly to the south. His reforms to the Macedonian army were pivotal in his success. In 338 BCE he invaded the southern city-states of Thebes and Athens, defeating them at the Battle of Chaeronea. Now king of all but Sparta; Philip then entered into war against the Achaemenid Empire but was assassinated by one of his bodyguards Pausanias of Orestis, early in the conflict … and so entered, Alexander the Great onto the world stage, aged just twenty, born July 20, 356 BCE.

‘Modern belief in the Greek-ness of the Macedonian language was strengthened by the publication in 1994 of an important curse tablet from Pella that appears provisionally to indicate that the Macedonian language was a form of northwest Greek. Macedonian religion looks Greek; there are local variations, but that is equally true of incontestably Greek places in, for instance, the Peloponnese. Many Macedonian personal names resemble Greek ones… The Classical Age was resplendent with most of the cultural wonders associated with Ancient Greece. It corresponds with the period of the height of democracy, the flowering of Greek tragedy in the hands of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, and the architectural marvels, like the Parthenon, at Athens.’

The Greek word for philosophy, philosophia, translates as the ‘love for wisdom.’ The discipline dates back to ancient times with some of the greatest philosophers, including Pythagoras circa 570 to 495 BCE; Parmenides circa 540-? BCE; Socrates circa 469 to 399 BCE; Plato circa 428 to 348 BCE; Aristotle 384 to 322 BCE; and Epicurus 341 to 270 BCE. 

There are famous modern day philosophical thinkers who have had their contributions recognised as well. The same people descended from Lot, known as the Greeks, are now known as the French and are still producing the majority of the finest thinkers in the world. Examples include: John Calvin, 1509 to 1564; Rene Descartes, 1596 to 1650; Blaise Pascal, 1623 to 1662; Voltaire, 1694 to 1778, Auguste Comte, 1798 to 1857, Jean Paul Sartre, 1905 to 1980; Simone de Beauvoir, 1908 to 1986; Albert Camus, 1913 to 1960; and Michael Foucault, 1926 to 1984. Some of the major Greek contributors to science, lived during the Hellenistic era, including Euclid and Archimedes. 

In 600 BCE, a portion of the Greek Empire – an early enclave of Moabites – settled in Southern France and founded the colony of Massalia; now the city that is called Marseille and the oldest city in France – Kir of Moab. The primary link between the Classical Greeks and the French are not the Gauls, but the Franks. The original Gauls are not the ancestors of Moab and Ammon. We will study these Gauls in detail in a later chapter – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

As the Swedes, Norwegians and Danes believe they are Vikings and identify with that culture and past history, the truth, is that the original Vikings left Scandinavia and settled in Britain and Ireland – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. Likewise the French identify with a Gallic past, yet they are not Gauls, for the true Gauls vacated France for the shores of Britain and Ireland. The Gauls were a Celtic race who left their name in northwestern Italy as Gallia, in Belgium as Belgica and in France as Celtica. The nation of France emerged from this Gallic region of the Celtic culture and peoples. Gallia remains a name for France in the Latin, with Francogallia.

The Merovingian dynasty of the Franks attracts considerable interest from researchers and the public alike, in a similar vein to the Trojan kings. We will discuss them further in a subsequent chapter as they are perhaps not all that they seem – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The Merovingian kings were ostensibly a Frankish, Salian dynasty lasting some three hundred years – 476 to 750 CE – and are traditionally reckoned as the first race of the ‘kings of France.’ They importantly for the French identity, ended the hegemony of the Visigoths in Gaul. Merovingian derives from the name Merovech meaning Sea-Bull – the father of Childeric I, who ruled a tribe of Salian Franks from his capital at Tournai. 

Childeric was succeeded by his son Clovis I in 481/482 CE. Many regard Clovis as the beginning point for the history of France. Clovis I extended his rule over all the Salian Franks by conquering or annexing the territories of the Ripuarian Franks and the Alemanni; uniting nearly all of Gaul except for Burgundy – the seeds of modern Switzerland – and what is now Provence. Important choices by Clovis included making Paris his new capital and converting to Christianity sometime during 496 to 506 CE. 

At Clovis’ death in 511 – and in a situation similar to Alexander at the time of his death – his realm was divided among his four sons, Theuderic I, Chlodomir, Childebert I and Chlotar I. Despite the frequently bloody competition between them, the brothers managed to extend Frankish rule over Thuringia in 531 and Burgundy in 534; as well as gaining control over Septimania on the Mediterranean coast; Bavaria; and the lands of the Saxons to the north. By 558 CE, Chlotar I was the only surviving son of Clovis. 

The Merovingians grew their hair long (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe) which distinguished them among the Franks who cut their hair short. Contemporaries referred to them as the ‘long-haired kings’, in Latin reges criniti. A Merovingian whose hair was cut could not rule. The Merovingians used a distinct stock of names. Clovis, evolved into Louis and remained common among French royalty to the 19th century – with claimant for the throne Louis XIX in 1830, allegedly king for twenty minutes.

The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals and emphasis his, bold mine:

‘The old Trojan Royal House – of the line of DARDANUS – was restored to power after the Greek defeat at Troy in 1149. As noted by Herman L. Hoeh:

“A complete list of TROJAN RULERS after the fall of Troy in 1181 may be found in the original Spanish work by Bartholome Gutierrez entitled: Historia del estado presente y antiguo, de la mui noble y mui leal ciudad de Xerez de la Frontera. It was published in Xerez, Spain in 1886″ (Compendium of World History, Volume II).

‘… HELENUS, the son of Priam and Hecuba, fled Troy after the first Trojan War and settled in Illyria or Epirus. There Helenus and his followers founded the cities of Buthrotum and Chaonia. During the Second Trojan War in 1149, the descendants of Helenus REGAINED CONTROL of Troy from the Greeks and restored the Royal House of DARDANUS to the city. 

The Spanish history by Gutierrez records the names of Helenus’ descendants who controlled Troy and the surrounding region until the Third Trojan War in 677… At the fall of Troy in 677, members of the Trojan Royal Family, and most of the population of the city, fled to the NORTHERN SHORES OF THE BLACK SEA in eastern Europe. For the next 234 years, in this region, the… TROJAN HOUSE provided eleven rulers over the people who fled Troy…

In 442 B.C. MARCOMIR, Antenor’s son, ascended the throne; and in 441 he migrated out of Scythia and settled the people on the DANUBE. In 431 the Goths forced him, along with over 175,000 men, out of the area and into the country now called West Friesland, Gelders and Holland. Then, nine years later, Marcomir crossed the Rhine and conquered part of Gaul – MODERN FRANCE! He made his brother governor, and continued the gradual conquest of the entirety of Gaul.

Eventually this people became known as FRANKS or Franconians after a king called FRANCUS who reigned from 39 – 11 B.C. The last King of the Franks – Marcomir V – won a great victory over the Romans at Cologne in 382 A. D. and recovered all the lands in the possession of the Romans, except Armoria or Little Brittany, in 390. However, he was slain in battle three years later and the Romans conquered the FRANKS – commanding them to refrain from electing kings over themselves. Instead, the Franks elected Dukes to reign over them, starting with Genebald I in 328 A.D.

The fifth duke of the East Franks, Pharamund (404-419) is recognized by early historians as being the FIRST TRUE KING OF FRANCE. In 427 the succession passed to Clodion who founded the MEROVINGIAN DYNASTY. There is something VERY INTERESTING about this dynasty that bears explanation:

“Its kings all wore LONG HAIR. They kept their kingly office until the Pope suggested to the East Franks (Germans) that they could gain the power over the Merovingians by cutting the king’s hair. The last Merovingian was accordingly tonsured. The government thereafter passed to Pippin, father of the German king Charlemagne, who RESTORED the Roman Empire to the west in 800.

The history of the Merovingians, WHO DESCENDED [perhaps] FROM THE [early] TROJAN LINE AND THE HOUSE OF JUDAH [Zarah], is made especially interesting in a book entitled The Long-haired Kings, by J. M. Wallace-Hadrill. (See especially chapter 7.) The Merovingians recognized that… THEY WERE NOT OF THE THRONE OF DAVID [Pharez] and would hold their power only so long as they kept a NAZARITE TRADITION long hairsymbolizing their subjection to a Higher Power God – who rules supreme among men. (See Numbers 6)” (Compendium of World History, Volume II, page 183).’

The first consideration by this writer was that the Merovingian kings were descended from Moab (or Ammon) via the later ruling Trojans. Subsequent research lent credence to considering the explanation that the Merovingians were from a tribe of Israel which differed from that of Judah, the tribe of Dan -Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Further consideration yet and evidence of a DNA lineage via the specific paternal Haplogroup R1b (Z381 > Z331) for the Merovingian kings, led to acknowledging a descent from the tribe of Judah. As Darda (Dara) the fifth and youngest son of Zarah founded Troy, the link between this branch of Zarah and the Merovingians is not beyond realistic foundation – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. It is then of note that by their own admission, the Merovingians were not descendants of David’s line from Pharaz.

Thus as a branch of Zarah initially ruled Troy prior to Moab and Ammon in the Troad, so too a branch of Zarah (Merovingians) ruled the fledgling Frankish (Salian) kingdom lands prior to the Carolingian rulers of non-Judah (Israelite) descent and with a high degree of probability, were actually of Moabite lineage.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 445 – emphasis his, bold mine:

‘Even the name Lancelot, according to Ried, derived from L’Alan de Lot, Alan from the Lot Valley of southwest France. The Lot Valley is the same region that the Essenes, Templars, Rex Deus, Cathars, and Merovingians settled in. Lot derives from Lot, the nephew of Abraham, recorded in the Nephilim-infested Sodom and Gomorrrah narrative. Lot also inexplicably shows up in the original Camu-lot. One wonders, were Camulot and the Lot region of France thus considered by Gnostics as the new Sodom and Gomorrah cities of light?’ – Paris is the “City of Light”.

The Franks like other Germanic peoples had resided in Scandinavia before their migration southwards and prior to that, they are linked to the Black Sea area. The Franks from the beginning, were divided into two distinct political yet related groups. The Salian Franks of very probable Moabite descent, dwelt in the west of France. This Frankish kingdom became known as Neustria and encompassed northern France, Burgundy, Orleans – upper central France – and Provence.

The Ripuarian Franks, most likely descended from Ammon, dwelt in the Rhineland region of northwestern Germany; which in turn became known as Austrasia and later encompassed Austria, the Netherlands and northern Germany. The name Ripuarian is thought to mean river people or river dwellers. One is reminded of Ammon’s capital Rabbah, the city of water and Quebec with its strong association with the sea. The name Franci, from Frank is linked with the english word frank, to be ‘free.’ Other accepted meanings include the Germanic words for ‘javelin, fierce, bold’ and ‘insolent.’

The author of the Chronicle of Fredegar in the seventh century, claimed the Franks came originally from Troy, citing the works of Virgil and Hieronymous: ‘Blessed Jerome has written about the ancient kings of the Franks, whose story was first told by the poet Virgil: their first king was Priam and, after Troy was captured by trickery, they departed. Afterwards they had as king Friga, then they split into two parts, the first going into Macedonia, the second group, which left Asia with Friga were called the Frigii, settled on the banks of the Danube and the Ocean Sea – Black Sea. Again splitting into two groups, half of them entered Europe with their king Francio. After crossing Europe with their wives and children they occupied the banks of the Rhine and not far from the Rhine began to build the city of “Troy.”

The Liber Historiae Francorum (or Gesta regum Francoru) describes how 12,000 Trojans, alledgely led by Priam and Antenor (or rather descendants) sailed from Troy to the River Don and on to Pannonia which is on the River Danube settling near the Sea of Azov. There they founded a city called Sicambria. The Sicambri circa 55 BCE are linked to the area occupied by the Salian Franks in northwestern France. The Trojans joined the Roman army in accomplishing the task of driving enemies into the marshes of Mæotis, for which it is claimed they received the name of Franks, meaning ‘savage.’

There are many kings called great and within that group, there are only a select few who cast a long shadow over the other rulers labelled great. The great of the great, if you will. For instance, Alexander the Great of Macedon. Another is Charles I or Charlemagne, who lived from 742 to 814 CE. He was the son of Pepin III, king from 751 to 768 and Bertrada of Laon. 

Charlemagne co-ruled with his brother Carloman I from 768 until his death in 771. Pepin had peacefully wrenched the monarchy away from Chileric III, by beseeching Pope Zachary (741-752 CE) for the need of a strong ruler such as himself: the Mayor of the Palace, effectively wielding the true power over the Frankish kingdom. Charlemagne is considered a founder of both the French and German monarchies. The French monarchy would continue to be a great power in Europe for the following thousand years. 

It is thought that Charlemagne was born in either Liege in Belgium, or Aachen in Germany, where he died. He displayed a talent for languages and could speak Latin and understood Greek, amongst others. Charlemagne expanded the Frankish kingdom; establishing the Carolingian Empire. As a zealous defender of ‘Christianity’, Charlemagne gave money and land to the Catholic church and protected successive popes. 

To acknowledge Charlemagne’s power and reinforce his support of the church, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the Romans on December 25, 800, at St Peter’s Basilica in Rome – thus uniting Western Europe and the Holy Roman Empire for the first time since the fall of Rome. ‘Charlemagne ruled from the start by force of his personality which embodied the warrior-king ethos combined with Christian vision.’

Charlemagne maintained a violent and protracted thirty year series of battles from 772 to 804 CE – called the Saxon Wars – against the German Saxons, a ‘pagan’ worshipping Germanic tribe who had earned a reputation for ruthlessness. 

Bust of Charlemagne – note the symbols of the German Eagle and the French Fleur-de-lis

In 782 at the Massacre of Verden, Charlemagne ordered the slaughter of some four and a half thousand Saxons and tried to force them to convert to Christianity; declaring that anyone who did not get baptised or follow the Catholic faith, would be put to death. The aim was to break the Saxon’s will to fight, but they still would not surrender their autonomy or repudiate their religion. In 804, Charlemagne deported over ten thousand Saxons to his kingdom in Neustria and replaced them in Saxony with his own people. This effectively won the conflict, while earning the enmity of the Scandinavian kings; who bid their time until Charlemagne’s death and who then unleashed Viking raids on Francia during 820 to 840. 

Charlemagne’s son Louis was born in 778 to his second wife, Hildegard of the Vinzgau, who had nine children by the time she died at the age of 26 in 783. When King Louis I, the Pious died in 840, the empire was divided among his three sons who fought each other for supremacy. Their conflict was concluded by the Treaty of Verdun in 843 which divided the empire between Louis’ sons. Louis II, the German (843-876) received East Francia; Lothair I (843-855), Middle Francia; and Charles II, the Bald (843-877) gained West Francia. None of the kings were interested in working with their brothers and the empire’s infrastructure, as well as most of the reforms advanced by Charlemagne, deteriorated. His notable reforms included the first public schools and a monetary standard. 

Hollister describes the king: ‘Charlemagne towered over his contemporaries both figuratively and literally. He was 6 feet 3 ½ inches tall [ironic as his father was very short], thick-necked, and pot bellied yet imposing in appearance for all that. He could be warm and talkative, but he could also be hard, cruel, and violent, and his subjects came to regard him with both admiration and fear… Above all else, Charlemagne was a warrior-king. He led his armies on yearly campaigns as a matter of course. Only gradually did he develop a notion of Christian mission and a program of unifying and systematically expanding the Christian West.’ 

Notable events in French history include, the Hundred Years War with the English, beginning in 1337. Then in 1348, the plague of Black Death spread through France killing a large percentage of the population. In 1415, the English defeated the French at the Battle of Agincourt. In 1453, the Hundred Years’ War finally drew to a close when the French defeated the English at the Battle of Castillon. The year 1643 saw Louis XIV become King of France. He ruled for seventy-two years and was known as Louis the Great and the Sun King. In 1778, France became involved in the American War of Independence, siding with the colonies in their drive for independent governance from Great Britain. The most popular French king names have been Louis with eighteen kings; Charles with ten; and Philip with five – the name of Alexander the Great’s father.

In 1789, the French Revolution began with the storming of the Bastille. In 1792, the French Republic was proclaimed and the following year, King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were executed by guillotine. In 1799, Napoleon seized power, overthrowing the French Directory; making himself Emperor. Conquering most of Europe by 1811, he had been officially crowned Emperor of France in 1804. By 1815, Napoleon was defeated by a coalition, led by England’s the Duke of Wellington.

Much could be said regarding Napoleon I, who like a reincarnated Alexander, embodied more than a passing similarity. The following, is a brief synopsis from Britannia – emphasis mine: 

‘Napoleon I, French in full Napoléon Bonaparte… byname the Corsican or the Little Corporal, French byname Le Corse or Le Petit Caporal, (born August 15, 1769, Ajaccio, Corsica – died May 5, 1821, St. Helena Island), French general, first consul (1799-1804), and emperor of the French (1804-1814/15), one of the most celebrated personages in the history of the West. He revolutionized military organization and training; sponsored the Naploeonic Code, the prototype of later civil-law codes; reorganized education; and established the long-lived Concordat with the papacy. Napoleon’s many reforms left a lasting mark on the institutions of France and of much of western Europe. But his driving passion was the military expansion of French dominion, and, though at his fall he left France little larger than it had been at the outbreak of the revolution in 1789, he was almost unanimously revered during his lifetime and until the end of the Second Empire under his nephew Napoleon III as one of history’s great heroes.’

There is an air of the Germanic or perhaps Flemish-Dutch about Charlemagne, not so with Napoleon Bonaparte who is wholly French like his spiritual antecedent, Alexander the Great. Both of which shared one major attribute and that was superior military innovation. It gave them the edge over their opponents. Sandwiched between Charlemagne and Napoleon was another formidable French leader and warrior, Joan of Arc. It was vital that England did not gain a stranglehold on France and Joan was the difference.

Britannia – emphasis mine:

‘St. Joan of Arc, byname the Maid of Orléans… (born circa 1412, Domrémy, Bar, France – died May 30, 1431, Rouen; canonized May 16, 1920… national heroine of France, a peasant girl who, believing that she was acting under divine guidance, led the French army in a momentous victory at Orleans [in 1429] that repulsed an English attempt to conquer France during the Hundred Years’ War. 

Captured a year afterward, Joan was burned to death by the English and their French collaborators as a heretic. She became the greatest national heroine of her compatriots, and her achievement was a decisive factor in the later awakening of French national consciousness. Joan was the daughter of a tenant farmer… In her mission of expelling the English and their Burgundian allies… she felt herself to be guided by the voices of St. Michael [and others]… Joan was endowed with remarkable mental and physical courage, as well as a robust common sense, and she possessed many attributes characteristic of the female visionaries who were a noted feature of her time. These qualities included extreme personal piety, a claim to direct communication with the saints, and a consequent reliance upon individual experience of God’s presence beyond the ministrations of the priesthood and the confines of the institutional church.’

The 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Notice the similarity with the customary tablets used for the Ten commandments; with the United States Declaration of Independence; and with the Eye of Providence – the all-seeing eye of a god (Article: Thoth). This Eye is a symbol that has an eye enclosed in a pyramid, surrounded by rays of light from the Sun to represent superficially, the divine providence of God watching over humanity – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. In reality, the god who watches, is the one who holds this world captive – Articles: 33; and Asherah.

The Eye of Providence appears on the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States, depicted on the one dollar bill. The Eye of Providence was adopted in 1782, but was first proposed as an element of the Great Seal in 1776. Coincidentally, it is thought to be the suggestion of the artistic consultant, Pierre Eugene du Simitiere – of French ancestry born in Geneva, Switzerland.

In 1889, the iconic Eiffel Tower was built in Paris for the World’s Fair

France suffered greatly in both World War I and World War II, with considerable loss of life and spilt blood on its soil. In 1940 During World War II, France was occupied by the Germans and under their direct control. German officials oversaw all aspects of government, supported by the military. Any infraction of the rules could be dealt with by the Nazis bureaucrats or by the military. Vichy France was a puppet government. It was governed by French officials, with the Germans maintaining only a small oversight group to ensure that Vichy France did not contravene the interests of the Germans. The Vichy government generally cooperated with the Germans; rounding up and deporting Jews and anyone else the Nazis declared as their enemies.

Most Resistance activity was fought in the occupied territories, as there was little incentive to take action against the Germans in Vichy France. It would have impacted the measure of self-governance the French already had and run the risk of inciting severe penalties against the civilian population. Relatively few French actually took an active part in the Resistance. Many offered passive support by not reporting Resistance movements, but the vast majority of French citizens in both occupied and Vichy France simply avoided doing anything to attract the attention of the gestapo or of collaborating Frenchmen. Allied forces liberated the country in 1944. 

An additional interesting coincidence is France’s close association with the Modern Olympic Games. It was the Greeks who staged the first Olympic Games in Olympia during 776 BCE and it was a modern ‘Greek’, a French aristocrat, Baron Pierre de Coubertin who spoke of the Games’ revival. Athens was understandably, awarded the first re-instituted Games in 1896 in homage to the Olympics’ Greek origins. Though Paris hosting the second games in 1900, was truer to its returning to its spiritual and physical origin. Paris was the first home of the International Olympic Committee, before it moved to Lausanne, Switzerland. France also hosted the Summer Olympics in 1924 and has hosted the Winter Games three times. Paris is hosted the Olympic Games exactly one hundred years later, in 2024. It will join Athens and London in hosting the games a record three times; while Los Angeles is set to host for a third time in 2028.

Britannica: ‘France has long provided a geographic, economic, and linguistic bridge joining northern and southern Europe. It is Europe’s most important agricultural producer and one of the world’s leading industrial powers.’ A long standing and well known theme of the French nation, is the insistence on the supremacy of the individual. Historian Jules Michelet remarked…

“England is an empire, Germany is a nation, a race, France is a person.”

‘This is surely reflective of the French national character; one that was born from a familial origin more intimate than the beginning of other nations. Writer Gustave Flaubert philosophically deduced: ‘I am no more modern than I am ancient, no more French than Chinese; and the idea of la patrie, the fatherland – that is, the obligation to live on a bit of earth coloured red or blue on a map, and to detest the other bits coloured green or black – has always seemed to me narrow, restricted, and ferociously stupid.’ 

France is a major world power as evidenced in being one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council with the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and China. In 2015 France was listed as being ‘the best networked state in the world’ as a country that ‘is [a] member of more multi-lateral organisations than any other country.’ Reminds of Lot and his participation and position in Sodom. France is a leading member of the International Francophone Organisation (OIF) of eighty-four fully or partly French speaking nations. In 2017 France was the fourth largest donor of development aid in the world, after the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. A 2018 study by Credit Suisse ranked the French Armed Forces as the world’s sixth largest military and most powerful in Europe, behind Russia. 

France is an integral member of the intergovernmental organisation comprising the seven most powerful economies – not including China and India – in the world, the G7. France’s second biggest export is automobiles. French automobile brands include renowned Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Alpine and Bugatti. France is famous for the most prestigious wines in the world; as well as for champagne – from the region of the same name – and cognac exports. Many cosmetic brands originate from France, including Vichy, Nuxe, Yves-Rocher and Bioderma. 

France has a GDP of $3.21 trillion in 2025, ranking as the seventh largest economy in the world. Tourism is a very important industry and France receives the most visitors of any country each year with Paris the most visited capital in the world and voted the most romantic city destination. France is a mixed economy, with many private and semi-private businesses across a diverse range of industries. There is heavy government involvement in certain key sectors such as defence and electrical power generation. The French government’s commitment to economic intervention in favour of social equality, creates challenges for the economy such as a rigid labor market with high unemployment and a large public debt relative to other advanced economies.

‘The following product groups represent the highest dollar value in France’s import purchases during 2021

  1. Machinery including computers: US$84.2 billion
  2. Vehicles: $75.9 billion 
  3. Mineral fuels including oil: $70.8 billion 
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $64.1 billion 
  5. Pharmaceuticals: $33.9 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $29.2 billion 
  7. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $23.3 billion 
  8. Organic chemicals: $16.5 billion 
  9. Iron, steel: $15.2 billion 
  10. Articles of iron or steel: $14.3 billion


The fastest growers among the top product categories from 2020 to 2021 were mineral fuels including oil (up 80.4%), iron or steel as materials (up 57.1%), items made from iron or steel (up 37.2%), plastics as a material and items made from plastic (up 31.4%) and electrical machinery or equipment (up 19.5%).’

The French Tricolore

France ranks highly in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves, one behind Italy at number three. France in fourth position is ahead of those nations we have investigated so far, such as Russia (5), China (6), Switzerland (7), Japan (8) and India (9). France has 2,436.0 tonnes of gold which represents 64.5 percent of its foreign reserves. The French central bank has sold little of its gold reserves in recent years. ‘The Banque de France vaults in Paris are one of the four designated depositories of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).’

France was the most populous nation in Europe in 1801, containing about one sixth of the continent’s inhabitants. By 1936, the French population had increased by fifty percent; though in the same period the number of people in Italy and Germany had nearly trebled and in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands the population had nearly quadrupled. The population of France today is 66,647,930 people, the fourth highest in Europe between the United Kingdom and Italy. France has never been a major source of international migrants like the other prominent nations surrounding it. 

In the seventeenth century due to religious persecution, France lost more than four hundred thousand Huguenot refugees – usually highly skilled – mainly to Prussia in northeast Germany, to England, the Netherlands and the United States. In the same century, relatively small numbers of emigrants first settled in North America, particularly eastern Canada and Quebec and in the southern state of Louisiana. Small numbers of French, especially from Brittany and Normandy continue to relocate to Canada.

An online encyclopaedia states, that ‘most French people are of Celtic (Gauls) origin, with an admixture of Italic (Roman) and Germanic (Franks) groups.’ As touched upon, the Gauls were in fact early British and Irish peoples and it is the Salian and Ripuarian Franks who are the nucleus of the French nation. The Latin and Celtic component reveals their familial resemblance to the Italians and Swiss respectively; whom represent their cousins from both Nahor and Haran respectively. We will discover when we investigate Haran’s brother Abraham and his descendants the why and where of the Germanic component in the French people. The fact that France is composed of two brothers is the key piece of the French puzzle and explains their approximate north western to south eastern population demographic divide.

The major differences between the North and South of France, Santa Fe Relocation, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The two regions of France are heavily influenced by the surrounding countries and the weather. While many aspects of Northern France are reminiscent of Germany and Belgium, such as the architecture [industry and commerce], Southern France feels more Mediterranean, sharing many features [such as cuisine and pace of life] with Spain and Italy. The lifestyle and culture varies between the two regions… In Northern France most people tend to be quite honest and blunt, but they also tend to form much deeper relationships with people… The easiest way to make friends in Southern France is to speak the language.’

Encyclopaedia: ‘Large-scale immigration over the last century and a half has led to a more multicultural society. In 2004, the Institute Montaigne estimated that within Metropolitan France, 51 million people were White (85% of the population), 6 million were Northwest African (10%), 2 million were Black (3.3%), and 1 million were Asian (1.7%). In 2005, it was Western Europe’s leading recipient of asylum seekers… In 2010, France… [was] among the top five asylum recipients in the world… [even though] France established controls to curb Eastern European migration. Immigration remains a contentious political issue.’

Recall Ezekiel 25:10 ESV: ‘I will give [Moab] along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations…’

The region of Catalonia though within Spain, also includes Catalan speakers in the historical French region of Roussillon. For some four hundred years this Catalan territory has been united with France, called Catalunya nord and today known as Pyrenees Orientales with the city of Perpignan. The autonomous community of Catalonia is the richest and most highly industrialised region of Spain; reflecting its difference from the rest of the Spanish. For instance, the Catalan textile industry achieved prominence between 1283 and 1313; long remaining the premier industry of Spain until the 1950s. 

Britannia – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Catalonia was formerly a principality of the crown of Aragon, and it has played an important role in the history of the Iberian Peninsula. From the 17th century it was the centre of a separatist movement that sometimes dominated Spanish affairs. In 2006 Catalonia was granted “nation” status and given the same level of taxation responsibility as the Spanish central government. Spain’s Constitutional Court struck down portions of this autonomy statute in 2010, ruling that Catalans constituted a “nationality” but that Catalonia was not, itself, a “nation.”

This is strikingly similar to the ruling accorded to Quebec in Canada.

‘Scotland’s referendum on independence from the United Kingdom in… 2014, although ultimately unsuccessful, [galvanised] the independence movement in Catalonia. Convergence and Union leader Artur Mas called for the long-promised, albeit nonbinding, independence referendum to be held… The move was immediately challenged by Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, and the independence campaign was suspended while the Constitutional Court considered the legality of the vote. Ultimately, Mas proceeded with the referendum but framed it as an informal poll of Catalan opinion. With more than one-third of registered voters participating in the balloting, over 80 percent expressed a desire for independence.’

This sentiment survives till this day, though there has been a power struggle between the central government in Madrid and that of the Catalonian capital, Barcelona; which is currently stalled and in Madrid’s favour. The Catalan government surveys regularly its people regarding its “sentiment of belonging.” In July 2019, the results indicated that 46.7% of Catalans would favour independence from Spain. This has dropped markedly after the heavy handed response from Madrid in 2018. With the stronger centralist tendencies in France however, French Catalans display a much less open sense of uniqueness, having been integrated more seamlessly ‘into the unitary French national identity.’ 

There are 7,596,131 people in Catalonia and in France 423,112 Catalonians. It is not surprising that the French Catalonians feel more at home in France than their Spanish counter parts if they are from similar stock. We only learn of Spanish Catalonian and Basque discontent not French Catalonian and Basque grievances.

The etymology of Basque according to some scholars is based on bhar-s-, meaning ‘summit, point’ or ‘leaves.’ Barscunes may have meant ‘the mountain people, the tall ones’ or the proud ones. The last definition is interesting considering the pride of Moab. Euskal Herria is the oldest documented Basque name for the area they inhabit, dating from the sixteenth century. The Spanish Basque Country, is the largest and most populated part of the Basque territories. It includes two main regions, the Basque Autonomous Community – capital city, Vitoria-Gasteiz – and the Chartered Community of Navarre – capital city, Pamplona. The Spanish Constitution of 1978 states ‘that Navarre may become a part of the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country if it is so decided by its people and institutions… To date, there has been no implementation of this law.’

For many French Basques, their identity is mixed with a sense of being Basque and French. Whereas in the Spanish Basque Country, there are many Basques who don’t have a sense of Spanish identity at all. Former Basque rugby union player and French international, Imanol Harinordoquy, said about his national identity: ‘I am French and Basque. There is no conflict, I am proud of both… I have friends who are involved in the political side of things but that is not for me. My only interest is the culture, the Euskera language, the people, our history and ways.’

Rugby union is an important sport in parts of France, particularly in Paris and Marseille. It is also a popular sport among French Basques, with major clubs Biarritz Olympique and Aviron Bayonnais traditional heavy weights in the premier division of French Rugby. Biarritz regularly play Champion Cup matches, especially knockout matches in San Sebastian, Spain. Games between the Basque clubs and Catalan club USA Perpignan are always hard fought. The fact that the French Basque and Catalans are so keen on rugby may allude to their Moab and Ammon heritage. Though Rugby is played in Spain, it is amongst the French that it is a passion. These French consider France the spiritual home of rugby, even in lieu of its origins in England.

An online encyclopaedia mentions: ‘Strabo’s account of the north of Spain in his Geographica (written between approximately 20 BC and 20 AD) makes a mention of “a sort of woman-rule…” a first mention of the – for the period – unusual position of women. Women could inherit and control property as well as officiate in churches… matrilineal inheritance laws, and agricultural work performed by women continued in Basque country until the early twentieth century. Could this be a hearkening back to the unique circumstances and reverence surrounding Moab and Ammon’s respective mothers?

For more than a century, scholars have widely discussed the high status of Basque women in law codes, as well as their positions as judges, inheritors, and arbitrators through ante-Roman, medieval, and modern times. The system of laws governing succession in the French Basque region reflected total equality between the sexes. Up until the eve of the French Revolution, the Basque woman was truly ‘the mistress of the house, hereditary guardian, and head of the lineage.’ This may have a link to the Amazons who lived in the Aegean Sea – south of the Troad and the isle of Lesbos – either a clan of warrior women or a female dominated society.

Basque Country Flag above (notice its similarity to the Union Jack of the United Kingdom) and the Catalonia Flag below.

Interestingly, the French capital Paris, apart from being known as the City of Love and the number one visited city in the world, is also known as mentioned as the City of Lights. Paris played a leading role during the Age of Enlightenment as well as literally being one of the first European cities to install gas city street lights in 1820; with the first electric streetlight appearing in 1878. 

A somber and stygian matter is the aspect of Moab and Ammon’s origin. Surveys have labelled the French as the most depressed nation. In 2011, the World Health Organisation in a report, said the French are the most likely to suffer from ‘a major depressive episode’ in their lifetimes. This followed a report in 2008, where the French learned ‘they consume more anti-depressants than any other country’ in the world. What could be an underlying cause?

The coincidence of a Frenchman is repeated here in the undertaking of the following study and the nature of its subject matter. Claude Lévi-Strauss, a French and Jewish anthropologist and ethnologist ‘was key in the development of the theory of structuralism and structural anthropology.’ The chair of Social Anthropology at the Collège de France from 1959 to 1982; he was elected a member of the Académie française in 1973 and was also a member of the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences in Paris. Levi-Strauss received a number of honours from universities and institutions throughout the world and with James George Frazer and Franz Boas, is considered a ‘father of modern anthropology.’ His significant work was aimed – through a structural method – ‘at discovering universal invariants in human society, chief among which he believed to be the incest taboo.’

A poll by Ipsos in late 2020, estimated one in ten French people have been the victim of sexual abuse within the family as children or adolescents: 78% were female and 22% male. The poll suggested the number of incest cases has risen from 3% of the population in 2009 – equating to 2 million victims – to 10% in 2020; an alarming 6.7 million victims. This is shocking, though it is worth noting that the countries with the highest rate of incest are… France and Spain. Also, not all people polled are forthcoming, thus the ten percent figure may actually be higher as evidenced by the anti-depressant consumption. 

At time of writing, under French law there is no legal age of consent, though the Senate voted for the threshold to be set at 13. At present a victim of rape or abuse is considered consenting by default and has to prove non-consent. New legislation proposes criminalising sexual acts between an adult and a child under 13 – currently an “offence” and not a “crime” – and extending the statute of limitations to give victims more time to bring legal proceedings. Not to single France out entirely, there are other nations with either a lax view or lenient laws regarding consenting adult incest. France is not being confined as unique by this measure; though the percentage of its occurrence is of significance, in the shadow of the French descending originally from Moab and Ammon. 

The continuous perpetuation of a certain percentage of incestuous births within the population (and original endogamy), could have a bearing on the blood, hormone and DNA composition of said people in society. 

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Rhesus negative blood has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Rhesus Negative Blood Factor’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

Forensic Science International: Genetics, Martin Zieger & Silvia Utz, Volume 48 September 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Y-chromosomal Haplotype and Haplogroup distribution of modern Switzerland still reflects the alpine divide as a geographical barrier for human migration.’

‘A sample of 606 Swiss individuals has been characterized for 27 Y-STR and 34 Y-SNPs, defining major European haplogroups. For the first time, a subsample from the southernmost part of Switzerland, the Italian speaking canton Ticino, has been included. The data reveals significant intra-national differences in the distribution of haplogroups R1b-U106, R1b-U152, I1 and J2a north and south of the alpine divide, with R1b-U152 being the most frequent haplogroup among all Swiss subpopulations [also the dominant R1b Haplogroup in France and Italy], reaching 26% in average and 53 % in the Ticino sample. 

In addition, a high percentage of haplogroup E1b1b-M35 in Eastern Switzerland corresponds well with data reported from Western Austria. In general, we detected a low level of differentiation between the subgroups north of the alpine divide. This is the first comprehensive Y chromosomal dataset for Switzerland, demonstrating significant population substructure due to an intra-national geographical barrier.’

Swiss men

‘Pairwise FST calculations based on the maximal STR marker set (YFilerPlus® + PowerPlex Y23®) show little intra-national differentiation among the 6 regional subpopulations (Table 2). In line with our previous observations, all subpopulations show the largest FST values in pairwise comparison with the southernmost Swiss canton Ticino subpopulation, with the largest difference being the one between Northwestern Switzerland and Ticino. We also compared our dataset to datasets from other countries, using the AMOVA tool from YHRD. The multiple dimensional scaling plot in Fig. 2a localizes the Swiss data between the datasets from neighboring countries. For one of the direct neighboring countries, no data was included, since there was no French dataset forPowerPlex® Y23 available on the YHRD. 

If we divide the sample into language subgroups, the German speaking subpopulation locates even closer to the Austrian sample, whereas the French speaking subpopulation is somewhat closer to the samples from Belgium and Spain. Surprisingly, the Italian speaking sample co-localizes with the sample from Spain and is significantly different from the Italian sample, registered on YHRD [due to the Swiss being a distinct people from the Italians, French and Germans, regardless of the different languages spoken]. As a control, we also checked the genetic distance of our regional subsamples to the four other Swiss YFiler datasets registered on YHRD. They show all a high degree of similarity, except for the sample from Basel that exhibits extremely large RST values towards all the other subpopulations, ranging from 0.084 to 0.173, even towards the sample from the same region of Northwestern Switzerland (0.101). All RST values and corresponding p-values generated with the YHRD AMOVA tool are available in Supplementary Table 2. 

Pairwise FST values among the different regional subgroups. NW = Northwestern Switzerland; CS = Central Switzerland; BE = Bern area; TI = Ticino; WS = Western Switzerland; SG = St. Gallen.’


NWCSBETIWSSG
SG0.00680.00630.00640.01090.0049
WS0.00430.00320.00360.0077
TI0.01410.01020.0085

BE0.00500.0044


CS0.0063



NW




Swiss women

‘Fig. 2. Multiple dimensional scaling blot based on RST values, generated for PowerPlex® Y23 datasets with the AMOVA tool from YHRD. A) Comparison of the whole sample (“Switzerland”) to other national European datasets, registered on YHRD. B) Comparison of Swiss (“CH”) subpopulations based on mother tongue to national datasets from neighboring countries. Spain was included as the next western country in mainland Europe, since no French sample for PowerPlex® Y23 was available on the YHRD. The data points for Spain and the Italian speaking Swiss subsample collapse into one.’

On PCA graphs, the Swiss-French are marginally closer to the French than Swiss-Germans, though all three form an equilateral triangle. The Swiss-Germans have an affinity with Western Germans and also with the Dutch in the southern provinces of the Netherlands. We will see this confirmed between the Swiss and Dutch later when observing their respective Haplogroups. The fact that Swiss-Italians* are genetically closer to the Spanish rather than Italians as a whole, will not be a surprise to the constant reader who has read the preceding chapters – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Zieger & Utz: ‘For the comparison of the haplogroup distributions among different regional subgroups, the regions defined in our previous work were maintained. All haplogroup proportions are listed in Table 5. We detected five significant regional differences in haplogroup spread. Whereas the [Y-DNA] haplogroups I1-M253 and R1b-U106 are more or less evenly distributed north of the Alps, they are almost absent from the Ticino sample. In return, haplogroups J2a-M410 and R1b-U152 are far more abundant in the Ticino sample than in the rest of the country. Furthermore, we detected a significant enrichment of haplogroup E1b1b-M35 in the easternmost sample from St. Gallen. We could also detect a slightly larger proportion of E1b1b-M35 in the sample from Western Switzerland. However, this observation [proved] not to be significant.

As expected, we observe a good correspondence of the dataset with the metapopulation “Western European”, what can be concluded from the distribution of the estimated haplotype frequencies. The fact that 90% of the haplotypes are predicted to be more frequent in the Western European than in the global panel, can be seen as a successful quality control of the sampling scheme. The population sample also fits well in the context of the neighboring countries and shows no noteworthy differences compared to the Swiss datasets previously registered on the YHRD. 

The only exception concerns the sample from Basel. However, since the Basel sample on YHRD shows large genetic differences with all other Swiss samples, including our sample collected from the same region, we assume some kind of sampling error for this regional subsample and we would like to suggest that it should be used with caution for any interpretation and comparison. The fact that the Italian* speaking subsample co-locates rather with the sample from Spain than with the sample from Italy, might be attributed to the higher overall percentage of haplogroup R1b in Spain than in Italy. The fraction of R1b in the Spanish population corresponds better to the 70 % R1b in the Ticino sample. Given the dubious reputation of the prediction tools, we were surprised how well the haplogroup predictions corresponded to the haplogroups determined by SNaPshot assay.’ 


NWCSWSSGBETIHg (tot)
E1b1b (M35)44913**467
G (M201)129661249
I1 (M253)1391012112*10
I2 (M223)753444
I2 (P215)4421222
J1 (M267)1110
J2a (M410)114610*3
J2b (M102)4331343
N (M46)10
O (M175)10
QR (M45)20
R1a (M198)7454424
R1b (U106)12151213172*13
R1b (U152)192924282053***26
R1b (U198)110
R1b (M269)14141913181616
R1b (M343)10
R2 (M124)10
KLT (M9)21121
F (M213)10

‘So, even though we would agree that for reliable results, every SNP should be finally determined in the wet lab, we cannot deny that for samples of Western European ancestry, predictors seem to deliver good preliminary results. The HAPEST predictor we used here has already been shown to deliver accurate predictions for typical European haplogroups. We assume that such a high accuracy of haplogroup prediction of 95% could be achieved only because we have very good data coverage for Western Europe. For most reliable predictions, we recommend combining an YHRD search with the haplogroup prediction tool. All haplogroups that were concordant between YHRD ancestry information and HAPEST haplogroup prediction turned out to be correct.

SNP typing for common European haplogroups revealed some expected patterns, demonstrating that the modern Swiss population still reflects the Alps as geographical barrier for human migration. We detected significantly less haplogroup I1-M253 south of the alpine divide than in the German and French speaking parts of Switzerland. This was expected, since I1 is most common in Northern Europe and can only be found in small proportions south of the Alps. We detected significant differences in the distribution of two sublineages of R1b-M269 north and south of the Alps: notably lineages R1b-U106 [Germanic -Germany and England] and R1b-U152 [Latin – Italy and France]. R1b-U106 is mainly spread along the river Rhine, reaching the largest proportions at the southern coast of the North Sea. R1b-U106 evolved approximately at the same time [as] haplogroup R1b-P312/S116. R1b-U152 is a sublineage of R1b-P312/S116 of younger origin.

This writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, it’s most recent mutations (see below). Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

Martin Zieger & Silvia Utz: ‘It has been suggested that [U152] originates from a Franco-Cantabrian region and has been brought to the Alps and northern Italy by migration along the Mediterranean coast. Today [U152] reaches its highest percentages in northern Italy. Northwestern Italy has a very high percentage of haplogroup R1b (around 70 %) with the highest proportions in the area of Bergamo. In this pre-alpine region, located about 50 km from Ticino, the percentage of individuals with haplogroup R1b-U152 is around 50 %, just as for our Ticino sample. Haplogroup R1b-U152 is significantly less frequent north of the Alps, but remains the most frequent haplogroup throughout the entire country [as it is in both Italy and France].’

These findings concerning Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b as evidenced by the preceding table confirm that the Swiss are less like the northern Germans or southern English in that they do not possess R1b-U198 beyond a trace element. The Alpine split of the north and south, confirms that though many Swiss men are related to the Germans through R1b-U106; the fact remains that R1b-U152 is the main Haplogroup throughout all Switzerland. Confirming that they are more closely related to the French and Italians. This should not be a surprise when we understand that the Swiss descend from Haran, who is the grandfather of Lot’s descendants in France; and the elder brother of Nahor, the father of many Northern and to a lesser degree, Central Italians.

The Genomic Heritage of French Canadians, Razib Khan, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘One of the great things about the mass personal genomic revolution is that it allows people to have direct access to their own information. This is important for the more than 90% of the human population which has sketchy genealogical records.’ 

‘But even with genealogical records there are often omissions and biases in transmission of information. This is one reason that HAP, Dodecad and Eurogenes BGA are so interesting: they combine what people already know with scientific genealogy. This intersection can often be very inferentially fruitful.

But what about if you had a whole population with rich robust conventional genealogical records? Combined with the power of the new genomics you could really crank up the level of insight. Where to find these records? A reason that Jewish genetics is so useful and interesting is that there is often a relative dearth of records when it comes to the lineages of American Ashkenazi Jews. Many American Jews even today are often sketchy about the region of the “Old Country” from which their forebears arrived. Jews have been interesting from a genetic perspective because of the relative excess of ethnically distinctive Mendelian disorders within their population. 

There happens to be another group in North America with the same characteristic: the French Canadians. And importantly, in the French Canadian population you do have copious genealogical records. The origins of this group lay in the 17th and 18th century, and the Roman Catholic Church has often been a punctilious institution when it comes to preserving events under its purview such as baptisms and marriages. The genealogical archives are so robust that last fall a research group input centuries of ancestry for [2,221] French Canadians, and used it to infer patterns of genetic relationships as a function of geography, as well as long term contribution by provenance.

That paper found that nearly 70% of the immigrant founding stock in this data set came directly from France. For the period before 1700 that fraction exceeds 95%. Of the remainder, about 15% of the founding stock were Acadians, who themselves were presumably mostly of French origin. Because of the earlier migration of the French founding stock, they left a stronger impact on future generations: But this research did not look directly at genetics. Rather, these inferences were generated from genealogical records which go back to the founding of Quebec and maintained coherency and integrity from generation to generation. Some of the members of the same research group now have a paper out which looks at the genomics of French Canadians, and directly compares their results to that of the earlier paper.’

Genomic and genealogical investigation of the French Canadian founder population structure – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Characterizing the genetic structure of worldwide populations is important for understanding human history and is essential to the design and analysis of genetic epidemiological [health and disease conditions] studies. In this study, we examined genetic structure and distant relatedness and their effect on the extent of linkage disequilibrium (LD) and homozygosity in the founder population of Quebec (Canada). In the French Canadian founder population, such analysis can be performed using both genomic and genealogical data. We investigated genetic differences, extent of LD, and homozygosity in 140 individuals from seven sub-populations of Quebec characterized by different demographic histories reflecting complex founder events. 

Genetic findings from genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data were correlated with genealogical information on each of these sub-populations. Our genomic data showed significant population structure and relatedness present in the contemporary Quebec population, also reflected in LD and homozygosity levels. 

Our extended genealogical data corroborated these findings and indicated that this structure is consistent with the settlement patterns involving several founder events. This provides an independent and complementary validation of genomic-based studies of population structure. Combined genomic and genealogical data in the Quebec founder population provide insights into the effects of the interplay of two important sources of bias in genetic epidemiological studies, unrecognized genetic structure and cryptic relatedness.’

‘In 1760 there were 70,000 residents in the areas of Canada which were under French rule. A substantial fraction of these derived from the much smaller 17th century founding population. Today the number of North Americans with some known French Canadian ancestry numbers around [10 million people]. I happen to know an individual whose great-great-grandmother was French Canadian. Using the internet it turned out that I could trace this woman’s ancestry along one line back to the countryside outside of Poitiers in the mid 16th century! Being conservative it seems that at least 5 million North Americans have overwhelming descent from the 1760 founding stock. These are the core French Canadians.

An immediate inference one might make from these background facts, the rapid expansion of the French Canadian ethnic group from a small core founding stock, is that they would have gone through a “population bottleneck.” The data here are mixed. On the one hand, there are particular Mendelian diseases associated with French Canadians. This is evidence of some level of inbreeding which would randomly increase the frequencies of deleterious recessively expressed alleles. 

And yet as noted in the paper French Canadians do not seem to have lower genetic diversity than the parental stock of French in the HGDP data set. Why? Because to go through a population bottleneck which is genetically significant you need a very small window of census size indeed. Tens of thousands is sufficiently large enough to preserve most of the genetic variation in the founder population which is not private to families. The sort of genetic polymorphisms which might have been typed for in widely distributed SNP chips. But that’s not the end of the story.’

‘Though French Canadians don’t seem [to] exhibit the hallmarks of having gone through an extreme population bottleneck as an aggregate, it turns out that in the populations surveyed there was evidence of substructure. The map… shows you the regions where the samples were drawn. Unlike the earlier study the sample size is smaller; this is a nod to the difference between a purely genealogical study and a genomic one. There needs to be money and time invested in typing individuals. Relatively public genealogical records are a different matter. Apparently the Gaspesia sample population were from a relatively later settlement. The urban samples naturally include descendants of local French Canadians, as well as rural to urban transplants.’

‘As one would expect the French Canadian sample clustered with the CEU (Utah whites from the HapMap) and French (from the HGDP) in the world wide PCA. And not surprisingly they exhibited smaller genetic distance to the French than to the Utah whites (who were of mostly British extraction). 

Using Fst, which measures the extent of genetic variance partitioning between populations, the values from the aggregate French Canadian sample to the CEU sample was 0.0014 and to the French HGDP sample was 0.00078. The Montreal French Canadian group exhibited values of 0.0020 and 0.0012. But, it is important to observe that there was statistically significant differences between the various French Canadian populations as well (excluding the Montreal-Quebec City pairing). This may explain the existence of particular Mendelian diseases in the French Canadian population despite their lack of reduced genetic variation: there’s localized pockets of inbreeding which are not smoked out by looking at total variation statistics. Additionally, the authors conclude that not taking this substructure into account in medical genetics could lead to false positives. Inter-population differences in disease susceptibilities correlated with genome-wide differences in allele frequencies could produce spurious associations.

In the final section the paper notes that there are some peculiarities in the genetics of the French Canadians which do indicate some level of genetic homogeneity, at least by locality. To explore this issue they focus on two genomic phenomena which measure correlations of alleles, genetic variations, over spans of the genome within populations. The two phenomena are linkage disequilibrium, which measures association across loci of particular variants, and runs-of-homozygosity, which highlights genomic regions where homozygosity seems enriched beyond expectation (the former is inter-locus, while the latter is intra-locus). Both of these values could be indicators of some level of population bottleneck or substructure, where stochastic evolutionary forces shift a population away from equilibrium as measured by the balance of parameters such as drift, selection, and mutation.’

‘To the right is a mashup of figures 5 and 6. On the left you have a figure which shows the extent of linkage disequilibrium as a function of distance between SNP. As you would expect the greater the distance between two SNPs, the more likely they’re to be in equilibrium as recombination has broken apart associations. The closer and closer two markers, the more likely they’re to be linked, physically and statistically. But there’s a difference between the two LD plots. There’s no difference between the CEU and French Canadian samples in the top panel, but there is in the bottom one. Why? The bottom panel shows LD between markers much further apart. Acadians in particular seem to exhibit more long distance LD than the other populations. This may be a sign of a population bottleneck and inbreeding.

Also, please note that the Utah white CEU sample is probably relatively similar to the French Canadians in its demographic history as North American groups go. It is homogeneous and expanded rapidly from a small founder group. To the right you have in the top panel total length of ROH per individual, and the bottom length of ROH greater than 1 MB. Again, the Acadians seem to be standouts in terms of their difference from the CEU reference. Interestingly, there’s no difference between CEU, French, and the two French Canadian urban samples. I suspect this is due to the fact that in Montreal and Quebec City the distinctive inbreeding found in the other samples has been eliminated through intermarriage. ROH disappear when you introduce heterozygosity through outbreeding.

What has all this told us? From a medical genetic perspective it is implying that population structure matters when evaluating French Canadians, an Acadian is not interchangeable with a native of Montreal. In terms of ethnically clustered diseases of French Canadians, in the USA the Cajuns, it may not be that there are patterns across the whole ethnic group, but trends within subgroups characterized by long-term endogamy. I wonder if the same might be true of Ashkenazi. 

Is there is a difference between Galicians and Litvaks? Such regional differences among European Jews are new, but the French Canadians themselves are the result of the past three centuries. These results also seem to reinforce the Frenchness of the French Canadians. A group which one could analyze in a similar vein would be the Boers, who are an amalgam of French Protestants, Dutch, and Germans, but seem to exhibit a dominance of the Dutch element culturally’ – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘Finally, the French Canadians may give us a small window in the long term demographic patterns and genetic dynamics which might be operative on a nearby ethnic group: the Puritans of New England. Because of their fecundity [fruitfulness] it seems likely that tens of millions of Americans today descend from the 30,000 or so English settlers who arrived in New England in the two decades between 1620 and 1640 [this very likely to be accurate]. This is the subject of the Greta Migration Project. With numbers in the few tens of thousands it seems unlikely that much of a thorough population bottleneck occurred with this group in a genetic sense in the aggregate. But the results from the French Canadians indicate that isolated groups can be subject to stochastic dynamics, and develop in their own peculiar directions.’

In later chapters, the Jews, Boers and Puritans will be investigated. What this article is confirming is that these peoples, regardless of religious, cultural and historical factors or influences, all remain homogenous peoples genetically. This evidence validates the proposal that these three peoples, with French Canadians are distinct peoples in their own right and not an amalgam of different unrelated ethnic groups.

Catalonians and Gascons of France, Khazaria – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Being Western Europeans, it is no surprise that the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Catalans is a branch of the R1b [M269] haplogroup. R1b1b2a1 [now R1b1a1a2] is nearly exclusive to western Europe, and the sub-haplogroup [M153] R1b1b2a1a2c [now R1b1b2a2c] is common among Catalans and Gascons.

The place of the Basques in the European Y-chromosome diversity landscape. European Journal of Human Genetics 13:12, multiple authors, (2005): pages 1293-1302.’

“The Y chromosomes of 68 male Basques were analyzed. About 86 percent of them carried varieties of haplogroup R1*(xR1a,R1b3f)-M173 [R1b-M173], of which most carried R1b3*-M269 [R1b-M269]. This is a commonality between Basques and other western Europeans. 7.1 percent of the Basques in this study (a lower frequency than other scientists had found) carried the Iberian-specific subclades R1b3d-M153 [R1b-M153 – Basque and Gascon] and R1b3f-SRY2627 [R1b-M167 Catalonian]…”

An mtDNA perspective of French genetic variation. Annals of Human Biology 34:1 multiple authors, (January-February 2007): pages 68-79.

‘This mitochondrial DNA study of 868 people from 12 areas of France includes Basques from the Basque province of Lapurdi in France. These French Basques were found to have noteworthy differences in mtDNA distribution compared to Spanish Basques.

Excerpts from the body of the paper: 

“… It is somewhat surprising to find Hg U4 at a relatively high frequency (6.2%) and diversity among the French Basques (absent in Spanish Basques), because this sub-clade of U is largely East European and West Siberian (Tambets et al. 2003) in its distribution. In contrast to U4, Hg U5b2 is rare among French Basques (2.5%), and more frequent in the Spanish Basques [as is HV0]. One other particularity of the French Basque is found within Hg J, more frequent than in the Spanish Basques, and also the presence of the Hg J1c haplotype with HVS-I motif 16069-16126-16300. The derivatives of this branch of Hg J have been so far found mostly in Near Eastern populations (Richards et al. 2002; Metspalu et al. 2004; and authors’ unpublished data). Likewise to U4, Hg T1 is found only in French Basques.

The pattern observed in the mtDNA pool of the French Basques from the Lapurdi region may be explained by genetic drift and cultural isolation in a relatively small long-term effective population size. In addition, it is also likely that both French and Spanish Basques, although sharing a common linguistic and probably also genetic ancestry, have been affected by admixture from different sources. 

Meanwhile, the overall high frequency of autosomal recessive coagulation factors deficiencies in French Basques population (Bauduer et al. 2004) argues in favour of genetic drift acting on this population… Taken together, our findings support the notion that ‘Basques’ are a strongly sub-divided population and support a conclusion that French and Spanish Basques have been effectively isolated from each other for a long enough period to allow random genetic drift to differentiate them.”

In other words, the Basque – who are related to the French – have retained their ‘Frenchness’, whereas those Basque who have dwelt with the Aramaean Spanish for many centuries or longer, show the resulting admixture. PCA graphs place the French Basque equally distant from southwest French and northwest Spanish. Ethnologists and geneticists have stressed the differences; saying the Basque especially and Catalonians, are entirely distinct from the Spanish, which is correct and the French, which is less true. The mixing with the Spanish on their side of the border has had an impact on the Basque and Catalonian Haplogroups and autosomal DNA. The Basque and Catalonians on the French side of the border have remained truer to their French origin culturally and ethnically, as descendants of probably Moab (possibly Ammon), rather than Aram – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil

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

‘Other genetic studies on the Basque have focused on examining blood groups, STR loci, and autosomal markers, often in an attempt to support the Paleolithic paradigm. However, in light of the aDNA studies, Basque distinctiveness can be accounted for by the processes of genetic drift, inbreeding over long periods of time and natural selective processes. Moreover, the researchers noted that the Basque are unique among European populations due to their extremely high rate of consanguinity [‘close relationship or connection by descent from a common ancestor’]. Basque social and cultural traditions continue to promote consanguinity. 

The genetic impact of such inbreeding has yet to fully explored by geneticists, but the high frequency of inherited disorders among the Basque, including Coagulation Deficiences (Factor XI) and Mutation F508 (Cystic Fibrosis Gene), support the suggestion that drift, inbreeding, and a small population size maintained over many generations, as opposed to significant retention of Paleolithic genetic ancestry, best explains the present genetic makeup of the Basque (Alonso 2005; Bauduer 2005).

Finally, even researchers that have found limited genetic evidence of probable Paleolithic ancestry among the Basque also acknowledge that such findings do not support the contention that contemporary Basque retain significant genetic links with indigenous Paleolithic Europeans. (Gonzalez 2006) For instance, although the Basque mtDNA lineage U8a may date to the late Paleolithic, it is rarely found today among modern-day Europeans and, furthermore, constitutes only [one percent] of contemporary Basque mtDNA results. Thus, U8a has diminished in frequency among populations today in a manner similar to the N1a lineage.’

French Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – Emphasis & bold mine:

French people mostly live in France but also live in neighboring Belgium and Switzerland and their descendants notably moved in large numbers to Quebec and Acadia. They are called Walloons in Belgium. The French are a complex mixture of ancient Celtic [Abraham], Iberian [Aram], Italic [Moab], Germanic [Ammon], and [ancient] Greek peoples [Moab and Ammon]. The standard French, Norman, and Occitan languages are members of the Romance linguistic family and all are written in the Latin alphabet.

Participants in the French Heritage DNA project belong to such Y-DNA (paternal-line) haplogroups as I-M253, I-P109, I-P37, J-P58, J-Z387, R-L21 [northwest France – Celtic] (a branch of R1b), R-M269 (R1b1a2, [now R1b1a1a2] the most common branch of R1b in western Europe), R-L552, and R-U198 [English].

Participants in the French Swiss DNA Project whose most distantly known ancestors were French people from Switzerland carry the Y-DNA haplogroups E-L542, E-V13, E-V36, E-M78, G-P15, G-M201, I-M253, I-Z138, N-M178, R-M269, R-U106 [Germanic], and R-U152 [Italian and French].

Y-chromosomal DNA analysis in French male lineages. Forensic Science International: Genetics 9, multiple authors, (March 2014): pages 162-168. First published online on December 29, 2013. 

The authors analyze Y-DNA haplogroups’ variation across France using a pool of 558 samples taken from men from 7 French regions: Alsace, Auvergne, Bretagne, Île-de-France, Midi-Pyrénées, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur. Figure 2 lists all the Y-chromosomal haplogroups they found and their frequencies on a per-region basis.

The haplogroups are BD,

E*, E1b1b1*, E1b1b1a, E1b1b1b, E1b1b1c*, E1b1b1c1,

F*, G,

I*, I2a2,

J*, J1a, J2,

K*, L, N1c, P*,

R1*, R1a,

R1b1*, R1b1b2*, R1b1b2a1*, R1b1b2a1a, R1b1b2a2d, R1b1b2a2e, R1b1b2a2g,

and T.’

Excerpt from the Abstract: 

“Even though we find that most of the individual populations in France were not differentiated from each other, Bretagne population shows population substructure…”

Excerpt from the body of the article: 

“From a total of 27 binary markers typed in the seven regions of France, 22 different haplogroups were found. The most frequent haplogroup in all the regions was R1b1b2* [M269] (xR1b1b2a1, 2d, 2e, 2g), with the exception of Alsace, where the most common one was R1b1b2a2g [U152].”

The coming of the Greeks to Provence and Corsica: Y-chromosome models of archaic Greek colonisation of the western Mediterranean. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11:69, multiple authors, (March 14, 2011). 

‘This paper’s goal was to study the genetic traces of Greek colonization in Provence in southern mainland France. 51 samples from Provençal Frenchmen were compared with 58 samples from people from Smyrna and 31 from Asia Minor Phokaia. The Y-DNA haplogroup E-V13 is known to be “characteristic of the Greek and Balkan mainland”. It was found among 19% of the Phokaian samples and 12% of the Smyrnian samples as well as among 4% of the Provençal Frenchmen, 4.6% of East Corsicans, and 1.6% of West Corsicans. Altogether, according to the Results section, taking into account all haplogroups, “An admixture analysis estimated that 17% of the Y-chromosomes of Provence may be attributed to Greek colonization.”

An mtDNA perspective of French genetic variation. Annals of Human Biology 34:1, multiple authors, (January-February 2007): pages 68-79. 

‘Mitochondrial DNA was evaluated for 868 samples these researchers and previous researchers gathered from inhabitants of France, predominantly from 12 specific locations, including but not limited to regions like Normandy, Seine-Maritime, and North-East in the north and Languedoc and Provence in the south. Ethnic French people proper as well as Bretons, Corsicans, and Basques living in France were tested…

H is by far the most common mtDNA haplogroup in France with the frequency of 45.56%.

Others include (but are not limited to) K at 8.74%, U5 at 8.3%, J at 7.65%, HV0 at 4.77%, U4 at 2.31%, I at 2.02%, and T1 at 1.66%.

The authors conclude: “The mtDNA haplogroup composition of the French does not differ significantly from the surrounding European genetic landscape.” However, they did find some level of distinctiveness among the Bretons and Basques…’

Eupedia, Genetic history of the Benelux and France, Maciamo Hay, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

Note that the total [Haplogroups] for France is biased towards North Americans of French descent (mostly from Québec), as genealogical DNA tests have not yet become popular among French people. 

R1b is the most common haplogroup in France. It includes four main subclades:

the Atlantic Celtic R1b-L21 in the north-west,

the Gascon-Iberian R1b-DF27 (including the Basque R1b-M153) in the south-west,

the Germanic R1b-U106 in the north,

and the Gaulish Celtic and Italic R1b-U152 in the east.’

R1bL21 (M529/S145) is concentrated in Brittany and shared with the Celtic nations of Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

R1bDF27 not only includes M153 associated with the Basque and the Gascon, but also M167 (SRY2627) which is concentrated in Catalonia and shared with the Basque as well as being found in Cornwall, England; Wales, Bavaria, Germany; Belgium and the Netherlands.

R1bU106 (M405/S21) is concentrated in Frisia, northern Netherlands and shared with Benelux, Germany, Austria, Norway and England. 

R1bU152 (S28) is predominately found in northern and central Italy and shared with Switzerland and France.

Notice that these various R1b Haplogroup strains are principally aligned (apart from DF27) with northern and central Europe rather than with southern Europe. People often think of France as a Latin country; it is actually more Teutonic. For even its supposed ‘Latin’ influence as shown by its genetic links with Switzerland and Italy, are actually non-Latin, for both these nations though containing a Latin element, are still predominantly Teutonic, ‘Germanic’ nations – having R1b-U152 as the dominating paternal Haplogroup – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Hay: ‘The ancient Burgundians, a Germanic tribe from eastern Denmark, appear to have carried considerable percentages of haplogroups R1a* and Q*, two haplogroups that are now found at unusually high frequencies around the former Kingdom of the Burgundians, in what is now the Rhône-Alpes region and the north of Provence [refer Switzerland]. 

Haplogroup R1b has numerous branches, each with their own origins. The ancient Gauls during the Bronze Age and Iron Age belonged primarily to R1b-P312 [S116 Iberia: Spain & Portugal], which is divided in three main subclades: DF27, L21 [Celtic] and U152. All of them are found throughout France, but DF27 is more common in the southern half of France, while L21 is especially common [in] the Northwest. Britons fleeing the Anglo-Saxon invasions in the 5th and 6th centuries crossed the Channel and settled in great number in Brittany, which increased the percentage of R1b-L21 in that region. Nowadays half of all R1b in Brittany is L21 (35% of all Y-DNA). 

Later in the Middle Ages Normandy, Anjou, Brittany and other parts of western France came under English rule, and some L21 may have come from England during that period. But it is most likely that Northwest Gaul already had a substantial percentage of L21 during the Iron Age.

The U152 clade of R1b is the most homogeneously distributed, with between 15% and 20% in most French regions. It is associated with Hallstatt and La Tène Celts that migrated from the North of the Alps to Gaul during the Iron Age, but also with the Cisalpine Gauls and Italic people from Italy. The ancient Romans and other Italic peoples would have belonged to the U152>Z56, U152>Z193 and some U152>L2 subclades [an incorrect assumption about the Romans]. Other L2 subclades [NW Europe] and the Z36 clade were found among the Etruscans (confirmed) [correct as we will discover] and probably also among the Alpine Celts [incorrect]. 

Data about deep clades is still sparse in France, but Italic Z56 and Z193 appear to be most common in Provence (~9%), followed by Champagne-Lorraine (5%), Alsace and Poitou-Charentes (both ~4.5%), Bourgogne-France Comté (4%) and Rhône-Alpes (3%). The ancient Romans also carried Greek/Balkanic R1b-Z2103 lineages [incorrect]. This haplogroup is found in the same regions, with a peak in the Rhône-Alpes region (~9%).

Germanic tribes brought R1b-U106 to France. It was particularly common among the Franks and was the lineage of the Kings of France.’ As we shall discover, Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b-U106 is a marker for all the male royal lines in Europe.

Hay: ‘Nowadays it is most common in Ile-de-France [including the capital, Paris] and Picardy (both ~16%), followed by Alsace (14.5%), Normandy (13.5%) and Flanders-Artois (11%). Other Germanic lineages are I1, I2a2a-L801, R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284. Almost all the I2a2a and R1a in northern and eastern France is of Germanic origin.’

‘Around 80% of G2a in France [ancient lineage from Shem] falls under the Celtic Z1816 clade. Another 15% is made up of the U1 branch, typically the L13 clade, which is usually of Italic/Roman origin. The remaining 5% of G2a descends from local Neolithic farmers. Most J2a in France belongs to the M67 and the M319 subclades, which were found among ancient Etruscans and Greeks.’ 

This is highly telling, as we will discover that the Etruscans were ‘Greek’ before leaving the Aegean and settling in central Italy. The Etruscans are related to the Classical and Hellenistic Greeks who formed the Greco-Macedonian Empire. In other words, the Etruscans and Moab and Ammon are closely related. The dominant connecting Y-DNA Haplogroup is R1b (U106) and not the ancient Haplogroup G2a from Shem and definitely not the Hamitic J2a, derived from admixture.

Hay: ‘These lineages probably came from Italy in Roman times, apart from some Greek lineages in the Côte d’Azur. J1 was also found among the Etruscans and is the likely source of the non-Jewish J1 in France. J2b was found in Bronze Age Illyria, among Iron Age Etruscans and Daunians, but was probably also found in other parts of central and southern Italy as well as in Greece. In France it would be mostly of Graeco-Roman (including Etruscan) origin [not so, J1 and J2 Haplogroups are the result of admixture with Arab men and related peoples]. Nowadays J2b makes up roughly half of all J2 in Provence and Languedoc, one third in Midi-Pyrénées and Lorraine, but under 20% in Aquitaine and Poitou-Charentes. It’s rare elsewhere.’

‘This map shows an estimation of the dominant ancestry in each region of France based on anthropological studies. Will DNA confirm this general pattern? Here is a summary of Y-DNA haplogroups found in France, and the ancient ethnicities associated with them:

  • Germanic/Nordic: R1b-U106, I1, I2-L801
  • Gaulish Celtic: R1b-U152 [Alpine]
  • Atlantic Celts: R1b-L21 [British and Irish Celts]
  • Iberian Celts: R1b-DF27, R1b-P312
  • Basque: R1b-DF27, R1b-M153 
  • Greek: E1b1b, E-M123, J2, R1b-L23 [Balkans, Greece, Turkey, Southern Italy], G2a, T1a, J1′

Regardless of descriptive labels for regions and ancestry, or where one draws an approximate line to split France into approximate halves, the above map confirms the dual nature of the French. The areas encompassing the Germanic, Celto-Germanic and Celto-Italic lineages roughly highlight one half and the Celtic, Greco-Roman and Celtiberian the other half.

The defining marker paternal group for French men is Haplogroup R1b. Principally it is U152 (Gaulish-Celtic-Italic); whereas all the others, R1b-U106, R1b-L21, R1b-DF27, R1b-L23 and E1b1b, J1, J2 and T1a are from intermixing and intermarriage. Finally, Haplogroups G2a, I1 and I2 are older lineages which are indicative of men related though distinct from the later defining R1b-U152 line.

The mtDNA Haplogroups for the Swiss and French are as follows:

Switzerland: H [47.9%] – J [11.5%] – T2 [9.3%] – U5 [6.7%] – K [5.3%] – 

HV0+V [4.9%] – U4 [3.1%] – T1 [2.2%] – W [1.8%] – L [0.9%] –

U2 [0.9%] – U3 [0.9%] – I [0.9%] – HV [0.4%] – U [0.4] – X [0.4]

France: H [44.3%] – K [8.7%] – U5 [8.2%] – J [7.7%] – T2 [6.2%] – 

HV0+V [5%] – U4 [2.5%] – HV [2%] – I [2%] – T1 [1.9%] – W [1.9%] –

U2 [1.6%] – U [1.4%] – U3 [1%] – L [0.9%] – X [0.9%] 

The mtDNA table showing the family resemblance between the Swiss and the French, yet the subtle difference between Haran and Lot’s children Moab and Ammon.

                                 H     J    T2   U5   K  HV0+V  HV    U4    T1

Switzerland          48    12     9     7     5        5         0.5      3       2

France                   44     8      6    8     9        5             3      3       2

Comparing the Swiss and French with their immediate neighbours, cements the family ties between cousins. Something we will see repeated frequently as we progress with the peoples of northwestern Europe. The French and Spanish are alike in frequency levels of H, T2 and U5, though in the other main mt-DNA Haplogroups comprising J, K, HV0+V, HV, U4 and T1, the French align more closely with the Italians. 

                               H    J    T2   U5     K     HV0+V   HV    U4    T1

Switzerland          48   12     9      7       5          5        0.5       3       2

Spain                     44     7     6      8       6          8        0.7       2       2

France                   44     8     6     8       9          5            3        3      2

Italy                       40     8     8     5       8          3            3        2      3

Adding Switzerland and France to our table of nations descended from Shem thus far, has Switzerland now as one bookend of the European descended peoples replacing Brazil, with Iran remaining at the other end. A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels for the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe, with France following this pattern. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe – in the main – exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.

                          H       HV   HV0+V    J        T2        U        U5       K

Switzerland    48    0.4          5          12         9      0.4         7         5

France             44       2           5           8          6         1          8        9

Brazil               44        2                      11 

Portugal          44     0.1          5           7         6          3          7         6

Spain               44     0.7          8           7         6          2         8         6

Poland            44         1          5            8         7       1.4        10        4

Russia             41         2          4            8         7          2        10        4

Greece             41        3        1.8          10         7          3          5        5

Italy                 40       3           3            8          8         3          5        8            

Ukraine          39        4           4            8         8      0.6        10        5

Romania        37        2           4           11          5         2          7        8

Finland           36                       7          6          2     0.8        21        5

Turkey            31         5       0.7            9          4         6         3         6

Iran                 17         7       0.6          14           5       12         3         7

It is worth reminding ourselves that Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.

Italys dominant Haplogroup is R1b and we can see the marked difference comparing with nations from Eastern Europe and beyond. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Swiss and French:

Switzerland: R1b [50%] – I1 [14%] – I2a2 [8%] – E1b1b [7.5%] – 

G2a [7.5%] – R1a [3.5%] – J2 [3%] – Ia21 [1.5%] –

Q [1.5%] – N1c1 [ 1%] – J1 [0.5%] – T1a [0.5%] 

France: R1b [58.5%] – I1 [8.5%] – E1b1b [7.5%] – J2 [6%] – 

G2a [5.5%] – I2a2 [3.5%] – I2a1 [3%] – R1a [3%] –

J1 [1.5%] – T1a [1%] – Q [0.5%] 

In keeping with cousins exhibiting similar traits and sharing more in common – more than they have with their own siblings – we will find that the Swiss Y-DNA Haplogroup sequencing is reminisce of the Dutch. Closer bonds shared with a cousin rather than a sibling can be explained, due to a more exact sharing of common Haplogroups and genetic DNA code.

                         R1b     R1a     I1    I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2     J1     G2a

Switzerland    50         4       14      2          8             8        3     0.5       8

France             59         3         9      3          4             8        6         2       6

Comparing the main Y-DNA Haplogroups, we see a greater divergence between Switzerland and France than with the mtDNA Haplogroups; though still close enough to express a family relationship. 

The main Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b is highest in Brittany with 77.3% and then Centre-Val de Loire with 70.6%. The lowest level of R1b is in Alsace with 43.7% and then Aquitaine with 48%. The highest percentage for I1 is found in Flanders-Artois with 16% and then Alsace with 15%. The highest level of R1a is in Languedoc-Roussillon with 10%; the highest level of J2 is found in Corsica with 14%; and the highest percentage of E1b1b is in Ile-de-France with 19% – due to the higher percentage of Africans from former French colonies.

                         R1b     R1a     I1    I2a1   I2a2    E1b1b    J2     J1     G2a

N Italy              50        5        7       1          4           11       10      2        8  

Switzerland     50       4      14       2          8            8         3      1         8

Tuscany           53        4       4       2           3            9       12      2         9

Lombardy       59        4       3       1            5           10        6               10

France             59        3       9       3            4            8        6       2        6

A comparison with the Northern Italian region of Lombardy shows a similarity with France. Switzerland has commonalty with the Central region Tuscany. Both France and Switzerland have common ground with northern Italy as a whole from a Y-DNA perspective. From a PCA standpoint, The French and Swiss have more in common than they do with Italy.

Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from the previous chapters, with the addition of Switzerland and France – the second major descendants from Peleg’s line, of Haran and his son Lot . 

                         J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia         43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia        33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey           33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24

Iran                32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece           26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Italy               19       3        16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania       15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal        13        3       10       14          7       1.5       56       58

Brazil             10                 10       11          5          4       54       58

Spain             10     1.5         8         7          3         2        69       71     

France            8        2         6          8         6         3        59       62

Ukraine          5     0.5     4.5          7          3       44         8       52

Switzerland   4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland            3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia             3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Finland                                        0.5                      5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. France has the second highest percentage of R1b after Spain, indicative of its westerly location. 

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                       R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal        1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain                2         69      1.5         5           1

France              3         59        9          3          4            

Switzerland     4         50      14          2          8          1

Brazil                4         54                  [9]            

Italy                  4         39         5        3           3         

Finland            5           4       28                   0.5      62

Turkey             8         16         1         4         0.5        4  

Greece            12         16         4       10         1.5      

Iran                 16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania        18         16         4       28           3        2

Ukraine          44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia             46          6         5        11                    23

Poland            58         13        9          6          2         4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 are compared with the ancient Haplogroup G2a also from Shem. Switzerland and France are sandwiched between Portugal, Spain and Italy, Brazil. They are both at the low end of Haplogroup R1a and the higher end with R1b.

Two Haplogroups are of note for the Swiss. First they have a trace of the very northern Haplogroup N1c1 (from admixture) – unlike France – in common with nations in the far northeast of Europe or its periphery, such as Finland and Russia. Second, Switzerland has the highest levels of Haplogroup I2a2 so far; and the second highest in Haplogroup I1 – after Finland – prevalent especially in northwestern Europe.

Y-DNA Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 reveal an older lineage of males amongst the Swiss, whom while related and also stemming from Shem’s son Arphaxad (and subsequently Peleg), they are not the same (later) line of descent from Haran (or his brother Nahor) as evidenced by Haplogroup R1b-U152.

We are increasingly able to observe more clearly the palpable east and west European divide as revealed by those nations with either R1a or R1b as their predominant paternal Haplogroup.

We have concluded the descendants of Abraham’s older brothers Haran (Swiss and French) and Nahor (Northern and Central Italians). The constant reader will be aware of the European peoples now remaining to be studied. These are all the descendants of Abraham. They reside in Northwestern Europe as well as their former colonies in the New World.

The next chapter will concentrate on Abraham’s children by his forgotten and mysterious second wife, Keturah.

One’s pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honour.

Proverbs 29:23 English Standard Version

“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

Galileo Galilei [1564-1642]

“Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.”

Mahatma Gandhi

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

Homo neanderthalensis III

An article written by Genesis and Genetics, entitled Neanderthal and His Biblical Identity, posted April 23, 2012 offers valuable insight on Homo neanderthalensis. There is agreement with their conclusion, whereby Neanderthal man was alive before the Flood and became extinct during that cataclysm. Where there is a differing view is that they subscribe to a. Homo neanderthalensis being the progenitor of modern Cro Magnon man; b. our ancestor Adam was the first Neanderthal; c. every human today has derived from the Neanderthal and possesses their DNA; d. that the Nephilim and neanderthal are one and the same and e. the history of mankind from Adam to our present day is only 6,000 years long – as per an erroneous interpretation of the first two chapters of the Book of Genesis.

The constant reader will recall from previous chapters and articles what we have discovered regarding these five points and so it is not this writer’s intention to re-address them all here – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II; and Homo neanderthalensis I, II & IV.

The bulk of the article is reprinted here and quoted from the perspective that a. supports the Neanderthal being a separate creation on Day Six; b. they were not our original ancestor; c. though they were a precursor to Homo sapiens of Day Eight; and d. did live concurrently and interbreed with, Homo sapiens.

Emphasis & bold mine:

‘The discovery of Neanderthal, and the subsequent extraction of his mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) has been the center of much speculation and many hypotheses in both the Christian and secular communities. The heart of the mystery for Christian scientists is: how could Neanderthal develop 210 mitochondrial DNA mutations so quickly, have so little genetic diversity, live in so many diverse nations without interbreeding with other humans, and disappear without leaving a historical or genetic trace?

This paper presents another hypothesis that couples the Bible with Neanderthal DNA evidence and is simply stated: Neanderthal is [a] pre-flood man. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that Neanderthal had very little genetic diversity; the fact that his genetic signature coincides with the Biblical history of [pre-Adamic] mankind; the fact that Neanderthal’s genetic diversity, small as it was, was passed on broadly to modern man through Noah’s three daughters-in law [agreed], and, finally, the evidence that Neanderthal did not possess the mutations which shortened life span from 900[0] plus years to less than 120. Accepting Neanderthal as [a pre-Adamic] pre-flood man sheds much light on, [and] actually solves, the following mysteries: 

1. How did Neanderthal go extinct?
2. Why is there no evidence of pre-flood man?
3. Why is Neanderthal genetically distinct from modern man?
4. Why do we have his (Neanderthal) mutations, but he doesn’t have ours (modern man)?

5. Why did Neanderthal not [continuously or successfully], interbreed with modern man?
6. Why are Neanderthal’s remains found in so many divers locations?
7. Why is Neanderthal physiologically and anatomically superior [different]?
8. Where does Neanderthal fit in post-flood Bible genealogy?

There is one mystery that remains and that is, why has Neanderthal not been recognized for who he is?

The following Biblical truths are relevant: 

  1. On day six everything God created was “very good” including man. (Genesis 1:31)
  2. Adam and Eve sinned sometime after day six [eight]; they received the first curse and became mortal (Genesis 2:17)
  3. Humanity became increasingly wicked; God was sorry He made mankind and decided to destroy them all. (Genesis 6:6-7)
  4. Noah found favor with God and was spared from the destruction. God also spared Noah’s wife, 3 sons, and 3 daughters-in-law. (Genesis 6:8,18)
  5. Just before the flood, God decreed a reduction of lifespan from 900[0]+ years to approximately 120 years. This will be referred to as the second curse. (Genesis 6:3, Genesis 11)

The Biblical model states everything was very good in the beginning and as a result of sin there were two distinct curses. These curses affected both lifespan and quality of life. It is reasonable to assume that these curses were expressed by means of DNA mutations. DNA is considered to be a language and it follows that God would use it as an instrument of control, much like our modern voice control systems. This would result in an explosion of DNA mutations at the time of each curse.

In the beginning… there were no human genetic mutations. After the first curse, there was a sudden explosion of genetic mutations, some of which gave us mortality; these cannot be identified since they are in everyone and there is no variation. However, there also were those mutations which varied from individual to individual, for example, genetic disease. These mutations resided in pre-flood man and passed on to modern man. 

Then, just before the flood, in 2400 B.C., [10,837 BCE according to an unconventional chronology] came the second curse. This would also be apparent in a sudden explosion of mutations. These mutations would be in the entire genome, but most certainly in the mitochondrial genome due to the close connection between mitochondria and lifespan (Masoro, E., 2011). 

Mitochondrial DNA has been sequenced since the 1970s and is especially useful for genealogical purposes. Then in the mid 1990s, methods were developed to sequence the mitochondria of ancient man. Since the Bible clearly documents ancient genealogy, including lifespan, mitochondrial DNA is the perfect tool for analyzing and confirming the Biblical history of man. 

Many human mitochondrial DNA sequences are available: 10s of thousands of modern human sequences and, as of late, some sequences of ancient man (Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon). Only 3 Cro-Magnon subjects were found, but they turned out to be uninteresting; they are all typically European. Neanderthal, on the other hand, is very interesting in that he is so similar to modern man, yet so distinct. This research is based on sixteen Neanderthal sequences, seven of which were the full 16565 nucleotide genomes.

In order to fittingly analyze mitochondrial DNA of ancient man, it is expedient to choose the reference sequence closest to Adam and Eve. Since Cro-Magnon mtDNA is so similar to modern man, the obvious choice is Neanderthal. We choose, arbitrarily, one Neanderthal (GenBank NC_011137) which was found in Croatia and sequenced in 2009. We defined this sequence as the Nearest Adam Reference Sequence (NARS). Again, the assumption made is that this is the most ancient human sequenced and that he, Neanderthal, should be the closest available human to Adam and Eve. 

Most secular mtDNA analysis is conducted using the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS). This reference sequence is that of the first human to be sequenced (GenBank NC012920). He/she have remained anonymous, but this individual is identified as haplogroup H, typically European.

The Bible is clear that pre-flood man lived 900[0]+ years. In order for this to be true, pre-flood man’s physiology had to be superior to ours. Neanderthal had better bone structure (Lewin, R. 2005), better muscle tone (Lewin, R. 2005), better occlusion (Cuozzo, J. 1998 p.75), stronger teeth (Cuozzo, J. 1998 p.222) and larger brain cavity (Marcia S. Ponce de León 2008). There is also evidence that Neanderthal lived long lives, significantly longer than modern man. (Cuozzo, J. 1998 p.209) 

Observational evidence can be unreliable and misleading, particularity concerning this case where post-flood man has had access to the Neanderthal caves for thousands of years. These recorded observations are also subject to preconceived ideas and bias, but are a matter of interest; and, do support the hypothesis that Neanderthal is [a] pre-flood man. However, the strong support for the subject hypothesis rests on DNA evidence. 

Consider the days of the flood: There were probably millions, possible billions of humans. They didn’t listen to Noah concerning the impending deluge. When the deluge started, they reacted; some ran to higher ground and some held on to anything that would float. As the waters rose, there were humans, animals, and debris everywhere. The humans and animals would use debris for rafts and could have lived on these rafts for a considerable amount of time. As time went on, everything with the breath of life died and there were dead bodies everywhere: on the rafts, floating, or sinking to the ocean floor. 

First, consider those who died on the rafts. As the waters receded, the rafts would run aground. As time went on, some of the carcasses would be discovered by their post-flood ancestors. Some of the post flood ancestors would want to bury them with dignity and others would want to simply dispose of the carcasses. There is evidence that some Neanderthals were ceremonially buried in caves. (NOUGIER, L., 1963) 

Secondly, there were those who were either eaten by sea creatures, or sank to the bottom of the sea. After sinking to the bottom, they would be entombed in strata most probably in the limestone deposits. There is documented evidence of this happening. (BUSK, G. 1865; Finlayson, J. 2001) 

Lastly, there were those who, as the waters receded, were swept with other debris into the newly formed limestone caves. These would have been the dead floating on rafts, or some of the skeletons on bottom of the sea. Some were caught in powerful cave currents that shattered their bones and deposited them in the deep recesses of the caves along with other pre-flood creatures; they were mangled and covered with debris. There is documented evidence of this scenario. (Zimmer, C. 2010)

Using the NARS (Nearest Adam Reference Sequence), the 16 Neanderthal mtDNA sequences and 15,000 modern man mtDNA sequences were evaluated.

Number of mtDNA Mutations Based on NARS 

NARS:   D-loop Mutations  / Total Mutations

Modern man: 25 / 210 

Neanderthal: 5 / 10

[The] Table shows that Neanderthal has very few mutations in the mitochondrial DNA and that modern man has many. This is what you would expect: ancient man – few mutations; modern man – more mutations.’

The correct reason for the discrepancy is because Adam was a complex, sophisticated re-drawing of modern man. An advancement and evolution if you will, from Neanderthal man of Day six. 

‘Just this table alone is compelling evidence that Neanderthal is [an early] pre-flood man; he possesses the first curse mutations but not those of the second curse; he fits the Biblical mutation model perfectly.

[Before] the Garden of Eden… man’s mtDNA possessed typically 10 mutations. Then, there was an explosion of approximately 200 additional mutations; these were a result of God speaking them into humanity [at the time of Adam’s creation]; these mutations were [later] passed through Noah’s three daughters-in-law (mitochondrial DNA)… Noah lived 950[0] years, but his sons lived shorter lives. His grandsons lived shorter lives yet; and it took approximately 8 generations for the mutations to fully express themselves resulting in a lifespan of approximately 120 years. 

Many of the 210 mutations are significant. At least 40 of these mutations code for different amino acids. The mitochondria supplies energy and regulates the electrical grid in the body (Campbell, N., 2006); it is the source of many diseases (Chinnery, P.F., et. al. 2010). 

Notice that the number of mutations… is flat with respect to time. Looking at the Bible, there is no evidence that the number of mutations increase accidentally with time. This is also supported by Cro- Magnon mtDNA; Cro-Magnon is considered ancient man; but, the limited mtDNA we have does not indicate he had any fewer mutations than modern man. According to both the Bible model and the raw mtDNA data, the mutation with time slope is flat. Also, this is a plot of mutations, not mutation expression; mutation expression is poorly understood by secular science and won’t be addressed at this time. 

This analysis revealed that the combined Neanderthal genomes have 18 mutations in the D-loop. This number will most probably increase as more Neanderthal sequences become available, but we have a fair amount of confidence about these 18. D-loop mutations were used for this analysis since D-loop data is available for all 16 of the Neanderthal subjects and the 15,000+ modern human individuals who participated in migration studies (Behar, D. 2007). 

One would expect that these 18 mutations would be passed through Noah’s three daughters-in-law and would be widely distributed in the modern population. And, they are: Table 2 [not shown] presents the modern population groups (haplogroups) which inherited the Neanderthal’s mutations. The table lists the sequence number of each mutation, the nucleotide variations, and the haplogroups which possess each variation. Both variations are included since it is impossible to know which variation is the mutation and which variation is the day-6 original nucleotide. 

If Neanderthal is placed in the position of [a] “pre-flood human,” everything fits… Neanderthal bore the genetics of the first curse, but not the genetics of the second curse. And, all humanity after the flood possess the genetics from both the first and second curses. It works. 

However, placing Neanderthal directly under one of the daughters-in-law of Noah or under any of their offspring, the enigma returns with the following unanswerable question:How could Neanderthal develop 210 mitochondrial DNA mutations so quickly, have so little genetic diversity, live in so many diverse nations without interbreeding with other humans, and disappear without leaving a historical or genetic trace?”

Yes, how indeed?

‘Note that Neanderthal remains have been found in France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Croatia, Russia, Siberia, Iraq, Israel, Belgium, the bottom of the North Sea, and Uzbekistan. 

Neanderthal does not fit in the post-flood world; but, placing him where he belongs, in the pre-flood [and pre-Adamic] world, his DNA is congruent with the Biblical model of [a] pre-flood man. Neanderthal bore the mutations of the first curse, but not those of the second curse…

The world has attempted and succeeded to discredit Neanderthal to the point that it is an insult to be called a Neanderthal or be connected with him in any way. The slander of Neanderthal does not fit the evidence, but has prejudiced many. It is time to [acknowledge] who he is and give him his proper place in the rich Biblical history of man.

So, in conclusion, here are the answers to the mysteries presented in the abstract based on acceptance of Neanderthal as pre-flood man. 

1. How did Neanderthal go extinct?

Answer: He died in the flood 

2. Why is there no evidence of pre-flood man?

Answer: There is much evidence of pre-flood man – Neanderthal [and Homo sapiens]

3. Why is Neanderthal genetically distinct from modern man?

Answer: He did not possess the genetic mutations of the second curse [and he was created on Day Six; not Day Eight like Adam]. 

4. Why do we have his (Neanderthal) mutations, but he doesn’t have ours (modern man)?

Answer: He is our common ancestor [only through interbreeding; not as an originator]

5. Why did Neanderthal not interbreed with modern man?

Answer: He couldn’t; Neanderthal and modern man were separated by the flood [disagree, they did]. 

6. Why are Neanderthal’s remains found in so many divers locations?

Answer: The flood deposited them there [disagree in part – Neanderthal and Denisovans lived worldwide prior to the flood]. 

7. Why is Neanderthal physiologically and anatomically superior?

Answer: His DNA was superior [different] and not subject to the second curse.

8. Where does Neanderthal fit in post-flood Bible genealogy? 

Answer: He doesn’t. We know the DNA from the table of nations people (Genesis Chapter 10) and subsequent generations; none has the Neanderthal genetic signature.

References 

Behar, D., Rosset, S., Blue-Smith, J., Balanovsky, O., Tzur, S. Comas, D., Mitchell, R., Quintana-Murci, L., Tyler-Smith, C., Wells, S., The Genographic Consortium (2007) “The Genographic Project Public Participation Mitochondrial DNA Database” 

BUSK, G. (1865). On a very ancient human cranium from Gibraltar, Report of the 34th meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Bath 1864. 91-2 

Campbell, N.A., et. al.,(2006). “Biology Concepts and Connections” Fifth Edition, Pearson, San Francisco. p.98-99. 

Chinnery, P. F., et. al.(2010). “Mitochondrial Disorders Overview,” Institute of Human Genetics, Newcastle 

Cuozzo J., (1998) “Buried Alive The Startling Truth About Neanderthal Man,” Master Books Inc. 

Diamond J., (2006) “The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal”, p. 42 

Finlayson, J. C., et. al. (2001) The Gibraltar Neanderthals and their extinction, p.117-122 

Green R., Malaspinas A-S, Krause J., Briggs A., et al. (2008) “A Complete Neandertal Mitochondrial Genome Sequence Determined by High-Throughput Sequencing.” Cell, 134:416-426. 

Krings M., Stone A., Schmitz R.W., Krainitzki H., Stoneking M., and Pääbo S. (1997): “Neanderthal DNA sequences and the origin of modern humans.” Cell, 90:19-30. 

NOUGIER L.-R., 1963, La préhistoire : essai de paléosociologie religieuse. Paris : Bloud & Gay : 43-44 

Masoro, E., Austad, S., “Handbook of the Biology of Aging Seventh Edition” (London: Academic Press 2011) p.75 

Lewin, R., “Human Evolution: an illustrated Introduction Fifth Edition,” (Blackwell Publishing 2005) p.180 

Marcia S. Ponce de León, Lubov Golovanova, Vladimir Doronichev, Galina Romanova, Takeru Akazawa, Osamu Kondo, Hajime Ishida, and Christoph P. E. Zollikofer, (2008) “Neanderthal brain size at birth provides insights into the evolution of human life history”. 

Zimmer, C., December 21, 2010, The New York Times – Science, “Bones Give Peek into the lives of Neanderthals”, p D1 

Note 1: One of the first things you notice is that if you reverse the mutations/variations in the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS), the two references systems become identical. This does not directly contribute to our case, but shows the close similarities of our two subjects. 

Note 2: Notice in Table 3 [not shown] that Neanderthal does not show variation in all of the nucleotides; this is because the variations did not appear until after the flood. For instance, take sequence 16037; all of the Neanderthal (16 of them) were Gs. Unless, at a later date some Neanderthal is found to have some other nucleotide, it had to be a post flood mutation. Conversely, sequence number 16078 had a variation (A or G); this places the variation/mutation before the flood. If Neanderthal did, in fact, live before the flood, he would have no post-flood mutations. So, if the post flood mutations are removed from the rCRS, 17 sequences become identical between the reference system and you have the Neanderthal and European sequences vary by 8 nucleotides which is exactly the expected human variation. (Krings, M., 1997) Summarizing, Neanderthal does not possess the post flood mutations, and these post flood mutations are built into the rCRS and result in a bias.’ 

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

Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

Chapter XXV

Peleg, the brother of Joktan, is not only synonymous with a split in Arphaxad’s line, but most famously with the division of all the peoples and ethnicities descending from Japheth, Ham, Canaan and Shem who had congregated in the Mesopotamian region – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

The failed Tower of Babel venture circa 6755 BCE, had ended with the Son of Man – by some means unexplained – confounding the universal language spoken – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Now, eleven of the main lines of people began to spread abroad; the seven from Japheth and the three from Ham. Cush, Phut and Mizra travelled to northeast Africa and Egypt; Canaan eventually to northwest Africa, via the land later known as Palestine. Gomer and Javan headed towards the Mediterranean and Magog, Tubal, Meschech and Madai northward to Anatolia – Asia Minor. The majority of Tiras’ descendants heading west into south eastern Europe as Gomer and Javan; but unlike them, continuing westwards via Scotland, Iceland, Greenland and onto North America – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine: 

‘The name Peleg meaning Division, Dividing Canal from the verb (palag), to split or divide. Noun (peleg) means channel or canal and noun (pelagga) means stream or division. Nouns (pelugga) and noun (miplagga) mean division.

NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names agree: the name Peleg means Division or Divider, although the word is commonly used to denote a channel or canal. Note that this “division of the earth” follows the pattern of the second creation day, in which Joktan represents the waters under the dividing firmament, which eventually produced dry land and all its creatures, while Peleg represents the dividing firmament, which eventually came to house the celestial lights that would lead the living on earth (Genesis 15:5, Daniel 12:3).’

The genealogy of Arphaxad to Abraham is listed in Genesis chapter eleven. Peleg had a son called Reu, born 6827 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Reu’s name in Hebrew means, a ‘friend, associate.’

In the Book of Jubilees we read further in chapter 10:18-27.

‘… Peleg took to himself a wife, whose name was Lomna the daughter of Sina’ar, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Reu; for he said: ‘Behold the children of men have become evil through the wicked purpose of building for themselves a city and a tower in the land of Shinar

… for in his days they built the city and the tower, saying, ‘Go to, let us ascend thereby into heaven…’ And the Lord sent a mighty wind against the tower* and overthrew it upon the earth, and behold it was between Asshur and Babylon in the land of Shinar, and they called its name ‘Overthrow’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Two points of interest are the dating of the tower of Babel during the time of Peleg and the meaning of Peleg’s name to include a division associated with water. In an unconventional chronology, Peleg was born in 7727 BCE and died in 4737 BCE; during the precessional Age of Cancer, lasting from 8810 to 6650 BCE. Human life spans were considerably reduced post-flood – in part due to the changes in Earth’s atmosphere – though still enormously long compared with the dramatic decrease, which eventuated in Abraham’s lifetime some five generations later – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. Peleg lived for 2,990 years.

During this time frame, Nimrod challenges the Eternal and gathered the nations in support of his rebellion; with the Tower of Babel being a literal and symbolic statement of their united defiance. Nimrod had been alive for about a thousand years or longer when Peleg was born. An earlier date for the confusion of the languages and the dividing of the earth is circa 7275 BCE and a later date is 6232 BCE. Dividing in two gives 6755 BCE. This appears plausible as Nimrod would still be ‘young’ and Peleg about a third of the way through his life. 

This approximate dating supports a gap in history between this event and the sudden ‘(re)appearance’ of the early – but more accurately intermediate – Sumerian Civilisation circa 4000 BCE (or earlier). It also ties in with the three hundred year transitional period – from 6976 to 6676 BCE – between the Treta Yuga Silver Age and the Dwapara Yuga Bronze Age; the epoch before our current Kali Yuga Iron Age, running from 3676 BCE to 2025 CE. Four short years from the time of writing until we enter another three hundred year transitional period, which also coincides with the Age of Aquarius beginning in 1990. Though Aquarius is an air sign, it has a strong connection with water. Cancer, the Age at the time of the Earth’s division is a water sign and is a startling coincidence. 

The end of the Kali Yuga in 2015: Unravelling the mysteries of the Yuga Cycle, Bibhu Dev Misra, 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The 300 year transitional period between the Treta Yuga (Silver Age) and the Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age) from 6976 BC – 6676 BC also coincides with a significant environmental event – the Black Sea Catastrophe which has recently been dated to 6700 BC. The Black Sea once used to be a freshwater lake. That is, until the Mediterranean Sea, swollen with melted glacial waters, breached a natural dam, and cut through the narrow Bosphorous Strait, catastrophically flooding the Black Sea. This raised the water levels of the Black Sea by several hundred feet, flooded more than 60,000 square miles of land, and significantly expanded the Black Sea shoreline (by around 30%). This event fundamentally changed the course of civilization in Southeastern Europe and western Anatolia. Geologists Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in New York, who had first proposed the Black Sea Catastrophe hypothesis, have gone to the extent of comparing it to Noah’s Flood.

Similar major flooding events were taking place in many parts of the world, as massive glacial lakes, swelled by the waters of the melting ice, breached their ice barriers, and rushed into the surrounding areas. In the book Underworld, Graham Hancock has described some of the terrible events that ravaged the planet during that time’ – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

‘Sometime between 6900 BC – 6200 BC the Laurentide ice-sheet disintegrated in the Hudson Bay and an enormous quantity of glacial waters from the inland Lake Agassiz/Ojibway discharged into the Labrador Sea. This was possibly the “single largest flood of the Quarternary Period”, which may have single-handedly raised global sea-level by half a metre. The period between 7000 BC – 6000 BC was also characterized by the occurrences of gigantic earthquakes in Europe. In northern Sweden, some of these earthquakes caused “waves on the ground”, 10 metres high, referred to as “rock tsunamis”. It is possible that the global chain of cataclysmic events during this transitional period may have been triggered by a single underlying cause, which we are yet to find out.’

The ‘mighty wind’ which the Lord sent against the tower* could have been a detonation of some kind. We will run into a similar scenario in the next chapter when we investigate the life of Lot and the destruction of Sodom with its neighbouring cities some five thousand years after the tower of Babel’s apparent obliteration – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. A blast of this magnitude may have set off considerable seismic activity, leading to earthquakes and localised flooding throughout the Middle East and well beyond. 

Reu also had a son, called Serug, born in 5867 BCE. Serug’s name in Hebrew means, ‘branch’ from the verb sarag to be ‘intertwined.’ Between Serug’s birth and his son Nahor (I), Shem died in 5717 BCE, age 6,120 years and Arphaxad died in 5617 BCE, age 5,100 years – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Book of Jubilees 11:1-6

‘… Reu took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ora, the daughter of Ur, the son of Kesed, and she bare him a son, and he called his name Seroh… And the sons of Noah began to war on each other, to take captive and to slay each other, and to shed the blood of men on the earth, and to eat blood, and to build strong cities, and walls, and towers, and individuals (began) to exalt themselves above the nation, and to found the beginnings of kingdoms, and to go to war people against people, and nation against nation, and city against city, and all (began) to do evil, and to acquire arms, and to teach their sons war, and they began to capture cities, and to sell male and female slaves. And Ur, the son of Kesed, built the city of ‘Ara of the Chaldees^, and called its name after his own name and the name^ of his father. 

And they made for themselves molten images, and they worshipped each the idol… and they began to make graven images and unclean simulacra, and malignant spirits assisted and seduced (them) into committing transgression and uncleanness. And the prince Mastema [chief of spirits – Beelzebub]… sent forth other spirits, those which were put under his hand, to do all manner of wrong and sin… to corrupt and destroy, and to shed blood upon the earth. 

For this reason he called the name of Seroh, Serug, for every one turned to do all manner of sin and transgression. And he grew up, and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, near to the father of his wife’s mother, and he worshipped idols, and he took to himself a wife… and her name was Melka, the daughter of Kaber, the daughter of his father’s brother.’

Kesed is a family name, as Nahor (II) had a grandson called Chesed. We will return to the people called the Chaldees and Chaldeans. Nahor I, Abraham’s grandfather was born in 4967 BCE, while Peleg later died in 4737 BCE. Nahor I died in 2887 BCE, though his son Terah of purported Nimrod fame (refer previous chapter), was born in 4077 BCE. Terah in Hebrew derives from the verb tarah, meaning: ‘wanderer’ or ‘turn’ and the noun ruah, means, ‘wind, breath’ or ‘spirit.’

Book of Jubilees 11:7-14

‘And she [Melka] bare him Nahor [I]… and he grew and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, and his father taught him the researches of the Chaldees to divine and augur, according to the signs of heaven [astrology]. And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was Ijaska, the daughter of Nestag of the Chaldees. And she bare him Terah… And the prince Mastema sent ravens and birds to devour the seed which was sown in the land, in order to destroy the land, and rob the children of men of their labours. And the years began to be barren… it was only with great effort that they could save a little of all the fruit of the earth in their days… Terah took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Edna, the daughter of ‘Abram, the daughter of his father’s sister. And… she bare him a son, and he called his name Abram, by the name of the father of his mother; for he had died before his daughter had conceived a son.’

Abram is a family name along with Kesed and Nahor. There are two Nahors: Nahor I, the grandfather of Abraham and Nahor II, the brother of Abraham. It is Abraham’s brother we are studying and will refer to him simply, as Nahor. In Genesis 11:26, we learn of Terah’s three sons, Abram, later known as Abraham, Nahor and Haran. 

It is a similar situation to Genesis 10:1, where Shem, Ham and Japheth are listed, but in fact Japheth is the eldest and while Shem appears the youngest in certain contexts, it is Ham who was the youngest of the three (Canaan not withstanding) – Genesis 9:24.

Abram is stated first as his descendants would fulfil the Genesis 3:15 prophecy. Though Haran is the eldest and Nahor is in the middle as the second born son of Terah. We will discover that Haran died prematurely and it was territory named after him, where Abraham later dwelt. More importantly, in support for Haran being the eldest is that Nahor married a niece from Haran’s family. Haran had children first and they were marriageable age, for Nahor. Similarly, Abraham also married family. What is not clear superficially, is whose exactly.

Haran was born in 2009 BCE and Abraham was born in 1977 BCE. Nahor was born perhaps circa 1993 BCE. Nahor in Hebrew means: ‘snort’ or ‘scorched’ from the verb nhr, ‘to snort vigorously’ and the root harar, ‘to be a central hub of heat.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so… being hot and ultimately… being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom).

Verb (harar I) means to be hot, burned or charred. Noun (harer) denotes a parched place and noun (harhur) describes a violent heat or fever. The unused verb (harar II) means to be free… which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun (hor) means noble or nobleman. The unused verb (harar III) appears to refer to the enclosure of kilns and ovens, as the first ones were most likely built in natural hollows. The noun… (hor)… [means] hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies.

Verb (hara) means to burn or ignite (in the Bible solely in an emotional way: to get angry). Noun (haron) describes the burning of anger. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Verb (nahar) looks very much like a passive or reflexive version of (harar) or its participle. This verb isn’t used in the Bible but nouns (nahar) and (naharah) describe the vigorous snorting of a horse, and noun (nahir) means nostril (which in turn reminds of a cavern).

Whatever the true etymology and original meaning, to any Hebrew audience the name Nahor would mean both A Snort or A Snorting, and Charred or Scorched, or even Noble or Freeman. For a meaning of the name Nahor… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads… Breathing Hard.

Joshua 24:2

English Standard Version

And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Long ago, your fathers lived beyond the Euphrates [Ur of the Chaldees], Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods’ – Genesis 31:53

Book of Jasher 9:7-8

‘And the king [of Ur] and all his servants, and Terah with all his household were then the first of those that served gods of wood and stone. And Terah had twelve gods of large size, made of wood and stone, after the twelve months of the year, and he served each one monthly, and every month Terah would bring his meat offering and drink offering to his gods; thus did Terah all the days.’

Jubilees 12:1-15

‘And it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son.’

And he said, “What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship, And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. Why do ye worship things that have no spirit in them? For they are the work of (men’s) hands, And on your shoulders do ye bear them, And ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them, And a misleading of the heart to those who worship them: Worship them not.”

And his father said unto him, ‘I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them? And if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee.’ And these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.’

Recall, Terah is recorded as originally serving Nimrod directly at his command, administering the Babylonian religious system resurrected by Nimrod after the Flood with his mother-wife Semiramis… the evil angel Lilith – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: Lilith.

Though historically, the king in question was perhaps Shulgi, the son of Ur-Nammu and 2nd king of the 3rd Dynasty of Ur. Shulgi ruled 46 years, from 1970 to 1924 BCE – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. Though in reality it was likely a far earlier, unknown king whom maintained the traditions of Nimrod.  

Regardless, the entanglement of that situation clung to Terah as if he were shrink-wrapped in plastic. This alignment to the mystery religion is beyond coincidental, as Terah’s descendants through Nahor, have continued their unrivalled involvement and allegiance, to the present day.

After the unknown king’s death, Terah maintained an exalted position in Ur with huge strings attached. To give this up was a monumental request from Abraham. To defy the people who viewed Terah as synonymous with Nimrod’s legacy, was tantamount to death. 

Book of Jasher 7:41, 49-51

‘And he [the king] placed Terah the son of Nahor the prince of his host, and he dignified him and elevated him above all his princes… And Terah the son of Nahor, prince of [the king’s] host, was in those days very great in the sight of the king and his subjects, and the king and princes loved him, and they elevated him very high. And Terah took a wife and her name was Amthelo [Edna in the Book of Jubilees] the daughter of Cornebo; and the wife of Terah [later] conceived and bare him a son… and Terah called the name of his son that was born to him Abram, because the king had raised him in those days, and dignified him above all his princes that were with him.’ 

Different sources include Shem, Abraham or Esau as the eventual slayer of Nimrod. If Nimrod was born circa 8700 BCE, it is dubious whether he would still be alive some 7,000 years later when Abram was born in 1977 BCE. Shem died in 5717 BCE and is the only candidate of the three who makes sense. Nimrod’s days after the failed tower were numbered and his demise in this era would appear logical.

We will look at two different versions of the events that transpired surrounding the death of Abram’s eldest brother Haran and his family’s rather hasty departure from Ur in Sumer. The two accounts may be inaccurate or contain elements of what happened. Either way, Abram’s family fled; most likely driven by their dissatisfaction with a religious-political system they could no longer support.  

The Book of Jasher in chapter 8:1-36, enumerates an apparent history between Nimrod and Abraham, which began at his birth. It is proposed that it was actually the second king of the Third Dynasty of Ur. Shulgi is to Ur as Hammurabi was to Babylon and Chedorlaomer to Elam – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. King Shulgi preceded them both by a few years and was a prominent ruler of his time and the most famous monarch to have reigned from Ur – after his father the renowned Ur-Nammu.

It was in 1927 BCE when Abram’s family departed Ur for Haran; with Abram being fifty years old. Therefore, the name of Nimrod has been substituted with either Ur-Nammu – who reigned from 1988 to 1970 BCE – or Shulgi as applicable, to give the account an element of veracity that it lacks with Nimrod as the king of Ur. Besides, Nimrod had been the king of ancient Babylon, yet the king of Babylon at the time of Abram’s birth in 1977 BCE was the second king of the Amorite Dynasty I of Babylon, Sumu-la-El who began his thirty-five year reign three years earlier in 1980 BCE.

1 ‘And it was in the night that Abram was born, that all the servants of Terah, and all the wise men of [Ur-Nammu], and his conjurors came and ate and drank in the house of Terah, and they rejoiced with him on that night. 

2 And when all the wise men and conjurors went out from the house of Terah, they lifted up their eyes toward heaven that night to look at the stars, and they saw, and behold one very large star came from the east and ran in the heavens, and he swallowed up the four stars from the four sides of the heavens. 

4 And they said to each other, This only betokens the child that has been born to Terah this night, who will grow up and be fruitful, and multiply, and possess all the earth, he and his children for ever, and he and his seed will slay great kings, and inherit their lands. 6 And they spoke and said to each other, Behold the sight that we saw last night is hidden from the king, it has not been made known to him. 7 And should this thing get known to the king in the latter days, he will say to us, Why have you concealed this matter from me, and then we shall all suffer death; therefore, now let us go and tell the king the sight which we saw, and the interpretation thereof, and we shall then remain clear. 

8 And they did so… and we saw a great star coming from the east, and the same star ran with great speed, and swallowed up four great stars, from the four sides of the heavens. 11 … this thing applies to the child that is born to Terah, who will grow up and multiply greatly, and become powerful, and kill all the kings of the earth, and inherit all their lands, he and his seed forever. 14 And the king heard their words and they seemed good in his sight, and he sent and called for Terah… 15 And the king said to Terah… 16 And now therefore give me the child, that we may slay him before his evil springs up against us, and I will give you for his value, your house full of silver and gold. 28 And Terah saw that the anger of the king was kindled against him, and he answered the king, saying, All that I have is in the king’s power; whatever the king desires to do to his servant, that let him do, yea, even my son, he is in the king’s power, without value in exchange, he and his two brothers that are older than he [Haran and Nahor]. 29 And the king said to Terah, No, but I will purchase your younger son for a price… ‘

‘Terah said, Let my king give me three days’ time [three is the number of decision and finality] till I consider this matter within myself, and consult with my family concerning the words of my king; and he pressed the king greatly to agree to this. 31 And the king hearkened to Terah, and he did so and he gave him three days’ time, and Terah went out from the king’s presence, and he came home to his family and spoke to them all the words of the king; and the people were greatly afraid. 32 And it was in the third day that the king sent to Terah, saying, Send me your son for a price as I spoke to you; and shouldst you not do this, I will send and slay all you hast in your house, so that you shall not even have a dog remaining. 33 And Terah hastened, (as the thing was urgent from the king), and he took a child from one of his servants, which his handmaid had born to him that day, and Terah brought the child to the king and received value for him. 

34 And Yahweh was with Terah in this matter, that [Ur-Nammu] might not cause Abram’s death, and the king took the child from Terah and with all his might dashed his head to the ground, for he thought it had been Abram; and this was concealed from him from that day, and it was forgotten by the king, as it was the will of Providence not to suffer Abram’s death. 35 And Terah took Abram his son secretly, together with his mother and nurse, and he concealed them in a cave, and he brought them their provisions monthly. 36 And Yahweh was with Abram in the cave and he grew up, and Abram was in the cave ten years, and the [new] king [Shulgi] and his princes, soothsayers and sages, thought that the [previous] king [Ur-Nammu] had killed Abram.’

Book of Jubilees 12:1-15:

‘And in the [fiftieth] year [1927 BCE] of the life of Abram… Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it. And they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire. And Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died [at 82 years of age] in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father [who died in 1842 BCE], and they buried [Haran] in Ur of the Chaldees [in Sumer].’ 

Stalled by the palpable reticence from Terah, Abraham took matters into his own hands. Abraham would later when rescuing Lot, attack and ambush King Chedorlaomer the Elamite and his coalition army by cover of night. This Ur of Chaldea was located south of Babylon, in the area known as Sumer – the southern portion of the Land of Shinar. The descendants of Joktan had primarily dwelt in Sumer and the descendants of Peleg, mainly to the North in Akkadia where the city of Babylon was located.

Jubilees: ‘And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of [northern] Lebanon… and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran [for 25 years, from 1927 to 1902 BCE].’

At this point, after the devastating loss of his eldest son Haran, Terah – his name meaning, wanderer – decides to leave Ur and his privileged life behind. They leave to begin a new life, to soften the blow of the loss of Haran as well as possibly concern about retribution from Shulgi the king. Terah may have acted differently if he had known Haran had died at the hands of Abraham. Saying that, the Book of Jasher claims a very different version of events surrounding Haran’s death.

Book of Jasher 11:33-61, 12:1-70

33 ‘And when Abram saw all these things his anger was kindled against his father, and he hastened and took a hatchet in his hand, and came unto the chamber of the gods, and he broke all his father’s gods. 34 And when he had done breaking the images, he placed the hatchet in the hand of the great god which was there before them, and he went out; and Terah his father came home, for he had heard at the door the sound of the striking of the hatchet; so Terah came into the house to know what this was about. 

35 And Terah, having heard the noise of the hatchet in the room of images, ran to the room to the images, and he met Abram going out. 36 And Terah entered the room and found all the idols fallen down and broken… 37 And when Terah saw this his anger was greatly kindled… 38 And he found Abram his son still sitting in the house; and he said to him, What is this work you hast done to my gods? 

… 42 Is there in these gods spirit, soul or power to do all you hast told me? Are they not wood and stone, and have I not myself made them, and canst you speak such lies, saying that the large god that was with them smote them? It is you that didst place the hatchet in his hands, and then say he smote them all. 43 And Abram answered his father and said to him, And how canst you then serve these idols in whom there is no power to do any thing? Can those idols in which you trust deliver you? Can they hear your prayers when you call upon them? Can they deliver you from the hands of your enemies, or will they fight your battles for you against your enemies, that you shouldst serve wood and stone which can neither speak nor hear? 46 Did not our fathers in days of old sin in this matter, and Yahweh the Almighty of the universe brought the waters of the flood upon them and destroyed the whole earth?

52 … and they went and brought Abram before the king. And [Shulgi] and all his princes and servants were that day sitting before him, and Terah sat also before them. 53 And the king said to Abram, What is this that you hast done to your father and to his gods? And Abram answered the king in the words that he spoke to his father… The large god that was with them in the house did to them what you hast heard.’  

Abram exhibits a black sense of humour and a level of audaciousness before the king.

Jasher: 54 ‘And the king said to Abram, Had they power to speak and eat and do as you hast said? And Abram answered the king, saying, And if there be no power in them why dost you serve them and cause the sons of men to err through your follies? 56 O foolish, simple, and ignorant king, woe unto you forever. 60 And if your wicked heart will not hearken to my words to cause you to forsake your evil ways, and to serve the eternal Yahweh, then wilt you die in shame in the latter days, you, your people and all who are connected with you, hearing your words or walking in your evil ways.’

It is worth noting that a later Chaldean king, Nebuchadnezzar II, faced a similar challenge and after being humbled, became a believer in the Eternal.

Jasher: 1 ‘And when the king heard the words of Abram he ordered him to be put into prison; and Abram was ten days in prison. 3 And the king said to the princes and sages, Have you heard what Abram, the son of Terah, has done to his father? 5 And they all answered the king saying, The man who reviles the king should be hanged upon a tree [a reference to crucifixion]; but having done all the things that he said, and having despised our gods, he must therefore be burned to death, for this is the law in this matter. 6 … And the king did so, and he commanded his servants that they should prepare a fire for three days and three nights in the king’s furnace… and the king ordered them to take Abram from prison and bring him out to be burned [a pre-shadowing of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego: Daniel 3:12-30]. 

7 And all the king’s servants, princes, lords, governors, and judges, and all the inhabitants of the land, about nine hundred thousand men, stood opposite the furnace to see Abram. 8 And all the women and little ones crowded upon the roofs and towers to see what was doing with Abram, and they all stood together at a distance; and there was not a man left that did not come on that day to behold the scene. 9 And when Abram was come, the conjurors of the king and the sages saw Abram, and they cried out to the king, saying, Our sovereign lord, surely this is the man whom we know to have been the child at whose birth the great star swallowed the four stars, which we declared to the king…

10 And behold now his father has also transgressed your commands, and mocked you by bringing you another child, which you didst kill. 11 And when the king heard their words, he was exceedingly wroth, and he ordered Terah to be brought before him. 15 And the king said Who advised you to this? Tell me, do not hide aught from me, and then you shall not die. 16 And Terah was greatly terrified in the king’s presence, and he said to the king, It was Haran my eldest son who advised me to this; and Haran was in those days that Abram was born, two and thirty years old. 17 But Haran did not advise his father to anything, for Terah said this to the king in order to deliver his soul from the king, for he feared greatly; and the king said to Terah, Haran your son who advised you to this shall die through fire with Abram; for the sentence of death is upon him for having rebelled against the king’s desire in doing this thing. 

18 And Haran at that time felt inclined to follow the ways of Abram, but he kept it within himself. 19 And Haran said in his heart, Behold now the king has seized Abram on account of these things which Abram did, and it shall come to pass, that if Abram prevail over the king I will follow him, but if the king prevail I will go after the king. 20 And when Terah had spoken this to the king concerning Haran his son, the king ordered Haran to be seized with Abram. 22 And the king’s servants took Abram and his brother, and they stripped them of all their clothes excepting their lower garments which were upon them. 23 And they bound their hands and feet with linen cords, and the servants of the king lifted them up and cast them both into the furnace.

24 And Yahweh loved Abram and he had compassion over him, and Yahweh [the Son of Man] came down and delivered Abram from the fire and he was not burned [just as the Son of God had saved Shadrach and his friends: Daniel 3:25]. 25 But all the cords with which they bound him were burned, while Abram remained and walked about in the fire. 26 And Haran died when they had cast him into the fire, and he was burned to ashes, for his heart was not perfect with Yahweh; and those men who cast him into the fire, the flame of the fire spread over them, and they were burned, and twelve men of them died.

27 And Abram walked in the midst of the fire three days and three nights, and all the servants of the king saw him walking in the fire, and they came and told the king, saying, Behold we have seen Abram walking about in the midst of the fire, and even the lower garments which are upon him are not burned, but the cord with which he was bound is burned. 28 And when the king heard their words his heart fainted and he would not believe them; so he sent other faithful princes to see this matter, and they went and saw it and told it to the king; and the king rose to go and see it, and he saw Abram walking to and fro in the midst of the fire, and he saw Haran’s body burned, and the king wondered greatly. 

29 And the king ordered Abram to be taken out from the fire; and his servants approached to take him out and they could not, for the fire was round about and the flame ascending toward them from the furnace. 30 And the king’s servants fled from it, and the king rebuked them, saying, Make haste and bring Abram out of the fire that you shall not die. 31 And the servants of the king again approached to bring Abram out, and the flames came upon them and burned their faces so that eight of them died.

32 And when the king saw that his servants could not approach the fire lest they should be burned, the king called to Abram, O servant of Yahweh who is in heaven, go forth from amidst the fire and come hither before me; and Abram hearkened to the voice of the king, and he went forth from the fire and came and stood before the king. 34 And the king said to Abram, How is it that you wast not burned in the fire? 35 And Abram said to the king, Yahweh of heaven and earth in whom I trust and who has all in his power, He delivered me from the fire into which you didst cast me.

36 … And the king, princes, and inhabitants of the land, seeing that Abram was delivered from the fire, they came and bowed down to Abram. 38 And Abram said to them, Do not bow down to me, but bow down to Yahweh of the world who made you, and serve him, and go in his ways for it is he who delivered me from out of this fire, and it is he who created the souls and spirits of all men, and formed man in his mother’s womb, and brought him forth into the world, and it is he who will deliver those who trust in him from all pain. 39 And this thing seemed very wonderful in the eyes of the king and princes, that Abram was saved from the fire and that Haran was burned; and the king gave Abram many presents and he gave him his two head servants from the king’s house; the name of one was Oni and the name of the other was Eliezer. 

40 And all the kings, princes and servants gave Abram many gifts of silver and gold and pearl, and the king and his princes sent him away, and he went in peace. 41 And Abram went forth from the king in peace, and many of the king’s servants followed him, and about three hundred men joined him. 42 And Abram returned on that day and went to his father’s house, he and the men that followed him, and Abram served Yahweh his Almighty all the days of his life, and he walked in his ways and followed his law‘ – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 43 ‘And from that day forward Abram inclined the hearts of the sons of men to serve Yahweh. 

57 Now therefore my king, surely you know… since your sages saw this at the birth of Abram, and if my king will suffer Abram to live in the earth it will be to the injury of my lord and king, for all the days that Abram lives neither you nor your kingdom will be established, for this was known formerly at his birth; and why will not my king slay him, that his evil may be kept from you in latter days? 58 And [Shulgi] hearkened to the voice of Anuki [Anunnaki?], and he sent some of his servants in secret to go and seize Abram, and bring him before the king to suffer death. 59 And Eliezer, Abram’s servant whom the king had given him, was at that time in the presence of the king, and he heard what Anuki had advised the king, and what the king had said to cause Abram’s death. 

60 And Eliezer said to Abram, Hasten, rise up and save your soul, that you may not die through the hands of the king, for thus did he see in a dream concerning you, and thus did Anuki interpret it, and thus also did Anuki advise the king concerning you. 61 And Abram hearkened to the voice of Eliezer, and Abram hastened and ran for safety… and the king’s servants… searched through out the country and he was not to be found, and… the king’s anger against Abram was stilled, as they did not find him, and the king drove from his mind this matter concerning Abram. 63 And Abram… was still afraid of the king; and Terah came to see Abram his son secretly… 64 And Abram said to his father, Dost you not know that the king thinks to slay me, and to annihilate my name from the earth by the advice of his wicked counsellors? 

65 Now whom hast you here and what hast you in this land? Arise, let us go together to the land of Canaan, that we may be delivered from his hand, lest you perish also… 66 Dost you not know or hast you not heard, that it is not through love that [the king] gives you all this honor, but it is only for his benefit that he bestows all this good upon you? 67 And if he do unto you greater good than this, surely these are only vanities of the world, for wealth and riches cannot avail in the day of wrath and anger. 68 Now therefore hearken to my voice, and let us arise and go to the land of Canaan, out of the reach of injury from [the king]; and serve you Yahweh who created you in the earth and it will be well with you; and cast away all the vain things which you pursuest. 70 And Terah hearkened to the voice of his son Abram, and Terah did all that Abram said, for this was from Yahweh, that the king should not cause Abram’s death.’

In this version, it wasn’t Abraham who accidentally killed his brother. Terah had his own firstborn son murdered. It was Terah with the grisly secret to hide. Nor did Terah altogether need Abraham to convince him to leave Ur, for how long before Shulgi’s mind returned to Terah’s betrayal, by hiding Abram after his birth. In each account, the common denominators are a. the death of Haran (by fire) because he did not have the same relationship with the Eternal as Abram; b. Abram’s dissatisfaction with his fathers’ religious beliefs and allegiance to Ur’s king and his persuading Terah to repent; and c. motives for Terah and or Abram to leave Ur behind. This was no mean decision, as Terah’s family were counted as aristocracy; royalty even, for Terah was a prince and as we shall discover as well about Abraham. It was a complete uprooting and sacrifice to abandon the privileged yet complicated life, titles, standing and influence they enjoyed in Ur. 

The land of Haran, named after Terah’s eldest son Haran, was in a direct line northwest from Ur. Ur was fifty miles south of Babylon. From Ur of the Chaldees to the region of Haran is approximately 600 miles. Haran was located on the edge of southeastern Asia Minor, halfway along the Fertile Crescent between Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean and just beyond the northern reaches of the land which became known as Lebanon – the ‘land of Laban’ a grandson of Nahor. Terah and his family did not make it to the final destination of Canaan, deciding to linger in Haran. 

Genesis 11:31

English Standard Version

‘Terah took Abram his son and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife, and they went forth together from Ur of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan, but when they came to Haran, they settled there.

Book of Jasher 13:1-2 

‘… And when they came as far as the land of Haran they remained there, for it was exceedingly good land for pasture, and of sufficient extent for those who accompanied them. And the people of the land of Haran saw that Abram was good and upright with Yahweh and men, and that Yahweh his Almighty was with him, and some of the people of the land of Haran came and joined Abram, and he taught them the instruction of Yahweh and his ways; and these men remained with Abram in his house and they adhered to him.’ 

Terah died in Haran in 1842 BCE – Genesis 11:32. Apart from Haran, there was another city called Ur – though not to be confused with Ur located six hundred miles southeast.

Genesis 11:27-29

English Standard Version

‘Now these are the generations of Terah. Terah fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran fathered Lot. Haran died in the presence of his father Terah in the land of his kindred, in Ur of the Chaldeans. And Abram and Nahor took wives. The name of Abram’s wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran the father of Milcah and Iscah. 30 Now Sarai was barren; she had no child.’

Nahor married his niece – the daughter of his deceased brother Haran. Haran has three children mentioned in the Bible, Lot, Milcah and the mysterious Iscah. They were all born and raised in the city of Ur in Sumer. Before we turn to Milcah and Nahor, let’s look at Iscah and Sarai.

Genesis 20:9-13

English Standard Version

‘Then Abimelech [the Philistine king] called Abraham [c. 1878 BCE] and said to him, “What have you done to us? And how have I sinned against you, that you have brought on me and my kingdom a great sin? You have done to me things that ought not to be done.” And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What did you see, that you did this thing?” Abraham said, “I did it because I thought, ‘There is no fear of God at all in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.’ Besides, she is indeed my [half] sister, the daughter of my father though not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife. And when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, I said to her, ‘This is the kindness you must do me: at every place to which we come, say of me, “He is my brother.”

Abraham feared he would be murdered for his beautiful wife Sarai – her name was later changed to Sarah. Sarai in Hebrew means, my princess and Sarah similarly means, princess. He says to Abimelech that she is his half-sister. Yet, we read above in Genesis 11:31, that Sarai was Terah’s daughter-in-law. It does not say that Sarah is Terah’s daughter. Abraham also claims that she has a different mother. We learned in the Book of Jasher that Terah had a wife named Amthelo. The Bible delineates if a man has more than one wife. It doesn’t say this for Terah. The Book of Jasher states that Terah married again, though later in his old age. Two clear falsifications from Abraham, to add to the original one, of Sarah not being his wife. This situation had apparently already occurred when Abraham and Sarah had previously travelled to Egypt.’

Genesis 12:10-20

English Standard Version

10 ‘Now there was a famine in the land. So Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. 11 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife, “I know that you are a woman beautiful in appearance, 12 and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me, but they will let you live. 

13 Say you are my sister, that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared for your sake.” 14 When Abram entered Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 15 And when the princes of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels.17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had.’

These two accounts are often highlighted by commentators to show that the highly obedient patriarch to the Creator, lied – twice. Technically, the lie to Abimelech was a half-truth if the story were true. It would be more constructive, if the time spent on critiquing Abraham’s behaviour had been used to question the discrepancy in Abraham and Sarah’s cover story. For Sarah was accomplice in saying that Abraham was her brother. The Pharaoh in question – according to an unconventional chronology and a synchronisation of the Egyptian dynasties – was the third Pharaoh of Dynasty I: Djer. The meeting took place in 1902 BCE, when Sarah was sixty-five years old and just after Abraham had moved from Haran to Canaan. Djer ruled a united Egypt from 1922 to 1875 BCE.

The only plausible answer, if Sarah was not Terah’s daughter and therefore not Abraham’s sister, is that she is Iscah; the sister of Milcah and the daughter of Haran. In the Talmud, Rabbi Isaac states that Iscah is synonymous with Sarai. Thus, the two sisters, Milcah and Sarai, married the two younger brothers of their father, Haran: Nahor and Abraham. The uncles, married their nieces. In the Book of Leviticus, marriages between aunt and nephew would be later outlawed, though it did not forbid marriage between an uncle and niece, nor deem it incestuous – Leviticus 18:14; 20:19. 

The name Iscah in Hebrew means, one who looks forth. This is interesting, as Sarah was barren, and so ‘one who looks forth’ for a baby, is an apt name.

The Book of Jasher 12:44 & 9:1-6

‘And at that time Nahor and Abram took unto themselves wives, the daughters of their brother Haran; the wife of Nahor was Milca and the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai. And Sarai, wife of Abram, was barren; she had no offspring in those days. And Haran, the son of Terah, Abram’s oldest brother, took a wife in those days. Haran was thirty-nine years old when he took her; and the wife of Haran conceived and bare a son, and he called his name Lot [who was born in 1970 BCE, seven years after Abraham]. And she conceived again and bare a daughter, and she called her name Milca; and she again conceived and bare a daughter, and she called her name Sarai. 

Haran was forty-two years old when he begat Sarai [in 1967 BCE], which was in the tenth year of the life of Abram; and in those days Abram and his mother and nurse went out from the cave, as the king and his subjects had forgotten the affair of Abram… and Abram knew Yahweh from three years old, and he went in the ways of Yahweh until the day of his death…’

It is interesting to note that Abraham’s nephew was of a similar age. An easy interpretation of their relationship – their closeness as evidenced with Abraham following Lot when he had been captured, securing his life in a dare devil night time raid – can incorrectly be perceived that they (as Uncle and Nephew) were like a father and son. Rather, their ages show that they must have had a relationship akin to brothers. This presumably would have been strengthened with the loss of Lot’s father – when he was forty-three – and Abraham’s eldest brother, Haran.

Also, if accurate, Abraham’s tender age highlights that the Eternal was working with Abraham from very young, showing that Abraham was precocious, open minded and humble. Quite often, though not always, it is a reoccurring theme that the Creator works with His true servants either very rarely from before birth; sometimes rarely, from birth; or less rarely (yet still infrequently), from a young child. 

Genesis 22:20-24

English Standard Version

‘Now after these things it was told to Abraham, “Behold, Milcah also has borne children to your brother Nahor: 

Uz [family name of Aram, Joktan and Esau] his firstborn, Buz his brother, Kemuel the father of Aram [family name of Shem’s son Aram], Chesed [family name], Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph [7th son]’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son – ‘and Bethuel.” (Bethuel fathered Rebekah.)’ – Genesis 24:24. ‘These eight Milcah bore to Nahor, Abraham’s brother. 

Moreover, his concubine, whose name was Reumah, bore Tebah, Gaham, Tahash, and Maacah.’

Nahor and Milcah had eight sons – Uz the firstborn (or Huz) in some translations and the interlinear version. Buz means ‘to despise’ or ‘hold as insignificant’ and ‘my contempt.’ Huz is similar with Uz and means ‘wood, counsel’ and ‘fastened.’ We briefly covered Uz, the son of Aram and their fastened location in Italy – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

The peoples of (northern and central) Italy, are the principal descendants of Nahor – by his wife and concubine. Early in their northern Mesopotamian history, they settled in the same region as sons of Aram – specifically Uz – and that relationship is evident in modern Italy. To reinforce this, Kemuel, the third son is the only one stated with a son, or grandson of Nahor and his name is… Aram.

Nahor had a concubine called Reumah and she bare four sons to Nahor and so we have a third gene pool to add to Milcah’s sons and the descendants of Uz from Aram. DNA and Haplogroup evidence point to Reumah’s ancestry being possibly from Arphaxad’s great grandson Joktan – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

Whereas Milcah, as her husband Nahor, were descended from Joktan’s brother Peleg – Genesis 10:25. What is significant, is that the southern Italians and Sicilians are more closely related to Greeks than they are to other Italians. The Greeks themselves are descended from Joktan’s sixth son, Uzal – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. It is more than a passing coincidence that variations of Uz, H-uz, B-uz and Aram from Nahor; Uz from Aram; and Uz-al from Joktan, should all be found either in the modern Italian nation or nearby neighbours, Greece. 

Therefore the three sections of Italy: North, Central and Southern are represented by Milcah, Aram and Reumah. That said, the descendants of Nahor and Uz from Aram have in part blended, so that northern and central Italy are a mix of the two. Still, PCA graphs reveal that northern Italians are genetically closer to the related peoples from Aram in Spain and Portugal. And while the central Italians sit between the northern and southern Italians; it is the Italians in the north of Italy with which they share more in common.

Apart from Aram, many additional grandson’s of Nahor are listed in the Book of Jasher 22:15-39:

15 ‘And Abraham’s brother Nahor and his father and all belonging to them dwelt in Haran, for they did not come with Abraham to the land of Canaan. 16 And children were born to Nahor which Milca the daughter of Haran, and sister to Sarah, Abraham’s wife, bare to him. 

17 And these are the names of those that were born to him, Uz, Buz, Kemuel, Kesed, Chazo, Pildash, Tidlaf, and Bethuel, being eight sons, these are the children of Milca which she bare to Nahor, Abraham’s brother… 19 And the children that were born to Nahor were twelve sons besides his daughters, and they also had children born to them in Haran.

20 And the children of Uz the first born of Nahor were Abi, Cheref, Gadin, Melus, and Deborah their sister.

21 And the sons of Buz were Berachel, Naamath, Sheva, and Madonu.

22 And the sons of Kemuel were Aram and Rechob.

23 And the sons of Kesed were Anamlech, Meshai, Benon and Yifi;

and the sons of Chazo were Pildash, Mechi and Opher.

24 And the sons of Pildash were Arud, Chamum, Mered and Moloch‘ – refer article: Belphegor.

Note that Nahor’s fifth son Chazo named his firstborn son the same name as his younger and sixth brother, Pildash.

25 ‘And the sons of Tidlaf [Jidlaph] were Mushan, Cushan and Mutzi.

26 And the children of Bethuel were Sechar, Laban and their sister Rebecca.

27 These are the families of the children of Nahor, that were born to them in Haran; and Aram the son of Kemuel and Rechob his brother went away from Haran, and they found a valley in the land by the river Euphrates. 28 And they built a city there, and they called the name of the city after the name of Pethor the son of Aram, that is Aram Naherayim [near Padan-Aram] unto this day.

29 And the children of Kesed also went to dwell where they could find a place, and they went and they found a valley opposite to the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 30 And they there built themselves a city, and they called the name at the city Kesed after the name of their father, that is the land Kasdim* unto this day, and the Kasdim [Chaldeans] dwelt in that land and they were fruitful and multiplied** exceedingly.’

A simplified map of the three main waves of people who entered the Italian Peninsula after the departure of the Romans. They constituted the Heruli, Ostrogoths or eastern Goths and the Lombards; who broadly represent descendants of Joktan, Aram and the branches of Nahor’s family respectively. Anciently, Nahor’s tribes were known as the Chaldees who overthrew Babylon and made it their capital; just as in Italy today and the appropriating of Rome – modern Babylon – as the capital of the Italian nation.

As an aside, the Suevi were the descendants of Shem’s son Aram and the ancestors of the Portuguese. The Visigoths are also descendants from Aram and are the ancestors of the Spaniards. The Spanish – like the Italians – are a complex amalgamation of peoples. That said, the majority of Spanish who departed for the Americas are either descended from a different branch of Aram’s four sons (Vandals and Alans), or are of Moorish and Berber stock – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Jasher: 31 ‘And Terah, father of Nahor and Abraham, went and took another wife in his old age, and her name was Pelilah, and she conceived and bare him a son [in 1867 BCE] and he called his name Zoba. 32 And Terah lived twenty-five years after he begat Zoba. 33 And Terah died in that year, that is in the thirty-fifth year [1842 BCE] of the birth of Isaac [in 1877 BCE the] son of Abraham… 35 And Zoba the son of Terah lived thirty years [1837 BCE] and he begat Aram, Achlis and Merik. 36 And Aram son of Zoba son of Terah, had three wives and he begat twelve sons and three daughters; and the Lord gave to Aram the son of Zoba, riches and possessions, and abundance of cattle, and flocks and herds, and the man increased** greatly.’

And so today, the descendants of Terah and Nahor have been richly blessed as figures show for the economy, standard of living and quality of life of the Italian nation.

Jasher: 37 ‘And Aram the son of Zoba and his [brothers] and all his household journeyed from Haran, and they went to dwell where they should find a place, for their property was too great to remain in Haran; for they could not stop in Haran together with their brethren the children of Nahor. 38 And Aram the son of Zoba went with his brethren [Achlis and Merik], and they found a valley at a distance toward the eastern country and they dwelt there. 39 And they also built a city there, and they called the name thereof Aram, after the name of their eldest brother; that is Aram Zoba to this day.’

Aram, Achlis and Merik – sons of Zoba, son of Terah – went to dwell where the sons of Kesed the son of Nahor – Anamlech, Meshai, Benon and Yifi – had gone to dwell. Also, where Aram and Rechob – sons of Kemuel, son of Nahor – had travelled. All three groups dwelt south of Haran and in a vicinity west of Shinar. This region was adjacent to Uz, son of Aram the son of Shem, and is the Padan-Aram where Bethuel’s family also migrated. In essence, this means that the ‘Aramaean’ elements from Nahor and Terah merged with Uz from Aram and form the dual regions of northern and central Italy today. 

Kemuel means, ‘congregation of God, God’s rising’ and ‘God’s grain.’ The ancient peoples of Nahor were instrumental in perpetuating the Babylonian Mystery religion inherited from Nimrod and today it is  continued by the Universal Roman Catholic Church in the smallest state in the world, the Vatican City – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod^.

An aerial view of St Peter’s Basilica and of St Peter’s Square in the Vatican City, Rome.

Nahor’s people also made the city of Babylon, their own and today that great capital is represented by the city of Rome.

Just as the ancient capital of Assyria, Nineveh is replicated today in Moscow – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia^.

The other parallel, is that as the sons of Joktan lived in ancient Sumer, the South eastern portion of the Land of Shinar, the descendants of Peleg – mainly comprised from Nahor’s children – lived adjacently to the Northwest in Akkad. Today, the sons of Joktan live to the East, adjacent to the Italian Peninsula – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

Chesed means, as if it were a: ‘field, mountain, breast, protecting spirit.’ The Alfred Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads for Chesed: Increase. Though for the word Chaldean: ‘as it were demons.’ The Hebrew word for Chaldeans is Kashedim* the plural of Chesed.

Researchers state that Nahor named his son after the people he came from. That is, an earlier Kesed as mentioned in the Book of Jubilees. Similarly, others claim the word Chaldean (or Chaldee) does not derive from Chesed; because Chesed is stated in chapter twenty-two of Genesis, whereas the word Chaldean is used in Genesis chapter eleven to describe Abraham’s origination in ‘Ur of the Chaldeans.’ The second view is explained by either post-dated editing, or by the fact it is substantiating the first view raised. 

The line from Arphaxad to Peleg and then on to Nahor is just one line of descent. It is recorded in the Bible, that other peoples came from that line. It goes without saying that other sons and daughters were born to all the different families, even from Terah as discussed. Family trees grow large very quickly and could not all be recorded in scripture. In the book of Jubilees we read of Peleg’s son Reu. Reu married Ora, the daughter of Ur, who was the son of the earlier Kesed. Both Ur and Kesed were family names. The name Ur first being used in southern Mesopotamia for a city and then used again in Haran. The A-kkad-ians and Kashed-im were Arphaxad’s children and so Nahor using the name Kesed was not inexplicable, nor a deliberate attempt to name his son after the Kashedim. It would be like being an English person from England and having either word as your last name as people do today, for instance: John England.

Another point is that the word or prefix Kush, Kash and Kish which was common in the Babylonian region, is reflective of the original Babylonians – and Assyrians – than that of Cush, descended from Ham as discussed previously^. Speaking of family names, the prime repeating name in Arphaxad’s family has the prefix Reu. Reu the son of Peleg, just mentioned; Reu-mah the concubine of Nahor and later we will see there is a Reu-el, in the family of Esau – also Jethro the father-in-law of Moses, the priest of Midian who’s name was Reu-el – and a Reu-ben, the first born son in the family of Jacob.

Nahor’s fifth son’s name Hazo means, ‘seer, vision’ or ‘to see or have a vision.’ Pildash means, ‘steely, flashing steel, fiery iron.’ Jidlaph means, ‘he will weep, he weeps, he drips.’ Bethuel, the father of Rebekah means, ‘man of God, house of God’ and ‘virgin of God.’ There is a religious or pious theme reflected in the definitions for these names. Today, the Italian people are not just staunchly Catholic, it is the heart, soul and headquarters of the Catholic faith. 

The mother of these eight sons, Milcah’s name means, ‘queen’ or ‘counsel.’ Milcah was an ancestor of the patriarch Jacob. Milcah’s son Bethuel moved to Padan-Aram and fathered Rebekah – Genesis 24:15. 

Milcah’s granddaughter Rebekah, then married Milcah’s nephew Isaac (Genesis 24:67) and gave birth to Jacob (Genesis 25:21), who became Israel. Milcah and her sister Sarah are contrasted in that she conceived a bounty of sons and Sarah was barren. Eventually though, Sarah shared being an ancestor in that she bore Isaac, Jacob’s father – Genesis 21:1-4. 

The mother of Nahor’s remaining four sons was Reumah and her name means, ‘exalted’ or ‘wild ox.’ Reumah’s sons names are Tebah, which means, ‘confidence, slaughter’ or ‘butcher’; Gaham, which means, ‘flame, burning’; Tahash, meaning, ‘to hurry’ or ‘hasten’; and Maacah meaning, ‘oppression, to press’ or ‘squeeze.’ It could be ventured that these names reflect the Latin temperament.

Nahor moved from Ur of the Chaldees with his father Terah and younger brother Abraham. While they settled in Haran, Nahor dwelt adjacent to Aramean territory and the land of Aram’s son Uz, which became known as Aram Nahar-aim, founding the city of Nahor.

Genesis 24:10

Young’s Literal Translation

‘And the servant taketh ten camels of the camels of his lord and goeth, also of all the goods of his lord in his hand, and he riseth, and goeth unto Aram-Naharaim, unto the city of Nahor

The word Nahar-aim means ‘two rivers,’ that is, the Euphrates and the Tigris. From Hebrew, it has been translated into Greek as the midst of [two] rivers.

Genesis 25:20

English Standard Version

‘… and Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife.’

The word paddan means ‘area’ in Aramaean, thus the name Paddan-Aram could be translated as the region, area or even field of the Aramaeans. The descendants of Nahor had become interchangeably known as Aramaeans (or Syrians). Bethuel had moved away from but still adjacent to the region of Aram-Naharaim.

Genesis 27:43

English Standard Version

‘Now therefore, my son, obey my voice. Arise, flee to Laban my brother in Haran.’

Rebekah is speaking to Jacob after he had deceived his own father regarding the birthright blessing. Laban was her brother, the son of Bethuel, son of Nahor and was living in Haran. Haran was synonymous with the territory of Padan-Aram, near Aram-Naharaim.

Genesis 29:4-5

English Standard Version

4 ‘Jacob said to them, “My brothers [or cousins], where do you come from?” They said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?” They said, “We know him.”

Laban is called the son of Nahor, though the Hebrew word for son can mean a descendant, as in a grandson. Abraham, Lot the son of Haran and Nahor each dwelt near each other either in Haran which included the northern Ur, Aram-Naharaim or Padan-Aram.

Nahor’s descendants in the Bible are collectively called Chaldeans from the word Chaldees, derived from Kashedim, linked to the Hebrew names Kesed and Chesed. They are not called Aramaeans (or Syrians) from an historical or prophetic viewpoint after the book of Genesis. 

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Abraham lived among the Chaldeans. One whole book of the Bible – Habakkuk – is entirely devoted to a prophecy concerning the Chaldeans in these latter days! But where are the Chaldeans today? Certainly they are not at ancient Babylon. No one lives there! Notice first where the Chaldeans were. Abraham came from “Ur of the Chaldees”. Ancient Ur was in Mesopotamia. Ur is a shortened name for Urfa. There were once two cities by that name. 

Stephen, in his inspired sermon, makes plain that it was the northern Ur in Mesopotamia from which Abram came (Acts 7:2-3). That is where the Chaldeans first dwelt – over 400 miles northwest of ancient Babylon. Who are these Chaldeans so frequently mentioned in Bible prophecy? Here is the plain, simple explanation recognized by most Hebrew scholars. The word “Chaldean” comes from the Greek. The original Hebrew word is Chasdim, meaning “the people of Chesed”. Notice that Chesed was a common name in the family of Abraham (Genesis 22:22).

Next, consider the original Hebrew word translated in our Bibles as “Arphaxad”. Most biblical encyclopaedias will clearly show that the Hebrew form is Arfachesed MEANING ARFA OR URFA THE CHALDEAN! The Chaldeans come from Arphaxad. They are his children. Abraham was a branch of this stock! The city of Ur was named after Arfa or Urfa, the Chaldean. Chaldean probably means “capturer”, just as Jacob means “supplanter”. The reason that some Chaldeans were later associated with Babylon in Daniel’s time is that a small part of them was later settled by the Assyrians near Babylon. The original inspired Hebrew of Isaiah 23:13 explains this: “Behold, the land of the Chaldeans – this is the people that was not, when Asshur founded it for shipmen”. How clear.

The Chaldeans were divided, not an organized nation. A part of them was transplanted to Babylon. At Babylon they became the ruling class. But the remainder settled farther north around Lake Van, about halfway between the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean. Here they were called [Chaldeans]… Sometimes they were referred to as HURRI or Hurrians, after Haran (Genesis 11:29; 22:20-24). Sometimes they bore the name GUTI, probably meaning “people of God.”

The Amorites and Kassites; the Guti and Gutium; the Goths and Visigoths; were all descended from Aram as studied in Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The Ostrogoths or eastern Goths who swept into the Italian Peninsula and partially into the Balkans were related and possibly composed of a mix of the descendants of Nahor, Aram and Zoba. Dr Hoeh raises the point for two locations for the ancient Chaldeans. The fragmented nature of their structure mirrors modern day Italy, which did not form a single unified nation until between 1861 to 1871. The Chaldeans from Nahor are not the same as the Guti from Gether a son of Aram; nor with the Hurrians who descend from Nahor’s elder brother Haran. Similarly, the ancient Mitanni kingdom may have comprised a mixture of Nahor and Uz from Aram. We will revisit this when we study Haran in the following chapter.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘At a later date the tribe of Kassi obtained a permanent footing in Babylonia and established a dynasty there which lasted for several centuries [circa 1200-800 BCE]. Kassites and Babylonians intermingled together, and the long continuance of Kassite rule has been thought to explain the name of Kasdim given to the inhabitants of Babylonia in the Old Testament. 

Chesed, of which Kasdim is the Hebrew plural, has been explained as Kas-da the country of the Kassitesit is quite as easy to derive Kasdim from the Assyrian verb Kasddu to conquer so that the Kasidi or Kasdim would be the Kassite conquerors of the Chaldaean plain. In the Septuagint the Hebrew word Kasdim is translated… Chaldaeans… Chaldaean and Babylonian had become synonymous terms, and Babylonia had come to be known as Chaldaea…’

This writer is not convinced the Kassites were one and the same with the Chaldeans; rather, they are considered a division of Aram. The Kassites migrated from the east, from a similar location as the Guti. The Kassites, in direction of travel and time-frame, do not sit squarely enough to identify as the Chaldeans. The Kassites rose to prominence in the south of Mesopotamia at the same time as the Mitanni were rising in the North. The Mitanni are linked with the descendants of Nahor and or Uz from Aram – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

The major accomplishment of the Kassites was to unify Mesopotamian culture, centred around Babylon, instead of continuing the separate independence of the surrounding city-states. This paved the way for the Chaldeans to rule a strong capital in Babylon and a unified region of neighbouring cities.

Dynasty X from 626 to 539 BCE was the most famous ruling dynasty of the Chaldeans and included Nebuchadnezzar II, who features prominently in the Old Testament.

Nebuchadnezzar II

The first king Nabopolassar – who reigned from 626 to 605 BCE – was a native of Babylon, who drove out the Assyrians and re-established an independent Babylonian kingdom. His son, Nebuchadnezzar ruled from 605 to 562 BCE and it was he, who took the Kingdom of Judah into captivity. He was succeeded by his son, Amel-Marduk (565-560 BCE). His reign was short-lived as the throne was usurped by Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law Neriglissar from 560 to 556 BCE. Then his son Labashi-Marduk, briefly reigned in 556 BCE, who in turn had the throne usurped by another possible son (Daniel 5:2, 11, 13, 18) of Nebuchadnezzar, Nabonidus (556-539 BCE). 

Nabonidus ruled until the fall of Babylon, at the hands of Cyrus the Great and the Medo-Persian empire – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. This tumultuous sequence of rapidly toppled regimes is reminiscent of modern day Italian government and its frequent changes of ruling political parties and prime minsters. In 2019, Italy had endured sixty-nine governments since the ending of World War II, with an average of nearly one every year, each lasting on average for merely thirteen months. It ‘is a revolving door like no other in Europe.’

The Chaldeans are mentioned in a number of scriptures in the Bible.

Isaiah 23:13

New English Translation

‘Look at the land of the Chaldeans, these people who have lost their identity! The Assyrians have made it a home for wild animals. They erected their siege towers, demolished its fortresses, and turned it into a heap of ruins.’

The Chaldeans had originally transformed Babylon and Babylonia into a wealthy, prosperous region. Assyrian rule left it impoverished and powerless.

Habakkuk 1:6

English Standard Version

‘For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation [Latin temperament], who march through the breadth of the earth to seize dwellings not their own.’

Job 1:17

Amplified Bible

‘While he was still speaking, another [messenger] also came and said, “The Chaldeans formed three bands and made a raid on the camels and have taken them away and have killed the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”

Ezra 5:11-13

English Standard Version

‘And this was their reply to us: ‘We are the servants [tribes of Judah and Benjamin] of the God of heaven and earth, and we are rebuilding the house that was built many years ago, which a great king of Israel [Solomon] built and finished. But because our fathers had angered the God of heaven, he gave them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, the Chaldean, who destroyed this house and carried away the people to Babylonia. However, in the first year of Cyrus… Cyrus the king made a decree that this house of God should be rebuilt.’

Ezekiel 23:14-17, 23

English Standard Version

‘… She [Kingdom of Judah] saw men portrayed on the wall, the images of the Chaldeans portrayed in vermilion, wearing belts on their waists, with flowing turbans on their heads, all of them having the appearance of officers, a likeness of Babylonians whose native land was Chaldea. When she saw them, she lusted after them and sent messengers to them in Chaldea. And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoring lust. And after she was defiled by them, she turned from them in disgust… the Babylonians and all the Chaldeans, Pekod [visitation] and Shoa [rich] and Koa [cutting off]…’ 

The vermillion is reminiscent of the crimson (purple and red) worn by Cardinals in the Vatican – Revelation 17:4.

The next passage laments the fall of Babylon to the Medes. The Chaldeans were zealous, religious and deeply steeped in astrology, the occult and the mystery religion. Plus, the Chaldeans were renowned for their cultural influence and artistic talent. Just as modern Italy led the renaissance and is a global influencer in cuisine, fashion, art and film. This might explain the focus on the feminine aspect describing their empire in the Book of Isaiah (Ezekiel 16:1-58). 

Isaiah chapter forty-seven, is similar to the verses we read regarding the Prince and the ‘King’ of Tyre in Ezekiel twenty-eight – refer article: Asherah. The description of the fall of ancient Babylon, runs in tandem with the descriptions in the Book of Revelation regarding the future Babylon. 

Also, the “Queen forevermore, I am” and “there is no one besides me”, is a hidden reference to none other than the original Queen of Heaven, Asherah. Her wisdom – pride and knowledge – from which the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil derives, led her astray. This path was chosen in her desire to remain in the blended spirit and physical realm, where she was a god, pseudo-creator and is mystically known as the architect – Article: Asherah. This is what the Serpent Samael offered by trickery to Eve – a descent wholly from spirit to the physical with no way (seemingly) back – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Isaiah 47:1-15

Amplified Bible

1 ‘Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; Sit on the ground [in abject humiliation]; there is no throne for you, O daughter of the Chaldeans, For you will no longer be called tender and delicate. 2 “Take millstones [as a female slave does] and grind meal; Remove your veil, strip off the skirt, Uncover the leg, cross the rivers [at the command of your captors]. 3 “Your nakedness will be uncovered, Your shame will also be exposed; I will take vengeance and will spare no man.” 4 Our Redeemer [will do all this], the Lord of hosts is His name, The Holy One of Israel. 5 “Sit in silence, and go into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans; For you will no longer be called The queen of kingdoms.” 

6 “I was angry with My people, I profaned [Judah] My inheritance And gave them into your hand [Babylon]. You showed them no mercy; You made your yoke very heavy on the aged. 7 “And you said, ‘I shall be a queen [H1404 – gbereth: ‘lady, mistress’ from root H1376 – gbiyr: lord, ruler] forevermore [H5769 – olam: perpetual, continuous existence, unending].’

You did not consider these things, Nor did you [seriously] remember the [ultimate] outcome of such conduct. 8 “Now, then, hear this, you who live a luxuriant life, You who dwell safely and securely, Who say in your heart (mind), ‘I am [the queen], and there is no one besides me. I shall not sit as a widow, Nor know the loss of children.’ 9 “But these two things shall come to you abruptly, in one day: Loss of children and widowhood. They will come on you in full measure In spite of your many [claims of power through your] sorceries, In spite of the great power of your enchantments. 

10 “For you [Babylon] have trusted and felt confident in your wickedness; you have said, ‘No one sees me.’ [like Samael, the ‘blinded of God’] Your wisdom [Matthew 10:16 ESV “… so be wise as serpents…] and your knowledge [Genesis 3:6 Amplified Bible “And when the woman saw that the tree was… to be desired in order to make one wise and insightful (knowledgable)…” ] have led you astray, And you have said in your heart (mind), ‘I am, and there is no one besides me [H657 ‘ephec & H656 ‘aphec, meaning: ‘to cease, come to an end, be clean gone, fail, finality, end, at an end].’

Exodus 3:14 ESV “God [elohiym, a God, not the God] said to Moses, “I am [H1961 hayah & H1933 hava, meaning: ‘to fall, to become, to happen, to come about, to come to pass. to appear, to arise, to come into being, to be instituted, to be established, to be brought about, to be, to exist’] who I am. (or I will be what I will be)” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’ Either an evasive, cryptic and somewhat derisive reply or just honest, blunt and to the point?

The Name of God as revealed in Exodus 3:14, An explanation of its meaning, K J Cronin – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Moses was quite understandably anticipating what the Israelites would say to him when he told them that their God had sent him to them. The first thing he anticipated them asking for was the name of their God, YHWH, which if Moses had not known would have proved that he was not sent by Him. 

It would, therefore, have been a perfectly reasonable and practical question for the Israelites to ask. As for Moses’ question of Exodus 3:13, “What should I say to them?”, we need only keep in mind one certainty to understand what Moses was asking for in these words. That certainty is that Moses already knew of the existence of a Divine name in Israelite tradition when he asked this question of God. We know this for certain because Moses refers to a Divine name in Israelite tradition immediately before he asks the question of God. It is very unlikely that he could have been aware of the existence of a Divine name without being aware of what it was and so I believe that we can say with certainty that Moses knew the name YHWH before he asked his question of Exodus 3:13.

Moreover, we are informed that as a young man Moses regarded the Hebrews in his midst as his kinsfolk (Exodus 2:11). It is very unlikely that he would not have known the most important feature of his kinsfolk’s religion – the proper name of their God – and so our certainty is confirmed that Moses knew the name YHWH before asking the question of Exodus 3:13. Furthermore, his father-in-law in Midian was a priest (Exodus 2:16) and as such would surely have known the names of the most prominent regional deities amongst whom YHWH would have been counted, which also confirms our certainty that Moses would have known the name YHWH before he asked the question of Exodus 3:13. Bearing in mind these three points the question of Exodus 3:13 can perhaps best be understood as Moses saying to God “I know that You have a proper name, and I even know what that name is, but I still want direction from You as to how I should respond to the Israelites if they ask me for Your name.”

In response to his question Moses received what was no doubt more than he had expected when he asked the question of God, just as the Israelites received more than they could have expected when they asked Moses for the name of their God. Neither Moses nor the Israelites could have expected to receive two names in response to their respective questions but that is what they did receive.

For his part Moses received two answers to his question of Exodus 3:13, or two parts of the one answer, one of them in Exodus 3:14 and one in Exodus 3:15. He was told that when the Israelites ask him for the name of the God who sent him to them, he was first to say that ehyeh had sent him to them (3:14b) and he was then to say that YHWH had sent him to them (3:15). Both words are clearly intended to be understood as answers to the same question because the sentence structure in the two verses is identical, they have a shared vocabulary and there is only one question being answered.

Irrespective of the widespread opinion that these verses are attributable to the Elhoistic source, the entire passage is written with great care and deliberation and is clearly intended to be read and understood precisely as we find it. 

Considered in this way, and as the bold-type text makes clear, the most important difference between the two answers Moses receives to his question is that in the position where Exodus 3:14b has the word ehyeh, Exodus 3:15 has the name YHWH. Both are identified as sending Moses to the Israelites and because there is only one God doing the sending both must be names of the God of Israel. Moreover the word ehyeh is a first person singular of the verb, which means that as a name it can only be one by which God knows Himself; a Personal name. Therefore Ehyeh must be the Personal name of God and YHWH His proper name. It will be recalled that this conclusion is supported by the interpretations of Recanati, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, Sarna and Buber among others.’

Isaiah: 11 “Therefore disaster will come on you; You will not know how to make it disappear [with your magic]. And disaster will fall on you For which you cannot atone [with all your offerings to your gods]; And destruction about which you do not know Will come on you suddenly. 12 “Persist, then, [Babylon] in your enchantments and your many sorceries with which you have labored from your youth; Perhaps you will be able to profit [from them], Perhaps you may prevail and cause trembling. 

13  “You are wearied by your many counsels. Just let the astrologers, The stargazers, Those who predict by the new moons [each month] Stand up and save you from the things that will come upon you [Babylon]. 14 “In fact, they are like stubble; Fire burns them. They cannot save themselves from the power of the flame [much less save the nation], There is no blazing coal for warming Nor fire before which to sit! 15 “This is how they have become to you, those [astrologers and sorcerers] with whom you have labored, Those who have done business with you from your youth; Each has wandered in his own way. There is no one to save you.’

This passage in Isaiah chapter forty-seven is dual in intention and loaded with meaning. We have read previously regarding Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the statue of gold, silver, brass, iron and clay in preceding chapters. The first five chapters of the Book of Daniel are dedicated to the Chaldean empire; with the first four relating to the ruler King Nebuchadnezzar himself. The king’s astrologers were not able to recount the dream, let alone explain it. Daniel had it revealed to him by the Creator through Gabriel (Daniel 9:21) and explains:

Daniel 2:1-2, 31-38 

English Standard Version

‘In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar had dreams; his spirit was troubled, and his sleep left him. 2 Then the king commanded that the magicians, the enchanters, the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans be summoned to tell the king his dreams. 31 You saw, O king, and behold, a great image. This image, mighty and of exceeding brightness, stood before you, and its appearance was frightening. 32 The head of this image was of fine gold… 

37 You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, 38 and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all – you are the head of gold.’ 

Recall, the Medo-Persian Empire (Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) was the chest and arms comprising silver and one of the legs of iron was the Byzantine Empire, the eastern leg of the Roman Empire – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

The feet and toes of iron and clay are a spirit-human mix. Daniel 2:43 says: ‘As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage – by the seed of men – but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay.

The Chaldean empire was the most cultured, refined and resplendent of the six kingdoms described or predicted. It remained shorter – less widespread – than the ones that followed and was not as militarily dominant as evidenced by the softer, though more valuable element of gold – Article: The Ark of God.

Another description of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire is in the Book of Daniel in chapter seven. We have previously covered the Medo-Persian empire, the second kingdom being described as a bear and also in chapter eight as a ram; the fourth kingdom, of which the Byzantium empire constitutes half of, being described in chapter seven as a ‘terrible beast with ten horns.’

Daniel 7:1-4, 17

English Standard Version

‘In the first year of Belshazzar [556 BCE, son of Nabonidus] king of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream and visions of his head as he lay in his bed. Then he wrote down the dream and told the sum of the matter. Daniel declared, “I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea. And four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another. The first was like a lion and had eagles wings [like the Cherubim].

Then as I looked its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man, and the mind of a man was given to it…” ‘These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth.’

The lion – or a bull with a human head, known as a Lamassu – with eagles wings is a prevalent animal hybrid symbol in Chaldean history.

It is also seen sometimes in Asshur’s monuments as well in Lud’s – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. Today, it is frequently seen in none other than Italy.

The symbol of Saint Mark of Venice is a prime example below.

In Daniel chapter four we read of Nebuchadnezzar’s greatness, his pride, his being humbled through madness and then his subsequent acknowledgment of the Creator for all that he had been given. The tree described, is a parallel analogy of the restraint of Asherah – refer article: Asherah.

Daniel: ‘… I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in you [Daniel] and that no mystery is too difficult for you, tell me the visions of my dream that I saw and their interpretation. 10 The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these… [Daniel] answered and said… The tree you saw, which grew and became strong, so that its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth, 21 whose leaves were beautiful and its fruit abundant, and in which was food for all, under which beasts of the field found shade, and in whose branches the birds of the heavens lived – 22 it is you, O king, who have grown and become strong. Your greatness has grown and reaches to heaven [the attention of the spirit realm], and your dominion to the ends of the earth. 

23 And because the king saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven and saying, ‘Chop down the tree and destroy it, but leave the stump of its roots in the earth, bound with a band of iron and bronze, in the tender grass of the field, and let him be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven periods of time pass over him…’

27 Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you: break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your prosperity.” 29 At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, 30 and the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?”

Pride before a fall.

31 ‘While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you… until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” 33 Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.’

34 ‘At the end of the days [seven years] I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever… 35 all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?” 36 At the same time my reason returned to me, and for the glory of my kingdom, my majesty and splendor returned to me. My counselors and my lords sought me, and I was established in my kingdom, and still more greatness was added to me [like Job].

37 Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, for all his works are right and his ways are just; and those who walk in pride he is able to humble.’

This was a remarkable experience, lesson and process of conversion for the arrogant and self-righteous Nebuchadnezzar who had been brought low, humbled and in an about turn admitted gratitude and became thankful to the supreme source of all his blessings.

Prior to looking at the golden age of the Chaldeans, we will look at their ancient ancestors and clarify an important scholarly debate. We have noted the sons of Canaan; as the original inhabitants of the land of Canaan – with the Nephilim and Elioud giants. In time, other peoples came to be known by the names of some of the sons of Canaan. We have seen this with the Amorites and how that name became more well known for the blond Aramaeans, than it did for the darker-skinned Amor-ites descended from Canaan. 

A case in point is Heth. We have studied the original Heth, living in Hamath and now equating to modern Nigeria – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. In time there were a light-skinned people called Hittites. Where it becomes complex, is that these Hittites inherited the name of Hatti, not from the original Heth of Canaan, but rather from the proto-Chaldeans, who were known as Chatti. To further complicate the issue, historians have associated Khatti and Kheta (or Khetae) a reference to the Kittim, to then conclude that the Hatti and Hittites were tawny-skinned Asiatics descended from the Kittim of Javan. Kittim – present day Indonesia – is not the true identity of the Hatti or the Hittites.

We will study the Hittites in detail, for their imprint and impact on the world has been monumental in successive re-incarnations throughout ancient and modern history. Regarding the Hatti and the Hittites, the New World Encyclopaedia states, emphasis and bold mine:

‘”Hittites” is the conventional English-language term for an ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language and established a kingdom centered in Hattusa (the modern village of Bogazkoy in north-central Turkey), through most of the second millennium B.C.E. The Hittite kingdom, or at least its core region, was apparently called Hatti in the reconstructed Hittite language. 

However, the Hittites should be distinguished from the Hattians,” an earlier people who inhabited the same region until the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., and spoke a non-IndoEuropean language conventionally called Hattic.

Hittites or more recently, Hethites is also the common English name of a Biblical people, who are also called Children of Heth. These people are mentioned several times in the Old Testament, from the time of the Patriarchs up to Ezra’s return from Babylonian captivity of Judah. The archaeologists who discovered the Anatolian Hittites in the nineteenth century initially believed the two peoples to be the same, but this identification remains disputed.

Around 2000 B.C.E., the region centered in Hattusa that would later become the core of the Hittite kingdom was inhabited by people with a distinct culture who spoke a non-Indo-European language. The name “Hattic” is used by Anatolianists to distinguish this language from the Indo-European Hittite language, that appeared on the scene at the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E. and became the administrative language of the Hittite kingdom over the next six or seven centuries. 

As noted above, “Hittite” is a modern convention for referring to this language. The native term was Nesili, i.e. “in the language of Nesa.” The early Hittites, whose prior whereabouts are unknown, borrowed heavily from the pre-existing Hattian culture, and also from that of the Assyrian traders – in particular, the cuneiform writing and the use of cylindrical seals. Since Hattic continued to be used in the Hittite kingdom for religious purposes [a trait of the Chaldeans], and there is substantial continuity between the two cultures, it is not known whether the Hattic speakers – the Hattians – were displaced by the speakers of Hittite [yes], were absorbed by them [no], or just adopted their language [no].’

To summarise the aforementioned quote: Two different, successive peoples dwelt in ancient Anatolia, with different languages, the Hatti and Hattic, a non-Indo-European language and then the Hittites, speaking Hittite an Indo-European language. The Hittites are definitely not the same as the sons of Heth, or Hethites from Canaan. Identifying them as one and the same is a false premise, which is correct to remain disputed amongst scholars. We will learn definitively once we study the Hittites, that the Hatti – the future Chaldeans – did not adopt the Hittite language nor did they become absorbed into the Hittite civilisation. Rather, the Hatti were displaced by the encroaching Hittites.

Amazing Bible Time Line – emphasis mine:

‘It is a matter of considerable scholarly debate whether the biblical “Hittites” signified any or all of:

1) the original Hattites of Hatti; [no, they do not]

2) their Indo-European conquerors (Nesili), who retained the name ‘Hatti” for Central Anatolia, and are today referred to as the “Hittites” (the subject of this article); [yes, they are the same] or

3) a Canaanite group who may or may not have been related to either or both of the Anatolian groups, and who also may or may not be identical with the later Neo-Hittite, Luwian polities [redundant]. 

Other biblical scholars have argued that rather than being connected with Heth, son of Canaan, [Heth and the Hittites are different] instead the Anatolian land of Hatti was mentioned in Old Testament literature and apocrypha as “Kittim” (Chittim), a people said to be named for a son of Javan [incorrect].’

Sarah wife of Abraham. Fairy tale or Real History? Gerard Gertoux – emphasis mine:

‘The Hittites who lived in Syria, and sometimes in Canaan, wanted to define themselves by their genealogical link “people from the land of Heth” as does the Bible (Genesis 26:34; 36:2), the original land being likely the region around Hat(ti)-tusa (Hattusa). According to the Bible, when Joshua entered the Promised Land (in 1493 BCE) [1407 BC] he expelled a number of nations, including the Hittites. These Hittites were located north of Syria. The few scattered references that we have to Hantili’s reign (1500-1495) indicate that he intended on maintaining Hittite influence on Syria. The Hittites, south of Euphrates, mentioned in the time of Joshua and Hantili I, are therefore the same

The Hittites met by Abraham were not quite the same as those of Joshua 37 since they are identified as sons of Heth, not Hittites. In the biblical narrative (Genesis 23:2-10), Ephron (“of a calf”), son of Zohar (“tawny”), was not a Hittite in the usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite, implying that they had been settled in this region for a long time.’

Yes… Ephron was an original son of Heth, a son of Canaan, an African with dark skin – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

‘Consequently the history of Hittites is complex, its official beginning is the period called Early Empire (c. 1530 BCE) but previously there was a period called Hattian period, with 3 ancestors kingdoms, those of Hattusa, Kanesh and Carchemish. Those ancient Hittites, called Hattians by scholars or sons of Heth, son of Canaan in Genesis 10:15, were [incorrectly called] the ancestors of the Hittites.’

The sons of Heth – Black people – were not the ancestors of the Hittites; nor were the Hattians. The Hittites are related to the Hattians, but the Hattians are not the ancestors of the Hittites. Heth, Hatti and the Hittites are three separate, distinct peoples. Egyptian depictions of the Battle of Kadesh, show long-nosed Hattian soldiers, while the Hittite leaders look different; highlighting two different peoples.

Ancient history can be hazy for all cultures and empires with information largely based on king lists and inscriptions on tablets, steles and so forth. The Akkadian kingdom in central Mesopotamia, the northern half of the land of Shinar with Sumer, the older civilisation in the south, fascinates; yet their rise and fall are cloaked in shadows. After the Tower of Babel, all peoples dispersed eventually. The sons of Shem stayed closer to the main theatre of events, for longer. The Akkadians were the main body – or rather became the most influential – from Peleg’s branch of Arphaxad’s family tree and later Sumer were the branch from Joktan (refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans). 

The Amurru or Amorites from the Northwest, circa 1994 BCE and the Gutians – both Aramaean peoples – from the East, circa 2067 BCE had invaded the region, with Terah and his family living further south, in northern Sumer at this time. Accad is listed in Genesis chapter ten with Babel, Erech and Calneh as the beginning of Nimrod’s kingdom. The Akkadian Empire reached its political peak between 2224 and 2064 BCE, following the conquests of its founder the great Sargon during 2224 to 2169 BCE. Under Sargon and his successors, the Akkadian language was imposed on the neighbouring conquered states of Elam, the Guti and the Martu – or Amurru. Sargon had also defeated Sumer, Canaan and the Assyrians. Akkad is regarded as the first empire in recent ancient history. 

Sargon claimed he did not know his father and that his mother was a changeling. A changeling is believed to be a fairy which has been left in place of a human, who has been stolen by fairies. Other sources say his mother was La’ibum (or Itti-Bel), either a. a humble gardener; b. a hierodule – ‘a slave-prostitute living in a temple and dedicated to the service of a god’ – or c. a priestess to the Babylonian goddess Ishtar – Inanna in Sumer. Sargon was originally a Rabshakeh, or cupbearer to a king of Kish, Ur-Zababa – Kish as in the Khatti and not from Cush – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

After the fall of the Akkadian Empire, the people of Mesopotamia eventually split into two major Akkadian speaking nations; Assyria in the upper north, and a few centuries later, Babylonia to its south. The third Dynasty of Ur from 1988 to 1882 BCE was founded by Ur-Nammu (or Ur-Namma). Ur-Nammu became king after serving as governor to his father and Ur-Nammu – notice family name of Ur – was the first king to use the title, King of Sumer and Akkad. Ur-Nammu is credited with building the ziggurats at Ur and Uruk. The Code of Ur-Nammu, parallels the later Code of Hammurabi – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. The phrase: There will come a king of the four quarters of the earth, originated from Akkadian soothsaying.

During the same time period of the preeminence of Akkad – from 2224 to 2039 BCE the kingdom of the Hatti existed in western Asia Minor – as evidenced by Hittite and Assyrian records. The structure of archeological finds in sites like Hattush, reveal a highly developed culture, with distinct social classes. The Hattians were organised ‘in monarchial city-states. These states were ruled as theocratic kingdoms or principalities.’ A theocracy is ‘a system of government by priests claiming a divine commission’ and ‘a form of government in which a deity is recognised as the supreme civil ruler, the deity’s laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities.’ The Pope and Cardinals of the Vatican, bearing a more than coincidental parallel of similarity.

The pantheon of gods in Hatti, included the storm god Taru, represented by a bull and the sun goddess Furusemu, represented by a leopard, amongst other symbols. Certain reliefs show a female figure giving birth to a bull; as the the mother goddess Kattahha was mother to the storm god Taru – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and article: The Calendar Conspiracy. 

Ancient symbols are often replicated in modern insignias by businesses and sports teams. For instance, the famous Italian sports car marque, Lamborghini. 

The Hittites incorporated much of the Hattian pantheon into their own religious beliefs. James Mellaart proposed that the Hattian ‘religion revolved around a water-from-the-earth concept. Pictorial and written sources show that the deity of paramount importance to the inhabitants of Anatolia was the terrestrial water-god. The Hittite legends of Telipinu and the serpentine dragon Illuyanka found their origin in the Hattian civilization.’

World History Encyclopaedia, Hatti, Joshua J Mark, 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Hatti… migrated to the area sometime prior to 2400 BCE. The region was known as ‘Land of the Hatti’ from c. 2350 BCE until 630 BCE, attesting to the influence of the Hattian culture there.  Controlling a significant number of city states and small kingdoms, they had established lucrative trade with the region of Sumer (southern Mesopotamia) by the year 2700 BCE. The historian Erdal Yavuz writes: ‘Besides the timber and stone essential for construction, but deficient in Mesopotamia, Anatolia had rich mines which provided copper, silver, iron, and gold.’ Their trade with the cities of Mesopotamia enriched the region and helped to develop their kingdom. The historian Marc Van De Mieroop includes the Hatti among the nations… in the diplomatic and trade consortium he refers to as The Club of the Great Powers it, included Mitanni, Babylonia, Assyria, Hatti and Egypt…

In 2500 BCE the Hatti established their capital high on a hill at the city of Hattusa [seven Hills of Rome] and held lands securely in the surrounding areas, administering laws and regulating trade in a number of neighboring states. Between c. 2334-2279 BCE the great Sargon of Akkad invaded the region after sacking the city of Ur in 2330 BCE. He then turned his attention to Hattusa but failed to gain an advantage over the city’s defences which were especially strong in that it was located high on a well-defended and fortified plateau. 

Following Sargon’s campaigns in the region, his grandson Naram-Sin (2261-2224 BCE) continued his policies, fighting against the Hattic King Pamba late in the 23rd century BCE with as little success as his grandfather had. In spite of the constant harassment from the Akkadians, Hattic art flourished around 2200 BCE and, by 2000 BCE, their civilization was at its height with prosperous trading colonies established between Hattusa and their other city of Kanesh and, of course, continuing trade relations with Mesopotamia.

In 1700 BCE, the Kingdom of the Hatti was again invaded, this time by the Hittites, and the great city of Hattusa was stormed and destroyed by a king named Anitta from the neighboring Kingdom of Kussara. Excavations at the site show that the city was burned to the ground. King Anitta had such contempt for the city he had vanquished that he cursed the ground and further cursed whoever should re-build Hattusa and try to rule there. Even so, not long after, the city was re-built and re-populated by a later king of Kussara who called himself Hattusili [I]. 

Whoever the Hatti originally were, or where they came from, remains a mystery in the modern day owing to the lack of ancient records. The actual nature of the relationship between the Hatti and the Hittites remains a mystery in the modern day and waits on the discovery of ancient documentation to be resolved.’

Joshua Mark confirms the distinction between the Hatti and Hittites; admitting the lack of historical information regarding their relationship. When we study the Hittites, the relationship will become clearly apparent – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. The dates he provides are all earlier than Nahor’s life, for he was not born until circa 1993 BCE. These Hatti were ante-descendants of Nahor, descending from Peleg and perhaps Terah. It was from the Hatti in Anatolia that the Mitanni of upper Mesopotamia descended – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Later, the Chaldeans dwelt near the coastal area of the Persian Gulf and had not been entirely subjugated by the Assyrians. In 630 BCE Nabopolassar became king of the Chaldeans and by 626 BCE he had forced the Assyrians out of Uruk and crowned himself king of Babylonia. He endeavoured to destroy Assyria, while at the same time, to restore the dilapidated network of canals in the neighbouring cities of and including, Babylon. 

As the Babylonians had grown tired of Assyrian rule and weary of internal struggles, they were easily persuaded to submit to the new Chaldean king. The result was a rapid social and economic consolidation, assisted by the fact that after the fall of Assyria, no external enemy threatened Babylonia for decades. In the cities, the temples were an important part of the economy and the business class regained its strength in the trades, commerce, livestock breeding as well as in agriculture. The collapse of the Assyrian empire, had meant many trade arteries were rerouted through Babylonia with the city of Babylon emerging as a world centre.

Naboploassar had fought the Assyrian King Ashur-uballiṭ II and then turned his attention against Egypt; his successes alternating with defeats. In 605 BCE Nabopolassar died in Babylon. 

Nabopolassar had named his oldest son Nabu-kudurri-usur*, after the famous king of the second dynasty of Isin. He was trained carefully for his future kingship and shared responsibilities with his father. When Nabopolassar died, Nebuchadnezzar* II was with his army in Syria. He had just crushingly defeated the Egyptians near Carchemish in a bloody battle and was pursuing them toward the South. He returned immediately to Babylon on hearing the news of his father’s death. Nebuchadnezzar’s numerous building inscriptions enumerate his many wars, most of them interestingly, ending with prayers

Nebuchadnezzar continued to frequently campaign in Syria in the bid to drive out the Egyptians. In 604 BCE he took the Philistine city of Ashkelon and attacked Canaan at the end of 598 BCE. King Jehoiakim of Judah had rebelled and was relying on aid from Egypt. Even so, Jerusalem was won on March 16, 597 BCE. Jehoiakim died during the siege, and his son, King Johoiachin, together with at least 3,000 people from Judah, were led into exile in Babylonia. The captives were treated well, according to document records.

Judah rebelled again in 589 BCE and Jerusalem was placed under siege. The city finally fell between 587 and 586 BCE and was completely destroyed, along with the Temple. Many thousands from Judah and Benjamin were forced into Babylonian exile. The former Kingdom of Judah, was reduced to a province of the Babylonian empire. The revolt had been caused by an Egyptian invasion which pushed as far north as Sidon. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre for thirteen years without taking the city, as he had no decisive winning fleet at his disposal. In 568 and 567 BCE he attacked Egypt, again without much success, but from that time on the Egyptians refrained from further attacks on Canaan. 

Nebuchadnezzar was at peace with Media throughout his reign and he was a mediator after the Median-Lydian war which lasted five years from 590 to 585 BCE. The Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar grew, becoming one of the richest lands in western Asia – a remarkable transformation as it had been rather poor when it was ruled by the Assyrians. Babylon was the largest city of the civilised world. Nebuchadnezzar maintained the revitalised canal systems of his father and built many supplementary canals, making the land even more fertile; with trade and commerce booming during his reign.

Nebuchadnezzar’s building efforts easily surpassed those of most of the Assyrian kings before him. He fortified the old double walls of Babylon, adding a triple wall outside the old wall and erected a further wall, the Median Wall, north of the city between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers. According to Greek estimates, the Median Wall was about one hundred feet high. Nebuchadnezzar enlarged the original palace, ‘adding many wings, so that hundreds of rooms with large inner courts were now at the disposal of the central offices of the empire. Colourful glazed-tile bas-reliefs decorated the walls. Terrace gardens, called the Hanging Gardens in later accounts, were [built]. Hundreds of thousands of workers are thought to have been required for all his ambitious building  projects.’

Britannica- emphasis mine:

‘The temples were objects of special concern. He devoted himself first and foremost to the completion of Etemenanki, the “Tower of babel.’ Construction of this building began in the time of Nebuchadrezzar I about 1110 [BCE]. It stood as a “building ruin” until the reign of Esarhaddon of Assyria, who resumed building about 680 but did not finish. [Nebuchadnezzar] II was able to complete the whole building. The mean dimensions of Etemenanki are to be found in the Esagila Tablet, which has been known since the late 19th century. Its base measured about 300 feet on each side, and it was 300 feet in height. There were five terrace like gradations surmounted by a temple, the whole tower being about twice the height of those of other temples. The wide street used for processions led along the eastern side by the inner city walls and crossed at the enormous Ishtar gate with its world-renowned bas-relief tiles. [Nebuchadnezzar] also built many smaller temples throughout the country.

The [last] king [of Dynasty X] was the Aramaean Nabonidus… [556–539 BCE] from Harran, one of the most interesting and enigmatic figures of ancient times. His mother, Addagoppe, was a priestess of the god Sin* in Harran; she came to Babylon and managed to secure responsible offices for her son at court. The god of the moon* rewarded her piety with a long life – she lived to be 103 – and she was buried in Harran with all the honours of a queen in 547 [BCE]. 

His viceroy in Babylonia was his son Bel-shar-usur, the Belshazzar of the Book of Daniel in the Bible. Cyrus… [annexed] Media in 550. Nabonidus, in turn, allied himself with Croesus of Lydia [Lud] in order to fight Cyrus. Yet, when Cyrus attacked Lydia and annexed it in 546, Nabonidus was not able to help Croesus. Cyrus bode his time. In 542 Nabonidus returned to Babylonia, where his son had been able to maintain good order in external matters but had not overcome a growing internal opposition to his father. He appointed his daughter to be high priestess of the god Sin in Ur, thus returning to the Sumerian-Old Babylonian religious tradition. 

The priests of Marduk looked to Cyrus, hoping to have better relations with him than with Nabonidus; they promised Cyrus the surrender of Babylon without a fight if he would grant them their privileges in return. In 539 [BCE] Cyrus [I] attacked northern Babylonia with a large army, defeating Nabonidus, and entered the city of Babylon without a battle. The other cities did not offer any resistance either. Nabonidus surrendered, receiving a small territory in eastern Iran. Babylonia’s peaceful submission to Cyrus saved it from the fate of Assyria. It became a territory under the Persian crown but kept its cultural autonomy. Even the racially mixed western part of the Babylonian empire submitted without resistance.’

King Nebuchadnezzar was reportedly a very short man, though he overshadowed his height with his personality and achievements.

Nebuchadnezzar II king of Babylonia, Henry W F Saggs – emphasis mine:

‘Nebuchadnezzar II… is known from cuneiform inscriptions, the Bible and later Jewish sources, and classical authors. His name, from the Akkadian Nabu-kudurri-usur, means “O  Nabu, watch over my heir.” While his father disclaimed royal descent, Nebuchadnezzar claimed the third-millennium Akkadian ruler Naram-Sin as ancestor. The year of his birth is uncertain, but it is not likely to have been before 630 BCE, for according to tradition Nebuchadnezzar began his military career as a young man, appearing as a military administrator by 610. He is first mentioned by his father as working as a labourer in the restoration of the temple of Marduk, the chief god of the city of Babylon and the national god of Babylonia.

After his father’s death on August 16, 605, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon and ascended the throne within three weeks. This rapid consolidation of his accession and the fact that he could return to Syria shortly afterward reflected his strong grip on the empire. Much influenced by the Assyrian imperial tradition, Nebuchadnezzar consciously pursued a policy of expansion, claiming the grant of universal kingship by Marduk and praying to have “no opponent from horizon to sky.”

Nebuchadnezzar’s main activity, other than as military commander, was the rebuilding of Babylon. He completed and extended fortifications begun by his father, built a great moat and a new outer defense wall, paved the ceremonial Processional Way with limestone, rebuilt and embellished the principal temples, and cut canals. This he did not only for his own glorification but also in honour of the gods. He claimed to be “the one who set in the mouth of the people reverence for the great gods” and disparaged predecessors who had built palaces elsewhere than at Babylon and had only journeyed there for the New Year Feast. Little is known of his family life beyond the tradition that he married a Median princess, whose yearning for her native terrain he sought to ease by creating gardens simulating hills.

Despite the fateful part he played in Judah’s history, Nebuchadnezzar is seen in Jewish tradition in a predominantly favourable light. It was claimed that he gave orders for the protection of Jeremiah, who regarded him as God’s appointed instrument whom it was impiety to disobey, and the prophet Ezekiel expressed a similar view at the attack on Tyre’ – Article: The Ark of God. ‘A corresponding attitude to Nebuchadnezzar, as God’s instrument against wrongdoers, occurs in the Apocrypha in 1 Esdras and, as protector to be prayed for, in Baruch. In Daniel (Old Testament) and in Bel and the Dragon (Apocrypha), Nebuchadnezzar appears as a man, initially deceived by bad advisers, who welcomes the situation in which truth is triumphant and God is vindicated.

In modern times Nebuchadnezzar has been treated as the type of godless conqueror; Napoleon was compared to him. The story of Nebuchadnezzar is the basis of Giuseppe Verdi’s opera Nabucco [the coincidental irony of a modern Italian (Chaldean) writing about an ancient Chaldean (Italian)], while his supposed madness is the theme of William Blake’s picture “Nebuchadnezzar.”

Did King Nebuchadnezzar Really Go Mad and Eat Grass for 7 Years? David Roos, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘The Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II is one of the greatest villains of the Hebrew Bible… In… 2 Kings, Nebuchadnezzar and his army lay siege to Jerusalem, loot gold and other treasures from the temple, abduct the Judean king and his court, and carry off 10,000 officers, artisans and skilled workers into exile in Babylon. Ten years later, Nebuchadnezzar returns and razes Solomon’s temple to the ground. And in another unforgettable story in Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar is punished for his hubris and wanders the wilderness like a beast eating grass for seven years.

The question is: Did any of this really happen? For centuries, historians and biblical scholars have searched for clues about the real-life Nebuchadnezzar II… We know from the archaeological record that Nebuchadnezzar was a master builder, raising Babylon to a grandeur unmatched in the ancient Near East. But was Nebuchadnezzar really the tyrant who sacked Jerusalem and sent the Judeans into exile, and is there any truth to the Bible’s account of his “bestial” bout with madness?’

“Nebuchadnezzar is one of those characters in the Bible for whom we have an enormous amount of data from non-biblical sources,” says Eckart Frahm, a professor of Near Eastern languages and civilizations at Yale University. “There’s just a tremendous amount of material.”

‘Archaeologists have recovered tens of thousands of clay tablets and other inscribed objects from sites across the ancient Babylonian Empire, which stretched from the Mediterranean Sea (modern-day Egypt and Israel) to the Persian Gulf (Iraq, Iran and Kuwait). They were written in cuneiform and include everything from royal proclamations to accounting documents. “Among [these texts] are many, many inscriptions written in Nebuchadnezzar’s own name,” says Frahm, “and obviously in these texts he presents himself not as a villain, but as the ‘great builder.’ He’s very eager to indicate that he built these massive temples and palaces, and that he’s also very pious. He confesses that he’s constantly thinking of the gods when building temples to them.”

Nebuchadnezzar doesn’t write anything about his political or military exploits, but some important details were captured in a remarkable set of clay tablets known as the Babylonian Chronicles.’

Or, it may have been the measure of the man, why Nebuchadnezzar chose to leave these aspects of pride in his life in the background and reflect on those of higher altruistic value. Nebuchadnezzar as recoded in the Book of Daniel had a change of heart after his affliction with madness – Daniel 4:34-37. His self image was humbled to include a relationship with a Creator who had opened his mind to understand and appreciate the matters that carry important consequence. 

Roos: ‘In 2 Kings, we learn that the Judean King Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute to Babylon, so Nebuchanezzar invaded Judah to quash the rebellion. The Babylonian Chronicles confirm this, and provide an exact date for the conquest of Jerusalem (597 B.C.E.)’

“There’s no reason to doubt that this really happened,” says Frahm of both the first Babylonian siege in 597 B.C.E. and the second in 587 B.C.E. “On both occasions, many people in Jerusalem were in fact taken into exile, including the royal family.”

‘King Jehoiakim died either before or during the siege, leaving his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin to taste Nebuchadnezzar’s wrath. Along with the young king and his extended royal family, thousands of Jerusalem’s elites – officials, priests, warriors, artisans – were all marched to Babylon. In the early 20th century, archaeologists excavating beneath the ruins of an ancient Babylonian palace found 14 vaulted rooms they first believed to be part of the legendary Hanging Gardens of Babylon, but later figured out were part of a royal storehouse. In that storehouse were more clay tablets, mostly records of the day-to-day affairs of the palace. And among those tablets was a 3-inch tall fragment containing the name “Jehoiakhin, king of Judah.” The fragment turned out to be part of a “ration list” indicating how much oil and foodstuffs were given to King Jehoiachin and his exiled Judean court in Babylon. “That was a remarkable find,” says Frahm. The ration list specifically mentions Jehoiachin, other Judean dignitaries and Jehoiachin’s five sons. The quantities of the rations were sizable…    

So where does this leave the famous story of Nebuchadnezzar losing his marbles and eating grass for seven years? [author allows his prejudice to spill over into derogatory sarcasm] Are there also hints in the historical record?… Nebuchadnezzar has a disturbing dream that none of his court magicians could interpret, so he asks Daniel, a young exiled Judean known as a visionary. To Daniel, the dream is clear: If Nebuchadnezzar doesn’t repent and praise the one true God, he will be stricken with a madness that will cause him to wander the wilderness like a beast. Incredibly, there is an independent record of a Babylonian king going mad and wandering in the wilderness for years. But it wasn’t Nebuchadnezzar, says Frahm. In Babylonian texts, the “mad king” was Nabonidus, a king who ruled two decades after Nebuchadnezzar and ended up losing the Babylonian Empire to the Persians.’

The author places too much confidence in the suppositions of Frahm; as well as reading the Babylonian text at face value. Why would an otherwise impressive record of Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements be tarnished with the sensitive episode of a sustained mental breakdown, or the fact he converted to worship the one true God of the tribe of Judah? Easy to pin the story on a later, lesser king, if such is the case?

Roos: ‘According to the records, King Nabonidus replaced the Babylonian gods with a new moon god and then led his troops on a strange campaign into the Arabian Desert to attack some towns, including Yathrib, the later Medina. He then dwelled the next 10 years in the Arabian city of Tayma. “This sojourn of Nabonidus in Arabia for 10 years is clearly the background of the story of Nebuchadnezzar in the wilderness,” says Frahm. There’s even physical proof of the Nabonidus story also being tied to a Hebrew sage.

Four fragments discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls contained what’s now known as the Prayer of Nabonidus: I was afflicted [with an evil ulcer] for seven years… and an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from among the [children of the exile of Judah, and said,] “Recount this in writing to [glorify and exalt] the Name of the [Most High God].”

Frahm says that the “exorcist” in the Nabonidus account is clearly Daniel, and it’s easy to understand why the authors of Daniel would have substituted the “tyrant” Nebuchadnezzar in their retelling. “In this theology, where you have to be punished for the sins you committed, it makes sense that it’s Nebuchadnezzar and not Nabonidus who is said to have had this strange episode,” says Frahm.”

It would seem that this parallel yet, different account is about Nabonidus. An exorcist and ulcer are not part of Nebuchadnezzar’s story. Frahm has made sizeable jumps in assumption which are not necessarily true. Likewise, his very reasons why Nebuchadnezzar is in the biblical account and not Nabonidus, can be swapped as to why Nabinidus is recorded in the Dead Sea Scroll fragments and not Nebuchadnezzar.

Roos: ‘The Hebrew Bible is an incredible document, not only for the faithful, but for historians like Frahm. In books like 2 Kings and Jeremiah, there are accounts of Nebuchadnezzar and later Babylonian kings that have been independently confirmed by ancient cuneiform tablets recovered from Babylonian sites. But then you have the [story] in Daniel about… Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams and being cursed with a seven-year madness, all of which Frahm describes not as history, but literature [can’t have it both ways; either both are fiction or both are historical accounts].

What does the example of Nebuchadnezzar teach us about the historicity of the Bible? That it’s neither entirely factual nor entirely made up, Frahm says. “You have to look at the details,” says Frahm. “When we have these independent sources, as we do for the sixth century B.C.E., you do have a good chance of figuring out what is historically correct and what is later theological interpretation [this line of reasoning is circular, flimsy and biased].”

Roos is keen to discredit the biblical account and promote Frahm’s agenda driven interpretation of the Babylonian texts. By Frahm’s own admission, he states the name of Nebuchadnezzar has been substituted with Nabonidus. If true, this would not be hard to understand and has support for two reasons. Firstly, Nebuchadnezzar II was the most prominent and successful ruler of the Chaldean Dynasty X of Babylon. Why besmirch his legacy and renown with an account of madness? It was easy to transfer this episode to a weak king who was the last king of the dynasty; and whom allowed the kingdom slide away irrevocably into the hands of the Medes and Persians. 

Secondly, the Bible is clear that Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar had an involved and complex relationship. They have the starring roles in the first four chapters of the Book of Daniel. There is just one chapter devoted to Daniel and Nabonidus and it does not portray as close a relationship. Nor does Nabonidus appear to have any affinity with the Eternal as Nebuchadnezzar before him; therefore, as the Babylonian text accounts appear suspiciously inaccurate and do not align with the Bible, they are to be mistrusted before the Book of Daniel.

Italian men

Forwarding some five hundred years, Germanic tribes are credited with originating from a homeland in southern Scandinavia – modern day Sweden and Norway – including the Jutland area in northern Denmark and a narrow strip of Baltic coastline. The East Germanic Goths were one of the first of the Germanic tribes to form a recognised kingdom and Jordanes states, according to Dio: ‘the Goths were ever wiser than other barbarians and were nearly like the Greeks.’ This is more than coincidental, in that the eastern Goths are closely related to the people we will study as the Greeks in the next chapter – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Those of noble birth amongst the Goths – from whom their kings and priests were appointed – were first known as Tarabostesei. The word ‘tarabostesei’ with its suffixe removed leaves tarabost. The first part, tara can have several meanings, including ‘bull’ or ‘fast.’ Recall the storm god of the Hatti, Taru the bull. The second half, ‘bost’ means ‘hand’ or ‘fist’.

The Goths were constantly attended by a subject tribe, the Heruli who later emerged in Italy as part of the Gothic kingdom of Rome, and to an extent by the Scirii as well. Edward Dawson proposes that there is a distinct possibility that the Goth name emerged as a result of Gaulish (Celtic) influence on a tribal name which derived from Woden (or Wodan). ‘The use of Godan instead of Wodan by the Langobard tribe is [key], given the known tendency of Gaulish to convert a ‘w’ into a ‘gw’ or ‘gu’ sound. It then appears that Wodan [from Odin], Goth, and God are cognates.’ The people of Guti, Goth, or God.

The Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths), dominated a vast swathe of what is now southern Russia and Ukraine by the mid-third century. In the Old English epic poem Widsith, the Ostrogoths are known as the Hreo-Gotum or Victory Goths. They migrated through eastern Europe and southwards through modern day Poland. In 487 CE the Scirian commander of Rome, Odoacer, defeated the Rugli tribe, long time allies of the Ostrogoths. This presented a future threat for Italy, with the Langobards migrating into the Rugli homelands in Lower Austria. Theodoric the Great, led the Ostrogothic invasion of Italy, supported by elements of the Rugli – over throwing Rome and ruling from 493 to 526 CE.

Italian women

The Langobards or Langobardi were the other significant body of people to invade and settle in Italy; who had originated in northwestern Germany from the 1st century CE and later migrated above northern Silesia – now western Poland as part of the Suevi or Suebi confederation of tribes. Recall, the Suevi continued on into the Iberian Peninsula and settled in Portugal – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The Suebi were comprised of principally Hul a son of Aram. It is probable that they, like the Goths had earlier origins in southern Scandinavia and were forced to migrate due to population expansion. They were also known by their original ethnic name, the Winnili  – ‘Winn’ Germanic for ‘striving’ or ‘being victorious’, reminiscent of the Victory Goths.

In 415, continuing to wander – recall Terah’s name means, wanderer – from Poland, the Langobards had entered Vurgundaib. This is thought to be the original lands of the Burgundians – who eventually settled in present day Switzerland – located in the northern Carpathians. Their westwards journey by the tail end of the fifth century lead to the area equating with modern Austria. They began to attack the established order in Italy from 568 CE; invading northern Italy and surrounding the ‘island’ dominion in Venice. The Langobards, were now known as Lombards and they filled a void left by the demise of the Ostrogoth kingdom at the hands of Byzantium. 

The Lombards occupied territory which had been home to various Celtic tribes since the sixth century BCE, almost unopposed. Their attacks badly affected Rome, cutting it off from the Byzantine empire. Unlike the Ostrogoths, the Lombards did not seek to preserve the ancient Roman methods of governance. Their kingdom in the North and the independent Lombard duchies to the South in central Italy, added a Germanic essence to the peninsula which had begun with the Goth’s arrival. 

This highlights the distinction between the northern and north central Italians with the South central and southern Italians; with the Lombards in the North descending from Nahor’s wife Milcah and the Goths from Aram’s son Uz. Whereas, the southern Italians and Sicilians contain a mixture from Nahor’s concubine Reumah and Joktan’s children, such as Uzal, the progenitor of the modern Greeks. Somewhere in this mix is Terah’s other son, Zoba and his son Aram. Zoba’s descendants, like those from Uz of Aram may be represented by the ancient Mitanni of Mesopotamia – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

The biggest city in southern Italy is Naples, with some three million people. The biggest city in central Italy is the capital Rome, with approximately four million people. The biggest city in northern Italy and the fashion capital of the world, Milan – though the French would beg to differ – has three million people. It is the capital of the Lombardy region, houses the Italian stock exchange, the Borsa Italiana and has the third largest economy in Europe according to GDP after the cities of London and Paris.

During 584 to 585, the Lombards invaded the Merovingian Frankish region of Provence. Returning in kind, the Frankish king of Austrasia, Childebert II and Guntramn, king of Burgundy, invaded Lombard Italy, or Lombardy as it came to be known. They captured Trent and opened negotiations with the eastern Roman emperor with the probable view, of carving up Italy between them. The Lombards, fearing Frankish domination, elected a new king called Authari, to end their disunity after ten years of rule by various Dukes. In 590, Authari was succeeded by Agilulf, the Duke of Turin, who was able to recover most of the portions of land that had been lost to the Frankish-Byzantine alliance. The Lombards, like the Visigioths of Spain were Arians, though they later converted to orthodox christianity in the latter part of the seventh century – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America

The invasion of papal territories by the Lombard kings Aistulf (749–756) and Desiderius (756–774) compelled Pope Adrian I to seek aid from the Frankish king Charlemagne. The Franks entered Italy in 773 and after a year’s siege Pavia fell to their armies. Desiderius was captured and Charlemagne became king of the Lombards as well as of the Franks. Lombard rule in Italy came to an end in 774. In a momentous and astute act, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne head of the Holy Roman Empire on December 25, 800 CE.

The Frankish king Charlemagne conquering Lombardy would be echoed centuries later, when the French Emperor Napoleon also subjugated Italy.

In the 1200s, powerful city-states – indicative of the ancient Chaldeans – began to develop throughout Italy including Florence, Milan, Venice, and Naples. The Renaissance began in Florence, Italy in the 1300s. The Lombards of Florence (or Firenze), are credited with initialising banks and the system of banking. From these Princedoms, famous merchant families arose such as the Medici in Florence, who then formed political dynasties. 

Italy is responsible for driving the arts, sciences and exploration forward with massive worldwide impact; a precursor to the age of discovery, later joined by Portugal (1400-1500) and Spain (1500-1600). Famous influencers, included: Galileo, Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Volta, Dante, Ariosto, Verdi and Vivaldi. Today, Italian artists, writers, designers, musicians, chefs, actors and filmmakers have added immeasurably to global art and culture.

In 1796, Northern Italy was conquered by Napoleon and incorporated into the French Empire. Later in 1805, Napoleon declared Italy a kingdom. Subsequently in 1814, Napoleon was defeated and Italy was divided up into small states. In 1815, the process of reunification began and in 1861, the Kingdom of Italy was established for the second time. Rome and Venice had been separate states, but by 1866, Venice became part of Italy and by 1870, Rome was included in one united kingdom. The key personalities in achieving unification were General Garibaldi, spear heading the campaign in Naples and Sicily, the Count of Cavour who led the government of the House of Savoy in the Kingdom of Sardinia for the Northern Italian monarchy and Victor Emmanuel II – who became the first king of the united Italy. Italy remained a monarchy until 1946.

‘From the late 19th century to the early 20th century, Italy rapidly industrialised, mainly in the north, and acquired a colonial empire, while the south remained largely impoverished and excluded from industrialisation, fuelling a large and influential diaspora.’ Many Italians migrated to Brazil – as well as Argentina, Uruguay and the United States.

Italy’s geographic shape resembles a boot. The other boot that completes the pair exists elsewhere – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. During World War I, Italy fought on the side of the Allies, though under the rule of the fascist leader Benito Mussolini (1922-1943), it waged war against the Allied powers in World War II. From 1945, Italy has had a multiparty system dominated by two large parties: the Christian Democratic Party and the Italian Communist Party. 

In the early 1990s the Italian party system underwent a radical transformation and the political centre collapsed, leaving a right and left polarisation of the party options which threw the north and south divide of Italy into sharper contrast and gave rise to political leaders like media magnate Silvio Berlusconi. 

Italy is considered to be one of the world’s most culturally and economically advanced countries, with 59,155,168 people. It is the third largest economy in the European Union, in the top ten in the world according to national wealth and the third largest with a central bank gold reserve, behind the United States and Germany. Italy has 2,451.8 tonnes of gold which equates to 69.3 percent of its foreign reserves. Italy has maintained the size of its reserves over a long period. 

Mario Draghi, a former Bank of Italy and European Central Bank governor, ‘when asked by a reporter in 2013 what role gold plays in a central bank’s portfolio, answered that the metal was “a reserve of safety,” adding, “it gives you a fairly good protection against fluctuations against the dollar.” Recall that the Chaldeans were represented by the head of gold in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. 

Italy ‘ranks very highly in life expectancy [due to its mediterranean diet], quality of life, healthcare and education. The country plays a prominent role in regional and global economic, military, cultural and diplomatic affairs; it is both a regional power and a great power, and is ranked the world’s eighth most-powerful military. 

Italy is a founding and leading member of the European Union… the country has long been a global centre of art, music, literature, philosophy, science, [technology and fashion; greatly influencing and contributing] to diverse fields including cinema, cuisine, sports, jurisprudence, banking and business. As a reflection of its cultural wealth, Italy is home to the world’s largest number of World Heritage sites (55), and is the fifth-most visited country’ in the world.

The Chaldeans were one of the foremost cultured civilisations in the ancient world, just as Italy is today.

Italy is a member of the elite group of G7 nations; comprising the most advanced, developed and biggest economies in the world – excepting the burgeoning economies of the BRIC nations, comprising Brazil, Russia, India and China. These four as we have learned, represent the most prominent descendants from Japheth, Ham and Shem in the scriptures, in that they represent respectively, Tyre from Aram; Asshur and the Assyrians; Cush (biblically translated Ethiopia); and Magog, Tubal and Meschech.

Japan is the one non-European nation in the seven, though by irony is the most westernised nation of those from the East just as Tarshish was anciently – Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan. Italy is one of the four influential nations from Europe and as we shall discover, is closely related to them all – France, Germany and the United Kingdom – for they are all descended from either Nahor or one of his brothers, Haran and Abraham. 

There are numerous theories on the etymology of the name Italia. One is that it was borrowed via Greek from the Oscan Viteliu, ‘land of calves’ which in Latin is vitulus. Nahor’s concubine Reumah’s name, included wild ox as a meaning. The daughters of Laban, a grandson of Nahor, both married Jacob, Abraham’s grandson. Leah’s name includes the definition of wild cow and her younger sister Rachel, includes ewe, a female sheep in hers.

Flag of the Italian Navy, displaying the coat of arms of Venice, Genoa, Pisa and Amalfi the most prominent maritime republics. The strong shipping tradition is indicative of the sons of Aram – Spanish and Portuguese.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Italian global shipments during 2021.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$108.1 billion 
  2. Vehicles: $45.4 billion
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $37.7 billion 
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $36.7 billion
  5. Plastics, plastic articles: $26.3 billion 
  6. Articles of iron or steel: $21.3 billion
  7. Gems, precious metals: $20.8 billion 
  8. Mineral fuels including oil: $19.6 billion 
  9. Iron, steel: $19.2 billion 
  10. Furniture, bedding, lighting, signs, prefabricated buildings: $15.8 billion 

Mineral fuels including oil represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 75.3% from 2020 to 2021. That product category was propelled by Italy’s greater international sales of refined petroleum oils. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel as materials via a 72.9% gain.’

Flag of Italy

Allegedly, Napoleon chose the Italian flag in 1796 during the annexation of Piedmont, based on the French Tricolore and substituting blue for green. Though it may have been inspired by the colour of the uniforms of the Milanese City militia; whose members since 1782, had worn a green uniform with red and white gorget patches. Also, red and white were peculiar to the ancient municipal coat of arms of Milan and were common on Lombard military uniforms.

The world’s eighth largest economy according to GDP belongs to Italy, at $2.46 trillion in 2025. Italy’s economy and level of development vary notably by region, with a more developed, industrial economy in the North contrasted by underdeveloped southern regions. Italy’s second biggest export is automobiles, including several famous brands such as Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Ferrari, Lamborghini and Maserati. One of Italy’s most famous exports is clothing, which includes world-famous brands such as Versace, Gucci, Giorgio Armani and Prada. 

The flag of Venice above and of the Vatican City below

Did you know that Italians have the most diverse DNA in Europe? L’Italo Americano, Giulia Franceschini, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘We usually say that America is a melting pot of cultures and races, but did you know that, according to genetic research, Italy may be just as varied? The study was carried out by a team of researchers from Rome’s Universita La Sapienza, in collaboration with the universities of Bologna, Cagliari and Pisa, and led by anthropologist Giovanni Destro Bisol in 2014. Its main findings show that Italian DNA has from 7 to 30 times more differences than those registered between the Portuguese and the Hungarians. This variety is present everywhere, from North to South and includes also Italy’s islands, Sardinia and Sicily. In other words, Bisol et al.’s research shows that Italians have a higher level of diversity among themselves than populations living at opposite corners of the continent.’ 

The diagram below is a good example of the difference between those peoples predominantly descended from Ham’s son Mizra in the Middle East (gold) and North Africa (brown) – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia – below 0.0 x axis and the peoples of Europe descending in the main from Shem’s son Arphaxad – above 0.0 x axis. It also shows the East to west gradient divide studied in the preceding chapter.

The red markers show the similarity between Eastern Europeans such as Poles and Ukrainians with south eastern Europeans including Romanians and Greeks, who all descend from Joktan and are positioned less than 0.0 y axis. The Blue of southern (central) Italy is the interconnection between Eastern and Western Europe (green) showing both the similarity with each half of the continent, yet also its uniqueness. Their markers lie predominantly above 0.0 y axis, as befits the majority of Italian descent from either Peleg (or Aram) rather than from Joktan.

Genetic History of Ethnic Italians, unknown author, 2017:

‘In… recent decades there has been a huge increase in the study of human genetics. Practically it has substituted the banned (after WW2) studies on human races. Now we don’t divide world populations because of their eyes and/or hair color, but because of their so called genetic “haplogroup.”

Ratio of blond haired people in Italy: with yellow shading, over 20% of the population; and black below 2.4% of the population. Highlighting the difference between the Teutonic (Chaldean) north; the Gothic (Aramaean/Zoba) Centre; and the Grecian (Joktan) south.

Eupedia explains the Y-DNA Haplogroup correlation for blond hair, red hair and blue eyes.

Fair hair was another physical trait associated with the Indo-Europeans. In contrast, the genes for blue eyes were already present among Mesolithic Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I [I1, I2a1 and I2a2]. The genes for blond hair are more strongly correlated with the distribution of haplogroup R1a, but those for red hair have not been found in Europe before the Bronze Age [beginning circa 2500 to 2000 BCE], and appear to have been spread primarily by R1b people.’

United States National Library of Medicine, Is eye color determined by genetics? – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘A person’s eye color results from pigmentation of a structure called the iris, which surrounds the small black hole in the center of the eye (the pupil) and helps control how much light can enter the eye. The color of the iris ranges on a continuum from very light blue to dark brown. 

Most of the time eye color is categorized as blue, green/hazel, or brown. Brown is the most frequent eye color worldwide. Lighter eye colors, such as blue and green, are found almost exclusively among people of European ancestry.

Eye color is determined by variations in a person’s genes. Most of the genes associated with eye color are involved in the production, transport, or storage of a pigment called melanin. Eye color is directly related to the amount and quality of melanin in the front layers of the iris. People with brown eyes have a large amount of melanin in the iris, while people with blue eyes have much less of this pigment.

A particular region on chromosome 15 plays a major role in eye color. Within this region, there are two genes located very close together: OCA2 and HERC2. The protein produced from the OCA2 gene, known as the P protein, is involved in the maturation of melanosomes, which are cellular structures that produce and store melanin. The P protein therefore plays a crucial role in the amount and quality of melanin that is present in the iris. Several common variations (polymorphisms) in the OCA2 gene reduce the amount of functional P protein that is produced. Less P protein means that less melanin is present in the iris, leading to blue eyes instead of brown in people with a polymorphism in this gene.

A region of the nearby HERC2 gene known as intron 86 contains a segment of DNA that controls the activity (expression) of the OCA2 gene, turning it on or off as needed. At least one polymorphism in this area of the HERC2 gene has been shown to reduce the expression of OCA2, which leads to less melanin in the iris and lighter-colored eyes.

Several other genes play smaller roles in determining eye color. Some of these genes are also involved in skin and hair coloring. Genes with reported roles in eye color include ASIP, IRF4, SLC24A4, SLC24A5, SLC45A2, TPCN2, TYR, and TYRP1. The effects of these genes likely combine with those of OCA2 and HERC2 to produce a continuum of eye colors in different people.’

As with fairer coloured hair, lighter eyes predominate in the northern regions of Italy. In previous chapters, particularly with the descendants of Shem, there have been sometimes irregular patterns in which nations are more closely related with other countries when comparing mitochondrial DNA inherited from mothers, or Y chromosome DNA inherited from fathers. 

As Franceschini states, there is wide diversification in Italy from north to south. We will compare the mtDNA from several regions now we recognise the three component parts of Italy: northern, central and southern Italy, including Sicily. Specific regions chosen to reflect these three sections are the highest population areas of Lombardy in the North; Tuscany and Latium (or Lazio) in Central Italy; and Campania and Sicily in the South.

Lombardy: H [38.4%] – K [11.3%] – T2 [9%] – X [6.8%] – 

J [5.1%] – U5 [5.1%] – U4 [4%] – HV0+V [3.9%] – HV [3.4%] –

T1 [2.8%] – U1 [1.7%] – U2 [1.1%] 

Lombardy has the highest percentages of lesser Haplogroups K and X in Italy; though with regard to the most common mtDNA Haplogroup in Europeans, Lombardy has less than the Italian average for H. Whereas neighbouring Piedmont has the highest percentage of Haplogroup H with 56.5% and yet the lowest level of HV at 1.2%. The region of Veneto stands out with the highest percentage of Haplogroup T2 – a relatively young Haplogroup – of 18.8%. In contrast, Liguria has the lowest level of T2 with 4% but has the highest percentage of HV0+V, with 10%. Friuli-Venezia-Guilia in the far northeast has the second highest levels of Haplogroup H with 54%, yet interestingly, has the lowest levels of a number of Haplogroups: HV0+V, 0%; J, 4%; T1, 0%; K, 2%; I, 0% and X, 0%.

Tuscany: H [41.4%] – T2 [8.6%] – K [7.8%] – J [6.4%] – 

HV0+V [5.1%] – HV [4.8%] – U5 [4%] – U3 [3.5%] – T1 [2.7%] –

U3 [2.4%] – U4 [2.1%] – X [2.1%] – U2 [1.9%] – U1 [0.5%]

Latium: H [39.3%] – J [8.4%] – K [7.6%] – U3 [5.3%] – 

HV0+V [4.7%] – T2 [4.6%] – U5 [4.2%] – HV [3.2%] – X [3.1%] –

T1 [2.9%] – U2 [1.9%] – U1 [1.6%] – U [1.2%] – U4 [0.6%]

Both Tuscany and Latium are not far removed from each other or from Lombardy; with mainly average levels of most Haplogroups. In fact on PCA graphs, Northern Italians and Central Italians are similar. Even Corsicans though part of France; have a genetic composition in keeping with Central Italians. It is as we move southwards that we find observable differences. For Southern Italians are more alike with Greeks and Sardinians, are not comparable with anyone, being as far removed from Southern and Central Italians as say an Iranian. 

Campania: H [43.8%] – J [8%] – K [7.4%] – T2 [6.3%] – 

U3 [5.2%] – U5 [4.1%] – T1 [4.1%] – HV [2.8%] – HV0+V [2.8%] –

U [2.2%] – U4 [1.9%] – X [1.7%] – U1 [1.1%] – U2 [0.6%]

Sicily: H [45.2%] – J [6.7%] – K [6.3%] – HV [5%] – 

T2 [4.4%] – X [3.7%] – U5 [3.3%] – T1 [2.7%] – HV0+V [2.3%] –

U1 [2%] – U1 [1.7%] – U4 [1.3%] – U2 [1%] – U3 [0.7%]

Sardinia: H [44.3%] – J [13%] – T2 [10.3%] – U5 [10%] – 

K [6%] – HV [4.4%] – HV0+V [3.7%] – T1 [2.9%] –

U [1.4%] – L [0.5%] – X [0.4%]

Both Campania and Sicily, as well as Sardinia exhibit above average percentages of prime Haplogroup H. Campania has the highest levels of T1 and Sardinia lacks a number of the U sub-Haplogroups. Calabria located in the southern most tip of Italy has the highest level of HV with 10% and also the lowest percentage of Haplogroup H with 28%. Calabria also has the highest percentage of Haplogroup J and Sardinia second with 14% and 13% respectively. 

The average percentages as shown across Italy as a whole. 

Italy: H [40.2%] – T2 [8.2%] – J [8.1%] – K [7.7%] – U5 [4.6%] – 

HV0+V [3.3%] – HV [2.9%] – T1 [3.3%] – U [2.7%] – U3 [2.1%] –

X [2%] – U4 [1.9%] – U2 [1.6%] –  U1 [1.5%] –  L [0.8%]

                            H       HV   HV0+V    J        T2     U5       K       X

Piedmont         57       1.2          7          7         6      1.2        7        3

Lombardy        38         3          4          5         9         5       11        7

Tuscany            41         5           5          6         9        4        8         2

Latium              39         3           5         8         5        4         8        3

Campania         44         3          3          8        6         4        7      1.7

Calabria            28       10          4        14       10       12        8        2

Sicily                 45          5          2          7        4          3        6        4

Sardinia            44         4          4        13       10       10        6     1.3

Italy                   40         3          3          8        8         5         8        2

The demarkation between regions is blurred and not overly obvious. There are few clear patterns. For example, Haplogroup H percentages fluctuate rather than steadily increase or decrease when heading southwards, though T2 levels do decrease overall. Lombardy’s higher levels of Haplogroup K, is invariably associated with Ashkenazi Jews and the Basque in Spain and France.

                           H       J      T2      K      HV    U5   HV0+V

Lombardy          38      5        9       11         3        5          4

Campania          44      8        6        7          3        4          3

Portugal             44       7       6        6       0.1        7          5

Spain                  44       7       6        6       0.7        8          8

According to PCA graphs, Portugal and Spain are closer to Lombardy. Contrastingly, the stronger link in maternal mtDNA is between Campania in the south of Italy and Iberia. The addition of Brazil confirms a maternal similarity amongst these four regions.

                            H       U        T         J     HV0+V   HV        X         

Spain                44      14        9         7           8          0.7      1.7     

Portugal           44      13       10        7           5          0.1         2          

Brazil                44      16       14       11                          2         3         

Campania        44      15       10        8           3             3         2

It is now enlightening to add Italy to the mtDNA comparison table of the principle descendants of Shem studied thus far.

                        H         HV    HV0+V      J        T2         U        U5       K

Brazil             44          2                         11 

Portugal        44       0.1           5             7         6           3          7         6

Spain             44       0.7           8            7          6           2         8         6

Poland          44           1           5             8         7        1.4        10        4

Russia           41           2           4            8          7           2        10        4

Greece           41          3         1.8          10          7          3          5         5

Italy               40         3            3            8          8          3          5         8            

Ukraine        39          4            4            8          8      0.6        10         5

Romania      37          2            4           11          5           2          7        8

Finland         36                        7            6          2       0.8        21        5

Turkey          31           5        0.7            9          4           6         3         6

Iran               17           7        0.6           14          5         12         3         7

A comparison of the principal mtDNA Haplogroups for Italy with the other prominent descendants of Shem studied so far, shows that Italy with its diverse blood lines, is unlike Turkey or Iran and with its combined genetic input from Nahor, Terah, Aram and Joktan sits quite closely with Greece. Italy in fact sits squarely in the middle of the table and bisects the descendants of Arphaxad in half. From an mtDNA perspective, it is not as close to its Latin cousins.

We have Aram at one end of the spectrum and Lud at the other, with the sons of Joktan interspersed between them and Asshur and now Nahor, relatively in the centre of those nations dominated by Haplogroup H. This highlights how closely related the sons of Shem are and particularly those from Arphaxad. Note the similarity between Portugal and Spain; Russia and Ukraine; and Greece and Italy.

The Haplogroup map above emphatically shows on the maternal mtDNA side how closely related north and central Italy are; yet their paternal Y-DNA (classifications now out of date) rightly reveals a considerable difference. In other words, their original fathers were from different families, yet their mothers are near identical. This would mean that Aram’s son Uz must have married a relative of Milcah and Sarah, the daughters of Haran. On the other hand, southern Italy has a markedly different maternal lineage, as well as a unique paternal line of descent. Therefore, their original progenitors were not related to Uz, Nahor or either of their wives.

The Fifty-Three Known Forefathers of the Italian People: Latest Discoveries from Genetics, Michael Curtotti, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘If we go back far enough (thousands of years) we find (along the patrilineal line) that virtually all Italians are descended from only fifty-three men. A third kind of DNA “autosomal DNA” [First two: Y-DNA (paternal) and mt-DNA (maternal)] (found on all the chromosomes except the sex chromosome) is also used to find relatives and estimate ethnicity (although the latter process is controversial).

R1b, the highest proportion across Italy and one of the 53 forefathers we can now identify is “R1b-U152” [(S28) is most frequent in northern and central Italy, France and Switzerland]… and is the patrilineal ancestor of over 22% of Italians. The highest representation of R1b-U152 occurs in Bergamo plains (53%) and Bergamo Valleys (46%) and Tortona (35%).

The next of our fifty-three forefathers is R1b-S116 [P312] who is the patrilineal ancestor of 8% of Italians. R1b-S116 is found most frequently in Spain [and Portugal].

R1b-U106 [S21, M405], who comes in at 3.8% is a forefather of proto-Germanic speakers [Germany, Low Countries, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom]. He lived 4700 years ago and his branch expanded from northern Europe around 1700-500 BCE. Some of his descendants will have arrived in Italy during the Gothic and Lombard periods.

R1b-L23 dates to 6100 years before the present and represents 3.5% of Italian paternal ancestry [Southern Italy, Greece, the Caucasus]. The branch is most strongly represented in Anatolia [Asia Minor, modern Turkey] and may be associated with the ancient Hittites [the Hatti]…’

In connection with sub-Haplogroup R1b-U106, this – in the form of its prototype mutations – would have been passed along Arphaxad’s line via Peleg and though present in Italy’s male descendants, is actually the dominant R1b in the Germanic related peoples of western Europe. R-U106 perhaps appearing nearly 4,000 years ago when Nahor and his two brothers were born. The approximate date given of 4,700 years ago by scientists is then seemingly quite accurate.

The R1b-L23 date of 6100 BCE is also interesting in that this goes back to Peleg, the ancestor, of Nahor and his descendants, the Chaldeans; when the divisional Haplogroup split, between R1b and R1a in Arphaxad’s line likely occurred, at the very latest. Thus the dates for R-U106 and L23 may need to be called into question and a more recent (revised) mutation for each is probable.

It is actually R1b-U152 which is the defining marker Haplogroup for men descended from Nahor. R1b-S116 is the marker paternal Haplogroup for those men descended from Aram’s son Uz. Haplogroup R1b-L23 is the Haplogroup associated with males descended from Joktan’s son Uzal. Terah’s son Zoba is a guess and could be either of the R1b sub-clades U152, L23 or even U106.

The author, inadvertently says ancient Hittites, this doesn’t mean the later Hittites, but the earlier Hatti (or Chatti), who are none other than the Chaldeans, descended primarily from Nahor – the modern day Italians.

Eupedia, Maciamo Hay, 2013 & 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to the founding myth of Rome, Romulus and Remus descended from the Latin kings of Alba Longa, themselves descended from Trojan prince Aeneas, who fled to the Latium after the destruction of Troy by the Greeks. Troy may well have been founded by the early M269 and/or L23 branches of R1b… If there is any truth in the myth (as there usually is), the Trojans might have brought M269 or L23 (probably with other haplogroups, notably J2) to central Italy circa 1200 BCE, around the same time as U152 invaded from the north. 

The Etruscans, who are thought to have originated in western Anatolia, not far from Troy, might also have brought R1b-L23 to Italy, also blended with other haplogroups. Nowadays R1b-L23 [in the south] is the second most common subclade of R1b in Italy, although well behind R1b-U152 [in northern and central Italy]. By comparing Sardinian… DNA, it can be estimated that the Sardinians have inherited between 16% and 24% of their Y-DNA from the Phoenicians.’

Investigation will show that with regard to the Trojans, M269 is an accurate assessment and L23 is not. The same can be said of the Etruscans. The more specific R1b sub-Haplogroups for both are actually M269 and U106. With regard to the Phoenicians, Hay is more accurate if he meant R1b-S116.

Eupedia: ‘In 475, various East Germanic tribes (Herulians, Rugians, and Scirians) were refused federated status by [the] Roman emperor. Under the leadership of Odoacer, a former secretary of Attila, they deposed the last emperor and created the first Kingdom of Italy (476-493), bringing to an end the Western Roman Empire. 

The kingdom was taken over by the Ostrogoths, who ruled the whole of Italy except Sardinia until 553. The Ostrogoths’s capital was Ravenna. They were succeeded by the Lombards (568-774), who had to contend for the political control of Italy with the Byzantines. Like the Ostrogoths, the Lombards had invaded Italy from Pannonia and settled more densely in north-east Italy and in Lombardy, which was named after them. The Lombard capital was in Pavia, Lombardy. They set up many duchies, notably those of Friuli (based in Cividale), Trento, Tuscany (based in Lucca), Spoleto, Benevento, as well as in the major cities of Lombardy and Venetia.

In the 5th century the Goths would have become such a melting pot that their original Germanic Y-DNA might have only represented a small percentage of their lineages. This explains why there is apparently so little Germanic Y-DNA in south-western France and Spain (location of the former Visigothic kingdom) compared to other regions conquered by Germanic tribes in Western Europe, including Italy.

In contrast with the Goths and the Vandals, the Lombards left Scandinavia and descended due south through Germany, Austria and Slovenia, only leaving Germanic territory a few decades before reaching Italy. The Lombards would have consequently remained a predominantly Germanic tribe by the time they invaded Italy.’

Hay has drawn correct conclusions though possibly via incorrect summations. The reason there is ‘little’ Germanic DNA in Spain is because they are different peoples from the Germanic Germans. Northern Italians are labelled ‘Germanic’ yet they are in part kindred peoples with the Spanish and Portuguese – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The migratory route of the Lombards had little to do with their Germanic-ness.

The Vandals and Alans were not Germanic and the Visigoths and Suevi – the Spanish and Portuguese today – were not pure Germanic. The Visigoths and Suevi were relatively Germanic, when compared with the Vandals, Alans and Moors, who were a blend of Aram and descendants from Ham, via Mizra’s sons Casluh and Caphtor – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Note the decrease of R1b heading southwards and the increase through admixture of the Hamitic J, either from inhabitants from southeastern Europe or the Middle East. Like wise the Canaanite E1b1b Haplogroup also increases as a result of intermixing from the same regions as well as North Africa. The old Shem Haplogroup G and the intermediate Haplogroup I generally increase towards the South. As does R1a from intermarriage with principally eastern Europeans descended from Joktan.

The Y-DNA percentages below for the higher population regions of Italy, plus Sardinia; followed by a comparison with the nations of Shem studied to date, reveal the following.

Lombardy: R1b [59%] – G2a [10%] – E1b1b [10%] – J2 [6%] – 

I2a2 [5%] – R1a [4%] – I1 [2.5%] – I2a1 [1%] – T1a [1%] 

Tuscany: R1b [52.5%] – J2 [11.5%] – G2a [9%] – E1b1b [9%] – 

I1 [4%] – R1a [4%] – I2a2 [2.5%] – J1 [2%] – T1a [2%] –

I2a1 [1.5%] – L [0.5%]

Latium: R1b [29%] – J2 [18.5%] – E1b1b [16.5%] – G2a [11%] – 

I1 [8.5%] – T1a [4.5%] -I2a2 [3%] –  R1a [2%] – J1 [2%] –

Q [2%] – I2a1 [1%]

Campania: R1b [29%] – J2 [18%] – E1b1b [16%] – G2a [11%] – 

J1 [6%] – I2a1 [4%] – T1a [4%] – R1a [3%] – I1 [3%] – I2a2 [1.5%] 

Sicily: R1b [26%] – J2 [23%] – E1b1b [20.5%] – G2a [8.5%] – 

R1a [4.5%] – T1a [4%] – J1 [ 3.5%] – I1 [3.5%] – I2a1 [3%] –

I2a2 [1%] – Q [1%]  

Sardinia: I2a1 [37.5%] – R1b [18.5%] – G2a [12%] – E1b1b [9.5%] – 

J2 [9%] – J1 [4%] – I2a2 [2%] – T1a [1.5%] – R1a [1%] – L [0.5%]

With the exception of Sardinia, the four predominant Italian Y-DNA Haplogroups overall, include R1b, J2, E1b1b and G2a. This grouping is similar with Spain, Portugal and Brazil. Haplogroup R1b is indicative of western Europe, J2 of West and South West Asia, E1b1b of North Africa and G2a of the Caucasus region. It is important to remember that E1b1b and J2 are paternal lines of descent from Canaan and Ham respectively and are the result of admixture from intermixing and intermarriage. 

Haplogroup G on the other hand is an ancient lineage descending from Shem and it is very interesting that it has a consistently strong presence in Italian males from the South running all the way up the peninsula to the North. Again, it is Haplogroup R1b which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Italian men descended from either Nahor or Aram. What is also worth noting is the almost lack of Haplogroups I2 and I1 in Italy overall, with Sardinia being the exception and showing its parallel ties with the Balkans – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

Lombardy has the highest average for R1b, though the highest level has been recorded in Tuscany with 76.2%. Sardinia has the lowest level of R1b, followed by Sicily. Lombardy has the lowest percentage for J2, while Calabria in the very south possesses an average of 29%. The highest percentage for E1b1b is found in Sicily; while Piedmont and Trentino-South Tyrol have the lowest with 6%. The highest level by far of I2a1 is Sardinia and is similar to certain countries in the Balkans. The highest percentages for I1 are found in Friuli-Venezia-Giuliai with 21% and also R1a with 13%; while Sardinia has the lowest I1 and Umbria and Molise each have with 0% of R1a.

                            R1b      J2     E1b1b     G2a    I1     I2a1     I2a2     R1a      J1

Lombardy          59         6         10          10      3         1           5          4         

Tuscany              53       12          9            9       4        2           3          4         2

Latium                29       19        17           11       9        1            3          2         2

Campania           29      18        16           11       3        4           2           3         6

Sicily                   26       23        21            9       4        3                        5         4

Sardinia              19         9        10          12               38           2           1         4  

There are a number of salient points highlighted in the Table. It is strikingly clear as confirmed by PCA data that the paternal ancestry for Sardinia is unlike the rest of Italy. Tuscany is counted with Central Italy, though from a paternal Haplogroup perspective, it has much in common with Lombardy in the North. 

Haplogroup R1b indicative of western Europe, decreases from north to central Italy markedly, with Latium – which includes Rome – being closer with southern Italy. It also supports the evidence that R1b generally decreases as one heads in a south eastern direction in Europe. 

In contrast, Haplogroups J2 and E1b1b increase. The J2 increase is understandable as it is rarer in northern Europe. Though even the Spanish and Portuguese do not have as high a percentage of J2. One has to look to Greece, Turkey and Iran for similarly high levels. Haplogroup J2 is reflective of admixture in southern European and southeastern European males, as in the near east and West Asia with a source likely in South West Asian males – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Haplogroup J2 is related to the Hamitic J1 carried by the majority of Arab men.

Haplogroup E1b1b percentages – a Canaanite paternal Haplogroup – are different, in that even Turkey and Iran do not compare with Sicily. It is only Greece which matches southern Italy. This should not be a surprise as remember, all these nations descend from Shem and as with cousins, some similarities are shared with certain cousins and other likenesses with different relatives. It bears out that those nations with these higher levels have a. been drawn to dwell further south in warmer climes and latitudes; and b. due to their location, they therefore show higher levels of admixture with men principally descended from Canaan and Mizra in North Africa and the Middle East. The approximate breakdown for E1b1b in Italy is E1b1b1a, 10%; E1b1b1c, 3%; and E1b1b1b, 1 %.

Combining the regions into the three main areas as well as a total average for Italy produces the following results.

Italy North: R1b [49.5%] – E1b1b [11%] – J2 [10%] – G2a [7.5%] – 

I1 [7%] – R1a [4.5%] – I2a2 [3.5%] – T1a [2%] – J1 [1.5%] – I2a1 [1%] 

Italy Central: R1b [36%] – J2 [23%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – G2a [11%] – 

J1 [5%] – R1a [3%] – T1a [3%] – I1 [2.5%] – I2a1 [2%] – I2a2 [1.5%] 

Italy South: R1b [27.5%] – J2 [21.5%] – E1b1b [18.5%] – G2a [10.5%] – 

J1 [4%] – I2a1 [3.5%] – R1a [3%] – I1 [2.5] – T1a [2.5%] – I2a2 [1%]

Italy: R1b [39%] – J2 [15.5%] – E1b1b [13.5%] – G2a [9%] – 

I1 [4.5%] – R1a [4%] – I2a1 [3%] – J1 [3%] – I2a2 [2.5%] – T1a [2.5%] 

Aside from the sub-Haplogroups mentioned of U152, U106, L23 and S116 for R1b, others include: L21 (M529) found in the Celtic arc of Europe and M167 found in northern Spain. 

                                R1b      J2     E1b1b    G2a     I1     I2a1   I2a2    R1a      J1

Italy North             50       10         11          8        7         1         4         5         2

Italy Central          36       23         12         11        3        2         2         3         5

Italy South             28       22        19         11        3        4          1         3         4

Italy                         39       16         14          9        5        3         3         4         3

Italy subdivided into its three key parts, highlights a little clearer the Haplogroup level changes. Italy as a whole and averaged out reflects central Italy in both R1b and E1b1b levels. There is a clear three way split, which can be explained by three separate paternal lineages that have intertwined, yet remain distinct. The fathers being Uz from Aram and a wife probably related to Terah’s family; Nahor from Arphaxad and Peleg and his wife Milcah from Haran, as well as his concubine Reumah, possibly descended from Joktan. 

Added to this mix and not to be discounted is a mysterious father, such as Aram from Zoba (and Terah) and again a wife possibly from Joktan’s family. Perhaps revealed in the undefined grey areas above. In total, three original progenitors with Nahor providing two of the eventual four lines. Central Italians show evidence of similar admixture in that J2 Haplogroup levels are akin to southern Italy, yet their E1b1b levels are different, being closer to northern Italy. Plus, the R1b percentage is marginally closer to southern Italians which also highlights increased intermixing as opposed to northern Italian men. 

Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b that is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared with Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 or S21, is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. 

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, we will find the levels of R1b vary, though gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups for some of the nations we will study. R-M269 stretches across Europe, with levels increasing as one heads westwards. R-U106 covers western Europe eastwards with its epicentre in Central Europe.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Italy’s dominant Haplogroup is R1b and we can see the marked difference comparing with nations from Eastern Europe and beyond. It is worth mentioning that the north to south axis is as important as the east to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – Chapters XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Our Y-DNA comparison table from the previous chapters, now sees the addition of Italy – the first major descendant from Peleg’s line, Nahor. 

                       J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia       43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia      33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey         33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24

Iran              32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece         26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Italy             19       3        16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania     15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal      13        3       10       14          7       1.5       56       58

Brazil           10                 10       11          5          4       54       58

Spain           10     1.5         8         7          3         2       69        71     

Ukraine        5     0.5     4.5          7          3       44         8       52

Poland          3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia           3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Finland                                      0.5                      5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. Italy slots in towards the middle of the table with relatively average figures for all their main Haplogroups. This mirrors Italy’s geographic position in bisecting western and eastern Europe and the descendants of Peleg and Joktan.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                     R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal      1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain              2         69      1.5         5           1

Brazil              4         54                  [9]            

Italy                4         39         5        3           3         

Finland          5           4       28                   0.5      62

Turkey           8         16         1         4         0.5        4  

Greece          12         16         4       10         1.5      

Iran               16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania      18         16         4       28           3        2

Ukraine        44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia           46          6         5        11                    23

Poland          58         13        9          6          2         4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising the old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 with the ancient Haplogroup G2a (all from Shem) are compared. Italy has more in common with the other Aramaean nations of south western Europe, which is not a surprise. It sits towards the top of the table due to its low levels of R1a and higher percentage of R1b. Being a southern and western European nation, Italy does not exhibit more than low percentages for Haplogroups I1 and I2. Italy has little in common with those nations further north and east such as Poland, Ukraine and Russia. Though as mentioned, Southern Italy has marked autosomal DNA commonality with Greece.

Italy is a Latin country and like Spain, it has a Gothic core. While Gothic may be considered broadly Germanic it is not an accurate label. Spain has experienced multiple influences, yet a Visigoth demographic dominance, means it is a Latin nation. Unlike Spain, Italy includes a Germanic – in a more Teuton sense – ethnic element in its north and a Balkan, Grecian composition in its south. While Spain is wholly Latin, Italy becomes more latinised as one heads southwards.

Italy during its multi-layered past received Greek, Roman and Celtic influences amongst others, yet even so, it is today a Latin nation dominated by its Ostrogoth centre. For Latin nations encompass a similar culture, a related romance language, the same religion and to some degree, shared ethnicity. In fact, Italy’s composition is closer to France – the nation forming the centre of our focus in the following chapter. Italy is a complex yet subtle blend from Germanic to Latin and sits between Spain and the French. For France has a more pronounced Latinised south and Germanic north. Still, both France and Italy, straddle the two world’s; while linguistically, it is Italy and Spain which are more closely related.

Incline your ear, and hear the words of the wise, and apply your heart to… knowledge…

Proverbs 22:17 English Standard Version

“Majorities are generally wrong, if only in their reasons for being right.”

George Saintsbury

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Nephilim & Elioud Giants II

‘Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the LORD said, ‘My spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’ There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them.’

Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown‘ – Genesis 6:1-4 NKJV.

Genesis 6 Giants: Master Builders of Prehistoric and Ancient Civilizations, Stephen Quayle, 2009 – emphasis mine:

‘Obviously, the ‘daughters of men’ were simply human women. But who were the ‘sons of God’? And who – or what – were the giants and ‘mighty men’ who were the offspring of the sons of God and daughters of men?… One explanation fits this scripture passage perfectly. Not surprisingly, it was also accepted as truth by ancient Jewish scholars. It becomes apparent with careful study of the scriptures as well. “This view maintains that the ‘sons of God’ are angels. As creatures of God, these creatures (like mankind) bear a family relationship in that they were created by God and, therefore, can be viewed in a sense as being His sons. Not only that, this interpretation explains why all the human beings involved are female while all the male figures are called the ‘sons of God.’

In the Book of Job, angels are described as sons of God – Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. Elsewhere in the Bible they are similarly described: Psalms 29:1; 89:6; 104:4, Daniel 3:25, Hebrews 1:7, 14.

Quayle: ‘The Nephilim that were produced by the angel/mankind marriage were much different from either of their parents. This, too, went against God’s plan for the Earth in which each animal and human being was to reproduce ‘after its own kind.’ This is perhaps the best demonstration that the parents of these creatures were not simply descendants of Cain and Seth. Had they been, they would have produced human offspring, rather than the Nephilim… “A careful study of the first introduction of this word in Genesis also shows that the Nephilim have appeared more than one time in history. The verses don’t say that the first account was the only time this occurred. Notice that there were giants ‘in those days’ and ‘also after that’ time as well… the giants could only be coming from the sons of God interbreeding with the daughters of men…’

The Theory of Three Human Species, Epoch Times, Leonardo Vintini – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Old Testament tells a story in which a diminutive David defeats the giant Goliath. Using just a sling to slay his enormous foe, this unlikely victor became the second Hebrew monarch. While many consider the tale to be merely a colorful allegory, a recent finding exhibiting the oldest known Philistine inscriptions suggests that Goliath may have actually existed. This artifact – a small clay shard – was found in Israel in 2005 by Tell es-Safi University archeologists. It is inscribed with the words “Alwt and Wlt” which, according to Professor Aaron Demsky, coincide with the name Goliath. Alwt and Wlt are non-Semitic names which are etymologically similar to the name Goliath. Studies confirm that the carving was made around 950 BC, which would put it within 70 years of when biblical scholars believe this historic fight occurred [in circa 1022 BCE]’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

‘While the find may lend some new credibility to an ancient tale, it may also serve as a piece to another puzzle that’s even more intriguing. One might assume that, even if the epic battle really did take place, Goliath’s size was surely exaggerated for dramatic effect. However, evidence collected from around the globe over the last century suggests that the existence of a real giant may not have been that strange after all. 

In fact, these finds have led some to believe that the mankind of antiquity may have come in three distinct sizes: giants, humans, and hobbits.

In the fall of 2004, a group of investigators working in Indonesia found remains of a race of “hobbit” men measuring just over three feet. Researchers determined that these smaller humans had existed alongside man until about 13,000 years ago [the time of the Flood]. The research team – including Indonesian paleoanthropologist Professor T. Jacob – dubbed the small race Homo floresiensis, named after the Indonesian island of Flores where the skeletons were uncovered. Some say these hobbits still roam the jungle, prompting many visitors to the island in recent years in search of a myth incarnate.

The wealth of evidence for a race of giants is even greater. Remains of giant humans have been found in practically every part of the globe: Tunisia; Pennsylvania; Glen Rose, Texas; Gargayan in the Philippines; Syria; Morocco; Australia; and throughout the Urbasa mountain range in Spain. Perhaps the most popular and scientifically recognized example is the “Giant of Java,” found just south of China’ – refer articles:Monoliths of the Nephilim; and Nephilim & Elioud Giants II.

‘Similar human remains that were found in nearby southern China reveal large humans who possessed six digits on each extremity. This polydactyl characteristic seems to have been a regular pattern in this race of men, as other examples have shown. In Soviet Georgia, skeletons were found of men between 9 and 10 feet tall that also possessed six digits on the hands and feet. Among several biblical passages that mention the existence of giants, Samuel 21:20 also observes this extra-digit phenomenon: “In still another battle, which took place at Gath, there was a huge man with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot – twenty-four in all.”

Despite the vast amount of skeletal evidence – as well as the unearthed tools and teeth that would otherwise prove comically large by normal human standards – it seems that there are still not a great number of scientists dedicated to studying this phenomenon. The modern world often regards mention of these different-sized human races in ancient texts and folklore as the product of a vivid imagination – though many different cultures record very similar accounts… in light of the various remains uncovered throughout the world… these “mythical” stories may have actually been accurate depictions of life at that time. If these races of various size did exist, why three sizes, and where did the other two go?’

Perhaps the premise for the Lord of the Rings by J R R Tolkien is not quite so far-fetched? 

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver, 2017, pages 223-224 – emphasis mine:

‘Archaeologists and anthropologists have found numerous remains of what appear to be human-alien hybrids… it’s difficult to determine their true origin as the DNA evidence… is undoubtedly being suppressed, ignored or confiscated by mainstream organizations and authorities. 

Of particular interest are the significant number of elongated skulls that have been found, mainly in Central and South America… we can easily tell the difference between humans that have had their heads bound and the elongated skulls that appear to have developed naturally… the ones found in Paracas [in Peru] were 60 percent heavier than human skulls, were structurally different, and had craniums that were 25 percent larger than ours. Researchers were able to extract mitochondrial DNA from them and found mutations which indicated an unknown human-like species that didn’t fit the evolutionary tree.’

A Peruvian skull purported to be Nephilim in origin with an elongated cranium

Possible or very likely probable physical evidence of Elioud, the second generation angel-human hybrids. God proclaimed that the means by which Satan, His adversarial nemesis would ultimately be punished and destroyed would be through the seed of the woman Eve and eventually her distant descendant. The Devil is an original and ancient, vastly powerful entity. Thus, this prophecy was a serious pronouncement against the Serpent of old. A human woman, Mary from the line of Seth, Noah, Shem and Arphaxad would give birth to a male child the Son of Man, who would one day destroy the Adversary. 

Genesis 3:15

English Standard Version

“I will put [H7896 – shiyth: appoint] enmity [H342 – ‘eybah: hatred] between you [the Serpent] andthe woman [Eve], andbetween your offspring [H2233 – zera: (demonic) seed] and her offspring [humanity]; he [the Messiah] shall bruise [H7779 – shuwph: crush] your head [defeat spiritually, eternally] and you shall bruise his heel [physical, temporal death].”

This was the first prophecy of the coming Messiah. The Serpent of Old was put on notice and from that point on, Satan set out to corrupt or destroy any suspected God-fearing child who could potentially be the prophesied Redeemer. The first godly child born Abel, was killed by his wicked brother Cain. Cain was banished and Adam and Eve bore another son Seth. At his birth Eve declared: “For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew” – Genesis 4:25, KJV.

As other obedient sons to the Creator began to populate the Earth, Samael instituted his Nephilim sabotage program. By corrupting the seed of the woman, Samael – the Serpent of the Garden, not of old – could prevent the birth of the human Messiah, who could not be part Satan’s seed. Samael sought to make the Word of God fail. The Nephilim were his attempt to thwart the Creator’s plan of salvation and place his mark on all of the world. The Nephilim giants, through their evil angelic parentage, sought to undermine or undo the Creator’s plan of reconciliation to Himself. In their overpowering of the world, they reproduced so rapidly that nearly all flesh on the Earth became corrupted; while the Nephilim dominated the Earth through terror, war and bloodshed. 

The Nephilim spread violence and evil to the degree that: ‘God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.’ Humanity was on the verge of being wiped out with no hope of redemption, if every person born became part fallen angel with the ante-mark of the Beast. It necessitated the Eternal’s intervention with swift and decisive divine judgement, by flooding the earth to a. counter the Nephilim-human hybridisation, b. endeavour to destroy the Nephilim and Elioud, c. punish the fallen Angels for their illicit relations with women and d. preserve humankind.

A generic depiction of Satan, yet is it an accurate one? Could it be of someone else instead, such as Samael?

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 65, 135-136 – emphasis mine:

‘The Sumerian gods regarded man as a convenience and nothing more. He supplied their wants, kept their cities, and provided cannon fodder for their various military ventures. The gods were cruel and unsympathetic masters. They considered humans as merely unruly children, no more important than pets, to be governed ruthlessly and without sentiment [refer article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are]. At one time, man was regarded as a source of food and no different from the cattle and sheep that he raised… the Sumerian word LU[LU] was used for sheep as well as man, and it seems that this term was used gastronomically as well… [the fallen Angels] offspring [were] more mammal than reptile [six generations in]… plans… went awry and they produced creatures quite unlike their reptilian forebears. 

The “divine” race was becoming diluted and the mammalian [human] genes appeared to dominate the reptilian [serpent] strain which became recessive. This factor may have been the main reason which led to the experiments in genetic engineering, one of the major crimes levelled against the [Watchers]. In order to redress the unforeseen and unwarranted dilution of the saurian strain, the [dark Angels] began experiments in changing the genetic codes, hoping in this way to reestablish their strain as the dominant one. These experiments… got out of control… “changing a man into a horse or mule or vice versa [minotaurs, centaurs, satyrs], or transferring an embryo from one womb to another… they began to sin against [birds, animals, reptiles and fish].”

Ghost population of ancient humans may have mated with ancestors of modern humans, USA TODAY, Ryan W Miller, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘Ancestors of people living in what is today West Africa may have reproduced with a species of ancient humans unknown to scientists, new research suggests. Scientists know Europeans mated with Neanderthals and people in Oceania with Denisovans, but a new study published… in the peer-reviewed journal Science Advances found that genetic variation within West African populations is best explained by the presence of a new ancient human species altogether.’

The interbreeding with the people of Day Six is verified in the human immune system and the HLA (human leucocyte antigen) family of genes. The origins of the HLA class 1 genes are evidence that our ancient relatives interbred with Neanderthals and Denisovans. The introduced genes led to 4%+ change in the modern human genome. When researchers studied a variant of HLA called HLA-B73 found in modern humans; it was discovered that it had originated from cross-breeding with Denisovans. Scientists have estimated that Europeans owe more than half their variants of one class of gene to interbreeding with Neanderthals.

Miller: ‘With difficulties in obtaining a full fossil record and ancient DNA, scientists’ understanding of the genetic diversity within West African populations has been poor. To get a fuller picture, researchers at University of California, Los Angeles compared 405 genomes of West Africans with Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes. Sriram Sankararaman, one of the study’s authors, told NPR that the researchers used statistical modeling to figure out which parts of the DNA they were analyzing did not come from modern humans, then compare those to the two ancient hominin species. What they found is the presence of DNA from “an archaic ghost population” in modern West African populations’ genetic ancestry. “We don’t have a clear identity for this archaic group,” Sankararaman told NPR. “That’s why we use the term ‘ghost.’ It doesn’t seem to be particularly closely related to the groups from which we have genome sequences from.”

This ghost population have left ‘snippets of foreign’ DNA in modern Africans. These genetic ‘leftovers’ do not resemble DNA from any modern humans; nor does the foreign DNA resemble Neanderthal DNA, which shows up in the DNA of modern humans, but categorically not in sub-Saharan Africans. The University of Washington announced: ‘[The ghost population] had to be similar enough in appearance to anatomically modern humans that reproduction would happen.’ This DNA evidence is either the exact same or something similar but distinct from that mentioned in Ed Whelan’s article; that led one to believe that foreign DNA could be evidence of Homo erectus in our ancestral line. 

Miller: ‘The “ghost population” likely split from humans and Neanderthals into a new species… The study also says the breeding may have occurred over an extended period of time, rather than all at once. “It’s very likely that the true picture is much more complicated,” Sankararaman told the Guardian. John Hawks, an anthropologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told the newspaper that studies like this one, “Open a window showing us that there is much more than we thought to learn about our ancestors.”

A different picture would be what if there were a quantifiable DNA residue, an actual footprint for the existence of the Nephilim, the hybrid species of human after sexual interaction with dark Angels? The Watchers, after choosing to enter the physical plane, would have possessed their own unique genetic data, that would contribute a fifty percent component of a newly conceived and born Nephilim.

The Biblical Book of Jude is an abridged companion to the in-depth Book of Enoch, regarding the antediluvian age. Jude, a half-brother of Christ, says the following regarding the Watchers.

Jude 1, 3, 6-7

English Standard Version

‘Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James [full blood brother]… I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.

Andtheangels who did not stay[1]within their own position o fauthority [G746 – arche: beginning, origin, principality], but left [2] [G620 – apoleipo: to desert or forsake] theirproper dwelling [G3613 – oiketerion: ‘of the body as a dwelling place for (their) spirit’], he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness [G2217 – zophos: blackness (of the netherworld)] until the judgment [G2920 – krisis: condemnation, separation, a trial] of thegreat day  

just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality [G1608 – ekporneuo: to go a whoring, give one’s self over to fornication] and [3] pursued [for evil] unnatural desire [strange (or different) flesh], serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.’

These Angels, as per the original Greek, decided to (1) leave their spiritual home in the spirit realm, to (2) take on a form of physicality, transforming their ethereal bodies so as to dwell in our physical dimensions on Earth and (3) have carnal sexual relationships with human women. Those religious teachers which proclaim otherwise are ignoring the clear message of the scriptures. The Greek word used for dwelling is also used in 2 Corinthians 5:2, regarding the future resurrected spiritual body of a believer. Two hundred (million) Watchers ventured into our dimensions prior to the flood; when two million disobedient angels followed a dark Lord called, Samyaza

The Book of Enoch 6:1-7; 7:1-6

‘In those days, when the children of man had multiplied, it happened that there were born unto them handsome and beautiful daughters. And the angels, the children of heaven, saw them and desired them; and they said to one another, “Come, let us choose wives for ourselves from among the daughters of man and beget us children.”

And [Semyaza], being their leader, said unto them, “I fear that perhaps you will not consent that this deed should be done, and I alone will become responsible for this great sin.” But they all responded to him, “Let us all swear an oath and bind everyone among us by a curse not to abandon this suggestion but to do the deed.” Then they all swore together and bound one another by the curse. And they were altogether two [million]; and they descended into ‘Ardos, which is the summit of Hermon. And they called the mount Armon, for they swore and bound one another by a curse.’

There is immense significance in this sworn pact. Note Dan on the map. We will discuss the Tribe of Dan in Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe and his link with Mount Hermon and the Nephilim.

Enoch: ‘And they took wives unto themselves, and everyone respectively chose one woman for himself, and they began to go unto them. And they taught them magical medicine, incantations, [spells] the cutting of roots, and taught them about plants [drugs]. And the women became pregnant and gave birth to great giants whose heights were three hundred cubits [300 seems a stretch – no pun intended – even 30 cubits would be 45 feet tall].

These giants consumed the produce of all the people until the people detested feeding them. So the giants turned against the people in order to eat them. And they began to sin against birds, wild beasts, reptiles, and fish. And their flesh was devoured the one by the other, and they drank blood. And then the earth brought an accusation against the oppressors.’

This invasion of renegade angels following Samyaza swore an oath, to materialise into our realm with the purpose of performing the sabotaging act of cohabiting with the daughters of human men. These Watchers had closely observed, lusting after and becoming captivatingly entranced with the daughters born to the children of men; whether from the line of Seth (Homo sapiens), the people of Day Six (Homo neanderthalenis), the line of Cain (to be explained) and possibly hybrid lines involving the mixing between all three. To say it was a bit of a genetic mess is an understatement and now it was set to become a whole lot more heterogenous. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 88-90 – emphasis mine:

‘Enoch identified those high-ranking, overseeing [Seraphim] as “Watchers”… from a specific order, Grigori… who revolted in heaven… [and] who later sinned with [the] daughters of [Cain]… The Hebrew word for watcher defined itself as “those who watch, or those who are awake”… the holy rulers and governors of the earth… The watchers… were referred alternatively to as “archons.” Archons were… hostile heavenly forces… a governor of an Aeon… great celestial princes, each reigning over a particular region of the earth, just as Deuteronomy describes [we will reference this fully later]. Their authority was that of a watcher/archon/ruler of a specific region, aeon, or nation in the physical universe.’ 

The Grigori were originally a superior order of angels who dwelt in the ‘highest heaven’ with the Eternal and after their transformation in appearance, resembled human beings. Watcher means: ‘one who watches, those who watch, those who are awake’ and ‘those who do not sleep.’ Esoteric tradition states they were a special elite class of angel created to be earthly shepherds of the primitive humans.

Michael Howard adds: ‘It was their task to observe and watch over the emerging human species and report back on their progress. However they were confined by the divine prime directive not to interfere in human evolution. Unfortunately they decided to ignore God’s command and defy his orders and become teachers to the human race, with unfortunate repercussions for both themselves and humanity. The fallen angels taught their wives and children a variety of new technological skills, magical knowledge and occult wisdom. This suggests that psychic abilities and magical powers were originally an ancient inheritance from the angelic realm given to early humans. In the Luciferian tradition this is known in spiritual and metaphorical terms as the ‘witch blood’, ‘elven blood’ or ‘faery blood’ that is possessed by witches and wizards… the Watchers… were cultural exemplars and the bringers of civilisation to the early human race.’

The Watchers said one to another: “Come, we must take to ourselves concubines from the descendants of men.” Theses Angels would have surely known that this was now a one-way trip and that they would be barred from returning to their spiritual home, in the heavens. This plan undoubtedly must have been a directive set by the Devil.

Recall, the seriousness of their actions, inspired Samyaza to say:

“I fear that you may not fulfill this venture, and I alone shall suffer for so terrible a crime.”

The rebellious Angels answered:

“We all pledge and bind ourselves by fears that we will not change our mind and hearts, but we will fulfil this venture.”

Hence the oath, for the two million to bind themselves to the planned objective.

The Watchers then descended upon Mount Hermon in the days of Jared, righteous Enoch’s father. The dark Angels materialised into this realm, they took human women, cohabiting with them and in the process taught all of them to be wicked through the secret occult disciplines of sorcery, witchcraft and black magic. 

The Angels no doubt eventually took multiple wives and concubines, so that by the time of the Flood some 11,000 years later, practically all three human lines were irreversibly corrupted.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 18-19, 124 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to the Zohar,angels do not have a sexual gender, even though they can adopt one; this changeling ability… is held up to be the explanation of how angels were capable of copulating with the daughters of men. Ginsburg backs up this shape-shifting doctrine… angels lost their transcendental [supernatural] qualities while on the earth; they took on sublunary [terrestrial] bodies so that they, indeed, could mate with human females, and likely each other, to create lower forms of gods on earth [elemental spirits]… 

The book of Megadriel,War in Heaven:

“… And behold, the Watchers descended to earth in the place called Ardos, which is in the summit of Mount Hermon (‘Sacred Mountain’). And they transformed their Angelic essence into the forms of men. And the Watchers who descended unto Ardos numbered 200. And they were known henceforth as Grigori. And immediately upon their descent to earth they took women unto themselves as wives, and sinned with them… And Watcher’s wives conceived and gave birth to abominable creatures called Nefillim.’

The Testament of Reuben:

“… for it was thus that… (women) charmed the watchers… before the Flood. As they continued looking at the women, they were filled with desire for them and perpetrated the act in their minds. Then they were transformed into human males, and while the women were living with their husbands they appeared to them. Since the women’s minds were filled with lust for these apparitions, they gave birth to giants.” 

the Kebra Negast: “… daughters of Cain… conceived, but they were unable to bring forth children and they died. Of the children who were in [their] wombs, some died and some did come forth by splitting open the bellies of their mothers. They came forth by their navels, and when they were grown up they became giants.”

The Book of Jubilees:

“Then came the flood upon the earth, namely, owing to the fornication wherein the Watchers against the law of their ordinances went a whoring after the daughters of men, and took themselves wives of all which they chose: and they made the beginning of uncleanness. And they begat sons, the nephilim, and they were all unlike, and they devoured one another: and the Giants slew one man another.”

It was not a surprise to the residents of Sodom, that angels were visiting Lot. They demanded sexual relations with the angels, as this was obviously a common occurrence in the city – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Genesis 6:4, ESV: ‘… in those days, and also afterward…’ These people were addicted to this particular act of perversion with fallen angels offering themselves in human form, and they were not going to let this new opportunity pass. It explains the biblical phrases unnatural desire and strange flesh. We can comprehend the necessity of destroying Sodom and the three other surrounding cities, to halt the process of sabotaging the human race being repeated as before the Flood. 

These additional rebellious angels after the flood, must have been dwelling in or visiting these cities. There is no mention of their being placed in restraint with the former Watchers, rather they underwent a punishment of eternal fire or eternal* death. Their comrades are chained in hell, underneath and inside the Earth in darkness. The word for hell is Tartarus and signifies a deep abyss: the mythological underworld and abode for the dead – Article: Thoth. Message Bible: ‘And you know the story of the angels who didn’t stick to their post, abandoning it for other, darker missions. But they are now chained and jailed in a black hole until the great Judgment Day.’

The author of 2 Peter elaborates similarly to Jude’s explanation.

2 Peter 2:4-6

English Standard Version

4 ‘For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; 5 if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes [G5077 – tephroo: to incinerate, consume] he condemned them to extinction* [G2692 – katastrophe: destruction, demolition, ‘the extinction of a spirit’], making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly…’

Jude 8-16, 18-19

English Standard Version

‘Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones. But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively. Woe to them! For they walked in the way of Cain and abandoned themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam’s error and perished in Korah’s rebellion’ – Article: Belphegor.

The Devil may have wanted Moses to remain dead and Michael was tasked with resurrecting Moses, as he was bodily visible in the transfiguration account along with Elijah – Matthew 17:1-4. Was the Devil objecting to Moses being raised from the dead early?

‘These are hidden reefs at your love feasts, as they feast with you without fear, shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds [without the Holy Spirit], swept along by winds; fruitless trees [spiritually dead] in late autumn, twice dead [no hope of resurrection], uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars [homeless angels], for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever [eternal darkness of death].

It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying,“Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, toexecute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” [Enoch 1:9] These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own sinful desires; they are loud-mouthed boasters, showing favoritism to gain advantage… “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit.’

The Days of Noah were the Days of the Nephilim: Genesis Sixth Chapter, C K Quarterman – emphasis mine: 

‘The Nephilim and Fallen Angels… appear in the myths of many diverse cultures, and folklore, sometimes passing themselves off as beings that came from the stars, even calling themselves star gods. The emperors of Japan, the Kings of the Aztec’s, and Mayans, are said to be descendants of the star gods… the Titans [Titan the Sun-god, ancestor of the Titans and elder brother of Kronos, god of Saturn the original sun]… were a race of powerful deities in Greek mythology… the elder gods are overthrown by the younger Olympians. In this myth, the Dark Lords are the descendants of Uranus (ruler of the cosmos), that ruled during the legendary “Golden Age”. In this golden age of Greek mythology, Cronus (Ancient Greek – Kronos), overthrew Uranus during a ten-year series of battles, known as the “Battle of the Titans” -refer article: Thoth].

‘The Nephilim… became the heroes of Greek and Roman mythology. The children of the Nephilim gave birth to the Elouid. The Nephilim and the Elouid were the builders of the large objects found around the world, such as the [Egyptian] Pyramids, the smaller pyramids in Central America, Cambodia, and ancient temples… the many early megaliths, and structures’ refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim-]…

‘The name [Elioud also transliterated Eljo] is the word used for the antediluvian children of the Nephilim; being a quarter angelic. The Fallen Angels fathered Nephilim and the Nephilim fathered the Elouid. For instance, [the giant King David fought], Goliath of Gath was a son of a giant; not a Nephilim himself, but rather he was an Elouid.

The Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, and all ancient cultures, recorded a race of beings displaying great powers of intellect, huge size and great strength. These nearly universal records give testimony of very large beings, generally from 8 to 12 feet tall, but some as tall as thirty-six feet. Some weighed over a thousand pounds. The Sumerians had Gilgamesh, the Babylonian King which is pictured on stone tablets recovered from Mesopotamia. He is depicted holding two lions by the leg, one in each hand. It is said he was able to take out a lion single handed, because of his size and incredible strength.

According to tradition, the Nephilim had enormous psychic abilities. They performed levitation, mind control, and remote viewing. They had the power of pronouncing and removing curses and diseases, and had ways of knowing and predicting the future. They were extremely intelligent. They knew all about science, architecture, and engineering. According to 1 Enoch they created human sacrifice. They drank blood, were cannibals and taught abortion. They certainly tampered with both human and animal gene pools [Book of Jasher] to try and hinder redemption through a human bloodline. The book of Enoch states, “And the fifth [Satan (of five), serving the Satan] was named Kasdeja: this is he who showed… the smitings of the embryo in the womb, that it may pass away…” (Enoch 69:12a).’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 20-21, 23:

‘All primeval cultures teem with fabulous stories of famous heroes, people of great size and… strength… superheroes… from a sexual union between immortal gods and humans… Hercules, the most famous of the Greek Titans, was the hero son of Zeus and Alcmena… [and] with the gods [fallen Angels]… [fended] off the ten-year Titan [Nephilim-giants] rebellion against the gods. Hercules slew the leader of the rebellious giants, Alcyoneus. Hercules is also famous for slaying a dragon [Seraph] in his quest for the Golden Apples (Tree of Life) that granted immortality, which was located in the Garden of Hesperides (Eden). Jason… quested after the Golden Fleece, the Golden Pelt of Aries the Ram, guarded by a dragon. Jason’s ship, Argos… and his crew was known as the Argonauts. Hercules was a member of Jason’s crew. Cadmus was… the brother of the female Titan Europa… Hesiod noted the refugee Titan remnant fled to the blessed Isles on the edge of the world; likely England and Ireland.’

The [Elioud] Race, C K Quarterman – emphasis mine:

‘The Giants or Nephilim had the spirits of their fathers, but mortal bodies like their mothers… [so] they could also reproduce with human women… and their children are called the Elouid… [or] Eljo. What most authors have not taken into account is that Nephilim and their children the Eloiud could reproduce. This explains some of the strangeness of ancient mythology… The amount of genetic variation throughout all modern human populations is surprisingly small and implies a recent origin for the common ancestor of us all. Accordingly, this agrees with Noah’s flood where in Genesis the Nephilim and their children are destroyed. Although, there were other incursions of fallen angels they never again corrupted humanity to the degree they had previously to the flood. Nephilim [possibly] and Elouid [probably] had six fingers and six toes. 

And yet again there was war at Gath, where was a man of great stature, whose fingers and toes were four and twenty, six on each hand, and six on each foot: and he also was the son of the giant. But when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea David’s brother slew him. These were born until the giant in Gath; and they fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants. (1 Chronicles 20:6-8).’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 26-31 – emphasis & bold mine:

Nephilim were ‘bulked by muscle, gifted with strength. Og’s height to breadth ratio… was an astonishing two to one, establishing Og as being incredibly broad, for the average human maintains a three to one ratio… One needs to only reason that such large beings must have been designed and bioengineered differently in order to support such size and weight. Josephus indicated that the countenances of the giants were entirely unique from normal human anatomy. Nephilim descendants were terrible and surprising to the sight, just as they were fearsome to the hearing… terrible to look upon… [possessing] the face of a viper, a snake. Josephus went on to state that the bones of those creatures were kept on public display for all to wonder at… as late as 70 CE… let us look to define Anak: ‘long necked, i.e. a giant,” that the sun touched their necks because they were so long, like those of snakes… a frightening (snake-like) appearance… emim translates as “inspiring fear,” and rephaim translates as “causing one’s heart to grow weak at a glance.”

Nephilim mirrored their fathers, fallen angels serpents identified as seraphim… Serpent-like angels… recorded in the Gnostic gospel Origin of the World, possessing faces that were long and narrow, prominent cheekbones, elongated jawbones, thin lips, and slanted eyes… Nephilim and watchers were both referred to by the antediluvians as serpents… Nephilim eyes were said to have been glowing and solid gold or honey coloured, while their skin was white [fair] and rough [scaly?]… Egyptian monuments recorded both Anakim and Rephaim as unusually tall and fair-skinned… Canaanite art… clearly portrays beings with long, serpentine necks, heads like cobras, small mouths and coffee bean eyes.

We will return many times to the Canaanites… with particular reference to Nephilim and their cult of the bull… [refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy] the shadowy… Anunnaki, were referred to in the Kur-Sag Epic as princes and splendid serpents… Eves name somehow derived from or is related to the word snake, and Eve was an original serpent goddess of fertility and life… As for the Central Americans, the practice of flattening the skull was likely an attempt to approximate the image of an early civilised and dominant people, perhaps the Nephilim… [their] culture and religions were oozing with serpentine imagery.’

The land of Canaan named because Canaan’s descendants had originally settled there, became a popular piece of real estate – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Subsequent descendants of Shem also settled in the land and as discussed elsewhere, these later arrivals were called by some of the names attributed to Canaan’s original sons – refer Chapter XXIII Aram** & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; Chapter XV The Philsitines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. There were yet another set of arrivals between the two, though they may have actually been the first. These, are the Nephilim. 

Recall the angels who sinned before the flood were chained or bound… until the time of Judgment – 2 Peter 2:4.

The second incursion after the flood would have been a new set of fallen angels as indicated by the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and or, Nephilim flood survivors. When the Israelites reconnoiter the land of Canaan before entering in 1406 BCE, by sending spies, they record:

Numbers 13:32-33

New English Translation

‘Then they presented the Israelites with a discouraging report of the land they had investigated, saying, “The land that we passed through to investigate is a land that devours [cannibals] its inhabitants. All the people we saw there are of great stature [Elioud giants]. We even saw the Nephilim [H5303 – nphiyl: giants] there (the descendants of Anak came from the Nephilim), and we seemed like grasshoppers [one would against giants up to possibly thirty-six feet tall] both to ourselves and to them.”

We are introduced to the Anakim, a dominant race of giants and descendants of Anak a first generation Elioud – the son of Arba from the Nephilim. In the Old Testament there are many families or clans of giants recorded. It is not a hard and fast rule, though in the main if a family with ite(s) on the end has a name originally given to a son of Canaan, then these people would either be human or possibly a human and Elioud mix – for example, Jebus and the Jebusites. If they have a name that is not derived from one of Canaan’s sons, then they are most likely either completely or predominantly of Elioud descent. For instance the Anakim (or Anakites).

The situation we find in Canaan when the Israelites are instructed to take the land and kill everyone, is that humans and giants are living amongst each other as they had done in the days of Sodom, Gomorrah and the surrounding cities nearly five hundred years previously. For instance Amalek, who we encountered in the Battle of the Valley of Siddim in 1894 BCE – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. They existed as Nephilim descended giants in Abraham’s day; by the time the sons of Jacob arrived, they also included an amalgamation with the descendants of Esau’s grandson Amalek – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Genesis 15:18-21

English Standard Version

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

The Creator promised the land of Canaan to Abraham and one specific line of his descendants, the family of Jacob. The tribes listed here are a mixture of human and Nephilim. The Kenites are later associated with Esau and the Horites, also a Nephilim related peoples which Esau’s line intermarried. 

The Kenizzites, Kadmonities and Perizzites are names not listed with Canaan’s children. The Kenites are considered by some to be descendants of Cain. We will study the Kenites further and seek to answer whether they were astonishing survivors of the flood or began anew after the deluge – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The Rephaim were post-flood Nephilim and from them descended the clans of Elioud giants stated in the Old Testament, such as the Anakim. Rephaim means, faded ones or ones who have sunk. It is similar to the term Nephilim, meaning the fallen.

All the other names listed would have been the true descendants of Canaan circa 1977 to 1877 BCE during the time of Abraham. By 1406 BCE though, theses names were indicative in part, of descendants of Shem and with some irony, children of Abraham from his second wife Keturah and also from Sarah’s handmaiden, Hagar. 

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, page 115: 

‘It is possible that a reference to the blond Amorite race is to be found in the Old Testament. The word khori in Hebrew means ‘white bread’ from a root which signifies ‘to be white,’ and the most natural way of explaining the name of the Horim or Horites, the predecessors of the Edomites in the mountains of Seir, is that it signifies ‘the Blonds.’ It is difficult otherwise to understand its recurrence in districts with which the Horites had nothing to do.’ 

The Nephilim were whiter than white – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The blondness may be in reference to them solely, or inclusive of the white population living amongst them.

Deuteronomy 20:17

New Century Version

‘Completely destroy these people: the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded.’

Judges 3:5

English Standard Version

‘So the people of Israel lived among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.’

The sons of Jacob did not completely destroy the human population of the land, nor had they wiped out the Nephilim and Elioud threat. It wasn’t until King Davids reign (1010 to 970 BCE) when remnants of the giants living in Canaan suffered extinction.

Numbers 24:21

English Standard Version

‘And he looked on the Kenite, and took up his discourse and said, “Enduring is your dwelling place, and your nest is set in the rock.”*

Like the Horites, the Kenites lived in caves and carved out rock faces. The Kenite name associated with Esau’s descendants, later became linked with Abraham’s grandchildren from his son Midian. Perhaps the original Kenites were descendants of Cain and Cainites. What is interesting about this, is that both Cain and the Kenites were renowned in history as metal smiths.

A H Sayce, pages 118-119:

‘Separate from the Edomites or Amalekites were the Kenites or wandering ‘smiths’. They formed an important Guild in an age when the art of metallurgy was confined to a few. In the time of Saul we hear of them as camping among the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:6), while the prophecy of Balaam seems to imply that they had established themselves at Petra* (Numbers 22: 20, 21). The art of working iron was one which required peculiar skill and strength, and the secrets it involved were jealously preserved among certain… families.’

Numbers 13:29

English Standard Version

“The Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb. The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country. And the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.”

Joshua 11:3

English Standard Version

‘… to the Canaanites in the east and the west, the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, and the Jebusites in the hill country, and the Hivites under [Mount] Hermon in the land of Mizpah.’

Not only did the Nephilim live in caves and rock faces, they also preferred to live up high at elevated altitudes. There is a school of thought that there is a correlation between people with rhesus negative blood and bearing Nephilim ancestors. We will return to the rhesus negative blood type in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. Interesting to note is that rhesus negative holders possess a greater oxygen capacity and are in turn more adaptable to higher altitudes and mountain side habitation. Mount Hermon in the land of Bashan was renowned for where the Watchers first descended to the physical planes of Earth. After the Flood, it was venerated by the Nephilim. Notice the Hivites lived at the base of Mt Hermon, or even in catacombs underneath. The later ‘Hivites’ are a people descended from Abraham and became known by this Canaanite label. 

The Hivites and Kenites developed a close relationship with two of Jacob’s sons as well as Canaan’s children who dwelt in Sidon – all living at high altitude (refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

Amos 2:9

English Standard Version

“Yet it was I who destroyed the Amorite before them, whose height was like the height of the cedars and who was as strong as the oaks; I destroyed his fruit above and his roots beneath.”

The blond ‘Amorites’ were a prominent people and not to be compared with the original son of Canaan, Amor. Nor to be confused with these Amorites, where their name means, ‘the high ones’ for they were tall giants, are the Amorites who were associated with northern Mesopotamia, Akkad and Babylon as early ruling dynasties, descended from Shem’s son Aram.** Sihon, King of the Amorites and Og, King of Bashan were infamous giants who dwelt east of the Jordan River in Gilead. This territory was later associated with Jacob’s sons Dan and Reuben. Og and Sihon’s inherited power can be attributed to their reputed ancestor; none other than leader of the fallen Watchers, Samyaza (aka Samael). 

Deuteronomy 3:11

English Standard Version

‘For only Og the king of Bashan was left of the remnant of the Rephaim [not an original Nephilim, but an Elioud giant]. Behold, his bed was a bed of iron. Is it not in Rabbah of the Ammonites? Nine cubits was its length [13.5 feet], and four cubits its breadth [6 feet], according to the common cubit [of 18 inches].’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 177-178 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Og was king of Gilead… and… Bashan… a gigantic man, known for his great strength and power… [his] beauty… complimented by the extraordinary adeptness and skill of his hands… Og was a surviving antediluvian ancestor [descendant] of the Nephilim[the] Talmud… [cites] Og as progeny of Hiyya, son of Shemyaza… Other Jewish legends, recorded Og and Sihon were sons of Aniah, who also connected his ancestry back to Shemazai… believed to be the last of the original antediluvian giants that somehow survived the deluge. In Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis… Og escaped the flood by clinging to a rope ladder attached to Noah’s Ark… Noah … took pity… and fed Og daily… Og swore an oath… that he… would serve Noah and his descendants in perpetuity… and his kin that were with him. Og repented of his evil… But at some point after the floodwaters had receded, Og returned to his wicked antediluvian ways.’

Book of Enoch Chapter Six

4. ‘And they all answered [Samyaza] and said: ‘Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.’ 5. Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations [curse, malediction] upon it. 6. And they were in all two [million]; who descended in the days of Jared [Enoch’s father, circa 22,000 BCE] on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it.’

The meaning of Hermon, includes interpretations of high and sacred and is then placed with mountain, thus sacred mountain. It can mean a firm fort or ‘mountain of snow.’ The verb haram means literally: ‘to designate’ or ‘consign to the afterlife.’

Mount Hermon is 43 miles from Ashtaroth, the ancient capital of King Og of Bashan

The Anasazi and Anakim: Nephilim Ruins and Evidence of Ritual Murder, Mark Andrew Carpenter – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Who were the Anasazi? The term Anasazi is a xenonym used primarily by the Navajo people, which has been variously translated as “ancient ones” or “ancient enemies” or “ancient ancestral enemies.” This refers to a genetic and culturally unique group who were hostile towards the ancestors of modern tribes, and who dominated the American Southwest in ancient times before other tribes displaced them. Different Native American tribes like the Paiute and Hopi make references to this same group in their traditions. The daughter of Paiute Chief Winnemucca, Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins wrote about who her people called the Si-Te-Cah in her book Life Among the Paiutes: Their Wrongs and Claims. The Paiute oral tradition holds that the Si-Te-Cah, were a race of red-haired, cannibalistic giants who the Paiutes exterminated long ago.’

Anasazi cliff dwellings in Mesa Verde National Park, USA

‘Who were the Anakim? According to scholars, when the Hebrews completed their forty years of wandering through the Sinai desert they finally arrived in the promised land of Canaan, which was already occupied by a race of fearsome giants, whom we now call the Anakim… the wealth of context clues makes it quite clear that this was a race of giant warriors who preceded the arrival of the Hebrews into Canaan, very similar to the Native American Anasazi tribal stories. 

In the early Greek interpretations the word Nephilim was translated as “giants.” Other, later translations include “fallen ones,” and “appointed ones or overseers,” and “bound ones, or prisoners.”

Apocryphal texts such as the Book of Enoch provide additional clues about the Nephilim/Anakim people, but these texts are generally regarded by academics as lacking validity because they were omitted from the official biblical cannon. However, the term apocrypha comes from the Greek roots apo (away) and krytein (to hide or conceal). This would suggest that these books were not omitted due to a lack of validity, but, rather, were deliberately hidden for some other reason, perhaps political or theological.

The academic position on these Nephilim/Anakim accounts is that the fundamental, literal interpretation of them is deeply flawed, and rightfully so. Mythology cannot be automatically accepted at face value. However, therein lies a contradiction because the mainstream academics automatically reject any historical value in these accounts, which is equally flawed reasoning, nothing more than fundamental figurative interpretation. This gives rise to a discerning question: is there archaeological/anthropological evidence to support these myths about the Nephilim/Anakim?

Early American archaeology is filled with reports of human remains that exhibited unique physical traits and theories of a vanished ethnic group. However, this narrative was rejected by the academic authorities of the time, including the Smithsonian and the National Geographical Society, even though it was their own experts advancing such theories.

Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah are littered with strange ruins and petroglyphs that are vaguely attributed to tribes that preceded modern Native Americans. 

In a National Geographic article from 2016, Aaron Sidder explored the odd reality that the ruling elite of Chaco Culture had six fingers and toes, hence the title of the article “Extra Fingers and Toes Were Revered in Ancient Culture.” The article states that anthropologist Patricia Crown from the University of New Mexico was originally fascinated by the “divine powers attributed to polydactyls among the Maya.” Polydactyls are humans with extra fingers or toes. Crown goes on to summarize her team’s findings at Chaco Canyon, “We found that people with six toes especially, were common and seemed to be associated with important ritual structures and high-status objects like turquoise” – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘Six fingered hand and six toed footprints impressed upon the plaster walls of ancient structures have also been discovered. It is known that there were dwellings and ritual structures, but why exactly these subterranean ritual spaces (known as kivas) were dug into the ground and why so many were fashioned in a honeycomb design is unknown. It’s clear that there were certain geographic, geometric, and astronomical alignments taken into account by the ancient builders of these structures [Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim]. But these areas are generally poor locations for accessing natural resources… regarding Mesa Verde, which is another Anasazi site in southwestern Colorado… [there was the] discovery of cannibalism at the site. “Cut marks and percussion scars implicate humans in the disarticulation and reduction of these bodies. Evidence of heat exposure on some bone fragments and laboratory analyses of human coprolite recovered from one of the pit houses support the interpretation that people prepared and consumed human body parts.”

The Anasazi White House Ruins in Canyon de Chelly National Monument, Arizona

‘Another Anasazi site within Arizona’s Canyon de Chelly… [included]… the discoveries [of] no bones of animals [having] been found, no skins, no clothing, no bedding. Many of the rooms are bare but for water vessels. One room, about 40 by 700 feet, was probably the main dining hall, for cooking utensils are found here. What these people lived on is a problem, though it is presumed that they came south in the winter and farmed in the valleys, going back north in the summer. Undoubtedly, a good many thousands of years before the Christian era, a people lived here which reached a high stage of civilization. 

The remains of 14 infants were found in a slab-lined [cyst] used earlier as a storage bin. Below the infants were the bodies of four other children packed in an enormous basket…

In Utah’s Dry Fork Canyon, petroglyphs adorn primordial stone walls, and these glyphs tell ancient stories of violence. At the Fermont petroglyphs for instance, a figure interestingly known as “big foot man” (due to his disproportionate foot size) is depicted with a cone-shaped head, six fingers, who seems to be proudly displaying decapitated victims. Another glyph at McConkie Ranch shows a horned figure brandishing a bloody weapon illustrated through the use of a red pigment.

In 1911, at Lovelock Cave in Nevada, guano miners discovered a trove of ancient bones and artifacts. Then from 1912 to 1965 a series of… excavations occurred at the site during which tens-of-thousands of objects, including… strange human remains, were recovered… looking at the fragments of information available some disturbing conclusions can be drawn. For instance, in the photographs it is evident that some of the skulls had teeth that were apparently filed to a sharp point, which is a customary practice also found amongst certain Polynesian tribes who practiced cannibalism. Also, within the fine print of these reports are measurements of at least one skeleton. 

It was 6.5 feet (2 meters) tall and the mandibles, bone density, and ocular cavities suggest that these were very large, very muscular people with abnormal eyes.

Before delving into the texts, artifacts, and remains regarding the people who preceded the ancient Canaanites (the Anakim), it’s important to touch on the fact that cultures like the Philistines, Canaanites, and Phoenicians are not well understood. The boundaries of their civilization, their genetics, and cultural assimilation patterns are an extremely complex web that is still mostly a mystery. But there is strong evidence for the notion that the Carthaginians, Philistines, and Phoenicians were all offshoot branches of the same original civilization: the Canaanites. It is not disputed that the Phoenician homeland was in the Levant. The ancient Egyptian accounts suggest the people from Carthage referred to themselves as Kenaani or Kinaani which equates to Canaanite.’

The Philistines are descended partially from the line of Ham and his son Mizra, the ancestor of Casluh, Pathros and Caphtor – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. The original Canaan was the youngest son of Ham – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Once we have studied the Phoenicians, including their related kin, the Carthaginians and covered the other two sets of ‘Canaanites’ we will be able to unravel the web of mystery for this region – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The second set of Canaanites, being the Nephilim and their giant Elioud offspring.

Carpenter: ‘In 2005… Dr. Aren Maeir, professor at BarIlan University in Israel and director of an excavation at the ancient city of Gath, discovered pottery shards with the name Goliath inscribed on them. The biblical combatant Goliath was said to be the greatest warrior of the Philistines. He… had six fingers on each hand, six toes on each foot, and he was known as the Goliath of Gath. The shard is dated to around 950 BC, which is within seventy years [of the fight with David circa 1022 BCE and] of the alleged biblical existence of Goliath.’ 

The Gath archaeological site in Israel where the Goliath fragment was found. This fragment is strongly connected with the Anakim giants. 

‘King Og of Bashan is perhaps the most interesting… because his great size and strength are mentioned in correlation with a structure and an area in the region. In… Deuteronomy, it is stated that Og is the last of the Rephaim and that his enormous bedstead, or sarcophagus, was still a site of wonder for many people.’

An old drawing of King Og of Bashan, an Anakim giant – note the other giants in the upper right of the picture

‘The entire Levant, from Turkey to Egypt, is dotted with field after field of ancient dolmens. In this particular Canaan region, there is a site known as Rujm el-Hiri, which is connected with the Anakim people. This site has many names, but one modern Hebrew name for the site is Gilgal Refaim or “the wheel of the giant.” The central section of this site matches the dimensions stated in Deuteronomy but also shares uncanny similarities to the mysterious structures at Chaco Canyon. Structural resemblance in and of itself would not be noteworthy. But an enigmatic megalith of concentric stone circles* that allegedly contains the remains of a very large polydactyl is beyond noteworthy’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim*.

We will encounter a circular pattern in connection with the Nephilim and of their constructions consistently on our journey.

These concentric circles* are strangely, intriguingly, consistently and uniquely, replicated in the layout of

a. Stonehenge;

b. Plato’s account of the geographic configuration of Atlantis;

c. crop circles;

Silbury, Wiltshire, England, 2005

d. the rings of both Saturn; and the recently discovered, Super Saturn.

C K Quarterman – emphasis and bold mine:

‘Over the past several decades, there have been a steadily increasing number of archaeological discoveries, which, because of their mysterious and highly controversial nature, have been classified as ‘out-of-place’ artifacts… [called] Ooparts. 

[They are] objects and artifacts which are found in the wrong place and the wrong time [that] may give evidence of a Pre-Adamite earth. There appearances in… layers of geological strata (which are very ancient) give non-traditional science evidence of a preceding period of technical sophistication extending far beyond the inventive capabilities of the ancient peoples among whose remains they were discovered… ancient artifacts arise which baffle orthodox [disciplines]… [providing] clues in these anomalies or Ooparts… [which indicate] that ancient civilizations had a highly advanced technology. 

The pyramids of Egypt are among the most enduring and perhaps the most obvious signs of advanced ancient technology. The pyramids show a highly advanced system of science and engineering’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘The Indian Mahabharata… describes wars where terrible weapons are used. “Gurkha, flying in his swift and powerful Vimana, hurled against the three cities of the Vrishnas and Andhakas a single projectile charged with all the power of the universe. An incandescent column of smoke and fire, as brilliant as ten thousand suns, rose in all its splendor. It was the unknown weapon, the iron thunderbolt, a gigantic messenger of death, which reduced to ashes the entire race of the Vrishnis and Andhakas. The corpses were so burnt they were no longer recognizable. Hair and finger nails fell out, Pottery broke without cause. Foodstuffs were poisoned. To escape, the warriors threw themselves in streams to wash themselves and their equipment.”

In the possession of the Creation Evidences Museum at Glen Rose, Texas is another ancient artifact. This artifact consists of a metal hammer, imbedded in Ordovician rock, with a portion of the handle still in place. This was discovered in June of 1936 near London. At the time of the discovery the Ordovician rock encased the entire metal hammer. Battelle Laboratories analyzed the artifact and found that the metal hammer head was 96.6% iron, 0.74% sulfur, and 2.6% chlorine. 

I am told no metallurgist today can alloy metallic iron with chlorine. Fabrication of this implement required technology which cannot be duplicated today.

[A] disk* is in the possession of Professor Gutierrez of Bogota, [Columbia; this] disk shows men and women, depicted sexually. In addition, around the edges is the progression of a fetus to a child. This disk from South America is one of the most interesting finds in Ooparts Archaeology. This disk is made of black stone and measures about 22 cm in diameter, and weighs 2-kilo grams. It is made of a stone called Luddite.’

‘A prehistoric dating has been suggested for the stone, but this disk cannot be classified in any known South American system of cultures. The symbols on the disk are carvings separated with single vertical stripes. One side shows biological details like male sperm, female egg cells, and genitals, the fertilized egg, and a growing embryo. The male sperm and female egg can only be seen with a microscope! How did the ancients know this? The other side of the Genetic Disk shows scenes of cell division. Researchers are plainly able to recognize the different phases of human gestation on the disk. Very significant are the distant eyes and the broad nose of the zygote. This is a characteristic of the embryonic structure of the [human] head.’

The Anasazi and Anakim:

‘There is a wealth of ancient textual evidence to suggest that the Canaanites (and therefore the Anakim) practiced human sacrifice/infanticide to an extent that exceeds what has been “found” in the Bible or chapters removed from the original Bible. Greek and Roman authors all recorded accounts that reinforced the idea that sacrifice/infanticide was common with the Anakim’ – Article: Belphegor.

‘Authors like Plutarch and Herodotus, for example, attest to this in their writings… in 2014, Dr. Josephine Quinn of Oxford University uncovered definitive evidence of infant sacrifice at a variety of Phoenician/Carthaginian/Canaanite colonies across the Mediterranean declaring “What we are saying now is that the archaeological, literary, and documentary evidence for child sacrifice is overwhelming and that instead of dismissing it out of hand, we should try and understand it.”

While legends cannot be blindly accepted at face value, empirical evidence indicates the presence in the ancient past of genetically unique humans who practiced ritualistic murder, mutilation, and cannibalism. They were large, red-haired polydactyls, master masons, astronomers, and seafarers. They were renowned for their bloodlust and combat capability. It cannot be stated as fact that the Anasazi originated in Canaan, home of the Anakim, but it can be stated that such stark cultural and genetic parallels cannot be mere coincidence.

The sons of Anak, the Anakim, were the leading Elioud family of the Nephilim line known as Rephaim after the Flood and in the land of Canaan. Other leading tribes of giants counted as Rephaim include: the Emites (or Emim) meaning ‘terrors’ or ‘terrible ones’, the Zamzummites, (or Zuzites), the Horites and Avvites – Genesis 14:5-6 and Deuteronomy 2:10-12, 23. Apart from these five main clans, numerous other giants are described in the scriptures either in battle or in contention with the sons of Jacob, including: the demagogue Nimrod; Goliath of Gath; Agag, king of the Amalekites; and Og, king of Bashan. 

Two unnamed giants include: a warrior in 1 Chronicles 20:6; and an Egyptian in 1 Chronicles 11:23. Cities or locations where they lived included: Hebron; Seir; Gaza; Gath; Ashdod; Bashan; Ham; Moab; and the Valley of the Rephaim. There are also famous giant slayers, such as Chedorlaomer, King David and Saul’s son, Jonathan. Peoples affiliated with giants in the Bible already discussed, include: the Amorites; Perizzites; the Philistines; Amalekites; Kenites; and the Jebusites, whose name means ‘those who trample.’

In Isaiah 13:3 we read of the the holy mighty ones making a future appearance and are in fact the instruments of the Creator’s wrath:

Orthodox Jewish Bible

I have commanded My Mekuddash [H6942 – qadash: sanctified, sacred, holy, consecrate, majestic, hallow(ed)], I have also summoned My Gibbor [H1368 – gibbowr: mighty, champion, giant] for Mine anger, even them that rejoice in My highness.

New English Translation

I have given orders to my chosen soldiers; I have summoned the warriors through whom I will vent my anger…

Young’s Literal Translation

3 I have given charge to My sanctified ones, Also I have called My mighty ones for Mine anger, Those rejoicing at Mine excellency. 5 They are coming in from a land afar off, From the end of the heavens, Jehovah and the instruments of His indignation, To destroy all the land.

Joel 2:7

King James Version

‘They shall run like mighty men; they shall climb the wall like men of war; and they shall march every one on his ways, and they shall not break their ranks…’

As the Day of the Lord draws near, we will experience a civilisation similar to Noah’s world before the Flood. As we approach full corruption and ultimate extinction, the Son of Man will return just in time to stop humanity sliding into oblivion; just as eight people were saved right before all life on the earth was destroyed in the great Flood. The Son of Man warned in Matthew 24:37 that the days preceding His return would resemble the days of Noah, or a time like Noah’s and then like now, people gave no heed to the Creator’s warnings through Noah or his Word today – still going about their lives as if everything will just carry on, regardless. 

Ecclesiastes 1:9

New English Translation

‘What exists now is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing truly new on earth [or under the sun].’

Hence, since the Nephilim were a major part of the antediluvian age leading into the flood, do not be surprised if a similar scenario is acted out at the end of the age. Gibbor means mighty one and is the same word used for Nimrod. The False Prophet who serves the Beast, may not only beNephilim, but the leader of an uprising of them in furthering the Beast’s mark on the world – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. The mighty ones of the Eternal will ultimately clash and defeat the mighty ones of the Dragon.

In addition to the Book of Enoch found at Qumran with the Dead Sea Scrolls, there is the Book of Giants which similarly expands the narrative of Genesis 6:4 in the Bible.

Reconstructed Text Fragment, Book of Giants, C K Quarterman – emphasis & bold mine:

‘(Gilamesh speaks) “I am a giant, and by my mighty strength in my arm, I can vanquish anyone mortal. I have made war with them (mortals) in the past but I am not now able to stand against my opponents who reside in heaven, and dwell in holy places. And not only this, but they are in fact stronger than I am. The day of the ravening wild beasts has come and that of the wild man [as I am known]. 

I saw a tree uprooted except for three of its roots. While I was… watching, [some beings…] moved all the roots into this garden [but not the three]. “This dream vision concerns the death of our souls,” said Ohya, “and those of Gilgamesh and all his companions. However, Gilgamesh said to me that [all the forebodings] concerned [only the rulers of earth, the temporal, powerful ones, whom the leader of the good angels has cursed].

After this, two of them had visions; they were unable to sleep and they came to their comrades and told their “dreams”, to the assembly, their comrades. The monsters. They reported that in their dream they seemed to be observing a garden [Eden?] where “gardeners” (angels?) were watering two hundred trees [the ‘200’ rebellious Angels, led by Samyaza?] and large shoots came out of their roots. [Suddenly the garden became ablaze] so that the garden was destroyed and all the water evaporated. Then they went to the giants to tell them of their dreams. (The suggestion was made to seek out the scribe and prophet Enoch to interpret the dreams.) Let us seek out [righteous] Enoch, the noted scribe, and he will interpret for us the dream. 

Thereupon Ohya declared to the giants “I too this night had another dream and behold the Ruler of Heaven came down to earth [and made an end of us]. Such is the ending of my dream”. Upon hearing this, all the monster[s] and giants grew afraid and called Mahway, (the Titan) He came to meet the giants who pleaded with him and sent him to Enoch, the scribe. They (the giants) said to him “Go to Enoch so that he may speak to you and then return saying] you have heard his voice.” 

Ohya spoke to Mahway, and said to him, “He (Enoch) will listen and interpret the dreams and tell us how long we giants have to live and rule on earth.” (After a journey through the heavens Mahway sees Enoch and speaks to him of his request) Mahway mounted up in the air as if upon strong winds, using his hands like eagle’s wings. He left behind the inhabited world and passed over the great desert of Desolation, Enoch saw him and hailed him [Mahway told Enoch of his mission and said to him that he would speak with him.] Flying here and there Enoch came a second time to Mahway (after he, Enoch, had warned Mahway about flying too near the sun) Mahway spoke to Enoch and said that the giants and all the monsters of the earth await his words. 

[If the Fall of the wicked angels has been carried out (by divine Providence)] from their days of heavenly glory, can you at least assure us that the number of our days spent doing harm will be added to our lives. We wish to know the meaning of the two hundred trees [trees symbolic of angels] that came down from heaven. (Enoch, having received Mahway’s request, tried to intercede with God but unavailingly. Accordingly, he presented Mahway with a tablet which was full of foreboding about the coming judgement…) The scribe, Enoch, gave Mahway a copy of another tablet (not the one doused in water) that bore his (Enoch’s) own handwriting. 

The writing on the tablet said: in the name of the great and holy God, this message is sent to, Shemihaza [Samyaza], and all his companions. Let it be known to you (the giants and monsters) that you will not escape judgement for all the things that you have done, and that your wives, their sons [Nephilim], and the wives of their [Elioud] sons [will not escape], and that by your licentiousness on the earth, there has been visited upon you a heavenly judgement. The land is crying out and complaining about you and the deeds of your children and about the harm you have done to it. Until the heavenly angel Raphael, arrives, behold, destruction is coming by a great flood which will destroy all living things, whatever is in the deserts and the seas. The meaning of the [dreams/matter is by way of a judgement] for all your evil. But if you now loosen the bonds binding you to evil and pray (for forgiveness). (You may be saved).’ 

Artistic depiction of Raphael

It is commonly held that fallen angels and demonic spirits are one and the same. The majority of fallen angels are either dwelling outside our dimension or as the two hundred myriads (two million) who descended to earth, are in restraint within the dungeon that is the deep abyss of tartarus. They are extremely powerful entities and would in the main, have no reason or use in inhabiting a human body – though there may be exceptions. Whereas, the deceased Nephilim were different, in that they being half spirit, were dispossessed of their earthly, physical bodies upon death and continued to live as discorporate spirits. 

Book of Enoch 15:1-12

But HE raised me up and said to me with HIS voice, “Enoch,” I then heard, “Do not fear, Enoch, righteous man, scribe of righteousness; come near to ME and hear MY voice.” “And tell the Watchers of heaven on whose behalf you have been sent to intercede: ‘It is meet for you that you intercede on behalf of man, and not man on your behalf.”

“For what reason have you abandoned the high… and eternal heaven; and slept with women and defiled yourselves with the daughters of the people, taking wives, acting like the children of the earth, and begetting giant sons?”

Surely you used to be spiritual, the living ones, (possessing) eternal life; but now you have defiled yourselves with women, and with the blood of the flesh begotten children, you have lusted with the blood of the people, like them producing blood and flesh, which die and perish.”

“On that account, I have given you wives in order that seeds might be sown upon them and children born by them, so that the deeds that are done upon the earth will not be withheld from you.” “Indeed you, formerly you were spiritual, having eternal life; and immortal in all the generations of the world.” “That is why formerly I did not make wives for you, for the dwelling of the spiritual beings of heaven is heaven.” 

But now the giants who are born from the union of the spirits and the flesh shall be called evil spirits upon the earth, because their dwelling shall be upon the earth and inside the earth.” “Evil spirits have come out of their bodies. Because from the day that they were created from the ones [that] became the Watchers; their first origin is the spiritual foundation. They will become evil upon the earth and shall be called evil spirits.”

“The dwelling of the spiritual beings of heaven is heaven; but the dwelling of the spirits of the earth, which are born upon the earth, is in the earth.” “The spirits of the giants oppress each other; they will corrupt, fall, be excited, and fall upon the earth, and cause sorrow. They eat no food, nor become thirsty, nor find obstacles.” “And these spirits shall rise up against the children of the people and against the women, because they have proceeded forth from them.”

As demonic spirits are trapped in our physical realm, some seek out bodies to enter and inhabit.

Matthew 12:43

New Century Version

“When an evil [G169 – akathartos: unclean, foul, impure, daemonic] spirit comes out of a person, it travels [passes] through dry places [arid or waterless], looking [craving] for a place to rest [or with water], but it doesn’t find it.”

Disembodied Nephilim, now evil spirits were accustomed to a corporal body and so seek to find rest for their spirit in the familiar environment of a person’s physical body – or perhaps more accurately, their mind. They are called familiars by mediums because they are psychically intimate with those who channel them. These spirits lie about who they are, pretending to be spirits of the dead. No passed away human is communicating with loved ones. It is a lying spirit, who possesses privileged knowledge and is able to fool the innocent or gullible. Apparitions and ghosts are really demonic entities.

Reincarnation is attributable to demons with inside personal knowledge gained from inhabiting previous human beings. For a person who has a strong feeling or knowing about a past life and events, these are genuinely real memories; just not the person’s in question, but rather the demon’s own. 

Evil spirits seek attachment to a receptive body and to drain its spiritual energy. To slake some of their own spiritual thirst, by feeding on the host’s soul, as a parasite would. The spirit in man empowers a human being’s mind, as the electrical current conducted by the ionised water within the body powers the brain and the nervous system. It is interesting to note that a human being is typically composed of anywhere between 45 to 75% water. Water in turn being a symbol for spirit – Ezekiel 36:25-27, John 7:37-39. 

These entities gain power from the emitted energy generated from a person’s emotions, particularly those which are negative and dark, such as sadness, depression, suicidal thoughts, fear, anger and especially wrath and hatred. 

Wickedness derived from their worship or submission through, necromancy, witch craft, black magic and the occult allows the inhabiting spirit or spirits to control the host more fully, while draining their energy more deeply, possibly leading to full possession. Sexual excitement and lust, especially those stemming from an inordinate amount of masturbation or perverse activity also gives a spirit greater licence to manipulate and dominate their host. The release of sexual energy at orgasm is the most powerful emittance of energy and is siphoned off, dissipated for the demon’s gratification. 

Returning to the Book of Jude, we can see how it is enlightening regarding the characteristics of the deceased Nephilim, now demonic spirits and not just the dark angels.

Jude 12-13

English Standard Version

These are hidden reefs at your love feasts, as they feast with you without fear, shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.

Twice dead, in that the Nephilim have died once and will die again at the time of Judgement. Twice dead, in that they will become spiritually dead in addition to having undergone a physical death. The fallen Angels blasphemed the Holy Spirit in producing unholy offspring and thus the Nephilim are ultimately condemned to destruction. Though they endeavour to obtain limited and temporary respite now, stealing from individual’s energy auras; they will never obtain eternal spiritual rest.

Romans 6:23

English Standard Version

‘For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life…’

Hebrews 9:27

New English Translation

‘… just as people are appointed to die once, and then to face judgment…’

A second death, equates to eternal death. The first death for humankind is a physical death, which then leads after a resurrection to an opportunity to live forever.

Ezekiel 18:20

New English Translation

‘The person who sins is the one who will die… the righteous person will be judged according to his righteousness, and the wicked person according to his wickedness.’

Job 26:5

New Century Version

‘The spirits of the dead tremble, those who are beneath and in the waters.’

Many Nephilim and their Elioud offspring drowned and physically died, losing their bodies in the flood waters. The ESV in the following verse mentions the leader of the bottomless pit and the future Beast – Abaddon in Hebrew and Apollyon in Greek. Otherwise known as Azazel, with his transgressions exposed and known by the Creator -Chapter XXI The incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod

Job 26:5-6

English Standard Version

‘The dead tremble under the waters and their inhabitants. Sheol [the darkness and dust of the earth] is naked before God, and Abaddon has no covering.’

1 Timothy 4:1

New King James Version

‘Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith [the faith Jude said to earnestly contend for], giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons…’

False dogma, doctrines and teachings in Christianity are authored by demons. They can be persuasive and require less belief and less effort on behalf of believers – refer articles: The Pauline Paradox; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

Deuteronomy 32:17

New English Translation

‘[The Israelites] sacrificed to demons, not God, to gods they had not known; to new gods who had recently come along, gods your ancestors had not known about.’

Psalm 106:36-38

New English Translation

‘They worshiped their idols [false gods], which became a snare to them. They sacrificed their sons and daughters to demons. They shed innocent blood – the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols [demons] of Canaan’ – Article: Belphegor. ‘The land was polluted by bloodshed.’

Recall King Solomon, who himself was deceived by the doctrines sacrificing children… submitting to false gods – worshiping demons and surrendering control over himself to them – in exchange for greater power and influence over other people – Article: Na’amah.

The word demon or daimon is linked to the Greek verb daiesthai, which means ‘to divide, distribute.’ The Nephilim were certainly divided, or cut in two upon their death.

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

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

Addendum I

A 38 centimetre long finger was mysteriously uncovered in Egypt – evidence of the Nephilim?

Ancient Code, December 3, 2023: ‘The images of a giant finger… has researchers clueless as they state that something like this is impossible. According to science, it is impossible, yet, the finger found in Egypt seems to be… real… as the finger even has a certificate of authenticity and X-Ray images [dating to the 1960s]. The images displayed were taken in 1988 and were published by one of Europe’s leading newspaper, BILD.de’

‘The remains of this finger are impressive, it is a huge mummified humanoid finger… Researchers from Egypt believe it had to belong to a creature that was over 5 meters [in] height. Only a few people got to take images of this incredible artifact in 1988. The owner of the giant finger was, according to Gregor Spörri, a grave robber… When Gregor Spörri, a 56-year-old [Swiss] entrepreneur offered to [buy] the finger, the owner responded: NEVER.

In an interview with BILD.de, Spörri stated: “It was an oblong package, smelled musty,” Spörri said when he told his story to the public in 2012. “I was totally flabbergasted when I saw the dark brown giant finger. I was allowed to take it in hand and also to take pictures. A bill was put next to it to get a size comparison. The bent finger was split open and covered with dried mold.”

‘After Spörri left Egypt he wanted to know more about this incredible relic, he wanted to find out where the rest of this giant creature was located. He returned to Egypt in 2009 compelled to learn more about it. Unfortunately, by then, the old man who allowed Spörri to take pictures of the giant finger had vanished, and with him all traces of the mysterious finger that has scientists and researchers scratching their heads.

Researchers have had mixed feelings when it comes to this mysterious ancient relic. The biggest problem is that the finger does not fit into any conventional theories presented by archaeologists or historians… Is this enough evidence to finally conclude that giants did, in fact, walk on Earth in the distant past? And that the mysterious gigantic footprints found in different places on Earth are real?’

Additional details are described by Annemieke Witteveen:

Part 1

‘The journey was a 2 hour ride to the district Bir Hooker, a place near Sadat City, located about 100 km northwest of Cairo. They stopped at a farm where Spörri met an elderly farmer named Nagib. Nagib is a descendant of an ancient family of grave robbers. From a legacy of his ancestors, Nagib inherited two wooden boxes full of valuables that provided him a good income over the years. The stolen treasures were sold to Western tourists and the proceeds bought Nagib land. However, there was one item he never sold which had been in the possession of his family for 150 years. Only a few people had ever seen this object.

Nagib was in financial difficulty so he proposed that Spörri could see this particular object, photograph it and hold it for a fee of $300.  Spörri sat on a wooden bench as Nagib pulled out a wooden box and lifted the lid. As a musty smell rose in the air, he took out an elongated packet, wrapped in a leather cloth with lace around it. Underneath the leather cloth, old rags were wrapped around a strange looking object. When Nagib unwrapped the package, a gray-brown oblong object emerged. He laid the object carefully in the hands of Spörri who examined the object with curiosity. He suddenly realized he was holding a gigantic mummified finger.

It was not an ordinary finger as it measured at least 35 centimeters (13.77 in) long and was about 6 centimeters (2.36 in) thick. Spörri examined the finger in detail and was able to determine that what he was holding was old, organic and humanoid. The finger looked like it had been cut off with anatomical precision, and in some places was crumbled. The leathery skin was ripped in places and the skin was a few millimeters thick. Between the dried skinfolds he could see remains of fungus and the nail was loose. The surface of the skin was damaged in some places, as if mice had gnawed on it. The bone felt woody. 

Spörri was dumbfounded as the abnormal size of the finger would have meant that its owner must have reached at least 5 or 6 meters (16.40 or 19.68 ft) in height. His skepticism led Nagib to show him another item contained within the wooden box – a leather file folder containing a number of documents. Inside the folder was a certificate of authenticity, some papers with Arabic and Latin letters, a Polaroid photo of the finger and an X-ray made in the 60s. The farmer’s son had some research done through a friend in the hospital of Cairo. When Spörri compared the finger to the x-ray he could see that the proportions and shape were correct and that the x-ray was of the finger he was holding.’

Part 2

‘Nagib refused to tell Spörri where the finger was found but made allusions to a hidden room in the basement of the Great Pyramid where huge, empty graves are located. Nagib made it clear that the relic was not for sale as it was too important for Nagib’s family. Before he returned to his hotel, Spörri took a number of photos where he put a banknote next to the finger in order to indicate the size.’

On the way back to Cairo, Spörri realized that what he had seen was very special. In the years following his viewing of the giant… finger, Spörri did not speak much about what he had seen. The times when he did speak about it showed him that scientists were not interested in it, simply because it did not fit in with their existing theories.

So instead Spörri embarked on intensive research into the possibility of the existence of giants in ancient times. He studied sacred texts… and many other writings containing tales and mythologies. He was surprised to discover that there are in fact frequent references to giants. In 79 AD Flavius ​​Josephus mentioned giants in his writings about the Jewish war: “There were giants. Much larger and shaped differently than normal people. Terrible to see. Anyone who has not seen it with his or her own eyes cannot believe they were so big.”

‘Scientists have studied the pictures but were not able to draw any conclusion on the basis of images alone. They did however confirm that the mummified finger appeared authentic but rejected the possibility of a past race of giants. They investigated the possibility of whether the finger may be related to makrodactylie (or Proteus syndrome or gigantism). This condition involves the excessive growth of the toes or fingers of the patient. This theory was subsequently discounted as the relic has normal proportions of thickness and size of the nail in relation to the length of the finger. In Makrodactylie this ratio is absent and the bone will be longer than normal.

Spörri traveled to Egypt again in 2009 to actively search for the relic. In 19 years, however, much had changed, roads had been constructed, the nation has experienced significant civil unrest, and Nagib, an elderly man in 1988, was most likely now deceased. To date, the search has yielded no results and it seems like the relic, as well as its custodians have vanished. Nevertheless, Spörri’s encounter with the ancient mummified finger raises important questions about our past and our origins.’

Addendum II

Exposing the Secret History of Giants and the Underground Hyperborean Gallery in Romania

Valda Roric, January 26, 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘About 5,500 years ago, an underground gallery was constructed in the region by the Agathyrsi. In February 2012, a group of geologists followed the gold vein in the same place. They kept digging until they ended up at the base of the gallery. To their utter surprise, they found a gravestone which was definitely not made of common rock. The geologists took a sample, and the laboratory results revealed that the components of the tombstone included 55% 50 karat gold dust, 15% granite dust and 30% wolfram. Also, the analysis revealed that the composite rock had been made using a type of technology unknown today.

Known by the name of “The Hyperborean Gallery” or “Gallery 13”, the place of this amazing discovery is located beneath Cornea village. A number of other discoveries were made at the site in 1976. However, in the name of “security” the anthropological and archaeological discoveries were deemed too unusual and shocking for the time, so the gallery was permanently sealed.

The gravestone was not the only unusual item found inside the gallery. On it, archaeologists found a 10 meter (32.8 ft.) tall skeleton of a giant. Apparently, the giant had been buried there after his death, with his legs gathered on one side. Lacking the proper equipment necessary to analyze such a find, the skeleton was sent to Moscow. Unfortunately, nothing has been reported about the giant ever since.’

The discovery of a skeleton that measures 10 meters or 32.8 Feet

‘As for the tombstone, a new series of research was planned to analyze it in 2012. The relic was dug up once again and measurements showed that it was six meters (19.7 feet) wide, twelve meters (39.4 feet) long and three meters (9.8 feet) tall. It weighed almost 1700 tons and contained somewhere around 900 tons of solid gold. To make a comparison, such a quantity of gold would have required over twenty years of mining work to gather’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘The last thing known about the gravestone is that it had been cut up into 80 smaller pieces in order to make its transportation possible. As for its destination, it is not known where it lies today.

One of the archaeologists working in Gallery 13 took a set of photos with the gravestone and sent them to a paleolinguist. The latter noticed emerald green bas-relief writing covering the entire surface of the artifact. The text had been written in three parallel rows which started in the upper left. From there, the writing descended diagonally, similar to a serpent, and formed a spiral around a wolf head. Finally, the script ended in the lower right corner. The paleolinguist speculated that the unknown writing could be Pelasgian and that the discovery with its markings and writing clearly possessed great cultural and historical value. Nevertheless, the gravestone was cut and melted. The state obtained a share of 19 pieces, 31%, as stipulated in the local gold exploitation contract’ – refer Romania: Chapter XIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

‘During the excavation, the lifting of the gravestone also revealed the entrance to a pit. The four meter (13.1 feet) diameter pit had a descending spiral stairway and a milky violet light radiated from the inside. A closer inspection of the stairs made it clear that they looked as if cut into the walls of the pit by a laser and, as for the violet light, nobody could determine its source.

Curious to find the source of the light and to see what was inside, the paleolinguist descended into the pit, but nobody else proved brave enough to join him. The night passed and the man never returned from the pit. Ultimately, the army sealed the entry to the pit, as well as the entire Gallery 13, with cement. Those present never talked about the discoveries again – as they had been made to sign confidentiality agreements, therefore what lies beyond the staircase of the pit remains a mystery.

Depending on the region of Romania where the legends come from, there are different names for giants. In the Boziorul area, giants are known as “tartars” (“tartari”), for example. A number of unusually tall skeletons have been uncovered at Scaieni, in Buzaului Mountains. For instance, when locals tried to plant apple trees on a hill, they accidentally discovered humanoid skeletons of over 2.4 meters (8.2 feet) tall along with pottery fragments.’

‘Knowing the local legends, people from the area immediately thought about the tartars. One of these legends even claims that the mountain formation known as the “Pillars of Tainita” (“Stalpii Tainitei”) had actually been built by these giants of old. In the past, the giants were also credited for building two large underground halls somewhere beneath the mountain. The strange formation which can be seen up on Tainita Mountain resembles a set of stone chairs. As they are found at high altitude and in a highly inaccessible area, locals claim that tartars built the chairs to sit on when they wanted to gather for council.

In Maramures, the Fortress of Oncesti (“Cetatea de la Oncesti”) was believed to be the home of the giants. In regions such as Teleorman, Giurgiu, and southern Muntenia, giants are known as “jidovs” (“jidovi”). A local legend speaks about a hero going by the name of Novac who fought a jidov. Once the giant was defeated, he ran away to save his life, but in his flight he left a mark on the ground. The area has been called “Brazda lui Novac” ever since. In the region there are also other formations called “maguri” by locals who believe that these have been built by giants.

Giant skeletons have been unearthed in other parts of the country… in October 1989, 20 giant skeletons were found in Pantelimon – Lebada… discoveries have been unearthed at Polovragi, at Cetateni, beneath Negru Voda Monastery, and in the Bucegi Mountains – where the existence of a network of underground tunnels surprised workers… [as well as] in… Scaieni in Buzau County, Mariuta in Calarasi County, [the] Persani Mountains, Polovragi, Piatra Craiului, [and in] Tara Hategului…

A number of archaeological discoveries have been made in Giurgiu [County]… an… interesting discovery was made between the years 1940 and 1950 [at Argedava]. In this period, archaeologists unearthed 80 humanoid skeletons which appeared to be giants. The huge skeletons measured about four to five meters (13-16 feet) in height. Although most are suddenly “lost” after being discovered, the secret Romanian giants continue to be unearthed.’

Homo neanderthalensis II

Neanderthal man attracts considerable interest from scientists and the public alike. The word Neanderthal is based on the area of first discovery, the Neander Valley, Germany in 1856. Tal is the German word for Valley. A time frame is required for Neanderthal man and it is the Sixth Day that presents itself. 

The next human on record, though entirely different, was Homo sapiens – ‘man who thinks’ or ‘wise man’ that is, Cro-Magnon man, named after the first location of discovery: Dordogne, France in 1868 and equating to the Eighth Day creation of Adam and Eve. 

If we consider the re-creation periods as twenty-four thousand years and not twenty-four hours, there is geological and interventionist evolutionary time to prepare for each phase from plant life to animal life to eventually humankind (Neanderthal). Then a sabbatical (or multiple millennial) rest, before the next, more advanced phase introducing Adam and Eve in a separate garden region within Eden; itself west of where mankind created on Day Six dwelt. The Elohim of plural gods involved in the creation on Day six are in contrast with the singular Elohim (El) God of Days Seven and Eight. This Elohim had overseen Days One to Six, hence the rest, though now took a hands on approach towards the creation on Day Eight. 

The garden in Eden had been prepared for Adam and Eve, separate from the rest of the creation. When Cain journeyed eastwards with his wife to the land of Nod, it was there, where Cain found people, the Neanderthal of day Six and consequently settled. The academic and scientific propagandised agenda, is to subject the hulking, slow-witted Homo neanderthalensis to the same condemnation as the dumb brute Homo erectus, similarly before him. Both are incorrectly portrayed as ape-like, yet both are our ancestors in part, supported by genetic evidence. The reality is that they were early humans, part of the Homo genus as distinct species, who looked like us and thought like us. In fact, due to the closeness of similarities, some paleo-anthropologists originally though incorrectly classified them as subspecies members of Homo sapiens. Both appeared abruptly… different from previous forms and without evolutionary precursors.

The creation of the Neanderthal on Day six or a precursor to them, occurred approximately 75,000 BCE, some forty-eight thousand years before the arrival of Adam and Eve. The age of Homo erectus was considerably earlier, during the age of the gods, the original Egyptian Zep Tepi or ‘first time’ when they arrived on earth approximately 450,000 BCE until their rebellion circa 200,000 BCE. During this extraordinary 250,000 year period, the Angels established a technologically advanced world wide civilisation on planet Earth. Experimentation defined the era, with dinosaurs, hominids and hominins, including the most advanced, the Homo erectus – ‘upright man’ – living during this epoch. Fossils showing footprints of dinosaur and human together are confirmation of this real yet incredible scenario from our distant past – though plausibly may have occurred more recently during the antediluvian age.

Neanderthal man was bigger boned, stockier, with larger brows, jutting jaws and sharper teeth, even so, their brain capacity appears to have been no different than later forms. The Neanderthal brain is thought to have grown at a slower rate than humans, yet became larger. Antonio Rosas, chairman of the paleoanthropology group at Spain’s National Museum of Natural Sciences in Madrid stated: “We thought our slow way of growing was very specific, very particular, very unique to our species. What we realize now is that this pattern of slow growth that allows us to have this big brain and mature slowly, with all the advantages involved with that, was also shared by different human species.” ‘Intellectually, Neanderthals have been found associated with signs of art and culture.’ Homo erectus were capable of watercraft construction [building boats] and seafaring navigation [travelling across the sea] – ‘an activity which would have required high intelligence.’

Homo sapiens sapiens skull compared to Homo neanderthalensis above

Homo erectus skeleton below

Lloyd Pye discusses Homo Neanderthalenis in, Everything you know is still wrong, pages: 159-161, 173, 545-546, 552-553, 558-559 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The neanderthals were roughly the size of modern humans in terms of height… females around 5.0 feet and males as much as 6.0 feet. Where they diverge is in their bulk. Compared to us they are physically huge. Their bones are twice as thick as ours, meaning their muscles and their strength would be awesome to behold. In all species bones and muscles have a closely interdependent relationship… [size to power ratio].

Neanderthals… are no longer considered the predecessors of Cro-Magnon [Homo sapiens]. In 2009 the first draft of the Neanderthal genome was completed. To everyone’s surprise, Neanderthals were found to be too different from humans to have been our direct ancestors. Instead they are considered very close “cousins”, who potentially interbred with the actual human ancestors, but according to the DNA, we could not have evolved from them in the Darwinian sense. This leaves an awkward gap in the family tree… 

It is worth mentioning that there is a second Neanderthal-like species of [prehuman] that was initially identified from a single fragment of a finger bone. That fragment was originally thought to be Neanderthal due to physical similarities, and it was not until a chance DNA test in 2010 that the genetic differences were discovered and the new species – “denisova” – was officially recognised.

Denisova is the Southeast Asian equivalent of Neanderthal… Traces of Denisovan DNA have been found in modern humans in Australia, the Philippines, and other populations in Southeastern Asia and Oceania. Modern natives of Melanesia have been found to carry as much as 6% Denisovan DNA. Results from analysis of Denisova’s DNA announced in the Journal Nature in 2016 found that it likely had dark skin…

With the decoding of the Neanderthal genome in 2010… modern humans were reported to have 1-5% Neanderthal DNA, except in Africa. Humans of native African descent have 0% Neanderthal DNA… humans share 99.7% of our DNA with Neanderthals. [This] 99.7% similar figure is based on the total number of matching protein encoding genes, and it is the same parameters that were used to determine that chimps are [99.8%] similar to humans and gorillas 98% similar. The 0-5% figure is based on the amount of DNA that is exactly the same in modern humans. For example, Jane Doe’s DNA might say she is 10% Viking, 60% British & Irish, 2% Neanderthal, and 28% Non-specific Northwestern European. She is still 100% human but also [including] 2% Neanderthal…’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver, 2017, page 345 – emphasis & bold mine:

Theres no question that H. erectus and the Neanderthals and Denisovans were closely related. The timeline fits, the DNA fits (what little we’ve found), and their skulls show a steady progression with no awkward jumps or gaps. It’s uncertain whether the Denisovans were an offshoot of the Neanderthals or perhaps vice versa… The latest findings indicate that Denisovans were already living in Spain before the Neanderthals evolved… But the link between H. erectus… and modern humans doesn’t work at all… the most damning evidence is the shape, size, and structure of their skulls. They don’t resemble ours at all.’

Homo erectus, Denisovans and the Neanderthal are all related; whereas Homo sapiens are not, in that they did not evolve or descend from the other three forms, though they do carry a small percentage of their DNA. Well, ostensibly only neanderthal and Denisovan… The data confirms that Adam and Eve were genetically different, as humans are in comparison with chimpanzees, even though sharing 99.8% genetic data. We are likewise genetically close to Neanderthal man with 99.7% similarity. Scientists claim Neanderthal man became extinct; even so, humans today carry from zero to 5% of their DNA. This data confirms that Homo neanderthalenis existed prior to the flood in the antediluvian world with Homo sapiens; though not during the First Time before the re-creation, with Homo erectus. Thus, inter-breeding between Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man must have occurred, as scientists now admit – Article: Homo neanderthalensis IV.

Scientists discovered that the male Neanderthal Y sex chromosome probably kept the two lineages from successfully interbreeding, in that the chromosome could have created conditions which frequently led to miscarriages when a Neanderthal male and Homo sapiens female procreated. This is remarkably similar with the conditions associated with the Rhesus negative factor and pregnant mothers – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The April 7th 2016, issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics contains a study* by Stanford University. Fernando Mendez, a population geneticist and his colleagues ‘discovered three mutations on the Y chromosome of a Neanderthal male that would have produced molecules which can trigger immune responses from women during pregnancy.’ The immune responses were linked to miscarriages. 

If the Adamic line grew to outnumber the Neanderthal line, then it is easy to see that their numbers would dwindle even faster when hampered with a breeding incompatibility. Regardless, successful mating did occur, for the presence of Neanderthal DNA in small measure in Europeans; the peoples of the Middle East; South Asia; and then considerable levels in East Asian peoples, reveals that this DNA was carried by Japheth’s wife, Adataneses. For Neanderthal Y-DNA is deemed extinct and not present in humans today; with just variations from the female mtDNA Haplogroups being detectable. 

The Divergence of Neandertal and Modern Human Y Chromosomes*

‘Although the Neandertal Y chromosome (and mtDNA) might have simply drifted out of the modern human gene pool, it is also possible that genetic incompatibilities contributed to their loss. In comparing the Neandertal lineage to those of modern humans, we identified four coding differences with predicted functional impacts, three missense and one nonsense. Three mutations – within PCDH11Y, USP9Y, and TMSB4Y – are unique to the Neandertal lineage, and one, within KMD5D, is fixed in modern human sequences. The first gene, PCDH11Y, resides in the X-transposed region of the Y chromosome. Together with its X-chromosome homolog… it might play a role in brain lateralization and language development. 

Interestingly, all three genes with potentially functional missense differences between the Neandertal and modern humans sequences are H-Y genes… [and] have led to genetic incompatibilities between modern humans and Neandertals and to the consequent loss of Neandertal Y chromosomes in modern human populations. Indeed, reduced fertility or viability of hybrid offspring with Neandertal Y chromosomes is fully consistent with Haldane’s rule, which states that “when in the (first generation) offspring of two different animal races one sex is absent, rare, or sterile, that sex is the (heterogametic) sex.”

Seventy percent of East Asians have inherited the Neanderthal POU2F3 gene, which is involved in Keratin production and is thought to be responsible for straightening hair. DNA tests demonstrate that Neanderthals possessed fair skin, like the majority of oriental people. Most Mongoloids and Australoids who interbred with them, carry both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA.

The Combined Landscape of Denisovan and Neanderthal Ancestry in Present-Day Humans, multiple authors, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Some present-day humans derive up to ∼5% of their ancestry from archaic Denisovans, an even larger proportion than the ∼2% from Neanderthals. 

We developed methods that can disambiguate the locations of segments of Denisovan and Neanderthal ancestry in present-day humans and applied them to 257 high-coverage genomes from 120 diverse populations, among which were 20 individual Oceanians with high Denisovan ancestry. In Oceanians, the average size of Denisovan fragments is larger than Neanderthal fragments, implying a more recent average date of Denisovan admixture in the history of these populations. We document more Denisovan ancestry in South Asia than is expected based on existing models of history, reflecting a previously undocumented mixture related to archaic humans. Denisovan ancestry, just like Neanderthal ancestry, has been deleterious on a modern human genetic background, as reflected by its depletion near genes. Finally, the reduction of both archaic ancestries is especially pronounced on chromosome X and near genes more highly expressed in testes than other tissues… This suggests that reduced male fertility may be a general feature of mixtures of human populations…’

Fine-Scale Maps of Denisovan and Neanderthal Introgression

(A) Non-overlapping 100 kb windows that have non-zero inferred archaic ancestry in each of six populations (blue, Denisova; red, Neanderthal). In the innermost rings, we plot deserts (windows >10 Mb). 

(B) Correlation of confidently inferred archaic ancestry (Neanderthal ancestry in six non-African populations and Denisovan ancestry in Oceanians) across populations in non-overlapping windows of size 100 kb, 1 Mb, and 10 Mb.

(C) We plot the median of the proportion of Denisovan and Neanderthal ancestry within quintiles of a B statistic measuring intensity of linked selection (low B indicates the regions most affected by linked selection). 

‘It has been suggested that the empirically observed reduction in Neanderthal ancestry in Europeans and East Asians near functionally important regions could be explained by a greater load of weakly deleterious alleles in Neanderthals due to the smaller population size of Neanderthals since separation, followed by purging of deleterious Neanderthal alleles in the mixed population. Since we have shown that similar patterns are associated with the Denisovan introgression event, it seems plausible that similar evolutionary forces operated to remove Denisovan ancestry segments. However, the model of a greater load of deleterious mutations in archaic humans cannot explain the observed reduction of both Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry near genes that are disproportionately expressed in testes, suggesting that male hybrid sterility may have been associated with both introgressions. An important direction for future research is to understand the relative importance of purging of slightly deleterious alleles, as well as reduced fertility in hybrid males, in changing the content of genomes in the aftermath of the interbreeding that occurred between modern and archaic humans.’

The only way to unravel this perplexing mystery and understand the sudden demise of the Neanderthal is to recognise that a. they were an adam and the ‘mankind’ created in the Sixth age, b. they died in the Flood, regardless of how many were left because they may have been hunted by the lines of Cain or Seth and c. they did intermarry with either or both Cain and Seth’s line – from the Adam of the Eighth age – hence their DNA in modern Homo sapiens sapiens which must have been carried by Noah’s daughter-in-law Adataneses at least. The studies concluding points.

  • Denisovan admixture into modern humans occurred after Neanderthal admixture
  • There is more Denisovan ancestry in South Asians than expected from current models
  • Denisovan ancestry has been subject to positive and negative selection after admixture
  • Male infertility most likely occurred after modern human interbreeding with Denisovans

Alan Alford adds – capitalisation his, emphasis mine: 

‘As uncomfortable as it may seem, all of the Mesopotamian texts indicate that man was originally created as a slave race to relieve the “toil” of the Gods. These claims are indeed repeated in our encyclopaedias, under the heading of religious myth, but it is a fact that the Hebrew word for worship, avod, literally means “Work”! The Sumerian texts consistently called these earliest beings LU.LU, which also had the connotation of worker or servant. According to the ancient texts, the first Adam was a test-tube baby, created by the Gods from already living matter. Adam’s DNA (not his rib) was used to create the first woman. Humans were then cloned to ease the “toil” of the Gods. As for the first “Adam”, the evidence suggests that he was a hybrid mixture of God and Homo erectus.’

Sumerian texts confirm that during the age of the gods on Earth, they created a prototype human after many unsuccessful attempts. This being was to be a worker for them, mining precious elements, particularly gold – refer article: The Ark of God. These workers for the Annunaki gods (or angels), were called Lulu, the ‘black headed ones.’ Alford mentions the Lulu worker and Homo erectus in the same breath and by coincidence, they are one and the same. His misapplying the Lulu with Adam and Eve is incorrect. Even though Adam was created to ‘work the garden of Eden’ he was a spirit being fashioned to serve the Creator, not the Angels as the Lulu had been designed. His transformation with Eve to become ‘human’ meant a deconstruction of his spiritual composition and ‘godlike’ anatomy and the addition of ‘humanlike’ – such as Homo erectus – genes. In this regard, Alford hits the nail on the head.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 110-111 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Black Heads were created at… Nippur, known in legend as the place where heaven bonds with the earth. The first Black Heads were two interesting individuals named Ulligarra and Zalgarra, from which all Black Heads derived. Black Heads were created… male and female at the same time, with a mandate to multiply^ in great numbers. Their posterity’s purpose was to till the soil, to erect buildings, and to serve the Annunaki. Black Heads also thought of themselves as the “tenants of the garden of the gods.” They proliferated^ beyond all expectations [like the descendants of Japheth – Genesis 9:27] and later were drafted by the gods to toil as a massive workforce in exchange for consistent rations of food. At some point much later in time, Adapa and Titi [Adam and Eve] were procreated through a selected female from among the Blackheads [Homo erectus]… and the god Enki.’

Adam and Eve were the original Homo sapiens, thus either Noah or his three sons, Japheth, Ham and Shem, were the first Homo sapiens sapiens. 

An Analysis of modern African DNA reveals that ancestral Eurasian Haplogroups – mitochondrial Haplogroups M and N and Y-chromosomal Haplogroup CF – appear to represent mutations of mtDNA HgL3 and Y-chromosomal HgCT; Haplogroups associated with African ancestors. The complication with using this recent DNA data to place the ancestors of all living humans in Africa is that it assumes the first people carrying the identified mutations were themselves on that continent. To confirm the proposed assumption requires DNA from humans who definitively lived in Africa circa 70,000 years ago. Recall, it is proposed that the Neanderthal was formed between 75,397 and 51,397 BCE.

The huge problem, is that the oldest sample of African DNA ever recovered is a mere 8,100 years old. The lack of sufficiently old African genetic material means scientists cannot currently use DNA alone to geographically place the earliest ancestors of modern Africans. If we accept for a moment, the belief that the ancestors of today’s Africans lived in Africa 70,000 years ago, we still have no evidence that the Haplogroups at the base of the Eurasian population, were associated with these populations earlier than 70,000 years ago. Moving the ‘out of Africa’ migration dates back even further “takes an already weak model into the realms of outright scientific fraud” according to one article.

A selection of insightful scientists are beginning to question whether the basal Haplogroups might relate to migrations into Africa rather than originating there. Researchers at the University of La Laguna have suggested that Haplogroup L3 entered Africa from Asia. This would support the Ark coming to rest in the Himalayas and the first major post-diluvian civilisation springing up in the Indus Valley region – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The paper’s title is self-explanatory: Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basic lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago. The authors of the paper posit an earlier African origin for these Asian migrants, whilst highlighting a further glaring anomaly within their data:

‘The southern route hypothesis proposes that the Eurasian branches (M and N) of the macrohaplogroup L3 differentiated in or near the African continent and rapidly spread across the Asian peninsulas to reach Australia and Melanesia. Under this assumption, it is expected that, in general, coalescence ages of haplogroups should decrease from Africa to Australia. However, we have demonstrated that this is not the case. Just on the contrary, the… relative ages of M and N haplogroups run, against to expectation, westwards with younger haplogroup ages going to Africa.’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver, 2017, pages 148-150 – emphasis mine:

‘Scientists working on the Human Genome Project and other DNA projects have discovered an extra 223 genes (out of a total of about 20,000) in us that don’t appear in any other species. Some of these orphan genes… may have arisen from non-coding sequences of DNA… de novo origination… Or… from natural or artificial horizontal transfer from another organism… viral, bacterial or extraterrestrial… we can immediately rule out the viral option… We’ve already mapped the parts of our genome that came from viruses, and none of the 223 orphan genes were among them. But we did find the complete genome of a functioning virus hidden in there.’

Appropriate, as humankind acts unlike any animal on earth, even considering the reptilian and mammalian aspects of our mind and brain function. Human beings are akin to a virus. We as the virus, are living off the host the Earth, rampaging and pillaging the resources and environment of our gracious host. Exhibiting the same ruthless disrespect for the earth, as a virus does in its single-driven desire to feed and grow exponentially.

Romans 8:20-22

English Standard Version

‘For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.’

Silver: ‘Some (non-mainstream) geneticists believe that aliens may have spliced 223 orphan genes into the genome of one of the Earth’s native hominids, such as Homo erectus… ** some researchers claim there’s evidence of twenty extraterrestrial species in our DNA… this hybridisation process created an instant leap from the native hominin to modern humans [Homo sapiens]. 

There’s plenty of evidence of external interference in our genome… there are hundreds of scars where sections of genes have been duplicated from other genes, had their heads or tails stripped off (which normally disables them), had sections added or removed, or been joined onto parts of other genes. These cuts and splices have been present in our genome for… thousands of years. Our own scientists can perform these same processes in their labs today, but they’ve only had the technology to do it for the last few years. If we accept that the hybridisation theory is correct, that means… that the… process didn’t turn out quite the way it should have done. Since alien abductions are still happening, it may be the case that we’re a work in progress and not yet the finished article.’

DNA Study Reveals We Have a Mystery Human Ancestor, Ed Whelan, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘A new method for analyzing modern and archaic human DNA has thrown up some fascinating results. It appears that modern humans (Homo Sapiens) mated earlier and more frequently with an archaic human ancestor, a species of extinct hominins [early humans]. Moreover, they have found evidence the DNA of this mysterious archaic human ancestor** is still part of our modern human genetic inheritance.

An American team of scientists, from leading American universities, embarked upon an ambitious plan to map the flow of genes between different species of hominids [primates and humans]. Gene flow is an indication of interbreeding between ancient human species. A new algorithm, known as ARGweaver-D, was developed by Melissa J. Hubisz to achieve the goals of the project. This algorithm allowed researchers to develop a model of the lineages of early humans.

During the study, researchers compared the genomes of two Neanderthals, a Denisovan and two modern African individuals. The Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) were an extinct species of humans that… once inhabited vast areas of Eurasia. Denisovans are a mysterious species, only known through their DNA, who probably ranged across an area that covered Siberia and East Asia. The samples from modern Africans were selected because they are known not to have Neanderthal nor Denisovan genes.

Based on the ground-breaking algorithm the researchers were able to develop an ancestral recombination graph, which “includes a tree that captures the relationships among all individuals at every position along the genome, and the recombination events that cause those trees to change from one position to the next,” Siepel told Live Science. The team were able to build up a picture of the extensive interbreeding between different species of hominids and gain insights even into their migration patterns.

And research has already shown that modern humans, Denisovans, Neanderthals interbred in the ancient past. However, using the new algorithm, researchers were able to show that this interbreeding occurred much earlier than once believed. The results from a sample of Denisovan DNA were remarkable. [Inverse] states that the ‘genome contained genetic material that came from an unexpected source – an archaic human ancestor that was neither human [homo sapiens], nor Neanderthal, nor Denisovan.’ This was a mystery. Researchers have theorized that the genes may have come from Homo erectus…

However, the “story” of Homo Erectus is unproven because we do not have any DNA from this long-extinct human species. Siepel told Live Science that “the genome of that extinct species of human has never been sequenced.” As a result, there is much we still don’t know about human evolution, including if H. Erectus (upright man) is our ancestor. It is also possible that the mysterious DNA found ‘nested’ in the genome sequences comes from a new and unknown archaic human ancestor species.’

In the advent of no other likely candidate, Homo erectus is not only the favourite front runner, but the only one. Bear in mind that Adam was a spirit entity turned into a physical being. The physical genes and blueprint had to have originated from an existing source, as our DNA reveals a pre-existing component in Homo sapiens even though Homo sapiens itself was a new hybrid species. Scientific investigation proves humans did not descend from Neanderthals (and Denisovans) but rather interbred with them; yet have discovered an ‘unknown archaic human ancestor.’ There just aren’t any other options that we are aware, apart from Homo erectus.

Whelan: ‘The new research indicates that the human tree is much more complex than first thought… Siepel told Live Science that “A picture is emerging of a series of distinct but related populations moving around the globe and frequently interacting with one another, with occasional interbreeding events that produced hybrid offspring.” It is not known if these hybrids were fit enough to survive and have offspring. It seems likely that at least some survived and this accounts for the distinctive genetic inheritance of many groups. 

For example, Tibetans and Pacific Islanders show traces of Denisovan DNA. These interbreeding events were very important in the evolution of modern humans. Science Daily reports that “15% of these ‘super-archaic’ regions may have been passed down to modern humans.” This means that genes which flowed between different archaic human species are still part of modern people’s genetic make-up, including those from an [original] unknown archaic human ancestor.’

The line of Seth, which includes righteous Enoch – as opposed to evil Enoch from the line of Cain (refer article: Thoth) – on through to Noah is the Homo sapiens line of humans. Beginning with the Y-DNA Adam and mtDNA Eve, (for scientists) the fallen and transformed Adam and Eve (for the benefit of Christians). Later, transferring to Noah’s three sons as Homo sapiens sapiens (modern man). Homo neanderthalenis were the male and female humans created two Days prior and had been living on the earth for some forty-eight thousand years or more. Their line did not survive the flood, because the Creator chose to save the line of Seth instead. The people of Day Six may have been corrupted beyond return by their mixing with Cain’s descendants. The Denisovans are as labelled, mysterious and while they are genetically linked to the Neanderthal, it is for now until more data is forthcoming, that we can only include them with the Neanderthals from Day Six. 

Regarding the ‘unknown archaic human ancestor’, if modern humans are a combination of varying genetic sources, whether from God, angels or aliens and say the human component is from Homo erectus as seems entirely plausible; surely it would be integral within our composition and not necessarily an anomaly that could readily stand out. It would differ from the genetic material which was introduced via inter-breeding like Neanderthal DNA in humans. Alternatively, should it turn out to be the unknown genetic material is not a core element but rather an admixture through intermixing, the unknown ancestor and addition of extra genetic DNA would result from mixing with another species entirely. 

Could that species be the dark Angels, who were the Watchers and descended to Earth during the time of Jared the father of righteous Enoch. Jared was born circa 22,797 BCE and the arrival of the Watchers would have been circa 22,000 BCE. The pairing of angels with human women may have occurred with both the Neanderthal and Seth lines of humans. It most definitely took place with the line of  Cain.  

Two points to ponder from the above is firstly, the unique fact that sub-Saharan Africans either do not have any Neanderthal (or Denisova) DNA at all or virtually none. The other, is the question regarding 15% archaic genetic material residing within modern humans. We will address the Rhesus negative component in modern humans – Article: Rhesus Negative Blood factor. For it is rare in the Black and Asian communities, though within White Europeans it averages… fifteen percent.

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

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

Ophir & Ukraine

With events occurring rapidly in Eastern Europe and the world watching with bated breath, it is timely that Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans has just been posted. The vast array of peoples of European or western descent, those of Western Eurasia if you will – which is beginning to sound like George Orwell’s 1984 with three superstates ruling the world – excepting Russia, Turkey, Portugal and Spain descend from Shem’s son, Arphaxad.

It is worth noting that George Orwell by sound insight rather than biblical acumen, called it very close to how events will play out as we lurch then speed towards the end of this age. His three powers were: 1. Oceania which included all of North and South America, Australia, New Zealand, the southern third of Africa and the British Isles; of which is the main location for the novel and its new name is Airstrip One 2. Eurasia which covered all of Europe and Russia and 3. Eastasia which included China, Japan, the Koreas and South East Asia. The remaining region comprising the bulk of Africa, the Middle East and Southwest Asia is disputed and fought over by the three superstates.

Please refer to the article Four Kings & One Queen for more detail, though briefly: the Bible predicts that eventually Russia as the King of the North, will align with a German led Europe – and without the United Kingdom. A China led Asia is referred to as the Kings of the East in the Bible and will spell the final chapters of our current history, when they finally confront the King of the North at a battle prophesied with the name of Armageddon.

The only slight discrepancy in Orwell’s geopolitical structure is that the nations of Celtic-Saxon-Viking descent will be left in the cold as the (non-biblical though appropriate moniker) King of the West. The nations of Central and South America will align as an economic and political unit according to Bible prophecy – and not as allies of the United States or Canada. Though difficult to envision now, the future for the British descended peoples is bleak, as the Bible predicts that the United States and a considerably stronger Canada will one day fall out. Coupled with this, they will both turn against what is left of a dissolved United Kingdom, namely England. The final pieces of these nations downfall is that – as will happen within Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – the effects of mass immigration into the United States and Canada will affect the stability of these nations, the political unity and consequently their economic dominance.

This will lead to a lessening of their literal military might but also their confidence in using it. The coup de grace is that it is very conceivable that with rapidly changing economic and political conditions, sections of the fifty states of America will form new geopolitical entities that while remaining powerful, will lose their collective standing and influence, as will definitely occur in the United Kingdom – refer article: 2050. For Scotland will seek and gain independence and Northern Ireland will eventually leave the Union and form a federated Ireland with the Republic. It is not clear whether Wales which with England, constitutes the Kingdom of England will stay or leave. Judging by events, history and prophecy it appears Wales may become independent in the future.

Some will be thinking, how will America ever fall with their military might, backed up by the world’s premier arsenal of military technology and nuclear warheads. Briefly, the main powers of the world – by deciding who enters and who doesn’t join the ‘nuclear club’ – have been able to maintain their control of the masses that bit more effectively by keeping the world firmly under the mushroom-like umbrella of an ominous nuclear threat of mass destruction that is not as dangerous as governments would have you believe – refer article: Nuclear Nefariousness.

Nuclear weapons not withstanding; the current situation in Ukraine is not as potentially deadly as one would surmise. From a geopolitical and biblical perspective it is the ominous rumblings of “no good will come of this”. It is the continuation of the dominoes – by design – systematically being placed in the overall scheme of those in the highest authority who seek to continually strengthen their control and power – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

The land of Ophir is mentioned a number of times in the Bible and a few times is actually a lot; as most of the two hundred countries in the world are not mentioned specifically outside of the genealogical table of nations in Genesis chapter ten and I Chronicles chapter one. Would a nation comparable to Ukraine’s size be omitted from the Bible discourse? Ophir was a son of Joktan, who was the great grandson of Arphaxad, the third son of Shem.

1 Kings 22:48

English Standard Version

‘Jehoshaphat made ships of Tarshish to go to Ophir for gold, but they did not go, for the ships were wrecked at Ezion-geber.’

1 kings 10.11

English Standard Version

‘Moreover, the fleet of Hiram [King of Tyre], which brought gold from Ophir [H211 – ‘Owphiyr: ‘gold region in the east’], brought from Ophir a very great amount of almug [H484 – ‘almuggiym: a tree from Lebanon (sandalwood?)] wood* and precious stones.’

Job 28:16

English Standard Version

‘It cannot be valued in the gold of Ophir, in precious onyx or sapphire.’

Psalm 45:9

English Standard Version

 ‘… daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.’

Isaiah 13:12

English Standard Version

‘I will make people more rare than fine gold, and mankind than the gold of Ophir.’

Ophir is mentioned in a number of verses throughout the Old Testament and always in context of its gold and mineral wealth. One would expect this nation to standout amongst Joktan’s descendants today, just by sheer size of either resources and or, its economy. The meaning of Ophir is contradictory as it can mean, ‘exhausted, depleted’ and ‘reducing to ashes’ – ‘which is what remains when all useful energy is extracted from a fuel’ – or conversely: ‘rich, abundance’ a ‘mark of wealth’ or a ‘coast of riches’ according to Abarim Publications.

Glenn Webb – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Excerpt from Peresopnytsia Gospel (Matthew 19:1) (1556) where the word ukrainy (оукраины) corresponds to ‘coasts’ (KJV Bible) or ‘region’ (NIV Bible). [The] Ukrainian symbol is a trident and has a coastline to its south.’

Rare Gold Nuggets – emphasis mine: 

‘Gold mining is still a young and growing industry in Ukraine. As with many regions in the world with a turbulent political history, the economic development in the mining industry has been limited… Ukraine holds large reserves of gold in several regions… some suggestions that there is as much as 3,000 tons of gold to be found all around Ukraine…’

This is the equivalent of 2,722 tonnes and would place Ukraine 5th in countries with the largest gold mine reserves, behind Australia at number one with 10,000 tonnes; Russia with 5,300 tonnes; South Africa with 3,200 tonnes; and the United States with 3,000 tonnes. The value of 2,722 tonnes of gold is a staggering USD $209,005,228,637.00.

‘… there are more than two hundred locations around Ukraine that gold is known to be found. The potential for gold… is amazingly vast… These are huge expectations for a huge country.’

A Short History of the Ukrainian Tryzub, Gary Sohayda, January 2022 – emphasis mine:

‘A trident with a crossed central prong was… confirmed in 1918 as the emblem of the Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet. In 1939, the Diet of Carpatho-Ukraine, the short-lived independent Ukrainian state that emerged from Czecho-Slovakia, adopted the trident with a cross as its official coat of arms. Finally, in 1992, following the restoration of Ukraine’s independence the previous year, Ukraine’s Parliament adopted the trident as the chief element in its coat of arms. The trident is today shown on Ukraine’s monetary emissions (coins as well as some bank notes or their watermark) and on its postage stamps.’

The Trident is a potent symbol of the god of the sea and water, Neptune and Poseidon. A link to Ophir’s strategic importance for gold via its position in ancient mercantile trade routes – once located in Sumer near the Persian Gulf, then later during the United Kingdom of Israel and the reign of King Solomon, on the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula. Today, Ukraine represents a vital ‘warm water port’ for itself and Russia and hence, the obvious importance of the Crimea.

The trident is a weapon, whether for spear fishing or as a pole arm. The significance as a weapon of Neptune is the fact that it symbolises his control over the seas. Though its wider application is that the three prongs reflect his mastery over the three principalities of heaven, earth and hell. Neptune’s power does not stop there, for it is also linked with birth, life and death; mind, body and spirit; and the past, present and future – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning?

Ukraine is Ophir, the eleventh son of Joktan. All the conflicting definitions for Ophir’s name are strangely specific and accurate about Ukraine and parallel the rather schizophrenic history and destiny of Ukraine as an unhappy and unwilling junior partner of Russia. The verb even means ‘to desire or draw near’ exactly typifying the relationship which Little Russia has with Great Russia. 

For the largest Russian diaspora in the world are the 8,334,100 Russian people living in Ukraine (2001 Census). To complicate matters, a third of the Ukrainian population in the eastern part of the country identify as Russian, speaking Russian. Other Ukrainians also speak Russian and higher percentages of Russians live in the western and central regions of the nation, as well as in the industrialised city centres. The total population of Ukraine is 38,911,001 people – the seventh highest in Europe.

Ukraine is the 4th biggest mineral producer in the world, behind South Africa in first place, Russia and Australia. Ukraine has up to $510 billion in iron ore reserves alone. Apart from the presence of many mineral reserves, Ukraine is best known for its productive mining sector. There are over three hundred mining facilities actively operating across Ukraine. As an aside, both South Africa and Australia were foreordained to be rich in natural resources and consequently mineral powers – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali the Antipodean Tribes

Ukrainian man and woman

Europe’s second largest country, is a land of vast fertile agricultural plains and large pockets of heavy industry in the east. Ukraine is known as the ‘breadbasket’ of Europe and is amongst the top three exporters of grain in the world. It has some of the most fertile land on earth with rich black soil called chernozem – literally, ‘black dirt.’ 

This soil produces considerable agricultural yields due to its high moisture storage capacity and levels of humus; with more than seventy percent of the country comprising prime agricultural land. Parts of Russia and the United States of America also have rich soils with high organic content called mollisols. It is estimated that Ukraine can feed at least half a billion people. 

Its main crops include corn, soybeans, rye, oats, beets and barley. With Russia, Ukraine supplies a quarter of the world’s wheat and half of its sunflower products. Ukraine is the fourth largest producer of potatoes in the world.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Ukrainian global shipments during 2021…

  1. Iron, steel: US$13.1 billion
  2. Cereals: $11.8 billion 
  3. Ores, slag, ash: $7 billion 
  4. Animal/vegetable fats, oils, waxes: $6.9 billion
  5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $3.2 billion 
  6. Machinery including computers: $2.1 billion 
  7. Oil seeds: $2.1 billion 
  8. Wood: $1.9 billion*
  9. Food industry waste, animal fodder: $1.7 billion 
  10. Articles of iron or steel: $1.2 billion 

Iron and steel was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 70.8% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was cereals via a 25.8% gain led by higher international sales of corn, wheat and barley.’

The word Ukraine literally means, on the outskirts and from a Russian imperial perspective, that has been true. Ukraine has been ‘the borderland’ for much of its existence, enduring its role as a convergence point between the East and the West; partly including territory once occupied by the Scythian and Sarmatian peoples. Ukraine and Russia share common historical origins, especially in the East; whereas the west of the country has closer ties with its European neighbours and particularly Poland.

Early Germanic tribes from Jutland and surrounding environs migrated and in time some of them would filter down towards western Ukraine, including the mighty Goths who would control a vast swathe of Ukraine for a couple of centuries. Following this, Ukraine was home to some of the earliest Slav states – descendants of the earlier Sarmatians – and notably, the grand principality of Kiev in the tenth and eleventh centuries made it a focus of East Slavic cultural development. 

The Cossack Hetmanate republic emerged in central Ukraine in the seventeenth century. The region only gained more permanent borders during the Soviet era and independence as a sovereign nation wasn’t achieved until 1991, upon the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ukraine is a unitary republic governed under a semi-presidential system which has been moving increasingly towards strengthening ties with the rest of Europe, until the 2022 invasion by Russia. 

Flag of Ukraine

Referring to the modern state as The Ukraine is incorrect both grammatically and politically, says ‘Oksana Kyzyma of the embassy of Ukraine in London. “Ukraine is both the conventional short and long name of the country.” The use of the article relates to the time before independence in 1991, when Ukraine was a republic of the Soviet Union. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukrainians probably decided that the article denigrated their country (by identifying it as part of Russia) and abolished ‘the’ while speaking English… As well as being a form of linguistic independence in Europe, it is also hugely symbolic for Ukrainians.’ 

Ukraine Is the Most Important Country for the European Union… Ivan Dikov, 2019: 

‘Which is the most important “outside’ country for the European Union at the present moment and for the foreseeable future… It’s Ukraine. The reason… Ukraine is the largest country that has the realistic potential, the desire, and a wide range of prerequisites to become a member state of the European Union… Of course, that is a very long shot: Ukraine hasn’t even been recognized as an official EU candidate country yet, and it’s not even sure when it will be, or even that it ever will be… [yet it’s] population seemingly has the desire to do so, and, what’s ever more important, whose society wishes to change correspondingly in the process. 

… Ukraine is what Poland was among the countries that joined the EU in the three “Eastern Enlargements” in the decade between 2004 and 2013… the great thing about the European Union is that it is a Union of “losers”: countries which either built empires to see them crashing down, or which were otherwise crushed, mauled, or severely threatened by empires… Ukraine… is quite big but not too big, so that… the Union as a whole… will be able to “swallow” its accession with relative ease. If or when Ukraine becomes a member of the EU, it would naturally assume a spot among the Big Six – which are now about to become the Big Five… (Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland)… while this is still a very long shot, and Britain’s departure (which itself was a long shot for a while) is regrettable, but such a set up would bring a better East – West balance inside the EU… It would be very shrewd of the entire European Union to take notice of that fact.’

Any movement by Ukraine towards the European Union have been stopped in its tracks at time of writing; with Russian forces entering the Ukraine on February 24, 2022, with a build up of Russian troops in the Crimea beginning on the formidable date of 22.02.2022. Events today were created centuries ago. Between 1772 and 1795, the Russian Empire and Hapsburg Austria as a result of the Partitions of Poland each had control of the territory which comprises modern day Ukraine for a hundred years or more. The Russian Revolution led to the Ukraine’s own civil war and then war with the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1921. In 1922, one hundred years ago, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was established. Leap ahead to 1954 and new Soviet leader Khrushchev who succeeded Stalin; himself a Ukrainian, transferred Crimea to Ukraine to mark the 300th anniversary of the Russian-Ukraine Union. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, Crimea became independent. 

Late 2013 President Viktor Yanukovych, suspended preparations for the implementation of an association agreement with the European Union. This decision resulted in months of mass protests. The Ukrainian parliament impeached Yanukovych on 22 February 2014. During the 22nd and 23rd February – exactly eight years previously – the Russo-Ukrainian War began with Russian forces entering Crimea. It was not an invasion as such since Russia had a naval base in Sevastopol. A referendum in the largely ethnic Russian autonomous region of Crimea was held and with a ninety-five percent majority mandate, Crimea was de facto annexed by Russia in March 2014.

The Crimean Peninsula has key strategic importance as the Black Sea region is pivotal to Russia, for it is the only gateway to the Mediterranean, Africa and beyond. Access is vital for shipping, oil and gas pipelines, as well as for military operations. Russia could and would, never give up this most important warm water sea gate. 

It was during the Crimean War between 1853 to 1856 that a coalition comprising Britain, France and Turkey won Crimea from Russia. Russia’s mistrust of the West is reasonable and the threat of Ukraine joining the European Union and or Nato with possible foreign military presence on Russia’s border, led to its preemptive strike on Ukraine, to topple a puppet regime with links to and support from, the West. 

Ukraine is very unstable with its ‘debt-to-GDP ratio [doubling] and close to 60% of the people [living] below the poverty line. Its industries are crumbling, and pensions/social welfare have been deeply slashed. Neo-Nazi groups are on the rise, and 80% of young people are desperate to leave the country’ now with no end in sight.

Ukraine is very unstable with its ‘debt-to-GDP ratio [doubling] and close to 60% of the people [living] below the poverty line. Its industries are crumbling, and pensions/social welfare have been deeply slashed. Neo-Nazi groups are on the rise, and 80% of young people are desperate to leave the country’ now with no end in sight.

And so like its name Ophir, Ukraine is at once a nation ‘exhausted, depleted’ and is being ‘[reduced] to ashes’ – yet Ukraine remains a nation potentially ‘rich, [with] abundance’ having a ‘mark of wealth’ and a ‘coast of riches.’

Edited excerpt from Chapter XXIV – Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

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

Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

Chapter XXIV

Shem’s third son is Arphaxad. He is a mysterious figure in the shadow of his four brothers. Unlike Elam, Asshur and Lud, who all had singular, distinct nations descend from them, Arphaxad – in the vein of his younger brother Aram – is the progenitor of the most nations in the world from a diversity perspective (following Canaan) and the second highest in sheer number (after Canaan) – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. He is not though, the direct ancestor of one nation; but is the indirect ancestor of a great number. By elimination, it is now obvious that the remaining European peoples in Europe and the New World, descend from Arphaxad.

To add to Arphaxad’s enigmatic aura, the meaning of his name is baffling. Two proposed are boundary of the Chaldeans and stronghold of the Chaldees. The Chaldeans did descend from Arphaxad, but seemingly quite a few generations later; as the Hebrew word which Chaldee is derived from is Chesed or Kesed, a son of Nahor – Abraham’s brother.

A H Sayce confirms the difficulty in defining Arphaxad – The Races of the Old Testament, 1891, page 64:

‘In the tenth chapter of Genesis Arphaxad is the brother of Aram. He is placed next to Asshur with whom therefore he would have been in geographical contact. Now Arphaxad is written in the original Hebrew Arpha-Chesed, the Arpha of Chesed. What Arpha means is doubtful. Professor Schrader connects it with the Arabic urfak and accordingly renders the name the territory of Chesed. Up to the present no light has been cast on the word by the Assyrian texts.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… In Greek this name is spelled… Arphaxad… The name Arpachshad is probably extremely old and from a language that’s long since gone. And thus the original meaning of this name is unclear. BDB Theological Dictionary suggests that it is a combination of ‘rp (not in Hebrew but in cognate languages) meaning extent, border

The name Arpachshad is difficult to interpret. Since both (a-r-p) and (k-sh-d) do not exist in Hebrew, we should look for a possible combination of smaller words: The Hebrew word is used once, as a contraction of the word (the Nile; Amos 8:8), which in turn may be derived from (‘or), light

It may even be a contraction of (‘arar), curse. Or (‘ara), pluck or gather, with derivative (‘ari), lion… (pak) means flask or vial, from the root (pkk), an unused root that probably means trickle… (puk) denotes a black powder that was used as eye make-up (Jeremiah 4:30, 2 Kings 9:30)… (ke) means as if, but never occurs as a particle. For the sake of brevity (Arpachshad is already an unusually long name)… may be a contraction of (peh), mouth, or (poh), a particle denoting here or hither… (shed) is usually translated with demon, or the object of child sacrifice (Deuteronomy 32:17). (shod) means havoc… (shad) means breast, bosom.

Whatever the name Arpachshad may mean, the meaning is deeply hidden.’

Abarim Publications have helpfully broken the name down to its component parts. Highlighted are those that most closely resemble in this writer’s view, Arphaxad’s name – Or-pak-shad, meaning for example: ‘life from within the heart.Light gives life and warmth, while the breast (heart) is connected with the closeness of an embrace, intimacy and the source of strong emotional feelings, to cherish and hold dear as if within a flask. Was Arphaxad light hearted or did he have a warm heart? He certainly did, if he took young Canaan into his family and raised him as his own – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator

Previously, when studying Canaan we looked at the fact his people did not migrate all the way to the African continent like their cousins from Cush, Phut and Mizra. They stopped in the high value real estate land that became known as the Land of Canaan. Canaan’s people may have been so familiar with Arphaxad’s family, that they felt comfortable dwelling near them. For it was Arphaxad’s descendants who founded both Akkadia and Sumer – in the Land of Shinar located later in southern Mesopotamia – northeast of Canaan (refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity).

The Book of Jubilees chapter eight, describes something more sinister: 

1 ‘… in the beginning thereof Arpachshad took to himself a wife and her name was Rasu’eja, the daughter of Susan, the daughter of Elam, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Kainam. 2 And the son grew, and his father taught him writing, and he went to seek for himself a place where he might seize for himself a city. 3 And he found a writing which former (generations) had carved on the rock, and he read what was thereon, and he transcribed it and sinned owing to it; for it contained the teaching of the Watchers in accordance with which they used to observe the omens of the sun and moon and stars in all the signs of heaven‘ (Astrology – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim). 4 ‘And he wrote it down and said nothing regarding it; for he was afraid to speak to Noah about it lest he should be angry with him on account of it. 

5 And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was Melka, the daughter of Madai, the son of Japheth, and… he begat a son, and called his name Shelah; for he said: ‘Truly I have been sent.’ 6… and Shelah grew up and took to himself a wife, and her name was Mu’ak, the daughter of Kesed, his father’s brother… 7 And she bare him a son… thereof, and he called his name Eber: and he took unto himself a wife, and her name was ‘Azurad, the daughter of Nebrod [Nimrod]… 

8 And… she bare him son, and he called his name Peleg; for in the days when he was born the children of Noah began to divide the earth amongst themselves: for this reason he called his name Peleg. 9 And they divided it secretly amongst themselves, and told it to Noah.’

We have addressed Kainam’s birth and his inclusion in Arphaxad’s family; who was born from the incest between Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk and Noah – Chapter XI Ham Aequator. For Canaan to have found inscriptions regarding Watchers while seeking a city, he would have had to have been in the coastal strip later called Canaan. We have discussed the plague of Nephilim in this area and their base at Mount Hermon – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

The genealogy details have undeniably been tampered with as we have previously discovered. We know this for two reasons as: a. the line of Arphaxad would not have been dramatically diluted by the line of Canaan so quickly following the Flood and b. it is unlikely Arphaxad’s grandson Eber, would have taken Nephilim offspring for a wife. Or, the possibility remains that Eber may have had more than one wife and Azurad was a second wife. The prime line of descent would not have been contaminated so early on in the genealogy of Arphaxad’s family tree with Nephilim DNA. Though that was surely the Watchers’ plan.

The agenda by whoever has written these verses or whomever has edited them, has been to cast aspersion on the line that produced the promised seed of the Messiah, who would ultimately defeat the Serpent’s seed – Genesis 3:15. Verse 1 is impossible and verses 5-7 highly unlikely. Shelah’s wife from Kesed, is fabricated, or it was a different Kesed to the one born to Abraham’s brother, Nahor. Kesed is not included as a sixth son of Shem. Maybe he was another son from Arphaxad not listed because no known nation has proceeded from him – Genesis 10:11. There is an interesting similarity between Nimrod’s daughter Azur-ad and Assur, as it can be spelled without the h – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod.

The Book of Jasher chapter seven, lists three sons for Arphaxad, whereas the Bible concentrates on the eldest, Shelah:

16 … and the sons of Arpachshad were Shela-c-h, Anar and Ashcol.

Genesis 11:10-13

English Standard Version

‘These are the generations of Shem. When Shem was 100 years old, he fathered Arpachshad two years after the flood. And Shem lived after he fathered Arpachshad 500 years and had other sons and daughters. When Arpachshad had lived 35 years, he fathered Shelah. And Arpachshad lived after he fathered Shelah 403 years and had other sons and daughters.’ 

We learn that Arphaxad had other sons and daughters. Added to the account in the Book of Jubilees, these additional sons and brothers comprised those peoples who would establish the early cities in the lower Mesopotamian delta region. Akkadia, a legacy from the name Arphaxad in the northwest and Sumer, derived from the name Shem in the southeast. The descendants of Arphaxad’s great grandsons Peleg and Joktan, constituted the dominant peoples of Akkadia and Sumer respectively. 

The ageing process changed after the Flood, in that Noah and his sons lives were shorter than if the antediluvian atmosphere and climatic conditions had remained (containing a higher Carbon dioxide to Oxygen ratio) – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World; and Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Whether DNA manipulation was involved is conjecture, though cannot be dismissed. The ages after the Flood were still yet impressive and beyond our comprehension. They did not settle into what we know today until approximately beginning with Abraham, who lived to one hundred and seventy-five years of age and his grandson Joseph who lived to one hundred and ten.

Reading Genesis 10:10-13 based on an unconventional chronology – and a sexagesimal interpretation of the rounded numbers in the biblical account (refer Article: Na’amah) – would read as the following:

‘These are the generations of Shem. When Shem was 1,120 years old, he fathered Arpachshad 120 years after the flood. And Shem lived after he fathered Arpachshad 5,000 years and had other sons and daughters. When Arpachshad had lived 1,070 years, he fathered Shelah. And Arpachshad lived after he fathered Shelah 4,030 years and had other sons and daughters.’ 

Thus the corresponding adjusted dates mean Arphaxad was born circa 10,717 BCE, his son Shelah in 9647 BCE, his son Eber in 8747 BCE and his son Peleg in 7727 BCE. Nimrod was born circa 8700 BCE and the Tower of Babel, with the confounding of the single language into many and all the peoples dispersing from the Middle East occurred between approximately 6755 to 6232 BCE – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. It was circa 4000 BCE or earlier that Sumerian civilisation suddenly appears fully formed with extensive records. 

Staggeringly, Noah lived until 7337 BCE. Shem died in 5717 BCE and Arphaxad died in 5617 BCE. Abraham’s father Terah, was born 4077 BCE. We have read how Terah may have worked for Nimrod. Nimrod if still alive would have been about 5,700 years old. Quite possible, as he was not only a first generation Nephilim, but could possibly have lived this long as a full human being, for Arphaxad lived for 5,100 years. It wasn’t until 1977 BCE that Abraham was born and so accounts of Abraham fleeing from Nimrod or slaying him are not reliable.

Abarim Publications explain Arphaxad’s son Shelah’s name, with two interpretations.

‘There are two completely different Hebrew names in the Bible that are commonly both translated with Shelah. But they’re spelled different and they mean different things. We’ll call them Shelah I and Shelah II:

The name Shelah I… Meaning Missionary, Emissary From the verb (shalah), to send. The only Shelah I (probably more properly pronounced as Shelach) of the Bible is a son of Arpachshad, son of Shem… (Genesis 10:24). This Shelah was an ancestor of Christ and is mentioned by Luke (Luke 3:35). The prophet Nehemiah makes mention of a Pool of Shelah in Jerusalem (3:15), which refers to Shiloah or Siloam in Greek. The verb (shalah) means to send; to send whatever from messengers to arrows. It may even be used to describe a plant’s offshoots or branches. Noun (shelah) refers to some kind of weapon, apparently a kind of missile. Plural noun (shilluhim) means a send-off; a sending away or parting gift. Noun (mishlah) describes an outstretching of one’s hand (i.e. an undertaking, or referring to the place where the letting go takes place)…the name Shelah may mean Sent Out, Branch or Javelin.

The name Shelah II… Meaning Extracted… Prosperity, Request, Petition… From the verb (shala), to extract or de-employ. From the verb (sha’al), to ask or request… Shelah, a son of Judah with the unnamed daughter of Shua (Genesis 38:5). This Shelah became the progenitor of the Shelanites (Numbers 26:20). The town of Shiloh… The verb (shalal) means to extract, mostly in the sense of to plunder. Adjective (sholal) means barefoot. Noun (shilya) means afterbirth. Perhaps a second verb (shala) means to be at rest and prosper… Nouns (shalu) and (shalwa) mean prosperity. Adjectives (sheli) and (shalew) mean quiet, private or prosperous.

The name Shelah means all of the above, but would probably be interpreted to mean either Prosperity or Booty. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names disagrees with all these obvious similarities, and takes the name Shelah to… meaning request or petition [such as by Prayer]…’

Shelah’s son was Eber, with Abarim Publications saying the following – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Eber: Meaning The Region Beyond, One From Beyond, He Who Passed Over, From the verb (‘abar), to pass over [and also ‘to cross over’]. There are five Ebers mentioned in the Bible: The father of Peleg… (Genesis 10:24). A Gadite chief (1 Chronicles 5:13). A son of Elpaal of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 8:12). A son of Shashak of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 8:22). The chief of the Levitical family of Amok when Joiakim was high priest in post-exilic Israel (Nehemiah 12:20).

The first Eber marks an important point in the Biblical genealogies, as of Shem it was said that he was the father of ‘all the children of Eber’. And in the days of Peleg, the son of Eber, ‘the earth was divided’ (Genesis 10:25). The sons of Joktan, Peleg’s brother, are the last mentioned Shemite generation before the tower of Babel was built. Peleg became the ancestor of Abraham, who was the first to be called Hebrew, a word that is highly similar to the name Eber. The name Eber comes from the verb (abar) meaning to pass through: The important verb (‘abar) means to pass or cross over (a river, border, obstacle or terrain). The derived noun (‘eber) describes what or where you end up when you do the verb: the other side or region beyond.’

It is interesting to note that in Genesis chapter ten, before any of Shem’s sons are listed, Shem is listed first, as the father of all the children of Eber. It is from Eber that the term Hebrew derives and refers principally to the the sons of Jacob, who became known as Hebrews. We will learn later that etymologically derived words from Eber are located in Europe and help trace some of the sons of Jacob.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine: 

‘Notice Arphaxad first. He is a son of Shem. He is mentioned in Genesis 10:22 and I Chronicles 1:24. Arphaxad had a grandson named Eber. The name Eber mens a “migrant,” one who comes from the “region beyond.” The sons of Eber are properly known as “Hebrews” – and there are about 400 million of them on earth today! Yet almost no one really knows who the sons of Eber – the Hebrews – are at this time!

Eber had two sons reckoned to him. It was in their day, about 100 [4,000] years after the flood, that God “divided the earth” as an inheritance for the different family groups (Genesis 10:25 and Deuteronomy 32:8). From Peleg, one of these two sons, came Abraham. God promised Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the dust of the ground. The Jews are certainly not as numerous as the dust. Only a tiny fraction of Abraham’s descendants are known as Jews today!’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe ‘Where are the others?’

Eber’s second son Joktan, or possibly Peleg’s twin due to phrasing, represents a major division within Arphaxad’s line and today is represented by those nations we label Eastern Europe. Joktan had an impressive thirteen sons who are listed in Genesis and 1 Chronicles. The peoples of Eastern Europe fall into three main categories; those more closely related to the Russians of Asshur in north eastern Europe; those with an affinity with Austrians in central Europe; and those peoples similar to southern Italians. As there are more than thirteen nations in Eastern Europe, we will endeavour to identify thirteen lines of lineal descent and isolate any variations as evidenced by Haplogroups and autosomal DNA. 

Genesis 10:25-30

English Standard Version

‘To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one [H259 – ‘echad: the other, another. Not word used for first] was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brothers [H251 – ‘ach: half-brother] name was Joktan.’

It is possible that Peleg and Joktan were half brothers with different mothers. 

‘Joktan fathered Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, Obal, Abimael, Sheba, Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab; all these were the sons of Joktan. 

The territory in which they lived extended from Mesha in the direction of Sephar to the hill country of the east [the Arabian Peninsula].’

Notice, a Sheba and a Havilah. The same names we have already seen for sons of Cush; the northern Indians of India and the nation of Bangladesh respectively – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. There is an Uz-al, similar to the Uz of Aram in Italy – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The four names in bold or italics are the sons mentioned in the Bible outside of Genesis ten and I Chronicles one. It is probable that these four are the biggest or most prominent brothers, as the Bible tends to give air time to the most influential or well known nations in any family group – particularly, from an interaction with the sons of Jacob perspective. Ophir was once famously renowned for its wealth from trade in the ancient world. The youngest son, Jobab, is a family name replicated in Edom’s descendants – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

A detailed Map of the ancient Middle East showing the locations of Shem’s descendants; notice Joktan’s region and specifically the land of Ophir.

The children of Joktan before migrating to the Arabian Peninsula, originally dwelt to the east of Arphaxad’s other children who had descended from Peleg. Anciently, Sumer was southeast of Akkadia and today, Joktan lives to the east of Peleg’s descendants. Both peoples descended from Arphaxad and both originally spoke Sumerian. Scholars have proposed that Akkadia, or Babylon spoke Chaldee which was a branch of Aramaic. Chaldee was introduced later, with the arrival of the Chaldean ruling elite. Prior to that, the primeval language of Babylon and for all the Land of Shinar was Sumerian; a language with no certain affinity to any other known language – Chapter XVIII – Elam & Turkey

A number of researchers have either thought that the reference to the east, coupled with so many sons indicates that Joktan must be China; or that other references in the Bible stating Arabia and Ishmael are a link to the Arabic world. Both are incorrect summations as we have already seen regarding the identities for China and the Arab related peoples – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Joktan, meaning: He Will Be Small from the verb (qaton), to be small.

Joktan is a son of the famous Eber, his brother being Peleg, the forefather of Abraham (Genesis 10:25). The name Joktan is the active form of the verb (qaton) meaning to be small or insignificant: Adjectives (qatan) and (qaton) mean small, young or insignificant. Noun (qeton) refers to the little finger.

For a meaning of the name Joktan, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads He Will Be Made Small. A name of similar meaning is Paul.’

Hitchcock’s Bible Names dictionary says for Joktan: ‘small dispute’ or ‘contention’ and ‘disgust.’ There must be no small irony in the name, as the peoples descended from Joktan are far from small in number. It could be argued that they are not as big a presence on the world stage as other nations. In this, the name is probably indicative of the peoples descended from Joktan. Historically, the Slavs – argued as deriving from Slaves – Balts and the Balkans have been trodden underfoot by the bigger aggressor nations to their east, west and south: Russia, Germany and Turkey.

For simplicity the twenty-two modern nations of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Moldova, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Albania and the peoples of the former Yugoslavia North Macedonia, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo – broadly comprise Joktans descendants today.

What has to be remembered is that according to the Bible and the Book of Jasher, Arphaxad had other sons, Anar and Ashcol and thus the surplus of nations – exceeding the number thirteen – could be more closely related to these sons and not necessarily from Joktan specifically. Using a genetic measure could resolve the conundrum, in that subtracting the seven nations of the former Yugoslavia, excepting Slovenia, North Macedonia and Kosovo, as well as Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania for reasons which will become apparent would leave thirteen nations. North Macedonia has strong ethnic and geo-political ties with Bulgaria and leans towards Joktan; while Kosovo is comprised of 92.93% Albanians and could count as one with Albania. Hence twenty-one nations less the thirteen peoples from Joktan leaves the four Baltic nations and the four remaining Balkan nations. All these countries singularly have smaller populations of ten million people or less – the exceptions being Ukraine, Poland and Romania – with the smallest being Montenegro with 628,272 people.

We will gradually refine the possibilities as we progress and a clearer picture will come into focus.

Genesis 25:17-18

English Standard Version

17 ‘(These are the years of the life of Ishmael: 137 years. He breathed his last and died, and was gathered to his people.) 18 They settled from Havilah to Shur [to be raised, wall, fort, bull], which is opposite Egypt in the direction of Assyria. He settled over against [in hostility towards] all his kinsmen.

This verse has prominent clues to where Ishmael is living today, which we will look into further in Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. The Havilah mentioned in this verse, is not the Havilah of Bangladesh descended from Cush. In 1 Samuel 15:7, Havilah is mentioned in connection with Esau’s grandson, Amalek. Another major clue, that will become clearer later in our study. 

Havilah is associated with gold – Genesis 2:11-14. In Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, Havilah from Cush was considered as being referred to in this passage about Eden. Researchers, myself included, do not normally link Havilah with Joktan’s son of the same name. Yet the reference to gold is a clue of key importance. Bangladesh is not known for gold deposits. A handful of eastern European nations are. It would seem then, that this Havilah described with Cush and critically Assyria, is actually the son of Joktan and not the son of Cush.

Gold is also a theme for two of the other three sons of Joktan mentioned in scripture. Of the twenty-two nations possibly associated with Joktan, four stand out in their current gold mining production or alternatively have large potential reserves. Due to the geography described in these two verses – relating to Ishmael, Shur and Asshur the Russians – Havilah, the twelfth son of Joktan equates with the modern nation of Poland. The definition of Havilah is detailed in the section on Cush and Phut. Briefly, it means ‘tremble’ or ‘languish.’ The history of Poland has been severe, with both the Germans and Russians, especially cruel. Poland has certainly been left to languish, which means: ‘to be or become weak or feeble; droop; fade, suffer hardship and distress.’ The population of Poland is 38,165,251 people.

Rare Gold Nuggets – emphasis mine:

‘The potential for undiscovered gold deposits to be found in Poland is still there, even though the country has been mined for centuries. The many deposits that are out there are signs of just how impressive the natural resources of this unique country truly are.’

Polish man and woman

Poland has the 21st largest economy in the world, with a 2019 GDP of $595.86 billion – and the leading economy of the sons of Joktan. Heavy industry, iron and steel production, machinery manufacturing, shipbuilding and coal mining, are all vital components of Poland’s economy. ‘Poland’s business friendly climate and sound macroeconomic policies allowed it to be the only EU country to avoid recession in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.’

Ezekiel 27:18-21

Complete Jewish Bible

‘Because you [Tyre-Brazil] were so wealthy, with such a variety of valuable merchandise, Dammesek [Spain] traded wine from Helbon and white wool* with you. V’dan [Dan or Eden] and Yavan [Greeks… H3120 – Yavan & H3196 – yayin: wine, winebibbers, banqueting, intoxication] from Uzal [H235 – ‘azal: to go away, to disappear, be gone (spent), fail, to go to and fro, gad about] traded ironwork, cassia^ and aromatic cane for your goods. D’dan [Dedan (Abraham & Keturah)] traded with you for riding gear. Arabia [Abraham & Keturah’s sons] and all the princes of K’dar [Ishmael] were your customers; for your goods they traded lambs, rams and goats.’

Most translations are not faithful to the interlinear translation. The CJB renders it accurately. Uzal – the sixth son of Joktan – is usually not even named, but translated for instance, as merely ‘traversing back and forth’ in the New King James Version. 

The name Javan is interesting and has a double meaning as we have seen previously with Javan in the Book of Daniel. It is the only biblical identity used for Javan from Japheth and the modern territory of Greece. For example, we saw clearly that Cush and Ethiopia are not used this way in scripture – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. This verse is not clear in which Javan is intended. Clues point to both. The word for Javan has a root word and this word means wine. Greeks today drink more wine, with thirty-five percent compared to beer, at five percent.

The phrasing is a clever clue to Uzal’s identity as it is like saying: ‘Greece from Greece.’ The reference to ‘going to and fro’ in a trading context is indicative of modern Greece, which is synonymous with shipping and its most important industry, worth some $21.9 billion in 2018. Ancient Uzal is the modern day nation of Greece. Indonesia, a nation from Javan and his son’s descendants the Kittim on the other hand, is the world’s leading cinnamon producer, with 43% of the total world production in 2014. Cinnamon can be made from the cassia^ plant. 

Yechezkel 27:19

Orthodox Jewish Bible

‘Vedan also and Yavan (Greece) provided for your wares with fine yarn*; wrought iron, cassia, and cane, were among thy merchandise.’

Greek man and woman

The OJB has translated Uzal as its identifying sign. This is valuable information, as Greece is ranked 18th in the world for wool production; while it is number one in Eastern Europe. Greece is 11th in the world for Cotton production and 7th in worldwide exports. The modern state of Greece should not be confused with the same people as the Classical or Hellenistic Greeks. 

This is a good example of a people settling millennia later in a territory which still retains the original name. In fact, Greece before the ancient European Greeks, was originally the Greece from Javan, the son of Japheth – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. The population of Greece is 9,945,471 people.

Rare Gold Nuggets – emphasis mine:

‘Greece is a country that has good potential when it comes to finding gold. Many experts believe that Greece contains some very large gold reserves, many of which are virtually untapped. With that being said, Greek gold production is currently only producing a scant few thousand kilograms of gold per year.’

Ezekiel 27:21-24

English Standard Version

‘Arabia [Abraham & Keturah] and all the princes of Kedar [Ishmael] were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you [Tyre-Brazil]. The traders of Sheba [1] and Raamah [India] traded with you; they exchanged for your wares the best of all kinds of spices and all precious stones and gold. Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba [2], Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you. In your market these traded with you in choice garments, in clothes of blue and embroidered work, and in carpets of colored material, bound with cords and made secure.’

The traders of Sheba in verse 23 are different from the ‘traders of Sheba’ in verse 22. The first are the Northern Indians; the second descend from Joktan.

Psalm 72:10, 15

English Standard Version

‘May the kings of Tarshish [Japan] and of the coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] render him tribute; may the kings of Sheba [India H7614] and Seba [Sri Lanka H5434] bring gifts! Long may he live; may gold of Sheba [H7614] be given to him…’ 

Similarly in these verses, two different Shebas are stated, even though it is the same Hebrew word for the exact same name, yet remaining distinct from the other name of Seba using a different Hebrew word. 

Rare Gold Nuggets – emphasis mine:

‘Romania is home to the largest gold deposit in continental Europe. Romania is one of the poorer countries in Europe, but from a view of the resources available for mining it is actually one of the richest. There are a large variety of minerals that are commercially mined here. The potential for gold mining in Romania is strong and the history of mining in the country is extensive.’

Sheba – the tenth son descended from Joktan – is Romania. Like the Greeks, the Romanians have inherited the name from the ancient Romans; though they are not the Romans. 

Romanian man and woman

Similarly, the Magyars in Hungary are not Huns, they simply have the appellation of the former peoples, by that name: the Turks – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. The population of Romania is 18,915,140 people.

1 Kings 22:48

English Standard Version

‘Jehoshaphat made ships of Tarshish to go to Ophir for gold, but they did not go, for the ships were wrecked at Ezion-geber.’

1 kings 10.11

English Standard Version

‘Moreover, the fleet of Hiram [King of Tyre], which brought gold from Ophir [H211 – ‘Owphiyr: ‘gold region in the east’], brought from Ophir a very great amount of almug [H484 – ‘almuggiym: a tree from Lebanon (sandalwood?)] wood* and precious stones.’

Job 28:16

English Standard Version

‘It cannot be valued in the gold of Ophir, in precious onyx or sapphire.’

Psalm 45:9

English Standard Version

 ‘… daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.’

Isaiah 13:12

English Standard Version

‘I will make people more rare than fine gold, and mankind than the gold of Ophir.’

Ophir is mentioned in a number of verses throughout the Old Testament and always in context of its gold and mineral wealth. One would expect this nation to standout amongst Joktan’s descendants today, just by sheer size of either resources and or, its economy. The meaning of Ophir is contradictory as it can mean, ‘exhausted, depleted’ and ‘reducing to ashes’ – ‘which is what remains when all useful energy is extracted from a fuel’ – or conversely: ‘rich, abundance’ a ‘mark of wealth’ or a ‘coast of riches’ according to Abarim Publications.

Glenn Webb – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Excerpt from Peresopnytsia Gospel (Matthew 19:1) (1556) where the word ukrainy (оукраины) corresponds to ‘coasts’ (KJV Bible) or ‘region’ (NIV Bible). [The] Ukrainian symbol is a trident and has a coastline to its south.’

Rare Gold Nuggets – emphasis mine: 

‘Gold mining is still a young and growing industry in Ukraine. As with many regions in the world with a turbulent political history, the economic development in the mining industry has been limited… Ukraine holds large reserves of gold in several regions… some suggestions that there is as much as 3,000 tons of gold to be found all around Ukraine…’

This is the equivalent of 2,722 tonnes and would place Ukraine 5th in countries with the largest gold mine reserves, behind Australia at number one with 10,000 tonnes; Russia with 5,300 tonnes; South Africa with 3,200 tonnes; and the United States with 3,000 tonnes. The value of 2,722 tonnes of gold is a staggering USD $209,005,228,637.00.

‘… there are more than two hundred locations around Ukraine that gold is known to be found. The potential for gold… is amazingly vast… These are huge expectations for a huge country.’

A Short History of the Ukrainian Tryzub, Gary Sohayda, January 2022 – emphasis mine:

‘A trident with a crossed central prong was… confirmed in 1918 as the emblem of the Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet. In 1939, the Diet of Carpatho-Ukraine, the short-lived independent Ukrainian state that emerged from Czecho-Slovakia, adopted the trident with a cross as its official coat of arms. Finally, in 1992, following the restoration of Ukraine’s independence the previous year, Ukraine’s Parliament adopted the trident as the chief element in its coat of arms. The trident is today shown on Ukraine’s monetary emissions (coins as well as some bank notes or their watermark) and on its postage stamps.’

The Trident is a potent symbol of the god of the sea and water, Neptune and Poseidon. A link to Ophir’s strategic importance for gold via its position in ancient mercantile trade routes – once located in Sumer near the Persian Gulf, then later during the United Kingdom of Israel and the reign of King Solomon, on the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula. Today, Ukraine represents a vital ‘warm water port’ for itself and Russia and hence, the obvious importance of the Crimea.

The trident is a weapon, whether for spear fishing or as a pole arm. The significance as a weapon of Neptune is the fact that it symbolises his control over the seas. Though its wider application is that the three prongs reflect his mastery over the three principalities of heaven, earth and hell. Neptune’s power does not stop there, for it is also linked with birth, life and death; mind, body and spirit; and the past, present and future – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning?

Ukraine is Ophir, the eleventh son of Joktan. All the conflicting definitions for Ophir’s name are strangely specific and accurate about Ukraine and parallel the rather schizophrenic history and destiny of Ukraine as an unhappy and unwilling junior partner of Russia. The verb even means ‘to desire or draw near’ exactly typifying the relationship which Little Russia has with Great Russia. 

For the largest Russian diaspora in the world are the 8,334,100 Russian people living in Ukraine (2001 Census). To complicate matters, a third of the Ukrainian population in the eastern part of the country identify as Russian, speaking Russian. Other Ukrainians also speak Russian and higher percentages of Russians live in the western and central regions of the nation, as well as in the industrialised city centres. The total population of Ukraine is 38,911,001 people – the seventh highest in Europe.

Ukraine is the 4th biggest mineral producer in the world, behind South Africa in first place, Russia and Australia. Ukraine has up to $510 billion in iron ore reserves alone. Apart from the presence of many mineral reserves, Ukraine is best known for its productive mining sector. There are over three hundred mining facilities actively operating across Ukraine. As an aside, both South Africa and Australia were foreordained to be rich in natural resources and consequently mineral powers – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali the Antipodean Tribes

Ukrainian man and woman

Europe’s second largest country, is a land of vast fertile agricultural plains and large pockets of heavy industry in the east. Ukraine is known as the ‘breadbasket’ of Europe and is amongst the top three exporters of grain in the world. It has some of the most fertile land on earth with rich black soil called chernozem – literally, ‘black dirt.’ 

This soil produces considerable agricultural yields due to its high moisture storage capacity and levels of humus; with more than seventy percent of the country comprising prime agricultural land. Parts of Russia and the United States of America also have rich soils with high organic content called mollisols. It is estimated that Ukraine can feed at least half a billion people. 

Its main crops include corn, soybeans, rye, oats, beets and barley. With Russia, Ukraine supplies a quarter of the world’s wheat and half of its sunflower products. Ukraine is the fourth largest producer of potatoes in the world.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Ukrainian global shipments during 2021…

  1. Iron, steel: US$13.1 billion
  2. Cereals: $11.8 billion 
  3. Ores, slag, ash: $7 billion 
  4. Animal/vegetable fats, oils, waxes: $6.9 billion
  5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $3.2 billion 
  6. Machinery including computers: $2.1 billion 
  7. Oil seeds: $2.1 billion 
  8. Wood: $1.9 billion*
  9. Food industry waste, animal fodder: $1.7 billion 
  10. Articles of iron or steel: $1.2 billion 

Iron and steel was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 70.8% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was cereals via a 25.8% gain led by higher international sales of corn, wheat and barley.’

The word Ukraine literally means, on the outskirts and from a Russian imperial perspective, that has been true. Ukraine has been ‘the borderland’ for much of its existence, enduring its role as a convergence point between the East and the West; partly including territory once occupied by the Scythian and Sarmatian peoples. Ukraine and Russia share common historical origins, especially in the East; whereas the west of the country has closer ties with its European neighbours and particularly Poland.

Early Germanic tribes from Jutland and surrounding environs migrated and in time some of them would filter down towards western Ukraine, including the mighty Goths who would control a vast swathe of Ukraine for a couple of centuries. Following this, Ukraine was home to some of the earliest Slav states – descendants of the earlier Sarmatians – and notably, the grand principality of Kiev in the tenth and eleventh centuries made it a focus of East Slavic cultural development. 

The Cossack Hetmanate republic emerged in central Ukraine in the seventeenth century. The region only gained more permanent borders during the Soviet era and independence as a sovereign nation wasn’t achieved until 1991, upon the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ukraine is a unitary republic governed under a semi-presidential system which has been moving increasingly towards strengthening ties with the rest of Europe, until the 2022 invasion by Russia. 

Flags of Ukraine and Greece

Referring to the modern state as The Ukraine is incorrect both grammatically and politically, says ‘Oksana Kyzyma of the embassy of Ukraine in London. “Ukraine is both the conventional short and long name of the country.” The use of the article relates to the time before independence in 1991, when Ukraine was a republic of the Soviet Union. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukrainians probably decided that the article denigrated their country (by identifying it as part of Russia) and abolished ‘the’ while speaking English… As well as being a form of linguistic independence in Europe, it is also hugely symbolic for Ukrainians.’ 

Ukraine Is the Most Important Country for the European Union… Ivan Dikov, 2019: 

‘Which is the most important “outside’ country for the European Union at the present moment and for the foreseeable future… It’s Ukraine. The reason… Ukraine is the largest country that has the realistic potential, the desire, and a wide range of prerequisites to become a member state of the European Union… Of course, that is a very long shot: Ukraine hasn’t even been recognized as an official EU candidate country yet, and it’s not even sure when it will be, or even that it ever will be… [yet it’s] population seemingly has the desire to do so, and, what’s ever more important, whose society wishes to change correspondingly in the process. 

… Ukraine is what Poland was among the countries that joined the EU in the three “Eastern Enlargements” in the decade between 2004 and 2013… the great thing about the European Union is that it is a Union of “losers”: countries which either built empires to see them crashing down, or which were otherwise crushed, mauled, or severely threatened by empires… Ukraine… is quite big but not too big, so that… the Union as a whole… will be able to “swallow” its accession with relative ease. If or when Ukraine becomes a member of the EU, it would naturally assume a spot among the Big Six – which are now about to become the Big Five… (Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland)… while this is still a very long shot, and Britain’s departure (which itself was a long shot for a while) is regrettable, but such a set up would bring a better East – West balance inside the EU… It would be very shrewd of the entire European Union to take notice of that fact.’

Any movement by Ukraine towards the European Union have been stopped in its tracks at time of writing; with Russian forces entering the Ukraine on February 24, 2022, with a build up of Russian troops in the Crimea beginning on the formidable date of 22.02.2022. Events today were created centuries ago. Between 1772 and 1795, the Russian Empire and Hapsburg Austria as a result of the Partitions of Poland each had control of the territory which comprises modern day Ukraine for a hundred years or more. The Russian Revolution led to the Ukraine’s own civil war and then war with the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1921. In 1922, one hundred years ago, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was established. Leap ahead to 1954 and new Soviet leader Khrushchev who succeeded Stalin; himself a Ukrainian, transferred Crimea to Ukraine to mark the 300th anniversary of the Russian-Ukraine Union. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, Crimea became independent.

Late 2013 President Viktor Yanukovych, suspended preparations for the implementation of an association agreement with the European Union. This decision resulted in months of mass protests. The Ukrainian parliament impeached Yanukovych on 22 February 2014. During the 22nd and 23rd February – exactly eight years previously – the Russo-Ukrainian War began with Russian forces entering Crimea. It was not an invasion as such since Russia had a naval base in Sevastopol. A referendum in the largely ethnic Russian autonomous region of Crimea was held and with a ninety-five percent majority mandate, Crimea was de facto annexed by Russia in March 2014.

The Crimean Peninsula has key strategic importance as the Black Sea region is pivotal to Russia, for it is the only gateway to the Mediterranean, Africa and beyond. Access is vital for shipping, oil and gas pipelines, as well as for military operations. Russia could and would, never give up this most important warm water sea gate. 

It was during the Crimean War between 1853 to 1856 that a coalition comprising Britain, France and Turkey won Crimea from Russia. Russia’s mistrust of the West is reasonable and the threat of Ukraine joining the European Union and or Nato with possible foreign military presence on Russia’s border, led to its preemptive strike on Ukraine, to topple a puppet regime with links to and support from, the West. 

Ukraine is very unstable with its ‘debt-to-GDP ratio [doubling] and close to 60% of the people [living] below the poverty line. Its industries are crumbling, and pensions/social welfare have been deeply slashed. Neo-Nazi groups are on the rise, and 80% of young people are desperate to leave the country’ now with no end in sight.

Ukraine is very unstable with its ‘debt-to-GDP ratio [doubling] and close to 60% of the people [living] below the poverty line. Its industries are crumbling, and pensions/social welfare have been deeply slashed. Neo-Nazi groups are on the rise, and 80% of young people are desperate to leave the country’ now with no end in sight.

And so like its name Ophir, Ukraine is at once a nation ‘exhausted, depleted’ and is being ‘[reduced] to ashes’ – yet remains a nation potentially ‘rich, [with] abundance’ having a ‘mark of wealth’ and a ‘coast of riches.’

One nation we have not discussed, whom enigmatically may or may not descend from Joktan, is Finland – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. We will investigate the Finns further, though will include them with Joktan for the time being, for they still share a common descent from Arphaxad. Finland is ranked number 10 in the top ten technologically advanced nations, one behind China at nine. According to the Global Innovation Index, Finland ranks number six in the world. Recall Singapore is number five and South Korea tenth in the world. Finland is famously renowned as the creator of Nokia which ‘ruled the communication industry, for over a dozen years.’ Finland is proficient in high-tech projects and exhibits medical prowess. Finland’s core areas of focus are in biosciences, energy and environmental sciences. 

Finnish man and woman

The division between Eber’s sons Joktan and Peleg is supported not just by geography, language and culture but chiefly, genetically. A major Haplogroup of the paternal Y-chromosome tree is the extensive R1, which is represented by two principle lineages: R1a and R1b. More than half the men of European descent belong to R1b. 

Haplogroup R1a, is primarily found in central Asia, southern Asia (both through admixture) and as a defining marker Haplogroup of the Slavic speaking male populations in Eastern Europe. 

The Y-DNA map of West Eurasia shows the principle Haplogroup division for Europe into, not just a north-south or east-west split but into quarters. Thus for north western Europe the predominant Haplogroups include I1 (and N1c1 from Japheth admixture); for western Europe, R1b (and I2a2); for eastern Europe R1a; and for south eastern Europe, I2a1.

What is important to stress is to understand that the defining Y-DNA marker Haplogroup for Joktan’s male descendants is R1a. Haplogroup I2a1 though frequent in the Balkan region, is an older lineage and those men who carry I2a1 are distantly related but not the same as the males with R1a – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens. Similarly, the Balkan men who carry J2, J1 and E1b1b lineages are reflecting mutations from a Hamitic (or Canaanite) line of descent such as from Phut, Mizra and Canaan respectively.

Below, are listed the leading mtDNA maternal Haplogroups – showing the diversity yet interconnectedness of the peoples of eastern Europe descending from Joktan’s thirteen sons, at least – stretching from Finland in the North to Greece in the South. Data for Moldova, Montenegro and Kosovo not included. Following, is a comparison of the four principle nations outlined from the scriptures, plus Finland, as well as the other nations of eastern Europe in approximate geographical order, descending from the northwest to the southeast.

Finland: H [36.3%] – U5 [20.7] – W [9.6%] – HV0+V [7.3%] – 

J [5.9%] – K [4.5%] – I [4.2%] – T2 [2.4%] 

Ukraine: H [39%] – U5 [9.8%] – T2 [8.4%] – J [8.1%] – U4 [5.8%] – 

K [4.9%] – HV0+V [4.3%] – HV [3.5%]

Poland: H [43.9%] – U5 [10.1%] – J [7.9%] – T2 [6.9%] – U4 [5.2%] – 

HV0+V [4.9%] – K [4%] – W [3.6%] 

Romania: H [37.2%] – J [10.5%] – K [7.9%] – U5 [7.2%] – T2 [5.1%] – 

HV0+V [4%] – W [3.9%] – T1 [3.5%] 

Greece: H [40.5%] – J [9.5%] – T2 [6.6%] – U5 [5.2%] – K [5.1%] – 

X [4.2%] – U3 [3.8%] – T1 [3.5%] – HV [2.7%] 

Estonia:      H [45.8%] – J [10.7%] – T2 [7.6%] – U5 [ 13.3%] –

U4 [5.7%] – W [3%] 

Latvia:        H [42%] – U5 [10%] – U4 [8.7%] – T2 [6.3%] –

J [6%] – I [4.6%] 

Lithuania:  H [45.3%] – U5 [11.4%] – T2 [7%] – J 6.4%] –

U4 [3.8%] 

Belarus:      H [39.1%] – U5 [9.1%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.6%] –

HV0+V [6%] – T2 [5.1%] 

Czech R:     H [40.2%] – J [10%] – U5 [9.7%] – T2 [7.7%] –

T1 [4%] – K [3.4%] 

Slovakia:     H [43%] – U5 [ 11.1%] – J [9.6%] – T2 [8.1%] –

U4 [5.5%] – K [3.8%] 

Hungary:    H [39.2%] – J [10.1%] – T2 [8.7%] – U5 [7.4%] –

K [6.8%] – W [5.2%] 

Slovenia:     H [44.4%] – J [9.8%] – U5 [9%] – T2 [6.4%] –

K [5.3%] – HV0+V [4.8%] 

Croatia:       H [41.1%] – U5 [10.3%] – J [9.7%] – T2 [5.8%] –

HV0+V [5.1%] – K [5.1%] 

Serbia:         H [41%] – U5 [9.4%] – J [6.8%] – U4 [6.8%] –

HV0+V [5.1%] – K [4.3%] 

Bosnia/H:   H [45.8%] – U5 [8.8%] – J [8.3%] – U4 [4.9%] –

K [4.9%] – HV0+V [4.7%] 

Macedonia: H [45%] – U5 [8%] – J [7.5%] – K [5%] –

HV0+V [4.5%] – T1 [4.5%]

Bulgaria:      H [41.9%] – J [7.7%] – U5 [6.9%] – K [5.8%] –

T2 [4.7%] – T1 [4.7%] 

Albania:       H [47.9%] – J [7.1%] – U5 [6.4%] – T2 [5.5%] –

K [5.2%] – T1 [4.3%] 

Placing the data in a relative geographic order does not show specific relatedness; though PCA graphs do confirm the geographic clusters as being indicative of who is most closely related to whom in eastern Europe. The Finns are unique, yet in turn are the most related to the Baltic nations, who are then related to the Poles, Belorussians and Ukrainians – and by extension, the Russians. The Czechs and Slovaks are next genetically related with a gap between them and the Slovenians, Hungarians, Croats and Moldavians. Further in genetic distance are the Serbians and Bosnians and then Romanians, Bulgarians and Macedonians. Unsurprisingly, the most distantly related from the Finns, are the Albanians and Greeks. Finland stands out as an outlier; even so, they are not related to Scandinavia – comprising Sweden, Denmark and Norway – even though counted a Nordic nation like Iceland. 

                           H    HVO+V   J       T2     U4    U5      K      W

Finland           36         7           6        2         1      21       5      10

Romania         37         4         11         5         3       7       8       4

Belarus            39        6           9         5        3        9       2       4

Ukraine           39        4           8         8        6      10       5       3

Hungary          39        5         10         9        3        7       7       5

Czech R.          40        3         10         8        2      10       3       1

Croatia             41        5         10         6        2       10       5      3

Serbia               41        5           7         2        7         9       4      3

Greece              41        2         10         7        3         6       5       1

Latvia               42        3          6          6        9      10       2       4

Bulgaria           42        4          8          5        4        7       6       3

Slovakia           43        3        10          8        6       11       4       2

Poland             44        5          8           7        5       10      4       4

Slovenia          44         5        10           6        3        9      5       2

Lithuania        45         5          6           7        4       11      2       2

Macedonia     45         5          8           4        2        8      5       4

Estonia            46         2        11           8        6      13      2       3

Bosnia & H.    46         5         8           4        5        9      5        3

Albania            48        3          7           6        3        6      5        3

Haplogroup H is the most frequent mtDNA found in Europe and based on an ascending percentage for this Haplogroup, places Finland as one bookend, with the lowest percentage and Albania as the other, with the highest. Not a big surprise, yet what is, is the fact that the groupings do not match geographic location or the PCA relationships. Finland stands out with its disproportionately high levels of U5 and W. The Baltic nations also possess relatively higher percentages for Haplogroup U5.

Spain:      H [44.1%] – J [6.6%] – T2 [6.4%] – K [6.3%] – U [1.8%] –

HV [0.7%] 

Ukraine: H 39%] – J [8.1] – K [4.9%] – HV [3.5%] – T2 [2.4%] –

U [0.6%] 

Russia:    H [41.2%] – J [7.8%] – T2 [6.5%] – K [3.7%] – U [2.2%] –

HV [1.8%] 

Turkey:   H [30.8%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.3%] – K [5.6%] – HV [4.8%] –

T2 [4.3%]

Iran:        H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] –

T2 [4.9%]

As one heads west, the most prevalent Western Eurasian mtDNA Haplogroup H, essentially increases in the prominent nations descended from Shem, studied to date. Haplogroup T2 also increases, whereas Haplogroups J, U and HV decrease. In contrast with younger Haplogroup T, Haplogroup U is one of the oldest and most diverse of the European Haplogroups.

                        H         HV    HV0+V      J        T2         U        U5       K

Brazil             44          2                         11 

Portugal        44       0.1           5             7         6           3          7         6

Spain             44       0.7           8            7          6           2         8         6

Poland          44           1           5             8         7        1.4        10        4

Russia           41           2           4            8          7           2        10        4

Greece           41          3         1.8          10          7          3          5         5

Ukraine        39          4            4            8          8      0.6        10         5

Romania      37          2            4           11          5           2          7        8

Finland         36                        7            6          2       0.8        21        5

Turkey          31           5        0.7            9          4           6         3         6

Iran               17           7        0.6           14          5         12         3         7

With the exception of Poland, the descendants of Joktan are entirely sandwiched between Asshur at one end and Elam and Lud on the other. A few of Arphaxad’s children from Joktan have much in common with the Russians when comparing mtDNA Haplogroups. With the six already highlighted, the additional five nations reflect the changing Haplogroups from north to south and east to west. Supporting the contention that the descendants from Arphaxad’s great grandson Joktan, share strong similarity with one of their four uncles. Their offspring equate to cousins. There is no denying that northern Europe, as represented by Poland and Ukraine for instance, are strikingly similar with the Russians. A shared maternal ancestor at some point is feasible for the Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians. 

Eupedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘99% [of Y-DNA Haplogroup] R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 (R1a-M417), which is divided in the following subclades:

R1a-Z645 makes up the majority of R1a individuals from Central Europe to South Asia. R1a-Z283 [R1a1a1b1] is the main Central & East European branch. R1a-M458 [R1a1a1b1a1], primarily a [western] Slavic subclade, with maximum frequencies in Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, but is also fairly common in southeast Ukraine and northwest Russia. Its subclade R1a-L260 [R1a1a1b1a1a] is clearly West Slavic, with a peak of frequency in Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, and radiating at lower frequencies into East Germany, East Austria, Slovenia and Hungary.

R1a-Z280 [R1a1a1b1a2] is also an Balto-Slavic marker, found all over central and Eastern Europe (except in the Balkans), with a western limit running from East Germany to Switzerland and Northeast Italy. It can be divided in many clusters: East Slavic, Baltic, Pomeranian, Polish, Carpathian, East-Alpine, Czechoslovak, and so on. Its subclade R1a-L365 is a Pomeranian cluster found also in southern Poland.’

‘In terms of observable haplogroups, Greece and Albania are quite alike. Although geographically close to Sweden and Norway, Finland looks genetically very different, having more similarities with places like Estonia and Lithuania. Bulgaria and Romania are extraordinarily similar to one another. The haplogroup compositions of the Czech Republic, Austria, and Hungary aren’t exactly identical, but very comparable. Greeces genetic makeup has a lot in common with Turkey’s. Genetically speaking, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia are extremely similar.

The Balkans is likely the most genetically varied area of Europe. Haplogroup N3 [N1] is observable all over Eastern Europe, but it’s practically nonexistent in Western Europe. Haplogroup R1a is one of the most predominant haplogroups in Nordic regions and Eastern Europe. While in Western Europe the most prevalent haplogroup is clearly R1b. 

The farther north you go in Europe, the harder it is to detect Haplogroup J1 (Jewish, Arabic). There is now strong evidence that both R1a and R1b people contributed to the diffusion of the A111T mutation of the SLC24A5, which explains approximately 35% of skin tone difference between Europeans and Africans, and most variations within South Asia’ – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis

‘The distribution pattern of the A111T allele (rs1426654) of matches almost perfectly the spread of Indo-European R1a and R1b lineages around Europe [derived from Shem], the Middle East [from Shem through admixture^], Central Asia^ and South Asia^. R1a populations have an equally high incidence of this allele as R1b populations. On the other hand, the A111T mutation was absent from the 24,000[?] -year-old R* sample from Siberia, and is absent from most modern R2 populations^ in Southeast India and Southeast Asia. Consequently, it can be safely assumed that the mutation arose among the R1* lineage during the late Upper Paleolithic, probably some time between 20,000 and 13,000 years ago [or more likely between circa 8000 to 7000 BCE according to an unconventional chronology].

the genes for blue eyes were already present among Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I. The genes for blond hair are more strongly correlated with the distribution of haplogroup R1a, but those for red hair have not been found in Western or Central Europe before the Bronze Age [beginning circa 2500 to 2000 BCE], and appear to have been spread primarily by R1b people.

Nowadays, high frequencies of R1a are found in Poland (57.5% of the population), Ukraine (40 to 65%), European Russia (45 to 65%), Belarus (51%), Slovakia (42%), Latvia (40%), Lithuania (38%), the Czech Republic (34%), Hungary (32%), Norway (27%), Austria (26%), Croatia (24%), north-east Germany (24%) Sweden (19%), and Romania (18%).’

‘Haplogroup N1c is found chiefly in north-eastern Europe, particularly in Finland (61%), Lapland (53%), Estonia (34%), Latvia (38%), Lithuania (42%) and northern Russia (30%), and to a lower extent also in central Russia (15%), Belarus (10%), eastern Ukraine (9%), Sweden (7%), Poland (4%) and Turkey (4%). 

N1c represents the western extent of haplogroup N, which is found all over the Far East (China, Korea, Japan), Mongolia and Siberia, especially among Uralic speakers of northern Siberia.

Haplogroup I1 is the most common type of haplogroup I in northern Europe. It is found mostly in Scandinavia and Finland, where it typically [represents] over 35% of the Y chromosomes. Associated with the Norse ethnicity, I1 is found in all places invaded by ancient Germanic tribes and the Vikings. After the core of ancient Germanic civilisation in Scandinavia, the highest frequencies of I1 are observed in other Germanic-speaking regions, such as Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands, which all have between 10% and 20% of I1 lineages.

Haplogroup I2 is the most common paternal lineage in former Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria and Sardinia, and a major lineage in most Slavic countries. Its maximum frequencies are observed in Bosnia (55%, including 71% in Bosnian Croats), Sardinia (39.5%), Croatia (38%), Serbia (33%), Montenegro (31%), Romania (28%), Moldova (24%), Macedonia (24%), Slovenia (22%), Bulgaria (22%), Belarus (18.5%), Hungary (18%), Slovakia (17.5%), Ukraine (13.5%), and Albania (13.5%). It is found at a frequency of 5 to 10% in Germanic countries.’

The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for Eastern Europe fall into five major categories which are either N1c1, R1a, I2a1, E1b1b or J2. Haplogroup N through admixture is indicative of northern inhabitants; similarly for E1b1b and J2 in southern Europe; with R1a and I2a1 sitting in-between them on an east-west axis. Higher percentages of the N1c1 group are found mainly in the Balts and the same for the I1 group which is found mainly in the northern Slavs. The I2a1 and E1b1b groups are predominantly associated with southern Slavs and J2 in Greece. Levels of R1a are typically stronger in western Slavs. As far as a neat split thirteen ways to indicate the thirteen sons of Joktan, the data could be manipulated a number of ways for the desired outcome. Remember too, that of these paternal Haplogroups, only R1a, I1 and I2a1 descend from Shem and it is R1a which is the defining marker Haplogroup for males in Eastern Europe (and Russia). While I2a1 is an older ancestral line related to – though clearly prior to – R1a mutations.

What is interesting is that if one takes a Cold War map of Europe prior to 1991, there were thirteen nations exactly in Eastern Europe. With the exception of Finland, one which was not part of the Soviet Union, Greece; five which were part of the Soviet Union, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine; and seven which had Communist regimes under the heel of Moscow: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and Yugoslavia (with multiple states). The twenty-one peoples – 22 nations – have been grouped as it struck this writer and thirteen sub-groups appear plausible: one for N1c1, six for R1a, three for I2a1, two for E1b1b and one for J2.

Though this is in regard to predominant paternal Haplogroups, for it is only R1a which is the defining marker Haplogroup for northern and southern Slavic peoples. I2a1 is a secondary European Haplogroup; whereas E1b1b and J2 are Canaanite and Hamitic mutations from ancient admixture and N1c1 is a similar non-European group resulting from intermixing with an East Asian line descending from Japheth.

Finland: N1c1 [61.5%] – I1 [28%] – R1a [5%] – R1b [3.5%] – 

I2a2 [0.5%] – E1b1b [0.5%] 

Estonia: N1c1 [34%] – R1a [32%] – I1 [15%] – R1b [8%] – 

T1a [3.5%] – I2a1 [3%] – E1b1b [2.5%] – J2 [1%]  –

I2a2 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Latvia: R1a [40%] – N1c1 [38%] – R1b [12%] – I1 [6%] – 

I2a1 [1%] – I2a2 [1%] – E1b1b [0.5%] – J2 [0.5%] –

T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Lithuania: N1c1 [42%] – R1a [38%] – I1 [6%] – I2a1 [6%] –

R1b [5%] – I2a2 [1%] – E1b1b [1%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

The consensus is that the Finns and Estonians are more similar as per a PCA graph, though the Y-DNA Haplogroups show Estonia and Lithuania are actually more closely related. All three Baltic nations obviously form one group and three divisions within it, with Latvia and Lithuania closer together and Estonia closer to Finland. Recall that when comparing mtDNA Haplogroups, it was Finland which is closer to Latvia, then followed by Lithuania and lastly, Estonia.

Many – this writer included – have assumed Finland as a Nordic and not a Scandinavian country, and not having been under the umbrella but merely the shade of the Soviet Union’s Iron Curtain, was a truly Western European Nation. In fact, biblical identity adherents have nearly always postulated that Finland is one of the twelve sons of Jacob, namely the tribe of Issachar. 

It was realised early during this writer’s study that Finland was not a lost tribe of Israel. It has taken considerably longer to identify the Finns more accurately. It was thought for a prolonged period that they were in fact a son of Abraham, descending from his wife Keturah. Identity adherents could have remonstrated against current arguments, twenty-five years ago perhaps. Genetic and Haplogroup studies of the past twenty years prove beyond a shadow of doubt, that Finland is neither descended from Isaac or Abraham.

Though the enigma of the Finns does not end there. Recall we mentioned that Arphaxad had other sons, including Anar and Ashcol as well as daughters. With mtDNA Haplogroup U5, the Finns stand out from the rest of Arphaxad’s children with considerably higher levels. So it is with the Y-DNA Haplogroups N1c1 and I1, where the percentage levels are extraordinarily high in Finland compared to either their Scandinavian or Baltic nation neighbours.

Abraham had a second wife after his first wife Sarah died. Her name was Keturah and she gave Abraham six sons. Her lineage is not provided in the Bible, though Haplogroups of certain nations in Europe strongly indicate that Keturah was from Arphaxad’s line but not from one of Abraham’s brothers, that is, from Peleg or even directly from Joktan’s line. This means Keturah was not from Arphaxad’s son Shelah, but someone related to Shelah; someone such as one of his brothers: Anar or Ashcol. 

We will return to this discussion again in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The main point to consider is that the Finns are unique genetically; including their language group Finno-Ugric, which they share with Hungary. In fact, Hungarian has roots all the way back to Sumer, which supports the notion that descendants of Arphaxad at one time, peopled Sumer and northern neighbouring Akkad – Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

                              N1c1    R1a     I1     R1b    I2a1   I2a2    J2    E1b1b

Finland                  62         5      28       4                  0.5                0.5

Estonia                  34      32       15       8         3       0.5        1          3

Lithuania              42       38        6       5         6           1                    1

Latvia                    38      40        6     12         1            1    0.5      0.5            

The table comparing Finland and the Baltic states with the nations which exhibit very high percentages of the N1c1 Haplogroup; confirming the uniqueness of Finland and the closeness of the Baltic nations with one another. Even so, R1a is the true paternal lineage for the three Baltic nations. Whereas for Finland it is I1, with the more prevalent N1c1 being an infusion from intermixing. Latvia is included in this group as the difference between N1c1 and R1a is marginal. They also share a complete lack of Haplogroup G2a – an older line from Shem than I and R1a – which is indicative of southern Europe, Anatolia and especially the Caucasus.

Khazaria, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis mine:

‘Swedish Population Substructure Revealed by Genome-Wide Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Data, multiple authors, 2011:

The autosomal DNA genomes of 1,525 Swedes were autosomally compared to 280 Finns (from both Eastern Finland and Western Finland) along with Germans, Brits, and Russians.’

“… the Finns seem to be an exception to this rule: they do not appear genetically very close to the Swedes although they are geographically nearby. However, the Finns tend to show inflated genetic distances relative to [all] the [other] European populations in general, not only relative to the Swedes… Northern Swedes and Eastern Finns exhibited longer genetic distances than their geographic location would imply… Of the Swedes, Norrland and Svealand individuals were closest to Finns, and the Finns who had closest affinity to the Swedes were mainly Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnians (SSOB). 

Interestingly, the neighboring Swedish and Finnish provinces in the north, Norrbotten (NBO) and Northern Ostrobothnia (NOB), did not appear very close in the MDS plot; instead, Norrbotten seemed to show closer affinity to Western Finland… The principal component analysis clearly separated the Finnish regions and Eastern and Western counties from the Swedish as well as the Finnish regions and counties from each other. Geneland showed three clusters, roughly corresponding to Sweden, Eastern Finland and Western Finland.”

‘MtDNA diversity revealed that Lithuanians are close to both Slavic (Indo-European)and Finno-Ugric speaking populations of Northern and Eastern Europe. Y-chromosome SNP haplogroup analysis showed Lithuanians to be closest to Latvians and Estonians’ 

Belarus: R1a [51%] – I2a1 [17.5%] – N1c1 [10%] – R1b [5.5%] –

I1 [5.5%] – E1b1b [4%] – J2 [2.5%] – G2a [1.5%] – I2a2 [1%] –

J1 [1%] 

Ukraine: R1a [44%] – I2a1 [20.5%] – R1b [8%] – E1b1b [6.5%] –

N1c1 [5.5%] – I1 [4.5%] – J2 [4.5%] – G2a [3%] – T1a [1%] –

I2a2 [0.5%] – J1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Moldova: R1a [30.5%] – I2a1 [21%] – R1b [16%] – E1b1b [13%] –

I1 [5%] – J2 [4%] – J1 [4%] – I2a2 [3%] – N1c1 [1.5%] – G2a [1%] –

T1a [1%] 

Poland: R1a [57.5%] – R1b [12.5%] – I1 [ 8.5%] – I2a1 [5.5%] –

N1c1 [4%] – E1b1b [3.5%] – J2 [2.5%] – I2a2 [2%] – G2a [1.5%] –

T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Czech R: R1a [33%] – R1b [28%] – I2a1 – [8.5%] – I1 [7.5%] –

E1b1b [6.5%] – G2a [5%] – J2 [4%] – I2a2 [3%] – N1c1 [2.5%] –

J1 [1%] – T1a [0.5%]

Slovakia: R1a [41.5%] – I2a1 [16%] – R1b [14.5%] – I1 [6.5%] –

E1b1b [6.5%] – G2a [4%] – N1c1 [3%] – J2 [2%]  – I2a2 [1.5%] –

J1 [1%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Slovenia: R1a [38%] – I2a1 [20.5%] – R1b [18%] – I1 [9%] –

E1b1b [5%] – J2 [2.5%] – I2a2 [1.5%] – G2a [1.5%] – T1a [1%] 

Hungary: R1a [29.5] – R1b [18.5] – I2a1 [16%] – I1 [8.5%] –

E1b1b [8%] – J2 [6.5%] – G2a [3.5%] – J1 [3%] – I2a2 [2%] –

N1c1 [0.5%] 

The second group of countries dominated by the R1a Haplogroup, primarily comprise the western and eastern Slavs. The maternal mtDNA showed a close alignment between the Czechs and Slovaks, whereas the paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups reveal a wider variation; with the Slovaks having more in common with Slovenia and the Czechs with Hungary. Overall on a PCA graph, the Czechs and Slovaks are genetically closer; while the Hungarians are closer with Slovenians. Conversely from the mtDNA data, Belarus and Ukraine are not quite as similar, with Ukraine showing a similarity with Slovakia. Overall, Ukraine is relatively speaking, equally most related with Poles, Belorussians and Russians.

Poland is at the far northwest region of Joktan’s children and carries the highest percentage of R1a. The Poles and Czechs have each had territory which has intermingled with Germany, before, during and after German and Prussian expansion. The Magyars of Hungary have been closely associated with the Austrians – a descendant of Peleg – during the Hapsburg ruled Austro-Hungarian Empire.

One researcher states that the Hungarian language of Magyar is utterly unique in the world and is actually the closest to ancient Sumerian. As mentioned, the sons of Joktan settled in lower Mesopotamia and became known as Sumerians; while their cousins from Peleg, were known as Akkadians. 

                         R1a     I2a1    R1b       I1      N1c1   I2a2   E1b1b    J2

Poland              58         6        13         9         4          2         4          3

Belarus             51        18         6          6       10          1         4          3

Ukraine            44       21          8         5         6       0.5         7          5

Slovakia           42       16         15         7         3        1.5         7          2

Slovenia           38       21         18        9                   1.5         5          3

Czech R.           33        9         28        8         3           3         7          4

Moldova           31       21         16        5       1.5           3       13          4

Hungary          30       16         19        9      0.5           2         8          7

For the Baltic nations and Finland, the principal Y-DNA Haplogroups are N1c1, R1a and I1. All reflective of their positions as northern as well as eastern European nations. As we travel from north to south the Haplogroup N1c1 markedly decreases; whereas E1b1b and J2 increase. The impact of the mixed Huns and Turks is evident in this admixture, which left the Baltic nations untouched. Heading east and south it is Haplogroup R1a which dominates, while travelling west, R1b expectedly increases. 

The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for the central Slavic speaking peoples include R1a, I2a1 and R1b. Notice from the previous group the omission of the northern Haplogroups of N1c1 and I1. Haplogroup R1a – reflective of eastern European males – is prominent as is the older I2a1, which is indicative of eastern Europe and particularly south eastern Europe. Polish men exhibit the highest levels of R1a and the Czechs the highest percentage of R1b in Eastern Europe. 

Khazaria, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine

Paleo-Balkan and Slavic Contributions to the Genetic Pool of Moldavians: Insights from the Y Chromosome, multiple authors, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:  

This study included 125 Y-DNA samples from Moldavian males from the villages of Karahasani and Sofia and they were compared to other European populations including 54 Romanians living in eastern Romania and 53 Ukrainians living in eastern Moldova.’ 

“… In Moldavians, 19 Y chromosome haplogroups were identified, the most common being I-M423 (20.8%), R-M17* (17.6%), R[1a1a1b1a1]-M458 (12.8%), E-v13 (8.8%), R[1b]-M269* and R-M412* (both 7.2%). In Romanians, 14 haplogroups were found including I-M423 (40.7%), R-M17* (16.7%), R-M405 (7.4%), E-v13 and R-M412* (both 5.6%). In Ukrainians, 13 haplogroups were identified including R-M17 (34.0%), I-M423 (20.8%), R-M269* (9.4%), N-M178, R-M458 and R-M73 (each 5.7%). Our results show that a significant majority of the Moldavian paternal gene pool belongs to eastern/central European and Balkan/eastern Mediterranean Y lineages. Phylogenetic and AMOVA analyses based on Y-STR loci also revealed that Moldavians are close to both eastern/central European and Balkan-Carpathian populations [particularly Croatian men].”

“All Slovenian samples group together with Hungarians, Czechs, and some Croatians (‘Central-Eastern European’ cluster) as also suggested by the PCA… Analysis of the UPGMA tree based on the Fst matrix shows all Slovenian individuals clustering together with Hungarians, Czechs, Croatians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians… Y chromosome diversity splits into two major haplogroups R1b and R1a with the latter suggesting a genetic contribution from the steppe. Slovenian individuals are more closely related to Northern [Austrian] and Eastern European [Hungary] populations than Southern European populations even though they are geographically closer.”

Croatia: I2a1 [37%] – R1a [24%] – E1b1b [10%] – R1b [8.5%] –

J2 [6%] – I1 [5.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – I2a2 [1%] – J1 [1%] – Q [1%] –

N1c [0.5%] – T1a [0.5%]

Bosnia & Herzegovina: I2a1 [50.5% ] – R1a [18%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – 

J2 [5.5%] – I1 [4.5%] – R1b [3.5%] – G2a [1.5%] – J1 [1%] –

N1c [1%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Serbia: I2a1 [34%] – R1a [18%] – E1b1b [15%] – J2 [9%] –

I1 [8%] – R1b [6%] – G2a [2.5%] – N1c [2.5%] – J1 [1%] – Q [1%] –

I2a2 [0.5%] – T1a [0.5%]

Montenegro: I2a1 [29.5%] – E1b1b [27%] – R1b [9.5%] – J2 [9%] – 

R1a [7.5%] – I1 [6%] – G2a [2.5%] – Q [2%] – I2a2 [1.5%] –

N1c [1.5%] – J1 [0.5%] 

Macedonia: I2a1 [23%] – E1b1b [21.5%] – J2 [14%] – R1a [13.5%] – 

R1b [12.5%] – G2a [4%] – I1 [3%] – J1 [2%] – I2a2 [1.5%] – T1a [1.5] –

Q [0.5%] – N1c [0.5%] 

Romania: I2a1  [28%] – R1a [18%] – R1b [15.5%] – E1b1b [14%] – 

J2 [13.5%] – I1 – [3.5%] –  G2a [3%] – I2a2 [2.5%] – N1c [1.5%] –

J1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – Q [0.5%]

The third group possessing higher percentages of the older (intermediate) I2a1 Haplogroup, consists of nations in south eastern Europe. Distinct groupings are visible from former Yugoslavian states. Some researchers have compared Romania and Bulgaria as being similar, yet they both stand out as quite distinct from other eastern European or south eastern European nations. Bulgaria is equally distant from Macedonia and Romania on the PCA graph. 

The principle Y-DNA Haplogroups for these six nations are I2a1, R1a and E1b1b. The higher levels of E1b1b and J2 are reminiscent of say Portugal or Turkey respectively. By far the highest percentage of I2a1 is found in Bosnia Herzegovina.

                                  I2a1    R1a    E1b1b     J2     R1b      I1     I2a2     N1c

Bosnia & H.              51        18         12          6        4         5                      1

Croatia                      37        24         10         6        9          6         1       0.5

Serbia                        34        18         15         9        6          8     0.5          3

Montenegro             30         8         27         9       10         6      1.5        1.5

Romania                   28       18         14        14       16         4         3        1.5

Macedonia               23        14         22        14      13         3      1.5        0.5

It could be argued that these nations and particularly the Balkan states remaining after the implosion of the former Yugoslavia are like Finland, descendants of Arphaxad through his sons Anar and Ashcol; with Haplogroup I the common denominator.

Khazaria, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘I2a (I-P37.2), [the] most common haplogroup, found among 29.2% of Serbian Serbs and 30.9% of Bosnian-Herzegovinian Serbs. It peaks in the Herzegovina region. Other Slavic peoples also carry I2a. Geneticists believe that I2a ultimately originated in the Balkans about 10,000 years ago… 720 Croatian males had their Y-DNA examined… and compared with thousands of samples from different European ethnicities. 

Many different haplogroups were found among the Croats, yet 3 haplogroups stood out as particularly distinctive: I2a1b-M423 (found in over 30% of the Croatian samples and the most indigenous to the region), R1a1a1b1a*-M558 (found in 19% of the Croats…) and E1b1b1a1b1a-V13 (found in about 9% of the Croats…) This Y chromosomal study compares Croats with Slovenians, Serbs, Macedonian Slavs, Macedonian Greeks, Albanians, Poles… [and] reports that among 108 studied mainland Croatians their frequencies are 15.7% belonging to R1b-M173 [and] 34.3% to R1a-M17…’

Kosovo: E1b1b [47.5%] – R1b [21%] – J2 [16.5%] – I1 [5.5%] – 

R1a [4.5%]  – I2a1 [2.5%]

Bulgaria: E1b1b [23.5%] – I2a1 [20%] – R1a [17%] –

R1b [11%] – J2 [11%] – G2a [5%] – I1 [4%] – J1 [3%] –

I2a2 [2%]  – T1a [1.5%] – Q [0.5%] – N1c [0.5%]

Albania: E1b1b [27.5%] – J2 [19.5%] – R1b [16%] –

I2a1 [12%] – R1a [9%] – I1 [2%] – J1 [2%] – I2a2 [1.5%] –

G2a [1.5%] – T1a [1%] 

Greece: J2 [23%] – E1b1b [21%] – R1b [15.5%] –

R1a [11.5%] – I2a1 [9.5%] – G2a [6.3%] – T1a [4.5%] –

I1 [3.5%] – J1 [3%] – I2a2 [1.5%] 

The final grouping driven by high percentages of E1b1b and J2 includes Kosovo, which emerged out of the ruins of the fragmented Yugoslavia. Most have always assumed Greece is a western nation and like Finland, it was not under Soviet domination. Yet, its Haplogroups show that it belongs where it is located, with its fellow brothers, the sons of Joktan. With that said, the Greeks reveal considerable diversity from admixture amongst the mainland and island populations. Additionally, they are genetically similar with not just Albanians but also southern Italians and Jews. We will investigate this further in the following chapter. For we will confirm there is more than one branch or family in the Bible with the name Uz – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

                           E1b1b    J2     R1b     I2a1     R1a     I1    I2a2      N1c

Kosovo                 48        17       21          3                5                    

Albania                28        20      16        12          9        2       1.5      

Bulgaria               24        11       11        20        17        4          2      0.5

Greece                  21         23      16        10        12        4       1.5

The predominant Y-DNA Haplogroups for these four most south easterly European nations are E1b1b and J2 from admixture with Canaan and Ham respectively and a little surprisingly, R1b. Though this has likely been influenced by males of Turkish descent – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. For the first time R1a drops out of the top three. Haplogroup I2a1 is still relatively prominent, as the neighbouring nations to the north west. Bulgaria with the closeness between Haplogroups E1b1b and I2a1 could be included in the preceding group; as Greece is included here, rather than a separate group of one with J2. Its dominant J2 Haplogroup places it near J2 dominated Turkey, 24%; and Iran, 23%.

Bulgarian Autosomal DNA lends weight to its inclusion with Romania and the Balkan states. Greece with Albania and Kosovo has a strong presence of R1b and thus like Turkey, their true paternal lineage is possibly R1b when one discounts E1b1b and J2 from admixture. The alternative is that R1a as with Iran is probably the definitive paternal marker Haplogroup and R1b is a sign of heavy intermixing.

Kosovo possesses the highest percentage of E1b1b. The PCA graph earlier confirms two points. First, the wide diverseness of the Eastern Europeans stretching from the Baltic to the extremity of the Balkans and yet also, within this sizeable region and its numerous nations, are the thirteen sons of Joktan. All showing their interrelatedness through primarily Haplogroup R1a. Whereas I1 and I2a1 are reflective of Arphaxad and not necessarily of Joktan.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, we will find the levels of R1b vary, though gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups for a number of the nations we will study. R-M269 stretches across Europe, with levels increasing as one heads westwards. R-U106 covers western Europe eastwards with its epicentre in Central Europe.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The addition of the Slavic speaking nations with Turkey and Russia highlights the progression of R1b from east to west as well as south to north. Slovenia is the most southern country of the four represented yet also the most westerly. Its R-M269 level is closer to Turkey, though its R-U106 percentage is closer to Russia. Like the other three, R1a is the prime male Haplogroup and as with Ukraine, Haplogroup I2a1 is second. Ukraine has a R-M269 level similar to Russia, though its R-U106 percentage is higher. Poland is similar with Ukraine, whereas the Czechs stand out with higher levels of R-M269 and R-U106. 

How much of this has been influenced by their border changes with Germany and mixing of peoples is undetermined. Like Poland, the Czech Republic has Haplogroup R1a first and R1b second instead of I2a1. The Czech Republic has less R1a than the other three Slav nations and conversely, more R1b than any other nation descending from Joktan; with Poland possessing the highest levels of R1a of all of Joktan’s descendants. 

Other Eastern European nations percentage of R-M269 include the following:

Bulgaria   R-M269   10.5%

Croatia     R-M269   12.4%

Romania  R-M269   13.0%

Greece      R-M269   13.5%

Moldova   R-M269   14.6%

Albania     R-M269   18.2%

Our evolving table from the previous chapter, compared the nations from Aram with Asshur, Elam and Lud. We will add the select nations discussed in the scriptures and descended from either Arphaxad or via his great grandson, Joktan.

                       J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia       43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia      33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey         33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24

Iran              32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece         26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Romania     15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal      13        3       10       14          7       1.5       56       58

Brazil           10                 10       11          5          4       54       58

Spain           10     1.5         8         7          3         2       69        71     

Ukraine        5     0.5     4.5          7          3       44         8       52

Poland          3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia           3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Finland                                      0.5                      5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is now the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a from Russia, while Greece has more E1b1b than Portugal. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. A clear example of the European R1a and R1b Y-DNA divide between the descendants of Aram and Peleg in western Europe and Asshur and Joktan in Eastern Europe. The diverseness of Joktan’s descendants is shown by their slotting in between Elam, Lud and Aram; as well as between Aram and Asshur.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                     R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal      1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain              2         69      1.5         5           1

Brazil              4         54                  [9]            

Finland          5           4       28                   0.5      62

Turkey            8         16         1         4        0.5        4  

Greece          12         16         4       10         1.5      

Iran               16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania      18         16         4       28           3        2

Ukraine        44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia           46          6         5        11                    23

Poland          58         13        9          6          2         4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising the old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 with the ancient Haplogroup G2a (all from Shem) are compared. The paternal Y-DNA diversity within Joktan’s children is repeated. Ukraine and Poland bear closer similarity with Russia from Asshur; and Greece and Romania aligning with Turkey from Elam and Iran from Lud, albeit distantly. Romania and Ukraine possess significantly higher levels in I2a1 and Poland in Haplogroup R1a. Finland has a seismic difference with all the other peoples, with its high level of I1 and very high percentage in N1c1. 

The patterns discerned thus far are substantiated in the comparison tables of major Y-DNA Haplogroups. R1b noticeably increases from east to west. Russia aside from Finland, has the lowest levels and Spain the highest. Haplogroup R1a visibly does the opposite, so that the lowest levels are exhibited in Portugal and Spain, with the highest in Poland, followed by Russia. 

The typically northern Haplogroup of N1c1 is virtually non-existent in southern Europe, with Finland and Russia aside from the Baltic nations, having the highest percentages. Haplogroups more commonly associated with peoples from Canaan and Ham – in North Africa, the Middle East and West Asia – of E1b1b, J1 and J2 are more prevalent in southern Europe, decreasing northwards. For example, excluding Georgia, Greece has the highest percentage of E1b1b, whereas Finland and Russia the lowest.

Finally, gauging by Haplogroup R1a percentages over 30% for instance, there are eleven prominent nations. Locating thirteen ethnic lines as individual countries is clearly a pitfall. Groupings of related ethnic lines according to autosomal DNA, contained in the regional split between the Southern region of the Balkans and the Northern area east of the Baltic, results in the following:

Greece, Albania (Kosovo) [1], North Macedonia, Bulgaria [2], Romania, Moldova [3], Bosnia [4], Serbia (Montenegro) [5], Croatia [6], Slovenia, Hungary [7]

Slovakia, Czech [8], Ukraine [9], Poland [10], Belorussia [11], Lithuania, Latvia [12], Estonia (Finland) [13].

The next chapter focuses on Joktan’s elder brother Peleg and specifically his descendants through Abraham’s brother, Nahor.

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.

Proverbs 3:5-6 English Standard Version

“Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.”

Leo Tolstoy 1828-1910

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil

Chapter XXIII

The fifth and youngest son of Shem, is Aram. Aram is the only son of Shem in the Bible, to list Shem’s grandsons. This signifies that they must be identifiable nations and peoples over a large area as we learned with the sons of Gomer, Javan and Cush – though not as disparate or numerous as the Canaanites with over fifty nations of descent or Mizraim with over thirty nations. It is sincerely recommended to read in tandem with this section: Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Genesis 10:23

English Standard Version

The sons of Aram: Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitals his, emphasis mine:

‘Trouble is boiling up in the Middle East. Syria is now the focal point of intrigue [written in 1957]. Where is Syria mentioned in the Bible? Who are the Syrians? The Syrians are the descendants of Aram, a son of Shem. Everywhere in the Old Testament where the word “Syria” or “Syrian” appears in English, the word in Hebrew is Aram or Aramean. The Arameans were called Syrians by the Greeks because they once formed part of the Assyrian Empire dominated by Asshur, the Germanic [rather, Russian] people’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

As previously discussed, the nation of Syria is an Arab nation and they descend from Ham’s son Mizra – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. The words Aram and Aramaean are translated as Syria and Syrian in the Bible. The sons of Aram, dwelt to the northwest of Asshur in northern Mesopotamia and hence the similar sounding names of As-syria and Syria. Further descendants from Aram dwelt to the southwest – near and on the coast of northern Canaan, in juxtaposition to the later Philistines on the southern coast. The sons of Jacob inherited the central coastal region.

Hoeh: ‘Now we are about to find an unusual characteristic of the children of Aram. Aram had four sons listed in Genesis 10:23: Uz, Hul, Gether and Mash. Compare this with I Chronicles 1:17. Here the sons of Shem include “Aram, AND Uz, and Hul, and Gether, and Meshech.” First, notice that the sons of Aram are raised to the level of brothers in I Chronicles 1 they are on an equal footing with their uncles!* Further, the name Mash is changed into Meshech, because Mash became associated with Meshech, the son of Japheth!’

We will confirm that Mash from Aram, is not associated with Meshech descended from Japheth – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Hoeh: ‘Why should these sons be elevated to the position of fathers of distinct peoples? Because the sons of Aram must have possessed extremely divergent characteristics. Here is the proof! Where are the sons of Meshech or Mash today? We ought to find them in Russia, since that is where Meshech the son of Japheth is! And indeed we do find them there! In the far north of European Russia dwell the little-known Zyrians or Sirians or Syryenians – the name is spelled in half a dozen different ways.

They are related to numerous small tribes scattered throughout European Russia. And where are the sons of Hul? According to the Jewish historian Josephus, Hul, the brother of Mash, founded Armenia, a land in the Caucasus between the Black and Caspian Sea (Book I, chapter vi, section 4). The Armenians are a very business-like people. Many have migrated to America. The name “Armenian”, like the word “Syryenian” (applied to Mash or Meshech) means a son of Aram, or son of Syria. The ending “-ian” means “son of” in the Armenian tongue!’

We have heard repeatedly as the constant reader will testify that Gomer and a number of other identities are ascribed to either Armenia or Turkey. So many identities cannot all be Armenian or Turkish. What this shows, is how many diverse peoples at different times, lived at this strategic east-west crossroads in Asia Minor before continuing to migrate. The Armenians and Turks are just the last to arrive and dwell in a region of high migratory activity – yet they are not descendants of Aram – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Hoeh: ‘Present-day Syria, on the Mediterranean, was founded by Uz, according to Josephus. As the descendants of Gether are nowhere mentioned in prophecy, their movements do not need to be included here. See Josephus’ ANTIQUITIES and the article on “Afghanistan” in the BRITANNICA for their present location. No wonder the sons of Aram were raised to the rank of distinct people. They are extremely divergent in national characteristics. Who would ever guess today that all these people had the same father, Aram?’

As it turns out, these divergent people are not all the sons of Aram. The people previously identified as Canaanites and Javan by Dr Hoeh are in fact Aram. Aram’s four sons are distinct yet separated peoples today, though their Haplogroups and autosomal DNA reveal they are closely related and not as diverse genetically as Hoeh proclaimed. Finally, relying on Josephus at best, has limited value as he addressed what he understood at the time of writing and at worst, he has been found to be less than reliable in numerous instances. Peoples and nations had a long way to travel in their respective migrations before a settled picture could come into somewhat clearer focus from circa 1600 when the American colonies were forming, more specifically by the 1870s when the German (1871) and Italian (1861) states had united to form nations and particularly from between 1918 to 1945 with the redrawing of European boundaries.

We have seen how the sons of Shem thus far, are located on the periphery of Europe proper: Lud in Iran, Elam in Turkey and Asshur in Russia. 

The four sons of Aram are similarly located on the outer edges of Europe, in principally Spain and Portugal on the Iberian Peninsula and stretched across the Atlantic Ocean in Brazil, South America. Descendants of Aram are also located throughout the heavily mixed Hispanic nations of the Americas and particularly concentrated in Uruguay, Argentina and Chile – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. Similarly, descendants of Aram are also located in Italy, though the Italian Peninsula contains more than one lineage of people as we will discover.

In Genesis 25:20, a wife was found for Isaac from Abraham’s brother’s family. This brother had a close association with Aram. Dwelling in the same territory as one of Aram’s sons Uz, so that a shared name of Paddan-Aram describes them both. We find in Genesis chapter twenty-two a list of sons, where Uz and Aram are both shared family names. 

Genesis 25:20 

English Standard Version

‘… and Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban [the father of Leah and Rachel] the Aramean, to be his wife.’

Genesis 22:21-23

English Standard Version

21 “Uz [or Huz] his [Nahor’s] firstborn, Buz his brother, Kemuel the father of Aram, 22 Chesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph, and Bethuel.” 23 (Bethuel fathered Rebekah)…”

The word Paddan in Hebrew means ‘a field’ or ‘a plain’ – therefore, the field or plain of Aram. Both of the sons named Uz descending from Aram as well as from Nahor, are the firstborn of their brothers.

Jeremiah 25:19-22

English Standard Version

19 ‘Pharaoh king of Egypt, his servants, his officials, all his people, 20 and all the mixed tribes among them; all the kings of the land of Uz [Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans] and all the kings of the land of the Philistines (Ashkelon, Gaza, Ekron, and the remnant of Ashdod) [Spanish speaking Central and South America]; 21 Edom, Moab, and the sons of Ammon; 22 all the kings of Tyre [Aram], all the kings of Sidon [South Africa], and the kings of the coastland across the sea [East Asia and South East Asia]…’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Uz in Hebrew means, ‘Contemplation, Inner Strength’, from the verb (‘us), to create inner strength by contemplation.

The name Uz is assigned four times in the Bible:

  • A [firstborn] son of Aram, a son of Shem… (Genesis 10:23).
  • The first-born son of Nahor and Milcah (Genesis 22:21).
  • A descendant of Seir the Horite (Genesis 36:28)…
  • A location… where Job lived (Job 1:1).

The name Uz probably arose in a language other than Hebrew… but spelled as is, it is identical to the verb (‘us) meaning to counsel, regard:

Noun (‘osma) means strength Adjective (‘asum) means mighty or numerous. Noun (ta’asuma) is a plural and intensive form meaning might but a whole lot of it.

The very common noun (‘es) means tree (whose fruits proverbially show its “heart”). Collectively, trees are known as (‘esa)… [such as] the cedars of Tyre…

Probably a by-form of the previous, the verb (‘us) means to counsel or regard with deep inner contemplation. To a Hebrew audience the name Uz would have meant Counsel or Contemplation, an interpretation that is confirmed by Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names, which reads Counsellor. NOBSE Study Bible Name List takes a different approach and goes possibly through the root (‘sh) that yields the noun (es) meaning tree, wood or timber. Hence NOBSE reads Firmness.’

We will study Italy (and Uz) separately and so for now, concentrating on the remaining three sons of Aram; Hul, Gether and Mash who none of which are specifically mentioned again in the Bible, even though they are distinct peoples as advocated by Dr Hoeh. Two of the three are prominent and are stated, though with different nomenclature. One is called Tyre throughout the Bible and the other sometimes as Aram or Syria, though invariably by its capital city, Damascus. Damascus as the capital of Aram included primarily the descendants of Gether and today they equate to the Spaniards of Spain – and by extension, their descendants who migrated to the Americas. Hul and Mash (or Meshech) are not so clear. It appears that one is associated with the Portuguese and Brazil and the other mixed throughout Latin America.

Abarim Publications, bold mine:

‘Aram meaning: ‘Elevated, Citadel’ from the verb (rum), to be high.

Altogether, the name Aram or Syria occurs 12 times in the New Testament. [Other] Biblical Arams are:

  • A son of Shemer, son of Heber, son of Beriah, son of Asher, the eighth son of Jacob and the second of Zilpah (1 Chronicles 7:34).
  • A district in Gilead (1 Chronicles 2:23).
  • … the King James and the Darby translations list an Aram in the genealogy of Christ, but this Greek Aram is due to an odd transliteration of the Hebrew name Ram. Modern English versions of the Bible speak of Ram (Matthew 1:3, Luke 3:33).

The name Aram comes probably from the common Hebrew verb (rum) meaning to be high, rise up: The verb (rum) means to be high or high up in either a physical, social or even altitudinal sense, and may also refer to the apex in a natural process: the being ripe and ready-for-harvest of fruits. Subsequently, our verb may imply a state beyond ripe (higher than ripe, overripe), which thus refers to rotting and being maggot riddled. This means that to the ancients higher did not simply mean better, and an arrogant political status that was higher than it should be equaled rot and worms (Acts 12:23).

Derived nouns, such as (rum) and related forms, describe height or pride. Noun (ramut) describes some high thing. The noun (‘armon) refers to a society’s apex: a citadel or palace. The noun (re’em) describes the wild ox, which was named possibly for the same reason why we moderns call a rising market a “bull” market. The similar verb (ra’am) means to rise.

The noun (‘armon), meaning citadel, is thought to derive from a root (‘rm), which, according to BDB Theological Dictionary, is probably a by-form of the Hebrew verb (rum) and which is identical to our name Aram. The name Aram, in fact, may derive from the idea of a global capital…

The aspect of being at high altitude is reflected in Spain’s capital Madrid perhaps, which averages 646 metres above sea level. This is not necessarily high for a number of towns or cities, though it is the highest capital in the world. Parts of Madrid can be 750 meters above sea level. Some have made note of 666 metres for parts of Madrid and the correlation with the number of the Beast. A film incorporating Madrid as the birthplace of the Antichrist was made by Spanish film director Alex de la Iglesia called, The Day of the beast.

Notice the reference to the bull, recalling its strong link with the Philistines and still within Spain’s traditions today – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Finally, the idea of a global capital is insightful; remember this point when we study Italy in Chapter XXV and when we identify Tyre shortly.

One source says Aram can mean a flaming fire. Aram’s capital – mirrored by Spain’s capital Madrid today – is represented by Damascus in the Bible and means, a sack of blood. The son of Aram who principally populates Spain is Gether – refer Goth: Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Gether meaning: ‘Winepress of Vision, Circle of the Winepress’ or ‘Fear.’

From (1) the noun (gat), winepress, and (2) the verb (ra’a), to see or understand… and… the verb (tur), to explore or survey… From the verb (gur), to fear. 

Jerome suggests that [Gether] consists of two elements.. The verb (yagan) probably meant to beat or press… The second part of the name Gether, according to Jerome, may come from the verb (ra’a), meaning to see: The verb (ra’a) means to see, and by extension to understand. It may mean to become visible (of, say, an angel) or to become understandable (of, say, a theory). Noun (ro’eh) means either seer, or prophetic vision, and noun (mar’a) means either vision as means of revelation, or mirror.’

The Spanish are known for their wine production.

‘The verb (garar) means to drag or drag away, mostly in a circular or repetitive* motion. The verb (gara) means to strive or agitate strife, obviously not by means of one singular assault but rather by repeated provocations and withdrawals. Noun (tigra) means contention or opposition. Nouns (gor) and (gur) both denote lion cubs. Perhaps young male lions were named after the verb (gur) because they are expelled from the pride and are forced to roam adjacent territories. Perhaps a third identical verb (gur) means to dread, but perhaps it describes dread that is built up over time and from many little threats and suspicions. Nouns (magor) and (megora) mean fear or terror…’

Judges 10:6

New Century Version

‘Again the Israelites did what the Lord said was wrong. They worshiped Baal and Ashtoreth, the gods of Aram, Sidon, Moab, and Ammon, and the gods of the Philistines. The Israelites left the Lord and stopped serving him.’

Judges 18:7 

Bible in Basic English 

‘Then the five men [from Dan] went on their way and came to Laish and saw the people who were there, living without thought of danger, like the Zidonians, quiet and safe; for they had everything on earth for their needs, and they were far from the Zidonians and had no business with Aram.’

2 Samuel 8:6

English Standard Version

‘Then David put garrisons in Aram of Damascus, and the Syrians became servants to David and brought tribute. And the Lord gave victory to David wherever he went.’

Isaiah 7:8

New King James Version

‘For the head of Syria [Aram] is Damascus, And the head of Damascus is [King] Rezin. Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be broken, So that it will not be a people.’

Isaiah 9:12

English Standard Version

‘The Syrians [Spanish] on the east and the Philistines [Central America and South America, excepting Brazil] on the west devour Israel with open mouth. For all this his anger has not turned away, and his hand is stretched out still.’

Isaiah 22:6 

Bible in Basic English

‘And Elam [Turkey] was armed with arrows, and Aram came on horseback; and the breastplate of Kir [wall or boundary with Moab] was uncovered.’

2 Kings 16:10

English Standard Version

‘When King Ahaz [of Judah] went to Damascus to meet Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, he saw the altar that was at Damascus. And King Ahaz sent to Uriah the priest a model of the altar, and its pattern, exact in all its details.’

Jeremiah 49:23

English Standard Version

‘Concerning Damascus: “Hamath [Nigeria] and Arpad [Ethiopia] are confounded, for they have heard bad news; they melt in fear, they are troubled like the sea that cannot be quiet.’

Ezekiel 27:18-19

New Century Version

‘People of Damascus became traders for you because you have many good things and great wealth. They traded your goods for wine from Helbon, wool from Zahar, and barrels of wine from Izal. They received wrought iron, cassia, and sugar cane in payment for your good things.’

Amos 1:5

Amplified Bible

“I also will break the bar [of the gate] of Damascus, And cut off and destroy the inhabitant from the Valley of Aven (Wickedness), And the ruler who holds the scepter, from Beth-eden (Damascus); And the people of Aram [conquered by the Assyrians] will go into exile to Kir,” [Moab] Says the Lord.’

It is of note that the sceptre of royalty is attached with Damascus (of Aram); for Spain with its current king, Felipe VI – since 2014 – is one of the few nations in the world which possesses a (parliamentary) monarchy.

‘Beth-Eden’ means: The House of Eden. We will learn that Eden (not the Garden) are part of the lineage of Haran’s descendants; the brother of Abraham – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

The reference to ‘the gods of Aram, Baal and Ashteroth’ – their idols and altars – is the same religion of their neighbours or affiliated peoples. Today, the descendant religion of this ancient false system of worship is the Universal Church (or Catholicism) and its Protestant daughters. Notice the Syrians and Philistines in the Bible are linked frequently, just as Spain and Spanish Central America and South America are closely linked by history, culture, religion, migration and ethnicity.

The Aramaeans have had an influential role in the affairs of Ephraim and Judah – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Biblically in the past, Damascus was representative of an economic power, just as the Spanish Empire historically was a dominant economic (and military) power during the sixteenth century.

Spain is located on the eastern Iberian Peninsula in south west Europe. The peninsula has witnessed considerable activity over the centuries with the influx of numerous peoples and consecutive empires. The Phoenicians arrived in the ninth century BCE or earlier, followed by the related Carthaginians, the Greeks and then the Romans With the Romans having a lasting impact on Spain’s culture, naming it Hispania. The invading Visigoths drove out the Romans circa 500 CE. In 711 the Moors, including returning Alans and Vandals came across the Mediterranean Sea from North Africa and re-conquered most of Spain, naming it al-Andalus: al_An_s (Alans) and [V]Andal_s (Vandals). They would remain there for hundreds of years until the Europeans retook Spain as part of the Reconquista – refer Chapter XV The Philistines; Latino-Hispano America

In 1137, the Kingdom of Aragon was formed and in 1139, the Kingdom of Portugal was established. In 1469, Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon married. The infamous Spanish Inquisitions began in 1478 and a year later, the Kingdom of Spain was formed when Isabella and Ferdinand were made King and Queen uniting Aragon and Castile. In 1492, the Reconquista ended with the conquest of Grenada and Columbus (re)discovering the New World, while searching for India – hence the naming of the West Indies.

During the 1500s and the Age of Exploration, Spain became the most powerful country in Europe and realistically the world. Fuelled by their North and South American colonies and the great wealth of gold they acquired. A turning point in the year of 1588 was the battle of the world’s two greatest navies, with the British – led by Sir Francis Drake – (and the weather) defeating the Spanish Armada. 

Spanish men

In 1761 Spain joined the Seven Years’ War against their old nemesis Great Britain. In 1808 the Peninsular War was fought against Napoleon’s French Empire and the Spanish American wars of independence began. By 1833 the majority of the Spanish territories in America had gained their independence. The Allies won the Peninsular War in 1814, with Spain being freed from French rule. Spain later lost the Spanish-American war of 1898 and ceded huge territory in the continental United States as well as Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam.

Spanish women

Spain became a republic in 1931 and in 1936, Spain endured a civil war. The nationalist forces won – beating the Republicans – with a General, Francisco Franco becoming leader and commencing a dictatorship lasting until 1975. From 1959 the Spanish miracle began; with a period of sustained economic growth and prosperity. Spain had a GDP of $1.62 trillion in 2023, making it the 16th largest economy in the world. 

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Spanish global shipments during 2021. 

  1. Vehicles: US$54.9 billion
  2. Machinery including computers: $26.3 billion 
  3. Mineral fuels including oil: $24.9 billion 
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $20.5 billion
  5. Pharmaceuticals: $20.3 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $16.2 billion 
  7. Fruits, nuts: $12.5 billion
  8. Iron, steel: $10.8 billion 
  9. Meat: $10.6 billion 
  10. Articles of iron or steel: $9.4 billion 


Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 100% since 2020. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel which rose 69.6%.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Hul meaning: ‘Circle, Writhing.’ From the verb (hul), to writhe.

The name Hul comes from the root group (hul I & II): Verb (hul I) denotes a whirling in circular motions.* It comes with quite a cluster of derivatives, most notably the noun (hol), meaning sand; the noun (hil), meaning pain so bad that it makes one writhe (specifically childbirth)… Verb (hul II) means to be strong, and the important derived noun (hayil) means might. A by-form of the previous: the verb (halam I) means to be strong.’

Hul’s meaning of strong is similar with that of Uz – the first born son – of strength and Hul’s circular motion is similar to Gether and its meaning, circle. Both Gether and Hul writhed in motion and gave ‘birth’ to nations. Second born son Hul likely identifies with Portugal for it gave birth to the nation Brazil. Brazil is specifically addressed as Tyre in the Bible, while (prophetically), Damascus refers to Spain – not to the city of Damascus in modern day Syria (Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia).

The youngest of Aram’s four sons Mash (or Meshech), may in like manner with the third born son Gether, be scattered far afield, ranging from Argentina to Mexico. If so, Aram shares with Meshech from Japheth the trait of being part of or compressed with, a larger body of people. As Meshech of China is mixed with Tubal and Magog; Mash is merged with Gether, as well as descendants from Tiras (Japheth), Mizra (Ham) and Canaan – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech; and Chapter XV The Philistines; Latino-Hispano America.

While Brazil has significant African and American Indian minorities added with the majority of Portuguese inhabitants; a large number of Italians also emigrated to Brazil, corresponding with the eldest brother Uz. Thus as the two youngest sons, Gether and Mash are linked in possibly Spain and particularly in Spanish speaking America; the two eldest sons, Uz and Hul are linked in being non-Spanish and deriving from Italy and Portugal respectively.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Mash meaning: ‘Departed, Drawn Out’ From the verb (mush), to depart, or (masha), to draw out, or (mashak), to draw or drag.’

The definition of mash is relevant when viewed in the context of the formation of Latin America.

‘In Genesis 10:23, Mash is listed as a son of Aram, who is a son of Shem… In 1 Chronicles 1:17 the same genealogy occurs, although the various generations are now all listed as sons of Shem. And Mash is called (Meshech). Another man named Meshech is mentioned as a son of Japheth, who is another son of Noah (Genesis 10:2). He is mentioned about half a dozen times in the Bible… and it’s clear that these are the names of nations rather than individuals…

The name (Mash) does not occur as regular word in Hebrew, but it may be viewed as a contraction of the word (mush), meaning depart or remove (or rather: could be viewed as an expansion of an original): The verb (mashash) means to feel; to sense or search for tactilely. This verb has no derivatives but does show up in two alternate forms, namely (mush) and (mish). 

An assumed whole other verb (mush) or (mish) means to depart or remove… Perhaps these two verbs relate in the sweeping or scanning motion* that usually accompanies tactile reconnaissance. This same motion could be applied to describe [as] being footloose or untethered. Verb (nasa’) describes an upward motion, generally of something that is being pulled up and out so as to remove it.

Noun (nasi’) describes a lifted-up one, i.e. (1) a captain or chief, or (2) a mist or vapor. Noun (si’) means loftiness or pride [note meaning of Aram]. Noun (se’et) means dignity, swelling or outburst, a rising-up. This noun is spelled the same as (she’t), ruin or devastation, from the verb (sha’a), to be noisy or ruinous.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Tyre meaning: ‘Rock’ From the noun (sur), rock.

Tyre is the Greek/Latin name for the famous Phoenician city often mentioned together with Sidon (Joshua 10:29). It still exists today, being situated south on the coast of Lebanon,  just north of Israel. Famous Biblical Tyrians are Hiram, the builder of the temple of Solomon, and Jezebel the wife of king Ahab. Another famous Phoenician was Hannibal of Carthage, which was a Tyrian colony.

The name Tyre could be considered a Hebrew equivalent of the Greek name Peter, and when Jesus said that upon this “rock” he would build his church (Matthew 16:18), his original audience doubtlessly remembered how Solomon built the temple of YHWH on the rock of Phoenician knowledge and resources (1 Kings 5:1-12). 

In New Testament times the city of Tyre was still a booming town (spelled in Greek as, Turos). Jesus referred to it (Matthew 11:21), preached to visitors from it (Luke 6:17) and retreated to its region (Matthew 15:21)… Paul spent seven days there while the ship he was travelling with was unloading…

The Semetic, and thus original, name for Tyre is pronounced Zor or Zur… scholars assume that the Hebrew name for Tyre, equals the regular word (sur) meaning rock (Jeremiah 21:13, Job 14:18). In Deuteronomy 32:31 the author compares the gods of the nations to the living God and says, “Indeed, their rock is not like our Rock”: Verb (sur II) means to confine, secure or besiege. Noun (masor) means siege and (mesura) means stronghold. Verb (sur III) means to be an adversary. Verb (sur IV) means to form or fashion. Noun (sura) means form and noun (sir) means image. Verb (sur V)… probably means to be sharp. 

The important noun (sur) means rock, and is equivalent to the Greek noun (petra), from which comes the name Peter. Verb (sarar I) means to bind… Adjective (sar) means narrow. Nouns (sar) and (sara) mean distress and yield denominative verb (sara), meaning to suffer^ distress. Verb (sarar II) means to show hostility and relates to verb (sur III). Noun (sara) means vexer or rival-wife. Verb (srh) probably describes the bleeding of an odoriferous tree. Noun (sari) denotes a kind of costly balsam.’

Remember these definitions for Tyre: rock, narrow, sharp, confine, bind and secure. In the future, Tyre will be become a powerful and problematic political entity. Especially, when allied with the Philistines – the Spanish speaking descended nations in Central America and South America, particularly Mexico – against the United States of America – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.  

Joshua 19:29

English Standard Version

‘Then the boundary turns to Ramah, reaching to the fortified city of Tyre. Then the boundary turns to Hosah, and it ends at the sea…

1 Kings 7:14

English Standard Version

‘He was the son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, and his father was a man of Tyre, a worker in bronze. And he was full of wisdom, understanding, and skill for making any work in bronze. He came to King Solomon and did all his work.’

2 Chronicles 2:14

English Standard Version

‘… the son of a woman of the daughters of Dan [elder brother of Naphtali], and his father was a man of Tyre.

He is trained to work in gold, silver, bronze, iron, stone, and wood, and in purple, blue, and crimson fabrics and fine linen, and to do all sorts of engraving and execute any design that may be assigned him, with your craftsmen, the craftsmen of my lord, David your father’ – refer article: The Ark of God.

Psalm 87:4

New English Translation

I mention Rahab [Egypt] and Babylon to my followers. Here are Philistia [Central America and South America] and Tyre [Brazil], along with Ethiopia [Cush (India)]. It is said of them, “This one was born there.”

Isaiah 23:1, 8

New King James Version

‘The burden against Tyre. Wail, you ships of Tarshish! [Japan] For [Tyre] is laid waste, So that there is no house, no harbor; From the land of [Kittim (Indonesia)] it is revealed to them. Who has taken this counsel against Tyre, the crowning city, Whose merchants are princes, Whose traders are the honorable of the earth?’

Isaiah 23:15-17

Revised Standard Version

15 ‘In that day Tyre will be forgotten for seventy years, like the days of one king. At the end of seventy years, it will happen to Tyre as in the song of the harlot: 16 “Take a harp, go about the city, O forgotten harlot! Make sweet melody, sing many songs, that you may be remembered.” 17 At the end of seventy years, the Lord will visit Tyre, and she will return to her hire, and will play the harlot with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

Verse seventeen coincidentally, yet importantly links the descendants of Hul – (from Aram) in Brazil – with those of Uz – (from Aram) in Italy. Both Tyre and Babylon are referred to as harlots and this is in reference to their shared allegiance to the Universal Church and united power of influence.

Jeremiah 47:4 

BBE

‘Because of the day which is coming with destruction on all the Philistines [Central and South America], cutting off from Tyre [Brazil] and Zidon [South Africa] the last of their helpers: for the Lord will send destruction on the Philistines, the rest of the sea-land of Caphtor.

Joel 3:4

English Standard Version

“What are you to me, O Tyre and Sidon, and all the regions of Philistia? Are you paying me back for something? If you are paying me back, I will return your payment on your own head swiftly and speedily.”

Zechariah 9:3 

BBE

‘And Tyre made for herself a strong place, and got together silver like dust and the best gold like the earth of the streets.’

Acts 21:3

English Standard Version

‘When we had come in sight of Cyprus [Kittim (Indonesia)], leaving it on the left [east] we sailed to Syria [Aram] and landed at Tyre [Brazil]…’

Brazil was born in the modern age in the year 1500, when Portuguese explorer Pedro Alvarez Cabral, with thirteen ships and twelve hundred men discovered Brazil; thinking it was a large island, while on route to India – subsequently claiming the land for Portugal. In 1532, Sao Vicente was established as the first permanent settlement in Brazil by Portuguese explorer Martim Afonso de Sousa. The primary export was sugar. In 1565 the city of Rio de Janeiro was founded.

The Dutch established a colony called New Holland on the northwest coast of Brazil in 1640; while Portugal declared its independence from Spain. The following year, Portugal officially took over the territory of New Holland from the Dutch. For the significance of this interaction between the Portuguese and the Dutch, refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. In 1727, the first coffee bush was planted in Brazil by Francisco de Melo Palheta. Brazil ultimately became the world’s largest producer of coffee. 

Slaves were imported from the Sub-Sahara Western Africa slave trade – as well as the Portuguese colonies of Angola and Mozambique in East Africa – to work the fields (Chapter XII Canaan & Africa). Nearly three million slaves were brought from Africa during the three centuries lasting from 1500 to 1800. The Portuguese during this time had defeated the French to re-take Rio de Janeiro; as well as taking control of several Dutch and British outposts. In 1763, the capital city was moved from Salvador to Rio de Janeiro.

Rio de Janeiro (December 15, 2014): Christ, the symbol of Rio de Janeiro standing on top of Corcovado Hill, overlooking Guanabara Bay.

Rio de Janeiro ceased being the capital when it was replaced by Brasilia in 1960. Recall some of the definitions for Tyre: rock, narrow, sharp, confine, bind and secure. While Brazil equates to Tyre, it is no coincidence that Rio should have the rocky landscape that it does or that it is the third largest port in Brazil. The (rather ugly), yet unique and imposing statue of (a false) Christ the Redeemer, stands atop the city. A quiet and patient witness to the destiny of political and spiritual harlotry that awaits the city and the country – Isaiah 23:1-17.

In 1807, the Portuguese royal family escaped from Napoleon and fled to Brazil. In 1815, the former colony was elevated to a kingdom. Although the king, Dom Joao VI, returned to Portugal in 1821, his son Pedro remained in Brazil; declaring Brazil’s independence in 1822, after annexing Uruguay as a province in 1821. Pedro I became emperor of the newly created Empire of Brazil. In 1824, the first constitution of Brazil was adopted and the fledgling country was recognised by the United States. In 1888, slavery was abolished by the Golden Law, with four million slaves being set free. In 1889, the short-lived monarchy was overthrown by a military coup led by Deodoro da Fonseca and replaced with a federal republic. Since then, the country has been ruled by elected presidents as well as enduring^ military coups and martial rule.

Brazilian men

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Brazilian global shipments during 2021.

  1. Ores, slag, ash: US$48.7 billion 
  2. Oil seeds: $39.2 billion 
  3. Mineral fuels including oil: $38.4 billion 
  4. Meat: $18.2 billion 
  5. Iron, steel: $14.3 billion 
  6. Machinery including computers: $10.7 billion 
  7. Sugar, sugar confectionery: $9.4 billion 
  8. Vehicles: $9 billion 
  9. Food industry waste, animal fodder: $8 billion 
  10. Woodpulp: $6.7 billion 

Ores, slag and ash was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 68.6% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was the oil seeds product category via a 64.5% increase. Brazil’s shipments of mineral fuels including oil posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 54.2% year over year.’

Brazil has the tenth largest economy in the world and is the dominant economic power in South America, with a GDP of $2.31 trillion in 2025. Brazil’s very ‘diversified economy runs the gamut from heavy industries, such as aircraft and automotive production, to mineral and energy resource extraction. It also has a large agricultural sector that makes it a major exporter of coffee and soy beans.’

Brazil has steadily grown in importance as a prime breadbasket of the world; exporting five of the world’s major crops. The country has two key agricultural regions; one in the Southern region which is fertile from higher rainfall and also a drier North Eastern region. The former is responsible for a big percentage of the nation’s grains, oil seeds and export crops while the latter produces its cocoa and tropical fruits. Important agricultural products in the country include wheat, rice, sugarcane, corn, citrus and beef. Cattle farming in Brazil is massive with millions of tonnes produced yearly, so much so that deforestation of the Amazon Rain forest has become a critical issue. Nether-the-less, Brazil remains the world’s leading meat exporter. Brazil is also the leading sugarcane producer in the world with a total yield of about six hundred million tonnes every year. Amongst the world’s top soybean producers, Brazil is ranked second. The country also produces vast amounts of corn and is the world’s third largest exporter. 

Brazil ranks highly at number six of the top ten countries with the most natural resources, one place behind Russia. ‘Brazil possesses commodities worth $21.8 trillion, including gold, iron, oil and uranium. The mining industry focuses on bauxite, copper, gold, iron, and tin.’ Brazil impressively, contains the ‘largest gold and uranium deposits in the world and is the second-largest oil producer.’ Timber remains the country’s most valuable natural resource, which accounts for over 12.3% of the world’s total timber supplies. This has echoes of the Cedars of Lebanon, so important to the Phoenicians of Tyre and the Kingdom of Israel for ship building and subsequent mercantile and commercial trade routes throughout the Mediterranean and well beyond the Pillars of Hercules – the Straits of Gibraltar.

There are two distinct identities for Aram, apart from Uz which is incorporated within Italy. The Aram-Damascus component comprised of Gether (Mash) in Spain and the descendants of Hul constituting Portugal and Brazil. Aram-Damascus-Gether historically, were arch rivals of the sons of Jacob and up until the modern age remained so. Tyre (Hul) had an economic-trading relationship with the Israelite Kingdom, which has been mirrored in recent history.

We will study Aram initially and then concentrate on Tyre. The further we go back into pre-history these two identities are blurred, then as we enter the time of Abraham around 2000 BCE, the two begin to become clearer as separate entities. One of the most distinctive identifying points of interest is language. Aramaean was one of the most prominent languages amongst the descendants of Shem and today, the descendant romance languages are equally influential and widespread. 

Brazilian women

2 Kings 18:26 

English Standard Version

‘Then Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebnah, and Joah, said to the Rabshakeh, “Please speak to your servants in Aramaic, for we understand it. Do not speak to us in the language of Judah [Hebrew] within the hearing of the people who are on the wall.”

The top ten spoken languages in the world today include three romance languages of which Spanish and Portuguese are included. Some of the top ten are included such as China, India, the Arab nations, Russia and Indonesia which all have obviously sizeable populations, or influence on near neighbours.

Whereas, England, France and especially Spain and Portugal exhibit smaller populations. Extensive colonies contributed to the volume of people who speak their languages. The ancient world was no different. The ancestors of the Spaniards and Portuguese travelled the breadth of the world via mercantile trade and in so doing, spread the Aramaic and Phoenician languages.

World Atlas:

1. English – 1.13 Billion Speakers

2. Mandarin – 1.12 Billion Speakers (China)

3. Hindi – 615 Million Speakers (India)

4. Spanish – 534 Million Speakers

5. French – 280 Million Speakers

6. Standard Arabic – 274 Million Speakers

7. Bengali – 265 Million Speakers (Bangladesh)

8. Russian – 258 Million Speakers

9. Portuguese – 234 Million Speakers

10. Indonesian – 199 Million Speakers

Aramaeans were distinctively defined by their use of either the West Semitic Old Aramaic Language between 1100 BCE and 200 CE, written using the Phoenician alphabet and also a modified Aramaic alphabet. As early as 900 BCE, Aramaic competed with the East Semitic Akkadian language and script of Assyria and Babylonia; spreading throughout the Middle East. By 800 BCE, Aramaic had become the lingua franca of the Neo Assyrian Empire and also ‘during the Achaemenid period as Imperial Aramaic. Although marginalised by Greek in the Hellenistic period, Aramaic in its varying dialects remained unchallenged as the common language of all Semitic peoples of the region until the Arab Islamic conquest of Mesopotamia in the [seventh century CE], when it [was] gradually superseded by Arabic.’ 

The Phoenician language was a member of the Canaanite branch of the Semitic languages. Its descendant language spoken in the Carthaginian Empire was Punic. Their evolved language descendant re-surfaced as Latin, from which we derive the Italian and French languages. Though it is Spanish, which is the predominant heir to ancient Aramaic; it is Portuguese which derives from a direct line of descent from the original Phoenician – notice the letter P in Phoenician, Punic and then – to Portuguese. 

Romance Languages of Europe

Who were the Arameans? Is There a Connection Between the Amorites and the Arameans? Daniel Bodi – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In Sumero-Akkadian texts from the period from 2400 to 1600 BCE, Sumerian MAR.TU, Akkadian amurru occur as a geographical term… In OB times, the Amurru region embraced the great Syrian desert, the Orontes River valley, and the Amanus Mountains. In later Assyrian texts, Amurru was an established name for Syria-Palestine. 

While in the 24th century BCE, Eblaite sources refer to a “king (LUGAL) of Mar-tu,”… the specific reason why the Amorites began migrating to the south-east of Mesopotamia in the course of the 21st century BCE still eludes us. The period stretching from 2000 to 1595 BCE is sometimes called “The Amorite era,” with reference to the political influence assumed by the Amorites and their epigones. During the 17th century BCE the Amorite power began to decline with the final demise experienced under the attacks of the Hittite king Mursili I, around 1595. There is no surviving Babylonian account of the conquest of Babylon by the Hittites. After this date the Amorite kingdoms are replaced by the establishment of new entities directed by new ethnic groups like the Hittites, the Kassites and the Hurrites. In Late Bronze Age, the kingdom of Mittani… also known as Ḫanigalbat and as Nahrin “Rivers” occupied northern Syria, between the Tigris and the Euphrates. Geographically, the Amorites and the Aramean clans originally occupied the same region. 

Another valuable corpus of texts useful in the reconstruction of the geographic and linguistic continuity between the Amorites and the Arameans is provided by the so-called Suhu texts, from the MB period. Just as with the term Amorite, the term Aram can stand for a toponym [a name derived from the name of a place], a geographic region in Syria, a conglomerate of tribes, and a language. The earliest attestation of the term Aramu appears as a toponym. The Ebla texts dating from the end of the 3rd millennium BCE mention a toponym a-ra-mu. The Aramean invasions of Mesopotamia from the west began at the latest during the late 2nd millennium BCE and are attested from the time of Tiglath-pileser I (1114-1076 BCE) of Assyria and Marduk-nadin-ahhe (1099-1082 BCE) of Babylonia. 

Ahlamu, forerunners of the Arameans, had been present in Mesopotamia in the Kassite period… The Amorites spoke a language belonging to the Northwest Semitic ones to which Phoenician, Aramaic… represent some chronologically more recent offshoots. There seems to exist a linguistic continuity between the Amorite and the Aramaic languages. R. Zadok has suggested that certain eastern members of the Amorite dialect cluster, which were spoken in the Djezireh and on the fringe of the Syrian desert, were the ancestors of the Aramaic language. 

In the Hebrew Bible there are two examples where two daughters are offered to the same man. First among the patriarchal stories, Laban offered Jacob two daughters for wives, Leah and Rachel, and later Saul offered David likewise his two daughters, first Merab then Michal. The coarse Jacob-Laban story in Genesis 29:26-28, narrates how the former obtained the two sisters Leah and Rachel for wives seems to serve the purpose of showing how the nemesis or divine retribution is at work. 

Jacob cheated his older brother Esau, now he gets cheated in turn by waking up in the morning finding himself in bed with the older daughter Leah while he desired Rachel, the younger one. This patriarchal tradition of incestuous marriages chronologically precedes the strict prohibition of a marriage to two sisters at the same time found in Leviticus 18:18. 

The ancestors of the Hebrew tribes issued from Laban’s sister Rebekah (with Isaac) and his two daughters Leah and Rachel (with Jacob, Rebekah’s son) lived in paddan-‘aram, an expression to be connected with Akkadian paddanu, padanu “the way, the path,” meaning in this case “the way of the Arameans” (Genesis 25:20 “Rebekah [Isaac’s wife], was the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean”; After marrying Rachel and Leah the daughters of Laban the Aramean, Jacob returned to Canaan: Genesis 48:7 [Jacob says] “for when I came from Paddan, Rachel to my sorrow died in the land of Canaan”). 

The incestuous practice of giving two daughters to the same man is attested among the Amorites as the Mari documents show. As R. Zadok suggests, the nucleus of some of the chronologically later Aramean tribes seems to have evolved from the previous conglomerate of the Amorite ones. They both occupied Northern Mesopotamia and thrived in the same geographical area. 

Moreover, scholars are becoming increasingly aware of the similarities in the marriage transactions between the Amorite semi-nomads and the ancient Hebrews. J. Sasson compares the way Isaac obtained Rebekah, Laban’s sister from the “city of Nahor” in Haran, as a spouse as described in Genesis 24:1-27, with the way the Sim’alite Amorite warlord Zimri-Lim negotiated his marriage with Sibtum, the daughter of Yarim-Lim from Ḫalab (Aleppo), by a proxy as described in several cuneiform letters from Mari ARMT XXVI 10; 11; 13. Both marriage transactions share numerous specific details which are best explained as being due to the conservatism of marriage customs in Northern Syria. They tend to confirm the continuity between the Amorite tribes and the Aramean ones… 

Rebekah’s and Sibtu’s betrothals share the following elements: long-distance negotiations by wise servants or ambassadors, rich gifts to the bride and the family of the bride, the veiling of the bride, her own acceptance of her new status, the attachment of maids to her person, the merging of two families, the anxiety of the bride’s family, the long trek back, and the preparation of a chamber for the new mistress of the house. In the case of Jacob being offered two sisters Leah and Rachel as wives, it reflects Laban the Aramean’s indelicate attempt to manipulate and control him. 

As a result of intensive scholarly research on ancient Amorite traditions, history and customs, it has become increasingly evident that there exists a connection and a geographical, historical and linguistic continuity between the OB Amorite nomadic tribes and the MB Aramean ones. The geographic area where the ancient Amorites settled corresponds to the area occupied by the Aramean tribes at the end of the second millennium BCE.’ 

The author’s expose of Jacob and his wives is included as we will study the family he married into in Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. It is well to remember that the Paddan-Aram of Nahor’s family while linked, are distinct from the Aramaeans from Aram. Abraham’s brother Nahor is represented by the peoples known as the Mitanni, as we will uncover. The association between the Amorites of this period and the later Aramaeans is supported in the fact that these Amorites are described in historical sources as including people with blond hair. Therefore, they cannot be the original black peoples descended from Canaan; nor is it likely that they were all Nephilim of similar name – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

The Mitanni empire was composed of different smaller kingdoms spread throughout the region between Anatolia and Babylon – modern Turkey and Iraq. The Mitanni took control of the Tigris and Euphrates basin after the fall of Amorite (Aramaean) Babylon to the Hittite King Mursili I, circa 1595 BCE and the Kassites in turn ruled the fallen Babylon. The Mitanni had good relations with the Kassites and Hurrians. The Hurrians as we will learn, were descendants of Abraham’s other brother, Haran. Notice the word Hur-[ri]-an contains Haran – their original forefather – within its spelling. We will explore this relationship further when we study Abraham’s brothers, Nahor and Haran. After the Battle of Megiddo circa 1482 to 1457 BCE, Egypt and the Mitanni fought each other relentlessly. This was mirrored, when the Visi-goths of Geth-er clashed with the Alans, Vandals and Moors of Mash, Casluh and Caphtor, the Philistines centuries later.

Prior to this, the Hurrians had been based in the region surrounding Urkesh and Arrapha in northern Ur; not Ur in southern Mesopotamia some six hundred miles away near Babylon. They appear to have formed a successful relationship with the Mitanni circa 1600 BCE. The Hurrian warrior nobility enabled the combined peoples to coalesce into a feudal state, that by 1500 BCE were dominating their neighbours. By 1420 BCE the domain of the Mitanni king Saustatar stretched from the Mediterranean all the way to the northern Zagros Mountains, in western Iran. Saustatar ‘sacked the Assyrian capital of Assur, and humiliated its inhabitants by sending the doors from the city’s famous temple to Wassukanni, the capital of Mitanni.’ This led to a cease fire between Egypt and the Mitanni kingdom and an alliance was forged between the next king of Mitanni, Artatama I – who succeeded Saustatar – and the Egyptians. 

Wassukanni is thought to be Tell al-Fakhariyeh in present day Syria. The pharaohs of Egypt called the Mitanni region, Naharina – also Nahrin and Maryannu – after the Assyro-Akkadian word for river. Notice the word Nahar-ina has Nahor, their original progenitor within its spelling. The Me-ta-ni region was also known as Aram-Naharaim, the Rivers of Syria. ‘Assyrians always referred to the Mitanni as Hanigalbat or Hani-Rabbat and the Hittites – a related people – used the appellation Hurri. ‘The earliest attestation of the term Hanigalbat can be read in Akkadian within the “Annals of Hattusili I” (circa 1650-1620 BCE) along with the Hittite version mentioning “the Hurrian enemy”.’

The combined Hurrite-Mitanni kingdom was a regional power from circa 1500 to 1300 BCE. The Hurrians were gradually overshadowed by the Hittites on the west and the Assyrians to the east and weakened by internal strife; while the Mitanni kingdom was relegated to province status and a pawn within the Middle Assyrian Empire. The people of Mitanni have been incorrectly linked by some scholars with the Gutians, of Gether from the previous millennia. 

We have spoken of the Guti previously, regarding the northern four king alliance led by Chedorlaomer of Elam – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. The fourth King, Tidal king of Nations was a ruler of the Gutium and not of Assyria, as a number of biblical researchers propose. The Gutian’s early history is as mysterious as is the subsequent Mitanni’s. The Guti had lived in the Zagros Mountain range and had gradually settled in increasing numbers in Akkad and Sumer. Then circa 2200 BCE, had swept down in force; defeating the Akkadian Empire and subjugating most of Sumer, ruling for about a century before being driven westwards.

Going forward two thousand years, the ‘Germanic’ Visigoths were the Western Got-h-s,  the descendants of the Gut-i from Geth-er, separated from their Ostrogoth brethren in the Italian Peninsula by the divisions of their peoples circa 270 CE. 

The Visigoth kingdom had been based north of the Danube, in the region of modern Bulgaria and Romania and was created with the consent of Rome. Later, falling out with Rome, the Goths after a sojourn via Scandinavia established their own kingdom with a capital in Tolosa, modern day Toulouse and the province of Gallia Aquitania in south western Gaul. The Goths then forced out the related Alani and Vandali (Alan and Vandal) tribes from the Iberian Peninsula, when they migrated southwards into Hispania. 

The Visigoth Kingdom lasted for three centuries from 418 to 711 CE. In 507, they were defeated – and their king, Alaric II was killed in battle – by the Franks, led by Clovis I. The Visigoths were then hedged in and limited to Hispania south of the Pyrenees, with the Kingdom of the Suebi in northeastern Iberia. It is very possible that the word Got-h is a derivative name, for the Gut-ones, the people who migrated from Scandinavia and anciently in Mesopotamia were known as the Gut-i, descended from Get-her.

In the modern era, ‘Spain ruled one of the largest empires in history which was also one of the first global empires, spawning a large cultural and linguistic legacy.’ The origins of the Roman name Hispania and the modern Espana are presumed to have derived, from the Phoenician and Carthaginian reference to the region as Spania, or from the Iberian word Hispalis meaning ‘city of the western world.’ The root of the Phoenician term span means to forge metals, thus i-spn-ya would mean, ‘the land where metals are forged.’ Another plausible explanation is the claim that Hispania derives from the Basque word Ezpanna meaning ‘edge, border,’ a reference to the Iberian Peninsula constituting the southwestern corner of continental Europe.

In 1492, ‘the combined forces of Castile and Aragon captured the Emirate of Granada from its last ruler Muhammad XII, ending the last remnant of a 781 year presence of Islamic [Moorish] rule in Iberia.’ The Austrian Hapsburg monarchy who ruled Spain, ‘was one of the leading world powers throughout the [1500s] and most of the 17th century, a position reinforced by trade and wealth from colonial possessions and became the world’s leading maritime power.’ Spain achieved the first circumnavigation of the world during 1519 to 1521. It was the first empire on which it was said that the sun never set. ‘It reached its apogee during the reigns of the first two Spanish Habsburgs – Charles I (1516-1556) and Philip II (1556-1598).’

Flag of Spain

The population of Spain is 47,892,306 people. The PLVS VLTRA on the Spanish flag means ‘further beyond’ in Latin. In the context of the coat of arms of Spain, it means beyond the Straits of Gibraltar, referring to the Americas and the former Spanish territories and to go beyond.

The word Canaan, with regard to the land of (and pronounced ‘keinan’ since circa 1500, due to the Great Vowel Shift, beginning in southern England) comes from the Hebrew knʿn and the Greek Χανααν, Khanaan. It appears as ki-na-ah-na in the Amarna Letters (dated 14th century BCE), and knʿn is found on coins from Phoenicia in the last half of the 1st millennium. The etymology is uncertain, though the term derives from the Semitic root knʿ ‘to be low, humble, subjugated’ as studied in Chapter Twelve.

Some scholars have suggested that this implies an original meaning of lowlands, in contrast with Aram, which was located further east inland at higher altitude, in the highlands. Ephraim Avigdor Speiser in 1936 alternatively suggests, the term derives from the Hurrian, Kinahhu, purportedly referring to the colour purple; thus Canaan and Phoenicia would be synonyms for the Land of Purple, as previously discussed in Chapter XII Canaan & Africa

‘Tablets found in the Hurrian city of Nuzi in the early 20th century appear to use the term Kinahnu as a synonym for red or purple dye, laboriously produced by the Kassite rulers of Babylon from murex molluscs as early as 1600 BC and on the Mediterranean coast by the Phoenicians from a byproduct of glassmaking.’ The Purple cloth of Tyre was a renowned Canaanite export mentioned in the Book of Exodus and the Romans attached nobility and royalty to it.

‘In 2003, Christine Marie Thompson identified the Cisjordan Corpus, a concentration of hacksilber hoards in Israel and Palestine.’ The hoards are all silver dominant; with the largest hoard found at Eshtemo’a, present-day as-Samu and contained 26 kg of silver – Zechariah 9:3. In this geographical region that was part of Phoenicia, the hoards date to circa 1200 to 800 BCE. There is no other known concentration of silver hoards in the Mediterranean and its date range overlaps with the reigns of King Solomon from 970 to 930 BCE and that of Hiram of Tyre between 980 and 947 BCE.

The Hacksilber objects in these Phoenician hoards, have lead isotope ratios that match ores in the silver producing regions of Sardinia and Spain. Anciently, the island of Sardinia was associated with metal trading and was also called by the ancient Greeks, ‘Argyrophleps nesos’ – Island of the silver veins. The Hacksilber evidence confirms what Homer and the Greek historians Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus all stated; that the Phoenicians were exploiting the metals in the western Mediterranean and Atlantic, prior to making them permanent colonies – 2 Chronicles 2:14. Before the Phoenicians, Tarshish had dwelt in the same Mediterranean locations and similarly traded – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.

For the Phoenicians to successfully travel and trade, they needed the best ships.* From 1200 BCE the Phoenicians built large merchant ships and developed the Keel on the underside of the hull for ocean going stability. Pegged mortise and tenon joints proved an innovative forefront adaption for hundreds of years. The Phoenicians were possibly the first to introduce the bireme – two decks of oars, around 700 BCE – also used by the Greeks and Assyrians. An Assyrian account describes Phoenicians evading capture with these ships. The Phoenicians are also credited with inventing the trireme; regarded as the most advanced and powerful vessel in the ancient Mediterranean world, again adopted by the Greeks and Romans.

The Phoenicians developed several maritime inventions. The amphora, a type of container used for both dry and liquid goods, which became a standardised measurement of volume for nearly two thousand years. The remnants of self-cleaning artificial harbours have been discovered in Sidon, Tyre, Atlit and Acre. 

Carthage

The first example of admiralty law appears in the Levant at this time and the Phoenicians also contributed greatly to cartography in succeeding centuries. In modern times, the Portuguese and Spanish – ancient ‘Phoenicians’ from Hul and ‘Arameans’ from Gether respectively – were many decades ahead of the Dutch, French and British who all later, developed successful mercantile and military navies.

Thought Co, N S Gill, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Phoenicians from Tyre (Lebanon) founded Carthage, an ancient city-state in the area that is modern Tunisia. Carthage became a major economic and political power in the Mediterranean fighting over territory in Sicily with the Greeks and Romans. Eventually, Carthage fell to the Romans, but it took three wars. The Romans destroyed Carthage at the end of the Third Punic War, but then rebuilt it as a new Carthage. Although Alpha and Beta are Greek letters that give us our word alphabet, the alphabet itself comes from the Phoenicians, at least conventionally. Greek myth and legend credit the dragon-teeth-sowing Phoenician Cadmus as not only founding the Boeotian Greek city of Thebes but bringing the letters with him. 

The 22-letter abecedary of the Phoenicians contained only consonants, some of which had no equivalent in Greek. So the Greeks substituted their vowels for the unused letters. Some say that without the vowels, it was not an alphabet. If vowels aren’t required, Egypt can also make a claim for the earliest alphabet. Were this the only contribution of the Phoenicians, their place in history would be assured, but they did more. So much, it seems as though jealousy prompted the Romans to set out to annihilate them in 146 B.C. when they razed Carthage and were [rumoured] to have salted its earth.’

The Phoenicians are… credited with:

  • Inventing glass.
  • The bireme (two tiers of oars) galley.
  • The luxurious purple dye… known as Tyrian.
  • Circumnavigating Africa.
  • Navigating by the stars.

Notice the similarity between Tyre – subsequent to its being an island and later an outcrop – and Rio de Janeiro.

Gill: ‘The Phoenicians were merchants who developed an extensive empire almost as a by-product of their quality merchandise and trading routes. They are believed to have gone as far as England to buy Cornish tin, but they started in Tyre, in an area now part of Lebanon, and expanded. By the time the Greeks were colonizing Syracuse and the rest of Sicily, the Phoenicians were already (9th century B.C.) a major power in the middle of the Mediterranean. The principal city of the Phoenicians, Carthage, was located near modern Tunis, on a promontory on the Northern Coast of Africa. It was a prime spot for access to all areas of the “known world.”

The people of Carthage seem more primitive compared to modern sensibilities than the Romans or Greeks for one main reason: They are said to have sacrificed humans, babies, and toddlers (possibly their first born to “ensure” fertility). Unlike the Romans of their time, the leaders of Carthage hired mercenary soldiers and had a capable navy

They were extremely adept at trade, a fact that allowed them to rebuild a profitable economy even after the setbacks of military defeat during the Punic Wars, which included a yearly tribute to Rome of almost 10 tons of silver. Such wealth allowed them to have paved streets and multi-story homes, compared with which proud Rome looked shabby. According to Polybius (born circa 204 B.C.), the Greek historian Timaeus of Tauromenion (circa 357-260 B.C.), dated the founding of Carthage to 814 or 813 B.C.’

The author raises two salient points which show the link between the Phoenicians and their descendants, the Portuguese of Portugal and Brazil. The correlation of Greek stemming from Portuguese has been replicated with Latin deriving from Phoenician-Punic and then giving rise to the Romance languages. We will discover that the Greeks modern day descendants also speak a Romance language and are bound in language to the Portuguese as they were anciently – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The Phoenicians like the Portuguese after them, were adept traders and capable ship builders, even possessing a Navy, though they were not imperialistic militarily and did not maintain an army or seek to fight wars.  

The story of the Phoenicians is one of two halves, east and west. In the east with the rise of the merchant traders of Tyre and the other Phoenician coastal cities; then west, in Cyprus, Sicily, Sardinia, Spain and particularly Carthage. Carthage was an excellent location for commanding Mediterranean mercantile trade routes. It was halfway along the North African coast, perfectly situated for facilitating the commercial and mining transactions in copper and silver between the rich mines of Spain or Britain and the empires of the Eastern Mediterranean. It is an obvious replication when twenty-three centuries later, we see the east to west transference again; from Portugal of the Iberian Peninsula to Brazil in South America.

The Phoenicians: Mysterious Merchant Mariners Whose Inventions Impacted the World Forever, Dhwty, 2019 – emphasis mine:

‘The Phoenicians were an ancient people who once ruled the Mediterranean. Despite little being known about them as very few of their inscriptions have survived, their legacy has had an enormous impact on the world, which is still felt today.

Scholars have speculated that the Phoenicians referred to themselves as ‘Kena’ani’ (‘Kinahna’ in Akkadian, or ‘Canaanite’ in English). Interestingly, in Hebrew, this word also meant ‘merchant’, which is an apt description of the Phoenicians. The term ‘Phoenicians’, however, is commonly used today, as it was the Greeks who called these people by this name. 

The ancient Greeks referred to the land of the Phoenicians as ‘Phoiniki’, which is derived from the Egyptian ‘Fnkhw’, meaning ‘Syrian’. 

The Greek ‘Phoiniki’ is phonetically similar to their word for the color purple or crimson (‘phoinix’). This is due to the fact that one of the most valuable objects produced and exported by the Phoenicians was a dye known as Tyrian purple. Thus, the Phoenicians were known also as the ‘Purple People’ – refer Chapter XII Canaan^ & Africa.

‘According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the Phoenicians were originally from the Red Sea* area, but later emigrated to and settled along the eastern coast of the Mediterranean. Archaeologists today, however, regard Herodotus’ account of the Phoenicians’ origins as a myth

In addition, there is a lack of evidence to support the claims that the Phoenicians emigrated to the eastern Mediterranean from other areas of the ancient world. Instead, it is accepted that the Phoenicians were originally from the eastern Mediterranean and may have developed from the Ghassulian culture, which is an archaeological stage in southern Palestine dating to the Middle Chalcolithic period, i.e. the 4th millennium BC.

The Phoenicians flourished during the 1st millennium BC. During that time, there were other Canaanite cultures inhabiting the region as well, and archaeologists are unable to differentiate between the Phoenicians and these other cultures* in terms of material culture, language and religious beliefs. This is due to the fact that the Phoenicians were themselves Canaanites’ as in inhabitants of the region not blood relatives of the original Canaan^.

There were other peoples and cultures in the densely populated and very popular land of Canaan. Other sons of Aram, the sons of Isaac, the sons of Lot and further sons of Abraham as well as Elioud giants. None of these peoples – just like the Phoenicians – were Canaanites by race, only by their residency in the land of Canaan. This is an extremely important point to comprehend and remember. The belief that all these peoples were ‘Canaanites’, has blurred and blinded the endeavour to actually identify all these disparate peoples.

Dhwty: ‘Glass was already being produced by other civilizations including the Mesopotamians and Egyptians. The glass produced by these civilizations was colored and it is speculated that the Phoenicians were the first ones to produce transparent glass. Yet another produce of Phoenicia was cedar wood, which the region is famous for, as far back as the Mesopotamian period. One of the main consumers of cedar wood during the 1st millennium BC was Egypt, as the demand for wood by the Egyptians was greater than the local supply. Therefore, cedar wood was imported into Egypt from Phoenicia. During the 14th century BC, for instance, the Phoenicians paid tribute to Egypt by offering cedar wood, as attested in the Amarna Letters. 

We do not know to whether the Phoenicians had a shared identity* and if they considered themselves as a single nation. Nevertheless, we do know that they established city states which were politically independent. It seems that each city state was ruled by a monarch, whose power was limited by a powerful oligarchy. In addition, there is no evidence that the cities banded together into a federation. Instead, they operated independently. Among the most notable Phoenician city states were Tyre, Sidon and Byblos. 

Byblos (known today in Arabic as Jbail) is located about 30 kilometers (20 miles) to the north of modern day Beirut. Byblos is considered to be one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world… Like Byblos, Sidon (known today in Arabic as Saida) was already an ancient city by the time it became an independent city state. Sidon was established during the 3rd millennium BC and prospered in the following millennium as a result of trade. 

On the other hand, Tyre (known today in Arabic as Sur) was probably originally founded as a colony of Sidon. In time, Tyre surpassed Sidon as the most important Phoenician city state as it traded and established its own colonies in other parts of the Mediterranean. According to tradition, the famous city of Carthage was established as a colony of Tyre in 814 BC. Both Sidon and Tyre are also mentioned frequently in the Old Testament. For instance, the king of Tyre, Hiram, is recorded as providing Solomon the materials required for building the temple in Jerusalem [Articles: The Ark of God; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son]. One of the major battles of Alexander’s campaign against the Persian Empire was the Siege of Tyre, which occurred in 332 BC.’

The early history of Sidon is difficult to ascertain. It may well have founded Tyre. The important point is that in time, Sidon though ‘Phoenician’ was peopled by different people to the Aramaeans of Tyre. We have studied Sidon briefly in Chapter XII Canaan & Africa, regarding Canaan’s descendants. We will also investigate the British descended peoples as well as the Dutch Afrikaners.

It is these Dutch ancestors* who became the prominent peoples of Sidon and were also called Phoenicians. Again, their primary endeavour as was Tyre’s, was to create wealth through trade and not acting as a conventional empire based on an imperialist model. This was replicated by the Dutch millennia later, just like the Portuguese.

Spain tellingly on the other hand, was intent on building an empire and derived its wealth accordingly. To be clear, the Phoenicians were the Hul line of Aram; today featured as the Portuguese and Brazilians; whereas the Syrians of Damascus were from the Gether line of Aram corresponding to the Spaniards of Spain. The Uz line of Aram blended with Nahor’s children and we will investigate them separately. 

The southwest of Iberia was already a very old Roman province founded in 27 BCE, when it was invaded in the fifth century. Named Lusitania after the Lusitani people, it comprised much of the southern half of modern Portugal and the westernmost parts of modern Spain.

The peninsula was successively invaded by first, the Vandals (and Alans) descended from Mash; second, the Suevi from Hul; third, the Visigoths from Gether; and fourth, the Moors descended from Caphtor and Casluh of Mizra – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Flag of Portugal

Portugal itself first emerged as a march, border county of the kingdom of Asturias in 868 CE. It was one of the few areas not fully conquered by the Umayyad Moors; though Portugal became a vassal of the Kingdom of Leon. It slowly grew in strength and in 1071 Garcia II of Galicia was declared King of Portugal. Portugal subsequently broke away from the Kingdom of Galicia in 1095.

Afonso Henriques proclaimed himself King of Portugal in 1139. Eventually in 1179 a papal bull officially recognised Afonso I as king. The Algarve was fully reconquered from the Moors in 1249 and in 1255 Lisbon became the capital. In 1373 Portugal formed an alliance with England: 

‘… which is the longest-standing alliance in the world. Over time, this went far beyond geo-political and military cooperation (protecting both nations’ interests in Africa, the Americas and Asia against French, Spanish and Dutch rivals) and maintained strong trade and cultural ties between the two old European allies.’

This alliance was ratified by the Treaty of Windsor in 1386 and has continued until the present day. When we study the identity of the four peoples of the United Kingdom, we will appreciate the significance of this alliance between the modern Phoenicians and England, which is more than a passing coincidence. The early genesis of the Portuguese Empire began when the Portuguese Armada sailed to the rich Islamic region of Ceuta in North Africa in 1415. The decisive event though was when Portuguese explorer, Bartolomeu Dias discovered the southernmost part of Africa in 1487; the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa – modern day Sidon.

The Age of Discovery for European nations venturing outside the Mediterranean, began with Portugal, the modern day Phoenicians. During the 1400s and 1500s, Portugal ascended to the status of a world power, building a vast global maritime and commercial empire – economically, politically and culturally to rival England, France and Spain prior to their individual ascendancies. While Portugal was not a power within European affairs, its worldwide colonies and trade were supreme, founded on a strong thalassocracy.

A thalassocracy or thalattocracy is defined as a sea power:

‘… a state with primarily maritime realms, an empire at sea, or a seaborne empire. Traditional thalassocracies seldom dominate interiors, even in their home territories. Examples of this were the Phoenician states of Tyre, Sidon and Carthage and the Italian maritime republics of Venice and Genoa

The Ancient Greeks first used the word thalassocracy to describe the government of the Minoan civilisation [the Philistines], whose power depended on its navy. Under the direction of Henry the Navigator, the Portuguese developed a new, much lighter* ship [as the Phoenicians before them], the caravel, which could sail farther and faster, and, above all, was highly maneuverable and could sail much nearer the wind, or into the wind.’

The Portuguese discovered the valuable Spice Islands in Indonesia and Malaysia in 1512, landing in China a year later. In 1513, Spaniard Vasco Nunez de Balboa crossed the Isthmus of Panama, reaching the ‘other sea’ from the New World. Europe first received news of the eastern and western Pacific within a one year span. ‘East and west exploration overlapped in 1522, when a Castilian expedition, led by Portuguese navigator Ferdinand Magellan and later by Spanish Basque navigator Juan Sebastian Elcano, sailing westward, completed the first circumnavigation of the world’ for Spain.

Joao Rodrigues Cabrilho, was a Portuguese navigator who sailed for the Spanish Crown and was the first European to set foot in California, landing on the shore of San Diego Bay on September 28, 1542; claiming California for Spain. In 1543, the arrival of the Portuguese in Japan initiated the Nanban trade period, where the Japanese adopted several technologies and cultural practices, such as European styled ships. When the Chinese banned direct trade by Chinese merchants with Japan, the Portuguese filled this commercial vacuum as intermediaries between China and Japan. 

The twist of the Phoenician descendants impacting the trading mercantile descendants of Tarshish during the modern age is not lost – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan. The Portuguese bought Chinese silk, selling it to the Japanese in return for Japanese mined silver. Silver was highly valued in China, so that the Portuguese could use Japanese silver to buy even larger stocks of Chinese silk. In 1573, when the Spanish established a trading base in Manila, the Portuguese intermediary trade was ended because of China’s new source of incoming silver originating from the Spanish Americas.

By the 1600s and early 1700s, Portugal retained most of its colonies, but had gradually lost its competitive edge in wealth as the Dutch, French and English beginning in 1495, entered and dominated the respective spice and slave trades. Portugal was progressively weakened by a series of events, including Spain’s abortive attempt to conquer England in 1588 by means of the Spanish Armada. Portugal found itself in an uncomfortable dynamic, having contributed many ships to the Spanish invasion fleet due to its union with Spain.

The country then suffered another setback when the destruction of much of its capital city occurred during an earthquake in 1755. The occupation by the French during the Napoleonic Wars and the subsequent loss of its largest and prized colony Brazil, in 1822 were decisive. Lastly, from the middle of the 1800s to the late 1950s, nearly two million Portuguese departed Portugal to live in Brazil (or the United States). Today, Portugal has a stagnant population that currently stands at 10,413,363 people.

It is popularly proposed that Portugal derived its name from the Callaeci people of Calle. The Romans built a port at the mouth of the Douro, which they called Portus Calle in 200 BCE, after defeating the Carthaginians. Portus became Porto from which Oporto derives and Calle became Galle. Cale or Caileach was the name of a Celtic deity. Port of Cale became Portucale and by the seventh century, Portugale and finally by the eleventh century Portugal. The Celtic word cale or cala meant ‘port, an inlet’ or ‘harbour.’ It is  likely that Galacia in Spain has derived from Callaeci and Gallaeci[a].

Portuguese men

Some scholars ‘propose that the Celtic branches [P-Celtic and Q-Celtic] all share the same origin, and place names such as Cale, Gal, Gaia, Calais, Galatia, Galicia, Gaul… all stem from one linguistic root.’ Certain French scholars support the belief that the name may have come from Portus Gallus, the Port of the Gauls. In this, there may be the truth. Gael and Gaul may be linked as in the ‘Port of the Gael.’ It is very possible that the Callaeci or Gallae-ci were originally Gaels. The Gaels eventually left Portugal and migrated to Ireland. We will return to this journey in detail – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Portuguese women

The word Brazil is associated with the Portuguese word for brazilwood, a tree that once was plentiful along the Brazilian coast. In Portuguese, brazilwood is pau-brasil, with the word brasil commonly defined etymologically as ‘red like an ember’, formed from brasa (ember) and the suffix -il (from -iculum or -ilium). Brazilwood produces a deep red dye and was highly valued by the European textile industry. It was the ‘earliest commercially exploited product from Brazil.’

Not a coincidence, that the Phoenicians were famous for their purple dye over 2,500 years earlier. Similarly, throughout the sixteenth century, huge amounts of brazilwood was harvested along the Brazilian coast. This has echoes of the vast quantity of Cedar trees planted and felled along the North Canaan coast.

The official Portuguese name in original Portuguese records was the Land of the Holy Cross – Terra da Santa Cruz. Sailors and merchants called it simply the Land of Brazil – Terra do Brasil – due to the brazilwood trade. 

The Federative Republic of Brazil is the largest country in South America as well as in Latin America, with 212,719,685 people. Brazil is the world’s fifth largest country by area and the seventh most populous. The federation is composed of the union of twenty-six states. Brazil is one of the most multicultural and ethnically diverse nations in the world.

Brazil is a regional and middle power in international affairs. ‘On account of its international recognition and influence, the country is subsequently classified as an emerging, potential superpower. A potential superpower is a state or a political and economic entity that is speculated to be – or to have the potential to soon become – a superpower.’

The United States once a superpower became a hyper power – one that dominates all other states in military, culture, economy, technology and diplomacy – after the collapse of the former rival superpower, the Soviet Union. Several nation states are potential superpowers, though all have aspects that may hinder them attaining true superpower status. They include the European Union and the BRIC economies of Brazil, Tyre-Hul-Aram; Russia, Asshur; India, Cush; and China, Magog, Tubal and Meshech. Japan, Tarshish; is labeled a cultural superpower due to the large scale influence of Japanese popular culture. Its status as a potential superpower has eroded due to an ageing, declining population since the 1990s and lack of substantial economic growth since the 1980s.

Brazil as modern day Tyre in the scriptures, will ultimately become a world economic powerhouse; if not necessarily a political or military superpower. An article in The Diplomatic Courier, by former British Ambassador to Brazil, Peter Collecott, ‘identifies that Brazil’s recognition as a potential superpower largely stems from its own national identity and ambition. Collecott points out that for the past two hundred years Brazil has sought to emerge as a serious global economic and political power, a position “that [Brazil] instinctively feels is her due.”

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 262, 264:

‘When one in four of a state’s population is in abject poverty it is difficult for that state to become rich. This does not mean Brazil is not a rising power, just that its rise will be limited [perhaps resembling India’s similar status]. A shortcut to growth could be soft power… Every few years, often led by Brazil, the South Americans attempt to launch their version of the EU – the latest incarnation being UNASUR… Its headquarters is in Ecuador but Brazil has the loudest voice. In this it resembles the EU, which has an HQ in Belgium and a leading power in Germany.

And there the comparison stops… the Latin Americans differ in politics, economics, currencies, education levels and labour laws. But Brazil will keep working to help create a South American powerhouse using its diplomatic and increasing economic strength. The country is by nature non-confrontational, its foreign policy is against intervention in other countries, and war with any of its neighbours seems highly unlikely. It has managed to maintain good relations with all the other eleven South American nations despite having a border with nine of them… the primary regional power in Latin America… looks to be Brazil’s destiny…’

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In his 2014 publication, The BRICs Superpower Challenge: Foreign and Security Policy Analysis, professor Kwang Ho Chun carefully assesses the likelihood of the BRICs countries [Brazil, Russia, India, China] attaining the status of superpowers. 

Regarding Brazil, Kwang Ho Chun highlights that the country possesses enormous and almost untouched “strategic” natural resources, including valuable minerals, a tenth of the world’s fresh water and Earth’s largest remaining rainforest. Because of this, Kwang Ho Chun feels it is likely that Brazil could gain a dominant role in international relations, especially when it comes to environmental issues. This soft power influence is further enhanced by Brazil’s policy makers seeking to engage in as many international organizations as possible and forming alliances, most notably on social, diplomatic and economic issues.’

These traits and aspirations mirror ancient Tyre closely, as a state with considerable global economic influence. Brazil this century, could realistically challenge Japan, 4th; Germany, 3rd; and even possibly China for number two ranking of largest world economy. Though countries such as India and Indonesia may grow even faster.

‘Despite its economic potential and Brazil’s “self-image as a country with a great destiny,” Kwang Ho Chun believes that the country “falls far short of the levels required for a superpower.” Supporting his belief, he emphasises Brazil’s apparent lack of “traditional hard power” (i.e. military power and global security influence) as a major obstacle. Kwang Ho Chun writes that Brazil has “little incentive to invest in its military” as “the country developed in an environment with hardly any inter-state security threats”, therefore Brazil “may never be in a position to accumulate enough influence on global security matters to meet the criteria of being a superpower.” Instead, Ho Chun feels that Brazil will emerge as a great power with an important position in some spheres of influence but limited in others such as international security.’ 

This is insightful, as again it describes ancient Tyre. Its military was simply to defend its isolationist ‘Rock-island’ position. Tyre was not interested in becoming an imperialistic military empire, as Brazil similarly seeks global economic and diplomatic influence ahead of military power… for now. 

The motto of the flag of Brazil: Order and Progress

According to the Brazilian National Research by Household Sample (PNAD) in 2008: 48.43% of the population, approximately 103 million people, described themselves as White; 43.80% or 93 million as Pardo or Brown; 6.84% or 15 million as Black; 0.58% or 1.2 million as Asian; 0.28% or approximately 599,000 people as Amerindian (officially called Indigena or Indigenous); and 0.07% or approximately 150,000 people did not state their race.

It is probable that some people have self identified as white, when in fact they are mixed, even slightly and then a certain proportion of those who claim to be brown may be mixed in varying degree and are more white^^ than brown. Thus the figure for White people may be higher than forty-eight percent and for Brown people lower than forty-three percent. As we have studied the Amerindian Haplogroups in Chapter II Tiras the Amerindian and the African Haplogroups in Chapter XII Canaan & Africa, we will concentrate on the people descended principally from Aram. 

It is challenging – at time of writing – finding up-to-date comprehensive research on the White population of Brazil, though what is available shows they are unsurprisingly, most similar to the Portuguese and then Italians, the two dominant lines of Brazilian descent.

The Ancestry of Brazilian mtDNA Lineages, multiple authors, 2000 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Brazilians form one of the most heterogeneous populations in the world, the result of 5 centuries of interethnic crosses between peoples from three continents: the European colonizers, represented mainly by the Portuguese; African slaves; and the autochthonous Amerindians. When the Portuguese arrived, exactly 500 years ago, there were ~ 2.5 million indigenous people living in the area of what is now Brazil. The Portuguese-Amerindian admixture started soon after the arrival of the first colonizers. Mating between European men and indigenous women became commonplace and later (after 1755) was even encouraged as a strategy for population growth and colonial occupation of the country.’

‘The Amerindian tribes underwent a drastic demographic decline due to conflicts with the European colonizers and diseases to which they were not adapted. Today [2000] there are ~ 326,000 Amerindians in Brazil, living on land set aside for them by the federal government. Africans were introduced beginning in the middle of the 16th century, brought to Brazil as slaves to work on sugarcane farms and, later, in the gold and diamond mines and on coffee plantations. Historical records suggest that between 1551 and 1850 (when the slave trade was abolished), ~ 3.5 million Africans arrived in Brazil. As to the European immigration, it is estimated that ~ 500,000 Portuguese arrived in the country between 1500 and 1808. From then on, after the Brazilian ports were legally opened to all friendly nations, Brazil received increasing numbers of immigrants from several parts of the world.’ 

Portugal [1: Hul-Aram] remained by far the most important source of migrants, followed by Italy [2: Uz-Aram], Spain [3: Gether-Aram], and Germany. In the 20th century, Asian immigration took place, mainly from Japan [Tarshish], as well as from Lebanon and Syria [Mizra]. According to Callegari-Jacques and Salzano (1999), 58% of the immigrants who arrived in Brazil between 1500 and 1972 were Europeans, 40% were Africans, and 2% were Asians. The question that arises is, How much did these different groups actually contribute to the gene pool of present-day Brazilians?’

Haplogroup Frequencies within the Three Continental Fractions of Brazilian mtDNA Pool


Frequency in brazil
HaplogroupOverallNorthernNortheasternSoutheasternSouthern
NativeAmerican:




A0.300.150.370.390.27
B0.290.310.270.300.27
C0.240.380.090.180.27
D0.160.150.270.120.18
Total1.001.001.001.001.00






African:




L1a0.100.180.060.17
L1b0.040.050.030.17
L1c0.190.290.090.230.17
L20.200.140.230.23
L3d0.060.090.33
L3e0.300.430.320.32
L3*0.040.050.06
U60.060.140.060.17
Total1.001.001.001.001.00






European:




H0.440.270.650.450.39
pre*V0.030.070.030.03
V0.060.060.130.03
HV*0.010.03
U0.160.130.180.160.15
pre*HV0.010.03
J0.110.200.060.030.18
T0.140.270.060.130.12
I0.010.07
X0.030.060.03
Total1.001.001.001.001.00

‘The Brazilian sample includes mtDNA lineages from almost all the familiar European haplogroups, except for some marginal ones, such as W and other quite-rare haplogroups related to haplogroup I. The frequency of the dominant haplogroup H (44%); in the European fraction is somewhat higher, on average, than that observed in Europe but is well within the range of western-European H frequencies… [and] suggests predominantly western-European ancestry. Considering that 30% of the European immigrants (including the Portuguese colonizers) to Brazil came from Italy, one can expect that a considerable number of mtDNA lineages in the Brazilian sample have Italian ancestry.’

The mtDNA Haplogroups for Brazil, Portugal, Spain, Catalonia and the Basque.

Brazil: H [44%] – U [16%] – T [14%] – J [11%] – V [9%] – HV [2%] –

X [3%] – I [1%] 

Portugal: H [43.9%] – J [6.8%] – U5 [6.5%] – L [6.4%] – T2 [6.3%] –

K [6.1%] – HV0+V [4.8%] – T1 [3.3%] – U [3%] – I [2.2%] – X [2%] –

W [1.8%] – U4 [1.7%] – U2 [1.2%] – U3 [0.9%] – HV [0.1%]

Spain: H [44.1%] – U5 [8.1%] – HV0+V [7.5%] – J [6.6%] – T2 [6.4%] –

K [6.3%] – L [2.4%] – T1 [2.1%] – U4 [1.9%] – U [1.8%] – X [1.7%] –

U3 [1.4%] – W [1.4%] – U2 [1.1%] – I [1.1%] – HV [0.7%] 

Catalonia: H [29.5%] – U5 [10.1%] – K [10%] – T2 [7.6%] –

HV0+V [7.5%] – J [7%] – W [5%] – U [3.9%] – U4 [3.8%] – L [3.1%] –

U3 [2.5%] – X [2.5%] – T1 [1.3%] – U2 [1.3%] – I [1.3%] – HV [0.5%] 

Basque: H [49%] – U5 [11.7%] – HV0+V [7.9%] – J [7.6%] –

T2 [6%] – K [5.3%] – X [2.3%] – U [1.9%] – T1 [1.5%] – W [1.1%] –

U2 [1%] – HV [0.8%] – U4 [0.8%] – I [0.6%] – L [0.3%] – U3 [0.3%] 

When comparing the main mtDNA Haplogroups, the similarity between Portugal and Spain is surprisingly striking. The two distinct enclaves of settlement within Spain, Catalonia and the Basque country are quite different from each other in Haplogroup H and Catalonia appears the odd one out in the group; though only in comparison with Haplogroup H. The higher percentage of Haplogroup L in Portugal reflects Black immigrants from Brazil.

                        H    HV0+V   J      T2      K      U5     L        

Portugal            44          5        7       6        6        7       6             

Spain                 44          8        7       6        6        8       2            

Basque              49          8        8       6        5      12    0.3             

Catalonia          30          8        7       8      10      10       3    

Brazil’s maternal mtDNA Haplogroup percentage sequence is unsurprisingly aligned with Portugal, where its White population has predominantly originated.

                        H       U        T         J       HV    X      I    

Brazil                44      16       14       11         2      3       1     

Portugal           44      13       10        7      0.1      2       2              

Spain                44      14        9         7      0.7      2       1

Basque             49      16        8         8     0.8      2       1

Catalonia         30     22        9         7      0.5      3       1

The ethnic relatedness of these peoples is highlighted by their common ancestry, cultures and languages. Identity experts have persistently taught that these Latin nations are Canaanites from Ham or sons of Japheth’s son, Javan. The constant reader will hopefully discern that these explanations are lacking solid support – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Spain:    H [44.1%] – J [6.6%] – T2 [6.4%] – K [6.3%] – U [1.8%] – HV [0.7%] 

Russia:  H [41.2%] – J [7.8%] – T2 [6.5%] – K [3.7%] – U [2.2%] – HV [1.8%] 

Turkey: H [30.8%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.3%] – K [5.6%] – HV [4.8%] – T2 [4.3%]

Iran:      H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] –

T2 [4.9%]

It is worth noting that as one heads west, key Western Eurasian mtDNA Haplogroup H increases in the above prominent nations descended from Shem studied so far. Haplogroup T2 also increases, whereas Haplogroups J, U and HV decrease. In contrast with Haplogroup T, Haplogroup U is one of the oldest and most diverse of the European Haplogroups.

Of all the peoples investigated thus far, either descended from Japheth and his seven sons; Ham and his three sons (Canaan and his six sons); or Shem’s two out of five sons, who have exhibited black or brown hair and brown eyes regardless of skin tones and eye tints; it is the Russians from Asshur, who are the first peoples on our identity journey, who possess a marked increase in fair hair and blue eyes.

The descendants of Aram are halfway between in that they possess higher levels of fair hair and blue eyes than the Turks of Elam and the Persians of Lud; yet lower than the Russians of Asshur. 

                        H        HV   HV0+V    J      T2     U      U5     K

Brazil             44        2                      11

Portugal        44     0.1            5         7        6       3        7       6

Spain             44     0.7            8        7         6       2       8       6

Russia           41         2            4        8         7       2      10      4

Turkey          31         5         0.7        9         4       6       3       6

Iran               17         7         0.6      14         5      12       3       7

Comparing Portugal, Spain and Brazil with Russia, Turkey and Iran reveals that Aram, Asshur, Elam and Lud respectively, are clearly distinct from one another; though still also visibly related as cousins. If we compared their Haplogroups with India or China it is palpable that these nations are descended from the separate and unique line of Shem rather than from either Ham or Japheth. It also clearly delineates the similarity of Portugal and Brazil with Spain as brothers. As well as the fact that Russians though distantly – as evidenced by principal component analysis – still as Asshur, are closer to the peoples of Iberia and Aram, than those of Turkey or Iran.

R1b M343 / M415

Eupedia, Phoenicians & Greeks – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The oldest city in Iberia is Cadiz, which was founded by the Phoenicians as Gadir or Agadir in 1104 BCE. The Phoenicians also founded Almunecar, Malaga, Cartaya and Huelva, and settled in other existing cities such as Tartessos and Carmona.

Based on the haplogroups found in modern Lebanon and in their former colonies, the Phoenicians seem to have carried a mixture of haplogroup J2a, J1, E1b1b, G, R1b-M269/L23, T, L, R1b-V88, R2 and Q1b, roughly in that order of frequency. It is not easy to assess the percentage of modern Iberian lineages of Phoenician origin because many other peoples brought similar haplogroups. The most uniquely Phoenician lineages, which were normally not found among the ancient Greeks and Romans, are Q1b, R1b-V88 and R2. And indeed all of them have been found, mostly in Portugal and south-west Andalusia, but only at trace frequencies (under 0.5%).’

It is the view of this writer that these Haplogroups are all examples of admixture and are doubtful as being typically ‘Phoenician.’ Whereas Haplogroup R1b would intrinsically be the defining paternal Haplogroup. The article has the preconceived view that Phoenician equals Levant or Arab related – as reflected by the first three listed Haplogroups – which is incorrect. Thus relying on the Lebanese sequence of Y-DNA Haplogroups which are J2 dominant with far less R1b.

Eupedia: ‘The island of Ibiza was another major Phoenician colony, which has the particularity of having been left in isolation for most of its subsequent history. It is therefore likely to have more Phoenician lineages than average. That is probably the case as Adams et al. (2008) found 17% of haplogroup T on Ibiza, by far the highest percentage in Europe for the Middle Eastern lineage, but also 13% of haplogroup G (more than anywhere else in Iberia) and 4% of E-M123 the Levantine variety of E1b1b.

Not surprisingly, the second highest percentage of haplogroup T identified in Iberia is in Cadiz (10%). Like haplogroup T, E-M123 is mostly found in Murcia, Andalusia, Extremadura and Portugal, suggesting that this is where the Phoenicians had the largest genetic impact. Not surprisingly haplogroups J1 and J2a also peak in these regions.’

Haplogroups J1 (and J2) are actually reflective of the Moors genetic legacy, rather than the Phoenicians. Whereas Haplogroup G is interesting, because it is an ancient lineage deriving from Shem – from which the R1b mutation eventually evolved.

Eupedia: ‘In 406, the Alans (who were not Germanic but of Iranic origin, the Suebi [modern day Portuguese (Hul)] and the Vandals [included in modern day Central and South America (Mash)] crossed the Rhine together, invading Gaul, then three years later, they crossed the Pyrenees into Roman Hispania. The Suebi migrated to the western half of Iberia, where they established the Kingdom of Gallaecia (409–585). The Vandals and the Alans went south to Andalusia, then crossed over [to] North Africa in 429, where they founded a kingdom that also comprised Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica.

The Suebi As a Germanic tribe, they would have brought haplogroups I1, I2a2a, (M223, formerly known as I2b1), R1b-U106 [specifically, R1b-S116*] and R1a (L664, Z282 and Z283 subclades) to the Iberian peninsula, and indeed all of them except R1a are found essentially in the western half of the Iberian [Peninsula], especially in Portugal and Galicia. R1a is found in northern Castile, Asturias and Cantabria, and could… have been brought there by the Visigoths… [more likely, the Alans]

The Basques are indeed somewhat different genetically from other Spaniards. They have a bit more Northwest European ancestry [similar to southwest France]… The absence of Red Sea and Southwest Asian admixture indicates that the Basques do not have any Phoenician [Aramaean], Jewish, Greek, Roman or Arabic ancestry. Looking at maternal lineages, the Basques also stand out from the rest of the peninsula, lacking many haplogroups… This is in perfect agreement with the fact that Basque language is non-Indo-European. What generally comes as a surprise is that 85% of Basque paternal lineages belong to the Proto-Celtic R1b-P312.

Interestingly the Catalans also lack the Southwest Asian ancestry, but do have some Red Sea and Caucasian genes. The Southwest Asian admixture is slightly more common in southern Portugal and Andalusia, which is consistent with the higher historical presence of Phoenician, Roman and Arabic people in that region. The Basques and the Catalans are the only Western European completely lacking genetic contribution from Southwest Asia. This is also translated in an extreme scarcity of Y-haplogroups J1, E-M34 and T, which are all typically Southwest Asian linages.’

Khazaria, Portuguese Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries – emphasis & bold mine

‘Varieties of R1b, a common Y-DNA haplogroup in western Europe, are found in abundance among Portuguese men. About 60 percent of Southern Portuguese and about 83 percent of Northern Portuguese belong to the subclade of R1b known as the Atlantic Modal Haplotype (AMH). There are even some areas in Portugal where the AMH is found in about 90% of men.

The mtDNA haplogroups H, U, and L were found in substantial numbers in the population of Portugal in ancient times (including the Epipaleolithic, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic eras) just as they are today. 

Millions of mixed-race (white/black/Amerindian) descendants of Portuguese live in Brazil today. Some Portuguese of Portugal themselves have a small portion of black ancestry as well. This is true of the mainland, in part since African slaves were brought to southwestern Portugal’s Alcacer do Sal region in the 1400s-1800s… Portuguese people occasionally match European Jews in the autosomal DNA databases as a result of having shared Sephardic Jewish ancestors.’

Peter Ralph and Graham Coop. “The Geography of Recent Genetic Ancestry across Europe.” PLOS Biology (May 7, 2013). Excerpts:

“… Patterns for the Iberian peninsula are similar, with both Spain and Portugal showing very few common ancestors with other populations over the last 2,500 years. However, the rate of IBD [identical-by-descent] sharing within the peninsula is much higher than within Italy – during the last 1,500 years the Iberian peninsula shares fewer than two genetic common ancestors with other populations, compared to roughly 30 per pair within the peninsula – Italians share on average only about eight with each other during this period…”

“Genetic characterization of uni parental lineages in populations from Southwest Iberia with past malaria endemicity.” American Journal of Human Biology 22:5 (September-October 2010): multiple authors, pages 588-595. Excerpts from the Abstract:

‘…in Pias, the Mediterranean influence might be traced to ancient contacts with Greeks, Phoenicians, and Carthaginians, who established important trading networks in southern Iberia.’

“Relatedness among Basques, Portuguese, Spaniards, and Algerians studied by HLA allelic frequencies and haplotypes.” Immunogenetics 47:1 (1997): multiple authors, pages 37-43. Excerpts from the Abstract:

‘The results of the present HLA study in Portuguese populations show that they have features in common with Basques and Spaniards from Madrid…’

“Meta-Analysis of Mitochondrial DNA Variation in the Iberian Peninsula”, 2016, multiple authors: Excerpts from the Results section:

“… Within the Iberian Peninsula, Spain has overall higher values of haplotype diversity than Portugal… Nucleotide diversity has its highest value in the Mediterranean area, but it is also high in Portugal… The high frequency of haplogroup H in the North of Iberia spans all along the Portuguese territories, where frequencies range from 49% in the North to 45% in the South. Haplogroup U constitutes the second most frequent haplogroup in Iberia; its frequency is similar in the main Iberian regions; it reaches the highest frequency in North of Portugal (26%)…”

“Portuguese mitochondrial DNA genetic diversity – An update and a phylogenetic revision”, multiple authors, 2015. Excerpts from the Abstract:

“In general, a typical Western European haplogroup composition was found in mainland Portugal, associated to high level of mitochondrial genetic diversity. Within the country, no signs of substructure were detected.” 

“Diversity of mtDNA lineages in Portugal: Not a genetic edge of European variation”, Annals of Human Genetics 64:6, multiple authors, (November 2000): pages 491-506.

‘A study consisting of mitochondrial DNA samples from 100 Northern Portuguese, 82 Central Portuguese, and 59 Southern Portuguese. Portuguese people have more genetic diversity than some of their neighbors. They carry “all the most important European haplogroups…” They also carry the mtDNA haplogroups U6 and L, both of African origin. U6 is “restricted to North Portugal whereas L was widespread all over the country.’

Catalonians and Gascons of France

Being Western Europeans, it is no surprise that the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Catalans is a branch of the R1b haplogroup. R1b1b2a1 is nearly exclusive to western Europe, and the sub-haplogroup R1b1b2a1a2c is common among Catalans and Gascons.’

The Basques, Catalonians and Gascons have as much or more in common genetically with the southern French than Spaniards. We will delve into this further when France is studied.

The Phylogeography of Brazilian Y-Chromosome Lineages, multiple authors, 2001 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Amerindians [from Tiras] originally peopled South America… Centuries later (on April 22, 1500), the Portuguese “discovered” Brazil, by then inhabited by 2.4 million Amerindians… Colonization of the new country initially involved men only; the immigration of European women during the first centuries was insignificant… Thus, the first Brazilians arose by mating between European males and Amerindian females. During the period 1500–1808, 500,000 Portuguese, mostly men, arrived in Brazil. 

The most frequent Y chromosomes in white Brazilian males belonged to haplogroup 1 [R1b] (54%), which has been observed in high frequencies (40% – 80%) in Europe and seems to be absent from Africa and Japan. Accordingly, this haplogroup was seen in 60% of the Portuguese tested. In Brazil, haplogroup 1 showed discrete regional variation, with the lowest frequency in the south. 

Second in frequency (18%) was haplogroup 2 [E1b1b], which has a rather wide geographical range that includes Europe, Africa, and Asia. This haplogroup was also the second most common among the Portuguese (13%) and is known to be especially frequent in Italy, from where 30% of the European immigrants to Brazil originated. Haplogroup 2 showed regional variation, having the highest frequencies in the south (29%) and in the northeast (18%). Its relatively high frequency in the south of Brazil is probably related to the large Italian immigration to this area. 

The same applies to haplogroup 3 [I1 and I2], geographically distributed in northeastern Europe and Asia, which was observed in 3.5% of the Brazilian males. The fact that it was seen almost exclusively in the south of Brazil suggests a European origin.

Haplogroup PN2 [J2] was the third in frequency, having been seen in 10% of Brazilians, with even regional distribution. This haplogroup is observed in 50% of the North Africans and in frequencies >29% in Egyptians, Greeks, Italians, and Lebanese. Haplogroup 21 [J] has been shown to have a north-south cline in Portugal, climbing from a frequency of 10.6% in the north to 24.5% in southern Portugal. Haplogroup M34 [J1], defined by the M34 mutation, is a subtype of haplogroup 21 and, apparently, has a low frequency but a quite broad geographical distribution in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It was seen in 3% of the Brazilians and 2% of the Portuguese samples.

The 12f2 deletion at DYS11 defines haplogroup 9 [G], the next most common Y-chromosome lineage observed in Brazil (8%). This haplogroup shows maximum frequency in Jews and other Middle Eastern populations, but it is also found in North Africans and Europeans. Portugal, where haplogroup 9 was seen in 6% of the individuals studied, seems to be the major source of these Y chromosomes in Brazil. There was a large Jewish population in Portugal until 1509, when Jews were deported during the Inquisition. To avoid expulsion, many Jews converted to Catholicism and became “New Christians,” many of whom immigrated to Brazil, carrying haplogroup 9 Y chromosomes. However, there were contributions from other populations. For example… haplogroup 9 shows the highest frequency (16%) in the north of Brazil. Intrigued by this observation, we searched the historical records and discovered that in the early 19th century there was a significant immigration wave of Moroccan Jews to the Amazon area, with eventual settlement in Manaus and Belem.

With the exception of an unknown number of colonizers who arrived during the Dutch 30-year domination of the northeast of Brazil in the 17th century, Portugal was the only significant source of European immigrants to Brazil until 1808. Starting in the mid-16th century and continuing until 1855, 4 million African slaves were sent to Brazil… In 1808 the Portuguese court, fleeing Napoleon’s army, moved to Brazil and opened its seaports to trade with all nations. This was soon followed by the arrival of settlers from other countries. During the period 1820-1975, 5,686,133 immigrants, mostly Europeans, arrived officially in Brazil… Portuguese and Italian immigrants arrived in almost equal numbers (comprising almost 70% of the total), followed by immigrants from Spain, Germany, Syria, Lebanon, and Japan’ – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.

The European element in Brazil’s demography has been populated by contributions principally from Hul (Portuguese) and from Uz (Italians). The descendants from Gether, the Spanish (Visigoth) of Spain are a minority; with the other lineage of Spaniards from Mash (Vandal), mainly migrating outside of Brazil throughout the Americas.

‘Now, after 500 years, it is worthwhile to ask about the genetic composition of the Brazilian population. We decided to try to partially answer this question by using lineage markers to ascertain the ancestry from different continents. In the first part of this project we analyzed 247 Brazilian mtDNAs and were surprised to find the high Amerindian (33%) and African (28%) contributions to the total mtDNA pool of white Brazilians… [total: 61%] 

In the present study, we analyzed Y-chromosome UEPs in 200 Brazilian males from four different regions in Brazil (a subset of the 247 individuals typed for mtDNA). Our data demonstrate that the vast majority^^ of Y chromosomes in white Brazilian males, regardless of their regional source, is of European origin, with a very low frequency of sub-Saharan African chromosomes and a complete absence of Amerindian contributions. Together, our results configure a picture of strong directional mating in Brazil involving European males and Amerindian and African females. This is in consonance with the known history of the peopling of Brazil since 1500.’

Male Lineages in Brazil: Intercontinental Admixture and Stratification of the European Background, multiple authors, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Brazil is a country of continental extension, and it is currently divided into five main geopolitical regions (North, Northeast, Central-West, Southeast and South) with diverse histories of colonization and settlement, a fact that is reflected in the genetic structure of the current Brazilian population. The sample from the Northern region presented the highest Native American ancestry (8.4%), whereas the more pronounced African contribution could be observed in the Northeastern population (15.1%). The Central-Western and Southern samples showed the higher European contributions (95.7% and 93.6%, respectively). The Southeastern region presented significant European (86.1%) and African (12.0%) contributions. 

The subtyping of the most frequent European lineage in Brazil (R1b1a-M269) allowed differences in the genetic European background of the five Brazilian regions to be investigated for the first time. Further studies using SNPs to increase the discrimination between lineages inside haplogroup R-M207 were performed in large samples from West Asian and European populations, revealing different gradients for R1b1a-M269 sub-clades inside Europe. The L11-derived allele (also known as S127) separates Western European from the Eurasian lineages. Inside R-M207, the frequencies of these sub-haplogroups were all investigated in each geopolitical region [of Brazil]. 

The haplogroup Q1a2-M346 and its sub-lineages, mainly Q1a2-M3, are almost completely restricted to Native American populations… haplogroups E1b1b-M123 and J-P209 present higher frequencies in Central-Western Brazil (4.1% and 16.0%, respectively) than in Portugal (1.2% and 10.4%, respectively). More than 50% of the Y chromosomes belong to the R1 branch, namely to the sub-lineage R1b1a-M269…’

Haplogroups E1b1b and J are indicative of male lineages associated either indirectly or directly with Canaan’ sons, Ham’s son Mizra and his descendants through sons Casluh and Caphtor (Moors) – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

‘Haplogroup R1b1a-S116*, which has its greatest frequency in Iberia was, by far, the most frequent haplogroup observed in our sample, representing 32.5% of the Y chromosomes investigated… the haplogroup R1b1a-S116* was the most frequent in the five geopolitical regions of the country emphasizing the strong influence of the early Portuguese colonization… Portugal was estimated to be the main source of the male European lineages to Central-West, Southeast and South Brazil. The North and the Northeast showed the highest contribution from France and Italy^, respectively… [and] the Northeast appears to have a higher Eastern European^ contribution than do other Brazilian regions. The highest migration rate from Lebanon was to the Central-West, whereas a significant migration from Germany** was observed to the Central East, Southeast and South.

The sub-haplogroup R1b1a-U106** (S21) is more frequent in Central and Eastern Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany, while R1b1a-S116, more frequent in the Western portion of the continent, is further subdivided into several haplogroups. 

The sub-lineage R1b1a-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula, R1b1a-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy, and R1b1a-M529 has higher frequencies in England and Ireland.’

‘The sub-lineages R1b1a-M153 and R1b1a-M167 were described at high frequencies in Basque Country. R1b1a-M167 was also found at high frequencies in the Pyrenees [Catalonia].’

The principal R1b sub-Haplogroups in Brazil are shown in the table below. The L23 is ostensibly of Eastern European origin. The predominant R1b is S116 which originates in the Iberian Peninsula, stemming from both Portugal and Spain. The extent of Italian and German immigration is shown by the levels of (R1b) U152 and U106, respectively. Notice that the five geopolitical regions of Brazil are as expected, genetically closer to first Portugal and then Spain than any other nation of Europe. 

We will discover the English and Irish are from the same familial line – that is, they share the same paternal ancestor – and the French and northern Italians are related, in that their paternal ancestors were brothers. The peoples of the Iberian Peninsula share the same R1b-S116 with Brazil, confirming their shared status as brothers descending from the same father, Aram.

As a side note, this writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, it’s most recent mutations. This is not the chapter to elaborate on this contention, though at some point it is hoped it can be addressed more fully, with input from geneticists welcome.

Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, we will find the levels of R1b vary, though gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups for a number of the nations we will study. R-M269 stretches across Europe, with levels increasing as one heads westwards. R-U106 covers western Europe eastwards with its epicentre in Central Europe. Turkey and Russia are the first two nations and both have lower levels of R1b, possessing higher levels of other Haplogroups, for instance for Turkey, it is Haplogroups J1 and J2 at 33% and for Russia, Haplogroups R1a at 46% and N1c1 at 23%.

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

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

Portugal: R-M269   60%

Adding Portugal’s R1b national percentage clearly highlights the marked difference between the eastern regions inhabited by Shem’s descendants from those of western Europe. We will continue to see evidence of this pronounced genetic demographic as we progress. 

Y-DNA distribution across Brazilian regions and an intriguingly high % of Y-DNA I, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘I’ve just read this study (Male Lineages in Brazil: Intercontinental Admixture and Stratification of the European Background) on the distribution of male lineages of Brazilians and there is something that struck me as very intriguing and, I think, difficult to explain… what do you think can explain this:

There is a surprisingly high percentage of haplogroup I, 8.9% as a whole and reaching a (for me) astounding 11.5% in the Northeast^ of Brazil, the region that least received the post-1830 non-Iberian immigration, and until the 1880s the most populous region (now the 2nd one). I thought I1 and I2 lineages would correlate a more Eastern/Northeastern European influx, but that definitely is NOT the origin of most Northeastern colonial immigrants from Europe as far as I know. 

Could the Dutch have left such a noticeable impact on Y-DNA when their Dutch Brazil in the northeast lasted less than 30 years, and also – according to their Portuguese defeaters, at least – they were expelled en masse from Brazil? There was also some short settlement and longer trading voyages by Frenchmen in the Northeastern coast. These hypotheses, though, wouldn’t solve the issue that I is also strong in the North (10%), never occupied by the Dutch or French.

I thought of a clear mistake in the analysis or a very skewed and misleading sample, but looking at the other Y-DNA percentage they look totally reasonable and explainable: highest E1b1a (8.2%) in the Northeast, the largest center for slaves in roughly ~1530-1780; highest R1(xR1b), i.e. mostly R1a, in the South (5.5%), by far the main destination of the Germans and Slavs; highest Q1a2 (8.1%) in the North, the last region to be effectively colonized outside the coastal region and still today with the largest Amerindian population. So, everything fits just right, except for that high I1+I2 percentage in the Northeast/North!

As an aside, I found it interesting that, even with the relatively minor contribution of non-Western European Y-DNA (Amerindians, Africans, other Europeans), the haplogroups E1b1b (10.9%), J (10.1%) and G (5.1%) are very present, adding to a full 26.1%, more than 1/4 of the male lineages. That really indicates how strongly the (traditionally/originally) non-IE lineages resisted in Portugal.’

Haplogroups E1b1b, J1 and J2 are a result of admixture and are not correctly labeled as either western or eastern European in origin.

‘Another interesting finding, though maybe coincidental due to patterns of the demographic formation, is that the Y-DNA distribution of the Brazilian Northeast appears as the most Central European-shifted among the 4 regions (i.e. a bit closer to France and, [less of] Italy), while the Southeast has the Y-DNA makeup closest to Portugal’s, even though it’s received the largest and most diversified number of immigrants from 1860 to our days. I really don’t know what to make of those results, how to explain them fitting into Brazilian history. What would you suggest/hypothesize?’

Judging from the preceding article, it would appear that the answer includes the presence of people from north-eastern Europe. High percentages of Y-DNA Haplogroup I2a1 (and lesser degree I1) are present in certain Slavic speaking nations from northern Europe and not just concentrated in south-eastern Europe – for instance, Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Keeping in mind as well that certain areas of Spain have similar frequencies of Haplogroup I, such as Aragon, Andalusia, Valencia, Catalonia and not forgetting Portugal.

Just as Haplogroup G is an ancient male lineage from Shem, Haplogroups I1 and I2 are intermediary Haplogroups, which are relatively old and ‘descendants’ of G. In turn, Haplogroups R1a and R1b are descendant mutations from Haplogroup I. The presence of I1 and I2 in Brazil is no more or less puzzling than Haplogroup G is. It just means that higher levels of older paternal lines have migrated to Brazil.

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for Brazil, Portugal, Spain, Catalonia and the Basque.

Brazil: R1b [54%] – E1b1b [10.9%] – J2 [10.1%] – I1/I2 [8.9%] –

G2a [5.1%] – R1a [4%] – J1 [3%] – E1b1a1 [3%] – Q1a2 [2%]

Portugal: R1b [56%] – E1b1b [14%] – J2 [9.5%] – G2a [6.5%] –

I2a2 [3%] – J1 [3%] – T1a [2.5%] – I1 [2%] – I2a1 [1.5%] –

R1a [1.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Spain: R1b [69%] – J2 [8%] – E1b1b [7%] – I2a1 [4.5%] –

G2a [3%] – T1a [2.5%] – R1a  [2%] – J1 [1.5%] – I1 [1.5%] –

I2a2 [1%] 

Catalonia: R1b [66.5%] – E1b1b [8.5%] – J2 [7.5%] – G2a [4.5%] –

I2a1 [3.5%] – I1 [2%] – I2a2 [1.5%] – R1a [1.5%] – J1 [1.5%] –

T1a [1%]

Basque: R1b [85%] –  I2a1 [5%] – J2 [2.5%] – E1b1b [2.5%] –

G2a [1.5%] – I1 [0.5] – J1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Brazil:        R1b – E1b1b – J2 – I1/I2 – G2a – R1a – E1b1a1 – Q1a2

Portugal:   R1b – E1b1b – J2 – G2a – I2a2 – J1 – T1a – I1 – I2a1 – R1a – Q 

Catalonia: R1b – E1b1b – J2 – G2a – I2a1 – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – J1 – T1a

Spain:        R1b – J2 – E1b1b – I2a1 – G2a – T1a – R1a  I1 – J1 – I2a2

Basque:     R1b –  I2a1 – J2 – E1b1b – G2a – I1 – J1 – Q

From a Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence perspective, particularly the first key three Haplogroups for two of Aram’s sons, the strong regional identities of the Basque resemble the Spanish and Catalonia surprisingly, parallels Portugal. From a percentage perspective, the Catalonians sit with Spain as a whole and the Basque remain distinctly unique. 

It would be interesting to have more insight in how the Casluh* and Caphtor element has shaped Spain’s genetic history and its current Haplogroup composition. Comments from a geneticist regarding Spain’s national genealogy would be welcome with regard to the impact on the Spanish Visigoths who today principally reside on the Iberian Peninsula and those Spaniards who left for the New World – the Alans, Vandals (Mash) and Moors.* 

Within Spain there is wide variance in each Haplogroup. 

It is interesting to note that Spain without Portugal resembles the head of a Bull, with its horns of Galicia and Cataluna either side – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

For instance, after the Basque country and Catalonia, it is the men of Castille-La-Mancha with the highest R1b at 66%; yet neighbouring Extremadura has the lowest percentage of R1b at 50%. Extremadura in turn has the highest E1b1b at 18.5% and aside from the Basque, it is Aragon and Castille-La-Mancha with the lowest at 5%. It is again Extremadura which possesses the highest levels of J2 at 11.5% and aside from the Basque it is Cantabria with the lowest level of 3%. 

Cantabria on the other hand has the highest percentage of G2a at 10.5%, with Aragon and Valencia the lowest with 1%. All Spanish regions are low in J1, I1 and I2a2. Regarding I2a1, Aragon has the highest levels at 14.5% and Asturias and Castile & Leon with the lowest at 2%. Haplogroup R1a is low throughout Spain with only Cantabria having a relatively higher percentage of 8.5%.

This disjointed regional Haplogroup cocktail is at first sight confusing and perhaps appears difficult in extrapolating meaningful data. Yet, it would seem that Extremadura shows the greatest evidence of a higher rate of admixture with the Moorish occupation. Confirmed by its lower levels of R1b and higher percentages of E1b1b and J2.

                            R1b    E1b1b     J2        I       G      R1a     T

Mexico               50         10       [10]      4        4        4        

Brazil                  54         11         10       9        5        4      

Portugal             56         14         10       7        7      1.5       3

Catalonia           67           9           8       7        5      1.5       1

Spain                  69           7           8       7        3        2       3

Basque               85           3           3       6     1.5                                         

What does this all mean? Well, the paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup table explains why the Basques may not feel comfortable living as part of Spain and their desire to achieve independence as a separate state. It certainly confirms their isolation and non-mixing with neighbours over the centuries. In marked contrast are the 7,710,126 people in Catalonia who are in fact very similar with the rest of Spain in their Y-DNA Haplogroups – confirmed by autosomal DNA as shown on the PCA plot below. Spain would not be supportive of any independence claims by Catalonia as we witnessed in 2017. The impact on Spain’s economy would be enormous should Catalonia gain independence, as it is the 2nd largest economy in Spain by nominal GDP. 

This is in stark contrast to the mtDNA Haplogroups we saw earlier, which showed the opposite, in that the Basque though slightly removed were considerably more aligned with Brazil, Portugal and Spain. It was in fact the Catalonians, which stood out differently. We will investigate the Basque and Catalonians more fully when we investigate the French, as the surprises do not end there.

The addition of Mexico appears to highlight a difference between Mexican’s of ‘Spanish’ descent and the Spanish within Spain; though in actuality it doesn’t when the Amerindian component (and Haplogroup Q for approximately twenty percent of Mexican men) is remembered – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America

Comparing the Y-DNA Haplogroups found more frequently in Southern Europe, where they have origins in peoples presently living in North Africa, the Middle East, Levant and Caucasus.

                      E1b1b    J1      J2      G2a

Brazil              11                [10]       5

Portugal         14       1.5      10        7

Spain                7       1.5        8        3        

Basque             3      0.5        3      1.5

Confirmation if required, that a Moorish (Berber) and Arabic genetic footprint in Iberian men is more than negligible. It is more pronounced in Portugal and less so in Spain, with the Basque proving their isolation and lack of serious admixture.

Adding Spain’s Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence with those selected larger nations previously studied, highlights Aram’s paternal dominant R1b Haplogroup compared with the defining marker Haplogroups R1a (and N1c1) for Asshur-Russia; R1a (and J2) for Lud-Iran; and R1b (and J2) for Elam-Turkey. Though recall, J2 is not the core lineal descent for Elamite and Luddite males. It is a result of frequent admixture with males from Southwest Asia – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Likewise, Haplogroup N1c1 in Russian males is a result of admixture with descendants from Japheth.

It will be shown that Shem’s remaining and middle son, Arphaxad and his male descendants are predominantly split between R1a and R1b, with a few exceptions; where I1, I2a1 and I2a2 are remaining earlier lines of descent from Shem, predominantly found amongst Arphaxad.

Spain:     R1b – J2 – E1b1b – I2a1 – G2a – T1a – R1a  I1 – J1 – I2a2

Russia:   R1a – N1c – I2a1 – R1b – I1 – J2 – E1b1b – T1a – Q – G2a 

Turkey:  J2 – R1b – G2a – E1b1b – J1 – R1a – I2a1 – N – L – T1a – Q –

O – I1 – R2 – H – C – I2a2 

Iran:       J2 – R1a – G2a – R1b – J1 – E1b1b – L – Q – T1a – N1c2 – I

Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table begun with the Persians of Iran in Chapter XVII.

                       J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia       43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia      33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey         33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24

Iran              32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Portugal      13        3       10       14          7       1.5       56       58

Brazil           10                 10       11          5          4       54       58

Spain           10     1.5         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Russia           3                   3          3          1       46         6       52

Georgia still bookends one end with the highest Haplogroup J percentages and lowest R1 and Russia retains the other bookend, with the lowest Haplogroup J levels and contrastingly the highest R1a. Georgia possesses the highest level of J2 as well as Haplogroup G2a – which is its defining marker Haplogroup. While Russia has the highest percentages of R1a. Portugal has the highest levels of E1b1b and Spain the highest percentage of R1b. Comparing Aram’s descendants with those of Shem’s studied so far, portrays the difference in their inherited levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b as well as admixture in J and E1b1b. Iran and Turkey though J2 and J1 driven – showing greater recent intermixing with Arab related men – are still defined by the Haplogroups from Shem of R1a, R1b and G.

As discussed previously, four of the five sons of Shem live on the periphery of Europe, surrounding where Arphaxad’s descendants dwell. Asshur, Elam and Lud – Russia, Turkey and Iran – live in the East and to the Southeast of Europe. The sons of Aram also dwell in peripheral locations within and outside Europe; in Italy, Iberia, Brazil and throughout the America’s, particularly the southern region of South America.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 from Ham, which are more frequent in southern Europe. 

                     R1a      R1b       I1     I2a1      I2a2    N1c

Portugal      1.5         56         2      1.5           5          

Spain              2         69      1.5         5           1

Brazil              4         54                  [9]            

Turkey            8         16         1         4        0.5       4  

Iran               16         10                 0.5                     1           

Russia           46          6         5        11                   23

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising the old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 with the ancient Haplogroup G2a, (all from Shem) are compared. With the inclusion of Spain and Portugal for instance, the pattern shows an increase in R1b correlating with a decrease in R1a heading westwards. Nor are the northern Haplogroups of I1, I2a2 and N1c1 displayed more than minimally in the southern Latin nations comprising Iberia. 

Brazil, Portugal and Spain are all similar, exhibiting low levels of R1a due to virtually no interaction with eastern Europe directly and principally received through the immigration of men to Brazil; plus, high levels of R1b, as is common with males throughout western Europe and their descendants in the Americas. As Russia has much in common with Slavic speaking eastern Europe genetically, we will learn that the Spanish and Portuguese share a closer genetic template with the Italians and French.

The next chapter focuses on the final son of five descended from Noah’s son Shem. The constant reader will be aware this means the majority of Europeans are in fact descended from one paternal ancestor – numbering forty-one countries and three dependancies.

People with good sense know what I say is true; and those with knowledge know my words are right.

Proverbs 8:9 New Century Version

“Most people believe most of the things they believe only because they believe that most people believe them.” 

Mokokoma Mokhonoana 

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Alpha & Omega

Chapter XXII

It should be stated at the outset, that this chapter contains summations, piecemeal guesswork, together with a wide variety of both reliable and subjective sources and so, it is not categoric in the main. Putting it all together creates a landscape, which is considered reasonable. The endeavour has been to remain impartial and record with integrity. It is an important part of the equation, to investigate antediluvian life in better understanding the postdiluvian world, the ethnic races of peoples inhabiting it and their modern identities.

It is sincerely recommended to read Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod and Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla, prior to reading the present chapter.

Noah and the Deluge Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux – emphasis mine:

‘For honest and scientific historians, “truth” is based on two main pillars: 1) an accurate chronology anchored on absolute dates (Herodotus principle) and 2) reliable documents coming from critical editions (Thucydides’ principle), consequently the theory of evolution is ahistorical, because it is impossible to know in which year the first couple of human beings appeared and it is impossible to find even one witness of this pivotal event among the oldest writings… In contrast, if we compare the oldest writings from Egypt and Sumer, including the Bible which appeared later… it is possible to know when and where the first human beings appeared on Earth.’

Much has been suggested regarding pre-human beings and what they may or may not have been like. As we are dealing with a past where we know little and even though DNA can help to learn more, it does not answer everything for the time being. The data as with all fields, can be manipulated to produce the desired result. For instance, some scientists state some Neanderthals – named after the location in Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany where they were first discovered – possessed light skin with red hair, albeit only one percent and others say it was impossible for them to have had red hair and light skin. Some researchers postulate that Neanderthal man could speak like a modern human; conversely others say they did not have the necessary internal physical formation in their throat and larynx to allow them to articulate as we do.

Scientists admit to speculating and the word probable is used ad infinitum in most material regarding pre-human and early human beings. DNA is variable in that if we used it to judge East Asians for example, they should be as dark skinned as sub-Saharan Africans; but they are not. 

A key pigment gene in Europeans produces blue eyes, whereas for East Asians it gives them a light skin. It does not affect their eye colour; even though it is the exact same gene, it has a different expression. Europeans and East Asians have a very different genetic architecture concerning skin colour, which scientists do not yet fully understand, though we will seek to answer.

While studying Noah, we observed a study declaring light skin and blue eyes being a relatively recent adaptation in the human genome – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. A further study was conducted, though their dating is more what one would expect than the 8,000 years ago proposed by the former study – for light skin at least (not blue eyes). Sandra Beleza at the University of Porto in Portugal and her colleagues studied three genes associated with lighter skin pigmentation. They are found everywhere, though more commonly in Europe than say Africa. Fifty people from Europe and seventy from sub-Saharan Africa were analysed to help her team gauge when paler skin first appeared in European peoples. The results suggested ‘only 11,000 to 19,000 years ago.’ This time frame very plausible, for according to an unconventional chronology it matches when Noah and his three sons were born: Noah in 16,837 BCE and his sons circa 11,837 BCE.

This leads to a thorny issue, one of dating and chronology. This writer’s viewpoint will inevitably infuriate scientists and exasperate theologians in equal measure. The contention presented here is that with scientific dating, once we go past a certain point, there are far too many noughts. Suspiciously, the scientific agenda in upholding Charles Darwin’s 1859, Origin of the Species and their paranoia in seeking to eliminate God, are to blame – Article: Designated Design or Chance Chaos? In one hundred and sixty-five years, the arguments for its validity remain unsatisfactory. An anonymous quote stated: “atheism takes none of the time and effort of a real religion.” It could be offered that the zeal with which atheists and agnostics defend their position or more accurately, attack the creation model is not only more time consuming than a ‘real religion’ but by virtue of the passion expressed is a pseudo-religion itself. 

In fact, the faith advanced by adherents of evolution is greater than the faith exhibited by Christians. For they believe in something that is untenable. At least the evidence of a superior power is all around in the form of our natural word – refer article: Designated Design or Chance Chaos? There is evidence for micro-evolution occurring within species. The evidence for macro-evolution? It remains elusive. Nor does subscribing to the Christian ideal that the (re)creation of all physical matter pertaining to our Earth and near solar system, occurred in six literal twenty-four hour days provide a satisfactory answer. Here conversely, a few zeros should be added.

The asininity of the scientific establishment and the puerility of the church community is equally perplexing and frustrating. A well versed child could ascertain one theory is nonsensically long and the other explanation is impossibly short. This is not meant too overly condemn; it is born from incredulity that people so easily accept rather than challenge, the orthodox answers espoused by two interpretations that just don’t add up or ring true.

2 Peter 3:5

English Standard Version

‘For they [the wise of this world, academia and science] deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens [spirit realm] existed long ago, and the earth was formed [G4921 – sunistao: to put together, composition] out of water [water is a physical type of the Holy Spirit, John 7:37-39, 1 Corinthians 12:13] and through water by the word of God…’

Mistrust in both systems, mirrors thinking how or who is responsible for our perception of reality. For the answer is much like the extraordinary disembodied head in the mystical 1939 film The Wizard of Oz, where Dorothy’s dog Toto pulls back the veil to reveal a secret: behind the curtain is nothing but a snake oil salesman who admits to being ordinary and would you believe, is actually from the very same state of Kansas, as Dorothy. 

Credence is thin for an evolutionary theory which postulates an inherent intelligence within nature just happened with no thought, design and purpose preceding its origination. Which in itself is a contradiction, for intelligence must have had a beginning or source. The connectivity of nature and even within Chaos theory, of its myriad patterns leads to the logical conclusion that there is imagination and creativity behind it all. Saying that, thorough investigation has convinced this writer that the supreme source of all things – the Eternal Creator – does not create everything by some instant, miraculous fiat. Thus in contradistinction to a rigid creationist position. 

The answer lies between the two – as does ironically, an accurate chronology – in that the Ancient of Days created majestic creatures who have gone forth and created, primarily on the supreme Being’s behalf and in other instances according to their own desire, with mixed results. These powerful entities have been the thought and intent of the same source and an expression or manifestation of both His Wisdom and His Word.

The fundamental law of the spiritual and physical creations is that all beings have the freedom to make choices, whether in pursuing serving self or in serving others. Each is a path with repercussions and outcomes. Judgement follows both paths and the decisions chosen. The Garden of Eden and the two Trees, or Ways typified this essential experience. The Bible reveals that humankind followed these two different paths after the Garden of Eden expulsion, right through to the Flood – Article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the earth… beginning of the World. Albeit, there was only one family which were keeping to the path of righteousness. The whole world had turned aside to a path of evil and thus the Creator’s decision to start anew, by cleansing the Earth though flooding: a form of baptismal purification.  

Deuteronomy 30:19

English Standard Version

‘I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live…’

2 Corinthians 5:10, Acts 17:31, John 5:22 

English Standard Version

‘For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil’ –

“because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a Man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” –

‘For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son…’

Part of that process, is allowing every world or civilisation to develop unhindered and uninfluenced. What has gone wrong, maybe in other worlds though most definitely in ours, is that humanity has not been allowed to develop naturally and organically. The rebellious Angels have taken their war with the Ancient of Days to Earth and humans are collateral in the exchanges. Human civilisation evolved unnaturally and has been manipulated by these unseen Archons (rulers) and so our world was re-created and maintained through continuous intervention – Article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

Ephesians 6:11-12

New Century Version

‘Put on the full armor of God so that you can fight against the devil’s evil tricks [G3180 – methodeia: cunning arts, deceit, craft, wiles, lie in wait]. Our fight is not against people on earth [the physical realm comprising three dimensions of space and one of time] but against the [original or very first] rulers [Asherah, Samael, Azazel and Lilith] and authorities [fallen dark Angels] and the powers [demons] of this world’s darkness [blinded, secret], against the spiritual powers of evil in the heavenly world [spiritual dimensions beyond those humanity perceive].

ESV, verse 12: ‘For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness…’

From the standpoint of paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups, the scientific method appears mainly accurate and so does the dating of the ending of the Last Glacial Maxim (Ice Age) coinciding with the Great Deluge. As science aims to date older events it becomes skewed, with a trigger-happy addition of noughts as if a finger were stuck on the zero key. Even if the spiritual realm is very ancient and this were true, the physical universe is not necessarily as old. The fifteen billion years ascribed to its origin and the five billion years to the beginning of the earth are far-fetched numbers which even evolution would scratch its head over if it could think. 

Ignoring evolution while allowing for intervention by superior angelic (or alien if one prefers) intelligences, means time frames are dramatically concertinaed. Though not as quick as the Eternal waving a magic wand, required by creationists who insist upon literal twenty-four hour days for each phase of creation.

A Universe of a million years of age and an Earth aged five hundred thousand years; with the Solar System somewhere in between, is plausible in allowing time for both the original creation and its subsequent controlled manipulation which has steered the momentous changes involved for planetary bodies to take shape, form and set; as well as the evolving experimentation tasked for all the flora and fauna here on the earth and who knows, possibly elsewhere.

Likewise with the biblical Genesis account and ascribing a mere six thousand years for all history on Earth and just six days for all life to come into existence, has set creationists up to look sophomoric at best and half-witted at worst to the scientific world. Respect has been lost on both sides as each have denied a manifest plan of design guided by an obvious process of interference. This solution, if both sides could take a breath and be rationally honest; ultimately includes a supreme Creator, incorporating engineered evolution, with the macro level in the hands of interventionists. Christians have taken the Genesis account literally, with not enough zeros. They have adhered to the following verses in regard to human history, yet bafflingly ignored them for the actual creation. The author of 2 Peter even says: “don’t let it escape your attention.” 

Psalm 90:4

New Century Version

‘To [the Ancient of Days], a thousand years is like the passing of a day, or like a few hours in the night.

2 Peter 3:8

New English Translation

‘Now, dear friends, do not let this one thing escape your notice, that a single day is like a thousand years with the Lord and a thousand years are like a single day.’

Creationists on both scores are wide off the mark. Humankind’s history is considerably longer than a mere six thousand years and the re-creation of physical life on the earth took longer than one hundred and forty-four hours. What we will find is that the account in Genesis is actually a second creation after the angelic rebellion.

If we let the Bible interpret itself, then there is cause in considering six thousand years for the re-formation of plant life, sea creatures, insects, birds, animals and the introduction of man. For some this makes sense.

Joy Fay Gomes: “One day with the Lord is as a thousand years to man, so that means the earth was created in 6000 years, not 6 days.”

Yet biologically, this appears a stretch and to the mind of this writer the following quote struck a cord.

Michael Pickett: ‘PSALMS 90, verse 4: For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night. Being [an] army veteran that has done guard duty 2 hrs on/4 off, or 4hrs on/4 hrs off, it could be 72,000 years or 36,000 years.’ 

It isn’t immediately clear whether Michael is speaking of the length of each day or for the week comprising six days – not including the seventh day the Creator rested (Genesis 2:1-3). Based on his suggestion, perhaps the length of the day in question is composed of twenty-four parts. If each day of the (re)creation lasted twenty-four thousand years, this would provide for any rational, logical, fair-minded person with a good dose of common sense, a time period of one hundred and forty-four thousand years for the Eternal to regenerate cosmic, flora and fauna life on Earth.

If such is the case, then the number 144,000 itself is curious for two reasons. First, it is the exact number of righteous saints spared at the end of the age – Revelation 7:4; 14:1, 3. Has time gone full circle? Second, it represents the exact number of white (limestone) casing stones originally fitted on the Great Pyramid – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Gerard Gertoux states, “… chronology is the backbone of history, as Herodotus understood long ago. An accurate chronology is the only way to access historical truth.” In his paper, Absolute Egyptian chronology based on synchronisms dated by astronomy versus carbon-14 dating, Gertoux show the lack of dependability of C-14 dating once we go back in time past circa 2000 BCE. It’s inaccuracy increases exponentially and cannot be trusted in any form of serious scholarship or research regarding ancient prehistory and science.

‘The Egyptian royal lists give a chronology of all kings dating back to Menes/Narmer… The main disagreement between Egyptologists concerns the dating of the first dynasties. There are two main trends: those who favour radiocarbon dating… and those who favour historical and astronomical dataThis difference of about 200 years between two methods supposed to give an absolute dating is scientifically incomprehensible.’

Presumably unknown to Gertoux, is that most of the Egyptian dynasties overlap and do not run consecutively for some thirty-one plus ruling epochs. Rather, certain dynasties relate to Upper Egypt and others to Lower Egypt and so are invariably running concurrently. Narmer or Pharaoh Menes was the first Pharaoh of a united Egypt; beginning his reign in 1988 BCE and ruling until 1970 BCE, when his son Hor-Aha ascended the throne, according to an unconventional chronology. This time frame is approximately a thousand years later than proposed by orthodox Egyptologists.

Gertoux: ‘Consequently, today (2019), the majority of Egyptologists consider radiocarbon measurements for setting absolute dates, but the confrontation with conventional Egyptian chronology, some of whose dates are fixed by astronomy, reverses this scientific belief. The evaluation of Egyptian chronologies is impossible because no Egyptologist indicates which dating method he used neither its margin of error. Most of them rely on radiocarbon measurements (Manning: 2006, 327-355)… 

The comparison between the two dating methods, by astronomy (conventional historical dates) or radiocarbon (in fact carbon-14 calibrated by dendrochronology), shows that dates obtained by radiocarbon match those from astronomy until 2000 BCE (errors of measurement are not significant) but before 2000 BCE the dates obtained by radiocarbon deviate exponentially from the dates obtained by astronomy (Haas, et al: 1987, 585-606). Radiocarbon dating therefore does not give absolute dates.’ 

Gods of the New Millennium, Alan Alford, 1997 – emphasis mine:

‘Today, the sciences of anthropology and genetics tell us that the ancestry of Homo sapiens is a lot more ancient than this time scale [of 1,656 years] suggests, but when the Bible was compiled this knowledge was not known. The Biblical editors would thus have had no qualms at all about drastically reducing the Biblical time scales, which ran through the ages of the patriarchs, to match their own preconceptions. In so doing, they would assume that the higher dates recorded by their ancestors were somehow in error.

Zecharia Sitchin suspected that the ages of the early patriarchs may have been reduced by a factor of 60. I adjusted for this, but the figures still did not reconcile. Another commentator suggested that the Biblical figures were months rather than years, but by his own admission this continued to give “contradictory results” Treating these numbers as “days” has also been considered, but without success. They would not have divided the figures by a random number, but by a convenient factor which was a credible explanation of the perceived discrepancy. A factor of 100, for instance, springs readily to mind. If we multiply 1,656 years by 100 we arrive at a date 165,600 years before the Flood.’

Alan Alford was comfortable with this figure as he was aiming to reconcile the ages of the patriarchs with our ancestor mitochondrial Eve, dated by scientists to have lived between two hundred and fifty thousand and one hundred and fifty thousand years ago. Subsequently giving Adam an age of ninety-three thousand years. It is plausible as Alford suggests that the later Bible editors took one look at the Genesis account and presumed the length of the patriarchs ages too incredulous and thus eliminated a zero or two, resulting in a still unbelievable figure of nine hundred and thirty years for Adam’s life. 

An alternative proposal is half-way between the two, prior to editing. It is a balance between the brevity of the creationist and the elongated timescale of the scientist. Thus Adam’s age was perhaps nearer to nine thousand, three hundred years of age. A day for a thousand years, appearing to live forever without immediate recompense for his sin; yet ultimately dying as the Creator promised. 

Genesis 5:5

English Standard Version

‘Thus all the days [H3117 – yowm: day (24 hour period)] that Adam lived [H2425 – chayay: to have life] were 930 years [H8141 – shaneh: as indication of age (of years of life)], and he died.’

There are three Hebrew words for the number 930; one for nine (H8672 – tesha), one for hundred (H3967 – me’ah) and one for thirty (H7970 – shlowshiym). Tesha means ‘nine, ninth’ or ‘nineteenth.’ Shlowshiym means ‘thirty, thirtieth.’ It derives from H7969 which can be translated as not only ‘thirteen, thirteenth, third, thrice, threescore’ and interestingly as ‘three’ but also amazingly as three hundred. The other word of interest is the middle word for hundred, me’ah. The KJV translates it variously as: hundred, 571 times; eleven hundred (1,100*), 3 times; hundredth, 3 times; hundredfold, twice; hundred, once; and six score, once. It can be a ‘simple number’ or ‘part of a larger* number.’

What is worth noting is that not only can it be a fraction and reduced to one-hundredth it can also be multiplicative. Also of note is the word, sixscore as this means literally six scores, with a score equaling twenty, hence one hundred and twenty. This appears somewhat random. Half or threescore, is sixty and this factor is what Alford has considered. Though it does not apply prior to the flood, this figure may have bearing after the flood. 

There is a separate Hebrew word for a thousand (H505 – eleph*), which means literally ‘a thousand.’ With that in mind, there is a further Hebrew word, (H7233 – rababah), which can be translated as ten thousand; 13 times; million, once; and many, once. It means ‘multitude, myriad’ and ‘ten thousand.’ It has the connotation of ‘abundance’ and to ‘multiply’, though specifically, a myriad figure whether ‘definite or indefinite’ in quantity.

So it can be an open ended number. There is a sizeable difference between a million or more and say ten thousand. In Genesis 24:60 the word is translated as millions, yet the context demands the use of ten thousand to be realistically accurate.

The interlinear in the original Hebrew ostensibly says: ‘days Adam lived nine [9] hundred [100] years thirty [30] years.’ This is a somewhat odd expression: ‘nine hundred years [and then another] thirty years’ – why not just say nine hundred [and] thirty years? Therefore, what if hidden within the verse, it is really stating: ‘… Adam lived nine thousand three hundred years…’

Alford: ‘In 1987, Allan Wilson, Mark Stoneking and Rebecca Cann, from the University of California at Berkeley, declared that all women alive today must have had a common genetic ancestor who lived between 250-150,000 years ago. How did they arrive at this conclusion? This genetic dating has been made possible by the discovery of mitochondria the tiny bodies within a cell that are responsible for production of energy through breakdown of sugars. 

Unlike our other DNA, which is scrambled by sexual recombination, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited virtually unchanged through the female line and is thus a perfect marker to trace ancestral relations. Moreover, it mutates at a predictable rate. The number of differences between the mtDNA in a worldwide sample of 135 different women allowed Wilson, Stoneking and Cann to compare how far back the ancestors of these women had diverged. In order to calibrate the divergences, the researchers used a comparison of mtDNA between man and chimpanzees, based on a separation 5 million years ago. And that led to the conclusion that a common ancestor named “Mitochondrial Eve” must have lived 250-150,000 years ago. This genetic evidence has been challenged, due to its calibration with the chimpanzees, whose separation date from man is not known with certainty.

Consequently, in 1992, the geneticists returned with an improved methodology. Working with other associates, Mark Stoneking this time used an intraspecific calibration, based on different human populations. In order to validate the results, the team utilized two different approaches, which gave remarkably similar results. As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, this does not mean that Eve was the only woman on Earth at that time, just that she is the only one who has an unbroken line of female descendants. The chances are that many earlier Eves have descendants alive today, but their ancestry has passed, at some point, through the male line only. Despite the new mtDNA dates, most studies still tend to support and cite the 200,000 BP common ancestor. It is, after all, a date remarkably similar to the fossil evidence for the emergence of Home sapiens.’

Alford understandably plumbs for one hundred and thirty thousand years ago as a date for mitochondrial Eve in his research, rather than the more commonly accepted one hundred and eighty thousand plus years ago as the former supported his chronological hypothesis. I remain unconvinced on this dating for our genetic origin. 

Comparing humans to chimpanzees is unstable and inconclusive to begin with and basing on an estimated date of five million years is flawed; suspiciously upholding the evolutionary agenda, by neatly removing any hint of design or intelligent intervention and the subsequent phased manipulation of mankind’s genome. Deducting a zero from the 250,000 years ago for Eve would venture close to when Eve could have been created according to an unconventional chronology, in approximately 27,397 BCE. Where it becomes interesting is the dating between 250,000 years to 200,000 years ago accords with an unconventional chronology for the creation of Homo erectus.

The dating of the biblical post-flood era is more complicated.

Alford: ‘…it was necessary to reduce [the post-flood Patriarch’s ages up to Abraham’s father] by a common factor, which I suggest was 50. Why was it decided to divide the Sumerian numbers by 50? [Their ages] can only be divided sensibly by 25, 50 or 100. No other divisor would produce whole numbers. It can be seen that a divisor of 50 results in Nahor becoming father to Terah when he was 29 years old. If a factor of 100 had been used, Nahor would have fathered Terah at the age of 14! If, on the other hand, 25 had been used as the divisor, Terah would have fathered Abram at the age of 140! Fifty was thus the best compromise by far. 

Now, in order to calculate the real elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham, all we have to do is to convert the Sumerian numbers… from base 60 to base 10. The result… is a duration of 8,860 years [from the flood to the birth of Abraham]. The Sumerian numerical system was sexagesimal in character and so they made use of the factor of 10 as well as 6. Thus the sequence included 1, [2, 3, 4, 5,] 10, [20, 30, 40, 50], 60, 360, 600, 3600…’

One can not claim to have an exact chronology, as it is based on accounts which may or may not have been accurately recorded or preserved. Additionally, Bible ages appear often to be rounded to whole numbers. As Oscar Wilde commented: “history is the lie commonly agreed upon.” What is offered here, is a unique chronology of its kind, that is closest to attempting to reconcile recorded history, scientific data and the biblical account.

The time-line and chronology of the Earth is easier to assimilate, if broken down into five epochs consisting of:

a. the time from the beginning of the physical universe through to the solar system, until the angels arrive to rule on the Earth and their subsequent rebellion

b. the re-creation of the Earth as per the Genesis account

c. Adam and Eve until the Flood

d. the time between the Flood and Abraham

e. the life of Abraham to our present era

The cornerstone of the dating used, is the agreement by the majority of secular and biblical scholars that the building of Solomons Temple began in the 4th year of his reign in 966 BCE. 1 Kings 6:1 states a period of 480 years elapsed between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple’s construction. Many biblical scholars now recognise an Exodus date of 1446 BCE for the Israelites departure from Egypt. 

If such is the case, then it is a matter of simple arithmetic in computing the ages, births, deaths and so forth in the Bible as one just has to work backwards. Key events and secular kings and rulers can also be thus aligned in parallel and consequently substantiated. Though one would be surprised at the amount of conflicting interpretations of simply adding or subtracting the patriarchs ages. This simple act of arithmetic produces an assortment of results it would appear. Regardless, this writer is confident – as I am sure everyone else is with their own findings – that an accurate dating line from the birth of Abraham in 1977 BCE to the end of the reign of Solomon in 930 BCE has been achieved. Though remains receptive to any conclusive research to the contrary. 

The dating for the five main epochs proposed are:

a: circa 1,000,000+ to 195,397 BCE

b: circa 195,397 to 27,397 BCE

c: circa 27,397 to 10,837 BCE

d: 10,837 to 1977 BCE

e: 1977 BCE to the present

The fourth epoch witnessed a considerable reduction in mankind’s longevity. Author Chan Thomas provides dates and physical evidence for major cataclysms and periods of upheaval in Earths history. His dates are for five demarcations of time in his Book, The Adam and Eve Story, The History of Cataclysms, 1993. His work was read after this research and it was staggering to learn of the dateline similarity. Needless to say, the periods he proposes were of great interest. 

His eras include, 7,000 years ago which Thomas equates to Noah’s flood; 10,500 to 11,500 years ago which he calls ‘Adam and Eves’ flood’ [that is, their creation]; 18,500 years ago, where Thomas quotes Genesis 2:4, ESV: ‘These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.’ His understanding of when the earth and Solar System were created; 29,000 years ago which Chan says was the end of the ‘Wisconsin era’ and 43,800 years ago, which ‘was derived by Jess hale, a super mathematician.’ 

This writer would concur with Thomas’ canny dating and subtly shift the events along one, so that his first era or most recent cataclysm, would coincide with the Tower of Babel and the division of the Earth during the time of Peleg, circa 6755 BCE, the second, with the flood in 10,837 BCE and the third, with either the birth of Noah in 16,837 BCE, or notably circa 22,000 BCE with the irruption of the fallen Angels (and their Nephilim progeny). The fourth era would then equate with the creation of Adam and Eve, circa 27,397 BCE. The final date coincides with approximately with the ending of Day Six (and beginning of Day Seven) in 51,397 BCE.

Everything is not always as it seems or rather, what we see and know now, may not have always been the case. Before we look at chapters one and two of the Genesis account about the creation of Adam and Eve, there is one matter which has perplexed and worth checking first. 

Genesis 1:1-5, 14-19

English Standard Version

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without [shape] form  [H8414 – tohuw: to lie waste] and void [H922 – bohuw: to be empty], and darkness [H2822 – choshek: obscurity] was over the face of the [watery] deep [H8415 – thowm: deep place]. And the Spirit [breath, soul, wind] of God was hovering over the face [surface] of the waters.’

The Hebrew word tohuw means: ‘confusion, unreality, emptiness, place of chaos, a desolation (of surface), in vain’ and ‘vanity.’ The word bohuw means: ‘to be empty, a vacuity’ and ‘an undistinguishable ruin.’ The Hebrew word for darkness in this context means: ‘misery, destruction, death, sorrow’ and ‘wickedness.’ The word for deep means: ‘sea, abyss’ or ‘grave.’ 

We have a dramatic picture revealed of an Earth already in existence, which has been decimated. The Creator would not, did not, create the Earth in such a state. The Bible reveals that God is not the ‘author of confusion’ and destruction – 1 Corinthians 14:33. There are tell tale signs that a galactic war occurred in our solar system. Not only the Earth but all the planets sustained devastation when a third of the angels revolted when they followed the Adversary into rebellion – Revelation 12:3-4. 

This is why the planets Mercury, Venus and Mars all have poisonous atmospheres and varying levels of annihilation writ all over them, coupled with the partial remains of one planet exhibited in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter; as well as another in the Kuiper Belt of icy objects (comets) that is many times more massive outside of Neptune’s orbit, including the largest of its bodies, the dwarf planet Pluto – renamed since 2006 (refer article: Thoth). Beyond Pluto is the Oort Cloud which extends almost a third of the way to the nearest star, Proxima Centauri; housing many more icy objects, where scientists claim ‘to be the origin of most of the long-period comets that have been observed’ in our Solar System. 

The Historicity of the Bible, Chronology, Archaeology, Archaeoastronomy, Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis & bold mine:

Tohu is akin to names [for] sea and sea monster. Not only Tohu but also cognate Akkadian Tiamat ‘primeval water monster’ and Leviathan ‘water monster’ (mentioned in other Biblical books, Job 41) might be compared to the Egyptian constellation of Crocodile (modern Draco). Bohu as a cognate of Hebrew behemot ‘earth monster’ might be compared to the Egyptian constellation of Hippopotamus (Ursa Minor) [or the Bear of Ursa Major]. The Spirit of God (ruah, a cognate of the Arabic legendary bird Ruhh name) can be related to the image of Cygnus constellation (‘swan’ or simply ‘bird’ in ancient Greek astronomy)’ – Articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and The Pyramid Perplexity.  

‘Thus, three primordial beings in the Creation story (Tohu, Bohu, and Ruah) might be linked to the circumpolar (unsetting, ‘immortal’) constellations of Draco, Ursa Minor, and Cygnus. Aforementioned Behemoth, Leviathan, and the monstrous bird Ziz of medieval legends might be other images of the same constellations. On the other hand, three primordial beings of Chaos may symbolize three Babylonian zones of the heaven: tohu may be referred to the zone of Enki-Ea the water god (the southern constellations), boho may be linked to the zone of Anu the sky god (the constellations near the ecliptic), ruah refers to the zone of Enlil the air god (the northern constellations).   

Behemoth’s sword (Job 40:19) and ‘the flame of a whirling sword’ which guarded the Paradise (Genesis 3:24) may be regarded as sword-shaped Cygnus or more likely as Bootes which also resembles the sword [refer Cherubim, article: The Ark of God]. The fall of the primordial serpent in the book of Revelation may be related to such astronomical event as the exit of the North Celestial Pole from the constellation of Draco (after 2000 BCE) and the moving of the constellation toward the horizon’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘The throne of God (merkabah) is a cognate of the name of chariot (markab), whereas the unsetting circumpolar constellation of Ursa Major is regarded as a chariot in ancient astronomy. Ursa Major might also appear in the image of menorah (the first description: Exodus 25:31-40) as ‘a lamp to burn continually’ (Exodus 27:20; Leviticus 24:2-4)’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

We shall return to a number of points raised pertaining to the history of the Earth and its near neighbours. Genesis chapter one recounts the re-creation of the Earth, though the other planets of the solar system remain untouched physically, in a state of degradation. There is enough data to support the proposition that Earth’s Moon was not an original body connected with the Earth. Just two points from an innumerable number (of which we will return), are that because the Moon is oversized in comparison with the Earth, doubt is created regarding its credentials as a naturally formed moon in this Solar System. Secondly, the Moon is completely hollow, not displaying the internal composition commonly shared by planets and other moons. This raises the serious question of whether it actually is an artificial construct? 

Then the fact the moon shows signs of a serious aerial bombardment yet was not rejuvenated at the same time as the Earth, lends itself to it being an astral body which may have been somewhere else in the solar system and brought to Earth’s orbit.

Genesis: 3 ‘And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day…14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” 

And it was so. 16 And God made [H6213 – asah: fashioned] the two great lights – the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night – and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.’

We learn further that the Sun and the Moon were two new lights to rule the day and night. What then, was the source of light before this new age, which on the fourth Day saw the introduction of the Sun and Moon perhaps as little (or as long) as 125,000 years ago. The age before the Angelic rebellion (circa 450,000 to 200,000 BCE) required a Sun for the plant life, dinosaurs, early hominin and other creatures. Yet Genesis says in the re-creation there is a new Sun and Moon. As the Moon has a considerable number of anomalies, which reveal it was a new addition in the solar system; it is not unreasonable, to question what happened to the old Sun?

Was Saturn the Sun? Multiple Authors, 2015 – emphasis theirs, bold mine:

Was Saturn the Sun in ancient times? Or seen in history and mythology skies as a Sun like object? The Saturn Theory through comparative mythology (Roman Saturnalia festival) suggest that Saturn may have been our first Sun or was at least associated as our star. This is explored through David Talbott’s Saturn Myth and perhaps starting to be explained through the Saturnian cosmology’s of the Thunderbolts Electric Universe theory, Alfred de Grazia and… Immanuel Velikovsky inspired catastrophism models and revised chronology.

Thompson in his introduction to his collection of astrological reports [Sun and Saturn] has noticed that the planet Saturn was also designated as Samas, i.e. “sun” by the Babylonian-Assyrian astrologers and he quotes the statement of Hyginus to the effect that Saturn was called the star of the sun. During the Saturnalia festival period (around our Christmas time) the roles of Roman households was reversed, with slaves becoming the master, in remembrance of when Saturn recently ruled the skies and it was a Golden Age. The Romans nostalgized that legendary state as the Golden Age of Latium. Many of the rites of the Saturnalia were intended to restore that long lost utopia – if only for a short time each year. Was Saturn a brown dwarf star where planet Earth resided during the Golden Age?’ 

‘During the past century several authorities noticed that Greek and Latin astronomical texts show a mysterious confusion of the “Sun” – Greek Helios, Latin Sol – with the outermost planet, Saturn. Though the designation seems bizarre, the expression star of Helios or star of Sol was applied to Saturn! Of the Babylonian star-worshippers the chronicler Diodorus writes: “To the one we call Saturn they give a special name. ‘Sun-Star’.”

As strange as it may seem, early astronomical traditions identify the primeval sun as the planet Saturn, the distant planet which the alchemists called the best sun and which the Babylonians, the founders of astronomy, identified as the exemplary light of heaven, the “sun”-god Shamash. (Shamash is the planet Saturn, the astronomical texts say.) [refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim] Saturn did not move on its present remote orbit, but ruled as the central sun around which the other heavenly bodies visually revolved [including the Earth].

… the words used by ancient civilizations that are interpreted today as “the Sun” – like the Egyptian Ra, the Greek Helios, and the Roman Sol – all originally referred to the gas giant Saturn! Was that planet our primordial parent? Was Saturn until recently a much larger brown dwarf? (The apparent size and color of an electric star is an electrical phenomenon. If Jupiter’s magnetosphere were lit up it would appear the size of the full Moon). Was ancient man around to see it as a sun? If not, why would anyone call a faint yellowish speck in the night sky – the Sun?

Chronos [meaning ‘time’] was [mythologically] confused with, or perhaps consciously identified with, due to the similarity in name, the Titan Cronus already in antiquity, the identification becoming more widespread during the Renaissance, giving rise to the allegory of Father Time wielding the harvesting scythe’ – the Grim Reaper, as represented by Azrael, [refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?]

‘He was depicted in Greco-Roman mosaics as a man turning the Zodiac Wheel. Chronos [or Khronos in Greek], however, might also be contrasted with the deity Aion [or Aeon] as Eternal Time [emerging from the primordial chaos]. Chronos [Latin version] is usually portrayed through an old, wise [serpent] man with a long, grey beard, such as “Father Time”… [‘personification of time’] – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy

‘Now, even though Velikovsky points out that Saturn was once a much more massive body than it is today, it is hard to imagine that it could have been massive enough to be a star in the context of the thermonuclear theory of stellar energy. If, however, it was an electrically fuelled star, its initial stellar state and its sudden demise seem readily explainable.’

This would explain both the level of importance and mystery that the hidden ‘planet’ generates in ancient astronomical history and also the Genesis account requiring a new sun, after the angelic rebellion and the havoc and chaos of a solar system wide, war of destruction. In Genesis chapters one and two we read of the re-introduction of life on a newly re-formed Earth; complete with a different Sun and a new Moon. With a cursory reading, the two chapters appear to run together, with the second chapter amplifying the first. 

Upon a closer examination, the two chapters are contradictory in explaining apparently the same events; but, an in-depth comparison reveals two related though different stories in sequential and chronological order. 

The writing styles of the two stories recorded in both chapters are distinct, with differing intent implied by the two versions. Adding to theologian’s belief that they were written by two different people at two different times for two different reasons and combined later, by perhaps Moses the compiler of the first five books of the Bible and not necessarily the author of all the material within the Books of the Law (Torah). Researchers, theologians, Bible teachers and preachers, have gone to great lengths in making the two chapters mesh as the same event. More radical opinion has led to labelling Adam a hermaphrodite, due to the implications of cobbling the two incompatible chapters together.  

In so doing, the first version of creation implies the Creator formed Adam and Eve at the same time, ‘male and female he created them.’ Some early Christian theologians decided this meant they had serene undifferentiation, or basically, were both sexes. The two apparent versions of creation, also gave rise to the idea of Lilith, an extraordinarily mis-understood personage who occupies even less space in the Bible than Azazel; though with comparable impact on humankind’s history and future as her twin brother – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod and article: Lilith. Jewish mythology misleadingly teaches she was Adam’s first wife. Lilith is purportedly the woman mentioned in the first creation story, while Eve is Adam’s second wife. Most sources incorrectly label her a demonic spirit when in fact she is a fallen dark Angel.

A thorough expose by John D Keyser explains the two creation chapters in Genesis. The Two Creation Accounts of Genesis – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine, except in the Table:

‘Writes Manfred Barthel: “The unsuspecting reader is… confronted with a puzzling problem in the first two chapters of Genesis: two consecutive and mutually contradictory accounts of the Creation. In the first account God creates the heavens, the oceans, and the earth, and man [plural – mankind] is the final event on the program; in the second we are simply told that ‘the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden,’ and a man [singular] is the first creature to be brought into being. This seems to be a fairly glaring inconsistency, to say the least” (What the Bible Really Says).

Notice… how The Original Bible Project translates these verses –

“And ELOHIM [the gods] said, ‘Let US (The verb is PLURAL, for other examples of the same see Genesis 3:5, 22; 11:7) make MAN (‘adam) (Hebrew ‘adam is used generically, OF THE HUMAN SPECIES AS A WHOLE, BOTH MALE AND FEMALE (note that both the male and female are addressed in the following verses) in OUR image, according to OUR likeness… 

and let THEM rule over the fish of the sea, and over the flying thing of the heavens, and over the animals, and over ALL… the earth, and over every moving thing that moves upon the earth.’ And ELOHIM CREATED THE MAN (Or [the] MANKIND) in [their] image: in the image of ELOHIM [the gods…] created him; male and female [they] CREATED THEM” (Genesis 1:26-27).

Now chapter 2:7, 15-16:

“…then YHVH ELOHIM [the Lord God] FORMED (Hebrew yatzar is used for the formation of the human being in the womb [Psalm 139:16]). THE MAN of the dust from the ground and He blew into his nostrils breath of life… and THE MAN [Adam] became a living being (Hebrew nephesh chayyah)… And YHVH ELOHIM took THE MAN [Adam] and settled him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. (“Selections from the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings,” James D. Tabor Chief Editor. 1997)’

‘The Holy Bible in Modern English (commonly known as the Ferrar Fenton Bible) was one of the earliest translations of the Bible into “modern English” – i.e., English as spoken and written in the 19th and 20th centuries. Work on this translation was initiated by a London businessman named Ferrar Fenton who had acquired a great learning and understanding of ancient Sanskrit, Greek, Hebrew and Latin through being a distinguished member of the Royal Asiatic Society. As a tradesman he also had access to numerous ancient Septuagint and Masoretic manuscripts to aid in his translation, and he also used Brian Walton’s Polygot Bible (1657) for minimal referencing. The complete Bible was first published in 1903, though parts were published as separate volumes during the preceding eleven years. Fenton spent approximately fifty years working on his translation, with his sole goal “to study the Bible absolutely in its original languages, to ascertain what its writers actually said and thought.” The result has introduced some interesting renditions that differ from what is commonly found in other translations.

His translation of Genesis 1:26-27, and Genesis 2:7, 15-16, is as follows:

“God then said, ‘Let Us make MEN under Our Shadow, as Our Representatives, and subject to THEM the fish of the waters, and the birds of the sky, and the quadupeds, as well as the whole of the earth, and every reptile that creeps upon it.’ So God created MEN under his own Shadow, creating THEM in the Shadow of God, and constituting them male and female” (Genesis 1:26-27).

Now Genesis 2:7, 15-16:

“The EVER-LIVING GOD afterwards formed Man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils PERCEPTION OF LIFE, BUT MAN BECAME A LIFE-CONTAINING SOUL… The EVER-LIVING GOD then took the MAN and placed him in the Garden of Eden for the purpose of cultivating and taking care of it. And the LORD GOD instructed the MAN, saying, ‘For food you may eat of the whole of the trees of the Garden…”

As we can see, there are some appreciable differences between the two creation accounts in chapters one and two…separated by the seventh day of… rest…’ 

It is vital to note that the gods who were involved in the creation of man are different from the Eternal Creator who undertook the creation of Adam and Eve, afterwards.

Keyser: ‘… the Hebrew word [adam, aadam or aw-dawm] is translated into our English language in various ways.

(a) ADAM is a species (MANKIND in general, all races of mankind upon the earth)

(b) ADAM is also a tribe/race (“Adamites” – those of the tribe of Adam, his descendants),

(c) ADAM is also the proper name of the first earthly ancestor of the Messiah (Adam from the Garden of Eden).

Early translators, including those of the King James Version of the Bible, indicate that the word for man (‘adam) is PLURAL in Genesis chapter 1 and chapter 5 (verse 2), but SINGULAR in chapter 2. The Hebrew word for man in chapters 1 and 5 is without the Article. Without the definite Article “the” it is the collective noun with the meaning “mankind,” as it would be in English. This is borne out by the use of the plural personal pronoun “them” referring to man in verses 26, 27 and 28… God created male and female at the SAME TIME in chapter one of Genesis.

Following is a chart with two columns – the column on the left pertains to ALL OF MANKIND other than Adam (known as “the sixth day [of] CREATION”); and the column on the right pertains SOLELY TO ADAM and his offspring, his “tribe” (referred to as “the eighth day FORMING”).’

Genesis Chapter OneGenesis Chapter Two
They all (plural) were CREATED. Created is Hebrew word #1254 bara’ “…male and female created He them” (Genesis 1:27).Adam alone (singular) is FORMED. Formed is Hebrew word #3335 yatsar “… in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed” (Genesis 2:8).
They are created male and female at the same time. No ‘Adam’s Rib here!Adam is formed some time before Eve. She later being made from him.
They were simply created, human and mortal. “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27).Adam given the breath of life, became a living soul. (Adam would have lived forever had he not fallen – see Genesis 6:3 “for that he also is flesh”), Ask yourself, “also,” as in whom else?
They are told to multiply. “…Be fruitful and multiply…” (Genesis 1:28).No such command given to Adam and Eve (Adam’s family was told to multiply after the flood; i.e., Noah’s family was told in Genesis 9:1).
Mankind given dominion over animals and fish.Adam was a farmer.
The animals were wild animals and the plants were wild plants. No names given.They were domestic animals and crop plants.
Adam named these.
There was not yet rain.“… went up a mist from the earth…” (Gen. 2:6)
The creation was completed. All the various races, men and women alike, were created. But after that, in Genesis 2:5, YEHOVAH saw that He “did not have a man to till the ground” (farmer). So YEHOVAH then FORMED Adam.

‘Then the most striking evidence that Genesis One and Two are NOT recording the same event is to be found in the following observations: (1) In Genesis One, the plants and animals were created BEFORE man(kind) was created. (2) In Genesis Two, the plants and animals were formed AFTER the man Adam was formed.

We have a man and a woman (“them”) being created (bara’) in Genesis 1 before the ‘Adam (singular) who was formed (yatsar) in Genesis 2. “Created” and “formed” have different meanings. We cannot remain honest if we try to say that “created” = bara’ is the same as “formed” = yatsar. (The same goes for the equivalent plasso and ktizo in the New Testament Greek).

“CREATED: Hebrew word #1254; bara’ – to shape, to fashion, to create (always with God as subject) used of individual man, used of new conditions and circumstances, to be created, used of birth, used of something new. “FORMED: Hebrew word #3335; yatsar – to form, to fashion, to frame, used of human activity, used of divine activity, used of Israel as a people, to frame, to pre-ordain, to plan (figurative of divine) to purpose of a situation, to be predetermined, to be pre-ordained, to be formed.”

‘Let’s now look at Genesis 2:18:

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” “That the man” refers to a particular man – Adam (‘eth ha-‘adam). This sets Adam apart from the other races created on the sixth “day” creation. The term “help meet” in the Hebrew text, should be translated “as his counterpart.”

‘Going to the next verse in Genesis 2 we read –

“And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof” (Genesis 2:19). These creatures that YEHOVAH God created and brought to Adam are what we would call domestic animals – or farm animals. The nature and reason for Adam’s (Ha-‘adam’s) existence was to till the soil (farming), so we see that the need for these animals existed.

‘… let’s review the order of the creation of physical life on earth to this point:

(1) First came the trees, grass and plant life after dry land had appeared – on the third day or period.

(2) Second in the order… God created the beasts of the field – or the wild animals on the sixth day or period.

(3) Third in the order of creation came male and female… man except for Adam (‘eth Ha-‘Adam). This was also done on the sixth “day.” This is what is referred to as the Sixth Day Creation. We noted that both male and female were created at the SAME TIME on this day or period after all the animals are created. We also noted that Adam and Eve are NOT YET on the scene they will not be mentioned by name until chapter two.

(4) Fourth… After the mass creation of peoples on the sixth day or period YEHOVAH God rested on the seventh.

(5) Fifth in the order of YEHOVAH’s creation – on the eighth “day” (or a time beyond) – YEHOVAH God formed Adam (‘eth Ha-‘Adam) to till the soil. 

(6) The last order of the creation to this point is the creation of all domestic animals for the use by Adam – and his naming of them.

‘… God has only given the domestic animals – and NO wife – to Adam… to be aware of here: The phrase “there was NOT FOUND a helper (counterpart, companion) comparable to him (Adam – Genesis 2:20)” suggests that… God went looking for a counterpart for Adam but could not find one. This begs the question: If Adam was the first created human being – where in the world did… God go looking? The only way this phrase makes any sense is if human beings had previously been created – both male and female – on the sixth day of creation…

Let’s take a look at the verses that document that Eve was taken from Adam, and that it was a special event not common to the creation of women in Genesis One: “And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and He (YEHOVAH God) took one of his (Adam’s) ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made He A WOMAN, and He brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man” (Genesis 2:21-23, KJV)

In the above verses from Genesis Two “A WOMAN” in verse 22 has an Article. In the Hebrew this woman (Eve) is la’ishaah – but a woman in general (especially from the sixth-day creation) is simply ishaah. In other words, this particular woman Eve was made by… God OUT OF Adam – not that all women were made this way. This further strengthens the argument that the sixth-day creation and the eighth-day forming were totally different events – for in the sixth day we see that “… male and female CREATED He them” (Genesis 1:27) but here in the eighth day we see that “… the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, MADE He a woman…” (Genesis 2:22).

Eve was from Adam, but ALL other women were created at the SAME TIME alongside the other men in the sixth “day” of YEHOVAH’s Creation. There is no way that this Genesis chapter two event regarding Eve can be construed as simply a further explanation of all the women being created in Genesis chapter one. This is an entirely different event with its own peculiarities. Eve is MADE (Hebrew word #1129) from Adam in Genesis 2:22. 

Adam’s Rib, Genesis and Genetics, 2011 – emphasis mine:

“… [concerning] an article of a man who was in a serious automobile accident; he lived, but required many reconstruction surgeries on his face and cranium. He noticed that the doctor was using rib material for the reconstruction, and it appeared that the doctor kept using the same rib. Before one surgery the man asked the doctor when would he have to start using a different rib. The surgeon told him that it wouldn’t be necessary since human ribs regenerate.

It is true, PubMedID: 7332200 documents 12 patients that were subject to cranioplasty surgery using their human ribs to rebuild cranium bone damage. Forty-two pieces of rib, average length 13 cm were removed to rebuild the cranium. All 12 patients “had solid protection of the brain” and “complete regeneration of the donor rib.”

The rib is the only human bone that regenerates. The fact that the rib regenerates supports another scripture:

Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. (KJV)

If Adam would have had a missing rib, the creation wouldn’t be “very good,” it would be blemished. However, we now know that Adam was totally restored to the “very good” condition; science confirms what has been in Genesis all along.”

Here is another significant scientific fact concerning the creation of Eve. Adam, being human male, had one X and one Y chromosome; Eve had two X’s. This may be a small point, but it shows that all the genetic information required to create Eve was in Adam. So, Eve could be taken from Adam, but Adam could not be taken from Eve.”

Keyser: ‘The most important difference between the mankind of Genesis 1:26 and Adam in Genesis 2:7 is that Adam received the Breath of… God in his nostrils. Later, when the procreative power of Abram and Sara was regenerated, the spirit of… God was embedded in their genes – memorialized by the addition of the fifth letter [h] of the Hebrew alphabet to their names. Adam was the first SPIRITUAL man – but NOT the first biological man. “And man BECAME a living soul” (Genesis 2:7). The word “became” is consistently used in a manner showing that the subject became something that it had not been before.’ 

John Keyser raises a profound point in his last paragraph, which is absolutely pivotal in understanding the difference between the peoples of Day Six and Adam and Eve of Day Eight. 

It also explains the reason why Adam and Eve after being tempted by the Serpent to take the wrong path, or tree, they a. required ‘clothes’ and b. were ejected from the ‘Garden’ of Eden. Both of them had been a spiritual creation, with spirit bodies. They were not physical. After taking the ‘fruit’ from the forbidden tree, which gave them new knowledge and access to an alternative (physical) reality, they were then subjected to the penalty (or punishment) of death as the Lord God had promised – Genesis 2:16-17, Ezekiel 18:4. This necessitated their transformation from spirit to flesh; now as a result of their transgression Adam and Eve were neither spirit or immortal but rather physical and mortal – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?

Recall in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla, the redness of Adam’s blood was explained. Some incorrectly teach that Adam was white skinned and could blush and this is the meaning of his ‘redness.’ Iurii Mosenkis adds an interesting view, particularly in light of the suspicion that Adam’s origin was not from Earth originally and (trans)planted here later.

‘Let us remember that humans, especially men, were depicted in red dyes in [the] Ancient Near East (such [as] Egyptian pictures [which] are the most famous). Adam’s name means ‘red’ in Hebrew: the name reflects a belief that the man was created from red clay (adama in Hebrew). It is very likely to assume that nomads, attentive to the night sky, associated the brightest red star of Arcturus [in the Bootes Constellation] with Adam, created from the red clay. The neighboring brightest [white] star of Spica [in the Virgo Constellation] these nomads might have connected with Eve – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Moreover, the constellation of Serpens (which Latin name means ‘snake’) arose over the eastern horizon near Arcturus and Spica at that time. Naturally, the snake of Eden might be associated with the image of Serpens constellation [Draco].    

[The creation of Adam is] marked… [by] the appearance of the red star of Arcturus on the eastern horizon before the sunrise in the autumn. Arcturus became the brightest autumnal star when the sickle-shaped constellation of Scorpio became invisible before the sunrise. The ancient Greeks interpreted the celestial event as the replacing of Cronus (sickle’s owner) by the Zeus, whereas the Old Testament draws our attention to the red colour of Arcturus, correlating it with the image of Adam whose name means ‘red’… and this climatic event… marked by the autumnal appearance of red Arcturus, [is] interpreted as [Adam’s expulsion] from… paradise.    

The dog with the red mouth might be related to Canis Major and the star of Sirius in the mouth of the figure of this constellation. Sirius is described as the red star in many ancient records. Perhaps, this description might be influenced by the relation between the first morning rise of Sirius and the red water of the Nile in ancient Egypt’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.  

The above quote is of interest because as we progress in our journey in this chapter and beyond, a theme develops where certain concepts like a mathematical formula (or code) keep arising and appear to either equal each other or are parts of the same equation. They include in no particular order: Adam, Red, Mars, Sirius, Dog, Jackal, Sphinx, Pyramid, Serpent, Dragon and Queen (or Goddess) of Heaven. 

Aside from Genesis chapters one and two there are other passages in the Bible which exhibit different writing styles. An explanation is provided by David A Snyder in Abraham of Ur, 2014:

‘As the Historical-Critical Method of study increased, Biblical scholars as far back as the 17th century began to look for ways to reconcile the inconsistencies in scripture. They identified up to four different sources of input into the first five books of the Bible – the Torah. Since that time, there has been a persuasive argument known by Biblical scholars as the Documentary Hypothesis or Four Source theory. 

This theory tries to explain the “doublets” and “triplets” of stories within the Hebrew Scripture, such as the different creation and flood stories that are placed right after each other and are sometimes contradictory. Many of these stories are clearly written in different styles, grammar and from differing religious and political perspectives. Based on this theory, it is possible to conclude that each author wrote the same stories from the perspective of his own time and place. A German Biblical scholar, Julius Wellhausen, was one of the first to identify and classify these four sources as follows: 

  1. The “J” or Yahwistic source (Jahweh in German) written about 950 BC [930 BCE onwards] in the southern kingdom of Judah. It refers to God throughout as Yahweh and the kingdom of Judah is paramount. 
  2. The “E” Elohist source written about 850 BC in the northern kingdom of Israel probably by a Levite priest. It refers to God as El or Elohim throughout and de-emphasizes the kingdom of Judah.
  3. The “D” Deuteronomist source written about 600 BC in Jerusalem during the period of religious reform. It emphasizes the history of Israel from a perspective of king Josiah of Judah.
  4. The “P” Priestly source written about 500 BC by Jewish priests in exile in Babylon. It emphasizes temple worship in one location in Jerusalem as proclaimed by King Hezekiah.

Finally someone, called a redactor, put all four of these sources into one work, the Hebrew Scripture that we have today. 

It would be the same as if someone took all four of the New Testament Gospels and put them into one book – but keeping the original words of each author. If this hypothesis is true, the final redactor must have been a literary genius to be able to capture all of the versions and make it look like one work – a work that is the most read book in the history of man. 

Richard Friedman in his book Who wrote the Bible, and his follow-up book, The Bible with sources Revealed, gives a detailed analysis as to why each separate author was inclined to write as he did. When one looks at the conflicting styles and perspectives side by side as Friedman does in his works, it is quite clear that this hypothesis has great credibility. 

The Four Source Theory is so well understood in today’s Biblical studies that many authors will simply refer to the “P” or “E” source without explaining the theory itself. Friedman’s timeline is somewhat different from Wellhausen’s by positing that the Hebrew Scripture that has come down to us was written in the court of King Hezekiah between 722 and 609 BC, possibly by the author of the book of Jeremiah’ – Hezekiah reigned 720 to 691 BCE and Jeremiah wrote between 628 to 588 BCE. 

‘This theory complicates the accepted Hebrew tradition that Moses was the author of the first five books of the Bible. This is an anathema to Orthodox Jews and many Evangelical Christians, who interpret the Bible literally. In my opinion, even if the Documentary Hypothesis is correct, one can easily accept that Moses was the original author of these oral traditions revealed by Yahweh. The four sources clearly wrote their individual story from one core source.’

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Neanderthal man has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Homo neanderthalensis II’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

The angelic Sons of God, arrived on a young Earth during an ancient era circa 450,000 BCE, from (ostensibly Nibiru) though further back in time from Orion, Sirius and other stars and constellations – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. They were commissioned to seed the Earth and oversee the terra-forming of it. The experimentation with flora and fauna, hominids, dinosaurs and so forth, occurred during this epoch. At a certain point (circa 200,000 BCE), rebellion broke out in the Angel’s ‘new’ home world. A massive war of the galaxies ensued and the Adversary with its forces was driven out of the heavenly abode of God and down to our solar system. The bombardment of the planets and ensuing destruction caused the extinction of life on Earth.

One version of events at this time interpreted from the Sumerian texts, says the Earth, previously known as Tiamat (the watery planet), located between Mars and Jupiter was struck by a renegade ninth ‘planet’ – not counting dwarf planet Pluto, otherwise known as Planet X (ten) or Nibiru – and torn asunder. The remains in part, included the asteroid belt and the remaining critically wounded, smaller mass was flung past Mars to its present orbit, outside of Venus. 

There are a number of interesting astronomical and scientific aspects pertaining to this cataclysmic event, which will be discussed as we progress. For example, within the Earth there are two globular zones embedded deep in its mantle. Giant behemoths of denser iron rich material which stretch beneath Africa and the Pacific called large low-velocity provinces (LLVPs).

Scientists theorise they are the buried remains from a cosmic collision with a hypothetical lost planet, Theia – which in the process formed the Moon. Thus chunks from Theia’s mantle merged with Earth’s own, sinking deep and becoming the LLVPs.

Discovered through seismic imaging the LLVPs are thought to be between 2 and 3.5 percent denser than the mantle around them. The extra weight keeps them anchored near the core after the planetary fragments gradually sank. The reason why the debris did not mix more uniformly (or evenly) with Earth’s mantle was due to the cooler, lower mantle being shielded from the full intensity of the collision’s energy, allowing the portions of the mystery planet’s broken mantle to remain intact.

Could a part of Nibiru form part of the present Earth, formerly Tiamat? What about the residue of Tiamat allegedly still in the rubble of the asteroid belt? It may come as a surprise that the largest asteroid, Ceres, is in fact a dwarf planet. It is 950 kilometres in diameter and was discovered in 1801.

Far from being a lumpy piece of rock, Ceres looks like a planet and possesses features common to larger planetary bodies, such as craters, volcanoes and landslides. Scientists thought Ceres was merely a large rock of about 30% ice. Recent findings show the surface layers of Ceres is composed of 90% ice (water), pointing to a past as an ‘ocean world’ frozen in time. Is Ceres (and the asteroid belt) evidence of a destroyed larger, watery planet such as Tiamat?

Time passed and the intact residue of Tiamat was as described in Genesis 1:2: ‘… the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.’ The word was in Hebrew means ‘became’ and could be translated became without form. In Hebrew the words ‘without form’ are tohu va bohu, indicating the world became void, or was destroyed as mentioned previously. Between its creation in Genesis 1:1, a cataclysmic war caused the resulting condition described in Genesis 1:2.

In Genesis 1:3 the re-creation of Tiamat now Earth, began about 195,397 BCE. It is proposed the next one hundred and sixty-eight thousand years until the end of 27,397 BCE were the seven Days of restoring life, in separating the moisture canopy from the oceans – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nullald – re-introducing plant life, sea creatures, land animals and finally Neanderthal man, culminating in a Sabbath period of rest – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 

Some will ask, how did plantation and vegetation survive without the carbon dioxide provided by animal life. The unique firmament consisting of water vapour, affected the carbon and oxygen levels so that plant life could sustain itself differently. There was no rain in the antediluvian era, for the Earth was watered by mists which rose from the Earth and became dew upon the ground. 

The firmament canopy, called the Raqiya in Hebrew encircling the earth, resulted in warm, humid conditions, with stable temperatures throughout the world. It would have also acted as a radiation filter, blocking harmful effects of ultraviolet and cosmic radiation. Vegetation found beneath the Polar Icecaps adds support to this likely scenario.

Flying Serpents and Dragons, Rene Andrew Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 93-95, 100, 102 – emphasis mine:

‘The Earth’s primordial [atmosphere]… was composed mostly of water vapor, some carbon dioxide, and virtually no hydrocarbons [the opposite to Venus’ atmosphere]… the proportions of carbon dioxide and water vapor in the atmosphere and the capture of long wave radiation… resulted in the “greenhouse effect.” … temperatures would… be uniform between night and day… summer and winter… Although the surface of the Earth was shielded from the direct rays of the Sun, plant life was abundant and luxurious due to the proportion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere… as much as a thousand times more… than… today. There was no rain or storms… People obtained much of their water from underground sources [Genesis 2:5-6]. It was not until the cloud cover collapsed with the… Deluge that man saw sunlight and the blue sky… 

… in Genesis… the Lord introduced the rainbow… the result of the prismatic effect of the bending of the rays of the sun through water droplets… only [occuring] after rain… [requiring] the direct action of sunlight. Both religious and secular sources indicate that early man… were vegetarian and not meat eaters… [refer article: Red or Green?] man did not eat flesh until after the Deluge [Genesis 9:3; 10:8-9]. This was not true of the Nefilim or Anunna who turned to eating flesh of animals and eventually that of humans.

It has been estimated that if the atmosphere was composed of pure moisture and suddenly condensed, it would amount to no more than 30 feet of water, certainly not enough in itself to inundate the Earth… the oceans of the earth hold more than 200 million cubic miles of water. The sudden [tidal] movement of this water would be enough to drown about three-quarters of the present surface of the planet… in addition to the condensation of the cloud cover, [it] would … provide enough water to [submerge] even the largest continent. In addition to the inundation of falling rain and the sloshing of the oceans, water may have been added from outside sources. According to… Velikovsky… the Deluge was caused by the planet Saturn… about a hundred times more massive than the Earth, had flared as a nova at that time. The planet expelled debris, some of which was absorbed by Jupiter, and some of which eventually encountered the Earth and other planets… the Deluge was the result of this debris, consisting mainly of moisture which collapsed the Earth’s vapor canopy, adding enormous amounts of water to the surface of the Earth… [raising] the sea surface to its present level.’

Apart from Saturn’s nova which may have taken place earlier, though can’t be ruled out; we will look further into the possible cause of the Flood and which planetary body was involved – Articles: Thoth; and The Younger Dryas Stadial: End of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

Boulay: ‘The “light of seven days”… refers to… just before the Deluge when the Earth was engulfed in Brilliant light… [verified]… in the Epic of Gilgamesh… This bright light… may have been caused by the planet Saturn. Isaiah 30:25-26 [ESV: “… And on every lofty mountain and every high hill there will be brooks running with water, in the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall. Moreover, the light of the moon will be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun will be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day when the Lord binds up the brokenness of his people, and heals the wounds inflicted by his blow.”] In the Talmud, seven days before the Deluge, God changed the primeval order and the sun rose in the west and set in the east.

In Psalm 23:4 [ESV] we read: “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow* of death, I will fear no evil…” And in Amos 5:7-9 [CJB]: 7 “You who turn justice to bitter wormwood and throw righteousness to the ground! 8 He who made the Pleiades and Orion, who brings deathlike shadows* [the shadow of death] over the morning, who darkens the day into night, who calls for the water in the sea and with it floods the earth – Adonai is his name – 9 he flashes destruction on the strong, so that destruction overcomes the fortress.” It’s clear here that the Pleiades and Orion are associated with catastrophic events that brought on darkness on earth in the morning and turned day into night, at the same time causing the land to be flooded.’

Remember the reference to ‘wormwood’, for it is linked with the Flood cataclysm.

Humans are not from Earth – A Scientific Evaluation of the Evidence, Ellis Silver, 2017, pages 50, 58 and 103 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Our original home planet must be… constantly and comfortably warm, with day and night temperatures both about the same. That might be because the thick cloud cover prevents heat loss at night; because the ground absorbs heat during the day and radiates it at night; because… the planetary crust is thin and heat from the core radiates through it… we must have evolved on a planet with consistent levels of light… akin to early or late summer in the temperate regions on Earth… no dangerous UV radiation. If the whole planet was shrouded in cloud, and there were no seasons, there would be little distinction between the tropical and temperate regions. Both would be highly habitable…

Our body’s natural (circadian) rhythm doesn’t match the earth‘s 24 hour clock. This is simple enough to prove: just deprive people of external stimuli, such as daylight and clocks, and let them wake and sleep and turn the lights on and off whenever they like. After about two weeks they’ll settle into their body’s natural sleep-wake cycle, completely out of step with the outside world, where each day lasts around 25 hours.’

Silver has raised a telling point and has subtly suggested humankind existing on a different planet before being placed on Earth, as mankind isn’t well suited to all of the conditions on this planet. 

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, pages 37-38:

‘… if you put a Caucasian person in a deprivation tank with no external influences, that person will exhibit a [25] hour biorhythm… this matches the length of a day on Mars. So, basically Caucasians are… Martians.’

If Homo sapiens did originate elsewhere, then Mars would be worth investigating. Rather, it seems clear that the conditions Silver is describing, perfectly fit with the antediluvian earth before the flood. Earth and Mars once had a twin planet complex; thus Earth days may have been longer and mirrored Mars in the pre-flood epoch. An important part of the puzzle in Earth’s history is the supercontinent Pangaea, which once covered a third of the planet and the accompanying theory of continual drift and plate tectonics. The name Pangaea derives from the Greek pan, meaning ‘all, entire, whole’ and Gaia, meaning ‘Mother Earth’ and ‘land’. The concept that all the continents were once joined was first proposed by German Alfred Wegener in 1912. Wegener’s theory was fine-tuned by Arthur Holmes who proposed mantle convection, which was confirmed by the mapping of the ocean floor after World War II and the acceptance of plate tectonics as the mechanism for continent separation. 

The close alignment of the coast lines of North and South America with Europe and Africa had been noted as early as 1596 by Abraham Ortelius. There are many evidences that the theory is correct: in geology, the fossil record, Paleomagnetic studies of embedded rock, coal placement and the continuity of mountain chains. For instance, the eastern coast of Brazil and the western edge of Africa share fossils of the same type of reptile, indicating that these two land masses were once one continent and creatures lived in an area which split in two.

What is interesting is that scientists believe supercontinents forming and breaking up is cyclical and that Pangaea is merely the most recent. Yet, if the Earth is not as old as scientists theorise, then this may not necessarily be true.

The constant reader will know that this writer would not subscribe to the dates of Pangaea’s creation ‘335 million years ago or its breakup ‘175 million years ago.’ Yet conversely, it is hoped they are correct regarding the continents current movement from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge towards the centre of the Pacific Ocean and colliding, taking 80 million years to do so.

Coal typically forms in warm and wet climates. There is coal beneath Antartica’s ice caps, signalling that the icy continent once had a very different climate and or, it was in another location on the Earth in the past – refer article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis.

National Geographic, Texas and Antartica Were Attached, Rocks Hint, Richard A Lovett, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘About 1.1 billion years ago, what are now El Paso, Texas, and Antarctica appear to have existed side by side, scientists say. The find is part of a decades-long effort to piece together fragments of an ancient supercontinent that existed before Pangaea. 

The supercontinent’s pieces can be reassembled by tracing ancient mountain belts and other geologic patterns – such as the Appalachian Mountains, which are geologically related to mountains of England and Scandinavia

But “we see older mountain belts suggesting that all the continents came together in the past to make other supercontinents,” Loewy said. Some of these features appear to be traces of Pangaea’s predecessor, Rodinia, a supercontinent that contained most of the word’s landmasses…

For their study, Loewy and colleagues collected rocks from a region known as the North American Mid-continental Rift System. The system is an ancient volcanic zone running from Canada to Texas, where what is now North America… The southern end of this rift includes the Franklin Mountains near El Paso. The team then compared the North American rocks to samples from mountains in Coats Land in East Antarctica, on the coast of the Weddell Sea. The Coats Land mountains are mostly buried in ice, except for “two tiny tips of mountain peaks,” Loewy said. Rocks collected from both sites match in age and in lead isotope ratios, Loewy said, showing that both sets of volcanic rocks erupted from the same rift zone. The results indicate that, even though the regions today are widely separated, the two landmasses were once connected. “It’s such a neat thing,” she said, referring to the past ties between the West Texas desert and Antarctica’s glaciers. “It’s a quite spectacular contrast.”

It has been a labour in endeavouring to understand when Pangaea existed and broke up. Having considered the cataclysm epochs as outlined by Chan Thomas and therefore entertaining the angelic rebellion on Earth and the subsequent re-creation in Genesis chapter one; Noah’s flood; and also the time of Peleg when ‘the earth was divided.’ The Angelic rebellion is ruled out because of the destruction of Tiamat and the reborn Earth. This leaves Noah’s flood in 10,837 BCE and the tower of Babel circa 6755 BCE – Genesis 10:25 (Article: The Pyramid Perplexity). The answer may lay in a combination of both events.

It is important to understand that before the Flood there was an ice age and the drastic alteration in climate after the Flood appears to be linked with the breakup of Pangaea, which was accompanied by the outgassing of large quantities of Carbon Dioxide from continental rifts – refer articles: The Younger Dryas Stadial: End of the Earth… Beginning of the World; and Climate Change & Global Warming – Climate Crisis or a New Equilibrium? This produced a ‘Mesozoic CO2 High’ contributing to the very warm climate after the deluge.

The opening of the Tethys Ocean – a body of salt water which separated the ancient continents of Gondwana and Laurasia, two halves of Pangaea as it split, with the Mediterranean, Black, Caspian and Aral Seas, the modern vestiges – also contributed to global warming. The very active mid-ocean ridges associated with the breakup of the Pangaean Continent raised sea levels to their highest in the geological record, flooding much of the continents. The expansion of the temperate climate zones that accompanied the breakup of Pangaea may have contributed to the diversification of the angiosperms (the majority of plant life).

Genesis 1:9

English Standard Version

‘And God said, “Let the waters [Panthalassa] under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear [Pangaea].” And it was so.’

In the re-creation of the Earth, it appears that the waters plural, exist with the dry land, singular.

The Controversy, Donald Chittick, 1984, page 195:

‘If the waters, or the seas were in one place, then it seems logical to conclude the land was also in one piece elsewhere. If that were not the case, water would have then been in several places, as today, with multiple continents. If the waters were in one place, then it is a hint that perhaps there was one giant continent and the multiple continents we observe today came some time after creation.’

A perplexing question is the fact that there is a massive gap in ancient history. From the Great Flood to the recognised beginnings of ancient Sumer, there is an unaccounted 6,000 years or so. Nearly three thousand years elapse from the tower of Babel until the Sumerians and pre-dynastic Egypt. The division after the tower of Babel was obviously monumental for such a long period to pass before people regathered in large enough numbers in Sumer and again in Egypt.

Was the division more than just the confounding of the one tongue into multiple languages? – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. Commentators have rightly quoted Genesis 9:13-16, the Rainbow Covenant and the Creator’s promise, where He would not flood the earth again – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. Recall this oath was apparently ignored by Nimrod when building the Tower. In the time of Peleg, there was not another global flood; though serious localised flooding did occur – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

What Happened in the “Days of Peleg”? John D Morris Phd, 1993 – emphasis mine:

‘One of the most interesting passages in [the Bible] is that found in Genesis 10:25, where it mentions an individual named Peleg, and says, “in his days was the earth divided.” The word translated “divided” is used only a few times in the Old Testament, including a parallel passage in I Chronicles 1:19. Interestingly, the name Peleg is quite similar to the Hebrew word “divided” (Palag). There have been many treatments of the verse. One suggests that “divided” implies “surveyed” as in divided into grids. Could the early post-Flood inhabitants have explored and mapped the new earth, so radically different from the pre-Flood earth? There are ancient maps and traditions of far-away continents.

Another deals with the possibility of continental separation. Geologists have marshaled much evidence that the continents were once together… But any scheme of rapid separation would itself cause havoc on the earth… For this reason, I am convinced that Genesis 10:25 should not be understood to imply that “In the days of Peleg the Atlantic Ocean opened up.” This would have caused devastation comparable to Noah’s Flood, and the Bible has no mention of it. If the continents separated, they did so during Noah’s Flood. The traditional interpretation relates Peleg’s day to the division of language/family groups at the Tower of Babel. 

Comparing the lineage of Shem, which includes Peleg, to the lineage of Ham, [and] which includes Nimrod, leader of the rebellion at Babel, we find it likely that Peleg was born soon after the dispersion (assuming the genealogies are complete). Thus it would have been reasonable for his father Eber to name a son in commemoration [anticipation] of this miraculous event.

One “separator” did occur sometime after the dispersion. The Ice Age, which followed the Flood, would have caused sea level to be an estimated 600 feet lower than today, since such a great volume of water was trapped as ice on the continents. Such a lowering of today’s seas would reconnect the continents once again. The connected continents would have aided in both animal and human migration following both the Flood and the dispersion, as commanded by God (Genesis 8:17; 11:4, 8, 9). Then the ending of the Ice Age and the melting of the ice sheets would cause sea level to rise, covering the land bridges and “dividing” the continents after migration had occurred. Perhaps this is what happened “in the days of Peleg.”

The logic of the last proposal from Morris is easy to concur with. There is simplicity in Pangaea originating in the Genesis chapter one re-creation as the original land mass of the Earth in the antediluvian age. It would explain how the animals were able to travel to Noah to board the Ark or to at least present themselves if they were to become a DNA sample – Genesis 7:9 (Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla). 

During the Flood, the continent had separated with land bridges plausibly existing until the water fully receded to current levels. Animals which had been motivated to travel to Noah now headed in reverse to those regions they are located in today. Hence, no worldwide cataclysmic flood or geological upheaval in Peleg’s time as per the Rainbow Covenant and yet the Earth was fully divided during Peleg’s lifetime as land bridges must have fully receded and been covered over with sea water.

Not just ancient Antartica presents a mysterious history, but the opposite pole at the Artic in the past, appears to not only have had a civilisation but also a different geographic configuration. There is considerable interest – aside from archaic ‘mythical’ societies such as Atlantis and Lemuria – in ancient Hyperborea. The name can be translated as ‘beyond the North Wind, extremely north’ or ‘to carry over’. The north wind was personified by the Greek god, Boreas. The ‘father of history’, Herodotus wrote about Hyperboreans even though he was sceptical, for both Hesiod and Homer speak of them as fact.  

Book IV, Pliny the Elder:

“At this spot are supposed to be the hinges upon which the world revolves, and the extreme limits of the revolutions of the stars. Here we find light for six months together, given by the Sun in one continuous day… there is but one rising of the sun for the year, and that at the summer solstice [June 21], and but one setting, at the winter solstice [December 22]. This region, warmed by the rays of the sun, is of a most delightful temperature, and exempt from every noxious blast… The abodes of the natives are the woods and groves; the gods receive their worship singly and in groups, while all discord and every kind of sickness are things utterly unknown. Death comes upon them only when satiated with life; [“a race that lives to an extreme old age”] after a career of feasting, in an old age sated with every luxury, they leap from a certain rock there into the sea [a lake* to transform into a swan]; and this they deem the most desirable mode of ending existence.”

The ancient Greeks knew about North America as they were aware of the region around the Arctic Circle of Hyperborea, a ‘broken bridge’ which connected northern Europe with North America. The poet Pindar (522-443 BCE) wrote: “neither by ship nor on foot would you find the marvelous road to the assembly of the Hyperboreans.” Hyperborea was located in the far north in the Artic Circle and was not easy to find or to traverse the terrain in getting there. Ancient maps show that Green Land may have been on its southern edge. The land became synonymous with remoteness and exoticism.

Map by Abraham Ortelius, Amsterdam 1572: at the top left Oceanvs Hyperborevs separates Iceland from Greenland

Pinder:

“Never the Muse is absent from their ways: lyres clash and flutes cry and everywhere maiden choruses whirling. Neither disease nor bitter old age is mixed in their sacred blood; far from labor and battle they live.”

The Hyperboreans obviously liked to celebrate and party. They are suspiciously reminiscent of the Nephilim and the Elioud, with no disease, no old age, a description as immortal ‘giants’ and possessing ‘sacred blood.’ They are linked to the cult of Apollo, for it was he alone of the twelve Olympians who was venerated by them; as he visited in his ‘flying vehicle’ to spend ‘his winter amongst them every ‘nineteen years to rejuvenate’ – bringing Light while Greece endured Darkness (Article: Thoth). As we have uncovered Apollo’s identity as Azazel the most prominent of the two hundred (million) Watchers -refer article: Na’amah – the time frame for this civilisation parallels Atlantis, existing in the antediluvian age of history. Refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis

Arctic continent on the Gerardus Mercator map of 1595

Starseed Journey – RH Negative Blood, 2009 – emphasis mine: 

‘Dr. Valery Dyemen, a Russian researcher of the Arctic, is convinced that Hyperborea existed. He said: “I believe we should be looking for the traces of that civilization in Eurasia and American arctic regions, in the islands and archipelagos of the Arctic Oceans, at the bottom of some seas, lakes and rivers. It’s worthy of notice that Russia has the largest number of locations and artifacts that could bear relevance to Hyperborea.” One of the charts by Gerhardus Mercator, the 16th century Flemish cartographer and geographer, shows a huge continent lying in the vicinity of the North Pole. The land is an archipelago composed of several islands divided by deep rivers. A mountain sits in the center of the land (according to legends, the ancestors of Indo-Europeans lived near Mount Meru). The question is: How did that land appear on the chart? There was no information whatsoever regarding the Arctic regions during the Middle Ages. We have some reasons to believe that Mercator had used an ancient chart, the one that is mentioned in his letter dated 1580. That chart showed a continent located in the center of the Arctic Ocean, which was pictured ice-free on the chart.’

Greek legend states that the Boreades, descendants of Boreas and a snow-nymph Chione (or Khione), founded the first theocratic monarchy on Hyperborea. Aelian: ‘This god [Apollo] has as priests the sons of Boreas (North Wind) and Chione (Snow), three in number, brothers by birth, and six cubits in height [10 feet or 3 metres tall].’ According to the Roman author Aelian, the Hyperboreans were allegedly once on the verge of a great war against anotherformidable ‘race of soldiers’ possibly from Atlantis. The war didn’t happen as these ‘soldiers’ realised in time that the inhabitants of Hyperborea were ‘far too strong. 

Diodorus Siculus adds: ‘And the kings of this (Hyperborean) city and the supervisors of the sacred precinct are called Boreadae, since they are descendants of Boreas, and the succession to these positions is always kept in their family.’ This would make sense as they were recorded as gods who had descended from heaven. The Boreans were renowned for their technology and prosperity. Medusa was apparently banished to Hyperborea. 

Ancient Code – emphasis & bold mine: ‘Certain esoteric systems and spiritual traditions speak of Hyperborea as the terrestrial and celestial principle of civilization. In other words, the home of the ancient people. The original human. Some authors have even proposed several theories suggesting that Hyperborea was the original Garden of Eden, the exact place where the earthly planes and celestial planes meet. The land was described in a number of legends as being the perfect place on Earth, hence its connection to the Garden of Eden’ – refer article: The Eden Enigma.

30 Things You Should Know About Hyperborea – Homeplace of Gods, Land of Giants, Ivan Petricevic – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Hecateaus of Abdera… described how the Hyperboreans constructed on their land “a magnificent sacred precinct of Apollo and a notable temple adorned with many votive offerings and is spherical in shape.” Curiously, some scholars have identified this temple with Stonehenge‘ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘Greek lyric poet Alcaeus (600 BC) sang of the actual or mystical journey of Apollo to the land of the Hyperboreans: “… O King Apollo, son of great Zeus, whom thy father did furnish forth at thy birth with the golden headband and lyre of a shell, and giving thee moreover a swan-drawn chariot to drive, would have thee go to Delphi…”

Hyperborea (note its circular layout)

When we read of the far north of Europe and the Artic Circle, we think of an extremely cold land with snow and ice, that is marked by long winters. Hyperborea was the opposite and the Greeks knew of it as having eternal spring and sunshine. So much so, that the goddess of the Night and Darkness, Nyx could not even bring darkness to the land. Nor could Boreas blow his brutal cold wind into the lands beyond even his reach. 

Mike Greenburg PhD – emphasis mine:

‘With endless spring and eternal light, Hyperborea was capable of producing two harvests of grain each year with less… work required… Most of the land was left wild… with dense forests and green meadows covering the nation. The Eridanos [flowed] lazily across the landscape, attracting white swans. Hyperborea was a land of plenty. Hyperborea… had no fear of invading armies because it was protected by natural defenses. Without the constant threat of war, the people lived a peaceful existence…

The god of light [Apollo] was an obvious deity to be worshipped in a land that knew neither the darkness of night nor that of winter. According to Pindar, the Greek hero Perseus was one of the few southerners to ever see that land and was invited to a banquet in the god’s honor.’

“Yet was it with these (the Hyperboreans) that Perseus the warrior chief once feasted, entering their homes, and chanced upon their sacrifices unto the god… for in their banquets and rich praise Apollon greatly delights, and laughs to see the rampant lewdness of those brutish beasts. Nor is the Mousa (Muse) a stranger to their life, but on all sides the feet of maidens dancing, the full tones of the lyre and pealing flutes are all astir; with leaves of gleaming laurel bound upon their hair, they throng with happy hearts to join the revel. Illness and wasting old age visit not this hallowed race, but far from toil and battle they dwell secure from fate’s remorseless vengeance.” – Pindar, Pindar Pythian Ode 10. 27 ff (translation Conway)

‘A lake* was formed by the son of Phaethon, the son of Helios who flew the chariot of the sun too close to earth. The swans that lived there were in honor of his friend Cygnus, while the graceful poplar trees on its banks were his sisters. The swans associated with Cygnus were one of the animals associated with the legendary country, but another was even more magnificent’ – refer Cygnus, articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘Heracles was another of the rare Greeks to visit the land of Hyperborea while on his quest to capture the Cerynitian Hind. The golden-horned deer that was sacred to Artemis [twin sister to Apollo] fled north during the chase, leading Heracles far from Greece. The deer was eventually captured in Hyperborea, its homeland. But the description of the deer is seen by some historians as an important clue about the location of the myth.

The hind was described as female, but also marked by its golden horns. There are no species of deer native to the regions of Greece in which the females have horns. To find horned female deer, one must travel much further north than the lands usually identified with Hyperborea. The only species in Europe that matches the description are reindeer. Reindeer are not native to the regions of Gaul or the island of Britain. They live much further north. While most commonly associated with Scandinavia, reindeer can also be found in the tundra regions of northern Asia as far as Siberia.’

The eighth Day era, including the Garden of Eden, saw the creation of Adam and Eve circa 27,397 BCE. Legend says Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden seven years later. Cain circa 27,390 BCE and Abel circa 27,385 BCE were born about this time and it was circa 26,129 BCE when Cain killed Abel. Seth was born relatively shortly thereafter in 26,097 BCE and his son Enosh, was born in 25,047 BCE. The Bible does not give an age for Cain’s first son Enoch, though circa 26,119 BCE fits the time frame in an unconventional chronology.

Regarding the inflated length of scientific eras, contrasted with more plausible time frames for the origin of mankind, Len Kasten writes in Alien World Order, 2017, pages 7, 10 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… and sixty-five million years ago… the dinosaurs became extinct. That period, known as the Jurassic, is based on carbon dating, which is notoriously unreliable. There is contrary evidence that the age of the dinosaurs may have been [far more recent].’

‘The DNA of [numerous] races was donated to create the new human race [Homo neanderthalensis] about forty thousand years ago [and Cro Magnon man about 29,000 ya]human DNA has been “tweaked” and has evolved consequently due to twenty-two modifications…’

Some of the gods, the fallen dark Angels known as the Watchers ‘returned’ to Earth. This secondary rebellion by Satan’s cohorts, occurred about 22,000 BCE when Cain’s descendant evil Lamech – not Noah’s father – was born (Article: Na’amah). Righteous Enoch from Seth’s (and Noahs) line, was born in 21,175 BCE. This was interestingly, during the age of Aquarius, between 23,930 and 21,770 BCE. Our current age is also the age of Aquarius and began in 1990.

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 53, 57-59, 61-63, 67, 132-133 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Mespotamia was the fertile ground from whence sprang all the legends and stories associated with dragons. It is here that we will find the first allusion to flying serpent-gods [Seraphim in the Bible] as dragons. After the Deluge, there was a terrible period of struggle when the serpent-gods fought among themselves in the sky, and when mankind retreated underground for shelter and survival. It was also the beginning of all the legends which associate dragons with precious stones. In a fragment from one of the earliest known Sumerian tablets… there is a description of the coming of the gods to this planet… when the earth was engulfed in a dense cloud cover. The reptilian nature of the gods is explicit… [with] no attempt to mask the nature of the gods with a metaphor’ – Article: Principalities & potentates: What they want… Who they are. ‘The most significant Sumerian term used to describe the flying serpent with flaming breath was U-SHUM-GAL…  Modern translators render the composite word as “dragon,” without further comment. However… SHUM means “flying serpent”… Because of the troubling indication that SHUM may represent a sky vehicle with flaming exhausts, traditional translators prefer to leave [as dragon]…’ – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

‘The functions of their early cities [during the First Time] would suggest that [the Anunna or Anunnaki] came [to earth] to obtain gold, silver, and other rare metals…’ -Article: The Ark of God – ‘When the Kingship had come down from heaven, [ANU] founded the five [first] cities… Eridu [1], he gave to the leader… [Enki]. Eridu was the first city built on the planet which probably gave our world its name – Earth…The origin of the word “Earth” is unknown and its origin lost in antiquity, but logically and linguistically it can be traced back to Eridu. For example, in Old High German, Earth is Erda; it is Erthe in Middle English, Era in Greek, Ereds in Aramaic, and Eretz in Hebrew… It was from Eridu that Enki [chief ‘Engineer and Geneticist’ god] directed all operations on Earth… the raising of the cities… agriculture, animal husbandry… mines… in Africa… transportation of ores and the processing of the ores* at Badtibira [2]. 

Larak [3] was… the space control centre for the complex. Sippar [4] was the platform for the space shuttles, especially those hauling metal cargo… the space activities were… [later] at Baalbeck in Lebanon’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘… Shuruppak [5]… was dedicated to… the goddess Ninhursag [the ‘Science and Medical Director’ god]. She was deeply involved with Enki in producing a primitive man to do the labor of the gods. Uruk was the… home of the great god An [Anu the Patriarch] when he was on Earth [during the First Time]… after the Deluge… the [re-built] city was taken over by Inanna, his [great grand daughter]… 

Nippur was the city of Enlil… he exercised supreme authority over all the Anunna on Earth… From the heights of the Ekur [house on the mountain], it was said that Enlil’s “eyes scans the land,” and “his lifted beam searches the heart of all the lands.” This is strongly indicative of a communications or control center. The city of Nippur was rebuilt after the Deluge but at a different location. Nippur is where… the Lord kept his shekinah or spacecraft… until the days of Enosh. Then he abruptly left for his heavenly abode, never to return except on special occasions. It was… at Nippur, at the river Chebar, that Ezekiel saw the “fiery chariot” described so vividly… [Ezekiel 1:4-28]. 

Every Sumerian city [after the flood] was dedicated to a major god, who served as its protector and benefactor. There was a special secure area with a great court wherein were the palace and temples. In the center was a ziggurat which overlooked the city. The ziggurat was a stepped artificial mountain or pyramid rising from the treeless plain. On its lower levels there were quarters for the priesthood. They controlled the whole wealth of the state; its ranks included archivists, teachers, scribes, scholars, mathematicians and other functionaries. Atop the ziggurat there was a sacred temple. In its center was an antechamber or cella, the “holy of holies” and was reserved for the gods to rest when they were on earth’ – refer article: The Ark of God

‘It was here that they mated with selected humans in order to produce a race of demi-gods [Nephilim and Elioud giants] to serve as the kings, generals, and other intermediaries. These acted as a buffer with mankind. All the great heroes of Mesopotamia claimed to be the issue of a god and a mortal. These beings were called “changelings.” The hero Gilgamesh often boasted that his mother [female god (angel)] was the goddess Ninsun. Another great hero, Sargon the Great of the Akkad Dynasty, also claimed to be a changeling and the child of a mortal and a goddess [female spirit (angel)].

Female fallen angel

Enosh means “mortal” or “human being”… during his era the ‘faces of man became ape-like [Cain’s line losing their reptilian DNA dominance]. “Enosh… begot Kenon or Cainan. Meaning “metalsmith” or “craftsman”… the second city built was called Badtibira or “city* for metal processing”… Kenon… begot Mahala’el… “praiser of the Lord”… Jared [4th generation after Seth] was the first Patriarch not to marry his sister… Jared… [may] mean “he of Eridu.” Righteous Enoch’s ascent to heaven… [led to him becoming] “divine” and [he] was made chief of the heavens, second to the deity himself.’

There are a number of salient points mentioned by Boulay. If the serpent gods and dragons made their presence known again after the Flood in a bid to restart what had been cut short by the deluge, then the reality of new Nephilim offspring, arises. These would be in addition to any Nephilim who had survived the Flood. This scenario has to be considered as a. there were a number of massive monolithic buildings all around the globe that date to the post-flood era, b. the heinous behaviour of Sodom and the other three cities of the plain which were destroyed would have been even more serious if a second irruption of Nephilim had occurred and c. it may explain the numbers of Nephilim and Elioud in the land of Canaan when the sons of Jacob arrived in 1406 BCE and the Creator’s instructions to ‘kill them all.’

If Gilgamesh, a legendary hero and Sargon I the Great, a historical king both had angelic mothers, it cannot be dismissed out of hand that Nimrod also had a dark Angel for a Mother. It at once offers an explanation while indelibly underscoring the repulsive nature of the act, why Nimrod would have been drawn to make his own mother his wife – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. Boulay curiously quotes that men during the time of Enosh – circa 25,000 to 15,000 BCE – the son of Seth and contemporary with Cain’s evil son Enoch, became more ape-like and less reptilian. Now this is quite an admission and as we will discover, does not pertain to the line of Seth but to the progeny of Cain.

Some of the gods we will encounter on our journey, include the following (with their primary symbols).

Ishtar, the daughter of Sin; represented by the eight pointed star and a lion.

Enki (or Oannes) was represented as the water god by a fish-goat and also as a ram.

Nergal, god of the underworld had a symbol of a winged lion with panther heads. The symbol of a winged lion was implemented by the Chaldeans and is still used by them today [Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans].

Marduk’s symbol was a dragon.

Adad had a symbol of a bull with forked lightening.

Sin, eldest son of Enlil was the Moon god, represented by the crescent moon.

Anu, Enki and Enlil were the three horned gods of a trinity – Article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning the Nephilim has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Nephilim & Elioud Giants II’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

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

‘… there were several prominent members of Freemasonry and the occult societies who were well aware of Genesis 6, the angels who sinned with human woman and the Nephilim. The Encyclopedia of Freemasonry states: “The legend of the Craft in the Old Constitutions refers to Nimrod as one of the founders of Masonry. Thus in the York Manuscript we read: “At [the] making of [the Tower of Babel] there was Masonry first much esteemed of, and the King of Babylon was called Nimrod was, a mason himselfe and loved well Masons.” 

Beginning and End, The Nephilim and the Great Secret of the Occult – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘What do the symbols of Freemasonry… mean? What is the mystery they have been concealing for centuries? The secret is The Fusion of Opposites What the occult societies… have concealed is that the path to attaining godhood and immortality is found in… the account of the fallen angelic Sons of God marrying the daughters of men and giving birth to the Nephilim giants – hybrid supermen who dominated the antediluvian world. The great expectation of the occult is a future age where the angels interact with humanity that can revive that era and turn men to gods‘ – refer articles: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?; and Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.’

Can you see the fusion of opposites?

‘… symbols were used to conceal secrets across cultures and generations. And what these symbols constantly reference is the… Fusion of Heavenly and Earthly realms. Freemasonry acknowledges this: “The Compass, as the Symbol of the Heavens, represents the spiritual portion of this double nature of Humanity… and the Square, as the Symbol of the Earth, its material, sensual, and baser portion” – Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma (Article: 33).

‘The compass (“sons of god”) fuses with the square (“daughters of men”) to create the demi-god or god-man… the ritual heiros gamos, which is a reenactment of the forbidden union between the Sons of God and daughters of men…. [and is the] ritual… depicted in the movie Eyes Wide Shut – a film about secret societies. Leonardo Da Vinci was… a member of esoteric societies and did conceal messages in his work. One of his lesser-known sketches is called “Angel in the Flesh.” In it he depicts an angel having both male and female reproductive organs (fusing two opposites).’

‘… Jacob saw a ladder which angels used to leave and return to Heaven. It was an intersection between the heavenly and earthly realms. In the occult, the symbol has been co-opted as a code for accessing the divine realm. The drawing of the double helix shape of DNA was published in 1952 by Nobel prize winner Francis Crick.’

‘However, in the mystery schools the shape of DNA has existed for centuries. Dr. Jeremy Narby, came to this very conclusion in his book The Cosmic Serpent – DNA and the Origins of Knowledge.’

‘Narby spent several years living in the Peruvian Amazon rainforest, studying indigenous cultures and their religious practices. He was stunned to learn that the shamans, who went into trances [fuelled] by ayahuasca, (a plant-based hallucinogen…) not only saw serpents in their vision, but drew figures of intertwined serpents… [looking] identical to the shape of DNA.’

Narby: ‘I… plunged into Mircea Eliade’s book Shamanism… and discovered that there were “countless examples” of shamanic ladders on all five continents, here a “spiral ladder,” there a “stairway” or “braided ropes” … “the symbolism of the rope, like that of the ladder, necessarily implies communication between sky and earth. It is by means of a rope or a ladder (as, too, by a vine, a bridge, a chain of arrows, etc.) that the gods descended to earth and men go up to the sky.” (pp. 62 – 63).

‘The consistent theme whether its shamanism or… occultists is that the path to “godhood” must come through some transformation of humanity right down to our DNA. What spirit inspires shamans in drug induced trances to see such images? A spirit of God? Or rather the spirit of fallen angels and demons.’

‘The Baphomet is one of the most famous symbols of the occult is a clear representation of the Fusion of Opposites. It is part-man, part-beast. One of its arms points up while the other points down. It has female and male body parts (like Da Vinci’s sketch) with a caduceus for its phallus. On its arms are written the terms “solve” and “coagula” a motto of alchemy. Alchemy is most known for its quest to turn lead into gold – but many state that is merely a metaphor for turning men into immortals’ – Articles: The Ark of God; and Thoth.’

‘Eliphas Levi made another, not as well-known drawing called The Star of David (there is no “Star of David” in the Bible)… [refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe] once again… this drawing is the fusion of opposites.’

‘… in Levi’s Star of David there is a snake with its tail in its mouth. This is the Ouroboros: “It is found in Gnosticism and alchemy representing cyclical natural life…” On the TV series The X-files, Scully, the skeptic FBI agent, was persuaded by a mysterious lover to get a tattoo. She chose to get an ouroboros on her back. The overarching theme of this series was the creation of alien-human hybrids. And Scully herself would one day be mysteriously impregnated with a baby she feared was part-alien.

The original “fusion of opposites” was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good And Evil in the Garden of Eden. It bore the one fruit that God warned Adam and Eve would lead to their deaths. [The Serpent] tricked Eve into thinking there was a path to immortality through disobedience to God and seeking one’s own way.’

The image is a clear reference to Adam and Eve with the DNA/serpent coiled around them

‘Like all the promises of the Devil, the “immortality” offered by the Antichrist will be a deception. It is salvation that turns a person from a condemned sinner to a son of the Holy God. No occult ritual can do it. No secret incantation can achieve it. Satan does not want people to know or consider this, lest they repent and believe. And thus [it] has devised all manner of false religious systems and mysteries to deceive and confuse the masses into thinking they can perform their way to being immortal or achieving Heaven on Earth.’

Beginning and End, The Nephilim and the Alien Gospel Deception – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Do aliens exist? Did aliens create the human race? Will aliens return to Earth? Is it possible that God and angels are extra-terrestrial aliens?’

Could an alien invasion be a part of the great delusion of the end times?

‘The Bible predicts that there will be a future time of supernatural events appearing in the sight of all people on Earth. Angelic beings and demons will manifest in view for all to see. So, in the face of this how could people still not believe in the supernatural as described in the Bible? What would cause them to doubt? The answer could be the Alien Gospel Deception – the false idea that alien beings from another planet created the human race millions of years ago and will one day return to save us from our own destruction.’

‘… any alien, extra-terrestrial being or “UFO” are actually manifestations of a spiritual realm being… in the first few chapters of the Bible it is well-established that heavenly realm, supernatural beings interacted with humanity. However, this has not stopped Hollywood or the secular community from promoting the notion that beings from another planet are real and that even the Biblical account can be explained by replacing God with an alien race.

The Ancient Aliens television series has been one of the most influential shows in promoting the notion that aliens were responsible for the creation of humanity, technology and the many ancient megaliths that still stand all over the Earth. And on many occasions, they even go to Bible passages to preach their false message of aliens being the true creators… With high quality production and subtle suggestions, they quickly try to cast doubt on the Biblical account and raise the possibility of alien beings actually being the reason for the ancient books of Scripture.

Prometheus directed by Ridley Scott, was one of the biggest films of recent years to push this concept to the masses. The movie was about a team of scientists and astronauts who head into space to locate an alien race… from the onset the message is clear – alien beings created humanity. Ridley Scott made no secret that explaining away religion was a big part of the message of the film.

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools…” – Romans 1:18-22.  

‘This passage reveals that all people know, intuitively, that God exists. The revelation can come just from observing nature and the cosmos. But because of our sinful nature, we reject God, and some deny His very existence… Scott was so determined to challenge the Bible in his film, he admitted that in an early version of the script of Prometheus, [he] originally planned on depicting Jesus as a space alien “emissary” who really came to Earth to aid humanity’s “evolution”…’

Movies.com: “You throw religion and spirituality into the equation for Prometheus, though, and it almost acts as a hand grenade. We had heard it was scripted that the Engineers were targeting our planet for destruction because we had crucified one of their representatives, and that Jesus Christ might have been an alien. Was that ever considered?”

RS: “We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose. But if you look at it as an “our children are misbehaving down there” scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control… And you can say, Lets’ send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it. Guess what? They crucified him.”

‘The ABC series “V” left no doubt that it was promoting the mingling of human DNA with the “gods.” … “V” in which an alien race appears on Earth offering supernatural healing of diseases, advanced technology and world peace… the aliens quickly take the place of any religion and even the priest on the show argues that they can [be] received as “saviors.” The aliens are worshiped and treated as gods. The arrival of the spaceships above New York City cause seismic tremors so strong that an enormous crucifix is shaken from the wall of a church and shown smashing to the ground – a barely subtle symbol of the superiority of “alien gods” over Jesus Christ.’

‘In one episode the alien leader visits the Vatican, where Catholic leaders make a pact to work with the aliens. The real Vatican has already acknowledged the possibility of alien life on other planets. And Pope Francis, who has endorsed many heretical doctrines and one world religion, has said that not only could aliens exist but that they should be baptized for salvation if they desire it.

All the while the aliens plot to manipulate human DNA for control of humanity. And the key to the conquest by the alien race is conceiving an alien-human hybrid. The aliens regularly seduce humans to achieve this goal. In the series finale, it is the human-alien hybrid child who can guide the thoughts of the entire global population, reducing humanity to mind-controlled zombies who surrender to their alien gods. Such a corruption of humanity is precisely what the Devil sought to accomplish in Genesis 6 when the rebel Sons of God took human women as wives. It was a plot to destroy the human genetic code and thwart any chance of redemption by the Promised Seed of the Woman.

The SyFy mini-series “Childhood’s End”, one of the most disturbing alien [productions] of late, centered on an alien arrival where the invaders also proposed that they wanted to help mankind and solve all of our problems: For the first few years of the alien arrival, they do not reveal themselves to society – instead appointing a human to serve as their “messenger” delivering their message to the world. After earning the trust, admiration and worship of humanity, the alien leader reveals himself as a common depiction of Satan:

‘Despite looking like common conception of The Devil, the alien leader… was well-received by the public. The entire agenda of the aliens is to take all of the children of the Earth and give them godlike powers allowing them to form a collective consciousness. Thus all of the adults on Earth become obsolete and are killed.

The Bible is clear that in the final years before the Second Coming of Christ, God will permit the overwhelming majority of the world to fall victim to the greatest deception of all time belief that the Antichrist is the actual Messiah and God. The Book of Revelation describes in detail that the Antichrist will rule over a global government in which he is installed as global dictator and deity to be worshiped. And the world will be awed and enamoured with their supposed “saviour” – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod

‘The Lord Jesus Christ said that during the end times we would witness: “Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.” (Luke 21:26). The “powers” of Heaven are a reference to angelic beings, who will be removed from their current stations and cast to Earth. Could these beings present themselves as aliens from another planet? Rather than pointing to God, could these end times deceivers instead deceive humanity into thinking they are superior life forms from another world who “seeded” Earth and gave birth to humanity and that the Antichrist is their chosen leader, emboldening the global populace to embrace the spawn of the Devil as their hero? 

One of the most revered UFO researchers of all time would seem to agree. John Keel was a legendary ‘UFOlogist’ (although he grew to dislike this term and preferred to be called a “Fortean”). Keel, a Korean War Veteran, foreign radio correspondent, Army Staffer and very successful Hollywood writer, coined the term “Men in Black” and is the author of the book, The Mothman Prophecies… Keel, who died in 2009, spent years interviewing hundreds of people who claimed encounters with aliens or UFOs all over the country. He studied tens of thousands of reports on UFO sightings. Not only is he considered one of the foremost UFO/alien researchers in history, several films have been made about his work. His research into aliens and UFOs was the basis for much of the plot of the TV show “The X-Files” and many science fictions writers speculate that the main character Fox Mulder was based on John Keel.

What is significant about Keel (and possibly why his name is not more renowned today) is that as he continued his research into the alien/UFO phenomenon, he changed his perspective entirely. As he stated in his acclaimed book ‘Operation Trojan Horse’: “Throughout most of history, the manifestations of demonology and demonopathy have been viewed from a religious perspective and explained as the work of the Devil. The bizarre manipulation and ill effects described in the demonological literature are usually regarded as the results of a great unseen conflict between God and the Devil. 

In UFO lore, the same conflict has been observed and the believers have explained it as a space war between the “Guardians” (good guys from outer space), who are protecting our planet, and some evil extraterrestrial race. The manifestations are the same, only the reference is different. The literature indicates that the phenomenon carefully cultivated the religious frame of reference in early times, just as the modern manifestations have carefully supported the extraterrestrial frame of reference.

Keel’s conclusions line up with the Bible. Any appearance of sighting of analien” or “UFO is nothing more than a manifestation of a fallen being from the spiritual realm whether demon or angel. Keel, who was not even a Christian, was able to understand the reality of spirit beings which Scripture teaches exist and can lure us into sinful rebellion. Even the Antichrist and False Prophet will dispatch demons to entice the leaders of the world to come wage war against The Lord Jesus Christ Himself. This should underscore the persuasive power of these beings and how they could accomplish a global delusion.’

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, page 27 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The typical Grey alien has the appearance of a 3 to 4 month old human [foetus] grown to higher proportions. They have reptilian genetics activated and an artificially implanted soul-personality, similar to an android or robot. They are not a natural species; they are an artificially developed race based on human [foetuses]… they have no hormonal development, requiring soaking in human hormones and blood for nourishment. They have no digestive system… just as human foetuses do not… still connected to the mother.

When I was in the Montauk Project… I was told… “The Universe is hostile, its not peaceful. There is no love, light, and peace in the Universe; everyone is fighting everyone else for control. The Reptilians, or Draco [Seraphim], want to assimilate all beings into their empire.”

The sinister agenda of the powers that be, intended for humankind – in final fulfilment of the mark of the Beast – is the re-creation of Homo nephilus.

Sharon Gilbert – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The genetic manipulation that began in Mesopotamia’s earliest days not only precipitated the Flood of Noah’s time, but it continued afterward… remember, Genesis tells us that the mingling of angelic DNA and human DNA began before the flood, but it continued “after.” Noah’s perfect DNA grew corrupt in most lines, but God preserved a “perfect,” kingly line that ended with Mary and her miraculous Son, Jesus Christ.

… some unlucky humans have seen what may be one modern version of the ancient “dragon.” To these contactees, the skies sometimes reveal terrifying, shining crafts bearing unearthly occupants whose singular purpose is to breed with mankind. Yes, it might be debated whether these abductions involve aliens from beyond our stars, aliens from beneath our oceans, demons pretending to be one or both, or even the lies of our own government, but this matters not. Whether alien, demons, or government shadows, people are being contacted and convinced that their DNA is extracted and used in breeding experimentation… whatever the source of these encounters, they are part of an overarching spiritual war. Demonic entities and fallen angels are still attempting to tweak mankind’s DNA…

Once their bodies died, the Nephilim’’ spirits did not go to sheol… it appears. Instead, they attached themselves to the earth, waiting for flesh to inhabit. When we read that angelic hybridization returned after the flood, then it could be that angels continued to fall (for those pre-Flood fallen angels had been chained for their sins),and/or that the spirits of the Nephilim (demons) now plagued mankind, not only by inhabiting him (possession) but also by re-creating him through genetic manipulation!’

Chris Putnam & Tom Horn – emphasis: 

‘Unnatural forms of life first sprang up in ancient days and, according to the Bible, this is a repeatable phenomenon… Therefore, we shall show unequivocally that the question is not whether humans were, can be, or are being hybridized, but whether alien/demon agencies are involved in the process. If so, does this imply something very uncomfortable, which most of us do not want to think about – that a form of “human” exists that quite possibly cannot be redeemed?

Indeed, almost immediately following the Great Flood, Scripture confirms the return of hybrid humans, including Og, the King of Bashan… Anak and his Anakim; and other beings among the tribes of Emim, Horim, and Zamsumim… Does this suggest that the Nephilim offspring were intentionally being bred down in size with each generation, thus allowing for eventual seamless, secret integration among human societies of pseudo-humans with “corrupted” genetic code?’

Gary Stearman – emphasis mine: 

‘When did this happen the first time, and who did it? The clear answer is given in Genesis, Chapter Six, in the record of the fallen angels who mingled their seed with the seed of mankind, resulting in a societal monstrosity that God was forced to destroy in the Flood of Noah. There is growing historical evidence that the entire creation – human and animal – was tainted.

Daniel’s prophecy [Daniel 2:42-43] tells us that just before the giant statue’s iron legs [feet] crumble (in the days of the Great Tribulation), fallen angels will descend openly to Earth once again. Then, they will repeat their evil work…. to infiltrate the genome of mankind. They know that if human seed can be corrupted, it will render God’s plan of redemption null and void.

[T]hose with eyes to see can understand that an alien force is now infiltrating the human race, with the express purpose of creating human-alien hybrids, some of which are indistinguishable from pure human beings. We have arrived at the heart of this unmentionable topic: human/alien hybridization.’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver, 2017, pages 332-334 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… geneticists have recently begun editing our DNA. There will undoubtedly be a huge number of edits to come. Eventually, we should see the eradication of conditions like spina bifida that we can’t get rid of any other way… Once we fully understand what we’re doing, it should be possible to modify absolutely anything… we could take the genes for regenerating limbs from lizards and splice them into ourselves [embryos]. We already have those genes, but ours aren’t active, so it might simply be a case of replacing like for like. In a few generations time, losing a limb might no longer be a life-changing-issue… [as well as being] able to prevent or reverse ageing by extending the length [of] our telomeres – geneticists have already had some success with this.

Many people will object to these changes. In the future, this could lead to two separate human species: those who welcome and embrace all the changes and thus become superhuman [Homo novus superior]; and those who resist them and insist on remaining pure. I can foresee the superhuman out-competing the pure ones, whose numbers will dwindle as a result until they become extinct [more likely, exterminated]. But alongside the rise of the superhuman, we’ll also have the rise of intelligent machines

So we can expect to see brain-machine interfaces, cyborgs (people who are part machine) [Homo machina], and robots running human brain software as their operating system. That will make things like deep space exploration a lot less complicated. Intelligent robots might also replace us on Earth, becoming soldiers, miners, doctors, surgeons, maintenance staff at nuclear power stations, and more. They’ll be better at it than us, and they’ll be able to go into situations that would harm us. Will they eventually be treated as a species in their own right? What happens when their brains become superior to ours? That’s only a matter of time.’

A confronting and challenging future awaits the myriad peoples inhabiting the globe. A destiny which seeks to strip away the very humanity that makes humankind human. A closer look at who is behind all this is tantamount. Coupled with why there has been an aeons long cosmic galactic struggle, in which we collectively and inextricably find ourselves. 

There are two opposing forces in the Universe. One comprising goodness, light, love, peace and selflessness. The other is composed of the absence of these attributes; so that evil, darkness, hate, violence and selfishness are its hallmarks. The principle players of the righteous path, include the Ancient of Days, the Son of Man and Michael. And introducing the two Witnesses, who make a dramatic late entrance. Unless of course they are faithful servants who have been a. specially prepared; b. had unconventional lives; and c. mysterious passings from this world. Six people who fit these criteria include: righteous Enoch, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, John the Baptist and Melchizedek.

Their adversarial nemeses formed from the rebellious path, are Satan the Devil, Samael, Azazel and Lilith. And like the two Witnesses perhaps, making a guest re-appearance: Nimrod.

We will discover that apart from Michael – and the two Witnesses? – all have multiple names and titles, which at first, may appear confusing when differentiating them. Each will be addressed in turn and keep in mind that these are the main ten principle entities in this dramatic story we are about to unfold. 

Even though one being is mentioned in the scriptures as an Archangel, which is Michael, Talmudic lore numbers a handful of archangels including a supreme light-bearing Samael. Samael is synonymous with the seducer, the destroyer, the accuser of particularly the sons of Jacob, whom Michael defends and has been regarded as both good and evil in various texts. It would be easy to then confuse Samael with being Satan the Devil, though this is not the case. That said Samael is a both a serpent and a devil like Satan. We will spend time investigating the Adversary, as well as Samael – as we have in part previously, with Azazel and Lilith with whom we shall return (refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: Lilith).

Satan as the Serpent of Old, represents the path of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden story and yet it was not this Serpent who thrust the Way of this Tree deceivingly on Eve, Adam and ensuing humanity. 

Surprisingly, we have already introduced Samael (the Serpent of Eden) when we discussed Samyaza – Samyaza, the leader of the two hundred myriad (two million) Watchers (refer article: Na’amah). Samyaza means ‘covering’ or ‘that which covers’ – refer article: The Ark of God. Interestingly, it can also mean, ‘the beast that is covered.’ His name can be rendered as Shemyazaz which means, ‘the shining one who covers himself with light.’ Remember these definitions, for we will study a famous biblical personage who both covers and brings forth light.

Conclusions on Samyaza’s identity have led other researchers to claim Samyaza is Satan, Lucifer or even Azazel. Yet Samyaza and Azazel are mentioned in the same passage in chapter seven of the Book of Enoch as two separate beings. Azazel as a captain and prefect of other Watchers, as well as the deputy to Samyaza, the undisputed leader of the Watchers. 

We will successfully rule out Satan as being Samyaza, though the suggestion of Lucifer, a descriptive title rather than a personal name is with merit and worth pursuing later. What has not been readily considered is that Samyaza and Samael are one and the same. Samael is of immense importance in Satan’s hierarchy and is the highest ranking cohort after Satan. His role as head of the Watchers and responsibility in implementing the plan to sabotage the genetic integrity of humankind is not to be relegated in its magnitude. Samael’s role was the head and commander-in-chief of the entire army of the lesser satans, or ‘adversaries’ as well as the principal Angel of Death. As the ‘Venom of God’, Samael was the vengeful hand of the Creator and yet still, His formidable enemy. With Satan, Samael is an ancient adversary and arch-nemesis of the Eternal.

While Samael is the loyal servant of the Adversary, it remains the role of Satan the Devil, who is the prime member of the heavenly host involved with all activities grim and destructive. A Serpent had a devastating role in the Garden of Eden, engineering the transformation of Adam and Eve from fully spiritual creatures into becoming spirits trapped within physical bodies – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?

For Satan was at once opposed to their creation and to serving them. Tradition says the Devil would not acknowledge Adam’s potential as an heir to the Creator and a future son of God. Nor would Satan agree, to what it perceived would be honouring in deference a lesser entity beneath itself.

Though it is well established that Satan is allegedly the Serpent who tempted Eve, some commentators correctly, do not agree. It is proposed that the snake was not a form of Satan, but rather another serpent, a different separate beast from the field. The contention by most in disagreement, is that the serpent was Lilith – a dark fallen angel and sister to her twin, Azazel. Lilith is reputed to be the first wife of Adam. She was not happy with her role in being subservient to Adam and fled. She apparently returned to the Garden of Eden to find Adam married to Eve and therefore vowed revenge by tempting Eve, taking the form of a serpent. That is, with a snakes tail from the waist down, similar to a Gorgon or Medusa. Lillith has subsequently been known as a succubus – a seducing night spirit – as well as the Mother of Demons – refer article: Lilith. Alan Alford says regarding the Serpent:

‘… the literal meaning of the Hebrew word for the Biblical Serpent [is] – nahash. This term comes from the root NHSH which means “to find things out, to solve secrets.”

We will investigate this aspect of a serpent further and confirm who the identity of the Serpent in the Garden of Eden really was. Satan heralded the onset of a dark, war-ravaged epoch. Though the instigator of the rebellion against the Most High; significantly, others may have not turned aside all at the same time with the Devil. There was a time far beyond this, consisting of pure light and genuine peace. During this blissful period, two events occurred which contributed to the seeds of our present difficulties – the forming of the physical Universe, our solar system and with it, the beginning of Satan’s heart turning to deceit. One version of events is as follows.

Everything you know is still wrong, Lloyd Pye, 2009 & 2017, pages 379-381, 383-391, 403-404 – emphasis &  bold mine:

‘The Sumerian “Epic of Creation” is… called Enuma Elish… [and] means “When in the heights.” [The Genesis account of creation is considered to be based on these six tablets and the origin of the] glitch in Genesis that causedcreationto be reported as occurring in six literal days rather than in six varied periods lasting an indeterminate number of eons. [The Enuma Elish is] an allegorical account of our solar system’s formation… [and this is] my… interpretation… 

‘”In the beginning” the Sun, Mercury, and a large planet called “Tiamat” [the watery planet] were formed. Next formed were Venus and Mars, taking places between Mercury and Tiamat.’

There is reason to consider that Venus was not original to the early Solar system but a later arrival as a detached and lost moon of Jupiter – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. Mercury also contains anomalies which give pause to consider its origin in greater detail. In that, either it too is a displaced moon or due to its over sized core, a once larger planet – refer article: Thoth. Added to these inconsistencies – as discussed – is the fact that Saturn was the first sun of our Solar System.

Pye: ‘Then came Jupiter and Saturn, with Pluto originally formed as a moon of Saturn. Uranus and Neptune were the last to be formed. Once the solar system was established but still primordial… another planet… approached from deep space. Nibiru was unattached and isolated, possibly sent hurtling through the galaxy by its protosun exploding during formation… Nibiru was as large as Tiamat (which was smaller than Saturn but larger than Uranus or Neptune), and it came in on or near the ecliptic from a clockwise direction, as opposed to the other planet’s counterclockwise motion.’

‘In the January edition of The Astronomical Journal, scientists at Caltech explained… of their… mathematical proof that there must be another planet in our solar system… estimated to have an incredible 10,000 year orbit, be somewhere between the size of earth and Neptune, and unlike all of the other planets, it is on an elliptical orbit.’

Note rogue planet Nibiru was presumably not as big as Tiamat – which was bigger than Neptune/Uranus – yet the resulting collision was enough to split Tiamat in two, with a sizeable Earth and much debris in the asteroid belt.

Pye” ‘The new planet does not yet have an official name, though many call it “planet 9” [Nibiru and formerly Planet X prior to the de-classification of Pluto from a planet in 2006], and it has not yet been found by one of the telescopes powerful enough to view it[?] In July 2017 the results of a new study by astronomers at Complutense University of Madrid were announced. They used an entirely different method of calculation, and – surprise, surprise – got exactly the same result as Caltech.’

Search for the Tenth Planet, Astronomy Magazine, December 1981 – emphasis mine: 

“Astronomers are readying telescopes to probe the outer reaches of our solar system for an elusive planet much larger than Earth. Its existence would explain a 160-year-old mystery. The pull exerted by its gravity would account for a wobble in Uranus’ orbit that was first detected in 1821 by a French astronomer, Alexis Bouvard… Astronomers at the U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO) are using a powerful computer… and a telescopic search… Van Flandern thinks the tenth planet may… lie 50 to 100 astronomical units from the Sun. (An astronomical unit is the mean distance between Earth and the Sun.)”

New York Times, June 19th, 1982 – emphasis mine:

“…[scientists at] the National Aeronautics and Space Administration… agency’s Ames Research Center said the… spacecraft, Pioneer 10 and 11… are already farther into space than any other man-made object… If the mystery object is a new planet, it may lie five billion miles beyond the outer orbital ring of known planets, the space agency said. If it is a dark star type of object, it may be 50 billion* miles beyond the known planets; if it is a black hole, 100 billion miles. A black hole is a hypothetical body in space, believed to be a collapsed star so condensed that neither light nor matter can escape from its gravitational field.”

Does the Sun have a Dark Companion? Newsweek, June 28, 1982 – emphasis & bold mine:

“… to explain quirks in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune… John Anderson of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California… suggests that the sun has an unseen companion, a dark star gravitationally bound to it… Other scientists suggest that the most likely cause of the orbital snags is a tenth planet…”

Uranus’ orbit was once further out than Neptune; in reverse of their present day positions.

A dark star is a hypothetical type of star that is thought to have existed in the early universe before conventional stars, powered not by nuclear fusion but dark matter annihilation which generates heat and prevents the star from collapsing.

US News World Report, 1983: ‘Last year, the infrared astronomical satellite (IRAS), circling in a polar orbit 560 miles from the Earth, detected heat from an object about 50 billion* miles away that is now the subject of intense speculation.’

New York Times, January 30, 1983 – emphasis & bold mine:

“Something out there beyond the farthest reaches of the known solar system seems to be tugging at Uranus and Neptune. Some gravitational force keeps perturbing the two giant planets, causing irregularities in their orbits. The force suggests a presence far away and unseen, a large object that may be the long-sought Planet X. The last time a serious search of the skies was made it led to the discovery… of Pluto, the ninth planet. But the story begins more than a century before that, after the discovery of Uranus in 1781 by the English astronomer and musician William Herschel. Until then, the planetary system seemed to end with Saturn.

As astronomers observed Uranus, noting irregularities in its orbital path, many speculated that they were witnessing the gravitational pull of an unknown planet. So began the first planetary search based on astronomers predictions, which ended in… [1846] with the discovery of Neptune almost simultaneously by English, French, and German astronomers. But Neptune was not massive enough to account entirely for the orbital behavior of Uranus. Indeed, Neptune itself seemed to be affected by a still more remote planet.

In the last 19th century, two American astronomers, Willian H. Pickering and Percival Lowell, predicted the size and approximate location of the trans-Neptunian body, which Lowell called Planet X. Years later [in 1930], Pluto was detected by Clyde W. Tombaugh working at Lowell Observatory in Arizona. Several astronomers, however, suspected it might not be the Planet X of prediction. Subsequent observation proved them right. Pluto was too small to change the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, the combined mass of Pluto and its recently discovered satellite, Charon, is only 1/5 that of Earth’s moon. Recent calculations by the United States Naval Observatory have confirmed the orbital perturbation exhibited by Uranus and Neptune, which Dr. Thomas C Van Flandern, an astronomer at the observatory, says could be explained by “a single undiscovered planet”. He and a colleague, Dr. Richard Harrington, calculate that the 10th planet should be two to five times more massive than Earth and have a highly elliptical orbit…”

Planet 9 (Nibiru) at five times the size of Earth would be bigger than Uranus, which is four times bigger though not as big as Saturn which is nine times larger than Earth. Even so, some estimates place the mystery planet at the far reaches of our Solar System as ten times larger – somewhere between the size of Saturn and Jupiter, which is eleven times bigger than Earth.

Mystery Heavenly Body Discovered, Washington Post, December 31, 1983 – emphasis & bold mine:

A heavenly body possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it would be part of this solar system has been found in the direction of the constellation Orion by an orbiting telescope aboard the U.S. infrared astronomical satellite. So mysterious is the object that astronomers do not know if it is [1] a planet, [2] a giant comet, [3] a nearby “protostar” that never got hot enough to become a star, [4] a distant galaxy so young that it is still in the process of forming its first stars or [5] a galaxy so shrouded in dust that none of the light cast by its stars ever gets through.”

The five options all bear consideration. Number four and five appear less likely. While number two is feasible for a few reasons – such as the most probable colliding candidate – the idea of intelligent life inhabiting a comet does not seem likely either. Hence why number one is the traditional explanation, in light of the Anunnaki supposedly originating there.

The third option – like a dark star – is an intriguing thought considering the biblical analogy between stars and spirit beings. Stars form from massive clouds of cold gas and dust. Once a protostar gains enough mass for the corresponding pressure in its core to heat it to temperatures high enough for fusion, the energy created generates an opposing pressure that prevents further collapse and so a stable star is born.

In resemblance of the enigmatic Planet 9, protostars because they are usually surrounded by dust – which blocks the light that they emit – are difficult to observe in the visible spectrum. Protostars are key in the formation of planetary systems; where protoplanetary disks surrounding protostars contain the raw materials from which planets, moons, and other celestial bodies are formed. These aspects of a protostar are interesting in light of the impact Nibiru may have had on Earth’s history more than once.

“The most fascinating explanation of this mystery body, which is so cold it casts no light and has never been seen by optical telescopes on Earth or in space, is that it is a giant gaseous planet, as large as Jupiter and as close to Earth as 50 billion miles. While that may seem like a great distance in earthbound terms, it is a stone’s throw in cosmological terms, so close in fact that it would be the nearest heavenly body to Earth beyond the outermost planet Pluto [and still within the gravitational influence of the Sun].”

“If it is really that close, it would be a part of our solar system,” said Dr. James Houck of Cornell University’s Center for Radio Physics and Space Research and a member of the IRAS science team. “If it is that close, I don’t know how the world’s planetary scientists would even begin to classify it.”

“The mystery body was seen twice by the infrared satellite as it scanned the northern sky from last January to November, when the satellite ran out of the supercold helium that allowed its telescope to see the coldest bodies in the heavens. The second observation took place six months after the first and suggested the mystery body had not moved from its spot in the sky near the western edge of the constellation Orion in that time. “This suggests it’s not a comet because a comet would not be as large as the one we’ve observed and a comet would probably have moved,” Houck said. “A planet may have moved if it were as close as 50 billion miles but it could still be a more distant planet and not have moved in six months time.

Whatever it is, Houck said, the mystery body is so cold its temperature is no more than 40 degrees above “absolute” zero, which is 459 degrees Fahrenheit below zero. The telescope aboard IRAS is cooled so low and is so sensitive it can “see” objects in the heavens that are only 20 degrees above absolute zero. When IRAS scientists first saw the mystery body and calculated that it could be as close as 50 billion miles, there was some speculation that it might be moving toward Earth.”

In Newsweek, July 13, 1987, NASA disclosed there might be a 10th planet orbiting the Sun. NASA research scientist John Anderson: ‘… if he is right, two of the most intriguing puzzles of space science might be solved: what caused mysterious irregularities in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune during the 19th Century? And what killed off the dinosaurs 26 million years ago.’

In the Astronomical Journal, Richard Harrington in 1988 wrote that a planet three to four times the size of Earth existed; having a position three to four times further from the sun than Pluto. According to mathematical models it is believed that Planet X or Nibiru has an extremely elliptical orbit of 30 degrees.

An AP article, October 23, 1996, New Rebel Planet found outside the Solar System, stated: ‘A new planet that breaks all the rules about how and where planets form has been identified in orbit of a twin star about 70 light years from Earth in a constellation commonly known as the Northern Cross. The new planet has a roller coaster like orbit that swoops down close to its central star and then swings far out into frigid fringes, following a strange egg-shaped orbit that is unlike that of any other known planet.’

It was in 2008 that Japanese researchers announced according to their calculations, that there should be an ‘undiscovered’ planet at a distance of approximately 100 AU [astronomical units] with a size of up to two-thirds of the planet Earth.

Pye: ‘As Nibiru [Planet 9] neared the solar system, it was drawn from its headlong path by the electromagnetic/gravitational pulls of Neptune and Uranus. All three bodies were still… plasmic (unsolidified), so their increasing nearness created electromagnetic disturbances that culminated in a bulge forming at one side of Nibiru. By the time it reached Uranus, enough material had been drawn from its body to create four moons orbiting it. When it reached the far more powerful gravitational fields of Jupiter and Saturn, it was drawn even more toward an orbit around the Sun. [With] three more moons [total seven] pulled from its body… orbiting around it.

Small Venus and smaller Mars had little effect on it, but soon it faced an object its own size – Tiamat. That confrontation created more electromagnetic disturbances, which caused Tiamat to produce eleven new moons, the chief among them called “Kingu” [purportedly our present Moon, though Kingu is more likely to have been one of Nibiru’s (seven) moons]. Now Nibiru was fully in the grip of the Sun’s powerful gravitational forces and its fate was sealed: it had been captured as a new member of the solar system; new, but unlike any of its other natural siblings. It would have an orbit and sidereal period completely unrelated to any of theirs, making it unique in all the heavens. However it was not safe and secure in its new orbit.

While being captured by the Sun and sent on its first orbit around, Nibiru barely missed colliding with Tiamat. 

But several of its seven new moons… did smash into Tiamat… Those monumental collisions shattered the still-cooling protoplanet to its core, but left it physically intact. However, all but the largest of its eleven moons – Kingu – were swept away in Nibiru’s strong wake. On its next orbit through the solar system, Nibiru itself collided with previously cracked Tiamat, an event of such cataclysmic proportions it can barely be imagined. 

Chief among the results was a “mingling of the waters” of both planets*… Even more dramatic was that unlucky Tiamat was broken completely apartcleaved in half!’ We shall return to this point, which is described in the Old Testament. ‘After the cleaving, three major events occurred.

First, the remaining half of Tiamat was struck by one of Nibiru’s moons, which – combined with the ricochet effect of the collision with Nibiru – propelled it and its surviving moon, Kingu, into a new orbit between Mars and Venus. Then the plasmic body of the remaining half began slowly folding in on itself (as all fluid bodies do in space), becoming a new planet substantially smaller than the old Tiamat. (Whether Nibiru’s moon ricocheted away or melded with the new planet to become part of it is not made clear… though melding is most likely [as] the text does say in the earlier collisions Tiamat “devoured” the moons that struck it.) The new planet was Earth, and Kingu became its Moon.

The second major event was that the half of Tiamat struck by Nibiru’s “windshield,” so to speak, splattered into millions of smaller plasmic globs (some many miles wide but most mountain – to boulder – sized) while streaming into a long arc behind the speeding survivor of the collision. As those millions of globs quick-froze into rocks in the sub-zero vacuum of space (all with irregular shapes because none had enough mass to resist hardening long enough to form into a sphere), they established an equilibrium suspended between the Sun’s pull and the nearly equal (and much closer) pulls of Jupiter and Saturn. In other words, they became the Asteroid Belt in our solar system.

The collision’s third major effect was to ricochet Nibiru into a new orbit that carried it around the solar system in a giant “loop” (the precise word in Enuma Elish) that required 3,600 years to complete. It was also knocked off the ecliptic, which left it entering and exiting the solar system at an oblique angle that all but eliminated the chance of a collision with another planet. Its path around the Sun and through the solar system was established between Mars and the Asteroid Belt.’

Zecharia Sitchin, 2009 – emphasis & bold mine:

“So, You See, As Nibiru Orbits… No, that is not (yet) a quote from a report in the scientific journal Nature, but that is what the conclusion is of a study by six astronomers (including one from a NASA institute) published in the Journal’s July 16, 2009 issue. The Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter is presumed to be the remnant of ‘something’ that was there and broke up. So how come it includes bits and pieces of matter found only in the outer reaches of the Solar System? The enigma is compounded by the fact that these strange bits and pieces contain organic-rich matter. 

The group’s findings: These are bits and pieces of “primordial trans-Neptunian objects” left in the Asteroid Belt as orbiting ‘comets’ or ‘cometlike objects’ pass through it and collide with its asteroids, leaving behind a ‘footprint’. Substitute ‘Nibiru’ with its “organic-rich matter” for “comets or cometlike objects” as it passes periodically through the Asteroid Belt, and you get the true answer – another instance of modern science catching up with ancient knowledge.”

Pye: ‘Nibirus last act before settling into its new life as a permanent member of this solar system was to pass near Saturn on its way out and capture a large moon (“Gaga” in the text, now known as Pluto). It too was pulled off the ecliptic by an unspecified amount, but eventually found a home at 17 degrees above the ecliptic. Today we know Pluto has a tiny moon, Cahron unmentioned in the Enuma Elish… Pluto has assumed a wildly erratic orbit that sees it careen between deep space and inside the orbit of Neptune. Astronomers accept that its small size and strange orbit strongly indicate it began life as a satellite of one of the large outer planets, but they do not know which one, nor how it could have been removed to its current location. With Pluto’s capture from Saturn and removal to the far edge of the solar system, Nibiru had done its work of reshaping the Suns entire family.” All the members – now numbering 12 with the addition of Nibiru, Pluto, Earth (formerly Tiamat), and its Moon – settled into establishing the orbits needed to stabilize the entire celestial dynamic. And so they continue to this day.

Potential proof that at least some comets are the product of the Nibiru/Tiamat collision comes from analysis of a comet called “Hartley 2” that is on a short elliptical orbit that loops from almost as close to the sun as Earth, to just slightly farther away from the sun than Jupiter. In 2011, astronomers using the powerful Herschel Space observatory (a telescope) and infrared light were able to measure the composition of the water that was being released from the comet. The measurement was not based on salinity or mineral composition, but rather on Earth’s unique ratio of “heavy” and “light” water. Light water is normal water, H2O. Heavy water contains Deuterium (Hydrogen-2) instead of Hydrogen, and has the chemical symbol D2O.

… a subsequent investigation of the comet by NASA’s “Deep Impact” space probe in 2013… allowed an even closer look at the water composition, and led researchers to a startling conclusion: “We have evidence of two different kinds of ice in the core” a comet following an orbit eerily similar to Nibirus path when it collided with Tiamat (Earth), contains ice water that is a match to the water of Earths oceans, and a second different type of water.*

…the Sumerians… described Uranus and Neptune as “watery twins” with a “blue-green” colour… [in] 1986, when the Voyager satellite passed Uranus… for the first time… Uranus was watery (its surface was a kind of slushy ice) and it was coloured blue-green… [Uranus was discovered in 1781 by William Herschel. Prior to this there are at least seventeen surviving star charts complied by astronomers that show Uranus on them; but in each case it was mis-identified as a blue star]… in 1989, Voyager reached Neptune… [and] Voyager found Neptune was just as the Sumerians had claimed: a blue-green ball of slushy ice!’

The key aspects of this (mythical) cosmic encounter include the following:

a. Tiamat the precursor to Earth was a large planet – approximately the size of Uranus and Neptune – and was in orbit between Jupiter and Mars.

b. Nibiru (Planet 9) appears to be at least the size of Tiamat or significantly larger.

c. Nibiru’s second fly-by in the early Solar System hit Tiamat, sending one half into a new orbit between Venus and Mars, while the remainder became the asteroid belt.

d. When Nibiru left the Solar System it captured a moon from Saturn, which is now Pluto.

e. Nibiru has a path every 3,600 years between Jupiter and Mars.

Supposedly, the Moon (Kingu) was one of Tiamat’s moons, yet the composition of our Moon bears no resemblance** to Earth. It obviously has come from somewhere else. If not from Nibiru during their cataclysmic exchange, then from where?

The following points – reproduced from Ancient Code – are salient aspects of Nibiru’s past destructive power as well as a dire warning of what may fall upon humanity in the future.

  • Mythologically speaking, Nibiru has the appearance of a fiery beast, appearing in the sky like a second sun [Revelation 8:10-11].
  • Nibiru is a magnetic planet, causing the Earth to tilt in space as it passes.
  • Nibiru is believed to have four times the diameter of Earth and is 23 times more massive, a truly gigantic planet.
  • According to ancient texts, Nibiru is wrapped in a cloud of red iron oxide dust, making the rivers and lakes acquire a reddish colour [Revelation 8:7-8, 11].
  • It is believed that it would cause days of obscurity [and darkness – Revelation 6:12; 8:12] while passing next to other planets, possibly even stopping their rotation during its transition across space due to its incredible magnetic properties.
  • Nibiru is also associated with great dangers. Some researchers believe if a planet like Nibiru came close to Earth, it would cause large earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions creating an entirely new geography and climate [Revelation 6:13-14; 8:10-11].
  • It is called “The Destroyer” in the Kolbrin, a parallel Bible: “Men forget the days of the Destroyer. Only the wise know where it went and that it shall return at the appointed time… It is the Destroyer… Its color was bright and fierce and ever-changing, with an unstable appearance… a fierce body of flames [Revelation 9:11].

Christian Negureanu – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The real cause of climate changes, volcanoes activity, intensification of the seismic activity etc., is [that] the planet [Eris is] getting closer to our solar system, intermediary named 2003 – UB-313, and known in Antiquity under various names as: Nibiru, Marduk, Nemesis, Hercolubus, the Gods Planet, the Planet of the Empire, the Planet of the Cross or the Red Planet.’

This writer does not necessarily concur with Negureanu at this point with assigning the identity of Nibiru (or Planet 9), with Eris (or UB-313), due to their vast difference in size.

Negureanu: ‘First observed on October 21, 2003 using the 1.22 Oschin telescope, at Mount Palomar Observatory (California). Discovered by Michael E. Brown, Chad Trujillo, David L. Rabinovitz, on January 5, 2005… Further observations published in October 2005 have shown a satellite named Dysnomia [(Gabriella)].

The planet Eris/ Nibiru periodically getting closer to Earth once in 3,600 years generates numerous climate changes, one being the global warming with its natural consequence – the melting of the glaciers. The effect of glaciers melting, because of their sweet water, will be the ending of the thermo – saline natural system, the “engine” that allows the Gulfstream circulation to the North and the freezing of spread areas in the North – West of Europe and North – East U.S.A’ – Article: Climate Change & Global Warming – Climate Crisis or a New Equilibrium?

‘Briefly, here is the process that took place during the last two periods in which the Gods planet has passed between Mars and Jupiter, the nearest point to Earth: 7,200 years ago [5175 BCE], during the cataclysm known as “Noah’s flood” [rather, the time of Peleg; 7727 to 4737 BCE; and the Tower of Babel; 6755 to 6232 BCE according to an unconventional chronology], “sudden changes in temperature, violent storms and water avalanches from Antarctica broke off from their ‘ice prison’.

Dr. John T. Hollin at Maine University (U.S.A.) considers that large pieces periodically came out of the Antarctic ice field creating a huge tide (Zecharia Sitchin, The Twelfth Planet). 3,600 years ago, during the… Exodus [1446 BCE = 3,471 years ago] from Egypt in the middle of the second millennium B.C., the Earth suffered big cataclysms. “A celestial body that recently entered our solar system – a new comet – came very close to Earth (causing) the eventual disappearance of the glacier layer“ (Immanuel Velikovsky, “Worlds in Collision”)’ – Article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

‘The current situation – the Poles glaciers’ melting is accelerating. The climate and geological changes will increase because the planet Eris/Nibiru has not even been close to Pluto, its nearest point to Earth. This is supposed to happen between 2012-2014… identical phenomena [is] also [taking] place on other planets from our solar system because of Eris/ Nibiru.

Here are few examples: The Neptune’s moon, Triton is warming (BBC Science & Technology News, July 25, 1999). Pluto experiences an extraordinary heating (Massachusetts Institute of Technology News, October 9, 2002). Volcanic eruption on Jupiter’s satellite Io (Icarus Astronomy, November 2002). The warming of Mars (ABC News, December 7, 2002). The warming of Saturn (January 28, 2007, Interstars).

[Scientists] of the UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) – physics and astronomy department and those at the University of Boston have noticed that the temperature of the superior atmosphere of Saturn is higher that estimated. Thus, professor Allan Aylward at UCLA considers necessary the reexamination of the main hypotheses regarding the planetary atmosphere and establishing the cause of the respective heating. He also noticed a similar process on Mars, concluding: “Studying the aspects within other planetary atmospheres will help us to find out clues of the Terra’s future.”

The Sumerian writings say that a satellite of the Nibiru planet hit another planet, Tiamat, creating the “Sky” (The Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter) and the Earth in the beginning of our solar system. Professor M. Brown has recently proved in the journal Nature that the planet 2003 – EL 61 [Haumea a dwarf planet the size of Pluto in the Kuiper Belt] suffered a terrible collision with another celestial body at the beginning of our solar system.

Eris’s area, 2,400 km +/- 97 km, measured by using images from the Hubble telescope, was made public at the end of April 2006. In… 1991, based on the data from the Apocalypse/ Revelation, I had given the dimensions of a possible planetary station: it was 2,400 km. The last book of the Bible contains details… [in] ([Revelation] chapter 21: 2, 12, 16) called the NEW JERUSALEM. a) diameter: 12,000 x 200 m (1 stadium) = 2,400 km. b) area: 2,400 km (length) x 2,400 km (width) x 12 (levels or floors) = 69,120,000 km2′ – Article: The Ark of God.

The final paragraph is of interest if accurate. The diameter of Eris also known as Xena, is 2,326 km, comparable to re-categorised Pluto, now a (controversial) dwarf planet at 2,376 km. Eris is two thirds the Moon’s diameter and one-third of its volume. Small planet Eris has a tiny moon called Dysnomia, nick named Gabriella. Eris was the Greek goddess of discord and Dysnomia a demon goddess of lawlessness and fittingly the daughter of Eris.

Stewart Swerdlow a researcher in the field of alternative world history, presents a different scenario, in that Venus was not present in the early formation of our Solar System. One that this writer would concur with. The hypothesis of Venus being a later addition to our solar system is supported by world renowned alternative historian and author, Immanuel Velikovsky. Most experts blind to their own folly, wrongfully viewed pioneering Velikovsky as a ‘pseudohistorical’ quack. 

Swerdlow proposes that humanoid aliens (Cherubim) from the Lyran star cluster fled after a Draco-Orion alliance of reptilian aliens (Seraphim) had destroyed three of their fourteen home planets. Lyrans entered our Solar System and colonised two planets, Mars and Maldek. With no Venus present and an Earth which was second from the Sun, Mars third and Maldek positioned fourth. Maldek was a large planet and had a highly ‘livable’ atmosphere as did Mars at the time. Mars had oceans like earth and seasons; thus displaying an axis tilt comparable to earth today. 

This writer would disagree in that a. Mercury was either a later addition as Venus was, or a larger planet which had been demolished, with its residual core hurled to a new orbit – again like Venus – and b. the planet Maldek, was not fourth from the Sun. But rather it location the actual following sequence, quoted from the article, Thoth and the second book of The Divine Pymander, called Poimandres, or The Vision:

“In this manner it was accomplished, O Hermes: The Word moving like a breath through space called forth the Fire by the friction of its motion. Therefore, the Fire is called the Son of Striving. The Workman passed as a whirlwind through the universe, causing the substances to vibrate and glow with its friction, The Son of Striving thus formed Seven Governors, the Spirits of the Planets [symbolised – in order of original positions – by 1. Mars, 2. Tiamat (now Earth and the Asteroid Belt), 3. Jupiter, 4. Saturn, 5. Uranus, 6. Neptune and 7. Maldek (now the Kuiper Belt)], whose orbits bounded the world; and the Seven Governors controlled the world by the mysterious power called Destiny given them by the Fiery Workman [Holy Spirit].”

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, pages 13-14 – emphasis & bold mine:

NASA now admits Mars once had a full atmosphere, oceans, and was similar to Earth. Mars has seasons. In the Martian springtime part of the northern polar ice cap retreats and greenery can be seen forming in the northern hemisphere. You can also see where the water used to flow [which is now beneath its surface]; there is still life that exists on Mars.

The Moon is an artificial object and it is hollow. The Moon does not spin or rotate; it is a [mechanically] fixed object with [suspiciously] one side always facing the Earth. The Moon’s orbit… stays in the same layer of space due to mass and gravitational pull. It is a vehicle parked in space like a satellite and without a magnetic field. The Draco colonised Earth from this vehicle. They started with the land mass now referred to as “Lemuria” [Pacific Ocean].’ 

While many may debate the last two sentences, there are a number of anomalies surrounding Earth’s enigmatic Moon – supporting Swerdlow’s comments. It is the only moon in the Solar System without a name and is simply called, the Moon.

The Moon certainly seems to be engineered, for on November 20, 1969, the Apollo 12 crew after returning to their command ship, intentionally sent the lunar module ascent stage crashing back onto the Moon’s surface – about 40 miles from the landing site – creating an artificial moonquake. The resulting impact was the equivalent to one ton of TNT. NASA scientists listened while ultra-sensitive seismic equipment recorded an unexpected and astounding occurrence.

The Moon reverberated like a bell for thirty or more minutes. The vibration wave took almost eight minutes to reach a peak, then decreased in intensity, something no one had expected. According to Ken Johnson – supervisor of the data and photo control department – the whole Moon wobbled in such a precise way that it was “almost as though it had gigantic hydraulic damper struts inside it.”

The Moon has elements it should not have. Is the Moon the creation of Alien Intelligence? by Mikhail Vasin and Alexander Shcerbakov from the Soviet Academy of Science in July 1970, asked: How is it possible that the surface of the moon is so hard and why does it contain minerals like Titanium? For contrary to the idea that heavier objects sink, heavier rocks are found on the surface. Lunar rock samples have contained ten times more titanium than titanium rich rocks on planet Earth. Scientists are unable to explain why. Traces of bronze, mica and amphibole were also found.

More mysteriously, lunar rocks have been found to contain the elements Uranium 236; and Neptunium 237, which never occur naturally in nature – because Uranium 236 is radioactive nuclear waste which is found in spent nuclear and reprocessed Uranium. Similarly, Neptunium 237 is a radioactive metallic element and the by-product of nuclear reactors and the production of Plutonium. Ancient Code: “You have to ask the question: What is happening on Earth’s Moon? From where do these elements and minerals come from?”

The Moon does not have a solid core. Researchers are almost unanimous that the Moon is hollow or has a very low-intensity interior. Curiously, the Moon’s concentration of mass is located at a series of points just below the surface. NASA scientist Gordon MacDonald in 1962 stated: “… astronomical data… require that the interior of the moon be less dense than the outer parts. Indeed, it would seem that the moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere.” Intelligent Life in the Universe, Carl Sagan, 1966: “A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object.”

Even more baffling for scientists – who are not aware of or either reject the Sumerian texts – is the fact that the Moon is older than Earth. Incredibly, our Moon is unlike any other satellite discovered in the known universe. According to some scientists the Moon is eight hundred thousand years older than the Earth. While the length of time proposed here is challenged, the fact remains that the Earth and Moon did not form at the same time; nor did the Moon originate** from the early Earth as would be expected.

Earl Ubell: ‘If the Earth and the moon were created at the same time, close to one another, how come one body, the Earth has great amounts of Iron, while the other body, the moon, has very little of it.’ Likewise, magnetized rocks have been found on the Moon – albeit not strong enough to pick up a paper clip – even so, there is no magnetic field on the moon. So where did the magnetism come from? Recall, Planet Nibiru is reportedly a ‘magnetic’ planet.

The Moon exhibits a unique orbit around the Earth. It is the only moon in the solar system which displays a stationary, nearly perfect circular orbit. It does not spin like a natural celestial body. In other words, our Moon does not share any characteristics with other moons found in our Solar System. From any point on the surface of our planet only one side of the Moon is visible. What is the moon hiding? The Moon maintains a precise position. What is keeping the moon in its nearly perfect sentry like post? With an exact altitude, course and speed, allowing it to function its purpose in relation to the planet Earth.

Is it also a coincidence that the Moon is at the right distance from Earth to completely cover the sun during an eclipse? Isaac Asimov: “There is no astronomical reason why the moon and the sun should fit so well. It’s the purest of coincidences, and only the Earth among all the planets is blessed in this way.”

William Roy Shelton: “It is important to remember that something had to put the moon in or near its current circular pattern around the Earth…” The question is: what was that something?

Ancient Code: ‘… the Moon should not be where it is… Everything points to the… Earth’s moon was in fact placed into its current orbit in the distant past. The Moon’s unnatural orbit and irregular composition raise hundreds of questions that neither NASA scientists, astronomers or geologists are able to answer… Despite all efforts to understand Earth’s “natural” satellite, the truth is that we have very little information about the Moon’s origin and purpose.’

Russian scientists Vasin and Shcherbakov ‘advanced the theory that the moon is not an entirely natural object, but a planetoid that was excavated eons ago in the depths of space by intelligent beings with a technology superior to ours.’

Earth was once completely covered by water and had a dense water vapour atmosphere which was unbreathable – Genesis 1:1-2, 9-10 – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, page 8 – emphasis mine:

‘The earth does not have an iron core that spins; that is fake science. The earth has a magma globe at the centre which acts like an inner sun. The North Pole opening is… 1,300 miles wide; the South Pole is around 950 miles wide. All planets have an interior surface. There are caverns and sometimes ways to get into the inner area of the planet; it is not all molten material’ – refer Hollow Earth – article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis. ‘The only exceptions are the large gas planets [Jupiter and Saturn]. Aircraft is restricted from flying directly over the North Pole, allegedly from the “magnetic interference with the aircraft”. This is not true; Global Handlers do not want you to see what is down there.’

These ideas about the inner Earth are not unique to Swerdlow. The phenomena of a mythical land inside our planet is a persistent idea, replete with supernatural beings with advanced technology. Jules Verne’s classic, A Journey to the Center of the Earth, may just have merit after all.

Plato spoke of a mythical inner world with long and narrow tunnels connecting the four corners of our planet. Survivors of Atlantis were rumoured to have gone deep underground. The Macuxi Indians who live in the Amazon, believe they are the descendants of the Sun’s children, the protectors of the ‘inner Earth.’ Oral legends speak of an entrance into the Earth where the Macuxies would enter a cavern, traveling thirteen to fifteen days until they reached the interior and ‘at the other side of the world in the inner Earth’ giants who are twelve feet tall resided.

Russian Physicist Fedor Nevolin suggested the Earth has a smaller Sun in its centre, providing an environment for life to flourish inside our planet. Leonard Euler, a mathematical genius concluded that the Earth was hollow, inhabited and contained a central sun. Edmund Halley, discoverer of Comet Halley and Royal Astronomer of England also believed that the Earth was hollow.

Ancient Code: ‘The Babylonian hero Gilgamesh visited his ancestor Utnapishtim in the bowels of the earth; in Greek mythology, Orpheus tries to rescue Eurydice from the underground hell; it was said that the Pharaohs of Egypt communicated with the underworld, which could be accessed via secret tunnels hidden in the pyramids; and Buddhists believed (and still believe) that millions of people live in Agharta, an underground paradise ruled by the king of the world.’

Scientific research has confirmed there is a large ocean of water located inside the mantle of the Earth. So much water it could fill the oceans on our planet up to three times. Added to this is the fact that the water located on the surface of our planet did not come from space but from within the Earth itself. Surprisingly, there is a mysterious source of oxygen deep in the mantle of the Earth. So vast that it influences the climate on the surface. 

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, pages 3-6, 40 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In the very beginning of our galaxy there were two main types of beings that existed. One was Draco, or the Reptilian beings that existed in the Draco star system; the other was the Lyreans… beings that exist in our solar system and galaxy, 70% are humanoid, 25% are Reptilian, and 5% are other types of beings.’ 

The Bible reveals a similar ratio of approximately 66% to 33% in Revelation 12:4 NET, “Now the dragon’s tail swept away a third of the stars [(reptilian) angels] in heaven and hurled them to the earth…” – Article: The Ark of God.

Swerdlow: ‘The Draco star system looks snake-like. If you count the stars there are 16. From a space perspective Draco and Lyra are relatively close by, but in reality they are light years away from each other. When you see Reptilian images and depictions on the Earth… there are blazing sun rays in the hieroglyphs and wall reliefs. There are 16 rays of the central sun, representing the Draco star system. 

Today, advertisements [including flags and heraldic devices] and corporate logos with radiating suns are symbolic representations of the Draco star system.’

Similar to a radiating sun is the sun disk. According to some accounts the disk depicts the celestial body of Nibiru. Frequent interpretations for this symbol however include comparisons with the sky, the sun, solar power and the renewal of life (eternity of the Spirit) or divinity, majesty and power. The winged disk is a stylized image of eagle’s wings. In ancient Egypt, the winged sun was associated with Ra and Horus. This may be in reference to the original Sun, Saturn and not our current star, Sol. Often it is accompanied by one or two uraeus of cobras on each side, and one or two Ankhs – Egyptian crosses.

Swerdlow: ‘The Reptilians… are not from the physical universe. The androgynous Reptilian form was the initial manifestation of a being in physical reality… Reptilians have a mindset that makes them feel superior because outside of physical reality there is no male/female separation, there is only energy. Because the Reptilians are androgynous with male and female incorporated in one body, there is no differentiation of the sexes. Energetically being male and female in the same body matches [God]. They believe that any species that has to differentiate between male and female is inferior, or further removed from the origin of [God].

Reptilians feel superior because reptilian DNA does not change over eons of time; it remains stable. Their mentality is that they are already perfect Reptilian [animal] species here on earth… rarely change… since prehistoric times, the Reptilian form has not changed much; this is true of the Draco species. Mammalian genetics have to constantly adapt, change and evolve. Reptilians do not change since they are already evolved, believing that they are more representative of [God’s Mind]. Reptilians… [have]… an agenda of occupation to assimilate all such [mammalian] beings into their Empire. In their mindset, this is their holy mission neither right or wrong. This is simply how they think. The Draco Empire is part of the “Orion Confederation.”

Further corroborating background on the Draco or in reality, rebellious Seraphim, is provided by Dee Finney, entitled, Draconians – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to Alex Collier: “… it was decided that the human life form was to be created in the Lyran system. The orientation of the human race in Lyrae was agricultural in nature… the Alpha Draconians and the Lyrans were afraid of each other… the Alpha Draconians were apparently the first race in our galaxy to have interstellar space travel, and have had this capability for 4 billion years… the Draconians came and saw Bila, with all its abundance and food and natural resources, the Draconians wanted to control it. There was apparently a mis-communication or misunderstanding… The Lyrans wanted to know more about the Draconians before some kind of “assistance” was offered. 

The Draconians mistook the communication as a refusal, and subsequently destroyed three out of 14 planets in the Lyran system. The Lyrans were basically defenseless. The planets Bila, Teka and Merck were destroyed. It is at this point in history that the Draconians began to look at humans as a food source’ – refer article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are – ‘This is how old the struggle is between the reptilian and [humanoid] races. The Draconians are the force behind the repression of human populations everywhere… instilling fear-based belief systems and restrictive hierarchies. The Andromedans consider the Draconians the “ultimate warriors,” in a negative sense.”

Moranae continues, “the Draconians are the oldest reptilian race in our universe. Their forefathers came to our universe from another separate universe or reality system. When this occured, no one really knows. The Draconians themselves are not really clear on when they got here. The Draconians teach their masses that they were here in this universe first, before humans, and as such they are heirs to the universe and should be considered royalty. They find disgust in the fact that humans do not recognize this as a truth. 

They have conquered many star systems and have genetically altered many of the life forms they have encountered [including humankind]. The area of the galaxy most densely populated with Draconian sub-races is in the Orion system, which is a huge system, and systems in Rigel and Capella. The mind set or consciousness of the majority of races in these systems is Service-to-Self [the path offered by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil], and as such they are always invading, subverting and manipulating less advanced races, and using their technology for control and domination

This is a very old and ancient war, and the peace that does not exist is always being tested by these beings, who believe that fear rules, and love is weak. They believe that those they perceive to be less fortunate, in comparison to them, are meant to be slaves. This belief system is promoted at birth in the reptilian races, wherein the mother, after giving birth, will abandon the offspring to fend for themselves. If they survive they are cared for by a warrior class that uses these children for games of combat and amusement.”

‘So, you can see that the reptilians are forever stuck in survival mode. This means they have no boundaries in what they will do to other beings. Morenae continues, “it is engrained in them never to trust a human. They are taught the Draconian version of the history of the ‘Great Galactic War’, which teaches that humans are at fault for invading the universe, and that humans selfishly wanted the Draconian society to starve and struggle for the basic materials that would allow them to exist.” The Reptilians enjoy human flesh, and human children best, for two reasons. The first is that children don’t have the accumulation of pollutants in their bodies that adults do, and when children are put into a state of fear, their energy…field and [adrenaline] just explodes. The reptilians get a “rush” from this stuff.

The Alpha Draconians, a reptilian race composed of master geneticists, tinker with life – which from their perspective exists as a natural resource. The Draconians look at lifeforms which they have created or altered as a natural resource. Apparently, the Alpha Draconians created the primate race, which was first brought to Mars and then to Earth [Planet of the Apes franchise comes to mind]. 

The primate race was then tinkered with by many other different races – 21 other races – resulting in the primate race having been modified 22 times. This primate race eventually became Homo Sapien Sapiens. – who we are on a physical level. Yes, we used to have 12 strands of DNA. Ten strands were taken out by a group from Orion in order to control us and hold us back. Why would they want to hold us back?

The reason the Orion group wanted to hold us back was because they found out who we were on a soul level. Again, according to the Andromedans [the Andromeda Galaxy, next to the Milky Way Galaxy] we humans are part of a group of energies that they know of as the Paa Tal. The reason that the Andromedans use the word Paa Tal, which is by the way a Draconian word, is because the Draconians have legends about warring with a race that was creating human life forms that were opposed to Draconian philosophy. The Paa Tal created life forms that could evolve on their own, with free expression. The Draconians, on the other hand, created races to function as a natural resource for their pleasure. So, you have two very different philosophies.”

The Draconians are a very large reptilian race, otherwise known as “the Dracs”. There is [a] royal line of the reptilian race called the Ciakar. They range from 14 to 22 feet tall and can weigh up to 1,800 pounds. They do have winged appendages and they are awesome beings [as fallen, dark angels]. They’re extremely clairvoyant and extremely clever, and they can also be extremely sinister. They apparently were brought by someone to our time and space, our universe, in full physicality, and [abandoned] here. They were taken to Alpha Draconis because the nature of that place gave them the best chance of survival. 

So, they were kicked out of some [different] place. They are a major factor to be reckoned with. They are for the most part Service-to-Self and do not care for the human race, because when they were [cast down] here they were told that this universe was theirs to command. They still have this mind set. They were one of the first races to chart our solar system, and in fact they were the first race to state that our solar system belonged to them.

… I understand that some of them have been coming back, and that more of them will be coming back. They have had space travel for 3 billion years, and they are a remarkable race. But, they have an attitude, and a lot of human races inside and outside our galaxy have had problems with them. They look like a 22 foot tall veloci-raptor, and they’re smart, intelligent and very different from us. They apparently at one time came across human colonies in Lyrae… the human race, per se, was not created in the Lyraen system. It was brought there to survive… from what the Andromedans have told me, for some reason once they go back 427 million years, they just don’t know what else is there… although the physicality is there, there is no history of races before that. At least, that they know of, in the Lyraen system. 

… the Draconians were flying through… [and] came across these human colonies, which were agricultural in nature. Because of their talents in horticulture, these humans were making the planets better, like gardens. When the Draconians came and saw this incredible wealth of food, they basically wanted to control it. Apparently there was a misunderstanding. The Lyraens wanted to know more about the Draconian race before they gave them what they wanted, and apparently the Draconians misunderstood this request, went back and attacked the planets, blew three of them up and killed a lot of people. The Lyraens were forced to migrate and scatter into different parts of our galaxy.

So, the action did facilitate colonization, although I wrestle with whether the Draconians were planted here specifically to force us to evolve, or that there is some other agenda here‘ – refer article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are. ‘I do know that there are other reptilian races that are descendants of the Draconians, and many of them are master geneticists. I am told that most of the dinosaurs were brought here, and to Mars, where they came first. Our current human form was crafted on Mars, where the primate and human genes were combined, and then brought to earth to work as slaves in the mines.’ 

“What is it about the human mind that causes some species to want to suppress us so much? What is it that is so unique to the genetic make up? Do they have free will in the same way we do?”

A: “I don’t know that it is so much our minds as it is our extremes of emotions and our essence. They have always stressed that the containment of emotion in physical form is what is most attractive, because they want this due to their loss of passion, and as a result they have become more dependent on technology. Here we are, getting deeper and deeper into physicality, when in fact we have the ability to just leave all of this behind. So, we are not correctly using our power as a race. We are wasting it. 

As far as our free will as compared to the free will of other races, it is one and the same. It’s just that we don’t as a population have the realization of the power of our collective free will. We don’t totally realize the sovereignty that our free will gives us. That is why they are manipulating us through belief systems in order to try and get [us] to relinquish our free will, by coercing us to use our own free will against us and ask them to come down here and control us. It’s a choice.”

‘There are many races belonging to the reptilian lifestream, a group far older than that of the human. The reptoids commonly witnessed by Earthlings, come from the Draco constellation; about eight feet tall, covered in lizard scales, with ferocious talons. They are quite a self-involved race, only interested in space exploration for the purpose of conquest. Many wars have been waged between the Draconians and humanoids in the past; the latter often becoming slave races to the former. Reptoids tend to be great warriors, owing to their physical strength, natural body armour, and firey temper. The Draconians do not maintain diplomatic relations with many planets, but are in contact with several other reptilian races. They are also in contact with the Global Elite, for the prospect of using this planet as a slave and food colony attracts them here’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? – ‘They have no respect for humans and would have invaded long ago if we did not have such outstanding support from our benign space brothers.

With seven different types of Draco races, the leader group is a seven to eight foot tall winged reptilian-type creature. The slender four to five foot Draco similar to a lizard performs menial tasks and aids in abductions. Harsh, warlike beings who feel little emotion, the Draco have no regard for culture or other beings. Most Draco are androgynous and reproduce by parthenogenesis, or cloning. One special group that is completely male creates hybrid races that conquer others. The Earths Moon is a Draco planetoid placed in orbit aeons ago during the time of the Lemurian colonization. With the intention to divide and conquer, they are known to be brutal… The Draco have vast underground bases on Earth and colonies on Venus.’

Dee Finney explains the Draconian agenda for humanity, which consists of mind control via Religion, leading towards total enslavement.

‘The first religion on Earth was the Reptilian belief system brought by the colonists of Lemuria. Their religion believed in a God-Mind that contained a hierarchy, or caste system. This caste system was extrapolated to the several Reptilian species incorporated into the Draco Empire. Each species had its own place in the structure of their society. Every individual knew its functions and respected these boundaries. To violate these rules meant death. The Reptilians operate as a group mind, meaning that no single Reptilian can make a decision for itself. Only the upper caste, or winged ones, have the semblance of individuality. They were, and are, the leaders.

When this religion was brought to Sumeria, the caste system was infused into society as a religious hierarchy. Remember that the colonists of Sumeria were refugees from Lyrae/Mars/Maldek. They, like the Atlanteans, maintained the original belief system of the Lyraen culture. The Lyraen belief system encouraged individuality, as well as promoted service to others as a pathway to self-growth. The Lyraens believed that red-haired people were connectors to God-Mind, and as such, used them as oracles.

The Reptilians worshipped the transparent beings from the astral planes as their creators. The transparent beings have a mass consciousness, like an Oversoul. They are basically genderless, although in terms of physical reality, their characteristics and traits render them more masculine than feminine. When the Reptilians brought this religion to the Sumerians, they were careful to introduce it in a way that would be accepted and followed. First, they created a gender base for a gender-minded population. Then, they instilled fear to control the mind-patterns. Cleverly, they devised a religion based on a male-female, god-goddess control system. The male god was called Nimrod; the female goddess, Semiramus. They are depicted as half-human, half-Reptilian. Their appearances were designed to frighten the humans into submission.

Nimrod and Semiramis eventually became the Osiris and Isis of Egypt, and the Apollo [Azazel/Sun] and Athena [Lilith/Venus] of Greece, among many other gods. All used the male/female, god/goddess theme because it represented the original Reptilian androgyny and the separation of the human prototype into the male/female, Adam/Eve.

Because of the “masculine” tendency of the transparent people, and despite being androgynous themselves, the Reptilians prefer the powerful male over the female. They represented their androgyny in Sumer by placing three horns on the Reptilian God, Nimrod. There are many layers of symbolism to this:

  • The penis and two testicles.
  • Two energies uniting to create a third, i.e., the human prototype.
  • The three levels of existence: hyperspace, astral, and physical.
  • The three levels of awareness: conscious, subconscious, and superconscious.
  • Androgyny leading to male and female sections.

Thus, the number three was an important symbol to the Reptilians on Earth. They represent this in many ways, including the lily, or fleur-de-lis with its three points. They also use the scorpion with its stinger and two piercing claws’ – refer article: 33.

The advanced version of the scorpion is the eagle, which represents the scorpion in its higher form. Because of this, the eagle came to represent raising from a lower form to a higher one’ – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. ‘It represented power and globalization. Because it was a bird of prey, it was able to capture everything beneath it, especially live food’ – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

‘For these reasons, the Romans always used an eagle on their staffs whenever they marched into a city or country’ – Chapter XXVIII The True identity & Origin of Germany & Austria: Ishmael & Hagar. ‘Most people do not realize that all birds are descendents of Reptilian dinosaurs. Many corporate logos and superheroes of today have wings attached to them’ – Article: Thoth. ‘The wings also represent the winged Reptilian leaders in the upper echelon of the Reptilian/Illuminati flowchart.

The original pyramids, built after the destruction of Atlantis, were energy points. They were the same shapes underground as above, making them into octahedrons. At their centre is a tetrahedron. This master shape is the archetype symbol for God-Mind totality. Anything at its exact centre is absolutely protected. The octahedron is also the shape of the Delta-T antenna used at the Montauk Project. This shape, when energized in the proper color codes, causes interdimensional rifts, creating vortices and wormholes. Rituals performed at this centre point produce vast energies that can be transmitted through hyperspace to anywhere in creation.

Some researchers claim that the pyramids were pumping stations for underground Nile tributaries. This is only partially true. Because water is an electromagnetic amplifier, it was used to surround the ritual chamber located in the Delta-T to boost ritual energy. Using these methods, the ancient Egyptians controlled weather, destroyed enemies, created stargates, and boosted their Reptilian energies in ceremony. This is also why the Montauk Project was located near vast amounts of water.

The Great Pyramid is part of a protective solar system grid, linking the Moon and Mars monuments together to produce a force field to repel invaders. The Great Pyramid is also connected to other points on the Earth such as Stonehenge, a submerged Atlantean crystal, Tiahuanaco, Ayers Rock, and the White Pyramid in western China. Together, they form an energy containment field similar to an electric fence. The HAARP project in Alaska taps into this’ – Articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and The Pyramid Perplexity.

Dee Finney quotes Stewart Swerdlow and his experience of possession. Included only because of the suspicion that either, Grey aliens are, a. elemental spirits; b. the offspring of fallen angels, such as the Draco or alternatively; c. they are demonic entities derived from the Nephilim. 

“That night, the session was most interesting. After I was entranced, a small white being, who looked like a typical grey, entered my body. Speaking at first in a strange language that only Duncan understood, it then spoke in English as the tone became more ominous. This being said that it had every right to take possession of my body because I was one of them! Challenging this remark, Preston said that I was a human being with a soul from God, and no one was allowed to use the body except Stewart. The entity cursed Preston and called him Pressed On. It said I worked for them and was carrying out a mission vital to the success of their program on Earth. Both Preston and Duncan saw the physical shape of my body change as if it were a grey alien body. The outline of my face similarly changed. Then, the being started to move my body. Getting up, it walked around while making nasty comments about those present. Although my eyes were closed, my body walked around the room as if it were wide awake.”

‘Identifying itself as a Draco commander, it gave its name as Gengeeko. Preston immediately understood the Draco to be powerful, reptilian warriors. The creature told Preston that an invasion force was on its way to Earth and that nothing could stop it. 

The moon orbiting the Earth was their first craft. It had arrived here aeons ago to control the planet. After creating the Lemurian civilization, they had been removed from the Earth by the Atlans and the descendents of the disbanded Lyraen Empire with the help of the Pleiadians. Now, the Draco were returning to reclaim the Earth and use it as a military base for entry into the rest of the galaxy. At this point, I realized that this was why so many races were interested in the Earth. If this planet falls, then the rest of the galaxy is in danger

The Draconian then stood up and rasped a warning… Claiming that humans were weak, it said that humans needed the order that an invasion would bring. This way, the invasion would benefit everyone. The Draco would receive the raw materials, workers, and food that they needed for their invasion into the rest of the galaxy. The Earth would be protected forever by the Draco Empire. Our leaders were well aware of the impending invasion, gradually preparing the world population via television shows and movies. Even rulers in some countries were humans with Draco soul-personalities. The reptilian within my body expanded upon his ideas by saying that the United Nations would be the forum for a central planetary government. United States leaders were in league with Draco allies without realizing it. 

I was given information that the USSR was in league with the Draco and allowing them to use Soviet bases for advance operations. But, the USSR would eventually break up into smaller nations and disrupt the agreement. When this happened [in 1991], I was told that this was a deception to lull the rest of the world into a false peace. The various Soviet governments were closely aligned with each other. When the opportunity was right, the Soviets would pounce on the unsuspecting countries [for example, Ukraine]. In this way, the Draco had a powerful ally on Earth to do their dirty work for them.’

The constant reader will appreciate the sinister irony of the Draco commander’s comment about Soviet Russia – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

‘The rest of the conversation involved information about the Sirian interest in Israel and the Jewish people. The Jews, he said, were created as a joint effort between the Sirians and the Draco’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. ‘The genetic stock came from the Hebrews, a race of Sirian origin. The Ohalu Council, comprised of the leaders of the Sirian civilization, provided the Torah (the first five books of Moses, i.e., the Old Testament of the Bible) with its coded information that I would learn to decipher. In fact, the Ohaluans are nonphysical beings who remain in hyperspace. The Sirians are their physical descendents. 

Ancient Hebrew is the language of this council. A holy language, it comes directly from the Mind of God. Each letter is a symbol, number, archetype, and geometric shape that is used to translate from the spiritual into the physical. In fact, each chapter of the Old Testament can be decoded to letter patterns. When recurring patterns are matched against one another, geometric shapes are formed. These include a doughnut shape, diamonds, three-dimensional triangles, etc. When all the patterns are enfolded on one another, a tetrahedron is formed in multidimensionality. 

That is to say, the shape can only be demonstrated on paper by drawing a three-dimensional tetrahedron. However, its actual shape goes far beyond anything that can be shown graphically with current technology. All letters of the Hebrew alphabet can be seen within the shape of the tetrahedron. In the ancient Hebrew alphabet there are four letters that have a stylized crown on top of them. No one knew why. However, if all of the other letters were somehow forgotten, except for those four special ones, by using these four, the tetrahedron could be reconstructed and all the other letters again found within the shape. Scientists in Jerusalem and New York are only now realizing the information encoded within the Old Testament as they review it by computer and research the various letter patterns. What type of mind could have created such a timeless document? Certainly not a human one.

I also learned that there were originally twelve root races on the Earth at the beginning of life on this planet. What this means is that there were twelve original alien races that agreed to genetically manipulate and seed life on this planet as part of a great experiment. The purpose was to determine if all of the man frequencies in the galaxy could live together harmoniously or if they would destroy one another. These twelve alien races monitored their contributions to the experiment over the millennia. Some lost interest while some completely altered their original ideas. In any event, the twelve races are returning to remove or aid their part of the project before invasion forces arrive on Earth and usurp all of the resources and people – Revelation 13-17. The outcome of this invasion is yet to be determined – Revelation 18-22.

Many of the original races keep bases in this solar system to watch the Earth. A Sirian base on Mars has existed for many thousands of years. The Amphibians have bases on Neptune and on Titan, a moon of Saturn. The Draco, who are the invading reptilians, have bases on Venus as well as under the Earth. The Pleiadeans have a base on a moon of Jupiter. Many others maintain platforms or stations in orbit around the Earth and other planets in this solar system. Most of them do not want to be discovered yet.’

According to Swerdlow, the Draco-Orions eventually discovered the hiding Lyrans on Mars and Maldek. The Draco were experts at hollowing out small planets, comets and asteroids for mining purposes and then later using them as either stealth space craft, or as projectile missiles. In this instance, the Dracos launched an ice comet into the solar system. As it passed Uranus, it caused the planet to flip and rotate horizontally on its side at a 98 degree axis tilt. This means that the poles are parallel to the plane of the solar system, not perpendicular like Earth. Uranus doesn’t spin left to right, it spins up to down; so that for 42 years the South pole faces the Sun and then the North pole directly faces the sun for the following 42 years – refer 42, articles: How to be Happy; Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity.

The comet continued its trajectory, passing so close to Maldek, the electromagnetic stress caused Maldek to explode, leaving the fragmented planet behind as the asteroid belt (rather, the Kuiper Belt), with other bits being pulled by the strong magnetic pulls of Jupiter and Saturn to become moons. The passing comet stripped much of Mar’s atmosphere and vaporised its oceans, causing the planet to orbit further away from the Sun. 

The launch of the comet had been timed to perfection, so as to inflict maximum damage on the Lyran planets. This comet was actually a planet, taken by the Draco from a different constellation. The comet was Venus and like Uranus, has a retrograde spin that is clockwise rather than anti-clockwise as the other planets. Along with theorist Immanuel Velikovsky, Central American mythology supports Venus’ later entry into our Solar System.

The ice planet Venus, then formed a mutual orbit with earth, pushing it further away from the Sun where it is located today. This also caused Earth to spin faster, pulling off water and vaporising into the stratosphere above; producing a breathable atmosphere and moderate climate. Ice caps appeared at the poles, oceans levels receded and the two largest continents of Atlantis and Lemuria rose from the sea.

Swerdlow’s version of the early Solar System adds aspects not included in Pye’s account discussed earlier. We shall return to this important subject in this chapter as well as in future articles.  

Venus, second from top left and Uranus, centre of bottom have irregular axial tilts as well as rotating orbital spins compared to the other planets of the Solar System. Pluto has an irregular tilt of 120 degrees, the most similar to that of Uranus of 98 degrees. As a comparison, Neptune is 30 degrees, Saturn is 27 degrees and Jupiter is 3 degrees. Whereas Mars is 25 degrees, Earth is 23 degrees and Mercury is the most upright at 0.03 degrees. Venus, even more perplexing than Pluto is 177 degrees.

The consensus among astronomers has been that the solar system always had just four giant planets – Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus. David Nesvorny at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio Texas claims otherwise, after running 6,000 simulations of the solar system’s birth and early development. A fifth giant planet (Maldek, [Tiamat?]) is now acknowledged as once being included in our solar system. 

The computer simulations by the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, Texas, showed that it is statistically extremely unlikely that the solar system began with four giant planets. By its calculations, it only had a 2.5 per cent chance of reaching its current population and orbital layout with just four giants, but was 10 times more likely to have developed to its present state, if there was a fifth massive planetary body in the mix.

From our present position on Earth, possibly Maldek and probably Tiamat, could have been bright enough to be seen in the daytime and may have dominated the night sky. Whichever the planet – and perhaps both Maldek and Tiamat – it was a. solid, because diamond bearing carbonaceous asteroids appear as the debris of its destruction (Asteroid belt) and b. it was also a water-bearing planet, since a high percentage of water is contained in the solar system’s comets (Kuiper belt).

There is a high probability that all the planets of our solar system were blue-green watery orbs and life-sustaining worlds. Satan before its fall, with many angels, populated the old Earth – so why not the other planets. Just as Venus is anomalous, appearing to be a late comer in our solar system; Earth’s moon is irregular and suspicious in composition; Uranus has a mysterious unorthodox spin; and ancient records document a fifth large planet in our solar system. These conundrums are answered in the two alternative origins discussed. Swerdlow’s account has much to consider and favour over interpretations of the Enuma Elish record. Perhaps, both stories contain elements of the truth, or are they accurate in part because they occurred at different times? 

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, pages 15-18 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Reptilians were the first intelligent beings to colonise Earth. This is why Reptilians consider this to be their planet. After Lemuria was colonised, Reptilians were the only ones that existed… It was a long time before humanity developed from the Lyraen refugees that came from Mars and Maldek to colonise Atlantis. The Lemurians viewed the Atlanteans as occupiers and invaders… they were here first. Mammalian and Reptilian creatures are not designed to live in the same environment… [requiring] different living conditions. The Atlanteans had a problem with the Lemurian animal food source… dinosaurs. They rampaged over landmasses and devoured the food the Atlanteans were cultivating. 

The Atlanteans… used electromagnetic pulse weapons to kill them. This is the real truth… why… [they] abruptly became extinct. There was no gigantic asteroid or comet… 60 million years ago… the planet would have been a barren wasteland forever… [the] huge trench… off the coast of Yucatan [Mexico]… is where the Atlantean continent and archipelagos rose up, leaving the trench as a result’ – Article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis.

… the Atlanteans and Lemurians… [waged] numerous wars between the two civilizations. They hated each other; each thought the other did not belong on the same planet. 

In an effort to create peace between the two species, a third species was created… [Homo Erectus circa 250,000 BCE] The Reptilians agreed to the plan as long as their genetics were foundational with mammalian genetics secondary… when a human foetus gestates in the womb in the first trimester, the zygote appears an androgynous Reptilian. As it develops the mammalian genetic sequences open secondarily, just as they were encoded. This is also when sexual differentiation in the fetus occurs. Every now and then… a baby [is] born with Reptilian… scaly* skin, a tail, red eyes, and webbed hands or feet. When androgyny manifests in the body the individual is referred to as a “hermaphrodite” or an “intersex”. Everything happens for a reason. [God] does not produce accidents. This is why… you are a hybrid! 

… [When] “God” took a rib from Adam and created Eve… [this] simply means an androgynous… body was divided into male and female components. The agenda of the Reptilians is to occupy all cultures [Earth] and upgrade them [down-grade humanity] to Reptilian [again]. The snake offering [‘fruit’] to Eve represents the enticement of humanity to become [more] Reptilian [less mammalian]. Eve taking the [‘fruit’] represents humanity accepting Reptilian control as handlers of Humanity from that generation forward.’

If this is true regarding Adam, as we touched upon earlier in the chapter, it would explain why it was important enough to be explained in the Bible that Adam was alone, and why Eve was created by taking his DNA symbolised by his rib figuratively or literally and cloned. Though we will learn that they were still both sexless at this point and remember, still both spirit.

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, Pages 13, 22-23, 117 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… [the Anunnaki] required a labour force… primitive man was created… combining… native ape-man with their own saurian nature… This [man] was half human and half reptile, what can be called a Homo-saurus. It was a failed experiment for the main reason it was a “mule” and could not reproduce itself… [later] it was decided to modify [man] and give it reproductive powers given more mammalian traits [resulting in Homo erectus]. 

… [later again] the Biblical “Fall of Man” [is] where Adam [and Eve] achieved knowingor the ability to reproduce sexually. As a result of this genetic modification, man lost most of his saurian nature – his shiny, luminous skin and scaly* hide. According to the Haggadah… “The first result was that Adam and Eve became naked… their bodies had been overlaid with a horny skin and enveloped with the cloud of glory… of Adam… it was bright as daylight and covered his body like a luminous garment.” No sooner had they violated the command given them then the cloud of glory and the horny skin dropped from them, and they stood there in their nakedness and ashamed.”

… a tract from a Gnostic document… states, that because of the eating of the forbidden fruit… “Then their mind opened. For when they ate, the light of knowledge shone for them. When they put on shame, they knew that they were naked with regard to knowledge. When they sobered up, they saw that they were naked, and they became enamoured of one another. When they saw their makers, they loathed them since they were beastly forms. They understood very much.”

[Adam and Eve] acquired… a soft flexible skin, body hair, the need to sweat [Genesis 3:19], and the ability to produce live young. It is explicit in Eve’s punishment that she is to bear the pangs of live birth like a mammal – Genesis 3:16. [They] no longer ran around naked… [and] had to wear clothing for comfort and protection… [Adam] was a Homo sapiens a hybrid mammal-saurian creature… a quantum jump in evolution… from wild ape-man to a new species known as Cro-Magnon Man [Homo sapiens].’

There may well be credence to this account, in as much Adam and Eve did lose their (shiny, luminous) spirit bodies – to be replaced by (mammalian) physical ones. Whether they were initially saurian (with scaly, horny skin) and had mammalian traits added when they were punished and became physical; or whether while spirit, they were godly with their turning physical due to a combination of saurian-mammalian components being added, is a point of conjecture. Scientific discovery, the biblical record and logic would lean towards the latter of the two.

In support of what Swerdlow states, the Triune brain theory proposed by American physician and neuroscientist, Paul Maclean in the 1960s, posits that the human brain is composed of three parts; all constituting our consciousness, with the oldest being the reptilian complex or lizard brain (archipallium) located in the brain stem, leading from the spinal cord and the cerebellum, which controls instinct, dominance, survival (through fear) and also reproduction – the fight or flight complex. One could say the reptilian component is the primitive brain and continuously runs on autopilot.

Outside of this area is the mid-brain limbic system (paleopallium) or mammalian brain. It provides our feelings, emotions, attachments, habits and memories; where we learn to seek pleasure and avoid pain. One could say the mammalian brain dictates our decisions, the same as for animals. 

The outer layer of our brain is the new brain and comprised of the neocortex (neopallium) or primate brain and is what makes us human or in the image of our Creator and not just another animal as evolutionists would have us believe. This part of our brain controls language, ideas, concepts, imagination, creativity, abstract thought and logic. One could say the human brain allows humans to rationalise and reason, to think and be aware.

The archipallium may not be the oldest component of the human brain at all. Though considered primal, this is really in regard to the base nature of mankind rather than being its first nature (or mind). The neopallium is in fact the residue of Adam and Eve’s true nature. Their change to a physical being with a fleshly body, brought about the accompanying change in their nature (and mind), which now had the addition of mammalian and reptilian traits.

Boulay: ‘… the Adam of Genesis… [was] created in the image of the serpent-god… The hybrid that was created… looked reptilian… Adam was thus created in both the image or selem and likeness or dmut of his creator. The use of both terms in the Biblical text was meant to leave no doubt that man was similar to the gods in appearance

While reptiles and dinosaurs may have been inspired by reptilian gods, anthropomorphic creatures – whether hominids, Neanderthal^ man or Adam – were not. The Bible is clear that the people of Day Six^ were made in the image of their Elohim makers, while Adam was created in the image of his El-ohim maker.

Boulay: ‘As long as [Adam and Eve] remained in the Garden of Eden, [they] did not propagate… because they were [clones] and could not reproduce… [in] the Haggadah… Adam was created from the four corners of the world. “The dust was of various colors – red, black, white, and green. Red was for the blood, black for the bowels, white for the bones, and green for the pale skin.”

Had Adam [begun as] a homo sapiens, the colour of dust used for the skin would have presumably been pink or brown. Homo-saurus or reptile-man was probably much larger and taller than modern man… Rabbinical records disclose that “Adam, who had been a giant, diminished in stature to the size of an ordinary man.” Likely an allegorical description depicting Adam’s change (fall) from a spiritual creature to an earthly one. ‘The antediluvian Patriarchs and Sumerian kings, who were part saurian, were apparently very large men and stood out physically among the hordes of mankind.’

It is possible the author has inadvertently swapped the creation of the people of Day Six, an Adam and that of the Adam on the Eighth Day, with the later giant saurian humans who would have been the Nephilim resulting from angelic-human interbreeding. The physical Adam would have received the different colours from his new blood, organs, bones and skin.

Tiamat was the ancestral home for the angels and early prototype humans before the era of Earth. The planet Tiamat is referred to by other names in various sources. What is not commonly known, is that it is mentioned in the Bible and was the home of the Adversary and a seat of its power. The planet is called Rahab. In Hebrew it has two meanings. From the verb, it means to be or become ‘broad, large, wide’ or ‘spacious’. Associated with territory, yet including the attributes of fame, abilities, courage and trouble. The secondary meaning from the verb, means to embolden or be ‘haughty, proud’ and ‘arrogant.’ Originally, the Creator formed the early earth to be populated, a home for life.

Isaiah 45:18

New Century Version

The Lord created the heavens. He is the God who formed the earth and made it. He did not want it to be empty, but he wanted life on the earth. This is what the Lord says: “I am the Lord. There is no other God.”

Jeremiah 4:23-26

English Standard Version

23 ‘I looked on the earth, and behold, it was without form and void; and to the heavens, and they had no light. 24 I looked on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro. 25  I looked, and behold, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled. 26  I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the Lord, before his fierce anger.’

Jeremiah is referring to the state of the earth after its pre-Adamic destruction in Genesis 1:1 and prior to its re-creation in Genesis 1:2. Scholars call this the Gap Theory. The state of the severed, cut in two Earth was horrifically worse even than the devastation caused by Noah’s flood. There had been a terrible eruption of evil on Tiamat, after the angelic rebellion. We learn from Jeremiah that there was a thriving civilisation, replete with cities and inhabitants. We know these were not Homo sapiens or descendants of Adam. Who were they: Hominins, Angels? The context gleaned from other Old Testament verses, in addedition to this account implies that the inhabitants were principally angelic. The phrase, ‘there was no man’, means no created Adamic man yet. Not that there had been Homo neanderthlesis or Homo sapiens and that they had been destroyed. 

There is a phenomenon in astronomy which has taken hold of the interest of many researchers and writers detailing mankind’s early history – for instance Graham Hancock, Fingerprints of the Gods, 1996 – and that is the precession of the equinoxes. It must of taken captive the minds of ancient man as well, as it is evidenced by certain civilisations as a long-count calendar that marks a giant clock which the Earth rotates through vast periods of time. The big question arises, how did ancient man learn of this knowledge? Or more pointedly, who gave them this knowledge. One source as we have read in the Book of Enoch, gives the actual names of those who taught and instructed early humans. 

The spring (March 20) and autumnal (September 22) equinoxes are the two days in a year whereby the sun rises exactly over the equator. It creates the same length of day all over the planet. Throughout history, it has provided a way for people to delineate the change of the seasons from longer or shorter days. 

Britannica:

‘The precession of the equinoxes is the motion of the equinoxes along the ecliptic (the plane of Earth’s orbit) caused by the cyclic precession of Earth’s axis of rotation… [it is not] the stars that… [move] but rather the observing platform – Earth. Such a motion is called precession and consists of a cyclic wobbling in the orientation of Earth’s axis of rotation with a period of 25,772 [to 25,920] years. [However, the annual rate of precession is now thought to be speeding up, meaning the calculated length of one full cycle is getting shorter.] Precession was the third-discovered motion of Earth, after the far more obvious daily rotation and annual revolution.

Precession is caused by the gravitational influence of the Sun and Moon acting on Earth’s equatorial bulge. To a much lesser extent, the planets exert influence as well. The projection onto the sky of Earth’s axis of rotation results in two notable points at opposite directions: the north and south celestial poles. Because of precession, these points trace out circles on the sky. Today the north celestial pole points to within just 1° of the arc of Polaris. It will point closest to Polaris about 2100 CE’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. In 12,000 years the north celestial pole will point about 5° from Vega [coincidently in the constellation Lyra]. Presently, the south celestial pole does not point in the vicinity of any bright star.’

Precession is minutely slow as it is a very gradual shift in the Earth’s position relative to the stars. The rate of precession of the earth equals 1 degree every 72 years. Thus precession of the equinox is like a clock. The twelve numbers are the zodiac constellations and the hand is the eyesight of an observer looking east on the day of the spring equinox. It’s a clock that moves over a very long timespan. One period, or hour takes roughly 2160 years for the sun to move and rise again into one constellation, before shifting into the next one. This remarkable cycle is due to a synchronicity between the speed of the earth’s rotation around the sun and the speed of rotation of our galaxy. Whereas from the Earth, the sun passes one zodiac constellation per month, and cycles through all twelve once a year. The paths of the moon and visible planets are also within the belt of the zodiac.

The zodiac constellations are often regarded as the domain of astrology, rather than astronomy. Exact calculations aren’t readily made with room for interpretation, for there is no firm consensus among astrologers or astronomers as to when the Age of Aquarius began for instance. Many favour 2012, the end of the Mayan long count calendar while this writers computations resulted in the year 1990. Significantly, it was a landmark year as it was sandwiched between the year preceding which saw the fall of the Berlin Wall (Communism in Europe) and the year following when the collapse of the Soviet Union occurred. It also heralded the beginning of our world turning towards a darker path, as computer (internet) and phone technology advanced exponentially; impacting our information and communication driven society irrevocably – Daniel 12:4. 

For non-constant readers or those just reading this chapter, both the nations of Germany (Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar) and Russia (Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia) figure prominently in future Bible prophecy. The King of the North, Russia and a German led European Union will become formidable allies as they first dispose of the weakened western powers of America and Britain, before ultimately defeating the King of the South – an Islamic alliance of nations, possibly fronted by Turkey and, or Iran. It is after this and very close to the end of our age, that they confront the Kings of the East, led by China – refer Article: Four Kings & One Queen.

What actually causes precession has never been fully explained in the lunisolar theory of the Earth’s ‘wobble’ or by the laws of Copernicus or Newton’s equations. These models use the sun as a stationary object, yet this is unlikely as it is part of a spiral galaxy. Astrophysics has revealed a large number of binary star systems where stars do not just sit in one place. They actually rotate around another star* or system. This is now established science and thus the permutations for precession means it can be calculated by the sun’s motion around another central orbiting partner. This is more accurate than by the Earth’s wobble alone.

There is a curious link between precession and the Great pyramid of Giza. It has been shown that the exterior measurements of the Pyramid of Giza are an accurate representation of the Earth’s northern hemisphere on a scale of 1:43,200. A number that proves highly significant when one considers the method of doubling or halving key numbers used frequently in ancient Egypt. 

For instance 25,920 years divided by twelve constellations equals 2,160 years; times this by two produces 4,320. The platonic year of 25,920 years produces the decimal 25.92. Doubling this number equals 51.84. Amazingly, the angle of inclination or slope of the pyramid is cited as 51.8539761 degrees. Though created with sekeds, (an ancient Egyptian unit for the measurement of the slope of an inclined surface such as the triangular faces of a pyramid) it is exactly 51.84. A pyramid based on phi, would be 51.83 degrees. This number at very least, is an extraordinary coincidence in light of the astronomical references applicable to the pyramid – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

In Chapter XV The Philstines: Latino-Hispano** America, we discussed the Sun god, Bull veneration and their link with Mithras

Crystalinks – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Mithraism is recognized as having pronounced astrological elements, but the details are debated. One scholar of Mithraism, David Ulansey, has interpreted Mithras (Mithras Sol Invictus – the unconquerable sun) as a second sun or star* that is responsible for precession. He suggests the cult may have been inspired by Hipparchus’ discovery of precession. Part of his analysis is based on the tauroctony, an image of Mithras sacrificing a bull, found in most of the temples. According to Ulansey, the tauroctony is a star chart’ – article: Chapter XV The Philstines: Latino-Hispano America.

Mithras is a second sun or hyper-cosmic sun and/or the constellation Perseus, and the bull is Taurus, a constellation of the zodiac. In an earlier astrological age, the vernal equinox had taken place when the Sun was in Taurus [during 4490 to 2330 BCE]. The tauroctony, by this reasoning, commemorated Mithras-Perseus ending the “Age of Taurus” (about 2000 BC based on the Vernal Equinox…

The iconography also contains two torch bearing boys (Cautes and Cautopates) [Casluh and Caphtor**] on each side of the zodiac. Ulansey, and Walter Cruttenden in his book Lost Star of Myth and Time, interpret these to mean ages of growth and decay, or enlightenment and darkness; primal elements of the cosmic progression. Thus Mithraism is thought to have something to do with the changing ages within the precession cycle or Great Year (Plato’s term for one complete precession of the equinox).’

The Bible condemns worshiping luminaries in the heavens, whether the physical orbs of the Sun, Moon, planets and stars, or the angelic beings associated with them – Deuteronomy 4:19, Ezekiel 8:15-17, Jeremiah 19:13. 

Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The main difference between Canaanite religion and the religion of Moses is the close relation of Canaanite deities with the astronomical and weather events. Biblical monotheism strove against the solar and the lunar deities, Astarta (Venus planet) [Akkadian: Ishtar], and Baal (Taurus constellation)’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

‘Perhaps, the cult of the divine pair might reflect the observation of Venus in Taurus. Taurus is the house of Venus in the Babylonian and… Greek astrology. According to Nonnus, the founder of Berit (Beirut) is Astarte who named the city after her daughter. Astarte as the founder of Berit might be similar to Dido as the founder of Carthage… Phoenician depictions of Astarte looking through the window might depict the astronomical temples.   

Despite that traces of astral cults and even God’s victory over a dragon are presented in the Bible, the images of the sun, the moon, and the dragon are prohibited in Talmud and Rabbinic literature… the Bible… [includes] much more information about the celestial events than it is traditionally considered. Isaiah (Isaiah 47:13) enumerates three astronomical / astrological professions. Abraham couldn’t calculate stars (Genesis 15:5) [and] he observed the cattle, the goat, the ram, two doves and the fire and smoke among it at… night (Genesis 15:9-10, 17), i.e. Taurus, Capricorn, Aries constellations, the Pleiades (‘doves’ in ancient Greek astronomy), and the Milky Way respectively’ – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.   

The solar and the lunar eclipses repeat after some periods, and the 18-year saros and the 54-year triple saros or exeligmos (which were already calculated in… ancient times) are significant among them. If the annual solstice is well-known then the similar event in the moon’s revolution such as lunistice (repeating every nine years) is known very little. Paranatellon (plural paranatellonta) is an ancient Greek concept (but also well-known in the Babylonian and other ancient astronomical traditions) of [a] constellation which [rises] simultaneously with… [another] constellation.

For instance, Aquila constellation (‘eagle’) rises with Scorpio constellation (‘scorpion’), so Aquila replaced Scorpio among four constellations of the solstices and the equinoxes in the books of Ezekiel and… Revelation’ – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. ‘Conjunction (in a broad sense) is a visible close position of two or more celestial bodies, mainly planets’ – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy. ‘The planet parade (in a broad sense) is the collection of the sun, the moon, and the planets in [the] same constellation or in adjoining constellations. 

Resheph (Phoenician ‘fire’), or Phoenician Apollo, was firstly mentioned in the Eblaite texts (3rd millennium BC) as Rasap; the god was also known to the Ugaritians. The Phoenicians called him b’l chtz ‘lord of the arrow’. The Cyprians identified him with Apollo and gave him the epithet… ‘arrow’. The name of Resheph appears in the Bible with the meaning of ‘arrow’ (as ‘lightning of the bow’, Job 5:7). Resheph like [the] Greek Apollo [aka Azazel] may be Sagittarius** while his arrow may be Sagitta.

Marduk slew the sea monster [Leviathan] Tiamat [Earth] and her [female] servant Kingu [the Moon], divided her body into many pieces and invented the zodiac. The dismemberment of Tiamat’s body by Marduk may be interpreted astronomically as an identification of 1) particular constellations near Hydra = Tiamat, or 2) particular stars in Hydra (with [the] division of Osiris’ body as a possible identification of stars in [the] Orion constellation), or 3) the division of the ecliptic: 

Marduk-Jupiter divided the way of the sun into twelve parts (‘Ram Zodiac’, i.e. zodiac with the vernal equinox in Aries which began from about 2000 BCE) with the subdivision of each part by three stars into three ‘decans’; Marduk also ‘founded the station of Nibur’ (Nibur or Nibiru is the same [as] Jupiter in some positions).

The name of Tiamat (Akkadian ti’amtum) is an earlier form of Akkadian tamtu ‘sea’; these words are also related to [the] Greek… name of the sea goddess and Titaness. The New Year cosmological battle of Marduk (Jupiter) and Nabu (Mercury [Article: Thoth]) against Tiamat and Kingu closely resembles the battle of Heracles and Iolaus against Lernean Hydra (Hydra constellation) and his assistant crawfish (Cancer constellation). Then Marduk and Heracles are Jupiter, Nabu and Iolaus are Mercury, Tiamat and Hydra are [the] Hydra constellation while [or Earth] Kingu and crawfish are [the] Cancer constellation [or the Moon]. Marduk pierced the belly of Tiamat with an arrow: the arrow might be arrow-shaped Cancer near Hydra. Tiamat with her eleven assistants (old zodiac?) fights Marduk with his eleven assistants (new zodiac). This battle resembles the Greek Titanomachia regarded as a change of the zodiacal epoch’ – Article: Thoth.

‘If the names of the Mesopotamian zodiacal constellations are of… Sumerian origin, then the zodiac was created by the Sumerians. “The Sumerian zodiac, from which our own was derived via later Mesopotamian and Greek astrologists, is of early and unknown origin, having like Athena appeared full-[grown].” The Sumerians identified the Morning Star and the Evening Star as the same planet Venus in the early 3rd millennium BCE and listed constellations (regarded as deities) in the late 3rd millennium BCE.

The Greek Orion myth is closely related to the Egyptian myth of Horus who was killed by a scorpion sent by the god Seth. The ancient Greeks identified Horus with Orion. We can also compare the myth of Osiris: his first death in the coffin floating down the Nile represented the [setting] of [the] Orion constellation (Osiris) after the rising of the Pegasus Square constellation (coffin) and Aquarius constellation (the Nile). The second death of Osiris, caused by Seth, symbolized the [setting] of [the] Orion constellation during the rising of Scorpio or/and Ophiuchos constellations (Seth). Red Seth is red star Antares in [the] Scorpio constellation. 

Swallow-shaped Isis is [the] Pisces constellation (‘Swallow’ in the Sumero-Babylonian astronomy), and hawk-shaped Isis is Aquila constellation (whereas the main astronomical embodiment of Isis was Sirius). The winter solstice as the birthday of Osiris was related to the winter (evening) rising of [the] Orion constellation. The birth of Horus is the new [rising] of Orion which coincides with the appearance of the ‘new-born’ sun in Aquarius (the constellations of the winter solstice during the 4th – 3rd millennia BCE). The snake slain by Horus is the [setting] of [the] Serpens constellation, and his victory over Seth is the [setting] of Scorpio or/and Sagittarius. 

Cow-shaped Hathor (the name literally means ‘home of Horus’) is Taurus as the constellation where the Sun (Horus) was located at the vernal equinox during the 4th – 3rd millennia BCE. Thus, Osiris is Orion and Horus is both Orion and the sun (the sun in Orion?). Seven Hathors (as in the Tale of Two Brothers) symbolized the seven stars Pleiades in Taurus. Nut the cow as a goddess of the sky, related to the Milky Way, symbolized Taurus (near the Milky Way) as the vernal equinox constellation during the 4th – 3rd millennia BCE. Imkhotep resurrected pharaoh-Osiris (Orion) like Asklepius (Ophiuchus), identified with Imkhotep, resurrected Orion: Ophiuchus was located in the zenith in the evening when Orion rose in the morning. 

The dead were cut in pre-Dynastic Egypt, the phallus was separated from the other parts of the body, and the fact might be related to Osiris’ myth. So, archaeological, astronomical, and written evidence are correlated. Osiris is also sometimes regarded as the lunar god: 28 years of his reign stand for the days of the lunar month, and 14 [body] parts he was cut into by Seth signify the days of the moon [decreasing, or waning – and also the number of stars in the constellation of Orion]. Nephilim are the offspring of [the] Orion constellation (which is named Niyphelah) in the Aramaic tradition, whereas Orion is the giant constellation and the David-Goliath duel might be astronomically interpreted as the [setting] of Orion [Nimrod] during the rise of Sagittarius** [Apollos/Azazel].’ 

The Nephilim association with Orion is a clue to the origin of the rebellious Watchers and is in all probability, the original home world (before Draco) of the fallen angels who came to Earth in the antediluvian age.

Crystalinks defines the Age of Aquarius – emphasis & bold mine:

‘[The age of Aquarius according to astrological mysticism, symbolises] unusual harmony and understanding in the world [yet to be evidenced… though the seeds are being sown]. Those who follow that belief system see it as a turning point in human consciousness in which balance is restored by consciously moving beyond the physical body. The Aquarius symbol is metaphoric in content, meaning ‘closure in water’. Water [or spirit] represents the collective unconsciousness or consciousness hologram [the matrix] which creates the grid programs of our physical reality. Many connect the Age of Aquarius with the return of the goddess, priestess, or feminine energies those that vibrate above/faster than physical frequency.’

Chief of which are the supremely powerful and influential spirit entities, Asherah, Lilith and Naamah. of which we will have more to say – articles: Lilith; and Na’amah. ‘This is the return to higher consciousness, the awakening of higher mind and thought in the alchemy of time.’ This is all rather ominous indeed when transposed or layered against the mark of the Beast and the Man of Lawlessness – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Based on an unconventional chronology, key periods of the precessional equinox periods lasting 2,160 years include… the one we are currently in, the Age of Aquarius from 1990 to 4150. This is the final age of humanity as we know it, during which the final uprising of the dark Angels and the Nephilim will occur; the victorious return of the Son of Man; and the millennial rule of the Kingdom of God.

For interested readers, the twelve sons of Jacob equate to a sign of the zodiac and their symbols include those of the zodiac constellations. For example, the water bearer Aquarius is associated with Jacob’s eldest son, Reuben. Genesis 49:4, Douay Rheims: ‘[Reuben] art poured out as water, grow thou not…’ – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

The precessional age prior to Aquarius was that of Pisces the Fish, from 170 BCE to 1990 CE. The Messiah is equated with fish numerous times in scripture – Mark 6:38-44. Three intertwined fish, a symbol of the false Trinity is a prominent symbol of the Universal Church. Aries the Ram began in 2330 BCE lasting until 170 BCE. It typified the age of Abraham and most famously the ram provided as a substitute for the life of Isaac – Genesis 22:13. The preceding age from 4490 till 2330 BCE was that of Taurus the bull. A time which was heavily influenced by Sun worship and veneration of its symbol, the bull, lasting well into the next age of the ram.

The time preceding the flood, its devastation and aftermath occurred during the precessional age of Leo the lion, from 10,970 to 8810 BCE. By strange coincidence the angels who rebelled producing Nephilim offspring began their evil crusade during the age of Aquarius from 23,930 to 21,770 BCE, just as it will be set to rekindle during our current age of Aquarius.

There is much confusion amongst commentators regarding which tribes display what zodiac attributes or of which zodiacal house they are represented by. There are many interpretations which jumble the tribes, even the best answer of them being in groups of air, fire, earth and water is incorrect. Whereas the answer is explained in Numbers 2:1-33, where the camp layout is explained for the sons of Jacob. It is four groupings of three tribes on a north-south by east-west axis – Article: The Ark of God. The order listing gives a hint of prominence and a descending order by degree. Plus the three tribes of each group are in a zodiac sequential order.

The first camp was the eastern camp and this comprised in zodiacal order, Zebulun as Cancer, Judah as appropriately Leo (the Lion) and Issachar as Virgo. Judah is the leader, with a Fire sign – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. Virgo is Earth and Cancer the Crab is unsurprisingly, Water – which is applicable to Zebulun and his location today – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. Issachar like the Messiah who was born in the sign of Virgo, have been hard pressed – refer article: Chronology of Christ. All three are blood brothers, sharing Leah as their mother.

The second encampment was positioned in the west and in order, comprised Benjamin as Aries, Ephraim as Taurus and Manasseh as Gemini. Again all three are fully related, having Rachel as their mother. Ephraim is the leader with an Earth sign. Gemini is Air and Aries is Fire. Ephraim with the symbol of a Bull with horns is specifically applicable. Aries the Ram also possesses horns and the god of war is applicable to the fearsome clan of Benjamin. The Twins of Gemini are remarkably applicable to the tribe of Manasseh, split into two half tribes – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.   

The third camp was towards the north and comprised Naphtali as Libra, Dan as Scorpio and Asher as Sagittarius. All three are handmaid wives children, with Dan and Naphtali being full brothers. Dan is the leader and the sign of scorpio can also be rendered as a Serpent or an Eagle, with each being applicable to the tribe of Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. The Scales of Justice are applicable to the freedom loving tribe of Naphtali. Asher are a very blessed tribe in the image of Ephraim. Having a symbol of a Centaur is not far removed from the Bull of Ephraim – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. Sagittarius is a Fire sign, Libra an Air sign and surprisingly, Scorpio is not Fire, but rather Water. The Tribe of Dan had a special affinity with ships and by degree with water like Reuben – Judges 5:17.

The fourth and final camp was to the south and in order comprised Gad as Capricorn, Reuben as mentioned, Aquarius and Simeon as Pisces. Reuben and Simeon are full brothers, with Leah as their mother. Gad is the full brother of Asher. Capricorn is an Earth sign and its symbol is a Goat and like the Ram and Bull, has horns. Pisces is a Water sign and is represented by two Fish. This is indicative of including the missing brother, Levi. Hence the two fish are Simeon and Levi. The surprise is that Aquarius is not a Water sign but rather an Air sign, with Reuben being the leader of this group. 

The four leader tribes all represent a different zodiacal element of Fire, Earth, Water and Air respectively: Judah, Ephraim, Dan and Reuben. Their respective symbols are the Lion, a Bull, an Eagle or Serpent and a Man or Woman. Each are uniquely indicative. In Ezekiel we learn that the Cherubim, an order of celestial being for they are not called angels in the Bible, have four faces – Article: The Ark of God.

Ezekiel 10:14

English Standard Version

‘And every one had four faces: the first face was the face of the cherub [bull, ox], and the second face was a human face, and the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.’

Some translations use cherub, though most use Bull or Ox. At a reasonable stretch it could also be translated as a unicorn. The Eagle and Lion are self explanatory and the Human face would equate to Reuben. What is very interesting about Ephraim is that we will discover they were the main body of a group of tribes collectively known as the (British) Saxons. The leading tribe were the Angles and they gave their name to East Anglia and Eng-land, from Angl-land. A symbol of Ephraim is a Bull, though the word angle has been proposed as really a transliteration of the word angel. The original Angles were described by contemporaries as angels (or blonds) because of the very high percentage of fair haired and handsome looking people amongst the Angles. It is recorded that those that weren’t, dyed their hair blond. The association with an angel is not far removed from that of a cherub and hence could be another symbol for the tribe of Ephraim – refer Cherubim, article: The Ark of God.

Hominids, Hominins, the dinosaurs and other experimentation took place on Earth during this golden age of Angels until the angels rebelled, by about 200,000 BCE based on proportional timing given in the Sumerian Texts. There is scientific evidence that Hominins and Dinosaurs lived on the Earth at the same time. There have been archeological finds, such as Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas in which Dinosaur and early man fossil footprints are seen side-by-side in the same sedimentary rock. The re-creation of the Earth began in approximately 195,397 BCE lasting one hundred and forty-four thousand years, with the introduction of a sun’s rays emitting through the new Earth’s atmosphere. This time from the star Sol, instead of perhaps Saturn. The re-creation would have been far shorter, with the benefit of hindsight and experience from about 250,000 to 500,000 years of experimentation. 

The Adversary was responsible for what we call and perceive as the physical creation. They are the Architect of it, though not the original Creator. All seemed to be an enormous success. News of the Ancient of Day’s plan to create a being in His own image with the potential of life inherent as well as adoption as a son or daughter of God unlike the angels – but rather alike unto the Son of Man within an inner family circle, as the first fruits of a unique harvest of souls – was highly probably the trigger which fired the Old Serpent into planning a usurpation of the throne of Heaven.

The very slowly growing, seeping realisation that Satan was having within, of its superiority over all others in the cosmos – the rationalisation that they and they alone were destined to govern all and depose the Eternal One who was losing the plot – now catapulted the Serpent’s mind to reasoning it had to seize control of the spiritual realm and the physical universe in having any hope of preserving, or bettering its status in the Almighty’s creation. This required supplanting the Creator and ruling all that there was. It then meant when the staged coup was found out (and failed), that the Adversary had to sabotage the Creator at every stage of the evolution of mankind towards that end.  

2 Corinthians 6:18

English Standard Version

“… and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty.”

John 1:11-14

English Standard Version

‘He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.’

Galatians 4:3-7

English Standard Version

‘In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved [to the Adversary]… But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman… to redeem those… so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” So you are no longer a slave [to Satan], but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.’

Isaiah 14:12-14

English Standard Version

‘How you are fallen from heaven [the abode of God], O Day [Venus] Star [H1966 – heylel: light-bearer, shining one], son of Dawn [morning, early, light]! How you are cut down to the ground [to the physical universe], you who laid the nations low! [‘which didst weaken the nations’] You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven [the spiritual dimension]; above the stars [angels] of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly [the Government of the Creator] in the far reaches of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds [angelic realm]; I will make myself like the Most High [the Ancient of Days].’

This passage is seen as straight forward. Even so, it provokes two schools of thought. One is that the personality described here, is the Devil or Satan and their rebellion against the Most High. The other view is that this being described as heylel in Hebrew and lucifer in Latin, is a different person. As Satan is apparently not called these descriptions anywhere else in scripture, there is cause to entertain two different entities.

In addition, the Son of Man is also described as a morning star – Revelation 2:28; 22:16. For some, this is inexplicable and leads to differentiating ‘Lucifer’ and Satan as (correctly) two separate beings. An alternative explanation is to (incorrectly) propose that these are two personas of a pre-insurgent and a post-insurrection, Satan. Others (incorrectly) teach Christ and Lucifer – as light bearing morning stars – are the same being.

A key factor, is the point that both this personality and Christ are known as or called ‘morning stars, light bearers’ and ‘bringers of light.’ They are descriptive terms of what they are and not names. Thus heylel or the misleading translation lucifer, are delineating a different person from Satan. Again, Christ and ‘Heylel’ are not the same person. Likewise, certain commentators fail to recognise the duality of Isaiah chapter fourteen and therefore think the description of Lucifer is solely referring to a human King of Babylon.

We have discussed how Samael, also known as Samyaza, is a light bringer or one who shines brightly. This would lend weight to heylel not being a reference to Satan and rather, Samael. Satan is similarly described in 2 Corinthians 11:14, CJB by Paul: “… for the Adversary… masquerades as an angel of light…”

Perhaps a persuasive argument for it being Satan spoken about in Isaiah chapter fourteen is the reference to ‘falling from Heaven’. For it is seemingly only the Devil who is remarked of in this way. Christ said in Luke 10:18, KJV: “… I beheld Satan as lightening fall from heaven.” And in Revelation 12:11 NIV: “The great dragon was hurled down – that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan… hurled to the earth, and [their] angels with [them].”

Archangel Michael defeating the Dragon

Yet, a third of the angels fell from Heaven to Earth just as Satan did – Revelation 12:4. Just as other fallen angels are called ‘devils’ and ‘satans’, it is not out of place for the entity, second highest in the pantheon of evil gods to be similarly described as, falling from heaven – Isaiah 14:12.

Isaiah chapter fourteen supports Jeremiah chapter four, in that there were nations comprising angels inhabiting the old Earth (Tiamat) at the time the angel’s rebelled. It can be fairly reasoned that prior to Adam, civilisations of angels existed on the Earth and possibly on the other terrestrial planets at that time. 

According to Genesis 1:28, mankind of Day Six, the Neanderthals, were told to ‘replenish’ or fill the Earth, meaning that the Earth had been previously inhabited with angels and early man – Hominid and Hominin. For the Hebrew word for replenish is the same word which the Lord used when He commanded Noah to replenish the Earth in Genesis 9:1. Twice, the Creator has had to oversee destruction of life on the old Earth (Tiamat) and the new Earth and twice the repopulation of a rejuvenated Earth with new life.

Some have pondered the number of the world’s population when the great deluge struck. Population studies have revealed through mathematical algorithms, that the population was approximately nine billion people (refer Lambert Dolphin for a detailed explanation). The world’s population at time of writing is 7.9 billion (now 8.2 billion as of May 2025) and expected to reach nine billion by 2037 or sooner. At the rate it is increasing presently, the year 2033 is likely.

It is both amazing and alarming how quickly the world’s population has reached each milestone of an additional billion inhabitants. In 1804 was one billion people; 123 years later it reached two billion in 1927; in 33 years it reached three billion in 1960; 14 years to reach four billion in 1974; 13 years to reach five billion in 1987; 12 years to reach six billion in 1999; 12 years to reach seven billion in 2011; and only 11 years to reach eight billion in 2022. It may take merely another 11 years to hit 9 billion people on planet Earth. What after that, 10 years, 9 years…?

Ezekiel 28:1-19

English Standard Version

Prophecy Against the Prince of Tyre

1 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, say to the prince [ruler, leader] of Tyre, Thus says the Lord God: “Because your heart is proud, and you have said, I am a god, I sit in the seat [assembly] of the gods, in the heart of the [roaring] seas,’ yet you are but a man [hypocrite], and no god, though you make your heart [inclination] like the heart [mind] of a god – 3 you are indeed wiser [‘shrewd, crafty, cunning, wily, subtle’ like the Serpent in Genesis 3:1] than Daniel; no secret is hidden [be held (in the) dark] from you; 4 by your wisdom and your understanding [intelligence] you have made wealth for yourself, and have gathered gold and silver into your treasuries;

5 by your great wisdom in your trade  [traffic, merchandise] you have increased [multiplied, make large] your wealth [H2428 – chayil: might], and your heart has become proud [H1361 – gabahh: lofty] in your wealth – 6 therefore thus says the Lord God: Because you make your heart like the heart of a god, 7 therefore, behold, I will bring foreigners upon you, the most ruthless of the nations; and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of your wisdom and defile your splendor. 8 They shall thrust you down into the pit [the Abyss], and you shall die the death of the slain in the heart of the seas. 9 Will you still say, ‘I am a god,’ in the presence of those who kill you, though you are but a man [not a literal man, less than a god], and no god [like the Creator], in the hands of those who slay you?”

It is interesting to note the salient points regarding the Prince of Tyre: they are wise or crafty as a serpent, say like a Seraph; created incredible wealth for themselves through trade; and are haughty because of it; they think of themselves as more than an angel, yea a god; and whose end is the bottomless pit. The word for proud is translated as: ‘exalt, high, above, height’ and ‘upward.’ It means ‘haughty, lofty, tall, arrogant.’

The connotation includes: ‘lift up, mount up, raise up [to] great height.’ The word for wealth is translated as: army, 56 times; man of valour, 37 times; host, 29 times; forces, 14 times; valiant, 13 times; strength, 12 times; riches, 11 times; wealth, 10 times; power, 9 times; substance, 8 times; and might, 6 times. The Prince of Tyre had acquired not only wealth but a. the trappings of wealth, that is, power and b. the means by which to retain power, an army of followers. For this being, it is all about the pride in their wisdom and abilities, equating themselves with the Ancient of Days.

A Lament over the King of Tyre

11 Moreover, the word of the Lord came to me: 12 “Son of man, raise a lamentation [H7015 – qiynah: dirge, elegy] over the king [royal (one)] of Tyre, and say [H559 – ‘amar: speak, utter] to [them], Thus says the Lord God:

“You were the signet [or seal] of perfection, full of wisdom [Proverbs 8:22-31] and perfect in beauty. 13 You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius [ruby, carnelian, garnet], topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and crafted in gold were your settings and your engravings. [Original Hebrew says: ‘the workmanship (H4399) of your tabrets or tambourines (H8596) and your pipes (H5345)’] On the day that you were created they were prepared. 14 You were an anointed [H4473 – mimshach: ‘outspread (with outstretched wings)’, root H4886: ‘consecrate’] guardian [H5526 – cakak: defend, cover, protector, join together] cherub [‘flanking God’s throne’]. 

I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked [planets of the Solar System]. 15 You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, till unrighteousness [H5766 – avel: violent deeds of injustice] was found in you. 16 In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence [H2555 – chamac: injustice] in your midst, and you sinned [H2398 – chata: ‘miss the way or path of right’]; so I cast you [threw you] as a profane^ [H2490 – chalal: polluted] thing [disgraced] from the mountain of God, and I destroyed [H6 – ‘abad: exterminate] you, O guardian [anointed] cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire [“no more strolling among the gems of fire for you!”].

17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty [H3308 – yophiy]; you corrupted  [H7843 – shchath: to spoil, ruin] your wisdom for the sake of your splendor [brightness, shining]. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you. 18 By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade you profaned your sanctuaries; so I brought fire out from your midst; it consumed [destroyed] you, and I turned you to ashes on the earth in the sight of all who saw you [cast into a lake of fire]. 19  All who know you among the peoples are appalled [astonished, desolate, devastated] at you; you have come to a dreadful [terror, calamity, destruction] end and shall be no more forever” – Revelation 20:2, 7, 10.

The salient points for the King of Tyre and they are numerous, include: they are perfect; full of wisdom; extraordinarily beautiful; trusted in the Garden of Eden; bedecked with jewels; arrayed in gold; an anointed guardian cherub by the Eternal’s throne; held the highest position of authority in the Almighty’s government; became unrighteous; turned violent; were thrown out of God’s sanctuary and cast to the ground, meaning the physical plane; their headquarters on Earth (Tiamat) was destroyed; they became proud because of how beautiful they were; their wisdom became secondary to their outward splendour; and they will be consumed by eternal fire when this Earth is destroyed. 

The King of Tyre like the Prince of Tyre, is wise and became full of pride. Yet unusually, considerable extra detail is provided for the ‘King’ of Tyre. Why split them into a prince and king if they are the same person? Chapter Twenty-Eight in Ezekiel is speaking of two very different personalities, though commentators read it as describing just one being, while then equating them with the same personality as described in Isaiah chapter Fourteen. In support of being one person, is how a prince can either inherit or usurp the position of a king. Yet the fact remains that a. a prince is distinct and separate from a king and b. a king is of higher rank than a prince.

The telling point about the King of Tyre, is the first which happens to be the most profound in its permutations. The Prince of Tyre has a prophecy or prediction against them; whereas the King of Tyre is given a lament. The word for lament also means a dirge or elegy. Lament: ‘to feel or express sorrow or regret for’, ‘to mourn for or over deeply’, ‘a formal expression of sorrow or mourning, especially in verse or song; an elegy or dirge.’ Elegy: ‘a mournful, melancholy, or plaintive poem, especially a funeral song or a lament for the dead’. Dirge: ‘a funeral song or tune, or one expressing mourning in commemoration of the dead’. What do all three words have in common? They are expressions for a. mourning and sorrow and b. in commemoration of someone who is already, ‘dead.’ Not only are they dead, they are lamented. 

We will learn that the King of Tyre is not yet dead, but that it is the death of the relationship being lamented by the Almighty. One does not lament someone unless they hold extreme value to the one mourning. Who could such a being be, who has turned against the Eternal yet is still worthy of remembrance by Him in memorial?

The very next point made is nearly as weighty as the first, for in verse twelve, it is not necessarily a king being addressed, but it is someone royal, someone of prestige. This personage could be feminine. Clues of the such are that they are described as a perfect creation, possessing perfect beauty – absolute beauty of face and form – every precious gem, including diamonds, sapphires, emeralds, ruby and gold was their covering, they were an anointed Cherub or protector of the Creator’s very throne, an integral member of the Celestial Assembly; but then condemned for their unjust actions and their pride over their beauty, swapping righteous wisdom for self-glorification of their own splendour and thus cast out from the mountain of God. Something akin to spontaneous combustion, means they will be destroyed, being stunningly terminated and reduced to ashes forever.

Penetrating deeper into these words and phrases, we can confirm that there is a distinct femaleness flowing from them. This entity is the sum of female beauty, rather than of masculine handsomeness – to the point of perfection, in that the Creator was proud of His work – and they are clothed in extensive jewellery and gold, walking or strutting their splendour for all to see. Precious gems and stones are adored by woman the world over. What woman does not like jewellery or ever has enough? It could be argued the same can be said of an effeminate or trans-sexual male; or, these verses really are describing a female being. The text could just as accurately be rendered the Queen of Tyre. We will study further regarding the question of a Queen of Heaven; a Goddess in the spirit realm, who was created as a companion for the Ancient of Days. 

Article: The Ark of God:

‘Most Bible translations say king; only a couple use the correct contextual, ‘ruler. In the Hebrew, the word ‘him’ is not there and has been added in English translations, only misleading further regarding the true identity of this ‘ruler of Tyre.’ For the Hebrew word if it were included in the original, would be H1931 hu or hi, meaning either ‘he, she’ or ‘it’ depending on the context.’

As this king is actually a queen, ‘the difficulty is that the Hebrew word used, melek (H4428) is masculine… It stems from the same root word which can mean king or queen (H4427 – melek), literally, “to become queen or king.” The Hebrew does not have a specific word for queen, for it only recognises a queen as not a ruler in her own right, but as subsidiary to a king. Thus, there is the the feminine of melek, in malkah (H4436) which is used invariably for a queen regent or wife of a king. For example Queen Vashti, the wife of Artaxerxes I (or Ahasuerus) – Esther 1:9 (Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes).

Alternatively, shegal (H7694) for a queen consort (Psalm 45:9, Daniel 5:2-3), which simply means a ‘wife’ of the first rank, as distinguished from mere concubines and gebirah (H1377 for a lady or queen mother – for example Tahpenes, wife of Pharaoh Hadad, 1 Kings 11:19 (1 Kings 2:19). McClintock and Strong: ‘Gebirdh… is expressive of authority; it means “powerful” or “mistress,” being the feminine of gebir, “master,” or “lord.” The feminine is to be understood by its relation to the masculine, which is not applied to kingly power or to kings, but to general authority and dominion.’ 

The one exception is the Queen of Sheba who visited King Solomon. She very obviously a female, was accorded the Hebrew word malkah – 1 Kings 10:1 (refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut). Otherwise there has been in Hebrew, a bias in the assumption a ruler was male and therefore a king and so in the case of typing this ruler against that of Tyre, the identity of Wisdom the once closest companion of the Ancient of Days turned His greatest Adversary (Job 1:6-12), has remained conveniently hidden for millennia…’ 

Like the resplendent personage in Isaiah chapter fourteen who fell from Heaven, the King of Tyre is similarly spectacular and cast out from the Eternal’s presence. The plot thickens and provides significant food for thought. The Hebrew word for violence in verse sixteen means: ‘cruelty, wrong, false, damage, oppressor’ and ‘unjust gain’ – Violence ‘done against’ others and ‘violent [in] dealing’ with others. The word profane translates as: ‘pollute, defile, break, wounded’ and ‘slay.’ It can also mean ‘piped’. It means: ‘to desecrate’ or ‘pollute oneself sexually and ‘to violate the honour of’ or ‘dishonour’ or ‘violate (a covenant).’ Further important clues, are a sexual connotation, where it can mean ‘prostitute.’ Did this creature betray the Eternal and was that betrayal sexual? Also, the Hebrew word for violence can mean to ‘wound (fatally), bore through’ and ‘pierce.’ This implies a serious injury in the least and at the worst, death. 

Additionally, Ezekiel refers to musical proficiency, in playing ‘the flute or pipe’ a ‘player on instruments.’ This being was given the gift of musical talent so they could share joy with the Eternal – Article: Na’amah. Recall, we discussed a similar reference to Nimrod in the previous chapter. Interestingly, though some translations mention Satan, it is actually the Prince of the Power of the Air or the One who rules those in the air, who is described in Ephesians 2:2, BSB: as “… the ruler of the power of the air [waves]… the spirit who is now at work…” This being is none other than the Lord of the Fliers or Lord of those who Fly. His title, as revealed in the Bible is Beelzebub; while his personal name is perhaps a surprise for many, for it is Samael.

The word for destroyed is past tense and leaves little to the imagination. It is translated as: ‘perish, lose, fail, utterly, broken, undone’ and ‘void’. It also means: ’cause to vanish, go astray, die, be exterminated, be lost, to give up (as lost), to blot out, do away with, put to death (of divine judgement).’ The connotation is, ‘have no way to flee, to wander away’ or ‘lose oneself.’ There can be no doubt that this being has either died, or has a death sentence against them that makes them as good as dead. The Hebrew word for corrupted in verse seventeen can be translated as: ‘destroy, mar, waster’ and ‘battered.’ The word means: ‘go to ruin, decay, to be marred, be injured, be ruined, be rotted, to spoil, ruin, to pervert, corrupt (morally).’ 

The verses in this passage about the ‘king’ of Tyre are referring to someone else entirely. They are separate from the verses describing the Prince of Tyre. Each are also distinct from those contained in Isaiah. Aside from the connections through covering and shining; the clues reveal that this being is not Samael; but rather a creature of great Wisdom who betrayed the Creator and very possibly, has been seriously wounded. For this being, it has been about distancing themselves from the Eternal and following their own path or Way of Wisdom. We will investigate further, this mysterious and enigmatic being of perfection and wisdom. Samael, ‘a’ satan but not ‘the’ Satan, is not described as perfect or beautiful. Rather, as Samyaza, he desired the beauty and allure of human women on Earth.

The Serpent in Genesis chapter three is Samael and described as crafty – meaning: ‘shrewd, sly, sensible, prudent, subtle’ from the Hebrew aruwm, H6175 – though they are not described as full of wisdom. Satan is described as a Dragon, presumably of the order of Seraphim, meaning a fiery flying serpent – as well as associated with the serpentine creature known as Leviathan. The being in Ezekiel 28:14 and 16, is described as a Cherub. If Satan is the ‘King of Tyre’ in type, this would raise a conundrum. Unless Satan underwent a transformation.

The Book of Job reveals that Satan meets with the Creator to report on its activities on Earth – Job 1:6. Satan fell from Heaven metaphorically, losing its place of trust – Luke 10:18; Revelation 12:3-4. Even so, the Adversary did not lose their position of power – Revelation 12:7-9; Matthew 4:8-9. Ultimately, the Devil will be punished and lose everything, including its life – Revelation 20:10; Matthew 25:41. 

The one incorrectly called Lucifer, but rather Heylel in the Hebrew – the ‘shining one, light bearer’ and ‘morning star’ – is not the same personage as the King of Tyre in Ezekiel chapter Twenty-Eight. Ostensibly it appears so, though reference to Satan’s right hand, Samael remains plausible and probable. 

It would explain the persistent belief in which Satan’s identity and the mysterious ‘Lucifer’ are not the same person. If such is the case, then Samael as Heylel, fell from Heaven after saying in his heart that he would exalt himself above all other angels, sit in the Assembly of Celestial government, ruling as the Most High himself. This being like Satan, seeks to rule in the place of the Creator and topple the hierarchy of Heaven. For Samael, it is all about a thirst and lust for Power. This in turn raises the vital question – for clues suggest it is a legitimate one – of whether all the forces of evil are united, or torn apart by factions. 

The war for control of the spiritual realm, described in Revelation chapter Twelve has not happened; it is yet future. Once it takes place and the Archangel Michael defeats the Dragon, the Adversary is cast out literally and once for all. This time, to begin the final countdown of end time events on Earth. 

The earlier verses In Ezekiel chapter twenty-eight concerning the Prince of Tyre, on a cursory reading could appear to be about Samael. Closer scrutiny hints they are written about the other key figure in the Adversary’s hierarchy, Azazel. Azazel is integral in Satan’s plans and has undoubtedly become its second in command, after a possible rift with Samael. The verses show a different punishment for a unique being; though the sin of intellectual pride is similar and the reliance on their own wisdom. The Prince of Tyre says: I am a god. This differs subtly from what Heylel says: I will make myself like the Most High. The reference to being put in the pit, while not convincingly clinching the identity of Azazel with Abaddon and Apollyon the Beast, certainly lends weight. Azazel’s role in the sabotage mission to Earth before the Flood and again in the future as the Beast – who is let out of the Abyss – reveals Azazel is extremely high profile. This is why there are multiple, yet cryptic mentions of Azazel in the scriptures. 

The verses in Ezekiel speak of his amassing great wealth while on Earth and his retinue of followers who evolved into an army. Recall, Azazel taught mankind the rudiments of warfare. Azazel is known as the peacock angel and we will learn that he was a charismatic teacher and leader, with ‘beauty of wisdom’ and ‘splendour’ or ‘brightness’ – articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. The Creator both demeans yet aptly describes Azazel, by saying he is a man and not god. As the word man in this context is for a creature – the same as used for the Man of Sin and the Son of Man. The Beast, though angelic, transforms from spirit into an earthly visitation, while manifest in our dimensions and thus the fitting label of man is used – Revelation 13:18. This is not so remarkable remember, for it was what Azazel performed prior to the flood, transforming from a spirit being to one humanlike. After Samael, it is Azazel who is responsible in endeavouring to thwart the Creator’s plan for mankind.

It is his mark which will be devastatingly revealed in the majority of mankind – Revelation 13:16-17. In the Greek (G5480 – charagma) the word mark can be translated as ‘graven’ and means: ‘a stamp, an imprinted mark’ like a ‘mark branded upon horses’ signifying ownership. It also has the connotation of a ‘thing carved, sculpture, graven work’ and ‘of idolatrous images.’ More significantly it alludes to ‘a scratch or etching (as a badge* of servitude)’ or a ‘sculptured figure (statue).’

The root word of mark (G5482 – charax) means to ‘sharpen to a point, a stake’ or a ‘palisade a pale, or rampart.’ A rampart is an elevated fortification with a capped stone parapet. One can’t help but think of the Great Pyramid and its original capstone which may have been composed of gold, a crystal of some sort or possibly even diamond encrusted. The sharpened point of a palisade may even include pointing – no pun intended – to the tip of a hypodermic needle. It is worth mentioning that via an injection, it is possible to insert by needle, a long, thin radio-frequency identification microchip, or RFID – Article: Covid 19 Injection.

The number of the Beast is 666 and in the Greek it is written as chi xi stigma (G5516). Stigma in Greek (G4742) stems from the primary word stizo, meaning to ‘stick’ or ‘prick’ a ‘mark incised or punched (for recognition of ownership)’ a ‘scar* of service.’ Strong’s adds: ‘a mark pricked [cut] in or branded upon the body.’ It was common in the past for soldiers and slaves to bear the mark of their commander or master. Refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod for further information on what the mark of the Beast may entail – as well as the article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

Unknown source – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Carl Sanders sat in seventeen New World Order meetings with heads-of-state officials such as Henry Kissinger and Bob Gates of the C.I.A. to discuss plans on how to bring about a one-world system. The government commissioned Carl Sanders [in the 1960s] to design a microchip for identifying and controlling the peoples of the world a microchip that could be inserted under the skin with a hypodermic needle.’

The invention of RFID technology is credited to scientist Harry Stockman in 1948. Though a Russian physicist Leon Theremin, is commonly attributed as having created the first RFID device and its successful technological application in 1946. Even so, it has earlier roots back to the Second World War as RFID is a combination of radar and radio broadcast technology. In 1963, R F Harrington formulated new RFID ideas which included scattering data and information. The potential of RFID technology was unlocked in 1973 by Charles Walton, who patented the first RFID key card. Regarding the actual platform to administer RFID technology minutely, it was in 1959 when the actual microchip was invented by Jack Kilby of Texas Instruments and also Robert Noyce.

‘Carl Sanders, with a team of engineers behind him, with U.S. grant monies supplied by tax dollars, took on this project and designed a microchip that is powered by a lithium battery, rechargeable through the temperature changes in our skin. Without the knowledge of the Bible (Brother Sanders was not a Christian at the time), these engineers spent one-and-a-half-million dollars doing research on the best and most convenient place to have the microchip inserted… These researchers found that the forehead and the back of the hand are not just the most convenient places, but are also the only viable places for rapid, consistent temperature changes in the skin to recharge the lithium battery. 

The microchip is approximately seven millimeters in length, .75 millimeters in diameter, about the size of a grain of rice. It is capable of storing pages upon pages of information about you. All your general history, work history, crime record, health history, and financial data can be stored on this chip.

Brother Sanders believes that this microchip, which he regretfully helped design, is the “mark” spoken about in Revelation 13:16-18. The original Greek word for “mark” is “charagma,” which means a “scratch or etching.” It is also interesting to note that the number 666 is actually a word in the original Greek. The word is “chi xi stigma,” with the last part, “stigma,” also meaning “to stick or prick.” Carl believes this refers to a hypodermic needle.

Mr. Sanders asked a Boston Medical Center doctor what would happen if the lithium contained within the RFID microchip leaked into the body. The doctor responded that if the microchip broke inside a human body, the lithium would cause a severe and painful wound filled with pus. This is what the book of Revelation says: “And the first (angel) went, and poured out his vial on the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore on the men which had the mark of the beast, and on them which worshipped his image” (Revelation 16:2).’

Artist depictions for Azazel as a fallen dark angel above and as Abaddon (or Apollyon) the Beast of the Abyss below

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Asherah and her true identity has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Asherah’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

As mentioned earlier, a planet called Rahab is squarely stated in scripture, particularly at the time of its destruction. The word Rahab is interesting for a variety of reasons. Firstly, it is an ’emblematic name’ and epithet for Egypt (refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia); secondly, it is the name of a famous harlot from Jericho, who had her life spared because of her kindness and hospitality to the Israelite spies. So much so, that she is listed in the chapter of faith in the Book of Hebrews – Joshua 2:1-21; Hebrews 11:30-31. 

Thirdly, the word means ‘proud, strength’ and includes ‘boaster’ or ‘blusterer’ deriving from the root words H7292 and H7293. Further meanings include: ‘to behave proudly, act stormily or boisterously or arrogantly, to act insolently, storm against, beset, importune, embolden, capture, overcome, to disturb, alarm, awe, confuse’ and ‘make bold or proud.’ Fourthly and most interestingly, the word Rahab refers to a ‘mythical’ sea* monster. This piece of information is significant.

Isaiah 51:9

English Standard Version

‘Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the Lord; awake, as in days of old, the generations of long ago. Was it not you who cut [H2672 – chatsab: cleave, hew] Rahab [H7294] in pieces, who pierced^ [H2490 – chalal: the exact same word as used in Ezekiel 28:16 regarding the ‘king’ of Tyre] the dragon?’

These events occurred in ages past and long ago, as in before the Creation of Adam and Eve nearly 30,000 years ago. The planet Rahab suffered a fate remarkably similar to that of Tiamat, which was cut or cleaved in two; one half left in pieces. One of the angel’s home worlds and head quarters of the Dragon was destroyed. The Creator struck a massive blow. Rahab, was cut, while the Dragon, was pierced. The Dragon is the Devil and the one known as the Adversary. Rahab is clearly analogous with the Dragon. We will explore a similar link between Tiamat and the sea* monster, Leviathan, as well as the feminine aspect of each. 

From a planetary perspective, Tiamat was cleaved in two. In like manner, Mars either at the same time was caught up in the cosmic battle which ensued, or later at the time of the Flood was again hit by a sphere such as Venus, Nibiru or one of its moons travelling though our Solar System. The scaring on Mars is still visible today and is considered one of the great wonders of the solar system, defying conventional attempts to explain. It leaves progressive astronomers with one viable solution, consisting of a cosmic thunderbolt of electricity in adequately answering the massive gouging found in the Valles Marineris, which is four times deeper than the Grand Canyon and stretching for nearly three thousand miles. 

Particularly as upon investigation, flooding has been ruled out. Ralph Juergens wrote in 1974: ‘… this entire region resembles nothing so much as an area zapped by a powerful electric arc advancing unsteadily across the surface, occasionally splitting in two, and now and then-weakening, so that its traces narrow and even degrade into lines of disconnected craters.’

A quote from an unknown author: 

‘The planet of the “Covering Cherub” [Ezekiel 28:16] is still evident within the debris, asteroids and comets, which are strewn throughout our solar system. Significantly, these chunks of the rebel angel’s planet, cosmic stones, have been used to mete out God’s judgment throughout history. God’s judgment on the rebels continued, as the incomprehensibly violent and genetically unlikely dinosaurs, the very image of the dragon, “that old serpent”, were destroyed with another chunk of the rebel cherub’s planet.”

Isaiah 30:7

New English Translation

Egypt is totally incapable of helping. For this reason I call her “Proud one who is silenced.”

The English word Egypt is used here, though the Hebrew Rahab is used by the NIV, NRSV, NAB and others. Some translations say: ‘a helpless monster’ CEV, or ‘the harmless Dragon’ NLT.

Psalm 89:10

New Century Version

‘You crushed the sea monster [Leviathan] Rahab; by your power you scattered your enemies.’

Job 26:11-13

English Standard Version

‘The pillars of heaven tremble and are astounded at his rebuke. By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he shattered [H4272 – machats: ‘dash asunder, strike through, pierce, smash’] Rahab. By his wind [spirit] the heavens were made fair [garnished]; his hand pierced [forbids] the fleeing [fugitive, crooked] serpent.’

Job 9:13

New English Translation

‘God does not restrain his anger; under him the helpers of Rahab lie crushed.’

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, page 35 – emphasis mine:

‘Nibiru was an artificial world [the Annunaki] used [as] a vehicle [like a death star]. It was converted from a planet-sized asteroid, or comet. These beings created the Black Race [Homo erectus] on Earth as recorded in the Sumerian tablets. The Annunaki considered the Black Race to be their personal possession similar to how the Draco consider the rest of the world to be their possession. The beings on Nibiru have nothing to do with the Draco. They are two separate cultures and races. Each one with an agenda, even though they are [both] genetically Reptilian. The [two] are at odds with each other and were at war… something terrible happened on the Moon. There is evidence of explosion sites and debris from vehicles. The Sumerian’s and Egyptians documented wars in space with flashes of light and explosions seen on the Moon.’

Various researchers state that Nibiru, (Planet 9, formerly Planet X) – whether it is a bonafide planet (star) or an artificial sphere-cum-space craft – will be due back into our Solar System. Others credit it with the biblical name in the Book of Revelation of Wormwood. The word wormwood, is mentioned a number of times in the Bible.

Proverbs 5:3-5

English Standard Version

‘For the lips of a forbidden woman< drip honey, and her speech is smoother than oil, but in the end she is bitter [H4751 – mar: angry] as wormwood [words of sorrow], sharp as a two-edged sword. Her feet go down to death; her steps follow the path to Sheol [the grave or hell]…’

Note the female< connection. The word for bitter can be translated as: ‘bitterly, chafed, discontented’ and ‘heavy.’ It means bitter ‘of water or food’, of harlot’s< end, end of wickedness, cry’ and ‘of pain.’ The Hebrew word for wormwood is la’anah (H3939) and can also be translated as hemlock. It has the connotation of, ‘to curse’ as wormwood is poisonous and thus ‘accursed.’ Hemlock is a very poisonous plant. All parts of it are toxic of which it is fatal and there is no cure. The toxins are alkaloids which cause muscular paralysis, leading to respiratory failure and death. Hemlock can grow from between three to ten feet tall. It is part of the Umbellferae with white flowerheads, that resemble those of parsnips, carrots, angelica and water hemlock and is actually part of the carrot family Apiaceae, native to Europe and North Africa.

Wormwood is associated with a sharp ‘two-edged sword’, as Nibiru may have sliced through the planet Rahab. It is also associated with ‘death.’ Wormwood means ‘absence’ and ‘bitter sorrow.’ In the Bible it is associated with either bitterness, as in ‘a root of bitterness’, poison or death – Hebrews 12:14-15. Samael is also associated with poison and death. Wormwood is a bitter herb, used for medicine and for various digestive problems. Wormwood is also used to treat fever, depression, muscle pain and worm infections. It can also be used to increase sexual desire. It can be applied directly to the skin in healing wounds and insect bites as a counterirritant to reduce pain. Wormwood oil is used as a fragrance component in soaps, cosmetics and perfumes, as well as an insecticide. 

Wormwood extracts are used in alcoholic beverages, such as Vermouth. Absinthe> is another well-known alcoholic beverage prepared from wormwood oil; being a bright emerald-green colour. It is now banned in many countries, including the United States; but it is still allowed in the European Union countries as long as the content of the chemical thujone is less than 35 mg/kg. Thujone is potentially poisonous. Distilling wormwood in alcohol increases the thujone concentration. Thujone excites the central nervous system. However, an overdose can cause seizures and other adverse effects.

In Amos 6:12, wormwood is described as poison and unrighteousness. Amos 5:7, describes the judgement and unrighteousness of wormwood. Lamentations 3.19, describes wormwood as gall; Lamentations 3:15, says ‘drunk with wormwood.’ Jeremiah 9:15 and 23:15, speak of ‘drinking wormwood as the water of gall.’ Deuteronomy 29:18, reveals ‘a root that bears gall and wormwood.’ Gall means ‘bitter’ or ‘bitterness of spirit’ though it is also a synonym for impudence, effrontery, rancour, audacity, spite, venom, malice and haughtiness.

Revelation 8:10-11

English Standard Version

‘The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star [Nibiru?] fell from heaven, blazing [consume with fire] like a torch [G2985 – lampas: ‘a lamp, the flame of which is fed with oil’], and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. The name of the star [angel] is Wormwood [G894 – apsinthos*]. A third of the waters became wormwood [poisonous], and many people died from the water, because it had been made bitter’ – article: 33.

The Ukrainian word for Wormwood is… Chernobyl

It was on Saturday 26th April 1986, in what was then the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, that a reactor in the nuclear power station of Chernobyl in northern Ukraine, exploded; releasing massive amounts of radiation that drifted across northern Europe, affecting the inhabitants and food grown in the entire region. The immediate area surrounding the power station has been evacuated permanently and the damaged reactor was ‘entombed in millions of tons of cement’ – Article: Nuclear Nefariousness.

Many in Ukraine and Russia, thought this augmented the beginning of a nuclear armageddon with radiation preceding it. The word chernobyl refers to Artemisia** vulgaris, whereas the word used for wormwood in Ukrainian is polyn and is the plant Artemisia absinthium.> ‘Botanically and chemically, Absinthium vulgaris (misprint for Artemisia vulgaris) is so similar to A. absinthium that A. vulgaris is also sometimes called “wormwood”, though “mugwort” is a more common English name.’ Not to be confused with St John’s wort (or Tarragon), which is Artemisia dracunculus.

It is unlikely that either are being referred to in Revelation, as ‘Artemisia judaica is widely cited as the most likely candidate for the biblical wormwood. In Christian legend, when the biblical serpent was expelled from Eden, wormwood sprang in its trail to prevent its return. Indeed, the herb is a frequent biblical symbol for bitterness, calamity, and sorrow…’ 

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, pages 35-36:

‘In the year 2000, The New York Times reported that NASA had discovered a large object past Pluto that had an elliptical orbit… NASA expected the object to pass close to earth around 2003. The Illuminati used particle beam accelerator weapons [directed free energy] in pulse form to blow up Nibiru as it neared Jupiter. Nibiru was destroyed in April 2003. This is why… asteroids and meteors [have been] flooding the Earth from the gravitational pull of the Sun. Fragments of Nibiru were seen for months and years after the destruction, flying into the Sun via the NASA suncam.’ If this is accurate, then another candidate other than Nibiru is required to fulfil Wormwood or, it wasn’t the real Nibiru which was exploded.

In the film adaptation of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Snape’s earliest words to Harry are: “Potter! What would I get if I added powdered root of asphodel to an infusion of wormwood?” Asphodel is a remedy for poisonous snake bites and connected with the underworld of the dead. Wormwood is also linked with the lunar deity Artemis. Artemis** is the root word for Artemisia, or wormwood. 

This is where it becomes diabolically interesting for Artemis is the Greek goddess of the Moon, a huntress, daughter of Zeus and twin sister of Apollo. Artemis is a Mother Goddess, yet a perpetual ‘virgin’ like her mother the Queen of Heaven, the Madonna.

Artemis, also known as Aphrodite, Venus, Astarte, Inanna, Ishtar (Easter), Semiramis and by her true (biblical) name, Lilith

Her twin Apollo is none other than Apollyon (or Abaddon) of the abyss – the fallen dark Angel and future Beast. Lilith is the daughter of Samael and twin sister of Azazel. Her guise as the Virgin Artemis is not without irony for Lilith was the mother and wife of Demi-god Nimrod. A family tree is forming, with a grandson, sister, brother and father all mentioned in scripture; albeit not always obviously or directly. The glaring omission is the mother of this remarkable Pentahedron. What shape does a Pentahedron make? Including its base, a four sided Pyramid no less – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Some biblical commentators presently teach that Nimrod, as the ‘spirit of Osiris-Apollo’, will be resurrected as the future Beast and Antichrist. It is worth noting their comments for what we can glean from them, even though we have already addressed the subject. For if Nimrod were to be resurrected or rather, his (Nephilim) spirit were to re-appear and manifest in this plane to cause havoc a second time; it would be in the form of the False Prophet – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. It is Azazel, bound in the Abyss – called Abaddon (and Apollyon) – who is the Beast (Antichrist).

Tom Horn – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Numerous scholarly and classical works identify “Apollyon” as the god “Apollo” – the Greek deity “of death and pestilence,” and Webster’s Dictionary points out that “Apollyon” was a common variant of “Apollo” until recent history… Accordingly, the name Apollo turns up in ancient literature with the verb apollymi or apollyo (destroy), and scholars including W. R. F. Browning believe… Paul may have identified the god Apollo as the “spirit of Antichrist” operating behind the persecuting Roman emperor, Domitian, who wanted to be recognized as “Apollo incarnate” in his day.

Most Prophecy experts today believe the Man of Sin [not the (first) Beast, but the second beast called the False Prophet] spoken of in Scripture will soon emerge on the world scene as a saviour… the source of his profound comprehension and irresistible presence will be the result of an invisible network of thousands of years of collective knowledge stemming from his embodiment of a very old, super-intelligent spirit [such as Nimrod]. As Jesus Christ was the “seed of the woman” (Genesis 3:15), he will be the “seed of the serpent.” And though his arrival in the form of a man was foretold by numerous Scriptures, the broad masses will not immediately recognize him for what he actually is – paganism’s ultimate incarnation…’ – Articles: Thoth; and Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

‘This is where the very title of Peter Goodgame’s fascinating new book, The Second Coming of the Antichrist, introduces an intriguing hypothesis – that Satan’s seed was manifest once before in history and is now poised to return again in bodily form. People not familiar with biblical eschatology may find this idea fantastic, that the [beings] who [become] the [Beast, including the False Prophet were] once alive, then [were] dead, and [will return] from the grave to rule the world in the end times 

… But in identifying the ancient spirit that will be revived in the end-times Antichrist, the rabbit hole goes deeper. Convincing evidence exists farther back in time that the historical figure upon whom these myths were based was the legendary King Enmerkar of Uruk, known in the Bible as Nimrod…’

Doug Woodward – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Egyptian Book of the Dead quotes Osiris (Apollo) saying, “I am Yesterday and I am Today; and I have the power to be born a second time.[Tom] Horn quotes [Manly P.] Hall from The Secret Teachings of the Ages, in which he says, “The Dying God shall rise again! The secret room in the House of the Hidden Places shall be rediscovered. The Pyramid again shall stand as the ideal emblem of solidarity, inspiration, aspiration, resurrection and regeneration” – refer Tower of Babel, article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘Interestingly, Edgar Cayce, the Sleeping Prophet, predicted in the 1930’s that a secret room known as the Hall of Records would be discovered within the Egyptian Sphinx. This room would provide proof of the Antediluvian civilization of Atlantis and provide the history of the world before the Flood of Noah’ – Article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis.

Rob Skiba – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to Webster’s, Apollyon is a common misspelling of Apollo. In Hellenistic theology, Apollo is generally depicted as a very benevolent god, representative of poetry, music and the arts. However, he is also known as the sender and stayer of pestilence. As a son of Zeus this would certainly fit – especially if… Zeus is Lucifer [rather, Samael] – a being who loves to appear as an angel of light and goodness, but in fact is the harbinger of plague, pestilence and death. Considering the fact that the Fifth Trumpet releases the plague of locusts (which is certainly a pestilence), the idea that Apollo (Apollyon) [as the Beast and Antichrist] is directly referred to as “the king [that rules] over them” truly fits! 

… Apollo [Abaddon] will have the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit and [returns] with a horde of demonic warriors who have been bound in the Abyss for centuries [millennia]. Rudolf Steiner, the author of “Egyptian Myths and Mysteries,” written in 1908, states: “The Greeks… as they became acquainted with the Egyptian mysteries they recognized that Osiris [Nimrod] was the same as the god whom they called Apollo. They said that the Egyptian Osiris was Apollo, and that, like Osiris, Apollo worked upon the nerves so as to achieve a soul-life within man. The Anti-Christ is the return of Apollo [Azazel] and probably the return of other prophesied gods, such as Quetzacoatl [also Azazel] of the Mayans and Baal [meaning ‘lord’, title of Samael (Samyaza)] of the Canaanites. Both of which are sky gods like Apollo.’

Quetzacoatl is an iconic god from ancient Mesoamerica and dates even further back into antiquity. He is associated with the Sun, wind and air; with the planet Venus; the dawn; crafts; learning and knowledge. In Aztec belief, Quetzacoatl had a twin and psychopomp, Xoloti the dog-headed soul guide for the dead. This aspect is mindful of the Giza Sphinx and its once original dog head of Anubis, the Egyptian god of the afterlife’ – refer The Message of the Sphinx, Graham Hancock & Robert Bauval; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Quetzacoatl was believed to be a white-haired charismatic visitor who flew in on his sky-chariot and taught the ancient Americans the fundamentals of building a society. Quetzacoatl eventually left, though he promised to return. Azazel will one day return. Azazel was also charismatic and godly. It is interesting to compare how Azazel is the peacock angel and Quetzacoatl means the feathered serpent. His name is derived from the Nahuatl words, quetzalli referring to the quetzal – ‘the emerald plumed bird’ – and specifically the ‘tail feather of the quetzal bird’ and coatl meaning ‘snake’ or serpent – refer articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. Male Peacocks also have resplendent sapphire blue and emerald green tail feathers. In its literal sense, a seventeenth century descendant of Aztec royalty Ixtilxochitl, said the name means: ‘serpent of precious feathers’ and in its allegorical sense, ‘wisest of men.’

Animal symbols associated with Quetzacoatl include the rattlesnake, the crow and a macaw. The bird symbolism represents Azazel’s angelic identity as well as his flying capability. Whereas the reptile symbolism refers to the type of angelic being he is… of the Seraphim

Glorian, Sons of Samuel – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Samael is the name of an angel, a very important angel who unfortunately has been removed from the Christian religion and has been trampled in the mud in the Jewish tradition, but in the very scriptures it is stated that Samael is a great angel. The name Samael is Hebrew. Every Hebrew letter has meanings and numbers related to it. When we look at the components of this word Samael, we see that it ends with EL. El in Hebrew means God. In the Bible there are places where the most holy God is called EL. He is also called Elohim which is plural for “Gods” or “Gods and Goddesses.” Elohim comes from EL. In Hebrew Samael is spelled Samech, Mem, Aleph, Lamed. Four letters. This is a four letter name of [a] God: a tetragrammaton.

The first portion of this name is Samech Mem. Sam (Samech + Mem): bitter beverage, drug, poison, toxin, medicine, potion; perfume. The name Sama-el means “the medicine of God, the perfume of God, the poison of God, the drug of God, the bitter beverage of God.” All of these are accurate translations.

The [original] serpent is the Divine Mother Kundalini [Article: 33]. She is symbolized in the first letter of the name Samael. The letter Samech looks like a circle and it represents that serpent who eats its tail. That cosmic womb, the ouroboros, the great serpent of the universe, is the ancient symbol deep in the heart of every [false] religion: the dragon of nature, the great dragon, the great serpent. 

Samech is a circle that is constantly in motion, rotating, which represents the cosmic womb of the Divine Mother, the fire, the base of all existence, the eternal cycle of life: night and day, dark and light, two sides of the same thing, but which is always positive. This is the great mystery of the Divine Mother, hidden in the very first letter of the name Samael.

In addition, the letter Samech is the fifteenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The fifteenth letter is related to the Fifteenth Arcanum, which is Passion, the Devil. So we see here some very interesting contradictions… But… this is integral to the nature of this great angel, duality; the positive and the negative, light and dark, black and white [good and evil]. Lucifer, the tempter, serves God. It is through Lucifer that the universe can exist; nonetheless, we have to defeat Lucifer [Samael].

The second letter in Samael is Mem. Mem is the thirteenth Hebrew letter and relates to water. The man represents the waters of life, which are within the womb, both in the microcosm and the macrocosm. Mem is the basis of the Mayim (Mem + Iod + Mem), which is Hebrew for the “waters.” You can see that the letters Samech and Mem are very deeply connected. In fact, their shapes are very similar. Mem represents the Mayim, the waters, and it is from the waters of creation that all life emerges. These waters are in the womb of the Divine Mother, Maia, Mary [as in the Queen of Heaven], related to Mar*, the sea [where Leviathan dwells]. Furthermore, Mem is the Thirteenth Arcanum, which is the Arcanum of death, Immortality, signifying great change.

Samael is said to be related with the planet Mars*… in the Zohar. Samael says: “… my entire domination is based on killing. And if I accept the Torah, there will no longer be wars. My rule is over the planet Maadim (Mars) [the red planet] that indicates spilling of [red] blood” … ‘Mars is related with the sephirah Geburah (which means “Severity”), and is the fifth sphere from the top down on the Tree of Life. Geburah is related with Mars and the Sun [god], and it is the domain of justice, security, punishment, but from God. In other words, when God needs to send his force to render judgement or punishment, it is the force of Samael, that angel, [angel of death] who does it.

There was another angel in the seventh heaven, different in appearance from all the others, and of frightful mien. His height was so great, it would have taken five hundred years to cover a distance equal to it, and from the crown of his head to the soles of his feet he was studded with glaring eyes, at the sight of which the beholder fell prostrate in awe.’ “This one,” said Metatron [a transfigured righteous Enoch according to certain sources], addressing Moses, “is Samael, who takes the soul away from man.” “Whither goes he now?” asked Moses, and Metatron replied, “To fetch the soul of Job the pious.” [Moses and Job lived at approximately the same time – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe] Thereupon Moses prayed to God in these words, “O may it be Thy will, my God and the God of my fathers, not to let me fall into the hands of this angel.” 

‘When we look into the Garden of Eden, we see that Samael rides on the [old] serpent; that serpent is the first letter of his name, Samech, and that serpent is the Divine Mother Kundalini, the very energy of creation. In the Bible, the serpent comes to tempt the woman in relation with the Tree of Knowledge. This indicates a very deep relationship between divine knowledge, the knowledge of God, the Divine Mother, death, water, and the serpent… when we investigate the many traditions throughout the world, we find this tree and we always find it is related with the Goddess [of Wisdom and knowledge]. 

In the Egyptian tradition, Nut is the goddess of the Tree of Life, and we see pictures of her pouring out a liquid to sustain the life of her followers; that liquid is the beverage of God, the medicine of Samael. It is the ambrosia, amrita, or soma in Sanskrit terms. Soma gives the power of creation, the power of immortality. Immortality is the thirteen Arcanum (Mem) and emerges from the waters of the Divine Mother.

When we acquire real knowledge, for example, just hearing about this teaching, it can taste bitter, it can taste intense, it can shock us. That knowledge is the essence of this angel, Samael. It is “a bitter beverage” [bitter like wormwood] to the ego, it is “poison” [poisonous like hemlock] to the ego, but it is the “potion” or “perfume of God” that illuminates [Lucifer/Samael] the soul. Thus when we encounter gnosis or Daath (Hebrew for knowledge) we enter into a great conflict, psychologically… real knowledge, the esoteric knowledge, not just beliefs. When you experience this knowledge… you feel a great shock to the depth of our soul ; most people run away because it is intense and a poison to the ego: it terrifies the ego, because… Samael is the angel of death to the ego. The angel Samael is Mars, Aries, the God of war… 

… Samael… wages his war on behalf of God, not for selfish purposes, and not to punish indiscriminately, but to punish on behalf of God, with the permission of God, and for the good of all. Samael performs the will of God. Samael – doing his duty – appeared in the Garden to tempt the woman so that she would have the opportunity to learn… and to grow, to advance, but she did not. She gave into her desire and failed… the woman succumbs to temptation and had to bear the consequences. The first consequence was that the man and woman were cast out of Eden. Adam and Eve conceived a child. In the Bible [it] states that Adam knew his wife and Eve [beget] Cain. 

In Kabbalah [Jewish (occult knowledge) mysticism], the story goes deeper. It states that when the serpent tempted Eve, “it injected its filth into her”… the serpent is dual, Samech is dual: light and dark. This is why the Tree of Knowledge is the Tree of Knowledge of Good and… of Evil… When Eve succumbed to temptation she… is the one who brought evil, death, because when she failed in the temptation from Samael… [a] serpent, she polarized that energy to become negative. The serpent is the power of creativity through sex that tempts us to use our sexual power. When we have desire, we use that power to feed desire, to sustain our desires instead of doing the will of God. Instead of conquering our temptations and conquering our desires, we fall to our desires. 

This is that dual nature which manifests in us psychologically, energetically. This failure is because we become hypnotized by desire, and desire works through our physical senses, and primarily through sex. It tempts us with sensations that we want to experience, to sustain. Sensations are illusions. This is why the Divine Mother is called “Maya,” which can be translated as illusion, and [she as] the [old] serpent utilizes that illusion in order to tempt us. Unfortunately, we do not see through the illusion. We love materialistic sensations and we become addicted to them. The result is the birth of Cain.’ 

The parentage of Cain will be investigated further; as well as the idea that Samael and a mother goddess are or were, a double act. There is an apt saying that the ‘truth is truly stranger than fiction.’ None more so than what we are about to learn.

Glorian: “After this, they gave birth to the first son. He was the son of defilement, because two had intercourse with [Eve],and she conceived from both [Samael a serpent and the man, Adam] and gave birth to two [evil Cain and righteous Abel]. Each resembled his own father [Samael and Adam respectively] and their spirits were separated, one to the side and one to the other. Each was in the appearance of his own aspect.” – Zohar.

This is why the man and woman, Adam and Eve, had two children. They reflect the two sides of the Tree of Knowledge: Good and Evil, or the Pure Spirit and the Impure Spirit. These two children reflect their source. Abel is the pure one who is depicted as a shepherd and whose sacrifices God prefers; Cain is depicted as a gatherer of the fruits of the earth, but God does not prefer his sacrifices, thus Cain becomes angry and jealous. These two children represent the two potential outcomes of that Tree. The Tree of Knowledge (Daath) is within us, thus these children represent the two outcomes of how we use our energies. The power, the energy, that arrives to us from the angel Samael [the serpent of Eden – Genesis 3:1] and… the Divine Mother [the Old Serpent – Revelation 12:9], can be used for purity or impurity. 

Adam and Eve know the mysteries, but they succumbed to temptation and created Abel and Cain. Historically, when we look at Cain and Abel, it is from these two that humanity emerged. It says in the Zohar, “From the side of Kayin [Cain] came all the evil species, spirits, demons [Nephilim] and sorcerers [black magicians, warlocks and witches]. From the side of Hevel [Abel] came something more merciful, but still not perfect. This was left to Shet [Seth], the ancestor of all the righteous generations in the world [righteous Enoch and Noah], from whom the generations of the world issued. But from Kayin issued all the ruthless people, all the sinners and wicked people of the world [evil Enoch and evil Lamech].” 

‘Nonetheless, what we learn in Kabbalah is that when the Serpent came upon Eve and she gave birth to Cain, that child Cain is the child of… Samael. So when we talk about the sons of Samael, the first one we need to talk about is Cain, because Cain is the outcome of the temptation. This is why the Zohar blames Samael for everything. This is why Cain is said to have split nature: half human, half angel… from Cain came all the impurities, all the evil doers, but by parentage he is half-angel [the first Nephilim]. It states in the Zohar that he was different from other people, different from the rest [of] humanity. He stood out because he had half divine [spirit] heritage.

We are already children of Samael because we belong to the Aryan race. “Aryan” comes from Ares, which is the name of Mars. This entire humanity is the race of Ares, the race of Mars, children of Samael.’

Perhaps not all humanity but the line of Cain are the race of Ares. Yet, recall earlier how it is Caucasian people who exhibit a 25 hour bio-rhythm in likeness of Mars – as opposed to 24 hours for Earth. This is mentioned because the term Aryan technically applies to white people – who originally descend from Noah’s son, Shem. But historically, Aryan derives from the same word as Iran and refers to people from that region anciently who would eventually become known as European.

Glorian: ‘The doctrine of Samael is the doctrine of the Tree of Knowledge. This is the great controversy, the great duality of the Tree in the midst of the Garden… That Tree can lead to the path of… (Goodness) or… (impurity, evil). Both are the result of the power of Samael. After Abel is killed in the Bible and Cain is banished, a mark is put on Cain because Cain is still a child of Samael. That mark is a vav, the Hebrew letter, which is the sixth letter and is related with the Arcanum of Indecision…’

Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil

The Light in the Dark Place, Sex in the Garden of Eden: The Forbidden Truth, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Let’s resolve the Garden of Eden mystery once and for all. Here’s what happened in the Garden of Eden: “And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.” Genesis 3: 2-3 KJV. 

The word ‘touch’ is the Hebrew word H5060 naga… and is defined in the Strongs Concordance as follows: touch – A primitive root; properly to touch, that is, lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphemistically, to lie with a woman); by implication to reach (figuratively to arrive, acquire); violently, to strike (punish, defeat, destroy… beat… be able to bring (down), cast, come (nigh), draw near… get up, happen, join… plague, reach (up), smite, strike, touch… This means that… In the Garden of Eden, Eve was impregnated by the serpent with Cain and again bare Abel by Adam. 

Let’s continue a little further in the book of Genesis: “And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.” Genesis 3: 11-15 KJV. 

In Hebrew the word for beguiled is nasha’ [H5377] and means: ‘deceive, to lead astray, to (mentally) delude or (morally) to seduce.’ In English, the word also means: ‘to influence by trickery, flattery, mislead, cheat’ and ‘to charm.’ The nachash [serpent] originates from the word nachash H5172 meaning: to hiss, that is, whisper a (magic) spell; generally to prognosticate… [an enchanter]… The ability of the nachash… to hiss and whisper a (magic) spell helps us understand how Eve was beguiled with the impregnation of Cain.

The word ‘woman’ is the Hebrew word H802 ‘ishshah nashiym…‘ and is defined in the Strongs Concordance as follows: woman – The first form is the feminine of H376 or H582; the second form is an irregular plural; a woman (used in the same wide sense as H582)… (adulter)ess… Adultery was the original sin in the Garden of Eden. Eve was impregnated by [Samael on behalf of Satan] (the serpent/nachash) with Cain (Kain) and again bare Abel (Habel) by Adam. Cain and Abel were conceived via heteropaternal superfecundation. Heteropaternal superfecundation refers to the fertilization of two separate ova by two different fathers. Cain and Abel were twins of two different fathers.’

“And Adam knew Hava his wife, who had desired the Angel; and she conceived, and bare Kain; and she said, I have acquired a man, the Angel of the Lord. And she added to bear from her husband Adam his twin, even Habel. And Habel was a shepherd of the flock, but Kain was a man working in the earth.” (from The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel, On the Book of Genesis.)

“The secret that unlocks all things biblical is the knowledge that Cain was a child of Eve and Lucifer [Samael] and not the firstborn son of Adam. Understanding that there are two bloodlines upon the planet and that these two bloodlines have been warring with one another since the inception and dawning of humanity upon this world will help one to decipher this critical theme as it plays out through the totality of all available scripture, from the fall to soon coming judgment.” (from ‘Lucifer Father of Cain’ by Zen Garcia)

‘Understanding that Cain was the literal child of [a] devil becomes very obvious throughout scripture and John 8 helps us put all the pieces of this mystery together. Jesus rebukes those who are opposing him: Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father [Samael] the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. (John 8:43-45 KJV). From this, we know that the devil [the Serpent in the Garden of Eden] was a murderer and a liar from the beginning. In Genesis 4, Cain murdered his brother Abel and then lied about it!

The origin of our flesh stems back to the Garden of Eden when Eve was beguiled by the serpent and all of humanity fell from our spiritual state of being into a carnal system known as the flesh. All of mankind has the ‘skin of the serpent’ as revealed in Genesis 3 of the ancient text of The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel: And Adam called the name of his wife Hava, because she is the mother of all the children of men. And the Lord God made Adam and to his wife vestures of honour from the skin of the serpent, which he had cast from him, upon the skin of their flesh, instead of that adornment which had been cast away; and He clothed them.’

Human skin cells magnified under an electron microscope in comparison with the scales of a snake. Modern science reveals the remarkable similarity between human skin and serpent scales. The transmutation of the skin or DNA template of the ‘serpent’ was reconstructed and given to Adam and Eve in their new physical form.

Samael is known, by numerous names, aliases, titles and descriptions: Lucifer, Heylel, Morningstar, Son of the Morning, Light Bringer, Phosphorus (morning star of Venus – Sulphur), Hesperus (evening star of Venus), Devil, the Power of the Air, Prince of Lies, Prince of Darkness, Prince of the East, Prince of the Seraphim, Serpent (of Eden), the Dark Lord, the Evil One, Beelzebub (which means: the Lord who Flies, Lord of the Flyers and misleadingly, Lord of the Flies), Baal (meaning Lord), Samyaza and incorrectly as Mephistopheles.

Whereas it is the Adversary, Satan, who is likened to a great red Dragon, an ancient Serpent, and the god of this World.

Regarding Samael’s kind, he is invariably labeled an archangel, a fallen angel or as a Seraphim. He is likely a fallen Seraph if he is a serpent as alluded in the Book of Genesis. The Angelic order is difficult to ascertain, in that it is ostensibly unclear (refer article: The Ark of God). Different commentators place them in differing orders while adding ranks or hierarchies which though inspired from the New Testament are not stated as such in scripture; so that Archangel, Cherubim and Seraphim are all at different times placed as first. Simply, the Cherubim and Seraphim are two different orders of spiritual creatures, yet they are not stated directly as angels for angels are messengers; but for the want of a better term it is used. The Bible does not rank one above the other. Those angelic beings with specific or higher responsibilities, are deemed an Archangel. 

The Seraphim originated as a Dragon species. Those who rebelled, having transformed into a reptilian line of angels, which include a variety of beings also exhibiting Arachnid, Insectoid and Amphibian like features and natures. The Cherubim are an assorted collection of spiritual creatures, exhibiting either mammalian (feline/bovine), avian or anthropomorphic features and qualities. The Book of Ezekiel chapter ten, reveals four main types: Eagle, Bull (or Ox/Unicorn), Lion and Man.

Samael’s father is the Ancient of Days and his mother, is purported to be Asherah. Samael’s siblings include the Archangel Michael and ‘archangels’ Gabriel, Raphael and Ariel (or Uriel). Samael’s chief consorts included his own Mother the Queen of Heaven, Asherah and also his daughter by her, Lilith. Samael had additional offspring, including Lilith’s twin Azazel. Tradition assigns the Hesperides – Nymphs who were Daughters of the Morning Star – and a son, Mundus. Mundus was allegedly born to Samael and Lilith; though Samael and Mundus did not get on together. Mundus sought to usurp his father’s throne unsuccessfully and was nearly killed by Samael; but a sliver of his essence escaped. Mundus may be one and the same with Marduk. The nucleus and origin of the story of Osiris, Isis, Seth and Horus may derive from these gods.

A fictional quote from Lucifer, though apt: 

‘Since time immemorial, you humans would always blame me for your failings. You use my name as if I spent my entire day sitting on your shoulders, forcing you to commit acts you would otherwise find repulsive. “The Devil made me do it.” I never made any one of you do anything. That is your own doing. I introduced free will yet you began to cultivate it into sin and empower it thereby becoming your own demons. A fact that I tried to prove to my Father and siblings. And yet I was cast out, stripped of my power, and to be burned in the Abyss for eternity… All because I was right.’

Samael is revered among the rebellious angels for his unsurpassed wisdom, incredible genius and majestic power. He is noted to have had originally six, colossal whitish gold wings, as a Seraph does, which were said to look as though they were made of light.

Tradition says his wings shifted into various shades of dark red during his rebellious stage; later becoming shades of black when he fully rebelled. His wings were eventually burned off during his fall; mutating into giant red chiropteran, or Bat-like wings.

Samael was one of the first of the Creator’s offspring and was chosen to lead in the administration of the spirit realm of angels tasked with the responsibilities involved with the physical universe, including the Earth and to develop life. Samael’s exalted position and power may have been an early seed contributing to his self-pride and growing delusion in over throwing the Most High. Alternatively, this may have actually been ignited by his Mother. Samael’s pride was also challenged when the Creator selected him with watching over and guiding His other creations, particularly humankind, which were perceived as beneath him. When the Ancient of Days planned to create Adam, Samael’s pride and disdain accelerated, overtaking him and he grew increasingly rebellious, towards his Father. Samael became dissatisfied with remaining loyal to the Eternal. Coupled with the realisation that his Father was favouring this new creation, the Adam; watching over these infant-like creatures like a Shepherd over a flock was intolerable for him.

Samael was heavily opposed towards the Creator’s plan of predestinating mankind; so that their destiny was ultimately, under God’s will and command. Since Samael embodies and champions free-will, this would go against his very being and purpose. One commentator says: ‘He was opposed at the idea that God would want all to follow under his guidance and rule with them having no choice nor say in the matter and having to either die or live by God’s decree. Lucifer’s paranoia made him see God as a tyrannical ruler and declared that no one should not be in control of their own lives and fate and as such, proclaimed that he would rule in God’s stead. Lucifer rebelled against God, with the support of [the leadership of Asherah and] one-third of the heavenly host.’ Samael is a being of incalculable celestial power and is among the most powerful entities in all of creation with Ariel stating, that “the Morningstar is powerful in ways that defy description itself…”

Revealing Quotes attributed to Samael:

“Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.”

“You know Nothing of my family. I loved my brothers and sisters. My Father. And my Mother. But the fact that I needed to shepherd you flawed and abominable pieces of dust and clay is an insult to my very purpose and existence. The fact that my Father favoured you… over His own family is an offence towards our hearts. The fact that He has so much faith in you even after I outright proved how flawed, deceptive, and murderous you all could be and moreover had the unmitigated Gall to banish me further down in the Pit for my transgressions… Is Unforgivable”

“After eons of reigning within the Abyss I knew but only one reason that my Father would not listen… He would be the victim of senility. And no one would want the Almighty to lord over all creation in such a condition. Thus, I would appoint myself as the new lord of the cosmos and rule in His stead but as blindness and naivety would have it my siblings would not allow for it. Our ongoing disagreements over the matter eventually sparked a civil war of which I tried to avoid though what is the use when you are within the confines of pre-destination that was written by a senile old man?”

“A liar am I? Now I find that to be quite offensive. Those Biblical authors and the God-praising fools all bestowed upon me the title of ‘Prince of Lies’. Let me assure you that I am no deceiver nor trickster of any sort. If you want to make a deal then I will tell you the contents of my side of the deal. If you want to hear the truth I will tell you the truth. And I will tell you the exact literal truth. But be warned, my dear. The Devil’s truth is but a path towards damnation. After all… the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

“The greatest lie I ever told? No, it was not convincing the world I didn’t exist, plenty of people do believe I exist. Nor was it convincing people God doesn’t exist. That would spoil the fun of our little game. It was not saying there is only Heaven or only Hell. It was not leading you to so-called ‘pagan deities’. My greatest lie was but three words: God commands it. You’d be amazed how easy it is to lead you away from Him with nothing but His name and a flimsy excuse.”

“Go and tell them that I’m coming… Go and tell them that I’m here, and show them the evidence… You’re not ready for me. No one is.” 

An interesting comparison to which we have already alluded, is to compare the pivotal players during the tail-end of the latter days, which comprises the final seven year period before the Kingdom of God and includes the momentous three and a half year tribulation on the world, climaxing with the Day of the Lord. First and foremost there is the Ancient of Days and His Adversary: Asherah, formerly Wisdom and loyal wife and co-ruler of the Creation, now the rogue Devil called Satan. Next is the Word and Son of Man, the supreme Creator’s Son; with His nemesis: fellow light bringer and Morning Star, Samael (or Samyaza). 

Continuing on the adversarial side is Asherah’s and Samael’s son, Azazel. A fallen Angel of the highest rank, restrained in the bottomless Pit while awaiting his release and the receipt of immense power from the Dragon as the coming Beast. Azazel is an anti-christ in direct opposition to the true Christ and the reason why he is selected as one of the two goats, the other being the Word in the Atonement ceremony – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Ark of God. Nimrod part angel and of Nephilim descent, is the son of Azazel’s sister, Lilith. Nimrod the ante-christ and False Prophet is a dual antagonist with his uncle against the real Son of God. Nimrod is descended from his grandfather Asshur, who shares the similarity of name with Nimrod’s grandmother, Asher-ah. 

In opposition to Azazel and Nimrod on Christ’s behalf, are the two Witnesses of Revelation Chapter eleven. Three* men have been taken from this world, not having died a normal death. In a place between here and where the Creator dwells, as ‘no man has ascended to Heaven’ yet all humans have to ‘die once’ – John 3:13, Hebrews 9:27 (Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?)

For many seasoned Bible students, Elijah* and Moses are considered as the clear representatives in fulfilling the roles. The casting of these two men would fulfil a church and state function. Another popular pairing is Enoch* and Elijah. These men transcended an orthodox death, with the Eternal taking them both early. Enoch’s credentials are that he ministered to Nephilim, while Elijah’s ministry centred on opposing Baal worship which was rife in ancient Israel. 

This pairing is favoured because it would satisfy a representative from the antediluvian age and the post-flood world. A pairing perhaps not readily considered is Enoch and Melchizedek* as the end-time witnesses of the Most High – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The merit in this pairing is that it would include two individuals with immeasurable wisdom acquired from profound longevities. 

A further option not considered until time of writing, is Elijah and his disciple Elisha, who received a double portion of the Holy Spirit – 2 Kings 2:9-15. The witnesses are likened as light from a lamp stand, filled with over flowing oil, a euphemism for the Holy Spirit – Zechariah 4:11-14; Revelation 11:4. These two men lived at the same time, confronted the same evil, were master and student and no doubt developed a close bond of friendship and trust. This unique relationship may have occurred for a task that yet lays ahead. Finally, John the Baptist possessed similar credentials with Elijah and a status unlike any man born before or after him – Matthew 11:11, 14.

Whichever the identities of the two Witnesses, they powerfully preach the true gospel message of Christ, the Kingdom of God, and in openly opposing the False Prophet, they are murdered at the end of the Tribulation by the Beast, to then three days later, be resurrected as has been ordained for all – Hebrews 9:27. Whether Asherah purposely conjured a plan of opposition and conflict, or just simply grew resentful with her relationship with the Eternal is hard to judge. Her discontent eventually poisoned Samael who’s motive to sabotage the Creator’s plan for Adam-kind with the infiltration of the Garden of Eden was another step in his plan to attain ultimate power. 

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning the Garden of Eden has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘The Eden Enigma’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

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

‘… there is one paragraph in the ancient Sumerian epic The Deluge reminiscent of the linear week of creation in Genesis. It refers to the pantheon of gods as creators rather than God the Father, and the order is different, but sounds familiar: “After Anu, Enlil, Enki and Ninhursag had fashioned the black-headed people [Homo erectus]… vegetation luxuriated from the earth, animals, and four-legged creatures of the plain were brought artfully into existence – ” 

Within the ancient Mesopotamian myths there was no consistent creation story, but rather several different versions where the numerous gods [angels] were created from a begetter [the Eternal] and his consort [Asherah] out of a chaos of nothingness. 

The Sumerian god Enki is the god of fresh water and is depicted in reliefs found on temple walls with water flowing up from the ground. In the Epic Atra-Khasis, we find Enki creating man from clay in a similar manner after the gods had rebelled over all the work they had to endure on earth: “Enki opened his mouth and addressed the great gods: I will make a purifying bath. Let one god be slaughtered so that all the gods may be cleansed in a dipping. From his flesh and blood, let Nintu (Enki’s assistant) mix clay, that god and man may be thoroughly mixed in the clay… proclaim living man as its sign… Then the spirit of the god’s flesh becomes the spirit within man. 

This is clearly the concept of man receiving some sort of spirit from the gods, something we would call a soul…’ – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning? ‘In the Epic of Atra-Khasis, the gods created man so the gods would no longer have to toil on the earth. The Mesopotamian gods created man for the purpose of providing them with food, drink and shelter as we have seen when we discussed Temple Sacrifices. [Mans’] purpose in life was to be the gods’ servants. Genesis 2 may be referring to a similar work related situation where it says: “there was no man to till the soil”, which would imply that up until that time someone else was tilling the soil. 

The Creation Epic of Akkad known as Enuma Elish is the most complete creation story that we have found to date, and it gives us great insight into the Mesopotamian concept of deity. This story tells of the ancient struggle between cosmic order and chaos. This itself is quite interesting as scientists today are toying with a Chaos Theory to explain the existence of the universe’ – Article: Chance Chaos or Designated Design? ‘This epic was of such importance to the theology of the time that it was recited by the scribes for all to hear at the beginning of each year, much as the Hebrews did with the Torah years later. There are similarities in the beginning of the Creation Epic and the first chapter of Genesis where God created all things. 

In the Creation Epic it is a begetter and his consort who bring forth all there is. Here are a few lines from the story:

“When on high the heaven had not been named, Firm ground below had not been called by name, naught but primordial Apsu [the Creator], their begetter and Mummu-Tiamat [Asherah], she who bore them all, their waters commingling as a single body; … When no gods whatever had been brought into being, uncalled by name, their destinies undetermined – Then it was that the gods were formed within them. Anu begot in his image Nudimmud.”

Apsu, the male spirit of life-giving fresh water and the abyss, is called the begetter, and Tiamat, the female spirit of salt water [the sea] and chaos, is his consort; they commingled to form all the gods. The gods later bring forth man. Genesis mimics the creation epics in that God made matter out of nothing – a creating God. The polytheistic version is devoid of a single creator so they manufactured a human understanding of this mystery to bring about matter from nothingness. Much like the scientists of today, who are stuck in their Big Bang Theory with the question, “who made the thing that banged?” [The] ancients acknowledged a begetter and consort, but do not tell us from where they came. 

Like God in Genesis, who decided to destroy evil man with the flood, so do Apsu and Tiamat. After they had created the gods, they decided to kill off the first bunch and start all over. Their excuse was that the gods were a noisy bunch and therefore needed to be destroyed: “Apsu, opening his mouth, said unto resplendent [shining brilliantly, gleaming] Tiamat:

“Their ways are verily loathsome unto me. By day I find no relief, nor repose by night. I will destroy, I will wreck their ways that quiet may be restored. Let us have our rest.” It seems that the god Ea (Enki in Sumer), the good father-god of the hero-god Marduk in the epic, was wise to their plans and was able to stop the slaughter of the gods: “Surpassing in wisdom, accomplished, resourceful… The all wise, saw through their scheme”. He then sought out Apsu, and poured sleep upon him. And while he was powerless: He loosened his band, tore off his tiara, removed his halo and put it on himself. Having fettered Apsu, he slew him.” 

There was to be a great battle in the heavens between the good gods and the evil gods. It will be Marduk, who will battle Tiamat and the turncoat evil gods that joined her. He will finally kill her, she who begat them all. After this turmoil, the gods created the cosmos from the remains of Tiamat with part of her being the land, and part of her being the heavens. The story also includes a reference of darkness turned to light; then the gods determined the years, the months, and the days much as God the Father does in Chapter 1 of Genesis. The main difference in the order of creation is that in the ancient Mesopotamian creation stories the gods were first created, and then they created man. In our story we see the god Marduk create man from the blood of Tiamat: “Blood I will mass and cause bones to be. I will establish a savage, man shall be his name. Verily, savage-man I will create. He shall be charged with the service of the gods that they might be at ease.”

The pantheon of Sumerian gods

Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis & bold mine:

‘If Adam and Eve might be linked with the stars [Arcturus in Bootes and Spica in Virgo], we have the same possibility for Cain and Abel. If one was very bad and another was very good, we must recollect the similar ethical characteristics of the stars. First of all, we can throw a look at Antares and Aldebaran. Several millennia BCE they were not only very perceptible stars on the sky but also the points of the equinoxes. Among them, Antares had a bad reputation. Its name connects it with Ares (Mars) because both are red, whereas Mars was considered a sinister planet in ancient astrology.

If Cain was a plowman* and Abel was a shepherd (Genesis 4:2-3) then their symbols might be easily found in the sky: Antares is the brightest star of the sickle-shaped* Scorpio constellation (sickle as an attribute of the plowman) whereas Aldebaran is the brightest star of the bull-shaped Taurus* (bull as an attribute of a plowman [shepherd/farmer]). These stars are in opposition: when one rises, another sets. In addition, both these stars are described among ‘four royal stars’ (linked with the solstices and the equinoxes) in ancient Iranian sacral astronomy…’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Second Book of Adam and Eve 1:6-8 

“As for Cain, when the mourning for his brother was ended, he took his sister Luluwa and married her, without leave from his father and mother; for they could not keep him from her, by reason of their heavy heart. He then went down to the bottom of the mountain [Mount of Olives], away from the garden, near to the place where he had killed his brother [in Jerusalem]. And in that place were many fruit trees and forest trees. His sister bare him children, who in their turn began to multiply by degrees until they filled that place.”

The Book of Adam says Cain left the Garden, though presumably he was still in Eden. If his family multiplied at a high rate, it may also explain his migrating later to the land of Nod. According to Chabad a Jewish organisation, rabbis teach an alternative theory to that of Cain and Abel being twins, in that Cain was born first with a twin sister and Abel was born as one of a triplet; with each brother intended to marry their twin or triplet. If true, the Bible omits this information. Possibly it was there originally, as a large amount of humanities pre-flood history is glaringly missing. Biblical researcher and writer Ernest Martin, provided interesting parallels between Eden and the portable Tabernacle of the ancient Israelites – Article: The Ark of God.

There were three divisions in the Land of Eden and these are analogous with the three divisions of the Tabernacle and later, the Temple. The Garden of Eden was a separate area within the more extensive region called Eden. The garden itself was comprised of two sections. There was an inner area where the Lord God dwelt, reminisce of the Tabernacle’s Holy of Holies. The second section was the remainder of the Garden where Adam and Eve lived and tended the flora and fauna. In the Tabernacle and Temple, this area was called the Holy Place and it was where the Priests performed ceremonial duties. Outside the Garden, surrounding it, was the Land of Eden. 

When Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden, they were still able to live in the Land of Eden. Just outside where the Cherubim guarded with a flaming sword, was the eastern gate of the Garden. It was here that Cain and Abel built an altar to petition the Lord God of the inner Garden. An altar at the east entrance, to offer sacrifices; whereas in the Tabernacle and Temple, this altar was analogous to the Altar of Burnt Offering, located just east of the Holy Place. 

The extended area of the Land of Eden can be identified with the broader area of the Camp of Israel, where the Israelites lived. The land to the west of Eden was called the Land of Nod, or the ‘Land of wandering’ and it was here that the people of Day Six dwelt, the Neanderthal. It was this community which Cain after he was expelled from the land of Eden, seized control of as the world’s first despot. The land of Nod equates to the Land of the Gentiles or Babylon, outside of the Camp of Israel and in the ‘midst of the world.’

Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘It was this outer area east of Eden that God said Cain would be provided with an animal sacrifice that would “lie at the door” (Genesis 4:7). The Hebrew… “couching at the door”… this sin offering was to be presented alive “at the door”… an entrance [or portal]… back into the Land of Eden from the land of Nod.’

Many biblical names, especially those in Genesis, have an element of wordplay which often serves to underscore an individual figure’s role in the story they feature in. Notably, the name Adam means man, because he was the first modern man, and Eve comes from a word meaning life, because she is the source of life for all humanity. The names of Adam and Eve’s first two children, Cain and Abel though, are more obscure. 

In Genesis, it says Cain’s name – more like ‘Kayan’ in Hebrew – comes from the word kanah, meaning ‘to get,’ because Eve had gotten a baby… but, not from Adam. Abel – more like ‘Hevel’ in Hebrew – receives his name from a root, meaning ‘breath,’ and indicates something that doesn’t last long. However, Rabbi David Zaslow argues Cain’s name reflects the meaning of kanah, as ‘to build’ for Cain goes on to build a city, among other things. As a builder and architect, his name is related to a word meaning ‘smith’ as in a metalworker. Abel may also derive from a Sumerian word meaning ‘son.’ One son who works with his hands, and one son born to die.

The meaning of the mark of Cain is ambiguous as we have discussed. Cain’s mark and his curse have often been conflated. Bible Odyssey interpretations state: ‘that Cain was given leprosy, or his forehead sprouted a horn (which ultimately led to Cain’s death when his son confused him with a wild animal), or the sacred name of God was inscribed on his arm or forehead as a protective sigil. Others suggest maybe God just gave him a dog as protection, which might also have been seen as a curse, as there are no positive references to dogs in the Hebrew Bible.’ The provocative explanation, is the mark of Cain was darker skin, ‘an idea used as a justification for slavery and racism well into the 20th century.’ 

The sacred name of God inscribed on his arm or forehead as a protective sigil is of particular interest. The majority of humanity will one day receive the mark of the Beast – from the fallen dark Angel Azazel. Azazel led the corruption of humanity in Enoch’s day and is predicted to do so again, once released from the abyss. The Holy Day of Atonement, is about receiving reconciliation with the Ancient of Days, as opposed to following Azazel. 

This was achieved in the once shedding of animal blood and then later fulfilled by the Word and His sacrifice – Leviticus 16:15-16. Leviticus 17:11, ESV says: ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.’ It is by blood we are cleansed, or by blood that we are defiled.

The mark of the Beast could still include a defiling of humanity by turning them into hybrids from a combination of mankind’s DNA and angel-kind’s spirit. Of course, any defilement is far greater than a mere physical contamination. The goal would be to mutate the unique spirit and soul within mankind into one more like the fallen Angels and the Nephilim. Our hands and mind, which defines us as human, would be affected; as human DNA, symbolised by the blood can be altered. In Revelation Chapter seven, the servants of the Creator in the end times, the 144,000 are sealed in their foreheads. An opposite mark from the one of the Beast. These people are given Holy Spirit protection from a hybridisation program. Their genetic material will be kept pure and fully human just like Noah. These sealed sons of Jacob will not carry any Nephilim DNA.

In Genesis 4:10-11 ESV,  the Creator speaks with Cain after he murders his brother: ‘… the voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand.’ The curse on Cain is from the ground, the very place where righteous Abel’s blood flowed into. Cain receives a mark of protection, so that no one will dare kill him. We will study Cain’s origins and confirm he is in fact the very first of the Nephilim. Already tainted, already having the mark of the Beast. Yet we learn that the Creator added a distinguishing mark. If a physical mark or sign was used, then the irony may be that Cain was not turned black, but rather white. The tradition of leprosy then would be significant. Cain would certainly stand out amongst an ante-diluvian population of darker skinned people.

There are two forms of leprosy, black and white. Alternatively, if Cain an original Nephilim had been born white, then his black leprosy would have stood out equally. We saw how Moses’ sister Miriam was struck with white leprosy – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. In 2 Kings Chapter five, we read about Naaman a commander in the army of the king of Syria (Aram, son of Shem). In verse 27, ESV: “Therefore the leprosy of Naaman shall cling to you and to your descendants forever.” So he went out from his presence a leper, like snow. If Cain received leprosy, he could have easily had this mark for the rest of his life. Today, leprosy is not hereditary and has been curable since 1982. The white leprosy in the Old Testament must have been a different strain or a completely unique disease, to be passed on genetically.

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 130-131, 138 – emphasis mine:

‘… in the Apocalypse of Adam… Adam reveals to his son Seth that “the Lord, who created us, created a son from himself and Eve, your mother”… the Life of Adam and Eve… observes that Eve “bore a son and he was lustrous.” This is a good description of the shiny, luminous hide of the reptile gods… [also] Eve tells Adam:

My Lord, I saw… the blood of my son… Abel, being thrust into the mouth of Cain… and he drank it mercilessly… it did not stay in his stomach but came out of his mouth. They got up to see what happened and found Abel killed by Cain. The crime of Cain was… not only to commit fracticide but also to eat the flesh and blood of his brother. This behaviour [is] more reptilian than human, for Cain… was half saurian… [and] the main reason for [Cain’s line being] superseded by that of Seth… the deity warned that “whoever kills Cain shall suffer vengeance seven fold”… Cain was reputedly accidentally killed by [evil] Lamech [his descendant], thus fulfilling the curse of the seventh generation.’

Genesis 4:23-24

English Standard Version

23 Lamech said to his wives: “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say: I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me. 24 If Cain’s revenge is sevenfold, then Lamech’s is seventy-sevenfold.”

‘… in the Haggadah… Lamech was… old and blind… when he went hunting [and] was led by his son Tubal-Cain, who would tell his father when game came into sight, so that Lamech could shoot at it with his bow and arrow… he aimed at some horned creature which Tubal-Cain thought to be a beast. In fact, it was Cain bearing the “sign of Cain,” a horn in the forehead, according to the Haggadah, but more probably a set of horns on the head. Lamech killed him and in despair, he struck out inadvertently killing his son Tubal-Cain… it accounts for the killing of a man and a boy, both of which were not just ordinary people.’

After God cursed Cain, Cain left the presence of the Lord, travelled east to Nod, the land of Wandering; builds a city to exalt his evil son Enoch and his story in the Bible ends – Articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and Na’amah. Josephus, in his work Antiquities, expands on the further exploits of the miscreant Cain. He did not repent of his crime against Abel or live peaceably after his own life was spared from the Creator’s wrath. Cain in fact, grows exponentially wicked and the world’s foremost innovator of evil.

Josephus states, ‘Cain dedicated himself to the pursuit of pleasure and wealth at any cost… perpetrating theft and violence upon his neighbours. He built up a great amount of wealth through stealing and strong-arming [reference: Armstrong]… [also] building up a huge army… Cain is… credited with creating weights and measures… to make sure no one was accidentally being generous by innocently giving too much. He likewise invented the idea of property lines and drawing up fortifications to protect one’s belongings with violence.’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 8-9, 12-13, 55-56 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Dowland Manuscript of the Legend of the Craft lists the Seven Liberal [Sacred] Sciences: 

“Grammere” to teach humankind to both speak and write truly; 

“Rhethoricke” to teach humankind to speak in subtle terms;

“Dialectyke” to teach humankind to discern between truth and falsehoods;

“Arithmeticke” to teach humankind to compute all manner of numbers;

“Geometrie” to teach humankind to measure the earth and all things 

(this is the science of Masonry);

“Musicke” to teach humankind song and the language of musical instruments;

“Astronomye” to teach humankind the course of the planets and stars

Jubal… specialised in music, inventing musical instruments [Jabal, Geometry and Masonry]… Tubal-Cain… exceeded all other men in strength and excelled in the martial arts… [and] inventing the art of manufacturing brass… Cain [means] “a metal worker,” thereby attributing Tubal to being his first name, and Cain denoting his expertise [Artificer], just as his forefather [Cain] must have been some form of metalworker or smith…’ – refer article: Na’amah

Naamah the Charmer… according to Jewish legends married and copulated with Shamdon [a fallen Angel], producing the giant Asmodeous… the Cainites used the Seven Sacred Sciences for evil… Two of Cain’s descendants were fingered as particularly corrupt in the application of the Sacred Sciences: [evil] Enoch and [evil] Lamech… Enoch [was] instructed in the Seven Sacred Sciences by a people known as watchers… [Enoch introduced]… sinister sacraments… From Astronomy, he created astrology and sun worship… implemented … rituals, ceremonies, and rites with this new, repulsive religion. The knowledge could then only be passed on to initiates, the selected guardians of the knowledge that was then cloaked in mysteries and secrets.’

The Book of Adam says Cain’s wife was Luluwa. The Book of Jubilees calls his sister Awan. Abel’s wife was supposedly his sister Azura, who would later marry Seth after her husband’s death. 

Book of Jubilees 4:1, 7-8, 10

‘… [Eve] gave birth… to her daughter Awan. And Adam and his wife mourned for Abel four weeks of years, [28 years] and in the fourth year of the fifth week [32 years] they became joyful, and Adam knew his wife again, and she bare him a son, and he called his name Seth; for he said ‘Yahweh has raised up a second seed unto us on the earth instead of Abel; for Cain slew him.’ And in the sixth week [35-42 years] he begat his daughter Azura. And Adam knew Eve his wife and she bare yet nine sons.’ 

The descendants of Cain continued in wickedness. Josephus confirms that within Adam’s lifetime, the lineage of Cain had become a corrupt mess; each new generation of Elioud more evil than the last.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 112 – emphasis mine:

‘… the descendants of Cain and Lulawa-Lilith [a daughter of Lilith], such as [evil] Enoch, [evil] Lamech, Tubal-Cain, and Naamah were in truth Nephilim [and], in fact, initially immortal. The Sumerian mythology appears to strongly advocate a distinct strain of Nephilim directly connected to Cain and the people of day six [the Neanderthal], but distinct from the Nephilim created on Mount Hermon by dark angels… Cain and Lulawa-Lilith [usurped] kingship over the people of day six… [infusing] a unique variety of Nephilim bloodlines [of the Royal Dragon] into [them].’

Gary Wayne provides a lot of information to digest. The likely scenario is that Cain married a sister, though Lilith keeps raising her head as the first wife of Adam prior to Eve’s birth, as well as the wife of Cain. We will consider the dark angel Lilith who is incorrectly described by many, as a demon – Article: Lilith. Records support her role as not only being Samael’s daughter but also his consort. Lilith was likewise Nimrod’s mother and subsequently his wife. A relationship with Adam appears unlikely, though cannot be ruled out as is her role as possibly Cain’s wife. Either way, Cain strongly appears to not only be a progenitor of a Nephilim-Elioud line, but in being an original Nephilim himself. 

A variant line of Nephilim from Cain as offered by Wayne, distinct from that of the dark angels does sickeningly become apparent as we progress. The sheer evil perpetrated by Cain’s line, as embodied by the evil Enoch and Lamech, as well as Naamah may have an explanation if we understand their serpentine bloodline, stemming from the Genesis 3:15 prophetic curse. The tainting of the Day Six Neanderthal human is insightful and again would explain, a. the requirement of their line dying out at the time of the flood and not existing in fulness in our age, and yet b. for Neanderthal and/or Denisovan DNA – whether tainted or not – to be identifiable in all populations in small degree (though not always identifiable in the sub-Saharan African) and in cases, very high percentages as in the East Asian and related peoples of the world – articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV. 

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 16-18, 21-22, 33, 123-124 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘…the serpent [Samael] lived in the Garden of Eden and did all the necessary work to maintain it. It was of such high stature that it unhesitatingly challenged the deity… an upright creature that stood on two feet… In appearance, the legged serpent must have been a fearsome creature… the Biblical serpent is often connected with godly knowledge, healing and immortality… nahash… usually translated as serpent… means… “he who knows all secrets”… the Apocalypse of Abraham… clearly depicts the serpent… a dragon in form, but having hands and feet, just like a man’s, on his back six wings on the right and six on the left [similar to the Seraphim].

the original occupant of the garden was Sophia [Wisdom, Asherah, the Adversary] who gave the “breath of life” to Adam and then provided her daughter Zoe as a wife to Adam… [and] the original denizen of Eden was Lilith, and Adam was created to be her mate. She rejected Adam mainly because she would not assume a subordinate or recumbent position in sexual intercourse. She left the Garden of Eden and only then was Eve created as a mate… [from Adam’s ‘life force’ or ‘essence of life’]… a Midrash account… [says] Eve was not created from Adam’s rib but rather from his tail… the stump, now a useless coccyx, is still carried by Adam’s descendants… Adam… lost his reptilian tail… left as a reminder… of his reptilian ancestry…’ 

Book of Jubilees 3:9, 15-17 

3:9 ‘And after Adam had completed forty days in the land where he had been created, we brought him into the garden of Eden to till and keep it, but his wife they brought in on the eightieth day, and after this she entered into the garden of Eden. 15 … Adam and his wife were in the garden of Eden for seven years tilling and keeping it, and we gave him work and we instructed him to do everything that is suitable for tillage. 17 And after the completion of the seven years, which he had completed there, seven years exactly, and in the second month [Iyar, corresponding to April/May], on the seventeenth day (of the month), the serpent came and approached the woman…’

The book of Jubilees states Adam was created in one location and then brought to the Garden. Could Adam have been created somewhere entirely different, say the planet Mars first and then placed in the Garden of Eden, before expulsion seven years later. If so, Adam and Eve had seven peaceful years before Samael tempted Eve. This is a lengthy period of time and so Samael’s argument had to be even more persuasive to counter the established relationship already built with the Lord God. Either that, or there was some dissatisfaction on Eve and Adam’s part which the Serpent was able to tap into and exploit. 

Adam was possibly created on the 27th day of the 11th month (January/February) and then eighty days later on the 17th of the 2nd month (April/May) Eve was placed in the Garden exactly seven years before having to leave the garden. Boulay presses the reptilian origin of Adam and Eve, whereas though an obvious component of humankind, this writer does not subscribe to it being an original state.

Boulay: ‘One ancient Jewish account relates how the two trees grew out of one tree and separated or branched out at a certain height. It is only in the Old Testament that the dichotomy is made so strongly; all other societies refer to but one tree… that is the Tree of Immortality. The snake or serpent has historically been associated with immortality. It was the legged serpent in the garden… that used immortality to be taken away from man.

According to the scriptures there was no turning back for man. He had taken the decisive step and achieved “knowing” or sexual knowledge and could procreate and now start the mammal race known as mankind or Homo sapiens. In obtaining this mixed blessing, however, he had to give up long life or immortality. The two were apparently mutually exclusive. Man could have retained his divine reptilian form and long life but remain a mule at best, a limited homo-saurus. In terms of evolution, modern man appeared on the scene about 40,000 [30,000 according to an unconventional chronology] years ago as if by magic.’  

The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and its association with the physical realm as defined in being a sexual creature is persistent and certainly seems to be a viable explanation for Adam and Eve’s transformation. 

Deuteronomy 1:39

Amplified Bible

‘Moreover, your little ones whom you said would become prey, and your sons, who today have no knowledge of good or evil [that is, have not entered puberty or reached sexual maturity], shall enter Canaan, and I will give it to them and they shall possess it.’

The notion that the Tree was once one tree appears credible, as originally there was only the Ancient of Days, the One who had always existed as the Eternal. The Tree of Life and immortality was the original or first path. With the creation and manifestation of the Creator’s Wisdom as Asherah and her subsequent deviating from the Way of this path, a new trunk and path formed. One that was limited, contradictory, the source of all ‘isms and based on the physical senses, gratification and ultimately, mortal.

Genesis 3:7

English Standard Version

‘Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths.’

After Adam and Eve ate the symbolic fruit, they covered their private parts with leaves from the tree they had ‘eaten’ from. The Midrash and the Book of Adam 20:5 – ‘… when I ate… the fig, and from it I took leaves and it made me a girdle, even from the tree of which I ate.’ The Fig tree is representative of the Tree of knowledge. Four days before the Messiah was crucified when he was travelling from Bethany, he was hungry and spied a fig tree. 

Mark 11:13-14

English Standard Version

‘And seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to see if he could find anything on it. When he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. And he said to it, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples heard it.’

Christ had recently been to Bethphage which Ernest Martin defines as, ‘house of unripe figs.’ It was not the season for figs, yet Christ cursed the tree regardless for not having fruit. Martin says the leaves were a miracle as they were not due for another month. If it had leaves, it would have had fruit and being on a major thoroughfare, the tree had already been stripped of its fruit by passers by.

Mark 11:20-24

English Standard Version

‘As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. And Peter remembered and said to him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree that you cursed has withered.” And Jesus answered them, “Have faith in God… whoever… does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him… whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.’

Martin adds that the symbolism of the fig tree is linked with the Tree of Knowledge, in that the tree that ‘Adam and Eve first ate which brought sin and death to them’ and all humanity, ‘was now withered and dead.’ Thus when Christ went to the tree to look for figs to eat, as Eve had symbolically done, there were none. This tree’s fruit were now removed forever from humanities temptation so that no man would eat of it again ‘and to complete his victory over sin, a short time later Jesus was going to be sacrificed for the sins of the world just a few yards away…’

It can be no coincidence that the Sanhedrin met in Bethphage, meaning house of unripe figs, for special sentencing and excommunication of the very worst infringers of the Law. They were meant to be unbiased ‘because at this place in the court there were supposed to be no ripe figs available to tempt the judges [in eating from] the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil… [as] was the case with Adam and Eve.’ 

Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, page 385 – emphasis mine:

‘…the tree of life was reckoned by the early Jews to have been the almond tree. And early Christians considered the tree on which Jesus was crucified as being the Tree of Life. Since Jesus was crucified on a literal tree, could it have been an almond?’

Some commentators subscribe to the Tree of Life being represented by an olive tree and though there is much symbolism with the Holy Spirit in the scriptures, the actual fruit of the tree cannot be eaten unless the olive is cured to remove the extremely bitter taste.

Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 389-390 – emphasis mine:

‘… the Tree of Life a short distance away [from the fig tree representing the Tree of Good and Evil] (probably an almond for the symbol to be carried out fully) became the very tree on which Jesus was crucified… The miracle of these two trees happened… near the… Miphkad altar which represented the altar promised to Cain and his descendants at the top of the Mount of Olives…’

The root of the Nephilim plague on earth, descending from their angelic fathers who had entered the Earth plane, led by Samyaza* and Azazel prior to Enoch’s birth, originates with Samael*, Eve, Adam and their sons, Cain and Abel. In Genesis chapter four, we read that Adam and Eve were intimate, she became pregnant, gave birth to Cain and with the ‘Lord’s help, created a man.’ There are two diametrically opposed camps in the Christian world regarding Eve’s first two sons. Those who believe Cain and Abel had the same father… and those who don’t. The entire chapter of Genesis chapter three is dissected by both sides and the crucial battle ground for the argument, is in the beginning of Genesis chapter four, in verse one.

Genesis 3:1-22, 4:1-2

English Standard Version

1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree [root H6095 – atsah] in the garden?'”

The Serpent homed-in on Eve, planning to manipulate her female thoughts, feminine perspective and motivations, but more importantly, if corrupted offspring were to be produced, it was Eve who would be impregnated. 

The Hebrew word Nachash for serpent, according to one commentator means a ‘beautiful shining creature.’ The word serpent is unfortunate as it produces the image of a slithering, legless snake. Rather, it refers to the Seraphim, a fire breathing, flying serpent, an order of dragons, with arms, legs and wings. Impressive creatures in their size, colour and form. Fallen ones able to transform from black to white, as an angel of light – 2 Corinthians 11:14. Tree in Hebrew, means: ‘properly to fasten’ or ‘make firm’ and the root means ‘to close (the eyes)’ – in fact, not to open. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was a symbolic representation of a real entity: Asherah. And likewise, the Serpent of the Garden – who led Eve towards her – was Samael.

One writer on the subject states regarding the serpent – emphasis & bold mine:

Nachash, regrettably translated Serpent, was a specific Chay [the Hebrew word for beast]… There are several opinions regarding the actual nature of this seduction which cannot be clearly decided by the text alone. 

Eve knew that nachash [the serpent] was not The Lord, but just a nice looking Chay… Why then did she say that her first child, Cain, was from The Lord? (Genesis 4:1) I think it was because she had been deceived by Satan [rather Samael] into believing that he was [a] God and wanted her to thus perform for him. No question [that] Eve was thoroughly deceived.”

Matthew 23:28-35

English Standard Version

28 ‘So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness [just like Nimrod, the False Prophet]. 29 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites… 30 saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets…

33 You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? 34 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, 35 so that on you [the Jewish people – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe] may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel…’

Genesis: 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'”

The word ‘fruit’ is Periy in the original Hebrew. It can mean literal fruit from a fruit tree, or it can signify progeny or offspring, from a sexual relationship. As the tree in question is Asherah and it is her way – a path chosen and typified by perhaps a literal Fig tree – the context is centrally pointing to the latter expression of symbolism.

As we have addressed, Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance says for the Hebrew word naga, that it means: ‘to touch’ that is, ‘lay the hand upon’ for any purpose and euphemistically ‘to lie with a woman’. By implication ‘to reach’ or ‘to arrive, acquire’ violently, ‘to strike, punish, defeat, destroy’. This was the Lord God’s first commandment in Genesis 2:16. A warning to Eve (and Adam) to stay away from the path of Asherah, the Tree of Good and Evil. A sexual relationship was forbidden as the result would be ‘fruit’, that is, children. If Eve did, she would die, losing her spirituality, incorruptibility, immortality; becoming instead physical, corruptible, mortal.

Matthew 7:17-20

English Standard Version

‘So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.’

Genesis: 4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened [rather, shut], and you will be like God [actually, like Asherah], knowing [both] good and evil.”

The Serpent lied to Eve, saying she and Adam would be like the Creator Himself, if they utilised their own creative power to reproduce. They would in essence live forever, in that their offspring would continue to perpetuate their human line. Their eyes would be open to sin and shut to the truth. The motion picture, Eyes Wide Shut, the final film directed by Stanley Kubrick before his untimely death six days after his last edit – though not the final one, as Warner Brothers are rumoured to have re-edited the film before release – has many audible and visual whistle-blowing scenes, regarding devil worship and secret satanic sex orgies amongst the upper echelons of society’s influential elite – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

John 8:37-45

English Standard Version

“I know that you are offspring of Abraham [that is, descended from his grandson, Esau]; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.” They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father – even God.” 

Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.

You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.”

The unpalatable truth that we will investigate further in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, is that these children of Abraham had intermarried with a number of Nephilim-Elioud families, including ones descended from Cain himself. It is for this reason, that the Son of Man could shockingly accuse – both figuratively and literally – the Judean or more precisely the Idumean leaders, of being of their father… the devil, Samael.

Acts 13:6-10

English Standard Version

‘… they came upon a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet named Bar-Jesus… a man of intelligence, who summoned Barnabas and Saul and sought to hear the word of God. 8 But Elymas the magician (for that is the meaning of his name) opposed them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith. But… Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him and said, “You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy, will you not stop making crooked the straight paths of the Lord?’

Isaiah 61:3

New Century Version

‘… and to help the sorrowing people of Jerusalem. I will give them a crown to replace their ashes, and the oil of gladness to replace their sorrow, and clothes of praise to replace their spirit of sadness. Then they will be called Trees of Goodness, trees planted by the Lord to show his greatness.’

Proverbs 13:2-3

English Standard Version

From the fruit of his mouth a man eats what is good, but the desire of the treacherous is for violence. Whoever guards his mouth preserves his life; he who opens wide his lips comes to ruin.’

Jeremiah 24:1-2

English Standard Version

‘… the Lord showed [Jeremiah] this vision: behold, two baskets of figs placed before the temple of the Lord. One basket had very good figs, like first-ripe figs, but the other basket had very bad figs, so bad that they could not be eaten.’

Matthew 24:29-34

English Standard Version

“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. 

“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.”

Matthew 13:37-40

English Standard Version

He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age.”

Genesis: 6 ‘So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight** to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.’ 

The verse says Adam ate, or shared this relationship but does not say it was with the Serpent, Samael. It could quite easily be just with Eve, which fits the subject and context of the sentence.

Luke 6:43

English Standard Version

“For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit…”

1 John 2:16

New English Translation

because all that is in the world (the desire of the flesh and the desire** of the eyes and the arrogance produced by material possessions) is not from the Father, but is from the world [Samael].’

2 Corinthians 11:3

English Standard Version

‘… But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived [G1818 – exapatao: beguile, seduce wholly] Eve by his cunning [G3834 – panourgia: craftiness, false wisdom, trickery], your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.’

Genesis: 7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves [from the very Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil] together and made themselves loincloths [to cover their modesty]. 

8 And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the Lord God called to the man and said to him, “Where are you?” 10 And he said, “I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.” 11 He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” 

Adam and Eve exchanged an innocent, spiritual state, an incorruptible body, vibrating at a higher frequency in a higher dimension; for a carnal, physical, corruptible denser body, vibrating at a slower rate in our present lower three dimensions. Their eyes had been opened to a different life on a different plane of existence, entirely in the material world. For humanity to have ongoing physical sexual relationships and at the same time be trapped in the physical realm, they required a physical body with physical anatomy. Hence the need to cover their new sexual organs; of which Eve and then Adam had wasted no time in putting to use. Samael the Serpent had tricked Eve and thus Adam, to exchange their spiritual experience and bodies in the Garden of Eden, living with many trees (that is angels), for a life with the men and woman from the Sixth Day of creation. Acquiring similar bodies with the Neanderthal and reproducing like them. 

It is apparent that the Creator had a different intention for Adam and Eve. To create beings after his own kind rather than angel-kind who had originally been born from Asherah. Asherah with Samael sabotaged His project, giving Adam and Eve, not only physical bodies and reproductive systems but also, genetically switching off ninety percent of their capabilities, while implanting the cold, objective, self-serving, survival at all costs – stemming from constant fear – component of their minds, inherited from the fallen, rebellious reptilian angels.

12 The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me [blaming the Lord God], she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent [enchanter] deceived [seduced] me, and I ate.”

1 Timothy 2:13-15

English Standard Version

13 ‘For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing…

Physical reproduction was not the intended plan for Adam and Eve. Asherah and Samael, once learning that the ultimate plan of the Ancient of Days was to create and reproduce beings just like Himself; realised these new beings would have a different status from all other spiritual creatures. 

They may have reasoned: “We’ll give the Creator children” and perhaps Samael thought; “I’ll give Him so many, He won’t know what to do with them all and regret his decision” adding, “I will show them how to self-perpetuate by reproducing themselves.”

Thereby losing their spiritual status and becoming base like other men – the Neanderthal, Homo erectus and others perhaps before them. “I’ll then kick start the whole program, so that the first-born, Cain is half-angel and thus corrupt the human genetic code” for potentially billions of human beings, thus denying them and the Creator, the new God-kind family He intends.

The remaining big question: is why did Asherah and Samael seek to take over from the supreme Creator? If they had just kept the status quo, they would have perpetually remained imminently influential, after the Ancient of Days Himself. The necessity for the Word to save the sabotaged humans would not have been required and nor possibly, would the Word have been elevated above Asherah and Samael as has eventuated.

Genesis: 14 ‘The Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.’ 

The Serpent including all fallen Seraphim angels were then principally trapped in this Solar System and the terrestrial planets. With the loss of their figurative wings and elevation in heaven and or life in higher planes (as dragons), the now serpent-reptilian angels were restrained even further than they had been since their initial rebellion and cosmic battle within our galaxy and beyond. 

Psalm 44:25

English Standard Version

‘For our soul is bowed down to the dust; our belly clings [cleaveth] to the ground.’

Psalm 72:9

English Standard Version

‘May desert tribes bow down before him [abject defeat and subjugation], and his enemies lick the dust! [utter humiliation].’

Genesis: 15 ‘I will put enmity between you [the serpent-reptilian angels] and the woman [physical humans], and between your offspring [the Nephilim] and her offspring; he [the Messiah] shall bruise your head [take away your crown], and you shall bruise his heel [kill Him].”

Samael and his angels have their kind, just as humans have theirs. Samael is at war with humanity. The first shot fired was deceiving Eve and the resulting birth of Cain. This set the stage for the descent of fallen Angels led by Samael (as Samyaza) and his son Azazel. This was the best option available for seeking to destroy humanity; as complete destruction via a global disaster was denied to them by the Creator.

Galatians 5:14-17

New English Translation

14 ‘For the whole law can be summed up in a single commandment, namely, “You must love your neighbour as yourself.”

15 However, if you continually bite and devour one another, beware that you are not consumed by one another. 16 But I say, live by the Spirit and you will not carry out the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh has desires that are opposed [contrary] to the Spirit, and the Spirit has desires that are opposed^ [contrary] to the flesh, for these are in opposition to each other, so that you cannot do what you want.’

The word ‘contrary’ comes from the Greek word antikeimai, also translated in the New Testament as ‘adversary’. The flesh and the spirit are adversarial, antagonistic, hostile, at enmity with one another.

Galatians 6:8

New English Translation

‘… because the person who sows [Greek speiro: deriving sperma or sperm] to his own flesh will reap corruption from the flesh, but the one who sows to the Spirit will reap eternal life from the Spirit.’

Romans 16:20

English Standard Version

‘The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet…’

Genesis: 16 ‘To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be contrary^ to your husband, but he shall rule over you.’

This verse has the most meaning if we understand the sexual nature of the preceding fifteen verses. Animals do not experience pain at child-birth like humans. It has been assumed that Eve and subsequent women have had difficult child birth relative to animals, primarily as a punishment for what happened in the Garden of Eden. What is just as significant is that Eve was not meant to be reproducing in this way in the first place and hence pain being an indicative factor of this truth. 

Humans are not from Earth – A Scientific Evaluation of the Evidence, Ellis Silver, 2017, Pages 125-126 – emphasis mine:

‘Our babies grow way too big inside their poor mothers, who have a devil (ironic – no thanks to the Devil) of a job getting them out. The pelvic opening is barely large enough, and the baby has to rotate in complicated ways to pass through it. If anything goes wrong during this process, both the mother and her baby can suffer serious injury, permanent disability, or even death. No other truly native (non-domesticated) species has this problem, so something isn’t right here.’

17 And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants [plant based diet] of the field’ – refer article: Red or Green?

Romans 8:20-23

New Century Version

‘Everything God made was changed to become useless, not by its own wish but because God wanted it and because all along there was this hope: that everything God made would be set free from ruin to have the freedom and glory that belong to God’s children. We know that everything God made has been waiting until now in pain, like a woman ready to give birth. Not only the world, but we also have been waiting with pain inside us. We have the Spirit as the first part of God’s promise. So we are waiting for God to finish making us his own children, which means our bodies will be made free.’

Genesis: 19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” 20 The man called his wife’s name Eve [life], because she was the mother of all living. 21 And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.’ 

Ecclesiastes 12:7

New Century Version

‘You will turn back into the dust of the earth again, but your spirit will return to God who gave it.’

1 Corinthians 15:47-49

New Century Version

‘The first man came from the dust of the earth. The second man came from heaven. People who belong to the earth are like the first man of earth. But those people who belong to heaven are like the man of heaven. Just as we were made like the man of earth, so we will also be made like the man of heaven.’

Genesis: 22 ‘Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil [reproducing after his own kind]. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take [not the same word as touch] also of the tree of life [the Word, the Bread from Heaven] and eat, and live forever – ” 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden [into Eden, outside the garden] to work the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.’

John 6:48-71

English Standard Version

‘I am the bread of life. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever’ – refer article: The Manna Mystery. ‘And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. “Did I not choose you, the twelve? And yet one of you is a devil [G1228 – diabolos: backbiter, calumniator (slanderer), traducer, accuser, opposer].” He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was going to betray him.’

Revelation 1:16

English Standard Version

‘In his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth came a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength.’

Revelation 2:7

English Standard Version

‘He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise [Eden] of God.’

Genesis 4:1 ‘Now Adam knew [H3045 – yada’: to know (a person carnally)] Eve his wife, and she conceived [H2029 – harah: became pregnant] and bore [brought forth] Cain, saying, “I have gotten [H7069 – qanah: acquire, create, purchased, possessed] a man [H376 – ‘iyish:  a man, not a child] with the help of the Lord.” 2 And again, she bore his brother Abel…’

Who Fathered Cain, Willie Martin – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘… in the ancient literature of Israel, especially the commentaries on the Hebrew Bible written in Aramaic and commonly known as Targums’… one text [Targum of Jonathan] gives this interpretation of Genesis 4:1: ‘And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by the Angel [Samael], and she conceived and bare Cain; and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like the earthly beings, and she said, “I have acquired a man, the angel of the Lord.” 

In another Rabbinic work: Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer: “And she saw that his likeness was not of earthly beings, but of the heavenly beings, and she prophesied and said: I have gotten a man from the Lord.” It would appear from [these two] references that the problem with Genesis 4:1 is an omission of some of the words of the Hebrew text. 

… quoting from the King James Version and adding the potentially needed words in quotation marks from the Targum of Jonathan… “And Adam knew his wife Eve, ‘who was pregnant by [Samael],’ and she conceived and bare Cain, ‘and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like earthly beings,’ and she said, I have gotten a man from ‘the angel’ of the Lord.”

Once we become aware there is a discrepancy both in the Massoretic and Septuagint texts as opposed to the Aramaic Targums on Genesis 4:1, certain comments by various Biblical scholars start to make sense. Many of the best Hebrew scholars confirm there is a problem with Genesis 4:1! “The Interpreter’s Bible,” a twelve volume… collaborative work of 36 “consulting editors” plus 124 other “contributors” makes the following observation on this verse, volume 1, page 517:

“Cain seems originally to have been the ancestor of the Kenites… The meaning of the name is ‘metalworker’ or ‘smith;’ here, however, it is represented as a derivation of a word meaning ‘acquire,’ ‘get’ one of the popular etymologies frequent in Genesis; hence the mother’s words I HAVE GOTTEN A MAN FROM THE LORD (KJV) is a rendering, following the LXX and vulgate of ‘eth Yahweh, which is literally, ‘with Yahweh…’

Another ancient commentary gives a similar interpretation of the same passage: ‘And Adam knew his wife Eve, who had desired the Angel; and she conceived, and bare Cain; and she said, “I have acquired a man, the angel of the Lord…” (Palestinian Targum). One Rabbinic source states: “Eve bore Cain from the filth of the serpent, and therefore from him were descended all the wicked generations, and from his side is the abode of spirits and demons [Nephilim].’ (Ahare Moth 76b). 

… rabbi Johanan stated, ‘When the serpent copulated with Eve, he infused her with lust.’ (Yebamoth 103b). Another rabbi states: ‘Thus I have learnt, that when the serpent had intercourse with Eve he injected defilement into her.’ (Haye Sarah 126a). Lastly, another replies: ‘You rightly said that when the serpent had carnal intercourse with Eve he injected into her defilement.’ (Haye Sarah 126b), (Scott Stinson, “The Serpent and Eve,” The Vision {Schell City, MO: The Church of Israel, July 1998, Volume 2 Number 8} page 28)*

A similar explanation for the evil deeds of Cain’s lineage is found elsewhere. We read: ‘FOR TWO BEINGS HAD INTERCOURSE WITH EVE, AND SHE CONCEIVED FROM BOTH AND BORE TWO CHILDREN. Each followed one of the male parents, to this side and one to the other, and similarly their characters. On the side of Cain are all the haunts of the evil species, from which come evil spirit and demons.” (Bereshith 36b)*

Let’s consider 1 John 3:12… “Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous.” (NIV). The New Testament in Modern English, by J.B. Phillips: “We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain, who was A SON OF THE DEVIL…” Ferror Fenton Translation: “Because this is the doctrine which you learned from the first, that we should love one another; NOT BEING IMPELLED BY THE WICKED ONE, AS CAIN WAS, WHO MURDERED HIS BROTHER. Living Bible: “We are not to be like Cain, WHO BELONGED TO SATAN…”

… please note, the word “of” in Greek is #1537 in the Strong’s Concordance. When used implying a person, it means “a son of.” Of: Strong’s Concordance: #1537 ek (ek) or ex (ex); a primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence action or motion proceeds), from, out (of place, time, or cause; literal or figurative; direct or remote).

The Wycliffe Bible Commentary page 1473: “HE (Cain) IS SAID TO HAVE BELONGED TO THE FAMILY OF THE WICKED ONE.” Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Holy Bible, volume 3, page 936: “WHICH SHOWED HIM (Cain) TO BE OF THAT WICKED ONE, OF THE SERPENT’S SEED” so early was such seed sown, and so ancient THE ENMITY BETWEEN SEED AND SEED.” Matthew Henry’s Commentary, volume 6, page 1077: “IT SHOWED THAT HE (Cain) was as the firstborn of the serpent’s seed…” Seed: Strong’s Concordance: #4690 sperma (sper’-mah); from 4687; something sown, i.e. seed (including the male “sperm”); by implication, offspring; specifically, a remnant (figuratively, as if kept over for planting): KJV – issue, seed. There is medical proof that two fathers could impregnate the same woman, and the children would have two different fathers and one mother.

When the Bible was originally written, commas (and other punctuation marks) were completely unknown. Punctuation marks were invented by Aldus Manutious in the Fifteenth Century. Since the original manuscripts had no punctuation marks, the translators placed commas wherever they thought they should go; based entirely on their beliefs…” With this, you can begin to see the problem we are up against with the interpretation of Genesis 4:1. We must give the translators credit though, as they placed a semicolon (;) between, “And Adam knew Eve his wife” (;) “and she conceived and bore Cain.” A semicolon indicates the greatest degree of separation possible within a sentence before dividing it into two separate sentences. It is our opinion that the translators should have used two separate sentences in this case as Adam knowing Eve, in this particular case, had nothing to do with Eve bearing Cain. Should it have been two sentences, or one? 

Once we begin to understand that Eve was pregnant with Cain BEFORE Adam ever knew her, we can realize Adam knowing Eve didn’t have anything to do with Eve bearing Cain. It’s the old concept of cause and effect. We could say we went to a movie one evening and the sun rose the next morning. If this was said, it would be true. But, even though it was true, it does not mean that the sun rising the next morning had anything to do with our having gone to a movie.

It would appear that Eve had Twins because Genesis 4:2 says, “… she again bore his brother Abel.” The word in Hebrew for “again” is #3254 and means “to continue something or to add.” In other words, after [Eve] bore Cain, she “continued” bearing Abel.’

Samyaza, also known as Semjaza, having as one translation of his name, ‘infamous rebellion’, is perhaps the most powerful fallen Angel. He was the undisputed leader of the Grigori group of angels who rebelled against the Creator’s will, mating with women while also facilitating the teaching of forbidden knowledge. This sounds remarkably reminiscent of the Serpent with Eve. Rightly so, Samyaza’s wickedness has been viewed as an alter-ego of Samael. Samyaza was reputed to be one of the few angels in creation who knew the Most High’s true name. This special knowledge earned him the title of, He sees the Name, and it is little wonder that Samael would be one to have this prized knowledge.

The term Grigori means: ‘Those Who Watch’, ‘Those Who Are Awake’, or ‘The Ones Who Never Sleep.’ They originally served early humanity as the possessors of vast depositories of information regarding all aspects of civilisation. They were first called the Watchers, as it was their responsibility to observe humanity, lending assistance when necessary but not interfering in the course of human development.

When the rebel angels first congregated upon Mount Hermon to organize their secret pact with some two million members, Samyaza as their recognised ‘chieftain, initially doubts the initiates’ resolve to forswear heaven. This they had planned to achieve through a clandestine oath under penalty of death, thereby binding themselves to the treachery in which they would use their heavenly knowledge to create a counterfeit religion – a set of beliefs, a different path and way – on earth to ‘satisfy their lusts and carnal desires’ in seducing human women.

Samyaza convinced the other Watchers to join himself in permanently entering the Earth plane, resulting in ‘great impiety and much fornication, and they went astray and all their ways became corrupt.’ The Watchers also taught and instructed humankind blasphemously, the occult dark arts, sciences and celestial ‘secrets or mysteries’ of the true heavenly gnosis (knowledge) – especially the wisdom possessed by Azazel, who taught men the secrets of war, magic, metallurgy and weaponry as well as instructing women, ‘on seductive ornamentation, costly stones, jewellery, cosmetics and colouring tinctures.’

Book of Enoch Chapter Nine:

1. ‘And then Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel looked down from heaven and saw much blood being shed upon the earth, and all lawlessness being wrought upon the earth. 2. And they said one to another: ‘The earth made without inhabitant cries the voice of their crying up to the gates of heaven. 3 And now to you, the holy ones of heaven, the souls of men make their suit, saying, “Bring our cause before the Most High.” 4. And they said to the Lord of the ages: ‘Lord of lords, God of gods, King of kings, the throne of Thy glory (standeth) unto all the generations of the ages, and Thy name holy and glorious and blessed unto all the ages! 5. Thou hast made all things, and power over all things hast Thou: and all things are naked and open in Thy sight, and Thou seest all things, and nothing can hide itself from Thee. 

6. Thou seest what Azazel hath done, who hath taught all unrighteousness on earth and revealed the eternal secrets which were (preserved) in heaven, which men were striving to learn: 7. And Semjaza, to whom Thou hast given authority to bear rule over his associates. 8. And they have gone to the daughters of men upon the earth, and have slept with the women, and have defiled themselves, and revealed to them all kinds of sins. 9. And the women have borne giants, and the whole earth has thereby been filled with blood and unrighteousness. 10. And now, behold, the souls of those who have died are crying and making their suit to the gates of heaven, and their lamentations have ascended: and cannot cease because of the lawless deeds which are wrought on the earth. 11. And Thou knowest all things before they come to pass, and Thou seest these things and Thou dost suffer them, and Thou dost not say to us what we are to do to them in regard to these.’

The Creator commanded the angel Gabriel to cause the Nephilim giants to wage civil war; telling Michael to bind Azazel and the Grigori for seventy generations in the bottomless pit of the abyss, until the Great Tribulation and then afterward on the Day of Judgement, they will be thrown into the Lake of Fire.

Book of Enoch Chapter Ten:

9. ‘And to Gabriel said the Lord: ‘Proceed against the bastards and the reprobates, and against the children of fornication: and destroy [the children of fornication and] the children of the Watchers from amongst men [and cause them to go forth]: send them one against the other that they may destroy each other in battle: for length of days shall they not have. 10. And no request that they (i.e. their fathers) make of thee shall be granted unto their fathers on their behalf; for they hope to live an eternal life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years.’ “11. And the Lord said unto Michael: Go, bind Semjaza and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves with them in all their uncleanness. 

12. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgment and of their consummation, till the judgment that is for ever and ever is consummated. 13. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed will from thenceforth be bound together with them to the end of all generations.’

The name Abaddon in Hebrew means ‘place of destruction’ and he is the head Angel of the Abyss. The Greek title for Abaddon is Apollyon which literally means The Destroyer. While many consider Abaddon to be another name for Samael, he is actually Azazel. He is the Beast who will command the monstrous horde of angelic locusts from the Abyss, who will rampage over the earth in the tribulation period, following the orders of his mother Asherah, the Great Dragon. In esoteric wisdom, Abaddon is apparently associated with the colours blood red, brown and green; the season of winter; the month of January; the weekday, Saturday; the attributes of intuition, sacrifice and challenge; the gem, ruby; and weapon, the sword. 

Cornelius Agrippa is said to have equated Abaddon with Apollyon and calls him the ‘Monarch in the shadow of the planet* sphere of Venus.’ In most texts which speak of him, Abaddon is among the most feared of supernatural beings, with fallen angels and demons fearing his very name alone. Even Samael has reportedly admitted, that he avoids confrontation with Abaddon, implying that his son Azazel is as formidable as himself.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 91-92 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The suffix to Shemyaza, yaza, was a Zend word for “angel, or divine being.” Azazel did not repent of his sins… while Shemyaza somehow repented from his sins but could not face God; he hung himself between heaven and earth (on Orion) [home of the Watchers]. Remember… the root for the Aramaic word Nephila [means] Orion, suggesting the Nephilim derive from [Semyaza], the one hung on Orion, and his 200 [two million] rebellious angels… Azazel persisted in leading humankind from God, and that is why two goats are sacrificed on the Day of Atonement: one for the sins of the Israelites and one for the sins of Azazel… “to send a goat… to the Ruler whose realm is in the places of desolation. From the emanation of his power come destruction and ruin… His portion among the animals is the goat.

The demons [‘dead’ spirits of Nephilim] are part of his realm and are all called in the Bible, Seirem**‘ – Seir is linked with Edom – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe – ‘(legendary he-goats fostered by Azazel).” The Goat of Mendes** and its pentagram, representing satanic cultures, are both directly associated with Azazel… Azazel was singled out… “that all the sins of the earth were written upon Azazel.” He was then judged and cast into darkness, into the abyss… to be held there until the end time when Azazel will once more be released to work his corruption on the earth… Shemyaza… produced Nephilim males named Hiwwa and Hiyya. Shemyaza… provided the name of God [YHWH] to Ishtar [Lilith] for sex, and he was therefore tried and hung for eternity in the Abyss.’

Enoch & the Watchers: The Real Story of Angels & Demons, Michael Howard, 2009 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Shemyaza is seen by some modern Luciferians as either the emissary of Lumiel or one of his avatars (an incarnated divine being in human form).’

Lumiel is described as likely a cherubim or archangel, meaning ‘light of God, the reason’ or ‘hidden of God’ and ‘the God of why’s’. Lumiel’s identity is synonymous with Heylel (or Lucifer) and as we have deduced, Heylel is actually Samael. Critically, Samyaza is the ubiquitous Samael. 

Howard: ‘He not only fell in love with human women, but also with the Babylonian deity Ishtar, the goddess of love and war. She promised to have sex with him if he would in return reveal to her the secret name of God. When Shemyaza told her, Ishtar used this forbidden knowledge to ascend to the stars and she [Lilith] reigned over the constellation of Pleiades or the Seven Sisters. While the other Watchers were rounded up by the archangels and punished by God, Shemyaza voluntarily repented his error and sentenced himself to hang upside down in the constellation of Orion the Hunter, with whom he is sometimes identified in the Luciferian tradition.

In the Qabalistic tradition, Naamah, the sister of the biblical first smith Tubal-Cain, seduced Azazel and she has been associated with Ishtar’ – refer articles: Na’amah; and Lilith. Azazel was popularly believed to have a retinue of hairy he-goat** demons known as the se’irim [Nephiim] who, like the Watchers, lusted after human women. It cannot be a total coincidence that the Church imagined the Devil or Satan [Samael] in the form of a hairy half-human he-goat [Baphomet**] with a massive erect phallus who had sexual intercourse with his female worshippers at the Witches Sabbath.’

‘It is possible that Lumiel [Samael/Samyaza/Lucifer] may have originated in Canaan as Shahar, the god of the morning star (Venus). He had a twin* called Shalem, who was also symbolised by the planet Venus, but as the evening star. These divine bright and dark twins represented the solar light emerging from the darkness of night at dawn and descending into it at dusk. They were the children of the goddess Asherah, and there is archaeological evidence from the Middle East that the Hebrews adopted her worship when they settled in Canaan and practised it alongside reverence of the tribal storm god Yahweh [rather Baal-hadad, (or Samael)].

The Old Testament has several references to the continued worship of Asherah as “Queen of Heaven” by the allegedly monotheistic Hebrews. This took place at shrines in sacred groves on hills where they made offerings of cakes and incense to the goddess. In Canaanite mythology, Shahar, as the Lord of the Morning Star, was cast down from heaven for defying the high god El in the form of a lightning bolt. In that form he fertilised Mother Earth with his divine phallic force. 

When the first man and woman ate the forbidden fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the astral or heavenly garden, they became consciously aware. Their first realisation was that their physical ‘cloaks of flesh’ were naked. They rushed to cover their genitals as they had become aware of the so-called ‘serpent power’ or kundalini that can be raised by sexual intercourse and non-reproductive sex acts…’ – refer article: 33 – ‘the primeval Dreamtime or ‘Golden Age’ of cosmic and [earthly] harmony and primal innocence that may have existed on the material plane or on some kind of astral or pre-material plane.’

The link between the morning and evening star of Venus opens up the possibility of a new scenario to consider between Samael and Azazel in perhaps not being father and son, but of (twin) brothers. The close dynamic may well be explained by this relationship just as much as a father and son. Twins can be notoriously close, ‘in sync’ or at one with each other. It also lends weight to the understanding that Samyaza and Samael are the same being. Interesting too, that Howard links the twins as children of Asherah. For all we know, the two million Watchers may have been the top hierarchy of Samael’s legions. He, with his close cohorts may have infiltrated the physical plane in a supreme effort to pollute and defile humanity. As we have noted, Samyaza’s ‘take the back seat’ approach to Azazel is suspiciously similar to Satan, when she with the sons of God meet with the Eternal. 

The angel Gadreel, also known as Gadriel, means the Wall of God and the Silent Sentinel and is listed as one of the chief cadres in the Grigori of fallen Angels. He is responsible for teaching mankind about warfare – ‘every instrument of death to the children of men’ – with Azazel. Gadreel is mentioned as the third of five prominent satans who led the Watchers into copulating with human females. Gadreel is said to be the angel who originally guarded the gate to the Garden of Eden – not to be confused with the Cherubim who were installed when Adam’s family were banished – until Samael tricked Gadreel into letting him in. This forever destroyed the Garden’s stability, triggering the events which caused Adam and Eve to lose their place in Eden’s Garden. 

As punishment for his failure, Gadreel was banished from the Garden of Eden. Gadreel: “When they say my name perhaps I will be remembered, not as the one who let the serpent in but as one of the few who helped give Heaven a second chance.”

Asbeel (or Asbiel), meaning ‘God has forsaken’ or ‘deserter from God’ is the Angel of Ruin, a Grigori fallen Angel who is listed second of the five satans in the Book of Enoch. While it is common for fallen angels to disrespect the supreme Creator, it is said that Asbeel, true to the meaning of his name completely abandoned himself from the Ancient of Days and His grace. Unlike many of the fallen, Asbeel apparently wished nothing from the Creator as he lost his faith in Him, as well as his faith in his brethren who remain in Heaven with Michael. 

Note the avian nature depicted for Asbeel by Peter Mohrbacher. The image is not far removed from The Hermit of the Tarot and renditions for Thoth, the Ibis God of Egypt – refer article: Thoth.

Asbeel pondered on why the Ancient of Days would not allow His creations to fully develop themselves freely; yet he contradictorily reasons why the Creator would choose ‘destructive eternal solutions’ rather than unconditionally, completely clean away the evil and malice in their hearts. This led him to become a maltheist, believing that the Creator was a tyrant, whom would rather have worship and praise given to Him in exchange for conditionally aiding His creations, rather than just outright helping whether or not they worship Him. Therefore, Asbeel was one of Samael’s greatest supporters.

Penemue, known as the Fallen Scribe or Angel of the Written Word, was said to be the Scribe of the Creator before becoming the fourth of the five satans. Penemue descended to Earth in the form of a woman and revealed to humans secret wisdoms, the art of reading and the use of ink and paper. ‘Many of the fallen angels have taken to wandering the spheres, but some have taken it upon themselves to settle. As they are no longer welcome in the upper spheres, they looked to lower spheres for their new home. The Grigori are known to reside in Nava Siyyon, as they call their home. Of them, perhaps the strangest tale is that of Penemue.’

‘Originally one of the archivists of the higher spheres, the Scribe had no real cause to rebel against her masters. Penemue, by most accounts, was dedicated to her domain of words and writing. Her existence was marked only by her friendship with [the Watcher] Ramiel, the Hope.’ When Samael began to respond to the seeds of doubt instilled by Asherah, he went to Ramiel for advice. Ramiel brought him to Penemue, ‘in the hope that the Scribe could find the words to assuage Samael’s doubts. To everyone’s surprise, Penemue could not find them. Instead, she suggested that Samael think on the issues, and then write on them in order to help others with the same doubts. The rest, as they say, is history. Few… have ever read the words Samael wrote, but those who have insist his arguments were persuasive. Penemue, at the very least, was convinced. Against the will of the ancient gods, she taught mortal life the arts of the pen. She and the others who rebelled, were cast out. Penemue, lacking other options, joined the Fallen, and to this day acts as their chronicler… for Penemue is still the undisputed master of words’ – Article: Thoth.

Azrael (or Azriel) meaning ‘One Whom God Helps’, ‘Help from God’ or ‘Angel of God’, as mentioned is also known as the Archangel of Death and leader of the angels of death or death angels. ‘He is also known as the Pale Rider, King of Atrocity and King of Skulls. He is responsible for transporting the souls of the deceased after death…’

In art, Azrael is often depicted wielding a sword or scythe and wearing a hood, since these symbols represent his role as the Angel of Death who is reminiscent of the Grim Reaper – refer article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning? In one description, Azrael has four faces, four thousand wings and seventy thousand feet. Azrael’s true form is so terrifyingly awful, it is said that the mere sight of it could not only kill a human, but can drive even an angel or demon to madness. His whole body consists of eyes and tongues whose number corresponds to the number of people inhabiting the Earth. He is constantly recording and erasing in a large book the names of men at birth and death, respectively. Azrael may then have enacted the final plague of the ten plagues that God unleashed upon Egypt, causing the deaths of the firstborn children of Egypt but sparing the lives of the Hebrews.

The Five Satans in the Book of Enoch, James Scott Trimm, 2019 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Book of Enoch… makes a very interesting statement: ‘And I heard the fourth voice fending off the Satans and forbidding them to come before YHWH of Spirits to accuse them who dwell on the earth.’ (1 Enoch 40:7) Now to people today who have been conditioned to think of “Satan” as a name rather than a title, seeing the name Satan in the plural seems very odd indeed. 

But to the ancient Hebrew reader we are simply looking at the title “the adversary” describing more than one “adversary”. Yes the Book of Enoch is telling us that the Fallen Angels are subject to more than one “satan” (adversary). Since the Tanak often uses the term “THE Adversary” (Ha-Satan) it is clear that there is nonetheless a unique figure who is a leader over all of the fallen angels who is called in the Hebrew “Ha-Satan” “The Satan”.

After giving the names of the twenty leaders of tens [myriads] of the fallen angels (found in 1 Enoch 6:7-8 and repeated in 1 Enoch 69:2-3) the Book of Enoch gives us a list of five leaders over forties in 69:4-12 who are five “satans” or five adversaries to whom the fallen angels are subject. These appear to be the “satans” referred to in 1 Enoch 40:7. This portion of the Book of Enoch (1 Enoch 69) has only survived in Ethiopic, however I will endeavor in this article to reach behind the Ethiopic, to the original Hebrew of these verses:  

4 The name of the first Yekon: that is, the one who led astray [all] the sons of Elohim, and brought them down to the earth, and led them astray through the daughters of men. The original Hebrew behind “Yekon” may have been (Yekom) “rebel; one who rises up” however in Biblical Hebrew this word (from a root meaning “to rise up”) simply means “a living thing” (Strong’s 3351). Another possibility is (Y’kam’am) (Strong’s 3360) which is a name used twice in the Tanak (1 Chronicles 23:19; 24:23) meaning “he who gathers the people together”. (Or simply “Y’kam” “he who gathers”) Yekon appears to be a title for Shemikhazah [Samyaza] who in the Book of Enoch chapter 6 led the 200 [two million] fallen angels astray through the daughters of men.

5 And the second was named Asbeel: he imparted to the set-apart sons of Elohim evil counsel, and led them astray so that they defiled their bodies with the daughters of men. “Asbeel” is probably a scribal error for Kasbeel, who while they still dwelt in heaven obtained the secret of the sacred name and the secret of its numbers so that they could be used in the oath that bound them together: 13 And this is the number of Kasbeel, the chief of the oath, which he showed to the set-apart ones when he dwelt high above in glory, and its name is Biqa. 14 This (angel) requested Mikha’el [Michael] to show him the hidden name, that he might enunciate it in the oath, so that those might quake before that name and oath 15 who revealed all that was in secret to the children of men? And this is the power of this oath, for it is powerful and strong, and he placed this oath Akae in the hand of Mikha’el. (1 Enoch 69:13-15) The underlying Hebrew for Kasbeel may have been (Khashevel) “thought of El.”

6 And the third was named Gadreel: he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons of death to the children of men. 7 And from his hand they have proceeded against those who dwell on the earth from that day and for evermore. The Hebrew may have been (Gederel) “mason of El” or “wall of El.”

8 And the fourth was named Penemue: he taught the children of men the bitter and the sweet, and he taught them all the secrets of their wisdom. 9 And he instructed mankind in writing with ink and paper, and thereby many sinned from eternity to eternity and until this day’ – Article: Thoth. ‘The title in Hebrew may have been (Pana Emunah) “He has turned from trust/faith” or “inside.” Since the Book of Enoch itself refers to Enoch as “Enoch the Scribe” (1 Enoch 12:4), Enoch felt a parenthetical explanation was needed: 

10 For men were not created for such a purpose, to give confirmation to their good faith with pen and ink… writing was not originally intended for man at the time he was created (because man was created immortal), but after the fall, writing serves the purpose of allowing man to pass information from generation to generation, so that ideas are not lost when men die. 

12 And the fifth was named Kasdeya: this is he who showed the children of men all the wicked smitings of spirits and demons, and the smitings of the embryo in the womb, that it may pass away, and [the smitings of the soul] the bites of the serpent, and the smitings which befall through the noontide heat, the son of the serpent named Taba’et. (1 Enoch 69:4-12)… The original Hebrew behind “Kasdeya” may have been (Khesedyah) “Yah has favored” (see 1 Chronicles 3:20) but Aramaic (Kash’diya) “Chaldeans” may be more likely.

The Book of Enoch tells us that the fallen angels introduced an ancient abortion procedure… Similarly the Book of Jasher (see Joshua 10:23 and 2 Samuel 1:18) tells us that during these days before the flood a “draught” was also introduced that was a permanent method of birth control for women: 17 And Lamech, the son of M’tushael, became related to Kayinan by marriage, and he took his two daughters for his wives, and Adah conceived and bare a son to Lamech, and she called his name Yaval [Jabal]. 18 And she again conceived and bare a son, and called his name Yuval [Jubal]; and Zillah, her sister, was barren in those days and had no offspring.

19 For in those days the sons of men began to trespass against Elohim, and to transgress the commandments which he had commanded to the man, to be fruitful and multiply in the earth. 20 And some of the sons of men caused their wives to drink a draught that would render them barren, in order that they might retain their figures and whereby their beautiful appearance might not fade. 21 And when the sons of men caused some of their wives to drink, Zillah drank with them. 22 And the child-bearing women appeared abominable in the eyes of their husbands as widows, while their husbands lived, for to the barren ones only they were attached. (Jasher 2:17-22)’

Secrets of the Oath That Binds the Fallen Angels, James Scott Trimm 2019 – emphasis mine:

‘… I want to tell you more about this “oath” they “swore” by which they bound themselves by imprecations… this portion of the Book of Enoch has survived only in Ethiopic… Enoch goes on to tell us that the power of this oath is the very Power which Created and Upholds the universe itself. The very laws of nature, the laws of nature’s Creator are the very power of this oath… (1 Enoch 69:16-24) Then Enoch reveals to us that the “hidden name”, by which the oath was enunciated is also “the name of that Son of Man”… (1 Enoch 69:25-29).

The “oath” was enunciated with “the hidden name” which corresponds to a “number” and revealed to us in the Book of Enoch only in hidden form with the words “biqa” and “akae”. So what is the hidden meaning of these mysterious words? In Hebrew letters and numbers are the same thing, so a series of letters can express a word but it can also express a number. When Hebrew words are converted to numbers, or vice versa, this is called “gematria.” 

The gematria of “biqa” is 117 [which adds up to 9, a mysterious and magical number of spiritual completion], which is also the gematria for “YHWH Elohim.” The gematria of “akae” is 91 [which adds up to 10, number of Judgement and 1, number of initiation or source], which is also the gematria for “Adonai YHWH.” (91 is also the gematria for the Hebrew words for “amen,” “angel,” and “manna.”) The “hidden name” which enunciated the oath was the name of YHWH! And the Book of Enoch also reveals to us that YHWH is the Name of the Son of Man. 

In my recently published… Why the Rabbis Suppressed the Book of Enoch, I demonstrated that the Rabbis suppressed the Book of Enoch because the Deity of Messiah is revealed in it.

According to the Book of Enoch the fallen angels bound their oath by imprecations, swearing by the Name of YHWH and it is the Name of YHWH which has the power to bind these fallen angels “with chains” (1 Enoch 69:28). There is power in the Name of YHWH and this is why we read in Luke: 17 And those seventy whom He had sent, returned with great joy and said to Him, Our Adon, even the shadim were subject to us by Your Name. 18 And He said to them: I saw that HaSatan fell like lightning from heaven. 19 Behold, I give to you authority to tread upon serpents [fallen angels and demons] and scorpions, and the power of the enemy, and nothing will hurt you. (Luke 10:17-19 HRV)

And this is why we read in the Tanak: The name of YHWH is a strong tower: the righteous runs into it, and is set up on high. (Proverbs 18:10 HRV) Through You do we push down our adversaries; through Your name do we tread them under that rise up against us. (Psalm 44:6 (44:2) HRV) There is none like unto You, O YHWH; You are great, and Your name is great in might. (Jeremiah 10:6 HRV) The Name of YHWH is the Name of the Son of Man, the Name of the Messiah, and it is the Name which the Book of Enoch is telling us can bind the fallen angels “with chains.”

We have discovered Asherah was the consort of the Ancient of Days and the mother of Samael – refer article: Asherah. In ancient literature, she bears a remarkable similarity with the watery planet Tiamat; the original planet before the one we now call Earth. Tiamat was recognised as the Primordial Goddess, Leviathan of the Oceans and also as the Goddess of Chaos. She is considered the original Mother of Dragons, including the Seraphim and other ‘monsters.’ Tiamat is also known as Nammu (or Nannu). Other purported titles and names include: Draconic Corpus, Femme Fatale, Original Mother, Ocean of Void and the Sea of Dawn. Tiamat personifies anarchy, motherhood, femininity, the Earth, dragons and madness. 

Kingu the Moon, was both a consort and her offspring. ‘Tiamat was the “shining” personification of salt water who roared and smote as the chaos of original creation. She and Apsu filled the cosmic abyss with the primeval waters. She is “Ummu-Hubur who formed all things”. She [Asherah] mated with her lover Abzu, the Primordial God of Fresh Water [the Ancient of Days], to produce younger deities of the pantheon [Angels]. She is the symbol of the chaos of primordial creation, depicted as a woman, she represents the beauty of the feminine… [and] depicted as the glistening one.’

‘She is also [depicted as] an Earth Mother Goddess though her title [Rahab] has been forgotten. She is portrayed as either a sea serpent or a dragon. It is suggested that there are two parts to the mythos, the first in which Tiamat is a creator goddess [Wisdom], through a “Sacred marriage” between salt and fresh water, peacefully creating the cosmos through successive generations. In the second, Tiamat is considered the monstrous embodiment of primordial chaos [Asherah].’

Tiamat’s form is unique, in that she had one head for each primary colour of the most common species of dragons: black, blue, red, green and white. Each head was able to operate independently of each other, having the powers of a member of the respective races of Dragon-kind. Her body also had traits in common with a Wyvern, including a long tail tipped with a poisonous stinger. Joseph Fontenrose concluded that “there is reason to believe that Tiamat was sometimes, not necessarily always, conceived as a dragoness.”

An online comment states – emphasis mine:

‘Tiamat was originally arrogant, greedy, hateful, spiteful and vain. She never forgave any kind of slight and was focused in obtaining more power and wealth though she did adore her own children. Whether Tiamat has lost her ideals, or whether she has no reason since the beginning, it can be interpreted as either way, but one cannot surmise the reason.’

Tiamat as Wisdom, wanted to be seen by the Most High as an equal. Her arrogance led to dissatisfaction and ultimately to Asherah’s rebellion and the opposing path to life – the path of the knowledge of good and evil.

‘Although she simply birthed, raised and loved her children, which was viewed as her only meaning in life, she has set out to fight against humanity… [declaring] “you are not needed.” Her behavioural ideology when becoming a Beast is extremely simple; she runs under the extremely primitive system of “If I do not kill humanity, I will be killed.”

Rahab is associated with the ocean and is known as the Angel of the Sea and the Angel of the Deep. ‘Rahab was the angel of insolence and pride [like Tiamat], responsible for shaking the waters and producing [huge] waves… responsible for the roaring of the sea… banished from Heaven chained into the depths of the deep sea.’ In Jewish folklore, Rahab – meaning noise, tumult, arrogance – is a mythical sea monster, a dragon of the waters like Leviathan, the ‘demonic angel of the sea’. Rahab represents the primordial abyss, the water-dragon of darkness and chaos, again, comparable to Tiamat. ‘Fallen from grace… is little more than a banished soul chained to the depths of the ocean… a tortured soul indeed. Unfavored, unloved, unwanted… Lost to the light of day…’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 579-584 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Baal, the great storm god [Samael], was alternatively known… as the bull and was called variantly a dragon, a serpent, and the celebrated slayer of the chaos monster… of the sea… the great Leviathan recorded in Job… known in Near Eastern mythology as Tiamat [Asherah]… all the gods of Babylon shrunk before Tiamatthe goddess and dragon of disorder. Marduk split Tiamat in two… and then confined half to the sky [asteroid belt] and half to the earth… Tiamat… the great World Dragon or Cosmic Dragon… possessing a vast serpentine body…

Together with Apsu [the Ancient of days]… she produced the heavens, earth, and spawned the gods… [linked with the] “abyss”, “void,” or “bottomless pit”… Leviathan… encircled [like the Ouroboros] the world in the great Abyss, or depths of the cosmic ocean… the mightest creature of creation that eventually required the slaying of the female, for two such creatures would have destroyed the earth… Lotan, the seven-headed dragon of the sea… is considered… to be the same monster as Tiamat and Leviathan…’

A correlation exists between Tiamat [Asherah], a leviathan; dragon; and sea serpent – split in two by Marduk – and the defeat and scattering by the storm god, Hadad-Ba’al [Samael] with the help of his sister ‘Anat. Lotan (or Lawtan) is a seven-headed sea serpent or dragon in Ugaritic myth. It represents a ‘great stream’ in the ‘cosmic ocean’ of myth as well as the ‘mass destruction of floods’ – Genesis 7:6-7. Lotan was also a name of a son of Sier – Gensis 36:20-22. Abarim Publications says that Lotan means: ‘a covering, to envelop’ and ‘wrap closely’ like a coiled snake. It would seem that Lotan, Leviathan, Tiamat and Asherah are one. The references to seven heads, living in the sea and floods are all described in the Bible as attributes of the Dragon, the ancient Serpent or Serpent of old.

Revelation 12:3-4, 15-16

English Standard Version

‘And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on [its] heads seven diadems. [Her] tail swept down a third of the stars [angels] of heaven and cast them to the earth… 

The serpent poured water like a river out of [its] mouth after the woman, to sweep her away with a flood. But the earth came to the help of the woman [true believers], and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from [her] mouth.’

Daniel Chapter seven speaks of the four beasts or kingdoms which ‘come up from the sea’ as Revelation chapter thirteen describes the first Beast with seven heads, arising from ‘the sea.’ As mentioned, the idea of coming from the sea could be a euphemism for actually originating – from humanities perspective – as either space, or the spirit realm.** The book of Isaiah speaks of the Eternal eventually killing Leviathan.

Isaiah 27:1

New English Translation

‘At that time the Lord will punish with his destructive, great, and powerful sword Leviathan the fast-moving [piercing (Job 26:13), slippery, slithering, fleeing] serpent, Leviathan the squirming [crooked, wriggling, writhing] serpent; he will kill [destroy] the sea monster [dragon (with seven* heads)].’

Psalm 74:14

English Standard Version

‘You crushed the [seven] heads* of Leviathan; you gave [her] as food for the creatures of the wilderness.’

Gary Wayne: ‘… the Bible describes Rahab… a sea monster… churning… the primordial seas… You rule over the surging sea… You crushed Rahab like one of the slain – Psalm 89:7, 9-10. Job 26:12-13 declares… by his wisdom he cut Rahab to pieces… pierced the gliding serpent… (Isaiah 51:9)… Rahab… an evil power overcome by God… signifies God’s power over the chaos of the primordial waters of creation… Rahab was the angel of the sea who rebelled at the creation of the world. On day three of the Genesis creation account, the primeval waters refused to remain separated into upper and lower waters… this is the defiance and destruction at creation that God met with, which the Bible skirts around… polytheist beliefs recall the snake-like being weaving through the cosmos known as the Evil One

Genesis only records the separation of upper and lower waters… supported in Isaiah 43:16, without noting the rebellion… details… are recorded in Psalm 18:7-15… Similarly, Psalm 104:4-9 records in detail the account of tearing the rebellious waters back apart and permanently confining them… to ensure… sky and earth, thus providing the earth with both dry land and sea… the crushing of Rahab’s skull… Psalm 74:13… is directly related to the separating the sky from the earth…

In 1908, Nicola Tesla identified ether as the water of the obscure expanse, the water above… a tenuous fluid filling all space with a spinning motion… once in motion, this water becomes matter, but when still, it reverts back to its normal state. Ether… the essence of space…** the fifth element. 

Newton described ether as an invisible substance permeating the universe like a living spirit. Einstein concluded ether is necessary for the laws of physics to exist and that without ether, there would be no light, no space, and no time.’

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Lilith has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Lilith’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

True World History Humanity’s Saga, Stewart A Swerdlow, 2014, pages 39-40 – emphasis mine:

‘The progression of Reptilian religion from Sumer to modern times always involves 3, or the Trinity’ – refer article: 33. ‘They had the 3-horned God which eventually became the “Fleur-de-lis”. Sumer religion consists of the Reptilian Gods “Nimrod” and “Semiramis”… [with] human shaped bodies in Reptilian form. They always have a male and female because this represents the androgyny of the reptilian body; male and female in one.’

‘This is where the shape-shifting… began, mixing Reptilian blood with human… to create a being that would look human, but would have a Reptilian agenda… hybrids that were a 50/50 genetic split between Reptilian and mammalian… a Reptilian mindset with the genetics constantly manifesting a Reptilian form, the physical body requires the ingestion of human hormones, organs, and blood, thus feeding the mammalian genetics to help hold a human appearance. The ingestion of human DNA instructs those genetics to open and manifest as such. This is the origin of the blood sacrificial rituals… explaining why humans were actually sacrificed and eaten. 

The blood rituals were originally about maintaining the human form through the harmonics of the mammalian energy. They still go on to this day in Illuminati culture or subculture… when you take communion you are told, “This is my body and this is my blood”… you are participating in the Reptilian ceremony of ingesting human hormones. Abraham was to sacrifice his son, Isaac… this shows… that in those days human ritual sacrifice was acceptable, and it still is.’

Nimrod and Semiramis, Marty A Cauley, 2017 – (excluding author’s notes), emphasis & bold mine, capitalisation his: 

‘Just as male angels who left their heavenly state and estate to mate with human females became subject to death (Jude 1:6), so female angels who left their heavenly state and estate to mate with human males became subject to death. The purpose of the present inquiry is to explore the additional possibility that Nimrods mother (and thus wife) [Lilith] might be a historical example of such an occasion

… a quote which I had read earlier… but had forgotten: If Nimrod were a Nephilim, then his father [Cush or Kish, a son (descendant) of Asshur]… would have had to consort with a fallen angel in the form of a succubus (the female form)’ – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. ‘Nimrod is called a gibbor in the Hebrew text of Genesis 10:9… specifically mighty in hunting… [a] mighty hunter. But gibbor could be used of [1] mighty beasts (Proverbs 30:30), [2] mighty men (Joshua 1:14), [3] mighty God (Isaiah 10:21) or [4] mighty angels (Psalm 103:20). Granted, the giant Goliath was called a gibbor (1 Samuel 17:51), and some… have grossly oversimplified the lexical relationship by implying, on that singular basis, that gibbor means giant. Obviously, if one looks [at] the other usages of the word just mentioned, gibbor does not mean giant. Goliath was a mighty warrior; therefore, gibbor is appropriately used of Goliath. 

This giant was a mighty warrior. Mighty (gibbor) is used of this giant, but gibbor cannot be simplistically equated with giant. 

The first biblical occurrence of gibbor is in Genesis 6:4: “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.” Some… interpret Nephilim to mean fallen ones, thus referring to fallen angels who mated with human women. Others interpret Nephilim to refer to the giants who were produced because of that mating. Heiser provides lexical reasons for adopting the latter perspective… The only other use of Nephilim in the Bible is Numbers 13:33, where it refers to the giant offspring, thus confirming Heiser’s deduction. Nephilim means giants. The LXE and LXX translate it as giants (gigantes) respectively, as do some English translations (e.g., KJV, NKJ).

What about gibbor, however? We already have observed that, in and of itself, gibbor does not mean giant. Nevertheless, surprisingly, the LXE and LXX render gibbor as giants (gigantes) in Genesis 6:4: “Now the giants [Hebrew Nephilim; Greek gigantes] were upon the earth in those days; and after that when the sons of God [the Watchers] were wont to go in to the daughters of men [the daughters of Cain], they bore children to them, those were the giants [Hebrew gibbon; Greek gigantes] of old, the men of renown.”

Why would the Greek render the Hebrew gibbor as giants on this occasion? Apparently, the translators of the Septuagint believed that these particular mighty men (gibbor) were mighty because they were giants (Nephilim).

The only other occurrence of gibbor in Genesis is used of Nimrod and is dealt with in the same way by the LXX and LXE: “Cush became the father of Nimrod; he began to be a giant [Hebrew gibbor; Greek gigas] upon the earth. He was a giant [Hebrew gibbon; Greek gigas] hunter before the Lord; therefore, it is said, ‘Like Nimrod a giant [Hebrew gibbor; Greek gigas] hunter before the Lord’ (Genesis 10:8-9; TM). The LXX, and thus the LXE as well, evidently felt justified, based on the context in Genesis, in deducing that Nimrod became a gibbor like the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4. Thus, from the LXX-LXE perspective, Nimrod began to become gigantic, a giant. These Greek translations rendering it as such in harmony with contextual sensitivity. The LXX also extends that reasoning to a different word in a similar text outside of Genesis: “And Cush begot Nimrod; he began to be a giant [gigas; LXX] hunter on the earth” (1 Chronicles 1:10; TM). 

The LXE, however, is content here, outside of the Genesis context, to render it as mighty hunter. In any event, the LXX has reasonably deduced: 1. In Genesis, the gibbor were giants/Nephilim. 2. Nimrod became a gibbor in Genesis. 3. Therefore, per Genesis, Nimrod became a giant/Nephilim. Nimrod began to be something he was not before – a giant (i.e., a Nephilim). Pure linguistical and contextual analysis yields this result. One does not need to resort to myth and legend to make this deduction. Nimrod is linked by the word gibbor to the Nephilim of Genesis. But how did the giants (i.e., Nephilim) in Genesis 6:4 come about? By fallen angels mating with humans. By the same process of reasoning, one would deduce that the contextual inference is that if Nimrod is a giant (i.e., Nephilim) like… those in Genesis 6:4, then he became a giant/Nephilim in the same way: by the mating of fallen angels with humans. 

No contextual indicator of any different source for the giant/Nephilim is given in Genesis with one exception, which Moses supplies in the immediate context: 

Cush [from Asshur], not a fallen angel, fathered Nimrod. So if Nimrod was born as the result of a fallen angel mating with a human (as implied by the Genesis 6:4 context) and if he was a first generation giant/Nephilim (like those in Genesis 6:4), then the only logical conclusion left is that Nimrod’s mother was a fallen angel. Cush [Kish] married a fallen female angel. Nimrod was the offspring of that union…

Noah cursed Canaan, not Ham. Although Ham’s wife seduced Noah, resulting in Canaan’s birth and Noah’s curse, Ham was an innocent party… Ham’s wife had the latent Nephilim DNA. Although Cush and Canaan had the same father [rather, Cush from Ham and Canaan from Noah] – Ham, they may not have had the same mother. After Ham’s wife seduced Noah (and their offspring – Canaan – was cursed by Noah because of her), Ham may not have had any further sexual relations with her. 

Ham eventually may have taken another wife who was not tainted by Nephilim DNA so that his other three sons could be born of a mother who was free of the serpent’s seed and thus not be cursed. On the other hand, even if one believes that all four of Ham’s sons were born of the same mother, the curse was only invoked on Canaan – the one conceived by the illicit seduction. Regardless, the contextual implication of the curse is that Cush was not tainted by Nephilim DNA. 

Only Canaan had Nephilim DNA. Nimrod’s mother, rather than his father, is the more plausible source of Nimrod becoming a Nephilim. The biblical evidence would lead one to suspect that Nimrod’s mother was a fallen female angel – a goddess. Like the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4 who were giants born of a supernatural origin, Nimrod was also a gibbor born of supernatural origin, a mighty giant born by the sexual union of a human with a fallen angel. Since this deduction is the most possible explanation of the biblical data, I will adopt it as my skeleton key in unlocking the most plausible biblical associations and legendary speculations.’

This writer concurs with Cauley’s line of reasoning regarding Nimrod’s parentage – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. Though would differ regarding Canaan receiving any Nephilim DNA from his mother, Na’eltama’uk – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. Yet, Noah being seduced by Ham’s wife with Canaan’s birth the result, is agreed. When studying the incident involving Canaan, Ham and Noah, different scenarios were investigated. There is an alternative scenario, which was purposely not discussed as it is difficult to biblically support and to only infer. 

It involves Ham having an encounter with his own mother, Emzara, though it does not explain Noah in his tent alone; naked; inebriated; or the sexual act committed against him, part of the story. An additional hypothesis, again not included, was that Canaan’s ‘incident’ with Noah, may have involved transvestism on Canaan’s part; coupled with or enabling him to perform a homosexual act on Noah. These explanations have been ruled out. Yet it is not clear which lines fathered Nephilim. It was probably not just a Canaanite issue, as Cauley and others propose

Cauley: ‘According to some legends, Nimrod married his mother Semiramis… in whose land he built his tower in the land of Shinar (Hebrew)’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘She [Lilith] became known as the Queen of Heaven [originally her mother, Asherah’s title]. Either she was a mere human mortal making herself out to be a goddess or, more likely, a fallen immortal doing the same. If the latter is correct, then she was either (1) the daughter of a goddess or (2) a goddess who became mortal to mate with human men to produce Nephilim offspring and institute goddess worship, deifying herself as Ishtar – and Nimrod (or their son) as Gilgamesh in the process. 

Another variation posits that Gilgamesh’s mother was Ninsum, a goddess (thus a fallen angel). My theory is that when this beautiful, fallen, earthbound, Nordic angel got the chance, she made herself out to be a goddess and thus became the goddess of legend. 

Nimrod was not born a Nephilim (giant); he began to be(come) a Nephilim (giant) later as he started to grow. Obviously, the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4 were not giants at the point of birth. These Nephilim offspring subsequently grew to be giants, which is why Nimrod became a giant later, as he grew. Unlike the alternate proposals, this deduction is in full harmony with the link established by Genesis between the Nephilim and Nimrod.’

Notes: As a result of the division of languages going from one to seventy, Nimrod was known by many names, as was his wife. Regardless of which goddess myth is invoked, fallen-goddess hypotheses are more likely than alternatives, which pose that Nimrod merely (1) activated dormant Nephilim genes or (2) modified his own genes or (3) opened his third eye by marrying his mother or (4) became mighty at the age of twenty by putting on the garments of skin that God created for Adam and Eve.

‘Chick masterfully summarizes Hislop’s position in three pages. Per the legend that Chick cites, “during a riot in the city of Babylon, Semiramis was spotted. She was so beautiful, the riot stopped so everyone could look at her and admire her beauty.” If this legend is to be treated as historical fact, then why not accept the fact that her exceeding beauty is attributable to her heavenly origin? Chick surmises, “Cush [Kish] married the most beautiful woman on Earth. Her name was Semiramis. She became the Queen of Babylon

‘If she was indeed the most beautiful woman on Earth, this would make her more beautiful than any fallen female angel on Earth at the time. This proposition only makes sense if she was a fallen angel herself. Her unnatural beauty should hint at her supernatural origin. Hislop, whom Chick is citing, provides documentation that Semiramis was a blond [haired], blue eyed beauty (which would fit the description of a Nordic). Schnoebelen believes that when angels initially fall, they are [exceedingly] handsome or beautiful Nordics.’

Recall that Lilith was extraordinarily beautiful, attractive and seductive. Lilith as the Queen of Babylon is later described as the Whore of Babylon. 

Cauley: ‘Over the passage of time, however, fallen angels become serpentine, reflecting the nature of their new leader – Satan. If Schnoebelen is correct, Semiramis would have been a recently fallen [post-flood] angel, and the serpentine gods and goddesses of Sumer would have been ancient [pre-flood] fallen angels who had been on earth in their earthbound state for an extended period of time.’

‘… my assessment is that the snake goddess holding a serpentine infant represents a fallen female angel who, after mating with a human male, has given birth to a genetic hybrid. To expand upon that assessment in the present discussion I call attention to the manuscript evidence cited by Putnam and Horn from the Dead Sea Scrolls that “a Watcher named Melkiresha” was “in the form of a reptilian… the Watchers are described in explicitly reptilian terms by the ancient Hebrews” (emphasis theirs). Putnam and Horn… They surmise: “Inanna, [a] ‘Queen of Heaven,’ a mother goddess who much later would be called by some, ‘Mary, the Queen of Heaven and the Mother of Jesus Christ.’

‘Putnam and Horn list three possible explanations “regarding the origin of the early mythological gods: 1) The Euhemerus View; 2) The Ancient Astronaut Theory; and 3) the Biblical View. The Euhemerus View was based on the historical theories of the Greek scholar Euhemerus who claimed that the pagan gods originated with certain ancient kings who were later deified”. 

The second view attributes these ancient gods to ancient aliens who came to this planet in UFOs. Putnam and Horn opt for the third view – the biblical viewthat these early gods are explained by fallen angels coming down and mating with human women.

Their explanation for the gods is very good, except for the fact that they showed the picture of a goddess – a female serpentine deity! Accordingly, they should have explicitly acknowledged that implication of their argument is that some of these fallen angels were goddesses. I am simply following their argument through to its logical implication. Nimrod was not merely a human king who was later deified via legends. The Euhemerus View is not sufficient to explain the biblical data. Nimrod was a demigod. This is the biblical view. Similarly, Semiramis was more than just a woman who became a queen and who was later defied as the Queen of Heaven simply by the force of legends. She was in fact a fallen goddess.’

Notes: At the point they become serpentine, they become totally given over to evil. Greys are failed genetic mistakes with limited intellect, drones, robotic clones, like mules in being unable to reproduce, doing the work of their masters. They are never leaders. Schnoebelen goes on to say that these Reptilians (Draconians) welched on their agreement with the US government. So the US government went into the underground bases and kicked them out, like the TV mini-series V. 

Schnoebelen believes that fallen female angels also came down to Earth at the time of Genesis 6 sexual incursion to mate with humans and thereby “defile the DNA of the people”. Either way, you would get FADNA (fallen angel DNA)… some people whom I respect hold Schnoebelen’s testimony to be valid, which increases my confidence in his testimony as well. Thus, I am not appealing to Schnoebelen’s testimony just because it supports my theory. 

In the interview, Schnoebelen says that he “was opening up doorways to the parallel universes” through occult magic back in his warlock days.

Cauley: ‘The Mother Goddess (Mother of God) is holding her deified infant (Tammuz), who is a hybrid that also would grow to be a giant like his father, Nimrod. Per Hislop’s documentation, Semiramis had blond hair and blue eyes. Therefore, in my opinion Semiramis was a Nordic rather than a Reptilian. In a slide discussing the Mother of Harlots, Missler says, “All occultic practices originated in Babylon.” He goes on to explain that (1) our observance of Christmas [refer article: Asherah] is linked with “Tammuz, the son of Nimrod and his queen, Semiramis, [who] was identified with the Babylon Sun God [Apollo (Azazel)] (about December 22) and that (2) our observance of Easter is associated with “the Babylonian worship of Ishtar, the Golden Egg of Astarte, and the fertility rights of spring.” These are matters that the mystery religion of Babylon is traceable back to Semiramis. She is the focus of many OT texts and possibly the principle figure in a key NT discussion dealing with mystery Babylon and the woman riding the beast (Revelation 17:1-7).’ 

Nimrod is linked with Christmas and December 25th, possibly his birthday. Easter is derived from Ishtar who is Lilith; while Lilith is entwined with Mystery Babylon the Great. Encompassing them both is the Sun god, Azazel.

Cauley: ‘The goddess mentioned in 1 Kings 11:5, 33 is Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Sidonians. She is also mentioned in other passages. Ashtaroth is the plural form of Ashtoreth. This form is also used several times in the OT. Among the Assyrians, Ashtoreth is identified as Ishtar, from which our word Easter is derived. She was the planetary goddess of Venus, the goddess of love and fertility. The Greeks would call her Aphrodite. The Israelites idolatrously worshipped her as the Queen of Heaven [actually Asherah, the first Queen of Heaven] (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-19; 44:25). Posing that she is one of the fallen female angelic watchers who desired worship seems reasonable enough. She is also worshipped as Asherah [Semiramis (or Lilith) is to Asherah, as Azazel is to Samael – separate entities]. She and her sacred Asherah pole are mentioned nineteen times in the OT. Baal [Samael] had 450 prophets, while Asherah, his consort, had 400 prophets (1 Kings 18:19). Baal [Samael] and Asherah [Satan] were counted among the hosts of heaven by their followers (2 Kings 23:4). Asherim were cultic objects used in her worship (mentioned in twenty OT verses).’ 

Notes: [A Woman Rides the Beast, David] Hunt’s thesis is that the woman who rides the beast is the Roman Catholic Church (RCH). This may be the religious entity, but in the present discussion I am more interested in the spiritual entity worshipped by the Roman Catholic Church Semiramis – worshipped under the guise of the Madonna holding her infant. 

Cauley: ‘According to some legends, Semiramis was a virgin that sprung from the sea [or space, the cosmos similar to Leviathan (and Tiamat), representing Asherah]. Semiramis is her Greek name derived from her original Assyrian name Sammuramat (gift of the sea). Her fame eventually surpassed that of Nimrod. As to Nimrod, in Genesis 10:8 he began (chalal) to become (hayah) a giant (Hebrew gibbor; G”eek gigas). Hayah, the verb for become, is the same verb found in Genesis 1:2: “The Earth had become formless and void” (TM). 

In conjunction with the classical gap theory, I hold that the Earth became formless and void as a result of Lucifer’s fall [Samael]’ – rather Satan (Asherah) – ‘The action of this fallen angel resulted in the Earth becoming formless and void. By invoking PFA in conjunction with the Genesis 6 explanation, I hypothesize that Nimrod likewise became a gibbor as a result of the action of a fallen angel, namely his mother [Lilith].’

Notes: Therefore, I am not suggesting that just because the word hayah has one meaning in one context it must have that same meaning in another context. Other factors must be considered. My perception, though, is that these other factors may justify seeing a deeper association between hayah in these two verses, rather than just saying that they share the same lexical domain or that it means to become. 

Cauley: ‘Whether Semiramis was her original name is a matter of speculation. In any event, after the division of the languages at the tower of Babel, she would have had seventy names. Pinpointing her original name before that division is not necessary. For sake of argument, let us suppose that Sammuramat was one of her many names. Could another Sammuramat subsequently exhibit many of the same characteristics? Of course, she could. Would it be a mere accident? Probably not. 

Adopting the conspiratorial mindset, I pose that there was a second Sammuramat and that her appearance in the annuals of history was not accidental; rather, it was purposefully conspiratorial. My hypothesis is that Satan [Asherah] used Sammuramat II [Lilith] to confuse historians concerning Sammuramat I [Asherah]. I disagree with Skiba’s version of the Nimrod-Semiramis thing, in which he regards Semiramis to be a mere Nephilim, I am [favourably] inclined to think that Skiba may be right in concluding that Semiramis [ostensibly Lilith, but originally Asherah] was known as Ishtar to the Mesopotamians, Isis to the Egyptians, Astarte in the Northwestern Semetic regions, and Inanna to the Sumerians. She had temples at Sidon and Tyre, and the Philistines of Ashkelon apparently venerated her as well. (See 1 Samuel 31:1-10 and Herodotus i. 105). She was everywhere! In North Africa, she was known as Tanith, which means the “Face of Baal” signifying that she was his [Samael’s] consort… And in the land of Canaan, she was known as Ashtoreth and even King Solomon went after her’ – 1 Kings 11:4-5. 

Notes: No doubt, transmogrification is possible: A person’s DNA can be modified so that he or she becomes a Nephilim. Canaan found the writings of the watchers and sought this ability. Ken Johnson, Fallen Angels (USA, 2013), 38-40. This will also happen when humans take the mark of the beast. However, Lake follows Horn in posing that this is what happened to Nimrod (p. 92). Although this is an attractive proposition, I find it more likely that Cush [Nimrod’s father] experimented with transmogrification on himself and married a fallen angel. Therefore, Nimrod was born of a transmogrified father and a fallen-angel mother. Nimrod’s father [Kish from Asshur] was a demigod and his mother [Lilith] a goddess. Therefore, Nimrod was Gilgamesh, two-thirds (66.6%) god. His number is 666 [refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: Monoliths of the Nephilim]. 

Cauley: ‘Hislop cites Eusebius’ Chronicle… Ninus and Semiramis ruled over Assyria and the whole of Asia.” Hislop is not unaware that a later Semiramis is also postulated: Sir H. Rawlinson having found evidence at Nineveh, of the existence of a Semiramis about six or seven centuries before the Christian era, seems inclined to regard her as the only Semiramis that ever existed. But this is subversive of all history.

The fact that there was a Semiramis in the primeval ages of the world, is beyond all doubt, although some of the exploits of the latter queen [Lilith] have evidently been attributed to her predecessor [Asherah]. 

In other words, Hislop postulates two different queens by the name Semiramis – Semiramis I and Semiramis II – and he believes that some of the actions of the latter were attributed to the former. He cites Layard in support. The Illustrated Dictionary & Concordance of the Bible claims other women in history have also been called Semiramis. Could it be that the name Semiramis is like the name Candice or Cleopatra? Was the wife of Nimrod just Semiramis the first?’ – in reality, Semiramis II, even if not chronologically.

Notes: “Tradition ascribes the invention of the punishment of the cross to a woman, the queen Semiramis!”

Cauley: ‘Here, then, is the crux of the matter. Some historians place Semiramis at a time compatible with her being the wife of Nimrod, while other historians place her later. In Religion, Woodrow is assuming the former. Hislop is focused on the former but allows that two different women by that same name lived in both time periods. This proposition poses an easy reconciliation between the two groups of historians. 

Woodrow’s follow-up book, The Babylon Connection?, supplies a question mark but is still prone to overstatement. Whereas before he overstated his argument in [favour] of a Nimrod-Semiramis connection, in this book he overstates his criticism. He acknowledges: “History about Semiramis is so confused, some have supposed there were two women by this name, and that one may have lived earlier”… He immediately dismisses such a reconciliation between the historical data, giving no creditability to the possibility of such a proposal. One reason is because he finds it preposterous to think that Semiramis could have been the mother, wife, and sister of Nimrod. His short-sightedness is obvious in that Skiba poses a simple solution: Semiramis’ father took his daughter as his wife and begat Nimrod, who later took her as his wife. This postulation maintains the mother-wife-sister relation. Nevertheless, since I theorize that Semiramis was a fallen angel rather than a Nephilim, I would pose that Nimrod took his mother as his wife after his father [Kish from Asshur] died. My hypothesis maintains a mother-wife relation and would attribute the sister relation to historical confusion. 

Some [Nephilim researchers] believe that Nimrod was a Nephilim… [and] in that case, his mother was a fallen female angel who also became his wife… [who then] instituted the Babylonian Mystery Religion… [identified]… as Semiramis… [they also] believe that Nimrod is the Assyrian beast who was and is not and will come (Revelation 17:8)… [and] that the woman carried in the ephah to the land of Shinar by the two winged female entities represent this Babylonian Mystery Religion coming back home to roost (Zechariah 5:9-11)… that the woman carried in the ephah is Semiramis. I hold these theories as well. And like Nimrod, she might return from the abyss in the future – if she has not already.’

This writer would concur with the thoughts expressed in the preceding paragraph – that the identity of the rider is Semiramis (Lilith) – except that Nimrod is the second Beast of Revelation, the False Prophet and Man of Sin – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod. So that the first Beast being ridden is in fact the Sun god, Apollyon (Azazel).

Notes: Heiser argues that if panspermia were proven true, then intelligent theistic panspermia would harmonize with the Bible. If this were the case, then the highly-evolved extraterrestrials that God used to bring life to our planet and modify our DNA, via theistic evolution [Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis], until humanity reached the point that God conferred upon humans the status of His image bearers [Homo sapiens] on this planet, were most likely angels (Genesis 1:26-28) [the Elohim]. This postulation does not rule out His using angels to create other intelligent beings on other planets. For an opposing point of view, which basically insists that the only life on other planets would be that of fallen angels, see Jeffery W. Mardis, What Dwells Beyond: The Bible Believer’s Handbook to Understanding Life in the Universe, third edition (Crane, MO: Defender Publishing Co., 2015). Although his book is a very commendable read, there are weaknesses in his argument which I discuss elsewhere. I pose a mediating position. God created animal and plant life on other planets but not humanoid life. 

There is potential evidence of animal and plant life originating on other planets and being transplanted to Earth. The incredibly baffling mollusc, the Octopus is one such creature which offers the possibility.

Cauley: ‘Naturally, this proposal concerning Semiramis being a fallen female angel will be met with resistance since it postulates not only the existence of fallen female angels but that they mate with human males…

Lake’s perspective… 

“It is interesting to note that all of the angels revealed in the Bible are presented as male. (I am concerned about some of today’s ministers reportedly having visitations from female angels. This does not fit the biblical norm, and I believe deception is involved.) Their stories seem to deviate from the creation of mankind. God desired a helpmeet for Adam and created Eve from Adam’s own flesh. This action not only gave Adam a companion, wife, and friend, but it enabled him to procreate. This ability corresponds with God’s command for the two to “be fruitful and multiply.” No such command was ever given to the angels. It would seem that they were all created as males, and God never intended for them to procreate. So we see, in Genesis 6, why both the concepts of sex and procreation were such an overwhelming temptation for them. This understanding allows us to correlate within our thinking: (1) Genesis 6; (2) the men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanting to have sex with the angels; and (3) what Jesus said about angels in Matthew 22:30.”

Cauley: ‘Lake’s assessment is fallacious for multiple reasons. The two winged female entities in Zechariah 5:9-11 appear to be some type of female angel. Some believe that they are fallen cherubim, which is generally admitted to be a class of angel, even by some of those holding Lake’s bias. In fact, Cris Putnam is even open to the possibility that these female angels are not fallen: ‘Because most of these appearances recorded in Scripture are of male messengers, it is commonly assumed that there are no female angels.

In Sense and Nonsense about Angels and Demons, Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman conclude that “angels can appear in bodily form, but they don’t come in male and female varieties.” However, the authors simply ignore or overlook contrary biblical evidence. (The same can be said of Lake.) The prophet Zechariah recorded a vision entailing two female supernatural entities with wings on a divinely appointed mission: 

“Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.” (Zechariah 5:9) 

‘A stork is an unclean bird to the Hebraic mindset. Furthermore, these winged women are carrying another woman only identified as “Wickedness” (Zechariah 5:8). On one hand, it seems likely that these women are fallen angels, but on the other hand, one could argue that because it was a divinely appointed mission, it was not indicative of their status. Either way, the idea that the immortals are exclusively male seems to be based on male-dominated tradition than on biblical exegesis.

Personally, I believe that these winged women are fallen female angels. Thus, by my count, at least four fallen female angels are described in Scripture: Lilith, Semiramis [the same being (and/or Asherah)], and these two fallen cherubim (who are probably carrying Semiramis in the ephah to Babylon). God flies by means of cherubic chariots’ – Article: The Ark of God – ‘My speculative theory is that wingless Semiramis will fly by means of these fallen cherubic chariots to Babylon via a UFO. Regardless, experiential data confirms that female angels genuinely exist. Lake’s appeal to Adam and Eve self-destructs since they were created as male and female in the image of the angels as the intermediate image bearers of God. Thus, angels would presumably be male and female as well. The reason that male and female angels do not procreate is because they are immortal, not because they are all males. Lake’s argument that God made all angels male with frustrated sexual desires fails on many levels. He leaves the question unanswered: “Why would God design angels as male with attendant sexual desires but no way to fulfill those desires?” 

He practically accuses God’s poor design as placing angels in a state of “overwhelming temptation.” I would pose instead that since the earthly reality is a mirror of the heavenly reality that not only are angels created male and female, they are given the legitimate means to satisfy the functions for which they were designed. They were designed as sexual beings, so they have the legitimate means to satisfy the desires that go along with that design. 

In short, a verse like 1 Corinthians 10:13 applies to our heavenly counterparts as well: “No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, that you may be able to endure it.” God does not place us in situations of overwhelming temptation. Nor does He do so to angels.

Genesis 6 is explained by the fact that those male angels who fell wanted more than just sex, they wanted procreation [to defile the human line], something female angels could not give them, but also something for which they were not designed.

If anything, the homosexual desires of Sodom and Gomorrah is refuted by, not explained by, the heterosexual desires of the angels in Genesis 6. In their original state, the sexual desires of the heavenly angels were heterosexual, only after their fall were their desires perverted to encompass homosexual desires. Jesus should be understood as saying that resurrected believers will not marry because they will be like angels in being immortal, not that they will be like angels in being all male, much less sexually frustrated males!

Lake practically concedes this last point on the next page where he explains Jesus’ comment: “The subject of these verses in Matthew is marriage and procreation”… The point of the passage is not that all believers will be male in the resurrected state! Rather, they will not have procreative marriages. Lake then appeals to mythology as having some historical basis when it poses that “supernatural beings” (gods) had sex with human women. Agreed. 

But some mythology also poses that “supernatural beings” (goddesses) had sex with human men – a fact he overlooks. Then, on the next page, he cites a video in which Schnoebelen says, “To be accepted into the lower branches of the Illuminati, he was required to marry a fallen angel… Entrance in the Palladium is where this marriage/sexual union with a fallen angel takes place”… – Article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are – ‘Lake cites Schnoebelen as an authority on the subject, which is understandable. But why not pose that the celestial beings mating with these human males were fallen female angels? Lake did not clarify whether Schnoebelen had sex with a male or female angel, so I consulted Schnoebelen for myself to see what he had to say. 

Schnoebelen describes his sexual experience as a “congress (meaning sexual introitus).” Sexual introitus would be expected to refer to entrance into the vaginal tubular opening. He says that he had “sexual introitus, sexual intercourse” with this fallen angel. Would this not be sex with a fallen female angel? He says that, in doing so, he became one flesh with the entity, and the biblical passage to which he alludes is describing sexual relations between a male and a female: “Do you not know that the one who joins himself to a harlot is one body with her? For He says, ‘The two will become one flesh’ (1 Corinthians 6:16). Schnoebelen says, “You are becoming one with a fallen angel.” But the implications of his terms and citation are more explicit: If you are a male, you are becoming one with a fallen female angel. 

Lake gives a great deal of credibility to Schnoebelen’s testimony. Fine. So do I. But we should give equal credibility to the sexual implications of the gender of fallen female angel Schnoebelen describes, as he goes on to explain: A satanic wedding was performed, where I was married to the arch goddess Lilith. And she actually came down. And how many of you have heard of Lilith? She is a very nasty, very ancient demoness goddess, strongman type being. Maybe I should say strongwoman; I don’t want to be sexist… she is regarded as the mother of all demons. And she [Lilith] is regarded as the patron saint of crib deaths and abortions… So I got to marry this creature. I tell you that was one heck of a honeymoon…’

Schnoebelen explains that some Jewish people even today are afraid of Lilith, and he goes on to affirm the reality of male incubus and female succubus… I personally do not believe Lilith was the first wife of Adam. My working theory is that she is Lucifer’s [Samael’s] fallen soulmate and that she mates with human males. I have no reason to doubt that it was Lilith herself who mated with Schnoebelen. She is not bound in the pit of Tartarus, for example. Yet one could at least allow the possibility that it might have been another fallen female angel impersonating Lilith that had sex with Schnoebelen. Regardless of these finer details, I concur with Lake in accepting Schnoebelen’s testimony as basically valid… he will go on to explain that he does not believe… Jewish legend regarding the origin of demons but rather holds to the more traditional view in which demons are the spirits of deceased Nephilim. 

Even so, the personal part of his testimony is completely believable where he relates his experience: He had vaginal intercourse with a fallen female angel. Surely, he could tell that it was a female angel rather than a male angel with whom he was having sex! I will accept that part of his testimony at face value. 

I have no reason whatsoever to believe that it was a male angel impersonating female angel or taking on a feminine form! Additionally, some abductees claim that they can sense the gender of the Greys even apart from any apparent genitalia. If Schnoebelen had the experience he claimed to have, then the mental merging would have confirmed the physical merging as to the gender of the angel with whom he was sexually engaging. Schnoebelen had sex with a genuine fallen female angel. Lake should have informed his readers that it was a female angel with whom Schnoebelen copulated. Evidently, Lake was [blinded] by his traditional mindset so that he failed to see the full significance of Schnoebelen’s testimony regarding the fallen angel’s gender.’

Notes: One reason I am open to the possibility of fallen female angels impersonating other well-known fallen female angels is that I suspect that they would do so in order to give the illusion that these fallen female angels are omniscient, spanning history in time and space… Semiramis knew the biblical prophesies of the virgin who would give birth to the Messiah and, as the wife of Nimrod and queen of Babylon, Semiramis created a false religion in which she made herself out to be that virgin. 

Therefore, very early in human history, she imitated the blessed virgin while in her earthbound mortal form. The spirit of the mystery religion of Babylon and the worship of Our Lady (actually of Semiramis under the guise of Mary) has been kept alive and well on planet Earth… Schnoebelen… says that he would never confuse a demon with a fallen angel because he has encountered both and the difference between them is like that of a mosquito compared to a human being. “Fallen angels are awesome beings… demons are not”… If we accept his testimony as creditable, should we not accept it as reliable when he says that he had sex with a fallen female angel? Can we not trust that the difference between a male and female angel is sufficient so that he is a credible witness?

More surprisingly, even Schnoebelen seems to be inconsistent regarding angelic gender. Elsewhere, even Schnoebelen will say, “From all indications, the angels in the Scripture are male”… His assessment here is refuted by his own testimony on another occasion… in which he said that he had sex [with] the goddess Lilith and that, in doing so, he became one flesh with a fallen angel. But this fallen angel is mentioned in Scripture. One might make allowance for this inconsistency since, in that context, he is not (consistently) counting cherubim and seraphim as angels… Even so, he gives credibility to the testimony of others that Nordic angels can be female… Apparently, he must rely on the testimony of others on this matter because he has only seen angels one or two times… He places angels in the lowest level of the celestial council… So if Lilith and the stork-women were higher ranking celestial beings, they would technically not be angels if the designation angel is limited to the lowest ranking celestial council members. Even so, he is inconsistent in that he says that seraphim “are the most awesome of all angelic beings… the highest order of angels”…

Consistency dictates that one acknowledges that not all angels in the Scripture are male. He makes a number of interesting comments… He says that fallen angels must drink blood to reproduce, which is where we got our vampire stories… He offers confirmative proof of DUMBs (deep underground military bases)… wars, and tunnels in that he has had one or two encounters with the Reptilians… He says that fallen angels become mortal when they fall, which is why Reptilians can be killed. 

Cauley: ‘Lake proceeds to discuss the Mystery Religion of Babylon as the unfinished work of Nimrod, which is all fine and well, but it might be better described as the unfinished work of Semiramis [Lilith]. Historically, the Babylonian Mystery Religion was her baby. Mystery Babylon was started by a woman [ultimately, Asherah] and will end with a woman [Lilith] (Revelation 17:5). Rob Skiba argues that the antichrist (the beast who comes out of the bottomless pit a few verses later in Revelation 17:8) is Nimrod. If the beast is Nimrod, a mere demigod, why not allow the possibility that the woman in chapter 17 is Semiramis, a fallen angelic goddess? After all, she is depicted as the Queen of Heaven, spanning the pages of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. Skiba even quotes Tom Horn, who perceptively implies that she was a fallen angel: 

“Nearly three decades after the Amalantrah Working, rocket scientist and cofounder of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Jack Parsons and his pal L. Ron Hubbard (Church of Scientology founder) conducted a second ritual (in 1946), the “Babylon Working,” in an attempt to reopen the gateway created by Crowley. The two men were not seeking audience with Lam. Instead they wanted the spirit of Babylon, the archetype divine feminine, to pass through the portal and to incarnate itself within a human being. Many adepts of [Evil] Enochian magic and Ordo Templi Orientis believe they succeeded and that she – the whore of Babylon – walks the earth today. It would come as no surprise, as Babylonian and earlier “gods” have been depicted as coming through “gates” for some time.”

Cauley: ‘This statement is good, as far as it goes, but Horn does not pursue the implications of his observation. Elsewhere, Horn discusses various gods and goddesses of mythology and the fallen angels behind them and postulates:

“The iconographies, myths, and rituals of each deity exhibited the specific characteristics (nature, gender, underworld authority…) of that particular deity.”

Cauley: ‘Since Horn acknowledges that the gender of the god and goddess worshipped matches the gender of the spiritual entities behind those gods and goddesses, he should have entitled his book, The Gods and Goddesses Who Walk Among Us. In The Ahriman Gate, he graphically portrays the reality of such a goddess. In Nephilim Stargates, Horn notes that the Bible agrees with mythology in picturing such gods and goddesses imprisoned behind gates (extradimensional portals) within the Earth. What Horn is saying, therefore, is that Parsons and Hubbard were trying to open up a portal to bring back the archetype divine feminine spirit, the whore of Babylon – who is none other than the goddess Semiramis! [in other words, Lilith]. Many adepts believe that Parsons and Hubbard succeeded, and Horn leaves open the possibility that they are right. 

If this is true, then while so many nephologists are waiting for Nimrod to return, they are overlooking the fact that Semiramis already has returned! She’s back! She has been released… from her imprisonment behind an extradimensional portal. The preliminary fulfillment of Zechariah 5:9-11 already has taken place!’ 

Notes: According to some legends, Semiramis killed Nimrod and then used him to formulate her mystery religion. In the end, he [actually the Beast, Apollyon (Azazel)] may return the [favour] by using her and her mystery religion and then kill her and destroy her mystery religion (Revelation 18). 

This is an insightful observation, as the Beast (Azazel) will use the Whore of Babylon (his sister Lilith) who rides him and then – as Apollyon the Destroyer – will in fact destroy her (Revelation 17:16, ESV: “… the beast will hate the prostitute. They will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire…”)

Notes: Thomas R. Horn, Nephilim Stargates: The Year 2012 and the Return of the Watchers (Crane, MO: Anomalos Publishing House, 2007), 21-22, quoted in Rob Skiba, Babylon Rising: And The First Shall Be Last (updated and expanded), Kindle Edition (King’s Gate Media, 2013)… In a section entitled, “Were there female Nephilim too?” Skiba correctly answers affirmatively, thus explaining why, in passages such as Deuteronomy 3:5-7 and 7:1-3, God demanded that the women and children be killed.

Rob Skiba, Archon Invasion: The Rise, Fall and Return of the Nephilim (Kindle Edition, 2012)… In this discussion, he astutely perceives Semiramis to be a goddess worshipped under many names: Diana, Artemis, Ishtar, Isis, Astarte, Inanna, Tanith, Ashtoreth, Aphrodite, Juno, Venus, Caelestis, Urania, Columbia, Liberty, and Queen of Heaven. Unfortunately, though, Skiba claims that these goddesses were nothing more than demigoddesses (female Nephilim or offspring of Nephilim): “We find absolutely no evidence in Scripture for the notion of female angels, we must therefore conclude that these so-called ‘goddesses’ were in fact giants, Nephilim, and/or Elioud (i.e., offspring of Nephilim)”…’

He notes, “Some will try to use Zachariah [sic.] 5:9 as an example of female angels, but the Hebrew words used to describe these individuals do not indicate this to be true. They are simply described as women (Hebrew: ishshah – Strong’s # 802) with wings. This could either be allegorical or we could be looking at hybrids, but one thing is certain, there is no supporting evidence in Scripture that would indicate they are female angels” … He overstates his case with this circular reasoning. 

Zechariah 5:9 could readily be interpreted as supplying the supportive evidence which he denies to exist. The fact that we are created in the image of male and female elohim provides grounds for concluding that we are created in the image of male and female angels. Therefore, nothing prevents us from taking Zechariah 5:9 as collaborative evidence in Scripture for female angel. Ishshah does not necessarily mean a human woman. 

Female is the appropriate translation on various occasions, as noted by BDB: female children (Numbers 31:18); female animals (Genesis 7:2; Isaiah 34:15). One could just as easily pose that these winged women were female angels. In short, Skiba’s postulation that Semiramis rebuilt Babylon after the Tower of Babel incident is plausible… His belief that Semiramis was a Nephilim daughter of Cush… is less plausible than my proposal that she was a fallen angel who married Cush [Kish from Asshur]. 

Cauley: ‘Fortson’s book, Beyond Flesh and Blood, is a great introductory text and excels where most books fail in explicitly acknowledging the existence of female angels. Fortson adds that, per Babylonian legend, Gilgamesh’s father was Lilu, who “was known to sexually seduce women in their sleep, which leads many to believe that he may have been an incubus”… Some pose that Lilu is the male counterpart to Lilith. Speculations regarding Gilgamesh get particularly interesting when nephologists make him out to be Nimrod – or Tammuz (who was the alleged son of Nimrod, thus Nimrod reincarnated). 

According to other legends, Gilgamesh’s father was a demigod and his mother was a goddess. If Gilgameshs father was the demigod Nimrod and his mother was the goddess Semiramis, then the legends that make Gilgamesh out to be the son of a demigod and goddess naturally fit.’ 

Initially, this writer entertained Gilgamesh as Nimrod, though his identity as Nimrod’s son is an interesting idea and plausible alternative.

Cauley: ‘Understandably, some nephologists therefore pose that Gilgamesh was the son of Nimrod. Some would question the computation, however. How would having a mother who is 100% goddess and a father who is 50% god result in an offspring that is 66.6% god? Would the offspring not be 75% god? On the other hand, if Cush [Kish] modified his own DNA so that he was 26% (≈ 1/4) god, then the math and legend would work out. 

Nimrod would have gotten 13% [of] his alien DNA from his father, Cush, and 50% of his alien DNA from his mother, Semiramis. He would be 1/3 human and 2/3 god. Thus, Nimrod (rather than Tammuz) would be Gilgamesh. I suspect this is the case. 

My synthetic hypothesis, that Nimrod’s parents were a genetically modified father (Cush) and a fallen angelic mother (Semiramis), gives me an advantage over the simplistic hypothesis of nephologists who reject a second sexual incursion in favor of simple transmogrification to explain postflood Nephilim. First, my proposal bases its principle argument on the primary document. I am drawing my principle deductions from the context and syntax of the biblical material. The most natural deduction from the primary source material (i.e., the book of Genesis) is that Nimrod became a gibbor through the same means that the Nephilim did in Genesis 6, which is through the mating of fallen angels with humans. This is the only means supplied in the context of Genesis for becoming a gibbor. The LXX makes the proper deduction. 

Second, my rejection of the transmogrification of Nimrod is supported by the verbal syntax. In Genesis 10:8 and 1 Chronicles 1:10, chalal (plus the Lamed) is in the Hiphil tense, in which case BDB defines it as begin to. The LXX/LXE renders it accordingly: Nimrod began to become a giant. The transmogrification theory should not be misconstrued to give the impression that chalal could be translated in the verse to mean that Nimrod began to corrupt himself to become a giant. Not so! Had this reflexive meaning been intended, then a Niphal tense would have been implemented. BDB supplies a couple of examples of the reflexive meaning: to profane himself (Leviticus 21:4), she profanes herself (Leviticus 21:9). Nimrod, in contrast, did not profane himself, as is proven by the Hiphil rather than Niphal tense. The genetic corruption was passed on to him by his parents. He did not corrupt his own DNA. 

Third, those posing that Nimrod transmogrified his own DNA must leave the primary source material and run to secondary sources to import their theory of transmogrification into the Genesis text and, in doing so, supplant the contextual and syntactical implications of the primary source material. Secondary source material should be used to supplement, not supplant, primary source material. Do not treat secondary as primary. My synthesis allows for transmogrification from secondary sources to be applied to a secondary agent. Rather than apply it directly to Nimrod, my transmogrification-incursion hypothesis applies transmogrification to Nimrod indirectly through Cush (and the incursion to Semiramis). Thus, I can concur indirectly with nephologists such as Horn, Johnson, and Skiba who assert [post-flood] transmogrification in relation to Nimrod. 

Fourth, my transmogrification-incursion theory is supported by those myths which assert that Nimrod’s father was a demigod but his mother was a goddess. She was an agent of the second incursion. Accordingly, my model concurs directly with nephologists like Missler and Eastman who believe that Nimrod’s mother was a fallen angel.’

Notes: Putnam and Horn… suggest that some moral decision on Nimrod’s part may have triggered a change in his genetic code by turning on a genetic mutation which had been passed down to him by his bloodline. This mediating postulation is perhaps permissible because it places the original mutation in the DNA passed down to him by his parents. As an alternative, they pose that a retrovirus may have modified his DNA. In view of the legends and the verb tense, though, the more likely scenario is that Cush [Kish] modified his own DNA via a retrovirus and then passed that on to his son, Nimrod.

Cauley: ‘Horn and Putnam make a claim that is astonishing regarding its implications: ‘During the time of Peleg (Genesis 10:25), God descended from Heaven with the seventy angels in order to teach the people of the earth their respective languages. Later, Michael, at the behest of God, asked people to choose its patron angel, and each nation chose the angel who had taught it its language… This pantheon of divine beings or angels who were originally to administer the affairs of Heaven and earth for the benefit of each people group became corrupt and disloyal to God in their administration of those nations (Psalm 82). 

They then began soliciting worship as gods (and goddesses), and because these angels, unlike their human admirers, would continue on earth until the end of time, each “spirit” behind the pagan attributes would become known at miscellaneous times in history and to various cultures by different names. This certainly agrees with the biblical definition of idolatry as the worship of fallen angels, and means the characterization of such spirits as Nimrod/Apollo, Jupiter, Zeus, Isis (i.e., Semiramis!)…

Unwittingly perhaps, Horn and Putnam put Isis/Semiramis in this pantheon of seventy angels who became corrupt! By implicitly putting Isis in this fallen pantheon, they have acknowledged that goddesses were part of the group, as I pointed out in the inserts above. Putnam opens their discussion in Immortals by affirming his belief in female angels, and elsewhere Horn states that the specific gender of the gods and goddesses of antiquity is accurately portrayed by the myths and icons of those fallen angels. Postulating that Putnam and Horn believe that female angels were part of this seventy-angel pantheon is reasonable. My surprise was that their argument would lead to the conclusion that Isis herself may have been one of these seventy angels! 

In any event, if their statement means that the very spirits that possessed Nimrod and posed as his wife, Semiramis, were part of the seventy angels who taught the seventy languages, then they are mistaken. God would not have put these fallen spirits in charge of teaching the languages. Semiramis would have fallen before the division of the nations at the Tower of Babel and thus not have been a candidate to be one of the seventy angels who descended from Heaven with God. 

Yet the male and female angels who were members of that seventy-angel group may have followed the examples of Nimrod and Semiramis, respectively, and thus contributed to the Nimrod-Isis legend. Horn and Putnam probably mean something along this line, which is entirely possible, even probable. Semiramis would not have acted alone in spreading her Babylonian Mystery Religion throughout the Earth. Surely, she would [have] had fallen accomplices who assisted her through imitation. 

Skiba devotes an entire book, Archon Invasion, to refuting the multiple incursion theory (MIT). Skiba believes that the initial group of Nephilim were produced by a sexual incursion of fallen male angels having sex with human females. These angels were imprisoned in Tartarus and had to watch their Nephilim offspring kill one another. Therefore, per Skiba, no other fallen angels would dare do such a thing. All subsequent Nephilim DNA contamination must be explained by: (1) DNA transference theory (DNATT) – the offspring of these original Nephilim passing on this contamination to their offspring and thus subsequent generations, (2) human DNA modification theory (HDNAMT) – humans modifying their own DNA, and (3) angelic-human DNA modification theory (AHDNAMT) – fallen angels modifying human DNA through scientific experimentation on humans without having sex with humans. Because Skiba is correct in affirming these three forms of contamination, his book is a worthy read. On the other hand, he overstates his case at various points, giving too much weight to secondary sources, and failing to address all relevant facts. 

The primary source material is the Bible, according to which [antediluvian] Nephilim were the result of a [pre-flood] sexual incursion of male fallen angels mating with human females (Genesis 6:4). The only other time the Bible uses the word Nephilim is in Numbers 13:33: “There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.” Skiba insists that these [post-flood] Nephilim were not the result of a second incursion because they are the sons of Anak, not the sons of fallen angels. 

Presumably, these Anakim were a simple case of DNA transfer since Anak “was himself a son of a giant name Arba” (Joshua 15:13; 21:11). Arba was an Amorite… a descendent of Amorous (the father of the Amorites) and thus descendent of Canaan… Therefore, Skiba gives this genealogy: Ham – Canaan – Amorous/Amorites – Arba – Anak/Anakim. Skiba is correct [?] to infer that Nephilim DNA was transferred through Ham’s wife to his descendants. Yet it must be pointed out that this is only an inference. The text does not make it explicit. Skiba is critical of MIT because the biblical text does not make it explicit that a second incursion occurred. Thus, MIT is dependent upon logical inference. What he fails to note is that his own DNATT is likewise just as dependent upon logical inference within the biblical narrative. His argument is highly dependent upon the inference that Ham’s wife, who gave birth to Canaan, was genetically tainted’ – interestingly, though unrelated is that the descendants of Canaan today are the only peoples to either not carry any percentage of Neanderthal DNA, literally 0% or extremely small amounts – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa – ‘He makes a great case in this regard, and I concur…’

An inference can also be made that all eight people boarding the Ark, were cleared; given the green light to be the progenitors of the races and thus were nearly, racially pure as Noah. I say nearly, because Neanderthal DNA from the people of Day Six crossed over on the Ark – probably through Japheth’s wife ‘Adataneses. The likely-hood of further angelic incursions is 99% to someone carrying corrupted Nephilim DNA onto the Ark of 1%. Poor Ham’s wife, Na’eltama’uk; she gets it in the neck, both for Noah’s incident with Canaan and the Nephilim eruption in the post-diluvian world. While the first accusation is correct, the second is speculation at best. It is rather Canaan, who may have experimented with Nephilim DNA – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. A second irruption, after the Flood is borne out also by the fact that this was the core issue of the five cities of the Plain. The complete destruction and utter annihilation of Sodom and the other three cities is testament this scenario is accurate.  

Cauley: ‘Nevertheless, the biblical text does not make this explicit and even goes to some length to make it ambiguous as to why Canaan was cursed’ – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator – ‘Moreover, the Bible does not clarify why some of his decedents were marked for extermination while others were only submitted [too] servitude. MIT can offer the hypothesis that those decedents who were born as a result of a second incursion were more genetically tainted than those who simply tainted by DNATT. Thus, these Nephilim were larger than other giants and marked for extermination.’

The difference lies in the fact that the pure physical descendants of Canaan were subject to slavery. Only those descendants who had mixed with the Nephilim – because both chose to live in the land allotted for Shem’s children – were earmarked for elimination.

Cauley: ‘Skiba has an excellent discussion of how recessive DNA traits could show up in some offspring but not in others. Still, in my opinion, MIT has the better explanation as to why the Nephilim giants were larger and why only some Canaanites were to be exterminated. Moreover, the two theories are not mutually exclusive. Based on secondary evidence (i.e., [non-biblical] material), Johnson is correct to suspect that Canaan sought to perform further DNA modification. Consequently, in HDNAMT one would not have to invoke a second incursion to explain these [post-flood] Nephilim. Yet, once again, the two theories are complementary rather than necessarily exclusive. All four models should be deemed correct: DNATT, HDNAMT, AHDNAMT, and MIT. 

Granted, MIT is more restricted after the flood. For one thing, fallen angels would be less inclined to become mortal and thus be subject to Tartarus. Also, their entrance into the earthly dimension could have been made more difficult. Indeed, the portals between earth and the fourth dimension were apparently closed, requiring human sacrifice (etc.) to reopen them. Horn and Putnam have an excellent discussion of the reopening of these portals in which they cite Daniel Mastral’s Traces of the Occult to the effect that only seventy-two out of the ninety portals had been reopened by 2001… Moreover, ‘Mastral tell us that some human individuals are indeed empowered by changes in their DNA. This can happen in three ways: demonic sexual spirits (incubus and succubus) can transport semen among humans; a demon possessed man can fertilize a woman, or, very rarely, a couple can pass through a portal and have sex in the other side. In all cases, the higher energy affects the embryo’s DNA in a way that makes it easier for the individual to interact with spirits and be a channel for more powerful psychic powers.

According to such ex-Satanists, fallen entities are still very much engaged in sexual activity, having sex with both male and female human beings. Such accounts destroy Skiba’s argument against MIT. And he ignores it! He does not discuss incubi or succubi in Invasion. Yet these experiences are very much a part of the [post-flood] invasion. He acts as if all supernatural abduction experiences are explainable by AHDNAMT, when in fact they are not. Male and female humans are being abducted and raped by fallen male and female elohim. MIT is occurring.’

‘… the terms elohim and demons can be very broad terms… some succubi are demonesses (i.e., the deceased spirits of fallen angel-human hybrids), but at least some succubi are fallen female angels, thus goddesses. Even so, the conjecture that some succubi are merely demonesses rather than fallen angels is open to challenge. Putnam makes an interesting observation: “Not every entity labeled ‘demon’ is the same sort of being. Missler points out that holy angels seem to manifest human [bodies] at will, but demons seek to control the bodies of others. This is well supported by biblical texts.” Following this line of reasoning, one would deduce that fallen entities manifesting in physical bodies to have sex are fallen angels, not deceased spirits of Nephilim, not demons in other words. However, Putnam poses an interesting case in which it is difficult to determine if the entities in question were demons or fallen angels. 

Invisible beings were biting a girl and leaving visible teeth marks with saliva. She could see her invisible accosters, but those observing her could not. But she did grab the hair of her invisible attackers and had some of it in her hand. Putnam then reminds us of his discussion of demons taking physical form as succubi and incubi… and then proceeds to discuss fallen angels as sons of God… In my opinion, the entities tormenting the girl may have been demons rather than fallen angels. Such experiences are not isolated. 

Putnam provides an interview with Reverand Ray Boeche… in which Boeche says that it is “fascinating to speculate about (the differences between fallen [angels] and demons as their deceased Nephilim offspring), but when you’re dealing with (as I have been for the last couple of months) three women – unknown to each other – who are being sexually assaulted by invisible entities who cease their activity only at the name of Christ, how important is the distinction?” 

Pragmatically, the difference may be moot in such a case. Nevertheless, since they are invisible entities, I suspect that they are merely demons. Fallen angels could physically manifest, as Missler’s comment would lead us to deduce. Therefore, succubi and incubi taking a visible physical form are probably fallen angels rather than demons. Schnoebelen describes the experience: 

“Frequent sexual self-stimulation will often attract sexual spirits (those appearing to be men are called incubi, those looking like women are called succubi). These are spirits which will come and assume the form of impossibly perfect sexual partners. They will appear more flawless and desirable than even airbrushed centerfolds because Satan will have observed just what sort of person “turns on” his target. The spirit will exactly fulfill that fantasy. As ghastly as this idea is, it is common practice in the higher levels of Satanism. They believe these “demon lovers” will come to men and draw seed from them. Then they will steal the resulting seed and go assault a human woman in male [form] with or without her permission. Such spiritual “rape” is more common than most would think. The sick “hope” of such encounters is that the woman will conceive a child half-human and half-demon – a candidate for the anti-Christ! 

Needless to say, once a man or woman has experienced “sex” with such a creature, normal marital relations with their spouse (however attractive) will pale into boring routine. Thus, the victim returns more and more to the spirit lover, and the bondage grows ever deeper. This is not fiction from a horror novel. It is going on all the time. In high level Satanism, both of us were “married” to demons. We both had frequent “sex” with our Ascended Master spirit guides! We felt that this was the way we could gradually “evolve” into gods.”

Cauley: ‘Schnoebelen is an ex-Satanist. His wife was a Wiccan. They left the occult and came to faith in Jesus. During their time in the occult, they both had frequent sex with incubi and succubi who would assume incredibly sexy physical form. He calls them demons, evidently in the broad sense of the word, using the word demon to refer to fallen angels. Elsewhere, he says that when all else fails and Christian women are still being accosted by fallen angels, they should cover their hair because angels are very much attracted by their long hair (1 Corinthians 11:10-15). He testifies that in his ministry experience this works every time. Either Schnoebelen and those like him are being fraudulent, or Skiba is completely mistaken in thinking that there are no [post-flood] sexual incursions taking place on the part of fallen elohim. In my assessment, the latter is unquestionably the better conclusion. Skiba is wrong. Fallen angels are still having sex with human beings. 

Legends purport not only Titans but Titanesses, such as Theia, “the ancient female equivalent of Lucifer [Samael] – the female ‘light bearer’.” Perhaps some legends regarding Titanesses recall echoes of [pre-flood] fallen female angels while other legends, regarding Olympian goddesses, do the same for [post-flood] fallen female angels. In any event, Anak’s father being a Nephilim does not rule out the possibility that his mother was a goddess (a fallen female angel). Regarding Nordics, Schnoebelen states: 

“These are reported to appear just like humans, except they are unusually statuesque and blonde, almost like “Nordic gods,” hence the name. Both males and females have been reported, both equally attractive; although the males are much more common.” 

Cauley: ‘He gives three possibilities: “They may be first generation offspring of the fallen celestials that turned out very well (like the “mighty men, the men of renown”) in Genesis. Anyone who experiments with breeding whether it is plants or livestock, knows that occasionally you get a “gem” and a lot of times you get a loser. They also may be “newly fallen” angels that have not yet lost their original beauty. They COULD even be elect angels, except that there is no record of them ever behaving like the angels in the Bible. It is reported that they have a policy of non-interference in human affairs (like the “Prime Directive” on Star Trek) but little is actually known of them.”

Cauley: ‘Perhaps some Nordics are fallen, and some are unfallen, if we allow the third possibility of non-interference. In any case, Semiramis could not be put into the third category. She was the epidemy of interference. She would have to be placed into either the first or second category. She was either the offspring of a fallen celestial, or she was a newly fallen celestial. The latter is more probable. Perhaps her male celestial counterpart [Samyaza (Samael), her father] was one of the 200 [myriad] watchers who fell before the flood, leaving her without a sexual mate in Heaven. If so, rather than spend an eternity in Heaven without a sexual mate, she chose to leave Heaven and mate with human males since this was the only sexual option left. Ruark links Semiramis name with the land of Shinar: 

“… Semiramis was a native of Erech (Genesis 10:10), which as evidenced by [its] name seems to have been built by a Hamitic family (Ham’s wife was said to have been descended from Cain who built the first Erech in [honour] of his son). The name Semiramis is a later, Hellenized form of the Sumerian name “Sammur-amat”, or “gift of the sea.” The initial element “sammur” when translated into Hebrew becomes “Shinar” (the biblical name for lower Mesopotamia), and is the word from which we derive “Sumeria”. This one tarnished woman then, had such a lasting impact upon world history that not only do we call by her name the land from which civilization flowed, but God himself through the sacred writer has let us know that its distinguishing characteristic was that it was “the Land of Shinar,” or Semiramis” – refer shinar*, article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Cauley: ‘If he is correct, then the Land of Shinar is the Land of Semiramis. As to the geographical location, commentators equate it with Babylonia based on Genesis 10:10* (NAC; WBC). Some say that Amraphel, the king of Shinar in Genesis 14:1, cannot be positively identified’ – it can and is, as Hammurabi: refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings – ‘Yet some speculate that this might have been another name for Nimrod. In any event, if Semiramis became the Queen of Babylonia, whose fame exceeded that of her husband, then it makes sense that the land was named after her. 

This article has interacted briefly with some of the various conjectures concerning the possible relation between Nimrod and Semiramis. Affirming such a relation practically requires that one adopt a two-Semiramis hypothesis. If so, then a reasonable case can be made that Semiramis I [in reality, Semiramis II (or Lilith)] was a fallen female angel who became the mother of Nimrod, thereby explaining his Nephilim DNA. Possibly, Semiramis II was also a fallen female angel (or at least a hybrid). 

The focus of this article has been on Semiramis I, simply referred to as Semiramis in this study. She and other fallen angels have been impersonating Mary, as the Queen of Heaven. Possibly, during the Tribulation, she will drink human blood and once again take a mortal earthbound form and once again rule as the Queen of Babylon.’ 

The series of photo’s in this article depicting various statues from around the globe representing different ages, leave no doubt regarding the correlation and association with veneration or worship of Semiramis as a Queen of Heaven; a Mother of god; the Madonna and Child; and as Europa, as evidenced by the Statue of Liberty in the United States; the Flag of the European Union; and the fallen dark Angel, Lilith. Yet these personifications of purportedly Lilith, are all ultimately in the shadow of her Mother, Asherah – Article: Asherah.

Likewise, her relationship as the goddess of the Moon and Europa* with the cult of the Bull and the Sun (or Zeus) her original consort, Samael – Articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and The Calendar Conspiracy.

The stars representing angels and the serpents, fallen angels or Seraphs. Though of course, the first and original Queen of Heaven was Lilith’s mother, Asherah.

Iurii Mosenkis: 

‘The name of Europe may be interpreted as ‘wide-eyed, wide-faced’ (i.e. the full moon) in Greek or ‘west’ in Phoenician in comparison with Akkadian ereb samsi ‘sun set’. Two versions may be combined by astronomy: Europe may be the ‘wide-faced’ full moon* which appears in the west when the sun sets.’ 

The principle angelic beings who serve the Ancient of Days, invariably classed as archangels:

1. Michael: is the most well known Archangel and the Commander in Chief of the loyal heavenly Host; one of the pre-eminent and eldest of the Eternal’s creatures – Jude 1:9. As scripture does not refer to any other being in such a manner it is possible that Michael is the only Archangel and that it is a position of responsibility, as opposed to a category. Micheal will lead the Creator’s armies against Satan’s forces and her final assault on Heaven, defeating who maybe his very Mother – Revelation 12:7. In the Book of Daniel, Michael appears as ‘one of the chief princes’ who in Daniel’s vision comes to Gabriel’s aid in his contest with the prince of Persia – Daniel 8:16; 9:21. 

Daniel 12:1

English Standard Version

“At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people [the sons of Jacob]. And there shall be a time of trouble [the Great Tribulation], such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered [the sealed 144,000], everyone whose name shall be found written in the book [of Life].”

In Hebrew, Michael means who is like God. Michael is said to represent the South; the element of Fire; and he is linked with the Sun and its weekday, Sunday. In the Book of First Thessalonians there is a reference to the archangel or an archangel; yet neither the or an in the original Greek. It is interesting to note that it is not in the plural and infers just one. So that the majority believe that it refers to Michael. 

Some then equate the returning Son of Man’s descent to Earth with that of the voice of the archangel, teaching that Christ and Michael are one person. This may be the case, though intuition and a lack of any other scriptural support says otherwise. In fact, the heralding of Christ’s return would be the responsibility of the chief messenger, Gabriel; so there is no reason why he isn’t the archangel in question. Particularly as he may be alluded** to in the phrase the trumpet^ of God. 

1 Thessalonians 4:16

New English Translation

‘For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangel**, and with the trumpet [or horn] of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.’

This verse could be read a number of ways, granted. The prepositions in English are not in the Hebrew. Thus it does not necessarily mean Michael. It is this writer’s opinion that the Lord’s return is signalled with a command from on High, communicated by Gabriel. 

Michael is purported to have said:

“For eons I have followed my Father’s orders. Always doing what He says without question because I believed that His actions had meaning as they always have. Throughout the centuries that have passed I was so focused on being the one good son He would be proud of that I have forgotten to think for myself. And the fear of this made me believe that I will end up like my [Mother Asherah]. But now… now I understand. It is time for me to be who I am, rather than who I am supposed to be.”

2. Gabriel: is the chief messenger of the Creator, whose main weapon is considered the Horn^ of Truth. Michael is counted as his brother, with two other angels mentioned outside of scripture, Raphael and a sister Ariel. Gabriel is equated with his counterpart, the messenger Hermes (or Mercury) – refer article: Thoth – and is said to represent the West; the element of Water; as well as being linked with the Moon and the day of the week Monday. Gabriel is not specifically called** an archangel in the Bible, though Christian theology considers him one. 

His name means warrior of God and also the following: ‘man of God’; ‘strength of God’; ‘Master who is of God’; ‘hero of God’; and ‘God has shown Himself mightily’. Gabriel is known to be the left hand of the Creator in contrast with Michael who is the right hand. Gabriel is purportedly the third oldest of the archangels after Michael and Samael. Gabriel told Elizabeth that she would bear John the Baptist and Mary that she would give birth to the Messiah – Luke 1:19, 26. Gabriel asked Mary to name her son Yeshua (Joshua/Jesus), meaning ‘Saviour.’ Gabriel announced the seventy weeks prophecy to Daniel and may have been the spirit who revealed the meaning of his dreams.

Accounted to Gabriel:

“Michael’s… fighting demons and vanquishing evil. Raphael heals the sick, the wounded, and the dying. Ariel guides the souls of the departed with her light… [and I descend] from the Heavens to pass forth messages from my Father to [His] chosen ones…”

3. Raphael: whose name means God heals or (One that Heals) is a non-canonical high ranking archangel, brother to Michael, Gabriel and Ariel. Raphael is said to represent the East; the element of Air; and is linked with the planet Mercury and its weekday, Wednesday. Raphael is mentioned in the apocryphal book of Tobit. He is said to be the guardian of the Tree of Life opposite the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden. If so, it would mean that Raphael is a Cherub, of the Cherubim order – Genesis 3:24.

Raphael is associated with an unnamed angel mentioned in the Gospel of John, who stirs the water at the healing pool of Bethesda – John 5:2-4. Most of Raphael’s exploits take place in the Apocrypha, where his main role has been in imprisoning Azazel. He is also thought to be one of the three angels who visited the patriarch Abraham and his wife Sarah, to help with their conception; as well as the angel who healed Abraham’s grandson Jacob’s wrestling injuries.

Catholics venerate Michael, Gabriel and Raphael, while Protestants recognise Michael as the only named Archangel. There are numerous other angels outside of Christendom who are also considered archangels.

4. Ariel: is known as the archangel of Wisdom. She shines the light of the Creator’s truth into the darkness of confusion. Her name means: fire of God or (flame of God). Ariel is listed as one of the four principle archangels, with her brothers Michael, Gabriel and Raphael. Among the four she was the last to be created, making her the youngest of her siblings. She is also known as: ‘God is My Light’; ‘Archangel of Fire’; ‘Torch of God’; ‘Angel of the Divine Presence’; and the ‘Archangel of Salvation.’ Ariel is said to represent the North; the planet Earth; and she is linked with Venus and its weekday, Friday. Ariel is not mentioned explicitly by name in any of the widely accepted scriptures, though she is subtly included in Isaiah 29:1, 2, 7 as Ariel, another name for Jerusalem, the city of David.

As her name also means Flame of God for her depiction of holding a flaming sword, the Apocrypha says Ariel was the guardian Cherub to the Gates of the Garden of Eden. As with Raphael, Ariel could be considered a Cherub. She stands over both the World and Tartarus (or Hell). ‘She is said to carry the stars in the sky, and on the final day of judgement, she will oversee the resurrection and retribution of human souls.’ Her name can be rendered in the masculine, Uriel. This has unwittingly (or wittingly) created confusion about her sex and whether there are two different beings.

Uriel

Ariel: “I know that most of my family believes that my [Mother] is lost and beyond reprieve. But I refuse to believe so. I may be the youngest of my siblings but I’m still the archangel of wisdom for a reason. I shine my Father’s light into darkness and confusion. That’s why I can’t give up on [Asherah, the first Wisdom]. And I could care less what others would say to me for daring to have faith in her, because at the end of the day she’s still my [Mother] and I love her so. We’ll be a family again.”

5. Reuel: who is also known as Raguel (or Sealtiel). He is the archangel of justice and fairness. His name means: friend of God. Reuel is linked with the planet Jupiter and its weekday, Thursday; and his number is the numeral six. Reuel is considered one of the ‘seven archangels’ whose function is to take vengeance on the world of the luminaries who have transgressed the Creator’s laws. His role includes watching the world of mankind as well as keeping fallen angels and demons in check. 

His chief role in Heaven is to oversee all of the lower Angels. Reuel ensures that the angels are working together harmoniously, according to the Divine order and will. It was allegedly Reuel, who showed righteous Enoch, the Seven Mountains and in the midst of them, the highest mountain which held the throne of the Ancient of Days. Reuel is not mentioned in the canonical writings of the Bible, however in 2 Enoch, the patriarch Enoch was carried as a mortal to and from Heaven by the angels Raguel and Sariel.

6. Sariel: also known as Suruel^ – and possibly Saraquel or Zerachiel – means: God’s command. According to the Cabala, Sariel is one of the seven angels who rule the earth; yet he is also confusingly listed as one of the chiefs of the Watchers who sinned. Perhaps there are two angelic beings called by the same name. Sariel is considered one of the ‘seven archangels’ in 1 Enoch and a primary angel in leading souls to judgement. Sariel is also typified as an angel of healing with Raphael.

Sariel is linked with the planet Mars and its weekday, Tuesday. Sariel is named as the one who retrieved the soul of Moses from Mount Sinai. He is also called a ‘prince of the presence.’ His name appears in Gnostic amulets and it is said that when he is invoked, he manifests in the form of an ox. This would be indicative of the Cherubim order. Like his namesake, he is associated with the skies and instructs others on the ‘course or motion of the Moon.’ In occult circles Sariel is one of the nine angels of the summer equinox and can protect against the evil eye. This is likely referring to the Watcher, Sariel.

7. Remiel: the seventh archangel meaning: mercy of God; ‘Compassion of God’; or ‘Thunder of God.’ Remiel is the archangel of Hope, Visions and Dreams along with being the protector of mankind. Like Reuel, Remiel’s role is to observe humanity; helping when necessary but not interfering. Remiel was created at the same time as Reuel and is linked with the planet Saturn and its weekday, Saturday.

He is charged with leading souls to judgment with Sariel and knows which souls will be saved and which will be destroyed. Remiel is said to have been the archangel responsible for the destruction of the armies of the Assyrian King Sennacherib.

Other beings considered archangels include: Azrael: the Angel of Death and Rebirth; Chamuel; Jophiel (female); Haniel (female); Jeremiel; Nathaniel; Zadkiel; Sandalphon and Metatron: formerly righteous Enoch.

Book of Enoch 20:1-7

‘And these are names of the kodesh [‘holy, sacred, separate’] malakim [angels] who watch: Suru’el [Sariel] for he is of eternity [clamour] and of trembling. Raphael… for he is [over] the spirits of man. Raguel [Reuel]… who [takes] vengeance [inflicts punishment] for the world and for the luminaries. Michael… for he is obedient in his benevolence over the people and [commands] the nations. Saraqa’el… who is set [presides] over the spirits of mankind who sin in the spirit. Gabriel… who [oversees] the Garden of Eden, and the serpents [seraphim], and the cherubim.’ 

The Book of Enoch speaks of four types of Spiritual Creatures: Cherub, Seraph, Ophan and Malak. Though the mysterious ophan appear to be part of the Cherubim and the mechanism for moving God’s throne – refer article: The Ark of God. The malakim derive from the Hebrew word mal’akh for ‘messenger’ the same as the Greek word angelos for angels. Each of these beings serve the Creator and also serve humankind either behind the scenes like Michael, on the sons of Jacob’s behalf, or openly with human interaction, as with Gabriel. Archangels, though they be angels and messengers; may also be foremost of the heavenly creatures in the angelic pantheon.

Book of Enoch 

40:1 ‘And after that, I saw a hundred thousand times a hundred thousand [ten billion], ten million times ten million [one hundred trillion], an innumerable and uncountable multitude who stand before the Splendor of Yahweh of Hosts. 40:2 I saw them standing on the four wings of Yahweh of Hosts and saw four [Cherubim?] other faces among those who do not slumber, and I came to know their names, which the [Angel] who came with me revealed to me; and he also showed me all the hidden things.

40:3 Then I heard the voices of those four faces while they were saying praises before Yahweh of Splendor. 40:4 The first voice was blessing the NAME of YAHWEH of Hosts. 40:5 The second voice I heard blessing the Elect One [the Son of man] and the elect ones [the 24 Elders – Revelation 4:4] who are clinging onto Yahweh of Hosts. 40:6 And the third voice I heard interceding and praying on behalf of those who dwell upon the earth and supplicating in the NAME of YAHWEH of Hosts. 40:7 And the fourth voice I heard expelling the demons and forbidding them from coming to Yahweh of Hosts in order to accuse those who dwell upon the earth.

40:8 And after that, I asked the malak of Shalom [angel of peace], who was going with me and showed me everything that was hidden, “Who are these four faces which I have seen and whose voices I have heard and written down?” 40:9 And he said to me, “The first one is the merciful and forbearing Michael; the second one, who is set over all disease and every wound of the children of the people, is Raphael; the third, who is set over all exercise of strength, is Gabriel; and the fourth, who is set over all actions of repentance unto the hope of those who would inherit eternal life, is Phanuel [or Orphiel, meaning the face of God or (God has turned)] by name.”

Phanuel

40:10 So these are HIS four [Angels or chief messengers]: they are of Yahweh of Hosts, and the four voices which I heard in those days.’

Cherubs are a fascinating order of beings, alongside the Seraphim in the spiritual hierarchy. Whether they are angels, or separate classes of heavenly beings serving the Eternal is a matter of conjecture and speculation amongst theologians. Conversely, it should be considered if all spirit beings are angels… that there are two types of angel; the mammalian (and avian) Cherubim and the reptilian Seraphim

It can be questioned if one type takes after their Father, the Ancient of Days and if the other takes after their Mother, Asherah? Though if Asherah is an ‘anointed Cherub’ how could she also be a Seraphim styled Dragon? The answer may lay in that she was a mixture of both from the beginning and or, she became more serpentine* over time as the result of her rebellion.

This writer’s previous thinking was that Cherubs, Seraphs – and the Ophanim if a genuine category of their own – are types of spirit beings and not the same as the fourth category, Angels. Though as cherubs can be – not just bovine, avian and feline, but also – humanoid, perhaps there are two orders and angels fall into one or the other.

Ophanim is Hebrew for ‘wheels, whirlwinds, spheres’ and refers to ‘the wheels’ seen in Ezekiel’s vision of the chariot (a sky vehicle, or space craft) described in Ezekiel 1:15-21. According to Ezekiel’s narrative in the Bible, they are creatures created of interlocking gold wheels, with the exterior of each wheel covered with many eyes. They are described as being renowned for their knowledge and wisdom. It is said that the Ophanim never sleep and are constantly busy in guarding the Ancient of Days throne in Heaven. And so, Ophanim are described as thrones as well as wheels. According to Maimonides a Jewish scholar in the twelfth century, the Ophanim were the highest in a hierarchy of ‘angels’ as they were ‘tasked with guarding God’s throne’ – refer article: The Ark of God

The biblical prophet Ezekiel describes the cherubim as a tetrad of living creatures, each having four faces: of a lion, an ox (bull), an eagle and of a man. One would presume this is symbolic in that they possess the four facets described and not a literal description of four faces. More likely, each Cherub may have a predominant personality so that one may look human, one birdlike like Lilith for instance and another bovine like a minotaur; which could include Baal-hadad (or Samael*) the storm god. They may have shape shifting ability in exhibiting them at will. 

This reminds of the Egyptian gods with human bodies and heads of animals, such as the highest and strongest god Horus with the head of a falcon. Apophis, the god of chaos, had a serpents head; Anubis the head of a jackal and likely the original head of the Sphinx in Giza – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? The goddess of war, Sekhmet had a lioness head; Heket the goddess of birth and fertility possessed a frogs head and her husband, Khnum had the head of a ram; Sobek, the head of a crocodile; Thoth the head of an Ibis – Article: Thoth – and Kehpheri, the head of a scarab beetle.

The Cherubim are reputed to have the stature and hands of a human, the feet of a calf, and four eye covered wings – Ezekiel 1:4-14, 10:1-22. Two of the wings extend upward, meeting above and sustaining the throne of God; while the other two stretch downward and cover the creatures themselves. 

The Bible indicates in Ezekiel 28:11-19 that there was an anointed Cherub who covered the Supreme Creator’s throne. There were two Cherubs given this role – Exodus 25:17-21; 37:6-9; 1 Kings 6:23-30. A mystery arises from this, in that who is the other covering Cherub? If Wisdom was one of the anointed Cherubs and Asherah is the first of the Most High’s creations as was the Word; then the Son of Man could be the other anointed Cherub. 

The Ark of God: ‘A surprise answer to who may have been the second covering Cherub with Asherah is the mysterious leader of the Watchers who rebelliously descended to Earth in the endeavour to corrupt humanity during the time of righteous Enoch. His name was Samyaza, which tellingly means ‘covering’ or ‘that which covers.’

The defining definition of Cherub is not clear, though the verb karabu means ‘to bless’ and the adjective form, is ‘to be mighty’ or Mighty Ones. It can also connote ‘to approach’ and to be ‘in the midst’ or ‘within.’ Hence, these mighty multi-faceted beings are blessed by attending to the Creator and are in the midst of His presence and throne.

The Cherubim: Their Role on the Ark in the Holy of Holies, Dr Rabbi Zev Farber – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Tradition has a rich history of interpreting the mythical cherubs in numerous ways. Nevertheless the extensive findings from the Ancient Near East make it clear that the Cherubs historically represented either frightening beasts used as guards, or the equivalent of flying horses drawing chariots; these images fit a number of biblical passages.’

Above: The Gate of All Nations; Persian Palace in Persepolis – Below: Assyrian Style Lamassu Guards from Nimrud, in the Louvre

‘In the Mishkan, however, they served either as God’s throne or as buffers surrounding the deity. Accordingly, the Ark of the Covenant was to be the footstool or podium of God. King David says this explicitly in 1 Chronicles 28:2, “Hear me, my brothers, my people! I wanted to build a resting-place for the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, for the footstool of our God.” Isaiah 66:1 begins: “Thus said [Yahweh]: The heaven is My throne and the earth is My footstool.”

Above: Apollo riding a Grypon – Below: Neptune (Poseidon) rides a chariot

Anciently karibu were depicted as colossal bulls. The Cherubs that are stationed by the Eternal’s throne-cum-transportation device appear to conduct a dual role of bodyguard, providing a protective covering with their wings; and flight attendants, including piloting of said craft (or chariot) – Psalm 18:10, 2 Samuel 22:11, Ezekiel 9:3. Engravings and paintings of chimera type creatures abound as do sphinx, gryphons and lamassu which are all cherubim inspired.

Above: Saturn rides his Chariot of Serpents by Pietro Bonato – Below: Dionysus and the Centaurs

Farber: ‘The idea of a god or a king riding a chariot pulled by fantastic creatures exists in the Ancient Near East. Phoenician art depicts sphinx driven war chariots, for instance. The idea is most developed, and well known, in the ancient Greek and Roman worlds, where many different gods and goddesses are [pictured] with their own chariots. Apollo rides a gryphon, Poseidon a pair of Hippokampi (horse-fish). Helios’ chariot is carried by winged horses, Saturn by serpents, and Dionysius by centaurs. When seen in this context, the imagery of God riding a chariot in the Bible seems in keeping with ancient conceptions and poetic norms.’

It is written that the archangel Gabriel oversees the Garden of Eden and other Cherubim. It is Cherubim who guard the Garden of Eden and other sacred places. 

Cherubim are associated with the images of Lamassu, with a human head, the body of a bull (or lion) and wings like an eagle. While the Sphinx invariably had a human female head, the body of a lion and the wings of a falcon. The Griffin on the other hand, had a body, tail and hind legs of a lion and the head, wings and front talons of an eagle.

The word Seraph includes the meaning of the Burning or Shining Ones and they are considered by some as the highest order of creature and the ‘choir of the Heavens’, due to their close proximity to the Ancient of Days. The Seraphim are recorded in the prophet Isaiah’s vision – Isaiah 6:1-7. Seraphim are described as having six wings, with two wings covering their faces, two covering their feet, and two used for flight.

Other sources claim their voices are said to be powerful enough to fatally kill a mere human and able to shatter glass. It is believed before his fall from grace, Samael was Prince of the choir of Seraphim.

‘It is said that the Seraphim flew about the throne on which God was seated, singing His praises as they called special attention to God’s glory and majesty. These beings apparently also served as agents of purification. An ancient Judean seal from the  eighth century BCE depicts them as flying asps, yet having human characteristics, as encountered by Isaiah in his commissioning as a prophet. Seraphim are known to defy the laws of the universe when commanded such as when one placed a hot coal against Isaiah’s lips with the words, “See, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for.” It did not burn him, but instead healed.’ Similar to the other types of holy angels, the seraphim are in perfect obedience to God. In likeness of the Cherubim, the Seraphim are especially focused on worshipping God.

Isaiah 14:29

Orthodox Jewish Bible

‘Rejoice not thou, all ye of Peleshet (Philistia), because the shevet (rod) of him that struck thee is broken; for out of the shoresh nachash (snake’s root) shall spring up a viper, and its pri (fruit) [from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil] shall be a fiery flying serpent [Seraph, a dragon].’

Further Bible verses regarding Seraphim include: Isaiah 30:6, Deuteronomy 8:15 and Numbers 21:4-9 – refer article: The Ark of God. Seraph, in Hebrew means ‘fiery serpent’ or ‘poisonous serpent.’ Recall, two of the definitions for the name Samael are poison of God and venom of God. In Egypt, the cobra was referred to as ‘the flaming one.’ Its icon was called Uraeus and adorned the Pharaoh’s headpiece.

Those Seraphs who rebelled have transformed from the beautiful creations they once were as per the prophecy in Genesis 3:15. That is, trapped in the lowest dimensions of the solar system and the Earth, losing their figurative wings and unable to reside further up the dimensional, vibrational ladder; ‘crawling on their bellies and eating dust’, living in the lesser spiritual densities such as the fourth dimension, just out of range of our three physical dimensions. They have morphed from glorious dragons into reptilian like serpents and lizards; amphibious frogs; Arachnids (spiders and scorpions); the insectoid-like Praying Mantis, locusts; and possibly even xenomorph entities.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 666 – emphasis and bold mine:

‘… elementals [the possible offspring between fallen Angels], who were obscure, distinct, spurious, subhuman beings lost to secular history… possessed a mysterious pygmy stature… [included are] the notorious elves, fairies, trolls, goblins, and… of course, the infamous, unexplained aliens… [also] gnomes, leprechauns, and the little people. Elementals are refugees from the flood utilizing Sidhes portals (with alien flying saucers) from the Otherworld and employed to serve dark angels… elementals are indeed the greys posing as aliens [if they are not biological robots]…reprobate beings serving the objectives of the rebellion and the destruction of humankind.’

Wayne raises an important point. We know there are angelic beings: the righteous and the fallen. The union with humans produced Nephilim and they in turn once deceased, became demonic entities – unclean, lying spirits. There is also a third type of spiritual being which does not answer to angel or demon. Wayne brings attention to elemental spirits and his conclusion about the Grey aliens may be correct if they are neither demonic or angelic. 

Putting the many pieces of the puzzle together, presents in a concluding summary, a clearer picture of the pivotal players in the early cosmos.

Asherah, began as the Ancient of Days first creation by, through and of his Wisdom. Asherah as Wisdom, steadily matured and grew from birth to womanhood; becoming the Most High’s friend, wife, lover and co-Creator. A beautiful and black ebony Cherub, in amazing contrast to Himself. Mother of the original angelic creation, a Goddess and with the Most High, the first Queen of Heaven. It would appear she was equated with Mother Earth (or Gaia) and the preceding prototype Earth – Tiamat, the larger planet located on the far side of Mars. When she rebelled, Asherah’s planet and home world in this Solar System was destroyed. Tiamat was pierced and cut in two; its atmosphere and surface life destroyed. Asherah morphed into an adversary and became Satan the Devil – a Leviathan and a Dragon.

Why did Asherah break the status quo? It may have been simply the issue of being denied the co-equality she so craved. A level footing with the Ancient of Days was never going to be given. Even to His beloved Son, has He not given equality. This denial, perceived as a slight or betrayal, whether real or imagined, surely contributed to her actions. It was the English playwright and poet William Congreve, who wrote these lines in his play The Mourning Bride, in 1697:

‘Heav’n has no Rage, like Love to Hatred turn’d, Nor Hell a Fury, like a Woman scorn’d.’

Which is where we have derived the saying of: “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.” The Ancient of Day’s plan for the full potential of humankind, was likely the trigger pulled or the button pushed in both Asherah’s and Samael’s minds. The rest is history as they say.

With regard to the temptation of Eve in the Garden of Eden, the story involving Gadreel doesn’t sit right. The verse in the Book of Enoch, where Gadreel is stated as seducing Eve, appears an abrupt insertion running against the context and lacking integrity. As is the inclusion of Lilith, proven to be spurious ideology from the Kabbalah. Samael’s identity as a serpent appears beyond question. Even so, he is not the Adversary, the Serpent of Old or the Great Red Dragon described in the Book of Revelation. 

He is though, the Serpent in the Garden of Eden who is cursed in Genesis 3:15. As it is Eve who has sexual relations thereby falling pregnant with Cain; the identity transgressing with her, must be that of a male. Samael posed as an angel of light, to deceive Eve in thinking she was with someone else… someone like the Lord God.

Angel of Light

Samael gained Eve’s trust by discrediting the Creator and successfully selling the Way of his mother Asherah, represented by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil… serving as Samael’s introduction for sexual seduction and entrapment. To acknowledge that Eve was deceived into accepting the physical realm and sealed the deal with a sexual encounter is key. Eve then introduced Adam to sex. Adam did not have a relationship with the Serpent Samael.

1 Timothy 2:14

New English Translation

‘And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, because she was fully deceived, fell into transgression [sin].’ 

This was a massive act of sabotage, with Samael taking the lead role and the part of the perpetrator, in impregnating Eve. Eve thought she had been given Cain from the Lord, so the dupe was a good one – the most effectively sinister fraud of all time. To be fair, Eve never ever stood a chance and this opens up a whole list of questions, as to why she was left vulnerable in the Garden, without Adam or the Lord God’s presence of protection. 

Lilith is mentioned in the Bible as is her twin brother Azazel. Anyone in the Bible, even if not mentioned often or even just once, is recorded for a reason and has more than a passing role. There are very few righteous spirit entities mentioned by name and similarly with fallen angels. Lilith as Azazel’s sister, is in turn Samael’s daughter by his own mother, Asherah. Incest appears to be the norm on the dark side of the gods family tree. Mentioned earlier, Apollyon has a sister, Artemis the huntress. The fact that Lilith is mentioned in the same chapter as Nimrod, also a mighty hunter, is a significant coincidence. Particularly in recognition of Nimrod’s association with Asshur-Russia and Lilith with Edom-Israel during end time events – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Lilith known as Semiramis, is both Nimrod’s mother and wife. If Azazel, the future Beast and an Antichrist with Nimrod his nephew, the second beast and False Prophet work together, we have a diabolically fascinating nuclear family.

More than one source, links Semiramis as the mother and wife of Ninus, the king attributed with the founding of the city of Nineveh the principal capital of Asshur and Assyria. It is Lilith and Nimrod, who are credited with the founding or continuation post-flood, of the Mystery Babylonian Religion and Mother goddess worship – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod

Lilith is a spiritual harlot beginning with her incestuous relationships with her father Samael and later with her son Nimrod. Lilith continues her harlotry in the future as the Whore of Babylon, the woman who rides the scarlet red beast of false religion and deception.

The truth is truly stranger than fiction and no more so than here. 

We have covered considerable ground in this chapter. Thank you to the constant reader for sharing the journey. It is appreciated that readers will not agree with everything stated, but it is hoped disagreement as well as affirmation can be springboards for future discussion in seeking to grow in grace and knowledge – 2 Peter 3:18. Some readers will wonder the significance of the title of the chapter, Alpha & Omega. 

They are literally the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. The phrase means the ‘beginning and end’ or the ‘first and the last.’ It is specifically in reference to the Eternal God; though it is used here as a homage to the Ancient of days and the Son of Man, as no book about our beginnings, our history, our identity and our potential is complete without a chapter dedicated to them. 

Revelation 22:13

English Standard Version

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end” – Revelation 21:6-7.

Revelation 1:8

The Message

The Master declares, “I’m A to Z. I’m The God Who Is, The God Who Was, and The God About to Arrive. I’m the Sovereign-Strong” – Revelation 1:17-18.

Isaiah 44:6

Amplified Bible

‘For the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts says this, “I am the First and I am the Last; And there is no God besides Me.”

Exodus 3:13-14

English Standard Version

‘Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’

All things began with the Father and all things have been accomplished and made manifest through his Son, who will complete all things – Acts 17:31, 2 Corinthians 5:10, Colossians 1:15-20, 2 Timothy 4:1, Revelation 3:14; 20:11-15; 22:12. 

They are, the Alpha and Omega.

Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am he; I am the first, and I am the last.

Isaiah 48:12 English Standard Version

“Only the bravest souls dare to participate in the most epic of journeys, such as the story of Earth.”

James Carwin

“The discovery of Earth as a nexus planet comes from the future. There are many extraterrestrial groups that come from 300 years in your future and have travelled back in time in order to prevent something unspeakable from happening. There is literally a race and a tug of war happening in space over your planet.”

Deltavash

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod

Chapter XXI

Nimrod is listed as a son of Cush in Genesis chapter ten, though we are not told whether he is the eldest, youngest or somewhere in between his supposed five half-brothers? – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Nimrod was apparently of the Nephilim – part human, part fallen angel – yet many would debate this point, and for that to be possible, Nimrod’s father must have had more than one wife (or partner). The woman in question – though again, many would dispute whether an angel or the nephilim could actually be female – who was Nimrod’s mother, would have had to have been an angel herself. Or the alternative, is that his apparent ancestor Ham had a relationship with an angel, meaning Nimrod’s father was of the Nephilim, with Nimrod being a first generation Elioud (giant) – 1 Enoch 7:11. This scenario could be deemed unlikely as it appears to contradict the biblical account. 

Sources speak of male nephilim, not female. Are there any references to either angels or the Nephilim fathering daughters? Is there only one viable gender produced and is this the case with the Nephilim?Are hybrids always sterile? We find references to sons as in, the sons of Anak in the Book of Numbers. Yet in the least, this shows the Nephilim could reproduce for at least one generation after themselves and were not entirely sterile. So, what is the truth regarding Nimrod’s ancestry?

Numbers 13:22, 33

English Standard Version

33 “And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons [H1121 – ben] of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.”

22 ‘They went up into the Negeb and came to Hebron. Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the descendants [H3211 – yaliyd] of Anak, were there…’

In verse thirty-three the Hebrew word ben is typically used for ‘son’ or ‘grandson’ and in the KJV it is used 2,978 times for the word son. Though this word also means ‘children’ and is used 1,568 times. Children is in the ‘plural’ and includes ‘male and female.’ It can even be used in reference to the ‘sons of God (for angels)’.

The Hebrew word used in verse twenty-two is translated as ‘born, six times; children, four times; and sons, two times. It could be phrased, ‘those born of Anak.’ Sons can be used to denote all offspring, thereby including male and female descendants. We learn that the children of Anak are not just first generation Elioud – also transliterated Eljo, Book of Jubilees 7:22 – but rather were a generational line of descent. The Book of Joshua adds important information regarding the Anakim.

Joshua 14:15; 15:13

English Standard Version

‘Now the name of Hebron formerly was Kiriath-arba. (Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim… Arba was the father of Anak).’

Anak had a father called Arba, who was in fact the progenitor of a line of Elioud and was therefore an original line of Nephilim. Thus his son Anak was not of the Nephilim, but a first generation Elioud and literally the first of the Anakim giants.

We have investigated and understand from Chapter XI Ham Aequator, the family intrigue in Ham’s family with his involvement in the incident between Noah and Ham’s wife, Na’eltama’uk which resulted in the birth of Canaan.

So does this dysfunctionally extend to Cush and his family? It seems that a Cushite Nimrod may not have been the progenitor of a specific line of people, whether Elioud or a nation state, as per the genealogical listing in the Table of Nations in Genesis chapter ten. Only a few concise verses speak about Nimrod, yet a tremendous amount is contained within them; with permutations far reaching through the annals of time until our present day and beyond – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Nimrod in Hebrew means: ‘to Rebel’ from the verb marad, ‘to be rebellious or revolt.’ From the scant detail in the Bible, there is enough to learn his Nephilim condition and that he was likely not the only one of his kind after the flood as others had survived; but he was probably the first true nephilim to be born after the great flood – becoming the preeminent being of his kind in the world, to stand fully in defiance against the Creator. 

Genesis 10:6-12

English Standard Version

6 ‘The sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt [Mizraim], Put… 7 The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan. 

8 Cush fathered [H3205 – yalad: bring forth] Nimrod [H5248 – Nimrowd: rebellion, valiant]; he was the first [H2490 – chalal: began] on earth to be [H1961 – hayah] a mighty man [H1368 – gibbowr: strong, brave].’ 

The word ‘first’ or ‘began’ derives from the Hebrew chalal which has a variety of sinister connotations and bleak meanings: ‘to profane, pollute, defile, stain, sorrow, desecrate, prostitute, break’ and ‘slay.’ It includes to ‘defile oneself ritually, sexually’ or in eating ‘common things.’ ‘To violate’ or ‘dishonour a covenant’ and ‘to wound, dissolve’ or ‘pierce.’ ‘To break one’s word’, ‘to begin as if by an “opening wedge”. It also includes ‘to play the flute or pipe’ and a ‘player on instruments.’

The two meanings worth noting are the opening wedge and playing the flute or pipe. One recalls the tale of the pied – meaning more than two patches of colour on clothing – piper. In 1284, a colourful Piper led one hundred and thirty children away from the town of Hamelin in Lower Saxony, Germany, to a mountain, after also ridding the township of rats. Initially, it appeared the Piper was doing the town a great service before his real motive was threateningly and hypnotically carried out. This is alarmingly reflective of Nimrod as we shall discover. The ‘opening wedge’ relates to Nimrod beginning what had occurred in the antediluvian age and was shut down by the flood; the opening of the conduits between our physical dimensions and the spiritual realm – refer article: Belphegor

The phrase ‘to be’ in the Hebrew is highly revealing for it means: ‘come to pass, exist, happen, fall out, come about.’ Nimrod was the first or began ‘to come into being, to arise’ and ‘be established.’ Nimrod came to ‘be in existence, remain’ and ‘be brought about’ as in a ‘place or time.’ The end of verse eight reveals what he was to be. 

The Hebrew for mighty is gibbowr or in the plural, gibborim. It can be translated as ‘strong, brave, valiant, champion, chief’ and interestingly as an ‘upright man’ and finally, as a ‘giant.’ By implication it renders as a ‘powerful warrior’ or ‘tyrant.’ The word is derived from H1396 gabar, which means: ‘to prevail, be powerful’ and significantly in Nimrod’s case, ‘to act proudly (toward God).’ This word does not prove or disprove that Nimrod was of the Nephilim of or by itself.

Yet, Genesis chapter six, uses the same phraseology to describe the original Nephilim.

Genesis 6:4

English Standard Version

‘The Nephilim [H5303 – nphiyl: giant, tyrant, bully] were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God [H430 – ‘elohiym: angels] came in to the daughters [H1323 – bath: young women] of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty [H1368 – gibbowr] men [ones] who were of old [H5769 – ‘owlam], the men [H582 – ‘enowsh] of renown [H8034 – shem].

The Hebrew word Nphiyl derives from the primitive root naphal H5307. Now this word reveals the true nature of these ‘giant tyrants.’ This word is used to describe Cain, of which we shall return – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Na’amah. It can be translated as the following: fail, 318 times; fall down, 25 times; cast down, 18 plus 9 times; fall away, 5 times; divide, 5 times; overthrow, 5 times; and lost, twice. Additional meanings include: ‘to fall (of violent death), to fall short, waste away, to throw or to prostrate oneself, be cast down, fugitive, perish’ and ‘rot.’ The definitions are not positive and reveal the abominable condition of creatures which were part spiritual and part physical – fallen ones like their dark angelic fathers. 

The phrase ‘of old’ adds anther piece to the Nephilim puzzle. It is translated as: ever, 272 times; everlasting, 63 times; perpetual, 22 times; evermore, 15 times; ancient, 5 times; always, 3 times; and long, twice. It literally means a ‘long duration, antiquity, for ever, everlasting, long time, ancient time’ and tellingly, ‘continuous existence, indefinite or unending future, eternity.’ Even more revealingly, it derives from the word alam H5956. This word is translated as ‘hide, blind, dissemblers, hidden, secret’ and ‘secret thing’, meaning ‘be hidden, to be concealed, be secret, to hide oneself, to veil from sight.’

The word ‘dissembler’ is intriguing for it means: ‘to give a false or misleading appearance to; conceal the truth or real nature of: feign, to let pass unnoticed; ignore… to conceal one’s true motives, thoughts… by some pretence; speak or act hypocritically.’ We will discover that this is the exact modus operandi of the Nephilim who reside in the shadowy world which bridges our own and that of the angelic realm.

The Hebrew word for man literally means a mortal man. What is interesting is that these were not normal men. The word ‘enowsh derives from ‘anash H605. This word defines these men of renown as ‘woeful’ and ‘[incurably] desperately wicked, to be desperate, to be sick, to be frail, feeble’ and ‘melancholy.’ The Hebrew word for renown is the same word used for Noah’s son, Shem. It means: ‘fame, glory, reputation’ and ‘authority.’ The word shem is regarded as the equivalent of H8064, Shamayim, which means: ‘to be lofty, the heavens or stars.’ This links the Nephilim to their infamous fathers, the sons of God who became corrupt angels, the fallen stars from heaven – Revelation 12:4.

The Voice translates the same verse as:

“Now at that time and for some time to come, a great warrior race lived on the earth. Whenever the sons of God would have sex with the humans’ daughters, the women bore them children who became mighty warriors. In the days of old, they became famous heroes, the kind people tell stories about!”

Other translations also use the word Hero. Websters Dictionary: ‘the offspring of the gods and a human.’ The online Dictionary: ‘a being of godlike prowess… who often came to be honoured as a divinity, an immortal being; demigod.’

All this paints a dark picture. There can be no doubt that we are speaking of non-human beings that were physical yes, in that their bodies would eventually ‘perish’ yet the spirit unlike mankind’s, had an ‘existence [which] was everlasting’ and unholy. Certain biblical scholars and commentators reason this does not prove that Nimrod was Nephilim, but rather he was a Gibbo’r – a mighty man, a powerful tyrant ruler, no more no less. As we progress, support for Nimrod’s Nephilim status escalates.

9 ‘He was a mighty hunter [H6718 – tsayid] before [H6440 – paniym: in opposition to, against, in front of, facing] the Lord. Therefore it is said, “Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the Lord”.’

The Hebrew word for hunter is translated as: ‘hunting’, 3 times plus once; and ‘catch’, once. It lends itself more to ‘the chase.’ The word tsayid is a form of tsuwd H6679, meaning: ‘chased’ and ‘sore’. It also means ‘to hunt eagerly or keenly’ and ‘to catch an animal’ or ‘figuratively, men.’ Not only was Nimrod the first to set himself in opposition to the Eternal during the post-diluvian age; he took the starring role in re-establishing the rebellious system of universal government and control which had begun with Cain and led to the Flood in the first place – refer article: Thoth. His predatory harvesting of mankind’s bodies, minds and souls, into a unified singular force was another attempt at thwarting the Creator’s plan and the continuation of the ongoing war between the serpent of Eden and humankind – Genesis 3:15. 

10 ‘The beginning [H7225 – re’shiyth] of his kingdom [dominion] was Babel [Babylon], Erech [Uruk – (Arach, Iraq)], Accad [Akkad], and Calneh, in the land of Shinar [ostensibly Akkad and Sumer].’ 

The Hebrew word for beginning is translated as: ‘firstfruits, first’ and ‘chief.’ It means the ‘best’ and ‘choice part.’ The ‘first, in place, time, order or rank.’ The matter that was  preeminent for Nimrod, was the building of Babel and what he intended to accomplish in this city-state complex. Either Nimrod departed, once Babel was completed and the wheels were set in motion for his diabolical Tower, or he left Shinar for Assyria after the aborted Tower of Babel incident. For whichever reason, Nimrod then went to the land of Ashur’s descendants building another four cities.

11 ‘From that land [region] he went into Assyria [H804 – Ashshuwr or Asshur] and built Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah [Nimrud], and 12 Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city [Nineveh].’

Nimrod completed the ‘great city’ in Assyria, a rival to Babel in Shinar; which would not always be Assyria’s capital but even so, would always be its main city – Nineveh. It is not clear what Nineveh means, though most concordances provide ‘abode of Ninus.’ Ninus was the mythological founder of Nineveh. Many commentaries equate Nimrod with Ninus, though it is likely that Ninus was Ninyas, Nimrod’s son. Ninus was supposedly the son of Belos or Bel, deriving from the god Baal. 

Thus, Nimrod was the instrumental architect of the great civilisations which arose in the fertile crescent of the land of Shinar; when the descendants of Noah’s sons migrated from the Indus Valley westward to Mesopotamia. This, after originally settling between the modern states of Pakistan and India after taking a route southwards from the Himalayas after the Flood – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

Bear in mind that the land of Shinar may have originally encompassed a broader geographical area and Nimrod might have been instrumental in the evolution of post-flood Egypt’s civilisation – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

There are two anomalies in the verses in Genesis describing Nimrod. An online encyclopaedia discusses the ambiguity in the original Hebrew text that makes it unclear whether it is Nimrod or Asshur who additionally built the remaining four cities, beginning with Nineveh: ‘… (both interpretations are reflected in various English versions). Sir Walter Raleigh devoted several pages in his History of the World (circa 1616) to reciting past scholarship regarding the question of whether it had been Nimrod or Ashur who built the cities in Assyria.’

The opinion of this writer, judging from the two sentences comprising verses ten and eleven running together, with Nimrod being the subject, is that he is the founder of all eight cities. The four cities – including Babel (or Babylon), a future capital – of Shinar, in time, came to represent Arphaxad’s children; while the remaining four cities with Nineveh, the future capital of Assyria, came to represent Asshur’s descendants – the first of Shem’s five sons to expand their influence and power. 

During the time of Nimrod, one assumes all eight city-states would have been peopled by his family of brothers, right? This would mean principally Cush, and perhaps also Phut and Mizra… that is, if Nimrod is in fact related to Ham’s son Cush?

If it was not for a cryptic verse in the Book of Micah, one would probably move on seamlessly with an expose on Nimrod as a son of Cush. The red flag though, is that a descendant of Cush – the predominant peoples of the Indian sub-continent and South Asia today (refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut) – should have such an invested interest and building program, in the two main future strongholds of civilisation for Shem’s dominant sons, Asshur (Russians) and Arphaxad (Europeans). It appears that a Cushite Nimrod took little interest in his own people from Ham and rather concentrated his efforts with his cousins from Shem. Something is out of kilter.

Micah 5:6

New English Translation

‘They will rule the land of Assyria with the sword, the land [country, people] of Nimrod with a drawn sword…’

Micah’s future prophecy states ‘the people or country of Nimrod’ and equates it with the land of Assyria and not with the land of Cush.

The Torah online – emphasis and bold mine:

‘The Nimrod passage interrupts the genealogy of Ham, which continues in verse 12. Moreover, the verses seem to diverge from the structure of the larger genealogical list: it focuses on one individual and the cities he founded, not on the sons he begat… the geographic picture it presents is problematic… Shinʿar is in southern Mesopotamia and Ashur in northern Mesopotamia, all in “Shemitic” territory. 

Cush, however, ostensibly Nimrod’s father, like other descendants of Ham, represents the well-known land of Kush, also known as Nubia, the Septuagint’s “Ethiopia,” roughly today’s Sudan. How are we to make sense of this? Critical scholarship is almost unanimous in the assessment that verses 8-12 were taken from a different source than the preceding and following verses. Most scholars would assign verses 1-7 and 13-32 to the Priestly school, and verses 8–12 to the J source. 

This suggests that we may explain the Nimrod narrative independently of the surrounding Table of Nations. This leaves us with two questions: What was its original meaning, and why was it linked to the genealogy of Cush? [The option]… embraced by most scholars and is likely correct… [is that] the Cush in verse 8, Nimrod’s father, [is ] not [from] Nubia, but… a place in Mesopotamia. According to this, whoever inserted the J tradition into its present place mistakenly conflated the two.

The mid-third millennium B.C.E. was a time of great change in Mesopotamia. After several centuries of rivalry between various Sumerian city-states such as Ur, Uruk, Lagash and Umma, the rulers of the city of Kish managed to establish supremacy over much of southern Mesopotamia. This was the first time one Sumerian city succeeded in doing this. In successive generations, the title “King of Kish” (sar-kissati) would come to mean a divinely authorized ruler over all of Sumer and would be claimed at different times by the rulers of various cities. Use of the title “King of Kish” implied being victorious at war, a righteous judge and a builder of cities. Kish, I would argue, is the basis of the Cush of the Nimrod passage (v. 8).’ 

It is the view of this writer that the preceding summation is accurate when weighing the association of the biblical Nimrod with all things Assyrian or descending from Asshur and nothing related to anything deriving from the Ethiopian, Cush – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Further investigation on Nimrod, his actions and motives only further cement his physical line of descent being from Asshur and not from Cush. How and why the verses relating to him are inserted with Cush’s family tree and not Asshur’s is either a scribal error in thinking the father of Nimrod was Cush from Ham, or it was a deliberate attempt to conceal Nimrod’s true lineage from Kish; perhaps a grandson of Shem and a son of Asshur.

The name Cush (Kish) is intriguing for in the Hebrew it connotes black or a blackened countenance which the darker peoples of Cush (Southern India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh) possess. Jone’s Dictionary offers an alternative meaning that could well describe Nimrod’s father as: full of darkness.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Nouns (mered) and (mardut) mean rebellion. The letter (nun), with which our name starts may be due to a grammatical construction that turns a verb passive (he was rebelled against), reflective (he turned himself against), or resultative (to be rebellious).

… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Rebel. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Strong BDB Theological Dictionary suggests a relation to the Babylonian god Marduk, or the star-god Namra-uddu. Some scholars propose that Nimrod is the same figure as the mighty Greek hunter Orion.

… [Nimrod’s] epithet “mighty hunter before YHWH” (Genesis 10:9) seems to indicate that the Lord was quite taken with Nimrod’s hunting skills. And what was he hunting for? His name suggests that he embodied the object of rebellion, but back when there was no empire to rebel against, the rise of empire was the actual rebellion.

It stands to reason that Nimrod… strove to rebel against primitivity and embrace culture and sophistication. Today some speak of science as “the pursuit of knowledge,” which may be precisely what “mighty hunter before YHWH” means. The name Nimrod may literally mean Rebel but by implication it means Cultivation or even Enlightenment.’

The last paragraph is especially insightful – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘The word for hunter is (sayyad) and derives from the verb (sud), meaning to hunt or fish. This means that Nimrod was probably the first of the so-called “fishers of men” (Matthew 4:19).’ 

Nimrod was a forerunner of a one-world-government dictator, establishing himself as mankind’s teacher, provider, master and saviour – an ante-christ, preceding not just the true Christ, but also the predicted anti-christ or ‘in-opposition-to’ false Prophet in the Book of Revelation.

‘Noun (mesad) means fastness or stronghold (a typically defensive structure). Noun (masod) may mean siege works or hunting implement (like a net). The denominative verb (sid) means to supply oneself with food.’

The Book of Jasher 7:23-51 offers insight into Nimrod. It may even be a facet of the Noah, Ham and Canaan jig-saw we studied in Chapter XI Ham Aequator. Reference to the passage delayed, so as not to influence the preceding study. There is room for doubt with regard to its authenticity or veracity. It is included more for interest sake rather than historical accuracy; with liberty being taken by this writer in only including the salient points and omitting the obvious poetic licence. 

23 ‘… At that time the sons of men again began to rebel and transgress against God… 24… the garments of skin which God made for Adam and his wife, when they went out of the garden… 25… after the death of Adam and his wife… were given to [righteous] Enoch [Article: Thoth]… and when Enoch was taken up to God, he gave them to Methuselah, his son. 26. And at the death of Methuselah, Noah took them and brought them to the ark, and they were with him until he went out of the ark. 

27 And… Ham stole those garments from Noah his father, and he took them and hid them from his brothers. 28 And when Ham begat his first born Cush, he gave him the garments in secret, and they were with Cush many days. 29 And Cush also concealed them from his sons and brothers, and… Cush… gave [Nimrod] those garments… and Nimrod grew up, and when he was twenty years old he put on those garments. 

30… Nimrod became strong when he put on the garments… [similar to the Judge of Israel, Samson – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe], and he was a mighty hunter in the earth, yea, he was a mighty hunter in the field, and he hunted the animals and he built altars…[refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity] 31 And Nimrod strengthened himself, and he rose up from amongst his brethren, and he fought the battles of his brethren against all their enemies round about.

32… and he reigned upon earth… 34 And… at that time there was a war between his brethren and the children of Japheth, so that they were in the power of their enemies. 35 And Nimrod went forth at that time… and when he was on the road, Nimrod strengthened the hearts of the people that went with him. 36 And he said to them, Do not fear, neither be alarmed, for all our enemies will be delivered into our hands, and you may do with them as you please. 

37 And all the men that went… they fought against their enemies, and they destroyed them, and subdued them, and Nimrod placed standing officers over them in their respective places. 38 And he took some of their children as security, and they were all servants to Nimrod and to his brethren… 

39 And when Nimrod had… returned from battle, after having conquered his enemies, all his brethren, together with those who knew him before, assembled to make him king over them, and they placed the regal crown upon his head. 40 And he set over his subjects and people, princes, judges, and rulers, as is the custom amongst kings. 41 And he placed Terah [Abraham’s father] the son of Nahor the prince of his host, and he dignified him and elevated him above all his princes [Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans].

42 And whilst he was reigning according to his heart’s desire, after having conquered all his enemies around, he advised with his counselors to build a city for his palace, and they did so. 43 And they found a large valley opposite to the east, and they built him a large and extensive city, and Nimrod called the name of the city that he built Shinar [Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis]… 44 And Nimrod dwelt in Shinar, and he reigned securely, and he fought with his enemies and he subdued them, and he prospered in all his battles, and his kingdom became very great’ – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

The war against Japheth’s children if genuine, would have occurred relatively early after the flood in 10,837 BCE according to an unconventional chronology. Time would have elapsed for Noah’s family to migrate from Kashmir to the Indus Valley circa 10,500 to 9500 BCE and for these people’s descendants to migrate west to Mesopotamia (and Egypt) between circa 9500 to 8500 BCE – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and article: Monoliths of the Nephilim – with Nimrod born circa 8700 BCE.

The heart of the reason for war with Japheth was probably land and territory disputes circa 7500 BCE. We learn in Genesis chapter ten that Nimrod built his cities in Shinar first, then the cities in Asshur (between approximately 7500 to 7000 BCE). The building of the Tower at Babel would have followed after 7000 BCE, culminating in its destruction circa 6755 to 6232 BCE – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology. For an exact date for the Tower of Babel’s construction, refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Abraham’s father Terah was born in 4077 BCE according to an unconventional chronology. It seems incredulous that Nimrod could still be alive… but he was not an offspring of Nephilim who had survived the Flood and was thus a second generation Nephilim, an Elioud giant who would have been quarter angelic (or spirit). These beings were a ‘watered-down’ version and did not live as long. Though they grew to great stature and their bones have been discovered in numerous sites around the world – refer articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants II; and Monoliths of the Nephilim.

Nimrod was not one of these and so it is possible he was still alive, even after 4,000 years and ruling in 4077 BCE. For his age would be like those who lived prior to the Flood – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. That is, if he had not died during the Tower of Babel confusion. Meanwhile, humans were still living long ages – at a reduced scale – for Terah did not die until 1842 BCE, living some 2,235 years. 

Yet the evidence for Nimrod not still being alive, nor being the ruler* of Babylon, is presented in Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Jasher: 45 ‘And all nations and tongues heard of his fame, and they gathered themselves to him, and they bowed down to the earth, and they brought him offerings, and he became their lord and king, and they all dwelt with him in the city at Shinar, and Nimrod reigned in the earth over all the sons of Noah, and they were all under his power and counsel. 46 And all the earth was of one tongue and words of union, but Nimrod did not go in the ways of the Lord, and he was more wicked than all the men that were before him, from the days of the flood until those days. 47 And he made gods of wood and stone, and he bowed down to them, and he rebelled against the Lord, and taught all his subjects and the people of the earth his wicked ways; and Mardon his son was more wicked than his father… 

49 And Terah the son of Nahor, prince of Nimrod’s host, was in those days very great in the sight of the king* and his subjects, and the king and princes loved him, and they elevated him very high. 50 And Terah took a wife and her name was Amthelo the daughter of Cornebo; and the wife of Terah conceived and bare him a [third] son in those days [in 1977 BCE]. 51 … and Terah called the name of his son that was born to him Abram, because the king had raised him in those days, and dignified him above all his princes that were with him.’

The garments of Nimrod made him near invincible and are possibly linked to a different genetic composition or spiritual condition. It would seem they are used here as a clue or symbol of Nimrod’s hybrid (Nephilim) status. Note the one tongue, or language of the earth. Noah and his family spoke the same language and all his grandsons and so forth did the same – Article: Thoth

This is how in large part Nimrod was able to have successful dominion over all of Noah’s descendants and why when Nimrod is purported to have built the tower of Babel, that the prime target for the sabotage of it, was language. In the Book of Jubilees 8:6-7 we read: ‘… and Shelah grew up and took to himself a wife, and her name was Mu’ak, the daughter of Kesed, his father’s [Arphaxad] brother… And she bare him a son… and he called his name Eber: and he took unto himself a wife, and her name was Azurad, the daughter of Nebrod…’

As Nebrod is considered the Greek form of Nimrod, we have a grave question regarding the lineage of Arphaxad’s line. Is it coincidental that as Canaan was inserted as the father of Shelah (in Arphaxad’s line) – which is improbable, refer Chapter XI Ham Aequatorand a descendant of Nimrod is inserted as the mother of Peleg and Joktan (in Arphaxad’s line). Nimrod a descendant of Asshur, has his daughter included in Arphaxad’s line, making Nimrod an indirect ancestor of Abraham? There is a serious question mark, over the authenticity of such a situation and only adds to the already dubiousness of Nimrod being a blood relation of Cush.

Regardless, Nimrod lived and ruled within Shem’s inheritance and not in Hamite territory. He fought the enemy of Shem – who had been predicted to enlarge and dwell with him in Genesis 9:27 – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium. Even if Nimrod was alive to elevate Terah – from Arphaxad’s and Shem’s line – for loyalty, why not someone from Ham’s line, if he was truly descended from Cush? 

The reason being that it was people descended from Shem, Nimrod’s subjects and kin who had participated in the military offensive and war against Japheth. Recall the future conflict between the ships from Kittim – son of Javan, son of Japheth – and the Assyrian, King of the North – refer Chapter VIII Indonesia: Kittim, Khitai & Cathay; and article: Four Kings & One Queen.

The land of Shinar in southern Mesopotamia anciently included Sumer and its people, the Sumerians. This culture is viewed as the oldest and the originators of civilisation in the region. Sumer etymologically, is linked to Shumer, to Shum and to Shem. The link between this region and Nimrod supports his being white and not dark skinned and if so, his bloodline (on one side) descended from Asshur and not from Cush.

We have considered the Nephilim producing males, with no reference to female Nephilim and by extension Elioud (giants). Yet if true, Nimrod had a daughter Azurad, a first generation Elioud and one quarter angelic. This would infer that Nimrod’s mother was an angel as proposed earlier and not of the Nephilim. The status and exploits of Nimrod are considerably more impressive than any other Nephilim descended giants on the earth post-flood and are more reminiscent of the Nephilim prior to the flood. This supports the proposition that a. Nimrod was Nephilim and b. that he was either the only one of his kind, or the first to be born after the flood. Whereas all other Nephilim, for instance Anak or rather his father Arba, may have crossed over as survivors of the flood – refer article: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I

A profound and vital key which has been missed by most and misinterpreted by those few who have understood, is that Nimrod mirrors the man of lawlessness in the New Testament. Some incorrectly teach that Nimrod is a type of the Antichrist, thus ascribing to him the identity of the first Beast. The truth is that Nimrod actually represents the entity who is the second beast, the one who is called the False Prophet in scripture. The following verses in the book of second Thessalonians eerily parallel Nimrod. 

2 Thessalonians 2:1-12

English Standard Version

‘… we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 

9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.’

The author of 2 Thessalonians (not Paul) warns not to be fooled about a ‘false end time’ before it actually occurs – refer article: The Pauline Paradox. For the False Prophet needs to appear first and it is this Prophet who may well produce ‘apostolic evidence’ to show Christ has already returned – Revelation 13:11-18. During Paul’s ministry he speaks about two mysteries. One of which is the hidden agenda of the Serpent, stemming from the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 and is ‘already at work’ – Article: Thoth. Paul very curiously says the man of lawlessness is being restrained until ‘his time.’ This certainly precludes a human being. How could they be restrained for two thousand years or more? The ‘coming of the lawless one’ is by direct orchestration of Satan the ancient Serpent (of old). The ‘man’ of lawlessness can only be a spirit being and not a mortal human being; yet will manifest as one of us.

It is the belief of some, that Nimrod is the Antichrist without considering his role as the False Prophet and that he will re-appear in the future. We will study the identity of the first Beast, for as an idea it is not to be summarily dismissed. In the following chapter we will investigate the Nephilim more fully, though it is enough to be said for now that as they eventually lost their physical, corporate bodies at physical death their non-corporal spirit lived on – Article: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I.

Thus, Nimrod re-incarnating as a human is a possible prospect and not far-fetched as it may at first sound. Nimrod did not die, he eventually lost his physical body to the corruption and disintegration universally experienced on the Earth and either caused by old age – or there is reason to believe he was murdered. As a direct offspring of an angelic being, his spirit would not end when his physical body died – refer article: Lilith; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

This future religious Potentate, either channels the same rebellious spirit and self-exalting opposition exhibited by Nimrod… or is actually Nimrod. We have learned in the preceding chapter that Assyria is a future and final King of the North. Could its leader be the first Beast – the Antichrist? And could the False Prophet – the second Beast – be someone with ties to ancient Assyria… say, someone like Nimrod? 

New Dawn – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Igor Nikolaevich Panarin (born 1958), dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s school for future diplomats, is a geopolitical analyst, political scientist and media commentator, with significant influence on Russian thinking. An examination of his views and public pronouncements is therefore important in discerning the outlook of Russia’s leading academic and political circles, as well as considering what influences are shaping Russian national consciousness. Panarin is a former officer of the KGB. In 1991 he reached the rank of colonel in the Federal Agency of Government Communications and Information, then the Russian equivalent of the US National Security Agency. Dr. Panarin believes Russia’s destiny is Eurasia. 

He proposed his own version of the Eurasian Economic Union, ‘Eurasia-Rus’, an interstate formation modelled after the European Union. Panarin has called attention to the messianic legacy of Russia as the Third Rome,’ the centre of a new civilisation based on a sacred mission that is an inherent part of the Russian soul [refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia]. This is an attitude one can discern in much of what Vladimir Putin says. The United States’ opposition to a revived Russia can thus be understood as part of a clash of world outlooks. This messianic outlook endures in Russia regardless of the outward mode of political expression.’

Regarding Russia’s future role, one of the world’s most accurate psychics, Edgar Cayce, predicted that Russia would be a ‘force of light’ in preventing a World War from occurring, amidst the global turmoil we experience today. His predictions were made nearly ninety years ago in a series of World Affairs Readings about the future of world finance, world leadership, collective spirituality and the significant role Russia would play on the world’s stage.

Excerpt from Waking Times, 2015 – emphasis theirs, bold mine:

‘When asked in 1932 about political and economic trends in Europe Cayce zeroed in on Russia: 

Europe is as a house broken up. Some years ago there was the experience of a mighty peoples being overridden for the gratification and satisfaction of a few, irrespective of any other man’s right. That peoples are going through the experience of being born again, and is the thorn in the flesh to many a political and financial nation in Europe, in the world…” 

Q: What is the name of that nation referred to? A: Russia!

70 years after the defeat of the Axis powers, Russia has been reborn, but the rest of the world is now largely under the thumb of the Western globalist banking cartel. This cartel is organized as the IMF, the World Bank, the Bank for International Settlements, and the global network of central banks, reserve banks, development banks, and investment banks that hold the world’s elected governments in perpetual receivership and the world’s people in bondage to mathematically impossible to pay debt – refer article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? 

‘In 2013 the US was attempting to invade Syria under obviously false pretences. Vladimir Putin prevented US involvement by threatening to intervene militarily…

With the deliberate destruction of Ukraine by the George Soros funded color-revolution destabilization team then the advances of the IMF to debt-conquer Ukraine with tens of billions of dollars in forced development loans, Putin’s Russia emerged as the singular force capable of checking the banking cabals global advance, and is refusing to allow Ukraine and Crimea to fall into the hands of Western backed forces.

Cayce spoke of Russia’s role as being the ‘hope of the world’ in a coming time such as this: 

“In Russia there comes the hope of the world, not as that sometimes termed of the communistic, or Bolshevik, no; but freedom, freedom! That each man will live for his fellow man! The principle has been born. It will take years for it to be crystallised, but out of Russia comes again the hope of the world.” (Edgar Cayce, 1944)

‘Even before WWII, Cayce appears to have foreseen the need for Russia to evolve spiritually in some manner so that it would be able to rise in opposition to the decaying moral values of the capitalist West and play its part as the great [false] hope of the world.’ 

Cayce was asked, “What should be the attitude of so called capitalist nations toward Russia?”

“On Russia’s religious development will come the greater hope of the world. Then that one, or group, that is the closer in its relationships, may fare the better in the gradual changes and final settlement of conditions as to the rule of the world.”

‘Six months later, additional information was presented which helped to clarify this earlier prediction. 

“Out of Russia, you see, there may come that which may be the basis of a more world wide religious thought or trend…”

‘When Hugh Lynn asked Cayce about the Russian situation in June 1938, he was told: 

“A new understanding has and will come to a troubled people. Here, because of the yoke of oppression, because of the self indulgences, has arisen another extreme. Only when there is freedom of speech, the right to worship according to the dictates of the conscience – until these come about, still turmoils will be within.”

‘Essentially Cayce appears to be referring to Russia after the trials under Soviet rule and the collapse of the Soviet Union, as well as the need for the world to return to humanistic values in order to free itself from the oppression of the Zionist cartels which have been organizing against the human race for centuries’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

‘Cayce is saying that some sort of much needed spiritual leadership will come from Russia in this time, some kind of attitude that will make it possible for a transition of this calibre to occur without having to experience the guaranteed destruction of any World War III.

And what would spiritual leadership look like in a world gone mad, anyhow? At first it would appear as common sense. Of course. 

Aristotle even goes as far as to say that common sense is where consciousness originates. So if a society is lacking in common sense, and there’s little to no conscience, morality, empathy, consciousness, creativity, taste, discernment or love, how does one propose to govern such a population?

Did Edgar Cayce somehow know that Russia would take the common sense gap between spiritual leadership and the guaranteed destruction of World War III… Speaking on the current state of US and Russia relations at a recent summit, Putin said, regarding America: 

“You must rise above the endless desire to dominate. You must stop acting out of imperialistic ambitions. Do not poison the minds of millions of people; like there can be no other way but imperialistic politics.” – Vladimir Putin

‘Cayce also made comments about America’s future moral decay: In the final World affairs reading given on June 22, 1944, less than six months before Edgar’s death, he addresses the spirit and “the sin of America.”

“What is the spirit of America? Most individuals proudly boast “freedom.” Freedom of what? When ye bind men’s hearts and minds through various ways and manners, does it give them freedom of speech? Freedom of worship? Freedom from want?… In the application of these principles… America may boast, but rather is that principle being forgotten… and that is the sin of America.”

‘Did Edgar Cayce foresee Putin’s interfering role in the Western cabals plan to overtake the world through financial domination, political destabilization, and all out world war, order out of chaos? Cayce also predicted the possibility of a THIRD World War. He spoke of strifes arising… in Libya, and in Egypt, in Ankara, and in Syria; through the straits around those areas above the Persian Gulf.

Whether or not you believe in the power of the human mind to connect with Source and withdraw information about the future, things are lining up in such a way that Cayce’s prophecies regarding Russia are proving quite prescient now, giving us a clue that at least we shouldn’t hold on too tightly to any preconceived notions about what will happen in coming years… [while] in a vacuum of any common sense or humanistic leadership from the present powers that be…’

Perception would dictate that these prophecies if accurate, are being directed to a future leader of Russia and not to the current President, Vladimir Putin. If seen in this light, then the support for a powerful, charismatic, profoundly influential leader to emerge from Russia is heightened. Mikhail Gorbachev was a charismatic leader for Russia, who was able to court the western leaders, gaining the respect and trust of President Ronald Reagan of the United States and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom. How much more could a leader achieve which has guidance, strength and composition of a wily spiritual nature. 

Book of Enoch 7:1-6

1. “And all the [other sons of God] together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments [black magick], and the cutting of roots [spells], and made them acquainted with plants [witch craft]. 2. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants [Nephilim]… 3. Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, 4. the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. 5. And they began todevour one another’s flesh, and drink the blood. 6. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.”

The first generation of Nephilim were completely out of control and did not manage their hybrid genetic composition well at all. The myths and legends of giants, cannibalism and vampirism are born from reality, in an epoch over twenty thousand years ago. As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be the same at the end of our age. Notice the chilling phrase ‘lawless ones’ specifically relating to the Nephilim. The future ‘man of lawlessness’ is (plausibly) of Nephilim descent. To understand Nimrod and the False Prophet better, it would be beneficial to study an adversary of the true Christ; the first Beast, as well as the origins of the Nephilim.  

Daniel 7:25-26

English Standard Version

‘[The Beast] shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time [prophetic 42 months of 30 days – Revelation 13:5; Daniel 11:11-12]. But the court shall sit in judgment, and his dominion shall be taken away, to be consumed and destroyed to the end’ – Articles: The Calendar Conspiracy; and The Sabbath Secrecy.

Certain Bible teachers claim changes from the Lunar based (sacred) calendar to the introduction of the Roman Julian/Gregorian calendar is the fulfilment of this passage. This is short-sighted and perceptively restricted. For the reality is the unworldly Beast will supernaturally blur time and dimensions in an attempt to change the natural order. Blending (physical) man constrained in the third dimension with (spirit) entities trapped in the fourth (and fifth) dimensions. A range of existence just out of human focus at present, except via seances, ouija boards and casting spells.

Book of Enoch 8:1-2

Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony [a brittle, lustrous, white metallic element… used chiefly in alloys and in compounds in medicine], and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all colouring tinctures” – refer article: Na’amah. “And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. 

Semjaza taught enchantments, and root-cuttings,

Armaros the resolving [banishment] of enchantments,

Baraqijal, (taught) astrology,

Kokabel [‘a great angelic prince who rules over the stars’] the constellations [astronomy],

Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds [weather], and

Sariel [associated with the fertility of the Earth, the spring equinox in March, the martial zodiac sign of Aries the Ram and was invoked for protection against the malefic power of the Evil Eye] the course of the moon [the Lunar calendar for horticulture and agriculture]. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven…”

Sariel: Angel of the Waning Moon

The Book of Enoch describes two hundred – but actually two million – fallen, dark angels, in groups of twenty (100,000) with a leader for each group descending to our realm – refer article: Na’amah. A third rebellion against the Creator. The first when the Adversary, known as the Great Red Dragon was originally cast out of Heaven – Revelation 12:3-4. The second when the Serpent – not the Dragon – seduced Eve in the Garden of Eden – Genesis 3:6-7. The third, when the Serpent – or its personal, real name as we shall learn, Samael – sought to finish what had been started in Eden, in corrupting mankind even further in another attempt to sabotage the Creator’s plans for humankind and a continuation of the Genesis 3:15, generational war – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Semjaza or Samyaza, is the head of the rebellious angels and of the other nine leaders, though confusingly, it is Azazel, second of the ten leaders who is the prime instigator and driving force in teaching and corrupting humanity. Samyaza means: ‘the (or my) name has seen’ or ‘he sees the name’ and is associated with an ‘infamous rebellion.’

It was while researching the character Azazel, that Azazel was confused with Azrael. Though it was soon realised that they are two different beings. In the process, it was discovered outside the Book of Enoch, that it is Azrael and not Azazel, who is described in likeness of Samael; as an ‘angel of death’ and one who is responsible for the prescribed time allotted to humans – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning? Azrael is depicted as a grim reaper and thus the angel in the scriptures referred to by the term, angel of death, may well be Azrael working on Satan’s behalf and at the same time, ultimately fulfilling the Creator’s plan.

Azrael also known as Azriel (or Asriel) means: ‘Angel of God’, ‘Help from God’, ‘God’s help’, ‘God is my help’ or ‘helper of the Divine.’ The idea of serving the Eternal is supported by its name’s definition and may extend to it even being a mysterious angel of the Lord. Islam and certain Jewish sources contrastingly perceive Azrael as ‘an embodiment of evil’ and therefore a fallen angel, even an Archangel of death. It is not conclusive that Azrael is evil. One of the leading sinful angels listed in the Book of Enoch is Sariel and some translations link the name with Azrael. There is no other evidence they are one and the same entity.

It was this similarity of relationship in as far as a role, that opened the possibility that a certain influential being might actually be a son of Satan the Dragon as well as of Samael the Serpent – with the most likely candidate being… Azazel. There is reason to seriously contend they are all related. As we progress, a case will form to support this hypothesis. At the least, it appears strongly that Azazel is, or has become, the Serpent’s second in command – at least here on the Earth. 

Samael the Serpent of Eden is an extremely powerful entity, whose name means: ‘God has heard’ or ‘heard by God’ and then as a transformation occurred through his rebellion, the name also means, ‘venom of God’, ‘poison of God’ and ‘blindness of God.’

Samael is the name of the being incorrectly called Lucifer. Samael is a (deceitful) ‘light bringer’ as well as an adversary leading many rebellious angels, yet all the while in the shadow of the preeminent nemesis of God: Ha-Satan (the Satan) and true Adversary of the Eternal. This being is an enigma and will be studied in depth in the following chapter – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. For now, so that the context of what follows makes sense, it needs to be shared that Satan is a female persona. Her name is revealed in the Old Testament as, Asherah.

Samael conducts a powerfully corrupt agenda for Satan – where it’s time and effort is concentrated as a. an accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10), the true body of believers; b. as a seducer of humankind, for the whole world is held unwittingly captive; and c. as a destroyer of the cosmos. Satan and Samael seek to pervert the innocence and good of the Eternal’s creation.

Intriguingly, the definitions for the names Sam-yaza and Sam-ael are similar in an indirect way. It is suspicious how Samyaza, though leader of the ‘two hundred’ Watchers, takes a place behind the scenes and allows Azazel to be the leading focus of attention. Yet, why wouldn’t a preeminent being, second only to Satan not descend to earth and be involved in the plan to thoroughly corrupt mankind – seeing through what he had begun in the Garden of Eden. The Earth is the centre of the battle between both the Serpent’s forces and humanity descended from Eve, and the tactics used by Samuel are outright guerrilla warfare. This would include his under cover infiltration as Samyaza, using his most trusted minions. For Samael assumes a role in the shadows reminiscent of his mother described in the Book of Job.

Job 1:6-7

English Standard Version

‘Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. The Lord said to Satan, “From where have you come?” Satan answered the Lord and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.”

Notice, Satan slips in with the angelic sons of God… ‘and Satan also came in among them.’ These three words, and, also, among, all allude to either a. Satan’s possible reluctance at having to report in; b. contentment to be in the shadows and waiting for the Lord to speak first; or c. they belie Asherah’s feminine agenda, where often, women like to make a grand entrance and to be seen.

Revelation 13:1-9

English Standard Version

13 ‘And I saw a beast rising out of the sea… And to it the dragon gave his [G846 – autos: ‘the same’] power and his throne and great authority. 3 One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed, and the whole earth marveled as they followed the beast. 4 And they worshiped the dragon, for [it] had given [it’s] authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?” 5 And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. 

7 Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain. 9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear…’

As an important aside, the Greek word used throughout the passage for the pronoun he, is an assumption. In verse two for example, it would be more accurately translated as ‘the dragon gave the same power’. Autos means: ‘himself, herself, themselves, itself, he, she, it’ and of course, ‘the same’. The King James version has a bias in using him 1,952 times, her 242 times and same 80 times, depending on context. Though as we shall discover in the next chapter, the context is not always clear and has to be deduced from other related passages. In this instance the profound permutation, is that the Dragon who reigns over the evil realm of angelic beings was once the Queen of Heaven.

If the mysterious first Beast, who is given power by the Dragon is her son, then many pieces of the biblical end time prophecy puzzle would become startlingly clear. Notice the similarity of complete control over humanity in the vein of Azazel who originally corrupted the whole pre-flood world. Also mirrored, are Nimrod’s early attempts at one-world-government in the post-flood age. 

In the Apocalypse of Abraham, in Chapter 23:7, Azazel is described as having seven heads, fourteen faces and ‘hands and feet like a man’s [and] on his back six wings on the right and six on the left.’ Twelve wings or six pairs. The Bible describes a being with six wings as a Seraph, which literally means a ‘flying fiery serpent’ or simply, a dragon. We will investigate the order of the Seraphim further.

A key aspect of the delusion sent from the Lawless One, is receiving its mark.

Revelation 13:16-18

English Standard Version

16 ‘Also it [the second beast] causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, 17 so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast [G2342 – therion: wild, savage, ferocious and venomous] or the number of its name. 18 This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man [G444 – anthropos: man-faced, male sex, body and soul], and his number is 666.’

There is considerable speculation and conjecture on what the mark is and what the number means. The two main clues are that one, the mark is restrictive in that without it, functioning in society will either be difficult or impossible. A ‘cashless’ society, replaced with a digital, micro-chipped currency would make orthodox purchasing impossible, for those without the mark. The second, is that the mark is also the name of the beast. The name in turn has a number. The beast is described like a serpent, yet also as a ‘man’. The Beast is suspiciously like a fallen Seraph that has incarnated as a human. The mark then, may be a transformation of a similar kind, though in reverse – refer articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

The mark is presumably not visible or unsightly, but under the skin or even not just inside the body, but within and part of a human being. The beginning of bar-codes on consumer products was popular in conspiracy circles; and so being encoded in some way is probably accurate. The hand and forehead are symbolic of our humanity and what separates us from other mammals and animals. That is, our possession of a thumb and ability to hold, control and build; as well as the reasoning powers of intellect situated in our frontal lobe. 

A controlling manipulation of human DNA to alter Homo sapiens sapiens to something new, Homo novus, or engineered, Homo machinus is not so far fetched – article: The Great Reset & the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The agenda in the antediluvian era was to thwart the Creator’s original plan for mankind. It has remained the unseen program of His adversaries and will accelerate again ‘as in the days of Noah’ in the latter days – Article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are

Interestingly, the Carbon-12 atom in humans – one of five elements in our DNA – is composed of six protons, six electrons and six neutrons. The book of Revelation says 666 is a number of a man; yet the Word (Christ) is called the Son of Man as the false Prophet is called the Man of Lawlessness. Yet both are spiritual creatures and not fully human – only in form. The number belongs to the second Beast and its mark could be a form of corruption of what makes us human albeit with a spiritual origin and design.

An unknown internet source states – emphasis & bold mine: 

“Carbon-12 is the most abundant of the two stable isotopes of the element carbon, accounting for 98.89% of carbon. Its abundance is due to the Triple-alpha process… by which it is created in stars, and as Carl Sagan… said, “we’re made of star stuff.” The English name carbon, comes from the Latin carbo for coal and charcoal, whence also comes the French charbon, meaning charcoal… in the bible… Isaiah 6:6 – “Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar.” The name Seraphim meaning “the burning ones”, are the first hierarchy of angels…

The Latin word corresponding to Greek Phosphorus is “Lucifer.” Phosphorus (Greek Phosphoros), a name meaning “Light-Bringer…” When combined with oxygen and hydrogen, carbon can form many groups of important biological compounds, including sugars, lignans, chitins, alcohols, fats, aromatic esters, carotenoids and terpenes. With nitrogen it forms alkaloids, and with the addition of sulfur it also forms antibiotics, amino acids, and rubber products. With the addition of phosphorus to these other elements, it forms DNA and RNA, the chemical-code carriers of life, and adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the most important energy-transfer molecule in all living cells.

Nucleotides are biological molecules that form the building blocks of nucleic acids (DNA and RNA). Each nucleotide has three components: a phosphate group, a five-carbon sugar, and a nitrogen-containing base. The phosphate groups and the sugars form the backbone of each strand of DNA or RNA. The phosphate is a component of DNA, RNA, ATP, and also the phospholipids that form all cell membranes. Phosphorus (Lucifer) is just the ‘spark’ in our DNA that makes us fire. When the 666 of Carbon is combined with the elements above and mixed with Lucifer… Phosp-Horus, we get a combination or reaction of chemical elements that forms DNA and RNA. 

This magical god given chemical-code carrier is the very code for all life, and of course, it is the number of a man; his number is 6 neutrons, 6 protons, and 6 electrons, Six hundred threescore and six (666). Various chemical elements when combined with Carbon, forms our very material reality, or what some may call, the Matrix. The number 666 may be the sequence of DNA genetic signals or DNA fragments necessary for successful cloning. Man was created on the sixth day. The number 6 represents man and is not a perfect number [Article: 33]. Therefor 666 is “man’s” number, and stops short of the perfect number seven.”

The number six has historically been assigned to man and it was Homo neanderthalensis that was created on the Sixth Day or epoch, as re-counted in Genesis chapter one. Genesis chapter two, runs a parallel account of creation which reveals Adam and Eve, Homo sapiens or Cro-Magnon man, were created on the Eighth Day – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Manly P Hall:

“We are the gods of the atoms that make up ourselves, but we are also the atoms of the gods that make up the universe.”

Computer chips are being implanted in humans. They are for recording and filing data more than anything else, as well as the novel switching on and off of electronic items. Any kind of genetic manipulation would probably come in the form of an injection, or a pill. The covid 19 event is suspiciously the type of scenario, whereby additives in a vaccine could be administered unsuspectingly to a very wide audience – refer article: Covid 19 Injection

A means to reduce the world’s population by sterilisation, is an example of a covert inoculation agenda. Ultimately, a compound that alters our DNA, may be highly attractive in the short term, if it were to extend our lives or open up psychic abilities. Though not in the long term, if it changes our genetic make-up, making us less than human; transforming into a hybrid that affects our spiritual future and eternal salvation. For further information on the mark, please refer to Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and the article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

Man is more than just a body which acts as a vehicle for the soul, that animates it. There is a spirit in man which the Creator has imparted to humanity. We read about the Holy Spirit which emanates from the Ancient of Days; that is, His divine essence and creative force in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla – also article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. His spirit is the source of the spirit in man – refer article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?

The above quote alludes to Lucifer – real name, Samael (the Serpent of Eden) – as the spiritual spark in our DNA. Regardless, the physical manifestation of the spirit which imparts life and acts as an ignition in keeping us all alive; is represented by the flow of electrical current though the circuitry of the body’s nervous system, which fires the brain’s capacity for controlling our metabolism and indirectly the lungs continuously breathing in oxygen and our hearts perpetually pumping oxygenated blood through a network of arteries.

1 Thessalonians 5:23

English Standard Version

‘Now may… God… himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit [G4151 – pneuma: of the wind, breath, human spirit, ‘the vital principal by which the body is animated’ and ‘the power by which [a] human being feels, thinks, decides’] and soul  [G5590 – psuche: ‘the soul as an essence differs from the body’, a living being, that in which there is life] and body [G4983 – soma: a living body or dead corpse of a man or animal] be kept blameless…’

The three components of a human being and until science acknowledges this fundamental understanding of our composition and the laws governing our combined physical and spiritual attributes; their endeavours to fully understand the human mind will forever be limited.

Job 32:8

English Standard Version

‘But it is the spirit in man, the breath of the Almighty, that makes him understand.’

The spirit in man empowers our mind to be more advanced than animal life; to think, to reason, to plan, to question and to formulate answers.

Ecclesiastes 12:7

English Standard Version

and the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.’

As the spirit in man is given by the Creator from conception, it returns to Him upon death. Our body decomposes; our soul dissipates; and our spirit – what makes us, us – is kept by the Creator in a state of sleep, until the appointed time.

Job 14:14

New Century Version

‘Will the dead live again? All my days are a struggle; I will wait until my change [relief] comes.’

1 Corinthians 15:35-49

English Standard Version

35 ‘But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 36 You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40 There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars [angels]; for star differs from star in glory.

42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural [physical like an animal] body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam [Christ] became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image [likeness] of the man of heaven.’

Paul speaks in verses 38-39, of the difference between fish, birds, animals and humans. Each genetic make up for each kind is unique. One did not evolve from the other as in macro-evolution – Article: Designated Design or Chance Chaos? Again, until scientists admit the existence of a spiritual realm and its dimensions being the source of the physical world, they will repeatedly fall short in comprehending the true nature of the universe, our galaxy, our solar system, our Earth and ourselves.

Verse 41 is speaking of heavenly hosts and the stars are types of angels. The angels differ in their roles, responsibilities, gifts and abilities. Verse 44 highlights the change that Job was seeking. To be fully spirit and leave the physical order behind forever. Verse 47 shows the Son of Man is a man from heaven. Hence the number of the Beast is in reference to itself and not mankind specifically, though undoubtedly it will impinge on humanity and thus the dire warning not to believe in the lie of the Man of Sin (his mystery of iniquity) – no matter what is promised.

Ecclesiastes 3:18-21

English Standard Version

18 ‘I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. 19 For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. 20 All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return. 21 Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth?’

Humans are similar to animals, in that they are both physical flesh and die. The difference being – apart from being different kinds or kingdoms – is the fact that animals live once and the plan for them ends there. Their spirit returns to the Creator, though it is described as going down to the earth to show its end. The spirit in man goes upward, to reveal that people will live again.

1 Corinthians 2:14

English Standard Version

‘The natural person [unbeliever] does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly [foolish, simple] to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.’ 

There is a an animal spirit, a spirit in man, an angelic spirit and the prime spirit these three have been born from, the Holy Spirit of the Ancient of Days. Following on from I Corinthians 15, it is difficult for a person to comprehend the matrix of our pseudo-reality beyond a certain point if they do not acknowledge that it is an image; a simulation, an advanced computer program which has been deliberately designed. Engineered by spirit beings – dark, fallen angels, including the Watchers – who do not have our welfare at heart and use the physical world to keep humanity captive and imprisoned. 

Revelation 13:11-15

English Standard Version

11 ‘Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon [seraphim]. 12 It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. 13 It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, 14 and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15 And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.’

The second beast is linked with the first, in that they receive their power from the Dragon. Their status as human is seriously in doubt and only the Son of Man is referred to as the Lamb, thus this beast has a religious role – as a false prophet – in deceiving the world that it is their saviour allied with the first Beast. 

Matthew 7:15

English Standard Version

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.”

2 Corinthians 11:13-15

English Standard Version

13 ‘For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises [them self] as an angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if [its] servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.’

Matthew 24:9-14

English Standard Version

9 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. 12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”

2 Timothy 3:1-8

English Standard Version

‘But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. 2 For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, 4 treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people… always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith [Article: Thoth].’

2 Timothy 3:12-15

English Standard Version

12 ‘Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13 while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.’

Some scholars propose the two horns symbolise two unified religions in the Beast’s control – Catholicism and Protestantism? Christianity and Islam? The False Prophet would hold more credibility if it was not associated with any religion. The False Prophet is more likely to form a syncretism of beliefs or to not uphold any religion including Hinduism and Buddhism, teaching an entirely new way. The one exception, could be Judaism – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Whatever the outcome, the feet of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue are partly of iron and partly of clay; only melding together for a brief time. A short time being the final seven year period, cut in two parts by the Abomination of Desolation, with the final three and one half years fulfilling the great Tribulation and the time of Jacob’s Trouble. 

Remember too, it is the second Beast – not the first – that instigates the mark of the first Beast and with it, the ability to subsist or not. The second Beast also mysteriously creates an image of the first Beast, somehow giving it life or reality in this realm. The image is an icon or idol of some kind; a physical representation of the powerful angelic spirit that is the Beast.

End Time Headlines, Ricky Scaparo: 

‘After this “Image” has been created, this False Prophet will somehow through supernatural demonic power actually be able to cause this image to have breath. What’s very interesting here is the word “breath” used is a word that means breath or life. It has the same connotation found in the Book of Genesis when God created Adam from the dust of the ground and “breathed” life into his nostrils and he became a living being. Satan will perform a counterfeit miracle as God did with the first man Adam by breathing life into him. The Bible tells us that this image will be able to speak and actually cause civilization to worship the Antichrist. If they refuse they will be killed according to the scripture.’

Revelation 17:3-8

English Standard Version

3 ‘And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names… 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality. 5 And on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations”.’

We are introduced to a Woman in addition to the two Beasts of Revelation chapter thirteen. We will investigate the identity of this Woman in the following chapter. Verse seven reveals that the woman is actually sitting astride the first Beast – with seven heads and ten horns – Revelation 13:1. 

Like the sealing of the 144,000 saints with the Holy Spirit on their foreheads and the mark of the Beast, on the rest of the world’s foreheads (Revelation 7:3; 9:4; 13:16), the woman also has on her forehead, a mystery name written – Article: Thoth. Her name is Babylon the Great which is central to the mystery of lawlessness and the Man of Lawlessness discussed in Second Thessalonians 2:3, 7; who is described as the son of destruction or perdition. Perdition means: ‘a state of final spiritual ruin; loss of the soul, damnation, utter destruction or ruin.’ We have surmised that the man of lawlessness is the False Prophet, though the use of the term, son of destruction (or perdition) is remarkably similar to the same term used in verse eight of Revelation chapter seventeen, in reference to the Beast.

6 ‘And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her, I marveled greatly. 7 But the angel said to me, “Why do you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her. 8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction… 18 And the woman that you saw is the great city that has dominion over the kings of the earth.”’

Notice Babylon is in reference to a system not a city; an ancient system going all the way back to Nimrod and beyond to Cain. The great city in verse eighteen, is not the city of Babylon or its fulfilment today in the Vatican in Rome as some assume – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. It equates to the city of Jerusalem in the state of Israel today – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. A woman in scripture can signify true believers as in the Body of Christ and here in this context, as the false church of a Queen of Heaven or the Mother of a god, who has arisen to deceive humanity – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

The female entity described in these verses is part of the deception of 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12. She will be consequently accepted, as humanity is indoctrinated by the False Prophet, working in tandem with herself and the Beast. The Beast is cryptically referred to as being in the past but not the present, yet will again in the future. There is a being who was – in the antediluvian age – then, through rebellion and being placed in restraint – 2 Peter 2:4, Jude 1:6 is not… though is about to rise from its place of restraint, a spiritual abyss or pit. 

It is worth noting that the the original disciple Judas Iscariot who forfeited a position as an apostle by betraying the Son of Man is the only other person to be called a son of perdition – John 17:12. As with the Beast, Satan took a personal interest in Judas, to ensure the job was done – Luke 22:3, John 6:70, Revelation 16:13. Curiously, when the apostles were choosing between two men for a replacement for Judas, they said: “… to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place” – Acts 1:25, ESV. His own place being utter destruction, the same fate that will befall the Dragon, the Beast and the False Prophet – Revelation 20:10.

The constant reader will recognise the consistent and frequent image of the Bull and its significance in Baal worship. In the next chapter, we will study the shocking identity of Baal’s consort – her origin, her identity and her role.

Revelation 9:11

English Standard Version

‘They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit [G12 – abussos: unbounded]. His name in Hebrew is Abaddon [G3 – abaddon: destruction, ruin, destroying angel], and in Greek he is called Apollyon [G623 – apollyon: the destroyer, the angel of the bottomless pit].’

The name Apollyon is interesting, for like Abaddon meaning destruction, it means destroyer and it is this that researchers concentrate on, though we will focus on the first part of the name.

Etymology Dictionary: ‘destroying angel of the bottomless pit… from present participle of Greek apollyein “to destroy utterly” (from apo “from, away from” + olluein “to destroy”); a translation of Hebrew Abaddon before vowels ap-, word-forming element meaning “of, from, away from; separate, apart from, free from,” from Greek apo “from, away from; after; in descent from,” in compounds, “asunder, off; finishing, completing; back again,” of time, “after,” of origin, “sprung from, descended from; because of,” from… root apo-off, away“…’

The significance of being separated and away from, is revealed in the name of a certain being that fits the criteria of being a. who is actually named in the Bible, b. is part of the rebellious Watcher angels which came to Earth prior to the flood, c. with those angels chained and placed in restraint in the abyss and d. waiting to be released from the pit and arising from the abyss… synonymous with both the appearing of Apollyon and the Beast – Revelation 9:1-2; 13:1.

Apollyon: Angel of the Void

An abyss by definition is a very ‘deep hole’ – refer article: Belphegor. Invariably, an abyss is associated with the sea for it is the earth’s oceans that yield the deepest depths. The Beast rises from the sea… yet allegorically, the sea can be symbolic of the vast expanse of space.

The Greek word for pit is translated in the Bible variously as ‘bottomless, deep’ an ‘abyss’ and one version has ‘eternal darkness.’ It also means, ‘the immeasurable depth’ and ‘of Orcus, a very deep gulf or chasm in the lowest parts of the earth as the common receptacle of the dead and especially as the abode of the demons.’ Orcus is both the god of Hades, the underworld and also a ‘plutino, a trans-Neptunian object that is locked in a 2:3 resonance with the ice giant Neptune, making two revolutions around the Sun to every three of Neptune’s.’ The bottomless pit is tantamount to a prison and not a place that spirit entities desire to dwell.

Luke 8:27-31

Amplified Bible

27 ‘Now when Jesus stepped out on land, He was met by a man from the city (of Gerasa) who was possessed with demons. For a long time he had worn no clothes, and was not living in a house, but among the tombs. 28 Seeing Jesus, he cried out (with a terrible voice from the depths of his throat) and fell down before Him (in dread and terror), and shouted loudly, “What business do we have (in common) with each other, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me (before the appointed time of judgment)!’ – Matthew 25:41.

29 ‘Now He was (already) commanding the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For it had seized him (violently) many times; and he was kept under guard and bound with chains and shackles, but he would break the bonds and be driven by the demon into the desert. 30 Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, “Legion”; because many demons had entered him. 31 They continually begged Him not to command them to go into the abyss.’

A Roman legion in the days of the republic consisted of 3,000 soldiers, or infantrymen. By the time of the Roman Empire during the life of Christ, a legion of men according to Alex Mann, comprised specifically, 5,120 troops and officers with 128 cavalry.

There is compelling reason to believe, that Apollyon and Azazel are the same being. For the terms Abaddon and Apollyon are actually descriptive names, whereas Azazel is his personal name. As the Ancient Serpent; the Great Red Dragon; and Leviathan; are descriptions of the entity Asherah. Similarly, Wisdom and Satan are not her names but rather titles for the Queen of Heaven. Likewise, Heylel in Hebrew and Lucifer in Latin are descriptions of the being with titles such as, Ba’al and Beelzebub – correctly meaning ‘Lord of the Fliers’, or ‘Lord of those who Fly’ – for the former archangel named Samael.

The Son of Man; the Lamb; Christ; the Messiah; and the Word are but titles or descriptive names for the Son of God, whose real name is Immanuel – with Jesus, Joshua or more correctly Yeshua, being his temporary earthly name. 

Azazel ‘the peacock angel’ and his comrade fallen angels departed Heaven with the intent of destruction and destroying mankind; while also desiring to dwell on earth and partake of forbidden earthly pleasures. They were bound here to earth, as punishment. Abaddon is mentioned six times in the Bible, linked to sheol or hell, though sheol means hell as in this earth, beneath Heaven – not a fiery hellfire, or hades. Abaddon’s true identity as Azazel, as discussed in the Book of Leviticus.

Leviticus 16:8-10

English Standard Version

8 ‘And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. 9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, 10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel [H5799 – aza’zel: goat of departure, entire removal, scapegoat].’

Azazel: Angel of Sacrifices

Azazel means: ‘Strong [strength, rugged] of God’, ‘the strong god’, ‘god of victory’, ‘the goat god’ and ‘she-goat to go away [of going away]’, ‘remove completely.’ Notice the uncanny similarity with the name Apollyon, in going away [departure] and separated [removal]. The term scapegoat is unfortunately the one teachers and preachers focus on and use, particularly with regard to the Day of Atonement. It is the least accurate and gives the connotation that Azazel is an innocent victim, whereas he is a guilty perpetrator. 

Michael Howard: ‘Azazel was popularly believed to have a retinue of hairy he-goat demons known as the se’irim who, like the Watchers, lusted after human women. It cannot be a total coincidence that the Church imagined the Devil or Satan in the form of a hairy half-human he-goat with a massive erect phallus who had sexual intercourse with his female worshippers at the Witches Sabbath.’

Baphomet – the Goat of Mendes

Book of Enoch 10:4-8

4. ‘And again the Lord said to Raphael [an Archangel]: “Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert [refer article: Belphegor]… and cover his face that he may not see light. 6. And on the day of the great judgment he [the Beast] shall be cast into the fire.

And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. 8. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin“.’

A heavy accusation is levelled against Azazel in being responsible for the corrupting of mankind’s path and ascribing to him all sin. It makes sense why Azazel represents one of the goats on Atonement. The other goat pictures Christ taking on all the sin caused by Azazel and dying as the sin offering. Azazel meanwhile, though bound and in the spiritual wilderness of the abyss, lives to await his reprisal role as the Beast; to then later be put to death with the Dragon and the False Prophet. 

Revelation 20:10

English Standard Version

‘… and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.’

Book of Enoch 13:1-2

1. ‘And Enoch went and said: “Azazel, thou shalt have no peace: a severe sentence has gone forth against thee to put thee in bonds: 2. And thou shalt not have toleration nor request granted to thee, because of the unrighteousness which thou hast taught, and because of all the works of godlessness and unrighteousness and sin which thou hast shown to men”.’

The fallen dark Angels left their first estate in the heavenly realm and have been bound in restraint in lower dimensions, within the Earth. All three beings, the Dragon, the Beast and the False Prophet will be cast into an electrical firestorm. As the dragon, the Devil and the Serpent of old; and the Beast, Azazel a fallen Seraphim angel; are wholly supernatural, it logically follows that the False Prophet, while the most human of the three, cannot be fully human and must be angelic or Nephilim at the very least. 

Some scholars have conjectured that the antichrist and first Beast, derives from either Esau and the Edomites or from the tribe of Dan, the fifth son of Jacob. A third option not considered until now, is a link with Assyria and the King of the North. The fourth option of a supernatural entity is almost completely overlooked; negating all three options; unless of course for those few who believe a reincarnated Nimrod is the antichrist. For in a bizarre accidental twist, this would then fulfil the third option presented. Azazel as the Beast, rules the first three scenarios out of consideration; yet Nimrod as the False Prophet remains in contention, not only as one of the three entities who comprise an unholy Trinity of Evil in the very latter days, but as a plausible link with Assyria, as a descendant of Kish, and (son) of Asshur.

Digging Deep into the Revelation of Jesus Christ, page 114 – quoted by Michael Copple, emphasis mine:

‘[Revelation] Chapter 13 introduces us to how Satan (the dragon) blasphemously sets up its own false trinity. Satan acts as the Father, the Antichrist as the Son, and the False Prophet as the Spirit who attempts to bring glory to the Antichrist. Satan appoints two great beasts… the first beast rising up out of the sea – the Antichrist and his empire – and the second beast out of the earth or land – the False Prophet…’

Scholars debate whether the Beast and False Prophet are governmental systems or two individual men. The answer is neither – they are a fallen Angel and a Nephilim who are in league with Satan – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. This is why the deception is so grand, the evil so wicked, the stakes so high.

Revelation 19:20

English Standard Version

‘And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur.’

Revelation 16:13-14

English Standard Version

‘And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs. For they are demonic spirits, performing signs, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty.’

Revelation 16:13-14 reveals the spiritual composition of the Dragon, Beast and False Prophet. To call any of them human men is way off the mark.

Exodus 8:1-3

English Standard Version

‘Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord, “Let my people go, that they may serve me. 2 But if you refuse to let them go, behold, I will plague all your country with frogs. 3 The Nile shall swarm with frogs that shall come up into your house and into your bedroom and on your bed and into the houses of your servants and your people, and into your ovens and your kneading bowls”.’

Most readers will be familiar with the images of Grey Aliens. What stands out is a. their remarkable mentally hive like resemblance to insects such as ants and bees; b. their physical similarity in appearance to amphibious tadpoles, with bulging eyes and under-developed foetus-like bodies; as well as c. their clinical, indifferent reptilian nature. Biblical researcher Gary Wayne summarises some of the points we have contemplated. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 549-551 – emphasis mine:

‘Abaddon… is the leader of the angels of the Abyss… This will undoubtedly be the destroyer Azazel, who introduced war and violence to the descendants of Cain, and the fallen one who will possess the Antichrist… [who] will be glorified as… Orion… who the Great [Pyramid] and the Sphinx point to and honor [Articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity]. The beast… Osiris the sun god… will permit each person the opportunity to decide what is right and what is wrong in what will be a solemn game of global situational ethics. The inhabitants of the world will be compelled to choose to worship and follow the Antichrist, [the Beast], and their New Age religion or follow the alleged evil God of the Christians, [Jews] and Muslims.

This duty bound choice will be punctuated by the forthcoming galactic war of rebellion to free the inhabitants of earth… The decision to follow the Antichrist and fight for [freedom] will be sealed by the mark of the Beast, a sign of their new covenant and choice. Secret, spurious knowledge… will abound… The world will be vibrating with expectancy as it celebrates these fantastic discoveries… people sharing common consciousness through transcendental meditation [will] create a figurative conduit that is not restricted by the laws of physics; the web/matrix of the life force heals everything, creating world peace… humanity will anticipate ascension into godhood.’

The realisation of Azazel being Apollyon – who in turn is the Beast – was something surmised prior to reading this passage. As Wayne has an abundance of salient arguments in his comprehensive research, it was encouraging to learn an independent investigation ran in tandem with his and was not merely a fanciful digression on this writer’s part.

The rising of the Beast Azazel, the destroying angel Apollyon and its transformation of humanity and the world

Returning to Nimrod and the Tower of Babel.

Genesis 11:1-9 

English Standard Version

‘Now the whole earth had one language [speech] and the same words. 2 And as people migrated from the east, [in the Indus Valley] they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3 And they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.” And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower [H4026 – migdal: pyramidal elevated stage] with its top [H7218 – ro’sh: summit, height of stars, (same word used for Gog the rosh of Meshech and Tubal)] in the heavens [H8064 – shamayim: sky, abode of the stars], and let us make a name [‘memorial, monument’ that is ‘famous’ of ‘glory’ and ‘renown’, like as the ‘ancient heroes’ or Nephilim before the flood] for ourselves, lest we be dispersed [scattered] over the face of the whole earth.”

5 And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. 6 And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.’ 

Genesis 3:22 ESV: ‘Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever…”

7 ‘Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.” 8 So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. 9 Therefore its name was called Babel [confusion – Aramaic Bab-el: ‘the gate of God’], because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth…’

The peoples of the world spoke one language after the Flood. This seems reasonable considering everyone on the earth had sprung from six people and a family of eight. Though the families would have multiplied quickly, we are dealing with possibly millions of people rather than tens of millions. The initial assumption about the tower resembling anything pyramidal was taken as a symbolic ascent towards heaven rather than literally. Yet this may not be the case – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

The mention of stars, a euphemism for angels, inclines towards including a spiritual motivation, task and threat with a physical manifestation. It is worth noting that the Hebrew word for ‘height’ or ‘top’, is the same word used for the highly probable Nephilim descended demagogue (de-magog-ue) Gog, the yet future ruler of China – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. The idea of making a name for themselves as a throwback to the mighty pre-flood Nephilim links the tower of Babel endeavour not only with its mastermind, Nimrod, but also the constellation of Orion and the Great Pyramid of Giza – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.  

What had never been noticed before in reading this passage, is that the people were building the tower so that they could remain as one and not be divided or scattered. If the Lord deemed it necessary to take the steps down ‘on the stairway’ to the Earth, then the threat to His plan, was of an extreme and urgent nature. It does not explicitly say that Nimrod heads this unified project in Genesis chapter eleven; though by putting it in context with the preceding chapter of the Bible and with extra-biblical sources, it is difficult to argue Nimrod was not involved as its leader.

Josephus wrote on the incident – emphasis & bold mine:

“Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was… a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it were through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to reach. 

And that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers. Now the multitude were very ready to follow the determination of Nimrod, and to esteem it a piece of cowardice to submit to God; and they built a tower, neither sparing any pains, nor being in any degree negligent about the work: and, by reason of the multitude of hands employed in it, it grew very high, sooner than any one could expect; but the thickness of it was so great, and it was so strongly built, that thereby its great height seemed, upon the view, to be less than it really was.

It was built of burnt brick, cemented together with mortar, made of bitumen, that it might not be liable to admit water. When God saw that they acted so madly, he did not resolve to destroy them utterly, since they were not grown wiser by the destruction of the former sinners; but he caused a tumult among them, by producing in them diverse languages, and causing that, through the multitude of those languages, they should not be able to understand one another. The place wherein they built the tower is now called Babylon, because of the confusion of that language which they readily understood before…”

As Josephus has shown himself to be an unreliable source (and witness) on numerous occasions, his account may be more interesting in contemplating what he hasn’t said, while ignoring the rest.

An Islamic tradition holds that the original single language was Hebrew and that Eber was allowed to retain it for his descendants as he refused to take part in the building of the Tower – the same Eber who purportedly married Nimrod’s daughter. The confusing of the language created seventy-two languages according to legend. This is remarkably close to the seventy nations in the Genesis Ten table of nations. 

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Book of Jubilees contains one of the most detailed accounts found anywhere of the Tower. And they began to build, and in the fourth week they made brick with fire, and the bricks served them for stone, and the clay with which they cemented them together was asphalt which comes out of the sea, and out of the fountains of water in the land of Shinar. And they built it: forty and three years were they building it; its breadth was 203 bricks, and the height [of a brick] was the third of one; its height amounted to 5433 cubits and 2 palms, and [the extent of one wall was] thirteen stades [and of the other thirty stades]. (Jubilees 10:20-21, Charles’ 1913 translation).

In Pseudo-Philo the direction for the building is ascribed not only to Nimrod, who is made prince of the Hamites but also to Joktan as prince of the Semites, and to Phenech son of Dodanim as prince of the Japhetites.

The phrase “Tower of Babel” does not appear in the Bible; it is always “the city and the tower” or just “the city”. According to the Bible, the city received the name “Babel” from the Hebrew verb (balal), meaning to jumble or to confuse. The Book of Genesis does not mention how tall the tower was. The phrase used to describe the tower, “its top in the sky” (verse 4), was an idiom for impressive height; rather than implying arrogance, this was simply a cliché for height.

The Book of Jubilees mentions the tower’s height as being 5,433 cubits and 2 palms, or 2,484 m (8,150 ft)… or roughly 1.6 miles* high. The Third Apocalypse of Baruch mentions that the ‘tower of strife’ reached a height of 463 cubits, or 211.8 m (695 ft), taller than any structure built in human history until the construction of the Eiffel Tower in 1889, which is 324 m (1,063 ft) in height.’ Taller than the Great Pyramid even which with its original casing stones was 481 feet tall.

To put claims for the Tower of Babel into a modern context, the Burj Khalifa – also known as the Burj Dubai prior to its inauguration in 2010 – is a skyscraper in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. It is the world’s tallest building; with a total height of 829.8 metres (2,722 feet – just over half a mile tall) and a roof height – excluding its antenna, though including a 242.6 meter spire – of 828 m (2,717 feet). 

The Jeddah Tower – formerly known as the Kingdom Tower – has been under construction since 2013 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; though currently stalled, it is designed to reach an incredible 1,000 m (3,281 feet). As the world’s proposed first 1 km plus building, it would soar 170 metres (550 feet) taller than the Burj Khalifa. Even so, this is well short of the purported Tower of Babel’s height in the Book of Jubilees. 

‘In his book, Structures: Or Why Things Don’t Fall Down (Pelican 1978-1984), Professor J. E. Gordon considers the height of the Tower of Babel. He wrote, “brick and stone weigh about 120 lb per cubic foot (2,000 kg per cubic metre) and the crushing strength of these materials is generally rather better than 6,000 lbs per square inch or 40 mega-pascals. Elementary arithmetic shows that a tower with parallel walls could have been built to a height of 2.1 km (1.3 miles)* before the bricks at the bottom were crushed. However, by making the walls taper towards the top they… could well have been built to a height where the men of Shinnar would run short of oxygen and had difficulty in breathing before the brick walls crushed beneath their own dead weight”.’

Alan Alford comments further – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Whilst the term “Gods” is full of awkward connotations for us, the Sumerians did not suffer from such problems, and referred to them as the AN.UNNA.KI, literally meaning, “Those Who from Heaven to Earth Came”. They also described them pictographically as DIN.GIR. What does the term DIN.GIR mean? The pictographic sign for GIR is commonly understood to mean a sharp-edged object, but an insight into its true significance can be gleaned from the sign for KA.GIR which appears to show the aerodynamically-shaped GIR inside a shaft-like underground chamber. The sign for the first syllable DTN makes little sense until it is combined with GIR to form DIN.GIR. 

The two syllables when written together, make a perfect fit, representing, in Sitchin’s words: “…a picture of a rocket-propelled spaceship, with a landing craft docked into it perfectly – just as the lunar module was docked with Apollo 11.” 

As with the Apollo [linked with Apollyon; the Sun^ god; Orion; and Nimrod] rockets, three sections can be seen in the pictographic sign DIN.GIR the lowest stage propulsion unit with the main thrust engines, the middle stage containing supplies and equipment and the upper stage command module. The full meaning of DIN.GIR, usually translated “Gods”, is conveyed more fully by Sitchin’s translation as “The Righteous Ones of the Blazing Rockets”. (The name Sumer was literally written as KI.EN.GTR, meaning “the Land of the Lords of the Rockets”, but it also had the connotation “Land of the Watchers”, the latter term virtually identical to the term neter by which the Egyptians referred to their Gods). 

Zecharia Sitchin’s study also identified a second, different type of aerial vehicle. Whilst the GIR appeared to describe the rocket-like craft required for journeys beyond Earth’s atmosphere, another vehicle known as a MU was used to fly within the Earth’s skies. Sitchin pointed out that the original term shu-mu, meaning “that which is a MU”, later became known in the Semitic language as shem (and its variant sham). Drawing on the earlier work of G. Redslob, he pointed out that the terms shem and shamaim (the latter meaning “heaven”) both stemmed from the root word shamah, meaning “that which is highward”. Because the term shem also had the connotation “that by which one is remembered”, it came to be translated as “name”. 

Thus an unchallenged translation of an inscription on Gudea’s temple reads “its name shall fill the lands”, whereas it ought to read more literally as “its MU shall hug the lands from horizon to horizon”. Sensing that shem or MU might represent an object, some scholars have left the word untranslated. The Bible, too, has translated the term shem as “name” and thus disguised the original meaning of the text. A particularly important example of this, as highlighted by Zecharia Sitchin, is the Biblical story of the Tower of Babel.

If we substitute the literal meaning of shem as “sky vehicle”, the unintelligible tale in Genesis (the significance of which has always puzzled scholars) begins to take on a new meaning: Then they said, “Come let us build ourselves a city with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a sky vehicle and not be scattered over the face of the whole Earth.”

‘A classic example [of mistranslation] is the confusion which has arisen concerning the worship of a Sun God, both in ancient Egypt and the Near East. According to Greek legend, Hellos was a Sun God who traversed the skies in a chariot [sky vehicle, rocket]. The Greeks renamed the sacred Egyptian city of Leopolis in his honour, as Heliopolis – the “City of Hellos” – Article: Thoth. ‘In the Near East, the same name Heliopolis was given by the Greeks to the city of Baalbek’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim

Recall we discussed the Sun^ god whilst studying the Philistines and the Minoans – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Alford: ‘Historians dismiss the ancient belief in these two sacred sites as a primitive form of Hellos/Sun worship. However, let us take a closer look at where the legend of Hellos the Sun God came from. Both Heliopolises were important sites for the Gods… and both were associated with a God known to the Akkadians as Shamash. Sumerian texts called him UTU, a God who controlled the sites of the shems and the “eagles”. The name Shamash, when spelled Shem-esh, literally means “shemfire” and is thus often translated as “He Who is Bright as the Sun”. The Sumerian name UTU indeed meant “the Shining One“, whilst Mesopotamian texts described Utu/Shamash as rising and traversing the skies. It is not difficult to see how the accounts of these journeys could subsequently be misconstrued as the daily movement of the Sun!’

Further to the veneration of the Sun, is the importance of the first day of the month of May. “It was May 1st when the ancient druids honored their great Sun God and Goddess with an uninhibited festival complete with initiations, sex orgies, drunken revelry, and human sacrifice. Aleister Crowley… taught that the Great Work (is) the ‘transformation of humanity’… we are told that the Great Work ‘may only be begun in the spring, under the signs of Aries, Taurus [May 1st], and Gemini [Article: Thoth]…” (Marrs, page 230)’ – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

At this point we do not know exactly what the tower constituted, though it was serious enough for the Creator to stop the endeavour in its tracks. As the Creator said nothing would be withheld from humanity, it must be presumed that the structure was linked to mankind gaining access to what had been denied to them in Eden. Was it a portal entrance and star-gate route to heaven and immortality, as well as a safe guard against another catastrophic Flood?

Are the pyramids a replica in some way of the original tower, or perhaps more correctly, a precursor of the tower. The great Pyramid of Giza, has an internal mechanism no one has been able to definitively explain. Some scholars have concluded the tower was more than just an extremely tall building; rather, a portal or doorway between dimensions, a gateway in accessing spiritual realms.

Observe how the Great Pyramid once looked – gleaming white, with possibly a diamond encrusted or probably, a gold apex (Article: The Ark of God) – and how the Second Pyramid looks today after its pristine white limestone casing has been stolen over the millennia. 

In light of this, William Henry presents a case for a link between the Tower of Babel and ancient Egypt.

Ancient Code – capitalisation theirs: ‘The Great Temple of Seti I at Abydos in the Osiris sanctuary contains many fascinating relief carvings on the walls, still rich in color today. The temple is dedicated to six major gods – Osiris, Isis, Horus, Amun-Ra, Ra-Horakhty and Ptah, and also to Seti I himself. The Osiris sanctuary is dedicated to this god of the underworld and his son Horus god of the sky. Osiris is often depicted with greenish skin, an elongated head, and partially mummy-wrapped legs.

At this temple, we find a depiction considered of importance… The relief carving shows an extraordinary object that some say represents unknown technology. It’s called the Osiris Device or Osiris Stargate Device by William Henry, investigative mythologist.’

‘Henry made a connection between the Osiris Device and the Tower of Babel from biblical accounts.

“… THE SUMERIAN KING NIMROD BUILT A LADDER (SYMBOLIZED BY AN H) OR TOWER (ACTUALLY A GATE) THAT REACHED FROM BABYLON INTO THE STARS. THE JEALOUS ISRAELITE GOD YAHWEH GOT NERVOUS ABOUT HUMANKIND ‘MAKING A NAME OR RENOWN’ FOR ITSELF BY BUILDING THIS GATE. IF SUCCESSFUL, SAYS THE BOOK OF GENESIS, “NOTHING WE CAN IMAGINE WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR US…”

BIBLICAL SCHOLARS SAY NIMROD WAS KNOWN AS OSIRIS, THE EGYPTIAN GOD OF RESURRECTION, IN EGYPT. BOTH ARE ASSOCIATED WITH LADDERS OR STAIRWAYS TO HEAVEN. THIS IS KEY. INSIDE SETY’S 14TH CENTURY B.C. TEMPLE AT ABYDOS, IN THE OSIRIS CHAPEL, IS THE MAGNIFICENT DEPICTION OF OSIRIS AS A PILLAR OR TOWER. IN FACT, THE EGYPTIANS CALLED THIS OSIRIS PILLAR THE TA-WER OR ‘BOND BETWEEN HEAVEN AND EARTH’. SOUNDS LIKE BABEL TO ME.”

‘Then the researcher looked at a similar depiction on the opposite wall of the Osiris sanctuary. He suggests that the shape of the ship reminded him of the shape of a wormhole in space, and that the Osiris device had been transformed into the figure of Seti.’

“ON THE OPPOSITE WALL OF THE OSIRIS CHAPEL AT ABYDOS IS THE OSIRIS DEVICE, ENHANCED, I NOTICED, WITH THE SHIP OF ETERNITY UPON WHICH THE KING WILL SAIL INTO ETERNITY AS A STAR. THIS SHIP RESEMBLES A MODERN DRAWING OF A WORMHOLE. PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO SETY WHO APPEARS TO HAVE TRANSFORMED HIS BODY INTO THE OSIRIS DEVICE… OR IS COMING OUT OF IT. THIS IS A WONDERFUL MOMENT OF TRANSFORMATION AND RESURRECTION…”

‘If there is a connection with Osiris, the Sumerian king Nimrod, and the story of the Tower of Babel, could this attempt to create “a stairway to heaven” be the motive for the biblical destruction of the tower, or this technology? The Anubis shrine found in King Tut’s tomb could be a physical representation of the Osiris device, which is similar in appearance to the Ark of the Covenant of the Bible’ – refer article: The Ark of God; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

The tower of Babel incident occurred between circa 6755 and 6232 BCE, some 4,000 years after the flood and well before the birth of Abraham in 1977 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. 

Genesis 10:25

English Standard Version

‘To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brother’s name was Joktan.

The time of Peleg – born circa 7727 and who lived until 4737 BCE – included the tower of Babel and the subsequent changing of one language to many, with the dispersal of the multitude of peoples and races descended from Japheth, Ham and a proportion of Shem. This then had an impact on humanities gene pool in assisting the diversity produced through Noah’s sixteen grandsons to continue diversification and not blend as it would have, if all nations had remained in the Near east and Middle east.

Unknown source – emphasis & bold mine:

‘This actually happened at Babel [as the] imposition of separate languages created instant barriers. Not only would people tend not to marry someone they couldn’t understand, but groups that spoke the same language would have difficulty relating… and trusting those that did not. Thus, they would move away from each other, into different environments. 

The dispersion at Babel broke up a large interbreeding group into small inbreeding groups. The resultant groups would have different mixes of genes for various physical features. By itself, this dispersion would ensure, in a short time, that there would be certain fixed differences in some of these groups, commonly called races.’ In addition, the selection pressure off the environment would modify the existing combinations of genes so that the physical characteristics of each group would tend to suit their environment. 

There has been no simple-to-complex evolution of any genes, for the genes were present already. The dominant features of the various people groups result from different combinations of previously existing created genes, plus some minor degenerative changes, resulting from mutation (accidental changes which can be inherited). The originally created (genetic) information has been either reshuffled or has degenerated.’ 

Scientists present dates for the major expansions of key paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups which amazingly parallel the birth of Noah in 16,837 BCE, the birth of his three sons about 11,837 BCE and would you credit it, the time of the diffusion of the ethnic races during the time of Peleg and the tower of Babel, circa 6755 BCE.

Different traditions state either Shem, Abraham or Esau may have murdered Nimrod. An unconventional chronology would dictate that Abraham and Esau both lived too late, but Shem died some time after the Tower of Babel incident and would fit a chronology of two men who were living great lengths of time. Shem, because he was from the antediluvian age and Nimrod because of his Nephilim birth. 

Nimrod was born anywhere between 9,000 to 8,000 BCE, presuming his father Kish was Asshur’s son. If he died during the tower of Babel incident circa 6755 BCE, he would have been approximately 2,000 years old. Shem who had been born a thousand years prior to the flood, did not live the phenomenal amount of time his father Noah had, though it was still a staggering 6,120 years, with his death circa 5717 BCE.

Nimrod is linked to the following names and identities: Gilgamesh and Baal as previously discussed, Bacchus, Mithras, Ra, Adonis, Dionysis, the Nephilim related Osiris and Orion and the intriguing association with the Greek god, Apollo. While Nimrod does not fulfil the role of Apollo himself, it is his relationship with Apollo which is significant. For the Angel of the Abyss, Azazel, known as Apollyon is one and the same as the Greek god Apollo; also associated with plague and destruction.

Apollyon, the Greek Destroyer, Venus Satanas, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Apollyon was the same name of the god of the Sun known to the Greeks, known as Apollo or Apollon. The god Apollo acted as the destroyer of evil, but he was also a bringer of doom. He was also known as a god of purification, who was associated with the sun for his ability to be omnipotent.

Apollo was also known as a god of prophecy, as many would bring their sacrifices to him at his temple at Delphi to have their oracle read. The Greeks received oracles from Apollo at Delphi for matters of daily life, and also for military purposes as well. For example, within the poetry of the Iliad, the god Apollo sends a plague of destruction on the Achaians which could only be stopped through prayers and sacrifices to Apollo. The practice of offering sacrifices to Apollo lasted well into the third century, and in some places the cult of Apollo lasted until the 6th century CE.

It was also known that Apollo had a holy day each seventh day of the month. The seventh day of each month is holy to Apollon, and, of course, the same tradition is used in the Christian calendar where the 7th day is named after the sun (Sunday) and is considered holy, and as a day of rest.’

Sunday is in fact the 1st day of the week on the Gregorian calendar, with Saturday equating to the seventh day.

Satanas: ‘In Greek myth, Apollo was the son of Zeus, a sky-god and the Twin of Artemis, goddess of the hunt and of the moon. Just like Artemis, he carried a bow and arrow which he used to cause destruction. As the goddess Athena watched over Apollon at the battle of Troy, she titled Apollon as the Striker From Afar. This is similar to the Biblical John’s writing that tells how Apollyon is from a bottomless pit of destruction. Apollo was known as the twin of Artemis and he had also been referred to as the Striker from Afar (as found in the Hymn to Apollon).

A god is demonized by a new religion as a way to make the public turn from their old ways. When the worship of Apollo was Romanized, adopted by the roman people, he took on an additional title of Apollon Luciferos… to denote [his power] of being a light-bringer. The public worship of Apollo in the Mediterranean was in direct competition with the development of Christianity… during the time that John wrote [the Book of Revelation]. The use of the name Apollyon within the bible, as the ‘Angel of the Pit’ was a direct association with this Greek god Apollo as a Satan, an adversary to Christianity.’

Notice the consistent association of the Sun, the Sun god and sun (day) worship, with Apollyon (or Apollo). The system of Azazel the Beast seeks to change laws associated with time (and space). Yet many christians believe it has already begun with the Calendar. We will study the Gregorian (Julian) calendar; the Jewish calendar; and the Hebrew (or Sacred) calendar for they are all different – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

The fact that the Sun god Apollo is linked to a ‘seventh’ day, which is in fact Saturday (on the Gregorian calendar) – not Sunday – is profound, for a motive in changing the calendar system was to hide the truth of the seventh day Sabbath. Saturday is not the true Sabbath (on the Sacred calendar)… for the word Saturday, derives from the planet Saturn and has the root meaning of being hidden. So that Saturday is not the real seventh day – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy.

In the next chapter we will investigate Azazel’s family and the question of who exactly is his father; his mother (already touched upon); and the identity of his twin sister. Apollo (or Apollon) titled striker from afar is remarkably similar to Apollyon, far away and with Azazel, going away.

Much has been written about Nimrod’s wife; identified mainly with either Ishtar – from which the word easter derives – and Semiramis (and their son, Tammuz – Ezekiel 8:14). Nimrod purportedly married his own mother. We will look into the subject of Nimrod’s mother more fully and her identity as a dark angel in the following chapter. Which accounts for both Nimrod’s Nephilim ancestry and the evilness attributed to him.

The central pieces of information pivotal in understanding Nimrod’s life, is his spiritual descent through an angelic mother and his physical lineage not from Ham’s son Cush, but rather from a (possible) grandson of Shem called Kish, a son of Asshur. The word Kish was a name of an ancient city-state in northern Sumer and it was also used as a kingly title in early Mesopotamian history. This is significant with regard to Assyria, for as we have learned, Asshur has played, does play and will play, a significant role in human affairs and world history, in its fulfilment as the latter day King of the North.

So what do you think should be done to those who do not respect the Son of God, who look at the blood of the agreement that made them holy as no different from others’ blood, who insult the Spirit of God’s grace? Surely they should have a much worse punishment.

Hebrews 10:29 New Century Version

Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Matthew 12:31-32 English Standard Version

But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin.

Mark 3:29 New English Translation

“When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong.”

Eugene V Debs 

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Post Scriptum

New research has led to a reappraisal of the Tower of Babel. Investigating material about the Great Pyramid resulted in a clearer understanding pertaining to the biblical account of the tower built by Nimrod. When the Eternal apprehended the threat posed by the Tower of Babel’s construction, He confounded the single language at the time causing the evolution of multiple languages we have today. The crucial piece of information to note and remember, is the fact that the tower was not destroyed, but rather abandoned. Those readers interested in where the story progresses following this chapter, please refer to the essential article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia

Chapter XX

The second son born to Shem was called Asshur. The land where Asshur dwelt, became known as Assyria and it is this word which is used in the Bible. Historians also use the word Assyria to refer to the ancient peoples of Asshur and their ruling dynasties. There are today a Middle Eastern people known as Assyrians, though these are decidedly not a residue of the once mighty Assyrian Empire as we shall discover.

Asshur is mentioned repeatedly throughout the Old Testament. Its relationship with the sons of Jacob was tempestuous at best and catastrophic at worst. The vying for centre stage and influence has been waged between the two most prominent sons of Shem, Asshur and Arphaxad from the beginning and continues to the present day.

As disclosed when discussing Madai* (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes) and his relationship with Elam – the modern nation of Turkey (Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) – Asshur is the ancestor of the peoples of Russia.

We have read previously in Zephaniah 9:13, which reveals Asshur was to ultimately live in the North, where other nations of the North are located, such as Magog and Togarmah – Northeastern China and the two Koreas – refer Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Most biblical identity aficionados are familiar with Asshur and his prominence in the Bible. They with secular Assyriologists, share a fascination for all things Assyrian, yet do not truly understand which modern people they actually have a  passion for. Nor are they aware of the considerably greater threat posed by Asshur as Russia, compared to the commonly held yet erroneous belief within the biblical identity community that Germany is Assyria. One wonders if the fascination is more with Germany than it is for Asshur.

It would be flippant to say Russia backwards spells Aissur. Though in essence this highlights exactly how many identities are deduced from nonsensical assumptions and wrongful interpretations in etymology and heraldic symbolism for example; often lacking a thorough line of reasoning and convincing evidence.

Russia is a land of superlatives; a country stretching over a vast expanse nearly twice the size of the territory of Canada, the world’s second largest nation. Extending across the whole of northern Asia and the eastern third of Europe; spanning eleven time zones; incorporating deserts and semiarid steppes; to deep forests and Artic tundra. Russia contains Europe’s longest river the Volga, its largest lake, Ladoga and the world’s deepest lake, Baikal

The first modern state in Russia was founded in 862 CE by King Rurik of the Rus, who was made the ruler of Novgorod. The Rus King Oleg, later conquered the city of Kiev and started the kingdom of the Kievan Rus in 882. 

During the tenth and eleventh centuries the Kievan Rus grew to become a powerful empire, reaching peaks under Vladimir the Great in 980 and Yaroslav I the Wise in 1015. In 1237, the Mongols led by Batu Khan, overran the region and scattered the Kievan Rus. 

In its wake, the Grand Duchy of Moscow under Ivan III in 1462 rose to power and became the head of the Eastern Roman Empire, driving out the Mongols in 1480. Ivan IV (or the Terrible), crowned himself the first Tsar of Russia in 1547 and began the exponential expansion of Russian lands. The title Tsar etymologically denotes a name derived from Caesar and the Russians called their empire the Third Rome. We will discover this is more than a coincidence. In 1613, Mikhail Romanov established the Roman-ov dynasty – enduring until 1917. Under the rule of Tsar Peter the Great from 1689 to 1725, the Russian empire continued its incredible expansion – Article: Four Kings & One Queen

It became a major power and the capital was moved again, by Peter the Great from Moscow to St. Petersburg in 1713. As the Russians have repeatedly moved their capitals from Novgorod, Kiev, St Petersburg – also called Leningrad – and Moscow; the Assyrians exhibited the same proclivity transferring their capitals from Ashur, Calah and Nineveh respectively.

Moscow – the modern incarnation of the ancient Assyrian capital, Nineveh

In 1762, Tsar Peter III was assassinated and his wife Catherine II – of German descent – assumed the crown. She ruled for thirty-four years in what would be called the Golden Age of the Russian Empire. In 1812, Napoleon unsuccessfully invaded Russia. During the nineteenth century, the influence of Russian culture was at its height. Musicians and writers such as Dostoyevsky, Tchaikovsky and Tolstoy became famous throughout the world. 

In 1853 the Crimean War began, which Russia eventually lost, against an alliance comprising France, the Ottoman Empire (Turkey), Britain and Sardinia. In 1867, Russia sensationally sold Alaska to the United States of America for $7.2 million dollars. In 1897, the Social Democratic Party was established. It would later split into the Bolshevik and Menshevik parties. In 1904, Russia went to war against Japan in Manchuria and decisively lost. 

In 1917 Vladimir Lenin – who was half Tatar* – led the Bolshevik Party in revolution overthrowing the Tsar. Civil war broke out in 1918 and eventually the communist Soviet Union was born in 1922. After Lenin died in 1924, Joseph Stalin – who was half Georgian (Chapter XVII Lud & Iran) – seized power. Under Stalin, approximately 20 to 40 million people ultimately died, in famines; concentration camps; and executions in the great purge beginning in 1934.

During World War II, Russia initially allied with the Germans; however the Germans invaded Russia in 1941. In 1942, the Russian army defeated the German army at the Battle of Stalingrad. This was the major turning point in World War II. From 1949, an arms race developed between Russia and the United States of America and the Cold War ensued for decades. Though in reality, has never ended.

In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev was elected General Secretary. He instituted freedom of speech and openness of the government (Glasnost) as well as a restructuring of the economy (Perestroika). After the historic fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the dissolution of the Soviet Union shortly there after occurred in December 1991. The preeminent empire constituting a union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, (or the Soviet Union) – U.S.S.R – became a single independent country, now called the Russian Federation. 

The Cathedral of the Resurrection of Christ – commonly known as the Church of the Saviour on Spilled Blood – is illuminated at night in St. Petersburg, Russia.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘The children of Abraham called Asshurim received that name as a result of migrating to the land of Assyria or Asshur. We shall know where the Asshurim are if we first locate the modern day descendants of Assyria or Asshur.’

This would appear to be a reasonable line of reasoning, yet Abraham and Keturah’s children did not live anywhere near Asshur originally. We have seen replication of names already with children from Japaheth, Ham and Shem. The duplication shows a different people with the same name and may mean an amalgamation or it may not. In this instance we will learn it is the latter. Yet from a strict geographical sense, Hoeh is not far off.

Hoeh: ‘Asshur means “strong” or “powerful”. Asshur was a brother of Arphaxad (Genesis 10:22). The Assyrians – who came from Asshur – settled along the Tigris River around the city of Nineveh (Genesis 10:11). None of the sons of Asshur are mentioned in the Bible, but history gives us several of their names. Some of the sons of Asshur are these: Kharmen, or Germanni – meaning men of war; Khatti; Akkadians; Almani, or Halmani; and Kassites, or Cossaei. (For these names see any article on “Assyria”, or these separate names, in Biblical encyclopaedias).’

The Germani, Khatti, Akkadians and Kassites are not Assyrian names at all, but rather neighbours from different ancestors in different eras.


‘Where are these tribes today? They are no longer in ancient Assyria! Where did they go? The entire tenth chapter of Isaiah pictures the power that Asshur – the Assyrians – shall wield in these latter days. But where shall we look for them? First of all the Assyrians were driven from their land shortly after their fall in 610 B.C. Pliny, the Roman historian of the time of Christ, says the “Assyrians were north of the Crimea in Russia” (NATURAL HISTORY, book IV, section xii). About 300 years later Jerome writes that “Asshur is also joined with the tribes invading Western Europe ALONG THE RHINE” (Letter CXXIII, section 16, from NICENE AND POST-NICENE FATHERS).

So the Assyrians migrated to Central Europe! Notice the tribes coming into Central Europe – into Germany and Austria: the Khatti (the ancient name for Hessians – see ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANICA article “Germany”): the Quadians (Latin for the Akkadians); the Germanni from which the word German” comes today; the Chauci (the Cossaei of ancient Assyria); and the Allemani (the Latin name for the ancient Alman tribe of Assyria ). CERTAINLY HERE ARE THE TRIBES OF ASSYRIA! Germany is Assyria in prophecy! The North Germans, basically, are therefore the sons of Asshurim of Keturah. The remainder of the Germans and Austrians are the descendants of the ancient Assyrians or Asshur.’

Peoples migrated and their names did not always travel with them. The original Khatti are linked with Italy, whether there is an association with the name Hessian or not – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. The Germanni dwelt throughout much of Western Europe and beyond, with most of their numbers represented by the Saxon tribes which invaded Britain – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The Asshurim though settling adjacent to Germany, are not in Germany today – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Asshur did not travel into western Europe as a Germanic tribe – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. They are an eastern European people; genetically, culturally and geographically linked to the Slavic speaking peoples.

Hoeh: ‘The ancient Assyrians deified their ancestor Asshur. In the Indo-Germanic language the name Asshur was spelled Athur (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANICA article “Mesopotamia”, section Persians). And when the Assyrians are next found in Central Europe they are still worshipping Athur as Thur or Thor! And we still commemorate Asshur by the name Thursday – Asshur’s day! The name Asshur or Athur is still preserved among the Thuringian Germans’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

The word Thursday for the fifth day of the week actually derives from the planet Jupiter, also known as Jove and the god Zeus. As reflected in the Sicilian, Jovi; the French, Jeudi; Spainsh, Jueves; Uropi, Zusdia; Scots, Fuirsday; Finnish, Torstai; and the Scandinavian, Torsdag meaning ‘Thor’s day’ – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 59-60, 136-137 – emphasis mine:

‘Asshur, or Assyria… belonged both in race and language to the Semitic stock [incorrect]. The features of the Assyrian, as portrayed upon his monuments, are of a typical Semitic cast, and his mental and moral characteristics were those of the Semitic race. The country of Assyria took its name from the old capital Assur, or Asshur, now represented by the mounds of Kalah Sherghat, a little to the north of the junction of the Tigris with the Lower Zab. The founders of the city of Asshur and the kingdom of Assyria had moved northward from Babylonia. The Semitic language of Babylonia differed from that of Assyria only as the dialect of Middlesex differs from that of Oxfordshire. 

It was from Babylonia that the Assyrians had brought their religion, their customs, their art of writing, their science, and their traditions. Their gods were the gods of Babylonia, with the sole exception of the supreme Assur. They built their houses of brick in a land of stone and raised their temples and palaces on lofty platforms, because this had been necessary in the alluvial plain of Babylonia, where stone did not exist and protection had to be sought from the floods of winter. It was the ambition of those Assyrian kings who aimed at empire to be crowned in Babylon. Only so could their right to dominion out side the boundaries of Assyria itself be recognised and made legitimate. To become king of Babylon and the adopted child of the Babylonian Bel [Baal] was to the Assyrian monarch what coronation in Rome [in the Vatican] was to the mediaeval [Germanic] prince. 

the [Assyrian’s]… favourite occupations were commerce and war. But the Assyrian remained to the last merely a conquering caste. His superiority, physical and mental, to the older population of the country had made his first invasion of it irresistible, and the iron discipline and political organisation which he subsequently maintained enabled him to preserve his power. He has been called the Roman of the East, and in many respects the comparison is just. Like the Roman he had a genius for organising and administering, for making and obeying laws, and for submitting to the restraints of an inexorable discipline. The armies of Assyria swept all before them, and the conception of a centralised empire was first formed and realised by the Assyrian kings.’

The Assyrians had the advantage of a larger population, considerable intellect, with the ability to control their people as a organised militaristic unit. Some would offer the same could be said about the Germans. The difference being that Germany possesses these tendencies sporadically, whereas Russia exhibits them continually. We will learn that the Russians do actually have a connection with the Romans; specifically the later empire of the East and that it can be no surprise that Asshur was foremost in having a centralised, totalitarian and militaristic society purposed to build empires. The history of Asshur and Russia is replete with examples of their parallel empirical behavioural endeavours. 

Before continuing with an article about Assyria, it would be beneficial to list the main Assyrian Kings during the period we will study the most closely. There are multiple king lists which differ prior to Ashur-dan I. He began his reign in 1178 BCE and the king lists are identical in their contents from this date. Ashur-dan I was a king of the Middle Assyrian Empire. The epoch we will be most interested, is the Neo-Assyrian era from 912 to 609 BCE. This line of Assyrian kings ended with the defeat of Assyria’s final king Ashur-uballit II by the combined efforts, of the Neo-Babylonian Empire with the Median Empire in 609 BCE.

The Adaside dynasty:

Shalmaneser IV:      783 – 773 BCE – son of Adad-nirari III

Ashur-dan III:          773 – 755 BCE – son of Adad-nirari III

Ashur-nirari V:         755 – 745 BCE – son of Adad-nirari III

The Pre-Sargonid kings:

Tiglath-Pileser III: 745 – 727 BCE – claimed to be the son of Adad-nirari III,

though actually a General who usurped the throne from Ashur-nirari V

Shalmaneser V:        727 – 722 BCE – son of Tiglath-Pileser III

Sargonid dynasty kings:

Sargon II:            722 – 705 BCE – claimed to be the son of Tiglath-Pileser III

and usurped the throne from his (brother?) Shalmaneser V

Sennacherib:             705 – 681 BCE – son of Sargon II

Esarhaddon:               681 – 669 BCE – son of Sennacherib

Ashurbanipal:             669 – 631 BCE – son of Esarhaddon

Ashur-etil-ilani:        631 – 627 BCE – son of Ashurbanipal

Sinsharishkun:           627 – 612 BCE – son of Ashurbanipal 

Sin-shumu-lishir:   626 BCE – General of Ashur-etil-ilani who rebelled against

Sinsharishkun, attempting to claim the throne for himself

Ashur-uballit II:  612 – 609 BCE – unclear relationship, possibly the son of Sinsharishkun 

The following article primarily about Germany – linking it erroneously with Assyria – contains valuable material regarding the identity of Germany – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Conversely, there are sections of interest worth highlighting with regard to the identity of Assyria.

The History of Germany, Stephen Flurry, 1997 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘For several years now… we have taught that modern-day Germany descended from the people the Bible refers to as the Assyrians. In this article, we will prove this fact from the Bible and other historical sources. 

As Noah’s family multiplied exceedingly, many migrated… to a plain in the land of Shinar… (modern-day Iraq). Genesis 10 gives only the briefest account of this occurrence, mainly by just listing the lineages of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. But God does draw special attention to Nimrod… Nimrod’s name means “he rebelled” – against God, that is. Nimrod established the kingdom of Babylon. Babylon means confusion, which is what happened when God confounded their language at the tower of Babel. Aside from Nimrod, Genesis 10 also draws special attention to Asshur. “Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah.” (Genesis 10:11). 

As the margin suggests, a better translation of this verse would reveal that Asshur and Nimrod went out of the land of Shinar to build Nineveh and other cities. There is strong evidence to indicate that Asshur worked with Nimrod, probably in the military field, and helped to build Babel and Nineveh, as well as other cities.’

We will study Nimrod in depth in the next chapter – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. According to an unconventional chronology (note firstly, lifetimes were extended prior to the flood and secondly after the flood up until Abraham), Arphaxad was born circa 10,717 BCE; thus Asshur as the second son of Shem would have been born before Arphaxad, in circa 10,750 BCE. Nimrod was apparently the second generation after the flood, though we will consider that he was actually the third generation and born sometime later, in approximately 8700 BCE.

The Tower of Babel instigated by Nimrod, ended about 6755 BCE – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. The descent from the Ark’s original resting place by early families to the Indus Valley; building a civilisation there; and then migrating to Egypt, Anatolia and Mesopotamia would likely mean that the cities built in Shinar and later Assyria would have taken place circa 8000 BCE – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

Flurry: ‘Now notice verse 22: “The children of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Aram.” Notice that Arphaxad is listed in this verse as the third son of Shem. Now read Genesis 11:10: “These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood.” Neither of Shem’s first two sons, Elam or Asshur, are mentioned! 

That’s because they were rejected as the heirs of Shem’s inheritance. If they were working alongside Nimrod, you can see why Shem (and God) rejected them! Asshur parted with his father and raised up the Assyrian Empire.’

There is debate over whether Arphaxad was born or conceived two years after the flood. According to the following four verses, Shem’s son Arphaxad would have been born on the Ark: Genesis 5:32, Genesis 7:11, Genesis 11:10 and Genesis 8:13. However, according to Genesis 8:15-19 and Genesis 9:18-19, no children left the Ark. A way to resolve this mathematical conundrum is to say the wording applies to conception rather than birth. This would be the only way to fit the three sons of Elam, Asshur and Arphaxad in a very busy two year period for Shem’s wife, Sedequedelabab.

If on the other hand, the sexagesimal Sumerian counting system is correctly applied as per an unconventional chronology – and not the mis-leading edited interpretation in Genesis – then Arphaxad was actually born 120 years after the flood.

Flurry: ‘Notice what the historian Josephus recorded concerning Asshur: “Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons… Ashur lived at the city of Nineveh; and named his subjects Assyrians, WHO BECAME THE MOST FORTUNATE NATION; BEYOND OTHERS.” (Antiquities, I, vi, 4). Assyria quickly became the most prosperous, powerful nation of the day. 

… in Genesis 14:1-2: “And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal KING OF NATIONS; That these made war…” These four kings in verse 1 were allied as a gigantic Assyrian empire, as Josephus points out: “At this time, when the Assyrians had the dominion over Asia, the people of Sodom were in a flourishing condition… the Assyrians made war upon them; and, dividing their army into four parts, fought against them. Now every part of the army had its own commander; and when the battle was joined, the Assyrians were conquerors; and imposed tribute on the kings of the Sodomites, who submitted to this slavery twelve years… but on the thirteenth year they rebelled, and then the army of the Assyrians came upon them, under their commanders, Amraphel, Arioch, Chedorlaomer, and Tidal. These kings had laid waste all Syria, and overthrown the offspring of the giants.” (Antiquities, I, ix, 1). 

… Lange’s Commentary says, “According to Ktesias and others, the Assyrians were the first to establish a world-dominion.” (volume 1, page 403). The last king listed in Genesis 14:1 is Tidal, the “king of nations”. He ruled in the region of Asia Minor. The word Tidal comes from a Hebrew word which means “to fear, make afraid, dreadful and terrible.” For centuries, Assyria caused many nations GREAT FEAR! These four Assyrian generals [kings] came to make war with the kings in Canaan because of their rebellion (GENESIS 14:4). The Assyrians routed the people of Canaan, including the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 14:17 says that Abram also killed the four [one] top leaders of the Assyrian Empire, mentioned in verse 1. It was a complete rout! The power of Assyria was smashed in one night! Think about how the course of history was changed at this point.’ 

We have learned in the preceding chapter regarding Chedorlaomer, how this was a period of Elamite ascendancy and that these were four Kings of separate city-states, not four Generals of one state – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. Flurry has made some very big assumptions – the first based on the dubious historian, Josephus – not supported by the biblical account. Though he may be forgiven for ascribing Assyria to Tidal and Arioch, the Bible clearly states the king of Elam, Asshur’s elder brother and the king of Shinar which included Akkad and Sumer and their main capital cities Babylon and Uruk. These peoples were descended from Asshur’s younger brother Arphaxad – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

Assyria was a region at this time in northern Mesopotamia; it had no jurisdiction over southern Mesopotamia which incorporated the Land of Shinar – Akkadia and Sumer – or Elam to the far southeast. Josephus states the kings had ‘laid waste all Syria’. The Gutim, Hurrian, Mitanni and Chatti states were predominantly Syrian or Aramaean regions – allied with peoples from Haran and Nahor – to the North and west of Shinar and Assyria. We also discovered that only Arioch of Ellasar (or Larsa) a giant, possibly died in the raid. Genesis 14:17 reveals Abraham defeated Chedorlaomer’s forces during his night time ambush attack; not who died in the confrontation. The Assyrians were neither involved or decimated; nor was the course of history changed for Assyria at this time.

Flurry: ‘James McCabe, author of History of the World, says the Assyrians were a “fierce, treacherous race, delighting in the dangers of the chase and in war. The Assyrian troops were notably among the most formidable of ancient warriors… They never kept faith when it was to their interest to break treaties, and were regarded with suspicion by their neighbors in consequence of this characteristic… In organization and equipment of their troops, and in their system of attack and defence and their method of reducing fortified places, the Assyrians manifested a superiority to the nations by which they were surrounded.” (volume 1, pages 155, 160). 

Dr. Herman Hoeh wrote, “Ancient Assyria was the greatest war-making power in all history” (January 1963, Plain Truth, “Germany in Prophecy!”). 

‘James Hastings wrote, “The Assyrians of historic times were more robust, warlike, ‘fierce’, than the mild industrial Babylonians. This may have been due to the influence of climate and incessant warfare; but it may indicate a different race… The whole organization of the State was essentially military.” (Dictionary of the Bible, article “Assyria and Babylonia”).’

This is a correct observation as the cultured Babylonians were as different from the warlike Assyrians as the modern day Italians are compared to the Russians – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Flurry: ‘Leonard Catrell in Anvil of Civilization, wrote: “In all the annals of human conquest, it is difficult to find any people more dedicated to bloodshed and slaughter than the Assyrians. Their ferocity and cruelty have few parallels save in modern times.” (It’s interesting that Catrell can only compare their ferocity with those “in modern times.” By far, the Germans have been more dedicated to bloodshed than any other nation in this century.)’

The unfortunate reality as borne out by the figures of the dead, is that Russian rule has been more fierce than the Germans; responsible for the deaths of many, many millions more. Comparisons have been made between Hitler’s and Stalin’s regimes by historians, with Stalin clearly the more diabolical, terrorising and blood-thirsty – with tens of millions dead in comparison with Hitler’s millions.

Flurry: ‘C. Leonard Woolley described what these people looked like in his book, The Sumerians: “In the Zagros hills and across the plain to the Tigris, there lived a… fair-haired… people akin to the Guti (Goths) who… remained in what was afterwards Assyria.” (page 5). 

Here is what Dr. Herman Hoeh wrote in “Germany in Prophecy!”: “When the ancient Greek writers wanted to distinguish the Assyrians from the Arameans or Syrians, the Greeks called the Assyrians, ‘Leucosyri’ – meaning ‘whites’ or ‘blonds’ as distinct from the very brunette Syrians” (Plain Truth, January 1963, page17). 

By the time of Christ, the Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder recorded that the Assyrians were now dwelling north of the Black sea (Natural History, IV, 12, page 183). By this time, they had moved north. Much was written about the early German tribes which poured into Europe during the first and second centuries A.D., thanks in large part to the writings of the Roman historian Tacitus, who lived at that time. Among the most significant of these early German tribes are the Chatti… Chatti means “to break down by violence; to make afraid or terrify.” The ancestors of this German tribe, before migrating, lived mostly in Asia Minor, and were called the Assyrian Chatti. 

Many of these early German tribes were in constant conflict with the Roman Empire which is why the Romans collectively labeled them Germani, meaning “war men”. These early tribes migrated into Central Europe, as historians verify. The Romans labeled all of them “war men”. But from where did they come? Smith’s Classical Dictionary answers: “There can be NO DOUBT that they (the Assyrians)… migrated into Europe from the Caucasus and the countries around the Black and Caspian seas.” (article “Germania”, page 361).’

Modern Germany has inherited the name ‘Germany’. The Germans do not call themselves by that name. They are known by different names in different languages. They call themselves Deutsch, far removed from the word German. The quote from Smith’s Classical Dictionary does not include the ‘Assyrians’, this has been added as an assumption. We will study the Chatti or Hatti in detail, as there are two different nations, a former and a later peoples, who were known by that name.

Flurry: ‘Some have argued that the Assyrian people spoke a Semitic language, not Indo-Germanic, and therefore the Germans could not be the descendants of the ancient Assyrians. Yet there is a passage in the Bible which clearly reveals how and why most of the ancient Assyrians acquired a new and different language. In the days of Nimrod, a tower was constructed at Babel which was to be the capital city of a world-ruling dictatorship, under which, God’s truth would have been completely stamped out. Concerning the rebellious people of Nimrod’s day, God said, “Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.”(GENESIS 11:6). 

To keep civilization from progressing to a point of self-destruction so soon, God had to “confound their language” (v.7). This miraculous intervention by God was the origin of differing languages. This was when most of the Assyrians acquired the Indo-Germanic tongue and other related languages. Dr. Herman Hoeh wrote in his article, “Germany in Prophecy!”: “European scholars have thoroughly studied the language of the land of Hatti – the ancestors of the Hessians. They found it to be an Indo-Germanic tongue – numerous words of which were akin to Old High German!… The language of the Hatti was the language of the West Assyrians… Scholars admit that for centuries the language of the people who inhabited Assyria was not merely Semitic.” (Plain Truth, January 1963, page 27).’

The later Hatti are associated with the Germans and the link with High German we will explore. These Hatti became known as Hittites and were linked with Assyria, living to their west in ancient Anatolia. These Hatti (or Hittites) were a distinct, separate people allied with Assyria. A similar relationship has existed in more recent history, which we will cover. The language of the Hatti, was not ‘the language of the West Assyrian,’ in that the Hatti were not Assyrian. This is a stretch, as is saying the Assyrians went from a Semitic language to an Indo-Germanic one at the time of Peleg. We do not know this. While those scholars who profess ‘Semitic’ speaking Asshur could not be the ancestor of the Indo-Germanic speaking Germans are entirely correct. 

Flurry: ‘On the banks of the Mosel River in western Germany, just six miles from the Luxembourg border, sits the ancient German city of Trier. The Romans claim to be the founders of this ancient city. But German tradition, and even the name of the city, suggests otherwise. 

“On the Rotes Haus (Red House) beside the Steipe, there is a text in Latin boasting that Trier, or Treves, is older than Rome, thirteen hundred years older in fact. That is when Trebeta, son of Semiramis, is said to have founded the town.” That’s what it says in the opening paragraph of the Trier Colorphoto Guide to the Town. Josef K.L. Bihl writes in his German textbook, In deutschen Landen, “Trier was founded by Trebeta, a son of the famous Assyrian King Ninus” (page 69). The biblical name for Ninus is Nimrod

Semiramis was married to Nimrod, the founder of Babylon (Genesis 10:8-10)… Genesis 10:11 says that Asshur and his descendants went out of Babylon and constructed the Assyrian capital – Nineveh. But as the margin correctly indicates, it was Nimrod who led Asshur out of Babylon and who actually supervised the construction project in Nineveh. Early on, the Bible indicates a close alliance between Nimrod and Asshur.’

Two important points from Stephen Flurry’s comments. If Ninus is Nimrod and Ninus is an Assyrian king, how does this square with Nimrod supposedly being a descendant of Cush? Secondly, if Nimrod led Asshur himself or Asshur’s people out of Babylon in the land of Shinar to build Nineveh, the future main city and capital of Assyria, how does this equate with Nimrod being a son of Cush?

Was a descendant of Cush really ruling Shinar; comprising the descendants of Arphaxad, as well as the region of Asshur? Was Nimrod actually even descended from Ham’s son Cush? We shall return to these very important questions in the following chapter. For the shocking truth is that Nimrod was a descendant of Asshur through his father Kish (and mother Semiramis).

According to Abarim Publications, Asshur in Hebrew means: ‘level plain, step, happy, just.’ Derived from the verb asher, ‘to go (straight) on’, or yasher, ‘to be level, straight up, just.’

Abarim – emphasis mine:

‘There are two men and one empire called Asshur (=Assyria) in the Bible, and the names of all of these probably derive from the similarly named primary deity of Assyria. Asshur, Assyria and the Assyrians are not to be confused with:

  • The name Aram, the country directly north of Israel, which in Greek times became known by its present name of Syria. Its capital has been Damascus since ancient times. Even though Syria and Assyria are different countries, the Greeks called them both [the same], which isn’t all that strange since several cities and regions in Assyria are known by names that contain Aram; see for instance the names Aram-naharaim and Paddan-aram.
  • The quite different name Ashhur, belonging to the head [leader] of Tekoa (1 Chronicles 2:24)
  • The quite similar name Asher, which belonged to the eighth son of Jacob and second of Zilpah (Genesis 30:13)’ – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.
  • ‘The Asshurim, who were a people descending from Abraham and Keturah (Genesis 25:3)’ – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘The lesser known man named Asshur is mentioned in the genealogy of Judah (1 Chronicles 2:24), and has no further role in the Bible. The other man named Asshur was a son of Shem… (Genesis 10:22), and, on the Biblical stage, from him sprang the people called the Assyrians, who lived in Assyria, which in the Bible is known simply as Asshur. Its capital city Nineveh was built by Nimrod, according to the Bible (Genesis 10:11).

In the demographical record, the country Assyria started out as a small settlement named Assur, “built on a sandstone cliff on the west of the Tigris about 35 kilometers north of its confluence with the lower Zab River” (says The Oxford Companion to the Bible). It became an empire in the 19th century BC, but soon dwindled, reemerged in the 14th century during which it even took control over Babylon to its south, but quickly faded again.

Under Tiglath-pileser I (1115-1076 BC) the empire experienced brief and extensive success, but succumbed to the invasion of the Arameans. In 935 BC Assyria began to reconquer its territories lost to Aram, which brought them in range of Canaan, and also created the formidable Neo-Assyrian empire that we hear so much about in the Bible.

The foundations of the Neo-Assyrian empire were laid by king Ashurnasirpal II (884-859 BC), who [re]built the city of Calah, which is also known as Nimrud (in the Bible personified as Nimrod), and expanded the (up to then marginal) town of Nineveh. Ashurnasirpal’s son Shalmaneser III (859-824 BC) fought at the battle of Qarqar (853 BC), which entailed a clash between the Assyrian imperial army and a coalition of eleven states headed by king Hadadezer of Damascus, and which included the Arameans… and Israel under king Ahab. 

The Bible omits this battle and we know about it from the Kurkh monoliths, which were found in 1861 in Iraq. These monoliths contain the only (possible) reference to Israel in Assyrian and Babylonian records. At Qarqar the progression of the Assyrian empire was checked and in the years that followed its power diminished.

In 745 BC, a revolt in Calah led to the assumption of the Assyrian throne by the vigorous Tiglath-pileser III… who spent his career in conflict intervention all over the broader region. Even king Ahaz of Judah called upon the intervention of this imperial sheriff, when he found his kingdom besieged by kings Rezin of Aram and Pekah of Israel (2 Kings 16:7). He embellished his request with a gift made of silver and gold from the temple of YHWH, and Tiglath-pileser responded by capturing Damascus, exiling its people to Kir and executing Rezin (2 Kings 16:9). Still, the Chronicler wryly asserts that Tiglath-pileser’s assistance didn’t help Ahaz all that much (2 Chronicles 28:21). As part of the same campaign, Tiglath-pileser also invaded the land of Naphtali in the north of Israel and apparently also the territories of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh on the east (1 Chronicles 5:6, 5:26), and deported* the people in what became known as the First Deportation (1 Kings 15:29). King Pekah of Israel was murdered and succeeded by Hoshea, son of Elah, who was made to pay an annual tribute to the king of Assyria.

After six years of paying taxes to Assyria, king Hoshea figured he could get away from it by allying Israel with Egypt. Tiglath-pileser’s son Shalmaneser V (727-722) didn’t think so, marched on Samaria, besieged it for three years and finally captured it. He imprisoned Hoshea and deported the city’s population (2 Kings 17:4-6). His successor was the usurper Sargon II (722-705 BC), who is mentioned only once in the Bible, in Isaiah 20:1 in reference to the battle of Ashdod. But it was he who deported the rest of Israel in what is known as the Second Deportation. This action effectively ended the northern kingdom of Israel and virtually wiped out the tribes other than Judah [with Benjamin] and the two nationally absorbed tribes of Levi and Simeon.

Sargon’s son Sennacherib (705-681 BC) sacked Babylon, deported its population and besieged Jerusalem in the fourteenth year of the reign of king Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:13). King Hezekiah initially bought him off with a tribute of 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold (2 Kings 18:14) but Sennacherib wanted Jerusalem’s submission. He sent Rabshakeh and a division of his army to negotiate Jerusalem’s peaceful surrender but king Hezekiah wouldn’t budge (18:36). Hezekiah sent his chief of staff Eliakim to the prophet Isaiah, who told him that the Lord had said that Jerusalem would not fall to the Assyrians (19:7, 19:20). When Rabshakeh went to report Hezekiah’s refusal to surrender to Sennacherib, he found his king engaged in battle with the army of Libnah and realized that the heat was off Jerusalem (19:8). Then one night the Lord decimated the Assyrian army by undisclosed means, and Sennacherib went home. He was killed by his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer in the temple of the god Nisroch, and his son Esarhaddon became king in his place (681-669 BC).

King Esarhaddon died of an illness and was succeeded by the great Ashurbanipal (669-627 BC), who expanded the Assyrian empire to its record size. In the Bible he’s mentioned only as the king who brought people from outside to Samaria (Ezra 4:10). After his death his empire succumbed to civil war and was left without central reign. Finally, a man named Sin-shar-ishkun (approximately 623-612) took the throne, but within a decade the empire was invaded by a coalition of Medes and Babylonians, who captured the central provinces. 

The last king of Assyria was Ashur-uballit II (612-609), who ruled in Haran, in the empire’s remaining western territories. He had support from Egypt but lost his lands to the Babylonians. The Assyrian empire and its vibrant culture remained forgotten until archeologists of the modern age revived it. The name Asshur is highly similar to the Hebrew name Asher but is spelled with a waw before the resh… [the] verb (‘ashar) covers a decisive progression or a setting right, and is often applied to describe happiness and prosperity…’

We learn of two sons born to Asshur in the Book of Jasher 7:16

And the sons of Ashar were Mirus and Mokil

In Isaiah 66:19 ESV, we read the verse in connection with Tarshish, Lud, Tubal and Javan. Pul is mentioned and commentators sometimes define Pul as Phut or Put. 

‘… and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish [Japan], Pul [H6322 – Puwl: distinguishing], and Lud [Iran], who draw the bow, to Tubal [Southeastern Coastland China] and Javan [Archipelago South East Asia], to the coastlands [Gomer and Continental SE Asia] far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.’

In 2 Kings 15:19 ESV, we learn:

Pul the king of Assyria came against the land, and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver, that he might help him to confirm his hold on the royal power.

1 Chronicles 5:26

English Standard Version

‘So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser [745-727 BCE] king of Assyria, and he took them into exile*, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day [at time of writing].’

Pul is not Phut, but rather a king of Assyria; either Tiglath-pileser III himself, or a successor. Isaiah could well be referring to a future ruler. The most obvious explanation is the spirit or mind of Tiglath-pileser III was moved to take Israel captive. In Hebrew, Pul means: ‘distinctive, discerner’ or ‘darkling.’ From the verb palal, ‘to distinguish’ or ‘discern.’

Related names via the verb are amazingly, Amraphel the alternate name we discovered for Hammurabi – former ally and turned enemy of Chedorlaomer of Elam – and also the Nephilim, which we will discuss in the chapter following Nimrod – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The name Pul is assigned to one human male and one country:

  • Pul the man is the same as Tiglath-pileser III, king of Assyria. 
  • Pul the country is mentioned by the prophet Isaiah… Since the other lands that Isaiah lists are all well known, commentators nowadays believe that this otherwise unmentioned Pul is the same as the better known Put. This obviously remains conjecture.

It’s been a long surviving mystery where the name Pul might have come from. In Context of Scripture (2002), William W. Hallo submits: “Today we know that Tiglath-pileser III was Pul, though there is still some discussion among Assyriologists concerning the etymology and use of the name Pul”. Barry J. Beitzel writes in Biblica – The Bible Atlas (2007): “For centuries it was assumed that Pul and Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria were separate kings, as implied by the account in 2 Kings. It is now known that “Pul” is a diminutive form of Tiglath-pil…eser, presumably from the middle portion of the name from where it may have been associated in folk etymology. Pul or Pulu is a well-known Assyrian name, meaning “limestone” (or block of limestone)”.

‘There aren’t many ways to write Pul in Hebrew, but it appears that his name was really Pulu… also associated to the words for Wonderful, Judge and Gloom. NOBSE Study Bible Name List appears to go with the old tradition and reads Strong.’

In Ezekiel 27:23 ESV, we see Assyria linked in trade with Tyre (Aram), other Western European nations and the Medes (Madai-Central Asia): 

‘Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you.’

Abarim Publications: 

‘The name Chilmad occurs only once in the Bible, namely in Ezekiel 27:23, where it is listed among the many nations that traded with Tyre. Unlike most of the other names of this list, it’s not clear where Chilmad might have been located. Some scholars… have proposed that Chilmad isn’t really a name but simply means “all Media”… Since it’s not clear where Chilmad might have been it’s also not clear from which language this name comes, let alone what it might have meant. It’s not even certain that Chilmad is really a name, or was ever intended as one. Ancient Hebrew scribes often transliterated foreign names into barely recognizable forms, often to make a point or pun.

… we surmise that our “name” may have originated as a compressed version of, “all measure” or “all sorts”, in the vein of the similar phrase, “all wealth”, (Ezekiel 27:12 and 27:18), and the phrases, “all spices”, and, “all stones” (both 27:22). The first part of our “name” looks like the noun (kol), meaning all or the whole… And the second part of our name looks like it has to do with the name for Media, namely from the verb (madad), to measure… It’s unclear what the name Chilmad means, but among a Hebrew audience there might have been a creative few who heard Of All Sorts or In Every Measure or even All Disease.’

In Psalm 83:4-8 ESV, we read of a past alliance or at least a list of the principle adversaries against Jacob’s sons, including Asshur’s powerful military involvement or presence. We will return to this passage when we have studied all the identities listed. All the identities apart from Assyria, are usually identified as being in the Middle East or the Islamic world, which is not correct. 

4 ‘They say, “Come, let us wipe them out as a nation; let the name of Israel be remembered no more!” 5 For they conspire with one accord; against you they make a covenant – 6 the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab* and the Hagrites, 7 Gebal and Ammon* and Amalek, Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre; 8 Asshur also has joined them; they are the strong arm [for] the children of Lot*…’

Isaiah 31:5-9

English Standard Version

5 ‘Like birds hovering, so the Lord of hosts will protect Jerusalem; he will protect and deliver it; he will spare and rescue it.” 6 Turn to him from whom people have deeply revolted, O children of Israel. 7 For in that day everyone shall cast away his idols of silver and his idols of gold, which your hands have sinfully made for you. 8 “And the Assyrian shall fall by a sword, not of man; and a sword, not of man, shall devour him; and he shall flee from the sword, and his young men shall be put to forced labor. 9 His rock shall pass away in terror, and his officers desert the standard in panic,” declares the Lord, whose fire is in Zion, and whose furnace is in Jerusalem.’

This event occurred in part, when Sennacherib’s army was decimated prior to their planned attack circa 701 BCE on Jerusalem, the capital of the Kingdom of Judah – comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with Simeon and Levi. It is principally revealing a future event, as the young men of Asshur were not taken as slaves in Sennacherib’s defeat.

Isaiah 30:31

English Standard Version

‘The Assyrians will be terror-stricken at the voice of the Lord, when he strikes with his rod.’

The Assyrians are used to being the Rod of the Creator’s anger, not at the end of it.

Isaiah 10:4-8, 11-16, 24-27

New Century Version

4 ‘… God Will Punish Assyria. 5 God says, “How terrible it will be for the king of Assyria. I use him like a rod to show my anger; in anger I use Assyria like a club [rod]. 6 I send [Assyria] to fight against a nation that is separated from God. I am angry with those people, so I command Assyria to fight against them, to take their wealth from them, to trample them down like dirt in the streets. 

7 But Assyria’s king doesn’t understand that I am using him; he doesn’t know he is a tool for me. He only wants to destroy other people and to defeat many nations. 8 The king of Assyria says to himself, ‘All of my commanders are like kings… 11 As I defeated Samaria and her idols, I will also defeat Jerusalem and her idols’.”

12 When the Lord finishes doing what he planned to Mount Zion and Jerusalem, he will punish Assyria. The king of Assyria is very proud, and his pride has made him do these evil things, so God will punish him. 13 The king of Assyria says this: “By my own power I have done these things; by my wisdom I have defeated many nations. I have taken their wealth, and, like a mighty one’ – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod – ‘I have taken their people…

Not one raised a hand or opened its mouth to stop me.” 15 An ax is not better than the person who swings it. A saw is not better than the one who uses it. A stick cannot control the person who picks it up. A club cannot pick up the person! 16 So the Lord God All-Powerful will send a terrible disease upon Assyria’s soldiers. The strength of Assyria will be burned up like a fire burning until everything is gone.

24 This is what the Lord God All-Powerful says: “My people living in Jerusalem, don’t be afraid of the Assyrians, who beat you with a rod and raise a stick against you, as Egypt did. 25 After a short time my anger against you will stop, and then I will turn my anger to destroying them.” 26 Then the Lord All-Powerful will beat the Assyrians with a whip as he defeated Midian at the rock of Oreb. He will raise his stick over the waters as he did in Egypt. 27 Then the troubles that Assyria puts on you will be removed, and the load they make you carry will be taken away…’

Matthew 12:41

English Standard Version

‘The men of Nineveh [capital of Assyria, equating to Moscow today] will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah…’

The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints – emphasis mine:

‘In 721 B.C. Assyria swept out of the north, captured the Northern Kingdom of Israel, and took the ten tribes into captivity. From there they became lost to history. Assyria, named from the god Ashur (highest in the pantheon of Assyrian gods), was located in the Mesopotamian plain. It was bordered on the west by the Syrian desert [of the Aramaeans], on the south by Babylonia [capital of the Chaldeans], and on the north and east by the Persian [Elam] and Urarthian hills [of Lud]. This area today is primarily the nation of Iraq.

“[The Assyrians (modern Russia)] took their common language and their arts from Sumeria [Joktan (modern Eastern Europe)], but modified them later into an almost undistinguishable similarity to the language and arts of Babylonia [Peleg (modern Western Europe)]. Their circumstances, however, forbade them to indulge in the effeminate ease of Babylon; from beginning to end they were a race of warriors, mighty in muscle and courage, abounding in proud hair and beard, standing straight, stern and solid on their monuments, and bestriding with tremendous feet the east-Mediterranean world. Their history is one of kings and slaves, wars and conquests, bloody victories and sudden defeat.” (Will Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, The Story of Civilization, 1:266.)

“Assyria’s ascent as a formidable power in the Near East was due in large measure to strong kings who increased her borders and subjected other nations as tributaries. Assyria first became an independent nation between 1813 and 1781 B.C. under Shamshi-Adad. Under [their] kings Assyria reached its greatest apex of power, controlling the area that included not only Assyria but also Babylonia, Armenia, Media, Judea, Syria, Phoenicia, Sumeria, Elam, and Egypt. This empire “was without doubt the most extensive administrative organization yet seen in the Mediterranean or Near Eastern world; only Hammurabi and Thutmose III had approached it, and Persia alone would equal it before the coming of Alexander” (Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, 1:270).

‘The most vital part of the Assyrian government was its army. Warfare was a science to the leaders of Assyria… cavalry [was] introduced by Ashurnasirpal to aid the infantry and chariots, [as were] sappers, armor made from iron, siege machines, and battering rams [which] were all developed or perfected by the Assyrians. Strategy and tactics were also well understood by the Assyrian officers. But it was not just Assyrian effectiveness in warfare that struck terror to the hearts of the Near Eastern world. They were savage and brutal as well. 

“A captured city was usually plundered and burnt to the ground, and its site was deliberately denuded by killing its trees. The loyalty of the troops was secured by dividing a large part of the spoils among them; their bravery was ensured by the general rule of the Near East that all captives in war might be enslaved or slain. Soldiers were rewarded for every severed head they brought in from the field, so that the aftermath of a victory generally witnessed the wholesale decapitation of fallen foes. 

Most often the prisoners, who would have consumed much food in a long campaign, and would have constituted a danger and nuisance in the rear, were dispatched after the battle; they knelt with their backs to their captors, who beat their heads in with clubs, or cut them off with cutlasses. Scribes stood by to count the number of prisoners taken and killed by each soldier, and apportioned the booty accordingly; the king, if time permitted, presided at the slaughter. The nobles among the defeated were given more special treatment: their ears, noses, hands and feet were sliced off, or they were thrown from high towers, or they and their children were beheaded, or flayed alive, or roasted over a slow fire…

In all departments of Assyrian life we meet with a patriarchal sternness natural to a people that lived by conquest, and in every sense on the border of barbarism. Just as the Romans took thousands of prisoners into lifelong slavery after their victories, and dragged others to the Circus Maximus to be torn to pieces by starving animals, so the Assyrians seemed to find satisfaction – or a necessary tutelage for their sons – in torturing captives, blinding children before the eyes of their parents, flaying men alive, roasting them in kilns, chaining them in cages for the amusement of the populace, and then sending the survivors off to execution. Ashurnasirpal [II] tells how “all the chiefs who had revolted I flayed, with their skins I covered the pillar, some in the midst I walled up, others on stakes I impaled, still others I arranged around the pillar on stakes… As for the chieftains and royal officers who had rebelled, I cut off their members.’

Ashurbanipal boasts that “I burned three thousand captives with fire, I left not a single one among them alive to serve as a hostage.” Another of his inscriptions reads: “These warriors who had sinned against Ashur and had plotted evil against me… from their hostile mouths have I torn their tongues, and I have compassed their destruction. As for the others who remained alive, I offered them as a funerary sacrifice… their lacerated members have I given unto the dogs, the swine, the wolves… By accomplishing these deeds I have rejoiced the heart of the great gods.”

Statue of Ashurbanipal in San Francisco

Another monarch instructs his artisans to engrave upon the bricks these claims on the admiration of posterity: “My war chariots crush men and beasts… The monuments which I erect are made of human corpses from which I have cut the head and limbs. I cut off the hands of all those whom I capture alive.” Reliefs at Nineveh show men being impaled or flayed, or having their tongues torn out; one shows a king gouging out the eyes of prisoners with a lance while he holds their heads conveniently in place with a cord passed through their lips.” (Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, 1:271, 275–76.)’

This is brutal behaviour in the extreme – even in warfare – and is indicative of one stand out peoples of West Eurasian origin… none other than the Russians. The analogy with the Romans is uncanny for its exactitude, as we shall discover. Only the Germans can bear any reasonable European comparison with the Russians for violence and as we shall learn, the comparison with Rome is also applicable.

‘Under the reign of Tiglath-pileser II[I], Assyria began consolidating its power in the western part of the empire. Around 738 B.C. he demanded and received tribute from Damascus, the capital of Syria, and Samaria, the capital of Israel (2 Kings 15:19-20). But four years later, the two… states rebelled, and once again Tiglath-pileser moved in. Damascus was conquered, as was part of the territory of the Northern Kingdom, and the people were carried off into captivity (2 Kings 15:29). It seems to have been Tiglath-pileser who originated large-scale deportations of conquered peoples. By deporting a conquered people en masse to a foreign land, Tiglath-pileser hoped to break their unity and destroy their national identity. The practice of large deportations continued under Shalmaneser [V] and later Sargon II, successors to Tiglath-pileser [III] who also played an important role in the history of the Northern Kingdom of Israel.’

Reproduced almost in its entirety below, is the entry for Assyria by Britannica. The casual reader may skim or skip ahead; though readers with a special interest in Asshur and Assyria, may find much value if they have not read the information previously – emphasis mine.

‘Strictly speaking, the use of the name “Assyria” for the period before the latter half of the 2nd millennium BCE is anachronistic; Assyria – as against the city-state of Ashur – did not become an independent state until about 1400 BCE. In contrast to southern Mesopotamia… written sources in Assyria do not begin until very late, shortly before Ur III [Neo-Sumerian Empire 2100 BCE]. In the early 2nd millennium the main cities of this region were Ashur (160 miles north-northwest of modern Baghdad), the capital (synonymous with the city god and national divinity)… [and] Nineveh, lying opposite modern Mosul… In Assyria, inscriptions were composed in Akkadian from the beginning. Under Ur III, Ashur was a provincial capital. The inhabitants of southern Mesopotamia called Assyria Shubir in Sumerian and Subartu in Akkadian; these names may point to a Subarean population that was related to the Hurrians.

The Assyrian dialect of Akkadian found in the beginning of the 2nd millennium differs strongly from the dialect of Babylonia. These two versions of the Akkadian language continue into the 1st millennium. In contrast to the kings of southern Mesopotamia, the rulers of Ashur styled themselves not king but partly issiakum, the Akkadian equivalent of the Sumerian word ensi, partly ruba’um, or “great one.” Unfortunately, the rulers cannot be synchronized precisely with the kings of southern Mesopotamia before Shamshi-Adad I.

Aside from the generally scarce reports on projected construction, there is at present no information about the city of Ashur and its surroundings. There exists, however, unexpectedly rewarding source material from the trading colonies of Ashur in Anatolia. The texts come mainly from Kanesh (modern Kultepe, near Kayseri, in Turkey) and from Hattusa (modern Bogazkoy, Turkey), the later Hittite capital. In the 19th century BCE three generations of Assyrian merchants engaged in a lively commodity trade (especially in textiles and metal) between the homeland and Anatolia, also taking part profitably in internal Anatolian trade. Clearly these forays by Assyrian merchants led to some transplanting of Mesopotamian culture into Anatolia. Thus the Anatolians adopted cuneiform writing and used the Assyrian language.

From about 1813 to about 1781 [rather 1910-1878 BCE] Assyria was ruled by Shamshi-Adad I… Shamshi-Adad’s father – an Amorite [Aramaean], to judge by the name – had ruled near Mari. The son, not being of Assyrian origin, ascended the throne of Assyria as a foreigner and on a detour, as it were, after having spent some time as an exile in Babylonia. He had his two sons rule as viceroys, in Ekallatum on the Tigris and in Mari, respectively, until the older of the two, Ishme-Dagan [I], succeeded his father on the throne. Through the archive of correspondence in the palace at Mari, scholars are particularly well informed about Shamshi-Adad’s reign and many aspects of his personality. Shamshi-Adad’s state had a common border for some time with… Babylonia… Soon after Shamshi-Adad’s death, Mari broke away, regaining its independence under an Amorite dynasty that had been living there for generations; in the end, Hammurabi [1894-1852 BCE] conquered and destroyed Mari. After Ishme-Dagan’s death [1857-1837 BCE], Assyrian history is lost sight of for more than 100 years.

Very little can be said about northern Assyria during the 2nd millennium BCE. Information on the old capital, Ashur, located in the south of the country, is somewhat more plentiful. The old lists of kings suggest that the same dynasty ruled continuously over Ashur from about 1600. All the names of the kings are given, but little else is known about Ashur before 1420. 

Almost all the princes had Akkadian names, and it can be assumed that their sphere of influence was rather small. Although Assyria belonged to the kingdom of the Mitanni [Hurrians] for a long time, it seems that Ashur retained a certain autonomy. Located close to the boundary with Babylonia, it played that empire off against Mitanni whenever possible. Puzur-Ashur III concluded a border treaty with Babylonia about 1480, as did Ashur-bel-nisheshu about 1405. Ashur-nadin-ahhe II (c. 1392 – c. 1383) was even able to obtain support from Egypt, which sent him a consignment of gold. 

Ashur-uballit I (c. 1354 – c. 1318) was at first subject to King Tushratta of Mitanni. After 1340, however, he attacked Tushratta, presumably together with Suppiluliumas I of the Hittites. Taking away from Mitanni parts of northeastern Mesopotamia, Ashur-uballiṭ now called himself “Great King” and socialized with the king of Egypt on equal terms, arousing the indignation of the king of Babylonia. Ashur-uballiṭ was the first to name Assyria the Land of Ashur, because the old name, Subartu, was often used in a derogatory sense in Babylonia. He ordered his short inscriptions to be partly written in the Babylonian dialect rather than the Assyrian, since this was considered refined

Marrying his daughter to a Babylonian, he intervened there energetically when Kassite nobles murdered his grandson. Future generations came to consider [Ashur-uballit I] rightfully as the real founder of the Assyrian empire. His son Enlil-nirari (c. 1326 – c. 1318) also fought against Babylonia. Arik-den-ili (c. 1308 – c. 1297) turned westward, where he encountered Semitic tribes of the so-called Akhlamu group.

Still greater successes were achieved by Adad-nirari I (c. 1295 – c. 1264). Defeating the Kassite king Nazimaruttash, he forced him to retreat. After that he defeated the kings of Mitanni, first Shattuara I, then Wasashatta. This enabled him for a time to incorporate all Mesopotamia into his empire as a province, although in later struggles he lost large parts to the Hittites. Adad-nirari’s inscriptions were more elaborate than those of his predecessors and were written in the Babylonian dialect. In them he declares that he feels called to these wars by the gods, a statement that was to be repeated by other kings after him. Assuming the old title of great king, he called himself “King of All.” He enlarged the temple and the palace in Ashur and also developed the fortifications there, particularly at the banks of the Tigris River. He worked on large building projects in the provinces.

His son Shalmaneser I (Shulmanu-asharidu; c. 1263 – c. 1234) attacked Uruatru (later called Urartu)’ – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran – ‘in southern Armenia, which had allegedly broken away. Shattuara II of Hanigalbat, however, put him into a difficult situation, cutting his forces off from their water supplies. With courage born of despair, the Assyrians fought themselves free. They then set about reducing what was left of the Mitanni kingdom into an Assyrian province. The king claimed to have blinded 14,400 enemies in one eye – psychological warfare of a similar kind was used more and more as time went by. The Hittites tried in vain to save Hanigalbat. Together with the Babylonians they fought a commercial war against Ashur for many years. Like his father, Shalmaneser was a great builder. At the juncture of the Tigris and Great Zab rivers, he founded a strategically situated second capital, Kalakh (biblical Calah; modern Nimrud).

His son was Tukulti-Ninurta (c. 1233 – c. 1197), the Ninus of Greek legends. Gifted but extravagant, he made his nation a great power. He carried off thousands of Hittites from eastern Anatolia. He fought particularly hard against Babylonia, deporting Kashtiliash IV to Assyria. When the Babylonians rebelled again, he plundered the temples in Babylon, an act regarded as a sacrilege, even in Assyria. The relationship between the king and his capital deteriorated steadily. For this reason the king began to build a new city, Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta, on the other side of the Tigris River. Ultimately, even his sons rebelled against him and laid siege to him in his city; in the end he was murdered. His victorious wars against Babylonia were glorified in an epic poem, but his empire broke up soon after his death. Assyrian power declined for a time, while that of Babylonia rose. Assyria had suffered under the oppression of both the Hurrians and the Mitanni kingdom. Its struggle for liberation and the bitter wars that followed had much to do with its development into a military power. 

In his capital of Ashur, the king depended on the citizen class and the priesthood, as well as on the landed nobility that furnished him with the war-chariot troops. The breeding of horses was carried on intensively; remnants of elaborate directions for their training are extant’ – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. ‘After a period of decline following Tukulti-Ninurta I, Assyria was consolidated and stabilized under Ashur-dan I [1178-1133 BCE] and Ashur-resh-ishi I (c. 1133 – c. 1116). Several times forced to fight against Babylonia, the latter was even able to defend himself against an attack by Nebuchadrezzar I. According to the inscriptions, most of his building efforts were in Nineveh, rather than in the old capital of Ashur. His son Tiglath-pileser I (Tukulti-apil-Esharra; (c. 1115 – c. 1077) raised the power of Assyria to new heights. 

First he turned against a large army of the Mushki that had entered into southern Armenia from Anatolia, defeating them decisively. After this, he forced the small Hurrian states of southern Armenia to pay him tribute. Trained in mountain warfare themselves and helped by capable pioneers, the Assyrians were now able to advance far into the mountain regions’ – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. ‘Their main enemies were the Aramaeans… whose many small states often combined against the Assyrians’ – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

‘Tiglath-pileser I also went to Syria and even reached the Mediterranean, where he took a sea voyage. After 1100 these campaigns led to conflicts with Babylonia. Tiglath-pileser conquered northern Babylonia and plundered Babylon, without decisively defeating Marduk-nadin-ahhe. In his own country the king paid particular attention to agriculture and fruit growing, improved the administrative system, and developed more thorough methods of training scribes.

Three of his sons reigned after Tiglath-pileser, including Ashur-bel-kala (c. 1074 – c. 1057). Like his father, he fought in southern Armenia and against the Aramaeans with Babylonia as his ally. Disintegration of the empire could not be delayed, however. The grandson of Tiglath-pileser, Ashurnasirpal I (c. 1050 – c. 1032), was sickly and unable to do more than defend Assyria proper against his enemies. Fragments of three of his prayers to Ishtar are preserved; among them is a penitential prayer in which he wonders about the cause of so much adversity. Referring to his many good deeds but admitting his guilt at the same time, he asks for forgiveness and health. According to the king, part of his guilt lay in neglecting to teach his subjects the fear of god. After him, little is known for 100 years.

State and society during the time of Tiglath-pileser were not essentially different from those of the 13th century. Collections of laws, drafts, and edicts of the court exist that go back as far as the 14th century BCE. Presumably, most of these remained in effect. One tablet defining the marriage laws shows that the social position of women in Assyria was lower than in Babylonia or Israel or among the Hittites. A man was allowed to send away his wife at his own pleasure with or without divorce money. In the case of adultery, he was permitted to kill or maim her. Outside her house the woman was forced to observe many restrictions, such as the wearing of a veil. It is not clear whether these regulations carried the weight of law, but they seem to have represented a reaction against practices that were more favourable to women. 

Two somewhat older marriage contracts, for example, granted equal rights to both partners, even in divorce. The women of the king’s harem were subject to severe punishment, including beating, maiming, and death, along with those who guarded and looked after them. The penal laws of the time were generally more severe in Assyria than in other countries… The death penalty was not uncommon. In less serious cases the penalty was forced labour after flogging. In certain cases there was trial by ordeal. One tablet treats the subject of landed property rights. Offences against the established boundary lines called for extremely severe punishment. A creditor was allowed to force his debtor to work for him, but he could not sell him.

The greater part of Assyrian literature was either taken over from Babylonia or written by the Assyrians in the Babylonian dialect, who modeled their works on Babylonian originals. The Assyrian dialect was used in legal documents, court and temple rituals, and collections of recipes – as, for example, in directions for making perfumes. A new art form was the picture tale: a continuing series of pictures carved on square stelae of stone. The pictures, showing war or hunting scenes, begin at the top of the stela and run down around it, with inscriptions under the pictures explaining them. These and the finely cut seals show that the fine arts of Assyria were beginning to surpass those of Babylonia. Architecture and other forms of the monumental arts also began a further development, such as the double temple with its two towers (ziggurat). Colourful enameled tiles were used to decorate the facades.

The most important factor in the history of Mesopotamia in the 10th century was the continuing threat from the Aramaean[s]. Again and again, the kings of both Babylonia and Assyria were forced to repel their invasions. Even though the Aramaeans were not able to gain a foothold in the main cities, there are evidences of them in many rural areas. Ashur-dan II (934-912) succeeded in suppressing the Aramaeans and the mountain people, in this way stabilizing the Assyrian boundaries. He reintroduced the use of the Assyrian dialect in his written records.

Adad-nirari II (c. 911-891) left detailed accounts of his wars and his efforts to improve agriculture. He led six campaigns against Aramaean intruders from northern Arabia. In two campaigns against Babylonia he forced Shamash-mudammiq (c. 930–904) to surrender extensive territories. Shamash-mudammiq was murdered, and a treaty with his successor, Nabu-shum-ukin (c. 904–888), secured peace for many years. Tukulti-Ninurta II (c. 890–884), the son of Adad-nirari II, preferred Nineveh to Ashur. He fought campaigns in southern Armenia. He was portrayed on stelae in blue and yellow enamel in the late Hittite style, showing him under a winged sun – a theme adopted from Egyptian art. 

His son Ashurnasirpal II (883-859) continued the policy of conquest and expansion. He left a detailed account of his campaigns, which were impressive in their cruelty. Defeated enemies were impaled, flayed, or beheaded in great numbers. Mass deportations, however, were found to serve the interests of the growing empire better than terror. Through the systematic exchange of native populations, conquered regions were denationalized. The result was a submissive, mixed population in which the Aramaean element became the majority. This provided the labour force for the various public works in the metropolitan centres of the Assyrian empire. Ashurnasirpal II rebuilt Kalakh, founded by Shalmaneser I, and made it his capital. Ashur remained the centre of the worship of the god Ashur – in whose name all the wars of conquest were fought. A third capital was Nineveh.’

Remember the Russians have moved their capitals from Novgorod, Kiev, St Petersburg (Leningrad) and Moscow.

‘Ashurnasirpal II was the first to use cavalry units to any large extent in addition to infantry and war-chariot troops. He also was the first to employ heavy, mobile battering rams and wall breakers in his sieges. The campaigns of Ashurnasirpal II led him mainly to southern Armenia and Mesopotamia. 

After a series of heavy wars, he incorporated Mesopotamia as far as the Euphrates River. A campaign to Syria encountered little resistance. There was no great war against Babylonia. Ashurnasirpal, like other Assyrian kings, may have been moved by religion not to destroy Babylonia, which had almost the same gods as Assyria. Both empires must have profited from mutual trade and cultural exchange. The Babylonians, under the energetic Nabu-apla-iddina (c. 887-855) attacked the Aramaeans in southern Mesopotamia… Ashurnasirpal, so brutal in his wars, was able to inspire architects, structural engineers, and artists and sculptors to heights never before achieved. He built and enlarged temples and palaces in several cities. His most impressive monument was his own palace in Kalakh, covering a space of 269,000 square feet (25,000 square metres). Hundreds of large limestone slabs were used in murals in the staterooms and living quarters.’

Recall Pul or Pulu, is a well-known Assyrian name, which includes the meaning ‘limestone’ or ‘block of limestone.’

‘Most of the scenes were done in relief, but painted murals also have been found. Most of them depict mythological themes and symbolic fertility rites, with the king participating. Brutal war pictures were aimed to discourage enemies. The chief god of Kalakh was Ninurta, a god of war and the hunt. The tower of the temple dedicated to Ninurta also served as an astronomical observaotory. Kalakh soon became the cultural centre of the empire. Ashurnasirpal claimed to have entertained 69,574 guests at the opening ceremonies of his palace.

The son and successor of Ashurnasirpal was Shalmaneser III (858-824). His father’s equal in both brutality and energy, he was less realistic in his undertakings. His inscriptions, in a peculiar blend of Assyrian and Babylonian, record his considerable achievements but are not always able to conceal his failures. His campaigns were directed mostly against Syria. While he was able to conquer northern Syria and make it a province, in the south he could only weaken the strong state of Damascus [of the Aramaeans] and was unable, even after several wars, to eliminate it. In 841 he laid unsuccessful siege to Damascus.

Also in 841 King Jehu of Israel was forced to pay tribute. In his invasion of Cilicia, Shalmaneser had only partial success. The same was true of the kingdom of Urartu in Armenia, from which, however, the troops returned with immense quantities of lumber and building stone. The king and, in later years, the general Dayyan-Ashur went several times to western Iran, where they found such states as Mannai in northwestern Iran and, farther away in the southeast, the Persians. They also encountered the Medes during these wars. Horse tribute was collected’ – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

‘In Babylonia, Marduk-zakir-shumi I ascended the throne about the year 855. His brother Marduk-bel-usati rebelled against him, and in 851 the king was forced to ask Shalmaneser for help. Shalmaneser was only too happy to oblige; when the usurper had been finally eliminated (850), Shalmaneser went to southern Babylonia, which at that time was almost completely dominated by Aramaeans. There he encountered, among others, the Chaldeans, mentioned for the first time in 878 BCE, who were to play a leading role in the history of later times; Shalmaneser made them tributaries.

During his long reign he built temples, palaces, and fortifications in Assyria as well as in the other capitals of his provinces. His artists created many statues and stelae. Among the best known is the Black Obelisk, which includes a picture of Jehu of Israel paying tribute. In the last four years of the reign of Shalmaneser, the crown prince Ashur-da’in-apla led a rebellion. The old king appointed his younger son Shamshi-Adad as the new crown prince. Forced to flee to Babylonia, Shamshi-Adad V (823-811) finally managed to regain the kingship with the help of Marduk-zakir-shumi I under humiliating conditions. As king he campaigned with varying success in southern Armenia and Azerbaijan, later turning against Babylonia. He won several battles against the Babylonian kings Marduk-balassu-iqbi and Baba-aha-iddina (about 818-12) and pushed through to Chaldea. Babylonia remained independent, however.

Shamshi-Adad V died while Adad-nirari III (810-783) was still a minor. His Babylonian mother, Sammu-ramat, took over the regency, governing with great energy until 806. The Greeks, who called her Semiramis, credited her with legendary accomplishments, but historically little is known about her. Adad-nirari later led several campaigns against the Medes and also against Syria and Palestine. In 804 he reached Gaza, but Damascus [later the capital of the Aramaeans] proved invincible. He also fought in Babylonia, helping to restore order in the north. Shalmaneser IV (c. 783-773) fought against Urartu [of Lud], then at the height of its power under King Argishti (c. 780-755). He successfully defended eastern Mesopotamia against attacks from Armenia. On the other hand, he lost most of Syria after a campaign against Damascus in 773. The reign of Ashur-dan III (772-755) was shadowed by rebellions and by epidemics of plague. Of Ashur-nirari V (754-746) little is known.

In Assyria the feudal structure of society remained largely unchanged. Many of the conquered lands were combined to form large provinces. The governors of these provinces sometimes acquired considerable independence, particularly under the weaker monarchs after Adad-nirari III. Some of them even composed their own inscriptions. The influx of displaced peoples into the cities of Assyria created large metropolitan centres. The spoils of war, together with an expanding trade, favoured the development of a well-to-do commercial class. The dense population of the cities gave rise to social tensions that only the strong kings were able to contain. 

A number of the former capitals of the conquered lands remained important as capitals of provinces. There was much new building. A standing occupational force was needed in the provinces, and these troops grew steadily in proportion to the total military forces. There are no records on the training of officers or on military logistics. The civil service also expanded, the largest administrative body being the royal court, with thousands of functionaries and craftsmen in the several residential cities.

The cultural decline about the year 1000 was overcome during the reigns of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III. The arts in particular experienced a tremendous resurgence. Literary works continued to be written in Assyrian and were seldom of great importance. The literature that had been taken over from Babylonia was further developed with new writings, although one can rarely distinguish between works written in Assyria and works written in Babylonia. In religion, the official cults of Ashur and Ninurta continued, while the religion of the common people went its separate way.

For no other period of Assyrian history is there an abundance of sources comparable to those available for the interval from roughly 745 to 640. Aside from the large number of royal inscriptions, about 2,400 letters, most of them more or less fragmentary, have been published. Usually the senders and recipients of these letters are the king and high government officials. Among them are reports from royal agents about foreign affairs and letters about cultic matters. Treaties, oracles, queries to the sun god about political matters, and prayers of or for kings contain a great deal of additional information. Last but certainly not least are paintings and wall reliefs, which are often very informative.

The decline of Assyrian power after 780 was notable; Syria and considerable lands in the north were lost. A military coup deposed King Ashur-nirari V and raised a general to the throne. Under the name of Tiglath-pileser III (745-727), he brought the empire to its greatest expanse. He reduced the size of the provinces in order to break the partial independence of the governors. He also invalidated the tax privileges of cities such as Ashur and Harran in order to distribute the tax load more evenly over the entire realm. Military equipment was improved substantially. In 746 he went to Babylonia to aid Nabu-nasir (747-734) in his fight against Aramaean tribes. Tiglath-pileser defeated the Aramaeans and then made visits to the large cities of Babylonia. There he tried to secure the support of the priesthood by patronizing their building projects. Babylonia retained its independence.

His next undertaking was to check Urartu [modern day Persians]. His campaigns in Azerbaijan were designed to drive a wedge between Urartu [Lud] and the Medes [Madai]. In 743 he went to Syria, defeating there an army of Urartu. The Syrian city of Arpad, which had formed an alliance with Urartu, did not surrender so easily. It took Tiglath-pileser three years of siege to conquer Arpad, whereupon he massacred the inhabitants and destroyed the city. In 738 a new coalition formed against Assyria under the leadership of Sam’al (modern Zincirli) in northern Syria. It was defeated, and all the princes from Damascus to eastern Anatolia were forced to pay tribute. Another campaign in 735, this time directed against Urartu itself, was only partly successful. 

In 734 Tiglath-pileser invaded southern Syria and the Philistine territories in Palestine, going as far as the Egyptian border. Damascus and Israel tried to organize resistance against him, seeking to bring Judah into their alliance. Ahaz of Judah, however, asked Tiglath-pileser for help. In 733 Tiglath-pileser devastated Israel and forced it to surrender large territories. In 732 he advanced upon Damascus, first devastating the gardens outside the city and then conquering the capital and killing the king, whom he replaced with a governor. The queen of southern Arabia, Samsil, was now obliged to pay tribute, being permitted in return to use the harbour of the city of Gaza, which was in Assyrian hands.

The death of King Nabonassar of Babylonia caused a chaotic situation to develop there, and the Aramaean Ukin-zer crowned himself king. In 731 Tiglath-pileser fought and beat him and his allies, but he did not capture Ukin-zer until 729. This time he did not appoint a new king for Babylonia but assumed the crown himself under the name Pulu (Pul in the Hebrew Bible). In his old age he abstained from further campaigning, devoting himself to the improvement of his capital, Kalakh. He rebuilt the palace of Shalmaneser III, filled it with treasures from his wars, and decorated the walls with bas-reliefs. The latter were almost all of warlike character, as if designed to intimidate the onlooker with their presentation of gruesome executions. These pictorial narratives on slabs, sometimes painted, have also been found in Syria, at the sites of several provincial capitals of ancient Assyria.

Tiglath-pileser was succeeded by his son Shalmaneser V (726-722), who continued the policy of his father. As king of Babylonia, he called himself Ululai. Almost nothing is known about his enterprises, since his successor destroyed all his inscriptions. The Hebrew Bible relates that he marched against Hoshea of Israel in 724 after Hoshea had rebelled. He was probably assassinated during the long siege of Samaria. His successor maintained that the god Ashur had withdrawn his support of Shalmaneser V for acts of disrespect.

It was probably a younger brother of Shalmaneser who ascended the throne of Assyria in 721. Assuming the old name of Sharru-kin (Sargon in the Bible), meaning “Legitimate King,” he assured himself of the support of the priesthood and the merchant class by restoring privileges they had lost, particularly the tax exemptions of the great temples. The change of sovereign in Assyria triggered another crisis in Babylonia. 

An Aramaean prince from the south, Marduk-apal-iddina II (the biblical Merodach-Baladan), seized power in Babylon in 721 and was able to retain it until 710 with the help of Humbanigash I of Elam. A first attempt by Sargon to recover Babylonia miscarried when Elam defeated him in 721. During the same year the protracted siege of Samaria was brought to a close. The Samarian upper class was deported, and Israel became an Assyrian province. Samaria was repopulated with Syrians [Aramaeans] and Babylonians [Chaldeans]. Judah remained independent by paying tribute. In 720 Sargon squelched a rebellion in Syria that had been supported by Egypt. Then he defeated both Hanunu of Gaza and an Egyptian army near the Egyptian border. In 717 and 716 he campaigned in northern Syria, making the hitherto independent state of Carchemish one of his provinces. He also went to Cilicia in an effort to prevent further encroachments of the Phrygians under King Midas (Assyrian: Mita).

In order to protect his ally, the state of Mannai, in Azerbaijan, Sargon embarked on a campaign in Iran in 719 and incorporated parts of Media as provinces of his empire; however, in 716 another war became necessary. At the same time, he was busy preparing a major attack against Urartu. Under the leadership of the crown prince Sennacherib, armies of agents infiltrated Urartu, which was also threatened from the north by the Cimmerians. 

Many of their messages and reports have been preserved. The longest inscription ever composed by the Assyrians about a year’s enterprise (430 very long lines) is dedicated to this Urartu campaign of 714. Phrased in the style of a first report to the god Ashur, it is interspersed with stirring descriptions of natural scenery. The strong points of Urartu must have been well fortified. Sargon tried to avoid them by going through the province of Mannai and attacking the Median principalities on the eastern side of Lake Urmia. In the meantime, hoping to surprise the Assyrian troops, Rusa of Urartu had closed the narrow pass lying between Lake Urmia and Sahand Mount. Sargon, anticipating this, led a small band of cavalry in a surprise charge that developed into a great victory for the Assyrians’ – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. ‘Rusa fled and died. The Assyrians pushed forward, destroying all the cities, fortifications, and even irrigation works of Urartu. They did not conquer Tushpa (the capital) but took possession of the mountain city of Musasir. The spoils were immense. The following years saw only small campaigns in Media and eastern Anatolia and against Ashdod, in Palestine. King Midas of Phrygia and some cities on Cyprus were quite ready to pay tribute.

Sargon was now free to settle accounts with Marduk-apal-iddina of Babylonia. Abandoned by his ally Shutruk-Nahhunte II of Elam, Marduk-apal-iddina found it best to flee, first to his native land on the Persian Gulf and later to Elam. Because the Aramaean prince had made himself very unpopular with his subjects, Sargon was hailed as the liberator of Babylonia. He complied with the wishes of the priesthood and at the same time put down the Aramaean nobility. He was satisfied with the modest title of governor of Babylonia.

At first Sargon resided in Kalakh, but he then decided to found an entirely new capital north of Nineveh. He called the city Dur-Sharrukin – “Sargons-burg” (modern Khorsabad, Iraq). Reminiscent of a certain Peter the Great, who moved his capital from Moscow to St Petersburg in 1713!

He erected his palace on a high terrace in the northeastern part of the city. The temples of the main gods, smaller in size, were built within the palatial rectangle, which was surrounded by a special wall. This arrangement enabled Sargon to supervise the priests better than had been possible in the old, large temple complexes. One consequence of this design was that the figure of the king pushed the gods somewhat into the background, thereby gaining in importance. Desiring that his palace match the vastness of his empire, Sargon planned it in monumental dimensions. Stone reliefs of two winged bulls with human heads flanked the entrance; they were much larger than anything comparable built before. 

The walls were decorated with long rows of bas-reliefs showing scenes of war and festive processions. A comparison with a well-executed stela of the Babylonian king Marduk-apal-iddina shows that the fine arts of Assyria had far surpassed those of Babylonia. Sargon never completed his capital, though from 713 to 705 BCE tens of thousands of labourers and hundreds of artisans worked on the great city. Yet, with the exception of some magnificent buildings for public officials, only a few durable edifices were completed in the residential section. In 705, in a campaign in northwestern Iran, Sargon was ambushed and killed. His corpse remained unburied, to be devoured by birds of prey. 

Sargon’s son Sennacherib, who had quarreled with his father, was inclined to believe with the priests that his death was a punishment from the neglected gods of the ancient capitals. Sennacherib (Assyrian: Sin-ahhe-eriba; 704-681) was well prepared for his position as sovereign. With him Assyria acquired an exceptionally clever and gifted, though often extravagant, ruler. His father, interestingly enough, is not mentioned in any of his many inscriptions. He left the new city of Dur-Sharrukin at once and resided in Ashur for a few years, until in 701 he made Nineveh his capital.

Sennacherib had considerable difficulties with Babylonia. In 703 Marduk-apal-iddina again crowned himself king with the aid of Elam, proceeding at once to ally himself with other enemies of Assyria. After nine months he was forced to withdraw when Sennacherib defeated a coalition army consisting of Babylonians, Aramaeans, and Elamites. The new puppet king of Babylonia was Bel-ibni (702–700), who had been raised in Assyria.

In 702 Sennacherib launched a raid into western Iran. In 701 there followed his most famous campaign, against Syria and Palestine, with the purpose of gaining control over the main road from Syria to Egypt in preparation for later campaigns against Egypt itself. When Sennacherib’s army approached, Sidon immediately expelled its ruler, Luli, who was hostile to Assyria. The other allies either surrendered or were defeated. An Egyptian army was defeated at Eltekeh in Judah. Sennacherib laid siege to Jersualem, and the king of Judah, Hezekiah, was called upon to surrender, but he did not comply. 

An Assyrian officer tried to incite the people of Jerusalem against Hezekiah, but his efforts failed. In view of the difficulty of surrounding a mountain stronghold such as Jerusalem, and of the minor importance of this town for the main purpose of the campaign, Sennacherib cut short the attack and left Palestine with his army, which according to the Hebrew Bible (2 Kings 19:35) had been decimated by an epidemic. The number of Assyrian dead is reported to have risen to 185,000. Nevertheless, Hezekiah is reported to have paid tribute to Sennacherib on at least one occasion.

Bel-ibni of Babylonia seceded from the union with Assyria in 700. Sennacherib moved quickly, defeating Bel-ibni and replacing him with Sennacherib’s oldest son, Ashur-nadin-shumi. The next few years were relatively peaceful. Sennacherib used this time to prepare a decisive attack against Elam, which time and again had supported Babylonian rebellions. The overland route to Elam had been cut off and fortified by the Elamites. Sennacherib had ships built in Syria and at Nineveh. The ships from Syria were moved on rollers from the Euphrates to the Tigris. The fleet sailed downstream and was quite successful in the lagoons of the Persian Gulf and along the southern coastline of Elam. The Elamites launched a counteroffensive by land, occupying Babylonia and putting a man of their choice on the throne. Not until 693 were the Assyrians again able to fight their way through to the north. Finally, in 689, Sennacherib had his revenge. Babylon was conquered and completely destroyed, the temples plundered and leveled. The waters of the Arakhtu Canal were diverted over the ruins, and the inner city remained almost totally uninhabited for eight years. 

Even many Assyrians were indignant at this, believing that the Babylonian god Marduk must be grievously offended at the destruction of his temple and the carrying off of his image. Marduk was also an Assyrian deity, to whom many Assyrians turned in time [of] need. A political-theological propaganda campaign was launched to explain to the people that what had taken place was in accord with the wish of most of the gods. 

A story was written in which Marduk, because of a transgression, was captured and brought before a tribunal. Only a part of the commentary to this botched piece of literature is extant. Even the great poem of the creation of the world, the Enuma relish, was altered: the god Marduk was replaced by the god Ashur. Sennacherib’s boundless energies brought no gain to his empire, however, and probably weakened it. The tenacity of this king can be seen in his building projects; for example, when Nineveh needed water for irrigation, Sennacherib had his engineers divert the waters of a tributary of the Great Zab River. The canal had to cross a valley at Jerwan. An aqueduct was constructed, consisting of about two million blocks of limestone, with five huge, pointed archways over the brook in the valley. The bed of the canal on the aqueduct was sealed with cement containing magnesium. Parts of this aqueduct are still standing today. Sennacherib wrote of these and other technological accomplishments in minute detail, with illustrations.

Sennacherib built a huge palace in Nineveh, adorned with reliefs, some of them depicting the transport of colossal bull statues by water and by land. Many of the rooms were decorated with pictorial narratives in bas-relief telling of war and of building activities. Considerable advances can be noted in artistic execution, particularly in the portrayal of landscapes and animals. Outstanding are the depictions of the battles in the lagoons, the life in the military camps, and the deportations. In 681 BCE there was a rebellion. Sennacherib was assassinated by one or two of his sons in the temple of the god Ninurta at Kalakh. This god, along with the god Marduk, had been badly treated by Sennacherib, and the event was widely regarded as punishment of divine origin.

Ignoring the claims of his older brothers, an imperial council appointed Esarhaddon (Ashur-aha-iddina; 680-669) as Sennacherib’s successor. The choice is all the more difficult to explain in that Esarhaddon, unlike his father, was friendly toward the Babylonians. It can be assumed that his energetic and designing mother, Zakutu (Naqia), who came from Syria or Judah, used all her influence on his behalf to override the national party of Assyria. The theory that he was a partner in plotting the murder of his father is rather improbable; at any rate, he was able to procure the loyalty of his father’s army. His brothers had to flee to Urartu. In his inscriptions, Esarhaddon always mentions both his father and grandfather.

Defining the destruction of Babylon explicitly as punishment by the god Marduk, the new king soon ordered the reconstruction of the city. He referred to himself only as governor of Babylonia and through his policies obtained the support of the cities of Babylonia. At the beginning of his reign the Aramaean tribes were still allied with Elam against him, but Urtaku of Elam (675-664) signed a peace treaty and freed him for campaigning elsewhere. In 679 he stationed a garrison at the Egyptian border, because Egypt, under the Ethiopian king Taharqa, was planning to intervene in Syria. 

He put down with great severity a rebellion of the combined forces of Sidon, Tyre, and other Syrian cities. The time was ripe to attack Egypt, which was suffering under the rule of the Ethiopians [descended from Cush] and was by no means a united country. Esarhaddon’s first attempt in 674-673 miscarried. In 671 BCE, however, his forces took Memphis, the Egyptian capital. Assyrian consultants were assigned to assist the princes of the 22 provinces, their main duty being the collection of tribute.

Occasional threats came from the mountainous border regions of eastern Anatolia and Iran. Pushed forward by the Scythians, the Cimmerians in northern Iran and Transcaucasia tried to gain a foothold in Syria and western Iran. Esarhaddon allied himself with the Scythian king Partatua by giving him one of his daughters in marriage. In so doing he checked the movement of the Cimmerians. Nevertheless, the apprehensions of Esarhaddon can be seen in his many offerings, supplications, and requests to the sun god’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘These were concerned less with his own enterprises than with the plans of enemies and vassals and the reliability of civil servants. The priestesses of Ishtar had to reassure Esarhaddon constantly by calling out to him, “Do not be afraid.” Previous kings, as far as is known, had never needed this kind of encouragement.

At home Esarhaddon was faced with serious difficulties from factions in the court. His oldest son had died early. The national party suspected his second son, Shamash-shum-ukin, of being too friendly with the Babylonians; he may also have been considered unequal to the task of kingship. His third son, Ashurbanipal, was given the succession in 672, Shamash-shum-ukin remaining crown prince of Babylonia. This arrangement caused much dissension, and some farsighted civil servants warned of disastrous effects. Nevertheless, the Assyrian nobles, priests, and city leaders were sworn to just such an adjustment of the royal line; even the vassal princes had to take very detailed oaths of allegiance to Ashurbanipal, with many curses against perjurers.

Another matter of deep concern for Esarhaddon was his failing health. He regarded eclipses of the moon as particularly alarming omens, and, in order to prevent a fatal illness from striking him at these times, he had substitute kings chosen who ruled during the three eclipses that occurred during his 12-year reign. The replacement kings died or were put to death after their brief term of office. During his off-terms Esarhaddon called himself “Mister Peasant.” This practice implied that the gods could not distinguish between the real king and a false one – quite contrary to the usual assumptions of the religion. Esarhaddon enlarged and improved the temples in both Assyria and Babylonia. He also constructed a palace in Kalakh, using many of the picture slabs of Tiglath-pileser III. The works that remain are not on the level of those of either his predecessors or of Ashurbanipal. He died while on an expedition to put down a revolt in Egypt.

Although the death of his father occurred far from home, Ashurbanipal assumed the kingship as planned. He may have owed his fortunes to the intercession of his grandmother Zakutu, who had recognized his superior capacities. He tells of his diversified education by the priests and his training in armour-making as well as in other military arts. He may have been the only king in Assyria with a scholarly background. As crown prince he also had studied the administration of the vast empire. The record notes that the gods granted him a record harvest during the first year of his reign. There were also good crops in subsequent years. During these first years he also was successful in foreign policy, and his relationship with his brother in Babylonia was good.

In 668 he put down a rebellion in Egypt and drove out King Taharqa, but in 664 the nephew of Taharqa, Tanutamon, gathered forces for a new rebellion. Ashurbanipal went to Egypt, pursuing the Ethiopian prince far into the south. His decisive victory moved Tyre and other parts of the empire to resume regular payments of tribute. Ashurbanipal installed Psamtik (Greek: Psammetichos) as prince over the Egyptian region of Sais. In 656 Psamtik dislodged the Assyrian garrisons with the aid of Carian and Ionian mercenaries, making Egypt again independent. Ashurbanipal did not attempt to reconquer it. A former ally of Assyria, Gyges of Lydia, had aided Psamtik in his rebellion. In return, Assyria did not help Gyges when he was attacked by the Cimmerians. Gyges lost his throne and his life. His son Ardys decided that the payment of tribute to Assyria was a lesser evil than conquest by the Cimmerians.

Graver difficulties loomed in southern Babylonia, which was attacked by Elam in 664. Another attack came in 653, whereupon Ashurbanipal sent a large army that decisively defeated the Elamites. Their king was killed, and some of the Elamite states were encouraged to secede. Elam was no longer strong enough to assume an active part on the international scene. This victory had serious consequences for Babylonia. Shamash-shum-ukin had grown weary of being patronized by his domineering brother. He formed a secret alliance in 656 with the Iranians, Elamites, Aramaeans, Arabs, and Egyptians, directed against Ashurbanipal. The withdrawal of defeated Elam from this alliance was probably the reason for a premature attack by Shamash-shum-ukin at the end of the year 652, without waiting for the promised assistance from Egypt. 

Ashurbanipal, taken by surprise, soon pulled his troops together. The Babylonian army was defeated, and Shamash-shum-ukin was surrounded in his fortified city of Babylon. His allies were not able to hold their own against the Assyrians. Reinforcements of Arabian camel troops also were defeated. The city of Babylon was under siege for three years. It fell in 648 amid scenes of horrible carnage, Shamash-shum-ukin dying in his burning palace. After 648 the Assyrians made a few punitive attacks on the Arabs, breaking the forward thrust of the Arab tribes for a long time to come.

The main objective of the Assyrians, however, was a final settlement of their relations with Elam. The refusal of Elam in 647 to extradite an Aramaean prince was used as pretext for a new attack that drove deep into its territory. The assault on the solidly fortified capital of Susa followed, probably in 646. The Assyrians destroyed the city, including its temples and palaces. Vast spoils were taken. As usual, the upper classes of the land were exiled to Assyria and other parts of the empire, and Elam became an Assyrian province. Assyria had now extended its domain to southwestern Iran. Cyrus I of Persia sent tribute and hostages to Nineveh, hoping perhaps to secure protection for his borders with Media. Little is known about the last years of Ashurbanipal’s reign.

Ashurbanipal left more inscriptions than any of his predecessors. His campaigns were not always recorded in chronological order but clustered in groups according to their purpose. The accounts were highly subjective. One of his most remarkable accomplishments was the founding of the great palace library in Nineveh (modern Kuyunjik), which is today one of the most important sources for the study of ancient Mesopotamia. The king himself supervised its construction. Important works were kept in more than one copy, some intended for the king’s personal use. The work of arranging and cataloging drew upon the experience of centuries in the management of collections in huge temple archives such as the one in Ashur. In his inscriptions Ashurbanipal tells of becoming an enthusiastic hunter of big game, acquiring a taste for it during a fight with marauding lions. In his palace at Nineveh the long rows of hunting scenes show what a masterful artist can accomplish in bas-relief; with these reliefs Assyrian art reached its peak. In the series depicting his wars, particularly the wars fought in Elam, the scenes are overloaded with human figures. Those portraying the battles with the Arabian camel troops are magnificent in execution.

One reason for the durability of the Assyrian empire was the practice of deporting large numbers of people from conquered areas and resettling others in their place. This kept many of the conquered nationalities from regaining their power. Equally important was the installation in conquered areas of a highly developed civil service under the leadership of trained officers. The highest ranking civil servant carried the title of tartan, a Hurrian word. The tartans also represented the king during his absence. In descending rank were the palace overseer, the main cupbearer, the palace administrator, and the governor of Assyria. The generals often held high official positions, particularly in the provinces. The civil service numbered about 100,000, many of them former inhabitants of subjugated provinces. Prisoners became slaves but were later often freed.

No laws are known for the empire, although documents point to the existence of rules and standards for justice. Those who broke contracts were subject to severe penalties, even in cases of minor importance: the sacrifice of a son or the eating of a pound of wool and drinking of a great deal of water afterward, which led to a painful death. The position of women was inferior, except for the queen and some priestesses. 

As yet there are no detailed studies of the economic situation during this period. The landed nobility still played an important role, in conjunction with the merchants in the cities. The large increase in the supply of precious metals – received as tribute or taken as spoils – did not disrupt economic stability in many regions. Stimulated by the patronage of the kings and the great temples, the arts and crafts flourished during this period. The policy of resettling Aramaeans and other conquered peoples in Assyria brought many talented artists and artisans into Assyrian cities, where they introduced new styles and techniques. High-ranking provincial civil servants, who were often very powerful, saw to it that the provincial capitals also benefited from this economic and cultural growth.

Harran became the most important city in the western part of the empire; in the neighbouring settlement of Huzirina (modern Sultantepe, in northern Syria), the remains of an important library have been discovered. Very few Aramaic texts from this period have been found; the climate of Mesopotamia is not conducive to the preservation of the papyrus and parchment on which these texts were written. There is no evidence that a literary tradition existed in any of the other languages spoken within the borders of the Assyrian empire at this time, except in peripheral areas of Syria and Palestine.

Culturally and economically, Babylonia lagged behind Assyria in this period. The wars with Assyria – particularly the catastrophic defeats of 689 and 648 – together with many smaller tribal wars disrupted trade and agricultural production. The great Babylonian temples fared best during this period, since they continued to enjoy the patronage of the Assyrian monarchs. Only a few documents from the temples have been preserved, however. There is evidence that the scribal schools continued to operate, and “Sumerian” inscriptions were even composed for Shamash-shum-ukin. In comparison with the Assyrian developments, the pictorial arts were neglected, and Babylonian artists may have found work in Assyria.

During this period people began to use the names of ancestors as a kind of family name; this increase in family consciousness is probably an indication that the number of old families was growing smaller. By this time the process of “Aramaicization” had reached even the oldest cities of Babylonia and Assyria. Apparently this era was not very fruitful for literature either in Babylonia or in Assyria. In Assyria numerous royal inscriptions, some as long as 1,300 lines, were among the most important texts; some of them were diverse in content and well composed. Most of the hymns and prayers were written in the traditional style. Many oracles, often of unusual content, were proclaimed in the Assyrian dialect, most often by the priestesses of the goddess Ishtar of Arbela. In Assyria as in Babylonia, the beginnings of a real historical literature are observed; most of the authors have remained anonymous up to the present.

The many gods of the tradition were worshiped in Babylonia and Assyria in large and small temples, as in earlier times. Very detailed rituals regulated the sacrifices, and the interpretations of the ritual performances in the cultic commentaries were rather different and sometimes very strange. On some of the temple towers (ziggurats), astronomical observatories were installed. The earliest of these may have been the observatory of the Ninurta temple at Kalakh in Assyria, which dates back to the 9th century BCE; it was destroyed with the city in 612. The most important observatory in Babylonia from about 580 was situated on the ziggurat Etemenanki, a temple of Marduk in Babylon. In Assyria the observation of the Sun, Moon, and stars had already reached a rather high level; the periodic recurrence of eclipses was established. After 600, astronomical observation and calculations developed steadily, and they reached their high point after 500, when Babylonian and Greek astronomers began their fruitful collaboration. Incomplete astronomical diaries, beginning in 652 and covering some 600 years, have been preserved. Few historical sources remain for the last 30 years of the Assyrian empire. There are no extant inscriptions of Ashurbanipal after 640 BCE, and the few surviving inscriptions of his successors contain only vague allusions to political matters. In Babylonia the silence is almost total until 625 BCE, when the chronicles resume. The rapid downfall of the Assyrian empire was formerly attributed to military defeat, although it was never clear how the Medes and the Babylonians alone could have accomplished this.’

Part of the answer is that the Scythians were an ally of the Medes and Chaldeans and involved in the overthrow of Assyria.

‘More recent work has established that after 635 a civil war occurred, weakening the empire so that it could no longer stand up against a foreign enemy. Ashurbanipal had twin sons. Ashur-etel-ilani was appointed successor to the throne, but his twin brother Sin-shar-ishkun did not recognize him. The fight between them and their supporters forced the old king to withdraw to Harran, in 632 at the latest, perhaps ruling from there over the western part of the empire until his death in 627. Ashur-etel-ilani governed in Assyria from about 633, but a general, Sin-shum-lisher, soon rebelled against him and proclaimed himself counter-king. Some years later (629?) Sin-shar-ishkun finally succeeded in obtaining the kingship. In Babylonian documents dates can be found for all three kings. To add to the confusion, until 626 there are also dates of Ashurbanipal and a king named Kandalanu. 

In 626 the Chaldean Nabopolassar (Nabu-apal-uṣur) revolted from Urek and occupied Babylon. There were several changes in government. King Ashur-etel-ilani was forced to withdraw to the west, where he died sometime after 625. About the year 626 the Scythians laid waste to Syria and Palestine. In 625 the Medes became united under Cyaxares and began to conquer the Iranian provinces of Assyria. One chronicle relates of wars between Sin-shar-ishkun and Nabopolassar in Babylonia in 625-623. It was not long until the Assyrians were driven out of Babylonia. In 616 the Medes struck against Nineveh, but, according to the Greek historian Herodotus, were driven back by the Scythians. In 615, however, the Medes conquered Arrapkha (Kirkuk), and in 614 they took the old capital of Ashur, looting and destroying the city. Now Cyaxares and Nabopolassar made an alliance for the purpose of dividing Assyria. In 612 Kalakh and Nineveh succumbed to the superior strength of the allies. The revenge taken on the Assyrians was terrible: 200 years later Xenophon found the country still sparsely populated.

Sin-shar-ishkun, king of Assyria, found death in his burning palace. The commander of the Assyrian army in the west crowned himself king in the city of Harran, assuming the name of the founder of the empire, Ashur-uballiṭ II (611–609 BCE). Ashur-uballiṭ had to face both the Babylonians and the Medes. They conquered Harran in 610, without, however, destroying the city completely. In 609 the remaining Assyrian troops had to capitulate. With this event Assyria disappeared from history. The great empires that succeeded it learned a great deal from the hated Assyrians, both in the arts and in the organization of their states.’

The double headed eagle, an ancient symbol of Assyria and their allies the Hittites – above. Most famously associated with the Byzantine Empire – below. 

Czar Ivan III ruled from 1462 to 1505 and instituted the black double-headed** eagle as an official emblem of the Russian state; for he was eager to create a link between Byzantium and Russia (which is more than a random coincidence). It featured as a design motif in the regalia of the Russian Imperial Court until the fall of the monarchy in 1917. 

In 1992 the Russian Federation restored it to the state coat of arms. In Russia, the double-headed eagle was accompanied by another national symbol: a horseman slaying a serpent with a spear, portrayed on a shield. The horseman is a symbol of Russia’s capital, Moscow and usually represents St George the Victorious. Notice the small saltire in the tail feathers, reminiscent of Scotland’s State flag. It is worthy to note that the horseman slaying a dragon (serpent) is in eerie similitude with the tribe of Dan, who are described as a serpent who bites a horse’s heels, bringing down its rider – Genesis 49:17. There is considerably more to learn about the tribe of Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

The coat of arms has changed throughout history, with the eagle changing from gold to black and then back to its current gold; as well as losing and gaining the crowns over the heads. Currently, each head is topped with another crown floating between them, which once more symbolizes unity. In its talons, the eagle holds an orb and a sceptre – symbols of power and authority. The current interpretation of the coat of arms is quite similar to those used in the Russian Empire. After the monarchy was overthrown in 1917, the eagle became white; then the Bolsheviks gave the bird a rest for about 70 years, replacing it with the communist hammer and sickle.

Prior to Asshur’s re-appearance from the embryonic Rus and long after their demise as the Assyrian Empire, the descendants of Asshur held another lengthy period of preeminence on the world stage as the rulers of the early period of the Eastern Roman Empire. A fascinating connection between the Byzantine Empire and Russia, is the use of the term Tzar and Czar (or Csar) for their kings and the etymological link with C-ae-sar, the rulers of the Roman empire. 

The family name of Romanov in Russia derived from the word Roman. The Russian alphabet remarkably resembles the Greek alphabet and its letters used by Byzantium. Russia’s state religion is Eastern Orthodox Christianity, the most similar to yet still distinct from, Roman Catholicism. Assyria also had a parallel system of worship to ancient Babylon, substituting their god Assur for the Babylonian Marduk – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. 

Marduk is thought to be derived from amar-Utu, the ‘immortal son of Utu’ or ‘the bull calf of the sun god Utu’ – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy, Addendum II. The double-headed** Sumerian sun god had the epithet Bel from Baal, meaning Lord. Marduk was also known as the storm god – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino & Hispano America. More than coincidently, Nimrod also, was revered as the god, Marduk.

Salient points are that Marduk is associated with the planet Jupiter, also important in the Roman pantheon of gods. Marduk is often depicted as a man and his predominant symbol is a serpentine dragon. Marduk ascended to great power after being chosen to lead the Annunaki gods during a cosmic civil war… the primeval angelic rebellion – refer Samael: Chapter XXII Alpa & Omega. As an aside, Marduk was the god revered by the great Nebuchadnezzar II of Chaldea-Babylon.

Shamash was the Sumerian sun god, though Assur was also represented as the solar disc that appears frequently in Assyrian iconography. Typically, the symbol of Assur was a winged disc with horns (symbol for the crescent Moon) and rippling rays either side a circle or wheel, suspended from wings, enclosing a warrior drawing a bow to discharge an arrow. A comment online states: ‘An Assyrian standard… has the disc mounted on a bull’s head with horns. The upper part of the disc is occupied by a warrior, whose head, part of his bow, and the point of his arrow protrude from the circle. The rippling water rays are V-shaped, and two bulls, treading river-like rays, occupy the divisions thus formed. There are also two heads^ – a lion’s and a man’s – with gaping mouths (refer article: Belphegor), which may symbolize tempests, the destroying power of the sun, or the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates.’

Jastrow regards the winged disc as “the purer and more genuine symbol of Ashur as a solar deity”.  He calls it “a sun disc with protruding rays”, and says: “To this symbol the warrior with the bow and arrow was added – a despiritualization that reflects the martial spirit of the Assyrian empire.” Notice the depiction of Assur with an eagles^ head – refer Cherubim, article: The Ark of God; and article: Thoth.

In the past, Assyria kindled an allied relationship with the Hittites to their west in Anatolia, later eclipsing them. Millennia onwards, Asshur replicated the relationship, as the Eastern Roman Empire which evolved from and later shaded the western leg of the Roman Empire – the original founding Romans – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Russia in modern times has maintained a covert relationship with these present day Hittites. Who financed in part, the 1917 Revolution and lent support after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In return, Russia has provided military technology to the similarly warlike modern day Hittites. 

The Byzantine Empire was the continuation of the Roman Empire in its eastern provinces, when its capital was Constantinople – formerly Byzantium, now Istanbul. It survived the fragmentation and fall of the Western Roman Empire in the fifth century CE and continued to exist for an additional thousand years until it fell to the Ottoman Empire in 1453. During most of its existence, the empire was the most powerful economic, cultural and military presence in Europe.

We learned with ancient Elam how its power faded, with its people migrating and re-appearing as the Persians. Their original home and the people who remained dwelling there are called Elam by historians, even though they were not originally Elamites – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.  

Similarly, portions of Asshur migrated northwards during the middle of the first millennium CE. Gradually leaving their name Byzantium behind as evidence and re-surfacing as the early Rus. The Russian peoples progressively grew more powerful as the subsequent waves of migrants arrived, leaving Byzantium successively weaker.

The name Byzantine Empire, is a term created after the end of the realm, as its citizens continued to refer to their empire simply as the Roman Empire and to themselves as Romans. Though the Roman state continued and its traditions were maintained, historians confirm the difference in distinguishing Byzantium from its predecessor the empire of Rome. For it was centred in Constantinople not Rome and oriented towards Greek rather than Latin culture; characterised by Eastern Orthodox Christianity as opposed to Roman Catholicism.

Several events occurring from the fourth to sixth centuries mark the period of transition during which the Roman Empire’s Greek East and Latin West diverged. Constantine I – whom in more than passing, we have mentioned regarding the Council of Nicaea and the Arian controversy – ruling from 306 to 337 CE sought to unify the empire – Articles: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. He established Constantinople as the new capital in 330 CE – again, an Asshurite proclivity – while legalising Christianity, giving it imperial preference. Under Theodosius I from 379 to 395, Christianity officially became the formal state religion. In the reign of Heraclius during 610 to 641, the Empire’s military and administration were restructured; as was the adoption of Greek for official use – replacing Latin.

The West had suffered heavily from the instability of the third century CE and the distinction between the Hellenised East and the Latinised West persisted; becoming increasingly important in later centuries, leading to a gradual estrangement of the two Roman worlds. An early instance of the partition of the Empire occurred in 293 when Emperor Diocletian created a new administrative system, the tetrarchy, to guarantee security in all endangered regions of the Empire. He associated himself with a co-emperor, Augustus and each co-emperor then adopted a young colleague given the title of Caesar to share in their rule and eventually to succeed the senior emperor. The tetrarchy was short-lived, collapsing in 313 with Constantine I reuniting the two administrative divisions of the Empire as the sole Augustus.

Theodosius I was the last Emperor to rule both the Eastern and Western halves of the Empire. In 391 and 392 he issued a series of edicts banning pagan religion. Pagan festivals and sacrifices were banned, as was access to all pagan temples and places of worship. The last Olympic Games are believed to have been held in 393 CE. In 395, Theodosius I bequeathed the imperial office jointly to his sons: Arcadius in the East and Honorius in the West, effectively dividing Imperial administration. During the fifth century the Eastern empire was spared the difficulties faced by the West. It had a more established urban culture and greater financial resources, allowing it to placate invaders with tribute or pay foreign mercenaries. 

For instance, to fend off the Huns, Theodosius had to pay an enormous annual tribute to Attila. After the fall of Attila, the Eastern Empire enjoyed a period of peace, while the Western Empire continued to deteriorate due to the expanding migration and invasions of the Germanic barbarians. The West’s demise is dated at 476 CE, when the Germanic Eastern Roman Foederati General Odoacer, deposed the Western Emperor Romulus Augustulus.

Previously, we investigated the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the correlation of the Medes with the Turko-Mongol peoples (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes), as well as the Persians with Turkey (refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey), as both representing the chest and two arms of Silver. In Daniel 2:33, 40-43 NET, it says:

33 ‘Its legs were of iron; its feet were partly of iron and partly of clay. Then there will be a fourth kingdom, one strong like iron. Just like iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything, and as iron breaks in pieces all these metals, so it will break in pieces and crush the others. 41 In that you were seeing feet and toes partly of wet clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom. Some of the strength of iron will be in it, for you saw iron mixed with wet clay. 42 In that the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, the latter stages of this kingdom will be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 And in that you saw iron mixed with wet clay, so people will be mixed with one another without adhering to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay’ – refer articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and 2050.

It would be highly unusual to miss out the Assyrians, from the statue, as other major European powers are included as we shall discover. The two legs represent the division of the Roman Empire – as the two arms reflect the dual nature of the Medo-Persian Empire. One leg was the Eastern Roman Empire, Byzantium and this leg incorporated the descendants of Asshur – the modern Russians. We will study the identity of the other leg in a subsequent chapter. Some commentators believe the ten toes, represent a grouping of nations yet to occur, or ten rulers administering regions of the earth; even proposing a divisional split of nations from Western and Eastern Europe. The legs are of iron, being much stronger than the silver of the Medes and Persians, yet not as culturally sophisticated or resplendent. 

Only the toes are stated as iron and clay, a mix that cannot fully meld or last. Judging from Daniel chapter seven, the possibility exists that the mixing could be between flesh and spirit; humans and Nephilim; or between humankind and angelic kind. This would be a formidable mix, though ultimately flawed in any capacity to endure. The days of Noah are to be repeated in the latter days and so this scenario, is worthy of consideration – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.

The genesis of Rome and its end are split into different periods, dependant on which stage of its civilisation is being referred to. Rome was officially founded circa 753 BCE, though it earliest incarnation was much earlier. Two brothers and demigods – Romulus and Remus – are credited with founding Rome and it was allegedly ruled by seven kings during the Roman Kingdom until 509 BCE. It was then that the monarchy was replaced with elected magistrates and is known as the Roman Republic, lasting until 27 BCE with the establishment of the Roman Empire by Octavius, appointing himself Augustus – the first emperor. The empire divided in 395 CE, with the Western branch ending when it fell in 476 CE and the Eastern branch’s demise not until 1453. 

Arithmetically, it would seem that one leg is longer than the other in that the Roman Empire lasted from 27 BCE to 476 CE. Whereas the Byzantine Empire lasted from 395 to 1453 CE. If we compare the period of the Roman Republic and Empire from 509 BCE to 476 CE, it is 985 years. Similarly, if we consider the Byzantine Empire beginning when the Western fell from 476 to 1453 CE, it results in 977 years. The legs would appear to actually match. Rome began its conquest of Greece at the Battle of Corinth in 146 BCE – the same year Rome defeated Carthage. 

Daniel 7:7, 17-28

New English Translation 

7 ‘After these things, as I was watching in the night visions a fourth beast appearedone dreadful, terrible, and very strong. It had two large rows of iron teeth. It devoured and crushed, and anything that was left it trampled with its feet. It was different from all the beasts [kingdoms and empires] that came before it, and it had ten horns. 17 These large beasts, which are four in number, represent four kings who will arise from the earth. 18 The holy ones of the Most High will receive the kingdom and will take possession of the kingdom forever and ever.

19 Then I wanted to know the meaning of the fourth beast… 20 I also wanted to know the meaning of the ten horns on its head, and of that other horn that came up and before which three others fell. This was the horn that had eyes and a mouth speaking arrogant things, whose appearance was more formidable than the others. 21 While I was watching, that horn began to wage war against the holy ones and was defeating them, 22 until the Ancient of Days arrived and judgment was rendered in favor of the holy ones of the Most High. Then the time came for the holy ones to take possession of the kingdom.

23 This is what he told me: “The fourth beast means that there will be a fourth kingdom on earth that will differ from all the other kingdoms. It will devour all the earth and will trample and crush it. 24 The ten horns mean that ten kings will arise from that kingdom. Another king will arise after them, but he will be different from the earlier ones. He will humiliate three kings. 25 He will speak words against the Most High. He will harass the holy ones of the Most High continually. His intention will be to change times established by law. The holy ones will be delivered into his hand for a time, times, and half a time. 

26 But the court will convene, and his ruling authority will be removed – destroyed and abolished forever! 27 Then the kingdom, authority, and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be delivered to the people of the holy ones of the Most High. His kingdom is an eternal kingdom; all authorities will serve him and obey him.” 28 This is the conclusion of the matter. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts troubled me greatly, and the color drained from my face. But I kept the matter to myself.’

Note the impact this prophecy had on Daniel, the righteous man who recorded it – Ezekiel 14:14. It is truly astounding and terrifying in its implications and in its eventual future reality. The ‘changing times by law’ has been interpreted by some biblical scholars as already occurring with manipulations of the calendar, so as to make it difficult for worshipers in observing the true sabbath and holy days. We will study what the possible ramifications mean, in an additional article: The Calendar Conspiracy

Each empire lasted a longer period of time than its predecessor. The fourth empire endured considerably longer than the first three, in fact longer than all of them combined. Each empire included territory greater in size than its predecessor. It is thought by most biblical prophecy scholars that the fourth empire is a system that still exists today, or is a continuance of the Holy Roman empire as exhibited through the last millennia and a half by the supremacy of the Church at Rome; a type of modern Babylon – for this Church has had influential control over the governments of Europe and the crowning of its kings. 

The ten horns are viewed as successive rulers of the ‘Roman system’ with the little horn a future ruler. We will study this subject further in the following chapter – also refer article: Is America Babylon? The fourth beast is certainly not like the ones preceding it, such as the bear (or ram) of Medo-Persia. The fourth beast is likened more to a Tyrannosaurus rex (or a Xenomorph), something Daniel was not familiar with, yet inspired genuine horror and dread. 

If we are dealing with a supernatural intruder, the ‘little horn’ may try to actually alter or revise time scales in the latter day events, so as to thwart the Son of Man’s return. The little horn equates to the Son of Perdition and the Man of Lawlessness – 2 Thessalonians 2:3. This entity fulfils the role of the false prophet, the second beast who worships the first beast – Revelation 13:11-18. We will discuss this relationship in more depth in the next chapter. 

2 Thessalonians 2:3-13

New Century Version

3 ‘Do not let anyone fool you in any way. That day of the Lord will not come until the turning away from God happens and the Man of Evil, who is on his way to hell, appears. 4 He will be against and put himself above any so-called god or anything that people worship. And that Man of Evil will even go into God’s Temple and sit there and say that he is God.

5 I told you when I was with you that all this would happen. Do you not remember? 6 And now you know what is stopping that Man of Evil so he will appear at the right time. 7 The secret power of evil is already working in the world, but there is one who is stopping that power. And he will continue to stop it until he is taken out of the way. 

8 Then that Man of Evil will appear, and the Lord Jesus will kill him with the breath that comes from his mouth and will destroy him with the glory of his coming. 9 The Man of Evil will come by the power of Satan. He will have great power, and he will do many different false miracles, signs, and wonders. 10 He will use every kind of evil to trick those who are lost. They will die, because they refused to love the truth. (If they loved the truth, they would be saved.) 11 For this reason God sends them something powerful that leads them away from the truth so they will believe a lie. 12 So all those will be judged guilty who did not believe the truth, but enjoyed doing evil.

13 Brothers and sisters, whom the Lord loves, God chose you from the beginning to be saved. So we must always thank God for you. You are saved by the Spirit that makes you holy and by your faith in the truth.’

The term ‘holy one’ can refer to righteous angels as in Daniel 4:13, 17 and 23; the Creator as in Isaiah 6:3; as well as including true believers in the latter days.

1 Thessalonians 3:13

New International Version

‘May he strengthen your hearts so that you will be blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus comes with all his holy ones.’

English Standard Version

so that he may establish your hearts blameless in holiness before our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints [G40 – hagios: saint, holy one].’

2 Thessalonians 1:10

New American Bible

‘… when he comes to be glorified among his holy ones [G40 – hagios] and to be marveled at on that day among all who have believed, for our testimony to you was believed.’

1 Peter 1:15-16

New English Translation

‘… but, like the Holy One who called you, become holy yourselves in all of your conduct, for it is written, “You shall be holy, because I am holy”.’

The migration of people – the descendants of Asshur travelling in a long arc from Asia Minor to Scandinavia – as the Eastern Roman Empire weakened and disintegrated saw them eventually surface as the Rus Grand Principality of Kiev beginning in 882 and which lasted until 1239. Led by Rurik, the Rus Vikings ruled the northern Slavs from Novgorod – a region between present day St Petersburg and Moscow. Kiev was captured – according to legend – by Askold and Dir, two Rus boyars of high nobility.

The settlement was on the main north-south trade route which was used by the Vikings to reach the rich markets of Constantinople; therefore conquering Kiev meant controlling trade. They were soon dispossessed by a Rus prince by the name of Oleg, a kinsman of Rurik who then moved the capital to Kiev from Novgorod. By the eleventh century the word Rus was associated with the Principality of Kiev, while the term Varangian was common as a term for Scandinavians traveling the river routes. 

The Rus are considered to have originated on the Roslagen or Rus-law seashore of Uppland. This is not universally accepted, though Ros-lagen adapted into Slavic easily becomes Rus. An alternative option for naming the Rus, is that it may originate in the Proto-Finnic word for Swedish Scandinavians Ruotsi – a possible Finnic origin for Rurik’s name. This name may have been used by the Rus for themselves, or alternatively by the eastern Slavs who would soon be subjects of the Rus. Ruotsi is derived from ruskea, meaning light brown which is related to the old Russian rusi, for brown. Hence the name Rus and a Slavic word rusy – referring to hair colour ranging from dark ash-blond to light-brown – cognate with ryzhy, used for red-haired.

The two main theories for the Russian’s origins are the Normanist, which places the Rus ancestrally as Northern Vikings trading and raiding on the river routes between the Baltic and the Black Seas from the eighth to eleventh centuries and the anti-Normanist explanation, which places their origins as being autochthonous (meaning: ‘indigenous rather than descended from migrants or colonists’) with the region of the Carpathian Mountains.

There is merit to both theories which can be reconciled by the Assyrian descended peoples travelling from western Asia Minor to the Carpathian Mountains and then onwards to Scandinavia. The Russian Y-DNA Haplogroups are similar with northern Slavic speaking peoples as well as the Finno-Ugric peoples of the Baltic. There is some minor influence evidenced from Scandinavia and vice-versa. In the words of F Donald Logan: ‘… in 839, the Rus were Swedes; in 1043 the Rus were Slavs.’

The Primary Chronicle is a Slavonic language narrative account of Rus history, compiled from a wide range of sources in Kiev at the start of the thirteenth century. Coincidently, the chronicle includes the texts of a series of Rus-Byzantine Treaties from 911, 945 and 971. The Rus-Byzantine Treaties give a valuable insight into the names of the Rus. Of the fourteen Rus signatories to the Treaty in 907, all had Norse names, though by the Rus-Byzantine Treaty in 945, some signatories of the Rus had Slavic names while the vast majority still retained Norse names. 

Other possible origins for the name Rus include the three early emperors of the Urartian Empire in the Caucasus – enemies and neighbours north of Assyria – from the eighth to sixth centuries BCE. Their names being Rusa I (735-714 BCE), Rusa II and Rusa III, documented in cuneiform monuments – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

The ancient Sarmatian tribe of the Roxolani, from the Ossetic, ruhs meaning ‘light’; the Russian rusyje volosy, meaning ‘light-brown hair’ or Dahl’s dictionary definition of rus, meaning: ‘world, universe’, or literally ‘white world, white light.’

From the Old Slavic name that meant ‘river-people’, tribes of fishermen and ploughmen settled near and navigated the rivers Dnieper, Don, Dniester and Western Dvina. The rus root is preserved in the modern Slavic and Russian words ruslo for ‘river-bed’ and rusalka, for ‘water sprite’. From one of two rivers in the Ukraine near Kiev and Pereyaslav, Ros and Rusna, whose names are derived from a postulated Slavic term for water, akin to rosa for dew.

Lastly, a postulated proto-Slavic word for bear, cognate with Greek arctos and Latin ursus – refer Ursa Minor and the North Pole Star, article: The Pyramid Perplexity. This is interesting as we hear of Russia described, as the Russian Bear. 

A look at an atlas shows the outline of Russia – and particularly the old Soviet union – and its likeness to a bear. Its head and mouth pointing westwards and its tail and hind paw eastwards.

The Russias were all the lands of the Rus, incorporating the principalities and states which had existed from the ninth century onwards. 

A Japanese map from 1900.

Ivan Vasilyevich (or the Terrible), ruled from 1547 to 1584; spending a great deal of his reign fighting the Livonian Wars in an effort to conquer Old Livonia and North Estonia. With the expectation of expanding his new empire westwards; the forces of Sweden, Lithuania and Poland were able to check Ivan. Ivan IV, known as Grozny the Terrible, was the first Czar of all the Russias and was a descendant of Theodora, a daughter of Sartaq Khan of the Golden Horde – refer Chapter XVII Elam & Turkey.

The descendants of Rurik of Novgorod who had ruled the Rus from the late ninth century, had their rule ended in the early seventeenth century; by an interregnum period of civil war following the murder of Czar Dimitri I and then his successor being deposed by the Seven Boyars, or nobles. These same nobles invited Sigismund III of Poland-Lithuania to Moscow in 1610; electing his son, Wladyislaw as Czar. But, Wladyislaw was unable to take up the position due to his father’s opposition and so the Czarate continued to fight within itself for three years without a Czar to rule Russia at all. This was known by later generations as the Times of Troubles.

A prominent family called the Romanovs, formed Russia’s second dynasty. The most famous being Mikhail Romanov who was descended from a mysterious Boyar – privileged landowner from high ranking feudal nobility – Andrei Ivanovich Kobyla. During the reign of Ivan IV, Koblya’s descendants via his son Feodor, became known as the Yakovlev family. A grandchild from one of them, Roman Yurievich Zakharyin-Yuriev, assumed the formation of a clan name, by adapting his first name into Romanov or Romanoff – essentially meaning the clan or descendants of Roman. Roman’s daughter, Anastasia Zakharyina, became the wife of Ivan IV in 1547; bringing the family great wealth and influence. 

Following the expulsion of the Poles in 1612, the crown was offered to several Rurik and Gedimin princes whilst a number of pretenders also sought to claim the throne. In the end, the son of the highly respected Filaret Romanov was asked – the sixteen year old Mikhail Romanov I, who ruled from 1613 to 1645 – and the nephew of Czar Feodor I. Once he had been persuaded to accept by his mother Kseniya Ivanovna Shestova, he pursued a policy of emphasising family ties with the Ruriks. 

Mikhail made sure that he sought the advice of the Assembly of the Land on important issues, thereby ensuring that the populace loved him and the nobility respected him. Mikhail (or Michael) Romanov ended the wars against Sweden and Poland-Lithunia, allowing the return of his father from exile. Filaret Romanov then assumed the administrative duties of Czar, without the trappings of power. Michael’s role was ceremonial until his father’s death in 1633. The direct line of Romanov rulers died out with Elizabeth Petrovna, the daughter of Peter the Great. She had ruled from 1741 to 1762; although the direct male line had already ended with the death of Peter II in 1730. A period of crisis followed her death until a suitable candidate was sought amongst various distant relatives. In the end, a grandson of Peter I was found in the German House of Holstein-Gottorp, a branch of the House of Oldenburg. 

Peter III (or Karl Peter Ulrich), was the son from a marriage between Grand Duchess Anne, daughter of Peter I and Duke Charles-Frederick of Holstein-Gottorp. Acclaimed as a Romanov, the fact remains he began the line of Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov which ruled Russia until 1917. As the Duke of Holstein-Gottorp he had an extra degree of interest in the affairs of Germany – too much for some elements of the Russian nobility. Peter III planned an attack on Denmark in order to restore areas of Schleswig to his duchy, and thereby withdrawing Russian troops from the Seven Years War. 

In Europe, the Seven Years War was fought between an alliance constituting France, Russia, Sweden, Austria and Saxony, against Prussia, Hanover and Great Britain between 1756 and 1763. The war had international interest, particularly as Britain and France were fighting one another for domination of North America and India. As such, it had been originally referred to as the first world war.

The plot to depose Peter III was led by his own wife. He was transported to captivity at Ropsha, where he died after only six months on the throne in mysterious circumstances. Catherine Yekaterina became Czarina and is known in history, as Catherine II and the Great, ruling from 1762 until 1796. Catherine cast a long shadow over neighbouring lands during her reign. Beginning in 1762, she tightened Russian control of Livonia and Estonia. In 1764, she created the imperial province of Novorossiya or New Russia along the central northern area of the Black Sea coast – which is now part of Ukraine. The province was a merging of several military districts and the Cossack Hetmanate in order to improve and increase Russian control of the region as part of the ongoing process of impinging on the Ottoman Empire. 

In 1767, all of Alania fell under the Russian Empire’s rule as part of Catherine’s thrust southwards through the Caucasus Mountains to remove territories from Turkey’s influence. During 1768 till 1774, the First Russo-Turkish War was part of Catherine’s desire to secure the conquest of territory on Russia’s southern borders. The most serious revolt during Catherines’s reign was the Ural Cossack rebellion of 1773 to 1775. Two battles fought back to back over four days at Kazan, eventually defeated the rebels. The Second Russo-Turkish War occurred between 1787 and 1792, with Russia gaining from Turkish losses.

From 1791, Russia operated an area known as the Pale of Settlement. Initially it was small, but increased greatly from 1793 and the Second Partition of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. By the mid-nineteenth century it incorporated a substantial territory comprising modern Belarus – eastern Poland at the time – eastern Latvia, Lithuania, the province of Bessarabia – modern Moldova – and western Ukraine. Having formerly been citizens of the defunct commonwealth, the Jewish population of the Pale were restricted from moving eastwards into Russia. Catherine II died in 1796 after an eventful reign that greatly solidified and strengthened the Russian Empire. Her son Paul I reigned briefly from 1796 to 1801; cut short when he was killed in a palace coup.

The threads of Russia’s ties with Germany remained entwined when the Bolshevik government seized control in 1917 – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. The new government, far from stable, badly handled what remained of Russia’s First World War effort, holding out for a beneficial peace agreement with Germany. Instead, Russia was forced to accept the harsh terms of the Brest-Litovsk treaty. As a result of that as well as too many reforms in too short a period, Russia lost control over many of its outlying states and provinces. Principally those which had been handed over to Germany under the terms of the treaty, Bessarabia, such as Byelorussia, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldavia, Russina Poland, Western Ukraine, the Crimea, the industrial Donetz basin and the Don. It took the collapse of Imperial Germany and three long years of civil war before the Russian empire could be reborn under Soviet control. 

The former Soviet Union at the height of its power and territory, which in reality was a modern day Empire and reflective of the dictatorial and militaristic martial based civilisation of the mighty Assyrian Empires of the past.

Modern claims of sovereignty over the Russias included Grand Duke Vladimir Cyrillovich Romanov to be the rightful heir to Czar Nicholas II, which was not disputed. 

Czar Nicholas II

However, since his death in 1992 the divided branches of the House of Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov each put forward their own claimant as heir to the throne of the Russias. Prince Nicholas Romanovich is recognised by most of the family, bearing direct descent from the uncrowned successor to Nicholas II, Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich. Meanwhile, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, the daughter of Grand Duke Vladimir, upholds her claim because her father issued a controversial decree recognising her as his successor. 

Left: Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany (left) with Nicholas II (right) in 1905. 

Nicholas is wearing a German Army uniform, while Wilhelm wears that of a Russian hussar regiment. 

Right: Tsar Nicholas II (left) and King George V of Britain (right) in Berlin, 1913

Nicholas married Princess Alexandra of Hesse-Darmstadt less than a month after he became Tsar at the age of twenty-six in 1894. Alexandra was a grand daughter of Queen Victoria. Meanwhile Nicholas was first cousin to King George V of England – of which he bore an uncanny resemblance – and second cousin to Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany.

The most infamous claim in succession for the Russian throne was by Anna Anderson the supposed daughter Anastasia (later disproved genetically), of Czar Nicholas who had been able to escape, when her father, mother, brother and sisters had all been shot and their bodies amateurishly cremated. Even so, her claim as a pretender to any throne was redundant while a valid male heir lived.

Modern Russia is a federal, semi-presidential republic founded in 1991 in the wake of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. ‘Despite bearing the resemblance of a democratic state in terms of its offices and elections, it always manages to convey the impression that old habits die hard in terms of its tendencies towards strong centralist control.’ 

The map above shows the extent of the Soviet Union’s geo-political power and reach after World War II until 1991.  

The apt term Iron Curtain was coined by Winston Churchill. The map is also significant as it shows the split between Western Europe and Eastern Europe – with the exceptions of Finland and Greece which should be orange and East Germany, blue – which we will discover is the family division of one of Shem’s sons – not including Iran, Turkey, Russia, Spain and Portugal.

Russia lays at the heart of the CIS – the Commonwealth of Independent States – a voluntary organisation of republics that had once formed part of the original Soviet empire. Its creation had been principally masterminded by Boris Yeltsin the president of the Russian republic. The clever ploy had been carried out behind the back of Mikhail Gorbachev; leaving him with no other choice than to announce the dissolution of the Soviet state. 

Most of the Russian population is concentrated in the western European portion of the country, especially in the fertile region surrounding Moscow. Moscow and St Petersburg – formerly Leningrad – are the two most important cultural and financial centres in Russia and are among the most picturesque cities in the world. 

Russians are also populous in Asia; beginning in the seventeenth century and particularly pronounced throughout much of the twentieth century, a steady flow of ethnic Russians and Russian speaking peoples migrated eastward into Siberia, where cities such as Vladivostok and Irkutsk flourish today. 

Russia is a multinational state with over one hundred and ninety ethnic groups within its twenty-two republics; all with unique languages and cultures. The population is 144,156,010 people of which eighty-one percent are ethnic or Slavic Russian. It is the most populous country in Europe and the ninth most populous country in the world. Russia’s population density stands at only nine inhabitants per square kilometre, or twenty-three per square mile. Russia has one of the oldest populations in the world, with an average age of 40.3 years and a projected population by 2030 of 139,599,000 people. 

The Russian economy can be fragile at times, though still ranks as one of the world’s biggest economies by nominal GDP. Russia is the world’s eleventh largest economy, with a GDP of $1.70 trillion as of 2019, 1.3% higher than in 2018. Russia has moved toward a more market-based economy over the three decades since the collapse of the Soviet Union, though government ownership of and intervention in business, is still common. As a leading exporter of oil and gas, as well as other minerals and metals, Russia’s economy is highly sensitive to swings in world commodity prices. 

Austrian statesman Klemens Furst von Metternich aptly noted: “Russia is never as strong as she appears, and never as weak as she appears.”

As one of the world’s largest producers of gas and oil derived from its considerable mineral and oil reserves, Russia does not refrain from using its power in this area as an economic weapon. Russia is an energy superpower. The country has the world’s largest natural gas reserves, the second largest coal reserves and the eighth largest oil reserves. Russia is the world’s leading natural gas exporter – which gives it immense control over much of Europe – and the second largest oil exporter. Added to these impressive statistics, Russia is the fourth largest electricity producer and the ninth largest renewable energy producer in the world. Russia was the first country to develop civilian nuclear power and to construct the world’s first nuclear power plant. In 2019, nuclear energy generated twenty percent of the country’s electricity.

It is prophesied in the scriptures how Russia will be catapulted to the top of world hegemony – refer articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen. A part of that process will be investing in the infrastructure required to tap into the immense wealth of resources in the Arctic Ocean – something the United States appears reticent. In 2014, President Putin ‘for the first time added the Arctic region as a sphere of Russian influence in its official foreign policy doctrine’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 282.

And for good reason: ‘In 2008 the United States Geological Survey estimated that 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids and 90 billion barrels of oil are in the Arctic, with the vast majority of it offshore. As more territory becomes accessible, extra reserves of the gold, zinc, nickel and iron already found in part of the Arctic may be discovered’ – Tim Marshall, pages 277-278.

Marshall, page 19: ‘Energy as political power will be deployed time and again in the coming years, and the concept of “ethnic Russians” will be used to justify whatever moves Russia makes.’

Russia’s land offers a massive source of crops and its Chernozemie region in Central Russia makes it one of the major bread basket nations of the world with China, Brazil, Canada and the United States. This region is renowned for its rich soil known as Black Earth. The soil contains a high humus percentage and other soil enriching nutrients such as ammonia and phosphorous. It is also deep and its clay like qualities give it water retaining properties. This makes the area an agricultural powerhouse for Russia. Main crops include grains, particularly wheat and sunflowers, corn, soy beans, peas, rapeseed and barley. 

Of the top ten Countries with the most natural resources, Russia is ranked number five in the world; behind India at four and ahead of Brazil at six. Also, Russia is positioned at number two behind South Africa for the world’s top five mineral producing powers. Russia’s total estimated natural resources are worth $75 trillion. The country boasts the biggest mining industry in the world, which is a driving force in its national economy; producing substantial volumes of mineral fuels, industrial minerals, and metals. Russia is a leading producer of aluminum, arsenic, cement, copper, magnesium metal, as well as compounds like nitrogen, palladium, silicon, and vanadium. The nation is the second-largest exporter of rare earth minerals and accounts for up to 20% of nickel and cobalt production in the world and 7% of global iron ore and coal exports.

Of the top ten technological nations in the world, Russia is at number six, ahead of the United Kingdom at seven and behind Germany at five. Russia led the space race with space exploration and moon landings. It is a leading producer and inventor of weapons technology and defence systems; being a major exporter of its equipment worldwide.

The richness of resources has not translated into an easy life for most of the country’s people; much of Russia’s history has been a grim tale of the very wealthy and powerful few, ruling over the great mass of their poor and powerless compatriots. An uncompromising parallel with the ancient Assyrians and their martial driven society and warlike persona. Despite such weighty problems, Russia shows potential promise of re-gaining its superpower* status. 

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Russian global shipments during 2021.

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$211.5 billion 
  2. Gems, precious metals: $31.6 billion 
  3. Iron, steel: $28.9 billion 
  4. Fertilizers: $12.5 billion 
  5. Wood: $11.7 billion 
  6. Machinery including computers: $10.7 billion 
  7. Cereals: $9.1 billion 
  8. Aluminum: $8.8 billion 
  9. Ores, slag, ash: $7.4 billion 
  10. Plastics, plastic articles: $6.2 billion 


Iron and steel was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 80.4% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were international sales of Russian fertilizers via a 78.5% gain. Russia’s shipments of ores, slag and ash posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 71.2%. The sole decliner among Russia’s top 10 export categories was cereals thanks to its -2.2% drop year over year.’

Russia is listed at number five in the world for countries with the largest gold reserves. Russia possesses 2,295.4 tonnes which equates to 22.0% of foreign reserves. ‘The Russian Central Bank has been one of the largest buyers of gold for the past seven years and overtook China in 2018’ who is now sixth. ‘In 2017, Russia bought 224 tonnes of bullion in an effort to diversify away from the U.S. dollar, as its relationship with the West has grown chilly since the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in mid-2014. To raise the cash for these purchases, Russia sold a huge percentage of its U.S. Treasuries.’

As of 2017, the Russian military comprised over one million active duty personnel, the fifth largest in the world. It is mandatory for all male citizens aged between 18 and 27 to be drafted for a year of service in Armed Forces – a distant residue of the militaristic mindset of Assyria. Russia’s tank force is the biggest in the world, while its surface navy and air force are among the largest. The country has a huge and fully indigenous arms industry producing most of its own military equipment with only a few types of weapons imported. It has been one of the world’s top supplier of arms since 2001, accounting for about thirty percent of worldwide weapons sales; while exporting weapons to about eighty countries. Russia is the third biggest exporter of arms behind the United States and China. 

The state flag of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – USSR – from 1922 to 1991 

Above: The Russian Naval ensign adopted in 1712 and designed by Czar Peter I, between 1692 and 1712, after proposing eight different designs. Inspiration taken from the Scottish Saltire of the same colours in reverse. 

Below: The current flag of the Russian Federation

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:

‘The Russian Federation has been suggested as a potential candidate for resuming superpower* status in the 21st century… while others have made the assertion that it is already a superpower. 

In his 2005 publication entitled Russia in the 21st Century: The Prodigal Superpower, Steven Rosefielde, a professor of economics at University of North Carolina… predicted that Russia would… augur another arms race… Rosefielde noted that such an end would come with tremendous sacrifice to global security and the Russian people’s freedom.

Matthew Fleischer of the Los Angeles Times contends that Russia will not become a superpower unless climate change eats away at the permafrost that covers, as of March 2014, two-thirds of the country’s landmass. The absence of this permafrost would reveal immense stores of oil, natural gas, and precious minerals, as well as potential farmland, which would allow Russia to “become the world’s bread basket – and control the planet’s food supply.”

… in December 2013, Russian president Vladimir Putin denied any Russian aspiration to be a superpower. He was quoted saying: “We do not aspire to be called some kind of superpower, understanding that as a claim to world or regional hegemony. We do not infringe on anyone’s interests, we do not force our patronage on anyone, or try to teach anyone how to live [a dig aimed at the United States].”

Forbes writer Jonathan Adelman… summarized the arguments against Russia’s superpower potential… “Russia has a trade profile of a Third World country [for now], a GNP the size of Canada which is less than 15 percent of the United States GDP, no soft power, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Wall Street or highly rated universities.” Former political journalist Peter Brown wrote that Russia “would like to reclaim the superpower status it held for nearly 40 years after World War II,” but in the 21st century “may lack the combination of economic and military power” to do so. He said that “Russia won’t be a superpower anytime soon,” [agreed] citing Russia’s shrinking population, high levels of poverty and poor public health. In 2011, British historian and professor Niall Ferguson… suggested that Russia is on its way to “global irrelevance”.

The world’s economic pundits and other experts may have written Russia off, predicting its near future decline; though the scriptures paint a different picture for the destiny of the King of the North. A century or two, can change the fortunes of a nation considerably, particularly after a major conflagration such as a Third World War – refer articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen.

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 7: ‘Russia, like all great powers, is thinking in terms of the next 100 years and understands that in that time anything can happen.’

Encyclopaedia: ‘Russia has, however, shown a slight population growth since 2012, partly due to immigration. The number of Chinese in… Russia’s Far East has been growing.’

Marshall, page 11: ‘China may well eventually control parts of Siberia in the long-term future’ – in fulfilment of the Genesis 9:27 prophecy – ‘but this would be through Russia’s declining birth rate and Chinese immigration moving north. The empty depopulating spaces of Russia’s Far East are… likely to come under Chinese cultural, and eventually political, control.’

An important aspect of the Russian mentally and a palpable trait of the ancient Assyrians was insightfully and eloquently opined by Winston Churchill in 1939 and embellished seven years later:

“It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest… I am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less respect than for weakness, especially military weakness.”

In Chapter XVII Lud & Iran and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey, we studied the two sons of Shem who have the most in common with regard to their mtDNA maternal and Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups. The Persian Iranians with the Turks, exhibit varying admixture with the neighbouring Arab related peoples and or, a shared past history with the Turko-Mongol peoples. Underlying these factors though, is the fact their autosomal DNA bears a closer resemblance. In contrast, comparing them with the Russians, it soon becomes obvious there is a marked difference between the latter and the former two peoples. 

What we will discover as we progress through each of Shem’s five sons, is that some are more closely related to certain brothers than others. We will also find, especially towards the end, how similar cousins can be to each other compared to their own siblings. It is quite common for cousins to be drawn to each other and get along better with one another than with their own brothers and sisters. Haplogroups can reflect these relationship dynamics. 

Russian men

Asshur shares Haplogroups and autosomal DNA predominantly with Eastern Europe, partially with Northern Europe and negligibly with Southern Europe and Western Europe. Contrastingly, Aram shares Haplogroups split between Western Europe and Southern Europe, with little commonalty with either Northern or Eastern Europe.

The remaining son of Shem, Arphaxad sits in the middle of these two geographically and bridges the gap between them genetically. 

Russian women

Of all the peoples investigated thus far, either descended from Japheth and his seven sons; Ham and his three sons (Canaan and his six sons); or Shem’s two out of five sons, who have exhibited black or brown hair and brown eyes regardless of skin tones and eye tints; it is the Russians from Asshur, who are the first peoples on our identity journey, who possess a marked increase in fair hair and blue eyes.

The mtDNA Haplogroups for Russians in descending order. 

H [41.2%] – U5 [ 10.4%] – J [7.8%] – T2 [6.5%] – HVO+V [4.2%] – 

U4 [3.9%] – K [3.7%] – T1 [2.7%] – U [2.2%] – I [2%] – HV [1.8%] – 

W [1.8%] – U2 [ 1.4%] – X [1.3%] – U3 [1.1%] – L [0.2%] 

The main maternal Haplogroups shared with Turkey and Iran include H, U, J and T2. Haplogroup H is the most frequent Haplogroup throughout West Eurasia; J is a major European Haplogroup and T, a more recent European Haplogroup. It is Haplogroup U5, where there is a more pronounced difference between Russia and the West Asian nations descended from Elam and Lud. As Turkey exhibits a significantly higher percentage of Haplogroup H than Iran, so does Russia compared with Turkey.

Russia:  H [41.2%] – U5 [10.4%] – J [7.8%] – T2 [6.5%] – K [3.7%] –

HV [1.8%] 

Turkey: H [30.8%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.3%] – K [5.6%] – HV [4.8%] – T2 [4.3%]

Iran:      H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] –

T2 [4.9%]

The three Haplogroups which Iran and Turkey share higher levels, which Russia also possesses but in lower percentages include K, U and HV. Haplogroup K is higher in distinctive groups such as the Basque and the Ashkenazi Jew and found in Central Asia and North Africa. 

In contrast with Haplogroup T, Haplogroup U is one of the oldest and most diverse of the European Haplogroups. Haplogroup HV is the ancestral group to both H and V, with H dominating European lineages.

                       H       HV      J       T2      U      U5      K

Russia          41        2         8        7        2       10       4

Turkey         31        5          9       4        6         3       6

Iran              17        7        14        5      12         3       7

Iran and Turkey – who are similar genetically – share dominancy in Haplogroup H, followed by J, U and K, with T2 and U5 rarer. So it is interesting that for Russians the main Haplogroups following H, are U5, J and T2, with K and U rarer. Thus all three nations share H and J as overall predominant, yet after that the frequency is opposite in that Russians exhibit more of maternal Haplogroups U5 and T2.

Russia ostensibly, has more in common albeit distantly, with Turkey than Iran. We will learn that Russia in fact, has more commonality with the Northern Slavic and Baltic nations. Recall the first and fourth points in the introduction. Peoples today invariably live next to those peoples they are most related to – with a few notable exceptions and Haplogroups provide the evidence that this hypothesis is a valid one.

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

‘Russians are the dominant ethnicity in Russia today. The Russian language belongs to the East Slavic family and is related to Ukrainian and Belarusian. The Russian people, too, are closely related to their Belarusian and Ukrainian neighbors, and also fairly close to Poles and Slovenians… We can genetically divide the Russian people into two* main types: Northern Russians and Southern Russians.’

Mitochondrial DNA variability in Poles and Russians, Annals of Human Genetics 66, multiple authors, 2002, pages 261-283. Excerpts from the summary:

“The main mitochondrial haplogroup of the Polish and Russian sequences is group H, which is the most frequent haplogroup in Europe and also common in the Near East. Haplogroup H comprises the majority of the Russian (42.3%) and Polish (45.2%) samples… The node designated as HV* is highly important in mtDNA phylogeny because two of the most frequent haplogroups in Europe, H and pre-V, descend from it. The haplogroup HV*, rare in European populations, was identified in Polish and Russian samples with low frequency (1% and 2%, respectively)…

Haplogroup J sequences in Poles and Russians are characterized by similar frequencies of 7.8% and 8%, respectively… Haplogroup U and K sequences, which are defined by a variant-12308HinfI, were found in 19.5% of the Polish mtDNAs and in 20.0% of the Russian mtDNAs.”

“The distribution of the subgroup U5a and U5b frequencies in Poles and Russians is approximately equal, with the U5a subgroup prevailing over U5b – 5.3% and 3.4% in Poles, and 7.5% and 3% in Russians. U4 (with CR motif 16356-195) is the next relatively frequent subgroup in the populations studied, being found at a frequency of 5% in Poles and 3.5% in Russians.”

Mitochondrial DNA variation in Russian populations… Genetika 38:11, multiple authors, 2002, pages 1532-1538. Excerpts from the abstract, translated into English:

“Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) polymorphism was examined in three Russian populations from the European part of Russia (Stavropol krai, Orel oblast, and Saratov oblast). This analysis showed that mitochondrial gene pool of Russians was represented by the mtDNA types belonging to haplogroups H, V, HV*, J, T, U, K, I, W, and X. A mongoloid admixture (1.5%) was revealed in the form of mtDNA types of macrohaplogroup M. Comparative analysis of the mtDNA haplogroup frequency distribution patterns in six Russian populations from the European part of Russia indicated the absence of substantial genetic differences between them. However, in Russian populations from the southern and central regions the frequency of haplogroup V (average frequency 8%) was higher than in the populations from more northern regions…”

The macrohaplogroup U structure in Russians, Human Genetics 53:4, multiple authors, 2017, pages 498-503. Abstract:

“The structure and diversity of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) macrohaplogroup U lineages in Russians from Eastern Europe are studied on the basis of analysis of variation of nucleotide sequences of complete mitochondrial genomes. In total, 132 mitochondrial genomes belonging to haplogroups U1, U2e, U3, U4, U5, U7, U8a, and K are characterized. 

Results of phylogeographic analysis show that the mitochondrial gene pool of Russians contains mtDNA haplotypes belonging to subhaplogroups that are characteristic only of Russians and other Eastern Slavs (13.7%), Slavs in general (11.4%), Slavs and Germans* (17.4%), and Slavs, Germans, and Baltic Finns (9.8%). 

Results of molecular dating show that ages of mtDNA subhaplogroups to which Russian mtDNA haplotypes belong vary in a wide range, from 600 to 17000 years. However, molecular dating results for Slavic and Slavic-Germanic* mtDNA subhaplogroups demonstrate that their formation mainly occurred in the Bronze and Iron Ages (1000 to 5000 years ago). Only some instances (for subhaplogroups U5b1a1 and U5b1e1a) are characterized by a good agreement between molecular dating results and the chronology of Slavic ethnic history based on historical and archaeological data.”

Genetic studies show that modern Russians are closest to Belarussians, Poles, Slovaks, Czechs, Balts and Ukrainians. In an interesting twist, the Ethnographer Zelenin, affirms ‘that Russians overall are more similar to Belarusians and to Ukrainians than southern Russians* are to northern Russians.’ 

A study found that ‘the genetic distances from the Russians to the European language groups indicate that the gene pool of present-day Russians bears the influence of Slavic, Baltic, Finno-Ugric and, to a lesser extent, Germanic groups, as well as Iranian and Turkic groups.’ 

These findings ‘uphold the traditionally held genetic differentiation between Northern and Southern Russians, with the decisive ethnic element being the Finno-Ugric one, more important in the north, the southern population having substantial – generally unacknowledged in historical debates about Russian ethnogenesis – Germanic influence.’

The Russians as Asshur are a bridge genetically amongst the sons of Shem and this will be affirmed; becoming more apparent when we study his brothers, Aram and Arphaxad. Aram and the western half of Arphaxad are both similar, as Lud and Elam are to each other. 

Asshur stands between the two pairings, leaning towards the eastern half of Arphaxad’s descendants. The reason and evidence for these relationships will be supported once Arphaxad’s descendants through Joktan’s mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups are studied – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

In reiteration of point one in the introduction, peoples today are living next to those people they are most related to. Even though Russians have had interaction and inter-marrying with Germanic and Finno-ugric peoples, as well as Turks and Iranians, their dominant association in shared migration, history, culture and language has been with fellow Slavic speaking peoples.

What historians and geneticists have not understood is that the Russians (or the Rus), did not originate in the Carpathian Mountains nor from Uppland in Scandinavia. These were merely settlements along their northwestern route from the lands of Byzantium, and anciently before that in upper Mesopotamia. 

The northward dwelling Russian men, have similarity with the Finno-Ugric peoples in that they have similarly high levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup N1c1 admixture from the line of Japheth. The southward male Russian inhabitants display higher levels of I2a1 in common with southeastern Slavic speaking Europeans. Russians possess these two male lineages, as does Arphaxad, with geneticists and ethnologists seeking to explain these paternal Haplogroups as deriving from mixing alone. 

This may be accurate for N1c1, but not for I2a1. The reason being that I2a1 is an older ancestral Haplogroup from which descendants possessing R1a are related. The two Y-DNA Haplogroup maps of Europe show that the R1a Haplogroup is indigenous to not only Russians but also much of Eastern Europe, particularly northeastern Europe. Each may have had an influence on the other, for Ukraine, Belarus and Poland have high levels of R1a like Russia. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland have high levels of N1c1, like a sizeable minority of Russian men.

The paternal Haplogroups for Russians match the northern Slavic and Baltic peoples they reside next too. Likewise, the nation of Germany’s regional Haplogroup spread match their neighbours. That is, the people with which they are related to in West Central Europe. When we study the Slavs of Eastern Europe and then the Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Latin peoples of Western Europe, it will be self-evident why Russia identifies with Asshur and why Germany cannot be Assyria.

Similarly, the peoples of the Middle East called Assyrians – who are either Arab or Kurdish extraction – are descended from principally Ham and Mizra (or partially from Shem via Lud) and cannot be from Asshur.

Four of the five sons of Shem all live on the periphery of Europe, surrounding where Arphaxad’s descendants dwell. Asshur, Elam and Lud – Russia, Turkey and Iran – live in Eastern Europe and West Asia. We will find that the sons of Aram dwell in peripheral locations within and without Europe – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino & Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil

As a guide it is worth mentioning as we delve into the European peoples more fully that broadly speaking, their principle Y-DNA Haplogroups of R1a, R1b, I1 and I2a1 signify approximately the four quarters of Europe. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 in the North; with I2a1 in the South (and east). Added to this, is N1c1 originating from Japheth prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance Haplogroup J2 (with J1 and E1b1b) from Ham, found more commonly in southern Europe. 

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

‘The Y-DNA (paternal) haplogroup R1a and its offshoots are very common among Russian men. Some specific subgroups of R1a [M420] found among ethnic Russians in the “Russia-Slavic DNA Project” include R1a1 [M459], R1a1a [M17], R1a1a1g, and R1a1a1g2. The “Russia-Slavic DNA Project” includes men who have the sub-types R1b1a2 and R1b1a2a1a1b… [and] the sub-types I2a and I2a2. The Y-DNA haplogroup N is also common among Russian men… N haplogroups are often signals of Finnic ancestry… N1c1 is a sub-type that’s found in Russia. E1b1b Y-DNA haplogroups (ultimately originating in northeastern Africa) are not very common among Russian men, but some do have them.’

Two Sources of the Russian Patrilineal Heritage in Their Eurasian Context, American Journal of Human Genetics 82:1, multiple authors, 2008, pages 236-250. Excerpts from the abstract:

“… In the present study of the variation of the Y chromosome pool of ethnic Russians, we show that the patrilineages within the pre-Ivan the Terrible historic borders of Russia have two main distinct sources. One of these antedates the linguistic split between West and East Slavonic-speaking people and is common for the two groups; the other is genetically highlighted by the pre-eminence of haplogroup (hg) [N] and is most parsimoniously explained by extensive assimilation of (or language change in) northeastern indigenous Finno-Ugric tribes. 

The distribution of all frequent Y chromosome haplogroups (which account for 95% of the Y chromosomal spectrum in Russians) follows a similar north-south clinal pattern among autosomal markers, apparent from synthetic maps.”

‘Excerpts from middle of the study: “We collected 1228 DNA samples from 14 regional Russian populations. All sampled individuals identified their four grandparents as ethnic Russians, with their mother tongue being Russian. The rural areas and small towns were chosen for sampling so that the influence of more recent migrations could be minimized. Only individuals with all four grandparents born in the local area were sampled… The 1228 Russian Y chromosomes analyzed, all except 20 (1.6%) fall into seven major haplogroups (E, G, I, J, K2, N, and R1) characteristic to West Eurasian populations. 

Eleven samples could be classified up to the root level of haplogroups F and K, and nine samples (0.7%) fell into haplogroups C, Q, and R2 that are specific to East and South Asian populations. At a higher level of molecular resolution, only eight subclades of these major West Eurasian Y chromosome haplogroups are presented with their average frequency greater than 1%, including R1a, [N1c1], [I1], R1b, [I2], J2, [N1b1], and [E1b1b]. Taken together, they account for 95% of the total Russian Y chromosomal pool. 

… Every second Russian Y chromosome belongs to haplogroup R1a… within the boundaries of Europe, R1a is characteristic for BaltoSlavonic populations, with two exceptions: southern Slavs [I2a1] and northern Russians [N1c1]. R1a frequency decreases in northeastern Russian populations down to 20% – 30%, in contrast to central-southern Russia, where its frequency is twice as high…

The second frequent among Russians is haplogroup [N1C1, formerly N3], which is a typical haplogroup for Altaic and Finno-Ugric populations of Siberia and northeastern Europe… within the Russian area, the frequency of [N1c1] decreases significantly from north (>35%) to south (<10%)… The third most frequent haplogroup in Russians is [I2a1], and its variation is also clinal… The remaining two haplogroups, J2 and [E1b1b, formerly E3b], exhibit spotty frequencies in Russians, expected for low-frequency haplogroups.”

Map above of R1a-Z282 (R1a1a1b1a) specific to Russian males

A 2008 paper, sampling 1,228 people in Russia who self-identified as ethnic Russians, found the following top four Y-DNA Haplogroups among the sample:

R1a: 19.8% to 62.7%, with an average of 46.7%

N1: 5.4% to 53.7%, with averages of 21.6% for all regions

(10% Central and South Russia)

I: 0% to 26.8%, with an average of 17.6% for all regions

(23.5% Central and South Russia)

R1b: 0% to 14%, with an average of 5.8%

Y-DNA Haplogroups listed for Russia, Turkey and Iran. The constant reader will recall the similarities between Turkey and Iran.

Russia: R1a [46%] – N1c [23%] – I2a1 [10.5%] – R1b [6%] – I1 [5%] – 

J2 [3%] – E1b1b [2.5%] – T1a [1.5%] – Q [1.5%] – G2a [1%] 

Russia:   R1a – N1c – I2a1 – R1b – I1 – J2 – E1b1b – T1a – Q – G2a 

Turkey:  J2 – R1b – G2a – E1b1b – J1 – R1a – I2a1 – N – L – T1a –

Q – O – I1 – R2 – H – C – I2a2 

Iran:       J2 – R1a – G2a – R1b – J1 – E1b1b – L – Q – T1a – N1c2 – I

From this comparison, we learn that Russia’s Y-DNA Haplogroups – though similar when comparing lineages descending from Shem: R1a, I2a1, R1b, I1 and G2a – stand out as different from those of Turkey and Iran in sequencing and percentages. Caused in part through admixture, though not wholly. We will learn that Asshur has a closer genetic relationship with his younger brother, Arphaxad. 

Viewing the table from the preceding chapters and adding Russia highlights the disparity between Russia and the other two peoples in those paternal Haplogroups more usually associated with North Africa, the Middle East and West Asia (as well as southern Europe from admixture), consisting of E1b1b, J1 and J2 from Ham – and in the Caucasus, G2a from Shem.

Whereas, Russia’s high frequency of R1a firmly places it in the Eastern European genetic sphere. The one small surprise is the low level of R1b in Russians (from admixture); though six percent is an average and levels can be comparable with Turkey and Iran in certain areas. What is more significant and shows Russia’s closer genetic ties with north and eastern Europeans is adding the percentages for R1b and R1a. Russia has 52% compared with 24% and 26% for Turkey and Iran respectively.

                       J1       J2     E1b1b      G      R1a      R1b

Iran                9        23         7          10       16        10

Turkey           9        24       11           11         8        16

Russia                        3         3            1       46          6

Selecting the key Haplogroups more closely associated with the majority of the European nations and particularly in the northern regions of Europe, reveals how Russia’s highest percentages position it with similarly related peoples in north eastern Europe – as will be discussed in later chapters – whilst highlighting how similar, yet distinct Turkey and Iran are compared with Europe as a whole.

For both Turkey and Iran in their male populations reveal heavy intermixing over many centuries – in part generated by their geographic positions – where half their Haplogroups have originated from Shem (R1a, R1b, G, I) and the other half have derived from admixture with Ham (J2, J1, E1b1b).  

                      R1a     R1b     I1     I2a1   I2a2     N1c

Russia           46        6        5        11                   23

Turkey            8       16        1         4       0.5        4  

Iran               16       10               0.5                      1           

The comparison table subtly shifts with the emphasis on northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising the far older I1 and I2a1 from Shem and – resulting from admixture with Japheth – Haplogroup N1c1. Iran’s dominant paternal Haplogroups are J2 and R1a; Turkey’s comprise J2 and R1b; whereas Russia’s include R1a and N1c1. 

It is not surprising that Haplogroup I2a2 is negligible in Russia as this is found primarily in northwestern Europe, or that the R1b percentage is low, as this is predominantly a western European Haplogroup. 

As Haplogroup J2, followed by E1b1b and J1 seemingly distinguishes Turkey as a southern European nation at best and in reality a nation of the near east; Haplogroup R1a with N1c1, I2a1 and I1, identifies Russia as both an eastern and a northern European nation. That said, the original core paternal line for Turkish men descended from Elam is R1b, followed by G2a. The other paternal Haplogroup lineages are evidence of intermixing and intermarriage.  

Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table comprising Iran, Turkey and their related neighbours, with the addition of the Russians.

                       J        J1      J2     E1b1b      G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia       43      16       27         2          30        9        10       19 

Iran              32       9       23         7          10       16        10       26

Armenia      33      11       22         6          12         5        30      35  

Turkey         33       9       24         11         11         8        16       24 

Russia            3                  3          3            1       46         6       52

As Georgia bookends one end with the highest Haplogroup J percentages and lowest R1; Russia bookends the other with the lowest Haplogroup J levels and contrastingly the highest R1 groups. Georgia possesses the highest level of J2 as well as its core male Haplogroup G2a; while Russia has the highest percentage of its core male Haplogroup R1a and secondly N1c1 from intermixing with males from Japheth.

The next two chapters concentrate on firstly, Nimrod from the Book of Genesis and his link with Asshur… in more ways than one. And Secondly, the Earth’s physical and spiritual history preceding Nimrod and how it arrived at the circumstances which allowed Nimrod to take centre stage in the post global Flood cataclysm world.

Chapter twenty-three will resume with Shem’s fifth and youngest son, Aram; whom we have discussed in part in Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino & Hispano America.

For those readers interested in all things Assyrian or Russian, there is an excellent two volume historical novel that brings the ancient world of Assyria colourfully alive, called The Assyrian by Nicholas Guild (1987) and its sequel The Blood Star (1989).

If a wise man has a controversy with a foolish and arrogant man, The foolish man ignores logic and fairness and only rages or laughs… there is no peace… or agreement.

Proverbs 29:9 Amplified Bible

“… we must bear in mind that the cause of learning has often been promoted by scholars who are prepared to take a risk and expose their brain-waves to the pitiless criticisms of others.”

F F Bruce 1910-1990

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

Arthur Schopenhauer

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

The Pauline Paradox

Warning: ***If you deem yourself a Christian, this will be one of the most important articles you will ever read. It will also be one of the most unsettling and upsetting. It is not designed to shake your faith in Christ, but to remind the reader of the profound and wise words of the author of the Book of Jude and ‘earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered.’ For the truth of the Way taught by Christ was sabotaged and forged into a religion called Christianity; where today it does not embody the true teachings of the original apostles in the early church.***

This is the shocking truth of how Christianity was subverted by a Saul of Tarsus.

The Teachings of Christ or the Theology of Paul? A line divides them and every Christian must choose their side. 

Christianity is far removed from how it looked in the few short years following the death of the Messiah in 30 CE – Article: The Christ Chronology.

Yes, this transformation did not take centuries, but only a matter of years – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

Unbelievable? Well, the historical record and the New Testament scriptures ominously reveal otherwise. 

Christian Commentators have acknowledged how Christianity is dominated by the letters of Paul; has been shaped more by Paul than anyone else; and that it is as if Paul began an entirely new religion – one which was unrecognisable with the teachings of Christ and the original apostles. But with that said, few ever proceed to question why that is or what it means for us today? 

Why was it only Paul, who called himself an apostle? 

Why did Paul distance himself from the true apostles who were commissioned directly by Christ?

Why was Paul’s ministry extensively catalogued in the New Testament Cannon instead of that of Peter, John or James who have only token entries? 

The Apostle Peter while not the head apostle was the first among equals and had been given by Christ, the keys to bind and loosen doctrine. How was it then, that Paul rebuked him and set doctrine of his own accord in the early church?

God is forgiving upon genuine repentance, yet even King David a man after God’s own heart – being a lover of His Law – was deemed unfit to build a Holy Temple for God, due to the blood which stained his hands – Psalm 119:97, 1 Chronicles 22:7-8. 

How was Paul – who had not avenged enemies of Israel in battle like David, yet had taken pleasure in hunting God’s elect, was then – with blood of the saints on his hands, granted dispensation to build the Eternal’s spiritual temple? It begs the question: How could a man who willingly sent believers to their death, be chosen to lead God’s work? 

There are countless anomalies surrounding Paul – nearly all of them revealed by the writing of his own hand. 

It is a given that a number of scriptures – and particularly in the New Testament – have been tampered with in the endeavour to support anti-christian teachings adopted by the Universal Church over the past two thousand years – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

Some within the body of Christ recognise that the teachings of Paul have been used to mold Christianity and in the process any ‘difficult scriptures’ are curiously always to be found in the writings of Paul. 

What these same people have not always realised is that thirteen books of the twenty-seven in the New Testament are accredited to a man who is not who he says he is. What we will perhaps never know is whether Paul was a well meaning convert who veered off the path of the Way. Or, if he was a sinister ploy by the authorities to infiltrate the early movement of the Church of God and supplant its central truth of Christ’s good news with another gospel. 

The Great Pyramid Decoded, Peter Lemesurier, 1977 & 1996 – emphasis his: 

‘Whether present-day Christian teaching bears any real comparison with those original teachings by Joshua the Nazarene is a moot point. For [the Great Pyramid’s] prophecy is quite insistent that Paul’s ‘Christianity’ was destined to be an offshoot, or deviation, from the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth… it was to represent a spiritually static, inferior path based on some kind of diminution of the Nazarene teachings. 

That ‘gentile’ Christianity had its origin in the apostle Paul is neither new nor a particularly controversial suggestion: but that it may represent a deviation or ‘falling away’ from the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth… is a notion which is still relatively in its infancy at the time of writing [in 1977]. Indeed, it seems likely that it will be many years yet before acceptance by Christians of the idea becomes at all general and before the original message of Jesus himself – whatever it was – is rediscovered and re-accepted by mankind at large. 

… the Pyramid’s chronograph appears to portray the future Paul as a drastic ‘revisionist’, and indicates that the movement he was to found would take the form of a serious departure from the original Messianic teachings’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

This gives grave pause for thought…

The purpose of this article is to a. highlight specific verses in Paul’s writings which one could call red flags; b. compare doctrinal inconsistencies with the teachings of Christ, as well as; c. contrast with the General Epistles of Peter, John, James and Jude. 

We will in turn investigate nearly all the books of the New Testament regarding the authenticity of their origin and authorship.  

The English Standard Version of the Bible will be used throughout unless otherwise stated. 

To be fairer on Paul, we will proceed through his letters and epistles as they are ordered in the Bible. Though this is not the chronological order with which they were written. For those readers interested in the background to Paul’s writings and when they were written, please refer to the article: The Sabbath Secrecy. But before beginning with the Book of Romans, we will investigate the Book of Acts. This work is a record of the early church and its authorship is credited to the Luke who allegedly compiled the Gospel of the same name. 

Acts

The first time we read about Paul is when he was still using his Hebrew name, Saul. Paul being a Latinised version for ease of travel and protection within the Roman Empire. It is at the stoning and execution of the zealous convert, Stephen. Acts 7:58: ‘Then they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul.’ Notice Paul is a young man. This was soon after Christ’s death in the year 30 or following in 31 CE. 

Acts 8:1-3: ‘And Saul approved of his execution. And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. Devout men buried Stephen and made great lamentation over him. But Saul was ravaging the church, and entering house after house, he dragged off men and women and committed them to prison.’ 

The first eight chapters of Acts focus on the apostles Peter and John, where Peter takes the lead in preaching powerfully and healing the sick; as well as the exploits of Stephen and Philip of the seven men chosen to serve as deacons. Yet it is here that a mysterious curtain is partially drawn on Peter and fully upon him from chapter sixteen until the last chapter of Acts in chapter twenty-eight, where it is Paul who is the sole centre of attention – as if Peter and the apostles had ceased to exist… in the mind of Luke at least.

In Colossians 4:14, the author says: “Luke the beloved physician greets you…” Seemingly, Paul and Luke are close friends. We will observe on our journey how Paul surrounds himself with loyal and often, younger men. Does this have anything to do with Luke changing his focus half way through in Acts from Peter to Paul instead? It is a strange re-direction by Luke and lasts for all the remaining thirteen chapters.  

Chapter Nine of Acts, begins with the conversion of Paul. His conversion experience is recounted again by Luke in both chapter twenty-two and chapter twenty-six.

‘But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.’

While still filled with aggression and hatred, Paul is struck blind for three days and told to meet a disciple, Ananias in Damascus. Ananias like Paul in a vision was told to lay hands on Paul and heal him. 

‘But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem. And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.” But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” 

The being who identified himself earlier as ‘Jesus’, says Paul must ‘suffer’. Why would Jesus wish to injure someone in this way? Why would Jesus call a cruel person like Paul in the first place? This is entirely without precedent in the scriptures. Search them from beginning to end and find God calling an evil intentioned person? While all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, the Eternal always works with those who have a righteous heart to begin with. 

‘So Ananias departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes, and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized; and taking food, he was strengthened.’

The fact scales fell from Paul’s eyes may or may not have relevance, though it is perhaps pertinent when later the idea of a lying spirit is addressed with regard to Paul’s conversion and commission – 1 Kings 22:22. The connection would be between the spirit in question being of a reptilian nature and the use of scales to blind Paul – Article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

A further anomaly is the fact that Ananias in Damascus was directed specifically to: “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul…”

According to Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers: ‘A street answering to this description still runs from the Eastern Gate to the palace of the Pacha, [about half a mile in length, running from east to west] and is known locally as the “Street of Bazaars.” 

‘Whether or no this was one of the streets which Benhadad allowed Ahab to make in Damascus… cannot be said…’ – Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible.

 1 Kings 20:30-34

English Standard Version

30 ‘… [King] Ben-hadad also fled and entered an inner chamber in the city… 33 Now the men were watching for a sign… Then Ben-hadad came out… 34 And Ben-hadad said… “The cities that my father took from your father I will restore, and you may establish bazaars for yourself in Damascus, as my father did in Samaria.” And [King] Ahab [of Israel from 874 to 853 BCE] said, “I will let you go on these terms.”

The street called Straight may have been nearly nine hundred years old at the time of Paul. The house of Judas was located in this street. We do not know whether Judas was a believer or not, though he was acting as Saul’s host. It might have been the home of Judas Barsabbas. He is introduced in Acts chapter fifteen, where we learn he is a prophet like Silas and was chosen with him to accompany Paul and Barnabas on their journey to Antioch. Barsabbas being a patronymic, Judas was probably the brother of Joseph Barsabbas.

Interestingly, Joseph was one of the two men selected to replace Judas Iscariot; though it was Matthias who was chosen by lot. According to Lavern Gooding, the reference to the ‘house of Judas’ is a clue or red flag regarding Paul’s false conversion and his evil destiny – much like fellow saboteur, Judas Iscariot.

Acts: ‘For some days he was with the disciples at Damascus. And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” And all who heard him were amazed and said, “Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called upon this name? And has he not come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests?” But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.’ 

The Jews tried to kill him, but Paul was able to escape from Damascus. 

An incredible turn around in such a short space of time. Though keep in mind this version in Acts is not written by Paul, but recorded by Luke and so we are relying on his word. 

‘And when he had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples. And they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple. But Barnabas [Acts 4:36] took him and brought him to the apostles and declared to them how on the road he had seen the Lord, who spoke to him, and how at Damascus he had preached boldly in the name of Jesus. So he went in and out among them at Jerusalem, preaching boldly in the name of the Lord. And he spoke and disputed against the Hellenists. But they were seeking to kill him. And when the brothers learned this, they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him off to Tarsus.’

Barnabas was to later travel with Paul on missionary journeys – Acts 12:25. He was the only disciple in Jerusalem who accepted Paul’s sensational and dramatic change of heart and took him to meet the apostles. In Chapter ten of Acts, Peter has a vision showing him ‘Gentiles’ are to be included in salvation through Christ. This is interesting for the reason that God chose to reveal this to Peter and not the future ‘Apostle to the Gentiles’: Paul.

Barnabas is called a good man in Acts 11:24. He searches for Paul in Tarsus and ‘for a whole year they met with the church [in Antioch] and taught a great many people.’ 

Acts 13:1-3 

‘Now there were in the church at Antioch prophets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen a lifelong friend of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off.’ 

Notice, the men are called teachers and prophets. One would assume Barnabas and Paul are teachers. Neither are addressed as apostles, though Barnabas is named first and clearly the senior of the two. Remember these two points. If the Holy Spirit was truly at work as Luke states, then this would indicate that Paul may have been genuine in his intentions to begin with and a change in his heart grew later.

Chapter thirteen continues with Barnabas and Paul – where Saul is now known as Paul – traveling to Cyprus and in between to eventually Antioch. Early in their journey the Apostle John joins them for a time before departing elsewhere. Paul confronts a magician who seeks to lead a proconsul away from the faith. In so doing Paul curses him – of all things and not for the last time – to temporary blindness. It is after this event that Luke decides to name Paul first every time he and Barnabas are mentioned together. The two of them preach powerfully, with Jews becoming angry and Gentiles eager to hear the gospel. 

It is in Acts 14:4, that Luke decides to call Barnabas and Paul apostles. But by what authority? At Lystra, Paul heals a cripple and the crowds hail them as gods, calling Barnabas, Zeus and Paul as ‘chief speaker’: Hermes – Articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. Luke says Elders were appointed in each church. 

Acts chapter fifteen is a landmark occasion for the Jerusalem conference took place in 49 CE. This is some nineteen years after the death of Christ. It was called because many Jews and Pharisees were teaching new converts that it was still ‘necessary to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses.’ The apostles and elders gathered, with Peter reminding – after much debate – of how it was revealed to him that Gentiles were to be saved too.

Though it is questionable who these Gentiles were exactly and does it really mean the tribes of Israel who were not the true ‘Jews’ of the tribe of Judah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. They then listened to Barnabas and Paul – where Luke places Barnabas first for the first time they are both mentioned at the conference. 

Apostle Peter

James the brother of Christ – as James the brother of John had been martyred (Acts 12:2) – who was presiding over the council as an Elder of the Jerusalem church and conference host, summarised their decision (note, he is not called an apostle). Gentiles were not to be put under the terms of the Old Covenant with Israel and thus were not obligated to be circumcised or keep the ritualistic aspects of the Law. James added they should “abstain from the things polluted by idols [1], and from sexual immorality [2], and from what has been strangled [3], and from blood [4].”

Remember these four points for Paul discusses them later. The sexual immorality mentioned refers to acts with temple prostitutes – of either sex – associated with the rituals in sacrificing meat to idols.

Barnabas is placed first for a second time, when the council sends a letter to the Gentile converts, saying: “… it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul…” It is readily apparent that Luke favours Paul by naming him first and only names Barnabas first when the council – which clearly views the older in the faith Barnabas as senior – acknowledges Barnabas first in their letter, as they had done previously when receiving their joint testimony. 

At the end of chapter fifteen, ‘Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John [Hebrew name] called Mark [Latin name] – Acts 12:25. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.’

Luke matter of fact says Barnabas took Mark and departed, whereas he says Paul was commended and strengthened the churches. No compliments for Barnabas and favouring Paul instead. One reason why Paul could have it in for Mark, is that he possibly recognised a young man who was not in his corner. Having the balance of power in favour of Barnabas was not in Paul’s interest. Whereas Silas was a loyal supporter of Paul at this point, though perhaps did not remain so. 

Paul was unforgiving (1) of the perceived misdemeanour committed by Mark. In contrast to the exhortation by the author to the Colossians: “… bearing with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive.” Echoing the words of Christ: “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” – Matthew 6:14-15.

This incident involves seemingly two converted men – a ‘good’ man and another ‘filled’ with the Holy Spirit – who somehow were not able to resolve a non life or death matter. A peaceful way of resolving the issue would have been if Paul had suggested that while Mark could be an under study to Barnabas, he could take Silas in a similar role. Paul appears to forget that Barnabas was the only person to befriend him after his conversion or to introduce him to the apostles. Paul on the physical level exhibits emotional immaturity and spiritually, a callow attitude. We will discover that there is more to this disagreement than meets the eye and explains Paul’s inexplicable stubbornness.   

The Jerusalem Council was the most significant event in early church history since the death of the beloved Messiah. The dust from its far reaching decision had still not settled, yet in the very next chapter of Acts, Paul meets a disciple called Timothy, ‘the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions that had been reached by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem.’ 

The irony here, is Paul delivering the verdict from the council – regarding circumcision not being a requirement under the New Covenant – yet circumcising Timothy himself no less. In performing it personally on Timothy – his soon to be constant travelling companion – a level of inappropriateness was incorporated into the act by Paul. 

Paul advocated being all things to all men, 1 Corinthians 9:22: “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” It wasn’t Paul who was saving but Christ and being weak for the weak is not helping them to become strong – Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:15. 

Being one way for some and another way for others is duplicitous. The Lord’s half brother, James wrote: “… for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind… he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways” – James 1:6, 8. James also said: “So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin” – James 4:17. Peter set the right example: ‘… Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men” – Acts 5:29. 

Paul’s actions make no sense whatsoever as he wrote: ‘Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh’ – Philippians 3:2. And, “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you” – Galatians 5:2. 

This is no less than hypocrisy (2) on Paul’s part. In the next book we will study, Paul says: ‘But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God’ – Romans 2:29. Unfortunately, there is no excuse for Paul’s actions and so one can only think Paul had an ulterior motive. 

Further, we will learn that Paul called Peter out publicly for alleged hypocrisy relating to circumcised and non-circumcised company he was keeping – Galatians 2:11-14. Rather ironic are Paul’s actions then, regarding Timothy and his circumcision in light of this – “pot calling kettle black” springs to mind. While Paul makes an issue of a rift with Peter after this confrontation; Luke makes no mention of it in the Book of Acts. Luke seems desirous of portraying complete unity between the apostles, elders and Paul. 

So successful is he in this that defenders of Paul’s ‘apostolic’ authority – purportedly received directly from Christ – use the conference in Acts fifteen as evidence that Paul was not the author of a new religion… which evolved into false christianity. While the apostles and Paul were certainly of one accord on circumcision at this time, Paul clearly drifts later on matters of the law, grace, faith and works as revealed in his letters. The Gospel of the Kingdom of God as taught by Christ became through Paul, a gospel about or of Christ. 

The Acts fifteen conference cannot be used as proof that Paul taught the same doctrine as the apostles. It can only be used as evidence of their mutual agreement on physical circumcision no longer being binding on new converts as a sign of conversion or a requirement for salvation – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy.  

Continuing in chapter sixteen, we learn in verse eleven that the author of Acts, Luke, was travelling with Paul and Silas. Also, the Holy Spirit forbade Paul and his party from travelling through Mysia. This was the area covering western Asia Minor. What is interesting, is the fact this region contained the seven churches of Revelation. The significance of which is the prophetic importance of these churches – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Yet Paul was denied visiting them.

Even so we learn that while Paul and his company were in Philippi, ‘one who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. And after she was baptized [presumably by Paul], and her household as well, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.” And she prevailed upon us’ – Acts 16:14-15, ESV.

Thyatira was one of the seven churches and prophetically, the fourth era of the true church. A dual pronouncement meant that during Paul’s day as well as about a thousand years later, the church fell to condemnation. Christ declared through the Apostle John:

“But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality.”

“Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works. But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call the deep things of Satan…” – Revelation 2:20-24, ESV.

The Jerusalem conference was clear when it admonished: “abstain from the things polluted by idols and from sexual immorality.” Lavern Gooding postulates that Lydia, Paul’s convert, was Jezebel and led many astray – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. It is worth noting that Jezebel was the wife of King Ahab, who in turn may have built the Straight Street, where the house of Judas was located and perhaps a lineage of evil. The original Jezebel was a prophetess; a whore; a sorcerer; and a murderer. The second Jezebel was and is synonymous with the false universal church and the legacy of Paul.

In Acts chapter eighteen, Paul became exasperated with the Jews who he reasoned with on the Sabbath in the Synagogues. ‘And when they opposed and reviled him, he shook out his garments and said to them, “Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.” Up to this point, Paul seemed to be focusing on the Jews, which was contrary to his apparent commission given him in chapter nine – ‘Gentiles, kings and the children of Israel.’

 In fact, the Jews ‘made a united attack on Paul and brought him before the tribunal, saying, “This man is persuading people to worship God contrary to the law.” This seems an odd thing to accuse Paul of. While he may have preached against circumcision and sacrifices, what was he saying about the law? 

Well, Paul has much to say about the law in his letters and epistles. We will discover that the law is the central fulcrum on which the true faith and false christianity pivot. Christ made clear in the plainest language that even a child can understand, that the law had not been abrogated as modern christianity – based on Pauline theology – teaches. 

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven” – Matthew 5:17-19. 

True believers are distinguished by the fact they observe the Law. “Then the dragon became furious… and went off to make war… on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus” – Revelation 12:17. While the commandments are contained within the Law; what is the testimony of Jesus? Revelation 19:10, provides the answer: “For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”

Where did Christianity acquire the doctrine of the law having been done away? At the worst, from the teachings of Paul, or in the least from a misinterpretation of Paul’s writings? Paul was certainly an expert in the law; having grown up as a Pharisee and being taught by the preeminent Gamaliel who as a Pharisee, was a Rabbi and leader in the Sanhedrin as well as a respected teacher of the law – Acts 5:34.

In Acts chapter nineteen, Luke claims: ‘And God was doing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that even handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were carried away to the sick, and their diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them.’ The church this writer attended when young issued anointed cloths based on this example; whereby a minister would anoint a small piece of cloth with oil, pray over it and this would be sent to a member who was unwell and not able to attend church or readily see a minster. It is open to question whether this example in Acts was a one off event; unique  to Paul; or a precedent for a ritual of Christian healing?

It was an odd occurrence, though not too dissimilar to the account about Christ. ‘And behold, a woman who had suffered from a discharge of blood for twelve years came up behind him and touched the fringe of his garment, for she said to herself, “If I only touch his garment, I will be made well.” Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well’ – Matthew 9:20-22.

Paul raises a young man called Eutychus from the dead in chapter twenty. While this is an impressive act, it could be argued Paul had inadvertently killed him while being both long winded and unmindful of his audience. Paul was speaking to brethren ‘and he prolonged his speech until midnight. And a young man named Eutychus, sitting at the window, sank into a deep sleep as Paul talked still longer. And being overcome by sleep, he fell down from the third story and was taken up dead. But Paul went down and bent over him, and taking him in his arms, said, “Do not be alarmed, for his life is in him.” And when Paul had gone up and had broken bread and eaten, he conversed with them a long while, until daybreak, and so departed.’

A problem with long sermons is that they are tiring on the mind and exacting on the concentration of the recipients. A speaker may like the sound of their own voice and they may even think what they are saying is important; but the most effective talks are brief and to the point. Added to this, encouraging questions and open dialogue is of more benefit to the audience than being subjected to a protracted monologue. One person notes this passage as an example of Paul being ‘boring’, or one could say he was self absorbed (3). 

Further in chapter twenty, Paul says farewell to the elders in Ephesus, knowing he will never see them again. He says: “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.”

It is ironic that Paul should use this analogy of a vicious, hungry wolf for three reasons.

First, the author of Matthew records Christ’s warning: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits” – Matthew 7:15-16.

Second, Paul was descended from the tribe of Benjamin, who is described by Jacob: “Benjamin – (as) a wolf will he tear to pieces; In the morning he will devour the prey, And in the evening he will divide the booty” – Genesis 49:27, Darby.

Third, while Paul is concerned others will tear down and destroy his work; he is the wolf in sheep’s clothing who had torn down the Law; removed works of faith and added grace; and changed the gospel message from the kingdom of God to one about Christ.

In Acts chapter twenty-one an important event occurs with far reaching consequence. Paul while in Jerusalem, meets with James the Lord’s half-brother and with the Elders. ‘After greeting them, [Paul] related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified God. 

And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs. What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 

Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law. But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality.” Then Paul took the men, and the next day he purified himself along with them and went into the temple, giving notice when the days of purification would be fulfilled and the offering presented for each one of them.’

Notice James and the Elders held authority over Paul and he acquiesced to their instructions. An example of damage limitation by James and the other elders. What is not clear, is what Paul had done wrong by exhorting Gentile and Jew alike to forsake the physical rites and rituals of the Mosaic Law. The Old Covenant and the ceremonial law had passed away; while the terms for the New Covenant incorporated a transference and amplification of the moral law – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy

Was James saying this only applied to Gentiles and that Jews were still obligated by the terms of the Old Covenant. Surely not? Then the only explanation is that Paul was advocating a dissolution of the whole Law. It appears James misunderstood at this point what Paul was saying. Either that, or he was exactly aware and was deliberately trying to set Paul straight. 

Over the next few chapters the Jews in Jerusalem were outraged with Paul’s teachings about the law and he was arrested, bound and set to be beaten. With Roman involvement, the matter became complicated, for Paul was a Roman citizen. Though he still remained in custody. When questioned in chapter twenty-five: ‘Paul argued in his defense, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I committed any offense.” By Paul appealing to Caesar in Rome, it negated his early release. Twice, Paul recounts his unusual conversion experience as recorded by Luke in Acts chapter nine. En route to Rome, the vessel carrying Paul is shipwrecked on Malta. Once in Rome he is placed under house arrest – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. 

Paul

So ends the Acts of the Apostles, yet predominantly about one man in particular, with it remaining questionable that he was actually an apostle. He is called an ‘Apostle of Satan’ by Lavern Gooding. A strong indictment, though one we will prove one way or the other by the end of this investigation.

The next book following Acts is the Epistle to the Romans. It is attributed to Paul; is the longest of his thirteen books and it is considered one of the most theologically significant books of the Bible, providing a comprehensive exposition on the salvation offered through the ‘gospel of Jesus Christ’. Romans is addressed to the Church in Rome, a group Paul had not yet visited at time of writing; but whom he would become very close during his periods of house arrest in Rome at the hands of Caesar – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

Romans

Paul is eager to emphasise his credentials as an apostle, Romans 1: 1, 5: ‘Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God… through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations…’ 

It is of note that the ‘apostle to the Gentiles’ acknowledges that the gospel priority was to the Israelites. Remember this point as we will return to it later in Romans… 16 ‘For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.’

Romans 2:6-7, 13, 20, 26, 28 

6 ‘He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life… 

13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.’

It is concerning that in verse sixteen, Paul describes the gospel he is teaching as not Christ’s but his: ‘… on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.’

20 ‘… having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth…

26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 

28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical.’

In Romans chapter two, Paul clearly states that a believer is 1. rewarded according to their works; 2. that it is doers of the law who are made right with God; 3. the law is truth; 4. obeying the law replaces physical circumcision; 5. and so as a result, circumcision is inward and of the spirit. These are all biblically supported statements. 

When it becomes interesting is in chapter three, where Paul reveals he is the master of rambling double speak. What is he really saying readers? 

Paul: 7 ‘But if through my lie God’s truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner? 8 And why not do evil that good may come? – as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.’ 

Perhaps Paul is being sarcastic, but if so, he has opened himself up to a misinterpretation where it appears Paul admits to being a liar (4) in furthering the ‘truth’ – in speaking evil if it leads to ‘good’. But when does lying ever lead to truth or evil to goodness? Paul says peoples judgement of him is slanderous, yet in contradiction acknowledges their condemnation is with foundation.

Paul: 20 ‘For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.’

We have learned that Paul was subservient to James the Lord’s half-brother and senior Elder in Jerusalem. Which is an interesting anomaly if Paul was an apostle and James was not. Paul saying a person’s works do not make him right with God is contrary to what James expounded. 

‘But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing’ – James 1:22-25.

Paul: 21 ‘But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it.’

Well, which one is it? 

Paul: 23 ‘for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.’ 

Whereas James says: “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?” – James 2:14.

Paul: 27 ‘Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.’

James 2:18, 24 – ‘But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works… You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.’ 

Observe Paul uses the word, ‘boasting’. Paul’s use of this word is so numerous in his letters, it becomes truly wearisome as the careful and constant reader will notice.

Paul: 28 ‘For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.’

James 2:17: “So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

Paul: 31 ‘Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.’ Paul’s statement in verse 31 contradicts – not just James but – his own words in verse 28. 

It is both fascinating and alarming to witness the clear discrepancy between the words of James compiled perhaps not long after Paul’s very own. James cryptically writes the following in verse twenty of chapter two:

“Will you understand, O vain man, that faith without deeds is dead?” – New Matthew Bible. 

James is clearly exasperated with someone and writes a stinging rebuke to a ‘vain’ man. Was it Paul he is referring to? Who else in the biblical record was teaching a way contrary to the truth about the Law as propounded by James? 

Think on this…

The Damascus Document, curiously describes a shift from Christ’s message to a different one: 

“When the Man of Mockery appeared, who spread on Israel waters… For they had sought flattery, choosing travesties of true religion; they looked for gaps in the law… They overstepped [the] covenant, violated [the] law… for one who deals in mere wind, a spewer of lies, had spewed them. So it is with all men who entered the new covenant in the land of Damascus, but then turned back and traitorously turned away from the living water.”

This person sought a loop hole in the law, in the desire to lessen it and ultimately do away with it. Living water is symbolic of the Holy Spirit. John 7:38, ESV: ‘Whoever believes in me… Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.’ Whereas, spewed out water represents a different spirit. 

‘The serpent spewed water like a river out of its mouth after the woman [the true Church], in order to sweep her away in the flood; but the land came to her rescue – it opened its mouth and swallowed up the river which the dragon had spewed out of its mouth’ – Revelation 12:15-16, Complete Jewish Bible.

In Romans chapter four, Paul expounds in overly long detail about the righteousness of Abraham and how the promises of his descendant’s national greatness was through his faith – sealed by circumcision – and not by works: Romans 4:11, 13. Yet after some twenty-five verses, nearly everything Paul says about Abraham is negated by two simple verses in Genesis 26:4-5: “I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and will give to your offspring all these lands. And in your offspring all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.”

 Notice what Pauls says to the Roman brethren: “But the fact of the matter is this: when we try to gain God’s blessing and salvation by keeping his laws we always end up under his anger, for we always fail to keep them. The only way we can keep from breaking laws is not to have any to break! – Romans 4:15, Living Bible.

But Christ said: “Don’t misunderstand why I have come – it isn’t to cancel the laws of Moses and the warnings of the prophets. No, I came to fulfill them and to make them all come true” – Matthew 5:17, Living Bible.

In chapter three, Paul introduces his recurring theme of the blood sacrifice of Christ and in chapter four salvation through grace. In chapter five, Paul continues with each theme, marrying them together. Chapter six addresses being slaves to righteousness rather than to sin. Chapter seven is about being released from the penalty of death caused by sin, the transgression of the law. The chapter summed up by Paul’s comment: “… So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin” – Romans 7:25. 

One commentator uses Romans 7:19, “For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing”, as evidence Paul ‘practiced evil’ (5). A bit harsh as Paul did not have to be so honest and was only sharing a state natural for all people – Christian or not – who strive to overcome faults stemming from their human nature. 

In chapter eight of the Book of Romans, Paul continues in segregating the law into two. 

Verse two: ‘For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.’

Chapter 9:1-4 – ‘I am speaking the truth in Christ – I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit – that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed [not the first or last time Paul mentions cursing] and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.’ 

Paul grandiloquently proclaims he would sacrifice his own salvation for his people. No one who understood the stakes involved would exchange their eternal life in this way. Paul in exaggerating his sentiments, is being insincere (6). 

Again in contrast with the words of James, Paul states: 31 ‘… Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works.’

Paul, 10:5 – ‘For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them’ just like Abraham did. 

9 ‘… if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved’, though not without good works and obeying the commandments – James 2:14, Revelation 12:17. 

Speaking of the ‘little flock’ (Luke 12:32), Paul says the following in chapter eleven, verses five and six. “So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.” This is a telling statement, for the author of 2 Peter – ironically as it turns out – exhorts believers to grow in grace and knowledge – 2 Peter 3:18. This is in glaring contradistinction with Paul’s explanation.

As Paul says, true Christians are given grace or shown favour. This is because God works with sinners before conversion and looking on their heart, grants grace accordingly. They continue under the Eternal’s grace while remaining righteous; performing good works; and keeping His commandments. Paul’s words not withstanding, grace is still grace whether based on works or not. Yes, the Eternal chooses to give a person grace, though it is only continued to be offered if one continually grows in their Christian walk and develops character as 2 Peter makes plain. 

Paul: 13 ‘Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry 14 in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.’

Paul yet again stresses his apostleship of which only he seems to be aware. One wonders if his obsession with the Gentile cause, was in response to their being ‘no room at the inn’ and his being a ‘Johnny come lately’ – in that the apostles had already been commissioned to go to the House of Israel. 

Paul is haughty (7) in regard to his ministry due to its separateness from the apostles as well as it potentially reaching a wider audience. It is an impure and arrogant attitude to think good could come from evil. Who exactly did Paul want to make jealous? Did it include the apostles? And was he having a dig at them by saying, ‘Jews’ could be converted by the strength of his own work with the gentiles? Whose ministry did he suppose he represented? That of Christ or his own? 

Paul continues in chapter eleven to explain how Gentiles could be grafted onto an Olive Tree representing Israel, in place of branches broken off through their unbelief. This analogy is peculiar to Paul and not repeated by Christ or the apostles. The reference to the 144,000 from the tribes of Israel in the Book of Revelation as well as Christ’s commission to the apostles, cast doubt on the inspiration of this teaching from Paul. ‘These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” – Matthew 10:5-6. 

In chapter thirteen, Paul instructs that we should be respectful of the governments and councils that bear rule over us. It is certainly prudent to follow laws and pay taxes which do not conflict with God’s law, yet Paul overstates the case when he claims they are ‘instituted by God’. While Paul is correct in ‘there is no authority except from God’; civil governments are all based on their lust and greed for power and money. They are not God’s ‘servants’ or ‘ministers’. They are rather tools in the hands of the Adversary – Matthew 4:8-9. 

Chapter fourteen – and especially verse 5 – is counted with certain other passages of Paul as a ‘difficult scripture’. Yet if Paul’s writings had not been canonised, then there would not be any difficult scriptures in the New Testament. Pause and think on that. Those readers interested in a discussion on Romans fourteen and other difficult verses pertaining to the Law, Holy Days and the Sabbath either written by or ascribed to Paul, can be found in the article: The Sabbath Secrecy

In brief, Paul waffles about days of religious observance without delineating which days he refers – “Some people think that certain days are special and more important than other days. Other people think that all days are the same. Each person should decide what seems right to him” EEB – and then unlike the apostles or Christ, does not speak with apostolic authority, but rather in a double-minded manner unbecoming of one ‘commissioned’ by Christ – James 1:8. Coincidental that it is James who describes a double-minded man in chapter one of his epistle; then calls him a vain man in chapter two. Are both in reference to Paul?

A further curious statement by Paul is in verse 12: “So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.” Why would this be needed if a Christian is saved by grace and faith alone? Unless of course, a person’s works are of importance as decreed by James and not by Paul. 

In chapter fifteen, Paul quotes the prophet Isaiah as a prelude to what he will say next. The verses in Isaiah refer to Christ and the Gentiles, though Paul appropriates them for himself. 

Paul continues: 15 ‘But on some points I have written to you very boldly by way of reminder, because of the grace given me by God 16 to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God… 17 In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to be proud of my work for God. 18 For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to bring the Gentiles to obedience – by word and deed, 19 by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God – so that from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; 20 and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else’s foundation…’ 

Paul works on the proven principle that if you mention something enough times – his commission to the Gentiles – it not only breathes life into it but also becomes deeply embedded in peoples minds as the ‘truth’. Verse twenty is revealing about Paul’s motives. What servant of Christ would think this way. Paul is undoubtedly thirsty (8). The Phillips version says: ‘My constant ambition has been to preach the Gospel where the name of Christ was previously unknown, and to avoid as far as possible building on another man’s foundations…’

Paul does not fear the spot light and seeks centre stage at every opportunity. Here he shows ambition but also, knows he is not fully accepted by the apostles, nor is his gospel in step with them. Are these thoughts to share? As Christ said: “… How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” – Matthew 12:34. Give any person long enough and they reveal themselves by what they say. 

An online comment: ‘Paul[…] knew that overlapping with other “apostles” would lead to all kinds of problems, so he started [a] long [way off]… [in] Antioch but still in the Greek speaking part of the empire. But it was useless, other apostles began to preach in Paul’s churches, he learned the lesson so well that his next target would be Hispania, so far [away] there would certainly not be [any] overlapping.’

Paul: 22 ‘This is the reason why I have so often been hindered from coming to you. 23 But now, since I no longer have any room for work in these regions, and since I have longed for many years to come to you, 24 I hope to see you in passing as I go to Spain, and to be helped on my journey there by you, once I have enjoyed your company for a while. 25 At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem bringing aid to the saints. 26 For Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. 27 For they were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings. 28 When therefore I have completed this and have delivered to them what has been collected, I will leave for Spain by way of you. 29 I know that when I come to you I will come in the fullness of the blessing of Christ.’

Paul artfully discloses – while bragging about his own role – that other Gentile congregations have donated for the poor. Inspiring the Roman church to match this generosity as well as mentioning twice to be hospitable to him when he arrives from his long journey. 

An additional online comment pointedly describes how the apostles viewed the maverick Paul. 

James: “Paul our friend. This no circumcision thing for gentiles isn’t playing real well here in Jerusalem.”

Paul: “Well, we just need more gentiles. I’m thinking on taking this message to them. You know, all around the [Mediterranean]. Maybe as far as Spain.”

Peter: “Oh my, how long will you be gone?”

Paul: “Certainly years and years.”

James: “We will miss you (ahem), but [it’s] for the greater good. How soon can, I mean, will you have to leave?”

Paul; 30 ‘I appeal to you, brothers, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf, 31 that I may be delivered from the unbelievers in Judea, and that my service for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints, 32 so that by God’s will I may come to you with joy and be refreshed in your company.’

Paul is in some small part at least, smarting that he is not lauded by the Jerusalem Elders and certainly by James. He hopes instead that the saints – the brethren – appreciate all his charity work for them in Jerusalem. Ignore that the donations are from Gentile brethren and not from Paul personally. 

The final chapter in Romans reads like a who’s who of those whom Paul has naturally formed attachments, yet seem to have preeminence in some way or another. But one cannot help feeling that it is not the mark of a considerate or converted mind to formulate such a long list of recommendation; thereby leaving those who are left out, feeling on the outside. This encouraging of the creation of us and them, is what is fundamentally wrong not just in society but in the churches of religion – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days

Even Paul himself declares: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” – Galatians 3:28. ‘Peter also said: “Now I am certain that God treats all people alike” – Acts 10:34, CEV. 

Paul: 5 ‘… Greet my beloved Epaenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in Asia. 7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me. 13 Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord; also his mother, who has been a mother to me as well’ – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

17 ‘I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. 18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. 19 For your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you… 20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.’

Paul is concerned with division which challenges his doctrine and the allegiance of Gentile converts to him. Far from Satan being crushed, the Adversary relentlessly persecuted christians in Rome for many years to come. This is one of the failed predictions of Paul about Christ’s eminent return. It is regrettable to acknowledge this of Paul, as it has been a debilitating flaw of many a worker for Christ through the centuries. Yet in so doing they have all run the risk of being false prophets when it has inevitably not come to pass – Deuteronomy 18:20-22, Jeremiah 28:9.

Paul: 21 ‘Timothy, my fellow worker, greets you… 22 I Tertius, who wrote this letter, greet you in the Lord. 23 Gaius, who is host to me and to the whole church, greets you’ – 3 John 1. ‘Erastus, the city treasurer, and our brother Quartus, greet you. 25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith – 27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.’

Why mention Erastus is the city treasurer. Is that important when all converts are one in the body of Christ? A true christian leaves their status of being rich or poor, master or slave, male or female or Jew and Gentile at the door when they enter a place of worship. They do not wish to be reminded of temporal things in a letter from Paul when seeking to share in spiritual relationships within a congregation. 

It is disconcerting not so much Paul calls it his gospel, but that the ‘him’ he refers to as the ‘wise’ God is then attached to a ‘mystery’. It is the Adversary who is deemed a wise god. They are the architect and guardian of a mystery. The plan of God is not mysterious, whereas Satan’s strategy has remained cloaked in secrecy for eons – refer Brotherhood of the Snake, Article: Thoth

So ends Paul’s letter to a church he did not found, nor had he yet visited. Though still keen to stamp his authority on a Gentile congregation in Rome far from Jerusalem’s influence. It provides much food for thought regarding Paul, his character and motive. Yet this remains the tip of an iceberg. As we progress, not only his personality but Paul’s theology crystallises into sharper focus.

 1 Corinthians 

The next book in the Bible is called First Corinthians. There are two letters to the church at Corinth in the New Testament, though there are other letters from Paul to the church not included in the Bible – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. Of interest, is the fact that Paul founded the church congregation in Corinth during his second missionary journey. This aspect helps the reader appreciate the sentiments expressed by Paul in his letters to them. 

Paul: 1 ‘Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus… 4 I give thanks to my God always… 5 that in every way you were enriched in him in all speech and all knowledge – 6 even as the testimony about Christ was confirmed among you – 7 so that you are not lacking in any gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 8 who will sustain you to the end…’ 

Paul alludes again to the return of Jesus in their lifetimes. Paul doesn’t miss an opportunity to overstate his important influence on the fledgling congregation; especially with what follows. 

Paul: 10 ‘I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 

14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius [Romans 16:23, 3 John 1], 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.’

Paul makes some jarring comments here. For information about Apollos, the probable author of the Book of Hebrews – and definitely not Paul – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy. Cephas is a reference to Peter. Paul does not even deign to use his Hebrew name but rather an Aramaic version of it. The divisions in Corinth must have been alarming to Paul, in light of his old nemesis Peter, as well as a newer rival in the popular and charismatic, Apollos. Some were even striving to gain the upper hand and take the spiritual high ground by saying, “I don’t follow a man, ‘I follow Christ’, so there.” 

Why was there dissension, if Paul’s teachings were the same as Peter’s and Apollos. Yet we are beginning to see that they were not the same. Nor was Paul a team player. This was an inevitable recipe for contention amongst converts. 

Paul representing himself in baptism and likening his choice of words with the crucifixion is both bad taste and disrespectful to Christ. It serves no positive purpose and should not have been written down. Paul is obviously perturbed and while trying to keep a lid on his anger, some spills out onto the page of the manuscript. Blurred by emotion, Paul is then unsure about who he has or has not baptised and in the same breath relegates baptism beneath the far more glorious preaching of his gospel. 

A sincere servant of Christ would surely greatly rejoice at the opportunity to baptise a new believer into the body of Christ, over mere preaching. Paul then has the effrontery and irony to claim he does not preach with fancy speech, yet his letters are chocked full with verbose circumlocution. Paul’s tried technique in beguiling his audience to readily accept his own doctrines, is in fact to present ‘eloquent wisdom’ through convoluted and confusing language. One cannot help but feel that Paul likes the sound of his own voice, not just verbally, but certainly in the written word. 

Paul is so angry with his converts, that he has a serious and personal dig at them. 

Paul: 26 ‘For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” 

And that was them told. 

Paul’s choice in using the word wisdom in reference to Christ is interesting, for the original Wisdom of God was the consort of the Eternal, who became His Adversary – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.  

Paul digresses in chapter two to then return to the subject of division in the Corinth congregation in chapter three. 

1 ‘But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it… 3 For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way? 5 What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. 6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. 7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.

10 According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building upon it… 11 For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw – 13 each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done.’

Paul accuses the brethren of being spiritually immature. But are some of them actually the opposite if they are seeing through Paul’s theology. Paul neatly draws an analogy and in the process places Apollos second to himself, but of course, it is God who gives the growth. In light of the wise god and its mystery, it is notable that Paul describes himself a master builder, as in a master [free]mason perhaps? And in mentioning the Day [of the Lord], Paul is hearkening to the judgement of his work in their lifetime because Christ will soon return. 

Chapter four is rather oddly written, with strange ramblings. It’s as if Paul is speaking casually and it has been recorded as such. It does not bear the hallmark of a well thought out letter. 

1 ‘This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. 3 … with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. 4 For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 

8 Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! Without us you have become kings! And would that you did reign, so that we might share the rule with you! 9 For I think that God has exhibited us apostles [this reference includes Apollos] as last of all, like men sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men. 10 We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in honor, but we in disrepute. 13 … We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world, the refuse of all things. 

15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.’ Matthew 23:9 – “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.”

16 ‘I urge you, then, be imitators of me. 17 That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church.’ 1 Peter 2:21 – “For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps.”

Chapter five continues with sentiments and conclusions contrary to scripture, regarding a case of incestuous sexual immorality. Paul claims: 

3 ‘For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. 4 When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.’

How can Paul be present? It is not his spirit then. What spirit is representing him if such is the case? It is a weird thing to say and as one commentator states, Paul is exhibiting a vengeful (9) spirit towards the sinner. 

Matthew 7:1-2 – “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.”

Paul: 12 ‘For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

James 4:11-12 – ‘Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law… But who are you to judge your neighbor?’

Chapter six: 2 ‘Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? … 3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? …’ Only Paul claims this. Yet the Apostle John says Christ is the only judge – John 5:22: ‘For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son…’

Paul: 5 ‘I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers…’ Yet Paul could not resolve a dispute with Barnabas or with Peter as we shall learn. 

In chapter seven, Paul continues his habit of imposing his own opinions on the brethren, which invariably challenge scripture. Paul gives his view on marriage, with a bias towards remaining single. So much so, Paul is the veritable champion of singleness as an ideal. Going forward, one can clearly understand how the Catholic Church was to fully embrace a celibate priesthood. In addition, a haziness descends on Paul’s sexual orientation, leaving a question mark on whether an abstinence from marriage actually covered latent homosexuality.

It is important to note that Paul may have once been married. A social expectation in being a member of the party of the Pharisees – let alone an over zealous one like Paul (Acts 9:1-2, Galatians 1:13-15, Philippians 3:4-6) – was to be married. Though a requirement to marry has not been shown in any reliable sources and while it is possible that a member of the Sanhedrin needed to be married, no primary sources stipulate this. Even though Paul was advanced in Judaism, he gives no evidence that he was ever a member of the Sanhedrin.

Paul: 1… “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”

Why? 

Paul: 2 ‘But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.’

Paul advocates being a bachelor, a spinster and with it celibate. Physically, this runs contrary to a man and woman becoming one flesh and having children – Genesis 1:28; 2:24. Yet spiritually, it does find some support from Christ in Matthew 19:11-12. Paul with his sentiments, created an opening for the Universal Church to advocate celibacy for priests as well as portraying sex as sinful with the expression, ‘burn with passion.’

Crucially, Paul reveals his own status as unmarried and single at time of writing; while hinting he may be a widower.

Paul: 10 ‘To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.’

One is holy when they possess the Holy Spirit – just as Paul himself admitted in 1 Corinthians 6:19. An unconverted person is not holy – 1 Corinthians 2:14. Nor can they be made holy by extension from a converted Christian – Acts 2:4. 

15 ‘But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved.

Paul is disallowing divorce for believers, but says it is acceptable to divorce if one is married to an unbeliever and they wish to separate. Christ taught that marriage between a (converted) couple was a union which should not be dissolved; though with the exception being on grounds of sexual immorality – Matthew 19:6, 9. 

It suits Paul perhaps to make this distinction if he had a wife and they were estranged. We know Paul after his extraordinary conversion experience travelling to Damascus, proceeded to Arabia for three years (Galatians 1:17) before returning briefly to Jerusalem (Galatians 1:18) and then it was another fourteen years before he visited Jerusalem again (Galatians 2:1).

On each occasion he did not bring a wife with him. What we know from this – and Paul’s sentiments in chapter seven – is that for whatever reason (if Paul did have a wife), she did not accompany him on his missionary travels. What we do not know if such is the case, is whether she may have left him or he abandoned her; and if so presumably it would have been over a difference now in beliefs. It likely would have been mutual. Paul would then have had little choice but to outwardly follow Christ’s teachings and while remaining married, lived as a eunuch forced into being single and unable to remarry due to still having a living spouse (Matthew 19:3-11).

While this is all conjecture it would fit the possibility of this scenario and Paul defending his own actions in this passage. Ironically, his words have become justification (for many) in divorcing for abandonment. Even though in verse seventeen Paul clearly dictates he has not received any command from the Lord.

Paul: 17 ‘… This is my rule in all the churches. 25 … I have no command from the Lord, but I give my judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.

If Paul and his wife separated over the irreconcilable difference of their beliefs, it is not confirmed by any traditions recorded by a number of the early Church fathers; though Paul having a partner is apparently substantiated. 

Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Philippians: Shorter version, Chapter IV:

“For I pray that, being found worthy of God, I may be found at their feet in the kingdom, as at the feet of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; as of Joseph, and Isaiah, and the rest of the prophets; as of Peter, and Paul, and the rest of the apostles, that were married men. For they entered into these marriages not for the sake of appetite, but out of regard for the propagation of mankind.”

Clement of Alexandria (circa 150 CE to 215 CE), On Marriage Miscellanies, Book III, Chapter VI:

“53. Even Paul did not hesitate in one letter to address his consort [Philippians 4:3]. The only reason why he did not take her about with him was that it would have been an inconvenience for his ministry. Accordingly he says in a letter: “Have we not a right to take about with us a wife that is a sister like the other apostles?” [1 Corinthians 9:5] But the latter, in accordance with their particular ministry, devoted themselves to preaching without any distraction, and took their wives with them not as women with whom they had marriage relations, but as sisters, that they might be their fellow-ministers in dealing with housewives. It was through them that the Lord’s teaching penetrated also the women’s quarters without any scandal being aroused.”

Origen of Alexandria (circa 185 CE to 253/254 CE) Commentary on the Epistles to the Romans, Book I, Chapter I, No. 3:

“Paul, then, if certain traditions are true, was called while in possession of a wife, concerning whom he speaks when writing to the Philippians, ‘I ask you also, my loyal mate, help these women.’ Since he had become free by mutual consent with her, he calls himself a slave of Christ. But if, as other think, he had no wife, nonetheless he who was free when he was called is yet a slave of Christ.”

Eusebius of Caesarea / Pamphilus (circa 264 CE to 339 CE), Church History, Book III, Chapter XXX:

“And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles [Philippians 4:3], to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry.”

Refer 1 Corinthians chapter nine, verse five below.

26 ‘I think that in view of the present distress it is good for a person to remain as he is. 27 … Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned… Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. 29 This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, 30 and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, 31 and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away.’

Paul is endeavouring to put people off from marrying. Not only that, Paul is giving his own opinion and clearly not confessing any divine inspiration from the word of God. How does marrying involve sinning? What is Paul trying to spare a married couple from? Perhaps the heartache of being attached to someone in a world of increasing persecution for Christians? Paul obviously thinks or believes Christ’s return is near at hand. He falls into the trap of many a false apostle who would follow in his footsteps down through the centuries.  

Paul: 32 ‘I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. 33 But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord. 38 So then he who marries his betrothed does well, and he who refrains from marriage will do even better. 39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. 40 Yet in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is. And I think that I too have the Spirit of God.’ 

The converse is more true, in that a single person often obsesses over the fact they do not have a partner. A happily married couple is just that, happier, settled, convicted. How can being single be better? Ask most singles and they would vehemently disagree. Paul stamps authority on his own personal convictions by saying, well, “I have the Holy Spirit and know what I am speaking about.” But this from a man who favours friendships and seemingly relationships, with younger men…

In chapter eight, incredibly, Paul who was part of the Jerusalem conference and agreed its terms; endorses a liberal stance with the Corinthian brethren on meat offered to Idols. 

“…. that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled… If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well…” – Acts 15:29. 

Then after ruling meat offered to idols is acceptable, Paul adds that as some people may have a weak conscience and could be offended, he doesn’t eat meat offered to an idol in front of them. For he did not wish to make his ‘brother stumble’ or ‘sin against Christ’. If he really thought it was okay, then why sugarcoat it and just eat anyway, setting an example so that they can grow and strengthen in their faith.

Paul had the audacity to accuse Peter of a similar hypocrisy, yet cannot see his own duplicity in this matter. Regardless, Paul was contravening an apostolic decree, sanctioned first by Peter’s authority – in Matthew 16:19 – and ratified by host elder, James. 

Paul: “… some Christians… have been used to thinking of idols as alive, and have believed that food offered to the idols is really being offered to actual gods… God doesn’t care whether we eat it or not” – The Living Bible.

Paul truly does not comprehend the seriousness of eating meat offered to an idol – refer article: Belphegor.

Contrary to what Paul was teaching the Corinthians, the gods of the idols were very real.

Clementines Homilies 9:9-10

‘For the demons having power by means of the food given to them, are admitted into your bodies by your own hands… the reason why demons delight in entering into [people’s] bodies is this. Being spirits, and having desires after meats and drinks, and sexual pleasures, but not being able to partake of these by reason of their being spirits, and wanting organs fitted for their enjoyment, they enter into the bodies of [people], in order that, getting organs to minister to them, they may obtain the thing that they wish, whether it be meat, by means of [a person’s] teeth [and tongue], or sexual pleasure, by means of [their] members’ – refer articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II

Hegisuppus the Nazarene (circa 108 to 180 CE) recorded: “James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the Just by all from the time of the Saviour to the present day; for there were many that bore the name of James. He was holy from his mother’s womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head…”

James was a vegetarian or perhaps a vegan, so he had no issues with accidentally eating unclean meat or any food offered to idols. So too was the Apostle Peter, for he reveals: “However, such a choice has occurred to you, perhaps, without you understanding or knowing my manner of life, that I use only bread and olives, and rarely pot-herbs; and that this is my only coat and cloak which I wear; and I have no need of any of them, nor of anything else: for even in these I abound. For my mind, seeing all the eternal good things that are there, regards none of the things that are here” – Clementine Homily 12:6.

In chapter nine, Paul uses his own human reasoning – ‘based’ on scripture – in justifying the manner he wins converts; as well as his right to be supported materially by the Corinthian brethren. 

Paul: 1 ‘Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? 2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.’

Paul using the negative adverb, not – five times is appropriate as a. he wasn’t an apostle; b. he never met Christ; and c. he was not recognised as an apostle outside of those church congregations he personally raised up. 

Paul: 3 ‘This is my defense to those who would examine me.’

Paul has apparently been questioned about his conduct and is defensive in response. If he considers himself in the right, then why is he even entertaining the criticism levelled at him? Or has he been abusing people’s hospitality? On the other hand, perhaps some brethren – ‘those of Cephas and Apollos’ for instance – have been withholding charity due to doctrinal differences or a dislike of Paul. 

Paul: 4 ‘Do we not have the right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? 6 Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living? 7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard without eating any of its fruit? Or who tends a flock without getting some of the milk?’

Wyatt Houtz considers: ‘The best explanation of this passage is that when Paul chose to confront promiscuous and sensuous marital relations in the Corinthian Church, he was concerned that he would be accused of hypocrisy due to his own separation from his wife. Additionally, Paul is aware that Peter’s wife did believe him and chose to follow him in his apostolic ministry, and so he was concerned that Peter’s example would be used against him as well e.g. Paul, why didn’t you bring your wife with you like Peter? 

Therefore the “believing wife” is identified as Peter’s wife and the “unbelieving wife” is Paul’s own wife. This is not speculation because it appears in the very text of 1 Cor 9:3-5 (NRSV): “This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. Don’t we have the right to food and drink? Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas (Peter)?” 

Paul is obviously annoyed. We receive confirmation that certain apostles, the Lord’s brother’s (James and Jude) and specifically Peter are married. Paul as his habitual manner writes duplicitously, so that is he admitting he has a believing wife who does not travel with him or is he merely irked that his illustrious colleague has a believing wife and lessens his own standing in some way?

The surprise here if the first reason was correct, is the consideration that Paul’s wife was in fact a believer. Surprisingly again, support for this is perhaps intimated in the Letter to the Philippians.

2 ‘I urge Euodia and Syntyche to agree with each other in the Lord. 3 Yes, and I ask you, my true yokefellow [G4805 – suzugos: yoked together, companion], to help these women who have contended at my side for the gospel…’ – Philippians 4:2-3, Berean Standard Bible.

Biblical scholars debate without agreement to what Paul means in verse three. The Greek word suzugos means: ‘of those united by the bond of marriage, relationship, office, labour, study, business, or the like.’ The word can reference a close bond with a ‘fellow, consort, comrade, colleague or partner.’ Some scholars consider the reference by Paul to be a fellow unnamed co-worker and others that it is actually a personal name.

Online comment: The adjective σύζυγος is related to the verb συζεύγνυμι, which means “to be yoked together.” This verb occurs twice in the Greek New Testament, and in both instances, it refers to being married. For example, in Matt. 19:6, it is written… ‘so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man separate!’

‘… Jesus Christ is referring back to the marriage of Adam and Eve. Accordingly, one who is σύζυγος, “yoked together,” would be one’s spouse. On the other hand, as the lexicons clearly state, the word does not only possess the meaning of “spouse.”

As for the claim that… Paul is referring to someone’s name, I hesitate to accept this claim since he modifies σύζυγε by the adjective γνήσιε, which he does nowhere else before a name. On the other hand, he does modify names by other adjectives elsewhere, which therefore leaves the possibility.

By itself, it cannot be determined whether σύζυγε is referring to a male or female, since it could be declined in the masculine or feminine gender. However, because it is modified by the adjective γνήσιε, which is certainly declined in the masculine gender alone, then σύζυγε must also be declined in the masculine gender in agreement with the adjective γνήσιε.

If… Paul would have modified σύζυγε by γνησία, which is declined in the feminine gender (whether vocative or nominative), then there would have been a basis for the assertion that σύζυγε is referring to a wife.

In summary, σύζυγε by itself can mean “wife,” or even “husband.” Only an associated adjective or the definite article when the word is not declined in the vocative case could clue the reader in on whether it’s referring to a male or female! However, because… Paul modifies σύζυγε by the masculine-gender adjective γνήσιε, the word σύζυγε in [Philippians 4:13] is understood to be declined in the masculine gender and could not therefore be interpreted as referring to the apostle Paul’s wife. It could however be a proper name, but ultimately, the matter remains unsettled.’

Whether knowingly or unknowingly, Paul is contradictory and confusing on the issue of a wife; her status (and or her beliefs) and this we will discover is par for the course for Paul in his epistles and letters. Based on chapter seven of 1 Corinthians, the answer appears to be Paul was unmarried and favoured a single life. The question of whether Paul was a widower or rather had never been married – with the exception of the Church fathers – remains for now unclear.

Paul: 8 ‘Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not certainly speak for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. 11 If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more?’

In this instance, Paul is content to quote from the Law when it suits his position. It is not his right to claim assistance from the brethren if they choose to withhold it from him. Paul does not seem to consider he may be at fault. Christ made clear to the disciples who became apostles that they were not to rely on physical needs and that hospitality would be shown them from those receptive to the truth. 

‘And he called the twelve together… 2 and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal. 3 And he said to them, “Take nothing for your journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money; and do not have two tunics. 4 And whatever house you enter, stay there, and from there depart” – Luke 9:1-4. And on the chance it was not: 5 “And wherever they do not receive you, when you leave that town shake off the dust from your feet as a testimony against them” – Luke 9:5.

Paul: ‘Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in the sacrificial offerings? 14 In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel.’ 

Then after correcting the Corinthian brethren, Pauls admits that he hasn’t made use of his right to seek charity from them. Notice, he calls it the gospel of Christ, rather than the Kingdom of God – Matthew 6:33; 9:35.

Paul: 15 ‘But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting. 16 For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward, but if not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a stewardship. 18 What then is my reward? That in my preaching I may present the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel.’

Why then is Paul even raising the topic? Why is he putting the brethren on a guilt trip? Paul exaggerates, saying he would rather ‘die’ before not being able to boast about not receiving help in the first place. This is both an arrogant attitude on Paul’s behalf as well as in the way he words his thoughts. Not befitting of a converted spirit acting with love and kindness; his me, me attitude is but rather a reflection of a carnal mind which has been offended and strikes with retaliatory venom. The gospel message was to be freely shared, so why would Paul make an issue out of him freely preaching it? – Matthew 10:8. 

Paul: 19 ‘For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings. 27 But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.’

The very thing Paul publicly corrected Peter on is what Paul is doing in being a deceptive Chameleon (10), with regard to the Law. Paul makes a distinction between the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ. While the Old Covenant included the Law of Moses and was replaced by the New Covenant with the Law of Christ, these are not two different sets of laws but rather one. Christ did not abolish the Law of Moses but rather built upon it and amplified its physical requirements with spiritual applications.

 Matthew 5:17-19, 21-22, 27-28 

English Standard Version 

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 … whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 

21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment… 

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.’ 

In chapter ten, Paul discusses their ancestors during the time of Moses and says in verse eleven: ‘Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.’ Paul mentions again that they are living in the end; though as it turns out, Christ’s words in Matthew twenty-four heralded the beginning of the ‘latter days’ in which we still find ourselves – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

Paul: 14 ‘Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? 19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy…’

Earlier, Paul speaks to them as immature, now they are sensible and they are too ‘judge  for themselves’. While the Universal Church teaches a literal taking from the blood and flesh of Christ, this is not what Paul meant, surely? Paul clearly says not to eat meat offered to idols and demons. Yet in the following verses Paul is unclear, using double speak to say it is okay so as not to offend other people.

 Paul: 23 “All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. 24 Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. 25 Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 26 For “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.” 27 If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience – 29 I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else’s conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks? 31 So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 32 Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, 33 just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved.’ 

So, what you don’t know won’t hurt you, yet if challenged then compromise for the sake of unity and not causing offence – refer article: Red or Green? Yet, the author of First Peter said: “… always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect’ – 1 Peter 3:15. Christ taught to do good, by setting the right example – Matthew 5:16. There is an understanding which states: “One cannot please all the people all the time.” Paul reveals in verse thirty-three that he is a people pleaser (11). 

In Chapter eleven, Paul addresses two issues. The first is the relationship between a husband and wife and how a wife shows subservience to her husband by having a. long hair and b. covering it, particularly when praying (verse 13). 

Paul: 2 ‘Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5 but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. 6 For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man.’ 

Paul is relying on tradition, the custom of the day and his own opinions, which flow easily for a man who is not married himself. In Islam, one will find women being covered – not just the head but from head to toe – surviving to the present day. Paul is slanting his opinion in the last verse, as Genesis states: ‘So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them’ – Genesis 1:27.

Paul: 8 ‘For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.’ 

Paul is likely referring to the Watcher angels, who were tempted by the allure of women and their long hair.

Paul: 11 ‘Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; 12 for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, 15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.’ 

Paul stamps his authority on the matter by dissuading any challenge against him. No, nature does not teach that long hair is wrong for a man – Judges 16:17. The custom in Paul’s time amongst Israelite men was to wear their hair long and evidenced later by the Celts, Saxons and Vikings. It was the Romans who instigated short hair as worn by the Caesars, Senators and soldiers. The legacy of which persists today, though some cultures have retained or embraced longer hair such as the Amerindians and Latins. 

The second issue covered by Paul is the Bread and Wine ceremony, usually described as the Last Supper or the Lord’s Supper which occurred the evening prior (13th) to the Passover on the 14th of Nisan or Abib. 

Paul: 17 ‘But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.’ 

This is a difficult situation, because when Christ and the disciples took the bread and wine, it had been preceded by a meal. So it was not wrong the Corinthian brethren were having a meal. This problem was that some had more food than others and perhaps were not sharing – or others felt a meal was not applicable – and certain people were drinking too much before hand.

 Paul: 23 ‘For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus… said… “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.’ 

This is a problematic verse because does Paul mean as often as you take it yearly, or is he advocating taking the bread and wine regularly? Christianity has assumed it is regularly, as daily for example in the Universal Church. One Church of God viewed the ceremony incorrectly as a ‘New Testament’ Passover, preceding the annual Passover the following evening. There is confusion on what the ceremony is and when to take it and even what type of bread to use, without Paul being unclear on how often – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

The former consideration of this writer based on Paul’s discussion and the early church – as recorded in Acts by Luke – is that it could be taken as often as one felt convicted – Acts 2:46, Jude 12. Yet from an historic perspective – the Quartodeciman versus Easter Controversy – and the solemn nature of the ceremony, it appears partaking annually as a memorial of Christ’s final night with the disciples and subsequent death is biblically supported.

Paul: 33 ‘So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another – 34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home – so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.’

Paul speaks of spiritual gifts in chapter twelve and how the body of Christ is one with many equal members. Yet enigmatically says: ‘But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.’ Why would a converted person desire ‘higher’ gifts? Only a carnal mind would be concerned about that and think this way. 

In chapter thirteen, Paul defines love which is interesting coming from an unmarried man. Even so, he hits upon pertinent aspects which are repeated at many a wedding ceremony. 

In chapter fourteen, Paul revisits spiritual gifts; encouraging the desire for the gift of prophecy over speaking in tongues. The issue of tongues is unclear in that today it is an occurrence principally amongst Pentecostals and quite frankly sounds like gibberish, so that one wonders the true source of said gift. Paul acknowledges that tongues are of no benefit other than to the one speaking if no one understands or is able to interpret. It remains a mysterious gift to this writer for a. not ever witnessing the speaking in tongues and b. what was it really like in Pauls’s time as he describes it as: “… if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible…” 

Paul then stresses the value of prophesying and makes an important well known statement in verse thirty-three: “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.” This is a profoundly ironic verse for difficulty encountered in certain scriptures pertaining to the Law stem from the very words of Paul or ones attributed to him. 

Paul: 33 ‘As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36 Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. 38 If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. 39 So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But all things should be done decently and in order.’

Paul reveals his unhidden chauvinistic thinking. He has already said that all members of the body are equal. Though apparently not. In chapter eleven verse five, Paul acknowledges: “… every wife who prays or prophesies.” In Acts 21:8-9, we learn of Philip’s four daughters who prophesied. Were these women to remain silent instead? Paul in his own interest, mentions the Law. Yet which law? For where in the Old Testament does Paul refer? Perhaps he alludes to Genesis 3:16 or Numbers 30:3-12, yet neither passage refer to Paul’s blanket statement. 

It would seem Paul is rather misleadingly referring to either a law of the Pharisees or of the Romans, of which he was both. So how could this be a ‘command’ from the Lord? Then he has the temerity to use this line of reasoning in halting any challenge to his authority from a legitimate prophet or spiritually converted person. ‘Done decently and in order’ according to Paul and not necessarily God’s word. 

Paul explains the end goal and hope of a Christian is the resurrection from mortality to immortality, with a new body in chapter fifteen. 

Paul: 1 ‘Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you – unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures…’ 

While this is unarguably good news and part of the Gospel, it is not the Gospel – or good news – of the Kingdom of God.  

Paul: 5 ‘and that he appeared to Cephas [Peter], then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James [the brother of Christ], then to all the apostles [?].’

One imagines, Paul is referring to those historically believed to be apostles; though not officially referred to as such by Christ, the original apostles or in the Bible. Only from conjecture or intimation from Paul. They include James and Jude – the Lord’s half brothers – Barnabas and Apollos.   

Paul: 8 ‘Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.’

Paul is exhibiting false humility and at the same time elevating himself above the true apostles and evangelising ministers. It is extremely alarming that Paul should use the auspicious expression, ‘I am what I am.’ For Christ used this to describe himself and this in turn has echoes from the being who spoke with Moses in the burning bush, when Moses stood on holy ground – John 8:58, Exodus 3:14. Who in their right mind would dare to utter such a thing. It is immensely disrespectful and borders, no falls, into blasphemy (12) – 1 Timothy 1:13. Which spirit of Paul spoke these words? – 2 Corinthians 12:7. 

Paul rightly expresses a powerful truth when he states in verse nineteen: “If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.” Paul denounces the wrongful practice of baptism on behalf of the dead and relates how he ‘fought with beasts at Ephesus’ in his past life. 

Paul: 50 ‘I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God… 51 Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed…’ – Job 14:14, Daniel 12:2. 54 ‘then shall come to pass the saying that is written: 

“Death is swallowed up in victory.” 55 “O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?” 

56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.’

Paul refers yet again to his mystery – Revelation 17:5, 2 Thessalonians 2:7, Colossians 1:26.

Paul misquotes Hosea 14:13 for his own use, where it actually says: ‘… I shall redeem them from Death. O Death, where are your plagues? O Sheol, where is your sting?’ The power of sin is not the law, but rather the transgression of the Law. 

Chapter sixteen sees Paul close his letter much like to the Romans. A whos who of those people deemed by Paul as important in his furtherance of creating an environment of us and them

Paul 1 ‘Now concerning the collection for the saints: as I directed the churches of Galatia, so you also are to do. 2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come. 3 And when I arrive, I will send those whom you accredit by letter to carry your gift to Jerusalem. 4 If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me.’ 

Being seen involved in collecting for the ‘poor’ is always at the forefront of Paul’s efforts as well as going to Jerusalem regularly. Where he was very much on the outside, yet couldn’t help himself in still visiting – in the endeavour to know what was happening at headquarters. I imagine the Elders groaned inwardly each time. 

Paul: 5 ‘I will visit you after passing through Macedonia, for I intend to pass through Macedonia, 6 and perhaps I will stay with you or even spend the winter, so that you may help me on my journey, wherever I go. 7 For I do not want to see you now just in passing. I hope to spend some time with you, if the Lord permits. 8 But I will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost, 9 for a wide door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many adversaries.’

As there were factions in Corinth, those people not pro Paul may have felt the same way as those in Jerusalem, knowing Paul planned to stay months instead of days or weeks. One wonders what the wide door in Ephesus involved. Saying there are many adversaries is of note for two reasons. 

First, there is a letter written to the Ephesian congregation, though – as we will address – biblical scholars are not in agreement as to its authorship. Six of Paul’s accredited thirteen books in the biblical canon are disputed. Three are strongly doubted and a further three less so; with Ephesians being one of the latter suspects. This is strange since Paul had an affinity with the city. 

Second, the Apostle John in his visions recorded in the Book of Revelation, includes seven prophetic letters to seven literal churches in Asia Minor – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. One of those congregations was located in Ephesus and happens to be the first church in a prophetic sequence. This era of the true church began with the death of Christ in 30 CE and was superseded by the second era circa 300 CE – Article: Chronology of Christ; and Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology

John records the words of Christ to this first church, which include:

“I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false… Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate” – Revelation 2:2, 6. 

These sentiments are truly shocking and though Christ is obviously speaking of Nicholas in part, one of the seven ordained Deacons, he has used the word apostle in the plural – Acts 6:5. A stated false teacher of prominence in the New Testament was Simon Magus – Acts 8:9-24.

As James speaks of a ‘double minded and vain man’ of mysterious identity in his epistle, is Christ speaking of a false apostle in particular. One who lived during the first era of the church, one who had more than a passing affiliation with the city of Ephesus; one who has incorrectly become known as an apostle; and one who invented a new religion – knowingly or not – called Christianity. But it was not the true faith and Way taught by Christ and the apostles – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days

This is an astounding thought and of itself does not condemn Paul; yet as we progress through the entirety of Paul’s writings and the case against him grows stronger, this passage cannot be taken lightly or routinely dismissed.                                                 

Paul: 10 ‘When Timothy comes, see that you put him at ease among you, for he is doing the work of the Lord, as I am. 11 So let no one despise him. Help him on his way in peace, that he may return to me, for I am expecting him with the brothers. 12 Now concerning our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to visit you with the other brothers, but it was not at all his will to come now. He will come when he has opportunity.’

Timothy is considered an Evangelist, though Paul equating Timothy with himself may mean he was viewed as an apostle, by Paul at least. Regardless, Paul clearly has a soft spot for the young man he personally circumcised. It is very interesting that Apollos who some brethren preferred, is clearly his own man and not submitting to Paul’s authority in this instance. Even more so when understood that Apollos is very probably the author of the important book to the Hebrews – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy.

Paul: 15 ‘Now I urge you, brothers – you know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints – 16 be subject to such as these, and to every fellow worker and laborer. 17 I rejoice at the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus, because they have made up for your absence, 18 for they refreshed my spirit as well as yours. Give recognition to such people. 21 I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. 22 If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed. Our Lord, come!’ 

Paul plays the name game and is keen for the brethren to give homage to those longest in the faith, just like he doesn’t to the apostles converted before him. Unlike the letter to the Romans it is unclear who the scribe of 1 Corinthians was and whether Paul wrote physically more than just the greeting at the end. Paul makes mention of the imminent return of Christ and nonsensically curses (13) anyone who does not love the Lord. That would include a great number of people. 

2 Corinthians 

Paul leads off his second letter to Corinth, repeating and asserting his ‘apostleship’, while elevating Timothy to his side. ‘Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, To the church of God that is at Corinth, with all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia…’

Chapter three: ‘Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you, or from you? 2 You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on our hearts, to be known and read by all. 3 And you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.’ 

One commentator states: ‘… Acts sugarcoated the relationship between Paul and the Jerusalem church.’ If such is the case, then recall the reason for this is because the author Luke, favoured Paul. ‘Notice how Paul did not possess a letter of recommendation from James… “Wherefore observe the greatest caution, that you believe no teacher, unless he brings from Jerusalem the testimonial of James the Lord’s brother… For no one, unless he has gone up thither, and there has been approved as a fit and faithful teacher for preaching the word of Christ, – unless, I say, he brings a testimonial thence, is by any means to be received. But let neither prophet nor apostle be looked for by you at this time, besides us” – Clementine Recognitions XXXV

While this quote is taken from a work* believed to have been written in the second or third centuries, it likely finds its inspiration from an actual decree issued by the headquarters church in Jerusalem. It gives plausible cause why Paul would tackle the issue in his letter to the brethren at Corinth – particularly in light of the various factions supporting either, Paul, Apollos or Peter. Clementine states congregations were to exhibit the greatest caution in not believing anyone without a testimonial approving them as a fit and faithful teacher. They were not to receive or look for any apostle who had not been endorsed by the Elders in Jerusalem. Even if the reader chooses to ignore this paragraph, the entire body of evidence presented from scripture cuts right through any argument against there being a doctrinal divide between the true apostles consecrated by Christ and the maverick false apostle, Paul. 

The Clementine literature* including the Homilies and Recognitions (above) is an account of the conversion of Clement of Rome with his subsequent life and travels with the apostle Peter and how they became traveling companions. They also contain discourses by Peter, such as the following: 

“Our Lord and Prophet, who has sent us, declared to us that the wicked one, having disputed with Him forty days, and having prevailed nothing against Him, promised that he would send apostles from amongst his subjects, to deceive. Wherefore, above all, remember to shun apostle or teacher or prophet who does not first accurately compare his preaching with that of James, who was called the brother of the Lord, and to whom was entrusted to administer the church of the Hebrews in Jerusalem…” – Clementine Homily 11:35.

Paul manipulates the brethren in chapter seven: 2 ‘Make room in your hearts for us. We have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have taken advantage of no one. 3 I do not say this to condemn you, for I said before that you are in our hearts, to die together and to live together. 4 I am acting with great boldness toward you; I have great pride in you; I am filled with comfort…’

Paul then rambles for the remainder of the chapter, making little sense and fixating on Titus. 6 ‘But God, who comforts the downcast, comforted us by the coming of Titus, 7 and not only by his coming but also by the comfort with which he was comforted by you, as he told us of your longing, your mourning, your zeal for me, so that I rejoiced still more. 8 For even if I made you grieve with my letter, I do not regret it – though I did regret it, for I see that that letter grieved you, though only for a while. 9 As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us. 

11 For see what earnestness this godly grief has produced in you, but also what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what punishment! At every point you have proved yourselves innocent in the matter. 12 So although I wrote to you, it was not for the sake of the one who did the wrong, nor for the sake of the one who suffered the wrong, but in order that your earnestness for us might be revealed to you in the sight of God. 

13 Therefore we are comforted. And besides our own comfort, we rejoiced still more at the joy of Titus, because his spirit has been refreshed by you all. 14 For whatever boasts I made to him about you, I was not put to shame. But just as everything we said to you was true, so also our boasting before Titus has proved true. 15 And his affection for you is even greater, as he remembers the obedience of you all, how you received him with fear and trembling [?].’

This chapter sadly reveals a muddled and confused Paul exhibiting a bipolar personality (14). 

In chapter nine, Paul masterfully squeezes the brethren to make good on their promise to give aid. 

Paul: 1 ‘Now it is superfluous for me to write to you about the ministry for the saints, 2 for I know your readiness, of which I boast about you to the people of Macedonia, saying that Achaia has been ready since last year. And your zeal has stirred up most of them. 3 But I am sending the brothers so that our boasting about you may not prove empty in this matter, so that you may be ready, as I said you would be. 4 Otherwise, if some Macedonians come with me and find that you are not ready, we would be humiliated – to say nothing of you – for being so confident. 5 So I thought it necessary to urge the brothers to go on ahead to you and arrange in advance for the gift you have promised, so that it may be ready as a willing gift, not as an exaction. 7 Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.’

Chapter ten: 1 ‘I, Paul, myself entreat you, by the meekness and gentleness of Christ – I who am humble when face to face with you, but bold toward you when I am away! – 2 I beg of you that when I am present I may not have to show boldness with such confidence as I count on showing against some…’

Paul uses the personal pronoun I, seven times in just two verses. 

Paul: 7 ‘… If anyone is confident that he is Christ’s, let him remind himself that just as he is Christ’s, so also are we. 8 For even if I boast a little too much of our authority, which the Lord gave for building you up and not for destroying you, I will not be ashamed. 9 I do not want to appear to be frightening you with my letters. 10 For they say, “His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account.” 11 Let such a person understand that what we say by letter when absent, we do when present. 

13 But we will not boast beyond limits, but will boast only with regard to the area of influence God assigned to us, to reach even to you. 14 For we are not overextending ourselves, as though we did not reach you. For we were the first to come all the way to you with the gospel of Christ. 15 We do not boast beyond limit in the labors of others. But our hope is that as your faith increases, our area of influence among you may be greatly enlarged, 16 so that we may preach the gospel in lands beyond you, without boasting of work already done in another’s area of influence. 17 “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” 18 For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends.’ 

Paul has broached the subject again of an area of operations and treading on toes. Paul is desirous of travelling further afield to escape this situation; which is annoying him more so, due to the fact that he preached in the region first. Paul uses his favourite word, boast, an inordinate number of times in chapter ten (7 times) and in chapter eleven, ten times. 

Paul: 1 ‘I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. Do bear with me! 2 For I feel a divine [G2316 – theos: a deity, especially the supreme Divinity] jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.’ 

How could a mortal human possess a divine jealousy. This makes no sense; is another exaggeration used by Paul as is his habit; and borders, on the blasphemous. 

3 ‘But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 4 For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.’

Another Jesus, as in the true Christ? A different gospel, as in the Kingdom of God and not Paul’s gospel of Christ?

5 ‘Indeed, I consider that I am not in the least inferior to these super-apostles [G3029 – lian: chiefest, greatly, exceedingly, exceedingly beyond measure]. 6 Even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not so in knowledge; indeed, in every way we have made this plain to you in all things.’

Paul compares himself to the apostles and exalts himself above these simple fishermen and tax collectors. He is a well educated Pharisee and like the serpent he mentions, is puffed up with knowledge and wisdom. 

7 ‘Or did I commit a sin in humbling myself so that you might be exalted, because I preached God’s gospel to you free of charge? 8 I robbed other churches by accepting support from them in order to serve you.’ Paul admits to being a thief [15]. 

9 ‘And when I was with you and was in need, I did not burden anyone, for the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied my need. So I refrained and will refrain from burdening you in any way. 10 As the truth of Christ is in me, this boasting of mine will not be silenced in the regions of Achaia.’

Paul readily admits to being a boaster (16) – 1 Corinthians 9:15. 

12 ‘And what I am doing I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. 16 I repeat, let no one think me foolish. But even if you do, accept me as a fool, so that I too may boast a little.’ 

Paul claims not to be foolish, yet plays at being foolish (17) and as a result reveals foolishness – 2 Corinthians 11:1, 17; 12:11. The thing Paul is accusing others, is the very thing he is guilty of being himself: a false apostle.

The remainder of this chapter is the raving of a ‘madman’ who continues to uncontrollably boast.

Paul: 17 ‘What I am saying with this boastful confidence, I say not as the Lord would but as a fool. 18 Since many boast according to the flesh, I too will boast. 19 For you gladly bear with fools, being wise yourselves! 20 For you bear it if someone makes slaves of you, or devours you, or takes advantage of you, or puts on airs, or strikes you in the face. 21 To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that! But whatever anyone else dares to boast of – I am speaking as a fool – I also dare to boast of that.

 22 Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they offspring of Abraham? So am I. 23 Are they servants of Christ? I am a better oneI am talking like a madman – with far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death. 24 Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea; 26 on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; 27 in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure.’

28 ‘And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches. 29 Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to fall, and I am not indignant? 30 If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness. 31 The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, he who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying.’ 

In chapter twelve, it is regrettable though transparently palpable that Paul continues his diatribe of boastful madness. There is clearly a deterioration in Paul’s mental wellbeing between the writing of 1 Corinthians in the Spring of 55 CE and his ‘second’ letter in the Autumn of the same year – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy

Paul: 1 ‘I must go on boasting. Though there is nothing to be gained by it, I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord.’

Yet, were these visions really from the Lord or a deceiving spirit?*

2 ‘I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago [circa 41 CE] was caught up to the third heaven – whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows. 3 And I know that this man was caught up into paradise – whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows’ – 

Why is Paul speaking about himself in the third person and then repeats himself. 

4 ‘and he heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter. 5 On behalf of this man I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except of my weaknesses – 6 though if I should wish to boast, I would not be a fool, for I would be speaking the truth; but I refrain from it, so that no one may think more of me than he sees in me or hears from me. 7 So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn [G4647 – skolops: ‘a pointed piece of wood, a pale, a stake; a sharp stake, splinter] was given me in the flesh, a messenger* of Satan to harass [G2852 – kolaphizo: buffet; ‘to strike with the fist, give one a blow with the fist; to maltreat, treat with violence and contumely] me, to keep me from becoming conceited.’

One commentator offers that Paul was possessed (18) – 1 Corinthians 15:10. This might be an overly heavy accusation, though the point stands that Paul may have been manipulated to believe his calling had been legitimate when in reality it was a dastardly ploy to sabotage the Way of Christ for a message instead about Christ. While we have an example in the Bible of someone who was not converted being afflicted by an evil spirit (King Sau), we do not have any precedent of a godly person enduring the same persecution – 1 Samuel 16:14. 

Paul: 8 ‘Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me’ – Article: 33. 9 ‘But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong.’ 

The Eternal protects and favours the righteous and does not seek to make life difficult for those who obey Him – Psalm 5:2; 84:11, Jeremiah 29:11. 

11 ‘I have been a fool! You forced me to it, for I ought to have been commended by you. For I was not at all inferior to these super-apostles, even though I am nothing.’

Paul is an expert at saying one thing and then immediately saying the opposite. It is double-speak at its finest, or rather worst. Paul cannot be ‘nothing’ in comparison to the true apostles and yet neither inferior to them at the same time. Paul bemoans the fact that the Corinthian brethren have not endorsed his efforts or recognised his accomplishment sufficiently.

12 ‘The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works.’ This is no wonder, for Paul himself says: “… for even Satan disguises [it]self as an angel of light’ – 2 Corinthians 11:14.

The author of 2 Thessalonians – disputed by scholars and probably not written by Paul – worryingly adds: ‘The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false ‘signs and wonders.’

Paul: 13 ‘For in what were you less favored than the rest of the churches, except that I myself did not burden you? Forgive me this wrong! 14 Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you… 15 … If I love you more, am I to be loved less? 16 But granting that I myself did not burden you, I was crafty, you say, and got the better of you by deceit’ (19). 

In chapter thirteen Paul does not write a long list of people to greet, acknowledge or submit too. Presumably, because only a few months separates each letter. 

Paul: 2 ‘I warned those who sinned before and all the others, and I warn them now while absent, as I did when present on my second visit, that if I come again I will not spare them – 3 since you seek proof that Christ is speaking in me… 5 Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith [of Paul]. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you? – unless indeed you fail to meet the test!’ 

Recall, Paul says this to the church in Rome a year later – Romans 8:10. Paul alludes to the same idea earlier in this letter – 2 Corinthians 4:6-7. The Bible clearly teaches that the Holy Spirit is given to a true believer upon conversion – Acts 2:4. The Holy Spirit – which is His power and essence – is from the Father. Christ does not live in a human being – John chapter six notwithstanding. This is tantamount to a form of possession. 

Bibles for America: ‘In writing Jesus Christ is in you, Paul wasn’t speaking poetically or metaphorically. He meant that Jesus Christ was literally dwelling within them.’

Paul mentions Christ living in someone three times to the Galatians and in epistles attributed to Paul – though disputed by scholars – once each in Ephesians, Colossians and 2 Thessalonians. As Paul is teaching a concept contrary to scripture and he is the only one to espouse this teaching it is by definition, a false doctrine. 

Paul: 6 ‘I hope you will find out that we have not failed the test. 7 But we pray to God that you may not do wrong – not that we may appear to have met the test, but that you may do what is right, though we may seem to have failed. 8 For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth. 9 For we are glad when we are weak and you are strong. Your restoration is what we pray for. 10 For this reason I write these things while I am away from you, that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority that the Lord has given me for building up and not for tearing down.’ 

Paul is confusing in what he says, while at the same time throwing his weight around in a condescending manner. So ends the three longest of the undisputed books by Paul, written during 55 and 56 CE. 

 Galatians

The next book in the Bible accredited to Paul is his letter to the Galatians. The Sabbath Secrecy: ‘Now in these days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. And one of them named Agabus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine [between 44 to 48 CE] over all the world (this took place in the days of Claudius) [Roman emperor from 41 to 54 CE] – Acts 11:27-28. 

The fact Paul visits Jerusalem with relief for the brethren in 48 CE, at the tail end of the famine, while mentioning the circumcision issue, but not the Jerusalem Council or its decision, dates the writing of the Book of Galatians in the minds of most scholars, to between 48 and 49 CE.’ 

The Book of Galatians has been surveyed in the article, The Sabbath Secrecy and so an in-depth discussion on the ramifications of the Law is not required here. Rather, Galatians portrayal of doctrine taught by Paul within the focus of the present article will be examined.  

Paul: 1 ‘Paul, an apostle – not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ… 6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel – 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.’ 

Paul emphasises his apostleship, which is now standard fare. The ‘different gospel’ could be referring to the good news of the Kingdom of God, or a reference to those who advocate circumcision and strict obedience to the Mosaic Law. Either way, it is in fact Paul who has introduced a different gospel. As in 2 Corinthians, Paul is adept at uttering curses. And this time, a double curse. 

He is like the man described in Psalms: “His mouth is filled with cursing and deceit and oppression; under his tongue are mischief and iniquity” – Psalm 10:7. Christ said not to take an oath; of which a curse is a form of and James exhorts us not to curse – Matthew 5:34-35, James 3:10. It is an unchangeable course of action when declaring a vow or curse on God’s behalf and not to be a flippant proclamation – Genesis 4:11; 9:25, 2 Kings 2:23-25. 

Paul: 11 ‘For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.’ 

Paul conveniently catapults himself into an elite group of people indeed – when he alone claims God appointed him before birth – which include (James the Just notwithstanding) Christ, John (the Baptist) and Jeremiah – Matthew 1:18, Luke 1:15. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations” – Jeremiah 1:5. Yet none of these men made the claim themselves like Paul does.  

Paul: 18 ‘Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas [Peter] and remained with him fifteen days. 19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother. 20 (In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!) 21 Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22 And I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only were hearing it said, “He who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they glorified God because of me.’ 

Paul identifies James, the half brother of Jesus as an apostle. As he is the only one to do so, his testimony cannot be trusted. It would be in Paul’s interest to include James so as to strengthen his own claims. But neither man was directly taught or commissioned by Christ and therefore not an original apostle. Whereas the replacement for Judas Iscariot, Matthias, had followed Christ and was a witness to his resurrection – Acts 1:21-22. 

Paul has a serious case of the me, me’s, which we experienced in the letters to the Corinthians. None of the apostles in the gospel accounts or general epistles write in this manner. Nor did Christ for that matter. Paul recounts his conversion experience differently from that recorded in the Book of Acts by Luke. We only have his word for his version of events. What does not make sense is why God would require a thirteenth apostle to go to the Gentiles. Why was the eleven apostles and – the actual thirteenth apostle – Matthias, inadequate and unfit for the task, pray tell? Three years was a long time to be away… training? It may not have been a ‘mans gospel’, but a gospel about Christ did not originate with Christ either. 

An online comment highlights the discrepancy and confusion in the accounts of Paul’s alleged conversion experience. 

‘In reading… blog articles on Acts I came upon this interesting observation: “In chapters 9 and 22 Paul is told to go to Damascus [and] be instructed by a man named Ananias about what to do next. In chapter 26 Paul is not told to go be instructed by Ananias, instead Jesus himself instructs him.”

In another post I used Luke’s version of [Paul’s] “conversion” as told in chapter 9 as an indication that he contradicts Paul’s own version in Galatians… my interpretation is that Luke does not want to show Jesus giving direct instructions to anybody… 

But, why does Luke make Paul repeat the idea in chapter 22 and then contradict himself in 26? Because Luke knew Galatians! He had the difficult task of dealing with tradition (Galatians) and his own agenda so he suggests to the reader that what really happened in Paul’s conversion is what is told in chapter 9… Paul himself initially remembered it that way (chapter 22) but [later] changed his mind and then remembered differently (chapter 26)… the way he told it in [Galatians].’

This is an example highlighting the untrustworthiness of Paul’s version of events or either the unreliableness of the biblical historian, Luke?

Paul takes great stock in his time in Arabia and his being taught by ‘Christ’ through a revelation – it is a point of vanity for him. It is not clear how long Paul was in the wilderness of the desert. It was presumably the majority of the three years he was away. So it is of note that In Matthew chapter twenty-four, Jesus warns of false teachers who claim they have found Christ in diverse manners or places: “See, I have told you beforehand. So, if they say to you, ‘Look, [Christ is to be found] in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it…”

Continuing in chapter two: 1 ‘Then after fourteen years [in 48 CE] I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed [1] influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain.’

Paul never misses an opportunity to have a dig at the apostles and yet again relies on revelations. Revelations, visions and dreams are not always from the Eternal and are invariably a form of divination, deriving from an unholy source.

Relying on revelation as superior or viewing it as greater than direct teaching was a tack employed by the early aspiring false leader, Simon Magus. His exploits are discussed in the article: The Seven Churches: A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. In a debate with the Apostle Peter, Simon arrogantly and condescendingly states his case – as undoubtedly would Paul: 

“You professed that you had well understood the doctrines and deeds of your teacher because you saw them before you with your own eyes, and heard them with your own ears, and that it is not possible for any other to have anything similar by vision or apparition. 

But I shall show that this is false. He who hears one with his own ears, is not altogether fully assured of the truth of what is said; for his mind has to consider whether he is wrong or not, inasmuch as he is a man as far as appearance goes. But apparition not merely presents an object to view, but inspires him who sees it with confidence, for it comes from God” – Clementine Homily 17:13

Simon by his words reveals he is not converted and does not truly understand the spiritual workings of God. Like the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, he tries to cast doubt on the veracity of Christ and what he has said. Simon also begins his counter argument with, ‘But I shall…’ showing his carnal, selfish, envious and rebellious attitude towards God’s chosen and elect spiritual leader in the blessed Peter.

Simon fails to recognise that the Son of God walked the Earth and even while a human man, his teaching far supersedes any from an angel or demon, whether sent from God or not. Nor is Simon cognisant of the fact that Peter as the bearer of the Keys to the Kingdom, is the rock on which the Rock that is Christ has bestowed the responsibility to lead the body of Christ in the truth. 

Peter offers his logical and winning rebuttal in the debate:

“But can any one be rendered fit for instruction through apparitions? And if you will say, ‘It is possible,’ then I ask, ‘Why did our teacher abide and discourse a whole year to those who were awake?’ And how are we to believe your word, when you tell us that He appeared to you? And how did He appear to you, when you entertain opinions contrary to His teaching? 

But if you were seen and taught by Him, and became His apostle for a single hour, proclaim His utterances, interpret His sayings, love His apostles, contend not with me who companied with Him. For in direct opposition to me, who am a firm rock, the foundation of the Church, you now stand.

But if, indeed, you really wish to work in the cause of truth, learn first of all from us what we have learned from Him, and becoming a disciple of the truth, become a fellow-worker with us” – Clementine Homily 17:19.

That was Simon told. And it would be the same for Nicholas, Paul and all those who did not speak the same truth as the apostles. If false teachers are not talking the talk, they are certainly not walking the walk. 

“I am also against those prophets who speak their own words and claim they came from me. Listen to what I, the Lord, say! I am against the prophets who tell their dreams that are full of lies. They tell these dreams and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting. I did not send them or order them to go, and they are of no help at all to the people. I, the Lord, have spoken” – Jeremiah 23:31-32, GNT. 

Paul: 3 ‘But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.’ Yet Timothy was circumcised by Paul… go figure – Acts 16:3. 

Paul: 6 ‘And from those who seemed [2] to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality) – those, I say, who seemed [3] influential added nothing to me. 7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed [4] to be pillars [Revelation 3:12], perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.’

Paul maintains his obsession with collecting aid for the poor and in the process looking good. Paul continues to grind his axe against the true apostles. Rather, this is Paul’s first written letter contained in the Bible, yet he cannot help himself and include his negative attitude towards the spiritual leaders of the church. As noted, the gospel message was for the Israelites – which ironically, many of the Galatians were – and so a mission to the Gentiles may have been a convenient answer for the elders in Jerusalem, regarding the pesky Paul. 

It suits Paul to say God shows no partiality, because of his jealously towards James, Peter and John. But God is partial: “But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word” – Isaiah 66:2.

Saul means a worker, yet the name he favoured was Paul, which means small. Pity Paul did not remain small in his own eyes like his namesake King Saul once did. ‘And Samuel said, “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The Lord anointed you king over Israel” – 1 Samuel 15:17.

Paul: 11 ‘But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”

But with which gospel were they not in step? What about being all things to all people as Paul himself ironically taught? Peter may have felt a measure of guilty duplicity when the ascetic followers of James visited. Though it was a grey area not yet finalised at the Jerusalem conference. Added to this, it was through Peter that an inspired decision was reached. Paul exaggerates as is his custom saying the senior apostle was ‘condemned’. By whom? Paul? 

Online comment: “This topic makes me wonder about the vision given to Peter regarding the clean/unclean diet in Acts 10 (as a setup for Gentiles being accepted as clean). Peter struggled to find the connection at first (a hint of the conflict at the mixed dinner with Paul and the gentiles) and pieced this vision together a little later (Acts 11). There needed to be some bridge from Peter or James to accept non-jewish members at the table and this vision seems to be a very convenient event to formally create that bridge after the fact (if we assume Acts 10-11 flows in chronological order). If Peter had the vision before any dinners with Paul and some gentiles, then I would have expected Peter to have restated his vision at the table and not acted as he did in Paul’s letter. If Peter had his vision AFTER the dinner with Paul and the gentiles, then Peter’s actions before and afterwards make much more sense.”

Peter, the true source of apostolic authority. 

Bart Erhman presents a sensible analysis of the confrontation between Paul and Peter: 

‘Paul and Peter were both in the city, with its Christian community, which included Gentiles. They were both enjoying “table fellowship” with the Gentile Christians – meaning they were eating their meals together. This could be a problem for strict Jews, because it could involve breaking rules for kosher. And then something significant happened: some “men from James” (i.e., the leader of the church in Jerusalem – a church that was, of course, Jewish in its composition) arrived, and for some unspecified reason, Peter stopped eating with the Gentile Christians.

Scholars have had long and heated debates over what the actual situation was. In my view, it was probably that these Jewish Christians (from James) thought that it was important for Jews to continue behaving like Jews, even if they believed in Jesus; and Peter, so as not to cause them any offense, agreed to do so while they were in town. 

Paul did not see this as a sensible compromise. On the contrary, he went ballistic. He publicly attacked Peter and went off in a huff. In Paul’s view, not eating with Gentiles meant assuming that the Law continued to have abiding force after the messiah had come, and that view compromised the very nature of the Gospel, which was for all people, Jew and Gentile.’

Online comment: “… Rabbi Adam Bernay explained the table fellowship incident the best: Jews in the first century avoided mixing with Gentiles because it was thought that they were unclean because they ate unclean foods. As Peter stated in Acts 10:28, “You know how unLawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation.” Long after Jesus’ crucifixion, Peter is reporting that “I have never eaten anything defiled or unclean.” (Acts 10:14). However, because of Peter’s vision of the 4 footed animals in Acts 10:10-16, Peter concluded that “God has shown me that I should not call any man defiled or unclean” (Acts 10:28) and that may have made him more amenable to eating with Paul’s Gentile converts. James’ men, however, still appear to follow the traditional ways and pressured Peter and Barnabas to stop eating with the Gentiles…”

Erhman: ‘Paul is clear: there was a rift between Peter and himself. And Paul never indicates that it was ever healed. James appears to be on one side of this dispute (by implication); Paul on the other; Peter somewhere in the middle (which for Paul meant he was on the “other side”).’

Online comment: “I don’t think anyone found it easy to get on with Paul. Brilliant theologian that he was, he was also a fanatic fiery extremist!”

Are these the actions of a converted mind? Doe not Paul himself say that ‘love is patient and kind… is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable… bears all things…’ – 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.

Erhman: ‘The other thing Paul never reports is who won the argument in Antioch, in the eyes of most of those who were present. Since Paul does not indicate that the church in Antioch agreed with him, a lot of critical scholars (most of them?) have concluded that Peter probably was seen as having the stronger position. Paul in any event was angry and saw this view of Peter’s as a major assault on his understanding of the salvation brought about by Christ – not as a minor issue. 

Acts does not mention this episode and gives no reason to think there ever was a split in the apostolic ranks. On the contrary, in Acts Paul and the others are simpatico from the very beginning and there is never any rift. If you read Acts as a historical narrative that describes things “as they really happened” in the early church, you get a very, very different view from the one given by Paul himself.’

Online comment – emphasis mine: “Paul repeatedly in his letters gives indication as to how aggrieved he is about his low social and spiritual status, not being treated like the other apostles “but I have better stuff from Gods son directly!”, implying he was destined to be greater than Moses the highest figure in Judaism (prophet who comes with the law vs one who comes with salvation!) and so on. Imagine challenging the top right hand man during Jesus’ mission in public? Just the thought of that boggles the mind. 

Now with a relatively captive audience of his own he is trying to smear Peters reputation, if this incident even happened as Paul claims it did or happened at all. Paul is known to fake things like the prophecy the end times would happen soon which didn’t pan out at all or taking advantage of his audiences illiteracy when misquoting Hebrew scriptures in his own favor. He also seems to have fielded challenges by his own converts which likely was a massive bruise.”

Paul: 15 ‘We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners;’ 

Jews were not superior and sinners too.  

16 ‘yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.’

True, good works do not set us apart, but neither does just believing in Christ. It is Christ’s sacrifice and his shed blood which cleanses and justifies a believer.

17 ‘But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor.’

In the Living Bible, verse eighteen reads: “Rather, we are sinners if we start rebuilding the old systems I have been destroying…” Yet Christ said: “With all the earnestness I have I say: Every law in the Book will continue until its purpose is achieved” – Matthew 5:18, Living Bible.

19 ‘For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.’

Not true. Christ does not literally live inside us.

Paul: ‘And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.’

True. 

21 ‘I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.’

Not true. 

Christ died so we can receive forgiveness of sin. For the breaking of the Law, once held a death penalty over our heads. Which Christ’s sacrifice has removed. A person is deemed righteous by God because they faithfully obey the Law. 

In chapter three, Paul doesn’t pull any punches. 

Paul: 1 ‘O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. 2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain – if indeed it was in vain? 5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith…’ 

Paul berates the Galatians for returning to the teaching of Judaism, where the Old Covenant Law is deemed sufficient rather than faith in Christ. In essence rejecting the Messiah’s sacrifice. 

Paul: 10 ‘For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” 12 But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us – for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

The ‘curse’ of the law, is sin – Daniel 9:11. 

Paul: 14 ‘so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.’

Paul uses the idea that all nations would be blessed through the faith of Abraham. This furthers the commission he has carved out for himself to go to the Gentiles. Yet we have learned in a number of articles that it is the tribes of Israel who are being targeted for conversion in this age, the latter days – with Gentiles presently receiving a witness – and it will be during the Kingdom of God that all people will be called to the truth; conversion; and a relationship with God. Paul paraphrases the Old Testament and does not directly quote when he says “it is written” – refer Deuteronomy 11:1-32; 28:1-68; 30: 1-20. 

In verse twenty, Paul acknowledges “God is one” and not a Trinity – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius.

Paul states: “Let me put it another way. The Jewish laws were our teacher and guide until Christ came to give us right standing with God through our faith. But now that Christ has come, we don’t need those laws any longer to guard us and lead us to him” – Galatians 3:24-25, Living Bible.

But Christ said: “And so if anyone breaks the least commandment and teaches others to, he shall be the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But those who teach God’s laws and obey them shall be great in the Kingdom of Heaven” – Matthew 5:19, Living Bible.

In chapter four, verse eleven, Paul discusses the brethren fanatically observing religious days, saying: “I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain” – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 

Paul: 12 ‘Brothers, I entreat you, become as I am, for I also have become as you are. You did me no wrong. 13 You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first, 14 and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus. 15 What then has become of your blessedness? For I testify to you that, if possible, you would have gouged out your eyes and given them to me 19 … my little children, for whom I am again in the anguish of childbirth until Christ is formed in you! 20 I wish I could be present with you now and change my tone, for I am perplexed about you.’

Paul had a serious disfigurement of some kind which affected his eye sight. This was probably a result of the stoning which left him nearly dead and partially blind – Acts 14:19. Paul equates himself with both an angel and with Jesus. Would a righteous man dare draw such a comparison? – Psalms 8:4. Also, why would a man use an analogy of a woman in travail to explain his own emotional pain? 

In chapter five, Paul tackles the main problem of the Judaizers and their tactic of pressurising new christians into being circumcised. 

Paul: 1 ‘For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. 2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. 3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. 4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. 

7 You were running well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? 8 This persuasion is not from him who calls you. 10 I have confidence in the Lord that you will take no other view, and the one who is troubling you will bear the penalty, whoever he is. 11 But if I, brothers, still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed. 12 I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves!’ 

Paul displays the vengeful (20) side of his nature, which had been clearly evident when he persecuted the early christians and in his ad hoc use of curses. 

Paul: 18 ‘But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.’

Rather, not under the curse of the Law, which is sin and ultimately, death. 

The final chapter of Galatians includes wise words from Paul. For even those who do not bear a true witness can offer profitable wisdom in their teachings and philosophy. It is of note that the tone and direction of Paul’s letter to the Galatians is lucid and considerably less languid or rambling than his letters to the Corinthians eight years later. Does this indicate a deterioration in Paul’s cognitive ability and emotional wellbeing? It appears such could be the case. 

Paul: 3 ‘For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4 But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor.

11 See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand.

12 It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh who would force you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 For even those who are circumcised do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. 14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 17 From now on let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.’

Paul does not close with his usual who’s who of salutations, as this is his first known letter to a congregation relatively early in church history. Paul is correct about those who seek to circumcise for wrong reasons; while using his favourite word, boast. Paul concludes by drawing an inappropriate parallel with his suffering and Christ.

Ephesians 

The next book in the New Testament canon is the Letter to the Ephesians. The Ephesian congregation were an early and prominent church in western Asia Minor. So much so, that they were chosen by Christ to represent the first era of the true church in the revelation given to the apostle John – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days

It is of great interest then, that scholars dispute the authenticity of the book being authored by Paul. Though open to contention, it ‘may be authentic’ as opposed to ‘probably not authentic’. In the view of this writer it is not authentic and so not applicable in this discussion – about Paul the man and his teachings. The main points against Ephesians being a book written by Paul and in fact someone who later – probably from the Ephesian congregation and familiar with Pauline theology – wrote the book in mimicry of Paul is summarised by Bart Erhman.

Erhman: ‘The reasons for thinking Paul did not write this letter are numerous and compelling. For one thing, the writing style is not Paul’s. Paul usually writes in short pointed sentences; the sentences in Ephesians are long and complex. The book also has an inordinate number of words that otherwise don’t occur in Paul’s writings, 116 altogether, well higher than average… But the main reason for thinking that Paul didn’t write Ephesians is that what the author says in places does not gel with what Paul himself says in his own letters. In point after point, when you look carefully at Ephesians, it stands at odds with Paul himself. This book was apparently written by a later Christian in one of Paul’s churches who wanted to deal with a big issue of his own day: the relation of Jews and Gentiles in the church. He did so by claiming to be Paul, knowing full well that he wasn’t Paul. He accomplished his goal, that is, by producing a forgery.’

Perhaps this person was even called Paul. Let’s call him Paul II. This author was familiar with the ‘mystery’ so oft mentioned by Paul and says in verse nine of chapter one: “… making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ…” Paul II knew Paul well, for they use his favourite word in verse nine of chapter two: “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” 

In chapter three, Paul II – oh no, yes he does – returns to the suspicious mystery introduced by Paul and adds intriguing details. 

‘For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles – 2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace that was given to me for you, 3 how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. 4 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. 6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.’

Here we have from Paul II an explanation of the ‘mystery’. That Gentiles are fellow heirs. They may be in the future but saying they are now is reminisce of Paul, who was the only one to teach this and not supported by the apostles. The fact Paul II builds on Paul’s doctrine, adds weight to his possibly knowing Paul and at least being familiar with his ideology. 

So much so he writes: 8 ‘To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, who created all things, 10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. 14 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family [?] in heaven and on earth is named [?] …’

This is a bold statement surely, for are not the angelic realm beyond and above the confining dimensions of our world and of linear time. What could they learn that they do not already know? What does Paul II mean in verse fourteen?

In chapter four, Paul II understands that God is one and that Christ is a separate being and that they are not, a trinity – which was introduced or rather confirmed at the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE. 

4 ‘There is one body and one Spirit – just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call – 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.’ 

It is Paul II and not Paul who describes responsibilities and functions in the church, which have been changed to ranks by the Universal Church. 

11 ‘And he gave the apostles [1], the prophets [2], the evangelists [3], the [shepherds and teachers 4], 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ…’

In chapter five, Paul II gaining confidence in his masterly mimesis embellishes the mystery theme – after telling wives to submit to their husbands in ‘everything’ – where he says: 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.’ 

The final chapter does not contain any personal salutations what-so-ever. This is unusual since the letter was allegedly written after 1 and 2 Corinthians and Romans when Paul was under house arrest. Paul II presents an analogy – expanded upon from a comment by Paul to the Thessalonians – between the armour and weaponry of a soldier and the tools a believer has in their christian walk – Ephesians 6:10-17. 

Paul II: 18 ‘… To that end, keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, 19 and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, 20 for which I am an ambassador in chains, that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak.’

Another spin on the ‘mystery’ is spun by Paul II. 

Paul II: 21 ‘So that you also may know how I am and what I am doing, Tychicus the beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord will tell you everything. 22 I have sent him to you for this very purpose, that you may know how we are, and that he may encourage your hearts. 23 Peace be to the brothers…’ 

If this letter is a forgery, then Paul II is extremely audacious in proclaiming he is in chains and that Tychicus will bring word about him. The use of the word, ‘brothers’, is a Pauline expression. The mention of being in captivity is peculiar as is including Tychicus. Why would Paul II do this while the real Paul is under house arrest and run the risk of being exposed by Tychicus? This is a tremendously risky ploy. It means the letter may not have been written very long after Paul’s death at all. 

There is one other explanation, which would explain the different grammar and vocabulary at least – if not the doctrinal subtlety’s – and that is Paul II understood what Paul wanted to say and wrote it for him, like a ghost writer. The fact many scholars still maintain Ephesians is a Pauline letter may be answered if this was the case. Thus, Paul II may be Tychicus and it would explain the lack of salutations; why the letter is clearly not written by or a dictation from Paul; yet contains enough doctrinal similarity for it to be considered the most Pauline of the six disputed books. 

It means importantly, that Tychicus was not writing from any ill intent but primarily as a kindness to the prominent Ephesus church congregation in light of Paul’s impending or recent death and his never seeing them again. Perhaps Paul and or Tychicus were hoping to encourage the brethren and not to deliberately mislead. If such is the case, kudos to Tychicus for relaying Paul’s final thoughts to the church so effectively that doubt on its literal authorship has only come to light in recent decades. 

Philippians 

The next book is the letter to the church at Philippi. 

Paul: 1. ‘Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons…’ 

Paul has to mention the overseers and deacons in furthering division and is not content with just including everyone as the saints. Fan favourite Timothy is included by Paul’s side and uncharacteristically, Paul does not mention himself as an apostle. 

Paul: 6 ‘And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. 7 It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel. 8 For God is my witness, how I yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus. 12 I want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel, 13 so that it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ. 14 And most of the brothers, having become confident in the Lord by my imprisonment, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.’

This is clearly the Paul we have come to know in the letters to the Romans, Corinthians and Galatians. Notice its saccharine enthusiasm indicative of Paul and in contrast to the more measured letter to the Ephesians. Paul is also relishing in his new found infamy in Rome. 

Paul: 15 ‘Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will. 16 The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17 The former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely but thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment. 18 What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.’

Even while under arrest, Paul is still facing and aware of opposition to his version of the gospel. In chapter two Paul singles out two men who are fiercely loyal to Paul. If we were to wonder at how close Timothy and Paul were it is revealed here. 

Paul: 19 ‘I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, so that I too may be cheered by news of you. 20 For I have no one like him, who will be genuinely concerned for your welfare. 21 For they all seek their own interests, not those of Jesus Christ. 22 But you know Timothy’s proven worth, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel. 23 I hope therefore to send him just as soon as I see how it will go with me, 24 and I trust in the Lord that shortly I myself will come also. 

25 I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, 26 for he has been longing for you all and has been distressed because you heard that he was ill. 27 Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. 28 I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. 29 So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men, 30 for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was lacking in your service to me.’

Chapter three: 2 ‘Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. 3 For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh – 4 though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin [refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes], a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.’ 

Paul returns to the subject of circumcision and the Judaizers performing the rite; so that it must have still been an issue some ten years later. Paul is quick to remind the brethren of his exalted status. I’m sure everyone wanted to be reminded Paul had been a vengeful persecutor of the church. How was Paul blameless under the law? Did he keep it perfectly? 

Chapter four: 1 ‘Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.’ 

Paul refers to the brothers frequently but never ever includes the sisters in Christ. Paul does not refer to many people in the final chapter. Possibly it was a smaller church, or perhaps Paul had less allies to salute. 

Paul writes some of his most profoundly moving words in any letter, to the Philippian brethren.

6 ‘do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. 

8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. 9 What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me – practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.’ 

Yet it wouldn’t be Paul, if he didn’t artfully bring it back to himself. 

Paul: 14 ‘Yet it was kind of you to share my trouble. 15 And you Philippians yourselves know that in the beginning of the gospel, when I left Macedonia, no church entered into partnership with me in giving and receiving, except you only. 16 Even in Thessalonica you sent me help for my needs once and again. 17 Not that I seek the gift, but I seek the fruit that increases to your credit. 18 I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God. 19 And my God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus. 21 … The brothers who are with me greet you. 22 All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household.’

Paul fawns over the brethren regarding their gifts, flattering them to excess and daring to equate them as sacrifices, that would please God in how generous they have been to Paul. 

Colossians

The letter to the Colossians is disputed, though ‘may be authentic’. This particular book is of special interest as it may double in subject matter with the missing authentic letter to the Laodiceans – the church chosen by Christ to represent the final era of the true Church before his return – Article: The Seven Churches A Message for the Church if God in the Latter Days. If Paul did not write Colossians, then the plot deepens because it contrasts with the Book of Ephesians. Where Ephesians is distinctly Pauline on one hand, yet clearly a watered down version of his own work – almost a light weight in comparison – Colossians is the opposite in that it is a heavyweight of doctrinal expression. Penned by someone of considerable knowledge and intellect; who at the same time has both an economical and complex writing style. Let’s call him Paul III.

Bart Erhman: ‘As with every instance of forgery, the case of Colossians is cumulative, involving multiple factors. None has proved more decisive over the past thirty years than the question of writing style. The case was made most effectively in 1973 by Walter Bujard, in a study both exhaustive and exhausting, widely thought to be unanswerable. 

Bujard compares the writing style of Colossians to the other Pauline letters, focusing especially on those of comparable length (Galatians, Philippians, and 1 Thessalonians), and looking at an inordinately wide range of stylistic features. The use of conjunctions (of all kinds); infinitives; participles, relative clauses; repetitions of words and word groups; use of antithetical statements; parallel constructions; the use of preposition ἐν; the piling up of genitives; and on and on. In case after case, Colossians stands apart from Paul’s letters. 

Bujard goes on… for a very long time, page after page, statistic after statistic. What is striking is that all these features point the same way. When one adds to these the other commonly noted (though related) features of the style of Colossians – the long complex sentences, the piling up of genitives, the sequences of similar sounding words, and so on – the conclusion can scarcely be denied. This book is not written in Paul’s style. 

Arguments based on style are strongly supported by considerations of content. In several striking and significant ways the teaching of Colossians differs from the undisputed letters. Most commonly noted is the eschatological view…’ 

Paul III: 1 ‘Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, 2 To the saints and faithful brothers in Christ at Colossae: 

3 We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you, 4 since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of the love that you have for all the saints, 5 because of the hope laid up for you in heaven. Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, 6 which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and increasing – as it also does among you, since the day you heard it and understood the grace of God in truth, 7 just as you learned it from Epaphras our beloved fellow servant. He is a faithful minister of Christ on your behalf 8 and has made known to us your love in the Spirit.’

Paul III must know not only Paul but also his fellow minister, for him to mention Epaphras by name. At this point the letter appears remarkably similar to the writing of Paul – the use of ‘brothers’ and mentioning Timothy. Paul III is certainly familiar with Paul’s manner of writing and the themes he addresses, just as Paul II (or Tychicus) displayed.

Paul III: 12 ‘giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. 13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son…’ 

Erhman: ‘In 1:13 the author insists that God (already) “has delivered us from the authority of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved son.” Already? An aorist [a verb tense, as in Classical Greek, expressing action or, in the indicative mood, past action, without further limitation or implication] tense? Is this Paul?’ 

Paul III: 14 ‘in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.’ 

Erhman: ‘There are other theological differences from Paul, frequently noted, all of them pointing in the same direction. A later author has taken up Pauline themes and shifted them in decidedly non-Pauline ways. Unlike Paul, this author understands redemption as the “forgiveness of sins” (1:14; as does Ephesians 1:7). The phrase occurs nowhere else in the Pauline corpus; indeed, the term ἀφίημι itself, in the sense of “forgive sins,” is absent from Paul, except in the quotation of Psalm 32:1 in Romans 4:7 (“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven”). So too, analogously, with a different term, 2:13 speaks of trespasses being forgiven: χαρισάμενος ἡμῖν πάντα τὰ παραπτώματα. Χαρίζομαι is never used this way in the undisputed Paulines. So too 3:13 speaks of “forgiving one another just as the Lord has forgiven you,” using χαρίζομαι again.’

Here we have a major shift from what Paul would advocate. The following enlightening verses in chapter one discuss the nature of Christ and his relationship with God the Father. 

Paul III: 15 ‘He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities – all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.’

This is an immensely important passage, for it paradoxically reveals the truth of Unitarianism and by extension Arianism, while blending in the falsehood of Trinitarianism – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Christ is the image of the one true God, who had remained hidden to the masses until Christ came to Earth – Article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. Christ was created – Revelation 3:14. Though was he the first of God’s spiritual creation? – refer Chapter XXIII Alpha & Omega. Consequently, verse sixteen is false; with verses seventeen and eighteen, true. Verse nineteen is false; yet verse twenty is true. 

Paul III: 24 ‘Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26 the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints. 27 To them God chose to make known… the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 29 For this I toil, struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me.’

Paul III may have deviated from Paul earlier in the chapter, though he appears onboard here with Paul and Tychicus (Paul II) with regard to propounding the ongoing mystery doctrine. The same Tychicus who would afterwards – though shortly – write to the Ephesians. The mystery now being the false doctrine of Christ living inside someone instead of the Holy Spirit. Paul III on behalf of Paul – which certainly seems like a Pauline thing to say – equates his sufferings with those of Christ, all on behalf of the brethren no less. As one commentator points out, ‘Paul’ is inferring he is better than Christ (21). 

Chapter two of Colossians is a power packed, problematic passage of scripture. It contains a verse which is unarguably the most debated over and least understood ever – Colossians 2:16. Of course, if one discounted the books written by Paul and those accredited to him, the most difficult scripture in the New Testament – in fact the whole Bible – conveniently disappears from any theological debate on the Sabbath and Holy Days – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy

Paul III: ‘For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, 2 that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.’

Paul III is safe in the knowledge that Paul has not visited Colossae or Laodicea and met the brethren.

Paul III: 4 ‘I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. 5 For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit… 6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, 7 rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. 8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental [air, earth, water, fire] spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.’

Paul III is warning against turning aside from the Christ they had been taught. But was this the false gospel of/about Christ; where the Law is relaxed; where believing in him through faith and receiving his grace is enough?

Paul III: 9 ‘For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10 and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses…’

This is a powerful and inspiring passage of scripture. To be honest, all four chapters of Colossians – doctrinal digressions included – are far more rewarding reading than anything written by Paul. Though – as in chapter one, verse nineteen – verse nine in chapter two is false. For Christ is the Son of God, but he is not God. God is one, not two or three – Matthew 12:3. Paul himself taught that God is one and not a Trinity – 1 Corinthians 8:4-6. 

Bart Erhman: ‘More striking still is [Colossians] 2:12-13, and 3:1, which insist that believers have already experienced a kind of spiritual resurrection after having died with Christ… statements in clear tension with Paul’s emphatic statements elsewhere, such as Romans 6:1-6, where it is quite clear that, whereas those who have been baptized “have died” with Christ, they decidedly have not been “raised up” with him yet. 

This is an important point in Paul’s theology, not a subsidiary matter. The resurrection is something future, something that is yet to happen. So too Philippians 3:11… And yet more emphatically in 1 Corinthians 15… 

One can easily argue that this is one of the – if not the single – key to understanding Paul’s opposition to the Corinthian enthusiasts. They believed they were leading some kind of spiritual, resurrected existence, and Paul insisted that it had not yet happened. They may have died with Christ, but they had not yet been raised with him. That will come only at the end. This is the view Paul argues against in Corinth. Maybe he changed his mind. But given the stylistic differences – and the other matters of content to be discussed – it seems unlikely. Colossians is written by someone who has taken a twist on a Pauline theme, moving it precisely in the direction Paul refused to go.’

Paul III: 14 ‘by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. 16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.’ 

One wonders if Paul III understood the confusion and consternation he would cause in the minds of some when not being entirely clear in these verses. It is of note that Tychicus left well alone this subject when he wrote his copy cat letter to the Ephesian church. We shall discuss this aspect further at the end of Colossians. The context of three of the verses leans towards one interpretation and verse sixteen can be used to argue the opposite – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy. The fact Paul did not even write these verses just adds to the increasing intrigue surrounding him and his gospel message. 

Paul III: 18 ‘Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head… 20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations – 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used) – according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.’

There must have been serious issues in the church at Colossae that went beyond false Christian doctrines to be discussing angels, spirits, visions, asceticism and self-made religion. 

Chapter three: 1 ‘If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. 3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.’

Erhman raises an important point in that one is not ‘born again’ until the resurrection. But is Paul III wrong to say in essence we have by being baptised in a watery grave died and then been raised a new man or creation. Just as Christ was raised from the dead, though he was still yet to ascend to Heaven – John 20:17. Just as a true believer is deemed a ‘citizen of Heaven’ by Paul even though they await their resurrection to immortality – Philippians 3:20-21.  

The rest of chapter three bears remarkable similarity with the Book of Ephesians – written afterwards – and even in part with Philippians written earlier by Paul. A sage bit of advice for a christian is, 23 ‘Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men…’

Chapter four follows the same similar path, in that Paul III sets the precedent for Tychicus (Paul II) to easily follow and copy. Unlike Ephesians, Paul III mentions locations and a number of people in greeting. 

Paul III: 3 ‘At the same time, pray also for us, that God may open to us a door for the word, to declare the mystery of Christ, on account of which I am in prison – 4 that I may make it clear, which is how I ought to speak. 

Tychicus will tell you all about my activities. He is a beloved brother and faithful minister and fellow servant in the Lord. 8 I have sent him to you for this very purpose, that you may know how we are and that he may encourage your hearts, 9 and with him Onesimus, our faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you. They will tell you of everything that has taken place here.’

Could Tychicus be Paul III? Probably not, as the writing styles of Colossians and Ephesians are markedly different even though the content is remarkably similar. 

Paul III: 10 ‘Aristarchus my fellow prisoner greets you, and Mark [author of the Gospel of Mark] the cousin [G431 – anepsios: cousin, sister’s son] of Barnabas [Acts 12:12; 15:37], (concerning whom you have received instructions – if he comes to you, welcome him) 11 and Jesus who is called Justus. These are the only men of the circumcision among my fellow workers for the kingdom of God, and they have been a comfort to me.’

It is not clear if John Mark was the cousin of Barnabas or his nephew. We will discover that Mark is the son of Peter and thus Peter and Barnabas are either brothers or uncle and nephew respectively. 

Paul III: 12 ‘Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ Jesus, greets you, always struggling on your behalf in his prayers, that you may stand mature and fully assured in all the will of God. 13 For I bear him witness that he has worked hard for you and for those in Laodicea and in Hierapolis. 

14 Luke [author of the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts] the beloved physician greets you, as does Demas. 15 Give my greetings to the brothers at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house. 16 And when this letter has been read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea. 17 And say to Archippus, “See that you fulfill the ministry that you have received in the Lord.”

Seems as if Archippus was slacking a little, in ‘Paul’s’ eyes at least. 

18 ‘I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. Remember my chains. Grace be with you.’

This is some claim to be the hand of Paul, if a forgery. Paul III possesses considerable knowledge about Paul’s fellow workers and even exhorts that the letter be read to the congregation in Laodicea and vice versa. Though we do not have the original Laodicean letter. Which means it did not have anything extra to add to the Colossae letter and thus the letter to the Colossians is sufficient. All this makes little sense if Paul had nothing to do with the letter in the first place. 

If Tychicus wrote Ephesians and seemingly with Paul’s knowledge, then the case for Paul III having Paul’s sanction is just as feasible and strengthened if Paul wrote his own greeting. This means Onesimus and Epaphras are likely candidates, as Paul says for each that they are associated or from the area of Colossae, Laodicea and Hieraplois. 

That said, it would seem considering information in the Book of Philemon, that Epaphras may well have been Paul III. Whether he took a dictation from Paul or not, he clearly wrote the letter in his own style. Doctrinal deviations aside, the content and tone of the letter still matches to a degree that of Paul. It is perhaps easier to understand how critical scholars are divided and yet why many insist Colossians was written by Paul. 

What is interesting is that Epaphras bears a striking resemblance to Epaphroditus, who we read about in Philippians 4:18 and who had passed on gifts to Paul. Epaphroditus would have been cognisant of Paul’s letter to the Philippians and therefore well versed to transcribe Paul’s thoughts in the Colossian letter. Recall, Epaphras was first mentioned in chapter one of Colossians. 

Most commentators view them as two different men; one from Philippi and one from Colossae. Yet, the possibility exists that Epaphras was a shortened pet name for Epaphroditus. In Philippians 2:25, Paul describes Epaphroditus in glowing terms: “I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need…” 

Only a select number of people are described like this by Paul. We learn Epaphroditus is part of Paul’s inner circle and that he is not from Philippi but had been sent to them – Philippians 2:29. Epaphras is similarly given prominence in Philemon 23. 

Richard Fellows: ‘Both [men] were with Paul for at least part of his time in prison. Furthermore, Epaphras was Paul’s “fellow prisoner”, and Epaphroditus is described in similar terms as “fellow soldier”. Many commentators infer that Epaphras had voluntarily chosen to share Paul’s confinement to be able to minister to his needs. This would fit Epaphroditus very well. It would explain how Epaphroditus had been a “minister to my need”… Both Epaphras and Epaphroditus therefore seem to have ministered to Paul’s needs in prison. 

… the probability of an associate of Paul in the Aegean region being called Epaphroditus is about 0.2%. For “Epaphras” the probability is about 0.05%. Now, Epaphras and Epaphroditus were both among Paul’s close associates during his imprisonment(s). 

How many such people were there? 10? 20? 50? Let’s be generous and assume that there were 100! The probability that Epaphras and Epaphroditus were different people would then be just 100*(0.2%+0.05%)/(1+100*(0.2%+0.05%) = 20%, and that’s being generous. So, Epaphras was almost certainly Epaphroditus. And even if, by some fluke, Epaphras was not the Epaphroditus of Philippians, we would still conclude that his full name was probably Epaphroditus.’ 

This writer concurs with Fellows and the synchronicity of Epaphroditus being nome other than Epaphras. Further, in looking for an author for the Book of Colossians, Epaphras is a logical choice as Paul III. Perhaps Epaphras chose his shortened name for Colossians and Philemon so that a connection with Philippians was not as easily made, nor his true identity as the one who wrote the Book of Colossians. 

Mentioned earlier was the similarity between Colossians and the later book, Ephesians. One commentator states: ‘The striking resemblance of the two Epistles, and the apparent repetitiousness and dependence of Ephesians on Colossians… seem to be unworthy of such an original thinker as Paul.’

Mark Allan Powell: ‘Ephesians is remarkably similar to the letter of Paul to the Colossians: 

• Somewhere between one-half and one-third of the 155 verses in Ephesians have close parallels to the material found in Colossians.

• In many cases, these parallels occur in the same order of presentation.

• A few passages are very close in wording (cf. Ephesians 1:4 with Colossians 1:22; Ephesians 1:15 with Colossians 1:4; Ephesians 6:21–22 with Colossians 4:7–8).

Most scholars believe that Colossians was written first and that whoever wrote Ephesians was familiar with the contents of that letter. This seems to make sense, because Ephesians has the more generic tone, presenting general reflection on points that, in Colossians, are made with reference to a specific situation.

This allows for a number of possibilities:

  • Paul wrote Colossians as a specific letter to a particular church, and then he wrote Ephesians as a more general letter dealing with the same subject matter.
  • Paul wrote Colossians, and later someone else used Colossians as a template to create Ephesians as a pseudepigraphical letter written in Paul’s name.
  • Paul wrote neither Colossians nor Ephesians; some pseudonymous author wrote both letters.
  • One pseudonymous author wrote Colossians, and later a different pseudonymous author used Colossians as a template to create Ephesians.’

It seems the fourth possibility is the correct one after weighing the evidence. 

The following two tables were complied by Felix Just S.J., Ph.D. The first shows the striking similarity between Colossians and Ephesians, chapter by chapter. 

EphesiansColossiansTopic
1:1-21:1-2Introduction
1:71:14, 20Redemption, forgiveness
1:101:20All-inclusive Christ
1:15-171:3-4, 9-10Intercession for the readers
1:181:27Riches of glorious inheritance
1:21-221:16-18Christ’s domain
2:52:13You he made alive
2:12-131:21-22Aliens brought near
2:152:14Abolishing the commandments
3:11:24Paul, the prisoner
3:2-31:25-26Divine mystery made known to Paul
3:71:23, 25Paul, minister of the universal gospel
3:8-91:27Paul to make known the mystery to all
4:11:10Lead a life worthy of your calling
4:23:12-13With all lowliness, meekness, patience forebearing one another
4:15-162:19Christ unites members of the Church
4:22-323:5-10, 12Put off old nature and put on new nature
5:3-63:5-9No immorality among you
5:154:5Walk wisely and make the most of time
5:19-203:16-17Sing songs, hymns, and spiritual songs, giving thanks to God
5:21-6:93:18-4:1Household Duties: husbands, wives, children, parents, slaves, masters
6:18-204:2-3Paul the prisoner exhorts persistence in prayer
6:21-224:7-8Tychicus sent to inform church about Paul and to encourage them

The second table highlights the key doctrinal – not so much differences – but personal perspectives between Paul and the possible compilers of Colossians and Ephesians, Epaphras and Tychicus, respectively.

Category of Theology:Paul’s Early LettersColossians / Ephesians
Christology:
(about Jesus)
earthly, human, suffering  [like Mark]
(1Cor 2:2; Gal 3:1; 6:14; cf. Phil 2:5-11)
cosmic, divine, exalted  [like John]
(Col 1:15-20; 2:9-10;  Eph 1:3-4, 21-22)
Ecclesiology:
(on the Church)
many local churches, each forms the “body of Christ”
(Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-27)
one world-wide body, with Christ as head of the body
(Col 1:18, 24;  Eph 1:22-23; 3:8-10; 5:23-32)
Moral Theology:
(on Sin & Forgiveness)
freedom from sin (sing.)
(Rom 5:1-21; 6:1-23; 8:1-4; Gal 5:1, 13)
forgiveness of sins (pl.) through Christ
(Col 1:14; 2:13; 3:13;  Eph 1:7; 2:1-3)
Eschatology:
(on the End Times)
& Soteriology:
(on Salvation)
temporal focus, “imminent” expectation:
Christ will return soon,
we will be raised on the day of the Lord
(1 Cor 4:5; 15:20-24; 1 Thess 4:13-18; 5:1-6)
spatial focus, “realized” interpretation:
Christ now reigns above,
we share resurrection life already now
(Col 1:11-14; 2:12-13; 3:1-3;  Eph 1:20; 2:4-6)

1 Thessalonians 

The next book by Paul is his first letter to the Thessalonians. While some attribute the writing of this letter before Galatians in 48 to 49 CE, others argue it was an early letter written after Galatians. Paul’s greeting includes Silvanus – also called Silas, Acts 15:22 – and unsurprisingly, Timothy. In chapter one, Paul praises the Thessalonians for their faith which has become known to others further afield. 

Paul: 4 ‘but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts. 5 For we never came with words of flattery, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed – God is witness. 6 Nor did we seek glory from people, whether from you or from others, though we could have made demands as apostles of Christ. 7 But we were gentle among you, like a nursing mother taking care of her own children. 8 So, being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us.’

The things Paul says he hasn’t done, he does and vice versa. Paul sugar coats his sentiments repeatedly with syrupy sweet compliments while being at the same time demanding. Does an apostle have more right to make demands than anyone else? Is not the body one, made up of many equal members? Paul uses another odd analogy for a man, of a nursing mother no less. Paul continues in the same vein.

Paul: 9 ‘For you remember, brothers, our labor and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God. 10 You are witnesses, and God also, how holy and righteous and blameless was our conduct toward you believers. 11 For you know how, like a father with his children, 12 we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.

14 For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea. For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind 16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved – so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them at last!’ 

It is not clear to what Paul refers. The sacking of Jerusalem did not occur until between 66 to 70 CE. Regardless, Paul is rejoicing at the suffering of his own people. In chapter three, Paul repeats his pleasure about the brethren’s faith and how Timothy was sent to them. 

Chapter four: 15 ‘For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words.’

Paul believes and teaches that Christ will return in their life times. Verse seventeen reveals Paul expected to be one of those alive when it happened. This has been a common proclamation from those of questionable conversion; preaching like phoney prophets and fake apostles. Some believe Paul is saying Christ is an archangel, with the Jehovah’s Witnesses teaching Christ and Michael are one and the same. This is incorrect – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. In the final chapter, Paul continues on the subject of Christ’s return. 

Bart Erhman: ‘Paul wrote the Christians in Thessalonica because some of them had become disturbed over the death of a number of their fellow believers. When he converted these people, Paul had taught them that the end of the age was imminent, that they were soon to enter the Kingdom when Jesus returned. But members of the congregation had died before it happened. Had they lost out on their heavenly reward? Paul writes to assure the survivors that no, even those who have died will be brought into the kingdom.’

Paul: 1 ‘Now concerning the times and the seasons, brothers, you have no need to have anything written to you. 2 For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. 8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation.’

Recall, the author of Ephesians embellishes what Paul says in verse eight. 

“Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace. In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one; and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” – Ephesians 6:14-17. 

Tychicus remembers the helmet analogy of salvation, forgetting hope and changes the breastplate from faith and love to righteousness. This shows, if anything else, that Paul did not write Ephesians. 

Paul: 12 ‘We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, 13 and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work.’ 

Paul reinforcing his unbiblical hierarchal control. 

Paul: 26 ‘Greet all the brothers with a holy kiss. 27 I put you under oath before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers.’

Jesus was clear in never swearing an oath – Matthew 5:33-37. Likewise, a kiss of greeting from Judas Iscariot didn’t work out so well for Christ – Matthew 26:48-49. 

2 Thessalonians 

The second letter to the Church at Thessalonica is disputed, though deemed that it ‘may be authentic.’ Let’s call the author, Paul IV.

The letter begins the same way as the first, with greetings from Paul, Silvanus and Timothy.

 Paul IV: 4 ‘Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring. 5 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God… 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, 10 when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.’ 

Paul IV cleverly mimics Paul’s content from the first letter in a close comparison; though portrays Christ’s return in violent imagery and decidedly in contrast to the more gentle Jesus of Paul. Paul IV does not include any believers being alive at Christ’s return like Paul does each time. He speaks of our testimony instead of mine, though does use Paul’s favourite word, boast. Paul IV mentions the Kingdom of God, a phrase Paul is reticent to use as it it reminds of the true gospel being spread abroad by the apostles. 

Chapter two contains a powerful prophecy. While Paul introduces the theme of Christ’s return in the first letter, Paul IV runs with it in detail. This passage has been discussed at length in a number of articles – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity

Paul IV: 1 ‘Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.’ 

Notice Paul IV is definitely not the original Paul for he does not use the personal pronouns I and me, but rather our and us. It would seem Christ’s return was a hot topic, no thanks to Paul. Was Paul IV combatting the letters of Paul II (or Tychicus) and Paul III (or Epaphras), when he mentions a letter seeming to be from ‘Paul’. It is an ironic statement for Paul IV to say, when he is doing just such a thing himself. 

Paul IV: 3 ‘Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness* is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time.

7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he** is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.’

Ostensibly this is about the second beast* – Revelation 13:11-18. Even so, the prophecy may be dual or in two parts. The dreaded ‘mystery’ raises its head yet again – Revelation 17:5. Shockingly, could Paul IV be cryptically referring to Paul** who was teaching his mystery, a veritable form of lawlessness – which favours grace over the Law. Paul also claimed to reinforce his credentials through ‘signs and wonders’ – Acts 15:12, Romans 15:19, 2 Corinthians 12:12.  

In connection with this passage Jesus warned in Matthew chapter twenty-four: “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.”

Recall Paul incongruously said in 2 Corinthians chapter eleven: “And what I am doing I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ… Their end will correspond to their deeds.”

Verse five is a curious statement from a forger: “Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?”… unless, he personally knew Paul and heard him preach regularly – just like Paul II and Paul III. 

Erhman: ‘The author of 2 Thessalonians, claiming to be Paul, argues that the end is not, in fact, coming right away. Certain things have to happen first. There will be some kind of political or religious uprising and rebellion, and an Antichrist-like figure will appear who will take his seat in the Temple of Jerusalem and declare himself to be God. Only then will the “Lord Jesus” come to “destroy him with the breath of his mouth” (2:3-8)… But can this be by the same author who wrote the other letter, 1 Thessalonians? Compare the scenario of Jesus’s appearance in 2 Thessalonians, according to which it will be a while yet and preceded by recognizable events, with that of 1 Thessalonians, when the end will come like a “thief in the night,” who appears when people least expect it. There seems to be a fundamental disparity between the teachings of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, which is why so many scholars think that 2 Thessalonians is not by Paul.’

Paul IV: 14 ‘To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.’ 

The final chapter is devoid of locations and personal salutations. 

Paul IV: 14 ‘If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother. 17 I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the sign of genuineness in every letter of mine; it is the way I write.’

What an odd closing to the letter from a potential forger. How to draw attention to yourself and arouse suspicion. Or was it intentional? A form of whistle blowing. Yet for what reason? Is this the same scenario as with the later letters to Colossae and Ephesus? Did Paul IV have sanction from Paul? Does this explain why Paul IV uses us instead of me. The difference in this case is that Paul was not imprisoned. So why have a ghost writer? Is it related to the return of Christ being explained as a future event rather than an imminent one. This is a radical shift in thinking if instigated from Paul.

It seems too much to accept this line of reasoning, so that the alternative is that unlike Paul II and Paul III, Paul IV was not a. writing on behalf of Paul at all; b. wanted to publicise to a wide audience the mystery of lawlessness in using the name of Paul and his authority; and c. may have written the letter some time after Paul’s death. So that the letter has gained kudos as Paul’s because it is a second letter to the Thessalonians after Paul’s original; as well as the fact it seemingly follows on from his content in the first letter. 

As the two letters to the Thessalonians are deemed earlier letters of Paul, it seems Paul IV saying: “This is the sign of genuineness in every letter of mine; it is the way I write”, was something he got away with because the letter was forged sometime after Paul and without his sanction. After I Corinthians in 55 CE as Paul uses similar terminology. If it had been written closer to 1 Thessalonians as universally agreed, it would have raised a huge red flag and exposed itself quickly as a forgery. 

The identity of Paul IV is a genuine mystery – no irony intended – and very unlikely to be the same as Paul II and Paul III. Timothy, who is included in the greeting of both letters was perhaps the most loyal supporter of Paul and had the closest personal relationship with him. While a contender, there is another person who should be considered as the prime suspect. 

A person within Paul’s inner circle, though in decreasing profile and of lesser importance to Paul as time elapsed. Just such a candidate is found in the person of Silvanus, otherwise known as Silas. He is included in the beginning of both letters. Silas was well acquainted with Paul, for recall in Acts fifteen when Paul and Barnabas disagreed about including John Mark in their party; Paul chose Silas instead to accompany him. What is of special note is that Silas was a prophet – Acts 15:32. The second chapter of 2 Thessalonians is a remarkable prophecy yet to be fully fulfilled. One given to a prophet no less. It certainly did not originate with Paul who was fixated on Christ’s return in his own lifetime. Thus, there is good reason to consider Silas was Paul IV. 

1 Timothy

The next three books attributed to Paul – known as the Pastoral Epistles – are not only disputed, they are deemed ‘probably not authentic.’ Therefore, there is serious doubt as to their authenticity and little reason to abide their teaching. The first of these is 1 Timothy.

Online Encyclopaedia: Most scholars now affirm the view that I Timothy was not written by Paul. ‘As evidence for this perspective, they put forward that the pastoral epistles contain 306 words that Paul does not use in his unquestioned letters, that their style of writing is different from that of his unquestioned letters, that they reflect conditions and a church organization not current in Paul’s day, and that they do not appear in early lists of his canonical works. Marcion, an orthodox bishop later excommunicated for heresy, formed an early canon of scripture c. 140 around the Gospel of Luke and ten of the canonical Pauline epistles excluding 1-2 Timothy and Titus. The reasons for these exclusions are unknown, and so speculation abounds, including the hypotheses that they were not written until after Marcion’s time, or that he knew of them, but regarded them as inauthentic.’

It is incongruous that the person closest to Paul should have two letters apparently written to him which are not from Paul at all. It does raise the question why Paul would have written to Timothy at all and not spoken to his constant travel companion directly. Or, if Paul felt the need to write, one imagines it would have been personal and not for public consumption. Even the dating for these three letters is uncertain, supporting doubt in their Pauline veracity. If the letters to Timothy and Titus are spurious, then caution is required in assessing their content in light of true doctrine. Let’s call the author of 1 Timothy, Paul V. 

Paul V: 1 ‘Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope, 2 To Timothy, my true child in the faith…’ 

Paul V wastes no time in stamping apostolic authority, saying Paul is an apostle according to the command no less of not just Christ but also of God. Paul would have said, by the will of God – I Corinthians 1:1. A less used expression is used of God as a saviour; which He is, see Isaiah 43:11, yet it detracts from the fact that Christ is our immediate saviour – Luke 2:11. At the same time, Paul V confirms Paul’s favourite convert. 

Paul V: 3 ‘As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, 4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. 5 The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.’

Paul V gives a personal charge to (a) Timothy to defend doctrine, including remaining in Ephesus. Recall, the Ephesian letter in Revelation warns of false apostles. One wonders if those ‘swerving’ from the law were countering Paul’s teaching that it was not required for salvation. We do not know what the speculation was concerning genealogies. Though what is interesting is the Church of Latter Day Saints has constructed the biggest database detailing ancestral history in the world. 

Amercian Experience: ‘Mormons trace their family trees to find the names of ancestors who died without learning about the restored Mormon Gospel so that these relatives from past generations can be baptized by proxy in the temple. For Latter-day Saints, genealogy is a way to save more souls and strengthen the eternal family unit. 

Original records – about 2.4 million rolls of microfilm containing 2 billion names that have been traced – are locked away behind 14-ton doors in the Granite Mountain Records Vault, a climate-controlled repository designed to survive a nuclear impact that is built into the Wasatch mountain range, about 20 miles southeast of Salt Lake City. 

One of the core tenets of Mormon faith is that the dead can be baptized into the faith after their passing. Baptism of the dead evolved from the beliefs that baptism is necessary for salvation and that the family unit can continue to exist together beyond mortal life if all members are baptized.’

Baptism is viewed by the Mormons as an essential requirement to enter the Kingdom of God and thus baptism for the dead has been practiced since 1840. Recall, Paul rightly condemned baptising for the dead – 1 Corinthians 15:29. It is a false doctrine and perverts true baptism by water immersion of the willing, sound mind of an adult – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days

Online Encyclopaedia: ‘Latter-day Saint scholar John A. Tvedtnes says: “Baptism for the dead was performed by the dominant [Universal] church until forbidden by the sixth canon of the Council of Carthage (397). Some of the smaller sects, however, continued the practice.” 

Epiphanius of Salamis (between 310 and 320-403) reported that he had heard it said… among followers of Cerinthus…’ “For their school reached its height in this country, I mean Asia, and in Galatia as well. And in these countries I also heard of a tradition which said that when some of their people died too soon, without baptism, others would be baptized for them in their names, so that they would not be punished for rising unbaptized at the resurrection and become the subjects of the authority that made the world.”

‘John Chrysostom (c. 347-407) mockingly attributes to the Marcionites of the late 4th century a similar practice: if one of their followers who was being prepared for baptism died before receiving baptism, the dead person’s corpse was addressed with the question whether he wished to be baptized, whereupon another answered affirmatively and was baptized for the dead person.’

Paul V: 8 ‘Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted. 12 I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, 13 though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief…’ 

Critical scholars are convinced Paul did not write 1 Timothy. While the wording and some of the expressions do not remind of Paul, the sentiments do. Again, the forger or ghost writer either knew Paul or had access to his writings in cleverly mimicking him. Paul V makes use of the personal pronoun I just like Paul. Though forgets himself when he says, “The aim of our charge…”

One commentator uses the confession of blasphemy (22) as an additional fault of Paul, though this is unfair as it was prior to his confession of faith – and written by Paul V. That said, perhaps it stands – recall 1 Corinthians 15:10. 

Paul V: 14 ‘and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 15 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. 16 But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life.’

Overall, this chapter feels like Paul, with the self absorbed fixation on himself and grandiose styled descriptions, such as being the chief of sinners (23); yet the wording and phrasing distinctly does not sound like him. 

Paul V: 18 ‘This charge I entrust to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies previously made about you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, 19 holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, 20 among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.’

We are not told what these two men did. A righteous person would not hand anyone over to the Adversary. Nor are we any wiser about prophecies pertaining to Timothy. Paul V causes quite a stir in chapter two. 

Paul V: 1 ‘First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. 7 For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.’ 

While praying for a peaceful life is understandable and prudent, giving thanks for those in high positions who seek to control and oppress the masses is not. This more than hints at propaganda and perhaps reveals a writing of the epistle well after Paul’s death. While God may desire all people to be saved, such is not the case in this age or ultimately where some will maintain their choice to rebel. Paul V speaks a biblical truth in that Christ is not God and was fully human while on Earth. Paul V maintains the authoritative legacy of Paul’s ‘apostleship’ and combatting – it would seem – continued opposition by those who do not recognise Paul as an apostle. 

Paul V: 8 ‘I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling’

Notice the directives from Paul V are stemming from himself and are not originating from God’s word. There are a large number of personal pronouns in the vein of Paul. Public prayer is a vainglorious task and is in contradiction to what Christ admonished – Matthew 6:6. Lifting joined hands in the shape of a steeple is a pagan gesture, for steeples on churches are representative of obelisks and menhirs which are of themselves phallic symbols. Added to this, a steeple is a tower structure pointed skyward, indicative of the rebellious Tower of Babel – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.  

Paul V: 9 ‘likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10 but with what is proper for women who profess godliness – with good works.’

A woman can still have styled hair, jewellery and fine clothes and remain modest and godly. These sentiments and ones to follow have a parallel with the corresponding passages in Ephesians and Colossians written ironically by Paul II (Tychicus) and Paul III (Epaphras) respectively. Though these are likely an echo of Paul’s ideas – 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. 

The book of 1 Peter expresses similar thoughts in chapter three of 1 Timothy. 

1 ‘Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, 2 when they see your respectful and pure conduct. 3 Do not let your adorning be external – the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear – 4 but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. 5 For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, 6 as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord [?]. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening. 7 Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.’

The author takes liberties in presuming to know how godly women adorned themselves or acted. A gentle and quiet spirit is noble, though not more so than a zealous and outgoing spirit; whom can still be humble and god fearing. 

This opens a question on the authenticity of 1 Peter. While some hold it was written between 60 to 65 CE, other scholars present reasons for a later date between 70 to 80 CE and so these ‘scholars doubt Petrine authorship because they are convinced that 1 Peter is dependent on the Pauline epistles and therefore was written after [Paul’s]… ministry because it shares many of the same motifs espoused in Ephesians, Colossians, and the Pastorial Epistles’ of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus – of which all five are disputed as even being Paul’s letters in the first place. 

Online Encyclopaedia: ‘… some scholars argue that there is enough evidence to conclude that Peter did, in fact, write 1 Peter. For instance, there are similarities between 1 Peter and Peter’s speeches in the Biblical book of Acts, allusions to several historical sayings of Jesus indicative of eyewitness testimony (e.g., compare Luke 12:35 with 1 Peter 1:13, Matthew 5:16 with 1 Peter 2:12, and Matthew 5:10 with 1 Peter 3:14), and early attestation of Peter’s authorship found in 2 Peter (AD 60-160) and the letters of Clement (AD 70-140), all supporting genuine Petrine origin.’

It would be easy for the author of 1 Peter to copy the style of Peter from Acts and the gospels, while 2 Peter does not lend veracity as it is also disputed. 

Other scholars ‘such as Bart D. Erhman are convinced that the language, dating, literary style, and structure of this text makes it implausible to conclude that 1 Peter was written by Peter. According to these scholars, it is more likely that 1 Peter is a pseudonymous letter, written later by an unknown Christian in his name.’ 

Unfortunately, this appears to be probably the truth. It’s strong similarity with the forged Pauline epistles is undeniable and begs a later date which would be following the death of Peter – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

Paul V: 11 ‘Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing – if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.’ 

Paul V presents a misogynistic (24) attitude, which honestly finds its foothold in Pauline texts whether originally written by Paul or not. These directives are humanly devised and not inspired by God and have conveniently kept women subservient and powerless for centuries. It was in the Universal Church’s interest to keep women quiet in church and obedient to their husbands at home. 

Verse twelve ‘has been the source of considerable controversy concerning gender equality. Some denominations use it as a justification to deny the ordination of women.’ There could be grounds for this, as the Book of Acts does not provide examples of female elders/pastors/shepherds/teachers. In chapter eighteen there is the story of Aquila and his wife Priscilla instructing Apollos. Though this appears to have been conducted in private with the husband and wife working as a team. Romans sixteen shows a woman can be a deaconess. Even so they are not associated with speaking and teaching, but rather serving. 

The only example of this occurring is in Acts twenty-one for example, where Philip’s four daughters were prophetesses – who prophesied. Though an important point is that they were not married. Meaning, they were not exercising authority over a husband. They probably were not prophesying in the formal setting of the male dominated Synagogue but in private. 

‘Some theologians have interpreted it too mean that all women should be subordinate to all men, and others too mean women should not teach, pray, or speak in public.’ 

The context leans to a marriage relationship and not with women being subordinate to ‘all’ men, but rather her husband. It would seem to this writer that women, particularly wives and mothers would be teaching their children and praying with them as an example. It is a moot point whether the calling of an elder is extended to women or that any would wish to seek or desire such a position which places one under increased responsibility and potential condemnation – Proverbs 31:20, 23, 26, 30. 

Rightly or wrongly, Paul V addresses the issue further making clear men are to be elders in a church congregation. 

Paul V: 1 ‘The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, 5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.’

Paul V contradicts himself, for it is only a puffed up individual who seeks an office of any kind, for in this desire they do not comprehend the magnitude of commitment and sacrifice required in being a true servant. The person who shuns this responsibility is likely the preferred person for the role. Just because someone is new in the faith, is not always a reason to hold them back either. 

Plus, there are no offices in the spiritual organism of the church. Only functions and responsibilities within the body of Christ composed of true believers. Paul V is revealing his agenda of control within the church. It is not proof that the epistle was written in the second century. It may well have been written in the first century, shortly after Paul’s passing. Being well thought of by carnal, worldly people who are motivated by their greed for money and a lust for power, is not a valid marker of one’s reputation. 

Paul V: 8 ‘Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. 9 They must hold the mystery [1] of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. 11 Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. 12 Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. 13 For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.’ 

This is where Paul V reveals a time lapse between the original letters of Paul and that of 1 Timothy. For in the apostolic era, there were (1) apostles, (2) prophets/prophetesses and (3) deacons/deaconesses. Deacon literally meaning a servant or minister. This is why Philip the Deacon was also an evangelist, for he was preaching powerfully – Acts 6:5; 21:8. Thus men who were deacons became elders; otherwise known in the New Testament as bishops, shepherds, pastors and teachers. An elder was an ordained deacon. A deacon was simply a servant and minster. 

A deacon who travelled and preached was performing the work of an evangelist. Though these are functions and not ranks. Thus for Paul V to mark a distinction between an elder and deacon as two separate offices highlights two things. First, it is unscriptural and therefore a false doctrine and two, it reveals the supposed first letter from Paul to Timothy, is in fact not only a forgery, but likely a document written well after the first century as many scholars attest. Finally, notice the mystery rears its head yet again. 

Paul V 14 ‘I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, 15 if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth. 16 Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery [2] of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.’ 

Encyclopaedia: ‘In An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture, published posthumously in 1754, Isaac Newton argues that a small change to early Greek versions of verse 3:16 increased textual support for trinitarianism, a doctrine to which Newton [rightly] did not subscribe.’ Newton concluded Arianism was scripturally sound. 

The fact Paul V acknowledges Christ was flesh, would normally reveal the letter was written prior to the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE and the advent of the doctrine of the Trinity. Which in denying Christ was fully human, is the spirit of the antichrist – 1 John 4:2-3, 2 John 1:7. Yet beginning with the word godliness – and particularly in tandem with the word mystery – does hint at the trinity doctrine. Whether this was written this way exactly or originally by Paul V, or edited later is by the bye, for it is contained in a book of questionable origin and dubious canonical inclusion. 

Paul V: 1 ‘Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 2 through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, 3 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.’ 

Which faith are people departing from? The Pauline heresy, furthered by Paul II, Paul III and Paul V? 

The forbidding of marriage being an exception in that it is unscriptural and largely based on misinterpretations of the Bible, as well as of Paul – 1 Corinthians 7:25. The idea may have gained credence as many christians believed in the ‘imminent end of the age’ – 1 Corinthians 7:29-31. 

Encyclopaedia: ‘The earliest textual evidence of the forbidding of marriage to clerics and the duty of those already married to abstain from sexual contact with their wives is in the fourth-century decrees of the Synod of Elvira [circa 305 CE] and the later Council of Carthage (390). According to some writers, this presumed a previous norm, which was being flouted in practice.’

Synod of Elvira, Canon 33: “It is decided that marriage be altogether prohibited to bishops, priests, and deacons, or to all clerics placed in the ministry, and that they keep away from their wives and not beget children; whoever does this shall be deprived of the honor of the clerical office.”

‘Among the early Church statements on the topic of sexual continence and celibacy are the Directa and Cum in unum decretals of Pope Siricius (c. 385), which asserted that clerical sexual abstinence was an apostolic practice that must be followed by ministers of the church.’ 

Paul V errs from scripture when he says all food is good if prayed over. While Christ acknowledged food did not defile a man spiritually (Matthew 15:11) – for the Old Covenant was being replaced – unclean meat has been proven to be detrimental to health – Article: Red or Green? The food laws while not binding under the New Covenant are still applicable rules of healthful living – Leviticus 11:1-47. No manner of prayer or thanksgiving will change good common sense in eliminating the harmful properties of consuming unclean meat. Surely the desire of every true believer, is to protect the temple which houses the Holy Spirit. Thus anything damaging such as smoking, drugs and drinking alcohol excessively while not a sin, still include consequences. 

Paul V includes further propaganda control: 6 ‘If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine that you have followed. 7 Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths… 11 Command and teach these things. 14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you. 15 Practice these things, immerse yourself in them, so that all may see your progress. 16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.’

Paul V does not elaborate on the prophecy and circumstances of Timothy’s selection as a deacon (or servant). Paul treated Timothy as special and it may be explained in part by his unique calling. This confidence in expressing personal knowledge if not a fabrication, possibly points to a letter written by a person who was a. close to Paul and or Timothy and thus b. Paul V may well have written this letter in the first or very early second century. 

In chapter five, Paul V discusses relationships and how young widows should remarry and not dedicate themselves to the church as an older widow. Also, ‘If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are truly widows.’ Yet in the same breath Paul V says: ‘Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.’ 

Paul V advocates saving money on the widows and spending it on ambitious elders. How to widen the ‘us and them’ gap; reward those with power and keep the poor down trodden. 

Paul V: 23 ‘(No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.)’

Again, Paul V appears privy to personal information. One would even wonder if Timothy himself wrote 1 Timothy?

Paul V: 1 ‘Let all who are under a yoke as bondservants regard their own masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled. Teach and urge these things. 3 If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, 4 he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, 5 and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.’

It is important to note that the disputes about words today are nearly always contained in those books written by Paul or accredited to him. Paul V seems to be aware of this fact and we wonder whether the disputes were over the words, faith, works, law and grace?  

Paul V: 10 ‘For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. 11 But as for you, O man of God, flee these things… Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. 13 I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, 14 to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which he will display at the proper time – he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.’

The author refers to Christ’s return taking place at the ‘proper time’. Paul V has refined Paul’s teaching. Paul V – increasingly becoming a clear companion of Paul – understands that Paul is going to die or has died before Christ’s return. To have mentioned the unique circumstances of Timothy’s ordination more than once is overkill. Why would Paul V stress this point if the letter was written decades or centuries after the death of Paul? To what purpose? To merely stamp pseudo Pauline authority on the letter? If though, the letter was written just prior to or just after Paul’s death, then the only and obvious candidate for the authorship of 1 Timothy, is… Timothy. 

Paul V: 17 ‘As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. 18 They are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, 19 thus storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life. 

20 O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” 21 for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you.’ 

Paul V closes with God being one, thus well before the errant Trinity doctrine in 325 CE; exhorts that the rich are to conveniently share their wealth; and for Timothy to ignore all the ideas and teachings which contradict Pauline theology. 

The impression from 1 Timothy is of a letter perhaps stemming from Paul and written by Paul V. Or more likely, Paul V knew Paul so well, he has been able to write a masterful forgery. Who could pull this off so expertly and what would be their motive? Without any viable suspects, the obvious candidate is Timothy himself. Perhaps in light of much of the content – to consolidate power – the endeavour was to strengthen both the continuity of authority and teaching from Paul to his closest confidant and companion Timothy and thereby cement Timothy’s position as a worthy successor of Paul. Adding the phrase ‘O man of God’ about himself, assisted in the recognition of Timothy as the spiritual protege of the ‘apostle to the Gentiles.’

2 Timothy 

In chapter one – let’s call him Paul VI, though remembering he could be the same person as Paul V – Paul VI begins in like manner to 1 Timothy. 

Paul VI: 1 ‘Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God according to the promise of the life that is in Christ Jesus, 2 To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. 3 I thank God whom I serve, as did my ancestors, with a clear conscience, as I remember you constantly in my prayers night and day. 4 As I remember your tears, I long to see you, that I may be filled with joy. 5 I am reminded of your sincere faith, a faith that dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, dwells in you as well. 6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands, 7 for God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.’

We have learned that the elders consecrated Timothy as a Deacon and Paul circumcised Timothy. Paul also baptised him, laying hands on him to receive the Holy Spirit. Their close relationship affirmed through remembrance and tears. If not fabricated, who would know these personal details, other than Paul or Timothy? As Paul did not write 2 Timothy either, then one would assume logically only Timothy would know these details and consider them important enough to strengthen his cause.

Paul VI: 8 ‘Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, 9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before [predestination*] the ages began, 10 and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, 11 for which I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, 12 which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that day what has been entrusted to me. 13 Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.

15 You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes. 16 May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains, 17 but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me earnestly and found me – 18 may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day! – and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus.’ 

If this is not Paul, then again it is a clever mimicry of his style, words and sentiments right down to talking himself up and advocating to ‘follow’ me. Even slipping in his apostleship between preaching and teaching. Paul VI praises Onesiphorus, for he requires supporters just as Paul had for himself with Timothy. Many may have turned aside from his gospel. One ponders why this happened? 

Chapter Two: 8 ‘Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead… as preached in my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal… 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. 14 Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. 17 … Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18 who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some.’ 

This sounds like the issues addressed in the letters to the Ephesians and Colossians. Why are some debating the meaning of words? Again, is it to do with faith, works, law and grace? Is Paul VI having an increasingly difficult time defending Paul’s doctrines. The names Hymenaeus and Philetus, bear a coincidental similarity with Phygelus and Hermogenes in verse fifteen. 

Paul VI: 20 ‘Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use*, some for dishonorable. 21 Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work. 22 So flee youthful passions… 23 Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. 24 And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.’

The dissension amongst Paul’s congregations seems to be rife. Why would a forger go to the trouble to record this, if they were not an ardent follower or ally of Paul? 

Chapter Three: ‘But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty.’ 

The wording here is a similar expression to that found in 1 Timothy 4:1, “Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times.” The last days signifying literally, the here and now in the minds of Paul and Paul VI. 

Paul VI: 2 ‘For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money [1 Timothy 6:10], proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, 4 treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power’ – refer Jude 18.

This passage resounds with humanity’s failings today; yet the truth is, it is always indicative of mankind, for people are continually beset with the same human nature whatever age they live in. 

Paul VI: ‘Avoid such people. 6 For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, 7 always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth’ refer Jude 4, 12. 8 ‘Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. 9 But they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men.’

These verses stick out as a little strange for a personal letter. Did Paul VI forget himself for a moment and include esoteric knowledge not for the masses? ‘Then Pharaoh summoned the wise men and the sorcerers, and they, the magicians of Egypt, also did the same by their secret arts’ – Exodus 7:11. Paul VI also a member of the same mystery elite espoused by his mentor, Paul. 

Paul VI: 10 ‘You, however, have followed my [1] teaching, my [2]conduct, my [3] aim in life, my [4] faith, my [5] patience, my [6] love, my [7] steadfastness, 11 my [8] persecutions and sufferings that happened to me [9] at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra – which persecutions I [10] endured; yet from them all the Lord rescued me [11]. 14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings…’ and one might add, the mystery writings.

Paul VI: 16 ‘All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.’ 

The last statement by Paul VI is debatable, as we have discovered regarding a number of the books included in the New Testament Canon. 

Chapter Four: ‘I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. 5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry [of a deacon and servant].’

Timothy was ordained a Deacon, to be a servant and minister. Paul VI rightly encourages Timothy to perform the work of an evangelist [bringer of good news], not that it was a specific role, rank, office outside of being a minister. How true it is today, in that people find teachers who teach what resonates with a person’s preconceived ideas on what is truth. Most people do not actually seek the truth. And should these people accidentally bump into the truth, they invariably recoil from it because it does not align with their own truth. 

Paul VI: 6 ‘For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. 7 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness [Revelation 3:11], which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.’ 

Did Paul utter these words? Did he finally realise that Christ was not returning in his lifetime. Or had it become painfully apparent to Paul VI that this was the reality Christians were facing? 

Paul VI: 9 ‘Do your best to come to me soon. 10 For Demas, in love with this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica.’

This might be an effort to smear the name of Demas and wrongfully accuse him of forsaking not the truth, but the way of Paul. Demas may have woken up to the travelling road show that was Paul and his magical mystery tour beguiling teachers and saints alike. Therefore no longer an ally of Timothy. If so, Demas would be a second candidate for the writing of 2 Thessalonians which combats Paul’s teachings recorded in 1 Thessalonians.  

Paul VI: ‘Crescens has gone to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. 11 Luke alone is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry. 12 Tychicus I have sent to Ephesus. 13 When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments.’ 

“Come to me soon”, says Paul VI. This must be the best forgery in the history of forged writings. If Paul did not write this letter with his own hand, then someone close to Paul could have taken a dictation from him. As Paul VI reveals Luke – the complier of the Book of Acts and alleged author of the Gospel of Luke – is with Paul; he is a second candidate for authorship, with Timothy. It would be interesting to learn from a Greek scholar, whether Acts of the Apostles and 2 Timothy share any etymological similarity. 

Some teach Titus deserted Paul, though only Demas forsook Paul. Others unconvincingly hold that Timothy and Titus were the same person. Mark is ironically, the same John Mark whom Paul did not wish to take with him and who partnered with his Uncle Barnabas instead. Obviously his accompanying Barnabas did not last as Paul mentions him favourably more than once. We will learn that Mark also spent time with Peter. And recall Tychicus (Paul II) the strongest candidate as the author of the Book of Ephesians – a pale imitation of Colossians.

Paul VI: 14 ‘Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. 15 Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our [Paul and Timothy] message. 16 At my first defense no one came to stand by me, but all deserted me. May it not be charged against them! 17 But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. So I was rescued from the lion’s mouth [1 Peter 5:8]. 18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil deed and bring me safely into his heavenly kingdom. To him be the glory forever and ever. Amen. 

19 Greet Prisca and Aquila [Romans 16:3], and the household of Onesiphorus. 20 Erastus remained at Corinth, and I left Trophimus, who was ill, at Miletus. 21 Do your best to come before winter. Eubulus sends greetings to you, as do Pudens [Romans 16:13] and Linus and Claudia and all the brothers [in Rome]. 22 The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.’

An additional prospect for writing 2 Timothy is Onesiphorus, who apparently visited Paul in Rome – 2 Timothy 1:16. If he is Paul VI, then Onesiphorus is not Paul V, equating to Timothy and the probable author of 1 Timothy. This results in an interesting anomaly as some researchers maintain – due to content – that 1 Timothy is in fact a copy of 2 Timothy which it seems preceded 1 Timothy chronologically. This bears discussing before studying the letter to Paul’s second favourite child in Christ, Titus – mentioned at the end of 2 Timothy and in Galatians 2:3, 2 Corinthians 2:13; 7:6-7, 13-15; 8:6, 16-17. 

Online comment: ‘… I increasingly think 2 Timothy is actually authentic. It would, based on the content, have been Paul’s last letter. The case for 1 Timothy being a forgery is… compelling, but it shows in a number of places that the corpus of Paul’s authentic letters was likely available to the author for close replication (see 1 Timothy 2:7 vs Galatians 1:20, Romans 9:1, 2 Corinthians 11:31, 1 Timothy 1:20 vs 1 Corinthians 5:5). 

If 2 Timothy was… authentic, it would stand to reason the author of 1 Timothy should have had a copy of it to build their letter… [from]. Bart Ehrman in Forged… says… the two weren’t written by the same author. And indeed, there’s an indication that might be the case in how 1 Timothy:

  • Refers to the heretics introduced in 2 Timothy by name as if already known 
  • Combined the two separate individuals of Hymenaeus (claimed resurrection already took place) and Alexander (metalworker opposing Paul’s message) into a single grouping 
  • Is ideologically at odds with 2 Timothy in claiming to have sent to Satan the heretics vs 2 Timothy’s “treat with kindness/gentleness” (3:23-26)  

As well, one of the chief arguments against 2 Timothy is the heresy of Hymenaeus of an over-realized eschatology, which was thought to have been Gnostic and thus necessitated authorship in the second century – but I’ve found a compelling case for proto-Thomas predating Paul’s Corinthian letters, and the Gospel of Thomas certainly has sayings along the lines of over-realized eschatology: 

51. His disciples said to him, “When will the rest for the dead take place, and when will the new world come?” 

He said to them, “What you are looking forward to has come, but you don’t know it.”

TL;DR: “I think 2 Timothy is the only disputed Pauline epistle that is actually authentic (excluding possibly 2 Thessalonians), that it was his last one written, that 1 Timothy is a forgery from the [early] 2nd [or late first] century*, and that the similarity between 1 & 2 Timothy was a result of the author of the former using the corpus of authentic Pauline epistles to forge it which included 2 Timothy.”

‘On that last point, consider this analysis of the Pauline Epistles using machine learning. In particular look at the table of highest pairwise similarity (Table 3 [not shown]). 

Yes, 2 Timothy ranks high in similarity to both 1 Timothy and Titus – but as mentioned before that could have been the result of a forger writing 1 Timothy and Titus with a copy of 2 Timothy in front of them. 

What’s striking is that 1 Timothy and Titus don’t have high pairwise similarity to any other letter besides each other and 2 Timothy. But 2 Timothy has high pairwise similarity to: 1 [Thessalonians – Paul] & 2 Thessalonians [Paul IV – Silas], Ephesians [Paul II – Tychicus], Philippians [Paul], Philemon [Paul], Colossians [Paul III – Epaphras], 2 Corinthians [Paul], Galatians [Paul], and Romans [Paul]. 

But ad hominem arguments are fallacious because even a broken clock can be right [twice in any given twenty-four hours], and there are people like Raymond E. Brown who looked at 2 Timothy as not being authored by the same author as 1 Timothy and Titus. 

If the ultimate conclusion were to be a claim of 2 Timothy’s authenticity but 1 Timothy and Titus’s inauthenticity (a key component of the argument for the former), such a position would hardly fit within the parameters of a statement of faith or apologetic approach.’ 

A different commentator adds: ‘There is solid evidence of Ignatius of Antioch quoting 1 & 2 Timothy (Epistles to Polycarp, Ephesians, & Philadelphians) in likely the late 1st century [to] 2nd century CE (no later than 117 CE)* [martyred in 116 CE – refer Article: The Sabbath Secrecy]. Also Polycarp [69 to 155 CE] does as well (Letter to the Philippians) in likely the early to mid 2nd Century CE (120 CE is a good estimate).’

These arguments show that 2 Timothy is a better forgery than 1 Timothy, in that the author of 1 Timothy perhaps departed from his own style for one mimicking Paul even more closely in 2 Timothy. Whether it was written first or not has little bearing if the author for each was Timothy. For let’s be honest, while Luke supported Paul, it is a long shot he would write 2 Timothy or have the motive to do so. Onesiphorus is a tenuous suspect and so remains secondary to Timothy. Consider if Timothy did write one letter – in whatever order – then it is plausible he wrote the other letter on the heels of the first. Only if it could be proven that there was a lengthy gap between the two, could it be concluded that Timothy wrote one and not the other.

Regarding 1 Timothy and Titus having pairwise similarity and 2 Timothy having pairwise similarity with both these letters as well as Paul’s original (and accredited) epistles, lends support to Paul being if not the author of 2 Timothy perhaps its inspiration. So that Timothy as its true author was able to maintain a level of Pauline similitude in the second letter. Due to the different thrust of 1 Timothy, which discusses government (both within and without the Church), false teachers, doctrinal dissension and relationships; there is logic to the argument that it was written after 2 Timothy. The perceived different style between the two letters would be answered by the fact that Timothy was not using the thoughts of Paul as a template – as he had practised previously – but was presenting his own ideas in seeking to cement his own position of authority in the newly created power vacuum following Paul’s death.

In this instance, the premise Paul V and Paul VI are the same person, may well be justified in the person of his closest disciple and confidant: Timothy.

Titus

The penultimate book credited to Paul and the final book of the six disputed, is the letter to Titus. Which is deemed ‘probably not authentic.’ Let’s call the author, Paul VII.

Paul VII: 1 ‘Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth, which accords with godliness, 2 in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began 3 and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior; 4 To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.’ 

In this writer’s opinion, this is a poor copy of Paul’s writing and phraseology. On the surface it does seem similar, though a closer inspection reveals a paraphrasing of Paul’s sentiments contained in other letters. Nor does it bear immediate resemblance with either of the letters to (and from) Timothy.

Paul VII: 5 ‘This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you – 6 if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. 7 For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, 8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. 9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.’

Paul VII continues in the vein of Paul – and in a number of other epistles written by other ‘Pauls’ – while tightening the stricture of a church government not found in the earliest of the church congregations. The aspect of having one wife is used as an example of judgement and prejudice. What about the righteous, Abraham, Jacob and David? What man has perfectly obedient children or is truly above reproach? All men sin and have weaknesses whether readily apparent or deeply hidden. A man who is humble, kind and is not a hypocrite is a good man and worthy of being a servant.

Paul VII: 10 ‘For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party. 11 They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach.

12 One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” 13 This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, 14 not devoting themselves to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth. 15 To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled. 16 They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work.’ 

Paul VII condemning the circumcision party seems to be a political anachronism. An event well past at the supposed writing of Titus. While Paul VII is pulling no punches like Paul and likely accurate in his stereo typing, his inflammatory language against the Jews and racial slur against the Cretans is out of character even for him. Nor does it exhibit the careful diplomacy of the author of the letters to Timothy, but rather a brazen arrogancy not like any other Pauline letter. 

Paul VII continues with controlling propaganda and inconsistencies: 1 ‘But as for you, teach what accords with sound doctrine. 3 Older women… are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to… 4 train the young women… 5 to be… pure, working at home… and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. 7 Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works… 9 Bondservants are to be submissive to their own masters in everything… 11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 … in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ… 15 Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.’

Paul VII, acknowledges the requirement for good works as per the teaching of James. In the final chapter, Paul VII reminds of those issues addressed in 1 Timothy. Part of the reason why some subscribe to the same author for both. 1 Timothy is broader in scope with more inconsistencies than Titus. Perhaps Titus was based on 1 Timothy.  

Paul VIII: 1 ‘Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, 2 … to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. 3 For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. 4 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.’

Paul VII is correct in that we are not saved by our own righteousness before conversion or if one falls away – Isaiah 64:6. Though good works are required by a true believer and have a bearing on our reward – Revelation 2:19, 26. Christ is our Saviour, yet he was never God; is not God now; and was not God when on the Earth as the Messiah. The fact Christ is called God is a red flag indicating a considerably later date for the construction of the letter to Titus. 

Paul VII: 8 ‘The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people. 9 But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.’

And there we have it. Arguments about the Law can only mean one thing. Those who followed Pauline theology were being challenged by those who believed in the Way, originally espoused by Christ. ‘Quarrels about the law’ could also indicate a later date for the authorship of Titus.   

Paul VII: 10 ‘As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. 12 When I send Artemas or Tychicus to you, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there.’

Paul VII is deliberately trying to convince that ‘Paul’ wrote this letter a. prior to his prison epistles; b. before 2 Timothy; and c. about the same time as 1 Timothy – of which it appears to have been based on or copied from.  

Paul VII: 13 ‘Do your best to speed Zenas the lawyer and Apollos [ the probable author of Hebrews] on their way; see that they lack nothing. 14 And let our people learn to devote themselves to good works, so as to help cases of urgent need, and not be unfruitful. 15 All who are with me send greetings to you. Greet those who love us in the faith.’

Good works is finally defined by Paul VII, as taking care of the [financial] needs of the poor. Not necessarily living a righteous life. Apollos is mentioned, the author of the Book of Hebrews; which is so unPauline there is no doubt whatsoever that a. Paul did not write Hebrews; b. because many believed and followed Apollos, that Hebrews is worthy of acceptance; and c. the content of the book reveals it is in fact inspired scripture and part of the true New Testament canon. Adding the name of Apollos gives a pseudo credence to the Book of Titus.

The mention of Tychicus (Paul II) – the possible writer of the Book of Ephesians – may have had a hand in the compiling of Titus. Against this is that Titus more than any other ‘Pauline’ book appears perplexingly to be a far later addition to Paul’s library of letters. So that considering Titus as the writer of the book with his name – to maintain continuity of authority and dogma – seems a stretch. 

Clarke Morledge in an article written to combat the arguments of Bart Erhman and other scholars, raises interesting points concerning the pastoral epistles – italics his. 

Forgery and Counterforgery: What About the Pastoral Letters?

‘Bart Ehrman holds to the view that all three of these letters were written decades after Paul’s death by someone claiming to be Paul, making certain alterations to Paul’s message in the process… there are also progressive Christian scholars who make the same type of arguments… 

First, very few, if any, of the details of Paul’s various journeys with respect to Ephesus, in the case of Timothy, and Crete, in the case of Titus, can be synced with anything written in the Book of Acts. 

Secondly, the style and vocabulary of these three letters are substantially different from the established Pauline writings, more so than even 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians and Colossians. 

Thirdly, more questions were raised about the authenticity of the pastoral letters in the early church than any of the other Pauline letters found in our New Testament. 

Fourthly, the claim is made that the theology and message of the pastoral letters differ so much from the rest of Paul’s letters that they could not have been written by Paul himself. 

We cannot simply rule out these details found in the pastoral letters in Paul’s life simply because the Book of Acts omits them. Acts was never meant to give us an exhaustive history of Paul’s life after his conversion to Christ.’

The second sentence is a non-argument and redundant. The first sentence is true enough. That said, Luke was an ardent supporter of Paul and while his expertise as an accurate historian for others may be in question, it seems regarding Paul, he was conscientious. Luke mentions Paul’s conversion more than once and chronicles his missionary journeys quite extensively. So that coupled with the second, third and fourth points, it does not help in the least in supporting the pastoral epistles as being authentic Pauline authorship, when they appear unrelated to Luke’s history. 

Morledge: ‘As to the unique style and vocabulary of the pastoral letters, it is curious to note that these letters use more unique Greek words for important ideas that are not found elsewhere in Paul’s writings. The phrase to “pursue righteousness” as found in 1 Timothy 6:11 and 2 Timothy 2:22 is never found elsewhere in Paul, a phrase that at first glance might seem at odds with Paul’s teaching on justification. The word for “babble” in 1 Timothy 6:20 and 2 Timothy 2:16 is never used anywhere else in the New Testament. The hugely controversial word commonly translated to “have authority” or “assume authority” in 1 Timothy 2:12 (authenteo) is only found here once in the entire New Testament, whereas a different word for “authority” is found elsewhere in Paul. 

Yet as suggested before, such uniqueness in vocabulary can be explained by Paul’s use of a specific secretary who accompanied him, who chose to express Paul’s teaching with a different vocabulary thought to be synonymous with Paul’s earlier teaching, acting in good faith. Or it could have simply been the exact words Paul wanted to use in these letters, which gives us a greater richness to the entire corpus of Paul’s thought.

In other words, if the pastoral letters represent the final expression of Paul’s thought before his death, it should not surprise us to think Paul’s thought had developed over time, resulting in certain style and vocabulary differences from earlier writings, particularly if a secretary was involved.’

The first paragraph above is damming information and establishes a link between 1 and 2 Timothy, where they were either written by the same person or one copied from the other. The second paragraph is truly clutching at straws and denying what is clearly evident. 

Morledge: ‘A third objection raised is that these letters were late in being accepted as truly Pauline, by the early church. The 2nd century heretic Marcion was a vigorous supporter of Paul, but Marcion neglected to include 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus in his canon of acceptable, New Testament books. Nevertheless, the 2nd century apologist Tertullian argued that Marcion knew of these letters, but instead desired not to include them within the Marcion canon. The famous early fourth century copy of the Bible, Codex Vaticanus, lacks the pastoral letters, but it also lacks Philemon, which is well regarded as being authentic, suggesting that Codex Vaticanus simply left out Paul’s personal correspondence with individuals while retaining those letters addressed to church communities (e.g. Romans, Galatian, etc.).  

The 2nd century Assyrian Christian Tatian was skeptical about the authentic status of these letters as well, and in particular Origen observes that some Christians were skeptical about 2 Timothy, due to the mention of the magicians Jannes and Jambres in 2 Timothy 3:8, names of persons not found in the Old Testament.

But by the end of the 2nd century all three letters were universally accepted as Pauline and remained that way for centuries. Serious doubts about the authenticity of the pastoral letters only re-emerged in the beginning of the 19th century. 

By far the strongest component of Ehrman’s argument against the Pauline authenticity of the pastoral letters has to do with the theological content of the letter. The claim is that the theological teaching in these letters is so different that it makes it difficult to accept the idea that Paul really wrote these letters. For example, in the undisputed letters of Paul, the term “faith” means the kind of trust a person must have in Christ in order to bring about salvation through his death, as we find in passages like  Romans 1:12; Galatians 2:16. 

However, in the pastoral letters, “faith” means something different; that is, the body of teaching which defines historically orthodox Christianity. This notion of “faith” developed later in the church, according to Ehrman, in response to various heretical movements, like Gnosticism. The term “righteous” in the undisputed letters refers to having a right standing before God, as in Romans 2:13, whereas in the pastoral letters, “righteous” now refers to the morality of an individual, as in someone who is “upright” (see Titus 1:8).’

This lends to not just a different authorship on Paul’s behalf but an entirely different and separate agenda by Paul V and Paul VI. This means a mere follower of Paul is ruled out. It could still entail someone close to Paul or who knew him, but had their own ideas and used his name to express them, such as Timothy. Perhaps some time had elapsed after Paul’s death as Erhman suggests; potentially ruling out Timothy, Luke and Onesiphorus as the writers of Titus. Though this writer remains unconvinced on this line of reasoning for 1 and 2 Timothy. 

Morledge: ‘Contra Ehrman, the problem with this argument is that “faith” does at times refer to the substance of Christian doctrine (1 Corinthians 16:13; 2 Corinthians 13;5; Galatians 1:23; Philemon 1:27) in Paul’s undisputed letters. Plus, the word “righteous” sometimes has an association with morality in the undisputed letters. True, it would be fair to say that the emphasis changes in the pastoral letters, but the concepts are not mutually exclusive from one another. This does not sufficiently demonstrate that the content of the pastoral letters contradicts or undermines the teaching in the undisputed letters.’

The four scriptural examples cited above could be used for either interpretation for ‘faith’. In fact, they appeared better examples of the first definition than the second as Morledge vainly proposes. 

Morledge: ‘Ehrman also suggests that the pastoral letters focus on the qualifications of elder/overseer in the church, and other features of church structure, as found in the pastoral letters, is completely missing in the rest of the Pauline correspondence. This would indicate that the organized structure of church offices arose later in the history of the church, and did not overlap with the time of Paul. For Ehrman, this is in contrast with a more organic concept of Christian leadership marked by a sense of urgency concerning the expected apocalyptic end-time event coming within Paul’s lifetime, that did not materialize, along with a freer sense of the gifting of the Holy Spirit which empowers a person for Christian ministry. 

Yet again, we see that Erhman’s argument ignores, or at least sidelines, the presence of overseers and deacons in Philippians 1:1, one of Paul’s undisputed letters. Erhman’s case also sidelines the contribution of the Book of Acts, whereby in Acts 20:17-38, Paul summons the elders of the church in Ephesus to come and meet him in Miletus. How could any of these references to “elders” during Paul’s lifetime make any sense if no such office of “elder” had yet existed? However, if we are to understand that the pastoral letters were some of Paul’s last writings before his death, it would certainly be a concern of Paul’s to write specifically about the need to have proper oversight within the church, to carry on Paul’s mission after his death, particularly when the undisputed Pauline material is concerned about false teaching creeping into the church during his lifetime, as Paul extensively writes about in letters such as Galatians.’

There are two ways of answering this point. What Morledge and Erhman are unaware is the issue with Paul’s theology; his being a false apostle; and his role in creating a new religion called christianity, which was not a continuation of the original faith known as the Way. Paul is part of the problem if he is referring to two different offices in Philippians chapter one. The alternative and probably the correct answer, is that he is highlighting the simple fact that while all elders are ministers, servants or ‘deacons’, not all deacons were elders as we witness with Stephen and Philip who did not pastor congregations but rather evangelised – preaching the good news of the Kingdom of God. 

Morledge: ‘Even more scandalizing to modern sensibilities, Bart Ehrman argues that 1 Timothy in particular takes a somewhat disparaging view of women. In contrast with the undisputed letters of Paul, which affirms women as leaders in the early church, 1 Timothy takes a different view according to Ehrman, now that Paul had been long dead and the next generations of the church had to grapple with the delay of the Second Coming, and prepare for the existence of the church over the long-haul: 

“The women who once exercised authority in the church through their teaching and prophesying needed to be brought to bay now that the church needed to be seen as a respectable institution. The leaders needed to be upright men admired even by those on the outside” (Ehrman, page 204). 

‘Essentially, Bart Ehrman is saying that the pseudonymous author of 1 Timothy has sufficiently altered the teaching of the genuine Apostle Paul so as to domesticate his earlier message. Gone is the more egalitarian approach to men and women in the ministry of the church, and now it would appear that Paul has either changed his mind, or the pseudonymous “Paul” has manipulated Paul’s message to fit more within patriarchal social patterns of late first century or even second century Greco-Roman culture.’ 

This is well possible in that Timothy himself was the one to shape the evolving church, which was beginning to restrict the role of women, while emphasising that of the men. 

Morledge: ‘Another version of Ehrman’s argument regarding 1 Timothy is best summarized by John Barton, a progressive Christian scholar in the U.K., in a book which receives Ehrman’s enthusiastic endorsement, A History of the Bible

… the structures of the church that are implied in the Pastorals resemble much more those of the second century than those of Paul’s day. In Paul’s letters, as we have seen, church order is still inchoate; in the Pastorals there is a Christian polity, with bishops who have some standing in society in general and who are supposed to be heads of a family; and there is an order of widows in which elderly women can be enrolled (1 Timothy 5:3-16). The position of women is clear: they are to be subordinate to men…” (see Barton, A History of the Bible, page 182). 

‘There is no hint from either Ehrman or Barton that the teaching regarding women was with respect to some particular situation in the church of Ephesus, or some temporary injunction. Rather, the pseudonymous author of 1 Timothy has radically altered the authentic Paul’s teaching on the relationship between men and women in the church. But have Ehrman and Barton overstated their argument? 

Neither Ehrman nor Barton consider the possibility that the application for 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is expounded in Paul’s teaching in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, which specifically teaches that the office of elder/overseer in the church is restricted to only qualified men, for the sake modeling fatherhood for Christian families, while permitting both men and women to serve in other capacities in the church, specifically as deacon (1 Timothy 3:8-13, Romans 16:1).

If Ehrman (or Barton’s) position is correct, it is exceedingly difficult to avoid the charge of forgery with respect to 1 Timothy, and by implication 2 Timothy and Titus as well. However, as I have argued elsewhere, the charges of misogyny against the Paul of 1 Timothy have been greatly overblown and distorted. Paul is not prohibiting women from any and all kinds of leadership within the church. Rather, women are only being asked not to serve specifically as “elders/overseers.” The community of the church, which is supposed to be a priesthood of all believers, where all Christians are called to minister for the sake of the Gospel, male and female, does not need an army of elders/overseers to effectively spread the Gospel. Rather, the office of “elder/overseer” represents but one function within the body of Christ where ministry and leadership can exist in a myriad of ways.’ 

On this point, I concur with Morledge. Elders were and are men, while women as deaconesses or prophetesses are able to serve and teach. 

Morledge: “Dr. Bashaw is not alone in her views. I know of yet another progressive Christian scholar, who shall not be named, who believes that Paul did not write the letter to Titus, while still insisting that the pseudonymous character of the letter need not be labeled pejoratively as a “forgery.” In Titus 1:12, the author quotes Epimenides, most likely, when he says “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” However, this scholar states that for Paul to have referenced this quote is actually something the genuine Paul would never do. Presumably, this scholar believes that this negative reference as to the Cretans being “liars” is a kind of ethnic slur that would have been unbecoming of the Apostle Paul. Others who accept this interpretation would either be forced to conclude that Paul completely erred in making such a racist comment, or that indeed, the “real” Paul never had anything to do with writing this letter to Titus. It was the work of an imposter!” 

‘However, this scholar whom I shall not name misunderstands the context for this quotation. Just prior to the Epimenides quotation, Paul acknowledges that there are members of the “circumcision party,” otherwise affiliated with the Judaizers of Galatians, who were deceiving Gentile Christians to think that they must become circumcised in order to become fully Jewish and fully follow Christ. Paul urges Titus that such false teachers should be silenced (Titus 1:10-11). Paul’s use of the Epimenides quote was not being used as an ethnic slur, so as to slander all Cretans. Rather, Paul is referencing the supposed immoral reputation of the Cretans in order to describe in particular these false teachers who were, in fact, lying to the Gentile Christians.’

While this might be the case, the wider issue is that the whole tone of Titus does not seem to emanate from Paul, but someone else. 

Morledge continues: ‘Nevertheless, it is important to state that the argument in defense of Paul in Titus is even stronger than that! Paul was giving an illustration of a well-known logical paradox to show that the false teachers in the church were misusing language in order to deceive believers: the so-called “liar’s paradox.”

The key to understanding the “liar’s paradox” is grounded in the fact that Epimenides himself was from Crete, a Cretan making a supposedly true claim that all Cretans are liars. If “Cretans are always liars,” would you really believe a Cretan, like Epimenides? Paul’s sarcastic expression in the next verse, verse 13, “This testimony is true,” is tongue in cheek, underscoring how logically deceitful the false teachers of Crete really were. Paul is using a famous quote familiar to the Cretans, to illustrate the logical inconsistency of the false teachers in Crete. 

Therefore, to classify Paul’s use of the Epimenides quote as a kind of broadly ethnic slur is to distort the rather sophisticated context in which Paul was using it. It is an unconvincing argument to make if one wishes to attribute Titus to have been written by someone other than Paul.’

Granted, Morledge may have a valid point, though it does not distract from the fact that it just doesn’t sound like Paul… at all. 

Morledge: ‘To claim, as this scholar appears to suggest, such a pseudonymous writing is somehow still not a forgery, after making such a stinging critique about the use of the “Cretans are always liars” quote is quite baffling. For if the author of Titus would misrepresent the authentic Paul so badly, then this only reinforces the argument that Titus is indeed a forgery. Such a line of thinking appears to be more like a form of “wishful thinking,” a vain attempt to somehow retain the use of Titus as genuine Scripture for the Christian by somehow pretending that the letter is not a forgery, while at the same time making an argument which actually suggests that Titus is indeed a forgery! How astonishing and perplexing can such scholarship be? 

Frankly, Bart Ehrman’s rejection of this kind of fallacious thinking is far more convincing than the case made by this progressive Christian scholar to somehow “save” Titus from the jaws of “forgery” status. It is far more convincing to either reject Titus as being forgery altogether, or else accept Titus as being fully and authentically Pauline. Such alternatives are more plausible than this kind of convoluted, progressive Christian logic. Better yet, it makes better sense to say that indeed the early church got it right in judging Titus to be an actual letter authorized by the Apostle Paul.’

Morledge is right, either Titus is a forgery or it isn’t for it purports to be from Paul. If not written by Paul, it is a forgery. Of course this all pales into insignificance as the six forgeries are as redundant as the seven books of Paul are, in as far as being legitimate New Testament scripture. 

Morledge: ‘This same progressive Christian scholar, who still is not to be named, holds to the belief that the Bible allows for women to serve as “elders/overseers” in a Christian church. However, this scholar is not an evangelical egalitarian; that is, one who believes that the teaching regarding women in 1 Timothy is only addressing a particular historical, culturally-limited situation in Timothy’s church in Ephesus, and therefore, is not applicable to churches today. Instead, this scholar quite frankly acknowledges that the author, whom this scholar claims is pseudonymously writing under Paul’s name, in 1 Timothy 2-3 is restricting the office of “elder/overseer” to that of being a qualified male, in very much a universalizing sense. As a result, this scholar contends that this message in 1 Timothy goes against Paul’s established teaching elsewhere in his truly authentic letters. 

If this scholar is correct, does this not indicate a blatant contradiction in the New Testament? How could it be fully asserted that a supposedly pseudonymous work like 1 Timothy be still accepted within the New Testament canon, and not call it a deceptive forgery?’ 

Exactly.

The authorship of Titus remains a mystery for now and so we must be content with his temporary name of Paul VII. What is evident is that it is neither a letter from Paul or it would seem of Timothy. It’s style and content hint at a work based on the other two pastoral epistles and therefore penned later than they were presumably by Paul V and Paul VI (Timothy).  

Philemon

The final and undisputed letter of Paul, is his message to Philemon. 

1 ‘Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, To Philemon our beloved fellow worker 2 and Apphia our sister and Archippus our fellow soldier, and the church in your house: 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 

4 I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers, 5 because I hear of your love and of the faith that you have toward the Lord Jesus and for all the saints, 6 and I pray that the sharing of your faith may become effective for the full knowledge of every good thing that is in us for the sake of Christ. 7 For I have derived much joy and comfort from your love, my brother, because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you.’ 

This is unmistakably Paul, being his usual diplomatic self, tempered with flattery and sweet talk. 

Paul: 8 ‘Accordingly, though I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do what is required, 9 yet for love’s sake I prefer to appeal to you – I, Paul, an old man and now a prisoner also for Christ Jesus – 10 I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I became in my imprisonment. 11 (Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is indeed useful to you and to me.) 12 I am sending him back to you, sending my very heart. 13 I would have been glad to keep him with me, in order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for the gospel, 14 but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord. 

15 For this perhaps is why he was parted from you for a while, that you might have him back forever, 16 no longer as a bondservant but more than a bondservant, as a beloved brother – especially to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord. 17 So if you consider me your partner, receive him as you would receive me. 18 If he has wronged you at all, or owes you anything, charge that to my account. 19 I, Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay it – to say nothing of your owing me even your own self. 20 Yes, brother, I want some benefit from you in the Lord. Refresh my heart in Christ.’ 

Paul has used the tried and tested technique of being a leaning, smiling, elephant to get his own way. What is ghastly is Paul’s claim in verse nineteen that Philemon owes his very salvation to Paul. The Living Bible translates the verse to its full awfulness: “… but I won’t mention how much you owe me! The fact is, you even owe me your very soul!”

Paul: 21 ‘Confident of your obedience, I write to you, knowing that you will do even more than I say. 22 At the same time, prepare a guest room for me, for I am hoping that through your prayers I will be graciously given to you. 

23 Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends greetings to you, 24 and so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my fellow workers. 25 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.’

As Demas is mentioned with Paul, this letter was clearly written before 2 Timothy 4:10. Timothy has pride of place at the beginning as expected and longtime supporter Luke is included. Mark clearly found favour with Paul and one wonders what eventuated between John Mark and Barnabas for this to transpire. Loyal comrade Epaphras (Paul III) is included – the possible author of Colossians. 

One who flies under the radar is Aristarchus, an obvious follower of Paul and within his inner circle. He is mentioned four other times in the New Testament. He was a Macedonian from Thessalonica – Acts 27:2. Perhaps he too is a candidate for the authorship of 2 Thessalonians with Silas and Demas. Aristarchus is linked with a fellow Macedonian called Gaius – Acts 19:29; 20:24. Remember his name for he figures later. Aristarchus is linked by association with Epaphras, Mark and Demas in the letter to the Colossians – Colossians 4:10, 12, 14. Some might think Paul’s letter to Philemon is a masterful display of diplomacy, while for others a sinister form of black mail. Either way, one commentator views the letter as an example of Paul being a bully (25).

Morledge: ‘Among British New Testament scholars in 2011, a poll was taken asking if a particular letter attributed to the Apostle Paul was really written by the Apostle Paul. The Letter to the Hebrews lacks any formal attribution to Paul, but what is remarkable is that at least half of the scholars surveyed seriously doubt that Paul really wrote any of the pastoral letters: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, or Titus. Bart Ehrman would say that these three letters were all forgeries.’

And so ends the testimony of one Saul of Tarsus and of those who wrote in his name either with or without his permission or knowledge. The ramifications are enormous and while it should not shatter a true believer’s faith in the Word of God, it should warn a believer of the fact that scripture has to be tested. For a whole religion called Christianity has resulted from one man.

“Every time that I have been in a deep discussion with a Christian, I noted that when they liked what God said, they quote him. When they do not like what God said, they quote Jesus. When they do not like what Jesus said, they quote Paul. When I point this out, the discussion is often over” – Anonymous

The true faith is nestled in the words of Christ contained in the gospels; of the apostles in the early chapters of the Book of Acts; by Apollos in the Book of Hebrews: John in Revelation; and in certain of the General Epistles. But which ones? We will turn our attention to them now and then conclude with an investigation into who wrote each of the four gospels.

James

The first book is that written by a James. Circumstantial evidence points to the Lord’s half brother and senior Elder of Jerusalem as the author and not the brother of John who was an early martyr – Galatians 1:19, Acts 12:2 – nor James, the son of Alphaeus, one of the twelve apostles and brother of Matthew. 

Acts tells us that James is the only one whom Peter wanted informed about his divinely orchestrated release from prison – Acts 12:17.

While some dispute James wrote the Book of James, the prevalent view amongst scholars is that it is authentic. Even so, it is worth looking at certain questions about its origin after we have briefly surveyed its five chapters.

‘The main themes of The Book of James revolve around practical and ethical Christian living. Biblegateway.com lists ten themes in the book.

  1. God is the source of all wisdom
  2. Testing and trials
  3. Wealth and oppression
  4. Material things will not last
  5. The unjust rich
  6. Everything belongs to God
  7. Favoritism
  8. Godly Speech
  9. Faith and Good Deeds
  10. The Law

The key points in chapter one are that God does not tempt anyone. This is true. The Bible is replete with examples of God testing or trying those He loves. Whereas temptation is the domain of the Adversary. 

James: 25 ‘But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing. 26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.’

In chapter two, James discusses faith with out works being dead – 26 ‘For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.’ 

In chapter three, James goes into detail regarding the tongue and controlling it. 7 ‘For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.’ 

Chapter four is about humility. 7 ‘Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8 Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you.’ 

James warns to remain steadfast in the final chapter, with his closing words being: 19 ‘My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.’

James does not refer to anyone, for his opening remarks in chapter one are not to a person or congregation: 1 ‘James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion: Greetings.’ The word for servant is not deacon, but rather the Greek word for a slave. 

Regarding the authorship of the book, Zondervan ask the following questions. ‘… was it really James who wrote the book? Or was it simply attributed to him? This issue involves several questions.

1. Would a person with James’s background be capable of the quality of Greek and the rhetorical sophistication that is found in this letter? 

Their answer is that James probably wasn’t highly educated in Greek as ‘the second brother in an artisan family’ too ‘have composed some of the better Greek in the New Testament’ and relied on an amanuensis – in essence, a coauthor. While this may have happened, so too, James might have originally written his letter in Aramaic – being translated into Greek later. 

This may more accurately explain how articulate James appears and why his letter is so eloquent. Recall, he was the presiding Elder at the Jerusalem conference and would have likely possessed speaking ability to be selected as the host of such a momentous event including all the apostles. Just because Paul used ghostwriters – as Zondervan admit – does not mean James did.   

2. Does James show a knowledge of Paul’s letters and, if so, would James have been alive long enough to have written such a letter? 

Zondervan: ‘This question is more significant. 

The key passage here is James 2:14-26, in which James argues that faith without works [is] dead (James 2:17, 26) – that is, that it cannot save anyone (James 2:14). 

Three aspects of this passage remind one of Paul:

  1. the expression “faith without works” and its various permutations;
  2. the citation of Abraham and specifically the citation of Genesis 15:6 in James 2:23 (also cited in Romans 4:3 and Galatians 3:6); and
  3. the linking of “justification” to “works” as opposed to “faith alone” (James 2:24).

If these three aspects are in fact borrowed from Pauline letters, then James must be later than Romans (in 56 CE) and Galatians (in 48-49 CE), for Romans 3:28 and Galatians 2:16 are the key passages in which Paul asserts that one is justified by faith and apart from “works of the law,” which would be the statements James is opposing.’ 

These aspects as well as James referring to 1. a double-minded man; as well as 2. a vain man; indicate that James was well aware of what Paul was teaching and perhaps what he had written and why he includes a rebuttal – James 1:8; 2:20; 4:8. As James was martyred circa 62 CE, then it is entirely plausible that he wrote his letter between 56 and 62 CE. 

3. Was James prominent enough after his martyrdom and the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE that a later writer or community might have used his name to give authority to a letter that they composed? 

This question has a deliberate agenda in seeking to refuse to accept James as the author and trying to find reasons or excuses to support this premise. 

Zondervan: ‘It depends on knowing whom Christians would have pointed to as influential figures in the period before 230 CE (i.e. the time of Origen). James certainly did have some continuing importance in that Josephus mentions his death (Ant. 20.200–201), as does Hegesippus (according to Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 2.23). [This] letter is definitely not Gnostic (it has nothing to say about knowledge, mysteries [unlike a number accredited to Paul], or secret revelation, for instance, although it does refer to knowing this or that), nor is it interested in the martyrdom of James or of anyone else (other than the obscure reference in James 5:6), for that matter. In other words, it does not fit the pattern of interest found in the references to and use of James in post-first-century works. In fact, its interests (including its lack of interest in Christology) are those of the first century, not of the second.’

As Zondervan acknowledge, James was well known by contemporary historians and its content dates it to the first century. James 5:6: “You have condemned and murdered the righteous person. He does not resist you.” Did James write his letter while under arrest, prior to his martyrdom? It is a strange thing to say otherwise. 

4. Finally, if James, the Lord’s brother, did write the letter, why is the letter so poorly attested until the period of Origen? 

Zondervan satisfactorily answer their own question: 

‘First, James originated in a part of the world that was thrown into turmoil five or so years after his death. He was reportedly the leader of the Jerusalem community of the followers of Jesus, who, tradition claims, fled to Pella before the Romans reached Jerusalem and whose city was, therefore, destroyed after they left. In other words, both his community and his natural constituency, ethnic Jewish followers of Jesus, were in disarray after 66-70 CE, a tragedy that was compounded by later Jewish uprisings elsewhere in the Roman world and the second Jewish war of 133-135 CE. 

Second, it is not surprising that as James became used by Gnostic and other groups, there would be some, such as Origen, who would want to capture him for what became known as the orthodox stream of Christianity. Origen, living in Palestine, was well placed to make use of a document valued (at least in some circles) there. 

Third, James was not useful in the doctrinal controversies of the second and following centuries. The letter has little to say about Jesus – at least not with respect to what was being debated about him during those centuries – or about ecclesiology, so it is not surprising that this letter was neglected. This, of course, also makes it unlikely to have been composed in the second century, unless the writer was skillfully and purposely able to avoid current issues in the attempt to create a verisimilitude of an earlier period.’

Zondervan conclude that James was written immediately after his death, before the Roman persecution and composed of his sermons and sayings; due to the eclectic nature of the topics discussed. Claiming it ‘shows signs of being an edited work with catchword transitions and shifts in vocabulary for the same time’, is plausible. Though so is James doing the same thing with his own notes. Or perhaps it was edited in such a manner after his death when his version was translated into Greek. For Zondervan allow that ‘it would be presumptuous to argue that the work could not have been produced during the lifetime of James or that James would never have put his own sermons and sayings together.’

The Most Controversial Books That Were Included In The Bible, Benito Cereno, 2020: 

‘In the earliest days of the Christian church, there were two general flavors of Christianity: the Gentile-centric approach of the missionary Paul, which said faith in Christ superseded the Jewish law, and the more Jewish style of the Jerusalem church and its leader, James the Just, which said you had to actually, like, do good things to be a good person. You may be able to piece together which side “won” by the fact half the New Testament is made up of the writings of Paul, and James only has one brief letter, which had to fight to be included.’

‘… James is the most Jewish book in the New Testament, focusing on fulfilling Christ’s message with the fruits of one’s actions rather than the more Pauline message of seeking redemption and eternal life. This Jewish approach to Christianity soon withered on the vine in favor of Paul’s more universal style, which combined with the fact the letter was not attributed to one of the Twelve Apostles led to the Epistle of James to be neglected for centuries until authors like St. Augustine stumped for its canonicity. Martin Luther, of course, considered it of secondary canonical rank for suggesting faith alone isn’t enough. This despite the small fact James the Just was Jesus’s brother.’

Most importantly, the Book of James unlike a number of Pauline epistles, is a completely unique corpus in the New Testament and clearly original material.  So much so, that Martin Luther detested the book and would have exorcised it from the Bible, should he have been able to do so – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. For it did not support the Pauline theology he favoured and taught. 

Martin Luther venomously displayed his displeasure towards the Book of James: ‘In the first place it is flatly against St.Paul and all the rest of scripture in ascribing justification to works… This fault proves that this epistle is not the work of any apostle… But this James does nothing more than drive to the law and its works. He calls the law a “law of liberty”, though Paul calls it a law of slavery, of wrath, of death, and of sin’ – Luthers Works, Volume 35, pages 395-398. 

Comparing the deceitful fallaciousness of brother Paul versus the elementary honesty of James the Just:

Paul: “So this is what we are saying. A person becomes right with God if they trust in Christ. It is not because they do the good things which God’s Law teaches” – Romans 3:28, Easy English Bible.

James: “So you see how God accepts someone as right with himself. That person must not only believe in God. He must also do good things to show that he has faith” – James 2:24, Easy English Bible.

1 Peter

Unfortunately, bearing the above in mind about James, the same cannot be necessarily said about the two epistles of Peter. 

Peter: 1 ‘Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, 

To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you.’

The author is direct and to the point in his opening salutation. Just, that he is an apostle of Jesus Christ. From what we learn of him in the gospels and acts, this sounds like Peter and his manner of speaking. It is interesting that he addresses a vast area – like James – and that much of it is the same region that encompasses Paul’s ministry. Peter also acknowledges the scriptural doctrine of predestination in the lives of true believers. 

Peter: 3 ‘Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5 who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.’ 

Some think Peter is referring to the false doctrine of being ‘born again’ though he is referring to being begotten as in conception and being ‘born’ again as the Greek word implies. Peter then makes clear that the resurrection is yet future and the culmination of the being ‘begotten again’ process – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. A little like a caterpillar which forms a chrysalis and is subsequently reborn a butterfly. 

This Peter speaks of trials, being tested and being holy. There are a number of red flags. The first is where he says, 10 ‘Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.’ 

Oh no, there is that Pauline word, grace. Is 1 Peter a later book, written after Paul’s letters? Secondly, it is not Christ’’s spirit but the Holy Spirit from the Father which dwells in a true believer. 

The third warning bell on the authenticity of 1 Peter is: 12 ‘It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.’ The last statement is remarkably similar to the misleading verse in the spurious, Book of Ephesians: “… and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, who created all things, so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places’ – Ephesians 3:9-10. 

The fourth red flag in chapter one is where Peter says: 17 ‘And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds…’ Yet it is the Father, who has given all judgement to Christ and judges no one Himself – John 5:22, 27. 

In chapter two, Peter – increasingly looking like an imposter – writes his fifth red flag in writing with worrying similarity to the words written in the third chapter of the spurious letter to Titus. 

Peter: 13 ‘Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. 17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor. 18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. 25 For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.’

Peter the Imposter’s instructions are remarkably like Paul VII and the use of the word overseer or bishop in relation to Christ may hint at a later, specious letter not written by the Apostle Peter at all. We have already noted the striking similarity of chapter three with various Pauline and pseudo-Pauline epistles, regarding the subjugation of women. 

Peter the Imposter continues: 18 ‘For Christ… 19 … went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20 because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ…’

Peter raises a further red flag regarding baptism, as baptism washes away sin and makes us clean; it is Christ’s shed blood which purifies our conscience – Psalm 51:2, Acts 22:16, Hebrews 9:14; 10:22. 

Jude also writes of the Watcher angels: 6 ‘And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day…’ There are further similarities between Jude and the so called Peter’s epistles; arousing suspicion of one copying from the other. 

In chapter four this Peter, like Paul mentions Christ’s return being sooner rather than later: 7 ‘The end of all things is at hand… 10 As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace…12 Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial [the tribulation] when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?’

Chapter five: 1 ‘So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: 4 And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. 8 Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. 9 Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world.’ 

Peter referring to himself as an elder is puzzling, as he travelled the known world preaching the gospel as one sent forth – the meaning of the word apostle. He did not reside permanently in Jerusalem – like James – or in Galilee, to be viewed as an elder or deacon. The references to a brotherhood, hearkens to Paul continually addressing the ‘brothers’ and reminds of some secret or sinister monastic order like the Jesuits or even just simply the priesthood.   

Peter the Imposter: 12 ‘By Silvanus, a faithful brother as I regard him, I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it. 13 She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings, and so does Mark, my son. 14 Greet one another with the kiss of love. Peace to all of you who are in Christ.’ 

This is an interesting closing for it includes Silas (Paul IV), the possible author of 2 Thessalonians and it’s remarkable prophecy about the man of lawlessness (Paul). Silas as conjectured, perhaps not only lost fervour for Paul but leant towards Peter as time passed. The author intimates that Silas was involved in the epistle. 

Catholic Answers: ‘Pope Benedict [XVI]… identifies different possible roles that Sylvanis may have played regarding the epistle: 

  1. He may have been the messenger who carried it to its recipients. 
  2. He may have served as the secretary or editor of the letter who polished Peter’s Greek for him. 
  3. He may have served as Peter’s agent in writing the letter on his behalf.’

As Silas is the chief suspect for the authorship of 2 Thessalonians and an eventual opponent of Paul, it then carries a measure of plausibility that he would a. side with Peter and b. entertain involvement in a letter credited to the senior apostle.

Commentators suggest Peter is referencing spiritual Babylon – rather than ancient Babylon – and thus the congregation in Rome. If Peter is speaking of an individual, why keep her identity secret? Or, is it a coded reference of some sort for the brotherhood? 

The ever present John Mark (1 Peter 5:13) appears – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. As Mark is Peter’s son and either the nephew or cousin of Barnabas; we now have an understanding of why Paul did not wish to travel with Mark the son of Peter; with whom he did not see eye to eye, respect, or get along with. 

While there is much in Peter (the Imposter’s) first letter to commend it as perhaps authentic, there are enough doctrinal red flags to create serious doubt or at least question whether it has been edited. We will return to 1 Peter after investigating 2 Peter. 

2 Peter

The Most Controversial Books That Were Included In The Bible, Benito Cereno, 2020: 

You’d think the most controversial book in the entire biblical canon is Revelation thanks to its… hard to interpret apocalyptic visions, but there was another book that was even more contentious: the Second Epistle of Peter.

Bible.org… “The history of the acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon has all the grace of a college hazing event. This epistle was examined, prayed over, considered, and debated more than any other New Testament book- including Revelation.”

‘First, the language of 2 Peter didn’t match that of 1 Peter… as closely as the church fathers would have liked. Next, 2 Peter has significant textual overlap with the Epistle of Jude, itself hotly debated. Finally, the name Peter… had already been applied to numerous heretical texts, such as the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter, and so the fathers were hesitant to accept 2 Peter without certainty. Nevertheless, while most modern scholarship says 2 Peter is definitely not by the St. Peter, the church accepted its apostolic authority, though early Protestant Reformers were still skeptical.’

Anonymous Peter: 1 ‘Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, 

To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: 2 May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.’

This opening is in contrast to 1 Peter. Why would Peter identify himself differently? Plus his claim of ‘equal standing with ours’ is haughty and condescending. The salutation while direct, lacks any humility, kindness or warmth. 

The remainder of chapter one has a different tone from that of 1 Peter. More akin to Paul strangely enough. The author of 2 Peter is clearly not the same person as 1 Peter. Chapter two contains ideas and expressions directly lifted it would appear from the Book of Jude – written by the brother of James and half brother of Jesus.  

Anonymous Peter: 1 ‘But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. 3 And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.’

Jude: 4 ‘For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.’

Anonymous Peter: 4 ‘For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; 5 if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked 8 (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard); 9 then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, 10 and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority.’

Verse five is a redundant repetition of verse twenty in chapter two of 1 Peter.

Jude: 6 ‘And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day – 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.’ 

Anonymous Peter: ‘Bold and willful, they do not tremble as they blaspheme the glorious ones, 11 whereas angels, though greater in might and power, do not pronounce a blasphemous judgment against them before the Lord. 12 But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant, will also be destroyed in their destruction, 13 suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing. They count it pleasure to revel in the daytime. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their deceptions, while they feast with you. 14 They have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin. They entice unsteady souls. They have hearts trained in greed. Accursed children!’ 

The author of 2 Peter is uttering a curse – contrary to scripture – like Paul.

Jude: 8 ‘Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones. 9 But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” 10 But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively. 12 These are hidden reefs at your love feasts, as they feast with you without fear…’

Anonymous Peter: 15 ‘Forsaking the right way, they have gone astray. They have followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved gain from wrongdoing, 16 but was rebuked for his own transgression; a speechless donkey spoke with human voice and restrained the prophet’s madness.’

Jude: 11 ‘Woe to them! For they walked in the way of Cain and abandoned themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam’s error and perished in Korah’s rebellion.’ 

Anonymous Peter: 17 ‘These are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm. For them the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved. 18 For, speaking loud boasts of folly, they entice by sensual passions of the flesh those who are barely escaping from those who live in error.’ 

Jude: 12 ‘… shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted; 13 wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.’ 

The final chapter of 2 Peter has its own peculiarities in addition to plagiarism. 

Anonymous Peter: 1 ‘This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, 2 that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, 3 knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires.’ 

Jude: 17 ‘But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. 18 They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” 

Anonymous Peter: 15 ‘And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.’

The truth is simple and plain so that a child can understand. If scripture is difficult to comprehend then its source is not from God but rather the Adversary. The following quote sums up this living law. 

Anonymous Peter: 17 ‘You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.’

This Peter in accentuating his second letter, focusses needless attention on an already highly suspicious epistle in the first place. The nail in the coffin in giving the letter any credibility at all is saying Paul is a ‘beloved brother.’ The use of the word brother, for a fellow ‘apostle’ of inspired scripture would have been a slight of the highest magnitude.

The real Peter would not have viewed the heretical Paul in this way or condoned him publicly in a letter. The wording and apologetic excuse offered for Paul’s teachings just doesn’t sound like the Peter we know in the gospels or early Acts. This is clearly an author with an agenda to defend Pauline doctrine. The irony, is that Paul’s theology regarding the law is the ‘error of lawless people.’ 

In the non-canonical Epistle of Peter to James, we gain vital and profound insight into Peter’s feelings regarding Paul; the interpretation of the Law; and the ‘commission’ to the Gentiles. 

“Knowing, my brother, your eager desire after that which is for the advantage of us all, I beg and beseech you not to communicate to any one of the Gentiles the books of my preachings which I sent to you, nor to any one of our own tribe before trial; but if any one has been proved and found worthy, then to commit them to him… for if it be not so done, our word of truth will be rent into many opinions. And this I know, not as being a prophet, but as already seeing the beginning of this very evil. 

For some among the Gentiles have rejected my legal preaching, attaching themselves to certain lawless and trifling preaching of the man who is my enemy.

And these things some have attempted… to transform my words by certain various interpretations, in order to the dissolution of the law; as though I also myself were of such a mind… But if, while I am still alive, they dare thus to misrepresent me, how much more will those who shall come after me dare to do so!

For such a thing [would be] to act in opposition to the law of God which was spoken by Moses, and was borne witness to by our Lord in respect of its eternal continuance; for thus he spoke: ‘The heavens and the earth shall pass away, but one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law.’

Anonymous Peter’s exhortation to grow in grace and knowledge is a sound one, though if one is saved by grace, how does one grow in more grace? If there is serious doubt on the authenticity of 1 Peter, there is sadly virtually none on the bogus letter of 2 Peter. Added to this is that 2 Peter could be a much later work in the vein of the letter to Titus and perhaps also written by someone like Paul VII.

Following on from the connection made between Silas (Paul IV) as being the possible author of 2 Thessalonians. A commentator online believes there is a connection between 1 Peter and 1 Thessalonians – unanimously attributed to Paul – and that both books could be the work of Silas, no less. 

‘A comparative analysis of 1 Peter 4 and 1 Thessalonians 4 reveals striking similarities: 

1. Call to avoid hedonistic passions: (1 Peter 4:2-3, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5).
2. Association with gentile behavior: Both accounts link this type of behavior to the practices of gentiles (1 Peter 4:3, 1 Thessalonians 4:5).
3. Warning of judgment: Both passages warn of God’s judgment for those who persist in sinful behavior (1 Thessalonians 4;6, 1 Peter 4:5).
4. End times themes: Both accounts touch on eschatological topics (1 Thessalonians 4:16, 1 Peter 4:7).
5. Reference to deceased believers: Both passages mention those who have already died and how the gospel was preached to them (1 Thessalonians 4:13-14, 1 Peter 4:6).
6. Call to love one another: (1 Thessalonians 4:9, 1 Peter 4:8). 

Silvanus is named in both letters. It’s reasonable to assume that Silvanus played a role in authoring/influencing both texts. The convergence of these themes and motifs within a relatively short section of both letters suggests that Silvanus, as a potential co-author or influencer, may have contributed to the composition of these passages. This would explain the similarities in style, structure, and content between 1 Peter 4 and 1 Thessalonians 4.’

Conversely, if Paul did write 1 Thessalonians, it means a sympathiser of Pauline doctrine wrote 1 Peter and certainly not Peter the Apostle. If Silas wrote the contrasting 2 Thessalonians, it is unlikely he authored a book bearing similarity to the one he was opposing, so-to-speak. 

Encyclopaedia: ‘The vast majority of biblical scholars think the two epistles do not share the same author, due to wide differences in Greek style and views between the two letters. Most scholars today conclude that Peter the Apostle was the author of neither of the two epistles that are attributed to him.’ 

This writer concurs, though not because of Acts 4:13. ‘Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated [G62 – agrammatos: unlearned, unlettered, illiterate], common [G2399 – idiotes: unskilled in the arts, ignorant] men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus.’

Peter was not of low intelligence or a simpleton; but rather, an uneducated man in that he did not have a formal education like Paul for example. Remember, Luke favoured Paul, so his less than complimentary choice of words means little if he merely meant illiterate and ignorant. The truth is that Peter was unschooled in academia and an ordinary man, yet he and John spoke powerfully and effectively as learned citizens. What scholars fail to realise or mention is that the apostles had time to learn Hebrew and Greek over the couple of decades they travelled, so that when they composed their respective gospels and epistles; their command of written Greek would probably be of the level required to justify their claim as original authors of the work assigned to them. 

Important points which undermine the veracity of 1 and 2 Peter, as listed by Bible Authenticity: 

A. ‘Nero’s persecution of Christians in Rome (Tacitus, Annals, 15.44) set a precedent for Roman officials in all the provinces to consider Christians as criminals. First Peter includes several references to the persecution of Christians outside Rome (1 Peter 1:6; 2:15; 3:15-16; 4:12-13; 5:8-9). Since all scholars agree that Peter died during Nero’s reign (A.D. 64-68; cf Eusebius, History, 2.25), and since persecution outside of Rome began after Nero’s reign, many New Testament commentators hold that both 1 and 2 Peter (but, especially so 2 Peter) are pseudonymous works (falsely attributed to the apostle Peter).’ 

Agreed.

B. ‘The enormous geographical area represented by the audi­ence addressed in 1 Peter 1:1 (for example, believers in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia) suggests to many scholars that these epistles were not composed until well after the 60s… enough time would have had to elapse after Paul’s missionary journeys to allow for the growth of Christianity in these areas (especially since we have no record that Paul even visited Pontus, Cappadocia or Bithynia).

Perhaps, though if authentic, they still could have been written during the 60s CE.

C. First and Second Peter both demonstrate a refined vocabulary and rich literary style. Since Peter and John are called “unschooled, ordinary men” in Acts 4:13… it [is] unlikely that Peter would have possessed the skill to write these epistles.’

Non-argument.

D. ‘The Greek of 1 Peter is much more polished than that of 2 Peter, and there are striking vocabulary differences between 1 and 2 Peter. Therefore, critics claim that each letter must have a different writer.’

Agreed. 

E. ‘Some scholars claim that the false teaching referred to in 2 Peter is a form of Gnosticism that emerged decades after the apostle Peter’s lifetime, which, if true, would mean that Peter could not have written the letter.’

Added to this is the fact that Titus appears to be of later authorship as well and possessing a similar jarring tone that links it to – 2 Peter and its author – the unknown Paul VII.   

Similarities in vocabulary and expressions, showing the author of 2 Peter didn’t just copy the Book of Jude but also 1 Peter – NAB unless otherwise stated.

Identical opening salutation: “May grace and peace be yours in abundance” – 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Peter 1:2.

Precious: “With precious blood of Christ” – 1 Peter 1:19. “The precious and very great promises” – 2 Peter 1:4. 

Witness/Eyewitness: “As a fellow… witness to the sufferings of Christ” – 1 Peter 5:1. “We were eyewitness of his majesty” – 2 Peter 1:16, NIV. 

Grace in conclusion of letter: “… testifying that this is the true grace of God” – 1 Peter 5:12. “… grow in grace… of our Lord Jesus Christ” – 2 Peter 3:18. 

Reference to the same Old Testament event: Noah and the ark – 1 Peter 3:18-21 – and the flood – 2 Peter 2:5. 

Specific words used in 2 Peter and Peter’s speeches in the Book of Acts: 

Obtained: 2 Peter 1:1, NKJV and Acts 1:17, NKJV. 

Godliness: 2 Peter 1:3, 6, 7; 3:11, NASB and Acts 3:12, HCSB. 

Reward of unrighteousness: 2 Peter 2:13, 15, LSV and Acts 1:18, LSV 

Thus, both books ascribed to the Apostle Peter appear to be false attestations. Added to this is the fact that each book is written by a different author; with 2 Peter being either based upon or copied from 1 Peter and Jude. The similarities between 1 Thessalonians and 1 Peter, mean Paul IV (Silas) could be a contender for being Peter the imposter also. Even the partial similarity between Titus and 2 Peter lends serious consideration that Paul VII and anonymous Peter are one and the same person.

Now focussing on the three epistles of John and either their joint or separate authorship.

1 John

John: 1 ‘That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life – 2 the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us…’

The subject matter reminds of the opening in the Gospel of John. Where James ignores speaking about Christ, John keeps Christ central in his letter. In chapter two, John addresses believers as his little children, perhaps indicating John is advanced in years and thus a later date for the letter. John packs a punch with the serious nature of the content beginning in chapter two.  

John: 1 ‘My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him…’ 

This is a pointed accusation. Is it in reference to Paul’s theology taking hold in numerous congregations? 

John: 7 ‘Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard.’

“You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself…” – Leviticus 19:18.

John : 8 ‘At the same time, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining. 9 Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. 10 Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling.’

John is reiterating what Christ spoke and what John recorded in his gospel account: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” – John 13:34-35. 

Christ revealed the two commandments which incorporate the whole Law of God: “when the Pharisees heard that [Jesus] had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets” – Matthew 22:34-40.

John: 15 ‘Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world – the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life – is not from the Father but is from the world. 17 And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever. 

18 Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour’ – 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12.

John : 19 ‘They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.’ 

Was Paul’s legacy and his entourage of minster-deacons included in this declaration by John? Who else could John be referring? – I John 4:1.*

John: 20 ‘But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. 21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.’ 

John 18:38: Pilate said to [Christ], “What is truth?”

John: 22 ‘Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. 24 Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is the promise that he made to us – eternal life.’

Thus any religion, whether it be Judaism, Islam or Satanism for example, which denies not just Christ as a prophet and a human man; but as the Son of God and mediator between the Father and humankind as the Messiah, is… the spirit of antichrist.  

John: 26 ‘I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you. 27 But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie – just as it has taught you, abide in him.’ 

This is a most profound statement, of which only a small handful of humans have understood over the past two thousand years. For it is the Holy Spirit which reveals truth to a true believer within the body of Christ. While a believer has to study, meditate and pray on an issue of belief, it is the Holy Spirit which guides towards understanding spiritual truth and the true doctrine of the scriptures of which Jude commends.  

John : 28 ‘And now, little children, abide in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not shrink from him in shame at his coming. 29 If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born [G1080 –  gennao: begotten, conceived] of him.’

John is showing his advanced age again in hoping Christ’s return is near. While the Greek word can mean to ‘bring forth’ or be ‘born’, we know from other passages (1 John 3:2) and contexts that John does not intend to be born but rather begotten – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. For it was John who recorded the revealing discussion between Christ and Nicodemus on what being born again really means – John 3:1-8. 

After two chapters it is clear that a. the author of 1 John is in all probability the same John who wrote the gospel – unless it is a forgery of the highest calibre; and b. John is the apostle of the same name and the brother of James, for doctrinally, his words are true. In chapter three, John speaks of sin, love and keeping the commandments of Jesus.

 John: 18 ‘Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth. 19 By this we shall know that we are of the truth and reassure our heart before him… 22 and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. 24 Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us.’

John continues speaking about Christ’s love for us and how we show love to others in chapter four. 

John: 1 ‘Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false* prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. 4 Little children, you are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. 5 They are from the world; therefore they speak from the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error.’

John warns about deceiving spirits and those people who teach error in Christ’s name. Remember, John was writing anywhere between 90 to 98 CE, when he died. Enough decades had passed after Christ’s death and particularly the passing of Paul, for a false gospel about Christ to spread. A gospel not about the Kingdom of God, but about Christ himself. A gospel not about bringing humanity to the Father, but a gospel proclaiming Christ was God and had been correctly, human and incorrectly, also divine while on Earth. 

In the final chapter, John continues in his endeavour to combat antinomianism: a salvation by faith and divine grace alone, without the need to perform good works based on the moral code of the ten commandments. 

John: 1 ‘Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been [begotten] of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been [begotten] of him. 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. 

6 This is he who came by water and blood – Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.’

The above verses in some translations say the following instead: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” 

Johnny Lyndall: ‘The part in bold is not in most translations (most put it in a footnote) because it is not in a single Greek manuscript that has ever been found. It is only found written in Latin in the margins in copies of some more recent manuscripts. Erasmus, who in 1517 compiled the first official Greek New Testament based on the best manuscripts they had at the time did not include it in the first and second editions. But because of pressure from the church and the Emperor (and who knows what other threats), he finally added it to his third edition. Actually its addition strays from John’s point of trying to show that Jesus is fully human, that He came in the flesh and had a human body.’

John: 13 ‘I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life. 14 And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. 15 And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests that we have asked of him. 20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. 21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols.’ 

John confirms he is writing the letter and that true believers understand the truth about Christ and about the one true God. Do you the reader truly understand? While christians profess to understand Jesus was a fleshly human while on Earth as the appointed Messiah, they in the same breath believe in the error of the Trinity. Which holds that Christ was God prior to being born a human and that once resurrected, he became God again, all the while somehow being a ‘divine’ human as the Christ. Christ was not divine; is not divine; was not a divine being who became human; and was not a divine human being. Christ represents the one true God and has become through adoption and the resurrection, his Son. The same process is being offered to humans in stages. 

On Earth, Jesus was fully human as Apollos in the Book of Hebrews states, for he had to be just like us, otherwise he couldn’t be our Saviour. Granted, Christ was given the Holy Spirit without measure to help him achieve perfection and holy angels to protect him. That said, his burden and struggle for our salvation is beyond comprehension and his incredible sacrifice of love offered to humanity, plummets the depths of understanding. 

Verse twenty-one seems strangely out of place after the natural ending of verse twenty. Perhaps it was tacked on later or the beginning of a new idea, where the rest has been removed for some reason? Oddly, the verse has a correlation with a verse by Paul. “Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry” – 1 Corinthians 10:14. 

It is the opinion of this writer that 1 John is a letter written by the same John as the gospel and the Book of Revelation. Not another John, but the apostle of Jesus Christ – the one he loved. 1 John stands out as a true testimony in stark contrast to the palpably bogus 2 Peter and the almost equally dubious 1 Peter. While the Book of James stands as a legitimate work, the question of its piecemeal content and it being an amalgamation of James’ genuine sentiments hold a valid argument. 

The central theme of this letter is the Apostle John insisting ‘that [his] apostolic testimony trumps any reinterpretation of Jesus by those who were not commissioned by him and who were far removed from personal knowledge of him.’ 

After reading the five chapters of 1 John in their entirety, this writer was reminded of the power and strength in this short book and how John through his writing reveals his deep conversion, conviction, goodness, kindness and above all, his love.

2 John

The Most Controversial Books That Were Included In The Bible, Benito Cereno, 2020: 

‘There is what could be charitably called an overabundance of… [Johns] in the New Testament. There’s John the Baptist, John the Apostle, John the Evangelist (i.e., the [supposed] writer of the Gospel of John), John the Elder (possibly the author of the Epistles of John), and John of Patmos [same person as the apostle] (the author of Revelation). With the exception of John the Baptist… any combination of the other Johns might or might not be the same person. In fact, the traditional view held by much of mainstream Christianity is all the non-Baptist Johns are the same… But arriving at that consensus was not without controversy, and it made the canonicity of the second and third epistles of John questionable…’

‘According to the Encyclopedia of the Bible, the books of 2 and 3 John reference being written by an Elder; likewise, the church father Papias claimed to be a disciple of a certain John the Elder. The historian Eusebius argued John the Elder was not the same person as John the Apostle, thereby calling the apostolic authority of 2 and 3 John into question. The fact these letters were extremely short and generally unrelated to universal issues of the church was also a cause for concern. After the fourth century, however, general consensus agreed on their apostolic origin.’

The second letter attributed to John is not hard to fathom as being inauthentic. 

Unknown John: 1 ‘The elder to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth, and not only I, but also all who know the truth, 2 because of the truth that abides in us and will be with us forever: 3 Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father’s Son, in truth and love.’

The opening salutation is out of place, because we know from the Gospel of John and 1 John, that John just launches right in, without all the circuitous greetings as is the habit of someone like Paul. Or in this case, a forger. Even in the Book of Revelation, John refuses to speak of himself in the first person. In complete antithesis to Paul say, who must have set records in the use of I, me and my.  

Unknown John: 4 ‘I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father. 5 And now I ask you, dear lady – not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning – that we love one another. 6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it. 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. 9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. 

12 Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete. 13 The children of your elect sister greet you.’

This letter is obviously not written by the Apostle John, for a. it contains opening and closing salutations; b. it redundantly repeats almost verbatim what was said more eloquently in 1 John; c. John was too old and likely incarcerated to be able to visit personally; and d. the use of dear lady and sister are not John’s vernacular and appear a later reference to the growing Universal Church and not to the true church of God in his day. 

3 John

The third letter attributed to John is so clearly not from John that it is a very poor joke indeed by whomever decreed it should be included in the holy canon of the New Testament. The reader can read for themselves the almost laughable clues it was written by someone mainly mimicking Paul and John a little. Let’s call him John Paul. 

John Paul: 1 ‘The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth. 

2 Beloved, I pray that all may go well with you and that you may be in good health, as it goes well with your soul. 3 For I rejoiced greatly when the brothers came and testified to your truth, as indeed you are walking in the truth. 4 I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth. 

Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are, 6 who testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God. 7 For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. 8 Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth. 

I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. 10 So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church.’ 

Encyclopaedia: ‘If 3 John was written by John the Apostle… it is strange that Diotrephes would oppose him since the apostles were highly respected in the early church.’ Due to the Pauline nature of the letter, one could probably think correctly that Diotrephes was challenging the false gospel of the brotherhood. 

John Paul: 11 ‘Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God. 12 Demetrius has received a good testimony from everyone, and from the truth itself. We also add our testimony, and you know that our testimony is true.’

According to the Apostolic Constitutions VII.46.9, Demetrius was ordained by John as bishop of Philadelphia – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

John Paul: 13 ‘I had much to write to you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink. 14 I hope to see you soon, and we will talk face to face. 15 Peace be to you. The friends greet you. Greet the friends, each by name.’ 

This letter is so Pauline, one can almost hear Paul’s written voice as one reads. This is a masterful forgery of Paul say, though a woeful attempt of John. Who in their right mind thought this could be palmed off as the third letter of John? Rather as a letter of a ‘Paul’ to Gaius, it should have been simply called, Gaius. Perhaps Gaius – or Demetrius – is a candidate as an author, though as a follower of Paul, why say it is a letter from John. Unless it was to confuse the Gentile followers of John in Asia Minor. 

Even with the differences, the similarity of the two letters may indicate Unknown John and John Paul are the same person. The focus on Gaius at the beginning of the third letter places him in the spotlight as the possible author. Paul did not baptise many people, though Gaius was one – 1 Corinthians 1:14. Sonny Emerson: ‘Early church tradition suggests something significant about Gaius. Some believe John might have chosen him as the bishop of the Pergamum church.’ This is unlikely for Gaius was a close friend of Paul – Acts 19:29; 20:4, Romans 16:23.

The first Book of John ‘is written in a simple style, without syntactical flourishes, and makes frequent use of asyndeton, where related thoughts are placed next to one another without conjunctions. In contrast to the linear style used in the Pauline epistles, biblical scholar Ernest DeWitt Burton suggests that John’s thought “moves in circles”, forming a slowly advancing sequence of thought’ – Online Encyclopaedia. 

Certain critical scholars maintain that the Gospel of John and 1 John were written by two different people. ‘For instance, 1 John often uses a demonstrative pronoun at the beginning of a sentence, then a particle or conjunction, followed by an explanation or definition of the demonstrative at the end of the sentence – a stylistic technique which is not used in the gospel. The author of the epistle also “uses the conditional sentence in a variety of rhetorical figures which are unknown to the gospel”. This indicates, at the very least, the linguistic characteristics changed over time.’

I would concur with the last sentence. For the gospel was a. written well before the first epistle, possibly a couple of decades; b. John was an older man and as older people realise, one changes in a variety of ways with age; and c. the letter has a personal, entreating tone, whereas the gospel is a report of historical events. Thus the points raised support a different approach not necessarily a different person.

 That said, most critical scholars conclude that John the Apostle wrote none of the works accredited to him. Instead, they favour a certain John the Evangelist. Ironiocally, they may well be the same person. 

Accomplished biblical scholar Bart Erhman – who provides logical insight on the Pauline epistles – presents a fair assessment of 1 John, though at the end overthinks the matter with an incorrect time frame to arrive at an erroneous conclusion in this writer’s opinion. 

Forgery and Counterforgery, Bart Erhman: ‘In this case the author is not claiming simply to be a member of the entire Christian community who has “heard… seen… and handled” the incarnate word of life. He is a part of a smaller community that has had these tangible experiences involving Christ, and he is relating them to his readers. 

To begin with, that is evident from the graphic nature of the language the community may have “seen… and heard” Christ in a metaphorical sense; but they certainly did not “handle” him. As Brown has observed: “clearly the author is claiming participation in a physical contact with Jesus.” Moreover, and yet more compelling, the author makes a clear differentiation here between himself and his readers, between “we” and “you”: whereas “we have heard… have seen… have looked upon … and handled with our hands” (v. 1), it is to “you” that the author has proclaimed these things (v. 2). 

Thus only some believers have been in real, physical contact with Christ, and can attest to his physical existence as one who could be observed, heard, and handled. And the author includes himself among this select group. In other words, the author is claiming to have been among the inner group of Jesus’ followers who can bear witness to his real, physical nature. Except that he cannot be. He is an author living and writing long after the fact. In asserting that he was an eyewitness to the life of Jesus, he is advancing a false authorial claim. This then is a forgery, a book whose author claims to be someone other than who he is’ – page 422. 

Raymond E Brown in The Community of the Beloved Disciple, presents a case for a tradition of elders who passed along testimony so that 1 John while accurate was actually written after John. Thus as one online comment suggests, ‘the epistles were written by someone who considered them[selves] a “presbyteros” (which means “elder”) because they were of the generation directly after the beloved disciple would’ve lived. 

From this perspective, it’s hard to agree with Ehrman’s analysis’ – agreed. ‘The author never falsely attached a name to their work (like the Pastoral Epistles or 2 Peter) and perhaps, seeing themselves as a “presbyteros”, wrote with a certain level of extra “authority” behind their polemic in a completely earnest way.’ 

Yes, anything but admit the book could be an authentic work by an eye witness who was within the inner circle of the greatest human to have ever lived.

 The language of the second epistle is remarkably similar to 3 John, so that some scholars consider they were composed by the same person. Though the letter’s ‘acknowledgment and rejection of gnostic theology may reveal a later date of authorship than orthodox Christianity claims. The Adherents of gnosticism were most numerous during the second and third centuries.’ Further evidence in support of its fictitious origin is that early ‘church literature contains no mention of the epistle, with the first reference to it appearing in the middle of the third century AD. 

This lack of documentation, though likely due to the extreme brevity of the epistle, caused early church writers to doubt its authenticity until the early 5th century, when it was accepted into the canon along with the other two epistles of John. Third John is the shortest book of the Bible by word count, though 2 John has fewer verses. It is the only New Testament book which does not contain the names “Jesus” or “Christ”.’

There are numerous similarities between 2 John and 3 John; as each follow the format of personal letters indicative of the era. The ‘author self-identifies as “the Presbyter”…  and both deal with themes of hospitality and conflict within the church. They are also extremely similar in length, probably because they were both written to fit on one papyrus sheet. 

3 John is also linguistically similar to… 2 John… Of 99 different words used, 21 are unimportant words like “and” or “the”, leaving 78 significant words. 23 of these do not appear in 1 John or the Gospel of John, of which four are unique to 3 John, one is common to 2 and 3 John, and two are found in both 2 and 3 John… Approximately 30% of the significant words in 3 John do not appear in 1 John or the Gospel, compared to 20% for 2 John. These considerations indicate a close affinity between 2 and 3 John… A minority of scholars, however, argue against common authorship of 2 and 3 John, and Rudolf Bultmann held that 2 John was a forgery based on 3 John. 

The first reference to 3 John is in the middle of the third century; Eusebius says that Origen knew of both 2 and 3 John, however Origen is reported as saying “all do not consider them genuine”. By the end of the fourth century the Presbyter (author of 2 and 3 John) was thought to be a different person than the Apostle John.’

Jude

The Book of Jude is the last and final general epistle. It is a remarkable work and while the 2 Peter author (Paul VII) borrowed heavily from it; is it an authentic letter and was it written by Jude? Personally, Jude is an intriguing book and whether it is what it purports to be or not, it contains gems of information. Consensus is that Jude was the Lord’s half-brother as documented by Clement of Alexandria (150-215 CE) and Eusebius of Caesarea. 

We have quoted substantially from Jude when discussing 2 Peter, so here are the remaining notable verses from the short letter. 

Jude: 1 ‘Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, To those who are called, beloved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ: 2 May mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you. 3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.’ 

The opening greeting reveals Jude is the brother of James, the author of the Book of James – Galatians 1:19. The Bible records Christ had four half brothers and at least two sisters, perhaps more. His brothers were James, Joseph, Simon and Jude – Matthew 13:55. James the second oldest brother after Jesus and Jude the youngest of the five brothers. 

Zondervan: ‘It’s worth mentioning that neither James nor Jude call themselves the “brother of the Lord,” the title others would give to them later. There is also no evidence that Jesus’ family made use of their relationship to Jesus. Instead, by calling themselves slaves, they use a title of personal self-deprecation. Free people would have avoided this. But combining “slave” with “of Jesus the Anointed One” turns this title of self-deprecation into a title of authority – because they are sharing in Jesus authority. In doing so, Jude makes it clear that he is not operating under the authority of the emperor or another high official – Roman or Jewish. He is serving an alternative kingdom.’

Verse three is one of the most profound and powerful verses in the scriptures. It discloses that the Way, was being thwarted – by Pauline Christianity – and alerts the reader that the truth has to be searched for. Just like the brethren in Berea who studied the Bible meticulously – Acts 17:11. 

Jude: 5 ‘Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.’ 

Jude confirms that the Lord who spoke with Moses and set the ten plagues on Egypt was none other than the Word, who represented the Father – Exodus 11:1. 

Jude: 9 ‘But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.”

Allegedly, Jude quotes from the apocryphal Testament of Moses (aka Assumption of Moses). Yet the Assumption of Moses is incomplete, missing up to half its text and does not reference the statement in Jude 9.

There are seven verses in the books of Daniel and Revelation which mention the angelic prince, Michael by name. It is Jude who calls him an archangel. The only place to use the word, aside from Paul  – 1 Thessalonians 4:16. 

Jude: 14 ‘It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, 15 to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” 

Jude quotes from the fascinating Book of Enoch. While the holy ones could be referencing angels it could just as well be referring to the Saints – of the first resurrection – who accompany Christ when he returns. Recall, the commission to the apostles was to go the the tribes of Israel and it is the same tribes who are sealed and saved at the time of the end, numbering 144,000 – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Jude: 16 ‘These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own sinful desires; they are loud-mouthed boasters, showing favoritism to gain advantage.’ 

While it is an assumption to presume Jude is thinking about Paul in this instance, who else could he be referring to? Paul undeniably fell into the trap of boasting in self praise and playing favourites to manipulate those serving him. 

Jude: 17 ‘But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. 18 They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” 19 It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. 20 But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life. 22 And have mercy on those who doubt; 23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh.’ 

Jude closes with a powerful pronouncement. Recall verse eighteen was copied by the author of 2 Peter 3:3. Jude like James, does not equate himself as an apostle. He undoubtedly was a servant [deacon] though as an elder in Jerusalem. Jude exhorts to have mercy on those who doubt, like the double minded man written about in James, perhaps? 

All the New Testament books aside from the authentic books (in this writer’s opinion) of Hebrews and Revelation written by Apollos and John respectively, have been addressed – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

Though briefly regarding the Book of Revelation…

The Most Controversial Books That Were Included In The Bible, Benito Cereno, 2020: 

‘… the Book of Revelation… has one of the most contentious paths to canonicity of any book of the Bible… however… the controversy was not about the fact the book is a cryptic enigma… and no one can agree on whether [it’s] a metaphor or not. Instead… Revelation’s road to the canon had a trajectory somewhat opposite of most contentious New Testament books. Some… were met with a lukewarm response that required the Church Fathers to warm up to them.

Revelation, on the other hand, was initially met with an enthusiastic reception, largely thanks to the idea the author of the book was John the Apostle. This… was accepted… until a third century author claimed it to be a forgery by the heretic Cerinthus, and others disagreed with its message of a literal thousand-year reign by Christ on Earth.

Revelation was eventually affirmed as a book given authority by Church Fathers, but many early Protestant leaders like Martin Luther and John Calvin rejected its apostolic and prophetic authenticity, and even today it is the only New Testament book not read in the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church.’

Let’s conclude with the four gospels. As scholars such as Bart Erhman seem to have an invested interest in tearing down almost the entire New Testament, their arguments are not completely convincing. Thus the focus of the following information is on the aspects which indicate who the authors of the four gospels are, rather than who they are not. 

Gospel of John 

Zondervan: ‘The earliest ascription of authorship to John comes from Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (d. AD 156), and from Papias, a contemporary of Polycarp, whose writings survive only as quotations in the later writings of Irenaeus and Eusebius.’

Who Wrote the Four Gospels? James M Rochford: ‘Eusebius (4th century AD, Israel): The gospel was written by “John, the companion of Peter, James, and the other apostles” (Church History 3.34.5).’

Zondervan: ‘Both Polycarp and Papias lived in the greater vicinity of Ephesus in western Asia Minor, the location to which the apostle John is said to have fled at about the time when the Romans destroyed the temple in Jerusalem (AD 70)… There he presumably lived for the rest of his long life, on into the reign of Trajan, the Roman emperor who ruled the empire from AD 98 to 117. 

Irenaeus (AD 175–195), bishop of Lyon, was born in Asia Minor and as a child personally knew Polycarp, who is said to have been appointed bishop of Smyrna by eyewitnesses of the Lord Jesus. Irenaeus says that John, the disciple of the Lord who was with Jesus in the upper room, wrote the gospel of John while living in Ephesus (Haer. 3.1.2).’ 

James M Rochford: ‘Irenaeus: “John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, had himself published a Gospel during his residence in Ephesus in Asia” (Against Heresies 3.1.2; Church History 5.8).’

Zondervan: ‘Even though such sources are subject to the same historical scrutiny as other ancient documents, this is a remarkable chain of historical witnesses – from Irenaeus, to Polycarp, to John himself – enjoyed by no other New Testament book.’ 

Rochford: ‘Ignatius (AD 110, Turkey) quotes John 3:8 (Ignatius Philadelphia 7:1). 

Theophilus of Antioch (AD 165, Turkey) referenced John’s gospel (To Autolyous 2.22). 

Muratorian Fragment (AD 170, Rome): “The fourth gospel is that of John, one of the disciples.” This text states that John’s fellow-disciples exhorted him to write a gospel, and after fasting and prayer, Andrew (Peter’s brother) claimed to receive a revelation that John should write a gospel. 

Tatian’s Diatessaron (AD 170, Syria) included John among the four gospels. 

Tertullian (AD 210, Tunisia, North Africa): “We lay it down as our first position, that the evangelical Testament has apostles for its authors… Of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instill faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it afterwards” (Against Marcion 4.2). Tertullian quoted John’s gospel “freely in his works.” 

Clement of Alexandria (AD 215, Egypt): “John, it is said, used all the time a message which was not written down, and at last took to writing for the following cause. The three gospels which had been written down before were distributed to all including himself; it is said he welcomed them and testified to their truth but said that there was only lacking to the narrative the account of what was done by Christ at first and at the beginning of the preaching… They say accordingly that John was asked to relate in his own gospel the period passed over in silence by the former evangelists” (Church History 3.24.1-13). Clement quoted “at considerable length from almost every chapter of John.” 

… notice the wide testimony given above. These authors stretched from Israel to Turkey to Rome to Syria to France to North Africa to Egypt! How could these authors have all conspired to get the correct name for this gospel? D.A. Carson states that the external evidence for Johannine authorship is “virtually unanimous.” Even critics of John’s authorship still consider the external evidence to be “formidable.” In fact, one critic writes, “Of any external evidence to the contrary that could be called cogent I am not aware.” 

The Book of John itself provides a plethora of evidence that it was John who wrote the gospel bearing his name. 

Rochford: ‘At the very least, the author was “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 21:24). And he was “an identifiable figure” and “someone about whom a rumor could circulate.” Otherwise, there would be no use in adding this rumor in John 21:23 about him living until Jesus’ return. Thus, the gospel’s “first readers must have known his name.” He is the same person who wrote the gospel, because he wrote, “This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and wrote these things” (John 21:24), and earlier he wrote, “Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” (John 20:30-31). In both cases, the term “written” or “wrote” applies to the entire book… 

Furthermore, he claims to be an eyewitness. At the beginning of the gospel, he writes, “the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). Later, at the end of the gospel, he writes, “He who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe” (John 19:35). 

Places where the Beloved Disciple is mentioned increase in vivid details (John 1:35-40; 13:23-26; 20:1-10; 21:7; also 18:15-16). 

  • The author was an apostle, because he is found at the Last Supper (John 13:23) and only the “twelve” apostles were at the Last Supper (Mark 14:17). 
  • The fact that the author was fishing with the disciples (John 21) points to John of Zebedee, who was a fisherman (Luke 5:3; Mark 1:20). 
  • Peter, Thomas, Nathaniel, Philip, and Judas are mentioned (which rules them out as the author). 
  • James of Zebedee cannot be the author because he died too early (Acts 12:2; ~AD 41-44; compare with John 21:23). 
  • John is the only gospel to call “John the Baptist” simply “John” (John 1:6). Carson comments, “The simplest explanation is that John the son of Zebedee is the one person who would not feel it necessary to distinguish the other John from himself.” 
  • John of Zebedee was one of Jesus’ “inner three” disciples who followed him most closely. So it would be likely to see him identified as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.”

Sovereign Jesus: ‘Having demonstrated that John wrote the fourth gospel, and was an eyewitness of the events about which he wrote, we now see that he becomes a witness for the authorship of the Synoptic Gospels, a connecting link in the chain between his time and that of the Synoptics. As Chapman points out, John assumes that his readers are familiar with the earlier Gospels… In each of the Synoptic Gospels he refers to incidents they relate and adds more details; so that, “In some passages St John’s wording seems to show that he had all the three Synoptic Gospels before him” – Chapman 1944, pages 36-37. 

But while there are similarities between the Synoptics and John, there are also differences. One way to account for them (not that they should all be alike as they were never meant to be) is that the Synoptics concentrate on the Galilean ministry whereas John focuses on the Jerusalem ministry, with the Synoptics’ emphasis on the parables as opposed to John’s focus on the dialogues and discourses. Guthrie (2002, page 1022) suggests that one way to account for the most difficult of the differences, the chronology of the passion events, is the possible use of different calendars by John and the Synoptics, “but we do not know enough to arrive at a completely satisfying answer”.  And this can be applied to many of the other alleged discrepancies between the gospels.’

The answer to the riddle of the chronology for the final supper, the crucifixion, Passover and the resurrection; can be explained by the simple fact that a biblical day begins at sunrise and not at sunset as kept by the Jews today – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy

Sovereign Jesus: ‘It must be admitted, though, that while the evidence points to John (and Matthew, Mark and Luke for each of their gospels) as the author, it is not as conclusive as if John had written his name at the beginning… and this was not uncommon. For example, the Roman historian Livy doesn’t identify himself as the author of his History, neither does Polybius identify himself as the writer of “The Rise of the Roman Empire”; nor does Julius Caesar identify himself as the author of “The Gallic Wars”, but he does speak of himself in the third person. Yet we have no hesitation in accepting that each of these authors wrote the histories attributed to them; so why is there a problem with accepting the authorship of the gospels as being written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? 

If you were to cast doubt on the authorship of the aforementioned secular histories, people would think you must have come down in the last shower; yet there is a long history of so-called theologians who question every jot and tittle of the gospels – indeed, the whole Bible – and deny their authenticity because they don’t have a positive identification attached to them. 

I suggest that the real reason unbelievers, liberals, ex-Christians, atheists, and skeptics reject the gospels is that the authors were committed to Jesus; they recorded what they saw, in the cases of Matthew and John; Mark wrote what Peter saw; and Luke wrote what disciples and other eye-witnesses saw. Unbelievers reject the gospels because the gospels are religious. They think that this discounts them from being legitimate. They call the bible a religious text and therefore dismiss it as being a second-rate writing not to be taken seriously, somewhere in between the realms of fantasy and poetry… 

But just because the gospel writers had religious and spiritual aims or were committed to Jesus doesn’t mean they invented or misrepresented what they saw and heard. And a Christian worldview doesn’t disqualify a person from being a competent or honest writer. There is no reason to doubt the integrity of the gospel writers. Luke, for example, states his aim in the same way that a secular historian of the time did, and this aim was to present a carefully researched account of the divine Son of God. And when we read his Acts of the Apostles, it has the same feel as if we’re reading a classical history style-wise, and is filled with obvious touches of authenticity. The shipwreck, for example, is full of details that only an eyewitness would think of writing, and is so vividly related, with so many details unselfconsciously described, that it could only have been written by Luke, the one who was there. 

With all this in mind, it is important that we know when John wrote his Gospel. The consensus among conservative scholars is that it was written around 90 AD, shortly before he died. However, Dr. Ann Nyland has good reason for a much earlier date for John’s Gospel, and this would consequently push the Synoptic Gospels even further back and much closer to Jesus himself.

She writes: “John’s Good News is clearly pre-war and written before 66 AD. John states that the pool [of Bethesda] has (not had) 5 porticoes, and describes the temple as still standing. Both were not standing after the catastrophic war of 66-70 AD between the Jews and the Romans in Palestine. In the war the temple was destroyed as were many parts of Jerusalem. The reference to Peter’s prophesied manner of death in John 21:19 possibly suggests that John’s Good News was written after 64 AD, the date of Peter’s death in the Neronian persecution”.

There is reason to believe Peter died the year following Paul in 67 CE. This would still fit as the temple was not fully destroyed until 70 CE – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

Conventional scholarship considers the Gospel of Mark to have been written circa 70 CE and Matthew, Luke and Acts sometime around and after 80 CE. Nyland is probably correct about John’s gospel and thus the three synoptic gospels would have been written far earlier. Let’s face it, it makes more sense that Matthew the Apostle and Mark – the assistant and son of Peter, writing from his father’s perspective – would write sooner rather than later about the circumstances pertaining to the life changing events surrounding Jesus’ sojourn on Earth and his dramatic death. Thus, these two books may have been written anywhere between 30 to 60 CE, as was the Gospel of Luke. Luke likely began Acts of the Apostles after writing his gospel, completing it around the time of Paul’s death in 66 CE. 

Gospel of Luke 

External evidence for Luke’s authorship includes the following records. 

Muratorian Fragment – Rome, 170 CE: “The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke. Luke, the well-known physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him as one zealous for the law, composed it in his own name, according to… belief. Yet he himself had not seen the Lord in the flesh; and therefore, as he was able to ascertain events, so indeed he begins to tell the story from the birth of John [the Baptist].”

Irenaeus – Lyons, France, 180 CE: “Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him” – Against Heresies 3.1.1. 

Tertullian – Tunisia, North Africa, 210 CE: “Luke, however, was not an apostle, but only an apostolic man; not a master, but a disciple, and so inferior to a master – at least as far subsequent to him as the apostle whom he followed… was subsequent to the others… Inasmuch, therefore, as the enlightener of Luke himself desired the authority of his predecessors for both his own faith and preaching, how much more may not I require for Luke’s Gospel that which was necessary for the Gospel of his master” – Against Marcion 4.2.5. 

Origen – Alexandria, Egypt, 250 CE: “According to Luke, who wrote, for those who from the Gentiles (came to believe) the Gospel that was praised by Paul” – Church History 6.25.4.

Who Wrote the Four Gospels? James M Rochford: 

‘… it is highly unlikely that the early Christians would invent Luke as the author of this gospel. After all, Luke himself wasn’t an eyewitness (Luke 1:2), he was an obscure figure, and far more popular and authoritative figures could have been selected. And yet, the historical evidence for Luke’s authorship is so strong that it “was unquestioned until 18th century skepticism.”

There are several lines of evidence within this gospel that would support Luke’s authorship. 

First, it is odd that the receiver of the gospel would be named, but not the author. Luke and Acts are written to the “most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:3; cf. Acts 1:1). Richard Bauckham notes how utterly bizarre it would be to write a book to a named person, while keeping the author’s name anonymous. He writes, “It is inconceivable that a work with a named dedicatee should have been anonymous. The author’s name may have featured in an original title, but in any case would have been known to the dedicatee and other first readers because the author would have presented the book to the dedicatee.” 

In other words, it makes far more sense that this book was written to a known person (Theophilus) by a known person (Luke). Bauckham notes that this doesn’t prove that Luke was the author, but it does demonstrate that some author would need to be named. Since all of the external evidence points to Luke, this would raise our confidence in Luke’s authorship. 

Who wrote the Book of Luke: Seeking authorship clues, Marko Marina: ‘Among all the Gospels in the New Testament, Luke exhibits the most extensive vocabulary. Additionally, he displays a deep understanding of political terminology and expertise in historical writing techniques.’

Rochford: ‘Second, in all three references to Luke in the NT, we discover Mark mentioned alongside him. This not only implies that these two authors knew each other (Philemon 23-24; Colossians 4:10-11, 14; 2 Timothy 4:11), but also that Luke used Mark’s gospel as one of his sources (see Luke 1:1-3). 

Third, the “we” passages help us to identify authorship (Acts 16:8-10; 20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1-28:16). Three sections in Acts change from the third person (e.g. “Paul did this” or “Peter did that”) to the first person plural (e.g. “We did this…” or “We did that…”). This means that the author personally accompanied Paul on his trip in these three sections. He saw the initial evangelization of Philippi (16:10-17), and he travelled with Paul on his journey from Miletus to Jerusalem (20:5-15; 21:1-18). Finally, he accompanied Paul on his trip to Rome (27:1-28:16). The author could not have been one of the travelling companions mentioned with Paul during this trip, because then the author wouldn’t have said “we.” This eliminates a lot of potential authors, and leaves Luke as the best possibility.’ 

Detractors point out significant differences between what Paul says about himself in his undisputed letters and what Luke says in the Book of Acts. 

Marko Marina: ‘One example that illustrates this discrepancy is the account in Acts claiming that Paul immediately went to speak with the apostles in Jerusalem after his conversion (Acts 9:23-27). However, in Galatians (Galatians 1:18-20), Paul swears that he visited Jerusalem only three years later. It is doubtful that someone who was both Paul’s associate and traveling companion would make such a serious mistake. This type of situation presents a major challenge to the theory that attributes the authorship of Luke’s Gospel and Acts to Luke, a companion of Paul.’

Possibly, if one sides with a rather megalomaniacal Paul, who shows himself to ramble at times and elevate himself at every opportunity. His whole conversion story could have easily been embellished with his spiritual sojourn in Arabia. As Luke shows himself to be a ‘highly educated author proficient in Greek’ and an able historian; it would be his version of events which perhaps hold more authenticity than the itinerant Paul. 

Orthodox biblical scholarship to the contrary with its agenda to disbelieve what is plainly before them; the logic in Luke being the author of the gospel bearing his name, while not as conclusive as with the Gospel of John, is convincing. Particularly as those who object cannot provide a tenable alternative. 

Answering the question of who wrote the books of Matthew and Mark is more complicated. It is worth going into detail as readers may be interested in the incredible story of their origins.

Gospel of Matthew 

Ostensibly, the Apostle Matthew is credited as the author of the gospel and we will use his name for now. External evidence includes the following quotes. 

Papias – Hierapolis, Asia Minor, 130 CE: “Matthew composed the sayings in the Hebrew dialect and each person interpreted them as best he could” – Church History 3.39.16. 

Justin Martyr – Israel, 150 CE: Martyr does not refer to Matthew by name, but attributes Matthew 16:17 as, “recorded in the memoirs of His apostles” – Dialogue with Trypho 103.8. 

Irenaeus – Lyons, France, 180 CE: “Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrew in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome” – Against Heresies 3.1.1; cf. Church History 5.8.2.

 Clement of Alexandria – Egypt, 215 CE: “Of all those who had been with the Lord only Matthew and John left us their recollections, and tradition says they took to writing perforce. Matthew had first preached to the Hebrews, and when he was on the point of going to others he transmitted in writing in his native language the Gospel according to himself, and thus supplied by writing the lack of his own presence to those from whom he was sent” – Church History 3.24.5-6. 

Rochford: ‘Matthew was the most quoted gospel during the first 300 years of the church, and “the universal testimony of the early church is that the apostle Matthew wrote it, and our earliest textual witnesses attribute it to him (Kata Matthaion).” The gospel names Matthew as a tax collector (Matthew 9:9; 10:3), so it’s likely that he was literate and would’ve taken notes. Furthermore, the author writes about Matthew in a self-deprecating way, being the only author to refer to Matthew as “the tax collector” (Matthew 10:3). The title (“The gospel according to Matthew”) fits the name in the gospel, rather than the name “Levi” used by Mark (2:14) and Luke (5:27-29).’

Who wrote the Gospel of Matthew: Exploring the Mystery, Joshua Schachterle: 

‘Matthew is rightly called the most Jewish of the Gospels for several reasons… the genealogy of Jesus at the beginning of the Gospel links him directly not only to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob but also to David, Israel’s greatest king. Wilson also notes that the author clearly has knowledge of Hebrew. He makes numerous references to the Hebrew Bible in the text and insists on the importance of Torah observance. All of this points to a Jewish author for Matthew. 

The Gospel of Matthew was written in Greek, not the Aramaic language spoken in Israel at the time. Most scholars concur that Antioch, Syria is the most probable location for the writing of Matthew, given that Greek was the primary language spoken there. According to Aaron Gale, in the Jewish Annotated New Testament, only the Gospel of Matthew mentions that Jesus was recognized in Syria during his lifetime. It is also mentioned in later New Testament texts that a community led by Jesus existed there (Acts 11:19-27, 13:1, Galatians 2:11). Moreover, Peter, who was one of the leaders of the disciples, seems to have links to the city (Matthew 16-17-19, Galatians 2:11). 

Most scholars assume it was written between 80 and 90 CE, at least 60 years after Jesus’s death. Why? First, it refers in several verses to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Roman imperial army (22:7, 21:41, 22:4, 23:38). Since we know this happened in 70 CE, Matthew must have been written after that date. 

Furthermore, scholars have known for a long time that Matthew’s author used the Gospel of Mark, our oldest Gospel, as one of the main sources for his narrative. Therefore, Matthew had to be written after Mark, which was written around the time of the Temple’s destruction in 70 CE. Finally, the earliest written reference to the text of Matthew after the New Testament is found in letters written by a bishop from Antioch named Ignatius. In these letters, written around 110 CE, he quotes phrases from the Gospel.’ 

The last point is redundant as seen with the gospels of John and Luke. The second point regarding the Book of Mark preceding Matthew is a valid one – of which we will return – though has no bearing on overall chronology. The first point has the most import. Schachterle like those who choose to disbelieve has a. misquoted the above references found in the parables; and b. cannot credit that Jesus spoke a prophecy (Matthew 24:1-2) or that the author of Matthew actually wrote it down before it happened. 

The parables were not given for all to comprehend or allow the teaching of Jesus to be plainer to understand – Matthew 13:10-17. Those who live by faith, are given the knowledge to understand spiritual matters – John 4:24; 5:44, Jude 19. Luke 8:10: ‘[Jesus] said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables, so that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.” 

Only a true follower of the Way, who lives by faith would accept the miracle of fulfilled prophecy. As noted previously, if the synoptic gospels were written prior to John’s in circa 67 CE, then they were written between Christ’s death in 30 CE and John’s gospel. As Paul’s writings appear to begin in 48 or 49 CE, the gospels were likely written between 40 and 60 CE; with Mark and Matthew in the first decade of this period and Luke’s following later between 50 and 60 CE. This would then provide time for Luke to write Acts until the death of Paul in 66 CE, yet still prior to the Temple’s destruction in 70 CE. The books of James, Jude and Hebrews also written in the 60s CE, with only 1 John and Revelation being much later works, sometime during the 90s CE.

Gospel of Mark 

There is external evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mark. The authors’s identity is in question, though we will call him Mark for the time being. 

Papias – Hierapolis, Asia Minor, 130 CE: “When Mark became Peter’s interpreter, he wrote down accurately, although not in order, all that he remembered of what was said or done by the Lord. For he had not heard the Lord nor followed Him, but later, as I have said, he did Peter, who made his teaching fit his needs without, as it were, making any arrangement of the Lord’s oracles, so that Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things down as he remembered them” – Church History 3.39.15.

Anti-Marcionite Prologue – Italy, 160-180 CE: “Mark declared, who is called ‘stump-fingered’, because he had rather small fingers in comparison with the stature of the rest of his body. He was the interpreter of Peter. After the death of Peter himself he wrote down this same gospel in the regions of Italy.”

Irenaeus – Lyons, France, 180 CE: “After (Peter and Paul’s) death, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself also handed down to us in writing the things preached by Peter” – Against Heresies 3.1.2; cf. Church History 5.8.3.

Clement of Alexandria – Egypt, 215 CE: “They besought Mark, who was a follower of Peter and whose Gospel is extant, to leave behind with them in writing a record of the teaching passed on to them orally; and they did not cease until they had prevailed upon the man and so became responsible for the Scripture which is called the Gospel according to Mark” – Church History 2.15. 

We have come across John Mark a number of times. It is presumed he did not know Christ, though he may well have known of him better than scholars realise due to his familial ties with Peter and Barnabas; even if only a child at the time – Mark 14:51-52. Regardless of this, he is reputed to have recorded his father Peter’s recollection of events. There is a ring of truth to this, as we do not possess a book or letter from Peter – as 1 and 2 Peter are spurious – and so his memories unbeknown to the majority could be ostensibly in the book written by Mark. Yet there is a twist, which we will unravel shortly.  

James Rochford: ‘The church fathers openly admit that Mark was not an eyewitness, but this didn’t seem to bother them, because he wrote under the authority of Peter. If they were inclined to lie, they surely would’ve invented the idea that the author was an eyewitness, and they clearly could’ve conceived of a better figure than Mark! Not only is Mark obscure, but he is also portrayed as cowardly, having defected on his very first missionary journey with Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:13; 15:37-39). Why would the early church intentionally make up Mark as the author, when he was not a popular NT figure?’ 

Rochford is being unintentionally hard on Mark. The two verses referenced show Mark did not continue travelling with them because he returned to Jerusalem. He may have had a pressing reason to go back. To assist Peter in writing a gospel message perhaps? 

Rochford: ‘Within the book itself, we discover several clues that point toward Peter supervising Mark as the author. To be clear, this evidence isn’t conclusive, but it does support a cumulative case: 

First, by percentage, Mark refers to Peter more than any other gospel author (26x versus Matthew’s 29x). This could show that Peter’s point of view is more represented, because he oversaw the authorship of the book.’

Rochford hits on an important point here. Though remember that Peter is mentioned more often in Matthew – albeit a longer book – than in Mark. 

Rochford: ‘Second, the author never refers to Peter as “Simon Peter.” This is quite odd because the name Peter was a very common name in Israel at this time. And yet, the author never feels the need to identify Peter as Simon Peter – only as “Simon” or as “Peter.” This implies a familiarity with Peter.’ 

Again, Rochford raises an interesting point. The author of Mark did know Peter on intimate terms. While it could mean John Mark, his son; it could also mean a fellow apostle as we shall investigate. 

Rochford: ‘Third, the author mentions Peter as the first disciple (Mark 1:16) and the last (Mark 16:7). This forms an inclusio (i.e. “bookends” for the work) that demonstrates the author’s focus on Peter.’ 

This does not necessarily mean Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark. It does show that whoever wrote the book, recognised Peter as the senior apostle, not just in age but also at the behest of Christ. 

Rochford: ‘Fourth, the author refers to Capernaum as “home” (Mark 2:1). Of course, Jesus didn’t grow up in Capernaum, so why call it home? Whose home? The text tells us that Capernaum was Peter’s home (Mark 1:21, 29-31), which again betrays that the author wrote from Peter’s perspective.’ 

This is not quite right. Mark 2:1 says: ‘And when he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home.’ The remainder of the chapter clearly shows it was the home of Christ. What most Christians do not realise is that Jesus was not a pauper and related to the wealthy Uncle of his mother Mary, Joseph of Arimathea – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. Christ with Peter, paid the Capernaum Temple Tax – Matthew 17:24-17. This would have been because they were local and recognised as such.  

Rochford: ‘Fifth, Mark was with Peter and Paul in Rome, according to the NT. Paul was with Mark in Rome (Colossians 4:10; Philemon 24; 2 Timothy 4:11), as was Peter (1 Peter 5:13). Peter also refers to Mark as “his son” (1 Peter 5:13), which implies a close relationship.’ 

This identifies Mark and Peter being close as a father and son (whether physically or spiritually), though does not substantiate that either wrote a gospel necessarily. 

Rochford: ‘Sixth, Peter’s preaching summaries in Acts (see Acts 10:36-41) follow the same pattern as Mark. Lane writes, “While Peter’s preaching has been epitomized for inclusion in the Acts, it is clear that its structural development and emphases are accurately reflected in the Marcan outline.”

 Again, the author of Mark, knew Peter very well and had probably heard him speak on a number of occasions. 

Rochford: ‘Seventh, the Greek style of Mark seems to fit with a Judean Christian. Mark grew up in Jerusalem (Acts 12:12), and he was likely financially well off because his mother owned a house. Consequently, Carson and Moo write that the Greek “is simple and straightforward and full of the kind of Semitisms that one would expect of a Jerusalem-bred Christian.” It also contains many Aramaisms – early Aramaic expressions – which fits with a Judean author (see Mark 3:17; 5:41; 7:11, 34; 15:22).’

This point is important, for it closely fits the profile of the true author as we shall learn. Acts 12:12-14 is enlightening for a number of reasons: ‘When he realized this, he went to the house of Mary, the mother of John whose other name was Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying. And when he knocked at the door of the gateway, a servant girl named Rhoda came to answer. Recognizing Peter’s voice, in her joy she did not open the gate but ran in and reported that Peter was standing at the gate.’

Here we learn that John Mark’s mother is called Mary and thus Peter is her husband. Plus, Peter had his own business – perhaps in partnership with his brother Andrew, sharing a fleet of fishing boats – and therefore he was well off. Having a servant(s) substantiates Peter’s financial independence. The picture portrayed by scholars of disciples who were illiterate or poor is a damaging one, for it is plainly not true in this case. 

The following article is reprinted in almost its entirety for it presents an original and convincing case in explaining the actual authorship of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. 

Marcus-Matthew a.k.a. Levi, as author of Mark’s Gospel, Richard Fellows, 2024 – italics & bold his: 

‘Whenever The Gospel of Matthew refers to a person using “called” (λεγόμενον) it is introducing a name that is not a mere birth name (Matthew 1:16; 4:18; 10:2; 26:3, 14; 27:16, 17, 22). Matthew 9:9 is therefore presenting “Matthew” as a new name that was given to Levi son of Alphaeus. This is confirmed by Matthew 10:3, which identifies Matthew as the tax collector and reverses the order of Matthew and Thomas so that Matthew is next to his likely brother, James son of Alphaeus. Note that Matthew 10:2 similarly moves Andrew so that he is next to his brother, Peter. The compiler of The Gospel of Matthew had a tendency to clarify identities. Matthew 4:18 derives from Mark 1:16 but adds “who is called Peter” after Simon’s name, for clarity. Also, Matthew 27:56 calls Salome (Mark 15:40), “the mother of the sons of Zebedee” to clarify that she is the same person as mentioned in Matthew 20:20.

The renaming of Levi should not be surprising. Jesus gave new names to Simon (Cephas/Peter) and to the sons of Zebedee (Boanerges) (Mark 3;17), and probably to Mary (the Magdalene (tower)). The renaming habit continued with the apostles calling Joseph “Barnabas”. Among Paul’s associates we have Titus being called “Timothy” [?] (honouring God), Crispus, who was named “Sosthenes” (saving strength). Ignatius calls himself “Theophorus” (bearer of God). The name “Matthew” means “gift of God” and was an appropriate name for Levites, for the name is over-represented among priests, High Priests, and also among immediate relatives of men called Levi. 

But why did The Gospel of Mark not make it clear that Matthew was Levi renamed? This has long puzzled commentators. And why did the author feel the need to give the name of Levi’s father? The gospels give the names of fathers only when there was a need to distinguish between multiple people of the same name…  Jesus is called son of Joseph and son of Mary, but only in speech to people who were not Jesus followers. 

The text in The Gospel of Mark makes most sense if the author was Levi-Matthew. The author would not have needed to identify Levi as Matthew if the intended audience already knew. The author probably expects them to know Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:13; Romans 16:21), as commentators correctly point out, so he may have expected them to know himself as well. In much the same way, we can assume, for example, that the audience of Galatians knew that Cephas was Peter. The addition of “son of Alphaeus” could have helped with the identification. Not only might it have been unnecessary for Levi-Matthew to explicitly make the identification, it would have been egotistical for him to draw attention to the fact that Jesus had given him the name “Matthew”, since new names were given to the most prominent believers. 

Ancient historians often avoided use of the first-person and referred to themselves by name, as if the author was writing about someone else. The gospel writers, in particular, show humility by avoiding excessive reference to themselves. Luke avoided first person self-reference except in his preface, and in the “we-passages” of Acts where only the modest plural form of the first-person is used. Elsewhere he avoids first-person self-reference completely, even for events in which he must have participated. The Gospel of John limits self-reference to the third-person, and even manages to avoid naming himself by substituting the phrase “the beloved disciple” and similar. Presumably the gospel writers were influenced by Jesus’s teaching on humility, and/or they wanted to model humility and/or they wanted the readers’ attention to be on the subject matter, rather than on the person of the author. Their preference to remain in the background seems to have been respected by the early church because there seems to have been little interest in the identities of the authors until well into the second century. We should not be surprised that a gospel writer should mention themselves only by name, while avoiding first-person language. 

On any hypothesis Peter was the leading apostle during the ministry of Jesus and in the early church. With James and John, he had privileged access to Jesus. It is therefore to be expected that his reports would feature in The Gospel of Mark, whoever wrote it. However, The Gospel of Mark names Peter fewer times than any of the other gospels. It is the twelve who are mentioned more often in The Gospel of Mark than in any other. 

The Gospel of Mark is written from the point of view of a member of the twelve. For example, Mark 10:32 reads: 

They were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them; they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. He took the twelve aside again and began to tell them what was to happen to him…”

‘The verse is difficult to follow because we are not told who “they” are. Neither The Gospel of Matthew, nor Luke’s include this event. If, however, the author of The Gospel of Mark was one of the twelve it becomes clear. Here, as elsewhere, he distinguished between the twelve and the larger body of followers. The author, if he was one of the twelve, would think “we” but decide to put “they” instead to avoid first person self-reference. The text would read more smoothly if we replaced “they” with ‘we”. The author’s ambiguous or awkward wording can often be explained by his desire to avoid first-person self-reference. See C.H. Turner “Marcan Usage: Notes Critical and Exegetical, on the Second Gospel V. The Movement of Jesus and His Disciples and the Crowd” JTS (1925). 

Mark 6:6-13 reports instructions given only to the twelve. The twelve are sent out, and return at Mark 6:30. The author reports no information about Jesus during the mission of the twelve, perhaps because he was one of the twelve, so had no first-hand information. 

Note that Mark 14:22-24 includes the twelve five times: 

“While they were eating, he took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, and all of them drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.” 

The equivalent passage in 1 Corinthians 11:23-25 does not feature the twelve at all. This suggests that The Gospel of Mark was closer to eyewitness testimony even than Paul, who wrote these lines in 54 AD [55 CE], and knew Peter. The perspective of the twelve in The Gospel of Mark means that the author was one of the twelve and not just a hearer of Peter, for Paul was a hearer of Peter and lacked the perspective of the twelve in 1 Corinthians 11:23-25.’

Alternatively, we know Paul was not a fan of the apostles, period. Therefore not mentioning them at all isn’t a big surprise. Added to the fact he invariably made himself the centre of any point he was making. 

Fellows: ‘Even though Jesus travelled throughout Galilee (Mark 1:39), Capernaum is the focus in The Gospel of Mark

Mark 2:1 reads, “When he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home”. This verse seems to be written from the perspective of someone who was at Capernaum, who was waiting for Jesus to return, and who knew of only one home where Jesus had stayed. 

The calling of the twelve (Mark 3:13-20) happens on a mountain and it seems that only Jesus and the twelve are present. The manuscripts are evenly divided about whether we should read, “Then he went home” or “Then they went home”. The plural is more likely because Mark 1:29 demonstrates the tendency to change manuscripts from the plural to the singular. In any case, these words seem to come from someone whose home was in Capernaum. 

Mark 1:14-15 records the calling of Simon, Andrew, James, and John, which happens close to Capernaum and/or Levi’s tax booth, which was likely at Capernaum’s harbour for taxing goods imported by boat from outside of Antipas’s territory. 

While the author likely writes from the point of view of one of the twelve, in most cases it is impossible to determine whether he is writing as Matthew, or reporting Peter’s perspective (or both). However, the following texts favour Matthew’s authorship. 

Mark 1:19 says “he went”, even though Peter and Andrew were with him (Mark 1:16-18). The author’s tendency to include the disciples by using third person plural verbs has not yet begun, presumably because the author was not a travelling companion of Jesus until after his calling (Mark 2:14). 

Mark 1:21-28 takes place in the synagogue in Capernaum and Levi may have been present. Indeed, if we replace “they” with “we” in Mark 1:22, 27, it reads as Levi’s explanation of why he was so impressed by Jesus. 

Mark 1:29 reads, “As soon as they left the synagogue, they entered the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.” (The ESV changes “they” to “he”). The third person verb here seems unnatural, and the text is explained if the author accompanied Jesus from the synagogue to the house of Simon and Andrew: “As soon as we left the synagogue, we entered the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.” The author, wanting to avoid first-person verbs, censored himself, and used the third-person plural. 

Mark 1:39 says that he (Jesus) went throughout Galilee. After the calling of Levi, The Gospel of Mark usually includes the twelve by using the plural, they. The use of the singular here, and the fact that the tour of Galilee is summarized in just this one verse, suggests that the author did not accompany Jesus here. The only recorded incident during this tour is the story about the leper, which the author tells us became common knowledge (Mark 1:40-45). The passage (Mark 1:36-39) implies that Peter, James, and John, did accompany Jesus. The passage is therefore more likely to be written from the perspective of Levi, who had not yet been called, than that of Peter. 

Mark 2:3 reads, “Then they came, bringing to him a paralyzed man”. The third-person plural verb has no explicit subject and the NRSV has to supply one, as does Luke 5:18. All is explained if the author was Levi, who brought the paralyzed man to Jesus, with three others. Jesus recognized his audacious faith (Mark 2:5), and this would explain why Jesus called him from his tax booth in the very next pericope (Mark 2:13-14). 

Mark 2:15 refers to Levi’s house as “his house”, but the NRSV writes “Levi’s house” to clarify. The other synoptic gospels avoid the awkwardness. The audience of The Gospel of Mark, knowing that Levi was the author, will realize that he has replaced “my house” with “his house”. 

The author records insider information only after the calling of Matthew. There is a meal (Mark 2:13-17), and insider teachings with no mention of a crowd (Mark 2:18-22). In Mark 2:23-28 Jesus was with his disciples in the grainfields and again crowds are not mentioned, so the author may have been one of the disciples by that time.  

At Mark 14:31 Peter says that he will not deny Jesus, and we are then told, “And all of them said the same”. An audience who knew that the author was Matthew would know to translate, “And all of us said the same”, which would be natural. Luke has no parallel, but Matthew 26:35 clarifies the subject by writing, “And so said all the disciples”. This example suggests that Peter was not the only member of the 12 who was a source for The Gospel of Mark

Mark 3:6 “The Pharisees went out and immediately conspired with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him”. How did the author know about this conspiracy? Levi/Matthew worked for Herod Antipas, so his contacts could have informed him. 

… The Gospel of Mark mentions Herod Antipas and the Herodians more frequently than any other. The account of the killing of John the Baptist (Mark 6:14-29) could have been learned by Matthew from his Herodian contacts. The Gospel of Mark is less critical of tax collectors and of Herod Antipas than The Gospel of Matthew. Luke seems to be intermediate. 

Richard Bauckham has shown that those associated with the administration of the Herods often had Latin names and connections to Rome. Matthew, the former collaborator, who had worked for Herod, might well have fled to Rome to escape from the sicarii. Herodion (Romans 16:11) might have moved to Rome for a similar reason. The Gospel of Mark seems to have been written from Rome. 

As a tax collector and a probable Levite, Matthew was probably literate and therefore better able to write a gospel than Jesus’s uneducated companions (Acts 4:13). In short, the internal evidence in The Gospel of Mark points tentatively to Matthew, the tax collector, as the author. 

The compiler of The Gospel of Matthew used most of The Gospel of Mark, generally in sequence. He placed additional material where it seemed to belong chronologically (the birth narrative must come first, for example) or where it fit the theme (the parable of the weeds follows the parable of the sower, for example). However, the compiler does make some changes to the sequence that he inherited from The Gospel of Mark, and it will now be argued that he did so to minimize the extent of Matthew’s presence with Jesus, relative to Peter. This is explicable if the compiler was known to have been a hearer of Peter, and if The Gospel of Mark, which he intended to replace, was known to have been written by Matthew. 

He placed a lot of miscellaneous teaching (the sermon on the mount: Matthew 5:1-7:29) immediately after the calling of Peter, Andrew, James, and John. Whereas The Gospel of Mark puts the calling of Levi/Matthew just 43 verses after the calling of Peter, The Gospel of Matthew puts 161 verses between them. Indeed, the compiler’s desire to exclude Matthew from being a witness to the Sermon on the Mount may explain why he reverses the sequence of events to make Jesus leave Capernaum immediately after the calling of the four, rather than after the healing of Simon’s mother-in-law. His source for the Sermon on the Mount material is perhaps implied by his mention of the disciples (Matthew 5:1). He further delays the calling of Matthew by rearranging his written source to put the calming of the storm and the demoniac narratives before Matthew’s calling. We can also note that The Gospel of Matthew eliminates the pronoun at Matthew 9:10 (compare Mark 2:14), so that Matthew is no longer obviously Jesus’s host. Also, at Matthew 10:3 the compiler demoted Matthew by one place.’

‘Having finally called Matthew (Matthew 9:9), the compiler soon sends him away, along with the other eleven. He does this by reversing the sequence of The Gospel of Mark so that the sending of the twelve (Matthew 10:1-11:1) is before, rather than after, the events of Mark 2:22-6:5. In The Gospel of Mark the twelve are sent at Mark 6:13, and following only the account of the death of John the Baptist, they return to Jesus at Mark 6:30. The compiler of The Gospel of Matthew, however, does not mention the twelve again until Matthew 20:17. The twelve are not mentioned at Matthew 13:10 or Matthew 18:1, even though the Marcan parallel passages mention them. Peter, however, appears at  Matthew 14:28-32; 15:15; 16:17-19; 17:24-27, 18:15-22. 

The parallels to these verses, where they exist, in The Gospel of Mark and in Luke, do not mention Peter. The only two mentions of “church” (ἐκκλησία) in the gospels occur in two of these passages (Matthew 16:18, 18:17), so they may be anachronistic in wording. Matthew 16:17-19 records Jesus as saying that Peter is the rock on which the church is to be built. This would have been particularly interesting to the audience if their congregations had been established by Peter. In summary, the compiler of The Gospel of Matthew, went out of his way to diminish the duration of Matthew’s presence with Jesus, relative to Peter’s presence. We can now turn to Papias. 

Eusebius reports what Papias had written in the early second century: 

And the Elder said this also: ‘Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately everything that he remembered, without however recording in order what was either said or done by Christ. For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he follow Him; but afterwards, as I said, (attended) Peter, who adapted his instructions to the needs (of his hearers) but had no design of giving a connected account of the Lord’s oracles (λογίων). So then Mark made no mistake, while he thus wrote down some things as he remembered them; for he made it his one care not to omit anything that he heard, or to set down any false statement therein.’ Such then is the account given by Papias concerning Mark. But concerning Matthew, the following statement is made (by him): ‘So (οὖν) then Matthew composed the oracles (τὰ λόγια) in the Hebrew language (Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ), and each one interpreted them as he could.’ The same writer used quotations from the first Epistle of John, and likewise also from that of Peter… 

Which gospel did the Elder’s “Mark” write? Peter became an apostle exclusively to the circumcised, after Paul agreed to take responsibility for the uncircumcised (Galatians 2:7-8). Peter then went to Antioch (Galatians 2:11). As is generally agreed, The Gospel of Matthew was written for churches of Christian Jews in Syria (where Antioch was the largest city). So The Gospel of Matthew  was written for churches that could well have been established by Peter. The Gospel of Matthew therefore was likely the gospel compiled by the interpreter of Peter for Peter’s Jewish Greek speaking converts in Syria. It is unlikely that the more gentile audience of The Gospel of Mark would have been the domain of Peter’s interpreter, since Peter was the apostle to the circumcised. 

The “Mark” referred to by the elder put events in a wrong order. It is unlikely that his gospel was The Gospel of Mark, since its sequence is largely trusted by both the later synoptic gospels. The gospel with the bad order was The Gospel of Matthew, and Luke knew it, as we will see. Luke-Acts was written to churches of the Aegean. Also, Luke mentions Philip’s daughters (Acts 21:8-9), who later lived in Hierapolis (Eusebius, EH 3.31.9; 5.17.3), which is close to Ephesus. 

Luke also mentioned Joseph Justus Barsabbas (Acts 1:23), as did Papias of Hierapolis (Eusebius, EH 3.39.9). The Latin name, Justus, suggests that he left Palestine, because Christians did not use Latin names in Palestine. Luke might have mentioned this Justus and Philip’s daughters because they were known to at least some of his intended audience. Note also, that Papias’s story of the death of Judas seems to be an embellished version of the account in Acts 1:18, rather than the account in Matthew 27:5. 

Luke’s connection with Ephesus is further shown by the fact that he mentions Tyrannus (Acts 19:9) in a way that suggests that Tyrannus was a Christian known to at least some of his audience. Also, Luke’s gospel often agrees with the gospel of John, against The Gospel of Mark and The Gospel of Matthew, in episodes that the beloved disciple had witnessed (see Luuk van de Weghe, Living Footnotes). This suggests that Luke preferred eyewitness testimony, and that he had met the beloved disciple, who may well have been John the [elder Apostle], who lived in Ephesus. The relevance of all this is that Luke respected the order of The Gospel of Mark, but thoroughly disrespected the sequence of The Gospel of Matthew.’

Aside from Luke being a thorough historian and seeking an accurate chronological order; he would have also preferred a text written by Matthew over one written from the perspective of Peter by John Mark. 

Fellows: ‘This is demonstrated by the following charts from Douglas Harder. The chart on the left shows how Luke took material from The Gospel of Mark to make his “orderly account” (Luke 1:3). Most of the erratic lines here represent Lukan pericopes that parallel their Marcan equivalents only weakly. Indeed, it has been said that Luke made only two true transpositions of material in The Gospel of Mark. The chart on the right shows how Luke took pericopes from The Gospel of Matthew that are not found in The Gospel of Mark.’

‘Therefore, in the region where the elder lived, the order of The Gospel of Mark was trusted while the order of The Gospel of Matthew was rejected. Papias’s “Mark” was therefore the compiler of The Gospel of Matthew, not the author of The Gospel of Mark. Luke’s distain for the order of Matthew’s pericopes is explained if he, like Papias’s “Elder”, who lived nearby, knew that the compiler of The Gospel of Matthew had not written in order. This explains, for the first time, why the non-Marcan material in Luke and The Gospel of Matthew has such good agreement in wording (it is too good to be Q), but so little agreement in order. Synoptic problem specialists have found it puzzling why Luke does not make good use of the birth narrative found in The Gospel of Matthew. This can now be explained by his preference for eyewitness testimony. Unlike most of The Gospel of Matthew, the birth narrative episodes were not witnessed by Peter. 

The additional material about Peter in The Gospel of Matthew also supports the view that Papias’s Mark compiled it. Also, Peter’s interpreter would likely write for churches that he had helped Peter to found (churches built on the rock of Peter), and these are more likely to be the Syrian Jewish congregations of The Gospel of Matthew, than the mixed Roman congregations of The Gospel of Mark. I am also tempted to wonder whether the varying views of the role of the Jewish Law in The Gospel of Matthew can be explained by the fact that Peter’s opinion changed with time (see Acts 10), and by his tendency to adapt to his audience (Galatians 2:11-14). 

The elder’s Mark “made it his one care not to omit anything that he heard”. This does not fit The Gospel of Mark, which is the shortest gospel. On any hypothesis Papias knew of at least two gospels that were longer than The Gospel of Mark. 

So, since Papias’s Mark likely compiled The Gospel of Matthew, which gospel did Papias’s Matthew write? The Gospel of Mark is now the only sensible candidate. It is not clear whether Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ means Aramaic, or just a semitic style of Greek. Either way, those who “interpreted them” may be the aforementioned Mark, and also Luke. Thus Papias may be observing that both The Gospel of Matthew and Luke improve the Greek of The Gospel of Mark

If, on the other hand, Papias’s Mark was supposed by him to be the author of The Gospel of Mark, the text in [bold] font would be a strange digression that has little to do with Mark. The last sentence confirms that Papias was still talking about Mark, since he brings up 1 Peter where Mark is mentioned as an associate[…] of Peter (1 Peter 5:13) (the reference to 1 John was probably to show that John, unlike Mark was an eyewitness (1 John 1:1-3)). 

But do we need to conclude that the church fathers misunderstood Papias and misattributed The Gospel of Mark to Mark and The Gospel of Matthew to Matthew, instead of the other way round? Such misattributions are possible, but unlikely (see an article by Gathercole). 

It seems more likely, to me, that the compiler of The Gospel of Matthew, and his patron, attributed his gospel to his major source, Matthew, who had contributed about half of his material. That is to say, Matthew’s authorship of The Gospel of Mark explains how The Gospel of Matthew was attributed to Matthew. Some compare the gospel writers to students who copy each other’s homework, while taking the credit for it. This analogy, while appealing to professors, needs to be abandoned, as we have no evidence of any such plagiarism. Matthew wrote from his own memory, Mark credited Matthew, and Luke acknowledged that he used sources. Most of the early evangelists had Latin names (presumably Roman citizenship gave them needed legal protection) and it was not uncommon for them to use Latin praenomina (Luke/Lucius, John Mark, Titus Timothy). About 25% of men with a Latin praenomen were called “Mark”, and in Palestine the ratio is even higher. It was about twice as common as Lucius. 

The attribution of The Gospel of Mark to Mark may simply indicate[…] that Matthew used the name “Mark” when in Rome. Followers of Jesus did not use Roman names in Palestine. Richard Bauckham explains, “Few Palestinian Jews would have wanted a name that proclaimed allegiance to Rome” (Bauckham, “Paul and Other Jews with Latin names in the New Testament”). However, when they left Palestine they generally adopted (or already had) Latin names (the possible exceptions are Andronicus and Peter, which are Greek names; and Barnabas and Manaen, which are Semitic).

Consider Saul/Paul, Silas/Silvanus, Joseph/Justus, Jesus/Justus, Luke/Lucius, John/Mark, Simeon/Niger, Timothy/Titus, Simeon/Niger, and perhaps Joanna/Junia. In all these cases, except John/Mark and Simeon/Niger, the Latin and non-Latin names have a phonetic similarity. The name pair Matthew/Mark fits this pattern. The hypothesis that Matthew was Mark the evangelist explains the head-rhyme. Matthew would need a non-semitic name when in Rome at about the time of the war, and Mark, which was a common name, would be a likely name for Matthew to use. 

Some may object that there is no document that explicitly says that Matthew was Mark, but this is weak. We have no document that explicitly equates Silas with Silvanus or Titus with Timothy. Those who had two names were often split into two people by later tradition. This happened to Cephas/Peter, Silas/Silvanus, Titus/Timothy, and Levi/Matthew himself. Similarly, two people with the same name were often conflated. This happened to Marys, Philips, Johns, Jameses, and Clements, among others.

 It is likely, then, that we are looking at two Marks. 

1. One may have been a close associate of Peter (compare 1 Peter 5:13) and may have compiled The Gospel of Matthew. It is possible that he was John/Mark, but John/Mark is perhaps more likely to have been the author of The Gospel of John. See Pierson Parker “John and John Mark” JBL (1960), and Dean Furlong, The Identity of John the Evangelist. 

2. The other may have been Matthew, the tax collector.’ 

While it is easy to fully concur with Fellows compelling arguments throughout his comprehensive article; his suggestion that the author of John was not the Apostle John contradicts the internal evidence in the Gospel of John and the similarity between his book and 1 John. As John was an elder statesman within the Church of God, there would not be any conflict in John the Elder and the Apostle John being the same person. Both living in Ephesus is surely a striking coincidence otherwise. 

Fellows concludes: ‘The Gospel of Mark was written by Matthew, the tax collector, probably for the churches in Rome. He may have been known as “Mark” there. 

Peter’s interpreter, who was also called “Mark”, compiled The Gospel of Matthew for congregations of Jewish Christians in Syria that had been founded by Peter. He used The Gospel of Mark, that had been written by Matthew, and probably credited Matthew (he was not a plagiarist). He also used material that he had learned from Peter, which he arranged thematically. 

Luke wrote for the Aegean churches. He, and the elder mentioned by nearby Papias, knew that The Gospel of Matthew was not arranged chronologically, but he trusted the sequence in The Gospel of Mark and compiled his gospel accordingly.’ 

Of the twenty-seven books comprising the New Testament, ten are trustworthy: possessing either 1. an authentic authorship; 2. doctrinal purity; or 3. palpable Godly inspiration. The one possible exception is Jude – considering it’s unusual content and brevity.

Possible or probable authors in italics.

Matthew – Peter with John Mark

Mark – Matthew 

Luke – Luke

Acts – Luke

John – John

1 John – John

Revelation – John

Hebrews Apollos

James – James (?)

Jude – Jude (?)

Seventeen are to be either ignored or treated with caution and read selectively. The plausible exceptions being: primarily 2 Thessalonians which hinges on the prophecy it contains; and partially Colossians for its historic association with Laodicea and subsequent prophetic significance – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.  

The seven books believed to be written by Paul:

Romans – Paul

1 Corinthians – Paul

2 Corinthians – Paul

Galatians – Paul

Philippians – Paul

1 Thessalonians – Paul 

Philemon – Paul

The remaining six books credited to Paul, though doubted by biblical scholars in varying degree.

Ephesians – Paul II: Tychicus

Colossians – Paul III: Epaphras

2 Thessalonians – Paul IV: Silas / (Demas / Aristarchus) 

1 Timothy – Paul V: Timothy

2 Timothy – Paul VI: Timothy / (Onesiphorus)

Titus – Paul VII

Four – of the seven – General Epistles with suspicious authorship:

1 Peter – Peter the Imposter: Silas 

2 Peter – Anonymous Peter: Paul VII

2 John – Unknown John: Gaius 

3 John – John Paul: Gaius / (Demetrius) 

Paul V and Paul VI are very likely the same person, in the form of Timothy. So could be the unknown John and John Paul as Gaius. The same could be said about Paul VII and anonymous Peter who remains a mystery because both letters appear to have been written decades later. While Paul IV and Peter the imposter demonstrate a weaker connection, it cannot be ruled out that both are Silas – and that 1 Peter is a genuine work not written by Peter but complied by Silas from Peter’s sentiments. A similar scenario to what may have taken place with the Book of James.

The charges levelled against Paul – apart from a. his exhibiting self absorbed and erratic personality traits; b. a controlling style of church government where he played favourites; c. an erroneous belief in Christ’s imminent return; d. delivering a gospel message designed for the tribes of Israel to Gentiles instead; and e. an overt interest in young men – include the following three false doctrines. 

1. The concept that Christ would live inside anyone is unbiblical. Whether a righteous angel or God, neither would live inside a human being. This is a form of possession and what a demonic entity desires. The fact Paul repeated this concept, while at the same time admitting he had a spirit tormenting him, is of grave concern and explains how or why he would think Christ was inside him – Galatians 2:20. The Father plain and simple, gives his Holy Spirit to those who are anointed as first fruits in his plan of redemption.

2. A gospel message that deviates from the Kingdom of God which Christ preached, is a false gospel and is the tragic legacy of Paul’s evangelising. While the saving nature of Christ’s sacrifice is a vital aspect in achieving citizenship in the Kingdom, it is not the true gospel and so thanks to Paul; Christianity believes a flawed message where the good news of God’s coming kingdom is not promulgated widely. Christians are born, live and die without knowing the truth of God’s Kingdom, believing the lie instead about going to Heaven or Hell.

3. Believing on Christ and accepting his grace is only the first part of a Christian’s journey. One then must walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Good works prove that a Christian has accepted the grace given to them and desires to walk with God in every moment. Our reward is predicated on our character, exemplified by our thoughts, words and deeds. Christ set an example; he did not absolve a Christian in any shape or form by doing it for them. 

Thus, while a change in the Law took place from the Old to New Covenant, it was not done away. Physical concepts of the moral law were amplified into spiritual aspects. Ceremonial and sacrificial elements of the Law were abolished as a spiritual requirement, for Christ fulfilled the short comings of these through his own sacrifice. That said, the benefits of the Old Covenant statutes, judgements and laws which were given to Israel – in functioning as an effective society – are still sound principles in wholesome living: such as a healthy diet, cleanliness, adequate rest and productive measures in dealing with crime. 

Can any leeway be given to Paul at all? Not really. Have his words been misconstrued? Yes and no. Has a religion formed out of alignment with Paul. Some might think so and not understand the impact Paul had on the first era of the church. If orthodox Judaism – a bastardised residue of the ancient Israelite belief system encompassing the Old Covenant and the Law – veers in one direction, say to the right and false Christianity – the legacy of Pauline theology, centred on grace – swings to the left; then the path of the true faith and the Way – taught by Christ and the apostles – has been travelling between them in the middle… lost to the outside world. 

The tragic irony in all this is that considerable contention has arisen, with debate waged over what Paul did or did not say on the matter of the Law, Sabbath keeping and Holy Day and festival observance. All for nothing it would seem, for if his books are excluded from formalising official dogma, then any and all difficult scriptures melt away and it is to the Old Testament; the words of Christ in the gospels; and the pillars of the early church in the general epistles, Hebrews and Acts, we should turn. It is these books which show the way to the truth. 

Paul and the books written in his name are tares in amongst the truth. A poison which has spread its toxic tentacles and strangled the truth, leaving a false likeness which Christians misguidedly believe is the doctrine of Christ but is not. Apostolic teaching is contrary to Pauline theology and can be understood by those who wish to accept the enormity of what is at stake – Article: Heaven & Hell.

These beliefs are discussed in the article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days

For no one would want to hear these words from the Lord Jesus:

“And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness” – Matthew 7.23. 

We do not see any signs of God’s presence; there are no longer any prophets, and we have no one to tell us how long this will last. 

Psalm 74:9 New English Translation 

“Remember, when you’re reading your Bible, your Bible is also reading you. It is a two-way transaction.”

Derek Prince 

© Orion Gold 2022 & 2025 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings

Chapter XIX

The earliest known historical figure connected with Elam, is Enmebaragsei, the penultimate king of the first Dynasty of Kish who reigned over much of Sumer, possibly as late as circa 2615 to 2600 BCE. The Sumerian King List says he reigned nine hundred years. A more realistic 15 years is probable when dividing by 60, based on the Sumerian sexagesimal system according to an unconventional chronology. Enmebaragesi is a key figure as he bridges the divide between myth and history. He is the earliest ruler to be evidenced directly from archaeology. Four inscriptions have been found with his name. En is an honorary title and not part of his original name. Me means crown; bara means ruler; and si means to fill.

Enmebaragsei fought a successful campaign against Elam, capturing Uruk, confiscating their weapons and imposing his kingship – he “who made the land of Elam submit.” He preceded the Old Elamite period dated to circa 2600 to 1500 BCE, broadly incorporating three main dynasties beginning from approximately the end of his reign. They were the combined Awan I and II era, circa 2600 to 2300 BCE and 2300 to 1930 BCE consecutively; the Shimashki (or Simaski) era, circa 1955 to 1840 BCE; and the Sukkalmah era, circa 1840 to 1500 BCE. It is the end of the 1st dynasty and the beginning of the 2nd with which we are primarily interested.

The Awan (or Avan) II dynasty was contemporary with the Mesopotamian emperor Sargon I or the Great of Akkad, reigning from 2224 to 2169 BCE. He defeated the 12th Awan king, Luh-Ishshan – who reigned circa 2194 to 2169 BCE – subjugating Susa. Historical sources concerning Elam now become more frequent, as the Mesopotamians had developed an interest in resources, such as wood, stone and metal from the Iranian plateau; thereby encouraging more frequent military excursions to the region. 

Though the foreign Guti Dynasty (refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil) had been ruling in Sumer since 2088 BCE, it was in 2039 BCE that Akkad fell to the Gutians and with it, the final and 11th king of the Dynasty of Akkad – Shu-Dural (or Shu-Tural). The Gutium spoke an agglutinative language isolate like Sumer and Elam – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. The Gutians ruled Sumer and Elam until 1991 BCE. The last king of nineteen, Tirigan, reigned for only 40 days, when Utu-hengal reigning from 1995 to 1988 BCE of the 5th Dynasty of Uruk defeated him – ending the Gutian Dynasty. 

Now, Utu-Hengal was the father of Ur-Namma the 1st King of the Ur III Dynasty from 1988 to 1970 BCE and he in turn, was the father of King Shulgi who reigned from 1970 to 1924 BCE. 

These names are mentioned as there is considerably more to say about Ur-Namma as we progress, who was concurrent with King Kutik-Inshushinak of Elam the next to last king before Chedorlaomer; as well as Shulgi, the 2nd King of Ur, who was a contemporary of the Elamite King Chedorlaomer, as well as the Patriarch Abraham.

Elam declared independence under the supposedly last and 17th Awan king, Kutik-Inshushinak (or Puzur-Insusinak) who reigned from 1980 to 1955 BCE, throwing off the Akkadian language and promoting the Linear Elamite script in the process. Kutik-Inshushinak conquered the future principal Elamite cities of Susa and Anshan. The Shimashki dynasty arose at the tail end of the Awan Dynasties, with an unnamed king from 1955 to 1930 BCE, so that there was a crossover of some twenty-five years. Elam endured a continual threat of attacks from the Sumerians and the Gutians. The Elamite empire state of Shimashki at this time extended into northern Iran and as far as the Caspian Sea. 

A century later in 1882 BCE, the Elamites allied with the city of Susa and led by their king Kindattu (or Kindadu) – ruler from 1892 to 1872 BCE – the 10th king of the Shimashki Dynasty, sacked Ur in Sumer with the first Akkadian King of Isin (or Issn), Ishbi-Erra from 1895 to 1862 BCE; and defeated the 5th and final king of the Ur III Dynasty, the great grandson of Shulgi: Ibbi-Suen, who reigned twenty-four years beginning in 1906 BCE.

The succeeding Sukkalmah dynasty lasting from 1840 to 1500 BCE, is so named after the ‘Great or Grand regents’, the title borne by Elamite rulers. It was also called the Epartid dynasty after the name of its founder Eparti II – also known as Ebarti (or Ebarat) who reigned from circa 1840 to 1820 BCE – and was concurrent with both the Old Assyrian Empire and the Old Babylon period in Mesopotamia. Eparti II was a contemporary of Iddin-Dagan and his reign from 1842 to 1822 BCE; the grandson of Ishbi-Erra and 3rd King of the Isin Dynasty in Akkad – marrying his daughter. 

A ruler named Silhaha – (or Shilkhakha), ruling from 1820 to 1800 BCE – who described himself as ‘the chosen son of Ebarti’ is also credited as the founder of the dynasty. Ebarti II appears as the founder of the dynasty according to building inscriptions, but later kings refer to the second ruler Silhaha, Eparti’s son, in their filiation claims. Possibly, Silhaha won out over a brother; as there was an Eparti III before Shilhaha. Both their names as the founding members of the Sukkalmah Dynasty, have been found on the Gunagi silver vessels, inscribed in the Linear Elamite script. The Gunagi vessels were discovered only recently in 2004.

Notable Eparti dynasty rulers in Elam during this time include the 12th king Siruk-tuh (or Shirukduh), circa 1660 to 1640 BCE, who entered various military coalitions to contain the power of the southern Mesopotamian states; 14th ruler and a son of Siruk-tuh, Siwe-Palar-hupak, circa 1615 to 1595 BCE, who for some time was the most powerful ruler in the region, respectfully addressed as ‘Father’ by Mesopotamian kings such as Zimri-Lim of Mari.

The 16th king, Kutir-Nahhunte I (or Kedor-nakhunta), circa 1560 to 1530 BCE, exacted revenge and plundered the temples of southern Mesopotamia, as the North was under the control of the Old Assyrian Empire. In fact, Kutir-Nahhunte dealt so serious a defeat to the Babylonians that the event was remembered nearly one thousand years later in an inscription of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, when he conquered Susa in 660 BCE. 

Trade between the Indus Valley Civilisation and the cities of Mesopotamia and Elam have been deduced from numerous Indus artefacts; particularly in excavations in Susa, showing the origination of the post-diluvian society in the east and the subsequent migration west to the plains of Mesopotamia – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Objects made with shell species that are characteristic of the Indus coast, such as Trubinella Pyrum and Fasciolaria Trapezium, have been found in the archaeological sites of Mesopotamia and Susa dated circa 2500 to 2000 BCE. Carnelian beads from the Indus were found in Susa in the tell of the citadel excavation. Exchanges seem to have waned after 1900 BCE, with the eventual demise of the Indus valley civilisation. 

It is to this backdrop that we read of an extraordinary account in Genesis chapter fourteen. For a biblical account, it is remarkably detailed and it comprises two parts. A war between a confederacy of Southern Mesopotamian kings against vassal Canaanite kings to the southwest, which we will now look at and an amazing rescue operation of Lot by his uncle, the patriarch Abraham which we will study later in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Genesis 14:1-11

English Standard Version

‘In the days of [1] Amraphel king of Shinar, [2] Arioch king of Ellasar, [3] Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and [4] Tidal king of Goiim [or Nations], 2 these kings made war with 

Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar). 

3 And all these joined forces in the Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea) [north of the present day Dead Sea]. 

Twelve years [from 1907 to 1895 BCE] they had served Chedorlaomer, but in the thirteenth year they rebelled [1907-1895 BCE]. 

5 In the fourteenth year [1894 BCE] Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him came and defeated the Rephaim in Ashteroth-karnaim, the Zuzim in Ham, the Emim in Shaveh-kiriathaim, 

6 and the Horites in their hill country of Seir as far as El-paran on the border of the wilderness. 7 Then they turned back and came to En-mishpat (that is, Kadesh) and defeated all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites who were dwelling in Hazazon-tamar.

8 Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) went out, and they joined battle in the Valley of Siddim 9 with [1] Chedorlaomer king of Elam, [2] Tidal king of Goiim, [3] Amraphel king of Shinar, and [4] Arioch king of Ellasar, four kings against five. 10 Now the Valley of Siddim was full of bitumen pits, and as the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, some fell into them, and the rest fled to the hill country [of Seir]. 

11 So the enemy took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way.’

The five kings of the Plain, happen to represent the exact same five cities that the angels of the Lord came to destroy, sixteen years later and in the process, dramatically rescue Abraham’s nephew Lot, for the second time in his life. The references to the Repha-im, Zuz-im and Em-im are all clans of Nephilim offspring. In fact, the Horites and Amalekites are also included with these mysterious tribes. We will discuss these peoples in depth, in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega and in Chapter XXIX Esau: The thirteenth Tribe.

Though Chedorlaomer I of Elam is listed third – he is placed first in verse nine – Chedorlaomer is the leader of the northern confederacy. The only king not stated is that of Bela or Zoar. This city and its people were the only one of the five which were not destroyed by the Creator’s wrath during the time of Lot. The time frame is particularly critical, as this battle would need to have taken place between Abraham’s birth in 1977 BCE and his death in 1802 BCE. This would align with the end of the Awan II Dynasty and the beginning of the Shimashki.

Head of Chedorlaomer (and no, it is not Tom Hanks): Height 34.3 cm in Arsenical Copper from Iran, circa 2000 BCE. 

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1947

Hitchcock’s Bible Names Dictionary defines the name Chedorlaomer as: a roundness of a sheaf; Smith’s Bible Dictionary as: a handful of sheaves. The full name Chedorlaomer, is not known outside the Bible, although the name is genuinely Elamite. It is composed of two elements, which do appear separately in Elamite sources. ‘Laomer’ is apparently a divine name whose Elamite form is Lagamar. ‘Chedor’ is derived from the Elamite Katir (or Kutir), meaning ‘servant’. We have seen its use in the name of the 16th Sukkalmah Dynasty King Kutir-Nahhunte. The name could also mean ‘servant of the god Lagamar’.

Easton’s Bible Dictionary – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Many centuries before the age of Abraham, Canaan and even the Sinaitic peninsula had been conquered by Babylonian kings, and in the time of Abraham himself Babylonia was ruled by a dynasty which claimed sovereignty over Syria and Palestine. The most famous king of the dynasty was Khammu-rabi‘ (or Hammurabi), ‘who united Babylonia under one rule, and made Babylon its capital. When he ascended the throne’ – in 1894 BCE an unconventional chronology – ‘the country was under the suzerainty of the Elamites, and was divided into two kingdoms, that of Babylon (the Biblical Shinar) and that of Larsa (the Biblical Ellasar). 

The king of Larsa was Eri-Aku (“the servant of the moon-god”), the son of an Elamite prince, Kudur-Mabug’ or Durmah-ilani, ‘who is entitled “the father of the land of the Amorites.” A recently discovered tablet enumerates among the enemies of Khammu-rabi, Kudur-Lagamar (“the servant of the goddess Lagamar”) or Chedorlaomer, Eri-Aku or Arioch, and Tudkhula or Tidal. Khammu-rabi, whose name is also read Ammi-rapaltuor [for] Amraphel by some scholars, succeeded in overcoming Eri-Aku and driving the Elamites out of Babylonia.’

After the Valley of Siddim campaign, Hammurabi – or Amraphel, King of Shinar and – King of Babylon, ironically chose to go against his three former allies and circa 1893 BCE, he too rebelled. As we progress, we will possess significant support for the confirmation of the four Northern kings identities as real historical figures, as well as a credible time frame for the events recorded. It is proposed that Hammurabi was born in 1912 BCE according to an unconventional chronology and ascended the Babylonian throne in 1894 BCE, at the age of 18; following the abdication of the 5th king of the Amorite Dynasty, his father Sin-Muballit, who ruled for nineteen years from 1913 BCE. 

There is fevered debate over when Hammurabi of Babylon lived. This is convenient for scholars, in that it neatly throws a spanner in the works for conclusively supporting the accuracy of the biblical account. Hammurabi is a colourful and influential king in ancient history and thus for detractors, it is problematic to have such a clear sign of the authenticity of the biblical record; which in turn underpins the veracity of the existence of Abraham and his nephew Lot, whom both fathered peoples who have become prominent 21st century nations.

An informative paper: Abraham and Chedorlaomer Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence by Gérard Gertoux; provides comprehensive research in presenting the evidence for Chedorlaomer’s identity and his place as a legitimate historical king. Where we firstly and slightly disagree, is in the chronology by sixty years; for he has presumably, dated the Exodus in the early sixteenth century, circa 1507 BCE as opposed to the middle of the fifteenth century in 1446 BCE. Secondly, he has adopted the most recent academic opinion regarding the time frame for Hammurabi’s rule; some 200 to 150 years later than proposed hereAppendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology. He states, emphasis & bold mine:

‘The only way to assess the veracity (historical truth) of this event is by determining its exact chronology (“the backbone of history”). Foremost one should know that until now Babylonian chronology, which is the best known, has not been yet fixed since Oppert (1863) made the start of the reign of Hammurabi in 2394 BCE, Thureau-Dangin (1927) lowered this date to 2003 BCE and Gasche proposed (1998) lowering it again to 1696 BCE. Hammurabi has rejuvenated about 700 years during the 20th century!

When T.G. Pinches (1856-1934), lecturer in Assyriology at University College, London and at the University of Liverpool, published the Spartoli tablets he made a link between the biblical names: Amraphel, Arioch, Chedorlaomer and Tidal (Genesis 14:1) and Hammurabi, Eri-e-Aku, Kudur-lahgamal and Tudḫula. Unfortunately this deduction has three major errors: 1) Hammurabi (1697-1654) reigned three centuries after the events, 2) his name is very different from that of Amraphel and 3) the reading “laḫ” of the sign KU [for Chedorlaomer] is not documented.’ 

These three reasons are flimsy at best and are really no more than excuses. The dating conflict regarding Hammurabi’s timeline, means it has to be reconciled with other documents to understand when he truly lived. As we will find that Hammurabi was indeed a contemporary of Chedorlaomer, Arioch and Tidal, it is fitting to parallel his timeline with them. This then resolves the dates for Hammurabi’s life.

Some scholars have made the connecting link between the names Hammurabi and Amraphel. That aside, it is not unusual for people and places to have more than one name. Amraphel may have been his given name. As he was only eighteen when he ascended the Babylonian throne after Sin-Muballit and then ruled for a lengthy forty-two years. A new name may have been chosen as monarchs have done up until our recent history. The Bible possibly records his name as Amraphel as he had just ascended the throne and was in his very first year of his reign. An accurate record, no less than his being subsequently known after his exploits as Hammurabi and recorded as such in future histories.

Etymology shows the lah is actually part of Chedorlaomer’s name, though regardless, the Kudur-…gamal is still strong evidence for the correlation with his identity. Gertoux mixes Akkadian and Elamite together, to show the kudur is Akkadian and la(h)gamal is Elamite. The Akkadian actually says: kudur-lagamar and the Elamite says: kutir-lagamol. The Greek Septuagint refers to him as Chodol-logomor and it is synonymous with the aforementioned as well as the Hebrew name: Kdorla’omer.

Gérard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine:

Ku-du7-[ur-La-ga-mar] (line 13) reigned 36 years (line 14) over Akkad as king of Awan I (Elam). King List WB 444 (Weld-Blundell Prism) dated c. 1800 B.C. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (number: AN1923.44).

Kudur-Lagamar’s name is located in a part of the prism which is unfortunately very damaged but three important data have been preserved: [1] a mighty king of Elam at the end of the 3rd millennium BCE, [2] whose name was Kudu[-], [3] died without a successor.

A chronological reconstruction based on synchronisms shows that among the dynasties from Sumerian lists the third and last Elamite king of the Awan I dynasty was Kudur-Lagamar.’

‘The three Elamite kings of the dynasty of Awan I (Puzur-Insusinak [Kutik-Insusinak 1980-1955 BCE], [-]-lu [1955-1930 BCE], Kudur-Lagamar [1929-1893 BCE]) were regarded as genuine kings of Akkad in parallel with the Sumerian kings of the dynasty of Ur III (Ur-Nammu, Sulgi). Besides they used Akkadian in their writings, in place of Elamite, and they quoted Mesopotamian gods rather than their Elamite divinities.’

The Northern kings listed in Genesis fourteen verse one could be geographical in orientation, as Larsa is south of Babylon and Elam is south of Ellasar. Some researchers believe Tidal, King of Nations refers to a very northwesterly position and the peoples of Hatti, or later the Hittites in Anatolia. This would not fit with the cluster of powers in lower Mesopotamia. Nor would assigning all four kings as Assyrian kings as at least one researcher has proposed. This writer considers the Gutians – to the direct north of Elam and northeast of Shinar – as the fourth power in the alliance. We will look at the Gutium in more detail when we study Shem’s fifth son Aram in Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. 

The three main regions for Shem’s children in Mesopotamia were the city-states of Assyria, then the Land of Shinar and thirdly, Elam. As we have learned, the land of Shinar was split into north and south – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis. The North was known as Akkad – Akkadia or Accadia – and in time as Babylonia after its main city Babel; while the South was understood as Sumer. These two regions within Shinar, were the combined offspring of Shem’s son Arphaxad** – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

Arphaxad had two great grandsons, Peleg and Joktan. These two sons of Eber were the forefathers of a major split in the family line which we will study – and are confirmed in the Y-DNA super sub-Haplogroup split of R1 into the predominantly eastern R1a and western R1b. As an aside, the four remaining sons of Shem, while encompassing the earlier Haplogroups of G, I1 and I2 are principally identified by the paternal marker Haplogroups R1a and R1b.

There is good reason to acknowledge Peleg’s descendants comprised the northern territory of Akkad and Joktan’s children were located in Sumer. This would explain why two separate, yet closely related cultures arose though still under the banner of the Land of Shinar. Today, the same scenario has occurred with two distinct, yet adjacent regions of eastern and western nations within Europe – yet all descended from Arphaxad.**

In the British Museum there are artefacts mentioning three of the four northern kings at the Battle of the Valley of Siddim. The first two accounts record Chedorlaomer leading a rebellion with Tidal and Arioch’s son Dursrilani, a co-regent perhaps, against the king of Shinar at Babel circa 1929 to 1909 BCE, prior to the Valley of Siddim battle in 1894 BCE. The unnamed king of Shinar then strikes back. This king would have been from the Amorite Dynasty, the same as Hammurabi, the 6th king. The two possible kings are the 4th king, Apil-Sin who reigned from 1930 to 1913 BCE or the 5th king, Sin-Muballit* from 1913 to 1894 BCE. Each are viable as Apil-Sin is Hammurabi’s grandfather and Sin-Muballit, his father. A clear and reasonable motive for Hammurabi’s later actions against Chedorlaomer, suddenly becomes apparent: revenge.

The first artefact is British Museum #BM 35404 – sp II.987, which says: 

“The property and the possessions of Babylon, small and great, in their faithful counsel to Chedorlaomer [Ku-der-lah-ga-mal], king of the land of Elam”… I am a King, the son of a king… the son of a daughter of the king who on the throne of dominion have sat… Dur-sir-ilani the son of Arioch [Eri-ekua] who with the spoil of the throne of dominion sat, and with the sword was killed.”

The second artefact is British Museum #BM 34062 – sp.158 & SPII.962 and states that Chedorlaomer the king of the Elamites, turned against the king of Shinar and attacked his cities at Babil and Borsippa:

“The enemy, the Elamite, multiplied evils against Bel [Baal] and Babil [Babel] which he planned evil against… there he set his mind on destroying the temple… the enemy, the Elamite, took its goods… He decreed it’s destruction… he showed his dislike for and barred the people of Bel of Ezida… the road to Sumer. Who is this Chedorlaomer [Ku-der-lah-ga-mal], the maker of this evil? He has also gathered the Unman-Manda, and the people of Bel he has ruined… the Elamite caused his yoke to be directed down to Borsippa. He set his face against and he traversed also the road of darkness, the road to Mesku. This wicked man the Elamite, destroyed its palace, the princes he subdued with the sword, and from all the temples he carried off their goods as spoils of war, and he took them back to Elam.”

Notice Babylon is referred to as its original name of Babel – its name inherited prior to the Tower of Babel incident – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Chedorlaomer was a formidable opponent, a ‘wicked man’ who had subdued a future threat in Babylon and with it, their king – either Hammurabi’s father or grandfather – before amalgamating the states into a powerful coalition. 

Abraham and Chedorlaomer Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux:

‘The Spartoli tablets (c. 650 BCE) describe [the] famous attack of Babylonia by a coalition of evil kings named Kudur-KUKUmal, [ku.ku means: carrying no mercy] king of Elam, Tudhula, king of Gutium, and Eri-Aku [king of Larsa]. This coalition of kings (Sumer, Larsa, Gutium) united under Kutur-Lagamar is quite likely, because all these kings were vassals or allies of the king of Elam (and Akkad) at that time, moreover, they came from neighbouring regions. Chedorlaomer’s route and the description of his actions show that this king came to this region near Egypt in order to maintain control over this new land trade route. 

This ambitious project had to have worried Amenemhat I (1975-1946) because southern Canaan was a big source of supply. In order to protect Egypt, Amenemhat I built the “Walls of the Ruler”. One can notice that the area of Sodom is called Sutu(m) in execration texts (then Moab after 1800 BCE)’ Moab as a son of Lot, lived where Lot had previously dwelt. 

Gertoux: ‘Thus the kings of Sumer [Ur] were oppressed on two occasions: once by Kudu [Lagamar in 1909 BCE]* king of Awan, and once by Kindadu [in 1882 BCE], king of Simaski. These two kings of Elam left a bad unforgettable memory in Sumerian annals. After the destruction of Ur the kings of Elam were blackened because they were charged with all misfortunes that occurred in the land of Sumer.’

The Pharaoh mentioned by Gertoux, Amenemhat I – who reigned from 1677 to 1647 BCE – was actually a Pharaoh while Joseph and the other sons of Jacob were dwelling in Goshen, the Nile delta region in Lower Egypt – some three hundred years after Gertoux’s orthodox, though inaccurate dating – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? The wall he built was to the east of the delta region, to protect the eastern Egyptian frontier from the inhabitants of the Sinai Peninsula. As relations with the Israelites were still favourable at this time, it would seem a benevolent act and not an insidious one to contain the prospering sons of Jacob within Egypt’s boundary; though this cannot be ruled out as a partial motive. 

There is only one possible Pharaoh who ruled between 1929 BCE – the ascension of Chedorlaomer to the Elamite throne – and 1907 BCE, the first year of enforced tribute of the Transjordan City-States, who would have been concerned with the growing strength of Chedorlaomer. 

The 3rd Pharaoh of the 1st Dynasty Djer, was the the son of Hor-Aha. Prominent during Djer’s reign was his grandmother, Queen Neithhotep. Cemetery evidence confirms that she lived during the reign of Hor-Aha and succeeded him into Djer’s rule. Neithoptep had been the wife of the 1st Pharaoh, Narmer also known as Menes. The First Dynasty of Egypt is incorrectly dated as beginning circa 3100 BCE. We will return to the dating and accurate sequencing of the Egyptian dynasties in an unconventional chronology.

Djer ruled Lower and Upper Egypt beginning 1922 BCE for fifty-four years until 1868 BCE. What is interesting about this Pharaoh is that it was Djer, who met Abraham and Sarah in 1902 BCE, during the 20th year of his reign while there was a famine in Canaan. We will return to this story in Genesis chapter twelve, when we study Abraham in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia

The third artifact is British Museum #BM 35496 – sp III.2. A new King of Shinar, namely Hammurabi – or Amraphel – counter-attacks Dursirilani, Tidal and Chedorlaomer:

“Samas [Babylonian sun god] the illuminator of… Merodach [chief Babylonian god]… the rulers who were not nourishing… he caused to be slain. Dur-sir-ilani, the son of Arioch [Eri-ekua]… his goods he carried off to the waters of Babylon and back to the temple of Esaggil… his son, with the weapon of his hands, like a lamb he was slaughtered… the child he cut off… Tidal [Tu-ud-hul-amar] son of Gazza… his goods he carried off to the waters of Babylon and to the temple of Esaggil… 

His son, with the weapon of his hands, fell upon him… of his dominion, before the temple of Annunit… Elam, the city of Ahhe to the land of Rabbatu, he spoiled in ruins, he set the fortress of Akkad, the whole of Borsippa…ended Chedorlaomer [Ku-der-lah-ga-mal], his son, and with the steel sword he pierced his heart… his enemy. He took the will of these kings, the lords of sin… their rebellions… who the chief of the gods, Merodach, brought his anger against.”

It entailed a series of battles over a number of years imposed by the king of Shinar, violently slaughtering the other three kings and their families and in the process… ending three separate dynasties in a bloodbath of destruction. The artefacts confirm the names of Dursirilani, Tidal, and Chedorlaomer. Possibly, Arioch was the one casualty amongst the Mesopotamian kings during Abraham’s night time raid and this is why his son Dursirilani is listed as king of Ellasar (or Larsa), at the time of Hammurabi’s betrayal and revenge. Alternatively, Dursirilani may have been a co-regent with his father Arioch.

It was shortly after the Battle of the Valley of Siddim, when Hammurabi rebelled and slaughtered his – once allies now – enemies, beginning in 1893 BCE. 

It may now explain why Amraphel is listed first in the Genesis account. Ultimately, he killed his three rivals; each powerful rulers in southern Mesopotamia. As the king of Babylon and Akkad, Amraphel added the kingship of Sumer while subjugating both the lands of Elam and the Guti.

Regarding Chedorlaomer, the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, on British Museum Sp. II 987 and Sp. III, 2, records: 

‘… refers to the bond of heaven extended to the four regions, and the fame which Merodach set for the Elamites in Babylon, the city of his glory. So the gods, in their faithful or everlasting counsel, decreed to Kudur-lahgumal, king of Elam their favor. He came down, and performed what was good to them, and exercised dominion in Babylon, the city of Kar-Dunias (Babylonia). When in power, however, he acted in a way which did not please the Babylonians… [between 1929 and 1894 BCE].

The less perfect fragment (Sp. III, 2) contains, near the beginning, the word hammu, and if this be, as Professor F. Hommel has suggested, part of the name Hammurabi (Amraphel), it would in all probability place the identification of Kudur-lahgumal with Chedorlaomer beyond a doubt.’

This would cement an already compelling argument for the veracity of the king of Shinar’s identity as Hammurabi, who as Amraphel, was a contemporary of and briefly allied with Chedorlaomer, when he ascended the throne in 1894 BCE. Amraphel then in turn, rebelled against Chedorlaomer, killing him in 1893 BCE for the humiliation perpetrated against probably his father, Sin-Muballit or possibly his grandfather, Apil-Sin.

King Hammurabi

Hammurabi and the Babylonian Empire, Dr Joshua J Mark, 2018 – emphasis mine:

‘Hammurabi (also known as Khammurabi and Ammurapi… assumed the throne… and expanded the kingdom to conquer all of ancient Mesopotamia. The kingdom of Babylon comprised only the cities of Babylon, Kish, Sippar, and Borsippa when Hammurabi came to the throne but, through a succession of military campaigns, careful alliances made and broken when necessary, and political manoeuvres, he held the entire region under Babylonian control by [his death].

According to his own inscriptions, letters and administrative documents from his reign, he sought to improve the lives of those who lived under his rule. He is best known in the modern day for his law code which, although not the earliest code of laws, came to serve as a model for other cultures and is thought to have influenced the laws set down by Hebrew scribes, including those from the biblical Book of Exodus.

The fifth king of the dynasty, Sin-Muballit… successfully completed many public works projects but was unable to expand the kingdom or compete with the rival city of Larsa to the south. Larsa was the most lucrative trade center on the Persian Gulf and the profits from this trade enriched the city and encouraged expansion so that most of the cities of the south were under Larsa’s control. Sin-Muballit [1913-1894 BCE] led a force against Larsa but was defeated by their king Rim Sin I [1924-1865 BCE]. At this point it is uncertain what exactly happened, but it seems that Sin-Muballit was compelled to abdicate in favor of his son Hammurabi. Whether Rim Sin I thought Hammurabi would be less of a threat to Larsa is also unknown but, if so, he would be proven wrong. 

The historian Durant writes: “At the outset of [Babylonian history] stands the powerful figure of Hammurabi, conqueror and lawgiver through a reign of forty-three years. Primeval seals and inscriptions transmit him to us partially – a youth full of fire and genius, a very whirlwind in battle [akin to Alexander the Great], who crushes all rebels, cuts his enemies into pieces, marches over inaccessible mountains, and never loses an engagement. Under him the petty warring states of the lower valley were forced into unity and peace, and disciplined into order and security by an historic code of laws.”

‘The alliances [Hammurabi] made with other states would repeatedly be broken when the king found it necessary to do so but, as rulers continued to enter into pacts with Hammurabi, it does not seem to have occurred to any of them that he would do the same to them as he had previously to others. A technique he seems to have used first in this engagement would become his preferred method in others when circumstances allowed: the damming up of water sources to the city to withhold them from the enemy until surrender or, possibly, withholding the waters through a dam and then releasing them to flood the city before then mounting an attack.’

In 1866 BCE, the undefeated Hammurabi turned against Rim-Sin I because he had refused to support Hammurabi in his ongoing war against Elam, despite pledging troops. Hammurabi with extra troops from Mari, attacked Mashkan-shapir located on the northern edge of Rim-Sin’s realm. Hammurabi’s forces reached Larsa with alacrity and after a six-month siege the city of Larsa fell. Rim-Sin I escaped from the city but was soon found, taken prisoner and died thereafter in 1865 BCE. Rim-Sin I was the 14th and last king of the Larsa Dynasty which had begun in 2128 BCE.

In 1864 BCE, Hammurabi defeated a coalition that stood against him comprising Elam, the Guti and the Marhashi kingdom in Iran. The following year, he defeated Zimri-Lim the King of Mari, an Amorite kingdom northwest of Babylon and his former ally. Hammurabi not only broke his alliance with Zimri-Lim but also for the first and only time, completely destroyed Mari rather than conquering it. Hammurabi would subdue cities, absorb them into his kingdom, repair and improve them. Scholars have debated his reasons and believe Mari’s great wealth posed a threat and was too close in proximity to Babylon’s designs on being the greatest city in Mesopotamia. 

After Mari’s destruction, Hammurabi marched on Asshur, took control of the extent of Assyria and then Eshunna; so that by 1857 BCE – five years before his death at age sixty – he ruled all of Mesopotamia.

Joshua Mark: ‘A popular title applied to Hammurabi in his lifetime was bani matim, ‘builder of the land’, because of the many building projects and canals he ordered constructed throughout the region. Documents from the time attest to the efficacy of Hammurabi’s rule and his sincere desire to improve the lives of the people of Mesopotamia… letters and administrative works… such as directives for the building of canals, food distribution, beautification and building projects, and legal issues…

His law code is not the first such code in history (though it is often called so) but is certainly the most famous from antiquity prior to the code set down in the biblical books. The Code of Ur-Nammu… which originated with either Ur-Nammu or his son Shulgi of Ur, is the oldest code of laws in the world. Unlike the earlier Code of Ur-Nammu, which imposed fines or penalties of land, Hammurabi’s code epitomized the principle known as Lex Talionis, the law of retributive justice, in which punishment corresponds directly to the crime, better known as the concept of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’, made famous from the later law code of the Old Testament… 

By [1857 BCE]… Hammurabi was old and sick. In the last years of his life his son, Samsu-Iluna’ who ruled from 1852 to 1815 BCE, ‘had already taken over the responsibilities of the throne and assumed full reign by’ 1851 BCE. ‘The conquest of Eshnunna had removed a barrier to the east that had buffered the region against incursions by people such as the Hittites and Kassites. Once that barrier was gone, and news of the great king weakening spread, the eastern tribes prepared their armies to invade. 

The vast kingdom Hammurabi had built during his lifetime began to fall apart within a year of his death, and those cities that had been part of vassal states secured their borders and announced their autonomy. None of Hammurabi’s successors could put the kingdom back together again, and first the Hittites… then the Kassites invaded. The Hittites sacked Babylon and the Kassites inhabited and re-named it. The Elamites, who had been so completely defeated by Hammurabi decades before, invaded and carried off the stele of Hammurabi’s Law Code which was discovered at the Elamite city of Susa in 1902 CE.’

Gérard Gertoux summary:

‘Kedor-Lagomer corresponds to Kudur-Lagarma which is an Akkadian transcription of Kutir-Lagamal “bearer (servant) of Lagamal”. According to the biblical text (Genesis 10:10), Shinar was a region south of Mesopotamia composed of at least three major cities: Babylon (Babel), Uruk (Erech) and Aggad (Akkad). In time the name Babylon came to mean the whole of Babylonia (Daniel 1:2). During the period [1988-1894 BCE] the two main actors in the Mesopotamian world were the kings of Ur III and the kings of [late] Awan I [/II and early Shimashki]. 

The power of these two empires [Sumer and Elam] depended on trade and therefore control of trade routes. They earned money through vassal kings who levied customs duties on traders passing through their territories and had to pay to their “emperors” for ensuring their security (by means of military force). Kudur-Lagamar probably wanted to create a new major trade route from Susa to Egypt. The route taken by Abraham and that one followed by Chedorlaomer are in agreement with the major communication routes of the time.

In this context, the capture of the goddess Nanaya [in 1909 BCE] served to justify the westward expansionist projects of Kudur-Lagamar. Indeed, change in titulatures confirm his new role of “king of Akkad”. The complete titulature of the kings of Awan I, as the one of Puzur-Insusinak, was as follows: governor (ENSI) of Susa, viceroy (GIR.NITA) of Elam and king (LUGAL) of Awan. 

Abram…at that time… lived in Ur… he must have learned that Chedorlaomer had confiscated the statue of the goddess Nanaya [Inana or Ishtar]. [As the Assyrian king] Ashurbanipal refers exactly [circa 660 BC] to Ku-du[r-Lagamar], king of Awan I, in Sumerian royal lists and as the Spartoli tablets describe the attack of Babylonia by the king of Elam named Kudur-KUKUmal, this king of Elam must have been Chedorlaomer

Prior to [1909 BCE] relationships with the kings of Elam remained cordial… From this date Kutur-Lagamar behaves as “King of Akkad” and, in the same way as Sargon of Akkad, he chose to open a new trade route to the west as far as Egypt. Titulary of Ur… kings changed… [from] King of Sumer and Akkad… [to] King of the 4 corners (of Universe) [an indicative title of the later Mede and Persian (Elamite) empire], indicating that Akkad was no longer under full control of the king of Ur… 

[In summation]: King Kudur-Lagamar [reigning from 1929 to 1893 BCE] alias Chedorlaomer, actually existed since he was the third and last king of Awan I, the only Elamite dynasty mentioned in Sumerian lists. His two main actions that have passed to posterity were the capture of Uruk’s goddess (Nanaya) and [the] looting of the city of Sodom.’

The timing of two years – as deduced from Gertoux’s chronology – prior to the beginning of the tribute being exacted on the Canaanite cities in 1907 BCE, means King Chedorlaomer of Elam with his allies, Tudhula, king of the Gutium, and Eri-Aku king of Larsa, would have fought both the kings of Babylon [Akkad] and Sumer [Uruk] to gain control of the land of Shinar. This was twenty years after Chedorlaomer came to the throne of Elam and thus gave him ample time to consolidate his power, build his military capability and win or subjugate the necessary allies. 

This means, we now know which king he fought against in Babel; it would have been Hammurabi’s father, Sin-Muballit who reigned from 1913 to 1894 BCE – the 5th king of the Amorite Babylonian Dynasty – and in Ur, King Shu-Suen ruler from 1915 to 1906 BCE; the grandson of Shulgi, the son of Ur-Nammu, the founder of the Ur III Dynasty. This explains the abdication of Sin-Muballit in favour of his son, Hammurabi who was probably chosen by Chedorlaomer as a puppet king. A role that the young Amraphel spectacularly did not follow.

Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible, C H W Johns & James Hastings, 1909:

‘Arioch king of Ellasar was allied with Chedorlaomer in the campaign against the kings of the plain (Genesis 14:1). He has been identified with Rim-sin, king of Larsa, and consequently Ellasar is thought to be for al-Larsa, the city of Larsa. Larsa, modern Senkereh in Lower Babylonia on the east bank of the Euphrates, was celebrated for its temple and worship of the sun-god Shamash’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

The meaning of Ellasar is very close to the meaning of Nimrod, who we will study in detail – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. Ellasar in Hebrew means ‘rebellious God’ or ‘onto rebellion’ from the word ‘el, meaning God; or denoting motion toward and the verb sarar, ‘to be rebellious’ or ‘stubborn’, though more in attitude rather than revolt.

The city of Ellasar, is believed by most scholars to be the same city identified as Larsa. Some place it far north where the Hurrians dwelt, though this would not fit with the cluster of the remaining three cities in southern Mesopotamia. Larsa is credibly located southeast of the very ancient city of Erech or Uruk – from which Iraq derives its name – and northwest of Ur, where Abraham’s family originated – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

Tudhula of the Gutium is reputed to have ruled approximately from 1909 to either 1893 or possibly 1864 BCE. Support for these dates, is that Tidal may have come to power due to Chedorlaomer’s politicking and thus as one of his allies, would have assisted in the defeat of Babylon and Ur in 1909 BCE. Plus, Tidal if still king, would have died when Hammurabi defeated his coalition with Elam in 1864 BCE – or more likely earlier in 1893 BCE as discussed.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia – emphasis mine:

‘ERI-AKU er-i-a-koo’, e-ri-a-ku’: This is the probable Sumerian reading of the well-known Babylonian name written with the characters for “servant” (Sem wardu or ardu) and the group standing for the Moon-god Sin^ (written En-zu = Zu-en), otherwise Aku, the whole meaning “servant of the Moon-god.” This ruler, who was king of Larsa [Ellasa], is generally identified with the Arioch of Genesis 14:9. Eri-Aku belonged to an Elamite family which held the throne of Larsa, a state which, in common with Babylonia itself, acknowledged the suzerainty of Elam… it may be noted, that the expression adda, “father,” probably means simply “administrator”.’

Gérard Gertoux: ‘The Akkadian name Warad-Sin, king (LUGAL) of Larsa, is written Eri-Aku (e-ri-a-ku) which is a transcription of the Sumerian name IR-AGA “servant of the lunar disc” translated into Akkadian as (u)-ar-du-a-gu… Warad-Agu, an equivalent of Warad-Sin “servant of the Moon^ (god)”.’

What is interesting here, is that Rim-Sin I was the final king of the Larsa Dynasty from 1924 BCE to 1865 BCE and he is identified with Arioch of Ellasar (or Eri-Aku of Larsa). Yet Gertoux says Warad-Sin is also Eri-Aku, or Arioch. In the king lists, Warad-Sin was the brother of Rim-Sin I and supposedly ruled for twelve years prior to his brother from 1936 BCE to 1924 BCE and as a co-regency with his father, Kudur-Marbuk. Arioch, may then be a family name, a title, or even a descriptive name.

For we learn more about Eri-Aku in the Targum of Palestine account of Genesis 14:9, in that Eri-Aku was a giant. He was called Arioch due to his great height. Arioch is derived from Arik which means ‘tall among the giants’. Even compared to other giants, Arioch was impressive and intimidating. This is an interesting piece of information, as the Northern confederacy fought against Nephilim descended Elioud giants before literally turning around to subdue the five Canaanite kings. 

Picking up the story from Genesis Six Giants, emphasis mine:

‘Of course, no ancient records exist that tell us how many giants served under Chedorlaomer. He may have had only Arioch, or that towering king plus a few others, or he may have had many such men in his service. In any event, the results of their opening battle with the Jordanian giants clearly show that he commanded a far superior force. Sweeping down the valley, his army quickly laid siege to Ashteroth Karnaim.

This chief city of the Rephaim lay in the district of Bashan,’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe – ‘about six miles northwest of Edrei. These giants worshipped Astarte, the goddess of the crested^ moon’ – refer article: Lilith. 

‘They were greatly decimated. Continuing along what the ancients called the King’s Highway, a trade route that ran the entire length of the Trans-jordanian plateau to the Gulf of Aqabah, Chedorlaomer and his confederate kings next fell upon the enormous Zamzummim people at Ham. Some archaeologists identify this city with modern Ham, which is located in eastern Gilead, about four miles south of Irbid. 

After this, the kings from Elam and Mesopotamia attacked and cut off the terrible Emim giants at nearby Shaveh Kiriathaim. These people, described as “great and many and tall,” occupied the land that the Moabites later took. Sodom and Gomorrah, at the [northern] tip of the Salt Sea, stood next in line. They quickly got ready to defend themselves, expecting the worst. But to their amazement the invaders passed them by. Pressing on southward into the rough mountain range of Seir, Chedorlaomer waged war instead against the giant Horites.’

The land of Canaan was infested with Nephilim descended Elioud and was literally the land of the giants. In verse seven of Genesis chapter fourteen, just after the Horites are mentioned, we read about the defeated Amalekites. This reveals that the Amalekites existed before Esau had a future grandson called Amalek, some one hundred and twenty years later. Esau was to marry into and live with the Nephilim related Horites. The Amalekites of the Bible are identifiable in secular sources under a different name, which we will study. The link in Genesis fourteen between the Horites and Amalek and then Esau marrying into the Horites and naming a grandson Amalek is not only not a coincidence, but rather quite significant – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and article: Na’amah. The Amalekites were also Elioud and related to the giant Horites.

Genesis 6 Giants: ‘He also conquered the Negev to eliminate any threat from that quarter. Having thus neutralized all the countryround, he finally turned his attention upon the rebellious Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighbors. Giving up whatever security their fortified walls afforded them, “the king of Sodom and the king of Gomorrah and the king of Admah and the king of Zeboiim and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) came out,” notes Moses; “and they arrayed for battle against them in the valley of Siddim, against Chedorlaomer king of Elam and Tidal king of Goiim and Amraphel king of Shinar and Arioch king of Ellasar – four kings against five”.’

Regarding these ‘Canaanites’, the Book of Jasher 10:25-27, states:

‘And four men from the family of Ham went to the land of the plain; these are the names of the four men, Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboyim. And these men built themselves four cities in the land of the plain, and they called the names of their cities after their own names. And they and their children and all belonging to them dwelt in those cities, and they were fruitful and multiplied greatly and dwelt peaceably.’

Recall, the original inhabitants of Canaan unsurprisingly, were the peoples descended from Canaan – the son of Ham – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. The Nephilim arrived after the Canaanites and dwelt amongst them. The Book of Jasher claims Nimrod was the king of Shinar. We have learned that Hammurabi is undoubtedly the king in question. Nearly 5,000 years elapsed since Nimrod and the Tower of Babel incident and though longevity was on his side, it would be unlikely he was still living at this time. Such a powerful figure such as he was, he would have been still ruling and making his presence known if alive. His inferred demise points to when the Tower was ‘destroyed’ – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Genesis 6 Giants: ‘This bold strategy to meet the invaders in the open field was decided by the surrounding treacherous terrain. Many slime pits, dug to obtain pitch or mortar for building, transversed the area. While most English translations simply describe the Valley of Siddim as being “full of slime pits,” the force of the original Hebrew language, according to Speiser, conveys to the reader a picture of “one bitumen pit after another.” The locals were most familiar with the locations of these pits. The invaders were not. 

They were also accustomed to the foul-smelling, boiling waters on whose surface floated lumps of asphalt or bitumen the size of bulls. The enemy, they hoped, would be at least a little disconcerted by the unfamiliar terrain and terrible odor and afraid of falling into the boiling waters. But the pits failed to deter the invaders. Indeed, they soon turned them to their own advantage. In the resulting warfare, many in the defenders’ ranks saw death. Alarmed by the way the battle was progressing against them, the five local kings and their armies panicked and attempted to flee the field. The slime pits, however, made retreat difficult. In the confusion, two of the fleeing kings – and presumedly many men with them – fell into the tar pits. Those who escaped fled into the mountains.

For a time some scholars disbelieved this Genesis story, labeling it a fiction. But evidence dug up by archaeologists in recent years verifies that in Abraham’s time a great destruction came upon the very places mentioned in Chedorlaomer’s invasion. 

Dr. Nelson Glueck, whose work in this area extended from 1932 until 1947, when it was halted by the Israeli-Arab disturbances, reports that the highly developed civilization which flourished here during the Middle Bronze I period (c. 2100-1900 B.C.) came to an abrupt and savage end [in 1894 BCE]. 

This well-known archaeologist found that not only the cities mentioned in Genesis but also many villages – beginning with Ashtaroth-Karnaim and proceeding south through Transjordan and the Negev to Kadesh Barnea in the Sinai – were systematically gutted. “From southern Syria to central Sinai, their fury raged,” he writes. “A punitive expedition developed into an orgy of annihilation. I found that every village in their path had been plundered and left in ruins, and the countryside laid waste. The population had been wiped out or led away into captivity. For hundreds of years thereafter, the entire area was like an abandoned cemetery, hideously unkept, with all its monuments shattered and strewn in pieces on the ground”.’

Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Page 148:

‘The power of the invading kings, numbered as 800,000 according to the Haggadah, must have been overwhelming indeed, for they not only crushed these fortified cities but they never were rebuilt and the land [of the northern tip of the Dead Sea] remained unoccupied for a thousand years.’ 

Some will repeatedly take an opposing view and there will always be those who do not see what is in plain sight. Yet we have substantial verification documenting as historically authentic, the biblical account recording a devastating war.

The four northern kings were real personages and led the ancient coalition comprising city-states located in Elam, Akkad, Sumer and Aram. Acadia represented by descendants of Peleg and Sumer by those from Joktan – brothers and great grandsons from Shem’s son Arphaxad, collectively known as the land of Shinar – and with Elam and Aram, they exacted terrible revenge for disobedience by the southern kings of Ham and the Nephilim descended Elioud giants.

The modus operandi consisting of devastating destruction rings true, for we have learned how both Chedorlaomer and Hammurabi were uncompromising in their style of warfare. Possibly, a further reason why Amraphel is listed first, even while still a youngster; with his blitzkrieg style, he likely made a sizeable impression and perhaps shared the lead in the ensuing carnage; the obliteration of the opposition forces; and the desolation of their land.

“Look,” says the Teacher, “I have discovered this by adding one thing to another to find out the explanation…”

Ecclesiastes 7:27 Christian Standard Bible

“I would rather be in minority and be right, than in the majority and wrong.”

Jodi Picoult 

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

Elam & Turkey

Chapter XVIII

The first born son of Shem is Elam. We have discussed his relationship with Japheth’s son Madai and Elam’s identity as the people of Turkey in Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

The impact of Turkey’s influence and culture on the peoples who live adjacent is palpable in names and language, particularly on the Central Asian Republics descended from Madai

The Elamites were historically known as Persians and in the Bible, it is Elam which is being referred to and not the Persians from the nation of Iran who dwell in the region today. We have learned in the preceding chapter that Iran is descended from Lud and Lud is associated closely with Phut, Cush and Persia in the Bible – the nations respectively of Pakistan, India and Turkey. The regional powers of Lud-Iran and Elam-Turkey have crossed swords more than once. They are both descended from Noah’s son Shem and due to their location, have similarly intermingled with other people from primarily the Middle East for Iran and likewise plus Central Asia for Turkey, to each produce a complex ethnicity as shown by their paternal Haplogroups for example. 

Iran has intermixed with a son of Mizra from Ham and Turkey likewise as well as with the sons of Madai, a son from Japheth. Of the five sons of Shem, Elam and Lud are the closest genetically and so it is not a surprise that they should dwell in close proximity or share the same Islamic faith; both having one foot in two different worlds, geographically and in ideology. 

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Elam was a son of Shem (Genesis 10:22). Elam settled east of the ancient city of Babylon. Daniel the prophet spent some time in Elam (Daniel 8:2). The Elamites named the most famous mountain in their land Elwend (Rawlinson’s SEVEN GREAT MONARCHIES, chapter 1. Media). No wonder the Elamites were called the “Wends” in Europe.

Elam early invaded the Palestinian Coast of the Mediterranian (Genesis 14:1). There they named a river Elwend – the Greeks called it the Orontes. Some of them migrated into Asia Minor where they were named the people of Pul (Isaiah 66:19). From the word “Pul” comes P-o-land – the land of Pol or Pul! From Asia Minor they migrated into South Russia, then into Eastern Europe. Another tribe in ancient Elam was called KASHU (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BIBLICA…) In Poland we find the Kashub living today! (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITTANICA “Kashubes.”) The Greeks in ancient times said that the Elimaei dwelled northwest of them – in what is Southern Yugoslavia today (SMITH’s CLASSICAL DICTIONARY “Elimea”). 

The word Elimaei was also used by the Greeks to refer to the ancient land of “Elam” near Babylon. The Latins called the Elamites or Wends “Eneti”. Strabo, the Roman geographer wrote about the migration “of Enetians from Paphlagonia in Asia Minor TO THE ADRIATIC” – modern Yugoslavia! (GEOGRAPHY OF STRABO, page 227). Surely there is no mistaking where Elam is today.

… “Siberia!” The same word was used to refer to a part of ancient Elam, and today we have the Serbians in Yugoslavia – part of the land of Elam today! In Bible times Elam was divided between East and West, that is, between Media and Babylon. The same is true today! The Elamites are divided between East and West – between Western Europe and the Russian Iron Curtain’ – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

The former Yugoslavia and Poland do descend from Shem, though not from Elam. Pul is not a mistranslation for Phut, nor does it refer to Poland, but rather a King of Assyria as already touched upon previously – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.

Israel a History of – emphasis mine:

‘The first of Shem’s sons listed is Elam. The Elamites are recurrent throughout Scripture, and many monuments attest to their prominence in the region. Genesis 14 describes a confederation of Kings that waged war in Canaan during the times of Abram. 

One of the leaders of this alliance was Chedorlaomer, King of Elam. The Elamites capital city was Susa, or Shushan. This archaic city was located east of Mesopotamia. The Noahic Prophecy of Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem is fulfilled through the Elamites. They later merged with other peoples, namely the Medes. The Medes were descended from Madai, a son of Japheth. These two peoples joined forces to form the Persian Empire. Thus, the descendants from two of the sons of Noah, Shem and Japheth, joined together to form one of antiquity’s most powerful empires.’

According to Abraim, the meaning of Elam in Hebrew is ‘hidden’, from the verb ‘alam ‘to be hidden.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

  • A region named Elam is first mentioned in the War of Four Against Five Kings, when Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, enters into an alliance with kings Amraphel, [Arioch] and Tidal to battle an alliance of five Canaanite kings (Genesis 14:1). 
  • The Persian province named Elam, or Elymais, mentioned by the prophets Jeremiah 49:36… and Isaiah (21:2). The author of Acts seems to distinguish between Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia [Sumer] (Acts 2:9), and Ezra equates the Elamites with the men of Susa (a Persian city – Ezra 4:9).
  • The first mentioned person named Elam is a son of Shem… It’s assumed that the Biblical narrative identifies this Elam as the ancestor of the Persians.
  • A gatekeeping Korahite (1 Chronicles 26:3).
  • A Benjaminite (1 Chronicles 8:24).
  • An Elam among the signers of the covenant (Nehemiah 10:14).
  • Two heads of families that came back from exile, both named Elam (Ezra 2:7 and 2:31). One of these is possibly the same as the next:
  • The father of Shecaniah, son of Jehiel, who confessed to Ezra that Israel’s marriage to local women was contrary to the stipulations of YHWH (Ezra 10:2).
  • A priest present at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall (Nehemiah 12:42).

‘The verb (‘alam)… can be derived of any of the following: to be hidden or concealed and noun (ta’alumma) describes a hidden thing, but all this with an emphasis on a potential coming out rather than a hiding for, say, safety or mysteriousness. Noun (‘elem) describes a young man, (‘alma) a young woman, and (‘alumim) youth(s) in general, which appears to appeal to the still “hidden” potential of youth. Likewise the noun (olam), which means forever or everlasting, appears to refer to the potential of any present situation, which may realise when time is unlimited.

For the meaning of the name Elam, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Hidden, and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Hidden Time, Eternity, but the name Elam means just as much Young Man or Always.’ Strong’s Concordance adds ‘distant’.

‘Persia: from the verb (paras), to split or divide.

The name Persia once belonged to a huge empire, and is today mostly used to refer to the geographical area in which the much smaller derivative state of Iran (… which was named after king Aryaman, who lived around the time of David in 1000 BC) is situated, as well as its culture, history and language (Farsi, from the same root as Persia, which is spoken in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajkistan and some other formerly Persian regions)’ – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

‘Cyrus descended from Achaemenes (born around 700 BC… ) who had founded the Achaemenid dynasty of rulers of Persis (now Fars province of Iran; its ancient capital was called Parsa or Persepolis by the Greeks), and was named after his paternal grandfather Cyrus the First. Cyrus the Second’s maternal grandfather Astyages was a Median king and Cyrus may actually have spent his early childhood at the Median court.

For some obscure reason, the mean Median king Astyages went to war with his noble grandson Cyrus, who by that time had just ascended the modest and feudal throne of Persis. The ensuing victory was Cyrus’, but was also strikingly reported due to a mutiny on the Median side. Cyrus marched onto to the Median capital, and kept going until he had conquered Lydia [Lud] and Babylon… Cyrus the Great, had liberated and united their countless tribes and peoples into the largest empire the world has ever seen, stretching from the Balkans to India.

Persia’s signature quality was its promotion of religious and cultural diversity via a centralized administration, and for many centuries, Cyrus’ Persia was remembered with great nostalgia as a time of worldwide peace. It was that international nostalgic memory of Persian global freedom that paved the way for the copy-cat empire of Alexander of Macedon.

The origin of the name Persia appears to be not wholly agreed upon, but an excellent candidate is the ancient root far-, from whence come the Farsi word fars, meaning horseman, and the Arabic word farash, meaning stable [for horses]. The original Persians were either part of or developed close to the Eurasian nomads of the steppes, who are credited with the domestication of the horse. Tamed horses did wonders for the advancement of civilization, as well as for warfare and the centralization of large territories. For better or worse, the horse culture was exceedingly dominant in Eurasia, and it stands to reason that the Persians proudly dubbed themselves The Horse People.

This far- root may even be related to the Greek word (peri) and Avestan pairi-, meaning “around”, from which comes the modern Persian and Arabic word firdaus, meaning garden, and ultimately our word “paradise”. This very common Greek word (peri) is also the root of words such as the adjective (perissos), meaning exceeding, and the noun (perisseuma), meaning abundance. The Greek name for Persia was (Persis), which to a Greek ear probably sounded like Land of Plenty. This is not so strange since even in our time the word Persia brings to mind surplus and luxury (think of Persian rugs, Persian cats and even the peach, or “persic”).

The roots (paras)… most basically speak of a sudden bursting forth in a wide spray of elements of something that was previously well concealed [see meaning for Elam]. Verb (paras) means to break and divide in equal shares. The name Persia probably literally means Land Of The Horses*, but because the horse became known as “one hoofed” and then simply as “a hoof” and the hoof in turn began to be known mostly for its cloven variety of domesticated cattle, the name Persia in Hebrew adopted the additional meaning of Land Of Divisions.’

An important element in Persia’s rise to immense power was their terrifyingly effective use of cavalry. Cyrus the Great’s marriage allowed Persia access to the renowned Median horses, as well as allowing the Persians to adopt a variety of military tactics borrowed from the Medes – as used by the Scythians. Many breeds were used and colours ranged from black to light chestnut. 

No mixed colours, light colours or white markings were allowed as these horses were prone to bad hoofs and becoming lame. The situation could not be solved prior to the advent of horseshoes. The Median horses were noted as being exceptionally powerful, with larger heads and proud necks. Stunning white Nisean horses – carefully trained – were used for kings and generals to stand out; denoting wealth and authority.

Persian cavalry soldiers used large bright, heavily embroidered saddle cloths. Stirrups and saddles were not yet in use, so they were essentially riding bareback. In time, horses acquired armour of barding, a leather and metal apron to protect their chest; a bronze plate to protect their head; and a parmeridia which was a curvature of the saddle to protect the rider’s thighs. The Assyrians and the Sakaehad used horse armour from the seventh century BCE, though the Persians first mentioned employing it in 401 BCE with Cyrus the Younger’s Guard Cavalry. Cyrus the Younger was the son of Darius II of Persia and a prince and general Satrap of Lydia and Ionia from 408 to 401 BCE, when he died during a failed attempt to oust his older brother Artaxerxes II from the Persian throne. 

The Nisean* or Nisaean horse is mentioned by Herodotus circa 430 BCE: “In front of the king went first a thousand horsemen, picked men of the Persian nation – then spearmen a thousand, likewise chosen troops, with their spearheads pointing towards the ground – next ten of the sacred horses called Nisaean, all daintily caparisoned. (Now these horses are called Nisaean, because they come from the Nisaean plain, a vast flat in Media, producing horses of unusual size.)” They were the most valuable horse breed, with a more robust head compared to Arabian breeds and the royal Nisean was the preferred mount of the Persian nobility.

The Nisean horse was so sought after, that the Greeks – particularly, the Spartans; Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe – imported Nisean horses and bred them with their native stock and many nomadic tribes, such as the Scythians also imported, captured, or stole Nisean horses. Nisean horses had several traits, which they passed on to their descendants. One of them were bony knobs on their forehead often referred to as horns. This could have been due to prominent temple bones or cartilage on their forehead and is reminiscent of a unicorn. Pure white Niseans were the horses of kings and in myth, the gods. The Assyrians started their spring campaigns, by attacking the Medes so as to take their horses. The Medes were the breeders of the first Nisean horses; though the Nisean eventually became extinct by 1200 CE.

Turkish Flag

Earlier, a number of scriptures regarding Elam were studied, when verses on Madai were read – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. The Turk and Turko-Mongol relationship now established, we will concentrate on Elam; though we shall return to Madai towards the end of this chapter.

Ezekiel 32:24

English Standard Version

‘Elam is there, and all her multitude around her grave; all of them slain, fallen by the sword, who went down uncircumcised into the world below, who spread their terror in the land of the living; and they bear their shame with those who go down to the pit.’

Daniel 8:2

Expanded Bible

‘In this vision I saw myself in the capital city [or fortress city] of Susa, in the area [or province] of Elam. I was standing by the Ulai Canal [or Gate].’

The capital of Elam was Susa or Shushan, where the christian name Susan derives. Today, the capital of Turkey since 1923 is Ankara. Historically, it was Constantinople – changed to Istanbul in 1453 – and it is this city that equates with ancient Susa.

In the Book of Jasher 7:15, we learn of the sons of Elam:

… and the sons of Elam were Shushan, Machul and Harmon.

Turkey – in Asia Minor or Anatolia – is located at the crossroads between Europe and Asia and thus has had a pivotal geographic role. The city of Troy, famous in Greek literature, was located on the present western Turkish coastline – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

There were numerous city states in the Aegean-Asia Minor region, with the first major empires in Anatolia including the Hittite Empire in the west and the Assyrians to the east. The Persian Empire followed, then the Greco-Macedonian and of course the Roman Empire. In 330 CE, Byzantium became the new capital of the Roman Empire under Roman Emperor Constantine I – Articles: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. The city was renamed Constantinople and remained the capital of the Byzantine Empire for hundreds of years.

In the eleventh century, the Turks began to invade the area. The Seljuk Sultanate defeated the Byzantium army at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. The Ottoman Empire was founded by Osman I in 1299. It would become a powerful empire and ruled for just over six hundred years. In 1453 the Ottomans, under Sultan Mehmet II – the Conqueror – defeated Constantinople after besieging it for fifty-five days bringing an end to the Byzantium Empire. From 1520 until 1566, Suleiman the Magnificent ruled and he expanded the empire to include much of the Middle East, Greece, and Hungary. In 1568, the first conflict between Russia and Turkey initiated a series of Russo-Turkish wars which endured until 1878.

After World War I, the Ottoman Empire collapsed and Turkish war hero Mustafa Kemal founded the Republic of Turkey in 1923. He became known as Ataturk, which means ‘father of the Turks’. Turkey has the second largest standing military force in NATO, after the United States Armed Forces. The population of Turkey is 87,639,088 people, now less than neighbouring Iran. 

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Turkish global shipments during 2021.

  1. Vehicles: US$25 billion 
  2. Machinery including computers: $20.8 billion 
  3. Iron, steel: $17.1 billion 
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $12 billion
  5. Gems, precious metals: $11 billion
  6. Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $10.8 billion 
  7. Plastics, plastic articles: $10 billion 
  8. Articles of iron or steel: $8.8 billion 
  9. Mineral fuels including oil: $8.5 billion
  10. Clothing, accessories (not knit or crochet): $7.5 billion 

Iron and steel represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 94.1% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which rose 80.5% led by refined petroleum oils. Turkey’s shipments of gems and precious metals posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 63.8%, propelled by higher international revenues from gold.’

Turkey is the 19th largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $761.43 billion in 2019.

Turkey has a mainly open economy, containing large industrial and service sectors. Major industries include: electronics, petrochemicals and automotive production. Ever present political turmoil, with involvement in regional armed conflicts result in financial and currency market instability for Turkey; raising questions on its economic future.

Turkish men

Oxford Bible Church, Derek Walker – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The nation’s geography is a mirror of its political and military position… [and] it is being pulled both ways. Turkey covets recognition by the West – even to the point of desiring inclusion in the European Union. Turkey as part of NATO regularly cooperates with the United States in military operations in the region. But Turkey is still a Muslim nation. The Turkish government pays the salaries of 60,000 imams and dictates the contents of their sermons, often down to the last word. 

In the years following World War I, Kemal Ataturk aggressively transformed Turkey from a theocratic autocracy into a Western-oriented democracy. In 1922 he abolished the Sultanate. In 1924 he abolished the Caliphate and religious courts. In 1925 he made it illegal to wear the fez (a symbol of backwardness). Having rid Turkey of the trappings of Islam, he adopted Western ways. In 1925 Turkey adopted the Western calendar; in 1926 the Swiss civil code and Italian penal code; in 1928 [Turkey] switched to the Latin alphabet; in 1931 the metric system; in 1934 all Turks were obliged to take a surname, and women were given the vote. After World War II Turkey joined all the main Western institutions: the UN, IMF, OECD, Council of Europe and NATO. Turkey received associate membership in the EU in 1963. A crisis began to loom as Turkey applied for full membership in 1987. Although full membership was held out as an eventual goal, it began to become clear that Turkey was not being welcomed by the EU.

Turkey’s rejection has understandably clouded its course and strategy. Turkey is still viewed by many as a Middle Eastern nation with no place in Europe. This is an affront to the Turkish people who have, for many years, rejected much of their own past in favour of becoming members of the West. While full membership negotiations continue (since 2005) their future as part of the EU is still very much in doubt.

… up to quite recently, Turkey has been an ally of Israel, trading the use of air bases while the generals signed military assistance pacts with Israel. The generals have also made sure that Turkey remains a strictly secular state according to its constitution. But their power in Turkey is now waning. Islam has again become a rising influence in Turkey, particularly through the Directorate of Religious Affairs, which is attached to the Prime Ministry and has substantial resources (including 90,000 civil service personnel) under its control. 

The Directorate supplies imam (mosque prayer leaders) to every village or town; it writes the sermons the imam must preach; it organises the pilgrimages to Mecca; it provides commentaries on religious themes and publishes the Koran and other works; it pronounces judgements on religious questions and monitors mosque building; and it provides teachers and advisors to Turkish citizens living abroad and helps oversee official religious ties with other countries. The secondary education system, the Ankara University faculty, the police force, and the media are all becoming increasingly Muslim controlled. In each succeeding election, conservative Islamic elements seem to be gaining more power.

Turkey has been integrated with the West through membership of organizations such as the Council of Europe, NATO, OECD, OSCE and G-20. But [Turkey] has also fostered close cultural, political, economic and industrial relations with the Eastern world, particularly with the Middle East and the Turkic states of Central Asia, through membership in organizations such as the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and Economic Cooperation Organization. Since Turkey is linked to Central Asia both ethnically and linguistically, it has a natural relationship to these nations, and since the breakup of the former Soviet Union she has been able to strengthen her relationship with them greatly. [Four of the five] former Soviet Central Asian republics are Turkic speaking (Tajikistan is the exception, with a Persian dialect).

There has been a recent rise of political Islam… Since gaining power they have gradually been moving Turkey away from the west and towards the east, partly because of the Party’sIslamic roots and partly because of the EU’s rejection of Turkey.If this continues, Turkey will pursue its destiny more towards Eurasia and the Islamic Middle East.

If [Turkey] moves away from the West [it] will come under Russian influence, who covets Turkey as it is strategic, giving Russia control of the vital ports on the Mediterranean and the ability to outflank much of Europe [refer article: Four Kings & One Queen].’

Turkey is becoming more like Iran and is increasingly adrift from any real connection with Europe. The Bible supports this role for Elam and its eventual alliance with both the nations of Iran and Pakistan. We will look at the Old Elamite period from 2700 to 1500 BCE, when we study a prominent Biblical Elamite king, Chedorlaomer in the following chapter. 

Turkish women

The Middle Elamite period began with the rise of the Anshanite dynasties circa 1500 BCE. Their rule was characterised by an ‘Elamisation’ of language and culture in Susa, and their kings took the title ‘king of Anshan and Susa.’ Anshan was located in the mountainous north of Elam’s territory and Susa in the lowland south. The relationship between the two akin to the one today between Ankara the capital and Istanbul. The city of Susa, is one of the oldest in the world – as a past forerunner to the future Constantinople – dating back in records to at least 4200 BCE. Since its founding, Susa was known as a central power location for Elam and then later, for the related Persian dynasties. Susa’s power peaked during the Middle Elamite period between 1500 to 1100 BCE as the region’s capital.

Some of the kings married Kassite princesses. The Kassites were also a Language Isolate speaking people – arriving from the Zagros Mountains – who had taken Babylonia shortly after its sacking by the Hittite Empire in 1595 BCE. The Kassite king of Babylon Kurigalzu II – who had been installed on the throne by Ashur-uballit I of the Middle Assyrian Empire – temporarily occupied Elam circa 1320 BCE. We will look further into the relationship between the Hittites and Assyria, as well as the association of the Kassities with the Arameans. Kassite-Babylonian power waned and was defeated in 1158 BCE, by a combined force of Elam and the Middle Assyrian Empire, led by their king, Ashur-Dan I.

A couple of decades later, the Elamites were defeated by Nebuchadnezzar I of Babylon who reigned from 1125 to 1104 BCE – not to be confused with Nebuchadnezzar II written at length in the scriptures and king from 605 to 562 BCE – who sacked Susa; thus ending the greatest period of Elamite power during the Middle dynasties, but who was then himself defeated by the Assyrian king Ashur-resh-ishi I. The Elamite king – Khutelutush-In-Shushinak circa 1120 to 1110 BCE – fled to Anshan, but later returned to Susa and his brother, Shilhana-Hamru-Lagamar may have succeeded him as the last king of the Middle Elamite dynasty.

The last part of Shilhana’s name, ‘Lagamar’ is also the end suffix of Chedor-laomer. We will study this in significantly more detail – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. Following Khutelutush-In-Shushinak, the power of the Elamite empire began to wane quickly and Elam disappears into obscurity for over three centuries.

The darkening shroud enveloping Elam’s history from 1100 to 770 BCE included their migration northwards to Lake Urmia after their defeat. They resurfaced in the region as the Parsu. Assyrian sources circa 800 BCE distinguish the ‘powerful Medes.’ Medes was a broad term and included a number of peoples such as the Parsu Persians, who would cause the Elamite’s original home in the Iranian Plateau, to be renamed Persia.

In the 653 BCE, the Assyrian vassal state of Media fell to the Scythians and Cimmerians, causing the displacement of the migrating Parsu peoples to Anshan which their king Teispes had captured that same year; turning it into a kingdom under Asshurbanipal’s rule, which would a century later become the nucleus of the Achaemenid dynasty. King Asshurbanipal drove the Scythians and Cimmerians from their lands, while the Medes and Persians remained vassals of Assyria. 

We have discussed in our study about Madai, how the Persian Cyrus the Great (576-530 BCE), defeated Media at the Battle of Pasargadae in 551 BCE and became king of both kingdoms. The Median-Persian Empire endured from 550 to 330 BCE, when it was eventually conquered by Alexander the Great. 

After the fall of Persia, Elam migrated north again and now we will find them some seven hundred years later in that melting pot region of Central Asia. Madai migrated to the region known as Mongolia, east of central Asia. We would expect to find both Elam as Persia and Madai as Media in Asia and then track them both to their present locations in primarily: Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan. 

We will now investigate the proposition, that the Persians of Elam were included in the Hunnic peoples of Asia and were therefore the principal body of people known as the Huns; who in turn ultimately, settled in Asia Minor evolving into the mighty Ottoman Empire, the precursor to the modern nation of Turkey. As with many discussions on peoples of the past and their link with modern nations, there is much debate and polarisation in viewpoint on the Hunnic-Turkic association. Ultimately, there is an accurate explanation and this is what we are endeavouring to discover with each and every identity.

The Huns invaded southeastern Europe circa 370 CE and for seven decades built an enormous empire in central Europe. The Huns appeared from behind the Volga and the Don Rivers. They had overrun the Alani (Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America), overthrew the Ostrogoths (Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans) and defeated the Visigoths (Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil), in present day Romania by 376. ‘As warriors, the Huns inspired unparalleled fear. They were amazingly accurate mounted archers and their complete command of horsemanship, their ferocious charges… unpredictable retreats and the speed of their strategical movements brought them overwhelming victories.’

The Huns extended their power over many of the Germanic peoples of Europe and fought for the Romans. By 432 CE the leadership of the Huns had been centralised under a single king, Rua, or Rugila, who ruled for two years. Rua died in 434 and he was succeeded by his two nephews, Bleda and Atilla. About 445, Attila murdered his brother Bleda and in 447 continued his assault on the Eastern Roman Empire. He decimated the Balkans and forged south into Greece.

The Huns acquired gold from a. their treaties with Rome; b. plunder and c. by selling prisoners back to the Romans. This wealth altered the nature of their society. The military leadership became hereditary in Attila’s family and Attila assumed autocratic powers both in peace time and war. Atilla administered his impressive empire by means of loyal men, logades, whose function was the governing of and the collection of, the food and tribute from subject peoples.

In 451 Attila invaded Gaul but was defeated by Roman and Visigoth forces at the  Battle of the Catalaunian Plains or according to some authorities, of Maurica. This was Attila’s first and only defeat. In 452 the Huns invaded Italy but famine and pestilence forced them to abandon the campaign. In 453 Attila died and his many sons began quarrelling among themselves, whilst embarking on a series of costly struggles with their subjects who had revolted. The Huns were finally routed in 455 by a combination of Gepidae, Ostrogoths, Heruli and others in a great battle on the unidentified river Nedao in Pannonia. From there, they receded into the historical background. 

The Huns, reminiscent of the Turks over a thousand years later, were able to push deep within civilised Europe, but weren’t able to subjugate all of southern Europe. As the Turks pressed deep into eastern Europe and encroached on the Austro-Hungarian Empire, they were not able to penetrate any further west. The influence of the Huns is shown by their name left in the country of the Magyars, Hun-gary.

The Origins of the Huns – A new view on the eastern heritage of the Hun tribes. Text edited from conversations with Kemal Cemal, Turkey, 1 November 2002 – apart from Editor’s note, emphasis mine:

Editor’s Note: “When it was published in 2002 the subject of this article was somewhat controversial, and is even more so with hindsight. The views expressed here are the author’s own. They are presented here as the ‘opposition’ view of Hunnic origins, a view which did not fully tie in with prevailing thought on the Huns, and does so even less today.”

‘Although in the past the Huns are thought to have been Mongolian emigrants [descended from Madai (and Japheth) for instance], it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin [descended from Elam (and Shem)]. This point has been repeated by thousands of historians, sinologists, turcologists, altaistics, and other researchers. Let me try to state how this idea began with Sinology researchers.

While the Mongol Empire was in the ascendancy, the power of the Catholic Church seemed to be fading, and the power of the Pope was somewhat shaky. At the same time, the Mongols opened the eastern roads for travel, and the Pope decided that there were now so many evident non-Christians that his power in the West was under severe threat. If he could convert these non-Christians he could regain power. As a result, Jesuit missionaries started to head east. Before spreading Christianity, they researched Chinese beliefs. They examined Chinese history and philosophy’ – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. ‘There were some missioners who stayed twenty or thirty years in China, and built up healthy relations with Chinese scholars. They also started to translate Chinese books about both history and philosophy into Western languages. 

The first translations were made in Portuguese. Then this was translated to the other languages; Spanish, Italian and French’ – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. ‘So the West started to learn about China from these Jesuit missionaries. 

Sin means China in Latin and Sinology means “sciences of China.” Sinology mainly started with these translations in the sixteenth century, and Turk history became part of this study. Later, the number of Sinology studies increased with many travellers from the West heading to China. The book written by de Guinness in the eighteenth century is accepted as one of the important collected studies about Turkish history. De Guinness did not know Chinese but he wrote the history of the Turks [Elam-Turkey], Mongols [Madai/Turko-Mongols] and Tartars [Madai/Turko-Mongols] by using Jesuit missionaries’ translations. It was printed under the name of “General History of Turks, Tatars and Mongols.”

All the information obtained to this point by the researchers showed that the Huns were of Turkic origin. We learn nearly all our current knowledge on the Huns from the information left to us by their contemporary neighbours. For example. It is pretty definite that their language was Turkic. Chinese annals reveals that the Hunnic language was very close to that of the Toles, a Turkic tribe. The Byzantine Empire said that the language of the Huns was the same as the languages of the Bulgars, Avars, Szeklers and other tribes which were flooding into Eastern Europe from Central Asia. The historians of that period accepted that these Turkic-speaking tribes were no different from the Huns because their languages were the same.

There are many words written in Chinese chronicles which were used by Huns in daily life. These are Turkic words. K Shiratoriy, reading a Hunnic sentence which has survived to the present day, has proven that it is Turkic. Hunnic-runic writings belonging to European Huns in Cafcasia has been read and has been proven to be of Turkic origin.

One area for backing up this claim is that of Hunnic names. It is difficult to explain the names belonging to Asian Huns because of [the] fact that they were translated into Chinese in the form of Chinese names. The meanings of the names of European Huns can be comfortably explained in Turkish.

One of the most striking features related to European Hunnic names is that they can’t be explained by any language but Turkish.

Some of the names belonged to the German language due to cultural interaction, but the majority of them were Turkish. The author W Bang has proven the name of Attila’s wife was Arikan in Turkish in the result on his researches. 

There are many names and captions belonging to Hunnish leaders which were written down in a document at Duro-Eropas, a border castle in Doma which was captured by the Persians in 260 BC. These names and captions are Turkish names and captions. Aramaic writing in present-day Georgia appeared in the period following the Huns’ penetration into the Caucuses. This writing was also used by the Bulgars. It is estimated that this writing was proto-Turkic and appeared before the Orkhun inscriptions in Mongolia.

The word “Hun” comes from the word “kun” in Turkish It means people, or nation.

Tengri also means ‘God’ or ‘Heaven’ in Mongolian

English
GOD
POLITICALPOWER
GIRL
WOMAN
HORSETAIL
MAGIC
ARMY
IRANIAN
GO
WOLF
STRONG/THICK
SWORD
COUNTRY
Hunnish
TENGRI
KUT
KIZ
KATUN
TUG
BÜYÜ
ORDA
TAT
BAR
BÖRI
TOK
KILIÇ
EL
Turkish
TENGRI
KUT
KIZ
KATUN/KADIN/HATUN
TUG
BÜYÜ
ORDA/ORDU
TAT
BAR
BÖRI/KURT
TOK
KILIÇ
EL

A book written by Gyula Nemeth, the world famous Hungarian historian is recommended for further reading on this subject, and will greatly expand on this short feature.There are many Turkology institutes which study… the origins of the Turks in many European countries from Denmark and Germany to Russia and Japan. All of these contain a great number of resources regarding the origin of the Huns.

As stated, many sources claim the Huns were of Mongol origin, since European Huns were somewhat mongoloid in appearance. Some historians also accept Turks as Mongols. All of these views are somewhat back-to-front. The Chinese annals say the Mongols [from Madai] always lived to the east of the lands in which the Huns [from Elam] dwelt.The Mongols originate from what is now known as Manchuria [and Mongolia].

The Mongol Empire was based on Turkic elements rather than Mongol elements. The governing structure of the empire was based on Turkic ideas of governing. The official language of the Mongol Empire was Uigrian, which is a Turkic language. Eighteen Turkish tribes played an important role in the founding of the Mongol Empire. There are many more examples that show the effects of Turkic elements on the Mongol Empire. For example, the Indian Moghal Empire was established by Turks. But many scholars still hold the belief that the Moghals were of Mongol origin. The truth is that the language of the Moghals* was Turkic, and that the founders of this empire were proud of being Turk.’

The Moghuls* may have actually been a Turko-Mongol mix of people as scholars profess, with their offspring deriving from inter-tribal wars and the intermixing of the various Central Asian tribes. For they possessed not only a Turkic physiognomy but also included distinct mongol features. More indicative of the line of Madai than Elam, who were already a mixture of the two peoples. Generally aggressive towards their enemies and competitors they were known as excellent horse riders. Their descent seems to be via Timur-i Lang – or Tamerlane, founder of the eastern Iranian Timurid dynasty – and Chagatai Khan of the Chaghatayids. From 1519, as the ruler of Kabul, in Afghanistan, their leader Babar led a great many raids on Delhi, in India. In 1526, he was invited by the nobility to invade the sub-continent. Babar created a Moghal empire which eventually sacked and controlled Delhi, making it the heart of the empire.

Kemal Cemal: ‘You can come across many researchers who say the Huns are a nation whose origin is still [a] mystery. When you look at bibliographies on internet sites you will see that those sites have referenced the work of historians such as McGovern and Haelfen-Manchen, but these sites don’t say these authors already accept the Huns as Turkic. Haelfen-Manchen accepts that Asiatic Huns were in fact of Turkic origin and says that their language was also Turkic, but he raises an objection by adding that, in his view, European Huns are not descended from Asiatic Huns.

I don’t know the reason for it but many European researchers still seem not to accept that Attila’s Huns were of Turkic stock.’

A selection of insightful comments from forums on the general question: Who are the Huns Today? Emphasis mine.

1 ‘… less educated people, and advocates of the “non-Türkic origin theory of the Huns” also often claim that “the Turks did not exist before the 6th century AD”. But these arguments have been refuted by the known fact that names evolve and change, and the same [people] during different eras are mentioned under different names.

If in today’s terminology, the linguistic family and ethnos are called ‘Turkic’, they were called “Hun, Scythian, Tatar” etc. during other periods. The main body of the Turkic people consisted of ‘Tele/Tiele’ tribes, a confederation of nine Turkic [peoples]. The main body of the Huns consisted of Uigur tribes, and the modern descendants of the Tiele people are called the Turks. The first known records of the Turks are milleniums older than the modern notions of the linguistic family and the ethnos termed ‘Turkic’. For instance, Ptolemy used “Huns, Ases/Alans” instead of “North Pontic Turks”. Therefore, the Great Hunnic Empire was founded, and governed by the Turks. The first ‘tanhu/khan’ of the empire was Teoman/Tu-Man. He was succeeded by his son Mete/Mo-Tun. According to some theories, Mete and Oghuz Khan, the semi-mythological ancestor of the Turks, are the same persona.

The Gokturks considered themselves as the continuation of the Huns as well. The European Huns also emerged as a result of the migration movements following the collapse of the Hunnic Empire. Which means that Attila [the Hun], Teoman and Mete were the leaders of the same nation.

The list of scholars who acknowledge that the Huns were Turkic covers the whole alphabet:

“Altheim.. Bazin.. Bernshtam.. Chavannes.. Clauson.. de Guignes.. Eberhard.. Franke.. Grousset.. Gumilev.. Haussig.. Hirth.. Howorth.. Klaproth.. Krouse.. Lin Gan.. Loufer.. Marquart.. Ma Zhanshan.. McGovern.. Nemeth.. Parker.. Pelliot.. Pricak (Pritsak).. Radloff.. Remusat.. Roux.. Samolin.. Szasz.. and Wang Guowei.”

‘Chinese chronicles carry numerous statements on the linguistic and ethnological closeness or identity of the many Hunnic tribes. Among them are direct statements :

“Weishi and Beishi say that the customs and language of Yueban Xiongnu were the same with the Gaoche… Beishi gives the ancestry legend of the Gaoche and links it with the Xiongnu [Huns]. Zhoushu and Beishi state that the “Tujue [Turks-Gokturks]” were a branch of the Xiongnou. Suishu states that the ancestors of Tiele were descendants of Xiongnu. Xin Tangshu says that the ancestors of Huihe [Uigur] are the Xiongnu.”

‘The Eastern and Western Huns belonged to the Ogur linguistic family, the kin of Oghuz branch. Ogur is modestly called as the Karluk group today. In the antiquity, the Ogur family was much more visible than the Oghuz, due to their proximity to the literate southern populations. In addition, the Ogur group included Tochars, Kangars, Uigurs, Karluks, Bulgars, Khazars, Sabirs, Agathyrs and Avars. Huns are the ancestors of both Turks [from Elam] and Mongols [from Madai]… Turks and Mongols were once the same [united] people and have separated into two different ethnic groups after the Huns. In the past Mongolians looked more European than they do today. The Huns were genetically Eurasiatic. Chinese historians make this very clear. 

The confusion… arises from the fact that, defeated by the Chinese (3rd century?), half the Huns stayed in their ancestral homeland (Mongolia and Manchuria) and were gradually assimilated by the Chinese, and [the] other half moved Westward. Part of those that moved West became the ancestors of the modern Turks and Mongols [Turko-Mongol, Tatar], whereas the bulk, still under the ethnonym Hun, ended up in Europe and ruled most of Europe for close to a century. These (European) Huns [the Turks] had Uralic, Iranic, Slavic and Germanic people as their loyal subjects.

The Xiongnu from Mongolia/Manchuria predates the Huns in Europe (as they showed up 200 years later from the northern borders of China). Many scholars have debated for years and many now are in… agreement that they’re the same confederacy who… reached Europe. There were many Turkic tribes in Central and Western Asia. Many of the Mongol or Manchu origin of Xiongnu have integrated with the Turks, Alans, and other nomadic people as they [traveled] further to the west.

[A] Russian anthropologist (1960s) provided the ethnological details of the skulls and remains when [visiting] the Hunnish and Avar cemetary sites in Hungary and Romania. Most of [the] Hunnish elite leaders had a striking resemblance to modern Manchurians and the elite Avar remains with central Mongolians. He… also noted that… most of calvary remains were either intermixed or homogenous. 

Overall, it had a higher Turkic related remains (70% Turkic vs 30% Mongoloid). What’s interesting about his report is that the elite skulls were purely Mongoloid [Madai] without any mixture of Turks [Elam].

Hun, Avar and conquering Hungarian nomadic groups arrived into the Carpathian Basin from the Eurasian Steppes and significantly influenced its political and ethnical landscape. In order to shed light on the genetic affinity of above groups we have determined Y chromosomal haplogroups and autosomal loci, from 49 individuals, supposed to represent military leaders. Haplogroups from the Hun… are consistent with Xiongnu ancestry of European Huns [from Elam]. Most of the Avar… individuals carry east Asian Y haplogroups [C2, K and O2]… and their autosomal loci indicate mostly unmixed Asian characteristics [of Madai].

Let’s not speculate and have too much dependency on the languages and cultures alone as much can be borrowed. At the end of the day, the genetic proof wins in understanding the origin.’

2. ‘A great way of viewing the legacy of the Turkic migration is by looking at the spread of Altai-Uralic speaking minorities and nations. Speaking about the Uralic tribes, they are believed to share some basic fundamental similarities in language with the Altaic family. Uralic languages would include Hungarian, Finnish and Estonian. The Turkic tribes and Huns introduced the Uralic tribes to the Altaic language. All the Ural-Altaic languages share certain characteristics of syntax, morphology, and phonology. The languages use constructions of the type the-by-me-hunted bear rather than “the bear that I hunted,” and a-singing I went rather than “I sang as I went.” There are few if any conjunctions. Suffixation is the typical grammatical process – that is, meaningful elements are appended to stems, as in house-my, “my house,” go-(past)-I, “I went,” house-from, “from the house,” go-in-while, “while (in the act of) going,” and house-(plural)-my-from, “from my houses.”

A great many Ural-Altaic languages require vowel harmony; the vowels that occur together in a given word must be of the same type. Thus poly, “dust,” is a possible word in Finnish because o and y are both mid vowels and hence belong to the same phonetic class; likewise polku, “path,” is possible because o and u are both vowels. Words such as polu or poly are not possible, because o and u, or o and y, are too dissimilar. Stress generally falls on the first or last syllable; it does not move about, as in the English series family, familiar, familiarity.

Typically, the Ural-Altaic languages have no verb for “to have.” Possession is expressed by constructions such as the Hungarian nekem van, “to-me there-is.” Most of the languages do not express gender, do not have agreement between parts of speech (as in French les bonnes filles, “the good girls”), and do not permit consonant clusters, such as pr-, spr-, -st, or -rst, at the beginning or end of words.

Before the Hunnic empire the Scythians had migrated west from central Asia and had adopted Iranian influence. Just like the Oghuz Turkic tribes centuries later. However, The Scythians spoke a ‘Turkisized Iranian dialect’. 

The Scythians are very hard to uncover but are believed to have included groups of Huns with major Iranian influence’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. ‘Turkic tribes were believed to have lived on the fringes of Scythia. All these Proto Turkic-Mongol groups were nomadic horse-riding pastoralists in north-east Asia, and would attack ruthlessly with bow and arrow when migrating west. The Yuezhi, Huns and Turkic-Mongol groups lived in exclusive historical periods to one another. Their descendants and precursors lived close to each other, occasionally intermarried and influenced each other culturally. 

Interestingly Yuezhi were Chinese with Indian influence, in modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan. The Huns consisted of many smaller Turkic tribes in their advancements into Europe as well as Scythian tribes. Scythian and the Uralic tribes are also believed to form the Huns, Many Germanic tribes also formed infantry in the Hunnic empire against the Eastern and Western Roman empire. Still, the father of the Turkic peoples is considered – Bumin Qaghan the founder of the first Turkic empire called the Celestial Turks : Gokturks.

Bumin Qhagan was born [in 490 CE] just 37 years after the death of Atilla [in 453 CE]. Bumin Qhagan was the first to refer to himself as a Turk which stems origins to the word ‘Combat helmet’ in Chinese. These early Turkic people spoke old Turkic dialect and believed in Tengri – the one god represented by the Sun. Modern day Turks call God Tanri, and believe in the one god. Common Turkish and Turkic names include Atilla, Cengiz (Genghiz), Kaan (Qhagan).

It is a question whether the early Proto Turkic-Mongol groups such as the Avars, Khazars, Huns influenced the languages of the indigenous people. The Orkhon Inscriptions is the oldest preserved Old Turkic script. The inscriptions provided much of the foundation for translating other Turkic writings. The Hunnic language has been compared mainly with Turkic, Mongolic and Yeniseian languages, but bears most resemblance to this Old Turkic script.

The Huns are considered inter-related to these Turkic tribes just as much as Mongolians are. When calling Huns ‘Turk’ and ‘Turkic’ it is very misleading. The Turks mentioned are the descendants of the Gokturks of the Altai mountains hence ‘Altaic’ or the members of the Ashina [ancient Elamite city of Anshan] tribe. Also known as Asen, Asena, or Açina. It was the ruling dynasty of the old/ancient Turkic Peoples. It rose to prominence in the mid 6th century when Bumin Qaghan, revolted against the Rouran Khaganate and established the first Turkic empire.

Modern day Turks were so proud of their ancestry, they carried on the name Turk instead of Oghuz or Seljuk, the name of the Turkic Tribes in Persia and Anatolia, unlike many Central Asian nations such as the Kazakh’s, Azeri’s, Uzbeks, Turkmens, Kygrz… In fact, the Oghuz and Seljuks predecessor, the Ottomans, named their empire after their leader Osman and still referred to themselves as the ‘Turkish Empire’ for centuries. 

Modern day Turkey is more the Oghuz Turkic tribe or Oghuzstan/Seljukstan bearing heavy Persian and Byzantine influence than ‘Land of the Turks’. Therefore the term ‘Turk’ and ‘Turkic’ are very distinct. Information on the Hunnic language is contained in personal names and tribal ethnonyms. On the basis of these names, scholars have proposed that Hunnic may have been a Turkic language, a language between Mongolic and Turkic. Since the Huns consisted of many Turkic tribes, Turkic language had a huge influence in the Hunnic language.’ 

‘The Hunnic language is part of the broader Altaic languages, which is the family of Turkic and Mongolian languages. The Huns can be considered Altaic if we were to reference language and therefore Mongolian-Turkic.’

3. ‘Of course [the]… Xiongnu was [a] confederation of both Turks and Mongols. When we look at the DNA results, it’s shown clearly. Xiongnu samples divided into two [groups] as Xiong-Nu and Xiong-Nu_WE. Xiong-Nu results are closer to Mongolics and Xiong-Nu_WE results are closer to Central Asian Turkics (mostly to Uzbeks and Uighurs). And if we look [at] their descendants [the] Tian_Shan_Hun, they’re mostly closer to Turkics than any other [nation]. Short answer: Yes. Some [ignorant people] will deny this fact but facts are always painful.’

These comments with the article, support what we have learned about Elam and Madai and their close cultural, linguistic and migratory ties. They also support the assertion that the Huns were the precursors to the Turks and hence are descendants from Elam in the Bible. For there is a connecting link between the Turkic Huns and the Seljuks and Ottoman Turks.

The House of Seljuk originated from the Kinik branch of the Oghuz Turks who dwelt on the outskirts of the Muslim world, in the Yabgu Khagnate of the Oguz confederacy; located to the north of the Caspian and Aral Seas in the ninth century. In the tenth century, the Seljuks began migrating from their ancestral homeland into Persia, which became the base of the Great Seljuk Empire, after its foundation by Tughril.*

In 1071, the Seljuks defeated the Byzantines at the Battle of Manzikert, beginning the Turkification of the region. The Turkish language with Islam, was introduced to Armenia and Anatolia. The culturally Persianised Seljuks laid the foundation for a Turkic-Persian culture in Anatolia; continued by their successors the Ottomans. In 1243, the Seljuk armies were defeated by the Mongols at the Battle of Kose Dag, causing the Seljuk Empire’s power to slowly wane. One of the Turkish principalities governed by Osman I would evolve over the next two hundred years into the formidable Ottoman Empire.

In 1514, Sultan Selim I – ruler from 1512 to 1520 – vigorously expanded the empire’s southern and eastern borders, by defeating Shah Ismail I of the Safavid dynasty of Iran (Lud) in the Battle of Chaldiran. In 1517, Selim I also expanded Ottoman rule into Algeria (Mizra) and Egypt (Pathros) and created a naval presence in the Red Sea. 

A contest arose between the Ottoman and Portuguese empires to become the dominant sea power in the Indian Ocean, with a number of naval battle exchanges between the two in the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf. The Portuguese presence in the Indian Ocean had been perceived as a threat to the Ottoman monopoly over the ancient trade routes between East Asia and Western Europe – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

The Ottoman Empire’s power and prestige peaked in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, particularly during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, from 1520 to 1566; who instituted major legislative changes relating to society, education, taxation and criminal law. The empire was often in conflict with the Holy Roman Empire in its stubborn advance towards Central Europe through the Balkans and the southern part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the east during the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, the Ottomans were invariably at war with Safavid Persia over conflicts stemming from territorial disputes or religious differences. The Ottoman wars with Persia continued until the first half of the nineteenth century. 

An Ottoman Turk Cavalryman

From the sixteenth to the early twentieth century, the Ottoman Empire fought twelve wars with the Russian Tsardom and its sprawling Empire. Primarily about Ottoman territorial expansion and consolidation in southeastern and eastern Europe – beginning with the Russo-Turkish War of 1768 to 1774 – they became more about the survival of the Ottoman Empire; which had begun to lose its strategic territories on the northern Black Sea to the advancing Russians. From the second half of the eighteenth century onwards, the Ottoman Empire began to decline and ultimately culminated in its defeat in World war I after allying with the Central Powers.

The Mongols of Madai meanwhile – on the other side of Asia – had been steadily growing in power at the same time the Seljuk Turks of Elam were migrating to Persia. The father of infamous Chingiz Khan, his real name Temujin was a powerful clan leader named Yesukhei (or Yesugei). He led the Borjigin clan but died when Temujin was still a child – poisoned by Tartars the constant enemies of the Mongols. 

Temujin attempted to seize leadership of the Borjigin, but the tribesmen refused to be led by someone so young; so he and his family were cast adrift. Temujin and his brothers grew up in the wilderness, hunting for their own food. A dispute in which he and another brother killed a half-brother called Begter over hunting spoils, cemented his position for being ruthless and a worthy contender for commander. Thus by the time he was a young man, Temujin commanded a group of Mongol warriors. He won favour with Toghril* Khan of the Kerait tribe and was able to build up his forces into a powerful army; including the Onggirat (or Qongrat tribe), the same tribe his mother and his first wife were from. Soon, he was strong enough to attack the hated Tartars, defeating them in battle, beheading all their men, taking their women and children as concubines and slaves and at the same time, avenging his father’s death. 

Later, Jamuka a childhood friend, initiated a power struggle, betraying a close bond of trust that had been established between them as children at the age of twelve. For Jamuka and Temujin had become andas, or blood brothers; cemented by drinking each others blood. Jamuka persuaded Toghril that Temujin was a threat to them all and so the two of them allied against him. In the resulting close run campaign which was protracted for a year, Temujin emerged victorious against all the odds. Jamuka fled for his life with Toghril left for dead. 

Temujin was elevated to the most powerful warrior chief and at the age of forty-four in 1206, he was declared supreme khan. He then took a completely unique title, Chingiz Khan, meaning ‘the fierce king.’ Genghis Khan – descended from Madai – is as infamous and notorious as his Elamite counterpart before him: Attila the Hun. Gengis Khan died ironically, from a fall from his horse in 1227.

A Mongol cavalryman

Another famous Mongol, was the leader Kublai Khan born in 1215. The Mongols had taken control of China through a series of conquests, ending with total domination between the reigns of Genghis Khan and Kublai Khan. Kublai Khan retained China as his base during a civil war against his brother from 1260 to 1264, for control of the Mongol Empire. From 1279, he was emperor of the Chinese as well as great khan of the Mongols. The centre of the Mongol empire shifted with him to China, fragmenting its authority farther west. Kublai Khan’s death in 1294 heralded the eventual end of the empire’s power, so that the eastern Mongols ruled only in China, Mongolia, southern Siberia, and Tibet.

The Medo-Persian Empire in the Bible is represented by the chest and arms of silver in the prophetic vision of a male statue experienced by Nebuchadnezzar – Daniel 2:32, 39. The silver reflects a lesser refinement and status compared with the previous Chaldean-Babylonian Empire which was represented by a head of gold. The silver alternatively, is a stronger metal portraying a more robust kingdom, lasting longer. The two arms represent the two political-ethnic components of the Persian Empire – Media and Persia. 

This great world empire, which followed Babylon’s rise to power, defeated the Chaldeans in 539 BCE. It was symbolised by a bear (Daniel 7:5) and also as a ram in Daniel 8:2-7, 20-21, NET:

2 ‘In this vision I saw myself in Susa the citadel, which is located in the province of Elam. In the vision I saw myself at the Ulai Canal. 3 I looked up and saw a ram with two horns standing at the canal. Its two horns were both long, but one was longer than the other. The longer one [Persia] was coming up after the shorter one [Media]. 4 I saw that the ram was butting westward, northward, and southward.’

The last verse is a clue to Elam’s historic central geographic location, which is replicated today in Turkey’s position in Asia minor; at the strategic crossroads between Europe, the Near east, the Middle East and West Asia – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

‘No animal was able to stand before it, and there was none who could deliver from its power. It did as it pleased and acted arrogantly. 

5 While I was contemplating all this, a male goat was coming from the west over the surface of all the land without touching the ground [with great speed]. This goat had a conspicuous horn between its eyes. 6 It came to the two-horned ram that I had seen standing beside the canal and rushed against it with raging strength.

7 I saw it approaching the ram. It went into a fit of rage against the ram and struck it and broke off its two horns. The ram had no ability to resist it. The goat hurled the ram to the ground and trampled it. No one could deliver the ram from its power [in 330 BCE]. 20 The ram that you saw with the two horns stands for the kings of Media and Persia. 21 The male goat is the king of Greece, and the large horn between its eyes is the first king [Alexander the Great].’

We read of a severe judgement on Elam in Jeremiah 49:34-38 ESV, yet a curiously enigmatic and hopeful statement about Elam’s future is written in verse thirty-nine.

“But in the latter days I will restore the fortunes of Elam, declares the Lord.”

The NET says:

“Yet in future days I will reverse Elam’s ill fortune,” says the Lord.

The BBE says:

“But it will come about that, in the last days, I will let the fate of Elam be changed, says the Lord.”

Studies have revealed that Turkish people cluster most closely with population groups such as Armenians, Chechens, Georgians, Kurds, as well as with Iran and have the lowest Fst distance with these peoples – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

Benedetto in 2001, revealed that Central Asian genetic contribution to the current Anatolian mtDNA gene pool was estimated as roughly thirty percent by comparing the populations of Mediterranean Europe and the Turkic-speaking people of Central Asia.

Recall, a comparison of the Y-DNA Haplogroups for these nations in the preceding Chapter; verified Iran’s link with Turkey, though particularly Azerbaijan. Whereas Turkey, is closer to Armenia and Georgia sits between these two pairings.

A 2012 study of ethnic Turks by Hodoglugil stated – emphasis mine: 

‘[The] Turkish population has a close genetic similarity to Middle Eastern and European populations and some degree of similarity to South Asian and Central Asian populations.

Results also indicated previous population movements [such as migration, admixture] or genetic drift and that the Turkish genetic structure is unique.’ This completely supports Elam’s identity as distinct from either Persian, Arab or southeastern European. ‘A study in 2015 confirmed that previous genetic studies have generally used Turks as representatives of ancient Anatolians…results show that Turks are genetically shifted towards Central Asians, a pattern consistent with a history of mixture with populations from this region.’ 

With the rather recent development of genetic research in relation to human history and population genetics; inevitable criticism has arisen from researchers and scholars traditionally considered expert on the subject – including anthropologists, archaeologists and historians – because the formation of a ‘biological construct of historical communities’, in part, repudiates their twentieth century ‘scholarly’, error-ridden discourses. Or more bluntly: has put a lot of egg on their faces. 

Thus, the relatively new proposition of the Central Asiatic ethnic origin of the Turkish people is viewed as problematic, rather than a resolution. The status quo is perceived to be under threat and rightly so, as ensuing collisions between scholastic history which is often theory or opinion-led and fact-based scientific genetic evidence will continue to challenge incorrect orthodoxy. As one academic states: ‘… [the] clash with modern human [genetic research] raises in a new light the questions: What was a “Turk [or Turkic person]” and who are the modern Turks?’

An alarmed academia are rightly concerned that their control over unscientific hypothesising versions of history, will be exposed for the agenda-filled falsehoods it invariably represents. A similar stance will be held by some in that microcosm of historical research, which is influential in the biblical identity of nations movement. A new perception, contrary to the orthodox position is usually received as heretical, no matter how well documented – even with the solid unmoving evidence of science, underpinning it. Yet, as with all truth, it will eventually win out and have the last word.

The mtDNA Haplogroups for Turkey are similar to Iran in that the sequence for their first six groups are in common, though in marked varying percentages; for Turkey is more closely matched with Armenia. 

Turkey: H [30.8%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.3%] – K [5.6%] – HV [4.8%] –

T2 [4.3%] – U3 [3.7%] – U5 [3%] – T1 [2.8%] – H5 [2.4%] – U4 [1.9%] –

W [1.9%] – X [1.9%] – I [1.5%] – U2 [1.3%] – L [1.3%] – HVO + V [0.7%] 

Iran:      H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] –

T2 [4.9%]

As we did not consider the Tatar mtDNA Haplogroups earlier in Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes and only cursorily looked at the Kazakh mtDNA Haplogroups; we will include them in the comparison table.

Tatars: H [30.7%] – U5 [10.5%] – T2 [ 9.2%] – J [ 7.5%] –

U4 [7%] – K [5.7%] – HVO + V [3.9%] – U [3.1%] – T1 [2.6%] –

U3 [2.2%] – W [1.8%] – U2 [0.9%] – HV [0.9%] – I [0.9%]

                           HV     H        J      T2      U       K

Kazakhstan                 14       4        6         3      3

Iran                     7       17      14        5      12       7

Georgia              4       20       3        9        5     12

Azerbaijan         6       23       6      10        9      4

Armenia             6      30      10       5        8       7

Turkey                5       31       9        4        6       6

Tatars                  1      32       8        9        3       6

The Tatars possess an interesting resemblance to the Turks; though after everything we have investigated in chapter four and in this chapter, it is not a surprise. Coupled with the fact that the Tatars are interspersed within the Russian people. The Russian Communist leader Lenin from 1917 to 1924, is repudiated to have had Tatar blood, as well as Jewish. It is difficult to substantiate either, though Lenin was born in Ulyanovsk – known as Kazan/Simbirsk – a city where Russians and Tatars lived together.

The Kazakhs and Tatars aside, Iran and Turkey guided by the dominant H levels, bookend the mtDNA maternal Haplogroups in the wider Caucasus region. 

As previously noted when investigating Lud, ‘autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups show a different line of descent for Arab related peoples compared with Europeans, [yet there] must be a common denominator in the maternal lineage for Indians and Arabs from Ham with Europeans from Shem.’ As Haplogroup H is the most common group amongst Europeans and generally Arabs; followed by U and J.

According to a 2004 study by Cinnioglu, there are many Y-DNA Haplogroups present in Turkey. The majority of Haplogroups in Turkey are shared with West Asian and Caucasian neighbours, similar with Iran. 

‘The most common haplogroup in Turkey is J2 (24%), which is widespread among the Mediterranean, Caucasian and West Asian populations. Haplogroups that are common in Europe (R1b and I – 20%), South Asia (L, R2, H – 5.7%) and Africa (A, E3*, E3a – 1%) are also present. By contrast, Central Asian haplogroups are rarer (C, Q and O). However, the figure may rise to 36% if K, R1a, R1b and L (which infrequently occur in Central Asia but are notable in many other Western Turkic groups) are also included. J2 is also frequently found in Central Asia, a notably high frequency (30.4%) being observed particularly among Uzbeks.’

Turkey’s Y-DNA Haplogroups in comparison with its near neighbour, Iran.

Turkey: J2 – R1b – G2a – E1b1b – J1 – R1a – I2a1 – N – L –

T1a – Q – O – I1 – R2 – H – C – I2a2 

Iran:     J2 – R1a – G2a – R1b – J1 – E1b1b – L – Q – T1a – N1c2 – I

A Comparison of the main Haplogroups shared between these two nations, highlights that they have the first six in common. The key difference – aside from J2 and G2a – is that it is R1b which Turkey predominates in above R1a; whereas Iran has the opposite correlation. R1a in Europeans is concentrated in eastern Europe and R1b in western Europe. Both J2 and G2a are found in the Caucasus region, southern Europe and the Middle East. Yet J2 is an intermediate paternal line of descent from Ham – particularly defining men from Phut in Pakistan – and G2a an early lineage from Shem. Haplogroups J1 and E1b1b are associated heavily with the Middle East and North Africa and by degree with southern Europe from admixture. 

Turkey: J2 [24%] – R1b [16%] – G [11%] – E1b1b [11%] –

J1 [9%] – R1a [7.5%] – I2a1 [4%] – N [4%] – L [4%] –

T [2.5%] – Q [2%] – O [2%] – I1 [1%] – R2 [1%] – H [1%] –

C [1%] – I2a2 [0.5%] 

Iran: J2 [23%] – R1a [15.5%] – G [10%] – R1b [9.5%] – J1 [8.5%] –

E1b1b [6.5%] – L [6.5%] – Q [5.5%] – T [3%] – N [1%] – I [0.5%]

When we investigated Madai, we compared only those Y-DNA Haplogroups which clearly derived from Japheth – such as C, K, O and Q – and not any suspected admixture Haplogroups from Elam or others.

                              C        O       K       P      Q

Kazakhstan           40        8      10       3      2

Kyrgyzstan            14         8       2        2

Uzbekistan            12         4       7        6    

Turkmenistan                           13      10

Tajikistan                3

Thus, a comparison table of the principle Y-DNA Haplogroups for Turkey and Iran, as well as the Central Asian Republics as per the Haplogroups more closely associated with Shem of R1a, R1b and G2a or from Ham of J1, J2 and E1b1b – are now appropriate. Tajikistan is included even though it is the least representative of Madai and bears a closer similarity with Pakistan and Afghanistan – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut

                     J1       J2     R1a      R1b     G     E1b1b

Georgia      16       27        9        10     30          2

Iran              9        23     16         10      10          7

Turkey         9        24       8         16      11         11

Armenia     11       22        5        30      12           6

Azerbaijan          (31)       7         11      18           6 

Tajik                      18      44                     

Turkmen               17        7         37

Uzbek                    13      25         10                                        

Kazakh                    8        7           6          

Kyrgyz                     2      64          2    

Turkey and Iran apart from R1a and R1b percentages, are remarkably similar in their paternal descent – closer than their mtDNA maternal lineages. The Central Asians are a highly mixed peoples and as viewed on the PCA plot below, act as a genetic bridge between South Asia and Anatolia with the Caucasus. 

Recall from the previous chapter, where Iran-Lud-Ludim has interacted considerably with the Arab world, as has Turkey-Elam. Both nations have not strayed as far from their original homeland positions in ancient Mesopotamia – as Asshur, Aram and Arphaxad have – so that they have been in the pathway of peoples migrating east-west and vice-versa. Located at the crossroads of the world in Asia Minor – much like Madai in Central Asia – has meant a variety of additional paternal Haplogroups, albeit some at fractional percentages, being added to their core DNA.

The pie charts reflect the difference between the not so distantly related Greek and Turkish men. The latter having more E1b1b (from admixture) and I2a, whereas the Turks have more G2a.

Turkey and Iran share a number of similar Haplogroup percentages as brothers and sons of Shem.

We will learn in time, that Asshur and Aram are distinct from one another, yet both are more closely related to their brother Arphaxad than to either Elam or Lud. Supporting the hypothesis that nations today are more times than not, located next to those peoples they are more genetically related too. There are exceptions to the rule as we have seen already with Togarmah-Korea and Tarshish-Japan and there will be a handful more. 

Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table begun with Lud and now with the addition of Turkey.

                                    J        J1      J2     E1b1b      G      R1a     R1b      L

Uzbekistan              13                 13                                 25        10

Turkmenistan         17                 17                                   7        37

Azerbaijan               31                               6         18         7         11        2

Iran                           32       9       23         7          10       16        10        7

Armenia                   33      11       22         6          12         5        30       3

Turkey                      33       9       24         11         11         8         16       4

Georgia                    43      16       27         2          30        9        10        2

Turkey and Iran as Elam and Lud, are both Y-DNA Haplogroup J driven and specifically J2. This reveals the impact of intermixing and intermarriage with the dominant Middle Eastern J1 Haplogroup and the enigmatic J2 Haplogroup of West Asia – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens.

We will confirm that the remaining three sons of Shem have more in common with each other and they are R1a or R1b dominant, with Haplogroups G2a, J1, J2 and E1b1b all varying in lesser percentages as a result of admixture.

The focus will shift from J2 and G2a of South West Asia and the Caucasus to R1a and R1b, with the addition of I1 and I2; just as the nations of the Caucasus region shifted from the J1 and E1b1b emphasis of the Arab nations of the Middle East and North Africa.

Haplogroup G is an ancient line of descent from Shem and therefore Haplogroup G2a is an important component in the Turkish paternal heredity as is R1b and a lesser degree R1a – a reverse mirror image of Iran. For while Iran’s non Hamitic sequence is R1a, G2a and R1b; it is R1b, G2a and R1a for Turkish men.

It was concluded in the previous chapter that Persian men descending from Lud, are represented by the defining marker Haplogroup R1a-Z93. Whereas for Turkish males representing the original lineage from Elam, the defining marker Haplogroup – albeit perhaps also originally stemming via Haplogroup G – is R1b-Z2103.

The second son born to Shem after Elam is Asshur. He was an influential ancestor of a mighty people and yet their true identity today is completely mis-understood by experts in the field. So eager are they in convincing the Bible student of their role as Germany which superficially fits, the fact that it is easily exposed as entirely deficient when investigated fully against genetics and hereditary autosomal DNA, completely passes over them.

Though first, the next chapter will focus on the most famous yet enigmatic king in ancient Elam’s history – where the spotlight shines on him brightly in the early chapters of the Book of Genesis.

The ear that hears and the eye that sees – the Lord has made them both.

Proverbs 20:12 New English Translation

“A lie doesn’t become truth, wrong doesn’t become right, and evil doesn’t become good, just because it’s accepted by a majority.”

Booker T Washington 

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

Four Kings & One Queen

Interest in the Kings of the North and of the South is well founded as the culmination of their prophetic roles signals the onset of the time of Jacob’s trouble and may well unravel a third of a millennia from now, near and a little beyond the horizon line of where the third century ends and the next begins.

Jeremiah 30:7

English Standard Version

‘Alas! That day is so great there is none like it; it is a time of distress for Jacob; yet he shall be saved out of it.’

The Book of Daniel chapter eleven contains the single longest prophecy in the Bible; whom biblical scholars believe chronicles principally the break up of the Greco-Macedonian Empire, before projecting into the future. The early part of the chapter references Greece or Javan – somewhat confusingly – as it is not the son of Japheth being described, but actually the Greco-Macedonian Empire and its confrontation with the existing, ruling Medo-Persian Empire ending in 331 BCE.

This writer is not convinced that it is towards the end of the chapter when a change in the players of north and south is revealed, but that it occurs earlier. Regardless, the King of the North and King of the South shift from a Mediterranean and Middle Eastern theatre of orientation, to an imminent global power struggle. 

While not stated as such in the Bible, there is of sorts, a King of the West. This nation is presently a behemoth on the world stage; yet has begun a gradual decline, as we enter the beginning of the end – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Within a sixty-five year period, the pride of its power will speedily decline, suddenly fail and with that, it cataclysmically falls.

Isaiah 7:8

English Standard Version

‘… And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people.’

Its final demise will be spectacular, sudden, devastating and completed at the hands of the King of Assyria – Isaiah 7:17, Hosea 11:5. 

The United States does not play a role as the King of the North or the King of the South, though according to Bible prophecy, it will experience tragedy at the hands of the future King of the North (Article: Is America Babylon?)

The prevalent view amongst identity adherents and fundamentalist Christians has been that Asshur as ‘the instrument of God’s wrath’ in bringing true Israel to its knees in repentance past and future, is the nation of Germany and the Teuton peoples. Yet geography, history, migration, autosomal DNA, mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups, reveal that the Germans are actually descended from Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar

As the dominant nation from the descendants of Peleg – the son of Eber from Arphaxad a son of Shem – in Western Europe, centrally placed Germany is also the leading nation of all of Joktan’s descendants from Eber, who reside in Eastern Europe. In the future, a German led United States of Europe will ally itself with the real Assyrians – refer article: Is America Babylon? 

The prophet Balaam provides a future prophecy on these specific nations, including Kittim, a son of Javan descended from Japheth.

Numbers 24:24

English Standard Version

“But ships shall come from Kittim and shall afflict [H6031 – anah] Asshur and Eber; and he too shall come to utter destruction.”

It is in fact the Russians who descend from Asshur and are modern day Assyria – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Russia is both the King of the North and the instrument of God’s wrath against true Israel and Judah. The Hebrew word for afflict, means: ‘to afflict, abase’ or ‘humble (one self).’

While Iran and France are not the future King of the North, it is insightful by the source of this montage to correctly include Russia, Moscow and its current president under the banner of the King of the North.

Zephaniah 2:13

English Standard Version

‘And he will stretch out his hand against the north and destroy Assyria, and he will make Nineveh [their capital] a desolation, a dry waste like the desert.’

Isaiah 10:5, 24-25

English Standard Version

5 ‘Woe to Assyria, the rod of my anger; the staff in their hands is my fury… 

24 Therefore thus says the Lord God of hosts: “O my people, who dwell in Zion, be not afraid of the Assyrians when they strike with the rod and lift up their staff against you as the Egyptians did. 25 For in a very little while my fury will come to an end, and my anger will be directed to their destruction.’

There are only two nations in the northern hemisphere which could at a certain point in the future, possess the military and economic wherewithal to inflict a captivity of this magnitude on the modern nations of Israel and Judah – not the modern state called Israel – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. The nation of Germany is not in the north.

Amos 6:8-9, 11, 14

English Standard Version

‘… declares the Lord, the God of hosts: “I abhor the pride of Jacob and hate his strongholds, and I will deliver up the city and all that is in it.” … And if ten men remain in one house, they shall die… and the great house shall be struck down into fragments, and the little house into bits. “For behold, I will raise up against you a nation, O house of Israel,” declares the Lord, the God of hosts; “and they shall oppress you…”

The other contender nation China, already has its own predetermination as we will learn. The Assyrians are given their mission as Israel’s punisher from the Creator, though as they relish the role, their demise is also foretold. 

We then read further, about the King of the North in the book of Daniel. The whole of chapter eleven is worth reading, though for brevity the key verses include the following.

Daniel 11: 15, 18, 25, 29-31, 40, 42-44

English Standard Version

‘Then the king of the north shall come… Afterward he shall turn his face to the coastlands and shall capture many of them… And he shall stir up his power and his heart against the king of the south with a great army. And the king of the south shall wage war with an exceedingly great and mighty army, but he shall not stand, for plots shall be devised against him…’ 

The King of the North finds reason to attack the coastlands or isles which in the Bible are always associated with the far East. In this case, southeast Asia – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.

Isaiah 66:19, ESV: ‘… to Tarshish , Pul, and Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory…’ Pul, is not a mis-translation of Put or Phut. It is a name of a king; a King of Asshur and a reference to Assyria. Russia then turns its attention to the King of the South and defeats them in their first encounter.

Daniel: ‘At the time appointed he shall return and come into the south, but it shall not be this time as it was before. For ships of Kittim shall come against him, and he shall be afraid and withdraw, and shall turn back and be enraged and take action against the holy covenant… and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate’ – Matthew 24:15.

The interlinear says: ‘For ships Chittim shall come…’ It does not include ‘of’ or ‘from’ in the Hebrew, though it is considered the inference is from more than of, Kittim. Sometimes translated unhelpfully, as ships from the west. Some have then mistakenly translated Kittim as being Cyprus or Italy; where they once dwelled. The people today descended from Kittim live in the Indonesian archipelago – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.

We learned earlier in Numbers 24:24, that ships from Kittim inflict a loss on Asshur and Eber – an alliance of Russia and a German led European Union respectively. 

At some point, Kittim is either part of those nations amalgamated as the King of the South, and Indonesia’s military and naval power is formidable enough to fight Russia and Europe, or more likely, the verse is a veiled reference to a naval cavalcade, of various confederate nations travelling from a base in Kittim. It is plausible that Indonesia could accommodate a military and naval presence within its strategically positioned islands in southeast Asian waters. This enlargement of the King of the South alliance creates a powerful navy, which wins a confrontation against the King of the North, scaring them into retreat.

Modern navies since the last century have considerably more impact in any escalation than in the past, as they not only provide an effective means of transporting soldiers and military hardware, they include the critical strike potency afforded through the combined use of aircraft carriers and their jet fighter aircraft – Article: 2050.

In wrathful response, the abomination of desolation is committed and marks the beginning of the great tribulation some thirty days later and a final three and one half year period; a prophetic 1260 days before the Son of Man returns – Daniel 9:27, 12:11, Matthew 24:21-22.

Daniel: ‘At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt [Mizra] shall not escape. He shall become ruler of the treasures of gold and of silver, and all the precious things of Egypt, and the Libyans [Phut] and the Cushites shall follow in his train. But news from the east and the north shall alarm him, and he shall go out with great fury to destroy and devote many to destruction.’

The King of the North clashes for a third time with the King of the South, who this time is the aggressor – bolstered by winning the second exchange – attacking Russia with its allies. Notice the King of the North is prepared with ‘many ships’ and wins the third and final conflagration. Mizra includes the Arab nations, led by Egypt, Phut is Pakistan and Cush is India – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. India though, is not aligned with the King of the South. Russia gains control of Arab assets, for instance oil reserves. The threat from the Northeast, is an East Asian alliance, led by China.

The dominance of Russian interest expands to include the Middle East, West Asia and South Asia. This has been the long term goal of Russia – not withstanding the failed attempt at securing a warm water port during the war in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989 – and echoes the words of ‘Peter the Great… [who] advised his descendants to “approach as near as possible to Constantinople [Istanbul] and India [Cush]. Whoever governs there will be the true sovereign of the world. Consequently, excite continual wars, not only in Turkey [Elam], but in Persia [Iran, Lud]… Penetrate as far as the Persian Gulf [Iraq], advance as far as India” – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 13.

Ezekiel 27:10

New English Translation

‘Men of Persia [Elam], Lud, and Put [Pakistan] were in your army, men of war. They hung shield and helmet on you; they gave you your splendor.’

Lud a son of Shem, is associated with Elam and Phut geographically and militarily a number of times in the Bible. All the verses which mention them are connected with warfare. It is not a surprise therefore to discover that Lud is the modern militaristic state of Iran – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. Their relationship with Pakistan and Elam falls into place in the jig-saw of who comprises the King of the South; as Elam is the nation of Turkey – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

What is worth noting, from Ezekiel 27:10, is that Turkey, Iran and Pakistan are the heart and core of the future Islamic Alliance which is referred to in the Book of Daniel, as the King of the South. Peripheral players in this powerful confederacy, may well include other major Islamic nations of Egypt, Pathros from Mizra; Bangladesh, Havilah from Cush; and Indonesia, Kittim from Javan.

There are a handful of contender nations for leader of the Muslim world: population wise, Bangladesh and Indonesia; diplomatically wise as in gaining pan-Arab support, Egypt; militarily, Pakistan and critically, ideologically wise, Iran. The last two would appear favourites and Iran has the edge maybe, in religious zealotry and militancy compared with Pakistan. 

On the fringes because of its ostensibly more western footing is Turkey. How it would fit into an Islamic alliance is not as clear cut, unless economic clout is considered foremost. Potential leader cannot be ruled out particularly as its economy – 19th biggest GDP in the world – though marginally behind Indonesia at 16th and Saudi Arabia at 18th, is growing to soon make it the dominant nation of the South.

Turkey is included in the Next Eleven countries that are projected to dominate the global economy in the middle of the twenty-first century. Other N-11 nations coincidentally, include Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran and Pakistan. Most of the group’s total gross domestic product derives from Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and yes, Turkey. These Islamic nations are the fastest growing major economies of the next generation along with the burgeoning economies of the BRIC nations, comprising Brazil, India, China and forebodingly, Russia.

India is discussed in the Bible and has a vital role to play as the Queen of the South; a powerful counterpoint to the King of the South.

Matthew 12:42

Amplified Bible

‘The Queen of the South (Sheba) [Sheba and Dedan descended from Cush] will stand up [as a witness] at the judgment against this [last] generation, and will condemn it because she came from the ends of the earth to listen to the wisdom of Solomon; and now, something greater than Solomon is here [the Messiah].’

The term Queen of the South is a tantalising clue as it confirms the status of India on the world stage, while at the same time excluding it from the future union of Islamic nations incorporating the King of the South: Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt and their allies Indonesia and Bangladesh.

An alliance led by China, is predicted in the Book of Revelation.

Revelation 16:12

English Standard Version

‘The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, to prepare the way for the kings from the east.’

The Kings from the East comprise China, North Korea or sensationally, a united Korea and much of continental southeast Asia, including Vietnam, Myanmar and Thailand. At this juncture, after the King of the North has conclusively and systematically defeated the King of the South; the Queen of the South; and having previously dispatching the King of the West; China decides to impede Russia’s rush towards total global dominion.

Revelation 16:16

English Standard Version

‘And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon [G7171 meaning: ‘the hill or city of Megiddo’ derived from G4023: ‘to surround, encompass, take possession, sieze’ and G2022: ‘to pour upon’].’

The forces of the Russian King of the North square up against the combined Chinese led Asian Kings of the East on the plains below (adjacent to) Megiddo.

China comprises three of Japheth’s sons – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. Magog, Tubal and Meshech dwell in the North and in the East – Daniel 11:44, Revelation 16:12. Magog is described in Ezekiel chapters thirty-eight, thirty-nine and in Revelation 20:1–10. Only one nation in the world could be the correct match.

Gog is a future ruler of Magog – quite literally, a de-magog-ue.

Definition of a demagogue: ‘a person, especially an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people.’

This leader is suspiciously reminiscent of the Nephilim – Articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.

There are in fact two wars predicted, involving Magog:

1. Towards the end of the Great tribulation at the battle of Armageddon, Magog with the Kings of the East, faces off against the King of the North.

2. At the end of a millennial period of peace, Magog and its allies attack, not the present day state of Israel (or the Jews), but rather true Israel descended from the sons of Jacob – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

‘The phrase, “The Yellow Peril,” was first introduced into public print by Emperor William of Germany in 1895. In making a cartoon, representing the dangers likely to arise from the nations of the East against the West, the Emperor named the picture, ‘The Yellow Peril’ – The Yellow Peril, or the Orient vs. the Occident as viewed by modern statesmen and ancient prophets, 1911, Greenberry George Rupert (1847-1922).

The Statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream has been discussed previously, with the Medes of Madai, represented by the Turko-Mongols of Central Asia and the Persians of Elam, represented by Turkey, being the chest and arms of silver.

The head of gold is synonymous with the Babylonian Chaldean Empire from the descendants of Abraham’s brother Nahor, represented by Italy.

The torso and thighs of bronze equate to the Greco-Macedonian Empire, the descendants of Abraham’s nephew Lot (Moab and Ammon), represented by France – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Each descending metal is less valuable, though more robust than the one previous to it.

In Daniel 2:33, 40 NET, it says:

Its legs were of iron… Then there will be a fourth kingdom, one strong like iron. Just like iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything, and as iron breaks in pieces all these metals, so it will break in pieces and crush the others.’

The legs of iron, are much stronger than the bronze of the Greco-Macedonians, yet not as culturally sophisticated or resplendent. It would be unusually conspicuous if the Assyrians were missing from the statue, as other major European powers are included as we have investigated.

The two legs represent the division of the Roman Empire. One leg of iron is the Western Roman Empire centred in Rome and represents the descendants of Ishmael: Germany – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

The other leg is the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium and this leg represents the descendants of Asshur: Russia – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Edited excerpt from an answer to questions asked on Quora: What is the meaning of Daniel chapter 11? and What does the Bible mean about “Queen of the South”?

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Lud & Iran

Chapter XVII

The fourth son of Shem is Lud. His descendants are an elusive people to track historically and next to impossible to locate for identity researchers and biblical scholars alike. We have discussed the descendants of Phut and of Mizra’s son Lehab intermingling, so that the Bible translation ‘Libya’ applies to both – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Commentators have resolutely taught that Lud from Shem and the Lud-im from Mizra are separate peoples. Any references to Lud or ‘Lydia’ have been even more perplexing to the identity hunter in trying to establish which Lud in question is being addressed – the one from Ham, or the one descended from Shem? The answer is that the descendants of Lud, primarily descended from Shem, are living nestled within the region of Ham. 

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:

‘Shem had a son named Lud (Genesis 10:22). Lud early migrated from the Mesopotamian Valley. We read of Lud only as a trading people in the Old Testament. They play no important part in prophecy, but we ought to know where Lud’s descendants are today.

From the region of Western Mesopotamia, the sons of Lud spread into Western Asia Minor and founded the ancient Kingdom of Lydia. “The Assyrians called Lydia Ludu”, says the International Standard Bible Encylopaedia. From Lydia they spread into Europe. Enroute they gave the name Ludias to a river in Macedonia, north of Greece. Nearby, in Thrace, we find the town of Cabyle. A people of the white race called Cabyle or Kabyle are found in North Africa today!

The Romans found the Lydians spread over much of Italy and along the shores of the Adriatic in early times. They called the Lydians Etruscans and Tuscans. In the little country of Albania (next to Greece) the Tosks live today. The BRITANNICA states that these Albanians are probably “identical with Tuscus [and the] Etruscans” of Roman times, who were of Lud (article “Albania”). The Greeks call Albania Arberia, a word akin to Berber or Barbar. Associated with them are the Berbers, or Barbars. The Greeks probably derived the word Barbarian, meaning non-Greek, from the Berbers of Lud whom they met.

Ezekiel 30:5 gives the definite implication that part of Lud is to be found today in North Africa. Various forms of the name “Albania” are common even today in Italy. From Italy we can trace many Lydians to the East, around the Black Sea, where they founded another Kingdom of Albania in the Caucasus. 

According to many historians, “the name [Albania] arose from the alleged fact that the people were the descendants of emigrants from Alba in Italy”, the BRITANNICA states. In the region of the Causasus today dwell many small tribes, related to one another racially, but distinct linguistically. They are not related to any other people in Russia. They are known by a dozen different names. Among these are the Georgians from whom Joseph Stalin came.

The sons of Lud have not become a great people in the world [in part] due to the… geographic areas in which they settled. Isaiah 66:19 describes them today as dwelling among the Latin and Slavic peoples of Europe.’

The descendants of Lud actually play an important role in the future. Understanding their identity reveals they are located in West Asia and therefore not associated with North African, Latin or Slavic speaking peoples. The Albanians have inherited names from previous peoples who have migrated through Southern Europe. Their name Alba-nia does have a close association with the peoples of Alba who passed through Albania and Italy en route to ultimately, Alba in Britain. The Albanians were not a people living in the same location for over 2,500 years; thus their name today is inherited and not original to them – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. 

The Lydian civilisation dwelt in Western Asia Minor and then seemingly disappears from view. We will discover that it was a different people descended from Shem who were the ancient Etruscans. The Etruscans racially and culturally, have much more in common with the Romans and Greeks as well as with the Phoenicians of Carthage – with whom they had an alliance – to indicate any link with Lydia from Lud, to be unlikely. The Georgians though, are a part of Lud’s descendants.

Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:

‘Although there is a Semite of the same name, we find that Lud, grandson of Ham, was father of the Ludim. He was also the first-born of Mizraim. The Hebrew word is ludiyiy (SHD 3866), meaning to the firebrands: travailings (BDB). (The descendants of Lud, the fourth son of Shem, were supposedly the Lydians.)’

Recall, the definition for Lehab or Lubim, the son of Mizra living with Phut in Pakistan, is: ‘flames, to burn.’

CCG: ‘The entry in the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia is as follows:

“In Genesis 10:13 Ludim appears as the firstborn of Mizraim (Egypt), and in 10:22 Lud is the fourth son of Shem. We have therefore to do with two different nationalities bearing the same name, and not always easy to distinguish…”

‘In Isaiah 66.19 Lud is mentioned with Tarshish and Pul (generally regarded as a mistake for Phut), Tubal, Javan, and the isles. Accepting this emendation, the passage agrees with Jeremiah 46:9, where the Ludim are spoken of with Kush and Phut as the allies of Egypt; and also with Ezekiel 27:10, where Lud is referred to with Persia and Put… Lud, again, is mentioned with Ethiopia (Cush), Put, all the mingled people, Cab, and the children of the land which is in league (or, margin “the land of the covenant”), which were all to fall by the sword (Eze 30:5)…

The existence of Lud in the neighborhood of Egypt as well as in Asia Minor finds parallels in… Assyrian inscriptions… and… certain Assyrian letters relating to horses, by the side of the Cush (Kusu likewise) which stands for Ethiopia. Everything points, therefore, to the Semitic Lud and Ludim being Lydia, and the identification may be regarded as satisfactory. It is altogether otherwise with the Egyptian Lud and Ludim, however, about which little can be said at present. 

The reference in Isaiah 66:19 seems to locate the land of Lud in the Mediterranean, whilst Jeremiah (46:9) and Ezekiel (27:10; 30:5) place it squarely in Africa. The likelihood is that it is in North Africa on the Mediterranean shores. The Lydians in Asia Minor came into contact with the Assyrians and with Egypt in the early Seventh century BCE when their king Gyges sent an embassy to Ashurbanipal in 668 or 660 (Interpretative Dictionary Volume 3, page 179). Their language was not known and they were not really understood until the Persians conquered them in 546 BCE. Mellink (ibid.) considers the Lydians of Asia Minor to be neither Hamitic nor Semitic. However, if they were either it would be Semitic.’

We can understand the confusion caused in trying to separate both Luds. This then creates difficulties in who is who; with one commentator even saying they are neither. The Bible reveals the answer and it has been available all along, waiting to be read and plainly understood.

Ezekiel 30:5

Young’s Literal Translation

‘Cush [India], and Phut [Pakistan], and Lud, and all the mixture, and Chub [Lehab], And the sons of the land of the covenant with them by sword do fall…’

Lud is associated with India and Pakistan. Pakistan is Phut and Lehab together. Similarly, Lud is a mixture of peoples and thus all mention of Lud, Ludim or Lydia in the Bible relate to the two lines of Lud, together.

Lud is the nation of Iran.

Iran is also known as Persia and the main body of people are called Persian and speak Persian or Farsi. The original Persians once lived in this region and are now identifiable with Elam – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. Modern Iranians have inherited the name and again, it is not original to them.

The name Ludim is used once in the Bible, also translated as Lydia as opposed to Lud in other places.

Jeremiah 46.9

Bible in Basic English

‘Go up, you horses; go rushing on, you carriages of war; go out, you men of war: Cush and Put, gripping the body-cover, and the Ludim, with bent bows.’

New English Translation

‘Go ahead and charge into battle, you horsemen! Drive furiously, you charioteers! Let the soldiers march out into battle, those from Ethiopia and Libya who carry shields, and those from Lydia who are armed with the bow.’

The proficiency with bow and arrow may extend to modern warfare. If so, what tends to be thrown or fired now… is missiles.

Statue of Arash the Archer at the Sa’dabad Complex in the capital, Tehran

Isaiah 66.19

New English Translation

‘I will perform a mighty act among them and then send some of those who remain to the nations – to Tarshish [Japan], Pul [Asshur], Lud (known for its archers), Tubal [economic power located in southeastern coastal China], Javan [Archipelago South East Asia], and to the distant coastlands that have not heard about me or seen my splendor.’ 

Ezekiel 27:10

New English Translation

‘Men of Persia [Turkey (Elam)], Lud [Iran], and Put [Pakistan] were in your army, men of war. They hung shield and helmet on you; they gave you your splendor.’

We learn that Lud is associated with Cush, Phut and Elam geographically and militarily. All the verses are connected with warfare. It is not a surprise therefore to connect Lud with the modern militaristic state of Iran. Their complex geopolitical relationship with Turkey, Pakistan and India, also now falls into place.

The Middle Eastern and Southwest Asian jig-saw is looking a little more complete and hopefully of sense to the constant reader. Pul, is not a mis-translation of Put or Phut. Rather, we will learn later it is a name of a king – a King of Asshur. The reference is about Assyria and again, Iran has close historic ties with Russia – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia

What is worth noting from Ezekiel 27:10, is that Elam-Turkey, Lud-Iran and Phut-Pakistan are the heart and core of a future Islamic Alliance, which is referred to in the Book of Daniel, as the King of the South.* Peripheral players in this powerful alliance may well include other major Islamic nations, including: Egypt-Pathros from Mizra; Bangladesh-Havilah from Cush; and Indonesia-Kittim from Javan – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.*

The Oxford Bible Church article by Derek Walker, provides a good synopsis of Iran, though understandably links Iran with ‘Persia’, which is actually Elam in the Bible rather than Lud – emphasis mine:

‘Ezekiel 38:5 lists Persia as the principal (first mentioned) ally of Magog in the end-time war against Israel [not the state of Israel]. Persia is easy to identify as modern Iran. Iran was called Persia until 1935… then in the 1979 Revolution, the Islamic Republic of Iran. Once [Iran] was pro-western and pro-Israel but after Khomeini’s Islamic Revolution, [it] became anti-western, anti-Israel and more within the Russian sphere of influence.

Iran is a predominantly Muslim nation, with a radical fundamentalist leadership. Israel considers Iran as its most dangerous enemy. [Iran] desires to lead* the Muslim world, taking centre stage to bring Muslim and Arab nations together against Israel and the USA. [Iran] wants all Muslim nations to devise a common strategy against Israel in the Middle East. Iran is the most extreme of the extremists. Hezbullah is essentially an arm of Iran. Hamas is becoming increasingly dependent on [Iran]. On many occasions [its] leaders have expressed the desire to wipe Israel from the map, which is why there is so much concern that [Iran] is determined to have… nuclear capability. 

[Iran] supports many terrorist groups and could easily pass nuclear weapons to them to use against Israel and the West. That is why sanctions have been applied but Russia has protected Iran from the worst of them, because [it] has many lucrative contracts with [Iran], including helping Iran build its nuclear reactor and selling weapons… 

Russia continues to align [itself] with Israel’s enemies, and the top of this list is Iran, who would not hesitate to join in [an] invasion. In order to mount this large-scale invasion, Russia needs Iran as an ally. It would be much more difficult to move a large land army across the Caucasus Mountains bordering Turkey, than the Elburz Mountains bordering Iran. [Iran’s] general terrain is also easier to cross than Turkey’s.’

The map below shows the highest population regions and density. Most of Iran’s bigger cities are located in the west of the nation. Iran’s affinity lays more with Turkey and the Arab world, than its eastern neighbours comprising Pakistan and Afghanistan.

There are a handful of contender nations for leader* of the Muslim world: population wise, Bangladesh and Indonesia; diplomatically wise, as in gaining pan-Arab support, Egypt; militarily, Pakistan and critically, ideologically wise, Iran. The last two would appear favourites and Iran has the edge maybe, in religious zealotry and militancy compared with Pakistan. On the fringes because of its ostensibly more western footing is Turkey. How it would fit into an Islamic alliance is not as clear cut. Potential leader cannot be ruled out particularly as its economy (19th in the world) and marginally behind Indonesia (at 16th) and Saudi Arabia (at 18th), is growing to soon make it the dominant nation of the South.

In the Book of Jasher 7:17, we learn that Lud had two sons: Pethor and Bizayon.

The Muslim historian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, circa 915 CE recounts a tradition that the wife of Lud was named Shakbah, a daughter of Japheth and their two sons were Faros and Jurjan. He further states that Lud was also the progenitor of the Amalekites – both a grandson of Esau and a separate people by the same name – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

The first son, Far-os is reminiscent of Fars province in Iran. Fars, Pars or Faristan is the state that was once the southern part of the original homeland of Elam. The native name of the Persian language is Farsi or Parsi. Persia and Persian both derive from the Hellenized form of Persis, from the root word pars. The Old Persian word was Parsaa; while Fars is the Arabicised version of Pars.

The Book of Jubilees 9:6, says that Lud received: “the mountains of Asshur and all appertaining to them till it reaches the Great Sea, and till it reaches the east of Asshur his brother”. The Ethiopian version specifically reads: “… until it reaches, toward the east, toward his brother Asshur’s portion.” Scholars have associated Lud with the Lubdu of Assyrian sources, who inhabited certain parts of western Media.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The people called Ludim descend from Mizraim… spelled Ludiyim in 1 Chronicles 1:11. But the only person named Lud is a son of Shem. It appears that the only Lud in the Bible and the only Ludim in the Bible have nothing to do with each other; i.e. the Ludim stem from some other, otherwise unmentioned Lud. It may be that there once were two patriarchs named Lud and thus two peoples named Ludim, but that one people and the other patriarch vanished from the story.’

It is incredible that a commentary would head off on such a completely incorrect tangent and therefore, in a mis-leading direction, instead of seeing the simplicity of the obvious answer – that two merged to become one. Some forbearance needs to be given, as in nearly all other instances, Abarim have been far and away the best Bible concordance for this project’s requirements and of which I am grateful. 

Abarim: ‘It’s a mystery what the names Lud and Ludim might mean, although scholars have proposed several possibilities. The name Lydia means From Lud and the name Ahilud may mean Brother Of Lud. It can also be that – as is attested by Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names – in the language where this name came from (Phoenician, says Jones) the ‘d’ and the ‘z’ were pretty much indistinguishable and the name is actually Luz, meaning Turn of Twist, and thus the word by which the crooked almond tree was known.

The word (lwd) simply does not occur in Hebrew. BDB Theological Dictionary and NOBSE Study Bible Name List do not translate. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names, slightly more daring, indeed derives (Lud) from (luz), a verb meaning to turn aside, depart: The verb (luz) means to turn aside, [to bend] or away. Noun (lazut) means deviation or crookedness. Noun (luz) describes almond wood. To a Hebrew audience, perhaps the name Lud rang like it has something to do with the verb (yalad), meaning to beget, bring forth: perhaps Lud… means something like [twisted] Productivity or Emergence.

I cannot attest to the national character or approach of an Iranian, so do not know if the following is indicative or not – though its current leadership would indicate a correlation. It is not too dissimilar to the definition for a Philistine – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America

Luddite: ‘a member of any of various bands of workers in England (1811–16) organised to destroy manufacturing machinery, under the belief that its use diminished employment. Also: someone who is opposed or resistant to new technologies or technological change.’

The historical and chronological link between ancient Lydia and modern Iran can be found in the former state of Urartu. It received its name from the Assyrians who bordered their land to the south. The Hebrews called them Ararat and like present day Iran – with formerly Shahs and currently Ayatollahs – were synonymous with a prominent ruler who was the focal point of their civilisation. Herodotus called them Alarodians.**

Urartu was known for its indomitable fighting spirit and development of a high culture. H A B Lynch, remarked that Urartu was “no obscure dynasty which slept secure behind the mountains, but a splendid monarchy which for more than two centuries rivalled the claims of Assyria to the dominion of the ancient world.” Between 860 and 585 BCE, Urartu contested with Assyria for the dominance of western Asia. Its beginnings are supposedly lost in the mists of pre-history, though their identification with Lud and the people of Lydia in western Asia Minor fits their profile and location. 

Lehmann-Haupt proposes they migrated from that direction, citing as proof their ‘metallurgy, architecture and folkways.’ The people were first known as Nairi. They were also known as haldians** or children of the god (K)haldis. Haldi was portrayed as a man standing on a bull or lion, symbolic of his power – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. Temples were built in Haldi’s honour, which had distinctive square towers and reinforced corners. The king was known as the ‘servant of Haldi’ and all wars were carried out in his name.

Urartu sphinx statue above top and Haldi god relief above; compared to modern Persian symbols of a winged bull below and the Golden Lion below bottom – found on the Iranian flag prior to 1979.

An important deity was Shivani, the Sun god, who given his representation with a winged solar disk, was similar to the Egyptian god, Ra. The consort of Haldi was Arubani, the most important female goddess. Sielardi was the moon goddess and Sardi a star goddess. Urartu artwork includes the Tree of Life symbol common to Mesopotamian cultures and is depicted with a figure stood either side making offerings – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

The Urartians referred to themselves as Shurele – transliterated as Shurili or Surili. A name mentioned within the royal titles of the kings of Urartu; the king of Suri-lands. The word Suri has been theorised as originally referring to chariots or swords. The Shur-ili were able warriors typical of Lud, so this is possible; or it might be related to the word, king or ruler as in Shah.

All Urartu kings took pride in leading their armies into battle. Weapons as shown in temples, included iron and bronze swords, spears, javelins and bows. Lud likewise, is associated with weaponry in the scriptures. The modern Iranians combine religion and military as the Shurili Urartians did. The Uratians employed heavy shields which had large central bosses decorated with images of mythical creatures such as bulls and lions. They wore helmets and metal scale armour.

The main adversary of their kingdom was the Neo-Assyrian Empire, though there is evidence of trade between the two during times of peace. As the Assyrians used chariots, the Shurili may have as well, particularly as they were adept at horse breeding. Urartu did secure some victories in the mid-eighth century BCE, though Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727 BCE) laid siege to Tushpa and Sargon II (722-705) in 714 BCE mounted successful campaigns against the Urartu. Other enemies who bordered the Shurili, included the Cimmerians, Scythians and later the Medes – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

Forty-two inscriptions found at Van in 1842, reveal a unique people and culture. Professor A H Sayce said: ‘a new language and a new people to the museum of the ancient Oriental world’ has been added. The Vannic texts were described as ‘a vanished civilization from the grave.’ War, vandalism and the passing of time has obscured the chance to learn more than fragments of their history. The seat of the Shurili theocratic monarchy – like the Shah and Ayatollah combined – was Thuspa; capital of the territory called Biaina, later called Van. Tiglath-Pileser I, king of Assyria, asserted that he had conquered twenty-three kings of Nairi in 1114 BCE. These kingdoms must have been comparatively small regions within the greater Shurili empire of Urartu. 

An inscription of the Assyrian king Assurbelkala (1073‑1056 BCE), first includes the name Uruatru. Shalmanaser II (1030‑1019 BCE), claimed the conquest of ‘the entire country of Uruatru’ in three days. Sardur I (844‑828) united into a confederation the different segments of Urartu.

Sardur was the son of Lutipris, who had succeeded Arame. He left an inscription in the Assyrian language, calling himself King of Sura, which, according to Professor Albrecht Goetze, ‘is the same as Subaru.’ Sardur’s other titles included, ‘Great King,’ and ‘Ruler of Four Regions,’ or Shar-Kishatti, according to Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions. Sardur built a fortress of huge stones west of the Rock of Van, and his son and successor Ispuinis, chose that rock as his residence and the holy seat of the god Khaldis.

The period of rule by Ispuinis and his son Menuas is recognised as the highpoint in Urartean history. Under their successive reigns, it extended from the Zagros Mountains in the East to Palu in the North and Malatia in the West. During their combined reigns great works were constructed around Van, including the aqueduct of Shamiram‑Su, which was forty-five miles in length and brought the pure water of the Khoshab River to the eastern shores of Lake Van whose water is undrinkable, enabling King Menuas to found a city there in his name. This canal irrigates the plain of Van even to the present time.

Menuas strengthened the existing, great fortification of Melazkert. It was an ideal location for a fortress, for a power operating from the southern lowlands and building an empire on the Armenian plains. Made more secure by a fleet of ships on the lake and by the fortification of the passes of Mount Varag; the region became of first rate military importance against the hostile forces that lay in Mesopotamia. These factors explain the comparative immunity and rapid development of the empire under the successors of Sardur I – at a time when Assyria was ruled by warlike monarchs.

In 758 BCE, after crushing the revolt of the Hatti king of Milidu (Malatia), Sardur III successor of Argistis I, moved southward, putting the Great King of Carchemish, Jarablus under tribute and captured the whole territory as far as Halpa (Aleppo). ‘The empire of Assyria was then encircled’ says the Turkish scholar, Professor Shemseddin, ‘as if [in an iron hoop].’ Later, Surili rulers possessed the name of Rusas I and Rusas II. An intriguing coincidence, as the Shurili were neighbours of the Assyrians, who themselves were later to be known as Rus and eventually as Russians.

The Urartean language has been deemed as neither^ Semitic nor Indo-European, as efforts to decipher the cuneiform inscriptions through the present day Armenian language have failed. One investigator, P Jensen, found a certain similarity between the Urartean language and that in which the letter of King Tushratta of Mitanni – found at Tel-el‑Amarna, Egypt – was written. The name of the god Tesub of the Mitanni closely resembles that of the god Teisbas of Urartu. Another scholar thinks that ancient Urartu had a cultural connection with Asia Minor and Syria; citing the Hurri-Mitanni or Subarean remains in upper Mesopotamia and Syria as having points of resemblance with the characters of the Khaldian inscriptions.

Scholars suggest: ‘there appears to have been a pre-Indo-European substratum of speech which strongly influenced the Indo-European-Armenian’ and that ‘the Aryo-European must have exerted great influence upon the Urartean, even long before the times of the Vannic Empire.’ This coincides with modern day Persian, as even though classed as Indo-European and supposedly related to the Slavic, Germanic, Romance, Greek and Armenian languages, it is not mutually intelligible with them, for Persian is entirely unique.^ Shurili artwork has been found outside Urartu – when finding bronze items belonging to the royal household and identifying inscriptions on them – such as in Etruscan tombs in central Italy. 

The Iranian flag above is pre-revolution and the flag below post-revolution. 

The symbol in the centre of the flag means: God

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Iran… is a country in Western Asia with [92,227,196] inhabitants. Its central location in Eurasia and proximity to the Strait of Hormuz give it significant geostrategic importance. Iran is the world’s 17th most populous country. Spanning 1,648,195 km2 (636,372 square miles), it is the second largest country in the Middle East and the 17th largest in the world. 

The term Iran derives directly from Middle Persian Eran, first attested in a third-century inscription at Rustam Relief, with the accompanying Parthian inscription using the term Aryan, in reference to the Iranians… recognized as a derivative of Proto-Indo-European *ar-yo-, meaning “one who assembles (skilfully)”. According to the Iranian mythology, the country’s name comes from the name of Iraj, a legendary prince and shah who was killed by his brothers.

Historically, Iran has been referred to as Persia by the West, due mainly to the writings of Greek historians who referred to all of Iran as Persis… meaning “land of the Persians”, while Persis itself was one of the provinces of ancient Iran that is today defined as Fars. In 1935, Reza Shah requested the international community to refer to the country by its native name, Iran, effective 22 March that year. Today, both Iran and Persia are used in cultural contexts, while Iran remains irreplaceable in official state contexts. 

“Greater Ira” (Iranzamin or Iran e Bozorg) refers to territories of the Iranian cultural and linguistic zones. In addition to modern Iran, it includes portions of the Caucasus, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Afghanistan and Central Asia.

By the 1500s, Ismail I of Ardabil established the Safavid Empire with his capital at Tabriz. Beginning with Azerbaijan he subsequently extended his authority over all of the Iranian territories, and established an intermittent Iranian hegemony over the vast relative regions, reasserting the Iranian identity within large parts of Greater Iran.’

‘Iran was predominantly Sunni, but Ismail instigated a forced conversion to the Shia branch of Islam, spreading throughout the Safavid territories in the Caucasus, Iran, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia. As a result, modern-day Iran is the only official Shia nation of the world, with it holding an absolute majority in Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan, having there the first and the second highest number of Shia inhabitants by population percentage in the world. Meanwhile, the centuries-long geopolitical and ideological rivalry between Safavid Iran and the neighboring Ottoman Empire [Turkey] led to numerous Ottoman-Iranian wars. 

The Safavid era peaked in the reign of Abbas I (1587–1629) [who reinforced Iran’s military, political and economic power], surpassing their Turkish arch-rivals in strength, and making Iran a leading science and art hub in western Eurasia. The Safavid era saw the start of mass integration from Caucasian populations into new layers of the society of Iran, as well as mass resettlement of them within the heartlands of Iran, playing a pivotal role in the history of Iran for centuries onwards.’

This migration of people from the north is indicative of those descendants of Lud and Shem, amalgamating with the established peoples related to Arabs and in turn representing a lineage from the Ludim of Mizra and Ham.

‘The Russo-Iranian wars of 1804-1813 and 1826-1828 resulted in large irrevocable territorial losses for Iran in the Caucasus, (comprising modern-day Dagestan, Georgia [population: 3,806,893], Armenia [population: 2,957,151] and [the] Republic of Azerbaijan [population: 10,384,029]), which made part of the very concept of Iran for centuries, and thus substantial gains for the neighboring Russian Empire… which got confirmed per the treaties of Gulistan and Turkmenchay. 

Despite Iran’s neutrality during WW I, the Ottoman, Russian and British empires occupied the territory of western Iran and fought the [P]ersian Campaign before fully withdrawing their forces in 1921. [Britain] directed [the] 1921 Persian coup d’etat and Reza Shah’s establishment of the Pahlavi dynasty. Reza Shah, became the new Prime Minister of Iran and was declared the new monarch in 1925.

In June 1925, Reza Shah introduced conscription law… At that time every male person who had reached 21 years old must serve [in the] military for two years… [and the] Iranian constitution obliges all men of 18 years old and higher to serve in [the] military or police… They cannot leave the country or be employed without completion of the service period.

The 1979 Revolution, later known as the Islamic Revolution, began in January 1978 with the first major demonstrations against the Shah. After a year of strikes and demonstrations paralyzing the country and its economy, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi [Reza Shah’s son] fled to the United States, and [Ayatollah, meaning a high ranking Shiite religious authority] Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile to Tehran in February 1979, forming a new government. After holding a referendum, Iran officially became an Islamic republic in April 1979. A second referendum in December 1979 approved a theocratic constitution.

The Leader of the Revolution (“Supreme Leader”) is responsible for delineation and supervision of the policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Iranian president has limited power compared to the Supreme Leader Khamenei. The current longtime Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has been issuing decrees and making the final decisions on the economy, environment, foreign policy, education, national planning, and everything else in the country.

The officially stated goal of the government of Iran is to establish a new world order based on world peace, global collective security, and justice. Iran’s syncretic political system combines elements of an Islamic theocracy with vetted democracy.

On 22 September 1980, the Iraqi army invaded the western Iranian province of Khuzestan, launching the Iran-Iraq War. Although the forces of Saddam Hussein made several early advances, by mid 1982, the Iranian forces successfully managed to drive the Iraqi army back into Iraq. In July 1982, with Iraq thrown on the defensive, the regime of Iran took the decision to invade Iraq and conducted countless offensives in a bid to conquer Iraqi territory and capture cities, such as Basra. The war continued until 1988 when the Iraqi army defeated the Iranian forces inside Iraq and pushed the remaining Iranian troops back across the border. Subsequently, Khomeini accepted a truce mediated by the United Nations.’

Iran’s conflicts with Iraq, Turkey, Russia and of late, Israel parallels the war-like stature of Lud and reflects its militaristic leanings.

‘As of 2009, the government of Iran maintains diplomatic relations with 99 members of the United Nations, but not with the United States, and not with Israel – a state which Iran’s government has derecognized since the 1979 Revolution. Among Muslim nations, Iran has an adversarial relationship with Saudi Arabia due to different political and Islamic ideologies. While Iran is a Shia Islamic Republic, Saudi Arabia is a conservative Sunni monarchy. Regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the government of Iran has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Palestine, after [President] Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Judaism has a long history in Iran, dating back to the Achaemenid conquest of Babylonia. Although many left in the wake of the establishment of the State of Israel and the 1979 Revolution, about 8,756 to 25,000 Jewish people live in Iran. Iran has the largest Jewish population in the Middle East outside of Israel.’

This is immensely ironic and will be apparent; when we study the state of Israel and the modern Jewish people – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

‘Iran has the world’s second largest proved gas reserves after Russia, with 33.6 trillion cubic meters and the third largest natural gas production after Indonesia and Russia. It also ranks fourth in oil reserves with an estimated 153,600,000,000 barrels. It is OPEC’S second largest oil exporter, and is an energy superpower.’

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

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$16.7 billion 
  2. Plastics, plastic articles: $4.7 billion
  3. Iron, steel: $4.2 billion
  4. Fruits, nuts: $2.9 billion 
  5. Organic chemicals: $2.4 billion 
  6. Vegetables: $941.2 million 
  7. Copper: $876.2 million 
  8. Fertilizers: $722.9 million 
  9. Salt, sulphur, stone, cement: $512.3 million 
  10. Machinery including computers: $489.8 million 


Fruits and nuts was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 22% from 2019 to 2020. The only other product category to post expanding export sales was plastics both as materials and items made from plastic articles via its 7.5% increase. The leading decliner among Iran’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil thanks to a -27.2% drop year over year.’

‘… two-thirds of the population [are] under the age of 25. Iran’s population grew rapidly during the latter half of the 20th century, increasing from about 19 million in 1956 to more than 84 million by July 2020. Due to its young population, studies project that the growth will continue to [grow] until it stabilizes around 105 million by 2050.’

‘The Library of Congress issued… estimates [of the Iranian population]: 65% Persians (including Mazenderanis, Gilaks, and the Talysh), 16% Azerbaijanis, 7% Kurds, 6% Lurs, 2% Baloch, 1% Turkic tribal groups (including Qashqai and Turkmens), and non-Iranian, non-Turkic groups (including Armenians, Georgians, Assyrians, Circassians, and Arabs) less than 3%. It determined that Persian is the first language of at least 65% of the country’s population, and is the second language for most of the remaining 35%. Other nongovernmental estimates regarding the groups other than Persians and Azerbaijanis are roughly congruent with the World Factbook and the Library of Congress. 

However, many estimates regarding the number of these two groups differ significantly from the mentioned census; some place the number of ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran between 21.6 and 30% of the total population, with the majority holding it on 25%. In any case, the largest population of Azerbaijanis* in the world live in Iran [higher than in Azerbaijan].’

Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal stratification in Iran: relationship between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula, multiple authors, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Similarly, Quintana-Murci et al. found greater proportions of mtDNA haplogroups N1b, R2 [India], HV2, U7 [Pakistan], J2 and T* in northern Iran, whereas M* [India], N*, R5, B, pre-HV1, U2* [India], U2e and U3 lineages were higher in the south

A recent study, based on both Y-chromosome and mtDNA analyses, found little to no differences in ethnic groups (Indo–European speakers versus Semitic speakers) residing in close geographical proximity within Iran. Furthermore, another mtDNA investigation led to the conclusion that two Indo-Iranian-speaking Talysh groups from Iran and Azerbaijan, that claim a common ancestry, were genetically similar. In the same study, however, Y-chromosomal marker composition was shown to differ considerably between the Iranian and Azerbaijani Talysh, with the Azerbaijan Talysh more closely resembling the Azerbaijan neighbors than its Iranian counterpart. 

Results reported by Regueiro et al. also indicate differential gene flow between northern and southern Iranian groups (divided by the Dasht-e Kavir and Dash-e Lut deserts) not only with respect to the R-M198 [R1a1a] mutation, as illustrated by Wells et al., but also with R-M269 [R1b1a1a2] as well. 

The same study also reveals significant divergence in the overall Y-haplogroup distributions between northern and southern Iranians as well as between both groups and other spatially separated Iranian populations (the Esfahan of Central Iran reported by Nasidze et al. and Uzbekistan discussed in the study by Wells et al. In spite of these efforts, a consensus has not yet been reached as to the source populations, overall genetic relationships and degree of stratification between different Iranian regions.’

The mtDNA Haplogroups in Iran reveal a divergent north-south divide and in the overall Y-DNA Haplogroup picture it is replicated, so that combined there is a haziness in what are the original Iranian or Persian Haplogroups. This is due to the simple fact that there is autosomal DNA via Lud from Shem and also, via the Ludim from Mizra and Ham, which has intermingled over a very long period of time. 

‘In the MDS plot based on mtDNA [below], the southwest Asian populations are restricted to the left portion of the chart, the majority of which sequester in the lower left quadrant. The Afghanis group with the central Asians in the lower center of the graph is an expected association given that Afghanistan is frequently considered as a part of central Asia’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. ‘The Balkan Peninsula populations form a tight cluster at the right-most extreme of the lower right quadrant, whereas the populations from the Caucasus, Levant/Anatolia and North Africa conform to a ladder-like pattern that extends from the extreme right center of the chart into the upper right quadrant. 

The central and southern Iranians are close to each other and to the North Africa and Levant/Anatolia assemblages [those Arab, Berber and related peoples stemming from Casluh/Caphtor and Pathros, as well as Turkish from Elam, whereas] The Peninsular Arabs partition to the left of above mentioned groups of populations [those Arabs descending from Naphtuh and Anam]; interestingly, IN (present study) is located within this cluster, specifically close to the Qatar collection. Two other North Iranian populations from the South Caspian region, the Gilaki and Mazandarian, are positioned between Arabian and Levant groups, closest to Saudi Arabia, Oman and Egypt.

Clear differences are observed in the maternal versus paternal gene pools of each specific Iranian region, as well as when these are compared with each other. The IN collection exhibits a 92.1% influence from the Peninsular Arabs when mtDNA is examined while this impact [diminishes] to 11.2% when Y-chromosomal data are examined.’

Either way, the maternal ancestry in Iran is heavily weighted towards an affinity with the Arab sphere – Qatar, Egypt and Iraq – as clearly delineated on the first PCA plot below. This aligns with an ancestral line from Ludim or rather, his wife.

‘Similarly, the north Iranian Caspian populations of Gilaki and Mazandarian as well as central Iran and IS exhibit considerable proportions of mtDNA from the Arabian Peninsula (43.5 and 64.3%, 53.3% and 52.1%, respectively), whereas no apparent effect is seen in the Y-chromosomal component for central Iran and only 7.3% is observed for IS. 

Unfortunately, the Y-chromosome haplogroup counterparts were not reported at the resolution required for these analyses in the north Iran/Caspian populations. Balkan inputs are observed in the mtDNA pool of both IN (7.9%) and IS (23.1%), but are absent in Central Iran and in the other two north Iran collections. Whereas the Balkan region impacts the central Iran group at 28.7% via Y-chromosomal inputs, no Y-influence is detected in either the IN or IS populations. 

Imprints from the Levant and southwest Asia are mostly of Y-chromosomal origin, but are seen in the mtDNA of the central Iranian population and in the Gilaki. Central Asian impacts are only detected at the Y-chromosomal level and are absent from IS, whereas influences from Caucasia are observed in all instances except via mtDNA in IN despite its close geographical proximity to the region. No north African effects were detected for any of the Iranian populations using either mtDNA or Y-markers.’

(a) MDS plot based on observed frequency of mtDNA haplogroup distributions (stress=0.28852) (b) MDS plot based on observed frequency of Y-chromosome haplogroup distributions (stress=0.12492)

The graphs highlight the fact that in northern Iran the mtDNA maternal Haplogroups share an affinity with the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula descended from Ham. Both central and southern Iran are more related to each other and are distinct; being relatively equally distant from say Egypt from Mizra and Ham and Turkey from Elam and Shem.

Regarding Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups; northern Iran is closest to Georgia, central Iran with the countries of the Balkans, such as Macedonia and Greece, while southern Iran with Azerbaijan and Turkey. These nations are all descended from Shem and not from Ham. Thus confirming a related European lineage from Lud in contrast with the Hamitic maternal line from Ludim.

‘A comparison of the mtDNA pools of IN and IS populations reveals contrasting frequencies of haplogroups H, J and U [the primary mtDNA Haplogroups for peoples of European and West Asian extraction descended from Shem]. Although haplogroup J constitutes the majority (35.5%) of the maternal component in the north, it is considerably lower (14.5%) in IS.

Haplogroup U accounts for the majority (22.2%) of the mtDNA lineages in the south… The IN and IS also differ with respect to haplogroups T*, T1 and T3 (middle eastern – and lower Arabian Peninsula-specific), and L0 and L1 (characteristic of sub-Saharan Africans). In IS, haplogroups T and L are detected at frequencies of 3.4 and 2.56%, respectively, whereas both lineages are completely absent from the northern sample set. These findings, however, contradict the data published by Quintana-Murci et al., where L lineages are reported for the northern but not southern groups, and haplogroups T* and T1 are observed in both regions of the Plateau but are higher in the north than in the south. These differences could be due to the small sample size of the North Iranian collection. The presence of both haplogroups in the Iranian populations may be indicative of gene flow from the Middle East and Africa‘ [yes, agreed].

Or simply, that the Haplogroups from Ludim, which would account for the Middle East and North Africa input, are included* with Lud and his similar ancestry with the European peoples of the Balkans, Caucasia and Anatolia.

‘The admixture analysis results indicate that the majority of Iran’s mitochondrial pool is derived from Arabia [and subsequently from Ludim of Ham]. The Persian groups obtained from previous studies also display high degrees of similarity with the Peninsular Arabs; however, they all exhibit greater contribution from adjacent populations especially with groups from Caucasia. These genetic affinities are also evident in the MDS projection in which all the Iranian populations plot between the Arab collections, and the Levant-Anatolia and the northeast Africa assemblages. The three north Iranian populations partition nearest to the Arab cluster, whereas the central and south Iranian populations segregate closest to the Levant–Anatolia and the north African groups. 

The genetic affinities* between the Arabian Peninsula and Iranian groups may stem from gene flow at various points during the time continuum since the initial out-of-Africa dispersal… and/or during the Arab expansions of the third to the seventh centuries AD [unlikely]. Another plausible explanation for the closeness between Persia and Arabia may be the result of dispersals emanating out of central Asia into the Arabian Peninsula via Persia [unlikely]. 

However, the effect of these migrations is not well understood, and the degree of similarities between the Peninsular Arabs and the Iranians suggests widespread (involving the movement of large numbers of individuals) rather than discreet (a few scattered communities) migratory waves.

It should be noted that the degree of genetic flow from Arabia, as seen in the admixture analysis results, is much lower for the Y-chromosome than it is for the mtDNA. It is possible that this is the result of a larger male dissemination from other territories into Persia. This is apparent in the high frequencies of Y-haplogroup R1a1 (M198) of central Asian descent, which is believed to be a tell-tale marker for the expansion of the Kurgan horse culture and Indo-European languages. It is widely accepted that Iranians are Aryans [European or western as opposed to Hamitic or equatorial in origin] who migrated from the central Asian steppes around 4000 years before present.

The [mtDNA] J1b sub-haplogroup is abundant in the Mediterranean and southern Atlantic regions. Interestingly, the frequency of this marker in IN is significantly (with the Bonferroni adjustment for 11 comparisons) higher than that of any of the surrounding regions surveyed (panel J in portrays mtDNA haplogroup J as a whole), including those from the Levant (Palestine, Syria, Egypt and Jordan), west central Asia (Armenia), the Near East (Iraq and Iran Kurdish) and the Arabian Peninsula (Oman, UAE, Qatar and Yemen)… it is tempting to conclude that this distribution pattern suggests a North Iranian origin for this lineage…

Although IN and IS individuals form part of the ancestral core in the global J1b network, most of the remaining Iranian J1b haplotypes are located individually along the branch harboring the 16 222 transition. If the J1b source lies within northern Iran, it seems logical to expect more haplotype sharing or, at least, more integration of the IN and reference collections J1b sequences. The significance of the Iranian J1b frequency distribution and lineage pattern is not clear* at this point. Denser sampling within and around Iran may provide added insight with respect to the phylogeographic history of J1b within this region.’

Phylogeography, is the study of the “historical processes that may be responsible for the past to present geographic distributions of genealogical lineages. This is accomplished by considering the geographic distribution of individuals in light of genetics, particularly population genetics.”

‘The asymmetrical partitioning of mtDNA haplogroups J (IN 35.5% and IS 14.5%) and J1b (IN 22.7% and IS 6%) between the two study populations parallels that of the Y-lineage R1b1a-M269, also found at a substantially higher frequency in the northern portion of the Plateau (15 versus 6% for IN and IS, respectively). Furthermore, as was observed with the J and J1b mtDNA haplogroups, this Y-specific marker is substantially more abundant in IN than in most of the surrounding Middle East, Near East and Levantine groups examined, with the exception of Turkey (14.5%)’ – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. 

‘The M269 mutation is observed at elevated levels throughout Europe and declines in frequency along a southeast trajectory from Europe toward Pakistan (14.5–2.8%). The significance with respect to the enrichment of this European Y-chromosome marker in IN remains unclear. It is not known whether the presence of M269 in north Persia is associated with the northwest Neolithic agricultural movement from the Near East to Europe or if it signals a subsequent back migration eastward from Europe.’

The middle of this paragraph is highly signifiant, repeat: highly significant. For here is where we find men who have a higher concentration of R1b than all the other peoples of the Middle East or West Asia and South Asia – with the exception of Turkey. As explained, Iran as Lud, is a unique blend of Lud from Shem a western lineage and Ludim from Ham, an equatorial line of descent. The fact that Turkey is the only other major nation with a similar percentage of R1b is not a coincidence. For Turkey and Iran are brother nations, as Elam and Lud; both descending from Shem.

As we learned earlier: Pakistan is also a blend of two distinct peoples albeit, both from Ham; Iran is a blend of two separate unrelated peoples. Notice scientists use the term ‘back migration’ when they don’t realise they are dealing with an anomaly that is pointing towards an event not explicable by the hypothetical theories of evolution and the out of Africa paradigm.

‘The distribution of haplogroup I also differs between the northern (9.7%) and southern (1.7%) regions of Iran. This incongruence is significant at α=0.05 (P<0.03) but not following the application of the Bonferroni adjustment. It is noteworthy that, with the exception of its northern neighbor Azerbaijan, IN is the only population in which haplogroup I exhibits polymorphic levels. Also, a contour plot based on the regional phylogeographic distribution of the I haplogroup exhibits frequency clines consistent with an Iranian cradle. Moreover, when compared with other populations in the region, those from the Levant (Iraq, Syria and Palestine) and the Arabian Peninsula (Oman and UAE) exhibit significantly lower proportions of I individuals (1–2%). It should be noted that this haplogroup has been detected in European groups (… a tiny island off the coast of Croatia (11.3%), and Lemko, an isolate from the Carpathian Highlands (11.3%) at comparable frequencies to those observed in the North Iranian population. 

In addition, several studies report the Middle East as the origin of this haplogroup, but for unknown reasons, the prevalence of this lineage in the region has been lost. Thus, it is plausible that the high levels of haplogroup I present in IN may be the result of a localized enrichment through the action of genetic drift or may signal geographical proximity to the location of origin.’ 

Or, it might just simply be that Iranians paternally are fundamentally a white, western (‘European’) people enriched with maternal Hamitic, equatorial (Arab) DNA comparable to that exhibited in their near neighbours; geographically and ethnically .

‘Although [mtDNA] haplogroup H and its subclades are found in highest frequencies in Europe and Caucasia, the presence of these haplogroups in Iran may reflect gene flow from neighboring southwest Asia where they are present at moderate frequencies. Furthermore, considering the substantial frequency of H2a1 (12.5%) in central and inner Asia, its low frequency in eastern Europe and its absence in western Europe, it is likely that its presence in Iran may be due to gene flow from Asia. The fact that sub-haplogroups H2, H2a1, H4 and H7 are seen only in IS (absent in IN), and at relatively low frequencies, may stem from the low number of individuals collected in IN (n=31).

mtDNA haplogroup T is common in eastern and northern Europe, and is found as far as the Indus Valley and the Arabian Peninsula. Thus, the presence of sub-haplogroups T*, T1 and T3 in IS, and their absence in IN, may be associated with gene flow from the Arabian Peninsula to southern Iran.’

(a) mtDNA haplogroup distributions (b)  Y-chromosomal haplogroup distributions.

Huge study on Y-chromosome variation in Iran – Viola Grugni (et al. 2012), posted online – emphasis & bold mine:

UPDATE I: ‘One of the most interesting finds is the presence of a few IJ-M429* chromosomes in the sample. Haplogroup IJ encompasses the major European I subclade, and the major West Asian J subclade. The discovery of IJ* chromosomes is consistent with the origin of this haplogroup in West Asia; it is widely believed that haplogroup I represents a pre-Neolithic lineage in Europe, although at present there are no Y chromosome-tested pre-Neolithic remains.’

‘There is also a wide assortment of Q and R in Iran. While some of these may be intrusive (e.g., the 42.6% of Q1a2 in Turkmen, likely a legacy of their Central Asian origins), the overall picture appears consistent with a deep presence of these lineages in Iran. This is especially true for haplogroup R where pretty much every paragroup and derived group is present, excepting those likely to have originated recently elsewhere.’

UPDATE II: From the paper

“Although accounting only for 25% of the total variance, the first two components (Figure above) separate populations according to their geographic and ethnic origin and define five main clusters: East-African (1), North-African and Near Eastern Arab (2) [Ludim], European (3) [Lud], Near Eastern (4) [Ludim and Lud] and South Asian (5). The 1st PC clearly distinguishes the East African groups (showing a high frequency of haplogroup E) from all the others which distribute longitudinally along the axis with a wide overlapping between European and Arab peoples and between Near Eastern and South Asian groups. The 2nd PC separates the North-African and Near Eastern Arabs (characterized by the highest frequency of haplogroup J1) from Europeans (characterized by haplogroups I, R1a and R1b) and the Near Easterners from the South Asians (due to the distribution of haplogroups G, R2 and L). 

Iranian groups do not cluster all together, occupying intermediate positions among Arab, Near Eastern and Asian clusters. In this scenario, it is worth… noticing the position of three Iranian groups: (i) Khuzestan Arabs (KHU-Ar) who, despite their Arabic origin, are close to the Iranian samples; (ii) Armenians from Tehran (TEH-Ar), whose position, in the upper part of the Iranian distribution, indicates a close affinity with the Near Eastern cluster, while their position near Turkey and Caucasus groups, due to the high frequency R1b-M269 and other European markers (eg: I-M170), is in agreement with their Armenia origin…”

UPDATE V: ‘This confirms my observation from the recent studies in Afghanistan, that there is an inverse relationship of J2a and R1a in Iranian-speaking groups, with an excess of the latter among the eastern Iranians, and of the former among the Persians.’

From the paper:

“Among the different J2a haplogroups, J2a-M530 is the most informative as for ancient dispersal events from the Iranian region. This lineage probably originated in Iran…The high variance observed in the Italian Peninsula is probably the result of stratifications of subsequent migrations and/or of the presence of sub-lineages not yet identified.”

‘Of course, the idea that the diffusion of J2a related lineages ties in with early agricultural expansions has been with us for a long time, but it is time to abandon it. First of all, as we have seen, J2a diminishes greatly as we head towards South Asia; it certainly doesn’t look like the lineage of the multitude of agricultural settlements that sprang up along the southeastern vector soon after the invention of agriculture. Second, it is lacking so far in all ancient Y chromosome data from Europe down to 5,000 years ago. It seems much more [probable] that J2 related lineages spread from the highlands of West Asia much later.

It is unfortunate that there is no progress in the phylogeographic assessment of R1a in this paper. There have been substantial discoveries of SNPs within this haplogroup as a result of commercial testing; however there is clearly an ascertainment bias in the newer discoveries, as almost all these SNPs have been detected in Europeans [Eastern Europeans or Slavic speakers]. The new paper confirms the high levels of Y-STR variance in India [Cush], Pakistan [Phut], and Iran [Lud]. 

The Indo-Iranians were then initially the mixed descendants of the Indo-Europeans and the R1a old agricultural population, and were formed in the territory of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex. This also explains the contrast between Iranian and Armenian groups: the latter mostly lack the R1a lineage, contrasting with all Iranian groups (even their Kurdish neighbors) who possess it. Conversely, Iranian groups, and especially eastern Iranians and Indo-Ayrans lack the R1b lineage.

UPDATE VI: I have created… [a] dendrogram using the Y-haplogroup frequencies and the hclust package of R (default parameters):

From top to bottom, one can identify some clusters:

  • Eastern Europe, further broken down into Balkans and Slavic+Hungary
  • West Asian/Caucasus
  • Iranian Proper
  • Arab

These correspond largely to the clusters identified by the authors, with India and the Turkmen sample emerging as the clear outliers.’

The constant reader is urged to take time to study the dendrogram, as it aptly shows the evidence of Iran having one foot in the Arab world as Lud-im and one foot in the Caucasian world as Lud.

UPDATE VII:At present, the Iranian population is characterized by an extraordinary mix of different ethnic groups speaking a variety of Indo-Iranian, Semitic and Turkic languages. Despite these features, only [a] few studies have investigated the multiethnic components of the Iranian gene pool. 

In this survey 938 Iranian male DNAs belonging to 15 ethnic groups from 14 Iranian provinces were analyzed for 84 Y-chromosome biallelic markers and 10 STRs. The results show an autochthonous but non-homogeneous ancient background mainly composed by J2a sub-clades with different external contributions. 

The phylogeography of the main haplogroups allowed identifying post-glacial [post Flood] and Neolithic expansions toward western Eurasia but also recent movements towards the Iranian region from western Eurasia (R1b-L23 [R1b1a1a2 – downstream from M269]), Central Asia (Q-M25), Asia Minor (J2a-M92) and southern Mesopotamia (J1). In spite of the presence of important geographic barriers (Zagros and Alborz mountain ranges, and the Dasht-e Kavir and Dash-e Lut deserts) which may have limited gene flow, AMOVA analysis revealed that language, in addition to geography, has played an important role in shaping the nowadays Iranian gene pool. Overall, this study provides a portrait of the Y-chromosomal variation in Iran…’

Complete Mitochondrial DNA Diversity in Iranians, multiple authors, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘By reconstructing the complete mtDNA phylogeny of haplogroups R2, N3, U1, U3, U5a1g, U7, H13, HV2, HV12, M5a and C5c we have found a previously unexplored genetic connection between the studied Iranian populations and the Arabian Peninsula, India, Near East and Europe…

It is worth pointing out the position of Azeris from the Caucasus region, who despite their supposed common origin with Iranian Azeris, cluster quite separately and occupy an intermediate position between the Azeris/Georgians and Turks/Iranians grouping. Interestingly, the results of our MDS analysis do not combine the populations studied according to their geographic and/or linguistic affinity.’

‘Therefore, Turkic-speaking Qashqais, Azeris, and Turks are located quite distantly from each other on the plot, even though association between the latter two groups has been recently revealed based on complete mtDNA sequences. All populations from the Caucasus region (Armenians, Azeris, and Georgians) are scattered on the plot though their genetic proximity has been demonstrated by Schönberg et al. Similarly, Iranians from Tehran province and Persians studied here are clearly separated from each other.

Overall, the complete mtDNA sequence analysis revealed an extremely high level of genetic diversity in the Iranian populations studied which is comparable to the other groups from the South Caucasus, Anatolia and Europe. The Iranian populations studied here and previously exhibit similar mtDNA lineage composition and mainly consist of a western Eurasian [European] component, accounting for about 90% of all samples, with a very limited contribution from eastern Eurasia, South Asia and Africa. The South Asian and African influence is more pronounced in Iranians from the southern provinces of the country. 

Our results confirms that populations from Iran, Anatolia, the Caucasus and the Arabian Peninsula display a common set of maternal lineages although considerable regional differences in haplogroup frequencies exist. Meanwhile, some haplogroups previously defined as South Asian (such as [Y-DNA] R2 and [mtDNA] HV2) could be considered as having Southwest Asian origin, taking into account the relatively high frequency and diversity of those haplogroups in Iran.’

The ‘origin’ of these Haplogroups is South Asian – not South West Asian – entering Iran via admixture.

Persian men

It would be expected to view a rather complicated Haplogroup structure for Lud – comparing Iran with the three related peoples from the Caucasus region of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia. 

There is the admixture of Ludim from Mizra to consider and also Iran’s proximity to the descendants from Ham, with Iraq on its western border, Pakistan on its eastern border, Uzbekistan descended predominately from Japheth to the North and finally Lud’s brother Elam-Turkey on its northwestern frontier – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

The mtDNA maternal Haplogroups for Iran are:

H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] – T2 [4.9%] – 

U5 [3.3%] – T1 [3.1%] – U3 [2.8%] – X [2.8%] – I [2.4%]  W [2.4%] –

U2 [1.6%] – U4 [1%] – HV0+V [0.6%] – L [0.2%] 

                           HV     H        J      T2      U       K

Iran                     7       17      14       5       12       7

Iraq                     9       17      13       4         7       5

Georgia              4       20       3        9        5     12

Azerbaijan         6       23       6      10        9      4

Armenia             6      30      10       5        8       7

In essence, Iran’s combined regions provide an mtDNA top three Haplogroup picture the most reminiscent of Iraq. The admixture with Ludim is evident; yet the fact remains that the Arab and Persian peoples are still distinct ethnicities – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

It is of note that this maternal Haplogroup spread is closely associated with the descendants of Shem. While autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups show a different line of descent for Arab related peoples compared with Europeans, there must be a common denominator in the maternal lineage for Indians and Arabs from Ham with Europeans from Shem.

Haplogroup H is the most common group amongst Europeans and generally Arabs, then U and J; so it is interesting that in Iran there is a higher frequency of J in proportion, similar to Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

It is apparent overall that Iran has more in common with Azerbaijan and Georgia than Armenia; which we will confirm, has a closer link with Turkey.

Persian women

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for Iran:

Iran: J2 [23%] – R1a [15.5%] – G [10%] – R1b [9.5%] – J1 [8.5%] – 

E1b1b [6.5%] – L [6.5%] – Q [5.5%] – T [3%] – N [1%] – I [0.5%]

Iran:   J2 – R1a – G2a – R1b – J1 – E1b1b – L – Q – T1a – N1c2 – I

Iranian men have a higher percentage of J2 than J1; meaning less J1 which is associated with Middle Eastern peoples and more of Haplogroup J2 which is primarily associated with Pakistan from Phut and Lehab. Haplogroup J2 mutations are also found in the Levant, Anatolia and Southeastern Europe from admixture. Haplogroup E1b1b shows Iran’s link with ostensibly Mizra and inherited Haplogroups from Ludim resulting from intermixing with Canaan – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Haplogroup G is indicative of peoples in the Caucasus region and beyond – an older lineage descending from Shem. The more recent R1a and R1b Haplogroups are typically European Haplogroups and show Iran’s link with other male sibling descendants of Shem. There are exceptions, such as Pakistan, India and Central Asia, whom possess different sub-clades or mutations of R1a derived from admixture through intermixing and intermarriage – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter IV Central Asia  – Madai & the Medes.

The total percentage for the European paternal Haplogroups of G, I, R1a and R1b is 35.5% and reflects the European status of Iran from Lud. The total percentage of those Haplogroups associated with the Ludim of J1, E1b1b and T1a, totals 18%. The remaining Haplogroup percentages reveal the extent intermixing has occurred with neighbouring peoples over the centuries.

The Y-DNA Haplogroups of Iran’s near neighbours to the north.

Azerbaijan:  J – G2a – R1b – R1a – E1b1b – I – L 

Georgia:       G2a – J2 – J1 – R1b – R1a – E1b1b – I – L – T1a – Q             

Armenia:      R1b – J2 – G2a – J1 – R1a – E1b1b – I – T1a – L – Q – N1c2

Azerbaijan: J [31%] – G [18%] – R1b [11.1%] – R1a [6.9%] – E1b1b [6%] –

I [3%] – L [1.5%]

Georgia: G [30%] – J2 [ 27%] – J1 [16%] – R1b [10%] – R1a [9%] –

E1b1b [ 2%] – I [2% ] L [1.5%] – T [1.5%] – Q [1%]

Armenia: R1b [30%] – J2 [22%] – G [11.5%] – J1 [10.5%] – R1a [5%] –

E1b1b [6%] – I [4.5%] – T [4%] – L [3%] – Q [1%] – N [0.5%] 

Iran is closest to Azerbaijan genetically and the fact more Azerbaijanis live in Iran – approximately twenty million people plus, as opposed to inside Azerbaijan with approximately ten million – is a fact that supports common ancestry from Lud. Iran also shares some common ground with Georgia, but not so much with Armenia. The Haplogroups associated with descent from Ham are E1b1b, J1, J2, L and T. Haplogroups common with descent from Shem, are G, I, R1a and R1b.

Y-DNA Haplogroups for Iran’s immediate neighbours to the Northeast, East and West.

Turkmenistan: R1b – J2 – K – P – R1a – R2

Pakistan:           R1a – J – L – R2 – H – G – Q – C

Iraq:                   J1 – J2 – E1b1b – R1b – R1a – I – T1a – G2a – E1b1a –

L – Q – N

Turkmenistan: R1b [37%] – J2 [17%] – K [13%] – P [10%] – R1a [7%] –

R2 [3%]

Pakistan: R1a [37.1%] – J [20.2%] – L [11.6%] – R2 [7.8%] – H [6.2%] – 

G [6.2%] – Q [3.4%] – C [3%]

Iraq: J1 [43%] – J2 [19.5%] – E1b1b [9.5%] – R1b [9.5%] – R1a [5.5%] – 

I [4%] – T1a [3.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – E1b1a [0.9%] – L [0.5%] –

Q [0.5%] – N [0.5%]

Iran shares similar Hamitic Haplogroups with its western neighbour and nemesis, Iraq. As Iraq is adjacent to Iran and descended from Mizra and possibly from Ludim in part (with Naphtuh), we would expect them to be related to the Ludim within Iran – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Not surprisingly, Iran shares Y-DNA commonality with Pakistan-Phut and Turkmenistan from Madai, the closest of the Central Asian Republics.

Yet, we will discover that it is Turkey apart from Azerbaijan, which Iran has the most Y-DNA Haplogroup synchronicity with of its seven neighbours. This may be a surprise to many readers, who while they may be aware that Iran is not the same as Iraq and Pakistan, would have assumed a similar paternal linage with them rather than Turkey. Whereas Iran’s predominant lineage as Lud, is linked more closely instead with Turkey from Elam.

The table shows the key Y-DNA Haplogroups for the nations neighbouring Iran.

                                    J        J1      J2     E1b1b      G      R1a     R1b      L

Turkmenistan         17                 17                                   7         37

Pakistan                   20                             10          6       37                   12

Azerbaijan               31                               6          18        7         11        2

Iran                           32        9      23         7          10       16        10        7

Armenia                   33      11       22         6          12         5        30       3

Georgia                    43      16       27         2          30        9        10        2

Iraq                           63     43       20        10          3         6         10    0.5

There is an obvious relationship between Azerbaijan and Iran and the PCA plot clusters for Iran and Near Eastern peoples indicate that Azerbaijan has a closer link with Iran than Georgia or Armenia. The Bible says that Lud and Ludim (Iran), with Phut and Lehab (Pakistan), are a mingled and mixed people and this region of the world certainly fits this description. 

We will leave Turkmenistan out of the equation as they have a closer relationship with Turkey; which will be explored in the next chapter. Pakistan is clearly not related to the Caucasus nations and nor is Iraq with its higher levels of the Hamitic Haplogroups, J1 and E1b1b. Using Haplogroups J1 and J2 as geographic marker Haplogroups, it is Azerbaijan and Georgia who bookend the table. Georgia possesses the highest percentages of Haplogroups G and J2; Armenia for R1b; and Iran in R1a. All four nations possess Haplogroup L, normally associated with India and Pakistan; with the small amounts hinting at admixture. 

The four nations reveal their commonality – as well as a different lineage from the descendants of Ham dwelling in Pakistan and Iraq – exhibiting considerably higher levels of Haplogroup G – indicative of Shem’s early descendants – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.

Worthy of mention is that both Iran-Lud and Turkey-Elam, have interacted considerably with the Arab world. Both nations have not strayed as far from their original homeland positions in ancient Mesopotamia – unlike Asshur, Aram and Arphaxad – so that Iran has been in the pathway of peoples migrating east-west and vice-versa.

Located in the southern crossroads of the world, which incorporates Anatolia and stretches to West Asia much like Madai in Central Asia, has meant a variety of additional paternal Haplogroups for Iranian males, such as the related G, R1b and I from Shem; E1b1b, L and T from Ham; and Q and N from Japheth. These have been added to their core defining marker Haplogroup signatures: of R1a-Z93 as Lud, descended from Shem; and J as Ludim, descended from Mizra and Ham.

Wisdom rests in the heart of the discerning; it is not known in the inner parts of fools.

Proverbs 14:33 New English Translation

“Being on the side of the majority is often a sign that you are wrong, or the most unlikely to be right.” 

Mokokoma Mokhonoana

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

Chance Chaos or Designated Design?

Endeavouring to polarise evolution and creation is futile.

Evolution is a theory, that has been proven partially but not wholly and creation is all around us, whether one believes or not. The debates on which is right or who is right are senseless. Both are correct in their positions and both are incorrect in their explanations and until each side recognises that and admits it, they will both go round in circles never knowing the real answers to our origins.

One person asks how they are similar? Both require belief, though it would appear that by placing all your trust in just evolution as the mechanism for all life, it requires considerably more faith than in a creation; as mathematically, evolution defies all statistical probability. Yet scientists won’t tell you that or admit it openly.

The chances of ‘this happening’ or ‘that happening’ are just that, an astronomical lottery. It requires incredible faith ‘that everything just happened’ instead of believing there was intelligent thought which instigated the program we exist in and the compatible software to produce life – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. And not just life’s genesis, but it’s continued variations. In other words, everything had a beginning which the biblical account of the creation reveals and everything continues to mutate, just as science proposes, albeit through micro evolution.

Creation and evolution work together. To say there is one and not the other shows the folly of both scientists and creationists. Scientists could read their Bibles a bit more and creationists would do well to read a few more scientific journals, studies and papers.

Albert Einstein came to the conclusion that a God was behind everything we know and understand and are yet to comprehend. His theories are in essence mathematical formulae, as found in biology, chemistry and physics. Everything has a common numerical denominator. Music is just a sequence of numbers. The Great Pyramid’s construction is just a set of numbers; albeit a sequence that modern man is unable to replicate – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

“Go down deep enough into anything and you will find mathematics” – Dean Schlicter.

A physicist or chemist would be laughed out the room if they attempted to put forward an idea as factual without formulaic data or numerical evidence of how they arrived at their conclusions. Yet Biologists and evolutionists propose a theory as complete fact, based on sizeable conjecture and little substance of any weighted mathematical proof.

The Bible has some stern words for those who adopt such a stance and profess a flawed argument. The words are very appropriate to the age we live in.

“But you, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase” – Daniel 12:4, ESV.

People are travelling and communicating as never before. Knowledge is increasing exponentially, yet humankind is not becoming wiser. Something has gone terribly wrong.

The Book of Romans provides an answer. It is a letter written by Paul, remarkably, to the fledging early group of people believing the astonishing new movement sweeping across the Roman Empire even while they live in the very centre of disbelief and incredulity.

Paul had visited – and later lived in – Rome and he was well aware that of all the churches, theirs was the closest to the beating heart of the Roman empire and with that, the intellectual pride in being at the forefront of science, art and culture. There were already a whole pantheon of gods and no need for anymore. Yet Paul’s own commission was to reveal the one true God…

“For as I passed along [the streets of Athens] and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription: ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth…” – Acts 17:23–24, ESV.

Paul in his letter to the Romans goes straight to the biggest stumbling block for the people in Rome and it is a message that resonates throughout the passing centuries to our very day.

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.

So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools…” – Romans 1:18–22, ESV.

The intellectual elite and leading academia of our society, hide the truth and provide an alternative answer for anyone naive enough to accept it. This agenda is dark and all encompassing and would require further discussion – refer articles: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? and Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

Charles Darwin understood that nature as in the flora and fauna of botany and zoology, exhibited evolutionary mutational change. What he also understood, was that this paradigm did not fit humankind. This from a man who grew up in a non-conformist Unitarian family; went to Anglican school; then the University of Cambridge to acquire a Bachelor of Arts with the mind of entering the clergy. Though he rightfully came to distance himself from religion, he always maintained ‘the existence of God as a First Clause’ and he himself remained a theist until his death.

Human evolution is an entirely different matter, which again would require further discussion – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

There are seven key points which support a thought out, premeditated design in our world, solar system and universe. They are not original to me and I will leave out the last two which are predicated on faith – fulfilled prophecy and answered prayer.

The first five though, are based on self evident, good common sense; something that seems to be in short supply in our age particularly in view, of what is currently transpiring in our lives and the seeming gullibility of the majority.

They are self explanatory, so I will not belabour them, though they might be helpful to some, if they care to investigate them more fully.

  1. Law, whether they be laws of physics or chemistry demand a Law giver and instigator.
  2. Life, that is its biogenesis, requires a Life giver and initiator.
  3. Creation, the immense variety and number of species requires a Creator and originator.
  4. The sustenance or maintenance of all said laws and life, behooves a Sustainer and overseer.
  5. Design and the myriad intricate patterns within the Universe at the macro cosmos level or at the micro sub-atomic level demand a Designer and inventor.

Edited excerpt from an answer to a question asked on Quora: Why are the theories of creationism and evolutionism always opposed? Couldn’t they both be truthful or both false?

Addendum:

Albert Einstein was repeatedly indignant with being labelled a theist; as he was also with being called an atheist.

Einstein: “The divine reveals itself in the physical world.”

“Behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force is my religion. To that extent, I am in point of fact, religious.”

“Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe – a spirit vastly superior to that of man.”

“My God created laws… His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking but by immutable laws.”

‘Einstein did not believe in a personal God, who answers prayers and interferes in the universe. But he did believe in an intelligent mind or spirit, which created the universe with its immutable laws.’

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Arius, Alexander & Athanasius

The Trinitarian view of the Godhead was first imposed on Christianity in 325 CE at the Council of Nicea, with an initial Binitarian definition and then cemented in 381 CE, at the Council of Constantinople, with the addition of the Holy Ghost as a person. It is a confusing doctrine for it is concocted by men in error and not drawn from the simplicity of the scriptures or founded on truth. This new view – for Christianity, though actually an ancient idea – of the Godhead is, in paraphrased terms: 

A unity of a singular Deity, composed of three co-eternal, yet distinct identities 

The doctrine is convoluted, serpentine and cannot be supported by the Bible, hard as people endeavour to twist it. It willingly misinterprets and mis-understands, the uniqueness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The concept of a triune of gods was not new. A Queen of Heaven as a Mother of God reaches back into the annals of time, way farther than the beginning of humankind. This is why Christ’s mother Mary, has been elevated to Mother of God status – the real Trinity of the Universal Church – hidden in plain sight, in the shadow of the Trinity doctrine, but no less foisted on unsuspecting believers. 

Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz were a triad in ancient Babylon. In Egypt it was Osiris, Isis and Horus and in Mesopotamia, Anu, Enlil and Ea [Enki]. Hinduism has Brahma, Shivu and Vishnu and even Plato taught of an Unknown Father, Logos and a World Soul. In Greece, there was Zeus, Athena and Apollo (or Zeus, Poseidon and Pluto); and in Rome, the most well known trio of Jupiter, Juno and Minerva, though just one triad of a myriad believed by the ancient Romans. There is the triad of Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Manat in the time of Muhammed; the Lugus – Esus, Toutatis and Taranis – in Celtic mythology and the Saha Realm in Mahayana Buddhism: Shakyamuni, Avalokitesvara and Ksitigarbha. The Three Pure Ones of Taoism, Fu, Lu and Shou and the Hooded Spirits of the Gauls, to name literally just a few.

Let no one persuade the reader that a trinity is unique to Christianity, that it is Bible based or that it was taught by Christ and the apostles in the early church. 

Bishop’s Encylopedia of Religion, Society and Philosophy aptly describes the Arian controversy – emphasis mine.

‘The Arian controversy began in Alexandria when its bishop, Alexander (250-326), clashed with the presbyter Arius (256-336) over matters of theology’ – refer Arius, article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

“Although the points debated were many, the main issue at stake was whether the Logos, the Word of God, was coeternal with God. The phrase that eventually became the Arian motto, “there was when He was not,” aptly focuses on the point at issue. Alexander held that the Word existed eternally with the Father; Arius argued that the Word was not coeternal with the Father.”

‘Whereas Alexander believed in the divinity of the Word, Arius, although accepting the preexistence of the Word, claimed that the Word was not God, but the first of all creatures created by God. But in Alexander’s view, the Word was divine and therefore could not be created. It is coeternal with the Father.

Arius argued that Alexander’s view entailed a denial of monotheism. In Alexander’s view, there were two who were divine, and thus there were two gods. Alexander countered that Arius’s position denied the divinity of the Word and therefore the divinity of the Son. He also saw how Arius’s view had grave consequences for the Church’s worship of Jesus by suggesting that it had been worshiping a creature.

In 325 CE, the bishops gathered in Nicea in what would become known as the First Ecumenical Council. There was a small group of Arians led by the bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia (d. 341). Arius himself was not a bishop so could not sit in the council and Eusebius of Nicomedia had to represent him and his theology. The Arian position was… opposed by another small group of bishops, led by Alexander… One of Alexander’s followers was the deacon Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373) who, while not permitted to sit in the council, would become a leading defender of Nicene orthodoxy against Arianism. 

A creed was agreed upon that presented the views of the council that deliberately excluded Arianism. Constantine, either by his own accord or through his ecclesiastical advisor Hosius of Cordoba, suggested that the word homoousios (“of the same substance”) be included in the creed showing that the Son is just as divine as the Father.’

“We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of the Father, that is, from the substance of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things were made, both in heaven and on earth, who for us humans and for our salvation descended and became incarnate, becoming human, suffered and rose again on the third day… But those who say that there was when He was not, and that before being begotten He was not, or that He came from that which is not, or that the Son of God is of a different substance (hypostasis) or essence (ousia), or that He is created, or mutable, these the Catholic church anathematizes.”

The pivotal fulcrum of the debate about God, is not the nature of the Ancient of Days, but rather the Son of Man, with two key central points. First, was he a created being, or had he lived forever with the Almighty? Second, was he divine while on earth as Jesus Christ or was he fully human? This is where people have become extremely confused, with the debate raging for seventeen centuries. It is remarkably, still just as significant even in our present materialistic age, judging by forums like Quora. Yet, the Bible is very clear and the answer is simple to understand on both points.

Christ’s servant Apollos (refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy) explains in his letter to the Hebrews – that is, the true peoples descended from the sons of Jacob.

‘Since therefore the children [humanity] share in flesh and blood, he [Christ] himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one [Satan] who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery… Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted’ – Hebrews 2:14–18, English Standard Version.

In order for the Messiah to be the Saviour, he had to become fully human, just like us. Apollos says ‘in every respect.’ That meant he felt pain, psychological and physical. He got sick, had to repress sinful thoughts and control negative emotions like depression and wrath – Isaiah 53:1–12. He also had to fight the greatest temptation, sexual sin. Here lies the key, Deity cannot be tempted.

Christ could only fulfil the role of the Saviour as a human being. Therefore, he was not a deity or God. If he had been, it would have been an unfair fight against Satan the adversary. It still had to be an unfair fight, though in the Devil’s favour, because Christ was human. As a mortal, Christ was still the son of God and worthy of respect – John 13:13.

‘And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed – John 17:3–5, ESV.

When Christ fulfilled his mission here on Earth, he returned to the glory he had previously at the right hand of the Almighty. Revelation 1.14–15 describes the Son. It is remarkably similar to a description of the Father. Though it is obvious they are two separate entities, who each have their own throne.

In Daniel 7:9-10, New English Translation: 

“While I was watching, thrones were set up, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His attire was white like snow; the hair of his head was like lamb’s wool. His throne was ablaze with fire and its wheels were all aflame. A river of fire [the Holy Spirit] was streaming forth and proceeding from his presence.”

The Ancient of Days can be translated as Ancient One, Eternal God and the One who had been living forever. The Son of Man is not described similarly. The Eternal is the only being who had life inherent in Himself and is the source of all life – Acts 17:23–24. Notice the Holy Spirit being described as issuing forth from the Ancient of Days. One can call it a ghost to help make it sound like an individual but it is non-biblical, with no scriptural support.

The Arian view, upheld by the Goths for centuries, simply held that the Holy Spirit and Christ were not God, like the Father. Rather, the Father is the one true God; Christ his begotten, created son; and the Holy Spirit, God’s divine essence and being, as well as His power with which He simultaneously creates and upholds the creation – 1 Timothy 1:17, Revelation 3:14, Acts 1:8.

A verse which has added to the confusion regarding the nature of the Godhead is John 1:1. It has been translated in English to support the Trinitarian doctrine and represent Christ as one and the same as God; whereas in the original Greek it is actually saying that after God reasoned and thought, He spoke… and His Word came into existence.

In the beginning was the Word [G3056 – logos], and the Word was with [G4314 – pros] God, and [G2532 – kai] the [G3588 – ho] Word was [G2258 – enGod [G2316 – Theos].’

In English the verse says the Word existed with God from the beginning – that is with no beginning – and was [the same as] God. 

The word logos means: to ‘reason’ or ‘calculate, think’ and ‘speak, to command, to call by name.’ The word pros means: ‘near’ or ‘towards, above’ and ‘before.’ The word en means: ‘to be, to exist, to happen.’

The Interlinear shows the Greek to say in English, at the end of verse one: ‘… and God was the Word.’ In Greek it is ‘… kai Theos en ho logos.’ Not that the Word was God.

A paraphrased rendering of verse one to three: 

‘One of the first things the mind of God thought, He spoke… and his Word, that had always been part of Him, came into existence to fulfil all of His creation.’

It is by God’s spoken Word that the creation came into existence.

Psalm 33:6-9, The Voice:

‘The unfathomable cosmos came into being at the word of the Eternal’s imagination [Wisdom], a solitary voice in endless darkness. The breath of His mouth whispered the sea of stars [Angels] into existence. He gathers every drop of every ocean as in a jar, securing the ocean depths as His watery treasure. Let all people stand in awe of the Eternal; let every man, woman, and child live in wonder of Him. For He spoke, and all things came into being. A single command from His lips, and all creation obeyed and stood its ground.’

The Voice of God is the Building Block of the Universe, Genesis and Genetics, 2022:

‘One can model a human voice mathematically by the expression e^kt where e is 2.718 (base of the natural logarithm), k is an imaginary number, and t is time. Amazingly, we now know that the function e^kt can describe everything in the universe since everything is a wave. Thousands of years ago the Bible proclaimed that God spoke the creation into existence’ – Appendix IV An Unconventional Chronology.

God converted his voice (energy) into mass (the creation). Quantum physics tells us that quantum waves create everything we see. God’s voice produced waves that have the ability to become quantum particles. These waves continue to vibrate forever. The quantum waves never die out because they are too small to be affected by friction. One might say they are eternal. Therefore, God’s Word and voice are the same.’

Now, in the Book of Jude written by the half-brother of Christ (Article: The Pauline Paradox), we are admonished to: “contend for the faith that was once delivered to the saints.”

Even during the lives of the apostles, a mere twenty years after the Messiah’s death the true faith was being thwarted.

‘For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work’ – 2 Thessalonians 2:7, ESV.

In the letter to the church of the Colossians, the author speaks of another mystery: ‘the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints. To them God chose to make known how great… are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ…’ – Colossians 1:26-27. And, what is the mystery of Christ?

‘[Christ] is the image [G1504 eikon: likeness] of the invisible God, the firstborn [G4416 prototokos] of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities – all things were created through him and for him. And he is before [G4253 pro: in front of, prior] all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.’ – Colossians 1:15-18.

The highlighted phrases in this passage of scripture all equal the same thing. That is, the Son of Man is not just the first or beginning of God’s plan figuratively or preeminently, he is literally, first of the creation. Christ as the image of the Eternal One, is a wholly separate yet near identical being. We will look at the Greek word for beginning shortly, though the main word of interest is firstborn. The word prototokos means: ‘the firstborn of all creation’ the ‘first begotten’ “literally and figuratively” according to Strongs Concordance.

In the letter to the Colossians the author mentions the church at Laodicea – more than once, for emphasis.

“For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face… to reach… the… full… understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments [like the Trinity]” – Colossians 2:1-4 ESV.

The writer of the epistle had apparently not met the church at Colossae or Laodicea. Epaphras had been sent to teach the Colossians and Laodiceans – Colossians 1:7; 4:12-13. It goes on to state:

“Give my greetings to the brothers at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house. And when this letter has been read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea” – Colossians 4:15-16.

We do not have the original letter to the Laodiceans. We can guess that it is important to be mentioned, though it may well have been similar to the letter to the Colossians and therefore we are not missing anything relevant. The prevalent school of thought by a number of biblical scholars is that the Book of Ephesians is actually the Laodicean letter. What is highly pertinent though, is that there is another letter written to the Laodiceans recorded by the Apostle John and inspired by the Word.

It is immensely revealing that the final message to the body of Christ, the church in the latter days, speaks of the nature of Christ in the very first sentence, revealing his created status. While in the next breath, counsels Christians to anoint their eyes so that they may see. 

“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.’

The Greek word for beginning is G746 – arche, meaning: ‘origin, first.’ It is ‘the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader.’ Though not just in rank or place, it also connotes order and time

The Greek word for creation is more telling. It is G2937 – ktisis, meaning: ‘the act of founding, establishing, building’ and ‘anything created.’ It applies to a ‘being that is a creature, who is a creation.’

“For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked* [exposed as Adam and Eve were, 1 Peter 5:5, 8]. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire [the Day of the Lord], so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness* may not be seen, and salve [the Holy Spirit] to anoint your eyes, so that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.”

The church in the end times is self-righteous, for it is encumbered with much knowledge; yet little understanding – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. The nature of Christ is forefront in this final warning letter. Proverbs 29:18 KJV says: ‘Where there is no vision, the people perish.’ The Laodiceans like the Colossians, are reminded of the nature of Christ and the truth of this mystery.

‘For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man [G444 anthropos] Christ Jesus’ – 1 Timothy 2:5.

This is a pivotal verse, as it clearly shows there is only one God and how the Son – who is different from the Father – has the ordained role of serving the Father and humankind in bringing them ultimately together. The Greek word for man is anthropos and means ‘a human being’. It confirms that the Messiah was fully human while on the Earth.

John continues in the Laodicean letter, with the words of the Son of Man, just prior to his return:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says…” – Revelation 3:14–22 ESV.

Do you see… do you hear?

Edited excerpt from Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America and also in answer to questions posed on Quora: What is the Trinity? and What is Arianism?

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Predestination & Free Will

1 Timothy 2:4

English Standard Version

‘… [God] who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.’

The well known verse in Matthew 22.14: ‘many are called, few are chosen’ is mis-leading as the word are is added. The intent of the verse is how ‘many [or all] are selected, few choose’ or respond. One translation out of about sixty, translated the verse correctly.

TPT: “For everyone is invited to enter in, but few respond in excellence.”

The Creator would like all to be saved. The reality is, that is sadly not going to happen. The author of 2 Timothy continues:

2 Timothy 2:19-21

New Century Version

‘But God’s strong foundation continues to stand. These words are written on the seal: “The Lord knows those who belong to him,” and “Everyone who wants to belong to the Lord must stop doing wrong.”

In a large house there are not only things made of gold and silver, but also things made of wood and clay. Some things are used for special purposes, and others are made for ordinary jobs. All who make themselves clean from evil will be used for special purposes. They will be made holy, useful to the Master, ready to do any good work.’

The words predestination [or fate] and free will are not helpful. They are polar extremes of black and white; whereas the answer is a careful blend of the two.

The Eternal does select people to work more closely with, for they are those who are willing to put in the effort to be acceptable. It is a paradoxical equation of the Creator predestinating those He wishes to work with, yet the people selected for this relationship are the very people who will believe in Him though faith and also show obedience to Him by good works.

Some might think faith is the easier part and good works the harder, but Christ says in Luke 18:7-8, English Standard Version:

‘And will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them? I tell you, he will give justice to them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?

Paul says in Galatians 2:16

English Standard Version

‘… yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.’

Yet, in James 2:17, English Standard Version, it says:

‘So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.’

And John confirms in Revelation 14:12

English Standard Version

‘Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.’

We learn from Paul, that we are set apart through our faith in Christ (and accepting his sacrifice). Yet doing this alone is talking the talk. If we do not walk the walk and live by every word of God, as spoken by James and John, our sanctified status would become of no effect and possibly lost. Like the foolish Virgins with no oil (Holy Spirit) in their lamps – Matthew 25:1–12.

The end result of denying the salvation offered once accepted is given in Mark 3:28-29, English Standard Version:

“Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.”

For this reason, Matthew also confirms why only a few choose in Matthew 7:14, English Standard Version:

‘For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.’

Luke supports the fact that those who choose this path are small in number, yet the reward is worth the effort in Luke 12:32, English Standard Version:

‘Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.’

The prophet Malachi compares at the time of the end, the many who doubt and the few with faith. Malachi 3:13-17; 4:1-3, New Century Version:

‘The Lord says, “You have said terrible things about me.

“But you ask, ‘What have we said about you?’

“You have said, ‘It is useless to serve God. It did no good to obey his laws and to show the Lord All-Powerful that we were sorry for what we did. So we say that proud people are happy. Evil people succeed. They challenge God and get away with it.

For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall. And you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the Lord of hosts.”

Excerpt from an answer to the question posed on Quora: Is predestination biblical according to Ephesians 1:4?

“… even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him…”

Ephesians 1:4 English Standard Version

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Shem Occidentalis

Chapter XVI

Noah’s third son is Shem. His descendants are prominent in the Bible and influential in the history of civilisation. His descendants – from all his five sons – are the European, western peoples of the Earth located in Europe, West Asia and the New World of the Americas as well as in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. They include a diverse range of peoples from fair skin, blue eyes and blond hair, to olive skin, brown eyes and black hair. 

Shem in Hebrew, means: ‘name’ or ‘renown’ from the noun shem.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Shem became the ancestor of Abraham and thus Jesus (Luke 3.36)… Shem… lent his name to the language group that Hebrew is part of: Semitic. The name Shem is equal to the word (shem), which itself means “name”:

The name Shem means Name, Fame or Reputation, or even Identity or Personality

we’re pretty sure that Shem wasn’t named after his own fame or prowess but rather after the Name of the Creator, which in turn reflected all of his deeds…

For a meaning of the name Shem, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads… Renown. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… adds Celebrated, Distinguished.’

We will consider additional definitions and ramifications for Shem’s name when we study Nimrod in Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Shem is mentioned in the genealogical lists in Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One with his brothers. We have investigated the incident involving Noah, Ham and his wife, Na’eltama’uk – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

Shem with Japheth, acted honourably in dealing with the aftermath and his reward is recounted in Genesis 9:26, Expanded Bible:

Noah also said, “May the Lord, the God of Shem, be praised [or blessed]! May Canaan be Shem’s slave.”

Notice, Shem wasn’t being praised or his name, but rather the Creator. There is a clue here that Shem may have been similar to Noah, Enoch and Abel before them, in being a member of a priestly line and a servant of the Creator.

Some teach that Shem is the same person as the priest of the most High God, Melchizedek, whom Abraham paid tithes to and partook of bread and wine. In the Book of Jasher it says in chapter sixteen, verses 11-12:

11 ‘And Adonizedek king of Jerusalem, the same was Shem [of renown], went out with his men to meet Abram and his people, with bread and wine, and they remained together in the valley of Melech‘ – refer articles: Na’amah; and Belphegor. 12 ‘And Adonizedek blessed Abram, and Abram gave him a tenth from all that he had brought from the spoil of his enemies, for Adonizedek was a priest before God.’

Using Usher’s widely accepted biblical chronology, this would be possible. Combining science (worldwide geological flood evidence is missing for circa 4000 BCE to 2500 BCE) and an accurate chronology (an unconventional chronology based on the Sumerian sexagesimal base 60 system) for the Old Testament epoch following the Flood – and prior to Genesis chapter twelve – it would be impossible for Shem and Abraham to meet, as Shem died in 5717 BCE and Abraham was born in 1977 BCE.

That aside, Melchizedek is a unique personality and not to be mistaken for Shem or even Christ as some propose. We will look at Nimrod’s kingdom later, though for now it is interesting to note that his territory was the ‘land of Shinar’ – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Shinar is mentioned outside of the Nimrod account recorded in Genesis Ten and Eleven.

Joshua 7:20-21

English Standard Version

20 ‘And Achan answered Joshua, “Truly I have sinned against the Lord God of Israel, and this is what I did: 21 when I saw among the spoil a beautiful cloak from Shinar, and 200 shekels of silver, and a bar of gold weighing 50 shekels, then I coveted them and took them. And see, they are hidden in the earth inside my tent, with the silver underneath.”

Isaiah 11:11

English Standard Version

11 ‘In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria [Asshur (Russia)], from Egypt [Mizra – Arabs (of the Middle East and North Africa)], from Pathros [nation of Egypt], from Cush [India], from Elam [Turkey], from Shinar [Europe], from Hamath [Nigeria], and from the coastlands of the sea [East Asia and South East Asia].’

Zechariah 5:10-11

English Standard Version

10 ‘Then I said to the angel who talked with me, “Where are they taking the basket?” 11 He said to me, “To the land of Shinar, to build a house for it. And when this is prepared, they will set the basket down there on its base.”

What is the Land of Shinar and Where is it Located? Petros Koutoupis, 2007 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Genesis 10:10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel [Babylon], and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Genesis 10:11 Out of that land went forth Asshur [Nimrod], and built Nineveh [capital], and Rehoboth-ir, and Kalaḥ, Genesis 10:12 and Resen between Nineveh and Kalaḥ – the same is the great city. 

In the past, many have argued… about the true location of the land of Shinar… among a majority of scholars in the same field, [I] have identified this to mean the land of Sumer. While the Sumerians themselves called their land ki-en-gir (“place of the civilized lords”), the name Sumer is derived from the Akkadian Shumer [Shem].’

The land of Shinar in Mesopotamia is a later re-naming for a region which had existed in the remote past elsewhere – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Just as the Ararat Mountain range located in Turkey, is a re-naming of the earlier mountains now known as the Himalayas – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Koutoupis:

‘Shinar is simply a Hebrew corruption of the Akkadian word. It literally translates to”country of two rivers” which could only mean the Tigris and Euphrates when taking into account the cities mentioned above. 

Erech/Uruk, Akkad/Agade, and Babylon existed nowhere else but the land of Shinar. In times past, early rulers used to differentiate the lands between Sumer and Akkad when boasting of their achievements, making the one the southern kingdom (Sumer) and the other the northern kingdom (Akkad). 

Collectively this had evolved to one piece of land between the two rivers. Further evidence of its location, outside of Genesis 10:10-11 comes to us from the Book of Daniel: 

1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. 1:2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God; and he carried them into the land ofShinar to the house of his god, and the vessels he brought into the treasure-house of his god. 

Nebuchadnezzar [II], a Neo-Babylonian king to whom Jerusalem fell [during 607 BCE to 587 BCE] and which also resulted in the Jewish Exile, was said to have come from the land of Shinar or Chaldea.

Erech has been identified with the Mesopotamian city of Uruk (Sumerian Unug); the home and kingdom of Gilgamesh. Akkad has been identified with Agade, the capital of the Akkadian Empire. Babel was the native name of the city the Greeks called Babylon, which literatally translates [as] “gate of god”, corresponding to the Akkadian Bab-ili. As for the location of Calneh, modern day scholars have located this to be Nippur (modern day Niffer), which is situated in the marshes of [the] east bank of the Euphrates; roughly 60 miles southeast of Babylon.’

Assyria deriving its name from Asshur, was situated to the north of Akkad and not counted as the land of Shinar. The land of Shinar incorporated Akkad and Sumer, with Babylon (formerly Babel), to the south of Akkad; located approximately in the middle of the two regions. Thus the cities of Accad and Babylon were northwards in Akkad and Calneh (or Nippur) and Erech further south in Sumer.

‘Sumer’ and the Sumerians derive from the name Shem, while the Akkad[ian] origin is unclear. The term Chaldea[n] is believed to have derived from Shem’s son Arphaxad – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Akkad is possibly linked to Arphaxad as well – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. 

The early geography involved descendants from three of the sons of Shem in close proximity after the Tower of Babel, so that in the north of the fertile crescent there was located Asshur, below them, Arphaxad and beneath them, Elam. Aram (or Syria) and Lud (or Lydia), were not so clearly defined. Lud has been identified more with Ham’s children, particularly Mizra and may have been located originally south of Shinar. Lud is invisible until he appears in Anatolia in Western Asia Minor – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

The same applies to Aram until he appears north of Assyria and to the East of Lud. This layout will come into clearer focus, once we uncover the five identities for the sons of Shem. 

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 60-61 – emphasis mine:

‘… But Babylonia had not always been in Semitic hands. Its earliest population belonged to another race, and the language which they spoke was agglutinative… it was the pre-Semitic population, and not the Semitic intruders, to whom the origin of Chaldaean culture and civilisation were due. It was this population who were the inventors of the pictorial characters which developed into the cuneiform syllabary, they were the first to write on tablets of clay, they founded the great cities and temples of the country, and initiated the art and science, the literature and law, the systems of government and religion which the Semitic Babylonians afterwards inherited. Babylonia was divided into the two provinces of Accad in the north and Sumer… in the south; Accad was the first to fall under Semitic influence and domination, and it was here that the first Semitic empire that of Sargon of Accad took its rise.’

Turkey (or Elam) is not considered by all biblical historians as a line of Shem but invariably from Japheth. The interaction of Elam with Madai – descended from Japheth – accounts for some of the confusion. The pictorial characters are the cursive script of Elam and evidenced today by modern Turkish. Recall in the previous chapter we touched upon the link between Turkish and Sumerian.

Agglutinative is defined as:

‘pertaining to or noting a language, as Turkish, characterized by agglutination.’ It includes ‘the act or process of uniting by glue or other tenacious substance, the state of being thus united; adhesion of parts, that which is united; a mass or group cemented together.’

In linguistics:

‘a process of word formation in which morphemes, each having one relatively constant shape, are combined without fusion or morphophonemic change, and in which each grammatical category is typically represented by a single morpheme in the resulting word, especially such a process involving the addition of one or more affixes to a base, as in Turkish, in which ev means “house,” ev-den means “from a house,” and ev-ler-den means “from houses.”

Though descended from Shem, Elam as Turkey, has its feet planted firmly in the two worlds of Japheth and Ham, as evidenced by its link with the Central Asians; a Turko-Mongol language; and the non-European religion of Islam – refer Chapter IVCentral Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

In time, Elam moved eastwards from Sumer – adjacent to the Persian Gulf, into modern day Iran – and hence the gradual lessening of their influence on the descendants of Arphaxad who moved southwards from Akkadia into Sumer – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

Two other nations which have agglutinating languages, causing dispute regarding their language families are the Korean and Japonic languages. An understandable coincidence, as we have learned in chapters six and nine, that both Korea descending from Gomer and Japan from Javan, migrated in a different pattern to their brothers in South East Asia. Thus, their languages are not readily linked to not-so-related close neighbours China, or more closely related, yet geographically distant relatives in the southeast of Asia – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.

Book of Jubilees 7:13-18

‘And Ham knew that his father had cursed his younger son, and he was displeased that he had cursed his son and he parted from his father, he and his sons with him, Cush [Indian] and Mizraim [Arab] and Put [Pakistani] and Canaan [African]. And he built for himself a city and called its name after the name of his wife Na’elatama’uk. And Japheth saw it, and became envious of his brother, and he too built for himself a city, and he called its name after the name of his wife ‘Adataneses.

And Shem dwelt with his father Noah, and he built a city close to his father on the mountain, and he too called its name after the name of his wife Sedeqetelebab. And behold these three cities are near Mount Lubar; Sedeqetelebab fronting the mountain on its east; and Na’eltama’uk on the south; ‘Adatan’eses towards the west. And these are the sons of Shem: Elam, and Asshur, and Arpachshad…’

This account relates to the period following the Flood, or shortly after the incident with Noah – Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

As Noah stayed close to the Kashmir area, then the locations for Ham’s and Japheth’s children equate with their travelling along the Indus River and populating this region in southwest Asia. Japheth and Ham continued to the far west; Shem migrating behind them both. Japheth’s descendants eventually dwelling in the Aegean and Anatolia; Ham’s descendants living in Canaan, Egypt and North Africa; while Shem’s descendants settled in Mesopotamia.

Shem’s descendants migrating westward and displacing the children of Japheth and Ham would answer two questions.

Why the sons of Ham migrated into North Africa, though the children of Canaan lingered in the coastal strip of the East Mediterranean – because the land was rich in natural resources and beautiful, being the best real estate in the area – rather than continuing southward with Cush, Phut and Mizra.

And, Why the sons of Japheth moved northward into Asia Minor and west into Greece and its islands. Javan or ‘Greece’ – the island peoples – left their family names throughout the area until the present day – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium; Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.

It would explain why the area is now known as Sumer, as Shem’s descendants have left a more recent and indelible imprint. Remember, the time frame is considerably longer ago than typically credited by historians or biblical scholars. Some time well after 10,837 BCE, though still prior to Nimrod circa 6755 BCE.

Then we are introduced to Nimrod and the emphasis of the names for the areas of Assyria named after Asshur, Akkad named after Arphaxad and Sumer after Shem; even though his first born Elam, may have been originally first, his memory has been erased or blurred due to his migration further southeast – possibly directly after the Tower of Babel – as well as the important fact of lower Mesopotamia being inhabited by additional children of Arphaxad – for Arphaxad had numerous descendants – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

The Book of Jubilees provides additional details regarding Shem’s territory – the central middle eastern region – which was sandwiched between Japheth to the north and Ham to the south. It is referenced against the Garden of Eden, which we will return to when we study Eden – Article: The Eden Enigma.

Book of Jubilees 8:10-18, 21

8:10 ‘And it came to pass… that they divided the earth into three parts, for Shem and Ham and Japheth, according to the inheritance of each… 11 And he called his sons, and they drew nigh to him, they and their children, and he divided the earth into the lots, which his three sons were to take in possession, and they reached forth their hands, and took the writing out of the bosom of Noah, their father.

12 And there came forth on the writing as Shem’s lot the middle of the earth which he should take as an inheritance for himself and for his sons… from the middle of the mountain range of Rafa, from the mouth of the water from the river Tina, and his portion goes towards the west through the midst of this river, and it extends till it reaches the water of the abysses, out of which this river goes forth and pours its waters into the sea Me’at, and this river flows into the great sea. And all that is towards the north is Japheth’s, and all that is towards the south belongs to Shem. 13 And it extends till it reaches Karaso… which looks towards the south. 14 And his portion extends along the great sea, and it extends in a straight line till it reaches… the Egyptian Sea… and it extends to the west to ‘Afra, and it extends till it reaches the waters of the river Gihon, and to the south of the waters of Gihon, to the banks of this river. 

21 And he knew that a blessed portion and a blessing had come to Shem and his sons unto the generations… the whole land of Eden and the whole land of the Red Sea… the land of Bashan, and all the land of Lebanon and the islands of Kaftur, and all the mountains of Sanir and ‘Amana, and the mountains of Asshur in the north, and all the land of Elam, Asshur, and Babel, and Susan [the eventual capital of Elam] and Ma’edai [Madai], and all the mountains of Ararat [Turkey], and all the region beyond the sea, which is beyond the mountains of Asshur towards the north, a blessed and spacious land, and all that is in it is very good [the whole of Mesopotamia and Anatolia].’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Shinar Meaning:

From the root (s’r), which expresses intense negative emotion and the experience of violence. From the root (na’ar), to growl, shake or be young. From (1) the verb (shanan), to be sharp, and (2) the noun (‘ir), city.

Scholars generally assume that Shinar is the Hebrew interpretation of what is commonly referred to as Sumer. 

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names derives [shinar] from (sh’r): (se’ar) means hair… the… verb (sa’ar)… literally mean[s] to be hairy… but in fact is solely used to mean to be afraid… Noun (sa’r) means horror. Verb (sa’ar) means to sweep or whirl away… in relation to a storm wind. 

Verb (she’ar)… to break, tear through or split… nouns (sha’ar), gate, and (sho’er), gatekeeper… The core idea of root (sh’r) is to split open, to break through. Thus, for a meaning of the name Shinar, Jones reads Casting Out, or Scattering In All Manner Of Ways…’

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine: 

‘The name Sin’ar occurs eight times in the Hebrew Bible… This location of Shinar is evident from its description as encompassing both Babel/Babylon (in northern Babylonia) and Erech/Uruk (in southern Babylonia). In the Book of Genesis… Verse 11:2 states that Shinar enclosed the plain that became the site of the Tower of Babel after the Great Flood. [The Book of] Jubilees 9:3 allots Shinar (or, in the Ethiopic text, Sadna Sena`or) to Ashur… Jubilees 10:20 states that the Tower of Babel was built with bitumen from the sea of Shinar. David Rohl theorized that the Tower was actually located in Eridu*, which was once located on the Persian Gulf, where there are ruins of a massive, ancient ziggurat worked from bitumen.’

Alan Alford comments on Sumer – emphasis mine:

‘The discovery of ancient Sumer is an exciting story, which begins in the nineteenth century… Spurred on by Biblical clues, the accounts of earlier travellers and by local folklore, archaeologists such as the Paris-born Englishman Sir Austen Henry Layard indeed found their fame and fortune. It was a Frenchman who made the first important discovery. In 1843, Paul Emile Botta uncovered fantastic temples, palaces and a ziggurat (step-pyramid) at a site identified as Dur-Sharru-Kin, the eighth century BC capital of Sargon II, king of Assyria. Botta will always be remembered as the discoverer of the Assyrian civilization.

Whilst archaeologists such as Botta and Layard continued to seek and explore new sites such as Nimrud and Nineveh, scholars such as Sir Henry Rawlinson and Jules Oppert began to shed light on the numerous clay tablets which the digs had uncovered. It soon became apparent that the ancient Mesopotamians were diligent record keepers, preserving information in a cuneiform script, inscribed on clay tablets. In 1835, Rawlinson had carefully copied a vital trilingual inscription on a stone slab found at Behistun in Persia; in 1846, he deciphered the script and its languages, one of which was Akkadian, common to the Assyrians and the Babylonians, who had inherited the Near East after the collapse of Sumer c. 2000 BC.

Sir Henry Rawlinson’s timing was fortuitous. A few years later, Sir Austen Henry Layard began to excavate the mounds of the ancient Assyrian capital Nineveh, 250 miles north of modern-day Baghdad. As well as fantastic temples and palaces, he discovered in 1850 the library of Ashurbanipal [Assyrian King, from 669 to 631 BCE], containing a collection of 30,000 clay tablets. As more and more tablets were translated, the archaeologists became increasingly excited by the independent confirmation of Biblical rulers and cities.

One inscription, listing the achievements of an earlier ruler, Sargon I, claimed that he was the “King of Akkad, King of Kish”, and that he had defeated in battle the cities of “Uruk, Ur and Lagash”. Scholars were amazed to find that this Sargon had preceded his later namesake by nearly two thousand years, taking the Mesopotamian civilization back to at least 2400 BC. This was just the beginning of a series of tremendous finds which turned back the clock on the beginning of civilization and enriched the museums of Europe and America with some of their prize exhibits. At this time, Sumer did not exist in the history books – it is only with hindsight that we now recognize it as the Biblical “Shinar”.

Further south, the hot and dusty wasteland of Uruk yielded the world’s first ever ziggurat, dedicated to the Goddess Inanna, as well as examples of some of the earliest inscribed writing. The best preserved ziggurat in the whole of Mesopotamia was found at Ur, the birthplace of the Old Testament patriarch Abraham. The partly restored ruins of that ziggurat still dominate the landscape today at the modern town of Muqayyar, 186 miles south-east of Baghdad. It was at Eridu, however, almost 200 miles south-east of Baghdad that the earliest Sumerian city was found. The city of Eridu is [today] an abandoned, windswept wilderness, dominated by the ruins of Ur-Nammu’s* ziggurat’ – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.

With all that said, it is important to understand – as it will be confirmed later on in our journey – that the original and first Shinar was located in a different geographical position to the one it became synonymous with in lower Mesopotamia (refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity).

The subjects of albinism, Noah, his son Shem and the introduction of white skin were addressed in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; as well as a discussion on melanin variation which causes the darkness and lightness of skin, hair and eyes in Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Blond hair is linked to the carriers of paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a; blue eyes with Haplogroup I1; and Red hair with Haplogroup R1b. The argument for antediluvian humans possessing a light shade of brown skin is incontrovertible and the introduction of all other shades which are evident in South Asians, East Asians, Arabs, Latinos and Europeans through Noah, his sons and their wives is the only scenario that fits the 11,000 to 19,000 years ago timeline, for these genetic mutations described by scientists – and supported by an unconventional chronology.

Due to lengthened ages in the antediluvian age, Noah was born nearly 19,000 years ago and his sons about 14,000 years ago; with Noah’s grandsons beginning to be born approximately 13,000 years ago – Article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

The exact time frame when the explosion of Haplogroup mutations is thought to have occurred.  

Real History explains the scientific process of where and how white skin originates – capitalisation theirs, emphasis & bold mine:

‘Gene copies, however, are not always healthy. When the copies of a gene differ from each other, as through deleterious mutation or failure: Then in this heterozygous condition, we call the two parts “Alleles” and the undamaged or un-mutated allele is dominant, and the organism’s appearance and function is normal. The damaged “other” allele has no noticeable effect on the organism’s appearance, and is called the “Recessive” allele.

When BOTH alleles of a gene become recessive, then the gene cannot complete its assignment. As an example: many Black people have alleles of their “P” gene which are heterozygous and they look normal in every way: (The “P” gene controls the production of Melanin in the skin for protection from the Sun).’ 

‘But if TWO of these people with heterozygous alleles in their “P” gene [reproduce], then one or more, of their children will be an Albino. If two Albinos mate, there is only damaged or recessive “P” genes to inherit; therefore ALL of their children will be White.’ 

‘The trait for curly hair (which is the [norm] for humans) follows the same rules, two damaged or recessive allele’s of the “TCHH” gene [results in] straight hair.

Same for the genes which control eye color and hair color: (Blonde and Red hair is recessive, as is Blue, Green, and Gray eyes).’

‘Washington Post: Friday, May 1, 2009, Study Finds Africans More Genetically Diverse Than Other Populations:

“Africans are more genetically diverse than the inhabitants of the rest of the world combined, according to a sweeping study that carried researchers into remote regions to sample the bloodlines of more than 100 distinct populations.

So says Sarah Tishkoff, a University of Pennsylvania geneticist who led the international research team. The report was published in the journal Science Express.”

‘Spencer Wells, [Genetic Anthropologist, on the first Great Migrations] page 39 The Journey of Man: A genetic Odyssey 

“… Genetic data corroborates the mitochondrial results, placing the root of the human family tree – our most recent common ancestor – [from Africans]… Consistent with this result, all of the genetic data shows the greatest number of polymorphisms in [Africans] – there is simply far more variation in that continent than anywhere else. You are more likely to sample extremely divergent genetic lineages within a single African village than you are in whole of the rest of the world. 

The majority of the genetic polymorphisms found in our species are found uniquely in Africans – Europeans, Asians and Native Americans carry only a small sample of the extraordinary diversity that can be found in any African village.”

‘The question was asked:

If Europeans are Albinos, then how is it that they still make [white children]? [The] confusion is due to believing [the] definition of [an] Albino. In order to confuse pigmented people, [Europeans]… try to say that ONLY type 1 (OCA1) [Chromosome 11] Albinos exist.’

‘They say:

“Though we have White Skin, we DON’T have White Hair and Red eyes. We also have good vision and can TAN, so that proves that we are NOT Albinos… Type “1” Albinos are [those] with White hair, White Skin, Red Eyes, and poor eyesight. There are “8” (so far discovered) types of Albinism, with type 2 (OCA2) [Chromosome 15] being by far the MOST COMMON!’

‘The phenotype typical of type 2 Albinism (OCA2) is “TANNABLE WHITE SKIN, BLONDE to BROWN HAIR, and BLUE, GREEN, GRAY, or BROWN EYES” – sound familiar? And how is it that type 2 (OCA2) Albinos can still make type 1 (OCA1) Albinos?

Simple, normal everyday European Albinism is caused by mutation of the “P” (OCA2) gene. Whereas type 1 (OCA1) Albinism is caused by a mutation of the tyrosinase gene. These genes are at different locations of the cell Chromosome, therefore one mutation does not exclude the other. Consequently type 2 Albinos producing type 1 Albinos is not unusual in the least. And just like in Blacks with Albinism, future generations are dependent only on the… partner’s mutations or lack of mutations.’

“It is my conviction that a white skin is not natural to man, and that by nature he has either a black or brown skin like our forefathers… and that the white man was never originally created by nature; and that, therefore, there is no race of white people.” From… Metaphysics of Sexual Love by Arthur Schopenhauer.’

Genetics Out of Africa, Dr. Orville Boyd Jenkins:

“Recently a major molecular cause of this change in skin color has been discovered in Europeans. Specifically, the gene SLC24A5 turns out to be critical for the production of melanin, the predominant dark pigment of the skin and hair… 100 percent of Europeans have a mutation in SLC24A5 that impairs the function of the protein…

Asians share the fully functional version of SLC24A5, but have acquired mutations in other genes that result in lighter skin, while retaining black hair (Francis Collins, The Language of Life (NY: Harper, 2010), page 150).”

Keith Cheng from Penn State College of Medicine reported that one amino acid difference in the gene SLC24A5 is a key contributor to the skin color difference between Europeans and West Africans. This is undoubtedly where the Irish get their light skin from. “The mutation in SLC24A5 changes just one building block in the protein, and contributes about a third of the visually striking differences in skin tone between peoples of African and European ancestry,” he said.’

The study by professor of pathology Keith Cheng, was published in the Genetics Journal, 2005. Cheng worked together with Victor Canfield, assistant professor of pharmacology, studying DNA sequence differences across the globe. Segments of genetic code have a mutation located closely on the same SLC24A5 chromosome and are often inherited together. Specifically the mutation is called A111T and is found in every one of European ancestry.

A111T is also found in peoples of the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent, though not in high numbers in Africans. Researchers discovered that all individuals from the Middle East, North Africa, East Africa and Southern India who carry the A111T mutation share a common ‘fingerprint’ or ‘traces of the ancestral genetic code’ in the corresponding chromosomal region; which indicates that all existing instances of this mutation originated from the same person.

That same person would be ancestor zero: Noah.

Cheng unwittingly confirms:

“This means that Middle Easterners and South Indians, which includes most inhabitants of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, share significant ancestry” – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Apparently, the mutated segment of DNA was itself created from a combination of two other mutated segments which are commonly found in Eastern Asians. Cheng comments:

“The coincidence of this interesting form of evidence of shared ancestry of East Asians with Europeans, within this tiny chromosomal region, is exciting… the combining of segments occurred after the ancestors of East Asians [descended from Japheth] and Europeans [descendants of Shem] split geographically [genetically] more than 50,000 [14,000] years ago; the A111T mutation occurred afterward” in Noah’s twenty-one grandsons.

Differences in skin colour affect skin cancer rates. For instance, Europeans have ten to twenty times more instances of melanoma than Africans; yet despite having lighter skin as well, East Asians have the same lower melanoma rates as Africans. The reason for this difference could only be explained once the gene mutations for both groups are found.

It is proposed that it is linked to the fact two original lines of humankind existed before Noah’s sons (Homo sapiens sapiens): the

Neanderthal line created on Day Six; and the

Adamic line (Homo sapiens) created on Day Eight

– refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV.

These antediluvian lines are replicated today with modifications, respectively to the oriental peoples descended from Japheth and the section of equatorial peoples descended from Ham’s wife, Na’eltama’uk (and Noah) through their son, Canaan – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

‘The study above mentions the term “Nonsyndromic”:

A “Syndrome” is a set of signs and symptoms that appear together and characterize a disease or medical condition. Therefore “Nonsyndromic” means something that is not associated with other signs and symptoms. This comes into play because Europeans typically deny their Albinism by claiming that “REAL” Albinos have bad eyesight! 

This study makes clear that is not the case:

Note that this study was [conducted] by Asians. Just like SLC24A5 is a gene denoting Albinism, so too is SLC45A2, an Albino gene. What is the official name of the MC1R gene? The official name of this gene is “melanocortin 1 receptor (alpha melanocyte stimulating hormone receptor).”

What is the normal function of the MC1R gene? The MC1R gene provides instructions for making a protein called the melanocortin 1 receptor. This receptor plays an important role in normal pigmentation. The receptor is primarily located on the surface of melanocytes, which are specialized cells that produce a pigment called melanin.

Melanin is the substance that gives skin, hair, and eyes their color. Melanin is also found in the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina), where it plays a role in normal vision.

Melanocytes make two forms of melanin, eumelanin and pheomelanin.

The relative amounts of these two pigments help determine the color of a person’s hair and skin. People who produce mostly eumelanin tend to have brown or black hair and dark skin that tans easily. Eumelanin also protects skin from damage caused by ultraviolet (UV) radiation in sunlight.

People who produce mostly pheomelanin tend to have red or blond hair, freckles, and light-colored skin that tans poorly. Because pheomelanin does not protect skin from UV radiation, people with more pheomelanin have an increased risk of skin damage caused by sun exposure.

The melanocortin 1 receptor controls which type of melanin is produced by melanocytes. When the receptor is activated, it triggers a series of chemical reactions inside melanocytes that stimulate these cells to make eumelanin. If the receptor is not activated or is blocked, melanocytes make pheomelanin instead of eumelanin.

Common variations (polymorphisms) in the MC1R gene are associated with normal differences in skin and hair color. Certain genetic variations are most common in people with red hair, fair skin, freckles, and an increased sensitivity to sun exposure. These MC1R polymorphisms reduce the ability of the melanocortin 1 receptor to stimulate eumelanin production, causing melanocytes to make mostly pheomelanin. Although MC1R is a key gene in normal human pigmentation, researchers believe that the effects of other genes also contribute to a person’s hair and skin coloring. The melanocortin 1 receptor is also active in cells other than melanocytes, including cells involved in the body’s immune and inflammatory responses. The receptor’s function in these cells is unknown.

The MC1R gene belongs to a family of genes called GPCR (G protein-coupled receptors). A gene family is a group of genes that share important characteristics. Classifying individual genes into families helps researchers describe how genes are related to each other. Many genetic changes in the MC1R gene increase the risk of developing skin cancer, including a common, serious form of skin cancer that begins in melanocytes (melanoma). Alterations in the MC1R gene disrupt the ability of the melanocortin 1 receptor to trigger eumelanin production in melanocytes.

Because eumelanin normally protects skin from the harmful effects of UV radiation, a lack of this pigment leaves fair skin more vulnerable to damage from sun exposure. Skin damage caused by UV radiation from the sun is a major risk factor for developing melanoma and other forms of skin cancer.

Studies suggest that variations in the MC1R gene may also increase the risk of developing melanoma in the absence of UV radiation-related skin damage. In these cases, melanomas can occur in people of dark or light skin coloring. These cancers are often associated with mutations in additional genes related to melanoma risk, such as the BRAF and CDKN2A genes. Researchers are working to explain the complex relationship among MC1R variations, other genetic and environmental factors, and melanoma risk.’

Online source:

“[The top four] places in the world where… [Europeans] refuse to accept the fact that they have physical disadvantages as regards the Sun [are] Israel, Australia, New Zealand [and] California… In these places they inhabit beaches as if they were Black or Brown people. The results are often disastrous.’

Since this comment, the state of Israel has been passed by Australia, moving into second and New Zealand has leapt into first, regarding the highest rates of skin cancer in the world.

‘Certain genetic changes in the MC1R gene modify the appearance of people with oculocutaneous albinism type 2. This form of albinism, which is caused by mutations in the OCA2 gene, is characterized by fair hair, light-colored eyes, creamy white skin, and vision problems. People with genetic changes in both the OCA2 and MC1R genes have many of the usual features of oculocutaneous albinism type 2; however, they typically have red hair instead of the usual yellow, blond, or light brown hair seen with this condition.’

Wiki:

‘Sodium/potassium/calcium exchanger 5 (NCKX5), also known as solute carrier family 24 member 5 (SLC24A5), is a protein that in humans is encoded by the SLC24A5 gene that has a major influence on natural skin colour variation. The NCKX5 protein is a member of the potassium-dependent sodium/calcium exchanger family. Sequence variation in the SLC24A5 gene, particularly a non-synonymous SNP changing the amino acid at position 111 in NCKX5 from alanine to threonine, has been associated with differences in skin pigmentation.’

‘The SLC24A5 gene’s derived threonine or Ala111Thr allele (rs1426654[3]) has been shown to be a major factor in the light skin tone of Europeans compared to Africans, and is believed to represent as much as 25–40% of the average skin tone difference between Europeans and West Africans. It has been the subject of recent selection in Western Eurasia, and is fixed in European populations.

The SLC24A5 gene, in humans, is located on the long (q) arm of chromosome 15 on position 21.1, from base pair 46,200,461 to base pair 46,221,881. NCKX5 is 43 kDa protein that is partially localized to the trans-Golgi network in melanocytes. Removal of the NCKX5 protein disrupts melanogenesis in human and mouse melanocytes, causing a significant reduction in melanin pigment production. Site-directed mutagenesis corresponding to a non-synonymous single nucleotide polymorphism in SLC24A5 alters a residue in NCKX5 (A111T) that is important for NCKX5 sodium-calcium exchanger activity.

SLC24A5 appears to have played a key role in the evolution of light skin in humans of European ancestry…

The Penn State team [calculated] that the gene, known as slc24a5, is responsible for about one-third of the pigment loss that made black skin white. A few other as-yet-unidentified mutated genes apparently account for the rest…’

This removes any doubt that Homo sapiens, from the line of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve were darker skinned.

Science has confirmed that white skin is a mutation – the SLC24A5 gene on Chromosome 15 – of a darker skinned human. Science dating of this event aligns with the birth of Shem and the genetic bottleneck at the time of the Flood.

Eve as mitochondrial Eve would have been mtDNA Haplogroup L. Adam as Y-DNA Adam, would have been Y-DNA Haplogroup A. Both these Haplogroups are Haplogroups found in sub-Saharan Black African peoples – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

‘The gene’s function in pigmentation was discovered in zebrafish as a result of the positional cloning of the gene responsible for the “golden” variety of this common pet store fish. Evidence in the International HapMap Project database of genetic variation in human populations showed that Europeans, represented by the “CEU” population, had two primary alleles differing by only one nucleotide, changing the 111th amino acid from alanine to threonine, abbreviated “A111T”.

The derived threonine allele (Ala111Thr; also known as A111T or Thr111) represented 98.7 to 100% of the alleles in European samples, while the ancestral or alanine form was found in 93 to 100% of samples of Sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians and Indigenous Americans. The variation is a SNP polymorphism rs1426654, which had been previously shown to be second among 3011 tabulated SNPs ranked as ancestry-informative markers.

This single change in SLC24A5 explains between 25 and 38% of the difference in skin melanin index between peoples of West African vs. European Ancestry.

Furthermore, the European mutation is associated with the largest region of diminished genetic variation in the CEU HapMap population, suggesting the possibility that the A111T mutation may be the subject of the single largest degree of selection in human populations of European ancestry. It is theorised that selection for the derived allele is based on the need for sunlight to produce the essential nutrient vitamin D. In northerly latitudes, where there is less sun, greater requirement for body coverage due to colder climate, and frequently, diets poor in vitamin D, making lighter skin more suitable for survival. Tests for this variation have obvious application to forensic science. 

It has been estimated that the threonine allele became predominant among Europeans 11,000 [circa 10,000 BCE to 9,000 BCE and the birth of Shem’s sons: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud and Aram] to [circa 17,000 BCE and the birth of Noah] 19,000 years ago.

After providing all manner of scientific data to prove European Albinism:

We now turn to the common sense approach to proving European Albinism… todays White Europeans… are clearly loath to admit that they are [technically] Albinos. So to hide this truth, they utilize all manner of “Double-Speak”: that is defining Albinism, but turning aside all inference to themselves.

They say things like: OCA2 is rare in Europe, but more common in AfricaALL White Europeans are ALREADY OCA2, so to hide that; they only count as Albino, those of their number who have genetic vision problems because of their OCA2 Albinism: (Another lie they tell is that ALL Albinos have vision problems). So for a better understanding, [let’s] DEFINE OCA2. OCA2 stands for Oculocutaneous Albinism type II.

“OCA” stands for Oculocutaneous Albinism. The “OC” stands for “Oculocutaneous”… Definition of OCULOCUTANEOUS:

relating to or affecting both the eyes and the skin – oculocutaneous albinism – Definition of ALBINISM: the condition of an albino. Full Definition of ALBINO: an organism exhibiting deficient pigmentation; especially: a human being that is congenitally deficient in pigment and usually has a milky or translucent skin, white or colorless hair, and eyes with pink or blue iris and deep-red pupil (In short, Albino means WHITE or WHITE like – from the Latin albus “white”).

These are the symptoms of OCA2. Genetics Home Reference

“The OCA2 gene (formerly called the P gene) provides instructions for making a protein called the P protein. This protein is located in melanocytes, which are specialized cells that produce a pigment called melanin. Melanin is the substance that gives skin, hair, and eyes their color. Melanin is also found in the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina), where it plays a role in normal vision.”

NOAH: National Organization for Albinism and Hypopigmentation.

Striking coincidence, or is it? And an intriguing irony that this acronym was chosen, spelling Noah… who is patently, Ancestor Zero. 

“A common myth is that people with albinism have red eyes. Although lighting conditions can allow the blood vessels at the back of the eye to be seen, which can cause the eyes to look reddish or violet, most people with albinism have blue eyes, and some have hazel or brown eyes. There are different types of albinism and the amount of pigment in the eyes varies; however, vision problems are associated with albinism.”

‘Did you notice in the “Genetics Home Reference” definition where it said that “The OCA2 gene was formerly called the P gene”?

Now why would White people RENAME a gene after a disease?

THE HUMAN BODY DOES NOT “NORMALLY” COME WITH DISEASE! So why did [Europeans] RENAME the “P” gene, and give it the name of a DISEASE? They did that when they found out that the MUTATED form of the “P” gene was “NORMAL” in THEM! OCA2 “IS” the “MUTATED” FORM of the “P” gene.

To put it plainly… A normal Black person’s gene would be called a “P” gene. And only the MUTATED form found in Europeans and African Albinos, would be called the OCA2 gene. Since ALL Europeans have the OCA2 gene, therefore they are all Albinos. And of course it’s rare in Africa, most Africans are NOT Albinos.

So then, if the OCA2 gene is a “Normal” human gene, then BLACKS MUST HAVE A “OCA-2” (Albinism gene) too? Logically then: if “OCA2” means “Oculocutaneous Albinism type 2” – HOW CAN BLACK PEOPLE HAVE THIS GENE AND NOT BE WHITE?…

Of course Black People DO NOT have a OCA2 Gene, they have a “P” gene. When the “P” gene is healthy, Black people make Black people. But when the “P” gene has “Mutated” and is no longer healthy, It CAN cause Black people to produce WHITE people (Albinos).

How can two people with normal pigmentation (Black people) produce a child with albinism? That is because these parents – like one out of every 75 people – are carriers for albinism. A carrier is someone who has one functional gene and one abnormal gene. (We all have two copies of all genes). Because the functional gene overrides the abnormal gene, these people do not have albinism themselves. However, they are still able to pass the abnormal gene on to their child. If the other parent is also a carrier for the same type of albinism, the offspring has a 25% chance of having albinism, a 50% chance of being a carrier, and a 25% chance of having two “normal” genes.

In Herodotus’s “History of the Persian Wars” of the dozens of peoples that he describes in the book; he chooses to describe only three peoples by racial type. The Colchians… whom he describes as “black-skinned and have woolly hair”. And the Budini of Gelonus (east-central Ukraine), whom he describes as (they have all deep blue eyes, and bright red hair). The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-118 A.D.) said this about them: 

“For my own part, I agree with those who think that the tribes of Germany are free from all taint of intermarriages with foreign nations, and that they appear as a distinct, unmixed race, like none but themselves. Hence, too, the same physical peculiarities throughout so vast a population. All have fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames, fit only for a sudden exertion. They are less able to bear laborious work. Heat and thirst they cannot in the least endure; to cold and hunger their climate and their soil inure them.”

‘From those passages we know for sure what White Europeans looked like when they first invaded Europe – they were Pure Albinos. But today, they rarely have the RED HAIR and BLUE EYES of their ancestors – What Happened?’

We will learn that the Germanic tribes in Germany were peoples who were predominantly fair and blue eyed and they still are today. It doesn’t account for all the White people in Europe with brunette hair and brown eyes. Thus the assertion that the blue eyed, red haired people are disappearing is not true in this background context, of ‘all white people were red haired and blue eyed.’ What is true, is that those nations which are predominately fair and blue eyed are being ‘watered down’ so-to-speak through intermarriage and inter-mixing – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Thus the following is relevant in that context.

‘THIS HAPPENED!

“Since the turn of the century, people born with blue eyes in the United States have dramatically decreased, with only about 10 percent having blue eyes today.

According to Mark Grant, an epidemiologist from Loyola University in Chicago.

During the turn of the last century, the percentage of people with blue eyes stood at 57.4% for those born between 1899 through 1905; and 33.8% for those born between 1936 through 1951.

According to Grant, in a study titled “Cohort effects in a genetically determined trait: eye color among US whites.”

This decrease in the occurrence of blue eyes is due to many factors, with the majority pointing to the increase in brown-eyed immigrants, mainly Hispanics and Asians, as well as heightened interracial relationships: as the other determinant, (when a normal Black person and a European make a baby, the baby GAINS varied ability to make MELANIN). Blue eyes, next to green, are the rarest eye color in the world, as people of countries in Asia and Africa possess brown eyes.”

‘Are there three Races? As the evidence indicates… [Europeans have]… taught… that there [are] THREE RACES:

The Black Race. The White Race. The [Asiatic] type Race.

This was just to give themselves an undeserved place of importance in the Human hierarchy. Following the evidence, it becomes clear that there are indeed THREE RACES, but their types are different:

[1] Blacks with “Negroid” features, produce Albinos with Negroid features [Canaan].

[2] Blacks with “Caucasian” features, produce Albinos with Caucasian features [Shem].

And [3] Blacks with “Mongol” features produce Albinos with Mongol features… [Japheth]

there is the one Black Human Race. Then there are TWO sub-races:

The Albino Race – which encompasses Whites/Albinos of EVERY Phenotype. (Europeans insist that they are the only “True” Whites: but as is clear from the evidence, they are in no way unique).

And then there is the “MULATTO” Races [which in reality is a fourth racial line: Ham]:

which are MIXTURES of all the above, in varying QUANTITIES… [including] the Middle East, North Africa, and Latin American: as well as Asia…’

A rather abrupt expression of the no less undeniable reality, that the oldest genes – as expressed by paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup A – pre-flood, are the ancestor genes (and Haplogroup) which mutated through Noah’s sons and grandsons into the variety of races or ethnicities we observe today. Thus the original mtDNA L and Y-DNA A Haplogroups were passed from Noah and Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk, to Canaan.

Future mutations of the founding Haplogroup A, would have been passed from Ham to each of his own three son’s descendants. Each son receiving a unique genetic inheritance, yet there are some Haplogroups common to each or all, via admixture.

Japheth received a unique set which diversified amongst his seven sons, as did Shem for his five sons. The fact there are crossover Haplogroups between Japheth, Ham and Shem’s grandson’s descendants, perhaps proves their family link – supported by the scientific understanding of genetic mutations as evidenced by Haplogroup expansions – and certainly through admixture.

For example, let’s take R1a and R1b.

Both are European marker Haplogroups, for western and eastern Europe respectively. Yet, many Indian males in India also carry R1a. Geneticists debate the origin of R1a: is it West Eurasian and therefore European; or Central Eurasian and South Asian in origin? Which line came from who? The answer is that it is Shem’s line who carried the Y-DNA R Haplogroup with any subsequent evidence in Ham’s line (R1a, R2) originating from admixture.

Therefore, Indians and Eastern Europeans are related, just not as closely as scientists think. They are not both Aryan, as the Indian peoples are Hamitic. Not brothers per se, but more accurately, cousins – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens. 

The principal mtDNA maternal Haplogroups associated with Shem’s descendants via his wife, Sedeqetelebab include:

Haplogroup H – is the most frequently found Haplogroup throughout West Eurasia, with a uniform distribution throughout Europe.

Haplogroup HV – is the ancestral Haplogroup to H and V, which dominates the western European lineages today. About seventy-five percent of the western European population descends from this Haplogroup.

Haplogroup I – is widespread throughout Europe, although at relatively low levels occurring at about two percent. 

Haplogroup J – is one of the four major specific European Haplogroups.

Haplogroup K – spread throughout Europe. Certain lineages are also found in Central Asia and Northern Africa. It is known for its presence in distinct population groups, such as the prehistoric Basques and the Ashkenazi Jews.

Haplogroup N – is one of the two major lineages from which non-African Haplogroups descend. Today, members of this Haplogroup are found in many continents around the world.

Haplogroup T – is a relatively young European Haplogroup.

Haplogroup U – is one of Europe’s oldest and most diverse Haplogroups. About 10 to 11% of Europeans and Americans of European descent belong to this Haplogroup.

Haplogroup V – a European Haplogroup with links to Iberia (Spain), which spread east and north.

Haplogroup W – is found throughout Europe, deriving from super Haplogroup N.

Sedeqetelebab

The global distribution of Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups associated with Shem’s descendants are summarised in Retina, Fifth Edition, 2013:

‘The highest frequencies of haplogroup G appear in the Caucasus region; however it also shows significant frequencies in the Mediterranean areas and the Middle East.

Haplogroup I [I1, I2a1 and I2a2] is a clear European haplogroup; it is one of the most frequent haplogroups among northwestern European populations. 

The extensive haplogroup R, which is mainly represented by two lineages – R1a and R1b. The members of R1b are… the most common Y haplogroup in Europe. More than half of men of European descent belong to R1b.

Haplogroup R1a is currently found in central and western Asia, India, and in Slavic populations of Eastern Europe.’

A PCA graph (below) highlighting the descendants of Shem and their genetic (diversity) proximity with one another. 

We will now turn our attention to Shem’s five sons and their offspring… beginning with the elusive descendants of Lud.

And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Colossians 3:17 English Standard Version

Sir Isaac Newton was asked how he discovered the law of gravity. He replied:

“By thinking about it all the time.”

“He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.”

Isaac Newton 1643 – 1727

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

Nephilim & Elioud Giants I

This writer would not normally comment on the Nephilim, though as there is widespread interest in the subject online, yet also considerable confusion relating to it, it was reconsidered. Particularly, as they will make their presence known in the future, though in another guise and not obviously as Nephilim

Two chapters are written in The Noachian Legacy, which address the topic in considerable detail. Entitled, Chapter XXI The Incredible Origin, Identity & Destiny of Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. They endeavour to support the comments briefly stated here.

It it is amazing the level of interest in the Nephilim, yet it is equally incredible how many people respond on Quora, who do not give any credence to their existence or involvement with humanity. One wonders why they are interested enough to reply if such is the case.

All issues have two sides, though experience shows that usually only one side is right. In this matter as in many others, when the truth is finally made known, one side will be much more surprised than the other.

The Bible reveals six key points:

  1. The beginning of the problem began with the encounter between the Serpent and Eve.

Genesis 3:13–15 New English Translation:

‘So the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman replied, “The serpent tricked me, and I ate.” The Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you… On your belly you will crawl and dust you will eat all the days of your life. And I will put hostility between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring…’

The Serpent is the leader of the fathers of the Nephilim; though not to be confused with Azazel as described in the Book of Enoch. The reference to crawling and dust, mean that these Seraph type angels were now constrained in the lower dimensions of our solar system. One could say that their ‘wings were clipped.’ The hostility between the fallen Angels and mankind has been perpetual and relentless, leading to the second point.

2. Certain beings known as the Sons of God (Job 1:6), fallen Angels, Watchers or Grigori decided to leave their first estate or habitation, the spiritual realm (1 Peter 3:19) and dwell with human women – Genesis 6:1-4.

Jude 1:6 English Standard Version

‘And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day…’

The reason for this decision, as well as the encounter in the Garden of Eden, is involved and complicated; warranting a fuller discussion and is expanded in the above mentioned chapters.

3. The result of this union of spirit and physical flesh was the offspring known as Nephilim. These beings were the mighty men of renown, giants and the demigods of the Titans from the antediluvian age of pre-history – Article: Thoth.

Nephil has a number of meanings which will be left out for now, though the main definition is that they are fallen ones, like their fathers. The dark Angels who came to Earth are not the Nephilim. Their children are the Nephilim.

4. Misnomer number one – the Nephilim were all killed in the Flood. They possibly, were not* – refer Numbers 13:33 and Genesis 6:4.

Some propose there was a second irruption of angels on the Earth to explain the Nephilim and Elioud giants in the post-diluvian age. This writer would concur, as the story of Lot in Sodom corroborates this, as well as the author of 2 Peter 2:4–6 – Chapter XXVI** The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Angels returning to Earth and or their offspring became an issue after the Flood in the land of Canaan (Genesis 14:1–9) and particularly in the five cities of the plain located at the northern tip of the Dead Sea: Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim and Bela – or Zoar. Four of the five cities were destroyed circa 1878 BCE (Deuteronomy 29:23) because human and angelic interaction had gotten to a tipping point – Genesis 19:23–25. Zoar alone escaped retribution because Lot requested to flee there. This accounts for the seismic response and drastic action taken against these cities.

Genesis 19:4–5 English Standard Version reveals:

‘But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot, “Where are the [angels] who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.”

As the inhabitants of Sodom were familiar with angelic beings, they were certainly not going to miss these angels of the Lord in their midst. The surface explanation of homosexuality is a blind; covering the more sinister activity** occurring in these cities.

The Nephilim and Elioud giant issue was not eradicated by Joshua in 1400 BCE, so that it was King David who finally ended their line circa 990 BCE – 2 Samuel 21:20–22.

5. Misnomer number two – the Nephilim are sterile. They are palpably not. See Deuteronomy 3:11 and Genesis 10:8–9. Second and third generation Nephilim are called Elioud – or Eljo – in the Books of Enoch and Jubilees. The Book of Enoch is a non-canonical book quoted in the scriptures, yet has been kept out of the Bible…

King Og the giant, is mentioned numerous times in scripture and was either a Nephil or a first generation Elioud – Deuteronomy 3:1–13, Joshua 2:10, Psalms 135:11. Non-canonical records describe Og surviving the Flood.*

6. There are beings who do not have corporal bodies, but seek to inhabit humans. They are known by many names, though commonly as demons, unclean and lying spirits – Luke 11:24, 1 Kings 22:22. The Book of Enoch 15:1–12, adds that when the giants died, they lost their physical bodies to death, yet their spiritual component did not die and henceforth they were called evil spirits.

As they were born on the earth or in the physical realm, they are bound to the earth to torment humankind. It is these same spirits who often respond to ouija boards and which work with Mediums as familiars; impersonating souls who have died.

An important point to understand for those who believe fallen angels are demons, is that Angels, Seraphs and Cherubs are magnificent beings of immense majesty. For after their rebellion, the fallen angels even with their power diminished and their beauty transformed, are still too lofty and mighty to demean themselves to inhabit a human body. Yet there are exceptions perhaps.

A Nephil was an abomination of spirit and flesh and while they were bigger, stronger, smarter and out lived mortal men, they still had a physical body. Their spirit was not the spirit of man (Job 32:8), but of their immortal fathers. Once their fleshly body died, their spirit lived on in an unnatural state. In this condition as a discorporate entity of energy, they often seek habitation in humans to quench their spiritual thirst and exist by degree in the physical realm – Luke 11:24-26.

Jude 12-13 English Standard Version

‘These are hidden reefs… as they feast with you without fear, shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars [or spirits], for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.’

The legends and myths of giants and vampires and the drinking of human blood with cannibalism, find their source from the Nephilim of the antediluvian age. It is also where the doctrine of re-incarnation originates. For evil spirits have inhabited various people in different times and so are able to transfer thoughts and memories to new hosts; who falsely think they have lived in the past.

Thus, the Annunaki gods of Sumerian inscriptions – as the fallen dark angels – would have fathered the Nephilim – the gigantic demigods – who are in turn instruments of theirs in their cause against humanity. This explains the various ancient king lists of gods and demigods who ruled extraordinary long lengths of time; as well as possibly the ancient Egyptian’s preoccupation with mummification – refer article Na’amah. The Giants are also linked with the plethora of monolithic structures throughout the world, such as Stonehenge in England – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

Matthew 22:30 ESV: ‘For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.’ This verse is often misleadingly quoted to support that the fallen Angels could not have procreated. The verse says that angels do not marry like humans.

It does not say that angels cannot be female. It does not say that angels cannot procreate. The key, is that angels left the spirit realm and entered the physical dimensions of the Earth. What they may or may not do, or can or cannot do is not applicable in the inferior environment of our world. They transcended physical laws and thus having relationships with human women was not beyond their capabilities.

Luke 20:36 ESV: ‘for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.’ This verse is also used as a proof that angels do not die. This verse does say that angels don’t die.

It does not say that Angels cannot be killed. Matthew 25:41 ESV: ‘Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”

Grey aliens are worth mentioning in that they exhibit tell-tale signs of demonic activity – abduction is a form of possession. The Grey alien’s body is suspiciously reminiscent of a bio-synthetic suit or covering for a being that does not have a true body – refer article: Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.

The reptilian like appearance of the Greys also reflects their possible ancestry from their seraphim fathers – meaning: ‘fiery flying serpents’, or ‘fire-breathing Dragons’ – Isaiah 6:2; 14:29, Numbers 21:6, Genesis 3:1–5, 14–15, Revelation 12:1–17; 20:2.

Edited excerpt from an answer to the question posed on Quora: What happened to the children of the Nephilim?

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to Orion Gold

The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America

Chapter XV

Casluh and Caphtor are listed as Mizraim’s sixth and seventh sons. We touched on in the previous chapter the debate amongst scholars about which son the Philistines descend from. That is, where the parenthesis should be. Some advocate where it is, after Casluh and others say it should be placed following Caphtor.

Genesis 10:14

English Standard Version

‘Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.’

We have already learned that there is some pairing of sorts, for the brothers from Mizra with the Lud-im and Lehab; and with Anam and Naphtuh. It is worth considering the same situation for Casluh and Caphtor. The additional information that they were now called Philistines undoubtedly has been added to the Bible verse. 

One explanation is that the sons of Caphtor ostensibly lived on the island of the same name. Casluh also migrated to Caphtor now known as Crete and together they left and settled on the southern coast of Canaan, which eventually became known as Palestine derived from the word Philistine.

Additionally, Casluh migrated to Caphtor (Crete) and in time – his descendants in the plural rather than merely a son in the singular – became know as the Caphtorim.

Another possibility, the one favoured and hence the parentheses, is that Casluh is the father of Caphtor. Thus, one could say Casluh as the father of Caphtor, is the father of the Philistines. By this reasoning Caphtor is not described as the father of the Philstines… for he was the Philistines.

The Interlinear says:

‘And Pathrusim, Casluhim out whom came Philistim [the Pelishites or inhabitants of Pelesheth].’

The Hebrew word is H3318 – yatsa’, translated by the KJV as out, 518 times; forth, 411 times; come, 24 times; and proceed, 16 times. It means ‘to come out, go forth’ and ‘begotten, grow’ and ‘shoot forth.’

This writer’s suggestion for Genesis 10:14 to make it clear would be:

Casluh the father of Caphtor (from whom the Philistines came).

There are no verses for Casluh outside of Genesis ten and 1 Chronicles one. There are a couple or so pertaining to Caphtor – whereas all other scriptures use the word Philistine. An indication that the Philistines are in part, from Caphtor – the son of Casluh and – the grandson of Mizra. In part, as the explanation of the Philistine identity is complex and we will discuss it further in a moment.

Deuteronomy 2:23

English Standard Version

‘As for the Avvim [a clan of Nephilim], who lived in villages as far as Gaza, the Caphtorim, who came from Caphtor, destroyed them and settled in their place.’

In the Book of Jasher 10:21-23, we have extra detail on Mizra’s sons: 

21 ‘And the children of Mitzraim are the Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuchim, Pathrusim, Casluchim and Caphturim, seven families. 22 All these dwell by the river Sihor, that is the brook of Egypt, and they built themselves cities and called them after their own names. 

23 And the children of Pathros and Casloch intermarried together, and from them went forth the Pelishtim, the Azathim, and the Gerarim, the Githim and the Ekronim, in all five families; these also built themselves cities, and they called their cities after the names of their fathers unto this day.’

Three bear resemblance to the three of the five major branches or city-states of the Philistines listed in the Bible and located in the lower southwest coast of Canaan:

Ashdod; Ashkelon; Gaza or Azath; Ekron; and Gath or Gith.

Gerar was another city of the Philistines and it was this city where Abraham and later his son Isaac visited its king, Abimelech – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Pelisht looks a little like Pereth. The Book of Jasher supports the contention that Casluh is the progenitor of Caphtor, the founder of the Philistines. 

The Philistines were the remnants of the ancient Minoan civilisation on Crete. A disaster forced the majority to migrate to the already established colony on the southern coast of Canaan during the same time frame the Israelites fled Egypt and were later subduing the land of Canaan.

Abarim Publications – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘The Casluhim are listed among the descendants of Mizraim… (Genesis 10:14, 1 Chronicles 1:2). They are also named as the ancestors of the Philistines and the Caphtorim…

The etymology of this name is uncertain. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names cites Jerome and reads Their Boundary Protected. Fuerst’s Hebrew & Chaldee lexicon to the Old Testament assumes relations with cognate words ks meaning mountain, and lh meaning to lighten burn, shine, make dry. The whole name would mean Dry, Barren Mountain. To a Hebrew audience, however, the dominant segment, which comprises the initial part of the name, looks a lot like the verb (kasal), meaning to be foolish 

The verb (kasal) means to have no skeletal strength or engage in pareidolia (falsely recognising images in random patterns…) or a “belief” in the systematic link between uncorrelated events. Nouns (kesel) and (kisla) mean stupidity or (misplaced) confidence. Noun (kesil)… is also the word forstellar constellations in general, and more specific the constellation Orion’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘Since all other meanings are deeply hidden, to a Hebrew audience the name Casluhim must have sounded similar to either Orionites or Bunch Of [Fools]. 

And if that isn’t bad enough, the segment (salah) is a common verb that means to forgive or pardon; this verb always describes God’s forgiving of man. Together with the particle (ke), as if, like, the name would also mean As If They Forgive, or As If They Were Forgiven, which seems to express a doubt and doesn’t sound very positive; the Casluhim are the Fools. Another name that may have to do with the constellation Orion is that of the mysterious race of the Nephilim’ – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.

‘The Torah explains that Caphtor is the land of the Caphtorim, who descended from Mizraim… (Genesis 10:4), which is to say that the ancient culture of Egypt radiated its science and technology and ignited an independent derivative culture, on the north and eastern coasts of the Mediterranean, long prior to the emergence of the Phoenicians (and note that Luke places a harbor named Phoenix on Crete: Acts 27:12).

These Caphtorim appear to have displaced several earlier cultures, among which the Avvim (Deuteronomy 2:23), but somewhere along the line the Caphtorim culture itself came under pressure of others. Through the prophet Amos YHWH declared that he brought up the Philistines from Caphtor, and through Jeremiah that the Philistines emerged as a separate derivative culture from a remnant of Caphtor.

At that time this remnant of Caphtor appears to have been concentrated on an island (the noun ‘i refers to a coast region: coast, capes and islands off the coast). Most commentators seem to favor Crete as the last stronghold of the Caphtorim, which would make the Philistines displaced survivors of the Minoan culture. The Minoans had maintained a highly advanced civilization from the 4th millennium BCE, which had absorbed much of Egypt’s culture and which in turn had radiated its own identity to the Greek and Canaan coasts. After a series of natural calamities and attacks by Hittites and probably others, the Minoan culture began to decline halfway [through] the 2nd millennium BCE. Around 1200 BCE, the Minoan culture had been eradicated from the island.

It seems reasonable to expect that certain Minoan refugees began to seek refuge with their old business partners. Right around the time that the Minoan culture came to an end, Egyptian records begin to make mention of the Philistines in their realm, and the distinct Philistine identity may very well have come about when waves of late-Minoan refugees overwhelmed native Canaanite tribes.

The name Caphtor is most likely a loan word from the Minoan language to indicate Minoan Cretans. Consequentially, this word, (kaptor), came to indicate the capital on top of a pillar, named after Crete as the place from which they were first imported (Amos 9:1) or knob of bulb as seen on the Menorah in the tabernacle (Exodus 25:33). But, because the Caphtorim appear so early in the Book of Genesis, the name should also have some Hebrew connection.

Hence some commentators recognize the root group (kapar): The verb (kapar) describes the formation of any sort of protective perimeter around any sort of vulnerable interior… The renowned theologian Gesenius… proposed that the name Caphtor could be seen as the superimposition of two three-letter roots, namely (kapar)and [the verb] (katar),meaning to surround: Noun (keter) means crown. Noun… (koteret)… denotes the capital of a pillar. The final part of the name bears strong resemblance to the word (tur), to explore or survey, and derivation (tor), dove.’

We will learn that all these definitions have merit and application.

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:

‘This “son” [Casluh] of Mizraim was the forefather of one of the more notable of the tribes, namely the Philistines… The name Casluhim (SHD 3695, kasluchiym) means fortified and is of foreign derivation. The brief entry for these people in the ISBE reads: Casluhim – an unknown people – or, according to [the] Septuagint, of the Casmanim, which would mean “shavers of the head” – a custom of the Phoenicians (forbidden to Hebrews as a rule)…

The term Caphtorim means crowns (SHD 3732, kaphtoriy) from Caphtor (3731)… They are called Gapthoriim in the Septuagint. Capthor first appears in the Akkadian texts as Kaptara, where it was described as beyond the Upper Sea and within the sphere of influence of Sargon of Akkad. References to Kaptara are found in the 18th century BCE Mari economic archives and in texts in both Akkadian and Ugaritic in Ugarit where it is kptr… The Egyptians refer to a place as Keftiu (kftywor kftiw) from what Egyptologists date as 2200 down to 1200 BCE.

Egyptologists generally accept that keftiu is the Egyptian form of Kaftara/Caphtor and it is clear from all contexts that it is Crete that is being mentioned.

It has been suggested that this tribe was in fact a son of the Casluhim (and thus a grandson of Mizraim… The ISBE provides several theories on the identity of this group, the first one considered the most likely.

1. Crete:

The country and people whence came the Philistines (Genesis 10:14 = 1 Chronicles 1:12 (here the clause “whence went forth the Philistines” should, probably come after Caphtorim); [Deuteronomy 2:23; Jeremiah 47:4; Amos 9:7). Jeremiah…] calls it an “island”; there is evidence of [an] ancient connection between Crete and Philistia; and the Philistines are called Cherethites, which may mean Cretans…

These considerations have led many to identify Caphtor with the important island of Crete. It should be noted, however, that the word ‘i, used by Jeremiah, denotes not only “isle,” but also “coastland.”

2. Phoenicia:

Ebers (Aegypten und die Bucher Moses, 130 ff) thought that Caphtor represented the Egyptian Kaft-ur, holding that Kaft was the Egyptian name for the colonies of Phoenicians in the Delta, extended to cover the Phoenicians in the north and their colonies. Kaft-ur, therefore, would mean “Greater Phoenicia.” But the discovery of Kaptar among the names of countries conquered by Ptolemy Auletes in an inscription on the Temple of Kom Ombo is fatal to this theory.

 3. Cilicia:

A third theory would identify Caphtor with the Kafto of the Egyptian inscriptions. As early as the time of Thotmes III the inhabitants of this land, the Kafti, are mentioned in the records. In the trilingual inscription of Canopus the name is rendered in Greek by Phoinike, “Phoenicia.” This seems to be an error, as the Kafti portrayed on the monuments have no features in common with the Semites. They certainly represent a western type.’

This raises a pointed coincidence, as we shall learn that the Philistines and the Phoenicians from Tyre are entwined geographically, culturally, linguistically and in large part, ethnically – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

This leads to an important realisation in that the Philistines are composed from a lesser people of Hamitic descent and another greater people descending from in fact Shem.

This was not obvious initially for the information provided in Genesis chapter ten only provides detail on the Mizraim component of the Philistines. We learn from other passages that the Philistines are – for the want of a better term – a mongrel people. Yet the truth of this mixture did not become fully apparent until paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups – in tandem with autosomal DNA – proved the reality of the heterogeneous origin of the Philistines. 

This is not embraced or understood amongst biblical identity researchers.

Herman Hoeh in The Origin of the Nations, 1957, adhered to the widely held yet incorrect interpretation of who the Philistines are today:

‘The main body of non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine today are not Canaanites, but Philistines! The Philistines, who came from Mizraim, inhabited Southern Palestine even in the days of Abraham (Genesis 21:34). They are still there today – in the Gaza strip in Palestine – causing no end of trouble (Zechariah 9:6-7)’ – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Scientific findings contradict a (solely) Hamitic origin for the Philistines.

Oema, The Philistines were likely of Greek origin, according to new DNA evidence:

‘… the investigation provided tangible evidence that… [the Philistines] were not only related to the Ancient Greeks, but may have been their descendants. 

According to DNA found in a large mass grave of Philistines, the tribe was proven not to be indigenous, but they had migrated to the area of ​​today’s Middle East… from southern Europe and probably the Aegean…

The genetic findings came from skeletons discovered by archaeologists in Israel in 2016, including the bones of newborns buried under Philistine homes. 

“Our study showed for the first time that the Philistines migrated to this area in the 12th century BC”, said Daniel Master, director of the Leon Levy mission to Ashkelon, a coastal city where the first Philistine cemetery was found. 

The Ashkelon team sent more than 100 skeletal specimens to the German Max Planck Institute for the Science of Anthropological History. The DNA was found in ten people, especially in the bones of the inner ear.’

Ancient Philistines Were Likely of Greek Origin, DNA Study Shows, Philip Chrysopoulos, 2025:

A groundbreaking 2019 genetic study showed that the genes of the buried belong to a European gene pool unlike the Semitic Levantine gene pool of later inhabitants of the area. According to scientists, there was a European-related gene flow that took place during the transition from the Bronze to the Iron Age, which supports the theory that Europeans migrated to the Middle East.

The study specifically states:

“An international team, led by scientists from the Max Planck Institiute for the Science of Human History and the Leon Levy Expedition, retrieved and analyzed, for the first time, genome-wide data from people who lived during the Bronze and Iron Age (~3,600-2,800 years ago) in the ancient port city of Ashkelon, one of the core Philistine cities during the Iron Age. The team found that a European derived ancestry was introduced in Ashkelon around the time of the Philistines’ estimated arrival, suggesting that ancestors of the Philistines migrated across the Mediterranean, reaching Ashkelon by the early Iron Age.”

The National Geographic report says that the DNA analysis from human remains covered three different time periods.

The periods of these burials include the Middle and Late Bronze Age (about 1650 to 1200 BC), thus pre-dating the arrival of the Philistines, while infant burials have been determined to have been from the late 1100 BC following the arrival of the Philistines. Finally, there are also individuals that were buried in the Philistine cemetery in the later Iron Age (hence from the 10th and 9th centuries BC).

The early Iron Age DNA samples include proportionally more “additional European ancestry” in their genetic signature – at roughly 14 percent – than in the pre-Philistine Bronze Age samples, which were 2 to 9 percent.

While the origins of the European genes are inconclusive, experts have determined that they were most likely from Greece, Crete, Sardinia, or the Iberian peninsula.

Many researchers also tie the presence of the Philistines to the exploits of the Sea Peoples, tribes that raided the eastern Mediterranean at the end of the Late Bronze Age in the 13th century and early 12th century BC. This supports the theory that the Philistines, who were possibly Greek, embarked on their journey from Europe as migrants and then settled down in Ashkelon in the 12th century BC.

The arrival of the Philistines in the early 12th century BC is marked by pottery resembling  that of the ancient Greek world, as well as the use of an Aegean script and a notable consumption of pork. Archaeologists agree that the Philistines were unlike their Hebrew neighbors…’

Additional evidence for the Grecian origin (and ethnicity) of the Philistines:

The Philistines today, comprise the peoples of Latino and Latina descent in Spanish Central and South America.

The article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens is not a definitive study by any stretch and is very much a work in progress. Still, it seeks to address this issue as well as others which have come to this writer’s attention when revising individual chapters.

The most pressing point to arise is one concerning the Philistines. Though the Bible cryptically states they came forth from Mizra’s son Casluh (Genesis 10:14) – who may or may not have been the father of Caphtor – with Caphtor being synonymous with ancient Crete; the likelihood exists that while the Philistines dwelt on Crete, their bloodline is predominantly from Shem’s son Aram – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil

The evidence for this is in the paternal Haplogroup R1b, the dominant group in Latino-Hispano American men. If the Philistines were principally descended from Mizra and akin to Arabs or Berbers; the dominating paternal Haplogroup would be either J1, (and J2) or E1b1b. Though with that said, these Haplogroups are invariably the next most frequently exhibited after R1b, with sometimes the exception of Haplogroup Q represented by the Amerindian demographic of the Americas. Therefore, the information provided in verse fourteen in Genesis chapter ten is only partially about ethnic lineage; for it is really revealing a geographical history.  

For the remainder of this chapter, any reference to the Philistines, incorporates Casluh – and or Caphtor – from Mizra; as well as Aram, the youngest son of Shem. This current chapter would now more accurately follow the chapter about Aram. Though as Mizra’s descendants are included – even if as a minority – there is a case to leave it in the present order. Therefore, it is recommended that this chapter is read in conjunction with not only Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia but also Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Philistine Meaning:

Griever, Burrower, Weakner.

From the verb (palash), to burrow or to grieve loudly.

The Philistines were an immigrant people who lived under five kings in six Canaanite cities or regions: Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gath, Ekron and Avva (Joshua 13:3, Judges 3:3). They dominated the region during the reign of [King] Saul [from 1025-1010 BCE] (1 Samuel 13:19), and even defeated him on mount Gilboa, killed his sons and drove him to suicide (1 Samuel 31:6).

The Philistines were subdued and decimated by king David [1010-970 BCE] (2 Samuel 8:1), most famously in the valley of Elah where David killed Goliath of Gath, and it should be noted that the name Goliath doesn’t mean giant but refugee (1 Samuel 17:51). By the time of [King] Solomon [970-930 BCE], the Philistine cities had been largely destroyed or annexed by Israel although pockets of Philistine populations appear to have perpetuated until the time of Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:8). The ultimate end came for the Philistine culture when they were taken to Babylon… A related tribe, the Cherethites, who were possibly a rejected class of the Philistines, had even worked their way up into David’s military elite… (2 Samuel 20:7).

… the Minoan culture… invented a writing system that remains undeciphered to this day, called Linear A… the Philistines emerged from the Minoan civilization of Crete (Caphtorim), which in turn had emerged from a class of Egyptian dreamer-astronomers (Casluhim). The Minoan civilization lasted for three millennia but ultimately [grew] weak and petered out and was displaced by Mycenaeans from mainland [Greece]. This social pressure caused by an influx of Mycenaeans from the north probably caused waves of Minoan refugees toward the south.

The name Philistine comes from the verb (palash), which originally described the digging of burrows in river banks by rodents such as rats. By doing so, these creatures weaken the shore and may ultimately cause it to collapse. In Hebrew… this verb came to denote the verbal expression of intense grief brought about by a sudden destruction: 

The verb (palash) mostly means to roll around in ashes or dust due to intense grief. In cognate languages it describes the digging of tunnels or burrows. 

The ethnonym (Philistine) occurs predominantly in reference to Goliath of Gath (1 Samuel 17) and his descendants (2 Samuel 21). The proper plural, (Philistines), occurs all over the Bible, but in two cases a special plural, (Philistinians) is used: 1 Chronicles 14:10 and Amos 9:7… noun (pura) denotes a winepress, which is a synonym of (gat), from whence comes the name Gath: The verb (parar) means to split, divide and usually make more, expand or multiply… (pa’ar) means to branch out or to glorify. Verb (para) means to bear fruit or befruitful.

The name Cherethites: ‘Cretans, Outcasts’ from the name Crete, in turn from the verb (karat), to round up and cut off. In 2 Samuel 15:18, the Cherethites are mentioned along [with] the Pelethites but also the Gittites, who were Philistine refugees from Gath, as all three groups joined David on his flight from Absolam.

By the time Sheba of Bichri of Benjamin tries to ignite a rebellion against David, the Cherethites and Pelethites are mentioned along [with] general Joab and the elite Mighty Men as they set out to deal with Sheba (2 Samuel 20:7). In the aftermath of this crisis it becomes clear that the Cherethites and Pelethites are now choice warriors and Benaiah is their general (20:23)… the prophet Ezekiel… proclaimed the Cherethites doomed, and confirms their origin among the Philistines (Ezekiel 25:16). And since the Philistines themselves originate from Crete, the Cherethites are Cretans. The word “cretin” describes a fool or deficient person and is officially of unclear origin but it doubtlessly also relates to our verb (karat).’

The words Cretan and Philistine have very similar meaning.

Cretan:

‘a native or inhabitant of Crete. A person considered to be foolish or unintelligent.’

Whereas Philistine means:

‘a person who is lacking in, or hostile, or smugly indifferent to cultural values, intellectual pursuits and aesthetic refinement, or is contentedly commonplace in ideas and tastes.’

Abarim:

‘The civilization of Crete was one of the most advanced… in antiquity, which is probably due to the same reason why Holland [Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia] became so successful in the 17th century and the United States of America in the 20th [Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes]. It’s because these nations absorbed all the rejects of other nations, which created a huge diversity of people who were desperate to improve their lives.’

The countries located in Central and South America are mixed race nations to a very high degree with populations containing Amerindians (1), refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian; imported Black slaves (2), refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; peoples of Spanish descent including the Hamitic Philistines (3) descended from Casluh (and Caphtor); and those similarly of Spanish descent (in greater numbers), including those who are fairer complexioned and lighter skinned (4) – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Abarim:

‘The name Pelethites derives from the name Peleth, which, quite fittingly is of unclear origin. It may come from an otherwise unused verb that would be spelled (palat), and which exists in Arabic with the meaning of to flee or be swift. It may also derive from the Hebrew verb (pala), to be distinguished or separated: Verb (napal) means to fall (down, down to, into or upon). The plural form (napalim) literally means ‘fallen ones’ [like the Nephilim linked to the Avv (or Avva) displaced by the Philistines – refer articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II] ‘settled ones.’ Noun (nepel) refers to an abortion or untimely birth. The Pelethites were obviously Special Forces

Map of Central America and the Caribbean, including Cuba and Haiti with the Dominican Republic; as well as one of Crete below. Cuba was where Columbus first arrived, thinking he was in Asia. The colonising of Cuba began first, then the Americas. Comparing the shape of the islands of Crete and Cuba, they are similar, though Cuba is some ten times bigger. Certainly, Cuba has been a modern type and fulfilment for the island of Caphtor.

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:

‘[The Philistines] are among the most frequently mentioned people in the Bible. Their control and influence in the Mediterranean was such that it was once referred to as the “sea of the Philistines” (Exodus 23:31). The Hebrew term for them is Pelishtiy (SHD 6430, meaning immigrants), a patrial from Pelesheth or Philistia, the land of sojourners.

In his ISBE entry, C.R. Conder seems convinced that the Philistines were a Semitic rather than a Hamitic people. 

“The Philistines were an uncircumcised people inhabiting the shore plain between Gezer and Gaza in Southwestern Palestine… Besides these personal names, and those of the cities of Philistia which are all Semitic, we have the title given to Philistine lords, ceren, which Septuagint renders “satrap” and “ruler,” and which probably comes from a Semitic root meaning “to command.” It constantly applies to the rulers of Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gath and Ekron, the 5 chief cities of Philistia.”

The understandable confusion arises, for even today, the Latino-Hispano peoples though speaking a European Latin* language, Spanish; incorporate a Hamitic peoples descended from Ham through Mizra.

‘The fact that the Philistines were uncircumcised does not prove that they were not a Semitic people. Herodotus (ii.104) says that the Phoenicians acknowledged that they took this custom from the Egyptians, and the Arabs according to this passage were still uncircumcised, nor is it known that this was a custom of the Babylonians and Assyrians.

The Septuagint translators of the Pentateuch always render the name Phulistieim, and this also is found in 8 passages of Joshua and Judges, but in the later books the name is translated as meaning “strangers” throughout, because they were not the first inhabitants of Philistia…

In the Tell el-Amarna Letters we have also (about 1480 BC) letters from chiefs subject to Amenophis III at Joppa, Ashkelon, Gezer, Lachish and Keilah which show us a Semitic population, not only by the language of these letters, but also by the names of the writers. 

In the case of Ashkelon especially the Semitic rulers are found to have worshipped Dagon; and, though the name “Philistine” does not occur, the race was clearly the same found by the Assyrians in 800 BC in the land of Palastan beside the Great Sea. (ISBE)”

It must be remembered that in 1480 BCE the Exodus [1446 BCE] had not yet occurred… The Canaanites and Amorites were still in occupation and their language was identical with Hebrew and derived from the Akkadian, Sumerian and Amorite north – yet clearly they were not Semites.

It is thus of no surprise that the Hamitic Philistines used the Canaanite forms in communication with them…*

The Philistines were accomplished and feared warriors. In one particular battle in the Bible, they were able to put 30,000 chariots, 6000 horsemen and innumerable troops into the field (1 Samuel 13:5). And, along with the Ammonites, the Philistines were used directly by God to punish Israel (Judges 10:7). Other nations were also given the same task at various times, namely the Egyptians, Amorites, Zidonians, Maonites (from Moab and Ammon) and Amalekites (verses 11-12). However, the arrogance or pride of the Philistines, perhaps in their pre-eminent military power, was condemned in Zechariah 9:6.

In a number of scriptures we see King David accompanied by a bodyguard of Cherethites and Pelethites, which most commentators agree were clans of the Philistines… The ISBE article gives a view contrary to the accepted one regarding these people as mercenary bodyguards to a king of Israel.

“The real explanation of these various words for soldiers seems simple; and David – being a very popular king – is not likely to have needed foreign mercenaries; while the Philistines, whom he had so repeatedly smitten, were very unlikely to have formed trusty guards. The word “Cherethi” (kerethi) means a “smiter” or a “destroyer,” and “Pelethi” (pelethi) means “a swift one” or “pursuer.”… Evidently we have here two classes of troops – as among the Romans – the heavier regiment of “destroyers,” or “stabbers, “being armed with swords, daggers or spears; while the “swift ones” or “runners” pursued the defeated foe… The Pelethi or “pursuers” may have been “runners” on foot, but perhaps more probably mounted on camels, or on horses like the later Assyrians; for in the time of Solomon (I Kings 4:28) horses and riding camels were in use – the former for chariots.”

It seems unlikely that these are merely different classes of troops, as the nation (or people: Hebrew goyim) of Cherethites is mentioned prophetically in Zephaniah 2:5; and the taking of bodyguards from among other nations, including former enemies, is not as unusual as it might appear. As one example, Pharaoh Amenophis IV (Akhenaton) is said to have employed Syrians [Arameans], Libyans [Phut] and Nubians [Cush] in his bodyguard. In fact, kings were often in more danger from their own countrymen and close associates than from (former) foreign enemies. King Elah of Israel, for instance, was killed by his own chariot commander.

In 2 Samuel 15:18, the Cherethites and Pelethites were included with 600 Gittites from the Philistine city of Gath (the home of Goliath) in putting Solomon on King David’s mule and accompanying him as a declaration of his kingship. We thus have the remarkable situation of Cherethites and Pelethites remaining faithful to the ordained kings of Israel – both David and Solomon – in contrast to such men as the normally loyal priest Abiathar, who uncharacteristically sided with Adonijah against David’s approved successor, Solomon. This example may be typical of Gentiles brought into Israel displaying greater loyalty and valuing their ‘citizenship’ more highly than many native-born Israelites.

Ironically, the land of the Philistines was also seen as a place of refuge on several occasions [as Mexico is today. There is even an expression in the United States when on the run: “Gone South”]. Isaac went to Abimelech (meaning Father-king: apparently an official title, as with Pharaoh of Egypt) in Philistia when famine was threatening the land of Canaan (Genesis 26:1). Similarly, the Shunemite woman was sent to Philistia by Elisha to escape the seven-year famine in Israel (2 Kings 8:1-3). And even David, former scourge of the Philistines, sought refuge in the city of Gath when pursued by Saul (1 Samuel 27:1-2).

In 1 Samuel 6, we see that while they held the Ark of the Covenant, the Philistines were given the chance for salvation – but they did not take it’ – refer article: The Ark of God.

‘In consequence, they effectively invited the plagues of Egypt upon themselves… In the time of the Judges, Israel experienced 40 years of peace under Gideon (Judges 8:28) [from 1184 to 1144 BCE], followed by 40 years of grief under the Philistine yoke as purposed by God [lasting from 1086 to 1046 BCE], until Samson was raised up [during 1066 to 1046 BCE] to deliver Israel’ – Judges 13:1.

A selection of verses from the over two hundred references to the Philistines – and eleven for the Cherethites – including some of the principal and traditional enemies of the sons of Jacob.

Ezekiel 30:5

Bible in Basic English

‘Ethiopia [Cush] and Put [Pakistan] and Lud [Iran] and all the mixed people and Libya and the children of the land of the Cherethites will all be put to death with them by the sword.’

2 Samuel 15:18

English Standard Version

‘And all his servants passed by him, and all the Cherethites, and all the Pelethites, and all the six hundred Gittites who had followed [David] from Gath, passed on before the king.’

2 Samuel 8:12

English Standard Version

‘… from Edom, Moab, the Ammonites, the Philistines, Amalek, and from the spoil of Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah.’

Jeremiah 25:19-20

English Standard Version

‘Pharaoh king of Egypt, his servants, his officials, all his people, and all the mixed tribes among them; all the kings of the land of Uz [Aram] and all the kings of the land of the Philistines (Ashkelon, Gaza, Ekron, and the remnant of Ashdod)…’

Jeremiah 47:4

English Standard Version

‘… because of the day that is coming to destroy all the Philistines, to cut off from Tyre and Sidon every helper that remains. For the Lord is destroying the Philistines, the remnant of the coastland [or isle] of Caphtor.’

Ezekiel 25:16

English Standard Version

‘… therefore thus says the Lord God, Behold, I will stretch out my hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Cherethites and destroy the rest of the seacoast.’

Amos 1:8

New English Translation

“I will remove the ruler from Ashdod, the one who holds the royal scepter from Ashkelon. I will strike Ekron with my hand; the rest of the Philistines will also die.” The Sovereign Lord has spoken!

Zechariah 9:5-7

Expanded Bible

‘The city of Ashkelon will see it and be afraid. The people of Gaza will shake with fear, and the people of Ekron will lose hope. No king will be left in Gaza, and no one will live in Ashkelon anymore. Foreigners will live in Ashdod, and I will destroy the pride of the Philistines.

I will stop them from drinking blood and from eating forbidden food [a reference to the Giants who ruled amongst them and their cannibalistic habits]. Those left alive will belong to God. They will be leaders in Judah, and Ekron will become like the Jebusites.’

Joshua 11:22

English Standard Version

‘There was none of the Anakim [Elioud giants] left in the land of the people of Israel. Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod did some remain.’

Joshua 15:45-47

English Standard Version

‘Ekron, with its towns and its villages; from Ekron to the sea, all that were by the side of Ashdod, with their villages. Ashdod, its towns and its villages; Gaza, its towns and its villages; to the Brook of Egypt, and the Great Sea with its coastline.’

2 Samuel 1:20

English Standard Version

‘Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon, lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised exult.’

Jeremiah 47:5

New Century Version

‘The people from the city of Gaza will be sad and shave their heads. The people from the city of Ashkelon will be made silent. Those left alive from the valley, how long will you cut yourselves?’

Wall reliefs, such as in the temple of Karnak indicate a major influx of the Philistines arriving in southern Canaan from Crete possibly shortly after the fall of Troy, circa 1185 to 1180 BCE. The Judge Deborah witnessed the arrival of the Philistines, during her forty years of peace, beginning in 1184 BCE.

The Philistines established themselves in southern Israel’s coast, but did not start oppressing the tribe of Judah until 1086 BCE, the year of Samson’s birth. Samson battled the Philistines (Judges 13:1) from when he turned twenty until his death and the destruction of the main Philistine temple palace in 1046 BCE – Article: Samson.

It would not be until the time of David (1010-970 BCE) that the Philistines were fully subdued. By 604 BCE the Philistine state, after having been subjugated for centuries by Assyria, was finally destroyed by the Chaldean king, Nebuchadnezzar II from Babylon. After becoming part of the Neo-Babylonian Empire and its successor the Medo-Persian Empire, the Philistines seemingly vanish from the historical record by the late fifth century BCE.

Abraham and Chedorlaomer Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gerard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine :

‘Philistines in the time of Abraham are they Anachronistic?

The Philistines (pelisti) are mentioned for the first time in the Great inscription of Ramses III, year 8 (1185 BCE), among the list of Sea Peoples. Amenemope’s Onomasticon (c. 1100 BCE) then locates the Philistines (p-w-l-y-s3-ti) in Ahsdod, Ashkelon, Gaza, and [Ekron?] This massive influx of Philistines in the southern coastal plain of the Levant is mentioned 23 years before they annexed the land of Israel (1162-1122). According to Justinus (Philippics Histories XVIII:3:5), the Sidonians had already pushed back the Philistine ships one year prior to the Trojan War (1186 BCE). 

On the walls of Medinet Habu pirates from the Sea Peoples appear with plumed helmets while a Philistine chief is wearing a kind of beret. Emergence of the Philistines in Palestine is concomitant in Israelite and Egyptian chronologies. However, this synchronism is problematic because, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 2:23, Jeremiah 47:4, Amos 9:7), the Philistines who came from Crete (Caphtor) were already settled in this region (c. 2000 BCE) in the time of Abraham (Genesis 21:32-34). 

These Philistines associated with the Sea Peoples, were therefore installed in their ancient colonies before dominating the Israelites. If biblical research experts agree that the Philistines were from Crete (the system of their confederation of five tyrants inspired by Aegeans, for example, differed from surrounding Canaanite kingdoms), the Akkadian Kaptaru or Egyptian Keftiu, they consider however their mention in the Bible prior to Ramses III as an anachronism. In fact, the translation of the Egyptian word Keftiu, “those of Crete/Cretans” instead of “Crete”, not only solves many paradoxes in Egyptian data, but also confirms the great antiquity of the Philistines, which the Egyptians called, in accordance with their origin:

Cretans from islands in the middle of the [Mediterranean] sea (= the Minoans, at that time). 

The term Philistia appeared during the 22nd dynasty… The Philistine cities of Ashkelon and Ekron are already mentioned in the execration texts (dated c. 1950) and archaeologicalexcavations have shown that the Philistine city of Gerar (Tel Haror), cited in Genesis 26:1, flourished in the period 2000-1550 BCE. In addition, Crete was never a vassal of Egypt as was the case of southern Palestine (between 1530 and 1350 BCE). As noted Vercoutter the final w in the word Keftiu (k-f-ti-w) is abnormal (plural marker) but can be explained linguistically since the Akkadian name kaptaru “Crete” corresponds to the Egyptian k-f-ti-[r] with a disappearance of the final r. Thus keftiu can be translated as “those of Kaphto[r]” which refers to Cretans in an ethnic way, not geographic…

… the Treasury of Tod (discovered in Upper Egypt) enclosed in 4 chests bearing the cartouche of Pharaoh Amenemhat II (19011863) [1593-1558 BCE] contains 153 silver cups of Minoan manufacturing. These findings show that trade with Crete began prior to 2000 BCE [?] and mainly concerned the exchange of metal (and of precious materials). Mesopotamia imported mainly Cretan tin and Cypriot copper to make bronze while Egypt favoured Cretan vases including silver rhytons. 

A letter (EA 114) sent by Rib-Hadda, mayor of Byblos, to his suzerain, Pharaoh Amenhotep III (13831345) [877-840 BCE], confirms the crucial role of this port city, as well as the cities of Tyre, Beirut and Sidon, for ships transporting from Cyprus to Egypt. Thus the Egyptians of that time considered “those of Crete” (Keftiu), that they rubbed shoulders with in “Philistia”, were coming from these “islands in the middle of the sea (Crete)” with which they traded. Knossos must have been the main focus exporter, at least until 1370 BCE (date of the destruction of the palace at Knossos).

To sum up, until 1370 BCE, the Egyptians had relations with Cretans who were living in the islands in the middle of the sea (Minoans in Crete) mainly through those who were residing in their colony of Palestine (Philistines). This extraterritorial extension of Crete explains the paradoxes concerning the location of Keftiu and the representation of its inhabitants. 

The term Keftiu signifying Aegean figures (Minoans from Crete) in the tomb of Rekhmire (c. 1450 BCE) also appears in tombs of Menkheperreseneb (TT86) and Amenemhab (TT85), but here this term signifies Syrian figures (Philistines), some of which carry Aegean objects. The earliest iconographical hybrid with Aegean elements is known from the tomb of Puimre (TT39). The figure from the scene with four foreign princes in the tomb of Puimre shares elements in skin colour and hair style of Aegean figures and clothes of Syrian figures. Greek historians provide some information that illuminate the ethnic origin of the Philistines. 

According to Homer:

Amid the vast sea is the beautiful and fruitful island of Crete thousands of men live, and 90 cities are enclosed in this country, where people speak different languages. Amidst this country stands the city of Knossos, where Minos reigned for 9 years (Odyssey XIX:173-177).

Plato confirms this tradition on the primacy of Cretans (Laws I:1). A scholion on this passage says that the epithet of Zeus Pelasgikos was also read as Pelastikos.

Pelasgians were originally called Pelastians from which derives the name Philistines [Palestine]

(The words pelagos “high seas”, pelasgoi* (pélas-koi) “seamen” and pelastoi “philistines” are close). 

Chronological reconstruction of Philistia:

Around 2000 BCE, massive departure of Pelastians (former Philistines), a migratory ethnicity of Crete, towards Palestine (from whom it owes its name). Founding of sale counters at Ashkelon and Ekron (maybe also Ahsdod, Gaza and Gat[h]). “Philistia”is perceived by the Egyptians as a province of the Minoan kingdom. About 1930 BCE, Abraham met Abimelech [1878 BCE], a Canaanite [Philistine] king in Philistine territory (east of Gaza) and Phicol (Indo-European name), his army commander. Abimelech gave to Sarah 11 kilos of silver (Genesis 20:16), a rare metal in Palestine but abundant in Crete. Circa 1530 BCE [rather five hundred years later], expulsion of the Hyksos. “Philistia” is perceived as a Cretan principality that became vassal of Egypt. According to the biblical text, the Philistines were experts in the art of forging (Judges 1:18-19, 1 Samuel 13:19). 

Circa 1185 BCE, Philistines associated with Sea Peoples [had] revolted unsuccessfully against Egypt. Philistia is now called by the Egyptians according to its ethnic origin (Philistines) and not according to its geographical origin (Cretans). It became a province subordinate to Israel. The name Goliath was close to the Lydian name Alyattes and to the name written ‘LWT on an inscription (dated c. 900 BCE) found at Tel es-Safi (Gath?)’ – refer Goliath: Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

‘Circa 800 BCE, Adad-nerari III [811-783 BCE] attacked Philistia (Palastu) which became, despite several harshly repressed revolts, a vassal country of the Assyrian empire. In 604 BCE Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed Ashkelon, which would then be attached to Tyr. The province of Philistia was integrated into the Babylonian empire and lost all autonomy.

Archaeologists have long believed that the Aegeans representations in Egyptian tombs fell more under artistic convention than historical accuracy. This negative bias, as for biblical data on Crete and Philistines, has since been refuted by a thorough analysis of all these representations. The first trade links between Egypt and the Aegean world could even go up to 2400 BCE because there was discovered on the island of Cythera, a glass in marble on behalf of the Solar Temple Userkaf. These trips could possibly have been by sea because a boat with about twenty sailors on board (Egyptian and Phoenician) was represented on the walls of the mortuary temple of King Sahureat Abusir. As the history of Philistines is only beginning to emerge we cannot use its shortcomings to discredit the biblical data, which are further confirmed by archaeological discoveries.’

It isn’t imperative to understand the exact identity of the five (to eight) branches – specifically, the five principal cities – and who they equate to today. Prophetic verses are aimed at the ‘Philistines’, which in the main, refer to Mexico as the leading economic and military power of Spanish speaking Central America and South America.

The Philistines were frequent and dangerous enemies of the sons of Jacob. The exceptional warriors of Chereth and Pereth, with the Gittites of Gath are invariably grouped together.

Ashdod, Ashkelon and Gaza appear to be possibly preeminent, in that they are mentioned more often than either Gath and Ekron

Separating the Central and South American nations into potentially five groups, results in:

a. Argentina – with Uruguay and Chile.

Argentina’s population is 45,939,466 people. Argentina in English comes from Spanish, though the word is actually Italian, argentino meaning ‘[made] of silver’

b. the smaller nations of Central America and the Caribbean, with Guatemala being the largest with 18,618,630 people

c. Colombia – and Venezuela. Colombia has a population of 53,733,299 people

d. the nations southwards; with Peru the most prominent and sporting a population of 34,781,423 people and

e. Mexico, with a population of 132,565,494 people – the 11th highest in the world.

Ashkelon in Hebrew means: ‘I shall be weighed’ or ‘the Fire of Infamy.’

Ashdod means ‘powerful’ and

Gaza means ‘strong.’

Gath means ‘winepress’,

Chereth means ‘destroyer, smiter’ and ‘outcast’ while

Peleth means ‘pursuer, swift; or ‘separated.’

Ekron means ‘extermination, too pluck’ or ‘root up.’

These definitions are powerful and ominous. Assigning a name to a grouping is conjecture at this moment in time without further research.

What is significant, is that the combined population of these nineteen countries is approximately 420 million people. Their future allegiance with Tyre (Brazil) will prove to be a formidable economic and military bloc – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

This number is similar to the 450 million constituting Mizra’s offspring in North Africa and the Middle East.

Another similarity, is that as the Arab people are predominately Islamic, invariably exhibiting a high level of zealousness; the same can be said for their literal and figurative brothers in Roman Catholic Latin America, who are equally as ardent. 

Bob Thiel:

‘According to the detailed Pew multi-country survey in 2014, 69% of the Latin American population is Roman Catholic and 90% claim some type of Christianity (Religion in Latin America: Widespread Change in a Historically Catholic Region).’

We will turn our attention to the precursor people for the Philistine colony on the Canaan coast, the Minoans of Crete (or Caphtor); then, their descendants who considerably later converged on the Iberian Peninsula; their subsequent migration to the New World and lastly, the most influential nation incorporating descendants from Casluh (and Caphtor) amongst others: Mexico.

The Griffin Warrior: A Staggering Discovery from Ancient Greece, Philip Chrysopoulos, 2012 – emphasis mine: 

‘The discovery of the Griffin Warrior Tomb is one of the most fascinating archaeological findings as it seems to link the Minoan and the Mycenaean civilizations. On May 28, 2015, the archaeologists excavating in Pylos, southwestern Greece, discovered a Bronze Age tomb with a skeleton surrounded by rich artifacts, suggesting it belonged to an important man. The grave belongs to the Mycenaean Civilisation… 1750 BC – 1050 BC. 

Also, many of the objects found seem to be related to the Minoan Civilization, c. 3500 BC – 1100 BC. Overall archaeological research has shown that the Mycenaeans had reached most of the eastern Mediterranean, including ancient Egypt, the city-states of the Near East (today’s Turkey), and the islands of the Mediterranean. However, the strongest connection discovered is the one with the Minoan Civilization in the island of Crete. The Minoan Civilization was named after the legendary King Minos, but the islanders’ culture was very different from that found on mainland Greece.

The findings were jewelry, sealstones, carved ivories, combs, gold and silver goblets, and bronze weapons, hence the warrior suggestion. The artifacts included… Carnelian, amethyst, amber, and gold beads, four gold rings, many small, carved seals with etched depictions of combat, goddesses, reeds, altars, lions, and men jumping over bulls A plaque of ivory with a representation of a griffon in a rocky landscape…

Excavations on the Greek mainland and Crete have shown that, beginning around 1600 BC, the comparatively unsophisticated culture on the mainland underwent a transformation. “In time, there’s a blossoming of wealth and culture,” Stocker told UC Magazine. “Palaces are built, wealth accumulates, and power is consolidated in places such as Pylos and Mycenae.” For a few centuries, mainland Greeks seemed to imitate the Minoans. Pylos, an early Mycenaean power center, had buildings that resembled the large houses with ashlar masonry found at Knossos, Crete.

“There were probably four or five fancy mansions in Pylos at the time of the Griffin Warrior, all very Minoan in style,” Davis said. The mansions had painted walls, a type of artistry pioneered by the Minoans. For a time period, the Mycenaeans imported Minoan luxury goods and incorporated Minoan symbols, such as the bull, into their own art. Rich Mycenaeans were buried with Minoan luxury goods, while some other graves included locally produced Mycenaean objects, such as painted pottery, copies of Minoan originals. Mycenaean society also changed shape, becoming more hierarchical.’

Unknown source:

‘The best example of a palace society are the Minoans in Crete. According to Greek myth, Minos was a powerful ruler who lived in Crete in a palace so big that it is known as the Labyrinth. The Athenians had wronged him, so every nine years they had to send seven youths and seven beautiful maidens who were devoured by the Minotaur, a fearsome beast half man half bull.’

Samson, linked with the tribe of Dan judged Israel for 20 years. He died in 1046 BCE after 40 years of Philistine oppression. His death caused the killing of thousands of influential Philistines and it was the beginning of the sons of Jacob eventually overthrowing their rule – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

In Judges 16:23-30 ESV, we read of this event.

23 ‘Now the lords of the Philistines gathered to offer a great sacrifice to Dagon their god and to rejoice, and they said, “Our god has given Samson our enemy into our hand.” 24 And when the people saw him, they praised their god. For they said, “Our god has given our enemy into our hand, the ravager of our country, who has killed many of us.” 25 And when their hearts were merry, they said, “Call Samson, that he may entertain us.” So they called Samson out of the prison, and he entertained them. They made him stand between the pillars. 

26 And Samson said to the young man who held him by the hand, “Let me feel the pillars on which the house rests, that I may lean against them.” [for the Philistines had blinded Samson] 27 Now the house was full of men and women. All the lords of the Philistines were there, and on the roof there were about 3,000 men and women, who looked on while Samson entertained.

28 Then Samson called to the Lord and said, “O Lord God, please remember me and please strengthen me only this once, O God, that I may be avenged on the Philistines for my two eyes.”

29 And Samson grasped the two middle pillars on which the house rested, and he leaned his weight against them, his right hand on the one and his left hand on the other. 30 And Samson said, “Let me die with the Philistines.”

Then he bowed with all his strength, and the house fell upon the lords and upon all the people who were in it. So the dead whom he killed at his death were more than those whom he had killed during his life.’

This ‘house’ or temple palace had to be huge to hold so many people and this style of architecture was indicative of the Minoan civilisation located on Crete.

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:

‘The Minoan civilization was a Bronze Age Aegean civilisation on the island of Crete… flourishing from c. 3000 BC to c. 1450 BC until a late period of decline, finally ending around 1100 BC. It represents the first advanced civilization in Europe, leaving behind massive building complexes, tools, artwork, writing systems, and a massive network of trade. The civilization was rediscovered at the beginning of the 20th century through the work of British archaeologist Sir Arthur Evans.

The Minoan civilization is particularly notable for its large and elaborate palaces up to four stories high, featuring elaborate plumbing systems and decorated with frescoes. The most notable Minoan palace is that of Knossos, followed by that of Phaistos.

The Minoan period saw extensive trade between Crete, Aegean, and Mediterranean settlements, particularly the Near East. Through their traders and artists, the Minoans’ cultural influence reached beyond Crete to the Cyclades, the Old Kingdom of Egypt, copper-bearing Cyprus, Canaan and the Levantine coast and Anatolia [Asia Minor]. 

The Minoans primarily wrote in the Linear A… preceded by about a century by the Cretan hieroglyphs. It is unknown whether the language is Minoan, and its origin is debated. Although the hieroglyphs are often associated with the Egyptians, they also indicate a relationship to Mesopotamian writings. They… were used at the same time as Linear A (18th century BC). The hieroglyphs disappeared during the 17th century BC.’

Unknown source:

‘The Linear B tablets also reveal what may have been the most important activity of all: that is textile production’ – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

‘Knossos ran a massive textile industry in which every aspect of manufacture and production was centrally controlled from management to wool producing cloths, to the provision of raw materials and rations to skilled specialists in textile workshops. The workforce involved was substantial. A tablet in the Ashmolean Museum records monthly rations for women at Knossos and Phaistos, and the amount of grain issued would have sufficed for 500 women at each location. The tablets record some 100,000 sheep producing between 30 and 50 tons of wool annually for luxury textile manufacturers – this was large scale industry.’

Artwork from Minoan Crete depicting a bull and a double blade axe, prevalent in their culture.

Online Encyclopaedia: 

‘Bull-leaping is thought to have been a key ritual in the religion of the Minoan civilisation in… Crete… the bull was the subject of veneration and worship. Representation of the Bull at the palace of Knossos is a widespread symbol in the art and decoration of this archaeological site. The assumption, widely debated by scholars, is that the iconography represents a ritual sport [non-combatitive bull fighting] and/or performance in which human athletes – both male and female – literally vaulted over bulls as part of a ceremonial rite.’

‘This ritual is hypothesized to have consisted of an acrobatic leap over a bull, such that when the leaper grasped the bull’s horns, the bull would violently jerk its neck upwards, giving the leaper the momentum necessary to perform somersaults and other acrobatic tricks or stunts. The sport survives in modern France, usually with cows rather than bulls… in Spain, with bulls… and in Tamil Nadu, India with bulls…’

Bull vaulting – or leaping – artwork from Minoan Crete (above) and as it is performed today (below).

‘A running of the bulls… is an event that involves running in front of a small group of cattle, typically six but sometimes ten or more, that have been let loose on a course of a sectioned-off subset of a town’s streets, usually as part of a summertime festival. Particular breeds of cattle may be [favoured], such as the toro bravo in Spain… Bulls (non-castrated male cattle) are typically used in such events.’

Unknown source:

‘Bull fighting is very closely associated with Spain and can trace its origins back to 711 A.D [no coincidence that this was the peak of Al-Andalus and Moorish rule]. This is when the first bullfight took place in celebration for the crowning of King Alfonso VIII. It is very popular in Spain with several thousand Spaniards flocking to their local bull-ring each week. It is said that the total number of people watching bullfights in Spain reaches one million every year.’

Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:

‘Tauroctony is a modern name given to the central cult reliefs of the Roman Mithraic Mysteries. The imagery depicts Mithras killing a bull, hence the name tauroctony after the Greek word tauroktonos… A tauroctony is distinct from the cultic slaughter of a bull in ancient Rome called a taurobolium; the taurobolium was mainly part of the unrelated cult of Cybele.’

Britannica – emphasis mine:

‘Mithra, also spelled Mithras, Sanskrit Mitra, in ancient Indo-Iranian mythology, the god of light, whose cult spread from India in the east to as far west as Spain, Great Britain, and Germany. The first written mention of the Vedic Mitra dates to 1400 BC. His worship spread to Persia and, after the defeat of the Persians by Alexander the Great, throughout the Hellenic world. In the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, the cult of Mithra, carried and supported by the soldiers of the Roman Empire,was the chief rival to the newly developing religion of Christianity – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

According to myth, Mithra was born, bearing a torch and armed with a knife, beside a sacred stream [Holy Spirit] and under a sacred tree [in the Garden of Eden], a child of the earth itself. He soon rode, and later killed, the life-giving cosmic bull [the Storm god, Baal Hadad], whose blood fertilizes all vegetation [a god who oversaw the creation/evolution of life on the Earth]. Mithra’s slaying of the bull was a popular subject of Hellenic art and became the prototype for a bull-slaying ritual of fertility in the Mithraic cult. As god of light [a light bringer], Mithra was associated with the Greek sun god, Helios, and the Roman Sol Invictus [a god who rules life on Earth].’

Argentina (first flag) and Uruguay (second flag) have the golden sun god of May on their flags. The month of May’s name comes from the Italian Goddess of Spring: Maia. She was the wife of Vulcan (the Greek god Zeus). Maia is the eldest of the seven sisters, which comprise the Pleiades constellation – Articles: The Pyramid Perplexity; and 42.’

Maia is a nymph and the daughter of Atlas – her name means great one.

The month of May begins in the sign of Taurus the Bull.

Two common sayings describing bulls, include: being ‘bull headed’; and like ‘a bull in a china shop’.

These have similarity with the definitions for being a Cretan or a Philistine.

As well as ‘Two bulls do not live in the same shade’, a Swahili Proverb reminiscent of a Mexican standoff; where there are no winners… and ‘Talking about bulls is not the same as facing them in the ring’ – a Mexican Proverb. 

With reference to the Pleiades, it is an asterism in the Taurus the Bull constellation, adjacent to Orion and contain stars visible in the night sky. The Pleiades is well known as the Seven Sisters and Orion as the Great Hunter. 

Intriguingly, the Bible deems the Pleiades and Orion important enough to mention them thrice.

Job 38:31-33

English Standard Version

31 “Can you bind* the chains [H4576 ma’adannah – (sweet) influence] of the Pleiades or loose the cords [belt] of Orion? [Job 9:9]

32  Can you lead forth the Mazzaroth in their season [the 12 signs of the Zodiac and their 36 associated constellations], or can you guide the Bear [Ursa Major constellation] with its children? [Arcturus, a red giant star, 4th brightest in the sky, in the Bootes (the herdsman) constellation westwards of Ursa Major]

33 Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you establish their rule [H4896 mishtar – dominion, authority] on the earth?

Amos 5:8

English Standard Version

‘He who made the Pleiades [the seven sisters] and Orion [the great hunter], and turns deep darkness into the morning and darkens the day into night, who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out on the surface of the earth, the Lord is his name…’

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-52.png

The Belt of Orion has been written about copiously since the three stars, Zeta, Epsilon and Delta were discovered to be apparently (yet inaccurately) in the same alignment as the three pyramids of the Giza complex – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Inside the Great Pyramid there are four internal shafts originating from the Kings Gallery and the Queens Gallery which point to four different constellations.

There is reason to consider that the constellations of Orion to the South and Draco in the North are linked to the ancestral homes respectively of the Sons of God and of the fallen Angels; the progenitors of the Nephilim – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.

Bible Science forum, Josh Hartnett – emphasis mine:

‘… [the]… Pleiades as a group of seven stars… [are] visible to the naked eye as seven bright, blue-white stars, also called the Seven Sisters. Modern astronomy has shown that the constituent stars of Pleiades are expected to dissociate within the next 250 million years, and hence Pleiades is an open or unbound* cluster. That is, the motions and velocities of its constituent objects are such that the gravitational forces between them are not sufficient to hold it together (as a recognizable cluster) over the longer term. A ‘bound’ cluster, by contrast, can be shown to still be a recognizable grouping even if its motions are projected forward by a billion years or so. 

Modern astronomy has revealed that more than 500 mostly faint stars belong to the Pleiades star cluster… Pleiades is a large but expanding, or unbound, cluster of stars that are all just passing the same region of space at the same time with the same motion. What was originally thought to be bound is unbound and what was thought to be unbound is bound (given current astrophysical definitions).

The text in Job 38:31, 32 describe real astronomical bodies. God is speaking to Job in practical terms about [actual] objects that Job can see (or has seen) and He is expecting Job to give Him immediate answers’ – refer Article: Job.

‘In the past, some have used this passage in Job to claim biblical accuracy in relation to the universe… it was argued that God was asking Job if he can do the same as God, while now we could turn the argument around and suggest that God is asking Job if he can undo what God has done…’

The veneration of the Bull was so prevalent and dominant in the second millennium BCE, that the sons of Jacob incredibly, made an idol of a golden calf soon after they had been miraculously delivered from bondage in Egypt. Staggeringly, over five hundred years later, when Israel and Judah split into two kingdoms after King Solomon’s reign, golden calfs were erected again – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Exodus 32:1-8, 35

English Standard Version

‘When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves together to Aaron and said to him, “Up, make us gods who shall go before us. As for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” 2 So Aaron said to them, “Take off the rings of gold that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off the rings of gold that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron. 

4 And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool [H2747 cheret – ‘a stylus, chisel’] and made a golden [H4541 maccekah – ‘molten metal, cast image’] calf [H5695 egel – ‘bull-calf, bullock, a steer’ a male calf* nearly grown].

And they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” 5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said,”Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord” – which lord?

6 ‘And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. 7 And the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, for your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves. 8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way that I commanded them. They have made for themselves a golden calf [the Sun god, Ra] and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it and said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!”

19 And as soon as he came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, Moses’ anger burned hot, and he threw the tablets out of his hands and broke them at the foot of the mountain. 20 He took the calf that they had made and burned it with fire and ground it to powder and scattered it on the water and made the people of Israel drink it’ – refer article: The Ark of God.

21 ‘And Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought such a great sin upon them?” 22 And Aaron said, “Let not the anger of my lord burn hot. You know the people, that they are set on evil. 24 So I said to them, ‘Let any who have gold take it off.’ So they gave it to me, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf.” 

35 Then the Lord sent a plague on the people, because they made the calf, the one that Aaron made.’

This is quite a scenario. There were people who were either oblivious or chose to ignore the leadership of Moses and how the Eternal was working through him, or the fact that the Creator had delivered the Israelites from Egypt through a series of ten spectacular miraculous plagues and then again in a mind boggling act of parting the Red Sea to save them; afterwards crashing down thousands of tons of water to kill their enemies. The very people who had cruelly enslaved them for one hundred and forty-seven years – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? and Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.

Moses’s elder brother Aaron is a revelation; the man chosen to found the Levitical Priesthood for the ancient Israelites – temporarily substituting the perpetual Melchizedek Order. Aaron put his artistic ability to use, fashioning the calf of gold and then he used his carpentry skills to build an altar to a pagan, false god. Aaron ironically next blames the people for being set on evil. And finally how does he think he can fool Moses, with: ‘I threw [the gold] into the fire, and out came this calf’ line. Miracles had been plenteous, so it was worth a shot it would seem.

The Creator reveals His wrath and disgust not for the last time, when He says to Moses that they are ‘your people, whom you brought up out of… Egypt.’ It is not surprising Moses lost his temper – ‘his anger burned hot’ – forgetting himself and dares to smash the tablets of the Law, whom the Creator had only just given him; the very One who has also delivered Moses and everyone that is partying, giving veneration to a god of gold which has no life, no power and for deeds not done, not worthy of any honour. As an after thought, the Creator inflicts a plague. 

It wasn’t a good start for the fledgling relationship between the Eternal and the sons of Jacob and the tempestuousness of the marriage covenant continued, so that eventually the Creator divorced his chosen people and sent them into captivity some seven hundred years later for the Kingdom of Israel, and eight hundred and fifty years later for the Kingdom of Judah.

1 Kings 12:27-32

English Standard Version

27 ‘If this people go up to offer sacrifices in the temple of the Lord at Jerusalem, then the heart of this people will turn again to their lord, to Rehoboam king of Judah, and they will kill me and return to Rehoboam king of Judah.” 28 So the king took counsel [not good or wise counsel] and made two calves of gold. And he said to the people, “You have gone up to Jerusalem long enough. Behold your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.” 29 And he set one in Bethel [in the south], and the other he put in Dan [in the north].

30 Then this thing became a sin, for the people went as far as Dan to be before one. 31 He also made temples on high places and appointed priests from among all the people, who were not of the Levites. 32 And Jeroboam appointed a feast on the fifteenth day [the sabbath] of the eighth month [October/November] in similitude of the feast [of Tabernacles] that was observed in Judah [during the seventh month, September/October], and he offered sacrifices on the altar. So he did in Bethel, sacrificing to the calves that he made. And he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places that he had made.’

We will return to the incredible irony of an appointed feast in the eighth month later – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraimthe Birthright Tribes.

The weakness of Jeroboam is sad in that he established a different feast, illegal temples and false gods so as to retain his new position as King of Israel and not risk losing his power to Rehoboam, the King of Judah and Solomon’s son.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 228, 585-586 – emphasis mine:

‘The golden calf altercation communicates more significance than the superficial text delivers, explicating why God responded the way He did. The idol was part of the bull cult of Canaan… and the mysticism of [evil] Enoch. The golden calf would not have been a calf but rather a bull… Exodus describes the idol as a calf to denigrate it… a bull, the aboriginal symbol or potency. Others… conclude the golden calf was indeed a calf* and base this on the Apis/Osiris bull cult of ancient Egypt… Isis bore from her womb a calf that died and later became Osiris. The Apis bull was part of Horus-king tradition…’ – Article: Belphegor.

‘The bull from Egypt’s rival bull cult was a symbol of power and defiance… the skill set required for Aaron to manufacture the golden calf came from Jethro… these skills were derived from his Kenite background that allegedly dated back to Tubal-Cain and Cain, the master antediluvian metallurgists. Baal and related deities were by and large portrayed as mating bulls symbolising fertility… Early depictions of Molech portrayed him to be a man with a bull’s head… [with a] striking similarity between Molech… and the bull of Minos… on Crete’ – Article: Na’amah.

In the Mithras Symbolism [observe earlier photo above]

the Bull is Taurus;

the Dog is Canis Major, the Greater Dog star, Sirius;

the Snake is Hydra and Serpens from Draco and

the Scorpion is Scorpius or scorpio.

Coincidentally, all are represented in the shaft positions within the Great Pyramid.

Sun – Bull Cult: English Words Ox, Cow and Latin Taurus… derive from Sumerian Turkish, Mehmet Kurtkaya, 2019 – emphasis mine:

‘Imagine how important it was for the people living in the region to have domesticated these big animals. Aurochs [wild bulls] are the biggest animals ever domesticated apart from the elephant. There is a dispute whether elephants are [truly] domesticated or not. Moreover, cattle and [oxen were] not only a symbol of richness, it meant richness. Domestication of… cattle was a major breakthrough that provided the opportunity for people to rely less on game hunting. Cattle provided them milk, meat and blood. Their hides were used for clothing, their [dung] as fuel, and their bones as tools.’

Wild Aurochs painted on the walls of Lascaux Caves, France.

‘Gobeklitepe was deliberately buried with dirt and stones some 10,000 years ago. The reason is still unknown’ – refer Gobekli Tepe, article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

“Many animals have been totem animals for tens of thousands of years. These animals were representative of the group/tribe of people and their beliefs. Cult animals were symbols. Even today, sports teams have animal mascots… maybe remnants from ancient periods.

At the very least, associating a team with an animal is a major coincidence with ancient practices.”

[The] Bull is the oldest and most prominent [animal worshiped] in early agricultural societies. Latest genetics research revealed that [the] farming revolution… started in and around the Taurus mountains in Southeast Turkey and spread West to Europe and East to Iran from there. In fact, our modern wheat was first domesticated in Alacadag (Alaca mountain), near Gobeklitepe!’ – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

‘We know that bulls are specially portrayed by the hunter gatherers of Gobeklitepe. Not too far from Gobeklitepe, neolithic site of Catalhoyuk had a bull cult about 8000 years ago. We find a bull cult in the indigenous Hatti civilization in Turkey (Anatolia) some 4500 years ago. And in Sumer (starting around 4000 BC), bulls represented sun and sky gods, their highest gods.

So, there is a continuity of [the] bull cult for civilizations in Turkey and Mesopotamia for thousands of years. The fact that Gobeklitepe is located on a hill is an indication of a very important aspect of human beliefs some 12,000 years ago: sky and sun worship. This is in line with the idea of [a] sacred mountain found in Shamanistic beliefs from Siberia. In Sumer, we find Ekur, [a] sacred mountain house where gods resided, very similar to Olympos Mountain in Ancient Greece’ – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

From Ankara Medeniyetler Muzesi. Bull Cult from Catalhuyuk, a famous pre-pottery neolithic archeological site in Central Turkey 9,500-6,500 BP.

‘Egyptian Pyramids are the representations of the same beliefs based on sacred mountains. In Sumerian, “E” means house and the word “kur” represents a cosmic mountain, in addition to being the term for mountain: e+kur = Ekur. “Kur” is also the stem for the Turkish word “kurgan”, the burial mound found all over Eurasia, north Africa and [the] Americas. It also means the underworld.

“Gin” is [a] Sumerian word for mountain. “Gan” is gate as in gate to heaven. Kur+gan = Kurgan means “underworld mountain”. Some of the highest Sumerian gods, Enlil and Enki, who resided in Ekur were thought to have brought agriculture and animal husbandry to humans.

In Turkey, Mesopotamia and the surrounding regions, the bull was commonly associated with [the] sun and later [the] storm gods. Ugur (Hurrian) religious mountain sanctuaries Musasir, Kumme, Ukku and Subria located along the Taurus mountains in Southeastern Turkey, were considered as the most important centers of the Hurrian weather god Teshub (similar to Hatti Taru).

Hence, the name of the mountain ranges in Southern Turkey is the same as the word for Bull, [the] symbol animal of the storm god… They were first found in Sumer, Akkadian, Assyrian, and other ancient Near Eastern societies including the later Urartu kingdom, and Persia, Iran’ – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

‘Winged animal deities continued to be used elsewhere, for example in Ancient [Greece] such as the Pegasus, with [a] horse instead of the bull. [The] Cretan Minotaur is the half man-half bull deity.

Gold was the most important precious metal for ancient people, and it still is, many thousands of years later’ – Article: The Ark of God.

Sumerians used gold and lapis lazuli not only as [an] ornament but more so, for religious reasons. Gold represented the sun, and lapis lazuli the sky and the heavens. However, there was no lapis lazuli nor gold mines in Sumer or in the immediate vicinity. Moreover, their knowledge and their advanced workmanship of gold proves they worked with gold before migrating to Sumer. These are among the many evidences indicating the origins of the Sumerian people. For gold, Iran, Turkey, [and the] Indus Valley civilization are the potential sources but for lapis lazuli, there is only one source: Afghanistan!

All of this clearly point[s] at [the] Northeast’ – the Himalayan Mountains: refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla‘as the direction of their migration

Gold and Lapis Lazuli were not the only ones, they also imported silver which they used as money, as well as carnelian and chlorite.

Sun Language Theory states that languages were born out of religious rituals, specifically sun [sky] worship. Taurus is the word used for bull in Latin and similar words are found in other Indo-European languages that prove a single origin for the word. Taurus is also the name of the constellation deriving from the word for bull. Moreover, Taurus is the name of the mountain ranges extending from Southwest to Southeast Turkey! 

… The chapter “Gat (Gut) / Hatti / Hittite civilizations” [from] my book on Sumerian Turks: 

“How many people know that Taurus, the name of the zodiac sign, derives from a rather unknown civilization that lived in Turkey in ancient times? The bull was commonly the symbol and depiction of ancient Near Eastern storm gods, Taru/Taur is [the] Gat/Hatti bull cult from some 5,000 years ago. In Turkmenistan, Sumer, Anatolia, Ancient Greece and elsewhere in many corners of Eurasia we find: Taurus.” 

Taru was the name of the Hatti storm god and also the basis of Hittite Tarhunz, Etruscan Tarkan, similar in function to Greek Zeus, Indian Indra, Roman Jupiter and other Indo-European gods as well as Hurrian Teshub. In Greek mythology, many deities had an animal form. They are called theriomorphic gods. Note the relation of the Ancient Greek word “Theri” meaning “wild beast” to the word for Hatti god Taru and the word for bull “Taurus”. 

In “Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical”, late German Professor Walter Burkert explains [the] bull god in Greek mythology and shows that major Greek gods, Zeus, Dionysus, and Poseidon among others were at times associated with the bull. In Kyzikos, founded by the Pelasgians [Philistines] / Etruscans, Dyonisus has a tauromorphic cult image.

Poseidon, the god of the sea, was associated with either a horse or a bull. Zeus, in the form of a bull, abducted Europa and brought her to Crete. It is very likely that the Latin word for sea “Mare” derives from [the] Sumerian word for bull “Amar”… and this is due to the role of [the] bull in Greek mythology! Indian god Nandi is associated with the bull. Indra also is often mentioned as a bull. In Egypt, the bull was worshiped as Apis, and representative of the Sun god Ra. In Irish mythology, the hero Cu Chulainn appears in [the] Ulster cycle and Scottish folklore. Donn Cuailnge the bull, appears in Tain Bo Cuailnge, a legendary tale from Early Irish mythology.

From [a] Wikipedia article for “Cu Chulainn”.

“Cu Chulainn shows striking similarities to the legendary Persian hero Rostam, as well as to the Germanic Lay of Hildebrand and the labours of the Greek epic hero Heracles, suggesting a common Indo-European origin, but lacking in linguistic, anthropological and archaeological material.” 

“Lacking linguistic material”, wrong! And there is quite a lot of groundbreaking genetic studies involving the peopling of Europe and the British Isles that supports the connection. As a side note, Rostam or Rustam is the legendary hero in Shahname and Iranian mythology. Irish mythological hero Cu Chulainn sounds the same as Sumerian divine bull Gugalanna!

This is not a coincidence and points at the Sumerian Turkish origins of the Irish and English language and civilization.

Turkish word “okuz”… sounds and means exactly [the] same thing as the English word “ox”. In Hungarian, the word for “ox” is “okor”. It is very telling that Turkish “okuz” which is connected to the word “Oguz” Turkish has an “r” counterpart in Hungarian, as “okor”.

There are currently two versions of Turkish, one is Ogur Turkish the older one, and Oguz the newer one marked by an r-z conversion and some other features. This is additional evidence for [a] Hungarian connection to ancient Ogur Turkish which includes Sumerian.

That’s why Hungarian matches Sumerian so well.’

We will return to the pivotal Hungarian, Turkish and Sumerian language link – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XVIII – Elam & Turkey.

The tradition of keeping alive the veneration of the bull is highly visible in Spain, where a portion of the descendants of Casluh (and Caphtor) once dwelt – yet where the descendants of Aram* still do – Chapter XXXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

This is a good example of a previous people leaving behind traditions, language, names and so forth which make it look like they are the one-and-the-same people, but actually they are not, even if related. We will encounter a similar scenario with the Vikings who migrated from Scandinavia into Britain – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes

The exodus of peoples from Spain to New Spain – similar to the migration of people from Britain and Ireland to North America – was a staggering relocation of peoples. The people remaining in Old Spain are not Philistines – figuratively, geographically or prophetically. We will confirm that they are descended primarily from the line of Shem* and not Ham, Mizra, Casluh (or Caphtor) – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

While the Spanish were still a recipient of the vast wealth derived from an enormous empire in the Americas, they were not the exact same ethnic stock as the migrant peoples in the America’s; even though in large part related.

Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:

‘The weakening of the Western Roman Empire’s jurisdiction in [Roman] Hispania began in 409, when the Germanic Suebi [or Suevi] and Vandals, together with the Sarmation Alans entered the peninsula at the invitation of a Roman usurper. These tribes had crossed the Rhine in early 407 and ravaged Gaul [modern France]. 

The Suebi established a kingdom in what is today modern Galicia and northern Portugal, whereas the Vandals established themselves in southern Spain by 420 before crossing over to North Africa in 429 and taking Carthage in 439.

The Byzantines established an occidental province, Spania, in the south, with the intention of reviving Roman rule throughout Iberia. Eventually, however, Hispania was reunited under Visigothic rule. These Visigoths or Western Goths, after sacking Rome under the leadership of Alaric (410), turned towards the Iberian Peninsula with Athaulf for their leader, and occupied the northeastern portion. Wallia extended his rule over most of the peninsula, keeping the Suebians shut up in Galicia.

Theodoric I took part, with the Romans and Franks, in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains where Atilla was routed. Euric (466), who put an end to the last remnants of Roman power in the peninsula, may be considered the first monarch of Spain, though the Suebians still maintained their independence in Galicia. Euric was also the first king to give written laws to the Visigoths. In the following reigns the Catholic kings of France assumed the role of protectors of the Hispano-Roman Catholics against the Arianism* of the Visigoths…’

The considerable information presented, essentially provides the names of the peoples who either remained in the Iberian Peninsula and Hispania, forming the eventual nations of Spain and Portugal and those Hispanics who departed for the New World and New Spain.

We will discover that the Visigoths were the nucleus of people who remained in Spain;

while the Suebians were split between those people who migrated to Brazil and those who remained to form the modern nation of Portugal.

Whereas, the Vandals and Alans principally represent the Philistine peoples descended from Aram and who had been migrating from the Canaanite coast and through Europe for the past nearly one thousand years.

The one people not mentioned are the Moors, who represent the other integral branch of Philistine peoples descended from Casluh and in turn, Caphtor.

The misnomer is that the Moors were ‘Black’ or ‘dark’ skinned, yet this appellation was to distinguish the Moors from lighter skinned Europeans. Just as Sicilians were once labelled as black on census forms to segregate them from lighter skinned northern Italians.

The Moors were the ancestors of Berbers and certain Arabs. This is a vital point to remember as the paternal Haplogroups of Latin American men indicate their heritage as either being a ‘Philistine’ descended from Aram (and therefore Shem); or from Casluh, Caphtor and Mizra (and therefore Ham).

Returning to the Arianism held by the Visigoths.

The Trinitarian view of the Godhead was first imposed on Christianity in 325 CE at the Council of Nicaea, with an initial Binitarian definition and then again in 381 CE, at the Council of Constantinople, with the addition of the Holy ‘Ghost’ as a person. It is a confusing doctrine for it is concocted by men in error and not drawn from the simplicity of the scriptures or founded in truth. This new view – for Christianity, though actually an ancient idea – of the Godhead is, in paraphrased terms: 

A unity of a singular Deity, composed of three co-eternal, distinct identities. 

The doctrine is convoluted and serpentine and cannot be supported by the Bible, hard as people endeavour to try. It willingly misinterprets and mis-understands the uniqueness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The concept of a triune of gods was not new. A Queen of Heaven and Mother of God reach back into time, way farther than the beginning of humankind. This is why Christ’s mother Mary, has been elevated to Mother of God status – the real Trinity of the Universal Church – hidden in plain sight, in the shadow of the Trinity doctrine, but no less foisted on unsuspecting believers – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius

Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz were a prominent triad in ancient Babylon. In Egypt it was Osiris, Isis and Horus; and in Mesopotamia, Anu, Enlil and Ea – or Enki. Hinduism has Brahma, Shivu and Vishnu; and even Plato taught of an Unknown Father, a Logos and a World Soul. In Greece, there was Zeus, Athena and Apollo – or Zeus, Poseidon and Pluto – and in Rome, the most well known trio of Jupiter, Juno and Minerva; though just one triad of a myriad believed by the ancient Romans – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

There is the triad of Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Manat in the time of Mohammed, referenced in Surah 53:19-22; the Lugus – Esus, Toutatis and Taranis – in Celtic mythology; and the Saha Realm in Mahayana Buddhism – Shakyamuni, Avalokitesvara and Ksitigarbha. As well as the Three Pure Ones of Taoism; Fu, Lu and Shou; and the Hooded Spirits of the Gauls, to name literally just a few.

Let no one persuade the reader that the Trinity is unique to Christianity, that it is Bible based or that it was taught by Christ and the apostles in the early church. The Arian* view, upheld by the Goths for centuries, simply held that the Holy Spirit and Christ were not God, like the Father. Rather, the Father is the one true God; Christ his begotten, created son; and the Holy Spirit, God’s divine essence and power with which He simultaneously creates and upholds the creation – 1 Timothy 1:17; Revelation 3:14; Acts 1:8.

Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:

‘The name Alan is an Iranian dialectal form of Aryan.

Having migrated westwards [from Central Asia] and [becoming] dominant among the Sarmations [the future Slavs] living between the Don River and the Caspian Sea… The Alans are mentioned in the Vologases inscription which reads that Vologeses I, the Parthian king between around 51 and 78 AD, in the 11th year of his reign (62 AD), battled Kuluk, king of the Alani. The 1st century AD Jewish historian Josephus supplements this inscription. Josephus reports in the Jewish Wars (book 7, chapter 7.4) how Alans (whom he calls a “Scythian” tribe) living near the Sea of Azoz crossed the Iron Gates for plunder (72 AD) and defeated the armies of Pacorus, King of Media, and Tiridates King of Armenia, two brothers of Vologese I.’

There are three points of interest.

First, the old foes Israel and the Philistines were fighting each other once more. A different time, a different place and with different names but still the same peoples; with the duality of living near each other and the same requirement to fight.

Second, we will study the Parthians and investigate their identity as sons of Jacob – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

For it is no coincidence that the Mexican Philistines dwell adjacent to the United States of America today, acting one half, friendly economic ally and one half troublesome rival neighbour – with twin detrimental society changing influences of the drug trade on one hand and human traffic of some two thousand illegal immigrants a day, entering the United States on the other (Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

Third, the Alan Philistines holding to type and plundering. We will repeatedly confirm that the Vandals and Alans were masters of looting and pillage warfare.

Encyclopaedia:

‘In 135 AD, the Alans made a huge raid into Asia Minor via the Caucasus, ravaging Media and Armenia. They were eventually driven back by Arrian the governor of Cappadocia, who wrote a detailed report (Ektaxis kata Alanoon or ‘War Against the Alans’) that is a major source for studying Roman military tactics. 

From 215 to 250 AD, the Germanic Goths expanded south-eastwards and broke the Alan dominance on the Pontic Steppe. The Alans however seem to have had a significant influence on Gothic culture, who became excellent horsemen and adopted the Alanic animal style art. After the Gothic entry to the steppe, many of the Alans seem to have retreated eastwards towards the Don, where they seem to have established contacts with the Huns. Ammianus writes that the Alans were “somewhat like the Huns, but in their manner of life and their habits they are less savage.” Jordanes contrasted them with the Huns, noting that the Alans “were their equals in battle, but unlike them in their civilisation, manners and appearance” – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. 

‘Around 370, according to Ammianus, the peaceful relations between the Alans and Huns were broken, after the Huns attacked the Don Alans, killing many of them and establishing an alliance with the survivors. These Alans successfully invaded the Goths in 375 together with the Huns. They subsequently accompanied the Huns in their westward expansion. Following the Hunnic invasion in 370, other Alans… migrated westward. 

As the Roman Empire… [declined] the Alans split into various groups; some fought for the Romans while others joined the Huns, Visigoths [Spain] or Ostrogoths [Eastern Goths, Southern Italy and Greece]. A portion of the western Alans joined the Vandals and Suebi in their invasion of Roman Gaul…’

The Alans joined their kin, the Vandals and the Visigoths; with all entering Spain and the Ostrogoths in Italy. Many Italians migrated to the New World, especially to Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. These Italians, are principally a different people to the Italians in Italy, just as the Spanish remaining in Spain are not the same as the Hispanics who migrated to the America’s – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Encyclopaedia:

‘In 406 the Vandals advanced from Pannonia travelling west along the Danube without much difficulty, but when they reached the Rhine, they met resistance from the Franks, who populated and controlled Romanized regions in northern Gaul. Twenty thousand Vandals, including [their leader] Godigisel… died in the resulting battle… The Alan king Respendial saved the day for the Vandals in an armed encounter with the Franks at the crossing of the Rhine on December 31, 406. The Vandals crossed the Rhine, probably while it was frozen, to invade Gaul, which they devastated terribly. Under Godigisel’s son Gunderic, the Vandals plundered their way westward and southward through Aquitaine.

Following the fortunes of the Vandals and Suebi into the Iberian Peninsula (Hispania, comprising modern Portugal and Spain) in 409, the Alans led by Respendial settled in the provinces of Lusitania [west] and Cartaginensis. The Kingdom of the Alans was among the first Barbarian kingdoms to be founded. The Siling Vandals settled in Baetica [south], the Suebi in coastal Gallaecia, and the Asding Vandals in the rest of Gallaecia.

In 418 (or 426 according to some authors), the Alan king, Attaces, was killed in battle against the Visigoths, and this branch of the Alans subsequently appealed to the Asding Vandal king Gunderic to accept the Alan crown. Although some of these Alans are thought to have remained in Iberia, most went to North Africa [crossing the Strait of Gibraltar] with the Vandals in 429. Later the rulers of the Vandal Kingdom in North Africa styled themselves Rex Wandalorum et Alanorum (“King of the Vandals and Alans”).

There are some vestiges of the Alans in Portugal, namely in Alenquer (whose name may be Germanic for the Temple of the Alans, from “Alan Kerk”, and whose castle may have been established by them; the Alaunt is still represented in that city’s coat of arms), in the construction of the castles of Torres, Vedras and Almourol and in the city walls of Lisbon, where vestiges of their presence may be found under the foundations of the Church of Santa Luzia.

In 422 Gunderic decisively defeated a Roman-Suebi-Gothic coalition… For the next five years… Gunderic created widespread havoc in the western Mediterranean. In 425, the Vandals pillaged… Hispania and Mauritania, sacking Carthago Spartaria (Cartagena) and Hispalis (Seville)… 

The capture of the maritime city of Carthago Spartaria enabled the Vandals to engage in widespread naval activities. In 428 Gunderic… died… He was succeeded by his half-brother Genseric who although he was illegitimate (his mother was a Roman slave) had held a prominent position at the Vandal court, rising to the throne unchallenged.’

Map of the Vandal and Alan Kingdom at the height of their power. Notice the geography of their lands. Coasts and isles as in keeping with their preference for these types of regions, evidenced by the Minoan Island of Crete and the Philistine coast in South-west Canaan.

Encyclopaedia:

‘Genseric is often regarded by historians as the most able barbarian leader of the Migration Period… he probably contributed more to the destruction of Rome than any of his contemporaries. It is possible that the name Al-Andalus (and its derivative Andalasia) is derived from the Arabic adoption of the name of the Vandals.

The Vandals under Genseric (also known as Geiseric) crossed to Africa in 429. Although numbers are unknown and some historians debate the validity of estimates, based on Procopius’ assertion that the Vandals and Alans numbered 80,000 when they moved to North Africa… Genseric seized Carthage on October 19 [in 439 CE]. The city was captured without a fight; the Vandals entered the city while most of the inhabitants were attending the races at the hippodrome. Genseric made it his capital, and… he built his kingdom into a powerful state.

The impression given by ancient sources… was that the Vandal take-over of Carthage and North Africa led to widespread destruction. However, recent archaeological investigations have challenged this assertion. Although Carthage’s Odeon was destroyed, the street pattern remained the same and some public buildings were renovated. The political centre of Carthage was the Byrsa Hill. New industrial centres emerged within towns during this period. Historian Andy Merrills uses the large amounts of African Red Slip ware discovered across the Mediterranean dating from the Vandal period of North Africa to challenge the assumption that the Vandal rule of North Africa was a time of economic instability.

During the next thirty-five years, with a large fleet, Genseric looted the coasts of the Eastern and Western Empires. Vandal activity in the Mediterranean was so substantial that the sea’s name in Old English was Wendelsæ (i.e. Sea of the Vandals). After Atilla the Hun’s death, however, the Romans could afford to turn their attention back to the Vandals, who were in control of some of the richest lands of their former empire. In an effort to bring the Vandals into the fold of the Empire, Valentinian III offered his daughter’s hand in marriage to Genseric’s son. Before this treaty could be carried out, however, politics again played a crucial part in the blunders of Rome.

Petronius Maximus killed Valentinain III and claimed the Western throne. Diplomacy between the two factions broke down, and in 455 with a letter from the Empress Licinia Eudoxia, begging Genseric’s son to rescue her, the Vandals took Rome, along with the Empress and her daughters Eudocia and Placidia… on 2 June 455, Pope Leo the Great received Genseric and implored him to abstain from murder and destruction by fire, and to be satisfied with pillage.

Whether the pope’s influence saved Rome is, however, questioned. The Vandals departed with countless valuables. Eudoxia and her daughter Eudocia were taken to North Africa. As a result of the Vandal sack of Rome and piracy in the Mediterranean, it became important to the Roman Empire to destroy the Vandal kingdom. In 460, Malorain launched an expedition against the Vandals, but was defeated at the battle of Cartagena.

In 468 the Western and Eastern Roman empires launched an enormous expedition against the Vandals under the command of Basiliscus, which reportedly was composed of 100,000 soldiers and 1,000 ships. The Vandals defeated the invaders at the Battle of Cap Bon, capturing the Western fleet, and destroying the Eastern through the use of fire ships.

Following up the attack, the Vandals tried to invade the Peloponnese, but were driven back by the Maniots at Kenipolis with heavy losses. In retaliation, the Vandals took 500 hostages at Zakynthos, hacked them to pieces and threw the pieces overboard on the way to Carthage.

In the 470s, the Romans abandoned their policy of war against the Vandals… and in 476 Genseric was able to conclude a “perpetual peace” with Constantinople. Relations between the two states assumed a veneer of normality. From 477 onwards, the Vandals produced their own coinage, restricted to bronze and silver low-denomination coins.’

‘Differences between the Arian Vandals and their Trinitarian subjects (including both Catholics and Donatists) were a constant source of tension in their African state. Catholic bishops were exiled or killed by Genseric and laymen were excluded from office and frequently suffered confiscation of their property. He protected his Catholic subjects when his relations with Rome and Constantinople were friendly, as during the years 454-57, when the Catholic community at Carthage, being without a head, elected Deogratias bishop.

Huneric, Genseric’s successor, issued edicts against Catholics in 483 and 484 in an effort to marginalise them and make Arianism the primary religion in North Africa. Generally most Vandal kings… persecuted Trinitarian Christians to a greater or lesser extent, banning conversion for Vandals, exiling bishops and generally making life difficult for Trinitarians.

According to the 1913 Catholic Encyclopaedia:

“Genseric, one of the most powerful personalities of the “era of the Migrations”, died on 25 January 477, at the great age of around 88 years… [The Vandal-Alan Kingdom waned over the next fifty years and] in 534 Gelimer [Vandal leader] surrendered to the Byzantine conqueror, ending the Kingdom of the Vandals. North Africa… became a Roman province again, from which the Vandals were expelled. Many Vandals… fled to the two Gothic kingdoms (Ostrogothic Kingdom and Visigothic Kingdom) [Italy and Spain respectively]. 

The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia states that “Gelimer was honourably treated and received large estates in Galatia. He was also offered the rank of a patrician but had to refuse it because he was not willing to change his Arian faith. 

In the words of historian Roger Collins:

“The remaining Vandals were then shipped back to Constantinople to be absorbed into the imperial army. As a distinct ethnic unit they disappeared”.  Some… Vandals remained in North Africa while more migrated back to Spain.’

The Vandals did not cease to exist – they disappeared of sorts, just not quite in the way Roger Collins is saying – as they were assimilated into the Gothic lands of Spain and Italy, to later emigrate to the Americas. 

Encyclopaedia:

‘The etymology of the name [Vandal] may be related to a Germanic verb “wand – to wander” (English wend, German wandeln). The Germanic mythological figure of Aurvandil “shining wanderer; dawn wanderer, evening star”, or “Shining Vandal”… 

Renaissance and early-modern writers characterized the Vandals as barbarians, “sacking and looting” Rome [in AD 455]. This led to the use of the term “vandalism” to describe any pointless destruction, particularly the”barbarian” defacing of artwork.

English Restoration Poet John Dryden wrote, Till Goths, and Vandals, a rude Northern race, / Did all the matchless Monuments deface. Vandals and other “barbarian” groups had long been blamed for the fall of the Roman Empire by writers and historians.’

Two important points to remember about the Vandals and Alans.

Firstly, their corollary traits with the Philistines – rampaging and pillaging with total disregard for property – building elaborate palaces and staying true to their roots as sea peoples, migrating by ships and dwelling on coasts and isles.

Secondly, not all Vandals and Alans stayed in North Africa, some ventured to Italy and Asia Minor, though the vast majority returned to Spain. We will pick up their story again, a thousand years hence.

Encyclopaedia:

‘Castile, under the reign of Henry III, began the colonization of the Canary Islands in 1402… The conquest of the Canary Islands, inhabited by Guanche people, was only finished when the armies of the Crown of Castile won, in long and bloody wars, the islands of Gran Canaria (1478–1483), La Palma (1492–1493) and Tenerife (1494–1496).

In 1492, Spain drove out the last Moorish king of Granada.

After their victory, the Catholic monarchs negotiated with Christopher Columbus a Genoese sailor attempting to reach Cipangu by sailing west. Castile was already engaged in a race of exploration with Portugal to reach the Far East by sea when Columbus made his bold proposal to Isabella. Columbus instead inadvertently “discovered” the Americas, inaugurating the Spanish colonization of the continents. The Indies were reserved for Castile.

Spanish immigration to Cuba began in 1492, when… Columbus first landed on the island, and continues to the present day.

The first sighting of a Spanish boat approaching the island was on 28 October 1492, probably at Baracoa on the eastern point of the island… Columbus on his first voyage to the Americas, sailed south from what is now the Bahamas to explore the northeast coast of Cuba and the northern coast of Hispaniola. Columbus found the island believing it to be a peninsula of the Asian mainland. 

In 1511, Diego Velazquez de Cuellar set out with three ships and an army of 300 men from Santo Domingo to form the first Spanish settlement in Cuba, with orders from Spain to conquer the island. In 1517 Cuba’s [now] governor Diego Velazquez de Cuellar commissioned a fleet under the command of Hernandez de Cordoba to explore the Yucatan peninsula. They reached the coast where mayans invited them to land. They were attacked at night and only a remnant of the crew returned.’

‘Velazquez then commissioned another expedition led by his nephew Juan de Grijalva, who sailed south along the coast to [the] Tabasco part of the Aztec empire. In 1518 Velazquez gave the mayor of the capital of Cuba, Hernan Cortes, the command of an expedition to secure the interior of Mexico but, due to an old gripe between them, revoked the charter. In February 1519 Cortes went ahead anyway, in an act of open mutiny. With about 11 ships, 500 men, 13 horses and a small number of cannons he landed in Yucatan, in Mayan territory, claiming the land for the Spanish crown.’

‘From Trinidad he proceeded to Tabasco and won a battle against the natives. Among the vanquished was Marina (La Malinche), his future mistress, who knew both (Aztec) Nahuatl language and Maya, becoming a valuable interpreter and counsellor. Cortes learned about the wealthy Aztec Empire through La Malinche.

In July his men took over Veracruz and he placed himself under direct orders of new king Charles I of Spain. There Cortes asked for a meeting with Aztec Emperor Montezuma II, who repeatedly refused. They headed to Tenochtitlan and on the way made alliances with several tribes. In October, accompanied by about 3,000 Tiaxcaltec they marched to Choula, the second largest city in central Mexico.’

Popocatépetl Volcano is an active stratovolcano located in central Mexico. It is the second highest peak in Mexico, standing at 5,393 meters (17,694 feet), and has been in a phase of continuous activity since 1994, frequently emitting ash and gas.

‘Either to instill fear upon the Aztecs waiting for him or (as he later claimed) wishing to make an example when he feared native treachery, they massacred thousands of unarmed members of the nobility gathered at the central plaza and partially burned the city. Arriving in Tenochtitlan with a large army, on November 8 they were peacefully received by Montezuma II, who deliberately let Cortes enter the heart of the Aztec Empire, hoping to know them better to crush them later. The emperor gave them lavish gifts in gold which enticed them to plunder vast amounts. 

In his letters to King Charles, Cortes claimed to have learned then that he was considered by the Aztecs to be either an emissary of the feathered serpent god Quetzacoatl or Quetzalcoatl himself – a belief contested by a few modern historians’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘But he soon learned that his men on the coast had been attacked, and decided to hostage Moctezuma in his palace, demanding a ransom as tribute to King Charles. Meanwhile, Velasquez sent another expedition, led by Panfilo de Narvaez, to oppose Cortes, arriving in Mexico in April 1520 with 1,100 men. Cortés left 200 men in Tenochtitlan and took the rest to confront Narvaez, whom he overcame, convincing his men to join him. In Tenochtitlan one of Cortes’s lieutenants committed a massacre in the Great Temple, triggering local rebellion. 

Cortes speedily returned, attempting the support of Montezuma but the Aztec emperor was killed, possibly stoned by his subjects. The Spanish fled for the Tlaxcaltec during the Noche Triste, where they managed a narrow escape while their back guard was massacred. Much of the treasure looted was lost during this panicked escape.

After a battle in Otumba they reached Tlaxcala, having lost 870 men. Having prevailed with the assistance of allies and reinforcements from Cuba Cortes besieged Tenochtitlan and captured its ruler Cuauhtemoc in August 1521. As the Aztec Empire ended he claimed the city for Spain, renaming it Mexico City.’

Mexico City, capital of Mexico

The Spanish adopted at this time and continued throughout the Americas, a program of destroying indigenous settlements and then re-building them, destroying native art and literature, so that hardly any records remain today and near genocide of Amerindian populations, including Aztecs and Incas.’

From Cretans and Philistines to Vandals and Conquistadors; five thousand years of history for the descendants of Casluh (his son Caphtor), as well as Aram are charted with destruction and desecration.

One item the Philistines were prudent enough not to destroy was the Israelite’s Ark of the Covenant which they captured and held for seven months (refer 1 Samuel 5:1-11; 6:1) – article: The Ark of God.

Early Chinese descriptions of the ‘Spanish’ in the Philippines:

“These barbarians (Europeans) [Philistines] have a grim look, untidy hair, and an unpleasant smell. They have no rituals worthy of the name, they’re liars, and are rather arrogant. They conquer countries by fraud and force, ingratiating themselves in a friendly way, before they oppress the natives.

At the heart of their conduct is Violence.”

Mexican Flag

Encyclopaedia:

‘Mexihco is the Nahuatl term for the heartland of the Aztec Empire… with its people being known as the Mexica.

After the colony achieved independence from the Spanish Empire in 1821, [the] territory came to be known as the State of Mexico, with the new country being named after its capital: Mexico City, which itself was founded in 1524 on the site of the ancient Mexica capital of Mexico-Tenochtitlan.’

Mexico City

‘Mexico City is the…largest city of Mexico and the most-populous city in North America. Mexico City is one of the most important cultural and financial centres in the world. It is located in the Valley of Mexico (Valle de México), a large valley in the high plateaus in the center of Mexico, at an altitude of 2,240 meters (7,350 ft). 

… the population of Greater Mexico City is [22,013,412 people] which makes it the second-largest metropolitan area of the Western Hemisphere (behind Sao Paulo, Brazil… [with 22,346,768 people]). Mexico’s capital is both the oldest capital city in the Americas and one of two founded by indigenous people the other being Quito, Ecuador. The city was originally built on an island of Lake Texcoco by the Aztecs in 1325 as Tenochtitlan, which was almost completely destroyed in… 1521… Mexico City was systematically rebuilt by Cortes…

Much of the identity, traditions and architecture of Mexico developed during the 300-year colonial period from 1521 to independence in 1821. The two pillars of Spanish rule were the State and the Roman Catholic Church, both under the authority of the Spanish crown. In 1493 the pope had granted sweeping powers to the Spanish crown, with the proviso that the crown spread Christianity in its new realms. [Montezuma’s] successor and brother Cuitlahuac took control of the Aztec empire, but was among the first to fall from the first smallpox epidemic in the area a short time later. 

Unintentionally introduced by Spanish conquerors, among whom smallpox, measles, and other contagious diseases were endemic, epidemics of Old World infectious diseases ravaged Mesoamerica starting in the 1520s. Severely weakened, the Aztec empire was easily defeated by Cortes and his forces on his second return… The territory became part of the Spanish Empire under the name of New Spain [Nueva Espana] in 1535. 

The indigenous population stabilized around one to one and a half million individuals in the 17th century from the most commonly accepted five to thirty million pre-contact population.’

Lacandon Jungle

‘During the three hundred years of the colonial era, Mexico received between 400,000 and 500,000 Europeans, between 200,000 and 250,000 African slaves and between 40,000 and 120,000 Asians.

The first census in Mexico (New Spain) that included an ethnic classification was the 1793 census. Also known as the Revillagigedo census.

Europeans ranged from 18% to 22% of New Spain’s population,

Mestizos from 21% to 25%,

Indians from 51% to 61%…

The total population ranged from 3,799,561 to 6,122,354.

Society was organized in a racial hierarchy, with whites on top,

mixed-race persons and blacks in the middle, and

indigenous [Indians] at the bottom’

– Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

‘In the late eighteenth century the crown instituted reforms that privileged Iberian-born Spaniards (peninsulares) over American-born (criollos), limiting their access to offices. This discrimination between the two became a sparking point of discontent for white elites in the colony.

Mexico covers 1,972,550 square kilometers (761,610 square miles)… making it the world’s 13th-largest country by area, [11th]-most populous country and most populous Spanish-speaking nation. It is a federation comprising 31 states.

Pre-Columbian Mexico traces its origins to 8,000 BC and is identified as one of six cradles of civilisation; it was home to many advanced… civilizations, most well known among them the [Olmecs], Maya and the Aztecs.

The War of Texas Independence in 1836 and the Mexican-American War led to huge territorial losses in Mexico’s sparsely populated north, contiguous to the United States.’

The Mexican military is ranked 32nd out of 145 countries in terms of military strength. Mexico maintains an active personnel count of approximately 387,000 people and had a defence budget of $15.652 billion for 2024.

‘The Mexican Armed Forces maintain significant infrastructure… advanced naval dockyards… and advanced missile technologies. In recent years, Mexico… has taken steps to becoming more self-reliant in supplying its military by designing as well as manufacturing its own arms, missiles, aircraft, vehicles, heavy weaponry, electronics, defense systems, armor, heavy military industrial equipment and heavy naval vessels.

Historically, Mexico has remained neutral in international conflicts, with the exception of World War II. However, in recent years some political parties have proposed an amendment of the Constitution to allow the Mexican Army, Air Force or Navy to collaborate with the United Nations in peacekeeping missions, or to provide military help to countries that officially ask for it.’

Bible prophecy reveals the Philistines (Mexico) will become an increasing economic and military presence, as an ally of Tyre (Brazil) and a thorn in the side to the principle descendants of Jacob – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

‘The electronics industry of Mexico has grown enormously within the last decade. Mexico has the sixth largest electronics industry in the world after China [1], [the] United States [2], Japan [3], South Korea [4] and Taiwan [5]. 

Mexico produces the most automobiles of any North American nation. The industry produces technologically complex components and engages in some research and development activities…’ 

Mexican men

Mexico’s GDP was $1.69 trillion in 2025, making it the 15th largest economy in the world.

Over recent decades, Mexico emerged as a manufacturing economy under a series of free trade arrangements with the United States, Canada, and forty-four other nations. Many major United States manufacturers have integrated supply chains with counterparts or operations in Mexico.

‘The international drug trade constitutes an ongoing challenge to Mexico’s development, which has directly contributed to violence and corruption in the country.’

Monterrey, Mexico

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Mexican global shipments during 2024.

  1. Vehicles: US$168.4 billion
  2. Machinery including computers: $129.8 billion
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $114.4 billion
  4. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $36.9 billion
  5. Mineral fuels including oil: $27.4 billion
  6. Beverages, spirits, vinegar: $14.8 billion
  7. Furniture, bedding, lighting, signs, prefabricated buildings: $14.2 billion
  8. Fruits, nuts: $12.9 billion
  9. Vegetables: $11.8 billion
  10. Gems, precious metals: $11.2 billion


‘Fruits and nuts was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 47.3% from 2023 to 2024. In second place for improving export sales was machinery including computers via a 38.9% advance. The lone decliner among Mexico’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil, pulled down by a -16% year-over-year drop.’

Encyclopaedia:

‘The large economy, area, population and politics make Mexico a regional power and a middle power, and is often identified as an emerging power. However, Mexico continues to struggle with social inequalities, poverty and extensive crime; the country ranks poorly on the Global Peace Index.’

Mexican women

Aside from Mexico being a Latin economic leader, Venezuela is number eight in the top ten countries with the most Natural Resources. Venezuela has an estimated $14.3 trillion worth of natural resources and is the leading exporter of bauxite, coal, gold, iron ore, and oil. 

Flag of Venezuela and the pan South American colours comprising Yellow, blue and red.

Incredibly, the country’s oil reserves are greater than those of the United States, Canada, and Mexico combined. Venezuela is the third largest producer of coal after Brazil and Colombia. It also has the eighth largest reserves of natural gas accounting for 2.7% of the global supply and Venezuela has the second largest reserves of gold deposits in the world.

Man and woman from Venezuela

Encyclopaedia:

‘The coat of arms of Mexico [below] is a national symbol of Mexico and depicts a Mexican eagle perched on a prickly pear cactus devouring a rattlesnake. The design is rooted in the legend that the Aztec people would know where to build their city once they saw an eagle eating a snake on top of a lake. The image has been an important symbol of Mexican politics and culture for centuries. To the people of Tenochtitlan, this symbol had strong religious connotations, and to the Europeans, it came to symbolize the triumph of good over evil (with the snake sometimes representative of the serpent in the Garden of Eden).’

Encyclopaedia:

Regardless of ethnicity, the majority of Mexicans are united under the same national identity…

it is also observed that when asked directly about their ethno-racial identification, many Mexicans nowadays do not identify as Mestizos and that “static” ethnoracial labels such as “White” or “Indian” are far more prominent in contemporary Mexican society than the “Mestizo” one is…

… estimates of the percentage of European-descended Mexicans vary considerably depending [on] the criteria used:

recent nationwide field surveys that account for different phenotypical traits (hair color, skin color etc.) report a percentage between 18% – 23% if the criteria is the presence of blond hair, and of 47% if the criteria is skin color

While during the colonial era, most of the European migration into Mexico was Spanish, in the 19th and 20th centuries a substantial number of non-Spanish Europeans immigrated to the country, with Europeans often being the most numerous ethnic group in colonial Mexican cities.

Nowadays Mexico’s northern and western regions have the highest percentages of European populations, with the majority of the people not having native admixture or being of predominantly European ancestry.

The Afro-Mexican population (1,381,853 individuals as of 2015) is an ethnic group made up of descendants of Colonial-era slaves and recent immigrants of sub-Saharan African descent. Mexico had an active slave trade during the colonial period, and some 200,000 Africans were taken there, primarily in the 17th century.

The creation of a national Mexican identity, especially after the Mexican Revolution, emphasized Mexico’s indigenous and European past; it passively eliminated the African ancestors and contributions. Most of the African-descended population was absorbed into the surrounding Mestizo (mixed European/indigenous) and indigenous populations through unions among the groups. Evidence of this long history of intermarriage with Mestizo and indigenous Mexicans is also expressed in the fact that in the 2015 inter-census, 64.9% (896,829) of Afro-Mexicans also identified as indigenous. 

During the early 20th century, a substantial number of Arabs (mostly Christians), began arriving from the crumbling Ottoman Empire. The largest group were the Lebanese and an estimated 400,000 Mexicans have some Lebanese ancestry.’

A sampling of revealing quotes from a forum entitled:

What ancestry do most Mexicans have really? 

  1. even the Spanish mixed with the Moors, and were already a heavily mixed group before they arrived to the Americas… Actually, most Spanish/Spaniards were and still are white people, not mixed.”

2. “The claim of Spain being racially and genetically mixed is often exaggerated. As for Mexicans most Mexicans are a mix of European, Native American, African, Asian in varying degrees.”

  1. “I’ve been to both Spain and Mexico and the difference in physical appearance in both countries is quite palpable… the average Mexican face stands out in Spain, you can easily tell they come from the americas.”
  1. “Mexicans are very diverse. Many look hardcore native, others look Arab, others look Italian, and others blend with white Americans (albeit most of these have light skin, dark brown hair, and dark eyes). All of my brothers and sisters and I look so different, it is amazing. I look Asian. My sister looks Middle Eastern. Everyone thinks my mother is Armenian. My little sister has blondish hair with hazel eyes. My father looks Native American. My extended family is just as mixed!”
  1. “Many of the Spaniards were of [‘Jewish’] or Morisco (Moorish) heritage. There are records that in 1492, 1 out of every 4 Spaniards was a Jew or of [‘Jewish’] background. Because of the Inquisition, a great deal of those Converso Jews and Moors fled to the New World to escape, so factor in how many of those made it to Mexico and started families. Moriscos were Moors forced to convert to Catholicism, and were also discriminated and persecuted for centuries due to the Inquisition because of their Muslim roots. I am Mexican of Jewish Converso blood on my father’s side. Many of my dad’s family look Middle Eastern.
  1. “Around the middle of the 10th century, the majority of Spaniards living within Andalusia had converted to Islam. The Arabic language was then fully adopted by the 12th century, and it had supplanted the Arabized-Latin dialect (“Mozarabic”) that was spoken in Andalusia. Muslims did make the majority of Andalusia at one period in history. By the time of the Fall of Granada, the Muslim Spaniards had assimilated the minorities (Mid-Easterners, North Africans, Visigoths, Blacks, East Europeans) and the whole nation had become an “Arab” Andalusian society. That is to say, they identified as “Arabs” and… [were] called “Moors” in the West… Today’s Spaniards are not Muslim nor Arabic-speaking because the Christian Spaniards from [the] north… converted them to Christianity and imposed the Romance (mostly Castillian) language upon them. North Africans, Arabs, and Jews are ancestors of some Mexicans…”

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 430:

‘Although led by a white-looking elite, the vast majority of the population of Mexico was, and still is, of mixed-racial origin, and openly antagonistic to the white settlers to the north [in the USA], referring to them disparagingly as “gringoes,” a slang term which means “foreigner.” That Mexicans and other Latin Americans refer to whites as “foreigners” reveals much about the racial attitudes which prevailed, and still prevail, in this part of the world.’

Men from Argentina

Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In the Y-chromosome, the haplogroup R1b (West European gene) is prevalent and is carried by 50% of Mexican men.

Haplogroups J1/J2 (Middle Eastern) and E1b1b (North African) combined show up in 20% of Mexican men.

Haplogroups G, I[2a1], and R1a (Caucasus, Balkans, and East European, respectively) show up at a combined 12% of Mexican males.

Haplogroup Q (Amerindian/Native American) is carried by around 16% of Mexican males.’

Argentinian women

It is quite apparent when comparing Latins from Spain and Latinos (or Hispanics) from the Americas, that there is a difference. Many Central and South Americans do look like or could pass as an Arab. Males in this category would ostensibly carry Haplogroups J2, J1 or E1b1b and be from a Moorish or Arab and Berber related lineage, signalling a likely descent from Casluh, Caphtor or Canaan – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

And, there are people with either fair or sallow skin and features more reminiscent of an Iberian in these countries too. These men are likely descended from Aram and possessing Haplogroup R1b.

As varied amounts of Europeans have migrated to the Americas, there will be a small minority of those of true Spanish and Italian descent who are actually the same as Spaniards and Italians in Europe and while descendants of Aram, not necessarily those who could be deemed Philistines. They are obviously not descended from Mizra and the Moors and though migrating from Spain and Italy, they are not Vandal or Alan heritage either, but rather, possess Visigoth or Ostrogoth ancestry. We will later confirm an historic precedent for these two peoples being closely aligned as they were in the Iberian Peninsula as Vandals and Visigoths and in the ancient past as Philistines and Phoenicians – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

There are Haplogroup clades associated with Europeans, just as there are for Arabs, Indians, Asians and Africans. The Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is found outside of Europe, for example in South Asia via admixture; though it is principally a European marker – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

Europe is split roughly in half, with R1a being indicative of Eastern Europe and the Slavic speaking peoples and R1b associated with Western Europe, from the Nordic nations in the north through to the Latin nations of Southern Europe.

What the online encyclopaedia does not delineate, is if the Haplogroups identified as ‘European’ and principally R1b – such as the major sub-clade for non Asian and Africans, R-M269 (R1b1a1b) – are exhibited in different frequencies and concentrations in the Central and South American White male populations, compared with the Spanish and Italians of Europe. Nor does it discuss the variety of R1b sub-clades that are not typical to northwestern and western Europeans yet which are found in Mexican men and in other males of Central and South American nations.

The R1b in Latin America men reveals its ancestral link with Iberia in southwestern Europe. This is due in part to the fact that this is where the Hispanics have most recently originated from and where they have intermixed with the Spanish over many centuries. Conversely, a residue of descendants from Casluh (Caphtor) and the Aramaean Philistines undoubtedly still reside in Spain.

The following article addresses the difference in the percentage ratio of R1b in Mexican males, compared to their ‘origin’ with the Spanish in Spain – as well as the inclusion of R1 in the Native Indian population prior to the arrival of the Spanish.

Geneticists have been lax, in assuming that European peoples in the Americas – including the United States, Canada and other immigrant nations constituting Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – with their lineage from Europe, entirely carry the same Haplogroups and myriad sub-clades. The truth is that these new nations outside Europe, are unique and individual nations with their own Haplogroup footprint. The principal manner of understanding these new nations identities, is to appreciate they are not exact extensions of the mother country, but distinct daughter nations.

Y chromosome Haplogroup R in America, The overlooked lineage, Austin Whittall, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There is a very particular Y chromosome haplogroup in the Americas which is often ignored, overlooked or clumped together with “others” since it is not considered a founding lineage:

haplogroup R [M207] with its M173 mutation [R1]. 

Since modern Eurasian populations are predominantly haplogroup R, the Spaniards and Portuguese, French and British have a high proportion of hg. R in their genes. It was these people who discovered and conquered America so their admixture with the conquered American Native races will surely be reflected in contemporary Native Americans’ Y chromosomes by the presence of typically European R haplotypes.

Officially there are two Y chromosome haplogroups accepted as founding lineages in America:

haplogroup Q, which prevails among Amerindians with a 92.9% frequency and a less frequent haplogroup C, which is found at a much lower 7.1% frequency among indigenous American men, mostly in North America, but also with a patchy distribution in South America’ – refer Chapter II Tiras the Amerindian.

‘Then we have Haplogroup R which is considered by some to also be another Y chromosome founding Amerindian haplogroups. See, for instance Schurr et al., (2004) who add haplogroups P-M45, F-M89 and R1a1-M17 to hgs. Q and C as founding lineages. But others such as Zegura et al., (2004) are quite convinced that haplogroup R in Native Americans is of a recent European origin and that it admixed into the local natives during the last 500 years, after the discovery of America in 1492. This is a reasonable assumption: Hg. R[1] is found among Europeans at very high frequencies. But, it is also found all over the world, so why would it be absent in America?

Although the presence of hg. R[2] in South eastern Asia and Australia could also be attributed to European colonization (the Spaniards in the Philippines, the French in Indochina, the Dutch in Indonesia, and the British in Australia, etc.), but actually there is no serious academic objections to the notion that these are local Asian haplotypes and not the outcome recent admixture… [combined] data from three papers… show the frequency of hg. R in certain parts of the Old World and the Americas…

…the Asian frequencies are relatively low (2.5 to 8.6%), furthermore haplogroup R has not been detected in the highlands or coastal areas of West New Guinea and Papua New Guinea, New Britain, Moluccas, Vietnam (surprising since this was actually a French Colony) Taiwan or China. The American data on the other hand is quite different; the frequencies are much higher among some groups (12.6 to 100%), and lower in others (2.5 to 8.3%), at levels similar to those found in Asians.

This panorama indicates, in my opinion that America has the basic ancient coating of haplogroup R at Asian levels which was later overlain by additional hg. R from the European settlers. The problem is that mainstream science places all hg. R natives into the “mixed – races” category and dismisses haplogroup R as a founding lineage among Native Americans.’

But was a certain Haplogroup R really a founding lineage? Where did the ‘basic ancient coating of haplgroup R’ originate from? If not from admixture in the distant past? For Y-DNA Haplogroups C, D, K, N, O and Q are indicative of an Oriental, Eastern, Asian or Yellow origin. Whereas paternal Haplogroups G, I and R are indicative of a European, Western, Occidental or White origin. It is the conviction of this writer that any exceptions are from admixture via intermixing and intermarriage – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.

Whittall:

‘The whole of Mexico which has a very dense population and a history of admixture… of Spaniards with Native Americans and also (but to a lesser extent, African slaves) has a very low frequency of haplogroup R. Why?

Spaniards have a high frequency of hg. R and were particularly keen on mingling with the locals (natives) and with the African slaves (in Northern South America and Central America mostly), to an even greater degree than the more Puritan New England settlers. Admixture was due to a very concrete cause: women did not want to cross the oceans and settle in the New World. The few that did were wives of the Royal government officials. So the only available source of women were the local natives. Initially Spanish colonies were based on exploiting the local natives in mines and smelters to produce precious metals for export back to the Metropolis. The conquistadors were men whose aim was to make a quick fortune and return home to wife and family. Their relationships in America were basic and obviously had only one outlet: the local women. Only much later would European women migrate to America but again, they would only wed within their social circles.

So quite soon, Spanish American societies had plenty of mixed-race people:

Spanish with Indian resulted in Mestizo,

Spanish and Mestizo in Castizo,

Mestizo and Indian: Coyote,

a black and a Spanish woman: Mulato,

and so on… To maintain social order, each group had its privileges and obligations marked out by the Crown’s law (for instance Mestizos could not bear arms or have Indians given to them as encomienda – a form of serfdom), these legal inequalities eventually festered into the independence revolutions that began in 1810 and led to the creation of Spanish Americas Republics, ran by Criollos (descendants of Spaniards, but born in America) and Mestizos.

So, why is the prevalence of R haplogroup lower in Mexico and their former Colonial territories in S.W. USA? Do Spaniards have less proportion of haplogroup R than the French (in Canada) or the Britons (in the Eastern Seabord states)? No they don’t. Current Spaniards have between 51 and 85% haplogroup R, similar to the frequencies found among English and French. So this is not the cause of the unequal cline. And we have seen above that there was no reluctance on their part towards mingling with the natives. 

I believe that the reason for this is that haplogroup R was already present among the natives as a founding clade in America, introgression with Europeans added some percentage points to the mix, and very likely it incorporated new European R haplotypes, but there was a substantial presence of hg. R among North American natives. These appear… in the joining-network trees as outliers with unique haplotypes not shared with Europeans.’

While there is little argument with Haplogroup R1 having an ancient ‘outlier’ presence in the Amerindian with ‘unique haplotypes’; this writer does not concur that it is original with them but rather from admixture in the distant past.

An example is with their name sakes in the Indian sub-Continent, who possess R1a-Z93. A mutation common to Central Asia, Southwest Asia and South Asia, yet still having its origin in R1a-M417 – a line originating with White males. For while Indian men can be erroneously labeled Aryan or Indo-European, they are no such thing and are a result of admixture, pure and simple – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

So too, for any Amerindian male who possesses Haplogroup R1. It proves in the past, a non-Amerindian male was his ancient ancestor.

Whittall:

‘The exceptions that confirm the rule. The issue can be easily settled. An in depth sequencing of native hg. R haplotypes would help distinguish the “American” lines from those haplotypes that are surely “European”, however this has not been done. There is a clear preconception – prejudice among scholars that simply ignores the option that hg. R is a founding lineage among Amerindians.’

Whittall’s frustration is understandable, though results from such a test would reveal the mutational differences between an early R1 infusion and R1 admixture in more recent centuries. It would not validate Haplogroup R1 as an original founding lineage only that is was an early admixture. The same case could be said for Haplogroup C found in a minority of Amerindian males. This shows commonality through admixture with those males in Central Asia who predominantly carry Haplogroup C. It is in fact Haplogroup Q, which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Amerindian men; not C even and definitely not R1.

Even so, Austin Whittall as far back as 2014, raises a key point. Though not with just any differences between the founding Spanish and the Amerindian Y-DNA R1 Haplogroup, but taken one step further to include a comparison between the founding Spanish and those that remained in Spain. Science will provide the data we seek, as the Principle Component Analysis plot below left highlights the relative genetic difference between the Latino and European peoples.

Results should support the premise that R1b sub-clades carried to the America’s are not all the same as those that either remained in Spain or more accurately are not all exhibited by the Spanish in Spain.

In fact, the Mexico DNA Project poses a similar question – emphasis mine:

“It is widely believed that a large percentage of the earliest settlers of Mexico may have origins in the Middle East and were a result of the expulsion of non-Catholics out of Spain, just before the conquest of Mexico. Did the early Iberian settlers of Mexico have proportionately different origins than modern day Spaniards?” 

We will discover in fact, that there are clues that the differences in R1b sub-clades in the Americas do exist, as completed studies by the Mexico DNA Project on specific people and surnames reflective of Mexican heritage via Spain, have flagged outlier R1b Haplotypes.

‘Since most studies consider haplogroup R as a non-Native American line, it is “often removed from phylogenetic analysis”. As an example I quote a paper (Malhi et al., 2008) which describes the methodology:

“All individuals that did not belong to haplogroup Q and C were excluded from the Haplotype data set because these haplotypes are likely the result of non-native admixture“. And that is that; the data that is inconvenient is not even analysed. In all fairness, some studies have included Amerindian hg. R in their data (to disprove it as a founding lineage) and others have proposed it is a founding lineage, but that was long ago…

[One] paper… compares haplotypes… [and] overlooks something very interesting: 28.3%* of the populations sampled belonged to hg. R., the majority were R1b1a2, [now R1b1a1b – M269] but 2 individuals out of the 40 belonging to hg. R, were typed as being R1a1a1. This is… uncommon… identified by the mutations M17 ([M198] for R1a1a) and M417 (for R1a1a1), both are very basal and are found in men living in a vast area: Northern India, Slavic countries, Siberia, and, evidently America. This is not the typical R1b Western European haplotype, it is a rare variety. Of course, the authors do not analyse the R hg. samples at all. They declare it foreign and then focus on the accepted Amerindian lineages (Q and C).’

Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In a study conducted in 2014 by V. V. Ilyinskyon on bone fragments from 10 Alanic burials on the Don River, DNA could be abstracted from a total of seven. Four of them turned out to belong to yDNA Haplogroup G2 and six of them had mtDNA I. The fact that many of the samples share the same y- and mtDNA raises the possibility that the tested individuals belonged to the same tribe or even were close relatives. In 2015 the Institute of Archaeology in Moscow conducted research on various Sarmato-Alan and Saltovo-Mayaki culture Kurgan burials. 

In this analysis, the two Alan samples from the 4th to 6th century AD had yDNAs G2a-P15 and R1a-z94, while from the three Sarmatian samples from 2nd to 3rd century AD two had yDNA J1-M267 and one possessed R1a. Also, the three Saltovo-Mayaki samples from 8th to 9th century AD turned out to have yDNAs G, J2a-M410 and R1a-z94 respectively. A genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains of six Alans buried in the Caucasus from ca. 100 AD to 1400 AD. The sample of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1 and haplogroup Q-M242.’

The Haplogroup findings in this study are evidence of later peoples falling under the umbrella of the Alan-Sarmatian label. The Y-DNA Haplogroup G, is an older mutation yet lesser frequency clade of European descent. The Haplogroup remotely close was the one significantly earlier, R1. The other Haplogroups of particular interest are J1 and J2; indicative of the Arab and Arab related peoples of the Middle East, West Asia and South West Asia respectively – which would include descendants of Casluh (and Caphtor).

Eupedia: Genetic History of the Italians, Maciamo Hay, 2013 & 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Vandals were the first to reach the Italian peninsula. They had migrated to Iberia, then crossed over [to] North Africa in 429, where they founded a kingdom that also comprised Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica. Sardinia is the best place to look for traces of their DNA because on the one hand it is the best studied region of Italy, and on the other hand no other Germanic peoples settled there (apart from a very brief Gothic reign), which means that the presence of Germanic lineages on the island would incontestably be of Vandalic origin. 

Based on the detailed Y-chromosomal study of 1200 Sardinians by Francalacci et al. (2013), the Vandals appeared to have carried 35% of R1a, 29% of I2a2a, 24%*of R1b, 6% of I2a1b* and a mere 6% of I1.

The subclades identified were I1a3a2 (L1237+), I2a2a (L699+ and CTS616+), I2a1b (M423+), R1a-Z282 (including some Z280+), R1a-M458 (L1029+), R1b-U106 (Z381+), R1b-L21 (DF13>L513+), R1b-DF27 (Z196>Z209+).

The probable reason for the elevated (Proto-)Slavic R1a and the presence of the Eastern European I2-M423* is that the Vandals stayed in Poland before migrating to the Roman Empire. Over a third of Vandalic male lineages were therefore of Proto-Slavic origin.’

Not sure if these findings are helpful, as the percentages for R1a and I2a2 do not appear to match anyone today in the Americas. Of most interest are the R1b details as particularly R1b-DF27 is associated with Iberia. R1b-U106 is associated with Central and Western Europe, thus highlighting perhaps the similarity or the related ‘Spanish’ who left for the America’s compared to the Spaniards who stayed. Interestingly, the R1b-Z381 sub-clade is invariably indicative of a royal line – Articles: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens; and The Life & Death of Charles III.

The principle Arabic mtDNA Haplogroups are L, H and U – which are shared with Europeans, except L, shared with sub-Saharan Africans – and the main Y-DNA Haplogroups are J1, J2, E1b1b (through admixture) and to a lesser degree, T. These Y-DNA Haplogroups are not indicative of Europeans, apart from exceptions in southeastern Europe and western Asia through admixture. The main European Haplogroups in contrast, are R1a, R1b, I1 and I2a. 

It is worth noting the Spanish of the America’s exhibiting higher levels of Haplogroups associated with Arabs; which supports the proposed link between the Latino-Hispano of Central and South America with not just Aram but also kin descended from Mizra’s sons – while not forgetting a possible ancient relationship between Pathros of Egypt and Casluh from North Africa and subsequently Caphtor. 

There is scant information on the Haplogroups of Spanish descended peoples in the Americas. Particularly regarding mtDNA maternal Haplogroups as the focus understandably, is placed on the Amerindian wives which the vast majority of Conquistadors and settlers took. The main Haplogroups of the Native American wives – refer Chapter II Tiras the Amerindian – were A2, B2, C1 and D1 totalling an average of 93.3%.

The mtDNA Haplogroups associated with Spanish admixture, include H, J, K, T, U and V, totalling some 6.7%; and from Africans, L3 amounting to 0.7%. All are all low percentages in the pie chart diagram above, showing the mtDNA of the Mexican Mestizo (European and Indian mixed) population. 

An online forum included one person with Native American ancestry, who stated their mtDNA Haplogroup was B2g2, while another shared:

‘A Cuban-American friend had tested 95% European and 4% Native American, yet had the mtDNA Haplogroup A2d1, which is Native American.’ Thus showing a Native American heritage through the maternal line.

The main R1b sub-Haplogroups stemming from M269 include the following:

U106, which is frequent in Western Europe and decreases throughout Central Europe, reaching 66.8% in parts of Germany;

U152, the most frequent in France as well as in northern and central Italy;

U198, prevalent in England; and

M529, with high frequencies in Wales, Scotland and Ireland; though it is

S116 that is the sub-lineage heavily associated with the Iberian Peninsula. 

From which derives DF27 and includes M153, located primarily in the Basque Country of Spain and France; with a very high frequency in Gascony. 

DF27 also includes M167,** which is found at high frequencies in northeastern Spain, the Pyrenees and principally Catalonia.* It is also found in the Celtic arc of peoples, which includes: the Basque Country, Portugal, parts of western Europe, Wales and Cornwall, England.

Interesting R1b sub-clades which showed up in the Mexico DNA Project’s analysis included P25, a North African clade relating particularly to Jews.

L21>DF73, a northwestern Iberian clade; though typically, L21 is associated with northwestern Europe;

L150, a North African and eastern European clade; and

P66, of rare Italian origin.

This is pertinent as we know some Vandals and Alans migrated to Italy. 

Of more interest, was not the expected M269 which is dominant throughout western Europe, but the numerous clades associated with DF27. DF27 is of special interest as some of the peoples associated with it have the highest levels of Rh-negative blood types in the world. Something we will study further in article: Rhesus Negative Blood Factor.

R1b clades that appeared regularly included DF81, which stems from DF27.

The sub-lineage associated with DF27, M167 was frequent in the form of SRY 2627.**

One person commented on a forum:

“SRY2627 is just one small subclade of hundreds of subclades in the R1b tree. With so many subclades there is going to be a limited amount of people that are positive for the mutation. For instance, R1b exists in about 60% of the Spanish population, DF27 exists in about 40% of the Spanish population, about half of DF27 is Z195, and even fewer are Z198, and even fewer are Z292, and even fewer are SRY2627.” 

Even so, the fact that SRY 2627 was frequent in Mexicans, shows their link to Catalonia* – over the rest of Spain. This is significant, because the Catalonians are also viewed as being distinct from the rest of Spain.

Another frequent clade of DF27 in Mexico is Z196; strongly linked with Iberia and southwest France.

M65 is a R1b clade associated with the Basque like M153.

Two clades that were very frequent in the Mexican’s sampled included Z278 and Z214.

A comment online explains their relationship:

“My paternal Haplogroup also changed from R-z278 to R-Z214. R-z278 is most common in Northern Spain (Including Catalonia* and Galicia) the Basque Country and Gascony, but can also be found throughout Atlantic Europe and the British Isles.

R-Z214 is much more specific to the Basque Country and Gascony. In fact, if you’re positive for R-Z214 then there’s a good chance that you are positive for R-M153 which is downstream from R-Z214. R-M153 is called the “Basque Marker” and is virtually nonexistent outside of the Basque Country or with non-Basques. 23andMe does not test for R-M153.”

Other frequent Y-DNA Haplogroups include J2 and J1 clades, particularly J1 M267, which has its highest frequencies in the Middle East and North Africa and J1 P58, which is also indicative of Arabs in high frequencies.

Trace elements of E1b1a were found, though this would be from intermixing with Africans. Two derivatives of E1b1b (M215) were common, E1b1b1b (Z287) and E1b1b1b1; both tellingly associated with North Africa… the area that the Vandals and Alans occupied, sharing with Berbers and Arabs. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 403-405:

‘It is estimated that over six million Europeans, mainly of Spanish or Italian origin, emigrated to Argentina after its establishment as an independent state [in 1816]. A genetic study… in 2009… concluded that Argentinian DNA is 78.6 percent European, 17.3 percent Amerind, and 4.2 percent African… in Bolivia… in 2006, whites made up 15 percent of the population, with the rest comprising Amerind or mixed-race elements… a 2006 genetic study by the University of Chile revealed that… 30 percent of Chileans had Caucasian-only ancestry… a 2006… study in Uruguay [showed] 82 percent of male chromosomes were of European origin, 8 percent Amerindian and 10 percent African. On the maternal side, 49 percent of chromosomes were of European origin, 30 percent were Amerind, and 21 percent African.

Venezuela does not keep racial statistics of any sort… Costa Rica on the other hand, has one of the highest white populations of all the Central American countries. Politically, these nations have swayed between totalitarian dictatorships and partial democracies, while socially, South America has become the source of some of the greatest disparities in the world. The end result of this tremendous mix of races in South America has been a continent of extremes: relatively well-off white enclaves surrounded by masses of desperately poor and ever growing numbers of nonwhites.’

“We like to be called the ‘Continent of Hope’… This hope is like a promise of heaven, an IOU whose payment is always put off”

Pablo Neruda.

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the nations of the Caribbean, Central, and South America with the limited data available. Note the countries are not strictly grouped geographically but with those which have a similar sequence. D.R. is the Dominican Republic and R1 includes R1b and R1a.

Paraguay:  Q – R1 – E1b1b – J

Bolivia:      Q – R1 – E1b1b – J – I2 

Ecuador:    Q – R1 – E1b1b – J – I2 – G

These three nations are situated in east-central South America and have a high proportion of native American Indians; hence the leading Haplogroup Q percentage – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.

The only other nation to exhibit Q as their dominant Haplogroup is Guatemala, situated to the south of Mexico.

Guatemala: Q – R1 – I2 – J – E1b1b – G

Two nations which have Q and R1 swapped as their two main Haplogroups are Belize and Peru. Belize is also beneath Mexico and northeast of Guatemala. Likewise, Peru is situated between the Indian led populations of Ecuador and Bolivia. In fact, it is Peru which Mexico shares a simpler sequence, when comparing the first three dominant Haplogroups comprising R1, Q and J. 

Belize:  R1 – Q – I2 – J – E1b1b – G

Peru:    R1 – Q – J – I2 – E1b1b – G

The next set of Latino nations possess R1 as their primary Haplogroup and correspondingly, have either less or no, Haplogroup Q; due to considerably smaller indigenous Indian populations. In each case, Haplogroup J is second and includes El Salvador and Costa Rica from Central America and two groupings from South America: Colombia and Venezuela in the northwest of South America and Uruguay, Chile and Argentina in the southern tip of South America. 

El Salvador: R1 – J – I2 – E1b1b – Q – G

Costa Rica:   R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G

Colombia:     R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G

Venezuela:    R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G

Uruguay:       R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G

Chile:             R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G – Q

Argentina:     R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G – Q

Costa Rica like Argentina and it near neighbours exhibits a higher percentage of European descended citizens – from principally Spain and Italy – as shown by the R1 Haplogroup, indicative of a male line of descent from Aram. Whereas the J Haplogroup is reflective of an Arab related lineage from Casluh (and Caphtor).

The next three nations in Central America have relatively high Indian admixture and are also where Haplogroup E1b1b is more dominant – a Haplogroup shared with the Berbers of North Africa and Pathros of Egypt – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Honduras:  R1 – E1b1b – I2 – J – Q – G

Nicaragua:  R1 – E1b1b – J – I2 – Q – G

Panama:      R1 – E1b1b – Q – J – I2 – G

The last two countries exhibit a stronger Black African presence as evidenced by the Haplogroups E1b1a and B.

Cuba: R1 – E1b1a/E1b1b – I2 – G – J – T 

D R:    R1 – E1b1a/E1b1b – J – I2 – G -B

Though R1b, R1a and I2 are indicative of western and eastern Europeans, the Haplogroups comprising E1b1b and J are closer to nations from North Africa and the Middle East – and Southern Europe due to admixture – from the line of Ham.

While Haplogroup G is an ancient lineage from Shem dominant in the Caucasus. The lower percentage of R1b – in Mexico for instance – and the separate R1b clades which thread back to Iberia, reveal clues that the Latinos of the New World are distinct from the Latins of the Old. 

The assumption that the Latin American peoples are the same as the people in Spain, has only led to confusion for geneticists, ethnologists, historians and biblical scholars alike. Mexico and Cuba, though near neighbours, appear to have the greatest contrast in Y-DNA composition between them and bookend the Latino nations.

The Y-DNA Haplogroup breakdown for Mexico.

Mexico: R1b [50%] – Q1 [ 16%] – J [10%] – E1b1b [10%] – 

G2a [4%] – R1a [4%] – I2a2 [4%] 

Mexico has a high percentage of Indian males in its population as evidenced by Haplogroup Q; and shows its link with North Africa and the Middle East in its 20% share of Haplogroups J and E1b1b. Even so, a Mexican man with Haplogroup R1b, may not be primarily Spanish and instead a mix of ethnicities as shown by autosomal DNA.

Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia:

“Taking the core African Haplogroups A, B and E, these are the defining Canaanite Haplogroups – particularly E1b1a. 

The core paternal Arab Haplogroup is J1 and to a lesser extent through admixture, J2 and E1b1b. 

The Berbers are obviously related to the sub-Saharan Africans as they share E1b1b, which is a bridge Haplogroup for the two peoples. 

The core Haplogroups for the South Asians are H, L and J2. These are the defining Haplogroups for Cush, the Sukki and Phut. Their bridge Haplogroup – which Canaan and Mizra do not exhibit in quantity – is Haplogroup L. India and Pakistan also share the bridge Haplogroup J2 with Arab related peoples and therefore, all these equatorial peoples are linked or bonded through the key Haplogroups of either primarily J2 or L.”

Comparing two sets of peoples each from

Canaans descendants, Nigeria and Ethiopia;

Cush, India and Pakistan; and

Mizra, Egypt and Saudi Arabia,

previously was revealing, for it displayed the uniqueness and relatedness of Ham and or Na’eltama’uk’s descendants in equal measure.

                               A/B   E1b1a   E1b1b    J1     J2      H      L      R1 

Nigeria                    13       68          4             

Ethiopia                  11                    63     

Egypt                      1.3         3        46       21       7                 1       8

Saudi Arabia                       8          8       40    17                 2        7

Pakistan                                                             20       6      12     37

India                                                                     9      23     18     29

Mexico                                            10            [10]                        54

The addition of Mexico, provides a contrasting bookend to Nigeria at the other end with its high level of E1b1a. Mexico on the other hand, exhibiting the highest percentage of Haplogroup, R1 due to its Aramaean majority. 

A comparison of Egypt (Pathros) with Mexico (Casluh, Caphtor, Aram) and Aramaic Spain later, reveals that they are quite different. Ostensibly, Spain and Mexico look similar. Living together for fifteen hundred years cannot be discounted. The marked variance in R1b levels, shows there is yet a significant difference. It could be argued that intermixing with the Amerindian has reduced the R1b percentage. Until detailed studies are implemented on the exact composition and descent of the R-M269 sub-Haplogroups in Mexico (and Latin America), it will remain open to debate. 

The converse could also be a factor, in that Spain has increased levels of E1b1b and J because the descendants of Casluh (and Caphtor) dwelt on the Iberian Peninsula for a number of centuries and North Africa prior to that. As we progress and witness more identity discussion, the logic of the Philistine identity presented in this chapter will fit smoothly into place as the only plausible answer.

Just as there is a wide genetic gap between the Arab and the Black African – though they are surely related (as half-brothers) – the same is also true comparing Arab and Berber lineages; each a significant minority of the Latino-Hispano demographic in the Americas. The later identification of Spain, Brazil and the United States of America, will lend considerable weight in confirming the modern Philistine identity.

Thus ends the investigation into the descendants of Ham (and Na’eltama’uk).

The principle (maternal) mtDNA Haplogroups are in alphabetical order:

H, L, M and U.

Though it must be remembered that Haplogroup L is indicative of Canaan and Haplogroup M for Ham; while Haplogroups H and U have been absorbed into Ham’s maternal lineages through intermixture with Shem’s descendants.

Whereas the prime (paternal) Y-DNA Haplogroups are:

E1b1a, E1b1b, H, J1, J2 and L.

Haplogroups E1b1a and E1b1b are indicative of Canaan and Haplogroups, H, J1, J2 and L for Ham’s descendants respectively:

Cush, Mizra, Phut and the Sukkiim

– Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

As we confirmed with Japheth’s sons, there is widespread confusion in the biblical identity community.

Cush is misidentified as Ethiopia or as the Black Africans with Phut, who is also incorrectly associated with the modern nation of Libya. Some equate Sheba and Dedan with Saudi Arabia; while Canaan and Mizra are barely identified with any significant country or people and the Philistines are invariably yet erroneously, linked with the Palestinians.

The constant reader now has a firm foundation to rely upon as we proceed to investigate the five sons of Shem, beginning in the next chapter.

Don’t answer fools according to their folly, or you will become like them yourself. Answer fools according to their folly, or they will deem themselves wise.

Proverbs 26:4-5 Common English Bible

“There is a view of life which conceives that where the crowd is, there is also truth. There is another view of life which conceives that wherever there is a crowd, there is untruth.”

Soren Kierkegaard

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

Mizra: North Africa & Arabia

Chapter XIV

Ham’s second son is Mizra, translated correctly, though a little misleadingly as Egypt.

There is always it seems, an exception to the rule and in this case regarding point number two in the Introduction (primus verba), this is it. To a degree, that is. A number of the descendants of Mizra have paradoxically, migrated very far afield; yet they also live in their original historic homeland. 

In Genesis 10:13-14 NET, we are introduced to Mizra’s seven sons. Taking our cue from especially Canaan and partially Cush, we would expect to find a number of descended nations, rather than just one or seven. We are also met with a slight conundrum, though easily resolved.

Mizra identifies with the people known as Arabs; as well as those related peoples principally located in North Africa, the Middle East, West Asia and (partially) in Latin America.

‘Mizraim [Mizra] was the father of the Ludites, Anamites, Lehabites, Naphtuhites, Pathrusites Casluhites (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorites.’

Some versions list instead as:

Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim (or Lubim), Naphtuhim, Pathrusim, Casluhim and Caphtorim.

Footnotes:

‘The Casluhites lived in Crete and eventually settled east of the Egyptian Delta, between Egypt and Canaan [on the coast]. Several commentators prefer to reverse the order of the words to put this clause after the next word, since the Philistines came from Crete (where the Caphtorites lived).

But the table may suggest migration rather than lineage…’ – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

We will focus on the Casluhim and Caphtorim in the following chapter, while addressing the migration versus linage interpretation of the verse. 

A reasonably accurate map (excepting Spain) of Mizra’s second, fourth and fifth eldest sons partially in North Africa and principally the Middle East (green) and his two youngest sons partially in North Africa and in the New World (red).

Whereas it will be shown that Mizra’s eldest and third born sons are located in West Asia, merged with other peoples descending from both Ham and Shem.

The plural Mizraim is principally translated as Egypt in the Bible. Outside of the genealogy listings in Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One, the word Mizraim is used once in Genesis 50:11 ESV, on the occasion of Jacob’s death, the father of Joseph. 

‘When the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning on the threshing floor of Atad, they said, “This is a grievous mourning by the Egyptians.” Therefore the place was named Abel-mizraim [mourning (or meadow) of Egypt]; it is beyond the Jordan.’

Egypt is mentioned some seven hundred times in the Bible. The context usually implies all the sons of Mizra, or occasionally the principal son, Pathros. A couple of chapters address Mizra specifically, such as in Ezekiel 29:9-10 ESV:

‘… and the land of Egypt shall be a desolation and a waste. Then they will know that I am the Lord. “Because you said, ‘The Nile is mine, and I made it,’ therefore, behold, I am against you and against your streams, and I will make the land of Egypt an utter waste and desolation, from Migdol to Syene, as far as the border of Cush’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

We will learn that their descendants do live ‘as far as the border of Cush’ in India today.

In Isaiah 19:22-25 ESV we read of a future time, when three great peoples are at peace:

22 ‘And the Lord will strike Egypt, striking and healing, and they will return to the Lord, and he will listen to their pleas for mercy and heal them. 23 In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria, and Assyria will come into Egypt, and Egypt into Assyria, and the Egyptians [Arabs] will worship with the Assyrians’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

This is an extraordinary passage, for the simple reason that the two future protagonists predicted as the King of the South and the King of the North are being described as no longer enemies but as friends – Articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and Is America Babylon?

24 ‘In that day Israel will be the third with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth, 25 whom the Lord of hosts has blessed, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel my inheritance.

The unfounded yet widespread assumption or belief – held by many people within and without Islam – is that the Arab people descend from Ishmael, the eldest son of Abraham. 

This has been supported largely because the Prophet Mohammad in the Quran was seen as being a spiritual successor to Abraham… thus in time, a physical descent was gradually assimilated and assumed to be true.

In the Bible, Ishmael – with the other sons of Abraham, from his second wife Keturah – are described as living in Arabia or the ‘wilderness.’ This was in the Arabian Peninsula – mainly incorporating Saudi Arabia today. It is not calling Ishmael an Arab, but stating where he originally lived.

The sons of Mizra though, have in turn become known as Arabs, due to their dwelling in Arabia, before fanning out, migrating northwards on the peninsula and westwards into north Africa – Genesis 10:13.

An article by Mark Durie, 2019, entitled, Ishamel is not the Father of the Arabs addresses this important question – emphasis mine:

‘The commonly held view that Ishmael was the father of the Arab nations is not supported by the Bible, nor by other historical evidence.

For centuries, many Muslims, Christians and Jews have taken it for granted that the Arabs descended from Abraham through Ishmael. As Gerald Hawting put it:

“The idea that the Arabs are the physical descendants of Abraham through Ishmael is indeed taken by many, non-Muslims as well as Muslims, as a genealogical and historical fact.”

‘Authors and teachers often treat the word Ishmael as a kind of code for Islam or Muslims. According to Sir Fergus Millar, Professor Emeritus of Ancient History at Oxford University, it was Josephus, a Jewish historian writing in the first century CE, who first advanced the idea that Ishmael was the ancestor of the Arabs. In The Antiquities of the Jews Josephus stated that Ishmael was “the founder” of the Arabian nation, and Abraham was “their father”. From Josephus, this assumed connection between the Arabs and Abraham, through Ishmael, passed into the historical consciousness of Christians, and then made its way into early Islam.

The Qur’an does not speak of Ishmael or Abraham as ancestors of the Arabs – although it does have Abraham and Ishmael praying for Allah to make their descendants a Muslim people – but the link is established in the hadith literature, in traditions about Muhammad’s own genealogy. In this way Abraham and Ishmael came to be considered, in Islamic tradition, not only a spiritual antecedent of Muhammad as an Islamic prophet, but also the physical ancestor of (at least some of) the Arabs.’

An example of Muhammad’s false genealogy can be found at:

https://seerah.gtaf.org/books/1/chapters/1/arab-tribes-1/

Mark Durie:

‘What does the Bible say? It speaks both of Ishmaelites, the descendants of Ishmael, and of Arabs, but does not join them together. I. Ephʿal has pointed out that the references to Ishmaelites are earlier in the Bible, and the references to Arabs later. Both refer to non-sedentary, nomadic peoples, but they are separated by centuries. Ephʿal concludes that references to “Ishmaelites” cease by the mid 10th century BCE, and the references to “Arabs” only commence in the mid-8th century BCE, so “there is no historical basis to the tradition of associating Ishmaelites with the Arabs”.

The Bible does link the Ishmaelites with the Midianites, using these names as synonyms in two places. Genesis describes Joseph as being sold to a caravan of camel-riding Ishmaelites who are also called Midianites (Genesis 37:25–28, 36; 39:1; see also Judges 8:22-24).

The evidence indicates that Ishmael was not the father of the Arabs, and neither was Abraham. The Ishmaelites were probably Canaanites, speaking, not an early form of Arabic, but a dialect similar to Hebrew. In time they disappeared or were absorbed into other groups, like so many other ancient peoples. Much later Josephus invoked Ishmael’s name to conjure up a genealogy for the Arabs. He has a lot to answer for. The rest, as they say, is history.’

We will look into this further when we study Ishmael. The author states they were probably Canaanites. Not to be confused with the sons of Ham; but rather, they were part of the later ‘Canaanites’ – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Far from being assimilated into other peoples or disappearing, the Ishmaelites due to their numbers, have always been an influential people to the degree of Empire status more than once on the world stage – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:

‘Mizraim is commonly applied to Egypt. In fact, “Mizr” is the name which the natives still apply to Egypt today.’

Now what are the chances that the most prominent son of Mizr-a-im’s descendants (Pathros) should be known by the name of their father, Mizr(a)?

Would this not be a peculiar anomaly if the Arabs were truly descended from Ishmael… and would it not be an extraordinary non-coincidence indeed, if the Arab related peoples were not the descendants of Mizra?

Herman Hoeh:

‘The Greeks called the land Aegyptus – hence our Egypt.’

Rather, the English name ‘Egypt’ is derived from the Ancient Greek, Aigyptos; via Middle French, Egypte; and Latin, Aegyptus.

Hoeh:

‘First, notice that… Mizraim first settled on the northeast corner of the Mediterranean Sea. From there they spread through the Eastern Mediterranean isles and into Africa. The Philistines, who came from Mizraim [in part], inhabited Southern Palestine even in the days of Abraham (Genesis 21:34). They are still there today – in the Gaza strip in Palestine – causing no end of trouble (Zechariah 9:6-7). 

The Philistines (a branch of the family of Casluhim) settled originally on the Island of Crete in the Mediterranean. Crete is called, in the Bible, Caphtor (Jeremiah 47:4 and Amos 9:7). The Island of Caphtor was originally settled by the Caphtorim, a tribe of Mizraim (Genesis 10:14). Both the Philistines and the Caphtorim destroyed the Canaanites in South Palestine and lived in their place (Deuteronomy 2:23). No wonder there are so few Canaanites left! The main body of non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine today are not Canaanites, but Philistines! [they are neither].

The Pathrusim of Genesis 10:14 migrated from Asia Minor to central Egypt. Every prophecy shows Pathros to be a part of Egypt along the Nile (Jeremiah 44:1,5 and Ezekiel 29:14). The Naphtuhim probably settled in the extreme south of Egypt, founding the capital city of Napata among the black people of Africa.

The Lehabim – the word “Lehabim” means a people of reddish color – settled Libya originally. Libya is in North Africa. Today they are found scattered throughout the savanahs of the Western Sudan in Africa. In this region today we find a people “of reddish brown or light chestnut color… with smooth hair, never woolly, straight and even aquiline noses… differentiating them from the [Black] type”. The original word “Lehabim” was shortened in Bible times to “Lubim” (II Chronicles 12:3; 16:8). The [Africans] call these people “fulbe”, meaning, probably, Lubim dwelling in the ancient land of Phut. In the central reaches of the Sahara (the great desert in North Africa) live the Ludim (Gen.10:14) – the lightest of the Egyptians.

For example the Arabs acknowledge that they are descendants of Ishmael, the son of Abraham. In Bible prophecy they are often [never] mentioned by the name “Ishmael.”

We will confirm that the Philistines are not the non-Jewish peoples, the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, for they have travelled considerably farther afield. The final sentence is a good (or rather bad) example of how the first opinion heard, is the one that lingers the longest in peoples’ minds whether correct or incorrect. How easy it is to be indoctrinated without even realising. Just because a people claim to be someone does not make it necessarily so… we will find this scenario repeated later, to devastating effect -Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine: 

Mizraim is derived from a Hebrew term, and is a plural word with the meaning double straits (SHD 4714, mitsrayim – dual of matsor (4693). This duality may refer to the distinction between the original kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt. The Egyptians referred to their land as Kmt in the hieroglyphs. In [Neo-]Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions Egypt was known as Musur and Musri, probably from the word Misr meaning simply, land. The Ugaritic inscriptions refer to Egypt as Msrm, while in the Amarna tablets it is called Misri.’

The oldest attestation of the name Mizra (Misr) for Egypt is the Akkadian mi-is-ru (misru) related to misru, misirru, misaru, meaning ‘border’ or ‘frontier.’

‘The term Misr is still seen in the modern [official] Arabic name for the nation, Jumhuriyah [Misr]al-‘Arabiyah (the Arabic Republic of Egypt).’

While Misr is the Classical Quranic Arabic name for Egypt, Masr is the local pronunciation in Egyptian Arabic. 

Online Encylopaedia –  emphasis & bold mine:

‘Mizraim is the dual form of matzor, meaning a “mound” or “fortress”… Some Ancient Egyptian inscriptions at the time of Pharoah Amenhotep IV refer to Egypt as Masara and to Egyptians as Masrawi.

According to Eusebius’ Chronicon, Manetho had suggested that the great age of antiquity of which the later Egyptians boasted had actually preceded the Flood and that they were really descended from Mizraim, who settled there anew.

A similar story is related by medieval Islamic historians… and the Persians… stating that the pyramids etc. had been built by the wicked races before [rather, after] the Deluge, but that Noah’s descendant Mizraim (Masar or Mesr) was entrusted with reoccupying the region afterwards’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘The Islamic accounts also make Masar the son of a Bansar or Beisar and grandson of Ham, rather than a direct son of Ham… Some scholars think it likely that Mizraim is a dual form of the word Misr meaning “land”, and was translated literally into Ancient Egyptian as Ta-Wy (the Two Lands) by early pharaohs at Thebes who later founded the Middle Kingdom.

… according to George Syncellus the Book of Sothis, attributed to Manetho, (incorrectly) identified Mizraim with the legendary first Pharaoh Menes, said to have unified the Old Kingdom and built Memphis’ – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.

‘Mizraim also seems to correspond to Misor, said in Phoenician mythology to have been the father of Taautus who was given Egypt, and later scholars noticed that this also recalls Menes, whose son or successor was said to be Athothis’ – Article: Thoth.

‘… the author David Rohl has suggested a different interpretation: Amongst the followers of Meshkiagkash-er (Sumerian ruler) was his younger ‘brother’ – in his own right a strong and charismatic leader of men. He is the head of the falcon tribe – the descendants of Horus the ‘Far Distant’. The Bible calls this new Horus-king ‘Mizraim’ but this name is, in reality, no more than an epithet. It means ‘follower of Asr’ or ‘Asar’ (Egyptian Arabic m-asr with the Egyptian preposition m ‘from’). Mizraim is merely m-Izra with the majestic plural ending ‘im’. Likewise, that other great Semitic-speaking people -the Assyrians – called the country of the pharaohs ‘Musri’ (m-Usri).’

Abarim state that Mizra denotes duality.

In Hebrew it means:

‘double siege’ or ‘double distress’ from masor, ‘siege’ or ‘entrenchment’ and the verb sur, ‘to bind, besige’. Also mesar, ‘distress’ and the verb sarar, ‘to bind.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:  

‘Egypt was known by the names Musuru, Musru, Misir or Masri in other languages, and Mizraim is probably simply a phonetic transliteration into Hebrew of any of them. The verb from which the noun derives, is part of a group of five different roots: 

Sur I: to lean or incline

Sur II: to confine, secure or besiege

Sur III: to be an adversary 

Sur IV: to form or fashion

Sur V: to be sharp

The word (mesar), meaning straights or distress, written in a dual form would yield the name Mizraim… the name Mizraim means also Double Stronghold

An identifying clue to who and where the sons of Mizra are is the fact that the Arabic nations are invariably in a condition of strife and war – either against the state of Israel, Black Africans, minorities in their own countries, or most noticeably, their own people. This is a defining characteristic of the Arab nations, foretold centuries ago.

Isaiah 19:2-3

Young’s Literal Translation

‘And I armed Egyptians against Egyptians, And they fought, each against his brother, And each against his neighbour, City against city, kingdom against kingdom. And emptied out hath been in its midst the spirit of Egypt. And its counsel I swallow up, And they have sought unto the idols, And unto the charmers, And unto those having familiar spirits, And unto the wizards.’

The NET translates verse two as:

“I will provoke civil strife in Egypt: brothers will fight with one another, as will neighbors, cities, and kingdoms.”

In Hebrew, Pathros means: ‘South Land’ from the Egyptian pe-te-res or ‘place of interpretation’ from the verb patar, ‘to interpret dreams.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Pathros is the name [for] Mizraim’s South Region. Mizraim is the Hebrew name for Egypt, and southern Egypt was known as Upper Egypt. The name Pathros occurs half a dozen times in the Bible, always in clear association with Mizraim (Ezekiel 29:14, Isaiah 11:11). The writers of the Septuagint transliterated the name Pathros with Pa-athyris, meaning Belonging to Athor, but who Athor is remains a mystery’ – refer articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘Some words of interest: (pata), meaning to entice, deceive, persuade. Derivation (peti) means simple, foolish… (pat) means fragment, bit. The verb (rasas) means moisten. Derivation (rasis) means drop of dew. The identical but unused and not translatable root (rss) yields identical derivation (rasis), meaning fragment. Hence to the Hebrews the name Pathros may have sounded like Bits And Pieces, or even Wet Lands [the Nile], and Entreaty For A Drop, or any combination of the above.’

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim continues regarding Mizra’s fifth son Pathros – emphasis mine:

‘The Pathrusim (SHD 6625, meaning southerners) were a tribe located at Pathros near Thebes in Upper Egypt. The name Pathros means region of the south (6624), possibly from the Egyptian Pa-To-Ris. The LXX refers to the people as the Patrosoniim.

In the apocryphal Book of Jasher, both the Pathrusim and Casluhim were recorded as the progenitors of the Pelishtim, Azathim, Gerarim, Githim, and Ekronim, who were associated with several prominent Philistine cities, such as Gerar, Gath and Ekron’ – refer Chapter XVThe Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

‘The conclusions must be that if they did conjoin it was by branches. The main branch went south to Thebes while the cadet branch joined the Cashluhim and formed the five Philistine cities and hence also the five names in Jasher.

The Hebrew Pathros and the gentilic Pathrusim are derived from the Egyptian p’-t’-rsy, which is a term used to designate the whole of Egypt above Memphis. In the Assyrian material Esarhaddon refers to himself as the king of Musur [Mizra], Paturisi [Pathros], and Kusi [Cush], meaning, from Isaiah 11:11, that Musur and the Hebrew Misrayim was restricted to Middle and Lower Egypt, thus leaving Pathros for the Thebaid. Jeremiah 44:1, 15, Ezekiel 29:14 and 30:14 refer to Pathros as the original home of the Egyptians. The gentilic Pathrusim occurs only in Genesis 10:14 and 1 Chronicles 1:12.’

The prominence of Pathros in the Bible and its central position in Egypt and the Nile points to its identity actually being, the modern nation of Egypt.  

Egyptian men

Isaiah 11:11

English Standard Version

‘In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria [Russia], from Egypt [Mizra – Arabs of the Middle East and North Africa], from Pathros [country of Egypt], from Cush [India], from Elam [Turkey], from Shinar [Western Europe], from Hamath [Nigeria], and from the coastlands of the sea [East Asia and South East Asia].’

Jeremiah 44:1, 15

English Standard Version

‘The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the Judeans who lived in the land of Egypt, at Migdol, at Tahpanhes, at Memphis, and in the land of Pathros… Then all the men who knew that their wives had made offerings to other gods, and all the women who stood by, a great assembly, all the people who lived in Pathros in the land of Egypt…’

Cairo (above and below), the capital of Egypt and the River Nile (above)

The sprawling modern city of Cairo (below) encroaches on the most enduring monolithic enigma in the world… the Great Pyramid of Giza and its two companions, the second and third Pyramids – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Ezekiel 29:14

English Standard Version

‘… and I will restore the fortunes of Egypt and bring them back to the land of Pathros, the land of their origin, and there they shall be a lowly kingdom.’

Ezekiel 30:14

English Standard Version

‘I will make Pathros a desolation and will set fire to Zoan and will execute judgments on Thebes.’

These verses reveal Pathros is very much the heart of Mizra, though a separate, prominent people (or nation), who uniquely dwell in their original ancient homeland.  

The flag of Egypt – with the pan Arab colours comprising Red, White and Black.

Flags of the Arab nations use these core colours and or incorporate green, representing Islam.

Egypt has one of the longest histories of any country on the Earth and is an early cradle of civilisation.

Modern Egypt dates back to 1922, when it gained independence from the British Empire. Egypt declared itself a republic after a revolution deposing the monarchy in 1952. Egypt has endured decades of social and religious strife, with political instability. It has fought armed conflicts with Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973; occupying the Gaza Strip intermittently until 1967. In 1978, Egypt signed the Camp David Accords officially withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and recognising the state of Israel.  

Egyptian women

Islam is the official religion of Egypt and Arabic the official language.

With a population of 119,392,781 people, Egypt is the most populous country in North Africa, the Middle East and the Arab world and third in Africa after Nigeria and Ethiopia. By the year 2100, Egypt’s projected population will be 201,895,000 people – the 11th biggest in the world.

The great majority of its people live near the banks of the Nile River where the only arable land is found. The large regions of the Sahara desert which constitute most of Egypt’s territory, are sparsely populated – refer map below.

The Arab world inherited vast tracts of land constituting mainly desert. The current inhabitants live primarily, as shown above, near water. This area of the world has been actively dwelt in without rest by countless civilisations comprising millions of people so that the soil has understandably become barren.

The ancient Egyptian name of the country km.t, meaning ‘black land’, refers to the fertile black soils of the Nile flood plains, as distinct from the deshret or ‘red land’ of the desert.

With a large and diversified economy, Egypt is projected to become one of the largest in the world in the 21st century. Egypt presently has the second largest economy in Africa after South Africa which.

Egypt had nominal GDP of $347.3 billion in 2025, making it the 44th biggest economy in the world.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Egyptian global shipments during 2024. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$10.6 billion
  2. Electrical machinery, equipment: $2.5 billion
  3. Fertilizers: $2.4 billion
  4. Fruits, nuts: $2 billion
  5. Iron, steel: $1.9 billion
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $1.84 billion
  7. Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $1.53 billion
  8. Vegetables: $1.46 billion
  9. Gems, precious metals: $1.34 billion
  10. Salt, sulphur, stone, cement: $1.33 billion

Knitted or crocheted clothing and accessories represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 86.6% year over year since 2023. The other gainer was mineral fuels including oil, which rose 44.2% led by processed petroleum oils. The leading decliner among the top 10 Egyptian export categories was gems and precious metals which fell -27.7% year over year, pulled down by lower revenues for exported gold.’

In Ezekiel 27:7 NKJV, it states: 

‘Fine embroidered [H7553 – riqmah: from H7551 ‘to be skilfully wrought or woven’] linen [H8336 – shesh: ‘bleached white’] from Egypt was what you spread for your sail…’ 

King of Cotton, describes Egyptian cotton:

‘Egyptian cotton has not gained such a reputation without reason. Egyptian cotton “is” the world’s finest cotton and the following characteristics are what sets Egyptian cotton apart from other natural fibres: 

The length of the fibre makes it possible to make the finest of yarns without sacrificing the strength of the yarn… [The thread count is the number of threads in each square inch and generally speaking, the higher the thread count, the more luxurious, dense and soft the material will feel]. The strength of the fibre makes fabrics more solid and more resistant to stress. Its ability to absorb liquids gives fabrics made of Egyptian cotton deeper, brighter and more resistant colours. Its softness feels like nothing else in the world. Egyptian cotton is hand picked which guarantees the highest levels of purity. In addition, hand picking puts no stress on the fibres – as opposed to mechanical picking – leaving the fibres straight and intact.

All these factors have resulted in Egyptian cotton being by far the best cotton in the world. Fabrics made of Egyptian Cotton are softer, finer and last longer than any other cotton in the world.’

Encyclopaedia:

‘The coat of arms of Egypt is known as the Republican Eagle, National Emblem of Egypt or Egyptian Golden Eagle, is a heraldic golden eagle, facing the viewer’s left. The eagle’s breast is charged with an escutcheon bearing the red-white-black bands of the flag of Egypt rotated vertically, whilst the eagle’s talons hold a scroll bearing the official name of the state written in Kufic script. The earliest version of the Eagle of Saladin was that used as the flag of Saladin, the first Sultan of Egypt, whilst the modern version of the eagle was adopted during the Egyptian Revolution of 1952.’

Egypt is a regional power in North Africa, the Middle East and the Muslim World – a middle power worldwide.

Egypt has the strongest military in Africa; while South Africa is 4th and Nigeria 5th. The other Arab nations in the top ten, behind Egypt are Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia and Libya.

Egypt’s developing economy; fast increasing population (growing at the same rate as Pakistan in 2025: 1.57%); and expanding military capability are all indicators of Egypt (unbeknown to itself) being prepared for its future role – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.

So it is interesting that Egypt should be strengthening its relationship with Turkey – Chapter XVIII Turkey & Elam.

In February 2024, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan visited Egypt for the first time since 2012, ending more than a decade of political and diplomatic rupture between Egypt and Turkey.

Photograph taken and released by the Turkish Presidency Press Office on February 14, 2024, shows Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (R) being welcomed by his Egyptian counterpart Abdel Fattah al-Sisi (L) as he arrives at Cairo International Airport during his official visit to Egypt.

Middle East Eye:

It was ‘the biggest step yet towards cementing a rapprochement between the two regional powers.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi welcomed Erdogan on the Tarmac and the two exchanged a handshake.

After years in which they regarded each other as persona non grata – due primarily to Sisi’s 2013 coup against his predecessor Mohamed Morsi, an Erdogan ally – relations between the two leaders have improved since 2021, following behind-the-scenes diplomatic efforts.

The first fruits of these efforts emerged during the World Cup in Qatar in 2022, when Erdogan and Sisi briefly met for the first time.

The two leaders signed several agreements… both advocating for “a new era in relations,'” an increase in trade to “15 billion dollars per year in a few years,” and diplomatic cooperation in the Middle East and Africa.

“Egypt is currently Turkey’s top trading partner in Africa,” Sisi said in a press conference with Erdogan in Cairo.

Turkey-Egypt relations are of critical importance not only for the two countries but also for the region, and must be evaluated as part of changing circumstances, analysts say.

Countries from Sudan to Ethiopia and Libya are also directly affected by the nature of relations between Cairo and Ankara, as both countries have backed opposing sides in regional conflicts.

“It is a shift from strategic stubbornness to strategic relations,” [said Mehmet] Ozkan… a professor at the National Defence University in Turkey.’

In line with Egypt’s increasing stature is the effort and expenditure being expended on a new impressive capital city.

https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2023/08/photos-egypt-new-administrative-capital-megaproject/675179/

Egypt’s New Capital-City Megaproject, The Atlantic, August 30, 2023, Alan Taylor:

‘First announced in 2015, Egypt’s new, as-yet-unnamed capital city has been under construction for years, at an estimated cost of more than $50 billion. Temporarily referred to as the New Administrative Capital, the massive development is just one of several megaprojects being built by the government of President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

The new city, about 28 miles southeast of Cairo, is planned for more than six million residents, and is designed in part to relieve traffic and other stresses on the crumbling infrastructure in Cairo. The project, largely operated by Egypt’s Ministry of Defense, will consolidate and move government headquarters into a more controlled setting, monitored by more than 6,000 surveillance cameras.’

Skyscraper buildings, including the Iconic Tower, centre, in the central business district (CBD) of Egypt’s New Administrative Capital, on Monday, July 31, 2023.

‘It is already home to the tallest building in Africa, a huge presidential palace, dozens of ministry buildings, schools, hospitals, mosques, and churches – with many more to come. Completion remains years away, and the Egyptian government has gone deeply into debt, but some people have begun moving in, even though many Cairo residents, according to Reuters, say they “cannot afford to live in the new city.”

The first born son of Mizra is Lud, translated in the plural as Ludim in the Bible.

There is another Lud in the Bible, who is the fourth son of Shem. Sometimes translated as Lydia or the Lydians, after the people who dwelt in Western Asia Minor. They have intermingled and become synonymous – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

We will give more attention to both the descendants of Lud later; though to highlight the confusion researchers have experienced in trying to keep them separate we will refer to Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – Emphasis mine:

‘Although there is a Semite of the same name, we find that Lud, grandson of Ham, was father of the Ludim. He was also the first-born of Mizraim. 

The entry in the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (ISBE) is as follows:

“In Genesis 10:13 Ludim appears as the firstborn of Mizraim (Egypt), and in 10:22 Lud is the fourth son of Shem. We have therefore to do with two different nationalities bearing the same name, and not always easy to distinguish…”

‘Everything points, therefore, to the Semitic Lud and Ludim being Lydia, and the identification may be regarded as satisfactory. It is altogether otherwise with the Egyptian Lud and Ludim, however, about which little can be said at present. Mellink (ibid.) considers the Lydians of Asia Minor to be neither Hamitic nor Semitic. We dealt with the probable movement of the Semite Ludim to the Hindu Kush at the border of India and beyond into the Punjab in the papers Sons of Shem…’

Trying to split these two identities creates difficulty; once their mergence is understood, it becomes clear. We have an identical situation with Mizra’s third son Lehab.

The Lubim have merged with Phut’s descendants and both can be identified as ‘Libya’ in the Bible. Together, they comprise the modern nation of Pakistan – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Recall the verses we recently read in the preceding chapter: 2 Chronicles 12:3, 16:8, Nahum 3.9 and Ezekiel 30.5. All four verses translate Lubim or Lehab as Libya, the same as Phut. Libya refers to Phut, as does Lehab or Lubim; two identities, yet together they form a single nation.

In Daniel 11.43 YLT, we see a fifth and final example of this:

and he hath ruled over treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the desirable things of Egypt [Mizra – the Arabs], and Lubim [Pakistan] and Cushim [India] [are] at his steps.’

In Ezekiel 29:10 we read that Mizra’s people or ‘border’ would reach to Cush and so it does as Pakistan’s eastern border adjoins India.

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – Emphasis mine:

‘The term Lehabim (SHD 3853; sing. 3851) means flames or blades. It has been suggested that these people ought to be identified with the Lubim, arising from the proposal that “the one word may be a corruption of the other” (ISBE). The name Lubim is possibly the same as that of the country, Libya, to the northwest of Egypt. It is probably that the term Lybios as a son of Mizraim refers to the Ludim and the Lehabim who were conjoined, as were two other sons of Mizraim in North Africa, thereby forming the Philistines and also the Thebans.’

An astute point, particularly regarding the Philistines, which we will address in the next chapter; though this writer would suggest that the correct conjoining has been between Mizra’s son Lud-im and Shem’s son Lud and between Mizra’s son Lehab or Lub-im and Ham’s son Phut or Libya.

Mizra’s second and fourth sons respectively are Anam and Naphtuh.

They are placed together as they account for the Arab peoples laying towards the east of Pathros. They are only mentioned in the Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One genealogies and are therefore included in the general scriptures and prophecies pertaining to Mizra-im. 

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:

‘The second son of Mizraim has a name meaning affliction of the waters (anamiym, SHD 6047), and apparently derives from an Egyptian word. The Septuagint uses the term Enemetiim. An Assyrian text from the time of Sargon II refers to certain people as Anami, although they were apparently located in Cyrene, Libya as Albright suggests and… equates them with the cuneiform A-na-mi found in a geographical text from the time of Sargon II and parallel to Kapara, who were the Caphtorim. Little else is known of this tribe.

As the fourth of the tribes descended from Mizraim, the Naphtuhim have a name which means openings (SHD 5320, naphtuchiym), and is considered a word of foreign origin. The Septuagint gives their name as Nephthalim. The ISBE entry for this group reads:

“A son of Mizraim… but, according to most modern authorities, a district or a dependency of Egypt. Brown-Driver-Briggs… suggests that the Naphtuhim were located in Lower Egypt, and a connection has been made with Na-Ptah, the Egyptian word for Memphis.” 

Lambdin in his article… places the Naphtuhim between the Lehabim [Pakistan] (which are identified with the Libyans) and the Pathrusim [Egypt ] as inhabitants of Upper Egypt, and hence they are inhabitants of the Delta.’

The nations to the east of Egypt in the Near East, lean towards an identification with Naphtuh and the nations further south in the Arabian Peninsula identify with Anam. Anam in Hebrew also means: ‘responding waters’ from the verb ana, ‘to answer’ and the noun mayim, ‘waters.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘There are four verbs of the form (‘nh), or perhaps one verb with four distinct usages: Verb (‘ana I) means to answer, respond or correspond, and… means time… (‘ana III) means to afflict, oppressor humble, Noun (‘anaw) refers to the poor, afflicted or needy.

It’s not immediately obvious where the name Naphtuhim comes from, or that it is Hebrew to start with. But as it is, the name Naphtuhim may have reminded a Hebrew audience of the root-group (patah), conveying meaning of to open or to engrave… and since the opening of the lips precedes speaking, and the opening of ears precedes hearing, our verb may also mean to speak and to hear… to the opening of constricting things… to loosen or release. Noun (petiha) denotes a drawn sword (the edge of a sword was known as the “mouth” of it).’

The most prominent nation in the Arab world aside from Egypt is Saudi Arabia, with a population of 34,907,603 people. Of the top ten nations with the most natural resources it is a formidable number two, behind China. Saudi Arabia by Arabic standards is a small country in the Middle East, slightly larger than Mexico. Saudi Arabia has some $34.4 trillion worth of natural resources – notably oil. Saudi Arabia has been the world’s leading exporter of oil since its discovery in 1938. Possessing 22.4% of the world’s reserves, the country’s economy relies heavily on its oil exports. It has the fourth largest natural gas reserves and other major natural resources include ‘copper, feldspar, phosphate, silver, sulfur, tungsten, and zinc.’

Saudi Arabia had a nominal GDP of $1.08 Trillion in 2025, being the 18th largest economy in the world. The Saudi government owns and operates much of the country’s major industry through its oil company Aramco. Global environmental concerns drive an increased interest in developing non-fossil fuel energy sources, thus the Saudis look to diversify their economy, including encouraging private investment in healthcare and other service industries.

The script on the Saudi Arabian flag is the shahada, the Islamic creed:

There is no god but Allah; Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.’

The combined population of the twenty-four Arabic nations and territories is some four hundred and fifty million people. A united confederacy of Arab nations led by Egypt would certainly be a formidable force and could well participate with the leadership and primary allies of the King of the South – Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.  

Man from Dubai and Saudi Arabian woman

Mitochondrial DNA structure in the Arabian Peninsula, multiple authors, 2008 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The results showed that the Arabian Peninsula has received substantial gene flow from Africa* (20%), detected by the presence of L, M1 and U6* lineages; that an 18% of the Arabian Peninsula lineages have a clear eastern provenance, mainly represented by U lineages; but also by Indian M lineages and rare M links with Central Asia, Indonesia and even Australia.

However, the bulk (62%) of the Arabian lineages has a Northern source. However, when attending to the relative contribution of the different L haplogroups, Qatar, Saudi Arabia andYemen are highly similar for their L3 (34%), L2 (36%) and L0 (21%) frequencies whereas in Oman and UAE the bulk of L lineages belongs to L3 (72%).’ 

The maternal Haplogroups L2 and L3 in the peninsula Arabs are shared with sub-Saharan Africans – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

This is noteworthy in that while Canaan and Mizra had different fathers, they clearly shared a maternal ancestor – Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

Nearly all the main western Asia Haplogroups are detected in the Saudi Arabian Peninsula, including the rare U9 clade. Saudi Arabs have only a minority sub-Saharan Africa* component of 7%, similar to the specific Haplogroup contribution of North Africa of 5% and a small Indian influence at 3%. The majority of the Saudi Arab mitochondrial DNA lineages have a western Asia provenance of up to 85%.

‘The majority (12) of the 19 M lineages found in the Arabian Peninsula that do not belong to M1 have matches or are related to Indian clades, which confirm previous results. Five undefined M lineages were genome sequenced. It is confirmed that 5 of the 6 Saudi lineages analyzed have also Indian roots. All these Indian M sequences have been found in Arabia as isolated lineages that belong to clusters with deep roots and high diversity in India. Therefore, its presence in Arabia is better explained by recent backflow from India than by supposing that these lineages are footsteps of an M ancestral migration across Arabia.’

A third option available which explains the link between the Indian peoples of Cush and the Arabs of Mizra, is simply that they are brothers. The theories on who migrated from where to where are based on an evolutionary view of history and therefore the issue remains perplexing for geneticists and ethnologists alike.

‘The high diversity of N1a in the Arabian Peninsula, Ethiopia and Egypt raises the possibility that this area was a secondary center of expansion for this haplogroup. However, the highest diversity for N1b and N1c are in Turkey, and Kurds and Iranians, respectively.

Macrohaplogroup R is the main branch of N and their major subclades (H, J-T, K-U) embraced the majority of the West Eurasian mtDNA lineages. The Western Asia haplogroup H is the most abundant haplogroup in Europe and the Near East. However in the Arabian Peninsula its mean frequency is moderate…’

Haplogroups N, R and H are associated primarily with the descendants of Shem and Europeans. There is some crossover into Ham’s descendants through intermarriage and mixing. The mtDNA N Haplogroup which is higher in the Turks and Persians, reflects their lineal descent from Shem and not from Ham – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran; and XVIII Elam & Turkey.

‘Haplogroup T shows regional heterogeneity in Saudi Arabia and has significantly lower frequencies in Southern Yemen and Oman countries. 

Haplogroup U comprises numerous branches (U1 to U9 and K) that have different geographic distributions. In Saudi Arabia all of them have representatives albeit in minor frequencies, K (4%) and U3* (2.3%) being the most abundant clades.’

Recall that mtDNA Haplogroup U2 is mainly found in India; U7 in Pakistan; and U5 in Europe. It is important to remember that mtDNA Haplogroup U is indicative of Shem’s European descendants and has entered Ham’s descendants (Mizra-Arabia, Cush-India, Phut-Pakistan) lineages through intermixture – as with Haplogroup H and similarly for Haplogroup J.

‘There is no geographical heterogeneity for the total U distribution in Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, it is significantly different among the Arabian Peninsula countries, with Southern countries showing higher frequencies than the others.

As a whole, haplogroup J reaches its highest frequency in Saudi Arabia, where its regional distribution is also significantly heterogeneous but opposite to that found for (preHV)1. For the J, the West (37.5%) and Southeast (25.7%) regions have higher frequencies than the Central (17.6%) and North (16.3%) regions. Heterogeneity in the whole Peninsula is also significant being Saudi Arabia (21%) and Qatar (17.8%) the two countries with the highest J frequencies. However, the subclade distribution is different in each country. Subclade J1b is the main contributor (9.4%) in Saudi Arabia while other J subclades account for 14.5% in Qatar. With the Qatar exception, J1b is the most frequent subclade in the Arabian Peninsula. 

Nevertheless, whereas the J1b branch TMRCA (11,099 ± 8,381 years ago) was contemporary to that of the northern J1b1a1, the recalculated age of the (preHV)1b branch (by adding all the new HVSI sequences found in the present survey to the ones previously used, was of only 4,036 ± 2,211 years ago which situates this expansion in the Bronze Age. These results could be satisfactorily explained if we admit an older Paleolithic implantation in Saudi Arabia of the J1b clade that, perhaps, with some other N and L clades would form the primitive population.’

‘Graphical relationships among the studied populations. MDS plot based on FST haplogroup distances.

Codes are: Ce = Central Saudi Arab, Dz = Druze, Et = Ethiopian, Ke = Kenyan, No = Northern Saudi Arab, Nu = Nubian, SE = Southeastern Saudi Arab, Su = Sudan, We = Western Saudi Arab. Bd = Bedouin Arab, Eg = Egyptian, In = Iranian, Iq = Iraqi, Jo = Jordanian, Ku = Kurd, Om = Omani, Pa = Palestinian, Qa = Qatar, Sy = Syrian, Tu = Turk, UA = United Arab Emirates, Ye = Yemeni.’

Carriers of Mitochondrial DNA Macrohaplogroup N Lineages Reached Australia around 50,000 Years Ago following a Northern Asian Route, multiple authors, 2015 – emphasis mine:

‘Although the bulk of the Arabian sequences (70%) belong to different clades of macrohaplogroup R, 13% percent of Arabian samples belong to haplogroup L, with a clear sub-Saharan African origin.

One of the two L Arabian completely sequenced samples was a typical L2a1 lineage with a reversion at the 16309 position. The second is a derived L3i1a sequence, with its closest counterpart observed in Ethiopia pointing to a recent importation from northeastern Africa.

Seven per cent of the Arabian samples were assigned to macro-haplogroup M, of which 4% are members of the North African haplogroup M1, and the remaining 3% conform a miscellaneous group of sequences from South, Southeast and Eastern Asian origins and sole representatives of Melanesia (Q1), Madagascar (M32c) or Australia (M42). In particular, the rare Arabian M sample completely sequenced in this study belongs to the Indian M42b1 clade, sharing only transversion 95C with a Munda sequence (MUN22) at the same clade. A sister branch of the Indian M42b, with a coalescence time estimation around 55 kya [estimated date more accurate if quartered at the very least], has spread in Australia.’

Confirming the maternal genetic link – of Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk – between the Melanesians and Indians of Cush; and the Black peoples of Africa and Canaan with the Arabs from Mizra.

Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups Observed in Iraqi Population, multiple authors, 2015:

‘Mitochondrial DNA hypervariable regions I and II of [the] control region were sequenced from 100 random healthy unrelated individuals of three sequential generations [belonging] to the Arab [ethnicity of the] Iraqi population.

The aim of this study was to [detect] the mtDNA haplotypes and [classify them] into mtDNA haplogroups [thereby] useful in forensic genetics applications and determining the Iraqi population history. The sequence variation within [the] D-loop control region were analyzed [and] the composition of haplogroups… showed [a] high frequency of haplogroups U, H, J, M, D[?], T and N[?] (18%, 14%, 10%, 9%, 7%, 7% and 7%, respectively), [a] moderate frequency of haplogroups L and I was (4%) [found] and B[?], A[?], R and K (2%), and [a] low frequency of haplogroup pre-HV (1%). This study [also indicated a] lack of V, P, Y, X[?], O, Z, Q, G, E and C haplogroups.’

A comparison of mtDNA Haplogroups from the aforementioned paper, consisting of Arab populations and others from West Asia and Europe. It throws light on the simplicity, yet subtle complexity of the Haplogroup sequencing which dictates the similarities, yet differences between ethnicities and races.

                     Pre-HV  HV    H      U      J    M    T      I     K     L1     L3    W      X     V    

Iraq                               6     17      15     8     8     3      2   12                4      9     

Syria                  4         4     25      16    10    1   10             4       3               3               3 

Palestinian       2         2     31        8     9     2   13             7    0.9               3      3  

Arabia               4         4     13       11    21            5   0.8    4               11     2       2  

Iran                   6         6     17      22   14            8      2     8                2      2       3  

Turkey              4         4     25      19   11     4   12      2      6            0.3      4       4  

Slav                                      41       19   11  0.9   12      3     4                     0.9   0.6      3

Italy                   2         2     33      22    7             9      4     8                        2       3      5 

German                               50      14    8             9      3     7                         1    0.5      3 

American          7         7     31      23    9            12      2    8                         1        2  

Notice the lack of Haplogroups M and L in the Europeans and West Asians – apart from admixture – which are indicative of Indians and sub-Saharan Africans respectively.

The mtDNA Haplogroups H, V, J, T, U and K are typically associated with Europeans, the descendants of Shem. Though they are also exhibited by the descendants of Mizra. This reveals intermixing between maternal descendants of Shem and lineages from Mizra, just as we discovered between Cush and Shem with mtDNA Haplogroup U – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Another set of figures from a different study though not identical, still highlights the relative percentage shift from an eastern Arab population in Saudi Arabia, towards the far westerly location in Morocco of the near related Berbers.

The Arabs have sprung principally from five different sons of Mizra – and who knows how many wives from Ham and Shem – and thus exhibit a broad range within the maternal mtDNA Haplogroups. The Haplogroup N percentage is comprised of the totals for Haplogroups I, W and X. The Haplogroup U total is comprised of sub-Haplogroups of U, with U2, U3, U4 and U5. Haplogroup T includes the sum of T1 and T2 and Haplogroup HV includes the percentage for HV0+V.

                            L      H    H1+H3   HV      J      T       U      K       N

Lebanon            2     34         7           6        8     10      15      8       6       

Syria                   6     26                      5        9     12      20     6       4

Iraq                     8     17          2         11      13      9       17      5       4

Saudi Arabia   10       9                       1      19      7       10      4      5   

Palestine           11     27                      3      10      8        9      7       3      

Jordan              14     25         2           6       6      7       23      4       4   

Morocco           21     28        16          9       5       5      16      5       3

Egypt                22     16                      4       9      11        9      5       4

Algeria              25     31        12          9       4       5      10      3       2

Libya                 28     17                      9     10       6      12      5       3

Tunisia             28    28        12          7        5       8      14     10      3

Using the ancient mtDNA Haplogroup L – the defining marker Haplogroup for the related sub-Saharan Africans – Lebanon is one bookend, with the least and Tunisia is the other bookend with the highest level of L.

Lebanon, like its neighbouring nations, possess far less Haplogroup L than their cousins in North Africa who carry higher percentages. In contrast, the Arab nations of the Near East tend to have higher levels of Haplogroups J, T and U. Aside from Haplogroup L, Haplogroup H is also dominant amongst the Arabs, yet does not follow any geographical dispersion pattern as Haplogroup L portrays. 

The Lebanese while possessing the least of Haplogroup L, have the most overall of Haplogroup H at 33.8%. Jordan has the highest level of Haplogroup U overall, with close to 23% and Saudi Arabia has the highest percentage of Haplogroup J at 19.4%. Tunisia with 28.2%, edges Libya’s 27.5% for Haplogroup L.

Saudi Arabia: J [19.4%] – L [10.3%] – H [9%] – T2 [4.2%] –

K [4.2%] – T1 [2.3%] – HV [0.8%] 

Lebanon: H [33.8%] – K [8.3%] – J [7.9%] – T1 [5.7%] –

T2 [4.6%] – HV [3.1%] – L [1.8%] 

Egypt: L [21.8%] – H [15.7%] – J [8.8%] – T2 [6.1%] –

T1 [5.3%] – K [4.5%] – HV [4%]

Morocco: L [28.2%] – H [28.2% – K [4.8%] – J [4.7%] –

T2 [4.2%] – HV [2%] – T1 [0.7%]

Note that the dominant maternal Haplogroup for combined Berbers and Arabs in North Africa is primarily L, followed by H and then J. Whereas in Arabia and the Near East, the dominant Haplogroups are H or J, as in the case for Saudi Arabia. Overall, the dominant and defining marker mtDNA Haplogroups for the Arabic peoples is primarily H through admixture, followed by the naturally indicative L.

A considerable number of genetic disorders which are specific to Arabs, are located on a HLA segment on their chromosome 6. These segment mutations are then also markers for Arabs in genealogical and forensic profiling tests and studies, indicating they are a separate or rather distinct ethnic or racially defined family. Not solely a mixture of European and South Asian (or African) peoples and certainly not a hybrid people in the pure sense; though in part yes due to the obvious intermixing which has occurred in the distant past and is evidenced by the prevalence of mtDNA Haplogroups originating from Shem’s line.

Four principal autosomal DNA components characterise the populations in the Arab world:

Arabian, Levantine, Coptic and Maghrebi.

The Arabian component is the prime autosomal element in the Gulf region, though it is also found at significant frequencies in parts of the Levant and Northeast Africa. Its presence is also found in Lebanese Christians, Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews, Cypriots and Armenians which shows historical admixture. 

The Levantine component is the principal autosomal element in the Near East and the Caucasus area.

The Coptic component is the main autosomal element throughout Northeast Africa. It peaks amongst the Egyptian Copts in the Sudan and is found at high frequencies in the both the Nile Valley and the Horn of Africa.

The Maghrebi component is the main autosomal element in Northwest Africa and includes the Berber populations – who are related to Canaan as evidenced by their paternal and maternal Haplogroups. 

These four divisions broadly equate to Mizra’s sons as:

Pathros, Coptic;

Casluh and Caphtor, Maghrebi (and beyond in Latin America – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America);

Naphtuh, Levantine; and

Anam, Arabian.

While the remaining two sons, Ludim and Lehab (Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush and Phut), are geographically located further east in West Asia.

Clarification on the Ludim will be covered in a separate chapter discussing Shem’s son Lud – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.

A genetic study published in the European Journal of Human Genetics in 2019, stated that West Asians, that is Arabs, are closely related to Europeans, Northern Africans and to Southwest Asians. This writer would concur with the latter two; though the first group is a little misleading.

Arabs share certain Haplogroups at a higher frequency with Europeans from Southeastern Europe, though this does not hold to be true with the majority of Europeans. Northeastern and especially Northwestern Europeans, are genetically far removed from an Arab.

Arab Haplogroups link them more closely with Indian and Pakistani peoples; less so with Black Africans; and to a far lesser degree with peoples of the Caucasus and Southeast Europe. The same cannot be said for the remainder of Europe. This scenario is reminiscent of the Indian-Aryan misnomer addressed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush and Phut.

Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal stratification in Iran: relationship between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula, multiple authors, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The Somalis and Ethiopians are sequestered to the right extreme of the plot, whereas the other North African group from Egypt is adjacent to a closely intertwined Levant/Peninsular Arab grouping. The Yemenis are the only population from the Arabian Peninsula that deviates from this spatial pattern, likely due to their… geographical isolation from the rest of the Peninsular Arabs.

When all branches of haplogroup U are considered together, there are no well-defined frequency clines observed except for the obvious lack of the haplogroup within the African continent. Upon sub-dividing the branches of the aforementioned haplogroup (only the most highly represented branches within the Iranian domain were further explored [Persians being descendants of Shem and not Ham]), clear region-specific gradients are detected. 

For example, sub-haplogroups U2 [India] and U7 [Pakistan] are widely distributed throughout [South] Asia and the Arabian Peninsula, exhibiting their highest frequencies in the southwest Asian collections and displaying east-to-west frequency clines.

It is noteworthy that both haplogroups are found in the Arabian Peninsula.

Y-chromosomal haplogroup J is present in high frequencies throughout the Arabian Peninsula and the Levant, dissipating considerably in all directions. Haplogroup R[1a], on the other hand, presents very high frequencies in the central Asian/southwest Asian regions, with levels decreasing immediately beyond the Indus Valley area. A slight increase in frequencies is observed in the Balkan Peninsula.’

  1. MDS plot based on observed frequency of mtDNA haplogroup distributions (stress=0.28852). (b) MDS plot based on observed frequency of Y-chromosome haplogroup distributions (stress=0.12492). 

Analysing the Haplogroup family trees of the world discussed so far, it is evident that mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) which is passed from mothers to all their children, includes the main (Japheth) East Asian and American Indian Haplogroups, alphabetically of:

A, B, F and M.

The key non-admixture Haplogroups for Ham are:

L and M;

for Canaan: L;

and we will confirm that the main Haplogroups for Shem are:

H, J, T and U (K). 

Whereas, the Y-DNA Haplogroups passed from fathers only to their sons, include the main Haplogroups for Japheth, alphabetically of:

C, D, K, N, O1, O2 and Q.

The key Shem Y-DNA Haplogroups we will learn, are:

G, I1, I2, R1a and R1b;

the prime Haplogroups for Ham are:

H, J1 and J2; and for

Canaan:

A, B, E1b1a and E1b1b.

The primary Black African Y-DNA Haplogroups are in order of frequency, E, A and B. The E Haplogroup splits into the clades of E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b and E2. The primary mtDNA Haplogroups for the Africans include Haplogroups L0 through to L6.

The main Indian and Pakistani Y-DNA Haplogroups – excepting R1a from admixture* – are for India: H, L, R2 and for Pakistan: J, L, R2.

The principal mtDNA Haplogroups for Cush and Phut are M, R and U.* 

An intersting split occurs in the Arab world. Those nations to the West in North Africa, with a Berber majority have a Y-DNA descending sequence of E1b1b, J1, J2, T/G, (R1b/R1a). 

Those Arab nations eastwards in the Arabian Peninsula, Levantine and the Gulf, include countries who possess the same paternal Haplogroups, though the majority in a markedly reversed and different order of J1, J2, E1b1b, G/T, (R1a/R1b).  

The overview table above supports three suppositions.

Firstly, there is a clear difference between specific Arab Y-DNA Haplogroups and those of Europe – as we shall discover – with very high levels of E and J and far lower levels of R1a and R1b.

Secondly, there is a marked visible difference between the Arabic peoples from North Africa and those of the Middle East because they are from different sons of Mizra – whether Casluh and Caphtor or from Anam, Naphtuh and Ludim – and or mixed with a Canaanite lineage and therefore varying in frequency levels of either the defining paternal Arab marker Haplogroup J1 and or lesser related Haplogroup J2 and the Canaanite E1b1b.

Thirdly and related to the previous point, is the fact that Egypt though superficially looking as if it could belong to either group, is unique, aside from the Sudan because it descends from another son of Mizra: Pathros.

(a) mtDNA haplogroup distributions (b) Y-chromosomal haplogroup distributions.

Berber men possess a Y-DNA paternal Haplogroup related to Black africans, of E1b1b.

Arabs similarly share in small quantities with India and Southwest Asia, paternal Haplogroups H and L; while with men from Pakistan, they share proportionate levels of Haplogroup J2.

To the south of Egypt, there are nations which include Arabs though they are not necessarily the majority. Black Africans are a substantial part of these populations – countries such as Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia, Chad and the Sudan.

The spread of Haplogroup E1b1b, M215, is shown below. 

Egypt: E1b1b – J1 – J2 – T1 – R1b – G – E1b1a – R1a –

A/B – F [M89] – L – I – Q – K [M9]

Egypt: E1b1b [46%] – J1 [21%] – J2 [6.5%] – T1 [6%] –

R1b [6%] – G [5.5%] – E1b1a [3%] – R1a [2%] –

A/B [1.3%] – F [1%] – L [1%] – I [0.5%] –

Q – [0.5%] – K [0.2%] 

Egyptian men possess a variety of Haplogroups, though fundamentally their core marker Haplogroup is J1, with E1b1b and J2 a result of intermixing. Haplogroup E1b1b links them to their sub-Saharan African cousins and the Berbers in North Africa; J1 to their brothers in the Mid-East and J2 with their cousins in West Asia. Paternal Haplogroups E1b1a, A and B represent Black African admixture.

The approximate six percent of Haplogroup R1b in Egyptians is comprised of R1b-V88 at 2.97% and R1b-M269 also at 2.97%. R1b-V88 is a mutation of R1b found specifically in Arab peoples within Africa and the result of historical contact amongst migrating peoples. Whereas, R-M269 is the main R1b Haplogroup spread across Europe. It is found in lesser percentages in the Middle East as evidence of more recent intermixing and intermarriage.

Nations descended from Casluhim and Caphtorim lay to the west of Pathros Egypt.

Libya: E1b1b – J1 – J2 – R1b – T1 – F – I – R1a – L – G – K – A/B

Libya: E1b1b [44.5%] – J1 [27.4%] – J2 [6.9%] – R1b [5%] –

T [5%] – F [4.6%] – I [2%] – R1a [1.7%] – L [1.5%] –

G [1.1%] – K [0.6%] – A/B [0.6%] 

The breakdown of Libya’s R1b is R-V88 at 5.02%, with no R-M269. Thus recent admixture is virtually non-existent compared with historical contact. Libya’s maternal Haplogroups differ from Egypt, though the paternal Haplogroups align. Perhaps the Libyans are composed of a female lineage from Casluhim/Caphtorim and a male line from Pathros.

Tunisia: E1b1b – J1 – J2 – F – R1b – E1b1a – T1 – G – R1a – K – A/B – I 

Tunisia: E1b1b [72%] – J1 [16.5%] – J2 [3%] – F [2.6%] –

R1b [2.1%] – E1b1a [1.4%] – T1 [1%] – G [0.5%] –

R1a [0.5%] – K [0.3%] – A/B [0.1%] – I [0.1%] 

The breakdown of Tunisia’s R1b is R-V88 at 1.83% and R-M269 at 0.33%.

Algeria: E1b1b – J1 – R1b – J2 – F – K – R1a – Q – G – I

Algeria: E1b1b [59%] – J1 [22%] – R1b [9.5%] – J2 [5%] –

F [3.8%] – K [0.6%] – R1a [0.5%] –  Q [0.5%] –

G [0.5%] – I [0.1%] 

The breakdown of Algeria’s R1b is R-V88 at 2.56% and R-M269 at 7.04%. Algeria is the opposite to Libya in that it shows more recent admixture. This could be a throwback to the Vandals and Alans who migrated from the Iberian Peninsula to North Africa – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Morocco: E1b1b – J1 – R1b – J2 – G – A/B – F – I

Morocco: E1b1b [83%] – J1 [6.5%] – R1b [4.5%] – J2 [1.5%] – 

G [0.5%] – A/B [0.9%] – F [0.2%] – I [0.1%] 

The breakdown of Morocco’s R1b is R-V88 at 0.92% and R-M269 at 3.55%, similar to Algeria. The Berbers also live in Tunisia, the Western Sahara and Mauritania. 

According to Reguig in a 2014 study, the Berbers in southern Morocco possess 98.5% E1b1b. An earlier study by Fadhlaoui-Zid in 2011 reported results for Berbers in northern and southern Tunisia of an incredible 100% for Haplogroup E1b1b. 

On our journey so far, we have only come across two other peoples untouched by admixture, with a 100% Y-DNA Haplogroup:

the Amerindian Mixe males of Mexico with 100% of Haplogroup Q;

and in part, the Taiwanese Aborigines with men carrying 7% O1b, 9% O2a1 and 84% O1a (or 91% O1), adding up to 100% overall for Haplogroup O.

A comparison of the North African nations shows that Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco carry a Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence which differs from that of Egypt; notably in Haplogroups E1b1b, T1… and G – which is a paternal line from admixture with Shem. 

Libya appears to align with Egypt, apart from Haplogroup G. The Libyan population is considerably smaller than the other four nations comprising North Africa and they live primarily in the west of their nation, close to the Tunisian and Algerian populations. They are included as Casluh, though a likely paternal link with Egypt means they are a mixed people with Pathros. As one heads west, E1b1b increases and Haplogroups J1, J2, T and G in turn, decrease.

                    E1b1b     J1       J2      T      G

Libya             45        27        7       5       1

Egypt             46        21        7       6      6     

Algeria          59        22        5            0.5

Tunisia          72        17        3       1    0.5

Morocco       83          7     1.5             0.5

Now comparing the nations to the northeast of Egypt descended from Anam.

Syria: J1 – J2 – R1b – E1b1b – R1a – T – G – L – I 

Syria: J1 [30%] – J2 [17%] – R1b [13.5%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – 

R1a [10%] – T [5%] – G [3%] – I [5%] – L [3%] 

Iraq: J1 – J2 – E1b1b – R1b – R1a – I – T1a – G2a – E1b1a – L – N – Q 

Iraq: J1 [43%] – J2 [19.5%] – E1b1b [9.5%] – R1b [9.5%] – R1a [5.5%] – 

I [4%] – T1a [3.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – E1b1a [0.9%] – L [0.5%] –

Q [0.5%] – N [0.5%] 

Iraq’s R1b is R-M269 at 9.8%, with no R-V88, hence admixture with Europeans has been more recent and due to Iraq’s location this is logical. 

Kuwait:     J1/J2 – R1a – E1b1b – G2a – R1b – T1a – I – H – K – L

Kuwait: J [84%] – R1a [6.7%] – E1b1b [6%] – G [3.4%] – R1b [1.3%] 

Kuwait’s Haplogroups are represented by the Bedouin Arab; exhibiting a very high percentage of Haplogroup J.

Lebanon: J2 – J1 – E1b1b – R1b – G – L – T1 – I – L – R1a – Q – N 

Lebanon: J2 [26%] – J1 [20%] – E1b1b [17.5%] – R1b [8%] – G [6.5%] – 

L [5%] – T [5%] – I [5%] – R1a [2.5%] – Q [2%] – N [0.1]

Jordan: J1 – E1b1b – R1b – J2 – G – I – R1a – T

Jordan: J1 [31%] – E1b1b [26%] – R1b [18%] – J2 [13%] – G [3.5%] – 

I [3.5%] – R1a [1.5%] – T [0.5%]

Palestinian Arab: J1 – E1b1b – J2 – R1b – T – G – R1a 

Palestinian Arab: J1 [38.5%] – E1b1b [19.5%] – J2 [17%] – R1b [8.5%] – 

T [7%] – G [3%] – R1a [1.5%] 

This grouping is clearly different from those nations lying to the west of Egypt. A number of the nations have a higher percentage of paternal Haplogroup G from Shem, similar to Egypt, though unlike the rest of North Africa. Levels of E1b1b are far lower, with Haplogroup J1 being far more prominent than in North Africa. Lebanon stands out as the only nation with more J2 than J1. Haplogroup J2 being associated with West Asia (particularly Pakistan) and via admixture, related southern European men.

                            J1       J2     E1b1b      G       T   

Lebanon           20       26        18          7       5 

Syria                  30       17        12           3       5

Jordan               31       13        26          4    0.5

Palestine           39       17        20          3        7

Iraq                    43       20       10          3        4

Egypt                 21         7        44          6       6

Egypt is even more distinct from this northeast group of Arabic nations. It is similar to some only in the lesser G and T Haplogroups. Aside from Lebanon, the other four peoples are linked with a discernible family alignment. 

Comparing the nations to the east of Egypt in the Arabian Peninsula descended from Naphtuh.

Saudi Arabia: J1 -J2 – E1b1a – E1b1b – T – R1a – G – Q – R1b – L

Saudia Arabia: J1 [40%] – J2 [17%] – E1b1a [8%] – E1b1b [7.5%] – 

T [5%] – R1a [5%] – G [3%] – Q [2.5%] – R1b [2%] – L [2%] 

The United Arab Emirates

UAE: J1 – E1b1b – J2 – R1a – E1b1a – T – G – R1b – L – Q 

UAE: J1 [35%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – J2 [10%] – R1a [7.5%] –

E1b1a [5%] – T [5%] – G [4%] – R1b [4%] –

L [3%] – Q [2%] 

Bahrain: J – E1b1b – R1a – R2a – H – G – K – L – B

Qatar: J – R1a – E1b1b – G – E1b1a [3%] – L – R1b – [R2a] – [B] – [I] – [T]

Qatar: J [67%] – R1a [6.9%] – E1b1b [5.6%] – G [2.8%] –

E1b1a [3%] – L [2.8%] – R1b [1.4%]

Qatar like Kuwait, exhibits a high percentage of Haplogroup J.

Oman: J – E1b1b – R1a – T – G – R1b – L – H

Oman: J [47.9%] – E1b1b [15.7%] – R1a [ 9.1%] –

T [8.3%] – G [1.7%] – R1b [1.7%] – L [0.8%] 

Yemen: J1 – E1b1b – J2 – E1b1a – G – R1a – T

Yemen: J1 [72.5%] – E1b1b [13%] – J2 [8.5%] –

E1b1a [3%] – G [1.5%] 

This grouping is more closely related to the nations northeast of Egypt, though with the subtle difference of the third Haplogroup percentage shifting from R1b to R1a. The nations of North Africa are clearly more closely related as are the nations of the Middle East, as well as the Arabian Peninsula to each other; while Egypt straddles the three regions.

                              J1      J2      E1b1b        G        T    

UAE                     35      10         12            4        5    

Saudi Arabia      40      17           8            3        5

Yemen                 73        9         13          1.5

Egypt                   21        7         44            6        6

Yemen like Morocco is on the fringes of the Arab sphere and as Morocco has the highest levels of E1b1b, Yemen has the highest percentage of J1. Egypt clearly, is not like the others; yet is still palpably related. The lesser defining paternal marker Haplogroups for Arabs are T and J2. The prime defining marker Haplogroup for Berbers is E1b1b and for Arabs J1; specifically Haplogroup J-M267 – see map below .

                              E1b1b       J1       J2        T        G        J

Kuwait                      6                                             3       84

Qatar                         6                                             3       67

Saudi Arabia            8         40       17         5         3       57

Iraq                          10         43       20        4         3       63

Syria                         12         30       17         5         3      47

UAE                         12          35       10        5         4       45

Yemen                     13          73         9                 1.5      82

Oman                      16                                  8         2       48

Lebanon                 18          20       26        5         7       46

Palestine                20          39       17         7         3       56

Jordan                    26          31       13      0.5        4       44

Libya                       45          27         7         5         1       34

Egypt                      46          21          7        6         6       28

Algeria                    59          22         5                 0.5      27

Tunisia                    72          17         3         1       0.5     20

Morocco                 83            7         2                  0.5       9   

The comparison table shows that as Morocco and Yemen would each bookend the table for Haplogroup J1; it is Kuwait and Morocco who would bookend Haplogroup E1b1b. A combination of J1 and J2 though, highlights Kuwait as one bookend with Morocco for both Haplogroups of J and E. Again, Kuwait is at a geographic extremity of the Arab region like Morocco and Yemen. 

Morocco possesses the highest percentage of Haplogroup E1b1b at 83% and Kuwait the lowest with 6%. Yemen has the highest level of J1, at 73% and Morocco the least with 7%. Lebanon has the highest percentage of J2 at 26% and Morocco the least with 2%. For Haplogroup J overall, Kuwait has 84% compared to Morocco with the lowest level, at 9%. 

The dividing line between North Africa and the Mid-East is clear when observing mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups, with Egypt exactly in the centre. Libya as discussed, sits with North Africa regarding its mtDNA inheritance and with Egypt when comparing its Y-DNA sequence. 

Comparing two sets of peoples each: from Canaan’s descendants, Nigeria and Ethiopia; Cush, India and Pakistan; and Mizra, Egypt and Saudi Arabia; is revealing, for it displays their uniqueness and relatedness in equal measure.

                               A/B   E1b1a   E1b1b    J1     J2      H      L       

Nigeria                    13       68          4             

Ethiopia                  11                    63     

Egypt                      1.3         3        46       21       7                 1      

Saudi Arabia                       8          8       40    17                 2       

Pakistan                                                             20       6      12    

India                                                                     9      23     18    

The resulting comparison is unlike the seven sons of Japheth studied in chapters two to ten, who have very little variation in their Y-DNA paternal Haplogroup spread. For nearly all his son’s male descendants carry Haplogroup O as a common denominator, and if not O; then Haplogroup C unifies the majority, with Haplogroups K, D, Q and N playing a lesser role.

In contrast, this isn’t so for the three sons of Ham and their half brother Canaan. The variation amongst Ham’s sons is ostensibly the broadest of Noah’s four sons; more so than for Shem’s five sons, as we will discover.

Even so, the table above highlights the family link between Cush, Phut and Mizra, with half-brother Canaan who shares the same mother as the outlier – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Taking the core African Haplogroups A, B and E, these are the defining Canaanite Haplogroups – particularly E1b1a.

The core paternal Arab Haplogroup is J1 and to a lesser extent through admixture, J2 and E1b1b.

The Berbers are obviously related to the sub-Saharan Africans as they share E1b1b, which is a bridge Haplogroup for the two peoples.

The core Haplogroups for the South Asians are H, L and J2. These are the defining Haplogroups for Cush, the Sukki and Phut. Their bridge Haplogroup – which Canaan and Mizra do not exhibit in quantity – is Haplogroup L. India and Pakistan also share the bridge Haplogroup J2 with Arab related peoples and therefore, all these equatorial peoples are linked or bonded through the key Haplogroups of either primarily J2 or L.

It is the Arabs, who non-coincidentally lie between the other three and who possess genetic material in common with Africans as well as with South Asians. Nigeria and India are polar opposites, yet Egypt bridges the gap. This bears out the second point in the introduction (primus verba) regarding nations living adjacent to peoples who they are more closely related to – a concentric geography.

All are clearly brother nations:

Mizra, Phut and Cush, while not forgetting their half-brother, Canaan.

In chapter fifteen, the focus of attention will shift to the two youngest sons of Mizra and their unique relationship with not only a son of Shem but a son of Japheth.

Fools are rewarded with nothing but more foolishness, but the wise are rewarded with knowledge.

Proverbs 14:18 New Century Version

“I don’t imagine you will dispute the fact that at present the stupid people are in an absolutely overwhelming majority all the world over.” 

Henrik Ibsen

“In the end truth always wins.”

George F Jowett

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

India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut

Chapter XIII

Cush is the eldest son of Ham, having a close affinity with Phut; the third-born and not widely recognised, youngest of Ham’s sons – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

Five sons are attributed to Cush. Cush and Phut have historically been entwined and in the Bible are mentioned numerous times together; similar to what we learned, regarding Magog, Tubal and Meshech in chapter ten, though with a twist. 

Herman Hoeh continues his invaluable platform of research in Origin of the Nations, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘This puzzle is easily solved! Bordering on the Black Sea in the Colchis (near eastern Turkey today) lived in ancient times “dark-skinned people”, according to historians. This circumstance puzzled even the ancients who thought all black people ought to live in Africa! Black people living in what today is the Caucasus of Russia is merely a confirmation of the fact that civilization commenced with Nimrod, a black man, in Babylon (Genesis 10:8-10). His kingdom spread northward from Babel to this very region!’

Nimrod will form a separate study in a dedicated chapter – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

His identity will be unravelled and the assumption he was Black will be questioned and answered- Articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity.

Herman Hoeh:

‘When the Assyrians carried Egyptians and Ethiopians captive (Isaiah 20), many were undoubtedly planted in this very region where the remnants of Nimrod’s empire had long remained… These people practiced circumcision – just as the [Black] Aborigines of Australia do today! From this region a few hundred miles northwest of Babylon comes the [Black] race [Negritos and Melanesians] of Southeast Asia.

In II Chronicles 12:3 we read of the Sukkiim who came out of Africa into Palestine. We hear no more of them in Africa. But Herodotus tells us that they journeyed to Colchis by the Black Sea… In this region we find the mention of Sukhum… and of the dark-skinned Sakai.They gave their name to the Caspian Sea, which the ancients called “Sikim”… A large [?] province in India also is named Sikkim after them…

The Sakai are scattered throughout Southeast Asia. They journeyed with the sons of Gomer. One of the proofs that Gomer is in Asia, but not in Europe, is this fact that the [Black people] who lived in the land of Gomer near Babylon now live in Southeast Asia! In ancient Colchis also lived the Aeetas… Where are the Aeetas today? In the Philippines where some of the sons of Gomer [rather, Javan] also are… The really important reason for knowing where these [Black] people journeyed is that they help us solve the riddle where the sons of Gomer are today!’ – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Australian Aborigine men

Hoeh:

‘A most intriguing question is the origin of the [Black African]… Part of the black race stems from Cush (Genesis 10:6). Cush means black in Hebrew (YOUNG’s CONCORDANCE). The word “Cush” is often translated into English by the word “Ethiopia”, but not all Cushites live in Ethiopia (an independent nation in East Africa). The Greeks called the children of Cush “Ethiopians”. That’s why we use the word in English.’

Australian Aborigine women

Hoeh:

‘Cush first settled around ancient Babylon (Genesis 10:8-10). The children of Cush were the original Babylonians, not the Chaldeans who are in Southern Europe today. From Babylon, Cush spread far and wide. Most of the black children of Cush migrated across central Arabia and around the southern coast of Arabia to East Africa. The Egyptians called East Africa, south of Syene, “Kosh”. The Chaldeans and the Assyrians called it “Kushu”… Not all Scriptures refer to the Cushite who settled in East Africa.’

Dravidian women

Hoeh:

‘Cush also had sons who went east into Asia rather than Africa. Here is what Herodotus wrote:

The Ethiopians from the sun-rise (for [there are] two kinds)… were marshalled with the Indians, and did not at all differ from [them] in appearance but only in their language, and their hair. For the eastern Ethiopians are straight-haired; but those of (Africa) have hair more curly than that of any other people [the Black African is a different line and not descended from Cush – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa]. These Ethiopians from Asia were accounted (almost the same as the Indian [of India]) (Polymnia, section 20).’

Dravidian men

Hoeh:

The Brown people of South India and Ceylon [Sri Lanka] are the descendants of Cush!

Historians call them Dravidians today. The ancients called them SIBAE… Their Bible name was Seba (Genesis 10:7). Josephus, the Jewish historian, recognized an eastern and a western Cush – one in Asia, the other in Africa (ANTIQUITIES. VI, 2). Herodotus calls them “Asiatic Ethiopians” (Thalia, section 94). The word translated “Ethiopia”, in Ezekiel 38:5 should be properly translated “Cush”. It refers primarily to the Asiatic Cush, India today.’

The Aborigines of Australia are related to the Negritos of South East Asia and they in turn with the Indians from (southern) India – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The similarity of the Aborigine facial characteristics with the Dravidian peoples of Southern India and Sri Lanka (above) is too palpable to ignore. Herman Hoeh provides applicable and insightful information, yet with some incorrect conclusions.

Though the Black African is not descended from Cush but rather Canaan; the peoples from Southern India as explained by Dr Hoeh are descended from Cush – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

In fact, Cush’s sons have spread even further afield. Cush once lived in East Africa, though they are not there now. There is no east-west split of Cush today. This would make Bible verses confusing, not knowing which Cush is intended? Cush’s descendants were not the original Babylonians. The meaning of Cush has been problematic, regardless of Young’s Concordance definition as ‘black.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The origin of the name Cush is irretrievably obscure, and none of the translators have more to say about it than that it is related to Ethiopia, and having a dark countenance. The prophet Jeremiah rhetorically asks,“Can the Cushite change his skin?” (Jeremiah 13:23), which may or may not suggest that the Cushites were known for being black. Still, this says very little about the meaning of the name Cush. Klein’s Etymological dictionary of the Hebrew Language lists a word written similar to Ethiopia, meaning spindle (with poetic function of ‘horn’?) [the Horn of Africa, present day Ethiopia is southwards from where the descendants of Cush settled], but he gives no applications to try the word. The Septuagint translates this name with a compilation of derivatives of the Greek verb ‘to scorch,’ and noun ‘countenance’.

However, the Hebrew word for black is (sahar). The heth and rosh in this word are so dominant that the name Cush can hardly have come from it. Allowing this would link Cush to pretty much any other word that contains a shin. Like the word (yshsh; weak, impotent, aged) for instance, which makes a far more plausible candidate as a repeated letter often falls away and the yod alternates with the waw. In concert with the common Hebrew particle (ke; as if, like), the name would mean As If He Were Weak.

And then there is the root (yshh; meaning uncertain), which yields the noun (tushiya), meaning wisdom, sound knowledge, which would yield the meaning of Cush as As If He Were Getting Smarter… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads A Black Countenance, Full Of Darkness, but also submits… “the etymology is most uncertain”. NOBSE Study Bible Name List simply reads Black.’

Not only do we lack a clear definition for the name Cush, the word has caused editors confusion in translating Cush in the Bible. It is invariably translated as either Cush, Cushan, Cushim or Cushi – either with a capital C or K.

The following article by Peter Unseth, details inadvertently attributing biblical names to current political boundaries and the usage of the word Cush – emphasis mine.

Hebrew Kush: Sudan, Ethiopia, or Where?

‘Some published sources have acknowledged that Biblical kush was in what is now Egypt and Sudan… [and] I have found no actual evidence that the Kingdom of Kush indeed ruled any parts of the territory in modern Ethiopia. Much of the translators’ tendency to translate kush by a term that has modern day political significance stems from the Septuagint’s use of the word Aithiopia. At the time the Septuagint was translated, this was indeed a correct Greek term to use in translating kush. 

If kush is translated as “Ethiopia”, the question arises: “Ethiopia’s borders at which point in time?” But in the centuries and decades since such early translations as the KJV, the use of “Ethiopia” in translating kush into English has become less and less of a legitimate choice. Translators too often retained the word “Ethiopia”, overlooking the fact that there has been a change in what was referred to between the use of English “Ethiopia” in earlier centuries (when the English meaning of Ethiopia was very similar to that of Greek Aithiopia) and the word “Ethiopia” in common usage of 20th century English (and a number of the world’s languages).

… the kingdom of kush was not within the borders of present day Ethiopia, but rather within the borders of Sudan and Egypt. 

So we must conclude that the use of “Ethiopia” in English translations (and other languages) today leads readers to the erroneous conclusion that the Biblical references were to people and places actually within the delineated borders of the present state of Ethiopia.

I have studied over 30 English translations, charting their translations of kush in 21 verses. Their choices were generally from one of four terms:“kush”, “Ethiopia”, “Nubia”, “Sudan”… problems have resulted from kush being translated by a term that has present day political significance… ordinary readers have simply not understood the text correctly.

They have assumed that the word referred to an area that coincided with the borders of a modern state.

This confusion is increased when different versions use words referring to different states. My friend who grew up on the Ethiopian-Sudanese border was genuinely perplexed and wanted to know “Which country does the Bible refer to in Psalm 68:31, Ethiopia or Sudan?”

… Biblical prophecy has been applied to the wrong parts of the world as a result of terms with political significance’ – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.

‘Writers unduly influenced by translations have misunderstood the Biblical text and interpreted prophecies as applying to the present states of Ethiopia or Sudan. Writing about Biblical prophecy, Otis wrote “Persia [Elam], Ethiopia (Cush), Libya [Phut] … are all easily identifiable with modern nations”…

‘In summary, the Old Testament references to kush do not refer specifically or exclusively to the present states of Sudan, Ethiopia, or any other political entity in Africa, and should not be translated with terms that would refer to such political states. The word kush should be translated in a way that is faithful to the text and as clear as possible to the reader. This will generally mean that the word will have to be translated by different words or phrases, according to the particular context and language.’

The difficulty in translating Cush is removed when their identity is understood. Cush’s sons include a number of nations. The simplicity of the matter is that everywhere ‘Cush’ is stated, it can simply be replaced with India.

Leaving Nimrod for the time being, the five sons of Cush as given in Genesis 10:6-7 ESV are:

Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteca.

Raamah had two sons and they are Sheba and Dedan.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘There’s only one Seba in the Bible… (Genesis 10:7). There seems to be something secretive about this name. Neither BDB Theological Dictionary nor NOBSE Study Bible Name List dares to even hint at an interpretation. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names ignores any Hebrew words that may have to do with the name Seba and goes after an Arabic cognate and concludes Eminent.

… to a Hebrew audience the name Seba sounded very clearly like it came from the verb (saba), meaning to imbibe… and is mostly associated with strong liquor and heavy drinking. Noun (sobe) means a drink… Whatever the original name was intended to convey, to a Hebrew audience the name Seba must have looked like Drunkard. According to Klein’s Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language, the name Seba means He Drank Wine.’

Isaiah 43:3

English Standard Version

‘For I am the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Saviour. I give Egypt [Mizra] as your ransom, Cush [India] and Seba in exchange for you.’

Isaiah 45.14 

New Century Version

The Lord says, “The goods made in Egypt [Mizra] and Cush [India] and the tall people of Seba will come to you and will become yours. The Sabeans will walk behind you, coming along in chains. They will bow down before you and pray to you, saying, ‘God is with you, and there is no other God’.”

Psalm 72:10

English Standard Version

‘May the kings of Tarshish [Japan] and of the coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] render him tribute; may the kings of Sheba and Seba bring gifts!’

Seba is included with their neighbour, India. A clue is given regarding their height. The Tamils of Sri Lanka are taller than either Indian Tamils or Indians in general.

Seba and the Sabeans are the peoples of modern day Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka has a population of 23,298,176 people.

Cush’s sons together, boast a population far bigger than China’s combination, comprising Magog, Tubal and Meshech – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Sri Lankan man and woman

Notice the similarity again of not only the Australian Aborigine with the Dravidians of India; but also with Sri Lankans.

The predominant peoples of Sri Lanka are the Sinhalese (Seba).

Who is India in Bible Prophecy? Kelly McDonald, 2016:

‘An interesting fact… the Hebrew names for Ivory, Ape, and Peacock come from the Tamal language… (Smith’s Bible Dictionary, 1884).’

According to Abarim, Havilah in Hebrew means:

‘Circle’ and from the verb hul, ‘to whirl’, the verb hawa, ‘to gather into a symbiosis’ and the verb laha, ‘to languish’ and by extension, a ‘languishing village’, or an ‘exhausted revelation’.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The name Havilah is assigned three different times in the Bible: It is first mentioned as a land that contains both gold and the river Pishon, one of four rivers of Eden (Genesis 2:11). The people of Ishmael settled there (Genesis 25:18) and [King] Saul drove out the Amalekites from there (1 Samuel 15:7). 

The land [of] Havilah was probably named in retrospect, as the territory of one of the two human Havilahs… we surmise that the Pishon may have been named after the Indus River… that the story of the four rivers most generally tells of the evolution of human civilization… Also note that in Genesis 2:11 the name Havilah is preceded by the definite article or article of approach: the or onto Havilah. [1] A son of Cush, (Genesis 10:7). [2] A son of Joktan, the son of Eber (Genesis 10:29).’

The people of Ishmael for example, settled adjacent to the Havilah of Joktan^ descended from Shem; not the Havilah from Cush, the son of Ham.

Abarim:

‘The name Havilah probably comes from the root group (hul I & II) and can be interpreted in many ways: Verb (hul I) denotes a whirling in circular motions… noun (hol), mining sand, the noun (hil), meaning pain* so bad that it makes one writhe (specifically childbirth)… verb (hul II) means to be strong… derived noun (hayil) means might.

When the letter waw is a consonant (as it is in the name Havilah) it is a completely different letter than when it is a vowel (as in the verb), and there must be a very good reason why a vowel changes to a consonant (the same problem occurs with the name David). Perhaps it is to deliberately point at some other words. 

Perhaps to the verb (hawa): means to lay out in order to live collectively, and describes investing one’s personal sovereignty into a living collective… to prostrate, which is to submit oneself wholly and bodily to a collective or to a leader… another form of laying out is in proclaiming information that will lead to greater oneness among the hearers… the noun (ahawa) meaning brotherhood.

For a meaning of the name Havilah… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has… Trembling* (with pain).’

Genesis 2:10-14

New English Translation

‘Now a river flows from Eden to water the orchard, and from there it divides into four headstreams. The name of the first is Pishon; it runs through [Hebrew: it is that which goes around] entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. (The gold of that land is pure; pearls and lapis lazuli are also there). The name of the second river** is Gihon; it runs through the entire land of Cush [India]. The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates.’

Though it is tempting to assume the Havilah in question is that of Cush, because Cush is mentioned in the next verse; it is actually Havilah, the son of Joktan^ who is being referenced and which has a connection with Assyria – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Flags of Sri Lanka (above) and Bangladesh (below)

Havilah (from Cush) is the nation of Bangladesh.

Coincidently, it has so many rivers and water ways that regular and devastating flooding causes much pain* to its 176,852,422 inhabitants – currently the eighth highest in the world.

Assignment Point – emphasis mine:

‘Bangladesh is a land of rivers. In fact, the pride of Bangladesh is her rivers with one of the largest networks in the world. In spite of being a very small country, Bangladesh has an amazing number of about 700 rivers. Most of the rivers… rise from the Himalayan range and fall into the Bay of Bengal. 

The rivers of Bangladesh consist of tiny hilly streams, winding seasonal creeks, muddy canals, some truly magnificent rivers, and their tributaries. In some places, such as Patuakhali, Barisal, and Sundarbans… the watercourses are so plentiful that they form a veritable maze… Bangladesh has [coincidently] predominantly four major river systems –

1) the Brahmaputra-Jamuna, 2) the Ganges-Padma,** 3) the Surma-Meghna, and 4) the Chittagong region river system.’

The synchronous four main river systems many millennia apart is notable; with the Gihon river running through the ‘entire land of Cush’ possibly synonymous with the Ganges River? The original location of Eden and its Garden will be investigated in a subsequent study – refer article: The Eden Enigma

Man and woman from Bangladesh of whom 98% of the population are Bengali

Sabtah and Sabteca, the third and fifth sons of Cush, are not mentioned outside of Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:  

‘Sabtah is a son of Cush… In Genesis 10:7 his name is spelled [one way] but in 1 Chronicles 1:9 it’s spelled [differently as Sabta] which appears to be an Aramaic spelling. The etymology of the name Sabtah and that of his brother Sabteca is unclear. Both names start out with [a letter] which does not occur in Hebrew. 

Neither BDB Theological Dictionary nor NOBSE Study Bible Name List attempt to interpret these names but Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes relations with an Arabic verb, which transliterated into Hebrew would form [a word sabat] which means to beat or to break. Jones… states that this name means Breaking Through, and adds: i.e. a terror to foes. But perhaps a Hebrew audience that wasn’t aware of Arabic roots, would have associated our name Sabtah with the Hebrew root (sabab), meaning to turn or go around, encircle… the verb (sabab) describes a going in a circular motion: to turn, turnabout, turn into or to encircle. Nouns (mesab) and (musab) describe that which surrounds (i.e. a wall*)’

Abarim note Sabteca in Hebrew means:

‘Beating, Encircle Depression’, from an unused verb sabat, ‘to beat or break’ like Sabtah.

Abarim Publications:

‘From (1) the verb (sabab), to turn or encircle, and (2) the verb (ka’a), to be disheartened… the name Sabteca ends with (k-a), the meaning of which can also not be retrieved. The verb (ka’a) is a rare verb… The even rarer adjective (ka’eh) means cowed.’

Sabtah and Sabteca are a nation and a territory – possibly a future state – which are both encircled in being landlocked and thus represented by modern day Nepal with a population of 29,600,238 people (acting as a wall* along the mountainous border of India and China) and Kashmir, the disputed and disheartened territory located in the north of India and Pakistan. 

Kashmir’s population is an estimated 15,427,841 people.

Note the striking similarity of the spelling of Kash-mir, with – to the North east of Kashmir, above Pakistan – the Hindu Kush Mountain range… and Ham’s son, Cush.

Would this not be an extraordinary coincidence indeed, if the Indian related peoples were not the descendants of Cush?

The Indian administered region of Kashmir, the union territories of Jammu and Kashmir have 12,541,302 people. The Pakistani territory of Azad Kashmir has 2,016,192 people and the Chinese region of Gilgit-Baltistan, has 870,347 people (approximate figures).

In 2 Chronicles 12.2-3 ESV, we are introduced for the first and only time to the Sukki, Sukkites or Sukkiim as mentioned by Dr Hoeh. 

‘In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, because they had been unfaithful to the Lord, Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem with 1,200 chariots and 60,000 horsemen. And the people were without number who came with him from Egypt [Mizra] – Libyans [Lubim], Sukkiim, and Ethiopians [India].’

This was a military alliance with Egypt against King Rehoboam of the Kingdom of Judah. Sukki or Sikki, means ‘booth dwellers’ with the connotation of being both warlike and nomadic. The word has a similarity to the people of the Punjab, India who adhere to the Sik-h or Sikhism religion. Interestingly, the men let their hair grow, without cutting and wear turbans to keep it covered. Similar to a nazarite vow in the Old Testament and the Danite Judge Samson, who did not cut his hair – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe; and article: Samson. 

The Sukki are mentioned sandwiched between Phut and Cush and are a people in their own right, similar to Ararat and Minni, studied previously – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South Asia.

The biblical Sukki equate to the nation of Afghanistan.

Afghanistan’s population is 44,509,087 people.

The Pashtuns make up the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan, comprising between 38% and 42% of the country’s population. Their main territory Pashtunistan, is between the Hindu Kush mountains in Afghanistan and the Indus River in neighbouring Pakistan, where there, they are the second largest ethnic Group. 

Flag of Afghanistan 

Surely it is beyond a mere coincidence that in reflection of the Sukkiim, there is the city of Sukk-ur in neighbouring Pakistan and the state of Sikk-im in India.

“India is not a nation, nor a country. It is a subcontinent of nationalities” – Muhammad Ali-Jinnah.

We now turn our attention to the sub-Continent of India and study scriptures pertaining to Raamah and his sons Sheba and Dedan.

India: The Ancient Past, A History of the Indian subcontinent from c. 7000 BCE to CE 1200, 2007 & 2016, Burjor Avari – emphasis mine:

In view of their kindred peoples ‘… the earliest roots of Indian civilisation can only be understood through studying what has been recovered from archaeological excavations and field-work, mainly inside Pakistan. Nepal and Sri Lanka, too, have always had close links with the Indian cultural world. And, during varied periods of ancient history, Afghanistan and India have had a lasting symbiotic relationship.’

Raamah in Hebrew means:

‘Trembling, thundering’, from the verb ra’am and ‘to thunder’. Quite applicable, when one imagines the enormous multitude of Indians and the noisy tumult their voices and footfalls make. India’s population alone, is a staggering 1,470,948,055 people and set to overtake China during the first half of this century (this occurred in April 2023).

India’s share of the world’s population is just under 18% and while China’s population is forecast to decrease during the twenty-first century; India’s increased by 0.89% in 2025 over 2024 and shows no sign of abating. That said, both Pakistan and Bangladesh are increasing at an even faster rate than India.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The one and only Raamah in the Bible is a son of Cush… (Genesis 10:7). After his brief appearance in Genesis 10, and the parallel text of 1 Chronicles 1:9, where his name is spelled (Raama), we hear no more of this person. The unused verb (ra’am) probably meant to roll like thunder… appears to be a rare word to describe a horse’s mane, perhaps in the sense of its rolling or whipping. For a meaning of the name Raamah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Trembling. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Thundering.

There are two completely different names in the Bible that both transliterate into English as Sheba – We’ll call our two different names Sheba I (spelled with an ayin) and Sheba II (spelled with an aleph):

Sheba I: ‘Seven, Oath’ from (shaba), seven, or to swear.

The name Sheba-with-ayin is ascribed to: A town in Simeon (Joshua 19:2). A Benjaminite (2 Samuel 20:1). A Gadite (1 Chronicles 5:13). This name Sheba is identical to the words (sheba’), meaning seven and (shaba’), meaning to swear (an oath): has to do with… the act of binding with an oath… (seven seals or seven bonds).

Sheba II: Unknown, but perhaps Man, Drunk, Captive, Splinter

The name Sheba-with-aleph belongs to: [1] A son of Raamah… (Genesis 10:7). [2] A son of Joktan, who is the brother of Peleg (Genesis 10:28). [3] A son of Jokshan, son of Abraham and Keturah.* Sheba is also a region or nation of which the queen journeyed to Solomon 1 Kings 10:1;  Matthew 12.42).’

This raises an important point, which has been a stumbling block for many commentators and researchers: the fact there are two Sheba and Dedan relationships in the Bible; plus a third individual in the Table of Nations, called Sheba.* Also, Dedan is very much like Dodan, the son of Javan.

Understandably, it has been confusing for researchers. One from Ham and two separate Shebas from Shem. This has led some to consider an editorial slip-up and that all are one-and-the-same. Rather than accepting they are listed for a reason and the possibility they were just popular names of the day, like we have our more commonly used first names today. As we identity them on our journey, we will see that they are all separate personalities.

Abarim:

‘This name Sheba is according to Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names comparable with an Ethiopic word meaning ‘man’. And so, for a meaning of this name Sheba, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Man. BDB Theological Dictionary sees relations with a verb that means to make campaign or expedition, but lists (saba), meaning to imbibe (see the name Seba).

The name may even have to do with (shaba) to take captive. The noun is used in the Aramaic Talmud to mean splinter, a possible derivative (says BDB Theological Dictionary) from the unused (shbb I & II), which yields (shebabim, from root I), splinters, and (shabib, from root II), flame.

Dedan: Leading Gently, from the verb (dada), to move or lead slowly. The name Dedan comes possibly from the Hebrew noun (dd), meaning breast or nipple… For a meaning of the name Dedan, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names goes with (dada) and reads Leading Forward, i.e. great increase of family. The NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low…’

For further meanings, please refer back to Rodan and Dodan’s descendants from Javan in chapter seven. A ‘great increase of family’ is certainly applicable to India. The Sons of Raamah have populated India; Sheba to the North and Dedan to the South. 

Nota Bene

This writer allows for the possibility that the opposite could be applicable with regard to where Sheba and Dedan reside in India. For an almost as convincing argument could be made for this alternative geographical arrangement.

In Ezekiel 27:12-24 NET, describing trading with Tyre, we have references to Sheba and Dedan from Cush, as well as from Abraham. We can ascertain whom is being refereed to from the context of who is mentioned with them from an ethnic and geographical perspective. Recall point number one in the Introduction (primus verba).

12 “Tarshish [Japan] was your trade partner because of your abundant wealth; they exchanged silver, iron, tin, and lead for your products. 

13 Javan [Archipelago South East Asia], Tubal [Eastern Coastal China], and Meshech [Southern Central China] were your clients; they exchanged slaves and bronze items for your merchandise. 14 Beth Togarmah [a united Korea] exchanged horses, chargers, and mules for your products.

15 The Dedanites [Southern India] were your clients. Many coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] were your customers; they paid you with ivory tusks and ebony… 22 The merchants of Sheba [Northern India] and Raamah [all India] engaged in trade with you; they traded the best kinds of spices along with precious stones and gold for your products. 

20 Dedan [Abraham] was your client in saddle cloths for riding. 21 Arabia [Joktan, Abraham and Keturah] and all the princes of Kedar [Ishmael] were your trade partners; for lambs, rams, and goats they traded with you. 23 Haran, Kanneh, Eden [Haran], merchants from Sheba [Abraham], Asshur [Russia], and Kilmad were your clients. 24 They traded with you choice garments, purple [feature of Tyre and Phoenicians] clothes and embroidered work, and multicolored carpets bound and reinforced with cords; these were among your merchandise.”

The second stated Dedan and the second Sheba are related to Abraham and the peoples mentioned with them are descended from Shem. Sheba and Dedan of Raamah and Cush are in bold.

The majestic Taj Mahal ‘is an ivory-white marble mausoleum on the right bank of the river Yamuna in Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India. It was commissioned in 1631 by the fifth Mughal emperor, Shah Jahan, to house the tomb of his beloved wife, Mumtaz Mahal; it also houses the tomb of Shah Jahan himself.’

The mention of ‘precious stones’ is worth noting as India’s second biggest export is Gems and precious metals. Peter Unseth, comments on this in the article we read earlier – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In Job 28:19, in a reference to the surpassing quality of a topaz, Job speaks of the “topaz of kush”.

Job 28:19

New Century Version

“The topaz from Cush cannot compare to wisdom; it cannot be bought with the purest gold.”

‘(The identification of the exact stone is not precise.) There are no topaz (or other similar gems) found in Ethiopia [but there is in India], at least not in the quantity to be known outside of the immediate area. The point of the reference to Kush is to assert its quality, the particular geography of its origin is not the point of the passage [disagree, as it is part of the point]. “Here the place name probably designates the quality of the gem and not its place of origin” (Reyburn 1992:512) Following this line of reasoning, GNB translates this “the finest topaz.”

Once we understand where the modern descendants of Cush are located today, this verse is remarkable in its accuracy. It is actually stating a precious gem, from the present geographic location of Cush. Topaz is found in India and anciently, it was one of twelve precious stones esteemed in Indian culture and medicine.

Diamond mining extends back into Indian antiquity. Anciently, India was the source of nearly all the world’s known diamonds. In fact, until the discovery of diamonds in Brazil in 1726, India was the only place where diamonds were mined.

A case in point is the Koh-i-Noor (Persian for ‘Mountain of Light’), the eighth largest cut diamond in the world weighing 105.6 carats (21.12 g). Its dimensions being 3.6 cm (1.4 inches) long, 3.2 cm (1.3 inches) wide and 1.3 cm (0.5 inches) deep. The diamond is currently set in the front of the crown originally worn in 1937 by the Queen Mother (Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon), wife of George VI and mother of Elizabeth II. The same crown was worn by Camilla Parker Bowles at the coronation of Charles III. The diamond originated in the Kollur mine in present day Andhra Pradesh, India.

Psalm 72:10, 15

English Standard Version

‘May the kings of Tarshish [Japan] and of the coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] render him tribute; may the kings of Sheba [Northern India] and Seba [Sri Lanka] bring gifts! Long may he live; may gold of Sheba be given to him…’

India is number four in the world, in the top ten countries with the most natural resources. India’s mining sector contributes 11% of the country’s industrial GDP and 2.5% of its total Gross Domestic Product. In 2010 the mining and metal industry was worth over $106.4 billion. India’s coal reserves are the fourth largest in the world and its other natural resources include ‘bauxite, chromite, diamonds, limestone, natural gas, petroleum, and titanium ore. India provides over 12% of global thorium, over 60% of global mica production, and is the leading producer of manganese ore.’

Capital of India – New Delhi (above and below)

In Ezekiel 38:13 ESV – India, as we saw earlier with Japan, stands against the great East Asian – Chinese led – military alliance of the far future. This is in keeping with current geo-political alliances. Both Japan and India favour a relationship with the United States, South Korea and Taiwan. Whereas China aligns more closely with Russia, North Korea and Pakistan.

Sheba and Dedan [Northern and Southern India] and the merchants of Tarshish [Japan] and all its leaders will say to you, ‘Have you come to seize spoil? Have you assembled your hosts to carry off plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods, to seize great spoil?” – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Joel 3:8

Young’s Literal Translation

‘And have sold your sons and your daughters into the hand of the sons of Judah, And they have sold them to Shabeans [H7615 from H7614, Sheba: Genesis 10:7], unto a nation far off…

Most translations say Sabeans as in Seba, meaning Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon). It should read Sheba, as the people involved are being sold to a powerful nation and thus, India makes contextual sense. Sheba is also shown to be dominant over his brother Dedan in the scriptures. The relationship with Judah is also a significant clue to the identity of both Sheba and Judah – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Chapter eighteen of Isaiah is dedicated to Cush. Verse 1 and 2 ESV:

‘Ah, land of whirring wings [Havilah] that is beyond the rivers of Cush [such as the Ganga (Ganges), Godavari, Brahmaputra and Krishna, the four longest rivers], which sends ambassadors by the sea, in vessels of papyrus on the waters! 

Go, you swift messengers, to a nation tall and smooth [Dedan (Seba)], to a people feared near and far, a nation mighty [India] and conquering, whose land the rivers divide [India a country crisscrossed by nine major rivers].’

Ezekiel 30:3-5, 9

English Standard Version

3 ‘For the day is near, the day of the Lord is near; it will be a day of clouds [veiled reference to Magog-China], a time of doom for the nations. 4 A sword shall come upon Egypt [Mizra], and anguish shall be in Cush, when the slain fall in Egypt, and her wealth is carried away [by the King of the North], and her foundations are torn down.

Cush, and Put*, and Lud, and all Arabia, and Libya* and the people of the land that is in league, shall fall with them by the sword. 9 “On that day messengers shall go out from me in ships to terrify the unsuspecting people of Cush, and anguish shall come upon them on the day of Egypt’s doom; for, behold, it comes!’

Ezekiel 38:1-2,5-6

English Standard Version

‘The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, set your face toward Gog [the ruler], of the land of Magog [Northern China], the chief prince of Meshech [Southern Central China] and Tubal [Eastern Coastal China], and prophesy against him… Persia [Elam], Cush, and Put are with them, all of them with shield and helmet; Gomer [Continental South East Asia, particularly Vietnam] and all his hordes; Beth-togarmah [a united Korea] from the uttermost parts of the north with all his hordes – many peoples are with you.’

We learned in verse thirteen that Cush, comprising Sheba and Dedan with Tarshish-Japan are not aligned with Magog-China in the yet future, powerful military alliance. Though verse 5 says Cush is an ally. India presumably begins in the alliance, to then later withdraw.

City of Mumbai

Other noteworthy verses regarding Cush, include: Isaiah 20:1-6, Jeremiah 46:9, Ezekiel 27:10; 29:10, Habakkuk 3:7, Amos 9:7, Nahum 3:9 and Zephaniah 2:12.

Steven Collins, an experienced and knowledgable Identity researcher concurs with an identification of Sheba and Dedan with India; for he states on his website: 

“Sheba and Dedan” are increasingly looking like the nation of modern India, as is discussed in my May 2, 2007 Prophecy Blog entry entitled “Will India and the USA Become Allies?” India is a large democracy with an English-speaking history from its membership in the British Empire [and Commonwealth]. It is increasingly being drawn toward the West via economic ties as well as mutual concerns about Islamic terrorism [within Pakistan and Afghanistan] and the rapid militarization of China.’

India is one of a handful of nations named by name in the Old Testament – Esther 1:1; 8:9. The verses in question relate to the time of the Medo-Persian Empire; marking the kingdom’s boundary from Ethiopia in the West to India in the East – one the past location for the descendants of Cush, the other the present location.

The Hebrew word is Hoduw (H1912), signifying ‘the country surrounding the Indus’ and ‘Hodu’ – that is, Hindu-stan.

Jeremiah 13:23

English Standard Version

‘Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots…’

The people of Cush were identifiable by their darker skin. We read the following regarding the third wife of Moses. Presumably, his second wife had died at this point and the sister and brother of Moses took umbrage. 

Numbers 12:1-3, 9-11

English Standard Version

‘Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married… And they said, “Has the Lord indeed spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?” And the Lord heard it. Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against them, and he departed. When the cloud removed from over the tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, like snow. And Aaron turned toward Miriam, and behold, she was leprous. And Aaron said to Moses, “Oh, my lord, do not punish us because we have done foolishly and have sinned.’ 

It is ironic that Miriam’s condemnation of Moses taking a dark skinned wife, led to her becoming as white as snow. We read in 1 Kings and also the Song of Solomon – all eight chapters – about Solomon meeting the Queen of Sheba. Judging from the accounts, they were quite enamoured with each other.

1 Kings 10: 1-13 

English Standard Version

‘Now when the queen of Sheba [who reigned from 960 to 945 BCE] heard of the fame of Solomon [who reigned from 970 to 930 BCE] concerning the name of the Lord, she came to test him with hard questions [circa 955 BCE]. 2 She came to Jerusalem with a very great retinue, with camels bearing spices and very much gold and precious stones. And when she came to Solomon, she told him all that was on her mind.

3 And Solomon answered all her questions; there was nothing hidden from the king that he could not explain to her. 4 And when the queen of Sheba had seen all the wisdom of Solomon, the house^ that he had built [Temple completed in 959 BCE – 1 Kings 6:38], 5 the food of his table, the seating of his officials, and the attendance of his servants, their clothing, his cupbearers, and his burnt offerings that he offered at the house of the Lord, there was no more breath in her.

6 And she said to the king, “The report was true that I heard in my own land of your words and of your wisdom, 7 but I did not believe the reports until I came and my own eyes had seen it. And behold, the half was not told me. Your wisdom and prosperity surpass the report that I heard. 8 Happy are your men! Happy are your servants, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom! [Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son] 9 Blessed be the Lord your God, who has delighted in you and set you on the throne of Israel! Because the Lord loved Israel forever, he has made you king, that you may execute justice and righteousness.”

10 Then she gave the king 120 talents of gold, and a very great quantity of spices and precious stones. Never again came such an abundance of spices [such as those which combine to make curry perhaps: coriander, turmeric, cumin, chilli peppers] as these that the queen of Sheba gave to King Solomon.

11 Moreover, the fleet of Hiram, which brought gold from Ophir, brought from Ophir a very great amount of almug wood and precious stones. 12 And the king made of the almug wood supports for the house^ of the Lord [Temple construction began in 966 BCE] and for the king’s house, also lyres and harps for the singers. No such almug wood has come or been seen to this day.

13 And King Solomon gave to the queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon. So she turned and went back to her own land with her servants.’

Song of Solomon 1:5-6

New English Translation

‘I am dark [H7838 – shachowr: Black, jet black, dusky] but lovely, O maidens of Jerusalem, dark like the tents of Qedar [Kedar, son of Ishmael], lovely like the tent curtains of Salmah. Do not stare at me because I am dark [H7840 – scharyah: blackish, swarthy], for the sun has burned [scorched] my skin [not literally, but figuratively].’

Footnotes:

‘The [second use of the] term “dark” does not appear in the Hebrew in this line but is supplied in the translation from the preceding line for the sake of clarity. The terms “black but beautiful” in the A-line are broken up – the B-line picks up on “black” and the C-line picks up on “beautiful.” The Beloved was “black” like the rugged tents of Qedar woven from the wool of black goats, but “beautiful” as the decorative inner tent-curtains of King Solomon (J. L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry, 40; W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 181).’

Queen of Sheba

In an article entitled, The Dynasty of Moses and the Queen of Sheba, Hope of Israel Ministries, add fascinating details about an amazing forerunner romance which preceded Solomon and the Queen of Sheba – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘In the book of Deuteronomy… God made Moses an amazing promise. After Israel had sinned, and made a golden calf to worship, Yehovah was furious. He declared to Moses: “I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiffnecked people: Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven: and I will make of thee a nation MIGHTIER AND GREATER THAN THEY” (Deuteronomy 9:13-14). Moses, however, interceded for the people, and turned away… God’s wrath from them (verses 18-19, 22-29).

However, prior to Moses leaving Egypt, the Jewish historian Josephus points out that he had been a great general who led Pharaoh’s army to victory over the kingdom of Ethiopia, which had conquered most of Egypt. While attacking the Ethiopian capital city, Tharbis, the daughter of the king of Ethiopia, became enamoured of Moses, seeing his valiant exploits, and bargained to deliver the city into his hands if he would but marry her. Moses agreed, and she fulfilled her promise – and Moses married her, and fulfilled the obligation of a husband to her, causing her to become pregnant (Josephus, Antiquities, II, x). This occurred sometime before 1532 B.C., when Moses was driven out of Egypt for slaying an Egyptian (Exodus 2: 11-15). The vitally important royal city where this conflict culminated was “Saba.”

Moses will be the subject of study in another chapter – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? 

Accordingly, Moses was born later than the article proposes, by some six years in 1526 BCE. Moses fled from Egypt at forty years of age in 1486 BCE. His campaign in Cush would have been circa 1506 to 1496 BCE – refer Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.

‘Josephus relates:

“… he came upon the Ethiopians before they expected him; and, joining battle with them, he beat them, and deprived them of the hopes they had of success against the Egyptians, and went on in overthrowing their cities, and indeed made a great slaughter of these Ethiopians… the Ethiopians were in danger of being reduced to slavery, and all sorts of destruction; and at length they retired to SABA, which was a royal city of Ethiopia, which Cambyses afterward named MEROE, after the name of his own sister. 

The place was to be beseiged with very great difficulty, since it was both encompassed by the Nile quite round, and the other rivers...” (Antiquities II, X, 2). ‘The Greek historian Herodotus spoke of Meroe, or Saba, as “… a great city, the name of which is MEROE. This city is said to be the mother of all Ethiopia” (The History, pages 142-143, quoted in The Sign and the Seal, page 448).

When Egyptian history is properly restored and reconstructed, this event means that Moses’ son by Queen Tharbis became the progenitor of a line of Ethiopian [Cushite] kings. When Israel left Egypt in 1492 B.C., [1446 BCE] the land of Egypt was in a shambles – utterly destroyed, as the Papyrus Ipuwer states with awesome clarity in describing the plagues which fell upon that land – including the plague of blood – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

The papyrus also shows that invaders from the east, the Hyksos, conquered northern Egypt (lower Egypt) and dominated the region as cruel “shepherd kings” for about 500 years. These “Hyksos” were the Amalekites who fought the children of Israel in Sinai as they left Egypt (Exodus 18). They were not thrown out of Egypt until the reign of king Saul of Israel, who conquered the Amalekites in Arabia (I Samuel 15), and Samuel the prophet slew their king Agag (vs. 32-33)’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

‘At this same time, the famous and powerful Eighteenth Dynasty arose in southern Egypt and Ethiopia – a dynasty of dark-skinned kings and queens! Among the famous kings of this powerful dynasty, which overthrew the Hyksos and conquered northern (lower) Egypt, Immanuel Velikovsky writes in Ages in Chaos:

“The kingdom of Egypt, after regaining independence under AHMOSE, a contemporary of Saul, also achieved grandeur and glory under Amenhotep I, THUTMOSE I, Hatshepsut [Queen of Sheba], and THUTMOSE III. Egypt, devastated and destitute in the centuries under the rule of the Hyksos, rapidly grew in riches” (page 103).

Notice the strange sounding names of this line of kings from southern Egypt and Ethiopia – they contain the name of their ancestor, who was none other than the Biblical MOSES! Why would Egyptian kings of the [2nd] most powerful dynasty that ever ruled Egypt be called by the name of Moses, and be named after Moses? Because this dynasty of kings and queens was descended from Tharbis, who became Queen of Ethiopia, and her husband was none other than Moses!’

The first Pharaoh to incorporate moses as part of his name was a regional Pharaoh during the period of the Exodus, Pharaoh Dudimose I who reigned from 1450 to 1446 BCE. Though he was contemporaneous with Moses, he was not the Pharaoh of the Exodus as we shall discover – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Some commentators have stated ‘moses’ is merely a title or rank rather than a personal name, so as to minimise or eliminate Moses from Egypt’s historical record. It is probable it became a title during and after the famous Moses had left his mark on Egyptian history.

Hope of Israel:

‘As Josephus writes, after she delivered up the impregnable city of Saba to Moses, “No sooner was the agreement made, but it took effect immediately; and when Moses had cut off the Ethiopians, he gave thanks to God, and consummated his marriage, and led the Egyptians back to their own land” (Antiquities II, x, 2).

Notice! The royal city where this marriage was consummated was “Saba.” Saba can be none other than the same as Sheba! Thus, the Queen of Sheba, whom Josephus says was the Queen of Ethiopia and Egypt, who visited Solomon in 992 B.C., [circa 958 to 945 BCE] roughly 540 years after Moses married the Ethiopian princess, came from this same royal city of Saba-Sheba. This means that she was a royal descendant of Moses and Tharbis, the daughter of the king of Ethiopia – a descendant of Moses!

… God fulfilled his promise to make a powerful dynasty of kings from the loins of Moses. And in the days of Solomon, the Queen of Sheba – Hatshepsut [ruler of Egypt from 960 to 945 BCE], her Egyptian name, or Makeda, her Ethiopian name – like Tharbis, her ancestor, had a love affair or romance with a Hebrew leader, King Solomon. Thereby the royal lines of Moses [from the tribe of Levi] and David [from the tribe of Judah] became intertwined, and have ruled in the nation of Ethiopia [higher castes in the people of Cush] ever since…

The very name “Hatshepsut” itself may be indicative of the fact that this famous Queen, who visited the land of Punt, the “Divine Land,” and who built a temple on the banks of the Nile at Thebes in upper Egypt patterned after Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, was indeed the Queen of Sheba.

“Ha,” in Hebrew, means “the.” “Sut is a suffix which may relate to royalty. Thus her actual name is “Shep,” but nominatives are often interchangeable, and it could be rendered “Sheb,” that is, SHEBA – thus her very name could mean, “The Sheba Queen,” or” The Queen of Sheba.”

Interestingly, historians know that the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt, at its most powerful, was a [black] dynasty – that is, Ethiopian or Nubian! On page 105 of his book Ages in Chaos, Velikovsky has a plate showing the visage of Queen Hatshepsut, courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It is a regal looking statue showing her distinctive Ethiopian features, or a mixture of Ethiopian and Semitic – but of course, for she was the descendant of Tharbis and Moses!

Was Hatshepsut the same person as the Queen of Sheba, or the Queen of Ethiopia, as Josephus states clearly that the Queen of Sheba was? The Ethiopian name of this Queen, who visited Solomon and had a son by him, was Makeda. Did Hatshepsut have this as her personal name? Velikovsky quotes the Karnak obelisk, in Breasted, Records, volume II, section 325, in its description of the famous Egyptian Queen Hatshepsut: “Thy name reaches as far as the circuit of heaven, the fame of MAKERE (Hatshepsut) encircles the sea” (Ages in Chaos, page 105).

Makere is clearly the same name as Makeda, the Ethiopian name for the Queen of Sheba or Saba. The term “Sheba” or “Saba” refers to the name of the famous Ethiopian royal city at the confluence of the Nile and two other Ethiopian rivers, at the upper reaches of the Nile!

The word “Ethiopia” is a Greek word meaning “burnt faces.” The Hebrew word Cush, translated as “Ethiopia,” was used in Biblical times to refer to “the entire Nile Valley south of Egypt, including Nubia and Abyssinia” (Edward Ullendorff, Ethiopia and the Bible, page 5, quoted in The Sign and the Seal, page 450). 

The 1955 Revised Constitution of Ethiopia confirms the age-old monarchy’s Divine Right to rule. It states:

“The Imperial dignity shall remain perpetually attached to the line of Haile Selassie I, whose line descends without interruption from the dynasty of Menelik I, son of the Queen of Ethiopia, the Queen of Sheba, and King Solomon of Jerusalem…” (ibid., page 24). Haile Selassie, the former Emperor of Ethiopia, claimed to be the 225th direct line descendant of Menelik I, the son of the Queen of Sheba or Saba, the royal city and “mother” city of all Ethiopia. Thus her Biblical name, “Queen of Sheba,” actually helps to prove her true identity!’

The above claim of lineage by Haile Selassie from the nation of Ethiopia, is included for interest and not proof – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Though if the claim is correct, Selassie’s Y-DNA Haplogroup would be the same as King Solomon… and that would be R1b. If Moses’s first wife was a descendant from Cush, then it is not such a random act for Moses to later take another Cushite woman as his third wife. 

Was Hatshepsut the Queen of Sheba – or Merely the Queen of Theba? By Emmet Sweeney – emphasis mine:

‘In the Old Testament she is named simply “Queen of Sheba,” but in the Gospel of Matthew [12:42] she is called “Queen of the South”. Both these titles point directly to Egypt.

In the Book of Daniel the Ptolemaic pharaoh is named “King of the South” on several occasions. It may be that this was not the most common biblical designation for the Egyptian ruler, but its occurrence in Daniel, without any explanatory comments, proves beyond question that it was a commonly-used expression. And the king of the south shall be strong… and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north… and shall also carry captives into Egypt… So the king of the south shall come into his own kingdom and return to his own land (Daniel 11, v. 5-9).

It should be noted that the Book of Daniel is generally dated to the first century BC, whilst the Gospel of Matthew seems to have been written in the third quarter of the first century AD’ – not necessarily, refer article: The Pauline Paradox.

‘Evidently, during this century or two, “monarch of the south” was an accepted term for the Egyptian ruler… Hatshepsut was… very definitely a Queen of the South. She was also, as we shall now see, a Queen of Sheba.

The capital of Egypt during the Eighteenth Dynasty was the mighty city of Thebes. Modern Egyptologists still use this name, which is derived from the Greeks. Where the Greeks got it has always been a mystery, since the native name of the metropolis, in the hieroglyphs, is read as Wa-se or Wa-she (actually, the glyphs used are that of the scepter – written as Uas-t by Budge – and that of a plant and an arm – written as Shema or Sh-a by Budge: thus Uas-sha or Was-sha). 

… Lisa Liel of Israel, an authority on both hieroglyphic and cuneiform scripts, pointed out to me that in her opinion the word should be read as Se-wa or She-wa, since the spellings of hieroglyphic names vary and in addition are often written not precisely as they should be pronounced. In fact, spellings often had more to do with aesthetics or religious sentiment than with strict phonetics. Thus the name Tutankhamen is actually written as Amen-tutankh (since the god’s name had to come first) and the names of the Senwosret pharaohs of the Twelfth Dynasty appear in the hieroglyphs as Wsr-t-sn’ – Appendix VII:Moses, the Exodus and the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

‘One might also note that various pharaohs whose names are made up of the elements Ka-nefer-re are alternately named Nefer-ka-ra (in actual fact the name appears in the hieroglyphs normally as Ra-nefer-ka). 

Now, if Thebes’ Egyptian name is really Shewa (Sheba) then a whole host of hitherto mysterious facts become comprehensible. First and foremost, we now know where the Greeks got the word Thebes (Theba). A normal linguistic mutation (lisping) turns “s” or “sh” into “th.” Thus for example the Persians called Assyria, Athuria. Secondly, we know why Josephus called the capital of Ethiopia (i.e. Upper Egypt/Nubia) by the name Saba or Shaba. Finally, we understand the significance of the name of another cult shrine of the god Amon – the oasis of Siwa.

Thus the two titles by which the Queen of Sheba is known in the biblical story clearly identify her as a queen of Egypt’ – refer articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and Is America Babylon?

‘Yet the connection between Egypt and the terms Queen of Sheba and Queen of the South still however leaves us with the question: Why did the biblical authors prefer these terms to “Egypt”? One possible answer, which may or may not be of value, is that the Jewish chroniclers were keenly aware of the Nubian (ie “Ethiopian”) origin of the Eighteenth Dynasty. To call the Queen of Sheba an Egyptian would thus, perhaps, have been (in their minds at least) a slight inaccuracy. 

We recall here that a generation or so after the time of Solomon, Israel was attacked by an “Ethiopian” ruler named Zerah. Everyone, even mainstream scholars, agree that this “Ethiopian” king was an Egyptian pharaoh (he is said to have brought an army of Libyans [Phut] and Ethiopians [Cush] against Israel), and the present writer agrees with Velikovsky in identifying this man with Amenhotep II [7th king of the 18th Dynasty 912-887 BCE] – a man whose Nubian ethnic identity is very clear in the portrayals of him that have survived.’

There are scholars and commentators who refute Hatshephut being the same person as the Queen of Sheba and the biblical narrative as authentic; but in so doing, do not provide a viable, believable or provable alternative. 

Matthew 12:42

Amplified Bible

‘The Queen of the South (Sheba) will stand up [as a witness] at the judgment against this generation [the last generation], and will condemn it because she came from the ends of the earth to listen to the wisdom of Solomon; and now, something greater than Solomon is here [the Messiah].’

The term Queen of the South is a tantalising clue as it confirms the status of India on the world stage, while at the same time excluding it from the future confederation of Islamic nations incorporating the King of the South: Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia and possibly Bangladesh – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen

City of Calcutta

Anil Gupta predicts that India will become a superpower this century and that due to ‘India’s functional institutions of democracy, it will emerge as a desirable, entrepreneurial and resource and energy-efficient… full-fledged economic superpower by 2025′ – refer article: 2050.

India did briefly become the world’s fastest growing economy in 2015 but since 2018 growth has declined beneath China’s. Robyn Meredith notes that ‘some of India’s achievements, such as working to dismantle the centuries-old caste system and maintaining the world’s largest diverse democracy, are historically unprecedented.’ 

Fareed Zakaria offers that India’s young population allied with the second[?] largest English speaking population in the world could give India an advantage over China. Thus by 2050, India’s per capita income could rise by twenty times its current level. Another strength, is that India has maintained a democratic government, lasting for over seventy years, providing long-term stability and in the process giving India a stable name. Clyde Prestowitz founder and president of the Economic Strategy Institute and former counselor to the Secretary of Commerce in the Ronald Reagan administration, said:

“It is going to be India’s century. India is going to be the biggest economy in the world. It is going to be the biggest superpower of the 21st century.”

Parag Khanna believes India along with China will grow ever stronger as the West stagnates. Though he stresses that India is lagging behind by several decades in development and ‘strategic appetite.’ He added that India is “big but not important” as it has a successful professional class, yet many millions of its citizens still live in abject poverty.

Khanna also wrote that it ‘matters that China borders a dozen more countries than India and is not hemmed in by a vast ocean and the world’s tallest mountains.’ Manjari Chatterjee Miller, at Boston University ‘argues that India is a “would-be” great power but “resists its own rise” and that “India’s inability to develop top-down, long-term strategies means that it cannot systematically consider the implications of its growing power. So long as this remains the case, the country will not play the role in global affairs that many expect.”

Poverty (above) coupled with severe pollution of the River Ganges (below)

Garbage in the Ganges River in Varanasi, India; along one of the most revered stretches of India’s holiest river.

These summations are quite accurate regarding India’s destiny, for while it is surely a world power, whether gauged economically or militarily, it does not and will not fulfil overt superpower status. In other words, its effectiveness in shaping the world’s direction; building enough strategic allies; or its diplomatic influence are limited in comparison with the United States or China for instance. Even in the future, it will be a Latin confederation; an Islamic alliance; and a resurrected Russian empire in tandem with a German led United States of Europe, which will dominate global politics and trade.

A number of readers will have been doing mental cartwheels from the moment it was suggested India is composed of two brothers, Sheba and Dedan. As the ‘Aryans’ of northern India appear to be physically, diametrically opposite and in stark contrast with the Dravidians of southern India. How could they possibly be blood brothers? 

It is quite a hot topic and subject of debate regarding how different the two peoples of India appear to be… or are they? We will hope to understand this question by the end of the section on Cush.

India: The Ancient Past, A History of the Indian subcontinent from c. 7000 BCE to CE 1200, 2007 & 2016, Burjor Avari:

“The earliest sacred text of India, the Rig-Veda, speaks of a land called Sapta-Sindhava, which can be identified as the province of Punjab, formerly the land of seven rivers. Today, five rivers flow through it – the Indus [the most westerly], Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi and Sutlej/Beas – but some 4,000 years ago there were two other rivers, called the Sarasvati and the Drasadvati, which have long since dried up.”

The name India originates from a number of sources. The ancient Greeks referred to India as Indoi, translated as ‘The people of the Indus’. Hellenistic Greeks used Indos in reference to the river and India for the land around and beyond the river. The Old Persian word was Hindhu (or Hindush)*the eastern province of the Achaemenid empire. The Sanskrit word was Sindhu, or ‘river (frontier)’, for the Indus River.

Burjor Avari:

“So ‘India’ is actually a Greek expression; no native in ancient India would have thought of using this term. They used Sanskritic proper nouns such as Bharat (a descendant of the ancient Puru clan), Madhyadesha (the Middle Country), Aryavarta (the land of the Aryans) and Jambudvipa (the shape of a Jambu tree, broad at the top and narrowing at its base, like the map of India) to describe the vast terrain with which they became familiar.”

The term Bharat is mentioned in Indian epic poetry and recognised as the official name in the Republic of India’s Constitution – ‘India that is Bharat’. The modern rendering of the historical name Bharatavarsha – which applied to a region of the Gangetic Vally – is Hindustan,* a Middle Persian name for India, introduced during the Mughal Empire. Its meaning varied between referring to a region encompassing present day northern India with Pakistan, and to India in its near entirety.

India has the fourth largest economy in the world, with a nominal GDP of $4.18 trillion for 2025 – 6.2% higher than in 2024.

With its large population, India has the lowest per capita GDP amongst the twenty-five biggest economies in the world, though is the third largest by purchasing power parity, or PPP with $9.56 trillion. With an average annual GDP growth rate of 5.8% over the past two decades, India is one of the world’s fastest-growing economies.

‘India’s economy is a mixture of traditional village farming and handicrafts alongside booming modern industry and mechanized agriculture. India is a major exporter of technology services and business outsourcing, and the service sector makes up a large share of its economic output. Liberalization of India’s economy since the 1990’s has boosted economic growth, but inflexible business regulation, widespread corruption, and persistent poverty pose challenges to ongoing expansion.’

India is truly a global economic power in the making, in the vein of china.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Indian global shipments during 2024.

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$75.4 billion
  2. Electrical machinery, equipment: $40.2 billion
  3. Machinery including computers: $32.5 billion
  4. Gems, precious metals: $29.9 billion
  5. Pharmaceuticals: $23.3 billion
  6. Vehicles: $22.1 billion
  7. Organic chemicals: $21 billion
  8. Cereals: $12.1 billion
  9. Iron, steel: $10.3 billion
  10. Articles of iron or steel: $10.1 billion

Electrical machinery and equipment represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 24.3% from 2023 to 2024. In second place for improving export sales was machinery including computers via a 10.9% advance. India’s shipments of pharmaceuticals posted the third-fastest gain in value, up by 9.5%. The leading decliner among India’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil, pulled down by a -15.6% year-over-year retreat.’

Of the nations with the largest gold reserves, India ranks ninth, one place behind Japan. It has 687.8 tonnes, which represents 6.5 percent of its foreign reserves. The Bank of India in fact, has one of the largest stores of gold in the world and India is the ‘second largest consumer of the precious metal, and is one of the most reliable drivers of global demand.’

The State Emblem of India ‘is an adaptation of the Lion Capital of Ashoka, an ancient sculpture dating back to 280 BCE during the Maurya Empire. The statue is a three dimensional emblem showing four lions. It became the emblem of the Dominion of India in December 1947, and later the emblem of the Republic of India.’ 

After World War I – in which one million Indians served – a new period began in India. The British brought reforms but also repressive legislation, leading to a deepening Indian preoccupation with self-rule. A non-violent movement of non-co-operation began. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi would become its leader, figurehead and enduring symbol. At this time there was also an upsurge of Muslim nationalism. Ultimately, independence was achieved in 1947; tempered by the partition of the British Indian Empire into two independent states: a Hindu majority Dominion of India and a Muslim majority Dominion of Pakistan. Havoc ensued with ‘unprecedented migration amid large-scale loss of life.’

Online Encyclopaedia:

‘Economic liberalisation, which began in the 1990s, has created a large urban middle class, transformed India into one of the world’s fastest growing economies, and increased its geopolitical clout. Indian movies, music, and spiritual teachings play an increasing role in global culture. Yet, India is also shaped by seemingly unyielding poverty, both rural and urban; by religious and caste-related violence, by Maoist-inspired Naxalite insurgencies; and by separatism in Jammu and Kashmir and… unresolved territorial disputes with’ [both] China and… Pakistan.

India has two major language families, Indo-Aryan spoken by about 74% of the population and Dravidian, spoken by 24% of the population. ‘Other languages spoken in India come from the Austroasiatic and Sino-Tibetan language families. India has no national language. Hindi, with the largest number of speakers, is the official language of the government. English is used extensively in business and administration…’ 

There are approximately 245 million native speakers of Dravidian languages. Dravidian speakers form the majority of the population of Southern India descended from Dedan* and are also found in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Bhutan. The origins of the Dravidians are considered a ‘very complex subject of research and debate.’ 

The origin of the Sanskrit word dravida is Tamil. Sanskrit tradition used the word to denote the geographical region of Southern India and according to one source, dravida in Sanskrit means ‘surrounded by water’ or a ‘Peninsula.’

‘Epigraphic evidence of an ethnic group termed as such is found in ancient India where a number of inscriptions have come to light datable from the sixth to the fifth century BCE mentioning Damela or Dameda* persons.

‘Dravidian grammatical impact on the structure and syntax of Indo-Aryan languages is considered far greater than the Indo-Aryan grammatical impact on Dravidian. Some linguists explain this anomaly by arguing that Middle Indo-Aryan and New Indo-Aryan were built on a Dravidian substratum. There are also hundreds of Dravidian loanwords in Indo-Aryan languages, and vice versa.

Studies have shown that the Indian subcontinent houses two major ancestral components:

‘the Ancestral North Indians (ANI) which is broadly related to West Eurasians and the Ancestral South Indians (ASI) which is clearly distinct from ANI. Later, a component termed “AASI” (found to be the predominant element in ASI), was distinguished in subsequent studies.’

Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine: 

‘As no “ASI” or “AASI” ancient DNA is available, the indigenous Andamanese (exemplified by the Onge, a possibly distantly related population native to the Andaman Islands) is used as an (imperfect) proxy. The two groups (ANI and ASI) extensively mixed in India between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago (2200 BCE-100 CE). 

In fact, Dr. David Reich states that sometime between 1,900 and 4,200 years ago, “profound, pervasive convulsive mixture [between the ANI and ASI] occurred, affecting every Indo-European and Dravidian group in India without exception. “Because of this mixing, according to Reich et al., both ANI and ASI ancestry are found all over the subcontinent (in both northern and southern India) in varying proportions, and that “ANI ancestry ranges from 39-71% in India, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers”.

According to a large craniometric study (Raghavan and Bulbeck et al. 2013) the native populations of India and Sri Lanka have distinct craniometric and anthropologic ancestry. Both southern and northern groups are most similar to each other also show deep relations [with] populations of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa [not really Europe, partially North Africa and mainly the Middle East].

The study further showed that the native South Asians, north and south, form a unique group distinct from “Australo-Melanesians”. However Raghavan and Bulbeck et al., while noting the differences of South Asian from Andamanese and Australoid crania, while also noting the distinctiveness… between South Asian and Andamanese crania, explain that this is not in conflict with genetic evidence showing a partial common ancestry and genetic affinity between South Asians and the native Andamanese, stating that “the differences may be in part due the greater craniometric specialisation of South Asians compared to Andamanese.”

The Andamanese are Negrito peoples living on islands in the southeastern region of the Bay of Bengal in Southeast Asia. They are related to the Negritos and Melanesians of the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Australia, amongst other islands. 

As stated above and highly significant for the Andamanese (AASI) – and by implication all Melanesians – is the admittance that the cranial structure of an Australian Aborigine for example even though bigger, is still in genetic proportion to a person from Southern India (ASI). 

Compare a Dravidian and an Aborigine, side-by-side and the resemblance** is clear, as highlighted earlier. It is interesting to note that it was identified that the Polynesian-Micronesian and Filipino peoples are descended from and linked respectively with Rodan and Dodan from Javan – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The Negritos are descended from Dedan. Coincidently or not so, the highest number of Negrito peoples from Dedan, are located in Dodan of the Philippines. As researchers have claimed, there has been significant admixture between Polynesians descended from Japheth and Melanesians from Ham via inter-marriage, with their Haplogroups supporting this blend.

As we have digressed; let’s give attention to the Negritos, before returning to India and Cush. 

Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine: 

‘The main paternal haplogroup of the Negritos is K2b in the form of its rare primary clades K2b1 and P (a.k.a. K2b2 or P-P295). Most Aeta males (60%) carry K-P397 (K2b1), which is otherwise uncommon in the Philippines and is strongly associated with the indigenous peoples of Melanesia and Micronesia. Basal P is rare outside the Aeta and some other groups within Maritime Southeast Asia. Some Negrito populations are Haplogroup D-M174, a branch of D-M174 among Andaman Islanders, as well as Haplogroup O-P31 [M268 O1b] which is also common among the now Austroasiatic-speaking Negrito peoples, such as the Maniq and the Semang in Malaysia. The Onge and all the Adamanan Islanders belong strictly to the mitochondrial Haplogroup M.

It is also the predominant marker of other Negrito tribes as well as Aboriginal Australians and Papuans.

Analysis of mtDNA, which is inherited exclusively by maternal descent, confirms the above results. All Onge belong to mtDNA M, which is unique to Onge people.

A 2009 study by the Anthropological Survey of India and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute identified seven genomes from 26 isolated “relic tribes” from the Indian mainland, such as the Baiga tribe, which share “two synonymous polymorphisms with the M42 haplogroup, which is specific to Australian Aborigines”.

These were specific mtDNA mutations that are shared exclusively** by Australian aborigines and these Indian tribes, and no other known human groupings.

Bulbeck (2013) shows the Andamanese maternal mtDNA is entirely mitochondrial Haplogroup M. Their Y-DNA belongs to the D haplogroup, which has only been found in Japan and Tibet at low frequencies outside of the Andaman Islands, a fact that underscores the insularity of these tribes.

The word Negrito is the Spanish diminutive of negro, used to mean “little black person”. Many online dictionaries give the plural in English as either “Negritos” or “Negritoes”, without preference. The plural in Spanish is “Negritos”. This usage was coined by 16th-century Spanish missionaries operating in the Philippines, and was borrowed by other European travellers and colonialists across Austronesia to label various peoples perceived as sharing relatively small physical stature and dark skin – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

Contemporary usage of an alternative Spanish epithet, Negrillos, also tended to bundle these peoples with the pygmy peoples of Central Africa, based on perceived similarities in stature and complexion. (Historically, the label Negrito has also been used to refer to African pygmies.)’

Indian men

Dispersals Into India by Rene J Herrera & Ralph Garcia-Bertrand. In Ancestral DNA, Human Origins, and Migrations, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘All the mtDNA lineages outside Africa are derived from three deep-rooted (old) founder haplogroups: M, N, and R. This is reminiscent of what is seen in relation to the Y chromosome in which all haplogroups in Eurasia descend from three ancient haplogroups, C, D, and F. In addition, both uniparental genomes (genetic makeup) in the populations of India exhibit little recent mtDNA and Y chromosome impact from non-Indian-Eurasian groups, and no evidence of extinction or replacement of the original settlers has been observed…’

This is an important comment as it reveals that the Indian sub-continent is composed of specific peoples, especially applicable to the north in that they have not been diluted as significantly by Aryan peoples who have invaded and dwelt in Northern India, as many researchers, historians and anthropologists claim.

‘The very similar ages of haplogroups M, N, and R, 61,300, 64,100, and 65,500 ya, respectively [rather in reverse, let alone the inaccurate length of each by over fifty thousand years], are congruent with a single early migration, possibly made up of several hundred migrants. Also, it is noteworthy that several subhaplogroups derived from the M, N, and R parent mtDNA types exhibit dates of origins very similar to the parent haplogroups themselves.’

The mtDNA super Haplogroup M and its super sub Haplogroups N and R equate to the split of maternal Haplogroup L3 from L0 to L6. Haplogroups which derived from these parent Haplogroups, tangible in the offspring of the grandchildren of Noah, could (and should) therefore, exhibit dates of origins very similar to the parent Haplogroups themselves.

‘This condition suggests that the mutations that define the subhaplogroups of M, N, and R occurred soon after the arrival of AMHs to the subcontinent [Yes, this is correct]. It is also likely that population expansion events took place soon after the colonization of South Asia by AMHs [yes indeed]. These dispersals clearly extended beyond the borders of the Indian subcontinent and into the rest of Eurasia. These initial population expansion events… resulted in a fivefold increase in the population. 

Yet, signals of additional secondary expansions from the Near East to India involving lineages W, U7, [both mtDNA and recent mutations] and R2 [Y-DNA and most recent mutation]… are evident, dating to more recent time periods (about 30,000 to 20,000 ya) [plausibly half to a quarter of these dates – Article:Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens].^

These younger population expansion episodes coincide with humid epochs prior to the LGM 18,000 ya [rather post-flood and since 10,837 BCE – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World]. Also this radiation and increment in population density coincides with the emergence of a novel, more refined, and sophisticated lithic tradition in India known as the geometric microlithic technology.

There are a number of other parallelisms between Y chromosome and mtDNA inheritance in AMHs with regard to the peopling of South Asia. For example, both sets of uniparental genetic systems indicate that the dispersals that led to the peopling of South Asia occurred soon after sapiens exited Africa [the Ark] in a speedy migration [toward India and the Indus Valley, circa 10,500 BCE] and beyond to the east [West and Mesopotamia, circa 10,000 to 9,000 BCE]. 

The absence of nucleotide differences in the coding (gene-containing) mtDNA among South Asian, Southeast Asian, and Oceania groups is congruent with a scenario of a brisk dissemination eastward occurring during a time span of thousands of years rather than tens of thousands of years. If the dispersal had been slow, the DNA would have been able to accumulate mutations during the trip.’

This time frame fits the period following the Flood, for the dissemination for all the grandsons of Noah and not just Cush’s gene pool. That is, thousands of years had passed since 10,837 BCE rather than tens of thousands of years, which would have been indicative prior to the Flood – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

The mtDNA Haplogroups M, N and R and their descendent groups are mutations evident after the Flood, filtering from Noah’s three sons and their wives who carried L.^

‘As with the Y chromosome haplogroups, the mtDNA lineages generally exhibit genetic uniformity among extant Indian populations across language, caste, and tribal groups. This suggests that the arrival of the primal mtDNA types took place before the creation and partitioning of caste and tribal groups. Also, the mtDNA M lineage characterizes populations of East Eurasia [Japheth], including South Asia [Ham], whereas West Eurasian [Shem] populations feature mtDNA haplogroups N and R and their derivatives.

It is worth noting that a coastal route is also supported by both uniparental genetic markers.

Specifically, the absence of mtDNA haplogroup M in contemporaneous Levantine populations suggests…

AMHs carrying the mitochondrial M type de-parted Northeast Africa via the Southern route (the Horn of Africa) and continued through the littoral of Iran, Pakistan, and India to the east.

The other suprahaplogroup, type N, predominantly of West Eurasia, could have traveled with migrants using the southern (Horn of Africa) or northern (Sinai Peninsula) route, which then moved into the Levant and westward.

Today the most common mtDNA types in the subcontinent are M, R, and U. Haplogroup U is a descendant of R. The ancient M haplogroup and its sublineages constitute about 60% of the overall Indian populace. 

M is found at 58% among the cast groups [northern India] and 72% amid the tribes [southern India], with a demic increase toward the south and east of India. As a suprahaplogroup, M contributes considerably to the genetic diversity of the subcontinent. The other 40% of mtDNAs in India belong to suprahaplogroup R’ and evidence of admixture.

Indian women

An online Encyclopaedia remarks on pertinent points regarding Indian lactose tolerance – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to Gallego Romero et al. (2011), their research on lactose tolerance in India suggests that “the west Eurasian genetic contribution identified by Reich et al. (2009) principally reflects gene flow from Iran and the Middle East.” Gallego Romero notes that Indians who are lactose-tolerant show a genetic pattern regarding this tolerance which is “characteristic of the common European mutation. “According to Romero, this suggests that “the most common lactose tolerance mutation made a two-way migration out of the Middle East less than 10,000 years ago [agreed as post-flood]. While the mutation spread across Europe, another explorer must have brought the mutation eastward to India – likely traveling along the coast of the Persian Gulf where other pockets of the same mutation have been found.”

Asko Parpola, who regards the Harappans to have been Dravidian, notes…

Mehrgarh (7000 BCE to c. 2500 BCE), to the west of the Indus River valley, is a precursor of the Indus Valley Civilisation, whose inhabitants migrated into the Indus Valley and became the Indus Valley Civilisation‘ – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

‘It is one of the earliest sites with evidence of farming and herding in South Asia.

According to Mondal et al. 2017, based on paternal DNA analysis, Indians are most closely related to Southern Europeans [only through admixture] and people in the Levant and that this relation existed already before Steppe migration:

These results suggest that the European-related ancestry in Indian populations might be much older and more complex than anticipated…

Two genetic studies (Shinde et al. 2019 and Narasimhan et al. 2019,) analysing remains from the Indus Valley civilisation (of parts of Bronze Age Northwest India and East Pakistan), found them to have a mixture of ancestry… The analysed samples of both studies have little to none of the “Steppe ancestry” component associated with later Indo-European migrations into India. The authors found that the respective amounts of those ancestries varied significantly between individuals, and concluded that more samples are needed to get the full picture of Indian population* history.’

This data supports a descent from the Himalayas (Kashmir region) of Noah’s family following the flood cataclysm as proposed by this writer elsewhere. The admixture which resulted in Indian men having ‘European’ DNA (Haplogroups R1a, R2) likely occurred during the Tower of Babel incident circa 6755 BCE. Similarly, the genetic admixture passed on through Indian women is evidenced by Haplogroup U and to a lesser extent, mtDNA Haplogroup H.

Lactose tolerance, associated with European peoples is a clue to the fact that Indians who are not a European people, but rather a Hamitic line… have a palpable injection of European DNA. This is the reason why there is variance amongst individuals and not a uniform pattern of admixture throughout the Indian population.* Before we address how this admixture originated, a brief description of Lactose and what intolerance to it means.

Lactose is milk sugar and is an essential component of breast milk. Its digestion is made possible by an enzyme, called lactase, which breaks down lactose as simple sugars which are then absorbed into the bloodstream. In most mammals, the production of the lactase enzyme reduces significantly after weaning. Older children and adults become lactose intolerant. This applies to most of the world’s population. Some people possess a genetic mutation that allows the production of lactase through adulthood. This is called lactase persistence (LP). 

Lactase persistence is particularly common among Northwest Europeans descended from the ancient Celtic, Nordic and Germanic people. The highest incidence for the lactase persistence alleles, are found among the Scandinavia nations; Sweden, Denmark, Norway; the Dutch and British, comprising England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; and the Irish and Basque peoples. We will discover that these peoples are closely related and are all members of the same extended family.  

Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b men in Western Europe are thought to be the first people on Earth to successfully domesticate cattle and to develop a lifestyle based on cattle husbandry and herding – Genesis 30:29. It is known that most herding societies consumed some animal milk and made cheese from it, as cheese contains less lactose and is easier to digest for lactose intolerant people. Speculations among geneticists and evolutionary biologists regarding the origin of the lactase persistence allele in Europeans are ongoing. The origin of the mutation may have been present at low frequencies in the human gene pool before it underwent positive selective pressure among cattle-herding societies. 

The LP allele was found at a frequency of 27% among thirteen individuals from the Lichtenstein Cave in Germany. They belonged to the Urnfield culture and were a mix of Y-Haplogroups R1b, R1a and I2a2. Today, the LP allele is proportional to the percentage of R1b and to a lesser extent R1a, found in a population. In the British Isles, the Low Countries and southwest Scandinavia LP is the highest in the world – the combined percentage of R1a and R1b generally exceeds 70% of these populations. In Iberia, the highest percentage of LP is observed among the Basques, who have the highest percentage of R1b in Europe. In Italy, LP is most common in the north, in proportion to R1b levels. The lowest incidence of LP in Europe is found in Southern Italy, Greece and the Balkans – the regions which have the least R1b lineages.

The Indian population – a people descended from Ham – shows evidence of the presence of a mutation for Lactase persistence universally associated with Shem’s descendants. How did this happen? One of the biggest misconceptions in ethnology and the identity movement, is the belief that the peoples of North Africa, the Middle East and South(west) Asia are akin to European peoples.

For example, the Arabs claim to be descended from Ishmael, Abraham’s first son and this has definitely muddied the waters – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

The Indians are labelled Aryans and this has certainly clouded the issue further. 

The word Aryan, refers to the region of present day Iran and etymologically, Iran and Aryan are the same word. The European peoples who once lived there, later encroached on the region now located in northern India. The peoples of Northern India and Cush in turn, have had that name ascribed to them. Northern Indians do exhibit skin tones and facial characteristics that are ‘Aryan’, received through admixture. Are the Indians themselves Aryan… no they are not. 

We have covered considerable material thus far, which has shown that even though there is a difference between Northern and Southern Indians – these two descriptions are preferred to:

Aryan, Indo-European, Caste, Dravidian or Tribal,

(which only confound further) for we would expect some difference, as they are the brothers Sheba and Dedan – we have also observed that they are related, even before any admixture. What is overtly apparent with some of the Northern population, is the evidence of a fusion of more recent European ancestry.

There are two aspects in answering – or perhaps more accurately understanding – this question. The first is presented by Arthur Kemp in March of the Titans, 1991 & 2016, pages 36-37, 38 – emphasis mine:

‘Around 2000 BC, a sun worshipping Indo-European tribe calling themselves Aryans invaded central Asia and occupied territory as far as the north of India… [using] the Sanskrit written language. By the middle of the sixth century BC the Persian Empire [had] incorporated Aryana into its boundaries… During the first century AD, the Kushans, an Asiatic race, occupied Aryana… [later] Another branch of the Aryans penetrated as far east as India, where they settled and built a civilization. The invading Aryans were more advanced and referred to the conquered Indians as “Dasyu” – the “dark ones” or slaves. 

… a clear distinction was drawn between the two types of people in the Indus River Valley: the “fair” conquering immigrants and the “dark” native people. Within three hundred years… physical mixing… [led to] two racial classes… [and] membership in each class was determined solely by the color of an individual’s skin. This became known as the caste system. The word “caste” was… from the Latin word cactus, meaning pure. The original Sanskrit… was “varna” which means color… the caste system became more… complex, till four major divisions were created… with the highest caste, the Brahmans… being the lightest in color, and the Sudas or “untouchables” being the darkest.

The… Aryan… legacy lives on in the language, religion, and poetry of India – and the caste system. Blue or grey eyes can, however, still be found in the Indian upper classes, which tend to be concentrated in the northern parts of [the] country… Many of these lighter colored Indians become successful actors and actresses in India’s film industry which is nicknamed “bollywood.”

An online definition of the term caste: ‘caste is not originally an Indian word, though it is now widely used, both in English and in Indian languages. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is derived from the Portuguese casta, meaning “race, lineage, breed” and, originally, “pure or unmixed (stock or breed)”. There is no exact translation in Indian languages, but varna and jati are the two most approximate terms.’

The Kushans mentioned by Kemp were not Asiatic by race but rather geography. They were one of five branches of the Yuezhi confederation, an ostensibly ‘Indo-European’ nomadic people, but in reality descendants of Cush. The Yuezhi had lived in the grasslands of eastern Central Asia’s Tarim Basin, in present day Xinjiang, China until they were driven west by the Xiongnu during 176 to 160 BCE.

The Kushan Kingdom (135 BCE to 375 CE) was founded in the Bactria region of northern Afghanistan, where the Kushan displaced the Greco-Bactrian kingdom and expanded over the Hindu Kush Mountains into today’s India and Pakistan. The Kushans controlled parts of Afghanistan, Iran and in India the realm stretched from Purushapura (modern Peshawar, Pakistan) in the Northwest, to Varanasi (Uttar Pradesh) in the East and to Sanchi (Madhya Pradesh) in the South.

The fourth and greatest Kushan emperor, Kanishka the Great, elevated the Kushan Empire to its greatest geographic extent (including Kashmir and Tibet) and cultural breadth to become as its patron a centre of literature and art.

When the Kushan Empire was at its peak during the first three centuries after Christ, it ranked with Rome, China and Parthia as one of the great powers of the world. ‘The Kushan Kingdom was the crucible of trade among the Indian, Persian, Chinese and Roman empires and controlled a critical part of the legendary Silk Road.’ Ultimately, the empire fragmented into many principalities and was replaced in North India by the resurgent Hindu Gupta Empire while its Afghan territories became tributary to the Persian Sassanid Empire.

As with Kash-mir and the Hindu Kush, it is not a mere coincidence that the Kushan should have a name resembling their great paternal forebear Kush (Cush).

The second aspect stems from those Bible verses we looked at earlier about the third wife of Moses, who was a Cushite and King Solomon’s love affair with the Queen of Sheba – Hatshepsut of Egypt, also a Cushite – his one true love. Moses had a child with his first wife, the King’s daughter and Hatshepsut was descended from Moses. It is highly probable Moses and his third wife had children. He also had two sons with his second wife, Zipporah the Midianite. 

Even though Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3, 43), it doesn’t say that he truly loved any of them. Only one son, Rehoboam who became King of Judah after Solomon died, is mentioned in scripture with two daughters (1 Kings 4:11, 15), Taphath and Basemath – also the name of a daughter of Ishmael, who became a wife of Esau – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth tribe.

What is astonishing, is that only three children are mentioned, when Solomon must have had many, many children from so many wives. The Kebra Nagast contains a legend that Solomon sired a son with the Queen of Sheba and that she returned to her own land long before this child was born.

Moses was descended from the priestly tribe of Levi and Solomon was from the royal line of the tribe of Judah. The lines of Moses and Solomon intertwining, while mixing with Cush, creates descendants from either a priestly or a joint priestly and royal line – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.*

It would certainly be plausible for the royalty of Cush in desiring to protect and elevate those descendants and in so doing, contributing to the evolution of the caste system, to perpetuate these two lines. It also adds explanation to the lightness of skin that the Indians of higher castes exhibit and the physiological impact on Cush’s physiognomy and caste culture. This introduction of not only a priestly line, but also a royal line, would account for the caste system’s emphasis of the two highest, wealthier castes; of first priests – the Brahmins – and second rulers, the Kshatriyas or Rajanyas.

We will look at this further when studying Jacob’s sons and address a coincidence too striking to ignore, in the comparison of not only Cush’s historical association with Judah and Levi, but also its relationship* with them today.

Returning to King Solomon’s children and the seemingly glaring omission of them in the Bible. Scripture does offer an answer, though an unpalatable one. It helps to understand why there are no genealogical lists for Solomon’s sons as there are for Saul and David in the Bible and why Solomon is not included in Hebrews chapter eleven as a man of faith. The chapter reads as a hall of fame for heroes of the Old Testament. Yet Solomon is omitted – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

We have touched on 1 Kings eleven, regarding Solomon’s wives and concubines:

1 Kings 11:1-13

English Standard Version

‘Now King Solomon loved [or lusted after and collected] many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh [Hatshepsut]: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the people of Israel, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods.” Solomon clung to these in love. 3 He had 700 wives, who were princesses [from royalty], and 300 concubines. And his wives turned away his heart.

For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father. 

5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth [Ishtar] the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom [Molech] the abomination of the Ammonites’ – refer article: Na’amah. 6 ‘So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and did not wholly follow the Lord, as David his father had done. 7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab’ – refer article: Belphegor – ‘and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.**

8 And so he did for all his foreign wives, who made offerings and sacrificed to their gods. 9 And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart had turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice 10 and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods. But he did not keep what the Lord commanded’ – Article: Thoth. 

11 ‘Therefore the Lord said to Solomon, “Since this has been your practice and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes that I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you and will give it to your servant. 12 Yet for the sake of David your father I will not do it in your days, but I will tear it out of the hand of your son. 13 However, I will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son [Rehoboam], for the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem that I have chosen.”

Worshipers of gods such as Chemosh and Molech practiced human sacrifice: particularly the inhumane sacrificing of babies. Chemosh, Molech (or Milcom), are names for gods within the pantheon of Ba’al. The Jewish Encylopaedia maintains that Solomon built a temple to Chemosh on the Mount of Olives** which remained in use for over four hundred years, from circa 940 to 540 BCE.

Deuteronomy 12:29-31

English Standard Version

29 “When the Lord your God cuts off before you the nations whom you go in to dispossess, and you dispossess them and dwell in their land, 30 take care that you be not ensnared to follow them, after they have been destroyed before you, and that you do not inquire about their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? – that I also may do the same.’

31 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the Lord hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.’

Idols were composed of metal and fierce furnaces were heated inside the sculpture so it became cremation-level-hot. Worshipers placed babies onto the idol’s outstretched hands whereupon they burned to death. The hands could be winched so that the hands raised and then dropped the sacrifice into the idol’s mouth as if it were eating.

King Solomon’s Worshipful Offering to Molech – Illustration from the 1897 Bible Pictures and What They Teach Us by Charles Foster.

Isaiah 57:5-10

English Standard Version

‘… you who burn with lust [through sexual rituals and magic] among the oaks, under every green tree [of Asherah – refer Article: Asherah], who slaughter your children in the valleys, under the clefts of the rocks’ – Article: Belphegor. ‘On a high and lofty mountain [Nephilim related] you have set your bed, and there you went up to offer sacrifice… 

You journeyed to the king [Solomon] with oil and multiplied your perfumes; you sent your envoys far off, and sent down even to Sheol [the Earth as hell]. You were wearied with the length of your way, but you did not say, “It is hopeless”; you found new life for your strength, and so you were not faint.’

Leviticus 20:1-5

English Standard Version

20 The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Say to the people of Israel, Any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones. 3 I myself will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given one of his children to Molech, to make my sanctuary unclean and to profane my holy name. 4 And if the people of the land do at all close their eyes to that man when he gives one of his children to Molech, and do not put him to death, 5 then I will set my face against that man and against his clan and will cut them off from among their people, him and all who follow him in whoring after Molech.”

Atrocity of the highest order and we can understand why the Creator became wrathful with Solomon and why the Kingdom of Israel later fragmented into two – the separate kingdoms of Israel and Judah – and if the false idol temple remained in Jerusalem for some four hundred years, this takes us to the time period when Judah ultimately fell in 587 and 586 BCE, with their punishment leading to captivity. 

These sacrificial ceremonies were ancient and practised by Nimrod and the Nephilim before him. We will also find that a specific son of Jacob had and still continues, a propensity for these occult practices and that the powerful and prevalent backdrop of child sacrifice, looms large as a dark shadow over the account of the God who demanded Abraham to offer up his son Isaac – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Finally, recall when we studied Tiras in chapter three; sources claimed he had a descendant called Cushni, who had granddaughters that had married into Cush, Phut and Canaan’s families. It may explain the differences between North American Indians and those from Central and South America. It also possibly connects the American Indian by more than just a name with their counterparts on the Indian sub-Continent.

Flag of India

Ham’s ostensibly little understood third son Phut, is the ancestor of the peoples who comprise the nation of Pakistan.

Flag of Pakistan

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:

‘Ham had another son, Phut or Put – it is spelled both ways in the Bible. Here is what Josephus writes about the people of Phut. “Phut also was the founder of Libya (by which he means [North] Africa), and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself: there is also a river in the country of the Moors which bears that name; whence it is that… the Grecian historiographers mention (Africa) by the appellation of Phut”. Put, then, is the father of the west and central Africans, where the true [Black people] live today. The Egyptians called the region of the Sudan (which was south of Egypt) by the name of Pet. The Babylonians and Persians called a similar region “Putu”.

Notice, however, that Put is named before Canaan in the tenth chapter of Genesis and in I Chronicles 1. Put was originally settled just south of Asia Minor, between Mizraim and the city of Hamath of the Canaanites. From this region Phut spread west and south to Africa, and also east! Numerous sons of Put early settled into the western region of Mesopotamia, a few hundred miles from ancient Babylon. This is the original center of Hindi, the language of northern and central India. This is the same region that some of the sons of Abraham and Keturah settled.

The people who were settled in this region were uprooted by the Assyrians and driven east into India. In India the highest castes were not only called Brahmins, but also Rajputs.

The word “Rajput” means “king or chief of Put.”

The Indians of Central and North India – being slightly mixed with white stock – vary from light to dark brown. The Rajputs are the most noted warriors of India. The word “Phut” or “Put” means a warrior in Hebrew.

The word Phut is not properly translated “Libya” in Ezekiel 38:5. It should be translated Put or Phut, as given in the margin. The people of Phut are those of India. Of the four sons of Ham, only Cush bears a name which means “black”. Just as some of the sons of Cush are brown, so some of the children of Phut mutated [?] racially into black. But this is not all of the story.

What is the origin of all the black people of the Isles of Southeast Asia and Australia?’

Dr Hoeh with the best of intentions is incorrect in his conclusions and yet his views and variations thereof are misleadingly still commonly promulgated.

Derek walker – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Both Gesenius… and Brown… identify Put as Libya. The first settlement of Put was called Libya by the ancient historians Josephus and Pliny. The Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, called the Septuagint, translates Put as Libya in about 165 BC. Biblically, Put (or Putt) is the region west of Egypt. This is the nation of Libya. Most modern scholars agree with this interpretation. The descendants of Put migrated to the land west of Egypt and became the source of the North African Arab nations, such as Libya, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco.’

The geo-political state of Libya, has a population of 7,501,531 people. Whereas Phut is prophesied as a growing economic and military power. North African Libya is not ideally placed to fulfil the Bible verses ascribed to it. Nor is it near Cush, which we have identified as principally India. The exact same issues with ascribing ‘Ethiopia’ or Kush to the African nation of Ethiopia are mirrored in attributing ‘Libya’ or Phut to the African Arab State of Libya. Aside from being two of the three sons of Ham, both Phut and Cush have nothing to do with the Africans; in that the Black peoples are descended from Canaan – not Phut or Cush.

The meaning of Phut aside from Hoeh’s definition of ‘warrior’ is unclear, though according to Abarim may mean a ‘gift’, from the verb put, ‘to give’. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine: 

‘This name is spelled the same as the verb put, to give… There is nothing in Hebrew that looks like this name. If this name indeed derives from the Egyptian verb put, it would mean Gift… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… reads Extension. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Foreign Archers

The Book of Jasher 7:12 provides names for Phut’s sons:

And the sons of Phut were Gebul, Hadan, Benah and Adan.

The name Pakistan – in Urdu (and Persian) – means a land abounding in the pure and a land in which the pure abound.

While the word pak means ‘pure’ and stan, ‘land’; Pakistan is apparently an acronym. ‘The P is for Punjab, A is for Afghania… K for Kashmir, S for Sindh and T stands for ‘tan’, as in Baluchistan. From these five distinct regions, each with their own language, one state was formed, but not a nation’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 197.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan has the fifth highest population in the world, with 257,417,628 people and the second largest Muslim population after Indonesia. Though this is set to change in a remarkable way, for by 2100 Pakistan’s population is projected to be half a billion with a staggering 511,001,100 people. This would place it as third overall behind India and China, with Pakistan eclipsing Indonesia by some two hundred million people as the dominant Islamic country in the world. Perhaps becoming chief contender for leader of the King of the South (Daniel 11:40) – Articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and Is America Babylon?

Pakistan is ranked among the emerging and growth leading N-11 economies of the world. ‘Pakistan’s political history since independence has been characterised by periods of military rule, political instability and conflicts with India.’

Pakistan possesses the sixth largest standing armed forces in the world. ‘The United States, Turkey, and China maintain close military relations and regularly export military equipment and technology transfer to Pakistan. Joint logistics and major war games are occasionally carried out by the militaries of China and Turkey.’

Islamabad, capital of Pakistan

Urdu, the lingua franca and a symbol of Muslim identity and national unity is the national language understood by over 75% of Pakistanis. It is the main medium of communication in the country; yet the primary language of only 7% of Pakistan’s population.’ Urdu and English are the recognised official languages of Pakistan; even though Punjabi is the most common language overall, being the first language for 40% of Pakistan’s population.

 Pakistan is the 42nd largest economy in the world by nominal GDP – totalling $399 billion in 2025.

Pakistan’s principle exports:

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Pakistani global shipments during 2024.

  1. Miscellaneous textiles, worn clothing: US$5.5 billion
  2. Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $4.8 billion
  3. Cereals: $4.5 billion
  4. Clothing, accessories (not knit or crochet): $3.9 billion
  5. Cotton: $2.7 billion
  6. Copper: $842.4 million
  7. Leather/animal gut articles: $659.5 million
  8. Mineral fuels including oil: $559.1 million
  9. Sugar, sugar confectionery: $549.1 million
  10. Salt, sulphur, stone, cement: $537.8 million

Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 227.8% from 2023 to 2024. In second place for improving export sales was sugar including sugar confectionery via a 75.1% advance. The leading decliner among Pakistan’s top 10 export categories was cotton, recording a -12.8% year-over-year drop.’

City of Lahore

Jeremiah 46:9

English Standard Version

‘Advance, O horses, and rage, O chariots! Let the warriors go out: men of Cush [India] and Put [Pakistan] who handle the shield, men of Lud [Iran], skilled in handling the bow.’

Cush and Phut historically – aside from possessing formidable military capability – have been closely tied to each other, similar to Magog, Tubal and Meshech – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Cush and Phut, though often mentioned together; give no scriptural clue that they are one people in similar fashion with China and three brothers within its borders. Therefore, it is fascinating that they were one amalgamated people for so many centuries; with the fundamental difference being religion as the motivation in their separation and partition. 

In this regard, Pakistan has closer ties to its fellow Arabic and Islamic neighbours.

Pakistan Coat of Arms

Note Ezekiel 38:5 ESV:

‘Persia [Turkey], Cush [India], and Put [Pakistan] are with them, all of them with shield and helmet…’

We have just read about Pakistan’s relationship with Turkey and China in connection with military technology and tactical manoeuvres. The distant future military alliance with China includes Pakistan with other key Islamic States, such as Turkey and Iran.

In Daniel chapter eleven concerning the prophecy involving the end time King of the North and King of the South; the King of the North retaliates to an attack by the King of the South and subsequently subjugates Egypt (Mizra), Cush (India) and Phut (Pakistan), verse 43 ESV:

‘He [the King of the North] shall become ruler of the treasures of gold and of silver, and all the precious things of Egypt [Mizra], and the Libyans [Pakistan] and the Cushites [India] shall follow in his train.’

Ezekiel 27:10

New English Translation

‘Men of Persia [Turkey], Lud [Iran], and Put [H6316 – Puwt: meaning: a bow] were in your army, men of war. They hung shield and helmet on you; they gave you your splendor.’

2 Chronicles 16:8

New English Translation

‘Did not the Cushites and Libyans [H3864 – meaning: empty hearted, afflicted] have a huge army with chariots and a very large number of horsemen?’

Recall 2 Chronicles 12:3, which we looked at earlier. It also says Libyan or Lubim instead of Phut. 

There are a couple of verses regarding Phut, which appear to state him twice. They are distinct and different terms, yet describing similar people.

Nahum 3:9

New English Translation

‘Cush [Ethiopia] and Egypt [Mizra] had limitless strength; Put [H6316] and the Libyans [Lubim H3864] were among her allies.’

Ezekiel 30:5

New King James Version

“Ethiopia [Cush], Libya [Phut], Lydia [Lud], all the mingled people, Chub [H3552 – Lehab], and the men of the lands who are allied, shall fall with them by the sword.”

We will delve into this more fully in the next chapter; for now though, the Lub-im or Lehab (H3853) are similarly related peoples descended from a different son of Ham, who have intermingled with Phut in Pakistan. We have seen the difficulty in defining a meaning for Phut.

Not so for Lehab [H3853] – mentioned in the Genesis Chapter Ten and 1 Chronicles Chapter One table of nations – which in Hebrew means: ‘Flames, flaming’ from the noun lahab, ‘flame.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine: 

‘The unused verb (lahab) probably meant to flame or burn. Nouns (lahab) and (lehaba) mean flame, but also denoted the blade or a sword or tip of a spear. For a meaning of the name Lehabim, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Flaming. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has Flames, or more interpretative, Scorching Heat. There is, of course, no telling why [they] were named or known as suchperhaps they… were arms dealers [many a true word spoken in jest].’

In keeping with the definition of Lehab, Pakistan is a zealous militant Islamic nation; supportive of harbouring and training terrorist cells, while entertaining a militaristic bias, which will only intensify in the future.

Pakistani man and woman 

The partition of India was brutal.

‘By 1947 the forces of post-colonial nationalism and religious separatism broke the subcontinent into two, and later three major pieces: India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. An extraordinary movement of people followed as millions of Muslims fled the new borders of India, heading west to Pakistan, with millions of Hindus and Sikhs coming the other way. It was carnage. Riots broke out across both countries as Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and others turned on each other in panic and fear… at least a million people died and 15 million were displaced’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 194-195.

Marshall:

‘India and Pakistan can agree on one thing: neither wants the other one around. Each country fairly bristles with antagonism… so how they manage this unwanted relationship is a matter of life and death on a scale of tens of millions… Pakistan appears to define itself by its opposition to India, while India, despite obsessing about Pakistan, defines itself in many ways, including that of being an emerging world power with a growing economy… They have fought four major wars and many skirmishes. Modern Pakistan and India were born in fire; next time the fire could kill them.’

Perhaps it is India’s long held mistrust of both China and Pakistan which influences its decision to pull out – with Japan who does not join for similar reasons – from the East Asian and South(west) Asian alliance in the far future – Ezekiel 38:5, 13.

Deep common ancestry of Indian and western-Eurasian mitochondrial DNA lineages, multiple authors, 1999 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘About a fifth of the human gene pool belongs largely either to Indo-European or Dravidic speaking people inhabiting the Indian peninsula. The ‘Caucasoid share’ in their gene pool is thought to be related predominantly to the Indo-European speakers. 

A commonly held hypothesis, albeit not the only one, suggests a massive Indo-Aryan invasion to India some 4,000 years ago. Recent limited analysis of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of Indian populations has been interpreted as supporting this concept.

Here, this interpretation is questioned.

We found an extensive deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our estimate for this split is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and likely pre-dates their spread to Europe.

Only a small fraction of the ‘Caucasoid-specific’ mtDNA lineages found in Indian populations can be ascribed to a relatively recent admixture.

The diagram is an outline of this Indian mtDNA tree within the background of the previously defined global mtDNA lineage clusters (haplogroups)… all of the Indian mtDNA lineages we inferred can be seen as deriving from the African mtDNA lineage cluster L3a…

We found that more than 80% of the Indian mtDNA lineages belong to either Asian-specific haplogroup M (60.4%) or western-Eurasian-specific haplogroups H, I, J, K, U and W (20.5%), while the remaining 19.1% of lineages do not belong to any of the previously established mtDNA haplogroups. We note that haplogroup K should now be considered a sub-cluster of haplogroup U.’

‘The skeleton network of Indian lineage clusters on the background of continent-specific mtDNA haplogroups.

Red, Indians; green, western Eurasians; yellow, eastern Eurasians; blue, Africans.

Haplogroup frequencies are proportional to node sizes.’ 

Recall from our earlier investigations in previous chapters, the diagram above reflects the four main racial strands descending from Noah’s four sons – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

The mtDNA Haplogroup L lineages in blue (dominated Haplogroup L3) represent Canaan’s descendants from his six sons.

The yellow lineages reflect the descendants of Japheth and while Haplogroup M is predominant; we discovered that Haplogroup B was the one Haplogroup found in varying frequencies for all of Japheth’s seven sons.

Therefore, it is of considerable interest that Haplogroup M should figure prominently for both Japheth (yellow) and Cush (red) from Ham. Does this mean there was a shared common maternal ancestor? If so, who?

This leads to the next anomaly where mtDNA Haplogroup U is seemingly indicative of Shem’s descendants (in green) from his five sons (where Haplogroup H is dominant); yet Haplogroup U is also found amongst the descendants of Cush. This reveals a shared maternal ancestor.

‘All Indian, eastern-Eurasian and western-Eurasian mtDNA lineages coalesce finally to the African node L3a. The former are shown magnified to account for higher mtDNA diversity in sub-Saharan Africans. The most likely root of the tree is indicated within a pan-African cluster L1. The dashed line leading from the African external node L3a to the Eurasian mtDNA varieties identifies the position of L3a in the magnified part of the tree.

The first and the most profound layer of overlap between the western-Eurasian and the Indian mtDNA lineages relates to haplogroup U, a complex mtDNA lineage cluster with an estimated age of 51,00067,000 years. Until now, this haplogroup has not been reported to occur in India nor east of India and was considered a western-Eurasian-specific haplogroup.

Surprisingly, we found that haplogroup U is the second most frequent haplogroup in India as it is in Europe.

Nevertheless, the spread of haplogroup U subclusters in Europe and India differs profoundly.

The dominant subcluster in India is U2.

Although rare in Europe, the South-Asian form differs from the western-Eurasian one: western-Eurasian U2 includes a further characteristic transversion at nucleotide position (np) 16,129, which is absent in Indian U2 varieties. We calculated the coalescence age essentially as described in and estimate the split between the Indian and western-Eurasian U2 lineages as 53,000 ± 4,000 years before present (BP). 

We note that U5, the most frequent and ancient subcluster of haplogroup U in Europe, has an almost identical coalescence age estimate. Still, despite their equally deep time depth, the Indian U2 has not penetrated western Eurasia, and the European U5 has almost not reached India.’

This proves that the Indian, whether northern or southern with primarily mtDNA Haplogroup U2, is not Indo-European (or Aryan) – as with U5 and a differing U2 – but a specific, separate people who have descended from Ham not Shem.

Yet, while they share a common paternal ancestor in Noah and a maternal ancestor in his wife, Emzara; at some point the maternal lineage deriving from – Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk and then – Cush, shared a female ancestor with Shem’s descendants.

‘Reconstruction of haplogroup U lineages found in India.

Green bold lines, the background of previously characterized haplogroup U lineages from western Eurasia;

red lines, lineages and haplotypes found only in India;

pink nodes, Dravidic speakers [south];

blue nodes, Hindi speakers [north]. 

Subcluster U7 is another variety of haplogroup U present in India. Unlike the Indian U2, it has been sampled, albeit rarely, in southern Europe, the Near East and (according to HVR I sequence identification only) also in Central Asia. We calculated the coalescence age of this subcluster in India as… considerably younger than that for U2.

Typical western-Eurasian mtDNA lineages found in [primarly northern] India belong to haplogroups H, I, J, T, X and to subclusters U1, U4, U5 and K of haplogroup U. Frequencies of these lineages in Indian populations are more than an order of magnitude lower than in Europe: 5.2% versus 70%, respectively. This finding might be explained by gene flow… Nevertheless, we note that the frequency of these mtDNA haplogroups reveals neither a strong north-south, nor language-based gradient: they are found both among Hindi speakers from Uttar Pradesh (6%) and Dravidians of Andhra Pradesh (4%). 

Assuming that they are largely of western-Eurasian origin, we may ask when their spread in India started.’

The question does arise:

Could Haplogroup U actually be a mutation from Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk and not from Shem’s wife Sedeqetelebab at all? Could the shared maternal ancestor be from Ham’s lineage and not from Shem’s and thus the origin for mtDNA Haplogroup U is not with West Eurasians but rather from South(west) Asians? Support for this is lent by the fact that the Indian dominant Haplogroup mutation is U2; whereas the European dominant Haplogroup mutation is U5. Even if scientists are correct in an overlap, one had to be first.

‘To assign a tentative date for their introduction, we calculated the averaged minimal distance of the corresponding mtDNA hypervariable region sequences in Indians from the branches shared with western Eurasians. We obtained a value for the statistic ρ equal to 0.46, consistent with a divergence time of 9,300 ± 3,000 years BP [the post-flood epoch and the subsequent re-populating of the Earth]. 

This is an average over an unknown number of various founders and, therefore, does not tell us whether there were one or many migration waves, or whether there was a continuous long-lasting gradual admixture. Their low frequency but still general spread all over India plus the estimated time scale, does not support a recent massive Indo-Aryan invasion, at least as far as maternally inherited genetic lineages are concerned.

We note, however, that within an error margin this time estimate is consistent with the arrival to India of cereals domesticated in the Fertile Crescent [refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla]. Furthermore, the spread of these western-Eurasian-specific mtDNA clusters also among Dravidic-speaking populations of India lends credence to the suggested linguistic connection between Elamite [Indo-Iranian] and Dravidic populations.’

The article draws an important distinction between the time frames of maternal and paternal admixture. So that a maternal infusion of presumably (for now) West Eurasian genes stems back to the age following the global flood cataclysm – Article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

This would have occurred between 12,000 years to 9,000 years ago – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Whereas an apparently additional paternal genetic influx (Haplogroup R1a) in the Indian gene pool appears to have been a far more recent event.

‘Thus, we have shown that the overwhelming majority [but not all] of the so-called western-Eurasian-specific mtDNA lineages in Indian populations, estimated here to be carried by more than a hundred million contemporary Indians, belong in fact to an Indianspecific variety of [a] haplogroup U [mutation] of a late Pleistocene origin. The latter exhibits a direct common phylogenetic origin with its sister groups found in western Eurasia, but it should not be interpreted in terms of a recent admixture of western Caucasoids with Indians caused by a putative Indo-Aryan invasion 3,000–4,000 years BP. From the deep time depth of the split between the predominant Indian and European haplogroup U varieties, it could be speculated that haplogroup U arose in neither of the two regions. This split could have already happened in Africa, for example, in Ethiopia, where haplogroup U was recently described.’

The last sentence is significant as the people of Cush once lived in the Horn of Africa. And as the subsequent split or alternate U Haplogroup mutations from a common maternal descendant occurred post-flood and likely during the Tower of Babel epoch, it is even more relevant considering where the tower was situated – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity

‘Although there is no strong evidence yet for the presence of anatomically modern humans in India before 35,000-40,000 years ago, the earliest estimates of the presence of modern humans in Australia make it very likely that the subcontinent served as a pathway for east-ward migration of modern humans somewhat earlier and that it could have been inhabited by them en route, as suggested by the ‘Southern Route’ hypothesis.

Our coalescence age estimate for the mtDNA sub-cluster U2 overlaps not only with the corresponding value for the European U5, but with the suggested coalescence age of the Indian-specific subset of the predominantly Asian haplogroup M lineages as well. 

Taken together, these data suggest that a common denominator – most likely beneficial climate conditions [post Last Glacial Maximum] – led to the expansion of populations all over Eurasia [post-flood], including the ancestors [Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk, Cush’s wife and an unknown maternal ancestor from Shem] of those who now encompass most of the mtDNA genome pool of the extant Indians. 

Furthermore, this specific distribution of mtDNA varieties in India compared with the distribution observed among Mongoloids and the Caucasoid populations of western Eurasia is, at present, best explained by two separate late Pleistocene migrations of modern humans to India. One of them, possibly arriving by the southern route, brought to India [by] an ancestral population carrying haplogroup M and was spread further eastward. The second migration brought the ancestors of haplogroup U [U2, U7]. 

Although the admixture of these major waves started perhaps very early – explaining the spread of these major mtDNA varieties all over the subcontinent – it is likely that it happened after the carriers of haplogroup M found their way further east, explaining the absence of haplogroup U lineages among Mongoloid populations studied so far.’

The defining mtDNA Haplogroups for Japheth’s descendants include M (M7) and then uniquely F, A and D. Though it was the relatively recent Haplogroup B mutations (B4, B5) which were prevalent in varying frequencies amongst all seven of his son’s descendants today in Central Asia, East Asia and the Americas.

In the previous chapter, it was shown how support for Canaan being a fourth and separate genetic line was evident in their ancient defining mtDNA Haplogroups L0 through to L6 – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Though it is L3, which is the most frequent maternal lineage amongst sub-Saharan Africans.

The article’s conclusion is based on evolution and the ‘out of Africa’ theory; whereas the reality lays with an off the Ark scenario; in that both Ham and Shem’s wives, Na’eltama’uk and Sedeqetelebab – and not forgetting Japheth’s wife ‘Adataneses – who carried the genetic DNA for the mitochondria M super-Haplogroup; which later mutated into the sub-super Haplogroup R. Meaning, both may have carried the relevant specific mtDNA for the various U Haplogroups – deriving from R – in their respective lines.

If this is not the case, then the only other explanation is that a descendant of Shem intermixed with that of Cush’s line. Either way, it would explain the corresponding U Haplogroup mutations, U2 for Cush and U5 for Shem being of course, a similar yet perhaps slightly staggered age.

The main mtDNA Haplogroups in India include: 

M 51% – U 19% – R 12% – H 5% – HV 3% – W 3% – N 2% 

plus C, F, K, J, T, A, D, L2, B, I, L0, L1 and X which total less than 1%

The Lambadis nomads of India carry the highest levels of Y-DNA R1b and their mtDNA Haplogroups percentages are: 

M 64% – R 13% – U 12%

plus H, V, T, J, N, X, K and W which comprise 8%. 

The Sri Lankan mtDNA Haplogroups:

M 58% – U 18% – R 14% and H to W comprising 8%. 

The Bengali in Bangladesh, mtDNA Haplogroups: 

M 67% – U 13% – R 9% and H to W of 6%.

                           M       U        R 

India                 51       19       12

Lambadis        64       12       13

Sri Lanka         58      18       14

Bangladesh     67     13        9

It is clear that mtDNA Haplogroup M is the defining maternal Haplogroup for the Indian sub-continent.

The M macro-Haplogroup in India includes many subgroups, ‘that differ profoundly from other sublineages in East Asia…’ as well as Central Asia. This is because these peoples are descended from Japheth as we have studied, whereas the Indians and related peoples, are descended from Ham. Yet a common maternal ancestor appears to link them.

Subgroup M2, including M2a and M2b, is lower in the north of India and higher in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

M3a is highest in northwestern India; while M4a peaks in Pakistan and Kashmir. 

M6a and M6b are found in Kashmir, the Bay of Bengal and Sri Lanka. M18 is found throughout South Asia, whereas M25 is less frequent. 

R2 is common throughout the sub-continent and R5 as well, peaking in the southwest of India. R6 is widespread at low rates across India, peaking among Tamils and Kashmiris.

Related group W, is found in the northwest of India, peaking in the Punjab and Kashmir.

U2 is sparsely distributed, particularly in the northern half of India; though it is found in southwest Arabia. U2a has high density in both Pakistan and northwest India. U2b is found in Sri Lanka and also Oman, as is U2i. U2c is prominent in Bangladesh and West Bengal in India.

U7 is significant in Pakistan and the Punjab, with its highest presence in near neighbour Iran.

Indian man and woman

Retina, Y Haplogroups, Fifth Edition, 2013, M Cristina Kenney & Nitin Udar – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Clade C was found in Central Asia, South Asia, and East Asia… C2 [now C1b3a – M38] is found in New Guinea, Melanesia… C4 [now C1b3b – M347] appears to be restricted among aboriginal Australians and is dominant in that population. C5 [now C1b1a1 – M356] has a significant presence in India.

Haplogroup F is the parent of haplogroups from G to R; however excluding these common haplogroups, the minor clades F, F1, and F2, seem to appear in the Indian continent…

Until now, haplogroup H [L901] has not been well studied, members of this haplogroup were mainly found in the Indian continent [H1a]…

Haplogroup L [M20] is found mainly in India and Pakistan, as well as in the Middle East and, very occasionally, in Europe, particularly in Mediterranean countries… 

The highest frequencies of haplogroup M [P256] are shown in Melanesia, being restricted to the geographical distribution of Papuan languages…

The P [P295] clade is the parent of haplogroups Q and R, and is rarely found. It has been detected at low frequencies in the Caucasus and India [P1 – M45]…’

The major South Asian and Indian Y-DNA Haplogroups in order are R1a, H, L, R2 and J2.

According to studies undertaken between 2003 and 2010, R1a-Z93 as shown below, is prevalent throughout Central Asia, Southern Asia and West Asia. Meaning it is shared by Japheth’s (mixed) descendants from Madai; the Hamitic peoples of India; as well as the Persians of Iran descended from Shem. 

It is important to remember that R1a is the result of admixture in the male population and originates in Shem’s line and not Ham’s.

R2 on the other hand as shown below, is restricted to Southern Asia. It is a mutation peculiar to this region and not the same as the European R1a.

Haplogroup L is found in India, Pakistan and further west, to include the Near and Middle East.

Haplogroup J2 is a complex and complicated mutation to explain – Article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia .

While J2 is found in men of the Middle East, West Asia and Southern Europe, it appears to be a defining paternal Haplogroup for descendants of Phut in Pakistan.

Haplogroup H is the one Haplogroup that is nearly entirely restricted to South Asia and particularly indicative of Indian men. Y-DNA Haplogroup H is found at a high frequency, as the major indigenous paternal lineage and the defining marker Haplogroup for Indian males. It is rarely found outside of South Asia, with traces found in men of southeastern Europe and the Arabs of the Levant. All three branches of H (H1, L902; H2 and H3) are found in South Asia.

Haplogroup H1a (M69, M370) is found extensively in Southern India at approximately 28% and in Northern India at approximately 25%, showing their common heritage as the sons of Raamah. While in Pakistan, it is the reverse and is tellingly, much less frequent.

Haplogroup J2 is present in South Asia as J2a-M410 and J2b-M102. Overall, it is found in higher percentages in Pakistan than in India; giving it some commonality with the Arab nations to its west and showing its distinctiveness from India.

Haplogroup L is far more frequent in the south of India compared to the north, with rates of up to 68% in Karnataka as opposed to 2% to 7% in northern India. Overall, Pakistan nationally, has slightly less Haplogroup L than India. 

Haplogroup O1b (O-K18 from M248) is somewhat mysterious as it is heavily associated with the East Asians and Southeast Asians as we have learned in preceding chapters; yet it is found at varying frequencies in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh for instance.

Recall, the Melanesians also exhibit O1 which is believed to have derived from admixture with the Polynesian – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

Observe the sharp divide between the R1 Haplogroup of Central and South Asia with Haplogroup O in East Asia and South East Asia.

R1a is thought to have originated circa 25,000 years ago – though more likely, quarter the number to closer to 6,250 ya – with its sub-clade M417 (or M198) diversifying circa 5,500 ya, with a distribution of its sub-clades R-Z282 and R-Z280 in Central and Eastern Europe and R1a-Z93’s sub-Haplogroup M750 being exclusive of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

As this Haplogroup is found in Occidental and Oriental Eurasia as well as South Asia, it is a topic of much debate as to its origin geographically. This is a blind, as the premise is based on evolutionary migration from Africa and or Australia; rather than a post-diluvian migration from Kashmir; then the Indus Valley region; and later Mesopotamia and Arabia – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

The simple answer is that one son of Noah carried the potential for Y-DNA Haplogroup R; with Japheth’s and Ham’s children either inheriting or receiving R (R1a) by admixture – Chapter III Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

While R2 and R2a are Haplogroups found in South Asia with at least 90% of R-M124 found in the region and R1 or M173 with R* or M207, are found in Bali, Indonesia; the specific eastern European branch of R1a is R-M458 and it is with these men that R1a is the original defining marker Haplogroup – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

A recent genetic study by Yelmen et al. in 2019, shows that modern South Asian populations are close to each other and distinct from populations outside of South Asia or the lands comprising Cush (and Phut). Analysis performed by Mondal in 2017, concluded that closest neighbour studies revealed that Indian Y-DNA paternal lineages are close to southern European populations and that ‘European-related ancestry in Indian populations might be much older and more complex than anticipated, and might originate from the first wave of agriculturists or even earlier.’ 

This finding supports the lines of Shem and Cush intermixing as we have discussed. The relationships of Moses and King Solomon validate this in the least, while a greater numeric past influence from migrations and admixture at the most. The exact when and where this happened runs contrary to the current Aryan invasion circa 2000 BCE theory.

A major 2009 study by Reich, used 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers; hypothesizing ‘that the modern South Asian population was the result of admixture between two genetically divergent ancestral populations… These two “reconstructed” ancient populations he termed “Ancestral South Indians” (ASI) and “Ancestral North Indians” (ANI).’

Reich stated:

“ANI ancestry is significantly higher in Indo-European than Dravidian speakers, suggesting that the ancestral ASI may have spoken a Dravidian language before mixing with the ANI.” Both the ANI and ASI ancestry is distributed all across the subcontinent in varying degrees, with “ANI ancestry [ranging] from 39-71% in India, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers.”

Two studies based on autosomal markers – by Watkins in 2005 and Kivislid in  2003 – concluded that ‘Indian caste [northern India] and tribal populations [southern India] have a common ancestry.’

A 2004 study by Viswanathan et al. on ‘genetic structure and affinities among tribal populations of southern India concludes:

“Genetic differentiation was high and genetic distances were not significantly correlated with geographic distances. Genetic drift therefore probably played a significant role in shaping the patterns of genetic variation observed in southern Indian tribal populations. Otherwise, analyses of population relationships showed that all Indian and South Asian populations are still similar to one another, regardless of phenotypic [genetic and environmental] characteristics, and do not show any particular affinities to Africans. We conclude that the phenotypic similarities of some Indian groups to Africans do not reflect a close relationship between these groups, but are better explained by convergence.” 

The matter of the African being descended from Canaan and the Indian from Cush shows they are half brothers, conventionally from the same father, Ham. Though Canaan being a fourth son of Noah is actually a half-brother of Ham via Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk. Canaan is also a half-brother of Cush, again through having the same mother, Na’eltama’uk.

Autosomal DNA, Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups support this theory – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Due to having different fathers, their prime respective Haplogroup mutations of E1b1a (Canaan) and H1a (Cush) bear little resemblance. Though surprisingly, we find that it is not Cush and Phut which share a similar ethnic legacy, but rather it is Mizra and Phut who are similar siblings through paternal Haplogroups J1 and J2 respectively. For Ham’s remaining son Mizra, possesses a Y-DNA Haplogroup closely related to Phut – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

The Southern and Northern Indians are similar as brothers as their true shared Y-DNA Haplogroup H indicate. We cannot know how they differed exactly, though it is clear that Indo-European admixture has altered the Haplogroup percentages for the Northern Indian as we will learn.

Less frequent Haplogroups found in Indian men include: T, F, P, C, R1b, G, E1b1a and Q. Indians in the United Kingdom have also exhibited, E1b1b and J1.

Afghanistan’s Y-DNA Haplogroups are represented by its majority group the Pashtun, comprising some 40% of the population. Overall, Afghanistan has more in common with Pakistan than India, or even the other nations of South Asia. The mysterious Sukkim do not have a sequence close to any of Cush’s sons, apart from one.

In Pakistan (above), the Punjabs comprise approximately 50% of the population and the Pashtuns 15%. The Punjabs of India are located in the northwest of the country and account for approximately twenty million people.

Jammu and Kashmir Haplogroups are based on the Indian Gujars; who comprise 20 to 30% of the population. The southern Indians or Dravidians, comprise 25% of India’s population – of which, the two largest groups are the Telugus and the Tamils, with approximately eighty million people each.

The Nepalese Haplogroups are based on the Terai Hindus.

Afghanistan:               R1a – Q – L – H – G – J – R2 – C 

Jammu & Kashmir:   R1a – L – H – R2 – K – J – F – R1 – Q – C

Nepal:                           R1a – C – H – J – R2 

Afghanistan: R1a [51%] – Q [18.4%] – L [12.2%] – H [6.1%] –

G [6.1%] – J [2%] – R2 [2%] – C [2%]

Kashmir Gujars: R1a [40.9%] – L [16.3%] – H [10.2%] – R2 [8.2%] –

K [8.2%] – J [6.1%] – F [4%] – R1 [2%] – Q [2%] – C [2%]

Nepal: R1a [69.2%] – C [11.5%] – H [3.8%] – J [3.8%] – R2 [3.8%]

The Nepalese Hindus as Sabtah, show the influence of Central and East Asia with a higher percentage of Haplogroup C. Aside from Haplogroup Q, Afghanistan as the Sukkim and Kashmir as Sabteca, are more closely aligned in the key Cushite Haplogroup of H (and secondarily L) than any other people in the region – with the exception of Pakistan.

Bangladesh:       H – R1a – J – R2 – C – L – G – Q

Dravidian:          H – R1a – J – L – F – R2 – G – C – Q – R1b

Southern India: H – R1a – R2 – J – L – T – F – C – P – R1b 

Sri Lanka:           R1a – L – H – J – R2 – F – P – K

Eastern India:    R1a – H – R2 – J – T – F – P – L – C

Bangladesh: H [35.7%] – R1a [21.4%] – J [11.9%] – R2 [7.1%] –

C [7.1%] – L [4.8%] – G [4.7%]  – Q [2.4%] 

Dravidians: H [32.9%] – R1a [26.7%] – J [19.7%] – L [11.6%] –

F [9.3%] – R2 [ 6.2%] – G [ 2.3%] – C [1.7%] – Q [0.3%] – R1b [0.3%]

Southern India: H [27.5%] – R1a [26.7%] – R2 [21.5%] – J [19.7%] –

L [10.8%] – T [5.1%] – F [4%] – C [1.9%] – P [1.6%] – R1b [0.3%]

Sri Lanka: R1a [27%] – L [19%] – H [15%] – J [14%] –

R2 [ 12%] – F [9%] – P [3%] – K [1%] 

Eastern India: R1a [23.2%] – H [19.3%] – R2 [15.5%] – J [4.1%] –

T [3.8%] – F [2.7%] – P [2.7%] – L [1.9%] – C [o.8%]  

The Bangladeshi Y-DNA Haplogroups are based on the Bangladesh Bengalis. We can appreciate the identities of Havilah, Dedan and Seba are more aligned to each other than to the first group of Sukki, Sabtah and Sabteca.

As we will find repeatedly, some peoples have a closer Haplogroup sequence affinity with a cousin than a brother, who may also be somewhat removed geographically. Hence, one would expect Bangladesh and Eastern India to have more in common – or Eastern India with Southern India in comparison – as Sri Lanka and the Dravidian of Southern India; but as can be seen, it is in fact Eastern India and Sri Lanka that align more closely in paternal Haplogroup frequencies.

There is a relative resemblance between Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Dravidian Indians inhabiting Southern and Eastern India. All three peoples are generally the darker skinned peoples of Cush as the result of far less admixture. Hence, little surprise that the northern Indians – 72% of India’s population – possess a contrasting Haplogroup footprint compared to these three.

Notice above top, that while Pakistanis are similar to Indians they are clearly distinct from them. See above bottom, how looking closely, the data for Pakistan differs from that of India and sits clearly between India and that of North Africa and the Middle East.

Northern India:             R1a – H – R2 – J – L – F – G – R1b

Indian Upper Castes:   R1a – H – L – J – R2 – F – P – C – R1b

India Punjab:                 R1a – J – L – R1b – H – R2 – C

Lambadi:                         R1b – C – L – H – R1a – J – F – P 

Northern India: R1a [48.9%] – H [24.5%] – R2 [11.1%] – J [7.8%] –

L [1.7%] – F [1.1%] – G [0.6%] – R1b [0.6%] 

Upper Castes: R1a [30.5%] – H [23.3%] – L [11.4%] – J [10%] –

R2 [9%] – F [1.9%] – P [1.9%] – C [0.9%] – R1b [0.5%] 

Punjabi Indian: R1a [47%] – J [21.2%] – L [12.1%] – R1b [7.6%] –

H [5.7%] – R2 [4.6%] – C [3%] 

Lambadis: R1b [37.1%] – C [17.1%] – L [17.1%] – H [8.6%] –

R1a [8.6%] – J [5.7%] – F [2.9%] – P [2.9%] 

A comparison of the Haplogroup sequences for the Northern Indian, the upper castes, the Punjab and the Lombadis. Apart from the Lombadi Nomads and their anomaly of a high frequency R1b, the highest levels of R1b in India are in the Punjab. This could be a hint at the lines that have entered amongst others, from people like the priestly line of Moses** and a royal line from King Solomon.* The upper castes overall have a trace of R1b at 0.5%, as does northern India as a whole. 

It is important to note that excluding R1a from admixture, it is Haplogroup H which is the dominant male Haplogroup in Northern India as it is in Southern India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Whereas for the Punjabi Indian it is Haplogroup J2, which is also the prime Haplogroup for the men descended from Phut in Pakistan.

As R1b is indicative of a western European line of descent, this information alerts us to the fact that any link to the tribes of Judah* and Levi** – and by implication other sons of Jacob, as well as relatives of his – will point to them being found dwelling in Western Europe. 

The average percentages for Y-DNA Haplogroups for the vast nation of India and its myriad peoples.

India:    R1a – H – O2 – L – R2 – J2 – T1 – F – P – C – R1b – G

India: R1a [28.3%] – H [23%] – L [17.5%] – R2 [ 9.3%] – J2 [9.1%] – 

T [3.1%] – F [3%] – P [2.7%] – C [1.4%] – R1b [0.5%] –

G [0.1%] – Q [0.4%]

Strains of R1a and J2 are found extensively outside of India and its related neighbours. Haplogroups L and R2 though found outside of South Asia, are still predominant in the Indian sub-Continent. These four Haplogroups are all significant Haplogroups in India; yet, it is Haplogroup H1a which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Indian men and related peoples. 

The principal component analysis graph on the left clearly highlights the demarcation between the four ancestry groups descending from Cush-Ham (black); Canaan (blue); Japheth (grey); and Shem (yellow, green).

The Punjabi have a percentage of 8% for R1b. The Punjabi in Pakistan by comparison, do not have any R1b. If Pakistan was a son of Cush and not Phut, one would expect to find evidence of R1b, as it is even found in the Dravidian. Interestingly, the Pathans – originally Pashtuns from Afghanistan who are refugees in the Punjab region of Pakistan – comprising 15% of the population, have a similar percentage of R1b with the Punjabs of India.

Pathans Pakistan:  R1a – H – L – R2 – G – R1b – Q – R – C

Pathans Pakistan: R1a [38.1%] – H [14.3%] – L [9.5%] – R2 [9.5%] –

G [9.5%] – R1b [9.5%] – Q [9.5%] – R [4.8%] – C [4.8%]

Recall, we observed the noticeable difference between the Indo-European Indians of the North and the Dravidian Indians of the South. Whether it be physical characteristics, skin tone, culture and so forth, they appear too different to be the full brothers, Sheba and Dedan from Raamah their father.

Yet, we learned that they are related and their autosomal DNA supports this premise. The higher level in northern India’s R1a, a result from intermixing, as well as a corresponding lower level in R2, J and perhaps L. The Northern Indians retain similar levels of H with the south of India – the very Haplogroup which is unique to the Cushite men in South Asia.

Northern India: R1a [48.9%] – H [24.5%] – R2 [11.1%] –

J [7.8%] – L [1.7%] 

Southern India: H [27.5%] – R1a [26.7%] – R2 [21.5%] –

J [19.7%] – L [10.8%] 

Pakistan’s Punjab majority and the largest minority Pashtun peoples are relatively alike.

Pakistan Punjabi:      R1a – J  – R2 – G – H – L – Q – C 

Pakistan Pashtun:     R1a – L – G – J – Q – H – F – T

Pakistan Punjabi: R1a [ 35.4%] – J [27.1%] – R2 [12.5%] –

G [ 8.3%] – H [6.3%] – L [4.2%] – Q [4.2%] – C [2%] 

Pakistan Pashtun: R1a [44.8%] – L [12.5%] – G [11.5%] –

J [6.2%] – Q [5.2%] – H [4.2%] – F [2.1%] – T [1%] 

Comparing the Punjab of Pakistan and India and also the Pashtun of Pakistan and Afghanistan, we find that they are related, yet ostensibly different. There is a crossover so that some descendants of Phut say, are still living in the Indian Punjab; but, even though they have the same name, many are clearly not the same peoples. The Punjabis who left India for Pakistan are descended from Phut and not from Cush; and in turn are closely related to the Pathans (Pakistani Pashtun).

The lack of any R1b and far less frequency of Haplogroup H, reflect a different lineage; as does the difference in Haplogroup G between say Pakistan and India. Note that Y-DNA Haplogroup G is not indicative of the descendants of Cush and Phut as are H, L and J2, but rather an early paternal lineage of Shem.

Punjabi Indian: R1a [47%] – J [21.2%] – L [12.1%] – R1b [7.6%] –

H [5.7%] – R2 [4.6%] – C [3%] 

Pakistan Punjabi: R1a [ 35.4%] – J [27.1%] – R2 [12.5%] – G [ 8.3%] –

H [6.3%] – L [4.2%] – Q [4.2%] – C [2%] 

Afghanistan: R1a [51%] – Q [18.4%] – L [12.2%] – H [6.1%] – G [6.1%] –

J [2%] – R2 [2%] – C [2%]

Pakistan Pashtun: R1a [44.8%] – L [12.5%] – G [11.5%] – J [6.2%] –

Q [5.2%] – H [4.2%] – F [2.1%] – T [1%] 

Comparing Pakistan with India, highlights the fact that rather than being another descendant nation of Cush; Pakistan is descended from Phut. The Haplogroup sequencing, frequency, concentrations and percentages do not match the five main regions of Cush’s male descendants: India, Jammu and Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal.

Pakistan:       R1a – J – L – R2 – G – H – Q – C

India:             R1a – H – L – R2 – J2 – T – F – P – C – R1b – G – Q

Pakistan: R1a [37.1%] – J [20.2%] – L [11.6%] – R2 [7.8%] –

H [6.2%] – G [6.2%] – Q [3.4%] – C [3%] 

India: R1a [28.3%] – H [23%] – L [17.5%] – R2 [ 9.3%] –

J2 [9.1%] – T [3.1%] – F [3%] – P [2.7%] – C [1.4%] –

R1b [0.5%] – G [0.1%] – Q [0.4%]

The obvious difference between these two great peoples is India’s higher levels of defining Haplogroup H and Pakistan’s higher levels of Haplogroup J2. The higher percentage of J will be investigated in the following chapter – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

The comparison table shows the principle Y-DNA marker Haplogroups (including from admixture) for the males of South Asia – the actual defining marker Haplogroup for each is in bold.

                               H         R1a       R2        L         J

Afghanistan          6          51          2         12        2

Pakistan                6          37          8         12      20

Sri Lanka             15          27        12         19      14

India                     23         28          9        18        9

Bangladesh         36         21          7 5      12

Constant readers will notice that no paternal Haplogroups are included from Canaan’s line – A, B, E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b, E2 – thus supporting a distinct and separate lineage from Noah rather than from Ham and bearing no obvious link with the cluster of Haplogroups indicative of Ham’s sons descendants: H, J1, J2 and L.

Aside from the Sukki of Afghanistan with Haplogroup L; Pakistan with J2 does not fit neatly with the rest of South Asia and H1a. Instead, Pakistan as Phut is in contrast with the descendants of Cush and though admixture has occurred between the two, Pakistan leans towards West Asia – the clue being the difference in Haplogroups H and J. It is interesting to note that as Haplogroup H increases in these nations, the corresponding level of R1a from admixture decreases.

It is Haplogroup L which presents an interesting enigma in that it does not form a uniform pattern in its distribution. It would be tempting to say it highlights a divide in India with Haplogroup H – represented by Sheba and Dedan. Though the higher percentages of the paternal Haplogroup L in both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka would seem to contradict this theory. Perhaps L as a more recent mutation, will continue to outgrow H1a over time and become the defining marker for Cush instead of Haplogroup H – as might be the case currently in Sri Lanka and in time, India also.

While it still appears Sheba equates to Northern India and Dedan to Southern India, the possibility remains that they are the other way around and Southern India is Sheba, adjacent to the similar peoples of Seba in Sri Lanka.

Note the preponderance of words beginning with the letter P associated with Phut:

Pathan, Pashtun, Punjab and Pakistan.

Recall, that there appears to be more than one ‘Libya’ in scripture. We will study the Lubim in the next chapter and find they are actually incorporated into the nation of Pakistan. A clue is the prominence of Haplogroup J. 

We will discover in the next section that Haplogroup J is found liberally in those men of Arabic related descent. The sons of Cush exhibit this Haplogroup through admixture with related peoples descended from Ham. The fact that Pakistani men carry Haplogroup J at higher frequencies, is due in part to an Arab admixture embedded within the peoples of Phut.

Proverbs 9:9 New Century Version

Teach the wise, and they will become even wiser; teach good people, and they will learn even more.

“Majority wins, but majority is not necessarily right and sometimes majority is awfully wrong.” 

Amit Kalantri

“The public will believe anything, so long as it is not founded on truth.” 

Edith Sitwell

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

Homo neanderthalensis I

There are a number of peoples within China’s borders which include the Han, Manchu, Mongol and Tibetan. Tibetan populations are most genetically similar with other modern East Asian peoples. A 2016 study claimed that the Tibetan gene pool diverged from that of the Han Chinese around 15,000 years ago (likely much later than this); attributed to a post-LGM (Last Glacial Maximum) dispersal. Analysis of around two hundred contemporary populations showed that Tibetans shared ancestry with 82% from East Asia; 11% from Central Asia and Siberia; 6% from South Asia; and 1% with western Eurasia and also Oceania. 

These results support the premise that Tibetans arose from a mixture of multiple ancestral gene pools and that their origins are more complicated and ancient than previously suspected. The date of divergence between Tibetans and the Sherpas of Nepal has been estimated to have taken place about 11,000 to 7,000 years ago – between the Flood 10,837 BCE and the time of Peleg circa 6755 BCE – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

After modern Oceanic populations, Tibetan populations show the highest rate of allele sharing with primitive hominins (extinct humans not belonging to Homo sapiens) at over 6%. Remarkably, modern Tibetans show genetic affinities to three ancient peoples: Denisovans, Neanderthals and… an unidentified archaic population.* In comparison to modern Han populations, modern Tibetans show greater genetic affinity with Denisovans; however, both the Han and Tibetans have similar ratios of genetic affinity with general Neanderthal populations – Chapter II Japheth Orientalium

Tibetans have been identified as the modern population that has the most alleles in common with Ust’-Ishim man. Ust’-Ishim man is the term given to the remains of an early modern (Cro-Magnon [Homo sapiens]) human inhabiting western Siberia. The fossil of a male left femur – discovered in 2008 – was a very important discovery, as it had intact DNA. This allowed the complete sequencing of its genome; the oldest modern human genome to be decoded. Dated as forty-five thousand years old, though about half this age is more likely to be accurate. 

Coupled with this discovery was the finding of a fossil jaw in the Himalayan highlands of Tibet, belonging to none other than the vanished human species, Denisovan. From the scientists perspective, this discovery deepened the mystery of human ‘evolution’ in Asia. A local Buddhist monk found the fossil, which shows these ancient human relatives lived on the roof of the world in the rarefied air of almost 11,000 feet. 

This is an altitude that would leave most people starved for oxygen today. This notable contribution of the Denisovan genome, is an allele of a gene involved in adaptation for low oxygen. This allows today’s Tibetans and the Sherpa people to live at high altitude more comfortably than other people. When this was discovered, it was perplexing to scientists because they have inaccurately placed modern humans reaching the region at ‘forty thousand years ago at the earliest’ and yet the same allele is found in modern populations living in much lower altitudes. For instance, Denisova Cave the discovery site, is seven hundred metres above sea level. 

Scientists now entertain that Neanderthals may have lived past forty thousand years ago and are relying on new fossil evidence to resolve the question. Kirk Lohmueller, a University of California geneticist, admitted: ‘That’s a paradox the field needs to address.’ One answer could be that Neanderthals did not die out that long ago, but rather when the great flood occurred. This would place their demise about thirteen thousand years ago and would assist in understanding the amount of Neanderthal DNA that Europeans and particularly East Asians carry, if it was a far more recent development in our genetic encoding. 

In fact, some scientists after a detailed analysis of the DNA of people living in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, now think our species may have been interbreeding with Denisovans as recently as, fifteen thousand years ago.

Scientists shared interesting evidence in an article, Neanderthal Introgression at Chromosome 3p21.31 Was Under Positive Natural Selection in East Asians, multiple authors, 2014, of ‘accumulation of a Neanderthal DNA region found on chromosome 3 that contains 18 genes, with several [alleles] related to UV-light adaptation, [in] the Hyal2 gene.’

A map showing the global distribution of the introgressive Haplotypes from archaic hominins 

‘Their results reveal this region was positively selected and enriched in East Asians, ranging from up to [49.4] percent in Japanese to [66.5] percent in Southern [Han] Chinese… [as well as quite high percentages in Native Americans – see map]… the Neanderthal genomic region suggests that UV-light mutations were shown to be lost during the [unproven] exodus of modern humans from Africa, and reintroduced to Eurasians from Neanderthals.’

We touched on the sun light conditions, the UV-light adaptation and the formation of Vitamin D, as well as the atmospheric conditions in the antediluvian epoch previously – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.

We have a further link between the pre-flood world and the Neanderthal who existed prior to the flood, but not afterwards. Some researchers believe the Neanderthal and the Nephilim* are one and the same. This would indicate they are not. The requirement for the Neanderthal to have this genetic adaptation, means that the lineages of Japheth and Shem, with their generally fairer skins, both received the adaptation. 

The darker skinned peoples descending from Ham’s children are now linked more strongly, as the line of Seth whom Noah descended did not all inter-marry with either the people of Day Six or the descendants of Cain. Thus, Noah was pure in his genetic composition as discussed in chapter one. Cain’s line did mix and may explain some of the Japheth-like names of his family. Plus, we now have the strong likelihood that at least one person – Japheth’s wife ‘Adataneses – and maybe two people in Noah’s family had Neanderthal DNA, to then pass on to Japheth and through admixture, Shem’s children. We also have further support confirming the scientific data from Haplogroups – Y-DNA Haplogroup A and mtDNA Haplogroup L – that darker shades of skin originated first and lighter skinned people have subsequently descended or mutated from them – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis.

Though this writer leans away from the out of Africa hypothesis and towards the off the Ark scenario, they align in two important points, with science actually affirming the biblical, Sumerian and other ancient written accounts.

First, both show that there was an original environment and then a secondary one afterwards.

Secondly, there were a reduced number of ethnicities in this first environment and an increased number in the second. Either an African continent, then a post-Africa diversifying migration of future European and Asian peoples; or an antediluvian world preceding a post-diluvian world, with the development of increased variety in the ethnic races going from either two or three, to twenty-one. 

The Neanderthal were a separate line of human – prior to Homo sapiens – who existed before the flood. Their larger head and increased brain capacity reveals they were highly intelligent and certainly not ape-like as has been falsely promulgated. It is believed that the Denisovans and Neanderthals split, with the former migrating to Asia and the latter to Europe. In realty, the split is principally genetic and secondarily geographic. The Denisovans component is primarily present in Melanesians, East Indonesians and the Negritos from the Philippines, compared to other southeastern Asians. Thus, only populations situated to the east of the biological boundary traced by Alfred Russell Wallace in 1869, consistently share genetic material from Denisovans; pointing to a close relationship among them. 

The detailed aspects of one, the Neanderthal question; two, parallel humans; and three, the Nephilim* prior to the flood are addressed in a separate chapter, though for now, it is relevant to briefly discuss the relevance of Japheth possessing Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA is genetically closer than either is to Homo sapiens sapiens and modern man. About two per cent of the genome (ranging from 0 to 5%) of a typical European contains genetic material almost identical to Neanderthal DNA; though people in China, Japan and other East Asian countries carry 20 per cent – generally ranging from 15 to 30% – more Neanderthal DNA. This remains an inexplicable puzzle to scientists. 

Kirk Lohmueller and graduate student Bernard Kim constructed a computer model of Europeans and Asians, simulating reproduction over time, adding Neanderthal DNA and observing the emerging genetic differences. 

The modelling highlighted that the only scenario that could explain why modern Asians have more Neanderthal DNA, was that they had a second encounter with Neanderthals at a later date – another ‘pulse’ of their genes into the Asian pool. Of course, this two pulse hypothesis explanation runs into the same ‘forty thousand years ago’ difficulty, as the Neanderthal would have disappeared well before the European and Asian populations genetically diverged. ‘How could there have been Neanderthals left to interbreed with Asians a second time?’ Mainstream science remains adamant that Neanderthal man became extinct forty thousand years ago, contrary to growing evidence. 

So scientists are still left scratching their heads how Asians received their additional Neanderthal DNA. Weak explanations offered to this quandary include: ‘European ancestors bred with another yet-to-be discovered species of ancient human that watered down their Neanderthal DNA’… or… ‘Asians also mixed with another group of humans – now extinct – that had interbred with Neanderthals and carried much of their DNA.’

Regardless of time frames, the idea of additional inter-breeding between Neanderthal and East Asians, does not account for the fact that they did and Europeans did not. In a separate section, the Genesis account is dissected for any answers to this question – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

What we find, is that there were people that came into existence before Cro-Magnon or Homo sapiens man. These people were the Neanderthal – the people of Day Six in the Book of Genesis. The high level of their DNA and the Denisovan within Oriental Asian people can be answered if it was already included in Japheth’s line. 

How and when this happened could be answered a number of ways, aside from Japheth’s wife – Articles: Homo Neanderthalensis II, III & IV. Input on the technicalities of this process would be welcomed, as white Europeans possess considerably less Neanderthal DNA and no Denisovan, while sub-Saharan Black people possess either neither of the DNA genetic material of this early human, or minute traces of Neanderthal.

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter X – China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech

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

Canaan & Africa

Chapter XII

Conventionally, Canaan is the fourth and youngest son of Ham. Yet, as discussed in the previous chapter, enough evidence exists to cast doubt on the scriptural account as presently translated in the Book of Genesis – Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

Editing in later manuscripts appear to have sought to cover Canaan’s true identity as actually the fourth and youngest son of Noah. The complex and distinct genetic blueprint for Canaan’s descendants, convincingly supports this premise.

Initially for the purpose of the current study and the coherence of The Noachian Legacy it was endeavoured to retain as a whole, the orthodox view of Canaan’s parentage. After more thorough investigation, this writer is fully persuaded that this position is untenable. Therefore, an apologetic approach has been fully dismissed and replaced with a teaching clearly supported by science and scripture.

Before we continue in earnest, there is a vital key to understanding not just Canaan but numerous identities to follow. This matter is being laboured as it has been the single biggest block in understanding where the peoples of the Bible were in the past and where they are now. It requires a return to point number two in the introduction (primus verba). 

Original peoples dwelt in a region after the Flood; then they migrated. New peoples would move in; they then would be known by the names already associated with the area, the actual land, invariably from the previous dwellers. Tracking and identifying these former peoples, plus now the new ones becomes difficult, because historians and researchers assume they can rely on the names already established for the land area as still being applicable to the new migrations who are actually completely different people. 

Giving two peoples the same name because of where they are living and not based on who they are is non-sensical and mis-leading. We will discuss why the children of Canaan dwelt where they did and who the new people were that moved into their territory when Canaan migrated. All the information one can find on Canaan and Canaanites* in books, papers and online, unknown to the authors themselves, invariably relates to either:

a. other people from Ham’s line;

b. Shem’s descendants;

c. the line of Cain; and

d. the Nephilim.

But incredibly, not the true descendants of Canaan. 

Israel a History of – emphasis mine:

‘From Ca’naan came eleven sons, the eldest being Sidon. Sidon founded the city Sidon, and was the progenitor of the Phoenicians. From Heth came the Hittites (Genesis 23:10), who ruled over an empire in Asia Minor for over 800 years. Hittites are very active throughout the entire Old Testament. They were present in Canaan at the time of Abraham, reaching their zenith sometime later in Asia Minor, yet were still a force during the reign of Solomon 1,000 years later (II Chronicles 1:17). Eventually their empire crumbled, and there is evidence that some of the Hittite people fled eastward. Cuneiform monuments record the name “Khittae”, and this may have been modified to Cathay. Archaeologists have noted many similarities between the Hittites and the Mongoloids.’

We will discover that the Phoenicians are descended from Shem and not Ham – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

True Canaanites had well dispersed by the time the Israelites arrived in Canaan in 1407 BCE. The Phoenicians were a mercantile, shipping and sea people. The original Canaanites were not fond of the sea or boats.

Similarly, Heth was a prominent son of Canaan. Later, notable descendants of Shem became known as Hittites – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

These Hittites were a war-like people, establishing a powerful empire which rivalled the Assyrians – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Both Empires lived side-by-side in Asia Minor and established an alliance, rather than antagonising each other – Article: Is America Babylon?

We have discussed earlier how the Khitt-ae are descended from Kittim, a son of Javan and are the Malay peoples of Indonesia today – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.

Additionally, a biological and etymological link between Kittim and the Khitan State in northern China – led by the Liao dynasty from 916 to 1125 CE – is improbable.

The Khittae dwelt in Asia Minor millennia before the Hittites. An earlier people in Anatolia prior to the Hittites – though after the Khittae – were the Hattians. The Hatti, derived from Khatti – a different word – and though easily confused with the Khittae, are an entirely distinct people, descending from Shem – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Israel a History of:

‘The Sinites are an interesting tribe. There is tenuous evidence that they may be the ancestors of the Chinese. Possibly the Sinites migrated east all the way to China. Of the descendants of Ham, Sin and Heth are the two most probable ancestors of the Oriental people. Ca’naan’s descendants, according to scripture, “spread abroad” (Genesis 10:18). Of the lines descending from the sons of Noah, these peoples migrated perhaps more than any other.

The contributions made by the descendants of Ham, the youngest of the sons of Noah, are staggering. They were the first explorers. They became the first cultivators of the basic food groups. They discovered and invented medicines, and surgical practices. They were the first to develop fabrics, and the devices used to sew these fabrics. They were the inventors of mathematics, surveying, and navigation.’

The Chinese descend from Japheth and are East Asian, not Hamitic – refer Addendum II, Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meschech.

The Phoenicians, Hittites and Chinese have not been slaves or subjugated to other nations – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

The peoples described above who travelled extensively and contributed to the advancement of civilisation are the Phoenicians who built the city of Tyre and caused Sidon to flourish, making them world-renowned with their import-export trading interests. We will investigate and identity their descent as being from Shem and not Canaan – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 55-59 – emphasis mine:

‘Canaan bordered on Egypt, and the name is usually explained to mean the lowlands. It originally denoted, in fact, the narrow strip of land which lies between the sea and the mountains on the coast of Palestine. Here the great cities of the Phoenicians were built, and it was from hence that the Phoenician ships started on their voyages in search of wealth. As time went on, the name of Canaan came to be applied to the land beyond the mountains on the east.

In the letters written from Palestine to the Egyptian court a century before the Exodus, and discovered among the ruins of Tel el-Amarna, Kinakhkhi or Canaan denotes the district which intervened between the cities of the Philistines and the country northward of Gebal. The latter was called the land of the Amorites.

In the books of the Old Testament the word Canaan has acquired an even greater extent of meaning than it has in the tablets of Tel el-Amarna. The cities of the Philistines, as well as the barren region east of them, are alike included in Canaan. Even the Amorites have become Canaanites, like the inhabitants of Hamath far away to the north.’

Canaan is mentioned many, many times in the Bible, not in reference to their people but the land they first settled, that in time became busier than ‘grand central station’ in terms of human traffic and the varying numbers of nations who dwelt in the region for millennia.

Sayce:

‘The original land [actually much later] of Canaan was called Phoenicia by the Greeks and Kaftby the Egyptians. It is possible that both names were derived from the palms which grew luxuriantly there. Kaph and Kipptih signify a palm-branch in Hebrew, and phoenix in Greek has the same meaning. But it is also possible that the latter word was derived from the name of the country in which the Greeks first became acquainted with the palm, not that the country took its name from the tree.

The language of Canaan, as it is called by Isaiah [19:18], differed but slightly from Hebrew. The Hebrew tribes, in fact, like their kindred in Moab and Ammon, must have exchanged their earlier Aramaic dialects for the language of the country in which they settled. In no other way can we explain how it came about that the Syrian emigrant [Deuteronomy 26:5] should have acquired the ancient language of Canaan. The adoption of the new language was doubtless facilitated by the relationship of the Aramaic dialects to Hebrew or Phoenician.

They belonged to the same family of speech and bore the same relation to one another that French bears to Italian.’

Interesting and coincidental observation regarding language, which we will re-visit when studying Aram and Moab – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil, Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Sayce:

‘It will be seen that the tribes and cities of which Canaan is said to have been the father were related to one another only geographically. The blond Amorite and the yellow-skinned Hittite [rather Khittae] of the north had nothing in common from a racial point of view either with one another or with the Semitic tribes of Canaan. Geography and not ethnology has caused them to be grouped together.’

Sayce hits upon the key point regarding Canaan. The blond Amorites are not the descendants of Amor, the son of Canaan. All the information we read regarding Canaan in extraneous material and in the Bible after Abraham and certainly by the time the descendants of Jacob – the Israelites – arrived in stages between circa 1900 to 1400 BCE; witnesses a change in who the actual Canaanites were. The original Canaanites had departed for Africa and other Canaanites* had moved into the vacated strip of land, or had forced the true Canaanites southwestwards.

It was a lucrative piece of real estate with its rich soil and farm land, beautiful landscapes and extensive ports. There were numerous peoples who converged and those who were evil – the Nephilim descended Elioud giants and those who had intermarried with them, by default – fell to the descendants of Jacob during the waging of a monstrous war for seven years to clear the land after they entered in 1407 BCE – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

An online encyclopaedia, accurately states the multiculturalism and the variety of ethnicities incorporated under the ‘Canaanite’ umbrella during this intermediate period; with the incorrect ascribing of the term Phoenician from an ethnic vantage, yet accurate from a geographic perspective – emphasis mine:

‘The name “Canaan” appears throughout the Bible, where it corresponds to the Levant, in particular to the areas of the Southern Levant that provide the main setting of the narrative of the Bible: Phoenicia, Philistia, Israel, and other nations.

The word “Canaanites” serves as an ethnic catch-all term covering various indigenous populations.

It is by far the most frequently used ethnic term in the Bible. The name “Canaanites” is attested, many centuries later, as the endonym of the people later known to the Ancient Greeks from c. 500 BC as Phoenicians, and after the emigration of Canaanite-speakers to Carthage (founded in the 9th century BC), was also used as a self-designation by the Punics (chanani) of North Africa during Late Antiquity.’

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine: 

‘Originally the sons of Canaan settled in Palestine. Canaan, remember, was the first born of Ham [Canaan is Noah’s youngest son – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator]. Canaan’s descendants – and this includes the other sons of Ham [incorrect, Genesis 9:25-27] – were to be “servant of servants” (Genesis 9:25) [Genesis 9:25 states Canaan not Ham]. Their children are to serve both Shem and Japheth (verses 26,27).

There is nothing wrong with serving – we all have to learn to serve [Note: difference between serving, servitude and slavery]. Shem and Japheth must become God’s servants, too. That is why Canaan is called a “servant of servants.” Many have quoted this in direct reference to the [Black African]. As brothers of Canaan, the [Africans] have shared the same position in life, but [Africans] are not Canaanites.’

Dr Hoeh has confidently stated his position, firstly, based on the later ‘Canaanite’ peoples and the ‘trafficking’ (trading) of the Phoenicians – very understandable, yet incorrect. And secondly, to distance himself from the thorny issue of equating the Black peoples with Canaan – particularly at time of writing in 1957 America. 

Herman Hoeh:

‘The Canaanites were great traffickers of old. The word Canaanite in Zechariah 14:21 is, in fact, translated as “trafficker” in the Jewish translation. The Sidonians, descendants of Canaan, were famous seamen in the days of Solomon. The Greeks called them “Phoenicians”. But the Phoenicians called themselves “Kna” or “Knana”, meaning Canaanite.’

From a historical time-line perspective, the original Sidonians were linked to Canaan, who were not sea-traders; the intermediate Sidonians linked to Aram were the original Phoenicians, descending from a son of Shem; and the later Sidonians were linked with Midian, another successful trading people and a son of Abraham. The Phoenicians lived in Canaan as the collective area was known, hence their identification with this name – it was they who were the ‘famous seamen.’

Hoeh:

‘When Israel entered the land of Palestine under Joshua, whole tribes of the Canaanites were destroyed or driven out of central Palestine (Judges 3:1-4) because some of the Canaanites were extremely degenerate in their morals. Now turn to Genesis 10:18, “Afterward were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad”. Where did they journey?’

The ‘extremely degenerate’ Canaanites at this time, which the sons of Jacob encountered, were not the original sons of Canaan but the Nephilim descended Elioud giants who had infiltrated the land. We will cover this subject in-depth in later sections – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Origin, Identity and Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.

Hoeh:

‘The Canaanites settled the island of Malta and parts of Sicily, Southern Italy, Sardinia, North Africa and even Southern Spain and Portugal, where the sons of Javan were already living [The sons of Javan had long gone – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia].

Most people are familiar with the Phoenicians from grade and high school days. In North Africa the Canaanites are called Moors – a name probably derived from Amors, the Hebrew form of “Amorites”. From these lands they have spread into North and South America since the days of Columbus. The Portuguese – of mixed Canaanite and Tarshish stock – have settled much of Brazil. And the Sicilians are [well known] in big cities in America. The underworld “Mafia” organization which springs from Canaanitish Sicily, is but a modern version of their ancient tendency to traffic among the nations of the world.

Canaanites have also intermarried into Esau – Turkey today (Genesis 26:34), and Judah (Genesis 38:2), and Israel (Judges 3:5-7). Only a few Canaanites remain in North Palestine and Lebanon. The [true] Canaanites are seldom included in the prophecies which pertain to this twentieth century. They exert no great position or influence in the world.’

Esau’s ‘Canaanite’ wives were not true Canaanites but – as stated earlier of the four options for non-Canaanite* peoples a, b, c and d – they were from d. Nephilim families – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Judah did take a wife from the original Canaanites. The Israelites as mentioned in the Book of Judges took wives from later Canaanites from b. Shem’s descendants. We will learn that the Latins of Europe – such as the Portuguese and Sicilians mentioned by Hoeh – are descended from Shem and not from Japheth or Ham. The majority of Latino-Hispano Americans are descended from a. Shem and b. Ham; but not from Canaan, as is also true of the Moors and the Arab peoples of the Lebanon and Palestine – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Another fascinating coincidence has occurred, with regard to the Portuguese and Brazil, which we will return to in a later chapter.

The original meaning of Canaan was different. The term ‘trafficker’ and the link to trade, was applied to Canaan the land and the people living in Canaan later and not to the original Canaanites.

Herman Hoeh states the brother(s) of Ham have ‘shared the same position in life’. The Bible reveals that Canaan was to be a servant people, not Ham or any of the other three half-brothers of Canaan. Herman Hoeh ironically, while denying the simple truth of the Canaanites classification, in the process, reveals the true identity of Canaan.

For they are the Black peoples of Eastern, Central, Western and Southern sub-Sahara Africa; while including those non-Arab related peoples residing in Northern Africa. 

Matthew 18:1-5

New English Translation

‘At that time the disciples came to Jesus saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 He called a child, had him stand among them, 3 and said,

“I tell you the truth, unless you turn around and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven!

4 Whoever then humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes a child like this in my name welcomes me.’

One should like to think a child who has a basic understanding of world history, having learned about the slave trade, would… if presented with the question:

Which people in the world have endured untold hardships, extremes of poverty and the severest of suffering at the hands of slave traders, throughout recorded history?

… quickly offer the Black descended people of Africa as their answer.

It has been in the scriptures, right in front of us for a very long time. 

Luke 7:35

New English Translation

35 ‘But wisdom is vindicated [or shown to be right ] by all her children [by all those who follow her].’

It is a highly sensitive issue and many are reticent to vocalise the palpable truth; so as to escape the vitriolic criticism which could inevitably ensue. Not speaking the undeniable, doesn’t alter it or make it disappear.

Granted, it is a harshness beyond compare, how a whole lineage of people could be punished because of one man’s transgression; though we do not see all the pieces of the puzzle put together as the Creator does. 

The reality is that the Black peoples have suffered immeasurably at the hands of the British, Americans, Dutch, Portuguese, as well as the Arabs before them in recent history and as recorded in the Bible; at the hand of the Egyptians – per the El Amarna tablets circa 1500 BCE.

African tribes have continuously waged war against each other with horrific violence, making slaves of each other, cannibalising one another. There has been no rest for the descendants of Canaan and it continues to the present day, where in the main, African governments and regimes ruthlessly and relentlessly, brutally subjugate their own people. 

As tragic as the taking of people from their families and homes was and transplanting them in the New World of America, the Caribbean and Brazil, with dangerous, deadly ocean crossings and often savage masters; it has resulted for future generations of African Americans to have at least a chance of a life of opportunities, far greater than their fellow peoples – those living on the African Continent today.

This writer empathises with all the descendants of African Americans who have not benefited in being transplanted from their homeland and if history could be rewound, this reason alone would be enough cause to turn back time.

So while there is a concerted effort by some (as above) to either reject, ignore, hide or deny the truth… the fact remains, the ‘Bible is clear’ in that the peoples of Africa (in the main) are the descendants of Canaan.

They are not descended from Cush for example or a lineage of Jacob (Israel) including Judah; as advocated by the Black Hebrew Israelites (above). Note the colour purple.

Africa is vast, with immense natural resources.

In the top ten countries with the most natural resources which China tops, one African nation is included at number nine; the Democratic Republic of Congo. Mining is the primary industry of the DRC. It is estimated that the country has over $24 trillion in mineral deposits including the largest coltan reserve and vast amounts of cobalt. The DRC also possesses large copper, diamond (21% of Global production in 2019), gold, tantalum, and tin reserves, along with over three million tons of lithium.

Both Lithium and cobalt are integral ingredients for batteries in electric vehicles – refer article: Climate Change & Global Warming – Looming Crisis or a New Equilibrium?

The severity of the punishment handed down to the Canaanites stopped short with them and seemingly did not include their inherited possession of territory. Yet, ‘Africa has been equally cursed and blessed by its resources – blessed in so far as it has natural riches in abundance, but cursed because outsiders have long plundered them. In more recent times the nation states have been able to claim a share of these riches, and foreign countries now invest rather than steal, but still the people are rarely the beneficiaries’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 131.

Regarding Canaan’s name, there is somewhat of a conflict, between what the word actually means and what it became associated with. Strong’s Concordance H3667 includes:

merchant, traffic, traffickers, trader, Lowland and from the root H3665, humiliated.

Canaan, as inferred by several commentators, was to be a ‘servant of servants’, ‘humbled, subdued’ and ‘subjugated’. The land of Canaan was low lying and it became synonymous with merchants and trafficking of goods. Saying that, Canaan as a people were also trafficked and treated as merchandise.

Abarim Publications – emphasis theirs: 

‘For a meaning of the name Canaan, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Merchant or Servant… We would interpret the name Canaan as International Trade or International Synchronicity… From the verb (kana), to be brought into synchronicity.’

The name ‘Kenan’ first came to this writer’s attention when the television sitcom Kenan & Kel aired in the late 1990s.

While Kenan – meaning ‘possession’ – is not widely recognised as a popular African American name, it is ‘part of a broader trend where names of Hebrew origin are embraced within African American culture. Kenan has biblical roots and is mentioned in the Book of Genesis. Its unique meaning and cultural roots contribute to its appeal.

The name reflects a connection to heritage and identity…’

And so it does in a remarkable way, yet which is lost on the majority.

Canaan can also mean the ‘land of purple’ from the term kinahnu: purple dye. The colour purple became associated with the Phoenicians. It is an interesting coincidence that The Color Purple is the title of Alice Walker’s 1982 novel and subsequent Steven Spielberg film. The story is about African American gender, race and nationhood.

The link with purple to Canaan’s descendants is insightful, as evidenced by the propensity of African Americans (and Africans) in favouring various shades of purple in their attire.

An African wedding with the bride and groom wearing royal purple

The colour purple is associated with the following lofty traits, invariably denied to Canaan but no less desired.

Bourne Creative – emphasis mine:

‘Purple combines the calm stability of blue and the fierce energy of red. The color purple is often associated with royalty, nobility, luxury, power, and ambition. Purple also represents meanings of wealth, extravagance, creativity, wisdom, dignity, grandeur, devotion, peace, pride, mystery, independence, and magic.’

‘The color purple is a rare occurring color in nature and as a result is often seen as having sacred meaning. Lavender, orchid, lilac, and violet flowers are considered delicate and precious. Throughout history, purple robes were worn by royalty and people of authority or high rank…the rare occurrence of purple in nature made it one of the most expensive color dyes to create.’

Speaking of colour, the amount of melanin a person has dictates not only the shade of their skin. 

Rastafari: The Truth About Melanin – emphasis mine:

‘Melanin refines the nervous system in such a way that messages from the brain reach other areas of the body [more] rapidly in Black people… Black infants sit, stand, crawl and walk sooner than [white infants], and [demonstrate] more advanced cognitive skills than their white counterparts… Carol Barnes writes “… your mental processes (brain power) are controlled by the same chemical that gives Black humans their superior physical (athletics, rhythmic dancing) abilities. This chemical… is Melanin!”

The abundance of Melanin in Black humans produces a superior organism physically… Melanin is the neuro-chemical basis for what is called [Soul] in Black people. Is God Black? The Original Man was [black], “made in the Image of God” his Parent. Children look like their parents. All the other races are but diluted variations of the Original Black Race.’

This raises some key points.

When studying Noah, we established that the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man are described as white in the Bible – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

The same is written in the Book of Enoch chapter 46:1-3.

1 At that place, I saw the One to whom belongs the time before time. And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of splendor… 2 And I asked the one… who had revealed to me all the secrets… “Who is this… 3 And he answered me and said to me, “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells. And He will open all [that is] hidden… for Yahweh of Hosts [Ancient of Days] has chosen Him, and He is destined to be victorious before Yahweh of Hosts in eternal uprightness.”

We will look further in to man being the image of God. There is a link to the colour black as this author states; just not quite the answer one would expect – refer article: Asherah.

Rastafari:

‘Most [white people] have calcified pineal glands which thwarts Melatonin production, thereby limiting their [spiritual]* capacity. Located in the brain, the tiny pineal [and] pituitary glands regulate the body’s other glands’ – refer article: 33.

‘Esoteric tradition regards the area of these glands as the third eye, seat of the soul, and the mystical Uraeus represented by the cobra on the forehead of Egyptian [royalty’s] crowns.’

A succinct definition online:

‘Uraeus is an important symbol associated with the Gods, Goddesses, and Pharaohs of ancient Egypt. It is represented by the image of an upright cobra in a threatening pose and is believed to have its origins in Iaret, an Egyptian word meaning the risen one.

The icon symbolized divine authority, royalty, sovereignty, and supremacy and was worn as a crown or head ornament by the ancient Egyptian divinities and rulers. This sacred serpent symbol reiterated the connection between the Gods and the Pharaohs and wearing the Uraeus conveyed legitimacy to the royal personage.

The rearing cobra indicated that the ruler enjoyed the protection and patronage of Goddess Wadjet, the Lower Egypt deity [Article: Thoth].

After the unification of Egypt, the Uraeus was depicted together with the Vulture, which was the symbol of Nekhbet, the patroness of Upper Egypt [refer vulture; Gobekli Tepi, article: Monoliths of the Nephilim].

The merged symbol was called ‘The Two Ladies’, the joint protectors of the country’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Rastafari:

‘Why did Africans view the European as a child of God, but the Europeans viewed the African as a soulless savage? Because of “melatonin,” described as a mentally and morally stimulating humanizing hormone produced by the pineal gland. Scientific research reveals that most [white people] are unable to produce much melatonin because their pineal glands are often calcified and nonfunctioning. 

Pineal calcification rates with Africans is 5-15%; Asians 15-25%; Europeans 60-80%!

This is the chemical basis for the cultural differences between [blacks] and whites, causing some Black scholars to raise the question that the European approach, that of the logical, erect, rigid, anti-feeling posture, reflects a left brain orientation and reflects that they lack the chemical key of melatonin to turn on their unconscious and… feelings. Melanin [gives] humans the ability to [feel] because it is the absorber of all frequencies of energy.’

A case in point, is the faith* which Black people exhibit towards their Saviour and their exuberance and passion in church congregations. This has often produced thoughts of respect and a little jealousy towards their genuine peace and joy.

Rastafari:

‘After considering Melanin to be a “waste” product of body-metabolism which “served no useful function,” … science has now discovered that Melanin is the chemical key to life and the brain itself! All studies and facts about Melanin suggest that after 400 years of attempting to make [the Black race inferior], “Western science is facing the sobering reality that, by its own self-defined standards, Black people are probably superior to whites in both intellectual potential and muscle coordination.” (Sepia magazine interview).

In humans, melanin is the primary determinant of skin and hair color.

However, few people know that melanin is found in almost every organ of the body and is necessary for the brain and nerves to operate, the eyes to see, and the cells to reproduce.

It is also found in the stria vascularis of the inner ear. In the brain, tissues with melanin include the medulla and pigment-bearing neurons within areas of the brainstem, such as the locus coeruleus and the substantia nigra. It also occurs in the zona reticularis of the adrenal gland.

Exposure to the sun has the potential to cause premature aging of the skin, as well as various skin cancers. [The] ability to withstand the potentially damaging effects of the sun’s ultraviolet radiation depends on the amount of melanin in your skin, which is determined by the number of melanocytes that are active beneath the surface Melanin is an effective absorber of light; the pigment is able to dissipate more than 99.9% of absorbed UV radiation. In even the most light-skinned people, the body’s melanocytes respond to sun exposure by producing more melanin, which creates the effect known as tanning. However, there is a limit to the degree of protection that melanin can provide, and it’s significantly higher in people with naturally darker skin.

Melanin can absorb a great amount of energy and yet not produce a tremendous amount of heat when it absorbs this energy, because it can transform harmful energy into useful energy. According to dermatologist and dermapathologist Dr. Leon Edelstein, director of the National American West Skin Pathology Consultation Service, melanin can absorb tremendous quantities of energy of all kinds, including energy from sunlight, x-ray machines, and energy that is formed within cells during the metabolism of cells. His theory is that melanin has the ability to neutralize the potentially harmful effects of these energies.

Darkly pigmented people tend to exhibit less signs of aging. Dermatologist Susan C. Taylor, author of “Brown Skin,” points out that Blacks and other people of color generally look younger than their lighter-skinned peers because of the higher levels of melanin in their skin. The dark pigmentation protects from DNA damage and absorbs the right amounts of UV radiation needed by the body, as well as protects against folate depletion. 

Folate is water soluble vitamin B complex which naturally occurs in green, leafy vegetables, whole grains, and citrus fruits. Women need folate to maintain healthy eggs, for proper implantation of eggs, and for the normal development of placenta after fertilization. Folate is needed for normal sperm production in men. Furthermore, folate is essential for fetal growth, organ development, and neural tube development. Folate breaks down in high intense UVR. Dark-skinned women suffer the lowest level of neural tube defects.’

‘Dr. Frank Barr, pioneering discoverer of melanin’s organizing ability and other properties, theorizes in his technical work, Melanin: The Organizing Molecule:

“The hypothesis is advanced that (neuro)melanin (in conjunction with other pigment molecules such as the isopentenoids) functions as the major organizational molecule in living systems. Melanin is depicted as an organizational “trigger” capable of using established properties such as photon – (electron) – photon conversions, free radical-redox mechanism, ion exchange mechanisms, and semiconductive switching capabilities to direct energy to strategic molecular systems and sensitive hierarchies of protein enzyme cascades. Melanin is held capable of regulating a wide range of molecular interactions and metabolic processes…”

The map of former African colonies below is a grim picture. To be clear, the African people have suffered because of their forefather Ham, his wife Na’eltama’uk and their actions; not, because the Black people are inferior to any other ancestry group and ethnic line, or because they have brought suffering on themselves. Black people are not lesser to any other race of people on the Earth. 

Nor do they deserve any kind of racial discrimination for their ethnic characteristics and colour of their skin.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘In the Greek New Testament the name Canaan is spelled Χανααν [Acts 7:11 and 13:19] and Canaanite (female) is spelled Χαναναια (Matthew 15.22]. The masculine form Χαναναιος does not occur in the New Testament but both Matthew and Mark make mention of a Simon the Kanaanite (Κανανιτης;  [Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18]).

The name Canaan may have been original – meaning “land of purple,” says HAW Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, which relates it to Phoenicia, also meaning purple – and turned proverbial, but it may also have been taken from the Hebrew verb (kana) and projected back upon this person… The verb (kana) means to synchronize, or to give up individual leanings in order to unite more effectively as a group. Noun (kin’a) means bundle or pack.’

A further irony, as the sons of Canaan have not been a unified people and their leaders have not given up individual leanings.

Abarim:

‘The Old Testament’s passion for reaching the “land of Canaan” may have a very clear connotation of reaching the blissful situation of international synchronicity. Being located on the bridge between three continents, the [intermediate] historical people of Canaan maintained a flowering culture of trade. Thus the words, meaning Canaan, and, meaning Canaanite, acquired the additional meaning of trade or merchant (Zephaniah 1:11, Ezekiel 16:29).’

The original allotment of land running north-south on the furthest eastern coast of the mediterranean – or the far west coast of the fertile crescent – had been designated for Shem’s sons. Canaan’s descendants had dwelt there before migrating southwest to Africa. Ultimately, the sons of Jacob also migrated away from this strip of land.

In the Book of Jubilees chapter ten, verses 28-33, we read about Canaan after the Flood, when land was apportioned to Japheth Ham and Shem, in the wider Near and Middle Eastern region. Recall, Madai in chapter four, requested to live adjacent to Shem’s descendants – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes

‘And Ham and his sons went into the land which he was to occupy, which he acquired as his portion in the land of the south. And Canaan saw the land of Lebanon to the river of Egypt [the Nile], that it was very good, and he went not into the land of his inheritance to the west (that is to) the sea [North Africa], and he dwelt in the land of Lebanon, eastward and westward from the border of Jordan and from the border of the sea.

And Ham, his [step]father, and Cush and Mizraim his brothers said unto him:

“Thou hast settled in a land which is not thine, and which did not fall to us by lot: do not do so; for if thou dost do so, thou and thy sons will fall in the land and (be) accursed through sedition; for by sedition ye have settled, and by sedition will thy children fall, and thou shalt be rooted out for ever. Dwell not in the dwelling of Shem; for to Shem and to his sons did it come by their lot. Cursed art thou, and cursed shalt thou be beyond all the sons of Noah, by the curse by which we bound ourselves by an oath in the presence of the [Holy Judge], and in the presence of Noah our father.”

But he did not harken unto them, and dwelt in the land of Lebanon from Hamath* to the entering of Egypt…’ 

Canaan’s three [half]brothers all migrated to northern Africa and the horn of Africa. Canaan followed later as predicted, settling in North West Africa. Ultimately, two brothers left Africa and two remained. One being Canaan, who eventually spread southward throughout Sub-Saharan Africa.

We read in Genesis 10:15-18 ESV, of the sons of Canaan:

‘Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth, and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites.*

Afterward the clans of the Canaanites dispersed.’

In other words:

Sidon, Heth, Jebu, Amor, Girgash, Hiv, Ark, Sin, Arvad, Zemar and Hamath. 

The endeavour to identify all eleven of Canaan’s lines of descendants – as there are some fifty-four plus African nations containing Canaan’s offspring – for now, remains a future project. We will concentrate on Sidon the firstborn and Heth the second born, who are each prominent lineages. 

Insight into Canaan’s sons is provided by Professor Aaron Demsky, in Reading Biblical Genealogies – Including a close look at how the description of the Canaanite lineage was constructed (Genesis 10:15-18) emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Sons of Canaan… include twelve names. In order to come up with twelve Canaanite sons – another typological number implying a full people (see below) – it needed to include different kinds of names.

Six of the names are ethnic names, known from the lists of the indigenous Canaanite peoples, that appear either in part or in full some twenty-five times in the Bible.

Three of these terms are the externally documented: Canaanites, Amorites and Hittites.

The rest are unknown in non-biblical texts: Jebusites, Girgashites and Hivites. The [Perizzites], who appear in a number of these lists, are not mentioned here.

… The list also includes five Phoenician-Syrian city-states as part of the Canaanite league:

1. Sidon along the coast,

2. ‘Arqa (Tel ‘Arqa, ca.20 kms north east of Tripoli) [Ark]

3. Sin (Shian in the Assyrian sources; in later Jewish documents it is identified with Tripoli in Lebanon)

4. Arwad (Ruad, an island port between Tripoli and Latakia) [Arvad]

5. Ṣemer (Assyrian Ṣumur, south of Arwad) [Zemar]

6. Hamath (Ḫama one of the major cities in middle Syria), situated on the Orontes.

The names of these “sons” are not presented uniformly.

1. The first three – Canaan, Sidon and Heth – are proper names.

2. The “descendants” are written as gentilics (i.e., relational adjectives in the nisbe form) with the definite article (the Jebusite, the Amorite), etc. Canaan also appears in this form at the end of the list.

Chiastic Form

The “descendants” are listed in chiastic order. Sidon is the firstborn followed by Heth. Following Heth are the other five Canaanite peoples, related to Heth, and then the five city states, obviously related to Sidon, as they are all Phoenician city-states like Sidon…

The Significance of Twelve

As we see from the later genealogies of Nahor (Genesis 22:20-24), Ishmael (Genesis 25:13-15), and of course, Jacob, twelve is a significant number in biblical tradition for classifying large ethnic units, or tribal leagues, in the patriarchal period [Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son].

In this case of Canaan, however, we find a certain creativity in order to produce the desired number. The list has two anomalies:

1. The patriarch here is one of the twelve.

2. Five city-states (or feudal kingdoms) have been recast as clan units. 

As noted above, the larger branches of the three sons of Noah are defined not only by ethnicity and language affinity, but also by geographic proximity (verses 5, 20, 31).

Moreover, emphasizing the integral territorial aspect of tribal identity, sundry geographical notices were appended, e.g., verses 10-12; 30. Similarly, in verse 19, this genealogy of Canaan is enhanced by a fascinating geographic description of the borders of Canaan (verse 19):

The Canaanite territory extended from Sidon as far as Gerar, near Gaza, and as far as Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, near Lasha. This description serves both to minimalize Canaanite territory and to introduce places that will appear in later narratives.

Northern BorderPhoenician Cities  

Following a three pointed pattern of delineating borders, which I have identified, i.e., “From X, coming to Y, near Z”, the list begins with Sidon, which probably now implies the entire Tyrean kingdom on the Phoenician coast from Acco in the south to Nahr Kalb in the north (Joshua 13:4-6; compare the territory of Asher 19:24-30).

South-Western Border Philistine Cities

The second point, on the south-western border of Canaan, Gerar (Tel Harur, present day Netivot on Nahal Gerar, i.e. biblical Nahal HaBesor), was defined by the third point Gaza, some 20 kms away. This description of the southern border of Canaan serves another literary purpose by anticipating the stories of Abraham and Isaac going to Gerar and the story of Jacob’s funeral cortège from Egypt to Hebron at the end of the book (Genesis 50:10-11).

Eastern BorderThe Dead Sea and the Five Cities  

From the south western corner of the Land, the border goes to the southern edge of the Dead Sea. The description introduces the five cities [technically only four, as Lot escaped to Zoar and it was spared] which are eventually destroyed in the story of Lot and Sodom.’

Twin groupings for the descendants of Canaan, as proposed by Demsky. 

Cities: Sidon, Ark, Sin, Arvad, Zemar and Hamath

Clans: Heth, Jebus, Amor, Girgash, Hiv, (Canaan)

According to Demsky, the clans are the literal sons of Canaan and – amongst other places – they lived in the aforementioned cities.

This position seems to create further questions. How did these six cities acquire their names? It would seem plausible they are so named after their founders. ‘They’ being the first and seventh to eleventh sons listed in Genesis chapter ten. Is an extra Canaan applicable and if so, is he Canaan junior or possibly a grandson of Canaan senior?

The cities of Ark, Sin, Arvad, Zemar and Hamath have been included for a reason and while perhaps not sons names, became synonymous with sons from the clan list.

Support for this premise is that

a. Heth and Hiv (and perhaps Amor) unarguably became names attributed to Shem’s descendants, while Jebus and Girgash are not so clear; and

b. Ark, Sin and Zemar are not discussed prophetically, though Arvad, with Hamath (and Sidon) are and have become identifiable people in the world today.

Therefore it is proposed that there are six key lineages for Canaan’s descendants which are formed from pairs comprising a clan and a city. Three of them are prominent and will be discussed below.

There are a fair number of scriptures for some of the cities and sons, so we will look at a sample. The majority refer to ‘Canaanites’ during a later period where the original sons of Canaan were not living and so are discounted in this chapter.

The Book of Jasher 7:13 includes additional or duplicate names, totalling ten sons instead of eleven, with Jebus missing:

And the sons of Canaan were Zidon, Heth, Amori, Gergashi, Hivi, Arkee, Seni, Arodi [Arvad?], Zimodi [Zemar?] and Chamothi [Hamath].

Sidon, or Zidon in Hebrew means: ‘fishery, hunting place.’

From the verb sud, to hunt or fish. The noun mesad means fastness or stronghold – a typically defensive structure. ‘Sud’ in French means south.*

When studying Javan’s son Kittim – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia – a key economic, geographic maritime, port people; we looked at Isaiah chapter 23. There are additional major nations in a similar key geographic harbour location.

Isaiah 23:1-3

Complete Jewish Bible

A prophecy about Tzor [Tyre-Brazil]:

Howl, you “Tarshish” [Japanese] ships, because the harbor is destroyed! On returning from Kittim [Indonesia], they discover they cannot enter it. 2 Silence, you who live on the coast, you who have been enriched by the merchants of Tzidon [Sidon] crossing the sea. 3 By the great water the grain of Shichor, the harvest of the Nile, brought you profits. She was marketplace for the nations. 4 Shame, Tzidon, for the sea speaks; the fortress of the sea says, “I no longer have labor pains or bear children, yet I have raised neither boys nor girls.”

Verse 12 NCV:

He said, “Sidon, you will not rejoice any longer, because you are destroyed. Even if you cross the sea to Cyprus [Kittim], you will not find a place to rest.”

Zechariah 9:1-3

Revised Standard Version

‘The word of the Lord is against the land of Hadrach and will rest upon Damascus [capital of Aram]. For to the Lord belong the cities of Aram [son of Shem], even as all the tribes of Israel; Hamath [city of Canaan] also, which borders thereon, Tyre and Sidon, though they are very wise. Tyre has built herself a rampart, and heaped up silver like dust, and gold like the mud of the streets.’

Tyre is associated with the intermediate ‘Canaanites’ or Phoenicians; whereas the later ‘Phoenicians’ are linked with Sidon. Though the Phoenicians are White peoples descended from Shem, both nations today also contain a Black population descended from Canaan. We will study scriptures regarding Sidon, when we look at the European peoples who dwell within this nation – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

Modern day Sidon is en route from Tarshish-Japan and Kittim-Indonesia and links them to present day Tyre-Brazil – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

All are major trading nations and key ports. As Sidon is associated with Hamath and other Canaanites, we are looking for a prominent nation on the coast of Africa.

Sidon is the Republic of South Africa* – with indicators pointing to its Black citizens stemming from the Canaanite clan of Hiv (refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia).

Sin and Zemar are not mentioned outside of Genesis and 1 Chronicles. Ark is mentioned in Joshua 16:1-3, NET within the original lands of the tribe of Jospeh:

‘The land allotted to Joseph’s descendants extended from the Jordan at Jericho to the waters of Jericho to the east, through the desert and on up from Jericho into the hill country of Bethel. The southern border extended from Bethel to Luz, and crossed to Arkite territory at Ataroth. It then descended westward to Japhletite territory, as far as the territory of lower Beth Horon and Gezer, and ended at the sea.’

Arvad equates with the people of Angola – and perhaps populated by peoples descending from the Canaanite clan of Amor (refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega).

Arvad is connected in a military capacity with Sidon and particularly Tyre.

Flag of Angola

Ezekiel 27:8, 11 

New English Translation: 

‘The leaders of Sidon and Arvad were your rowers; your skilled men, O Tyre, were your captains… The Arvadites joined your army on your walls all around, and the Gammadites were in your towers. They hung their quivers on your walls all around; they perfected your beauty.’

Angolan man and woman

The link between Angola and Tyre will be become clear when we study Tyre, for Angolans were taken and used as slaves while a former colony – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Excluding Arab nations, Angola is the eighth most populous African nation – with 39,666,794 people – and possesses the fifth strongest military in sub-Saharan Africa, behind Ethiopia, South Africa, Nigeria and Kenya at fourth. Angola is Africa’s second largest oil producer.

The meaning of Arvad is a ‘wandering fugitive’ from the verb ‘arad, ‘to flee’ or ‘be free’ and the verb rud, ‘to wander restlessly.’

Luanda – capital of Angola

Hamath is mentioned a number of times and linked with Arvad, who in turn is associated with Sidon.

Hamath is the most prominent Canaanite region (city-state) after Sidon and today is the nation of Nigeria – with its people likely coming from the Canaanite clan of Heth.

A noteworthy ‘coincidence’ is Ham-ath being similar to the name of Canaan’s stepfather, Ham.

Just as Niger-ia has been originally named from the Latin niger for black.

Not so coincidentally, is the Nigerian tribes of Ham and Hyam.

Nigerian man and woman

2 Kings 19:13

English Standard Version

‘Where is the king of Hamath, the king of Arpad [Arvad], the king of the city of Sepharvaim, the king of Hena, or the king of Ivvah?’ – Isaiah 36:19.

2 Samuel 8:9-10

English Standard Version

When Toi king of Hamath heard that David had defeated the whole army of Hadadezer [of Zobah], Toi sent his son Joram to King David…’ – 1 Chronicles 18:1-5, Ezekiel 47:17.

The link between Hamath and King David of Judah is significant and not a coincidence – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

These verses also highlight the strength of Hamath – a sizeable nation commensurate with the economic or military clout of Sidon is being discussed. Nigeria with South Africa is a leading nation in Africa. It has an immense population of 240,147,796 people – sixth highest in the world.

Notice on the fertility rate chart earlier how Nigeria has one of the highest rates in the world. Nigeria is in red, located south of Niger in Pink, with the highest rate in the world.

Nigeria’s projected population by 2050 is 350 million people and by 2100, it is a staggering 477 million people. This would make Nigeria the fourth most populous nation in the world behind India (1), China (2) and Pakistan (3) and ahead of the DR Congo (5) and the United States of America (6). 

An online encyclopaedia, provides a summary of Nigeria’s recent history – emphasis mine:

‘… The Kano [Cana-an] Chronicle highlights an ancient history dating to around 999 AD of the Hausa Sahelian city-state of Kano, [Hamath city-state of Canaan] with other major Hausa cities… all having recorded histories dating back to the 10th century.’

The following Nigerian tribes also have names with more than a passing similarity with Canaan:

Kana-kuru, Kane-mbu, Kani-kon, Kanu-fi, Kanu-ri and Kene-rn.

Recall the Hebrew verb: Kana

Encyclopaedia: ‘

With the spread of Islam from the 7th century AD, the area became known… as Bilad Al Sudan (English: Land of the Blacks…) There are early historical references by medieval Arab and Muslim historians and geographers which refer to the Kanem-Bornu Empire [Kai-nam, Ken-an] as the region’s major centre for Islamic civilization.

In the 16th century, Portuguese explorers [modern day descendants of the Phoenicians from Tyre] were the first Europeans to begin significant, direct trade with peoples of Southern Nigeria, at the port they named Lagos and in Calabar along the [regions of the] Slave Coast.’

City of Lagos, the former capital until 1991 when it was replaced by Abuja – the prosperity of Lagos above in contrast with the poverty of the floating slum below.

Encyclopaedia:

‘Europeans traded goods with peoples at the coast; coastal trade with Europeans also marked the beginnings of the Atlantic slave trade. The port of Calabar on the historical Bight of Biafra (now commonly referred to as the Bight of Bonny) became one of the largest slave trading posts in West Africa in the era of the transatlantic slave trade. 

The majority of those enslaved and taken to these ports were captured in raids and wars. Usually the captives were taken back to the conquerors’ territory as forced labour; [in] time, they were sometimes acculturated and absorbed into the conquerors’ society. A number of slave routes were established throughout Nigeria linking the hinterland areas with the major coastal ports.’

We will return to the significance of the Portuguese being the first European peoples in the modern era, to both trade and colonise areas outside of Europe – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Encyclopaedia:

‘In the north, the incessant fighting amongst the Hausa city-states and the decline of the Bornu Empire gave rise to the Fulani people gaining headway into the region. At the beginning of the 19th century, Usman dan Fodio led a successful jihad against the Hausa Kingdoms founding the centralised Sokoto Caliphate (also known as the Fulani Empire). 

The empire with Arabic as its official language grew rapidly under his rule and that of his descendants, who sent out invading armies in every direction. The vast landlocked empire connected the East with the West Sudan region and made inroads down south conquering… and [advancing]… with the goal of reaching the Atlantic Ocean. The territory controlled by the Empire included much of modern-day northern and central Nigeria. 

The Sultan sent out emirs to establish a suzerainty over the conquered territories and promote Islamic [civilisation], the Emirs in turn became increasingly rich and powerful through trade and slavery.

By the 1890s, the largest slave population in the world, about two million, was concentrated in the territories of the Sokoto Caliphate. The use of slave labor was extensive, especially in agriculture. By the time of its break-up in 1903 into various European colonies, the Sokoto Caliphate was one of the largest pre-colonial African states.

A changing legal imperative ([the] transatlantic slave trade [was] outlawed by Britain in 1807)… [caused]… illegal smugglers [to purchase] slaves along the coast by native slavers. Britain’s West Africa Squadron sought to intercept the smugglers at sea. The rescued slaves were taken to Freetown, a colony in West Africa originally established for the resettlement of freed slaves from Britain.

In 1885, British claims to a West African sphere of influence received recognition from other European nations at the Berlin Conference. The following year, it chartered the Royal Niger Company… By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the company had vastly succeeded in subjugating the independent southern kingdoms along the Niger River. 

[The] British conquered Benin in 1897, and, in the Anglo-Aro War (1901–1902), defeated other opponents. The defeat of these states opened up the Niger area to British rule. In 1900, the company’s territory came under the direct control of the British government and established the Southern Nigeria Protectorate as a British protectorate and part of the British Empire, the foremost world power at the time. On 1 January 1914, the British formally united the Southern… and the Northern… [Protectorates] into the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria. 

Nigerian colonial Flag from 1914 to 1952

Inhabitants of the southern region sustained more interaction, economic and cultural, with the British and other Europeans owing to the coastal economy. By independence in 1960, regional differences… were marked. The legacy, though less pronounced, continues to the present [day, with imbalances] between North and South. For instance, northern Nigeria did not outlaw slavery until 1936 whilst in other parts of Nigeria slavery was abolished soon after colonialism.

Nigeria is classified as a mixed economy emerging market. It has reached lower-middle-income status according to the World Bank with its abundant supply of natural resources, well-developed financial, legal, communications, transport sectors and stock exchange (the Nigerian Stock Exchange), which is the second-largest in Africa. Nigeria is the United States’ largest trading partner in sub-Saharan Africa and supplies a fifth of its oil (11% of oil imports). The United States is the country’s largest foreign investor.

Economic development has been hindered by years of military rule, corruption, and mismanagement. The restoration of democracy and subsequent economic reforms have successfully put Nigeria back on track towards achieving its full economic potential.

Next to petrodollars, the second-biggest source of foreign exchange earnings for Nigeria are remittances sent home by Nigerians living abroad. Nigeria made history in April 2006 by becoming the first African country to completely pay off its debt (estimated $30 billion) owed to the Paris Club. Nigeria is trying to reach the Sustainable Development Goal Number 1, which is to end poverty in all its forms by 2030.’

Zuma Rock is a large monolith near Abuja

Nigeria is the 52nd largest economy in the world and the second biggest in the sub-Saharan African continent after South Africa. Its 2025 nominal GDP was $285 billion dollars.

Nigeria’s economy relies heavily on the oil industry and is the largest oil exporter on the continent; with Africa’s largest reserves of natural gas. Resource extraction industries, such as coal, tin, and other metal mining are integral to the Nigerian economy. Oil dominates in terms of contribution to GDP and exports. Between a fifth and a half of Nigerians work in agriculture, primarily small-scale subsistence agriculture. Nigeria’s economy has grown rapidly in the past few decades, but it also faces significant challenges such as desertification and lack of infrastructure.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Nigerian global shipments during 2021. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$42.4 billion
  2. Ships, boats: $1.4 billion
  3. Fertilizers: $949.8 million 
  4. Cocoa: $628.8 million 
  5. Oil seeds: $326.2 million 
  6. Zinc: $258.8 million 
  7. Aluminum: $190.3 million 
  8. Aircraft, spacecraft: $143.7 million 
  9. Tobacco, manufactured substitutes: $112.8 million 
  10. Lead: $94.1 million 


Fertilizers represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 423.8% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for Nigeria’s improving export sales was aluminum via a 341.2% gain. Shipments of lead: posted the third-fastest gain in value, up by 256.5%. The leading decliner among Nigeria’s top 10 export categories was ships and boats, thanks to a -30.3% drop year over year.’

The Flag of Nigeria with Coat of Arms

Heth in Hebrew means: ‘terror, dread,’ From the verb hatat, ‘to deplete of courage.’

A formidable name and the latter White peoples known by that name, certainly lived up to it. The Hittites in the Bible, are in every case, in reference to the later peoples – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

One passage which refers to the original people of Heth is in Genesis chapter twenty-three.

Genesis 23:8-11

English Standard Version

8 ‘And he said to them, “If you are willing that I [Abraham] should bury my dead out of my sight, hear me and entreat for me Ephron the son of Zohar, 9 that he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which he owns; it is at the end of his field. For the full price let him give it to me in your presence as property for a burying place.” 10 Now Ephron was sitting among the Hittites, and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the Hittites, of all who went in at the gate of his city, 11 “No, my lord, hear me: I give you the field, and I give you the cave that is in it. In the sight of the sons of my people I give it to you. Bury your dead.”

Nigerian Culture, Tradition, Diversity and Heritage

Jebus in Hebrew means: ‘trodden underfoot, he will trample down.’

The numerous references to the Jebusites including all the Canaanite clans are in the main, about the Nephilim descended Elioud giants or people dwelling in Canaan who intermarried with them. We will look at a selection of verses for these peoples in a subsequent chapter.

Amor in Hebrew means: ‘talkers.’

Genesis 15:18-21

English Standard Version

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

Girgash in Hebrew means: ‘dwellers in a clayey soil,’ ‘take and stroke’,

Hiv: ‘villagers’ and

Perizz: ‘wildling, rural.’

The Canaanites and Perizzites are almost always placed together. Their relationship is not clear.

Genesis 13:7

English Standard Version

‘… and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land.’

Online encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:

‘A 2009 genetic clustering study, which genotyped 1327 polymorphic markers in various African populations, identified six ancestral clusters. The clustering corresponded closely with ethnicity, culture and language. A 2018 whole genome sequencing study of the world’s populations observed similar clusters among the populations in Africa.’

Whether it was twelve, eleven or six principle Canaanite lines of descent, it appeared difficult to ascertain.

Scientific identification of six ancestral clusters, supports Aaron Demsky’s hypothesis and so we now have convincing support – as per the scriptural account – for Canaan’s six clans (and cities):

1 Hiv (Sidon)

2 Heth (Hamath)

3 Amor (Arvad)

4 Jebus, 5 Girgash and 6 Canaan (Sin, Ark and Zemar)

The major African ethnic groups could be divided (and paired) as located in:

1 Southern Africa

2 Western Africa

3 Central Africa

4 Eastern Africa, 5 Horn of Africa and 6 North Africa (Berbers)

The fact there are six prime mtDNA mutations (founding lineages) of Haplogroup L from Na’eltama’uk, comprising the L0 to L5 Haplogroups – all stemming from Haplogroup L carried by mitochondrial Eve and perhaps Emzara, the wife of Noah – exhibited in the peoples primarily in sub-Saharan Africa, is assuredly beyond a coincidence – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

In Chapter X Magog, Tubal & Meshech, the article Y Chromosomes of 40% Chinese Descend from Three Neolithic Super-Grandfathers stated in its additional paper – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… clade E [is distributed] mainly in Africa, so there are two hypotheses, 1) haplogroups D and CF migrated out of Africa separately; 2) the single common ancestor of CF and DE migrated out of Africa followed by a back-migration of E to Africa. From this study, the short interval between CF/DE and C/F divergences weakens the possibility of multiple independent migrations (CF, D, and DE*) out of Africa, and thus supports the latter hypothesis…

Y DNA haplogroup A represents the oldest branch of the Y-chromosome phylogeny. Like haplogroup B, it only appears in Africa, with the highest frequency among the hunter-gatherer groups in Ethiopia and Sudan. A3b1 is a Khoisan exclusive haplogroup [in Southern Africa].’

The alternative view of mankind ‘beginning’ in the Middle East (following a migration from the Indus Vally – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla) is more viable and this would support what we have learned with the descendants of Canaan migrating to Africa, not from Africa and culminating in a supposed ‘back-migration.’

Scientists concur that Y-DNA Haplogroup A is the oldest and original Haplogroup (derived from Y-DNA Adam) and associated with Black people and then make the incorrect assumption, that all people have come out of Africa. The exact same presumption has been made with mtDNA Haplogroups L0 and L1. 

This fabrication supports the unproven evolutionary theory for mankind, but does not allow for a provable pre-flood world, with a singular Brown/Black line – or dual racial lines if we include the Neanderthal of Day Six, a Yellow/Red line – and the introduction or rather activation of the genes for a White line through Noah and his son Shem after the great Flood – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; Articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV; Designated Design or Chance Chaos? and Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens.

After the deluge, the new races would evolve from the twenty-one lines from Noah’s grandsons, repopulating the world from the Hindu Kush and Indus Valley regions, as opposed to the African continent – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

African Human mtDNA phylogeography at a glance, Alexandra Rosa & António Brehm, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:

L0

Macrohaplogroup L divides into haplogroups L0-L6… Haplogroup L0 further includes sub-haplogroups L0a, L0d, L0f and L0k… L0d, the first individual sub-clade to derive from the L0 node…its divergence from L0abfk… The distribution of this clade appears to be restricted to Khoisan people in South Africa, and to Tanzanian and Angolan populations… Similarly, sub-haplogroup L0k is found almost exclusively among South African Khoisan… existing also at low frequencies among click-speaking Tanzanian groups… 

Their L0d and L0k shared lineages, which represent more than half of their maternal pool suggest an ancestral link predating the appearance of present-day click-speakers, likely remnants of an East African proto-Khoisan population… The mtDNA pool of the Khoisan people shows over 60% of L0d and L0k lineages… The L0a1 sub-clade has an eastern and southeastern African distribution including Nubia, Sudan and Ethiopia… L0a2 lineages are thought to trace the dispersal of Bantu-speakers towards South Africa…’

L1

MtDNA L1 One of its daughter clades, haplogroup L1b, is concentrated in western-central Africa, particularly along the coastal areas… peaking in the Senegal Mandenka and Wolof… and Fulani people in Burkina-Faso, Chad and South Cameroon… L1c occurs frequently in Central and West Africans… Curiously, more recent reports state frequencies ranging 18-25% in Angola Bantu ethnic groups… 

A substantial revision for the L1c phylogeny has been proposed by Quintana-Murci et al. (2008). It shed additional light… and helped corroborate past relationships between Central African Bantu-speaking farmers and their hunter-gathering neighbors, the Pygmies… Both groups likely shared an ancestral Central-African proto-population rich in L1c mtDNAs… and evolved into the diverse forms observed today among the modern agricultural populations (L1c1a, L1c1b, L1c1c, L1c2-6, etc.) while L1c1a is the only surviving clade in western Pygmies… Both L1b and L1c were proposed as Central Africa autochthonous [indigenous] lineages…’

L2

‘Together with L3, haplogroup L2 comprises~70% of the sub-Saharan maternal variation. Haplogroup L2a is the most frequent and wide-spread mtDNA cluster in Africa, reaching over 40% in Tuareg from Niger/Nigeria and Mali… Recent star-like demographic bursts in L2a1a and L2a2 and their expansion to southeast people are most likely associated with the expansion(s) of the Bantu-speaking populations… L2b-L2d haplogroups are dominant and largely confined to West and West-Central Africa…’ 

L3

‘… superhaplogroup L3… is widespread in Africa, its frequency and diversity providing evidence of a sub-Saharan expansion of its sub-clades towards West Africa…

This superhaplogroup is subdivided into various clades and harbours also the two main M and L superhaplogroups found outside of Africa.

Both L3b and L3d are prevalent in the West quadrant of sub-Saharan Africa… in average 10%… L3b also shows considerable frequencies in the Hutu people in Rwanda… and South African Kung… L3d constitutes an important percentage of the South African maternal pool, being more expressive in Angola and Tanzania… a subset of L3b is common among Bantu speakers of south-western Africa and thus is a likely marker of the Bantu expansion…

The L3e cluster has been subdivided into L3e1, L3e2, L3e3 and L3e4, since the time of HVS-I information per se… The oldest branches of L3e are thought to have arisen in Central Africa/nowadays Sudan… Within L3e2, the L3e2b lineages constitute the most frequent and widespread type of L3e, primarily found in West and Central Africa…

The network in Cerný et al. (2007) reflects a clear starlike phylogeny of L3e5 types found mostly in western Central Africa. Although an important diffusion has occurred into North Africa, the root type is relatively prevalent in the Chad Basin… The diffusion of haplogroup L3f ranges from Ethiopia in the east, to Angola and Mozambique in the south, the Chad Basin in Central Africa, Guinea-Bissau in the west and Tunisia in the north…

L3f1 founder lineages in Central and West Africa… L3f2 is a quite infrequent clade found almost exclusively among Chad speaking populations from the Chad Basin and virtually absent from Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan peoples… Therefore, it is contemporary with its sister clade L3f1, and probably arose around the Chad Basin area. Nevertheless, the haplogroup is present in northern Cushitic groups from Somalia and Ethiopia…’

L4

‘Haplogroup L4 is a sister clade of L3, typical of East and Northeast Africa, although present at low frequencies… The L4a motif has been found in Sudan and Ethiopia, though initially misclassified as L3e4… Similarly we also refer to L4b2, previously known as L3g… or L4g… This is frequent in Tanzania and Amhara and Gurages from Ethiopia…’

L5

‘Haplogroup L5, previously known as L1e, occupies an intermediate position between L1 and L2’3’4’6… It has been observed at low frequencies in eastern Africa, namely Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda and Tanzania, with minor gene flow introducing these lineages in the Mbuti Pygmies and North Cameroon Fali… The Central African Pygmies particular genetic pool including both L1c and L5 may assign them a “relict” status, similar to that proposed for the Khoisan…’

L6

‘The variation classified as haplogroup L6… is nowadays largely confined to Yemeni people and a few samples in Ethiopian Amhara and Gurages. It is noteworthy that L6 presents a very narrow phylogeography… Given its presence in Ethiopians, where its sister clades are also diverse and frequent… L6 has a most likely origin in East Africa, where it might have been preserved in isolation for tens of thousands of years. In any case the homeland of L6 may still be missing.’

African Americans

‘The current distribution range of African mtDNA lineages is far broader than the African continent. Long-distance gene flow mediated by the Atlantic slave trade since the 16th century is worth mentioning in this review. 

Brazilians harbor the most important reservoir of African maternal lineages outside of Africa.

Early description of the genetic landscape of Brazilians with sub-Saharan ancestry confirms the historical evidence, with L1c and L3e lineages summing up to nearly half of the African share

Later studies on Afro-Americans residing in the American continent report 65% of mtDNA types in South America as having a Central African origin, 41% and 59% of Central Americans tracing progeny to West Central Africa and West Africa respectively, while North American ancestors are estimated as being 28% West-Central Africans and 72% West Africans

These results corroborate the historical record of these regions… The origin of Afro-Americans in U.S.A. is associated with West African (>55%) and West-Central/Southwest African (<45%) mothers, also in close proximity to historical data… 

Recent results on admixture analysis suggest that Africans brought to Brazil as slaves were originally from two geographical regions: i) 69% of the maternal pool of Black Brazilians in Rio de Janeiro is attributed to West-Central and Southeast Africa, close to two former Portuguese colonies (Angola and Mozambique)’ – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil – ‘and ii) 82% of mtDNA lineages in Porto Alegre are found in West Africa, in the northern portion of the Gulf of Guinea…

Such detailed analysis is possible given the clear mtDNA haplogroup structure which allows the discrimination of geographic/linguistic origins. Once again genetic records are in agreement with historical data…’ 

African-American mitochondrial DNAs often match mtDNAs found in multiple African ethnic groups, multiple authors, 2006 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Atlantic slave trade resulted in the forced migration of an estimated 11 million Africans to the Americas.

Only 9 million are thought to have survived the passage, and many more died in the early years of captivity. Historical accounts indicate that virtually all enslaved Africans brought to North America came from either West or West Central Africa. A recent comparison of mtDNA sequences from 1148 African Americans living in the US with a database of African mtDNA sequences showed that more than 55% of the US lineages have a West African ancestor, while fewer than 41% came from West Central or South West Africa.

Because mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is passed from mother to daughter with few, if any, changes occurring over many generations, it is possible to compare contemporary African-American mtDNA haplotypes with contemporary mtDNA haplotypes in a worldwide database to obtain information about the ancestral origins of these mtDNAs.’

‘In such a comparison, continent-specific haplotypes are readily observed, and the assignment of mtDNAs to continent of origin is relatively straightforward. The more difficult task is to tie particular mtDNA haplotypes to specific geographical regions and ethnic groups within a continent.

This task is particularly difficult for Africa, as there is more genetic diversity among Africans than among people from any other continent

The most extensive pan-African haplotype… is in the L2a1 haplogroup. 40% of African-American mtDNAs did not match any sequence in the database, it is clear that matches to a single African ethnic group will not be the outcome for most African Americans, and even when a match to a single ethnic group is obtained, multiple matches may occur in a larger database.

Furthermore, for the typical African American, the maternal ancestor who was the source of the mtDNA was just one of hundreds of enslaved African ancestors.

In fact, it [is] likely that there has been more mixing of African ethnic groups in the Americas than has ever occurred elsewhere.

Thus, the ancestors of virtually all contemporary African Americans came from a large number of ethnic groups located throughout the region from Senegal to Angola.’

Whole-mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages, multiple authors, 2007:

‘Several L haplogroup lineages occur most frequently in eastern Africa (e.g., L0a, L0f, L5, and L3g), but some are specific to certain ethnic groups, such as haplogroup lineages L0d and L0k that previously have been found nearly exclusively among southern African “click” speakers.

The presence of very old mtDNA haplogroups (i.e., L0d, L0f, and L5) in Tanzanians that are rare or absent in other regions of Africa suggests populations in Tanzania may have had a large long-term effective population size and/or a large degree of long-term population structure, which has acted to preserve many divergent and rare mtDNA haplogroup lineages that appeared early in modern human history. The presence of these ancient lineages in Tanzania also suggests that eastern Africa might be the source of origin of many other African mtDNA haplogroup lineages. Our findings are consistent with other studies of mtDNA genetic diversity in African populations that have suggested populations in eastern Africa form a highly diverse gene pool…’

We have learned that certain African populations – for instance in Tanzania and Angola – are older, in that they possess clades of mtDNA Haplogroup L0. It is the oldest Haplogroup on the mtDNA tree originating from mitochondrial Eve and has been passed from mothers to sons and daughters ever since. Haplogroup L0 is indicative of the peoples of Southern Africa and the Khoisan are a representative example. They possess a light brown skin. Thus the biblical Eve would have been in all probability… light brown – as would Noah’s wife, Emzara.  

Khoisan of South Africa

The most ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup – the Y sex chromosome passed from fathers only to their sons – originating from Y-DNA Adam, is Haplogroup A.

It is only indicative of a proportion of sub-Saharan Africans, with the oldest clade of A00 – known as ‘Perry’s Y’ – discovered in an African American in 2012.

Haplogroup A00 was first discovered in Mbo Bantu men from West Cameroon. Bantu can vary in skin tone from light brown to medium brown. The highest concentration of Haplogroup A00 found in 2015, belonged to the Bangwa (Grassfields Bantu) of the Mbo.

The Bantu woman below, is a similar skin tone to the Khoisan. Again, the probability that the biblical Adam was also light brown… is highly likely. Every human descends from mutated DNA genetic code, which originally began with ancestors in the distant past who are today, most closely aligned with the Bantu and Khoisan peoples.

A sample of Y-DNA Haplogroups, representing males from the six largest African nations in population; with the addition of Ghana, Namibia, Senegal and Rwanda.

Kenya and Tanzania are represented by Bantu; South Africa is represented by the southern Bantu, Zulu; and the Khoisan. Namibia’s Haplogroups derive from the Nama; and Rwanda’s from the Tutsi, a Northeast Bantu people.

Ethiopia:  E1b1b [62.8%] – A [10.3%] – T [5.1%] – J [3.8%] –

B [1.3%] – E2 [1.3%]

Senegal:    E1b1a [81.3%] – E1b1b [6.5%] – E1a [5%] – E2 [2.9%] 

Tanzania: E1b1a [48.2%] – E1b1b [21.8%] – E2 [16.4%] –

B [9.1%] – A [2.7%] – T [1.8%]

Ghana:      E1b1a [92.3%] – E1a [2.2%] – E1b1b [1.1%]

Kenya:      E1b1a [51.7%] – E2 [17.2%] – A [13.8%] – E1b1b [13.7%] –

B [3.4%] 

Bantu:       E1b1a [54.7%] – E2 [21.2%] – B [10.9%] – A [5.1%] –

E1b1b [4.4%]

Zulu:         E1b1a [55%] – E2 [21%] – B [20%] – A [3%] 

Congo:      E1b1a [63.9%] – E2 [19.4%] – E1b1b [13.9%] –

A [2.8%] 

Nigeria:    E1b1a [68.2%] – B [9.6%] – E2 [6.9%] – E1a [4.5%] –

E1b1b [3.9%] – A [2.7%]

Rwanda:   E1b1a [80%] – B [15%] – E2 [4%] – E1b1b [1%] 

Khoisan:   E1b1a [35.7%] – A [33.3%] – E1b1b [14.7%] –

B [12.4%] – E2 [3.9%]

Namibia:   A [64%] – E1b1a [18%] – E1b1b [9%] 

Haplogroup J in Ethiopia is reflective of Arab related peoples and admixture.

Y-DNA Haplogroups E1b1a (V38), E1b1b (M215) and A, are the predominant paternal defining marker Haplogroups for sub-Saharan Africans; with E2 (M75), B and E1a (M132), lesser Haplogroups, yet still distinctive markers for Black men. 

Notice that these six paternal Haplogroup lineages are in alignment with the six identified biblical clans descending from Canaan’s sons.

When compared to the core Y-DNA Haplogroups for Japheth’s seven* sons investigated in chapters two to ten – the predominant Haplogroups being O2a, and then O1 with lesser Haplogroups in order C, D, Q, K and N – it is abundantly clear that there is no close connection, only a distant one through the interconnecting Haplogroups of BT and F, later mutations inherited from Japheth and Ham. 

The erroneous claim that there are no racial lines and only one race, collapses in a pile when these six key male African Haplogroups for Canaan are contrasted with the seven* primary paternal Haplogroups for the East Asians, Central Asians and Amerindians.

Haplogroups are the scientific evidence that races exist within humankind. Not that mankind is one race. This is non-sensical reasoning, all in the endeavour to be pseudo-politically correct and not offend anyone – refer finalis verbum

The genetic variation for Canaan’s six lineal descendants are highlighted above in the six regions comprising West Africa, Central and South Africa to East Africa, Horn of Africa and North Africa; including the six colours of mauve, medium blue and light blue to purple, medium green and light green.

Ethiopia is located in the Horn of Africa and its population is 137,326,802 people, the second highest in sub-Saharan Africa. By the year 2100, its population is forecast to be the seventh highest in the world with an impressive 367,290,000 people.

Flag of Ethiopia, constituting the pan African colours: green, yellow and red

The largest ethnic group in Ethiopia is the Oromo; of which it is their Y-DNA Haplogroup spread used rather than the combined population, as it affects the E1b1b, A and J percentages significantly.

Kenya in East Africa has the sixth highest population with 58,127,349 people.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo is in Central Africa, with the third highest population of 114,775,225 people.

War torn Congo

By 2100, the Congo is expected to have the fifth highest population in the world – surpassing the United States – with 430,709,000 people.

Flag of DR Congo

The main ethnic group in the Congo are the Kongo and in Nigeria it is the Igbo.

Tanzania in East Africa, has the fourth highest population with 71,627,811 people. Ghana in West Africa, has a population of 35,408,570 people – the tenth highest. 

In the South, the Republic of South Africa has the fifth highest population of 65,145,365 people, in which the vast majority are Black. The Y-DNA Haplogroups of the largest ethnic group, are taken from the Zulu.

Y heat map of current concentrations of the Y-DNA Haplogroup mutation of E1b1a1 (M2) derived from E1b1a (V38)

A comparison table of the sub-Saharan African peoples discussed in this chapter and their Y-DNA marker Haplogroups.

                                  A       B     E1a   E1b1a   E1b1b   E2     E

Namibia                    64                           18           9               27

RSA Khoisan           33      12                 36         15        4     55     

Kenya                       14        3                  52         14      17     83

Ethiopia                    10     1.3                               63     1.3     64

RSA Bantu                 5      11                   55          4       21     80

RSA Zulu                   3      20                   55                   21     76

Nigeria                       3      10       5          68          4         7     79

Tanzania                    3       9                    48        22       16     86

DR Congo                 3                              64        14       19     97

Rwanda                              15                    80          1         4     85

Senegal                                         5           81          7         3     96

Ghana                                           2           92          1                95

There is a correlation between the percentage of Haplogroup A and E1b1a or Haplogroup E overall. The higher Haplogroup A, the lower generally Haplogroup E and vice versa. As the Namibians are at one end with the highest percentage of Haplogroup A, it is the people of Ghana with E1b1a and the Congo, with E overall which are the other bookends. 

Haplogroups A, B and E are three of the five oldest or original Y-DNA Haplogroups. Thus, if Adam possessed Haplogroup A, this then passed along the line of Seth to reach Noah. Regardless, in this instance ostensibly Canaan – though in reality, Noah; refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator – carrying A, passed on the future mutations for Haplogroups B and DE which would later be exhibited in Canaan’s male descendants.

Therefore, it is Canaan for whatever reason, whose male descendants have inherited and retained the oldest and original Haplogroups comprising A and B; while also predominantly carrying Haplogroup E.

The highest percentages of Haplogroup A is found in southern Africa and particularly the Khoisan, Zulu and Bantu males of South Africa.

Haplogroups E1a and E2 prevalent in subequatorial Africa, are unique to Black Africans.

It is Haplogroup E1b1a which is the dominant sub-Saharan paternal Haplogroup, much like O2a1 is in East Asia and South East Asia.

The next most frequent Haplogroup E1b1b* – and second to E1b1a – is an interesting Haplogroup as we shall discover, for it is not just found in sub-Saharan Africa, but is widespread in North Africa; with relatively high concentrations in parts of southeastern and southern Europe.

As clades of E1b1b* from intermixing and intermarriage are found in Shem’s descendants – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

While the Berbers of North Africa are somewhat mysterious in that:

a. are they an Arab related people who have intermarried with Canaanites; or

b. Canaanites who have intermixed with Arabs – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia

The next chapter discusses the eldest and most influential of Ham’s sons.  

People with understanding want more knowledge, but fools just want more foolishness.

Proverbs 15:14 New Century Version

“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widely spread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”

Bertrand Russell 1872 – 1970

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

Ham Aequator

Chapter XI

Noah’s second and middle son is Ham – Genesis 5:32. We will discover that his descendants have spanned across the globe, principally throughout the hottest regions of the earth relative to the equator. Ham’s children have dispersed widely and comprise the darker skinned peoples of the world, ranging from black to olive skin and all the shades of brown in between. They are located in Central and South America, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, the Indian Sub-Continent, South East Asia and Oceania.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, page 50 – emphasis mine:

‘It is true that although Semites, Aryans, and Alaro-dians represent different races of mankind, they nevertheless all alike belong to the white stock, and may thus be said to be but varieties of one and the same original race… even granting it to be probable that the various white races are all descended from a common ancestry… it is possible that they may have developed out of more than one dark race’ – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis.

While Sayce is correct in his summation that the specific races stated above have stemmed from a common source, he is incorrect in believing they are ‘white’ or in this case, would have descended from Shem. For the peoples of the Middle East and India descend from Ham instead, yet admixture at more than one time is evident in both their paternal and maternal lineages.

Abarim Publications, emphasis mine:

‘The name that occurs in the English Bible as Ham is really two completely different Hebrew names; one which is pronounced Cham, and the other Ham. They have two completely different meanings, but since English readers are so used to the name Ham… call them Ham I and Ham II:

The name Ham I – Meaning:

Hot, or Protective Wall from the verb (ham), to be hot, or the verb (hmh), to protect or surround.

This name [C]Ham is identical to the adjective (ham), meaning warm, and also to the noun (ham), meaning father in law… The verb (hamam) means to be hot and is sometimes used to describe mental agitation. The noun (hamman) denotes [a] kind of mysterious small pillar (perhaps a device). The verb (yaham) also means hot, but mostly in a mental sense: to be excited or angered. The noun (hema) mostly refers to a severe mental “burning”: anger or rage.

For the meaning of this name [C]Ham, Alfred Jones (Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) confidently derives it from the verb (hamam), meaning to be hot, and renders it Heat, Black. Then he… connects blackness with sin. What escapes the… scholar is that:

  • This version of the name Ham is also identical to (ham), father-in-law, from the unused root (hmh) of which the cognates mean to protect or surround.
  • In the Bible not blackness but whiteness is associated with sin. Miriam turned white [2 Kings 5:27] because of her aggression against Moses’ second [3rd] wife, who was a Cushite and thus quite likely very black. And the bride of the Song of Solomon, often regarded as a type of the Church, was black as well (Song of Solomon 1:5). 
  • NOBSE Study Bible Name List simply reads Hot for Ham, but in view of the above, a closer rendering would be Passion or Intensity.

The name Ham II – Meaning: Noisy from the verb (hama), to be noisy.

Ham II, which is spelled and pronounced as Ham, denotes a once-mentioned town where kings Amraphel, Arioch, Chedorlaomer and Tidal defeated the Zuzim during the war of four against five kings (Genesis 14:5).

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names derives this Ham from the verb (hama), meaning cry aloud… The… verb (hama) means to be noisy… derived masculine noun (hamon) denotes a noisy multitude.’

The Zuzim (or Zuzites) from Zuz, in Ham, are one of six clans of the Nephilim descended giants mentioned in the Old Testament who lived on the Earth after the Flood – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

They are also called Zamzummim (or Zamzummites) – Deuteronomy 2:21. We will study Genesis chapter fourteen in more detail in a later section – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.

Nephilim are associated with at least two of the four sons of Ham. The definition of the word Ham infers that his descendants would be intense, passionate and at times hot headed – each accurate and applicable.

Psalm 105:23, 26-27

New English Translation

‘Israel moved to [entered] Egypt; Jacob lived for a time [lived as a resident foreigner] in the land of Ham [Africa]… He sent his servant Moses, and Aaron, whom he had chosen. They executed his miraculous signs among them, and his amazing deeds in the land of Ham.’

Egypt is translated from the Hebrew and Aramaic: Mizraim, for Mizra is a son of Ham. He was located in Northern Africa with two of his three brothers – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

Psalm 78:50-52 and 106:21-22

English Standard Version

‘… he did not spare them from death, but gave their lives over to the plague. He struck down every firstborn in Egypt, the firstfruits of their strength in the tents of Ham. Then he led out his people [the sons of Jacob] like sheep and guided them in the wilderness like a flock… They forgot God, their Saviour, who had done great things in Egypt, wondrous works in the land of Ham, and awesome deeds’ by the Red Sea – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or fact?

The Book of Jubilees provides additional geographic information on the land inheritance of the sons of Ham. It is referenced against the location of the Garden of Eden. We will return to this passage when we investigate Eden – refer article: The Eden Enigma.

The lands of Ham were to the south and west of Shem, as opposed to the north for Japheth – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.

Ham originally was located principally, in the continent of Africa. 

Book of Jubilees 8:10-11, 22-24

10 ‘And it came to pass… that they divided the earth into three parts, for Shem and Ham and Japheth, according to the inheritance of each… 11 And [Noah] called his sons, and they drew nigh to him, they and their children, and he divided the earth into the lots, which his three sons were to take in possession, and they reached forth their hands, and took the writing out of the bosom of Noah, their father. 

22 And for Ham came forth the second portion, beyond the Gihon [the River Nile] towards the south to the right [facing East] of the Garden, and it extends towards the south [Ethiopia and Kenya] and it extends to all the mountains of fire [African Rift Valley], and it extends towards the west to the sea of ‘Atel [Red Sea] and it extends towards the west till it reaches the sea of Ma’uk – that (sea) [Atlantic Ocean] into which everything which is not destroyed descends.’ 

Notice the line of active volcanoes in modern day Ethiopia and Kenya; the ancient lands of Ham’s son Cush. It is called the Rift Valley as the Nubian and Somalian plates are causing the continent of Africa to split into two land masses.  

Jubilees: 23 ‘And it goes forth towards the north to the limits of Gadir [Gibraltar, Spain], and it goes forth to the coast of the waters of the sea to the waters of the great sea [Mediterranean] till it draws near to the river Gihon, and goes along the river Gihon till it reaches the right of the Garden of Eden.’ 

24 ‘And this is the land which came forth for Ham as the portion which he was to occupy forever for himself and his sons unto their generations forever [rather, a very long time].’

We now arrive at an enigmatic passage of scripture in Genesis chapter nine. A comprehensive or definitive answer to the account was thought elusive, yet we will discover there is embedded in the verses in question a logical answer.

It is as mysterious as Noah’s role as Ancestor Zero – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The early chapters of Genesis are a very abbreviated, amalgamated coded version of events. The Bible stereotypically understates rather than overstates, and Genesis nine exhibits deliberate editing and censorship. Moses, who is credited with compiling the early books of the Bible would likely not have glossed over events as they now stand and thus, subsequent scribes and translators are likely culpable. 

The subject matter is unsavoury, unsettling and altruistically, it is lightly trusted that the editing was intended for our sensibilities rather than a deliberate desire to cover over the truth. 

Recall, we learned earlier that Noah planted a vineyard and made wine after the Flood, very possibly in the region of Kashmir – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

Further details are added in the Book of Jubilees.

Book of Jubilees 7:1-7

1 … ‘Noah planted vines on the mountain on which the ark had rested, named Lubar, one of the Ararat Mountains [in the Himalayas], and they produced fruit [it typically takes newly planted vines up to three years to grow grapes] in the fourth year [circa 10,833 BCE] and he guarded their fruit, and gathered it in this year in the seventh month [Tishri: September/October]. 

2 And he made wine and put it into a vessel, and kept it until the fifth year, until the first day, on the new month [new Moon] of the first month [Abib/Nisan: March/April]. 3 And he celebrated with joy the day of this feast…’

Due to the use of the word feast, it likely refers to the following Full Moon of the 14/15 day, equating to the Passover* and Feast of Unleavened Bread.

‘… he made a burnt sacrifice unto Yahweh, one young ox and one ram, and seven sheep, each a year old, and a kid of the goats, that he might make atonement thereby for himself and his sons…’

Similar to a later Patriarch named Job (Job 1:5) – refer article: Job. 

4 ‘… he prepared the kid* first [young goat], and placed some of its blood* on the flesh that was on the altar which he had made, and all the fat he laid on the altar where he made the burnt sacrifice, and the ox and the ram and the sheep, and he laid all their flesh upon the altar. 5 And he placed all their offerings mingled with [olive] oil upon it, and afterwards he sprinkled [red] wine on the fire which he had previously made on the altar, and he placed incense on the altar and caused a sweet savoir to ascend acceptable before Yahweh his Sovereign Ruler.’ 

The system of worshipping and obeying the Eternal One, through animal sacrifices was not inaugurated by Moses and Aaron during the time of the Israelites, but rather, re-activated. Abel and Noah in the antediluvian age and Abraham, Isaac and Jacob after the flood, all offered sacrifices to the Creator; for either the purpose of thanksgiving or atonement (and forgiveness) – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy

6 ‘And he rejoiced and drank of this wine, he and his children with joy. 7 And it was evening, and he went into his tent, and being drunken he lay down and slept, and was uncovered in his tent as he slept.’

A number of scenarios are possible, with it resembling an ancient crime scene and a re-opening of an investigation into a very cold case. Initially, the protagonists appear to include Noah; his son Ham; and or, his son Canaan. Though this will alter as we progress. While reading, it is not ostensibly clear who the perpetrator is nor entirely would you believe, the identity of the potential victim(s).

Genesis 9:18-26 

New Century Version

18 ‘The sons of Noah who came out of the boat with him were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.)’ 

The Voice: “… (Ham, by the way, was the father of Canaan)” – emphasis theirs.

Amplified: “… Ham was the father of Canaan [born later].” Brackets theirs. 

We are first alerted to misadventure by the concluding disjunctive clause, the parenthetical, Ham was the father of Canaan

The interlinear states:

‘And sons Noah that went forth ark were Shem Ham Japheth Ham [H2526 – Cham] father [H1 – ‘ab: literally or figuratively] Canaan [H3667 – Kenaan]’

We are told who the sons of Noah are; why delineate Canaan as Ham’s son, in a context about Noah’s sons. Could Canaan actually be Noah’s son… born after the Flood?

Genesis: 19 ‘These three men were Noah’s sons, and all the people on earth came from these three sons.

20 Noah became a farmer [H376 – ‘iyesh: husbandman] and planted a vineyard.’ 

NET: ‘The epithet a man of the soil indicates that Noah was a farmer. “Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard”; Hebrew “and Noah, a man of the ground, began and he planted a vineyard.”

Genesis: 21 ‘When he drank wine made from his grapes, he became drunk and lay naked in his tent.’ 

NET: ‘The Hebrew verb (galah) in the Hitpael verbal stem (vayyitgal) means “to uncover oneself” or “to be uncovered.” Noah became overheated because of the wine and uncovered himself in the tent.’

Genesis: 22 ‘Ham, the father of Canaan, looked at his naked father and told his brothers outside.’ 

The interlinear states:

‘And Ham father Canaan saw* [H7200 – Ra’ah] nakedness** [H6172 – ‘ervah] his father told his two brethren outside’

We are told that Ham is the father of Canaan. Why not just state Ham. The writer or editor desperately wants the reader to believe Canaan is Ham’s son. 

Is this because he is, though not legally. Or is it because Canaan isn’t Ham’s son at all. By including Canaan; the implication is that Ham is looking upon something that may have a. involved Canaan himself; or b. led to Canaan’s existence.

‘Looked at his naked’ father implies that there had been a sexual act; but, by whom and whom too?

NET: ‘some would translate “had sexual relations with,” arguing that Ham committed a homosexual act with his drunken father for which he was cursed. However, the expression”see nakedness” usually refers to observation of another’s nakedness, not a sexual act (see Genesis 42:9, 12 where “nakedness” is used metaphorically to convey the idea of “weakness” or “vulnerability”; Deuteronomy 23:14 where “nakedness” refers to excrement; Isaiah 47:3; Ezekiel 16:37; Lamentations 1:8.

The following verse (v.23) clearly indicates that visual observation, not a homosexual act, is in view here. In Leviticus 20:17 the expression “see nakedness” does appear to be a euphemism for sexual intercourse, but the context there, unlike that of Genesis 9:22, clearly indicates that in that passage sexual contact is in view. The expression “see nakedness” does not in itself suggest a sexual connotation. Some relate Genesis 9:22 to Leviticus 18:6-11, 15-19, where the expression “uncover [another’s] nakedness” (the Piel form of galah) refers euphemistically to sexual intercourse. 

However, Genesis 9:22 does not say Ham “uncovered” the nakedness of his father. According to the text, Noah uncovered himself; Ham merely saw his father naked. The point of the text is that Ham had no respect for his father. Rather than covering his father up, he told his brothers. Noah then gave an oracle that Ham’s [Canaan’s] descendants, who would be characterized by the same moral abandonment [for merely looking at a sleeping naked person and then cursing his son instead?], would be cursed. 

It is hard for modern people to appreciate why seeing another’s nakedness was such an abomination, because nakedness is so prevalent today. In the ancient world, especially in a patriarchal society, seeing another’s nakedness was a major [offence]. (See the account in Herodotus, Histories 1.8-13, where a general saw the nakedness of his master’s wife, and one of the two had to be put to death.) Besides, Ham was not a little boy wandering into his father’s bedroom…’

The thrust of the verse is that Ham is somehow complicit. If he is momentarily discounted from an actual act against Noah directly, he is not absolved from witnessing a possible aftermath of an episode either involving or against his father and not responding accordingly. Rather, he flippantly abrogates responsibility and chooses to alert his brothers instead. This response makes sense once we discover Ham conspired in the execution of what occurred in Noah’s tent.

In verse 22, the Hebrew word for saw* is translated by the KJV as see 879 times and look 104 times, but also as enjoy, four times. It can mean to ‘look intently at, behold, to gaze at.’ The circumstances hint that Ham did more than spot his naked father and then quickly leave to go and tell his brothers. There are two possibilities, in that Ham lingered, while observing the situation before him for longer than was appropriate and in the process gained some level of enjoyment or arousal from it; or incriminatingly, somehow re-arranged or manipulated the [crime] scene he discovered. Did he try to extricate himself, or was it Canaan he sought to protect?

As plausible as it may be that Ham or perhaps Canaan just looked, this verse has to be connected with verse 24, where it says: ‘when [Noah] woke up and learned what his youngest son^^ had done to him.’ Support for this line of reasoning is in the meaning for the Hebrew word nakedness** in verse 22. The KJV translates it as nakedness fifty times, though also as shame, one time, unclean, one time and uncleanness once. 

The nakedness in question is implying that the nudity on display was a shameful exposure of indecency or improper behaviour; as in ‘exposed, undefended, disgrace, blemish.’ The latin term pudenda would apply, in that in the very least, the genitalia of Noah were visible.

Interestingly, pudendum while signifying human external genital organs, is especially applied to those of a female.^

We will discover that this is the first of a number of massive clues.

23 Then Shem and Japheth got a coat [H8071 – simlah] and, carrying it on both their shoulders, they walked backwards into the tent and covered their father. They turned their faces away so that they did not see their father’s nakedness.

NET: ‘The word translated “garment” has the Hebrew definite article on it. The article may simply indicate that the garment is definite and vivid in the mind of the narrator, but it could refer instead to Noah’s garment. Did Ham bring it out when he told his brothers?’

Why would Ham go to the trouble of telling his brothers and not cover his father himself if it was simple exposure? Why would Shem and Japheth cover their father simply because he was naked, unless they were actually reacting to something more serious. The Hebrew word for coat is translated in the KJV as raiment, eleven times; clothes, six times; garment, six times; and apparel twice. It signifies a wrapper or mantle – sleeveless cloak or cape – as a covering garment. 

It does contain the ‘permutation for the feminine (through the idea of a cover assuming the shape of the object beneath); [for instance] a dress^, especially a mantle.’ It may have simply been a unisex dressing gown suitable for someone who is sleeping lying down, or there may be significance in this feminine association.

We will learn that there is in fact here in the text a second significant clue.

Genesis: 24 ‘Noah was sleeping because of the wine [H3196 – Yayin]. When he woke up and learned  [H3045 – Yada‘] what his youngest [H6996 – Qatan] son^^[H1121 – ben] had done [H6213 – asah] to him…’

NET: ‘Hebrew “his wine,” used here by metonymy for the drunken stupor it produced. The Hebrew verb (‘asah, “to do”) carries too general a sense to draw the conclusion that Ham had to have done more than look on his father’s nakedness and tell his brothers.’

Though it does imply more than just looking was undertook by someone other than Ham.

The Interlinear states:

‘And Noah awoke from his wine knew what his younger son had done’

The Hebrew word for knew, yada’ is translated by the KJV as know, 645 times; knowledge, nineteen times; perceive, eighteen times; and understand, seven times.

It can mean to ‘know a person carnally’ and ‘to be revealed.’

Surprisingly, Ham is not specifically mentioned. We now find two clues in the Hebrew words for younger and son. The KJV translates younger from Qatan as small, thirty-three times; little, nineteen times; youngest, fifteen times; younger, fourteen times; least, ten times; and lesser, twice. It signifies one who is ‘insignificant or unimportant.’

This indirect reference to Ham as the youngest is revealing in light of the recorded positions in the family hierarchy. Shem and Japheth vary in the order they are positioned in the Old Testament book of Genesis; between first and last, eldest or youngest, though Ham is always placed in the middle of his brothers – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

Piecing scripture together, we learn Japheth is actually the eldest and thus the reader assumes Shem is the youngest due to Ham’s position always being in the middle. Yet Noah is adamant that Ham is the youngest – which places Shem in the middle.

The possibility exists that Canaan could be being referenced as he is ostensibly Ham’s youngest son of four – Genesis 10:6. Alternatively, was Canaan Noah’s youngest son of four?

The Hebrew word for son ben, is translated by the KJV as son, 2,978 times; children, 1,568 times; old, 135 times; first, 51 times; man, twenty times; and young, eighteen times. A variety of meanings, though the one of considerable interest sandwiched between son and child – a member of a family group – is… grandson.

The use of this word, could suddenly shift focus to someone other than Ham, who is not even stated in verse 24. Canaan on the other hand is mentioned in verse 22, when Ham looked on his father. Canaan in comparison with Ham, would be less significant in importance and ‘smaller’ than Ham literally in age and figuratively in stature. 

The Hebrew word for ‘had done’ is translated in the KJV as do, 1,333 times; make, 653 times; wrought, 52 times; commit, 49 times; perform, eighteen times; and dress^, thirteen times. It signifies, ‘to fashion, to be used, to press, squeeze.’ Strong’s adds:‘bruise’ and ‘dress(ed).’ These definitions* may be of tell tale sexual significance when we investigate different theories next and in light of the hinted at feminine garment used to cover Noah’s nakedness. 

Noah knew something had happened. Just being looked at doesn’t warrant cursing an innocent grandson. It only makes any kind of sense, if either Ham or Canaan were guilty of more than just prurient observation. How would Noah have known he was stared at, especially while inebriated? If an act of some kind had been committed against him, or affecting him, there must have been evidence for Noah to know.

Genesis: 25 he said, “May there be a curse [H779 – ‘arar] on Canaan! May he be the lowest slave [H5650 – ‘ebed] to his brothers.”

The Hebrew word for curse is translated as simply a curse, sixty-two times and once, as bitterly. It is a severe curse, which from the primitive root means to ‘bitterly curse, execrate.’ Execrate means ‘to detest utterly, abhor, abominate, imprecate evil upon, damn’ and ‘denounce.’

This is no simple curse but one with enormous repercussions. If it is a punishment to fit the crime, then the crime must be one of great consequence for Noah to invoke a malediction of this degree.

The Hebrew word for slave is translated by the KJV as servant, 744 times; manservant, twenty-three times; bondman, twenty-one times; and bondage, ten times. It means to be a slave and the interlinear says a ‘servants of servants’; not a servant to other servants, but the lowest of all servants. This is an enormous clue in identifying Canaan’s descendants – Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa.

The people of Canaan are accused of sins in the scriptures; their ancestor Canaan is apparently guilty of nothing. Why does Noah curse Canaan and not Ham?

NET: ‘Cursed be Canaan. The curse is pronounced on Canaan, not Ham. Noah sees a problem in Ham’s character, and on the basis of that he delivers a prophecy about the future descendants who will live in slavery to such things and then be controlled by others. In a similar way Jacob pronounced oracles about his sons based on their revealed character… Wenham points out that”Ham’s indiscretion towards his father may easily be seen as a type of the later behavior of the Egyptians and Canaanites.

Noah’s curse on Canaan thus represents God’s sentence on the sins of the Canaanites, which their forefather Ham had exemplified.” He points out that the Canaanites are seen as sexually aberrant and Leviticus 18:3 describes Egypt [Mizra] and Canaan, both descendants of Ham, as having abominable practices. Hebrew “a servant of servants” (’eved ’avadim), an example of the superlative genitive.

It means Canaan will become the most abject of slaves.’

The New English Translation footnote supports the mildest interpretation of Genesis nine and adopts the view that Ham saw his father in a compromising position of nakedness. Noah thus disrespected, then felt compelled to curse Ham’s youngest son’s descendants to perpetual slavery and impoverishment. An honest appraisal of this line of enquiry would have to admit there are gaping plot holes. Strikingly, nor does the punishment have equivalency for the crime.

Looking closely at the story, the scenario includes Ham (or Canaan) as a perpetrator of varying degree, with Noah as the – or, as strange as it may sound, a further unknown second person (both a perpetrator and) also a – victim.

***Reader beware, the following segment may be unsettling***

Dr Rabbi Tzemah Yoreh in his article Noah’s Four Sons, puts forward a case of a combination of two texts from two editors in the scriptural account – emphasis mine:

‘A Supplementary-Hypothesis Solution

Viewed through the conceptual tool-kit of the supplementary paradigm of biblical criticism, one form of source criticism, it is likely that in an earlier version of the story (the J source), Noah had four sons, not three: Shem, Ham, Japheth, and Canaan. The later Priestly source had a different tradition, however, that Noah had only three sons (5:31, 6:10, 7:13, 9:19, 10:1, all P texts). P was by nature a conservative supplementer/editor – he finds a way to assert his view that does minimal violence to the biblical text. 

(According to the supplementary paradigm of biblical criticism, erasure or deletion was rarely if ever employed.) Accordingly, I would argue that P was not comfortable erasing Canaan entirely from the text in [favour] of his own view – and adds the clause “and Ham was the father of” to verse 18 to make it seem as though Canaan were Noah’s grandson rather than his son. P adds these same words again in verse 22, thereby making Ham the assailant instead of Canaan. Finally, he adds 9:19 to re-emphasize his view that Noah had only three sons. By doing so he brings J’s text in line with his own tradition of three sons, but at the expense of the coherence of the story.

Here is the original text: [Note: // represents where the seams are.]

The J Text 9:18 The sons of Noah who went out from the ship were Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and// Canaan // 9:20 Noah started out as a farmer, and planted a vineyard. 9:21 He drank of the wine and got drunk. He lay naked within his tent. 9:22 // Canaan saw the nakedness of his father, and told two of his brothers outside. 9:23 Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, walked backwards, and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were averted, and they didn’t see their father’s nakedness. 9:24 Noah awoke from his wine (-induced stupor), and knew what his youngest son had done to him. 9:25 He said, “Canaan is cursed. He will be a servant of servants (serving) his brothers.” 9:26 He said, “Blessed be YHWH, the God of Shem. Let Canaan be his servant. 9:27 May God make Japheth mighty. Let him dwell in the tents of Shem. Let Canaan be his servant.”

… a coded version of the original J text with the P supplements [italicised]: J + P (Canon)

9:18 The sons of Noah who went out from the ship were Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Ham was the father of Canaan. 9:19 These three were the sons of Noah, and from these, the whole earth was populated. 9:20 Noah started out as a farmer, and planted a vineyard. 9:21 He drank of the wine and got drunk. He lay naked within his tent. 9:22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside…

An Unexpected Corroboration?

Some intriguing corroboration to this enumeration is found in the midrash (late first millennium C.E.) – Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer… which also saw Canaan as one of Noah’s sons and solves the text-critical problem similarly. It goes without saying that Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer had no knowledge of J’s base text, though his harmonistic reading may be suggestive of a similar thought pattern:

Noah found a vine… the vine still had grapes upon it…he planted a vineyard from this vine…and on that very day fruit grew…he drank wine from it (the vine) and he revealed himself in his tent. Canaan came in, saw his father’s nakedness, tied a string to his penis and castrated* him, then he went out to tell his brothers… Ham came in, saw his father’s nakedness and neglecting the commandment to honor one’s father, reported it to his two brothers as though he were in the market and laughing at his father. His brothers rebuked him, they took a cover, and walking backwards covered their father’s nakedness… Noah arose from his stupor, discovered what his youngest son had done to him, and cursed him, as it says, “Cursed is Canaan”.

The author of Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer not only solves the problem of Canaan, but that of Ham as well. In J, it is unclear where Ham appears in the story; he plays no part and goes unmentioned. In Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer, Canaan is the son who castrates his father, thereby receiving a curse, and Ham laughs at his father instead of helping him, thus he does not get the blessing his brothers, Shem and Japhet receive, nor the curses Canaan receives. It is unclear how the author of this midrash understood the biblical text that says that Canaan was Noah’s grandson and not his son.

Similarly, and perhaps even stranger, the Quran notes that Noah had four sons (Sura 11, Hud v. 42-43). This unnamed fourth son refuses to come aboard the Ark, and instead climbs a mountain and is drowned. Some later Islamic commentators give his name as either Yam or Kan’an, the latter the Arabic version of Canaan. It is difficult to determine the relationship between Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer and the Quran, though they may have shared the same source. In any case, it is striking that an ancient tradition that was erased by P hundreds of years before the first millennium C.E. found its way back into texts over a thousand years later in such disparate sources as Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer and the Quran.’

The irony is not lost of a Rabbi quoting the Quran. Conjecture and assumptions of the author aside, the explanation of an older text stating Canaan as a son of Noah possibly answers the parenthetical conundrum of Genesis 9.18. It may add meaning to why Canaan as a son of Noah was cursed directly by his father and yet still allows for the involvement of Ham and his tantamount condoning of either Canaan’s purported actions or even his own.

In a similar incident (with an opposite result) in Genesis 21:8-10, Sarah the wife of Abraham, sees Ishmael mocking Isaac. She takes a dim view and Ishmael’s banishment with his mother Hagar stems in part, from this incident. Though Ishmael is punished by being banished, he still receives a future blessing and inheritance – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Nota Bene

For the ease of the established biblical paradigm it was formerly accepted by this writer that Noah had three sons, with Canaan being Ham’s youngest son. Subsequent research has led to the conclusion that Canaan is actually Noah’s fourth son, cementing the earlier manuscripts of Genesis as accurate. In support of this recognition is the fact that an investigation of autosomal DNA, including Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups for Canaan’s descendants indicates the probability they are a fourth racial line in their own right – in addition to the three originating from Japheth, Shem and Ham.

It is incongruous that while Herman Hoeh upheld the established understanding that Noah had only three sons; he should in turn recognise the obvious in that there are four principal skin tones and therefore four types of people (and not three) constituting humankind.

Herman Hoeh:

‘You will never find in the Bible such expressions, as

the “white race” [Shem], or

the “black race” [Canaan], or

the “yellow race” [Japheth], or

the “brown race” [Ham],

yet these four primary races ARE MENTIONED in the Bible! Why hasn’t this knowledge been known?’ – The Origin of the Nations, 1957.

Castration as an explanation would certainly answer the reason for the severity of the curse inflicted; as opposed to death. This was not a great option, when considering Canaan was to be the ancestor of at least six sons and distinct lineages of descent. Though, we are left scratching our heads as to what would be the motive? Stop Noah siring more sons, who would receive blessings and allotments of land, thus decreasing Canaan’s share? We will return to this notion.

In Genesis 9:24, with Noah saying he knew what his youngest (grand)son had done to him, leaves no doubt that something tangible had been done to Noah. Like Ham, Canaan was the youngest, whether his father was Ham (or Noah). This convincingly yet confusingly, shines the spotlight on both Ham and Canaan as dual persons of interest. 

Dr Rabbi David Frankel in his article, Noah, Ham and the Curse of Canaan: Who Did What to Whom in the Tent? A new solution to why Canaan (not Ham) was cursed, presents alternative solutions – italics his:

‘What Did Noah’s Youngest Son Do?

As already anticipated by the Rabbis, and suggested by some modern scholars, an earlier version of our story probably related a much more severe crime – the homosexual rape of his father when he was inebriated. This indeed is the kind of [offence] that would most naturally provoke the severe reaction depicted in the text. This assumption also accounts for the formulation of verse 24,

Noah awoke from his drunken stupor and knew what his youngest son had done to him. If his son had only looked at him, how would Noah have “known” when he awoke that this had occurred? Further, the final words “had done to him” imply a much more concrete and physical act than mere gazing. The statement that Noah knew what was done to him after waking from his drunken stupor contrasts with Lot who was similarly abused sexually by his daughters while drunk, and concerning whom we read (Genesis 19:35), and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose.

Leviticus 20:17 shows that “seeing nakedness” is a euphemism for sex: Leviticus 20:17 If a man has sexual intercourse with his sister, whether the daughter of his father or his mother, so that he sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace. They must be cut off in the sight of the children of their people. He has exposed his sister’s nakedness; he will bear his punishment for iniquity.

Most likely, the phrase describing Noah’s nakedness, “and he became revealed inside his tent” was meant to evoke the theme of incest, as “revealing of nakedness”serves as the euphemism for incest in the prohibitions of Leviticus: Leviticus 18:6 None of you shall come near anyone of his own flesh to uncover nakedness… Thus, the sin, in the original narrative, is not homosexual sex itself, but forced incest of a son with his father in a situation in which the father has no ability to defend himself; this would explain the harshness of the father’s curse.’

While it is agreed with the author that incest (and rape) is an accurate integral aspect of what transpired in Noah’s tent – and hence a third major clue – an act of homosexual (sodomy or castration) by either Ham or Canaan will be shown to be wholly inaccurate.

David Frankel:

‘How then do we explain the part of the story in which Noah’s other sons enter the tent and cover their father without looking at him: Genesis 9:23 Shem and Japheth took the garment and placed it on their shoulders. Then they walked in backwards and covered up their father’s nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so they did not see their father’s nakedness.

This clearly implies that [the] sin was gazing and nothing more. Nevertheless, I believe that the evidence in [favour] of the sexual interpretation is too strong to simply dismiss. I suggest that the text was revised by an editor who took the euphemism “seeing nakedness” literally, as if the sin was really visual alone. 

Whether out of deference to Noah or in the name of modesty more generally, this editor sought to temper the severe [offence] of forced incest with an incapacitated father. This reinterpretation was accomplished by adding a report about the two brothers’ contrasting act of covering their father without looking.

The same editor also added the report of the perpetrator mockingly (?) relating to his brothers that he saw their father’s nakedness (verse 22b: “He told his two brothers who were outside”) so as to facilitate the subsequent presentation of the brothers’ contrasting act; the same editor then added the blessings of Shem and Japhet, the two “good” brothers/sons, at the end of the story.

In short, according to this reconstruction, the blessings of Shem and Japhet (beginning with “he also said”) and the subordination of Canaan to both of them are secondary (verses 26-27) additions. Thus, the original story told simply of the sin of the youngest son against his father, and the cursing of Canaan to be subservient to his unnamed brothers. Admittedly, this story is disappointingly brief in comparison with the one we are used to. On the other hand, it seems only fitting that a story as unseemly as this one would lack narrative embellishment and be as concise and to the point as possible.’

A similar scenario occurred when Jacob’s eldest son Reuben, commits adultery – incest of sorts – with his fathers wife’s handmaiden Bilhah. Reuben disqualifies himself and his descendants from the birthright blessings – which are then given to Joseph’s sons (Ephraim, Manasseh) and Judah – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Frankel:

‘The original story about forced rape of a father would explain why Noah would curse his youngest son so harshly, but Canaan is not Noah’s youngest son; Japhet is! In fact, Canaan isn’t Noah’s son at all! For this reason, many scholars suggest that in an earlier form of the story, Canaan must have been Noah’s youngest son, not Japhet. Without the redaction supplement of “Ham the father of,” v. 22 would have originally read “Canaan saw his father’s nakedness.” It indeed makes perfect sense to accept this reconstruction of v. 22, and to assume that if the story concludes with the cursing of Canaan, Canaan must have been the original youngest-son-culprit of the story.

On the other hand, the idea that Canaan was Noah’s youngest son is difficult. Verses 18-19, which introduce the non-Priestly account here, state that Noah’s three sons are Shem, Ham, and Japhet, and that they are the progenitors of the world. Moreover, the nation lists in chapter 10 (Priestly and non-Priestly alike) treat Ham as the father of Canaan and the progenitor of nations; Canaan and his offspring are only a subgroup under Ham.

The most important thing to note about the edited story is the strange preservation of the curse as directed at Canaan (three times!), in spite of the identification of the sinner of the story as Ham and the brothers as Shem and Japhet. Wouldn’t it have been more consistent to change the curse of Canaan into the curse of Ham?’

In this case scenario, Noah may have disowned his son Canaan. As Ishmael was banished, Canaan would have been relegated in status by Noah, not just by the curse. Ham was not blameless, even so, Canaan’s posterity could have been included with Ham in the scriptures – to save face – rather than shown as a separate fourth line of people from Noah as originally intended.

The only way this could be legitimately recorded with Canaan being identified as a son of Ham, is that Ham was not the father of Canaan at all but rather, the stepfather of Canaan. There is no other reason why the subsequent Bible texts included an adjusted table of nations to accommodate the change in Canaan’s status.

Considering the data thus far, it is problematic in ascribing to Ham the role of perpetrator – rather than that of an accomplice – and somewhat problematic in affirming Canaan as Noah’s son, rather than his being Ham’s youngest son and by extension, Noah’s youngest grandson.

Yet, serious consideration should be given to this second hypothesis, as Canaan’s descendant’s lines listed in Genesis Ten are numerous and more genetically divergent than for Japheth, for Shem or for Ham’s other sons. Eleven potential ancestry groups are listed for Canaan. Canaan stands out, for his sons descendants exhibit a wider spectrum of skin tones; more racial characteristics; and the most variations in their genome than all the other peoples in the world put together – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Dr Rabbi Tzemah Yoreh has presented the case for Genesis 9:19 ‘These three were the sons of Noah, and from these, the whole earth was populated’, as being part of the supplemented text P edit. This writer would offer that the whole sentence may not be additional but just the quick change from four to three sons, though the seam would indicate the whole sentence.

Dr Rabbi David Frankel concludes his article with a theory that the Genesis nine account is in fact about Ham and Canaan. Ham the actual victim. Having considered this theory, the conclusion is that considerable editing is required in proving it. Whereas, it can be readily accepted that additions or deletions to biblical text; the wholesale change of names; and shifting verses into other chapters seems a stretch too far. 

The same author is eager to down grade Canaan’s curse to a limited curse – subservient only to Ham or Mizraim of Egypt – rather than encompassing Shem and Japheth; thus throwing doubt on the biblical account as it stands, saying it is an editorial agenda in text P to strengthen the future family status of Jacob’s sons.

Further evidence in supporting Canaan as a son of Noah and not Ham is found in verses twenty-five to twenty-seven of Genesis chapter nine. As it says Canaan was to be a servant of ‘his brothers’ and not his uncles. Likewise, the brothers are revealed as Shem and Japheth and not as Mizra, Cush and Phut the sons of Ham. We will confirm in later chapters that Canaan’s descendants have tragically been slaves to Mizra and Shem, thus verifying it would seem, that Canaan is a brother of both Ham and Shem and not a son of Ham. That said, we will investigate the possibility that Canaan was born to Ham out of wedlock.

For it is curious that no matter how strenuously editing tries to transfer blame to Ham, it is Canaan who re-emerges as the accused. One commentator suggests that Canaan was Ham’s son though not by Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk, but by Noah’s wife Emzara. Alternatively, there may have been an undisclosed act of incest between Ham and a relation of Noah, but not Noah’s wife; as a peculiar anomaly links Canaan to the family of Arphaxad, one of the five sons of Shem.

While this writer since the first writing of this chapter has established this explanation as being in error, it remains included in this discussion for interests sake and in contrast to the actual sequence of events delineated in the conclusion.

The Creator has much to say on the matter of incest and it was considered a grievous transgression, punishable by death under the Mosaic Law during Israelite times. We saw in the line of Seth that it was the fifth generation which began marrying their cousins – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Prior to this, the second through to the fourth generation had little choice but to marry their sisters.

If such an act was committed with a relation of Noah and or Noah, it would seem that Ham, Canaan or a mysterious third party were fortunate to retain their lives; yet death would have been an impossible stumbling block to Ham or Canaan’s lines continuing following the flood. Ultimately, the curse placed on Canaan’s descendants is unarguably, the most serious action Noah could have taken. Death would have been kinder, but would have eliminated a whole racial line of people before it had even begun. 

The most well known incident of incest in the Bible involved the daughters of Lot, which is discussed in a subsequent chapter when we study their sons – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

The Book of Leviticus chapter 18, verses 6-18 is dedicated to every possible situation of incest – of which a few are quoted and statements potentially associated with the incident in Genesis chapter nine in italics. As might of happened with Ham in verse twenty-one and Canaan in verse thirteen – see below.

English Standard Version

6 “None of you shall approach any one of his close relatives to uncover nakedness. I am the Lord. 7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother, you shall not uncover her nakedness… 9 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your sister, your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether brought up in the family or in another home. 

10 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son’s daughter [granddaughter] or of your daughter’s daughter, for their nakedness is your own nakedness. 11 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, brought up in your father’s family, since she is your sister [step sister]… 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother, that is, you shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt.

15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness… 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, and you shall not take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter to uncover her nakedness; they are relatives; it is depravity. 18 And you shall not take a woman as a rival wife to her sister, uncovering her nakedness while her sister is still alive.”

The Patriarch Jacob married two sisters, though not by choice, but rather a shrewd play by his father-in-law Laban – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Leviticus chapter 20:11-21 continues with punishment for incest.

English Standard Version

11 ‘If a man lies with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. 12 If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them. 

13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them

If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you… 17 “If a man takes his sister, a daughter of his father or a daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace, and they shall be cut off in the sight of the children of their people…

21 If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is impurity. He has uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.”

In Genesis 5:6-14 ESV ‘… Seth… he fathered Enosh… Enosh… fathered Kenan…’ 

Kenan derives from H7018 Qeynan, also spelt as Cainan. It is similar to Canaan, though not etymologically derived from, for Canaan is H3667 kna’an, also spelt Kenaan. The name Kenan, is in Noah’s family line. The name Cain is derived from H7014 Qayin. All three are similar: Cain in Cain’s line; Cainan or Kenan in Seth’s; and Canaan or Kenaan ostensibly in Ham’s family. One could say, this is a family name.

We read in the Book of Jubilees 8:1-6

‘… in the beginning thereof Arpachshad took to himself a wife and her name was Rasu’eja, the daughter of Susan, the daughter of Elam [Arphaxad’s older brother], and she bare him a son… and [Arphaxad] called his name Kainam. And the son grew, and his father taught him writing, and he went to seek for himself a place where he might seize for himself a city

And he found a writing which former (generations) had carved on the rock, and he read what was thereon, and he transcribed it and sinned owing to it; for it contained the teaching of the Watchers in accordance with which they used to observe the omens of the sun and moon and stars in all the signs of heaven [astrology and black magic]. And he wrote it down and said nothing regarding it; for he was afraid to speak to Noah about it lest he should be angry with him on account of it. 

And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was Melka, the daughter of Madai’ – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes – ‘the son of Japheth, and… he begat a son, and called his name Shelah; for he said: ‘Truly I have been sent’… and Shelah grew up and took to himself a wife, and her name was Mu’ak, the daughter of Kesed his father’s brother…’

Another Chesed was a son of Nahor, Abraham’s brother – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

In Genesis 10:24-25 ESV we read: ‘Arpachshad fathered Shelah; and Shelah fathered Eber. To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brother’s name was Joktan.’

In the Masoretic text of the Bible Kainam is left out of the genealogy as we see here, yet in the Septuagint – LXX – Cainan is included, as in the Book of Jubilees. In the New Testament Gospel of Luke, we read the genealogy of Christ through his adoptive father, Joseph.

Luke 3:35-38

New English Translation

35 ‘the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan [G2536 – Kainan from H7018], the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Kenan [G2536 – Kainan], 38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.’

Footnote:

‘It is possible that the name Καϊνάμ (Kainam)should be omitted, since two key mss, P75vid and D, lack it. But the omission may be a motivated reading: This name is not found in the editions of the Hebrew OT, though it is in the LXX, at Genesis 11.12 and 10:24. But the witnesses with this reading (or a variation of it) are substantial: א B L ƒ1 33 (Καϊνάμ), A Θ Ψ 0102 ƒ13 M (Καϊνάν, Kainan).

The translation above has adopted the more common spelling “Cainan,” although it is based on the reading Καϊνάμ.The Greek text has Kainam here. Some modern English translations follow the Greek spelling more closely (NASB, NRSV Cainan) while others (NIV) use the OT form of the name (Kenan in Genesis 5:9, 12).’

Thus the names Cainan, Kainan, Kainam and Kenan are all related; with the Septuagint reading supporting Luke 3:36. The fact that Kenan has been inserted in enough manuscripts to draw attention and not be discounted, is a significant red flag. Though it is not the exact name of Kenaan, it is difficult to explain who else it could be?

The insertion of Kenan’s name leads to one viable conclusion if Canaan was the biological son of Ham. That he was the adoptive son of Arphaxad, who became his legal father. The Hebrew word fathered includes more than just a biological, blood-line parent. It can mean a father-in-law, a grandfather and even a distant relative; or in this case, a male, non-blood-line parent who raises the child.

Why would Arphaxad adopt Canaan or make him his ward? As Canaan is shown as being between Arphaxad and his blood-line son Shelah, Canaan must have been born before Shelah. Arphaxad would be Ham’s nephew and Canaan’s cousin. As he was considerably older, Arphaxad may have taken Noah’s youngest grandson Canaan under his wing. The relationship is noteworthy because in the Septuagint version of Genesis 10:22 it says: ‘Sons of Sem, Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Aram, and Cainan…’ In this scenario, Canaan was ethnically Hamitic lineage, but he is also listed in the lineage of Shem.

The Book of Jubilees reveals that Rasueja, Arphaxad’s wife, gave birth to Cainan. The ambiguous origin of Canaan as Ham’s son and his subsequent upbringing in Arphaxad’s household would be understandable, if Ham conducted a sexual liaison with Rasueja. This would have been incest and all the ramifications that went with it; for she was Noah’s great, great granddaughter.

Canaan was Ham’s fourth son and as such, one of the sixteen (twenty-one) blood-lines which re-populated the earth. Did Arphaxad retain Canaan in his family to spite Ham or perhaps, to maintain a close grip and control over Canaan, who with his descendants were ordained to be slaves. Or, was it an act of compassion towards his wife Rasueja and her bastard child.

From everything we have discussed, the key questions are:

a. Are Ham and Canaan father and son or brothers?

b. Was Noah violated and if so, was it by Ham, Canaan or someone else?

c. Was there a previous event that culminated with the incident in Noah’s tent?

It can be argued that there has been concerted effort in the scriptures to lessen Canaan’s role and heighten Ham’s. To take the spotlight off Canaan and portray him as a victim of Ham’s transgression(s). Ham did something unspeakable and Canaan’s children have paid an exacting price. At face value and with behind the scenes editing, the Bible appears to favour this scenario.

Previously, this writer has accepted this interpretation from those teachers who expounded the tenant that Ham is the prime subject of Genesis chapter nine and consequently the guilty party. A closer inspection of the Genesis nine passage as we have discovered, has convinced this writer that this interpretation is incorrect.

The parenthetical addition of Canaan as the son of Ham is an important fourth clue.

So is Noah waking up to know what his youngest (son) had done to him. And, it is Canaan who is cursed by Noah – not Ham.

The inclusion of a ‘Canaan’ in Arphaxad’s household and family line, with the naming of Canaan’s mother as Rasueja; yet his still remaining in Ham’s genealogical family tree in the table of nations as a Hamite not as one from Shem, underpins the likelihood that Ham is his father by incest. (But… is Ham Canaan’s real father or his stepfather?)

In this scenario (as well as the one investigated in the Addendum), Ham transgressed twice.

Once with the alleged incestuous act with Arphaxad’s wife Rasueja and again when he disrespectfully handled his father’s predicament and sided with his son. Ham observed Noah and the aftermath of an encounter, sexual or not. The phrase, looked upon his nakedness is categorically more than just seeing a naked body, though in Ham’s case, does not mean he is culpable of more himself – as the Hebrew infers. For the Bible in connection with Ham, does not use the euphemism for a sexual act: uncovered the nakedness of Noah. 

Whereas later, Noah was very much aware of what had been done and by whom – resulting in the profound proclamation against Canaan.

Book of Jubilees 7:13 

‘And Ham knew that his father had cursed his younger son, and he was displeased that he had cursed his son and he parted from his father, he and his sons with him, Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan.’

Part of the predicament Canaan found himself in, was compounded by his decision to practice the occult secrets of the Watchers; communicating with dark spirits. An interesting verse is found in the Old Testament.

Habakkuk 2:15-16

New English Translation

“Woe to you who force your neighbour to drink wine – you who make others intoxicated by forcing them to drink from the bowl of your furious anger so you can look at their naked bodies. But you will become drunk with shame, not majesty. Now it is your turn to drink and expose your uncircumcised foreskin! The cup of wine in the Lord’s right hand is coming to you, and disgrace will replace your majestic glory!”

The severity of the sin committed, resulted with Canaan becoming only the second person recorded in the Bible to receive an imprecation of this magnitude, following the infamous Cain.

Genesis 4:10-11

English Standard Version

And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed…”

In verse one of Genesis nine, the Creator blesses Noah and his sons, which includes Ham. Later in chapter nine after the incident, Ham is left out from a specific blessing and does not receive one with Japheth and Shem – such is the severity of the situation.

From the context and Noah’s response, a sexual act and or trick of some kind was undeniably inflicted on Noah.

Whether castration (unlikely) or incest by rape (probably), both acts are extremely weighty accusations.

Castration is difficult to accept without further evidence and motive.

The feminine aspect raised earlier of what may have been ‘done’, could be a reference hinting at the result of some sort of emasculation either through castration or incest involving transvestism on Canaan’s part as implied by various commentators – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

If Canaan was conceived in incest, it would be a peculiar parallelism indeed for him to then have possibly committed a similar transgression.

Conversely, the subtle feminine clues are in fact evidence pointing towards an incestuous rape by a mysterious third party, who’s identity is divulged in the Addendum following.

The family tree of Ham, with the addition of Canaan’s descendants.

The principal mtDNA maternal Haplogroups associated with Ham’s descendants and originating with his wife Na’eltama’uk, include:

Haplogroup L0 – oldest and original Haplogroup on the human mtDNA phylogenetic tree.

L0 supposedly arose ‘one hundred and fifty thousand years ago in eastern Africa’ where the alleged oldest fossils of anatomically modern humans have been found. These facts are open to debate, for the oldest fossils discovered are no where near that age. L0a arose later, associated with the peoples dwelling in the southeastern region of the African continent.

Haplogroup L equates to the original Homo sapiens, a mitochondrial Eve of science, also known as the biblical Eve – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Haplogroup L1 – one of the oldest branches of the maternal family tree is a daughter of mitochondrial Eve and sister to L0.

Frequently found in western and central sub-Saharan Africa, though seldom appears in eastern or southern Africa.

L2 – direct descendant of mitochondrial Eve.

It is currently found in a third of sub-Saharan Africans and its subgroup L2a is the most common mtDNA Haplogroup among African Americans.

Haplogroup L3 – another daughter of mitochondrial Eve and not only associated with Ham’s descendants; for it is the ancestor of all the non-African Haplogroups in the world today.

Haplogroup M – Subgroup M1 ‘intrigues scientists with its presence in East Africa’ and another subgroup M3, is native to India.

Haplogroup N – from L3, is one of the two major lineages with M, from which non-African Haplogroups descend.

Today, members of this Haplogroup are found in most of the continents around the world.

Haplogroup R – both ancient and complex.

Its carriers are found all over the world. Hamitic members of super Haplogroup R are located in Africa and the Middle East.

Haplogroup X – located globally, as well as North Africa, and the Near East. 

It is important to realise that Ham was like his brothers Japheth and Shem, who had inherited DNA from their father Noah and Emzara, their mother – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

The mtDNA Haplogroup mutations in Ham’s descendants are those deriving from Ham’s wife, Na’eltama’uk. She is certainly the maternal ancestor of Cush, Mizra and Phut; while also the mother of Canaan.

The global distribution of Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups associated with Ham (and Canaan’s) descendants are summarised in Retina, Fifth Edition, 2013:

‘Y DNA haplogroup A represents the oldest branch of the Y-chromosome phylogeny. Like haplogroup B, it only appears in Africa, with the highest frequency among… groups in Ethiopia and Sudan.

Haplogroup E [M96] is one of the most branched, with many subhaplogroups described. E1 [P147] and E2 [M75] were described in… Africa, and [E1b1 (P2), formerly E3] shows a wide geographic distribution, with two main [sub-]clades: [E1b1a V38], present all around Africa and among African-Americans; and [E1b1b M215], present in Western [southern] Europe [derived from admixture*], North Africa, and the Near East.’

The African dominated V38 clade divides again into E1b1a1 (M2) and E1b1a2 (M329). The M215 clade shared with Europeans* and Berbers divides into E1b1b1a (V68) and E1b1b1b (Z827). We will encounter these sub-Haplogroups frequently in the following chapters concerning specifically Canaan (and partially Ham’s) descendants. 

‘Haplogroup F is the parent of haplogroups from G to R; however excluding these common haplogroups, the minor clades F, F1, and F2, seem to appear in the Indian continent. Until now, haplogroup H has not been well studied, members of this haplogroup were mainly found in the Indian continent.’

‘It is generally agreed that haplogroup J was dispersed by the westward movement of people from the Middle East to North Africa, Europe, Central Asia, Pakistan, and India.

Haplogroup K is the ancestral haplogroup of major groups L to R, but, in addition, also includes the minor K and K1 to K5 [K2] haplogroups, which are present at low frequencies in dispersed geographic regions all around the world.’

‘Haplogroup L is found mainly in India and Pakistan, as well as in the Middle East and, very occasionally, in Europe, particularly in Mediterranean countries.

The highest frequencies of haplogroup M are shown in Melanesia, being restricted to the geographical distribution of Papuan languages’ – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

‘The P clade is the parent of haplogroups Q and R, and is rarely found. It has been detected at low frequencies in the Caucasus and India.

Haplogroup R1a [mutations deriving from admixture are] currently found in central and western Asia [as well as in] India… [while R1a carried by] Slavic populations of Eastern Europe [is a specific and original defining marker Haplogroup].’ 

Haplogroup T is unusual in that it is both geographically widespread and relatively rare. It is found predominantly in East Africa, Egypt, Western Asia, South Asia and adjoining areas.

The following chapter investigates the enigmatic Canaan and the role of his descendants in the world today.

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved,  a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2:15 English Standard Version

“A man may imagine things that are false, but he can only understand things that are true.”

“I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.”

Isaac Newton 1643 – 1727

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

Addendum

The enigma of Genesis chapter nine is now finally solved and the pieces of the puzzle all fall into their rightful place, both scripturally (and genetically – which will be discussed in chapter twelve). While certain aspects of our case summary remain the same others have changed. Such as the heart of the crime involving incestuous rape – with Canaan not in the role of the perpetrator but rather the result of the act. Ham is not his biological father, but rather Noah is and while Canaan may still have been taken in as Arphaxad’s ward, his biological mother was not Rasueja.

This writer admits being influenced by the biblical scholars before him, into thinking that the crime involving rape and a play for power was a male centric riddle to solve. Thus a rather chauvinistic approach was adopted. Though the truth is that a woman can exert the same influence and use rape as a tool in acquiring power.

The start of chapter nine begins with the Eternal blessing Noah and all three of his sons, including Ham – Genesis 9:1. At some point between this event and after the flood cataclysm, when Noah drank wine for the first time, coupled with the sacrifices he offered – around the time of the Passover and Unleavened Bread festivals – a plan was hatched by either Ham or his wife, Na’eltama’uk.

Na’eltama’uk

As the woman involved is not named or punished directly, it is safe to assume she either shared her idea with Ham or he shared it with her. Regardless, she was a willing accomplice even if coerced by her husband. It may even have been a spur of the moment decision when the family was together and Noah grew steadily drunk.

Either way, the motive was to increase the share of the pie to be divided between Japheth, Shem and Ham. Each was to receive 33% of the whole world. An addition of another son – born from Noah and Na’eltama’uk, Ham’s wife – would increase the Hamite share to 50%.

Ham was clearly involved even if not the instigator, for he witnessed the aftermath of the act between his wife and his father and couldn’t wait to tell his two brothers what had happened – Genesis 9:22. Shem and Japheth came in and covered Noah and Na’eltama’uk, so that Noah would learn what had happened to him – Genesis 9:23. One would assume Ham’s wife was as inebriated as Noah at this point and may explain her being able to follow through in her role.

The feminine clues now also make sense. In that not just the genitalia of Noah were exposed, but that of a woman too. The covering sheet or cloak was covering not just Noah but the woman laying next to him. Also, this is how Noah knew when he woke up, what his son Ham had plotted when he witnessed Na’eltama’uk by his side – Genesis 9:24. For the Hebrew word for ‘knew’ can mean to know a person carnally and to be revealed.

Ham and his wife Na’eltama’uk – while their skin tones would have been opposite to that shown, it captures the unsavouriness of the scheming pair.

Recall the three questions raised for one of the most enigmatic passages of scripture in the Bible.

Q: Was there a previous event that culminated with the incident in Noah’s tent?

A: No

Q: Are Ham and Canaan father and son or brothers?

A: Brothers 

Q: Was Noah violated and if so, was it by Ham, Canaan or someone else? 

A: Yes, by Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk

The only seeming minor anomaly in this scenario is that Ham is equated as the youngest son, when he always appears as the middle son. Of course this is allied with the fact Shem is always placed first and Japheth last when listed in Genesis. The Bible states Japheth was the elder brother of Shem, yet some translations misleadingly word it the other way around – Genesis 10:21. It shows Shem was next in age after Japheth; so that it appears Ham really was the youngest son after all. For even Genesis chapter ten where all the grandsons of Noah are named has them listed beginning with Japheth, then confusingly with Ham and Canaan next before Shem last.

Verse twenty-five supports the idea Ham and his wife were seeking power and control over Japheth and Shem’s descendants when Noah curses the offspring of their diabolical plot, Canaan. While Canaan was innocent, it struck a blow at his mother Na’eltama’uk in particular. The following two verses lend weight to the intrigue hatched and the substantial role played by Canaan’s stepfather Ham and not just his wife, Na’eltama’uk – Genesis 9:26-27.

For Ham does not receive a blessing from Noah at the end of chapter nine like he did from God at the beginning. Only Shem and Japheth are recipients, each at the expense of Ham and particularly, Canaan – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech

Chapter X

We arrive at one final – glaringly left-out – country, on our journey of the identity of nations and principally, the seven sons of Japheth. The informed reader will be doing cognitive cart wheels – for ironically, this nation is famous for its acrobats and tumblers – seeing not just one, but three of Japheth’s sons grouped together, after only discussing four sons thus far.

Tubal is the fifth son of Japheth and Meshech, the sixth. An enduring number of (many) painstaking years elapsed in searching for them both. The Koreas as Meshech and Japan as Tubal was considered; as well as studying the merit of North Korea as Meshech and South Korea as Tubal (with Japan as Togarmah) – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.

Eventually, the pieces of the puzzle led to only one viable answer – the identity arrangement we will now investigate. When searching for scientific support and historic precedent, this writer was incredulous in discovering considerable information for each avenue of enquiry.

A valuable lesson was learned: examine the genetic data more thoroughly and delve more rigorously into history.

Magog is the second son of Japheth. There are very few Bible verses on Magog, yet ironically, he is probably the most well-known of Japheth’s seven sons and the one that certainly leaves, the biggest impression. There has been less confusion surrounding Magog – saying that, many have attributed Magog incorrectly with the Celts (or Britain, as with Gomer) or primarily Russia – yet conversely, considerable mis-understanding regarding Meshech and Tubal. So much so, it has affected accurate research immeasurably.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 45, 47-48 – emphasis mine:

‘Gog is the Gugu of the Assyrian inscriptions, the Gyges of the Greeks… Tubal and Meshech… are almost always coupled together in the Old Testament, and were famous for their skill in archery.’

Israel a History of – emphasis mine:

‘These three sons of Japheth are closely linked throughout scripture. Ezekiel 38:2 mentions all three sons in a prophecy against Gog. Magog’s name possibly means “the place of Gog”, and is very likely that this referred to the region near the Black Sea called Georgia. Josephus states that Magog, or Gog, was the forebearer of the Scythians. The Scythians originally settled in the Black Sea area, which correlates to the meaning of Magog’s name. Ezekiel links these three brothers together in association with Rosh, translated “chief” in the King James… Rosh was the name from which present day Russia was derived. By and large, from the line of the sons of Noah, Magog, Meshech, and Tubal have come to be known and accepted by scholars as the originators of the current Russian peoples.’

The Scythians we will discover, are a line from Shem, not Japheth. Meshech and Tubal may well have lived in Russia and left their names behind while sojourning east. Neither Magog, or his two younger brothers identify with Russia. The Hebrew word ‘Rosh’ is just that, a Hebrew word meaning chief. It is a title, not a name or identity. 

Derek Walker – capitalisation his, emphasis mine: 

‘One of the most fascinating aspects of Ezekiel 38-39 is that Islam has its own version of the Battle of Gog and Magog, called the War of Yajuj and Majuj. In two places the Koran specifically mentions Yajuj and Majuj by name (18:96; 21:96).

Tubal and Meshech are mentioned together in Ezekiel 38:2. Some believe these people intermarried and became known as Magog, the dominant tribe.* There are two main theories for their location: (1) RUSSIA and (2) TURKEY. Whichever it is does not change the overall picture as both are identified by the other names in Ezekiel. 

(1) Regarding Meshech and Tubal, some assign a Russian identification, connecting these 2 nations with the modern Russian cities of Moscow and Tobolsk. This view is partly based on the similarity of sound in these names and their close proximity to Rosh (Russia). L. Sale-Harrison corroborated this identification on linguistic grounds. 

Wilhelm Gesenius, the world class Hebrew scholar, whose Hebrew Lexicon has never been surpassed, said Gog is undoubtedly the Russians. “Meshech was founder of the Moschi, a barbarous people, who dwelt in the Moschian mountains.” He went on to say that theGreek name “Moschi”, derived from the Hebrew ‘Meshech’, is thesource of the name for the city of MOSCOW.

In discussing Tubal he said, “Tubal is the son of Rapheth [Japheth], founder of the Tibereni, a people dwelling on the Black Sea to the west of the Moschi.” His conclusion was these people make up the modern Russian people. 

‘Meshech’ the 6th son of Japheth, [originally] settled in the NE portion of Asia Minor.His posterity extended from the shores of the Black Sea along to the south of the Caucasus. He was the father of the Rossi and Moschi, who dispersed their colonies over a vast portion of Russian territory. And their names are preserved in the names of Russians and Muscovites to this day. The Septuagint version of the Old Testament renders the term: “Meshech” by the words “Mosch” and “Rosch”; while “Moscovy” was a common name for Russia, and the city of Moscow is one of her principal cities.

‘Tubal’ or ‘Tobal’ [originally] settled beyond the Caspian and Black Seas in the eastern possessions of Russia, embracing a very large portion of these dominions. The name of this patriarch is still preserved in the river Tobal, which waters an immense tract of Russian territory; and the City of Tobalski in Russia is still a monument to him.

(2) Another line of study reveals that Meschech and Tubal are the ancient Moschi/Mushki and Tubalu/Tibareni peoples who dwelled in the area around, primarily south of, the Black and Caspian Seas in Ezekiel’s day. Meshech was located near what was known as Phrygia, in central and western Asia Minor, while Tubal was located in eastern Asia Minor. 

So Meshech and Tubal form portions of modern Turkey. Expositors Bible Commentary: “Meshech and Tubal refer to areas in eastern Turkey, southwest of Russia and northwest of Iran.” Assyrian texts & monuments locate Meshech (Mushku) and Tubal (Tabal) in Anatolia (Western Turkey), the areas that became known as Phyygia and Cappadocia. Later migrations north from Turkey to Russia could mean that both identifications are valid, and indeed both Turkey and Russia are directly to the north of Israel (as required by Ezekiel 38:6, 15, 39:2).

In any case, between them, Magog, Rosh, Mechesh and Tubal certainly represent RUSSIA…’

While all these apparent correlations appear superficially convincing, examining scripture thoroughly exposes the flaws in these two theories. We will expand on the potential of intermarrying later, with Derek Walker’s final sentence also key; though this writer would substitute the title Rosh with the personality of Gog.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation & emphasis his:

‘Russia is mentioned almost by name in some versions of the Bible! Turn to Ezekiel 38:2. Here you will find that a certain power called “Gog” is “the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal”. The proper translation is “the prince of Rosh. Meshech and Tubal!” In Hebrew, the word for chief is “Rosh”. That is also the ancient name for “Russia.”

We will study Russia and its identity as Asshur and scrutinise the word ‘rosh’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Rosh may look like Rus-sia but it is not a marker for the Russians but rather a clue to Meshech and Tubal’s relationship with Gog.

Herman Hoeh:

‘Over half of all Russia is occupied by a people called “Great Russians” today. The Great Russians are divided into two distinctive people who have remained constantly together since the beginning of history. We shall now prove from history that the Great Russians are the descendants of Meshech and Tubal (Genesis 10:2). Here is what the ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA says about the Great Russians: “Not with standing the unity of language, it is easy to detect among the Great Russians themselves two separate branches differing from one another by slight divergencies of language and type and DEEP DIVERSITIES OF NATIONAL CHARACTER…

One branch settled around Moscow. The word Moscow is but an English spelling of the Russian “Moskva”, a word almost identical to the one used by the Assyrians to refer to the the people of Meshech! The other branch constitutes the people of Tubal. This branch of the Great Russians founded the city of Tobolsk in Siberia and named the Tobol River… Meshech and Tubal migrated into Russia! Surely there is no mistaking who Meshech and Tubal are today.’

Meshech and Tubal, as a great many others, traversed and dwelt in the vast landscape that is now incorporated in the present day boundary of Russian land. Their final migratory resting place is not within Russia.

Hoeh: ‘… Do you know where the word “Siberia” comes from? In Asia Minor, where the people of Tubal first settled, a vast tract of land was called Subaria, sometimes spelled less correctly “Subartu”. This word has puzzled historians no end! Here is the origin of “Siberia!”

What is the origin of the word “Russian” – the “Rosh” of Ezekiel 38:2 (when properly translated)? The INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA gives the answer. Here, under the article “Rosh”, we find that a vast area of the Mesopotamian Valley was called “the land of Rashu!” The word “Russ” or “Rosh” means blonde. In modern times the name “Russ” was first applied to Russia because of the blond people of White Russia who live next to the people of Meshech and Tubal.’

Who Magog, Meshech and Tubal are not… the map above is an example of a common representation for the biblical identities listed in Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight. All without exception are incorrect, as our progression through the descendants of Japheth, Ham and Shem will reveal. Put and Cush are cold; Magog (Gog) not quite as cold; Persia warm, yet still cold; and Meshech, Tubal, Gomer with Togarmah very cold.

Hoeh: ‘Turn again to the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 and 39. Notice the identity of Gog and Magog. Who are the people called “Gog” and “Magog”? Magog, rather than Gog, is mentioned in Genesis 10:2. Gog is apparently a tribal subdivision of Magog.* In prophecy, Magog comes to great prominence in the West only in the latter days. Here is what the JEWISH ENCYCLOPAEDIA says about Gog and Mogog: “… [a] wall [was] built by… (Alexander the Great) to shut them off from the rest of the world… Geographically they represent the extreme northeast, and are placed on the borders of the sea that encircles the earth.”

‘Notice what the unrivalled McCLINTOCK & STRONG ENCYCLOPAEDIA says about Gog and Magog: “According to Reinegge… some of the Caucasian people call their mountains Gog, and the highest northern points Magog” –because the people of Magog once lived in these regions in Bible times!

“The [Arabians] are of the opinion that the descendants of Gog and Magog inhabit the northern parts of Asia, beyond the Tartars and Sclavonians (or Russians), and they put Yajuj and Majuj always in conjunction,thereby indicating theextreme points in north and north-east of Asia”. Some writers spell these Arabic words Yagog and Magog. Now to what people are these names referring? They dwell in the northern part of Asia, bordering on the ocean, andrise to prominence… “in the latter days” (Ezekiel 38:8).

The Mongols and their Asiatic kinsmen! In fact, the proper spelling of “Mongol” is “Mogol”, obviously a slightly changed form of “Magog”! And in Asiatic Russia live the Yakuts – the Yagog of the Arab historians. The people of Mongolia, together with China, Manchuria, Korea [Gomer’s son Togarmah] and Japan [Javan’s son Tarshish], are all of this one great branch of mankind. A remnant of the people of Magog appear, with pigtails and yellow skin, on the Egyptian monuments. They were called Kheta by the Egyptians and Ketei by the Greeks. When the Russians first met the Mongolians and Chinese they called them Khitai! Western Europeans used a similar word for China in the Middle Ages: Cathay. Here indeed is “Gog, of the land of Magog.”

Herman Hoeh errs in his conclusions regarding Tubal and Meshech, while he is partially correct with his summation of Magog.

No, The Bible Does Not Predict A Russian Invasion, Thom Jonas – emphasis mine:

‘… there are 3 main sources that heavily influenced the identification of Russia in Ezekiel 38:2. These are The Septuagint translation [1], Gesenius [2], and the Scofield Reference Bible [3].’

When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture, Paul Boyer, 1999, page 154 – emphasis mine:

“The German Hebraicist Wilhelm Gesenius (1786 – 1842), professor of theology at the University of Halle in Prussia, played a key role in the process by which Gog came to be identified as Russia. Gesenius, whose Old Testament lexicon of 1828 long stood as a standard reference work, viewed “Rosh” not only as a proper name but as an early form of the word “Russia.” In another step that would prove highly influential for prophecy interpretation, he also claimed that “Meshech” and “Tubal” were present-day Moscow and the Siberian city of Tobolsk.”

Meshech, Tubal, and Company: A Review Article, Edwin Yamauchi, 1992 – emphasis mine:

“The Hebrew word for “chief” (ros) in Ezekiel 38:2 was transliterated by the Septuagint as a proper name (Ros), giving rise to a widespread impression that “Russia” was intended. These groundless identifications have unfortunately gained widespread currency in the evangelical world through many channels: the first and the second editions of the Scofield Reference Bible; the phenomenally popular book by Hal Lindsey and C. C. Carlson, The Late Great Planet Earth; and the lectures of Campus Crusade evangelist Josh McDowell on numerous college campuses. The perpetuation of such idenfications based on superficial similarities is completely untenable in the light of the clear evidence of cuneiform texts which locate Mushku (Biblical Meshech) and Tabal (Biblical Tubal) [in the distant past] in central and eastern Anatolia.”

The Book of Ezekiel, Daniel I Block, 1997:

“Tubal or Tabal was the territorial designation of the interior Anatolian kingdom know to the Assyrians as Bit Buritash. This landlocked kingdom, between the Halys River and the Taurus River in Asia Minor, was bounded on the west by Meshech, on the south by Hilakku, on the east by Melidu and Til-garimmu (Beth-togarmah) and on the north by Kasku… Meshech, to be identified with Mushku/Musku in neo-Assyrian sources, was also located in central Anatolia. Ancient records attest to contact with the Assyrians as early as the reign of Tiglath-Pileser I in the 12th-11th century.”

Thom Jonas:

‘Further, all of the other places mentioned in Ezekiel 38 also appear together in the table of nations from Genesis 10, but “Rosh” does not appear there at all. In fact, the word “rosh” is never translated as a proper noun, despite appearing many times in the Old Testament.

… the identification of the remaining nations such as Meshech and Tubal has been settled by the discovery of Assyrian cuneiform tablets bearing all of their names. They refer to several ancient places that were situated near each other in the region of Asia Minor. This rules out the identification of Meshech as Moscow, and Tubal as Tobolsk, both of which were based on flawed etymology (they sound a bit the same – go figure!). The same applies to the association of Gomer with Germany, and you can follow this theme with most of the other places listed in that chapter.’

“It is a reflection on evangelical scholarship when some of its spokesmen continue to adhere to the groundless identification of ros as Russia, and the association of Meshech with Moscow and of Tubal with Tobolsk, when we have had cuneiform texts and discussions of them that provided the true clarification of these names since the end of the 19th century” – Meshech, Tubal, and Company: A Review Article, Edwin Yamauchi, 1992, pages 243-244.

Magog principally, is the modern nation of China.

The Chinese are an amalgamation of different, related peoples, with the answer contained inside the Bible all along. Discoveries in genetics have demonstrated the proposition as factual.

Think about it… for the question remains regardless:

Would the scriptures seriously remain silent on an influential mass of people such as the Chinese?

And in the process, ignoring a prominent nation of great magnitude from ‘end-time’ biblical prophecy?

Rosh in Hebrew, means: ‘Head, Chief, Top’.

From the root ro’sh [H7218], which has to do with primality and can mean ‘to shake the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank…)’ It can also mean, ‘beginning, first, principal, captain, company’ and ‘height.’ It is used as head, 349 times in the KJV of the Bible; chief, 91 rimes; and top, 73 times.

Definitions include: the head of men, a company or a division, the top or tip on a mountain, the height of stars.

The coat of arms of China is known as the National Emblem of the People’s Republic of China and features a red circle with a depiction of Tiananmen Gate, encompassed by sheaves of wheat and rice which symbolise agricultural workers.

Note the five stars positioned above.

The largest star represents the Chinese Communist Party, while the four smaller stars symbolise the four social classes defined by Maoism.

  1. The proletariat (workers)
  2. The peasantry (farmers)
  3. The intelligentsia (educated individuals)
  4. The national bourgeoisie (capitalists who supported the revolution).

The word following rosh in Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight, verse two is the Hebrew word *nasiy’ [H5387], which is translated by the KJV as prince, 96 times; captain, 12 times; chief, 10 times; ruler, 6 times; vapours, 3 times; and governor, 1 time. It refers to ‘one lifted up’ a ‘rising mist’ or ‘vapour.’ It is linked with H5375, ‘an exalted one’, a king.

Abarim Publications: 

‘The name Rosh belongs to a man and to a region in the Bible. Rosh the man is a son of Benjamin (Genesis 46:21), but other Biblical genealogies of Benjamin don’t list Rosh. Rosh the land is mentioned only by Ezekiel in his apocalyptic vision of the attack of Gog of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal (Ezekiel 38:2-3 and 39:1).’

Rosh is being misinterpreted and is either a title of a person known as Gog, or a description of a region called Gog – not a region called Rosh. Nor does the word rosh come after nasiy’, it precedes it. Thus ‘prince of rosh’ or literally ‘prince of head’ is not what the Hebrew is saying, it is saying: the ‘head prince.’

Abarim:

‘The name Rosh is the same as the noun (ro’sh) meaning head or top… it may also refer to the beginning of a period: adjective (ri’shon) literally means chiefly but is mostly used in the same sense of previous or former. Noun (ri’sha) means pinnacle but may also refer to some past golden age or bygone glory days.’

Magog can be defined as ‘place of Gog’ or ‘agent of Gog’. Magog is derived from the name Gog. Its literal meaning is ‘rooftop’* and ‘place of the roof’, from the noun gag, meaning ‘rooftop.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Magog was originally a son of Japheth, son of Noah (Genesis 10:2) but later this name came to denote a region (Ezekiel 38:2). Magog is often mentioned in conjunction with Gog of Reuben (1 Chronicles 5:4).’

We will return to Gog the descendent of Reuben, when we study the sons of Jacob – Chapter XXXI Rueben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Abarim:

‘Magog is often mentioned in conjunction with Gog… but later also the name of a certain prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal…literally the Chief Prince of the Occupied Zone that is The World… 

The name Magog is the name Gog with a prefixed mem, which may be a particle of inquisition: (me), what, or (mi), who? Or it may come from the particle (min; often abbreviated to a single mem), meaning from. Nouns that start with an m often describe place or agent of the parent verb.

Where the name Gog comes from is not clear; BDB Theological Dictionary resolutely declares its root unknown. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names, on the other hand, points towards the Hebrew word (gag), usually meaning roof. The noun (gag) means rooftop, but since a society was a “house” its “rooftop”referred to that society’s level of science and technology… the most remarkable usage is in Exodus 30:3 and 37:26 where [it] denotes the top of the altar of incense.

Gog may be aregion, and Magog is then said to mean From Gog (BDB Theological Dictionary). But Ezekiel 38:2 speaks of a man named Gog who is of the land of Magog (= the land of the land of Gog), which seems overly redundant.

But Gog may mean Roof, and Magog may subsequently mean Off The Roof, which means more in English than in Hebrew. Magog might literally mean Place Of The Roof and describe a center of wisdom, or Agent Of The Roof and describe a person who works in such [a] center.’

Perhaps place of the roof denotes China’s size and influence on the Earth, whether it be superior technology, military strength, economic power, or even the gigantic rooftop covering of its colossal population. China blankets civilisation with its increasing number of souls and its deluge of exports. Is the roof or top of the world, a prediction that China will be the preeminent power in the world – refer articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen.

It surely isn’t a coincidence that Rosh means top and Magog roof-top. A roof covers the whole building beneath it. It also protects those underneath.

A map of the world from a Chinese perspective – the Middle of the Earth (refer Addendum II) – and note how the United States of America is turned on its head.

Lastly, it could be a reference to conquering space and China’s dominance over the rest of the world beneath it. China is actively developing its space program to rival that of Russia and the United States. It became only the third nation to retrieve materials from the Moon, bringing back lunar rocks in December 2020.

The Great Wall of China – visible from outer space – was built over the course of many centuries, with its earliest sections dating back to the seventh century BCE. The most significant construction occurred during the Qin Dynasty from 221 BCE to 206 BCE and continued through the Ming Dynasty from 1368 until 1644.

Science-fiction writer Isaac Asimov proposed the idea for a space power station in 1941. China is planning to launch a fleet of mile-long solar panels into space by 2035, that would convert solar energy into electrical energy and be fully operational by 2050. A microwave transmitter or laser emitter would convert the power to a high frequency radio wave and transmit the highly economical green energy to Earth. An Array would capture the signal like a giant fishing net, converting into electricity to be fed into the grid.

In 2008, Japan confirmed the idea of space solar power a national goal. The United Kingdom has joined Japan, China, Russia and the United States in pursuing space based power generation, in a new space race. 

The People’s Republic of China receives continual press as an emerging ‘second superpower.’ Barry Buzan said in 2004 that “China certainly presents the most promising all-round profile” of a potential superpower. In 2011, Singapore’s first premier, Lee Kuan Yew, stated that: “[China] have transformed a poor society by an economic miracle to become now the second-largest economy in the world. How could they not aspire to be number 1 in Asia, and in time the world?” using their “huge and increasingly highly skilled and educated workers to out-sell and out-build all others.” Arvind Subramanian an Economist stated in 2012 that, “China was a top dog economically for thousands of years prior to the Ming dynasty. In some ways, the past few hundred years have been an aberration” – Article: 2050.

Though China is considerably ahead of the other top ten economic powers in the world it is yet to catch the United States; as China is lacking in soft power – the ability to influence others to your advantage – and has a low GDP per person. China also has an ageing and shrinking workforce to tackle in the future.

China’s uneasy relationship with the United States demonstrated by its two leaders, Xi Jinping and Donald Trump.

Susan Shirk in China: Fragile Superpower, 2008, lists factors that ‘could constrain China’s ability to become a superpower… limited supplies of energy and raw materials, questions over its innovation capability, inequality and corruption, and risks to social stability and the environment.’ Minxin Pei said in 2012, that China has used its economic power to influence some nations, yet is surrounded by potentially hostile nations. ‘This situation could improve if regional territorial disputes were resolved and China participated in an effective regional defence system that would reduce the fears of its neighbours.’ Also, a ‘democratization of China could improve foreign relations with many nations.’

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 62:

‘China is not weighed down or motivated diplomatically or economically by human rights in its dealings with the world. It is secure in its borders… and now moving around the globe in confidence. If it can avoid a serious conflict with Japan or the USA, then the only real danger to China is itself.

There are 1.4 billion reasons why China may succeed, and 1.4 billion reasons why it may not surpass America as the greatest power in the world. China has locked itself into the global economy. If we don’t buy, they don’t make.’

‘And if they don’t make there will be mass unemployment. If there is… long-term unemployment, in an age when the Chinese are a people packed into urban areas, the inevitable social unrest could be – like everything else in modern China – on a scale hitherto unseen.’

“China is a civilisation pretending to be a nation” – Lucian Pye

Meshech in Hebrew means: ‘Departed, drawn out’ from the verb mush, ‘to depart’; masha, ‘to draw out’; and mashak, ‘to draw or drag.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘In Genesis 10:23, Mash is listed as a son of Aram, who is a son of Shem… In 1 Chronicles 1:17 the same genealogy occurs, although the various generations are now all listed as sons of Shem. And Mash is called (Meshech). Another man named Meshech is mentioned as a son of Japheth… (Genesis 10:2). He is mentioned about half a dozen times in the Bible, mostly along with Javan and Tubal, and it’s clear that these are the names of nations rather than individuals (Psalm 120:5, Ezekiel 27:13). Older translations may have the ethnonym “the Moschi” instead of Meshech.

The name (Mash) does not occur as a regular word in Hebrew, but it may be viewed as a contraction of the word (mush), meaning depart or remove… The verb (mashash) means to feel; to sense or search for tactilely… and appears most often in the negative, when something is typically not ambulant but stays where it’s at… the sweeping or scanning motion that usually accompanies tactile reconnaissance. This same motion could be applied to describe a being footloose or untethered. Verb (nasa’) describes an upward motion, generally of something that is being pulled up and out so as to remove it… to lift up… to bear or carry… to take or take away… to loan on interest… to deceive or beguile.

Noun (mas’et), reflects… uprising (of smoke), uplifting (of hands), utterance (of an oracle), a burden or that what’s carried. Noun* (nasi’) describes a lifted-up one… a captain or chiefa mist or vapour. Note this keenly observed connection between paying interest and being formally governed…mesho’a, ruin or desolation… Plural noun (mashshu’ot) means deceptions… Noun (si’) means loftiness or pride. Noun (se’et) means dignity, swelling or outburst, a rising up… the verb (sha’a), to be noisy or ruinous. 

The verb (nasha)… to lend on interest or to forget, or rather to have a memory slowly evaporate away. Noun (neshiya) means forgetfulness or oblivion. Noun (neshi) means debt… Verb (masha) means… a drawing out of waters: to extract from water. NOBSE Study Bible Name List does not translate Mash but reads Extend(ed), or Tall for Meshech.’

An upward motion into mist or vapour could refer to space, or just how high Meshech is over the world. The final definitions of extended and tall alludes to this as does Meshech appearing to have financial power as a lender and the control or governance, that extends from lending – on a worldwide scale.

According to Abarim Publications, Tubal’s definition in Hebrew is incredible in light of both Magog’s and Meshech’s meanings. They define it from the noun tebel, as ‘the whole world-economy’ and the verb yabal, meaning ‘to flow or carry along’, ‘to bring, lead, conduct.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘In the Bible there’s one person named Tubal and one more named Tubal-cain [Genesis 4:22]. Tubal-cain and his brothers Jabal and Jubal and sister Naamah are the last in line from Cain, the cursed son of Adam and Eve [refer article: Na’amah]… Just Tubal descends from Cain’s youngest brother Seth and is a son of Japheth, who is a son of Noah… The latter Tubal shows up quite a bit in prophetic texts, usually in the company of his brothers Meshech and Magog… 

The verb (balal) means to mix something with oil, usually flour products… as ritualistic food preparation. The emphasis… lies on saturation and overflowing: to fill something with oil until it can absorb no more and begins to reject an excess of oil. Noun (belil) describes a very rich mix of animals to eat… and noun (teballul) tells of insoluble material that obstructs a person’s eye. 

Noun (yabal) means water course or conduit… noun (‘ubal) means stream or river… noun (bul) means produce or outgrowth. Noun (yobel)… describes “a carrier” or “a producer” or “something that drives a flow”… Verb (‘abel)… [is]… often used to describe a collective mourning, which either happened in a procession or else contagious enough to drag others along. Nouns (‘ebel) and (‘abel) both mean mourning, but the latter is also the word for [an] actual water stream or brook… adverb (‘abal)… expresses solemn affirmation (verily, truly, yes indeed I’m totally going along with you there) but later texts appear to put somewhat of a breaking force on the momentum (“yes! … but”)

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names settles for the general meaning of the verb and reads Flowing Forth for the meaning of the name Tubal. However, identical to the name Tubal is our root’s derivative (tebel), meaning world. Hence the name Tubal means World, but the whole flow and currencies of the world-economy in its broadest sense.’

A ‘very rich mix of animals’ is reflected in the varied taste of the Chinese and the breadth of animals they will eat. Tubal has a role to play in driving the global economy and therefore the world. The Earth appears to comply, though with growing reservation. There are a handful of alternative meanings for Meshech and Tubal, which we will now consider as we study verses on all three brothers.

The Book of Jubilees 8:25:

‘And for Japheth came forth the third portion beyond the river Tina to the north of the outflow of its waters, and it extends north-easterly to the whole region of Gog, and to all the country east thereof.’

Japheth’s area is measured against the land of Gog, as Magog is gigantic compared to his brothers. The Book of Jasher 7:4, 7-8 provides names for the sons of Magog, Tubal and Meshech, who are omitted in the Bible: 

‘And the sons of Magog were Elichanaf and Lubal

And the sons of Tubal were Ariphi, Kesed and Taari.

And the sons of Meshech were Dedon, Zaron and Shebashni.’

Notice the similarity with Meshech’s son Dedon and Javan’s son Dodan: the Filipinos – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia

The map above provides a good representation of some of Japheth’s descendants after their migration from the Indus Valley following the flood cataclysm (10,837 BCE), somewhere between 9500 and 7000 BCE. The sons of Javan and Madai are accurate as they are and Tiras would have been where Javan – which is redundant – is marked. Javan’s fourth son Tarshish, should be located between Dodan and Tiras and would later migrate to Iberia. Gomer is redundant and marks where Magog was actually dwelling. Tubal and Meshech would have been living adjacent to Magog, where Ashkenaz and Togarmah are in eastern Anatolia. Ashkenaz should be where Meshech and Tubal are placed and finally, Togarmah would have been residing where Magog is incorrectly placed in western Anatolia.

Books like the one below reveal the level of interest in China’s destiny, yet its title – with so many others – is misleading for it does not actually explain China’s role in end-time prophecy as the title and caption claim. 

It is not a forlorn quest as many erroneously think, such as Tom Hobson who writes: 

“When I first arrived at seminary 38 years ago [in 1979], I was full of curiosity as to where I could find the Chinese people in the Bible. Which of the names in the Genesis 10 Table of Nations was China by another name? A Chinese student was quick to advise me not to waste my time on the search.”

Talk about the worse advice ever. An example unfortunately, of the vast majority of souls who call themselves christian, yet in name only and typically not by exemplifying the faith of Christ the living Son of God. 

The Book of Ezekiel describes a combined East Asian and South East Asian military alliance, though it is far in the future, after the prophesied return of the Son of Man and at the end of a millennial Kingdom He establishes on Earth.

The Book of Daniel as we noted with Kittim, alludes to a battle between the King of the North and his confrontation with an enemy from the North and the East – Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.

Therefore, China has a two-fold role in figuring prominently in shaping world events through warfare. The first scenario, possibly a few centuries from now involves Magog in opposition to the King of the North – Russia and her ally, a German led, United States of Europe.

Ezekiel 38:1-23

New English Translation

A Prophecy Against Gog

1 ‘The Lord’s message came to me: 2 “Son of man, turn toward [Hebrew: “set your face against”], Gog of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal… Look, I am against you, Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.’

The Interlinear Hebrew text, without punctuation or prepositions says:

‘… set thy face against Gog land Magog chief prince Meshech Tubal… Gog chief prince Meshech…’

4 ‘I will turn you around, put hooks into your jaws, and bring you out with all your army, horses, and horsemen, all of them fully armed, a great company with shields of different types all of them armed with swords.

5 Persia [Elam-Turkey], Ethiopia [Cush-India], and Put [Phut-Pakistan] are with them, all of them with shields and helmets.

6 They are joined by Gomer [Continental South East Asia – principally Vietnam] with all its troops, and by Beth Togarmah [the (united) Koreas] from the remote parts of the north with all its troops – many peoples are with you.

7 Be ready and stay ready, you and all your companies assembled around you, and be a guard for them. 8 After many days you will be summoned [at the end of the Millennium]; in the latter years [the end of the era following our present age] you will come to a land restored from the ravages of war [the war preceding the return of Christ], from many peoples gathered on the mountains of Israel** that had long been in ruins.

Its people were brought out from the peoples, and all of them will be living securely [this is yet future, for the people of the state of Israel do not live securely]. 9 You will advance; you will come like a storm. You will be like a cloud* covering the earth [description of Magog], you, all your troops, and the many other peoples with you.

10 This is what the Sovereign Lord says: On that day thoughts will come into your mind, and you will devise an evil plan. 11 You will say, “I will invade a land of unwalled towns; I will advance against those living quietly in security – all of them living without walls and barred gates – ‘

This is speaking of a future time when the tribes of Israel – not the Jews – are restored to a new homeland without the need for fortifications.

12 ‘to loot and plunder, to attack the inhabited ruins and the people gathered from the nations, who are acquiring cattle and goods, who live at the center** of the earth [a reshuffled Middle East].”

13 Sheba and Dedan [grandsons of Cush (India)] and the traders of Tarshish [Japan] with all its young warriors [East Asian Tiger Economies] will say to you, “Have you come to loot? Have you assembled your armies to plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to haul away a great amount of spoils?”

14 … On that day when my people Israel [the sons of Jacob, not the current nation of Israel**] are living securely, you will take notice 15 and come from your place, from the remote parts of the north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great company and a vast army. 16 You will advance against my people Israel like a cloud covering the earth.

In future days I will bring you against my land so that the nations may acknowledge me, when before their eyes I magnify myself through you, O Gog.

17 … Are you the one of whom I spoke in former days by my servants the prophets of Israel, who prophesied in those days that I would bring you against them? 18 On that day, when Gog invades the land of Israel, declares the Sovereign Lord, my rage will mount up in my anger. 19 In my zeal, in the fire of my fury, I declare that on that day there will be a great earthquake in the land of Israel.

20 The fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the wild beasts, all the things that creep on the ground, and all people who live on the face of the earth will shake at my presence. The mountains will topple, the cliffs will fall, and every wall will fall to the ground. 21 I will call for a sword to attack Gog on all my mountains, declares the Sovereign Lord; every man’s sword will be against his brother.

22 I will judge him with plague and bloodshed. I will rain down on him, his troops, and the many peoples who are with him a torrential downpour, hailstones, fire, and brimstone [The Day of the Lord – Malachi 4:1-3].

23 I will exalt and magnify myself; I will reveal myself before many nations. Then they will know that I am the Lord.’

Footnote:

38:2 translation Hebrew : “the prince, the chief of Meshech and Tubal.” Some translate “the prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal,” but it is more likely that the Hebrew noun in question is a common noun in apposition to “prince,” rather than a proper name. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:434-35. As Block demonstrates, attempts by some popular writers to identify these proper names with later geographical sites in Russia are anachronistic. 

This writer concurs with the NET Bible footnote and does not subscribe to a prince of rosh. It doesn’t make sense to have a ‘prince of head, chief or top’. It does make sense to have a ‘head, chief or top prince’. This prince is the head, chief or top of Meshech and Tubal.

‘The accentual system and syntactical construction of the Hebrew language strongly indicate an appositional relationship between the words “prince” and “chief.” Both terms are related equally, then, to the geographical words Meshech and Tubal. Grammatically, it would seem best to render the phrase, “the prince, the chief, of Meshech and Tubal” – Ralph Alexander.

Foes From the Northern Frontier, Edwin Yamauchi, 2003, page 20:

‘For one thing, even if one were to transliterate the Hebrew rosh as a proper name… rather than translate it as “chief”… it can have nothing to do with modern “Russia”. This would be a gross anachronism, for the modern name is based upon the name Rus, which was brought into the region of Kiev, north of the Black Sea, by the Vikings only in the Middle Ages.’

Ezekiel, by Joseph Blenkinsopp, 1990, page 184:

‘Gog is further described as “chief prince” of Meshech and Tubal. There are only two proper names here, since ro’sh (“chief, head”) is nowhere attested as such. It has no more connection with Russia (a name of Norse extraction) than Meshech has with Moscow.’

The top prince, is revealed a few words previously as Gog… of the land of Magog. It is not immediately clear whether Gog is purely a dominant people; government; region within and part of Magog; or an actual leader either named or more likely, titled Gog. Verses 16 and 21-22 support an individual, with the use of the personal you and him

If Gog is a ruler, then it is an individual of great authority^ as they have ‘height’ as ‘one lifted up’ and as ‘an exalted one.’

John MacArthur:

“Gog came to be used as a general title for an enemy of God’s people. ‘Gog’ most likely carries the idea [of] ‘high’* or ‘supreme one,’ based on the comparison in Numbers 24:7.”

The rebellion of Magog transpires when the Adversary called Satan, is loosed* from their restraint; thus, the likelihood of Gog being an actual leader of Magog is strengthened. As is their identity being linked to the mysterious Nephilim^ – Articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

A supernatural element or explanation for the identity of Gog is plausible – as intimated in the artwork below – for it would mirror what is to befall humanity prior to Christ’s return (refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity).

Gog is clearly the leader over all three brothers. Therefore using the name (title) Gog is appropriate when referring to all three peoples comprising Magog, Tubal and Meshech.

As an aside – of which constant readers will be aware – it is worth noting the Goguryeo Kingdom which encompassed most of the Korean peninsula and large parts of Manchuria from 37 BCE until 668 CE – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

It was later known as Goryeo (meaning high* and beautiful) – alternatively spelled as Koryŏ – a shortened form of Goguryeo (Koguryŏ), meaning high Castle. The word was adopted as the official title in the fifth century and is the origin of the English word, Korea.

Ezekiel 39:1-16

New English Translation

“… O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal! 2 I will turn you around and ‘drag you along’ [definition of Tubal and Meshech]; I will lead you up from the remotest parts of the north and bring you against the mountains of Israel…

I will send fire on Magog and those who live securely in the coastlands [principally Magog, Tubal and Meshech with Gomer (in Continental SE Asia)]…

Then those who live in the cities of Israel will go out and use the weapons for kindling – the shields, bows and arrows, war clubs and spears – they will burn them for seven years. 10 They will not need to take wood from the field or cut down trees from the forests because they will make fires with the weapons…”

11 “On that day I will assign Gog a grave in Israel. It will be the valley of those who travel east of the sea; it will block the way of the travelers. There they will bury [their leader] Gog and all his horde [army]; they will call it the Valley of Hamon [H1995 – multitude] Gog.

12 For seven months Israel will bury them, in order to cleanse the land. 13 All the people of the land will bury them… 14 They will designate men to scout continually through the land, burying those who remain on the surface of the ground, in order to cleanse it. They will search for seven full months. 15 When the scouts survey the land and see a human bone, they will place a sign by it, until those assigned to burial duty have buried it in the valley of Hamon Gog. 16 (A city by the name of Hamonah will also be there)…’

The inference is that Gog is the identity of a real ruler. A literal dema-gog-ue.

Demagogue definition: ‘a person, especially an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people.’

Magog-China is clearly in the far ‘north’ as is Togarmah – refer Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas. Seven months to bury the dead and seven years of using the component parts of their weapons reveals the gigantic size of Magog and its alliance’s military might.

As there are prophetic Kings of the North and south, there is also a name for the Magog led confederacy from East Asia and Southeast Asia: the Kings from the East – article: Four Kings & One Queen.

Revelation 16:12-14

English Standard Version

12 ‘The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, to prepare the way for the kings from the east. 

13 And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs. 14 For they are demonic spirits, performing signs, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty.

Revelation 20:2, 7-9

English Standard Version

2 ‘… the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound [them] for a thousand years… 7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released* from [its] prison 8 and will come out to deceive^ the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea. 9 And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them…’

The book of Revelation is specific in that the gathering of Magog – at the instigation of the Adversary – is an innumerable number of people. Only two nations could provide such a prolific amount of personnel: India or China. 

We will learn that India does not descend from Japheth, nor does India fulfil the verses which apply to Magog. Remember, the timing of this attack against the sons of Jacob is at the end of the millennial rule and devoid of any alliance with the King of the South, or against the King of the North as before the Millennium.

It is perhaps signifiant and non-coincidental that the Dragon (Revelation 12:3, 9) will entice and enrage the people (Revelation 20:7-9) represented by none other than… a dragon.

The dragon is the primary symbol of China. In heraldry the dragon is a powerful and charismatic emblem. As formidable or more so even than that of an eagle (United States, Russia) or a lion (India, United Kingdom) both adopted by numerous nations in the world.

China Highlights, Chinese Dragons – Facts, Culture, Origins, and Art:

‘There are many differences between Western dragons and Chinese dragons.

Unlike Chinese dragons, Western dragons often live in lairs or caves in mountains, while Chinese dragons live at the [bottom] of lakes and rivers, and in cloudy skies.

Western dragons have large bat-like wings and big claws and most Western dragons look like carnivorous dinosaurs with wings, while Chinese dragons, though also dinosaur-size or larger, have elements of many different animals and in general look long and snake-like.

Western dragons are depicted as dangerous creatures and symbols of evil (usually), while Chinese dragons, by contrast, are believed to be friendly, auspicious, and lucky (usually) – symbols of great power, good fortune, wisdom, and health.’

A number of biblical scholars claim China is referenced in Revelation 9:16, NKJV:

‘Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them.’

Where Are The Chinese People In God’s Word?, Tom Hobson, 2017: 

‘The only other possible reference to the Chinese is in Revelation 16:12, the “kings from the East” who come in the final days before the return of Christ from beyond the Euphrates, for whom we are given their number: 200 million of them… It is a number probably larger than the entire population of the planet in 95 AD, but it has been argued that today’s China could potentially field an army that large. The claim that this is China cannot be proved, but cannot easily be dismissed.’

Yet the context of the preceding verses and those following verse sixteen is in relation to the supernatural undead. Released during the Sixth Trumpet of the Eternal’s wrath and judgement on the world; who then sweep across the Earth exacting plagues and subsequently death – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.


China’s standing army contains 2,035,000 active military personnel (in 2024), the highest in the world – followed by India and the United States. A far cry from two hundred million. That said, China certainly has the potential to raise an army of 200 million men (and women) in the future.

China’s state flag above and the Manchu Qing dynasty flag of 1890 to 1912 below

The meanings of the names Meshech and Tubal – those with a darker connotation – are compelling when compared with Magog’s, to cover like a cloud with an innumerable number of Soldiers.

Meshech as part of Gog, also means ‘deception,^ pride, forgetfulness’ and ‘oblivion’. Formulating a plan to deceive fellow nations and thereby encouraging them to be involved in the plot to attack the sons of Jacob – not the state of Israel – with a pride in their power; a forgetfulness of a prior age of suffering before the millennium; and a disregard for the then current age of peace; ultimately brings oblivion for the actions chosen and implemented by Gog. 

Tubal’s part as Gog, broadly means to ‘lead and drag’ other nations into a conspiracy, like a ‘poisonous wound’ and the forceful ‘flow of water’; other nations ‘agree to be coerced, though with growing reservation’.

Scriptures which pertain to Meshech and Tubal:

Psalm 120:5

New English Translation

‘How miserable I am. For I have lived temporarily in Meshech; I have resided among the tents of Kedar.’

Kedar – a son of Ishmael – is likened to Meshech, due to a similarity in exhibiting an austere and militaristic way of life. 

In reference to trading with Tyre, Ezekiel 27:12-14 NET:

12 “Tarshish [Japan] was your trade partner because of your abundant wealth; they exchanged silver, iron, tin, and lead for your products. 13 Javan [Archipelago SE Asia, principally Indonesia], Tubal, and Meshech were your clients; they exchanged slaves and bronze items for your merchandise. 14 Beth Togarmah [the Koreas] exchanged horses, chargers, and mules for your products.”

Ezekiel 32:26 

New Century Version

“Meshech and Tubal are there with the graves of all their soldiers around them. All of them are unclean and have been killed in war. They also frightened people when they lived on earth.”

Isaiah 66:19

English Standard Version

and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish [Japan], Pul, and Lud [a son of Shem (Iran)], who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands [or isles] far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.’

There are a number of scriptures including Magog, Tubal and Meshech together, as well as one each for the brothers where they are accounted for singularly. We could deduce three separate nations or three separate peoples in one nation, as the majority include all three or two together. As we have run out of East Asian nations, or rather attributed the remaining sons of Japheth successfully to their modern day counterparts, this writer is convinced it is the latter option. 

Obviously at one time, the brothers were separate peoples, before amalgamating. For the purpose of understanding the future prophecies in the Bible, they appear as one identity. It is interesting to note their order. Gog is always before Magog and both are listed first as designated leader of the three brothers.

Even though Tubal is older than Meshech, he is always placed second of the two, with one exception. It appears that when the context is militaristic, Meshech has dominance. The singular verse that signals economic power, it is Tubal with the superiority and listed first. The individual meanings of their names supports this arrangement.

Lastly, the verse where Tubal is listed without Meshech, associates Tubal with Javan’s children; highlighting their extreme eastern coastal location, as well as economic influence.

China’s major exports.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Chinese global shipments during 2024.

  1. Electrical machinery, equipment: US$928 billion
  2. Machinery including computers: $568.3 billion
  3. Vehicles: $216.1 billion
  4. Plastics, plastic articles: $141.3 billion
  5. Furniture, bedding, lighting, signs, prefab buildings: $126.4 billion
  6. Articles of iron or steel: $100.1 billion
  7. Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $85.4 billion
  8. Organic chemicals: $82.6 billion
  9. Toys, games: $82.5 billion
  10. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $72.5 billion

Vehicles represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 12.1% from 2023 to 2024. In second place for improving export sales was machinery including computers, propelled by an 11% gain. China’s shipments of plastics, both as materials and items made from plastic, posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 6.6%.

The lone year-over-year decliner among China’s top 10 export categories was the toys and games classification, thanks to its -7.4% drop.’

China is the world’s second largest economy, with a nominal GDP in current dollars of $19.23 trillion in 2025 – 3.95% higher than in 2024 and a 16.9% share of the world’s total.

China has opened its economy over the past four decades and its economic development has improved living standards greatly. The government has gradually phased out collectivised agriculture and industry, allowing greater flexibility for market prices and increasing the autonomy of businesses with the result of foreign and domestic trade investment booming. An industrial policy that encourages domestic manufacturing, has made China the world’s number one exporter. Still, China faces the ‘challenges of a rapidly ageing population and severe environmental degradation.’

China experiences an easier relationship and better understanding with its neighbour Russia, as demonstrated by its leaders Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. Even so, in the distant future China and Russia will become the deadliest of enemies – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.

Of the top ten countries with the most natural resources China tops the list as number one overall, with an estimated worth of $23 trillion. Ninety percent of China’s resources include coal and rare earth metals. Timber is a major natural resource and other resources China produces are ‘antimony, gold, graphite, lead, molybdenum, phosphates, tin, tungsten, vanadium, and zinc. China is the world’s second largest producer of bauxite, cobalt, copper, manganese, and silver’ and also has deposits of chromium and gem diamonds.

China fulfils the important role of being one of the world’s breadbaskets – in other words, it has large areas of highly arable land. It is in fact ranked number three in the world. The food produced by the country constitutes about twenty percent of total world exports. China has the largest agricultural output in the world and seventy-five percent of its farming focuses on food crop farming. The country’s primary crop is rice, with rice fields occupying approximately twenty-five percent of its cultivated land. 

That said, ‘China is caught in a catch-22. It needs to keep industrialising as it modernises and raises standards of living, but that very process threatens food production.’ Feeding its population is a growing problem for the Chinese government. If it cannot solve this dilemma there will be unrest. ‘More than 40 per cent of arable land is now either polluted or has thinning topsoil, according to their Ministry of Agriculture’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 52.

China is included in the top ten most technologically advanced nations in the world, positioned at number nine. Recall South Korea is number three and Japan number one. China has a long list of achievements in the last decade. It currently focuses on furthering advances in robotics, semiconductors, high-speed trains, super-computers and in genetics.

Of the top ten nations with the largest gold reserves, China is at number six, the highest in Asia.

China has 1,948.3 tonnes of gold, yet this is only 3.3% of its foreign reserves. As of 2021, China has allowed ‘domestic and international banks to import large amounts of the precious metal into the country in an effort to support prices.’

The only other East Asian nation in the top ten is Japan in eighth position. It has 765.2 tonnes which makes up 3.1 percent of its foreign reserves.

In January 2016, China ‘lowered interest rates below zero – which helped fuel demand for gold around the world.’

The gradual decline and shrinkage of America’s economy over ensuing decades; coupled with China’s increasing growth and competition in key sectors such as space, genetics and particularly in robotics and artificial intelligence will see increased aggravation and perhaps hostility between the behemoth that is the United States and the Chinese leviathan – Job 40:15-24; 41:1-34.

China’s wealthiest cities – as listed by The Richest website – assist in gauging any demographic patterns.

City number ten Chengdu, is located in the southwest of China. Also in the Southwest is Chongqing at number five.

In the Southeast is Hangzhou, nine; Guangzhou, seven; Suzhou, six; and Shenzhen at number four.

Suzhou

Both islands of Hong Kong and Taiwan are situated on the southeastern coast of mainland China. A city that we are all now aware is Wuhan, also in the Southeast and is ranked number eight.

‘Traditionally China’s powerful urban [centres] were along the borders or the coast, but Wuhan has risen up in recent years from central [southeast] China to become an extremely important city in its own right. First settled in 1500 BC, Wuhan is one of the oldest cities in China. Wuhan’s population of 10,220,000 [people] is relatively small by Chinese standards, but the city punches well above its weight economically. Regarded as the key to central China, Wuhan’s economy is based primarily on finance, transportation, and information technology.’

In the Northeast there are the cities of Tianjin, number three; and Beijing (formerly Peking) the capital, at number two.

‘The national capital of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing is one of China’s cities that the entire world is familiar with. Beijing is China’s political and cultural [centre], and home to virtually all of China’s largest state-owned companies. With a population of 21,150,000 [people], Beijing is home too many of the ruling government’s key leaders and operations, both past and present – the renowned Forbidden City, that housed the Chinese emperors of old, is situated in Beijing. Beijing’s economy is valued at an absolutely astounding 366.11 billion Yuan (approximately $59.88 billion USD).

It is by a large margin one of the global economy’s most important hubs, and one of the most prosperous and developed cities in China.’

Stunning photographs of Shanghai

At number one, is Shanghai – the counter point to Beijing in the North – located in the Southeast.

‘Although it might be tempting to assume Beijing is the Chinese economy’s most important city, since it also doubles as the national capital, that would be a mistake.

The specter of Shanghai looms large not only over all of China, but also over the entire world.

Shanghai proper has a population of 24,000,000 [people] (which doesn’t account for those living just outside the city) making it the most populous city in the entire world. It’s also the world’s busiest port city, and boasts an urban economy valued at an absolutely astounding 410.95 billion Yuan (approximately $67.16 billion USD). Shanghai has emerged in post-reform China as the nation’s economic leader, and its policies and practices have served as an example for China’s other rising cities since the influx of foreign investment into China began.

Where Shanghai goes, the Chinese economy will follow.’

Recall Tubal in its broadest sense means the whole flow and currencies of the world-economy. ‘To flow or carry along’, ‘to bring, lead, conduct.’

A breakdown of China’s richest cities includes: two in the Southwest; six in the Southeast; and two in the Northeast – or alternatively, eight in the South and two in the North.

Those cities located on the East coast of China, (refer maps) are in keeping with Tubal’s location, name and wealth.

China has the world’s second biggest population (following India), a staggering 1,414,453,100 people.

Magog certainly blankets like a ‘covering’ as the rooftop of the world.

Yet statistical projections predict China’s population will have sensationally plummeted to only 633,368,000 people by the year 2100. Even so, it will still be the second most populous nation in the world.

Mandarin is spoken in northern and southwestern China and has by far the most speakers. This language group includes the Beijing dialect which forms the basis for Standard Chinese called Putonghua or Guoyu and often translated as Mandarin or simply Chinese.

Wu varieties are spoken in Shanghai, most of Zhejiang and the southern parts of Jiangsu and Anhui. This group comprises hundreds of distinct spoken forms, many of which are not mutually intelligible. The Suzhou dialect is usually taken as representative as Shanghainese features several atypical innovations.

Jerry Norman classified ‘the traditional seven dialect groups of China into three larger groups: Northern (Mandarin), Central (Wu, Gan, and Xiang) and Southern (Hakka, Yue, and Min).’

Norman stated that the Southern Group was derived from a standard used in the Yangtze valley during the Han dynasty from 206 BCE to 220 CE, calling it Old Southern Chinese. The Central group was transitional between the Northern and Southern groups. Dialect boundaries between Wu and Min are particularly abrupt, while others, such as between Mandarin and Xiang or between Min and Hakka, are less clearly defined.

We will continue to investigate this three-part distinction – as highlighted in the major language groups – as it is a tip of an iceberg with regard to the Chinese composition of China.

There are a large number of peoples within China’s borders which include the Han, Manchu, Mongol and Tibetan for example. China is officially composed of fifty-six ethnic groups – the dominant Han (93%) and fifty-five ethnic minorities (shaoshu minzu) accounting for seven percent of the population.

Fifty-four minorities – except the Hui – use spoken languages of their own and twenty-three ethnic groups have their own written languages. 

The fifty-five ethnic minorities include:

Achang, Bai, Bonan, Bouyei, Blang, Dai, Daur, Deang, Dong, Dongxiang, Dulong, Ewenki, Gaoshan, Gelao, Hani, Hezhe, Hui, Jing, Jingpo, Jinuo, Kazak, Kirgiz, Korean, Lahu, Li, Lisu, Luoba, Manchu, Maonan, Menba, Miao, Mongolian, Mulao, Naxi, Nu, Oroqen, Ozbek, Pumi, Qiang, Russian, Salar, She, Shui, Tajik, Tatar, Tibetan, Tu, Tujia, Uigur, Wa, Xibe, Yao, Yi, Yugur, Zhuang.

According to population size, the major ethnic (minority) groups are in italics.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Neanderthal man has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Homo neanderthalensis I’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

A perusal of East Asians does highlight a few salient points.

They stand out from the rest of the world in physiognomy* and yet within Japheth’s seven sons, there is far less DNA variation amongst them than we will find exhibited in the six sons of Canaan for instance – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

The Oriental Asians mainly have straight hair, a smaller stature and are by various degrees rather inscrutable. They appear to have a closer affinity with a hive mentality, which adds to their industriousness compared with other peoples. Their languages are pictorial and reminiscent of the hieroglyphs of Ancient Egypt; which in turn possess a rather distinct alien* impression and perhaps inspiration. 

Plus, why do so many Asians wear eye glasses?

Myopia or nearsightedness afflicts some twelve percent of Americans and twenty-three percent of Australians. It is quite different in East Asia, where it has been recorded as high as 90%, starting in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan (all islands) and spreading to the big cities of China. High myopia affects two percent of Americans, but upwards of sixteen percent in East Asians. 

Then there is the mystery of the shape* of Asian eyes, alluding scientists ability to explain as there is no satisfactory evolutionary answer for the slant of the eyes. Formed by a fold of skin, Asian eyes look deceptively smaller. It can be known as a monolid, a single eyelid or a Mongolian bridle. Its correct name is the epicanthic fold or epicanthus.

Looking at the Haplogroup family trees, it is apparent that with mtDNA – mitochondria passed from mothers to their sons and daughters – the main East Asian Haplogroups alphabetically, of B, F and M* are less closely linked to the Haplogroups of H** and M* for Ham; L0 to L6 of Canaan; or the prime Haplogroups of H**, J and U for Shem. 

With regard to the Y-DNA Haplogroups – the Y sex chromosome passed from fathers only to their sons – they also indicate that the principle East Asian Haplogroups comprising O1a, 01b and O2 are less closely linked to the key Haplogroups of R1a and R1b for Shem; the main Haplogroups of Ham, H, J1 and J2; or E1b1a and E1b1b for Canaan. 

It is Ham and Shem who are marginally closer genetically on the maternal Haplogroup side and Japheth and Shem on the paternal Haplogroup side. This means that the wives of Ham and Shem were more closely related than with Japheth’s wife.

Even so, the Y-DNA passed from Noah to both Ham and Shem later exhibits more crossover mutations and shared Haplogroups – which we will discuss as we progress – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo Sapiens.

Meanwhile, Japheth’s descendants inherited a quite different set of Y-DNA Haplogroups. Considering the high levels of Neanderthal DNA in the Oriental Asian; it remains puzzling, why the African people descended from Canaan, possess practically 0% Neanderthal DNA, while the peoples from Ham and the Europeans from Shem, possess Neanderthal DNA albeit in smaller percentages – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Comparing autosomal DNA – the 22 pairs of chromosomes that contain about 20,000 genes which determine your traits and characteristics – it is the descendants of Shem and Japheth who are closer genetically; as per the PCA graph above, just to add to the mystery surrounding the origin of the races.

Chinese men

The distribution of Y-DNA Haplogroup D-M174 or D1, is found among nearly all the populations of Central Asia and Northeast Asia south of the Russian border, although at a low frequency of 2% or less. A significant spike in the frequency of D1 occurs towards the Tibetan Plateau (D1a1). D-M174 is also found at high frequencies among Japanese people as discussed previously (D1a2), though it fades into low frequencies in the Koreas and China, between the vast expanse of land separating Japan and Tibet.

A study carried out in 2018 calculated ‘pairwise FST (a measure of genetic difference) based on genome-wide SNPs, among the Han Chinese (Northern Han from Beijing and Southern Han from Hunan and Fujian provinces), Japanese and Korean populations.

It found that the smallest FST value was between North Han Chinese (CHB) and South Han Chinese (CHS) (FST[CHB-CHS] = 0.0014), while CHB and Korean (KOR) (FST[CHB-KOR] = 0.0026) and between KOR and Japanese (JPT) (FST[JPT-KOR] = 0.0033). Generally, pairwise FST between Han Chinese, Japanese and Korean (0.0026~ 0.0090) are greater than that within Han Chinese (0.0014).

These results suggested Han Chinese [Magog, Tubal, Meshech], Japanese [Tarshish (Javan)] and Korean [Togarmah (Gomer)] are different in terms of genetic make-up, and the difference among the three groups are much larger than that between northern [Magog] and southern Han Chinese [Tubal, Meshech].’

Chinese women

A genetic study on the remains of people circa 4000 BCE ‘from the Mogou site in the Gansu-Qinghai (or Ganqing) region of China revealed more information on the genetic contributions of [the] ancient Di-Quiang people to the ancestors of the Northern Han. It was deduced that 3300–3800 years ago some Mogou [Mago-g] people had merged into the ancestral Han population, resulting in the Mogou people being similar to some northern Han in sharing up to ~33% paternal [O2a1] and ~70% maternal (D, A, F, M10) haplogroups. The mixture rate was possibly 13-18%.

The contribution of northern Han to southern Han is substantial in both paternal and maternal lineages and a geographic cline exists for mtDNA. As a result, the northern Han [Magog] are the primary contributors to the gene pool of the southern Han [Tubal and Meshech]. The expansion process was dominated by males, as there is evidence of a greater contribution to the Y-chromosome [paternal] than the mtDNA [maternal] from northern Han to southern Han. 

These genetic observations are in line with historical records of continually large migratory waves of northern Chinese inhabitants escaping warfare and famine, to southern China. Other smaller southward migrations also occurred during the past two millennia. A study by the Chinese Academy of Sciences into the gene frequency data of Han subpopulations and ethnic minorities in China, showed that Han subpopulations in different regions are also genetically quite close to the local ethnic minorities, meaning that blood of ethnic minorities had mixed into Han, while at the same time, the blood of Han had mixed into the local populations. 

The most extensive genome-wide association study of the Han population, showed that geographic, genetic stratification from north to south has occurred and centrally placed populations acted as the conduit for outlying ones. Ultimately, with the exception in some ethnolinguistic branches of the Han Chinese, such as Pinghua, there is “coherent genetic structure” (homogeneity) in all Han Chinese.’

Y-chromosome Haplogroup O2 (M122), is a prevalent DNA marker in Han Chinese, as it appeared in China in prehistoric times. ‘It is found in more than 50% of Chinese males, and ranging up to over 80% in certain regional subgroups of the Han ethnicity.

The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of Han Chinese increases in diversity* as one looks from northern to southern China, which suggests that male migrants from northern China married with women from local peoples after arriving in southern China.’

Tests comparing the genetic profiles of northern Han, southern Han and southern natives determined that Haplogroups O-M176 (O1b2), O-M88 (O1b1a1a1a1a) and O-M7 (O2a2a1a2), which are prevalent in southern natives, were only observed in some southern Han – 4% on average – but not in the northern Han. This proves that the male contribution of southern natives on southern Han was limited. 

There are consistent strong genetic similarities in the Y chromosome Haplogroup distribution between the southern and northern Chinese population.

Analysis indicates almost all Han populations form a tight cluster in their Y chromosome. However, other research has also shown that the paternal lineages Y-DNA O-M119 (O1a), O-P201 (O2a2a1a1a [M-159]), O-P203 (O1a1a [M307]) and O-M95 (O1b1a1a) are found in both southern Han Chinese and South Chinese minorities, but more commonly in the latter. In fact, these paternal markers are in turn less frequent in northern Han Chinese.

The Han Chinese which form some 93% of China’s population are closely related, though there are variations in the Haplogroups to suggest the Han can be split into northern and southern origins. The southern Han have more variation than the northern Han and indicate a further division again.* The Mongols are an ethnic group in northern China (Inner Mongolia), Mongolia, parts of Siberia and Central Asia – Chapter III Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

The Later Jin dynasty from 1616 to 1636 CE and the subsequent Qing dynasty from 1636 (1644) to 1912 CE were established and ruled by Manchus, descended from the Jurchen people who earlier established the first Jin dynasty during 1115 to 1234 CE in China. Manchus form the largest branch of the Tungusic peoples and are distributed throughout China, forming the fourth largest ethnic group – the 2nd being Zhuang, with 17 million people and 3rd, the Hui with 10 million people. They can be found in thirty-one Chinese provincial regions. They also form the largest minority group in China without an autonomous region.

Manchu men with a single braid of hair known as a queue

While the Manchu ruling elite at the Qing imperial court in Beijing and in posts of authority throughout China increasingly adopted Han culture, the Qing imperial government viewed the Manchu communities – as well as those of various tribal people – in Manchuria as a place where traditional Manchu virtues could be preserved and as a vital reservoir of military manpower fully dedicated to the regime.

The Qing emperors endeavoured to protect the traditional way of life of the Manchus in central and northern Manchuria. In particular, they restricted the migration of Han settlers to the region. This had to be balanced with practical needs, such as maintaining the defence of northern China against the Russians and the Mongols, supplying government farms with a skilled work force and conducting trade in the region’s products. Even so, a continuous trickle of Han convicts, workers and merchants found their way to the Northeast.

There is debate* over whether the Qing equated the lands of the Qing state – including present-day Manchuria, Xinjiang, Mongolia, Tibet and other areas – with ‘China.’ Most Manchu people now live in Mainland China with a population of 10,410,585 people; approximately nine percent of the ethnic minorities and 0.8% of China’s total population.

Northern and southern China are two mega-regions within China. The self-perception of the Chinese nation has been dominated by this concept of two Chinas; as regional differences in culture and language have historically under-pinned distinct regional identities. Used as the geographical dividing line between northern and southern China is the Qinling-Huaihe Line – the Qin Mountains and the Huai River. The Northeast and Inner Mongolia are considered belonging to northern China according to this definition. 

At certain times in history Tibet and other areas, were not considered* as being part of either the North or south, though internal migration has led to previously marginalised areas being viewed as part of the North. The perception of a northern and southern China originates from differences in climate, geography, culture and physical traits; as well as historical periods of political division. 

Northern and north-eastern China is considered too cold and dry for rice cultivation – though rice is grown there today, using modern technology – and consists largely of flat plains, grasslands or desert, Southern China is contrastingly, warm and rainy enough for rice and consists of ‘lush mountains cut by river valleys’.

These differences have influenced warfare during the pre-modern era. For instance, cavalry could easily dominate the northern plains, but encountered difficulties against river navies used by the South. There are also major differences in cuisine, culture and popular entertainment. The Northern and Southern Dynasties showed such a high level of polarisation between North and South that sometimes northerners and southerners referred to each other as barbarians.

For a large part of Chinese history, northern China was economically ahead. The Jurchen or Manchu and Mongol invasion caused migration to southern China, so that the Emperor shifted the Song dynasty capital city from Kaifeng in northern China to Hangzhou, located south of the Yangtze river. The population of Shanghai increased from 12,000 households to over 250,000 inhabitants after Kaifeng was sacked by invading armies.

This began a shift of political, economic and cultural power from northern China to southern China. The Eastern coast of southern China has continued as a leading economic and cultural centre for China until the present day.

In 1730 the Kangxi Emperor made the observation in the Tingxun Geyan:

“The people of the North are strong; they must not copy the fancy diets of the Southerners, who are physically frail, live in a different environment, and have different stomachs and bowels.”

Lu Xun a major Chinese writer, wrote:

‘According to my observation, Northerners are sincere and honest; Southerners are skilled and quick-minded. These are their respective virtues. Yet sincerity and honesty lead to stupidity, whereas skillfulness and quick-mindedness lead to duplicity.’

During the Deng Xiaoping reforms of the 1980s, Southern China developed more quickly than Northern China, leading scholars to wonder whether the economic fault line would create political tension between the North and South. This was based on the idea that there would be conflict between the bureaucratic north and the commercial south.

This never eventuated ‘because the economic fault lines eventually created divisions between coastal China [represented primarily by Tubal] and the interior [Meshech] as well as between urban and rural China, which run in different directions from the north-south divide, and in part, because neither north or south has any type of obvious advantage within the Chinese central government.’

The concepts of North and South continue to play an important role in regional stereotypes.

Northerners are seen as:

  • Taller: according to the 2014 census, the average male height between the age of 20-24 was 173.4 cm in Beijing, 174.9 cm in Jilin province and 177.1 cm in Dalian
  • Speaking Mandarin Chinese with a northern (rhotic) accent
  • More likely to eat noodles, dumplings and wheat-based foods (rather than rice-based foods)

Southerners are viewed as:

  • Shorter: according to the 2014 census, the average male height between the age of 20–24 was 173.3 cm in Shanghai, 171.6 cm in Zhejiang provinceand 171.9 cm in Fujian province
  • Speaking Mandarin Chinese with a southern (non-rhotic) accent or speaking any southern Chinese language, such as those under Yue (e.g. Cantonese), Min (e.g. Hokkien), Wu (e.g. Shanghainese), Hakka, Xiang or Gan
  • More likely to eat rice-based foods (rather than wheat-based foods) and seafood

A Chinese man and woman

Following: two integral papers regarding Chinese origins. They are lengthy and a little technical for those readers so inclined. For those not so much inclined, the key findings have been highlighted in bold. We will then piece together what we have investigated, in endeavouring to clarify the puzzle of China’s inhabitants.

Ancient DNA Reveals That the Genetic Structure of the Northern Han Chinese Was Shaped Prior to 3,000 Years Ago, multiple authors, 2015 – emphasis & bold mine:

The Han Chinese are the largest ethnic group in the world, and their origins, development, and expansion are complex.

Many genetic studies have shown that Han Chinese can be divided into two distinct groups: northern Han Chinese and southern Han Chinese. The genetic history of the southern Han Chinese has been well studied. 

However, the genetic history of the northern Han Chinese is still obscure. In order to gain insight into the genetic history of the northern Han Chinese, 89 human remains were sampled from the Hengbei site… 

We used 64 authentic mtDNA data obtained in this study, 27 Y chromosome SNP data profiles from previously studied Hengbei samples, and genetic datasets of the current Chinese populations and two ancient northern Chinese populations to analyze the relationship between the ancient people of Hengbei and present-day northern Han Chinese. We used a wide range of population genetic analyses, including principal component analyses, shared mtDNA haplotype analyses, and geographic mapping of maternal genetic distances. 

The results show that the ancient people of Hengbei bore a strong genetic resemblance to presentday northern Han Chinese and were genetically distinct from other present-day Chinese populations and two ancient populations. These findings suggest that the genetic structure of northern Han Chinese was already shaped 3,000 years ago…’

The consensus is that the Han Chinese migrated south and contributed greatly to the paternal gene pool of the SH, whereas the Han Chinese and ancient southern ethnic groups both contributed almost equally to the SH maternal gene pool. However, the genetic history of the NH is still obscure. Currently, NH populations inhabit much of northern China, including the Central Plain and many outer regions that were inhabited by ancient northern ethnic groups. 

The Han Chinese or their ancestors who migrated northward from the Central Plain might have mixed with ancient northern ethnic groups or culturally assimilated the native population. This scenario would indicate that the Han Chinese living in different areas should have genetic profiles that differ from each other. However, genetic analyses have shown that there are no significant differences among the northern Han Chinese populations, which has led to conflicting arguments on whether the genetic structure of the NH is the result of an earlier ethnogenesis or, instead, results from a combination of population admixture and continuous migration of the Han Chinese. 

Until now, only a few genetic studies have investigated the ancient Han Chinese or their ancestors. These studies have been restricted by small sample sizes, high levels of kinship among samples, and short fragments of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and thus provide limited insights into the genetic history of the Han Chinese… a large number of graves were excavated at a necropolis called Hengbei located in the southern part of Shanxi Province, China, on the Central Plain, that dates back to approximately 3,000 years ago (Zhou dynasty), a key transitional period for the rise of the Han Chinese.

In a previous study investigating when haplogroup Q1a1 entered the genetic pool of the Han Chinese, we analyzed Y chromosome single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from human remains excavated from the Hengbei (HB) site and identified haplogroups for 27 samples. In the present study, we attempted to extract DNA from 89 human remains. Using a combination of Y chromosome SNPs and mtDNA genetic data, we uncover aspects of the genetic structure of the ancient people from the Central Plain region and begin to determine the genetic legacy of the northern Han Chinese in both the maternal and paternal lineages.

According to a previous study, the haplogroups of the Han Chinese can be classified into the northern East Asian-dominating haplogroups, including A, C, D, G, M8, M9, and Z, and the southern East Asian-dominating haplogroups, including B, F, M7, N, and R.

These haplogroups account for 52.7% and 33.85% of those in the Northern Han, respectively.

Among these haplogroups, D, B, F, and A were predominant in the NH, with frequencies of 25.77%, 11.54%, 11.54%, and 8.08%, respectively.

However, in the SH, the northern and southern East Asian-dominating haplogroups accounted for 35.62% and 51.91%, respectively.

The frequencies of haplogroups D, B, F, and A reached 15.68%, 20.85%, 16.29%, and 5.63%, respectively.’

In other words, the southern Han were opposite to the northern Han with a dominance understandably in south eastern mtDNA Haplogroups; as opposed to the northern Han being dominant, unsurprisingly in north eastern mtDNA Haplogroups. 

Recall on our journey through the descendants of Japheth, how the maternal Haplogroups B4/B5, F1 and M7 have figured prominently and of these it has been Haplogroup B which has been the overall common defining marker mt-DNA Haplogroup for Japheth’s children.

‘Notably, in the HB samples, haplogroups D, B, F, and A were also predominant and showed frequencies of 23.44%, 12.5%, 10.93%, and 10.93%, respectively.

In addition, the frequency of haplogroup M was high and reached 17.19%.

Other haplogroups such as C, G, M7, M8, M9, Z, N9a and R had lower frequencies at 3.13%, 1.56%, 1.56%, 3.13%, 7.81%, 3.13%, 3.13% and 1.56%, respectively.

The northern and southern East Asian-dominating haplogroups [from the Hengbei] account for 50.04% and 26.56%, respectively, which is similar to the values in the NH.

To further identify the genetic affinities among the HB, two ancient populations and the present-day Chinese population, represented by 9 NH, 9 Northern Minorities, 14 SH and 57 Southern Minority groups, the mtDNA haplogroup distributions were compared using a PCA.

The PCA plot of the first and second components (31.81% of the total variance), shows that the current populations largely segregate into three main clusters:

Northern Han (in orange), Southern Han (in blue)… Southern Minorities (in gray), and Northern Minorities (in green).

The distribution of populations in the PCA plot was in line with their geographic distribution, and these populations were separated by the first principal component. The populations living in northern China (NH and NM) are located on the right side of the PCA, and they contain the northern East Asian-dominating haplogroups A, C, D, G, M8, M9, and Z.’

‘In contrast, the populations living in southern China (SH and SM) are located on the left side of the PCA, and they contain the southern East Asian-dominating haplogroups B, F, M7, and R. 

Moreover, the NH can be separated from other populations except for two SH (Hubei and Shanghai), using the second principal component. The HB population (PC1 value: 0.071; PC2 value: 1.453) groups closely with the NH (PC1 value: 0.239±0.269; PC2 value: 1.590±0.336). Overall, these results indicate that the HB [Hengbei] population shares a similar genetic profile with the Northern Han that is distinct from the Northern Minorities and ancient northern ethnic groups.

The Han Chinese originated from the Central Plain region, which is substantially smaller than the region the Han Chinese now occupy. According to historical documents, the Han Chinese suffered many conflicts with natives prior to expansion into their lands. The Han migrated northward into regions inhabited by many ancient northern ethnic groups. Based on the advanced agriculture, technology, and culture, the Han Chinese or their ancestors often had a greater demographic advantage over ancient northern ethnic groups.

Thus, the Han Chinese or their ancestors might have played a predominant role in the genetic mixture of populations. This scenario would mean that the genetic structure of the NH was shaped a long time ago. In our study, the HB population showed great genetic affinities with the NH when maternal lineages were tested.

First, the HB contained a distribution and component of mtDNA similar to that of the NH and clustered closely together with the NH in the PCA plot.

Second, the HB shared more haplotypes with the NH than with other populations in the haplotype-sharing analysis. Third, the FST value from comparisons between the HB and NH populations was lowest and negative. Generally, FST value should theoretically range between 0 and 1. 

However, if the estimate of within diversity is larger than the estimate obtained of variance among groups, negative FST values should be obtained, and they are represented as equal to zero. It indicated that HB bore a very high similarity to NH populations.

Considering the location and culture of the HB, we suggest that the NH might have provided a significant contribution to the HB and find that the maternal genetic profiles of the NH [principally represented by Magog] were shaped 3,000 years ago. These conclusions are further supported by the relationship between the HB and NM, XN, and XB. 

In our study, the PCA plot is consistent with the SH not onlymixing with the SM but also with the NH, which is consistent with a previous genetic study that concluded that the SH was formed from almost equal contributions of southward migrating Han Chinese and southern natives.

However, the NH and NM group into two separate clusters, which is not consistent with their current geographic distributions because these two populations often live together in the northern region of China. Moreover, XN, XB1 and XB2 pool into the NM and are far away from HB and NH. 

A haplotype-sharing analysis of the three ancient populations and each present-day Han Chinese population shows that the fraction of haplotypes from HB is significantly higher than that from XN, XB1 and XB2 (all of the p values of HB/XN, HB/XB1 and XB2 are less than 0.01, two-tailed t-test. In the FST comparisons, the FST values of the XN/HB, XB/HB, XB/NH, XN/NH, and NM/NH are significantly higher, and all of the p values are less than 0.05, indicating that the XN and XB were distinct from the NH and HB. 

This finding indicates that the ancient populations of the XN and XB had a limited maternal genetic impact on present-day Han Chinese.

Y chromosome SNP analysis was consistent with the conclusions drawn from studying the maternal lineages. In the paternal lineage, HB contained the haplogroups or sub-haplogroups N, [O1a, O1b, O2a] and Q1a1. The total frequencies of these haplogroups reached high levels (66% – 100%) in current Han Chinese. Haplogroup Q1a1, which was predominant in HB, is highly specific to the Han Chinese. Haplogroup [O2a1], the second highest frequency (33.34%) in HB, occupies the highest frequencies in almost all current Han Chinese populations (32.5%-76.92%).

Moreover, in the PCA plot, HB groups closely [align] with the Han Chinese. 

These results indicate that the 3,000-year-old ancient people from the Central Plain region share similar paternal genetic profiles with the current Han Chinese.

In contrast, XN yielded three haplogroups (N3, Q, and C) but no haplogroup O. The frequency of O in NM is significantly lower than the frequency of O in NH, but the frequency of haplogroup N shows the inverse trend. Moreover, NM has a relatively high frequency of haplogroup R, but NH does not.’

Y Chromosomes of 40% Chinese Descend from Three Neolithic Super-Grandfathers, multiple authors, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘To achieve sufficiently high coverage in the non-recombining regions of Y chromosome (NRY) and an adequate representation of individual samples, we selected 110 males, encompassing the haplogroups O, C, D, N, and Q which are common in East Eurasians, as well as haplogroups J, G, and R which are common in West Eurasians and sequenced their non-repetitive segments of NRY using a pooling-and-capturing strategy.’

Y-DNA Haplogroups G, R1a and R1b are indicative of European men, whereas Haplogroups J1 and J2 are reflective of males of either Arab and Pakistani descent in the Middle East and West Asia, or of admixture with these lineages.

‘Results… Overall ∼4,500 base substitutions were identified in all the samples from the whole Y chromosome, in which >4,300 SNPs that has not been publicly named before 2012 (ISOGG etc.). We designated each of these SNP a name beginning with ‘F’ (for Fudan University). We obtained ∼3.90 Mbp of sequences with appropriate quality (at least 1× coverage on >100 out of 110 samples, and identified ∼3,600 SNPs in this region. 

A maximum parsimony phylogenetic tree of the 78 individuals with good coverage was reconstructed, the topology of which is congruent with the existing tree of human Y chromosome. The tree contained samples from haplogroups C, D, G, J, N, O, Q, and R, and thus represented all the three super-haplogroups out of Africa C, DE and F. In addition to the known lineages, many new downstream lineages were revealed. 

All the earlier divergences were found to be bifurcations, except for three star-like structures, i.e. multiple lineages branching off from a single node, were observed under Haplogroup [O2a-M324+], indicating strong expansion events.’

‘The most surprising discovery in the tree is the three star-like expansions in Haplogroup [O2a-M324+], i.e. under the M117 clade, the M134 [O2a2b1] x M117 [O2a2b1a1] paragroup, and the 002611 clade. Here we denote the three star-like expansions as Oα, Oβ, and , respectively. 

Since the sample selection for high-through put sequencing was intended for representing a wide variety of clades in East Asian populations, a star-like expansion indicates successful expansion of male lineages within a very short period (<500 years). These three clades are present with high frequency across many extant East Asian populations and encompass more than 40% of the present Han Chinese in total (estimated 16% for Oα, 11% for Oβ, and 14% for Oγ). 

It is conspicuous that roughly 300 million extant males are the patrilineal progenies of only three males in the late Neolithic Age.

The expansion dates are estimated 5.4 kya for Oα, 6.5 for Oβ, and 6.8 for Oγ… We therefore propose that in the late Neolithic Age, the three rapidly expanding clans established the founding patrilineal spectrum of the predecessors in East Asia.’

The authors are prosing a time frame post the tower of Babel dispersal during the time of Peleg circa 6755 BCE. This could conceivably be the case.

‘Since all the sequenced Han Chinese M117+ samples are under the Oα expansion, and M117+ subclade exists in moderate to very high frequency in many Tibeto-Burman ethnic groups, it would be of interest to know when the M117+ individuals in other ethnic groups diverged with the ones in Han Chinese, and whether they are also under the Oα expansion, in order to trace the origin and early history of [the] Sino-Tibetan language family.

Although most of the sequences in this study were obtained from individuals in China, the haplogroup representation (C, D, G, J, N, O, Q, and R) already enabled us to calculate the times of most of the major divergence events… like G/IJK, NO/P etc., since the times were achieved using the hypothesis of [a] molecular clock, and the results of divergence time between haplogroups would not be affected by from whichever continent or country the individuals were sampled. One good sequence from each of two haplogroups is enough for calculating their divergence time, and more sequences could only help to enhance the precision but would not greatly change the result.’

Additional Supporting Paper:

‘It [remains] mysterious… how many times the anatomically modern human migrated out of Africa, since that among the three super-haplogroups C, DE and F,

Haplogroup F distributes in [the] whole [of] Eurasia,

C in Asia and Austronesia,

D exclusively in Asia, while D’s brother clade

E [is distributed] mainly in Africa, so there are two hypotheses, 

1) haplogroups D and CF migrated out of Africa separately; 

2) the single common ancestor [Y-DNA Haplogroup B] of CF and DE migrated out of Africa followed by a back-migration of E to Africa. From this study, the short interval between CF/DE and C/F divergences weakens the possibility of multiple independent migrations (CF, D, and DE) out of Africa, and thus supports the latter hypothesis.’

We will return to Y-DNA Haplogroup E and the continent of Africa – Article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Haplogroup D is comprised of subclade D1-M15 [D1a1a] and D3-P99 [D1a1b], both in continental East Asia… especially frequent in Tibet [D1a1], subclade D2-M55 [D1a2a], nearly exclusively in Japan, and paragroup D, which was discovered mainly in Tibet as well as on the Andaman Islands. In this study, only [D1a1a] and [D1a1b] samples were sequenced. Except for the sample YCH177 (Zhuang ethnicity), all the tested D1 samples (Han and Yi ethnicities) are derivative at SNP N1.

Together with Haplogroup D, C is also considered as one of the harbingers in East Eurasia and Australia. Soon after its divergence with F, Haplogroup C moved eastwards along the coast of Indian Ocean, reached India and China, and might be associated with the earliest known modern human inhabitants in Australia… 

In China, the vast majority of Haplogroup C belongs to [C2]-M217, which constitutes ~10% of Han Chinese, as well as [a] great part of Altaic-speaking populations, e.g. Mongol, Manchu, and Kazakh [Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes].

Here we identified two clades of [C2] which split at 25.9 kya [?]: a northern clade (C3-n) with SNP F1396, including a Mongol and a Manchu sample, and a southern clade (C3-s) with SNP F1144, including all sequenced Han Chinese [C2] samples. The STRs of YCH168 (Mongol ethnicity) is close to the ‘star-cluster’, which is abundant in the steppe ethnicities, indicating that a substantial part of Altaic-speaking population belongs to C3-n. 

The southern clade expands rather late (only about 6.5 kya, i.e. in the Neolithic Age), including most former [C2] individuals in Han Chinese. Interestingly, the subclade C3d-M407 [C2c1a1a1], which is common in Sojot (Turkic) and Buryat (Mongolic), originated only after this expansion of C3-s. The C3-s clade showed a similar expansion time comparing to the three star-like expansions under [O2], and probably will also be found a multifurcation, if more samples will be sequenced.’

The southern clade expanded later than the north^ because it contained Tubal and Meshech’s lines, who share similar Haplogroup mutations not just with each other but with the northern clade as evidenced by Magog. The reason why these three brothers have easily and inconspicuously become one, is due to their strong similarity genetically, in temperament and in personalty.

‘The Superclade F did not undergo [a] major split since 54.0 kya [?], until the divergence of Haplogroup G and IJK at 35.8 kya [?], which was followed by the emergence of all major haplogroups (IJ, and K, and its subclades NO, P, and LT) during the following 3,000 years. Haplogroup NO… split into N and O at 30.0 kya [?] Haplogroup P diverged into Q and R at ~24.1 kya [?], slightly before the LGM.’

An alternative explanation is that Noah carried Haplogroup A, with the resulting mutations forming Haplogroups B to T all taking place after* the LGM and the Younger Dryas Stadial – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.

Both Japheth and Shem’s male descendants carry Y-DNA Haplogroups K, N and Q; yet they are original groups for Japheth’s descendants while contrastingly, they are mutations from admixture in Shem’s.

‘Most Q individuals in Han Chinese belong to the Q1a1-M120 clade, while R’s in Han Chinese are mostly R1a1-M17. The separation events of R1 and R2, and R1a and R1b are estimated here at 19.9 and 14.8 kya [?], respectively.* This study leads to a discovery of 265 new SNPs under Haplogroup N-M231, adding significantly to the only 11 currently known SNPs. Haplogroup N is frequently found in Tibeto-Burman, Austroasiatic, Altaic, Uralic, Slavic, and Baltic peoples. Haplogroup N went through a bottleneck lasting for 14 thousand years (30 – 15.8 kya).

Haplogroup O, which [covers] 1/4 of all males [in] the world today, began frequent splitting into subclades before [rather after] the LGM [Last Glacial Maximum]. The ancestor of O-M175 [Noah indirectly circa 19,000 ya and Japheth’s descendants after 13,000 years ago] suffered an intermediate bottleneck event at 30 – 25 kya, and expanded rapidly at 24.7 – 21.5 kya, indicating a southern distribution during [following] the LGM

We found that Haplogroups O1 and O2 share 6 SNPs (e.g. F75), forming a monophyletic lineage before joined with [O2]-M122… O1a1-P203 [O1a1a M307] is the major clade of Haplogroup O1 in China, especially frequent (>20%) in the eastern provinces like Zhejiang and Jiangsu, corresponding to the Neolithic expansion of the ancient Yue (ancestral group of present Tai-Kadai and southern Han Chinese). Since Tai-Kadai O1 samples were not included in this study, their divergence time with the East China Yue population is not yet clear.

Among the three main branches of Haplogroup O, [the O1] clade expanded the earliest, fitting the current distribution which is more at the south.^ All the sequenced O2-M268 [O1b] samples other than [O1b2]-M176 form a monophyletic clade, labeled by F1462, and the SNP PK4 lies inside this clade.

Further genotyping of the newly discovered SNPs under F1462 clade will unveil the origin and migration routes and time of the Austro-Asiatic and Tai-Kadai peoples in South China, Southeast Asia and India.

Haplogroup [O2] covers more than half of all the [male] Han Chinese population.’

Khazaria – emphasis & bold mine: 

Ancient DNA evidence supports the contribution of Di-Qiang people to the Han Chinese gene pool, multiple authors, 2010: 

“Han Chinese is the largest ethnic group in the world. During its development, it gradually integrated with many neighboring populations. To uncover the origin of the Han Chinese, ancient DNA analysis was performed on the remains of 46 humans (1700 to 1900 years ago) excavated from the Taojiazhai site in Qinghai province, northwest of China, where the Di-Qiang populations had previously lived. 

In this study, eight mtDNA haplogroups (A, B, D, F, M*, M10, N9a, and Z) and one Y-chromosome haplogroup [O2] were identified. All analyses show that the Taojiazhai population presents close genetic affinity to Tibeto-Burman populations (descendants of Di-Qiang populations) and Han Chinese, suggesting that the Di-Qiang populations may have contributed to the [Northern] Han Chinese [Magog] genetic pool.”

‘The Y-DNA haplogroup O2-M122 is very common in the Han Chinese population and had a presence in prehistoric China, as did Q1a1a1-M120, which is also found among Mongols. Other branches of Q1a are found among Central Asians, Siberians, Amerindians, and Northern Europeans.

Most Han Chinese lineages are of East Eurasian origin, and in autosomal tests most Chinese people score entirely within the East Asian and Southeast Asian categories. However, some male lineages originating from Central-South Eurasia or West Eurasia have been detected in some groups of northern Han, including:

R1a1, which is particularly common in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and South Asia; 

R2a, which is especially found among South Asians and also found among some Central Asians; 

G2a, which is fairly common in Southern Europe, Asia Minor, and the Caucasus

J1, which is especially common in the Middle East among Arabs and among [proselytised] Jews… 

J2a, which is prevalent among Middle Easterners, Italians, southern Spaniards, Pakistanis, and northwestern Indians.’

Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is a Haplogroup mutation naturally deriving from eastern Europeans. Occurrences in South Asia are from intermixing. Haplogroup R2a on the other hand is a mutation in South Asian men stemming from the resulting admixture evidenced by R1a.

Haplogroup G2a is the ancestor for I1 and I2 males in Europe.

Haplogroup J1 is indicative of Arabs and only found in other men through admixture.

Haplogroup J2 is complex and stems primarily from Pakistani men and related males in Northern India. J2 found in Western Asia and Southern Europe are mutations inherited from admixture.

‘The Han originated in China’s Central Plain (Zhōngyuán) region and were descendants of the Hua and Xia tribes that farmed the lands near the Yellow (Huáng Hé) River.’ 

The Xia Dynasty from circa 2070 BCE to 1600 BCE is considered the first dynasty in traditional Chinese historiography and at the same time often viewed as semi-mythical due to limited archaeological evidence.

‘Beginning during the early period of unified China’s rule by kings from the Shang dynasty, beginning around 1600 B.C.E., [lasting until circa 1046 BCE] the Hua and Xia combined to form the Huaxia ethnicity, but they later rebranded themselves the Han after the name of the ruling Han imperial dynasty (260 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.).

The Han people did not originally live as far south as Guangdong or as far southwest as Sichuan, nor in the far northern areas of today’s China. What happened was that in later times, many Han men [Magog] moved southward and northward into lands of other cultures and intermarried with their women, including those from the so-called Yue peoples of the south [Tubal] and the Dian peoples of the southwest [Meshech], and China politically grew to encompass those new lands. 

The Han culture became dominant in southern China after this expansion and the descendants of Han-Yue intermarriages came to regard themselves as Han. Although the Han are a coherent ethnicity on the paternal side, carrying a core group of Y-chromosomal haplogroups across the geographic span of the ethnicity, there are some genetic differences between the Northern Han and Southern Han that persist to the present day, because Southern Han are somewhat shifted towards southeastern Asians [Javan (and Gomer)] and carry some different mtDNA haplogroups. 

Nevertheless, Razib Khan pointed out that the Southern Han Chinese “are not closer to Southeast Asians than they are to North Chinese (the furthest southern dialect groups, such as those of Guangdong, are about equidistant to Vietnamese).”

On the maternal side, however, the mtDNA haplogroup distribution showed substantial differentiation between northern Hans and southern Hans.

The overall frequencies of the northern East Asian-dominating haplogroups (A, C, D, G, M8a, Y and Z) are much higher in northern Hans (55%, 49-64%) than are those in southern Hans (36%, 19-52%). In contrast, the frequency of the haplogroups that are dominant lineages (B, F, R9a, R9b and N9a) in southern natives is much higher in southern [Hans] (55%, 36-72%) than it is in northern Hans (33%, 18-42%).”

“… Our results highlight a distinct difference between spatial genetic structures of maternal and paternal lineages. A substantial genetic differentiation between northern and southern populations is the characteristic of maternal structure, with a significant uninterrupted genetic boundary extending approximately along the Huai River and Qin Mountains north to [the] Yangtze River.

On the paternal side, however, no obvious genetic differentiation between northern and southern populations is revealed.”

“…Fisher’s exact test revealed that [mt-DNA] haplogroups M7, D4, R9, A, and B4… displayed the most significant differences in distribution between northern and southern China… Haplogroups D4 [similar with the Koreans and Japanese] and A contributed most to the north cluster, whereas M7, F1, and B4 [similar with southeast Asians] to the south cluster […]”

“… Using only 6 populations (two Han Chinese populations, Japanese, Korean and two Mongolian populations) to reconstruct an individual tree, we found the phylogeny of the populations became clearer.

Japanese individuals have their own cluster and Korean individuals are almost distinct from Han Chinese.

North and South Han Chinese mixed together, but still have some substructure…”

A Comprehensive Map of Genetic Variation in the World’s Largest Ethnic Group-Han Chinese, multiple authors, 2018 – emphasis mine:

‘A comprehensive autosomal DNA study of the genomes of 11,670 Han women from 19 of China’s provinces plus one autonomous region and all four direct-controlled municipalities. Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… We identified previously unrecognized population structure along the East-West axis* of China, demonstrated a general pattern of isolation-by-distance among Han Chinese, and reported unique regional signals of admixture, such as European influences among the Northwestern provinces of China…”

Case for Two Divisions:

It is clear that China has a north-south divide ethnically and culturally, combined with an east-west divide economically. The concentration of prosperity can be located in the eastern and southern coasts of Tubal… and the governance of the nation in the north of Magog. The Han element to the South has more genetic variations, coupled with a greater variety of minorities – indicating a Meshech-Tubal amalgamation. The North is less diverse, with less minorities that have merged more fully; including the minorities to the far west and far north. This split concept would be indicative of a northern Magog and a southern Meshech-Tubal divide. 

Case for Three Divisions:

We have seen the scientific data to support three paternal parentages for the Chinese, as well as for three main language groups. Anciently, there were three dominant kingdoms: Wei, Shu* and Wu.

Wei representing Magog; Shu, Meshech; and Wu, Tubal.

Bob Thiel:

‘In China, along the coast, there was a people called [the] Three Han by the early Chinese writers [refer Addendum I].

Han may be a derivative of Javan or Yahan

The three were Ma-Han, Shon-Han and the Pien-Ha. There is, as Bishop writes, a very close relationship between them…’ – The Origin of Nations, History Research Projects, Craig White, 2003, pages 164-165.

It may or may not be a coincidence that the Chinese mafia are known as the Triads.

Encyclopaedia: ‘Chinese triads are organized crime syndicates that originated from secret societies in China, primarily in Hong Kong [1], Macau [2], and Taiwan [3]. They are involved in various illegal activities, including drug trafficking [1], extortion [2], and money laundering [3], and have a significant presence in many countries with Chinese communities.’

Case for Four Divisions:

Even though Gog appears strongly to be an individual, it is plausible to consider Gog as a fourth geopolitical component in China. Geographically, it would sit with Magog in the North. The Manchus would be a good fit for Gog, as they have had prominence as the ruling element of China historically – or it could mean the greater geopolitic area of the Beijing/Tianjin region.

An informative table and map, found online, with gratitude extended to its anonymous author; for they have marked the four territories, as this writer would approximately position them. 

ProvincePopulation (2010)Density (/km2)Area (km2)
NORTHEAST (GREEN) GOG


Jiangsu Province78,659,903767102,600
Hebei Province71,854,202383187,700
Beijing Municipality19,612,3681,16716,800
Tianjin Municipality12,938,2241,14411,305
Shandong Province95,793,065623153,800
Liaoning Province43,746,323300145,900
NORTHEAST TOTAL322,604,085522618,105




SOUTH (YELLOW) TUBAL


Shanghai Municipality23,019,1483,6306,341
Zhejiang Province54,426,891534102,000
Anhui Province59,500,510426139,700
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region7,061,2006,3961,104
Guangdong Province104,303,132579180,000
Jiangxi Province44,567,475267167,000
Fujian Province36,894,216304121,300
Hainan Province8,671,51825534,000
SOUTH TOTAL338,444,090451751,445




WEST (RED) MAGOG


Shaanxi Province37,327,378182205,600
Sichuan Province80,418,200166485,000
Yunnan Province45,966,239117394,000
Jilin Province27,462,297147187,400
Shanxi Province35,712,111228156,300
West subtotal226,886,2251591,428,300
Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region6,301,3509566,400
Heilongjiang Province38,312,22484454,000
Gansu Province25,575,25456454,300
Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region24,706,321211,183,000
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region21,813,334131,660,400
Qinghai Province5,626,7228721,200
Tibet Autonomous Region3,002,16621,228,400
Rural West subtotal125,337,371225,767,700
WEST TOTAL352,223,596497,196,000




MIDLANDS (BLUE) MESHECH


Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region46,026,629195236,000
Henan Province94,023,567563167,000
Hunan Province65,683,722313210,000
Guizhou Province34,746,468197176,000
Hubei Province57,237,740308185,900
Chongqing Municipality28,846,17035182,300
MIDLANDS TOTAL326,564,2963091,057,200




CHINA TOTAL1,339,836,0671449,622,750

Green and Red equate to Magog, with green representing Gog.

Blue for Meshech and yellow for Tubal.

The four quarters comprising extremely similar numbers of population; though greater Magog – Gog and Magog combined – represents half the Chinese population and therefore, the dominant tri-partner. As stated in the book of Revelation, their number is like the the sand of the sea. When Gog is spoken to separately from Magog, this would be plausible, whether it is their leader being addressed or if it is in reference to Northeast China and the leadership in Beijing, the capital.

Ezekiel 38 paraphrased with today’s identities, could read: 

‘The Lord’s message came to me: Son of man, turn toward, Beijing of the land of Manchuria… the leader over Southern China…’ 

Alternatively:

‘… turn toward Gog from Northern China… the leader ruling all the rest of China also…’

When comparing Y-DNA Haplogroups from China with Tibet, Bhutan, Taiwan and Mongolia, we find Tibet and Bhutan have Haplogroup sequencing in common, rather than with China. Mongolia has Haplogroups in common with the Central Asian Republics – refer Chapter IV Central Asia: Madai & the Medes – though Inner Mongolia within China has less of Haplogroup C and a higher percentage of O2 like China. 

Only Taiwan of the four, is similar with China; but not the Aboriginal Taiwanese whom we have discussed in Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia, but rather the Han Chinese, though this is a mis-leading appellation. 

Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact, The Taiwanese are not Han Chinese, Lin Kenryo:

‘Many people think the Taiwanese belong to the same ethnic group as the mainland Chinese… that 2% of the Taiwanese population are aborigines, 13% are natives of the mainland who fled to Taiwan with Chiang Kai-Shek in 1949 (and their descendants), and the remaining 85% are natives of the mainland who arrived in Taiwan prior to World War II. Therefore, they reach the conclusion that 98% of Taiwanese are Han Chinese.

Dr. Lin Mali, professor of hematology at Mackay Memorial Hospital in Taipei, conducted a hematological survey. By analyzing human lymphocytes, she discovered that the genetic makeup of Taiwanese is completely different from that of Han Chinese. The Taiwanese are not Han Chinese.’

The Taiwanese share a similar frequency of Y-DNA Haplogroup O2a1 with the Southern Han Chinese, though they differ enough in O1a and O1b2, to reveal that they are a distinct line of descent within the possible Meshech and probable, Tubal gene pool.

China:        O2 – O1b – O1a – C – N – K – D – Q

Taiwan:      O2 – O1a – O1b – C – Q – D

Tibet:          D – O2 – N – Q – C – R1a

Mongolia:  C – O2 – N – Q – O1b – D – K – R1a – O1a

Inner Mongolia: C – O2 – N – K – O1b

Comparing China’s Y-DNA Haplogroups with its nearest neighbours. 

China: O2a1 [56%] – O1b2 [13%] – O1a [12.5%] – C2a [7.5%] –

N1c2 [3.5%] – K [1.1%] – D1 [1.1%] – Q [1%] 

Taiwan: O2a1 [58.2%] – O1a [22.4%] – O1b2 [8.5%] – C [6.3%] –

Q [1.1%] – D1 [0.3%] 

Tibet: D1 [51.6%] – O2a1 [33.9%] – N1c2 [4.5%] – Q [3.2%] –

C [2.6%] – R1a [2%] 

Mongolia: C2a [51%] – O2a1 [13%] – N1c2 [11.5%] – Q [3.5%] –

O1b2 [2.5%] – D1a [1.5%] – K [1.5%] – R1a [1%] – O1a [0.2%] 

Inner Mongolia: C [46.7%] – O2a1 [28.9%] – N1c2 [13.3%] – 

K [4.4%] – O1b2 [2.2%] 

There is a resemblance between the Chinese and the Taiwanese, yet it is clear they are different. The Mongol peoples within China show the result of admixture with the Chinese; otherwise, Mongolia like Tibet is comprised by peoples unlike the Chinese. 

A comparison of the main Haplogroups within China, consisting of the Manchu, the Northern Han and the Southern Han – as well as Taiwan – shows the difference, yet similarity amongst them. Taiwan may well show the truer Haplogroup sequencing for Tubal; since it is mixed with Meshech in the Southern Han.

Manchu:  O2 – O1b – C – N – O1a – K – D – Q

N Han:     O2 – C – O1b – O1a – D – N – Q

S Han:      O2 – O1a – O1b – C – N – D – Q

Taiwan:    O2 – O1a – O1b – C – Q – D

The population of Taiwan is 23,061,033 people.

Manchu: O2a1 [49%] – O1b2 [22.5%] – C2a [19.5%] – N1c2 [3.5%] –

O1a [ 2.5%] – D1 [0.5%] – K [2%] – Q [0.5%] 

N Han: O2a1 [53.5%] – C2a [11%] – O1b2 [10.5%] – O1a [8.5%] –

D1 [3%] – N1c2 [2%] – Q [2%] 

S Han: O2a1 [56.5%] – O1a [15%] – O1b2 [13.5%] – C2a [6%] –

N1c2 [3.5%] – D1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Taiwan:  O2a1 [58.2%] – O1a [22.4%] – O1b2 [8.5%] – C [6.3%] –

Q [1.1%] – D1 [0.3%] 

A table showing the difference between the Northern and Southern Han and the similarity between the Southern Han and the Taiwanese. The Northern Han are comparable in O2 and O1b, exhibit less O1a and possess more D1 and Q Haplogroups than the Southern Han and Taiwanese. The Manchu’s high level of Haplogroup C gives them a commonality with the Mongol; otherwise they have more in common with the Northern Han overall. 

                                C       D1     K     N     O1a     O1b    O2      Q                  

Manchus:             20     0.5       2     4          3       23      49     0.5

Northern Han:     11        3              2          9        11      54       2

Southern Han:      6      0.5              4         15       14      57   0.5

Taiwan:                  6      0.5                         22         9      58    1.1

China, when compared with Korea and Japan, is closer with Korea’s Haplogroup sequence, yet remains distinct. In fact, the comparison highlights the marked difference between the three nations.

China:     O2 – O1b – O1a – C – N – K – D1 – Q

Korea:     O2 – O1b – C – N – O1a – D1 – Q – K

Japan:     D1 – O1b – O2 – C – N – O1a – Q 

Though related as sons of Japheth: Magog, with Tubal and Meshech, and Togarmah from Gomer and Tarshish from Javan, they are different peoples and do not share the same genealogy just because they dwell in juxtaposition together in the northeast of Asia. 

China: O2a1 [56%] – O1b2 [13%] – O1a [12.5%] – C2a [7.5%] –

N1c2 [3.5%] – K [1.1%] – D1 [1.1%] – Q [1%]

Korea: O2 – [42.1%] – O1b [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%] –

O1a [3.1%] – D1 [ 2.5%] – Q [1.8%] – K [0.5%] 

Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1b [30%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] –

N [2%] – O1a [1.5%] – Q [0.1%]

The main Y-DNA Haplogroups of a selection of the major nations descended from Japheth, in order:

Tarshish, Elishah, Kittim, Magog-Tubal-Meshech, Togarmah, Ashkenaz and Dodan.

Tarshish, Elishah, Kittim and Dodan are sons of Javan; Togarmah and Ashkenaz, sons of Gomer.

Japan:           D1 – O1b – O2 – C – N – O1a – Q 

Malaysia:      O1b – O2a – O1a – K – C – F

Indonesia:    O2 – O1b – O1a – C – K – D1

China:            O2 – O1b – O1a – C – N – K – D1 – Q

Korea:            O2 – O1b – C – N – O1a – D1 – Q – K

Vietnam:       O2 – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D1 – N 

Philippines:  O2 – O1a – K – C – O1b 

Japan and the Philippines bookend the seven nations, with the widest divergence between them. Japan and Malaysia do not have O2a as their prime Y-DNA Haplogroup; the other five do. China sits squarely in the middle, between Indonesia and the Koreas. The Philippines though having O2a as their first Haplogroup, O1b does not figure prominently as it does for the other six nations. 

Adding the Taiwanese ‘Han’ and Aborigines to these seven peoples and comparing the three principle Y-DNA marker Haplogroups for East Asians and Southeast Asians, O, C and K. The data for the Taiwan Aborigine is updated from previous chapters, with figures from a more recent study.  

Japan:           O1b  [30%]     O2a   [19%]     O1a   [1.5%]                      C  [7%]

Malaysia:      O1b  [32%]     O2a  [30%]     O1a      [8%]    K  [8%]    C   [6%] 

Indonesia:    O1b   [23%]    O2a  [29%]      O1a   [18%]    K   [3%]   C  [13%] 

China:            O1b  [13%]     O2a   [56%]    O1a  [13%]      K  [1%]      C   [8%] 

Taiwan [H]:  O1b    [9%]     O2a   [58%]   O1a  [22%]                         C   [6%] 

Korea:            O1b  [33%]     O2a  [42%]     O1a   [3%]      K  [4%]      C [13%]

Vietnam:       O1b  [33%]     O2a  [40%]     O1a   [6%]                          C  [4%] 

Philippines:  O1b    [3%]     O2a   [39%]    O1a  [28%]    K [20%]     C   [5%] 

Taiwan [A]:   O1b   [7%]      O2a     [9%]    O1a  [84%]  

Aside from Haplogroup D1, the brother nations descended from Javan group together – Japan, Malaysia and Indonesia – with the Philippines the outlier.

China and Taiwan group together as expected.

The Koreas and Vietnam group together as already discussed – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia; and Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

Returning to the comparison table begun in chapter four, with those peoples constituting Japhetic lineal descent – with samples from Tiras, Madai, Gomer, Javan and the addition of Magog, Tubal and Meshech.

                                     O     O2a   O1a   O1b     C       D         K       Q   N

NA Amerindian                                                    6                          77

Cook Islands              5                                       83                  8

Kazakhstan                8                                       40                10       2   7

Micronesia                 9                                       19                65

Mongolia                   16       13    0.2        3       51     1.5      1.5     4

Tibet                          34       34                             3     52                  3   5

Japan:                        51       19     1.5      30        7     40               0.1   2

Sulawesi                    51       17      21       13      22                   7      

Tonga                        60                                      23                  1

Borneo                      66       36       9       21      22

Indonesia                 69       29      18      23      13     0.5       3     

Malaysia                   70       30        8      32       6                   8

Philippines               70      39      28        3        5                 20

Sumatra                    72      40      18       14        5       2         4  

N Han                       74       54        9       11      11        3                  2     2        

Manchu                    75       49        3      23     20    0.5         2   0.5    4

Vietnam                    79      40        6      33       4        3                  7   3

South Korea             79      42        3      33      13     2.5      0.5      2   4

China                         82     56       13      13        8        1         1        1    4

Bali                             84       7       18      59        2                 1    0.4         

S Han                         86     57       15      14        6     0.5              0.5  4

Java                            88     23      23      42        2                 2  

Taiwan [H]                89     58      22        9        6     0.3              1.1

Taiwan [A]              100       9      84        7            

The addition of these seven people’s defining marker Y-DNA Haplogroups, is fascinating of itself. Coupled with the fact we have completed the sons of Japheth, it makes the table even more compelling reading.

We now have a rather comprehensive view of Japheth’s male descendants spread of the five key Haplogroups (C, D, K, O, Q) – aside from N (6) – mutated from Japheth, his seven sons and his seven (Ashkenaz, Riphath, Togarmah, Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, Dodan) to eleven (Ararat, Minni, Diphath, Rodan) named grandsons.

The Haplogroups are O, made up of O1a (7), O1b (8), O2a1 (9) and O2a2 (10);

C made up of C1a1 (1) and C2a (2);

D, made up of D1a1 (3) and D1a2 (4);

K (5) and Q (11).

It is a pertinent coincidence that there are eleven principle paternal Haplogroup mutations, corresponding with a potential eleven lines of descent from the grandsons of Japheth.

The seven regions or peoples we have added to the table are:

Mongolia, Tibet, China, Taiwan, the Manchu, the Northern Han and the Southern Han.

As five regions of Indonesia were included due to the diversity of its large population; the three representative peoples of China are in addition, to the overall Haplogroup sequencing for China. 

The two bookends so-to-speak are the Amerindian with the highest percentage of Haplogroup Q and just one other Haplogroup of C, and no Haplogroup O; and the Taiwan Aborigine with the highest percentage of Haplogroup O overall and with no other groups. In fact, the Taiwan Aborigine has a full 100% of Haplogroup O and the highest individual Haplogroup percentage of all, with 84% for O1a. 

To put this into some form of context, it is the Filipino who has the next highest O1a percentage with 28%. Interestingly, it is the Han Taiwanese who have the next highest overall O Haplogroup percentage with 89%. 

The insertion of Mongolia and Tibet are notable, in that Mongolia has the highest levels of Haplogroup C in Asia, with Kazakhstan next. This indicates a connection with the Turko-Mongol peoples of Central Asia and the Tatars of Russia and Siberia. The Tibetans have lower levels of O and the highest percentage of D, with Japan next. The vast geographic distance between these two peoples does not explain the high levels of D1 in common. Only the distinctive isolations, provide a tantalising clue to the strange anomaly which Tibet and Japan share. 

As remarked upon, the Taiwanese are clearly related to the Southern Han of China, yet their Haplogroups subtly reveal the distinct line of descent which makes them unique. The Manchu and Northern Han are too similar to ignore a common ancestry, with the Manchu possessing a high percentage of Haplogroup C reflecting probable admixture with the Mongols. 

The similarity of the Northern Han and the Southern Han clearly highlights a common ancestry from Japheth, as well as considerable admixture with each other; yet also delineates a separate divergent descent in keeping with if not three different sons, at the very least two from Japheth.

Highest frequency distribution of paternal Haplogroups include the following patterns:

Haplogroup C – 1: Polynesia 2: Northern and Central Asia

Haplogroup D – 1: Tibet 2: Japan

Haplogroup K – 1: Micronesia 2: Philippines

Haplogroup N – 1: Central Asia 2: Northern Asia

Haplogroup Q – 1: Americas 2: Northern Asia

Haplogroup O1a – 1: Taiwan 2: Philippines; 3: Indonesia

Haplogroup O1b – 1: Indonesia/Malaysia 2: Vietnam/South Korea; 3: Japan

Haplogroup O2a1 – 1: Taiwan/China 2: South Korea/Vietnam

The following peoples possess the highest percentages for the five principle defining East Asian, South East Asian, Central Asian and Amerindian Y-DNA Haplogroups:

the Taiwan aborigine men with 84% of O1a;

Bali with 59% of O1b;

the Taiwanese males with 58% of O2;

the Cook Islander men with 83% of C;

Micronesia with 65% of K;

the North American Indian with 77% of Q, with certain Amerindian tribes carrying 100% of Q;

and men in Tibet possessing 52% of Haplogroup D1a

A final thought on Haplogroups is the parallel between mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroup progression, in that while Japheth’s descendants are represented by a number of maternal Haplogroups, it is mtDNA Haplogroup B (B4 and B5) which figures consistently in all seven sons. Yet this Haplogroup while relatively recent, is not the youngest mutation, with F occurring after it.

Likewise, of all the paternal Haplogroups, it is O2 (O2a1) which figures not consistently but rather predominantly in Japheth’s male descendants. Similarly, O2 is recent, yet it is not the youngest mutation for it has been followed by Haplogroup Q.

Japheth’s seven sons, or the seven out of twenty-one grandsons of Noah are concluded. We may return to some in part as we progress, particularly Madai – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Historically in the biblical identity field, we have been taught incorrectly, to think that Madai (Eastern Europe) and Magog (Russia) are mainly attributable with European identities, or in the case of the Medes, also with Iran; Meshech and Tubal again as Russia; Gomer with the Turks, Germans or even the Cymry of Wales; and Javan as the Latin peoples of Europe (or with the ancient Greece)… when really, all these people are actually descended from Shem. The sons of Japheth were predicted to live in the far north and in the far off coastlands and isles – a neon-flashing arrow pointing towards East Asia and the Pacific in one trajectory and the Americas in the opposite direction. 

The children of Japheth were prophesied to eventually dwell in the lands of Shem and today we are witnessing a wide dispersal of Chinese, Filipinos, Thais and Vietnamese into European nations as well as critically the new world nations of the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium; and Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

At a stretch, the word Japheth has the connotation for fair and so identity seekers head off on a tangent in assuming Japheth must be the progenitor of the European peoples. Many East Asians do have fair skin – even a milky white skin – particularly those living in northeast Asia.

It is perplexing, why there has been such a comprehensive inaccuracy in the identities assigned to Japheth’s sons. Some of those interested in the subject, reject out of hand the simplistic view that Japheth, Ham, Shem (and Canaan) could actually be the forefathers of the eastern, equatorial, western (and African) peoples respectively. This would be too easy and logical an answer. It would also give the scriptures validity, when really they are just fanciful fables, right? 

Regrettably, the complete confusion and lack of coherence on the subject doesn’t overly improve with the sons of Ham and Canaan with which we shall now turn our attention. It is sincerely hoped the constant reader has received due reward from the journey thus far. For the path of discovery will continue to catechise and challenge, though this writer trusts we can continue travelling onwards as co-seekers of knowledge with open hearts and minds.

Spend time with the wise and you will become wise…

Proverbs 13:20 New Century Version

“Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, disbelief or ignorance.”

W Clement Stone 

“The thing you resist is the thing you need to hear the most.

Dr Robert Anthony

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

Addendum I

23andMe Increases Resolution of Chinese Ancestry Inference, 2022 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘With more than 30 detailed ancestry regions in China and 19 in Taiwan, 23andMe was already the best DNA test for people with Chinese ancestry, but there was room for improvement. “I had some specific regional matches in China and Taiwan, but my ancestry breakdown – my pie chart – just said 100 percent Chinese, which was a little disappointing since China has much more diversity than that,” said Alison Kung, 23andMe’s Director of Product Management, whose family hails from Taiwan. With this latest update, the “Chinese” reference population was replaced by three more specific populations: 

‘More than 90 percent of people in China identify as Han Chinese, but nested within that Han identity are many layers of regional variation. For example, separating the northern Han from the southern Han are vaguely defined, but often deeply felt, geographical, cultural, historical, and linguistic differences. To what extent does their DNA reflect those distinctions? 

A recent study, led by a group at BGI-Shenzhen in Guangdong, China, analyzed the population structure of self-described Han Chinese in China. The authors found a gradient of genetic similarity, but they were also able to identify three distinct genetic groups of Han Chinese, color-coded by region in the paper’s supplemental figure… shown below.’ 

Addendum II

Due to the incorrectly ingrained teachings on the identity of the Chinese over not just enduring decades but regrettably over the course of centuries, it may be productive to prove who China is not

One theory presented by biblical scholars is the seeming link between the Latin prefixes Sino- and Sin- from Sina (which historically refer to China or Chinese culture) and a. the biblical identity of Sin; as well as b. the reference to Sinim in the Old Testament. 

Firstly, the Sinites are named in Genesis 10:17 as a family line from Canaan, the youngest son of Noah and the brother of Japheth, Shem and Ham – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa*.

Sin is ostensibly an eighth son of eleven. Though in reality Sin was a city, later identified with Tripoli in Lebanon and once called Shian by the Assyrians. 

Sin was originally a city-state which at a certain point has been recast as a Canaanite clan and is not a literal ethnic or personal name for a person. While the city of Sin may have been foundered by a son of Canaan (perhaps even called Sin), it is probable Sin was at one time inhabited with a specific lineage descended from Canaan’s bona fide six* sons. 

It is debatable whether the naming of the Sinai Peninsula is linked with the southward migration of the Canaanite Sinites, or with the Moon goddess Sin for instance. Regardless, the Sinites were not descended from Japheth, whom the Chinese clearly are – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.

For they have little in common with sub-Saharan Africans. Endeavouring to draw an association between the Sinites and the Sino-Chinese is extremely tenuous at best.

One source states:

‘Sinae was an ancient Greek and Roman name for… people who dwelt south of the Seres in the eastern extremity of the inhabitable world. References to the Sinae include mention of a city that the Romans called Sera Metropolis, which is modern Chang’an.’

The Greeks and Romans likely derived the term Sinae from ‘Chin’. On the other hand, the name ‘Serica’ referred to the land where silk came from. Serica is thought to be derived from the Chinese word for silk 丝 sī pronounced ‘ser’.

‘Although the name Sinae appears to be derived from the same etymological source as the Latin prefixes Sino- and Sin-…’ Examples include: sinophile (someone who likes China) and sinologist (a person studying China) ‘… there is some controversy as to the ultimate origin of these terms, as their use in historical texts of classical antiquity in the West appears to antedate the emergence of the Qin (pronounced Chin) Dynasty and its empire, the name of which has often been cited as the source of Latin Sino- and Sin-.’

This is an important point as the Qin dynasty founded by Qin Shi Huang-Di in 221 BCE and which unified the country in the 3rd century BCE (between 259 BCE to 210 BCE), has its roots in the Sanskrit word cīna (China without the h) and was adopted into English through the Portuguese in the 16th century. Though the name China has been in use for centuries, it is not easy to trace to its origin. It may well derive from the Sanskrit word Chinasthana (meaning country to the East of India). 

The Qin (Chin) state (founded in 778 BCE) was situated as the most westerly of the numerous smaller kingdoms that eventually formed China and therefore would have been the first kingdom reached when traveling overland from India and Central Asia.

It is also important to remember that the Chinese do not refer to themselves as China or as Sino-. Just as there are English names for countries, for example Greece is known as Hellas to the Greeks and Egypt is Misr to its people – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: Arabia & North Africa.

The Chinese have various names for their country, though the official name for China is Zhōng guó. It means literally, the middle or central kingdom (or region). The term first appeared in historic records of the Zhou Dynasty (circa 1050/1046 BCE to 236/221 BCE). The name reflects the ancient Chinese belief that China is the centre of the world, geographically and culturally. 

Secondly, the ‘land of Sinim’ is a biblical hapax legomenon (A word or form that occurs only once in the recorded corpus of a given language) and appears in Isaiah 49:12. 

Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes

“A curious prophetic verse is in the Book of Isaiah, which describes where certain tribes of Israel were dispersed.

Isaiah 49:12

Christian Standard Bible

‘See, these will come from far away, from the north and from the west, and from the land [H776 – ‘erets: land without return (under) [the] world] of Sinim [H5515: ‘distant, a people living at the extremity of the known world’, by connotation the South].’

We know the North and west relates to the British Isles. The counterpoint to that is Sinim, which is inferred as the opposite direction of, or southwards (and far away). Just as the tribe of Naphtali was to eventually settle in the South and west… exactly where New Zealand is located – Deuteronomy 33:29.”

Scholars favour two interpretations, with the majority supporting China and the minority advocating Australia. Most dismiss Australia without further thought as surely it cannot be Australia? But this is due in large part because in their mind, China must be included somewhere in the Bible for they do not recognise that china is stated under other names elsewhere.

There are two aspects in answering which is correct.

First, as Naphtali (New Zealand) is in the South and west, so too Australia (tribe of Asher) is located southwards. As will become palpable, China is in the North and eastwards. 

Second, it suits scholars to lean towards China as a. they do not know where the Chinese are actually spoken of in the Bible and b. any theory which distracts from the identity and location of the ‘lost’ Israelites is agreeably preferable. 

The issue with this line of reasoning is that the context of the passage concerns the return of Israelites from around the world (North America [Ephraim and Manasseh], Britain [Judah, Simeon and Benjamin], Ireland [Gad and Reuben], Southern Africa [Zebulun and Issachar], Australia [Asher] and New Zealand [Naphtali]) to a new Israelite home after Christ’s return during the Millennium. It is definitively not speaking about any gentile peoples and specifically the Chinese, whom as we have discovered play a vastly different role.  

“The Jerome translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible for Isaiah 49:12 says:

‘ecce isti de longe venient et ecce illi ab aquilone et mari et isti de terra australi.’

The key phrase being: isti de terra australi. 

By a strange turn, the word Australia is derived from the Latin word australis, meaning ‘southern’. Australia has been colloquially referred to as Oz, slang for Aus’ since the early twentieth century. It is the ‘land down under’ and literally the great ‘southern land’. Australia has been called ‘the Oldest Continent’, ‘the Last of Lands’ and ‘the Last Frontier’. Australia is the last of lands, in the sense that it was the last continent, apart from Antarctica to be explored by Europeans.”

An example following of what is hidden in plain sight and of the prevalent and inaccurate view held amongst researchers. 

Where Are The Chinese People In God’s Word?, Tom Hobson, 2017 – emphasis mine: 

‘The Latin version reads de terra australi, “from the land of the south” (not Australia, although it is amusing to consider!). The Greek version reads “from the land of the Persians,” which may be a directional stab in the dark, or a directional understatement; the land in question may be much further east than Persia.’

“The term Terra Australis Incognita, or an ‘unknown land of the South’ dates back to Roman times. After European discovery, its name included Terra Australis.

An anonymous quote: 

‘The earliest recorded use of the word Australia in English was in 1625 in “A note of Australia del Espíritu Santo, written by Sir Richard Hakluyt”, published by Samuel Purchas in Hakluytus Posthumus, a corruption of the original Spanish name “Tierra Austral del Espíritu Santo” (Southern Land of the Holy Spirit) for an island in Vanuatu. 

The Dutch adjectival form Australische was used in a Dutch book in Batavia (Jakarta) in 1638, to refer to the newly discovered lands to the south. Australia was later used in a 1693 translation of Les Aventures de Jacques Sadeur dans la Découverte et le Voyage de la Terre Australe, a 1676 French novel by Gabriel de Foigny, under the pen-name Jacques Sadeur. Referring to the entire South Pacific region, Alexander Dalrymple used it in An Historical Collection of Voyages and Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean in 1771.’

The name Sinim (סינים siyniym) occurs nowhere else in the Bible and it is evident that it is a remote country; remarkable in that it is the only such land specified by name in the Bible. The Chaldee also interprets it as Jerome has done: of the south. Whereas the Syriac has not translated it but retained the name Sinim.”

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002:

‘The Egyptians referred to the southernmost known area of land as “sin-wur”. This corresponds to the Land of “Sinim” meaning Australia. There are reports of Egyptian and Phoenician remains being found in Australia.’

An additional teaching nearly as popular as Sinim in Isaiah 49:12, is that of the Chittim (or Kittim) in Isaiah 23:1, 12. 

An article, Is China in the Bible? by David Vejil spends time (unknowingly) dismissing China’s true biblical identity as that of Russia, while basing China’s identity on the Kittim from just one verse. 

This author with others forms the erroneous conclusion that the Khitai dynasty which ruled northern China from 907 CE to 1125 CE were descended from Kittim. The region to the north of China proper (the Song Dynasty) was the land of the Khitan – becoming Cathay. Whether the name Khitai is linked or derived from Kittim is not clear. The Khitai people were certainly not. 

There are a number of verses regarding Javan’s (Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia) son Kittim, of which we will note two in particular.

Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia

“Isaiah gives a prophecy on Tyre and its demise in chapter 23:1, 12 NCV:

This is a message about Tyre: You trading ships [of Tarshish (Japan)], cry! The houses and harbor of Tyre [Brazil] are destroyed. This news came to the ships from the land of [Kittim (Indonesia)]. He said, “Sidon [South Africa], you will not rejoice any longer, because you are destroyed. Even if you cross the sea to [Kittim], you will not find a place to rest.”

What David Vejil fails to notice or share with his readers is that both the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel reveal that Kittim is an island nation and therefore precludes China being Kittim. 

Jeremiah 2:10

King James Version

‘For pass over the isles of Chittim…’

Ezekiel 27:6

Young’s Literal Translation

‘Of oaks of Bashan they made thine oars [ship building], Thy bench they have made of ivory… from isles of Chittim.’

The sons of Javan include the related peoples of Japan; the aborigines of Taiwan; the Philippines; Malaysia; Indonesia; and Polynesia. There is no place for continental China within these island nations.

Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia

Chapter VII

Javan is the fourth and middle son of Japheth and his sons are the second and last recorded group of grandsons from Japheth in the Bible.

Genesis 10:4-5

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

4 ‘And the sons of Javan: Elisa and Tharsis, Cetthim and Dodanim. 5 By these were divided the islands [or isles]… in their lands… and their families in their nations.’

Living Bible

‘The sons of Javan:

Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, Dodanim.

Their descendants became the maritime nations in various lands, each with a separate language.’

1 Chronicles 1:7

English Standard Version

‘The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Rodanim.’

The sons of Javan are associated with islands and the sea.

Dodan is called Rodan in 1 Chronicles. Recall a similar situation with Gomer’s son Riphath and Diphath, regarding the reverse transliteration of the first letters R and D. Either another scribal error has occurred, with a different reference to the same Dodanim who once lived on the Greek Island of Rhodes… or there is an additional son of Javan, or even a grandson, via Javan’s son Dodan – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

On a personal note: I paused, contemplating which word to use to describe the situation and checked transcription which had come to mind, though I did not know what it meant or whether I had made it up. I then found the following definition, much to my surprise.

‘Transcription is the first of several steps of DNA based gene expression in which a particular segment of DNA is copied into RNA (especially mRNA) by the enzyme RNA polymerase. A molecule that allows the genetic material to be realized as a protein was first hypothesized by Francois Jacob and Jacques Monod. Severo Ochoa won a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1959 for developing a process for synthesizing RNA in vitro with polynucleotide phosphorylase, which was useful for cracking the genetic code.’

I was struck by the coincidence and perhaps significance of a genetic explanation and the utilisation of the letters D and R for DNA and RNA, with the first letters for D-odan and R-odan (and previously for R-iphath and D-iphath). I found this coincidence interesting, but had no reason to pursue the mRNA aspect. Though it certainly did attract my attention when I first heard the term: Covid 19 mRNA vaccine – refer article: Covid 19 Injection.

The Book of Jubilees provides the location for Javan some time after the Flood when Japheth’s children lived in southern Central Asia, Asia Minor and Southeastern Europe.

Book of Jubilees 9:10-11

‘And for Javan came forth the fourth portion every island and the islands which are towards the border of Lud.’

This is a reference to when Javan lived throughout the Greek Islands and Lud – a son of Shem – was located in the western region of Asia Minor – Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.

Book of Jasher 7:6 and 10:13

‘And the sons of Javan were Elisha, Tarshish, Chittim and Dudonim… And the children of Javan are the Javanim who dwell in the land of Makdonia [Macedonia].’

We will study Javan, his eldest son Elishah and his youngest son Dodan in this present chapter. Javan’s middle two sons – the Kittim (or Kitti) and Tarshish – we will discuss in separate chapters.

Israel a History of – emphasis theirs: 

‘The name Javan is the original form of the name Ionia. Ionia is synonymous with Greece. The same Hebrew word is translated “Javan” in some passages, and “Greece” in others. It is recognized and agreed upon by scholars that of the sons of Noah, Japheth, and his son Javan, were the initiators of the [first] Greeks. Hellas, as in Hellespont and Hellenists, is a form of the name Elishah [Javan’s firstborn son], and came to be applied to Greece as a whole.

The Tell el Amarna and Ugaritic documents, dating from the 1400’s to the 1300’s B.C., make mention of the Alasians. It appears that the Alasians were from Cyprus, yet another Greek connection to the sons of Noah and their descendants. [Dodan] are apparently the same as the Rodanim, mentioned in I Chronicles 1:7. The influence of Dodanim can be seen in the geographical names of Dardanelles, and Rhodes.’

Ancient Civilisation: 

‘The name of the next grandson [of Noah], Javan, is the Hebrew word for Greece. Greece, Grecia, or Grecians appears five times in the Old Testament, and is always the Hebrew word Javan. Daniel refers to ‘the king of Grecia’ (Daniel 8:21), literally ‘the king of Javan’. Javan’s sons were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim (Genesis 10:4), all of whom have connections with the [earliest] Greek people.

The Elysians (an ancient Greek people) obviously received their name from Elishah. Tarshish or Tarsus was located in the region of Cilicia (modern Turkey). Encyclopaedia Britannica says that Kittim is the biblical name for Cyprus… Dodonaeus, possibly a reference to the fourth son of Javan… His oracle was at Dodena.’ 

At the time of Daniel circa 500s BCE, the Greeks mentioned are the forerunners of the Greco-Macedonian Empire which would supplant the Medo-Persian Empire – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. These Greeks are a very different proposition to the original founders of the Grecian Isles and coasts following the Flood – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

The sons of Javan dispersed from the Middle East at the time of Peleg and the Tower of Babel circa 6755 BCE and into the Aegean. The later inhabitants of Greece, long after Javan’s descendants had begun their eastward arc towards the Far East and after the Minoans and Mycenaeans had arrived beginning circa 3500 BCE; began populating Greece from circa 1700 BCE – please refer to point number two in the introduction (primus verba).

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 46-47: 

‘Cyprus was called the island of the lonians by the Assyrians… Tarshish is usually identified with Tartessos in Spain, not far from the modern Gibraltar. It was the furthest point reached in the western basin of the Mediterranean by the Phoenician and Greek traders. The ships which made the voyage were consequently known as the ships which traded to Tarshish, or more briefly, ships of Tarshish. The phrase gradually came to be applied to any kind of merchant vessel, even to those which had never visited Tarshish at all. Kittim was Kition in Cyprus… It was, however, a Phoenician and not a Greek settlement… Dodanim, on the other hand, may represent a Greek colony…. Rodanim is an alternative reading of Dodanim… In this case, it will denote the natives of the island of Rhodes.’

The sons of Javan as the original ‘Greeks’ founded civilisations on the islands of Cyprus, Crete, Rhodes, Malta, Sicily and beyond; all the way to Spain and its islands and coastal regions. Considerably later, the Phoenicians, also a maritime people, descended from Shem; re-occupied many of the isles and inlets located in the Mediterranean Sea – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘… where are the Greeks, South Italians, Spaniards and Portuguese mentioned in prophecy? Turn to Genesis 10:2, 4. Here is the answer. You find Javan, a son of Japheth, listed. Javan had four sons… In I Chronicles 1:7 the last name is spelled Rodanim. The Bible itself proves how often names were changing [?] in ancient times. Where are the sons of Javan today? The Bible makes the answer very plain. No need to look for any evidence outside of the Bible this time.

Look in either STRONG’s or YOUNG’s CONCORDANCE. There you will find that in the Old Testament, wherever the words “Greece” or “Grecia” are used in English, the word “Javan” is used in Hebrew! Javan is the father of the Greeks, and of the other Latins. His son Elishah spread into “Hellas” – the Greek Isles in the Aegaean Sea and to Cyprus, anciently called “Alisha”. His son Dodanim or Rodanim spread through the Dodecanes, and the Isle of Rhodes and parts of the French Mediterranean coast along the Rhone.’

It is a common assumption to interpret Javan as the Latins of Italy and the Iberian peninsula – due to the apparent Javan Greek to Greece connection. Remembering points one and two in the introduction (primus verba), the original sons of Javan from Japheth travelled throughout the Mediterranean leaving their presence behind them through the naming of their cities. 

Migrating peoples descended from Shem, followed and settled. They may have assumed the original names, for instance ‘Greece’, though todays Greeks are not the sons of Javan, nor are they the remnants of the mighty Greco-Macedonian Empire, as we shall learn – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. As the constant reader will already realise or is beginning to see, it is inaccurate to assume otherwise merely based on place names and appellations for past civilisations.

Javan in Hebrew means: ‘mire’ from the noun yawen and is translated as Ionia, Grecia or Greece. It has a similar meaning to the root word H3196, effervescing, as in hot and active, like the amazing four hundred Volcanoes in Indonesia, of which one hundred and thirty are active.

In Persian, Javan means ‘young.’ 

Abarim Publications:

‘The name Javan comes from yawen… which is wet [swampy, boggy ground] or soft mud and represents the transitional state between water… and dry land… water (seas and rivers) denote liquidity, growth and potential… in the Bible the great cultures are always associated with their respective great rivers. For a meaning of the name Javan, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Supple, Clay. NOBSE Study Bible Name List simply reads Greece.’

An appropriate name when considering Javan’s relationship with water and where his sons are dwelling today. The descendants of Javan are located adjacent to their cousins from Gomer, in the principal archipelago nations of South East Asia – Malaysia (Singapore), the Philippines and the Pacific Islands… as well as Indonesia, to be discussed in the next chapter, followed by Tarshish . 

Elishah in Hebrew means: ‘God supports’, ‘God is my salvation’, also ‘to set upright, to stand.’ Abarim Publications adds that the verb, sasha means ‘to be unrestricted’ and thus to be free, to be saved from oppression and ultimate demise. The adjective shoa means: ‘(financially) independent’ or ‘freed in an economic sense’.

This definition is indicative of modern Malaysia.

Ezekiel 27:7

New English Translation

‘Fine linen from Egypt, woven with patterns, was used for your sail to serve as your banner; blue and purple from the coastlands of Elishah were used for your deck’s awning.’

Footnote:

‘This is probably a reference to Cyprus.’

The word translated as coastlands is H339 ‘iy meaning: ‘coast, island, shore, region’ and ‘a desirable, habitable spot’. Translated in the KJV as mainly isles, 30 times; or islands, five. Many translations translate Elishah as Cyprus, which can also mean Kitti the third born son of Javan. This is a fascinating connection as Elishah and Kitti both lived on Cyprus, before it became associated mainly with the Kittim – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia. 

Just as the island of Cyprus is split into a Turkish northern third and a Greek southern two-thirds today. Kitti works as a reliable alternative identity, for the simple reason they too, are a maritime nation sharing territory with Elishah. Anciently, Elishah lived on Cyprus as well as the Grecian mainland.

Today, Malaysia is the only nation descended from Javan which is not entirely comprised of islands. It is divided as West Malaysia on the peninsula shared with Thailand and East Malaysia on the island of Borneo – the world’s third largest island – shared with Indonesia. 

Flag of Malaysia

Malaysia has a long history of maritime activities, whether it be trade via shipping, its practical location for ports, or its many shipyards. Located In the Malay Peninsula, the first inhabitants were Negritos – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Traders and settlers from India and China arrived as early as the first century CE and established ports and coastal towns in the second and third centuries. Between the seventh and thirteenth centuries, most of the southern Malay Peninsula was part of the maritime Srivijayan Empire. In the early fifteenth century, Parameswara, a runaway king of the former Kingdom of Singapura, linked to the old Srivijayan court, founded the Malacca Sultanate. Malacca became a major Islamic centre and an important commercial hub in attracting trade from all around the region – particularly between China and India.

Malacca was conquered by Portugal in 1511, after which it was controlled by the Dutch from 1641. The significance of the Portuguese and Dutch invariably being the first Europeans to navigate the world’s oceans, while establishing trading posts (or colonies) will become remarkably clear as we progress – for they are each the embodiment of the original Phoenicians from Tyre and Sidon respectively (Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia).

In 1786, the British Empire established a presence in Malaya, when the Sultan of Kedah leased Penang Island to the British East India Company. The British later acquired the town of Singapore in 1819 and in 1824 took control of Malacca following the Anglo-Dutch Treaty. By 1826 the British controlled Penang, Malacca and Singapore. Under British rule, the immigration of Chinese and Indians to serve as labourers was encouraged. 

Capital of Malaysia – Kuala Lumpur

Peninsular Malaysia was unified as the Malayan Union in 1946 and restructured as the Federation of Malaya in 1948, achieving independence in 1957. Malaya united with North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore in 1963 to become Malaysia – though in 1965, Singapore was expelled from the federation.

Over half the population of Malaysia is ethnically Malay with the additional minorities including Chinese, Indians and indigenous peoples. The population of Malaysia is 36,184,495 people.

The Malays account for 13% of the total population in Singapore which comprises 5,889,544 people.

Singapore City

The mtDNA Haplogroup E, is found throughout Maritime Southeast Asia, though in small amounts – 2% in Malaysia (including Sabah of Borneo). It has been detected in populations of the Philippines, Indonesia, as well as in Taiwan. 

Haplogroup E is nearly absent from mainland East Asia. Even though Taiwan is predominantly Han Chinese, there is a residue of Haplogroup E due to the Malay-Polynesian (Austronesian) peoples originally entering Taiwan from the Chinese mainland. 

Malayan men

The principle mtDNA Haplogroups for Malayans include Ma* with 39.1%; F1a, 16.7% – the main branch of F in Southeast Asia – and B5, 10.8%. Other lesser key Haplogroups for the Malays include: M21a, 5.9%; B4, 7.8%; N9a, 2.9% and R, 7.8%.

Recall, Haplogroup B is of particular interest for it reveals a common maternal ancestral tie between South East Asia (Gomer, B4), Central Asia (Madai) and the Native Indians of the Americas (Tiras, B2). While B4 is the prevailing bough in Haplogroup B, it is B5 which is most frequent in North East Asia – and in this case for Malays.

The letter a, ‘includes all variations of the M super Haplogroup that are not specified’, such as M7 frequent in South East Asia and the descendants of Gomer – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Malayan women

Dodan in Hebrew means:

‘Leaders’ from the verb dada, ‘to move or lead slowly.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘In the parallel text of 1 Chronicles 1:7, the Dodanim are called Rodanim. Some scholars believe that the Chronicler made an error and read a Hebrew (resh) for the somewhat similar daleth – which would be comparable to a professional writer today speaking of Oatar instead of Qatar; rather unlikely, and threw an additional waw in for good measure. Another possibility is that the Dodanim of old were known as Rodanim in the Chronicler’s days. It’s even possible that by speaking of Rodanim, the Chronicler indicates that his text is not a copy of but rather a commentary on the established text…

The name Dodanim appears to be a plural form of a name similar to Dedan, and is closely similar to the name [Dedan]. The Dedanim, however, are either descendants of Japheth’s brother Ham (Genesis 10:7) or else Jokshan, a son of Abraham and a distant descendant of Japheth’s other brother Shem (Genesis 25:3).’

Mayon Volcano on the island of Luzon

Two men named Dedan are mentioned in the Bible: one a grandson of Cush, the son of Ham and the other a grandson of Abraham, descended from Shem. Two different Dedans, though commentators have erroneously tried to equate them as one and the same person, or biblical identity. Dodan’s name is very similar, though he is a separate person, resulting in a total of three people – two Dedans and one Dodan.

Palawan

Abarim:

‘It’s not immediately clear where the name Dodanim may have come from, but to a Hebrew audience it would have looked related to the following root group: The root (yadad) has to do with love… in the affectionate, physical sense. Adjective (yadid) means beloved or lovely… an identical verb (yadad II) means to cast a lot… originally meant to cast but which evolved to praise… our root has to do with physical fondling… [and]… to move slowly.’ 

The Filipinos – resulting from a process of elimination and linked relatedness – represent the descendants of Dodan today. The writing of Dodan in the plural as Dodanim in the Bible may be a clue pointing to the diversity of the Filipino people over such a large volume of island territory. The same may hold true of the Rodanim and Kittim. We will see this scenario repeated with Ham’s son Mizra, recorded as Mizraim.

Flag of the Philippines

The Republic of the Philippines consists incredibly, of approximately 7,641 islands which are categorised under three main geographical divisions from north to south: Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. The capital city is Manilla and the most populous city is Quezon City, both within the single urban area of Metro Manilla situated on the island of Luzon.

Manilla

The Philippines has a population of 117,249,747 people – the 14th most populated country in the world. Multiple ethnicities and cultures are found throughout the islands, with Negritos (Melanesians), some of the archipelago’s earliest inhabitants followed by successive waves of Austronesian peoples of Malay-Polynesian descent.

In 1521, Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan arrived and claimed the islands for Spain. In 1543, Spanish explorer Ruy Lopez de Villalobos named the archipelago Las Islas Filipinas in honor of Philip II of Spain. Colonisation began in earnest when Spanish explorer Miguel Lopez de Legazpi arrived from Mexico in 1565. In 1571, Spanish Manilla became the capital of the Spanish East Indies which encompassed Spanish territories in Asia and the Pacific.

The Spanish considered their war with the Muslims in Southeast Asia an extension of the Reconquista. From 1565 to 1821 the Philippines were governed as part of the Mexico based Viceroyalty of new Spain. Later it was administered from Madrid following the Mexican War of Independence. Manilla was the western hub of trans-Pacific trade and Catholicism became the dominant religion – after Islam had originally gained a foothold. 

In 1896 the Philippine Revolution began, which then became entwined with the 1898 Spanish-American War. Spain ceded the territory to the United States and Filipino rebels declared the First Philippine Republic. 

The Philippine Coat of Arms – note the presence of an American Eagle in the lower left quarter of the shield

The ensuing Philippine-American War ended with the United States establishing control over the territory, maintained until the Japanese invasion of the islands during World War II. The Philippines gained independence shortly thereafter in 1946.

Filipino men

Oxford Business Group – emphasis mine: 

‘Over the last 50 years, the Philippines has grown to become a leading provider of maritime professionals and is subsequently considered by many to be the seafaring capital of the world.  At present there are over 10.5m Filipinos living and working abroad, and in 2013 they sent total remittances of around $23 [billion] back home to the Philippines. The maritime industry is a major contributor to this: nearly 400,000 Filipino seafarers were working overseas in 2013, contributing a total of more than $5.2 [billion] in remittances. “Seafaring is the Philippines’ biggest strength, currently supplying roughly 30% of the world’s seafarers, which is miles away from the second-largest source country.”

Pommie Travels, Victoria Brewood – emphasis mine:

‘Asia is the last place you’d expect to find an English-speaking nation. A lengthy occupation by the United States introduced Filipinos to English. 

Today, most Filipinos [5th biggest English speaking nation in the world] speak the world’s most-spoken language… Filipino culture – it stands out noticeably from the rest of Asia. Thanks to 500 years of Spanish and American colonization, you could be forgiven for thinking you’ve arrived in Latin America rather than Asia.’

Filipino women

The Philippines had a GDP in 2025 of $497.5 billion. The 33rd biggest economy in the world; closely followed by Malaysia with the 37th biggest economy and a GDP of $444.98 billion. The main export of both the Philippines (50.3% of total exports) and Malaysia (36.8% of total exports) was comprised of electrical machinery and equipment.

Philippine Mitochondrial DNA Diversity: A Populated Viaduct between Taiwan and Indonesia? Multiple Authors, 2010 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Comparison of the mtDNA haplogroup frequency distributions in the three major island groups of the Philippines showed similar haplogroup profiles. Southeast Asian populations cluster closely together in an MDS plot including groups from Near Oceania and Polynesia. However, an MDS plot of Asians and Southeast Asians reveals genetic differentiation between these groups.’

‘Plot of first two dimensions produced by MDS analysis of mtDNA haplogroup frequencies in selected East, Southeast Asian, Near Oceanic, and Polynesian populations, including Borneo (BOR), Hakka (HAK), Hlai (HLA), Java (JAV), Maluku (MAL), Nusa Tenggara – Austronesian (NTA), Northern Han (NOH), Philippines (PHL), Southern Han (SOH), Sulawesi (SLW), Sumatra (SUM), Taiwanese Aborigines (TAB), Thailand (THL) and Vietnam (VTN).

(A) Including Nusa Tenggara – Non-Austronesian (NTN), Polynesian (POL), and West Papuan (WEP); Borneo and Sumatra overlap.

(B) East Asian and Southeast Asian groups only.’

‘The Philippines, Taiwanese Aborigines, and Sulawesi cannot be clearly separated in the first dimension of the MDS plot; these groups can only be distinguished in the second dimension. However, the MDS plot does enable us to differentiate between the latter populations and other Island Southeast Asians (Maluku, Java, Borneo, Sumatra, and Austronesian-speaking groups in the Nusa Tenggaras). 

Han Chinese populations from Taiwan (Hakka) and southern China group closely together, whereas mainland Southeast Asian populations from Vietnam and Thailand are interspersed with other East Asian groups. 

Genetic distances between these populations are most closely correlated with the distributions of haplogroups B5b, M7b3, and M7c3c (r ≥ 0.25); less so with other frequent haplogroups such as E1a1a and B4a1a. Lineages that comprise a significant proportion (≥5%) of the Philippine population and are generally shared with both Island and/or Mainland Southeast Asians include B4b1, B4c1b, B5b, E, and R9c. Among these mtDNA lineages, haplogroup E is unusual in that it is virtually absent in mainland Asia.’

Frequencies of major mtDNA haplogroups in East Asian, Southeast Asian, Papuan, and Polynesian groups

‘Haplogroup B4a1a is highly diverse in Taiwan, but the subclade (B4a1a1) characterized by a mutation at np 14,022 is absent there. The identification of haplogroup B4a1a1 in the Philippines may indicate a stage of development of the Polynesian Motif along the north to south pathway proposed in the general Out of Taiwan model for the Austronesian population expansion.

This apparently completes a series of genetic links from Taiwan (where the B4a1a motif may have originated), through the Philippines (where the np 14,022 mutation might have evolved) and finally to Indonesia (where the full Polynesian Motif first occurs). 

However, the observation of a B4a1a1 sample in the Philippine population is not necessarily incompatible with models that argue for an extended development period for the Polynesian Motif in ISEA, if the proposed area of development of the motif is expanded to include the Philippines. Another alternative explanation is that the B4a1a1 lineages might have been brought to the Philippines by a back migration from Indonesia.’

The cluster of island Southeast Asia and Polynesia mtDNA maternal Haplogroups, confirms the genetic link between Polynesia with the rest of southeast of Asia. The article also supports that migration from Taiwan to Indonesia and Polynesia went via the Philippine Islands.

The most common Filipino Haplogroups include:

M7c, 17.8%; B4a, 10.8%; E1a, 9.4%; B5b, 7.5%; Y2a1 5.6% and F1a, 4.7%.

Maternal mtDNA Haplogroups which the Filipinos possess in common with Taiwan and indicative of the Austronesian expansion include: B4a1a1a, E1a1a, M7b3, M7c3c, and Y2. All of these are almost completely non-existent in Thailand, showing first, that the Austronesian expansion from Taiwan did not include the South East Asian mainland and second, the precise ethnic dividing line existing between Gomer’s offspring and Javan’s descendants.

Complete mtDNA Genomes of Filipino Ethnolinguistic Groups: a melting pot of recent and ancient lineages in the Asia-Pacific region, Multiple Authors, 2013 – emphasis mine:

‘The Philippines is a strategic point in the Asia-Pacific region for the study of human diversity, history and origins, as it is a cross-road for human migrations and consequently exhibits enormous ethnolinguistic diversity. Although some mtDNA haplogroups can be associated with the Austronesian expansion, there are others that associate with South Asia, Near Oceania and Australia that are consistent with a southern migration route for ethnolinguistic group ancestors into the Asia-Pacific, with a timeline that overlaps with the initial colonization of the Asia-Pacific region, the initial colonization of the Philippines and a possible separate post-colonization migration into the Philippine archipelago.

Haplogroups B4b1a and B5b1c are of appreciable frequency (> 5%) in [Filipino Ethnolinguistic] groups. However, population comparison was limited to FE groups and Japan because Japan was the only population-based and geographically defined group in the reference data set that possessed B4b1 and B5b1 lineages. FE group and Japanese B4b1a and B5b1 coding sequences fall into distinct clades that diverged some 15-20 kya… suggesting an ancient link. 

But as macrohaplogroups B4 and B5 and their sublineages are generally associated with mainland East and Southeast Asia, more population-based samples of complete mtDNA genomes from these regions are required in order to verify the observed Filipino-Japanese association.’

This is a telling paragraph regarding the genetic link between the Filipinos and Japanese – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan. It is as revealing and vital as the link we investigated and established between Gomer’s sons Ashkenaz of Vietnam and Togarmah of the Koreas.

The article admits mtDNA Haplogroup B is associated with East Asia (B5) and South East Asia (B4*) and so questions its frequency in the archipelago nations. Yet as we have observed in preceding chapters, Haplogroup B is a common denominator throughout the descendants of Japheth studied thus far – Tiras (B2), Madai and Gomer.*

Though Haplogroup B – with F – is a relatively recent mutation as viewed above, it follows a lineage from the super haplogroups R to N and L3. The question arises as to how half of Japheth’s descendants carry A, B, F and Y mutations inherited from the maternal ancestor represented by N; while also possessing Haplogroups C, D, E, G and Z from another maternal ancestor, M.

A solution which runs counter to the conclusion reached by scientists, yet remains the only plausible answer is that Haplogroup M mutated from L3 and N actually follows M rather than L3.

‘In conclusion, this study has demonstrated various features of the mtDNA landscape of the Philippines… mtDNA showed that the Filipino population is heterogeneous and composed of diverse FE groups and Regional Centres groups, with no simple dichotomy between FENegrito and FEnon-Negrito groups… there… could [be] different demographic histories for the Filipino Ethnolinguistic groups included in the study… FE groups have genetic affinities primarily with northern East Asia and Southeast Asia…’

The most frequently occurring paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups among modern Filipinos are Haplogroup O-M119 (O1a) and Haplogroup O-M122 (O2), which are found with high frequency in many populations from East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Polynesia.^

Haplogroup O-M119 is shared especially with Taiwan, Western Indonesia and Madagascar.^ Filipinos unsurprisingly, also possess O-M268 (O1b) the remaining most prevalent male Haplogroup in Eastern Asia.  

The prime Y-DNA Haplogroups for Malays and Filipinos.

Malaysia: O1b [32%] – O2a [30%] – O1a [8%] – K [8%] –

C [6%] – F [6%] – [R1a – D1 – H]

Philippines: O2a  [39%] – O1a [28%] – K [20%] –

C [5%] – O1b [3%]

The Malays and Filipinos share five main key Haplogroups and are clearly related; yet as siblings, they could not be more different. In Malaysia there are Haplogroups belying the Indian element of the demographic with R1a and H. Unlike Vietnam with virtually no Haplogroup K, Malaysian men do carry it and Filipino men possess a full fifth of their population with the major interconnecting Haplogroup.

Fascinatingly, Malays and Filipinos are completely opposite in O1a and O1b frequency levels and only partially similar in O2. In fact, the high percentage for Haplogroups O1a and K is unique throughout East Asia. Overall, the Philippines stand out as distinct from Malay males, who with an equivalent high percentage of O1b share a more similar sequence with Vietnam and the Koreas. 

Vietnam: O2a [40%] – O1b [32.9%] – Q [7.1%] – O1a [5.7%] –

C [4.3%] – D1 [2.9%] – N [2.9%] – J2 [2.9%]

Korea: O2a [42.1%] – O1b [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%] –

O1a [3.1%] – D1 [ 2.5%] – Q [1.8%] – K [0.5%]

Comparing the key Y-DNA East Asian and Southeast Asian Haplogroups of C, K and O highlights the following.

Malaysia:        O1b  [32%]   O2a [30%]   O1a    [8%]   K   [8%]    C   [6%] 

Philippines:    O1b    [3%]   O2a [39%]   O1a  [28%]   K [20%]    C   [5%] 

Vietnam:         O1b  [33%]  O2a [40%]   O1a    [6%]                     C   [4%] 

Korea:            O1b  [33%]   O2a [42%]   O1a    [3%]   K [0.5%]   C  [13%]

The Malays, Filipinos, Vietnamese and Koreans possess unique clades within each Haplogroup as well as sharing other clades in common. This comparison is still helpful for it shows that the four nations are clearly related in being descendants from a common paternal ancestor in Japheth. Yet obviously reveals the distinction between the brothers Gomer and Javan and their descendants who are in turn cousins.

Something of interest we will note periodically on our journey, is the aspect that cousins can have a genetic similarity parallel with a similar personality and kinship which is as close as that of a sibling. Just as in everyday life, cousins can have a greater rapport with one another than with their own brother or sister. 

What is immediately apparent is the affinity between brothers Elishah and Dodan in having higher Haplogroup K percentages, as distinct from their cousins from Gomer. The higher percentage of C, separates Korea, who are are already exposed as a maverick in Gomer’s family; in their choosing to dwell in an entirely different location from the rest of their relations – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

As Malaysian men have similar levels of O1a and O1b with Vietnam and the Koreas, they do not with regard to Haplogroup O2. Whereas Filipino men do share a similar percentage of O2 with the Gomer nations but in O1a and O1b it is diametrically opposite.

Using our comparison table from previous chapters, with samples from Tiras, Madai and Gomer and charting two of the sons of Javan, we are presented with the following data. 

                                O     O2a   O1a   O1b     C     D       K       Q    N

NA Amerindian                                                6                         77

Kazakhstan             8                                      40                10      2  7

South Korea          79       42        3      33      13    2.5   0.5       2   4

Vietnam                 79       40        6      33       4        3                 7  3

Philippines            70       39     28        3        5               20

Malaysia                70       30        8      32       6                 8

What does this tell us and what can we learn thus far? Regarding the more recent Haplogroup mutation Q, it is missing from Javan’s sons, but evident in three of Japheth’s seven sons studied so far. As discussed, it is the marker Y-DNA Haplogroup for the Amerindian – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.

It is the converse with the ancient Haplogroup mutation D, where it is exhibited only in Gomer’s sons. The oldest Haplogroup mutation C, is unsurprisingly found in all discussed so far and is found at higher levels in central and northern Asia. The northern Haplogroup N is missing from Javan’s children, yet evident in Vietnam – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Interestingly, the major interconnecting Haplogroup K, stemming from the older Haplogroup F mutation does not it seems, follow a pattern. It is relatively absent in mainland south east Asia yet significantly higher in Javan’s island lands. An explanation for this may be linked with the Negritos population, particularly in the Philippines. 

Relatively young Haplogroup mutation O, stemming from NO and before that, Haplogroup K, shows that as combined group O, it is the predominant Y-DNA marker Haplogroup for Japheth’s male descendants through Noah’s grandsons Gomer and Javan. It is worth highlighting how Gomer’s sons, Togarmah and Ashkenaz both possess exactly 79% of group O; and just as noteworthy, the two sons of Javan; Dodan and Elishah, have exactly 70% in Haplogroup O mutations.

The differences appear once Haplogroup O-M175 is split into O-M122, O-M119 and O-M268. It is the men from the Philippines who are the most unlike their brother and cousins; with far less O1b and considerably more O1a. For Haplogroup O2, the Filipinos are more aligned with their Gomer cousins than with Malaysia. Whether migration pathways have a bearing is a credible question. For the evidence shows that the Filipinos originated in Taiwan before dwelling in the Philippine archipelago. Did the Malays travel in the same direction from the same origin, or via south Asia instead?

Returning to the relationship of Dodan with Rodan; it is proposed that Rodan equates with the Polynesian and Micronesian peoples of the Pacific and Oceania. Their locations include such diverse regions as Madagascar in the West, Hawaii in the North, Easter Island in the East and New Zealand in the South. 

Riphath and Diphath of Gomer, modern Cambodia and Laos; were not a ‘scribal error’, but an indication of two peoples closely aligned, historically, culturally and ethnically – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia. One deriving from the other or less likely, Diphath was a later son of Gomer. Javan’s youngest son Dodan – the Dodanim – strangely mirrors, the same relationship with Rodan, the Rodanim.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine: 

‘The Mauri, Milyaes and Gasgars migrated from the Mediterranean via Asia Minor… The Gasgars live on the Island of Madagasgar. The word “Madagasgar” means “Gasgars of the land of Madai! “The Milyaes are the Malayas of Southeast Asia; the Mauri are the Maori of the South Pacific, The Maori claim to have come from the West by ship from the land of “Raiatea” (AN INTRODUCTION TO POLYNESIAN ANTHROPOLOGY, by Peter Buck, page 14). Where was Raiatea? Some lost continent? NO! Raiatea was a land familiar to the Romans. They called it Raetia. It was located south of the Danube River… (SMITH’s CLASSICAL DICTIONARY).’

A number of researchers maintain the Polynesians sailed from South America across the Pacific Ocean to the Pacific Islands. In 1947, the Kon Tiki voyage by Thor Heyerdahl using a a Polynesian balsa wood raft sailed across the Pacific, westward from South America, beyond Easter Island to prove it could be done. Polynesians did sail that same direction, only after they had first sailed eastward to South America. When they returned, they brought with them bottle gourds, the paper mulberry tree and sweet potatoes called Kumara. All are found throughout the South Pacific, yet they are sourced from South American varieties. This transference of vegetation has confused some into thinking the Polynesians migrated originally from South America.

The Milyaes or Malays are linked to the Polynesians.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, page 32 – emphasis mine:

‘It was the philologist, for example, who first suggested the common origin of the Malayo-Polynesian race. He found that the languages spoken by the race implied a common mother-speech at no very distant period, and thus made it possible that the speakers also were derived from a common stock.’

The Journal of the Polynesian Society Volume VII: The Malayo-Polynesian Theory III, John Fraser, 1898 – emphasis mine:

‘Scientists have also done much to spread the Malayo-Polynesian theory, chiefly Wilhelm von Humboldt, who, on the very first page of his great work (Über die Kawi Sprache auf der Insel Java), says, “Under this name – the Malayan race – I include the inhabitants of all the islands of the great Southern Ocean.”

‘The view which I take is a “new theory” so far as I am concerned, for I have never seen it stated by any other. It is shortly this: Whereas others maintain that a conspicuous portion of the Polynesian language has come from the Malays, I hold that these words were Polynesian before they became Malayan; that is, that the Malays, when they came into the Indian Archipelago, found a Polynesian language there from which they borrowed largely.

And further, I hold that in Indonesia the first dwellers were of the Melanesian stock, that the ancestry of the present Polynesians was grafted on that, and that the Malays are the last and latest settlement there. Thus I account for the well-known fact that the ground-work of the purely Melanesian languages shows many root-words in common with the languages both of the brown Polynesians and the Malays. Others say that these words come through the Malays; I say that the Malays were the borrowers.

“The truth, – the more it’s shook, it shines,” and every question as to the origin of our Polynesians and their speech ought to be worthy of a place in your Journal… for the Malay itself is a borrower from far earlier forms which came originally from India.”

Negritos (Melanesians) of the Philippines

Ancient Origins, Caleb Strom – emphasis mine:

‘Although it is plausible that Polynesia was settled by ancient South Americans; all the genetic, linguistic, and ethnographic evidence points toward a predominantly southeast Asian origin. The two main theories today are called the Express Train Hypothesis and the Slow Boat Hypothesis.

The Express Train Hypothesis says that Polynesians originally [came] from Taiwan by way of the Philippines and Melanesia. According to this view, Polynesians are mainly a part of a migration wave that came out of Taiwan.

The western part of Polynesia was settled between 3000 and 1000 BC by people from Taiwan via the Philippines as well as parts of New Guinea. Eastern Polynesia was settled beginning around 900 AD as Polynesian voyagers began to set out from Tonga and Samoa and other islands of western Polynesia to settle the Hawaiian Islands, New Zealand, and Easter Island, among other islands of the region.

According to the Slow Boat Hypothesis, the ancestors of the Polynesians are of Austronesian descent and still have a connection to Taiwan, but the ancestors of modern Polynesians spent several centuries intermarrying with people of Papuan and Indonesian lineage before setting out to Polynesia.

The first view is supported by linguistic and ethnographic data, but there is genetic evidence for the second hypothesis. Genetic studies have shown, for example, that a significant percentage of the Polynesian population has y-chromosomal DNA [paternal] haplogroups coming from Papua New Guinea while most of the mtDNA [maternal] comes from haplogroups in Taiwan and Southeast Asia.

This suggests some degree of intermarriage between Polynesians and other Austronesian groups as well as non-Austronesian groups [Melanesians]. Another possible line of evidence for this hypothesis comes from the fact that there is a gap in the language evolution of Polynesian Austronesian languages. Polynesian languages have features that no other Austronesian languages possess. This could be because of interaction with Papuan and Indonesian populations.

A study in 2020 has suggested that the date for Polynesians meeting South Americans should be pushed back even further, to around 1150 AD. The nature of those genetic links and the location for that first contact also differs from previous beliefs.

As Ed Whelan writes: 

“Genetic evidence appears to prove that Polynesians are related to present-day Indigenous people, especially from the coast of Colombia and Ecuador. Interestingly, the DNA study concludes that the earliest contact was on Fatu Hiva, an island in the South Marquesas islands, sometime around 1150 AD, and not Rapa Nui which is much closer to the coast of South America.”

Is it possible that Amerindian cultures are partially responsible for the colonization of Polynesia, or at least part of it, after all? Although it is possible that South American voyagers sailed to Polynesia to meet the Rapa Nui or another group of Polynesians, the Polynesians are known to have been more skilled at seafaring at the time, so it is more likely that it was the Polynesians who came to the Americas.

The Polynesians may have come to South America to trade with the natives, and as a result may have ended up also bringing home South American brides. Intriguingly, there is circumstantial evidence for pre-Columbian contact between Native Americans and Polynesians – chicken^^ bones that have been found at an archaeological site on a beach in Chile that appear to predate the coming of the Spaniards.

Regardless of where the Polynesians originally came from, their ancestry appears to be more complex than initially thought. The more we learn about historical genetics the more we realize just how convoluted the communication and intermarriage between different populations was in the past. If we go far back enough, current thinking is that we are all a mixture of many lineages of mankind which originally diverged from a single lineage that goes back to Africa, perhaps 200,000 years ago.’

All the way back to mitochondrial Eve, though both the time frame and the origin in Africa are gravely disputed due to inconsistencies in dating methods.

Ancient Origins, April Holloway – emphasis mine:

‘Research into the origins and dispersal of Polynesian chickens^^ has helped scientists reconstruct the early migrations of the Polynesians and the animals they carried with them. The results revealed that the Philippines is the most likely ancestral homeland of the Polynesians, whose forebears colonised the Pacific about 3,200 years ago.

Polynesian seafarers explored vast areas of the Pacific and settled nearly every inhabitable island in the Pacific Ocean well before European explorers arrived in the 16th century. However, the ancestral relationships of people living in the widely scattered islands of the Pacific Ocean have long puzzled anthropologists.

The predominant theory is that the Polynesian people are a subset [Rodanim] of the sea-faring Austronesian people [Dodanim] who have their origins in Taiwan, having arrived there through South China about 8000 years ago. From there it is believed that they spread out across the Pacific [via the Philippines] to Polynesia, a sub-region made up of over 1,000 islands [Javan] scattered over the central and southern Pacific Ocean.’

Eight thousand years ago would be circa 6000 BCE. This fits the time frame after the dispersal of all the post-flood peoples at the time of Peleg and the Tower of Babel, about 6755 BCE according to an unconventional chronology – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Holloway:

‘It is thought that by roughly 1400 BC, the ‘Lapita People’, so-named after their pottery tradition, appeared in the Bismark Archipelago of northwest Melanesia. This culture is seen as having adapted and evolved through time and space since its emergence “Out of Taiwan”. Within a mere three or four centuries between about 1300 and 900 BC, the Lapita archaeological culture spread 6,000 km until it reached as far as Fiji, Tonga, and Samoa.’

It is widely held speakers of Austronesian languages began spreading from Taiwan into Island Southeast Asia. There are three theories, regarding the dispersion of peoples across the Pacific to Polynesia. These are outlined by Kayser in 2000 and are as follows:

  • Express Train model: A recent (c. 3000–1000 BC) expansion out of Taiwan, via the Philippines and eastern Indonesia and from the northwest of New Guinea, on to Island Melanesia by roughly 1400 BC. Reaching western Polynesian islands around 900 BC. This theory is supported by the majority of current genetic, linguistic and archaeological data.
  • Entangled Bank model: Emphasizes the long history of Austronesian speakers’ cultural and genetic interactions with indigenous Island Southeast Asians and Melanesians along the way to becoming the first Polynesians.
  • Slow Boat model: Similar to the express-train model but with a longer hiatus in Melanesia along with admixture – genetically, culturally and linguistically – with the local population. This is supported by the Y-chromosome data of Kayser, which shows that all three* haplotypes of Polynesian Y chromosomes can be traced back to Melanesia.

Polynesians acquired a reputation as great navigators – their canoes reached the most remote corners of the Pacific in keeping with Javan’s association with isles and the sea – allowing the settlement of islands as far apart as Hawaii, Rapanui (Easter Island) and Aotearoa (New Zealand). The people of Polynesia accomplished this voyaging using ancient navigation skills of reading stars, currents, clouds and bird movements – skills passed to successive generations down to the present day.

Ocean going war canoes of the New Zealand Maori

Fast Trains, Slow Boats, and the Ancestry of the Polynesian Islanders, S Oppenheimer & M Richards, 2001 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Our study provides evidence for a dual genetic origin of Pacific Islanders in Asia and Melanesia. This is in agreement with the Slow Boat hypothesis of Polynesian origins (Kayser, Brauer et al. 2000) according to which Polynesian ancestors originated in Asia, moved eastward, and mixed extensively with local Melanesians before colonizing the Pacific Islands. Although dating methods revealed somewhat similar entries of NRY/mtDNA haplogroups into Polynesia, haplotype sharing suggests that haplogroups of Melanesian origin may have appeared earlier in Polynesia than those of Asian origin, although more extensive sampling in Melanesia is needed to confirm this observation.

The striking difference observed here between Asian and Melanesian contributions to the paternal and maternal gene pool of Polynesians suggests an admixture bias toward more Melanesian men, perhaps as result of uxorilocal (matrilocal) residence and matrilineal descent in ancestral Polynesian society (Have and Marck 2003)…

Fiji played a pivotal role in the history of Polynesia: humans probably first migrated to Fiji, and subsequent settlement of Polynesia came from Fiji.

After analysis of mitochondrial DNA [maternal mtDNA] and Y [sex] Chromosome DNA [paternal Y-DNA], Atholl Anderson stated: “the ancestors of Polynesian women came from Taiwan while those of Polynesian men came from New Guinea. Subsequently, it was found that 96% of Polynesian mtDNA has an Asian origin, as does one-third of Polynesian Y chromosomes; the remaining two-thirds from New Guinea and nearby islands; this is consistent with matrilocal residence patterns.

Polynesians existed from the intermixing of few ancient Austronesian-Melanesian founders, genetically they belong almost entirely to the Haplogroup B (mtDNA), which is the marker of Austronesian expansions.” The high frequencies of mtDNA Haplogroup B within the Polynesians is the result of ‘founder effect’, representing the descendants of a few Austronesian females who had intermixed with Papuan men.’

A 2010 study using meta-analysis of the most reliable radiocarbon dates available, suggested that ‘the colonisation of Eastern Polynesia [including Hawaii and New Zealand] proceeded in two short episodes: in the Society Islands from 1025 to 1120 AD and further afield from 1190 to 1290 AD, with Easter Island being settled around 1200.’

Recent archeological models have projected more likely dates between 300 to 800 CE for the settlement of Easter Island and a date of 500 CE has been suggested for Hawaii. Linguistically, there is a very distinct East Polynesian subgroup, sharing a number of innovations not seen in other Polynesian languages. Hawaiian and Maori oral histories support this, for the earliest varieties of New Zealand Maori speech have multiple sources from around central Eastern Polynesia.

Genetic History of Polynesians and New Zealand Maori… Edana Lord – emphasis and bold mine:

‘As people moved throughout the Pacific and into Polynesia, genetic interactions took place. The movement of mitochondrial haplogroups represent the migration of people from South East Asia through Near Oceania into Polynesia. B and Q are two such haplogroups which made it through to Polynesia.

The B4 subclade arose… [and]… diverged into many more subclades including B4a1a which is restricted to Taiwan, Island Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The lineage B4a1a1 is prevalent in Near Oceania and has become almost fixed in Polynesia, making up more than 90% of all Polynesian mtDNA haplotypes.

Haplotypes from the Q1 lineage have also been reported in Polynesia, in particular Gambier and the Cook Islands.

The majority of the haplotypes can be found within the B4 clade, which is well represented in South East Asian and Pacific regions. Within each of the three populations, haplotypes derived from the B4a1a1 haplogroup was the most common. This haplogroup is seen in high frequency throughout Polynesia, Micronesia, Coastal Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Philippines. As this is common to all of the populations investigated here, it shows that they have a shared ancestry.’ 

This is confirmation of the genetic link between the Filipinos, the Polynesians and Micronesians. One that we would expect for the Dodan and Rodan connection hypothesis. In addition, we can include Polynesians – in the thread which unites maternal inheritance in Japheth’s descendants through the unifying mtDNA Haplogroup B – with the Amerindian; Central Asians; and South East Asians.

Lord: ‘One haplotype common to all three populations is B4a1a1a…^ which is thought to have arisen in the Bismarck Archipelago. The haplotypes can be separated into those from West Polynesia (Tokelau) and those from East Polynesia (French Polynesia and New Zealand). The haplotypes seen in West Polynesia are found deeper in the B4 clade than those from East Polynesia. This can be used as further evidence of population migration from West to East.

There are also haplotypes present in East Polynesia that are not seen throughout West Polynesia, such as the B4a1a1c haplotype… This can represent novel mutations in the expanding Polynesian populations or possibly genetic interactions with other groups of Polynesia and Micronesia.

The haplotypes present in the New Zealand population [of the Maori] are most similar to those from French Polynesia, for example haplotype B4a1a1mThis haplotype is restricted to the French Polynesian and New Zealand Maori populations. This contributes further to the hypothesis that New Zealand Maori are descended from Eastern Polynesians.’

The New Zealand Maori

Complete mitochondrial DNA sequences provide new insights into the Polynesian motif and the peopling of Madagascar, Multiple Authors, 2009 – emphasis mime:

“The ‘Polynesian motif’, popularly named for its high frequency among Polynesians, is characterized by a well known series of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) polymorphisms that now define haplogroup B4a1a1a…^ This lineage probably developed in eastern Island Southeast Asia or Near Oceania, during the mid-to late-Holocene, with recent dates suggesting an origin around 6,200 – 10,900 years before present (YBP)… The haplogroup’s immediate precursor… has been found in Taiwanese aboriginal groups with an estimated age of 13,200 YBP… This incremental series of dates are consistent with a model whereby Austronesian speaking populations expanded out of Taiwan during the mid-to-late-Holocene… Ultimately, the Austronesian expansion spread the immediate ancestor of the Polynesian motif, and later the motif itself, over a vast geographical area – from Taiwan in the north, New Zealand in the south, remote Polynesia in the east, and finally, Madagascar in the far west.”

These dates selected by scientists are closer to events recorded in the Bible than they realise. If we could marry scientific data with the biblical record, then it would be difficult for either side to continue disbelieving the credentials of the other. The dating of 10,900 to 6,200 years ago would be 8880 to 4180 BCE and fits a dispersion of peoples during the life of Peleg – Genesis 10:25; 11:9.

If we calculate enough time for the migrations of Japheth’s descendants from Kashmir, the Indus Valley, Asia Minor and Greece; allowing for the dispersion of peoples during the Tower of Babel incident circa 6755 BCE – and then for the movement of Javan’s grandchildren descended from Dodan (Filipinos) and Rodan (Polynesians) through Asia, it was very likely during this time frame lasting from 8000 to 4000 BCE. 

The subsequent migrations from Taiwan into the Philippines, Papua New Guinea and beyond into settling the western regions of Polynesia would then fall into the proposed dates offered by scientists of 3000 BCE to 1000 BCE.

The date of 13,200 years ago would equate to 11,180 BCE and this is interesting, as it falls between the birth of Japheth and the time of the Flood. The Flood occurred circa 10,837 BCE – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Japheth was born circa 11,800 BCE according to an unconventional chronology. Japheth as we have discussed, would have inherited and carried the genetic code and potential Y-DNA Haplogroup mutations that we now associate with the East Asian and Southeast Asian peoples. This would have obviously included the all important defining mutation that would become the mtDNA B Haplogroup received from his mother and or carried by Japheth’s wife. This then would mutate into all the B clades; including B4a1a1^ which the Polynesians (Rodan) extensively exhibit.

“The Polynesian motif is currently found at highest frequency in Polynesia, where it approaches fixation in some populations. It is also common in Micronesia and parts of Near Oceania, where it is not necessarily restricted to Austronesian speaking populations, but also occurs in some rare Papuan speaking groups [evidence of ancient admixture with Melanesians].

The motif is much less frequent in Island Southeast Asia, although it has been found sporadically in both central and eastern Indonesia. In Madagascar – the western edge of the Austronesian expansion – the Polynesian motif reaches a frequency of around 20%, thus leading to proposals that the island was settled by an Indonesian population, which later colonized the Pacific Islands, or even more speculatively, by direct migration from Polynesia itself.

Furthermore, these studies revealed that Indonesians have a major role in the colonization of Madagascar, and highlighted Borneo as a likely source of the Asian-derived Y chromosomes found in Malagasy today. This is consistent with linguistic evidence suggesting that the Malayo-Polynesian language spoken by Malagasy is related to the Barito language of southern Borneo.

Currently, our best model for the settlement of Madagascar suggests that the first settlers reached the island [some] 1500-2000 years ago, when there is clear archeological and paleoecological evidence of their occupation. Ultimately, a complex – and largely unknown – genetic and linguistic admixture process between populations of African and Southeast Asian descent produced the Malagasy we recognize today.

We observed the Polynesian motif at relatively high frequency in all three Malagasy groups: 50.0% in Merina, 21.8% in Vezo, and 13.4% in Mikea… Indeed, the first and second phases of our analysis revealed that 58 of the 266 Malagasy shared a set of mutations… which assign them to haplogroup B4a1a1.”^

There is a genetic line running through the mtDNA B4a1a1 Haplotype, from the Polynesians and Micronesians descended from Rodan, to the Filipinos of Dodan and then to their ancient ancestral home on the former Island of Formosa, now called Taiwan.

Melanesian and Asian Origins of Polynesians: mtDNA and Y Chromosome Gradients Across the Pacific – Molecular Biology and Evolution, Kayser, 2006 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to researchers, Y-DNA (direct paternal lines) in Polynesia has more haplogroup variations than mtDNA (direct maternal lines); however, about 75% reporting their paternal line as Polynesian are in one of the below three Y-DNA haplogroups:

1) Haplogroup C[1b3a (M38) M208]

This is the haplogroup of about 34% who report their paternal line as Polynesian. C1b3a [formerly C2] is found in Polynesia, Melanesia, New Guinea, and Indonesia.

2) Haplogroup O[2] (M122)

This is the haplogroup of about 24% who report their paternal line as Polynesian. O2a1 [L127] is typical of populations of East Asia, Southeast Asia, and culturally Austronesian regions of Oceania [Polynesia and Micronesia], with a moderate distribution in Central Asia. 

3) Haplogroup K (M9)

This is the haplogroup of about 18% who report their paternal line as Polynesian. K is an old lineage presently found only at low frequencies in Africa, Asia, and in the South Pacific. One descendent line of this lineage is restricted to aboriginal Australians [K2*], while another is found at low frequency in southern Europe, Northern Africa, and the Middle East.’

A Samoan family

The Polynesians are spread across Oceania. The regions with significant populations include in descending order:

New Zealand – 887,338

USA – 820,000

French Polynesia – 215,000

Australia – 210,843

Samoa – 192,342

Tonga – 103,036

Canada – 10,760

Tuvalu – 10,645

Chile – 5,682

A comparison of the main Y-DNA Haplogroups for the principal Polynesian centres of population travelling west to east, including their purported original homeland on Taiwan and the stopping off point the Philippines; before migrating into the Pacific proper.

There are two main sets of Haplogroups for Taiwan: the Han Chinese and of more interest to this discussion, Taiwanese Aborigines, which we will use here. 

Taiwan:                           O1a – O2 – O1b – C

Philippines:                    O2 – O1a – K – C – O1b

Philippine Negritos:     K – O2 – C – P 

Micronesia:                    K – C – O

Papua New Guinea:      M – C – K – O

Australian Aborigine:   C – K – O

Solomon Islands:           K – O – M

Vanuatu:                          K – M – C – O

Tuvalu:                             O – K – C

Fiji:                                   M – K – C – O

Tonga:                             O – C – M – K

Samoa:                           C – O – K – M 

Maori:                              C – O – K 

Cook Islands:                  C – K – O 

Tahiti:                               C – O – K

French Polynesia:           C – O – K

Placing the island nations into geographic clusters highlights a band running from Papua New Guinea and northern Australia in the West to French Polynesia in the East. New Zealand is to the south of this latitude boundary and Taiwan, the Philippines and Micronesia to the North.

What is immediately identifiable is that the nations to the North, south and far east maintain the core Y-DNA Haplogroups of South East Asians comprising C, K and O. They do not possess the defining Melanesian Haplogroup M, known as M-P256. It is the central clusters closest to New Guinea and Fiji which evidence admixture. We will address the Melanesian’s origin and identity in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. 

What is interesting to note, is that Haplogroup M derives from super sub-Haplogroup K; specifically K2b1 (formerly K2b1d). M-P256 is the most frequently occurring Y-chromosome Haplogroup in West Papua and Western Papua New Guinea and is found in Melanesia and in Indonesia. Coupled with Haplogroup S (B254), it is a primary sub-clade of K2b1 and together known as MS*.

In some ways, there are more questions than answers. For instance in Taiwan, the Han Chinese are similar with mainland Han Chinese, but not the same. The Taiwanese Aborigines do not resemble the Han or the Filipinos, so they are a bit of a quandary as to where their Y-DNA places them; with Javan or another son of Japheth? 

The Polynesians, Micronesians and Melanesians all share the key Asian Y-DNA Haplogroups C1, K2 and O2 in varying degree. The Melanesians with their darker skin shades are more of a mystery. The Fijians in part and especially the Papuan New Guineans and the Australian Aborigines have facial features more reminiscent of the Dravidian Indian of southern India and the Sri Lankans, than they do of Polynesians – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Their higher percentages of Haplogroup K, plus M show they are different, yet neither of these Haplogroups are indicative of the Indian or Sri Lankan – Haplogroup M not at all and K only partially.

As geneticists claim, it appears that Polynesians have intermarried with Melanesians from principally Papua New Guinea and Fiji, while fanning out from Taiwan originally and later the Philippines. The shared higher levels of K and the additional M Haplogroup mutations amongst the Polynesians and Melanesians is undoubtedly evidence of intermarriage over a lengthy period of time as proposed by the Slow Boat Model.

Taiwan:                           O1a [66.3%] – O2 [11%] – O1b [10.6%] – C [0.4%]

Philippines:                    O2 [39%] – O1a [28%] – K [20%] – C [5%]  – O1b [3%]

Philippine Negritos:     K [51%] – O2 [14%] – C [11%] – P [5%]

Micronesia:                    K [65%] – C [18.7%]  – O [9.4%]

The Taiwanese Aborigines show a low level of genetic intrusion, based on the dominant Haplogroup O1a; plus, the very high percentage for combined Haplogroup O, reveals endogamy, resulting in a relatively undiluted gene pool compared to everyone else in East Asia. The Micronesians meanwhile have Haplogroup K as their predominant Y-DNA Haplogroup, as opposed to the more recent O mutation.

Papua New Guinea:      M [59.6%] – C1 [17.3%] – K [8.3%] –

O [9.1%] – C [0.4%]

Australian Aborigine:   C1b3b [60.2%] – K [22.2%] – C [6%] –

O [0.9%]

It is with the Melanesian inhabitants of Papua New Guinea that we see Haplogroup S which is a mutation linked with M. It is at 12.3 %, whereas the highest levels are usually associated with Australian aboriginal men with up to 40.9%* (Karafet 2015).

Polynesian Islanders who exhibit Haplogroup S, include Vanuatu with 6.4%; Solomon Islands with 3.1%; Samoa with 1.6%, as well as a few others. The Papuans possess the highest levels of Haplogroup M as their predominant Y-Chromosome group as expected of Melanesians, yet the Australian aborigine remains an enigma for they do not have M as their principle Haplogroup; yet they do possess a high level of S.*

Solomon Islands:           K [59.4%] – O [28.1%] – M[9.4%]

Vanuatu:                          K [40.6%] – M [29.5%] – C [17.5%] – O [4.3%]

Fiji:                                   M [35%] – K [25%] – C1 [21.5%] – O [13%] – C [0/9%]

Fiji, like Malaysia shows evidence of an Indian presence in its demographic with small levels of Haplogroups R2a, R1a, H and J. Fiji’s principle Haplogroup as a typical Melanesian sample is M. The Solomon Islands and Vanuatu, like Micronesia with the highest levels, have a Haplogroup predominance in K; though they are Melanesian and not Polynesian.

Tuvalu:                             O [45%] – K [36%] – C1 [17%]

Tonga:                              O [60%] – C [23%] – M [8%] – K [1%]

Samoa:                             C1 [61.3%] – O [26%] – K [3.2%] – M [3.2%]

The Tongans have the highest ratio of Haplogroup O, in common with Taiwan. Samoa and Tonga are a mirror image of each other. Samoa begins those Islands which are dominated neither by Haplogroup O, K or M, but rather C. Like Tonga, there is evidence of intermarriage with Melanesians en route to their final island homelands. Whereas, nearby Tuvalu does not show ostensible intermixing.

Maori:                               C1 [42.6%] – O [5.6%] – K [1.9%] 

Cook Islands:                  C1 [83.3%] – K [7.5%] – O [4.6%]

Tahiti:                               C1 [66.7%] – O [29.2%] – K [4.2%]

French Polynesia:           C [53%] – O [37%] – K [8%]

The Maori men like the Samoans are predominant in Haplogroup C as is French Polynesia and particularly the relatively undiluted Cook Islands with the highest percentage of C in the Pacific. 

                                    O        C        K       M

Tahiti                          29      67         4

Cook Islands                5    83         8

Maori                            6      43        2

Samoa                         26     61        3       3

Tonga                          60     23          1        8

Tuvalu                        45     17       36

Micronesia                   9    19      65

The islands towards the northwest of the greater Polynesia and Micronesia region and by implication closer to the Philippines have very high frequency levels of Haplogroup K compared to the islands further east and south. In line with the Negritos of the Philippines as well as in part the Filipinos themselves. This region’s defining marker Haplogroup K, is the same as for the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu in the Melanesian zone to the southeast. 

Meanwhile, Haplogroup C1 follows an opposite trajectory, in that it spikes just past Melanesia to very high levels in the Samoans, Tahitians and especially the Cook Islanders. Yet all of these islands, including the Maori, possess very low levels of Haplogroup K2. 

The prime defining East Asian Haplogroup O follows a different pattern again. In that it is sparse in the far northwest of the Micronesian zone where K dominates, then increases towards the centre of the band with high levels in Tuvalu and Tonga; decreasing again eastwards with finally another spike in the far eastern region of French Polynesia. 

Tuvalu is worth noting in that it not only occupies a central position in the band from an east to west and a north to south ratio, but also its percentages of the three key Haplogroups of O, C and K are the most evenly spread. In line with Vanuatu with an even spread of K, M and C respectively and Fiji with M, K and C respectively; each within the central zone.

Returning to the comparison table with samples from Tiras, Madai, Gomer, Javan and now his grandson (or son), Rodan.

                                   O     O2a1   O1a   O1b     C       D    K     Q   N

NA Amerindian                                                   6                        77

Kazakhstan                8                                    40                10       2   7

South Korea             79       42        3      33   13    2.5     0.5       2   4

Vietnam                    79       40        6      33     4        3                 7  3

Philippines               70       39     28        3      5               20

Malaysia                   70       30      8      32       6                 8

Taiwan:                    88        11      66       11    0.4        

Micronesia                 9                                     19               65

Tuvalu                       45                                     17               36

Tonga                        60                                   23                 1

Samoa                       26                                   61                 3

Cook Islands              5                                   83                 8

The enigmatic Taiwanese aborigines stand out for a number of reasons. Compared to their East Asian relatives, they possess an extraordinarily low level of Haplogroup C; a low level of O1b, only matched by the Filipinos; a low level of O2 and contrastingly, an exceptionally high percentage of O1a. Then combining the O clades, the Taiwanese have an incredible 88% for Haplogroup O; with no Haplogroups K, D, Q, or N. 

Similarly for the Polynesians, they have no D, Q or N Haplogroups just like the other sons of Javan; the Philippines and Malaysia. The prime East Asian Haplogroup O is low on the outskirts of Polynesia, but increases considerably towards its epicentre, yet still not approaching the levels of the Philippines for example. Haplogroup C is quite the opposite and aside from Kazakhstan, the sampled Polynesian males all exhibit higher percentages of Haplogroup C, with the staggering 83% in the Cook Islands. 

The connecting Haplogroup K is interesting, as the pattern is random and though the Polynesian sample all possess K, it is variable – with those Polynesians and Micronesians closer to the Philippines possessing very high percentages, such as the 65% in Micronesian men. 

One can’t help but think that the original predominant Haplogroups for Polynesian males were O or C and to a far lesser degree perhaps K. Intermarrying and admixture with the Melanesians who appear to have had K then M as their dominant Y-DNA Haplogroup, meant an increase in these and a decrease in O and C overall. With the opposite impacting Melanesian men. The variance for each group highlighting how lengthy a period the intermarrying occurred, as well as how many of the population were intermixing.

Chapter eight shines a light on an easily over looked island nation in South East Asia descended from Javan – which while in the shadow of the Asian giant that is China on the mainland, is set to awaken as an economic and military power house not just in Asia but on the world stage at large.

Happy is the person who finds wisdom, the one who gets understanding. Wisdom is worth more than silver; it brings more profit than gold.

Proverbs 3:13-14 New Century Version

“If the majority doesn’t laugh at you, beware that you must be saying something wrong. When the majority thinks you are a fool, only then is there some possibility of you being a wise man.”

Laozi

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

Covid 19 Injection

Prior to Covid 19 the vaccine argument was widening to a broader audience and becoming increasingly animated between those for and those against. The timing of the Covid 19 outbreak has deflected the growing general vaccine debate, amongst other more pressing critical issues, such as the endangerment of much of earth’s species of wildlife particularly in the oceans, the melting of the polar ice caps and the deterioration of the ozone layer – refer article: Climate Change & Global Warming – Looming Crisis or a New Equilibrium?

Our society is polarising, with the Covid 19 virus pandemic and its subsequent immunisation program, adding impetus. There are always two choices and two paths, with people now facing the decision whether to receive an inoculation, or not.

Vaccine development can be broadly classified into two categories: gene-based and protein-based. Over past decades, traditional viral vector vaccines place a live, though weakened or inactivated disease germ, such as adenovirus – that causes the common cold – into the body as a shell to carry genetic code to cells, similar to a Trojan Horse. Once the specific genetic instructions are inside the nucleus of the body’s cells, the cells produce a spike protein to influence the body’s immune system and so create antibodies and memory cells to protect against a future infection.

Genetic engineering is an experimental technique, using genes to treat or prevent disease, either by a. replacing a mutated gene causing disease with a healthy copy, b. inactivating a mutated gene that is malfunctioning or c. introducing a new gene to fight a disease. It is in its infancy, with ethical concerns yet to be addressed or regulated and it continues to be controversial. Gene therapy involves inserting a new gene directly into a cell. The challenge, is targeting the new genes to the specific cells required and then also ensuring the new genes are precisely controlled by the body.

The mRNA vaccines fall into this category using a novel technology that has never been approved for widespread use. They do not contain a live virus but a synthetic, lab developed nucleoside-modified version of mRNA – messenger ribonucleic acid – a molecule coated with lipid nanoparticles** that provides the genetic code for reprogramming the body’s cells into making proteins to create antibodies.

The concern with the Covid 19 mRNA vaccines… [similar to retroviruses which contain a RNA genome that creates a DNA copy by reverse transcription, this then integrates into the cell of the host, literally inserting itself into the host cell’s genome; becoming a permanent part of it in the form of a sequence called a provirus. The proviral sequence is then transcribed in the host cell to produce viral proteins and particles that spread to the next cell – the most famous retrovirus being HIV-1^ – actually integrating their genetic material, (along with the new gene) into a chromosome in the human cell]… is that the mRNA vaccines are altering human DNA.

The standard response from officialdom is that these ‘vaccines do not change – or interact with – a recipient’s DNA’ and that ‘mRNA vaccines act entirely within the cytosol [Cytoplasm – see cell diagram] of the cell – they do not go near the nucleus where all the DNA is’ as supported by Alliance for Science:

‘… mRNA… does reprogram some of your cells… And that’s not a defect – it’s intentional… mRNA… is basically… a single-stranded nucleic acid that carries a genetic sequence from the DNA in the cell’s nucleus into the protein factories – called ribosomes [see cell diagram] – that sit outside the nucleus in the cellular cytoplasm… mRNA stays in the cytoplasm, where the ribosomes are. It does not enter the nucleus and cannot interact with your DNA or cause any changes to the genome. You might ask whether this DNA can genetically engineer your cells… the answer is no. DNA is injected in little circular pieces called “plasmids”… and while these do enter the nucleus, the new DNA does not integrate into your cellular genome.’

Web MD also assures us that, ‘for the vaccines to alter a person’s genes… the mRNA instructions would have to enter the cell’s control center, the nucleus. The nucleus is walled off from the rest of the cell by its own membrane. To get past that membrane, the mRNA would have to have an enzyme called a nuclear access signal… “which it doesn’t have.” Even if it could get into the nucleus, the single strand of mRNA would have to be translated back into a double stranded DNA. HIV^, the virus that causes Aids, can do this. It uses an enzyme like reverse transcriptase to insert itself into our chromosomes. The mRNA in the vaccines lacks this enzyme, so it can’t turn back into DNA. The DNA adenovirus used in the Johnson & Johnson vaccine does enter the nucleus of our cells, but it never integrates into our chromosomes.’

The Science Daily contains a report by The Mount Sinai Hospital & Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 2017: ‘Influenza A is responsible in part not only for seasonal flus but also pandemics such as H1N1 and other flus that cross from mammals (such as swine) or birds into humans. Influenza A is an RNA virus, meaning that it reproduces itself inside the nucleus. Most viruses replicate in a cell’s cytoplasm, outside the nucleus. The researchers found that once inside the nucleus, influenza A hijacks the RNA exosome, an essential protein complex that degrades RNA as a way to regulate gene expression.

The flu pathogen needs extra RNA to start the replication process so it steals these molecules from the hijacked exosome, Dr. Marazzi says. “Viruses have a very intelligent way of not messing too much with our own biology… It makes use of our by-products, so rather than allowing the exosome to chew up and degrade excess RNA, it tags the exosome and steals the RNA it needs before it is destroyed.”

“Without an RNA exosome, a virus cannot grow, so the agreement between the virus and host is that it is ok for the virus to use some of the host RNA because the host has other ways to suppress the virus that is replicated,” says the study’s lead author, Alex Rialdi, MPH, a graduate assistant in Dr. Marazzi’s laboratory.’

Thus we learn that the nucleus of a human cell is vulnerable to attack and therefore, it is not unrealistic to be concerned with the possibility of an unwanted intrusion stemming from a Covid 19 ‘vaccine’ side effect. And though Covid 19 derives from a different virus than that of Influenza and the flu, it behaves in a similar fashion and is unlike say, a measles virus, which can be controlled because it is exclusively in humans and does not mutate. Covid 19 as a coronavirus is intrinsically different; they jump from animals to humans and mutate to evade immunity, which makes it next to impossible to eradicate a virus like Covid 19. It is an endemic virus and ‘something we will have to learn to live with’ like a seasonal flu.

The inventor of the messenger RNA vaccine platform, Dr Robert Malone – who has been vaccinated himself – is expressing concerns on the safety of a mass scale roll out and the unethical ways the Covid 19 vaccine is being promoted – with ‘core bioethical principles… being violated.’ He is surely qualified on both the benefits and the risks of this technology. Dr Malone is calling for a stop to Covid 19 vaccines; explaining that the vaccine can cause an enhanced immune response, with a worse reaction when exposed to the natural coronavirus. It can also create further autoimmunities in the the body. Malone added that the spike protein is the most dangerous aspect, which can open up the blood brain barrier [BBB]. Leading too dangerous implications for the body [fatal blood clots] and explains why there have been adverse reactions to the Covid 19 vaccine.

Pascal Davies elaborates on Euronews, 2021: ‘Rare fatal blood clots linked to the COVID-19 vaccines AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson have caused major concerns, but a group of scientists in Germany claims they have cracked the code as to why this is happening. The researchers suggest vaccines that put adenovirus vectors – the cold viruses used to insert the spike protein of COVID-19 into the nucleus of the cell – into the body can, in some people, cause bits of coronavirus proteins to enter the nucleus and break up. The fragments then exit into the bloodstream and can cause clotting. The rare clumps in the blood can then become serious if the clots approach vital organs.

The scientists wrote in a pre-print study… that the vaccine is delivered to the nucleus of the cell rather than to the fluid around it that acts as a protein factory. “The adenovirus life cycle includes the infection of cells… [and] entry of the adenoviral DNA into the nucleus, and subsequently gene transcription by the host transcription machinery… And exactly here lies the problem: the viral piece of DNA… is not optimised to be transcribed inside of the nucleus”.’

The mRNA in the Covid 19 injection is coated with lipid nanoparticles and the standard official medical argument is that these are very unlikely to enter the brain, though it is conceded that it is a possibility of which it is then admitted, that the repercussions of such an eventuality are unknown. But, we are then reassured that any side effects are outweighed by the possible dangers of Covid 19 complications.

Shin Jie Yong addresses this matter on Microbial Instincts, 2021: ‘Jacob Wes Ulm, MD, Ph.D., a geneticist, explained this concern in detail in a letter to the British Medical Journal, as well as in a public comment to an article about mRNA vaccines on January 2021: “…it seems that they (mRNA vaccines) can enter a much broader tissue range compared to even attenuated virus vaccines… And since the mRNA vaccines would induce SARS-CoV-2 viral spike protein expression, that seems to mean that people who get the mRNA vaccines are going to have a much greater range of cells and tissues vulnerable to cytotoxic (T-cell) attack… with side effects that may not manifest for years (with cumulative damage and chronic inflammation).

This is where the picture gets aggravatingly murky,” Dr. Ulm added, mentioning that there seems to be no comprehensive data on the cellular localization – i.e., which types of cells the biomaterial enters – of the LNPs used by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna. Although there have been past studies on the cellular localization of LNPs, different LNP formulations would enter different cell types, Dr. Ulm stated, so “we don’t know where in the body they’re going,” adding that: “The nightmare scenario would be if [for example] the mRNA vaccines’ lipid nanoparticles are, indeed, crossing the BBB and getting endocytosed into critical glial cells, like oligodendrocytes, or even worse, into neurons themselves in the brain and spinal cord, putting a bullseye on these critical cells for cytotoxic (T-cells).”

‘European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) assessment report of the Moderna mRNA vaccine has reported: “Low levels of mRNA could be detected in all examined tissues except the kidney (in rats). This included heart, lung, testis, and also brain tissues, indicating that the mRNA/LNP platform crossed the blood/brain barrier, although to very low levels (2–4% of the plasma level).” Therefore, these reports suggest that the LNPs can carry bits of the mRNA vaccine into the brain. But we still don’t know what would happen after the mRNA vaccine enters the brain.’

Dr Malone apparently supports the premise offered by some, that the Covid 19 ‘shots are not vaccines but gene modifying interventions.’ According to Malone: “The German government has specifically outlawed the use of gene therapy-based vaccine as a term.” In response to his concerns, his personal Wikipedia page has been cut and all references to Robert Malone inventing the mRNA technology have been removed and attributed to various institutions. Malone likens these actions to George Orwell’s 1984; ironically, an official denial of vaccine dangers has been Federal Policy in the United States since 1984.

Evidence of this, is that vaccine companies perform their own safety and efficacy testing, over very short periods of time [days], using questionable controls, then declaring their products safe and effective; all without independent and valid testing. Plus, vaccines are not tested for their carcinogenic, mutagenic or impairment of fertility effects, despite containing cancer causing ingredients that can alter or damage DNA, RNA, fertility and sterility. Particularly as with even general vaccines, they are permitted by government regulators to contain ingredients that do not have to be listed [such as: ‘toxic chemicals, unidentifiable protein aggregates, nanoparticles, and nano-contaminants not listed as ingredients on package inserts].’ Those who administer vaccines and those who receive them, are not truly informed as to the full contents of the injection.

Vaccines contain ingredients that are either not required by the human body, are dangerous to the human body [especially when injected] or for ethical, religious reasons are unacceptable. For instance those who are Vegans, eat a plant-based diet, are Islamic or Jewish. Vaccines are tested on animals. Ingredients can include a cocktail of: ‘aluminum [Aluminium], mercury, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80, antibiotics, viruses and retroviruses of both human and animal origin, aborted human fetal material, DNA, RNA’ and hormones ‘of both human and animal origin’ [from urine, including: pigs, rats, mice, primates, cattle, sheep, horses and guinea pigs], ‘phenol, stainless steel, tungsten, lead, squalene, endotoxins, glyphosate, sodium borate, food proteins, Triton-X detergent, gelatin, egg proteins, yeast, glass shards, and blood-poisoning bacteria.’

The implications of the Covid 19 injection are worthy of investigation. In coming years, we may well experience a wave of viral mutations and variants in an ongoing pandemic crisis, all the while enduring successive booster vaccinations; with ever more strict legislation, restrictions and loss of freedoms.

The paradox is that with abortion rights – there is the freedom in the terminating of a life – it is my body, my choice. Yet society is being coerced by governments, today – possibly forced tomorrow – to imbibe a preparation into their system; in complete contradiction to ‘my body, my choice.’ It behooves us all to question what are the facts, which is the misinformation and arrive at an informed verdict, the best decision… the right choice.

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Post Script

What is an injection today, may become a pill tomorrow. In a dark reflection of life imitating art, our world is merging with the one portrayed in the 1932 novel, Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. Whereby pharmaceutical drugs, propaganda fuelled world news and a hypnotic social media controls everyones life in conformity. Add to this total subordination and equality of all citizenry, achieved through the restraint of our personal wealth via a worldwide centralised digital currency revolution.

Addendum I

‘[Research] shows that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA can integrate into human DNA. Using the Reverse Transcriptase (RT) found in human platelets, CD4 (Helper Cells) and other cells carrying Long Interspersed Nuclear Elements (LINE-1); or by the HIV-RT. LINE-1 averages 6,000 base pairs (bp) and comprises approximately 17% of human DNA… 80-100 of these LINE-1 segments are known to retro transpose leading to insertions, deletions, and rearrangement of genetic material.’

Image below shows mRNA inserting itself into brain cells

‘Evidence shows that the virus is engineered with Gain of Function (GOF) [a controversial medical research practice that involves genetically altering a virus or pathogen to ‘enhance the biological functions of gene products’ – in other words: it primarily ‘refers to viruses being taken from animals before they are genetically altered in a lab to make them more transmissible to humans‘] including mechanisms creating an Inflammo Thrombotic Response (ITR)… with Prion-like structures in the virus spike protein. Prion-like domains are critical to SARS-CoV-2 virulence. Prions are associated with “Mad Cow Disease” and neuromuscular movement disorders seen in Parkinson’s Disease and Alzheimer’s’ including ‘Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (CJD)… a fatal degenerative brain disorder.’

Addendum II

Addendum III

The UK government has revealed that once you have been double-vaccinated, one will never be able to acquire a full natural immunity to Covid variants; or possibly, any other viruses. The UK Department of Health stated on page twenty-three of its most recent Covid-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report Week 42: “N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who become infected after two doses of vaccination.”

This drop in antibodies is permanent. Covid-19 vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of the virus. The report states that vaccinated adults are more likely to be infected than unvaccinated people. As the vaccine ‘interferes with the body’s ability to make antibodies after infection not only against the spike protein but also against other parts of the virus.’

Vaccinated people seem to lack the ability to form antibodies against the nucleocapsid protein – the envelope of the virus – a vital part of the response in unvaccinated people. Thus the vaccinated are considerably more ‘susceptible to any mutations in the spike protein, even if they have already been infected and cured once or more.’ Compared to the unvaccinated, who gain lasting immunity to all strains of the virus after being naturally infected, even just once.

Addendum IV

Addendum V

UK Research and Innovation, Studying the link between COVID-19 vaccines and rare blood clots, January 31, 2025:

‘A… nationwide study aiming to understand the vascular complications around blood clots after coronavirus vaccination is now underway. New research has now begun following reports of a very rare condition involving blood clots and low platelet levels after COVID-19 vaccinations. The research is led by the British Heart Foundation (BHF) Data Science Centre – a partnership between UKRI-funded Health Data Research UK (HDR UK) and the BHF.

The rapid study will access healthcare records of all people in England. Firstly to identify who’s had a disease involving blood clots in the arteries or veins, and who’s been diagnosed with low platelet levels. The study will then compare the risk of developing one of these conditions among people who have had a COVID-19 vaccine versus those who have not had a vaccine.

With more than 30 million people vaccinated in the UK so far, the primary aim of the vaccine-blood-clotting research is to provide rapid, precise results regarding the vaccine and rare side-effects. And that means initially using data on England’s population.

Although blood clots linked to the COVID vaccine remain extremely rare there appears to be a higher risk in people shortly after the first dose of the AstraZeneca (AZ) vaccine…

Addendum VI

COVID vaccines and blood clots: what researchers know so far, Heidi Ledford, 2021:

 ‘… researchers now call vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), a life-threatening and mysterious condition that affects a very small number of people who have received the Oxford–AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID-19 vaccines.

The unusual constellation of symptoms was immediately familiar to… haematologists… with experience of treating people with a rare reaction to the anti-clotting drug heparin. That syndrome, called HIT, is also characterized by low platelet counts and sometimes the presence of clots. HIT is caused by heparin, a negatively charged molecule, binding to a positively charged protein called platelet factor 4 (PF4) that is produced by platelets to promote clotting.

Some researchers have proposed that impurities in the vaccines left over from the manufacturing process – such as snippets of DNA floating around in the solution, or proteins in the broth used to grow the virus – are interacting with PF4 to generate the clumps that are then targeted by antibodies.

Tarshish & Japan

Chapter IX

Javan’s second son Tarshish, figures prominently in the Bible. He lived the furthest of all his brothers; somewhat similar to Togarmah separating from Gomer’s other sons – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

Tarshish grew wealthy through trade and is synonymous with shipping. Of all the eastern peoples, Tarshish had a strong orientation to the West, enduring until the present day. There is only one candidate remaining in East Asia who could fulfil Tarshish’s inherited identity as a maritime island nation descended from Javan.

The people descended from Tarshish today, comprise the people of Japan.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957:

‘Tarshish first settled in Asia Minor. The city of Tarsus was named after him. Here… Paul was born. From Tarsus the tribe spread into Spain and northern Portugal, founding the famous port of Tartessus – the Tarshish of the Old Testament history of Solomon’s time…’

During Solomon’s reign from 970 to 930 BCE, the people of Tartessus were Phoenicians and not the descendants of Tarshish who founded the city. The following regions are attributed to Tarshish and are all plausible cities and ports established during trading expeditions and migrations in the ancient past, as we have formerly noted with Kittim in the Mediterranean – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia. 

The Targum of Jonathan renders Tarshish as Carthage in north Africa, though a biblical commentator Samuel Bochart, read it as Tartessos in ancient Hispania on the Iberian Peninsula, near Huelva and Sevilla today. Jewish scholar, Isaac Abarbanel, described Tarshish as ‘the city known in earlier times as Carthage and today called Tunis.’ An earlier identification had been with the inland town of Tarsus in Cilicia of south-central Turkey. American scholars William Albright and Frank Cross suggested Tarshish was located in Sardinia because of the discovery of the Nora Stone, whose Phoenician inscription mentions Tarshish.

Nineteenth century commentators proposed Tarshish was fulfilled in Britain, including proponent Alfred Dunkin. This idea stemmed from the fact that Tarshish is recorded to have been a trader in tin, silver, gold and lead which had all been mined in Cornwall. Britain is still reputed to be the ‘Merchants of Tarshish’ today by some Christian believers; which is weighted with irony, due to the many points of similarity between Japan and Britain.

Much could be written on the fascinating inter-relatedness of Japan and Great Britain – Island nations on the periphery of continents; part of yet separate, from their neighbours geographically and ideologically; strong self-identity; cultural icons; empires; military and economic powers; sea-faring and maritime states; ship builders; inventors; traders… world influencers – Article: 2050.

Japan, Its Biblical Past and Future, Bob Thiel, 2007:

‘… within Church of God circles [some] have… speculated that the Japanese may have descended from Ashkenaz [Vietnam], a son of Gomer (Generations of Japheth. Church of God News… 1965) or Togarmah [North Korea and South Korea], another of Gomer’s [sons]; the… Plain Truth magazine stated, “Japan is Tarshish of Asia in Bible prophecy” (Plache R F, Lexander G L. Japan’s New Role in Asia. Plain Truth, April 1968, page 27).

Steven M Collins in his book, The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! 1992, proposes three explanations on the biblical Tarshish – emphasis mine:

‘The King James Version of the Bible records in I Kings 10:22 that King Solomon “had at sea a navy of Tharshish” (other versions simply say “Tarshish”). One possibility is that Solomon had a fleet of ships based in Spain because Tartessus (in ancient Spain) is often identified as “Tarshish”… “ships of Tarshish” were recorded as having made voyages to the New World… It is also significant to note that I Kings 10:22 is the Bible’s first mention of “ships of Tarshish.” I Kings 10:22 may be a reference to a Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain which became the homeport of a major… fleet during Solomon’s reign. If so, Tartessus (or Tarshish) was a jumping-­off point for voyages throughout the Atlantic… [and] that a reference to “ships of Tarshish” identified the fleet that Israel (together with Tyre and Sidon) had based in ancient Spain. 

The second explanation considers the possibility that the extra “h” in the word Tharshish identifies this navy with one of the clans of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin, which was named “Tharshish” (I Chronicles 7:10). Since “Tharshish” is an Israelite name, the Bible’s reference to “ships of Tharshish” could mean that this navy was primarily crewed by members of this branch of the tribe of Benjamin. It is also possible that the term “ships of Tarshish” later came to describe a particular class of sea­going vessels used by the Phoenicians. This possibility is supported by the reference in I Kings 22:48 that over a century later Judah’s King Jehoshaphat tried to “make” a fleet composed of “ships of Tarshish” for basing in the Red Sea port of Ezion­geber.’ 

This is an insightful observation, as we will learn that modern day Benjamin does indeed have a strong ship building legacy – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Collins:

‘Some readers might wonder whether the “ships of Tarshish” belonged to the Japhethic tribe of Tarshish mentioned in Genesis 10:4. While that would seem to be a possibility at first, the fact that the Tartessian “Tarshish” was located in the direction that Jonah sailed to Tarshish, and the fact that the Iberian “Tarshish” spoke a dialect of Phoenician (a Semitic language) argues for a Semitic origin for Solomon’s “ships of Tharshish” and the Iberian “Tarshish.”

Further­more, there is no biblical evidence of any close cooperation between King Solomon’s Israelites and the Japhethic nation of Tarshish. Since Barry Fell’s book, America B.C. gives evidence of “the ships of Tarshish” being involved in ancient explorations of North America, this also argues that the biblical “Tarshish” was located proximate to the Atlantic Ocean (such as in ancient Spain).’ 

Tarshish may well be the city port, located in Spain. 

Mount Fuji is an active stratovolcano located on the Japanese Island of Honshu; though has been dormant since its last eruption in 1707. Mount Fuji is located about 60 miles (100 km) west of the Tokyo-Yokohama metropolitan area. The volcano has a summit elevation of 3,776.24 m (12,389 ft 3 in) and is the highest mountain in Japan, as well as being the second-highest volcano on any Asian Island after Indonesia.

Recall, we learned with Kittim in the preceding chapter, that the verse in Daniel detailing a naval fleet setting sail from Kittim is not a reference to the West, or to Rome, or even Italy, but as the verse states, it is a direct reference to Kittim the descendants of Javan. Albeit, it is a future prophecy. The difference here, is that the ‘ships of Tarshish’ are detailing a current event; though it is the ships of Tarshish stated, not Tarshish the port. With that in mind, there are verses which record a round trip to Tarshish being considerably further than merely from Canaan to Spain. 

Bochart suggested eastern localities for the ports of Ophir and Tarshish during King Solomon’s reign, specifically the Tamilakkam continent: present day Southern India* and Northern Ceylon** (now Sri Lanka), where the Dravidians were famous for their gold, pearls, ivory and peacock trade.

1 Kings 10:22

English Standard Version

‘For the king [Solomon] had a fleet of ships of Tarshish at sea with the fleet of Hiram [the Phoenician]. Once every three years the fleet of ships of Tarshish used to come bringing gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks.’

Contrary to Collins dismissing a relationship with Tarshish the nation, this verse may well be supporting an economic arrangement with the Tarshish of the East – rather than the city-port, of the western Mediterranean. If the visits were this infrequent, it supports Tarshish was all the way around the Earth, either in Japan or East Asia – some 5,656 miles from the Israelite Kingdom – and their ships were collecting exotic items throughout Southeast Asia and India en route. See 2 Chronicles 9:21, 1 Kings 22:48 and 2 Chronicles 20-36-37.

Ship building sites in Japan

Psalm 72:10

New Century Version

‘Let the kings of Tarshish and the faraway lands bring him [King Solomon] gifts. Let the kings of Sheba and Seba [a grandson (India*) and a son of Cush (Sri Lanka**) respectively] bring their presents to him.’

Jeremiah 10:9

English Standard Version

‘Beaten silver is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz. They are the work of the craftsman and of the hands of the goldsmith; their clothing is violet and purple; they are all the work of skilled men.’

The Japanese are a highly skilled people with an economy reflecting their talent, work ethic, technological prowess and subsequent wealth. 

The reference to violet and particularly purple, lends itself to either the Phoenicians – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa – or it is exemplifying the quality of the workmanship, the products and the fitness for royalty, such as for King Solomon himself. Either way, it cannot be ignored, that Tarshish was linked to ‘faraway’ lands – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia – and with ‘Sheba and Seba’ of Cush – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Both associations are clues to Tarshish being located a great distance away, as in Asia and not the western Mediterranean.

Ezekiel 27:12, 25

English Standard Version

‘Tarshish did business with you because of your great wealth of every kind; silver, iron, tin, and lead they exchanged for your wares… The ships of Tarshish traveled for you [Tyre] with your merchandise. So you were filled and heavily laden in the heart of the seas.’

Japan in the Bible, Peter Salemi:

‘In sixteenth-century Japan, the production of gold and particularly silver grew so significantly that it left a mark on world economic history. Indeed, Japan may have accounted for as much as one-third of the world’s silver output at the end of the sixteenth century and beginning of the seventeenth century’ – Kozo Yamamura, editor, The Cambridge History of Japan, pages 60-61.

‘The warlords of this period encouraged gold and silver mining as a source of funds, leading to the discovery and development of many more mines. Most of the daimyos held large stocks of gold and silver bullion and gold dust. Nobunaga, (1534-82, the ‘Japanese Attila’), and Hideyoshi (1535-98, a brilliant commander and statesman), both had great reserves of bullion collected in their castles and used gold freely and ostentatiously to impress the world with their magnificence’ – George Sansom, A History of Japan 1334-1615, pages 339-340.

Isaiah 23:1, 6, 10, 14

English Standard Version

‘The oracle concerning [the fall of] Tyre.

Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for Tyre [Brazil] is laid waste, without house or harbor! From the land of Kittim [Indonesia] it is revealed to them… Cross over to Tarshish [Japan]; wail, O inhabitants of the coast! Cross over your land like the Nile, O daughter of Tarshish; there is no restraint anymore… Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for your stronghold is laid waste.’

The fall of Tyre – a key trading partner – impacts both East Asia and Southeast Asia. Notice Tarshish and Kittim, two brothers in the far East, are linked together. This is not referring to a Phoenician port in the Mediterranean. 

Isaiah 66:19

English Standard Version

‘… and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud [fourth son of Shem], who draw the bow, to Tubal [fifth son of Japheth] and Javan, to the coastlandsfar away[archipelago Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines], that have not heard my fame or seen my glory [non-Christian countries]. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.’

Ezekiel 38:13

New English Translation

‘Sheba and Dedan [grandsons of Cush] and the traders of Tarshish with all its young warriors [Hebrew: lions, the East Asian ‘Tiger Economies’] will say to you, “Have you come to loot? Have you assembled your armies to plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to haul away a great amount of spoils?”

Tarshish, an economic and military power with Cush, stands against the great future military alliance comprising Magog, Meshech, Tubal and Gomer – which includes China and the continental Southeast Asian nations of Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos, with Togarmah, a re-united Korea – and does not join with them.

Jonah 1:1-3

New English Translation

‘The Lord’s message came to Jonah son of Amittai, “Go immediately to Nineveh, that large [Hebrew – gadol: great, populous, mighty, powerful, fierce] capital city, and announce judgment against its people because their wickedness has come to my attention.”

Instead, Jonah immediately headed off to Tarshish to escape the commission from the Lord. He traveled to Joppa and found a merchant ship heading to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went aboard it to go with them to Tarshish, far away from the Lord.’

Jonah understandably, was not keen to go to Nineveh in northern Mesopotamia, the very capital of the mighty Assyrian Empire. The equivalent assignment today would be travelling to Russia and preaching a message of sin and repentance to the Russian people in Moscow… daunting indeed – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

There is a humorous element to Jonah boarding a vessel that would not just take him away, but take him to the furthest reaches logistically possible. The furthest destination was Tarshish. 

Similarly, for most people today, travelling to Japan would be going to the ends of the earth. Japan is so far east, it is in the West so-to-speak. Tarshish can be understood to be in the far west, depending on which direction one is heading. For example, viewed from the United States – Isaiah 2:16; 60:9.

Psalm 48:7

Common English Bible

‘… or like the east wind [from the Pacific] when it smashes the ships of Tarshish [Japan].’

The meaning of Tarshish has a number of interesting aspects and permutations.

Exodus 28:20

King James Version

‘And the fourth row a beryl [H8658 – tarshiysh: a precious stone or gem], and an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be set in gold in their in closings.’

The Hebrew term tarshish is a homonym, occurring seven times in the Bible and translated beryl in older English versions. It is also the name of a gem stone associated with the Tribe of Asher, which has been identified by the Septuagint and by Josephus as the ‘gold stone’ possibly linked to the chrysolite – a gold, yellow colour – or yellow jasper.

Well known varieties of beryl include emerald and aquamarine. The meaning of Beryl in Sanskrit is a ‘light green semi-precious gemstone’ and in Italian, ‘blue green from the sea.’ It is often colourless* or translucent, though impurities give it colours ranging from green to blue, yellow, red (the rarest) and even black. It is the first stone on the fourth row of the priestly breastplate – Exodus 28:20. Refer also, Ezekiel 1:16 and Daniel 10:6. 

Tarshish in Hebrew means: ‘his Excellency’ and ‘breaking, subjection’.

The connotation includes a ‘white dove’ or being ‘dove-white’ and a ‘search for alabaster’.

The verb rashash means to ‘beat down, shatter’, the noun shayish ‘white alabaster’, the noun tor, ‘dove’.

Tarshish has a similar definition as Riphath, Togarmah and Kittim in the element of either ‘beating or breaking.’ This shows their familial ties and perhaps somewhat of a future warning – particularly for the first three.

Abarim  Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The name Tarshish (or Tharshish according to some translations) is assigned five times in the Bible: The first Tarshish is a son of Javan son of Japheth, son of Noah (Genesis 10:4). This name is spelled (Tarshishah) in 1 Chronicles 1:7, but the -ah ending may in fact stem from a locative suffix that means toward or unto, so that it could refer to the range of the sons of Javan: all the way to Tarshish. 

Most famous is Tarshish the city famed for its wealth and merchant fleet… but which location is unknown…

A Benjaminite (1 Chronicles 7:10).

One of seven Persian princes (Esther 1:14). Note that the name of one of two aspiring assassins of king Ahasuerus, namely Teresh (Esther 2:21), seems like a truncated version of Tarshish. And both may have something to do with the Persian governmental title tirshatha, usually translated with “governor” (Ezra 2:63, Nehemiah 7:65).

The Hebrew name of a certain precious stone (perhaps yellow jasper, says BDB Theological Dictionary, but translated chrysolite by NIV and beryl by NAS) is also tarshish…

These names (and noun) Tarshish come from different languages and have different etymologies. The Persian prince was probably known as Tarshata, meaning His Excellency (says BDB Theological Dictionary). Another suggestion is a relation to the word tarsta, meaning the feared or revered (BDB Theological Dictionary). 

… Jones translates the name Tarshish with Breaking or Subjection, and the prefix taw would denote a thorough destruction or an ongoing one. But although Tarshish is mentioned here and there as subject of God’s wrath (Psalm 48:7, Isaiah 2:16, 23:1), it is mostly known for its great success in the economic arena.

Isaiah even predicts that Tarshish is not going to be simply destroyed, as were Sodom and Gomorrah, but that its legacy will one day be employed to service God (Isaiah 60:9). It is unlikely that the name Tarshish is supposed to be linked to a verb that denotes defeat and destruction. Note that the shish-part of the name Tarshish looks a lot like the word (shayish), meaning alabaster amostly translucent or white crystal:

The beryl stone is transparent* in its purest form, though it can also amongst all the other colours stated, be white.

‘There’s an odd correlation between the color white and the number six. The nouns… shesh… and… shayish… mean alabaster, which is a whitish translucent material. The identical word… shesh… means six.

The noun…shushan… describes the lily, which has six leaves and is… white.’

The Japanese have a propensity in using flowers as symbols.

‘The adjective… yashesh… means old or white haired. The verb… tur… means to explore or survey and associates with a broad, circular or sweeping motion. Noun… tor… appears to describe a circular braid of hair.’ 

On a personal note, I am reminded of the cherry blossom emblem – used by the Japanese national rugby team. One of my vivid memories after being fortunate to visit Tokyo in 1989, was all the beautiful white – and not to forget pink – tree blossom.

The ‘circular braid’ is reminiscent of ancient Samurai warriors and modern Sumo wrestlers, with their long braided hair. The related Polynesians from Javan and also the Amerindians from Tiras, wore their hair in a similar fashion.

Japan comprises an amazing archipelago of 6,852 islands covering 145,937 square miles. The country’s four main islands from north to south, are Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku and Kyushu.

Tokyo is situated on Honshu and is both the capital and largest city.

Other major cities include Yokohama, Osaka, Nagoya, Sapporo, Fukuoka, Kobe and Kyoto. Japan is the 12th most populous country in the world, as well as one of the most densely populated and urbanised. About three quarters of the country’s terrain is mountainous, concentrating its population of 122,783,364 people on narrow coastal plains.

The Greater Tokyo area has approximately forty-one million residents (as of 2024) – the most populous metropolitan area, or mega-city in the world.

The first mention of the archipelago appear in Chinese chronicles from the first century CE. Between the fourth and ninth centuries, the kingdoms of Japan were unified under an emperor and beginning in the twelfth century political power was held by a series of military dictators, the Shoguns and feudal lords, known as Daimyo; each enforced by a class of warrior nobility, the Samurai.

The adoption of modern firearms rendered the traditional weapons of the Samurai obsolete. The most notable being the katana (‘one-sided blade’); a Japanese sword characterised by a ‘curved, single-edged blade with a circular or squared guard and long grip to accommodate two hands.’

A century long period of civil war ended in reunification in 1603 under the Tokugawa Shogunat.

A lengthy isolationist foreign policy was then enacted until 1854, when a United States fleet forced Japan to open trade – the awakening and emergence of the great trading nation of Tarshish – to the West, which led to the end of the shogunate and the restoration of imperial power in 1868. Japan adopted a Western styled constitution and pursued a program of industrialisation and modernisation.

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 235:

‘By the beginning of the twentieth century Japan was an industrial power with the third-largest navy in the world, and in 1905 it defeated the Russians in a war fought on land and sea. However, the very same island-nation geography that had allowed it to remain isolated was now giving it no choice but to engage with the world. The problem was that it chose to engage militarily.

Both the First Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War were fought to thwart Chinese and Russian influence in Korea. Japan considered Korea to be, in the words of its Prussian military advisor, Major Klemens Meckel, ‘A dagger pointed at the heart of Japan’. Controlling the Peninsula removed the threat, and controlling Manchuria made sure the hand of China, and to a lesser extent Russia, could not get near the dagger’s handle.’

In 1937, Japan invaded China and by 1941 it had entered World War II as an Axis power. After suffering defeat in the Pacific theatre of war, Japan surrendered in 1945. After World War II, Japan experienced impressive economic growth – boosted by American investment and loans – becoming the second largest economy in the world by 1990, before being surpassed by China in 2010. A leader in the automotive and electronics industries, Japan has made considerable contributions to science and technology.

Japan is a great power and maintains Self-Defence Forces which rank as the world’s 4th most powerful military. During the 1980s, political pundits and economic analysts predicted Japan achieving superpower status; due to its population, GDP and economic growth. It was thought, as with China today that Japan would eventually surpass the economy of the United States.

Japan is considered a cultural superpower in terms of its large-scale influence in food, ‘electronics, automobiles, music, video games and anime.’ Japan has faced an ongoing period of stagnation since the 1990s, an ageing population since the early 2000s and serious population decline beginning in 2011, all of which has eroded its potential as a superpower.

Japan’s name in Japanese is written using ‘the kanji 日本 and pronounced Nippon or Nihon’ and was adopted in the early 8th century. Prior to this, the country was known ‘in China as Wa (倭) and in Japan by the endonym Yamato.’ The characters 日本 mean a ‘sun origin’, which is in reference to Japan’s far eastern location and the source of the western epithet ‘Land of the Rising Sun.’

The official name of the Japanese flag is Nisshoki, which means the ‘sun-mark flag’, though most people call it Hinomaru, meaning ‘circle of the sun’, for the circle in the centre of the flag represents the sun. The flag of Japan isn’t white and red, it is actually white and crimson. The first documented use of the flag of Japan was in 701 CE and was mentioned in the Shoku Nihongi, ‘a classical Japanese history text, which credited Emperor Mommu with the flag’s use.’

The name Japan is based on Chinese pronunciation and was introduced to European languages through trade. In the 13th century, Marco Polo recorded the early Mandarin or Wu Chinese pronunciation as Cipangu. 

Japanese Flag (above) and Naval Ensign (below)

The old Malay name for Japan, Japang or Japun, was borrowed from a southern coastal Chinese dialect and encountered by Portuguese traders in Southeast Asia, who brought the word to Europe in the early 16th century.

The first version of the name in English appeared in a book published in 1577, which spelled the name as Giapan in a translation of a 1565 Portuguese letter.

An interesting coincidental similarity exists between the English word, Jap-an with the biblical name of their forefather, Jap-heth.

Would this not be an extraordinary coincidence indeed if Japheth were the ancestor of Europeans as promulgated by the majority of teachers – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium. 

Yet, if Japheth is actually the paternal ancestor of the peoples in East Asia, South East Asia, Central Asia, Polynesia and the indigenous Native Americans after all, then it would be more than a mere coincidence.

The Japanese coat of arms is commonly represented by the imperial crest, known as the chrysanthemum crest (kikumon), which features a stylised sixteen (flower) petal chrysanthemum.

Japan leads the world in robotics production and use; supplying approximately 55% of the world’s total. The Japanese consumer electronics industry once the strongest in the world, now faces stiff competition from South Korea, the United States and China. Japan remains a major leader in the video gaming industry, with the United States. 

On the index of most technological nations in the world, Japan is number one. Japanese scientists have made enormous contributions in the following fields: automobiles, electronics, machinery, earthquake engineering, optics, industrial robotics, metals and semi-conductors. Japanese researchers have won numerous Noble Prizes in recognition for their superior contribution in technological pursuits.

Japan is the fifth largest economy in the world; with a GDP of $4.18 trillion in 2025. Effective co-operation between government and industry, coupled with advanced technological know-how have built Japan’s manufacturing and export-oriented economy. Japan is low in natural resources and dependent on energy imports, particularly after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and a general shutdown of its nuclear power industry.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Japanese global shipments during 2021.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$147.1 billion
  2. Vehicles: $137.8 billion
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $117.9 billion 
  4. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $43 billion 
  5. Iron, steel: $34.6 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $30.3 billion 
  7. Organic chemicals: $18.3 billion 
  8. Other chemical goods: $14.6 billion 
  9. Gems, precious metals: $14.3 billion 
  10. Copper: $12.9 billion 

Iron and steel as materials represent the fastest growers among the top 10 export categories, up by 51.9% since 2020. In second place for improving export sales was copper which appreciated 37.7%.’

In 2020, Ships and boats at $10.8 billion was listed at number ten.

Japan is a member of the prestigious intergovernmental G7 Group of nations. These are the major industrialised nations, who drive the world economy, monetary issues and policy. Japan’s inclusion is significant as it is the only descendant of Japheth and the only nation from East Asia or outside the European and North American spheres.

Major nations not included are Russia (11th) due to its expulsion from the G8 in 2014 because of its annexation of the Ukraine and the Crimea; as well as the less developed major economies of China (2nd), India (5th) and Brazil (9th).

The other nations in the G7 include: the United States of America (1), Germany (4), the United Kingdom (6), France (7), Italy (8) and Canada (10).

Japan in the Bible, Peter Salemi – emphasis mine:

‘It appears that the sons of Tarshish originally settled in southern Asia Minor, giving their name to the city of Tarsus. The traditions of ancient Japan claim its people were led to the “Land of the Rising Sun” by a three legged crow – the “sun crow” representing the sun deity in the ancient Far East. Surprisingly, the rare imagery of three-legged birds as sun symbols has also been found on coins of Asia Minor, where sat Tarsus.

Yatagarasu – legend of the three legged crow

A.L. Sadler, a professor of Oriental Studies at the University of Sydney, wrote in his 1946 book A Short History of Japan

“… Some Japanese ethnologists favour the theory that the Yamato came from Central Asia” (pp. xi-xii).’

Support for this premise is the paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup D, which is prevalent in just two countries: Tibet and Japan.

Salemi:

‘The peoples of Persia called those descended from Javan in Asia Minor, Yuna or Yuana (Rapson 1914: 86).

Tarshish migrated with Kittim’ – Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.

‘They stayed with Kittim [Khitan?] for a time in northern China. The Chinese… Yuan Empire and Yuanan region take their names from Javan, father of Tarshish. In China, along the coast, there was a people called the Three Han by the early Chinese writers.

Han may be a derivation of Javan or Yahan.

They were recognized as being a very different people to the rest of the Chinese. The three were the Ma-Han, Shon-Han and the Pien-Han.

There is, as Bishop writes, a very close relationship between them and the people who settled Japan (Bishop 1925: 556). Their culture may be described as partly Chinese and partly central Asian (ibid, 558). Hurlimann traces them back to central Asia (Hurlimann 1970: 90) and Japanese traditions maintain they originated in the far west of Asia. (Odlum 1937: 17).

Colin in his Native Races and Their Customs writes:

“The principle settler in these archipeligoes was Tharsis, son of Java, together with his brothers.” (quoted in The Philippine Islands 1493-1898).

Of further interest is the statement in a Japanese document compiled in 720 AD, the Nihon Shoki; (The Chronicles of Japan), that Ninigi, a forefather of their race, had four sons. This may have been Javan, who also had four sons. From one of these sons descended the Japanese emperor Jemmu Tenno. This son was named Po-wori which means “Fire Bender” and may be compared to Tarshish which means “smelter” or “refiner”.

Japan’s role in Biblical Prophecy, Steve M Collins, 2007 – emphasis mine:

‘… Tarshish… A huge clue as to their modern identity is that Ezekiel 38:13 calls them “the merchants of Tarshish.” Their entire nation is so closely linked to merchandising goods to others that they are called a nation of “merchants”… Japan pioneered the export-driven model of mercantile sales to other nations as a national policy. This trait was so well-known that the nation was sometimes called “Japan, Inc.” in media articles… also prophesied [is] that there would be “young lions” that would be closely linked to the “merchants of Tarshish” in the latter days. 

There are a number of smaller Asian nations on the Pacific Rim which have copied the mercantile, export-driven success of the Japanese nation. These nations are even called the “young tiger” nations or “young tiger” economies of Asia. The “young tiger” nations include such nations as South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand…

Japan is an island nation and it lives at the doorstep of two powerful nations: Russia and China. Japan has fought wars with both nations, and China bears a vengeful grudge against Japan as a result of World War II. Russia seized Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands after World War II and its retention of these formerly Japanese islands is a bone of contention between Russia and Japan.

Japan cannot hope to make allies of these nations. Therefore, Japan must side with the USA and the West by default. However, Japan and the USA have grown to be genuine allies in the period after World War II. The USA was not a harsh conqueror of Japan. 

The USA (in Japan’s post-World War period of reconstruction) preserved Japan’s monarchy, treated the Japanese people and their culture with respect and laid the foundation for Japan’s mercantile success by blending Western, democratic institutions with Japan’s own unique culture. Japan has become a trusted ally and friend and it becoming an ever-more important nation in the Western alliance.

An article… in… The Economist… stated that Japan: ‘seeks closer ties with democratic India’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut – ‘and recently formalized a security alliance of sorts, only Japan’s second, with Australia… in addition to becoming an ally of Australia, Japan “sought a new partnership with India while building security ties with South east Asia,” and that “the main catalyst for the security pact (is) the rise of China.”

Japan, Its Biblical Past and Future, Bob Thiel, 2007:

“Ise is the most venerated shrine in Japan, representing the indigenous religion, Shinto, and the mythical origins of the Japanese people. The sacred mirror is kept at Ise… individuals, who claim to have seen the mirror, agree that the horizontal writing on the bronze back is distinctly un-Japanese in style and resembles ancient Hebrew or Aramaic, spawning theories that connect the Japanese people to the ancient… [Israelite] tribes who vanished from history after the Assyrian conquest in 722 BC.

Scholars have found similarities in ancient Hebrew and Japanese ceremonies, priest apparel, the structure and layout of shrines, language used in ancient texts, and the three imperial regalia having been used as tokens of authority. It has also been argued that the Ise Shrine symbol, carved into the stone lamps surrounding the complex, is the Star of David.”

Theiel: ‘Perhaps it should be mentioned that in Japan there has long been a small Caucasian group who has been there for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. It is possible that they had some contact with the Middle East and brought that knowledge with them when they [ended] up in Japan.’

A significant identification of Tarshish in the past was its interaction with the descendants of Shem through extensive trade and its western cultural leanings; considerably more so than any other descendant of Japheth. In modern times, Japan has repeated this assimilation of all things western to become technologically almost more western than the West. It is ironic that this began after centuries of self-imposed isolation beginning in 1624, after the Japanese government refused a Spanish trading delegation to step on Japanese soil. Japan reluctantly came out of isolation due to American intervention and displays of naval sea power during 1853 to 1864. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 374-376 – emphasis mine:

‘The Japanese government then began copying everything they saw in… European nations, a pattern for which their country later became famous.

French army officers were paid to enter Japan to remodel the Japanese army while British naval officers were paid to reorganise the Japanese Navy.

Dutch engineers were paid to supervise the construction of the first major Western style public works and infrastructure… and Japanese officials were sent abroad to study the… workings of [European] governments and to select their best features for duplication in Japan.

The new Japanese parliament [opened] in 1891, modelled directly on [European] parliaments… The Japanese constitution was drawn up by a specially-appointed commission under a samurai nobleman, Ito Hirobumi, who in 1882 sent missions to the US, Britain, France, Spain and Germany to observe their democratic systems. Eventually, the German model (and the Prussian variant in particular) was selected and implemented…

A new penal code was modelled on that of France, and a ministry of education, based on that of the United States, was established in 1871 to develop a system of universal education. Rapid industrialisation, under government direction, accompanied… political development and by 1890, Japan had completely revised its criminal, civil, and commercial law codes to match the European and American models.

By the end of the twentieth century, both Japan and China had developed into industrial giants, responsible for the production (but not the invention) of the majority of day-to-day appliances and convenience goods used all over the world. Both nations… practice immigration policies designed to preserve their racial homogeneity… unlike the … Western nations. Japan… famously refused to take Vietnamese boat people refugees of the 1970s and 1980s unless they were racially compatible with the existing Japanese population. This strict, racially-based immigration policy is [Japan’s]… formula for long-term survival and progress. If maintained, this policy will ensure that they escape the fate of Western nations who have abandoned such policies.’

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 239-240:

‘It is China that keeps Japanese leaders awake at night and keeps them close to the USA, diplomatically and militarily. Japanese statisticians fear that the population will shrink to under 100 million by the middle of the century. If the current birth rate continues, it is even possible that by 2110 the population will have fallen below the 50 million it was in 1910… [the Japanese population is rapidly ageing and predicted to drop to only ninety-five million people by 2050]

Japan, itself a re-militarising power with a quietly hawkish outlook, is going to require friends in the neighbourhood… this means the US 7th fleet will remain in the Bay of Tokyo and US Marines will remain in Okinawa, guarding the paths in and out of the Pacific and the China Sea… The waters can be expected to be rough.’

Encyclopaedia:

‘Geisha, also known as geiko or geigi, are female Japanese performing artists and entertainers trained in traditional Japanese performing arts styles, such as dance, music and singing, as well as being proficient conversationalists and hosts. Their distinct appearance is characterised by long, trailing kimono, traditional hairstyles and oshiroi make-up. Geisha entertain at parties known as ozashiki, often for the entertainment of wealthy clientele, as well as performing on stage and at festivals.

Despite long-held connotations between sex and geisha, a geisha’s sex and love life is usually distinct from her professional life. Geishas are not submissive and subservient, but in fact they are some of the most financially and emotionally successful and strongest women in Japan…’

‘The kimono is a traditional Japanese garment and the national dress of Japan. The kimono is a wrapped-front garment with square sleeves and a rectangular body, and is worn left side wrapped over right, unless the wearer is deceased. ‘

Japanese society is linguistically, ethnically and culturally homogeneous, composed of 98.1%^^ ethnic Japanese. The most dominant native ethnic group is the Yamato. Primary minority groups include: the indigenous Ainu and Ryukyuan people and also Brazilians, mostly of Japanese descent. We will return to the Brazilian connection – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Japanese men

A study by Hideaki Kanzawa, showed that the Jomon of Hokkaido and Honshu – the first of three peoples to have migrated into Japan – have a genome that is commonly found in Arctic populations but is rare in Yamato people.^^

According to Mitsuru Sakitani, the Jomon are an admixture of two distinct ethnic groups: a more ancient group, carriers of Y chromosome D1a2a (D-M55) and a more recent group, carriers of Y chromosome C1a1 (C-M8) ‘that migrated to Japan about 13,000 years ago.’

Haplogroup D1a2a is found in approximately 20% to 40% of the male population and Haplogroup C1a1 in about 6% of modern Japanese men.

Haplogroup D1a2a, originates in the Japanese archipelago and is distinct from other D-branches, with five unique mutations not found in the D1 Haplogroups. Scientists also propose that Haplogroup C1a1 originated about 12,000 years ago, which aligns with the start of the Jomon period.

According to a 2011 study, all major East Asian mtDNA lineages expanded prior to 8000 BCE, except for two Japanese lineages consisting of D4b2b1 and M7a1a expanding circa 5000 BCE, again during the Jomon Period.

Note, the mt-DNA Haplogroup D (above) not to be confused with Y-DNA Haplogroup D (below).

It is interesting how the timeline presented by scientists for the spreading and fanning out of the relevant ancient C and D Y-DNA Haplogroup mutations, mirror the dates of key events in our ancient past. The ending of the last ice age with the Flood in 10,837 BCE; according to an unconventional chronology – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World* – and the birth of Tarshish sometime after this; as well as the ‘time of Peleg’ circa 6755 BCE.

We will investigate Peleg and the Tower of Babel, when we study Nimrod; Shem’s third son Arphaxad; and Abraham’s eldest brother, Nahor – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: The Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Some readers will be aware that the early Haplogroups are often given as originating much further back than 13,000 years ago. The pre-flood world’s chronology and the vast difference in human longevity – due in large part to environmental factors* – is a missing key in understanding the time frames of the antediluvian world. It will be a shock for some and others will be incredulous; as initially this writer was too, in the knowledge that before the Flood, human ages were of immense length. 

A different method of counting was used – the sexagesimal system of the Sumerians, based on multiples of 60 as touched upon in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla – and not the metric decimal system based on multiples of 10, we use today or the imperial system based on multiples of 12… a descendant of the Sumerian counting system.

The biblical ages of the pre-flood patriarchs appear to have been manipulated – making them easier to mentally digest – following the Flood, resulting in our real pre-history being extraordinarily hidden. The king lists for ancient rulers length of reigns – for instance in Sumer – are fantastically long (refer article: Na’amah), many thousands of years for individual rulers. Historians have just dismissed them as fanciful and created a completely erroneous timeline of history more in accord with those who squeeze all creation and mankind’s history into a mere six thousand years… based on a misguided interpretation of an edited biblical chronology – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

The longevity of humans post-flood while considerable until the time of Abraham, were not nearly as long as prior to the flood – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.* A result of the Flood and the changes in the earth’s atmosphere, gravity and electro-magnetism was to reduce human life-span. An alternative explanation involving genetic manipulation cannot be entirely ruled out. From Abraham’s birth in 1977 BCE, we have witnessed human longevity reduce dramatically again to a ‘maximum’ of what we are now familiar with; consisting of approximately one hundred and twenty years. 

Genesis 6:3

New Century Version

The Lord said, “My Spirit will not remain in human beings forever, because they are flesh. They will live only 120 years.”

This verse is actually predicting how much time was left before the Deluge flooded the Earth, though it has been commonly interpreted to refer to the length of a human’s life… and since the patriarch Joseph at least, this has been true – Genesis 50:22.

It is one of the reasons – perhaps the principal argument – in which the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, was able to convince Eve in taking the ‘fruit’ from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; deceiving her and Adam regarding the truth about life and death… subtly twisting what the Creator had taught. Adam and Eve didn’t die and in fact, lived for millennia – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning?

Thus the promise of dying was delayed considerably, to the point of Adam and Eve appearing to almost live forever; though ultimately death came for them, with the tragic lie of the Serpent being eventually exposed – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.**

When scientists propose the earliest Haplogroups divided and sub-divided between 20,000 to 60,000 thousand years ago for example, this is inaccurate because Noah was born circa 17,000 BCE and possessed the entire genome for the races and Y-DNA Haplogroup A; which then mutationally diverged with his three son’s descendants and so on.

Noah’s sons were born circa 12,000 BCE – Genesis 5.32, 9.28, 11.10-11. Adam and his wife, (Mitochondrial) Eve, were formed nearly thirty-thousand years ago, circa 27,000 BCE and the line from which Noah descended was from their (second) son Seth, who was born circa 26,097 BCE. We will comprehensively study the antediluvian age in a separate chapter,** as well as an unconventional chronology for the history of humankind – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology

Japanese women

It is believed the Yayoi people – the second group of people to migrate into Japan (after the Jomon) – were migrants to the Japanese archipelago from Korea (or China) during the Yayoi period from 1000 to 300 BCE. They are seen as the direct ancestors of the modern Yamato – the majority of Japanese – as well as the Ryukyuan.

It is estimated that modern Japanese share on average about 90% of their genome with the Yayoi. There was a third period of major migration, during the Kofun period from 250 to 538 CE.

Ancient DNA rewrites early Japanese history – modern day populations have tripartite genetic origin, Trinity College Dublin, 2021: 

‘Ancient DNA extracted from human bones has rewritten early Japanese history by underlining that modern day populations in Japan have a tripartite genetic origin – a finding that refines previously accepted views of a dual genomic ancestry. Twelve newly sequenced ancient Japanese genomes show that modern day populations do indeed show the genetic signatures of early indigenous Jomon hunter-gatherer-fishers and immigrant Yayoi farmers – but also add a third genetic component that is linked to the Kofun peoples, whose culture spread in Japan between the 3rd and 7th centuries.’

A 2007 study by Nonaka, reported that the frequencies of the D1, (O1b), and O2** lineages in Japan were 38.8%, 33.5%,* and 16.7% respectively, constituting approximately 90% of the Japanese (male) population.

It is thought that the Yayoi mainly belonged to Haplogroup O1b2 (O-M176) found in 32%* of present day Japanese males; Haplogroup O-M122 (O2, formerly O3); Haplogroup O-K18 (F2320 – O1b1); and Haplogroup O-M119 (O1a) which are all typical for East Asian and Southeast Asians. 

Mitsueu Sakitani, suggests that Haplogroup O1b2, which is common in today’s Japanese, Koreans, and some Manchu, and O1a are one of the carriers of Yangtze civilisation. As the Yangtze civilisation declined, several tribes crossed westward and northerly, to the Shandong peninsula, the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago. One study labels Haplogroup O1b1, a major Austroasiatic paternal lineage and the Haplogroup O1b2 of Koreans and the Japanese as a ‘para-Austroasiatic’ paternal lineage.

A study in 2018, confirmed that the modern Japanese are predominantly descendants of the Yayoi and that they largely displaced the local Jomon. The mitochondrial chromosomes of modern Japanese are nearly identical with the Yayoi and differ significantly from the Jomon population. It is estimated that the majority of Japanese have about 12% Jomon ancestry or less.^ A more recent study by Gakihari in 2019, estimates the gene-flow from the Jomon into modern Japanese people at only 3.3%.^

Further studies report:

‘A 2011 SNP consortium study done by the Chinese Academy of Science and Max Planck Society consisting of 1,719 DNA samples determined that Koreans and Japanese clustered near to each other, confirming the findings of an earlier study that Koreans and Japanese are related [as cousins – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas].

However, the Japanese were found to be genetically closer to [their] Southeast Asian [sibling] populations as evident by a genetic position that is significantly closer towards Southeast Asian populations on the principal component analysis (PCA) chart [refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia].

Some Japanese individuals are also genetically closer to Southeast Asian and Melanesian populations when compared to other East Asians such as Koreans and Han Chinese, indicating possible genetic interactions between Japanese and these populations.

A 2008 study about genome-wide SNPs of East Asians by Chao Tian et al. reported that… the Japanese are relatively genetically distant from Han Chinese, compared to Koreans. Another study (2017) shows a relative strong relation between all East and Southeast Asians.’

We would expect to see the evidence of a link between Tarshish and his brothers located in archipelago Southeast Asia. Nor is it a surprise that the Japanese have DNA in common with Koreans and Chinese, for two reasons.

First, they are originally blood brothers, then becoming cousins all stemming from Japheth and second, there would have been noticeable admixture if the Japanese migrated through China, possibly Taiwan and then the Korean peninsula. Similar transference occurred when Koreans migrated through China and some travelled to the Japanese Islands; as well as Chinese traders who visited both Korea and Japan. 

The key in answering the Japanese identity, is not with the Japanese clustering with Koreans descended from Togarmah (Gomer), but rather their closer genetic link with South East Asians (Kittim, Elishah and Dodan) also descended from Javan.

Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes, multiple authors, 2006 – emphasis mine:

‘This survey of Y chromosome SNPs in Asia reveals a set of 41 haplogroups, 19 of which are present in Japan. Three haplogroups are almost entirely restricted to the Japanese archipelago: haplogroup D-P37.1 and its descendants (D-P37.1*, D-M116.1*, D.M125*, and D-P42), O-47z, and C-M8. 

These lineages account for 34.7, 22.0, and 5.4% of Japanese Y chromosomes, respectively, and may have originated on the Japanese archipelago. The Japanese population also has high frequencies of other haplogroup O lineages that are shared mainly with Southeast Asian populations, and C lineages that are shared primarily with northern Asians. In this section, we make the case that these Y chromosome lineages descend from different ancestral populations that gave rise to the Jomon and Yayoi cultures.

We plotted the frequencies of haplogroups D, O-P31 [O1b], and O-M122 [O2] in each of our six Japanese samples against the approximate geographic distances of each of these populations from Kyushu Island. Together, these haplogroups account for 86.9% of Japanese Y chromosomes. There is a U-shaped cline for haplogroup D, and inverted U-shaped patterns for haplogroups in clade O. Based on the frequencies of these two clades, we estimate the Jomon contribution to modern Japanese to be 40.3%,^ with the highest frequency in the Ainu (75%) and Ryukyuans (60%).

On the other hand, Yayoi Y chromosomes account for 51.9% of Japanese paternal lineages, with the highest contribution in Kyushu (62.3%) and lower contributions in Okinawa (37.8%) and northern Honshu (46.2%). Interestingly, there is no evidence for Yayoi lineages in the Ainu [only Jomon].

The highest frequency of continental D lineages is found in central Asia (especially in Tibet (50.4%). Evidence for shared ancestry between Tibetans and Japanese is seen in the MDS plot. The survival of ancient lineages within haplogroup D in Tibetans and Japanese may well reflect long periods of isolation for both groups. Interestingly, a Y-SNP survey of Andaman Islanders found a very high frequency of haplogroup D-M174* [D1] chromosomes in this isolated population…’

The connection between higher levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup D and isolated, endogamic Asian populations is important. The Tibetans have been secluded from external contact and mixture for centuries as have the Japanese. The fact that Tibet and Japan – two very isolated regions – possess an ancient and prime Haplogroup, with a high percentage cannot be a coincidence. 

‘The other postulated Japanese Paleolithic founding haplogroup, C-M8 [C1a1], is associated with Y-STR haplotypes that are related to Indian and central Asian C chromosomes. The presence of NO* chromosomes in Japan also may be an indication of a remnant Tibetan ancestry. A recent mtDNA study revealed direct connections of Japanese haplotypes with Tibet, parallel to those found for the Y chromosome.

Haplogroup M12 is the mitochondrial counterpart of Y chromosome D lineage.

This rare haplogroup was detected only in mainland Japanese, Koreans, and Tibetans, with the highest frequency and diversity in Tibet.

Our data also support the hypothesis that other Y haplogroups, such as lineages within haplogroup O-M122 (i.e., O-M134 and O-LINE), as well as the O-M95 lineage within O-P31, entered Japan with the Yayoi expansion. 

High frequencies of these lineages in southwestern Japan, Korea, and Southeast Asian populations likely explain the affinity of these populations in the MDS plot.

The entire O haplogroup has been proposed to have a Southeast Asian origin (Su et al. 1999; Kayser et al. 2000; Capelli et al. 2001; Karafet et al. 2001). In fact, nearly all lineages within the O-M175 clade… except O-SRY465 and O-47z, are present at their highest frequencies (e.g., O-M95, O-P31*, M122*, O-LINE, O-M119) in southeastern Asia/Oceania, and have been proposed to have southern Chinese origins…’

This is a significant parallel connection between the related peoples of Korea and continental South East Asia and Japan and archipelago South East Asia. Togarmah-Korea is closely connected to Ashkenaz-Vietnam (and Riphath-Cambodia); as Tarshish-Japan is related to Elishah-Malaysia, Dodan-Philippines and Kittim-Indonesia.

While the ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup D is almost entirely indicative of descendants from Japheth (D1), it is found in a small number of males descending from Canaan (D2). This might be explained by the connecting Y-DNA Haplogroup DE acting as a bridge between the two – as these two disparate peoples share male ancestors in common due to the YAP+ mutation – for the defining Y-DNA Haplogroup for males descended from Canaan is Haplogroup E (Chapter XII Canaan & Africa).

Phylogentic Tree by ISOGG (Version 14.151)

DE (YAP) Nigeria, Guinea-Bissau, Caribbean, Tibet

D (CTS3946) 

D1 (M174) East Asia, Andaman Islands, Central Asia, Mainland Southeast Asia 

D1a (CTS11577) 

D1a1 (F6251/Z27276) 

 – D1a1a (M15) Mainland China, Tibet, Altai Republic 

 – D1a1b (P99) Mainland China, Tibet, Mongol, Central Asia 

D1a2 (Z3660) 

 – D1a2a (M55) Japan (Yamato) 

 – D1a2b (Y34637) Andaman Islands (Onge and Jarawa) 

D1b (L1378) Philippines (Ryukyuan and Ainu of Japan)

D2 (A5580.2) Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Syria, African Americans 

Notice how D1a1 is indicative of mainland Asia; while D1a2 is found in Japan. Similarly, D1b is found in the Philippines as well as the indigenous Ryukyuan and Ainu of Japan. This lends support to Filipino men once living on Taiwan and dispersing from the island to the Philippine archipelago.

Wa-pedia – emphasis mine:

‘The origins of the Japanese people is not entirely clear yet. It is common for Japanese people to think that Japan is not part of Asia since it is an island, cut off from the continent [akin to the British who are alienated from Europe; whether in customs, culture, politics or national identity]. This tells a lot about how they see themselves in relation to their neighbours. But in spite of what the Japanese may think of themselves, they do not have extraterrestrial origins, and are indeed related to several peoples in Asia.’

Many a word spoken in jest – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV.

‘Kenichi Shinoda (2003) found Chinese-looking maternal lineages (haplogroups A, B, F, M8a and M10) in the Kanto region dating from the late Jōmon period mixed with typical Jōmon lineages (M7a, N9b)… this could indicate that farmers from mainland China colonised Japan several millennia before the Yayoi invasion, which would explain why the Japanese also possess typically South Chinese Y-haplogroups not found in Korea, such as O1a, O2a [now O1b], O3a1c [now O2a1c1 – F18] and O3a2 [now O2a2 – P201].

Haplogroup C is another extremely old lineage that… spread over most of Eurasia. Two subclades of C are found in Japan: C1a1 (aka C-M8, formerly C1) and C2a (aka C-M93, formerly C3).

Both are likely to have been in the Japanese archipelago since the first human beings reached the region… Haplogroup C1a seems to have split… in the middle of Eurasia, one group going west to Europe, and the other east to Japan. C1a2 is now nearly extinct in Europe. C1a1 is particularly common in Okinawa (7%), Shikoku (10%) and Tohoku (10%), but is apparently absent from Hokkaido and Kyushu.’

An explanation for this occurrence, would be that Tarshish (Jomon, Haplogroup C, D and Yayoi, Haplogroup O) migrated through Central Asia as the other sons of Japheth – though like some of their sea-faring, maritime bothers descended from Javan, for example the Malays from Elishah (and the Maori from Rodan) – a portion (Jomon, Haplogroup D) likely travelled from the Mediterranean heading east through West Asia, prior to migrating southwards and around southern Asia. Continuing to circumnavigate Southeast Asia and travelling northward beyond China to Japan – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

Paternal Haplogroup C1 is more commonly associated with Central Asia and northern Asia, while Haplogroup C2 in East Asia and Amerindian men of the Americas.

Wa-pedia:

‘Haplogroup C2a, representing also 3% of the population, is typically found among the Mongols, Manchus, Koreans and Siberians, which suggest a propagation by the Yayoi farmers. The last surviving tribes of ‘pure’ Ainu people, living on the island of Sakhalin in Russia, just north of Hokkaido, possess 15% of C2a (the remaining 85% being D1b [D1a2a]). There is therefore a good chance that C2a could also have come to Japan from Siberia through Sakhalin and Hokkaido. C2a is indeed found at both extremities of the country, peaking in Kyushu (8%), Hokkaido (5%), but is rare in central Japan, which supports the theory of two separate points of entry.

Over 40% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup D, a paternal lineage… 

Its first carriers would have migrated along the coasts of the Indian Ocean, from the Arabian peninsula all the way to Indonesia, then following the chain of islands up through the Philippines and using the land bridge from Taiwan through the present-day Ryukyu islands to Japan.’

When studying the Bible verses regarding Tarshish, we contemplated that the outposts of Tarshish from the mediterranean via India and Southeast Asia could lead to Japan. Therefore, not only were the various locations given for the ports of Tarshish accurate, they also provide a trail of approximately half of Tarshish’s male descendants all the way to Japan over a period of about 5,500 years – until the arrival of the Yayoi in 1000 BCE.

Wa-pedia:

‘Haplogroup D1b [D1a2a] (aka D-M55 or D-M64.1, formerly known as D2)… is found almost exclusively in Japan, with a small minority in places who have had historical ties with Japan, such as Korea. 

D1b is most common in Hokkaido (60-65%)… If D1b colonised Japan from the north, it would explain why its frequency is highest in northern Japan and, conversely also why [allegedly] pre-LGM [Last Glacial Maximum] lineages like C1a1 survived better in southern Japan…

The only other variety of D identified among the Japanese is D1a1[a] (D-M15), which only makes up 0.5% of the Japanese male population. This haplogroup is particularly common among some ethnic groups from Southwest China and Indochina, such as the Hmong and Ksingmul in Laos… and the Yao people in Guanxi and Vietnam. Tibetans carry about 54% of haplogroup D.

Andaman Islanders belong to the basal D*. It means that their most recent common ancestors goes back tens of thousands of years. In other words the genetic gap between these ethnic groups is immense, despite false appearances of belonging to a common haplogroup.

Haplogroup D1b [D1a2a]… [is thought to have] formed 45,000 [13,000] years ago, [after the flood cataclysm bottleneck], but the most recent common ancestor of Japanese D1b members lived 23,000 [circa 10,000] years ago [or less after the births of Japheth and Canaan’s sons] which means that other D1b branches may have become extinct outside Japan. Haplogroup D1b is found among the Ryukyuans as well as the Ainus, and is thought to have been the dominant paternal lineage of the Jōmon people.

Almost exactly half of Japanese men belong to haplogroup O, a paternal lineage of Paleolithic Sino-Korean origin that is now found all over East and Southeast Asia. Haplogroup [O1b2 – M176*] (aka O-SRY465) is found especially in Manchuria, Korea and Japan, and very probably came to Japan with the Yayoi people. It reaches its highest frequency in western Japan (35%) and is least common in Hokkaido (12.5%) and Okinawa (22%). In the rest of the country its frequency is around 30%.

Approximately two thirds of the Japanese [O1b – M268] belong to the [O1b2] subclade, which is much less common in Korea and Manchuria… Haplogroup [O1b2] (SRY465, M176): Found almost exclusively among the Korean, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese and Indonesian. Haplogroup  O-47z [O1b2a1a1 – F1204; a sub-clade of OK10 from O-M176*]: Found frequently among Japanese and Ryukyuans, with a moderate distribution among Indonesians, Koreans, Manchus, Thais, and Vietnamese.

Haplogroup [O2] (aka O-M122) is the main Han Chinese paternal lineage. It is an extremely diverse lineage, with numerous subclades, including many associated with the expansion of agriculture from northern China. Most of them are found in Korea and would have been part of the Yayoi migration to Japan. 

Within Japan, it reaches a maximum frequency in Okinawa (16%),** a region with low Yayoi ancestry. Its frequency among non-Okinawan Japanese is of 10-15%, about twice higher than in Korea, a fact that cannot be explained by the Yayoi invasion. 

A negligible percentage of the Japanese belong to haplogroup O1a (aka O-M119), a lineage especially common in southern China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, and haplogroup O2a1 (aka O-M95 [L127]), which is found in south-west China, Indochina, around Malaysia and in central-eastern India. Both of them might have also have come with South Chinese Neolithic farmers during the Jomon period.

Approximately 3% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup N, a lineage that is thought to have originated in China… but underwent a serious population bottleneck during the Last Glacial Maximum, and re-expanded after that.

Japanese people belong to N1… Haplogroup N1 was found at high frequency (26 out of 70 samples, or 37%) in Neolithic and Bronze Age remains (4500-700 BCE) from the West Liao River valley in Northeast China (Manchuria) by Yinqui Cui et al. (2013). Among the Neolithic samples, haplogroup N1 represented two thirds of the samples from the Hongshan culture (4700-2900 BCE) and all the samples from the Xiaoheyan culture (3000-2200 BCE). 

Haplogroup N1c is found especially among Uralic and Turkic peoples…  including among the Finns, Estonians and Sami in Northeast Europe, and among the Turks in Central Asia and Turkey. It is found at low frequencies in Korea and could have arrived with the Yayoi people. 

A comparison of Malay (Bahasa Indonesia/Melayu) and Japanese languages reveals a few uncanny similarities. Apart from the very similar phonetics in both languages, the same hierarchical differences exist in personal pronouns. For example ‘you’ can be either anda or kamu in Malay, and anata and kimi in Japanese. 

Not only are the meaning and usage of each identical, but they also sound almost the same. Likewise, the Japanese verb suki (to like) translates suka in Malay. The chances that this is a pure coincidence is extremely low, and may reveal a common origin. Furthermore, in both languages the plural can be formed by simply doubling the word. For instance, in Japanese hito means ‘person’, while hitobito means ‘people’. Likewise ware means ‘I’ or ‘you’, whereas wareware means ‘we’.

Doubling of words in Japanese is so common that there is a special character used only to mean the word is doubled (々) in written Japanese. In Malay, this way of forming the plural is almost systematic (person is orang, while people is orang-orang). Furthermore, expressions like ittekimasu, itteirashai, tadaima and okaeri, used to greet someone who leaves or enter a place, and which have no equivalent in Indo-European languages, have exact equivalents in Malay/Indonesian (selamat jalan, selamat tinggal…).

One could wonder how Malay and Japanese ever came to share such basic vocabulary and grammatical features, considering that there is no known historical migration from one region to other.’

The preceding paragraph is truly incredible, if one did not suspect a common ancestor (Javan) linking Tarshish-Japan with Elishah-Malaysia. Yet the constant reader will know already the obvious linguistic and ethnic tie between two such geographically seeming separate peoples, is easily, logically and reasonably explained; for they share the same father, Javan – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

As we have learned with Togarmah-Korea and Ashkenaz-Vietnam, both sons of Gomer, a genetic link proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the familial bond of sibling brothers.

Wa-pedia:

‘The Palaeolithic Jōmon people are thought to have arrived from Austronesia during the Ice Age. The original inhabitants of Indonesia and the Philippines might have been related to Dravidians of Southern India – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

Y-haplogroup C, which has been associated with the first migration of modern humans… towards Asia, is relatively frequent in Kerala (southern tip of India) and Borneo. These early Austronesians are thought to have been the ancestors of the Ice Age settlers of Japan (Y-haplogroups C1a1 and D1b [D1a2a]). The common root of the two languages must be more recent, and indeed there is one migration that could explain the connection between the two groups: the Neolithic Austronesian expansion from southern China.’

Recall in Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; where the Polynesians descended from Rodan and the Melanesian and Negritos peoples were investigated. The suspicion was that the physiognomy of these people, particularly the Australian Aborigine was similar to the Dravidian Indian. We will return to this question as the evidence indicates the Melanesians are not descended from Japheth, but rather from Ham – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Wa-pedia:

‘From approximately 5,000 BCE, South Chinese farmers expanded southward to Taiwan and Southeast Asia, bringing Y-haplogroups [O1a, O1b and O2] to the region, which are still the dominant paternal lineages today. There is evidence of farming in Taiwan at least from 4000 BCE, but agriculturalists would probably have arrived earlier considering that the Neolithic reached the Philippines circa 5000 BCE, and Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia around 4,000 BCE… the same migration could have followed the Ryukyu archipelago until Kyushu, then colonised Honshu and Shikoku. In fact, there is no good reason why these seafaring farmers would travel as far as Indonesia and not to Japan, which is much closer.

Many more Japanese words could be of Austronesian origin. The linguist David B. Solnit estimates that among 111 common Japanese words he analysed, 28% had Austronesian cognates only, while 40% had Altaic cognates, 23% competing cognates, and 9% no cognate in either.

Considering that the various branches of Proto-Austronesian split over 6,000 or 7,000 years ago, longer than Indo-European languages, it is not surprising that even languages that are undeniably classified as Austronesian… have evolved very diverging vocabularies today (except Polynesian languages, which only started to diversify with the Polynesian expansion 2,000 years ago).

It is generally more useful to look at the Proto-Autronesian root of words rather than to try to find direct matches between modern Japanese and modern Austronesian languages. For example, the Proto-Austronesian root for fish is *sikan, which gave sakana in Japanese (and maybe also ika, which means squid), ikan in Malay, ika in Fijian, and isda in Tagalog. Cases of high lexical-semantic retention over six millennia like kamu/kimi, anda/anata and suka/suki are extremely rare. The Austronesian connection with Japanese was first suggested in 1924 by the Dutch linguist Dirk van Hinloopen Labberton. 

Many linguists have since proposed the hypothesis that the Japonic language family evolved from an Austronesian substratum (Jōmon) onto which was added an Altaic superstratum (Yayoi).

However, if Austronesian speakers came to Japan with South Chinese Neolithic agriculturalists, the original Jomon people would have spoken another language, either one of Siberian origin, in light of the mtDNA ties between Jomon and Ainu people and eastern Siberians, or a language isolate, reflecting the uniqueness of the Jomon paternal lineage. Therefore, Middle and Late Jomon people would already have spoken a hybrid language. Likewise, the Koguryoic Korean language of the Yayoi people would also be a hybrid incorporating Altaic elements of Mongolian origin into an older Korean substratum of Paleosiberian origin. 

Since the 6th century CE, the Japanese started incorporating words from Chinese after adopting Buddhism and Chinese characters, in the same way that English absorbed a huge amount of Norman French and Latin words in the late Middle Ages [a further Japanese and British similarity]… approximately half of the Japanese vocabulary is of Chinese origin.

This explains why Japanese does not neatly fit in one or even two linguistic families, but is a hybrid of at least five separate sources: aboriginal Jomon, Austronesian, Korean, Altaic and Chinese.

Cultural and religious similarities also exist between Japan and Austronesia… most ethnic Malays and Indonesians are Muslim, but traditional religion survives in some islands, including Bali, which practices a syncretic form of Hinduism and aninism. Basically, Balinese religion is a form of Hinduism that has incorporated the aboriginal animistic religion. The parallel with Japan is obvious for people familiar with this culture. 

Japanese Shintoism is also a form of animism, and is practised side-by-side with Buddhism, a religion derived from Hinduism, sometimes blending the two religions in a syncretism known as Shinbutso-shugo. The relation between Hinduism and Buddhism is irrelevant here, and both are relatively recent imports in historical times. Before that, however, Jomon people and Neolithic Austronesians would have practised a very similar form of animism.

Japanese matsuri (festivals) resemble so much Balinese ones that one could wonder if one was not copied from the other.

During cremations in Bali, the dead body is carried on a portable shrine, very much in the way that the Japanese carry their mikoshi. Balinese funerals are joyful and people swinging the portable shrine in the streets and making loud noise to scare the evil spirits.

There are lots of other cultural similarities between ancient cultures of Indonesia and Japan.

For example, both Balinese temples and Japanese shrines, as well as traditional Japanese and Balinese houses have a wall surrounding them, originally meant to prevent evil spirits from penetrating the property. Despite the radical changes that Indonesian culture underwent after the introduction of Islam and Christianity, and the changes that Buddhism brought to Japan, it is still possible to observe clear similarities between the supposed original prehistoric cultures of the two archipelagoes.’

This is at once incredible yet is not, for we would expect more similarities between Japan and its related kin in Malaysia, Indonesia and by extension the Philippines and Polynesia; whether culturally, linguistically or ethnically, rather than with China or even Korea. The Koreans and Chinese are cousins, whereas the language and cultural similarities with the Malay peoples supports the proposition that the Japanese as Tarshish, are the brother of Elishah of Malaysia, Kittim of Indonesia, Dodan of the Philippines and Rodan of Polynesia.

Recall, an earlier quote from Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

‘Wa-pedia: “The study…[of]… Jung et al. (2010) said… that Koreans are genetically homogenous. The study said that the affinity of Koreans is predominately Southeast Asian with an estimated admixture of 79% Southeast Asian and 21% Northeast Asian for Koreans… all of the Koreans which were analyzed uniformly displayed a dual pattern of Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian origins.

The study said that Koreans and Japanese displayed no observable difference between each other in their proportion of Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian admixture.”

Japanese man and woman

The principle Japanese mtDNA Haplogroups include: 

D4 [34%] – M7 [12.5%] – B4 [7.5%] – G [7.5%] – A [7%]

– N9 [7%] – F [5.5%] – B5 [4.5%]

A comparison of mtDNA Haplogroups common throughout Southeast Asia such as M7, B5 and F1 show that the percentages decrease in both estranged northern nations. Japan and Korea have similar levels and more closely match the Philippines, which happens to be located between the northern two and the southern nations of Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand who all have higher percentages overall.

Even though mtDNA Haplogroup D is the primary maternal Haplogroup in the Koreas as well as in Japan and Haplogroups M and F figure prominently, it is as noted in previous chapters, Haplogroup B which as the common thread binds the descendants of Japheth from Tiras, Madai, Gomer and Javan.  

The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for the minority peoples in Japan: the Ainus descended from the Jomon; and the Ryukyuans, descended from the Yayoi

Region / HaplogroupCD1bNO1aO1bO2QOthers
Ainus (n=20)15%85%0%0%0%0%0%0%
Ryukyuans (n=132)8.5%45.5%1.5%1.5%23%19%0%1%

Notice the males of the Ainus and Ryukyuans both carry D1b which is found in the Philippines. 

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Yamato majority of Japan.

D1a2 – O1b – O2 – C1a1 – C2a – N1c2 – O1a – D1a1 – Q 

Japan: D1a2 [39%] – O1b [30%] – O2 [19%] – C1a1 [3.5%]

– C2a [3.5%] – N1c2 [2%] – O1a [1.5%] – D1a1 [0.5%] – Q [0.1%] 

A simplified percentage sequence for the Y-DNA Haplogroups.

Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1 [31.5%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] – N [2%] – Q [0.1%]

The Japanese possess the key Oriental and East Asian Haplogroups O and C (with the absence of K); while exhibiting the lesser marker Haplogroups, N and Q. The very high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup D is unique amongst the descendants of Japheth with the only other peoples bearing similar high levels, the Tibetans of Tibet.

Japan:           D1 – O1b – O2 – C – N – O1a – Q 

Malaysia:      O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F

Indonesia:    O2 – O1b – O1a – C – K – D1

Korea:            O2 – O1b – C – N – O1a – D1 – Q – K

Vietnam:       O2 – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D1 – N 

Philippines:  O2 – O1a – K – C – O1b 

A comparison of Japan with a selection of the nations studied thus far reveals the similarity of the East Asian peoples descended from Japheth’s sons, Javan and Gomer; while at the same time highlighting the unique and different paternal heritages. The Japanese are clearly distinct with high levels of D1. The second major Japanese Haplogroup is O1b and so it is Malaysia – which has O1b as their principle group – that is ostensibly closer to the Japanese – as shown on the PCA graph below. We have discussed the close linguistic ties between the two peoples.

The other four nations, two from Javan – Indonesia and the Philippines – and two from Gomer, all share O2a1 as their prime Haplogroup and so are further removed from the peoples residing on the Japanese isles.

Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1b [30%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] – N [2%]

– O1a [1.5%] – Q [0.1%]

Malaysia: O1b [32%] – O2 [30%] – O1a [8%] – K [8%] – C [6%]

– F [6%] 

Korea: O2 – [42.1%] – O1b [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%]

– O1a [3.1%] – D1 [ 2.5%] – Q [1.8%] – K [0.5%] 

Vietnam: O2 – [40%] – O1b [32.9%] – Q [7.1%] – O1a [5.7%]

– C [4.3%] – D1 [2.9%] – N [2.9%] 

Philippines: O2 – [39%] – O1a [28%] – K [20%] – C [5%]

– O1b [3%]

Comparing the defining marker Haplogroups of O, C and K, with the addition of Japan. The four main descendants of Javan have a distinct Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence; yet in these core groups, Japan and Malaysia bridge a closer gap overall with the Philippines and Indonesia bridging the other, albeit not as closely.

Taiwan:           O1a  [66%]   O1b  [11%]     O2a1  [11%]   C   [0.4%]

Korea:              O1a    [3%]   O1b [33%]     O2a1 [42%]   C   [13%]   K  [0.5%] 

Vietnam:         O1a    [6%]   O1b  [33%]    O2a1  [40%]  C     [4%] 

Philippines:    O1a  [28%]   O1b    [3%]    O2a1  [39%]  C     [5%]   K [20%]  

Indonesia:      O1a   [18%]   O1b  [23%]    O2a1  [29%]  C   [13%]   K   [3%] 

Malaysia:        O1a    [8%]   O1b  [32%]     O2a1 [30%]   C    [6%]   K   [8%] 

Japan:             O1a  [1.5%]   O1b  [30%]    O2a1  [19%]   C     [7%]    

Togarmah is estranged from his brothers in continental southeast Asia and of those brothers, Ararat, Minni, Riphath and Diphath, it is Ashkenaz with whom the clear closer genetic tie is shared – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Similarly, Tarshish is estranged from his brothers in archipelago Southeast Asia; yet in stark contrast with Togarmah, none of his brothers, whether Kittim, Dodan or Rodan is similar. It is Elishah that the semblance of a closer genetic tie is exhibited. 

Continuing the comparison table begun in chapter four for those peoples of Japhetic lineal descent; including samples from Tiras, Madai, Gomer, Javan’s sons, now with the addition of Tarshish.

                                     O     O2a1   O1a   O1b     C      D       K       Q  N

NA Amerindian                                                    6                        77

Cook Islands              5                                       83                 8

Kazakhstan                8                                      40                10       2  7

Micronesia                 9                                       19               65

Japan:                        51       19     1.5      30        7     40               0.1   2

Sulawesi                    51       17      21       13      22                  7      

Tonga                        60                                      23                  1

Borneo                      66       36       9       21      22

Indonesia                 69       29      18      23      13     0.5       3     

Malaysia                   70       30        8      32       6                  8

Philippines               70      39      28        3        5                20

Sumatra                    72      40      18       14        5       2         4  

Vietnam                    79      40        6      33        4        3                7  3

South Korea             79      42        3      33      13     2.5     0.5      2   4

Bali                            84        7       18      59        2                   1   0.4         

Java                           88      23      23      42        2                  2  

Taiwan:                     88      11      66       11     0.4        

The five regions of Indonesia are retained due to the diversity of its large population. Immediately, a number of points concerning the Japanese are apparent.

First, the Japanese are one of the few peoples to have minute trace levels of the interconnecting Haplogroup, K. 

Second, the minute percentage of Haplogroup O1a compared with their eastern relatives. In so doing, a percentage for total Haplogroup O which would otherwise be comparable with Malaysia at 70% does not exist. 

Third, though the Japanese possess an average level of O1b, similar to South Korea and Malaysia, they have a much lower level of O2, in keeping with much of Indonesia. Especially similar to the Indonesian island Sulawesi, with O2 and total Haplogroup O percentages matching. 

Fourth, this is due to a higher percentage in a Haplogroup other than O, like Sulawesi. For Sulawesi it is Haplogroup C and for Japan, it is Haplogroup D.

Fifth, the dominance of D in the men of Japan as the defining paternal marker Haplogroup puts them along side those other peoples which are defined by a Haplogroup other than O: and not with the Taiwan aborigines with 66% in O1a; Bali with 59% in O1b; or South Korea with 42% in O2. 

Those peoples include, the Cook Islander men with 83% of Haplogroup C; Micronesia with 65% of K; and the North American Indian males with 77% of Q.

In fact, no one else – excepting Tibet – has any percentage above 3% for D1. Japan is glaringly unique in the Japheth lineage. A study of the Japanese themselves only bears out their singularity in all aspects amongst East Asian peoples.

The next chapter concludes the study on Japheth’s children and what a finale it is.

Someone might say, “Look, this is new,” but really it has always been here. It was here before we were.

Ecclesiastes 1:10 New Century Version

“The more obvious a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterwards.”

Arthur Koestler 1905 – 1983

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

Kittim & Indonesia

Chapter VIII

The third son born to Javan is Kitti (or Kitt) translated solely in the plural: Kittim.

There are a number of Bible verses attributed to his descendants and their role in our civilisation is evolving as these words are written. A key player, growing in world affairs. A nation similar to China so-to-speak, in that it is awakening and beginning to flex its economic and ultimately, its military muscle.  

Israel a History of:

‘Kittim has been understood to refer to Cyprus. It is plausible that the Hebrew term “Ma-Kittim”, meaning “the land of Kittim”, perhaps developed into the term “Macedonia.”

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957:

‘The descendants of Kittim first settled on the island of Cyprus and then migrated into Southern Italy. This is simply proved by checking the historical fulfillment of Daniel 11:30. The “ships of Kittim” were Roman fleets* sailing from Cyprus. In modern times many Spanish and Portugese people (as well as Italians and a few Greeks) have migrated to the New World. These are the lands of Javan today.’ 

We have learned that Javan descends from Japheth and is an East Asian branch of the family tree, not European – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The Latin peoples of southern Europe do not descend from Japheth. Kittim travelled throughout the Mediterranean before their huge eastward arc towards Asia. Which was likely a trajectory similar to the one taken by the closely related Malays – who themselves may well have travelled via India rather than through Central Asia and China as the descendants of Gomer and Javan’s other sons did – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

It is not accurate to think that the Chinese were solely the Khitai, or called themselves by that name outside of the Khitan dynasty which ruled northern China from 907 CE to 1125 CE. The region to the north of China proper was known as Khitai – becoming Cathay. The ‘real’ China was further south beyond Khitan lands – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

The peoples who dwelt around the Yellow River delta region referred to themselves by the specific Dynasty in which time they lived. Whether the name Khitai is linked or derived from Kittim is not clear.

Early after the Flood, Kittim settled in present day Larnaca on the east coast of Cyprus, known in ancient times as Kition and in Latin, Citium. The whole Island became known as Kittim in Hebrew. The name was employed loosely in Hebrew literature, so it was often applied to all the Aegean islands and even to the West in general – especially the seafaring West.* 

Flavius Josephus circa 100 CE records in Antiquities of the Jews that Cethimus a son of Javan possessed the island Cethima: ‘it is now called Cyprus; and from that it is that all islands, and the greatest part of the sea coasts, are named Cethim by the Hebrews…’

The expression ‘isles of Kittim’, found in the Books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel indicates that some centuries prior to Josephus, this designation had become a broad description for the Mediterranean Islands. As Dr Hoeh says, this designation was further extended to apply to the Romans, Macedonians and Seleucid Greeks. The Septuagint translates the use of Kittim in the Book of Daniel 11:30 as Romans.

1 Maccabees 1:1 states that: Alexander the Great the Macedonian, had originated from the ‘land of Kittim’ – in reality, the ancient and at one time home of Kittim. By this later time, Hoeh describes the real Kittim who had long left the Mediterranean. As they were a prominent people, their legacy of territory and influence lingered in southern Europe through use of their name. 

In the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness from the Dead Sea Scrolls, Kittim is (incorrectly) referred to as being Asshur. Eleazar Sukenik argued that this reference to Asshur, refers to the Seleucid Empire which controlled the territory of the former Assyrian Empire; though his son Yigael Yadin, interpreted this phrase as a veiled reference to the Romans. Some authors have speculated that Kittim comes from an Akkadian word meaning invaders. Others have identified Kittim with the land of Hatti and the word Khatti for the Hittite Empire. We will learn that neither the Romans or the Hittites are descended from Japheth.

The mediaeval rabbinic compilation Yosippon, says Kittim camped in Campania, Italy and built a city called Posomanga, while descendants of Tubal camped in neighbouring Tuscany and built Sabino, with the Tiber river as their frontier. They soon went to war following the rape of certain sabines by Kittim, who are equated with the Romans. The war ended when Kittim showed the descendants of Tubal their mutual progeny. They then built cities called Porto, Albano, and Aresah. Later, their territory is occupied by Agnias, King of Carthage.

This may be an accurate account if it relates to between 9500 – 6000 BCE. If later than this, then these would be peoples descended from Shem living where Kittim and Tubal once dwelt and their names have been appropriated – Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis. Possibly, the people being described with former names, are the early Romans and Etruscans.

The name Kittim in Hebrew signifies:

‘Beaters, Pulverizers’ from the verb katat, ‘to beat or hammer.’

Recall two of the sons of Gomer: Riphath of Cambodia and Togarmah of North Korea and South Korea. Their names broadly mean, ‘Crusher’ and ‘Bone Breaker’ respectively.

Abarim Publications:

‘The name Kittim is a plural form of Kitty, although this singular doesn’t occur in Scriptures. 

The alternative plural form Kittiyyiym, occurs in Isaiah 23:12 and Jeremiah 2:10. 

The verb… means to beat or hammer, either to forge swords and ploughs and such, or to fragment and disperse of whatever is beaten. Adjective (katit) literally means beaten, but occurs only to denote a costly oil from beaten fruits. Noun (mekitta) refers to anything crushed or pulverised… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… reads Subduers.’

The peoples of Indonesia are the modern day descendants of Kittim.

The Republic of Indonesia consists of an astounding 18,108 islands; which include the prominent islands: Sumatra; Java; Borneo (Kalimantan in Indonesian); Bali; Sulawesi (formerly Celebes); Flores; (West) Timor; and Irian Jaya** (Papua).

Indonesia is the world’s largest island country and the fourteenth largest country by land area at 735,358 square miles.

With 285,721,236 people, it is the world’s fourth most populated country as well as the most populous Muslim majority nation. Java is the world’s most populous island and home to over half of the country’s population.

Notice the striking similarity between the name of the island with the most inhabitants of Indonesia, Java… and Kitti’s father, Java-n.**

This would be an extremely odd coincidence indeed if Japheth were truly the ancestor of Europeans as promulgated by the majority of teachers – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.

If on the other hand, Japheth is actually the paternal ancestor of the peoples in East Asia, South East Asia, Central Asia, Polynesia and the indigenous Native Americans, then perhaps it is not such a coincidence after all?

The country’s capital Jakarta, is the second highest urban populated area in the world.

The country shares land borders with Papua New Guinea, East Timor and the eastern part of Malaysia and despite its large population and densely populated regions, Indonesia has enormous areas of wilderness that support one of the world’s highest levels of biodiversity. Indonesia is consistently voted as one of the most beautiful countries in the world.

The Indonesian isles have been a valuable region for trade since the seventh century when the Srivijaya Empire (circa 700-1377 CE), a major naval and commercial power influenced trade and culture across the archipelago and later the Majapahit, which traded with people from mainland China and the Indian subcontinent. Local rulers absorbed foreign influences and Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms flourished. Sunni traders and Sufi scholars introduced Islam, while Europeans brought Christianity through colonisation. 

The first Europeans arrived in 1512, when Portuguese traders sought to monopolise sources of nutmeg and cloves. Dutch and British traders followed and in 1602, the Dutch established the Dutch East India Company. The politically dominant Javanese, are the largest ethnic group, constituting 40.2% of the population. They are predominantly located in the central to eastern parts of Java. The country’s official language is Indonesian, a variant of Malay. Most Indonesians speak at least one of more than seven hundred local languages, often as their first language; still, Javanese is the most widely spoken.

Intermittently interrupted by the Portuguese, French and British, the Dutch were the foremost colonial power for much of their three hundred and fifty year presence in the archipelago. The country proclaimed its independence in 1945, though it was not until 1949 when the Dutch recognised Indonesia’s sovereignty following an armed and diplomatic conflict between the two nations.

Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia:

“The significance of the Portuguese and Dutch invariably being the first Europeans to navigate the world’s oceans, while establishing trading posts (or colonies) will become remarkably clear as we progress – for they are each the embodiment of the original Phoenicians from Tyre and Sidon respectively (Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia).”

Prambanan Temples at Yogyakarta, Java

In 1850, George Earl an English ethnologist, proposed the term Indunesians, though preferring Malayunesians, for the inhabitants of the Indian Archipelago. One of his students James Logan, used Indonesia as a synonym for the Indian Archipelago. Dutch writers in East Indies publications, preferred the Malay Archipelago. The name Indonesia derives from Greek Indos and the word nesos, meaning ‘Indian islands’.

Flag of Indonesia

The economy of Indonesia is the largest in Southeast Asia; one of the emerging market economies of the world; and a member of the G20.

Indonesia is the 17th largest economy in the world by nominal GDP – totalling $1.43 trillion in 2025.

In 2012, Indonesia replaced India as the second fastest-growing G20 economy, behind China.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Indonesian global shipments during 2021. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$45.1 billion (19.8% of total exports)
  2. Animal/vegetable fats, oils, waxes: $32.8 billion (14.4%)
  3. Iron, steel: $20.9 billion (9.2%)
  4. Vehicles: $8.6 billion (3.8%)
  5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $8.5 billion (3.7%)
  6. Rubber, rubber articles: $7.1 billion (3.1%)
  7. Other chemical goods: $6.9 billion (3%)
  8. Ores, slag, ash: $6.4 billion (2.8%)
  9. Machinery including computers: $6.3 billion (2.8%)
  10. Footwear: $6.2 billion (2.7%)


Ores, slag and ash represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 96.3% from 2020 to 2021. That product category was galvanized by Indonesia’s higher international sales of exported copper ores and concentrates. In second place for improving export sales were the materials iron and steel via a 93.1% gain.’ 

Indonesia is a paradox as it has played a modest back-seat role in the world economy since its independence. Its importance has been considerably less than its size; abundant natural resources; and geographic location would seem to warrant. Kittim has not yet gotten into full-swing and we will likely witness over ensuing decades, a transformation of its influence on the world stage.

Indonesia is one of the top four with South Korea, in the Next Eleven nations and as the world’s biggest Islamic Nation, a contender as the potential leader, or influencing nation in the Muslim world – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.

Will Kenton:

‘The next eleven, also known as N-11, are the eleven countries that are poised to become the biggest economies in the world in the 21st century, after the BRIC [Brazil, Russia, India, China] countries. The next eleven are

South Korea, Mexico, Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Turkey, and Vietnam.

The next eleven were named in a paper… by… Goldman Sachs, published… 2005. The purpose of the paper was to review the performance of the BRIC countries, which are Brazil, Russia, [India], and China. The paper reviewed the progress of the BRICs, but then… introduced the idea of a larger set of countries that were likely to develop on a slower trajectory than the BRICs would, but could still become [economic] world powers. The authors of the paper used mathematical modeling to create charts of which countries could have the strongest economies… 45 years [Article: 2050] after the paper was published…’

Since time of first writing, the intergovernmental organisation has expanded into the BRICS, now including some of the N-11 nations – and noticeably, Indonesia – as well as three additional countries (in italics): 

Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates

The prophet Balaam provides a future prophecy on specific nations in the near future, including Kittim.

Numbers 24:24

English Standard Version

‘But ships shall come from Kittim and shall afflict [H6031 – anah: to afflict, abase or humble (one self)] Asshur and Eber; and he too shall come to utter destruction.’

Some have misleadingly translated Kittim as Cyprus or Italy.

Borobudur monument, Java – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

At some point, Indonesia’s military and naval power will either be formidable enough to combat combined Russian and European forces, or the verse is a veiled reference to a naval cavalcade of various nations travelling from a base in Kittim – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and article: Four Kings & One Queen.

A confederation of states linked to the King of the South, as written in the Book of Daniel^ is described. It also appears from the Hebrew word anah, that it could be the ships from Kittim which are humbled.

The Indonesian military, known as the Indonesian National Armed Forces has approximately 404,500 active personnel and a significant reserve force of approximately 401,000 personnel.

Indonesia’s armed forces are ranked 13th globally in military capability.

Provinces of Indonesia

Isaiah records a prophecy about Tyre and its demise in chapter 23:1, 12 NCV:

This is a message about Tyre:

You trading ships [of Tarshish-Japan], cry! The houses and harbor of Tyre [Brazil] are destroyed. This news came to the ships from the land of [Kittim-Indonesia].

He said, “Sidon [South Africa], you will not rejoice any longer, because you are destroyed. Even if you cross the sea to [Kittim], you will not find a place to rest.”

Jeremiah 2:10

King James Version

‘For pass over the isles of Chittim…’

Ezekiel 27:6

Young’s Literal Translation

‘Of oaks of Bashan they made thine oars [ship building], Thy bench they have made of ivory, A branch [H1323 – bath: daughter, town, company, first] of Ashurim from isles of Chittim.’

Ship building is a growing industry in Indonesia, presently in the shadow of Japan and Malaysia.

Later, we will learn the significance of Bashan and ships – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

The second part of the verse links Kittim and seemingly a great grandson of Abraham. Most translations inaccurately translate as Asshur the second son of Shem, possibly influenced by the relationship shown in Numbers 24:24. See Genesis 25:3 and the individual Ashurim and the Ashurites – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

We will discover that the descendants of Ashurim – also listed in the plural – have had an historical link with the Kittim of Indonesia. The Hebrew word used in Ezekiel is not the same as the one used for Abraham’s grandson in Genesis, though it is a closer match than the Hebrew word used for Jacob’s son Asher in Genesis chapter forty-nine – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

Yet Asher the son of Jacob cannot be ruled out of contention, as we will discover their close geographic location with Kittim is an uncanny irony.

Gunung Padang Pyramid, Java – the oldest pyramid in the world?

Refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Daniel chapter Eleven^ contains the single longest prophecy in the Bible, which chronicles thousands of years and on into the future. The early part of the chapter references – somewhat confusingly – Greece (or Javan); actually the Greco-Macedonian Empire and its confrontation with the existing, ruling Medo-Persian Empire. The players of north and south, subtly change over the centuries. Towards the end of the chapter the Kings of the North and the South have shifted from a Mediterranean – Middle Eastern – orientation to a global power struggle – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.

We read in Daniel 11: 15, 18, 29-30:

English Standard Version

‘Then the king of the north shall come… Afterward he shall turn his face to the coastlands [of Javan]^ and shall capture many of them… At the time appointed he shall return and come into the south, but it shall not be this time as it was before. For ships of Kittim shall come against him, and he shall be afraid and withdraw, and shall turn back and be enraged and take action against the holy covenant.’

Sometimes translated unhelpfully, as ships from the west. The interlinear says: ‘For ships Chittim shall come…’ It does not include ‘of’ or ‘from’ in the Hebrew, though this writer considers the inference is more accurately from rather than of Kittim.

We learned in Numbers 24:24 that Kittim fights against Asshur and Eber – an alliance constituting Russia and a German led Europe. Asshur (or Assyria) is revealed as the future King of the North. The King of the North attacks the coastlands of Southeast Asia. Kittim is either part of those nations amalgamated with the King of the South – a united Islamic bloc comprising the principal nations of Turkey, Iran, Pakistan and Egypt – or accommodates a military and naval presence within its strategically positioned borders in southeast Asian waters.

These verses in Daniel chapter Eleven highlight a beginning point of a specific time period, that includes actions of great magnitude performed by important and specific individuals in the future. The significance of this is considerable and we shall return to it in detail when we study Shem’s son, Asshur and also the demagogue Nimrod – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and articles: The Pyramid Perplexity; and Is America Babylon?

Geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, claims there is a genetic division between Eastern Orientals and Southeast Asians and Zhou Jixu agrees, that there is a physical difference between these two populations. That said, the complexity of the genetic data has led scientists to seriously doubt the usefulness of the concept of an Asian race; as distinctive Asian features clearly represent separate lines of descent for the sons of Japheth.

After studying all four of Javan’s sons, it will be understood that those sons of Japheth located in Asia, such as Madai, Gomer and Javan are all divergent and distinctive lines of lineal descent. As there are a number of lineages from Japheth’s sons, this does not discount an overall East Asian identity. There is variety within the Asian genome, for Japheth had seven sons. We have witnessed already the seven core Y-DNA Haplogroups being exhibited of C, K and O (O1, O2) and in lesser degree, D, N and Q.

Indonesian men

Austronesian Indonesians are genetically close to southeast Asians; while the further east one travels the more inhabitants of the Indonesian Islands who exhibit a Melanesian affinity. Prominent mt-DNA Haplogroups of which we are now quite familiar, include the prevalent southeastern Asian maternal Haplogroups M, F and B – with the addition of Y2 – in the western regions of Indonesia; amongst the speakers of Austronesian languages in Southeast Asia; the Pacific Islands; and on Madagascar. In the eastern island chains comprising Indonesia it is Haplogroups Q and P which are primarily found amongst non-Austronesian speakers.

Indonesian women

Recall from earlier chapters the predominant unifying mtDNA Haplogroup link amongst the descendants of Japheth has been Haplogroup B. While a variety of Haplogroups are evident, it is B which has been found in all of his descendants studied thus far: Tiras the Amerindian; Madai the Central Asian; Gomer on the mainland of South East Asia; Togarmah the Korean; and Javan in the islands of South East Asia.

Haplogroup B is a relatively recent mutation which derives from the super Haplogroups R, N and L3 respectively – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The Indonesian archipelago: an ancient genetic highway linking Asia and the Pacific, multiple authors, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Indonesia, an island nation linking mainland Asia with the Pacific world, hosts a wide range of linguistic, ethnic and genetic diversity. Despite the complexity of this cultural environment, genetic studies in Indonesia remain surprisingly sparse. The haplotype diversity of communities ranged from 0.862 – 0.996, which indicates that most individuals within these groups carry unique mtDNA lineages. The most diverse communities are found in eastern parts of the archipelago (Sumba, Flores, Pantar and Alor), where both Asian and Papuan lineages occur side by side.

Haplogroup frequencies differ between western and eastern Indonesia… In the west, haplogroups B5a (12%), B4c1b3 (9%) and Y2 (10.5%) are carried by a third of individuals. These haplogroups, frequent in western Indonesia, are notable by their near absence in eastern Indonesia. In the east, haplogroups F1a4 (8.7%), Q including Q1 and Q2 (7.7%), P (2.8%) and B4a1a1a (2.3%) represent nearly a quarter of individuals. 

Correspondingly, these haplogroups are rare or absent in western Indonesia, which is expected for lineages with strong Papuan connections (P and Q), but more surprising for lineages like the Polynesian motif (B4a1a1a). The Polynesian motif is found as far west as Bali, albeit in just two individuals (0.4%). However, it was not detected in samples from the western Indonesian islands of Java, Sumatra, Nias and Mentawai, even though this region is thought to have contributed to the settlement of Madagascar where the Polynesian motif is carried by nearly a third of individuals – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The prevalence of the Polynesian motif in Madagascar, and its absence from the island region where the inhabitants of Madagascar originated, has yet to be satisfactorily explained.’

A subsequent article in 2015 answers the question.**

‘We compared the distribution of Indonesian mtDNA haplogroups with those of surrounding populations… Most haplogroups are shared. The deep maternal lineages M17a, M73, M47, N21, N22, R21, R22 and R23 have patchy distributions across mainland and island southeast Asia, likely reflecting ancient maternal lineages tracing back to the first settlers in this region.

Four of these lineages (M17a, N21, R22 and R23) reach higher frequencies in western compared with eastern Indonesia… Owing to proposed population origins of Austronesian language speakers in Taiwan, Indonesian links to the Philippines andindigenous Taiwanese are of especial interest.

These three locations share four haplogroups (E1a1a, M7b3, M7c3c and Y2), which have previously been suggested as candidates for a mid-Holocene dispersal out of Taiwan… lineages shared with Filipinos and indigenous Taiwanese are generally more common in the east than in the west of Indonesia. The exceptions are Y2 and M7c3c…

Alternative hypotheses, such as Austronesian groups originating in and dispersing from Indonesia, remain possible, with many genetic lineages in Indonesia showing old and local connections. Models combining these two extremes may ultimately be the best predictors. We envisage some genetic contributions from Taiwan, possibly including speakers of early Austronesian languages, with a substantial biological heritage from waves of ancestral populations arriving in island southeast Asia… ancestral-derived haplotype orders are consistent with a rapid expansion from Taiwan to the Philippines and Indonesia, but population dispersals in the opposite direction are equally likely.

Although we provide haplogroup dates with some reluctance, we note that relative ages are inconsistent with a simple dispersal from Taiwan to the Philippines, and thence to Indonesia. Instead, they seem a better fit to widespread population movements within island southeast Asia during the Holocene.

The Polynesian motif is also generally associated with a Taiwanese dispersal, but actually possesses an unusual geographical distribution. The ancestral form occurs widely throughout mainland and island southeast Asia. However, the Polynesian motif itself is found only at low frequency in the Philippines (0.5%) and eastern Indonesia (2.3%). Although frequencies reach as high as 7.4% on Timor, the lineage is found no further west than Bali (0.4%, or just 2 of 457 individuals).

This is consistent with a proposed origin in island Melanesia, but notably conflicts with the high frequency of the Polynesian motif in Madagascar… We suggest that an inclusive framework that describes the full distribution of this unusual mtDNA lineage is still lacking. Nevertheless, an unambiguous connection with population dispersals from Taiwan during the Neolithic seems increasingly unlikely – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

In comparisons with neighboring populations, Indonesia’s closest geneticconnections lie toward mainland [Elishah – Malaysia] and island southeast Asia [Dodanim – Philippines] rather than Oceania [Rodanim]… the only mtDNA lineage found across all Indonesian island groups is M7c3c, but this haplogroup, while also present in Taiwan and the Philippines, appears to be absent from other Austronesian-speaking populations in Oceania.

Therefore, no single shared mtDNA lineage links all speakers of Austronesian languages, even if only at low frequency. Instead, Austronesian populations are characterized more by their diversity than by any shared genetic inheritance.’

This is not quite true, for mtDNA Haplogroup B4a1a is prevalent throughout ‘Taiwan, Island Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The lineage B4a1a1 is prevalent in Near Oceania and has become almost fixed in Polynesia, making up more than 90% of all Polynesian mtDNA haplotypes’ – Edana Lord, Genetic History of Polynesians and New Zealand Maori.

Genetic Admixture History of Eastern Indonesia as Revealed by Y-Chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA Analysis, multiple authors, 2009 – emphasis mine:

‘Eastern Indonesia possesses more linguistic diversity than any other region in Southeast Asia, with both Austronesian (AN) languages that are of East Asian origin, as well as non-Austronesian (NAN) languages of likely Melanesian origin. Here, we investigated the genetic history of human populations from seven eastern Indonesian [EI] islands, including AN and NAN speakers, as well as the relationship between languages and genes, by means of nonrecombining Y-chromosomal (NRY) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis.

We found that the eastern Indonesian gene pool consists of East Asian as well as Melanesian components, as might be expected based on linguistic evidence… In addition, we noted a small fraction of the NRY and mtDNA data shared between eastern Indonesians and Australian Aborigines likely reflecting an ancient link between Asia and Australia.^^

All AN languages trace back to a common ancestral language (Proto-AN) and are thought to have spread by an expansion that started about 5,500 – 6,000 years ago in Taiwan with an assumed ultimate origin in East Asia… Furthermore, we identified at least two haplogroups (Q1 and Q2) that were previously suggested to be of Melanesian origin… whereas our new data suggest they might be of EI origin instead. Moreover, the mtDNA sequence diversity within haplogroup Q1 was very high in EI (0.967 ± 0.01) making it somewhat unlikely that this haplogroup exists in EI as a result of a recent migration from Melanesia… 

We found NRY haplogroup C-RPS4Y in surprisingly high frequency in EI, accounting for 14.2% of all EI Y-chromosomes… which is the highest frequency of any region in our current and previous data set… The RPS4YT mutation characterizing the major haplogroup C represents one of the two oldest branches of the NRY tree in Asia/Oceania (in addition to M9)… It most likely represents the oldest NRY haplogroup of Asian origin in EI.

Haplogroup C-RPS4Y has not been reported in East Asia or Polynesia, is almost completely absent from Melanesia (reported so far from one male from coastal PNG and one Fijian), and is very rare in Southeast Asia (outside EI)… However, this NRY lineage was previously found at an appreciable frequency (∼10%) in northern Australian Aborigines… and also, albeit less frequently (∼1.3%), in central Australian Aborigines…^^ Extremely high frequencies of C-RPS4Y (xM38) (92%) were also previously found in males from Cibol on Flores…

C-RPS4Y^ was also previously found in India, albeit in low frequency, and was used to support an ancient genetic link between India and Australia.’

Supporting an historical and genetic link between the Indian Dravidian and the Australian Aborigine – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut

Mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosome suggest the settlement of Madagascar by Indonesian sea nomad populations, multiple authors, 2015 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Linguistic, cultural and genetic characteristics of the Malagasy suggest that both Africans and Island Southeast Asians were involved in the colonization of Madagascar. 

Populations from the Indonesian archipelago played an especially important role because linguistic evidence suggests that the Malagasy language branches from the Southeast Barito language family of southern Borneo, Indonesia, with the closest language spoken today by the Ma’anyan. A combination of phylogeographic analysis of genetic distances, haplotype comparisons and inference of parental populations by linear optimization, using both maternal and paternal DNA lineages, suggests that Malagasy derive from multiple regional sources in Indonesia, with a focus on eastern Borneo, southern Sulawesi and the Lesser Sunda islands.**

Prior to the European colonial period, Austronesian-speaking populations were the most widespread of any language family. While most groups speaking Austronesian languages moved eastward, settling the Pacific Ocean, others moved westward through the Indian Ocean, reaching eastern Africa and Madagascar. Dispersing halfway around the world within the past two millennia, the Austronesian expansion is often considered the last substantial wave of migration in human prehistory.

A recent study of genome-wide SNP data suggests that the western and central regions of Indonesia (Java/Borneo/Sulawesi) have the closest genetic connections with Malagasy.

This is in agreement with previous studies of uniparental markers (mtDNA and the Y chromosome), which found genetic affinity between Malagasy and western Indonesian populations. A key lineage linking Indonesia and Madagascar is the Polynesian motif (a mitochondrial DNA haplogroup, B4a1a1, characterized by the polymorphisms A14022G, T16217C, A16247G and C16261T).

More recently, it has been recognized that Malagasy carry specific point mutation variants (mtDNA nucleotides 1473 and 3423), which together have been termed the Malagasy motif. This Malagasy version of the Polynesian motif is distributed throughout Madagascar with frequencies in specific ethnic groups ranging from 11-50%. While still debated, this relatively homogenous distribution has been interpreted as supporting the first arrival of the Polynesian motif during an early phase of Madagascar’s settlement. To date, the Malagasy motif has not been found in Indonesia, or anywhere else outside Madagascar. 

Based on analysis of 96 Y chromosome binary markers… the majority of men in the Ma’anyan, Lebbo’ and Bajo carry haplogroups previously found in Southeast Asia, particularly C, K, and O… Among the haplogroups shared between Malagasy and Indonesians… four originated in Island Southeast Asia (C, O1a, O1a2, O2a1), while six have western Eurasian origins (J1, J2, J2b, T, L and R1a).

The Ma’anyan and five other Indonesian groups, all located around the Sulawesi sea (east Kalimantan Dayak, Java, Bali, Mandar and Sumba), share four of these Island Southeast Asian haplogroups. Importantly, Malagasy uniquely share just one subhaplogroup (O2a1a1 [F2159 or] – M88 [O1b, downstream from M111 – O1b1a1a1a1a?]) with Ma’anyan, and this lineage has not been discovered in other regions of Indonesia.

O2a1a1 may therefore be a marker of male genetic contributions from southern Borneo to Madagascar. 

Malagasy and Indonesians share mitochondrial haplogroups B4a1a, B4a1a1 (Polynesian motif), E1a1a, F3b, M7c1a4a, M32c and Q1… Of these, B4a1a1, E1a1a and Q1 are found exclusively in eastern Indonesia. Conversely, F3b, B4a1a and M7c1a4a occur ubiquitously across both eastern and western Indonesia, and M32c has been observed in only one Javanese individual.

The Polynesian motif (B4a1a1) is considered strong evidence of Indonesian gene flow into Madagascar, where a variant is found at moderate frequency (11-50%). With the exception of Bali… B4a1a1 only occurs in eastern Indonesia. Considering the restricted geographic distribution of the Polynesian motif, it is most likely that this lineage from Madagascar traces back to eastern rather than western Indonesia.

Malagasy and Indonesians share ten haplotypes in seven haplogroups… two haplotypes each in B4a1a and B4a1a1; three haplotypes in M7c1a4a; and one haplotype in each of the other shared haplogroups… eastern Indonesian populations tend to share more haplotypes with Malagasy than western Indonesian groups. We propose that the settlement of Madagascar had an Indonesian source location around southern Sulawesi, the Lesser Sunda islands and eastern Borneo.’

What we have learned thus far, from particularly Gomer and Javan; is the high percentage levels and predominant occurrence of the key Y-DNA Haplogroups O, C, K and a lesser degree, D, Q and N.

The peoples of Indonesia are no different and expectedly reveal a similar Haplogroup pattern. With that in mind – as we have just seen from the origin of the Polynesian element in the Madagascans – Indonesia has an extremely diverse set of peoples inhabiting its myriad island chain. Whether they be Malay, Polynesian or Melanesian.

Travelling from west to east, a selection of the prominent Islands, exhibit the following major Austronesian Y-DNA Haplogroups.

Sumatra:  O2 – O1a – O1b – [F] – C – K – D

Java:         O1b – O1a – O2 – C – K 

Bali:          O1b – O1a – O2 – C – K – Q 

Borneo:    O2 – C – O1b – O1a -[F]

Sulawesi:  C – O1a – O2 – O1b – K – [F] 

Sumatra has a population of nearly sixty million people and its male Haplogroup frequencies contribute heavily to the Indonesian total. Sumatra is distinct from other Indonesian Islands – aside from Borneo (O2) – and has a passing resemblance with the Filipinos.

Sumatra: O2 [39.8%] – O1a [17.5%] – O1b [14%] – F [14%] – C [5.3%]

– K [3.5%] – D [1.8%]  

Java has the highest number of people in Indonesia with nearly one hundred and fifty million people, over half the Indonesian total and dominates the Indonesian paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup pool. 

Java: O1b [41.5%] – O1a [22.6%] – O2 [22.6%] – C [1.9%] – K [1.9%]   

Java sits in stark contrast with Sumatra and though not aligned closely, Java has a closer match with the 0.7 million people of Bali, over any other island or nation in south east Asia.

Bali: O1b [58.8%] – O1a [18.1%] – O2  [6.9%] – C  [1.8%]

– K  [1.1%] – Q [0.4%]  

Borneo with approximately twenty-five million people has similarity in part with Sumatra as well as with Sulawesi.

Borneo: O2 [36%] – C [22.1%] – O1b [20.9%] – O1a [9.3%] – F [2.3%]

Sulawesi: C [22.2%] – O1a [21.4%] – O2  [16.7%] – O1b [13%] – K  [7.4%]

– F [5.6%]

The additional Melanesian Y-DNA Haplogroups of M and S, again travelling west to east, reveal the following.

Bali:                 O – C – K – M – S

Sulawesi:        O – C – K – S – M

Flores:             C1 – C – S – K – O – M

East Timor:    C1 – K – O – S – C – M

West Papua:   C1 – M – K – O

The Bali percentages for O, C and K are the same as above, with the addition of M at 0.7% and S at 0.4%. Sulawesi is again similar, with the addition of S at 5.1% and M at 1.1%. The remaining three islands in Indonesia have the following Y-DNA Haplogroups.

Flores: C1 [39.4%] – C [23.9%] – S [12.7%] – K [11.3%] -O 8.5%] – M [2.8%] 

East Timor: C1 [35.9%] – K [17.9%] – O [17.9%] – S [12.8%]

– C [7.7%] – M [7.7%] 

West Papua: C1 [44.4%] – M [29.3%] – K [23.3%] – O [3%] 

The islands of Flores with two million people, East Timor – a separate sovereign state, outside Indonesia – with 1.5 million people and West Papua, with one million people show the Haplogroup evidence of the Melanesian component in their demographics. West Timor is part of Indonesia, with a population of two million people and shares the Island of Timor with East Timor. 

West Papua is part of Indonesian New Guinea with Papua, which has five million people and they both share the western half of New Guinea with Papua New Guinea located in the eastern half, which has a population of nearly nine million people and is a separate, distinct nation. 

While the western half of New Guinea was a Dutch colony, the north-eastern region was once a German colony and the south-eastern territory a British colony. Papua New Guinea is a mineral power and the fifth biggest country in terms of natural mineral reserves; holding about $222 billion worth of reserves of bauxite, the commercial ore of Aluminum. The country is estimated to hold up to 24% of the total bauxite reserves in the world.

Bali:                 O [84%]   C  [1.8%]                       K [1.1%]     M   [0.7%]   S [0.4%]  

Sulawesi:        O [64%]   C  [11%]     C1  [11%]    K  [6%]      M    [1.1%]   S   [5%]     

Flores:             O   [9%]   C [24%]     C1 [39%]    K [11%]      M    [3%]     S [13%]    

East Timor:    O [18%]  C  [8%]     C1 [36%]    K [18%]    M    [8%]    S [13%]   

West Papua:   O   [3%]   C [44%]                         K [23%]    M [39%]  

A survey of the Melanesian Y-DNA Haplogroups shows the sharp lessening of the prime East Asian and Southeast Asian Haplogroup O and the steep increasing percentages of the typical Melanesian Haplogroups for M, S and in part, K. Haplogroup S is mainly confined to the Melanesian peoples of Indonesia – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The specific Haplogroups for East Timor include the following, which are in bold for typically Melanesian; italicised for typically South East Asian’ and both for those which reflect an indigenous Eastern Indonesian origin. 

Y-DNA:  C-M38, K-M9, S-M254, M-M4, M-P34, C-RPS4Y^, O-M119 [O1a]

mtDNA: P1, Q1, R14, B, B4a, F1a, R9c, E1a, E1b, E2, Polynesian motif.

Taiwan:           O1a  [66%]   O1b  [11%]     O2a1  [11%]   C   [0.4%]

Korea:              O1a    [3%]   O1b [33%]     O2a1 [42%]   C   [13%]   K  [0.5%] 

Vietnam:         O1a    [6%]   O1b  [33%]    O2a1  [40%]  C     [4%] 

Philippines:    O1a  [28%]   O1b   [3%]     O2a1  [39%]  C     [5%]   K [20%]  

Sumatra:         O1a  [18%]   O1b  [14%]     O2a1 [40%]   C     [5%]   K   [4%] 

Malaysia:        O1a    [8%]   O1b  [32%]     O2a1 [30%]   C    [6%]   K   [8%] 

Java:                O1a  [23%]   O1b  [42%]     O2a1 [23%]   C    [2%]    K  [2%]   

Bali:                  O1a  [18%]  O1b   [59%]    O2a1    [7%]   C    [2%]    K   [1%] 

Borneo:            O1a    [9%]  O1b   [21%]    O2a1  [36%]   C   [22%] 

Sulawesi:         O1a  [21%]   O1b   [13%]    O2a1  [17%]   C   [22%]   K   [7%] 

Comparing the selected five nations descended from Gomer and Javan with the five regions of Kittim shows that Sumatra appears to have the closest alignment overall with the Philippines (Dodan).

Borneo and Sulawesi have more in common with each other, than they they do with either Malaysia or the Philippines.

Similarly, Java and Bali are more closely aligned to each other.

Though, as Indonesian Haplogroups are influenced by the majority of their population dwelling on Java; the closest affinity of the overall Indonesian-Kittim Haplogroup sequence is with brother nation Malaysia-Elishah. 

                             O     O2a1   O1a   O1b      C       D      K     Q 

Sumatra             72        40       18       14        5       2      4  

Java                    88        23       23      42        2                2  

Bali                     84           7       18       59       2                 1     0.4         

Borneo               66        36         9       21      22

Sulawesi             51        17        21       13      22                7      

Indonesia          69        29       18       23      13     0.5     3     

Indonesia possesses a high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup O overall and low percentages of the other East Asian marker Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising C, K and D.

Java as representative of Indonesia due to its population size, is high in O1a and O1b, with an average level for O2. Overall for the O Haplogroup, Java has the highest percentage.

The Indonesian average at the base of the table is derived from the Haplogroup percentages of the four biggest regions and does not include Bali.

The comparison table begun in Chapter IV, with samples from Tiras, Madai, Gomer and Javan’s two sons studied thus far, now with the addition of Kittim.

                                     O     O2a1   O1a   O1b     C       D       K       Q  N

NA Amerindian                                                   6                          77

Cook Islands              5                                       83                 8

Kazakhstan                8                                      40                10       2   7

Micronesia                 9                                       19               65

Sulawesi                    51      17       21       13      22                  7      

Tonga                        60                                      23                  1

Borneo                      66      36        9       21      22

Indonesia                 69       29      18      23      13     0.5       3     

Malaysia                   70       30        8      32       6                 8

Philippines               70      39      28        3        5               20

Sumatra                    72      40      18       14        5        2        4  

Vietnam                    79      40        6      33        4        3                 7  3

South Korea             79      42        3      33      13     2.5     0.5       2  4

Bali                             84       7       18      59        2                  1    0.4         

Java                           88      23      23      42        2                 2  

Taiwan:                     88      11      66       11     0.4        

The Island of Java mirrors Taiwan for the highest percentage of combined O Haplogroups. Though for an even distribution of O1a, O1b and O2, Java stands out and is comparable only with Sulawesi by comparison.

Indonesian men as a whole carry little Haplogroup K and lower levels of Haplogroup C, aside from Borneo and Sulawesi. Bali has the highest O1b in Indonesia as well as for East Asia. For Sumatra it is O2, being joint second in East Asia and for Java males it is O1a, the third highest in East Asia.

Thus far over all, Haplogroup D is rare in East Asia. In Indonesia, Haplogroup D is carried by males in Sumatra; while Haplogroup Q also rare in East Asia, is possessed by men in Bali. 

As a recap: Haplogroup Q is the defining marker Haplogroup for the Amerindian; for Micronesia, it is Haplogroup K, which has also been influential in the Philippines.

Haplogroup C is the defining marker Haplogroup for the Cook Islands and Kazakhstan (Central Asia and Mongolia). 

Haplogroup O1b is not just the prime Haplogroup in Bali, but also in Java and Malaysia. 

Haplogroup O1a is the defining Haplogroup for the Taiwanese aborigine, as well as the Island of Sulawesi.

Meanwhile, Haplogroup O2 is the defining marker Haplogroup for South Korea, Vietnam, the Philippines, Sumatra, Borneo and the combined average for Indonesia.

Looking at Indonesia as a whole, it is the nation on the table which sits half way between the other nations from South East Asia on one side and the peoples of Polynesia, Central Asia and the Americas on the other.

One can’t help but consider the geography of the myriad island chain comprising Indonesia was as influential in the dispersal of Javan’s descendants in the past as it will be of strategic importance in the future.

Chapter nine visits Japheth’s enigmatic and maverick grandson, Tarshish.

There is gold, and an abundance of rubies, but words of knowledge are like a precious jewel.

Proverbs 20:15 New English Translation

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform.” (or pause and reflect)

Mark Twain 1835-1910

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

Togarmah & the Koreas

Chapter VI

There are exceptions to every rule in family living together, as per point number one in the introduction (primus verba). We will encounter two significant exceptions amongst Japheth’s grandsons, with the first being the youngest son of Gomer and his prompt decision to dwell apart from his siblings, Ashkenaz and Riphath. Togarmah is highlighted as a people with military capability and forms a prominent part of the formidable future alliance with Magog and Gomer’s other sons – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Book of Jasher 10:10-12

10 ‘And the children of Tugarma are ten families, and these are their names:

Buzar, Parzunac*, Balgar**, Elicanum, Ragbib, Tarki, Bid, Zebuc, Ongal and Tilmaz;

all these spread and rested in the north and built themselves cities. 11 And they called their cities after their own names, those are they who abide by the rivers Hithlah and Italac unto this day.

12 But the families of Angoli, Balgar** and Parzunac*,

they dwell by the great river Dubnee; and the names of their cities are also according to their own names.’

The sons of Togarmah are not recorded in the Bible. It is of significance that of the eleven families in the Book of Jasher, there was a division with eight living in one location and three in another. Remember this detail, for we will discover that modern Togarmah is in fact split into two.

Ancient Civilisation:

‘Encyclopaedia Britannica says that the Armenians traditionally claim to be descended from Togarmah… Ancient Armenia reached into Turkey. The name Turkey probably comes from Togarmah.’

On our journey we will experience more than once, nations claiming a specific biblical identity, though this does not make it so.

Israel a History of:

‘The Jewish Targums claim that Germany was also derived from Togarmah and his descendants. Turkey and Turkestan also have possible connections with Togarmah.’

Derek Walker – emphasis mine:

‘Togarmah is another country aligned with Russia [Russia is not Magog, Meshech or Tubal]. He was a son of Gomer, son of Japheth (Genesis 10:1-3), known in Assyrian records as Tilgarimmu, a city state in Eastern Anatolia (Asia Minor, modern Turkey)… This identification is generally acknowledged by all. The Bible confirms Togarmah’s location in Ezekiel 38:6: “Beth-Togarmah from the uttermost parts of the north with all its troops.” 

The word Beth at the beginning of the word is the Hebrew word for “house.” It means “house or place of Togarmah.” In Ezekiel 38:6: “the house of Togarmah, and all its hordes” are specifically pointed out as being from the north. 

Therefore we know it is directly north of Israel [the sons of Jacob – not the state of Israel]. Some of the sons of Togarmah can be traced to the Turkoman tribes of Central Asia. Rimmer had no doubts that Togarmah is ancient Armenia (most of which is in Turkey today…) and cited certain Assyrian chronicles as well as Tacitus in support of his view.’

Walker: ‘He said that the title the House of Togarmah is a common description for Armenia in Armenian literature. 

All agree to identify Togarmah with Armenia and Turkey. This fits Ezekiel, for Turkey is directly north of Israel. There’s a possible etymological connection between the names Togarmah and Turkey and Turkestan. In Ezekiel’s time, there was a city in Cappodocia (Turkey) known as Tegarma, Tagarma, Til-garimmu, and Takarama. It’s significant that [four] of the ancient locations Ezekiel gives are found today in the nation of Turkey. Clearly God is emphasising Turkey’s important part in the end-time coalition…’

Who Togarmah is not… the map above is an example of a common representation for the biblical identities listed in Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight. All without exception are incorrect, as our progression through the descendants of Japheth, Ham, Canaan and Shem will reveal. Put and Cush are cold; Magog (Meshech and Tubal) is cool; Persia warm; and Gomer with Togarmah, freezing.

The once location of Togarmah in Asia Minor relates to thousands of years ago, directly after the Flood – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Many peoples have dwelt at this major continental intersection at one time or another; migrating as new peoples encroached. All these different groups of people cannot now still be living there, or all be identified as Turks.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957:

‘One branch of the family of Gomer, however, did not journey to Southeast Asia’ – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

‘Ezekiel 38:6 explains it: “The house of Togarmah in the uttermost parts of the north, and all his bands” (Jewish translation). The far, far north means Russian Siberia today! That is where the descendants of Togarmah (Genesis 10:3) live. These Asiatics are still a wild nomadic people, much as they were 2500 years ago, trading “with horses and horsemen and mules” (Ezekiel 27:14).’

While Hoeh is closer to the truth than those who identify Togarmah with Armenia or Turkey, the descendants of Togarmah figure far more prominently in world affairs than as non-specifically identified nomadic, tribal, horsemen.

The first of the two scriptures referenced by Hoeh pertaining to Togarmah:

Ezekiel 38:6 English Standard Version, translates as quoted by Hoeh.

‘Gomer and all his hordes; Beth-togarmah from the uttermost parts of the north with all his hordes – many peoples are with you.’

Derek Walker explained the meaning of Beth as house. It is a family unit. Its use is showing Togarmah as a separate entity from his brothers Ashkenaz and Riphath – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

We learned when studying Madai, that Asshur (or Assyria) lives in the North – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

There are not many options in Central Asia and East Asia for who Togarmah might be today. Other translations state:

New Century Version

… the nation of Togarmah from the far north…

New English Translation

… and by Beth Togarmah from the remote parts of the north

There are only four peoples or five nations, which Togarmah could be: China, Mongolia, North Korea, South Korea and Japan.

Youngs Literal Translation

… The house of Togarmah of the sides of the north…

This is a more specific translation and eliminates China and Mongolia.

Modern King James version

… the house of Togarmah from the recesses of the north…

This translation effectively eliminates Japan, for the connotation of this word is a bend, a crook or even a hook. In the King James version it says ‘of the north quarters.’

North in Hebrew – tsaphon from the root H6845 tsaphan – signifies ‘hidden, stored up, dark, gloomy’ and ‘unknown.’

Quarters in Hebrew, from H3411: yrekah, meaning side or sides; is used 21 times in the KJV; coasts (3), parts (2); border (1); quarters (1). It also means ‘flank, extreme parts, the rear or recess’ and ‘recesses.’

The Peninsula jutting out from the Asian continent with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the north and the Republic of Korea in the South, is the clear answer to where Togarmah is located today.

It was not so obvious until studying this verse very closely. This writer had initially considered that Meshech and Tubal were North Korea and South Korea respectively and that Japan was Togarmah. Though only Korea, could equate to being tucked away in this manner and hidden in a crook or recess

Yet Korea’s strategic geographical location meant it was a ‘target for domination, occupation and plunder’, so that in attempting to isolate itself it earned the name, The Hermit Kingdom in the eighteenth century – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 223-224. Even today, North Korea exists under self-imposed isolation.

The second of the two scriptures referenced by Hoeh pertaining to Togarmah:

Ezekiel 27:14

New Century Version

‘People of Beth Togarmah traded your goods for work horses, war horses, and mules.’

This verse is a past reference to when Koreans were one people. Though with a modern application today, it reveals a nation who is economically and technically advanced; producing machinery and transport for industry as well as military armaments and weaponry.

Ancient Korea, Mark Cartwright, 2016:

In the past ‘[ancient] Korea has provided many unique contributions to world culture including the invention of movable metal type printing, superb celadon ceramics, the exquisite gold crowns of Silla [refer Addendum], the oldest astronomical observatory in Asia, fine gilt-bronze Buddist figurines, stone pagodas, hanji, the most prized paper in the world, and the ondol underfloor heating system.’

Today, South Korea is a major player in the global arms trade, significantly increasing its exports in recent years and establishing itself as a competitive supplier of military technology. South Korea is ranked the eighth largest weapons exporter in the world. After once relying heavily on the United States for supplying its military hardware to its armed forces, the country manufactures a range of military equipment, including: tanks, artillery and aircraft.

South Korea is ranked fifth in the world for both its automobile production and export volume. Major manufacturers include Hyundai, Kia and GM Korea. South Korea also possesses an impressive 22.5% market share of the world’s smart phone sector through Samsung Electronics.

Korea was split in two – arbitrarily along the 38th parallel – in 1945 and unlike North Vietnam and South Vietnam does not look like uniting anytime soon.

The use of House of Togarmah in Ezekiel 38:6, does not hint at just one of the Koreas being part of the far distant military alliance with Magog and the remainder of Gomer (refer article: Four Kings & One Queen) – but rather reveals the eventual unification of North Korea and South Korea.


Seoul: Capital of South Korea

Tim Marshall: ‘The two Koreas are still technically at war, and given the hair-trigger tensions between them a major conflict is never more than a few artillery rounds away. South Korea’s capital, the mega-city of Seoul, lies just 35 miles south of… the DMZ [demilitarised zone]. Almost half of South Korea’s 51 million people live in the greater Seoul region, which is home to much of its industry and financial centres, and it is all within range’ of the estimated ten thousand North Korean artillery pieces along the 148 mile long DMZ border… ‘each side continues to prepare for a war; as with Pakistan and India, they are locked in a mutual embrace of fear and suspicion’ – pages 227-228, 232.

Korea in Prophecy, Bob Thiel, 2009:

‘A Chinese tradition [states] that Korea came from a small kingdom within China:

“Somewhere north of that vast region watered by the Sungari River, itself only a tributary to the Amur, there existed, according to Chinese tradition, in very ancient times, a petty kingdom called Korai, or To-li. Out of this kingdom sprang the founder of the Corean race…” (Griffis, William Elliot. Corea, The Hermit Nation: I. Ancient and mediæval history. II. Political and social Corea. III. Modern and recent history 8th Edition. C. Scribner’s sons, 1907, pages 19, 21).

Koreans [maintain] their own tradition about where they [originate] from:

“Korean legends say that Tangun,* who lived in the 2300’s B.C., was the father of the Korean civilization – refer Addendum. Korea developed by itself until Kija, an exile from China, led about 5,000 followers to Korea in 1122 B.C. He founded a kingdom called Chosen [Chosun, meaning Morning Calm].” (Hu, Charles Y. Korea. World Book Encyclopedia, 50th edition, Volume 11. Chicago, page 296).’

The Goguryeo Kingdom was one of the great powers in East Asia and located in the northern and central regions of the Korean Peninsula, as well as the southern and central portion of Northeast China.

The Goguryeo Kingdom was established in 37 BCE, lasting until the fall of Pyongyang in 668. It was later known as Goryeo (meaning ‘high and beautiful’) – alternatively spelled as Koryŏ – a shortened form of Goguryeo (Koguryŏ), meaning ‘high Castle.’

The word was adopted as the official title in the fifth century and is the origin of the English word, Korea.

Encyclopaedia:

At the peak of its power, ‘Goguryeo encompassed most of the Korean peninsula and large parts of Manchuria, along with parts of eastern Mongolia, Inner Mongolia, and modern-day Russia. It was an active participant in the power struggle for control of the Korean peninsula and was… associated with the foreign affairs of neighboring polities in China and Japan.’

Prior to the Goguryeo Kingdom there was the Gojoseon, recognised as the first Korean kingdom. This kingdom emerged in northern Korea and parts of Manchuria, having developed a distinct culture and governance.

Ancient Korea, Mark Cartwright, 2016:

‘Gojoseon, according to Korean mythology as recounted in the 13th-century CE Samguk yusa (‘Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms’), was founded in 2333 BCE by Dangun Wanggeom (aka Tangun*) who was the offspring of the god Hwanung and a female bear transformed into a woman.’

Cartwright:

‘Gojoseon’s territories would later become Goguryeo (Koguryo) while the southern part of Korea at this time, often referred to as the Proto-Three Kingdoms Period, was spilt into the Three Hans of…

Byeonhan, Mahan, and Jinhan (no connection to the Chinese Han), which became the three states of Baekje (Paekche), Gaya (Kaya), and Silla in the subsequent Three Kingdoms Period.’

Following Gojoseon, Buyeo arose in approximately the second century BCE, lasting until 494 CE. It was influential in the region before being absorbed by the Goguryeo Kingdom.

Cartwright:

‘Silla captured the Gaya ruling city-state Geumwan Gaya (Bon-Gaya) in 532 CE, and the state collapsed completely a few decades later.

Baekje had… [an] alliance with Silla between 433 and 553 CE [which] brought some stability, but in 554 CE at a battle at Gwansanseong Fortress (modern Okcheon) Baekje tried to reclaim territory it had lost to a Silla invasion and their 30,000-strong army was defeated and the Baekje king Seong killed.

The in-fighting between the Korean states was finally settled by outside intervention from China. Goguryeo had successfully rebuffed three invasions from Sui China in the 7th century CE, and then the Tang Dynasty (618-907 CE) attempted an invasion in 644 CE, but the great general Yang Manchun… brought victory to the Koreans.

Goguryeo had joined forces with Baekje and successfully invaded Silla territory two years before, but the Tangs were not done with their plans for Korea and they decided on Silla as their temporary ally to defeat the other two remaining Korean states. In 660 CE, a Silla army of 50,000 led by the general Kim Yu-sin and a naval force of 130,000 men sent by the Tang emperor Gaozong proved more than enough to crush Baekje and its king, Uija, was taken to China.

Then in 667 CE Pyongyang fell, and the next year the Goguryeo king Bojang was likewise taken prisoner to China along with 200,000 of his subjects. Silla had no intention, though, of becoming a Chinese vassal state and defeated the remaining Tang army in battles at Maesosong (675 CE) and Kibolpo (676 CE). Silla then took control of all of Korea… forming a new state, the Unified Silla Kingdom.

Silla Gold Crown – National Museum of Korea

Cartwright:

‘The Unified Silla Kingdom (668- 935 CE) was the first dynasty to rule over the whole of the Korean peninsula. There was a state in the north at this time, Balhae (Parhae), but most of its territory was in Manchuria… so the majority of historians do not consider it a Korean state proper.’

Korea History Insights:

‘After… unification, the Unified Silla period brought peace, learning, and the golden age of Korean Buddhism. Beautiful temples and sculptures were built, and Korean culture flourished. At the same time, a new kingdom called Balhae was founded in the north by former Goguryeo people. Balhae controlled parts of Manchuria and northern Korea and had a highly advanced culture. For a time, the Korean Peninsula was divided between these two powerful states.

Next came the Goryeo Dynasty [from 918 to 1392]… This period was known for its support of Buddhism, beautiful celadon pottery, and the creation of the Tripitaka Koreana, a massive collection of Buddhist texts carved on over 80,000 wooden blocks. Goryeo faced many invasions, including attacks from the Mongols, but it survived for nearly 500 years through diplomacy and adaptation.’

‘In 1392, General Yi Seong-gye overthrew the Goryeo government and established the Joseon Dynasty [beginning in 1392 and lasting till 1897], which would rule Korea for over 500 years. Joseon was based on Confucianism, which created a strict social system and valued education, family, and loyalty. One of the greatest achievements of this era was the invention of the Korean alphabet, Hangul, by King Sejong the Great in 1443. This allowed common people to read and write for the first time.

Joseon also faced many challenges, including Japanese invasions in the 1590s and internal struggles. Despite hardships, it was a time of scholarly learning, art, and traditional Korean culture that still influences modern society today.

As Western powers and Japan grew stronger, Korea tried to protect itself by declaring the Korean Empire in 1897 under Emperor Gojong. Unfortunately, this didn’t last long. In 1910, Japan took full control of Korea, starting a 35-year period of colonization. During this time, Korean language and culture were suppressed, and many people suffered greatly.

But Koreans did not give up. Brave activists and students led movements for independence, such as the March 1st Movement in 1919. Many Koreans also fought alongside other countries during World War II, hoping to gain freedom.

When Japan was defeated in World War II in 1945, Korea was finally liberated. However, the country was soon divided into two zones [in uncanny parallel with Vietnam – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia]: the Soviet Union controlled the north and the United States controlled the south. In 1948, two separate governments were established: North Korea and South Korea.

In 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea, beginning the Korean War. It was a brutal conflict that left millions dead or wounded. The war ended in 1953 with a ceasefire – but not a peace treaty – meaning the two Koreas are still technically at war today.’

Notice the striking similarity of the words Gay-a, Goj-oseon and particularly Gog-uryeo with the name Gog.

This name association in Korea’s history being of considerable interest. Particularly in light of the prophetic significance of Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight and thirty-nine; whereby a united Korea (Togarmah) is included with not only its brothers (Gomer), but Ma-gog, Meshech, Tubal and their leader, Gog – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

North Korea

Abarim Publications:

‘The name Togarmah most likely originated in a language other than Hebrew, and therefore does not occur as a word in the Hebrew language. But, transliterated as is, at the heart of the name Togarmah sits the common Hebrew noun (gerem), bone, which figuratively is used to mean self or strength. It comes from the verb (garam), meaning to lay aside or save… The verb [garam] means to leave over, to save for laterto break bones [or breaking bones].’

Recall the names of Gomer, Riphath and Ashkenaz:

‘Bring to an end’, ‘Crushers’, ‘fire is scattered’ or ‘sprinkling of blood’ – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Further dread then, with the addition of ‘Bone breaker’ to this formidable list of adversaries. 

Readers paying careful attention, may recall the following quote from the preceding chapter regarding Gomer – emphasis mine:

‘The study said that Vietnamese people were the only population in the study’s phylogenetic analysis that did not reflect a sizable genetic difference between East Asian and Southeast Asian populations. Jung Jongsun et al. (2010) said that genetic structure analysis found significant admixture in “Vietnamese (or Cambodian) with unknown Southern original settlers.” The study said that it used Cambodians and Vietnamese to represent “Southern people,”… The study also said that Vietnamese people are located between Chinese and Cambodian people in the study’s genome map.’

Bhak Jong-hwa, a professor in the biomedical engineering department at the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST) states:

‘… the ancient Vietnamese, which was a population that flourished with rapid agricultural development after 8,000 BC, slowly travelled north to ancient civilizations in the Korean peninsula and the Russian Far East. Bhak said that Korean people were formed from the admixture of agricultural Southern Mongoloids from Vietnam who went through China – [according to most linguists and archaeologists with expertise in ancient Korea, the linguistic homeland of proto-Korean and of the early Koreans is located somewhere in Manchuria, particularly the Liao River.] – and hunter-gatherer Northern Mongoloids in the Korean Peninsula. Bhak said, “We believe the number of ancient dwellers who migrated north from Vietnam far exceeds the number of those occupying the peninsula,” making Koreans inherit more of their DNA from southerners.’

Regarding Vietnam, recall that the Vietnamese have a genetic structure that is partially dissimilar to their related neighbours (with an unknown admixture) and contrastingly aligned to East Asian peoples instead. Korea has been populated partially from a migratory wave of people travelling eastward in the North and primarily from another wave of migrants travelling northwards through China from… Vietnam – with Koreans actually possessing a majority of their DNA inherited from these southern immigrants.

This is quite an admission and provides a genetic link between Togarmah and his brother Ashkenaz in continental South East Asia. Who would have thought there is an ancestral association between the Vietnamese and Koreans. Yet the Bible acknowledged this fact millennia’s ago, when it described Togarmah dwelling separately from his brothers. 

North Korean soldiers

South Korea holds 5th in conventional power as North Korea climbs to 31st, Choi On-jung, January 27, 2026:

‘Korea’s conventional military strength ranked fifth in the world for the third straight year…

Korea’s GFP military strength ranking steadily climbed from ninth in 2013, to seventh in 2014, and sixth in 2020. Since 2024, it has held fifth.

North Korea ranked 31st, up three spots from last year (34th). After rising to 18th in 2019, North Korea’s ranking continued to fall to 36th in 2024, then rebounded over the past two years.’

The Genetic history of Koreans: Studies of polymorphisms in the human Y-chromosome produced evidence to suggest that:

‘the Korean people have a long history as a distinct, mostly endogamous [marrying their own] ethnic group, with successive waves of people moving to the peninsula and three major Y-chromosome haplogroups [O2a1, O1b and C]. Several studies confirmed that Koreans have both a Northeast and Southeast Asian genome.’

Paternal lineages, Jin Han-jun, 2003:

‘Korean males display a high frequency of Haplogroup O-M176 [O1b2, formerly O2b], a subclade that probably has spread mainly from somewhere in the Korean Peninsula or its vicinity, and Hapologroup O-M122 (O2, formerly O3), a common Y-DNA haplogroup among East and Southeast Asians in general.’

The men of the South East Asian nations of Gomer – Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Myanmar – likewise predominantly carry Y-DNA Haplogroup O2a1 and secondly, Haplogroup O1b.

Maternal lineages:

‘Haplogroup B [B4 and B5], which occurs very frequently in many populations of Southeast Asia, Polynesia, and the Americas, is found in approximately 10% (ethnic Koreans from Arun Banner, Inner Mongolia) to 20% (Koreans from South Korea) of Koreans. Haplogroup A has been detected in approximately 7% (Koreans from South Korea) to 15% (ethnic Koreans from Arun banner, Inner Mongolia) of Koreans. Haplogroup A is the most common mtDNA haplogroup among the Eskimo and many other Amerind ethnic groups of North and Central America.’

Other major Korean mtDNA Haplogroups include: D4 (29%), M7 (11%), G (6%) and F (5%). Similarly, the prevalent maternal Haplogroups in the South East Asian nations comprising Gomer include Haplogroups B, F and M7.

Immunoglobulin G: Hideo Matsumoto professor emeritus at Osaka medical College, tested Gm types [genetic markers] of immunoglobulin G of Korean populations in 2009. 

Matsumoto said that, ‘Gm afb1b3 is a southern marker gene possibly originating in southern China and found at high frequencies across Southeast Asia, southern China, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Assam and parts of the Pacific. Matsumoto said that the average frequency of Gm afb1b3 for Koreans was 14.7% which was intermediate between a frequency of 10.6% for general Japanese and a frequency of 24.1% for Beijing Han Chinese.’

Autosomal DNA, Jin Han-jun, 1999:

‘… based on genetic studies of classic genetic markers of protein and nuclear DNA… that these 9-bp deletion frequencies are consistent with earlier surveys which showed that 9-bp deletion frequencies increase going from Japan to mainland Asia to the Malay peninsula.’

South Korean men

‘The Cavalli-Sforza’s chord genetic distance (4D,) from Cavalli-Sforza & Bodmer (1971), which is based on the allele frequencies of the intergenic COII/tRNALys region, showed that Koreans are more genetically related to Japanese than Koreans are genetically related to the other East Asian populations which were surveyed. The close genetic affinity between present day Koreans and Japanese is expected due to the Yayoi migration from China and the Korean Peninsula to Japan which began about 2,300 years ago. Horai [1996] detected mtDNA D-loop variation which supports the idea that a large amount of maternal lineages came into Japan from immigrants from the Korean Peninsula after the Yayoi period.’

‘Kim Jong-jin [2005] conducted a study about the genetic relationships among East Asians based on allele frequencies. Focusing on how close Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are genetically related to each other. 

The study concluded that Middle West Korea was a melting pot in the Korean Peninsula with people traveling from North to South, South to North, and people traveling from East China…’

Jung (2010) said that Koreans are genetically homogenous.

The study stated ‘the affinity of Koreans is predominately Southeast Asian with an estimated admixture of 79% Southeast Asian and 21% Northeast Asian for Koreans… all of the Koreans which were analyzed uniformly displayed a dual pattern of Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian origins.

The study said that Koreans and Japanese displayed no observable difference between each other in their proportion of Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian admixture.’

We will refer again to this fascinating duality and the parallelism between the Korean and Japanese people when we discuss Japan – Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.

South Korean women

The Emerging Limbs and Twigs of the East Asian mtDNA Tree, multiple authors, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Haplogroups A, C, D, G, Y, and Z almost completely cover the mtDNA pool of Northeast Asians, whereas in Southeast Asians C, Y, or Z mtDNAs have rarely been found, but instead haplogroups B and F are predominant.’

Recall the Korean population exhibit the maternal Haplogroups associated with South East Asia – B: 10% to 20%; M7: 11%; F: 5%. Haplogroup B is of particular interest for both Central Asians and the Amerindians carry it as well. Thus creating a common maternal ancestral tie between South East Asia, Central Asia and the Native Indians of the Americas.

Though it is mtDNA Haplogroup D4, which highlights the unique maternal inheritance for Koreans.

‘N9a** is, compared with its sister bough Y, widely spread [in SE Asia], although at very low frequencies, among most East Asian populations… Considering the geographic distribution of the boughs and twigs we see further regional patterns. In contrast to A4, which is widely spread, the A5 twig, with its low diversity suggesting shallow time depth [not sons of Japheth but grandsons of Japheth with a mutational evolution and migration, unlike their siblings and uncles], is specific to Koreans and Japanese…

Similarly, B4 is the prevailing bough in haplogroup B… covering all haplogroup B types in Native Americans and Polynesians. B5 is found most frequent, accounting for about one third to one half of the B types, in eastern China, Korea, and Japan…

E1 is so far found only in Southeast Asia…F1a is the main branch of F… in Southeast Asia, whereas F1b is more frequent in Central Asians and Mongols, Koreans, and Japanese. G2a is highest among Central Asians (8.8%) [Kazakhstan] and also above 3% in Tibetans and Ainu and rare or absent among southern Chinese, Vietnamese, island Southeast Asians… and Siberians. G3 is not yet well screened, but evidently it is seen in Korea, Mongolia, and Central Asia. 

Haplogroup M7, although characteristic for East Asian populations, has not been found in the northeast of the continent…It is also very rare in Central AsiansThis haplogroup has been detected so far in China and Vietnam, the Korean peninsula and Japanese islands, as well as among Mongols, the West Siberian Mansi, and island Southeast Asia. Koreans possess lineages from both the southern and the northern haplogroup complex and share M7a with Japanese, Ainu, and Ryukyu islanders.

The geographic specificity of the boughs and twigs of M7… is most intriguing:

M7c1c is specific to island Southeast Asia and M7b1 is of Chinese provenance, whereas M7a, M7b2, and M7c1b are found almost exclusively in Korea and Japan. In fact, M7 is one of the prevailing haplogroups not only among Japanese (of Honshu and Kyushu) but also for Ainu and Ryukyuans, thus testifying to a common genetic background.’

South Korea

Khazaria, Korean Genetics – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Among Korean males who have been studied, the Y-DNA (paternal DNA) haplogroups [O1b2] (P49) [M176] and [O2] (M122) were particularly common… Koreans are racially a purely Mongoloid population. They carry the 1540C allele on their EDAR gene which among other things results in thicker hair than other races. Koreans also have the ABCC11 gene nearly universally so they have dry earwax as opposed to the wet earwax of most people in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.’

The Peopling of Korea Revealed by Analyses of Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosomal Markers, Han-Jun Jin, Chris Tyler-Smith, and Wook Kim, 2009: 

‘The mtDNA haplogroup D4 is very common among Korean people. This haplogroup is also prevalent in Siberia. The study found mtDNA haplogroup A in about 10% of the Koreans tested. 

A is the most frequently encountered mtDNA haplogroup among… New World Indian (Amerindian) populations from North America and Central America. Meanwhile, the mtDNAhaplogroup B is also found in some Koreans and it’s also common in China and Japan. Less common Korean mtDNA haplogroups include F, M, R, U, and Z.’

“The Koreans are generally considered a northeast Asian group because of their geographical location. However, recent findings from Y chromosome studies showed that the Korean population contains lineages from both southern and northern parts of East Asia.”

Y-chromosoaml DNA haplogroups and their implications for the dual origins of the Koreans, multiple authors, 2003:

“We have analyzed eight Y-chromosomal binary markers (YAP, RPS4Y(711), M9, M175, LINE1, SRY(+465), 47z, and M95) and three Y-STR markers (DYS390, DYS391, and DYS393) in 738 males from 11 ethnic groups in east Asia in order to study the male lineage history of Korea… the distribution pattern of Y-chromosomal haplogroups reveals the complex origin of the Koreans, resulting from genetic contributions involving the northern Asian settlement and range expansions mostly from southern-to-northern China.”

“The haplogroups carrying the M9-G mutation and additional sublineages of M9-G in Korea appear to be at an intermediate frequency (81.9%) between southeast and northeast Asian populations.

This result implies that the Korean population may be influenced by both the northeast and southeast Asian populations.

Even within haplogroup O, the most frequent Korean STR haplotype (23-10-13 with the markers DYS390-DYS391-DYS393), 19% of haplogroup O… is the most frequent in the Philippines (27%), whereas the second most frequent Korean haplotype (24-10-12, 16%) is the most frequent in Manchuria (45%)…”

‘In this study, the Koreans appear to be most closely related overall to the Manchurians among east Asian ethnic groups… although a principal components analysis of haplogroup frequencies reveals that they also cluster with populations from Yunnan and Vietnam…’

“Using two multiplex systems, all 593 Korean mtDNAs were allocated into 15 haplogroups: M, D, D4, D5, G, M7, M8, M9, M10, M11, R, R9, B, A, and N9. As the D4 haplotypes occurred most frequently in Koreans, the third multiplex system was used to further define D4 subhaplogroups:

D4a, D4b, D4e, D4g, D4h, and D4j.”

“[Mitochondrial] Haplogroup N9a** is characteristic of eastern Asian populations, where it is detected at… frequencies in Japan (4.6%), China (2.8%), Mongolia (2.1%) and Korea (3.9%)…”

Mapping Human Genetic Diversity in Asia, 2009:

‘Koreans were found to have the least amount of Austronesian DNA compared to other East Asian peoples, even a little less than the Japanese.’

This is a significant point, as this lends weight to the proposal that the Koreans with the Japanese, have been separated from the main body of their respective family enclaves. The Austronesian peoples, including the related archipelago southeast Asian nations of the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Polynesia, migrated southwards from Taiwan after crossing from mainland China thousands of years ago – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The Japanese as the remaining major Island people, were not included in this migratory path. Similarly, for the majority of the Korean people. Thus the Koreans and Japanese having the lowest amount of Austronesian DNA is not a surprise and supports their unorthodox movement and mutual mutational evolution in relation to their respective brothers and cousins.

Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes, multiple authors, 2005: 

“All southeastern Asian populations cluster together on the left side of the plot [not shown]; with only northern Han Chinese, Korean, and Manchu populations showing closer affinities with southeastern groups than with their geographic neighbors. All other northeast Asians, as well as central Asians, south Asians, and Oceanic populations, are on the right side of the plot… 

[There is a] very low incidence of (Y-DNA) D chromosomes in Korea [D1 (M174)]… [and] very few O-47z [sub-clade of M176 – O1b2] chromosomes found in Korea [8.7%] and Southeast Asia… Haplogroup M12 is the mitochondrial counterpart of Y chromosome D lineage. This rare haplogroup was detected only in mainland Japanese, Koreans, and Tibetans, with the highest frequency and diversity in Tibet (Tanaka et al. 2004). 

Y chromosomes that originated in Southeast Asia expanded to Korea and Japan…”

The final sentence is highly significant for the Japanese – as we shall discover – like the Koreans, they are related to their brother nations in South East Asia; and for whatever reason, both chose to dwell separately in the ancient past, replicating this pattern in the ages which followed into the present era.

There is a wealth of Haplogroup data for South Korea and the opposite for North Korea. Even so, there is confirmation unsurprisingly, that the paternal Haplogroup percentages match for they are a single people artificially separated and politically divided within two states. 

The male South Korean Y-DNA Haplogroups in descending percentage order:

O2a [42.1%] – O1b2 [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%] – O1a [3.1%] – 

D1 [ 2.5%] – Q [1.8%] – K [0.5%]

It is now interesting to compare South Korea and Vietnam.

Vietnam: O2a [40%] – O1b [32.9%] – Q [7.1%] – O1a [5.7%] – C [4.3%] –

D1 [2.9%] – N [2.9%] – J2 [2.9%]

Vietnam:         O2a – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D – N – J2

South Korea:  O2a – O1b – C – N – O1a – D – Q – K

If we disregard Vietnam’s West Asia influenced J2; the rarer Q for East Asian populations; the northern Eurasian N; the maverick Haplogroup D; and the ancient Haplogroup C (indicative of Central Asians); it is remarkable how aligned Korea and Vietnam are not only in their prime paternal marker Haplogroup of O2a1 – followed by O1b and O1a – but also in line with their autosomal DNA, as shown below on the PCA graph. One can with little difficulty, readily accept they had the same ancestral father – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Therefore substantiating the palpable familial link with the paradoxical geographic estrangement – as revealed in the scriptures – regarding Togarmah and his older brothers Ashkenaz and Riphath (Genesis 10:3). 

What would be the odds that these two peoples (blood brothers) consisting of Vietnam and Korea would both be cut in half so-to-speak, during the twentieth century. The two peoples are also located on the eastern extremity – or coastline – of their respective south easterly and north easterly abodes. 

Now adding the prime Korean Haplogroups to the table we began in Chapter Three – with the addition of Y-DNA Haplogroup N – while also delineating between the three main strains of the O Haplogroup.

                                  O     O2a   O1a   O1b     C      D      K      Q   N

NA Amerindian                                                6                         77

Kazakhstan             8                                      40                10      2   7

Vietnam                 79       40        6      33       4        3                7   3

South Korea          79       42        3      33      13    2.5     0.5      2   4

The Koreans show a clear link with north Asian migration, with a considerably higher level of Haplogroup C, as found in Central Asia and Mongolia.

Some dispute Y-DNA Haplogroups O1 and O2 as East Asian defining markers, but as we progress it will become difficult to support their premise.

We have now studied all three of Gomer’s sons, of which Haplogroup O is clearly the principle group. As O2a followed by O1b are the principle paternal defining marker Haplogroups for continental South East Asian males, so they are for Korean men as well.

South Korea

We will soon turn our attention to Javan and his four sons, whom parallel Gomer’s sons in more ways than one – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The House of Togarmah is a very specific title and carries an uncommon usage in the Bible. It distinctly alludes to one Korea in the predicted East Asian Army of the future; specifying a united Korea’s involvement in Magog’s military machine – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Flags of North Korea (left) and South Korea (right)

A comparison of North Korea and South Korea:

IndicatorNorth KoreaSouth Korea
CapitalPyongyangSeoul
Official languagesKorean
GovernmentJuche single-party stateRepresentative Democracy
Formal declaration9 September 194815 August 1948
Area120,540 km2100,210 km2
Population (2025)26,605,36951,643,062
GDP total (2025)$34.9 billion$1.79 trillion
CurrencyKorean People’s wonKorean Republic won
Active military personnel1,106,000639,000
Military expenditure (2010/2012)$10 billion$30 billion

North and South Korea’s combined population is comparable to the Amerindian and the Turko-Mongol populations in the world. With regard to Ezekiel 27:14 and the economic and military strength of Togarmah – it is worth listing and re-iterating the key industries and exports for both countries.

North Korea: military products, machine building, electric power, chemicals, mining (coal, iron ore, limestone, magnesite, graphite, copper, zinc, lead and precious metals), metallurgy, food processing and tourism.

South Korea: electronics, telecommunications, automobile production, chemicals, shipbuilding, steel and military products.

South Korea, with a 2025 GDP of $1.79 trillion was the 13th largest economy in the world and is the third biggest in East Asia.

South Korea’s economic journey is a twentieth century success story – the miracle on the Han River.

South Korea is reputed for its strategy of export led growth, the dominance of its large business conglomerates called Chaebols and its highly motivated and educated populace. South Korea has built a network of free trade agreements with as many as fifty-eight countries which account for over three-quarters of the world’s GDP. 

Korea History Insights:

‘After the war, South Korea was one of the poorest countries in the world. But through hard work, education, and innovation, it transformed into one of the world’s leading economies. Today, South Korea is known for its global influence in music (K-pop), film, technology, and fashion.’

South Korea ranks highly on the index of nations with superior technology – at number three in the world. South Korea is the birthplace to some of the biggest names in technology and development: LG, Hyundai, and Samsung are all global leaders. South Korea is also in the forefront of the incredibly vital robotics field. In 2023, South Korea was ranked tenth in the world on the Global Innovation Index – only one of two East Asian countries in the top ten, the other being Singapore at number five.

Coat of Arms of South Korea – inscription: Republic of Korea

South Korea is included in the group of Next Eleven countries which are projected to dominate the global economy in the middle of the 21st century. The other N-11 nations include Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Turkey, and Vietnam.

Most of the group’s total gross domestic product derives from Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and Turkey, whose economies have grown significantly. The World Bank described South Korea as one of the fastest growing major economies of the next generation along with the burgeoning economies of the BRIC nations originally comprising Brazil, Russia, India and China as well as non-BRIC nation Indonesia – Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia. 

Since time of first writing, the intergovernmental organisation has expanded into the BRICS, now including some of the N-11 nations as well as three additional countries (in italics):

Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates

Korea History Insights:

‘[South Korea] is… a democratic country with free elections, freedom of speech, and a strong desire for peace and reunification with the North.’

China buys 84.48% of North Koreas’s exports and in turn North Korea imports 84.12% of its goods from China; so fragile is the North Korean economy –Observatory of Economic Complexity figures, 2014.

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is the ‘least democratic state in the world’ and is ‘not run for the people’ or a republic. ‘North Korea is a stain on the world’s conscience, and yet few people know the full scale of the horrors taking place there’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 222.

Coat of Arms of North Korea – inscription: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

North Korea holds the dubious honour of being one of the world’s foremost powder kegs. While there are potential military hotspots in the world – such as the Middle East, Africa and nations bordering Russia – where conflagrations could ignite in a flash; it would not be a surprise if East Asia were to become the focus of attention, should a third world war enveloping the major powers arise over a geo-political crisis regarding North Korea or perhaps Taiwan for instance. Or even from escalated economic tension stemming from rapidly evolving trading-blocs. 

Regardless, an infamous place in history lays in wait for a combined Korean nation when they join in the august Asian alliance at the very end of the age following our present era – refer articles: Four Kings & One Queen; Is America Babylon? and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Chapter seven focuses on Gomer’s younger brother and his nearest neighbours in South East Asia.

Fools do not want to understand anything. They only want to tell others what they think.

Proverbs 18:2 New Century Version

“Did I ever think I might have been wrong? Yes, sometimes and briefly. But never because of the supposed majority against me.”

Christopher Hitchens

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

Addendum

Imagine the startling surprise when this writer noticed the following article, drawn to its eye catching title and anticipated insight.

Who Is North Korea In The Bible, Cassie Grissom, October 28, 2023:

‘North Korea is often regarded as one of the most mysterious countries in the world, shrouded in secrecy and largely isolated from the rest of the world. But there are some surprising references to North Korea in the Bible. Here, we take a closer look at this fascinating connection.

The most common biblical reference to North Korea comes from the Old Testament. In the Book of Isaiah, chapter 64, verse 2, there is mention of a land that the Hebrews call “Haemim”. The Hebrew word “Haemim” translates to “the hidden” or “the secret” and is believed to be a reference to North Korea, which was then known as Goguryeo.

This passage reads: “As wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God. He rooted out their cities; no one was left to inhabit them. Haemim was taken in his wrath and his fury, his fierce anger and whirlwinds of devouring fire.”

The passage appears to describe the power of God destroying the kingdom of Goguryeo and its inhabitants. It is also believed to be a prophetic warning to the North Korean government of the potential consequences of ruling an oppressive and authoritarian regime.’

Regrettably, anticipation turned to disappointment for Isaiah 64:2 does not seem to express the sentiments above and a search for the passage quoted (to date), has remained fruitless.

The Hebrew word hā·’ê·mîm (H348) is the plural of H357 and means ‘terrors’. The Emim were one of the Nephilim descended clans of giants, recorded in Genesis 14:5 and Deuteronomy 2:10-11. This particular clan was located in Moab – refer articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.

Grissom:

‘The Bible itself does not give any specific information about North Korea [apart from Ezekiel 27:14], but there are some scholars who believe that there are other references to North Korea scattered throughout scripture. In Deuteronomy 33:1, for instance, the author talks about a “people inhabiting the mysterious north [Ezekiel 38:6]”. This could be referring to the kingdom of Goguryeo, which was located in the northern part of the Korean peninsula.’

While we have investigated Togarmah dwelling in the North, chapter thirty-three of Deuteronomy does not discuss Togarmah but rather the sons of Jacob in the latter days.

Grissom:

‘Others point to the fact that the names of the two main rivers in North Korea, the Taedong and the Yalu, appear in the Bible as well. In the Book of Habakkuk, the prophet refers to “the streams of Taedong and Yalu”, which suggests that these were known to the Hebrews at one time.’

The banks of the Taedong River in the North Korean capital, Pyongyang (the former capital of the Goguryeo Kingdom)

This would be spectacular to say the least, though a search of the three chapters in the Book of Habakkuk did not yield any positive results regarding the rivers in question.

Alas, the three separate claims for North Korea in the scriptures in this instance, are unfounded.

Gomer: Continental South East Asia

Chapter V

Japheth’s eldest son is Gomer. He had three sons and they are the first three great grandsons of Noah listed in Genesis Ten – Chapter II Japheth Orientallium.

Genesis 10:3

English Standard Version

The sons of Gomer:

Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.

We will discuss the first two sons Ashkenaz and Riphath with their father Gomer, while studying the third son Togarmah separately – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

The following quotes are reprinted in large part, to show how the first suggestion of an identity – in one instance 439 years ago – can take hold perpetuating an error. Also, to highlight the pitfalls of using any given word as a proof, when they are either just interesting or completely misleading. These two points have almost irreparably discredited the identity of nations teaching.

Ancient Civilisation:

‘In modern Turkey is an area which in New Testament times was called Galatia. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus records that the people who were called Galatians or Gauls in his day (c. AD 93) were previously called Gomerites.’

This is disputable, for Josephus has been found an unreliable historian on more than one occasion, with an agenda of his own.

Ancient Civilisation: ‘They migrated westward to what are now called France and Spain [yes, the Galatians or Gauls did]. For many centuries France was called Gaul [true], after the descendants of Gomer [incorrect]. North-west Spain is called Galicia to this day [true]. Some of the Gomerites migrated further to what is now called Wales [incorrect, though the Cymry did]. The Welsh historian, Davis… records that the Welsh language is called Gomeraeg [true] (after their ancestor Gomer) [incorrect].’

The words Gaul and Gallic have a closer ethnic association with the words Gael(s) and Gaelic, though not necessarily an etymological one – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. The descendants of Gomer as Asian kin of Tiras and Madai, cannot be the ancestors of the Welsh. Refer previous chapters: Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

 Israel a History of:  

‘Herodotus and Plutarch associate Gomer, Japheth’s first son, with the peoples of Cimmeria, a region north of the Black Sea. Cimmeria is modern day Crimea. A certain group of Gomer’s descendants eventually moved westward, and the name was more than likely preserved in the names Germany and Cambria, or Wales.’

There is a link between the Welsh and the Cimmerians, just not with Gomer. Likewise, some have tried to equate the name Gomer with the word German. Trying to squeeze an Asian ancestry group into a European lineage does not work. Assumptions are easily conceived from selective word associations and dubious ancient historians and then too readily relied upon.

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 48-49 – emphasis mine:

‘Jeremiah (51.27) makes it pretty clear in what part of the world we are to look for Ashkenaz… Ararat was the district which lay between the Araxes and the mountains south of Lake Van, while the Minni adjoined the kingdom of Ararat on the east. Ashkenaz accordingly must have been precisely where an inscription of Sargon places the people of the Asguza, and we may therefore feel but little hesitation in identifying the two together. The Gimirra, or Kimmerians, are placed in the same locality by certain cuneiform inscriptions which relate to the closing days of the Assyrian Empire. On Riphath no light has as yet been thrown by the decipherment of the records of the past…’

As per point number two in the introduction (primus verba), Sayce has probably located where these people once lived though not where they finally migrated.

Oxford Bible Church, Derek Walker – emphasis mine:

‘Another participant in the end-time confederation of nations is ancient Gomer… Some prophecy teachers as well as the Rabbinical view identify Gomer as Germany, and the Jewish Talmud positively identify Gomer with the Germans.’

An Asian line from Japheth has been incorrectly matched to a European line of Shem. It would be helpful to learn exactly what the positive identification of Germany with Gomer is?

Walker: ‘A closer examination, however, reveals that the Gomerites were the ancient Cimmerians, expelled in 700 BC from the southern steppes of Russia into the area we know today as Turkey. Gomer, scholars seem to almost universally agree, “refers to the Celtic Cimmerians of Crim-Tartary.” Gomer is well known to the ancient world as Gimarrai of north central Asia Minor [Cappadocia]. These people are also known as the Cimmerians. This seems to be the simplest, most obvious interpretation. Gomer is to be identified with the Cimmerians (the Cimarrai of the Assyrian inscriptions), located on the shores of the Black and Caspian Seas. Gomer is Gimarra is Cimmeria is Cappadocia – central Turkey. 

The Cimmerians are well known to secular historians. The Scythians chased them across the Caucasus mountains into Asia Minor (Turkey). They made their way through that land, destroyed the Phrygian kingdom in the 7th-8th century BC., and in the 5th century raided the kingdom of Lydia. They kept all of southern and western Asia in turmoil for a century and a half. 

Dr Young, citing the best of the most recent archaeological finds, says of Gomer [the Cimmerians]: “They settled on the north of the Black Sea and then spread themselves westward and southward to the extremities of Europe.” Josephus said Gomer founded those whom the Greeks called the Galatians. This confirms the best identification of Gomer as Turkey.’

Who Gomer is not… the map above is an example of a common representation for the biblical identities listed in Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight. All without exception are incorrect, as our progression through the descendants of Japheth, Ham and Shem will reveal. Put, Cush and Magog are cold; Persia warm, yet still cool; and Gomer, Togarmah, Meshech and Tubal freezing.

Confusion has arisen as ‘Gomer’ is superficially linked to the Gimarri or Cimmerians and later, with the Gauls. The Cimmerians were warlike and spread to the extremities of southwestern Europe, before migrating to the British Isles. They just were not the Gomerites descended from Japheth.

Possibly the first author to identify Gomer, the Cimmerians and Cimbri with the Welsh name for themselves Cymri or Cymry, was the English antiquarian William Camden in his work: Britannia, published in 1586. In his 1716 book Drych y Prif Oesoedd, Welsh antiquary Theophilus Evans, posited correctly that the Welsh were descended from the Cimmerians and incorrectly, from Gomer.

An identity is offered and whether correct or incorrect, it is upheld. Scholars and researchers assume the question is answered. A certain academic laziness ensues and 439 years later, an original error deleteriously affects the mosaic of the overall identity jig-saw puzzle.

Celtic linguists follow the etymology proposed by Johann Kaspar Zeuss in 1853, which derives Cymry from the Brythonic word Combrogos, meaning ‘fellow countryman.’ The name Gomer – as in the pen-name of 19th century editor and author Joseph Harris – and its modern Welsh derivatives such as Gomeraeg – as an alternative name for the Welsh language – became popular for a time in Wales, but the Gomerian theory has long since been discredited as an outdated hypothesis with no historical or linguistic validity.

In rabbinic literature the kingdom of Ashkenaz was associated with the Scythian region, then later with the Slavic territories and from the Eleventh century, with Germany and northern Europe. Medieval Jews associated the term with the geographical area of the Rhineland and the Palatinate of Western Germany. The Jewish culture which developed in the area came to be called Ashkenazi. How the name of Ashkenaz came to be associated in the rabbinic literature with the Rhineland is a subject of speculation.

Associating a name from a grandson of Japheth with descendants from Shem has certainly muddied the waters. Ironically, we will learn later that the name Ashkenaz actually does have an association with the Jewish people – just not the one derived from Gomer – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Look in your Bible for a map – if you have one in your Bible. There you will probably have pictured the descendants of Gomer migrating into Europe! Nothing could be further from the truth. They migrated in exactly the opposite direction! But do you know why many have assumed that Gomer may be in modern Europe today? Because the people of Northwest Europe journeyed through the land of Gomer before coming to Europe and were therefore called Kymmri! Prophecy says this very fact would occur!

Notice what Israel is called while in captivity: “Gomer” (Hosea 1:3). The woman “Gomer” mentioned by the prophet had the same name which the children of Israel bore when coming into Europe! The Israelites were called Khumri or Cymmri, or Khmeri, or Cimmerians upon reaching northwest Europe. But where are the descendants of Gomer today?’

This is conjecture on Hoeh’s part, for there is a better case for the word Khumri deriving from a king of Israel, called Omri – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Hoeh:

‘Gomer originally settled northeast of Elam. From here they were driven to the Caucasus, between the Black and the Caspian Sea. Then they journeyed to Southeast Asia! Notice!

The native name for Cambodia in Indo-China is Khmer – the land of Gomer!

Read the BRITANNICA article on Cambodia. Associated with Gomer are the Chams and Annamese. Could this be only a coincidence? The Cambodians are related to the Siamese, [and] Burmese… In the ancient land of Gomer dwelled a small tribe called the Lullu (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BIBLICA). In extreme South China today dwell the Lulu, a non-Chinese race related to the people of Southeast Asia!’

Korea in Prophecy, Bob Thiel, 2009 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘An account penned in the nineteenth century…

“According to the Tartars and Orientals, the Chinese [specifically, South East Asians] are descended from Tchin, or Gin [Gomer], the son of Japheth, and brother of Tarag [Togarmah]…

Tchin is the Ashchenaz of Scripture, the son of Gomer…

The Orientals call all grandsons, sons. Another division of the descendants of Aschenaz or Atchinez – as his name was pronounced in the following parts – migrated across the Imaus mountains, now the great Altai and Changai. These people spread to a vast extent, till they reached the Pacific Ocean.

They formed the following nations:-

First – The Issedones, about the river Etchine, on the borders of China [1 – Ashkenaz] and the Desert of Thamo.

Second – The “Kin Tartars”, inhabiting the territory round the north of Corea [2- Togarmah], and along the shores of the Pacific Ocean…

[Third -] Tonkin, Cochin-China, Tciampa, Laos* or Schan States, and Cambodia [3 – Riphath*], anciently formed part of the Chinese Empire, the name of which was Tchin, so called from Atchinez, from which the names of nearly all these countries are derived.”

(Source: Painter, John Thomas. Ethnology: or The History & Genealogy of the Human Race. Baillière, Tindall & Cox, 1880 Original from Oxford University Digitized July 3, 2006, page 106).’

Online Encyclopaedia:

‘Cochinchina or Cochin-China is a historical exonym for part of Vietnam, depending on the contexts, usually for Southern Vietnam. Sometimes it referred to the whole of Vietnam, but it was commonly used to refer to the region south of the Gianh River. In the 17th and 18th centuries, Vietnam was divided between the Trịnh lords to the north and the Nguyễn lords to the south. The two domains bordered each other on the Son River. The northern section was called Tonkin by Europeans, and the southern part, Đàng Trong, was called Cochinchina by most Europeans and Quinam by the Dutch.’

The two eldest sons of Gomer, Ashkenaz and Riphath, migrated to mainland South East Asia and settled in what was historically called, Indochina. The name Indochina, was given to Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, due to their being culturally and socially influenced by the Indian (Indo) and Chinese (China) cultures.

The region comprises the nations of Myanmar (formerly Burma and the Burmese), Thailand (formerly Siam and the Siamese), Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

We will look at the island nations of South East Asia separately as they identify with a different son from Japheth – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

The meaning of Gomer in Hebrew is: ‘completion, complete’ or ‘perfect.’ From the verb meaning, ‘to complete, bring to an end’ or ‘come to an end.’

We read of Gomer in the Book of Jubilees 9:8-9. 

‘And the first portion came forth for Gomer to the east from the north side to the river Tina; and in the north there came forth for Magog all the inner portions of the north until it reaches to the sea of Me’at.’

Gomer is described as being adjacent and southwards of Magog, when Japheth’s descendants formed their original settlement in south eastern Europe and western Asia some time after the flood cataclysm – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

Riphath is not mentioned outside Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One, though seems to be synonymous with Gomer. The meaning of his name is not straight forward. It can include: ‘fruit, grain, healers’ and possibly ‘crushers.’ The noun is ripa, some sort of beaten and dried grain or fruit. The verb is rapa, ‘to heal.’

Thailand

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine: 

‘… since we don’t know how to translate the word [Riphath] we also don’t know what to do with the name… To add to the confusion, in 1 Chronicles 1:6 this descendant of Gomer is called Diphath – the letters d and r look much alike. Maybe this discrepancy is due to a scribal error, and maybe the man simply had two names.

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names refers to a root that doesn’t exist. Jones erroneously points at Job 26:11, where the verb (rapap), meaning to shake or tremble is used. And so Jones reads Crusher… NOBSE Study Bible Name List and BDB Theological Dictionary don’t even try to translate this name. Whatever Riphath may have been supposed to mean, the intent is lost for good. But to a Hebrew audience, the name Riphath may have sounded like Healers.’

Ashkenaz and Riphath are not obvious in their identification, though their names provide possible clues. Thailand is at the forefront for herbal remedies as well as cosmetic surgery; as Riphath possibly alludes to heal. 

Coat of Arms of Thailand

Online Encyclopaedia:

‘The motto on the Thailand coat of arms is in Pali and translates to “The unity of a people come together as a party shall be a guarantor of prosperity.”

The Garuda [above] was officially adopted as the national emblem… in 1911. However, the mythical creature had been used as a symbol of royalty in Thailand for centuries. The Garuda is a mythological beast… According to Hindu mythology, the Garuda is the vahana (vehicle) of the god Vishnu (Narayana). The Garuda also features in the national emblem of Indonesia.’

Capital of Thailand – Bangkok

Gomer’s eldest son, Ashkenaz’s name is from the noun esh, meaning: ‘fire’, ke: ‘like’ or ‘as’ and the verb naza, ‘to sprinkle.’ In Hebrew it means: ‘sprinkles like fire’ or ‘so fire is scattered’, with a connotation of a fire offering or a ritualistic sprinkling of blood or water and immediately reminds of the Vietnam war and the destructiveness of napalm.

Flag of Thailand

The leading economy of the the five nations is Thailand, with the second highest population after Vietnam, and the second biggest area after Myanmar. Thailand is the 30th largest economy in the world – 7th in East Asia – with a GDP of $546.22 billion in 2025 (while Vietnam the 9th in East Asia and 34th in the world, had a GDP of $490.97 billion in 2025).

The Thai economy possesses relatively high quality infrastructure as well as pro-free enterprise and pro-investment policies. Thailand is very dependent on exports; accounting for about two-thirds of its GDP. Thailand has a substantial international tourism industry. While its agricultural sector only makes up about 10% of its economy, it employs nearly a full 30% of its workers.

Thai man

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

  1. Machinery including computers: US$37.7 billion
  2. Electrical machinery, equipment: $34.1 billion
  3. Vehicles: $24.1 billion
  4. Gems, precious metals: $18 billion
  5. Rubber, rubber articles: $15.5 billion
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $11.9 billion
  7. Meat/seafood preparations: $6.6 billion
  8. Mineral fuels including oil: $6.1 billion
  9. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $4.7 billion
  10. Fruits, nuts: $4.2 billion

Gems and precious metals was the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 14.9% since 2019 propelled by higher international sales of gold. The leading decliner among Thailand’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil which fell -27.8% year over year.’

Thai Woman

While Thailand is currently the dominant economic power in mainland Southeast Asia, it is Vietnam who will transform into a powerful ally in the Gog led alliance in the period following Christ’s return – Article: Four Kings & One Queen; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

According to the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), data projections predict Vietnam is set to surpass Thailand as Southeast Asia’s second largest economy by 2028. Fuelled by strong growth in its manufacturing sector and increasing foreign investment.

Thailand

There are fifty-four ethnic groups in Vietnam which have been officially recognized by the Vietnamese government since 1979. Each ethnicity has its own unique language, traditions and culture. The largest ethnic group are the Kinh (or Viet), comprising 85.32% of the population.

From 1000 BCE the advanced Dong Son culture flourished in the Red River Delta region. Prior to 207 BCE with legend officially becoming history, the early periods for the lands which would become Vietnam were the following.

Names of Vietnam throughout… History, Kandle Dart, 2021:

Xích Quỷ (2879 – 2524 BC): A legendary period under King Dương Vương of the Hồng Bàng dynasty.

Văn Lang (2524 – 258 BC): A legendary period under the Hùng Kings of the Hồng Bàng dynasty.

Âu Lạc (257 – 207 BC): A legendary period under the King An Dương Vương of the Thục dynasty.

In 207 BCE, former Qin dynasty military governor (general and warlord) Trieu Da (Zhao Tuo or Chao T’o in Chinese) vanquished opponents, ending Chinese domination. Trieu Da killed all officials loyal to the Chinese emperor, adopted the customs of the Viet and made himself the ruler (emperor) of a vast non-Chinese empire known as Nam Viet (Nan-Yue in Chinese) – present day northern Vietnam and incorporating parts of southern China.

Britannica:

The year ‘207 BCE marks the end of Vietnamese legend and the beginning of Vietnamese history, as recorded in Chinese historical annals.’

Trieu Da in turn began the Triệu (or Zhao) dynasty which endured until 111 BCE; when the Han Chinese emperor Wu(di), conquered the Viet population and in the process ushered in a return to a thousand years of Chinese domination.

Meanwhile in southern Vietnam, there was Indian influence from the first century to the sixth century CE. The southernmost region of Vietnam was part of a state called Funan and in the second century, an Indian influenced state called Champa arose in the centre portion of Vietnam.

The people in northern Vietnam resented Han Chinese rule and in 40 CE the noblewomen sisters Trung Trac – whose husband a tribal lord had been executed by the Chinese – and Trung Nhi led a rebellion of the tribal chiefs and their armies, forming an independent state with themselves as queens. In retaliation the Chinese crushed the rebellion in 43 CE, creating a capital at Hanoi; with the sisters committing suicide.

Britannica:

The Chinese during the Han dynasty (206 BCE – 221 CE) endeavoured ‘to transform the people of the Red River delta into Chinese. Local customs were suppressed, and Chinese customs, rites, and institutions were imposed by force. Daoist and Confucian teachings were pressed upon the local people, together with instruction in the Chinese language; even Chinese clothing and hairstyles became obligatory.’

The Chinese continued to rule North Vietnam until 939 CE when a Vietnamese commander named Ngo Quyen defeated the Chinese at the battle of Bach Dang River and North Vietnam finally became an independent state after a thousand years. Ngo Quyen was the first King of Vietnam, reigning from 939 to 944.

Another thousand years ensued whereby reigning dynasties advanced the accomplishments of an independent nation free from Chinese rule. Even so, Vietnam at various times during these dynastic periods (Ly, 1009-1225; Tran, 1225-1440; Nguyen, 1802-1945) succumbed to civil wars and interventions by the Mongols, Chams, Manchus, Dutch, French, Japanese and Americans; as well as the Ming Empire who conquered the country for a period before the native Vietnamese regained their sovereignty.  

Additional dynasties between 1440 and 1802 included the Ho, Le, Mac (1527-1540, led by yes… Mac Dang Dung) and Tay Son dynasties.

Vietnam

Traditional Vietnam:

‘The Ly dynasty… is renowned for establishing a centralized government, promoting Buddhism, and laying the groundwork for an elaborate administrative system… the Tran Dynasty… is particularly celebrated for its military prowess, notably its successful resistance against Mongol invasions in the 13th century’

Britannica:

‘Although the new kingdom, now called Dai Viet (replacing the Chinese name, Annam), made considerable political, economic, and cultural progress, it soon encountered problems with its neighbors to the south. In the 12th and 13th centuries, Dai Viet fought several wars against the Islamic, Indianized kingdom of Champa on the central coast. It also clashed with the Khmer (Cambodian) empire, with its capital at Angkor, then the greatest power in mainland Southeast Asia.’

The Mongols who had gained control of China invaded Dai Viet three times (1257, 1284) but each time withdrawing and in 1288, General Tran Hung Dao sensationally repeated history by defeating the Mongolian fleet on the Bach Dang River.

The Chinese Ming dynasty (1368-1644) seized the opportunity to invade Dai Viet in 1407 as the Tran dynasty was in decline. The Ming rulers re-established Chinese administration and resumed the assimilation policies begun by their predecessors. Thus, Dai Viet became Annam once more.

In 1418 a wealthy land owner Le Loi, initiated the Lam Son Uprising. By 1428 the Chinese had been driven out and Le Loi became Emperor Le Thai To. His successor of the Later Le dynasty, Le Thanh Tong (1460-1497) in 1471, defeated the kingdom of Champa – with it becoming a vassal state – killing more than 60,000 Cham soldiers and 36,000 prisoners, including the king and most members of the royal family.

In 1516, Portuguese traders land in Da Nang heralding the beginning of European interest in Vietnam. In their wake came Roman Catholic missionaries comprising Dominicans and then Jesuits.

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, two rival families effectively held power: the Trinh in the North and the Nguyen in the South.

Britannica:

‘The elimination of Champa was followed by incursions into the Cambodian territory of the Mekong River delta, which the declining Khmer empire was no longer able to defend. Saigon (renamed Ho Chi Minh City in 1975) became Vietnamese shortly before 1700, and… Vietnam had reached its present size by 1757.’ While Hanoi in the North is Vietnam’s capital, Ho Chi Minh has the biggest population.

Ho Chi Minh City – formerly Saigon – named after Ho Chi Minh (originally Nguyen That Thanh) ‘a Vietnamese revolutionary and politician who served as the founder and first president of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam from 1945 until his death in 1969, and as its first prime minister from 1945 to 1955.’ 

In the 1770s rebellion was instigated by three brothers from Tay Son. Britannica: ‘Unity was reestablished only after a 30-year period of revolution, political chaos, and civil war (1772–1802). Although the revolution started in the south, it was directed against the ruling houses of both south and north.’

A Brief history of Vietnam, Tim Lambert:

Gradually the brothers ‘took territory from the Nguyen lords in the south [killing the ruling family in 1777] and the Trinh lords in the north. By 1786 they were in control of the whole of Vietnam and one brother, Nguyen Hue made himself Emperor Quang Trung. In 1788 the Chinese intervened in Vietnam but the Vietnamese routed them at Dong Da. However, a Nguyen lord named Nguyen Anh escaped. He raised an army [with French military assistance] and from 1789 he pushed back the rebels. Nguyen Anh took Hanoi in 1802 and made himself Emperor Gia Long. Under him, [Dai Viet, renamed] Vietnam became a strong united kingdom.’

Traditional Vietnam:

‘… the Nguyen Dynasty holds a unique place in Vietnamese history, reflecting significant changes in governance and society… this dynasty marked the transition to a modern state, with reforms aimed at centralizing power.’

Vietnam

The French empire began a systematic take over of Vietnam when it attacked the port of Da Nang in 1847. In 1859, France conquered Saigon, Laos and Cambodia, which together formed French Indochina. France gained full control of Vietnam in 1883 and turned it into a French colony.

Ho Chi Minh established the Indochinese Communist Party (ICP) in 1930. In 1941, the ICP organised a guerrilla army, the Viet Minh, in response to the Japanese invasion during the Second World War. In 1945 after the Japanese withdrawl caused a power vacuum, the Viet Minh seized power. Ho Chi Minh announced the independence of Vietnam in September of 1945.

Coat of Arms of Vietnam – inscription: Socialist Republic of Vietnam

Tim Lambert:

‘However, the great powers ignored the Vietnamese demand for independence. Under the terms of the Potsdam Conference Japanese troops south of the 16th parallel surrendered to the British. Those to the north surrendered to the Nationalist Chinese. 

However, the French army soon arrived in the south to take control from the British. In the north Chinese troops moved in. However, Ho Chi Minh soon decided that the French were the lesser of two evils and he signed a treaty, which said that French troops should replace Chinese troops in North Vietnam for 5 years. In return, the French promised to recognize Vietnam as a ‘free state’. 

However, it soon became clear the French had no intention of giving up power in Vietnam, and fighting broke out between them and the Viet Minh. For eight years the Viet Minh fought a guerrilla war against the French.’

In 1950, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam was recognised by both China and the USSR.

Lambert:

‘Finally, in 1954 they surrounded a French army at Dien Bien Phu. After a siege lasting 57 days, the French were forced to surrender. By then it was clear that the French could not win the war and both sides met at the Geneva Conference to end the war. They agreed that Vietnam would be temporarily divided at the 17th parallel and elections would be held by 20 July 1956. However, no elections were held and the division of Vietnam became permanent.’

‘In the north, Ho Chi Minh introduced a Communist regime while in the south Ngo Dinh Diem became ruler.’ In 1956, Ngo Dinh Diem initiated a campaign against political dissidents, leading to a communist uprising in 1957. By 1959 arms and men [the Vietcong] from North Vietnam were infiltrating the South in a long guerrilla war; with president Ngo Dinh Diem being ousted from power in 1963 and murdered in a US-backed military coup.

Lambert:

‘Gradually the USA became involved in the Vietnam War. As early as 1950 the US sent military advisers to South Vietnam. Financially they supported the French and later the South Vietnamese government. Then in 1964 two US ships were supposedly subject to ‘unprovoked’ attacks by the North Vietnamese’ in the Gulf of Tonkin.’

The United States then bombed the North, with the US Congress approving the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, authorising the president to take ‘all necessary measures’ to prevent ‘further aggression’. By December 1965 there were 183,000 American soldiers in Vietnam and by the end of 1967 there were 500,000 personnel. The Vietcong maintained their guerrilla warfare. 

In January 1968 the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese army launched the Tet offensive on US army positions in towns and cities across South Vietnam. More than five hundred civilians die in the American bloodbath on My Lai. Thousands are killed by communist forces during their occupation of the city of Hue.

As opposition to the war grew, President Nixon began to reduce US ground forces in Vietnam in 1969. A 1973 cease-fire agreement in Paris meant American troops withdrew completely. The South Vietnamese continued to fight the Vietcong alone. 

In 1975, North Vietnamese forces invaded South Vietnam, captured Saigon on the 30 April and took control of the entire country after the South Vietnamese President Duong Van Minh surrendered. Vietnam was reunited under communist rule and in 1976 the Socialist Republic of Vietnam was declared. Hundreds of thousands of people fled the country never to return.

When the Khmer Rouge attacked Vietnam the Vietnamese expelled the Pol Pot regime and occupied Cambodia in 1978. In response, Chinese troops crossed the northern border of Vietnam and were duly pushed back by Vietnamese troops. Vietnam remained in Cambodia until 1989.

The Vietnam People’s Army possesses an active manpower of approximately 450,000, with total strength – including paramilitary forces – potentially reaching up to 5,000,000.

Vietnam is ranked 23rd out of 145 countries in military strength in 2026.

Vietnam spearheads the nations in South East Asia descended from Gomer and ranks second overall, behind the increasingly foreboding, Indonesia – Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.

In 1986, the Vietnamese government introduced market reforms. Allowing the Vietnamese economy to grow rapidly. In 1994 the United States lifted a thirty year economic trade embargo on Vietnam and in 1995, diplomatic relations were restored between the two nations.

Vietnam

Names of Vietnam throughout… History, Kandle Dart, 2021:

‘Most names have the word “Đại” or/and Việt” or/and “Nam”.

Quốc hiệu (country name) Đại Việt (Great Viet) has the record of being used in the longest time, for over 700 years!

Meaning of the current name Việt Nam: Viet means the Viet people. Nam means the south. Together, it means the Viet of the Southern.

By including the word “Đại” (Great)/Big) in the past country names, the Vietnamese ancestors showed their pride and the ambition to expand their territory.

Will the country change her name again and break away from the word “Việt” or/and “Nam” in the future? Who knows? But I believe when there is a change of a political system, a shift of political ideology, a collapse of a regime, a name change is likely to happen. The name Đại Việt had been used for so many centuries before, perhaps some political leaders in the future may like to use that historical name again.’

In the Bible, Gomer is mentioned just once, aside from the genealogical lists; in a yet future, intimidating military alliance with several other nations – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.

In Ezekiel 38:2-6, ESV we read:

2 “Son of man, set your face toward Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him 3 and say, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. 

4 And I will turn you about and put hooks into your jaws, and I will bring you out, and all your army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed in full armor, a great host, all of them with buckler and shield, wielding swords. 

5 Persia, Cush, and Put are with them, all of them with shield and helmet;

Gomer and all his hordes;

Beth-togarmah from the uttermost parts of the north with all his hordes – many peoples are with you.”

Notice Togarmah is differentiated from Gomer, as his descendants migrated to a distant land.

Gomer is able to field a large army in this already massive military operation.

Countries comprising Continental SE Asia

CountryPopulation (2025)
Vietnam101,887,164
Thailand71,597,220
Myanmar54,741,345
Cambodia17,293,532
Laos7,865,838

With a combined population of just over 250 million people, we can understand how this would be feasible.

Vietnam will play a prominent role in a vast military alliance not just once but twice.

Preceding the confederation outlined in the Book of Ezekiel – which takes place at the end of the millennial rule of the Son of Man – the East Asian nations ally themselves against the King of the North just prior to Christ’s return (Daniel 11:44) – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.

Revelation 16:12

The Voice

‘… so that the kings from the east and their armies could make their way.’

Returning briefly to Gomer and his first two sons names meanings, it is a rather frightening prospect when they are pieced together:

Bring to an end, Crushers, fire is scattered and sprinkling of blood.

Ashkenaz is highlighted in a single verse in Jeremiah 51:27, NET:

“Raise up battle flags throughout the lands. Sound the trumpets calling the nations to do battle. Prepare the nations to do battle against Babylonia. Call for these kingdoms to attack her: Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz. Appoint a commander to lead the attack. Send horses against her like a swarm of locusts” – Revelation 9:3-11.

Footnote:

‘Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz were three kingdoms located in the Lake Van-Lake Urmia region that are now parts of eastern Turkey and northwestern Iran. These kingdoms were conquered and made vassal states by the Medes in the early sixth century’ – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

The regions of Ararat and Minni are described as kingdoms, placed on a similar footing with Ashkenaz. Actually, they are even listed before Ashkenaz. Thus they are not regions within another territory. The fact that the Bible states them, shows they are an identifiable family subdivision of Gomer as his additional sons, or perhaps the link to his eldest son Ashkenaz, means they are Gomer’s grandsons. As we read from A H Sayce, we know this was where these peoples were once located in modern Armenia, though they are not there now. If Ashkenaz and Riphath’s children are located in former Indo-China; how do these other two peoples relate to them?

It is not integral in understanding Gomer’s future role, where Ashkenaz and Riphath are specifically located, though it is invaluable for those people investigating who may be represented by them today. With the introduction of Ararat and Minni, coupled with Diphath, the enigmatic double of Riphath, the mystery deepens.

We have five Biblical identities associated with Gomer’s sons Ashkenaz and Riphath and we have unsurprisingly, five modern nations in continental Southeast Asia.

Previously, we addressed the original mountains of Ararat as representing the Himalayas, with the mountain ranges in Anatolia – modern Turkey – becoming a later identification – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

If the people of Ararat and Minni were once associated with this area in the past, then might they be near the Himalayas or in a mountainous region today?

The most mountainous nation in Southeast Asia is coincidentally, Myanmar – followed by Indonesia. The Hkakabo Razi is believed to be Myanmar’s highest mountain. The 19,295 foot tall mountain is also the highest mountain in Southeast Asia and is located in the northern Myanmar state of Kachin, in an outlying subrange of the Greater Himalayan mountain system adjacent to the tri-point border with India and China. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘Ararat is the name of a mountain range, which is famous for being the site of the first ship wreck in history: the stranding of the Ark of Noah (Genesis 8:4). Nowadays nobody knows for sure where the Ararat might be… according to Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names the name Ararat comes from (1) the common Hebrew word (har) hill, mountain. And (2) the Hebrew verb (yarad) to go down, descend, march down. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Mountain Of Descent, which is a wonderful interpretation if it didn’t ignore the final teth.

The following cluster of words seems more appropriate: (‘arar), to curse; (retet),trembling, panic, and (rata), wring out (Job 16:11), a word that, according to BDB Theological Dictionary may have to do with (yarat), precipitate, or be headlong, contrary (Numbers 22:32, “… because your way is contrary to me”. BDB Theological Dictionary suggest an alternative reading, “… thou hast precipitated the journey in front of me”.)

As is the case with many names from the earliest chapters of Genesis, it’s impossible to retrieve the intended meaning of the name Ararat. We can’t even be sure in which language this name originated. But the way this name was later spelled, it seems to stylise the Noah story: A curse and a trembling; then a mountain and a future in a flash laid out.’

The definition of Ararat is insightful with its accurate description of Noah’s family trekking down a mountain of magnitude, to populate the Indus Valley after the Flood. 

Minni in Hebrew means: ‘my portion, partly’. A subtle link with ‘my portion’ to Madai’s ‘middle land’ and Japheth’s ‘enlarged.’ From the preposition min, ‘from’, or the verb mana, ‘to count or reckon.’ The name Minni appears to have also originated from a language other than Hebrew.

In 1 Chronicles, Riphath is called Diphath. This is puzzling, as this writer does not believe it is an accident of a scribes quill. We learnt there was no clear definition for Riphath. Diphath seems a reflection for the same name. As there appears to be three components associated with Ashkenaz, there seems to be a similar aspect of two parts for Riphath. 

Book of Jasher 10:8-9

8 ‘And the children of Gomer, according to their cities, were… by the river Franza, by the river Senah. 9 And the children of Rephath are the Bartonim, who dwell in the land of Bartonia by the river Ledah, which empties its waters in the great sea Gihon, that is, oceanus.’

In like manner, the River Mekong is 2,703 miles long; the worlds 12th longest river and 7th longest in Asia. It serves all five nations and strategically opens out to the South China Sea via Vietnam.

Online comment:

‘Interestingly, linguistic-wise, Cambodia and Vietnam share… the same language family. Integration of Cambodia into [the Vietnamese] cultural and political [spheres] also took place regularly in [an] historical context[;] [with the] conquest and cultural conversion often [instigated] by the Vietnamese empire of the past[,] against the remnant of the old Khmer empire.’

Online comment – emphasis mine:

‘I’m often asked how similar Burmese is to the national languages of its Southeast Asian [neighbours], namely Thai, Lao and Khmer. And I’ve got to say: Burmese is quite different from the other three, whether it’s phonology, grammar, vocabulary, or writing.

In my perspective, one can divide Southeast Asia into two distinct sub-regions: continental Southeast Asia (Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam) and insular Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, Singapore [refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia]).

The national languages of Southeast Asia can similarly be divided along those same lines. It’s worth noting that all languages fall into a number of language families, which groups together languages that share a common ancestor, the proto-language of that family.

According to this conceptualization, Burmese is a clear outlier, as it is the only national language that’s part of the Sino-Tibetan language family, among the ranks of Chinese varieties and Tibetan. Thai and Lao are members of the Tai-Kadai language family. In fact, the two are quite similar, such that Thai and Lao are seen as languages in a Tai language ‘dialect continuum’ spanning from Thailand to southwest China. On the other hand, Khmer is part of the Mon-Khmer language family, linguistically related with neighboring Vietnamese.’

The principal lowland inhabitants of Laos are the Lao, who politically and culturally are the dominant group. They comprise the bulk of the Lao Loum; approximately 60% of the total population. The Lao are considered a branch of the Tai people, who began migrating southward from China in the first millennium CE. 

Thais tend to have high frequencies of Y-DNA Haplogroup O-M95 including its O-M88, O1b sub-clade, which also has been found with high frequency among both the Cham of Vietnam, the Kuy people in Laos and Cambodia, as well as the Jarai of Cambodia.

The genetic testing website 23andme groups Khmer people under the ‘Indonesian, Khmer, Thai and Myanmar’ reference population. This reference population contains people who have had recent ancestors from Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. Notice Vietnam is excluded, plus the similarity with Malaysia and Indonesia is possibly due to overspill from the migration of people of Ashkenaz, Riphath and the others to these two, non-Gomer descended nations.

Kim Wook in 2000, stated that genetically, Vietnamese people are mostly clustered with East Asians, of which his study analyzed DNA samples from Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and Mongolians, rather than with Southeast Asians. The same study analysed DNA samples of Indonesians, Filipinos and Thais included with the Vietnamese. The study observed that Vietnamese people were the only population in the study’s phylogenetic analysis that did not reflect a sizeable genetic difference between East Asian and Southeast Asian populations. In other words, they intriguingly bridge the genetic gap between these two regions.

Jung Jongsun in 2010, said that genetic structure analysis found significant admixture in ‘Vietnamese with unknown Southern original settlers’ and that Vietnamese people are located between Chinese and Cambodian people in the study’s genome map. 

We will return to the anomaly of the Vietnamese being distinct from their four related neighbours, whilst possessing a strong link with northeastern Asia – refer Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

Example of Vietnamese women whereby the woman in the photo above could pass for a north-eastern Asian, like a Korean – whereas the woman below looks like a south-eastern Asian such as a Thai.

Complete human mtDNA genome sequences from Vietnam and the phylogeography of Mainland Southeast Asia, multiple authors, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Vietnam is an important crossroads within Mainland Southeast Asia (MSEA) and a gateway to Island Southeast Asia… However, comparatively few studies have been undertaken of the genetic diversity of Vietnamese populations. We sequenced the entire mtDNA genome from 609 unrelated Vietnamese individuals… 399 distinct sequences (haplotypes) belonging to 135 haplogroups were identified, all belonging to the two macro-haplogroups M and N

Overall, F1 is the predominant haplogroup (19.38%) followed by B4 (17.41%), M7 (9.36%), B5 (7.22%), and M71 (6.08%); these haplogroups are also common in other MSEA populations…**

To identify Vietnamese-specific lineages (clades or branches consisting of sequences only from Vietnam), we constructed phylogenetic trees relating 2742 entire mtDNA genome sequences (including 609 newly sequenced mitogenomes from the present study and 2133 previously reported sequences from MSEA). Several previously undescribed sub-branches of haplogroups A, B, C, D, F, M and N were identified… In total, 111 novel lineages unique to Vietnam were found in the dataset. The majority of these belong to haplogroups B, F and M (25, 26 and 29, respectively); these are major haplogroups of MSEA, accounting for 76.35% of the sequences.**

Haplogroup A occurs mostly in northern and eastern Asia at frequencies from 5 to 10%, and is one of five founder haplogroups among native Americans. Overall, haplogroup A is most widespread in AA groups from Vietnam and Thailand… Within MSEA, haplogroup A is at highest frequency in northern Vietnam and northwestern Thailand.

Haplogroup B is one of the most common haplogroups in northern and eastern Asia, with three major subhaplogroups B4, B5 and B6. With the 164 Vietnamese mtDNA sequences belonging to haplogroup B, several new sub-clusters within B4, B5, and B6a are identified… B4 is the second most frequent haplogroup in Vietnam and is widespread across MSEA, especially northern Vietnam, northern Thailand, and Taiwan. However, B4 subhaplogroups that are relatively frequent in Taiwan… are absent in the Vietnamese AN groups… while haplogroup B4 has the highest frequency in northern Vietnam and Taiwan, there is very little overlap of B4 subhaplogroups between Vietnam and Taiwan… Overall, there is remarkably little sharing of sequences between groups from different language families or countries… haplogroup B5 reaches the highest frequency in northeastern Thailand. Haplogroup B6a is distributed mostly in northern Thailand.

Haplogroup C is widespread across East Asia and is one of the five founder haplogroups among native American populations… Haplogroup C5 is represented by a single haplotype belonging to subhaplogroup C5d*… and is present only in Vietnamese HM groups, while C4 is distributed in Vietnamese, Thai, and S. Chinese groups…

Haplogroup F is one of the most common haplogroups throughout Asia Haplogroup F1a is at high frequency in northern Vietnam and northeastern Thailand…

Haplogroup G is one of the most common mtDNA haplogroups among Japanese, Ainu, Mongol and Tibetan populations, and is also found at a lower frequency across East Asia, Central Asia and MSEA…The G2a1* sequence is from a TK group… Among MSEA populations, haplogroup G reaches the highest frequency in northern Vietnam

M is a macro-haplogroup found at high frequency all across Asia (including MSEA)… Haplogroup M7 reaches the highest frequency in eastern Thailand and northern Taiwan…

Haplogroup M71 is found in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam… haplogroup M71 has the highest frequency in central Vietnam…

N9a, one of three major sub-clades of haplogroup N, is found in East Asia, Southeast Asia and Central Asia… Haplogroup N9a reaches the highest frequency in southern peninsular Malaysia…’

The mtDNA macro-haplogroup M, is indicative of all oriental Asians. What is significant, is that M71 bonds the five continental southeast Asian nations, revealing a common maternal ancestry and a shared status as brothers.

Large-scale mitochondrial DNA analysis in Southeast Asia reveals evolutionary effects of cultural isolation in the multi-ethnic population of Myanmar, multiple authors, 2014 – emphasis mine: 

‘… we sequenced the mtDNA control region of 327 unrelated donors and the complete mitochondrial genome of 44 selected individuals… 

Population genetic analyses of Burmese control region sequences combined with population data from neighboring countries revealed that the Myanmar haplogroup distribution showed a typical Southeast Asian pattern, but also Northeast Asian and Indian influences. Analyzing mtDNA data from Myanmar is of great genetic interest, because in spite of accumulating knowledge in recent years the resolution of the mitochondrial haplogroup phylogeny in SEA, especially in macrohaplogroup M, is still very low compared to West-Eurasian haplogroups… 

Myanmar is subdivided into more than 100 ethnic groups amongst them the Bamar represent 68% of the population. Other important minorities are Shan (10%), Karen (7%), Arakanese (4%), Chinese (3%) and the ethno-linguistically related Mon and Khmer (2% each).

F1a1a** with 15.9% of all sequences was by far the most frequent haplogroup in this study, followed by C4b1 (7.0%), B6 (6.4%) and A4 (5.2%). R9b1a1a, D4 and G2b1a reached 4.6% each. The 78 individuals actually belonging to M split into 50 different haplogroups, 29 of them with only a single representative. The most common haplogroup in M was M21a (1.8%)… 

The Myanmar sample was typical for Southeast Asian populations with a high percentage of R9’F and B lineages as well as a variety of M haplogroups. The minor contribution of N lineages (without A, B and R9’F) to the gene pool also turned out to be characteristic for Southeast Asia. Noticeable was a relatively high percentage of A and C lineages in Myanmar compared to the neighboring countries…

A distinct geographic pattern appeared in the multi-dimensional scaling plot of pairwise Fst-values: The Myanmar sample fitted very well within the Southeast Asian cluster, the Central Asian populations formed a second cluster, the Korean sample represented East Asia, the Afghanistan population was representative for South Asia and Russia symbolized Western Eurasia. The main haplogroup distributions are displayed as pie charts. The size of the pie diagrams corresponds to sample size.

The proportion of N-lineages (without A,B and R9’F) increases from very low percentages in Southeast and East Asia over 50% in Central Asia to more than 75% in Afghanistan and 100% in the sample of Russian origin. The proportion of the American founding haplogroups A, B, C and D displayed an interesting pattern: from nonexistent in Russians it increased to more than 50% in East Asian Korea.

The mitochondrial haplogroup distribution in Myanmar showed a typical Southeast Asian pattern, confirming earlier findings but also adding new information: the population sample of Myanmar displayed quite a few parallels to North and Northeast Asian and also to South Asian populations. No traces of European or African influence to the maternal gene pool of Myanmar were detected. The description and dating of eight new mitochondrial haplogroups and the detection of three further basal M lineages shed more light on the population history of Southeast Asia.’

An in-depth analysis of the mitochondrial phylogenetic landscape of Cambodia, multiple authors, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘A total of 224 unique haplotypes were identified, which were mostly classified under haplogroups B5a1, F1a1, or categorized as newly defined basal haplogroups or basal sub-branches of R, N and M clades. The mtDNA data presented here increases the phylogenetic resolution in Cambodia significantly, thereby highlighting the need for an update of the current human mtDNA phylogeny. As a result of the historic expansion of the Khmer Empire in the twelfth century, the majority (96%) of Cambodia’s present-day population belongs to Khmer

Haplogroup distribution in different populations/data sets.

(A) Frequency plot of macrohaplogroups in different populations, including 1000 Genome Project data. The super populations are given for African ancestry, European ancestry, South Asian ancestry and admixed American ancestry.

East Asia is reported individually as Vietnam (KHV = Kinh in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam), China (CDX = Chinese Dai in Xishuangbanna, CHB = Han Chinese in Beijing, CHS = Southern Han Chinese) and Japan (JPT = Japanese in Tokyo). 

(B) Haplogroup distribution by publication… Bodner (Laos), Duong (mostly Vietnam), Kutanan (mostly Thailand), Summerer (Myanmar), Zhang (Cambodia).

“This study” indicates the present work’s data set. Macrohaplogroups represent M (yellow), N (green) and R (blue) groups.’

An article, Mitochondrial DNA control region variation in a population sample from Thailand, multiple authors, 2020, found that, ‘the [mtDNA] haplogroup composition [for Thailand] is comparable with other Southeast Asia population samples…’

The most frequent Haplogroups being B5a (9.4%), F1a1a (8.9%) and M (8.9%).**

Haplogroup B is a common mtDNA denominator thus far on our journey; as descendants of Tiras, Madai and now Gomer all exhibit the evidence of a shared maternal ancestor through this Haplogroup.

While the Amerindian includes other Haplogroups as do the Central Asians and the South East Asians – with F and M also prevalent amongst Central Asians – it is Haplogroup B which unifies these three sons maternal descent.

Haplogroup B is an intermediate to recent mutation like F and derives from super sub-Haplogroup R. Whereas the remaining mtDNA Haplogroups associated with Japheth’s descendants derive from earlier and older mutations from firstly super Haplogroup M, such as C, Z and D. And secondly for super Haplogroup N, they include Haplogroups A and X.

It depends how one chooses to group these five peoples, whether linguistically, historically, geographically or biblically. The Vietnamese are somewhat separated from the others genetically. Linguistically and historically, they are grouped with Cambodia, while Laos is linked with Thailand linguistically and historically. Myanmar is separated from the others linguistically. Thailand has a thriving economy which sets them apart. Historically, Myanmar and Thailand share a common heritage, as both were British colonies; whereas Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos were French colonies. 

Example of Vietnamese men whereby the man in the photo above could pass for a north-eastern Asian, like a Korean – whereas the man below looks like a south-eastern Asian such as a Thai. This apparent anomaly will be discussed in the following chapter.

Biblically, Riphath and Diphath are not specifically mentioned in scripture, whereas Ashkenaz is, with Ararat and Minni. From this, one could logically expect the latter three to equate to the three larger nations and the former two to the two smaller nations.

Thus, Riphath and Diphath are Cambodia and Laos.

Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz are in order, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam.

Myanmar the mountainous nation; Thailand located in the middle, with a significant portion of blessings; and Vietnam the nation with a history of fire and blood soaked warfare.

The final determining factor is their genetic variance or similarity from their respective Y-DNA Haplogroups. All five nations share O-M122, or O2 (formerly O3) as their predominant Haplogroup. The principle O2 lineage in mainland southeast Asia is M7 (O2a2a1a2).

In lesser quantities, O1a or M119 (formerly O1) and O1b (formerly O2) are found with the other indicative Asian paternal Haplogroups constituting C and D. Recall, Haplogroup C2 is the defining marker Haplogroup for Central Asia. The primary O1b lineage in continental southeast Asia is M95 (O1b1a1a).

Both Cambodia and Laos have a strikingly similar sequence percentage consisting of: O2, O1a, O1b, C, D and K. Each also have traces of Haplogroups associated with South Asia or West Asia, such as J2, H and R1a all through admixture. Thailand exhibits a similar sequence and is the closet to Cambodia and Laos. Myanmar has a higher percentage of Haplogroup D than any of the others; whilst Vietnam has Haplogroup Q, which is the principle Haplogroup for the Amerindian – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.

Myanmar:  O2 – D – O1b – O1a – C

Thailand:   O2 – [O1b] – O1a – C – D 

Vietnam:    O2 – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D – N – J2

The distinctiveness of the other three nations suggests they are not offspring of Ashkenaz or derived from the Vietnamese but lean heavily towards being the direct lineage of Gomer. This would support their separate listed status in the Book of Jeremiah. The three peoples combined were obviously powerful enough to cause a threat and this is supported by Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam having sizeable populations today, with the potential to capably wage a future military campaign. 

Thailand: O2a2 [35.3%] – O1b [?%] – O1a [8.8%] – C [2.9%] – D1 [2.9%] 

Vietnam: O2a2 [40%] – O1b [32.9%] – Q [7.1%] – O1a [5.7%] – C [4.3%]

– D1 [2.9%] – N [2.9%] – J2 [2.9%]

Vietnam’s paternal Haplogroups listed above – and the percentages for each – plus partially for Thailand. 

                                  C        O       K       D       Q

NA Amerindian     6                                      77

Kazakhstan           40        8      10                  2

Vietnam                   4      79                  3        7

Comparing Vietnam, with a representative from the preceding chapters: Kazakhstan from Madai and the North American Indian from Tiras, highlights two points.

First, the clear marker Haplogroups for Japheth’s male descendants – aside from N – are represented by C, D, K, O and Q.

Two, even so, it can be seen already just how wide the variation is between related siblings.

Each of the three so far, Tiras, Madai and Gomer though having groups in common, each demonstrate the individuality each possesses in having a prime Haplogroup distinct from one another – Q, C and O respectively.

In contrast, we will discover in the next few chapters that the severity of the divide reduces considerably with Japheth’s remaining four sons. One could say, it is a case of some brothers being more like each other than others.

So far, all carry Y-DNA Haplogroup Q, which was passed through Japheth’s line via the earlier connecting mutations comprising F, K and P. Yet, it is the sons of Tiras who exhibit the relatively recent Q as their prime Haplogroup.

All carry Haplogroup C, again passed via Japheth’s descendants; but it is the most undiluted sons of Madai in Kazakhstan after Mongolia, where the ancient group C is dominant. Though the number one principle Haplogroup for Japheth’s sons overall is O, it is devoid in the sons of Tiras and rare in the sons of Madai. For the male descendants of Gomer, Haplogroup O2a2a (M188) followed by O1b (M268) are the prime defining marker Haplogroups.

All five nations on the Southeast Asian mainland, include the core Y-DNA Haplogroups: O2, O1b, C and D. The primary significance, is that these five nations ultimately comprise the collective body of Gomer’s two eldest sons Ashkenaz and Riphath, with the additional offspring from Diphath, Ararat and Minni.

In the next chapter, we will investigate Gomer’s intriguing third and youngest son, Togarmah.

These are the people I am pleased with: those who are not proud or stubborn and who fear my word.

Isaiah 66:2 New Century Version

“I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”

Michael Crichton

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

Central Asia – Madai & the Medes

Chapter IV

Japheth’s third son Madai, is mentioned more frequently in the Bible than most of his brothers. This is due to a close relationship with a certain cousin from Shem.

Herman Hoeh discusses Madai in his 1957 article, Origin of the Nations – capitalisation  his, emphasis mine:

‘Herodotus mentions that the “Matienians” from the land of Rosh were associated with the people of Meshech and Tubal! (Thalia, 94.) And Pliny the Roman natural historian speaks of the “Matiani” as moving into Russia through the Caucasus (BooK VI, section xviii of NATURAL HISTORY). Not all Russians are Great Russians and White Russians. Some are called “Little Russians”. They live – in the Ukraine and the eastern parts of Romania and Poland. They are often called Ukrainians or Ruthenians. There are about 50 million of them! Who are these people? The MEDES! The sons of Madai! Here is the proof!

In Genesis 10:2 we have Madai, the son of Japheth listed. Now check in an exhaustive concordance. You will find the original Hebrew word translated into English as “Mede” or “Median” is always Madai. Madai is the father of the Medes. The Medes used to be associated with the Persians. You will read about them especially in the book of Daniel. But by the time of Nehemiah the Persians were much more prominent. Today there are no Medes left in Persia [Iran]. The Medes are gone. Certainly a great branch of the human family could not suddenly vanish from the earth!

Indeed they did not. Throughout South Russia – in the Ukraine – four centuries before Christ the Medes were beginning to settle. Here is what the historian Herodotus wrote of these people: “They say that they are a colony of the Medes. How they can have been a colony of the Medes I cannot comprehend; but anything may happen in course of time” (Terpsichore, 9). Herodotus, like many moderns, was prone to believe that the people who inhabited Mesopotamia and the”Bible lands” must be living there today. But they are not. The Arabs have taken their place! The fact that the Medes are the Little Russians today is further amplified by Pliny in his NATURAL HISTORY, Book VI, section xi. He mentions “the river Don, where the inhabitants are… said to be descended from the Medes”!

While Hoeh enthusiastically concludes the northeastern Slavic speaking nations, lead by Ukraine are descended from Madai, we will learn that the sons of Madai the Medes, are of an Asian line of descent – albeit with European admixture – and not living in eastern Europe – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans

The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, page 45:

‘Madai are the Medes, the Mada of the Assyrians. We first hear of them in the cuneiform records under the name of Amada, about B.C. 840, when their country was invaded by the Assyrian monarch. They were at that time settled in the Kurdish mountains, considerably to the east of Lake Urumiyeh. Some fifty years later, however, we find them in Media Rhagiana, where they are called no longer Amada but Mada. It was from the latter form of the name that the Greeks took the familiar Mede.’

Amazing Bible Time Line – emphasis mine: 

‘According to the Book of Jubilees [10:35-36], [Madai] married the daughter of Shem and pleaded with the three brothers of his wife [Elam, Asshur and Arphaxad] to let him live on their land instead [of] occupying an area in Japheth’s land[!] They gave him a spot to dwell on with his family and it was later… named Media. The capital city of Media was Ecbatana [Ezra 6:2]… Media flourished in the trade industry and was… blessed in the field of agriculture. Its lands were fertile…’ 

Recall Genesis 9:27 in Chapter II Japheth Orientalium – the prediction of Japheth dwelling with Shem – where, Madai has intermingled with Shem in extraordinary fashion and has been blessed with fertile soil and mineral wealth in its modern location.

The Book of Jubilees 8:5 states that a daughter of Madai named Milcah [Aramaic: Melkâ] married Canaan, Ham’s youngest son.

The Book of Jasher 7:5 

And the children of Madai were

Achon, Zeelo, Chazoni and Lot

We will meet another, well-known Lot, later – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

A selection of verses – in chronological order – regarding the Medes of Media in the Bible and revealing their intricate relationship with not only Elam of Persia, but also Asshur of Assyria.

2 Kings 17.6

English Standard Version

‘[Shalmaneser V]… the king of Assyria captured Samaria, and he carried the Israelites away to Assyria and placed them in Halah, and on the Habor, the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes.

This occurred during 721 to 718 BCE – 2 Kings 18:11. Media while a powerful people, found themselves in the shadow of the Babylonian Empire and subject to the Assyrian Empire. The Persian Cyrus or Darius the Great, became King of Persia in 559 BCE. His father was King Astyages of Media, against whom he rebelled and desiring to remove Media’s dominance over Persia, annexed Media to the Persian Empire in 549 BCE.

Cyrus was the first ruler of the Achaemenid Empire, which lasted for over two hundred years. The Medes though conquered, continued to be honoured in the new empire and were invariably referenced together with the Persians – Acts 2:9.

Isaiah 21:2

New Century Version

‘… Elam, attack the people! Media, surround the city and attack it! I will bring an end to the pain the city [of Babylon] causes.’ 

Cyrus conquered the Chaldean Empire in 539 BCE. This event was foretold long before by the prophets Isaiah (13:17) and Jeremiah (25:25; 51:11, 28) and it occurred one year before Cyrus/Darius issued the decree which allowed remnants of the Kingdom of Judah to return to Jerusalem – Ezra 1:1-4.

Daniel 5:28

English Standard Version

‘Peres, your kingdom [of the Chaldeans] is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”

Daniel 5:31

New Century Version

‘So Darius the Mede became the new king when he was sixty-two years old.’

Cyrus ruled until 530 BCE. There were two interim kings and then Darius came to the throne of the Medes and Persians in 522 BCE, ruling until 486 BCE. Darius was not a son of Cyrus, being a Mede and not a Persian. 

Daniel 6:15

New Century Version

Then those men went as a group to the king. They said, “Remember, O king, the law of the Medes and Persians says that no law or command given by the king can be changed.”

Daniel 6:28

New Century Version

‘So Daniel was successful during the time Darius [the Mede] was king and [later] when Cyrus the Persian was king.’

Daniel had found favour and was a key figure in the Court of both kings for half a century or more. In 485 BCE Xerxes I, the son of Darius the Mede became king, ruling until 465 BC. His son Artaxerxes I or Ahasuerus, ascended to the throne, when his father was murdered, at the age of twenty-six in 465/464 BCE. This was the apex of the empire, inherited from his father and when we are introduced to the biblical character Esther.

The second chapter of the Book of Esther reveals Esther’s rags to riches story. She was part of the returned captives originally from the Kingdom of Judah in 458/457 BCE. Esther descended from the tribe of Benjamin and was beautiful in countenance and spirit – Esther 2:7. She was placed in the King’s palace… 

Esther 1:1-4

New Century Version

‘This is what happened during the time of King Xerxes, the king who ruled the one hundred twenty-seven states from India to Cush.’ 

Literally from present day India all the way west, to the nation in east Africa now known as Ethiopia.

‘In those days King Xerxes ruled from his capital city of Susa [or Susan]. In the third year of his rule [482 BCE], he gave a banquet for all his important men and royal officers. The army leaders from the countries of Persia and Media and the important men from all Xerxes’ empire were there. The banquet lasted one hundred eighty days. All during that time King Xerxes was showing off the great wealth of his kingdom and his own great riches and glory.’

Esther 2:16-18

English Standard Version

‘And when Esther was taken to King Ahasuerus, into his royal palace… in the seventh year of his reign [458/457 BCE], the king loved Esther more than all the women, and she won grace and favour in his sight more than all the virgins, so that he set the royal crown on her head and made her queen instead of Vashti.’ 

Esther 1:19

English Standard Version

‘If it please the king, let a royal order go out from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes so that it may not be repealed, that Vashti is never again to come before King Ahasuerus. And let the king give her royal position to another who is better than she’ – Daniel 6:12.

‘Then the king gave a great feast for all his officials and servants; it was Esther’s feast. He also granted a remission of taxes to the provinces [including Jerusalem] and gave gifts with royal generosity.’

About a third of the references to the name Madai, including Media and the Medes in the Bible, occur in the Book of Esther. 

The Medo-Persian Empire contained 44% – about 50 million people – of the world’s population within its borders, according to Ehsan Yarshater in The Cambridge History of Iran – the highest such percentage for any empire in history.

To fully appreciate Madai’s identity, we will briefly touch upon Shem’s sons Elam and Asshur – with a selected identifying defining biblical verse for each – before returning in detail to each in their own chapters.

The modern day descendants of Elam or ancient Persia, are the Turks and the nation of Turkey – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey

Jeremiah 49:36

New English Translation

‘I will cause enemies to blow through Elam from every direction like the winds blowing in from the four quarters of heaven. I will scatter the people of Elam to the four winds. There will not be any nation where the refugees of Elam will not go.’

Footnote:

‘Or more simply, “I will bring enemies against Elam from every direction. / And I will scatter the people of Elam to the four winds.” Or more literally, “I will bring the four winds against Elam / from the four quarters of heaven./ I will scatter…” However, the winds are not to be understood literally here. God isn’t going to “blow the Elamites” out of Elam with natural forces. The winds must figuratively represent enemy forces that God will use to drive them out.’

We are provided an intriguing clue with regard to Elam’s location. It is vulnerable to attack from all sides: north, south, east and west. These are four points on a compass and represented by the direction of four winds, northerly, easterly and so forth. Turkey is literally at the crossroads of the Earth. It sits between the continents of Europe, Asia and the region of the Middle East geographically, politically and culturally – not quite a full member of any one.

Cyrus the Persian, the Elamite King, was known as:

‘The Great King, King of Kings, King of Anshan, King of Media, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the Four Corners of the World.’

Elam or Persia historically was geographically near Madai (or Media). Following points one, three and four in the introduction (primus verba), we should expect to find a European and Asian peoples not only in geographic proximity today but also connected through history, language and inter-marriage, revealed by their respective Haplogroups and autosomal DNA.

The reader is highly recommended to read Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey in conjunction with this chapter.

Meanwhile, the modern day descendants of Asshur and Assyria, dwell in Russia – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Zephaniah 2:13

English Standard Version

‘And he will stretch out his hand against the north [H6828 – tsaphown: northward, northern, (direction of), north side, north wind] and destroy Assyria, and he will make Nineveh [the capital] a desolation, a dry waste like the desert.’

If one studies a world map, Russia is as far north as you can travel. There it is; exactly where the Bible says. The Assyrians historically used their neighbour Media, as a foot stool. We will find a similar relationship has continued into modern times.

One can hear those readers with more than a cursory knowledge, gasping incredulously. Edward Hine first proposed Germany was Assyria in the 1870s – with people influenced by its adversarial relationship with Great Britain in following decades – and the idea proceeded to cement firmly in people’s minds like reinforced steel concrete. When Edom was first linked with Turkey is not exactly clear; though the arguments used hang by tenuous threads for both identities, with genetics providing the knock out blow, as it shall be discovered.

Many will be thinking: then who are the Germans and where is Edom? We will look more closely at these two influential peoples in later chapters – including the intricate relationship between Madai and Elam – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

It would be very convenient if Madai and or Elam still lived in present day Iran… since Iranians call themselves Persian – but this does not mean they are Madai or Elam. Please refer to point number one and two in the introduction (primus verba).

The cumulative evidence leads to Madai being the Turko-Mongol peoples of the Central Asian Republics; including the Tartars of Russia and the Mongols in Mongolia – namely, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan,Turkmenistan, partially Tajikistan and possibly including the Sami and Lapps of Russia, Finland and Scandinavia.

Madai from the verb madad, means: ‘measure, sufficient, enough’ or ‘judging’ and ‘as often as’, as well as ‘middle land’, and ‘out of the abundance of’. It could also be interpreted as: ‘My Measure[ment].’

For now, we will only introduce the relationship Madai has with Elam; detailing a comprehensive study later when we discuss Elam in Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. We will see support for the subservient relationship of Madai towards Asshur, present day Russia and the abundance Madai has been given in fulfilment of their name. If one looks at a map of the world, it is evident just how in the middle of the world, Madai truly is.

The five nations comprising Central Asia are former Soviet Republics, from the modern incarnation of the Assyrian Empire. They are referred to as ‘the stans’ – the Persian (Iranian) suffix meaning: land of.

The region historically connected the Silk Road, standing as the intersection for the movement of people, trade and philosophies between all parts of Asia and Europe. The population of the four principle nations is approximately 67 million people; not far off the Amerindian population of the Americas – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.

The people of Turkmenistan are known as Turkmen or Turkmen Turks.

Arlen Seitbatkal:

‘The word Turkmen stems from “Turk” and the intensifying suffix “men,” meaning true Turk. The word Trkmen is also mentioned in Mahmud al-Kashgari’s 11th-century dictionary, “Dīwān Lughāt al-Turk,” where it refers to an ethnic group and carries the meaning of Turk or Turkish person.’

Turkmen also live in Uzbekistan, Kazakstan, Iran and Afghanistan. They speak the Turkmen language; classified as part of the Eastern Oghuz branch of the Turkic languages – see map below. 

Examples of other Oghuz languages include Turkish and Azerbaijani. In the early Middle Ages, Turkmen originally called themselves Oghuz and then later as Turkmen.

Flag of Turkmenistan

Uzbekistan – the nation with the largest population of the four – mines 80 tons of gold yearly; 7th highest in the world. Uzbekistan’s copper deposits rank 10th in the world, its uranium deposits 12th and the country’s uranium production ranks 7th globally. The Uzbek national gas company, Uzbekneftegas ranks 11th in the world in natural gas production and the country has significant untapped reserves of oil and gas.

What’s in Name of Central Asian Nations, Aibarshyn Akhmetkali , 2025:

‘Scholars link the origin of the term Uzbek to the name of Uzbek Khan, the ruler of the Golden Horde in the 14th century. When the horde began to disintegrate, the nomadic tribes within his ulus began to call themselves Uzbeks.’

Arlen Seitbatkal:

“In the nomadic tradition, a strong leader has always been identified with the people. If someone had power and authority, people followed them, and their name became fixed after the group.”

Turkic influence in Central Asia during the first millennium CE brought Turkic culture and language to the lands now known as Kazakhstan.

Orexca:

‘Written sources of the 6th century register the term “Tyurk” which is pronounced as “Tutszyue” by the Chinese and as “Turk” by the Sogdians. Archeological studies of Turkic monuments make it possible to somehow compare “these” Turks with certain Turkic tribal associations. In the Sayano-Altai region they have identified certain archeological cultures which might well be likened to early Kyrgyz, early Kypchaks or early Oguzes.

In the course of not infrequent internecine wars, tribal discord, and struggles for power and pasture, a part of the Turkic tribes which inhabited the steppes and valleys of Kazakhstan moved southwards – to Central Asia (… Tyurgeshes, Karluks, Kypchaks, Uzbeks, Oguz, and Turkmens-Seldzhuks), to Asia Minor… [and] to the Caucasus (Turkmen and Seldzhuks)…

Starting from the 4th century up to the beginning of the 13th century, the territory of Kazakhstan was the seat of West-Turkic, Tyurgesh, Karluk Kaganates, of the state made by the Oguz, Karakhanides, Kimeks and Kypchaks. All of them successively replaced one another right up to the Mongol invasion.’

These states contributed to the spread of Islam and the development of urban culture.

Mongol influence occurred in the thirteenth century when Genghis Khan conquered the region (1219-1224), incorporating it into the vast Mongol territories – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. The region then became part of the Golden Horde, a Mongol successor state.

Orexca: ‘After the invasion, [that is] in the beginning of the 13th century, uluses of the Mongol Empire of Zhuchi-Khan and Zhagatai were formed, which later gave birth to Ak-Orda, Mongolistan and finally to the Kazakh Khanate’ in about 1465.

The Kazakh Khanate was established by Jani Beg (Janibek) and Karay (Kerei) Khan. Various nomadic Uzbek tribes were unified under a single political entity and subsequently developed a distinct Kazakh identity.

Britannica:

‘[For these] separatist Uzbeks became known as Kazakh (“Independent” or “Vagabond”) Uzbeks, and over time a significant differentiation developed between them and the [non-separatist] Uzbeks in their respective ways of life: that of the Kazakh was more nomadic, that of the Uzbeks more sedentary.’

Online Encyclopaedia:

‘According to the latest research of population genetics, mainly of autosomal markers and Y-chromosome polymorphism, it is believed that during the 13th to 15th centuries that the Kazakh ethnicity emerged.’

The Kazakh Khanate reached its peak in the sixteenth century with a golden age under the leadership of Kasym Khan (1509-1518), who expanded its territory and influence.

Britannica: ‘… the Kazakhs were the masters of virtually the entire steppe region, reportedly able to bring 200,000 horsemen into the field and feared by all their neighbours. The prevailing view is that the rule of Kasym Khan marked the beginning of an independent Kazakh polity. Under his rule Kazakh power extended from what is now southeastern Kazakhstan to the Ural Mountains.’

The Kazakh Khanate conducted wars with neighbouring states; the Uzbek Khanate and the Tsardom of Moscow (1547-1721). In the early sixteenth century, the Kazakhs faced an increasing threat from first the Mongols and then from Russia which was expanding its borders to the East.

Kazakhstan became part of the Russian Empire in the eighteenth century. Its colonisation was accompanied by significant changes in the traditional lifestyle of the Kazakh people. Russia sought to actively develop land resources and introduce new administrative structures.

History Central:

‘The situation worsened after 1861 when Russian and Ukrainian peasants flowed into Kazakhstan after the freeing of the serfs and were given Kazakh lands. (This influx of Russians and Ukrainians was not limited to this period – it continued throughout the first seven decades of the [twentieth] century as well such that by 1979, there were more Russians than native Kazakhs in the region.)

Simmering resentments [following repeated revolts] led to a major rebellion in 1916′, sparked by the forced mobilisation of Kazakhs to the Russian front during World War I. ‘In suppressing the uprising, the Russians killed thousands. The Communist revolution the next year [in 1917] plunged Kazakhstan into civil war. Defeated, Kazakhstan became part of Russia as an autonomous entity, eventually attaining the status of one of the Soviet Union’s republics [Kazakh SSR in 1936].’

Britannica:

‘From 1927 the Soviet government pursued a vigorous policy of transforming the Kazakh nomads into a settled population and of colonizing the region with Russians and Ukrainians.’ This period in its history was marked by industrialisation, collectivisation of agriculture and cultural repression.

Britannica: ‘Despite their nomadic rural existence, the Kazakhs were the most literate and dynamic Indigenous people in Central Asia. But the collectivisation brutally imposed by the Soviet regime resulted in a shocking decrease in the Kazakh population: between 1926 and 1939 the number of Kazakhs in the Soviet Union fell by about one-fifth. More than 1,500,000 died during this period, the majority from starvation and related diseases, others as a result of violence. Thousands of Kazakhs fled to China, but fewer than one-fourth survived the journey; about 300,000 fled to Uzbekistan and 44,000 to Turkmenistan.’

In 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kazakhstan became an independent country and a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States (with Russia); under the leadership of the first President Nursultan Nazarbayev. The new state began to implement economic reforms and political changes aimed at integrating into the international community.

History Central:

‘Non-Muslim ethnic minorities departed Kazakhstan in large numbers from the mid-1990s through the mid-2000s and a national program has repatriated about a million ethnic Kazakhs (from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Mongolia, and the Xinjiang region of China) back to Kazakhstan. As a result of this shift, the ethnic Kazakh share of the population now exceeds two-thirds.’

This checkered history replicates the intertwined historical relationship between the descendants of Asshur (Assyria) and Madai (the Medes); the ancestors of the Russians and Central Asians respectively.

Coat of Arms of Kazakhstan – inscription: QAZAQSTAN

Today, the transcontinental Republic of Kazakhstan, the nation with the biggest land area of the four within Central Asia, has an additional smaller portion west of the Ural Mountains in Eastern Europe. It is the world’s largest landlocked country and the 9th largest country in the world, with an area of 1,052,100 square miles. Kazakhstan is the dominant nation of Central Asia economically, generating 60% of the region’s GDP, mainly through its oil and gas industries. It also possesses vast mineral resources.

The Kazakh language is a member of the Turkic language family, with Uzbek, Kyrgyz, Tatar, Uyghur, modern Turkish, Azeri, Turkmen and numerous other languages spoken in Eastern Europe, as well as Central and Eastern Asia. 

Arlen Seitbatkal:

“In the works of academician Abduali Kaidarov and professor Telkozha Januzakov, it is explained that the word ‘qazaq’ can be associated both with ‘qas saq’ (true Sakas) and with the combination of the words ‘qaz’ (goose) and ‘aq’ (white). But most researchers agree that the concepts of yerkin (free) and batyr (warrior) are at the core. The people who broke away from Khan Abulkhair called themselves free, i.e. qazaq.”

CountryPopulation (2025*)Area (km²)GDP (nominal*)
 Kazakhstan20,963,9562,724,900$304.67 billion
 Kyrgyzstan7,347,316199,900$20.16 billion
 Uzbekistan37,386,036447,400$137.48 billion
Turkmenistan7,678,550488,100$72.12 billion
Total73,375,858

Kazakhstan has the 2nd largest uranium, chromium, lead, and zinc reserves; the 3rd largest manganese reserves; the 5th largest copper reserves; and ranks in the top ten in the world for coal, iron, and gold. It is also an exporter of diamonds. 

Flag of Kazakhstan

Most significantly for its economic future, Kazakhstan has the 11th largest proven reserves of both petroleum and natural gas in the world. There are three refineries in the country and not being capable of processing the total crude output, much of it is exported to Russia.

Russian Proton launch vehicle with the Granat high-energy astrophysics observatory, prior to launch on December 1, 1989, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan, while part of the Soviet Union was instrumental in the Russian Space Program; providing the launch sites for CCCP rockets.

Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan since 1997 and renamed from Aqmola in 1998

The Tatars are a collective of Turkic-speaking groups – nearly 7 million people – living in the Russian Federation. The Chinese referred to these nomadic tribes as Ta-Ta or Da-Da – meaning dirty or barbarian. During the early thirteenth century, Ghenghis Khan united the nomadic tribes then living in Mongolia. One of his grandsons Batu Khan, led the Mongol invasion of Eastern Europe – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Tatar man

Web source: 

‘The… Tatars were conquered by imperial Russian forces during the reign of Tsar Ivan IV in 1552… When the Russian Empire collapsed in 1917, the Tatars… formed their own home-land, the Idil-Ural State. The Soviet government… instead formed the Bashkir Autonomous Republic (Bashkortostan) and the Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (Tatarstan) on the same soil. When the Soviet government took over these regions, it redrew the boundaries and gave neighboring Russian provinces the best lands. By changing the boundaries, about 75 percent of the Tatar population found itself living outside the borders of Tatarstan.

Tatar culture was… affected… through the policy of Russification, where the Russian language and culture were legally forced on the Tatars and other ethnic groups… Tatars, of whom about 26 percent live in Tatarstan… is about the size of Ireland or Portugal. 

About 15 percent of all Tatars live in Bashkortostan, another ethnic homeland in the Russian Federation that lies just east of Tatarstan. There are also smaller Tatar populations in Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan… In 922, the Tatars’ predecessors, the Bulgars, converted to Islam, and the old Turkic script was replaced by the Arabic alphabet. 

A famous old Tatar… proverb is Tuzga yazmagannï soiläme, which means, roughly, “If it’s not written on salt, it’s wrong to even mention it.” The proverb refers to the ancient method of keeping records on plaques made of wood and salt, and commends the practicality of keeping written records.’

Recall ‘the Law of the Medes and Persians’, where a proclamation stood fast and could not be altered as discussed in the Books of Esther and Daniel.

Top 14 Tribes of Ancient Central Asia, Mahesh Shant – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Before the Turks entered the arena of history the Awars occupied the regions which later came under the sway of the Turks. After the destructions of the Huns, Syan Pi took over Manchuria, Mongolia and some parts of China. One of the dynasties descended from them, the To-Ba dynasty, was founded in 315 A. D. and continued till the 5th Century. This Hunnish tribe lived in the areas near Lake Baikal… and north of the Gobi desert [Mongolia].

At first the Chinese name for the Awar tribe was Ju-Jun but it was later (in 451 A. D.) changed to JvanJvan by the To-Ba Emperor Tai-Hu-Ti (425-452 A.D.)…

She Lun, a powerful chieftain, who conquered the Kao She tribe and, consolidating his military strength, took the title of Kagan (Khan). The king­dom of the She Lun, which spread from Korea to the Altai, included a part of China as well as a section of the trade route of Central Asia. The Awars relations with the Chinese were not unlike those of their Hunnish ancestors. At times they plundered the border regions of China, at others they gave military aid to the Chinese Emperor. The Turks put an end to the military might of the Awars in 546 A. D.’

Of interest is the remarkable coincidence of the To-Ba dynasty – who were related to descendants from Madai (just as the Huns were from Elam) – should take on the name of their long distant uncle, Japheth’s fourth son, Javan (Jvan-Jvan).

Shant:

‘The Selzuks were a nomadic people inhabiting the regions north of the Sir Darya [Syr Darya River]. They were also known as Turkmans and the region once inhabited by them now forms part of the Soviet Socialist Republic. A branch of the Aguz, they spread in the course of their wanderings to the northern banks of the Sir Darya.

The Guz or Aguz [Oghuz] Turks were divided into three branches – Kipchiaks, Kankalis and Karluks. The Selzuk dynasty, which ruled over Central Asia and Iran for a long time, was descended from the Kipchiaks, and the Turks of modern Turkey are descended from the Osmanali branch of this tribe.

The similarity in language points to the Uzbeks, Turkmans, Khirgiz and Kazaks having sprung alike from Turkish stock.

They can be divided into three parts:

(i) The Northern Turks – the Yakuts of Siberia,

(ii) The Eastern Turks – the Sinkiang Turks, Uzbeks, Kazaks are Kufa Tatars

(iii) The Western Turks – Osman Ali, Azerbaijanians and Turkmans.

A branch of the Turks left its original homeland in the Altai mountains and advanced into Turkestan, driving out or absorbing the Scythian and Sogdhian tribes inhabiting these regions. Among these Turks were the Selzuks and the Chingiz Mongols.

The Sulzuks acquired that name from Selzuk Turk their first Muslim Chief, although they were equally well-known as Turkmans. The Western Turks, of whom Turkmans were the majority, brought Asia Minor and Armenia under their control, while another branch of the Western Turks, the Osmani Turks, brought about the downfall of the Byzantine Empire, made Constantinople their capital in the 15th century and later extended their rule over Eastern Europe.’

The entwined relationship between Madai (Mongols) and Elam (Turks) – the Medes and Persians of old – has endured through the cyclic phases of their history. The label Turk, used interchangeably for Uzbeks, Kazakhs and Turkmen of Central Asia as well as for the Turkish in Asia Minor – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Facts and Details, People of Central Asia:

‘The people of Central Asia are basically divided into two types: the traditional nomads and semi-nomads (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Mongols and Turkmen) and the settled people (the Uzbeks and Tajiks). According [to] DNA studies, Tajiks, Uzbeks and Turkmen have retained their “ethnic purity.”

There has traditionally been a lot of intermarriage between the ethnic groups of Central Asia. Uzbeks and Tajiks have traditionally been difficult to distinguish from one another. The same is true with Kyrgyz and Kazakhs. Up until the 20th century… [the Uzbeks and Tajiks] were regarded as essentially the same people except that Uzbeks spoke a Turkish language and the Tajiks spoke a Persian language.

Tajiks are… distinguished from other Central [Asians] by their traditional Islamic-Iranian culture [and ethnicity]. Uzbeks consider themselves the [dominant] people of Central Asia by virtue of their numbers and their historic links to… Genghis Khan. Other ethnic groups in Central Asia dispute this claim.

Kazakhs and Kyrgyz are close relatives. They look similar, have many similar customs and speak similar languages. Many believe they are [essentially] the same people with Kazakhs traditionally residing in the steppes and Kyrgyz living in the mountains. The Kyrgyz, however, have a longer and more coherent history than the Kazakhs. Clan and regional ties have historically been more important than ethnic identity.

Central Asia is a meeting point of Turkic, Persian and Mongol cultures.’

The Analysis of the Genetic Structure of the Kazakh Population as estimated from mitochondrial Dnapolymorphism, Scientific Centre of Obstetrics, Genecology and Perinatology, Galina Berezina, Gulnara Svyatova & Zhanar Makhmutova, 2011:

‘The most closely related populations are the Kazakhs and Uighurs, they are accompanied by the Uzbeks and the nation(s) of the southern Altai on one level. The Kyrgyz and Bashkir [Tatar] nations formed an independent taxonomic group in this cluster. The contribution of [European] and [Asian] components in the formation of the anthropological type of the Kazakhs was proved… by Ismagulov (1970) on the basis of a comprehensive study of paleoantropological and craniological materials.’

The land of Kazakhstan has been a place of interaction comprising many ethnic layers during a historically long period. Mongolian tribes, Turkic-speaking populations from Siberia and Altai, Indo-Iranians from the Near East, as well as Slavs from Eastern Europe took part in the formation of the Kazakhs. Thus, it is possible to explain a high level of genetic variability of mtDNA, with a complicated ethnic history.

Khazaria, Kazakh Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis mine:

‘Kazakhs (Qazaqs, Kazaks) are a Turkic-speaking people living in several modern countries including (but not limited to) Kazakhstan, China, and Mongolia. They are approximately 70% [Asian] and 30% [European] and this admixture explains why some Kazakhs have light European physical features in contrast to the majority who have black hair, brown eyes, and epicanthic eyefolds. 

The Kazakhstan DNA Project‘s Y-chromosome records show that among its male members are the Y-DNA haplogroups C3, C3*, C3c, G… O2, Q1a3, E1b1b1, N1c1, R1a1, R1b1b1, R2, J2a1, J2a, and J2.’

The paternal Haplogroups in bold are indicative of lineages from Japheth; with the ancient C Haplogroup the defining marker for descendants from Madai.

Brook: ‘C3 [C2] (M217, P44) is not only common among Kazakhs but also frequent in Mongolia [and the Kyrgyz].

The analysis shows that Western Europe… and Eastern Europe… mtDNA lineages exist in the Kazakhs population. A high genetic diversity was observed in the Kazakhs population (h=0.996). “We have studied the relation between East Eurasian and West Eurasian lines in the gene pool of the Kazakhs using the data on polymorphism HVSI of mtDNA (frequencies of haplogroups). It was found out that the main contribution of East Eurasian lines (55% of the total gene pool) to the modern gene pool of mtDNA of the Kazakhs make haplogroups D, C, G and Z (36.2%), A and F (6.9%) and other haplogroups of Asian origin (11.9%) [B].’ 

The complexity of the Kazakh genetic make up is due to their Haplogroups being split between Asian (64-70%) and European lineages (30-35%); with their European genealogy being split further, between western (41%) and eastern European (55%) gene pools.  

Brook: ‘West Eurasian lines (41% of the total gene pool) in the Kazakh gene pool are most frequently represented by the haplogroups H (14.1%), K (2.6%), J (3.6%), T (5.5%), U5 (3%) and others (12.2%).” We found that more than 64% of mtDNA lineages belong to Asian-specific haplogroups (M, C, Z, D, G, A, B, F, N9). Supercluster M was found with most high frequency (45%).’ 

Japheth’s son Tiras possesses the mtDNA Haplogroups in common with Madai: C, D, A and B – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian. Haplogroups C and D derive from super sub-Haplogroup M, itself from L3 while Haplogroup A derives from super sub-Haplogroup N and B from super sub-Haplogroup R.

Brook: ‘Western-Eurasian specific haplogroups were observed in 35% (H, V, HV, J, T, U1, U2, U4, U5, U7, K, W, X)… the lineage of Hg U7, typical for all Levant, including Iran, was revealed in Kazakhs… East Asian hgs – A, B, F, N9 – make up about 18% in Kasakhs, like in all Central Asian populations, Altaics, Tuvinians and Bashkirs…

While those Kazak people who reside in China are mostly [Asian], just like Kazakhs in Kazakhstan, this study showed that 30.2% of their ancestry is western Eurasian. “In this study, we also find that all Turkic and Mongolic groups possess a common set of maternal haplogroups (C, D, G2a, H)…*

Kyrgyz (Kirghiz, Kirgiz) are a Turkic-speaking people living mostly in Kyrgyzstan but also in neighboring Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and China. They are descended from multiple different ancient peoples. Mongoloid (East Eurasian) ancestry represents between half and two-thirds of Kyrgyz ancestry. 

Kyrgyz living in Tajikistan and western areas of Kyrgyzstan have less Mongoloid ancestry and more Caucasoid ancestry than other Kyrgyz. Central and South Asian ancestry is the next most important element representing about one-fourth. West Eurasian (including European) represents about one-eighth. Ancestry from West Asia [Arab, Persian] is not significant in any Kyrgyz person and many have none of it.

The Kirgiz DNA-Project’s Y-chromosome records show that among its male members who are Kyrgyz from Kyrgyzstan are the Y-DNA haplogroups C-M217 (C3) [C2], I-M253 (I1), J-M172 [J2], N-M232, O-P201, R-M198 (R1a1a), R-M269 (R1b1a2), and R-M343 (R1b1a1). R1a1 (and its subtypes) is also found among Kazakhs, eastern Siberians, South Asians, East Slavs, and West Slavs.’

‘This study of Y-DNA includes Kyrgyz samples as well as samples from other Central Asian peoples like Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Karakalpaks, plus many other populations from elsewhere. M17 [R1a1] is suggested to be “a diagnostic Indo-Iranian marker”… [resulting from admixture with European lineages]. “The exceptionally high frequencies** [63%] of this marker in the Kyrgyz, Tajik/Khojant, and Ishkashim populations are likely to be due to drift, as these populations are less diverse, and are characterized by relatively small numbers of individuals living in isolated mountain valleys.”

The most prevalent mtDNA Haplogroups for the Kyrgyz, in order are: D, H and C.* D, C and G are indicative of Asian ancestry and H is reflective of European admixture in the maternal line.

The main Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups for the men from half of the seven million Kyrgyz are in descending percentage order: 

R1a [63.5%] – C2 [13.5%] – O [5.8%] – K [1.9%] – O2 [1.9%] – N1c1 [1.9%] – 

P [1.9%] – R1b [1.9%] – I1 [1.9%] – J2 [1.9%]

The Haplogroups, R1a, R1b and I1 are indicative of European admixture. The Haplogroups C2, K, O2 and N1c1, are the main Asian lineages for the Kyrgyz men, with C2 the principle defining Asian paternal Haplogroup. The very high frequency of R1a** is somewhat of an anomaly and reveals considerable admixture. For R1a is mainly associated with either the Eastern European peoples of Slavic descent; from eastern Siberia; or from mixed Indian ancestry in northern India. 

J2 is typically a west Asian Haplogroup and particularly associated with Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. R1b is the main identifying Haplogroup for western European men and Haplogroup I1 originates with northwestern Europeans. What is important, is that Haplogroups C, K, N and O are key Asian Y-DNA Haplogroups. 

The main Amerindian mtDNA Haplogroups – in order – are A, B, C and D. The Kyrgyz and the Kazakhs have the same Haplogroups, though with different variations and percentages. Similarly, the American Indian has Y-DNA Haplogroups Q and C, of which they share C with the Kyrgyz and both C2 and Q1a3 with the Kazakhs.

Kazakhstan Soldiers

The following prevalent Asian mtDNA Haplogroups are found in the Kazakh population of nearly twenty million people: D, C, G, Z, followed by A, F and also B and N9. The supercluster M is found with the highest frequency of 45%. The main European mtDNA Haplogroups include, H at 14%, K, J, T and U5. These two sets are very similar to the Kyrgyz people.

The main Y-DNA Haplogroups include:

C2 [40%] – K [10%] – O2 [8%] – J2 [8%] – R1a [7%] – N1c1 [7%] –

R1b [6%] – P – [3.3%] – Q1a3 [2%] – R2 [1%] – I1 [1%] 

This is where they differ, with the Kazakh’s showing less European admixture as shown by the predominant and distinct C, K and O Asian Haplogroups. It also highlights how principle admixture has passed from the maternal^ line, with Madai males taking Elamite wives, or in other words, Turko-Mongol males marrying primarily Turkish women. J2 is the most prevalent Y-DNA Haplogroup of Turkish men with R1b and a lesser extent R1a and so the Kazakh and Kyrgyz males possessing the same is not a coincidence.

Decoding a Highly Mixed Kazakh Genome, multiple authors, 2020 – emphasis mine: 

‘We present the whole genome sequence and thorough genetic variant and admixture analysis of a Central Asian, Kazakh MJS. We found several SNVs associated with drug toxicity, metabolism, diseases, phenotypic features and identified recent and ancient admixtures. Both PCA and phylogenetic analyses confirm closer MJS and other Kazakh similarity to modern East Asians than Europeans and showed the overall closest genetic affinities are with other Central Asian populations, namely, Kalmyk, Uzbek and Kyrgyz. All populations with significant similarity to MJS genome could be backed up by historic migration events involving the Kazakh population and the major fraction of genomic variation could be attributed to fairly recent admixture with geographically close populations.

However, MJS’s mitochondrial^ DNA [maternal] haplogroup is of European [Turkish] or Near Eastern (West Asian) [Iranian] ancestry. It corresponds to the heterozygous SNPs associated with European phenotypic features and confirmed by admixture f3 statistics and all other Kazakh autosomal data showed very similar ancestral compositions to MJS’s. This highly heterozygous and admixed Kazakh genome provides insights into complex admixtures and can serve as a reference for mapping complex heterogeneity in Central Asian populations.’

The males from the total eight million Tajiks exhibit these main Y-DNA Haplogroups:

R1a [44.7%] – J2 [18.4%] – R2 [7.9%] – C2 [2.6%] 

Tajikistan shows only a slim oriental link with their near neighbours and could have either mixed heavily or more likely, have more in common paternally with their southern Asian neighbours in Afghanistan and Pakistan – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut

The males from the six million people of Turkmenistan carry the following Y-DNA Haplogroups: 

R1b [37%] – J2 [17%] – K [13%] – P [10%] – R1a [7%] – R2 [3%]

The Haplogroup R2a (M124) is typically associated with the southern Asian men of particularly India with 10%; Pakistan with 8%; Western Asia; plus the Central Asian nations. 

The Turkmen on the other hand show strong admixture with the Turks (and related peoples) as revealed by their R1b and to a lesser extent J2 Haplogroup levels. The K and P Haplogroups are indicative of their Oriental ancestry. Haplogroup P derives from K and Q descends from P. Even though Y-DNA Haplogroups P and Q can be associated with Europeans in trace quantities due to admixture, they are sourced originally from and consistently found in, Asiatics .

Kazakh Women

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the men of half of the thirty million plus people in Uzbekistan: 

R1a [25.1%] – J2 [13.4%] – C2 [11.5%] – R1b [9.8%] – K [6.8%] –

P [5.5%] – O2 [4.1%] – R2 [2.2%] – I1 [2.2%] – N1c1 [1.4%]

Uzbekistan like the smaller Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan has obviously mixed with a people not descended from Japheth but rather from Shem, though not as heavily and thus retains more of their core Oriental Haplogroups such as C, K and O. Their R1a, J2 and R1b Haplogroups again link them as we will learn, with primarily Turkey.

Uzbek man

Seen together, their respective Y-DNA Haplogroups appear as the following: 

Tajikistan:           R1a – J2 – R2 – C2 

Turkmenistan:   R1b – J2 – K – P – R1a – R2

Kyrgyzstan:         R1a – C2 – O – K – O2 – J2 – N1c1 – P – R1b – I1 

Uzbekistan:         R1a – J2 – C2 – R1b – K – P – O2 – R2 – I1 – N1c1

Kazakhstan:        C2 – K – O2 – J2 – R1a – N1c1 – P – R1b – Q1a3 – R2 – I1

On the one hand they are all similar and on the other, there are differences highlighting the extent of the admixture experienced by Madai with principally Elam. Kazakhstan, the furthest north remains the closest to its genetic Asian roots. It is the nations of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan tucked underneath Kazakhstan to the south who are more mixed and it is Kyrgyzstan further east which remains purer than Uzbekistan in its core Asian Haplogroups. 

Meanwhile it should be no surprise that the nation the most southwards – Turkmenistan which is the closest to Turkey – exhibits the most genetic influence with higher frequencies in Haplogroups J2 and R1b. Tajikistan is the most distant and has more in common with southern Asia than it does with Central or East Asia. Of the two bigger populated nations, Uzbekistan reveals intermarriage levels similar to the others and only Kazakhstan is the nation that has mixed the least, thus retaining a truer Central Asian identity

Turkmen woman

Within the Haplogroup sequencing, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are more eastern in orientation, while Turkmenistan the most western oriented. Turkmenistan is geographically, linguistically and culturally more connected to Turkey – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. Uzbekistan bridges the gap between the other three. 

The Haplogroups C2, O2 and major sub-Haplogroups K and P are all indicative of these nations descending from Japheth and their close genetic relationship with northern and eastern Asians. 

A comparison table below for the principle Y-DNA defining marker Haplogroups for the North American Indian and Central Asian men.

         C   O  K  P  Q

NA Amerindian     6                                  77

Kazakhstan           40        8      10       3      2

Kyrgyzstan            14         8       2        2

Uzbekistan            12         4       7        6    

Turkmenistan                           13      10

What does this table tell us? Noah would have carried Y-DNA Haplogroup A, which later mutated to C, D and F in his descendants descending principally from his eldest son Japheth. Japheth in carrying the proto-type C (and F) Haplogroup, gave his sons the mutations which would eventually derive into C, D, K, N, O1, O2 and Q.

Coincidentally totalling seven principle Y-DNA Haplogroups and thereby equaling the same number of sons descending from Japheth. Overall, the predominant oriental Haplogroups for Central Asia chronologically being C, followed by K, P and finally O. 

It is Haplogroup C2 which is the defining marker Haplogroup for the male descendants of Japheth’s third born son Madai.

Tiras the Amerindian likely received Haplogroup C from admixture rather than inheriting it; thus proving interaction with either Madai or perhaps other sons of Japheth in the distant past. Some Native Indian tribes possess none and others varying levels of Haplogroup C.

More importantly, what we do know is that Japheth passed on the mutation which would eventually form Haplogroup Q. In this, the descendants of Tiras stand out with their relatively recent and unique Y-DNA Haplogroup marker. For other Asian peoples only carry Q in small quantities. Those European men who carry it, also possess it in small percentages, signifying admixture. 

The table from Decoding a Highly Mixed Kazakh Genome, shows the genetic markers in comparing Asian populations. AM = America, CA = Central Asia, EA = East Asia, EUR = Europe, NA = North Asia, OC = Oceania, SA = South Asia, SEA = Southeast Asia and WA = West Asia. 

Interestingly as expected, Tajikistan is not represented. The closeness between Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan is confirmed as it is between Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan following their westernisation and particularly Turkmenistan’s proximity to West Asia – Turkey and Iran. Both Tiras the Amerindian, and more so Madai in Central and North Asia, have experienced varying degrees of admixture as evidenced by the table. 

We will confirm that Japheth’s remaining five sons are all grouped in the bottom right hand corner of the table, incorporated within East Asia and Southeast Asia.

These findings correlate to what we should expect to find if the Turko-Mongol peoples are descended from Madai… an Asian people descended from Japheth, which have absorbed European DNA from Shem’s line at different times in their history. The variety of admixture may be accounted for by the following: 

  1. A historical alliance with the children of Elam in ancient Persia, and the intermarriage between the two peoples over a number of centuries. 
  1. The Assyrian* removal of captive Israelites to Media. There may have been relationships formed between the two peoples – with possibly the subsequent original introduction of the R1a* Y-DNA Haplogroup. 
  1. The Medes were in a unique position of migrating across the vast Asiatic continent, yet they did not remain and become far removed from their original homeland. The circuitous route via East Asia and Mongolia, meant the bulk of Madai ultimately returned to the middle of the world, merely settling a little northwards from their ancestral home in ancient Persia, now modern Iran – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

This central position meant they were also exposed to travellers travelling east and west and therefore the recipients of the resultant impact on their racial diversity and identity. Only the surface has been scratched regarding Madai; their place in the world; and their historical impact. We will revisit Madai, when we study Elam – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

Chapter five discusses two of the three sons of Gomer. A surprise for a number of researchers will be the fact that the descendants from Gomer are not located in Europe. A further revelation is that the third born son of Gomer, did not dwell near his brothers and this geographic patten is replicated today.

Words come again and again to our ears, but we never hear enough, nor can we ever really see all we want to see.

Ecclesiastes 1:8 New Century Version

“… being wrong can be dangerous, but being right, when society regards the majority’s falsehood as truth, could be fatal.” 

Thomas Szasz

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

Tiras the Amerindian

Chapter III

Tiras is the seventh and youngest son born to Japheth. This writer had read Herman Hoeh’s article, Origin of the Nations, July 1957, in the 1980s while at University. When looking at the identities more closely in the 1990s, it was not clear who Tiras was definitively until all of Japheth’s other sons had been studied; for Tiras is next to impossible to identify solely from the Bible, as he is listed just twice in the genealogies of Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One.

It was therefore a process of elimination and once the other six sons of Japheth were conclusively identified, it cemented Tiras as the Indigenous Amerindians of North America, Central America and South America.

Ultimately, agreement was reached with Dr Hoeh’s findings on the Native American Indians – though not with the conclusion that Polynesians descend from Tiras – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

During the course of researching Tiras, the insight of Daniel Garrison Brinton (1837-1899) an American surgeon, historian, archaeologist and ethnologist was encouragingly stumbled upon. Brinton accurately identifies Tiras as the progenitor of the indigenous peoples of the Americas. 

The descendants of Tiras are unusual, in that they are uniquely scattered throughout two vast continents and not identifiable in just one nation.

Tiras is mentioned in the Book of Jubilees 9:16

‘And For Tiras there came forth the seventh portion, four great islands in the midst of the sea, which reach to the portion of Ham…’

The islands at the time of writing would have been the Greek Isles and beyond in the Mediterranean Sea – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium. Remaining sons of Japheth also migrated to the Grecian Archipelago before moving further into Southern Europe and then migrating in a wide arc eastward towards central Asia – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. The portion of Ham mentioned would have been dwelling in North Africa.

A H Sayce in The Races of the Old Testament, 1891, confirms the difficulty in tracing Tiras, for he confesses on page 48: 

‘Tiras is the only son of Japhet whose name continues to be obscure. Future research can alone be expected to settle the question.’

Herman Hoeh’s invaluable research regarding Tiras – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘The word “Tyrus” used for the city of Tyre in Palestine has no relationship with Tiras, the son of Japheth. Tiras journeyed to Asia Minor… there is more historical evidence concerning the migrations of Tiras than of any other son of Japheth. Yet the world has never guessed to what land the descendants of Tiras finally migrated!’

Tyre was southward, on the coast of present day Israel and in the opposite direction from that travelled by Tiras.

Hoeh: ‘The river Dniester, which flows into the Black Sea near the border of Romania was anciently called Tiras.’

There is a city called Tiraspol in Moldova, near the Romanian border in the region once known as Thrace. Though it was built in 1792, the city name recalls the ancient name of the Tearus or Tyras River as Hoeh acknowledges.

Hoeh: ‘That was the main seat of the people of Tiras for many centuries [later known as the Tyragetae]. These people migrated along the shores of the Black Sea, the Aegaean and the Mediterranean Seas – before the coming of the Greeks. The Greeks finally displaced them. Where were the people of Tiras driven to?

Before we can answer these questions we must first learn the tribal names into which the family of Tiras subdivided. Here are some of their names: Dyras, Teres, Tauri, Carians, Calybes, Thyni, Amazons, Maias, Milyaes, Mauri, Gasgars… (See SMITH’s CLASSICAL GREEK AND ROMAN DICTIONARY for most of these names.) Where, today, do we find these same people located among the nations? In the NEW WORLD: where the American Indians are!’

Regarding the Milyaes, Mauri and Gasgars. We will find that they are Malays and Polynesians and not the same as Amerindians, or descended from Tiras. 

Additional interesting Indian tribal names include: Teyas in Texas; Tiwa in New Mexico; Tarahumara, Terocodane and Teroodane in Mexico; Terraba in Central America; Tairona in Colombia; Taruma in Guiana; and Tariano, Tariana and Terena in Brazil.

Hoeh: ‘The Amazons… in South America who gave their name[…] to the Amazon River. The Mayas live in Mexico and Guatemala. The Tinné Indians – the Greeks called them Thyni… live… in [Alberta] Canada. The Tarascan Indians of Mexico are called after “Taras, the name of a tribal god”, wrote Daniel G. Brinton in THE AMERICAN RACE… In South America live the Dures Indians, the Doraqsques, and the Turas, the Tauri and the Dauri; the Trios and Atures. In the Caribbean live Calybes – the same tribe that once lived by the Black Sea.

The people of Tiras are painted on the earliest monuments of the Mediterranean. The (colour) of their skin? – of “… reddish-brown complexion with their long black hair done up into a crest!” (quoted from THE SEA-KINGS OF CRETE, by James Baikie, [1926], page 74). From page 212 we read: “Judging from the surviving pictures, the Minoan men [the descendants of Tiras settled on the island of Crete prior to the Minoans – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America] were bronzed, with dark hair and beardless faces.”

Interestingly, the Minoans were allied with the Amazon tribes in the Aegean; so that the name Amazonia later appearing in South America is of little surprise. Murals of the temple in Medinet Habu in Egypt, depict people with features akin to the American Indians; while certain peoples related to the Minoans wore plumes. ‘The tufts of feathers offer incontrovertible evidence, because no other people have worn them’ – The True Origin of the American Indian, B Rea, 1968, page 14.

Hoeh: ‘The Mexicans called their temple Teocallis. This word is directly related to the Greek, meaning “place of worship of God”. The Greeks called the sons of Tiras, “sea people”. The native Indian name Anahuac, which the Indians of Mexico apply to the Valley of Mexico, means “around the water”.

Further evidence of Tiras in the Mediterranean is provided by words from the Aegean finding their way to the Americas.

Xious – Sioux

Andros – Androa tribe in Oregon; both names mean the same: “One which lives amongst trees”

Piraeus – Piros of Chihuahua

Anafi – Anafes of Brazil

Karpathos – Karpazos of Colorado

One commentator observes how ‘Mayan hieroglyphics show affinity with those of Egypt and also to Cretan scripts. Even certain Mayan names of days resemble the names of letters in the Phoenician alphabet. Stone scripts with markings and language similar to the Minoan has also been found at Fort Benning, Georgia. The main streets of the Mayans were bordered by fountains from which sprung hot and cold water. Similar installations of like design have been found beneath the ruins of Minos’s palace in Crete.’

This is noteworthy, for it is an example of the American Indian sharing a past history with the peoples who would also later populate the Americas – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Hoeh: ‘An analysis of the ancient Indian traditions points universally to “an eastern origin” – across the Atlantic, not the Pacific. (See THE AMERICAN RACE, pages 98-99.) In fact, the word Atlantic was used 2000 years before Columbus discovered America… it is an American Indian word. Its root is atlan meaning “water”. Only a slight migration may have taken place across the Pacific from Asia to America. The overwhelming movement has been out of the Mediterranean to the new world!’

Hoeh raises a significant point regarding the migratory direction of the descendants of Tiras. Japheth’s remaining six sons travelled eastwards, predominantly across the vast Eurasian land mass. There were exceptions amongst the sons of Javan. Japheth’s grandson Tarshish sailed, travelling westward; establishing trade routes and ports along the Mediterranean Sea all the way to the Iberian Peninsula, before doubling back eastwards.

There is considerable conjecture and discussion from historians and scientists alike, regarding the Indians in the Americas. Most maintain they approached from the West via Russia passing over the Bering Strait – which is just 50 miles across – while others maintain a westerly direction from Europe and traversing the Atlantic Ocean as Herman Hoeh proposed.

Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews, held with other ancients that Tiras was the founder of the Thracians. The original Thracians were descended from Tiras. The 1946 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica describes the people who anciently inhabited the region.

‘The name Thrace, because it has been used as a geographical term as well as an ethnic description, has added to the confusion. Thrace was inhabited by indigenous tribes, as well as by Celtic Tribes such as the Getas. The aboriginal inhabitants were the red-skinned Thracians mentioned by the Greek writers and they differed from the Celtic tribes not only in complexion but also in customs and religion (Herodotus, V. 14.)… The most outstanding archaeological monuments of this prehistoric period are the mound-like tombs, that were generally located in the outskirts of the ancient cities…’ and later found in the civilisations of the Mississippi and Mexico.

‘There is no well-defined difference between the aboriginal Thracians and the native Illyrians. All of the Thracian tribes and the Illyrian tribes practiced tattooing, which distinguished them from the Celtic tribes that had from time to time dominated them.’ The Universal Encyclopedia: ‘A custom unique to the Thracians was tattooing. The nobles painted the hair of their head blue.’

Whereas, later Thracians included red headed people who had the same name ascribed to them. Please refer to point number two in the introduction (primus verba). While other scholars consider Tiras as the founder of an ancient race of Pelasgian pirates and sea peoples called the Tursenich or Tursenioi, who once roamed the islands and coasts of the Aegean Sea. The name Thrusa or Turusha has been seen among Egyptian records, showing that they terrorised and invaded Syria and Egypt about 1250 BCE. They are referred to as Tursha in an inscription of Ramesses III and as Teresh of the Sea on the Merneptah Stele.

Regardless, the descendants of Tiras would have likely departed from the Mediterranean Sea prior to 1250 BCE, as would have all the sons of Japheth centuries before. Others have connected Tiras with the cities of Tarsus, Tarshish and even Troas, the city of Troy. 

Some researchers link Tiras to the Etruscans of Italy – who had been living in Lydia as the Tyrsenoi, before emigrating via Greece to Italy in the Eighth century BCE. We will discover the Etruscans are not descended from Tiras at all – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia

Tiras in Hebrew means: ‘desire, desirable’ or ‘moisturiser’ The verb rasas means ‘to moisten’ and the noun rasis means a ‘drop (of dew)’ or ‘fragment.’

A Chickasaw Woman

The Bible does not mention any sons for Tiras, yet the Book of Jasher 7:9 and 10:14 records the sons of Tiras as:

Benib, Gera, Lupirion and Gilak

While asserting that Rushash, Cushni, and Ongolis are also among his descendants.

The name Cushni is interesting as it is similar to Cush, a son of Ham. We will refer back to this when investigating Cush – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

An earlier rabbinic compilation, the Yosippon claims the descendants of Tiras to be the Rossi of Kiv or the Kievan Rus, listing them together with his brother Meshech’s supposed descendants as ‘the Rossi; the Saqsni and the Iglesusi.’

The linking of Tiras with Meshech – a son of Japheth – and the Russians is an incorrect tangent though an understandable one, as we will find when studying Meshech – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

A mediaeval Hebrew compilation, the Chronicles of Jerahmeel, provides an alternative tradition for the sons of Tiras, naming them as Maakh, Tabel, Bal’anah, Shampla, Meah, and Elash. These names were based on Pseudo-Philo circa 75 CE, which lists the sons of Tiras as Maac, Tabel, Ballana, Samplameac, and Elaz. 

The Persian historian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari circa 915 CE, states a tradition that Tiras had a son named Batawil and his daughters Qarnabil, Bakht, and Arsal, became wives for two of the sons of Ham: Cush and Phut – as well as for Canaan respectively.

Cush is mentioned again and we will return to this relationship. It is interesting Tiras may have had four to six sons, for though his descendants are not prolific, they are scattered over a vast section of the earth with a variety of ethnic characteristics; including Native American Indians stretching from Canada all the way to Argentina. If Tiras had three grand daughters, who married Cush, Put and Canaan, then his descendants in part, are innumerable. This is certainly plausible, as Noah’s grandsons would have had to take wives from their cousins when repopulating the earth.

Native American men

Genesis 9:1, 7

New Century Version

Then God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Have many children; grow in number and fill the earth. “As for you, Noah, I want you and your family to have many children, to grow in number on the earth, and to become many.”

The nation with the most Amerindians is Mexico. We will study Mexico and its combination of people in more depth, though for now concentrating on its Indian population. They are known as Mexican Native Americans; Native Mexicans; or the Indigenous peoples of Mexico. These peoples trace their communities back to the population existing in Central America prior to the arrival of the Spanish.

Interestingly, The 2nd article of the Mexican constitution classifies and numbers Indians not according to racial-ethnicity but rather cultural-ethnicity of ‘indigenous communities that preserve their indigenous languages, traditions, beliefs, and cultures.’

The INEGI or official census institute, reported in 2015 that 25,694,928 people in Mexico self-identified as being indigenous of many different ethnic groups; which constitute 21.5% of Mexico’s population. 

At the time of the Spanish conquest in the late fifteenth century, the indigenous population of Mexico had been estimated at about twenty-five million people and has only reached this figure again, over five hundred years later. A remarkable statistic and a tragic indictment of one peoples actions against another family member – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

The Amerindian population of other nations in the Americas include 9.8 million in Bolivia the second highest; 5.2 million in the United States; 2.13 million in Canada; 997,000 in Brazil and 955,000 in Argentina; with a total of approximately seventy million people throughout the Americas.

Flags of the Indian Nation

Historically, the Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints has taught that the American Indian are the descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel. 

Following are the opening remarks in an article by William Lobdell, a Times staff writer, 2006 – emphasis mine:

‘From the time he was a child in Peru, the Mormon Church instilled in Jose A. Loayza the conviction that he and millions of other Native Americans were descended from a lost tribe of Israel that reached the New World more than 2,000 years ago.

“We were taught all the blessings of that Hebrew lineage belonged to us and that we were special people,” said Loayza, now a Salt Lake City attorney. “It not only made me feel special, but it gave me a sense of transcendental identity, an identity with God.”

A few years ago, Loayza said, his faith was shaken and his identity stripped away by DNA evidence showing that the ancestors of American natives came from Asia, not the Middle East.’

We will study the unique lineage of the apparent ‘lost’ tribes of Israel. They are not related directly with the Amerindian descended from Tiras. The DNA evidence highlights the American Indians origin in common with the people of East Asia, but is not wholly accurate regarding their true origin of location. 

Native American women

The Diego antigen, a blood group system composed of 21 blood factors or antigens are inherited through alleles. The Diego antigen is common in Indigenous peoples of the Americas and in East Asians, but very rare or absent in most other populations, reflecting that the two groups share common ancestry – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

The Amerindians from Tiras are a lineage of the East Asian family of peoples who have sprung from Japheth. The Diego antigen discovered in 1953, is found in all the peoples of East Asia in varying percentages. 

Conversely, the Dia antigen is very rare in African and European populations and the Dia antigen is either very rare or absent in Aboriginal Australians, Papuans, natives of New Britain and surprisingly, Polynesians – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia

Whereas, the incidence of Diegoa+, relatively high in Siberian Eskimos and Aleut people (the levels of Diegoa+ in Aleuts is comparable to South American Indians), occurs at a much lower frequency (less than 0.5%) among Alaskan Eskimos and has not been found in the Inuit of Canada.

Retina, Fifth Edition, M Cristina Kenney & Nitin Udar, 2013:

‘Haplogroups are mtDNA sequence polymorphism variations that have occurred over [thousands of] years and correlate with the… origins of populations traced through the maternal lineages. The oldest haplogroups [originate] from [African peoples]… [of which]… European, Asian, and Native American haplogroups have evolved. 

Each haplogroup has related patterns of mtDNA sequences (haplotypes) that represent that population. [Y-DNA] Haplogroup Q is found in Asia, the Americas, Europe, and the Middle East. One of its sub-clades, group Q3 [Q1a3] is almost exclusively associated with the Native Americans…’

The mtDNA Haplogroups for the Indigenous Amerindians of North, Central and South America

Regarding the genetic history of the Indigenous peoples of America, the occurrence of the mtDNA (maternal) Haplogroups A, B, C and D among the eastern Asian and Amerindian populations has been recognised for some time. Unlike Haplogroup X, that is not strongly associated with East Asia, yet is the fifth most frequent mtDNA Haplogroup in the Indigenous Amerindian peoples. Rather, Haplogroup X is more strongly present in the Near East, the Caucasus region and Mediterranean Europe. 

Ninety-five percent of all Native Americans possess the sub-Haplogroups A2, B2, C1b, C1c, C1d, and D1. Haplogroup A being the predominant group overall in North America (and Central America); while Haplogroup C is most widespread throughout South America. 

A study in 2009, A great diversity of Amerindian mitochondrial DNA ancestry is present in the Mexican mestizo population, found that in Mexico the ‘frequency of the Amerindian haplogroups A2, B2, C1 and D1 was 51.1, 17.8, 18.5 and 5.9%, respectively.’ The remaining five percent possess the sub-Haplogroups X2a, D2a, C4c, and D4h3a. As these four sub-Haplogroups are rare, studies tend to exclude them. 

Whenever the results for any particular Amerindian population do not equal one hundred percent, it is because the remaining percent belongs to these rare sub-Haplogroups. This means that all Native Americans are descended from a small group of people, exhibiting a low genetic diversity, because they possessed only five mtDNA Haplogroups. A 2005 study conducted by Rutgers University, ‘concluded that the entire [Native American Indian] population of North America descended from just 70 individuals who arrived there about 14,000 years ago [after the global flood cataclysm]…’

In other words, the five principle mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups of the Indigenous Amerindian, are part of a single founding East Asian population. The link with East Asians, means scientists have assumed that migration had to be eastwards across the Bering Strait, based on the geography of similar related peoples. It does not seem to have occurred to the same scientists, that just because the Native American Indians are genetically related to East Asians, that it means they traveled together, or in the same direction – or even that it was the only migratory path.

Scientists base their theory heavily on the X2a and C4c lineages having a parallel genetic history, using this as proof that an Atlantic glacial entry route into North America is untenable; as C4c is a key Haplogroup in the East Asian portion of the mtDNA phylogeny.

Everything You Know Is Still Wrong, Lloyd Pye, 1997 & 2017, page 68: 

‘Folsom points were supplanted in the 1930’s by an earlier, very distinctive type that came to be called “Clovis” points because the first were found near Clovis, New Mexico. These presented another unwanted mystery because they had no precedent in either Alaska or anywhere in Asia. The only precedent anyone could find was the Solutrean point culture of southwestern Europe.’

The Solutrean hypothesis is an alternative theory, that the Amerindians approached the Americas from Europe.

Pye: ‘By then every scientist in the world was wedded to the idea that the indigenous populations of the Americas came by the land bridge connecting Russian and Alaska (Beringia) during the tail end of the last Ice Age, so this was another one of those inconvenient facts that had to be swept under the rug and kept there.’

There is support for Amerindians once living in the British Isles, who were the original Picts. They painted and tattooed their bodies, which was copied by the fair-skinned Caledonian peoples, who later were also known as Picts by the Romans – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

They had travelled from Spain in Western Europe – originating in Illyria and Thrace – as a warrior people who had been employed in the armies of Barbarians. They were ‘fierce, swarthy, half-naked, tattooed and painted.’ In Britain, they were called Attacotti, meaning the “very old ones”. They even used the totem-pole in Scotland.

The Attacotti were ruled over by a Pictish warrior aristocracy. The Attacotti were seen as aichechthúatha, meaning “client people”. The Caledonian Picts in Scotland adopted the matrilineal system of the Attacotti – like the Ohwachia Iroquois – and their reverence for a mother-goddess.

Sources refer to the original inhabitants of Scotland ‘as very dark, wild people with prominent cheek bones, living in the islands off Scotland.’ Another states: ‘Some were as Black and wild in their appearance as any American savages… like wild Indians, that a very little imagination was necessary to give one an impression of being upon an American river.’

Voltaire tellingly describes these early tribes in Britain:

“The inhabitants scarcely covered their nudity with a few skins of beast… and their ornaments were shapes that the men and women imprinted on the skin by pricking it and pouring on to it the juice of herbs, as the savages of America still do.”

In Scotland geographical place names resembling Tiras, included the River of Thurso, Tharsuinn Mountain and the Tarras River.

An interesting coincidence involves Tiras and another people descended from Japheth, discussed in the following chapter: Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. Anthropologists and historians refer to a Turanid people which once populated Scotland.

A commentators asks: ‘Who are the Turanid or Turanian peoples today? These are the Turkic peoples which occupy Central Asia and the territory north of the Caspian to the Black Sea, bordering on Thrace. This is mentioned because certain Turkic or Turanid tribes of Central Asia claim descent from Tiras. If so, the small Tirasian element would be totally absorbed by now into the Turkic masses…’

Another scholar writes: “Close to the Black Sea are the Kabards and Abkasians, who speak a curious agglutinative speech. Its nearest allies are in far-off North America, though Basque is slightly akin in structure… These Caucasus people might be related to the North Amerinds… It may be noted that Roland Dixon finds the same type of skull in those two regions.”

‘John Beddoe, famous anthropologist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, wrote in the classic work The Anthropological History of Europe, that a Mongoloid race once occupied Scotland as its earliest inhabitants. Further, he mentioned that traces of Turanian speech are still evident in the Scottish Gaelic language.’ 

An additional source adds, ‘most of the Attacotti suddenly disappeared in 503 AD with the arrival of the Scots (Gaels)… They left behind mounds of flint knives, stone-hewn tombs, and carvings. They were driven out of Britain and settled in Greenland for a time’ before migrating to Central America. ‘Toltec tradition say that they arrived in c. 503 AD to the already settled areas where Mexico City stands today.’

The base or core Y-DNA (paternal) Haplogroups for the Native American Indians are Q and C. There are a number of Indian tribes which also carry R1. This is somewhat of a mystery and thought to be the result of European colonisation at different stages of their history – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Notably, Haplogroup C is a key Haplogroup for Central Asians, yet for the American Indian, the ancient Haplogroup C is secondary to the far more recent Q mutation and can be rare. Therefore, Y-DNA Haplogroup Q,is the defining marker Haplogroup for male Amerindians.

Added to this, is the fact that only some branches of both Haplogroup Q and C are Native American. Specifically, subgroups Q1a3a and C3b (P39) alone, are found among the Native peoples of North America and South America. Other subgroups of Haplogroup Q and C are found elsewhere in the world, such as in Europe and Asia. This makes it very easy to determine if your direct paternal ancestor was or was not, Native American. 

The Algonquian men of northeastern North America possess the following Haplogroup frequencies:

R1 [38%] – Q [34%] – C [8%],

while the Apache of the southwestern United States possess:

Q [78%] – C [15%] – R1 [5%].

The Cherokee of the eastern United States carry:

Q [50%] – R1 [47% ] – C [2%];

the Navajo of the southwestern United States:

Q [92%] – R1 [3%] – C [1%];

and the Sioux men of central North America have:

R1 [50%] – Q [25%] – C [11%]. 

Native North Americans overall, have the following paternal Haplogroup frequency:

Q [77%] – R1 [13% ] – C [6%];

and in the United States specifically:

Q [58%] – R1 [22%] – C [9%]. 

In contrast, the Inuit men of the Artic have: Q [80%] – R1 [11%];

while the Canadian Inuit have: Q [55%] – R1 [34%] – C [2%].

The Mixe of Mexico are untouched by western influence with remarkably:

Q [100%];

whereas the Mixtec have: Q [93%] – R1 [7%];

and the Zapotec: Q [75%] – R1 [6%].

As research and understanding of the relatively new field of Haplogroups advances, refinements in the myriads of clades continues to evolve. Subsequent studies have highlighted that Q1a3a now includes both Native American and European members. Q1a3a1 is now deemed a Native American only Haplogroup. There is also another recently discovered Haplogroup Q1a3a4, that has likewise been designated a purely Native American group.

It is worth noting that as Tiras is the seventh and youngest son of Japheth, the male descendants of Tiras also carry – relatively speaking – the very young Haplogroup, Q. The fact some men carry C-P39, shows a distant link with an early and ancient Haplogroup – in Japheth’s line – and the many subsequent generational mutations arriving at Q. Thus, unlike Central Asian men who carry Haplogroup C2 as their defining marker, the sons of Tiras are identified by Haplogroup Q, which while very common, is somewhat rare outside of the Americas. 

Prior to 1952 and the use of DNA in hereditary research, scientists used blood proteins to study human genetic variation. The ABO blood group system is credited to the Austrian Karl Landsteiner, who found three different blood types in 1900 – refer article: Rhesus Negative Blood Factor. Blood groups are inherited from both parents and the ABO blood type is controlled by a single gene – the ABO gene – with three alleles: i, IA and IB.

Research by Ludwick and Hanka Herschfeld during World War I, found that the frequencies of blood groups A, B and O differed markedly around the world. The O blood type – resulting from the absence of both A and B alleles – is very common, with a rate of sixty-three percent in all human populations. 

Type O happens to be the primary blood type among the indigenous populations of the Americas, in particular within Central and South American populations, with a frequency of nearly one hundred percent. In contrast, in indigenous North American populations the frequency of type A ranges from sixteen to eighty-two percent. This data supports the initial Amerindians descending from an isolated population with a minimal number of individuals.

Map showing the dominance of blood type O amongst Native American Indians

There are two main hypotheses for the exceptionally high rate of type O blood amongst the Amerindians.

One is Genetic drift, in which the small number of Native American populations meant the almost complete absence of any other blood gene or type being passed down through the generations.

The other theory is the Bottleneck explanation, which proposes that there were high frequencies of blood type A and B among Native Americans but severe population decline during the sixteenth and seventeen centuries, caused by the introduction of disease from Europe resulted in a massive death toll of those with blood types A and B; leaving a large amount of type O survivors.

Chapter four investigates Japheth’s third son, Madai. Researchers have searched vainly for Madai’s descendants in Europe. Yet ironically, while they do not dwell in Europe, they have had historical ties with Europeans.

The mind of a person with understanding gets knowledge; the wise person listens to learn more.

Proverbs 18:15 New Century Version

“Rejecting God’s truth because of mankind’s hypocrisy is like rejecting mathematical truth because of mankind’s incompetence.” 

Orrin Woodward

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